https://graphics.reuters.com/USA-WHITE NATIONALST/0100B0DQ0VQ/index.html
The whole thing is an extremely educative read, but I'll highlight some of the parts most relevant to the WR (shit that many of the posters here have been warning about for a while).
Here's a quote about the general strategy:
Here's another:
Here's one example of that softened rhetoric:
And here's an example of a white nationalist claiming he isn't racist:
Anyway, I bring all this up mainly because I know
@MadDildo and the other mods have been trying to clean this place up. I've seen some recent claims that the WR isn't a significant hub of white nationalist and supremacist activity, even though many of us have stated that it has clearly become that, and I think this piece very clearly outlines how the WR has become a marketplace for many white supremacist ideas.
I also bring this up for some of the more reasonable posters who have no interest whatsoever in white supremacy but may have found themselves recently support white supremacist ideas. It's not your fault. Part of their mission is to take their insane shitbird ideas and make them sound totally reasonable. If you know what to look for, it should help.
I guess the larger overall discussion to be had here is about what can be done, from a governing perspective, to combat these more refined tactics. Unlike other gangs like MS13, Bloods, etc, white supremacist gangs aren't directly seeking money or territory. All that stuff only buys influence anyway.
Instead, they're just going straight for the influence, which makes sense since they have such a wider pool from which to recruit. You gotta be hispanic to join MS13 (afaik), and there aren't a lot of hispanics at all in many places, much less ones willing to risk their lives for a gang. So they have to offer money and power if they hope to recruit anyone.
But these white supremacist thugs are just going straight for cultural and legislative influence. They don't need to offer anything because they plan to transform the country through shifting the national discourse and just having their existing members in places where they can do that.
So what can/should be done?