blaa

submitted by [deleted] from self.whatever

continuing a conversation from a sub with more restrictive mod policies

all 20 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Woah. This is cool. We should have a dedicated sub where we continue conversations that were censored elsewhere.

[–]slushpilot 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Yup. Another community that I belong to had a channel called "take it offline" so when other people got tired of your off-topic digression in main channels, they could tell you to take it over there. It was often where the most interesting discussions kicked off.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

/u/dragonerne

They also correctly classify the karen meme as both sexist and racist. They also realize that there is a big lobby behind the trans movement; they even mention Soros. They are almost there.

I guess I assumed "almost there" here (from your comment in DAR) was "almost to recognizing hostile Jewish influence as the root of the problem". Which idk, the alt-right presents a compelling case that there's something going on there. But it seemed like the sort of thing that wouldn't be allowed on GC. Which maybe I'm annoyed about if it's actually true. But yeah, I guess that's what seemed deceptive.

And yes, you're right that it takes people time to get comfortable with ideas that are uncomfortable whether they're true or not, but ... that's what felt deceptive to me. Did I misunderstand what you meant there about "almost there"?

I saw a lot of overlap between my positions here and my positions in relation to dar

What kind of overlap do/did you see?

The responses seemed to indicate that GC is a sub for me to participate in and this is why I asked what DARs opinions were of GC and their opinions kind of disappointed me, personally

I'm surprised, I guess I had thought you were pretty committed to the DAR viewpoint of things, though I guess there's a variety of opinions there too. What about the opinions seemed kind of disappointing?

[–]Dragonerne 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (18 children)

I don't like when people are angry at eachother and I want to fix it by appealing to both sides in conflicts. This was always my role in school between the bullies and those that were bullied; trying to get people to stay friends.

I think my post on DAR was an attempt to appeal to them to be nice to GC and to give them a chance. The posts weren't very receptive to that idea but not entirely dismissive either, i think. "Almost there" was implied to be understood as something like what you wrote but I didn't write that explicitedly on purpose.

I agree with you, that sort of thing is probably not allowed on GC, but I don't think they would dismiss it or ban it if it was relevant. It's also not something I know a lot about so I would have to look into it first and probably wait for the GC debate subreddit.

The overlap? Well... A lot.
If someone accepts biology and evidence, then they're just a few links away from the alt-right.
However GC has a huge wall protecting them from alt-right dissident ideas because of indoctrination. The fascism/communism is one of such walls. It's a minor thing but if everything bad is incorrectly labeled and connected to the alt-right, then anything coming out of the alt-right will be dismissed, not because of what is said, but because of what is perceived to have been said.

Yes DAR is pretty varied. I had a few posts on there on reddit but lurked a lot. Definitely the highest quality subreddit in terms of content, not quite the same yet here but I guess it will come.
DAR was basically anyone with a brain on reddit, both left and right leaning. I lurked mostly not particularly because I agreed but more because I couldn't prove them wrong and neither could anyone else. 5 years I've seen them debate on different platforms and the only person that has been able to do decently has been censorship and the youtuber destiny.

Intersectionality is almost designed to be a "recruitment" (to use your word) pipeline to the alt-right. One simply has to add religion as an intersection and everything changes if people accept evidence.

I'm not comitted to one viewpoint or ideology. I have all kinds of contradictory viewpoints that I hold simultaneously. Everything would be much easier and I would feel much better if DAR turned out to be wrong.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (17 children)

Yeah I think it's good to remember that fighting is often not helpful. I know I could use the reminder. I also think it's important sometimes to not try to force each other together, it ends up creating problems that wouldn't be there if people just had more space. Sometimes. "Good fences make good neighbors" and all that. I think this related post was one I'd copied from a DAR discussion.

I've seen GC mentioned on r/DAR before, maybe you saw the post (maybe it was yours?). I remember people saying they felt pretty sympathetic to female separatism because they could see the similarity between 13/50 (or whatever the stat is, I forget exactly) and the 50/99 (male violence). I had been surprised to see it.

I agree with you, that sort of thing is probably not allowed on GC, but I don't think they would dismiss it or ban it if it was relevant. It's also not something I know a lot about so I would have to look into it first and probably wait for the GC debate subreddit.

There is a debate sub open, but it's not clear to me if it's only open to transgenderist feminists and radfems, or to everyone. /s/GCdebatesQT. The SaidIt sub is still relatively new. Personally I kinda wish for a place to discuss rather than to do combative debate, maybe an atmosphere more like that could develop there this time around.

I was banned on GC for responding when people brought up Jewish stuff. On the main GC sub, a woman said she was happy a public figure spoke out against "anti-Semitism". Of course, thinking the alt-right had a lot of good points about how that word is abused, I was angry! I said that it's sometimes abused. There was an exchange, I think I had said something about Jewish people in powerful positions, but I didn't say anything hateful, just... well, less than what everyone always says about whites. And I was banned.

I was banned on r/GCdebatesQT for something similar, when someone made a mod post about disallowing anti-Semitism, asking why anti-Semitism was listed first in their list of -isms and -phobias that weren't allowed on the sub, asking what counted. They removed my comments (and someone else's comments mentioning Jewish exploitation of Black Americans in the music industry). And I was banned.

You can imagine, after seeing this, and after reading all the stuff the alt-right argues for about this stuff all being a Jewish front to help destroy Whites... well it was like seeing it right before my eyes! Like how do you not come away from that thinking, "holy smokes, this really is a Jewish plot and it really isn't what it says it is!"

Here's the post I left when GC first came here talking about some of this. I guess my tone has softened a bit since then but I don't think I disagree today with anything I wrote in that statement.

I don't if they intend to treat things differently going forward wrt censorship. They seem to be removing less content lately than was removed on the reddit sub, but I don't know if that will continue when they build their new platform. They also seem to remove stuff that tries to hype up the racial stuff too much, in any direction. For example you can see in the modlog they banned user meerkat, and this woman(CW: anti-White, anti-Western content) was also censored on the old GC sub.

It's my experience that, while GC has problems with anti-White-ism, it's significantly less anti-White than other feminist spaces, and this includes how women of other races treat White women there. It's not perfect, but it seems like people generally find, well, racism in the classical sense, distasteful. Again though, unsure how things will look going forward.

The overlap? Well... A lot. If someone accepts biology and evidence, then they're just a few links away from the alt-right.

Interesting. My interest in the alt-right is mostly from the perspective of pro-White stuff, regardless of the human biodiversity stuff. And I do think they overstate some things. Nigerian immigrants (who eugenicized their pop by exporting as slaves those who lost wars) for example tend to outperform Whites in the US.

I also think GC has some dogmatic stances. For example. Though clearly not all participants agree with all the dogma, considering it was a GC participant who posted this.

I'm not sure how familiar you are with radical feminism and gender criticism. Sorry if this is stuff you've already heard: "Gender Critical" comes from the radical feminist tradition of criticizing gender as something that oppresses women. "Gender" here isn't supposed to mean this current wave of transgender stuff, though it seems like a lot of participants are not aware of that. Little post I tried to make about this.

I couldn't prove them wrong and neither could anyone else. 5 years I've seen them debate on different platforms and the only person that has been able to do decently has been censorship and the youtuber destiny. [...] I'm not comitted to one viewpoint or ideology. I have all kinds of contradictory viewpoints that I hold simultaneously. Everything would be much easier and I would feel much better if DAR turned out to be wrong.

Interesting. I guess it depends on what aspects of it you're talking about. I don't think they're right about everything, but I'm also not sure I could take them in a debate, so ... yeah, not sure that really qualifies. I don't like debate and I don't like feeling like I'm wrong, y'know?

I think radical feminism has some real "red pills" too, that the alt-right doesn't talk about, since the alt-right seems more like a male-centric movement imo. There are also factions of the pro-White movement that disagree with some of the alt-right stuff. There's a book "The Rats of Nationalism" that I've been considering reading.

In some ways I kindof think it's made me stupider because of all the "pill" stuff and I don't like it... like... stop trying to subversively "change my whole world", just explain your stuff. I shouldn't have been surprised to find out Africa had agriculture, for example. I mean, I already knew that from school! And I still felt like, "wait, this doesn't fit their narrative, something is off here, I thought black people couldn't do anything." I shouldn't be surprised when I encounter intelligent black people who are accomplishing a lot, both individually and as a group. And I wouldn't have been... before encountering the alt-right narrative.

The thing that's compelling about it to me is the immigration stuff. Yes, of course it will "change the culture and the demographics," and no, it's not "racist" to care about continuing to exist, especially in Europe my goodness! I think I pretty much agree with "anti-racist is a co-word for anti-white" even if I'm not ready to also believe everything the people who came up with that phrase say.

Sorry that was a huge wall of text. Um. TL;DR: I have some thoughts about GC and the alt-right

Also, I agree with the importance of labeling the bad communist stuff happening correctly.

What do you feel the alt-right has been unable to be beaten in debate about, if you want to answer here?

[–]Dragonerne 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (16 children)

Sorry, my reply wont be nearly worth the effort you delivered since its so late here. 2 AM. I'll do my best, forgive mistakes.

Nigerian immigrants (who eugenicized their pop by exporting as slaves those who lost wars) for example tend to outperform Whites in the US.

Nigerian immigrants to the US will not be a representative sample of the Nigerian population as a whole. It'll be some of the best qualified. The US is also anti-white and pro-black which helps them further. But it's important to remember that Africa is a huge place with huge genetic diversity, so making generalizations is generally,hehe, not a good idea.

I don't think they're right about everything, but I'm also not sure I could take them in a debate, so ... yeah, not sure that really qualifies.

This is how I feel :)
Still haven't researched all the topics regarding the tribe because I'm scared I might agree lol

I think radical feminism has some real "red pills" too, that the alt-right doesn't talk about, since the alt-right seems more like a male-centric movement imo.

Yes, I already learned some things wrt. the translobby. It's just ultimately we're all in the same boat, men and women and we need each other. Only our enemies would want us to have in-fighting. And that's exactly what do. It's really no surprise that marxism/communism is so prevalent or ingrained in radfem ideology. The thing is GC isn't like the other radfems, its obvious to me. They are "conservatives" or "alt-right in hiding" in their thinking - TRAs will agree with me here and GCs will disagree but this is why they were banned from reddit. GC is the intelligent group of women.

There are also factions of the pro-White movement that disagree with some of the alt-right stuff. There's a book "The Rats of Nationalism" that I've been considering reading.

Yes, alt-right is more like an umbrella term for pro-white, more or less. But the thing is most groups that diverge from the alt right seem to do it because of optics, not facts. But it's certainly not a unified political group. The strength of the alt right is that it has no taboo, while other groups have taboos that they don't want to admit and hence dance around with long weird explanations.
Imagine having to invent the entire intersectional theory to explain away that black people on average have lower iq? I'm obviously simplifying a lot but its just to make an example where some things can be so easily explained by very obvious reasoning but because we've been taught to be polite and not say mean things and that we are all exactly equally intelligent, then we have to find new reasons and explanations in order to avoid saying mean things and in order to be polite.

The thing that's compelling about it to me is the immigration stuff. Yes, of course it will "change the culture and the demographics," and no, it's not "racist" to care about continuing to exist, especially in Europe my goodness! I think I pretty much agree with "anti-racist is a co-word for anti-white" even if I'm not ready to also believe everything the people who came up with that phrase say.

A lot of their slogans and memes are just genius. It's honestly like magic. But the way I see it if you think this is obvious, then you're already alt-right or at least close, I don't mean that in a negative way.
"Leftists" don't see biology. So if a turk grows up in germany, he becomes just as german and anyone else, which is just stupid.

What do you feel the alt-right has been unable to be beaten in debate about, if you want to answer here?

Most of it is about framing the debate. Motte and bailey, anti-racist is anti-white, its okay to be white, never apologize for being white, weekly debunking the media narrative, immigration, men/women (biology wise), our greatest ally, power, history, iq, race, so many issues actually.

Nick Fuentes is quasi-alt-right but doesn't see himself as one at least publicly. He is very funny but I disagree with him on most things. Especially women. Well, he is a catholic and has very oldschool views about women.
I found this speech funny when I saw it but its some time ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KK3YTI0tYE
Trigger Warning :)

Good night

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

The thing is GC isn't like the other radfems, its obvious to me.

I'm surprised to hear you say that. What "other radfems" do you mean? I guess I think of GC as the radfems (as opposed to libfems).

The strength of the alt right is that it has no taboo, while other groups have taboos that they don't want to admit and hence dance around with long weird explanations.

Not sure I agree. "black organizing is their own accomplishment, they're not a Jewish golem"? "only 1% of males should breed?" "the holocaust happened"? "it really isn't all the jews fault"? "race-mixing is beneficial"? "only matriarchal civilizations last"? "being cruel to people in your civilization is generally going to harm your civilization?" "there is a lot of harmful-to-Whites stuff in the 'manosphere'"? "Asians are objectively superior and we should breed out whiteness asap with them?" "Jews are obviously superior and we should be their willing slaves or all convert?" "A lot of us are just contrarians who're mad we were stopped from bullying ppl we want to bully"? "Blacks and women are obviously becoming more capable and it's becoming clearer we're not just the best and it's scary"? "feminism is really good"? "transgenderism is a good general framework"? "we should support White women so they can choose to have all the kids they want with only the highest quality male genetics"? I feel like they sell themselves as having this hidden truth but ... idk if they always measure up to that. A lot of alt-right thinking seems motivated to me. I feel like a lot of the racial and genetic theories I've learned are a bit wishful and not based in scientific curiosity. I'm not sure they don't have taboo-ish things of their own.

Although perhaps we've been hanging around different parts of the pro-white scene.

"Leftists" don't see biology. So if a turk grows up in germany, he becomes just as german and anyone else, which is just stupid.

I feel like this is a simplification, idk. Maybe. People think whites have enough to give. And people don't like feeling like their own are bullying outsiders unfairly. Like, that seems like it's part of it too. I don't think there's no validity to the viewpoint, though idk. There's also the "inferiority complex" thing where you think everyone richer or whatever looks down on you, so it's ok if you abuse them.

And maybe whites are a bit, well, they think they're the best, and they're altruistic, and they want to help. The "white savior" thing. It's disappointing to have to admit you can't help and save everyone like you wanted to.

I think leftism has valid points.

because we've been taught to be polite and not say mean things

Yeah it seems more and more like even a small amount of well-meaning dishonesty can have disastrous consequences.

What do you feel the alt-right has been unable to be beaten in debate about, if you want to answer here? Most of it is about framing the debate.

That would suggest they're good at debating, but not that they're necessarily the most in touch with reality, no?

It's just ultimately we're all in the same boat, men and women and we need each other.

Yeah, agree completely.

[–][deleted]  (14 children)

[deleted]

    [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

    I'm surprised to hear you say that. What "other radfems" do you mean? I guess I think of GC as the radfems (as opposed to libfems).

    Yes, you're probably right. Goes to show how far their control over language goes.

    To give a little context, there exists a split between "liberal feminism" and "radical feminism". Generalizing a lot here, but: radical feminism thinks pornography is exploitation, feminism is for female women only, doesn't believe in transgender ideology, thinks female sex role expectations often harm women (extra time spent doing makeup, expectations to be deferential, etc). Liberal feminism thinks feminism is for men too and helps men, generally upholds transgender ideology, thinks sex work is work like any other, thinks makeup is empowering if women want to do it.

    showing a graph over the white population in the US historically with a projected future is one of the fastest and most effective redpills for a lot of people. At least it used to be. Mentioning that on reddit would get you instant banned from most subreddits

    Wow. Worst abuse I got on reddit was for saying "Our people should have children!"

    I feel like they sell themselves as having this hidden truth but ... idk if they always measure up to that.

    Where do you have those quotes from? [...] What would those taboo-ish things be?

    Oh! They're not actually quotes. They're ideas I think the alt-right wouldn't really consider, or would consider counter to their narrative. Something like taboos, that they don't really want to think or talk about because it's uncomfortable.

    [–][deleted]  (12 children)

    [deleted]

      [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

      You can't convert btw. You're like a dog - not in a good way - to them.

      You can't? Oh. I had thought you could. There's that video of that Jewish guy saying "Yes! We are going to dominate the world! But there's a way to avoid your fate: just convert already!"

      they have a different set of morals than us.

      How are the morals different?

      There are a lot of quotes. [...] I can't say anyone of them are taboo although I'm not an expert on all of them.

      Yeah I just meant them as examples of stuff I thought would run counter to their narrative that I think have some truth to them, that many members might try to not believe.

      Fair enough though about your responses to them, and on reflection DAR often did have intelligent responses to a lot of this stuff when confronted with it. Imo though they tend to overstate some things and aren't right about everything, and do engage in some degree of motivated thinking.

      [–]Dragonerne 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

      You can't? Oh. I had thought you could.

      Let's just say that its very hard :)
      Judaism is an ethnoreligion.

      How are the morals different?

      In many ways. Christians can't think the wrong things without sinning. Jews on the other hand can't do the wrong things, which means they invent all kinds of ways to do the things they cant do while not actually doing them. Like an entire jewish town connected wires on the rooftops between buildings so that the entire town counted as "indoor". They see cheating as part of the game. Those who follow the rules, lose basically.

      Yeah I just meant them as examples of stuff I thought would run counter to their narrative that I think have some truth to them, that many members might try to not believe.

      Yes, but not taboos imo. You really think that whiteness should be bred to extinction because asians are "objectively superior"?

      [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

      One more point:

      No. And we shouldn't breed out blackness either. Let asians come to Denmark and I promise you if we agree to compete, they wont stand a chance in Denmark. However let danes go to Africa and we wont outcompete Africans at least not unless we completely manage to change the environment in Africa to suit our genetics and evolution.

      Every race has the right to exist and we need to protect every race.

      I agree, I'm not out to go conquer anyone, I don't like that. I'd rather be friends, and I don't really see any reason not to be, just each in our own homelands.

      I disagree that we can simply rely on locally adapted genetics to protect each race. The history of earth is full of species getting replaced in their native ranges by other species. I think this puts whites in a position of false confidence which can be exploited, as it does any other race. We have to actually hold onto our territory if we want a place to exist, I don't think it's just going to happen automatically.

      [–]Dragonerne 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

      I think this puts whites in a position of false confidence which can be exploited, as it does any other race. We have to actually hold onto our territory if we want a place to exist, I don't think it's just going to happen automatically.

      Agreed. This is why I substantiated it with "if we agree to compete".