Ummm...the ideology behind the Civil Rights movement was getting equal rights for all people. Just because some saw it differently didn't change the very purpose of the movement. You have animal rights movements where people do silly things in their name it doesn't mean the movement is bad. I'm not sure why you think the supremacist one won out in the end lol it sounds like you are rather paranoid. What? You can't even name an organization and are basically saying that LGBT people view straight people as their oppressor? When you said this I thought you had a group in mind...since you don't... You are wrong here, not a surprise, but the LGBT community and Black community as a whole don't see straight or white people as oppressors, their problem is with policy. When you have a cop saying today that if you see a black person, just shoot them, then you must realize their concerns are legitimate. Instead of empathizing those concerns, you ignore them and don't care. You hate BLM so much? Well then, this is the reason they exist. Maybe you should speak up more about these issues that affect American citizens. How is it hard for me to understand? How can you not take context into consideration and say that the LGBT movement is equal to the alt-right or the KKK? Please tell me the last time the LGBT 'movement' initiated violence against straight people. I'll wait.
This is exactly what they do, they want to illegitimatize movements like that likely out of fear, they find one crazy person and then highlight that person. Anyone can take any cause and commit violence FOR that cause after all. The sensible thing is to actually look at the purpose of the movement. Otherwise, all groups, all organizations, according to Bobby and others that take this line of thinking, are bad. Every single one of them. Simply for fighting for a cause they believe in. His example that he loves to bring up isn't EVEN an identity movement AT ALL. Black Lives Matters doesn't promote the idea of black supremacy, in fact, there's probably more people that aren't black that supported the movement. We are actually meant to believe that organizations like GLAAD are just like the KKK, honestly, if you are right of center, you should control these talking points. This is the kind of insane line of thinking that loses more people than gains. Just like Maher was right on the #MeToo thing, you need to learn that there is context, degrees, and things aren't as simple as everything is as bad as rape. Things aren't as simple as identity movements are all as bad as the KKK. No one looks at an Irish Pride Parade and goes "Welp, those guys are just as bad as the KKK."
Yeah, that is another one that shouldn't be taken as a "sign of the times". Those comments are incredibly ignorant.
No, that was one early goal, there were a few ideologies at play within the civil rights movement and the one that won out in the end was the more radical ideologies. The rest sort of went away after the whole equal rights thing was achieved. Yes, you clearly misunderstood what I said despite me spelling it out for you about as simply as possible. I get that you are an identitarian and that's why you are so upset with what I'm saying.....a white nationalist would feel the same way for the same reason.
The battle is for the center. And where BLM fails is that it doesn't fight for the center but it fights to validate by attracting those who already agree - and that is why BLM won't succeed (same reason Occupy failed). BLM has to make it's case for the center, and part of that is disarming the attacks of the right. BLM should kick out anyone who expresses any kind of violence towards cops or against race. It also should only champion clear cut cases and not ones that are unclear. This is key - and the reason Thurgood Marshall and the NCAAP was successful - they never took the cause of anyone who looked like there might be a strong possibility they were guilty
What makes you think the radical ideologies won out? Well yes, I misunderstood you because you didn't answer my question. I asked which LGBT groups are openly against straight people, you claimed this was a thing, so I thought you had evidence to prove your claim. My mistake, you just pulled it from your bottom and expected I would like the smell of it, but if you make a claim it's fair for me to as for proof of your claim. I get that you are an identitarian Bobby, and that's why you are so upset that this thread mocks your peers and are so defensive in here, it's alright man, I understand that you feel targeted here.
I agree with this but the most important thing is it needs a visible leader. If it had that, said leader could condemn the crazies and move on. It has no visible leadership, anyone can co-opt it and that is a huge problem. I mean, we do know all of the legitimacy of the movement. It's amazing that the story I posted doesn't get reported or makes anyone against racism blood boil that officers of the law would behave in this manner.
Because they are all you saw going forward after the goals of the civil rights movement were accomplished. The Black Panther types was about all you had going forward. LOL that's just r****ded. If you want to accomplish any more than getting me to laugh at you then you'll have to do better.
I thought you meant as of today. I wonder if you know why that group was founded, you seemed to blame the Alt-right on BLM after all. I agree, it is rather silly, I'm glad you see this now since I was mocking your style of posting. I thought maybe if I reflected your style of posting back at you, you'd see how silly it actually is.
Why is any supremacist group founded? At their core, the answer is the same. The difference of course is that you are at a minimum sympathetic to certain identitarian groups....and honestly you likely have identitarian leanings yourself. Meanwhile I've been calling out all of those groups for a while now.....so it's not the same for you to say that as it is for me to say it to you. There's pretty solid reason to suspect that you are one yourself while you'd have to literally be a mentally deficient person to think that I was one given my stance on the matter.
Yes but you are arguing with your enemy on this, not the center. BobbytheGreat doesn't care if you are oppressed or if blacks get shot by cops - to him his side is right and he warps his reality to make it so. Debating him is a waste of your time. That's why he put me on ignore, because I kept pointing out the ridiculous of his arguments and he couldn't handle the cognitive disconnect. If you care about these issue, and clearly you do - as I do - then the question is how to shape the center. And the answer is by first shaping the left to be mindful of the real target in this fight.
I don't doubt that there are many social outcasts in the alt-right-Neo-Nazi movement. The expression of racism is a cheap substitute for what should be their expression of love for the women...or men...in their life. By keeping their feelings closed, they use racism as a substitute for all of that, perhaps. Trump is not alt-right, and those on the alt-right thinking that he will enact their sick policies of racial hierarchy and exclusion are greatly misguided. Trump, time-and-time-again, shows his ability to reach across not only the political but the ideological barrier to reach deals - just as he did recently to get our government up and running.
Sort of analogous to ISIS another extreme ideology. In many cases sexual frustration and lack of personal achievement make the ideology more appealing.
No, I think he is at least in some part alt-right. When policy has veered in that direction, people say that's Bannon, or that's Miller, or whatever. But the common denominator is Trump. The essential ideas underpinning making America great seems to be increasing America's cultural homogeneity, reducing its international relationships, and reduce accommodation of the needs of special cases, like the poor, racial minorities, religious minorities, and so on so that they won't be a burden to anyone else's prosperity. Sounds like everything @Dei would be about, if he hadn't been banned a long time ago. Sure, I don't expect a Nazi-style purge from Trump, but you don't have to be that extreme to fit some kind of definition of alt-right. After all, like BLM, Occupy, and other social movements, they might have some leading voices but they don't have a clearly defined leadership. By that same logic, you can ascribe sexual frustration and lack of personal achievement to people's decisionmaking on a lot of things. Joining a fraternity, forming a band, getting married, working for Apple, buying a Porsche. Kevin Durant only joined the Warriors because of his personal frustration at not being able to win the championship on his own. Stephen Curry only hits all those daggers because that's the only way he can get laid. Draymond Green plays the enforcer to overcompensate for the fact he wasn't even drafted in the first round. Are the Rockets going to beat them now that we understand those guys are only Warriors in the first place because they're losers? I think it's a gross oversimplification for both alt-right and ISIL. It might be a handy piece of propaganda if you can hang the Loser sign on them, but it won't help you understand and therefore combat either ideology. If this is how we're going to understand the opponent, we're going to lose.
