The Alt Right and the SJWs: Thoughts and discussion

[[Unactive Account]]

It seems like two radical ideologies from both left and right side of the political spectrum have emerged in today's society.

 

 

What are your thoughts on the Alt Right and (I don't know the official term for the extreme left) The Far Left?

 

Do you agree with some of the ideas? Have identity politics gone too far?

[Lib3l]

Both sides have created a rather horrible stereotype for the left and right.

A lot of people are too trigger happy to call conservatives alt-right if they have some slightly alternative views.

Likewise the right is too fast to dismiss leftists as "sjw" if they fight for real social justice.

I'm a leftist who believes fighting for social justice is very important but would not identity with many of these "sjw" groups. I personally think the alt-right is absolutely disgusting.

[Supervise]

The Alt-Right wants to form ethnostates and gas the Jews. I find nothing to approve of. People like Milo and Lauren Southern are just provocateurs and their views barely line up with the alt-right, they are known as the alt-light.

 

SJWs are just stupid, they are well meaning people that just don't understand what they talk about basically. I wouldn't call them the far left as they are near the center on many issues and very authoritarian.

[AFFIRMATIVE]

They provide some good youtube entertainment when i see them fail at political discourse when challenged by someone who has common sense.

 

Otherwise i just feel it's more of a first world entitlement problem where these type of people haven't encountered many major problems in their life, so they create their own problems from something mild just so they can be on the same level with people that have actual problems.

 

There are also some cases of hypocrisy. For example you can't just call yourself a feminist and the proceed to use the word mansplaining on a guy. That's just doing what the movement they support are against, which creates a sexist word that shouldn't exist in the first place considering there's already a word for that, which is "condescending", and it's gender neutral.

 

People should ditch this black and white mindset and just stop generalizing and labeling eachother like that and engage in actual conversation if they want to change the world for the better.

[KERPKEK]

Think of what is right, now think of the alternative to that. That's basically the alt-right in my eyes

[Acid Rap]

is this english?

lul

[silencedotmid]

I don't think that SJWs are an equal counterpart to the alt/far right. SJW is a derogatory term referring to progressive rights, but that doesn't encompass all of far-leftism like alt-right does. As such, I'm going to be talking about the far left for the rest of this post, which also includes socialists, antifascists, and unionists alongside social progressives (or SJWs).

 

Self-identifying members of the alt-right such as Richard Spencer and Milo Yiannopoulos frequently advocate for white nationalism, continued suppression of women, complete isolationism, and at worst, ethnic cleansing. And the scary thing is that their messages are resonating! Leftists have been having a hard time recently, as a lot of European governments are having to come to terms with the fact that their current immigration and refugee policies aren't working, and the economy isn't incredible. There's been a lot of schisms in the left recently (how many times has the Labour party imploded in the last 2 years?) and in this power gap, far-right nationalists have been assuming office, with their platforms essentially playing off of ingrained racism and fear of changing times. Maybe Donald Trump won't deport all Mexicans and build a wall, however, it's still terrifying that so many people immediately got behind his stances.

 

Anyways, I think that the "both sides are just as wrong!" argument isn't valid or applicable these days. Leftists are unsure which way their political parties should move, and in that power gap, far right parties have gained power, with their supporters literally advocating for genocide. While the left is a splintered concept trying to get its act together, the far and alt right are trying to systemically and rhetorically deny the rights of people they don't like. The misdoings and facist overtones of the alt-right aren't even comparable to the sometimes-misguided intentions of progressives, they're leagues worse.

 

 

People should ditch this black and white mindset and just stop generalizing and labeling eachother like that and engage in actual conversation if they want to change the world for the better.

I agree with some of this! Politics, at least in the US, are getting increasingly divided, with the parties moving further apart from each other and people flat-out refusing to engage in conversation with the people they disagree with. This is a big problem. Diversity in all senses, including political viewpoints, is an important step to reduce bigotry, misunderstanding, and intolerance.

However, there comes a point in which discourse will do no good. When someone is arguing that your race or identity doesn't have a right to exist, and they're sending death threats, they're beyond help, which is why the alt-right is so dangerous. At this point, they're so self-convinced that trying to fight them with logic and facts doesn't do any good, and might even be detrimental. If alt-right members want you dead or gone, you can't be giving them the platform to preach that and the assumption of good faith. This is why punching fascists is sometimes necessary.

[Supervise]

This is why punching fascists is sometimes necessary.

If they don't have free speech neither do you. They should be able to say whatever they want without fear of being attacked.

[[Unactive Account]]

I don't think that SJWs are an equal counterpart to the alt/far right. SJW is a derogatory term referring to progressive rights, but that doesn't encompass all of far-leftism like alt-right does. As such, I'm going to be talking about the far left for the rest of this post, which also includes socialists, antifascists, and unionists alongside social progressives (or SJWs).

Sorry. I couldn't recall what the far-left was called so I just called it SJW. 

 

Sorry about that

[Jams]

The Alt-Right wants to form ethnostates and gas the Jews. I find nothing to approve of. People like Milo and Lauren Southern are just provocateurs and their views barely line up with the alt-right, they are known as the alt-light.

 

SJWs are just stupid, they are well meaning people that just don't understand what they talk about basically. I wouldn't call them the far left as they are near the center on many issues and very authoritarian.

Like David said, to me it's basically:

Alt-Right: "Smart" with "bad" intentions. 

SJW: "Stupid" with "good" intentions.

The order of the words in quotes are interchanged based on personal views at the end of the day.

[Alberny]

Like David said, to me it's basically:

Alt-Right: "Smart" with "bad" intentions. 

SJW: "Stupid" with "good" intentions.

The order of the words in quotes are interchanged based on personal views at the end of the day.

Pretty much.

[Lib3l]

If they don't have free speech neither do you. They should be able to say whatever they want without fear of being attacked.

If you say you're going to go around killing blacks, gay and transgenders then what about the fear of them being attacked? 

The "punching nazis makes you just as bad as nazis" is stupid.

[Supervise]

If you say you're going to go around killing blacks, gay and transgenders

The problem with that argument is that it is not a common occurrence with neo-Nazis. I can't think of a single incident of it happening, although I'm sure it has.

[Professional Map Painter]

People got fed up of regressive SJW's and decided to go full Pinochet. Stop pushing identity politics and the alt-right wouldn't have a support base.

[silencedotmid]

If they don't have free speech neither do you. They should be able to say whatever they want without fear of being attacked.

Hate speech isn't protected as free speech, and the genocidal message of nazis is certainly hate speech. Punching nazis isn't an ideal, it's the only way to deal with the current situation. We tried giving fascists a fair discussion platform, and they used it to lie, bend facts, and preach hatred until they got their men into high offices. It's too late for discussion when they're out on the streets professing the death of non-whites and queer folk. The only thing someone else on the street can do at that very moment is show them that their ideals will not be tolerated. Fists are a decent way to demonstrate that.

[[Unactive Account]]

Hate speech isn't protected as free speech, and the genocidal message of nazis is certainly hate speech. Punching nazis isn't an ideal, it's the only way to deal with the current situation. We tried giving fascists a fair discussion platform, and they used it to lie, bend facts, and preach hatred until they got their men into high offices. It's too late for discussion when they're out on the streets professing the death of non-whites and queer folk. The only thing someone else on the street can do at that very moment is show them that their ideals will not be tolerated. Fists are a decent way to demonstrate that.

 

What about the saying. Two wrongs don't make a right? Lashing out in violence against the Alt-Right only proves their view that the left is crazy. I am a centrist but I believe debate is better than violence. 

[Apo]

Hate speech isn't protected as free speech, and the genocidal message of nazis is certainly hate speech. Punching nazis isn't an ideal, it's the only way to deal with the current situation. We tried giving fascists a fair discussion platform, and they used it to lie, bend facts, and preach hatred until they got their men into high offices. It's too late for discussion when they're out on the streets professing the death of non-whites and queer folk. The only thing someone else on the street can do at that very moment is show them that their ideals will not be tolerated. Fists are a decent way to demonstrate that.

 

Someone says mean things = They should get assaulted?

Do you honestly think that?

 

"Someone has an ideal I don't like, so I will react with violence."

Kinda sounds like the Nazis.

 

 

My opinion:

Both extremes are bad.

[HarryG]

 

SJWs are just stupid, they are well meaning people that just don't understand what they talk about basically.

True SJWs are not well meaning at all; they just want to limit free speech. Some of the things attributed to the "far left" and SJW's include firebombing a Milo event and Muslims and blacks vandalizing their own property with pro-Trump and racist graffiti to blame conservatives. That's basically lunacy. There are more proven cases of these faked incidents created by leftists then there are real incidents. What does that tell you?

[Lib3l]

What about the saying. Two wrongs don't make a right? Lashing out in violence against the Alt-Right only proves their view that the left is crazy. I am a centrist but I believe debate is better than violence. 

These people don't want to debate, they are too deluded to believe they could ever be convinced otherwise.

[Lib3l]

Someone says mean things = They should get assaulted?

Do you honestly think that?

 

Someone goes around saying they will assault others =They should be assaulted.

It's a fear factor, previously many people were too afraid to practice neo-nazi views due to the fear of being attacked.

 

It's funny how people are happy to restrict the free speech of Muslim extremists but when it comes to whites it's "muh free speech"

[Supervise]

True SJWs

The first flaw in your argument, SJW is a pejorative, "True SJWs" don't exist.

 

True SJWs are not well meaning at all; they just want to limit free speech.

I believe, in their minds at least, they are not limiting free speech, but rather preventing hate speech and promoting "the right side of history". They view opposers as equal to the people that opposed civil rights. 

 

Some of the things attributed to the "far left" and SJW's include firebombing a Milo event and Muslims and blacks vandalizing their own property with pro-Trump and racist graffiti to blame conservatives. That's basically lunacy.

I have seen not seen anyone defending this violence (feel free to give some examples, though), using this as an argument is just bad. I would compare it to saying "Some Muslims are terrorists, therefore Muslims are all bad" but I'm not going to as far less "SJWs" support this stuff than Muslims supporting terrorism. 

 

There are more proven cases of these faked incidents created by leftists then there are real incidents. What does that tell you?

Evidence, please?

[Twins_Mercury]

They're both pains in the ass and I would not want to associate with either of them.

[HarryG]

1. The first flaw in your argument, SJW is a pejorative, "True SJWs" don't exist.

 

2. I believe, in their minds at least, they are not limiting free speech, but rather preventing hate speech and promoting "the right side of history". They view opposers as equal to the people that opposed civil rights. 

 

3. I have seen not seen anyone defending this violence (feel free to give some examples, though), using this as an argument is just bad. I would compare it to saying "Some Muslims are terrorists, therefore Muslims are all bad" but I'm not going to as far less "SJWs" support this stuff than Muslims supporting terrorism. 

 

4. Evidence, please?

1. stupid, not addressing

 

2. how could anyone believe that preventing hate speech = labeling everyone with different views as racists and bigots and openly attacking people who disagree with them. Remember the mentally disabled kid who got attacked by leftists who drowned him in toilet water and tortured him for what was it, a few hours? Anyone who does that and thinks its right for any reason has got more than one screw loose. 

 

3. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jesse-benn/sorry-liberals-a-violent-_b_10316186.htmlJust one example of people thinking this shit is ok. Pretty much everything in the article about Trump loving violence is riddled with inaccuracy, though. No person in the normal political spectrum (barring alt right) thinks that all Muslims are terrorists, by the way. In case you still haven't gotten the memo, the proposed travel ban is based on statistics that the majority of refugees are coming from those countries. It has nothing to do with religion. Are you one of the people that thinks Islam is a race or something?

 

4. http://dailycaller.com/2016/11/17/heres-a-list-of-completely-substantiated-and-underreported-attacks-on-trump-supporters/

   http://www.fakehatecrimes.org/

 

Top those two with real attacks by Trump supporters. I dare you, Source 2 is 8 pages long I think.

[Sakamoto]

-bullshit-

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/10/15/it-will-be-a-bloodbath-inside-the-kansas-militia-plot-to-ignite-a-religious-war/

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/15/us/washington-mosque-arson/

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/91204919-132.html

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/01/americans-raise-600000-rebuild-burned-texas-mosque-170129205625913.html(Can't confirm if they're a Trump supporter)

 

SJW is nothing but a buzzword now. Social justice is good, by the way. The way that these people advocate social justice is bad.

 

I think anyone who calls themselves 'alt-right' is either a neo-nazi, reactionary, or retarded.

[HarryG]

-not enough sources-

 

SJW is nothing but a buzzword now. Social justice is good, by the way. The way that these people advocate social justice is bad.

 

I think anyone who calls themselves 'alt-right' is either a neo-nazi, reactionary, or retarded.

 

That's still only 4 incidents against my source 2, which has 8 pages of individual incidents (I'm sorry, around 55 or so are after Trump was elected, someone feel free to count for me but it's a lot more than 4)?