So I do want to treat the white victimization narrative with some skepticism. There’s plenty of overt hostility to white people in the rhetoric of the politically conscious middle/upper class, but I think one needs to make the case that the posturing of woke journalists and academics is actually driving a noticeable increase in white people’s mortality.
The counter narrative would be that white people are hit the hardest by atomization and the weakening of other, informal social organizations. Part of it may be because ethnic social organizations are more resilient than the religious and professional organizations that white people relied on to the specific changes. But I don’t think the solution is “white people should be allowed to organize on the basis of ethnicity”.
But I don’t think the solution is “white people should be allowed to organize on the basis of ethnicity”.
Mind unpacking that?
I live in a country thats had a massive and influential white-identity/ethnic-separatist movement for almost 60 years now, complete with terrorist attacks. It just so happened to be primarily directed against the other white people in the country: i refer of course to the Quebecois seperatist movement. And while its gotten racist as hell at points, that hasn’t stopped our left wing parties from sucking up and trying to appease them.
Any white-identity movement in the US, if riotously successful, would wind up representing 2-10% of the population (blue tribe isn’t joining, nor most old-school conservatives) which is comparable with most any other ethnic identity movement we happily celebrate. Sure it would “Purport” to represent a majority of the population...but so does Social Justice. Hell Feminism alone Purports to represent a 52% majority of the population, you lay on every other “marginalized group” and it seems Social Justice explicitly claims to be a majoritarian movement trying to wage ethnic conflict against a despised ethnic minority.
Of course Social Justice actually isn’t, it represents an activist class first and foremost, mostly in their struggles against their “allies”. But their rhetoric is that of a majoritarian identity movement motivated by opposition to a minority that is defined by their race and identity characteristics.
So then why is “White identity politics” excluded?
Well its clearly not to stop a majority from dominating, what would it mean for a majority to not dominate in a democracy? And further they could never really hope to achieve majority support to begin with, but only wind up defacto representing a minority contingent of despised and marginalized rednecks... but then of of course thats who we don’t want organizing.
Imagine if in contrast a “Scots-Irish” or “Appalachian” or “Southern” ethnic identity movement cropped up, if you think mainstream America would say “Well they are objectively a Minority (they aren’t a majority of the country) and they are objectively despised, I mean we fucking hate em....OK you can be an ethnic movement!”
....Well if you think that would happen you have vastly different priors than I.