Considering how close we are to Zig Forums and how often we encounter them, let's have a thread where we analyse, deconstruct and debate the mechanisms of Alt-Right and fascist rhetorics and help each other counter their techniques.
I, myself, have began to notice something I'd like to call "the right wing riposte"
Essentially, whenever an argument is made against a right-winger, they say something that is meant to turn a defense into a counter attack. A right winger will never defend their positions with well-researched facts, they will only say what they think will make them win the argument. Therefore, a rightwinger can espouse contradictory views at different points without suffering from any kind of mental dissonance.
A good example would be their defence for whenever someone shuts someone down for being overtly or explicitly racist.
"So much for the tolerant left" or "I thought leftists cared about freedom of speech", is a counter we've all heard many times, I'd bet and the technique is sort of Genius; instead of the debate being about the overt bighotry of the one being shut down, the debate is instead being turned into a discussion where the intial accuser must defend themselves from seeming like hipocrites or intolerants themselves, not because right.wingers actually care about biggotry or even free speech, but simply because right-wingers understand that controling the conversation is what will make them win everytime. Thus, many discussions with duch individuals are simply turned into shouting-matches where the merits of the original argument is never even adressed. The right wing shut down argument, because right-wing ideology is not fundementarily about any kind of ideological esence or any real standpoint, it is most about in-group mentality and aesthetics.
What are some other right-wing rhetorics that you guys have noticed online?
the best I tend to do is deadlock them with the "you have no facts or citations, and the ones you have posted (if any) are complete shit" and make that the hill to die on to frustrate them. The main thing I notice rhetoric wise is the baffling insistence on left = liberal, which makes no sense at all.
Adam Price
Indeed, I agree, but my postulate here is that it is not meant to make sense. They simply say what is rhetorically expedient for them to say. They don't care if the USSR under Stalin doesn't represent most communist branches or not, or that Kampuchea didn't live up to anything Marx ever wrote.
I think ironically Jordan Peterson gave a brilliant insight into the mentality of the alt-right then he posed that "truth, is that belief that is the most beneficial to a human being". In this sense, Zig Forums-people don't care if any of these claims are "true" or not, they only care that it will make them win or stall the discussion.
Cameron Nguyen
and yet all it does is make them look like fucking idiots to anyone who hasn't chugged the koolaid. one other thing I see a lot in arguments with the right (which I get into shamefully often) is the obstinate refusal to use cited sources. they'll just make an assertion, give a weak/biased source and expect that shit to fly.
Jace Ortiz
spot the op niggerjewsoros shill Example one: incoherent race / religion baiting. Also left can't meme, Autism Level, whoomiin naychure is capitalism and there would only ever be peace love and unity in muh ethnostate. This shit is getting old.
post any criticism of the MUH JOOZ autism and watch the screeching commence.
Ryder Long
I totally agree that it should, but I am not convinced that it does. A weakness of the left is that we often assume that most people are familiar with the language of logic and reason, but sadly, we were not born into a forum; we were born into a circus.
So what most people are going to see is one person making all the accusations, never going on the defence, and one constantly trying to put out fires through long-winded expositions, that not everyone can follow. So while it seems stupid and ought not be a winning strategy, it is, because it seems to be.
Eli King
Yeah they’re so dumb. So do you think it’s the Russians or white people running the world?
Ethan Murphy
time and time again they use this tactic of proclaiming you must be stupid not to believe: holocaust was fake, blacks are bad, protocols of zion, but none of those people tend to seem all that bright posting youtube videos as proof and random alt right blogs as sources
That reminds me; do you really think that they honestly believe that the holocaust never took place? There is little doubt that a lot of them believe that the holocaust, as a concept, is a great thing, but perhaps holocaust denial really stems from the fact that the holocaust comes with a lot of baggage for a political movement and thus, denying the holocaust is simply what will win the argument, regardless of whether or not it is true.
Jason Collins
the loss of WW2 is something the right will always be bitter about, so they'll scramble for any rickety logic that could lessen the blow.
Juan Green
Stupid white people. Everyone knows the internet is African technology and the founding fathers created the US to breed their own people out of existence.
Joshua Roberts
Like you said, they wish it was true but believe it was not. It seems they are using evidence as the basis for their beliefs. Abhorrent.
Josiah Moore
the only "evidence" they have amounts to MUH JOOZ and unsourced infographs
Elijah Roberts
Ironically, this is also a great demonstration of right-wing rhetorics; If you can't argue, bait and try to derail the discussion itself. It doesn't matter if it's dishonest, any technique is allowed when combatting the Great Other.
Dylan Butler
The classic "Communism killed (insert number of the week)" or "Its against human nature/only works on paper" and "Venezuela"
Jason Howard
'Allo lads, are the Strawmen feisty today?
Owen Davis
fraid so m8
Jonathan Walker
Carry on soldier, you'll all meet live fire drills one day, and God help you.
Ryder Nelson
The best way to btfo the alt right is to make direct rebuttals or refutations of their precious infographics that they cling on to so dearly. A lot of the alt right also supports Trump so if you point out that his cabinet has lots of Jews and his daughter is Jewish their mind goes in loops and mental gymnastics is very amusing. Like "Trump secretly hates jews." Another thing is pointing out that according to their race realism theories Jews and Asians have higher Autism Levels than whites.
One of the most common responses I've seen to that is that it took the "Jewish West" and the "🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧Soviet Union🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧" to defeat a tiny country.
Easton Jenkins
right wing = mental illness. this we know.
the route of all evil can always be traced back to JOOZ with them, and when you press them on it you realise how hollow the hatred is. just blind emotional stupidity with only the most thin veil of faux-intellectualism to coat it
Bentley Flores
yes yes however race realism is incontrovertible
Cooper Lopez
low effort
Camden Perez
Thats were you're wrong. Its like playing chess with a pidgin, its going to crap on the table and stare at you like he won a nobel prize.
As a general rule you need to understand that a belief that originate from emotions can rarely be undone by logic, if they were able to think objectively they wouldn't be there.
You have to understand how they "think", logic won't be enough you also have to make them feel stupid.
Camden Young
Just get them with Jews and Asians having higher Autism Levels
This rhetoric makes horse shoe theory look true because the right also says that leftism is a mental illness. It's really hard to anything when debating the alt right about da jooz because pic related happens
another one for the anti-pol folder. thanks fam. be that as it may, it's they who have all these completely ludicrous delusions and doublethink. being a prime example
Reading these posts is bizarre. It's like listening to people talking about debate when it's painfully clear none have ever had a debate. I mean, can you guys tell me where you go to find these debates?
Are you ancom Mark Dice? In any case, these mentally ill right wingers happen to be having children. So by what metric can we deduce they are ill compared to the groups that fail to procreate? By what metric are we defining mental health? How well you conform to the social norms of capitalist society? I'm dying to hear… Wow, this adjective soup is a great counterargument. How will they ever recover?… I mean, honestly… In a debate, could you even pretend to be familiar with Kevin MacDonald? That guy is their fallback horse. If they are actually pushed they go to him. Do you have any actual arguments?
How would that "get" a race realist? That is literally what they believe!
Inferior is a value judgement. There exists no contradiction between jews being inferior and jews having a disproportionate pull in various areas if the value the judgement is depending on is not contradictory to that reality. You can't just throw a value judgement out there without qualifying it with value.
right wingers are gay and dumb and don't read wikipedia articles trust me I understand how these people work.
Isaac Jones
Go on 4/pol/ and claim that Jews have a higher Autism Level than whites. See how they lash out. Look at the Nazis. They claimed Jews were subhuman but they also controlled the world. The term inferior is also ambiguous. It relate to intelligence, power, morals, humanity, etc. So it depends how define it
Mason Lopez
Let's assume for the sake of argument that racialist claims about genetically inherited intelligence are true. Why is the solution to promote segregation and racial infighting? There exist now emergent technologies like CRISPR which could be used to increase the general level of intelligence among all humans, assuming you actually are able to identify genes related to intelligence. As it stands now this technology (and other emergent technology) is probably just going to be used to entrench the social standing of the ruling-class once it's actually available for use. So why wouldn't you want to unite all racial groups under a set of achievable egalitarian goals, i.e. more equal distribution of these technologies, and better research into it? This would benefit the white population the same as the nonwhite population.
On Zig Forums. I used to be alt right myself I used these very talking points.
Well as you said if the racialist claims were true. The equal distribution of technology amongst the people would create an unequal output of research. There also needs to be incentive to do the research rather than the hope of striving for some groundbreaking research that can shorten the gap of inequality amongst men and the races
Christian Rogers
The person in the post said race realists. That's Jared Taylor's term. You are conflating whatever random Zig Forumsak you happen to run into on any given day with people with concrete ideas that can be engaged with consistently. But excluding that, what does lash out even mean? They lash out because? They think I-Q isn't everything? Because they are not I-Q nationalists but rather White nationalists? What they normally do is contextualize the I-Q stuff to its primary role of explaining the differences between blacks and whites in the US, mainly, as well as some intra-racial social factors. The I-Q stuff is much better understood in the context of Rushton, Jensen, Lynn, Vanhanen, Murray, Sailer and so on. It has never been a sole basis for White nationalism. What you describe seems more like a Zig Forumsak who isn't up to date their own doctrine on race. It's kind of like finding a self proclaimed communist whose idea of communism is described as 'no one works and everything is free!'. This person might exist, but its not a representation of any actual serious idea. Arguing against it would not be a score against any serious leftism.
Which is not a contradictory thing to say depending on how you define the human ideal. I am glad we agree on this. Now that we understand this we can ourselves stop using it.
Who says anything about promotion of racial infighting? They see segregation as both an emancipation of whites and a means of ending racial tension by separating the parties. They see racial fighting as being caused by proximity. Leaving aside the fact that the heritability of I-Q is mainstream in cognitive science and that we are already able to correlate Autism Level through polygenic scores… There is no reason to believe that an increase in intelligence would end tribalism. Because they value genetic lineage and genetic diversity. CRISPR editing your genes is like building robots instead of having children. But let me ask, if it is of no consequence to you what genetic material inherits the future, why would you mind if the future 'egalitarian' ideal was that of a white super race?
Sounds like you had a very low-brow understanding of the message. Like, a comically low brow understanding. What convinced you to view yourself as alt-right and what persuaded you out of it?
I find it bizarre, the fasination with birthrate and its intersection with rightwing ideology. As this stance takes all agency away from the individual. That said, love, procreation, and the birthrate are severally hindered by capitalism. Two examples. For those in developed countries, having a child is a financial burden, both for young adults wishing to carve a career within capitalism, and for workers. In the undeveloped world, having a child equates to another worker who is exploited by developed countries imperalism. On top of this, there is the child mortality rate between the developed and undeveloped world. People from the developed world have assurance that their child probably wont die before the they are 10-15. Whereas child mortality rate is exponentially high in the undeveloped world. Communist revolution would be the quickest way to end rampant birthrates as it would end the exploitation of all the workers. youtu.be/BkSO9pOVpRM
Still you must realize these people are an online presence only. Most of them are dumb kids having fun and the slowly becoming koolaid. They are not relevant to the real non-digital world.
Levi Ramirez
Because right-wingers and Zig Forums types, despite pretending to be 'counterculture', actually defend the status quo. They argue for things to remai in the same, which is the easiest thing to do.
Aiden Carter
So do you value genetic "diversity" or don't you?… My point is that increasing intelligence doesn't necessarily have to mean changing skin color. And didn't you just admit one post ago that racialists view Asians and Jews as having higher Autism Levels than whites? So why would white people be the standard for a "super race"? People of the same race have common interests, especially economic interests.
I think they do this on purpose, even if they understand the difference. Partially because they are rhetorically trained to attack liberal talking points, but more importantly, liberals are retarded, and attacking them is easy. If they can associate you with stupid liberal shit it makes it easier to attack you by tearing down flimsy liberal positions.
Nathaniel Barnes
It has social effects that are conducive to a certain result. Even Marx noted this with the troubles of English and Irish workers and his proposed solution was to separate them to help facilitate class consciousness on both sides.
You can say that X is hindered by capitalism until you are blue in the face. That fact does not matter if you don't have an alternative that the right can get behind. Not a single organization exists anywhere that can provide this. Even the Catholic left wing has their whole operation laced with anti-tradition and pro-immigration buggery. As for the individual. Right wing individualism is not really there in the same way left wing individualism is. They see individualism as responsibility not expression, if that makes any sense. So when talking heads on the right start harping on about individual responsibility they aren't appealing to individualism. They are appealing to your responsibility TO something, which is not individualistic at all. A classic example of this bait and switch is Jordan Peterson. He tries to bait right wingers into calling themselves individuals(to help them beat their nihilism) by appealing to their emotional responsibility of burying their father and being a strong and helpful pillar in that hour of need. That's not individualistic. That's an appeal to you to be a reliable member of your most base group, your family. Which is what right wingers ultimately care about. Structures that are larger than themselves that they can help build and maintain. The pro-capitalism rhetoric falls flat in the face of a person that gets this, like Tucker Carlson.
I wrote two sentences. One says: Group X values genetic diversity and would be opposed to gene editing their babies. The second says: 'If YOU do not value genetic diversity…' Do you see the difference? We are no longer talking about group X. We are talking about the person I asked the question of who is not a part of group X. I hope this clears up your misunderstanding. We are talking about gene editing people. My point was that certain people care about genes and genetic expression whilst others claim not to care. The person I was talking to made it sound like they did not care and that in a pseudo trans-humanist future none of it would matter to them. My question pertained to, if this person does not care about genetic expression, why would they care that the future was white only. (It would certainly eliminate racism and be more egalitarian.) The intent of the question was to tease out a possible inconsistency in the view that genes and genetic expression don't matter to them, because I believe that it matters to most people. I didn't "admit" to anything. It's literally what they believe. Nothing to the contrary was ever claimed nor was there ever an attempt to hide it. How on earth could I "admit" to it? It was falsely claimed that Autism Level scores of E-Asians and Ashkenazim was an inconvenience for race realists when the opposite was true. Because a white nationalist values the existence of white people. This value is not derived from I-Q. It's a base value of preference for what they consider their own. To them it's just the broad extension of their family. Asking why white people would be the standard for a super race to a group that holds this value is really stupid. It's literally in their name. Then the fighting is a natural consequence of living close together with those who have diverging interests to yours. I would not consider anyone who calls attention to this existing fight a promoter of it given the fact that the fight exists whether you consciously notice it or not.
ITT: Zig Forums thinks they are smart because they can debunk nazis
Tyler Brooks
I've come to the conclusion that this is an absolute waste of time. Maybe you could have a reasonable debate with some classic rightists that still hang out on forums like nationstates, but those are going the way of the dodo. Arguing with aut-right zoomers is like arguing with chimps who just want to outscreech and smear you in shit. Whenever you feel like debating an extremely online rightists, just do 10 pushups or something instead, that'd be far more productive.
Daniel Diaz
By classic do you mean classical liberals and libertarians? I can attest to this
Juan Hill
I mean anyone who wasn't given a lobotomy through imageboard culture yet. Even stormfront nazis who haven't migrated to Zig Forums.
Luis Nguyen
they have people who argue that unite the right was a victory for the right in both instances. I wouldn't bother.
Lucas Rogers
Every so often I see yet another delusional right wing spergout on some random website and I just have to reply with arguments and sources. Don't care if the post is 1 minute old or 5 years old. I do it not to correct or engage the poster, but to give any potential neutral reader a dose of reality before their brain is warped forever.
Daniel Wood
They may have shitty and wrong opinions but at least they don't autistically screech and shit themselves like Zig Forums bаboons. That's something. Extremely online politically charged people (both Zig Forums and idpol tumblrinas) are impossible to talk with and live completely divorced from reality.
Sebastian Murphy
Socialism works well in a homogeneous society with high productivity. Requires high trust and high responsibility, like your family, tribe. This is the human nature. This is why it calls to us.
Imposing socialism in large scale non trust society will result in authoritarian tendencies.
Robert Wright
You can't debate the right wing anonymously. They don't debate in good faith. They're trivial to prove wrong, but often they don't even understand what they're saying, let alone what you are, and if you do prove them wrong they'll just spam memes or become aggressive.
Debating right wingers when they have an identity attached is a lot better because when they make a fool of themselves, they can't vanish back into anonymity.
Bentley Reyes
Bamp
Liam Lee
BUMPITY BOMPO BAMP
James Kelly
Good advice.
Well, for counter-attacking when some alt-righter employs racial or anti-Semitic prejudices, I will actually play with stereotypes to undermine them. Like trying to angrily "debunk" a prejudice with reason and "the facts" like a liberal will do does not work. But the idea of a Jewish conspiracy is pretty laughable if you know any actual Jews because they argue with each other constantly. It's like they've never watched Seinfeld. There's a saying: "two Jews, three opinions." The idea that Jews of all people could pull of a conspiracy – that is the real joke.
Right wing, nothing. Have a dose of the real, you crazy rarities; shine your light on this: act for free.nostate.net/?p=19372
Who can love firebombing a doctor, right? Who wants to enable crime? These demands, these actions, they are… “deplorable”, hahaha!
So close your ears up to the demands; they are in any case from nearing four years ago. Still now we may look back towards the causes. For the fantastic thing about causality is that in all save a very few quantum physics edgecases, causality operates strictly in the past. We can see the past, sometimes. The specific complaints are of bias, incompetence, and repression. The doctor did not merely comply with the prison system, but did not even act as a doctor ought. The prisons are as dungeons, and that comparison is fair. There is a great “lawful” bias against thinkers beyond the norm in Greece, whereby the quality of law is degraded. That is someone’s status quo!
There was another event recently. A man’s case was mishandled by a vengeful establishment. I could tell you his name, but I would rather tell you that such events are common in Greece. That is why the Grecian state has no respect, why so many of its people harbor anarchists, seek employment outside of the norm, and will not pay their taxes. For the state of Greece is not earning the affinity of the public, but demanding it! They have not vision to act in usefully novel manners nor adequate control of their supposed exemplars of law.
Where the state’s pretense of law is valid, these kinds of movements do useful things, no things, or criminal things, and society may sort them accordingly. Where the state acts in a biased and vengeful manner against those it perceives as lawless, it makes ever more of people who must be perceived as lawless. The law cannot give up its force, but it can use that force honestly, consistently, and with apologetic sincerity; by this the incendiary zeal may be reduced.
Jeremiah Myers
You can make the argument that socialism will promote economic security and less work time which could promote white birth rates and more family time. I made this argument with a nazi once and they seemed to agree. But of course they have to ruin it by saying, "yeah, okay socialism is good, but we also need nationalism". I swear that these NPCs are just fulfilling the etymological satisfaction of aligning themselves with an ideology called "national socialism", even if it is completely divorced from it's ideological roots. You can even see pro-LGBT fascists these days. Further just proves the point that nazism is simply an aesthetic and identity, not any type of coherent political philosophy. Neopagan cancer seems to be a pulling factor for far-right nerds these days too, is there any way the left can appropriate this "European Awakening" beyond the typical wiccan and satanic stuff, to control the conversation?
Yes. Nobody can completely divorce someone from fascist spooks. You cannot argue against those spooks they are not rooted in reality. It is up to the fascist to fix themselves or be crushed.
Leo Rogers
The Fash always deserve a good bash.
David Ortiz
the fucking canucks have to somehow be involved in this.
What I consider to be the most autistic is the right's definition of race/ehnicity. Like. If you want to segregate people by their race, then how do you exactly determine their race? The human genome has many genes responsible for physical appearance. How do you check if someone is Balkan, Afroamerican, or mixed-race? I have not been answered yet, btw.
Carter Martin
somewhat arbitrary lines or genetic clustering with super computers like in Rosenberg 2002
The far-right is beyond spooked by traditionalism, muh country, and muh ancestor ghosts that live in the soil, these are not leftist by their very nature so it'll be difficult to appropriate them.
Xavier Rivera
Reactionary mindests have possessed the nihilistic alienated west, controlling the narrative would at least help bring some rational solutions to these wacky spiritual exercises.
