"Alt-right" Parading Ignorance, Stupidity, Malice, Etc.

[pErvinalia]

That's not accurate. He did not say to wear racism, xenophobia and nativism as a badge of honor. He said that when certain folks call you racist, xenophobic or nativist, wear that as a badge of honor. The point is that the people who sling those labels around do so indiscriminately, and they are not accurate accusations.

Sure, it's not as if there aren't plentiful examples of alt-right groups and individuals proudly using the Nazi salute. Le Pen's party has a long history of racism (against Jews in particular), but no, in Bannon's view the accusations aren't accurate. Bullshit.

We're not talking about examples of groups that are racist. We're talking about Bannon and the people he was talking to, who aren't. And, your logic would be like applying the extreme left antifa fuckwits as "examples" of the left and saying it's fair to call them all illiberal, anti-free speech, violent scumbags using fascist techniques while they falsely claim being antifascist. Does the fact that there are such examples mean we can legitimately label anyone the left with that same label?

That's exactly what you've done repeatedly with progressives. Because some SJWs are arguably progressives, you tar all progressivism with their shit.

He asked "why do they call you racists, homophobes, xenophobes, etc....?" And, he answered "because they can't answer the basic questions that they put in front of them. You argue for sovereignty, and they call you a nativist. You argue for your freedom, and they call you a xenophobe. You argue for your country, and they call you a racist. But the days of that smear are over." Then he goes on to say wear that as a badge of honor.

Bannon's bullshit can't hide the fact that if you promote racist views, people call you a racist.

Not people - leftist asshats. And they say things like "all white people are racist."

You are making a category error (I think is the best description). I think a reasonable portion of alt-right people are racist, yet I don't think that "all white people are racist". You are falsely equating different views.

Or, they declare that being in favor of border security is racist and xenophobic.

Which it can be.

I didn't even look into the Mussolini claim at all. It's probably more bullshit, like when Pat Buchanan got skewered for calling Hitler a great man, which he was - in the same vein that Caesar (who killed millions), and such other historical figures are "great." Not "good." Not "moral." BUt, of course, nobody can let someone speak for himself. Have to spin it.

Much like people claiming that Hillary was against giving South Korea too much power in a potentially unified Korea...

[pErvinalia]

I think NineBerry might be pervinalia's sock (or vice-versa)

Same habit of avoiding the awkward questions.

trolololol.

[pErvinalia]

Whenever I hear someone accusing someone of being racist, I usually suspect racism driving the statement (no joke)

I know you aren't joking. That's why I suspect you have some sort of brain injury.

[pErvinalia]

Again, this is not binary, unless you get totally polarised by the politics (an all too common thing...).

Holy fuck yes.
I used to follow pretty exclusively left media. Didn't realize the effect it had on me.
Later (around when I started using a new social media platform) I decided to consciously follow right media/humour etc. Now I do realize the effect it has on me, but I'm not really sure I'm any better equipped to deal with it.

This is ironic given how lacking in nuance your "arguments" are. It's the same as Seth who only believed in two types of people - Marxists or Libertarians. I'm pretty sure you view most people as either SJWs or regular normal right wing folk.

[Cunt]

Again, this is not binary, unless you get totally polarised by the politics (an all too common thing...).

Holy fuck yes.
I used to follow pretty exclusively left media. Didn't realize the effect it had on me.
Later (around when I started using a new social media platform) I decided to consciously follow right media/humour etc. Now I do realize the effect it has on me, but I'm not really sure I'm any better equipped to deal with it.

This is ironic given how lacking in nuance your "arguments" are. It's the same as Seth who only believed in two types of people - Marxists or Libertarians. I'm pretty sure you view most people as either SJWs or regular normal right wing folk.

There are only two types of people - those who endlessly avoid answering the simplest question about their positions, and those who do not.

[pErvinalia]

You forgot the third type - trolls.

[JimC]

Cunt wrote:

If they don't call themselves racist, what is the point of calling them racist?

Well, when you hear quotes from British nationalists along the lines of "Darkies should go back to their own fucking countries", I think you are allowed to join the dots...

[Cunt]

Oh, you are allowed to label people. I just think it's a shit idea.
Just like I'm allowed to label everyone a racist.

[JimC]

Oh, you are allowed to label people. I just think it's a shit idea.
Just like I'm allowed to label everyone a racist.

That is rather incoherent. It is quite clear that some people identify themselves as racists by their own words, or by their allegiance to groups or political movements with clear racist policies. When they have done so, it is perfectly appropriate to designate them as racist.

Having said that, it is true that some on the left use the term in an overarching manner that is at times quite absurd, such as statements that "white people are inherently racist" or that all people concerned about immigration or national pride are automatically racists etc. Such absurdities come from a sub-set of the far left that should be regarded as caricatures of progressive thought.

[Brian Peacock]

Oh, you are allowed to label people. I just think it's a shit idea.
Just like I'm allowed to label everyone a racist.

Of course you're allowed to label people whatever you want - but do they fit the bill, and what are your reasons for doing so? They're the kind of questions that follow.

[pErvinalia]

Why do we label anything? Because we like to categorise and it helps us make sense of a complicated world.

[Cunt]

Oh, you are allowed to label people. I just think it's a shit idea.
Just like I'm allowed to label everyone a racist.

That is rather incoherent. It is quite clear that some people identify themselves as racists by their own words, or by their allegiance to groups or political movements with clear racist policies. When they have done so, it is perfectly appropriate to designate them as racist.

Having said that, it is true that some on the left use the term in an overarching manner that is at times quite absurd, such as statements that "white people are inherently racist" or that all people concerned about immigration or national pride are automatically racists etc. Such absurdities come from a sub-set of the far left that should be regarded as caricatures of progressive thought.

While we are on the subject of racism, please tell me what you think of immigration, and border security, both in the US (because of their current political climate) and your own country.

[Brian Peacock]

A long read on Cambridge Analytics and their work for Bannon, Trump, and Farage...

‘I created Steve Bannon’s psychological warfare tool’: meet the data war whistleblower.

[JimC]

Oh, you are allowed to label people. I just think it's a shit idea.
Just like I'm allowed to label everyone a racist.

That is rather incoherent. It is quite clear that some people identify themselves as racists by their own words, or by their allegiance to groups or political movements with clear racist policies. When they have done so, it is perfectly appropriate to designate them as racist.

Having said that, it is true that some on the left use the term in an overarching manner that is at times quite absurd, such as statements that "white people are inherently racist" or that all people concerned about immigration or national pride are automatically racists etc. Such absurdities come from a sub-set of the far left that should be regarded as caricatures of progressive thought.

While we are on the subject of racism, please tell me what you think of immigration, and border security, both in the US (because of their current political climate) and your own country.

There are reasons why one might want to limit and control immigration into any country that have nothing to do with racism. It might be to do with the impact of a population increasing too rapidly on both the environment or resources such as food and water. It might be about concerns about jobs, and it is certainly reasonable to have at least some form of security vetting. If only those reasons are behind whatever form of border control is used, and it is applied with no input from the racial profile of potential immigrants, then it cannot be described as racist.

However, many right-wing groups in Oz, at least, want very tough immigration controls, and their self-proclamed racism shows the main reason behind it...

[Cunt]

Oh, you are allowed to label people. I just think it's a shit idea.
Just like I'm allowed to label everyone a racist.

That is rather incoherent. It is quite clear that some people identify themselves as racists by their own words, or by their allegiance to groups or political movements with clear racist policies. When they have done so, it is perfectly appropriate to designate them as racist.

Having said that, it is true that some on the left use the term in an overarching manner that is at times quite absurd, such as statements that "white people are inherently racist" or that all people concerned about immigration or national pride are automatically racists etc. Such absurdities come from a sub-set of the far left that should be regarded as caricatures of progressive thought.

While we are on the subject of racism, please tell me what you think of immigration, and border security, both in the US (because of their current political climate) and your own country.

There are reasons why one might want to limit and control immigration into any country that have nothing to do with racism. It might be to do with the impact of a population increasing too rapidly on both the environment or resources such as food and water. It might be about concerns about jobs, and it is certainly reasonable to have at least some form of security vetting. If only those reasons are behind whatever form of border control is used, and it is applied with no input from the racial profile of potential immigrants, then it cannot be described as racist.

However, many right-wing groups in Oz, at least, want very tough immigration controls, and their self-proclamed racism shows the main reason behind it...

Do you think someone who is anti religion is racist? Is someone racist if they are anti Islam, but ok with Buddhism?