Let's talk about the alt-right

[Blue_Max]

I'm pretty specific in the post unless you didn't bother reading it and went just by the title.

You also displayed progressive-left attitudes in your original post but I gave you the benefit of the doubt.
You just removed that doubt - this whole thread was made by a progressive as troll-bait right from the start.

 

[Blue_Max]

Here's the Merriam Webster definition for this term.

Just like "feminism", the dictionary definition and the real-world entity are two VERY different things.
Political progressivism has nothing to do with the dictionary definition related to "progression" ie: advancement.

This is why the opposition often refers to them as "regressive left" - there not only is no progression, the Progressives are tearing down society (especially families, male and female identity, national identity) to set themselves in all the places of power and be the judges of all moral authority, what to think and how to feel. They are authoritarians to the extreme, which you can see every time you disagree with one of their "wonderful new ideas" like 75+ genders, etc.

 

[jackstar7]

Based on a feeling? Did this feeling form from experience from sea to shining sea or is it a feeling you formed from watching fake news and reading alt-left web sources?

Can you list alt-left sources?

 

[MooseNSquirrel]

If you disagree with me BECAUSE your opinions are that of the *cough* Progressive Left, then the label fits - doesn't it?
If you disagree and actually state your own opinions that are based on objective facts, and present those facts to me, not only will I consider those facts, I'll also know you're capable of independent thought instead of being driven by the collective groupthink demanded by some groups out there (and that's not limited to the progressive left, many cults operate the same way.)

And by collective group think he means anyone using rational thought.

 

[desura]

Can you list alt-left sources?

I would argue that Vox, Slate, the WAPO, and The Atlantic, and Buzzfeed are leftist extremist, especially their younger less prominent writers. All of them reside in the D.C. bubble. I'd argue that the NYT even is less extreme than those sources.

There's something weird going on in DC probably in large part because the USA is experiencing some abnormal economics, i.e. $500 billion annual deficit and yet close to zero borrowing costs.

 

[zinfamous]

The alt-rght: overweight/underweight, virgin, angry white supremacist males that think "news" = youtube rant videos posted by long hairs.

 

[MrSquished]

I would argue that Vox, Slate, the WAPO, and The Atlantic, and Buzzfeed are leftist extremist, especially their younger less prominent writers. All of them reside in the D.C. bubble. I'd argue that the NYT even is less extreme than those sources.

There's something weird going on in DC probably in large part because the USA is experiencing some abnormal economics, i.e. $500 billion annual deficit and yet close to zero borrowing costs.

WaPo, Atlantic & Slate are extreme sites? That's insane.

 

[mikeymikec]

I had a poke through this article:
http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/03/29/an-establishment-conservatives-guide-to-the-alt-right/

and came to this quote:

"The alternative right are a much smarter group of people — which perhaps suggests why the Left hates them so much. They’re dangerously bright."

For its intended audience, this opinion piece is text-based fellatio.

 

[desura]

WaPo, Atlantic & Slate are extreme sites? That's insane.

Yes, I read them enough to get a sense that they are pretty far to the Left. Buzzfeed is based in NYC so I'm wrong on it being part of the D.C. Bubble. I don't read buzzfeed. But the Kate Aurthur attack on the Gaines family for their church was given favorable treatment in one place: Vox. It is apparent where their biases lie. They have fairly weak editorial control it appears and are unwilling to fire people who say stupid things like all Trump voters are oxy addicts.

 

[Commodus]

Yes, I read them enough to get a sense that they are pretty far to the Left. Buzzfeed is based in NYC so I'm wrong on it being part of the D.C. Bubble. I don't read buzzfeed. But the Kate Aurthur attack on the Gaines family for their church was given favorable treatment in one place: Vox. It is apparent where their biases lie. They have fairly weak editorial control it appears and are unwilling to fire people who say stupid things like all Trump voters are oxy addicts.

So who would you say is in the middle, then? Certainly not Fox News. WaPo and Atlantic fine for straight news pieces... Slate is definitely left-leaning.

 

[desura]

So who would you say is in the middle, then? Certainly not Fox News. WaPo and Atlantic fine for straight news pieces... Slate is definitely left-leaning.

Maybe The Week or Daily Beast. Politico is fairly decent.

For the right-leaning sites I rely on National Review and American Conservative.

NYRB is rigorous, but pretty left. I can at least respect them.

I can't say I have much respect for Vox, WAPO, Slate. The Atlantic has suffered a noticable decline since Andrew Sullivan left.

 

[MrSquished]

So who would you say is in the middle, then? Certainly not Fox News. WaPo and Atlantic fine for straight news pieces... Slate is definitely left-leaning.

You could argue Slate is left-leaning but this guy is calling them extremist. lol

The only extremist thing going on here is calling Slate extremist.

 

[leper84]

Anyone who disagrees with a modern liberal= Alt right.

A boogyman who's definition can be changed as seen fit. More of the same thought-police garbage where if you don't agree with the hive-mind then your a horrible *ist. Easier to demonize people who you disagree with than debate them, don't fall in line with the narrative then you're scum of the earth.

In reality, alt-right are probably just right leaning moderates, conservatives and libertarian types who had enough with the establishment republicans. They were insulted by both sides, called stupid, sexist, racist and got Trump elected because of the fact.

 

[raildogg]

LOL @ progressives. They don't get upset when Obama murders Middle Easterners but they do when Bush does it. Hypocrites.

The alt-right seem to be a prominent group on the internet it seems. They all seem to work with each other and to follow a certain narrative. From what I've seen, their motto is to spread fear and hate. Some of their messages:

• They are usually very, very anti-Obama. They often call him a Muslim; or if they don't, in the comments section you will see all kinds of attacks on him - calling him a black Muslim, racist Muslim, etc.
• They are usually very, very anti-Hillary. It appears that she is satanic and works in pedophiles. Of course, did they mention satanism or pedophilia before she ran for office? Not that I can see. Hillary started both of these things. Laughable but sad.
• They are usually very, very anti-Muslim. Every bad thing in the world is because of Muslims according to these guys and gals. The West is squeaky clean (besides Obama, Hillary and Merkel). I mean, it appears that their aim is to simply spread hate against Muslims. It's just venom.
• They are usually very, very anti-government except when it comes to Trump.
• They are usually very, very pro-Trump but I guess this is an obvious. I mean, the guy picks Wall Streeters and other shady characters but these guys simply see it as a positive.

I'm leaving out some other stuff but these are some of the main points.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Nope. Most white Americans, like most Americans in general, believe in meritocracy and equal protection of the laws, and not your entitlement by accident of birth bullshit.

Are you referring to opposition to birthright citizenship here?

 

[Puffnstuff]

I'm still waiting for the Kamikaze dive bombers to enter this thread.

 

[zinfamous]

LOL @ progressives. They don't get upset when Obama murders Middle Easterners but they do when Bush does it. Hypocrites.

I don't recall Obama illegally invading another country for no reason and starting a decade+war and killing off hundreds of thousands of civilians in the process. The rest of your post is noise, because you opened with such an idiotic, flawed premise. What is the point of continuing to read past this 2nd grade false equivalence?

We can argue about the problems with how Obama has handled his tenure escorting this Neocon wetdream of a war, but when you try to equate the two you come off as an unread simple person.

 

[rommelrommel]

Just taking this opportunity to highlight one of the big reasons the "progressive" left is losing popularity FAST.

They fight dirty. Honesty and facts mean nothing, only the end goal of winning for progressivism.

If they don't have a logical, factual argument to take down an opponent's point, they act like this - hurling baseless insults as much as possible in hopes of discrediting their opponent so the point they made will be ignored.
After all, who would want to agree with me if I was actually a sexist, racist, misogynistic, scumlord who can't please a woman so I need a fleshlight.... right?

Progressives are the ones who will get people fired if they feel offended by something; even if it was innocuous as a glance their way, or a barely-innuendo joke about computer dongles.

Thanks for making your methodology so crystal clear.

I'm actually pretty conservative but I enjoy messing with someone who is so easily triggered.

 

[agent00f]

And on the subject of granting people undue notoriety, President Donald Trump.
You do realize it's the media that MADE him President, by incessantly talking about him non-stop, right?
Even through hatred they granted him free air and free messaging time. They made him both popular and infamous.
And in our partisan world even an infamous person can automatically be granted power as long as they oppose someone else.

It's in this game of divide and conquer that entirely unfit and unwell men can rise to power.
A broken primary system without run-off elections let his minority rise to GOP victory.
Simply not being Hillary let his minority rise to national victory.

But most of all it was the media's non-stop Trump coverage from Summer 2015 that propelled him forward.
And now you wish to make mountains out of mole hills...the media will double down and give birth to the "alt-right" by giving it air time.
Sometimes it's best not to expose the general populace to a particular contagion until you know they're ready to handle it.
I fear that Trump proves America is not ready for the level of exposure that Democrats intend to provide.

I realize that Trump makes conservatism look bad, but this narrative that they didn't really vote or won't do anything for his/Bannon's cause is only going to look ever more like irredeemable denial.

 

[Jaskalas]

I realize that Trump makes conservatism look bad, but this narrative that they didn't really vote or won't do anything for his/Bannon's cause is only going to look ever more like irredeemable denial.

Cause?
Progressives have an organization in Congress, with a charter / set of principles. That's a level of organization. A common cause.
People who voted for Trump are not a party nor organization unto themselves. It's a range of causes, of vying purposes.
A ton of it is simply because the person on the ballot had a D or R label next to their name.
The clinch was the economic message, as you can tell from the specific locations that flipped.

We are well aware of the cause you speak for. It's near every other post containing "your sort" racist rhetoric. Irredeemable indeed.

 

[JSt0rm]

i love how the same few faces show up in every alt right/ racist thread. lmao.

 

[agent00f]

Cause?
Progressives have an organization in Congress, with a charter / set of principles. That's a level of organization. A common cause.
People who voted for Trump are not a party nor organization unto themselves. It's a range of causes, of vying purposes.
A ton of it is simply because the person on the ballot had a D or R label next to their name.
The clinch was the economic message, as you can tell from the specific locations that flipped.

Yeah those locations which showed trump support to be completely indifferent to economics, and where anti-illegal (ie indigenous looking mexicans) rhetoric resonated more than places where illegals actually were. Clearly demonstrated by that comprehensive study I both linked and quoted, which you predictably ignored because your cause trumps any empirical data.

We are well aware of the cause you speak for. It's near every other post containing "your sort" racist rhetoric. Irredeemable indeed.

My cause to expose people who'll do anything to cover for white nationalism is certainly obvious enough, and it's telling your sort feel anyone should be redeemed from it.

 

[Vic]

Are you referring to opposition to birthright citizenship here?

No, I was referring to the entitlement mentality of people like Richard Spencer and others in the 'alt-right.' Their arguments are always the same. Somehow, through some accident of birth, and in no way related to their own individual merit, they insist that they are more entitled to the protections of the laws than other citizens. And if you disagree with them, then you're not entitled either.

 

[jackstar7]

C'mon boomerang, do you have a list or no?

 

[Puffnstuff]

I'm still waiting for the Kamikaze dive bombers to enter this thread.

I just knew they'd find this thread.