4 ms·

It’s not that someone would switch to the alt-right, it’s that the definition of belief is moving the line so others are defining you as alt-right. As an examp

It’s not that someone would switch to the alt-right, it’s that the definition of belief is moving the line so others are defining you as alt-right. As an example, Ben Shapiro is by statements and beliefs not alt-right. He was attacked by them quite a bit. Yet, people have started calling him alt-right in media and forums. I too would never cross that line, but I believe others will be happy to redraw that line regardless of my actual beliefs. This is what happens when others can slap labels on you and there is no real debate.

throwanem 9y ago
"Alt-right" means "Nazi" now. It didn't always. Somebody dragged Richard Spencer out from whatever rock he lives under and into the public eye, specifically for the purpose of changing that meaning - or, as you have it, moving that line.
- archagon 9y ago
  Really? From Wikipedia: "Spencer and others have said that he created the term 'alt-right', which he considers a movement about white identity. Breitbart News described Spencer's website AlternativeRight.com as 'a center of alt-right thought.'" This matches with what I know. White supremacy was also featured prominently in the sidebar of /r/altright before it was banned.
  - throwanem 9y ago
    Really. I mean, Spencer says a lot of things. Do you believe all of them, or only the ones you find convenient? And the same Breitbart article [1] quoted there also devotes an entire section to disposing of the three dozen or so legit would-be Nazis on the fringe. Of course, that Breitbart article also dates from March 2016. Spencer didn't hit the big time for quite a few months after that - not, in fact, until just after the election [2], whereas "alt-right" in general had never really left the zeitgeist after its first big splash in August. But that changed when the media made Spencer its darling, because of course it did - the man is eminently hateable, which is precisely why he was made so notorious so fast. [1] http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/03/29/an-establishment-conservatives-guide-to-the-alt-right/ http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/03/29/an-establishment-co... [2] https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2015-01-01%202017-08-10&q=richard%20spencer,alt%20right https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2015-01-01%202...
eregorn 9y ago
I feel like this happened because it seems he accidentally presented himself to the outside world as alt-right. You'd only know he was a right libertarian (my impression at least) if you regularly listened to him. For example, Look at his Wikipedia article vs his /r/politics AMA. His Wikipedia article paints him as alt-right, because all of his major accomplishments that reach outside the audience are hyper-focused on culture wars and academia influence on politics. His support of Israel was mentioned, but he did flip to an alt-right acceptable view. The only thing suggesting on the wiki page he's not alt right is not supporting Trump, but it doesn't help that its implied they mostly attacked him for being Jewish. From that alone I would think it was a Milo situation, where they are alt-right that are unaccepted by the "alt-reich" because of a specific character trait. The AMA however gave me the idea he's right libertarian. A lot of his answers seem to circle back to the free market. His pro-life opinion is even a slight extension of that, where he believes life needs to be guaranteed to at least participate in the market. This, however, required direct drilling of the guy to actually get. So TLDR, He talks libertarian, but his noticeable acts are alt-right. I think this is a bit his fault, considering he didn't think to advertise his libertarian ideas at all in books or speeches even though he started his career before he even graduated college.
- protomyth 9y ago
  > I feel like this happened because it seems he accidentally presented himself to the outside world as alt-right. I would love for you to find one place Ben Shapiro presents as alt-right. > His Wikipedia article paints him as alt-right of course it does, Conservatives of all stripes have been complaining about the bias of Wikipedia for some time. It paints anyone who is sorta conservative as alt-right. If you believe he acts "alt-right" then pretty much every libertarian is alt-right, and that's just wrong.
  - eregorn 9y ago
    You can complain about Wikipedia, but you missed the point of me mentioning it. Here's a question I want answered because otherwise he might as well present as such: Do you think the Wikipedia page is missing anything important he's done? Specifically anything of note that has to do with the free market. Otherwise, its basically a "just one goat" situation, except he done like 7 goats. the day to day things are just not gonna stick out as much as the big things so what he says on his podcast isn't enough to change that perception.

throwanem 9y ago

"Alt-right" means "Nazi" now. It didn't always. Somebody dragged Richard Spencer out from whatever rock he lives under and into the public eye, specifically for the purpose of changing that meaning - or, as you have it, moving that line.

archagon 9y ago
Really? From Wikipedia: "Spencer and others have said that he created the term 'alt-right', which he considers a movement about white identity. Breitbart News described Spencer's website AlternativeRight.com as 'a center of alt-right thought.'" This matches with what I know. White supremacy was also featured prominently in the sidebar of /r/altright before it was banned.
- throwanem 9y ago
  Really. I mean, Spencer says a lot of things. Do you believe all of them, or only the ones you find convenient? And the same Breitbart article [1] quoted there also devotes an entire section to disposing of the three dozen or so legit would-be Nazis on the fringe. Of course, that Breitbart article also dates from March 2016. Spencer didn't hit the big time for quite a few months after that - not, in fact, until just after the election [2], whereas "alt-right" in general had never really left the zeitgeist after its first big splash in August. But that changed when the media made Spencer its darling, because of course it did - the man is eminently hateable, which is precisely why he was made so notorious so fast. [1] http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/03/29/an-establishment-conservatives-guide-to-the-alt-right/ http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/03/29/an-establishment-co... [2] https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2015-01-01%202017-08-10&q=richard%20spencer,alt%20right https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2015-01-01%202...

eregorn 9y ago

I feel like this happened because it seems he accidentally presented himself to the outside world as alt-right. You'd only know he was a right libertarian (my impression at least) if you regularly listened to him. For example, Look at his Wikipedia article vs his /r/politics AMA. His Wikipedia article paints him as alt-right, because all of his major accomplishments that reach outside the audience are hyper-focused on culture wars and academia influence on politics. His support of Israel was mentioned, but he did flip to an alt-right acceptable view. The only thing suggesting on the wiki page he's not alt right is not supporting Trump, but it doesn't help that its implied they mostly attacked him for being Jewish. From that alone I would think it was a Milo situation, where they are alt-right that are unaccepted by the "alt-reich" because of a specific character trait. The AMA however gave me the idea he's right libertarian. A lot of his answers seem to circle back to the free market. His pro-life opinion is even a slight extension of that, where he believes life needs to be guaranteed to at least participate in the market. This, however, required direct drilling of the guy to actually get. So TLDR, He talks libertarian, but his noticeable acts are alt-right. I think this is a bit his fault, considering he didn't think to advertise his libertarian ideas at all in books or speeches even though he started his career before he even graduated college.

protomyth 9y ago
> I feel like this happened because it seems he accidentally presented himself to the outside world as alt-right. I would love for you to find one place Ben Shapiro presents as alt-right. > His Wikipedia article paints him as alt-right of course it does, Conservatives of all stripes have been complaining about the bias of Wikipedia for some time. It paints anyone who is sorta conservative as alt-right. If you believe he acts "alt-right" then pretty much every libertarian is alt-right, and that's just wrong.
- eregorn 9y ago
  You can complain about Wikipedia, but you missed the point of me mentioning it. Here's a question I want answered because otherwise he might as well present as such: Do you think the Wikipedia page is missing anything important he's done? Specifically anything of note that has to do with the free market. Otherwise, its basically a "just one goat" situation, except he done like 7 goats. the day to day things are just not gonna stick out as much as the big things so what he says on his podcast isn't enough to change that perception.