The Alt-Right Playbook

Post Reply New Topic

I'm making this thread because I've noticed a trend in some of the arguments going on in this forum, particularly in PPR, that I think the following video series applies to. It's an insightful description of the tactics of people who promote the alt-right online and who argue their talking points for them, furthering and normalizing the spread of extremist ideas like those which led to the shooting in Christchurch NZ this past weekend. I think because of the violence coming out of the far right lately, this is a discussion we need to be having as a society, and I'm hoping this can help start this important discussion on the correct (I almost said "right", hahaha) foot.

This is the introductory video--I will post the rest of the series in the next couple of posts so they're not all jammed into one comment field:

The next couple of videos in the series:





And a brief clarification of what the author means when he refers to "the right":

And the next couple:

And two more:

And finally, the most recent video plus one more clarification/end note:

I don't think there are many alt-righters on WP. I don't even think there are that many incels either.

"It's an insightful description of the tactics of people who promote the alt-right online and who argue their talking points for them"

I don't think there are any genuine alt-righters on this forum, just some people who (most likely unwittingly) use their argument tactics. There are a couple who promote a lot of misinformation in the same vein as alt-right ideology by mostly posting "journalism" from extremely questionable (or flat out propaganda) sources, but I don't think they are truly alt-right either. The problem is that by using the same tactics--and often the same talking points--they are normalizing the alt-right, whatever their intentions or true beliefs may be. It's that normalization that I think is dangerous, not just because it might sway people to the far right but also because it reflects poorly on our community which already suffers enough stigma and suspicion, especially after a mass shooting because of how often the public associates autism with acts of anti-social violence like mass shootings and bombings.

And on top of all that, I would like to see the quality of debate on this forum improve. I'm hoping some people might recognize the logical errors they are making in some of these videos and learn how to argue their ideas more effectively.

No there aren't of course. There aren't many alt-righters in the world for that matter. It's a fringe element that's been augmented by the left. A byword that's used against most any kind of argument that's not in accord with leftist dogma.

Yea, it's a pretty amazing for some to actually believe that all evil in this world is a result of the alt-right and there is no blame at all within any portion of the left. There is plenty of hate to go around on all sides. The 'left' is not our savior, they contain corrupt authoritarian people, puppets of large corporations just as there are corrupt authoritarian people, puppets of large corporations on the right. Yet people try to pretend that right = devil while left = angel(Basically a fantasy world)

The truth of the mater is there are both bad people and good people on both sides. One side fears handing power to a corrupt government and the other side wishes to expand governments control to restrict corrupt people, the importance of both sides are equal.

Last edited by Crimadella on 20 Mar 2019, 8:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Until I came to Wrong Planet I didnt even know what an incel was. Yes, there are some incels here.

An argument that can be used against what you wrote is that you're using alt-right talking points and alt-right buzzwords, using alt-right tactics, expressing alt-right sentiments and so on. It's hard to say where the actual alt-right leaves off and the inventions of the left take over.

It's not their number that is at issue, it's how their ideas are propagated--because that is obviously happening. People are being converted to their way of thinking and it is resulting in an increase in alt-right violence. They may be few in number, but those few can do a lot of damage as we saw last weekend.

From the first Endnote video I posted:

You might be more informed on that particular issue if you watched the videos I posted. If you're not going to watch the videos that this thread is about, can you please not participate in the discussion about them? That seems rather unfair, to insist on talking about something you refuse to watch. How can you comment on the content of the videos (the purpose of this thread) if you won't watch the content?

This thread is not about the left-right divide, it is specifically about alt-right rhetoric. Please stick to the topic at hand or make your own thread about the left-right divide if that is what you wish to talk about.

Please define alt-right rhetoric and explain how it can be distinguished from someone just having an opinion that conflicts with those on the left.

The propagation seems to be mainly taking place from the left. There's the actual alt-right fringe and then there's the ubiquitous alt-right boogieman propagated by the left. Alt-right rhetoric being defined far more by the left than it is by the actual alt-right fringe.

Last edited by EzraS on 20 Mar 2019, 8:44 pm, edited 2 times in total.