U.S. Politics: Oh Donnie Boy, the Feds are calling...

[Heartofice]

6 hours ago, Simon Steele said:

It's weird how much Peterson supporters hate the fact that when alt-righters see him, they get hearts in their eyes. Tells you something is wrong with his approach. But he's also the philosopher of young lost white men who need a role model in these "difficult times for white men."

If there is anything interesting about Peterson, and I’m not sure there is that much, it’s how the media treats him. As a microcosm of click bait and ‘fake news media’ it’s quite entertaining to see

[OldGimletEye]

14 hours ago, SweetPea said:

I'm really not sure if that is a fair characterization. I've yet to see an alt-right personality who doesn't reject post modernism and is critical of it. And the article overexaggerates Nietzsche's influence (or popularity), going so far as to call him their "favorite philosopher". That's just flat out wrong. I've been following several alt-right figures for quite a while now, and Nietzsche is rarely if ever brought up.

Read again what Spencer said and then tell me it's not a fair characterization. It seems to me that the idea that everything is just bullshit and the only thing that matters is a struggle for power fits right in with alt-right ideology.

[SweetPea]

8 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

Read again what Spencer said and then tell me it's not a fair characterization. It seems to me that the idea that everything is just bullshit and the only thing that matters is a struggle for power fits right in with alt-right ideology.

Well what do you mean by "everything is just bullshit"? A rejection of many aspects of today's societies? Sure there is a lot of that, but I don't see the post modernism, especially not the move away from objective reality, truth, human nature etc. Quite the opposite, actually.

[OldGimletEye]

10 minutes ago, SweetPea said:

Well what do you mean by "everything is just bullshit"? A rejection of many aspects of today's societies?

Let's go straight to the source:

Quote

 All the modern pieties about race, peace, equality, justice, civility, universal suffrage — that’s all bullshit.

 

Quote

but I don't see the post modernism, especially not the move away from objective reality, truth, human nature etc. Quite the opposite, actually.

Oh really? I don't think so. Conservatives and the alt right have been spewing nonsense for years. Take for instance Trump's and conservatives made up, fairy tale, about our immigration problem, which you know doesn't really exist. Or their rejection of climate science.

They love Trump, and he doesn't really know the difference between shit and shinola. And they don't care that he doesn't.

To say they have embraced any sort of objective thinking is I think some wishful thinking on your part.

[SweetPea]

8 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

Let's go straight to the source:

 

Oh really? I don't think so. Conservatives and the alt right have been spewing nonsense for years. Take for instance Trump's and conservatives made up, fairy tale, about our immigration problem, which you know doesn't really exist. Or their rejection of climate science.

They love Trump, and he doesn't really know the difference between shit and shinola. And they don't care that he doesn't.

To say they have embraced any sort of objective thinking is I think some wishful thinking on your part.

I see. But there is a big difference between the alt right and mainstream conservatives, especially conservatives in the US and the Republican party. There's a reason why it's called alternative right. It is a move away from those things. There are many issues with the Republican Party: a history of warmongering, evolution denial, climate change denial and so on. These things aren't shared, they are rejected by the alt right, which is a global movement by the way, not limited to the US.

[OldGimletEye]

12 minutes ago, SweetPea said:

These things aren't shared, they are rejected by the alt right, which is a global movement by the way, not limited to the US.

Well, on the issue of immigration, the alt right, which seems to have influenced mainstream conservative thinking, is pretty delusional. And it seems to me, alt righters would willingly reject a how bunch of empirical work, everything from studies on redlining or the effect of race on inequality.

So no, I don't think the alt right is just a group of people simply calling balls and strikes, even if they would like to think of themselves of that way.

Quote

a history of warmongering

Well from the alt right Richard Spencer's perspective what's wrong with war mongering?

Isn't the disdain for war just another bullshit cultural convention?

I don't think the alt right are the princes of peace that you claim.

[SweetPea]

6 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

Well, on the issue of immigration, the alt right, which seems to have influenced mainstream conservative thinking, is pretty delusional. And it seems to me, alt righters would willingly reject a how bunch of empirical work, everything from studies on redlining or the effect of race on inequality.

So no, I don't think the alt right is just a group of people simply calling balls and strikes, even if they would like to think of themselves of that way.

The economical effects of immigration isn't even the biggest reason for the alt-right's rejection of it. I suspect most would still oppose it if you have managed to convince them that it's economically beneficial. This line of argument doesn't work against them.

Quote

Well from the alt right Richard Spencer's perspective what's wrong with war mongering?

Isn't the disdain for war just another bullshit cultural convention?

No it's not. This is why you shouldn't judge someone based on a few quotes selected by a journalist. Here's what a quick googling gave me (read the twitter thread):

https://twitter.com/RichardBSpencer/status/1076206842651598848

In short, he considers wars in the middle east insanely stupid, neocon nonsense. Pretty much the opposite of what you would have believed after reading that article. Funny how that works.

[OldGimletEye]

10 minutes ago, SweetPea said:

The economical effects of immigration isn't even the biggest reason for the alt-right's rejection of it. I suspect most would still oppose it if you have managed to convince them that it's economically beneficial. This line of argument doesn't work against them.

Then what is their argument exactly? Immigrants cause more crime? That too has no empirical basis.

10 minutes ago, SweetPea said:

The economical effects of immigration isn't even the biggest reason for the alt-right's rejection of it. I suspect most would still oppose it if you have managed to convince them that it's economically beneficial. This line of argument doesn't work against them.

No it's not. This is why you shouldn't judge someone based on a few quotes selected by a journalist. Here's what a quick googling gave me (read the twitter thread):

https://twitter.com/RichardBSpencer/status/1076206842651598848

In short, he considers wars in the middle east insanely stupid, neocon nonsense. Pretty much the opposite of what you would have believed after reading that article. Funny how that works.

Uh, this seems to be the old Texas Two step by you around the issue I was raising.

Let's say Spencer thinks that war is generally bad. In other words, he doesn't believe it is just a bullshit social convention.

If he thinks that aversion to war isn't just a social construct, then how does he conclude that anti-racism , equality, and so forth are just bullshit.

And then of course there is the fact that many alt-righters like to dress up as Nazi's or give Nazi style salutes. And you know, or at least I'd hope you know, Nazis weren't exactly famous for their aversion to war. So I don't buy your spin here that the alt right is a peaceful bunch. In fact, I think they are quite the opposite.

The fact of the matter is the alt-right is both loathsome and detestable. And it boggles the mind that anyone would try to put them into a positive light.

[mormont]

1 hour ago, SweetPea said:

I see. But there is a big difference between the alt right and mainstream conservatives, especially conservatives in the US and the Republican party. There's a reason why it's called alternative right. It is a move away from those things. There are many issues with the Republican Party: a history of warmongering, evolution denial, climate change denial and so on. These things aren't shared, they are rejected by the alt right, which is a global movement by the way, not limited to the US.

I'm sorry, but even leaving aside the most tendentious claim (that the alt-right aren't 'warmongers'), are you trying to suggest that the alt-right believes in evolution and climate change?

Utter nonsense. I know. You're going to pull the old tautological crap you regularly try to pull. You're going to say that anyone who doesn't believe in these things isn't really alt-right, and cite this as your proof that the alt-right really do believe in these things. This never persuades anyone but you seem to think it does.

Meanwhile, in the reality-based community, we will continue to regard the whole issue as a discussion about which flavour of shit you prefer.

 

[SweetPea]

3 hours ago, OldGimletEye said:

Then what is their argument exactly? Immigrants cause more crime? That too has no empirical basis.

Different cultures, different behavioral traits. What's wrong with people not wanting to import millions of immigrants who do not share their culture?

Quote

Uh, this seems to be the old Texas Two step by you around the issue I was raising.

Let's say Spencer thinks that war is generally bad. In other words, he doesn't believe it is just a bullshit social convention.

If he thinks that aversion to war isn't just a social construct, then how does he conclude that anti-racism , equality, and so forth are just bullshit.

You are giving too much weight to a single sentence, without even knowing the context. Do you seriously think you can understand someone's worldview from a couple of cherry picked sentences? You can't, you've already misunderstood him and assumed he is pro-war. That's the goal of these articles. 

Quote

And then of course there is the fact that many alt-righters like to dress up as Nazi's or give Nazi style salutes. And you know, or at least I'd hope you know, Nazis weren't exactly famous for their aversion to war. So I don't buy your spin here that the alt right is a peaceful bunch. In fact, I think they are quite the opposite.

Most of the nazi stuff is just memeing, very few people take it seriously, or share that ideology. There are shared elements like taking pride in your heritage, but that's not to say they are one and the same thing. You know what the nazis have also done? Invaded Poland and started a war that led to millions and millions of Europeans killing each other. Not exactly something that white nationalists are fond of.

Quote

The fact of the matter is the alt-right is both loathsome and detestable. And it boggles the mind that anyone would try to put them into a positive light.

Well it's interesting that you declare them loathsome and detestable without apparenty even understanding them. It's not about putting them into a positive light, it's about not misrepresenting them. 

3 hours ago, mormont said:

I'm sorry, but even leaving aside the most tendentious claim (that the alt-right aren't 'warmongers'), are you trying to suggest that the alt-right believes in evolution and climate change?

Ah, the usual post from you; lots of assertions, without any evidence or argument to back them up. Let's see. Of course I am suggesting that they believe in evolution. Absolutely. Do you disagree? Are you saying that race realism is not at the root of their ideology? The belief that human evolution did not stop after australopithecus, but continues to the present day, and has lead to the different human races and ethnicities we see today? Are you saying the alt-right doesn't claim there are genetic differences between different groups of people? I'm shocked, actually, that you would say that.

Climate change is a bit iffier, there are of course idiots who deny it, but it's certainly not wide-spread opinion, or the norm.

I welcome your arguments as to why they are warmongers.

Quote

Utter nonsense. I know. You're going to pull the old tautological crap you regularly try to pull. You're going to say that anyone who doesn't believe in these things isn't really alt-right, and cite this as your proof that the alt-right really do believe in these things. This never persuades anyone but you seem to think it does.

Nope, I'm not going to make a no true alt-righter fallacy here, I just want to give you a clearer picture, because you seem to have a lot of misunderstandings. And the truth is that the alt-right is a diverse group of people, not clones who follow some kind of dogma.

Quote

Meanwhile, in the reality-based community, we will continue to regard the whole issue as a discussion about which flavour of shit you prefer.

Yes, I know that reality-based community, it's where you make judgments about people based on a biased article instead of listening to what they're actually saying. 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

3 hours ago, mormont said:

I'm sorry, but even leaving aside the most tendentious claim (that the alt-right aren't 'warmongers'), are you trying to suggest that the alt-right believes in evolution and climate change?

Utter nonsense. I know. You're going to pull the old tautological crap you regularly try to pull. You're going to say that anyone who doesn't believe in these things isn't really alt-right, and cite this as your proof that the alt-right really do believe in these things. This never persuades anyone but you seem to think it does.

Meanwhile, in the reality-based community, we will continue to regard the whole issue as a discussion about which flavour of shit you prefer.

 

I find it serendipitous that you predict an incipient “no true Scotsman” fallacy.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

7 minutes ago, SweetPea said:

Different cultures, different behavioral traits. What's wrong with people not wanting to import millions of immigrants who do not share their culture?

You are giving too much weight to a single sentence, without even knowing the context. Do you seriously think you can understand someone's worldview from a couple of cherry picked sentences? You can't, you've already misunderstood him and assumed he is pro-war. That's the goal of these articles. 

Most of the nazi stuff is just memeing, very few people take it seriously, or share that ideology. There are shared elements like taking pride in your heritage, but that's not to say they are one and the same thing. You know what the nazis have also done? Invaded Poland and started a war that led to millions and millions of Europeans killing each other. Not exactly something that white nationalists are fond of.

Well it's interesting that you declare them loathsome and detestable without apparenty even understanding them. It's not about putting them into a positive light, it's about not misrepresenting them. 

Ah, the usual post from you; lots of assertions, without any evidence or argument to back them up. Let's see. Of course I am suggesting that they believe in evolution. Absolutely. Do you disagree? Are you saying that race realism is not at the root of their ideology? The belief that human evolution did not stop after australopithecus, but continues to the present day, and has lead to the different human races and ethnicities we see today? Are you saying the alt-right doesn't claim there are genetic differences between different groups of people? I'm shocked, actually, that you would say that.

Climate change is a bit iffier, there are of course idiots who deny it, but it's certainly not wide-spread opinion, or the norm.

I welcome your arguments as to why they are warmongers.

Nope, I'm not going to make a no true alt-righter fallacy here, I just want to give you a clearer picture, because you seem to have a lot of misunderstanding. And the truth is that the alt-right is a diverse group of people, not clones who follow some kind of dogma.

Yes, I know that reality-based community, it's where you make judgments about people based on a biased article instead of listening to what they're actually saying. 

Culture cannot be static.  I use “cannot” deliberately.  It is constantly in flux just like climate. It is the amalgamation of everyday human conditions and interactions between billions of individuals.  It is influenced by things borders cannot stop or control like television, radio, and internet interactions.

Merely being close to a border will influence the culture of that area.  As such attempts to stop immigration to “preserve culture” are the height of foolishness and an utter waste of time.  You might as well lead a charge to stop a tidal change or declare war on Autumn to keep Summer around.

[SweetPea]

13 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Culture cannot be static.  I use “cannot” deliberately.  It is constantly in flux just like climate. It is the amalgamation of everyday human conditions and interactions between billions of individuals.  It is influenced by things borders cannot stop or control like television, radio, and internet interactions.

Merely being close to a border will influence the culture of that area.  As such attempts to stop immigration to “preserve culture” are the height of foolishness and an utter waste of time.  You might as well lead a charge to stop a tidal change or declare war on Autumn to keep Summer around.

I hope you don't believe the everchanging nature of culture makes it a good idea to put an extremist muslim and a gay man next to eachother, after all culture is malleable and there couldn't possibly be a conflict right? Because that would be the height of foolishness. (Recent events in Morocco come to mind...)

Sorry, I'm being sarcastic. The point is, nobody is saying they want to freeze culture completely, they want it to change naturally and organically, not by being thrown together with people from wildly different cultures. Why is that wrong? And why does it make someone a terrible person if they believe that?

[Larry of the Lawn]

4 hours ago, SweetPea said:

The economical effects of immigration isn't even the biggest reason for the alt-right's rejection of it. I suspect most would still oppose it if you have managed to convince them that it's economically beneficial. This line of argument doesn't work against them.

51 minutes ago, SweetPea said:

Different cultures, different behavioral traits. What's wrong with people not wanting to import millions of immigrants who do not share their culture?

. 

.

I know you aren't from the US and are also extremely ignorant about what things are like here, so I'd just like to take the time to let you know that immigration over the southern border has been happening for well over a century, and that in California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas and beyond this natural cultural mingling has been happening the entire time.  It's nothing new or something to be concerned about, and it seems a very strange time indeed to voice such a concern as immigration from Mexico and Central  America has been declining. 

You'd also probably be interested to know that in the US (always happy to alleviate your lack of even the most basic history, just ask) pretty much everyone here is an immigrant.  The only people who should be up in arms over immigration are the Native Americans.  They're the only ones here with a valid complaint that immigrants have destroyed their culture and raped and murdered their people.  

Eta:. Hilarious that you think that a giant wall and keeping people apart is the 'natural' way for culture to mix.  ROFL lololol

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

33 minutes ago, SweetPea said:

I hope you don't believe the everchanging nature of culture makes it a good idea to put an extremist muslim and a gay man next to eachother, after all culture is malleable and there couldn't possibly be a conflict right? Because that would be the height of foolishness. (Recent events in Morocco come to mind...)

Sorry, I'm being sarcastic. The point is, nobody is saying they want to freeze culture completely, they want it to change naturally and organically, not by being thrown together with people from wildly different cultures. Why is that wrong? And why does it make someone a terrible person if they believe that?

Migration is part of organic cultural change.

[IheartIheartTesla]

Hypothesis: Gun control does not work because criminals will always find a way around laws to procure guns

Hypothesis: Wall control does work because illegal immigrants will never find a way around a wall to enter the country.

You know what they say about a first rate intelligence......

[OldGimletEye]

55 minutes ago, SweetPea said:

Different cultures, different behavioral traits. What's wrong with people not wanting to import millions of immigrants who do not share their culture?

Well the likes of Richard Spencer have called for a white ethno state. So it would seem the claim that this is just about "preserving the culture" is rather disingenuous.

But, even if I were to take this argument at face value, which I don't, I'd just point out that US culture as it stands today is the result of many ethnic groups. So, I think there is no reason to think there will be anything odious about today's immigrants or future immigrants having any negative impact on the US. They will just do what prior immigrants have done, which is just add to the US culture, making it a more interesting place to live.

Quote

You are giving too much weight to a single sentence, without even knowing the context. Do you seriously think you can understand someone's worldview from a couple of cherry picked sentences? You can't, you've already misunderstood him and assumed he is pro-war. That's the goal of these articles. 

I think I'm being accused here of taking Spencer out of context, when I think my real crime is taking Spencer in context.

But, I'll play along with this charade. The fact of the matter is that Spencer does seem to have a bit of high regard for fascism, having been seen on prior occasions giving Nazi salutes. I think the explanation that it is all in jest is pretty dishonest. And at Charlottesville, Spencer and his band of alt right assholes were heard chanting "Blood and Soil", which I do in fact believe had it's origins in 19th Century racist ideology in Germany, and then became popular with the Nazis themselves some decades later. And then, Spencer called Trump's election the "Victory of Will" which seems eerily similar to the infamous Nazi propaganda piece "Triump of the Will".

It would seem Spencer's prior actions and statements actually lend support to the plain meaning of his statement as quoted.

Quote

Most of the nazi stuff is just memeing, very few people take it seriously, or share that ideology. There are shared elements like taking pride in your heritage, but that's not to say they are one and the same thing. You know what the nazis have also done? Invaded Poland and started a war that led to millions and millions of Europeans killing each o ther. Not exactly something that white nationalists are fond of.

Now what kind of asshole would think that dressing like a Nazi or giving Nazi salutes was a funny joke or memeing?

And yeah, I do think people like Spencer, a thought leader of the alt right, do have a bit of regard for Nazism, as I explained above. And I think your trying to spin it as something else is nonsense.

Quote

Well it's interesting that you declare them loathsome and detestable without apparenty even understanding them. It's not about putting them into a positive light, it's about not misrepresenting them.

I think you are the one doing the misrepresentation here.

[Fez]

May be old news, but I just saw that last week Michigan Governor Snyder (about to be former) showed that he is actually less partisan than Scott Walker. Snyder vetoed 2 of the 4 "power-grab" bills (the one that would hamstring the state Attorney General and the one that would end transparency in campaign financing), the 3rd of the 4 bills never even made it out of the legislature (the one that would've taken certain authorities away from the state secretary of state). The 4th bill Snyder did sign though, which is the one that makes it extremely difficult for state agencies to implement regulations "more strict" than Federal regulations without state legislative approval. So it wasn't a clean sweep.

Interestingly, Snyder also vetoed a bill that would've extended the state's existing ban on telemedicine abortion. Not sure what to make of that; I generally assume Republicans will always approve more restrictive abortion laws. 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

59 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

And yeah, I do think people like Spencer, a thought leader of the alt right, do have a bit of regard for Nazism, as I explained above. And I think your trying to spin it as something else is nonsense.

Way too kind. Spencer is a Nazi, Plain and simple. The so called Alt-Right does not like the term Nazi, as that is too toxic, and got burned, by, well, the Nazis. I think I've said around a dozen times at least, but can we stop using the term Alt-Right altogether, and can we please call Nazis, Nazis again?

I mean, you don't call snakes alternative worms, do you?

[DanteGabriel]

I'm going to once again call upon my superior Asian genetics and reason that Sweatpee's idea of "organic cultural change" means "nothing that makes white people nervous."