Kolya on 7/11/2020 at 15:22
Quote Posted by Nameless Voice
Regardless, it seems really bizarre that
this is the outcome you take from a very interesting (and clearly well-researched) series about how the alt-right operates.
It's what I took from the short part I watched before closing it. As I said "Gabe" isn't a person, he's not even an example of anyone. People have motivations and experiences that drive their decisions. And if your clever theory how the alt-right snatches the dawdling minds of the sheeple cannot even allow for that, then it's clear to me that you don't have an interest in solving the actual question but would rather service your own bias.
Azaran on 7/11/2020 at 16:03
Sean Connery must be rolling in his grave
Thirith on 7/11/2020 at 16:43
Kolya, what is it you're even saying? The video does generalise - you can't make an argument without some degree of generalisation - but in practical terms, what does your talk about people having motivations and experiences that drive their decisions mean? I mean, obviously people don't all work exactly the same, but there are still common mechanisms. What is it the video essay is doing wrong? And how could it, or any argument, account for the infinite differences, little or large, between one person and another?
Starker on 7/11/2020 at 17:20
Quote Posted by Gryzemuis
I'm not native in English. So maybe it is that. But I also don't like being called a normie (I had never heard that word before). Just like I dislike being called a "techie" or a "nerd". I don't use those kinds of words myself. Not even in my head. I don't see people's first quality as someone who belongs to a certain group. I don't like to be put in a group myself, so I (try to) not do that to others.
If it comforts you, normie is one of the least worst names you might be called on 4chan. Kind of like someone calling you "undamaged". But congrats on managing to not hear the term before. Shows you haven't fallen down the rabbit hole.
heywood on 7/11/2020 at 17:44
To me, that video comes off kind of like some dude on the internet mansplaining how women react to postpartum depression.
While it may explain one path from moderate views to more extreme views, it's a caricature of a movement from an outsider and doesn't explore its root causes and long term remedies.
Starker on 7/11/2020 at 18:01
If one thing is clear, it's that he is no outsider. As someone who has visited 4chan (and worse) for quite a while, he has clearly done his research and knows these alt right spaces inside and out. The analogy would be closer to a psychology student "mansplaining" postpartum depression to a general audience.
As for the video offering no long term solutions to massive systemic issues or not delving deep into root causes, yes, that is a fair criticism. It is indeed outside the scope of the video. But then again, I have no idea what a long term remedy might even look like. For short term, he does offer some ideas how people might find their way out, though.
Starker on 7/11/2020 at 18:10
I'm curious though, what did you think about his position that this might not be a fight worth fighting and it might instead be a better to spend time and effort on fixing societal problems like income inequality?
Nameless Voice on 7/11/2020 at 18:59
Quote Posted by Kolya
As I said "Gabe" isn't a person, he's not even an example of anyone. People have motivations and experiences that drive their decisions.
What are you even talking about? He mentions some of Gabe's motivations - he's motivated by interest in his hobbies, in finding a group of people he has things in common with (generally those hobbies), fitting in, making friends. Those are some of the main motivations that most people have. The video mostly talks about his motivations online, since things like e.g. his job or non-online relationships aren't really what the video is about, so he only mentions those in passing.
How is someone supposed to make a video about how a cult draws people into it, without making some generalisations based on the kinds of people that the cult targets?
You can argue that people are all individuals - of course they are - but they still tend to have a lot of things in common. Humans love to classify people into groups - including the people themselves classifying themselves into groups that they associate with. Are you saying that we shouldn't do this at all? I'm not allowed to say I'm a nerd, for example, because people are all individually and cannot / should not be classified?
Thor on 7/11/2020 at 20:41
Quote Posted by SubJeff
You're an advocate of domestic violence.
This is one of the criteria for being justifiably labelled a terrible person. Just awful.
You're an idiot to boot, because you didn't immediately realise that this is the reason I called you that. Dolt.
Re: normie. Imagine being so fragile you get upset being labelled with this, the most innocuous of insults.
I'm not an advocate for domestic violence, dumbass, though I do think it would be alright for someone to give an idiot like you a good beating. That's an exception rather than the rule, though.
june gloom on 7/11/2020 at 21:14
Quote Posted by Kolya
I'm not surprised that my politics seem incoherent to you, gloom. I have a moral compass, where you only have an ideology. And that compass is telling me that you won't win against stereotypes and the norms of society by making up other stereotypes and norms that suit yourself.
ahahahaha your moral compass tells you to throw tantrums because you can't call trans women slurs? some moral compass you got, you weenie