100 genuine. I would have expected them to use the common latin or spanish. Not white supremacist. That feeds into a stereotype that doesn't exist here. It's like labeling the Oklahoma city bomber a muslim terrorist after 9/11 to fit in with the stereotyping of the day.

Suuuuure you're "100% genuine" in suggesting that calling a neo-Nazi with a fondness for sharing violent white supremacist rhetoric a white supremacist is like calling Timothy McVeigh a Muslim, and insisting the media ought to focus on the neo-Nazi's Spanish name instead of his "right wing death squad" patches.

So isn't the reason that Mauricio Garcia is labelled as a white supremacist because he himself actually wrote and self-identified as one?

If the Oklahoma city bombers did not leave behind any jihadist or pro-Islam writing of any sort and only left behind their white supremacy stuff I don't think they would have been labelled as Muslim terrorists if they did their attack soon after 9/11. The media very likely would have done something more like "white supremacy as displayed by the Oklahoma City Bombing is similar to the jihadist doctrine displayed by Al-Qaeda". Which is to say the media would have made links between the two (some spurious, some genuine) without actually saying the Oklahoma City Bombing was done by Muslim terrorists. This is so obvious to me to the point that I am beginning to feel empathetic to commenters doubting your being genuine - as much as I hate to admit it since I think trusting others are arguing in good faith is generally a better norm.

Whether the 9/11 era or now when someone commits a crime and actually leaves behind writing where they admit their beliefs, and motivation this is what they get labelled as. Why are you surprised when someone like Mauricio Garcia who admits white supremacist beliefs is then labelled as one by the media? Or is your claim that actually his writing is not white supremacist?