Racial inclusivism

i) The liberal establishment scapegoats white men for being white. Scapegoating innocent white guys for being white has the ironic effect of pushing some of them into the arms of white nationalism. And they are then attacked for being racists. It's both a vicious cycle and self-fulfilling prophecy.

ii) At present, a lot of white men have a legitimate grievance, because they are at or near the bottom of the intersectional spoils system. A system that discriminates against white men. That harms innocent white males. That should be opposed. 

iii) I'd like to segue from that to a related issue. Historically, the white evangelical church (in America) was, for the most part, on the wrong side of the civil rights movement. Nowadays it's done a 180. And that's generally for the best, although some segments of the evangelical church are overcorrecting for the past. 

iv) Which brings me to the main point. I suspect white supremacists think human beings naturally prefer to be with "their own kind". When modern-day evangelicals go out of their way to be racially inclusive, I suspect white supremacists think that's a case of theology suppressing what we really feel. And that's a reason for them to reject Christianity. They don't believe white evangelicals feel that way deep down, but misguided piety forces them to adopt that attitude because they think that's how they are supposed to feel about other races. White nationalists think that's well-meaning B.S. 

I don't know enough about the Alt Right or modern white nationalism to say that for a fact. It's just a hunch. But assuming that's the case, I'd like to address it head-on. Is evangelical racial inclusivism inauthentic? Are we sublimating our true impulses? Do we naturally prefer the company of our own race?

v) Many people live in racially homogenous enclaves. It's natural to feel more at ease with the people you grew up with, the people you spend most of your time with. And if that's an ethnic or racial enclave, then you're apt to feel more at ease with members of your own race or ethnicity. 

On a related note, we're more at ease with people who speak our language. If speaking a second language is effortful, then that has a somewhat distancing or alienating effect. Since it's easier to speak our own language, easier to communicate with people who speak the same language. 

In that regard, we can multiple examples in which people prefer to be with "their own kind". However, that's deceptive. In that context, do they prefer their company because they share the same racial/ethnic identity, or is that a contingent and incidental effect of living in a racial enclave? If your social circle is the same ethnicity or race, then the side effect is to prefer members of your own race since you've been saturated in that social environment. That's your conscious, as well as subconscious, frame of reference. 

Furthermore, language cuts across racial lines inasmuch as members of the same race frequently speak different languages while members different races frequently speak the same language. 

vi) If, however, you grew up in a racially heterogenous community, then social bonds might cut across racial lines. For instance, people tend to be more at ease with members of the same social class. But that's not a racial category. Members of different ethnic groups can and often do belong to the same social class–be it upper class, middle class, or working class. They have more in common at that level of comparison. Conversely, there can be antipathies between different social classes. 

vii) To take another example, if you have a multiethnic sports team, that's a setting in which men naturally become friends. The same dynamic occurs in military units. In those settings, racial differences are secondary.

viii) Consider guys who like the same movie genre (e.g. science fiction). Or play the same video games. Or the same sports (e.g. football, ice hockey, martial arts). That gives them a common domain of discourse. That transcends race. 

ix) In addition, we have natural rapport with some individuals. That's a basis of friendship. We click with certain people. That has far more to do with temperament or common interests than race. Conversely, there are folks who rub us the wrong way. And these are often members of our own race or people-group. For instance, it's not like being white automatically makes you simpatico with other whites. 

x) Even at the fundamental level of the family, there are people who prefer their friends to their relatives. Likewise, teenage boys and young bachelors naturally hang out with each other. Maturation includes an independent streak. You seek out and form attachments to people other than your relatives. 

xi) The ironic upshot is that white nationalism is artificial. I don't think we're naturally closer to members of our own race. And even if that were true as a default generality, many factors can neutralize that default generality. Christian racial inclusivism isn't a foreign veneer. Race doesn't run that deep.