SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Editor's summary: BuzzFeed, a media outlet and Pulitzer Prize finalist, obtained leaked emails from Breitbart News, some of which were published in Buzzfeed's roughly 9,000-word exposé of the site's inner workings. The article chronicles the rise of Milo Yiannopoulos, Breitbart's tech editor, and his relationship with Steve Bannon, the recent White House Chief Strategist who left the Trump administration and resumed his position as executive chairman of Breitbart News in August. It also details exchanges between Yiannopoulos and people such as Peter Thiel, Devin Saucier, and Curtis Yarvin, among others. The article shows how Breitbart "smuggled white nationalist ideas into the mainstream" by using Yiannopoulos as a go-between for white nationalists and others in his following, who provided him with story tips and constructive (?) criticism.
Vice Media has fired Mitchell Sunderland, an editor and writer for Broadly, Vice's women-focused site. Sunderland emailed Yiannopoulos and encouraged him to mock the feminist writer Lindy West. He also sent a Broadly video about the Satanic Temple and abortion rights to Tim Gionet, Yiannopoulos's tour manager, resulting in this story. Dan Lyons, a writer for the TV series Silicon Valley and author of Disrupted: My Misadventure in the Start-Up Bubble, and David Auerbach, a former technology writer for Slate, also passed along news tips to Breitbart. Auerbach has vociferously denied writing the emails.
Milo Yiannopoulos responded on Thursday, mainly taking issue with a video of him singing karaoke while Richard Spencer and others raised Nazi salutes. Yiannopoulos wrote, "I have said in the past that I find humor in breaking taboos and laughing at things that people tell me are forbidden to joke about. Everyone who knows me has seen me make jokes about some awful things. But everyone who knows me also knows I'm not a racist. As someone of Jewish ancestry, I of course condemn racism in the strongest possible terms. I have stopped making jokes on these matters because I do not want any confusion on this subject. I disavow Richard Spencer and his entire sorry band of idiots. I have been and am a steadfast supporter of Jews and Israel. I disavow white nationalism and I disavow racism and I always have. I have severe myopia, due to a congenital eye defect, as has been widely reported and as many people know or have seen from my squinting during public speeches. In a dark bar, I did not see these hand gestures. If I'd have realized white nationalist losers were hailing me as their leader, I'd have immediately walked off stage. I stand for, as always, race-blind nationalism. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm enjoying my honeymoon with my black husband."
Broadening Brush: Alt-White, Buzzfeed Exposé!
BuzzFeed has published documentation of the direct connection of Breitbart News, the alt-right movement, and Milo Yiannopoulos to white supremacists and neo-Nazi groups:
In August, after a white nationalist rally in Charlottesville ended in murder, Steve Bannon insisted that "there's no room in American society" for neo-Nazis, neo-Confederates, and the KKK.
But an explosive cache of documents obtained by BuzzFeed News proves that there was plenty of room for those voices on his website.
During the 2016 presidential campaign, under Bannon's leadership, Breitbart courted the alt-right — the insurgent, racist right-wing movement that helped sweep Donald Trump to power. The former White House chief strategist famously remarked that he wanted Breitbart to be "the platform for the alt-right."
The article is extensive, quoting from emails from the Breitbart organization itself.
In March, Breitbart editor Alex Marlow insisted "we're not a hate site." Breitbart's media relations staff repeatedly threatened to sue outlets that described Yiannopoulos as racist. And after the violent white supremacist protest in Charlottesville, Virginia, in August, Breitbart published an article explaining that when Bannon said the site welcomed the alt-right, he was merely referring to "computer gamers and blue-collar voters who hated the GOP brand."
These new emails and documents, however, clearly show that Breitbart does more than tolerate the most hate-filled, racist voices of the alt-right. It thrives on them, fueling and being fueled by some of the most toxic beliefs on the political spectrum — and clearing the way for them to enter the American mainstream.
Sometimes, it is good to know who you are lying down with, so you will know why you have fleas. And sometimes, journalists ought to "follow the money." I highly recommend reading the article, "Here's How Breitbart And Milo Smuggled Nazi and White Nationalist Ideas Into The Mainstream".
Liberal collusion with Alt-right! Shocking!
Now the Salon is getting into the fray, reporting on BuzzFeed's dump of Breitbart emails and pointing out that many liberal journalists are implicated.
A recently released cache of email correspondence revealed direct collaboration between popular alt-right website Breitbart and purported white nationalists and neo-Nazis. While the revelations are damning, they are not entirely surprising to those who follow Breitbart's editorial strategies. More shocking, perhaps, is that a number of purportedly liberal journalists have also secretly colluded with Breitbart over the years.
Again, this is a lengthy article, well worth the read, that goes into detail on the relations of Breitbart News to other journalistic entities, and political extremists. One example:
The surprising journalistic connections to Yiannopoulos include David Auerbach, a tech critic who has contributed extensively to Slate and has been published in intellectual left magazines like n+1, Triple Canopy, and even the Nation, one of the most esteemed voices of the American left. Auerbach once wrote a longform piece of cultural criticism for Triple Canopy exploring how the politics of anonymous online forum culture (A-Culture, in his parlance) eventually evolved into the fusion of libertarianism and racist nationalism that we now associate with sites like 4chan, 8chan and Reddit in its prelapsarian days.
Though anonymity does not play directly into the majority of the discussions on forums associated with A-culture, it is responsible—along with the written nature of the discourse—for the characteristics that have emerged from those sites. . . . Anyone entering into an A-culture forum is likely to witness a nonstop barrage of obscenity, abuse, hostility, and epithets related to race, gender, and sexuality. Anyone objecting to this barrage will immediately attract a torrent of even greater abuse. These forums maintain an equilibrium of offense designed to drive away anyone who is not sympathetic to the general libertarian mindset.
But it does seem that Buzzfeed has stirred up a hornet's nest of buzzing, the type of thing that may even attract buzzards.
Shortly thereafter, Auerbach tweeted that he had "told [Buzzfeed editor Ariel Kaminer] that this stuff was untrue. He's currently trying to put words in my mouth." Auerbach went on to speculate that "Buzzfeed might have it in for me because I criticized Buzzfeed chair Keith Lerer for hiring 4chan's founder." "I also criticized Buzzfeed's business model in NYMag," he added. "So yeah, they're probably pissed at me."
More about sexism and male privilege than racism. Or more of a cat-fight among journalists and whatever those who work for Breitbart are. As Alice said, "Curiouser and curiouser."
(Score: 1, Insightful) by crafoo on Sunday October 08 2017, @07:44PM (117 children)
Ah I see, so paint something with the "alt-right" paint and now we don't have to talk about the ideas or issues they publish. We just know they are bad.
I think we are seeing the effects of a enforced narrative in the majority of "mainstream media" outlets. The story is not to be deviated from. But still, there are a few free-thinking journalists who question the party line. What are they to do? Maybe send an email to own of those "alternative right" media outlets.
Hahahah the facade is cracking.
(Score: 2) by turgid on Sunday October 08 2017, @07:45PM
Yes, I'll have a doughnut and stick with church-based social activities in future. Thanks for your concern.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 5, Informative) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Sunday October 08 2017, @07:58PM (71 children)
That's pretty desperate, crafoo. Let's face it, if I were to paint Breitbart with "alt-right paint", it would be exactly the same damned colour when I finished as it was when I started.
Not saying that Breitbart represents the views of everyone to the right of me, or even of everyone who reads it, but trying to create distance between Breitbart and the Alt-Right is like trying to create distance between disco and mirrorballs.
(Score: 1, Troll) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday October 08 2017, @08:11PM (60 children)
If you think the alt-right are white supremacists and Breitbart are alt-right, you've never met an actual racist white man in your entire life. On the scale of MLK to Hitler, they don't even rank a respectable Al Sharpton.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 5, Informative) by pe1rxq on Sunday October 08 2017, @08:24PM (53 children)
So some are assholes and some are morons......
It might matter to you but I don't like either and I really don't care which of the two you belong to.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday October 08 2017, @08:40PM (35 children)
It matters to me because I dislike constant Godwin-ing. Save the cries of "white supremacist" or indeed any form of "racist" for when they're actually true. Hyperbole in this context serves nobody's interest except that of the hate merchants.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 5, Informative) by aristarchus on Sunday October 08 2017, @09:32PM (32 children)
It's NOT Godwinning when we are talking about actual Nazis, even if they are only "Neo", and even if they are only sympathizers.
Can you give us any indications that these cries are not actually true in this case? MY Gawd, man, even Eth got the memo and managed a post in this thread with no mention of the Jews! Again, the point of the entire article (Buzzfeed one) is that the ties to racist white supremacists are actual, with names named, positions delineated, and emails quoted.
Do you know what would really help the real merchants of hate, Oh Micturating Brazziere? For their racist white supremacist views to be accepted as a "different point of view" or a "reasonable political position". It is cuck operators like yourself and Milo that are attempting to do exactly this. For the rest of us, these people are evil, crazy, deranged, and if you feel compelled to defend them? In the interests of free speech? By trying to deep-six any discussion of this on SoylentNews? No, calling out Nazis as Nazis is not Godwinning, as Godwin himself has said.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday October 08 2017, @10:30PM (1 child)
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 08 2017, @10:42PM
Observe! The "Bubble"! Khallow quotes him self! He cannot be wrong! We are like the buzzing of flies to him! Or the buzzing of B-29's. Poor Nazis.
(Score: 3, Informative) by KiloByte on Sunday October 08 2017, @11:08PM (6 children)
Yeah, those who discriminate based on skin color and whether your genitals are mutilated or not. Like, say, Zuckerberg (who sounds like a likely candidate for 2020). Also spewing praise for a vile ideology whose adherents tend to literally (in the real rather than popular sense of the word) put "death to Jews" on their flags.
Yeah, we're indeed talking about actual Nazis here.
Ceterum censeo systemd esse delendam.
(Score: 1, Troll) by aristarchus on Monday October 09 2017, @02:40AM (5 children)
I have no idea what you are trying to say, (((KiloByte))). What is the "popular sense" of "death to Jews"? Not a Nazi, are we, now?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by KiloByte on Monday October 09 2017, @03:36AM (4 children)
Uhm, have you tried reading what I wrote? The comment you cut of of context was inserted after "literally", a word which millenials just love to use contrary to its real meaning.
In this particular case, I used the word "literally" as this group, whose US Dem leaders often voice support of, instead of just vaguely racist statements write "death to Jews" on their very flags, put this into constitutions, etc. Heck, they even try to replace the Declaration of Human Rights with their own version [wikipedia.org] — count the number of times their document condemns Jews!
I don't get why you accuse me of being a Jew (that's what putting one's name in ((( ))) means these days, right?). I'm not one, nor do I have any Jews in my ancestry I'm aware of. I'm a mere Polack, and that's a nationality that has only a small fraction of contributions to science/etc that Jews have. But neither am I a Nazi, SJW, Alt-Righter, BLM terrorist, or a member of any other hate group.
I merely consider that, while discriminating against people based on their ethnicity is evil, some ideologies do deserve being called out as vile. You don't get to pick your race, you do get to pick your religion (and I consider Communism or Nazism to be religions).
Ceterum censeo systemd esse delendam.
(Score: 3, Troll) by aristarchus on Monday October 09 2017, @04:23AM (3 children)
Thank you for your response. It "literally" clarifies nothing, in the literal sense of "literal". What is the "popular" sense of "death to Jews"? Are you suggesting that American conservative anti-Semites are not "literal" when they say things like, "Jews will not replace us!"? Or are you saying that only Arab anti-Semitism . . . um, you do realize that Arabs are Semites? So the Arabs would have to hate themselves? I am starting to think you are as confused as TMB on these issues. Literally.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Arik on Monday October 09 2017, @05:00AM
"What is the "popular" sense of "death to Jews"?"
That, or rather a similar phrase which I shan't repeat, is used 'in a popular sense' by some young people in a back-handed, humorous way. I rather dislike it myself, obviously, but I can still grasp the difference in intent and meaning. When it's used in this sense the meaning seems to be very much like when people of my generation would (with as straight a face as we could manage) claim to 'eat babies' as if we were 'huns' out of some world war agitprop.
There's an instinct to defiance that guarantees political correctness always provokes political incorrectness. And one common form of political incorrectness is to outwardly claim the very most politically incorrect title or aim you can think of, even (nay especially) if it can only be done in jest. This also helps form the in-group out-group boundary, and to police it. Other members of the group play along with the joke, again with faces as straight as can be managed (and these days so much interaction is digital making this part less of a limitation,) and out-group members, normies if you will, simply do not get the joke. Since they don't get the joke, they're easy to spot. Then they become the joke.
"Are you suggesting that American conservative anti-Semites are not "literal" when they say things like, "Jews will not replace us!"?"
If you could cite me a specific person that you're purporting to say that, and the context in which it was said, then we might be able to deduce what was actually meant.
Nah, I know, it's easier just to call everyone that you don't like a bad name, one that justifies punching them instead of talking.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 10 2017, @04:13AM (1 child)
Aristarchus normally I like your posts but in this you make yourself look very foolish. The phrase with the parenthetical clearly meant "they are literally (in the true sense of literally) putting 'death to jews ' on their flags." It's fine to nitpick but this is an informal conversation, not an array bounds check, and you make yourself seem /intentionally/ stupid by writing as you did.
Note well the /intentionally/ as no reasonable person would make the 'mistake' you did.
Which means you're not contributing to the conversation, you're just trolling.
I know you're better than that. I normally look forward to your contributions. Either someone's hacked your account to post making you look bad, or maybe you have beef with the other poster and are trying to troll? Regardless, you hurt our community, and impugn your own reputation.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Tuesday October 10 2017, @04:57AM
As serious criticism deserves a serious response. Yes, of course I "got" what KiloByte was trying to say. But as with the Masturbatory Buzzard, this is exactly the problem. "Death to Jews" does not literally mean "death to Jews", it just "popularly" means that? There is a reason that the interesting part of the Buzzfeed article is the attempt to get the Nazis, and Milo, by the way, to stop with the anti-semitic stuff. My point is that by normalizing this sort of "edgy" (as Arik puts it) young white guy posturing, we are in fact normalizing Nazism, and not just some Prep-school, Prince-Harry-for-a-gag, type Nazism, but opening the door for the real thing.
Now if you want to contrast that with Arab resentment over European imperialists and Zionists forcibly taking over the Levant and creating the state of Israel, well, that is another matter, and one only tangentially related to the issue at hand because of the alt-right simultaneous support of Nazis and Israel. And, of course, pedophilia. And you fear that I am damaging the reputation of SoylentNews? Pssshaw! My long experience in the world has shown me that you do not even let people play around with this sort of stuff. It has consequences, absolutely evil consequences.
(Score: 2, Troll) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday October 08 2017, @11:49PM (1 child)
I think we need to have us a class on what constitutes guilt and what does not. When's good for you?
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Monday October 09 2017, @05:33AM
Late to class, as usual? Anybody? Bueller?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Arik on Monday October 09 2017, @03:25AM (20 children)
My mind boggles, you never struck me as particularly gullible.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Monday October 09 2017, @04:29AM (18 children)
So, kind of like being a Black Republican [wikipedia.org], say, like Ben Carson, or Herman Cain, or Alan Keyes [wikipedia.org]? As for Milo, hey, it's a living, and he does seem to enjoy the limelight. In lieu of actual talent, this is probably the best gig he could get, even if it ends up with him in a camp somewhere. Camp! Ha! Get it?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Arik on Monday October 09 2017, @04:35AM (17 children)
Very much alike in the aspect under discussion at the moment, yes; as Ben Carson, Herman Cain, and Alan Keyes are also people who are clearly not nazis.
The regressive left seems to have become such an echo chamber that you've redefined 'nazi' to mean anyone that disagrees with you, on virtually anything, and I'm far from the first person to notice this.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 5, Informative) by aristarchus on Monday October 09 2017, @05:58AM (15 children)
Arik, you are usually not this dense, although always proportional-font challenged. There is this thing called "analogy", and in this case I was suggesting that a genetic jew/faggot supporting Nazis, is analogous to modern-day Black Republicans, who are members of a party that actively works against their interests as a minority, while benefiting them personally.
As for the "all right-wingers are Nazis", well, no. But you see, if you do not keep watch on them, or feed them after midnight, they have strong tendencies to become such. Thus it is important to see that Breitbart, and some very rich fascists in America, are trying to normalize what is just beyond the pale. Any American that advocates discrimination, even an "equal" discrimination, on the basis of race needs to be expelled. Outcast. Exiled. And all the more so those who profit off of "reverse discrimination" by being the token Blacks in the Republican party, or Milo's, um, buddy.
And you equally appear to be unaware of the actuality of Nazis in America? Did you not see any news reports of the "Untie the Right" rally in Charlottesville? I submitted a plethora of posts on this topic. Unfortunately, almost all were rejected, for some (nazi) reason, or TMB objected strenuously. But here is a link to an article and video that will show, and tell, you who was saying "Jews will not replace us. [theguardian.com]
Actual Nazis, Arik! Self-identified! And so it is not just a matter of who I disagree with. And, they just did it again, yesterday [nytimes.com].
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/The_Big_Lebowski [wikiquote.org]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday October 09 2017, @07:08AM (2 children)
So... do you have a reason for this "suggestion"?
The unintended consequences of such a stance are delicious. My view is that that would be an incredibly stupid idea. You might even figure out why when you get expelled in turn.
So what? The best you could do was link to a protest with "hundreds" of protesters. This is quite the molehill. There have been real Nazis in the US for around 80 years. They've been a massive joke ever since the end of the Second World War.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday October 09 2017, @07:55AM (1 child)
Now, that expelling is what I would call a feature, not a bug.
But that's just me; I have a strong distaste living in a dog-eat-dog society when there are quite a large number of places in this world were one can "live and let live".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday October 09 2017, @02:17PM
I favor those sorts of places as well. Expelling people because they don't have the approved attitude is most definitely not live and let live.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Arik on Monday October 09 2017, @07:10AM (9 children)
I am afraid it is not I who is being dense here. I understood precisely what you were saying. This is the, I don't know what to call it, arrogance? There's arrogance involved but that's not the right word. Tribalism? There's a lot of that involved.
Let me snip it out a little tighter.
"modern-day Black Republicans, who are members of a party that actively works against their interests"
*IN YOUR OPINION.*
In your opinion, they have made the wrong political choice, they have chosen against what YOU SAY they should believe is their own interest.
They disagree. And you show absolutely no respect whatsoever for their right to disagree with you. For their right to come to their own conclusion on the matter, at least should it disagree with your own! as to what their interests are, as a minority or as anything else?
How patronizing can you be? How can you deny them agency on the basis of their skin color and not realize that you're the racist?
"As for the "all right-wingers are Nazis", well, no. But you see, if you do not keep watch on them, or feed them after midnight, they have strong tendencies to become such."
There you go, the sjw credo in a nutshell. Anyone that disagrees with the slogans we learned from the washed up old lunatics the university assigned us for daycare is not *necessarily* a nazi - but they're probably at least a sympathizer and they definitely don't deserve civil rights like us good people do.
"Any American that advocates discrimination, even an "equal" discrimination, on the basis of race needs to be expelled. Outcast. Exiled."
I can tell you very precisely where you crossed the line. "Expelled." Expelling people because they have the wrong opinion is just as unamerican as advocating discrimination. In fact, it *is* advocating discrimination.
This is the language of authoritarianism. Whether the left or the right, the psychological disorder is very similar. This is the language of hygiene. The very same language Hitler used - first against literal vermin, enforcing strict food safety laws, forcing disinfection of insect-infested links in the food chain with zyklon b. Then it was euthanasia - not legalizing it, no - they made it mandatory. Again, it was about hygiene, removing the cell that was too damaged, that could never be made whole again, so that the resources could be better used for the good of the whole organism, the nation. And then it came to the jews and the fags and the roma and whole classes of people, and again that zyklon b was used. And again, this was justified, this was rationalized, in the language of hygiene. It was removing cancer, it was cleansing the larger body.
It comes from a mindset, a mindset that occurs more often when there's great danger of contagious disease. In such a time, it has survival value, and I presume you retain the first day of biology 101. That mindset wants to contain the uncontaminated in a safe space, and it wants to keep the other, anything or anyone that is potentially contaminated, on the other side of the wall, or under surveillance and curfew, it's obsessed with cleanliness, in both literal and figurative meanings of the word.
In terms of brain chemistry, I suspect there is essentially no difference between todays SJW yelling 'nazi!' and a real historic nazi yelling 'juden!'
"And you equally appear to be unaware of the actuality of Nazis in America?"
I suspect I'm much more aware, and accurately informed, of them than you to be frank.
I never said there aren't some people on the right with some fscking insanely wrong ideas btw. Quite the contrary.
But the intolerant and regressive elements on the left that fancy themselves the answer to this problem are once again only fanning the flames, just as their spiritual forbears did in the 30s!
You want to see the equivalent of nazis take over this country? Give them what they need. Push the language of hygiene and intolerance. Push hard on the fracture lines in society, encourage one class to overturn another. Organize, take direct action, wear masks and destroy property a bit now and then.
Tell yourself you're taking effective action against those horrible people, you're doing some good, standing up to the bullies, right? But what you're actually doing is making them look good. Playing right into their hands. People get sick of that kind of crap, and they want a strong man to put his foot down and make it stop, and the next thing you know some wacky little group of nuts that never mattered to anyone before you started punching them... holy $&!^ they won the election! How did that happen?
How indeed.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2, Funny) by aristarchus on Monday October 09 2017, @07:21AM (3 children)
So, you are not a Nazi?
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Arik on Monday October 09 2017, @08:29AM
I'll give you something to be disgusted by though. I've shaken hands with nazis! IN PLURAL! HELL I PARTIED WITH THEM MULTIPLE TIMES!
Well, at least they wanted to call themselves nazis. They weren't German, and none of them was even alive when there were nazis, but you know what I mean. Stupid white kids that thought it was edgy. With my childhood, I didn't have much of a choice in the matter, so there's my excuse. There was the stage where they'd surround me so no one could see then knock me down and kick me back and forth while chanting anti-semite shit. I beat them. I moved. I found a new bunch of em and I found a new way to beat them. At the height of my involvement with them, in college, I used to have parties at my house that were positively infamous for all the racist skinheads that showed up.
But it's not quite like that sounds, I have to give you that, even as I try to shock you. My house was open to everyone. It was probably the only place those stupid white kids trying to be edgy could come and sit down with a black guy and a jew and an arab and at least two east-asians and everyone have a beer and shoot the shit like we're all people. And I could do that because even when I had to fight these guys I still treated them with respect. I still treated them as human. So in the end they could trust me.
I suspect history will bear me out in thinking that's a more productive path than 'punch a nazi.'
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday October 09 2017, @02:53PM (1 child)
And you call yourself a philosopher. Why can't you troll [soylentnews.org] better?
(Score: 3, Funny) by aristarchus on Monday October 09 2017, @04:17PM
Are you suggesting that Arik is a Nazi?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by FatPhil on Monday October 09 2017, @02:30PM (4 children)
> Let me snip it out a little tighter.
> "modern-day Black Republicans, who are members of a party that actively works against their interests"
No. You may not. You have snipped not just in the middle of a sentence, but *in the middle of a noun phrase*. That's just off. "Their interests" is different from "their interests as a minority", you've not just destroyed the context, you've destroyed the meaning, of the quote. And given that ari was specifically focussing on the different types of interests these people might have, that's nothing but straw-man-creating butchery.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 1) by Arik on Monday October 09 2017, @07:35PM (3 children)
I don't think I did that at all, I actually considered it both ways, but you're right that they are different things. And this is another example of how you load the language up to create conflict, to make it inevitable. By insisting on their interests *as a minority* what you're doing is insisting that they must adopt the same tribalistic sort of identity politics you do. They have no obligation to do so! They are fully functioning, fully capable human beings who have the right to make up their own mind, and insisting as you do here that their skin color must define who they are and what their real interests are is just as racist as any of the "alt-right" chatter. At least those guys are mostly just trying to be funny. I don't get the impression you're trying to be funny.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 10 2017, @04:23AM (1 child)
Ugh. No. "Being funny" makes the uncomfortable more palatable. If a neonazi makes comedically-ept racist statements, and people laugh out of uncomfortableness or humour or both, but don't reject it, then racism has been normalized.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday October 10 2017, @11:21AM
There's a big difference between a joke and actual racism. There's also currently only one race in the US that is universally unable to laugh at itself.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday October 10 2017, @01:23PM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by Arik on Monday October 09 2017, @09:28AM (1 child)
Fine, I saw yours, and scenes to shock the eyes ears and brain.
Now you see mine: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7gKGq_MYpU
Go ahead, it won't hurt. More than you can bear.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Monday October 09 2017, @08:23PM
Hey! Is this where the khallow is getting all his UBI concern from? Cuckroach radio, just like in Rwanda?
(Score: 2, Informative) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday October 09 2017, @05:02PM
Way to miss the point, Arik.
Look, black folks in the US have a long history of voting against their best interest, and believing against it too. Any black person who is a Christian or a Muslim, for example, has a reeeeeeeeeeeal short historical memory. Clarence Thomas and Ben Carson seem to think that by adopting the beliefs and (lack of) values of their historical oppressors they can become members of "the club." And in a way they did, but the cost of entry was not only their souls but their pride.
Wanna know what "acting white" really is? It's not academic success in school. It's these traitors toadying up to the kyriarchy. THAT is race treason, not studying for good grades, because fucks like "Uncle" Clarence Thomas are throwing almost every other black person in the country under the bus. THIS is the definition of "house negro," and I wish more black folks would call them out on it.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Monday October 09 2017, @06:07PM
It turns out gay people can be massive hypocrites too. This surprises you?
(Score: 1, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Monday October 09 2017, @02:05AM (1 child)
"smuggled white nationalist ideas into the mainstream"
That's some insane shit, people. There is far more evidence that Patty Hearst joined a terrorist organization, and Ted Turner's wife was a treasonous whore - but the left ignores all that stuff, and attacks the right.
I have nothing but contempt for that entire "alt-right" shit. Everyone right of Chairman Mao is considered "alt-right" these days.
This article is nothing more than inflammatory, divisive propaganda. I don't know why it was even accepted.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 10 2017, @04:28AM
> This article is nothing more than inflammatory, divisive propaganda. I don't know why it was even accepted
Because it's more than just propaganda, though there is an aspect of that. It's a look into a political machine, and as citizens of a world in which the US is a leading state, the machinations of that state matter to everyone, and are worth inspecting. To fail to look behind the curtain is to abdicate responsibility; for those of us who wish to claim to live democratically, that is therefore unconscionable.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday October 08 2017, @09:21PM (9 children)
The asshole fairy has visited you in your sleep and tapped you on the head with her magic wand, rendering you an asshole.
Since you are now an asshole, everything you say is null and void and I will ignore you from now on no matter what you say.
See how easy that is?
(Score: 4, Informative) by pe1rxq on Sunday October 08 2017, @09:36PM (7 children)
If you subscribe to the breitbart worldview you deserve to be called a morron or asshole. It is as simple as that.
Don't get me wrong, you are allowed to be a morron or asshole, but don't think the rest of the sane world is just going to sit idle and not tell you what you really are.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 08 2017, @10:27PM
What is the substance in this post? It's as valid as crying in a corner that people see things differently than you, because they're "oh so mean stupid assholes!"
There's obviously a sizeable amount of people, and growing, who read websites like Breitbart and participate in related forums. What are you going to do as that number increases? Continue to scream "moron" and "asshole?"
The reality is that the majority of them hold the same opinion of you, and likely think of you as insane. "It's as simple as that," to quote you.
Go out into the real world, or online, and actually talk to people and tell them why they're wrong (I do). It's not something that has to be done every day, or even every week, but it's how you correct people when they're wrong.
Putting people in a box in your mind, sitting on it, and voicing publicly about how you've done so, accomplishes absolutely nothing.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 08 2017, @11:37PM (5 children)
>If you subscribe to the breitbart worldview you deserve to be called a morron
PURE LIBERAL GENIUS.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 09 2017, @04:25AM (4 children)
"Conservatives" are allowed to spew incendiary shit everywhere but as soon as anyone fights back, the strategy is to kick and scream like a toddler, yelling that their stupid liberals.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 09 2017, @04:27AM
I'm going to blame my phone's speech-to-text function and my tiredness for not noticing the bad grammar until it was too late.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday October 09 2017, @10:36AM (2 children)
I don't think you quite grok Freedom of Speech. It implicitly means speech you do not approve of. And there's not supposed to be a damned thing you can do about it except propose a counter-argument.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 10 2017, @05:22AM (1 child)
Or ask the editors not to run it?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday October 10 2017, @11:24AM
Sorry. Round these parts if it's true or debatable and is salvageable into something resembling journalism by the editors, we publish it.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 08 2017, @10:44PM
I've always wondered what exactly happened to Ethanol_fueled! Assumed he was dropped on his headed when very small, but a visit by the "Asshole Fairy" makes much more sense.
(Score: 4, Touché) by Runaway1956 on Monday October 09 2017, @02:15AM (6 children)
On the right, we have some assholes, and some morons. On the right we have some idiots, and we have some ideologists. How in the fuck do you pick between the two? Uhhhh - how 'bout we think for ourselves?
Ohhhh, but now, this is the United States of America. Everyone has to be blue or red, right? There's no room for anything else!!
To hell with all of that. There are three colors on our flag, and I choose to be white, thank you very much. If that offends anyone, so be it. I just don't give a small damn.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by Runaway1956 on Monday October 09 2017, @02:18AM
On the LEFT we have some idiots, and we have some ideologists.
Have fun with the typing error, children. I would actually prefer not to get any more involved with this childish submission.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 09 2017, @02:47AM (4 children)
That right there is a damned good idea, Runaway. Unfortunately, you stick to the "ourselves" part of right-wing tribal identity, and never quite get to the "think" part. This is why the alt-right can use useful idiots like you, the same way the Nazi party used working class "good Germans" in the Thirties. Think about it, Runaway. No, do not tell us what you think you think on it, you are just spouting right-wing Faux News talking points. Actually think about it. What does the Left want from you, Runaway? Why would they be interested in your vital bodily fluids, anyway? Why would they bother to dump chemicals from high-flying aircraft? Vinegar, Runaway, and Bourbon, the two cures to all your ills.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 09 2017, @03:03AM (1 child)
So much for Runaway not being triggered today.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 09 2017, @04:31AM
It's OK, we have just been informed that he was tapped on the head by the "Asshole Fairy". It is not his fault.
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Runaway1956 on Monday October 09 2017, @03:27AM (1 child)
Like I said, anyone to the right of Chairman Mao is "alt-right". And, once again, stupid, I don't even watch Fox. Somehow, you've entirely missed the fact that I go to RT News, Al Jazeera English, the BBC, India Times, and a dozen other news sources OUTSIDE OF THE UNITED STATES for my news. You want to pretend that you know me, but you're ignorant of my preferred news sources? Way to make yourself look stupid, Bubba.
You just run along now, to America's left MSM for your news. You need to get your marching orders updated!!
(Score: 2) by rylyeh on Monday October 09 2017, @06:53AM
For me (haven't read your sources) China Today has more detailed (yet censored) US political coverage, compared to US sources. But then again, I also read (and comment on) the Washington Post.
"a vast crenulate shell wherein rode the grey and awful form of primal Nodens, Lord of the Great Abyss."
(Score: 2, Flamebait) by Whoever on Monday October 09 2017, @03:19AM (4 children)
Ah, the rationalization of racists everywhere.
"these people are just like I am and I am not a racist, therefore racists don't exist".
I got news for you buddy: you are a racist. You are so racist that you can't or won't acknowledge it.
To see a racist, just look at Trump, who has a well documented history or racism and misogyny. But, TMB will keep excusing or ignoring it because he is happy to be a racist and doesn't want to change.
(Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 09 2017, @04:01AM (2 children)
Look, we all know you love calling Trump a racist. If he has a "well documented history" then it should be out there, no?
Instead we see a history that includes stuff like suing to remove racial deed restrictions on Mar-a-lago. We see a person who is clearly comfortable with black people. This goes back decades.
It was the other candidate who called them "superpredators" and couldn't recall a having a meaningful conversation with one.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday October 09 2017, @05:45AM (1 child)
Has it occurred to you that maybe they're BOTH racists? White middle/upper-class feminists have become basically the distaff counterparts to their loathsome husbands in far too many ways. "Intersectionality" is apparently a swear word to that bunch of patronizing self-serving hypocrites. Fuck Clinton AND Trump and may they BOTH end up in the same lava crater in Hell.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by rylyeh on Monday October 09 2017, @06:56AM
The 'Two Party System' is insufficient to represent citizens. Too bad all the other parties a running lunatics and zealots!
"a vast crenulate shell wherein rode the grey and awful form of primal Nodens, Lord of the Great Abyss."
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday October 09 2017, @10:39AM
I'd approve of it if he were literally Hitler. At least if he posted it in English. That's how we roll around here, free speech wise.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Thexalon on Monday October 09 2017, @05:17PM
The term "alt-right" was created by Richard Spencer, who wrote things like this: "And when White men talks about 'restoring the Constitution' - or, more so, 'Taking Our Country Back' - leftists and non-Whites are right to view this as threatening and racialist: it implies a return to origins and that the White man once owned America."
There are numerous other "alt-right" leaders who think in similar ways.
In their own words, these guys are white supremacists. They think about who is in charge in racial terms, and want their race to be on top. Comparing them to the racists of yore, they have their "respectable" sorts that more resemble the White Citizen's Councils, redliners and political segregationists. Those people's job is to put a polite and reasonable-seeming (to white people) veneer on the basic viewpoint that white people are superior to everybody else and should rule over them. The methods are different from the KKK, Aryan Nation, Neo-Nazis, and similar sorts, but their goals are identical.
As for Breitbart, Mr Bannon had this to say to a reporter at the Republican National Convention: "We’re the platform for the alt-right." So it's pretty reasonable to conclude that they at least aspire to be precisely that.
Yes I have. As in, I've had face-to-face conversations with people who advocated murdering everybody who isn't Christian, cisgender, and heterosexual. There are varying positions on what to do with racial minorities, with the big 3 options being "kill them all", "enslave them", and "expel them from the US by force". Which, again, is exactly what Richard Spencer is saying, even though he isn't using racial slurs.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by crafoo on Sunday October 08 2017, @11:27PM (9 children)
You can't even define what alt-right is in an intelligent manner. No one can, because it is an invented code word that means, "we don't have to consider these people's arguments because these are bad people."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 08 2017, @11:40PM
That's teach those awful neocons!
Wait, wrong dog whistle.
(Score: 2, Flamebait) by jmorris on Monday October 09 2017, @02:18AM (2 children)
I can. It means a Right that is neither Country Club Republican or Conservative. Everyone on the Alt-Right agrees on that point, that the Chamber of Commerce Republicans are indistinguishable from Dems now and that Conservatism failed to conserve anything and that now there really isn't anything LEFT to conserve so something new is needed, an ALTERNATIVE. Hence Alt-Right. On every other detail there tends to be debate but Vox Day's sixteen point list is pretty useful even if many now consider Vox a cuck or traitor over the Gab fiasco. It is all but impossible to agree with all sixteen since some kinda preclude others but the idea was that if you agree with most you are Alt-Right. If you agree with a few Alt-Light. If you don't agree with any of them you are probably a cuck or Prog.
And as for calling us Racists and Nazis, WE. DON'T. CARE. So save those insults for the cucks, they will still reflexively cower in fear, we won't. You Progs have literally called every Republican candidate of note both of those things since before Reagan. Those cards are charged to the max now and won't work, get some new insults.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 09 2017, @03:19AM
This post is a gem. Too bad I won't know for sure if this worldline includes the 2018 riots for another 6-7 months. All the kindling is there and hasn't changed at all from my original worldline.
The FEMA concentration camps formed in reaction to the massive loss of housing during the riots are still on the horizon. I wonder if the CDC will even need a cover story in this worldline?
It would seem more fitting if it were done by executive order this time around. The thought sort of gives me the heebie-jeebies. BRICS could wind up being the good guys in this wordline on the other side of the Stein's gate. Unfortunately, on N-day, I'll need to use the convergence to return to a worldline most like the one I left.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday October 09 2017, @06:03AM
You would be surprised at how much we agree on, J-Mo. According to that list I am "alt-lite."
The difference is in the implementation of the solutions we want, though. You are speaking from a place of profound selfishness and fear; some of us know where this leads when it grabs the reins of political power, and that place is nowhere good.
I know you aren't saying the things you say for laughs or troll points, nor are you simply trying to stir up trouble for its own sake. It's much too pure (or at least distilled and concentrated) for that. You are a clinical sociopath who has found the alt-right's talking points a justification for your own utter lack of humanity. But you're not stupid, or at least not lacking in brainpower. I know what you are. People like you arise in every era, and sometimes you can't be contained, to the detriment of everyone else...
Bannon isn't either; in fact, he and I actually did many of the same things in regard to our studies of various religions, history, value systems, logic, etc. But because he came from a position of relative privilege, he seethes with resentment for being pushed out from his "rightful place," whereas I was *always* on the margins in most regards, with the conspicuous exemption of being white (though in the parts of NYC i grew up in that was very much a minority ethnicity). He has the same resentment, anger, and fear you do. I can feel it clear across the internet.
Please, if you listen to nothing else I say, take this to heart: your "burn it down" message is nothing more than a reactionary outpouring of pain and rage. Your method will lead us back to the 19th century or worse, which in many ways is Bannon's stated goal ("Traditionalism" with a capital T). This will do no one any good. The past is gone, forever, and it won't ever, ever come back. All you would accomplish is dystopia. Please, engage with reality as it comes at you. Stop trying to be a rock in the stream of time, or you'll just get ground down to powder.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 5, Informative) by unauthorized on Monday October 09 2017, @02:28AM (3 children)
The gist is that they are white nationalists who want to live in ethnostates (ie racially homogeneous nations) and want to send all the people of different skin colors "back home". And no, that's not an euphemism, if it was Buzzfeed wouldn't need to grasp at straws like "journalist talks to people: Illuminati confirmed".
The alt right themselves invented the term and readily use it to refer to themselves. Here is an interview about the subject with the guy who coined it [youtube.com].
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by Runaway1956 on Monday October 09 2017, @03:34AM (2 children)
So, one young idiot coins a term, "alt-right", and your left latches onto it like it's meaningful? FFS, Spencer doesn't represent me, or anyone I know. You're as big an idiot as Spencer.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 09 2017, @04:34AM
Runaway, you stupid fucking hillbilly SJW! Just stop it, OK? You are giving away the entire alt-right strategy with your over-wrought emotional responses!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 10 2017, @04:36AM
The alt-right has embraced the term most strongly.
The D and R have taken to using it out of convenience since - but not before.
(Score: 4, Informative) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Monday October 09 2017, @11:04AM
"Alt-right" is not a term defined by the left. It is a term invented and defined by the alt-right themselves. It's a thing. Here, look: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right [wikipedia.org]
It's also worth mentioning that Bannon is on record as describing Breitbart as "the platform for the alt-right".
Now do you have anything factual to add to the conversation?
(Score: 1, Troll) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday October 08 2017, @08:13PM (32 children)
Yeah, hearing shit like this drivel is almost verbatim the kind of hysterical bullshit that cause me to switch radio stations after years of NPR to Fox Sports.
Even with such a hysterical summary there's nothing damning, so it resorts to MUH NAZIS.
Now, I like Breitbart for providing a counterpoint but even I will admit that they dog-whistle out the ass and I'm not that fond of the God stuff in there either, but nobody else is going to report nationally crime committed by illegal immigrants or how San Francisco is an unsustainable clusterfuck. It's the best we have so far for a decent counterpoint to liberal retardism that ain't full-on Westboro Baptist. It's the best place (other than /pol/) to read how Trump and Pence troll and bamboozle the living fuck out of liberal morons.
I think it is pretty juvenile how they embrace web spelling in their headlines and the rest of their articles could also use better proofreaders.
But racist? White nationalist? The best dirt you're gonna get is that they occasionally contact a relatively small percentage of White Nationalists for the sake of what common ground they do have rather than endorsement of White Nationalism.
LOLZ. Awaken, The Mighty Buzzard! They challenge you!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by c0lo on Sunday October 08 2017, @08:31PM (15 children)
FTFY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday October 08 2017, @08:39PM
Takyon is a capable writer and very well-mannered, I really enjoyed his 4/20 articles and he's put up with a good lot of my shit in IRC.
But sometimes I just don't agree with him, and that's perfectly damn fine if he doesn't agree with me either.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday October 08 2017, @08:41PM (10 children)
They can do both. Personally, I'm flattered.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Sunday October 08 2017, @08:45PM (9 children)
The free speech being a prerequisite. of course if it's a challenge here is also an exercise of free speech
The only issue is the intention: did they intend to challenge you or have they stopped at the free speech level only?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 3, Funny) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday October 08 2017, @11:56PM (8 children)
If I'm the one challenged, I get to pick the means of the duel, right? I choose single malt Irish whiskey.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday October 09 2017, @08:06AM (7 children)
Remind me not to challenge you: I hate whiskey, can't stand the stink of it.
On the other side, nothing beats a deeply chilled vodka, at some -17C or less.
Only perhaps some plum brandy, distilled at about 75% AVB (in both cases accompanying food, bacon and/or mature cheese preferred, is needed for a long run. Otherwise my old, well pickled liver will let me down after the first bottle).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday October 09 2017, @10:47AM (6 children)
Too cold on the vodka. I've had actual tissue injury from swallowing overly cold vodka before.
I can't back you on the brandy either but I could go with as much plum wine as necessary to resolve things. Fair warning though, I can drink sweet wines easier than water as long as they're made from anything but grapes.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday October 09 2017, @11:52AM (5 children)
Pour it in a 30-4 ml shot glasses at room temperature and they will get pretty around -10C -8C.
In that small quantity even in bottoms up style (the proper one), it can't actually cause frost damage.
Hell, no, you couldn't.
At equiv amount of alcohol - 75%ABV double distilled plum brandy [wikipedia.org] vs 10%AVB the strength of wine, you'll need to drink quite a large amount of liquid.
At my 0.5l of plum brandy I can afford to nibble food all the way through the bottle, no sweat in 3-4 hours.
At the same alcohol amount, you'll have to drink almost a gallon of wine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday October 09 2017, @12:32PM (1 child)
Not a problem. Mind you, there will be side effects. All that liquid has to go somewhere after processing.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday October 09 2017, @12:48PM
As long as you are able to deal with it in a civilized way (without affecting me), I have no issues.
Each one is free to do with their bodily fluids as he pleases; I'll chalk it down as, albeit unusual, pertaining to freedom of expression.
Even more so if you manage to "paint" a coherent message on the snow in dealing with processes liquids
(no, projectile vomit is not a valid result of processing, it's a sign of an aborted process)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by JeanCroix on Monday October 09 2017, @05:09PM (2 children)
150 proof? My preferred brands are Maraska or Navip, and I haven't even been able to find their old 100 proof strengths for years - it's all 80 these days, here in the US anyway. Which stuff do you like?
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday October 09 2017, @08:44PM (1 child)
Oh, haven't had that stuff for seems like thousands years, that is something migrating my ass from East Europe into Australia led to.
Anyway, to get to that strength you'll need to arrange with the distiller, one simply can't buy this stuff off the shelf.
The result is usually stored in some unappealing PET recycled bottles (which you wash carefully), but it's simply divine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by JeanCroix on Tuesday October 10 2017, @12:10PM
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Sunday October 08 2017, @11:51PM (2 children)
Just as MB exercises HIS right to free speech.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 09 2017, @02:51AM (1 child)
What's a "MB"? I have heard tell of a "TMB", but not of this "MB" of which you speak. Is it some kind of "Master Bater"?
(Score: 3, Touché) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday October 09 2017, @03:18AM
Damnit, did I leave my webcam on again?
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 08 2017, @08:56PM (5 children)
NPR today is as corporatist whore as 'commecial' radio/media.
PBS in general is and has been for decades, as evidenced to anyone trying to get copies of Mr Roger's Neighborhood or back issues of Reading Rainbow.
Hint: Both are disney-level impossible to get because both are being kept in vaults by their family members decades later.
(Score: 5, Informative) by takyon on Sunday October 08 2017, @09:10PM (2 children)
What does that have to do with PBS? Sounds like a problem with the copyright holders. PBS doesn't get to magically violate copyright law.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mister_Rogers%27_Neighborhood#Broadcast_history [wikipedia.org]
Family Communications Inc. was renamed to The Fred Rogers Company [wikipedia.org].
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by bzipitidoo on Monday October 09 2017, @08:38AM
Some years ago, the PBS News Hour did a story on copyright. They went with their favorite format of finding two opposing experts to argue each side. Problem was, for that story the two sides were "extreme copyright" and "even more extreme copyright", with questions such as whether 75 years was long enough, and one expert saying "yes" while the other said "no". The thought that 75 years might be far too long was completely ignored. It was the most unbalanced, flagrantly fraudulent reporting I've ever seen on the News Hour, which until then I had thought a cut above.
I had thought that being, you know, publicly funded as reflected in the "Public" part of their very name, meant they might strive to put the interests of their patrons, the public, first. Nope. Their journalists closed ranks with what they evidently thought were their own, the journalists of the corporate media world and the ownership scoundrels of the MAFIAA, defending Holy Copyright from the evil pirates of the Internet Age.
Sesame Street is pretty tough to get. Much of the funding for Sesame Street comes from the public, yet they refuse to release it under a copyleft license, or to the public domain.
That's hardly all. The reporting on Latin America is routinely filtered through a corporatist lens. To hear the mainstream media tell it, those crazy Latin Americans are always ruining their economies with lurches to the political left. Cuba, Venezuela, and a bit less often Brazil are trash talked in this fashion. PBS News Hour is no exception to that tone. For a different view, I suggest reading Greg Palast and Noam Chomsky. Foreign sources (such as, possibly, Al Jazeera) also have potential. I warn you though, when you still have faith that the US system of journalism can't possibly get things too wrong because we have Freedom of Speech and competition to keep them honest, Palast and Chomsky will come across as batshit nuts when you first start reading them. Praising Hugo Chavez as the best thing that ever happened to Venezuela? WTF? But then, when you start to think maybe they aren't completely crazy, maybe they're on to something, maybe even correct, you'll feel depressed by the scope of the bias that implies in the mainstream media, I didn't want to believe the US was that dirty and corrupt.
One of the biggest blunders the mainstream media made in recent times was the reporting on the cause for going to war in Iraq in 2003. Yes, PBS News Hour was in lockstep with the rest of them. After all the carnage, to learn that there never were any Weapons of Mass Destruction, except in Saddam Hussein's imagination, was sickening. The media totally failed to keep the Bush Administration honest. Moreover, the Bush Administration didn't give a crap about facts, and really would run a massive propaganda campaign, something that wasn't appreciated enough until it was too late for a whole lot of Iraqis. And what are the Democrats doing about all that? Giving the Republicans the roasting and butt kicking they so richly deserve? No. Instead the Democrats are making leftish noises while actually practicing fascist corporatism lite, and trying to pass that off as The Left, with ample help from the mainstream media. In a sense, that makes the Republicans more honest than the Democrats! The Republicans' propaganda is clumsy and obvious. Not so the Democrats. Slick bastards.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 10 2017, @05:41AM
As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Fred Rogers approaches 1.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Monday October 09 2017, @12:37AM
I stopped listening to NPR about halfway through Obama's reign when I realized it was never going to call him out on the right wing GWBesque shit he was doing.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday October 09 2017, @05:29PM
You are right that NPR is as biased as all get-out. You're wrong about exactly what that bias is, though. Here it is in a nutshell:
"This is radio for comfortable and well-off people. When our news stories report terrible things happening, you don't need to worry, it will never affect you, it's sad but it's happening to those poor people way over on the other side of the world/country/state. We're going to read off a bunch of announcements from whoever the president is without questioning a word of it or providing anything that might cause you to question it, because if we do the government will pull that segment of funding we get from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Now, here's a pointless and uninformative interview with a justifiably obscure artistic type whose work is banal but we're going to treat like a genius for some reason."
PBS at least tries to create some entertaining and educational shows, although they've definitely fallen a long way from their bits of actual brilliance like Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego? and Sesame Street back when Jim Henson was involved.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 5, Informative) by takyon on Sunday October 08 2017, @09:05PM (8 children)
Leaked documents/emails are news. They've been fine online news since the early days of WikiLeaks and Cryptome. That's all the justification needed to run this.
The BuzzFeed article doesn't go as far as saying that the news tips Breitbart received were untrue (and in some cases they were just calling attention to what was out there, like the Satanic Temple video). Breitbart did provide counterpoints. Some of those counterpoints were suggested to them by self-described white supremacists/nationalists. You can conclude whether that is good/bad/neutral. An initial chunk of the article suggested that these people helped define the "alt-right":
No one person or group can really claim ownership of the term "alt-right". It's muddled just like every other ideology out there. But it seems like Breitbart played a big role in defining the "alt-right" for many people.
There's also the aspect of liberal journalists secretly supporting Breitbart's cause, asking Milo to bash specific feminists, etc. Regardless of how one feels about that, I think most of us can agree that angle is interesting and damn funny.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 08 2017, @09:39PM (3 children)
Heck there was even that recent one where WSJ claims an _unamed_ bunch claimed that Russian AV stole NSA stuff...
(Score: 2) by takyon on Sunday October 08 2017, @10:11PM (2 children)
Let's assume that [soylentnews.org] was a true story for a second. Is that too much of a stretch? I hope not.
The story is that the breach happened in 2015 and was discovered in spring of 2016. Before the election. Around the same time many other things were happening WRT Russia. Later, you see the U.S. govt getting increasingly pissy towards Kaspersky Lab until finally banning it on all federal computers.
The conclusion is clear. The Russians were doing more meddling at the time than is immediately obvious. The details will trickle out years later, as they tend to do. As for alleged unnamed sources putting the story out there, get used to it, since there is a mix of condoned and forbidden leaking going on. The Obama administration went hard after whistleblowers/leakers and the Trump administration has signaled that they will do the same. Many sources will stay anonymous if they don't feel like being imprisoned.
Personally, I think the Russian spy agencies decided to throw everything at the wall and see what sticks. Hack a few state databases, buy some polarizing ads on Facebook, etc. Most of it doesn't qualify as "hacking the election", but it could have had some effect. Were the Russians responsible for the DNC emails? Maybe [time.com], maybe not [thenation.com]. But I don't think we will need to wait 50 years to get a clear picture of what really happened.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 09 2017, @04:02AM (1 child)
Assuming that story is true then it would be a GOOD THING for everyone else because then the NSA will have to its other job of protecting US stuff and tell Microsoft, Cisco etc to prevent those hacking tools from working.
NONE of it qualifies as hacking the election unless the voting machines or totals were hacked.
The DNC hacking even if done by the Russians isn't hacking the election, it's illegal/vigilante journalism.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday October 09 2017, @05:49AM
I can agree to that, although in the short term those NSA tools caused a lot of pain:
https://techcrunch.com/2017/05/12/ransomware-based-on-leaked-nsa-tools-spreads-to-dozens-of-countries/ [techcrunch.com]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2, Troll) by jmorris on Monday October 09 2017, @03:01AM (3 children)
They can claim anything, but anyone who doesn't laugh is dumb. The Alt-Right preexisted the first BB article. All they did was some actual journalism. They heard of a new political movement, went out and researched, contacted what looked like central figures in the factions they discovered to exist and interviewed them. They then wrote up an article, sent it back out to their interview subjects for comments and corrections and then reported to their readers. The article was well received, re-reported in most of the mainstream media, etc. None of that implies in the slightest any sort of definition or creation of the Alt-Right. Vox Day's sixteen point checklist is considered one of the most reliable definitions since it encompasses all of the significant factions instead of only some of them.
I do wish the rules would settle out at some point. I remember CNN almost going into autistic screeching about the DNC Leaks, shouting how it was ILLEGAL and even talking about it was probably criminal. Now we have the internal emails of a journalistic operation hacked, and everyone admits Milo's account was hacked so shut up, and suddenly it seems ok. So lets be clear, everyone is perfectly fine with targeting and hacking journalists now. Just asking, because if New York Times leaks shows up it doesn't look like anyone gets to say a goddamned word now. And we are all ok with that? Hack the planet, publish all the secrets, all that old 90's hacker stuff for real now?
Buckle up, the ride is about to get bumpy.
Yea, that was choice stuff. Expected though, everyone can see this train wreck coming. Even, probably especially, the left activists. But they are caught in a holiness spiral and there is no figure with enough authority on the Left to break them out of it before it spins up to a full singularity and eats the whole Left. At least some are willing to try, almost kinda hopeful actually. They were quietly acting over a year before it broke out into full retard "Free Speech is White Privilege" insanity. If I weren't a hardened bastard who knows what vile people they are I'd feel pity for what is going to happen to them. But I don't. I'll make popcorn when it goes full cannibalism and won't make the mistake of allowing the survivors into the Right camp.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday October 09 2017, @03:08AM (1 child)
I don't really care what CNN has to say about leaking. Most of the people you see on there are paid to read, talk, and look good on camera.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 09 2017, @09:01AM
You're not their target audience.
The Russians did their propaganda stuff and tried to influence the voters (not the same as hacking the election). And CNN etc did their propaganda stuff and tried to influence the voters.
CNN etc are now trying to spread the idea that the election results are invalid just because allegedly the Russians did a better job influencing the voters.
But the hard truth is the Democrats lost the election by fielding a weaker candidate. They use lame excuses like racism and the electoral college but the fact is a black guy won twice! The Democrats wanted Trump as their opponent, they "elevated" him.
That the DNC still try to blame everyone else for their failures is not a good sign.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 10 2017, @04:47AM
>> Leaked documents/emails are news.
> I do wish the rules would settle out at some point. I remember CNN almost going into autistic screeching about the DNC Leaks, shouting how it was ILLEGAL
CNN saying it doesn't make it true. Do you really think that any soylents thought the DNC leaks weren't news?
"You didn't like it before, you can't have it now" doesn't apply to truth values of statements, nor to newsworthiness.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 08 2017, @11:29PM
They are shoving the "god stuff" down your throat. Wait until Tribune media is taken over, that will make it even worse. There has never been a crackdown of these frauds on tv who are hawking religions and begging for money. They will be the first ones to put their boots on your neck for not conforming. I thought this crap was going away as I get older, but it seems to be getting worse. 1950's and the Crusades all over again. Sad days for the United States of America. ;_;
(Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 08 2017, @08:27PM (6 children)
What a quaint term the alt-right have for the opposite of "fake news".
(Score: 2, Redundant) by crafoo on Sunday October 08 2017, @11:38PM (5 children)
No. It's coordinated fake news driving a specific narrative. It's so transparently obvious I find it hard to believe people are taken in by it. I think they're most effective with the misleading people by just not reporting on a few key facts and events. Or mis-representing context.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 09 2017, @02:53AM (4 children)
As am I, that people on your side are so easily fooled by such transparent Nazism! Which side of the Looking Glass are you on? Does your side have turds laying about everywhere?
(Score: 2) by crafoo on Monday October 09 2017, @03:23AM (1 child)
You don't get to group me in with whatever collection of people you love to hate just because I'm calling out the obvious lies and propaganda of nearly every single major news outlet. Isn't it interesting that they are all in lock-step on the talking points? Indeed, we live in interesting times.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 09 2017, @04:36AM
Wouldn't think of it, you fucking Nazi!
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday October 09 2017, @03:45AM (1 child)
" Which side of the Looking Glass are you on?"
THAT is the problem. Your left and their right is a two dimensional illusion. It doesn't matter which side of the looking glass you're on, it's all bullshit. Presuming that you have a bathroom, and a mirror in that bathroom, walk in there and study the damned thing. How many dimensions are there? Look closely, you don't want to miss any!!
(Score: 2) by rylyeh on Monday October 09 2017, @07:10AM
Yes. That's the way Tweedle-Dee and Tweeldle-Dum(b) have distracted the citizenry since the inception of the US.
The virus in on the Desktop - brothers. Original thinking is required to move forward.
Gore Vidal and William F(ucker). Buckley debates should be reviewed. Brilliant both - arguing about the number of angels that fit on the head of a pin for all the good it did to the reality of the 'Establishment'.
"a vast crenulate shell wherein rode the grey and awful form of primal Nodens, Lord of the Great Abyss."
(Score: 5, Insightful) by julian on Monday October 09 2017, @05:51AM (3 children)
Nazism, or "Nazi Lite", which we see in the tiki-torchlight marches in c-ville, are bad. If you disagree that they are bad, you're wrong. Sorry. We had a world war about this before either of us were born and it was decided. Nazis are bad. Communists are also bad. We had a kind of war about that, too.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 09 2017, @08:05PM (2 children)
This.
Something people weren't getting, the enemy of your enemy is not your friend. The fascists came to power in Europe because people were sick of violence from the communists. At least now, both sides are widely chastised as violent, illiberal assholes.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 10 2017, @04:55AM (1 child)
> Nazis are bad. Communists are also bad.
OMG. These don't compare. You could have gotten away with
> Nazis are bad. Midcentury Russian Communists were also bad.
And probably get away with it; everyone hates the gulag, though any sensible person would still say the 'badness' of one far exceeded the other.
But you can't just say "communism bad mmkay" because there have been thousands of successful communist societies. Many of North America's indigenous peoples lived in variants of communism - but not top-down managed communism, bottom-up participant communism - successfully for hundreds or thousands of years. How do we know they were successful? Because their societies survived until eradicated by invaders with superior technology.
If I mirrored you and said some shit like "Nazis bad. Stale bread bad." maybe this would be clearer?
(Score: 2) by julian on Wednesday October 11 2017, @03:56AM
When people say "communism" especially in the USA they mean Stalinism. We can have a more nuanced political science discussion about the difference between socialism/communism/stalinism/trotskyism but when people hear "communism" they think gulags, commissars, parades of marching soldiers and missiles. Primitive communism, which was the state of human existence for the majority of our time on Earth, is not what people think of. I've read Marx. He was a brilliant thinker who correctly identified the contradictions in capitalism. He was a lousy prognostician. His solutions don't work, and cannot work. The transition he foresaw is impossible.
So when I say "communism is bad" I mean the attempts by industrial societies to implement communism are doomed to failure.
I want to get us to Star Trek. That's communism, it's also more closely related to primitive communism that Marx wrote of than it is to the communism Stalin actually created.