Politics discussion: on the alt-right and their relationship to the recent shooting in NZ

Fed up talking videogames? Why?
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics discussion: on the alt-right and their relationship to the recent shooting in NZ
by Moggy » Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:32 pm

Slayerx wrote:I'm pretty sure its more dangerous not to be aware of what they are saying than to simply ignore them


Ignoring them works though. I don’t have to hear their utter gooseberry fool if I don’t listen.

And if you deplatform them then nobody else has to hear their gooseberry fool either.

People are being murdered because of hate preachers (replace “preachers” with “personalities” if it makes you feel better). Saying “but it’s better to hear them out” just doesn’t cut it anymore.

We’ve let them speak and we have piles of bodies because of it.

User avatar
mic
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: I'm on my way...

PostRe: Politics discussion: on the alt-right and their relationship to the recent shooting in NZ
by mic » Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:39 pm

Slayerx wrote:I'm pretty sure its more dangerous not to be aware of what they are saying than to simply ignore them...


Not if you’re going to drink the Koolade.

White supremicist Dylan Roof, who perpetrated the Charlottesville massacre in 2015, claimed to have been radicalised after googling the police shooting of Trayvon Martin, which led him down the rabbit hole.

Google have had a lot of flack for discriminatory search results, such as “black youth” returning a page of mugshots, or “black on-“ autocompleting to “-white crime”, which is allegedly the search that set Dylan on the path to terrorism.

Why are these algorithms racist and sexist by default? Is it enough to blame it on social interest?

User avatar
Tineash
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics discussion: on the alt-right and their relationship to the recent shooting in NZ
by Tineash » Sat Mar 16, 2019 1:17 am

Who Pewdiepie follows on Twitter

Image

WHEW lots of good lulz there

"exceptionally annoying" - TheTurnipKing
User avatar
Rightey
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: There's been a mass shooting at a mosque in NZ
by Rightey » Sat Mar 16, 2019 1:31 am

Karl wrote:I suppose to some extent you could think of it as a slippery slope, but it isn't a fallacy -- if we're going to call it that, then it certainly is a slope and it is slippery. It's demonstrable that there is a social network funnel that leads from right-leaning figures like Pewdiepie and Jordan Peterson through increasingly extreme layers of the alt-right -- it's been mapped! It's well-documented that social media recommendation algorithms plunge users into bubbles of extreme content.

The sooner you accept that this is how a propaganda war is being fought on the Internet today - turning hearts away from social democracy and multiculturalism, and ultimately towards fascism - the less likely you are to become one of its unwitting soldiers.


I totally agree with the idea that these algorithms push people into bubbles, no matter what the persons leanings are, as their goal is to keep someone on the platform for as long as possible to serve them more ads, and they do this by just showing them what the algorithm thinks they want. But I think it's fear mongering and dangerous to say don't listen to these people, because while they're not Nazi's you'll end up watching Nazi stuff later on.

I remember reading an article about this issue that said the web is basically splitting into two parts, the libre web, and the tranquil web. The libre web, which is present in the west, has more free speech but also more extremism, and the surveillance on it is mostly passive. On the other hand the tranquil web, which is being pushed in places like China, and Turkey has far more active surveillance and censorship, but as a result there is less extremism.

Personally I see it as a battle between openness (free speech etc.) and inclusion. You can have inclusion at the expense of openness, or openness at the expense of inclusion. I think most people here in the West acknowledge the importance of both, but recently lots of places, both online and in the real world have been pushing for more inclusion of people who were traditionally marginalized. Which leads to less openness, something that our society is founded on, being eroded.

Cuttooth wrote:
Prototype wrote:
Tineash wrote:strawberry float you both very very much.


Great argument, well made.

Hiya. You're unrelentingly centrist position will get people killed, sorry.


This is a joke right? Are you seriously saying if you don't agree with my left wing politics you have blood on your hands? :lol:

Pelloki on ghosts wrote:Just start masturbating furiously. That'll make them go away.

Image
User avatar
Green Gecko
Director
Joined in 2008
Location: Sussex
Contact:

PostRe: Politics discussion: on the alt-right and their relationship to the recent shooting in NZ
by Green Gecko » Sat Mar 16, 2019 1:51 am

I have little else to add than the phrase "left/right/alt/lib/whatthefuckever" + "narrative" immediately discredits the opinion being criticised and suggests you are irrevocably biased, even without realising it. The thought process "anything other than what I think is probably an illusion" is a dodgy place to get into and I think that's something a few of the "alt-right" provocateurs mentioned in this thread want. They really really want their followers to be as uncritical and angry, and fearful as possible, so I would invite people to ask if that is how they feel. It's why angry, hateful, confused, vulnerable individuals are so impressionable and can be fed answers, especially at times like this.

Please just, don't be give up critical thinking. Even if you are a nazi, criticise nazism, be a better nazi. Hate jews intelligently, be very specific why you hate them. It's even just slightly a tiny bit easier to understand (no, that's the wrong word - imagine, I suppose?). And the same with any other prejudice.

And while I find the whole spectrum fascinating I find it kind of worrying and annoying that people have to berate the "other side" at all. It really undermines any productive debate and I'd ask that people tone down the strawberry floats and what if this thread is going to be worth having.

♥ gaems | t: @GRcade | FB: GRcadeUK | YT: GRcadeVideo | Twitch: GRcadeUK
Image
Image
mark9
Member
Joined in 2011

PostRe: Politics discussion: on the alt-right and their relationship to the recent shooting in NZ
by mark9 » Sat Mar 16, 2019 5:20 am

Slayerx wrote:You're entitled to that opinion but I would hardly call the people calling Peterson the stupid people's smart person 'Peers' but again that's your opinion.

I just find identity politics to be very dangerous and reading this thread, I think illustrates this we have a mass shooting which is horrible and somehow Pewdie Pie is dragged into a conversation along with anyone else people want to label Alt-Right which in my opinion is ridiculous.


Pewdie Pie was hardly dragged into the conversation, the gunman urged people to subscribe to PDP's channel before murdering 49 people.

User avatar
Vermilion
Member
Joined in 2018
Location: Everywhere
Contact:

PostRe: Politics discussion: on the alt-right and their relationship to the recent shooting in NZ
by Vermilion » Sat Mar 16, 2019 7:55 am

Pedz wrote:Well, at least us Welsh weren't involved.


That's because you were all too busy trying to pronounce some of your town names. ;)

User avatar
Cuttooth
Emeritus
Joined in 2008

PostRe: There's been a mass shooting at a mosque in NZ
by Cuttooth » Sat Mar 16, 2019 8:12 am

Rightey wrote:This is a joke right? Are you seriously saying if you don't agree with my left wing politics you have blood on your hands? :lol:

No because ultimately I think there are levels of complicity across the political spectrum. It's just that the centre readily subscribes to a view that a sensible middle ground removes their own complicity from the actions of the far ends of that political spectrum (e.g "the actions of the right fuel the left whose reaction fuels the right...", which suggests the centre just stays out of it) and lazily applies double standards to views of people who aren't in the centre with them.

I would seriously suggest that a majority of self describing moderate centrists need to recognise the rise of white nationalism in our collective societies is happening and has been happening for years, should understand how that has been allowed to happen, and recognise they share a significant amount of responsibility in it happening.

We mostly signed up to a view that we live in a post-racist society because slow, incremental social progression got us to a point where we could look back thirty or forty years and think "Amazing, look how far we've come in just a generation or two!". We failed to recognise that many people also looked back in horror and thought "Look at how much god given advantage I've had to give up to abnormal people, I want it to be my day again,".

The ideological centre failed to properly challenge that because the preferred, "balanced" approach of doing so (especially against a far-right acting in bad faith) instead legitimised it as any other basically acceptable point of view, and because of the centre's reluctance to confront the inconvenience of many of our long held traditions and structures of society being steeped in historic white supremacist imperialism.

This is something I posted on the legitimising of fascist views a couple of months ago:

A centre that wants to "hear both sides" and tackle the violent and hateful rhetoric of fascism head on with debate will not win because they’ve already ceded the ground of what should be considered reasonable to the right by doing so.

That harm is I feel the thing that is overlooked the most when giving the far-right a platform to air their views. Allowing targeted abuse against minority groups or the less powerful is saying the hurt those groups have to endure from that rhetoric (and further, the potential violence they have to face because of that rhetoric being legitimised) is an acceptable cost for a peaceful society that can only be fully experienced by those not targeted by that same rhetoric.


tl;dr - The centre's approach to white supremacy has been a failure and sticking your heels in with that approach will only lead to further harm.

User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics discussion: on the alt-right and their relationship to the recent shooting in NZ
by Moggy » Sat Mar 16, 2019 8:27 am



strawberry floating hell. :fp:

When was the last time we had angelic baby pictures of an Islamic terrorist?

User avatar
Pedz
Twitch Team
Joined in 2009

PostRe: Politics discussion: on the alt-right and their relationship to the recent shooting in NZ
by Pedz » Sat Mar 16, 2019 8:43 am

Vermilion wrote:
Pedz wrote:Well, at least us Welsh weren't involved.


That's because you were all too busy trying to pronounce some of your town names. ;)


We were singing and eating cheese on toast too. Don't get me started on the sheep.

ImageImage
User avatar
Tafdolphin
Member
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics discussion: on the alt-right and their relationship to the recent shooting in NZ
by Tafdolphin » Sat Mar 16, 2019 8:45 am

So GG your post confused me a little bit.

Green Gecko wrote:I have little else to add than the phrase "left/right/alt/lib/whatthefuckever" + "narrative" immediately discredits the opinion being criticised and suggests you are irrevocably biased, even without realising it.


If I used the term 'alt-right narrative' in describing a documented campaign of indoctrination perpetrated through various channels, such as so called news outlets, history podcasts and conspiracy theories all using twisted versions of the facts to promulgate racist, sexist, and anti-immigration views, does that make me biased? Is being biased against racism...bad?

I'm not sure what you're saying there.

The thought process "anything other than what I think is probably an illusion" is a dodgy place to get into and I think that's something a few of the "alt-right" provocateurs mentioned in this thread want. They really really want their followers to be as uncritical and angry, and fearful as possible, so I would invite people to ask if that is how they feel. It's why angry, hateful, confused, vulnerable individuals are so impressionable and can be fed answers, especially at times like this.


But there are narratives, ha, that are pure illusion. The Great Replacement, the inferiority of non-white races, the rise of the feminazi who wants the eradication of all maleness. Speaking out against these is not thinking they're an illusion, it's knowing they are having done the research and, you know, not being racist.

Please just, don't be give up critical thinking. Even if you are a nazi, criticise nazism, be a better nazi. Hate jews intelligently, be very specific why you hate them. It's even just slightly a tiny bit easier to understand (no, that's the wrong word - imagine, I suppose?). And the same with any other prejudice.


I get that the first part of this is the important bit but considering the thread this is a weird paragraph to have added here.

And while I find the whole spectrum fascinating I find it kind of worrying and annoying that people have to berate the "other side" at all. It really undermines any productive debate and I'd ask that people tone down the strawberry floats and what if this thread is going to be worth having.


I do worry that I've retreated too far into a left leaning bubble sometimes, and I try to analyse my own beliefs every time something like this comes up. I occassionally watch videos from alt-right sources before delving into deconstructions of said videos, and I try to look at poisonous social phenomena like racism and the rise of white supremacism with a critical eye. This doesn't mean I'll ever see them as anything other than completely baseless hate speech however.

Last edited by Tafdolphin on Sat Mar 16, 2019 8:48 am, edited 3 times in total.
Gemini73 wrote:Yes your are a sanctimonious twat

Bloggy blog blog blog.

Night Call: a game what I worked on
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics discussion: on the alt-right and their relationship to the recent shooting in NZ
by Moggy » Sat Mar 16, 2019 8:47 am

Sounds like Taf hasn’t read the Kalergi Plan. They are going to replace us!

User avatar
Benzin
Member
Joined in 2011

PostRe: Politics discussion: on the alt-right and their relationship to the recent shooting in NZ
by Benzin » Sat Mar 16, 2019 8:52 am

Karl wrote:Image

Don't watch their content, and don't watch anyone who collaborates with them.


Is Jeff Holiday only on there because he has discussions with those with opposing views? Or is there something beyond the YouTube personality a la PewDiePie?

User avatar
Nibble
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Big Tuna

PostRe: Politics discussion: on the alt-right and their relationship to the recent shooting in NZ
by Nibble » Sat Mar 16, 2019 9:35 am

Lex-Man wrote:I feel in Rogan's case it's more clear cut, he's providing a platform for people with totally nuts idea and basically introducing them to a new audience. He may not be a member of the alt-right but he's definitely helping them grow.


I find it incredibly disheartening that people who should know better continue to make appearances on Rogan's show.

User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics discussion: on the alt-right and their relationship to the recent shooting in NZ
by Moggy » Sat Mar 16, 2019 10:07 am


User avatar
Karl_
Nyaaaaaaa~!
Nyaaaaaaa~!
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: There's been a mass shooting at a mosque in NZ
by Karl_ » Sat Mar 16, 2019 11:08 am

GRcade Translate

Translating from [Centrist] to [English]:


Rightey wrote:I think it's fear mongering and dangerous to say don't listen to these people, because while they're not Nazi's you'll end up watching Nazi stuff later on.

"It doesn't bother me at all that a bunch of creators I love are actually part of a far-right radicalisation network. I think they're cool, so stop telling people not to watch them!"

Rightey wrote:I remember reading an article about this issue that said the web is basically splitting into two parts, the libre web, and the tranquil web. The libre web, which is present in the west, has more free speech but also more extremism, and the surveillance on it is mostly passive. On the other hand the tranquil web, which is being pushed in places like China, and Turkey has far more active surveillance and censorship, but as a result there is less extremism.

"If you tell people not to watch a right-wing academic's videos because he's part of a far-right radicalisation network, you want us to be like China or Turkey! I know this is a non-sequitur, but it plays into a narrative I want to push about leftists being authoritarian, so I wanted to see if I could slip it in!"

Rightey wrote:Personally I see it as a battle between openness (free speech etc.) and inclusion. You can have inclusion at the expense of openness, or openness at the expense of inclusion. I think most people here in the West acknowledge the importance of both, but recently lots of places, both online and in the real world have been pushing for more inclusion of people who were traditionally marginalized. Which leads to less openness, something that our society is founded on, being eroded.

"The principle of freedom is more important to me than anything else! Surely you can't disagree with that? Incidentally, I have watched a bunch of alt-right shitheads talking about freedom, and they say that minority equality takes my white freedoms away! Seems pretty convincing to me."

Rightey wrote:This is a joke right? Are you seriously saying if you don't agree with my left wing politics you have blood on your hands? :lol:

"I don't think you understand how this works. I'm an enlightened centrist. I can fail to stand up to fascism all day long, and it doesn't make me complicit! That's just how it works! No matter what they do, I can always say, when I said they had good points I didn't mean that!"

User avatar
jawafour
Member
Member
Joined in 2012

PostRe: Politics discussion: on the alt-right and their relationship to the recent shooting in NZ
by jawafour » Sat Mar 16, 2019 11:32 am

Karl, it feels like you're presenting the term "centrist" as meaning someone who tolerates and appeases fascists and racists. A centrist is a moderate; that doesn't mean someone solely displays or supports the most extreme behaviours and beliefs of either the left or the right.

I don't necessarily agree with Rightey's perspective but I also don't agree with you putting words into his mouth. Supposing I or anyone else said that, because you're left-leaning, you are a "commie-loving, no-rules layabout with no backbone"? You would probably be a bit unhappy about that and rightly so. It works the other way when you exaggerate someone's view; there is often degrees of grey in perspective rather than being solely black or white*. Freedom of speech is a foundation of many countries and it is a hard call to make on exactly where to draw the line. Sure, that line should, I feel, obviously be drawn well ahead of any form of racism or fascism; but we have to take care to ensure that any cancellation of this freedom is not being abused to stop protests or whatever from taking place.

* And, no, this does not mean that I believe racism is not a black / white issue and that it should be tolerated.

User avatar
Tafdolphin
Member
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics discussion: on the alt-right and their relationship to the recent shooting in NZ
by Tafdolphin » Sat Mar 16, 2019 11:46 am

jawafour wrote:Karl, it feels like you're presenting the term "centrist" as meaning someone who tolerates and appeases fascists and racists. A centrist is a moderate; that doesn't mean someone solely displays or supports the most extreme behaviours and beliefs of either the left or the right.


So the issue is that a moderate or a centrist is someone whose default response is generally either "very fine people on both sides" or "guys guys, can't we all just get along?"

The problem arises when one side of the argument is an exponentially growing network of white supremacists and racists. The moderate position falls apart when faced with one side that is objectively harmful. There is no debating a zealot, no reasoning with a person who believes that some races are inferior to their own.

When moderates/centrists attempt to mollify the two sides this in a sense is tolerating racism. It is appeasing fascists. It's telling them that their points are valid enough to hold up against those who think racism is bad.

When the two sides are "kill all Muslims" and "maybe strawberry floating don't" what value does a moderate viewpoint bring if not to appease the side that literally advocates genocide?

Similar with PDP. When Boogie, a "moderate" YouTuber's, first impulse wasn't to use his gigantic platform to condemn this act but to express solidarity with an insanely rich white man who does the same job as him, without considering why this insanely rich white man was mentioned by a mass-murderer in the first place, that's centrism. That's prioritising the need to not offend over facing the facts in front of your face.

The world is not black and white, that we all can agree on. But there are some viewpoints that, by their very tenets, have no place in society. Railing against them and the people that spread them is not a conversely extreme viewpoint...it is any responsible person's obligation.

Gemini73 wrote:Yes your are a sanctimonious twat

Bloggy blog blog blog.

Night Call: a game what I worked on
User avatar
jawafour
Member
Member
Joined in 2012

PostRe: Politics discussion: on the alt-right and their relationship to the recent shooting in NZ
by jawafour » Sat Mar 16, 2019 12:00 pm

You're assuming that everyone who considers themselves (or is considered by others) as being a centrist shares exactly the same views, Taf. They don't; just as not all left-leaning people think the same way and just as not all right-leaning people think the same way. There is an infinite scale and people sit at varying places on that scale.

In Rightey's case, my belief is that he was coming in with observations and points of discussion; not in any way indicating that he supports the extreme views.

And, again for clarity and to avoid assumptions being drawn, this does not mean that I think racism or fascism should be accepted in any form.

User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics discussion: on the alt-right and their relationship to the recent shooting in NZ
by Moggy » Sat Mar 16, 2019 12:03 pm

Welcome to the studio, on today’s show, does the Earth revolve around the sun?

To discuss this we have Galileo Galilei to argue for the heliocentric model. And for balance we have Dave who we found in Wetherspoons watching flat Earth videos on his phone.


Return to “Stuff”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], darksideby182, Finish.Last, Google [Bot], HSH28, It'sNotLupus, Joer, KjGarly, Lex-Man, Met, Oblomov Boblomov, Preezy, Saint of Killers, satriales, Squinty, Ste, That's not a growth, Tineash, Vermilion and 38 guests