Can we just drop the whole "alt-right" meme and just call them what they fuck are - nazis

...

...

Most of them are in fact not Nazis.

He advocates for the creation of a White ethno-state through non-violent means. Literally Israel for White Europeans.

You wouldn't be trying to argue that Israelis are Nazis, are you? If so, that's pretty fucking anti-semitic.

Fuck off

Thank you for conceding that you don't actually have an argument instead of dragging this out and making me waste my time blowing you the fuck out.

Pleasure sparring with you, love.

isrealis are nazis
kys

not an argument

you seem lost

Fuck off statist

...

What if I would?

Fuck off, faggot

B A S E D

...

Didn't they copied their fashion from Italians?

...

If you want the current trend of everyone who isn't an ideologically committed Neoliberal, SJW or Communist increasingly moving to the Far Right then sure.

This is what happens when stormfags assume positions (read: strawman) like the unable to lurk simpletons they are.

Simply the best

Just calling them nazis is what was done from the beginning it didnt work then wont work now

Hugo Boss designed all the uniforms for the Third Reich.

They wish they were nazis. The alt right would be riding the short-bus to the camps if hitler had his way.

test

...

...

The "The Alt-Right" is openly practicing Not Socialism here in America. This needs to be stopped before someone gets gassed. Can the Jewish agents who started this meme put an end to it before it spirals out of control?

Most of us don't really have a problem with it, but do it. The term Nazi has been overused so much in the last 50 years, no one cares anymore. You need a new buzzword.

No for one they love Russia for its conservatism even though Nazis hated Russians.

Meh, "Alt-Right" is just a label that can mean a million different things. It's like when normies use the word "socialist" to describe anything from Stalinism to Not Socialism to progressive tax policies.

The one thing that holds the "alt-right" together is the hate for constant Orwellian media propaganda vilifying whites.

I think fascist is more appropriate than nazi

Eye lad

Alt-right is some drivel the media coined to brand Trump supporters as fascists. Holla Forums is nat. socialist. Other far-right movements in the world can believe in a mixture of bullshit like Asserism or natbols.

See:

THIS

ALSO
I consider myself alt-right. Im not racist, or nazi or white or white power or whatever. I simpy dont agree with status-quo American conservatism, and I reject this notion of "politically Correct".

As such, Ill call it how I see it. Your shortsighted OP, and you seem to believe everything the media tells you, and everything posted on facebook/twitter.

We live in 1984, my friend. What fills up your facebook and twitter feed is not just people but many many bots, pushing a single agenda.

You need me to barrage you with polls for you to believe it? You need me to quote anonymous 'high-level sources' for it to be real?

Or do I need to take after the establishment and use an army of facebook, twitter and reddit bots, and fill your feed with MY agenda for you to finally believe?

Because thats whats happening. People are getting barraged with less-than-accurate polls, theyre being shown all this racism on social media. The racism which is largely either made up or exaggerated.

Yes there are white racists in America. There is that 1% or that .1% or that .01% that is racist. Just like there is that 1% or that .1% or that .01% of people from ANY race who are racist.

You want to talk about 'statistical anomalies' then lets talk about this so-called 'racism' epidemic in the US. Because I tell you what, what the mainstream media portrays likely far exceeds reality.

Racist facebook/twtter user? Your likely getting trolled.

And believe me, your the one getting trolled, my friend.

Opinion discarded.

Yes, of course it is. You must belive that all the 1.5 billion accounts on facebook are real people, then… that 1-in-5 of every man, woman and child on this earth uses facebbok?

Of course it is not. But it takes quite the tinfoil hat type of retardation to assume that every single one of those bots are there to push a single agenda.

Your correct, it was fallacious to state that every single bot pushes the same agenda, that was an oversimplification.

My point still stands though, that those bots are in fact still there, pushing agendas.

Here you go, mr. ancap. Hopefully you wont discard this statement now that i've omitted a 1984 reference.

I consider myself alt-right. Im not racist, or nazi or white or white power or whatever. I simpy dont agree with status-quo American conservatism, and I reject this notion of "politically Correct".

As such, Ill call it how I see it. Your shortsighted OP, and you seem to believe everything the media tells you, and everything posted on facebook/twitter.

What fills up your facebook and twitter feed is not just people but many many bots, pushing different agendas. How many of your Facebook friends do you actually know are real people?

You need me to barrage you with polls for you to believe it? You need me to quote anonymous 'high-level sources' for it to be real?

Or do I need to take after the establishment and use an army of facebook, twitter and reddit bots, and fill your feed with MY agenda for you to finally believe?

Because thats whats happening. People are getting barraged with less-than-accurate polls, theyre being shown all this racism on social media. The racism which is largely either made up or exaggerated.

Yes there are white racists in America. There is that 1% or that .1% or that .01% that is racist. Just like there is that 1% or that .1% or that .01% of people from ANY race who are racist.

You want to talk about 'statistical anomalies' then lets talk about this so-called 'racism' epidemic in the US. Because I tell you what, what the mainstream media portrays likely far exceeds reality.

Racist facebook/twtter user? Your likely getting trolled.

And believe me, your the one getting trolled, my friend.

lmao

Here you go, mr. ancomm. Hopefully you wont discard this statement now that i've omitted a 1984 reference.

I consider myself alt-right. Im not racist, or nazi or white or white power or whatever. I simpy dont agree with status-quo American conservatism, and I reject this notion of "politically Correct".

As such, Ill call it how I see it. Your shortsighted OP, and you seem to believe everything the media tells you, and everything posted on facebook/twitter.

What fills up your facebook and twitter feed is not just people but many many bots, pushing different agendas. How many of your Facebook friends do you actually know are real people?

You need me to barrage you with polls for you to believe it? You need me to quote anonymous 'high-level sources' for it to be real?

Or do I need to take after the establishment and use an army of facebook, twitter and reddit bots, and fill your feed with MY agenda for you to finally believe?

Because thats whats happening. People are getting barraged with less-than-accurate polls, theyre being shown all this racism on social media. The racism which is largely either made up or exaggerated.

Yes there are white racists in America. There is that 1% or that .1% or that .01% that is racist. Just like there is that 1% or that .1% or that .01% of people from ANY race who are racist.

You want to talk about 'statistical anomalies' then lets talk about this so-called 'racism' epidemic in the US. Because I tell you what, what the mainstream media portrays likely far exceeds reality.

Racist facebook/twtter user? Your likely getting trolled.

And believe me, your the one getting trolled, my friend.

I simpy dont agree with status-quo American conservatism, and I reject this notion of "politically Correct".

So the next logical step is to call yourself alt-right?

Is there a better term to refer to conservatives who are disillusioned with American conservatism?

As of yet, nobody has actually engaged in discussion. You have all just engaged in attacking the words chosen… Im only going to keep rewording this until there is nothing left to attack in it and you are forced to discuss the actual issue.

I consider myself alt-right, because I believe the term accurately and intuitively describes those who are disillusioned with American conservatism. Im not racist, or nazi or white or white power or whatever. I simpy dont agree with status-quo American conservatism, and I reject this notion of always being "politically Correct".

As such, Ill call it how I see it. Your shortsighted OP, and you seem to believe everything the media tells you, and everything posted on facebook/twitter.

What fills up your facebook and twitter feed is not just people but many many bots, pushing different agendas. How many of your Facebook friends do you actually know are real people?

You need me to barrage you with polls for you to believe it? You need me to quote anonymous 'high-level sources' for it to be real?

Or do I need to take after the establishment and use an army of facebook, twitter and reddit bots, and fill your feed with MY agenda for you to finally believe?

Because thats whats happening. People are getting barraged with less-than-accurate polls, theyre being shown all this racism on social media. The racism which is largely either made up or exaggerated.

Yes there are white racists in America. There is that 1% or that .1% or that .01% that is racist. Just like there is that 1% or that .1% or that .01% of people from ANY race who are racist.

You want to talk about 'statistical anomalies' then lets talk about this so-called 'racism' epidemic in the US. Because I tell you what, what the mainstream media portrays likely far exceeds reality.

Racist facebook/twtter user? Your likely getting trolled.

And believe me, your the one getting trolled, my friend.

When people talk about systemic racism in America they're not talking about white people having prejudiced views of black people. They're talking about the material conditions of black people in America and their relation to the state.

Nothing in your bloggish post is an arguement starter. You're just stating your hot opinions, what do you want us to debate?

This is a good point, but is the solution to continue seperating people into groups? or is the solution to consider everyone as equal Americans?

Ad hominem

I guess what im saying, is that isnt 'reverse racism' or 'positive racism' still the same thing as racism?

I agree that there are many black people which are economically suffering, but in the past there were also Irish who were treated this way, and catholics and protestants.

I dont believe the right answer is to pander to the special groups, but to make them equal, in all respects, under law

The alt-right has Nazis but they aren't all nazis.

And for the record, I would like to say the Native Americans suffer worse than blacks, in general.
> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sterilization_of_Native_American_women

inigo_montoya.jpg

This is the only point I am trying to make.

Even democrats have had their racist groups (black panthers, the entire confederate south) but this does not mean that the whole is the same as a part

It's generally the goal of leftists to ensure equality of opportunity - equal opportunities to work and make a living - for all people, regardless of race, sex, creed or whatever. Affirmative action and things like that are an attempt to level the playing field under capitalism but we are rather against the entire capitalist system as a whole - so instead of giving preferential access to certain races, for example, we'd be for free high-quality education for all.

so, some shitposter used the media's distorted mainstream definition of the alt-right, you felt deeply offended and repeated the same post 4 times?

Orwell himself must be rolling in his grave from all the retard analogies people make between 1984/Animal Farm and modern society.

They already got called nazis by hysterics like you, the media was constantly calling trump a fascist in case you don't recall, blasting the same laundry list of largely out of context remarks continually (while commenting strangely little on Hillary's racism, homophobia, etc.). And you wonder why Nazis felt empowered, when the mainstream narrative was that they'd taken over the Republican party?

Everything to the right of you is liberal which as we know is always borderline fascist/nazi. If you act this way don't be surprised when people ironically mock you by going "well ok then", or even start getting interested in what it is you continually have been telling them they are for decades.

Saying they should clean out their extremists is a little rich, seeing what the left tolerates.

Strawman

Im against capitalism, as well, I dont believe it to be a solution which can maintain itself indefinitely.

This is a hard statement to argue with, but I still have to point out the current institution of affirmative action. This selectively filters people by race, not aptitude.
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_action

Maybe. It is becoming widespread. But it is an important topic of discussion considering the US electronic surveillance of world population

lmao if you really can't see the connection between Newspeak and PC. what?

I wholeheartedly agree with this comment.

all language is ideological, always has been. You're simply advocating for its current state, not defending some immortal legacy.

Orwell would've been in the Labour party in the 60's and a NeoCon in the 70's, that's a fact.

I would suggest you read Das Kapital if you can. It goes into great detail as to the problems of capitalism, and he made some very robust predictions as to why things like the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis happen.

Consequently, we know very well the solutions to these problems, which are simply to eliminate private property & eventually production for exchange value. The problem we face today is how exactly to build robust institutions and systems for organizing production and distribution in such a society.

read the books

I read animal farm and it was just Anarchists being utopian faggots as usual.
Orwell was always a Romantic Little bitch, you can bet he would've sided with the US even before the Trostkysts did, The moment The Korean War and anti-colonial movements broke out, The moment Social Democracy tended to his oppressed Britsh Proletariat he would be just another Nationalist fighting evil COmmunists overseas.

Ill pick it up. Im not a big supporter of capitalism, i think there are better systems… especially when it involves the use of Fiat Money, which has been the case with the US dollar since Nixon decided to change it from commodity money to fiat in 1971. (This made a lot of wealthy people even more wealthier). Fiat money is proven to cause runaway inflation and concentrate wealth at the top.

Spooky

This is true, but the argument being made, which i rather agree with, is that current terms may be having their intended meaning twisted by those in power and popular media at large, such as alt-right being portrayed a hate group (right after the establishment suffered an embarassing defeat by so-called 'alt-rightists').

Not sure if I agree with this statement. Neocons are generally considered to advocate democracy by the use of military force (think George W. Bush)…

As far as the labour party statement goes, ill give that one a Maybe… Only because Labour party (US) was known for socialist democracy, and while Wells 1984 was against the idea of socialism (english socialism is called ingsoc in the novel and is the official governement of the ruling party)

Based on what logic? I'm curious

This is why you guys fail, there is no conversation with people from the other side, how do you expect to grow?

I have never seen any leftist propagating equality of opportunity, ever.
Do you have sauce on that?

Because that's also what most people on the right believe to my knowledge.

Can you people make some logical fucking arguments?
Calling something 'retarded' without explaining why makes you look like tumblr whales calling everything rape.

Explain how we are not in the transition towards an Orwellian state, the laws are there, and bit by bit they are manipulating our people into accepting them.

An example:
They sold it to the public it being a porn-filter. Making all the discussion about muh children.

What they didn't tell you is that it is allowed to do much MUCH more.

Neocons were romantic Socialists (trostkyst mostly) who renounced class struggle for "peace" and "freedom", recurring to Conservative institutions (church, family…) and the Bourgeois State to tend to the working class's ills rather than solving class contradictions.
Orwell fits the bill perfectly.

Not with inherited property rights you don't.
The dwindling Classic Liberals of the early 20th century pretty much regarded the poor as "subhuman" and made no claims on the natural social mobility of capitalism. It was only around the time the Socialist movements reached their peak that they started touching those subjects at all.
Nazis did indeed as have their Keynesian and later nonkeynesian conservative successors but not until then.

Not that guy, but the equality of opportunity can be reread as part of the socialist program. In On The Jewish Question, Marx makes this comment near the end:

"Only when the real, individual man re-absorbs in himself the abstract citizen, and as an individual human being has become a species-being in his everyday life, in his particular work, and in his particular situation, only when man has recognized and organized his “own powers” as social powers, and, consequently, no longer separates social power from himself in the shape of political power, only then will human emancipation have been accomplished."

Social relations go hand in hand with the activity of production, such that the "equality of outcome", taken as the usual meaningless representation of the social redistribution of wealth as repeated by its opponents, is part of the same programme in civil society as the equality opportunity; the equality of outcome not meaning the same house, car, and clothes (which capitalism arguably takes to its fullest potential anyway) but an equal potential in self-development as so far as the individual is capable.

The term equality of opportunity is obscured in its actual practice through a completely bullshit ideological lens. To the point that governments can argue for state-mandated tiers in the distribution of the quality of education while maintaining the premise that the education provided, for those falling into the lowest bracket, is somehow still as equally capable as providing that of the highest. Link related.

itv.com/news/update/2016-09-14/may-and-corbyn-clash-over-grammar-schools-at-pmqs/

Ill concede this argument to you. I haven't read too much about neoconservativism except what Wikipedia has to offer.

This is a very valid point in arguing certain current Orwellian trends, in addition to the US surveillance of people nationwide.

MIght I ask what sort of property rights you believe are just? I find it very fair that assuming my father owns property, or other wealth, that it be inherited to me after his death.

On this topic

Does this mean that it is 'just' to allow employers, educators to accepts less qualified candidates due to the color of their skin?

Let me propose this: If affirmative action is to take place, make it race-neutral… Base affirmative action on income and the individuals personal drive and achievements, not on skin color.

With this method, the disenfranchised are cared for without any mention or relation to skin color… only economic opportunity is taken into consideration, not race.

You can't claim a person born in poverty and a person born in wealth have the same opportunities without some sort of equalization by other means such as state intevention, it's just a lie. there are several examples such as education, nutrition, health, absent parents. nature.com/news/poverty-shrinks-brains-from-birth-1.17227

I view Wealth Redistribution as reduntant without the abolition of class so I'm not going to argue justice.

see this:

If your goal is to better living standards and to reduce poverty then yes. If your goal is to correct perceived historical injustices, "reverse racism" then no.

I agree with neither.

you're an illiterate faggot LOL
animal farm was a direct allegory of Octobyr, meant for children to understand
he became anti-communist after seeing what they were actually like, like everyone with a braincell eventually was, after FIGHTING WITH THEM in Spain.
none of this has to do with PC and Newspeak being eerily similar. you haven't even read 1984, yet you still talk copious shit, how surprising for a commie. your "language is always ideological" is essentially a meaningless statement without qualification btw.
philosophical inconsistency in a planned system produces an irrational one, irrational systems FAIL. this was Marx's whole point.

I understand you said you agree with neither, but by extension does that mean in your opinion that perceived historical injustices may only be corrected by having laws which explicitly favor specific groups?

No, I don't want them corrected.

Im sorry I think I may be misunderstanding what you wrote…

When you say yes/no are you referring to racial-based affirmative action, income-based affirmative action, or affirmative action in general?

Are you arguing in favor of a system that with every generation somehow 'equalizes' the individuals from birth, allowing for equal opportunity?

Im generally intrigued, this societal theory sounds pretty interesting.

Auto-correct…

im genuinely intrigued

ISRAEL IS A TERROR STATE YOU RETARDED NIGGER REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Not sure if I would call Israel a 'terror state' simply because their militaristic actions are overt and concerted.

But I do agree that they are aggressors and many are likely quite fascist, both traits shared largely with terrorism.

Of course children of those with a shtload of money go to elite-schools, but the majority of children go to the same schools (depending on country).
The state should intervene of giving rich and poor the same tests at the start of eductaion, then segregate towards intellectual capability in my opinion.

Of course poor children get developed less and have certain struggles that richer families don't have (or less).
But this means that their performance later on will remain under the level of their friends in more cozy households. This is sad for them, but lifting them up with imaginary points and ideology will not help their case, they won't get smarter because of it.
On the contrary, putting smarter kids under less smart kids compromises the smarter kids' performance and development.
Praising retard-olympics is fun for them, but actual achievement and progress will be attained by the nontard-olympics.
Pumping too much energy and money in tardl-olympics is a waste imo, since their output is not worth the investment imo.
Doesn't mean we let them be retards, they'll end up as street-thugs in that case.

What would help is making a certain level of education affordabble for let's say minimum 80% of the population.
The exceptionnaly retarded and smart kids get a special class (ater passed standardised or 'equal' tests of course).

I was the quiet smart kid in class, teachers always put they big-mouthed and less-performing kids next to me to 'make them behave'.
It didn't change much, their grades didn't go up and my disgust of the masses only grew. I did far better (in grades, so knowledge tests) being among smarter kids or behind a desk alone.

Holla Forums really got in your head uh?
Orwell was an Anarchist Socialist who was heavily critical of Leninism, I argued in this thread that his Anarchism was purely romantic and that he would cede to Bourgeois politics in no time.

I'm arguing for oldschool Marxist Socialism and for disregarding the bourgeois state.
race is meaningless.

They're a terror state in the same sense the US is.

lmao

I cant argue with this statement… The last half-century the US has had a horrible policy of secretly funding civil wars in countries around the world

>>>/urbanate/ is for you.

meant for

That quote is from the forward of "Toward European Unity", George Orwell.

Here is another Orwell quote:

I have no problem with socialism. It will only truly work though when classes are dissolved and money becomes meaningless

You're literally arguing for the basis of the stratification of the individual by their accumulation of social wealth.

Also this

Random question: why is conservative socialism commonly referred to as Fascism or nazism?

Why does it seem to unbelievable that conservative socialism cannot exist without fascism?

you're a wriggly little worm, comrade. effortlessly dodged.

You're using Bernie bro and Lolbert's definition of Socialism, not mine, not Orwell's, not Holla Forums's.
Rightists don't have socialism because they want to maintain class distinctions.
You could have NazBols and Asserists I guess.

...

I would argue that many leftists as well wish to maintain class distinction.

I would actually argue that both conservatism and liberalism have pushed people into groups or classes.

Is enforcing one's right to own private property, or the protection of free enterprise now nazism?

Which is why I never in my life argued for Liberalism, it's a 17th century ideology that belongs in the trash.

of course not, Nazis were explicitly anti-Liberal, but they were also anti-Socialist,

As long as were throwing up quotes (honestly you can quote just about anyone on anything) But its fun…

Wells Vs Mao. Whos right?

...

those aren't real quotes…

I will agree with you on the argument that socialism is different than liberalism or conservatism, and should not be lumped into the same basket (is this the true basket of deplorables?).

brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/g/george_orwell.html

Tell that to brainyquote.com im not the one who wrote them

MY QUOTES AREN'T REAL, you dense son of a bitch.

yes. all liberals belong in the trash.

Are you sure about that?

orwell.ru/library/articles/European_Unity/english/e_teu

Private Property and Personal Property (your toothbrush and bad dragon dildo) are two different things.

"free enterprise" top fucking kek. There is no such thing, small businesses still are exploited by banks, large corporations and the government that supports the aformentioned corporations.

Also success is so fucking rare that it is an unrealistic or realiable means to securing basic needs.

Many of the post-redscare mainstream "leftists" indeed, which is why I claimed Socialists don't.

now you're just trolling.

I am? your the one who called me a dense SOB claiming your quotes werent real… when they actually were.. Not sure if your the one trolling, or just uninformed

these quotes aren't real, they're a joke.
the rest of the quotes are real and sourced.

Seriously though >>>/urbanate/ is a great board.

like it has been said in this thread before "Nazi" has been over used to the point where it lost all meaning.

you should call them fascist or ethno-supremacists.

DO NOT use "white supremacists".

why not
no it hasn't, u serious?

uhhh why not? that's literally what they are

you don't want "white" to be associated with them.

people will have a hard time rejecting an ideology if that ideology (pretends) to be working for their interest, good or bad.
people are selfish. they give no fucks about strangers interests, especially if those strangers aren't part of their perceived "tribe"

well good job you fucking tool, you don't even know what you are.
you're an MRA or at best a strong conservative.

go check /r/alt_right and see what its about.
the magority decide what the movement is about.
the avrage alt_right is a "race realist" another code world for racism, just like altright is a code worrd for ethno-supremacy.

the Alt-right is a mix of local KKK and some good old European racism. with some sugar coating.
they make sure not to use words that would be a give away.
everything else isn't new.