the alt-right

Exactly. Shame on S&S for commissioning it in the first place.

Feel like this frog stuff could get pretty recursive, with an even fatter frog cartoon coming along in a few months for the even more insanely racist shut-in fringe of this groper lot, and so on ad infinitumy

Yummy yummy yummy
I got love in my infinitumy

i hate that these people like vaporwave

Exactly. Shame on S&S for commissioning it in the first place.

― "Taste's very strange!" (stevie), Thursday, December 28, 2017 3:30 PM (fifty-seven minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

that's my take away.. 'let us help you cloak your vile racist bullshit so we can sell some books'

^though at the same time kinda clueless about its appeal? Like no Milo fan wants him to dial back the insults and egomania.

Might be time for milo to launder his img by doing a few avuncular documentaries about classic railway journeys for bbc4

(lolbritain deep cut)

stephen fry: the o.g. milo

Really smart thread on the Milo manuscript shows how mainstream gatekeepers are laundering fascist and white supremacist ideas to the masses. Also, Jonathan Chait got two positive shout-outs in Milo's book! Congrats Jon! https://t.co/UJGY0uZDwW

— sean. 🎅🏽 (@SeanMcElwee) December 28, 2017

He has just been invited as a keynote speaker to the next Visegrad Group conference on the “future of Europe “ fwiw, so there is still someone willing to pay for his insight.

http://europajovojev4.eu/en/#koszonto

the thread linked in caek's link is a very effective expose imho

lmao

Hell, it turns out I even have my own groyper follower, with the totally not-creepy name of “SleepParalysis Groyper”… pic.twitter.com/lMD9CIcUrT

— Respectable Lawyer (@RespectableLaw) December 28, 2017

https://i.imgur.com/yeWakc0.jpg

oh my god, i forgot about those kids. jfc

The only thing I see in this photo is how terribly the hem on the big kid's jacket was sewn up. His mom must have really been in a rush!

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Maryland-Catholic-Girls-High-School-Fires-Alt-Right-Teacher-468152783.html

https://twitter.com/Real_Greg_Conte

he looks like a douche

these people are so sad

^^^This is what I feel most of the time. Like, these guys are such sad sack losers, but then I am pretty much fueling why they are so angry. Still, fuck them.

This clown's going to be forced into Hannibal Lecter-style restraints before the end of the first day

UPDATE: A representative for Milo Yiannopoulos confirms that he will now be representing himself in his lawsuit against Simon & Schuster pic.twitter.com/APGJ8opQMy

— Ellie Hall (@ellievhall) January 8, 2018

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egz-qV17gtc

lol, that is spot on

this fuckin guy

Controversial far-right commentator Milo Yiannopoulos has used a spoof story published by a satirical website to slam feminism and the NHS on his YouTube channel.

The former Simon Langton Grammar pupil laughed as he read verbatim the story which jokingly describes a man suing the NHS for not being offered a smear test on grounds of discrimination.

He told his followers, who hail mainly from America, "I am going to read a news story – I have checked this out, I promise this is real, I have not just made this up.”

The story features the entirely fictional character Nathan Grange-Vulva - a fairtrade coffee shop owner and men’s rights activist from Leigh-On-Sea who was awarded £150,000 in compensation and legal costs after being denied the routine exam.

Yiannopoulos, 33, ranted: “It makes me feel furious as a British taxpayer.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jan/19/channel-4-calls-in-security-experts-after-cathy-newman-suffers-online-abuse

Cathy Newman of Channel 4 is apparently being targeted by a bunch of alt-right dorks after her 30-minute interview with Jordan Peterson.

De Pear said on Twitter on Friday: “Our Channel 4 News on-screen journalists expect to be held to account for their journalism but the level of vicious misogynistic abuse, nastiness, and threat to Cathy Newman is an unacceptable response to a robust and engaging debate with Jordan Peterson.

“Such is the scale of threat, we are having to get security specialists in to carry out an analysis. I will not hesitate to get the police involved if necessary. What a terrible indictment of the times we live in.”

All of which begs the question as to why they’re giving Peterson such a huge platform in the first place. There is next to no chance that anyone aligned with his views is going to watch a robust interview and change their mind (the article references James Delingpole and Douglas Murray crowing about how he ran rings around her) and has just ended up ostensibly endangering the journalist. It seems massively irresponsible either way to continue to give them the oxygen of publicity.

Peterson is showing himself to be an opportunist with no principles willing to cater to whatever crowd or denominator will pledge money to his Patreon. He's not an ideologue, but when your audience is sending death threats to your 'enemies' and you turn your head, what's the difference? I think maybe a year ago, the average Peterson follower had a much more open mind. Now it's just a joke.

It's a small world after all.

By far the most surprising guest here at the @Cernovich event: Chelsea Manning!

— Charlie Warzel (@cwarzel) January 21, 2018

“I was standing outside MERGE looking through the photos I’d taken, when a young woman in a blue hoodie came up to me,” Sarsfield said. “She asked if I’d taken photos of her boyfriend. I asked her if her boyfriend was the one putting up the white supremacist stickers.”

“She said, ‘Yes,’ and that he’d called her saying he was in MERGE. She said she wanted me to delete the photos, because this whole thing was traumatic for them,” Sarsfield recalled. “She said he’s not a racist, he just likes to do these things to get a rise out of people.”

Sure. The Pepe hoodie is a nice touch.

http://littlevillagemag.com/man-puts-up-pro-white-stickers-on-the-ped-mall-during-the-womens-march-then-tries-to-hide-in-merge/

spending money to own the libs!!!!

Cathy Newman of Channel 4 is apparently being targeted by a bunch of alt-right dorks after her 30-minute interview with Jordan Peterson.

My first thought was why are Channel 4 running a half hour interview with some American dickhead I've never heard of?

he’s canadian

Well, there you go.

I'd never heard of peterson before but I'm sure he will get more coverage in the uk on the back of that interview, ppl were pretty angry at how badly newman handled him

Speaking of, here’s Shuja Haider trying to figure WTF is up with Peterson and why he’s banging on about postmodernism alla time.

Peterson is showing himself to be an opportunist with no principles willing to cater to whatever crowd or denominator will pledge money to his Patreon. He's not an ideologue, but when your audience is sending death threats to your 'enemies' and you turn your head, what's the difference? I think maybe a year ago, the average Peterson follower had a much more open mind. Now it's just a joke.

― flappy bird, Saturday, January 20, 2018 3:33 PM (three days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

he literally started his media appearances, public events, and patreon as a result of becoming widely known for a video of him telling trans students that he wouldn't use gender neutral pronouns. he has only ever had one very specific, very white, very male, and very young crowd

This seems to be his response to the attacks on Newman:

Peterson, who is interviewed in today’s Observer magazine, said that when he became aware of the abuse allegations he “immediately tweeted ‘if you’re one of those people doing that, back off’, there’s no excuse for that, no utility’.”

He said the experience had left him trying to put himself in Newman’s position. “There is no doubt that Cathy has been subjected to a withering barrage of criticism online. One of the things I’ve been trying to do is to try to imagine what I’d do if I found myself in her situation and how I would react to it and understand how it was happening. But they’ve provided no evidence that the criticisms constituted threats. There are some nasty cracks online but the idea that this is somehow reflective of a fundamental misogyny and that’s what’s driving this is ridiculous.”

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/jan/21/no-excuse-for-online-abuse-says-professor-in-tv-misogyny-row

Peterson is a bigot, a con artist, and a clown but that Viewpoint magazine article is basicslly gaslighting him about Derrida. Deconstruction was most certainly not based on some neutral phenomenological observation about how meaning is generated. By positing marginalization at the center of his model of language Derrida was making a political statement. Not a Marxist one or even a progressive one, but definitely casting his lot on the side of the marginalized, and claiming marginalization was necessary to all semantic and/or sociopolitical strucutres, and trying to enact through his critical pracis a return of the repressed (cf. “Archive Fever” his book on Freud). This kind of logic totally lies at the root of contemporary social justice discourse, whatever you tjink of it.

*think

*praxis

So many typos

I think Derrida is an extremely interesting theorist but in studying him I did come to think his work pointed ultimately to a kind of nihilism — albeit one that has an egalitarian core. People who want to defend lofty ideals like democracy or liberalism are right to be wary of him. Chait and Chomsky are not unconsciously repeating some ignorant trope about “cultural marxism” or whatever when they complain about the impact of french theory in the academy. It’s not a misunderstanding.

In actual fact, Derrida’s work was rooted in constant dialogue with the history of Western philosophy. He was a classical philosophical scholar, often presenting detailed and rigorous research on figures like Plato, Hegel, and Rousseau. His conversance with European thought extended into the 20th century as well.

This makes Derrida sound like a 7th grader.

Some of us went to shitty schools but I get yr point

"Derrida drew on a wide range of influences, especially Friedrich Nietzsche and Sigmund Freud, both thinkers Peterson deems acceptable, as well as Martin Heidegger. Applying their skeptical outlook to the phenomenology and structuralism in which he had achieved mastery, Derrida was able to interrogate these methods from within."

Yeah, he “interrogated” the canon the way Nietzsche did—pointing his crtical guns as what he saw as its most vulnerable points. And no one would write an article claiming that people who have a serious problem with Nietzsche are just crazy and reading dark implications into texts that are really quite reasonable and not trying to fuck with your deepest convictions at all actually.

Besides, it’s inaccurate to say that Derrida “engaged” with all the texts he deconstructed. His critical method was more oblique. He’d focus on seemingly incidental features of the text to demonstrate that their rhetoric was really quite fragile—that even the most complex philosophical argument hinged on a series of prejudices. This is why he was so maddening to argue with. (Foucualt’s “obscurantism terrorism” line.)

I don’t think Derrida is evil and I don’t agree with Peterson but I do think he was a radical thinker and that his influence has been considerable and that his work invites/demands a atrong counteratgument and these are things the article seemed to want to sidestep. Instead of mounting a defense of the critical tradition represented by Derrida they try to defend Derrida’s respectability.

I've liked what I read of Derrida, in part because of it's radicality, and I would quite honestly love to revive the Derrida-thread and have that discussion with you in more detail. I just don't think it has that much to do with the article and Jordan Peterson. I'm not sure how respectable Derrida looks in that article, or if it's even the aim, the aim is to show he was not a cultural marxist, and not even really a postmodernist either. Derrida himself said it was born to a large extent out of 68. And the thing with Petersons bullshit is that it mixes all the radicalness into a scary whole - with an antisemitic past - without bothering to search for the historical situation he wrote against. And that kinda goes for Chait and Chomsky as well, though not to the same extent. It's easy to say it goes against 'democracy' and 'liberalism', but it is to a large extent born from very real failures of those two ideals.

I know this is reductive but I take vague complaints about "postmodernism" to just be the new "corrupting the youth of Athens" and leave it at that.

I don’t think Derrida is evil and I don’t agree with Peterson but I do think he was a radical thinker and that his influence has been considerable and that his work invites/demands a atrong counteratgument and these are things the article seemed to want to sidestep. Instead of mounting a defense of the critical tradition represented by Derrida they try to defend Derrida’s respectability.

― treeship 2, Wednesday, January 24, 2018 4:36 AM (six hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i think you're nitpicking a little, the salient point is that derrida is not an anti-western philosophy guy, he's actually more engaged with and more well-versed in the western canon than just about anyone you might care to claim, including peterson himself, or any of the pseudo intellectuals of the alt-right!

also while he's influential in academia, more literature than philosophy no? the idea that his ideas are literally the motivating factor behind the chaos of the world, as peterson sees it, i.e. transgenderism, feminism, socialism, is ludicrous. just ime most of the woke social justice warrior types i know personally are generally against "postmodernist" thought or completely ignorant of it.

(more likely to be marxists, anarchists, etc.)

Yeah, the dumbest bits of this is just his received conspiracy theory conflating “post-modernism” and “(((Cultural Marxism)))” together

just ime most of the woke social justice warrior types i know personally are generally against "postmodernist" thought or completely ignorant of it.

(more likely to be marxists, anarchists, etc.)

I'm not a humanities or social science scholar but it does seem to me that the people who are really into things like contemporary critical race theory, post-colonial cultural criticism, or queer musicology are working from a pov that's fairly different from (and in some ways opposed to) a classical Marxist analysis, right?