McInnes, Molyneux, and 4chan: Investigating pathways to the alt-right

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,118
18,646
146
As the alt-right becomes vanilla ISIS, let's look at the pathways into the alt-right's repackaged version of the same old racism.

https://www.splcenter.org/20180419/...Do_1jLr06pIBv4FbKr4gg8utPbDin909kAEeDwXj3ec8k

Race realism
Many members of the forum note that McInnes’s online videos were particularly impactful because they introduce viewers to more extreme figures. “[D]ude i got here from Gavin because there was a time about 2-3 years ago when Gavin would take [sic] to people like Jared Taylor and Richard Spencer,” one user posted. In one of his genial interviews with Taylor (who he’s called a “super smart guy”), McInnes allowed the American Renaissance editor to peddle his racist tract “The Color of Crime,” which uses faulty statistical analysis to argue that non-whites are more prone to criminal behavior.

Respondents noted this kind of “race realism” — which relies on pseudoscientific evidence to argue that white people are a superior race — gave them a large push into the white nationalist camp. “If your prospect is an ‘objective’ type,” one forum member offered in a discussion of how to recruit others to their cause, “nothing beats race realism, and I’d say Jared Taylor and Alternative Hypothesis” — a “ human biodiversity” blog that argues race is genetically based — “are the most presentable, accessible, and pertinent in that field.” Another simply wrote, “Once I came across race realism it was over.” Indeed, Taylor is the second-most cited force for bringing people into the TRS/Daily Stormer network, with 20.3 percent of posters mentioning him.

Stefan Molyneux, a YouTube commentator, is also best known for amplifying scientific racism. Among his videos with titles like “Human Biodiversity and Criminality” and “Race, Genetics, and Intelligence,” he argues “skills and abilities have not been distributed evenly by mother nature between various ethnicities,” and multiethnic societies are a “problem” because “the blacks and the Hispanics, they don’t end up acting the same as the white population.” He’s also done a show with Taylor, titled “An Honest Conversation About Race,” that one respondent said they were “able to use” to help their friends and family “open their eyes.”

“These programs I think are the first steps,” they wrote.

The prolific Molyneux has attracted more than 770,000 subscribers to his YouTube channel, adding up to more than 230 million views of his videos. He relies largely on charisma, delivering ill-researched and scientifically unsound lectures with a degree of confidence that eases viewers into accepting his arguments.

Molyneux, one TRS poster explained, “remains a great stepping stone between the alt-light and the alt-right.”
 

nickqt

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2015
8,084
8,940
136
No, it's libruuls and the blacks who are the real racists.
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
21,985
6,298
136
Your suggestion for addressing this issue would be what?
Mine would be to unplug the entire pile of useless time wasting crap that interferes with actual human interaction. But my ideas are rarely popular around here.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
A typical fascist tactic is to accuse any exposure of their existence as an attack on freedom itself. So if the OP points out that you could click on most any Twitter follower of Stefan Molyneux, or even Woods or Woolery, and almost immediately find yourself immersed in talk of national socialism and the wonders of mass genocide, then the useful idiots will say that that must be because you hate freedom! and demand censorship!
And not that you're just trying to turn over that rock they're hiding under.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
I’d love to discuss with you Vic if you have anything beyond a personal insult. Feel free to contribute to the forum and I’d be happy to engage you with polite conversation.
Polite conversation requires honesty, which you never engage in.
I called you an idiot because you actually believe you need to be censored, rather than just exposed.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Your suggestion for addressing this issue would be what?
Mine would be to unplug the entire pile of useless time wasting crap that interferes with actual human interaction. But my ideas are rarely popular around here.
Your ideas aren't popular because you never have any.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meghan54

UglyCasanova

Lifer
Mar 25, 2001
19,275
1,361
126
A typical fascist tactic is to accuse any exposure of their existence as an attack on freedom itself. So if the OP points out that you could click on most any Twitter follower of Stefan Molyneux, or even Woods or Woolery, and almost immediately find yourself immersed in talk of national socialism and the wonders of mass genocide, then the useful idiots will say that that must be because you hate freedom! and demand censorship!
And not that you're just trying to turn over that rock they're hiding under.

Exposing people is fine and dandy and is something that should happen. It used to be reporters who would go out and do this but the media and that job was dispersed to the rest of via the internet and social media which made the job much easier and widespread. This is a good thing, it’s a positive for democracy (although it certainly has its negative side effects but that’s unrelated to this point) and society has a more free an open discourse.

But that’s not the end of it. It’s not simply an exposure, it’s a means to the next step. There’s absolutely been a push to censor and legislate "hate speech" both in the real life public context and the online one as well. A push on how to rid ourselves of unwanted speech and ideas. It’s an unnerving direction for society to be taking.
 

UglyCasanova

Lifer
Mar 25, 2001
19,275
1,361
126
Those liberals are always censoring free speech by speaking freely!


Liberals for advocate for the freedom of speech, progressives are the ones advocating for branding things "hate speech" and working in various methods to censor it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Challenger

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
9,436
1,569
126
I don't think they should be censored, but exposed for what they are, and called out on. Any "studies" provided by them should be debunked as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie and Vic

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Liberals for advocate for the freedom of speech, progressives are the ones advocating for branding things "hate speech" and working in various methods to censor it.
Why do you always ignore that "conservatives" keep demanding to censor speech they disagree with by labeling it as "treasonous" or "seditious"?
Why are you accusing the OP of demanding censorship of "hate speech" when he said nothing of the sort?

I think we all know why. Because you're trying to squash discussion of a subject that you don't want discussed. So you try to change the subject in order to misrepresent any free speech of that subject as an attack on free speech itself.
 

DrDoug

Diamond Member
Jan 16, 2014
3,580
1,629
136
Censorship is the ultimate goal. Increased state presence to monitor and protect.

Once again, it's not censorship if they can't post what they want on a web site that doesn't allow it. If you are afraid of conservative voices being censored, head over to Gab because they have lots of people that think just like you. Maybe you could move to Florida, where the Republicans there are working hard to pass a bill that mandates web sites like Facebook and Twitter have to host racist conservatives. Or else. Conservative assholes are being banned because they attack and shit all over people they hate. Rather than change their message, they are pushing legislation to force companies to let them continue shitting all over other people.

So go join Gab and fight the Man... oops, I mean women, liberals and brown people. There's no censorship there!
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
9,436
1,569
126
Once again, it's not censorship if they can't post what they want on a web site that doesn't allow it. If you are afraid of conservative voices being censored, head over to Gab because they have lots of people that think just like you. Maybe you could move to Florida, where the Republicans there are working hard to pass a bill that mandates web sites like Facebook and Twitter have to host racist conservatives. Or else. Conservative assholes are being banned because they attack and shit all over people they hate. Rather than change their message, they are pushing legislation to force companies to let them continue shitting all over other people.

So go join Gab and fight the Man... oops, I mean women, liberals and brown people. There's no censorship there!
And I wonder just how they think they are able to enforce this?
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Is it really censorship that social media companies don't see a good business model in radical conservatives who threaten and otherwise discourage everyone else from using their product?
 

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
9,436
1,569
126
Is it really censorship that social media companies don't see a good business model in radical conservatives who threaten and otherwise discourage everyone else from using their product?
It is not, the Social media are private companies and not something that is provided by the Public sector.
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
21,985
6,298
136
We made it all the way through the first 5 posts before the insults started. P&N is growing up.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,118
18,646
146
Exposing people is fine and dandy and is something that should happen. It used to be reporters who would go out and do this but the media and that job was dispersed to the rest of via the internet and social media which made the job much easier and widespread. This is a good thing, it’s a positive for democracy (although it certainly has its negative side effects but that’s unrelated to this point) and society has a more free an open discourse.

But that’s not the end of it. It’s not simply an exposure, it’s a means to the next step. There’s absolutely been a push to censor and legislate "hate speech" both in the real life public context and the online one as well. A push on how to rid ourselves of unwanted speech and ideas. It’s an unnerving direction for society to be taking.

In the 1920s, the Klan had a huge presence in the country. In the 1930s, the American Nazi Party was huge.

Neither was ever outlawed, nor their speech ever banned. And yet both were forced into obscurity.

No one here has advocated banning anyone's speech. Sunlight is the best disinfectant. Social pressure is the best remedy to racists and bigots.

You know this. But you, and they, keep trying to equate it to censorship because you can't stand the sunlight.

free_speech.png
 
Last edited: