| I’d say the characterization in your essay is accurate more or less & the premises trade on |
| an established 1960s radical narrative conflating white identity with racism, white liberty as |
| supremacism & white values as hatred. It is at once condescending elitist & divisive rhetoric |
| rooted in false universal objective premises as opposed to the viewpoints of the radicals |
| themselves. It is one thing to believe history oppresses your identity by way of culture mores |
| and yet another to impute incitement to self-defense. One is a personal worldview philosophy |
| and the other is of course a legal criminal challenge. |
| The problem with the [nth-wave] SJW 1960s radicals is they want to write their ideological |
| worldview opponents into crimes arbitrarily with all the force of big government autocratic |
| assassination & detainment authority. It is a slippery slope not based on principle but using |
| principle against itself for autocracy. For instance, your view that white men are racists |
| for standing up for their race and their families and heritage tradition with the implication |
| that racism be admonished even proscribed if only in the unwritten law of public opinion, |
| which informs custom tradition and principle as well as stare decisis precedent for judicial |
| opinion and future legislation implies suggests & by inference deduction chain makes explicit |
| the fact that because your worldview condemns white men you seek to outlaw their existence as |
| well as preclude each and every single instance of their peculiar interest. |
| Your so-called Civil Rights movement subjugated white male my identity to every other by way |
| of Affirmative Action whose predicate is a multi-tiered caste-like justice-system based on |
| economic incentives opportunities and implying political power authority voice and that’s not |
| all. There are a couple of other factors economically speaking which touch the political |
| picture flowing from the Civil Rights anti-white-male campaign movement from the radical 1960s |
| namely - voice and loyalty. Hirschman’s concepts are something more or less foreign to us in |
| the sense of exercising our 1st Amendment privilege of living in a sovereign nation - free |
| association. Your anti-white-male discrimination and hatred explicated in the letter and |
| imbued in the spirit of so-called Civil Rights violates my freedom to voice my concerns |
| within a company or without it -regarding its products clientele services or its associates; |
| also I am not able to exercise my loyalty freely without persecution for what you SJWs |
| characterize as racism and hatred - viz., loyalty to my identy and preference for the |
| products of its culture or its busineses , businesses in that domain etc. If I want to have a |
| white Christian credit card and shop in all white stores I cannot do that because Civil Rights |
| precludes my 1st Amendment right to peaceably assemble and my freedom of speech; also i am |
| constrained by so-called Civil Rights’ violation of my 9th & 10th Amendment such that nowhere |
| has the federal government been delegated authority to coerce commingling of persons within or |
| without a state or in any combination thereof. Big govt apologists speak to the Commerce |
| Clause & exclusion of the right of prohibiting someone a night’s rest in an inn on a highway |
| that’s English common law predating America itself. It does not grant or imply however the |
| entitlement of quotas for sinecure. That’s called abusing privilege of self-government. People |
| demand rights taken away from others to arrogate to themselves. And that’s my segue to your |
| statement regarding the incitement and intolerance. Defending ourselves as white men and |
| families, our tradition is standing up to the incitement and violence of barbarians running |
| roughshod over our territory like some weak-minded individuals. |
| Your statement that we oppose nihilist multiculturalism is correct. Your implication that because we defend |
| our homeland on behalf of our white identity we are supremacist suggests that nationalism is supremacism in |
| your view. In the sense that I/we don’t want our homeland changed rather for it to remain the same is the |
| essence of conservatism - we are conserving and being good stewards of our inheritance & our possessions. |
| Your statement implies that not giving away our birthright is supremacist and that’s fine but let’s be |
| clear about the definitions we are making, because it is important that we discuss terms on a level playing |
| field semantically otherwise we talk past each other and get confused. |
| But lastly to circle back in view of the reframing: you equivocate with regard to the definition of |
| conservatism implying that it is something other than what I’ve just described. Perhaps take a look at the |
| concept again and see if it means something else or you were merely mistaken. |
| And I will leave you with this food for thought: you on the internationalist left are in a demographic/race |
| war with your cousins on the intranationalist left. You agree on the subject of means (authoritarianism), |
| but disagree on the predicate (coercion toward the goal of division or unification). The internationalist |
| left wants to force everyone together to conform to a coalition under an all-powerful state force whereas |
| the intranationalist (nationalist) left wants to force separation of unlike persons for unification in |
| homogeneity. On this 3-dimensional political spectrum at leftism with the width branching at the connexion |
| of autocracy, you differ only on demographics (race question in particular). On the other hand, you are not |
| in a bloody race/demographic war with the right necessarily, except as it concerns the intersection of |
| those elements regarding their preference or assertiveness upon liberty. It can be veritably defined your |
| faction on the international left is at race and general demographic war with the nationalist left. However |
| you are at war with liberty on the right. Your cabal is at war with a more existential manifestation of |
| conflict with the right because the furthest right is of course an absence of government altogether with |
| perfect liberty. On a continuum of liberty and restriction in civil society you find yourself in a struggle |
| with the right generally across a spectrum of demographics as it relates to their preference for and |
| assertion of liberty. Just so we are talking about the same thing. You are fighting two main sides in the |
| war on whites, on white men and on white America and on Western Civilization for the globalists. |
| You are fighting 2 main sides in a war for one group with central authority and unlimited pretend currency. |