Victoribus Spolia wrote:Good, then there is no praexological or rational necessity to your claim and so it can safely dismissed as mere speculation based on some past correlations.
Nope, if you had clearly explained this I wouldn't have asked for a specific answer. Please answer the question.
Agreed in some cases, but under that definition the policies of Zimbabwe and South Africa would also be domination, which you are denying.
Not necessarily and as you have argued that would "depend on history" would it not? You have argued that "historical context" nullifies the dominance aspect in places where colonialism took places (Africa and the Americas), so would ethnic cleansing in Europe be non-supremacist then according to your position, since Europe is the native land of whites?
Not sufficiently or I wouldn't have asked the question, answer the question.
So then you concede those to be non-supremacist nationalisms, and what if they joined together into a pan-european nationalism (white nationalism)? would that be an appropriate nationalism?
Actually no, I am using logic to argue that according to your own definitions there are no exceptions made for "retributive" actions of vengeance against a demographic for perceived past wrongs, thus either your definitions are flawed or the black majority of south Africa is guilty of racist supremacism against the white minority.
If you concede that your definitions are wrong, and change them to allow retributive justice against colonialism, then we have more topics to discuss...
It appears to me that your position sounds oddly like the claim that white nationalists would make about your type....that is, that according to your views, only whites are capable of racism and supremacism, which sounds like a racist generalization against white people (anti-white).....you are coming dangerously close to confirming their complaints that the Left is not merely anti-racist, they are necessarily anti-white.
Prove them wrong.
I think the problem is that we are having two separate discussions.
You are discussing some logical thought experiment that occurs in some idealised place where history never occurred.
I am discussing reality, where history actually happened, and racism et al are things that actually exist and have social impact.
You can retreat into pure logic as much as you want. It will not chnage certain facts, like the fact that people who wosh to ethncially cleanse NA of people of colour are racist, no matter what they want to call themselves. For people like me and mine, there is no practical difference between white nationalists who want to ethnically cleanse us, or white supremacists who want to ethnically cleanse us.
There is a crack in everything,
That's how the light gets in...