3 ms·

I've only heard that term used to refer to groups in Western Europe. Those groups, incidentally, are very different from what is called the "alt-right" online.

StavrosK 9y ago
Very possibly (I'm from Greece, and Golden Dawn are Neo-Nazis). What's the difference between them and alt-right?
- candiodari 9y ago
  Well for one thing, they alt-right hate the association with Nazis, whereas Neonazi groups in Western Europe are quite open about that connection. They talk and glorify Hitler, (often publicly, which is where a lot of problems are created), profess their hate on Jews, give the Nazi salute, etc. They don't have much of an economic agenda, if any at all, whereas the online groups such as the alt-right are defined by their economic agenda. Neo-Nazis are also much more like the Nazis were: they are a youth movement. Most of what they do is not all that political. They organize parties. They go to soccer matches. They organize ping pong tournaments. They have biker clubs/gangs. They hang out in cafes. (I'm talking about North West Europe, don't know about Golden Dawn) The alt right is much more about extreme laissez-faire, associated with the republican party (Tea Party, etc). You have the same group on the left, sometimes referred to as the alt-left (as in associated with democrats), but the ideology is the same, they're about extreme laissez-faire and small government. Of course this is "very different" from the alt-right. Except, other than the association with the other large US party I can't find any real difference. The funny thing is that of course anti-immigration attitudes (immigration, the concept of moving countries, as opposed to immigrants, the people), historically, was far more associated with the left than the right. You can understand the reasoning too: if the state is to control worker outcomes, then of course the state must strictly control competition. Otherwise, companies simply undercut eachother by hiring cheap labour overseas. So the State must tightly control the borders, for goods and for people, so as to prevent that from happening. Immigration, which directly affects the most important market that socialists want to control, the labour market, must be very tightly controlled if the government is to succeed. I would even go so far as to say it makes very little sense, even today, for ostensibly leftist parties to be pro-open-borders. That is in direct opposition to their stated aims and clearly (and strongly) works against their stated aims. But of course the solution to that conundrum is simple : the entirety of the US is simply extreme-right, extreme laissez-faire. Including Obama, of course, who "nationalized" healthcare into a private sector solution (leftists worldwide went WTF), and spent (sorry "loaned") almost 8 trillion dollars of government money to keep capitalism running.
  - StavrosK 9y ago
    That's very insightful, thank you for the explanation.

StavrosK 9y ago

Very possibly (I'm from Greece, and Golden Dawn are Neo-Nazis). What's the difference between them and alt-right?

candiodari 9y ago
Well for one thing, they alt-right hate the association with Nazis, whereas Neonazi groups in Western Europe are quite open about that connection. They talk and glorify Hitler, (often publicly, which is where a lot of problems are created), profess their hate on Jews, give the Nazi salute, etc. They don't have much of an economic agenda, if any at all, whereas the online groups such as the alt-right are defined by their economic agenda. Neo-Nazis are also much more like the Nazis were: they are a youth movement. Most of what they do is not all that political. They organize parties. They go to soccer matches. They organize ping pong tournaments. They have biker clubs/gangs. They hang out in cafes. (I'm talking about North West Europe, don't know about Golden Dawn) The alt right is much more about extreme laissez-faire, associated with the republican party (Tea Party, etc). You have the same group on the left, sometimes referred to as the alt-left (as in associated with democrats), but the ideology is the same, they're about extreme laissez-faire and small government. Of course this is "very different" from the alt-right. Except, other than the association with the other large US party I can't find any real difference. The funny thing is that of course anti-immigration attitudes (immigration, the concept of moving countries, as opposed to immigrants, the people), historically, was far more associated with the left than the right. You can understand the reasoning too: if the state is to control worker outcomes, then of course the state must strictly control competition. Otherwise, companies simply undercut eachother by hiring cheap labour overseas. So the State must tightly control the borders, for goods and for people, so as to prevent that from happening. Immigration, which directly affects the most important market that socialists want to control, the labour market, must be very tightly controlled if the government is to succeed. I would even go so far as to say it makes very little sense, even today, for ostensibly leftist parties to be pro-open-borders. That is in direct opposition to their stated aims and clearly (and strongly) works against their stated aims. But of course the solution to that conundrum is simple : the entirety of the US is simply extreme-right, extreme laissez-faire. Including Obama, of course, who "nationalized" healthcare into a private sector solution (leftists worldwide went WTF), and spent (sorry "loaned") almost 8 trillion dollars of government money to keep capitalism running.
- StavrosK 9y ago
  That's very insightful, thank you for the explanation.