If you were to see someone making the following statement, where would you peg him as standing on the ideological spectrum?
“There’s a certain ritual of apology that white people and all white advocacy groups are expected to go through immediately following any incident of white violence. . . . This expectation we place on white people, to be absolutely clear, is anti-white bigotry. The denunciation is a form of apology: an apology for being white. The implication is that every white person is under suspicion of being sympathetic to white violence unless he or she explicitly says otherwise. There is no legitimate reason for white racial advocacy groups to need to condemn Dylann Roof or Stephen Paddock.”
What about this one?
“While politicians and anti-whites continue to pressure whites into nonsensical apologies based on our identity, many whites have, unfortunately, internalized the narrative of collective responsibility, leading them to issue condemnations of acts of violence and terrorism based only on the fact that we share the same color of skin. Coupled with the ever present voice of those calling for whites to speak out against white racist violence, those who have stepped up to this plate . . . [have merely internalized] the dominant narrative where whites are guilty until proven innocent.”