Total Posts:57|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Alt-Right and White Nationalists

SolonKR
Posts: 4,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2016 11:45:57 PM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
For context, in my survey that I did a few days ago, one person identified as a WN, and yet seven of you (more than 20% of respondents) identified as alt-right. Trump has disavowed the alt-right, and claims that Bannon isn't a part of it. The media has increasingly called the alt-right synonymous with white nationalism, just under a nicer label (see, for instance, https://www.washingtonpost.com..., where the professor being interviewed interestingly agrees that Bannon is not part of the alt-right). The man who claims to have coined the term "alt-right", Richard Spencer, is total racist garbage.

With that context in mind, I turn to you all to ask: what's the difference?
SO to Bailey, the love of my life <3
Scruggs
Posts: 91
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2016 11:55:31 PM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/22/2016 11:45:57 PM, SolonKR wrote:

With that context in mind, I turn to you all to ask: what's the difference?
It is really not too difficult. Alt-right = alternative-right. That is it. In America, the mainstream and established right wing is simply conservatism. If you do not want to be a conservative, yet still identify with right wing politics, then you would be a part of the alt-right. You might say that this title encompasses too broad of a group and I would agree. The alt-right is made up of white nationalists, separatists, supremacists, etc. However, it is also made up of people who disavow those types of ideologies.
"If a man does not put himself in the attitude of a sinner, his prayer will not be heard before God." A brother asked him, "what is a sinful soul?" And St. Abba Moses replied, "Everyone who bears his own sins, and does not consider those of his companion."
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2016 11:56:41 PM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
Don't know. Neither. Don't care either. If one labels tgemself, they create their own limitations.
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,086
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 12:27:49 AM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/22/2016 11:45:57 PM, SolonKR wrote:
For context, in my survey that I did a few days ago, one person identified as a WN, and yet seven of you (more than 20% of respondents) identified as alt-right. Trump has disavowed the alt-right, and claims that Bannon isn't a part of it. The media has increasingly called the alt-right synonymous with white nationalism, just under a nicer label (see, for instance, https://www.washingtonpost.com..., where the professor being interviewed interestingly agrees that Bannon is not part of the alt-right). The man who claims to have coined the term "alt-right", Richard Spencer, is total racist garbage.

With that context in mind, I turn to you all to ask: what's the difference?

As I explained recently in another thread, white nationalism falls under the umbrella of and comprises probably most of the "Alt-Right", but the Alt-Right also includes monarchists, people who favour traditional gender roles, religious fundamentalists, etc.
Google the term "Dark Enlightenment" to find out more about the Alt-Right.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Kynikos
Posts: 53
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 12:34:29 AM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
The alt-right is more "big tent".

As defined by the collective of people who call themselves altright. i.e., what the altright is. Not what the mainstream thinks or says it is.

Not that many white nationalists consider themselves part of it. They predate the altright (and don't embody the full breadth of the movement very well).
kevin24018
Posts: 1,952
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 1:01:00 AM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/22/2016 11:56:41 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
Don't know. Neither. Don't care either. If one labels tgemself, they create their own limitations.

we really have become rabid for labels and get overly emotional and hostile about their definition, I just don't think there's enough buckets to put everyone in.
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 1:18:32 AM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/23/2016 1:01:00 AM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 11/22/2016 11:56:41 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
Don't know. Neither. Don't care either. If one labels tgemself, they create their own limitations.

we really have become rabid for labels and get overly emotional and hostile about their definition, I just don't think there's enough buckets to put everyone in.

I actually find it somewhat comical anymore. Political Balkanization. At least in the valkans you actually had socio-cultural differences. Here it's mostly just ego.
kevin24018
Posts: 1,952
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 1:25:28 AM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/23/2016 1:18:32 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 11/23/2016 1:01:00 AM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 11/22/2016 11:56:41 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
Don't know. Neither. Don't care either. If one labels tgemself, they create their own limitations.

we really have become rabid for labels and get overly emotional and hostile about their definition, I just don't think there's enough buckets to put everyone in.

I actually find it somewhat comical anymore. Political Balkanization. At least in the valkans you actually had socio-cultural differences. Here it's mostly just ego.

man that is dead on, ego, the thought of possibly being wrong just doesn't exist in their unicorn world, nor does the opinion of others
Fernyx
Posts: 330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 1:32:43 AM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/22/2016 11:45:57 PM, SolonKR wrote:
For context, in my survey that I did a few days ago, one person identified as a WN, and yet seven of you (more than 20% of respondents) identified as alt-right. Trump has disavowed the alt-right, and claims that Bannon isn't a part of it. The media has increasingly called the alt-right synonymous with white nationalism, just under a nicer label (see, for instance, https://www.washingtonpost.com..., where the professor being interviewed interestingly agrees that Bannon is not part of the alt-right). The man who claims to have coined the term "alt-right", Richard Spencer, is total racist garbage.

With that context in mind, I turn to you all to ask: what's the difference?

The alt-right is right wing cultural nationalists, within that there are white nationalists, but not every nationalist is a white nationalist. Spencer is the media appointed alt-right leader and many in the alt-right do not identify with him, but he is a big part of the white nationalist side. That is what I have been able to understand.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,288
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 2:07:20 AM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/22/2016 11:45:57 PM, SolonKR wrote:
For context, in my survey that I did a few days ago, one person identified as a WN, and yet seven of you (more than 20% of respondents) identified as alt-right. Trump has disavowed the alt-right, and claims that Bannon isn't a part of it. The media has increasingly called the alt-right synonymous with white nationalism, just under a nicer label (see, for instance, https://www.washingtonpost.com..., where the professor being interviewed interestingly agrees that Bannon is not part of the alt-right). The man who claims to have coined the term "alt-right", Richard Spencer, is total racist garbage.

With that context in mind, I turn to you all to ask: what's the difference?

The Alt-right is a decentralized movement based on a mob mentality. They mock the idea that they have a leader, and often bicker about even their most core tenants, though it's generally focused around white advocacy, HBD (Human biodiversity), the 'JQ', or Jewish Question, and chan culture + trolling. Even those aren't universal though, they're just the 'nexus' to which the whole labyrinthine system of groups and ideologies are attached. Boiled down to a simple axiom that pretty much everyone in the alt right agrees upon, it would be 'diversity+proximity=conflict'.

White nationalism is a specific tenet holding that white people need their own nation. While it is a common view on the alt right, it's not a ubiquitous one. Jared Taylor, a peripheral figure, for example, just wants full freedom of association. Also, white nationalists themselves differ pretty widely. There's a meme on the Alt Right called 'GTKRWN' (Gas the kikes, race war now) which is intended to mock the people who go so fringe and edgy that they unironically turn into genocidal maniacs. A large amount of white nationalists, for example, have sympathy for and even meet with and support nationalists of other races, because they agree on fundamentals about how human society functions. Even among the mainstream, it isn't that controversial to say that 'hey, Japan should be a homeland for Japanese people and their culture', and people from other countries tend to not share the hysteria that those in the West have over someone saying 'hey, France should a homeland for French people and their culture.' It also doesn't mean 'no minorities at all', as is often implied.

The media also often lies about the Alt Right. Sometimes, they're just being their typical incompetent selves and getting everything wrong, but they often actually flat-out lie, like the piece that claimed that Richard Spencer said that he questions whether Jews are even really people, when he said nothing that could even be vaguely construed in that way.

http://dailycaller.com...
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
thett3
Posts: 14,381
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 2:13:16 AM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/23/2016 2:07:20 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 11/22/2016 11:45:57 PM, SolonKR wrote:
For context, in my survey that I did a few days ago, one person identified as a WN, and yet seven of you (more than 20% of respondents) identified as alt-right. Trump has disavowed the alt-right, and claims that Bannon isn't a part of it. The media has increasingly called the alt-right synonymous with white nationalism, just under a nicer label (see, for instance, https://www.washingtonpost.com..., where the professor being interviewed interestingly agrees that Bannon is not part of the alt-right). The man who claims to have coined the term "alt-right", Richard Spencer, is total racist garbage.

With that context in mind, I turn to you all to ask: what's the difference?

The Alt-right is a decentralized movement based on a mob mentality. They mock the idea that they have a leader, and often bicker about even their most core tenants, though it's generally focused around white advocacy, HBD (Human biodiversity), the 'JQ', or Jewish Question, and chan culture + trolling. Even those aren't universal though, they're just the 'nexus' to which the whole labyrinthine system of groups and ideologies are attached. Boiled down to a simple axiom that pretty much everyone in the alt right agrees upon, it would be 'diversity+proximity=conflict'.

White nationalism is a specific tenet holding that white people need their own nation. While it is a common view on the alt right, it's not a ubiquitous one. Jared Taylor, a peripheral figure, for example, just wants full freedom of association. Also, white nationalists themselves differ pretty widely. There's a meme on the Alt Right called 'GTKRWN' (Gas the kikes, race war now) which is intended to mock the people who go so fringe and edgy that they unironically turn into genocidal maniacs. A large amount of white nationalists, for example, have sympathy for and even meet with and support nationalists of other races, because they agree on fundamentals about how human society functions. Even among the mainstream, it isn't that controversial to say that 'hey, Japan should be a homeland for Japanese people and their culture', and people from other countries tend to not share the hysteria that those in the West have over someone saying 'hey, France should a homeland for French people and their culture.' It also doesn't mean 'no minorities at all', as is often implied.

The media also often lies about the Alt Right. Sometimes, they're just being their typical incompetent selves and getting everything wrong, but they often actually flat-out lie, like the piece that claimed that Richard Spencer said that he questions whether Jews are even really people, when he said nothing that could even be vaguely construed in that way.

http://dailycaller.com...

To add to this, the alt-right encompasses a lot of other dissident rightist philosophies such as NeoReaction, which is basically what I identify with--not in the weird "Moldbug is right about LITERALLY everything and we need monarchy NOW" sense, but in the sense that I nonironically agree with almost everything here: http://slatestarcodex.com...

If you think hierarchy, traditionalism, localism and tribalism are important values you really didn't have a place in American politics before maybe Trump. Hence, why I chose alt-right
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
thett3
Posts: 14,381
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 2:28:06 AM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
The alt-right is definitely not synonymous with white nationalism. I would say that in order to be a part of the "alt-right" you have to have a more realistic and nuanced ("red pilled") view of human nature, which inevitably leads to the question of racial dynamics/tribalism.

I've been called a white nationalist for saying that our immigration policies are foolishly changing the demographic composition of the country too rapidly and that we can expect a significant backlash. There's a world of difference between that and white nationalism...actual white nationalists are a minority among the alt-right, although almost everyone on the alt-right has viewpoints that would get them shouted down by leftists.
No matter how solid their arguments might be. I think for a lot of people, there is a sense of "if you're going to do the time, may as well do the crime" which causes them to embrace white nationalism
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
triangle.128k
Posts: 3,675
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 3:12:59 AM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
>look at all the different definitions everybody stated about the alt right

Let's face it, the alt-right is really just a "theory" or something that doesn't exist. There's no clear-cut definition of the alt-right, essentially making it a theory, concept, or just a buzzword/made up term.

People such as reactionaries and white nationalists have existed for the longest time, yet only now do people seem to be worried about them.
lannan13
Posts: 23,111
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 3:21:52 AM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/22/2016 11:45:57 PM, SolonKR wrote:
For context, in my survey that I did a few days ago, one person identified as a WN, and yet seven of you (more than 20% of respondents) identified as alt-right. Trump has disavowed the alt-right, and claims that Bannon isn't a part of it. The media has increasingly called the alt-right synonymous with white nationalism, just under a nicer label (see, for instance, https://www.washingtonpost.com..., where the professor being interviewed interestingly agrees that Bannon is not part of the alt-right). The man who claims to have coined the term "alt-right", Richard Spencer, is total racist garbage.

With that context in mind, I turn to you all to ask: what's the difference?

I think this would be the best explination of things in terms of what is the Alt-Right. http://www.breitbart.com...
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-Lannan13'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

If the sky's the limit then why do we have footprints on the Moon? I'm shooting my aspirations for the stars.

"If you are going through hell, keep going." "Sir Winston Churchill

"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." "Eleanor Roosevelt

Topics I want to debate. (http://tinyurl.com...)
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,288
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 6:10:43 PM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/23/2016 3:12:59 AM, triangle.128k wrote:
>look at all the different definitions everybody stated about the alt right

Let's face it, the alt-right is really just a "theory" or something that doesn't exist. There's no clear-cut definition of the alt-right, essentially making it a theory, concept, or just a buzzword/made up term.

People such as reactionaries and white nationalists have existed for the longest time, yet only now do people seem to be worried about them.

Using that logic, we can safely determine that 'species' don't actually exist.

Inexact =/= nonexistent.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
triangle.128k
Posts: 3,675
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 6:42:53 PM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/23/2016 6:10:43 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 11/23/2016 3:12:59 AM, triangle.128k wrote:
>look at all the different definitions everybody stated about the alt right

Let's face it, the alt-right is really just a "theory" or something that doesn't exist. There's no clear-cut definition of the alt-right, essentially making it a theory, concept, or just a buzzword/made up term.

People such as reactionaries and white nationalists have existed for the longest time, yet only now do people seem to be worried about them.

Using that logic, we can safely determine that 'species' don't actually exist.

Inexact =/= nonexistent.

This isn't species, but political terminology. Political terms almost always have a clear and concise definition (i.e. socialists, conservatives, liberals, tea-party, left/right wing. authoritarian, etc.)

On the other hand, "alt right" is really just a buzzword because there's absolutely no agreed upon definition, and it can sometimes get confusing on who is alt right and who isn't alt right. I mean, some would paint things like the UKIP or Breitbart news as alt right, but others would just define alt right as hardcore white nationalists or reactionaries.

The fact that definitions of the alt right vary to a large extent, this is mere evidence that there actually is no such thing. It's nothing but a buzzword. Why can't things be called like what they are? Reactionaries are reactionaries, right wing populists are right wing populists, white nationalists are white nationalists, and anti-elitists are anti-elitists. There is really no need to coin a term that is *extremely* loosely defined. For the most part, "alt right" is just a buzzword used by leftists and the mainstream media to scare everybody about the "racist boogeymen".
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,288
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 7:05:50 PM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/23/2016 6:42:53 PM, triangle.128k wrote:
At 11/23/2016 6:10:43 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 11/23/2016 3:12:59 AM, triangle.128k wrote:
>look at all the different definitions everybody stated about the alt right

Let's face it, the alt-right is really just a "theory" or something that doesn't exist. There's no clear-cut definition of the alt-right, essentially making it a theory, concept, or just a buzzword/made up term.

People such as reactionaries and white nationalists have existed for the longest time, yet only now do people seem to be worried about them.

Using that logic, we can safely determine that 'species' don't actually exist.

Inexact =/= nonexistent.

This isn't species, but political terminology. Political terms almost always have a clear and concise definition (i.e. socialists, conservatives, liberals, tea-party, left/right wing. authoritarian, etc.)

None of those things has a clear and concise definition.

On the other hand, "alt right" is really just a buzzword because there's absolutely no agreed upon definition, and it can sometimes get confusing on who is alt right and who isn't alt right. I mean, some would paint things like the UKIP or Breitbart news as alt right, but others would just define alt right as hardcore white nationalists or reactionaries.

It's a description of a movement. You run into the same problem if you take a magnifying glass to a term like 'Jacobin'. It is only the distant view which history affords us that makes that movement seem like a set and concrete thing. It had just as much internal turmoil and contradiction as the alt right does today.

The fact that definitions of the alt right vary to a large extent, this is mere evidence that there actually is no such thing. It's nothing but a buzzword.

Can you support that 'law' at all? As I said, the same 'law' applies to the biological concept of species. There are innumerable caveats to the point where it becomes impossible to sketch out even a short, absolute definition of the concept. But this is because the human brain is trying to classify something in the real world, and things in the real world are very complex. When you're looking at something like a mass movement, there are so many moving parts that a person can't really grasp it all unless he simplifies it and gives it a name. So trying to classify that task of naming, one which is pretty essential to communication and human society in general, as the creation of 'buzzwords' (ironically, you are using the word buzzword as a buzzword here), seems ill-advised.

Why can't things be called like what they are? Reactionaries are reactionaries, right wing populists are right wing populists, white nationalists are white nationalists, and anti-elitists are anti-elitists. There is really no need to coin a term that is *extremely* loosely defined.

Why can't we call ferns ferns, and moss moss, and conifers conifers, and do away with this whole loosely defined 'plant' business? Why talk of insects when we can be more exact and talk of beetles, butterflies, and bugs?

For the most part, "alt right" is just a buzzword used by leftists and the mainstream media to scare everybody about the "racist boogeymen".

It's also a word used by the alt right themselves, which undermines that point considerably.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,337
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 7:28:53 PM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/23/2016 2:28:06 AM, thett3 wrote:
The alt-right is definitely not synonymous with white nationalism. I would say that in order to be a part of the "alt-right" you have to have a more realistic and nuanced ("red pilled") view of human nature, which inevitably leads to the question of racial dynamics/tribalism.

I've been called a white nationalist for saying that our immigration policies are foolishly changing the demographic composition of the country too rapidly and that we can expect a significant backlash. There's a world of difference between that and white nationalism...actual white nationalists are a minority among the alt-right, although almost everyone on the alt-right has viewpoints that would get them shouted down by leftists.
No matter how solid their arguments might be. I think for a lot of people, there is a sense of "if you're going to do the time, may as well do the crime" which causes them to embrace white nationalism

As part of the three amigos..
https://s.blogcdn.com...

I know Skeps is mostly concerned about culture preservation, Thett is worried about demographic tensions, and I myself am worried that mandated diversity will ultimately spell an end to the experiment of the social concept of "equality under the law."

All 3 of us would probably be labeled white nationalists, as well as alt-right.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,337
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 7:38:40 PM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/23/2016 7:05:50 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:

Why can't things be called like what they are? Reactionaries are reactionaries, right wing populists are right wing populists, white nationalists are white nationalists, and anti-elitists are anti-elitists. There is really no need to coin a term that is *extremely* loosely defined.

Why can't we call ferns ferns, and moss moss, and conifers conifers, and do away with this whole loosely defined 'plant' business? Why talk of insects when we can be more exact and talk of beetles, butterflies, and bugs?

I love plant talk.
Devilry
Posts: 486
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 7:43:42 PM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/23/2016 7:28:53 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 11/23/2016 2:28:06 AM, thett3 wrote:
The alt-right is definitely not synonymous with white nationalism. I would say that in order to be a part of the "alt-right" you have to have a more realistic and nuanced ("red pilled") view of human nature, which inevitably leads to the question of racial dynamics/tribalism.

I've been called a white nationalist for saying that our immigration policies are foolishly changing the demographic composition of the country too rapidly and that we can expect a significant backlash. There's a world of difference between that and white nationalism...actual white nationalists are a minority among the alt-right, although almost everyone on the alt-right has viewpoints that would get them shouted down by leftists.
No matter how solid their arguments might be. I think for a lot of people, there is a sense of "if you're going to do the time, may as well do the crime" which causes them to embrace white nationalism

As part of the three amigos..
https://s.blogcdn.com...

I know Skeps is mostly concerned about culture preservation, Thett is worried about demographic tensions, and I myself am worried that mandated diversity will ultimately spell an end to the experiment of the social concept of "equality under the law."

All 3 of us would probably be labeled white nationalists, as well as alt-right.

And I for one just dislike black people.
: : : At 11/15/2016 6:22:17 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
: That's not racism. Thats economics.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,337
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 7:46:27 PM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/23/2016 7:43:42 PM, Devilry wrote:
At 11/23/2016 7:28:53 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 11/23/2016 2:28:06 AM, thett3 wrote:
The alt-right is definitely not synonymous with white nationalism. I would say that in order to be a part of the "alt-right" you have to have a more realistic and nuanced ("red pilled") view of human nature, which inevitably leads to the question of racial dynamics/tribalism.

I've been called a white nationalist for saying that our immigration policies are foolishly changing the demographic composition of the country too rapidly and that we can expect a significant backlash. There's a world of difference between that and white nationalism...actual white nationalists are a minority among the alt-right, although almost everyone on the alt-right has viewpoints that would get them shouted down by leftists.
No matter how solid their arguments might be. I think for a lot of people, there is a sense of "if you're going to do the time, may as well do the crime" which causes them to embrace white nationalism

As part of the three amigos..
https://s.blogcdn.com...

I know Skeps is mostly concerned about culture preservation, Thett is worried about demographic tensions, and I myself am worried that mandated diversity will ultimately spell an end to the experiment of the social concept of "equality under the law."

All 3 of us would probably be labeled white nationalists, as well as alt-right.

And I for one just dislike black people.

You just haven't met the right ones then.
Devilry
Posts: 486
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 7:47:43 PM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
Nah I love black people tbh. I used sit with one at the back of maths class and he'd let me give the teacher answers to homework from his copy.

He was kinda like my homework slave thinking about it.
: : : At 11/15/2016 6:22:17 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
: That's not racism. Thats economics.
Devilry
Posts: 486
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 7:48:11 PM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
Clever fellow though. I think he's a doctor now.
: : : At 11/15/2016 6:22:17 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
: That's not racism. Thats economics.
Devilry
Posts: 486
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 7:52:44 PM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
Seriously though, this whole segregation thing sounds about the most explosive politics I've ever heard in my life. People hate Americans enough for having all the power; now you lot want some world just for white people, that we can just say fck it to all illusions of humanity and brotherhood... I mean, it is total war you're talking about. Yes differences bring tension, but fcking wow that doesn't sound like it's going to ease any tensions to me.
: : : At 11/15/2016 6:22:17 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
: That's not racism. Thats economics.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,337
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 8:00:23 PM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/23/2016 7:52:44 PM, Devilry wrote:
Seriously though, this whole segregation thing sounds about the most explosive politics I've ever heard in my life. People hate Americans enough for having all the power; now you lot want some world just for white people, that we can just say fck it to all illusions of humanity and brotherhood... I mean, it is total war you're talking about. Yes differences bring tension, but fcking wow that doesn't sound like it's going to ease any tensions to me.

Well maybe America should have stuck with it's forced integration programs instead of allowing hundreds of splinter groups to pop up and show just how much Americans DON'T have in common.
kevin24018
Posts: 1,952
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 8:08:09 PM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/23/2016 7:43:42 PM, Devilry wrote:
At 11/23/2016 7:28:53 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 11/23/2016 2:28:06 AM, thett3 wrote:
The alt-right is definitely not synonymous with white nationalism. I would say that in order to be a part of the "alt-right" you have to have a more realistic and nuanced ("red pilled") view of human nature, which inevitably leads to the question of racial dynamics/tribalism.

I've been called a white nationalist for saying that our immigration policies are foolishly changing the demographic composition of the country too rapidly and that we can expect a significant backlash. There's a world of difference between that and white nationalism...actual white nationalists are a minority among the alt-right, although almost everyone on the alt-right has viewpoints that would get them shouted down by leftists.
No matter how solid their arguments might be. I think for a lot of people, there is a sense of "if you're going to do the time, may as well do the crime" which causes them to embrace white nationalism

As part of the three amigos..
https://s.blogcdn.com...

I know Skeps is mostly concerned about culture preservation, Thett is worried about demographic tensions, and I myself am worried that mandated diversity will ultimately spell an end to the experiment of the social concept of "equality under the law."

All 3 of us would probably be labeled white nationalists, as well as alt-right.

And I for one just dislike black people.

I know you are joking and all, but I just don't get this black/white thing really. I like people whom I have things in common with and can relate to, which I think is true for everyone really, how and why skin color factors in I just don't get because if it was really looked at I don't think it does, certainly not near to the extent as everyone makes it out. For the most part I don't like rap music as an example, well if most people of a certain race like it we probably move in different circles. Depending on how strongly I feel about something and if someone is the exact opposite I may actually dislike them, but again that is regardless of what they look like. Like minded people tend to hang out together imo. It's a tribe mentality probably but it's how we are made i guess.
Devilry
Posts: 486
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 8:12:28 PM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/23/2016 8:00:23 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 11/23/2016 7:52:44 PM, Devilry wrote:
Seriously though, this whole segregation thing sounds about the most explosive politics I've ever heard in my life. People hate Americans enough for having all the power; now you lot want some world just for white people, that we can just say fck it to all illusions of humanity and brotherhood... I mean, it is total war you're talking about. Yes differences bring tension, but fcking wow that doesn't sound like it's going to ease any tensions to me.

Well maybe America should have stuck with it's forced integration programs instead of allowing hundreds of splinter groups to pop up and show just how much Americans DON'T have in common.

I mean I think there's a sort of intelligible reaction to that whole BLM madness going on here. But then it seems about as simpleminded as the Build A Wall bullsht, and in addressing probably a thousand times more difficult a problem. I don't know what should be done or should have been done. Sending all the black people back to Africa, though - definitely not.
: : : At 11/15/2016 6:22:17 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
: That's not racism. Thats economics.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,337
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 8:15:18 PM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/23/2016 8:12:28 PM, Devilry wrote:
At 11/23/2016 8:00:23 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 11/23/2016 7:52:44 PM, Devilry wrote:
Seriously though, this whole segregation thing sounds about the most explosive politics I've ever heard in my life. People hate Americans enough for having all the power; now you lot want some world just for white people, that we can just say fck it to all illusions of humanity and brotherhood... I mean, it is total war you're talking about. Yes differences bring tension, but fcking wow that doesn't sound like it's going to ease any tensions to me.

Well maybe America should have stuck with it's forced integration programs instead of allowing hundreds of splinter groups to pop up and show just how much Americans DON'T have in common.

I mean I think there's a sort of intelligible reaction to that whole BLM madness going on here. But then it seems about as simpleminded as the Build A Wall bullsht, and in addressing probably a thousand times more difficult a problem. I don't know what should be done or should have been done. Sending all the black people back to Africa, though - definitely not.

I think most Trump supporters like the metaphor aspect of the wall, namely, that the country is serious about cohesion and the law. And the time to send Africans back was in the 1800's. It's too late now because they aren't African anymore.
Devilry
Posts: 486
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2016 8:16:51 PM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
At 11/23/2016 8:15:18 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 11/23/2016 8:12:28 PM, Devilry wrote:
At 11/23/2016 8:00:23 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 11/23/2016 7:52:44 PM, Devilry wrote:
Seriously though, this whole segregation thing sounds about the most explosive politics I've ever heard in my life. People hate Americans enough for having all the power; now you lot want some world just for white people, that we can just say fck it to all illusions of humanity and brotherhood... I mean, it is total war you're talking about. Yes differences bring tension, but fcking wow that doesn't sound like it's going to ease any tensions to me.

Well maybe America should have stuck with it's forced integration programs instead of allowing hundreds of splinter groups to pop up and show just how much Americans DON'T have in common.

I mean I think there's a sort of intelligible reaction to that whole BLM madness going on here. But then it seems about as simpleminded as the Build A Wall bullsht, and in addressing probably a thousand times more difficult a problem. I don't know what should be done or should have been done. Sending all the black people back to Africa, though - definitely not.

I think most Trump supporters like the metaphor aspect of the wall, namely, that the country is serious about cohesion and the law. And the time to send Africans back was in the 1800's. It's too late now because they aren't African anymore.

I think most Trump supporters are rabid animals dude.
: : : At 11/15/2016 6:22:17 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
: That's not racism. Thats economics.