- This topic has 59 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by
.
-
Despite that headline, I am absolutely positive that the alt-righters thought the media person was the one who got schooled.
Just out of curiosity, how do you define an alt-righter.
Are they all the same? What’s your definition of the term?Yeah I know.
There’s a difference between having a reluctance to repudiate something and *being* something. My whole issue this whole time has been the quick-trigger of not only the media – but society – to hastily attach a label like ‘racist’ or ‘misogynist’ or ‘anti-Semite’ on someone that uses unaccepted speech,
yes, we differ. For me, there’s things that have to be done, and leaders either enable that or obstruct it, and he obstructs it. I say that based on his own words. To me, he obstructs it because he himself does not believe there’s an issue. I see that as a bad step backwards. As for what he’s called? Well he’s a word warrior and a political smack talker and his mag attacks people all the time. The entire alt.right thing consists of repudiating what are to me genuine gains, against which he fights…because he does not believe there is a real problem.
So to me he represents a denial of racial problems while tolerating actual racists, a rollback of Roe v. Wade, a tendency to promote people like Sarah Palin while repudiating–largely through negative stereotyping—women whose vision of gender progress differs from hers, and so on. Then there’s the efforts to roll back what I see as progress and gains in other areas too.
I see him as being a knight arrayed in full battle dress against what I happen to believe is enlightenment and progress. In terms of him being called things, he makes a living calling different people, ideas, and things bad names. I mean it’s not like he’s a thinker–he’s a high-tone editorialist. Basically, to me, he’s Bernie.
The main thing, just narrowing it back down to the issue of race, is that he’s on the side of denial. To me that’s a problem in its own right. There’s more than one position on race, and so to me, it doesn’t reduce to “being okay” v. “outspoken throwback bigot type.”
Anyway, I am going to take a break from this one for a bit.
It’s Goff time.
Goff is either for touchdowns, or he denies they exist. I want to see which it is.
…
Well, no you can’t legislate morality. All that you can do is make laws that don’t allow the beliefs of one group to impinge upon the rights of another.
But I do think people can be taught to see the differences of other groups as just differences and not to automatically judge those differences as being better or worse. The world continues to get smaller and different groups are exposed to one another at a rate far greater than at any time in history. I think the exposure to other cultures makes some people feel uncomfortable. They think their way of life is in jeopardy and right now there is a lot of backlash against that. This leads to groups like the alt-right. They take a defensive posture instead of trying to understand or see the positives. But as the world continues to get smaller eventually the differences will seem less important. That’s my hope anyway.
Good stuff, Nitt. I agree that there shouldn’t be any laws enacted that would serve to penalize another race unjustly. You mention that people are fearful that their way of life is in jeopardy, and subsequently there’s some backlash over it, and I agree. But I think it’s misguided. I think it’s safe to assume that we’re talking about immigration. Most of what I hear from people across multiple platforms is that this administration is going to arbitrarily deport everyone and quickly erect a giant wall behind them. Break up families, leave children homeless, deny access to America, etc. That’s not the case. He was very clear that he was targeting criminals, and is flexible in his immigration reform policies. He wants people here — legally. He wants prosperity for all people, but he also wants the rules and laws of the land to be applied to everyone. I don’t know how it’s going to shake out, but I’m very confident that there won’t be an arbitrary mass deportation. He knows that local police forces know who the illegal criminals are. He knows they know who the gangs and drug dealers are and whether or not they’re here legally. He wants to give them the power to help remove those people from our society, and I’m all for it. Everyone should be for that. Otherwise, remove border police from the borders, open it up to Columbian Drug Lords, Islamic terrorists, drug smugglers, and anyone else who wants to come over and destroy the United States. Freedom and equal rights for all, yeah?
And I agree about the alt-right. They’re instigators and trolls, and aren’t doing anything to improve society. I just understand their motivation. Similarly, I understand the New Moral Order and their life mission to make everyone become tolerant whether they like it or not. I don’t understand or agree with how they attack people for being 20 steps removed from racism, but are racists anyway — just because. But it is what it is. The only thing I can do, personally, is ignore it when I know it’s unwarranted. More people on the right could benefit from doing the same. Then it might at least quiet down a little.
You have to be odd, to be number one.
-- Dr Seuss
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
