>>4623>Regarding this culture war stuff I think you can say a lot about this, and obviously there's no hiding who you think primarily has some issues here.
Don't get me wrong, i'm really no fan at all of backwater hicks who think fossils are the work of Satan and resent the result of the civil war. It's a backwards, go-nowhere way of thinking. All they do is romanticize the past, there's no forward-thinking, and yes, many of them are just simply hateful and dressing it up with whatever justification they can. I have no affinity for that kind of person. It's not the way i want to see us go moving forward, not at all.
There's issues all around, but i don't think dismissing any and all criticisms of social justice as racist nazis is helpful, just as it's not productive to dismiss any discussion about inequality as SJW cucks. It's kindof the same idea, using dismissal and mis-characterization rather than tackling the points head-on. It's hard for me to even really criticize picking up pieces like that, though. Even if they're looking to push propoganda, well, they can't really knock the pins down if the left isn't constantly making themselves look like crazies. Of course there is always going to be fringe groups, but many sectors of the left, like the huffington post, really have no sense of moderation. A billion-dollar website is hosting an article, and the editor in charge defended it after pushback. Does that sound like fringe to you? To me it sounds about as successful and mainstream as it can get. If you want to talk about fringe, we need a way of quantifying fringe, but i really don't see that situation as being fringe in any reasonable sense of the word at all. >You can talk about how very radical lefty stuff is generally very radical and offensive, and I agree, to the extent that I think some people take hunts for social justice to a place that just doesn't make sense, and is only hurtful. But I also think it's really media amplification of this that does the majority of the legwork, in converting white supremacists.
Yes, but it would be a lot harder if the left didn't give them any tinder to light. I also think it would be helpful if we stepped back and defined what a white supremacist is.>You are not likely to run into a single vocal radical, if you just live your life offline. The only place I've ever seen one is on the internet, and there is really zero political traction to policies that should discriminate against white people, while policies that discriminate against minorities at some level, have been routine for a long time, and there are still coming policies out that block minority voters and introduce school busing and all this kind of stuff.
I use to live in a very left state, and while it wasn't common, i did run into people like this. They do exist. It's not a problem, they generally just show up to protest something every now and then and are occasionally loud and irritating, not like they really have much power right now, but the sentiment is there. >This gives me the feeling that these narratives that the whites are being suppressed/oppressed by all the progressives, are not really congruent with reality, but that they're created because media outlets are incentivized to play them up. Of course white supremacists also love these and will spread them anywhere they can, since they really do a lot to sell the ideology to newcomers.
I kindof think it's both ways. I think white supremacists certainly do feed off that, and that certain right-leaning news outlets amplify and exaggerate to push their own agenda; However, that doesn't necessarily mean there isn't a problem. That doesn't mean that, say, racial discrimination against whites is taken as seriously as racial discrimination against other racial groups. That kind of discrimination against whites also doesn't mean there's not hardened forms of institutionalized racism that target minorities, both can exist simultaneously, both are a problem. One certainly does not solve the other.
1: A small article is published with a very fringe and politically provocative message, probably to clickbait people.
2: The title and maybe the most offensive parts of the message are clipped and drawn out of context, and introduced as talking points in a white supremacist propaganda piece.
3: Friends of the white supremacist propaganda network and freeze peach advocates pick up on how much social media chatter there is about this outrageous lefty policy, start talking about it on their shows, and further amplify the message.
Yes and no... That certinaly can be the pattern, and does happen, but the huffington post is a billion-dollar company with huge amounts of traffic, it is not fringe, so this sort of thing is progressively becoming more mainstream. This is kindof what i mean when i say i think it's both ways. It both is a slow, creeping problem that should be addressed, and also not the Armageddon that certain right-wing outlets proport it to be. >Serious and thought out lefty ideas like universal healthcare, increased top marginal income tax, making oral rape /officially/ rape, and so on and so forth, are not controversial ideas, are largely supported, and make up the majority of the political change that lefties are pushing for.
So then where's the dismissal of things like the huffpo article? I agree with you, but there's very little opposition of the most radical of leftist ideas on the left. That makes me feel like they're less opposed to it as a whole, and more that they don't think the Overton window is where it needs to be yet for them to push for it. Dismissing the radicals also allows them to know exactly how to shift the overton window as well. We're essentially giving the radical left free rein over the overton window. It's an excellent attrition strategy, and i think if we just dismiss "radicals" while not holding the overall ethos to those points, they inevitably win that battle of attrition.
This isn't an exclusively left thing, just a tactic, but one the left is doing far better at than the right. Nostalgia is the only thing fueling the far right at the moment, and i think that's destined to fail, it's a road that goes nowhere.
There are things i can agree are good to push for on the left. I think implementing some aspects of socialism as the bottom falls out on the economy is easily the most sensible way to move forward as a whole, and there's many other points i can definitely get behind. >You can argue that that's irrelevant because it still points to the point of discontent and what might be fueling the ideology, but I think it's good to think about how white supremacists could potentially wrong, or viewing the world from a skewed perspective, otherwise we're basically sympathizing and vibing with them, and that doesn't seem like a good place to be.
Personally, i think sympathy for any position is important, even if just for a bit. I don't think dismissal ever helps us. Everyone is coming from somewhere. Many of those places are stupid shit places that don't gel with reality, decency, or morality, but understanding how we got from point a to point b i think is always helpful. I think we can both sympathize and condemn.>I'm much more inclined to believe that if you're a genuine white supremacist, your primary goal really is that you have a visceral hatred of minorities, and the sjw narrative is more of a scapegoat and rhetorical strategy. This fits a lot more with the experiences I have with real white supremacists, offline and online.
I think that certainly exists, but is not exclusively the case. Hard to say exactly what the ratios are. >I think the observation that there is /something/ wrong with the education system is very astute.>So, stepping away from your post for a bit I'll add my thoughts to the education talk...>I see a lot of people thinking that if everyone got an education everyone would be able to procure a job, and I think that doesn't play out that way in reality. I think automation and development in first world countres cannot allow that everyone has a job. It's economically infeasible and even today you see that probably the majority of occupations are very very expendable positions that could be performed easily by a machine, and it's not like there are amazing stem occupations waiting for just everyone that wants them. You could push more people through here, though for sure. In general, more medical staff is greatly needed, I know that much, and one way to maybe start solving shortages like this might be to make the education more affordable/accesible and also reduce this cycle of nepotism A.C talks about that does contribute to university inefficiency.
I do generally agree that everyone isn't going to realistically be employed as we move closer and closer towards a post-scarcity society. Personally, i think that as we get better at creating wealth, we should just control our population, provide large amounts of welfare with our gains, and allow everyone to follow their passions. If education isn't the key to that though, we should be upfront about it. Too many people are being sold a bill of goods, and buying into that myth, that education will provide you with a better job, is causing a lot of very real harm. We could probably solve that with reforming schools to better define their purpose, being focused at what they're suppose to accomplish, and punished if they fail to do that, but i feel like that's not really politically feasible unless businesses and employees find a way to properly communicate skill without educational institutions acting as a gatekeeper. It's going to be near-impossible to implement politically, so i honestly think our best bet is for free market economics to push businesses and employees away from education. Things seem to be moving the opposite way though, with more credentialism rather than less. I have no idea why businesses are acting this way, especially if employment is as great as so many people claim it to be right now. I don't know where the dice are going to land on that one moving forward.>But I think that still kind of overlooks the large glaring issue of, there just isn't enough work at all for every individual in this stage of societal development. There are so many occupations were people just game the system or perform meaningless tasks, and even with these we have way too many leading idle and meaningless lives.>That's like a wider systemic issue, and has implications much further beyond white supremacy.
I 100% agree. I'd say the problem is the inevitable collapse of the lower class. I think some forms of socialism are easily the best solution to this problem, as we, as a somewhat necessary boon of the problem, have excess resources we can use to support those displaced. The problem kind of packages itself with the solution. Left to free-market economics, the whole thing, ironically, collapses under the weight of it's own success. The tricky part is how to implement the transition.