I'm tired of hearing these constant attacks on white supremacists after the events in charlottesville. Why are moderate white supremacists being lumped in together and sharing the blame for the actions of one reprehensible man that misinterpreted the ideals of white supremacy and became violent? Clearly the motivation of such attacks on white supremacists is nothing other than racism. And then people go around trying to get moderate white supremacists to condemn the actions of these few fringe groups that they are obviously not affiliated with. Those terrorist groups may have been brought up in the same basic ideology as moderate white supremacists and that may get used as a framework to radicalize them, but white supremacy is surely not to blame.
These events would be more easily explained by looking at socioeconomic factors, not by the base ideology of the attackers. White supremacists have been attacked in the media, living in impoverished sections of the country, and have had their free speech suppressed for so long, it shouldn't be surprising that nefarious people motivated by political and economic goals would capitalize on their oppression and radicalize a few white supremacists into violence. That doesn't tell us anything about your average white supremacist at all! Most white supremacists are peaceful, kind people that just want to live their life and not be discriminated against. You might even be acquainted with a few white supremacists and not even know it! So why is everyone placing the blame where it doesn't belong?
I'm sure there'll be a few that misinterpret this, but here's a hint: it's satire. I agree with nothing I'm writing in favor of white supremacy. I'm honestly interested, though, where the real difference lies between the ideology of white supremacists driving them to violence vs the religion of islam driving them to violence. They're both obviously wrong. They're both rooted in violent histories. They both support killing/cleansing based on arbitrary factors that are largely not in control of the victims.* They can both be reinterpreted at will to suggest that violence is not a core belief (obviously white supremacists want peace! whites are the most peaceful race! etc.) The criticism of both is likely to be considered racist by the supporters. There are large groups of both that are not vocal or actively violent (islam might have a slight upper hand here, but maybe not enough to make a substantive difference to the point I'm making). I haven't been super active in this fight so maybe I'm missing one but I honestly can't think of an argument against blaming islam for terrorism that doesn't also make the case against blaming the ideology of white supremacy for the violence of groups like the KKK and neo-nazis.
*To be fair, islam has a slight upper hand here because you can technically choose to convert, but I suspect that most white supremacists would probably let a black man live if he converted and espoused their ideology too. For most, converting to islam is about as likely as a black man becoming a white supremacist, though so maybe islam isn't too far ahead here.