There is a stark contrast in what is or is not taken seriously, [@Dynamo Frokane]. When you start speaking about ethno-states, most tend to shut themselves down. The extremists will of course adhere to it as gospel no matter what, but how often do you hear them making the news as the major focus of the media? Why is "It's okay to be white." a controversial statement at all? If it is perfectly acceptable to be any other race, as it should be, why is one of these permitted to suffer under "actual", a term I use [i]very[/i] loosely, critique? There is a distinct contrast in what passes for acceptable identity politics, because it is palatable, exploitable and in the minds of some, legitimately credible, and then there are the sorts people will immediately react to with a sense of discomfort.

I am less legitimately worried about the actual Alt-Right white nationalist sensationalists than I am any number of mainstream figures who are pandering based on race. One of those two groups is taken seriously and I am sure beyond a doubt you can decipher which under your own accord and volition. There is no shortage of cringe-worthy pandering to race, gender, or class by at least half of the current political battlefield of the United States, one of whom was almost elect of their party and another was a presidential candidate.

As for "millennial woes" I am unfamiliar to them personally.