全 166 件のコメント

[–]landiongames 68ポイント69ポイント  (26子コメント)

the more they push to extreme left, the more ordinary people who see trough the bullshit will start to ever more lean to the right, that includes the far right

[–]KelloPudgerro 21ポイント22ポイント  (6子コメント)

I always considered myself a extreme leftist but then i saw wtf was happening to sweden

[–]KommanderKetchup 2ポイント3ポイント  (5子コメント)

What's happening to Sweden? I'm out of the loop.

[–]WouldYouBanAGayGuy 13ポイント14ポイント  (2子コメント)

Sargon talked with someone in Sweden. So you're in luck!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgm-xUaX-i0

It's about an hour and a half in length but an interesting listen to. The guy essentially says that Sweden is what Tumbrl would be like irl. Yeah, creepy. Their government essentially shits on the native born citizens and tells them that they shouldn't get to enjoy what their ancestors built for them and that instead the immigrants are far more needy and deserving. Again, creepy.

[–]redgoldblue 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

if you subscribe to conservative newspapers there the media will track you down and ruin your life

[–]95wave [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

sweden has been turned into a nation of cucks

[–]kfms6741VIDYA AKBAR 31ポイント32ポイント  (5子コメント)

That's basically what happened to me. I used to consider myself very much on the left, but seeing SJWs go as full retard as they did pulled me right the fuck to the middle. I now have an understanding of what conservatives go through whenever their views are demonized by the mainstream press, and it's fucking awful.

[–]Gzalzi 9ポイント10ポイント  (4子コメント)

I've always considered myself an extreme liberal and very very leftist, but after all this garbage, I don't even wanna be associated with "liberals" anymore.

I still consider myself very liberal but these SJWs would probably think I'm a republican or something.

[–]ghostfox1_gfaqs 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm still very liberal. But I don't give a fuck what people call me, as long as my ideas stand based on evidence.

[–]Bwhitty23 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

Compared to these extremist we are literally late 20th century and 21st century conservatives. I too consider myself to be on the left and more middle left libertarian and I'm becoming increasingly disillusioned with liberals and I'm having doubts about having a majority leftist government. Looking at Europe and the EU and it is becoming clear that balance is so needed when you see what unchecked liberalism, sjwism and feminism do.

[–]abiggerhammer 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

Europe isn't all bad, and some places are actually pretty great. 14 years ago, Portugal took the extremely liberal step (even for Europe) of decriminalising all drugs, treating addiction as a public health problem instead, and the results have been positive for both individuals and society. That was pretty carefully checked liberalism, though, not unchecked.

[–]USonic [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Perhaps it wasn't a "liberal" decision, it was a rational one. Ideology raises the masses and votes, but it's not exactly fit for practical decisions.

[–]GOU_NoMoreMrNiceGuy 0ポイント1ポイント  (10子コメント)

as i mentioned somewhere else, imo, the extreme left of today is a response to the extreme right of the bush years and the karl rove lead, and massively successful, propaganda of the right.

extremism breeds extremism to fight it... because alas, moderation can't beat it.

so yes, absolutely, the extremists of the sjw breed more extremism on the right... but it's a cycle that's been going for a while now.

just hunker down with some popcorn and enjoy the spectacle.

[–]Kodiak_Marmoset 27ポイント28ポイント  (8子コメント)

the extreme left of today is a response to the extreme right of the bush years and the karl rove lead, and massively successful, propaganda of the right.

That isn't at all true. Extreme leftism has been a staple of the college scene since the '60s. It even had a huge resurgence in the '90s with the rise of "political correctness", and you know something is prominent in the cultural eye when Hollywood makes a movie mocking it.

Its popularity flows and ebbs but never disappears totally, which means it's silly to ascribe its prevalence now to the Bush years which ended seven years ago.

[–]Distind 15ポイント16ポイント  (1子コメント)

I rode the wave of liberal sentiment during the Bush years, you have no idea how different this is from then. When it started most of us would poke fun comfortably at some of the stupider ideas coming out of colleges, we had a real opposition to face and actually did so. Now, now people are making up shit so they can try and relive the glory days, but instead they're desperately over reaching to find something, anything, someone might oppose so they can feel important.

So all those stupid college ideas. Yeah. They've back because they make no sense outside of an academic environment and anyone with a clue will call bullshit. They're also fucking up a great deal of the real progress that has been made by taking identity politics to the next fucking level and giving every idiot and his brother Cletus viable material to attack.

Vox fucking Day has made good points in the last year. I've skimmed his shit for over a decade now, this is the first time I've noted it. That's how stupid the left is becoming. Trust me, I thought I could do something to slow this down and got steamrolled a few years back. Civil and intelligent have gone out of style.

[–]YetAnotherCommenter 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

I rode the wave of liberal sentiment during the Bush years, you have no idea how different this is from then.

That's because much of the anti-Bush sentiment was heavily from a secularist, pro-civil-liberties and non-interventionist direction. SJ was being criticized within the atheist movement by Hitchens, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Dawkins etc. and SJWs simply didn't have the same media presence they do now. Basically, the "anti-Bush" block were being Left-Liberal and thus they (like libertarians) shared roots in the Enlightenment tradition.

But now, SJ and Progressivism are all the rage, and Left-Liberalism is (fake valley girl accent) like, so yesterday!

[–]Agkistro13 4ポイント5ポイント  (2子コメント)

Also, I'd like to point out that anybody that's actually a serious conservative who reads books is laughing their ass off at the idea that Bush and Karl Rove represent the 'extreme right'. What the hell is so extreme right about interventionist foreign policy, open borders, and no child left behind?

[–]Distind -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Pretty much all of the domestic economic and social policies. I'm still lost on who was pro-interventionist foreign policy at that point though so I can give you that.

[–]ghostfox1_gfaqs 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Not really actually. It takes a while for cultural shifts to happen, and people who grew up/'matured' under the bush years are now in positions to use what power they now have to enact their views.

[–]abiggerhammer 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

The ebb and flow seems to move on a generational cycle, which I find interesting. There was the '60s, as you mentioned, and I remember the political correctness rampage of the '90s from when I was in college.

I've been seeing cultural brushfire conflicts in this iteration of the war kicking up since early 2009; what you see there is still referenced (usually by SJW partisans) occasionally in Puppygate, because never letting go of a grudge is apparently a central tenet of SJW doctrine. I probably only noticed that because science fiction used to be my community, though. I haven't looked for earlier instances of entryism in other communities. OTOH, there are other places, like the LinuxChix mailing list, that basically functioned as a viral reservoir for victimhood politics throughout the comparably sane 2000s. Unlike actual viruses, though, ideas are practically impossible to wipe out.

[–]GOU_NoMoreMrNiceGuy 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

i agree it's been around for a long time.

but i still believe that it's current resurgence is due to the bush years.

like conservatism. it's been around forever. the 50s was basically the wet dream of it... but then the 60s happened and the hippy anti authoritarianism extending into the 70s and from that, you probably got the resurgence of conservatism in the reagan years.

these movements are always around, but bouts of extremism fan the other side to an "equal+ and opposite" reaction.

[–]LamaofTrauma 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

just hunker down with some popcorn and enjoy the spectacle.

Ex-military here: No thanks. We need to find a way to actively stop these fucking idiot from getting power, because I do NOT want these shithead extremists on either side having access to our arsenal.

[–]n8summers 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Ordinary people don't become Nazis because of tumblristas

[–]landiongames 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

no but some people could very well go to extremes while others stay don't

[–]analpumping 51ポイント52ポイント  (0子コメント)

What you need to remember is that the "social justice" movement is made up overwhelmingly of wealthy white kids. Sure, they like to pretend online that they're totally marginalized people, but in real life? This is what they look like.

So, understanding who they are, try to see it from their perspective. Say they do trigger a resurgence of the radical right. Say it leads to horrible places; we have race wars, people are murdered for nothing more than the color of their skin, et cetera. It's no skin off their asses - they get to hide inside their gated communities, perfectly safe from the shitstorm they created. If anything, it actually helps them. They get to point to the violence they inspired as proof that they were right all along.

That's my view of perversion that calls itself the social justice movement, at least. A bunch of spoiled children, bravely putting vulnerable people in danger in order to feel morally superior.

[–]Bob9999999999999 29ポイント30ポイント  (4子コメント)

SJWs are so far to the left that they think the center-right is the far-right. It's difficult to convince someone that their actions are helping actual neo-Nazis gain power when they believe that actual neo-Nazis are already in power anyway.

[–]Spokker 11ポイント12ポイント  (2子コメント)

What's also interesting is the far left's insistence that they and their allies are continuing to be oppressed and lack privilege when they win so many political and social battles. Hard to believe this is a racist and sexist society when people get suspended or fired for dumb racist/sexist jokes at presentations, on social media and on television.

[–]ev1lb1t 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

Please don't confuse cooption and mccarthyist abuse of positions of power for "popularity".

They don't "win" social battles, they impose their will, top down, and most people say "WTF, that's fucking insane and wrong, and you're an ass who should not have that power", but nothing happens because they have no means of firing the ones who are doing this.

[–]Caesah 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'd say they're popular. They have supporters in sjws and those that believe that "whatever the media or Twitter says must be right so sjws have to be the good guys" instead of thinking freely.

[–]Kestyr 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's funny in a way. In Denmark you have the Folk party or peoples party which is essentially down right socialist but with an emphasis on using Far left economic policy on the Danish people rather than open border immigration and they're labeled as Far/Radical right wing.

[–]Storthos 11ポイント12ポイント  (0子コメント)

That was one of my points early on - by intentionally mischaracterizing GamerGate as being composed of misogynists/racists/neo-nazis/whatever, you are implicitly telling people that those viewpoints are more popular and socially acceptable than they are. You're telling the closet bigot, the kid on the fence just gaining political awareness, that these are popular, widespread ideas. By trying to get a cheap political win by dumping every awful name you can think of on your political opponents, you are actively doing harm to the cause of equality and tolerance.

That said, the growing indistinguishability of the far left and the far right has been troubling to say the least. I remember, when the world went mad with hate and fear after 9/11, the right making the case that the threat of terrorism was TOO GREAT to rely on due process, that free speech needed to have limits in order to protect us from extremists. Now, the same people who decried those very excesses now say that the threat of rape is TOO GREAT to rely on due process, that free speech needs to have limits in order to protect us from extremists.

I point out to these people, some of them close personal friends, that they are advocating the same things they were decrying a little over a decade ago, and they tell me that the difference is that they are right - the only difference between us and our enemies are targets, not tactics.

This new rise of the authoritarian, unliberal left has left me more than a little shaken - I've watched tribal madness overtake people I once thought reasonable, and the scope of acceptable political thought increasingly skew towards the extreme while obfuscating the median. I don't have much more to say other than that the proliferation of the extreme right and extreme left deeply, truly, frightens me.

[–]CaptainLhurgoyf 20ポイント21ポイント  (8子コメント)

A neo-Nazi can provide the seemingly perfect alternative to all of this guilt tripping from SJWs by going, "Are you sick and tired of being told you're a monster because of your race? We offer a better avenue for you by giving you an environment where you can feel proud of your heritage and not be shamed." (Because let's be honest, virtually nobody wants to become a neo-Nazi if they are directly asked that question.)

This very nearly happened to me. I had been exposed to SJWs for so long I started looking into neo-Nazi resources and following neo-Nazi blogs, largely for that exact same reason: I wanted to find a place where I felt like I didn't need to hate myself for being white, and I felt that if the SJWs wouldn't see me as anything but a racist I might as well be one. Thankfully, I managed to see later how dangerous what I was getting involved with was and I snapped out of it quickly. But from my own experiences? I'd say this scenario is very plausible.

[–]BurnerNumber3 17ポイント18ポイント  (5子コメント)

See I went from being far left on economic issues to, after being harried and harassed by these perpetually offended folks for so long, to being a right libertarian.

I don't want any kind of control thrust upon me. Not by the "culture nannies" nor the government. Of course, a neo-Nazi did try to get me to consider there ideas but I knew enough about the history of Nazi Germany to know that it'd just be replacing screams of "misogyny" with "impurity" or whatever gets their panties in a twist.

I just fundamentally want to be left the hell alone.

[–]J2383Wiggler Wonger 11ポイント12ポイント  (3子コメント)

I just fundamentally want to be left the hell alone.

Libertarianism in a nutshell.

[–]BurnerNumber3 3ポイント4ポイント  (2子コメント)

There's a reason why the hedgehog is fitting as an animal mascot for their party...

...and it isn't because Chris Chan made a libertarian sonichu OC

[–]J2383Wiggler Wonger 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

Chris Chan made a libertarian sonichu

*long sigh*

[–]BurnerNumber3 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Don't worry, I'm joking. As far as I know Sonichu is just racist and more religious right than anything.

[–]zahlman 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

See I went from being far left on economic issues to, after being harried and harassed by these perpetually offended folks for so long, to being a right libertarian.

The thing you need to understand is that "these perpetually offended folks" rarely give a shit about any kind of economics issue, especially if there isn't an easy way to make it about race.

[–]WouldYouBanAGayGuy 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Congratulations, you've become GamerGate!

https://twitter.com/srhbutts/status/615037274745536512

Waves at Butts

[–]CaptainLhurgoyf 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Finally, direct Ghazi hate. I have truly made it in this world.

[–]Zerael25k get! Party! 26ポイント27ポイント  (6子コメント)

[–]J2383Wiggler Wonger 12ポイント13ポイント  (1子コメント)

Damn. Just god fucking damn. The censoring speech article contains some of the most terrifying quotes I have ever seen. I honestly wasn't aware of the Nazi Party being censored early on, but even if it wasn't the idea that the holocaust is the end result of unfettered free speech isn't one I can even wrap my head around. I don't understand how someone can come to that conclusion with any level of seriousness. I know I say this so many times on KiA and TiA, but it speaks volumes to how privileged most of the people within the Social Justice movement are that they cannot see to how truly free speech benefits marginalized groups and squelches oppressive extremism.

[–]Deamon002 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

The author 'helpfully' neglects to mention that the Nazi Party was banned because it attempted to overthrow the Weimar Republic in a violent coup. Even still, Hitler and a few top Nazis were given extremely lenient prison sentences and the NSDAP was unbanned in a year. Within the first paragraph, this article stinks of revisionist history.

America is far less drawn to racism and authoritarianism than Europe is

And there goes any trace of his remaining credibility. *waves* Bye~~

[–]trollradar 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

As I have said before, one would be hard-pressed to find anyone outside of the US who supports full US-style freedom of speech – someone suggesting US-style freedom of speech outside of the US would be treated the same as (if not worse than) someone suggesting that murder and rape should be legalized. The concept of defending freedom of speech even for people that you profoundly despise does not exist outside of the US and neither does the idea that someone can disapprove of something without seeking to make it illegal.

He's not wrong. I live in Australia and genuinely believe America got it right in regards to free speech. You should see the looks of confusion, disgust and outright hatred I get whenever I disagree with someone over whatever the latest example of free speech banning happens to be. People here celebrate when we refuse or withdraw visas of visiting speakers because their opinions happen to be distasteful to the mainstream viewpoints. I get called a bigot and hatemonger despite very plainly stating my views are not about supporting the controversial opinions, but solely about defending the right of all people to express their views and that I don't trust any government to not abuse the privilege to suppress and outlaw speech for its own gain.

Everyone just wants to live in a happy little 'safe space' hugbox where their feels are never hurt and they somehow think that is both achievable, and wouldn't be abused for gain. Apart from anything else, I'd rather allow idiots with vile opinions to feel free to openly state those views so we know who to mock and ignore, rather than drive them underground and fuel their martyr complex.

[–]LoretoRomilda 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

They've started self-censoring the confederate flag. Free speech is passe.

[–]l0c0dantes 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I remember hearing an interview on NPR with a guy who used to recruit Muslim extemists.

He said, that the fact that the denying the holocaust is legal actionable hate speech, but drawing Mohamed wasn't was an effective argument to convince people.

[–]surgingchaos[S] 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Thanks for finding those articles. The author in both of them basically goes into what I said in far more detail.

[–]J2383Wiggler Wonger 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

TL;DR: I don't think we're necessarily becoming more authoritarian, I think maybe we're culturally getting fed up with authoritarianism and as such shining the spotlight onto all instances of it. We live in exciting times, and there are people out there working to build tools so nobody has to ask permission for the freedom of speech or privacy again.

TL;DR:TL;DR: TW:Meandering Libertarian ramblings.

As a libertarian, it saddens me to see the West become more and more authoritarian

I think that the wide left to right spread of the people within Gamergate shows that left to right isn't nearly as divisive as the authoritarian to libertarian(as in liberty, not the Libertarian party itself...I'll use anti-authoritarian to prevent confusion). In the past, because the primary social issues being pushed by the left were for the removal of restrictions, the primary pushback was from the authoritarian right. Now we're seeing a complete reversal of that with the authoritarian left attempting to force social controls but in the case of Gamergate unlike before it's not just the anti-authoritarians on the right who are calling bullshit it's the anti-authoritarians on both sides.

As a Libertarian I think that recent events indicate the possibility that public opinion is shifting away from authoritarianism. The most prominent example that springs to mind is how wildly successful Protein World was after telling the offended to fuck off. Even two years ago that would have been unimaginable for a corporation to do. There are numerous groups and movements looking to expand freedom, institutional transparency, and meritocracy over progressive stack or anything like it. I have no data to back this up, but in my experience the tech industry tends to lean pretty strongly libertarian; hardly a week goes by where some mediocre writer isn't complaining about the toxic Libertarian culture of meritocracy that plagues the tech industry; and nerds tend to go Libertarian in a way that does not require anyone else's permission. You have various open source cryptography projects with things like Bitcoin, Tor, the strong encryption tools that are provably secure and also provably not NSA tainted, and the like. Rather than ask nicely for freedoms, they're actively creating means of taking them regardless of what anyone says or does. Then you have folks like Michael "I don't understand that this is what they were aiming for" Steinbach saying that encryption makes it hard for the FBI to intercept communications so everyone cut that out because the FBI is only ever going to intercept communications lawfully so it's totally cool you guys(maybe just the tip).

I'm not saying that the anti-authoritarian side will ever fully win or even have a controlling share, but I think we live in a very exciting time where the average person is plunged into a position of being forced to understand the chilling effects more authoritarian policies can have. I think the only reason the Snowden leaks didn't cause rioting in the streets was the fact that they were presented in a dry, technologically dense way that most people didn't understand well enough to see the horrors within(John Oliver's interview with Snowden covered this beautifully).

[–]ggthxnore 37ポイント38ポイント  (5子コメント)

You are assuming that they'd consider more neo-Nazis a bad thing.

The more prominent actual neo-Nazis become the more credence a "you guys are neo-Nazis!" smear has. The same way you say SJWs are the best thing neo-Nazis could ask for, they serve the same purpose for the SJWs.

A resurgence of extreme right authoritarianism means one thing: donate to my Patreon.

[–]surgingchaos[S] 15ポイント16ポイント  (1子コメント)

Or you could say that both groups feed off of each other in an attempt to increase in power. The smear only works for people that are controlled by political correctness, which is something that is starting to dissolve away as people reach their wit's end with SJWs.

[–]Fucking_That_Chicken 11ポイント12ポイント  (0子コメント)

pretty much

their whole strategy functions like this, and I don't think they've thought of an endgame

[–]HammableOfCarthage 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

Both groups feed off each other until it's the USSR versus Nazi Germany.

[–]LeyonLecoq 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Those idiots don't know what they're playing with if they think that anything good is going to come out of seriously radicalizing people to the point where they consider right-wing extremists the lesser evil. Those people don't fuck around, and - unlike the maddening dishonesty of the SJW side of the coin - the simple honesty and sincerity of the extreme right-wing's pure hatred is very appealing to a lot of people.

Tens of millions lie buried in testament to that.

[–]I4dcQsEpLzTHvD1qhlDE 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

The more prominent actual neo-Nazis become the more credence a "you guys are neo-Nazis!" smear has

No, the more prominent so-called "neo-nazis" (seriously guys, you're as bad as SJWs) get, the more people see they are just normal people being branded with a label to make people dismiss them. It becomes less effective, not more, because people hear "that guy is a nazi!!1" and go "yeah so?".

[–]its_never_lupus 8ポイント9ポイント  (1子コメント)

It wouldn't bother them in the slightest. Socjus bullies are not nice people and they're not trying to help the world.

[–]BioShock_Trigger 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

they're not trying to help the world.

But it does seem like they are trying to help the world meet their needs and desires.

[–]Camhed 16ポイント17ポイント  (1子コメント)

Nazis and SJWs both agree whites are superior. The difference is the former believes this is natural and healthy and the latter believes it is arbitrarily achieved through oppression. They share almost everything as far as ideology goes; it's just one is right wing and one is left wing.

What this means is that all it takes is one logical step to switch from an SJW to a Nazi or vice versa. This is the belief that the current state of things is natural rather than the result of oppression.

[–]RoxWilco 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Upvoted. This kind of insightful comment is what I come here for.

[–]65117520180 10ポイント11ポイント  (9子コメント)

This can only lead to good things. Many normal moderates fought for Franco's side in the Spanish Civil War after the left showed their true colours

[–]Anathema_Redditus 1ポイント2ポイント  (8子コメント)

I actually like Franco. He and Mussolini are kind of the ideal benevolent dictators to me.

[–]Ed130_The_Vanguard 3ポイント4ポイント  (4子コメント)

Mussolini was an incompetent fuck who dragged Nazi Germany into a desert war with a pipe dream of a 'new Roman Empire.' Benevolent he was not.

[–]MitsuXLulu 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

i honestly dont know why hitler even bothered with him... oh well i guess the italians finally did SOMETHING useful

[–]Ed130_The_Vanguard 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

They did distract the Commonwealth forces in North Africa and 'closed' the Mediterranean, it was more nuisance work than anything in the early days.

[–]Kestyr 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Italy used to have one of the top navies while Germany was still building up. At the time it seemed good, but Mussolini also bluffed a lot of his strength. Relying on him rather than having something like a Spain type relationship lead to a lot of blunders like having to split the Nazis up in the Balkans and North Africa.

[–]65117520180 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm also quite fond of Pinochet.

[–]Kestyr 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Eh, I think Pinochet or Tito would be a better example than Mussolini.

[–]Anathema_Redditus 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

True, he did fuck up with Hitler and all. He was just the first guy to come to mind.

[–]cheat-master30 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

You are 100% spot on with this point. The extreme left encourages the extreme right and vice versa, and there's a definite chance that all the crap in the media and from SJWs and holier than though politicians (in the UK, quite a few seem to blame 'racism' for ANYTHING even remotely against their agenda) will just encourage the rise of another Nazi party or other extremist group. The example of UKIP is a perfect one here.

However, I'm also personally scared of another worrying possibility; that the GamerGate war in general will encourage said neo nazis to try and co opt the gaming community to their own political views.

I mean, let's face it. The extreme left are already doing that. They're called pretty much the entire gaming press. And it would be very easy for the other side to come in, 'support' GamerGate and our movements and then gradually try and encourage people to start believing in their (also) rather horrible political and social views. If I was lobbying or marketing for UKIP, all this stuff would make the gaming world perfect place to try and reach out to younger voters.

I also suspect that to some degree, some of the SJWs might be trying to distract people from seeing the real issues in the world and doing anything about them. Every minute where people argue over pointless gender ratios and representation in fictional media is time they're not looking at the problems in the real world after all. Maybe a bit conspiracy like, but it's at least possible. Block real political change by distracting people with arguments about stuff on the internet.

[–]aceofspades14 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is very true. I think SJWs and the rest of the authoritarian left are going to regret their bullying and silencing tactics. Nothing good ever comes of abandoning rule of law in favor of rule of force, and the far left has spent decades demonizing the right...unfortunately, the left in the media and even government are so far left even Stalin himself appears to be to the right of them, and the moderate left is getting a taste of their vitriol. I'm a right wing libertarian, and I see real liberals, non PC crazy liberals, get the same shame and silence treatment as myself and others on the right.

What we have, with GamerGate, and Sad Puppies, and every fandom or business that doesn't espouse social justice and finds itself a target of SJWs, is a despised minority (that is really no minority at all) is the target of an establishment that considers this "minority" unworthy of respect, unworthy of rights, and unworthy of having a say in the way they can live their lives and enjoy their pursuits. It’s an establishment that has one law for itself, and another for its enemies. It’s an establishment that inflicts an ever-increasing series of petty humiliations on its opponents and considers this all hilarious.

That’s a recipe for disaster. You cannot expect to change the status quo for yourself and then expect those you victimize not to play by the new rules you have created.

Most people have principles and would not dream of becoming violent or espousing radical extremes, but human nature favors payback. When you block all normal means of dissent, whether by ignoring your opponents or using the media to mock and abuse them, you build up the pressure. The number of people SJWs despise and abuse continues to grow, they keep pissing people off, and their list of targets expands. More anger and more frustration. If they continue to silence people, there is going to be a backlash. Each action, after all, has an equal and opposite reaction. Of course, they will never realize this until it is too late. It's downright scary.

[–]AFCSentinel 10ポイント11ポイント  (1子コメント)

Yup, spot on. Which is why so many on the "moderate" left (actually still far left but not left enough for the SJWs) are so worried about this whole identity politics schtick. It's distracting from the issues that are really of concern to working class people regardless of race, gender etc. while making the left look like loonies to the general public that are then looking towards people that are talking the talk I.e. moderate right/far right groups and parties. We are still recovering from a financial catatrophe of epic proportions and even though we have battles through recession various austerity policies are still in play. The very last the typical target group of leftist parties wants to hear is how "privileged" they are, despite being among the hardest hit by the recession and the necessary laws etc. to affect recovery.

[–]Kestyr 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's distracting from the issues that are really of concern to working class people regardless of race, gender etc

Bringing up the working class is a funny thing. The left abandoned them and shamed them for existing in a lot of places and spoke nastily to them after they spent the past century being their main voting stock. You end up with some funny results after that happens.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/22/alienated-french-working-class-vote-far-right-claims-analyst

“With no political offer from the left, working-class French people feel they have been abandoned economically, socially and culturally. The FN has stepped into the breach: it says to these people: ‘you are the most important and we will fight for you’.

“The left is trying to make up to what it calls ‘real minorities’ who it believes are discriminated against. In doing so it has become indifferent, even scornful, of the wider French working class. They say to these native French ‘you have not understood, you are racist and sexist’, and so these people have said, so be it. They are ready to admit voting FN because the left has abandoned them and the FN is interested in them.”

Bouvet is particularly scathing of the Socialist “ideas laboratory” Terra Nova, unveiled before Hollande’s successful 2012 presidential election, which suggested the Socialists could win by emulating Barack Obama’s mobilisation of the African, Latino and female vote, and by abandoning its traditional alliance with the middle and working classes.

[–]HammableOfCarthage 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

I fear we may be living in dangerous times with the lunatic fringe becoming more viable.

[–]SpencersCJ 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

The more insane you make the left look the more plausible you make the right look. And vice versa, this can only get worse

[–]Bwhitty23 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I don't know if this exist or not but I would love to see a novel explore the ideas of the pendulum swinging back and forth so far in each direction and the effects it will have on the protagonists and society as a whole. Some good social commentary and themes. Maybe I'll add this to the list of boom ideas I have that I've never gotten around to putting then pen to paper.

[–]ev1lb1t 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

A huge line that the white supremacist movement has been spouting for the past 40 years is how the white race is being persecuted and is under attack.

In the past 10 years, the SJW's have transformed this laughable soundbyte into a frightening reality.

This has given them a foot in the door of political discourse which sane people spent 25 years carefully closing.

Fuck SJWs for helping actual white supremacists gain ground.

[–]Kestyr 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Individual European nations receiving USA level immigration numbers despite having much smaller populaces, and those immigrants often being of the Lower stock, much different religion/culture, and unemployable rather than educated or middle class ones have done an enormous effort in revitalizing nativisim in Europe.

[–]DanteFTW 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

so we're in a Hulk-Buster situation (beat them within a time limit, before things turn ugly)

[–]HelloCMDR 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's funny, actually. It would be quite easy to turn the far left into the far right under the guise of ending the tyranny of the majority. The whole Stormfront or SJW thing isn't just a catchy meme. It should be a warning to the far left of just how convergent upon Neo-Nazism they have become.

Take the arguments of the far left:

  • The ending of a privileged class
  • The redistribution of wealth to the 'deserving'
  • Reparations for past plights and slights
  • Safe spaces for the 'good people'
  • Casual slights and normalization of abuse against a 'powerful lobby'
  • Said slights are supported by its populace because they are not in a position of power and it is rebalancing the social dynamics of the underclass
  • There is both guilt by association and blood, combined with the genetic fallacy
  • Said powerful lobby is both hopelessly incompetent and massively hegemonic
  • Frequent lies and mis-truths spread as fact
  • Extremists call for murder, arson and genocide
  • Moderates call for "control" and "rehabilitation"
  • Critics are said to be standing in the way of social progress

It would be stunningly easy to turn far left social justice into far right mob justice. All you really need is a suitable flash point. You could quite easily replace "the patriarchy" and "men" with "international Jewry" without changing a single one of the above arguments.

[–]JustABaku 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

No because then it will only justify their existence. They will bitch, yell and be unreasonable and label everyone a monster until these people say 'fuck it' and start 'accepting it' since, like you said...one can only be fed white guilt and male guilt so much until they snap. Then when the monster wake they can go SEE I TOLD YOU IT WAS THE NEO-ISIS-GOOBLER-NAZIS KKK!

[–]Rygar_the_Beast 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

Well, the SJWs think GG are all right leaning so i dont think they know that they are actually bringing the right into this mess. They think they have been fighting the right from the start.

[–]kalphis 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

That may just be a projection, since some of the "right" are friends with the SJWs. Hence the trolls in disguise.

[–]Aurondarklord 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

SJWs and the extreme right are just reflections of each other. Same basic concept, they just want to put different groups in power at the top of their rigid authoritarian pecking order. For a while now I've been predicting a fundamental shift in western politics, where the traditional left vs right dichotomy gets phased out in favor of an authoritarian vs libertarian one.

[–]Fenrir007 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

When you claim a group of normal people like gamers are neo-nazis, for example, I'd say you give actual neo-nazis a new measuring stick that would bring them much closer to normal people as a consequence.

In other words, if we become the benchmark for neo-nazis, this will be a great PR boost for actual neo-nazis. And this is bad for everyone, us and SJWs alike.

[–]jernd 6ポイント7ポイント  (2子コメント)

Why are you more scared of Nazis (supposedly killed 6 million Jews) than of Marxists (killed over 100 million people)? Ask yourself this question. Try to realize that the Marxists are all over our institutions and SJWs are just their "Hitler youth."

[–]surgingchaos[S] 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

I never said I was "more scared" of Nazis than Marxists.

What I am scared of though is that once more and more people get sick and tired of SJWs, rather than look for libertarian-oriented solutions that remove power from SJWs, they will simply turn to another brand of authoritarian ideals.

[–]slimthigh 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

Why are you more scared of Nazis (supposedly killed 6 million Jews) than of Marxists (killed over 100 million people)?

Because he has beein living his whole life exposed to propaganda by people sympathetic to communism.

[–]BigTimStrange 4ポイント5ポイント  (6子コメント)

To be fair, the right is trying to pull people to their side by painting SJWs as the Left as a whole. It's a vicious cycle I wish there was a clear way to break.

What really worries me though, is that this extremism isn't a problem, it's a symptom.

The more our brains perceive our survival is threatened, the more extreme we become. During the Depression, lynchings shot up. When Greece faltered, nazism grew. Germany was in a sad state of affairs when it embraced Hitler etc.

Extremist views are cropping up on a global scale. The whole world's going mad and I fear the worst is yet to come.

[–]NosesofShadows 7ポイント8ポイント  (5子コメント)

To be fair, the right is trying to pull people to their side by painting SJWs as the Left as a whole. It's a vicious cycle I wish there was a clear way to break.

SJWs ARE the left as a whole. The left as it stands today is nothing but communists swearing up and down that they're not communists.

Not saying the right is any better, but still, let's make this shit clear SJW=Liberal=Communist=LEFT-WING

[–]indigoanasazi 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

The left has really done a great job of driving everyone out who cared about economics.

Hell, that's what the whole 'neoconservative' label meant before it meant gerrymandering assholes: Leftists and socialists who had grown disillusioned with the wholehearted embracing of Marxist principles and identity politics on the left during the 70's who were abandoning the Democratic party. Hell, the term -they- wanted to be known by was 'paleoliberals'.

As it stands now, the left is entirely co-opted and zombified, but propped up with well-meaning people who are ignorant. As Lenin would have called them, "Useful Idiots".

[–]Agkistro13 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah, this. The people claiming that SJWs aren't 'the real left' are just in denial as the thing they they want to call themselves has been revealed to be utterly horrible. Now, not everybody on the left is as EXTREME about it as the people we are calling SJW's, but that's still what the SJW is- just further left than most leftists want to be. But of course, if we know anything about the left, "Further left than most leftists want to be" will be "Moderate" in 10 years.

[–]BigTimStrange 3ポイント4ポイント  (2子コメント)

SJWs ARE the left as a whole. The left as it stands today is nothing but communists swearing up and down that they're not communists.

So I'm an SJW?

[–]ev1lb1t 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

The democrats in the US and similar parties across canada and the EU fund, facilitate, and when asked will engage in apologism and excuses for SJW activity.

If you're voting for them you're enabling SJWs, so yes.

[–]Pinworm45 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think most of them are fine with that. They can't fight a war with no enemies, and they can't profit as victims of harassment with no one to call them fucking retards on twitter.

But yes, from a pragmatic perspective, they aren't the brightest bulbs. They seem to do more damage to their cause than anything. I mean, I'm an enemy of theirs now. I consider myself an anti-feminist. And I'm an Egalitarian who doesn't even think the government should have a legal basis to determine between sex, orientation, whatever. Kind of like an establishment clause for people.

I'm someone that by all rights should be on their side. I share the goals they claim to have. Yet I consider them probably my largest enemy right now.

Maybe they don't give a shit about me. But the simple fact is, I could have been an ally, now I am an enemy. I doubt I'm the only one.

Something has gone wrong on this opposite side. I don't really think that makes neo nazi's correct now, though, but I wouldn't doubt they're increasing the number of people in hate groups.

I just think they're probably fine with that since it helps their causes. At least their leaders. If there is no serious racial issues, they have no point in existing, and the entire life is a lie. So they have to make some. No doubt. Replace race with sex or being a fat fuck or whatever else.

[–]ceyen 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

They're to narcissistic to address the problems they're causing. With Obama wanting to out members of the KKK and that Tennessee mayor wanting to dig up that Confederate general, cracking down on hate groups like the Klan and messing with Confederates will only empower them and get them more pissed.

[–]BobMugabe35 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

They think everyone's already just authoritarian/racist/sexist/etc and that any of that that pops up as they're off dicking around is just them doing a good job of "exposing" it.

[–]MM985 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

I don't know political theory, or if there's a term/theory for it. But I call it the pendulum. And it reacts over time. We see shifts in perceptions sometimes quickly - usually very slowly.

The hyper sensitive political correctness of the past? The 'Think of the children!' And 'Family Values!' Schmucks clutching at their pearls in terror?

People got sick of that shit and it eventually fueled some great comedy that poked fun and bucked the pc police with a good spit in their eye. People got sick of it, and they reacted.

The same thing is happening now. And I can only hope that standing up to today's brand of moral Puritanism can continue to gain steam.

I think the reason SJ brand of authoritarianism has been as successful as it has is because they cloak it with 'protected' groups. Not in that it's illegal, but socially faux pas or complete suicide career wise to criticize or speak out against the hive mind. Coupled with the self assured zealotry being spoon fed in academia that this is right, this is justice, this is progressive.

I honestly have avoided openly discussing GamerGate in person or on social media except for calculated pieces I know can share, or if I know im going to get flak - do my homework to shoot down any tantrums and be at my most collected and unemotional.

I'm an overweight white guy who's reserved and admittedly a bit naive and socially oblivious. I'm not some cringe inducing fedora beard but there's enough there for some people to completely dismiss anything I have to say because I need to 'check my privilege' - Because the idea that I trust my own intelligence and form my own conclusions and opinions for a reason is completely fucking alien to these people.

But yeah, to get back on topic. I worry about it too. Specifically in the USA, I see Dems and people on the left use stupid bullshit from the right to vindicate and justify equally absurd ideas from the left.

[–]Herr_Rambler 2ポイント3ポイント  (12子コメント)

It is easy to spout the "There are no bad tactics, only bad targets" line when you are attacking others.

The authoritarian right tends to get physical when they attack. Not to mention they tend to have combat experience and know how to shoot a gun. Currently, the authoritarian left tends to pull fire alarms, scream, call names and rant on Tumblr. This is why the authoritarian right (In my opinion) is more dangerous. At least the authoritarian left does not maim and kill people. Yet...

[–]jubbergun 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

The authoritarian right tends to get physical when they attack.

I think most people only believe that because they think the Klan was "right-wing," and because they aren't old enough to remember 60s/70s radical groups like the Weather Underground, the Symbionese Liberation Army, the Earth Liberation Front, and the Black Liberation Army. Most white supremacists may identify as "right-wing" now, but in its early days and during the civil rights era the Klan was practically an arm of the democrat party, and decidedly more left-wing and in favor of government programs like those introduced under FDR and LBJ.

Even when people point to right-wing domestic "terrorists," they're mainly pointing at groups that never actually attacked anyone, but are remembered for taking up arms and resisting government intervention at their private compounds. Actual right wing terrorists, like those who target abortion providers, rarely get a mention. The radical left in this country has a long and storied history of violence. You just don't realize it because it literally is history, with no recent attacks or even threats of violence. The extreme right is no more, or no less, likely to get violent than the extreme left, and there is definitely greater historical evidence of left wing violence in the US.

[–]SatoshiKamasutra 13ポイント14ポイント  (2子コメント)

Except that in the US at least, the "authoritarian right" such as it even exists, are a bunch of losers in wooden shacks writing Internet manifestos and selling (or using) crystal meth. One of Dylann Roof's complaints is that he couldn't find any fellow racists to conspire with. Meanwhile the authoritarian left controls the universities, the media and has a strong political following.

[–]LazlowCohones 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

One of the major mistakes that you are making is that most backwoods racists, especially in the south are not members of the authoritarian right.

Most of the people flying the confederate flag have a paranoid, anti-government ideology. These people basically want to roll back and size and scope of the federal government to the way it was in the 1770s under the Articles of Confederation.

You hear it over and over with the fundamentalist "states rights, anti-tax, and property rights" positions that most of these people take.

In fact, one major manifestation of this type of ideology (though not necessarily racist in and of itself) is the crazy ass Sovereign Citizen movement.

The racist right in the US is hugely distinct from the far right in Europe, in this way.

[–]Agkistro13 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

What the hell is authoritarian about hating the government and living in the woods so nobody can tell you what to do? As backwards as racists like that can be, there's nothing authoritarian about it.

The authoritarian right would be like...radical Islam, maybe. Evangelical Christians have that streak too, but even when they want to enforce their will, they seem to restrict themselves to due process. I can live with 'let's pur our agenda to a vote and make it the law of the land' authoritarians more than the 'let's make it illegal to voice disagreement' sort you get from the SJW left.

[–]Spokker 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

Those incidents are not very common to begin with. Biggest source of violence, in the United States at least, is gang-related gun violence. I'm not worried about left-wing, right-wing or Muslim terrorism. I'm worried, at least in the back of my mind, about robbery gone wrong and home invasion and shit like that. I'm not shaking in my boots but of course I take basic steps that any reasonable person would to limit the likelihood that I'd be a victim of such crimes.

I don't know if there's anything an individual could do to protect themselves form, say, a mass shooting anyway. You would just hope that the FBI can detect those things before they happen.

[–]MM985 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

I might actually have to disagree, somewhat at least.

There was a time that the radical right was viewed as 'quaint' - out of touch religious loons that were more concerned with homosexuals causing hurricanes than with real issues like security, communism, and the economy.

Then somewhere along the line they started getting pandered to and that led to it's natural extremes. It's the fact politicians indulged them, that bolstered them to continue on.

It's that pandering in favor of stupid, pointless shit that's dangerous. And I'm cautiously hopeful that US conservatives will collectively pull their head out of their ass and move to the middle to fill a growing niche.

I consider the radical left to be less violent. Although not for a lack of death threats and harassment of their own brand.

But I do consider them more insidious in the sort of shit they pull. The far right chap will wear his bigotry on his sleeves. The radical left will gaslight, manipulate, move the goal posts, shame, degrade and attempt to change how people act, and the way they think.

The latter frightens me more.

Orwell is turning over in his grave so fast he's spinning.

[–]Agkistro13 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

I might actually have to disagree, somewhat at least. There was a time that the radical right was viewed as 'quaint' - out of touch religious loons that were more concerned with homosexuals causing hurricanes than with real issues like security, communism, and the economy.

It's like you think American political history begins in 1994 or something. The right didn't give a flying fuck about homosexuals until the left brought the issue up.

[–]MM985 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

The religious right didn't always have the sort of clout it does today. It was 'Family Values!' And the PC police clutching at their pearls, sleazy tv evangelicals and pray the gay away. Then they started getting courted hard by politicians pandering to their vote. that snowballed into the fucking parody of itself that it is today.

I want the GOP to pull its' shit together and throttle back from the religious right, and stop gargling corporate ballsacks to be the small government, financially conservative, and 'don't give a shit what you do' party they keep pretending to be.

And it's getting there, there are already some signs that it's happening. But until then I'm voting libertarian.

Edit: Actually did you even read my post? Or did you just read that first paragraph and immediately get so buttmad that you had to reply?

[–]ev1lb1t 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

There's no need to organize extra-governmental "brown shirts" when you have friends in the legislatures and can use the government itself to 'get physical', and friends in the press who can blackmail and slander companies into rendering you unemployable.

I'd rather be swiftly beaten to death than starve in the streets for lack of employment.

Twitter hate mobs lionized by the press causing McCarthyist professional purges.

Laws declaring political dissent "hate speech" and "harassment", backed up by swat teams.

Policies which deny equal protection on campuses when the person is a "cis white male"

Laws which declare men guilty simply for being men.

Laws which utilize the government to plunder "cis white males" and give the spoils to minorities. (seriously, replace white males with jews, minorities with aryans, it's FRIGHTENING)

[–][削除されました]  (1子コメント)

[deleted]

    [–]AutoModeratorAutomated sealioness[M] [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

    Your comment contained a link to another subreddit, and has been removed, in accordance with Rule 4.

    I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

    [–]Herr_Rambler 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Welp. There I go again. Spouting out unfounded opinions on the internet.

    [–]iamoverrated 2ポイント3ポイント  (6子コメント)

    Nazis are leftist, not right-wing... it's in their name, "National Socialists".

    [–]Morrigi_ 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

    The social aspect of National Socialism has nothing to do with Marxist socialism. Adolf Hitler put it best:

    "Why need we trouble to socialize banks and factories? We socialize human beings..."

    They also have nothing against the concept of private property.

    [–]YetAnotherCommenter 7ポイント8ポイント  (2子コメント)

    They also have nothing against the concept of private property.

    Actually the economies of fascist and national socialist regimes have always been extremely regimented and controlled by the government. Nominally, private property still exists, but the owner's ownership is conditional upon using that property in the service of the State.

    This is not "private property" in the meaningful sense of the term - having a property right over something means you can do whatever the hell you want with it. This is never possible in a fascist economic regime.

    The definition of economic fascism is basically central planning by the state, with a nominal veneer of private ownership. This is far closer to Lenin and Stalin than it is to anything advocated by the free market, classical liberal tradition.

    That said, I wouldn't describe the Nazis as "leftist" per se, since "left" and "right" are effectively meaningless concepts. However, National Socialism has a hell of a lot in common with many ideologies of the left, most notably collectivism (both methodological and political). In addition, no one would dispute that the 20s-30s-40s American Progressive tradition belongs on the left, and it was racist, nationalist, biologically determinist, elitist, collectivist, moralistic and anti-free-market.... all of which are also attributable to National Socialism (although the National Socialists had this sort of mystical-racial-spirit thing going on so they weren't positivists like the Progressives were).

    [–]Morrigi_ 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

    One major difference is that National Socialist Germany did not own the means of production, as the Soviet government did. Private businesses were allowed to flourish, so long as they were not seen to cause harm to the country. In addition, while it was collectivist, it was not traditionally socialist in its collectivism. A quote from Hitler on the latter point:

    "Our social welfare system is more than just charity. Because we do not say to the rich people: Please, give something to the poor. Instead, we say: German people, help yourselves!

    Everyone must help, whether you are rich or poor! Everyone must have the belief that there's always someone in a much worse situation than I am, and this person I want to help as a comrade..."

    There's a reason many people call National Socialism the "third position" compared to the traditional left and right, because it just doesn't fit neatly into classification like that.

    [–]YetAnotherCommenter 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

    One major difference is that National Socialist Germany did not own the means of production, as the Soviet government did.

    Ownership without control isn't that much different from full government ownership and control. The difference is effectively a charade.

    Private businesses were allowed to flourish, so long as they were not seen to cause harm to the country.

    No, they had to serve the country's interests and fit in with the plans and demands of the leaders. Nazi Germany was hardly anything close to laissez-faire (Hitler was an explicit anti-capitalist as well).

    In addition, while it was collectivist, it was not traditionally socialist in its collectivism.

    Correct, it didn't define the relevant collectives economically but rather on the basis of race/nationality.

    But to frame Nazism as the opposite of socialism like the traditional political spectrum does is frankly insane. The two ideologies have more similarities than differences on basically all issues relevant to political philosophy and political program.

    [–]Agkistro13 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Nazism was sort of a combination of both. Fascism in general can't be easily called a 'left' thing or a 'right' thing.

    [–]I4dcQsEpLzTHvD1qhlDE -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Nazis are leftist, not right-wing

    Wrong and right. They are not right-wing, but they are not left-wing either. Nazis were centrist authoritarians. Like this: https://theinklingdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/political-compass-figure-1.jpg

    [–]JohnGalt316 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

    remember when the left was the side of logic and reason?

    sjws are the Bible Thumpers of the left, but a lot less likeable

    [–]ChipyGlitchy 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

    We've never been the side of logic and reason because there is no such thing. Liberals have always had terrible ideas that the right had better solutions for and vice versa, its why an open conversation is so damn important in a true republic or democracy. Its a bouncing back and forth that creates things like the Bill of Rights and so on.

    The real issue isn't SJW or Bible thumpers its the idea that they cant talk to each other about jack shit anymore, the extremism of both the right and left is becoming the norm vs moderacy.

    I say we because I consider mysel a leftist and a liberal but I find myself more and more moderate even though at one point I would have been on the more extreme spectrum of political beliefs.

    [–]YetAnotherCommenter 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

    People have a tendency to coalesce around their identity groups when they feel their identity is being attacked.

    A sense of being victimized is necessary to generate a sense of "us" against "them." The Nazis imagined that Germans were an Oppressed Class, victims of international Jewry. Gay culture, particularly in the US, was formed in the context of being stigmatized, outcast, pathologized, criminalized etc. Nerd culture is itself based on a narrative of oppression, of feeling like a failure due to not being one of the jocks or the 'beautiful people' and of being bullied relentlessly. African-American culture cannot be understood without reference to slavery, urban poverty, and Jim Crow.

    SJWs go on about the monstrous evils of CHAWMs (Cisgender, Heterosexual, Ablebodied White Males) over and over again. They treat rape as innate within males. They love mocking and ridiculing, they love their "male tears" mugs, they treat racism as the Original Sin of all whites and they constantly exploit white guilt and go on about privilege and the like...

    They also happen to be directly influential on policy - the feminist lobby is responsible for a lot of child support/alimony law, and also Title IX and how that's used on campuses. They're gaining ground in their influence upon culture.

    Is it any surprise that they are driving people into white nationalist movements? Absolutely not!

    Look at how the Christian Right are reacting to the gay marriage decision; they're going on about how Christianity itself is being attacked and nearly on the verge of being criminalized (!). People rally around their identities when they believe those identities are subject to persecution.

    As a libertarian, it saddens me to see the West become more and more authoritarian.

    As a fellow libertarian, I agree. But I guess this is probably due to something in libertarianism itself; libertarianism is about individuals, not demographic categories. The ideology sees identity groups like race, creed, nation, class etc. as politically irrelevant. As such, whilst it opposes any form of discrimination based on such group, it doesn't offer any affirmation on an identity-based level.

    This probably helps explain why attacks on identity rarely make people drift more libertarian and instead incline towards identity-based authoritarianism... because there's no such thing as identity-based individualism (that's a contradiction in terms).

    [–]SnatchTease 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    according to the front page, sjw's are bringing all sorts, normal people included out of the woodworks to call them out on being tardmuffins.

    [–]Akesgeroth 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    When it comes to the "greater" fight, I've pretty much given up trying to avoid a war. I still believe in Gamergate simply because, as they say, "It's just video games". But when it comes to laws, to corporations, to wars... The world leaders are out for blood and nothing will stop them. The one thing that could stop them is the people, and the people are swallowing propaganda by the shovefuls.

    [–]internetideamachine 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    You'd think that maybe they would notice with the whole Conservative Party winning the majority in the UK...

    [–]HatredsBlazingGun 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I for one welcome our new Nazi overlords.

    [–]noretus 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Yeah this is something that I'm genuinely worried about. Western society has absolutely taken leaps towards a better, fairer and more equal society but SJW aggression and behavior makes you think we still live in the dark ages. It's only to be expected that that kind of vileness is met with equal vileness from the polar opposite.

    I'm afraid that far right still has more pull with humankind since it feeds off our worst vices and benefits from the promise of short-term rewards. The far left is more arbitrary.

    [–]Kinbaku_enthusiast 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    And that for a while will only serve to push their agenda. The enemy of an extremist is not their ideological opponent. The true enemy of an extremist is a moderate.

    [–]Inuma 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Fucking Xist, I gotta talk about this...

    Working on my political history post first, then feminism, then "Left vs Right" politics in America...

    [–]legitimateusername4 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    They don't care. It's all about jockeying for status amongst their toxic little cliques.

    I say this as someone who was center left but who has been pushed to the center right by my loathing of these clowns.

    [–]General_Urist 0ポイント1ポイント  (3子コメント)

    I once identified as a member of the extreme left, but that was back when "extreme left" still meant "guillotine the capitalists and establish a dictatorship of the proletariat", not all this "cis white mails are scum that must know their place" B.S. worse yet is that you can go onto leftist subs and criticism the former, but the moment you even doubt that latter, you get banned. By this point the left seams to be more of a vehicle for SOCJUS ideology than proletarian revolution. u/DavidByron2 once said the following on r/MensRights:

    I think it's a good litmus test for a feminist false flag operation. Do they ban critics of feminism but not critics of whatever the sub is pretending to be about?

    Which seems to apply to a frightening amount of places. A list that far-right organizations are usually absent from. One wonders how many people flock to the far right just because they can freely criticize SOCJUS ideology there.

    By this point, horseshoe theory has resulted in both the far right and far left making distinctions based on race/gender/sexuality. The difference is that one tells white males to be ashamed of their biology, the other tells them to be proud of it. and with the SOCJUS seeming to swamp everything, it's easy to see how the far right could seem like the only option.

    [–]RenegadeDoc 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    "the far left" of today isn't left wing at all. It;s economically liberal, sometimes even conservative and substitutes any real policy differences from right leaning groups with batshit identity politics.

    As you say, the old ideas of the left are fine to attack, but identity politics are sacred cows.

    That aint left wing.

    The left wing I grew up with was ALL ABOUT argument, dissent and disagreement.

    That used to be what the right wing mocked (it's why I find it so fucking retarded so many libertarians try to suggest the left is "authoritarian" by nature. Atm I have a libertardian telling me that religious conservatism and moral panics are exclusively left wing. I apparently need to provide "counter evidence" to the contrary)

    The horseshoe is a rather modern invention.

    It does fit, but it fits because this neuvo "far left" abandons all of the ideas of the left in favour of bullshit that is identical to fascism ><

    They damage the brand of the left (and liberalism, which is different, regardless of what Americans say) It's sad, but the power of the right wing has ALWAYS come from the left shooting itself in the foot because we allow everyone to speak and sometimes VERY BAD ideas gain traction.

    [–][削除されました]  (1子コメント)

    [deleted]

      [–]AutoModeratorAutomated sealioness[M] 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Your comment contained a link to another subreddit, and has been removed, in accordance with Rule 4.

      I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

      [–]Dwavenhobble 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Well I have real fun with this when someone tells me to check my privilege.

      I'm white but according to genetics I'm descended from Black Carribean's and for those genetics to be the way they are it means at least one of my ancestors was a Pirate. On the other side of my family it was mostly sheep rustlers. Its great it means if anyone does try to tell me I owe reparations or anything like that for being white I can turn round and point out there's probably a very high chance I'm white and would be owed reparations by someone.

      It seems for many SJW History is not History and everyone is responsible for all the crimes of their ancestors with no possible limit until what they see as justice has been extracted.

      [–]corruptigon2 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

      They are not aware and at this point I'm happy, they are two faces of the same medal, let them destroy each other.

      [–]jubbergun 0ポイント1ポイント  (5子コメント)

      I would hope that most people would have enough sense to awaken to the dangers the authoritarian left represents without jumping into the arms of neo-Nazis and/or white supremacist groups. I don't really see that happening anywhere.

      What you're seeing with far-right parties in Europe isn't a backlash against SJWs in particular, but the extreme left in general. Many Europeans have finally become aware of the flaws in some socialist policies and want some changes in governance, which is what led to Cameron's ascension to PM and austerity measures in the UK. Some Europeans are rightly concerned that certain immigrant groups are resisting assimilation into the larger culture. I'm sure there is a certain degree of xenophobia inherent in that reaction, but there's a large difference between being a bit put off by your neighbors unusual (to you) habits and the response to such issues as the Rotherham pedophile abuse, the Charlie Hebdo shootings, and/or the Paris riots. They expect their governments to defend the national culture, encourage assimilation into the same, and either deport dangerous immigrants are bar their entry. None of these are unreasonable concerns or expectations until they're taken to extremes.

      If you're old enough to remember the late 70s and early 80s, or you've extensively studied the political landscape of the time, you'll realize that Reagan's presidential wins had nothing to do with a backlash against the left. Many of the states and even electoral districts that voted him into the presidency continued to elect democrats to the house and senate. He never had a friendly congress either of his two terms, yet unlike a certain current president, he was able to get large parts of his agenda passed by actually talking to and working with the other party. He and then Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill cooperated despite their differences, and when tarring and feathering Reagan for being a successful conservative politician eventually goes out of fashion, the era will be looked upon as a golden age of American politics.

      In short, I think you misunderstand the political history of the 1980s and are unduly worried that many people will be swept up into the arms of reprobates in their fervor to combat the authoritarian left.

      [–]ev1lb1t 0ポイント1ポイント  (4子コメント)

      Reagan's political leanings have nothing to do with it, the economic numbers for the prosperity and health of the national economy and middle class take a nose-dive with his ascension. A nose-dive which continues to this day as his ludicrous voodoo-economic theories, informed no doubt by his years of experience in ACTING, have been continued to this day, along with his trillion-dollar military budgets sucking us dry while hiding the truly anemic economy for decades.

      America is in severe decline, and it's Reagan's fault.

      He sold out the nation's future for a small bit of prosperity during his presidency in the same way someone takes out a home equity line of credit while knowing they're next on the layoff schedule.

      [–]jubbergun -1ポイント0ポイント  (3子コメント)

      Reagan's political leanings have nothing to do with it, the economic numbers for the prosperity and health of the national economy and middle class take a nose-dive with his ascension.

      Citation Needed

      According to the Census Bureau's numbers, on a state-by-state breakdown median household income increased in a majority of states between 1979 and 1989, the years Reagan held office. Reagan and O'Neill worked out tax cuts that were extremely popular and helped to relieve the recession of the late 70s/early 80s that started under President Carter. America didn't see another period of recession until the mid 1990s, when the first President Bush was in office.

      A nose-dive which continues to this day

      Provably false, considering that the country has been in and out of a few recessions since Reagan's presidency. Maybe you don't know what a nose-dive is, or maybe you're given over to fits of ridiculous hyperbole, but in any case that's just a silly claim, and one that would absolve every president and congress since Reagan's service ended over 26 years ago for any responsibility for the effects of policies enacted in those two-and-a-half decades.

      I thank you for your post, though. You provide an excellent example of the tarring and feathering Reagan for being a successful conservative politician I mentioned in my previous post.

      [–]ev1lb1t 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

      Citation Needed

      http://ofslides.com/storage/s1/video/a3/0f/a30f9b6e40e889177556781ae4782808/slides.pdf

      (source for charts, the BEA's economic data going back to that period)

      on a state-by-state breakdown median household income increased in a majority of states between 1979 and 1989, the years Reagan held office.

      Yes, when you sell off the nation's future for increased wealth in the present (cheap shit from the third world in exchange for our JOBS), that's what happens, until everyone is done offshoring, then suddenly the lower real prices don't matter, because nobody has a damn job. (does the 1992 election ring a bell?!)

      When I get a HELOC on a house, and spend it like it's real money, I feel richer for a month, maybe a year, but then I'm stuck with the payments and am poorer forevermore.

      Honestly, anyone who claims to like Reagan is outing themselves as a failure at fiscal conservatism. Reaganomics is entirely based upon driving the nation into bankruptcy, both public and private, for shiny shit now.

      Provably false, considering that the country has been in and out of a few recessions since Reagan's presidency.

      And each one has been preceeded by millions of offshored jobs, followed by that destroyed purchasing power hitting the companies and their stocks (the market drops are what cause the classification of "recession"), and finally subject to a "jobless recovery", with each "recovery" being more jobless and debt-based than the last.

      This is actually supported by even the crack-potted Von Mises institute's studies. The abstracts claim offshoring "creates jobs", their actual study data shows nearly 70% of the jobs created are offshore, which means each recession causes a net loss of jobs followed by a jobless recovery.

      Does this sound famliar given the current 'recovery that never was' and the workforce participation rate not seen since most women were housewives?

      Please, stop lying to an economist.

      [–]jubbergun -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

      http://ourfuture.org/20110209/revisiting_the_reagan_nightmare

      I'm not sure that an organization like Campaign for America's Future that is essentially an arm of the democrat party is an objective source, especially when you consider that the only people who have anything to gain from demonizing Reagan are political operatives.

      And each one has been preceeded by millions of offshored jobs, followed by that destroyed purchasing power hitting the companies and their stocks, and finally subject to a "jobless recovery", with each "recovery" being more jobless and debt-based than the last.

      None of which has anything to do with Reagan's presidency, since every one of those recessions occurred years after his presidency.

      Please, stop lying to an economist.

      An economist would not only be better informed, but better able to explain their position with legitimate sources.

      [–]ev1lb1t 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

      You just committed genetic fallacy. The BEA sourced the data and charts presented in that article: http://ofslides.com/storage/s1/video/a3/0f/a30f9b6e40e889177556781ae4782808/slides.pdf

      None of which has anything to do with Reagan's presidency

      Are you dim?, they're the result of his economic philosophies being applied for DECADES, with the only interruption in the trend being the .com bubble. It's a dark shadow which continues to be a massive drain on American prosperity and global power to this day.

      Before Reagan:

      1 - tailor policy to maximize employment

      2 - employed people use their paychecks to buy things

      3 - business grows.

      Reagan's economic calculus:

      1 - slowly ship all jobs overseas

      2 - Import cheap shit

      3 - ??? people get the money to buy the cheap shit where exactly?? (my answer is the government! it's backed up by the food stamp and welfare data Romney lamented in 2012!)

      4 - profit (lol yeah right, that's why it's been recession after recession as deflationary pressures hollow out industry after industry)

      It's like an underpants gnomes equation!

      An economist would not only be better informed, but better able to explain their position with legitimate sources.

      You chose to declare a source an "illegitimate source", an orwellian term if I ever heard one, but their article was based on data provided by agencies like the BEA.

      So now you're declaring the Bureau of Economic Analysis "illegitimate".

      Would you like to take a stab at creationism and knock on some nobel laureate scientists too?

      It appears stalin and the left aren't the only ones with "useful idiots". Why oh why couldn't I have gone into neurology. They don't get pompous, self-righteous fools telling them how their object of expertise works.

      EDIT: 2008 change to 2012.

      [–]Spokker 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

      I don't buy this, and even if it were true, group X speaking their mind is not responsible for group Y and their activities, as long as group X's speech was otherwise non-violent, in my opinion.

      I would think SJW rhetoric would cause some people to become more anti-political correctness, not full fucking neo-Nazi.

      [–]quanadian 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

      I see what you mean, but I think right-wing hate groups primarily come from the "immigrants are taking are jobs and are raping our women" mentality.

      [–]SteadyFrunkin 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Of course they realize it. Their whole purpose is divisiveness. Look at anything they do. Then ask how it helps foster positive relations between people. It never does. It always falls into two categories, playing the victim or placing blame. You think they hype anything even resembling a race issue to REDUCE racism? Hell no. And the Charleston shooting was their crowning moment after years of identity politics and fanning the flames of hatred through constant race baiting and propaganda. An actual, legit, racism motivated murder (by a white person, finally) was committed after years of having to play pretend. The left is going to be jerking themselves off over Charleston for months. Why would they ever want to discourage the perfect scapegoat to limit people's rights and freedoms? Racism/sexism to the left is what terrorism was to the right. An excuse to grab power and exert authority over people.

      [–]Flyingfire -5ポイント-4ポイント  (12子コメント)

      national SOCIALISTS are in no way for a small state, hence not right wing.

      I mean FFS they came up with universal healthcare, gun control and pretty much all the neo-liberal(soft socialism) economics of controling the demand rather than the offer which is largely used by the left of today.

      [–]surgingchaos[S] 5ポイント6ポイント  (7子コメント)

      national SOCIALISTS are in no way for a small state, hence not right wing.

      If you are right wing it doesn't mean you automatically favor a small government. You need to stop looking at the political spectrum from just a left-right line and see it more as a square that separates libertarians from authoritarians

      When you do that you can then put SJWs and neo-Nazis in the authoritarian quadrants, and then realize just how similar they are to each other because of this.

      [–]Flyingfire -3ポイント-2ポイント  (6子コメント)

      this compass is a failure. you forget the simple fact that the state is based on the principles of enforcing obidience (authority) by holding the monopoly on violence(or threat of), so a small state(right) is NECESSARILY less authoritarian than a big state(left).

      why would you just trust anything as far as politics are concerned?

      If you are right wing it doesn't mean you automatically favor a small government.

      if you have water all over you are you wet? what right (politically) means isn't opinion even if you can find a lot of "RWs" doing it wrong.

      [–]kalphis 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Granted it's missing a political dimension, but you shouldn't mix or confuse the amount of social control (moral authority over persons) over the size of the state (level of political/territorial control per person). And even if you do know that authority itself is not exclusive to a left or right label. And "right wing" =/= bad everywhere and can even be considered relative.

      [–]I4dcQsEpLzTHvD1qhlDE -1ポイント0ポイント  (4子コメント)

      so a small state(right) is NECESSARILY less authoritarian than a big state(left).

      The size of the state is 100% entirely irrelevant to right vs left, that is the point. Right wing means "inequality is good". Left wing means "equality is good". That's it.

      [–]Ricwulf 0ポイント1ポイント  (3子コメント)

      Right wing means "inequality is good". Left wing means "equality is good". That's it.

      Except that over-simplifies it. Right-wing isn't so much "inequality is good" and more "inequality is a fact, deal with it". I know that it's semantics, but it frames the difference to be worse than it actually is.

      [–]I4dcQsEpLzTHvD1qhlDE 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

      but it frames the difference to be worse than it actually is

      Not really, it is just the perception of "equality". People tend to assume "equality" always means "equal treatment". But in the this case the meaning is "equal outcome". So yes, the right really is saying inequality is good. As in, doctors should get paid more than janitors, as it provides an incentive for smart, capable people to become doctors.

      [–]Ricwulf 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

      Well, yes and no at the same time. They are saying that the person should have equal opportunity, that the individual is equal in rights and opportunities. What that person then does with those options and their choices are up to them. If they fuck up, it's on them.

      Where the left-wing would try to enforce some sort of safety net at all times to try and allow people to always have another shot, the right-wing would have that safety net not there at all.

      Of course, neither option is the "best" option, but a mixture of the two. There absolutely needs to be some form of a safety net, lest poverty and class division get worse (think like medieval times where a lord would own everyone who lived on their land). Too much of a safety net, and people want to work less/get the world given to them on a platter. The drive to achieve is lost on many people, and innovation slows down.

      It's the struggle that is politics, it's all one big balancing act, with some moron (myself and everyone else included in that list) that thinks they know the best way to do it.

      [–]I4dcQsEpLzTHvD1qhlDE 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

      They are saying that the person should have equal opportunity

      Which is not what the equality of left vs right politics is about. That's what I am saying. That is totally irrelevant to the question. The terms come from the French Revolution, they have always been about equality of outcome.

      [–]I4dcQsEpLzTHvD1qhlDE 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

      national SOCIALISTS are in no way for a small state, hence not right wing.

      Right vs left is inequality vs equality. It has nothing to do with authoritarian vs libertarian.

      [–]YetAnotherCommenter -1ポイント0ポイント  (2子コメント)

      national SOCIALISTS are in no way for a small state, hence not right wing.

      "Right" vs. "Left" doesn't mean "small government" vs. "big government." If this were true, Anarchism would be considered a right-wing ideology.

      The entire left-right spectrum is complete bullshit and the concepts are meaningless (in terms of ideology classification). At best, a "left-wing" ideology is an ideology which is viewed favourably/sympathetically by the intelligentsia, and a "right-wing" ideology is any ideology which isn't.

      [–]kalphis 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

      Anarchism is right wing, in the sense that it favors individual rights over a larger, possible, collectives' rights. It's anti-authoritarian (which should be considered a different dimension), but still considered right wing. This can be applied globally if you think about the collective as the entire world, such that being nationalistic or culturally exclusive becomes right wing.

      [–]YetAnotherCommenter 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Anarchism is right wing, in the sense that it favors individual rights over a larger, possible, collectives' rights. It's anti-authoritarian (which should be considered a different dimension), but still considered right wing.

      This is only true if you take the definition of "right-wing" you proposed as axiomatically correct. I do not. I don't think "right-wing" has any reasonable or stable definition and thus I think the term shouldn't be thought of as descriptive of ideologies.

      This can be applied globally if you think about the collective as the entire world, such that being nationalistic or culturally exclusive becomes right wing.

      Micro-collectivism vs. Macro-collectivism is a difference of degree, not a difference of type (and individualism is equally opposed to both). In addition, Marxism was micro-collectivistic, merely on the basis of class rather than nationality.

      [–]videogameboss -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

      they "realize" it in the same sense that they realize eating piles of twinkies, ding dongs, and ho hos is going to kill them. it's somewhere in the back of their mind but the temptation to be a cunt is too much for them to resist.

      [–]ProfNekko -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Newton's third law does apply to politics as well... Didn't anyone ever tell them that?

      [–]GlutinousRice -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

      I went from Anarchism to Feodalism. Does that count as far-right?

      [–]Webringtheshake -2ポイント-1ポイント  (1子コメント)

      Yeah I've thought the same for a while. A sure way to push someone into the far right who's teetering on the edge is to scream at them for every microaggression.

      It's a bit like one of these: https://youtu.be/MMA6JIv1CZk?t=22s

      Put a Bahar Mustapha in the top, and see how many get pushed over the edge.

      [–]slimthigh 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Same deal with Big Red and MRAs. Feminists and SJWs are their own worse enemies.

      [–]Agkistro13 -3ポイント-2ポイント  (0子コメント)

      So are you calling Reagan and Thatcher neo-Nazi, or just regular right-authoritarians? I for one don't think a resurgence of people with ideas like theirs running the show is going to be 'far worse than what anyone could imagine', but what do I know, I was actually alive when they were in power.

      But yeah, you're right. The authoritarian-left is certainly pushing people to want something else. GOOD.