|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
United States44122 Posts
Incidentally many in the alt-right disagree with Milo's claims that it's not a racist movement and believe that he, as a homosexual Jewish media figure, is trying to hijack their movement.
Andrew Anglin wrote the following in response to Milo's article defining who the alt-right were and what they stand for
For those of us familiar with these issues, however, it is obvious that instead of being an attempt to understand the alt-right, it is an attempt to redefine it as what they want it to be.
This is the official beginning of the great co-opting. We knew it was coming.
Basically, they claim that everything the alt-right says it believes they don’t actually believe, but simply say they believe it as a part of a joke to piss off feminists and Black lives activists. Because they think it is funny to piss people off.
Note that he's saying that the above article, in which Milo explains the upcoming race war and how whites must discriminate to survive, isn't racist enough and is hijacking the true alt-right.
Upon finishing the article (Milo's explanation of the alt-right), one is left with two pressing questions:
1) How is it possible that this article does not mention The Daily Stormer? and
2) Why does this article not talk about Jews?
Possibly excluding /pol/, the largest part of the alt-right movement is the Daily Stormer. We have at least four times the traffic of all of the cuck alt-right sites combined.
And yet in this article, we are not mentioned.
Neither are the Jews.
Arguing against Milo's case that the Dindu memes and other similar racist memes are just good old fashioned transgression fun for shock value he clarifies that no, really, they do hate the blacks, gays and Jews.
But more importantly it is true that we actually hate all of these people. Of course we have fun doing it.
Milo wrote that
Are they actually bigots? No more than death metal devotees in the 80s were actually Satanists. For them, it’s simply a means to fluster their grandparents.
continuing his narrative that they were just having fun when they call black people apes etc. But the alt-right isn't having any part of this subversive Jewish propaganda.
lolwut?
Of course we hate these people.
Saying that we don’t hate them, and it’s all a big joke because we want to anger our parents, is not just spin, it’s an outright lie.
Maybe it was true in 2005 that we made racist jokes about Jews and hajis for teh lulz, but then things got real. Now we know for a fact these people are trying to destroy us.
Why would we not hate them?
lulz are not an end in themselves.
lulz are a weapon of the race war.
In response to Milo's claim that the old don't understand the alt-right because of WWII and the Holocaust he writes
“Horrors of the Holocaust.”
Find me a single alt-right twitter figure who believes the Holocaust is something other than a monumental hoax. Yes, we all joke about this stupid hoax, and yes, it is funny to joke about this stupid hoax.
and it goes on, and on, and on.
https://archive.is/5xful#selection-1053.0-1059.205
Clearly the alt-right is having a bit of an identity crisis regarding whether they just pretend to do and say racist stuff for fun, whether the race war is coming or whether the Jews and other mongrel races must be exterminated.
|
United States44122 Posts
On August 27 2016 02:49 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 02:32 KwarK wrote:https://archive.is/1FoFyAn article by Milo explaining who the alt right are. I'll let him use his own words The alt right are distinct from old school racist skinheads due to intelligence. Skinheads, by and large, are low-information, low-IQ thugs driven by the thrill of violence and tribal hatred. The alternative right are a much smarter group of people So, like racist skinheads but too smart for that crowd? People who want to be football hooligans but don't like leaving their mother's basements perhaps? The alt-right do not hold a utopian view of the human condition: just as they are inclined to prioritise the interests of their tribe, they recognise that other groups – Mexicans, African-Americans or Muslims – are likely to do the same. As communities become comprised of different peoples, the culture and politics of those communities become an expression of their constituent peoples. Note, this is literally a case for racial discrimination. The alt right claim that is is right to prioritize the interests of ones own group at the expense of others because of, and I know this is a loaded term but it's literally what he's saying, racial darwinism. That each race should favour itself because they assume that every other race will act similarly and it is necessary to act in such a way to protect the race (hence "diversity = white genocide"). Wait, you now say. He said groups and culture, he didn't specify the different races were in competition and that the whites must prioritize their own to win the war against the blacks, you've added your own racial emphasis there. The alt-right’s intellectuals would also argue that culture is inseparable from race. The alt-right believe that some degree of separation between peoples is necessary for a culture to be preserved. A Mosque next to an English street full of houses bearing the flag of St. George, according to alt-righters, is neither an English street nor a Muslim street — separation is necessary for distinctiveness. Okay, so he just wants whites to discriminate against other races. It's not like the alt-right are full on going for a literal race war. You’ll often encounter doomsday rhetoric in alt-right online communities: that’s because many of them instinctively feel that once large enough and ethnically distinct enough groups are brought together, they will inevitably come to blows. In short, they doubt that full “integration” is ever possible. Okay, so we're discriminating against non whites because different races are fundamentally incompatible and in competition with each other and we will inevitably find ourselves in a nationwide race war. Good to know. But in the words of Katrina Pierson, these are just the words he's using, we shouldn't pay attention to those. Focus on what you feel to be true without listening to facts. He makes no such claim. He claims the prioritization of tribal interests is a preexisting condition of a multicultural society. He didn't say that it was right. He claims it just is. The conclusions he draws are suspect as hell. Fundamental incompatibility is one of them.
Just so you know, large chunks of the alt-right attacked Milo's definition of them for incorrectly categorizing them as not real racists and suggesting that to them it's all a big joke. They were furious, how dare he suggest that their crusade to exterminate the lesser races was any kind of joke.
Poor Milo is caught in the middle. From the one side the Libs saying "yeah but that's still super racist, even if you're not serious" and from the other the alt-right going "how dare you challenge our commitment to Hitler's vision!".
|
On August 27 2016 03:03 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 02:49 Danglars wrote:On August 27 2016 02:32 KwarK wrote:https://archive.is/1FoFyAn article by Milo explaining who the alt right are. I'll let him use his own words The alt right are distinct from old school racist skinheads due to intelligence. Skinheads, by and large, are low-information, low-IQ thugs driven by the thrill of violence and tribal hatred. The alternative right are a much smarter group of people So, like racist skinheads but too smart for that crowd? People who want to be football hooligans but don't like leaving their mother's basements perhaps? The alt-right do not hold a utopian view of the human condition: just as they are inclined to prioritise the interests of their tribe, they recognise that other groups – Mexicans, African-Americans or Muslims – are likely to do the same. As communities become comprised of different peoples, the culture and politics of those communities become an expression of their constituent peoples. Note, this is literally a case for racial discrimination. The alt right claim that is is right to prioritize the interests of ones own group at the expense of others because of, and I know this is a loaded term but it's literally what he's saying, racial darwinism. That each race should favour itself because they assume that every other race will act similarly and it is necessary to act in such a way to protect the race (hence "diversity = white genocide"). Wait, you now say. He said groups and culture, he didn't specify the different races were in competition and that the whites must prioritize their own to win the war against the blacks, you've added your own racial emphasis there. The alt-right’s intellectuals would also argue that culture is inseparable from race. The alt-right believe that some degree of separation between peoples is necessary for a culture to be preserved. A Mosque next to an English street full of houses bearing the flag of St. George, according to alt-righters, is neither an English street nor a Muslim street — separation is necessary for distinctiveness. Okay, so he just wants whites to discriminate against other races. It's not like the alt-right are full on going for a literal race war. You’ll often encounter doomsday rhetoric in alt-right online communities: that’s because many of them instinctively feel that once large enough and ethnically distinct enough groups are brought together, they will inevitably come to blows. In short, they doubt that full “integration” is ever possible. Okay, so we're discriminating against non whites because different races are fundamentally incompatible and in competition with each other and we will inevitably find ourselves in a nationwide race war. Good to know. But in the words of Katrina Pierson, these are just the words he's using, we shouldn't pay attention to those. Focus on what you feel to be true without listening to facts. He makes no such claim. He claims the prioritization of tribal interests is a preexisting condition of a multicultural society. He didn't say that it was right. He claims it just is. The conclusions he draws are suspect as hell. Fundamental incompatibility is one of them. Just so you know, large chunks of the alt-right attacked Milo's definition of them for incorrectly categorizing them as not real racists and suggesting that to them it's all a big joke. They were furious, how dare he suggest that their crusade to exterminate the lesser races was any kind of joke. Poor Milo is caught in the middle. From the one side the Libs saying "yeah but that's still super racist, even if you're not serious" and from the other the alt-right going "how dare you challenge our commitment to Hitler's vision!".
but meanwhile, he's making a pretty good career out of the little niche he's carved out as a totally-not-racist.
|
United States44122 Posts
All the literal Nazis (like they actually Heil Hitler etc) who seem to think they're part of the alt-right movement must make it very confusing for the alt-right, especially given that there seem to be more of them in the alt-right movement than the non Nazis.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/YqOpKdI.png)
|
He is the very definition of Useful Idiot and is going to ride that one to the grave. Also he plagiarized Tori Amos in some really bad self published poetry a while ago. It continues to be funny to this day.
|
On August 27 2016 03:09 KwarK wrote:All the literal Nazis (like they actually Heil Hitler etc) who seem to think they're part of the alt-right movement must make it very confusing for the alt-right, especially given that there seem to be more of them in the alt-right movement than the non Nazis.
either they have a very clueless design guy or that's totally-not-a-swastika
|
On August 27 2016 02:41 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 01:43 Doodsmack wrote:On August 27 2016 01:39 Danglars wrote:On August 27 2016 00:26 Mohdoo wrote:On August 27 2016 00:19 Introvert wrote:On August 27 2016 00:03 Plansix wrote:“Clinton suggests giving the Republicans a way out and an attempt to bring back some form of civility to Washington. Democrat leaders are upset by the idea after years of gridlock, confused by the concept that that the parties used to work together to accomplish things.” This is called long term planning. The GOP isn’t going to disappear and if it did, it would be replaced by something the Democrats would need to deal with. On August 27 2016 00:00 Introvert wrote:
The point was the content and strategy. Stop reflexively going into Clinton defense mode. If anything, people are pointing out that her plan isn’t that terrible and doesn’t need defending. Suggesting that they work with the more reasonable members of the GOP who respect government isn’t this wild, crazy idea. People saw "wikileaks" and "dnc" and assumed I was accusing them of some conspiracy. I was following up on a post from earlier, though the content of the story can stand alone just fine. This is Hillary trying to win, while kinda throwing the congressional Dems under. I would argue that the persistence of the alt-right movement would inhibit Clinton's presidency more than losing a couple seats. The kind of silliness associated with Cruz' government shutdown is childish nonsense that has no place in government. Republicans used to play along. Obstruction has become a priority and Clinton is trying to cleanse the GOP of their cancer. She can get a lot done and make a lot of compromises so long as there are people in office who at least acknowledge she is president. Congress presents a modified budget to the president, president vetoes, waah Republicans are shutting down the government. It's important to preserve for future congresses as an important check on agency accountability and overreach. By all means, continue to defend the Freedom Caucus refusing routine government operation funding, premised on a futile attempt to gut Obamacare (after 60 failed repeal votes). We Democrats are liking our electoral chances. If you want to talk childishness, yes, holding so many repeal votes is the height of the art and political ass-covering (and many of them deserve to lose their seats for not taking effective action to stop the ACA). The rest is total ignorance on how much of government is totally immune from budget funding and partisan alignment with taking the budget hostage through presidential veto. A craven Congress will never make the civics case and the media will never report on it so Obama had the upper hand all along. You might live to see fierce opposition from a speaker and senate majority leader; I'm fighting for that day to eventually come.
You don't have a civics case that tying Obamacare policy negotiation to a continuing resolution which funds the daily operation of agencies unrelated to Obamacare is an intended use of the "power of the purse". You will lose your fight and Republicans will be worse off for it.
|
On August 27 2016 02:25 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 02:12 oBlade wrote:On August 27 2016 01:16 Dan HH wrote:On August 27 2016 00:57 xDaunt wrote:As for Milo himself and what he believes, I think he very clearly illustrates the problems with the present, over-expansive definition of racism. And he does this using inflammatory rhetoric to get a rise out of people, but when you actually listen to what his message is, it becomes quite clear that he's not a racist. You got me there, if we ignore everything racist that he says, it becomes quite clear that he's not a racist. Milo Yiannopoulos has made hundreds of racist statements: of the worst that you remember, name two. Using triple paranthesis whenever tweeting about someone that happens to be jewish, which is not some the_donald meme (well it might be now, I guess) but straight up neo-nazi jargon. Then there's using 'apes' when talking about black people. Is that racist enough?
I don't think so if that's what stood out in your mind, because he's Jewish and dates black people (I can't imagine wanting to date someone who was racist against you). Who'd he put parentheses around, himself? Other people "reclaimed" that meme.
|
United States44122 Posts
On August 27 2016 03:11 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 03:09 KwarK wrote:All the literal Nazis (like they actually Heil Hitler etc) who seem to think they're part of the alt-right movement must make it very confusing for the alt-right, especially given that there seem to be more of them in the alt-right movement than the non Nazis. either they have a very clueless design guy or that's totally-not-a-swastika
Read the topics bar along the top and then take a guess.
|
On August 27 2016 03:11 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 02:25 Dan HH wrote:On August 27 2016 02:12 oBlade wrote:On August 27 2016 01:16 Dan HH wrote:On August 27 2016 00:57 xDaunt wrote:As for Milo himself and what he believes, I think he very clearly illustrates the problems with the present, over-expansive definition of racism. And he does this using inflammatory rhetoric to get a rise out of people, but when you actually listen to what his message is, it becomes quite clear that he's not a racist. You got me there, if we ignore everything racist that he says, it becomes quite clear that he's not a racist. Milo Yiannopoulos has made hundreds of racist statements: of the worst that you remember, name two. Using triple paranthesis whenever tweeting about someone that happens to be jewish, which is not some the_donald meme (well it might be now, I guess) but straight up neo-nazi jargon. Then there's using 'apes' when talking about black people. Is that racist enough? I don't think so if that's what stood out in your mind, because he's Jewish and dates black people (I can't imagine wanting to date someone who was racist against you). Who'd he put parentheses around, himself? Other people "reclaimed" that meme.
Entering into a relationship with someone you loath has been a thing throughout history. It is the definition of an abusive relationship. Racist slave owners got into relationships with their slaves. That in no way is immunity racism.
|
Are people really debating whether Milo is a racist? Rofl
On August 27 2016 03:11 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 03:09 KwarK wrote:All the literal Nazis (like they actually Heil Hitler etc) who seem to think they're part of the alt-right movement must make it very confusing for the alt-right, especially given that there seem to be more of them in the alt-right movement than the non Nazis. either they have a very clueless design guy or that's totally-not-a-swastika
That clearly looks like the child of a Swastika and a Iron Cross to me, with an Endless Knot being the grandfather.
|
On August 27 2016 03:00 KwarK wrote:Incidentally many in the alt-right disagree with Milo's claims that it's not a racist movement and believe that he, as a homosexual Jewish media figure, is trying to hijack their movement. Andrew Anglin wrote the following in response to Milo's article defining who the alt-right were and what they stand for Show nested quote +For those of us familiar with these issues, however, it is obvious that instead of being an attempt to understand the alt-right, it is an attempt to redefine it as what they want it to be.
This is the official beginning of the great co-opting. We knew it was coming.
Basically, they claim that everything the alt-right says it believes they don’t actually believe, but simply say they believe it as a part of a joke to piss off feminists and Black lives activists. Because they think it is funny to piss people off. Note that he's saying that the above article, in which Milo explains the upcoming race war and how whites must discriminate to survive, isn't racist enough and is hijacking the true alt-right. Show nested quote +Upon finishing the article (Milo's explanation of the alt-right), one is left with two pressing questions:
1) How is it possible that this article does not mention The Daily Stormer? and
2) Why does this article not talk about Jews?
Possibly excluding /pol/, the largest part of the alt-right movement is the Daily Stormer. We have at least four times the traffic of all of the cuck alt-right sites combined.
And yet in this article, we are not mentioned.
Neither are the Jews. Arguing against Milo's case that the Dindu memes and other similar racist memes are just good old fashioned transgression fun for shock value he clarifies that no, really, they do hate the blacks, gays and Jews. Show nested quote +But more importantly it is true that we actually hate all of these people. Of course we have fun doing it. Milo wrote that Show nested quote +Are they actually bigots? No more than death metal devotees in the 80s were actually Satanists. For them, it’s simply a means to fluster their grandparents. continuing his narrative that they were just having fun when they call black people apes etc. But the alt-right isn't having any part of this subversive Jewish propaganda. Show nested quote +lolwut?
Of course we hate these people.
Saying that we don’t hate them, and it’s all a big joke because we want to anger our parents, is not just spin, it’s an outright lie.
Maybe it was true in 2005 that we made racist jokes about Jews and hajis for teh lulz, but then things got real. Now we know for a fact these people are trying to destroy us.
Why would we not hate them? In response to Milo's claim that the old don't understand the alt-right because of WWII and the Holocaust he writes Show nested quote +“Horrors of the Holocaust.”
Find me a single alt-right twitter figure who believes the Holocaust is something other than a monumental hoax. Yes, we all joke about this stupid hoax, and yes, it is funny to joke about this stupid hoax. and it goes on, and on, and on. https://archive.is/5xful#selection-1053.0-1059.205Clearly the alt-right is having a bit of an identity crisis regarding whether they just pretend to do and say racist stuff for fun, whether the race war is coming or whether the Jews and other mongrel races must be exterminated.
Those people legitimately sound like they are suffering from some sort of mental illness like Schizophrenia
|
On August 27 2016 03:15 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 03:11 oBlade wrote:On August 27 2016 02:25 Dan HH wrote:On August 27 2016 02:12 oBlade wrote:On August 27 2016 01:16 Dan HH wrote:On August 27 2016 00:57 xDaunt wrote:As for Milo himself and what he believes, I think he very clearly illustrates the problems with the present, over-expansive definition of racism. And he does this using inflammatory rhetoric to get a rise out of people, but when you actually listen to what his message is, it becomes quite clear that he's not a racist. You got me there, if we ignore everything racist that he says, it becomes quite clear that he's not a racist. Milo Yiannopoulos has made hundreds of racist statements: of the worst that you remember, name two. Using triple paranthesis whenever tweeting about someone that happens to be jewish, which is not some the_donald meme (well it might be now, I guess) but straight up neo-nazi jargon. Then there's using 'apes' when talking about black people. Is that racist enough? I don't think so if that's what stood out in your mind, because he's Jewish and dates black people (I can't imagine wanting to date someone who was racist against you). Who'd he put parentheses around, himself? Other people "reclaimed" that meme. Entering into a relationship with someone you loath has been a thing throughout history. It is the definition of an abusive relationship. Racist slave owners got into relationships with their slaves. That in no way is immunity racism.
No, but it makes the claim suspect because the US is free society and it's not the 1840s.
|
On August 27 2016 03:14 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 03:11 ticklishmusic wrote:On August 27 2016 03:09 KwarK wrote:All the literal Nazis (like they actually Heil Hitler etc) who seem to think they're part of the alt-right movement must make it very confusing for the alt-right, especially given that there seem to be more of them in the alt-right movement than the non Nazis. either they have a very clueless design guy or that's totally-not-a-swastika Read the topics bar along the top and then take a guess.
Jesus, I just went for a stroll on their site to see what the "articles" are like. That's mindblowing.
|
United States44122 Posts
On August 27 2016 03:18 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 03:00 KwarK wrote:Incidentally many in the alt-right disagree with Milo's claims that it's not a racist movement and believe that he, as a homosexual Jewish media figure, is trying to hijack their movement. Andrew Anglin wrote the following in response to Milo's article defining who the alt-right were and what they stand for For those of us familiar with these issues, however, it is obvious that instead of being an attempt to understand the alt-right, it is an attempt to redefine it as what they want it to be.
This is the official beginning of the great co-opting. We knew it was coming.
Basically, they claim that everything the alt-right says it believes they don’t actually believe, but simply say they believe it as a part of a joke to piss off feminists and Black lives activists. Because they think it is funny to piss people off. Note that he's saying that the above article, in which Milo explains the upcoming race war and how whites must discriminate to survive, isn't racist enough and is hijacking the true alt-right. Upon finishing the article (Milo's explanation of the alt-right), one is left with two pressing questions:
1) How is it possible that this article does not mention The Daily Stormer? and
2) Why does this article not talk about Jews?
Possibly excluding /pol/, the largest part of the alt-right movement is the Daily Stormer. We have at least four times the traffic of all of the cuck alt-right sites combined.
And yet in this article, we are not mentioned.
Neither are the Jews. Arguing against Milo's case that the Dindu memes and other similar racist memes are just good old fashioned transgression fun for shock value he clarifies that no, really, they do hate the blacks, gays and Jews. But more importantly it is true that we actually hate all of these people. Of course we have fun doing it. Milo wrote that Are they actually bigots? No more than death metal devotees in the 80s were actually Satanists. For them, it’s simply a means to fluster their grandparents. continuing his narrative that they were just having fun when they call black people apes etc. But the alt-right isn't having any part of this subversive Jewish propaganda. lolwut?
Of course we hate these people.
Saying that we don’t hate them, and it’s all a big joke because we want to anger our parents, is not just spin, it’s an outright lie.
Maybe it was true in 2005 that we made racist jokes about Jews and hajis for teh lulz, but then things got real. Now we know for a fact these people are trying to destroy us.
Why would we not hate them? lulz are not an end in themselves.
lulz are a weapon of the race war. In response to Milo's claim that the old don't understand the alt-right because of WWII and the Holocaust he writes “Horrors of the Holocaust.”
Find me a single alt-right twitter figure who believes the Holocaust is something other than a monumental hoax. Yes, we all joke about this stupid hoax, and yes, it is funny to joke about this stupid hoax. and it goes on, and on, and on. https://archive.is/5xful#selection-1053.0-1059.205Clearly the alt-right is having a bit of an identity crisis regarding whether they just pretend to do and say racist stuff for fun, whether the race war is coming or whether the Jews and other mongrel races must be exterminated. Those people legitimately sound like they are suffering from some sort of mental illness like Schizophrenia
They've always been around and the internet has allowed them to find each other and share their ideas in a way they couldn't do 20 years ago. But until this election they've been in political exile, despising the Republicans as collaborators. It's super fucked up. And while I certainly don't think Trump is a member of them he's certainly someone who they hear and think "this guy is someone we could rally behind". He speaks their language, even if they don't speak his. Hell, he retweets their memes and their infographics.
|
On August 27 2016 02:56 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 02:49 Danglars wrote:On August 27 2016 02:32 KwarK wrote:https://archive.is/1FoFyAn article by Milo explaining who the alt right are. I'll let him use his own words The alt right are distinct from old school racist skinheads due to intelligence. Skinheads, by and large, are low-information, low-IQ thugs driven by the thrill of violence and tribal hatred. The alternative right are a much smarter group of people So, like racist skinheads but too smart for that crowd? People who want to be football hooligans but don't like leaving their mother's basements perhaps? The alt-right do not hold a utopian view of the human condition: just as they are inclined to prioritise the interests of their tribe, they recognise that other groups – Mexicans, African-Americans or Muslims – are likely to do the same. As communities become comprised of different peoples, the culture and politics of those communities become an expression of their constituent peoples. Note, this is literally a case for racial discrimination. The alt right claim that is is right to prioritize the interests of ones own group at the expense of others because of, and I know this is a loaded term but it's literally what he's saying, racial darwinism. That each race should favour itself because they assume that every other race will act similarly and it is necessary to act in such a way to protect the race (hence "diversity = white genocide"). Wait, you now say. He said groups and culture, he didn't specify the different races were in competition and that the whites must prioritize their own to win the war against the blacks, you've added your own racial emphasis there. The alt-right’s intellectuals would also argue that culture is inseparable from race. The alt-right believe that some degree of separation between peoples is necessary for a culture to be preserved. A Mosque next to an English street full of houses bearing the flag of St. George, according to alt-righters, is neither an English street nor a Muslim street — separation is necessary for distinctiveness. Okay, so he just wants whites to discriminate against other races. It's not like the alt-right are full on going for a literal race war. You’ll often encounter doomsday rhetoric in alt-right online communities: that’s because many of them instinctively feel that once large enough and ethnically distinct enough groups are brought together, they will inevitably come to blows. In short, they doubt that full “integration” is ever possible. Okay, so we're discriminating against non whites because different races are fundamentally incompatible and in competition with each other and we will inevitably find ourselves in a nationwide race war. Good to know. But in the words of Katrina Pierson, these are just the words he's using, we shouldn't pay attention to those. Focus on what you feel to be true without listening to facts. He makes no such claim. He claims the prioritization of tribal interests is a preexisting condition of a multicultural society. He didn't say that it was right. He claims it just is. The conclusions he draws are suspect as hell. Fundamental incompatibility is one of them. That is white nationalism in its sanitized for the public form. Because the next step after that is arguing that the conflict in inevitable and whites should preserve their culture. Its a slow roll, but the end of the argument is the full on race war. When it's extended to race, I most certainly agree, and he's already there in the article.
On August 27 2016 03:03 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 02:49 Danglars wrote:On August 27 2016 02:32 KwarK wrote:https://archive.is/1FoFyAn article by Milo explaining who the alt right are. I'll let him use his own words The alt right are distinct from old school racist skinheads due to intelligence. Skinheads, by and large, are low-information, low-IQ thugs driven by the thrill of violence and tribal hatred. The alternative right are a much smarter group of people So, like racist skinheads but too smart for that crowd? People who want to be football hooligans but don't like leaving their mother's basements perhaps? The alt-right do not hold a utopian view of the human condition: just as they are inclined to prioritise the interests of their tribe, they recognise that other groups – Mexicans, African-Americans or Muslims – are likely to do the same. As communities become comprised of different peoples, the culture and politics of those communities become an expression of their constituent peoples. Note, this is literally a case for racial discrimination. The alt right claim that is is right to prioritize the interests of ones own group at the expense of others because of, and I know this is a loaded term but it's literally what he's saying, racial darwinism. That each race should favour itself because they assume that every other race will act similarly and it is necessary to act in such a way to protect the race (hence "diversity = white genocide"). Wait, you now say. He said groups and culture, he didn't specify the different races were in competition and that the whites must prioritize their own to win the war against the blacks, you've added your own racial emphasis there. The alt-right’s intellectuals would also argue that culture is inseparable from race. The alt-right believe that some degree of separation between peoples is necessary for a culture to be preserved. A Mosque next to an English street full of houses bearing the flag of St. George, according to alt-righters, is neither an English street nor a Muslim street — separation is necessary for distinctiveness. Okay, so he just wants whites to discriminate against other races. It's not like the alt-right are full on going for a literal race war. You’ll often encounter doomsday rhetoric in alt-right online communities: that’s because many of them instinctively feel that once large enough and ethnically distinct enough groups are brought together, they will inevitably come to blows. In short, they doubt that full “integration” is ever possible. Okay, so we're discriminating against non whites because different races are fundamentally incompatible and in competition with each other and we will inevitably find ourselves in a nationwide race war. Good to know. But in the words of Katrina Pierson, these are just the words he's using, we shouldn't pay attention to those. Focus on what you feel to be true without listening to facts. He makes no such claim. He claims the prioritization of tribal interests is a preexisting condition of a multicultural society. He didn't say that it was right. He claims it just is. The conclusions he draws are suspect as hell. Fundamental incompatibility is one of them. Just so you know, large chunks of the alt-right attacked Milo's definition of them for incorrectly categorizing them as not real racists and suggesting that to them it's all a big joke. They were furious, how dare he suggest that their crusade to exterminate the lesser races was any kind of joke. Poor Milo is caught in the middle. From the one side the Libs saying "yeah but that's still super racist, even if you're not serious" and from the other the alt-right going "how dare you challenge our commitment to Hitler's vision!".
Until we get polling, if ever, I can't speak to the large chunks here or there. It's a new movement and everybody can claim that this or that race element is part of it. In a post-Trump world win or lose, I expect some of these lines to condense. If the goal, however unattainable, is political influence and power, they'll have to coalesce behind figureheads beyond Milo.
On August 27 2016 02:59 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 02:49 Danglars wrote:
He makes no such claim. He claims the prioritization of tribal interests is a preexisting condition of a multicultural society. He didn't say that it was right. He claims it just is. The conclusions he draws are suspect as hell. Fundamental incompatibility is one of them. The assertion that racial separation is required for cultural identity also flies in the face of history. Every modern culture is a product of many generations of assimilation and amalgamation between different racial/ethnic groups at some point in history, and that process didn't cause those cultures to cease to exist. Separation of cultures along racial boundaries is only a thing if you take a myopic, Eurocentric view of history where the emergence of modern nation-states limited mass cultural migrations on that scale. I wholeheartedly agree when we're specifically talking about races.
On August 27 2016 03:11 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2016 02:41 Danglars wrote:On August 27 2016 01:43 Doodsmack wrote:On August 27 2016 01:39 Danglars wrote:On August 27 2016 00:26 Mohdoo wrote:On August 27 2016 00:19 Introvert wrote:On August 27 2016 00:03 Plansix wrote:“Clinton suggests giving the Republicans a way out and an attempt to bring back some form of civility to Washington. Democrat leaders are upset by the idea after years of gridlock, confused by the concept that that the parties used to work together to accomplish things.” This is called long term planning. The GOP isn’t going to disappear and if it did, it would be replaced by something the Democrats would need to deal with. On August 27 2016 00:00 Introvert wrote:
The point was the content and strategy. Stop reflexively going into Clinton defense mode. If anything, people are pointing out that her plan isn’t that terrible and doesn’t need defending. Suggesting that they work with the more reasonable members of the GOP who respect government isn’t this wild, crazy idea. People saw "wikileaks" and "dnc" and assumed I was accusing them of some conspiracy. I was following up on a post from earlier, though the content of the story can stand alone just fine. This is Hillary trying to win, while kinda throwing the congressional Dems under. I would argue that the persistence of the alt-right movement would inhibit Clinton's presidency more than losing a couple seats. The kind of silliness associated with Cruz' government shutdown is childish nonsense that has no place in government. Republicans used to play along. Obstruction has become a priority and Clinton is trying to cleanse the GOP of their cancer. She can get a lot done and make a lot of compromises so long as there are people in office who at least acknowledge she is president. Congress presents a modified budget to the president, president vetoes, waah Republicans are shutting down the government. It's important to preserve for future congresses as an important check on agency accountability and overreach. By all means, continue to defend the Freedom Caucus refusing routine government operation funding, premised on a futile attempt to gut Obamacare (after 60 failed repeal votes). We Democrats are liking our electoral chances. If you want to talk childishness, yes, holding so many repeal votes is the height of the art and political ass-covering (and many of them deserve to lose their seats for not taking effective action to stop the ACA). The rest is total ignorance on how much of government is totally immune from budget funding and partisan alignment with taking the budget hostage through presidential veto. A craven Congress will never make the civics case and the media will never report on it so Obama had the upper hand all along. You might live to see fierce opposition from a speaker and senate majority leader; I'm fighting for that day to eventually come. You don't have a civics case that tying Obamacare policy negotiation to a continuing resolution which funds the daily operation of agencies unrelated to Obamacare is an intended use of the "power of the purse". You will lose your fight and Republicans will be worse off for it. It became such a stink to the American people that the right response was repeal and start over. All attempts to reform aspects of Obamacare unrelated to expansion were stonewalled. The responsibility of all taxing and spending measures to originate in the House was precisely for the most direct citizens representatives to weigh in on everything that takes taxpayers money. That includes massive spending or redistribution programs of all kinds. It is most certainly a debate worth having at the highest offices of the nation. Republican leadership was not up to the task and I predict they'll suffer mightily as the one way to stop Obamacare was passed over after everybody's successful congressional campaigns based on total dismantling of Obamacare.
|
It is certainly concerning that Trump's relevance as a political actor enables and encourages a lot of shitty people to become more active and relevant to politics.
It is equally concerning that the regressive and dangerous parts of the left are enabled to say, "it doesn't matter how bad we are, your only other choice is Trump so vote for us you pleb."
|
On August 27 2016 02:32 KwarK wrote:https://archive.is/1FoFyAn article by Milo explaining who the alt right are. I'll let him use his own words The alt right are distinct from old school racist skinheads due to Show nested quote +intelligence. Skinheads, by and large, are low-information, low-IQ thugs driven by the thrill of violence and tribal hatred. The alternative right are a much smarter group of people So, like racist skinheads but too smart for that crowd? People who want to be football hooligans but don't like leaving their mother's basements perhaps?
More like people who have taken the time to critically examine some social norms and axioms and found them wanting. He does a thorough job describing exactly what he's talking about in the article, which you just gloss over.
Show nested quote +The alt-right do not hold a utopian view of the human condition: just as they are inclined to prioritise the interests of their tribe, they recognise that other groups – Mexicans, African-Americans or Muslims – are likely to do the same. As communities become comprised of different peoples, the culture and politics of those communities become an expression of their constituent peoples. Note, this is literally a case for racial discrimination. The alt right claim that is is right to prioritize the interests of ones own group at the expense of others because of, and I know this is a loaded term but it's literally what he's saying, racial darwinism. That each race should favour itself because they assume that every other race will act similarly and it is necessary to act in such a way to protect the race (hence "diversity = white genocide"). Wait, you now say. He said groups and culture, he didn't specify the different races were in competition and that the whites must prioritize their own to win the war against the blacks, you've added your own racial emphasis there.
You're imparting judgment where there is none. What he's describing is not that these Alt Right thinkers are making the case for how things should be so much as they are observing how things are. If you get right down to it, the success of democrats in the US is almost completely predicated upon precisely the type of crass racial (or other types of) discrimination that you are now objecting to. What do you think all of the pandering to the black vote or to the Hispanic vote is all about? Given these present circumstances, the logical question to ask is "why are white people (or other members of the traditional majority) prohibited from engaging in the same tribalistic behavior that other groups engage in for political gain?" This is hardly a controversial proposition. It's merely the logical extension of the crass identity politics spearheaded by the left.
Show nested quote +The alt-right’s intellectuals would also argue that culture is inseparable from race. The alt-right believe that some degree of separation between peoples is necessary for a culture to be preserved. A Mosque next to an English street full of houses bearing the flag of St. George, according to alt-righters, is neither an English street nor a Muslim street — separation is necessary for distinctiveness. Okay, so he just wants whites to discriminate against other races. It's not like the alt-right are full on going for a literal race war.
No, he's just making another observation. How much shit have I and other posters caught around here for suggesting that "black culture" is a significant cause of the current straits that many American black communities are in? We were labeled racists for even making the suggestion. So I don't see why you liberals would find the Milo's observation of the link between culture and race to be so objectionable when many of you have made the exact same arguments previously.
Show nested quote +You’ll often encounter doomsday rhetoric in alt-right online communities: that’s because many of them instinctively feel that once large enough and ethnically distinct enough groups are brought together, they will inevitably come to blows. In short, they doubt that full “integration” is ever possible. Okay, so we're discriminating against non whites because different races are fundamentally incompatible and in competition with each other and we will inevitably find ourselves in a nationwide race war. Good to know.
No, what Milo is describing is the Alt Right's rejection of multiculturalism. And again, the Alt Right is very diverse in its composition, so this rejection comes in many flavors depending upon which element of the Alt Right that you choose to look at (which you seem to be repeatedly forgetting in your cherry picking of quotes). The ugly truth is that history has shown that large, culturally-distinct populations often have problems coexisting. And yes, this ugly truth applies to our enlightened Western culture as well. Just take a gander at what's going on over in Europe.
But in the words of Katrina Pierson, these are just the words he's using, we shouldn't pay attention to those. Focus on what you feel to be true without listening to facts.
The problem is that you aren't even paying attention to his words. This works better when you leave everything in context.
|
Yeaaa race does not equal culture and trying to marry the two is a ridiculous notion, especially in a country like the United States..
These alt-right people clearly don't know how culture works or what race is (and why the concept doesn't apply to humanity).
|
On August 27 2016 03:34 Slaughter wrote:
Yeaaa race does not equal culture and trying to marry the two is a ridiculous notion, especially in a country like the United States..
People clearly don't know how culture works or what race is.
It all depends upon how you want to define the tribe. For me, culture is what matters. Race is basically irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
