3 ms·

ADL defines alt right and white supremacy to be the same: https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounders/alt-right-a-primer-about-the-new-white-supremacy https://w

ADL defines alt right and white supremacy to be the same: https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounders/alt-right-a-primer-about-the-new-white-supremacy https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounders/alt-right-a-prim... SPLC also say they are the same: https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/ideology/white-nationalist https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/ideo... The opinions of SPLC and ADL is especially relevant because mainstream media and social media companies such as Facebook seem to have relationships with them as well as similar orgs to define actions against people. So no, we are taking about the same poorly defined term because these orgs is an authority to Facebook. The reason it’s bullshit is that these orgs doesn’t relate it to truth and evidence, use their power to slap this label onto anyone that disagree with them and punish people for things they didn’t do.

joshuamorton 8y ago
>This vague term actually encompasses a range of people on the extreme right who reject mainstream conservatism in favor of forms of conservatism that embrace implicit or explicit racism or white supremacy. Unless you're of the opinion that "racism" and "white supremacy" are synonymous, the ADL does not define them as the same. >So no, we are taking about the same poorly defined term. To be clear, the "alt right" isn't white nationalist, it is, however, a white nationalist recruiting tool. Sort of like how you don't just start out as a random person and then the next day you become Jihadi Jane. You're slowly radicalized. The alt right to full-on white supremacist pipeline is the same way. You start off interested in self help, so you read 12 rules for life; then get caught up in Peterson's weird ideas about western culture; then pretty soon you're seeing not just his youtube lectures, but other lectures about western culture; and then videos about the decline of white/western culture; and then you're watching Richard Spencer; then you shoot up a church. Now absolutely, granted, not everyone follows the entire path, very few people end up radicalized, but while I'll absolutely agree with you that Peterson isn't a white supremacist, he's absolutely a useful idiot for them. But again, let's stick to people who have been accused of being "White Supremacists" since you're the one using the term alt-right, not Facebook. Which innocent people are getting accidentally confused for "white supremacists" specifically?
- asabjorn 8y ago
  From the same ADL source on white supremacy: > White supremacist Richard Spencer, who runs the National Policy Institute, a tiny white supremacist think tank, coined the term “Alternative Right” Or from the SPLC source: > The racist so-called “alt-right,” which came to prominence in late 2015, is white nationalism’s most recent formulation Both clearly use them in the same breath. We can argue semantics about one being the tool for the other etc etc. But that doesn't change the fact that they are being tightly related by organizations that is an authority to Facebook. SPLC and ADL is very aware of its power, and has related much of the prominent dissenters of wildly different ideologies to what they claim is alt-right; Maajid (an arab muslim, they lost a lawsuit on this one and apologized), Jordan Peterson (an individualist liberal), Ben Shapiro (a pretty normal conservative), Dave Rubin (a classical liberal) etc etc. SPLC and ADL are by this evidence too often bullshitters that don't relate what they say to truth, but instead relate it to their ideology that is not preoccupied with truth-seeking. It is really a shame their views are elevated like this as a justification for Facebooks and other organizations abuse of power.
  - joshuamorton 8y ago
    You still haven't given an example of someone being called a "white supremacist". Would you please? Or admit that you are fearmongering. Again, Facebook didn't use the word already right. They're talking about white supremacists. You're arguing that these are the same thing. So if that's the case, you should have ample examples of people calling Jordan Peterson a white supremacist also. If not, then maybe they aren't the same thing, and your equivocation is unwarranted and you should stop attempting to confuse the subject.
    - asabjorn 8y ago
      With regards to examples I can do better than showing how people use it in the same breath. Here [1, 2] are examples of where SPLC specifically uses alt-right and white supremacy to describe the viewpoints related to Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro, Dave Rubin etc in the same article. I've also shown that even the authoritarian sources Facebook trusts use alt-right and white supremacist in the same breath when defining the terms. These articles are no accident, this is what they believe. This is not fear mongering. This is people that don't mind using their power to accuse viewpoint opponents for things they didn't do and with no evidence claiming they hold reprehensible viewpoints. Edit: can't reply due to message depth limit, but the debate here is about facebook suppressing people like Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro, Dave Rubin using arguments made by SPLC and ADL such as the one in [1,2]. Why do they have the right to suppress other peoples viewpoints on dubious grounds with no recourse? It is pretty clear from your arguments that you agree that they are related or as you say "a white nationalist recruiting tool" regardless of how you otherwise view them. The process facebook institute will therefore suppress these viewpoints based upon no evidence and by subjectively mischaracterizing their viewpoints, with no recourse for this power abuse. [1] https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2018/06/07/prageru%E2%80%99s-influence https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2018/06/07/prageru%E2%80... [2] https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2016/08/25/whose-alt-right-it-anyway https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2016/08/25/whose-alt-rig...

joshuamorton 8y ago

>This vague term actually encompasses a range of people on the extreme right who reject mainstream conservatism in favor of forms of conservatism that embrace implicit or explicit racism or white supremacy. Unless you're of the opinion that "racism" and "white supremacy" are synonymous, the ADL does not define them as the same. >So no, we are taking about the same poorly defined term. To be clear, the "alt right" isn't white nationalist, it is, however, a white nationalist recruiting tool. Sort of like how you don't just start out as a random person and then the next day you become Jihadi Jane. You're slowly radicalized. The alt right to full-on white supremacist pipeline is the same way. You start off interested in self help, so you read 12 rules for life; then get caught up in Peterson's weird ideas about western culture; then pretty soon you're seeing not just his youtube lectures, but other lectures about western culture; and then videos about the decline of white/western culture; and then you're watching Richard Spencer; then you shoot up a church. Now absolutely, granted, not everyone follows the entire path, very few people end up radicalized, but while I'll absolutely agree with you that Peterson isn't a white supremacist, he's absolutely a useful idiot for them. But again, let's stick to people who have been accused of being "White Supremacists" since you're the one using the term alt-right, not Facebook. Which innocent people are getting accidentally confused for "white supremacists" specifically?

asabjorn 8y ago
From the same ADL source on white supremacy: > White supremacist Richard Spencer, who runs the National Policy Institute, a tiny white supremacist think tank, coined the term “Alternative Right” Or from the SPLC source: > The racist so-called “alt-right,” which came to prominence in late 2015, is white nationalism’s most recent formulation Both clearly use them in the same breath. We can argue semantics about one being the tool for the other etc etc. But that doesn't change the fact that they are being tightly related by organizations that is an authority to Facebook. SPLC and ADL is very aware of its power, and has related much of the prominent dissenters of wildly different ideologies to what they claim is alt-right; Maajid (an arab muslim, they lost a lawsuit on this one and apologized), Jordan Peterson (an individualist liberal), Ben Shapiro (a pretty normal conservative), Dave Rubin (a classical liberal) etc etc. SPLC and ADL are by this evidence too often bullshitters that don't relate what they say to truth, but instead relate it to their ideology that is not preoccupied with truth-seeking. It is really a shame their views are elevated like this as a justification for Facebooks and other organizations abuse of power.
- joshuamorton 8y ago
  You still haven't given an example of someone being called a "white supremacist". Would you please? Or admit that you are fearmongering. Again, Facebook didn't use the word already right. They're talking about white supremacists. You're arguing that these are the same thing. So if that's the case, you should have ample examples of people calling Jordan Peterson a white supremacist also. If not, then maybe they aren't the same thing, and your equivocation is unwarranted and you should stop attempting to confuse the subject.
  - asabjorn 8y ago
    With regards to examples I can do better than showing how people use it in the same breath. Here [1, 2] are examples of where SPLC specifically uses alt-right and white supremacy to describe the viewpoints related to Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro, Dave Rubin etc in the same article. I've also shown that even the authoritarian sources Facebook trusts use alt-right and white supremacist in the same breath when defining the terms. These articles are no accident, this is what they believe. This is not fear mongering. This is people that don't mind using their power to accuse viewpoint opponents for things they didn't do and with no evidence claiming they hold reprehensible viewpoints. Edit: can't reply due to message depth limit, but the debate here is about facebook suppressing people like Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro, Dave Rubin using arguments made by SPLC and ADL such as the one in [1,2]. Why do they have the right to suppress other peoples viewpoints on dubious grounds with no recourse? It is pretty clear from your arguments that you agree that they are related or as you say "a white nationalist recruiting tool" regardless of how you otherwise view them. The process facebook institute will therefore suppress these viewpoints based upon no evidence and by subjectively mischaracterizing their viewpoints, with no recourse for this power abuse. [1] https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2018/06/07/prageru%E2%80%99s-influence https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2018/06/07/prageru%E2%80... [2] https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2016/08/25/whose-alt-right-it-anyway https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2016/08/25/whose-alt-rig...