'The Proud Boys are Dangerous - Know Your Fash' - [Thought Slime]

[CmdrKing]

The frustrating part of groups like the Proud Boys is it’s hard to tell what’s a bit, a gag, a knowing performance to entertain and entice people to their side, and what’s stuff they actually believe.

Like, was Reality actually unable to notice the part where I described Stalin as a fascist without using the word, or were they just doing a “All left-wingers are authoritarian Stalin people” bit for funsies? I really don’t know.

[King Green]

Yah know what was funny 30 years ago; the PB's trying to brainwash or at least steal class 3 or 4 weapons and mobile war factories, now its not. I just checked 2 days ago, my friend whose a sergeant in police, was positioned in patrol for an extremely old Vietnam war-stock area in Oregon. I haven't contacted him yet but predicting some of the raid-reports from the literal "political bastards", he's doing fine, probably had to waste a full-months supply of SWAT concussion equipment?

Some PB's just nag like the stereotypical grampa but these nut-fucks, they are straight-edge evil for attempting a raid on an old but currently-in-use war-stock!

[BBally81]

Like, was Reality actually unable to notice the part where I described Stalin as a fascist without using the word, or were they just doing a “All left-wingers are authoritarian Stalin people” bit for funsies? I really don’t know.

It also seems they didn't notice my post where I list some of the "activities" the Proud Boys have done.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

The frustrating part of groups like the Proud Boys is it’s hard to tell what’s a bit, a gag, a knowing performance to entertain and entice people to their side, and what’s stuff they actually believe.

Like, was Reality actually unable to notice the part where I described Stalin as a fascist without using the word, or were they just doing a “All left-wingers are authoritarian Stalin people” bit for funsies? I really don’t know.

I think they took what you said about Stalin and aligned it with their conception of liberalism.

Libertarians tend to proxy more government as inherent authoritarianism and aren't able to comprehend anything so far as progressive principles on a organizationally developing agenda. It's not a matter of social theory it's just a matter of opposition over a construct of public/civil efficiency (who can get the point across by saying less (and not losing by generic debate driven protocol centered to armchair theorizing that they preconceived for the both of you)).

[CmdrKing]

Sure, but the particular features of how the authoritarianism manifests differ immensely in ways libertarians usually pick up, if they’re sincere. Like, liberal authoritarianism just does not care about religion in the way fascistic authoritarianism does.

Which is a long way of saying that usually you can distinguish a libertarian from someone claiming it to disguise right-wing beliefs in places those would be unwelcome.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I don't think that what Reality was saying was advocating for a conformity in self-identification and moral standards. It's the same thing that anti-vaxxers say about government and science; they're not trying to say that science shouldn't be listened to but that the government is using it for an agenda, and otherwise you're allowed to come up with a vaccine for yourself but the government is a different story. Likewise here, they purport any collective agenda of progressivism as a smoke screen to convert power to the private interest of people that have a wrought opinion of apple pie (people they've encountered who are indifferent to their jovial American ways).

So following off the last sentence, it's not a matter I think of making sure people conform to the American way, but only so far as to stop them from trying to make people unAmerican.

[ProfessorDetective]

I don't think that what Reality was saying was advocating for a conformity in self-identification and moral standards. It's the same thing that anti-vaxxers say about government and science; they're not trying to say that science shouldn't be listened to but that the government is using it for an agenda, and otherwise you're allowed to come up with a vaccine for yourself but the government is a different story. Likewise here, they purport any collective agenda of progressivism as a smoke screen to convert power to the private interest of people that have a wrought opinion of apple pie (people they've encountered who are indifferent to their jovial American ways).

So following off the last sentence, it's not a matter I think of making sure people conform to the American way, but only so far as to stop them from trying to make people unAmerican.

With 'unamerican' usually meaning 'not like them'. And since they tend to be toxic, jingoistic, psychos who are genuinely terrified of the not-thems having any kind of power, which would OBVIOUSLY lead to segregation/reservations/deportations/forced conversions/forced transitions/forced abortions/exterminations... but for THEM...

How do you respond to that kind of person without just backing away slowly and hoping they don't follow?

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I don't think that what Reality was saying was advocating for a conformity in self-identification and moral standards. It's the same thing that anti-vaxxers say about government and science; they're not trying to say that science shouldn't be listened to but that the government is using it for an agenda, and otherwise you're allowed to come up with a vaccine for yourself but the government is a different story. Likewise here, they purport any collective agenda of progressivism as a smoke screen to convert power to the private interest of people that have a wrought opinion of apple pie (people they've encountered who are indifferent to their jovial American ways).

So following off the last sentence, it's not a matter I think of making sure people conform to the American way, but only so far as to stop them from trying to make people unAmerican.

With 'unamerican' usually meaning 'not like them'. And since they tend to be toxic, jingoistic, psychos who are genuinely terrified of the not-thems having any kind of power, which would OBVIOUSLY lead to segregation/reservations/deportations/forced conversions/forced transitions/forced abortions/exterminations... but for THEM...

How do you respond to that kind of person without just backing away slowly and hoping they don't follow?

I'd say that's a bit reversed in thinking, in that the people that tend to be that combinational set of toxic, jingoistic, psychos tend to fall into the variety.

But aside from overt calls to racism in their policy, the Christianic libertarian sandbox I'm gathering is consistent with the likes of the KKK's brand of christianic politiking.

[McAvoy]

I wouldn't pay attention to what Reality says or doesn't pay attention to. He isn't here to argue in good faith. His whole mission here is to troll us. He may very well be a representative of the radical right like Proud Boys though for all we know. His line of trolling isn't that far off from what we have seen of them.

[CmdrKing]

Mmm, moreso I think it’s worth digging into because separating what’s done as part of the performance to attract new people and what’s the sincere (for lack of better word) ideology they hope to nudge people towards is useful in blunting their efforts, and it’s frustrating to not have a better sense of which is which.