I mean, if you have open and avowed white supremacists sympathizing with your causes I'd say it's time to reevaluate your messaging and wonder why such a toxic and shitheaded ideology is rooting for you.
I mean sure, if you ignore context and just look at the world the same way someone who hasn't developed object permanence you could probably say people like Richard Spencer or Stephen Crowder aren't white nationalists because they don't go on live TV and shout racial slurs (granted the latter's gotten close enough to have his YouTube channel suspended more than once, lmao).
But we live in a world that has things like 'Context' and 'Critical Thinking Skills' where most people can put 2 and 2 together and realize that weird quacking creature is, in fact, a Duck.
And even ignoring all this, my original statement was just trying to point out how utterly hilarious Shalcker's point was. I'm not all that invested in the 'Is Rittenhouse a NAZI?!' hill, because that barely changes the facts of the situation.
Not only is Kyle a white supremacist sympathizer (if not follower), anyone that defends him is as well.
He was only there because he and the all white "militia" he arrived with wanted to quell the outrage over another unarmed black death at the hands of the police.
You can bumblefuck your way around verbal and logic gymnastics all the fuck you want. That does not now nor has it ever changed the facts.
"When Facism comes to America, it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross." - Unknown
Apparently, you need a klan hood and dozen of swastika tatoos to count as one - and even then, one could probably claim it's just a "peace symbol" (or "I was trolling the left, really"), so totally a different thing. As if it was impossible to be even a tiny bit subtle in displaying their true beliefs - while at the same time, crying 'witch hunt' at every moment.
Some things you just intuitively know. Kyle is obviously a regular on /pol and hangs out with that crowd.
They have a biased point of view based on their ideology. Wisconsin is an open carry state. That means he is perfectly within his rights to carry a gun with him anywhere except hospitals, schools, or government buildings. From the point of view of the law, there is zero evidence that he intended to shoot anyone. Funmy how you don;'t hold the same standard to the guy who pulled his pistol in RIttenhouse's face and claim he never intended to shoot anyone. The point of view of the law is the same on him. He was free to carry his weapon as well and there is zero evidence of him intending to shoot anyone as well.
- - - Updated - - -
There are plenty of people on both sides of hte aisle who would do that. That is a false assumption.