How To Stop The Alt-Right

I have no solid idea where the word originated from. But a quick search result suggests it originated in 2009-2011 on Twitter which is around the time Gamergate was taking root. Which makes sense if you think about it.

Gamergate. What a fucking joke that was. However it is an important point in internet and journalism history though. It was when the spiteful radical feminists like Sarkessian and Laci Green, decided to wage war on a culture of introverts who generally keep to themselves, as well as a multi-billion dollar gaming media industry. How sad, if they truly cared about the plight of women around the world, why not spread awareness to the plight of women in India and the war torn Congo where rape rates are much much higher than the myths they fabricate? Why not spread awareness to how under Sharia Law, a woman's testimony is worth only half that of a man's. To be honest, feminists like them remind me of the hateful social republicans (and Hillary and Tipper Gore) of the 1990s who tried to place a ban on violent video game like Duke Nukem and Mortal Kombat. Nevertheless, they lost the pathetic battle they started, and the people are waking up to the lunacy of social justice warriors like them.

The truth is, Milo represented the gamers quite well. For the most part they keep to themselves, and there is ZERO PROOF that videogames make people sexist and violent. If anything, they use violent videogames as an outlet to take out their aggressions on simulated characters rather than real people.

 

Eye

Once again ALL leftists do that? ALL OF THEM?

What if I said ALL right wingers are white supremacists? Would you agree that is a fair description? I wouldn’t and I wouldn’t say it but you have no problem declaring at every opportunity that ALL the left are terrible and all liberals are horrible.

Again this seems to indicate you are not interested in honesty and the ‘truth’ and it make a lie of your claim that you do.

 

Eye

Again there seems to be contradictions in your stance one moment you say I won't "ban" them as they have constitutional rights those groups you hate but the next you say you would wish to ‘destroy’ them and that ‘They must be stopped’

You say the you would do this by discrediting them through telling the ‘truth’ but at the same you seem to be championing the alt-right which is well known for pushing the dubious and even out and out lies.

*

Anyway, back to the question you still seem to be avoiding - I’m still wondering what ‘special perks’ do you think straight white males are missing out of and therefore deserve to receive – again - as a specific group what do you think they specifically need help with?

 

The phrase "social justice warrior" is a term used strictly by gamers and the Alt Right, not liberals, to put down their progressive opponents . To me, "social justice" is a good thing denoting fair play and equitable relations among members of a society. "Social justice warrior", on the other hand, as a pejorative stereotype, came out of gamergate circa 2011 indicating a doctrinaire progressive activist who is self-righteous and sanctimonious. It tries to make a good thing into a bad thing. It was weaponized by Reddit and 4chan and used as an epithet for putting down cultural opponents. I see a danger in using the label as a synonym for "liberal" or "progressive" or "Left" because it implies that we're all into an ideology of political correctness and doctrinaire leftist programs. If I had to label myself, I'd probably say I'm a liberal-leaning moderate who tends to be a fiscal conservative, foreign policy pragmatist, and progressive on matters involving civil rights and income inequality. Like Bernie, I'm deeply concerned about the growing inequality and elitism in our society and the role of wealth in politics, but unlike him, I'm really not a socialist and I'm generally hostile to ideology and strident rhetoric. I voted for Hillary as the lesser of evils, and don't give a rats ass about the Democrats per se, unless they advance the values of --yes--social justice. I actually think folks like me outnumber the ideologues. Using labels like "Social Justice Warrior" is itself ideological and is more useful in propaganda than in meaningful conversation. I tend not to relate to the stereotype you're talking about, which I associate with Academia and Hollywood. I've grudgingly gone along with efforts to reform our vocabulary, but have trouble keeping pace with the acceptable terminology, like "differently abled" instead of "disabled".I don't have much patience for that crap!

 

I think we can do Public Service Announcements without shaming fat people. The public service announcements would simply present factual informationbesity kills. And information about how to get help. As for the cost of health care, though, I'm reluctant to go there, because I think the interests of individual liberty to do unhealthy but enjoyable things outweighs the interests of society in regulating behavior that drive the health care costs up. Everything I want to do is either illegal, immoral, or fattening!

Whether anti-fat motivated actions becomes a hate crime depends on whether or not there's a demonstrable record of fat-bashing. If there's a record of assaults on fat people, then yes, maybe they should be added to the list of people protected by hate crimes legislation.

 

I agree with Balbus that, whatever the merits, this is a relatively trivial issue compared with the rise of Trump and the gazillioniares. Republicans are now in a position to undue all of the social programs and civil rights gains fought for over the past several decades.

 

You can stop these groups by fighting them with better ideas, and exposing the true evils of what they are.

Again, I don't think any group deserves special perks. You can't generalize and make judgmental assumptions of a person's whole life story based on the color of their skin. That is the epitome of identity politics.

The problem is that anti-white racism is widely acceptable in society today. Why should anti-white racism be acceptable?

 

No racism is acceptable, but there's still plenty of white racism as well as anti-white racism. Why should sin be acceptable, but there's plenty of it? Because not all of us are good people. We have to work actively to fight it, not to condone or promote it. I really do think we've made gains. One of them just left office.

 

Eye

Then you need to have ‘better’ ideas and be truthful. The problem as I see it in the context of this thread is that the alt-right do not have ‘better’ ideas and are far too frequently untruthful, or at the very least misdirect or mislead.

So is back to the question you seem so reluctant to answer - I’m still wondering what ‘special perks’ do you think straight white males are missing out of and therefore deserve to receive – again - as a specific group what do you think they specifically need help with?

I don’t know of people who make generalized assumptions about a person's whole life story based on the colour of their skin - that is beyond those that seem to want to highlight the person’s skin colour for the own agenda.


I mean you instantly seem to think racism is all about skin colour, when in fact a lot of racism in the world is between ethnic groups that are the same colour or something very similar. Think of racism toward Jews or against Irish immigrants to the US, the bitter feud between say the Greeks and Turks or between differing tribal groups in Asia and Africa and so on, where the racism seems to have nothing to do with colour of skin.


And then there is the hatred of others based on religion (sectarianism) remember that although the KKK is most well known for hating black people they also very much hated Catholics and those of the Jewish religion, and today many alt-right white supremacist groups identify themselves as ‘Christian’ and are often Islamophobic.

But in general I do not see this ‘anti-white racism’ you seem to think is so ubiquitous.

I mean you talk about others been too sensitive but you and other in the alt-right movement seem to get hot under the collar for the most minor stuff. And blow other things up into some big conspiracy when it isn’t.

Again this seems to be more about distraction.

 

Yes, it would be easier, Eye, if you could narrow it down and be more specific. "Anti-white racism" is something I've never encountered in my part of the country, and is mainly something I've read about or heard about happening in the northeast or the West Coast. And it seems to take either of two forms: "reverse discrimination" controversies over affirmative action and charges of misandry on college campuses. Is there more to it than that? And how are gays, white or otherwise, at all privileged?

 

I left out a third form: anti-straight, white and/or male sentiments felt by people who consider themselves to be victims of straight white male discrimination or abuse. You mention Black Lives Matter quite a bit, and there are certainly some blacks who feel the whitey is against them and respond accordingly. Same with some gays about heteros and women about males. Some of this can be unfair, and I think they need to be called on it. Sympathizers of minorities or women struggling for equality may hold back and make allowances because of the all too human tendencies to stereotype and overgeneralize. But I have the impression the Alt Right looks for examples of this and blows them out of proportion as a means of inflaming straight white male emotions.

 

Okiefreak

As I say this all seems like a con game, it’s like when a magician distracts with one hand while with the other he’s pulling the ace of spades from up his sleeve.

But in this case right wings are making a big song and dance about ‘identity politics’ and ‘political correctness’ while right wing politicians push through tax cuts and deregulation that helps the wealthy but is detrimental to everyone else.

Thing is that Eye seems very passionate seemingly to the point of anger about these supposed slights American society is directing at ‘straight white males’ but even he does not seem to have looked at the fundamentals of this, to see if it is rationally based.

*

Anyway recently I’ve heard that disputes and fractures are opening up in the alt-right between hardliners and moderates.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/alt-right-civil-war-twitter-cernovich-milo-alaska-2016-12?r=US&IR=T

 

so we have alt right and alt fact...what is an alt left?

 

An invention of the Alt Right.

 

good answer, and might be true in some southern backwater hillbilly town.

but what do they think politically (according to those alt rights that invented it)

 

Well, since they don't exist, that's hard to say. Apparently, it means "extreme Left", as perceived by right wingers. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/12/01/meet-the-alt-left-the-gops-response-to-its-alt-right-problem/?utm_term=.edc1021abc72

 

Much like the way Black Lives Matter misdirects and misleads its followers into believing cops are at war with black people. Thereby creating more division and making cops less likely to patrol and enforce crimes in black areas, making those areas even less safe. Much like how college professors mislead college kids by promoting white guilt. I graduated college a long time ago, but I went to enroll in one class at my local community college in my city, and last April, the month that follows after women's history month (March), which follows after black history month (February), they decided to make April White Privilege history month. Creating more white guilt that people like you seem to suffer from. And promoting animosity against an entire race for atrocities of yesteryear. If you look back far enough, everybody's ancestor regardless their race did some pretty fucked up shit.

I already told you, over and over. You still don't get it do you; I'm a libertarian, remember? We don't believe anybody is entitled to anything from the government regardless the color of their skin.

How about the fact that anti-white racism is normalized in our society, but politically incorrect and racist to go the other direction? The fact that it is politically correct for leftists like Van Jones to call Trump's victory a "white-lash against a changing country." The fact that it is politically correct for Buzzfeed and MTV to make videos about why white guys suck and how they can better themselves, but they'd be black listed from existence and shut down if they switched "white" with any other ethnicity and you know it. The fact that articles from leftwing outlets can publish headlines titled: "The White Guy Problem," "White Men Must Be Stopped: The future of Mankind Depends on it," "I Don't Know What to do With Good White People," "10 Things White People Need to Stop Saying," "Dear White People: Here's a List of Things We Wish You'd Stop Doing." How about we erraticate that double standard. How about the fact that the Chicago PD and CNN had to debate whether or not it was an act of racism when 4 black teenagers who kidnapped and tortured a retarded white guy?

People like you and Okiefreak are the only ones left in this thread still defending this crap, and I wanna know why you think Anti-White racism should still be acceptable.

But that's what the whole idea of white privilege is built upon. Like how Bernie Sanders said, If you're white you don't know what it's like to be poor.

I personally think the Left shot themselves in the foot really bad in 2016 because of normalizing anti-white male racism. They lost the vote of the white blue collar worker in rust belt states to Trump this year. Many blue collar counties that have been democrat strongholds since the 70s turned red this year. I think because of the left's racism against white people, we are seeing a small rise in white nationalism. But don't take it from me. Keep on doing what you're doing and don't come crying to me when your team loses next time.

This thread was about offering snarky but helpful advice to reject identity politics and race baiting, so instead you can focus on left-wing policies that actually matter. But I see you don't wanna change for the better.






So is back to the question you seem so reluctant to answer - I’m still wondering what ‘special perks’ do you think straight white males are missing out of and therefore deserve to receive – again - as a specific group what do you think they specifically need help with?







I don’t know of people who make generalized assumptions about a person's whole life story based on the colour of their skin - that is beyond those that seem to want to highlight the person’s skin colour for the own agenda.


I mean you instantly seem to think racism is all about skin colour, when in fact a lot of racism in the world is between ethnic groups that are the same colour or something very similar. Think of racism toward Jews or against Irish immigrants to the US, the bitter feud between say the Greeks and Turks or between differing tribal groups in Asia and Africa and so on, where the racism seems to have nothing to do with colour of skin.


And then there is the hatred of others based on religion (sectarianism) remember that although the KKK is most well known for hating black people they also very much hated Catholics and those of the Jewish religion, and today many alt-right white supremacist groups identify themselves as ‘Christian’ and are often Islamophobic.





But in general I do not see this ‘anti-white racism’ you seem to think is so ubiquitous.

I mean you talk about others been too sensitive but you and other in the alt-right movement seem to get hot under the collar for the most minor stuff. And blow other things up into some big conspiracy when it isn’t.

Again this seems to be more about distraction.

 

So what to do about it? Why don't you get others who agree with you to go to those colleges and news media where this is happening and complain about it. Write letters to the editor. Go to the Dean's Office. If you don't get anywhere, make more noise. Don't be intimidated. Demonstrate. File a lawsuit! You could make FOX and even CNN if you do it right. The problems you're concerned about seem to be localized. We don't have them much in Oklahoma--quite the contrary! Of course people and groups are going to do and say extremist things. I'm a Christian, and am used to having jerks like Bill Mahrer take unfounded swipes at my religion because of what some fundie nutjob did, or because of misinformation circulated by some antichristian website. That's Bill Mahrer--annoying, extreme, opinionated, outrageous, often wrong, and more influential than he should be. But it's a free country, and what he says contributes to the dialogue. I don't take it lying down, but for the most part I recognize it for what it is and get on with my life. What you're done instead is support a maniac who is now our President and seems to be out of control. Your guy, Steve Bannon, is looking over Trump's shoulder and is now on the National Security Council. But are either likely to do anything about the marginality of underprivileged white guys you're worked up about? I don't think so. So I agree with Balbus. You've blown sleights and hurt feelings out of proportion, and we'll all pay a heavy price for it.

 

Erratum: That's Bill Maher.

 

Eye

Yes this I get – and I think anyone who has read one of your posts gets the same thing – you are angry.

But it seems to me that’s the problem anger is a strong emotion and one that can be manipulated.

I mean why are you so angry – you talk of spreading guilt, but I’m not feeling guilty is it that its making you feel guilty and if so why? And if you are not feeling guilty why are you getting so upset?

To me the only people that make a big deal out of ‘political correctness’ or ‘identity politics’ or this supposed ‘spreading of guilt’ are those that want to push a certain view of the world for political gain.

To me is a lot like a advert campaign where a problem is highlighted or blown out of proportion so that a product can be sold as a solution to that problem that really wasn’t a problem.