Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum
MisterSwig

The Tactics and Threat of the Alt-Right

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Repairman: I don't answer questions written in bold-point to the tune of "So, for the umpteenth time, what makes you different from a neo-Nazi". That's beneath my, and anyone else's dignity.

You know, I'm starting to resent these attempts to twist my words, to "monsterize" me, for lack of a better term. This isn't the first time you've done this by far. You seem to have had a personal vendetta against me for quite some time, as in this entire year and maybe before. Most people here have been very civil, and I've learned a good deal from this forum. Only one other person has sought out a personal vendetta against me, and I ended up blocking that person. That would be the easiest way right now to ensure I'm no longer asked bold-pointed questions implying I'm a neo-Nazi.

Edited by Dustin86

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Eiuol said:

He hasn't been inciting mistrust, or used any of those psychological warfare tactics, so there's nothing to defend from.

I beg to differ. On the thread about what would constitute a moral justification for overthrowing the government, Dustin made this argument:

If according to Objectivism, a government "initiating force" provides a moral justification for violent overthrow of that government, and every government in the world or that ever was initiates force to collect taxes and against those who evade taxes, then there would seem to be a moral justification according to Objectivist morality for the violent overthrow of every government in the world.

And you agreed with him. Yes, you agreed that Objectivism would support overthrowing every government in the world, simply because they collect taxes by force.

But that is not what any real Objectivist believes. It's not what Rand believed. She argued that: "The overthrow of a political system by force is justified only when it is directed against tyranny." (The New Left, p. 96) And the biggest threat of absolute tyranny right now is coming from Dustin's monarchist Alt-Right buddies.

You should better defend your mind from such people. 

Edited by MisterSwig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Dustin86 said:

Repairman: I don't answer questions written in bold-point to the tune of "So, for the umpteenth time, what makes you different from a neo-Nazi". That's beneath my, and anyone else's dignity.

You know, I'm starting to resent these attempts to twist my words, to "monsterize" me, for lack of a better term. This isn't the first time you've done this by far. You seem to have had a personal vendetta against me for quite some time, as in this entire year and maybe before. Most people here have been very civil, and I've learned a good deal from this forum. Only one other person has sought out a personal vendetta against me, and I ended up blocking that person. That would be the easiest way right now to ensure I'm no longer asked bold-pointed questions implying I'm a neo-Nazi.

Dustin86, it's more likely that you have no argument. That's why you so often start these belligerent dialogs, and then back off and/or say nothing. I've answered your questions, even when they include unnecessary tags such as: "Answer the question." Not even so much as "please." How rude. To be sure, it's very difficult to understand someone who refuses to clarify his position. It's not clarifying anything to tell people what you are not; simply put: what are you? I can't help noticing you're playing the "victim card" again. No one is "monsterizing" you. I think you're imagining others perceiving you as "the sworn enemy." I asked that you would explain what ever is your personal ideology, (aside for your malevolent universe), and how would it in any way benefit someone who holds a diametrically opposing view. Your metaphorical olive branch is getting a bit weak. So please, if you truly wish to be understood, explain what makes you different from the Alt-Right movement with which you expressed your solidarity, and yet deny association.

Edited by Repairman
a minor grammarical correction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, MisterSwig said:

You should better defend your mind from such people. 

You think I was somehow manipulated? Hardly. I actually said that it could be justified at least based on force being initiated to collect taxes. If you think I'm wrong, it's not because I was tricked into agreeing with Dustin. I had that view before Dustin even. Blame "V for Vendetta" if you need to blame something.

You seem to be paranoid that secret Alt-Righters are all around here, or that a veil has been pulled over our eyes. Or, you're ironically promoting distrust and only returned to troll us; your denouncement of Trump was followed by an almost exaggerated support of Hillary.

I wouldn't know which.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/22/2016 at 6:28 PM, Repairman said:

Is the term, "Establishment" an anti-concept? anybody?

I tend to think not. What would be the concept that it's replacing?

To me it means the entities that currently hold the most power and influence within the culture. I think those entities can be identified objectively. Certainly our president, Congress, and Supreme Court are very powerful politically. Financially there are big Wall Street banks. Artistically we have major Hollywood producers. Etc.

I think the Alt-Right mob simply wants to take power from whoever has it already. They are less about a real revolution, and more about a putsch, similar to the New Left of the '60s.

At the time, Rand said: "There is not a single basic principle of today's Establishment which [the New Left] do not share." (The New Left, p. 97) I think the same is mostly true with the Alt-Right and today's Establishment. Only this time the rebels have harnessed the power of the Internet and have a serious plan of attack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/23/2016 at 7:20 PM, MisterSwig said:

You seem to follow Dustin around this forum quite a bit. I've noticed.

Would you also like to register as an agent of the Alt-Right? Are you shitposting here?

I have a benevolent universe premise and a benevolent people premise, so no, I do not identify with the alt-right.

However, you seem vehemently opposed to the idea of persuading people who disagree with you through rational argument, which is characteristic of a malevolent people premise. Are you sure you don't identify with the alt-right yourself?

See my thread on the subject here:

Also, I have to say, this conspiratorial frenzy you've worked yourself up into over people like Louie and I, who have been on this forum for years, is absurd to the point of being comedic. Relevant Seinfeld:

 

Edited by epistemologue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, epistemologue said:

I have a benevolent universe premise and a benevolent people premise, so no, I do not identify with the alt-right.

Ah, so you've accepted Dustin's prior assertion that the MUP is what unites all the various Alt-Right factions? And that since you are BUP, you can't possibly be Alt-Right?

Maybe you aren't Alt-Right. But you didn't say what you do identify with. And you certainly gobbled up Dustin's position without any fuss.

Also, a few posts ago you said that you don't think white nationalism has anything to do with the Alt-Right. Have you changed your mind, now that, in your view, the MUP indicates an affiliation with the Alt-Right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Eiuol said:

You seem to be paranoid that secret Alt-Righters are all around here, or that a veil has been pulled over our eyes.

Well, I created this one thread about the Alt-Right and have already turned up an admitted Alt-Righter, another member whom I suspect is Alt-Right, and two members who have passively absorbed, or previously held, Dustin's blatantly non-objective political ideas. All that, and I barely left this one thread.

If that is being paranoid, then you have a definition of paranoia wholly unfamiliar to me. I call it recognizing reality.

Evade the evidence all you want, it won't change the fact that the Alt-Right are coming for you. Not only on this forum, but all over the Internet, and in the real world too--in case you hadn't noticed by now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, MisterSwig said:

and two members who have passively absorbed, or previously held, Dustin's blatantly non-objective political ideas. All that, and I barely left this one thread.

Those aren't Dustin's ideas as much as he got those ideas 2 ideas you cited from this site and people here. You got the order of causation backwards. Yeah, alt-right is MUP, I'm glad Epist expanded on that. It's pretty revealing, and what makes it morally wrong to support alt-right ideas.

Edited by Eiuol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah are you not familiar with the entire western liberal philosophic tradition? Basically one giant "No" to the pessimistic view of human nature expressed by Hobbes in which the authoritarian right has adopted wholeheartedly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Eiuol said:

Those aren't Dustin's ideas as much as he got those ideas 2 ideas you cited from this site and people here...  Yeah, alt-right is MUP... It's pretty revealing, and what makes it morally wrong to support alt-right ideas.

Why is it "revealing" if he got the ideas from people here?

I don't think it's revealing anything. A political movement is not defined by its view of the universe. Every leftist movement also comes out of a malevolent universe premise. What defines a political movement are its political views. And so far the Alt-Right seems to promote a brand of collectivism based on white nationalism and monarchism.

Furthermore, it's morally wrong to support the Alt-Right, not on account of their MUP, which is nothing unique or shocking, but rather on account of their particular ethical and political ideology, which is extremely evil.

Edited by MisterSwig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, MisterSwig said:

Why is it "revealing" if he got the ideas from people here?

I don't think it's revealing anything. A political movement is not defined by its view of the universe.

No, I meant it's revealing to think of alt-right in terms of MUP. It's easier to understand that way. I'd say a political movement is greatly informed by its view of the universe, its view of people, and its moral premises. I'd say radical Leftism is partly BUP but sees people as generally malevolent, and they're explicitly collectivist for cooperation. They'll promote revolution because no capitalist is truly good at all to them, but they'll use revolution no matter the stakes, even if it's a bad idea. Alt-right sees everything as terrible, nothing is worth respect except shows of brute power for its own sake, and a tribe is the best we can do to survive this hellscape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/23/2016 at 3:16 AM, Dustin86 said:

I am not a white nationalist but consider myself alt-right because I've considered myself so from the time when the term encompassed not just white nationalists but monarchists, those who are anti-democracy, also certain anti-feminists identified as such, etc. The way you are using the term, which is becoming more and more common today (mostly thanks to the media) but is not the original definition, is "alt-right = white nationalist".

As time passes, I often consider the various ideologies that comprise the many layers of mainstream political thought in the Unites States. A pall of pessimism enshrouds the nation. We are on the threshold of another (I hope) peaceful transition of power. Once again, Americans are expected to vote, not for an improvement in governance, but against the greater of two evils.

Then, I encounter an umbrella term: Alt-Right, which could identify one who is a white nationalist, while not being a white nationalist(?) It could include those who support a patriarchy, a monarchy, or anyone who has near complete contempt for natural human rights or life itself. A point of view based on a malevolent universe is common, all together too common among the lowest rungs of the economic hierarchy. Anecdotally, I understand that the malevolent universe premise is nearly universal among convicted criminals, which would explain their all-too-common quest for personal redemption through Christianity or Islam. Both of these creeds holds to a malevolent universe premise. While it requires no degree in theology to hold a religious faith, it would require some religious faith to believe in a monarch as one's sovereign. Throughout my life, I have witnessed the intellectual density of racists both religious and secular. We've come a long way in the past fifty years, but obviously not far enough.

It bothers me that one of the two leading contenders for the highest office is feeding, if not gorging, on racist sentiments. It is likely that his opponent will succeed. And while it will be a relief to have dodged the catastrophic ascent to power of someone as ill-equipped to hold that office, as Donald Trump is, the more successful candidate seems intent on following the same economic formula that has cast the pall of pessimism that has grown thicker in the past fifteen years.

A disgruntled population seeking redemption through an anti-politician politician is gaining converts. Republics historically have succumb to the reign of tyrants largely because of internal economic desperation. The liberty that has been our birthright, and the gift to other nations through the sacrifice of American lives, hangs in the balance, perhaps not in this election, but in a future election, one in which the United States gasps for economic freedom under crushing laws implemented with best of intentions. The ranks of the disgruntled will no doubt swell to a point where an American tyrant could win. Once established, suspensions of elections and other constitutional laws could become routine, and generations will pass until no one remembers the promise to secure the blessings of liberty ourselves and our posterity. No monarch or aristocracy in history was ever established without a violent conflict, or at least through coup d'etat.  And every one of them or their descendants tried to crush the freewill of the common people, often with bloody reprisals. The rise of the secular tyrants of the 20th century, Stalin, Hitler, and so many others support the argument that personal self-reliance must first be broken before a nation recedes into absolute authority, and ultimately, totalitarianism.

Must it always be between the lesser of two evils? As Objectivists, we know that evil wins with every compromise to evil. More than ever Americans need to recognize the value of individual liberty before it is voluntarily abandoned, and we are subjects to a new form of tyranny once again. It may not happen today, it may not happen tomorrow, but soon, and for the rest of your descendant's lives. 

Edited by Repairman
a minor grammarical correction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/21/2016 at 3:45 PM, Repairman said:

I'd be better served promoting constructive ideologies or philosophies, such as Objectivism, rather than taking any actions in opposition to any non-constructive cabal. What sort of actions would you recommend for thwarting these Alt-Right interlopers?

I think I agree with this basic sentiment. I think that with Trump's election and the influence Steve Bannon appears to have over him (Bannon was directly responsible for legal immigrants green cards almost being deported under Trump's executive order, which Trump signed without reading) we have evidence that the Alt-Right poses a serious threat. But I also agree that promoting better philosophical ideas is the way to defeat them. I actually think that the shifting political environment is a great opportunity for Objectivists and individualists to win support, and shows that there's a better answer to the anti-white, anti-male ideology of the radical left than white nationalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×