4 ms·

I've dealt with the alt-right since the early 2000s in various libertarian circles where they tried to justify everything from eugenics to claiming LGBT people

I've dealt with the alt-right since the early 2000s in various libertarian circles where they tried to justify everything from eugenics to claiming LGBT people are the product of bad families. So, I'm not going to coddle any of the alt-right when they themselves don't hide their authoritarianism and anti-humanism. When they support the following ideals of civil rights for all people and a heavily restrained government in terms of personal surveillance then we'll talk. Until then, I'm not playing with them. They either change their ways or expect the same rebukes I've given neoliberals.

jimmywanger 10y ago
The term "alt-right" was coined in 2008. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right) And you've been dealing with them since the early 2000s? How's your 6 years of swift development experience in iOS treating you? Also from the article, "The concept lacks a consensus ideology". Basically, you can twist it into whatever bogeyman you want it to be, as you just did.
- norea-armozel 10y ago
  Hun, they didn't use the term alt-right back then. I suggest you read up more. Try with the nonsense that Hans Hermann Hoppe has written. Or how about Lew Rockwell trying to court the likes of David Duke to his ideology? So, do you want to keep lying in public and assume that what I meant was they literally called themselves the Alt-Right in 2000? So, are you going to dispute my points that such individuals have been invading libertarian forums, mailing lists, and the like since 2000? Cause I'm all ears considering I was a moderator at the LvMi web forums for about half that time. Please try to tell me what I did and didn't experience. :)
  - jimmywanger 10y ago
    > Hun Starting off with condescension. Nice. Don't try that again. > So, do you want to keep lying in public and assume that what I meant was they literally called themselves the Alt-Right in 2000? That is your assertion. I pulled a citation that said the alt-right lacks a consensus ideology. Right now for you it seems just to be "people who piss you off and you disagree with." It means different things now, and has connotations in popular culture, connotations you're trying to exploit. > So, are you going to dispute my points that such individuals have been invading libertarian forums, mailing lists, and the like since 2000? "Such individuals". More name calling and lumping into weakly defined groups. How rhetorically sound. > Please try to tell me what I did and didn't experience. :) Nobody really cares what you did or did not experience. We are talking about your imprecise language, your use of labels to slander people, and lumping people into similar groups to push your particular agenda. Is that clear, "Hun"?
    - norea-armozel 10y ago
      >Starting off with condescension. Nice. Don't try that again. When I have to deal with folks who pretend that the alt-right only existed since 2008 when clearly the ideology has existed for far longer than that then I'm going to get mean. Deal with it. >That is your assertion. No it was entirely yours. >I pulled a citation that said the alt-right lacks a consensus ideology You linked to a Wikipedia article. I actually referenced someone who alt-right thinkers have studied or referred to in right libertarian circles (Hoppe). And consensus is irrelevant when the largest figureheads of the movement advocate for using force of the state to make white-only communities and to force LGBT people into the closet (via mandatory sterilization or reparative therapies). It doesn't matter if someone else in that movement doesn't advocate for those things so long as the biggest voices do. That's how the real world works when it comes to social movements and politics. You don't get to play pick 'n choose as to what a movement stands for. Either it's all in or it's all out. >Right now for you it seems just to be "people who piss you off and you disagree with." Yes, I'm pissed that crypto-fascists have derailed libertarian forums, mailing lists, and events just to distort the meaning of libertarianism being that I am a libertarian myself this would be a valid reason to be upset. >It means different things now, and has connotations in popular culture, connotations you're trying to exploit. No, I'm referring to it correctly because these clowns literally want to "ethno-nationalism" which is basically old fashioned 19th century nationalism that gave us the Nazis. So, I don't think I need to connote anything that what they are. >"Such individuals". More name calling and lumping into weakly defined groups. How rhetorically sound. More like the fact you want to evade the problem children in the alt-right which are literal fascists like Robert B Spencer to make it okay to be a racist and a crackpot (believing in eugenics). >Nobody really cares what you did or did not experience. Apparently, the fact you respond to my comments implies you do care. >We are talking about your imprecise language, your use of labels to slander people, and lumping people into similar groups to push your particular agenda. TFW someone assumes that people don't have agendas or values from which they derive their opinions. Unless you're a robot you got an agenda just like all of us. And trying to make it immoral or otherwise "bad" to have one is just another way for you to silence people who have valid issues with these clowns. So how about you: 1. Admit the alt-right has existed far longer than the word that they currently use to describe themselves (which was my point, but thanks for trying to lie through pedantry). 2. Acknowledge that these clowns aren't simply edge-lords but actual proponents of fascism (as many have openly advocated for). If you can't do these two things, hun, then you need to kindly STFU. Is that clear, cupcake?

jimmywanger 10y ago

The term "alt-right" was coined in 2008. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right) And you've been dealing with them since the early 2000s? How's your 6 years of swift development experience in iOS treating you? Also from the article, "The concept lacks a consensus ideology". Basically, you can twist it into whatever bogeyman you want it to be, as you just did.

norea-armozel 10y ago
Hun, they didn't use the term alt-right back then. I suggest you read up more. Try with the nonsense that Hans Hermann Hoppe has written. Or how about Lew Rockwell trying to court the likes of David Duke to his ideology? So, do you want to keep lying in public and assume that what I meant was they literally called themselves the Alt-Right in 2000? So, are you going to dispute my points that such individuals have been invading libertarian forums, mailing lists, and the like since 2000? Cause I'm all ears considering I was a moderator at the LvMi web forums for about half that time. Please try to tell me what I did and didn't experience. :)
- jimmywanger 10y ago
  > Hun Starting off with condescension. Nice. Don't try that again. > So, do you want to keep lying in public and assume that what I meant was they literally called themselves the Alt-Right in 2000? That is your assertion. I pulled a citation that said the alt-right lacks a consensus ideology. Right now for you it seems just to be "people who piss you off and you disagree with." It means different things now, and has connotations in popular culture, connotations you're trying to exploit. > So, are you going to dispute my points that such individuals have been invading libertarian forums, mailing lists, and the like since 2000? "Such individuals". More name calling and lumping into weakly defined groups. How rhetorically sound. > Please try to tell me what I did and didn't experience. :) Nobody really cares what you did or did not experience. We are talking about your imprecise language, your use of labels to slander people, and lumping people into similar groups to push your particular agenda. Is that clear, "Hun"?
  - norea-armozel 10y ago
    >Starting off with condescension. Nice. Don't try that again. When I have to deal with folks who pretend that the alt-right only existed since 2008 when clearly the ideology has existed for far longer than that then I'm going to get mean. Deal with it. >That is your assertion. No it was entirely yours. >I pulled a citation that said the alt-right lacks a consensus ideology You linked to a Wikipedia article. I actually referenced someone who alt-right thinkers have studied or referred to in right libertarian circles (Hoppe). And consensus is irrelevant when the largest figureheads of the movement advocate for using force of the state to make white-only communities and to force LGBT people into the closet (via mandatory sterilization or reparative therapies). It doesn't matter if someone else in that movement doesn't advocate for those things so long as the biggest voices do. That's how the real world works when it comes to social movements and politics. You don't get to play pick 'n choose as to what a movement stands for. Either it's all in or it's all out. >Right now for you it seems just to be "people who piss you off and you disagree with." Yes, I'm pissed that crypto-fascists have derailed libertarian forums, mailing lists, and events just to distort the meaning of libertarianism being that I am a libertarian myself this would be a valid reason to be upset. >It means different things now, and has connotations in popular culture, connotations you're trying to exploit. No, I'm referring to it correctly because these clowns literally want to "ethno-nationalism" which is basically old fashioned 19th century nationalism that gave us the Nazis. So, I don't think I need to connote anything that what they are. >"Such individuals". More name calling and lumping into weakly defined groups. How rhetorically sound. More like the fact you want to evade the problem children in the alt-right which are literal fascists like Robert B Spencer to make it okay to be a racist and a crackpot (believing in eugenics). >Nobody really cares what you did or did not experience. Apparently, the fact you respond to my comments implies you do care. >We are talking about your imprecise language, your use of labels to slander people, and lumping people into similar groups to push your particular agenda. TFW someone assumes that people don't have agendas or values from which they derive their opinions. Unless you're a robot you got an agenda just like all of us. And trying to make it immoral or otherwise "bad" to have one is just another way for you to silence people who have valid issues with these clowns. So how about you: 1. Admit the alt-right has existed far longer than the word that they currently use to describe themselves (which was my point, but thanks for trying to lie through pedantry). 2. Acknowledge that these clowns aren't simply edge-lords but actual proponents of fascism (as many have openly advocated for). If you can't do these two things, hun, then you need to kindly STFU. Is that clear, cupcake?