Recently, Candace Owens stated (1:06:16):
Based on the hierarchy of what’s impacting minority Americans, if I had to make a list of 100 things, white nationalism would not make the list.
White supremacy and white nationalism is not a problem that is harming Black America.
Writing for USA Today, Savannah Behrmann writes:
DHS contradicts Candace Owens on same day she testifies before Congress about white nationalism
On the same day that the Department of Homeland Security added violent white supremacist extremism to its list of terror threats for the first time since the agency’s creation after the 9/11 attacks, a controversial African American conservative commentator told Congress that “white nationalism is not a problem that is harming” communities of color in America.
The speakers, at the hearing in question, did not make any distinction between white-supremacy and white-nationalism. But the DHS document that Berhmann cites mentions only white-supremacy. Here is the pertinent text:
White supremacist violent extremism, one type of racially- and ethnically-motivated violent extremism, is one of the most potent forces driving domestic terrorism. Lone attackers, as opposed to cells or organizations, generally perpetrate these kinds of attacks. But they are also part of a broader movement. White supremacist violent extremists’ outlook can generally be characterized by hatred for immigrants and ethnic minorities, often combining these prejudices with virulent anti-Semitism or anti-Muslim views.
White supremacist violent extremists have adopted an increasingly transnational outlook in recent years, largely driven by the technological forces described earlier in this Strategic Framework. Similar to how ISIS inspired and connected with potential radical Islamist terrorists, white supremacist violent extremists connect with like-minded individuals online. In addition to mainstream social media platforms, white supremacist violent extremists use lesser-known sites like Gab, 8chan, and EndChan, as well as encrypted channels. Celebration of violence and conspiracy theories about the “ethnic replacement” of whites as the majority ethnicity in various Western countries are prominent in their online circles.
Prior to Anders Breivik’s notorious July 2011 attacks in Norway that claimed 77 lives, he posted a manifesto highlighting the threat of Europeans’ ethnic replacement by Muslim migrants. Subsequent terrorists have praised Breivik’s attacks and voiced similar grievances. On March 15, 2019, a gunman killed 51 worshipers at Christchurch’s Al Noor Mosque and Linwood Islamic Center. The shooter’s manifesto espoused anti-immigrant conspiracy theories and noted that the gunman had been in brief contact with Breivik. Several months later, another gunman launched an attack at a Walmart in El Paso, Texas, killing 22 and wounding 26. His online manifesto, which reflected elements of multiple ideologies, noted the attacker’s fear of ethnic replacement by people of Hispanic descent and praised the Christchurch attacker.
White supremacist violent extremists often scapegoat the Jewish people, voicing anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. On October 27, 2018, a gunman attacked Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, where the Tree of Life synagogue, D’Or Hadash, and Or L’Simcha congregations were gathered, killing 11 people and wounding six, including four law enforcement personnel who responded to the scene. Before the attack, he posted messages on Gab accusing a Jewish charity that assisted refugees of bringing in “invaders” to kill “our people.” Six months later, on April 27, 2019, a gunman opened fire on a synagogue in Poway, California, killing one. The shooter published an anti-Semitic manifesto on 8chan, citing the Christchurch and Pittsburgh gunmen as inspirations, and echoing similar anti-immigrant conspiracy theories.
How convenient for Behrmann to omit such a distinction. In fact, the two are not the same thing.
Regarding what Ms. Owens said, she was simply answering the question that was posed to her, and she answered it truthfully. It’s extremely rare for American blacks, today, to have to fear white-supremacy. What they fear is other blacks, and a perverse system set in place by liberals. Owens was right on the money.
It’s also interesting that the very same document, cited by Behrmann, lists “radical Islamist terrorists” as the number one international threat we face.
Is there a difference between “Islamist” and “Islamic?” If we give our stamp of approval to Islamic, giving Islam official recognition, but not its more virulent (Islamist) form, then how can the high and mighty speakers, at that hearing, fail to recognize the need to support, and encourage, a more benevolent form of white-nationalism?
If they were holding a hearing about the threat of Islamic terror, would they not have a Muslim scholar present to give his perspective on the matter? They would at least attempt to have one present. Why, then, did they not invite a moderate, law-abiding, white-nationalist (or, as some would call it, “white-advocate”)?
Especially galling to me was the testimony of Wasserman Schultz, from Orange County, Cal (around 58:40). He listed some offensive actions, taken by white students in his own district, and tells us how taken aback he is by those. Are we to believe that, during the same period of time, there were no black-on-white assaults in those schools? Considering my own experiences in Southern California, I seriously doubt it. The Media cherry picks, and reports, only offenses committed by whites, ignoring those committed by blacks and Hispanics.
On a positive note, the speakers did recognize our Constitutional right to free speech.
On another positive note, I’ll be attending the upcoming Northwest Forum in Seattle. I’ll report on it upon my return