First they came for FatPeopleHate, but I said nothing by poops in Introductions

[–]AFutureConcern 64 insightful - 5 fun64 insightful - 4 fun65 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

A great many people did say something. We warned that the first sub to be banned was the beginning of a slippery slope. That pretty soon, bans would be used for political purposes, to sway elections.

Pro-censorship advocates, in a move that would today be termed "gaslighting", ensured us that this was not a slippery slope, and that it was only egregious content that would be banned.

2016 was the year things accelerated. Free discussion online, a large part of it in response to Black Lives Matter, Critical Race Theory and Queer Theory, helped secure the election of Donald Trump and the exit of the UK from the European Union. This surge in nationalist sentiment, while modest, spooked the powers that be, and one of the largest propaganda campaigns in history, "The Resistance", set out to prevent it from ever happening again.

Activist groups pressured the media to run 24/7 "Orange Man Bad" content, attacking Donald Trump as a fascist, a Nazi, a sexist, a racist and all manner of other slurs. Disparate elements joined together in reaction to this, including r/The_Donald. This content defending Trump became labelled as so-called "Hate Speech" by activist shill accounts and bots that amplified this message, while at the same time Trump supporters were being accused of being Russian bots in a textbook case of Marx's maxim, "Accuse your enemy of what you are doing, as you are doing it to create confusion."

The cultural rot accelerated. Absurd claims from Critical Race Theory and Queer Theory, having incubated on Tumblr, and widely mocked at the time, now started to become gospel truth in a new religion. Any dissent from these ideas was now being routinely dismissed as "a rise in far-right radicalization". In reality, simply holding a centrist liberal view from circa 2005 was enough to get one branded a "far-right extremist". This widely-reported rise in "far-right extremism" was accepted unthinkingly by the politically-ignorant masses and they unwittingly helped enable further suppression on Reddit, supporting subreddit bans and then quarantines for major subreddits.

In 2020, with the majority of dissenting subs quarantined or suppressed, the second time Black Lives Matter was pushed, there was no memetic resistance to its spread. Systems were in place to downvote and suppress comments critical of the movement. Those claims from Critical Race Theory were now accepted by the visible majority of Reddit, and those claims state that "racism" is omnipresent in society, and that everyone must fight to defeat it.

Of course the only trace of "racism" left was a few humor and debate subs that had been quarantined or suppressed anyway. In the wake of Black Lives Matter, a quixotic Reddit decided to strike the killing blow to the enemy who was already defeated.


The story isn't over. This pattern repeats on scales large and small, through every community, as the Western world spirals into death.

Reddit and Hate Speech by ManWithABanana in MeanwhileOnReddit

[–]AFutureConcern 43 insightful - 5 fun43 insightful - 4 fun44 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

How on earth would you even judge who is in the majority? of the global population? of the subreddit's community? In America? Based on where your IP is posting from?

If you're white. It's based on if you're white. The rule will change the moment whites are not a majority.

I actually can't believe they added this clause. It's explicitly anti-white. They literally endorse hate against whites. In black and white.

Reddit admits that their latest subreddit purge was a failure; only 18% decrease in "toxic comments" by ISaidWhatISaid in censorship

[–]AFutureConcern 38 insightful - 2 fun38 insightful - 1 fun39 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I think it is working as intended. This is just a ploy by them to further turn the screws.

Furthermore, we know that "toxicity" is not the reason they are banning these subreddits. They are banning subreddits that are against the SJW cult ideology; Trump supporters, dissident rightists, rightists in general, anybody pro-white, classical liberals, gender-critical feminists. You can say that these groups have an "edgier" sense of humor than other groups but only because their views are against the prevailing narrative. Some of those subreddits like r/DebateAltRight had extremely strict moderation and generally cordial discussion; the ultimate reason it was banned was purely ideological and nothing to do with how "toxic" the comments were.

I don't want people to get complacent. If censorship didn't work, they wouldn't do it. Imagine the popularity of "forbidden" ideas today if they hadn't been ruthlessly purged from reddit, youtube, facebook and others. AI algorithms are coming and are going to do a far better job of moderating forbidden thoughts the moment they appear. They'll scour sites like saidit and effectively purge any thoughts on mainstream sites that look anything like e.g. what I've typed here. Censorship works, and it must be stopped.

r/LGBdroptheT was banned on reddit in another ban wave. The ban notice states "This community was banned for violating Reddit’s rule against promoting hate." It was literally a place showing the hate coming from trans extremists towards cis people via screenshots of their prejudice comments... by zeusdx1118 in whatever

[–]AFutureConcern 36 insightful - 3 fun36 insightful - 2 fun37 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

This is because "hate" doesn't mean what most people think it means. "Hate" refers to expression of opinions that contradict the approved egalitarian narrative, or that assist in overturning the approved narrative. The "T" are equal to everyone else according to the new religion, so it's "hateful" to "drop the T". All peoples are the same according to the new religion, so r/hbd (human bio-diversity) is "hateful" and must be banned. "Hate" is effectively heresy; it has nothing to do with hatred. If trans extremists show extreme hatred towards normal people, that cannot be heresy and so isn't "hate" - it can only be banned on other grounds which are way stricter (directly promoting violence or so).

Reddit and Hate Speech by ManWithABanana in MeanwhileOnReddit

[–]AFutureConcern 30 insightful - 4 fun30 insightful - 3 fun31 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

It's closer to "if you're female and believe that massive schlongs are not female" but I agree.

Such strange times we live in that feminists are now reactionaries. But that's clown world for you.

It happened guys. r/debatealtright was just banned a minute ago. by eth0 in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 26 insightful - 1 fun26 insightful - 0 fun27 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

We need to build. We need to build a parallel everything. We need separation from this globohomo system. It will be small - but it will be ours. Start signing up to groups that can achieve this.

The reason we're being censored isn't because our ideas are too unspeakably evil to showcase. It's because if people saw us, they'd know we aren't bad people who deserve to be mistreated. by WaltzRoommate in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 20 insightful - 1 fun20 insightful - 0 fun21 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

100%. If your average person knew how reasonable our ideas were they'd suddenly wonder what the media has been endlessly complaining about.

I myself once believed there was some "hateful" beyond; I thought I took a more reasonable position than those "extremists". Turns out there is no such thing. The "extremists" really are quite nice and reasonable and don't hate anyone. They really don't want people finding that out.

Why I am deeply alarmed by reddit censorship by Jizera in MeanwhileOnReddit

[–]AFutureConcern 19 insightful - 2 fun19 insightful - 1 fun20 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

You're absolutely right. Google censor anything that could be considered a free speech platform that competes with the tech monopolies (let alone an actual right-biased site). Reddit blocks any links to thedonald.win or voat.co - and shadowbans you if you mention saidit.net. They intentionally fracture competitors as well - if one gets too popular, you can bet it will be censored and another alternative promoted. Since there is no expectation of free speech from the masses anymore, and leftist fools will side with big tech, denying that any censorship is happening, the tech companies feel absolutely free to stifle their competition through aggressive censorship and control of the public discourse.

It happened guys. r/debatealtright was just banned a minute ago. by eth0 in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 17 insightful - 2 fun17 insightful - 1 fun18 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

The problem with this is that there is a fundamental asymmetry between left and right. Right is order; heirarchy, and left is disorder; entropy. It's far easier to subvert institutions to destroy the established order than it is to "subvert" a leftist-run mess (see CHAZ/CHOP) into some kind of order.

That's why my suggestion is to build. We need institutions in place that are our own, so that when the globohomo system eventually decays, we will have something ready to take its place.

Are men becoming more feminine? by PencilPusher55 in whatever

[–]AFutureConcern 14 insightful - 2 fun14 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

There is a deliberate campaign to make men more feminine, and women more masculine, yes. It's called queer theory, and it wants to erase ("queer") the distinction between all categories of sex, gender, sexuality etc. because they see the normal (and normativity) as fundamentally "oppressive" and rigid categorization creates this oppression; for example the existence of the "man" and "woman" categories create the oppression of women by men.

This idea comes directly from Jacques Derrida who is a heavy influence on this kind of leftist postmodernism.

In the Wake of the Series of Hate Hoaxes: Time to Reexamine the Charlottesville ‘Car Assault’. Was it a Staged Deception? by dragonslayer in conspiracy

[–]AFutureConcern 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

In the wake of the BLM riots, many people have been attacked in their cars by rioters. I've seen a lot of commentators say that if they were in that situation, they'd hit the gas and not think twice. It seems to me like James Fields did what any normal person would do when fearing for his life - flee. There should never have even been any charges.

Kenosha Riots, All Three Rioters Shot By Kyle Rittenhouse Have Violent Criminal Histories by suckitreddit in news

[–]AFutureConcern 12 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Some pointed questions for you:

  • What specifically is "fundamentalist" regarding this article's content, comments, or this platform more generally?
  • What is "disturbing" about fundamentalism? Are leftist fundamentalists "disturbing" when they burn down cities in service of their ideology?
  • Why would you consider fundamentalism a "sickness"? (If the fundamentals of Islam are correct, why shouldn't we try to form the caliphate?)

Twitter now blocking all Bitchute links by Erasmus in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The internet was largely ignored by those in power until the 2016 election. "Meme magic" really was real and the unprecedented ability to spread right-wing memes throughout the internet made them uncomfortable. Huge sums of money were donated to "the resistance" to stop any nationalist thought rising again, even tepid all-bark-no-bite civic nationalism from Trump.

They know what they are doing. Mid-wit level discourse on censorship focuses on "the Streisand effect" and other surface-level critiques. The people in charge of censorship at YouTube, Twitter and pro-censorship groups like the ADL and SPLC have all the data they need to accurately map out the network links between dissidents, and to measure the effect of their censorship on the discourse.

Do you think it's a coincidence that they banned Stefan Molyneux, an anarcho-capitalist who's not really alt-right? No - he was very popular, and formed a central node in the network of the right. From his twitter profile you'd always see /ourguys/ in the comments.

They have rightly seen that BitChute is a growing platform that provides a hub for dissidents to share ideas and comment below the videos - just like YouTube 4 years ago. So they engaged in the following process:

  • Research BitChute, find damning examples of "hateful" speech that normies would find objectionable
  • Run articles in mainstream media complaining about this "hateful" website so people's first impression is tainted, even though BitChute is a free speech platform, open to all
  • Pressure big sites that feature many links to BitChute to consider blocking or suppressing those links, citing the mainstream media articles [you are here]
  • Pressure payment processors, domain registrars, web hosting services - anything you can find, really - to drop BitChute, putting as much pressure on them as you can from as many angles as you can, citing the articles each time
  • At this point the user base of BitChute will become "concentrated" with dissidents; nobody wants to run a gaming channel on a platform that's censored everywhere. Use the fact that BitChute now exclusively contains dissident material as the basis for further smears, and repeat until it's irrelevant.

Intelligence isn't genetic by Chipit in whatever

[–]AFutureConcern 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They don't deny human biodiversity because they think it's false. They deny it because they think it helps justify an "oppressive narrative". It's all feelings and "oppression". If some groups are less intelligent on average, and this is due to natural reasons, or in fact any justifiable reason (natural or artificial), then those groups will be justifiably lower on the hierarchy than others. From their perspective, hierarchy is intolerable (and cannot / should not be justified) and so anybody sharing those facts must be "complicit" in what they call "white supremacy" (they call it this even if Asians are shown to have the highest IQ).

Then there are the "useful idiots" who believe the lies the former group tell about human biodiversity not existing. They truly think the Critical Social Justice types are simply complaining about unfair treatment, about prejudiced cops, and that we should strive to erase prejudice, and that we really are all the same underneath. They couldn't be further from the truth. Critical Social Justice activists do not care that human biodiversity exists, they simply want to destroy the narrative that it does. They don't care about "prejudice" because they'll happily pre-judge people if it advances their agenda. They only care about "oppression" which means when any (racial, ethnic, sex) group has more power than any other - and in particular, since white men have more power than other groups, they will deconstruct any narrative that justifies any of that power, regardless of how true it is.

Twitter now blocking all Bitchute links by Erasmus in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Every year the censorship gets worse and worse. I know it's going to continue but my heart sinks every time it happens. They won't leave us alone until we are completely silenced or dead. We can't even have the middle ground of a free platform, let alone widespread adoption of our ideas.

Who Owns Reddit? A breakdown of the type and nationality of shareholders. by magnora7 in MeanwhileOnReddit

[–]AFutureConcern 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, exactly. I think people need to change their mindset from "all these companies want to do is make money" to "all these companies want to do is push their agenda". Having power and reshaping society is the goal of having lots of money anyway; it's the root of their desires. If all they wanted to do was turn a profit they wouldn't engage in the level of censorship that they do.

Trump bans critical race theory training in the government by jet199 in politics

[–]AFutureConcern 10 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Lots of places are reporting that he banned "diversity training" which isn't the case. You can do diversity training without the above, you can probably do it better.

He should ban diversity training, too.

Is George Soros basically the Jewish fall guy? by probgoingtohell in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

does he actually have a part in the whole subversion thing?

George Soros funds the Open Society Foundations whose mission statement is:

The Open Society Foundations work to build vibrant and inclusive democracies whose governments are accountable to their citizens.

Note the "vibrant and inclusive" dog whistle which is code for the Great Replacement, and "democracies" which means spreading liberalism and exaltation of the weak to the world.

The open society is a term coined by Henri Bergson and later expanded upon by Karl Popper. Both Henri Bergson and Karl Popper were Jewish.

Karl Popper defined the open society as one "in which individuals are confronted with personal decisions" as opposed to a "magical or tribal or collectivist society." In other words, it's a liberal individualist project fundamentally opposed to nationalism. In a word - globohomo.

This globohomo institution has a $19,590,570,302 endowment, and a $1.2 billion annual budget. It spends (to name just some of the subversive areas it invests in):

  • $137 million on "economic equity and justice"
  • $112 million on "equality and anti-discrimination"
  • $74 million on "justice reform"

George Soros is therefore absolutely a subversive Jewish billionaire, implementing a globohomo vision of society dreamed up by Jewish philosophers.

The Woke Left v. the Alt-Right: A New Study Shows They’re More Alike Than Either Side Realizes - Quillette by Scrubjay in politics

[–]AFutureConcern 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

The woke left and the alt-right have fundamentally different and incompatible world views. Just because both are illiberal, meaning they both want to achieve their political aims rather than "letting people do what they want," doesn't mean they are at all the same.

  • The woke left denies that race exists; the alt-right believes that races are different
  • The woke left denies sexual dimorphism; the alt-right believes the sexes are different
  • The woke left praises diversity; the alt-right wants ethnostates
  • The woke left hates white people; the alt-right loves white people
  • The woke left hates the legacy of European civilization; the alt-right loves the legacy of European civilization
  • The woke left desires equality; the alt-right desires hierarchy
  • The woke left thinks language constructs reality; the alt-right thinks reality constructs language
  • The woke left adopts critical theory; the alt-right opposes critical theory
  • The woke left adopts queer theory; the alt-right opposes queer theory
  • The woke left supports feminism; the alt-right supports traditional gender roles
  • The woke left thinks racism is the greatest sin; the alt-right thinks racism is a social construct
  • The woke left supports abolishing the police; the alt-right supports law and order
  • The woke left agrees with multinational corporations; the alt-right opposes multinational corporations

I could go on and on. They aren't at all alike and horseshoe theory needs to die.

Teacher admits he helped write Common Core to end white privilege by Questionable in conspiracy

[–]AFutureConcern 10 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

You summed it up perfectly. That's precisely their aim. They would phrase it as something like, "empowering underachieving students to reach their potential" - except that the other result of it is that everyone gets dumber.

Twitter Suspends Donald Trump Jr. After He Posts Viral Video on Successful HCQ Treatment for COVID-19 by scrubking in politics

[–]AFutureConcern 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

If they don't take action after this they are confirmed to be completely controlled opposition. It's honestly unbelievable how the leftists on Twitter are fully in favor of this censorship. We warned this would happen, years ago - and it's truly only the right that cares, and they won't do anything to stop it. Dark times ahead...

Linux team approves new terminology, bans terms like 'blacklist' and 'slave' by TruthTeller in NotTheOnion

[–]AFutureConcern 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

It's not better.

Changing the terms validates the idea that terminology can be "harmful". In reality, nobody ever got hurt because the word "slave" was used in more than one way. But now any old books or any of the other places the word "slave" is used will be viewed as "racist" and bad.

This can only escalate.

Black SanFran politician proposes "CAREN Act" to make "racist 911 calls" illegal by [deleted] in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They literally called it after a racial slur against white women. And we all know what they mean by "racist" 911 calls. It means if a black guy is stalking a white woman alone in the park, making her nervous, and she calls the police. All I can advise white women is - don't walk alone in the park. There's literally nothing else you can do. Can't call the cops on the guy, can't fight back or shoot the guy if he assaults you - you'll go to jail if you try.

Why some members in this movement shouldn't be allowed to speak by Salos10000 in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

All of these symbols are simply symbols of our history, though. The only reason they are associated with "hate" is because of who is in charge. The OK sign, the phrase "It's okay to be white", Pepe the frog, Viking runes - all of these are called "hate symbols" because they are associated with us.

I think you are right, though, in that there's no way we can win being openly heretical. It just paints a huge target on our back. When we win, though, there will be nothing controversial about these symbols.

Just a gay guy tired of being told what I'm allowed to believe. by anarchy753 in Introductions

[–]AFutureConcern 10 insightful - 4 fun10 insightful - 3 fun11 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

What's next? Can't filter by weight because it's not body positive or is fatphobic?

Unironically, yes. It is quite clear and logical that in the woke religion where "discrimination" is viewed as the ultimate evil, any preferences at all that disfavor "marginalized groups" will ultimately be seen as evil. This means, effectively, that it will be disallowed to filter potential partners by:

  • Race (if not excluding whites)
  • Weight (if not excluding thin people)
  • Attractiveness (if not excluding attractive people)
  • Wealth (if not excluding rich people)
  • Gender (if not excluding men)

You'll see disagreement here from the intersectionalists and the queer theorists - the queer theorists will want to break down ("queer") the categories and remove them entirely; the intersectionalists will want to "center authentic dating profiles" by giving a boost to poor, fat, unattractive transgender lesbians in the app targeted at gay men.

100's of Examples of Anti-White Racism Being Spread by [deleted] in propaganda

[–]AFutureConcern 9 insightful - 4 fun9 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

This is true if you think "white supremacy" means "the belief, theory, or doctrine that white people are inherently superior to people from all other racial and ethnic groups, especially Black people, and are therefore rightfully the dominant group in any society," as it says in the dictionary.

In actual practice in the media, though, "white supremacy" means "the belief, theory or doctrine that white people deserve to exist and stand up for their own interests, and explicit discrimination and hatred toward whites should be discouraged." By this definition, the above imgur album is clearly "white supremacy".

The reason that the left has come to term such reasonable beliefs as "white supremacy" is because they have essentially figured out that the right was correct - in a fair, meritocratic, Western system, it's highly probable that blacks and other minority groups will do poorly. Rather than accept, though, that groups have different average abilities, the left decides the entire of society has to be rebuilt in a way that guarantees equal outcomes, which necessitates discriminating against whites. Anyone who opposes this clearly accepts to some degree the status quo, which is why standing up for white people is "white supremacy."

Now for a lot of classical liberals / centrists, this situation is confusing. It seems much like the "soft bigotry of low expectations" to expect blacks and other minorities to do poorly. Surely they must be the real racists! But to a leftist, as well as anyone willing to investigate uncomfortable facts, it's pretty dang obvious that we can expect blacks to score poorly on IQ tests, not show up to work on time, commit violent crime more often and so on. From the leftists' perspective, the view that all races are equal is purposely ignorant and self-serving. The real racism, in their view, is the very belief that high IQ, showing up to work on time, and not committing violent crime are positive traits in the first place. Hence they advocate for abolishing standardized tests, allowing flexible working hours, and freeing violent criminals from jail.

The reality is that we have to accept that groups are different and that we must expect whites to do better than blacks (on average) in the absence of discrimination. It's not enough to have blind faith in liberalism to "bring us equality," we have to accept that inequality between races is the natural (and desirable) result of a meritocratic system. Until we recognize that the anti-white left's observations about the under-performance of minority groups are not "racism", but a simple observation of fact (coupled with anti-white hatred and a misdiagnosis of the cause), we'll never defeat them.

Ay Tone, why dey celebratin'? by [deleted] in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What if we just don't think religions have agency?

Firstly, Jews are an ethno-religious group; not all of them even believe in God.

Secondly, the left in general believes strongly that religion has agency, especially when you are blaming "evangelicals" for Republican stances on abortion or sex education. Why don't the beliefs of Jews in power affect the decisions they make?

Today on reddit I posted 3 comments on a post on the front page. They were deleted by mods, and to verify my account, I have to send them a picture of my forearm showing my skin color. If my skin is not dark enough, I don't get approved. by magnora7 in MeanwhileOnReddit

[–]AFutureConcern 9 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

They don't care about slavery per se.

They only care that slavery was one of the bad things that happened on the path to white men being the demographic with the most power.

The moment you suggest paying white men reparations for the slavery their ancestors suffered, they will reject everything you say. Why? Because that would mean giving money from those "oppressed" by whites to "oppressor" whites. Every story they tell, every justification they give is steered towards taking power away from whites.

Are the Protocols of the Elders of Zion real? by Pink in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I believe The Protocols is a forgery. There is too much evidence that its text was plagiarized from various sources in order to tell a story, instead of a serious document that Jews actually used and followed. I think the document is referenced by mainstream media sources as a way of drawing those who notice Jewish power towards accepting very spurious claims, similarly to how the QAnon conspiracy theory is pushed to tie dissident-right voices to absurd conspiratorial claims.

How to deal with our movement being propagandized by Minedwe in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's open to debate, but the reason it's a bit of an echo chamber is because on reddit, it was one of the last alt-right subreddits, and the quarantine caused most honest debate to dry up. Now the users are here.

I would suggest asking some probing questions to us in another thread. I usually do my best to answer from the higher steps of the pyramid of debate.

Maybe I'll set up a devil's advocate thread as well to get the debate flowing.

First they came for FatPeopleHate, but I said nothing by poops in Introductions

[–]AFutureConcern 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

His stupidity actually made things worse because it meant people could criticize him on the grounds that he's an idiot, where their real reason was that they're communists and they must purge any right-wing thought. It got a lot of centrists/center-right on board with joining "The Resistance" and ushering in leftist censorship.

Japanese jazz pianist might never play again after New York subway attack. by [deleted] in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

It's not so absurd to suggest that Jewish record label owners deliberately promoted avant-garde music from minority artists. They do that today, proudly.

One thing I have learned about music tastes is that many people (myself included) seem to pick up their tastes from what they've consumed; meaning "people can like what ever they want" is not actually true - people like what's put in front of them, for the most part. Pop music is popular because it's what's produced and promoted, and while public attitudes do guide that to some degree (catchy hooks and rhythms become popular), things like the message in the lyrics or the simplicity of the piece just get tacitly accepted.

Music is absolutely a vector to promote poz, though I do agree with you that "Jews inventing Jazz" is at best an exaggeration of what is more likely a selection process on which artists became popular.

George Floyd Body cam Video Shows he was saying "I can't Breath" way before being put on the Ground. by scrubking in politics

[–]AFutureConcern 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

They probably thought he was just lying. He already told them:

  • He didn't do nothing (he did)
  • He's not resisting (he was)
  • He has claustrophobia (he didn't)
  • He's getting in the car (he wasn't)
  • He's not a bad guy (he was)

Why is it such a stretch to believe that when he says he can't breathe, that he could?

Refuting a big Cope: Deplatforming is extremely effective and Bitchute is a dead end by casparvoneverec in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

The other major issue is fragmentation. Our enemies constantly shill 10+ different platforms, all with "free speech", and their goal is to fracture the community into tiny pieces so it's easier to mop up.

  • There was a time when right-wing thought had a hub on 4chan; then 4chan split into 4chan and 8chan, which split into 8kun.top and 8chan.moe.
  • Right-wing thought had a close-knit network of YouTubers who would go on each others' shows and promote each other, with the YouTube algorithm promoting their channels and channels peripheral to them; now to get videos you have to go to bitchute.com, lbry.tv and dlive.tv.
  • Right-wing thought had an active membership on Twitter; now Twitter bans large users central and peripheral to the network (Stefan Molyneux, Morgoth, Martin Sellner) and the services replacing Twitter are fractured - Parler, Gab, Telegram.
  • Right-wing thought was popular on Reddit; now there are many sites that serve that function - saidit.net, notabug.io, voat.co, among others

What can we do to counter this, given our enemies are watching our every move?

Today on reddit I posted 3 comments on a post on the front page. They were deleted by mods, and to verify my account, I have to send them a picture of my forearm showing my skin color. If my skin is not dark enough, I don't get approved. by magnora7 in MeanwhileOnReddit

[–]AFutureConcern 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

They do want to end "racism".

"Racism" is a term used to attack white people. They view "racism" as a system of power that keeps white people ahead. Anything that equalizes this power structure (even including violence if it would be effective) is "antiracist" and is viewed as good.

Take antiracist scholar Ibram X. Kendi, for example - he says:

One either allows racial inequities to persevere, as a racist, or confronts racial inequities, as an antiracist. There is no in-between safe space of “not racist.” The claim of “not racist” neutrality is a mask for racism.

Basically, Kendi believes that you either discriminate against white people to "confront racial inequities" (in which case you are antiracist), or you don't, making you a racist. He doesn't care about being fair, or even equality of opportunity, but equality of outcome. He won't stop discriminating against white people until the relative power of the races is equalized.

IQ is largely a pseudoscientific swindle by Nassim Nicholas Taleb by avena_sativa_3 in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Taleb's whole shtick is claiming that most things are a "pseudoscientific swindle". His background is in trading, and he tends to distrust all predictive models (hence his "Black Swan"). I think it's true that IQ does not tell the whole story when it comes to intelligence and life success. It's very hard to predict things based on IQ alone. But then, it's very hard to predict things about a person based on anything alone.

Taleb's required standard of rigor would immediately discredit the entirety of psychology and the vast majority of social science in general. While I think most of it probably should be discredited, my standard of evidence is not nearly as high as Taleb; furthermore, my "null hypothesis" is NOT assuming that all groups are the same, so the fact that the evidence is less certain doesn't make me any more likely to accept the equalitarian hypothesis.

Everyone should vote Trump by TheCheebuMenace in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Our problems are deeper than the 4-year electoral cycle, unfortunately. Trump gave a lot of people enthusiasm that things could be turned around, but the rot was too deep. In reality, Trump is nothing more than a 90s liberal. Not that voting changes anything anyway, but if it did, reelecting Trump would only delay the inevitable. These riots and this cultural revolution is occurring under his watch, after all.

What SHOULD be taught in schools? by Aureus in AskSaidIt

[–]AFutureConcern 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

It doesn't. Critical thinking comes from Plato; "the analysis of facts to form a judgment."

Critical theory is named in a subversive way, and comes from the Frankfurt School in the early 20th century. It refers to "criticism" of a particular kind that critiques power in society; it is not concerned at all with "the analysis of facts to form a judgment;" in fact:

Critical Theory is only tangentially concerned with understanding or truth and has, as Hume might have it, abandoned descriptions of what is in favor of pushing for what the particular critical theory holds ought to be.

Some insight about free speech from Reddit: West turning into USSR by cloudrabbit in MeanwhileOnReddit

[–]AFutureConcern 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

It's a great excuse to purge right-wing dissidents from universities. Same with calls for "diversity" - it's a way of biasing the university towards a leftist agenda. The people discriminated against the most are lower-to-middle class white people, and those that benefit are the upper classes and lower-class blacks and Hispanics.

Intelligence isn't genetic by Chipit in whatever

[–]AFutureConcern 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It doesn't actually matter, the exact definition. The point is to pick a definition and stick with it, so that we can discover things about it. The psychometric variable underpinning IQ tests is general intelligence, or "g". But it doesn't matter if it's not quite right or exact. I can see where you're going. Intelligence is not well-defined => it can't be said to be heritable or genetic => all groups are just as naturally smart as each other.

The reason you do this is because you see that IQ differences caused by genetics help to "uphold" a "narrative" that "oppresses" groups who have low IQ. Of course, it does do exactly that, because it's true, but people being naturally less intelligent, whilst called "oppression" by Critical Social Justice activists, is totally justified because it is meritocratic. If intelligence were so well-defined and its genetic component so obvious that it was impossible to deny, Critical Social Justice would simply focus on dismantling the moral axiom that "truly meritocratic systems are justified".

By the grace of Allah, Globohomo is secularizing the Middle east by casparvoneverec in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

The counterjihad movement's main point is that Islam is bad because they're not liberal and homosexual enough. They fully submit to the moral framework of the GloboHomo Gayplex.

Ann Coulter tweets links to Unz review by casparvoneverec in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Michelle Malkin appeared on Radio 3Fourteen/Red Ice TV earlier this year - do you think we could land Queen Ann an interview?

I think Coulter is fully redpilled by the way. I remember Vincent James pointed out a tweet she made (quickly deleted), in response to Michael Cohen's lies he was convicted for, which said simply "Cohen." I'll leave you guessing what she could have meant by that.

Wanted to ask people here: Who do you think did 9/11 and why? by Jesus in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Same here, or at least I see no real reason to doubt it. All that talk of thermite, explosives, missiles is so stupid and misses the point entirely.

The real story is what narrative emerged from the attacks, and what did it lead to? A never-ending war in Afghanistan, the "war on terror," and a severe restriction of the freedoms of ordinary citizens - powers granted to authorities that are now being used against us. Instead of attacking the policies, idiot conservatives try debunking the supposed "reason" for the policies (so the towers were taken down by explosives, global warming isn't real and vaccines don't work), which was never the real reason in the first place, while tacitly accepting that if it were real, the measures would be justified.

I wonder what group of people were responsible for the creation of this monstrosity by Salos10000 in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Let's go through the items that are socially unacceptable.

Lynching

Lynching is a form of extrajudicial killing. It targets people who are believed to have committed a crime. Most of the victims of lynching in America were white. A disproportionate number of them were black, but then, black people commit more crime. While I'd rather the police do their job, lynching as a practice doesn't seem to me to indicate anyone feels white people are superior.

Hate crimes

Hate crimes are a socially constructed phenomenon whereby for using an ethnic slur while committing assault, one will get a far harsher sentence. Using a political slur (Nazi, commie, bigot, hater) does not have the same effect. One has to be more concerned about the slurs one uses to insult someone than whether you've beaten him over the head. The use of a slur during an assault is no evidence that the perpetrator secretly thinks that white people are superior.

Blackface

Blackface originated from white people dressing as black people, often in a mocking and offensive way. Up until maybe 20 years ago, simply dressing up as a black man with face paint was not considered "blackface", and was perfectly acceptable. Dressing as another race, sex, profession, or age is what acting was all about. The only reason it has become so taboo and offensive to blacks to dress up as a black person is because of media influence. Without media influence, blacks probably wouldn't mind that people dressed up as Barack Obama at a party.

The N Word

Again, media influence has made this particular slur worse than any other, and use of it has no relationship to believing white people are superior.

Swastikas

A symbol of European history and heritage, the humble swastika has been utterly destroyed in its reputation, not by the NSDAP, but by the port-WWII narrative surrounding it. The same happens ultimately to any symbols of European heritage.

Neo-Nazis

What they mean by Neo-Nazis includes everyone on this forum. It is a term with so broad a brush that anybody defending European heritage (or white people in general) will be tarred with it.

Burning Crosses

Like the swastika, burning crosses, marching with torches, and similar rituals are a part of European tradition. They really don't want any European heritage to survive (they want to destroy everything we love).

Racist Jokes

Racist jokes are told because they are breaking a taboo. The majority of people telling racist jokes aren't even racially aware themselves; they just laugh at the uncomfortableness of the situation, much as with jokes about rape, murder or dead babies.

Racial Slurs

Similar to hate crimes above, racial slurs are elevated to a special status as compared to any other insult. It's okay to hate realtors, bankers, or communists - even use slurs against them - but insult a protected class like Jews and there'll be hell to pay.

KKK

The KKK barely exists. I'm really surprised why it's still on these lists. Are there any non-feds in the KKK?

This Man Predicted Today's Crisis! How Marxism Disguises Itself As Social Justice & Equality. by blue1324 in WorldPolitics

[–]AFutureConcern 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

How Marxism Disguises Itself As Social Justice & Equality.

Well, Marxism is social justice and equality. It's just that most people don't realize what that means. Equality is pretending that people are equal when they are clearly not, and social justice is punishing successful groups (white people) for their sin of being more successful because they can only have gained their power through "oppression" (since they are equal to all other groups).

The idea of the oppressor/oppressed distinction of social justice ideology comes directly from the communist manifesto:

The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.

Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another, carried on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended, either in a revolutionary reconstitution of society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending classes.

Modern leftist movements simply apply this to men/women, white/black, straight/gay and so on.

Today on reddit I posted 3 comments on a post on the front page. They were deleted by mods, and to verify my account, I have to send them a picture of my forearm showing my skin color. If my skin is not dark enough, I don't get approved. by magnora7 in MeanwhileOnReddit

[–]AFutureConcern 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Yep, and also - black people are probably wealthier today than had they never been slaves. If we're to correct the historical wrong, should black people give up their wealth to whites and move back to Africa?

[Original Research] Jews Account for Over 22% of the Wealth of the Top 100 Billionaires by AFutureConcern in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think it's important to keep this information conservative, professional and not based on speculation. I think if you're going to count gentiles like Bezos and the Kochs as Jewish, you also have to update the count of what percentage of the world's population is Jewish - it'd be way higher than 2% of Americans.

Transgender identification often occurs in cluster outbreaks among friend groups—at up to SEVENTY times the expected prevalence rate by [deleted] in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Liberalism's permission of freedom of the will, combined with social network effects and the disconnection from nature that technology has brought, leads to exactly this kind of social contagion. There will be more things like this - weirder and weirder - as Piss Earth begins. It's very clear that conservatives were completely correct - the sexual revolution, gay marriage and so on were all on a slippery slope. And we're still sliding.

Am I correct in believing the Alt Right's hatred of Africans is based on the behaviors and attitudes of Western Blacks? by ayotollahsinIran in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This is right. The reason that people are confused is the word games played by postmodern leftists and the pun on the word "hate".

What we engage in is called "hate speech" against blacks. This has nothing to do with hating black people. For example, the statement "black people are less intelligent and more violent than white people" is considered "hate speech" because the ADL would interpret it as such. We don't have to have any emotion one way or the other toward blacks for this to be the case.

Now the people who actually engage in these word games, fully aware that they are abusing language to manipulate people into persecuting us, it's fair to say that I do hate those people. I do hate those that abuse me and abuse the truth - but only those that know that's what they are doing.

Seems like /pol/ might have found Ghislaine Maxwell's reddit account. by send_nasty_stuff in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So you're saying that a rich Jewish pedophile, and the Jewish heiress of the fortune of a Jewish media mogul and fraudster, used footage of elites engaging in sex acts with underage girls as blackmail against the most powerful people in the world, and covered this up by moderating news feeds on one of the most popular websites in the world, with the knowledge of the admins of said website?

I dunno, sounds pretty anti-semitic to me...

Why some members in this movement shouldn't be allowed to speak by Salos10000 in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I mean, the swastika and celtic cross have a history stretching back before those groups, and were chosen because they represent European history. The confederate flag(s) only represent the bad parts of American history because those in power declare it so; plenty of people who proudly display the confederate flag would tell you a different story.

On the other hand, the hammer and sickle is displayed proudly by communists despite representing mass murder and starvation. They just say that those regimes weren't "real" communism. The black power fist is displayed proudly by major corporations despite it being associated with black nationalist hate groups. They have no qualms about being associated with extremist left-wing groups through symbology - this is because they are in power.

The symbols are not what do us harm. What does us harm is the people in power, who point at the symbols as evidence we are bad. But if we used different symbols, they would just point at those symbols as evidence we are bad; the OK hand sign being the perfect example.

Some insight about free speech from Reddit: West turning into USSR by cloudrabbit in MeanwhileOnReddit

[–]AFutureConcern 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I actually think lower class blacks and other minorities will also be shut out.

All these groups that advocate for wealth redistribution in their direction are really stupid and short-sighted. Blacks in the US have a median income that is way higher than the world average. The logical conclusion of the leftist ideology they support is open-borders globalism and worldwide wealth redistribution. That means taking money away from privileged US blacks and giving it to Africans. They really don't know how good they have it.

First they came for FatPeopleHate, but I said nothing by poops in Introductions

[–]AFutureConcern 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

There are almost 0 actual communists in any position of power anywhere in the United States. The fact that you think there are any communists in positions of power in the States is pretty funny though, I'll give you that.

There are absolutely many neo-Marxists in positions of power. They form the HR and PR departments of major corporations, they are the editors of newspapers, they are the directors of movies and TV shows. They are the leaders of Black Lives Matter, which has been praised by governments and corporations worldwide. They have internalized totally a religion of equality in which different identity groups are viewed as "oppressor" and "oppressed" (in contrast to traditional materialist Marxism in which class is the sole consideration). By constructing these ideas, they invoke an inverse force against those designated as "oppressors". Class is simply lower down their list.

I sympathize to some extent with traditional Marxists who feel that this craziness has really taken things off course, but this is yet another case of "this isn't real communism" when this is literally how communism has gone every time. Purges of dissidents, purges of those who initially helped to tear down the old system, tearing down of monuments, destruction of culture, and concentration of power in a tiny elite while average middle-class people have their quality of life decimated. All we're missing is the famine.

U.S. Communists would actually very much understand why banning speech is bad, if anyone would, since historically it was Communists who were blacklisted in the 50's in our country. Even if they had only attended a meeting or two at a time when that was quite common.

They understand why banning speech is bad for those who are banned. It's become quite clear over recent years that censorship works and all of those centrist copes that "censorship will drive it underground and make it worse" just simply weren't true. They're quite happy to censor others to protect their power as we can see today.

Does anyone else feel that division between 'Left' and 'right' only serves to further divide us? by Freshly_Squeezed in conspiracy

[–]AFutureConcern 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

The left/right distinction is as such because we live in a society in which the left controls everything. "Left-wing" is that which agrees with the egalitarianism of our ruling elite; the definition of "right-wing" is then, "not left-wing". Therefore, if you have unorthodox views, you are right-wing by definition - whether you are an anarcho-capitalist, a monarchist, a fascist or a radical centrist, you will be put in the right-wing bucket.

That's what makes it so hard to escape the dichotomy - the very idea of escaping it would be counted as right-wing.

Imagine you had to re-construct your worldview for a teenager solely from sources unlikely to be banned. What would you recommend? by Mr9to5 in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Right. If they can convince people that WWII veterans were Antifa fighting for diversity, that multiculturalism built Europe, and that ancient Britons were actually black, they can convince people of anything - that Jesus advocated for sexual liberation and transgenderism, and that Plato was a real big fan of liberal democracy which is what he revealed in The Republic.

Ann Coulter tweets links to Unz review by casparvoneverec in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Twitter has turned out to be the mainstream social media site with the least censorship, and also the only one not run by a Jew. It's still absolutely terrible on there, don't get me wrong, but they at least have some semblance of enforcing actual rules instead of naked political censorship. (Or maybe it's just that they're incompetent and can't catch people's many sock accounts. Who knows.)

The Cause Behind Black Violence is Impulsivity by Soylent in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The problem with proposing something like this to "close the racial gap" is that what you're doing is essentially no different from affirmative action and there is no end to your program.

If medicating people to prevent violence is a good idea, why not apply it to all men? After all, men are significantly more violent than women. Why not give the weak, steroids, or the ugly, facelifts? And once medical science has been employed to equalize all groups' natural tendencies, we'll find something else to differentiate each other by, and you'll go on trying to dissolve that, too.

The real question is, why do you mind that group differences exist in the first place? If we get people to accept administering different drugs to different groups, we've already got people to accept that groups are different, and that's the big challenge in the first place. White people won't accept being discriminated against in admissions forever, and blacks won't accept being drugged to repress their nature forever. If only they'd accept that groups are different, and they could live with group inequality. Removing the inequality doesn't actually solve the problem.

DHS to label white supremacists as the 'most persistent and lethal threat' to the US: report by AFutureConcern in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It was never about this:

  • Have consistent moral standards based on rules and definitions
  • Investigate reality to see how those standards apply to the world
  • Take the most likely action to see results according to those moral standards and the evidence

It was always about this:

  • Believe firmly in egalitarianism and liberalism
  • Denounce those investigating or describing reality as racist because it contradicts your religious faith
  • Construct a narrative by any means necessary in order to prevent people reaching conclusions that contradict your faith

Why Civic Nationalism is a Fraud by Jacinda in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

A lot of the rhetoric from the far right about civic nationalism is wrong. Just because something isn't eternal doesn't mean it was a failure.

It doesn't, of course, but if you allow something to be destroyed you have failed. One can argue that civic nationalism prior to the collapse has not failed, but not if it is adopted as a purported preventative measure.

The majority of human history is in a sense multicultural states and empires. Even today the world outside the West are not just homogeneous nation states. Do you think Russia is a nation of only Russian slavs? Or Iran is only Persians? Even the Persian ethnic group is one that is a mixture of different races which is why a Persian can have a wide range of phenotypes.

Not multicultural in any sense like we have today. There was no taboo on "racism" for the majority of human history, and so groups could form identities and tribal allegiances. Leftists tend to vastly exaggerate the degree of diversity in historical societies. Travel to any village in medieval Europe and everyone there will look the same.

We could formalize this, of course, with an explicit definition and measurement of multiculturalism. For example, mean distance from grandparents' place of birth. You know what the results would be - the graph would form a hockey stick just like the population graph over time.

Israel is not ethno-nationalist. Jews come from all over the world but there is no conflict between the white or brown Jews.

Israel is exclusive about who they will let live in the country, based on ethnicity. This is something civic nationalists do not support. And I'd double check there is no conflict - it wouldn't surprise me if there were.


I think the main thing about your argument here, though, is that you're missing the point. The point is that race correlates to culture, and so the only way to be a civic nationalist is to accept the reality of race anyway.

For example, you may not care "what people skin color is so long as they agree with our values," but the reality is that skin color is a pretty good proxy for "values" anyway, at least among non-whites, who overwhelmingly vote for the left. All European nationalist movements have a very tiny nonwhite contingent.

The other issue is that nonwhites simply aren't buying civic nationalism whatsoever. They have a racial consciousness of their own (since it is not rendered taboo).

For example, blacks commit more violent crime than whites. This could be true of any racial group in principle, but in our world it's blacks. We're not going to change this without changing the culture you ostensibly wish to preserve, so, it will remain so. But blacks have a strong racial consciousness, and they really care about their higher incarceration rates. So you'll continue to get protests, until your culture is destroyed.

Youtube removed this Mr. Obvious video about Seth Rogen, who is Jewish, saying that "Israel is ridiculous, antiquated, and based on ethnic cleansing" but he's afraid to tell other Jewish people. Did this video violate Youtube's terms? You be the judge. by Chipit in censorship

[–]AFutureConcern 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, it violated YouTube's terms. It's critical of Israel and Jewish power. This means it qualifies as so-called "hate speech" - in fact a particular kind called "antisemitism".

"Hate speech" doesn't have much to do with hate, and has everything to do with protecting certain groups from criticism. You can hate someone or some group all you like on YouTube so long as it's not on the protected list. For example, Jews are a protected group, and so are immigrants. The purpose of these rules is to prevent criticism of Jews and immigration. Not on the protected list are right-wingers. Criticism of the "far-right" (which includes very tame liberal positions) for example is permitted and even encouraged by YouTube.

Refuting a big Cope: Deplatforming is extremely effective and Bitchute is a dead end by casparvoneverec in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I like your optimism. The only thing I'd say is that the enemy propaganda is so much easier to produce as well. So I don't think that gives us an advantage. What it does mean is that people are slaves to propaganda more than they ever were in the past, and I don't think that's an advantage for the pro-natural order right (reality tends to be a redpill).

Meanwhile on reddit, on a sports subreddit: "Anyone who questions Bill Gates is anti-vax" to massive amounts of upvotes (probably astroturfed) by magnora7 in MeanwhileOnReddit

[–]AFutureConcern 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

It's like a pharma company advertising page at this point, honestly. It's probably filled with pharma shilling groups, and I bet some of them are even hired by the Gates Foundation. Would not surprise me one bit.

I'll bet you it's not even secret. Go look for job postings for big pharma - they'll have positions available for "social media analyst" or "online relations manager" or something like that. Of course they have a presence on reddit. It's one of the top websites in the world.

Today on reddit I posted 3 comments on a post on the front page. They were deleted by mods, and to verify my account, I have to send them a picture of my forearm showing my skin color. If my skin is not dark enough, I don't get approved. by magnora7 in MeanwhileOnReddit

[–]AFutureConcern 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

You can force your will like a spoiled petulant child for a while. But only for a while.

Is this true? I fear it may not be. That the powers that be will eventually have full control over the populace.

At the moment we are programmed by telescreens in our pocket beaming propaganda at us, but still our everyday experiences and our brains' natural pattern recognition abilities help to ground us in reality. What happens when they start putting electrodes in our brain? Neuralink is a project by Elon Musk that seeks to do just that. They could adjust our perception in real-time to fit their manufactured narrative.

[Original Research] Jews Account for Over 22% of the Wealth of the Top 100 Billionaires by AFutureConcern in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Would be interesting to pull out all those Chinese billionaires too and then re-calibrate the list. I see folks like Jack Ma on there and wonder how much of that wealth is really "theirs" and how much are they just essentially gangster-sanctioned oligarchs who might disappear or "retire" one day.

It would be interesting, but I think unfair - that power is there, whether in the hands of the CCP or in the hands of Chinese billionaires - and we should not underestimate the power of China on the world stage.

Am I correct in believing the Alt Right's hatred of Africans is based on the behaviors and attitudes of Western Blacks? by ayotollahsinIran in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Every single person here believes that both genes and environment play a role in shaping the intelligence of an individual. When we try to quantify it, we find that genes explain about 80% of the variance in IQ, but if it's lower and our evidence is not good enough, I'd be happy to accept that.

It's the opposing position that's literally insane. Anti-hereditarians literally believe that there is no genetic component to group differences in IQ. Zero. They do accept (begrudgingly) that IQ sort of means something and that it's sort of genetic on an individual level. But they say that the claim that group differences in IQ have any genetic component (even 1%!) is a "racist" claim borne of "ignorance" and "prejudice" that "should not be entertained".

If individual IQ differences are mostly genetic, then group ones are at least likely to be genetic. The methods they use to dissuade people from this obvious assumption are called "applied postmodernism" (lying) where they will "deconstruct" all the words we use to obfuscate the argument; they'll say:

  • Race doesn't exist
  • IQ doesn't measure anything important
  • There are different "intelligences"
  • There is no IQ gap between races
  • If you control for X, Y and Z factor the differences go away
  • Intelligence is a social construct
  • Race is a social construct
  • Intelligence doesn't matter
  • Why do you care?

These are pure derailment tactics and I'm not sure that those proposing these ideas actually believe them. The point is to get us hung up on debating "what is race" so that casual observers don't make the inference that group differences in IQ are genetic (because that would be "racism" (heresy) and therefore intolerable).

Anti-woke leftist looking for a place with less brain-rot. by [deleted] in Introductions

[–]AFutureConcern 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think that people's ultimate motivation is never money. Money is simply a means to an end, and that end is usually driven by religious, spiritual or ideological concerns. Sure there is some element of personal greed (for material goods), but beyond a certain level of wealth the goal is usually (and billionaires will talk about this openly) to "have an impact" and "leave a legacy" on society. For a lot of billionaires the "weird tranny bathroom shit" really is their ideological goal, brought about by a deep-seated faith in total liberalism; a liberation of man from all worldly constraints. For others, it's an indirect, subversive way of destroying the civilization they despise - without a strong foundation of faith & family, Western civilization will eventually collapse - they see this, and wish to hasten the process.

What SHOULD be taught in schools? by Aureus in AskSaidIt

[–]AFutureConcern 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Agreed. Critical thinking, not critical theory.

Does anyone else feel that division between 'Left' and 'right' only serves to further divide us? by Freshly_Squeezed in conspiracy

[–]AFutureConcern 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This seems intuitive to me, but all the polls I've seen show only a small difference in voting preferences between men and women. What is your reasoning here?

It happened guys. r/debatealtright was just banned a minute ago. by eth0 in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They only closed chapo because it was already quarantined, and to give a sense of balance. We all know that they basically only censor right-wing subs, but the normies will read the headline and view it as some bipartisan effort to root out hate instead of the banning of "hate" (meaning anti-egalitarian thought) that it really is.

The grip is tightening, prepare for the worst by Dankmemer420 in WatchRedditDie

[–]AFutureConcern 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Very concerning, very blackpilling, but not entirely unexpected. To be honest I thought the left-wing social revolution was a while out yet, but technology has accelerated it far faster I could have imagined.

At least we have saidit.

Saidit or Ruckus by arainynightinskyrim in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'd make an identical post in both. On ruqqus there's the chance for a post to make it to the front page, not so here since we're excluded. On the other hand there are more users active here.

100's of Examples of Anti-White Racism Being Spread by [deleted] in propaganda

[–]AFutureConcern 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Stranger things have happened. Don't give up hope. I agree that a "boogaloo"-style uprising is far-fetched fantasy, but a popular political movement is not totally unreasonable. Our enemies are very strong but not invincible.

Can someone just simply explain what "pilpul" is? by TheWorldToCome in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Before I read this quote I'd not seen anyone truly express the frustration I feel when arguing with Jews and leftist types. It really captures their tactics perfectly. Perhaps I'll pick up Schopenhauer as well.

Trump Admin to Halt Critical Race Theory Trainings in the Federal Government by AFutureConcern in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Some points in favor and against this news:

For:

  • Critical Race Theory is explicitly anti-white, banning it must be good for us
  • It bans suggesting "that any race or ethnicity is inherently racist or evil"
  • It "divert[s] Federal dollars away from these un-American propaganda training sessions"

Against:

  • It's deeply liberal ("We can be proud that as an employer, the Federal government has employees of all races, ethnicities, and religions.")
  • It panders to minorities ("The President has a proven track record of standing for those whose voice has long been ignored")
  • It's decelerationist (retarding), in that CRT is really so insane that it wakes people up when they learn what it's actually saying
  • It confirms to adherents of CRT that they were right all along and Trump really is a racist white supremacist who is oppressing them (though, they'd say that anyway)

DHS to label white supremacists as the 'most persistent and lethal threat' to the US: report by AFutureConcern in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Devil's advocate counterpoint to the obvious reaction here:

Many people on the right claim that "whites are waking up" and that the left, in becoming overtly anti-white, will provoke a reaction such that "they have no idea what's coming". If that's right, are not the anti-whites in the government correct to label "white supremacy" as the greatest terror threat to their anti-white regime?

What Evidence Exists that Rittenhouse shot into a crowd? by EuropeanAwakening in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I don't go to reddit anymore, but it sounds really bad over there.

Here's the worst part - among centrists who understand that the left are going crazy, they still claim that "both sides spin a narrative" when it's the right who are trying desperately to cling to truth and the left keeps lying over and over. The first egregious case of this happening on reddit was the Covington Catholic kids, where a false narrative of "racist smirking white boys" was the only approved one except for r/the_donald (now banned).

I pretty much take the opposite side of all these cases, because it's usually the safe bet. I don't even want to think about how warped the mind of the average reddit normie is. They think Ahmaud Arbery got shot for no reason, George Floyd dindu nuffin, Michael Brown said "hands up, don't shoot," Trump's a fascist, censorship doesn't happen, racism is everywhere and Kyle Rittenhouse is a cold-blooded killer.

What term best describes your ideology, and why? by VarangianRasputin in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I'm a neoreactionary monarchist. Essentially, I agree with the neoreactionary analysis of power - that we live effectively under a social justice theocracy, and democracy is a complete illusion; it's impossible to give power to the people because power is conserved. Better to have an emperor than a pope with a mass of woke acolytes. I also wholeheartedly agree with the neoreactionary identification of leftism with entropy; leftism is the decay of culture, traditions, institutions and so on over time.

I'd say I'm a parochialist rather than a nationalist, though it's really the same idea at a different scale. I think relations between people are of increasing imporance, from Self > Family > Community > Nation > Race > Species > Life.

I think technology is leading inexorably towards deterritorialization, which is a fancy academic way of saying "GloboHomo". I want to stop this and I think severe restrictions on technology will be needed to do so. Never mind the continued existence of the white race, the human race and even life itself may be subsumed by the technological monster if we don't do something.

I wonder what group of people were responsible for the creation of this monstrosity by Salos10000 in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They are. They are just "fellow black people", if you know what I mean - see one of the founders of BLM and scroll on down to "early life"...

Something important the alt-right needs, a text list of jews in power and influence by marc_gee in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I went through the Forbes rich list for the top 100 billionaires and cataloged how many were Jewish:

https://saidit.net/s/debatealtright/comments/5j98/original_research_jews_account_for_over_22_of_the/

For things like this, the results are reproducible. So the trick is to ask normies a question - "How much of the world's wealth is controlled by Jews?" - with a well-defined way of measuring this fact. They will consistently underestimate the amount. (I myself would not have guessed 22+% given Jews' tiny percentage of the world population).

By getting them engaged in a question, and having them find out the answer, it's much easier to redpill them. Maybe even make them bet $20 on their answer! If a normie has lost $20 on a bet by claiming Jews don't have a lot of power, he's very likely to reconsider his position.

Cognitive Dissonance questions by send_nasty_stuff in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

I will answer from a Critical Theory perspective.


A transwoman goes to a waxing salon owned by a muslim woman who is religiously against sharing intimate space with a man. The transwoman demands to have her penis and balls waxed. The muslim woman refuses. Who is in the wrong? If you were a judge of this case, what would your ruling be?

Which decision helps uphold straight white male hegemony, and which decision hurts it? I think the decision should be to rule against the Muslim woman, but to word the ruling in such a way that emphasizes how wonderful her Islamic faith is, on some technicality. Alternatively, to rule against the trans woman, again on some technicality that he was being insulting towards Islam or something. Whichever decision is made - to blame white supremacy for the situation ever occurring.

If congress was 50% cis-men and 50% trans women (MtF), would you agree that it had a good gender balance?

No. In order to right historical wrongs, there must be disproportionate representation of minoritized groups. Women have 50% here only, but a mix of 10% cis men and 90% trans women (who are just women) would be more equitable.

Today, the City of Berkeley voted to halve the police budget. If you could examine any data from Berkeley in one year's time, what data would you examine to assess if this decision was good or bad?

We have to look at the data. This is very important. Let's take the crime rate - if it goes up as a result of this decision, this shows that we have more work to do in combating the systemic inequalities caused by our white supremacist system - abolishing the police entirely could achieve this. If it goes down, this shows that we have more work to do in combating the violent crime caused by policing in our white supremacist system - abolishing the police entirely could achieve this.

If the criminal justice system in the USA is so racist, why do asians get incarcerated less than whites?

Asians are white-adjacent. This means they gain many of the benefits of white supremacy because they act in a white way according to their own internalized white supremacist nature. They are still oppressed by white supremacy of course, but only by reckoning with their complicity in white supremacy and anti-Blackness can we achieve equity.

BLM says that the disproportionate incarceration and police killings of blacks is evidence of racism. Do you think that the disproportionate incarceration and police killings of men is evidence of sexism? Why or why not?

Racism is all around us, perpetrated by whites at the expense of Blacks. Similarly, patriarchy is all around us, perpetrated by men at the expense of non-men. The disproportionate incarceration and police killings of men is evidence that men are corrupted by patriarchy. It's evidence that men disproportionately commit hateful, violent crime against non-men in our white supremacist patriarchal system.

A women's 100-meter sprint race is held. The three finalists will receive a full-ride scholarship to a prestigious university, worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. All three winners are pre-op transgirls. The 4th, 5th, and 6th place are cis-girls. They complain. Are they being bigoted?

Yes, absolutely they are being bigoted. Their hate is obvious - this is transparent transphobia. But to another point - awarding hundreds of thousands of dollars as the result of a race is extremely problematic. It's potentially the most ableist thing I've ever heard (consumed, sorry ableism).

The NBA is majority black. Do you think this is evidence of racism among coaches? Most software companies are majority white. Do you think this is evidence of racism among tech CEOs? Explain your two answers.

We live in a white supremacist system. Black bodies are used for entertainment by white NBA coaches. This oppression and exploitation of Black bodies is absolutely evidence that we live in this white supremacist system. Black NBA players uphold a white supremacist narrative that Blacks can succeed in society if only they try really hard. Their existence helps uphold white supremacy.

Software companies are mostly white - this means they can perpetuate whiteness and white supremacy through their biased decisions in writing code. In order to make this equitable, we have to hire Black bodies to work in these fields. White hegemony in software must end!

Black people tend to do poorly in standardized tests compared to the national average. BLM says this is because of racism. Why do Asians do better on standardized tests compared to the national average?

Again, Asians are white-adjacent. They benefit from white supremacy. Standardized tests are racist because they perpetuate racial inequity. If a test gives lower results for Blacks, how can anybody defending it be anything but a white supremacist?

BLM often says that the reason that black people commit half the violent crimes in the USA despite being about 13% of the population is because of our history of slavery. However, black people in countries without slavery like Sweden or Japan have similar violent crime rates to US blacks. Why do you think this is?

Slavery is but one symptom of a system of white supremacy. White supremacy oppresses Blacks worldwide - not just in the US. Of course we see Black oppression manifesting itself as the voice of the unheard in countries like Sweden and Japan. Blacks are oppressed according to their truth - we can tell how oppressed they are because of the amount of crime they commit.

The British brutally colonized Ireland, killing millions of Irish- so many that the population still hasn’t recovered to its 1800 level! The Japanese brutally colonized Korea and Taiwan. Today, Ireland, Korea, and Taiwan are successful and wealthy. Why do you think that other former colonies like Congo, Zimbabwe, and Haiti aren’t successful today?

Ireland, Korea and Taiwan are successful and wealthy because they are considered white or white-adjacent, viewed as superior in our white supremacist system. The Congo, Zimbabwe and Haiti are viewed as Black, non-white, "other" and so are oppressed. You can tell they are oppressed because they aren't successful today.


I hope that clears up your questions.

Are the Protocols of the Elders of Zion real? by Pink in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Exactly right.

If a police officer suspects a man is dealing drugs, but can't catch him in the act, he might fabricate some evidence by planting some drugs on his person. Other officers discover that he did this and the guy is not charged.

Later on, turns out the guy really is dealing drugs. Plenty of evidence amasses that he was selling all kinds of narcotics the entire time. When charged, he points to the fabricated evidence from the month before, "But you're just like that other officer! Repeating debunked claims about my drug dealing when the evidence was a proven forgery!" With the profits from his drug empire, he owns the local media, repeats this message on it, and is able to pressure the police into letting him go.

Why I am deeply alarmed by reddit censorship by Jizera in MeanwhileOnReddit

[–]AFutureConcern 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

There are of course ways to encode the information that an automated tool cannot catch, for example

int.to_bytes(544869074015978395690356, 10, 'big').decode()

But the mods & admins will surely be watching. If they see you promoting saidit they may well manually shadowban you.

Anyone got a full list of anti-white companies and celebrities? by Markimus in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

It's better to post companies that aren't anti-white. Companies and sites run by /ourguys/ that we can support. It's not illegal (yet) to start a company that has pro-white messaging, or at least avoids anti-whiteness. So start forming these companies and supporting these companies.

The major hurdle is that larger companies are not allowed to form with any ideology subscribed to by mostly white people, because of anti-discrimination laws. Small businesses are fine, though.

Jim Goad Breaks Down What Black Lives Matter is Really About by Richard_Parker in debatealtright

[–]AFutureConcern 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I totally agree. He's totally right about opinions and facts as well - the separation of ought from is - where, as he points out, the majority of the world carry on as though moral opinions are the same thing as facts. This is a point he makes in a lot of articles, and it bears repeating.