It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: theantediluvian
Um, no category?
Being one the most articulate leftist's around, and the most descriptive anybody in this entire thread so far....
Are you capable of actually categorizing what this "thing" is and is not? Or is the subject, Hillary, and your looooong post, just about label attaching and smearing the opposition to PC / Hillary????
The alternative right, more commonly known as the alt-right, is an amorphous movement. Some — mostly Establishment types — insist it’s little more than a vehicle for the worst dregs of human society: anti-Semites, white supremacists, and other members of the Stormfront set. They’re wrong. Previously an obscure subculture, the alt-right burst onto the national political scene in 2015. Although initially small in number, the alt-right has a youthful energy and jarring, taboo-defying rhetoric that have boosted its membership and made it impossible to ignore.
There are many things that separate the alternative right from old-school racist skinheads (to whom they are often idiotically compared), but one thing stands out above all else: intelligence. Skinheads, by and large, are low-information, low-IQ thugs driven by the thrill of violence and tribal hatred. The alternative right are a much smarter group of people — which perhaps suggests why the Left hates them so much. They’re dangerously bright.
Natural conservatives can broadly be described as the group that the intellectuals above were writing for. They are mostly white, mostly male middle-American radicals, who are unapologetically embracing a new identity politics that prioritises the interests of their own demographic. In their politics, these new conservatives are only following their natural instincts — the same instincts that motivate conservatives across the globe. These motivations have been painstakingly researched by social psychologist Jonathan Haidt, and an instinct keenly felt by a huge swathe of the political population: the conservative instinct.
The conservative instinct, as described by Haidt, includes a preference for homogeneity over diversity, for stability over change, and for hierarchy and order over radical egalitarianism. Their instinctive wariness of the foreign and the unfamiliar is an instinct that we all share – an evolutionary safeguard against excessive, potentially perilous curiosity – but natural conservatives feel it with more intensity. They instinctively prefer familiar societies, familiar norms, and familiar institutions.
originally posted by: rockintitz
a reply to: Krazysh0t
Is an SWM a synonym for the alt-right? Because if it is then she is spot on.
The synonym is spot on, you said it buddy.
Poor choice of words? It would seem as though you think the two are interchangeable.
Nice back pedaling though
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: chris_stibrany
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Isn't 'alt right' a 'polite' 'PC' way for them to say Trump supporters?
Who is them? KKK members and neo nazis? Because they are the ones who coined the term and love calling themselves that.
originally posted by: theantediluvian
It's not a smear when it's true.
demean, browbeat, control, stalk, terrorize
It’s arguable that natural conservatives haven’t had real political representation for decades. Since the 1980s, establishment Republicans have obsessed over economics and foreign policy, fiercely defending the Reagan-Thatcher economic consensus at home and neoconservative interventionism abroad. In matters of culture and morality, the issues that natural conservatives really care about, all territory has been ceded to the Left, which now controls the academy, the entertainment industry and the press.
"the matter"? Nothing. You just restated my sentence. Yes, hate speech is a limitation on free speech.
originally posted by: stinkelbaum
you are one of the most uneducated people on the internet, well done!
that or a troll with poor bait.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: TheLaughingGod
Describing someone's behavior accurately is not an ad hominem remark. If you call someone a racist then prove it with racist remarks made by that person, then you aren't insulting or ad homineming them. You should go restudy Logic or at the very least logical fallacies.