Right Wing Grifters

FTA69

CQD wrote: »

I'd see Robinson as more anti foreigner little England etc right wing, whereas Peterson and Shapiro are more conservative really, for different reasons..

Calling Robinson a thug is hardly a controversial opinion, is it?.. The only people that would consider it as such would be 20cents' equivalents on the right surely..And there's a hundred page thread where various posters offer a vigorous defense of the bould Louise..You could probably name a couple of them off the top of your head..

Robinson is definitely part of a fascist milieu, and I wouldn’t use that term lightly.

The man was a member of a Holocaust-denying party in the form of the BNP, he then switched to a far right street movement full of neo-fascists and today maintains links with Generation Identity; an explicitly far right and racist organisation.

He’s a lot more sinister politically than a little Englander.

[Deleted User]

FTA69 wrote: »

He’s a lot more sinister politically than a little Englander.

I'm not disagreeing with you.. I already called him a thug above..

Boggles

CQD wrote: »

Well..she's pushing misandry.. Making her living from it..so that could be considered bigotry.. I haven't read any of her books to comment on whether or not the writing is actually criminally bad. Quite possible I'd say though..

A poor author is hardly equivalent to a violent career criminal is it?

Stupid comparison.

[Deleted User]

Boggles wrote: »

A poor author is hardly equivalent to a violent career criminal is it?

Stupid comparison.

Luis Enrique Marquez then

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

Luis Enrique Marquez then

Argentinian Sports Journalist?

Chris_Heilong

The way I see it is the opposite of these right wing sources are much more dangerous as they are more main stream and accepted even though they spread just as fake conspiracies and fake news for money, these are the likes of New York Times, Vox, CBS, MSNBC, the Guardian, CNN and the Wasington Post who had a headline calling Obama a conservative just because he dared call out some of the far left rhetoric he does not agree with.

[Deleted User]

Boggles wrote: »

Argentinian Sports Journalist?

No sorry. Luis Marquez the Antifa activist. Detestable human being.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Yeah it's an interesting observation, certainly there are click bait generators on all sides of the political spectrum who have made a career out of getting people to hate read them, but this kind of blatant straight forward grifting seems far more lucrative and pronounced on the right.

I'd say the demographic being older does have a lot to do with it.

I see the argument that I'm so used to more left wing media that I just don't see it there, so please, can someone show me what the left wing equivalent of this is?

http://www.infowarsshop.com/

Ludicrously expensive gimmicky products only vaguely related to the ideological content and relying on the perceived integrity of the personality to market them? Like, I've bought stickers or badges with slogans etc but nobody's ever tried to sell me a €15 bottle of water because the government puts toxic masculinity in the tap water.

Lefty Bicek

CQD wrote: »

But like, is half the reason people are more aware of Robinson and others because of negative publicity?

I personally think Robinson is a complete thug..But like, it's disingenuous to mention him in the same sentence as Peterson or Shapiro..

It's like someone equating LON and Pol Pot..
Has Louise ever apologized for the killing fields?..

People are aware of Robinson primarily because of what he says and has said, about Islam. It's what a lot of disaffected angry people in Britain would like to say, and who judging by the factual evidence have every right to say, without being disparaged by identity politics name-calling.

But they fear what Ann Cryer feared and you can see even in this irrelevant space, how that tactic is attempted. The difference is that people on here matter not one bit. When it's a parliamentarian, it matters a lot.

In some ways Robinson's grift is that accent of his.

ps Robinson was brought into this thread by the OP, and no-one else.

As for Jones, it's hard to understand how anyone can even stand the voice and the delivery.

kowloon

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Anyone who thinks Alex Jones should have been banned does not beleive in free speech...

People are always going to say freedom of speech is not freedom from the consequences of that free speech, he was removed by private companies. Personally, I'd let him keep his show, although I'd ban him from selling all of his snakeoil products on it.

Many of the "right wing" content creators mentioned here correctly predicted the Brexit result and Trumps victory, completely against the mainstream narritive.

Of course they did, they were supporting their favoured outcome, you don't see many people campaigning for a candidate by predicting they'll lose

Alex Jones openly states that his content is entertainment by the way and also, he was frighteningly accurate about a few things years in advance...

When you rant about anything and everything for a few hours per show you're bound to hit the nail on the head a few times, but it would be a massive mistake to take what he says seriously because of the sheer volume of it that is bat**** crazy and bears no relation to reality.


As for the term Mainstream Media; a lot of people seem to define mainstream based on stance and not popularity. Of course mainstream will run counter to your opinion if the majority of **** you call mainstream got that label because it doesn't hold your views.
Also, if you believe capitalism bring balance to the force you might accept that media outlets largely shift to suit the market, their audience (assuming the audience isn't the product). So if you deem the media to be biased one way or another based on audience trends the main source of that perceived bias is your own position relative to the general population.



Ultimately I think pigeonholing people and ideas based on where people sat in an assembly 200 years ago is a terrible way defining belief systems. I don't think Right and Left are fit for purpose.

/rant

Gynoid

Blake Eager Stratum wrote: »

I see the argument that I'm so used to more left wing media that I just don't see it there, so please, can someone show me what the left wing equivalent of this is?

http://www.infowarsshop.com/

Ludicrously expensive gimmicky products only vaguely related to the ideological content and relying on the perceived integrity of the personality to market them? Like, I've bought stickers or badges with slogans etc but nobody's ever tried to sell me a €15 bottle of water because the government puts toxic masculinity in the tap water.

I am going to show my bias and seething intolerance here by countering your Alex's money spinning with the super duper money spinning huckstering of that arse whisperer Eckhart Tolle, king of the neo Advaitists, a tribe of leftie luvvie liars who have encouraged unquantifiable selfishness, indulgent apathy and asinine detachment in the name of enlightenment. And if people imagine these guys have no bad effect I have seen lives and marriages wrecked by their soft voiced bullsh1t. If I met him I'd punch him so often in his smirking kisser he would be begging for a kick.

Ahhhh....
There, I feel better now

One eyed Jack

Blake Eager Stratum wrote: »

Ludicrously expensive gimmicky products only vaguely related to the ideological content and relying on the perceived integrity of the personality to market them? Like, I've bought stickers or badges with slogans etc but nobody's ever tried to sell me a €15 bottle of water because the government puts toxic masculinity in the tap water.

I’ll see your butt wipes, and raise you a fanny hat! :pac:


All these “influencers” of every political persuasion and ideological bent sell their tatty wares to support their “cause”.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Gynoid wrote: »

I am going to show my bias and seething intolerance here by countering your Alex's money spinning with the super duper money spinning huckstering of that arse whisperer Eckhart Tolle, king of the neo Advaitists, a tribe of leftie luvvie liars who have encouraged unquantifiable selfishness, indulgent apathy and asinine detachment in the name of enlightenment. And if people imagine these guys have no bad effect I have seen lives and marriages wrecked by their soft voiced bullsh1t. If I met him I'd punch him so often in his smirking kisser he would be begging for a kick.

Ahhhh....
There, I feel better now

To what extent is neo advaitism political in general or specifically left wing though? Tolle would probably be more analogous to televangelists and the like, in which case we can lump them in with the right wing grifters.

CtevenSrowder

20Cent wrote: »

Googled "Deepak Chopra Hay House" not getting anything.

Who are the others?

Carlos Maza, Ash Sarkar, Fiona Onasanya.

One eyed Jack

Gynoid wrote: »

that arse whisperer Eckhart Tolle

I just googled him there and couldn’t even get through his Wikipedia entry page...

s7ryf3925pivug

I'm all for banning woo on social media in addition to wing nut nonsense. I say ban all destructive manipulative nonsense, regardless of the creed.

JohnnyFlash

Grifters, boomers, etc. Why are you all so obsessed with stupid online American politics?

I’d send the lot of you off to a gulag to be honest.

CtevenSrowder

osarusan wrote: »

You asked me to provide an example of one of Pakman's left-biased long-winded rants aimed at the uninformed and gullible, and I did that.

It is exactly the behaviour you described in your OP:

You have but 20cent is just a left wing version of the right wing he hates so much. It's funny when you think about it.

AllForIt

Watch as alt right grifter gets torn apart by a lovely lefty <snigger>

Conveniently Holly Rigby seated on the left of your picture and Douglas Murray well known stupid fascist on the right.

Gynoid

Blake Eager Stratum wrote: »

To what extent is neo advaitism political in general or specifically left wing though? Tolle would probably be more analogous to televangelists and the like, in which case we can lump them in with the right wing grifters.

It is by far mostly liberal left wing types who indulge, and the political thing flows on from the delusions in the interconnectness of life - stop me, I have gone there with Eckhart . The televangelists are oxter deep in politics too. Just in my opinion.

CtevenSrowder

AllForIt wrote: »

Watch as alt right grifter gets torn apart by a lovely lefty <snigger>

Conveniently Holly Rigby seated on the left of your picture and Douglas Murray well known stupid fascist on the right.

There's been rumblings that she engaged in anti-semitism. She's even deleted her twitter. Oooh such drama!

Gynoid

Winston Mealy Dirt wrote: »

I'm all for banning woo on social media in addition to wing nut nonsense. I say ban all destructive manipulative nonsense, regardless of the creed.

Hahaha yer ban finger will be worn to a stump...

One eyed Jack

Winston Mealy Dirt wrote: »

I'm all for banning woo on social media in addition to wing nut nonsense. I say ban all destructive manipulative nonsense, regardless of the creed.

How soon do you imagine that would come back to bite you in the arse? I would suggest almost immediately.

20Cent

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

You have but 20cent is just a left wing version of the right wing he hates so much. It's funny when you think about it.

Observe:

David Pakman, sits and talks calmly and rationally about issues.


Alex Jones. screeming loon



Not the same.

Gynoid

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Grifters, boomers, etc. Why are you all so obsessed with stupid online American politics?

I’d send the lot of you off to a gulag to be honest.

Yeah, it seems like a point. But I think US has such an influence elsewhere that it is hard to avoid noticing. I started noticing when US war planes were being refueled in Ireland.

Lefty Bicek

AllForIt wrote: »

Watch as alt right grifter gets torn apart by a lovely lefty <snigger>

Conveniently Holly Rigby seated on the left of your picture and Douglas Murray well known stupid fascist on the right.

One thing Murray that is not, by any stretch, is stupid. And it just betrays your petulant lack of vocabulary to call him so.

In a different thread and time, such negative characterisation of him would have people being cynically denounced by the usual suspects here as 'closet homophobic', or some such equally useless epithet.

mcmoustache

Gynoid wrote: »

I dont know who Louise O Neill is but up until a couple of months ago I have read numerous people on boards defend the effective castration of children in support of irrational gender theory. In another life I was persistently called names and sneered at by certain long term posters for going against their abusive and contemptible ideology.

Again, check out any trans thread. In the women's sport one for example, there was mostly just one poster defending Mtf trans participation with far more people, including myself, saying that MtF trans athletes have an unfair advantage over biological women.

It's been a while since I saw any posts defending transitioning kids with puberty blockers and all that. I know that it happens in the wackier corners of the interned and that there are certain mainstream charities promoting it but those views, while they might exist, are not that numerous on boards.

Ulysses Gaze

20Cent wrote: »

Observe:

David Pakman, sits and talks calmly and rationally about issues.


Alex Jones. screeming loon



Not the same.

That's all very well 20Cent.

But did Pakman unearth the vast conspiracy that they are turning the frogs gay?

[Deleted User]

20Cent wrote: »

Observe:

David Pakman, sits and talks calmly and rationally about issues.


Alex Jones. screeming loon



Not the same.

It's little things like that that really undermine your arguments. It's like when the news has a story about Trump, they always choose the most unflattering photo to accompany the article. (oh I know, sure is there ever a GOOD photo of him! bwahahaha ammirite???)

Gynoid

mcmoustache wrote: »

It's been a while since I saw any posts defending transitioning kids with puberty blockers and all that. I know that it happens in the wackier corners of the interned and that there are certain mainstream charities promoting it but those views, while they might exist, are not that numerous on boards.

It's been, oh, about 3 months. The tide starting publicly turning elsewhere as research began to be done. But up to that on here on boards it was rabid. Not one or two. There was a considerable cohort of very vocal trans allies who defended child medical experiment and drag kids. I have their names in my black book, dont worry