Well not "everyone" says he is a fascist sociopath precisely and there are so many hyperboles thrown at each other in american political parties that doubt is nothing but sane.
And I also stand by my other point, that calling a tatooed redneck with mental illness "white supremacist" as if he was a normal member of a political movement is maybe not the best apporach (and I say the same for "islamic" attacks).
edit: Also i'm confused where he's "defending" the guy
Would this “tattooed redneck” that we shouldn’t call a “white supremacist” be the same person with a literal nazi swastika and SS runes tattoos, and a “RWDS” (Right Wing Death Squad) patch?
Jesus man. What more would it take to call him a neo-nazi white supremacist? A notarized letter found on his body, that was penned in his own hand?
And who the said he was mentally ill? We’ve had way too many shooters — including far right terrorists — that were not mentally ill committing mass murder.
I'm sorry you don't understand my point so let me expand:
- He is definitely a white supremacist, in the sense he adheres to hateful texts and probably calls/called himself that along with some other friends.
- Simply, white supremacism (or black supremacim, chinese, muslim or jewish supremacim) are in most case not real political movements but minorities of angry people with (similar) mental illness who act on their mental illness with the random tribe they feel they belong. (cf this testimony https://www.mmaindia.com/sean-strickland-opens-up-about-his-...)
- If you however are a functional member of the society, insisting on calling random shooters by their random political affiliation instead or their mental illness which is the primary factor is, if technically right, missing the point of the fact that weapons should not be given to mad people in general, and has also a tendency to stew political tensions.
- This is not a defense of white supremacism or shooters. Im french said the same when there was "islamic attacks" and people were weaponizing the fact they were mulslim for political purpose when in reality is was a bunch of angry 19 y.o. fanatazised by angry 60 y.o. imams with similar kinds mental illnesses.
And I also stand by my other point, that calling a tatooed redneck with mental illness "white supremacist" as if he was a normal member of a political movement is maybe not the best apporach (and I say the same for "islamic" attacks).
edit: Also i'm confused where he's "defending" the guy