Stormfront - /pol/ before /pol/

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Pointless Pedant said:
where they pretended to be moderate to a certain extent with the intention of revealing their true selves when they took power.
Click to expand...

"Stormfronts of the street" seem to be their major focus these days - it's basically about moving into areas and keeping their views secret until they're the majority of the population. They vastly underestimate how many of them it would take to execute the idea successfully, especially as a key part of their plan is the establishment of white-owned businesses which employ only white people.

Of course Stormfronters as a group aren't especially affluent, so there are always a lot of "I'd do it in a minute if someone paid my moving costs, provided housing, and gave me a job" type posts.
 
Pointless Pedant said:
Stormfront's history has been as troubled and exceptional as its founder's. As the first big white supremacist community on the web, the site attracted many wise and well adjusted users, such as Norwegian mass murderer Anders Breivik and Pennsylvania cop killer Richard Poplawski. Over 100 people have been murdered by Stormfront users since the site began; still, they will maintain that black people are all violent thugs.
Click to expand...
Pointless Pedant said:
Stormfront users have killed people, though. Anders Breivik posted on the site as Year2183 before the cowardly moderators deleted his 4 posts after the massacre. Another user shot dead 3 police officers in Pennsylvania in 2009.
Click to expand...

At the risk of causing some trouble ITT, I seriously take issue with the claim that "Stormfront users have killed 100+ people". Yes, there have been Stormfront users who've murdered people, some of who were active moments before their crimes, namely Wade Michael Page. However, the only metric which appears to be in place is having a registered account with some posts, which can greatly be used for manipulation.

By the current metric in place, Anders Breivik alone accounts for 77 people killed. However, he posted a whopping total (which you acknowledge) of 4 times in 2008, three years prior to doing the deed. Pretend @Heretics on Holiday succeeded in her murder plans. She was far more active in our little corner, but it wouldn't be fair to blame Kiwifarms for her actions. Until some evidence surfaces he was somehow more active than those measly four posts three years prior to the shooting, he can be considered an inapt contributor to Stormfront. The manifesto he wrote was intended for an audience much wider than their userbase. To do the Stormfront death toll any justice (which, in my opinion, demands the murderer in question to have been an active contributor on the board, especially in close proximity to the dates of the crime), you would have to subtract 77 from the 100+ body count.

By that same report produced by the SPLC, some of the murders don't even appear politically motivated, which undermines the assumption that white nationalism drives murder.

Pointless Pedant said:
Being pathetic doesn't mean people aren't dangerous.
Click to expand...
This much we can agree. However, there is a difference between thought and action.
 
Tempest said:
https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-...ormfront-founders-wife-fronts-minority-school

Chloe Black, the wife of Founder Don Black, works at a charity designed to help poor Hispanic and African American children out of poverty
Click to expand...

Or worked. That was like in 2008.

I'm not sure why they'd be so eager to drive someone back into white supremacy and away from their actual job which appeared to have been exactly opposite their supposed white supremacy goals.

Shouldn't such people be encouraged to knock off that bullshit and join the good side?

Or do they actually need their enemies so much that they'd rather actually discourage them from reforming and make sure they stay enemies?
 
Found this shit in their neck of the woods
 

Attachments

  • 6E316B35-3A45-4848-89A0-174F88A0FE40.png
    6E316B35-3A45-4848-89A0-174F88A0FE40.png
    1.6 MB · Views: 545
  • 0C703D2F-4681-4E5D-96D6-3D97E10081D3.jpeg
    0C703D2F-4681-4E5D-96D6-3D97E10081D3.jpeg
    141.3 KB · Views: 406
  • D1568909-F654-4768-92EC-0D9B184CA1DB.jpeg
    D1568909-F654-4768-92EC-0D9B184CA1DB.jpeg
    208.6 KB · Views: 418
Cancion232 said:
link_break.png
Funnily enough, I think the British actually denied lots of Muslims/Arabs from joining their military during World War 1. Whether you hate them or like them, it's still funny that the empire fighting the "evil racist nazis" had more racial restrictions on joining the military.
Click to expand...

No. The Indian army was the biggest volunteer force in history. Arabs didn't serve as much in the British forces because some of them were trying to revolt and join the Axis.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Iraqi_War

Even then, there was still an Arab Legion.

I think it's quite clear that the side which were the evil racists were the ones with a plan to eradicate the Slavic population of eastern Europe through intentional famine and slavery.
 
Last edited:
Pointless Pedant said:
No. The Indian army was the biggest volunteer force in history. Arabs didn't serve as much in the British forces because some of them were trying to revolt and join the Axis.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Iraqi_War

Even then, there was still an Arab Legion.

I think it's quite clear that the side which were the evil racists were the ones with a plan to eradicate the Slavic population of eastern Europe through intentional famine and slavery.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's fair. I wasn't saying the Nazis weren't evil or racist.

And, the Indians also tried revolting. They helped the Japanese many times in their campaigns in Burma. Though these aren't Nazis, the Indians too were revolting against the Axis. Also keep in mind that the majority of the Indian army either never left India or never left Asia. There are a few isolated times when they did, but generally speaking they didn't directly help the Brits against the Nazis.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azad_Hind
 
Cancion232 said:
Yeah, that's fair. I wasn't saying the Nazis weren't evil or racist.

And, the Indians also tried revolting. They helped the Japanese many times in their campaigns in Burma. Though these aren't Nazis, the Indians too were revolting against the Axis. Also keep in mind that the majority of the Indian army either never left India or never left Asia. There are a few isolated times when they did, but generally speaking they didn't directly help the Brits against the Nazis.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azad_Hind
Click to expand...

The vast majority of India didn't revolt; they fought on condition of being given independence after the war. Most of them were kept in India because Japan tried to invade it, along with the collaborators, culminating in the battles of Kohima and Imphal in 1944. Some Indians fought in North Africa and Italy.
 
Pointless Pedant said:
I think it's quite clear that the side which were the evil racists were the ones with a plan to eradicate the Slavic population of eastern Europe through intentional famine and slavery.
Click to expand...
Speaking of which, Slavic neo-nazis exist, and they are confusing as hell.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom