EPTAttacking the alt right is a waste of time because 1) no one knows what the hell it is, so 2) no one knows what the hell she's talking about.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 4975
| Forum Index > Closed |
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. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
Attacking the alt right is a waste of time because 1) no one knows what the hell it is, so 2) no one knows what the hell she's talking about. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
That will be the factor that decides this election. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On September 13 2016 11:24 Plansix wrote: Man who does not believe racism is an a pressing issue in the US also believes the Alt-right isn't worth worrying about. What happens next will shock you. Shocking. Not only do you fail to understand my point, but you don't even know what the alt right is. Here's a hint: alt right =/= racists. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Wegandi
United States2455 Posts
| ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
On September 13 2016 11:43 Wegandi wrote: Attacking a candidate in a two-party system for who their supporters/voters are is really really dumb. I'm sure if Kim Jong Un had a vote he'd vote for Hillary, but that says more about how fucked up the D's and R's have made the electoral process, than it does about any specific candidate. we don't need to speculate about this one http://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-usa-trump-idUSKCN0YN35S | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9186 Posts
On September 13 2016 11:24 Plansix wrote: Man who does not believe racism is an a pressing issue in the US also believes the Alt-right isn't worth worrying about. What happens next will shock you. Do you think "social justice warriors" are worth worrying about? If not, what makes you think alt-right is a serious problem but SJWs aren't? | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On September 13 2016 11:51 Sent. wrote: Do you think "social justice warriors" are worth worrying about? If not, what makes you think alt-right is a serious problem but SJWs aren't? Even if you accept the premise that racism is a pressing issue, attacking the alt right is a very stupid way of going about highlighting the issue. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On September 13 2016 11:51 Sent. wrote: Do you think "social justice warriors" are worth worrying about? If not, what makes you think alt-right is a serious problem but SJWs aren't? No. At worst they vainly try to limit free speech on colleges or something along those lines. But most of the stories about SJW advocating unlimited safe spaces to press people are hypocritical or isolated events. They are just asshole liberals who got a new name on the internet. I have zero fears of the mythical regressive left and I am a white dude. They are easy to avoid by not being a raging asshole. The alt-right is the rebranding of white supremacist, racists, sexists people across america who want to take back "america for real Americans." | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15664 Posts
On September 13 2016 11:54 xDaunt wrote: Even if you accept the premise that racism is a pressing issue, attacking the alt right is a very stupid way of going about highlighting the issue. The alt-right is uniting a lot of different people saying "fuck that shit". But people can be saying "fuck that shit" for a lot of reasons. They are just all being driven to Trump. The alt-right ended up being unified and given a sharp tip by Trump. None of them could ever agree on anything until Trump came by and catered to every one of their complaints. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
They'd be better off at this point with a candidate with more news presence, because Trump is not just a trainwreck anymore. He will get all the coverage still, but maybe not as negative. | ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On September 13 2016 11:26 xDaunt wrote: Shocking. Not only do you fail to understand my point, but you don't even know what the alt right is. Here's a hint: alt right =/= racists. @Plansix: were you saying there is a one-to-one correspondence between alt-right and racists? | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Not to say there aren't real racists etc. that use the faults of the SJW / regressive left as cover to push genuinely shitty ideas. They exist. However, those who are genuinely concerned about race/etc. related issues are lumped with these genuinely shitty groups for political expedience. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23188 Posts
On September 13 2016 11:54 xDaunt wrote: Even if you accept the premise that racism is a pressing issue... It is a pressing issue. Don't die on that hill. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On September 13 2016 12:16 Aquanim wrote: @Plansix: were you saying there is a one-to-one correspondence between alt-right and racists? No, only that someone who didn't believe racism was a problem in the US likely doesn't give enough of a shit to believe the alt right is a problem. If someone doesnt see racism as a rising threat minorities in the US, they are not going to even believe claims that the alt right exists. The alt right is a broad group if regressive assholes all brought under the banner of Trump. From redpill rape advocates(yes, they are real) to xenophobic atheists, they all flock to the banner if Trump and the alt right. They are not the majority of his followers, but enough to be concerned. | ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
On September 13 2016 11:43 Wegandi wrote: Attacking a candidate in a two-party system for who their supporters/voters are is really really dumb. I'm sure if Kim Jong Un had a vote he'd vote for Hillary, but that says more about how fucked up the D's and R's have made the electoral process, than it does about any specific candidate. They did the same shit to Ron Paul. I mean, if you have beef about specific policies, speech, etc. fair game, but this association game is really fucking stupid. Hugo Chavez is much worse than David Duke and his support of many D candidates was as much a low-brow attack as this non-sense with David Duke and trying to associate Trump as KKK lol. Maybe it's my penchant for logic and ridicule of those who try to use fallacies to push narratives, but I suppose this is why I hate politics. /shrug But the point isn't just that they support Trump. The point is that Trump enables them, takes some of them into his campaign, uses the imagery they create on Twitter, and doesn't call them out as fucking idiots when they talk about how the current President is a secret Muslim at his rallies and to this day won't dispel the birther bullshit. There's a reason the alt-right speech came right after Trump hired Bannon. It's because then it was no longer just association. | ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On September 13 2016 12:21 LegalLord wrote: The issue of the SJW / "regressive left" group is a dangerous form of name-calling self-righteous social regression that attempts to dismiss the concerns of people who don't agree with a straight leftist agenda (whose faults are many) as some "undesirable" or other that needs not be addressed - racist, sexist, Islamophobe, homophobe, bigot, you name it. The definitions of these terms are ever-expanding to include any number of people who happen to think differently. Generally speaking, people who support this kind of dismissive classification will have a hard time seeing anything wrong because it does have a reflexive appeal ("everyone I don't agree with is Hitler") but it's poisonous to genuine policy-making. Not to say there aren't real racists etc. that use the faults of the SJW / regressive left as cover to push genuinely shitty ideas. They exist. However, for political expedience, those who are genuinely concerned about race/etc. related issues are lumped with these genuinely shitty groups for political expedience. I think this point of view has merit with the following provisos: - it's entirely possible for one to be "genuinely shitty" while believing one is merely "genuinely concerned about race/etc. related issues". As a corollary, claiming to be the latter doesn't automatically make one not the former. - While I think they are a problem, I don't think the "SJWs/regressive left" are currently negatively affecting the course of human affairs and history to the same degree as the unreasonably conservative and the "alt right". Your mileage may vary. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On September 13 2016 12:28 TheTenthDoc wrote: There's a reason the alt-right speech came right after Trump hired Bannon. It's because then it was no longer just association. The alt right speech came after Trump hired Bannon because Hillary and her campaign erroneously thought that they could make some hay. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On September 13 2016 12:31 Aquanim wrote: I think this point of view has merit with the following provisos: - it's entirely possible for one to be "genuinely shitty" while believing one is merely "genuinely concerned about race/etc. related issues". As a corollary, claiming to be the latter doesn't automatically make one not the former. - While I think they are a problem, I don't think the "SJWs/regressive left" are currently negatively affecting the course of human affairs and history to the same degree as the unreasonably conservative and the "alt right". Your mileage may vary. The first objection is true, albeit rather aggressively diagnosed as it's easier to group people who disagree with you with terrible people than to acknowledge that sometimes they have a point. The second objection is an unfortunate result of the rather shitty state of conservatism in the US. One of the major problems with one party being terrible is that there is no pressure on the other party to be level-headed rather than arrogant and aggressive with their agenda to the point of empowering the terrible groups within their electorate. This problem is more visible and problematic in Europe than in the US at present, but the two are converging in ideological shittiness. | ||
| ||
