communities.win/c/DebateAltRight is now established

SamiAlHayid · 2022-04-06T14:16:15+00:00

Not an active one, but only one created on 18/02/2022:

https://communities.win/c/CringeAnarchy/

SamiAlHayid · 2021-08-30T05:36:14+00:00

I think I can follow this, though I haven't looked at a SQL database in years and will have to look at and re-use most of what I did in the past when I do some web design stuff in future.

If I had the time, I was thinking of drawing UML diagrams to figure out how I'd attempt such a task myself. But, for starters, I cannot even find a non-commercial program that does this.

Institutions, Individuals and Lists definitely seem like they should be separate tables within the database.

I think what you mean by 'field' is what I know as 'column'. Yes, each individual, institution and list would be one row. The first column would be a primary key (int), and then the rest of the columns would mostly be varchar. Of course, varchar seems like the lazy option and is more 'abusable'. It might, for example, make sense to make birth date/death date three ints ('day' would have a drop down box from 1-31, 'month' would have a drop down box from 1-12, 'year' would have a drop down box, rather than one varchar, since it lowers the chance of incorrect entries). No one can add an obviously unwanted/incorrect date like '99 99 9999' into the database that way.

I think the 'linking' tables sounds correct, because entries like 'Funder', 'Father', etc. would often be blank if they were to be added to the main Individuals table. So I think there would be a lot of NULL entries and it would also clutter the page for the addition of these to the database with various text boxes, etc. that will in most cases be unused. For example, if one was to add 'Noel Ignatiev', whoever his father was is likely of no consequence, will have no AltBase article, and may not even be public knowledge. Therefore, one would leave it empty and the database would have plenty of these empty cells in there. And this is probably the case for the vast majority of individuals. The linkages really need to be on a separate table, and the linkages added separately to the individuals themselves. Then, the database will not have as many empty cells in there.

I don't have any remarks on the rest, but it sounds to me like you are on the right track.

SamiAlHayid · 2021-07-17T09:48:33+00:00

They won't be shattered any time soon. Race denialism is growing even among Western geneticists (last study I read, only something like 52% accepted race as a legitimate category). Meanwhile, another study of their Chinese counterparts showed that practically all of them are believers. Even in Poland the overwhelming majority are as well.

However, Western 'science' has long been subordinate to left-liberal ideology. A lot of Eysenck's (despite him being literally a Jew) and Rushton's work is getting purged from journals, much to the acclaim of Western pseudo-intellectuals. We've seen how people like Carl and Kierkegaard—who in a normal society, would be the next generation taking our understanding of race/IQ/genes forward—are being treated. You can forget about getting funding for race/IQ/genetic research.

Chinese leftism, while entailing abortion, feminism, etc. hasn't entailed race denialism. Thus, I think the only hope for this important research is if China or Eastern Europe really takes this forward from where the West left it. Humans need some kind of breakthrough in order to end the racial egalitarian fantasy that is simply leading to dysgenics, lowering IQ's, etc. The egalitarians know the fantasy might be blown apart, as well, which is why they are constantly fearmongering about what they have termed 'scientific neoracism'. They're literally worried that science could lead to 'muh Holocaust' all over again.

SamiAlHayid · 2021-07-17T04:58:18+00:00

Sounds great. Yeah, I think there needs to be a distinction at the very least between individual and collectivity. For example, the former has a birth date whereas the latter has a foundation date. I don't think one is reducible to the other. Because concepts, ideas, theories, etc. can only come from individuals and/or collectivities (this does raise a question about concepts, ideas and theories whose founders are unknown, but most of these long predate modernity and are unlikely to warrant pages) they seem to me to be reducible to those two page types (e.g. 'Freudian-Marxism' would best be a section of 'Frankfurt School' and not as a section of 'Karl Marx', 'Sigmund Freud', 'Theodor Adorno', etc., though those pages would have links to 'Frankfurt School'; ideally, going right down to the 'Freudian-Marxism' section without having to manually scroll).

There then at very least needs to be a distinction between lists and the other two. For example, a hypothetical page about 'Antifa' really needs to be a list of organizations pages, e.g. 'Rose Bay Antifa', 'Portland Antifa', and probably has no content other than those hyperlinks.

This would help at the very least to reduce pages that:

Have too much data on the page because they are trying to address too wide a scope. For example, if I want to read 'Rose Bay Antifa' but it is a section on a bloated 'Antifa chapters' page, I would have to load the 'Portland Antifa' content as well.
Force people to scroll more than otherwise. I also do not want to scroll past the 'Portland Antifa' content if I only want to read 'Rose Bay Antifa'.

Hopefully it will take the shape of a large number of specific pages rather than a lesser number of more general pages.

Events might be a tough one, though, because I don't think they are reducible to these three categories. Furthermore, many events are happening which are totally unreported on. And I'm sure someone will want the functionality to document, for example, Antifa or BLM protests that occurred on a particular date, and indeed these are practically all unreported on and therefore 'hidden' from the public, even though they are on video (e.g. riotarchive.com, YouTube channels like 'Adapt Ahead') and so facts can be gathered on them. However, multiple organizations are involved and it would lead to a large amount of content duplication if the event information was copied onto the pages of all organizations known to be involved.

SamiAlHayid · 2021-07-16T12:04:23+00:00

Any progress made on 'individuals and institutions' yet?

Hopefully you can include the following features:

Ability to hyperlink text. For example, if I write something such as:

It is debatable as to whether the concept of Gemeinschaft significantly shaped the social thought of German sociologist Max Weber.

Hopefully I can turn 'Max Weber' and 'Gemeinschaft' into a link to a 'Max Weber' individuals page and a 'Ferdinand Tonnies' individuals page, respectively.

Here, 'Max Weber' would lead to 'Max Weber'. 'Gemeinschaft' would lead to 'Ferdinand Tonnies'.

Link to a particular part of an individuals page:

If I click on 'Gemeinschaft', not only should it go to the 'Ferdinand Tonnies' page, but to the 'Gemeinschaft' section of the 'Ferdinand Tonnies' page, so that the reader does not have to scroll all the way down to that section.

Categories page:

If I click on 'German sociologist', a page with every entry under the 'German sociologist' tag appears, with links to their respective pages. 'Max Weber' and 'Ferdinand Tonnies' would both have such tags and therefore links to their individual pages would be printed on this screen.

In conclusion, 'Max Weber' would lead to 'Max Weber' (individual), 'Gemeinschaft' would lead to a 'Gemeinschaft' section on 'Ferdinand Tonnies' (individual), 'German sociologist' would lead to 'German sociologists' (category).

SamiAlHayid · 2021-07-16T10:14:27+00:00

Someone still using Ruqqus needs to comment on one of CertifiedRabbi's Ruqqus posts to remind him to revisit here. Anyone know what happened to 'AFutureConcern' and 'WaltzRoommate'?

Probably the best way to start is to make a 'best threads' thread where everyone can submit their favourite thread links (links to this sub or to related subs only). We can then use this to consider the various questions commonly asked, topics commonly discussed, and positions commonly held, and work out what's worth including and what doesn't really matter. Some of my favourites:

France: https://saidit.net/s/debatealtright/comments/6q0t/what_is_the_nationalist_movement_like_in_france/

https://saidit.net/s/debatealtright/comments/6wb4/france_prominent_academics_and_macron/

https://saidit.net/s/debatealtright/comments/7el5/the_french_state_in_the_process_of_dissolving/

Nietzsche: https://saidit.net/s/debatealtright/comments/6pkh/nietzscheanism_is_right_wing_christianity/

China: https://saidit.net/s/debatealtright/comments/6x9p/the_nazi_inspiring_chinas_communists/

Duginism: https://saidit.net/s/debatealtright/comments/79wy/alexander_dugins_thoughts_on_the_west_europe_and/

From these threads one could ask at least two questions:

What are the general positions held on Dugin, 'Duginism' and NazBol?
Is France one of the most likely to be saved (e.g. Ethnocrat), or one of the least likely to be saved (e.g. Paul Gottfried, MartinezPerspective)?

Some arguments in favour: Size/popularity of RN compared to similar parties elsewhere, birthplace of much of the DR's predecessors (e.g. Benoist, Faye), current popularity of one of the only 'based' J's ever, Zemmour.

Some arguments against: Compare their sports team even against that even of Sweden, recent banning of GI.

SamiAlHayid