|
Race Realists posted:
Ironically, the first Death Wish is based on a novel in which the protagonist is presented as an unhinged nutcase. The author wasn't pleased when his novel about the dangerous seductive nature of retributive violence was embraced by audiences everywhere as a pro-vigilante story about the need to slaughter criminals. It's sort of the anti-Starship Troopers, in which a liberal book is adapted into a very right-wing film.
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2017 18:48
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 20:09 |
|
|
Race Realists posted:https://twitter.com/sbpdl/status/782735682943016964 Death Wish was a liberal book that was turned into a right-wing pro-vigilante film. Starship Troopers is a right-wing authoritarian book that was turned into an anti-war parody film.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2017 20:12
|
|
|
Yossarian-22 posted:If there's one plus with neofascism it's that its base is loving incel dorks. Imagine these people in the SS. Sad! They'd fit right in 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2017 07:04
|
|
|
How charming to see the alt-right splitting just as quick as any Trot group.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2017 09:11
|
|
|
Talmonis posted:Marty Mcfly, is that you?! Lol even in the "bad timeline" Biff Tanen was just a really rich guy, not President of the United States. Marty and Prof Brown need to get their loving poo poo together.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
I don't even want to imagine what the inside of one of those white baseball caps looks like after a Trump supporter has been wearing it for any amount of time. At least the Red coloration would kind of hide the sweat stains.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 19:20
|
|
|
I find the entire genre of youtube commentary channels completely inexplicable tbh Like, give me a nice long poorly written political rant and I'll read through it for the gems of craziness. But I can't listen to these greasy fat fucks sitting in front of their webcams at a flat angle talking in stream-of-consciousness about whatever stupid topic for thirty minutes straight. Actually I can't make it two minutes into their videos and I don't understand how anyone else can either.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 21:18
|
|
|
I knew this generation was hosed the day I found out that watching livestreams of other people playing DOTA is a thing tens of thousands of people are doing at any one time.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
You guys are acting like the American left has the organization, energy or institutional connections to actually suppress anything. From an outside perspective it looks more like an aggrieved person getting really drunk and then picking a bar fight they are unlikely to win.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
Relevant Tangent posted:He was pushed onto his sword. ftfy
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Yeah. The only reason Maher booked Milo is because he thought they could jerk off about being freedom of speech heroes after the Berkeley protest. Which is also why Milo was booked at CPAC, and it was being the keynote speaker at CPAC that triggered Reagan Battalion. Bill Maher had absolutely nothing to do with the sequence of events that led to Milo's fall from grace. To restate what you're alluding to more baldly: Maher knew he could get views, and therefore money, by featuring a ripped-from-the-headlines controversial figures on his show.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
Henry Rollins starred in a fun little indy horror / comedy / crime film called "He Never Died" that is worth watching if ever want to watch him punch people in the face and then eat them
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2017 21:53
|
|
|
quote:A few years ago I realised it was time to do something good with my life.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2017 23:04
|
|
|
A Pale Horse posted:Well from their perspective they are. America has no real tradition of leftism as it's understood in the rest of the world. Who's the most leftist American politician you can think of? Right now it's Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren and historically someone like Eugene Debbs or Huey Long? Socdem is extreme left in America so don't be surprised when American leftists are wary of putting on berets and hoisting AKs and storming the barricades. The American left was blowing poo poo up on a weekly basis in the 1970s.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
Cut the man some slack. He is trying to protect us from machine elves and their Luciferian plan to open an interdimensional portal into our world via the Large Hadron Collider. I think I will give Trump a pass on a few minor surveillance state transgressions when he just stopped a literal, sulfur smelling, child sacrificing demon from winning the election. You can't make the perfect the enemy of the good.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2017 04:51
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:It says that the entire psychological discipline of intelligence research is pseudo-science... Hmmm Nature posted:An ambitious effort to replicate 100 research findings in psychology ended last week — and the data look worrying. Results posted online on 24 April, which have not yet been peer-reviewed, suggest that key findings from only 39 of the published studies could be reproduced. quote:I just want to ask people: does this conform with your conception of how science operates? That entire fields are led by radical ideologues, and that despite glaring methodological flaws obvious even to laymen no dissenting views are accepted by journals because they fail to conform? In the social sciences this doesn't sound implausible at all. Remember this paper?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2017 21:58
|
|
|
Grondoth posted:I'm a bit worried about this across all disciplines, we tend to not really do replication experiments anymore cause lol who's gonna pay you to do that poo poo This would be less of a problem (though it would still be a serious issue) if social science disciplines like economics, psychology and political science would stop pretending to be hard sciences. Just because you can throw a bunch of math or conduct a controlled experiment doesn't suddenly mean your discipline is now as rigorous and reliable in its predictions as some idealized physics experiment. A lot of scholars want to create a illusion of greater objectivity and rigor than is actually appropriate for their disciplines. If you make your field opaque and jargonish enough and then throw in some statistical studies you can bamboozle a lot of laymen, even if your sample is actually a bunch of bored undergraduates sitting in a lecture hall and your ultimate conclusion is some none-sense about girls preferring pink because in our distant evolutionary past they picked strawberries. Years ago I remember a professor commenting on how often he would read poli sci papers where some kind of statistical analysis was seemingly bolted on at the last minute because - presumably - it's really hard to convincingly prove something with prose in 25-30 pages. So if you really want your journal article to seem convincing you toss in some kind of statistical or mathematical element, no matter how flimsy, because that instantly makes the entire exercise look more authoritative. I think you see the same kind of poo poo in psychology sometimes where a weak or questionable argument is supposed to be bolstered by a questionably designed study. After all, scholars are ultimately driven by the need to generate grants or to get their papers cited or become prestigious enough in their field to get hired at a school of their choice or to appear in the media, etc. If a poorly designed study will help convince the rubes that you're an authority then that temptation will be hard for a lot of people to pass up.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2017 19:46
|
|
|
Lindsey O. Graham posted:neuropsychology is not a hard scientific field Either Lindsay Graham has stronger opinions on psychology than I realized or you forgot to log off your gimmick account before posting this.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2017 23:25
|
|
|
Oh and I'll take a happy meal with extra happy thank you very much
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2017 23:28
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:they already had a conservative kid genius, then he hit puberty and turned into a liberal He had the most perfectly pretentious university kid reason for leaving the Republican party as I recall: he said they hadn't paid enough attention to developments in 19th and 20th century German philosophy.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
lol Conservatives are trying to come to terms with the fact that 1) maybe a couple tens of thousands of people in the entire country actually give a flying gently caress about ideological conservatism, meaning 2) they can choose between selling a poo poo ideology that has very little mass appeal or hitching themselves to unpredictable and untrustworthy youtube personalities who will change ideologies as soon as it suits them quote:This Tomi Lahren Experiment Was a Real Bad Idea This guy is writing for Eric Ericson's new site, "The Resurgent". Also did they get the art director from the Man in the High Castle to design their logo or something? 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 20:36
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:It's been about five years since I've read The Reactionary Mind, but one of its most important insights was how - because Conservatism is a reactionary ideology rooted in its opposition to liberalism, Conservatives are constantly struggling with newer generations who accept liberal challenges to inherited hierarchies as their core tenets. It only took a couple of decades before young right wing women accepted the key achievements of the sexual revolution for their own ideology, and the old men who dominate conservative discourse still can't deal with it. The Reactionary Mind made a good case for a lot of contemporary American conservatism being more of an aesthetic rejection of liberalism and a celebration of hierarchy, struggle and violence. Except there are still a few dweebs who actually think conservatism is about free markets or family values or something and they are inconsolably bitter that Trump is now revealing that 99% of the people who vote for the Republican party don't actually give a gently caress about the ideological conservatism that big corporations and billionaire families like the Kochs, the Bradleys, the Scaifs, and the Olins have been bankrolling.  "The angry mob of people that we dispossessed and then whipped up into a state of perpetual psychotic fury keeps falling for blatantly self-promoting youtube hucksters and unhinged demagogues instead of expressing their fealty to the timeless ideals of Bill Buckley, whatever will happen to the conservative movement?"
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 22:47
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:American conservatism is perverted by its roots, since we founded the country on a constitution that was based on Enlightenment notions of liberty. It naturally tends to be a bourgeois reaction, as opposed to continental conservatism, which was a direct reaction to the French revolution. That might be true for the elite advocates of conservatism but when it comes to actually garnering popular support American conservatism has always been hyper-reactionary. McCarthy is more important than Jefferson or Washington and the inchoate resentment of middle Americans who wanted to see uppity blacks punished and hippy students beaten by cops was the real animating force behind Reaganism and had more to do with the success of the ideology than anything that ever came out of the Chicago School.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2017 00:19
|
|
|
Controversial opinion here but I am totally comfortable with the precedent that someone who was explicitly trying to cause death or harm by triggering another person's medical condition is being charged with a crime
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
Even though they represent a small percentage of the overall population transgendered people are often viewed as the extreme embodiment of the belief that gender is a social construction rather than something determined by biology. Given that a lot of contemporary political arguments hinges on whether you think things are either determined by nature or constructed by social forces it's hardly surprising that trans issues would be used as a sort of proxy for all kinds of other debates about society.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2017 20:08
|
|
|
Ernst Rohm and the original SA goons practically flaunted their homosexuality and believed it made them superior warriors akin to the ancient Spartans. This article was written back in 2008 before the alt-right was on anyone radar but it gives lists a number of examples of gay fascists, some out and some closeted. quote:Gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell has a sensitive and intriguing explanation. “There are many reasons for this kind of thing,” he says. “Some of them are in denial. They are going for hyper-masculinity, the most extreme possible way of being a man. It’s a way of ostentatiously rejecting the perceived effeminacy of the homosexual ‘Other’. These troubled men have a simple belief in their minds: ‘Straight men are tough. Queers are weak. Therefore if I’m tough I can’t be queer.’ It’s a desperate way of proving their manhood.”
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2017 06:38
|
|
|
It is at turns funny and depressing to watch a generation of NEETs drifting through cyberspace and seemingly adopting whatever bizarre ideology or identity they happen to bump into first. It might be a form of nerd culture, a racialist ideology, a weird sexual kink or all of those things combined, it hardly seems to matter as long as it gives them a reason to exist in a society that really has no use for them.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
His prose has the sentence structure of a loving picture book. "See Satan. See Satan run. Satan was the first Liberal."
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 16:29
|
|
|
Actually the last Pope was in the Hitler youth.The current Pope was at most a collaborator with the Argentinian Junta when they were disappearing leftists during the Dirty War.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 20:33
|
|
|
If you care about the bible as a cultural artefact rather than a spiritual book then you should really read the King James version. That and the works of Shakespeare are responsible for most of the common idioms, turns of phrase and metaphors that English speakers commonly use today.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
Despite having been written forty years ago Christopher Lasch's "The Culture of Narcissism" has a lot to say about the contemporary alt-right. I think this passage is particularly relevant to the discussion of why a woman might yearn for a return to traditional patriarchal values or why the NEET generation in particular is attracted to the imagery of totalitarian ideologies:Christopher Lasch, The Culture of Narcissism: American Life in An Age of Diminishing Expectations posted:Imprisoned in his pseudo-awareness of himself, the new Narcissus would gladly take refuge in an idée fixe, a neurotic compulsion, a "magnificent obsession"--anything to get his mind off his own mind. Even unreflecting acquiescence in the daily grind, as the possibility of achieving it recedes into the historical distance, comes to seem like an almost enviable state of mind. It is a tribute to the peculiar horror of contemporary life that it makes the worst features of earlier times--the stupefaction of the masses, the obsessed and driven lives of the bourgeoisie--seem attractive by comparison. The nineteenth-century capitalist, compulsively industrious in the attempt to deliver himself from temptation, suffered torments inflicted by inner demons. Contemporary man, tortured on the other hand by self-consciousness, turns to new cults and therapies not to free himself from obsessions but to find meaning and purpose in life, to find something to live for, precisely to embrace an obsession, if only the passion maitresse of therapy itself. He would willingly exchange his self-consciousness for oblivion and his freedom to create new roles for some form of external dictation, the more arbitrary the better. The hero of a recent novel renounces free choice and lives according to the dictation of dice: "I established in my mind at that moment and for all time, the never questioned principle that what the dice dictates, I will perform." Men used to rail against the irony of fate; now they prefer it to the irony of unceasing self-consciousness. Whereas earlier ages sought to substitute reason for arbitrary dictation both from without and within, the twentieth century finds reason, in the debased contemporary form of ironic self-consciousness, a harsh master; it seeks to revive earlier forms of enslavement. The prison life of the past looks in our own time like liberation itself. For many people the idea of demolishing every form of hierarchy or replacing all arbitrarily assigned roles with personal decisions and choices - right down to choosing your own gender or being expected to be a self-made person in an extremely precarious economy - is intensely frightening. Assuming that everyone who joins the alt-right secretly expects to be part of the new master-class in society is mistaken. I think many people just want a stable set of values to orient themselves around and to lose themselves within, because the expectations of contemporary individualism weigh heavily on the growing number of losers in society.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
I don't think it's just a need to externalize failure, because even a lot of superficially successful and affluent people are utterly miserable right now. I think there's a deeper, and largely aesthetic, rejection of contemporary society happening right now and that you can't just reduce that rejection to a question of who is or isn't flourishing in the new economy (though certainly that plays a large role as well). Beneath the generic alienation of late capitalism there's a deeper kind of alienation that has been targeted by spiritual and religious traditions for many thousands of years. Building our entire society around personal choice and maximizing conspicuous consumption would probably alienate a lot of people even if we somehow created a post-scarcity utopia where everyone is provided for.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Imma reduce it down to something much simpler. Forget aesthetic rejection, here's the real reason - loneliness. I think we're describing the same thing from different angles. After all, the values of late capitalism in America increasingly are about making you a totally isolated individual whose entire identity has to be self constructed, which necessarily means all social and personal ties are extremely weak. It's hardly surprising that makes people feel lonely and isolated.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2017 17:15
|
|
|
You would think that Alabama would be easy mode for a white nationalist which makes Spencers' fuckup even funnier than if this had happened at Berkeley or New York
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 16:53
|
|
|
Isn't Sam Harris the pro-torture guy who got really upset when anyone correctly said he was pro torture? Also, I think, the guy who had a public meltdown when Noam Chomsky said he was too much of a clown to bother debating with?
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 21:54
|
|
|
I looked up the Harris-Chomsky correspondances and they are worth googling. Chomsky gave Harris permission to post the emails, in the form of a brutal own: "The idea of publishing personal correspondence is pretty weird, a strange form of exhibitionism – whatever the content. Personally, I can’t imagine doing it. However, if you want to do it, I won’t object."
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 22:25
|
|
|
fatherboxx posted:Guess I am just annoyed that "disenfranchised" is applied to people that don't suffer from material conditions or actual community pressure. A Pale Horse posted:Yeah, they're socially disenfranchised, not materially or politically. Either because of their repulsiveness (physical or personality), crippling shyness/social anxiety or disproportionate (to the culture) religiosity they feel like they don't belong in the popular culture and as a defense mechanism they formulate a reality where the problems are with society, not themselves. Where the whole world has gone nuts and they're the only sane ones left. It lends them what they've been missing all along, a sense of community and purpose. We all need that feeling of acceptance from someone and if no one else is willing to give it, well a nazi will do, especially since they'll reinforce your preconceptions about society and love you (in a way). I don't mean to sound too sympathetic to these folks, but I really believe most of the alt-right rank and file are not unsalvageable. There's a core of die-hard shitbags who deserve a long one way train trip out east, but most of the kekistanis are just lost souls who could be redirected with the right tactics. The last chapter of Angela Nagel's new book on the alt-right, "Kill All Normies", deals with this directly.    Nagel's more of a journalist than a scholar and she seems to take the alt-right's claim about "hypergamy" at face value. In my own experience there is hardly a "steep sexual hierarchy" for men on the contemporary dating / hookup scene. Perhaps my perceptions are coloured by living in big cities and mostly hanging around with a university / professional crowd but it seems like most folks of both sexes can get laid easily enough (securing a long term relationship with a committed partner seems somewhat less frequent but is hardly uncommon). There does seem to be a slice of the population who have almost no sexual or romantic partners but it seems like the real barrier for them is a mixture of social isolation, anxiety, overly high standards of unrealistic expectations, and self-segregation (i.e. spending all day on the internet or gaming). The idea that large numbers of men are denied sexual opportunities because a sexual elite is taking all the women doesn't even come close to matching up with my own experiences and I wish she'd explain what evidence she sees for this. But regardless of what the cause is I think that Nagel accurately describes the alt-right perspective here, even if that perspective is a weird fusion of gonzo porn and 1980s high school movies. They perceive themselves as an oppressed class being denied a precious resources (i.e. sex and romance).
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2017 12:00
|
|
|
Azathoth posted:I don't see anything wrong with understanding why people join alt right groups and even empathizing with them, that's basic humanity. What led them to this awful place started in childhood, and is the product of a long chain of events and poor choices. That said, I don't sympathize with them or excuse their behavior because of this, but I do understand where it comes from. Another one of the premises' of Nagel's "Kill All Normies" is that most of the impetus for the alt-right came from what she calls "tumblr-liberalism" and that the spread of a particular form of racial and gender identity politics online alienated many young white men and turned them into recruits for an online reactionary movement. Nagel argues that the call-out culture cultivated on left-wing parts of the twitter verse (she approvingly cites Mark Fisher's Vampire Castle essay) both drove away potential recruits and also caused the left to lose its capacity to actually win arguments on their merits. For her, the rise of the alt-right is largely viewed as a failure of the left to provide the alternative pathway you're alluding to.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2017 12:22
|
|
|
wizard on a water slide posted:Just as big a problem, imo, is how you convince people on the left to loving try to communicate with these dudes or even care. The alt-right's casual inhumanity has understandably and justifiably hardened most socialist, anarchist, etc types' attitude toward them and willingness to seek terms, because they basically thrive on being difficult, unlikable antagonists. I'm queer and I'm sick to loving death of reading pseudo-scientific theories from fuckwits about how the way I dress or what I do with my dick is the problem with western civilization, the Real Hitlers, the reason ISIS is going to destroy us, and so on. I understand, rationally, how they got to where they are, but I don't loving care how they feel anymore. I think Nagel's argument would be that tumblr-liberalism cultivated habits of thought on the left that make it tactically inflexible and unconvincing to anyone who isn't already an ally. In the conclusion to "Kill All Normies" she comes down quite hard on what she views as the "toxic" culture of a lot of online left-liberal discourse.   Nagel draws a comparison between online subcultures (of both the left and the right) and the formation of music subcultures and cites Sarah Thornton's concept of "subcultural capital", i.e. the idea (borrowing from Bordiue's idea of cultural capital) that subcultures use esoteric knowledge to police who really 'belongs' to the group. In the case of progressive internet sites and social media in the early 2010s she views the cultivation of a certain kind of leftist virtue (i.e. wokeness) as being a crucial resources for bloggers and social media personalities. Leftist call-out culture in the early 2010s, with its focus on identifying how various left-wing allies or figures had this or that "problematic" view, was a sort of improvised attempt to create a scarcity of virtue because this had become a precious resources for online personalities. For Nagel this entire culture both pushed away potential recruits and also robbed the left of its ability to develop a compelling arguments (she also complains that left-liberal sites like Buzzfeed and Upworthy were, in her view, using cultural liberalism to attack or diminish any kind of economic leftism). At times Nagel's book comes off like a big effort post right out of the Suck Zone. If you accept that interpretation then the issue here isn't really about being nicer to alt-righters. It's more a question of whether the left's own habits of thought and internal culture are holding it back or limiting its ability to develop good tactics. It's an interesting but far from perfect book and part of me wonders whether it would be worth doing a bigger effort post about it or even making a new thread to discuss it. If anyone would actually be interested in that let me know.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2017 14:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 20:09 |
|
|
Azathoth posted:I think that the Left needs to come to the same realization about the alt-right that they essentially did with the Westboro Baptist Church, which is to learn that shouting back at them gives them what they want, and instead ignore them when possible and calmly mitigate damage when not possible (such as their funeral protests). What's good for a "movement" or "cause" or group isn't necessarily going to benefit individuals who wish to profit from the movement. Engaging in pointless grudge matches or struggles with the enemy can help raise your profile and redirect some money into your patreon account even if it's not particularly conducive to winning any larger political struggle. Both the left and the right has its fair share of grifters who understand the usefulness of selective outrage.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2017 14:53
|
|