In which I focus on how black nationalism and white nationalism are often falsely equivocated, due to implicit reliance on a faulty and often America-centered definition of nationalism -- one that very frequently ignores the ways in which blackness and whiteness are conceived.

A disclaimer before we begin:

I am not an authority on this subject in any sense. I just happen to have read a fair bit on it, often from people who ARE.

As such, if I make a misstep in this, and you have a correction with a well-substantiated citation, then feel free to reply.

Now, for the context:

In his apology stream, SocDoneLeft claimed he had changed his views on black nationalism after a bit of reading.

In his hand at the time, in one of the screenshots I've seen, was a copy of Wretched of the Earth by Frantz Fanon.

Here are my inputs on that:

If you have not noticed at this point, I have expressed... "skepticism", let's so generously, towards the idea that he is willing to rehab himself.

After many an extended conversation with some users, I decided that while I am in no hurry to extend him forgiveness so readily...

...especially in light of other matters he has yet to address (that *I* have yet to address)...

I am, however, willing to put together a sort of "general" cliffnotes for the less informed, because I see discussions trip over this land mine often, and would like to clear the air.

If SDL is genuine in his commitment to being better and chooses to utilize this to that specific end, then so be it.

Now, I'm sure most of you reading recall the (justified) uproar over the video of a mentally disabled worker recently and how it spilled into more personal beefs.

The poster in question is infamous for doing this and similar stunts in order to advance the cause of what many people have called "black nationalism" - which, like so many other terms, is used without any regards to what it actually means.

So what IS black nationalism, then?

In the context it has been used recently - both the above, and by several other non-black leftist streamers, SDL included - it refers to any liberation politic that centers (and usually originates from) black people.

This phrase draws comparisons of it to white nationalism.

What that comparison ignores, as a start, is that where the white supremacist rhetoric that informs American society is concerned, whiteness and blackness are direct opposites to each other.

A sentiment implicit in ideas such as that being pro-black means being "anti-white".

(Whether or not it means that is far more complex than a "yes/no" can reasonably address.)

Similarly, mentions of horseshoe theory abound - which in itself is a highly flawed analysis rooted in the golden mean fallacy, and presumes that opposite extremes function the exact same.

That horseshoe theory is inaccurate is independent of the fact that seemingly "opposite" ideologies CAN function similarly, but said theory often fails to adequately address why.

And to start shedding some light on how that functions, who better to turn to than Frantz Fanon?

Credit for this goes to Dill and @RenyTure - Reny is far more educated in these matters than me, and I owe much of my knowledge to him.

As said elsewhere using this text, one of Fanon's concerns was a "native" elite replacing the settler elite.

A source: https://iep.utm.edu/fanon/ 

This is a common subject in black liberation politics for good reason. Fanon, Malcolm, Hampton, West - we have been warned time and again about the perils of having "black faces in high places", the Obamas and Condolezzas of the world - a concept clearly *echoed* elsewhere.

The word "echoed" is very important here - different types of oppression very often overlap with or else run parallel to each other, especially in regards to "selected" figureheads.

For trans people, there are the Jenners and the Clymers...

For East Asians, the Andys and IMCs.

For black people like me, the Candaces, the Gingriches, the Herman Cains...

And so on in each 'community'. We all have our "elite-aspirants" - either those actively preserving status quo, or others who wish to "reclaim" it for their group, rather than be rid of it entirely.

But such aspirations are not exclusive to any given ideology.

Thus, we have many among us, even leftists (*especially* leftists, mind) who express disdain for mainstream politics while repurposing its ideas. Not merely admitting to valid points, but laundering whole arguments...

...and then simply pushing them wholesale, but under a different banner (or brand) that they may become palatable to their "customers".

Like, say, the idea of elite-aspirant people in groups that face oppression being sanded down to "woke elites", "PMC", etc. for the right-wing.

And thus, black liberation politics are conflated with black nationalism whether or not they explicitly argue for such, and in turn demonized as "black supremacism".

A dynamic which - as has been noticed - is of great use to the establishment at large:

https://theintercept.com/2019/03/23/black-identity-extremist-fbi-domestic-terrorism/

(People are picky about sources, often reasonably so, and I will gladly compile a list of alternate sources for each point at the end of each thread.

Also, don't tag in any threader bots if you can help it. I'll gladly compile this in a much-easier-to read format down the line).

To concisely define black nationalism as I understand it, it is a set of ideologies with the common aim of restoring autonomy to black people - which among other things seeks to stop the reduction of the disparate 'black' cultures, continental and disaporic alike, to a monolith.

Nigerian, Congolese, Ethiopian, Eritrean, Algerian, Rwandan...

Disasporic Africans who have formed their own culture in the U.S., France, Mexico, Brazil...

And this is to speak nothing of the darker-skinned peoples who face discrimination similar to us.

The white nationalism so often cast as the opposite to this is also monolithic in nature - Irish, Scottish, Italian, Armenian, Celtic, Russian, Slavic...

But white supremacy is the origin from which arose the modern conception of race - and thus, of "black" and "white" races.

And as white supremacy and white nationalism lumps all these disparate cultures and ethnicity into that black monolith to simultaneously exploit and destroy - so too with the very "whites" they uplift, and in doing so inflict more damage to whiteness than any black "enemy" could.

And likewise with "non-white" people who retain their identity too well to be fully assimilated into whiteness, but are similarly taught to reject any "blackness" within them - which among other things leaves us with non-white people who believe they cannot be racist/anti-black.

Back to black nationalism - among these disparate ideologies are those who seek to "become their oppressor" as earlier discussed, and so employ oppressors' rhetoric even as they seek to supplant them.

Many have seen this to be the case with Tariq, Umar et. al. and correctly so.

However, where white supremacy, white nationalism, and its adherents and apologists are concerned, the main purpose of maintaining the black nationalism-white nationalism dynamic is to reinforce themselves before all else, as indicated by the opportunism surrounding that video...

...and as generally witnessed by the phrase "black nationalism is cancer", which ignores its contributions to the pushback against white nationalism AND the fact that it is, by the stated definition, not as innately self-destructive (if destructive at all) as white nationalism.

That it is used to such dishonest ends is something continually addressed by our community and within our community, as evident by actually listening to us and what we say - but then white nationalism could not reify itself so easily, and thus we are oft-deliberately ignored.

So ensues a feedback loop of hypocrites calling out hypocrites, most if not all of whom know that they speak the double tongue, and care not for that fact or for shame - only that they can redirect to the original wrong (or what they see as such).

Now how do we defuse that loop?

THIS is what the work is for.

And 'the work is the work' - reading, organizing, the dialectic, being didactic in our interactions with each other... all very necessary parts of a whole.

All of which end up lost when subjected to sufficient spectacle, as with Twitch and YouTube.

The evolution - or """purification""" - of one's politics is not a singular undertaking to make a person "right" or "virtuous", but an ongoing process entailing many tasks, all to the end of developing an understanding - and then acting on that understanding with confidence.

For otherwise we end up with the people who populate and perpetrate these feedback loops - seeking to be "right" above all else, correctness of reasoning be damned.

Of course, it is given that, in the process of developing one's politics, you *will* encounter conflicting views.

And this is why white nationalists and those adjacent to it - or apologist towards it - harp on so about free speech, forgetting that this inevitability also cuts """both ways""" as it were.

You WILL encounter different views, but that does not obligate you to humor those views.

A person can acknowledge views different to theirs and call them out as flawed or even wrong, with no contradiction - despite entitlements "bred" by the freedoms of the 1st Amendment.

You are free to argue what you like, and I am free to entertain it or show you the door thusly.

Which is why I have developed the habit of doing both in that order when dealing with bad faith arguments - taking them at their word, using those words to corral them, and finally summarily ejecting them.

It's done me wonders, and I say that without bragging in the slightest.

It is cathartic to pull apart shitty arguments, yes, but it should be done with a focus on understanding to what makes them shitty and providing alternatives - if not for the sake of the other person, then for your principles, as well as any future readers.

That is all for now.

And with that out of the way for the moment, I will provide the promised sources - and while I can guide people in a given direction, additional reading will have to be sought out and done mostly at your own discretion.

After all, I only have so many hours in the day for this.

Before I forget, this thread (thankfully, a much shorter one) by @besf0rt cuts more to the very general core of how differences in nationalism can exist and arise, such as some of the freshly-discussed differences between black nationalism ideologies and white nationalist ones. https://twitter.com/besf0rt/status/1387162209197899778