The Alt-Right is killing people

About the thread:

Are we looking at this the wrong way? Are homicides going up because of these Alt-Right people? Violence?

Instead of focusing on just homicides from Alt-Right people, what about overall homicides?

One of the criminology pitfalls, when it comes to statistics, is not looking at the population statistic, but looking at a segment. Sometimes, crimes flow from one demographic to another. Really, it's the humans putting the labels on these criminals but the criminals didn't change - only the labels.

By creating these labels, you can track statistics against them and show a trend. But you may be missing the bigger picture. The labels never mattered because these homicides would still occur.

How these labels and segments are helpful is if there is a particular solution to one of these labels you slapped on the population. Or perhaps a set of solutions.

But, if there is no utility in these labels, then it is probably just partisan bullshittery or boogeyman manufacturing.

So let's go back to the Alt-Righters. The homicides and figures about them. Legit? Or is it a label issue? Meaning, these are various groups of other people that were already violent and would have committed homicide? Meaning, better labels would be "Poor, uneducated, from criminal backgrounds"? Or, "Violent Drug offenders." Things like this.

The FBI tracks this stuff, sometimes. They'd have the answers, most likely.

Suicide is a Person's Right to Self Abort Brah!!!!!!!

Make it Legal End life all the way up to .......WHATEVER TRIMESTER !!

Originally posted by Flyattractor
[b]Suicide is a Person's Right to Self Abort Brah!!!!!!!

Make it Legal End life all the way up to .......WHATEVER TRIMESTER !!

[/B]

Remember Pooty. You have the RIGHT TO CHOSE to Self Abort at Any Time!

IT IS YOUR CHOICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Don't Every Try To Let Anyone try to talk you into adoption!!!!!

Originally posted by dadudemon
About the thread:

Are we looking at this the wrong way? Are homicides going up because of these Alt-Right people? Violence?

Instead of focusing on just homicides from Alt-Right people, what about overall homicides?

One of the criminology pitfalls, when it comes to statistics, is not looking at the population statistic, but looking at a segment. Sometimes, crimes flow from one demographic to another. Really, it's the humans putting the labels on these criminals but the criminals didn't change - only the labels.

By creating these labels, you can track statistics against them and show a trend. But you may be missing the bigger picture. The labels never mattered because these homicides would still occur.

How these labels and segments are helpful is if there is a particular solution to one of these labels you slapped on the population. Or perhaps a set of solutions.

But, if there is no utility in these labels, then it is probably just partisan bullshittery or boogeyman manufacturing.

So let's go back to the Alt-Righters. The homicides and figures about them. Legit? Or is it a label issue? Meaning, these are various groups of other people that were already violent and would have committed homicide? Meaning, better labels would be "Poor, uneducated, from criminal backgrounds"? Or, "Violent Drug offenders." Things like this.

The FBI tracks this stuff, sometimes. They'd have the answers, most likely.

I think Life is getting Pooty down...

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Yeah they'd tell you incels etc had always been around, the web provides a way for them to communicate, throw in Breightbart, SJW gateway videos, loosely affiliated enablers in the "online community", the usual suspects offline and the people you mention, you have a powder keg.

I do know there is some work/research done on ISIS and their methods to incite and recruit. My assumption is (similar to what you're talking about) that incels may be incited in similar methods to "go-commit-die."

The only FBI people I know work in drugs or Cybersecurity. The research dudes are mostly in DC. So unless someone has a contact in their criminology division, we won't know how they are analyzing and cutting up the data on incels.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I do know there is some work/research done on ISIS and their methods to incite and recruit. My assumption is (similar to what you're talking about) that incels may be incited in similar methods to "go-commit-die."

The only FBI people I know work in drugs or Cybersecurity. The research dudes are mostly in DC. So unless someone has a contact in their criminology division, we won't know how they are analyzing and cutting up the data on incels.

Originally posted by Robtard
Agreed, under-selling what they can do because say ISIS can do worse is both dangerous and deadly at times.

To me "at least your family was killed by a radicalized White Supremacist and not a Islamic Extremist" would be of little comfort, dead is dead.

In a European context it's a bit different because there is actually something of a systemic issue in a way, with mass immigration, law enforcement being limpwristed with the child grooming gangs, and a general tone of fear against discussing it.

In the US though with our current immigration policy and our law enforcement not really having a problem enforcing the law, it's not really something I put much emphasis on in regards to American politics.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
And that's the thing. I'm rather consistent on this point because I don't really care about ISIS or Islamic extremism in the context of American politics.

In a European context it's a bit different because there is actually something of a systemic issue in a way, with mass immigration, law enforcement being limpwristed with the child grooming gangs, and a general tone of fear against discussing it.

In the US though with our current immigration policy and our law enforcement not really having a problem enforcing the law, it's not really something I put much emphasis on in regards to American politics.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
DMB, Problem is a lot of rightists don't realise how far the Overton window has shifted and how near Alt-right y-they have become 🙂

Our problem is that you want to shift it so that the window of acceptable discourse excludes anyone who doesn't buy into the progressive intersectional narrative. Anyone who criticizes intersectional social justice is suddenly an alt-right fascist, no matter how much they don't give two shits about race, no matter how accepting they are of people being LGBT, no matter how many times they affirm that people should be judged by their individual merits and not by group identity, and no matter how many times they condemn the alt-right.

Only SOCIETY can Judge YOU! And only if it does it via SJW Rules.

You have no Say in it!!!!!

Originally posted by Emperordmb
No we rightists realize how far the overton window has shifted and how far you want to continue to shift it.

Our problem is that you want to shift it so that the window of acceptable discourse excludes anyone who doesn't buy into the progressive intersectional narrative. Anyone who criticizes intersectional social justice is suddenly an alt-right fascist, no matter how much they don't give two shits about race, no matter how accepting they are of people being LGBT, no matter how many times they affirm that people should be judged by their individual merits and not by group identity, and no matter how many times they condemn the alt-right.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
yeah that's what YouTube and red pillars will tell you, the reality is very different. DMB, I dont think social justice is a bad thing. I would like to see a lot less hate and a lot more parity of wealth.

My problem with Social Justice doesn't come from some hidden support for white supremacy. My view is that the opposite of racism is judging people as individuals rather than by their group identity and not discriminating on the basis of race. The modern social justice movement by contrast is inherently racially discriminatory, and makes all sorts of judgments based on group identity. I don't agree with viewing the world through a primarily racial lens and I think doing so is toxic.

Fundamentally that's the problem we have with people like you and your accusations of being alt-right and racist. You refuse to accept that anyone can object to the progressive orthodoxy from a position of individualist principle rather than white racial collectivist principle.

Just to be clear though, this isn't aimed at Robtard as much as it is the others, since despite Robtard's criticisms of my views or disagreements with me, it seems like he fundamentally recognizes the actual point of principle I'm operating on and that I'm not someone with a racial ideology.

"My view is that the opposite of racism is judging people as individuals rather than by their group identity and not discriminating on the basis of race." -dmb

That works in an ideal world; unfortunately we don't live in one, we live in one where people are marginalized because of their skin color, religion, race, sex and/or sexuality.

And believe me, I do understand that some people can take social justice to extremes and that's an abuse as well, but I don't think that's the norm. The 'squeaky wheel gets the grease' as the saying goes, so you hear about the college that tried to implement some absurd rule, while you don't here about the thousands that didn't

Been said before, Affirmative Action while flawed, as you want the best person for the job regardless of their social background, happened because certain groups of people were being denied an equal opportunity to succeed and advance. There was/is discrimination still. So it's an imperfect fix for a shit reality.

ps I don't think anyone here thinks you're actually a "radical"

I do.

I think that is a difference that really make no difference. end results are the same no? to the merit philosophy

Originally posted by NemeBro
I do.

You think everyone's a radical doh

..or a incel, cuck, tard, phaggot. The List goes on and on.