The alt right - Mod Warning in OP

oscarBravo

midnight city wrote: »

His popularity i meant. Nobody would know anything about him if there wasn't such nonsense coming form the liberal left.

There's a subtle element of "victim blaming", for want of a phrase, about the justification for the rise of the alt-right. If only the SJWs weren't so mouthy, the argument goes, there wouldn't be an alt-right.

The echoes of "why'd you make me do it?" are a little chilling.

ancapailldorcha

oscarBravo wrote: »

There's a subtle element of "victim blaming", for want of a phrase, about the justification for the rise of the alt-right. If only the SJWs weren't so mouthy, the argument goes, there wouldn't be an alt-right.

The echoes of "why'd you make me do it?" are a little chilling.

It's the effect of the Twittersphere. It encourages people to spout endless hateful nonsense to get noticed. It also has the habit of making certain groups appear much larger than they already are. How many so-called SJW's do you meet day to day? Damn few I'd wager. I'd know a small few candidates for the alt right but nobody who'd go on about privilege.

InTheTrees

I know I'll get shouted down for this but an African American in the white house has meant that a lot of people with deeply held feelings about certain things have been coming out of the woodwork over the last eight years.

Not a bad thing necessarily but I would expect the level of noise to dissipate considerably now.

Skullface McGubbin

The Alt Right is a coalition of different groups (some extreme, some not so extreme) that share one thing in common which is a strong rejection of the P.C progressive left wing ideology that rules most (if not all) of the institutions in western countries today. In other words, they're an anti-Left coalition which is why left wingers (especially Guardian reading SJW types) hate them so much.

The following link provides a detailed (and rather long) overview of them https://thelibertarianalliance.com/2016/08/29/the-rise-of-the-radical-right-the-alt-right-neoreaction-and-the-trump-campaign/

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

But again does nobody see the double standard here? Extremist SJWs who behave just as badly as people like Milo (and who in my view are responsible for creating his brand of reactionism) don't get dissected and called out in this manner, not in mainstream discourse. The Alt-Right is socially unacceptable, the SJW left is not. That's a major, major difference which in my view makes all the difference in terms of which is the more dangerous movement.

The thing is that SJWs have plenty of allies and sympathizers in positions of authority and positions of influence (such academia and mainstream media) and sites like this one. So they pretty much operate in a "no enemies to the left, no friends to the right" fashion.

The reasons why classical liberalism was replaced by progressive SJW type liberalism in recent decades can be attributed to the likes of Herbert Marcuse and his ilk.
Marcuse's essay "Repressive Tolerance" lays the groundwork of the "tolerance for me but not for thee" attitude that is common among today's regressive left folks.

oscarBravo

Skullface McGubbin wrote: »

...progressive left wing ideology...

...regressive left folks.

Make up your mind.

Lackey

Brian? wrote: »

Can you post some examples of feminists attacking men and SJWs attacking white people?

African American college student attacked a white college student for having dread locks (sp)
Hilary supports attacked lone trump voter, I'm not digging up links
Google and ye shall find.
Any 'far' movement right left or otherwise is never good ...but when facts are ignored people get pissed off and when there's no middle ground, and no ones listening Trump Brexit etc will happen.

Amazingfun

oscarBravo wrote: »

There's a subtle element of "victim blaming", for want of a phrase, about the justification for the rise of the alt-right. If only the SJWs weren't so mouthy, the argument goes, there wouldn't be an alt-right.

The echoes of "why'd you make me do it?" are a little chilling.

Why is a "justification" required at all? :rolleyes:

Brian?

Lackey wrote: »

African American college student attacked a white college student for having dread locks (sp)
Hilary supports attacked lone trump voter, I'm not digging up links
Google and ye shall find.
Any 'far' movement right left or otherwise is never good ...but when facts are ignored people get pissed off and when there's no middle ground, and no ones listening Trump Brexit etc will happen.

It's not up to me to google. The entire ethos of this forum is that if someone presents a point of view they should be able to back it up.

This is at least the fifth time, on various threads, present me with these SJWs committing acts of intolerance on the white man. I believe isolated examples of stupidity exist, but no one is oppressing the white man in the name of social justice.

alastair

Amazingfun wrote: »

Why is a "justification" required at all? :rolleyes:

None needed, but there's this guff about the alt-right being a response to progressives nonetheless. Idiocy is a human trait. That's all anyone needs to know. Here's the latest bunch of idiots.

Brian?

Amazingfun wrote: »

Why is a "justification" required at all? :rolleyes:

Because the alt right is a horrible mishmash of people with a large dollop of hatred thrown in. They love to lower the discourse to the insult level, everyone who disagrees with them is a SJW or a feminazi or a cuck or a libertard.

Do you think Milo has ever said "I respectfully disagree" without sneering?

Please don't respond about how the left are wrong about X and y. Address the hate spewed by the people you support.

Amazingfun

Idiots? There is plenty of very highly intelligent people within the "Altright".


Anyways, here is one of the videos that was mentioned above, the dreadlock incident:

Amazingfun

Brian? wrote: »

Because the alt right is a horrible mishmash of people with a large dollop of hatred thrown in. They love to lower the discourse to the insult level, everyone who disagrees with them is a SJW or a feminazi or a cuck or a libertard.

Do you think Milo has ever said "I respectfully disagree" without sneering?

Please don't respond about how the left are wrong about X and y. Address the hate spewed by the people you support.

lol, why are you so easily triggered by them? Serious query.

ancapailldorcha

alastair wrote: »

None needed, but there's this guff about the alt-right being a response to progressives nonetheless. Idiocy is a human trait. That's all anyone needs to know. Here's the latest bunch of idiots.

I'd disagree to a degree. The idiots are prevalent on both sides. However, we're not at a stage where performers are prevented from performing at Universities if their students don't like them. Universities are supposed to be melting pots of ideas. Instead, predominantly left-leaning students are trying to censor people they don't like instead of engaging with, or ignoring them. The far right loves censorship just as much. The point is that either side sees itself as the victim, sees itself as being oppressed and loves nothing more than to hurl vitriol at the other.

Sound of Silence

alastair wrote: »

Nope, there's an ample audience for reactionary rubbish. It doesn't require any 'nonsense' from the liberal left to set yourself up as a clown of intolerance.

You may say that, but many in the Alt-Right would consider themselves specifically as a counter-culture to what they would describe as modern Liberalism and "Equalatarianism". It just so happens that nonsense spawns nonsense, and we've ended up with another fine example of the horseshoe theory in action.

Brian?

Amazingfun wrote: »

Idiots? There is plenty of very highly intelligent people within the "Altright".

The idiots I was referring to are the people, left and right, that use violence and intolerance as a weapon against those they're ideologically opposed to.

Idiots who are often labelled as SJWs.

Anyways, here is one of the videos that was mentioned above, the dreadlock incident:

This is an idiot.

ancapailldorcha

Low quality posts deleted. Please try to be more constructive.

Brian?

Amazingfun wrote: »

lol, why are you so easily triggered by them? Serious query.

Triggered? Hilarious.

I am not triggered by them and I don't seek a safe space away from them. I want to confront them wherever they raise their heads.

Like now.

I'm trying to open a dialogue and you throw a one liner, a very unfunny one, back at me. How about we engage in debate instead?

alastair

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I'd disagree to a degree. The idiots are prevalent on both sides. However, we're not at a stage where performers are prevented from performing at Universities if their students don't like them. Universities are supposed to be melting pots of ideas. Instead, predominantly left-leaning students are trying to censor people they don't like instead of engaging with, or ignoring them. The far right loves censorship just as much. The point is that either side sees itself as the victim, sees itself as being oppressed and loves nothing more than to hurl vitriol at the other.

Thing is, there's a preponderance of evidence on one side and sod all on the other. Idiots be everywhere, but there's one side of this argument considerably more idiotic than the other (and consequently has a greater density of idiot supporters). There is no equivalence between the two sides.

Brian?

Sound of Silence wrote: »

You may say that, but many in the Alt-Right would consider themselves specifically as a counter-culture to what they would describe as modern Liberalism and "Equalatarianism". It just so happens that nonsense spawns nonsense, and we've ended up with another fine example of the horseshoe theory in action.

This is what gets me. They are a counter culture to a more tolerant, multi cultural, multi ethic and pluralist society. Surely society is improved by increased tolerance. What value does a counter culture to make society less tolerant have?

Amazingfun

Brian? wrote: »

Triggered? Hilarious.

I am not triggered by them and I don't seek a safe space away from them. I want to confront them wherever they raise their heads.

Like now.

I'm trying to open a dialogue and you throw a one liner, a very unfunny one, back at me. How about we engage in debate instead?

You said this :

Because the alt right is a horrible mishmash of people with a large dollop of hatred thrown in.

This is not "debate". That smacks of emotionalism, i.e, "triggering".

And anyways, what is there to debate about people expressing their opinions on a host of contemporary issues? They exist and have every right to. You don't like them, that is clear, but so what?

alastair

Sound of Silence wrote: »

You may say that, but many in the Alt-Right would consider themselves specifically as a counter-culture to what they would describe as modern Liberalism and "Equalatarianism". It just so happens that nonsense spawns nonsense, and we've ended up with another fine example of the horseshoe theory in action.

We really haven't. It's merely a flag of convenience for the same old stale reactionary bile.

oscarBravo

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The point is that either side sees itself as the victim, sees itself as being oppressed...

OK, let's think about that for a second. One perspective says that women, people of colour, gays and so on are victims of oppression. Another perspective says that white men are victims of oppression.

I think it's fairly clear to anyone looking at the question objectively which of those perspectives has the more validity.

For all the cries of "help, help, I'm being oppressed" from the alt-right, I can't imagine too many of them would actually prefer to be black lesbians.

ancapailldorcha

alastair wrote: »

Thing is, there's a preponderance of evidence on one side and sod all on the other. Idiots be everywhere, but there's one side of this argument considerably more idiotic than the other (and consequently has a greater density of idiot supporters). There is no equivalence between the two sides.

I didn't claim that the two were in any way equivalent. I was just pointing out that the modern left is going down less than desirable directions.

ancapailldorcha

oscarBravo wrote: »

OK, let's think about that for a second. One perspective says that women, people of colour, gays and so on are victims of oppression. Another perspective says that white men are victims of oppression.

I think it's fairly clear to anyone looking at the question objectively which of those perspectives has the more validity.

For all the cries of "help, help, I'm being oppressed" from the alt-right, I can't imagine too many of them would actually prefer to be black lesbians.

Again, I didn't say that each side had equal amounts of legitimacy. I didn't think I needed to.

oscarBravo

Brian? wrote: »

This is what gets me. They are a counter culture to a more tolerant, multi cultural, multi ethic and pluralist society. Surely society is improved by increased tolerance. What value does a counter culture to make society less tolerant have?

This is where you'll generally hear the "multiculturalism is a failed experiment" trope. Very little evidence is offered for this, other than an increase in racism, which is a pretty perfect example of begging the question.

oscarBravo

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Again, I didn't say that each side had equal amounts of legitimacy. I didn't think I needed to.

Accepted. Unfortunately, I think it needs to be said.

ancapailldorcha

oscarBravo wrote: »

Accepted. Unfortunately, I think it needs to be said.

I'll have to try to be clearer in future. I was trying to describe the common behaviours and mindsets of each.

alastair

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I didn't claim that the two were in any way equivalent. I was just pointing out that the modern left is going down less than desirable directions.

I'm not buying it. I suspect you've fallen hook, line and sinker for pretty weak bait. The modern left is the same range of opinions and perspectives it's ever been.

ancapailldorcha

alastair wrote: »

I'm not buying it. I suspect you've fallen hook, line and sinker for pretty weak bait. The modern left is the same range of opinions and perspectives it's ever been.

I'm not overly bothered what you buy. I'm a liberal and I make no apologies for it. I'm pro-immigration, pro-markets, pro-welfare state, pro-Universal healthcare and pro-free speech. On the last of those, much of the calls for censorship and restrictions of free speech are coming from the left.

oscarBravo

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I'll have to try to be clearer in future. I was trying to describe the common behaviours and mindsets of each.

I don't think it's so much a common mindset as the alt-right aping what they perceive as a successful strategy. They see liberals and progressives pointing out inequality and oppression and making gains as a result; they decide to claim that they're being oppressed in turn in an attempt to reverse those gains.

Objectively, there can be no comparison between the claims of oppression on either side. So it's not a common mindset; it's the difference between a legitimate grievance on the one hand, and bitterness at the loss of privilege on the other.