{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.012220566318926976, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.567514677103718, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Social Significance of Studying White Supremacy

J. his special issue of Sociological Focus represents an acknowledgment that the sociological study of white supremacy and white racialism is not a topic left exclusively to deviance and criminological scholars. We believe that the study of these actors must examine the nature, organization, and activities of the participants of the white supremacist and racialist movement from a sociological perspective. In addition, one must analyze the socioeconomic, cultural, and institutional links among selfdesignated white supremacists in order to understand their activities. The idea that white supremacists are social movement actors, like mainstream social movement actors and institutions, and are socially, politically, and ideologically constructed, derives from a use of the classic sociological imagination. The use of this approach presents an alternative view to the deviance perspective, which contends that white supremacist actors and institutions should be understood primarily as deviants. We believe that this volume moves the dialogue further into a rich sociological context where analysis is not limited to description but broadened into analyses of discourse, mobilization, and activity. The research in this volume builds on detailed historical, archival, interview, and Internet research, much of it from primary sources. The role of human agency and social structure in determining which individuals become associated with white supremacist activity and in defining the scope and structure of the resulting collectivity created by white supremacist organizing is a central concern for many of the essays. Katz and Bailey discuss the belief system employed among "constitutional militias" and compare that ideological system to the world view of white supremacists. The influence of supremacists on some sectors of the so-called Patriot movement is demonstrated via the narrative analysis used by Katz and Bailey. Perry also examines the structure and discourse of the Patriot movement in her discussion of the activities of that movement. Perry further illustrates the absorption of supremacist ideas within those groups. Ferber and Kimmel discuss the use of different components of a Western motif among white supremacist discourse as a means of legitimizing it. Standard discussions of white supremacy neglect social structure since membership within these groups is assumed to be an inevitable consequence of individual deviation. Ferber and Kimmel illustrate the manner in which this discourse can be construed as normative among some Americans. Berbrier demonstrates another aspect of the discourse of white supremacists in his analysis of how white supremacists construct an image of themselves as victims at the hands of the oppressive sociopolitical organization of American society. The development of white supremacy in its varied forms in the United States was the result not just of individual and motivational factors but also of structural ones. These organizations arose and changed because the economic and historic context created a cultural climate in which individuals would be receptive to the varied white supremacist messages of Christian Identity, international conspiracy, and ethnic conflict. Beck analyzes the socioeconomic factors that are tied to Ku Klux