They call themselves a “fraternity” to give ideological cover to their far-right beliefs and history of violence.
Instead, why not use the designation of a professional third-party, like the @splcenter, which calls them a “hate group”?
-
I feel like you recently suggested I was being sexist when I thought another journalists characterization of Atomwaffen ignored their white supremacy.
I did because you were, Shane. You jumped in to mansplain Atomwaffen to a female far-right researcher, like she had no idea what she was talking about. Making that kind of bad-faith assumption is sexist. Taking issue with someone’s word choice is not.
-
-
Think about it for two seconds— literally no one who has heard of the Atomwaffen is unaware that they’re white supremacists. Why would you make that assumption?
-
This plays on a long used rhetoric of vague "extremism," which is also extended to militant left revolutionary organizations and creates a broad set of impacts from joint terrorism task forces.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
I deleted my comment because I certainly don't want to come off that way, and I'll take the criticism seriously. It does feel as though this could be happening here. A fraternal organization just generally means a closed ritualized group, definitely not benign.
-
I have no issue with “fraternity,” but as I spent all night going over with
@areidross, why leave out that they’re a hate group? Do we just call Skrewdriver a “rock band” now? Is the KKK just some cosplay enthusiasts?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
So I just read it as a description of the type of organization it was, to separate it from like a political party or something of that sort.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.