Alt-right vs. Tea Party

[TheGreatA]

The term "alt right" was coined by a white supremacist to describe the racist right movement. Trump's campaign head used to run Breitbart, which he described as a platform for the alt right. Not really equivalent. It is the movement. Further, if someone wrote a manifesto of the alt right, no one else associated with the movement would be obliged to accept it as representative.

Now, someone who considers himself on the right and rejects both the alt right and the mainstream right is a different story.

The term "alternative right" has been used by numerous people to describe the rise of a viable alternative to the declining conservative movement. Spencer did not truly "coin" anything.

http://www.unz.com/article/the-decline-and-rise-of-the-alternative-right/

The alt right, in its current form, is nothing more than a loose collection of "alternative" right-wing ideologies, and there is an active power struggle within to establish which ideologies prove out to be stronger and more effective. In time, I reckon that the more extreme views will be "ironed" out, with the likes of Spencer being kicked to the curb, in order to be able to enter mainstream politics as anything more than a counter-cultural laughing stock.

The same way that people like this:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/black-lives-matter-controversial-tweet-1.3523055

Will eventually have their role be downplayed in the "BLM" movement.

 

[Satur9]

Yeah this kind of thing used to be funny but it's becoming more alarming than anything at this point. I mean what do you do with a group of people who insist that another group hates them and then uses that hate to demand some form of justice that can never been given? It leads those on the left to feel emboldened and justified to "fight back" and then you see things like this:

This is what happens when you spend decades characterizing people in a way that completely strips them of their humanity. This is what happens when you spend decades telling people they are oppressed and the country is against them.

The left in this country is vile and the single greatest threat to individual liberty in this country and ultimately the world.

And people act like guns shouldnt be available to protect yourself...

 

[Deleted member 429137]

I wasn't talking about capitalism. I was talking about communism, and yes, that's the only time where employees have been widely exploited. Why? Because there was only one employer.

In any event reading your posts I realize it escapes you how wages are set in the marketplace to begin with.

Interesting, because you didn't say widely exploited, you said successfully exploited. This is like when I'm on top of someone in side control and they stick a fraction of their kneecap in hoping they might create some wiggle room later.

Please go on about how communism is the only system to exploit workers. Is it not exploitation if they're getting the wages the market can get away with?

 

[Greoric]

Interesting, because you didn't say widely exploited, you said successfully exploited. This is like when I'm on top of someone in side control and they stick a fraction of their kneecap in hoping they might create some wiggle room later.

Please go on about how communism is the only system to exploit workers. Is it not exploitation if they're getting the wages the market can get away with?

Obviously not, because then workers are getting paid according to their productivity. That's exactly what you want.

 

[Jack V Savage]

The term "alternative right" has been used by numerous people to describe the rise of a viable alternative to the declining conservative movement. Spencer did not truly "coin" anything.

Sure he did. It's not like that's some kind of inevitable term.

The alt right, in its current form, is nothing more than a loose collection of "alternative" right-wing ideologies, and there is an active power struggle within to establish which ideologies prove out to be stronger and more effective.

The question is what are they alternatives to? The answer is basically the kind of right-leaning liberalism that has dominated the political right mixed with religious conservatism (with a rhetorical focus on limited gov't, free trade, etc.). The alternative is an illiberal right that explicitly rejects founding principles of the nation, generally in favor of some kind of ethnonationalism, but it can be a broader term that includes techno fascism, neoreaction, and the like.

In time, I reckon that the more extreme views will be "ironed" out, with the likes of Spencer being kicked to the curb, in order to be able to enter mainstream politics as anything more than a counter-cultural laughing stock.

If they move in that direction, they'll no longer be what they are--they'll just be right-leaning liberals or religious conservatives.

 

[Deleted member 429137]

Obviously not, because then workers are getting paid according to their productivity. That's exactly what you want.

So it cannot be exploitation if you are paying the bare minimun the law will allow... even if an employer is making fraudulent deductions, pocketing training pay, not paying overtime, not paying full hours worked, refusing to give enough hours for the worker to get benefits, instructing their employees to supplement their insufficient income with food stamps... because worker protections have been stripped away?

 

[Greoric]

So it cannot be exploitation if you are paying the bare minimun the law will allow... even if an employer is making fraudulent deductions, pocketing training pay, not paying overtime, not paying full hours worked, refusing to give enough hours for the worker to get benefits, instructing their employees to supplement their insufficient income with food stamps... because worker protections have been stripped away?

Market wages aren't established by law. Like I said, you grossly misunderstand why employers pay their employees the way they do.

 

[TheGreatA]

Sure he did. It's not like that's some kind of inevitable term.

How did he "coin" it if people were using the term "alternative right" long before he ever did? He took something that was already there, and added his own spin to it. But I wouldn't be so sure that everybody else used the term "alt-right" in the same context that Spencer does. Everybody seems to have their own idea of the "alt-right", from what I've seen. Some people form it in 4chan troll forums, others on Breitbart, etc.

The question is what are they alternatives to? The answer is basically the kind of right-leaning liberalism that has dominated the political right mixed with religious conservatism (with a rhetorical focus on limited gov't, free trade, etc.). The alternative is an illiberal right that explicitly rejects founding principles of the nation, generally in favor of some kind of ethnonationalism, but it can be a broader term that includes techno fascism, neoreaction, and the like.

They are alternatives to globalism, interventionism, religiously motivated conservatism. Ultimately, if the "alt-right" wishes to become a movement that is to be taken seriously, they have to focus more strongly on those aspects and abandon ideas which would prevent its ascension towards the mainstream, such as the silly idea that "white men" are being oppressed. This only serves to make them a laughing stock.

If they move in that direction, they'll no longer be what they are--they'll just be right-leaning liberals or religious conservatives.

They can be a mostly secular, nationalist, isolationist conservative movement which promotes traditional family values and gender roles based on scientific and practical arguments, not religious ones.

 

[saugeye killah]

Ultra aggressive? Show me any time one of these groups were as "aggressive" as the left has been in the US this election cycle

Under no circumstances would I ever defend most of the behavior depicted in that video. Of course there are idiots of all political persuasions. Anyone who attacks someone physically at a political rally (particularly from behind) is a criminal and deserves to be in jail. That said:









So yeah.....Y'all got some real fucking geniuses on your side of the aisle too, pal.

 

[Greoric]

Under no circumstances would I ever defend most of the behavior depicted in that video. Of course there are idiots of all political persuasions. Anyone who attacks someone physically at a political rally (particularly from behind) is a criminal and deserves to be in jail. That said:









So yeah.....Y'all got some real fucking geniuses on your side of the aisle too, pal.

Let's not pretend like the incidence of violence isn't lobsided though. In fact, the relative philosophies explain why. Libertarians are based around a premise of defending individual rights, while a left of center approach legitimizes violence by the state to take what they didn't produce.

With kind of rationale, it makes sense why the left center persuasion is more likely to use violence in their daily lives. It's rooted in their political beliefs.

 

[Quipling]

Let's not pretend like the incidence of violence isn't lobsided though. In fact, the relative philosophies explain why. Libertarians are based around a premise of defending individual rights, while a left of center approach legitimizes violence by the state to take what they didn't produce.

With kind of rationale, it makes sense why the left center persuasion is more likely to use violence in their daily lives. It's rooted in their political beliefs.

Are you now asserting that trump supporters are predominantly liberterians?

 

[Ruprecht]

Let's not pretend like the incidence of violence isn't lobsided though. In fact, the relative philosophies explain why. Libertarians are based around a premise of defending individual rights, while a left of center approach legitimizes violence by the state to take what they didn't produce.

With kind of rationale, it makes sense why the left center persuasion is more likely to use violence in their daily lives. It's rooted in their political beliefs.

Yeah... I mean it's not as if Nationalism is linked to violence in any way.

 

[TheGreatA]

Yeah... I mean it's not as if Nationalism is linked to violence in any way.

Nationalism isn't necessarily fascism. Switzerland has long been ruled by nationalists. Nobody has ever had problems with those guys.

Nationalism combined with interventionism, is usually a bad mix of political ideas.

 

[Greoric]

Are you now asserting that trump supporters are predominantly liberterians?

No, but they're closer to the libertarian philosophy than the people that go out of their way to protest them.

 

[Greoric]

Yeah... I mean it's not as if Nationalism is linked to violence in any way.

You mean like the Nazi's? As in the National Socialist Worker's Party? As in a left of center party?

 

[Ruprecht]

You mean like the Nazi's? As in the National Socialist Worker's Party? As in a left of center party?

Are you a troll these days?

 

[Greoric]

Are you a troll these days?

What's the troll? I realize you don't have a right leaning (read: individual liberty leaning) philosophy that's responsible for a population's genocide to blame, but that doesn't mean you can't just cry racist, bigot, homophobe to complete your argument.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

BLM isn't even a group. Anyone can use the hashtag or hold up a sign and declare themselves part of it and claim to speak for it. So I'll tell you what I told Mick, there are extreme elements in it, but they are effectively marginalized. The unifying idea--that discriminatory policing is bad and that the criminal justice system often acts as if black victims are less important--is not extreme. With Campaign Zero, some BLM activists came up with very reasonable solutions to some of the problems that have been outlined.

i'm not denying that overarching motif/theme present is there, people are frustrated and fed up from years of this. You are completely right about this, i've seen this w/ my own eyes my friends harassed for 'fitting a description' that was extremely vague, borderline 'check any black guy' territory.

i wouldn't call riots/blocking highways/looting being marginalized though, especially w/ the litany of social media sites allowing the perpetuation of that view. I see it linked all the time here, and on my own FB feed literally everyday. As much as that stuff is denigrated by racists on LiveLeak, it's touted all the same on WSHH.

 

[Space]

BLM isn't even a group.

So then who did Soros give money to? Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five?

Who made all those demands?

 

[M3t4tr0n]

Yeah this kind of thing used to be funny but it's becoming more alarming than anything at this point. I mean what do you do with a group of people who insist that another group hates them and then uses that hate to demand some form of justice that can never been given? It leads those on the left to feel emboldened and justified to "fight back" and then you see things like this:

This is what happens when you spend decades characterizing people in a way that completely strips them of their humanity. This is what happens when you spend decades telling people they are oppressed and the country is against them.

The left in this country is vile and the single greatest threat to individual liberty in this country and ultimately the world.

More Nephilim propaganda