Thread by @AnechoicMedia_

Slate's Tom Scocca tells us explicitly the problem that must end is mentioning the cultural concerns of whites, even obliquely.

A frustrated white man taking matters into his own hands is proof of how evil it is anyone was ever implying to help his concerns in the first place.

Bret Stephens, he says, is complicit for observing how the Democratic debates depicted "a party that makes too many Americans feel like strangers in their own country."

No argument is made for why this is incorrect or morally wrong, other than that the shooter would agree.

Sullivan is at fault for encouraging "an honest debate about the benefits and drawbacks of diversity".

Douthat is wrong to look to previous waves of migration as a model for cultural assimilation.

Why should we stop caring about these things because "some people did something"?

Douthat is complicit for saying immigration has "costs as well and benefits", and that it can "reduce social cohesion and civil trust."

You know who else believed in civil trust? Hitler!

Scocca puts it quite simply:

- concerns about social cohesion, costs of diversity, or alienation are "white nationalist talking points"

- if you use or mention any "white nationalist talking point" then you yourself are a white nationalist

No criticizing immigration, period.