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 White Nationalism Straight From Milo

page: 6
30
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 4 2016 @ 12:54 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Just for the record, they're not actually in denial over this. They know it and accept it. They just pretend to be ignorant of it when away from their alt-right safe spaces, just as they do with a lot of other issues.

I'm sure you've seen some of the disgusting pro-Hitler or pro-NeoNazi threads that have been deleted here. And anyone can look at the websites and recruitment videos for white supremacist groups & see some of the exact same arguments being made, word for word. You can even see their true intentions come to the surface in any of the minority bashing threads that come up from time to time (like a popular & repulsive thread about a possible Muslim being beaten nearly to death).

A snake can only hide its fangs for so long. Eventually it will need to sate its hunger, and that's when you'll see its true nature. The same goes for people and their true intentions.




posted on Sep, 4 2016 @ 01:16 AM
link   
What really bothers me about all this is simple, but it really bothers me.

The left is more concerned about the color of someone's ass than they are:

The national debt
Global government
government corruption
middle class taxes
Obamacare failures
illegal immigration
social security running out
depleted military force

To think like a Hillary supporter, you have to have a childish, very childish mind.

And I'm beginning to wonder how many of them hate this country.



posted on Sep, 4 2016 @ 01:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

This is completely unrelated to the topic and even to our currently off the rails back and forth but I came across it while I was looking at a few of your posts and I thought I'd do you a favor. It's one of those things that I can't let go unanswered. Here's the link

"Rachel Maddow in particular (just happens to be who I am watching) says that by bringing up people that have killed by illegals is bigotted because it is demonizing a group based on only a small amount. According to the GAO (which stats are in the following site) tehre were around 25000 charged cases of homicide for illegals in prison in 2013 (that doesn't mean that they committed al of thos that year, but that is how many were jailed at that point)."

How many times do you think Donald Trump has said "Remember Kate" or "What about Kate" or the like in his speeches? For a time there, it sure seemed that it was in each and every one of them. That's not really what I wanted to address though but rather what you anchored your Trump apology with.

It stuck out like a sore thumb to me because in all my reading, it's one of exactly two reports that I've ever seen used in attempts to "prove" the disproportionate criminality of illegal immigrants. It's a favorite of Rep. Steve King (R-IA) who was also partial to another GAO report from 2005 that he flagrantly misrepresented.

The author of your American Thinker source at least attempts to make sense of the data but he made a series of mistakes. Look at the report yourself. He does get over the first hurdle that trips up a lot of scaremongers, the fact that the group in question isn't just illegal immigrants but all non-citizens, including those in the country legally. He missed the next hurdle which is that figure is for arrests only with no distinction made for whether those arrests resulted in prosecution much less convictions. Along the same lines, the figure is the total number of arrests, not the total number of homicides (more than one person can be arrested for a single homicide obviously). The other thing that is completely overlooked is that the arrests in the study spanned 51 years.

Put it all together:

In 2013, among all non-citizens in prison, the total number of homicide arrests (not homicides, not convictions) over a 51 year period for all non-citizens (a group 2.5x as large as illegal immigrants alone) was 25,064 which worked out to be a bit less than 1% of all arrests of these people in prison.

Of course, those arrests are only for those that were in prison at the time of the study, the numbers are extrapolated from a sample of 1,000 prisoners, only drawn from federal prison records, etc — not conducive to drawing any sort of realistic conclusions either way.

What's a more realistic number? Good luck finding one because there's no standard for reporting crimes across jurisdictions let alone arrests and convictions.



posted on Sep, 4 2016 @ 01:47 AM
link   
It was about time white people became nationalistic, after all, all their countries are targeted for cultural extinction by cultural Marxism and demographic suicide by mass immigration. And the popular culture is increasingly hostile to white sovereignty and identity. Even asserting it is considered racist or hateful by the brainwashed.

Good for us white people!

(Remember the Coudenhove-Kalergi plan kids, Europeans are to be mixed away)

You liberals have no idea what kind of monster you are helping create right now. Don't forget about the Nazi-esque faction of the cabal, I bet they have big plans.



posted on Sep, 4 2016 @ 01:59 AM
link   
I don't think it has been mentionend yet: Milo Yiannopolous is a UK citizen, with a greek father and a jewish mother. He is gay and makes no secret about that he dates only black lovers.

Another former Breitbart editor would be Ben Shapiro, who is jewish with an armenian background.

Not your typical "white supremacist".

Oh, and the whole "Putin is behind it" thing - just ridicoulus. No evidence about it.

And quite a strong point, coming from someone who is paid millions by Saudi and Qatari sources.


Besides all of this: we see identity politics from the black community, feminists, SJWs, immigrants, muslims...
But white male americans, the one who built this country, are not allowed to make identity politics?



posted on Sep, 4 2016 @ 03:03 AM
link   
a reply to: TheLaughingGod

Some would call it karma from expansion and genocides of many peoples in early conquest and domination of society one of the first globalization efforts yet by extreme force and seeing anyone else as heathen animals not human beings.

21st century it's time to grow up from the past get over it and come together as one people of the world instead of all this separatist my group or label is more special than any others nonsense. Doing so means a prosperious future for all of humanity not doing so means more of the same jackass nonsense solving nothing that has taken place for 1000's of years



posted on Sep, 4 2016 @ 04:26 AM
link   
a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

Yes, and that transatlantic slave trade and the supposedly endless oppression of black people, would that be the result of karma too? Surely since whites are so much better off than blacks that would mean that blacks have been much worse historically than whites.

This perspective of course ignores the very individual nature of karma and the nature of spirit transcending race. Is there merit to the idea of national karma? I don't doubt it but do you know the actual specifics and can you pull out statistics? Probably not. Besides, that slave owner is probably getting eaten by flies in Africa right now. God has a great sense of humour about such things.

Yes, of course the proverbial we are all one spiel.. Not gonna happen, seems you know nothing of humanity.

So what is your point anyway? That white people should willingly take demographic suicide? Out of all peoples whites have elevated humanity the most technologically and even socially. What has Africa done for the World lately? You take demographic suicide! No? Then shut up about it and don't expect us to just lie down and die!

Whites ended slavery.. WORLDWIDE! Over 9000!!!! billion karma cookie points. Which begs the question, how much karmic debt are we talking about in the Middle East and Africa? The most violent and wretched of lands.. Those 400 million Hindus killed by Muslims? Ouch, that has to hurt.

As usual the historical perspective of liberals is hopelessly one sided and clueless.



posted on Sep, 4 2016 @ 05:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Logarock

It's not a reaction to the left. It's a reaction to Neo-Nazi's being unable to gain ground in the mainstream with all their visible extremism.


Blatant lie. Anyone that has visited Youtube in these last three years has seen this movement coalescing as a response to SJW type political correctness and overreach. Look at any of the prominent figures of the alt-right and you'll see a person that is perpetually at war with emotionally infantile social justice warriors.



You really have to be a moron to think that white people have lost even an inch of ground in the West or that there's an even an attempt worth mentioning to suppress white people.


Another blatant lie. From now on the default response to any liberal talking about racism should be a flippant reference to the Coudenhove-Kalergi plan and the founding of the European Union. That is really all that is needed, the alt-right should just endlessly repeat this point and shine a giant spotlight on it. Eventually someone will have to respond or acknowledge reality. This simple historical fact instantly demolishes the whole liberal narrative and rightly puts it in its right context, that of being a social engineering feat of monumental proportions designed as a stratagem for destroying all of our roots and all that is traditional as a means of controlling and dividing the masses.

Will you incorporate this incontrovertible fact into your worldview? Of course not, you have an aversion to reality. If it conflicts with the basis of your liberal narrative you will simply ignore it. I'll find you spouting the same lie on some other thread in a few days. Intellectual honesty is dead.

Let's make a deal. I'll admit that blacks in America have been targeted for cultural destruction by the elite in some capacity if you acknowledge this little historical fact. What say you? Everyone's a victim to these people in different ways. Just because their tactics for different groups differ doesn't mean they don't have an underlying agenda that touches everyone. I see and understand this type of reaction and where it comes from: whites are doing good and aside from white guilt, the "white people are evil" meme and politically correct attacks by progressives they aren't oppressed in any type of traditional way. The attack on white people is one of demographic and cultural subversion. We're all different colours but we all have one thing in common, we are all being preyed upon by a psychopathic cabal of elites. They are the real enemy and we should be focusing on them but if you're gonna deny this conspiracy and also deny our sovereignty while you're at it I hope you know that will mean war, the alt-right and the ascendant nationalist parties in Europe is only the beginning.



posted on Sep, 4 2016 @ 09:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian

After that I posted the tweets from the pool producer who 100% contradicted garbage pulled off YouTube by TCT. I also posted a tweet from an AP reporter who confirmed those tweets. After the argument was already delivered, I made a quip, the purpose of which was to shame the horde of Trumpeteers who'd fallen for what amounts to a hoax because of the undue credibility they'd ascribed to an alt-right propaganda blog — because it was an alt-right propaganda "news blog." It certainly wasn't because TCT had offered anything substantial to prove their claim.


I have no problem with you attacking sources as biased or terrible. In fact, I have often times found myself reading something to then have you show why that source is bad, and this has changed my mind. I think you are great at that.

My problem is that you use the term alt right as an addition to this, implying that being alt right alone makes the source less credible. But I will admit this is nit picking, if you back up claiming it is alt right by showing fatcs why the source isn't credible, that is sufficient. The problem is many people use this type of argument to ignore fact on both sides "Well that is from Breitbart, so I won't even read it". Not saying you do this, but many do (again on all sides).

Also, I love how you ignore the fact you said Oh no I did it again, which shows your pension for just labeling a source alt right to discredit it.


Do I need to start pasting excerpts of you using all sorts of labels of your own? How about this one:

"Don't try to turn this on conservatives, liberal ones are the ones making the argument that illegals are good for the economy, and claiming to have the moral high ground."

Tsk. Tsk.


I didn't criticize you for using labels. I try to not use them when possible, but as with everyone, it is inevitable that I will use them. The difference is I don't use these labels as an implication that a group is racist or always wrong. To prove this, many people politicians included would self proclaim to be liberal. It is not used as an insult like white nationalist. Ask Hillary if she is a liberal, she would say yes. Ask Trump if he is a white nationalist, Betting he says no.



Really? This is the best you could come up with? How about you put things in proper context? I was replying to this statement:

"Yup. All 200 of 'em."

In what way is this using the term alt-right to dismiss an argument? The argument he was making was that there are 200 alt-righters in existence. Disingenuous much?


You are absolutely right. After reading the thread, I agree with you that you were not using this derogatorily, you are just responding to what another person said. I am legitimately sorry and will admit that I was mistaken here.





Are you really going to pretend that any of the statements of mine that you've so helpfully pasted fit the bill? Can't win with facts? I'm all about the facts. In fact, your very first example came at the bottom of some pretty damn conclusive facts. It's no exaggeration to say that at least to that point in the thread, my post was the most fact filled of the lot.


Yes, you personally attacked Trump and Ron Paul because they have white national supporters. You provide no analysis at all on why Paul is a white nationalist, you just through the label out to discredit him. And with Trump, you admit that you would perhaps vote for him, but your one hang up is pandering to white nationalist.

You also attack Trump supporters as falling for his white nationalism. You posted this on four different threads in one day, as a way to discredit the pro trump people. You provide no analysis as to what positions are white nationalist that Trump has, or Ron Paul, and instead just lump these people in with white nationalist to say this somehow discredits them.

Keep in mind, this was all in one day. Your number one attack today has been to just claim Trump or other conservatives are white nationalist, and then to quote this article by Milo showing how bad white nationalist are.


Since you love reading my posts, maybe you can track down one where I actually used the term "alt-right" in any way resembling what you you were talking about instead of moving the goal posts. You're a slippery one, I'll give you that.


4 threads in one day you have claimed that Trump is backed by white nationalist and that was a reason to reject his arguments.


Shall we continue the tit for tat?

Here's another example of you using a label (as you're saying you hate labels — how ironic is that?) and going on about what a disadvantage white males are at in a academic settings:

"Universities and Academia are almost entirely "progressive" (I hate these labels but don't know how else to phrase it). Being white or any other member of the "dominant class" (such as male) is hugely disadvantaged in universities."

Gee, sure looks like your entire argument is propped up on the label "progressive."


These universities would self identify as progressive. Progressive is just a political ideology. It does not imply racism like white nationalist. Surely you can see the difference. Calling someone a liberal or Republican or Libertarian, etc. these are all self applied labels that are not positive or negative. You use alt right to imply anyone in this group is racist, when that has been shown to not be the case. In fact, you apply that term to people that don't think they are alt right, which is even worse.

Again, you don't answer then if I can call HIllary and others far left and imply they are racist and hate America. According to you, this is perfectly acceptable.



You're a practiced debater I see. It's not just the array of underhanded tactics either — I can't help but notice that you are not responding to anything about yourself from my own responses to keep the focus squarely on your dubious attacks on my character.

Of course it's all complete BS and you're not persuading anyone whose opinion carries any weight with me. Like I said, collect your high fives and move along with your sanctimonious blathering.

Or hell, don't. At least you're entertaining.


I am entertaining, aren't I!

Look I think you are one of the best posters on ATS. I disagree with you routinely, but your posts mostly make me think. I am just criticizing your use of repeating that people or ideas are alt right, and therefore must be dismissed as racist.

This argument is garbage, and no different than me saying far left arguments must be dismissed as racist.

I am having a brutal work week, and I will respond to all of your points in more depth when I have a chance. I was using your words to point out what I though were inconsistencies in your argument. I will admit that I know that this can be done to me, but I try to be consistent as much as possible, including arguing for positions on all sides of the political spectrum. But I welcome people pointing out my inconsistencies, it makes me a better person.

In no means do I think you are a bad person. I am enjoying the discussion and look forward to further ones.



posted on Sep, 4 2016 @ 12:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: BigBrotherDarkness
a reply to: TheLaughingGod

Some would call it karma from expansion and genocides of many peoples in early conquest and domination of society one of the first globalization efforts yet by extreme force and seeing anyone else as heathen animals not human beings.

21st century it's time to grow up from the past get over it and come together as one people of the world instead of all this separatist my group or label is more special than any others nonsense. Doing so means a prosperious future for all of humanity not doing so means more of the same jackass nonsense solving nothing that has taken place for 1000's of years


Here's the deal:

They want to erase Western Culture as racist just like they want to erase white people as racist.

Let's look around the world and find another culture that lives as well as Western culture.

Asian ones, but guess what? If you want truly racist cultures ... look no further than Asia! You think you are going to racially mix away China or Japan? Good luck.

Or do you think you are going to co-opt the fixtures and things of Western culture and automatically become wealthy while scrubbing away the vestiges of whiteness, including the cultural traits (not racial), that lead us to develop those things? They tried that in certain countries in Africa and it has not worked out like they thought.

In order for us all to come together, people have to be willing to recognize why certain peoples succeed and stop blaming it all on exploitation. Certain groups always come to the for no matter where they happen to be, and this happens because of their cultural traits and practices, not because of racial identity.



posted on Sep, 4 2016 @ 01:07 PM
link   
a reply to: svetlana84


white male americans, the one who built this country


Comedy gold right there.



posted on Sep, 4 2016 @ 03:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: svetlana84
I don't think it has been mentionend yet: Milo Yiannopolous is a UK citizen, with a greek father and a jewish mother. He is gay and makes no secret about that he dates only black lovers.

Another former Breitbart editor would be Ben Shapiro, who is jewish with an armenian background.

Not your typical "white supremacist".

Oh, and the whole "Putin is behind it" thing - just ridicoulus. No evidence about it.

And quite a strong point, coming from someone who is paid millions by Saudi and Qatari sources.


Besides all of this: we see identity politics from the black community, feminists, SJWs, immigrants, muslims...
But white male americans, the one who built this country, are not allowed to make identity politics?



I think most of our problems go back to the white/black community myth. As if we were all on the same mailing lists or get the same news letters.

Why white people realize that when concerning themselves but assume everyone else is secretly on the same team, I will never know.

We have got to stop blaming people for the actions of others.


We do it to everyone....

All white people are responsible for slavery.

All male black teens are criminals.

All cops are bullies hiding behind a badge.

All Muslims want shiria law.

When really we just think it is ok to assume all those groups are evil till they prove otherwise, which is impossible you can't prove a negative.



posted on Sep, 4 2016 @ 04:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Grambler



In 2013, among all non-citizens in prison, the total number of homicide arrests (not homicides, not convictions) over a 51 year period for all non-citizens (a group 2.5x as large as illegal immigrants alone) was 25,064 which worked out to be a bit less than 1% of all arrests of these people in prison.

Of course, those arrests are only for those that were in prison at the time of the study, the numbers are extrapolated from a sample of 1,000 prisoners, only drawn from federal prison records, etc — not conducive to drawing any sort of realistic conclusions either way.

What's a more realistic number? Good luck finding one because there's no standard for reporting crimes across jurisdictions let alone arrests and convictions.


I will buy your reasoning here. I wasn't trying to show that these numbers are huge or anything like that. My point was the number of illegals that have committed violent crimes in the US far exceeds how many cops have shot black people. This is a fact.

Yet people like Maddow and many of the rest of the main stream media, Obama, Hillary, much of academia, and many other people claim that it is an absolute necessity that we have a conversation about the epidemic of police killing innocent blacks.

So even if the stats are misleading from the GAO, I am sure you would agree that illegals commit more violent crimes a year than the amount of police that shoot unarmed black men.

So will you denounce the double standard that all of the afore mentioned people have saying mentioning illegal crime is bigoted and so insignificant that it doesn't warrant making an issue out of it, but claims we need to have a national conversation about the police killing blacks epidemic?



posted on Sep, 4 2016 @ 05:08 PM
link   
a reply to: xstealth




The left is more concerned about the color of someone's ass than they are:

The national debt
Global government
government corruption
middle class taxes
Obamacare failures
illegal immigration
social security running out
depleted military force

if america had a left wing party the taxing would start with the rich not middle class, democrats are center right after all.

if trump actually bought up, national debt, global government, corruption, health care, immigration, welfare and defence spending, rather than peoples colour and religion, maybe the democrats would stop point scoring, and the far right stops whining.
when a presidential candidate makes as many gaffs as trump has, then continues the same tact its easy for the opposition.

rather funny and shows your ideology that you somehow believe democrats started the race baiting.



posted on Sep, 4 2016 @ 05:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler


My problem is that you use the term alt right as an addition to this, implying that being alt right alone makes the source less credible


That's fair and point taken.


I didn't criticize you for using labels. I try to not use them when possible, but as with everyone, it is inevitable that I will use them. The difference is I don't use these labels as an implication that a group is racist or always wrong. To prove this, many people politicians included would self proclaim to be liberal. It is not used as an insult like white nationalist. Ask Hillary if she is a liberal, she would say yes. Ask Trump if he is a white nationalist, Betting he says no.


I don't personally believe that Trump is a white nationalist and yes, the term is bandied about to score political points as with most any other label (and I'm no innocent in this regard). Clearly there is a wide gulf between Donald Trump and somebody like Richard Spencer who is undoubtedly a white nationalist by even the strictest definition.

However, I don't think it's unfair to denounce the ideology of white nationalism and it should be noted that white nationalism is in fact a racist ideology by definition. Indeed, I'd argue that irrational political correctness and not objective reasoning are behind the notion that every opinion is equally worthy of consideration and I tend to believe you'd agree. Should we lock up neo-nazis for instance simple for having and espousing their opinions? No. Should we denounce them publicly? Hell yes. I'm all for the free marketplace of ideas but in thatmarket place, if its truly free, ideas that are unpopular will be openly condemned.

I'd also argue that while a given politician, political party, movement, etc may not wholly subscribe to a given ideology, that the proximity on a given issue is important. So while Trump may not be a dyed in the wool, card carrying white nationalist, certain elements of his platform are too close for comfort for many of us. In popular political discourse, a certain level of exaggeration and a loss of nuance are the nature of the beast because frankly, human intellect falls on a bell curve and it's very difficult to make reasonable arguments that the majority of people can or will comprehend. That's before even beginning to address the toolbox of rhetorical appeals and strategies of persuasion.

The upshot is I'm unapologetic when it comes to making the association of Trump, the alt-right, white nationalism and racism but any sane person knows that outside of the realms of political persuasion, there's no concrete evidence that Donald Trump is actually wearing der Führer underoos (but if you look at his expressions, I wouldn't entirely discount the idea that his tighty whities are a size too small).

I suppose I take the position that all's fair in love, war and polemics. After all, you don't bring a knife to a gunfight (to paraphrase Sean Connery's character in The Untouchables and to dog-whistle my leftists cohorts
) That said, I strive to be accurate and informative, I'll admit when I'm obviously wrong and while I might employ hyperbole to make a point, I won't deliberately lie to win an argument.


In no means do I think you are a bad person. I am enjoying the discussion and look forward to further ones.


You'll have to forgive me if I'm a little lazy this particular Sunday evening and I don't address each point you've made but I spent a bit more time writing the above than I'd intended (and full disclosure, I'm slightly buzzed). I will say that I too enjoy the discussion and the intellectual challenge and I have nothing but respect for you and harbor absolutely no ill will.


edit on 2016-9-4 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2016 @ 06:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: NthOther
Yay! A new label for you guys to box people into and deprive them of their individuality!

I assume now it will be "alt-right this" and "alt-right that", ad nauseam. You're going to beat everyone over the head with your new pet label until you drive it into the obscurity of another overused hate-phrase.

Let me guess. My "alt-right attitude" is showing, right?

Let the hate flow through you.


wha??????.....new pet label?.......how about SJW's, hillbots, Obummers, shillerys, etc .....geez.... again with the 180 shift from what your republican members on ATS have been writing on a constant basis this whole year, and comparing it to this.....all of a sudden you are getting "beaten over the head" with the phrase alt-right?.....so....the "ad-nauseam" is only present when it comes from the left.....and how is alt-right a "hate-phrase", when they use it to describe themselves?



posted on Sep, 4 2016 @ 06:08 PM
link   
The alt right is kinda like Black Lives Matter for white people...

Except they don't act a fool every time the media stirs the pot



posted on Sep, 5 2016 @ 09:35 PM
link   
As much as I really can't stand Milo Yiannopoulos (even though I totally get his point) the original article is about how the "Alt Right" is notracist.



posted on Sep, 5 2016 @ 10:11 PM
link   
a reply to: TheLaughingGod

Have you seen the most recent Purge film? One the series of film that is the Purge is not at all good, but the last one does it as a film of anti-white propaganda.

Not necessarily directed at you.
edit on 5-9-2016 by ksiezyc because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2016 @ 11:08 PM
link   
a reply to: ksiezyc

Nope, not seen it. In what way is it "anti-white"?

The one thing that I have noticed is that a lot of sitcoms seem to push cultural Marxism, non racist things are often interpreted as racism and characters like that old man in Anger Management(so awful) is typical. Presented as the old way of looking at things that needs to be done away with.

And I may be cherry-picking here but I've also noticed an abundance of stupid white males being presented in contrast with the reasonable minority or woman that is usually the victim of some kind of discrimination or otherwise stupid and offensive behaviour of usually a white guy but often also the system.

Well, it's to be expected. Hollywood is controlled by the same people that control our government, our media and our banks.

I know of one type of purge that would be reasonable though.




top topics



 
30
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join