No, we are not in 100% agreement, because you are equating that to racism.
- - - Updated - - -
You do realize that the entire Trumpster movement was based on "Social Justice," right? I don't think you Trumpsters realize that you are exactly like the SJWs you try and mock.
On MMO-C we learn that Anti-Fascism is locking arms with corporations, the State Department and agreeing with the CIA, But opposing the CIA and corporate America, and thinking Jews have a right to buy land and can expect tenants to pay rent THAT is ultra-Fash Nazism. Bellingcat is an MI6/CIA cut out. Clyburn Truther.
Who's this youtuber? What are his credentials, and why do I care what he says?
Putin khuliyo
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/...onic-nazi.html
Sure the guy that tweets "ironic" jokes about the holocaust just happened to go to the tiki-torch "Jews will not replace us" rally. And he was one of the faces/names used to advertise the "Unite the Right" Nazi rally, IIRC.
His tune only changed after someone maced him in the face and he cried like a bitch.
Of course those that cater and pander to white supremacists are going to deny that they do so when asked by non-white supremacists, it's bad for business when you let the cat out of the bag.
Yeah, conservatives are even worse. But where exactly is the dichotomy?
Word. All the while they're acting holier than thou for it, and having an all around punitive attitude to it. It's no coincidende they ask for bullshit things like fair representation or CEOs of minorities while the rest of them can get shafted, for all they really care.
Last edited by Dsonsion; 2019-04-01 at 04:37 PM.
If your approach is to highlight how totally fucked up the interviewee is, and how reprehensible and shitheaded their views are, because they're a Nazi, that's "journalism".
Giving them a chance to give "their side" with no pushback or derision is giving them a platform and giving them false credibility. It's acting to support those Nazis.
" His revolutionary movement is unlikely to succeed. But it is, I fear, authentic and durable. The shame of its indecency is felt only by those who share the country with Spencer, not by the man himself."Journalism:
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...-kampf/524505/
"Spencer invited me to join a discussion group he was organizing, the Robert Taft Club. I was wary when he evaded my questions about the politics of his club."
Is this giving a platform? Or shining a light upon evil?
"When i asked spencer to meet me in January, before Trump’s inauguration, he showed better manners than his fans. (He denies that he advocates violence.) The front door of his apartment in Alexandria, just outside Washington, is not clearly marked, and even though he had given me the address, I wouldn’t have found it had a bespectacled young man not intercepted me outside, while I was rummaging around trash cans looking for a house number. “Can I help you?” he asked. He had brown hair and a geeky affect."
He's clearly not on Spencer's side. This is like those who write biographies of Hitler, but still condemn the man for perpetrating the Holocaust; writing about someone is not giving their ideas support.
Today's USA is one where conservative rallies will chant "Jews will not replace us", where they rant about "Mexicans", where white nationalism is a core principle, etc.So if one's a Nazi, if they want to purge Jews, minorities, if they want ethnostates, they're EVIL, should be exposed.
If one is a misguided (IMO) milquetoast centrist conservative that is not NONE of the above, they should never, ever be put in the same category as the actual Nazis.
Claiming that modern American conservatives are mostly "none of the above" is just . . . generally incorrect. There's definitely a few; I wouldn't put Skroe in that basket. In terms of current US politicians, Mitt Romney doesn't strike me as that kind of guy. But a heck of a lot of the rest have at least some degree of this shade in their character.
Pointing out that someone's views and positions and rhetoric carry Nazi overtones is not "dehumanization". It's pointing out their dehumanization of others.This is the same tactic of dehumanization that the Nazis themselves use.
If you're just trying to argue that claiming that "all conservatives are Nazis" is wrong, sure. Some carry no similarities.
But pointing to an individual person, and pointing out how their rhetoric, or the rhetoric of those they support and follow, aligns closely to Nazi rhetoric? Totally legitimate, and indeed, necessary.
journalism is when you signalboost nazis then, aye?
You linked the Alt-Right Playbook "The Card says Moops" video yourself, in this very thread, just a few pages ago.
Now here you are, insisting that Tim Pool's card clearly says "Moops", and ignoring everything in that video.
He has clearly associated with Neo-Nazis in the past, on friendly terms.
Just take a look at Pool's Youtube videos on a weekly basis. The titles are all far-right talking points. They're pushing a narrative of a collapsing society threatened from without and within; a classic position of fascist thought. Some of his posts are thinly veiled white nationalism (one from 2 months ago about "declining Western population, for instance). There's a significant trend of anti-Islamic videos.
I mean, maybe he's a different flavor of white-nationalist fascist, but it sure feels like we're quibbling over insignificant details. Does it really matter if his ethnoreligious target is a different group than the 3rd Reich prioritized? The point is that they engage in such at all.
"I'm not a nazi I swear, I just want to talk about how the """global elite""" is conspiring to destroy the white majority in the most powerful empire on earth"
There's a difference between discussing that, and acting as if that's an attack against white people or "western civilization". As has been discussed elsewhere, white supremacist movements have gone to great lengths to sanitize and repackage their rhetoric to make it more palatable to the general public while still exposing others to the ideology and using it as a recruiting tool.
So sure, you can discuss whites being a minority eventually and that's fine. But when you frame it as an attack against "western civilization" then you're parroting white supremacist rhetoric.
Noting the demographic fact isn't what makes it white supremacist rhetoric.
Arguing that it's a threat to Western civilization, and doubling down on opposing immigration as a solution because of the threat to "Western culture", is what makes it white supremacist. The only thin veil is that he hides that argument in the actual video/description, not the title, but that concept is inherently ethno-nationalist in nature.
[quote]As for the Innuendo Studios video, I linked that because I am fair, and I want to know and understand how people think. I think there's a lot of paranoia in it, but also truth. Watched his altright videos quite a number of times. Impressive work. Biased, but impressive.
You're mis-using "bias". "Bias" infers prejudice, or some other form of unfair conclusion. Saying that "Nazis are shitheaded fuckers who should be marginalized and denigrated at every opportunity, for being such colossal fuckstains" for instance. That's harsh. It's definitely strongly worded. It is not biased, even given the amount of venom and abuse I deliberately inserted; it's based on a fair adjudication of exactly how evil and abusive their viewpoint is.
This mislabelling of "bias" is an attack on discussion, itself. The very concept of it. You implicitly accuse anyone and everyone you disagree with of "bias", which infers that they are unreasonable and their viewpoints without warrant. Having an opinion/viewpoint does not make one "biased".
- - - Updated - - -
Then he shouldn't make videos supporting and furthering white nationalist and fascist talking points.
Which he clearly does.
As I already pointed out.
You're insisting that Pool's card says "Moops", again.
I see this bait thread still hasn't been closed
"If you are ever asking yourself 'Is Trump lying or is he stupid?', the answer is most likely C: All of the Above" - Seth Meyers