The Alt-Right is killing people

Originally posted by Robtard
"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.

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.

My issue with social justice, even the more moderate end of it, is the extent of its devotion to a narrative that is too low resolution.

I'm in favor of a higher resolution response to these issues. If you can prove someone is discriminated against illegally, prosecute them under the law. If you see an incident of racism, stand up against it. If somebody says something you disagree with, attack the argument itself rather than ad homineming them on the basis of their group identity. Before calling someone privileged or victimized actually look at their life instead of presuming it on the basis of their identity.

My problem with the fixation on an oppressor oppressed narrative even in its more innocuous forms is that it is too low resolution. I don't think it's fair to label working class white people privileged or suggest that black college students at Yale are oppressed. I don't think it's appropriate to give people's arguments more or less weight based on their group identity. I don't think it's appropriate to push white guilt or make generalizations about masculinity being toxic.

And an example of this low resolution narrative at work is the wage gap. Based on an oppressor oppressed narrative, there is a tendency to assume a disparity in outcome is the result of identity based discrimination, which is why the progressive BBC got investigated for discriminating against women three times and were found innocent, and yet despite being found innocent of discrimination against women, a female employee at the BBC was able to pressure the BBC into paying her more money at threat of a lawsuit when the reason she made less than the male counterpart in question is because he worked basically twice as much as she did.

I will say though I am a lot more sympathetic to the LGB part of that movement than the feminist or racial elements considering that there's still actual controversy around homosexuality and gay marriage and gay adoption. That part of the movement has much more of an actual point.

Originally posted by Robtard
And believe, 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.

To give you an example of the people in positions of power, I don't think that your average progressive or democrat or left-winger would consider Jordan Peterson alt-right if they interacted with him or watched his videos. When you look at the media commentary on him from dozens of progressive or left-wing news outlets though... they have no problem calling him the darling of the alt-right or whatever other nonsense. I think there is a disconnect there between the views and extremism of the average progressive, and progressive media outlets.

I'd agree that it's not the norm among the entire populace of people who self-identify as "progressive" though. Most people who would consider themselves progressive aren't ensconced in the aforementioned terminology, or obsessed with the narrative. Most of them are just normal people rather than ideologues.

Like there are a number progressive people in my campus Christian group who would agree racism is a problem and in a political conversation even talk about some of these identity based issues, but they aren't enslaved to the narrative I often talk about. Identity comes up and even ties into some of their views, positions, and arguments, but its not close to being the primary lens through which they view the world or operate in a political discussion through.

For example, I'm friends with a gay person on here who is critical of Social Justice and finds the aforementioned terminology and would find a great deal of what's posted in Triggered cringey and objectionable and he'd have no problem saying so. At the same time though, he could be considered a progressive, he is passionate about LGBT issues, and would like to see more women in positions of power.

So just to clarify, when I complain about social justice, I'm not complaining about all progressives, because I don't consider all progressives SJWs.

My problem is that the progressives who are SJWs are institutionalists who try and work themselves into institutions and push their narrative top down in places like college campuses, or HR departments, or political positions. And the progressives who aren't SJWs, and the majority of people who aren't SJWs aren't institutionalists and are at best not motivated to grapple with that issue, and at worst willing to welcome them into these positions to avoid controversy and cover their asses (particularly on the corporate end).

Originally posted by Robtard
ps I don't think anyone here thinks you're actually a "radical"

Though actually I'll amend my statement and give Putinbot some credit. The impression I get from him is that he views me as being on the line with one foot in radicalism and the other not. The way he addresses me seems to imply I'm corrupt but salvageable.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
The main reason why I don’t think we should worry about the alt-right is because the system is working as it should. They are the most despised political group in the western world, they have no influence in trying to deplatform people, whenever they get into a crowd they get shat on by the press, whenever they commit acts of violence the law cracks down on them as it should.

They don’t have systemic power, they aren’t protected by those that do, they are people futilely screaming at the current paradigm and virtually everyone recognizes that they’re pieces of shit.

They are regularly retweeted by the president.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
I'm not a fan of racism either.

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.

Having the option to not view the world through a racial lens is white privilege.

You know who wishes they did not have to view the world through a racial lens but does not have that option? People who are discriminated, oppressed, and persecuted on the basis of their race.

Your "problem" with social justice does not necessarily reflect hidden white supremacist values, but it certainly enables white supremacists.

LOL!!!

Yeah cause Adam is now the True Fascist of KMC.

His every post proves it.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Having the option to not view the world through a racial lens is white privilege.

Do the opinions of minorities who don't agree with looking at the world through a racial lens count? Or are they Uncle Toms or some shit?

Most minorities I know aren't slavishly devoted to a racial lens, most of the people I've seen obsessing over pushing this racial narrative are actually middle class white people funny enough.

Although speaking of white privilege, do you know what that kind of language reminds me of? The way the Jews were viewed in pre-Nazi Germany, or the Kulaks in the Soviet Union.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
You know who wishes they did not have to view the world through a racial lens but does not have that option? People who are discriminated, oppressed, and persecuted on the basis of their race.

Or does the affirmative action complaint only mean anything if it comes from Asians? Or are they privileged too now?

You're retarded if you think the only way to address incidents of racism is through a racialist collectivist view. I call the alt-right pieces of shit, shit on their shitty ideology, and argue against racial discrimination in the public sector, all from an individualist point of view, committing myself to principle rather than swearing fealty to some minority coalition or "the interests of the white race" or some such shit. I judge incidents of racism harshly without the need to make presumptions about or hold people to different standards based on their race.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Your "problem" with social justice does not necessarily reflect hidden white supremacist values, but it certainly enables white supremacists.

If you successfully argue a point of individualist principle "don't judge a person by their race but by their character" and all that and if you shit on racial collectivism on principle, there's not much backlash there. (Edit: Actually no, there is backlash there, but most of it comes from social justice ideologues.)

But when you ask for discrimination against white people to meet some diversity quota, or suggest that they aren't allowed to speak on certain topics, or celebrate them becoming a smaller proportion of the country, or have people in the DNC talking about wanting to shut other white people up, or saying all white people are racist... that's a different story.

When you play this racial collectivist game, do you know what the response of some people is? "All these other groups are playing the game of racial collectivism and identity politics, why shouldn't we?"

Do you honestly think pushing a narrative that is resentful of a particular racial group is something that helps ease racial tensions? Are you too blind to see the racialized "us vs them" mentality it inspires?

No Adam, it's people like you who are enabling white supremacists, not me.

Also when you accuse anyone who disagrees with you on the topic of intersectionality white supremacists or enablers of white supremacy, you take all weight from the word, because you know what gives people pause in believing someone is a white supremacist or white racist? The people who call ****ing everyone racist and white supremacist.

I don’t view the world thru racial lens... Do I have white privilege? 🙁

And I am an Uncle Tom according to his doctrines. All good though.

Originally posted by Emperordmb

I'd question whether or not Putinbot views me that way considering he called half of his fellow British people fascists when I pressed him on it. His overton window is clearly a lot smaller than yours.

Though actually I'll amend my statement and give Putinbot some credit. The impression I get from him is that he views me as being on the line with one foot in radicalism and the other not. The way he addresses me seems to imply I'm corrupt but salvageable.

I believe as people are exposed to different groups they fear the different less. Most UK racists are rural, the football fan racist like Tommy Robinson from an Urban area are a throw back, as a Millwall fan I watched them embarrass themselves every Saturday at the Den and New Den growing up. They are like white van drivers and black cab drivers in London, a racist stereotype which is actually a stereotype for a reason.

Some members of some groups do struggle to integrate, and criminality has always surrounded the new, when they arrive in a society. For instance Turks and Eastern Europeans are far better at being Criminals in London than Yardies and present a bigger problem than Muslims to the fabric of Society, whilst some may be Islamic, particularly the Turks, Islam is not the issue, criminality is. It's the same with the Pakistan Rape Paedo gangs, the most successful paedo in British history wasn't a Pakistani he was a white DJ lauded by royals, politicians and the pope for his charity work.
Most Pakistanis are not Paedo's, race and religion are an easy answer and a go to for people with horrible minds.

Racists can be black, white or any other colour, but due to the power imbalance and the social structures of success in the world the most dangerous are the White.

White's do have privilege and I have traded off it to travel the world and make money. I know how lucky I am and I would love to see greater equality worldwide. I've done work with WHO and the UN at different times and feel progression isn't a bad thing. When you see real poverty, you realise SJW's and the other shit are smoke screens, that's the real red pill.

DMB, I think you are smart enough to when you have seen a bit more understand this, yes, I do have hope for you.

Typed from my Samsung in the back of a car so forgive typos etc.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Racists can be black, white or any other colour, but due to the power imbalance and the social structures of success in the world the most dangerous are the White.

I agree with the first part. Disagree with the second part. Mostly because it paints the wrong picture of where the danger really lies.

The danger lies most with those in power who the power to exercise their hate to harm others. We shouldn’t try to define ppl thru racial lines but zero in on those who are the actual actors. The fault lies in the actors and not those who share their skin tone.

Originally posted by Silent Master
LOL!!!

Indeed, nobody can never say Adam isn't funny when he tries.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
I agree with the first part. Disagree with the second part. Mostly because it paints the wrong picture of where the danger really lies.

The danger lies most with those in power who the power to exercise their hate to harm others. We shouldn’t try to define ppl thru racial lines but zero in on those who are the actual actors. The fault lies in the actors and not those who share their skin tone.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
You see there is some truth in this but it misses the inherent ability to manipulate tribalism these "actors" have. But, you are right, when the British left Africa in a lot of Countries, the Africans just installed a ruling class who in many ways were worse than the original colonials and are still fleecing there own people.

That is why we need to call out racist ideals on both sides. Sadly, while it is easy to spot rightist racists and call them and their ideals out, it seems that it is getting harder for the left as the racial discrimination from the left seem more nuanced and too deeply cultural (blaming and anger towards whites) to be simply called out straight from within their side of the fence.

Most of the logic behind “white privilege” for me is highly racist but seemed to be perfectly acceptable for example.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
That is why we need to call out racist ideals on both sides. Sadly, while it is easy to spot rightist racists and call them and their ideals out, it seems that it is getting harder for the left as the racial discrimination from the left seem more nuanced and too deeply cultural (blaming and anger towards whites) to be simply called out straight from within their side of the fence.

Most of the logic behind “white privilege” for me is highly racist but seemed to be perfectly acceptable for example.

Yep they still refuse to call out Ilhan Omars comments.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
That's absurd, I know plenty of black people who don't fixate on the world through a racial lens and some outright reject it. Way to make gross generalizations about people.

Many leftists eat two bowls of "Sweeping generalizations about race" for breakfast. Then they wash it all down with, "A healthy amount of racist condescension" to start the day. The breakfast of libtarded champions.

Guess what's for brunch (of course the eat brunch - that's the second most photographed meal of the day that they upload to their social media)? A toasted "Smug sense of superiority" that comes with "inappropriate belief in self-righteousness" dipping sauce. It comes garnished with "Hypocritical admonishment towards others" which is their FAV garnish.

Lol brunch. I think I went to one of those after a funeral once.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Many leftists eat two bowls of "Sweeping generalizations about race" for breakfast. Then they wash it all down with, "A healthy amount of racist condescension" to start the day. The breakfast of libtarded champions.

Guess what's for brunch (of course the eat brunch - that's the second most photographed meal of the day that they upload to their social media)? A toasted "Smug sense of superiority" that comes with "inappropriate belief in self-righteousness" dipping sauce. It comes garnished with "Hypocritical admonishment towards others" which is their FAV garnish.

It's always the Metropolitans.

The very people who laugh at "flyover states", and think their city is the real New York, most important city in the world (Except for maybe Londan)

Originally posted by Nibedicus
That is why we need to call out racist ideals on both sides. Sadly, while it is easy to spot rightist racists and call them and their ideals out, it seems that it is getting harder for the left as the racial discrimination from the left seem more nuanced and too deeply cultural (blaming and anger towards whites) to be simply called out straight from within their side of the fence.

Most of the logic behind “white privilege” for me is highly racist but seemed to be perfectly acceptable for example.

The Isrealies are already more humane to the Palestine's then vice versa.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
That's absurd, I know plenty of black people who don't fixate on the world through a racial lens and some outright reject it. Way to make gross generalizations about people.

Do the opinions of minorities who don't agree with looking at the world through a racial lens count? Or are they Uncle Toms or some shit?

Most minorities I know aren't slavishly devoted to a racial lens, most of the people I've seen obsessing over pushing this racial narrative are actually middle class white people funny enough.

Although speaking of white privilege, do you know what that kind of language reminds me of? The way the Jews were viewed in pre-Nazi Germany, or the Kulaks in the Soviet Union.

What is absurd is the notion that one can view the world independently of his own experience. The vehicle through which one navigates the world affects how he experiences and views the world.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
One party pushes racial discrimination in the public sector, and someone running for the chair of said party said "My job will be to shut [insert racial group here] people up." Can you guess which one? Hint: it's not the republicans.

Or does the affirmative action complaint only mean anything if it comes from Asians? Or are they privileged too now?

You're retarded if you think the only way to address incidents of racism is through a racialist collectivist view. I call the alt-right pieces of shit, shit on their shitty ideology, and argue against racial discrimination in the public sector, all from an individualist point of view, committing myself to principle rather than swearing fealty to some minority coalition or "the interests of the white race" or some such shit. I judge incidents of racism harshly without the need to make presumptions about or hold people to different standards based on their race.

This is the same argument postmodern feminists make: if women, collectively, want to stop being discriminated against on the basis of their gender, then we need to deconstruct the concept of womanhood; meanwhile, modern feminists retort that we cannot organize to advance the rights of women if we eliminate the category we are organizing around, which is womanhood.

You are effectively arguing that people who are discriminated against on the basis of a group to which they belong should not organize to advance the rights of people in that group, and that the best solution is to ignore the reason for their discrimination, and just treat everyone as individuals. “I do not see you as black, I just see you as a person,” is incredibly naïve and incredibly stupid.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
Tell me, what emboldens white supremacists more? Arguing against racial collectivism on principle and arguing against racism while not attacking people for not being white? Or pushing a narrative and racial collectivist lens that attacks white people specifically?

If you successfully argue a point of individualist principle "don't judge a person by their race but by their character" and all that and if you shit on racial collectivism on principle, there's not much backlash there. (Edit: Actually no, there is backlash there, but most of it comes from social justice ideologues.)

But when you ask for discrimination against white people to meet some diversity quota, or suggest that they aren't allowed to speak on certain topics, or celebrate them becoming a smaller proportion of the country, or have people in the DNC talking about wanting to shut other white people up, or saying all white people are racist... that's a different story.

When you play this racial collectivist game, do you know what the response of some people is? "All these other groups are playing the game of racial collectivism and identity politics, why shouldn't we?"

Do you honestly think pushing a narrative that is resentful of a particular racial group is something that helps ease racial tensions? Are you too blind to see the racialized "us vs them" mentality it inspires?

No Adam, it's people like you who are enabling white supremacists, not me.

Also when you accuse anyone who disagrees with you on the topic of intersectionality white supremacists or enablers of white supremacy, you take all weight from the word, because you know what gives people pause in believing someone is a white supremacist or white racist? The people who call ****ing everyone racist and white supremacist.

One who holds racist views will be hold them irrespective of what the targets of his racial bigotry do. All your “racial collectivism will lead to racism” fearmongering just provides them with a convenient excuse. And that is what I mean when I say you enable white supremacy. Your rhetoric shifts the blame from the perpetrators of racism to the victims of racism. “If you uppity negroes stopped organizing to advance your rights, and stopped pushing your racial collectivist agenda, and asked people to see you as individuals, then there would be less racism towards you,” is nonsense. “Colorblindness” itself is racist, because you do not have the right to not see someone how they are, and instead substitute a version of them that makes you more comfortable.