I didn't think the banner of Anonymous as-used-by leftist hacktivists was still active after the FBI's crackdown a decade ago. Imagine a world where the FBI treated white supremacist terrorists the same way they treat hacktivists.
An entirely deniable front for US cyberwarfare (or way to rally hacktivists to their cause) seems like a valuable thing for a nation state to create.
https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/racist-a...
https://www.kuow.org/stories/extremist-groups-popping-up-lef...
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/07/northwest-fr...
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.seattletimes.com/seattle-ne...
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.seattletimes.com/seattle-ne...
Hacktivists are not white hat hackers. They are black or grey and justify actions with personal morally. Judge each case by it's own merits. A lot of regular people get treated as terrorists when they do things like hack their school.
I haven't ever heard of white supremacist terrorist. I've heard of terrorist, I've heard of white supremacist, but I don't think the groups bi-sect. What is the last white supremacist terror attack you remember?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_terrorism_in_the_Unit...
Also, you should revisit your hat definitions. White and black hat are a matter of political perspective for each act and issue, but hacktivists are definitively not grey hat.
1995 Oklahoma City bombing, USA, 168 killed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing
2019 El Paso Walmart shooting, USA, 23 killed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_El_Paso_shooting
2019 Christchurch Mosque shooting, New Zealand, 51 killed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christchurch_mosque_shootings
The New Zealand shooting the fbi wasn't involved.
The El Paso mass shooting was against one group. You don't qualify to be a white supremacist unless you hate everyone not white. That person had a problem with a specific group hardly makes him hate everyone nor was his act against everyone not white.