Who’s colonialist racsim are you referring to here?
Jesus Fuck, y’all. Why do we want to turn it into the Slacker show? You know he just posts outrageous bullshit so that everyone will talk about him. Is it really worth giving him what he wants?
…50 people were slaughtered in my country just a couple of days ago. Society is infested with people who hold white supremacist beliefs like Slacker and I’m no longer going to let him get away with his bullshit here. Especially in this thread. I’m going to shine a spotlight on his pathetic ideology and I don’t give a fuck what you think.
Banquet Bear - if I may add something without being hostile here. IIRC you were was doing cartwheels months ago when New Zealand’s government restricted Stefan Molyneux and Lauren Southern from speaking at a public venue during their tour of Oceania. Whether that decision was wise is not clear to me and hinges somewhat on what dynamics in that nation are in play. I can tell you as a civilian in the states I’ve closely monitored Molyneux for 5 years, I consider him reprehensible for many reasons, and at the same time it would alarm me if his right to speak publicly here were restricted by the government. It’s easier to make the case that someone like Alex Jones is inciting mayhem based on his own words and IMO when social media giants cracked down on him that was overdue by several years. It’s not to say I don’t think Molyneux’s foray into the geopolitical sphere isn’t dangerous, but he’s mainly affected our country by being a Trump cheerleader and we need to try to overcome with reason. Beyond those egregious cases where causality is more explicit, I don’t think going off Southern Poverty Law Center guidelines, for example, would be sustainable – not in a multicultural society. They have uneven standards, sometimes draw spurious conclusions, and there would be backlash.
Please do consider joining us in embracing avenues that allow greater free speech, if not now then maybe a whim for the future (in contrast to nearly all of humanity’s past). It’s not so bad over here.
…what the fuck is this bullshit supposed to mean?
The New Zealand government didn’t do jack-shit to restrict Stefan Molyneux and Lauren Southern from speaking at a public venue during their tour of Oceania. Thats a fucking lie. If you are going to give me an irrelevant lecture at the very least do your fucking homework first.
Speaking of complicity, someone went ahead and did some counting.
Yes, there are caveats. No, they don’t ultimately make the picture less incredibly damning. This kind of propaganda gets people killed. I know at least one person in this thread who has spread propaganda like that (and should seriously just fuck off - I’m not naming names but if you feel spoken to, please, there are other threads).
I have no doubt they sincerely believe this, but they are very wrong. It is pretty dang clear that it is conservatives who elevate individual happiness over anything else.
Oh, they talk a good game about “family values”. But every policy that can be considered “pro-family” (paid parental leave, universal healthcare, affordable housing, expanded social welfare programs, funding increases for public education) is reflexively rejected by conservatives as “SOCIALISM!!”
The educated Millennial isn’t popping out babies right now like the conservatives think they “should.” They are burdened by student debt and can’t afford the suburban starter homes they’ve been led to believe are essential for a happy, healthy family. Plus, employment insecurity naturally makes weiners shrivel up and vaginas dry up. What’s the conservative solution to this problem? “They should have majored in STEM.” “They need to work harder, pull on those bootstraps harder.” “Maybe if they stopped buying coffee at Starbucks, they’d have enough for a downpayment.” Liberals aren’t perfect, but at least they are looking at real solutions, like making college free/more affordable and raising the minimum wage. At least liberals aren’t wasting time sanctimoniously lecturing the 25-year-old whose only crime was listening to the advice of all his elders (“Follow your passion!” and “Don’t worry about taking on student loans since everyone does it (except not me, since college was dirt cheap for me)”). Really, the only “pro-family” policy that conservatives can trumpet is their anti-abortion stance. The one that puts the life of a fetus above the life of its mother. The one that cares more about the well-being of a clump of cells over the well-being of a sentient child who is forced to live in crumbling, toxic housing with irresponsible, unloving parents.
Conservatives are the ones who elevate individual liberty (freedom to bear AK-47s, freedom to be offensive and hateful to anyone, at anytime) over the right to life and happiness. A mass shooter takes out 50 people? “Thoughts and prayers”, the conservatives say. “Let’s bring back Jesus to the classroom,” they say. While the liberals look for actual, evidenced-based solutions.
So anyone who sincerely thinks liberals are all about “individual happiness” don’t know what the fuck they’re talking about.
From your own link:
So a non-inflammatory, accurate story about Muslim violence is considered Propaganda as well in your opinion? If it was up to you what would happen, stories involving Muslims and violence wouldn’t be reported or would be censored?
I’ve read the manifesto, the shooter considers himself an eco-fascist, whatever exactly he considers that to be. He’s kind of like the Unabomber with the racism turned up to 11. He also criticizes the conservatives for putting personal profit and individual wealth and freedom over that of the conservatives fellow racial group, and he mentions the destruction of the environment and its natural resources, and overpopulation.
When you publish 8 of them per day?
Yes. Obviously, undeniably. It’s a classic propaganda tactic!
Look, let’s say you want to demonize a decent-sized demographic. Let’s say, hypothetically, black people. Do you need to make up crimes? Naw. All you need to do is read the police blotter. There are millions of black people in the US. As a result, it’s trivial to find a dozen or so truly heinous crimes committed by black people on any given day. It’d be equally easy to do the same for white people, or asians, or christians, or any adequately-sized group, just by statistical happenstance.
But you don’t do that. You just publish article after article about black people. You make sure to bring up their race in the article. Maybe you put it all under a specific subheader - “Black Crime”. Crimes by other groups don’t get the same treatment - standard police beat stuff doesn’t make the cut, and if you do have to write an article about a crime committed by a white guy, you certainly don’t bring up their race or anything like that.
And over time, people who read your paper get shown a distorted picture of the world. One where black people are super criminal, dangerous, and violent. There was never a single lie or inaccuracy, but the framing creates a worldview that is nonetheless built of racist propaganda.
(It is worth noting that Breitbart does all of this, right down to having a specific tag for “black crime”.)
And this works regardless of what group you use it on, because every demographic has criminals. What we’re seeing here is this propaganda tactic used at an extremely broad scale against Muslims. Is it any wonder that some people start to believe that Muslims are disproportionately criminal, or inherently dangerous, or need to be forcibly removed? That we need to close the borders, lest more of them come in?
The solution is to stop supporting news sources that pull this kind of shit. Maybe more, but I wouldn’t know how to solve this problem without infringing on the free press in unconscionable ways. But now that you know this, what will you do?
Nonsense. The two are not “mirrored” – they are fundamentally different in that alt-right ideology is defined by its hatred of civilized norms. Your complaint is equivalent to suggesting that (for example) not allowing the police to spy on the hippies is equivalent to not allowing the police to spy on the Mafia (which by definition is a group of people in whom the police ought to be taking a close interest).
That ought to be an effective way of curtailing his influence. I suspect that few if any of his followers want to listen to some egghead.
Talk about him, absolutely. He’s a big piece of the problem, with his consistent normalization of racism and xenophobia and religious bigotry. He doesn’t pick up the gun himself, but he holds the door open for the killers.
But I see little value in letting him dictate the terms of the discussion. I see little value in addressing him directly: he’s not someone who knows an honest idea when it bites him on the ass, and he’s not someone who’s going to be persuaded. He’s, although he’s not aware of it, a troll.
Talk about the issues. Don’t let Slacker become the ringleader.
And for Og’s sake don’t quote him. I don’t have a very extensive “ignore” list, but he’s right up there near the top. For a reason.
Yup. And that’s the last I’ll say on the Slacker topic, because even to talk to much about him by name is to let him direct the conversation to himself, as he desires.
Who gives a fuck about his manifesto? You quote the goddamn thing like you accept the word of that scumbag murdering piece of shit. ISIS has a propaganda arm too. Do you read their garbage too?
Well, somebody had to take up where Starving Artist left off, I suppose. 
Mills’s.
You sure seem to have cherry picked out 1% of it, and ignored 99% of it.
I was responding to a particular point that was made about conservatism and leftism, that these sorts of people blame leftists and progressives when conservatives are the ones that promote the freedom and importance of the individual at the expense of the collective.
I was pointing out that the shooter didn’t leave out conservatives in his criticisms of what he see’s as the ills of society, he blamed both sides of the political spectrum. That isn’t an endorsement of his views but since he put his views out there it does spark my prurient interest of what makes a person like this tick, I like to read about serial killers too and have watched many interviews of famous ones, it doesn’t mean I’m a serial killer or supporter of them.
I’ve thought about starting a thread about the Unabomber’s manifesto before to sort of dissect and discuss it, but it’s only out of intellectual curiosity.