Richard Spencer goes full globohomo

submitted by EthnocratArcheofuturist from self.debatealtright

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Can we also stop pretending that Dutton is a serious thinker?

[–]LGBTQIAIDSAnally Injected Death Sentence 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I never liked either of them. I've been in this scene for around eight years. Spencer was someone that I always heard about and saw clips of embedded in other people's videos—none of which made him seem endearing—but I still haven't watched any of his videos. Over the past few years, I haven't heard a single good thing about him. I'm always amused at the notion that 'Richard Spencer is the head of the Alt-Right', although not quite as much as the notion that 'Milo' or 'Donald Trump' are the head of the 'Alt-Right'.

I have never considered any of these three as being the leader of any social movement in which I have any interest whatsoever. They were never the 'heads' of the 'Alt-Right'. Furthermore, I never liked Spencer; I never liked the G(ay)reek Milo, who last I heard seems to be larping as a heterosexual Christian convert. Trump explicitly disavowed the 'Alt-Right' shortly after the mass media started using it as a pejorative around 2016, a trend which thankfully seems to have largely died off since then.

The way I remember it, 'Alt-Right' went from being the self-label of an internet-based social movement to a pejorative encompassing the whole Republican Party practically over night. There was a time when even standard Republican dipshits were calling themselves 'Alt-Right' consequent of the media using that term to attack Trump and some of his supporters reinterpreting it in an empowering way. They were effectively saying that we'll take your insult and wear it with pride, exactly like queers and faggots do with the terms... yep... 'queer' and 'faggot'. So now there are people who self-label as 'proud queers' and 'proud faggots'. It's the same thing with 'nigger' having became an empowering term or badge of honour in the form of 'nigga'. I think it's an IQ thing. You never see Whites call themselves 'proud honkeys' or 'proud crackers' in any serious sense; East Asians never call themselves 'proud chinks' or any such nonsense either. Stupid people seem to like appropriating the labels their enemies stick on them.

When Trump disavowed the 'Alt-Right', I remember that these people dumped that term just as fast as they embraced it, and thus it returned to being the self-label of a fairly big tent social movement united by several core, shared concerns and otherwise having a wide range of political diversity. Hence the infighting over religion and economics, in particular. Of course, a few years later we also started dumping that term ourselves.

Unlike Spencer, Dutton—a sort of classical liberal, rather Tory-ish chap who strikes me as someone who probably loves Churchill and hates 'fascism', 3P, 'Far-Right', etc.—from the get-go applied a scientistic twist to things that was lacking in the 'Alt-Right' because of its preponderance of philosophy graduates. I have for some years felt that there is too much philosophizing and not enough scientizing, but the 'Alt-Right' evidently appeals far more to humanities graduates rather than natural or social science graduates. Regardless, after a while it has seemed to me that Dutton tries to shoehorn everything into his preconceived biological, seemingly rather (Herbert) Spencerian, Social Darwinian framework. Talk about 'Natural Selection' and 'spiteful mutants' is merely one angle from which problems can be approached. But what about sociobiological, social-neuroscientific and even certain psychological and sociological approaches (while sifting through the garbage and avoiding Freudian psychoanalysis, Labeling, Foucauldianism and other rubbish paradigms)? Dutton simply does not want to leave his comfort zone.

At this point I think they're just trying to remain relevant by being contrarian and provocative. It's all about who has the 'hottest takes' and 'most superchats' and whatever. They have to come up with things that are increasingly wild and unique whilst being careful not to go too far and have everyone claim that they're full of shit.

[–]Wrangel 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It is kind of funny since at any alt right meetup irl nearly everyone who has a degree is a STEM major. The alt right is generally very programmer heavy. But, it does seem like a lot of the public faces are philosophy majors.

I agree that Dutton tries to explain everything under the sun with genetics and biology, and that has ideology is a bit weak. But, I still enjoy him and find him valuable since he is good at his science. Dutton is worth watching if you scale down his claims by a factor of three.

[–]LGBTQIAIDSAnally Injected Death Sentence 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

If your first paragraph is correct, and I have no reason to doubt it, then there is a large and rather unobserved discrepancy between content creators and the run-of-the-mill commenter who likes, upvotes, comments, etc. but does not upload. I suppose then that the philosophers are more interested in becoming 'public faces' or 'public intellectuals' than the scientists and others. It's a tough one: I usually think of philosophers as tending towards introversion, but our version of them conversely tend to be very talkative. I suppose it isn't impossible. Many of the Ancient Greek philosophers, often living in communes with the like-minded and writing very little (or nothing in the case of Socrates, who was averse to writing), clearly would have talked more than they wrote.

[–]ifuckredditsnitches_Resident Pajeet 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think the sort of person who studies philosophy in the present day is likely far more extroverted than your average STEM major. Along with that those who study philosophy are much more likely to come across arguments against the current paradigm than any other subject I can think of. Nowhere else in academia do you really get the opportunity to study schools of thoughts that are so opposed to modernity.