Alt-right. A terrorist movement in the making?

[Saiwania]

Let's just forget the fact that Arabs are considered white.

Arabs aren't White, being that they're not even remotely European in origin and can't pass as White visually. Arabs are more closely related to Semites as a Semitic people. The Arab belief is that they're descended from Ishmael instead of Issac. The US Census is the only organization to my knowledge, which is rediculous enough to consider Arabs as White.

[Ostroeuropa]

I'm not excusing anything. I hope it's understood that to many of the alt-right, race and civilization has a large overlap, and thus, an attack against America and Western civilization is by extension an attack against whites, if only because that's the civilization the majority of whites belong to.

Yeah, it totally was an attack on all white culture.

Let's just forget the fact that Arabs are considered white.

They're Caucasian, not white. This round of race definitions and boundaries is US style, not Eurostyle. If you asked a 19th century gentleman in a red coat with a massive moustache whether he was the same race as Arabs he'd say yes and start waffling about skull shape or whatever. If you asked a 19th century slave owner, he'd say fuck no.

[North German Realm]

Yeah, it totally was an attack on all white culture.

Let's just forget the fact that Arabs are considered white.

They're Caucasian, not white. This round of race definitions and boundaries is US style, not Eurostyle. If you asked a 19th century gentleman in a red coat with a massive moustache whether he was the same race as Arabs he'd say yes and start waffling about skull shape or whatever. If you asked a 19th century slave owner, he'd say fuck no.

They're... They're not Caucasian. They're specifically "semitic". Persians (and other Irani peoples) are the ones who're Caucasian.

[Ostroeuropa]

They're Caucasian, not white. This round of race definitions and boundaries is US style, not Eurostyle. If you asked a 19th century gentleman in a red coat with a massive moustache whether he was the same race as Arabs he'd say yes and start waffling about skull shape or whatever. If you asked a 19th century slave owner, he'd say fuck no.

They're... They're not Caucasian. They're specifically "semitic". Persians (and other Irani peoples) are the ones who're Caucasian.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian ... tocene.PNG

Green: Caucasoid
Yellow: Negroid
Pink: Capoid
Blue: Mongoloid
Orange: Australoid

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian_race

The Caucasian race (also Caucasoid[1] or Europid)[2] is a grouping of human beings historically regarded as a biological taxon, which, depending on which of the historical race classifications used, have usually included some or all of the ancient and modern populations of Europe, Western Asia, Central Asia, South Asia, North Africa, and the Horn of Africa.[3]

This was done in part to explain why Ottomans had an Empire, and the middle east had civilization, but africa

"""Didn't""".

It was also used to argue that the caste system in India placed Caucasians on top and that India had no civilization except that imposed on it by caucasians. In fact during early Indian conquest it is framed as a "Reunion of cousins" by both European and Indian ruling classes (Hence collaboration between the two), and modern Indian hypernationalism argues along these racial categories to this day, Arguing the "Out of India" racial origin theory whereby Europeans are descended from the "Aryan" Indians.

[North German Realm]

They're... They're not Caucasian. They're specifically "semitic". Persians (and other Irani peoples) are the ones who're Caucasian.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian ... tocene.PNG

Green: Caucasoid
Yellow: Negroid
Pink: Capoid
Blue: Mongoloid
Orange: Australoid

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian_race

The Caucasian race (also Caucasoid[1] or Europid)[2] is a grouping of human beings historically regarded as a biological taxon, which, depending on which of the historical race classifications used, have usually included some or all of the ancient and modern populations of Europe, Western Asia, Central Asia, South Asia, North Africa, and the Horn of Africa.[3]

Huh. You learn something new every day.

[Ostroeuropa]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian ... tocene.PNG

Green: Caucasoid
Yellow: Negroid
Pink: Capoid
Blue: Mongoloid
Orange: Australoid

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian_race

Huh. You learn something new every day.

It caused a historical stir when an Indian Punjabi who described themselves as "Full blooded Aryan" had a supreme court case in the US where he was like; "I'm the same race as you white folk and the entire planet agrees except you dinguses, this segregation stuff is bad. I don't want to sit next to a nigger in a restaurant. I get enough of that having to sit next to Untouchables back home and their racial inferiority makes me just as uncomfortable."

Like, all the racists were telling the Usa;
Yes, this is right. This is how to be racist. Be racist properly. It's science.

And the US was like
"No, fuck science, fuck all of you, the bible says white folk are different, he can sit with the darkies. If he's the same race then he must be miscegenated or some shit, maybe his caucasoid white ancestors conquered india or something but he's been browned over time by fucking the locals. There, happy now? He can sit with the mixed race people. I know what the scientific experts said, but science gets loads of things wrong, like evolution, and it's common sense they got this one wrong too."

In response.

Possibly the most stupid exchange in the history of humanity. You can regard it as The Great Shithead Schism in terms of racist ideology, and one school outlasted the other. Perhaps directly tied to the fact it was based on;


"Common Sense"

Rather than "Science".

People like to pretend we were just dicks to all the Indians. It's not true. We were plenty respectful (for its day, about as respectful as you'd be to any white foreigner) to Indians from a particular caste and geographical region, and they happened to rule india at the time. They received the benefits of resource extraction and so on with no problem. They mostly still do.

WONDER WHY that part of history gets downplayed. Hmmmm.

[Fedel]

antifa does acts of minor physical violence. It can be denounced for hooliganism (though I wouldn't denounce or condemn it anyway)

Says a lot about you as a person.

[North German Realm]

antifa does acts of minor physical violence. It can be denounced for hooliganism (though I wouldn't denounce or condemn it anyway)

Says a lot about you as a person.

You can assume about my person what you wish, but as far as I am concerned, it is the right, privilege, and civic duty of any red-blooded human living in a civilized society to punch any nazi in the face and if they can't, get physically close enough to a nazi that it is possible to. Assaulting non-Nazis, of course, is the different part (which is the part I might denounce as hooliganism)

[Fedel]

Says a lot about you as a person.

You can assume about my person what you wish,

Don't need to assume anything, you laid it out for us.

[Satuga]

Says a lot about you as a person.

You can assume about my person what you wish, but as far as I am concerned, it is the right, privilege, and civic duty of any red-blooded human living in a civilized society to punch any nazi in the face and if they can't, get physically close enough to a nazi that it is possible to. Assaulting non-Nazis, of course, is the different part (which is the part I might denounce as hooliganism)

Who gets to decide who isn't and is a nazi though? If it's a swatzika wearing cunt that is quite clearly a nazi then while I still don't agree I would say he should've expected it, but when is the line drawn from who is and isn't a nazi to you guys?
Also do you remember the "Bike Lock Bandit" the guy who hospitalized people with a blow to the temple with a bike lock which btw could've killed them. Do you take that for "hooliganism"?

[Shanhwa]

Says a lot about you as a person.

You can assume about my person what you wish, but as far as I am concerned, it is the right, privilege, and civic duty of any red-blooded human living in a civilized society to punch any nazi in the face and if they can't, get physically close enough to a nazi that it is possible to. Assaulting non-Nazis, of course, is the different part (which is the part I might denounce as hooliganism)

What about Stalinists? And Lenin followers? Or Maoists, or Communists in general?

[North German Realm]

You can assume about my person what you wish, but as far as I am concerned, it is the right, privilege, and civic duty of any red-blooded human living in a civilized society to punch any nazi in the face and if they can't, get physically close enough to a nazi that it is possible to. Assaulting non-Nazis, of course, is the different part (which is the part I might denounce as hooliganism)

Who gets to decide who isn't and is a nazi though? If it's a swatzika wearing cunt that is quite clearly a nazi then while I still don't agree I would say he should've expected it, but when is the line drawn from who is and isn't a nazi to you guys?
Also do you remember the "Bike Lock Bandit" the guy who hospitalized people with a blow to the temple with a bike lock which btw could've killed them. Do you take that for "hooliganism"?

Literally the guy marching in the street under a swastika, waving a tiki torch, yelling "JEWS WILL NOT REPLACE US" or "Blood and Soil" or some other rubbish like that. Or the guy talking about why Hitler totes didn't do anything wrong while shouting "Sieg Heil!" to a crowd chanting it back. If that guy isn't a Nazi, nobody is.

(Assaulting those who aren't obvious nazis, as I said, is different, which is why I don't fully support Antifa despite my person being "Against Fascism")

Regarding your latter point, while I don't exactly know the situation there, what you've described is not "minor assault", and is not the "General type of violence taken by antifa", thus not part of the discussion here. That is an actual legitimate crime that I believe should be punished.

You can assume about my person what you wish,

Don't need to assume anything, you laid it out for us.

If you say so.

[Free Arabian Nation]

You can assume about my person what you wish, but as far as I am concerned, it is the right, privilege, and civic duty of any red-blooded human living in a civilized society to punch any nazi in the face and if they can't, get physically close enough to a nazi that it is possible to. Assaulting non-Nazis, of course, is the different part (which is the part I might denounce as hooliganism)

What about Stalinists? And Lenin followers? Or Maoists, or Communists in general?

Also Ba'athist, Muslims, NazBols, Weird Tumblrite groups

Where do you draw the line? Nazis want to commit genocide, sure, but a lot of these groups also want to commit genocide.

[Shanhwa]

What about Stalinists? And Lenin followers? Or Maoists, or Communists in general?

Also Ba'athist, Muslims, NazBols, Weird Tumblrite groups

Where do you draw the line? Nazis want to commit genocide, sure, but a lot of these groups also want to commit genocide.

Clearly we just need groups to fight against them, like Antifa....wait a second! This sounds like the exact thing “Antifa” is fighting against! Hm.....

[Free Arabian Nation]

Who gets to decide who isn't and is a nazi though? If it's a swatzika wearing cunt that is quite clearly a nazi then while I still don't agree I would say he should've expected it, but when is the line drawn from who is and isn't a nazi to you guys?
Also do you remember the "Bike Lock Bandit" the guy who hospitalized people with a blow to the temple with a bike lock which btw could've killed them. Do you take that for "hooliganism"?

Literally the guy marching in the street under a swastika, waving a tiki torch, yelling "JEWS WILL NOT REPLACE US" or "Blood and Soil" or some other rubbish like that. Or the guy talking about why Hitler totes didn't do anything wrong while shouting "Sieg Heil!" to a crowd chanting it back. If that guy isn't a Nazi, nobody is.

(Assaulting those who aren't obvious nazis, as I said, is different, which is why I don't fully support Antifa despite my person being "Against Fascism")

Regarding your latter point, while I don't exactly know the situation there, what you've described is not "minor assault", and is not the "General type of violence taken by antifa", thus not part of the discussion here. That is an actual legitimate crime that I believe should be punished.

Don't need to assume anything, you laid it out for us.

If you say so.

OK, nvm.

[Awesome Dudes and Dudettes]

This thread is the definition of sadness. Can I get an F in the chat for my SJW Op's dying movement they belong to?

[West Leas Oros 2]

I find it strange how we're arguing over whether progressivism is to blame for the alt right. Who cares? It won't help us put a stop to it. Also, why are we thinking of progressivism as leftist?

[Awesome Dudes and Dudettes]

I find it strange how we're arguing over whether progressivism is to blame for the alt right. Who cares? It won't help us put a stop to it. Also, why are we thinking of progressivism as leftist?

Why argue about this at all? lol its dumb, OPs an SJW

[The Rich Port]

Now is as good a time to bring this up as any.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=P ... nzkA_HMFtQ

If you're ever arguing with an alt-right or really any conservative, it's a must-watch, IMO.

Anyway, the alt-right IMO cannot be identified as a terror movement as a whole, although we as a citizenry should keep an eye on them. They remind me of the Sovereign Citizens movement except less crazy.

At the same time, they both use evidentiary basis as a weapon, ignoring credible evidence while creating evidence of their own. The Sovereign Citizen movement, however, has always been anti-government, whereas conservatives are not exclusively anti-government, just anti-centrist or leftist government.

As the Alt-Right Playbook posits, they're part of a whole, that being The Monolithic Right/Reactionary/Conservative wing. They're the incels that are just shy of shooting up a mall.

[Diarcesia]

I'm not excusing anything. I hope it's understood that to many of the alt-right, race and civilization has a large overlap, and thus, an attack against America and Western civilization is by extension an attack against whites, if only because that's the civilization the majority of whites belong to.

Again....how does having to fabricate evidence and blatantly making stuff up to support what they claim in anyway making their beliefs any more understandable or valid? It is doing the exact opposite and showing how nonsensical and untrue their beliefs are.

This is the point I'm trying to make. Whether it's valid or not (it isn't) is irrelevant if the matter at hand is figuring out why they are thinking like that. Makes rebutting their assertions an easier job.

[West Leas Oros 2]

Now is as good a time to bring this up as any.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=P ... nzkA_HMFtQ

If you're ever arguing with an alt-right or really any conservative, it's a must-watch, IMO.

Anyway, the alt-right IMO cannot be identified as a terror movement as a whole, although we as a citizenry should keep an eye on them. They remind me of the Sovereign Citizens movement except less crazy.

At the same time, they both use evidentiary basis as a weapon, ignoring credible evidence while creating evidence of their own. The Sovereign Citizen movement, however, has always been anti-government, whereas conservatives are not exclusively anti-government, just anti-centrist or leftist government.

As the Alt-Right Playbook posits, they're part of a whole, that being The Monolithic Right/Reactionary/Conservative wing. They're the incels that are just shy of shooting up a mall.

I must say its incredibly ridiculous to consider the entire Right-Wing to be a monolith, and there is no real basis for such a claim other than "People who disagree with me are evil"

[The Rich Port]

Now is as good a time to bring this up as any.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=P ... nzkA_HMFtQ

If you're ever arguing with an alt-right or really any conservative, it's a must-watch, IMO.

Anyway, the alt-right IMO cannot be identified as a terror movement as a whole, although we as a citizenry should keep an eye on them. They remind me of the Sovereign Citizens movement except less crazy.

At the same time, they both use evidentiary basis as a weapon, ignoring credible evidence while creating evidence of their own. The Sovereign Citizen movement, however, has always been anti-government, whereas conservatives are not exclusively anti-government, just anti-centrist or leftist government.

As the Alt-Right Playbook posits, they're part of a whole, that being The Monolithic Right/Reactionary/Conservative wing. They're the incels that are just shy of shooting up a mall.

I must say its incredibly ridiculous to consider the entire Right-Wing to be a monolith, and there is no real basis for such a claim other than "People who disagree with me are evil"

Did you watch the video. Any of the videos. They vote as a block and have very little infighting or political disagreement, and whatever there is doesn't stop them from voting accordingly.

He also characterizes the left as disorganized, dis-unified, and prone of pointless, idiotic infighting, so it's not his bias in question.

[West Leas Oros 2]

I must say its incredibly ridiculous to consider the entire Right-Wing to be a monolith, and there is no real basis for such a claim other than "People who disagree with me are evil"

Did you watch the video. Any of the videos. They vote as a block and have very little infighting or political disagreement, and whatever there is doesn't stop them from voting accordingly.

He also characterizes the left as disorganized, dis-unified, and prone of pointless, idiotic infighting, so it's not his bias in question.

The entire right. Mind you, we aren't talking about a large block, we are talking about literally the entirety of the right-wing, and they are very much prone to infighting and disorganization, and often have goals that are in fact contradictory. To consider the right to be monolithic is ridiculous and simply not true, as factionalism will arise out of any movement, and the right is far from a unified force. Perhaps when compared to the left, but certainly they are far from unified. You're literally claiming that everyone from Ancaps to Neocons is "basically Nazi sympathizers". To consider the right a unified political force is simply illogical, as the right is made up of many factions, all with interests that run contrary to the interests of others.

[The Rich Port]

Did you watch the video. Any of the videos. They vote as a block and have very little infighting or political disagreement, and whatever there is doesn't stop them from voting accordingly.

He also characterizes the left as disorganized, dis-unified, and prone of pointless, idiotic infighting, so it's not his bias in question.

The entire right. Mind you, we aren't talking about a large block, we are talking about literally the entirety of the right-wing, and they are very much prone to infighting and disorganization, and often have goals that are in fact contradictory. To consider the right to be monolithic is ridiculous and simply not true, as factionalism will arise out of any movement, and the right is far from a unified force. Perhaps when compared to the left, but certainly they are far from unified. You're literally claiming that everyone from Ancaps to Neocons is "basically Nazi sympathizers". To consider the right a unified political force is simply illogical, as the right is made up of many factions, all with interests that run contrary to the interests of others.

I wasn't talking about Terran conservatives, I'm/Innuendo Studios is talking about AMERICAN conservatives. Trump and the alt-right unified all of the American conservatives by deconstructing euphemistic conservatism. It's no longer that big of a deal to say "the truth", that Mexicans are all rapists and that foreigners contribute nothing to America, not to mention that there is no such thing as facts.

Also, yes, that's indeed the case, compared to the left. It's why they controlled the electoral college, because reactionaries and conservatives cooperate and value voting loyalty over their integrity or allowing liberals to maintain power, right or wrong.

How about you watch the videos first.

[Diarcesia]

Did you watch the video. Any of the videos. They vote as a block and have very little infighting or political disagreement, and whatever there is doesn't stop them from voting accordingly.

He also characterizes the left as disorganized, dis-unified, and prone of pointless, idiotic infighting, so it's not his bias in question.

The entire right. Mind you, we aren't talking about a large block, we are talking about literally the entirety of the right-wing, and they are very much prone to infighting and disorganization, and often have goals that are in fact contradictory. To consider the right to be monolithic is ridiculous and simply not true, as factionalism will arise out of any movement, and the right is far from a unified force. Perhaps when compared to the left, but certainly they are far from unified. You're literally claiming that everyone from Ancaps to Neocons is "basically Nazi sympathizers". To consider the right a unified political force is simply illogical, as the right is made up of many factions, all with interests that run contrary to the interests of others.

Underlined is my emphasis.

Since the topic is about alt-right terrorism, it's important to try to "emulate" an alt-rightist's perspective. It's only a search away to finding a plethora of manifestos on how Western civilization/white race is under siege by the evil hordes.

I don't think this accurately captures the actual ideology. You're mistaking "Wartime propaganda" for political theory. This is why it's futile to point out that various aspects and crimes they accuse the "enemy" of aren't true.

It's not supposed to be true. It's done as a functional tool of dehumanization, out-grouping, and psyching ones self up for violence. This is a mistake many make when engaging with them, thinking if they point out that actually the Germans aren't bayoneting babies, everyone will calm down and go home. You come across as someone not "in" on the act. It's not meant to be true. It doesn't have to be true. It is simply an aspect of warfare and outgrouping.

The actual ideology is far more cynical and depressing than merely being misinformed about evil hordes. It is not inherent to British ideology that Germans bayonet babies. What is inherent to it is that you say they do under certain circumstances.