>>1676
I'm not from /pol/ because the board is a bit too intense for me, but I am a white passerby with nationalist leanings.
>>1687
Rhodesia was inhabited by black Africans before the whites, true. The whites did have their own country in that land for quite some time and had a legitimate claim. Now that blacks have taken the whole country the claim is expiring. Squatters rights apply on a national scale, believe it or not. If you can defend your claim to a territory it becomes yours.
South Africa is tricky, but I would like to see Afrikaners remain in the area with their own country. I'm not a fan of the rainbow nation thing and neither do I support colonial empires, so I would advocate a split up of the territory. Probably if the SA government continues as they wish they'll get rid of all the whites within the next 200 years, leaving only blacks, coloureds and indians. If you're a black nationalist I suppose there's no reason to support a split of territory since the white Africans are losing power and might get wiped out.
Whites do have a history in the area, just like how blacks have a history in the American south. If you'd advocate kicking out all the white Africans then you'd have to get rid of all the black (and white) Americans.
>>1692
>if a white person says anything good then it's patronizing
Get a grip. You're still a child if you can't take a kind word without being offended
Black nationalism works to the advantage of the white nationalist because it legitimizes the idea of nationalism while being difficult for SJW to attack, so it's only logical that a white nationalist would support other kinds of nationalism. He's simply expressing his awareness of this. You might also do well to understand that most nationalist ideologies are compatible, and that a black nationalist would logiPost too long. Click here to view the full text.