The alt right - Mod Warning in OP

alastair

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

How about the emergence of articles in mainstream outlets such as the Irish Times, Examiner, Journal etc which suggest that all men should feel responsible for the minority of men who behave badly? How about the fact that anyone with even the slightest anti-immigration views is routinely labelled a racist, without question, and this is seen as a reasonable inference? How about the fact, as others have suggested here, that you couldn't be anti-gay marriage during the last referendum without being utterly reviled for it by the SJW left? And most dangerously at all, how about the fact that the SJW left engages in the creation of online hate mobs, just like the alt right, but are almost never banned or censored for this, unlike the alt right?

I'm fairly far left myself, I'm just anti-regressive politics regardless of who it comes from. But it does seem to me that appalling behaviour from my own side of the political aisle is tolerated to a far greater extent in mainstream society and media compared with appalling behaviour from those on the far right.

I've no recollection of any such articles. Care to link to some?
These hate mobs? Again - where's the evidence of this?

Lots of rhetoric, but notable lack of substance.

Let's see the substance.

InTheTrees

Ferrari3600 wrote: »

SJW cucks PUA blah blah

Beta males blah blah

Cuckservatives, they are worse than the NAZI STALINISTS blah blah

As far as I can tell if you try and pin them down on any actual policys they get confused.

It's all about teen cliques and labels.

hatrickpatrick

alastair wrote: »

I've no recollection of any such articles. Care to link to some?
These hate mobs? Again - where's the evidence of this?

Lots of rhetoric, but notable lack of substance.

Let's see the substance.

I'll compile a list for you tonight when I'm home. I'm sure I have some of them bookmarked. One example off the top of my head, which I will search for a link to, was an article in either the Journal or Telegraph by a woman who suggested that ordinary, decent men should still feel a stab of shame or discomfort because of what other men do, just because they're also men. Reverse the genders and neither publication would have touched the article with a ten foot barge pole. As soon as I find it, I will link to it here.

Here's a more tangible one. Remember that guy who was instrumental in landing a satellite on an asteroid for the first time? Well, an internet hate mob of SJWs managed to turn the focus of that story away from the massive achievement and onto the fact that he was wearing a sexually explicit t-shirt in the office, and how this was somehow evidence of him devaluing all women to sex objects, or some such equally BS logic. As a result of the furore whipped up by the aforementioned internet mob, instead of getting to celebrate his big achievement, he had to apologise, on the brink of tears, on TV for being "offensive".

This is the kind of sh!te that is tolerated from the left, and it absolutely disgusts me and furthermore infuriates me that as a self-styled liberal, my political alignment is now intractably associated with these morons.

http://www.theverge.com/2014/11/13/7213819/your-bowling-shirt-is-holding-back-progress

EDIT: The aftermath http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2834451/Philae-comet-probe-scientist-embroiled-sexism-row-shirt-featuring-scantily-clad-women.html

alastair

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I'll compile a list for you tonight when I'm home. I'm sure I have some of them bookmarked. One example off the top of my head, which I will search for a link to, was an article in either the Journal or Telegraph by a woman who suggested that ordinary, decent men should still feel a stab of shame or discomfort because of what other men do, just because they're also men. Reverse the genders and neither publication would have touched the article with a ten foot barge pole. As soon as I find it, I will link to it here.

Here's a more tangible one. Remember that guy who was instrumental in landing a satellite on an asteroid for the first time? Well, an internet hate mob of SJWs managed to turn the focus of that story away from the massive achievement and onto the fact that he was wearing a sexually explicit t-shirt in the office, and how this was somehow evidence of him devaluing all women to sex objects, or some such equally BS logic. As a result of the furore whipped up by the aforementioned internet mob, instead of getting to celebrate his big achievement, he had to apologise, on the brink of tears, on TV for being "offensive".

This is the kind of sh!te that is tolerated from the left, and it absolutely disgusts me and furthermore infuriates me that as a self-styled liberal, my political alignment is now intractably associated with these morons.

http://www.theverge.com/2014/11/13/7213819/your-bowling-shirt-is-holding-back-progress

Dare I suggest that the whole shirt business was; A. Nothing like you describe, in that it neither turned the focus from the core story, and B. Wasn't presented as evidence of him devaluing all women as sexual objects. Given that he was working amongst female colleagues at the time, it was fairly obvious he must have come to terms with gender equality in his field. It was raised as a totem of sexism in the scientific community, but that argument really didn't gain any traction. The shirt was clearly considered inappropriate by many who wouldn't be remotely considered 'SJW's, seemingly forgetting that sartorial decision-making and scientists have never been great bedfellows. But mainly; C. This isn't remotely in the equivalence territory. It's a silly season story, with a frigging shirt at it's centre.

I'm going to suggest a thesis here. This notion that offensive trolling from idiotic reactionaries is the inevitable mirror of the same kind of thing from idiotic trolling progressives, is just the sort of self-defeating introspective hand-wringing from progressives, that cynical reactionaries will delight in summoning up. There's actually very little truth to it at all. Just as there's very little truth in the notion that Trump's win in the elections is down to failings on the progressive narrative in politics. They're both a crock.

Brian?

alastair wrote: »

Dare I suggest that the whole shirt business was; A. Nothing like you describe, in that it neither turned the focus from the core story, and B. Wasn't presented as evidence of him devaluing all women as sexual objects. Given that he was working amongst female colleagues at the time, it was fairly obvious he must have come to terms with gender equality in his field. It was raised as a totem of sexism in the scientific community, but that argument really didn't gain any traction. The shirt was clearly considered inappropriate by many who wouldn't be remotely considered 'SJW's, seemingly forgetting that sartorial decision-making and scientists have never been great bedfellows. But mainly; C. This isn't remotely in the equivalence territory. It's a silly season story, with a frigging shirt at it's centre.

I'm going to suggest a thesis here. This notion that offensive trolling from idiotic reactionaries is the inevitable mirror of the same kind of thing from idiotic trolling progressives, is just the sort of self-defeating introspective hand-wringing from progressives, that cynical reactionaries will delight in summoning up. There's actually very little truth to it at all. Just as there's very little truth in the notion that Trump's win in the elections is down to failings on the progressive narrative in politics. They're both a crock.

I couldn't agree more.

Who is the left wing equivalent of Milo? He's a reaction to a myth that doesn't exist. Social justice warrior is a throw away term used to stifle any debate. Many people on the alt right wholeheartedly embrace name calling. They love to use terms like social justice warriors, snowflakes or feminazis to describe people who simply want a more tolerant and equal society.

hatrickpatrick

Brian? wrote: »

I couldn't agree more.

Who is the left wing equivalent of Milo? He's a reaction to a myth that doesn't exist. Social justice warrior is a throw away term used to stifle any debate. Many people on the alt right wholeheartedly embrace name calling. They love to use terms like social justice warriors, snowflakes or feminazis to describe people who simply want a more tolerant and equal society.

Except apparently, tolerant of people wearing whatever the f*ck they want to wear.

Or singers singing whatever the f*ck they want to sing. (http://madamenoire.com/406804/robin-thicke-concert/)

Or video game developers writing however the f*ck they want to write. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Sarkeesian)

Or fathers' rights activists giving lectures about fathers' rights activism. (http://www.metronews.ca/news/ottawa/2014/04/10/protesters-shut-down-u-of-o-professors-mens-rights-talk.html)

Or people being allowed to hold individual opinions on whether a crude joke is funny or not without being fired. (http://www.cbc.ca/news/trending/hydro-one-employee-fired-after-fhritp-heckling-of-citynews-reporter-shauna-hunt-1.3070948) - note, he didn't make the joke but merely defended it

Or going out of your way to get two people sitting nearby fired for making a crude joke to eachother, which wasn't even a sexist joke to begin with (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/how-dongle-jokes-got-two-people-fired-and-led-to-ddos-attacks/)

Need any more?

I'm all for the right to protest and the right to criticise. I draw the line at asking for people's lives to be ruined over the words they speak, or actively trying to prevent a talk or event from taking place at all because you don't like the content of it. That's what I mean by "regressive left". When I was growing up, being tolerant included tolerating all speech - disagreeing with it, criticising it, but nonetheless tolerating it. The idea of retaliating with anything other than counter-argument is, to me, authoritarian - the very antithesis of liberal. You cannot call yourself a liberal and believe that it's ok for somebody to get fired for expressing an opinion, or that DJs shouldn't play a particular song because some people don't like its lyrics. That's not liberal, that's demanding conformity from all of society for one sub-group's likes and dislikes. That's what SJW means, and that in my view is that the cultural libertarians like Milo and his ilk are rebelling against.

All of the examples I have given here are relatively trivial compared to the very real fact that you cannot be anti-immigration anymore without being considered a racist and attacked as such, that one couldn't be anti gay marriage in the recent campaign without being harassed and branded a monster, etc.

And most ridiculously of all I feel compelled to once again point out that I actually agree with the left wing position on most of this speech. Blurred Lines is a vile song. Race in my view is a relic of the past. I not only voted for gay marriage but campaigned heavily for it among my peers. I have no time for sexism of any kind and directed against anybody. Same for racism.

But, the point is, I accept that in a liberal, culturally free society, I, one person, do not have any moral, ethical or legal right to impose my views on what other people are or are not allowed to do. That one's speech is a sacrosanct thing which no amount of majority opposition should be able to shut down. That each individual should have autonomy on what they write, what they sing, etc - that the majority do not get to determine that what they view as "tasteless" is actually "not allowed".

Before anyone attacks my views, I'm honestly curious as to how anyone can separate censorship by the mob on ideological grounds from censorship by the mob on, say, sectarian grounds. I highly doubt many of you would regard Catholics protesting a monty python film and petitioning for it to be removed from all cinemas as "liberal" - they'd be regarded, rightly, as authoritarian, which is the opposite of liberal. So how is it that people requesting self and corporate censorship on the grounds of political ideology get a free pass? They are as insidious and as unethical as any other form of mob "justice".

alastair

I take it these links were cut and paste from some Canadian site, previously discussing this supposed trend? Because there's an awful lot of dead links. Not too sure how you can claim that these inform your views, if you can't actually read them?

However - taking your word that you believe these instances to be trivial (except the sexual abuse of the TV reporter is straightforwardly wrong, and the guy fired must have had some conduct clause in his employment contract to warrant firing. No sympathy for him.), you're still not supporting this contention of 'hate mobs', of blanket equating immigration concerns with racism, and of the demonisation of any dissenting views in the marriage equality referendum.

InTheTrees

The impression i'm getting of the "alt right" is that the only topic they have any opinion on at all is how badly men are treated by women??

So the alt right is just about sexism?

Thy dont seem to comment on anything else.

InTheTrees

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Need any more?

Yes. Besides gender issues what other platforms do the "alt right" take a stand on?

oscarBravo

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Or video game developers writing however the f*ck they want to write. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Sarkeesian)

I think you've badly undermined your entire thesis by including this as part of it.

In response to her creation of a YouTube series on "Tropes vs Women in Video Games", she was subjected to a tidal wave of online harassment, including rape and death threats.

That, for me, sums up the difference between "SJWs" and the alt-right. A woman suggests that maybe we should look carefully at how female characters are presented in video games; in response she's threatened - on an epic scale - with rape and murder.

The idea that the alt-right is an inevitable backlash to the "SJW" movement is a textbook example of lazy equivalence.



With apologies to the mods, I thought this was well-timed:

Phoebas

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Need any more?

I don't know if its just me, but none of those links worked.

More than likely someone trying to supresses you.

Skylinehead

Phoebas wrote: »

I don't know if its just me, but none of those links worked.

More than likely someone trying to supresses you.

It's the bracket at the end of each URL causing it.

Tony EH

20Cent wrote: »

So the alt right Queen Milo interviewed on Channel 4 News. There is the usual shouting talking over and rude behavior from him. It does highlight a large issue with the alt right.

That is can one be provocative/satirical/mischievous or serious but not both.

They also have their own definitions of issues ie what feminism is.
One interesting thing is how he says they want to be fact based and post truth.

You can actually see the moment milo realises he's been shown to be full of it at about 4.50.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJiNeCBpCHQ

So, not only is this mouthy article gay, he's also a Jew? :rolleyes:

I'd like to take this noisy clown and put him in a time machine, send him back to 1944 and ship him off to a small place in Poland. Not only wouldn't it take long before he's in a ensamble consisting of stripey rags with a pink triangle and a yellow star sown on them, he would renounce his beloved right wing quicker than you could say the words "gas" and "chamber".

Talentless hacks like this guy are actually quite dangerous IMO. They play a disingenuous game riling up people's (in some cases legitimate) grievances for their own gain and not caring about the fallout. They are content with the money in their pocket.

He bangs on about so-called SJW's, while ignoring the work of previous social justice campaigners who fought for gay rights and against anti-semitism in the past century. It was his beloved right wing that was instrumental in suppressing those rights and the left wing he disparages so often that were tireless in their support for them in a climate when it wasn't popular to be so inclined and Milo wouldn't be sitting where he is today if it wasn't for the left wing he so despises.

The more I hear from this guy, the more I'm sickened by the little twat. A deeply, deeply, unplesant individual that represents everything wrong about some parts of the political spectrum operating today.

RDM_83 again

oscarBravo wrote: »

I think you've badly undermined your entire thesis by including this as part of it.

In response to her creation of a YouTube series on "Tropes vs Women in Video Games", she was subjected to a tidal wave of online harassment, including rape and death threats.

That, for me, sums up the difference between "SJWs" and the alt-right. A woman suggests that maybe we should look carefully at how female characters are presented in video games; in response she's threatened - on an epic scale - with rape and murder.

The idea that the alt-right is an inevitable backlash to the "SJW" movement is a textbook example of lazy equivalence.

There is plenty of examples of the SJW left doing stuff thats just as nasty.
Online example of abuse- SRS ("progressive" sub-reddit that was influential but is thankfully less so now) users commenting on a thread where a mens rights user is contemplating suicide telling him to do it.

Real world examples.

Old one but remember while the label of SJW is new this type of activism has been around for a long time - Erin Pizzey - founder of one of the first domestic abuse shelters - received - death threats and other actions because she believed women are involved in large percentage of domestic and child abuse ended up having to have the bomb squad open her male - her dogs were also killed (but this may have been by pedo's).

I've not time for the Pegeda people but when they organized a march in Dublin they were met with a high level of physical mob violence which they had not initiated, this can be seen on various youtube videos and there was Facebook posts about attacking them.

Tim Hunt - Out of context quotes by a single habitual liar result in a esteemed scientist having his reputation tarnished and forced to resign from various positions, this may be waved away as a single isolated but I know at least one researcher personally that the affair made hesitant about any public engagement in relation to UCL stuff as it made clear that the university would not defend them.

Bahar Mustafa - Goldsmith (london) student union officer makes numerous offensive statements about men and in protests prevents disabled from accessing services. Gets to keep job and retains support of the University of London student union. Used to live quiet close to Goldsmith for a while and there was a lot of SJW types (they might not be common in most of Ireland but they very much exist in the wild depending on your location). I am including this as a real world example as she was in a role where she was meant to be providing support to all of the student body that need help - including white males a group she vilified.

Currently there is a debate going on in University of Toronto relating to a professors views on potentially being legally required to use a persons preferred Zhe etc). This another Professors response.
http://imgur.com/a/2Uj02
http://imgur.com/a/Rdefj
Including this as a real world example as because remember the above professor is going to be teaching white cisgendered males from a variety of political positions, do you think they will get fair treatment in their class?

While trying to get a debate relating to Mens Issues such as high suicide and incarceration rates in the Houses of Parliment on international mens day, MP Philip Davies was laughed at by MP Jess Philips. Thankfully the debate happened this year (probably due to a public backlash against Jess Philips response) however he was accused of Mansplaining.

The current Shadow Home Secretary in Diana Abbot. Quotes of hers include
'White people love playing divide and rule’
"blonde, blue-eyed Finnish girls" were unsuitable as nurses because they had "never met a black person before"

(ironically Jess Philips and Abbot hate each others guts )

Anyway these are ones I can think of without googling (had to google the quotes though).

It is sufficient to say SJW do have an impact in the real world, particularly if one is a young person in the high education environment, there is a reason why a lot of this backlash is driven by the under 35's.

Chips Lovell

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Still does AFAIK. He's Breitbart's technology editor unless he recently left.

I'm assuming Bannon has left now to work for Trump though?

SterlingArcher

oscarBravo wrote: »

The idea that the alt-right is an inevitable backlash to the "SJW" movement is a textbook example of lazy equivalence.



With apologies to the mods, I thought this was well-timed:

In my completely un biased view.

As equally textbook lazy as suggesting anyone alt right is a nazi and must want to murder all Jews.

does Nazi now for some reason cover any resistance to immigration no matter how reasonable or ideas deemed not good for a like on Facebook. It's that exact lazy scoffing label tatic you employed that is on trial In politics and being hanged.

You're right.it was not sjws. It's just everyone who thinks different is an ignorant, bigot (irony) murderer.

Hey don't disagree or you will be labelled the equivalent- on an epic scale- of murder and genocide. seems you got more in common with the alt right than you think....

Foxtrot Oscar.

ancapailldorcha

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

I'm assuming Bannon has left now to work for Trump though?

I would think so. I was referring to Yiannopolous.

Rjd2

So one of the main alt right people Richard b Spencer had a rally this week and well its pretty grim reading.:(

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/21/us/alt-right-salutes-donald-trump.html

K-9

Rjd2 wrote: »

So one of the main alt right people Richard b Spencer had a rally this week and well its pretty grim reading.:(

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/21/us/alt-right-salutes-donald-trump.html

NYT, MSM etc.

Seriously, that only 200 stayed for the Nazi fun and games at the end tells a lot, that they think Trump represents them is the worry, silent majority and all that nonsense.

midnight city

Tony EH wrote: »

So, not only is this mouthy article gay, he's also a Jew? :rolleyes:

I'd like to take this noisy clown and put him in a time machine, send him back to 1944 and ship him off to a small place in Poland. Not only wouldn't it take long before he's in a ensamble consisting of stripey rags with a pink triangle and a yellow star sown on them, he would renounce his beloved right wing quicker than you could say the words "gas" and "chamber".

Talentless hacks like this guy are actually quite dangerous IMO. They play a disingenuous game riling up people's (in some cases legitimate) grievances for their own gain and not caring about the fallout. They are content with the money in their pocket.

He bangs on about so-called SJW's, while ignoring the work of previous social justice campaigners who fought for gay rights and against anti-semitism in the past century. It was his beloved right wing that was instrumental in suppressing those rights and the left wing he disparages so often that were tireless in their support for them in a climate when it wasn't popular to be so inclined and Milo wouldn't be sitting where he is today if it wasn't for the left wing he so despises.

The more I hear from this guy, the more I'm sickened by the little twat. A deeply, deeply, unplesant individual that represents everything wrong about some parts of the political spectrum operating today.

Milo is a creation of the liberal left, someone like him was bound to come out fighting after years and years of the extreme end of feminism attacking men and other sjw's attacking white people. It was only a matter of time before someone emerged to fight back. He is the opposite extreme and he has an audience. There are more and more like him emerging all the time too.

alastair

midnight city wrote: »

Milo is a creation of the liberal left, someone like him was bound to come out fighting after years and years of the extreme end of feminism attacking men and other sjw's attacking white people. It was only a matter of time before someone emerged to fight back. He is the opposite extreme and he has an audience. There are more and more like him emerging all the time too.

Milo is a creation of Milo. The 'fight back' against the windmills of 'SJW's' is a fabricated construct to rationalise sad old reactionary intolerance.

Brian?

midnight city wrote: »

Milo is a creation of the liberal left, someone like him was bound to come out fighting after years and years of the extreme end of feminism attacking men and other sjw's attacking white people. It was only a matter of time before someone emerged to fight back. He is the opposite extreme and he has an audience. There are more and more like him emerging all the time too.

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

Brian?

alastair wrote: »

Milo is a creation of Milo. The 'fight back' against the windmills of 'SJW's' is a fabricated construct to rationalise sad old reactionary intolerance.

100% agree. The only things Milo is fighting back against are equal rights movements.

Brian?

Brian? wrote: »

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

Are you limiting the scope to physical attacks?

Brian?

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Are you limiting the scope to physical attacks?

No. I'll take verbal, conceptual or ideological.

Tony EH

midnight city wrote: »

Milo is a creation of the liberal left, someone like him was bound to come out fighting after years and years of the extreme end of feminism attacking men and other sjw's attacking white people. It was only a matter of time before someone emerged to fight back. He is the opposite extreme and he has an audience. There are more and more like him emerging all the time too.

Nonsense. Milo has created himself, with some molding from people at Breitbart. He's a show, a self named "star" that bleats out any old crap because he knows there are going to be enough fools to listen.

As for the "liberal left", it was them who engaged in the fight for gay rights. The rights that Milo enjoys today and if it wasn't for their input, he'd probably just be another closet homo, afraid of a conservative backlash if he came out. Milo can be what he is today, because of the fight for rights that the left battled for in the 20th Century. But they are not responsible for his "creation" as a loud mouth, irritating con artist.

Amazingfun

The precious snowflakes of Britain have fearlessly used their power to ensure Milo The Powerful Gay dude doesn't destroy the youth, lol :

Milo Yiannopoulos
4 hrs ·
Facebook Mentions
·
My old high school has been bullied into canceling my talk on Tuesday by the "counter-extremism" unit at the U.K. Department of Education. 'Who even knew the DoE had a counter-extremism unit? And that it wasn't set up to combat terrorism but rather to punish gays with the wrong opinions? Perhaps if I'd called the speech "MUSLIMS ARE AWESOME!" they'd have left us alone. Disgusted.

Seems pretty silly since now they will all be wondering what they missed, as they head online to hear all his stuff. Genius!

Amazingfun

This was the first bit of Milo I ever heard, before he went full "camp".
I thought he did quite well here:

midnight city

alastair wrote: »

Milo is a creation of Milo. The 'fight back' against the windmills of 'SJW's' is a fabricated construct to rationalise sad old reactionary intolerance.

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

alastair

midnight city wrote: »

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

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.