Thread: Pro-Whites Should Use the Term White Civil Rights Activists

Or Maybe, Pro-White People Should Call Themselves "White Civil Rights Activists, fighting against the genocide of Whites"

Iconoclast

Originally Posted by FtR

Pro-White People Should Call Themselves "White Civil Rights Activists"

---

It would good for pro-white people to use a term for themselves that is both descriptive and presents themselves in a positive way. The anti-whites call pro-white people "white supremacists," which labels pro-whites in a negative way. It would be good to have one term to counter this propaganda.

Separatist, nationalist, white advocate, racialist and race realist are all terms that are good and have their uses. But it would be good to have one effective term that includes all pro-whites.

I suggest the term "white civil rights activist." It has a positive connotation. Civil rights are seen to be good. Being an activist for civil rights would be seen to be good. And the white part? We can say why shouldn't whites have civil rights, are you against that?

The name "white civil rights activist" gives pro-whites a counter to labels such as "white supremacist." One could simply answer, "I'm not a supremacist, I'm a white civil rights activist."

As it currently stands people could ask "If you're not a white supremacist then what are you?" Pro-whites need a strong response to this. "I'm a white civil rights activist" is a strong response.

The term "white civil rights activists" could include varying beliefs under its umbrella. If a pro-white is asked if they're a nationalist or separatist they could respond, "I want to make sure whites have civil rights and I advocate whatever policy ensures this. Then they could explain their own personal belief, always under the umbrella of "white civil rights activist." They could explain that pro-whites have different opinions about how white civil rights can be protected but they all have the same goal.

I encourage everyone to start using the term "white civil rights activist."

You stated your positions well.

However, you seem relatively new, and while 'white civil rights activist' resonates, over the years it simply has not generated any real impact, as it is like so many 'imitations' of all the other 'rights' groups. At the same time, this term (your term) was running beside another term, White Nationalist, which encompasses a much broader, although covers your 'rights' issue as well, scope of interests and political philosophies, that it has become the most common.

For more on this: Foundations

Just do whatever works. It may change from location to audience. Just make it work.

Rather than someone 'pro-white' saying that they're a "White Civil Rights Activist". Why not just say, I'm 'Pro-White, and leave it at that, allowing whomever to come to their own conclusion to what that means to them.

There's nothing wrong with the term "White Civil Rights Activist", which I'm sure that we can put to good use depending upon what Nordic Angle would suggest,"whatever works", especiallypending upon the type "audience".

Originally Posted by Nordic Angel

Just do whatever works. It may change from location to audience. Just make it work.

Originally Posted by JamesinUSA

Rather than someone 'pro-white' saying that they're a "White Civil Rights Activist". Why not just say, I'm 'Pro-White, and leave it at that, allowing whomever to come to their own conclusion to what that means to them.

There's nothing wrong with the term "White Civil Rights Activist", which I'm sure that we can put to good use depending upon what Nordic Angle would suggest,"whatever works", especiallypending upon the type "audience".

The 'whatever works' attitude is a 'conservative' attitude which has never worked. The whole Idea of White Nationalism is to support, Unilaterally, the concept that Race, as an 'identity' is first and foremost; then, by definition, 'civil rights' will follow and be demanded as an obvious agenda.

Nomenclature is important, and within reason, one may 'introduce' our struggle with a 'teaser', but it is important to know what White Nationalism is (see above link - Foundations), before everyone supports fragments of the whole.

In my response 'Whatever works' was meant to be more tactical in conveying our message than referring to the broader ideological concept of White Nationalism itself.

Originally Posted by JamesinUSA

In my response 'Whatever works' was meant to be more tactical in conveying our message than referring to the broader ideological concept of White Nationalism itself.

Understood.

It is important to make clear, as much as possible, what you are trying to say, in the clearest terms possible; also, to maintain consistency, and repetition.

This may help: Nomenclature

The only term I ever self-apply is "race realist" because I think it's very descriptive. But even that, I hardly bother with. If you ask me, the importance of word choice is often overstated. What we call ourselves doesn't matter - our detractors will still call us whatever they want, and a complex WN lexicon only distances us from the rest of the people.

We need to speak to people in their language. But most importantly, we need to offend with substance, not style!

Originally Posted by negative3

We need to speak to people in their language. But most importantly, we need to offend with substance, not style!

I'll go with that.

One of the points of using the term "white civil rights activist" is to appeal to unenlightened whites. It's an accurate description of pro white activists of all kinds though it's not an all encompassing description. The term "civil rights" has a positive connotation to many. We should use this positiveness for ourselves.

When they call us "white supremacists" we can call ourselves "white civil rights activists." Then we can call them "genocidists" and "bigots" for calling us "white supremacists."

We should define what we are, not the anti-white genocidists. One way we can do this is to call ourselves white civil rights activists.

I thought we were just talking about what name a person can use to describe themselves.

I change the name I use for things depending on the situation.

Sometimes I refer to myself as a vocalist.
Sometimes I refer to myself as a pianist.
Sometimes I refer to myself as a musician.

I just use whatever is relevant for the situation and I don't evaluate the cosmos over it.

Sorry if I was being too simple.

Sometimes I call myself a Nationalist.
Sometimes I tell people I am a supporter of European Heritage.

Depends on who I am talking to.

I use whatever my audience is comfortable with. If they are comfortable with my self identification they will be comfortable with what I stand for and the message I speak...and that means less opposition.

It's easier to spread your message to others if you don't offend them up front.

ya know???

(HEIL HITLER....we want a Nanny State.) Doesn't attract white patriots

If I am speaking to an Amerindian I just tell them I support preservation of National Heritage for all people including my own. Immediately the Amerindian will agree with me. If the Amerindian agrees with me up front then I can talk about my concerns for the severe decline of birth rates.

If I am speaking to another forum member I refer to myself as a WN. I don't bother to spell it out for them.

I'll just be glad when millions of people will once again feel comfortable in just thinking of themselves as being 'White', rather than trying to be go to great lengths to explain why they don't think in racial terms, or that they're just just 'Americans' for instance, knowing full well that most other races put their specific peoples interest before nationality.