|
Post by maolsheachlann on Aug 20, 2018 11:32:13 GMT
You persistently accuse me of "allying" with the Alt Right, and yet I have done no such thing, and have been very careful NOT to do so. If you think taking an argument on its merits is "allying" with it, well, I don't know what to say. I accuse you of allying with the alt-right on the grounds that you refer to them as "shock troops", that they keep the Overton window open, that you accuse anyone who warns against having anything to do with them, like Jonathon van Maren (who cannot simply be dismissed as a social justice warrior), of being "cowards". If you don't want to ally with them, then why are you referring to them approvingly? I've been very explicit about the aspects of the Alt Right of which I approve and those of which I strongly disapprove. And, as you know, the Alt Right is a pretty broad movement. irishpapist.blogspot.com/2017/03/i-am-not-alt-right.htmlI think I've been even clearer in my initial post on this thread, which I consider (at the risk of pomposity) my definitive statement on this subject. I refer anyone who wants to know my opinion on the Alt Right to it.
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Aug 20, 2018 11:38:03 GMT
I accuse you of allying with the alt-right on the grounds that you refer to them as "shock troops", that they keep the Overton window open, that you accuse anyone who warns against having anything to do with them, like Jonathon van Maren (who cannot simply be dismissed as a social justice warrior), of being "cowards". If you don't want to ally with them, then why are you referring to them approvingly? I've been very explicit about the aspects of the Alt Right of which I approve and those of which I strongly disapprove. And, as you know, the Alt Right is a pretty broad movement. irishpapist.blogspot.com/2017/03/i-am-not-alt-right.htmlI have never said that you agree with them on everything, rather that you appear willing to overlook what you disagree with in order to fight what you see as the bigger threat in political correctness. To give you an example of what I mean, Mussolini did not agree with Hitler's racism and anti-semitism, and only imposed anti-semitic laws under pressure from the German leader. Yet that opposition did not stop him from allying with Hitler in WWII. This and only this is what I meant by "allying".
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Aug 20, 2018 11:42:31 GMT
I have never said that you agree with them on everything, rather that you appear willing to overlook what you disagree with in order to fight what you see as the bigger threat in political correctness. To give you an example of what I mean, Mussolini did not agree with Hitler's racism and anti-semitism, and only imposed anti-semitic laws under pressure from the German leader. Yet that opposition did not stop him from allying with Hitler in WWII. This and only this is what I meant by "allying". But how am I "overlooking" it if I explicitly and repeatedly denounce it?
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Aug 20, 2018 11:44:56 GMT
What do you think about Sargon of Akkad, Dave Cullen, Roaming Millennial, Dave Rubin and figures like this? You see, I rather suspect you are including THOSE with the Alt Right too. Or at least, that they also get tainted by association.
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Aug 20, 2018 11:54:06 GMT
What do you think about Sargon of Akkad, Dave Cullen, Roaming Millennial, Dave Rubin and figures like this? You see, I rather suspect you are including THOSE with the Alt Right too. Or at least, that they also get tainted by association. They are not alt-right true, but they are alt-lite, in that they reject the open racism and anti-semitism of the alt-right, but have similar views and talking points on other issues.
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Aug 20, 2018 11:56:11 GMT
I have never said that you agree with them on everything, rather that you appear willing to overlook what you disagree with in order to fight what you see as the bigger threat in political correctness. To give you an example of what I mean, Mussolini did not agree with Hitler's racism and anti-semitism, and only imposed anti-semitic laws under pressure from the German leader. Yet that opposition did not stop him from allying with Hitler in WWII. This and only this is what I meant by "allying". But how am I "overlooking" it if I explicitly and repeatedly denounce it? You appear to be overlooking it because you see it as more important to focus on their opposition to PC than the views you object to, whereas if the opposite was the case, you would not be promoting it at all. If I was in your position, that's how I would see things.
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Aug 20, 2018 11:58:36 GMT
What do you think about Sargon of Akkad, Dave Cullen, Roaming Millennial, Dave Rubin and figures like this? You see, I rather suspect you are including THOSE with the Alt Right too. Or at least, that they also get tainted by association. They are not alt-right true, but they are alt-lite, in that they reject the open racism and anti-semitism of the alt-right, but have similar views and talking points on other issues. OK. I rest my case, Your Honour. Let the ladies and gentlemen of the jury watch any video by any of those figures and come to their own conclusions. This is what Young Ireland considers beyond the pale, presumably.
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Aug 20, 2018 12:01:38 GMT
But how am I "overlooking" it if I explicitly and repeatedly denounce it? You appear to be overlooking it because you see it as more important to focus on their opposition to PC than the views you object to, whereas if the opposite was the case, you would not be promoting it at all. If I was in your position, that's how I would see things. I take every argument on its merits. Simple as that.
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Aug 20, 2018 12:15:46 GMT
I have never said that you agree with them on everything, rather that you appear willing to overlook what you disagree with in order to fight what you see as the bigger threat in political correctness. To give you an example of what I mean, Mussolini did not agree with Hitler's racism and anti-semitism, and only imposed anti-semitic laws under pressure from the German leader. Yet that opposition did not stop him from allying with Hitler in WWII. This and only this is what I meant by "allying". A better analogy would be the Allied Powers in World War Two. You can deplore Stalin and still be glad the USSR won the battle of Stalingrad.
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Aug 20, 2018 12:32:22 GMT
I have never said that you agree with them on everything, rather that you appear willing to overlook what you disagree with in order to fight what you see as the bigger threat in political correctness. To give you an example of what I mean, Mussolini did not agree with Hitler's racism and anti-semitism, and only imposed anti-semitic laws under pressure from the German leader. Yet that opposition did not stop him from allying with Hitler in WWII. This and only this is what I meant by "allying". A better analogy would be the Allied Powers in World War Two. You can deplore Stalin and still be glad the USSR won the battle of Stalingrad. Actually, that proves my point. The Western Allies were much more accommodating towards Stalin than they should have been, but they believed that Hitler was worse than Stalin, in spite of the terror with which he ruled the Soviet Union. In this sense, they overlooked the perils of Communism to focus on the greater threat of Nazism. Similarly, you appear willing to overlook the racism and anti-semitism of the alt-right in order to oppose the greater evil of political correctness. The fundamental disagreement between us is this: you think that political correctness is so evil that we ought to ally with the alt-right to combat it, in spite of rather than because of their racism and anti-semitism. On the other hand, I do not think this is justified, either morally or prudentially, since doing so will only result in a major setback for Christianity in the West.
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Aug 20, 2018 12:36:38 GMT
A better analogy would be the Allied Powers in World War Two. You can deplore Stalin and still be glad the USSR won the battle of Stalingrad. Actually, that proves my point. The Western Allies were much more accommodating towards Stalin than they should have been, but they believed that Hitler was worse than Stalin, in spite of the terror with which he ruled the Soviet Union. In this sense, they overlooked the perils of Communism to focus on the greater threat of Nazism. Similarly, you appear willing to overlook the racism and anti-semitism of the alt-right in order to oppose the greater evil of political correctness. The fundamental disagreement between us is this: you think that political correctness is so evil that we ought to ally with the alt-right to combat it, in spite of rather than because of their racism and anti-semitism. On the other hand, I do not think this is justified, either morally or prudentially, since doing so will only result in a major setback for Christianity in the West. If you boil down your comment to the statement "I consider political correctness to be a MUCH greater danger than racism, xenophobia, neo-Nazism, etc. etc.", I can enthusiastically endorse it. A greater danger by orders of magnitude, I would say. There isn't even any serious comparison, in my mind. I also think globalism is a much greater danger than all those things-- but that's only if you worry about globalism. I realize you don't, but other people do.
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Aug 20, 2018 12:43:00 GMT
Actually, that proves my point. The Western Allies were much more accommodating towards Stalin than they should have been, but they believed that Hitler was worse than Stalin, in spite of the terror with which he ruled the Soviet Union. In this sense, they overlooked the perils of Communism to focus on the greater threat of Nazism. Similarly, you appear willing to overlook the racism and anti-semitism of the alt-right in order to oppose the greater evil of political correctness. The fundamental disagreement between us is this: you think that political correctness is so evil that we ought to ally with the alt-right to combat it, in spite of rather than because of their racism and anti-semitism. On the other hand, I do not think this is justified, either morally or prudentially, since doing so will only result in a major setback for Christianity in the West. If you boil down your comment to the statement "I consider political correctness to be a MUCH greater danger than racism, xenophobia, neo-Nazism, etc. etc.", I can enthusiastically endorse it. A greater danger by orders of magnitude, I would say. There isn't even any serious comparison, in my mind. I also think globalism is a much greater danger than all those things-- but that's only if you worry about globalism. I realize you don't, but other people do. OK, I think we are running around in circles here and it's unlikely we'll see eye to eye on this for the foreseeable future. Unless anyone has anything else to add, I think it's best if we leave it here.
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Aug 20, 2018 13:42:11 GMT
Well, yes, but I would like to underline the claim I would make about the relative dangers of racism, xenophobia, etc. and PC.
To anyone reading this: How many genuine racist or xenophobic incidents have you witnessed? I don't mean someone making a naughty joke. I mean, someone actually behaving worse to someone else because of their race, or nationality, using racial slurs, etc. I think I've witnessed perhaps three or four in my entire life, all comparatively minor. How many such incidents have you even heard reported by somebody you know (as opposed to the media and quangos)?
How many people have you heard, with your own ears, voice actual racist or xenophobic sentiments?
How many neo-Nazis have you met?
On the other hand...how many times a day will you be told (on TV, in lecture halls, at the cinema, etc.) that white people are privileged and racist?
How many times you will be told that masculinity is toxic? How many characters in entertainment will you encounter who personify that theory?
How often will you have LGBT propaganda pumped at you?
How often will you be told that national borders must be undermined or even abolished?
How often will you hear opposition to mass immigration described as "racism" or "far right"?
How many times will you be told a man can choose to be a woman and vice versa?
How many times will you encounter anti-Catholic and anti-Christian news stories and opinion pieces?
How many times will you be told that Brexit is a disaster and Donald Trump is a buffoon?
How many times will you have to stay quiet in a work meeting, class-room or other "public" venue because if you dared to speak out against something with which you deeply disagree, you might risk serious consequences?
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Aug 20, 2018 19:49:34 GMT
There's one other thing I'd like to add....there's the Alt Light, who are basically cultural libertarians and free speech campaigners, and then there are the Alt Right, who are usually (sadly) white nationalists.
Why don't I just concentrate on the Alt Light and ignore the Alt Right?
Because I think the Alt Light make one big mistake...they reject identity politics, often vehemently. I think identity politics are inevitable, and indeed I am a proponent of identity politics insofar as I am an Irish nationalist. My regret is that the Alt Right concentrate upon race when it comes to identity politics, rather than culture and traditions. But insofar as the Alt Right see the inevitability of identity politics, I think they are much more clued-in than the Alt Light and are often devastating in their analysis of why individualism is a delusion.
|
|
|
Post by assisi on Aug 20, 2018 21:36:18 GMT
There's one other thing I'd like to add....there's the Alt Light, who are basically cultural libertarians and free speech campaigners, and then there are the Alt Right, who are usually (sadly) white nationalists. Why don't I just concentrate on the Alt Light and ignore the Alt Right? Because I think the Alt Light make one big mistake...they reject identity politics, often vehemently. I think identity politics are inevitable, and indeed I am a proponent of identity politics insofar as I am an Irish nationalist. My regret is that the Alt Right concentrate upon race when it comes to identity politics, rather than culture and traditions. But insofar as the Alt Right see the inevitability of identity politics, I think they are much more clued-in than the Alt Light and are often devastating in their analysis of why individualism is a delusion. I don't know if it is the right definition when you call yourself a 'proponent of identity politics insofar as I am an Irish nationalist'. Yes, you have an identity, Irish, nationalist, Catholic, male, celtic, among other things. But identity politics is a different beast altogether. It is not a politics of rejoicing, celebrating or even protecting aspects of identity. It is using identity as a weapon to put down or attack another identity. It feeds on hate and perceived prejudices. In fact, it may be said that those that promote it don't particularly like the identity they are supposedly representing. It reduces politics and life to one or two narrow features. It needs to have the oppressed and the oppressors. It ultimately divides society on purpose so that it can eventually fill the void with its own ideology. I don't see your politics resembling anything like that.
|
|