It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

"Alt-Right": A Movement? An Ideology? An Ethnicity? WHAT is it?

page: 6
14
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 31 2016 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Nope. I wanted to know how to categorize this 'new' 'thing' that all the sudden is the Everything Evil. Since you just keep confirming that it, that the MSM's / Hillary's / etc conspiracy theory of a smear campaign of it is little more than a smear campaign of etc etc opposition (regardless of whether or not there really are people that would identify as such)...

You clearly can't categorize it as anything different, instead you come off as only being capable how demonstrating that it / its importance really is just the smear etc etc (that I suspected it was).
edit on 31-8-2016 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 31 2016 @ 09:28 AM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

you are being ridiculous.

It is a category of American editorializing voters. A "movement" of the intellectually challenged or blatantly anti-social and deliberately offensive off-the-leash misfits that no one takes seriously except for their own "tribe" members, who egg each other on and try to outdo each other, just like middle-school bully boys. Screeching, interrupting, and flinging poop. That's what they do.


A group of unpleasant people.

There are other demographics:

people who go to gyms and admire their muscles in the mirror, or the
people who pierce everything they can manage to pierce, or
the McMansion suburbanites who have 20% masonry on their homes and drive Lexus or BMW autos.

All of those groups have something in common, that's what makes them a thing.


Alt-Right is consistently unpleasant, oppositional, hateful, sensationalist and online. It's a thing.

edit on 8/31/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2016 @ 09:29 AM
link   
dbl



edit on 8/31/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2016 @ 09:41 AM
link   
So if you're a nationalist, you're racist.

If you're a globalist, you're not???

0_o



posted on Aug, 31 2016 @ 09:41 AM
link   
I know what the "Alt" is. I was just looking at my keyboard and I found it right there next to my spacer bar. I never even noticed it before. Then I discovered that it was on the "left" side, and I said to myself, is Hillary sending a signal to her followers in the KKK that she's on board? Who knows, but with all the conspiracy theories going on right now it's anybody's guess.





edit on 31-8-2016 by Fromabove because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2016 @ 10:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Okay, so all republicans / conservatives ARE "Alt-Right" as well.


It is what the Republican Party winnowed itself down to since the 1990s by RINOing out anyone who was not "conservative enough". Anyone to the left of whoever remained was deemed "liberal" and either publicly shamed or refused funds to campaign. During the purge years, RP leadership constantly and consistently kowtowed to and apologized for offending the alt right leaders of their extremists.

The GOP was warned 50 years ago (by their own conservatives) against allowing their extremists to gain power. What did they do? Party leaders not only promoted their extremists but welcomed the racist extremists who left the Democratic Party. (David Duke finally became a Republican in 1989.) It is this combination that now controls the RP.



posted on Aug, 31 2016 @ 10:17 AM
link   
I did think about the usenet Alt groups, but I thought they died out before alt right was a thing.
I don't think I've looked at a newsgroup since I stopped using Netscape :-)

As for the other stuff, views wise I'd fall into the alt right lot I think. I certainly see a lot of names I recognise off twitter.

It's interesting how some of you insist on categorising anyone on alt right as stupid, poor, Christian and racist yet rail against snowflake sjw and traitor :-)

In my opinion, anyone who is wholly on a single side, politically, is likely to be thick, whichever side they choose. The right has bad answers just as the left does, if you can't see that then you need a guide dog.
edit on 05pWed, 31 Aug 2016 10:20:05 -050020162016-08-31T10:20:05-05:00kAmerica/Chicago31000000k by SprocketUK because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2016 @ 10:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

oh ffs. It is a demographic. Just like any other demographic.

Category: white people

Attribute: difficult


Physical characteristics: white males

If the subject is all of the above,
AND exhibits the following:


    Racist
    Nationalist
    Miosynist
    Anti-social
    Violent
    Obnoxious
    Poor listening skills
    Limited education and/or personality disorder



In a manner consistently: disagreeable

That's who "alt-right" is.

It is a subspecie of American males. mammal, primate, sapiens


Hey, someone finally tried to answer the thread title question.


I suppose that would be a 'proper' categorization....

Now that you've clarified, it's people that annoy you that are "alt-right". Good to know, although you've basically been stating that from the get.

Nice display of being a sexist and a racist BTW

edit on 31-8-2016 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2016 @ 10:31 AM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

No. You have it backward. Alt-right people ANNOY ME.

Because they are annoying. Fundie Evangelicals annoy me, too. That doesn't make them alt-right.

Ghetto ebonics speakers with their pants down around their thighs annoy me.
They are decidedly not alt-right.

Asshat Wall-Streeters who stay at hotels and boss everyone around. They annoy me. They are not alt-right.

The "category" of "who annoys Buzzy" is not the topic.
But they count in it, yes.



posted on Aug, 31 2016 @ 10:35 AM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

sexist and racist?

WTF is wrong with you?
I'm a white heterosexual married postmenopausal educated (very well educated) experienced professional and mother of two adults.
I hardly think that's sexist or racist.

Tell ya what annoys me: the ignorant, blustering, interrupting Jerry Springer types; the obese, inarticulate whiners. The people who are unable to write or speak intelligently. If that happens to encompass alt-right, then sign me up.

Racist and sexist I am not. Tolerant? I try...Lord knows I try.

Phil Robertson is racist and sexist and ALT-RIGHT.


edit on 8/31/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2016 @ 10:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: beeyotch

"Freedom of speech" does not mean people can collectively make trouble being as outrageously inappropriate as possible.


Actually that is exactly what it means, it's in the very name of the term, free speech is pretty self-explanatory.

"Hate speech" on the other hand is a limitation on free speech. What's the matter? Are you people afraid that hate mongers will crawl out of the woodwork and start spewing hate and everyone will just succumb to the mysterious power of hate? Are you people not confident in your ability to counter such hate with reasonable arguments and facts? Is your position so weak that you need the government to control the speech of others?

That is a totalitarian streak no matter which way you want to put it. The only limitation on free speech should be incitement to violence and that's it.

To these kids being as outrageously inappropriate as possible is a form of protest or just trolling. To them this is a counter culture, you would probably praise the hippies for their childish antics. Well get used to it, the leftist narrative has gotten stale.. the youth want to rebel and this is their way of doing it.. and if they should challenge the establishment whilst doing it that's just great. In a society where everyone is offended by everything people need to learn how to cope with offense, they need exposure therapy not safe spaces and insulation from "dangerous ideas". This is a service to society and a backlash against the typical totalitarianism that liberals have come to represent.

Apparently you liberals have become the lame and stale old guys now.. the rebellious youth have spoken, try to not be so butthurt about being a "conformist establishment shill". (I love saying that ironically but I also mean it)

When I was living in the mountains of China in the first millennium all of us hermits were deeply racist. Against humans. We would make racist jokes all the time. Try to find the humour in the situation says the misanthropic Taoist hermit. This is the way of the true warrior monk, emotional alchemy. And if you look at me wrong I pluck eyes out for fun.



posted on Aug, 31 2016 @ 10:36 AM
link   
a reply to: desert

I cant argue with that. It's just weird that supposedly the "Alt-Right" would be some alternative to that, and yet herein we've discovered that the republicans too are all lumped into this new category.

Which is obscene considering rarely do I see people equate ALL Democrat's as being totally insane and obtuse and racist and violent SJW's. Take BW's "Alt-Rght" list for example, and slightly change it and you get the real deal SJW archetype:

Racist
Globalist
Sexist
Anti-social
Violent
Obnoxious
Poor listening skills
Limited education and/or personality disorder

So as I suspected, a big part of this whole all-in double-down spiel they're harping all the sudden is a counter-label to the SJW moniker. An irony being that SJW's being so sexist & racist & uncompromising & VIOLENT & MURDEROUS is what has pitted so many against them, myself included.



posted on Aug, 31 2016 @ 10:36 AM
link   
a reply to: SprocketUK

To understand American politics, one has to understand that both parties in the US (up until 20 years ago) used to be comprised of liberals, conservatives, and moderates. The system of American govt was set up from the beginning with "checks and balances", and parties were expected to compromise to get work done.

When one party shed itself of its liberals, moderates, and many conservatives, and instead allowed extremist ideology to take over and refuse to compromise or work with the other party, then there is a serious asymmetrical balance of power that threatens the Founding Father's notion of how this nation would be governed.

Interesting, a Democratic Party leader who teams up with Bernie Sanders as a Senate Progressive is Elizabeth Warren. Liz Warren was a Republican until the 1990s, when she disagreed with Republican economic ideas. She became a Democrat, knowing that voices like hers were no longer welcome in the party.



posted on Aug, 31 2016 @ 10:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
sexist and racist?

WTF is wrong with you?
I'm a white heterosexual married postmenopausal educated very well educated mother of two adults.
I hardly think that's sexist or racist.


Yet you can't see you own racist & sexist driven self-loathing. You just spelt it out: ANNOYING (a broad term in your case) WHITE MALES are to be lumped together and demonized, dehumanized. You clearly cant see your own bigotry either.



posted on Aug, 31 2016 @ 10:41 AM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss


Hey, someone finally tried to answer the thread title question.

I suppose that would be a 'proper' categorization....

Now that you've clarified, it's people that annoy you that are "alt-right". Good to know, although you've basically been stating that from the get.


Hey, someone finally gave you the response you were looking for so you could reply in the way you wanted to.



posted on Aug, 31 2016 @ 10:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Nice display of being a sexist and a racist BTW

You should really stop projecting the way you generalize groups into the whole onto other people. Buzzy clearly wasn't talking about all white males here and anyone with even a modicum of common sense could easily tell that she was merely just describing what it means to be "alt right", but because you've already projected your unfounded stereotype that Buzzy is racist and sexist, you instead generalize what she said to all white males. Very dishonest of you.

Of course I know you don't care about this nuance, but that's one of the things that makes you alt-right. Failure to recognize nuance in an argument in order to push unfounded strawmans is one of the most common tactics employed by the alt-right.



posted on Aug, 31 2016 @ 10:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t


originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

oh ffs. It is a demographic. Just like any other demographic.
Category: white people
Physical characteristics: white males
It is a subspecie of American males. mammal, primate, sapiens


I see racism & sexism. Oh, wait, that's right because she's a women she "cant" be sexist, and that also makes her a minority meaning she "cant" be racist. Because ONLY Straight White Males (SWM) are the "Patriarchy", regardless of anything to do with ACTUAL privilege.



posted on Aug, 31 2016 @ 10:48 AM
link   
a reply to: TheLaughingGod

I tend to agree 100% with everything you've said with one exception - that the memes so common with alt-right are the sole domain of youth.

I disagree strongly and a broad look at ATS will show (where people state their age group, and assuming they aren't lying) that the middle aged and older are just as if not more so to be less tolerant of those that don't fit precisely within their own demographic whether that be politics, religion, skin colour, gender, gender preference etc., and firmly believes that makes their opinion somewhat weaker than their own and any complaints about such a stance makes the opposer an SJW. It's an easy response when you haven't actually got something articulate.


edit on 31-8-2016 by uncommitted because: whoops, typo



posted on Aug, 31 2016 @ 10:54 AM
link   
a reply to: TheLaughingGod


"Hate speech" on the other hand is a limitation on free speech. What's the matter?


"the matter"? Nothing. You just restated my sentence. Yes, hate speech is a limitation on free speech.

therefore, it follows that "freedom of speech" exposes the dregs of society who shoot their mouths off with the sole mission and goal of deceiving people and upsetting them.

The same sort of people who think it's funny to watch "Ow! My Balls". Who delight in bathroom humor, and the social skills and presentation of a freight train.

That Trump is getting away with it is only pouring jet fuel on the flames. Like, the flames painted on the sides of the trucks in the rally a few days ago.....their vulgar calls for lynching and asking women if they want to suck on body parts, and saying they have rope and gasoline.....
as they drive away in their "monster trucks" -----

Not "rednecks", no. Not "hillbillies." Try "Antisocial Trash". The modern equivalent of the population who the Founding Fathers did not allow to "vote."

Except this time, they ARE allowed to vote.
And have reality tv shows. And say horrible things about people and to people. Used to be only the religious got to demean, browbeat, control, stalk, terrorize with ideas of hell and abandonment. Now alt-right gets to do it too!




edit on 8/31/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2016 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Of course you do, and I already pointed out why. Your rant there just reinforces my point about made up strawmans and disregarding nuance.







 
14
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join