|
SunAndSpring posted:In the recent years, I've noticed that the right-wing has a clearly dominant position when it comes to the use of the internet to sway opinions. Right-wing people are able to form effective brigades to do things like manipulate online polls, negatively review media that disagrees with their views, game systems like Reddit and Google to get right-wing opinions front-page coverage, and more. They also seem to be better at using computers in general, what with the prevalence of bots and DDOSing as tactics used by internet right-wingers. Yet, I haven't noticed any sort of counter-response from the left; nothing is done when, say, alt-right trolls review-bomb a video because it implies that black people are human and not some variety of orc. It isn't actually all that dominant on the Internet. Fascists and quasi-fascists are more visible online because anonymity allows them to say things they wouldn't in real life (the same is true of other fringe political opinions to an extent), but they're a still a minority. Maybe they make up the majority in certain spaces (like comments sections beneath news stories), but that's usually because people who aren't far-right are more likely to have given up on those spaces as a waste of time, energy, and sanity. Also, just as there are fewer far-rightists online than you think, there are more of them off-line than you think, as recent elections in several countries suggest. Silver2195 fucked around with this message at 20:13 on Dec 18, 2016 |
#
¿
Dec 18, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 10:24 |
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:This made me realize something else; the internet right is intolerant as all hell. They'll happily harass somebody offline and will not let up when they decide to hate somebody. If the alt right gets you in their crosshairs your best bet is to just disconnect and go offline. They are relentless. Depends on what you mean by the "internet left"; there at least used to be subcultures that would keep yelling at someone because they said something arguably sexist or whatever years ago, no matter how many times they apologized for it. (The original "SJWs," before right-wingers started using the term to mean anyone who thinks racism and sexism are bad.) That said, I think the people who used to do that sort of thing have mostly grown out of it now. Also, while the original-SJWs occasionally made death threats, the really nasty tactics (SWATTing comes to mind) seem to have been pioneered mainly by the far right.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2016 01:15
|
|
|
semper wifi posted:maybe it's because your opinions are not objectively correct and you can reasonably arrive at a different ones despite education and access to information Richard Spencer posted:Indeed, one wonders if those people are people at all, or instead soulless Golems, animated by some dark power quote:Whites do and other groups don’t. In the banality of normal life and in our most outlandish dreams, in both our Narrative and theirs, to be white is to be a striver, a crusader, an explorer and a conqueror. We build, we produce, we go upward. quote:As Europeans, we are, uniquely, at the center of history. We are, as Hegel recognized, the concept of world history. No one will honor us for losing gracefully. No one mourns the great crimes committed against us. For us, it is conquer or die. This is a unique burden for the white man, that our fate is entirely in our hands. And it is appropriate because within us, within the very blood in our veins as children of the sun lies the potential for greatness. quote:We were not meant to beg for moral validation from some of the most despicable creatures to pollute the soil of this planet. quote:Hail Trump. Hail our people. Hail victory. these are totally views you can reasonably arrive at 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2016 04:50
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:The far right seems very patient in seeking out media they hate and commenting. The Guardian has written articles on the subject. This liberal paper is of no interest to the far right, but if you look at the comments section, there's a lot of them there (less since they beefed up their moderation and removed comments from contentious articles.) The alt-right must be doing it deliberately to try and "convert the heathen." As far as I know, liberals don't generally go to Stormfront and start posting messages of love and peace. Or maybe they do, I haven't been there! Stormfront has an Opposing Views section for the pro-love and peace people to argue with the Neo-Nazis. I read a bit of it a few years back, and my impression was that, unfortunately, the kind of well-meaning liberals idealistic enough to argue with Neo-Nazis aren't very good debaters. (Tangent time: I know of two other forums with Opposing Views sections: RevLeft and the Flat Earth Society forums. Though in the case of the Flat Earth Society, I'm pretty sure the "dominant" Flat Earthers are mostly trolls, or at least engaging in devil's advocacy as a form of debate practice. Sincere Flat Earthers do exist (people can believe some really stupid things) but they're almost exclusively either religious fundamentalists or paranoid shizophrenics, whereas the Flat Earth Society forums are suspiciously full of otherwise reasonable Flat Earthers.)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2016 05:35
|
|