rigorousintuition.ca

Exactly, the "whiteness" of biological racism in modern times has been replaced by the "whiteness" of skin colour privilege theories in contemporary times. Both are constructs, regardless of whatever ways in which they may or may not correspond to certain data. The latter discourse is firmly under the control of so-called "anti-racists" and their curiously selective outrage. "White nationalists" are letting these people, like AD, frame the entire conversation without even making them work particularly hard. Of course this sort of manipulation runs in all sorts of directions and we can't simply confine it to just this issue.

All of these concepts are used to conflate, insinuate, and imply all sorts of things, to the great profit of those who see through them, it would seem.

tapitsbo » Sun Mar 06, 2016 3:32 am wrote:Exactly, the "whiteness" of biological racism in modern times has been replaced by the "whiteness" of skin colour privilege theories in contemporary times. Both are constructs, regardless of whatever ways in which they may or may not correspond to certain data. The latter discourse is firmly under the control of so-called "anti-racists" and their curiously selective outrage. "White nationalists" are letting these people, like AD, frame the entire conversation without even making them work particularly hard.

All of these concepts are used to conflate, insinuate, and imply all sorts of things, to the great profit of those who see through them, it would seem.

You're looking in the wrong places then. WN/alt-right discourse has found its own spaces and has been honing itself for quite some time now.

No need to take my word for it though, the stuff that AD posts describes this quite well, in fact that is what most of the recent alarm seems to be about. Alternatively/additionally, you can check this out for yourself, that's one thing the internet is good for.

I'm aware of the "alt-right" you speak of, I'm actually aware of it thanks to AD as I've said several times now. Still think they let AD-type discourse frame the discussion (as well as a lot of other flaws or ideas I'm simply opposed to).

tapitsbo » Sun Mar 06, 2016 3:48 am wrote:I'm aware of the "alt-right" you speak of, I'm actually aware of it thanks to AD as I've said several times now. Still think they let AD-type discourse frame the discussion (as well as a lot of other flaws).

Yes, AD has brought some useful stuff to the board, it just needs developing as well as pasting.

Alt-right sounds a bit like an American/internet thing to me and might be temporary, at present I'm viewing as an offshoot of WN. There aren't any new ideas there that weren't being discussed by WN's a decade ago.

To be fair, I heard AD's ideas being discussed some time ago, too. It's refreshing to hear people move on from both to some extent.

American Dream » Sun Mar 06, 2016 3:05 am wrote:Without a doubt, characters like jakell and tapitsbo would have been shown the door long ago, back when Jeff Wells was a more active presence here.

American Dream » Sun Mar 06, 2016 3:05 am wrote:Without a doubt

Based on what evidence? Based on whose evaluation?
Well, actually, NONE. Just weasel words to try to frame what follows

American Dream » Sun Mar 06, 2016 3:05 am wrote:characters like jakell and tapitsbo would have been shown the door long ago

And when it comes to fighting Holocaust Deniers *effectively*, everyone must only utilise the American Dream (and Hasbara McSolace's) screeching Guilt by Six Degrees of Association, rather than refuting them with logic and facts, like Nizkor do.

American Dream » Sun Mar 06, 2016 3:05 am wrote:back when Jeff Wells was a more active presence here.

Actually, it was precisely the reverse.
Back when Jeff was a more active presence here but (you had not arrived), there were interesting multi-perspective and robust discussions about subjects like David Icke, without the thread being shit-filled with badly written antiFa CopyPasta and the participants smeared as antiSemites -

I remember your "interrogation" (for daring to be interested in Annunaki-type legends) lasted for several weeks. It was as fun as stumbling into a Red Guard encampment.
Certainly your biggest beef seems to be with people who have the temerity to argue cogently against your viewpoints.
Your viewpoint, obviously, is the only correct one possible.

Back to the thread...
Please share how you deal with White Privilege in yourself.
Isn't the core of white privilege about attempts at Othering and domination and power over, the suppression of divergent viewpoints and social exclusion?
Remind you of anything?

https://www.facebook.com/14643006972184 ... =3&theater

But this is the joke, right?

The only effective Anti-Fascism is: Fascism.

You have to play the game to win!

...and nobody ever wins for very long.

Wombaticus Rex » Sun Mar 06, 2016 6:47 pm wrote:But this is the joke, right?

The only effective Anti-Fascism is: Fascism.

You have to play the game to win!

...and nobody ever wins for very long.

Exactly. the sole battle cry for antifa types is to destroy, eliminate, vanquish (etc) fascism. Whilst this is a nice simple heroic notion to get folk's blood up in the first place, it's not very clever to keep on repeating the slogan forever.

This was my thrust in the '100 organised men...' thread when I said that antifascists need to think a bit more and find a balance.

If the sole acting moderator is suggesting that to actually enforce the anti-fascist agreements we made back when Jeff Wells was more actively moderating is itself somehow fascist, then everything is truly fucked-up here.

American Dream » Sun Mar 06, 2016 3:44 pm wrote:If the sole acting moderator is suggesting that to actually enforce the anti-fascist agreements we made back when Jeff Wells was more actively moderating is itself somehow fascist, then everything is truly fucked-up here.

Again, your failures of reading comprehension drive the majority of your concerns about RI.

What you do here isn't fascist in the least; you're posting articles and typing into a box on a f'ing internet discussion forum, man, c'mon.

What I was talking about was actually winning. And when you posted the poorly made meme I was reacting to? So were you.

Discuss whatever the sweet hell y'all want. Free country and all.

If Jeff Wells were here he might send a few of these antifa threads to the activism sub-forum

OK- here's a reading comprehension question that you can be of help with;

I have gotten the impression through your various comments over time that you are actually supportive of far right dreck along the lines of: Radix Journal, Keith Preston, the Second Vermont Republic, Paleoconservatism, the (notorious) Bell Curve and et cetera.

Is there any truth at all to that impression?

American Dream » Sun Mar 06, 2016 4:05 pm wrote:I have gotten the impression through your various comments over time that you are actually supportive of far right dreck along the lines of: Radix Journal, Keith Preston, the Second Vermont Republic, Paleoconservatism, the (notorious) Bell Curve and et cetera.

Is there any truth at all to that impression?

I cannot help but take some mild offense at the assessment of my facilities implied by a few of those, but onward:

I've already talked through the Bell Curve stuff at some length with iamwhoiam in another thread.

Radix I've read for a few interviews but their original writing is quite crap; Keith Preston, to the extent he's ever registered with me, seems like a meaningless little wanker; I've fucking told you in no uncertain terms how I feel about Naylor and his "Second Vermont Republic" cottage industry; and "Paleoconservative" I am fine with, having been accused of it for years now. People say dumb shit all the time, if that's how you need to frame me, right on. Could be worse!

"There are no permanent enemies or comrades, only permanent duty." -Zhang Beihai

It's hard to know what really to make of the above. I would not hesitate to paint broad brush stroke and say "The Alt Right/Far Right is filled with toxic nonsense and is very much of a dead end road, politically, morally and socially".

Are you in substantive agreement?