The alt right - Mod Warning in OP

Skullface McGubbin

Billy86 wrote: »

From the article:

Alt-right: A young, energetic upstart faction of the Trump coalition heavily active on Twitter and underground forums. Characterised by nationalism, scepticism toward globalism and an irreverent sense of humour.

The above is still true, despite them being white supremacists

The actual alt right: https://www.reddit.com/r/altright/

Also true. Those two things don't conflict.

People can be neo-Nazis/fascists AND be a young, energetic upstart faction of the Trump coalition (not every Trump supporter is alt right. Some may be but not all.) heavily active on Twitter and underground forums. Characterised by nationalism, scepticism toward globalism and an irreverent sense of humour All at the same time. You can be one or you can be the other. You can also be both.
You think far right movements don't have young people or a sense of humor??

Now I'm not up in arms about the article myself, but considering it was called 'The alt-right movement: everything you need to know',

True. But of course a real "everything you need to know" piece about the alt right would take pages upon pages upon pages of material that would be too much for a single article. A more accurate title would have been "A fairly basic amount of things you need to know about the Alt Right plus a glossary of Alt Right Lingo". But nearly all news outlets today, regardless of political slant, go for the most click baity titles for their articles.

especially given that the author seems to share a lot of views with said alt right, does it not strike you as a little odd that it didn't mention race in there anywhere in the snippet above or the entire article? If you're confused about what I mean, click on the reddit link.

False!

From the article itself...

Dindu or Dindu Nuffin: A black man convicted of a crime, often one lionized by the press or portrayed as innocent. An attempt to approximate the African-American Vernacular English pronunciation of “didn’t do anything” (“dindu nuffin”).

ancapailldorcha

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I think the poster makes a very valid point. In fact, shouting down relatively moderate opinion that disagrees with the orthodoxy of the modern liberal left causes such opinion to remain unexpressed and unchallenged until it hardens into 'truth', In other words, the liberal left's unwillingness to discuss real issues in a real way is self-defeating.

There's no such thing as a "Liberal left". Liberalism is at odds with current leftism. Also, nobody has been shouted down. This is a discussion forum. In a way, you're proving my point. Tabloids and right-wing, anti-immigration press are still going strong.

oscarBravo

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I think the poster makes a very valid point. In fact, shouting down relatively moderate opinion that disagrees with the orthodoxy of the modern liberal left causes such opinion to remain unexpressed and unchallenged until it hardens into 'truth', In other words, the liberal left's unwillingness to discuss real issues in a real way is self-defeating.

Well, maybe - but mostly no. For example:

Lux23 wrote: »

I think immigration will cause issues economically and I would like there to be more control.

Now, this is an opinion. It also happens to be wrong, in the sense that it's unsupported by facts.

When such an opinion is responded to with the fact that immigration in fact creates net benefits economically, is that "shouting down"? Are we so far into post-truth that actual facts are dismissed as "orthodoxy of the modern liberal left"?

What happened to being entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts?

Brian?

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I think the poster makes a very valid point. In fact, shouting down relatively moderate opinion that disagrees with the orthodoxy of the modern liberal left causes such opinion to remain unexpressed and unchallenged until it hardens into 'truth', In other words, the liberal left's unwillingness to discuss real issues in a real way is self-defeating.

Every time someone says "liberal left" I go out into my back garden and scream at the sky. It's such a meaningless Americanism. The liberal left does not exist outside the mind of American right wingers.

Liberalism is a centrist position that. Left wing is left wing, it can vary from a mild social democrat like Bernie Sanders to a hard left anarchist/libertarian socialist like myself.

Pick the target of disgruntlment please. The liberals, the social Democrats, the communists or the entire left if you want.

Modern liberalism is about as left wing ad Tony Blair.

B_Wayne

Lux23 wrote: »

My view of the alt-right is that some people were getting tired of not being able to share their views because of what they deem to be political correctness. In some cases these views may well have been innocuous enough, e.g. I think immigration will cause issues economically and I would like there to be more control. I think that opinion is fair enough but for a long time if you shared it many people would jump down your throat and call you a racist. When its not a racist opinion, its an economic one. And so people sought out safe spaces to share and discuss opinions like that. But these spaces grew and sure enough people who wanted to share opinions such as "I want immigration to end because multiculturalism has failed" or "white people's culture is getting destroyed by immigration" joined. So what was a legitimate reaction to getting called a racist for sharing non-racist opinions got mixed up with sharing actual racist comments. And now somehow the latter is becoming as acceptable in some places as the former.

I view the alt right in the same light as I view intelligent design. It's rebranding. Creationism is intelligent design. The alt right is nazism dressed up. They believe in race wars, they worry about the 'white race' being usurped by other races. They're pretty akin to the views of Breivik, I imagine he would have shared an affinity with them.

Sand

Brian? wrote: »

Every time someone says "liberal left" I go out into my back garden and scream at the sky. It's such a meaningless Americanism. The liberal left does not exist outside the mind of American right wingers.

A lot of people feel the same about the term "alt-right".

Trolling has reached such an art form that trolls are now branching off into opposing schools who delegitimise and despise each other. I really am not sure if this is a win for wider humanity or not. Whoever wins, we lose.

Brian?

Sand wrote: »

A lot of people feel the same about the term "alt-right".

Well they shouldn't have invented the term and started using it for themselves then.

Trolling has reached such an art form that trolls are now branching off into opposing schools who delegitimise and despise each other. I really am not sure if this is a win for wider humanity or not. Whoever wins, we lose.

Trolling will have never be an art form. It's like dealing with 6 year old. Racist 6 year olds who deny being racist.

B_Wayne

Brian? wrote: »

Well they shouldn't have invented the term and started using it for themselves then.



Trolling will have never be an art form. It's like dealing with 6 year old. Racist 6 year olds who deny being racist.

I'm in favour of just using the traditional term "neo nazi".

Brian?

B_Wayne wrote: »

I'm in favour of just using the traditional term "neo nazi".

Me too, it cuts through the bull ****.

midnight city

I see those peaceful liberal lefties shut down a Milo speech at Davis university in California last night. They really are freedom loving people. Any wonder the alt right and other movements like it are growing.

Brian?

midnight city wrote: »

I see those peaceful liberal leftiesshut down a Milo speech at Davis university in California last night. They really are freedom loving people. Any wonder the alt right and other movements like it are growing.

I don't think liberal lefties shut anything down, seeing as they don't exist.

Yourself isit

oscarBravo wrote: »

Well, maybe - but mostly no. For example: Now, this is an opinion. It also happens to be wrong, in the sense that it's unsupported by facts.

When such an opinion is responded to with the fact that immigration in fact creates net benefits economically, is that "shouting down"? Are we so far into post-truth that actual facts are dismissed as "orthodoxy of the modern liberal left"?

What happened to being entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts?

The idea that immigration or globalisation benefit the average western worker is empirically suspect. It does benefit the 1%.

ancapailldorcha

Yourself isit wrote: »

The idea that immigration or globalisation benefit the average worker is empirically suspect. It does benefit the 1%.

Can you prove this?

Yourself isit

Brian? wrote: »

Well they shouldn't have invented the term and started using it for themselves then.

It's an American term. Who in Ireland would self describe as Alt Right?

most of the modern Irish identity politics left is a carbon copy of American identity politics left - adopting the use of "white" as if the experience of the ethnic Irish in Ireland could be compared to a Euro-American or Anglo-American histories.

Yourself isit

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Can you prove this?

Yes you can. American working class wages in particular and western wages in general have stagnated under neo-liberalism, globalisation and immigration. We should also be looking at disposable income (after rent etc).

Brian?

Yourself isit wrote: »

It's an American term. Who in Ireland would self describe as Alt Right?

Some posters on this thread. But why do you ask? This thread is about the alt right, I don't believe the term to be contentious in any way.

In opposition most of the modern Irish identity politics left is a carbon copy of American identity politics left - adopting the use of "white" as if the experience of the ethnic Irish in Ireland could be compared to a Euro-American or Anglo-American histories.

I'm sorry, but that's nonsense. What Irish identity politics exist on any significant scale anyway?

Again, this thread is about the alt right. The only defence for their carry on seems to be whatabouterry and whinging about this imaginary regressive left.

ancapailldorcha

Yourself isit wrote: »

Yes you can. American working class wages in particular and western wages in general have stagnated under neo-liberalism, globalisation and immigration. We should also be looking at disposable income (after rent etc).

That's just an observation. You've provided no evidence that this is down to migration.

Brian?

Yourself isit wrote: »

Yes you can. American working class wages in particular and western wages in general have stagnated under neo-liberalism, globalisation and immigration. We should also be looking at disposable income (after rent etc).

Stunning logic. Neo liberalism and globalisation ship jobs abroad, not open the doors to immigration.

Yourself isit

Brian? wrote: »

Some posters on this thread. But why do you ask? This thread is about the alt right, do I don't believe the term to be contentious in any way.

I ask because you you are complaining about the "American" use of the term liberal left. That was obvious because that was the specific post I was responding to.

I'm sorry, but that's nonsense. What Irish politics exist on any significant scale anyway?

That's not much of an answer to my question about the Americanised use of white for Ireland.

Again, this thread is about the alt right. The only defence for their carry on seems to be whatabouterry and whinging about this imaginary regressive left.

This thread is about the alt right but the self described alt right disappeared or were banned. So the debate moves on.

Without some type of challenge the thread is trending towards "they're Nazis" drive by posts.

Professor Moriarty

Brian? wrote: »

Some posters on this thread. But why do you ask? This thread is about the alt right, I don't believe the term to be contentious in any way.




I'm sorry, but that's nonsense. What Irish identity politics exist on any significant scale anyway?

Again, this thread is about the alt right. The only defence for their carry on seems to be whatabouterry and whinging about this imaginary regressive left.

If you don't like the term 'liberal left' (screaming at the sky will damage your vocal chords), and you accept that alt right as being on one end of a spectrum of opinion, how would describe people at the other end of the spectrum?

Yourself isit

Brian? wrote: »

Stunning logic. Neo liberalism and globalisation ship jobs abroad, not open the doors to immigration.

Thanks.

As we both agree then both mass immigration and globalisation are neo-liberal concepts. It's about allowing both capital and labour to be free of government interference.

midnight city

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

If you don't like the term 'liberal left' (screaming at the sky will damage your vocal chords), and you accept that alt right as being on one end of a spectrum of opinion, how would describe people at the other end of the spectrum?

Screaming at the sky.. it's all a bit Louise O'Neill. What other term fits I wonder, progressive left, sjw's, lefty.. the illiberal left perhaps is best of all.

ancapailldorcha

midnight city wrote: »

Screaming at the sky.. it's all a bit Louise O'Neill. What other term fits I wonder, progressive left, sjw's, lefty.. the illiberal left perhaps is best of all.

Ill-liberal left is probably the most apt moniker.

Brian?

Yourself isit wrote: »

I ask because you you are complaining about the "American" use of the term liberal left. That was obvious because that was the specific post I was responding to.

You missed the critical part of my point so. "Liberal Left" is a meaningless Americanism. Meaningless being the key
That's not much of an answer to my question about the Americanised use of white for Ireland.

This thread is about the alt right but the self described alt right disappeared or were banned. So the debate moves on.

Because they were completely unable to debate on an adult level. Why does the debate move on? Why is using alt right, a name they self identify by, and using liberal left, a meaningless term, equivalent?

Without some type of challenge the thread is trending towards "they're Nazis" drive by posts.

That's fine. But you're challenging the use of "alt right" in a thread about the alt right, where no one from the alt right has objected to the term.
.

Brian?

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

If you don't like the term 'liberal left' (screaming at the sky will damage your vocal chords), and you accept that alt right as being on one end of a spectrum of opinion, how would describe people at the other end of the spectrum?

Left. They are left wing.

It's my belief that the term "liberal left" was conceived of by right wing commentators in the US to falsely identify liberals as left wing. It's a continuation of the "reds under the bed" nonsense that's being going on for years.

Being left wing has negative implications in the US, so in effect it's used as a slur.

Yourself isit

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

That's just an observation. You've provided no evidence that this is down to migration.

It's probably not down to unicorns.

It is indeed just a correlation but correlation not being causation isn't the same as saying there is no information in correlation at all. And theres an obvious cause of worldwide wage competition. I don't think even right wing economists totally deny this (labour arbitrage they call it).

Globalists often cite globalisation as being benefical to world wage levels - which have risen in the last two decades - and for the reduction in absolute poverty. If globalisation is credited with wage increases in developing countries then it should be credited with wage stagnation in the West.

Yourself isit

Brian? wrote: »

You missed the critical part of my point so. "Liberal Left" is a meaningless Americanism. Meaningless being the key
That's not much of an answer to my question about the Americanised use of white for Ireland.



Because they were completely unable to debate on an adult level. Why does the debate move on? Why is using alt right, a name they self identify by, and using liberal left, a meaningless term, equivalent?



That's fine. But you're challenging the use of "alt right" in a thread about the alt right, where no one from the alt right has objected to the term.
.

Fair enough. I did miss your use of meaningless. So you have a point.

ancapailldorcha

Yourself isit wrote: »

It's probably not down to unicorns.

It is indeed just a correlation but correlation not being causation isn't the same as saying there is no information in correlation at all. And theres an obvious cause of worldwide wage competition. I don't think even right wing economists totally deny this (labour arbitrage they call it).

Globalists often cite globalisation as being benefical to world wage levels - which have risen in the last two decades - and for the reduction in absolute poverty. If globalisation is credited with wage increases in developing countries then it should be credited with wage stagnation in the West.

Again, no evidence. There's plenty of information in correlation but you've ignored anything substantial in favour of opting for the tired sensationalist tactic of blaming migrants.

Brian?

Yourself isit wrote: »

Thanks.

As we both agree then both mass immigration and globalisation are neo-liberal concepts. It's about allowing both capital and labour to be free of government interference.

Mass immigration supplies needed labour to the west where population growth is slow and declining. Why do you think Germany has become so multicultural? They need the workers. And how is your average German doing in terms of standard of living?

Brian?

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Again, no evidence. There's plenty of information in correlation but you've ignored anything substantial in favour of opting for the tired sensationalist tactic of blaming migrants.

Even when it was the bears, I knew ithat was th immigants.