Mongolian Neo-Nazis!

[Os Cangaceiros]

click (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/gallery/2010/aug/02/mongolia-far-right)

[A.R.Amistad]

Its hard to say whether these guys are serious or if they're just obsessed with that ridiculous little bar. One article on that sight seems to imply that it is the product of anti-Chinese sentiment.

There was a similiar incident in Taiwan where a dissilusioned student set up her own neo-Nazi group:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1545647/Taiwan-students-form-Nazi-party.html

[Adi Shankara]

Its hard to say whether these guys are serious or if they're just obsessed with that ridiculous little bar. One article on that sight seems to imply that it is the product of anti-Chinese sentiment.

There was a similiar incident in Taiwan where a dissilusioned student set up her own neo-Nazi group:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1545647/Taiwan-students-form-Nazi-party.html

They're not neo-nazis in the traditional sense; they don't hate everyone who isn't Mongolian, hell most of them don't even know what the Holocaust was I'm willing to bet, but they use it exemplify their hatred of Chinese people, due to the Chinese government's stranglehold on the Mongolian economy.

[RedStarOverChina]

There are "skinheads" in China and other Asian countries also, so this shouldn't surprise anybody. But these pathetic noobs do seem more motivated and violent.


They're not neo-nazis in the traditional sense; they don't hate everyone who isn't Mongolian, hell most of them don't even know what the Holocaust was I'm willing to bet, but they use it exemplify their hatred of Chinese people, due to the Chinese government's stranglehold on the Mongolian economy.
Actually, they also hate Koreans, Vietnamese, and Russians and anyone else who "steal Mongolian women". Funny that you seem to defend everyone, even the Neo-Nazis, so long as they oppose the Chinese government.

[DragonQuestWes]

I wonder what the other Neo-Nazi groups in North America and Europe would think of them.

Are these guys just nationalists?

[RedStarOverChina]

I actually went to Stormfront to see their reactions. Half the people mocked them for being posers.

[DunyaGongrenKomRevolyutsi]

Not meaning to be rude but what was the point of this thread?

Obviously there are Mongolian neo-nazis, there are neo-nazis in every country, even Israel (yes, real neo-nazis in Israel, not exactly a big deal either). It's just warped perceptions of "they should know better because theyre not white", which is kind of small minded because all reactionary ideologies are based on.. reaction, which is not a formulated, sensible or scientific approach.

[Nolan]

Nazi Israelis? Fuck, that's worse than Nazi Slavs.

[Blackscare]

they don't hate everyone who isn't Mongolian, hell most of them don't even know what the Holocaust was I'm willing to bet

Uh, what?

[this is an invasion]

The skinheads in China are super nationalistic and racist. I'm really not surprised that there are "neo-nazis" in other countries like that.

[Devrim]

Obviously there are Mongolian neo-nazis, there are neo-nazis in every country, even Israel (yes, real neo-nazis in Israel, not exactly a big deal either).

I have never heard of them in Turkey. Probably because Turkey has its own local version of fascism, which is very successful and makes the European neo-Nazi's look pretty much like a tea party.

Devrim

[Os Cangaceiros]

Not meaning to be rude but what was the point of this thread?

To promote discussion on Mongolian neo-nazis? *shrug*

[Sir Comradical]

At first I thought the idea of Neo-Nazism taking hold in Russia and Serbia was odd, but this really does take the cake. Having said that, I have an uncle in India who admires Hitler's patriotism, he also likes that Hitler brought "discipline" to Germany and opposed communism. So I guess it is possible for fascists all over the world to admire those aspects of Nazi Germany and for this reason identify with Nazism. The right-wing Hindu nationalists in India openly admire Hitler, that's no secret.

[DunyaGongrenKomRevolyutsi]

I have never heard of them in Turkey. Probably because Turkey has its own local version of fascism, which is very successful and makes the European neo-Nazi's look pretty much like a tea party.

Devrim

Well you have to wonder why one of Turkish's fascist paramilitaries is named after some of Hitler's u-boats, grey wolves?

[Devrim]

Well you have to wonder why one of Turkish's fascist paramilitaries is named after some of Hitler's u-boats, grey wolves?

No, it is not. It is a completely different reference to Asena (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asena) in Turkish mythology.

Devrim

[Dimentio]

At first I thought the idea of Neo-Nazism taking hold in Russia and Serbia was odd, but this really does take the cake. Having said that, I have an uncle in India who admires Hitler's patriotism, he also likes that Hitler brought "discipline" to Germany and opposed communism. So I guess it is possible for fascists all over the world to admire those aspects of Nazi Germany and for this reason identify with Nazism. The right-wing Hindu nationalists in India openly admire Hitler, that's no secret.

http://www.bjure.se/bilder/jackiearklov.jpg

One of Sweden's most well-known nazis in modern time.

[DunyaGongrenKomRevolyutsi]

No, it is not. It is a completely different reference to Asena (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asena) in Turkish mythology.

Devrim

OK, but anti semitism is not too uncommon in Turkey and especially after this years recent events I'm sure it has intensified. As a result, active right wing groups in Turkey are going to be even more anti semitic.

[Wanted Man]

Yes, but they are not "neo-nazis" in any reasonable sense of the word.

[Dimentio]

At first I thought the idea of Neo-Nazism taking hold in Russia and Serbia was odd, but this really does take the cake. Having said that, I have an uncle in India who admires Hitler's patriotism, he also likes that Hitler brought "discipline" to Germany and opposed communism. So I guess it is possible for fascists all over the world to admire those aspects of Nazi Germany and for this reason identify with Nazism. The right-wing Hindu nationalists in India openly admire Hitler, that's no secret.

Hardly surprising, Hitler is less hated in Asia and in Africa than in Europe and the western world, mostly because Hitler mostly wrought havoc in Europe. Due to that, as well as the brutalisation experienced by colonisation, third worlders in general tend to view Hitler as "another dictator" and not as some kind of demon lord with horns.

Third worlders are often a lot more politically sophisticated and savvy than westerners and don't tend to mystifty politicians as much, mostly because politics in their countries in general have a more direct life'n'death meaning.

Thus, Indians, Mongolians and Chinese when they read about Hitler doesn't necessarily conceptualise the same things that a westerner is reading in. They have experienced terrible massacres themselves, both pre-colonialism and post-colonialism, and thus don't tend to be as shocked by violence as a westerner.

I would actually guess that if a dictator arose to power in the EU and the USA and did some really horrible things against his own population, things of the kind which the ARENA did in El Salvador or Idi Amin in Uganda, it would actually pretty fast make the population docile and obedient as sheep (with the exception of some rural communities and some immigrant groups).

It is one thing to be taken into custody and beaten by police. It is an entirely other thing if the police gouges out one's eyes and rip off the arms and leave one on the street to bleed to death.

[Adi Shankara]

Actually, they also hate Koreans, Vietnamese, and Russians and anyone else who "steal Mongolian women". Funny that you seem to defend everyone, even the Neo-Nazis, so long as they oppose the Chinese government.

Show me where I defended them, asswipe. I was just saying most of them aren't even Nazis. They just have strong hatred of the Chinese and besides, what Viets? there aren't any Viets in Mongolia.

are you so nationalist you immediately assume I'm anti-PRC for speaking the facts?

[Queercommie Girl]

Show me where I defended them, asswipe. I was just saying most of them aren't even Nazis. They just have strong hatred of the Chinese and besides, what Viets? there aren't any Viets in Mongolia.

are you so nationalist you immediately assume I'm anti-PRC for speaking the facts?

There are Viets in Mongolia, just not as many as Chinese and Russians. The main beef Mongolian nationalists have are with the Chinese and the Russians, for obvious reasons.

[Queercommie Girl]

Frankly, obviously I'm opposed to any form of neo-Nazism, but Mongolia being a third world and Asian country, their neo-Nazism is not as objectively reactionary as first world Euro-American neo-Nazism.

In fact, even though their perceived reasons for upholding neo-Nazism (to defend their nation against the encroachment of the Chinese and the Russians) might be completely misguided, at least in the abstract sense it is more defensive than European neo-Nazism which literally seeks to wipe out every "non-Aryan" race. Ethnic nationalism is still generally much less reactionary than racial nationalism.

And to be fair, ever since China and Russia turned capitalist, there has indeed been some degree of economic exploitation conducted by both the Russians and the Chinese in Mongolia. Of course, the biggest economic threat facing the Mongolian people, like with many other parts of the third world, comes from Western multi-nationals and the Western nation-states that support them, not Russia or China. But neo-Nazis generally are way too dumb to realise this fact.

[Adi Shankara]

There are Viets in Mongolia, just not as many as Chinese and Russians. The main beef Mongolian nationalists have are with the Chinese and the Russians, for obvious reasons.

which is what I said basically, except that they target Chinese more than Russians for whatever reason. Maybe it's the historical antagonism these two cultures share. I don't know.

but in no way was I defending neo-nazi behavior. I'd love for him to show me where I was.

[Queercommie Girl]

which is what I said basically, except that they target Chinese more than Russians for whatever reason. Maybe it's the historical antagonism these two cultures share. I don't know.


It's not due to fundamental historical reasons, but due to the simple fact that the PRC still rules over Inner Mongolia, which the Mongolian nationalists consider to be a part of their country.

If anything, since Mongolians and Chinese are of the same race, (it's often not easy to tell us apart physically) fundamentally Mongolians should be more anti-Russian than anti-Chinese. But for ethnic nationalists like these Mongolian "neo-Nazis" (objectively not an entirely accurate term for them), contemporary political factors like Inner Mongolia obviously takes far greater precedence than abstract considerations of race. This is a fundamental difference between Asian and Western neo-Nazism. The former is more based on ethnicity, the latter is more based on physical race.

[Adi Shankara]

If anything, since Mongolians and Chinese are of the same race, (it's often not easy to tell us apart physically)

Hold on. Mongolians and Chinese aren't the same race! they are two different ethnicities, with Mongolians being descended from Asiatic and Turkic peoples, and Han Chinese being strictly Asiatic.

some Mongolians even have blond hair.

[Queercommie Girl]

Hold on. Mongolians and Chinese aren't the same race! they are two different ethnicities, with Mongolians being descended from Asiatic and Turkic peoples, and Han Chinese being strictly Asiatic.

some Mongolians even have blond hair.

Have you ever being to Mongolia? Very few Mongols have blonde hair.

And actually a few Han people have blonde hair too. Did you know that? But hair colour doesn't matter as much as facial shape.

Physically Mongolians do look like Chinese. You often cannot tell us apart. See for instance the portrait of Genghis Khan made during the Yuan dynasty. Turks in West Asia today look different even though they originated in Eastern Asia because they mixed heavily with the local Greek-speaking populations after migrating West, but the Mongols still have that original "Asiatic" look.

Therefore the "original" Turks in central and eastern Asia were also "purely Asiatic", like the Chinese and the Mongols, today's Turks in Western Asia only look different due to their mixing with the local Greek-speaking population.

Historically Han Chinese in northern China have mixed quite a bit with Mongols, Manchus and Turks as well. Even Mandarin Chinese, the language of northern China, is significantly influenced by the Altaic languages. Altaic royal families ruled in northern China during more than 50% of the last 1000 years of Chinese history. (Khitan Liao, Jurchen Jin, Mongol Yuan, Manchu Qing)

There is no such thing as "pure Han Chinese". Chances are, since I was from northern China, that I have quite a few Mongolian ancestors in the centuries past.

Physical race and ethnicity aren't the same thing. Germans and English are of the same race but two different ethnicities. Of course Mongols and Chinese aren't physically identical but they are far far closer to each other than say Mongols and Russians.

[Devrim]

OK, but anti semitism is not too uncommon in Turkey and especially after this years recent events I'm sure it has intensified. As a result, active right wing groups in Turkey are going to be even more anti semitic.


Yes, but they are not "neo-nazis" in any reasonable sense of the word.

'Wanted Man' is right. To the extent that anti-Semitism exists in Turkey, it is a product of the situation in Palestine and Turkish nationalism. You never see any 'Nazi imagery' or swastikas.

Anti-Semitism does not mean neo-Nazism though.

I would put it down to most of the Neo-Nazis in Europe are pretty much 'Mickey Mouse' affairs, on the political fringe. This isn't the case in Turkey. It is less than a decade since they were in Government, as part of a coalition, and could well be back in power next time. If we go back a few decades they had about 200,000 members and about a million sympathisers*. Why would they want to wave around Nazi flags when they are a serious party with a real possibility of power?

*This doesn't mean voters. They got 5,000,000 votes in the last election. It means organised sympathisers.

[Leo]

I have never heard of them in Turkey. They do exist as far as I am aware of, mostly as a sub-culture of the metal music fan sub-culture, something like the satanists.

[Adi Shankara]

Have you ever being to Mongolia? Very few Mongols have blonde hair.

But alas, they still exist.


And actually a few Han people have blonde hair too. Did you know that? But hair colour doesn't matter as much as facial shape.

You know judging racial characteristics based on physical appearance, skull shape etc. has been completely disproves, right?



Physically Mongolians do look like Chinese. You often cannot tell us apart.

You also can't really tell apart Afghanis from Dravidians either, but that doesn't even mean they are close to the same.


See for instance the portrait of Genghis Khan made during the Yuan dynasty. Turks in West Asia today look different even though they originated in Eastern Asia because they mixed heavily with the local Greek-speaking populations after migrating West, but the Mongols still have that original "Asiatic" look.

Mongolians didn't get their looks from that; they were Turkic, not Greek. Greeks are not Turkic.


Therefore the "original" Turks in central and eastern Asia were also "purely Asiatic", like the Chinese and the Mongols, today's Turks in Western Asia only look different due to their mixing with the local Greek-speaking population.

oh boy, I can just tell you're going to piss off some Turks with that statement :lol:


Physical race and ethnicity aren't the same thing. Germans and English are of the same race but two different ethnicities. Of course Mongols and Chinese aren't physically identical but they are far far closer to each other than say Mongols and Russians.

Germans and English are probably similar, seeing as they're both Saxon descended, but not Celts and English, Celts even have different genetic variables from other ethnicities in the area. Celts also have certain Haplotypes, and Ashkenaz jews are more suspectible to certain diseases than other Europeans, even if they may look exactly the same.

ethnicity isn't that simple as "they look like it, so they are it".

[Queercommie Girl]

But alas, they still exist.


So? The frequency is so low that it hardly matters at all, since among the Han the frequency of blonde hair isn't much lower.



You know judging racial characteristics based on physical appearance, skull shape etc. has been completely disproves, right?


And judging racial characteristics based on "hair colour" hasn't been?

If anything, skull shape has a much more deeper genetic origin than a purely superficial trait like hair colour?



You also can't really tell apart Afghanis from Dravidians either, but that doesn't even mean they are close to the same.


Afghans are still much closer to Dravidians than they are to say Russians or the Chinese.



Mongolians didn't get their looks from that; they were Turkic, not Greek. Greeks are not Turkic.


What is this "Mongolian look" you talk about? Most Mongols have relatively flat faces and narrow eyes like the Chinese and other Asiatic peoples, not prominent straight noses like Western Turks and Greeks. The portrait of Genghis Khan is clearly Asiatic, not Caucasian.



oh boy, I can just tell you're going to piss off some Turks with that statement :lol:


Really? Here is what devrim, who is from Turkey, posted in another thread here on RevLeft:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/radical-feminist-alternative-t135565/index3.html

post no. 43:

It is quite rare to meet Turkish people who look 'mongoloid'. I'd say that it is probably less than 1 in a 1,000. Today's Turks are, as genetic surveys have shown, ethnically very similar to the Greeks. This almost certainly means that a relatively small group of conquers from central Asia took over, then mixed with the local population. I would imagine that the Turks you meet who look 'mongoloid' today are the descendants of more recent immigrants.



Germans and English are probably similar, seeing as they're both Saxon descended, but not Celts and English, Celts even have different genetic variables from other ethnicities in the area. Celts also have certain Haplotypes, and Ashkenaz jews are more suspectible to certain diseases than other Europeans, even if they may look exactly the same.

ethnicity isn't that simple as "they look like it, so they are it".


And frankly you are ignorant of Chinese history. I told you already that northern Chinese people ethnically do have a partial Altaic ancestry. Some historians even think the original Han Chinese tribes also originated in northern Asia.

Han and Mongols do essentially share similar genetic markers on the Y chromosome.

[khad]

To all the numbnuts arguing this, ethnicity isn't the same as race. Ethnicity is much more determined by cultural factors.

To suggest that Mongols and Chinese have no genetic link, when the Mongols were a Chinese dynasty at one point, is sheer idiocy. The Northern Chinese gene pool has been shaped over the centuries by successive migrations and conquests--from Mongolia, Korea, and Siberia. It's one of the most diverse in east Asia.

Also, to talk about things like blonde hair is silly. You find such things even in Laos:

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:KDhC4I6gWbG8yM:/url?source=imgres&ct=tbn&q=http://i35.tinypic.com/1znbi3m.jpg&sa=X&ei=Y_xbTOWjMoH68AaRlODpAQ&ved=0CAUQ8wc&usg=AFQjCNGnWZ-IUJ2URcllyp30xO7NXJwpOA&t=1


You also can't really tell apart Afghanis from Dravidians either, but that doesn't even mean they are close to the same.
Afghans are still much closer to Dravidians than they are to say Russians or the Chinese.Are you fucking shitting me? How does the average Pastun, Uzbek, or Hazara look like someone from Southern India? Uzbeks and Hazaras in fact have explicitly East Asian phenotypes. Afghans may be one nationality, but not one race or ethnicity.

[Queercommie Girl]

To all the numbnuts arguing this, ethnicity isn't the same as race. Ethnicity is much more determined by cultural factors.

To suggest that Mongols and Chinese have no genetic link, when the Mongols were a fucking Chinese dynasty at one point, is sheer idiocy.

Are you fucking shitting me? How does the average Pastun, Uzbek, or Hazara look like someone from Southern India? Uzbeks and Hazaras in fact have explicitly East Asian phenotypes.

Hazaras are a small minority in Afghanistan derived from Mongol soldiers who settled there. Uzbeks are a mixture of Asiatic nomads and the original Indo-European settled populations of central Asia, thus their mixed Eurasian look. But they are not the main ethnic group in Afghanistan. Most Afghans still look largely caucasian, similar to the Dravidians of southern India.

I was referring to the main ethnic groups in Afghanistan, not ones like the Uzbeks or the Hazaras, which are minority populations.

[Devrim]

They do exist as far as I am aware of, mostly as a sub-culture of the metal music fan sub-culture, something like the satanists.

That is one of the advantages of knowing nothing about 'sub-cultures of the metal music fan sub-culture'. I am not sure that 'Satanists' exist in Turkey outside of the imagination of the media really either.

Devrim

[khad]

I was referring to the main ethnic groups in Afghanistan, not ones like the Uzbeks or the Hazaras, which are minority populations.
You just showed your ignorance. There is no majority ethnic group in Afghanistan. Pashtuns are a third of the population, and so are the Tajiks. Uzbeks and Hazara together are nearly 20% of the Afghan population. A smaller group, Aimaks (4%), also have mixed Persian and Mongolian heritage, though they're often counted as Tajiks in census. Afghanistan has always been a multiethnic agglomeration, so take your Great Han chauvinism elsewhere--ethnicity in Afghanistan isn't just something you play dress up with on festival day.

They have more of a right to be recognized as a face of Afghanistan than you as a Chinese living in the UK or France or wherever in Western Europe.

[Devrim]

You also can't really tell apart Afghanis from Dravidians either, but that doesn't even mean they are close to the same.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e2/Afghan_Schoolchildren_in_Kabul.jpg
Afghan kids

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d4/MuralitharanBust2004IMG.JPG

Sri Lankan Cricket player

Devrim

[Devrim]

oh boy, I can just tell you're going to piss off some Turks with that statement :lol:

Really? Here is what devrim, who is from Turkey, posted in another thread here on RevLeft:

post no. 43:

It is quite rare to meet Turkish people who look 'mongoloid'. I'd say that it is probably less than 1 in a 1,000. Today's Turks are, as genetic surveys have shown, ethnically very similar to the Greeks. This almost certainly means that a relatively small group of conquers from central Asia took over, then mixed with the local population. I would imagine that the Turks you meet who look 'mongoloid' today are the descendants of more recent immigrants.

I am not Turkish though I do live here. It does annoy some nationalists though I don't think that we should temper discussions of scientific fact to avoid upsetting nationalists.

Devrim

[Queercommie Girl]

You just showed your ignorance. There is no majority ethnic group in Afghanistan. Pashtuns are a third of the population, and so are the Tajiks. Uzbeks and Hazara together are nearly 20% of the Afghan population. A smaller group, Aimaks (4%), also have mixed Persian and Mongolian heritage, though they're often counted as Tajiks in census. Afghanistan has always been a multiethnic agglomeration, so take your Great Han chauvinism elsewhere--ethnicity in Afghanistan isn't just something you play dress up with on festival day.

They have more of a right to be recognized as a face of Afghanistan than you as a Chinese living in the UK or France or wherever in Western Europe.


I said main groups (plural), not main group (singular). My point is simply that the majority of Afghans are still largely caucasian-looking, nothing more.

I don't see what your point about my alleged "great han chauvinism" is about at all, since that is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand. And frankly you don't know enough about me to accuse me for being a "Han chauvinist". Care to provide any concrete evidence showing that I am a "Han chauvinist"?

And what do you mean "ethnicity in Afghanistan isn't just something you play dress up with on festival day"? Is that what you think ethnicity in China is like? You are indeed bordering on racism here, not to mention it's completely off-topic.

And I never said that ethnic Chinese people living in the UK should become the "face" of the UK either.

How can I be a "Han chauvinist" when I've actually said that there might actually be a bit of an objective justification for the Mongolian nationalists' attitudes, partly based on the exploitation of Mongolia by a now capitalist China?

[Queercommie Girl]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e2/Afghan_Schoolchildren_in_Kabul.jpg
Afghan kids

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d4/MuralitharanBust2004IMG.JPG

Sri Lankan Cricket player

Devrim

Nevertheless, both still look largely caucasian. And most of the Afghans in the first photo certainly looks nothing like East Asians.

[Pavlov's House Party]

These aren't "neo-Nazis", they are racists and nationalists who have adopted some Nazi symbols. There is a big difference between some ignorant racist and a fascist.

[Lenina Rosenweg]

Hold on. Mongolians and Chinese aren't the same race! they are two different ethnicities, with Mongolians being descended from Asiatic and Turkic peoples, and Han Chinese being strictly Asiatic.

some Mongolians even have blond hair.

You may be referring to the Uyghur people concentrated in Sinjiang and possibly the Uzbek people in western China, Afghanistan, and Uzbekistan. The Uyghurs are Turkic speaking with East Asian and European traits mixed in.They probably absorbed the Tocharians, an Indo-European group, at some time.Some Uyghurs look Chinese or Mongolian, some look European.

My understanding is that the term "Turkic" is more linguistic than anything else.
Also Mongolians generally are shorter and stockier than most Han people, I think.

[DunyaGongrenKomRevolyutsi]

'Wanted Man' is right. To the extent that anti-Semitism exists in Turkey, it is a product of the situation in Palestine and Turkish nationalism. You never see any 'Nazi imagery' or swastikas.

Anti-Semitism does not mean neo-Nazism though.

I would put it down to most of the Neo-Nazis in Europe are pretty much 'Mickey Mouse' affairs, on the political fringe. This isn't the case in Turkey. It is less than a decade since they were in Government, as part of a coalition, and could well be back in power next time. If we go back a few decades they had about 200,000 members and about a million sympathisers*. Why would they want to wave around Nazi flags when they are a serious party with a real possibility of power?

*This doesn't mean voters. They got 5,000,000 votes in the last election. It means organised sympathisers.

Good points there, but I would hasten to add that 'neo-nazism' doesnt usually exist on any large scale in Europe either, I mean sure you have some politicians who sympathise with mussolini and are anti-semitic but they are just as bad as their other right wing counterparts in most cases. I wasnt necessarily saying Turkey has a lot of neo-nazis but that, by any other name, they are probably anti semitic and right wing, just like a lot of other politicians who also arent nazis. The difference in most European countries is just that you swap semitic with islamic.

[28350]

Have some mongolian communism (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLF7Fl4SXh8) (yes, I know Tuva is part of Russia, but still) to balance out your diet.

On the bickerings over race:
Have some science (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luigi_Luca_Cavalli-Sforza#Quote) to balance out your diet.

The classification into races has proved to be a futile exercise for reasons that were already clear to Darwin[/URL].


Nazi Israelis? Fuck, that's worse than Nazi Slavs.
Have some [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meir_Kahane"]filthy shitbag (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin)s to balance out your diet.

[RedStarOverChina]

are you so nationalist you immediately assume I'm anti-PRC for speaking the facts?
Nearly everyone on this board, myself included, are critical of the Chinese state. That's not the problem.

The problem is your willingness to defend even Nazis and Lamaist, coupled with your tendency to make up "facts" out of thin air.


Show me where I defended them, asswipe. I was just saying most of them aren't even Nazis. They just have strong hatred of the Chinese and besides, what Viets? there aren't any Viets in Mongolia.
O RLY?


"We hate the Chinese, Koreans and Vietnamese,” the current head of Dayar Mongol calmly states in an interview, “because they do a lot of illegal things such as human trafficking, selling drugs and prostitution […]"
Three years ago, the leader of "Blue Mongol", another neo-Nazi group, was convicted of killing his daughter's boyfriend because the young man had studied in China.
"[They] shave the heads of women caught sleeping with Chinese men.” G. Damdinsuren, a Dayar Mongol board member, justified the tactics. “It is for their own good […] A small nation can only survive by keeping its blood pure."They are neo-Nazis, pure and simple. Stop defending them.

And don't come up with any more stupid ignorant crap about how "there are no Vietnamese in Mongolia".

[danyboy27]

hell most of them don't even know what the Holocaust was I'm willing to bet, but they use it exemplify their hatred of Chinese people, due to the Chinese government's stranglehold on the Mongolian economy.

Mongolian have history book too you know.

[Blackscare]

I have never heard of them in Turkey. Probably because Turkey has its own local version of fascism, which is very successful and makes the European neo-Nazi's look pretty much like a tea party.

Devrim


For curiosity's sake, what is the name of this brand of Turkish fascism?

[Vanguard1917]

For curiosity's sake, what is the name of this brand of Turkish fascism?

I believe Devrim is referring to the MHP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalist_Movement_Party). It was at its most dangerous as a CIA-backed counter-revolutionary militia during the 1970s, waging all-out war against the Turkish labour movement.

[Devrim]

For curiosity's sake, what is the name of this brand of Turkish fascism?

The main Turkish fascist organisation is the MHP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalist_Movement_Party), a smaller more extreme version is the BBP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Union_Party).

Devrim

[Devrim]

Good points there, but I would hasten to add that 'neo-nazism' doesnt usually exist on any large scale in Europe either, I mean sure you have some politicians who sympathise with mussolini and are anti-semitic but they are just as bad as their other right wing counterparts in most cases. I wasnt necessarily saying Turkey has a lot of neo-nazis but that, by any other name, they are probably anti semitic and right wing, just like a lot of other politicians who also arent nazis. The difference in most European countries is just that you swap semitic with islamic.

By 'Neo-Nazi' I mean the people running around with Swastikas and wearing funny clothes. I wouldn't say that the BNP in the UK today is 'Neo-Nazi' for example.

Devrim

[Adi Shankara]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e2/Afghan_Schoolchildren_in_Kabul.jpg
Afghan kids

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d4/MuralitharanBust2004IMG.JPG

Sri Lankan Cricket player

Devrim

My mistake, and apologies for my ignorance. I thought Dravidians referred to Northern Indians, esp. from the Punjab region and . I won't make that mistake again.

[Adi Shankara]

Nearly everyone on this board, myself included, are critical of the Chinese state. That's not the problem.

The problem is your willingness to defend even Nazis and Lamaist, coupled with your tendency to make up "facts" out of thin air.


O RLY?

They are neo-Nazis, pure and simple. Stop defending them.

And don't come up with any more stupid ignorant crap about how "there are no Vietnamese in Mongolia".

yeah, you still haven't shown me where I defended neo-nazi behavior. you have yet to (and never will) do that.

[Blackscare]

yeah, you still haven't shown me where I defended neo-nazi behavior. you have yet to (and never will) do that.


He was talking about how you denied they were actually neo-nazis and were instead just anti-PRC nationalists. The regalia they sport is telling though.

You can be rabid nationalist, or even a fascist, and not be a neo-nazi. But when you start actually mimicking nazi dress, etc, you become a very specific sub-type of fascist/ultra-nationalist, you become a neo-nazi.

[Adi Shankara]

You can be rabid nationalist, or even a fascist, and not be a neo-nazi. But when you start actually mimicking nazi dress, etc, you become a very specific sub-type of fascist/ultra-nationalist, you become a neo-nazi.

But isn't that just playing dress up? like, Rastafarians who have dreadlocks and smoke weed, but don't know the scripture behind it?

And me personally, I feel uncomfortable calling anyone who isn't a "Nordic European" a neo-nazi, mainly because a key tenet of nazi faith was that the nordic Europeans were superior to other races.

They seem to be racist national socialists, but not "Nazi" in the traditional sense.

[DunyaGongrenKomRevolyutsi]

By 'Neo-Nazi' I mean the people running around with Swastikas and wearing funny clothes. I wouldn't say that the BNP in the UK today is 'Neo-Nazi' for example.

Devrim

Yes that is right, also your point about the media hyping up neo nazism could be applicable to mongolia too (they are only showing one group,you could make nazis in this country look "big and menacing" if you showed enough pictures of the same group and said "oh look they are big and menacing".

[RedStarOverChina]

But isn't that just playing dress up? like, Rastafarians who have dreadlocks and smoke weed, but don't know the scripture behind it?
Yeah, they play dress-ups, shave women's heads for sleeping with foreigners, and murder their daughter's boyfriend for being unpatriotic.

What's the big deal?

Jesus fucking Christ!

[Adi Shankara]

Yeah, they play dress-ups, shave women's heads for sleeping with foreigners, and murder their daughter's boyfriend for being unpatriotic.

What's the big deal?

Jesus fucking Christ!


I said they were racial supremacists and bigoted. but not "nazis". there is a difference, but I don't see what significance it makes calling them a nazi.

by definition they can't be Nazi, just like Russians can't be nazi (even though they do it anyways) and just like blacks can't be KKK.

But I guess you're going to accuse me of defending them because I don't like abusing these terms lightly. They're racist, yes, they're bigoted, yes. but not nazis.

[Blackscare]

But isn't that just playing dress up? like, Rastafarians who have dreadlocks and smoke weed, but don't know the scripture behind it?

And you assume they don't know anything about the ideology they speak of why?

Oh yea, it's because they're mongolians who've never heard of the holocaust or or any other such historical facts that we westerners are privy to. :rolleyes:

[Adi Shankara]

And you assume they don't know anything about the ideology they speak of why?

Oh yea, it's because they're mongolians who've never heard of the holocaust or or any other such historical facts that we westerners are privy to. :rolleyes:

No, I never assumed that. It's just that Mongolians don't share the holocaust as a collective experience the way those in the West do.

[Blackscare]

But I guess you're going to accuse me of defending them because I don't like abusing these terms lightly. They're racist, yes, they're bigoted, yes. but not nazis.

I don't know, if you call yourself a nazi/neo-nazi and wear a swastika, I'll believe you. Ideologies can be adapted and slightly changed while still preserving their basic nature. Original Nazism was based on nordic europeans, but that doesn't mean that all the other tenets and attitudes about race couldn't translate to another fit another situation.

There's a reason they're called neo-nazis, not nazis. Neo-Nazis take inspiration from and trace their roots to original nazis, but nowhere are they the same thing as the originals. I'm pretty sure that Hitler would look down his nose at Neo-Nazis today whether they be from the american heartland, serbia, or mongolia. You're splitting hairs here and it's getting really annoying.

[Blackscare]

No, I never assumed that. It's just that Mongolians don't share the holocaust as a collective experience the way those in the West do.
they don't hate everyone who isn't Mongolian, hell most of them don't even know what the Holocaust was I'm willing to bet,K.

[Edit]

I'd also like to add that you've never once in your life been part of the "collective experience" of being in the holocaust, and neither have I. All we know about it today, by and large, is what the history books tell us about. You didn't experience it any more than a mongolian has, and you both basically have the exact same sources to go by. Ok, maybe you've talked to an elderly person who had been through the holocaust, once or twice. Big whoop, still nothing close to some kind of "authentic" understanding that we westerners somehow have simply by being western.

[Adi Shankara]

K.

I phrased that wrong. I meant "know what it is" in the terms of what it means to Westerners and Europeans.

[Sasha]

Ok, maybe you've talked to an elderly person who had been through the holocaust once or twice. Big whoop

i think you want to add some punctuation to that sentence ;)

[Os Cangaceiros]

"Neo-Nazism" as far as I can tell is simply a term used to describe militant fascists...it's not used to describe a direct line from German National Socialists--> Neo-Nazis. Which is kind of odd, seeing as Neo-Nazi means "New Nazi", but yeah. Fascism and various tenets of traditional German national socialism (such as the defense of "blood and honor") can exist in any country...that's why it's not such a big suprise to see Russian skinheads with swastika and Hitler tattoos, even though they would've been considered sub-Aryan according to Nazi orthodoxy. I don't see why anyone should doubt their sincerity, simply because they're Asian.

[Queercommie Girl]

Asian "neo-Nazis" objectively speaking are just largely ethnic nationalists who are fetishly attached to Hitler-style symbols, not "classical Nazis" in the Western sense. It doesn't mean they are not reactionary, of course.

[Dimentio]

Frankly, obviously I'm opposed to any form of neo-Nazism, but Mongolia being a third world and Asian country, their neo-Nazism is not as objectively reactionary as first world Euro-American neo-Nazism.

In fact, even though their perceived reasons for upholding neo-Nazism (to defend their nation against the encroachment of the Chinese and the Russians) might be completely misguided, at least in the abstract sense it is more defensive than European neo-Nazism which literally seeks to wipe out every "non-Aryan" race. Ethnic nationalism is still generally much less reactionary than racial nationalism.

And to be fair, ever since China and Russia turned capitalist, there has indeed been some degree of economic exploitation conducted by both the Russians and the Chinese in Mongolia. Of course, the biggest economic threat facing the Mongolian people, like with many other parts of the third world, comes from Western multi-nationals and the Western nation-states that support them, not Russia or China. But neo-Nazis generally are way too dumb to realise this fact.

European neo-nazism is not about wiping out non-aryans but to "take away non-aryans from Europe to prevent" what they call "race mixing". Modern nazism is more defensive overally than the old brand. If a nazi party won power in a European country today, it would most likely resemble Apartheid South Africa or South Rhodesia or Israel in its policies rather than Nazi Germany.

That is equally reactionary of course, but one cannot defeat an opponent without knowing their agenda.

[Queercommie Girl]

^

Actually in that case I don't think it is equally reactionary, I think classical Nazism of Hitler's era, the one that directly slaughtered 6 million Jews in concentration camps, is not on the same level as modern European Nazism today that just aims to drive out all immigrants and non-whites from Europe.

[Dimentio]

In some cases, neo-nazis in Europe are a bit more progressive-friendly than the more "democratic" xenophobic parties. They are generally against military intervention in foreign countries for example, not out of anti-imperialism or solidarity but because they live in the delusion that "ZOG" is behind everything.

[Queercommie Girl]

Frankly, to call neo-Nazis of any kind "progressive-friendly" is a grave political mistake.

Here is some serious news of neo-Nazi activities in Russia against the Trotskyist CWI:

http://chinaworker.info/en/content/news/1156/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+chinaworker-en+%28China+Worker+-+English+articles%29

[Dimentio]

Frankly, to call neo-Nazis of any kind "progressive-friendly" is a grave political mistake.

Here is some serious news of neo-Nazi activities in Russia against the Trotskyist CWI:

http://chinaworker.info/en/content/news/1156/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+chinaworker-en+%28China+Worker+-+English+articles%29

Of course they are attacking real progressive movements physically. What I'm referring to is the fact that nazis in general are against the occupation of Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan, though for bizarre reasons.

Last autumn, Swedish nazis for example demonstrated together with Palestinian Arabs during the al-Quds day.

That's why nazis and fascists in Sweden hate one another. The fascists are Pro-Israel.

[IndependentCitizen]

Why are some people arguing that they're not nazis?
I thought the fundamental belief of nazi morons was the 'preservation' of one's so called superior race?

[Queercommie Girl]

^

They are not "Nazis" in the classical sense because they are not motivated by racial nationalism, but by ethnic nationalism.

Asian "neo-Nazis" do not believe that the Asian or Mongolid race is the "master race", like Nazis in the West who believe that the white race is the "master race". Mongols and Chinese are essentially the same race but Mongol "neo-Nazis" hate the Chinese more than anyone else. What motivates them is nationalism, not racialism.

[IndependentCitizen]

Thanks for clearing that up for me.

[Aesop]

^

They are not "Nazis" in the classical sense because they are not motivated by racial nationalism, but by ethnic nationalism.

What are you on about.

whats the difference between racial and ethno-nationalism?

In addition you will be very hard pressed to find any nazis in a classical sense.

[Queercommie Girl]

What are you on about.

whats the difference between racial and ethno-nationalism?

In addition you will be very hard pressed to find any nazis in a classical sense.

By "Nazis in the classical sense" I meant Nazis during Hitler's time, i.e. those who believed that the white or Aryan race is fundamentally and biologically superior compared with all other races.

I'm not saying today's Nazis in the West are necessarily Nazis in this classical sense. I think some modern neo-Nazis in the West may be similar to the Asian neo-Nazis in that they are also largely just ethnic nationalists.

The difference between racialism and nationalism is very clear. The former is more reactionary than the latter. Racialism believes that a particular group of humans are biologically superior than all others in an intrinsic sense due to their skin colour, hair colour, genetics, facial shape etc, and while nationalists may also be quite reactionary, they do not believe that their nation is superior in this biological sense, but only in the political or at most cultural sense. In fact, many nationalists don't think of their nation as superior at all, they just believe in absolute political loyalty to their nation, and will fight for their nation at all costs. They might even think the idea that their own nation is somehow "intrinsically" superior is a dangerous one, because it can lead to complacency and therefore political and military defeat.

Racialism is always reactionary. Nationalism can actually be left-wing and partially progressive if it is essentially a part of a national liberation movement against imperialism and colonialism.

In short:

Racialism is the political belief that one's own physical race is biologically superior than other races, and therefore politically should rule over other races as the "master race".

Nationalism is the political belief that one should have absolute political loyalty to one's nation, regardless of what the nation may do in practice. It might also mean one believes that one's own nation is politically and culturally superior than other nations, but this is not necessarily the case for many nationalists.

[Aesop]

By "Nazis in the classical sense" I meant Nazis during Hitler's time, i.e. those who believed that the Aryan race is fundamentally and biologically superior compared with all other races.

*Fixed


I'm not saying today's Nazis in the West are necessarily Nazis in this classical sense. I think some modern neo-Nazis in the West may be similar to the Asian neo-Nazis in that they are also largely just ethnic nationalists.

How exactly is ethnic/ethno-nationalism different from racism. What would you call the BNP?


The difference between racialism and nationalism is very clear. The former is more reactionary than the latter.

Wait a minute you were talking about ethnic nationalism in your previous post now you shifted on to nationlism.

Could you explain the difference between racialism, ethnic nationalism and nationalism?

btw, chinese and mongolian people do not have to be of the same 'race' seeing race is socially constructed and arbitrary. Using your logic i guess that hitler was not motivated by racialism but by nationalism when you killed polish people seeing as they happen to be seen as 'white'.


Racialism is always reactionary. Nationalism can actually be left-wing and partially progressive if it is essentially a part of a national liberation movement against imperialism and colonialism.

I know what nationalism is, but your post was in regard into ethnic nationalism which is often just racism given a different name.

[Queercommie Girl]

How exactly is ethnic/ethno-nationalism different from racism. What would you call the BNP?


One involves arguments based on physical race. (Or some sort of invented "semi-mystical" idea of "physical race") The other does not.

The BNP IMO is at the core still a classical Nazi party based on Aryanism but on the surface because such a line is too "politically incorrect" they pretend to just be an ethnic-nationalist party and even allow black and Asian people to join. But my view is "politically biased" since I'm very strongly anti-fascist so I tend to see the worst in neo-Nazi parties.



Wait a minute you were talking about ethnic nationalism in your previous post now you shifted on to nationlism.

Could you explain the difference between racialism, ethnic nationalism and nationalism?


I was using ethnic-nationalism and nationalism interchangably since in practice they often mean the same kind of thing. The modern nation-state in the capitalist sense emerged around distinct ethnic groups for the most part. (There are also a few multi-ethnic nations in the world but politically they tend to be less stable)



btw, chinese and mongolian people do not have to be of the same 'race' seeing race is socially constructed and arbitrary. Using your logic i guess that hitler was not motivated by racialism but by nationalism when you killed polish people seeing as they happen to be seen as 'white'.


The Nazis had a complex hierarchical theory of race. There are races and sub-races. Both Germans and Polish people belonged to the white race, but different sub-races: Germanic vs. Slavic. Hitler thought the Slavs were inferior to the Germans but as white people still superior to the Asiatics like the Mongols and Chinese, who in turn are superior to Black people.

I guess Jews are an exception because even though physically they were white they were placed at the bottom of the racial hierarchy. But for the Nazis being a Jew certainly wasn't just a cultural thing, they had physical measurement criteria for Jewish "racial phenotypes", such as having a big nose beyond a certain size for example. In practice this kind of "tests" never really worked that well since objectively the Jews never were a homogenous racial group but it shows the Nazi's racialist mentality.

Similarly, Mongols and Chinese are of the same "race" but different "sub-races".

"Race" is a social construction, but crucially it is still a social construction that pretends to be scientific and having a physical basis. Racialists would certainly never subjectively admit that they are just relying on a social construction. For them it's all physically genuine.



I know what nationalism is, but your post was in regard into ethnic nationalism which is often just racism given a different name.

As I said, technically they are not the same as one is fundamentally based on some kind of idea involving physical race, while the other does not.

[Aesop]

One involves arguments based on physical race. (Or some sort of invented "semi-mystical" idea of "physical race") The other does not.

What?
ethno-nationalism does not have to involve arguements on 'physical race'. ethno-nationalism is a superfically term for just plain old racism. The BNP refer to themselves as ethno-nationalist so they don't scare away potenially voters.


The BNP IMO is at the core still a classical Nazi party based on Aryanism but on the surface because such a line is too "politically incorrect" they pretend to just be an ethnic-nationalist party and even allow black and Asian people to join. But my view is "politically biased" since I'm very strongly anti-fascist so I tend to see the worst in neo-Nazi parties.

They don't pretend to be 'ethnic-nationalist', they are ethno-nationalists(white-nationalist/neo-nazi). Sorry mate i can't believe you can not recongnise that the ethno-nationalism of the bnp is exactly the same as white-nationalism/neo-nazism. It is not rocket science why they decide to talk about ethnic british people as being celts, saxons and norse people.



I was using ethnic-nationalism and nationalism interchangably since in practice they often mean the same kind of thing.

So the SNP are ethnic-nationalists?
So you don't make the distintation between civic and ethnic nationalism.
So the SNP are the same as the BNP


The modern nation-state in the capitalist sense emerged around distinct ethnic groups for the most part. (There are also a few multi-ethnic nations in the world but politically they tend to be less stable)

:confused:Multi-ethnic nations tend to be less stable. Name me one nation which is not multi-ethnic?




The Nazis had a complex hierarchical theory of race. There are races and sub-races. Both Germans and Polish people belonged to the white race, but different sub-races: Germanic vs. Slavic. Hitler thought the Slavs were inferior to the Germans but as white people still superior to the Asiatics like the Mongols and Chinese, who in turn are superior to Black people.

Gosh.
Nazis did not have a 'complex hierarchial theory of race'. Aryan was what they meant by white. Unless if you read history with one eye closed you will realise that the defintion of white did not exist other in places which were settler colonies such as the USA, Austraila, Hong Kong. Hence this talk of poles being seen as white but being sub-race slav is ahistorical like the rest of your post.


Similarly, Mongols and Chinese are of the same "race" but different "sub-races".

Nonsense. As stated before races are socially constructed hence they differ between time and space, you may view them as the same race and part of a different 'sub-race'. But this view may be different to the view of these mongolian neo-nazis. Hence you may view polish people and german people as the same race but different sub-groups, but your view is not a view held by others such as nazis viewed them as a different race.


"Race" is a social construction, but crucially it is still a social construction that pretends to be scientific and having a physical basis.

This makes no sense. Do you mean racists 'try to make out that races are biologically features rather than socially constructed.


Racialists would certainly never subjectively admit that they are just relying on a social construction. For them it's all physically genuine.

I agree.




As I said, technically they are not the same as one is fundamentally based on some kind of idea involving physical race, while the other does not.

Don't think so.

[Comrade Mango]

I hate hearing about neo nazism.

[Queercommie Girl]

What?
ethno-nationalism does not have to involve arguements on 'physical race'. ethno-nationalism is a superfically term for just plain old racism. The BNP refer to themselves as ethno-nationalist so they don't scare away potenially voters.


Do you have a problem with your own first language, English?

I never said ethno-nationalism involves arguments of physical race. I said precisely the opposite, I meant that ethno-nationalism is not based on physical race, but Nazism is, which is the fundamental difference between the two.



They don't pretend to be 'ethnic-nationalist', they are ethno-nationalists(white-nationalist/neo-nazi). Sorry mate i can't believe you can not recongnise that the ethno-nationalism of the bnp is exactly the same as white-nationalism/neo-nazism. It is not rocket science why they decide to talk about ethnic british people as being celts, saxons and norse people.


The BNP actually has Black and Asian members. Did you know that? There is an ethnic Vietnamese member of the BNP who is a strong supporter. Ethno-nationalism isn't identical to white nationalism.

I don't disagree that deep down the BNP is a racist Nazi organisation that believes white people are superior, but that's not what they preach in public.



So the SNP are ethnic-nationalists?
So you don't make the distintation between civic and ethnic nationalism.
So the SNP are the same as the BNP


No because the BNP is not just ethno-nationalist. If they were they would still be reactionary but not so much. They are reactionary primarily because they are Nazis, no matter what kind of mild nationalist cover they put over their faces.

Technically the SNP is also reactionary from a Marxist perspective, but much less so. Also, compared with England, Scotland is a relatively oppressed nation (oppressed by the English), so it's somewhat different.



:confused:Multi-ethnic nations tend to be less stable. Name me one nation which is not multi-ethnic?


The majority of nation-states in the world emerged around a single dominant ethnic group. That's just world history 101. It also fits in with the Marxist theory of how capitalist nation-states developed.



Gosh.
Nazis did not have a 'complex hierarchial theory of race'. Aryan was what they meant by white. Unless if you read history with one eye closed you will realise that the defintion of white did not exist other in places which were settler colonies such as the USA, Austraila, Hong Kong. Hence this talk of poles being seen as white but being sub-race slav is ahistorical like the rest of your post.


Yes, the Nazis did have a hierarchical theory of race. Their ideology is actually quite complex. They utilised many pseudo-scientific methods to measure physical races.

You should not be so ignorant about the Nazis, since they are our enemy. "Know your enemy and know yourself".

The idea of "white race" and "white supremacy" did not begin with the Nazis, but much earlier. I suggest you read the excellent historical text "A People's History of the United States". Racism was used as a tool by the ruling capitalist class to artificially divide the working class along racial lines so they can't unite together to fight the capitalists.



Nonsense. As stated before races are socially constructed hence they differ between time and space, you may view them as the same race and part of a different 'sub-race'. But this view may be different to the view of these mongolian neo-nazis. Hence you may view polish people and german people as the same race but different sub-groups, but your view is not a view held by others such as nazis viewed them as a different race.


Irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that Mongol neo-Nazis do not view the Chinese as a different race. Their ideology isn't even primarily based on physical race.

My point was that according to the Nazi theory of races, both Chinese and Mongols belonged to the "Asiatic" race but different sub-races. I didn't say this view is necessarily objectively correct, though genetic analysis does show that the Mongols and the Chinese are quite close to each other in terms of "genetic differentiation", not that it really matters either way.



This makes no sense. Do you mean racists 'try to make out that races are biologically features rather than socially constructed.


Your grasp of the English language seems to be less than ideal. My point is that although objectively "race" is a social construction, for the Nazis it is something that is physically real.



Don't think so.


Like I said, the point here is simply that ethno-nationalism is not based on physical race but Nazism is based on ideas about physical race.

[Aesop]

Do you have a problem with your own first language, English?

I never said ethno-nationalism involves arguments of physical race. I said precisely the opposite, I meant that ethno-nationalism is not based on physical race, but Nazism is, which is the fundamental difference between the two.

Mate my command of the english language is fine.
It is you who fails to see that ethno-nationalism is just more of a less 'scary' of the BNP is the same as neo-nazism. I can't believe you fail to see it.




The BNP actually has Black and Asian members. Did you know that? There is an ethnic Vietnamese member of the BNP who is a strong supporter. Ethno-nationalism isn't identical to white nationalism.

Yes i did know that, try not to be condescending when you talking out of your arse.
Just because there is this so called one vietnamese supporter of the bnp does that mean the organisation no longer ceases to be a neo-nazi/ethno-nationalist/white-nationalist party?
If they were not a white-nationalist party how come in their manifesto they seek to pay people who happen not to be white to leave britain?
Anyway do you have only prove that they have black members?
The only reason why they do admit black and asian members is because they were pressured by the courts to do so.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/oct/15/bnp-non-white-members



I don't disagree that deep down the BNP is a racist Nazi organisation that believes white people are superior, but that's not what they preach in public.

I agree, but the only reason why they are not preaching it in public is due to the current political climate. Hence why they have switched from speaking about jews and gays, to other issues which the media has whipped up such as islam and immigration.


No because the BNP is not just ethno-nationalist. If they were they would still be reactionary but not so much. They are reactionary primarily because they are Nazis, no matter what kind of mild nationalist cover they put over their faces.

Refer back to my first post.


Technically the SNP is also reactionary from a Marxist perspective, but much less so. Also, compared with England, Scotland is a relatively oppressed nation (oppressed by the English), so it's somewhat different.

Now your just trying to evade the question.
Are ethno-nationalism and nationalism the same thing?




The majority of nation-states in the world emerged around a single dominant ethnic group. That's just world history 101. It also fits in with the Marxist theory of how capitalist nation-states developed.

Now we are talking past each other
You stated that multi-ethnic states tend to be less stable in your previous post.
I am asking you to state one nation-state that is not 'multi-ethnic'?





You should not be so ignorant about the Nazis, since they are our enemy. "Know your enemy and know yourself".

Coming from someone who thinks ethno-nationalism and nationalism(civic) is the same, and can't see that the BNP are a White-nationalist/neo-nazis party.


The idea of "white race" and "white supremacy" did not begin with the Nazis, but much earlier. I suggest you read the excellent historical text "A People's History of the United States". Racism was used as a tool by the ruling capitalist class to artificially divide the working class along racial lines so they can't unite together to fight the capitalists.

I never said that the concept of 'white' did not pre-date the nazis.
Fighting against a strawman?
If that book was written by Howard Zinn, and yes i have read that book.




Irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that Mongol neo-Nazis do not view the Chinese as a different race. Their ideology isn't even primarily based on physical race.

Racism is does not have to be based on a 'physical race'.
:confused:Well they must do, otherwise they would not be saying this "We have to make sure that as a nation our blood is pure"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/aug/02/mongolia-far-right



Your grasp of the English language seems to be less than ideal. My point is that although objectively "race" is a social construction, for the Nazis it is something that is physically real.

What the hell do you mean by physically real.
Do you mean that for nazis it is a biologically fact?




Like I said, the point here is simply that ethno-nationalism is not based on physical race but Nazism is based on ideas about physical race.

.........What are you trying to say?
Are you trying to say that ethno-nationalism is not based on physical features(such as skin colour, hair colour) and nazism is based on physical features.