Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 41 to 57 of 57

Thread: The spread of online hate groups

  1. #41
    perpetuus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    664
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default


    Quote Originally Posted by FreelancePoliceman View Post
    The Perpetual Now
    , it’s because the right doesn’t argue in good faith that debates are doomed to fail unless the other side devolves into using the same tactics, at which point the ‘debate’ becomes nothing more than a game of impressing the audience. This is why AOC refused to debate Shapiro: his entire schtick is making as many claims as possible within his allotted time that the opponent can only make a full response to a fraction of them during his own — and so, if they play his game, they’re put entirely on the defensive. Unless you’re particularly comfortable with public confrontation of this sort of behavior, and you have the maturity and experience to understand that’s what he’s doing,
    and
    you’re skilled in the same sort of verbal put-downs as he, you’re not going to have a good time.

    Unless you’re saying the left needs demagogues on the same level as the right, then “debate” is still useless.

    But most of Shapiro's instances of "destroying" opponents are videos of him debating ill-prepared college students. He doesn't always do as well when his opponents are prepared and know their shit. Same is true about most of the right wing 'shock jocks' such as Crowder. I'm not sure why people are scared to debate Shapiro. Even Joe Rogan was able to get him to stumble and stammer a couple times when he was a guest on his show, and Rogan didn't need to sink to demagoguery or shouting over Shapiro to achieve this--he used logic and in at least one moment it was clear where Shapiro stumbled because he realized he didn't have a good logical argument to back his position on gay marriage. Rogan isn't exactly the most confrontational, aggressive person in his debating/argument style, so if he could hold his own, there's no reason the best the left could offer couldn't do the same and better without having to sink to some of the tactics you mention.
    Last edited by perpetuus; 05-30-2019 at 04:47 PM.

  2. #42
    Muddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    2,800
    Mentioned
    152 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Alonzo This guy perfectly explains what I'm trying to get at here.


  3. #43
    Alonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    TIM
    SLE-C; E864 SX-SO
    Posts
    1,088
    Mentioned
    154 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Muddy View Post
    @Alonzo This guy perfectly explains what I'm trying to get at here.

    I agree with about 97.8% of what he said, but I don't believe that the aim of this thread greatly conflicts with what he's espousing.

    For starters, I used to be a part of Antifa and similarly like minded scenes and, admittedly, our blood runs a bit hot and belligerent--instinctively, I don't mind cracking a skull for a "just" cause. I'm far more pre-enlightened Malcolm X than I am MLK Jr. and Ghandi--I think it's easier to be all "Kumbaya" when some overt, blatant fascist isn't staring you directly in the eyes while denigrating and dehumanizing some of the communities you belong to. I've always thought that most Democrats and leftists in America were weak and allowed themselves to be steamrolled by a right wing that had the balls and courage to fight for what they wanted, and dirty at that. But eventually I learned that violence can often beget more violence, and an eye for an eye leaves everyone blind. Therefore, I left all that shit behind but the fire and righteous indignation is still there.

    Having said that, because I know that there are those on the opposite end of the ideological spectrum who are just like me, I must empathize with them on some level, and understand where their passion comes from, even if I personally find how they direct it to be wrong and misguided--which is why, unlike the thread that this is in response to, I didn't come out the gate "moralizing" about the need to show empathy. Nah, this thread was made more so in protection of the vulnerable who may get sucked into twisted ideologies by bad faith actors (Richard Spencer, "the crying Nazi," etc...); my aim was to expose that agenda, first and foremost; the agenda to pretend to be a friendly, well meaning, safe space when they're actually just looking for acolytes to "die" for their foolishness--or beliefs I find to be foolish. But I'm willing to engage people's ideas so long as they are presented directly, openly, honestly, and in good faith.

    IMO, people like Richard Spencer and "the Crying Nazi" are garbage juice; but if they ever sought redemption for their actions, would I turn them away? Most likely not. I know what it's like to be empathy impaired. lol And full of anger and hatred. I don't mind extending an ice pack after I knock their ass out. But I don't believe in laying down and letting certain views that might directly impact those I care for to go unchallenged. To me, that's just dumb. Nothing good comes from being too tolerant of people who refuse to tolerate you.

  4. #44
    Alonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    TIM
    SLE-C; E864 SX-SO
    Posts
    1,088
    Mentioned
    154 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by squark View Post
    Hm, I've always considered Antifa to be a hate group too.
    They are. lol They "hate" a certain kind of "hate." But it's more of a defensive hostility than it is offensive. And they also aren't responsible for the deaths of millions, unlike the groups they "hate."

  5. #45
    Moderator xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Miniluv
    Posts
    8,044
    Mentioned
    217 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    People on the right (like Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson) treat the other side like shit then play the victim when their opponents channel that disrespect back at them.

  6. #46

    Join Date
    May 2011
    TIM
    / / /
    Posts
    1,378
    Mentioned
    123 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think hate is where humans tend to go in mobs. There's a *lot* of distrust of ppl you don't know, and judgement, and I think it has something to do with how the majority of ppl are so-first. And there's this need for celebrities, for someone to observe and gossip about, just for entertainment and breaking up mundanity. Maybe it has something to do with needing to let off steam, since there's always discomfort building up from the fact that no one else's values are exactly like yours(?)

    Obviously people can be altruistic and great also, but there's nothing about (online) hate groups that seems contemporary, or region-specific. Reading about the Byzantines right now...

  7. #47
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    the bootie
    Posts
    4,052
    Mentioned
    300 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    https://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/43/a43r150.htm

    post WW2 most EU countries, and many others worldwide, deemed illegal any expression of fasci/nazi/racial ideologies. it wasn't censorship, but wiseness and correctness. I think with internet, "freedom of expression" at our hands, these laws went astray.

    I don't really consider this censorship, we're not denying anyone the right to express themselves, everyone can enjoy a racist joke, make one, say offensive things in pvt and that's ok, just let's not go back to public display of hate that proved damaging to humanity altogether.

    it's like with any other law, we may feel like driving beyond the speed limit, but the limit is there to prevent too bad consequences. it's the same with drugs, not all are legalized, some are just too risky for the collective's sanity to be made legal. it's the same with pretty much anything, we need limits to tell us where we can play, so that when we play outside those limits, at least we're aware of that.

    but in internet, in a society devoid of any kind of limitations, what is right? and wrong? liberalist stance: whatever makes you yourself and you happy. paradoxically, this is the opposite of what anarchism is.

    we're not realizing it, but this absolute freedom is actually robbing us of something else, that is, a social sense, a moral compass. this makes us even more subjected to fall victims of anyone whose sole image is more appealing to our tastes, lacking content, playing with our altered senses.

    some rules are still necessary. to reach a real freedom, we must first learn to control ourselves.

  8. #48
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    the bootie
    Posts
    4,052
    Mentioned
    300 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lemontrees View Post
    I think hate is where humans tend to go in mobs. There's a *lot* of distrust of ppl you don't know, and judgement, and I think it has something to do with how the majority of ppl are so-first. And there's this need for celebrities, for someone to observe and gossip about, just for entertainment and breaking up mundanity. Maybe it has something to do with needing to let off steam, since there's always discomfort building up from the fact that no one else's values are exactly like yours(?)

    Obviously people can be altruistic and great also, but there's nothing about (online) hate groups that seems contemporary, or region-specific. Reading about the Byzantines right now...
    the difference with the previous societies is that internet is the greatest tool of information ever made. we have all the possibilities to look for ourselves what is correct or not, but instead, we're still supporting the catchiest slogans, the ones that voice our trivial instincts more than the ones who propose reasoned arguments.

    I think it's not completely our fault.

  9. #49
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    15,766
    Mentioned
    1404 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    mistakes -> pain -> fear -> hate

    Alonzo you mistake in own type
    you spread the hate

    nuff said

  10. #50
    Dauphin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    North Carolina
    TIM
    EIE
    Posts
    946
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FreelancePoliceman View Post
    That’s simply wrong.



    Paranoia and hatred aren’t mutually exclusive. And anti-semitism has fallen out of favor, at least in the States, partially due to the “Judeo-Christian” mythos that was begun by the religious right. The main targets are blacks, Muslims/Arabs (to the extent that they even perceive a difference), and “liberals”/“the left” (that is, anyone to the left of them).



    They would certainly like their race to rule. But no, they rarely see themselves ruling because they’re too pathetic to imagine it. Their “resistance” fetishism is part of their conspiratal thinking — that someone’s out to get them, and they need to resist.



    You can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into. White supremacists don’t care to think, and will ridicule you for the effort. They will argue in bad faith in any “debate” one tries to have with them. The only effective response to a Nazi is public humiliation. I’ve heard milkshakes seem to work well.
    No, he's right on all counts. White nationalism and white supremacism are similar but separate ideologies. I've been on both extremes of the political spectrum and still have an ear to the ground with this sort of thing. The right isn't any different from the left when it comes to in-fighting and factions.
    The articles in the OP are a mix of propaganda (similar to ex-communist stories from the Cold War) and turning figures that are considered irrelevant or laughing-stocks among the majority of the far-right into bogeymen. You can find rumors for every group mentioned above as being "feds" or controlled opposition.
    The far-right isn't a cult. Even if their beliefs can be ridiculous, there will always be a clear line of reasoning as to how they got to those beliefs. Same as Marxist-Leninism, Anarchism, Islamism, what have you. As with all fringe political beliefs, the far-right is mostly (but not all) made up of alienated individuals seeking to make sense of why the world around them seems so wrong. Attempting to attack, humiliate, or silence them will only make them dig in their heels and give them martyr complexes. I'm telling you this because it's stupid to try and talk about a political ideology or group without making the slightest effort to find out what its adherents actually think or have to say about it.
    As an addendum note that not all of the far-right are white nationalists, white supremacists, national socialists, etc.

  11. #51

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    220
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xerxe View Post
    People on the right (like Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson) treat the other side like shit then play the victim when their opponents channel that disrespect back at them.
    So true.

    Petterson is brilliant except when he gets political. He's like that slightly more intelligent brother that hits the stupid brother behind his parent’s back then cries foul when they strike back. See what a bad person they are??

    When he allied with Milo I disowned him. Milo is a twat masquerading as a wit. Can’t stand that guy. I see Petterson’s interest in him as self referential which I find hypocritical in a clinical psychological therapist.

  12. #52
    perpetuus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    664
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think his whole reasoning was he saw Milo as fitting the trickster archetype, which I think is a fair, if oversimplistic catagorization, but yeah, I probably wouldn't have jumped on the defend Milo bandwagon were I in JP's shoes.

  13. #53
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    TIM
    LIE-Ni VLEF
    Posts
    918
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sol View Post
    nuff said
    "nuff said" what a fucking mong

  14. #54
    Moderator xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Miniluv
    Posts
    8,044
    Mentioned
    217 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by waddup View Post
    So true.

    Petterson is brilliant except when he gets political. He's like that slightly more intelligent brother that hits the stupid brother behind his parent’s back then cries foul when they strike back. See what a bad person they are??

    When he allied with Milo I disowned him. Milo is a twat masquerading as a wit. Can’t stand that guy. I see Petterson’s interest in him as self referential which I find hypocritical in a clinical psychological therapist.
    I agree with all of this except for the second sentence. I don't think Peterson is brilliant at all, with respect to anything. He's also a con-artist.

  15. #55
    perpetuus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    664
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    He’s good at his field. That is about it.

  16. #56

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    220
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xerxe View Post
    I agree with all of this except for the second sentence. I don't think Peterson is brilliant at all, with respect to anything. He's also a con-artist.
    Okay.

  17. #57
    The Morning Star EUDAEMONIUM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    gone
    TIM
    EIE
    Posts
    3,130
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I can't mass reply to all of this so I'll make my point this way. The typical classic liberal idea that freedoms end when they impede on other freedoms and tolerance of opinion end when you are intolerant of others opinions lead to glaring problems. There are many ideologies that are perfectly acceptable that have also lead to bloody violence. Typical American values, independence, fourth of July, and all that, lead to wars and genocide. Communism has lead to millions of deaths, but I suppose it has yet to be correctly implemented. Regardless, no one is marching in the streets to stamp out these ideologies.

    People can even make a peaceful religion like Buddhism into a violent ideologies:
    https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/25/asia/...tha/index.html

    What makes white nationalism more dangerous than these ideologies?

    What you all are playing out is thanks to the post WW2 ally propaganda that is still in effect. "Nazism" or "Fascism" is the grand menace of the world and all the problems in life can be attributed to this scapegoat.

    You can disagree with someone without manifesting all of your hate and anger on them. That goes for anyone. It does not contribute to proper analysis nor to discourse. When you call someone a Nazi, Racist, or attack their race or sexuality, when they simply do not believe that what you say is true, they will not listen to you because you have not presented the truth to them as they see it. When you can't articulate why you disagree with an ideology you do not know why you're doing what you're doing and you're following some unknown unarticulated compulsion toward violence.

    There is no Nazi party anymore, that war is over. What you're dealing with is the elements of a disgruntled class of people that feel that they are being attacked. Why attack them? Why attempt to humiliate them? Why make yourself into the enemy they are looking for?

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •