Are all white racists the same as “white supremacists”? When I hear about “white national extremists” or “white supremacists”, I picture people like the neo-nazi mentioned in about 5 of Ascenray’s 8 links. That’s what I think of, and that’s why I wouldn’t say those types of people present a pervasive problem in the military.
If we’re just talking about “racists”… that’s an entire different argument. There are a shit ton of racists. All kinds and all manner of racists. I would agree that “racism” is a pervasive problem in the military. Along with sexism.
Maybe we’re just disagreeing about the degree of racism that makes a person a supremacist? I guess I don’t really know where that line should be. Or if there should be a line at all.
I watched this live and thought this very thing. I wondered how his parents, and whoever got him his appointment to the academy are going to feel about this.
I’ve snipped your very long post so I can respond to the part directed at me. I think you are really, really anxious to stretch a point, and I’m not sure why. Your comment to Ascenray downthread indicates you don’t know what the difference between racism and white supremacy is. Why you wouldn’t you learn the difference before speculating that “only” 1% saw white nationalism and 21% saw racism if you didn’t know the difference? Maybe you erroneously thought my post was anti-US military and got defensive. In fact, it’s quite the opposite: I have tremendous respect for our military and want to see those trying to use its training for their own despicable white nationalist ends out of there. I want it almost as badly as military leadership does.
Even if you’re baseless speculation is accurate, which I doubt, 1% is still a hefty number when you consider white supremacist and white nationalist groups encourage members to infiltrate the military and specifically seek people with military training for leadership positions. The FBI realized this was an issue back in 2008, as Stars and Stripes reported:
and military leadership recognizes it today. In fact, the army just got rid of an acronym that has long been used by the Army Black Knights:
If you prefer to think Monken and Gen. Williams are over-reacting or too sensitive, do let them know.
And if you want to play around with percentages, be my guest.
Meanwhile, if you truly care about the military, as I do, then you’ll stop trying to argue the issue doesn’t exist and will see white supremacy in its ranks as military leaders do: a threat that is bad for the military and bad for the USA. Let’s get 'em out of there.
It honestly never occurred to me that we would be talking past each other on the basis of whether there are racists would notdare make a fairly covert signal. I mean, it isn’t like they are doing a Nazi salute in the pictures.
Now, once again, the gesture is ambiguous and I can see that is could be innocent horseplay or racist horseplay. As I said before, an investigation is in order before declaring anyone guilty — but I’m sure not going to declare anyone innocent at this stage either.
Let me use another example. The number 88 is associated with neo-Nazis. It is possible that if you see the number 88 dropped in to a conversation, it could be a subtle signal to those communicating on the same wavelength. Or, the person could be a big Dez Bryant fan.
But just because 88 is a popular number for wide receivers going back generations, doesn’t mean it doesn’t have a nefarious meaning in some contexts.
I don’t think I’ve made myself clear. Firstly, I know the difference between racism and “white supremacy”. My comment to ravenman was based on his statement about the retired military personnel at his country club expressing racist views. I wanted to make sure we are all on the same page with respect to what a white supremacists is. If someone believes that every white racist is, by definition, a white supremacists then that pretty much ends the discussion. My stance is not that there are no racists in the military, but that “white supremacists” are not a “pervasive problem” in the military. I didn’t state that I don’t know the difference between the two, just that I don’t really know where people are drawing the line, nor do I have a hard belief on where that line should be drawn. I find it important in a discussion like this to ensure we are all working off the same distinction.
Secondly, I am not being defensive. I don’t view any of these comments as anti-military.
Finally, I don’t think you understand my point about that statistic. The question lumps racism and white supremacy together. I wasn’t “speculating” on what the actual percentage might be. I was trying to point out the fact that the statistic is meaningless. If I conducted a survey asking participants if they travelled to either Florida or Europe last year, and 22% answered YES, that doesn’t actually suggest 22% of the people traveled to the Europe. It isn’t improper of me to point that out. It’s a lazy, and possibly intentionally loaded, survey question.
And it isn’t just white supremacists and neo-nazi groups looking to recruit veterans and infiltrate the military. Street gangs and cartels are doing the same thing. I am not denying these things. I just disagree about how “pervasive” this problem is in the military. The Pentagon seems to agree with me based on the statement in Ascenry’s cite.
But not every racist is a fan of Hitler. If someone made a racist comment, I wouldn’t automatically assume they are a white supremacists. If they were signalling with discreet 88s and the like, then yes, I would consider them white supremacists. I’ve met the former in the military. I’ve not seen the latter.
You said that the retired O6s at your country club made comments about Obama that were not based on his politics. That alone does not strike me as prime evidence the speaker is a white supremacists or a neo-nazi. I’d think they were racist, sure, but not necessarily a neo-nazi. Do you disagree with that?
No, I don’t think they were over-reacting. Calling it “Goofiness” and having it removed is by no means an over reaction.
But did you intentionally leave out the fact that:
“A two-month investigation by the military found that the motto as used without knowledge of its origin and had nothing to do “with the views or beliefs of white supremacist groups or any other disreputable organizations with which they might also be associated,” according to an executive summary of the investigation’s final report.”
I would expect West Point to have a freshman talk, orienting cadets to the rules of conduct they are held to while in and out of uniform. By now, I would also expect this talk to specifically address this hand gesture. There is no reason any of these students should ignorant about its connotations.
I wonder how the “THEY ARE JUST PLAYING A GAME!!” contingent would feel if West Point and similar institutions decide to prohibit cadets from playing this game while in uniform. I would be OK with this since the hand gesture would then officially become a stupid game with a stupid prize. Rather than just a stupid game.
Personally, I’d be perfectly okay with that. In fact, I hope they do. It was childish and unprofessional way before it was ever controversial. While I agree that “there is no reason any[one]… should [be] ignorant” about it’s potential for controversy and of the way it could be perceived by others, the fact is, many people are–new and old soldiers alike. The incident was brought up at work today and there were several soldiers who commented, “Wait, what!? People think it’s racist!?”. This came from a senior NCO with almost 17 years in the Army. There are others, still, who simply brush aside any insinuation that the gesture has or could have anything to do with White Power, and believe that such a perception is an issue for the offended to deal with, not for them to care about. So, it’s more than possible for soldiers–especially new cadets–to be either completely ignorant or completely apathetic to the potential White Power perceptions, connotations or interpretations of their gestures.
I can’t explain how some people can be ignorant of this. I only know that they are.
I predict that an Army wide, if not DOD-wide, policy letter will be coming soon.
I do view the issue as military leaders do. I am a leader in the military. I think our zero tolerance approach is working just fine, which is why I don’t think there is a “pervasive problem”. If someone is identified as having extremist views, they are punished and kicked out. If those views involved criminal activity, they are arrested and prosecuted. An Army private with far-right extremist views was arrested for “distributing information related to explosives” in Kansas a few months ago. These incidents are few and far between and do not constitute a pervasive problem. Speaking for the Pentagon, Jessica Maxwell states, “Out standards are clear; participation in extremist activities has never been tolerated” and is a punishable offense. If the military were tolerant of white supremacists, if it ignored complaints or reports, or tried to sweep things under the rug to protect careers, or if it otherwise fostered these views among it’s personnel, then I would agree there is a pervasive problem. But this is not the case. When such people are discovered, they are dealt with. Offenders are not “reassigned” or moved. They are punished and removed from service.
Agreed. And that is exactly the policy of the US Military.
Without putting much thought into it, I’d say neo Nazis generally support Hitler; but not all racists support Hitler.
I’m having a hard time thinking of a useful distinction between someone who is racist and someone who is a white supremacist. Maybe to some, a white supremacist implies a connection to an organization… but I’m not sure that’s universally accepted. On first blush, if someone thinks blacks are bad, it seems a natural corollary to assume that they think whites are superior, so how does that not translate to white supremacy?
To be clear, I see the point you are making, but my take is that we’re really splitting hairs on the matter.
A white supremacist wants to use force of arms to eradicate, or at least subjugate and enslave, all non-white residents of the US.(Never met one in 20 years in the Navy, not withstanding Bear_Nenno’s views on that organization] A racist can be someone who makes his juniors who happen to be non-white work twice as hard to get the same evaluation. (Have seen that behavior several times, and have seen it stamped out each time).
Check out the ADL definition of White Supremacy. I don’t want to post a link, because this is a work computer.
Fair point that this definition is more than just passive bigotry. But it says nothing about eradication, and subjugation/enslavement is just number one of several definitions, and it doesn’t seem to entirely fit within the text posted. (E.g., a race can be “dominated” without being enslaved.)
I see this, and the reaction to it, as strong incentive for white supremacists to highjack other hand gestures. It only takes few more before people start seeing racism everywhere.
Lord Jesus. It’s a perfectly innocent symbol that has been used for years and years. I don’t care if a relative handful of people started using it for their own shitty purposes. They don’t get to determine what a symbol means at large.
I could say that the peace symbol now means you support human trafficking. How many of you would suddenly stop using it? Hopefully none, because that would only give me power over you. Screw that.