People need to let the "the left eats itself" meme die. The right has as much, if not more, infighting and yet there's no equivalent meme (conservatives vs tea party, alt-right adjacents vs never-trumpers, the religious right vs libertarians, etc and etc).
We basically already are. They're given interviews on news stations and put in high ranking positions of power.
youtube should not have been giving people like sargon a platform either
only because useful idiots like youtube is giving alt-right influencers a platform
sure but for every successful takedown like this you have 10 ineffectual ones that only help spread the toxic ideas
Joe Rogan is a platform for hate now? He's a dumb jock who pretty much stays politically libertarian/middle of the road.
Don't you see a bit of a problem in the two points, side-by-side? Peterson was not compared to, but called a (neo)nazi. By your own account (with which I agree), (neo)nazis advocate genocide. The step from being against gay marriage because of a warped view on why people might fight for it to hating certain ethnical groups to the point of demanding them being eradicated is a... rather big one, I'd say. If (neo)nazi as a term is being used to describe people with traditional conservative viewpoints - as shitty as one might find these viewpoints - it plays down the actual meaning of the term. The quotes of Peterson on feminism, privilege and transsexuality that were posted afterwards are also consistent with a conservative societal view. Mind you, I do not agree with most of these things quoted (to be clear: The exceptions are "inventing a lot of new pronouns" which I agree is silly and "the pill was helping female emancipation", which I agree is true), but they are not outside the realm of conservativism.
Because being "middle of the road" when it comes to oppression is literally siding with the oppressors. This isn't a hard concept.
Unfortunately you cant just remove people that you disagree with. Sargon hasnt really broken any rules as of yet. It can become really arbitrary who we remove in fear of them being alt-right. For example, some have said Joe Rogan is alt-right (this got said a lot on GAF from people who dont watch him), despite him not really being political, because he sometimes says things that dont align with left leaning view.
I don't think he is either but people who are enjoy him *shrug*
We know now that unwitting (sometimes witting) centrists are helpful to the normalization of far right beliefs because they are willing to engage with and provide them with a mic and an audience.
You know what also turns a lot of people away from leftist causes? The normalization, rise, and empowering of fascists and nazis.
No, see, it's fine it's not his channel, it's fine, he's fine.
I don't get the logics behind this. What is the issue of right wing people and nazis read a book you like? With Fahrenheit in particular, it does have a (as I see it) good political message, so at worst, they don't get the message, but the book remains a good one.
People get turned away from the left when they think or people around them think the Nazis are correct.
Because racists are terrible and we don't want them to like the same stuff we like? I pretty much get it, though I've never read Fahrenheit 451.
Then shit dude I gotta burn my copy of They Live because the Alt-Right latched onto it seeing it as a movie about the ZOG despite John Carpenter repeatedly telling everyone that it was a satire against Reagan-era Yuppies.
Playboy Magazine in its heyday let all kinds of radical people from the far left and right be interviewed. It was journalism.
You mean this guy?
The answer is itself in that quote you're responding to; "there was a discussion of how ironic that situation was given the matter of the book", it's disappointing that the message of a book can either be oblivious to readers like those in the alt-right (else they'd either have to challenge the book, or change their views if they agree) or bastardise the text with their own subtext analysis, either way from a literary stand-point it's doing both book and author a disservice, but as Gio said it wasn't about it now being tied to Nazism. Take Citizen Kane for instance, the fact Trump has so colossally misinterpreted the film whenever he raves about it's greatness, or is at a level of narcissistic ignorance he can't fathom the film being a cautionary tale of the very likes of him, doesn't mean the film is viewed as shit, just that it's tragic how something so well constructed like a piece of literary or cinematic art can be so ineffectual in educating or swaying those with abhorrent views.
I mean, that's pretty much the most accurate way to describe Joe Rogan at this point? He's been straight up hosting these alt-right adjacent folks for some time. Like yeah it's harsh if you're a fan of him but maybe consider the truth in it.
Oh... nevermind then.
Totally. Just kind of an unfortunate fact. Like, I love wrestling even though there's so much that's problematic about it, not least of which are a lot of its fans.
You mean this guy?
I don't speak for anyone besides myself and experiences. Because I don't think he is doesn't mean he isn't or he is. The only thing I'm interested in is what he says or does that attracts those people to him.
This I understand, but I do not think it is a reason to be unhappy they like the book.
People are not binary. I'd agree that being a Nazi makes a person detestable, but still, it is just disagreement on one issue, albeit a major one. It is to be expected that there are still quite a few things you'd agree on with a lot of Nazis. For instance, the Nazi regime in Germany introduced orphan's pensions and introduced health care for pensioneers. I agree with those changes and I feel no shame about that. It does not counterbalance the abhorent acts and views of the NSDAP in Germany, though.
Clarify your stance because it sounds like you are saying that Nazis are gross yet somehow not gross.
I'm going to take this to PMs because it's off topic
