Jump to content
smac97

DezNat (Deseret Nation) = White Nationalism?

Recommended Posts

I've heard about "DezNat" (short for "Deseret Nation") a very few times.  I came across this article in The Daily Beast back in January, and then today saw this item in the Daily Utah Chronicle (an independent student paper at the Univeristy of Utah).

Both articles are strident in their denunciation of DezNat.  The Daily Beast article describes its origins as quite recent;

Quote

In early January, a post appeared on the Twitter account @MormonQueerconf, a page devoted to anonymous confessions from LGBTQ members of the Mormon Church, about a new hashtag circulating in LDS Twitter: #DezNat. “I am ABSOLUTELY TERRIFIED of #deznat,” the post read. “I feel like it’s only one meltdown away from being the one who ends up killing someone like me.”

#DezNat stands for “Deseret Nation.” It’s a loose, extremely controversial affiliation of online Mormons, which has divided the LDS Twittersphere in the past five months, drawing praise from conservative church members, and concerned, even fearful, criticism from progressives.

Several conservatives who spoke to The Daily Beast claimed that the hashtag is apolitical, nothing more than a way for church members to aggregate doctrinal commentary on Twitter. “It’s not ‘nationalism,’” said Dustin Turner, a church member and former Ted Cruz staffer who uses the hashtag. “Have you ever seen Red Sox Nation? It’s got the same connotation.” Another #DezNat proponent, a 28-year-old Washington State Fish & Wildlife official named Brett Cain said that he was initially concerned by the tag. “Nationalism doesn’t sound too good,” Cain said. “But it was explained to be a Deseret Nation—not in terms of country or borders—but a group of people with common culture and that culture is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.”

Still, others say it represents the most militant stream of Mormonism—a group of ultra-conservatives who often promote bigotry and violence against people of color, LGBTQ people, sex workers, non-Mormons, and former Mormons, or “apostates.” Steve Evans, a contributor to the progressive Mormon blog By Common Consent, told The Daily Beast that the group “varies from person to person… but sometimes it is more in the vein of nationalism. That is, it’s intended to designate a different (or higher) set of beliefs, a purer form of the religion, a higher level of devotion. It’s a shorthand for a very conservative subgroup of church members.”
...
The tag first appeared on Twitter in August of 2018 from the user @JPBellum, a self-described “violent agriculturalist” interested in “the Kingdom of God or nothing,” according to his Twitter bio. The user, who posts under the display name John Paul Bellum, published the inaugural tweet on August 6: “Is what you are doing today helping to building Deseret tomorrow? #DezNat,” he wrote.

By “Deseret,” Bellum was referring to a common term in Mormon lore meaning “bee hive,” which took on special significance when Brigham Young, the church’s second prophet, proposed it as the original name for a larger version of the state of Utah. Though Young’s proposal was rejected, the word is still in widespread use to connote a symbol of the predominantly Mormon state (the second-largest newspaper in Utah, for example, is called the Deseret News). But Bellum meant it much more literally, as he clarified in subsequent tweets: “#DezNat or Deseret Nation is basically the recognition that faithful members are a unique people and should be united spiritually, morally, economically, and politically behind Christ, the prophet, and the church,” one tweet read. “If all govt were gone tomorrow the church would fill that role.”

DqcmG8-U4AE_qIv?format=jpg&name=360x360

DqcmG9AVYAAidXS?format=jpg&name=360x360

In the days after he first birthed the hashtag, Bellum tweeted out a series of quotes from high-ranking Mormon officials, some broad-sweeping but many which articulated positions on major political issues within the LDS community, like same-sex marriage, ordaining women in the priesthood, immigration, and secular government.

In less than a month, the hashtag was getting regular use among a small group of Mormons, with usernames like @MilitantMormon, @MorMonger, @LatterDayOK, @DeseretDagger, @DeepStateDeseret, @AntiCommieSoc, and @BrighamGroyper, pairing the first name of Brigham Young with ‘Groyper,’ a smirking green animation, common among ultra-right-wing groups, which Slate’s Aaron May called “the fatter, more racist Pepe the Frog.”

By December, the tag had become so widespread that it attracted the attention of news outlets, prompting one member of the community to write an article on Medium, a text he claimed was “not a manifesto, because #DezNat does not need one.” The non-manifesto declared, among other things, that the tag was not “political, racial, national, or sexual.” But it also affirmed support for “The Family: A Proclamation to the World”—the 1995 text where Mormon leaders outlined their stance on homosexuality and gay marriage (which the church later used politically to petition state courts to ban gay marriage).

...

DwqIYVsUwAAhUHy?format=jpg&name=900x900

Some bits from the Daily Chronicle piece:

Quote

DezNat claims not to have any formal organization, but they do share an ideology far more sinister than Guzy’s vague claims of loyalty. DezNat believes they are the true followers of Christ and the prophet, that they alone interpret doctrine properly among Latter-day membership and that they must fight against the empowerment and expression of LGBTQ people, socialists, minorities, women and progressive members of the church.
...
It is cultivating a strong following of fellow Latter-day Saints who join the online movement, most keeping their real identities hidden. The Deseret Nation YouTube channel provides perspective into the group’s beliefs with videos promoting the subservience of women, anti-vaccination activism and variations of the flat-earth conspiracy. Hundreds of DezNat accounts regularly pop up on Twitter (some, of course, are taken down) with many targeting the LGBTQ community, women, people of color and even non-American white people (some in DezNat are extreme enough to have a thing against Europeans, who they refer to as Europooreans).

There is no Wikipedia entry about DezNat.  This omission is kind of significant, as it suggests that DezNat is a fairly insignificant phenomenon.  However, there is an entry for it at UrbanDictionary.com:

Quote
The term DezNat began as a hashtag, an abbreviation for Deseret Nationalism (Deseret, a term from the Book of Mormon, was first proposed as the name for Utah when it became a US territory). DezNat has become a movement and an ideology representing a fascist form of Mormonism, focusing on a goal of purging the faith of progressive Latter-day Saints, "apostates" and sinners.

The LGBTQ community are frequent targets of DezNat opprobrium. DezNats are often overtly racist and intolerant of other types of diversity.

As justification for their totalitarian views, DezNats point to the "teachings of the prophets," i.e. the "Q15", aka "the brethren" and former prophets. DezNat arguments rely on of distorted statements, taken out of context from any given leader's talk or article, or from scripture.

A point of pride with DezNat culture is that they are "unapologetic," or "unafraid," to speak up for "righteousness," and call out those who have kinder and tolerant viewpoints.

Since the LDS Church is institutionally and culturally very authority-minded, the DezNats are able to shut down conversation by appealing to the authority of the church's leadership, because they're simply "following the prophet." (Though the prophet has not given any indication that he is in need of their help.)

The leadership of the church has not addressed this group of members and their attempt to purge the church. Because of this, DezNats assume they have the blessing of the leadership.
I just learned about DezNats today on twitter and I was so depressed. I can't believe I belong to the same Church they do, they sound like Warren Jeffs.
by wickerwallet August 23, 2019

So a few observations/questions:

1. How widespread is this DezNat thing?  Is it really nothing more than a hashtag/callsign?  And is it really a "White Nationalism" thing?

2. Is anyone aware of any meetings or events scheduled by or for the benefit of people who subscribe to the DezNat sloganeering?

3. There seem to be a lot of accusations of DezNat people being "overtly racist" and "bigotry and violence against people of color, LGBTQ people, sex workers, non-Mormons, and former Mormons."  If true, then that needs to be utterly condemned, and we need to distance ourselves from such an ideology.  But is it true?  Can anyone point to "overtly racist" statements?  Calls for "bigotry and violence against people of color, LGBTQ people, sex workers," etc.?  

4. The YouTube channel, referenced above, attributed to "Deseret Nation" has videos going back 7 years, far longer than the August 2018 origin of the "DezNat" hashtag.  So it looks like this channel and "DezNat" have essentially nothing to do with each other, except for the shared name.  This channel also appears to contain videos entirely from one guy.  He calls himself "Ben Yamin" (sp?), wears strange clothes, uses odd phrases (odd for a Latter-day Saint, anyway, like "Peace be upon you"), and he talks about weird stuff like the "calendar of God," Zodiac ("Gospel in the Stars"), herbology, a vision of a bald eagle, and so on.  Most of his videos have very few views (in the tens, and many even in the single digits).  This guy may not be . . . all there.

That the author of the Daily Chronicle tried to use this channel as evidence of the nefarious doings of DezNat folks suggests rather strongly that he (the author) couldn't find any actual nefarious doings, and so had to scrape the bottom of the barrel.

5. It looks like much of the criticism is based on sociopolitical differences, rather than actual instances of misconduct or calls for "violence" from DezNat folks.

6. The Daily Chronicle piece is entitled "The LDS Church has a White Nationalist Problem."  I question that.  I have a hard time conceptualizing the members of the Church as sliding backwards in terms of race relations.  I am not saying that racism doesn't exist in the Church, but I am suggesting that we have made significant progress in such matters.  One of the better ways we have come to overcome race-based animus is sending out young men and young women to serve in cultures other than their own, often amongst persons of different races.  My father served in Argentina as a young man, and he and my mother later served missions in Samoa, Fabens, TX, and Zimbabwe.  My siblings and siblings-in-law have served missions in Brasil, the Philippines, Romania, Iowa, Taiwan, Vanuatu, Alaska, Florida, Venezuela, among the Navajo, and Samoa.  I have a Hawaiian sister, a Tahitian brother, and a Samoan sister-in-law.  My (biological) brother is raising two refugee boys, both Muslim, from Afghanistan.  I have friends and acquaintances who have served in missions all over the world.  My sister and her husband (an MD) recently moved to Vanuatu (where my sister had previously served as a missionary) to provide medical services and training for a few years. 

This makes racism hard to maintain.  For example, it's hard for a person who goes on a mission to Taiwan (peopled mostly ethnic Han, or what we generally call "Chinese"), who spends two years learning their language and about their culture, who knocks on their doors, invites them to church, worships with them, serves alongside them, participates in service projects for them, to then return home with a dislike of Chinese people.  To the contrary, missionary work almost always fosters a love and respect for different races and cultures.

The Church also works very hard to teach its members against racism, sexism, violence, etc.  Taken together, these efforts, both in teaching and in practice, provide a substantial bulwark against encroaching racism, etc. 

7. In sum, I think the above articles seem to be making mountains out of molehills, and are alarmist, perhaps even propagandistic.  However, I am open to contrasting viewpoints and evidences.

8. I have no particular interest in joining or advancing DezNat as an ideology.  At best, it gilds the lilly (the "lilly" being what the Church is already doing), and hence seems more like a hue and cry than anything substantive.  At worst, it is a distortion of the teaching of the Church and its leaders.

Thoughts?

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited by smac97
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I can't speak on the movement as a whole as I do think there are some troll accounts out there, but I personally know two people who are active in the deznat conversations on twitter. 

They are on the very devout end of the mormon spectrum. 

They are extremely conservative.

They genuinely think that Donald Trump is the greatest president in modern history.

They believe that anything LGBTQ is a result of satan's influence, including any softening or appearance of softening from the church.

They are very much scriptural literalists.

They go to church every Sunday.

They hate the church's new gun policy and they don't like that the November policy was rescinded.

This is a basic rundown of the types of people they are.

I often see people claiming this movement is fake and manufactured by trolls and I cringe, because it is real on some level.

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I've heard about "DezNat" (short for "Deseret Nation") a very few times.  I came across this article in The Daily Beast back in January, and then today saw this item in the Daily Utah Chronicle (an independent student paper at the Univeristy of Utah).

Both articles are strident in their denunciation of DezNat.  THe DB article describes its origins as quite recent;

Some bits from the Daily Chronicle piece:

There is no Wikipedia entry about DezNat.  This omission is kind of significant, as it suggests that DezNat is a fairly insignificant phenomenon.  However, there is an entry for it at UrbanDictionary.com:

So a few observations/questions:

1. How widespread is this DezNat thing?  Is it really nothing more than a hashtag/callsign?  And is it really a "White Nationalism" thing?

2. Is anyone aware of any meetings or events scheduled by or for the benefit of people who subscribe to the DezNat sloganeering?

3. There seem to be a lot of accusations of DezNat people being "overtly racist" and "bigotry and violence against people of color, LGBTQ people, sex workers, non-Mormons, and former Mormons."  If true, then that needs to be utterly condemned, and we need to distance ourselves from such an ideology.  But is it true?  Can anyone point to "overtly racist" statements?  Calls for "bigotry and violence against people of color, LGBTQ people, sex workers," etc.?  

4. The YouTube channel, referenced above, attributed to "Deseret Nation" has videos going back 7 years, far longer than the August 2018 origin of the "DezNat" hashtag.  So it looks like this channel and "DezNat" have essentially nothing to do with each other, except for the shared name.  This channel also appears to contain videos entirely from one guy.  He calls himself "Ben Yamin" (sp?), wears strange clothes, uses odd phrases (odd for a Latter-day Saint, anyway, like "Peace be upon you"), and he talks about weird stuff like the "calendar of God," Zodiac ("Gospel in the Stars"), herbology, a vision of a bald eagle, and so on.  Most of his videos have very few views (in the tens, and many even in the single digits).  This guy may not be . . . all there.

That the author of the Daily Chronicle tried to use this channel as evidence of the nefarious doings of DezNat folks suggests rather strongly that he (the author) couldn't find any actual nefarious doings, and so had to scrape the bottom of the barrel.

5. It looks like much of the criticism is based on sociopolitical differences, rather than actual instances of misconduct or calls for "violence" from DezNat folks.

6. The Daily Chronicle piece is entitled "The LDS Church has a White Nationalist Problem."  I question that.  I have a hard time conceptualizing the members of the Church as sliding backwards in terms of race relations.  I am not saying that racism doesn't exist in the Church, but I am suggesting that we have made significant progress in such matters.  One of the better ways we have come to overcome race-based animus is sending out young men and young women to serve in cultures other than their own, often amongst persons of different races.  My father served in Argentina as a young man, and he and my mother later served missions in Samoa, Fabens, TX, and Zimbabwe.  My siblings and siblings-in-law have served missions in Brasil, the Philippines, Romania, Iowa, Taiwan, Vanuatu, Alaska, Florida, Venezuela, among the Navajo, and Samoa.  I have a Hawaiian sister, a Tahitian brother, and a Samoan sister-in-law.  My (biological) brother is raising two refugee boys, both Muslim, from Afghanistan.  I have friends and acquaintances who have served in missions all over the world.  My sister and her husband (an MD) recently moved to Vanuatu (where my sister had previously served as a missionary) to provide medical services and training for a few years. 

This makes racism hard to maintain.  For example, it's hard for a person who goes on a mission to Taiwan (peopled mostly ethnic Han, or what we generally call "Chinese"), who spends two years learning their language and about their culture, who knocks on their doors, invites them to church, worships with them, serves alongside them, participates in service projects for them, to then return home with a dislike of Chinese people.  To the contrary, missionary work almost always fosters a love and respect for different races and cultures.

The Church also works very hard to teach its members against racism, sexism, violence, etc.  Taken together, these efforts, both in teaching and in practice, provide a substantial bulwark against encroaching racism, etc. 

7. In sum, I think the above articles seem to be making mountains out of molehills, and are alarmist, perhaps even propagandistic.  However, I am open to contrasting viewpoints and evidences.

8. I have no particular interest in joining or advancing DezNat as an ideology.  At best, it gilds the lilly (the "lilly" being what the Church is already doing), and hence seems more like a hue and cry than anything substantive.  At worst, it is a distortion of the teaching of the Church and its leaders.

Thoughts?

Thanks,

-Smac

This is the first I’ve heard of this thing, but at first glance, it appears to be a group of misguided Church members endeavoring to add credence to their political ideology/activism by putting the “Mormon” label on it. 

I disapprove of that, but then, I disapprove of the left-of-center Mormon Women for Ethical Government for the same reason. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, FearlessFixxer said:

I can't speak on the movement as a whole as I do think there are some troll accounts out there, but I personally know two people who are active in the deznat conversations on twitter. 

They are on the very devout end of the mormon spectrum. 

Okay.

15 minutes ago, FearlessFixxer said:

They are extremely conservative.

Politically conservative, you mean?

15 minutes ago, FearlessFixxer said:

They genuinely think that Donald Trump is the greatest president in modern history.

So DezNat sems more geared toward political ideologies/affiliations than religious ones?

15 minutes ago, FearlessFixxer said:

They believe that anything LGBTQ is a result of satan's influence, including any softening or appearance of softening from the church.

Are they speaking against the Brethren on this?  Are they saying the Church's much-more-moderate-than-it-used-to-be-but-still-firmly-based-on-the-Law-of-Chastity stance is "a result of Satan's influence?"

Can you provide any examples of this?

15 minutes ago, FearlessFixxer said:

They are very much scriptural literalists.

Examples?

15 minutes ago, FearlessFixxer said:

They go to church every Sunday.

They hate the church's new gun policy and they don't like that the November policy was rescinded.

This is a basic rundown of the types of people they are.

I often see people claiming this movement is fake and manufactured by trolls and I cringe, because it is real on some level.

"Real on some level."  Not sure what that means.

So far I'm reading a lot of attributed motives and characterizations, but seeing very little in the way of actual examples (of statements and/or actions of DezNat folks).

I'm not saying that this movement is "fake," or that it is "manufactured by trolls," but I question how widespread it is, how nefarious it is, etc.

Again, I am open to contrasting viewpoints and evidences.

Thanks,

-Smac

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, smac97 said:

I've heard about "DezNat" (short for "Deseret Nation") a very few times.  I came across this article in The Daily Beast back in January, and then today saw this item in the Daily Utah Chronicle (an independent student paper at the Univeristy of Utah).

Apart from what you just posted, a exmormon reddit forum is the only reason I have heard of deznat.

An article I read someone claimed to live in fear of deznat, but it seemed the only basis for the fear was twitter postings.

Personally I would rather not give them any attention.

 

Edited by provoman

Share this post


Link to post

I’ve never heard of this. 

Share this post


Link to post

Clue one: The Daily Utah Chronicle had an article all passionate about it.
Clue two: It's mainly a twitter hashtag, maybe a reddit thread or two.

This sounds like the LDS version of the tide pod challenge.  Or the momo challenge.  Or the tulip mania of 1637.  (And if you don't know what at least two of those are, the issue may lie in a lack of net-savviness.)

Edited by LoudmouthMormon

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

Clue one: The Daily Utah Chronicle had an article all passionate about it.
Clue two: It's mainly a twitter hashtag, maybe a reddit thread or two.

But . . . the YouTube channel!

😁

6 minutes ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

This sounds like the LDS version of the tide pod challenge.  Or the momo challenge.  Or the tulip mania of 1637.  (And if you don't know what at least two of those are, the issue may lie in a lack of net-savviness.)

I get the Tide Pod and Tulip Mania references.  Momo challenge . . . not so much.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

... comments that dog-whistled racism ..

Dog whistle = "There's nothing actually wrong with what was said, but I want to be offended by it anyway, so I'm going to pretend it secretly means something else."   Or as someone else said, "If these dog whistles are aimed at racists, why are you hearing them?"

Also, "White Nationalism" is a meaningless label used by people who want to make those they disagree with sound sinister and nefarious.

And I've never heard of DezNat, so I can't add a meaningful comment to the discussion (but that didn't stop me).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

So far virtually nothing in the way of actual evidence that DezNat is saying/doing nefarious things.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

From my very limited interaction with the community on Twitter. I have personally never seen them just attack someone for being LGBT. They will; however, stand up for the churches teachings if someone post something that is not true. Most recently the WOW has come up. People will post that they hope in conference it will be announced that coffee will be allowed and they will just respond with the teachings of the church.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, Nacho2dope said:

From my very limited interaction with the community on Twitter. I have personally never seen them just attack someone for being LGBT. They will; however, stand up for the churches teachings if someone post something that is not true. Most recently the WOW has come up. People will post that they hope in conference it will be announced that coffee will be allowed and they will just respond with the teachings of the church.

Is there any suggestion they are more comfortable with violence as a means to an end or of clear racism?

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, Calm said:

Is there any suggestion they are more comfortable with violence as a means to an end or of clear racism?

I am sure you can search and find some knucklehead with the Dez Nat hashtag that is comfortable with violence. I personally haven't seen any one with that hashtag promote violence or racism. I have seen two separate individuals on twitter advocate for the killing of President Oaks, which got a response from the Dez Nat community basically condemning  the comments and reporting them to twitter.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I know absolutely nothing about this stuff.

All I know is this.  For you non-Latin scholars, which I presume are numerous hereabouts, he word "bellum" in Latin means "war".

You know, like "bellicose"? "Antebellum"?

Rather odd to be a coincidence in my opinion.  First thing I noticed, and likely the last.  Mormon wacko offshoot.  What else is new?  ;)

We ARE a peculiar people.  ;)

 

Edited by mfbukowski

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, FearlessFixxer said:

This is a basic rundown of the types of people they are.

Definitely Deplorables in every way.  You know -THOSE kind of people.

They think differently than the way correct thinking people think.

Do you think perhaps these reactionaries should be rehabilitated for their own, and society's good.   Maybe sit them down and give them a good re-education session or 10 to teach them how to be good and co-operative citizens?  

Better yet maybe send them off to a nice camp somewhere while they learn the joys of social co-operation?  

Sometimes that's the only way you can educate people that deplorable.

Edited by mfbukowski
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
38 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Definitely Deplorables in every way.  You know -THOSE kind of people.

They think differently than the way correct thinking people think.

Do you think perhaps these reactionaries should be rehabilitated for their own, and society's good.   Maybe sit them down and give them a good re-education session or 10 to teach them how to be good and co-operative citizens?  

Better yet maybe send them off to a nice camp somewhere while they learn the joys of social co-operation?  

Sometimes that's the only way you can educate people that deplorable.

It isn't what I would do.

I say let them be.  I have faith in the free market of ideas

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, oremites said:

Dog whistle = "There's nothing actually wrong with what was said, but I want to be offended by it anyway, so I'm going to pretend it secretly means something else."   Or as someone else said, "If these dog whistles are aimed at racists, why are you hearing them?"

Also, "White Nationalism" is a meaningless label used by people who want to make those they disagree with sound sinister and nefarious.

And I've never heard of DezNat, so I can't add a meaningful comment to the discussion (but that didn't stop me).

Those denying the existence of dog-whistling white nationalists may be dog-whistling white nationalists themselves.

Dog whistles are common. It is not meant to obscure. Dog whistles are not a secret racist code. They are open. Most people familiar with racist culture know what they are. Their value is in communicating racism while having deniability while doing so. This same approach is used in criminal organizations or in shady corporations. When a higher up says “take care of the problem” often that means anything from forging false records to killing someone. If the person is caught the underling cannot say they were explicitly ordered to perform the nefarious deed by the higher up and they have to take the fall. It is a tool of gadianton robber types.

It is of course possible that someone might slip up and throw in a dog whistle, a simple mistake where the ox falls in the mire. Those who repeatedly use those dogwhistle phrases are either stupid or doing it deliberately.

As to white nationalism not existing...........bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaa!

youre_serious_futurama.gif

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, smac97 said:

So far virtually nothing in the way of actual evidence that DezNat is saying/doing nefarious things.

There is no DezNat. It is a twitter tag. Anyone can use it. There is no high council of DezNat granting people permission to use it and forbidding other. There are only individuals that use it and probably mean different things by it. Is it explicitly a marker of the above evils? No. Implicitly? Based on my sample not really though there are morons and bigots using it.

Then again “there are morons and bigots using it” could be Twitter’s overall motto.

Edited by The Nehor
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
44 minutes ago, FearlessFixxer said:

It isn't what I would do.

I say let them be.  I have faith in the free market of ideas

Just for the record for people who don't know me- that post was pure sarcasm.

But it would appeal I think to some on the left who might take it seriously.  

Chairman Mao would have been one of them.  I know because I used to be one too during my chats with my prof Angela Davis.

We talked a lot about the importance of "Education" of the bourgeoisie 

I got better.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Those denying the existence of dog-whistling white nationalists may be dog-whistling white nationalists themselves.

i don't deny the existence of dog-whistling white nationalists (thought they are few and far between).  I dispute the definition that seems to be applied 99% of the time which is "anyone to the right of me".

This misunderstanding is easy enough to resolve. What's your definition of "White Nationalism"?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

This sounds a lot like a group of Liberals hating anyone and anything that does not bow down to their current gods of thought and label "them" as white nationalists. From what I have read on this thread I wonder what the problem is? Never heard of them before and don't expect to hear of them again except on this thread. 

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, oremites said:

i don't deny the existence of dog-whistling white nationalists (thought they are few and far between).  I dispute the definition that seems to be applied 99% of the time which is "anyone to the right of me".

This misunderstanding is easy enough to resolve. What's your definition of "White Nationalism"?

I do not have a personal definition. I use the general one. I am not Ahab.

Share this post


Link to post

No white nationalism. There are members of all races using the Hashtag. It's not political at all. There are no meetings. It's simply a hashtag to say you sustain the brethren and the teachings of the Church.

it was started because faithful members were tired of there being nothing but Church bashing on twitter. I've seen several people mention that the members sharing quotes from prophets and scriptures has saved their testimony.

There are a couple troll accounts but they are quickly blocked

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I did a dive into the tag. Looks like it is fairly standard LDS Freedom Forum level discourse. A lot of self-righteousness. As to far right some of the users used images, avatars, and comments that dog-whistled racism and Trump support (Pepe, images that allude to black slavery) but not the majority. Most are just angry at the progmos (presumably progressive mormons?) who are clearly violating their covenants or something. A couple of screeds about the forces of leftism taking over the country and being ready to fight them but not too much of it. One allusion to a militia group.

I really do not like them but they are not majority fascists. They probably have roughly as many fascists as a percentage of their base as this board does.

One post made me laugh. An anti went to the Manhattan temple and waited outside for three hours and said no one went in or out in all that time and crowed that it proved the church was weakening. The response showed that the temple was closed for cleaning with the comment: “Satan is not sending his best.”

That anti was NNN.

That was hilarious

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...