Alt-right. A terrorist movement in the making?

[Amuaplye]

And the alt-right didn't exist when McVeigh did his bombing.

So what is your argument exactly? That based on an extremely broad definition of "alt-right and cherry picked events you can implicate broad schools of thought as inherently violent?

By that standard every political position is a terrorist movement in the making.

You want just alt-right attacks? Then, it cuts it down to this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unite_the_Right_rally
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_ ... d_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlesto ... h_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Munich_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisconsin ... e_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pittsburg ... e_shooting
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/29/us/s ... oting.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Behring_Breivik
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trollh%C3 ... ool_attack
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Jo_Cox
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christchu ... _shootings
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_2 ... g_attempts
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson ... r_shooting

[Washington Resistance Army]

ngl fam I've been on a roll absorbing every bit of info I can on different guerrilla warfare theories lately. I've been reading stuff from Mao, Che, the Red Army Faction, PIRA stuff, the National Socialist Liberation Front, Pierce's magazine articles detailing target acquisition and psyops etc etc. If you have any more suggestions shoot me my way.

Just... Do me a favor and stay away from Neo-Nazi wank fics, please.

Although, saying that, I'm going to have to read Turner now so I can make fun of the fact Pierce copied Communist concepts and didn't bother to credit them.

https://books.google.com/books?id=GHBOY ... re&f=false
https://books.google.com/books?id=BluwC ... re&f=false

These are two I remember reading, everything else is either Wikipedia skimming for convenience and random articles on the Internet and academic databases.

I think the Turner Diaries themselves are pretty memey but if you dive around the internet enough you can find some magazine articles he wrote for The Thunderbolt and Attack! that deal heavily with guerilla warfare and good portions of his theories feel, at least to me, very inspired by the Red Army Faction and thus Mao. He even uses the same style of terminology (urban guerrillas etc), it's been interesting to see the similarities between left and right wing militants to say the least.

Both of those look like good reads, links saved and I'll hopefully get to em soon. Thanks bud.

[Galloism]

Amuaplye is debunking the argument that "there is no right-wing terrorism"

Its easy to debunk Strawman arguments no one made.
His list is an assortment of unaffiliated people that he categorizes as "alt-right" despite the fact that the most violent acts occurred before the term alt-right was even conceived of.
A Number are Random Murders that are claimed to have a racial motive
And the ones that are explicitely political don't profess an allegiance to an "altright" cause.

Which was the Original Claim of the OP that the "Alt-right" in itself was a terrorist movement or "one in the making"
The claim wasn't weather people who share beliefs with the right or alt-right can't be terrorists.

The post he responded to was to my response of someone claiming that all "Fascists" (read: anyone Marxists disagree with politically) want to commit Genocide, which is untrue. Then Amuaplye replied with a list of random "right wing" terrorists as proof that all right wingers endorse genocide?

But this is what Leftists do, they tailor their definitions and guilt by association so they can create a more convincing strawman.

Meanwhile a thousand people can get killed by Terrorists explicitly citing Islam as their motivation and say that it had nothing to do with Islam

I wouldn’t call slate “mainstream”.

That being said, yes that’s super hypocritical.

[Kowani]

Also also, Wash, you seem weirdly familiar with the tactics used in The Turner Diaries, to cite them as somehow accurate and effective.

ngl fam I've been on a roll absorbing every bit of info I can on different guerrilla warfare theories lately. I've been reading stuff from Mao, Che, the Red Army Faction, PIRA stuff, the National Socialist Liberation Front, Pierce's magazine articles detailing target acquisition and psyops etc etc. If you have any more suggestions shoot me my way.

Did the Viet Cong ever write anything down?

[The Rich Port]

Just... Do me a favor and stay away from Neo-Nazi wank fics, please.

Although, saying that, I'm going to have to read Turner now so I can make fun of the fact Pierce copied Communist concepts and didn't bother to credit them.

https://books.google.com/books?id=GHBOY ... re&f=false
https://books.google.com/books?id=BluwC ... re&f=false

These are two I remember reading, everything else is either Wikipedia skimming for convenience and random articles on the Internet and academic databases.

I think the Turner Diaries themselves are pretty memey but if you dive around the internet enough you can find some magazine articles he wrote for The Thunderbolt and Attack! that deal heavily with guerilla warfare and good portions of his theories feel, at least to me, very inspired by the Red Army Faction and thus Mao. He even uses the same style of terminology (urban guerrillas etc), it's been interesting to see the similarities between left and right wing militants to say the least.

Both of those look like good reads, links saved and I'll hopefully get to em soon. Thanks bud.

Them reading like a 15 year old girl's ZOG fanfic non-withstanding, I consider it pretty dangerous.

It's like if My Immortal but Harry Potter is an Aryan warrior who hasn't found a "mate".

Cuz women like it when you call them "mates". Guess that works at the local neo-nazi bars.

[Amuaplye]

Cuz women like it when you call them "mates". Guess that works at the local neo-nazi bars.

It works if you're Australian

[The Rich Port]

Cuz women like it when you call them "mates". Guess that works at the local neo-nazi bars.

It works if you're Australian too

In this context it's a breeding mate.

Do Australians and Brits when they call each other mates mean it like that.

That's rather randy, if I do say so myself.

[Washington Resistance Army]

ngl fam I've been on a roll absorbing every bit of info I can on different guerrilla warfare theories lately. I've been reading stuff from Mao, Che, the Red Army Faction, PIRA stuff, the National Socialist Liberation Front, Pierce's magazine articles detailing target acquisition and psyops etc etc. If you have any more suggestions shoot me my way.

Did the Viet Cong ever write anything down?

General Giap wrote an insurrection manual in 1962, I've been meaning to pick up a copy for a while now.

[Diarcesia]

Amuaplye is debunking the argument that "there is no right-wing terrorism"

Its easy to debunk Strawman arguments no one made.
His list is an assortment of unaffiliated people that he categorizes as "alt-right" despite the fact that the most violent acts occurred before the term alt-right was even conceived of.
A Number are Random Murders that are claimed to have a racial motive
And the ones that are explicitely political don't profess an allegiance to an "altright" cause.

Which was the Original Claim of the OP that the "Alt-right" in itself was a terrorist movement or "one in the making"
The claim wasn't weather people who share beliefs with the right or alt-right can't be terrorists.

The post he responded to was to my response of someone claiming that all "Fascists" (read: anyone Marxists disagree with politically) want to commit Genocide, which is untrue. Then Amuaplye replied with a list of random "right wing" terrorists as proof that all right wingers endorse genocide?

I stand corrected there. Here's my question regarding fascism: how would it handle foreigners and minorities already living there that are already assimilated to the host country? A lot of the apprehension is that it includes ethnic cleansing and genocide because that's what happened historically, and that the alt-right kind of handwaves it.

Also, what is alt-right in your definition? How much overlap does it have with fascism?

But this is what Leftists do, they tailor their definitions and guilt by association so they can create a more convincing strawman.

Meanwhile a thousand people can get killed by Terrorists explicitly citing Islam as their motivation and say that it had nothing to do with Islam
(Image)

Irrelevant.

[Page]

Amuaplye is debunking the argument that "there is no right-wing terrorism"

Its easy to debunk Strawman arguments no one made.
His list is an assortment of unaffiliated people that he categorizes as "alt-right" despite the fact that the most violent acts occurred before the term alt-right was even conceived of.
A Number are Random Murders that are claimed to have a racial motive
And the ones that are explicitely political don't profess an allegiance to an "altright" cause.

Which was the Original Claim of the OP that the "Alt-right" in itself was a terrorist movement or "one in the making"
The claim wasn't weather people who share beliefs with the right or alt-right can't be terrorists.

The post he responded to was to my response of someone claiming that all "Fascists" (read: anyone Marxists disagree with politically) want to commit Genocide, which is untrue. Then Amuaplye replied with a list of random "right wing" terrorists as proof that all right wingers endorse genocide?

But this is what Leftists do, they tailor their definitions and guilt by association so they can create a more convincing strawman.

Meanwhile a thousand people can get killed by Terrorists explicitly citing Islam as their motivation and say that it had nothing to do with Islam

In one case we are talking about backlash toward Somali Americans as an ethnic group and those who would hold an entire people responsible for the actions of one. In the other case, we are talking about white supremacy and far right extremism. There is a difference. If one were to say that all white people are guilty of the terrorist attack in Christchurch, that would be wrong, just as it is wrong to hold any ethnic group as a whole responsible for an individual's action. But they are not talking about blaming white people, they are talking about blaming white supremacists.

[Jack Thomas Lang]

In one case we are talking about backlash toward Somali Americans as an ethnic group and those who would hold an entire people responsible for the actions of one. In the other case, we are talking about white supremacy and far right extremism. There is a difference. If one were to say that all white people are guilty of the terrorist attack in Christchurch, that would be wrong, just as it is wrong to hold any ethnic group as a whole responsible for an individual's action. But they are not talking about blaming white people, they are talking about blaming white supremacists.

The article subheading for the second article literally says that all White Australians should be implicated.

Sooo...

[Galloism]

Its easy to debunk Strawman arguments no one made.
His list is an assortment of unaffiliated people that he categorizes as "alt-right" despite the fact that the most violent acts occurred before the term alt-right was even conceived of.
A Number are Random Murders that are claimed to have a racial motive
And the ones that are explicitely political don't profess an allegiance to an "altright" cause.

Which was the Original Claim of the OP that the "Alt-right" in itself was a terrorist movement or "one in the making"
The claim wasn't weather people who share beliefs with the right or alt-right can't be terrorists.

The post he responded to was to my response of someone claiming that all "Fascists" (read: anyone Marxists disagree with politically) want to commit Genocide, which is untrue. Then Amuaplye replied with a list of random "right wing" terrorists as proof that all right wingers endorse genocide?

But this is what Leftists do, they tailor their definitions and guilt by association so they can create a more convincing strawman.

Meanwhile a thousand people can get killed by Terrorists explicitly citing Islam as their motivation and say that it had nothing to do with Islam

In one case we are talking about backlash toward Somali Americans as an ethnic group and those who would hold an entire people responsible for the actions of one. In the other case, we are talking about white supremacy and far right extremism. There is a difference. If one were to say that all white people are guilty of the terrorist attack in Christchurch, that would be wrong, just as it is wrong to hold any ethnic group as a whole responsible for an individual's action. But they are not talking about blaming white people, they are talking about blaming white supremacists.

You do know implicate and blame are synonyms, right?

[Neo Kerala]

We get it, you sympathize with anarchshits.

Did you forget fren? All white right wingers are evil conservative christians supremacists

As an Indian, I feel sorry for white people.The amount of stupid people who are racist to them is astounding.

[Hirota]

Its easy to debunk Strawman arguments no one made.
His list is an assortment of unaffiliated people that he categorizes as "alt-right" despite the fact that the most violent acts occurred before the term alt-right was even conceived of.
A Number are Random Murders that are claimed to have a racial motive
And the ones that are explicitely political don't profess an allegiance to an "altright" cause.

Which was the Original Claim of the OP that the "Alt-right" in itself was a terrorist movement or "one in the making"
The claim wasn't weather people who share beliefs with the right or alt-right can't be terrorists.

The post he responded to was to my response of someone claiming that all "Fascists" (read: anyone Marxists disagree with politically) want to commit Genocide, which is untrue. Then Amuaplye replied with a list of random "right wing" terrorists as proof that all right wingers endorse genocide?

But this is what Leftists do, they tailor their definitions and guilt by association so they can create a more convincing strawman.

Meanwhile a thousand people can get killed by Terrorists explicitly citing Islam as their motivation and say that it had nothing to do with Islam
(Image)

In one case we are talking about backlash toward Somali Americans as an ethnic group and those who would hold an entire people responsible for the actions of one. In the other case, we are talking about white supremacy and far right extremism. There is a difference. If one were to say that all white people are guilty of the terrorist attack in Christchurch, that would be wrong, just as it is wrong to hold any ethnic group as a whole responsible for an individual's action. But they are not talking about blaming white people, they are talking about blaming white supremacists.

Great Scott, did you even read the post you were replying to before posting that? Because your post reads like utter drivel.

Did you forget fren? All white right wingers are evil conservative christians supremacists

As an Indian, I feel sorry for white people.The amount of stupid people who are racist to them is astounding.

Within a demographic of the left, it's somehow "acceptable" - congratulated even - to be racist to white people at this moment in time. Just like how it used to be acceptable to be a dick to other demographics in the past - be that via racism, sexism, homophobia, anti-semitism, islamophobia etc etc.

It's just a new form of idiotic intolerance masquerading as something to be supposedly congratulated.

[Ostroeuropa]

In one case we are talking about backlash toward Somali Americans as an ethnic group and those who would hold an entire people responsible for the actions of one. In the other case, we are talking about white supremacy and far right extremism. There is a difference. If one were to say that all white people are guilty of the terrorist attack in Christchurch, that would be wrong, just as it is wrong to hold any ethnic group as a whole responsible for an individual's action. But they are not talking about blaming white people, they are talking about blaming white supremacists.

And the first one is talking about blaming third world cultural attitudes that are virtually indistinguishable from white supremacy. What's the difference?

[Mystic Warriors]

I love the alt right, for no other reason than they make the left look good in comparison.

[Ostroeuropa]

I stand corrected there. Here's my question regarding fascism: how would it handle foreigners and minorities already living there that are already assimilated to the host country? A lot of the apprehension is that it includes ethnic cleansing and genocide because that's what happened historically, and that the alt-right kind of handwaves it.

I can't speak for fascists, but there's a pretty simple answer to this for Europe.

Currently there's around 10% minorities. This is Carl of Swindon.

His grandfather is black. Not brown, full on black.

Even if we pretend the 10% of minorities in Europe are full on black, two generations of intermarriage will mean only whites remain regardless. When a mixed race person has kids with a white person, those kids tend to be white. This effect is even more pronounced with other ethnicities.

Arabs it'll take only one generation to get a white person with slightly tanned skin, and in two generations they'll basically be pale as any of them. Indians about the same.

And so on. When you accept "White" as a perception rather than a biological reality, this is obvious.

Provided immigration is stopped, and provided minorities are integrated, there is no need to do anything to ensure a white society, one will come about naturally.

Within about four generations, or perhaps five, it's likely the white descendents will even be at the point where they labor under the delusion all their ancestors were white.

Even if minorities were 25% of the population, we can expect a completely white populace to emerge over time unless the populations remain segregated and the minority one grows at a larger rate.

It's only when you hit about 50% that you even start to get the erosure of white people, and in that situation you know what you get?

The populace identifying as descended from both white people and minorities, a continuation of white cultural identity as a part of their heritage and so on. They'll also be "White" relative to other ethnicities, they'll merely be the palest shade of brown person.

It'd take minorities being an absolute majority of about 70% for white identity to be in danger of being "outbred".

If you watch sleeping with the far-right, a British documentary, you'll be able to see a half-indian half-white man who is a key figure in the far right in the UK. He looks like a kind of tanned white person. Him and David Duke, Nick Griffin and all that yuck it up all the time and discuss strategy to get fascism normalized.

He also absolutely flips out and sulks when the journalist "finds out" about his father and is like; "Yo dude... what?" and he's like; "I CHANGED MY NAME FOR A REASON. I DONT SEE HOW ITS RELEVANT." and sulks, while David Duke and Nick Griffin are like "Omg, you're so rude. Why bring THAT up?".

https://metro.co.uk/2019/02/21/sleeping ... y-8708079/

At one point, the nationalist was enraged when the journalist wanted to discuss his background, after his mum let slip that he was born ‘Dilip Sengupta’ – and changed his name a few years ago – and he aggressively asked for the footage to be stripped from the documentary.


Read more: https://metro.co.uk/2019/02/21/sleeping ... to=cbshare

Twitter: https://twitter.com/MetroUK | Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MetroUK/

So I kind of suspect that for all the guff, they are actually willing to view mixed race people as white provided they *appear* to be white, and espouse fascist politics.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

I love the alt right, for no other reason than they make the left look good in comparison.

If you need the alt-right to look good, are you really good?

[Thuzbekistan]

>worker ownership of the MoP is the same as class warfare on workers

The Soviet system under Stalin worked for the proletariat. Under Stalin there was democracy in the workplace, economic planning, and a socialist system. In my experience, anyone who equates soviet socialism with fascism is historically and politically illiterate.

Actually, the opposite is true. Soviet apologists are politically and historically illiterate, and revisionist lying academics does not change that. The central government was far from democratic, and there are countless cases where the Soviet Union did not help the workers it supposedly represented, and suppression of anti-government sentiment was commonplace.

Have you ever considered that theres a reason the nation lasted so long under socialism? Yeah it was an authoritarian hell hole, but given that the USSR started by ripping a feudal society to shreds, what they achieved by WW2 was incredible.

[Mystic Warriors]

I love the alt right, for no other reason than they make the left look good in comparison.

If you need the alt-right to look good, are you really good?

Dont really care.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

If you need the alt-right to look good, are you really good?

Dont really care.

Don't care about my post or don't care whether you're really good?

[LiberNovusAmericae]

Actually, the opposite is true. Soviet apologists are politically and historically illiterate, and revisionist lying academics does not change that. The central government was far from democratic, and there are countless cases where the Soviet Union did not help the workers it supposedly represented, and suppression of anti-government sentiment was commonplace.

Have you ever considered that theres a reason the nation lasted so long under socialism? Yeah it was an authoritarian hell hole, but given that the USSR started by ripping a feudal society to shreds, what they achieved by WW2 was incredible.

1. The U.S. lasted much longer than the Soviet Union, so the latter does not deserve any credit for being long lasting.
2. Just because it tore into the Nazis in WWII does not mean it should be emulated.

[Feudal Bulgaria]

So everything that isnt pro faggi and pedos is hateful.Very smart.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

So everything that isnt pro faggi and pedos is hateful.Very smart.

You appear not to know the difference between LGBT people and pedophiles. Do you need a little help?

[Nakena]

Did the Viet Cong ever write anything down?

General Giap wrote an insurrection manual in 1962, I've been meaning to pick up a copy for a while now.

Modern Warfare by Roger Trinquier