The Alt-right Playbook

[Skeptic Ginger]

Yes it's the obvious but maybe seeing examples of the playbook modeled it will make sense why it needs to be learned and countered.

[luchog]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Yes it's the obvious but maybe seeing examples of the playbook modeled it will make sense why it needs to be learned and countered.

This is why I have so many of the conservatrolls and contrarians here on ignore; and why it annoys the crap out of me to see how many people continue to still engage with them, drowning so many potentially useful discussions in noise and making the overwhelming majority of this forum little more than a sounding board for reactionaries.

Unfortunately, too many people on the left are far too eager to let the right drive the conversation and set the tone. And public debate is inherently allowing them to drive the conversation and set the tone.

Posted yet again: This Is The Daily Stormer’s Playbook

Another great explanation of the problems with debate: Why Debating Sucks (According To A Competitive Debater)

[Trebuchet]

Oh, there's a whole bunch of those. Gonna have to watch. Tomorrow. The cats are hungry.
But that first one was awesome.

[uke2se]

Have been arguing this for a while. Hopefully this thread'll go in a different direction than my last thread about this.

[The Great Zaganza]

What would be required of someone from the alt-right to demonstrate that they want to make a good faith effort at debate?
It seems to me that part of the alt-right playbook is to undermine their own credibility when it comes to constructive discussion.

[uke2se]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

What would be required of someone from the alt-right to demonstrate that they want to make a good faith effort at debate?
It seems to me that part of the alt-right playbook is to undermine their own credibility when it comes to constructive discussion m

The point is, they are never interested in good faith debate. That is why you should never engage with them.

[ChristianProgressive]

Originally Posted by luchog

Unfortunately, too many people on the left are far too eager to let the right drive the conversation and set the tone. And public debate is inherently allowing them to drive the conversation and set the tone.

Weaponized Tolerance at work. See also the Popper Paradox.

[rockysmith76]

Originally Posted by luchog

This is why I have so many of the conservatrolls and contrarians here on ignore; and why it annoys the crap out of me to see how many people continue to still engage with them, drowning so many potentially useful discussions in noise and making the overwhelming majority of this forum little more than a sounding board for reactionaries.

Unfortunately, too many people on the left are far too eager to let the right drive the conversation and set the tone. And public debate is inherently allowing them to drive the conversation and set the tone.

Posted yet again: This Is The Daily Stormer’s Playbook

Another great explanation of the problems with debate: Why Debating Sucks (According To A Competitive Debater)

Almost a valid point but by doing what you're doing you're also part of the problem. By hiding away in your own little reality bubble (And yes, BOTH sides have one), both sides entrench and no discussion of any kind occurs.

[The_Animus]

Originally Posted by luchog

This is why I have so many of the conservatrolls and contrarians here on ignore; and why it annoys the crap out of me to see how many people continue to still engage with them, drowning so many potentially useful discussions in noise and making the overwhelming majority of this forum little more than a sounding board for reactionaries.

Unfortunately, too many people on the left are far too eager to let the right drive the conversation and set the tone. And public debate is inherently allowing them to drive the conversation and set the tone.

Posted yet again: This Is The Daily Stormer’s Playbook

Another great explanation of the problems with debate: Why Debating Sucks (According To A Competitive Debater)

I agree with this. I've tried a few times to get more people here to just ignore them but people can't help themselves.

[The_Animus]

Originally Posted by rockysmith76

Almost a valid point but by doing what you're doing you're also part of the problem. By hiding away in your own little reality bubble (And yes, BOTH sides have one), both sides entrench and no discussion of any kind occurs.

The point was that there can be no discussion when the other party has no interest in genuine dscussion. It's just the equivalent of banging your head on the keyboard - painful and a waste of time.

[luchog]

Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive

Weaponized Tolerance at work. See also the Popper Paradox.

Tolerance is not a moral absolute; it is a peace treaty.

[JoeMorgue]

1. Yes, yet again I'm going to put out my standard canard that I really, really don't understand how people who "just can't ignore the people engaging the people" don't understand why "just ignore them" isn't the answer. If you understand why you can't "just ignore the people talking to the trolls" I can't imagine what difficulty exactly you are having with the "Why don't they just ignore them?" problem.

2. But more importantly until "Ignoring them" stops them from voting and otherwise influencing society, it's counter productive.

We can ignore them all we want. They aren't going away. I seriously don't understand how Donald Trump has cured everyone of the "Well just ignore the trolls" mentality.

Because all the behaviors we decided the only way to deal with was to ignore, is what Trump and his followers and his enablers are doing.

How did "ignoring" Trump work out for us?

[luchog]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

1. Yes, yet again I'm going to put out my standard canard that I really, really don't understand how people who "just can't ignore the people engaging the people" don't understand why "just ignore them" isn't the answer. If you understand why you can't "just ignore the people talking to the trolls" I can't imagine what difficulty exactly you are having with the "Why don't they just ignore them?" problem.

I think you're having a difficult time understanding the difference between an Internet message board, and a nationwide society.

You're also doing a great deal of selective reading, since you appear to have missed that whole "deplatforming" discussion.

[Safe-Keeper]

Also, there's a difference between bot reqarding people who just want to derail a thread or disrupt a conversation, and not interacting with people who genuenly want a discussion and just disagree. If a thread is about Trump and the usual suspects come running with whataboutisms, the only way to win is to not play - if you answer them, regardlessly of how, they have succeeded in derailing tve thread.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

What would be required of someone from the alt-right to demonstrate that they want to make a good faith effort at debate?
It seems to me that part of the alt-right playbook is to undermine their own credibility when it comes to constructive discussion.

Oh my word, TGZ you're missing the whole point.

Think of it instead as countering the false message that becomes the narrative because the GOP knows how to repeat a message until it becomes the narrative and we fail to counter that.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by luchog

...

Unfortunately, too many people on the left are far too eager to let the right drive the conversation and set the tone. And public debate is inherently allowing them to drive the conversation and set the tone.

Yes, this, a thousand times this.^

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by rockysmith76

Almost a valid point but by doing what you're doing you're also part of the problem. By hiding away in your own little reality bubble (And yes, BOTH sides have one), both sides entrench and no discussion of any kind occurs.

Who are you thinking of having this discussion with and what about?

Meanwhile the alt-right propaganda machines keeps churning along.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by The_Animus

I agree with this. I've tried a few times to get more people here to just ignore them but people can't help themselves.

There's a time to ignore, a time to counter the propaganda, and a time to reframe the debate.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by The_Animus

The point was that there can be no discussion when the other party has no interest in genuine dscussion. It's just the equivalent of banging your head on the keyboard - painful and a waste of time.

Is a debate the only option you see when the Trump minions repeat the talking point over and over that Trump was addressing Ukraine corruption?

[ChristianProgressive]

Originally Posted by luchog

Tolerance is not a moral absolute; it is a peace treaty.

This.

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

1. Yes, yet again I'm going to put out my standard canard that I really, really don't understand how people who "just can't ignore the people engaging the people" don't understand why "just ignore them" isn't the answer. If you understand why you can't "just ignore the people talking to the trolls" I can't imagine what difficulty exactly you are having with the "Why don't they just ignore them?" problem.

2. But more importantly until "Ignoring them" stops them from voting and otherwise influencing society, it's counter productive.

We can ignore them all we want. They aren't going away. I seriously don't understand how Donald Trump has cured everyone of the "Well just ignore the trolls" mentality.

Because all the behaviors we decided the only way to deal with was to ignore, is what Trump and his followers and his enablers are doing.

How did "ignoring" Trump work out for us?

They must be confronted at every turn possible and driven back under their bridges forever.

[Brainster]

I see that alt-right has become the new term for "Republicans I don't like," replacing the neocons.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by Brainster

I see that alt-right has become the new term for "Republicans I don't like," replacing the neocons.

Well, if the GOP Had not been so eager to embrace them as allies.....

Problem is I think the GOP Has gone totally off the tracks in since 2012; you apparently have not. I have seen GOP politicians..not just Trump do things I did not think any mainstream politician would do.
You think the GOP is the party you might have grown up with in the Reagan era. It's not.
Time to quit the denial. The GOP has made a deal with the devil, and eventually he will come around to collect.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Brainster

I see that alt-right has become the new term for "Republicans I don't like," replacing the neocons.

No. no. Alt-right are white supremacists for the most part, Trump minions for the most part and fully into alternative facts.

Neocons are like the Bush Cheney variety, eager to use military might around the world.

Regular Republicans still exist like George Will and a few others who recognize the alt-right are not Republicans in the true sense.

[Oversimplified a bit if anyone has complaints about my descriptions.]

[luchog]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brainster
I see that alt-right has become the new term for "Republicans I don't like," replacing the neocons.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

No. no. Alt-right are white supremacists for the most part, Trump minions for the most part and fully into alternative facts.

And this is yet another example of the tactics that was well-addressed in the video series you posted. Short, simple, emotionally-loaded, accusatory statements intended to put opponents on the defensive by forcing them to engage in corrections.

The video essay very explicitly and effectively differentiates between conservative, neocon, and alt.right individuals and philosophies, where the overlaps are between them, and how the latter work to emulate and imitate the former to cloak their own goals and aims.

The only purpose of a statement like Brainster's is to engage in exactly the sort of dishonest reframing and misdirecting of the debate described in Innuendo Studios' video essay. And, as usual, their opponents are allowing, even enabling, them to do that.

The overwhelming majority of the right-wing of the spectrum has abandoned honest, reasoned debate, to varying degrees, and engages in the same or similar tactics for shifting, reframing, and evading critical examination of their worldview and goals. Unfortunately, a sizable fraction of the left has as well, but fortunately not yet the majority.

[Venom]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

1. Yes, yet again I'm going to put out my standard canard that I really, really don't understand how people who "just can't ignore the people engaging the people" don't understand why "just ignore them" isn't the answer....

....How did "ignoring" Trump work out for us?

Reminds me of the "we don't negotiate with terrorists".

Of course you will, and you probably should, or else.

[I Am The Scum]

Originally Posted by rockysmith76

BOTH

Literally no one believes you when you use this word.

[Sideroxylon]

The demonstrated form and natural inclination of this place has been to dissect each of the claims and arguments made by a poster and engage with them, often chopping them up with the quote function.

There are a handful of people still here with the insight to not only well choose what to engage with but analyse and break up the distractions. JayUtah is a shinning light.

I am jaded and lack such wit, which my posting reflects.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Sideroxylon

The demonstrated form and natural inclination of this place has been to dissect each of the claims and arguments made by a poster and engage with them, often chopping them up with the quote function.

There are a handful of people still here with the insight to not only well choose what to engage with but analyse and break up the distractions. JayUtah is a shinning light.

I am jaded and lack such wit, which my posting reflects.

Engaging in a debate has its place.

IMO, what the Democrats are doing wrong, and have been since Al Gore and Kerry lost, is not understanding messaging. Go find any of my old political posts from the Bush election and you'll find I've been saying the same thing all along.

[Sideroxylon]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Engaging in a debate has its place.

IMO, what the Democrats are doing wrong, and have been since Al Gore and Kerry lost, is not understanding messaging. Go find any of my old political posts from the Bush election and you'll find I've been saying the same thing all along.

There are a whole generation of under thirties that seem to be well versed in dealing with this kind of argument, having grown up in the online spaces that gave birth to the alt right who have learnt how control debate as described in this video. What the Democrats and left parties around the world need is a large scale injection of youth and being prepared to listen to them.

Youth will not only lead in how to communicate but take the wheel on critical issues like climate change where others have failed.

[Sideroxylon]

Nancy Pelosi took the debate by the scruff in response to the “Do you hate the President?” question/accusation.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

[The Great Zaganza]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Oh my word, TGZ you're missing the whole point.

Think of it instead as countering the false message that becomes the narrative because the GOP knows how to repeat a message until it becomes the narrative and we fail to counter that.

I don't think I'm missing the point.
The Right is eating itself, and it is much smaller than weaker than it tries to appear - it's a pufferfish and just as poisonous.
But some will jump ship sooner or later, and we will have to make it easy for those who genuinely want to quit, and hard for those who are just pretending.

[PhantomWolf]

Originally Posted by Brainster

I see that alt-right has become the new term for "Republicans I don't like," replacing the neocons.

This isn't the case at all. The Alt-Right have always been in the dark shadows of the Far Right, just under different names. All that has happened now is that instead of being the crazy uncle in the corner that no-one wants to acknowledge, they are infiltrating the Republican Party and forcing out those that were moderate conservatives. They are an invasion force in the Republican Party, and a parasite. But hey, I guess as long as they don't wear their white hoods and burn crosses in public, but continue to vote for Trump, a lot of Republicans will be happy to have them taking over.

[Sideroxylon]

Originally Posted by Brainster

I see that alt-right has become the new term for "Republicans I don't like," replacing the neocons.

4chan alt-right to Steve Bannon to Trump. A broad illustration of genealogy of ideas.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Originally Posted by Sideroxylon

4chan alt-right to Steve Bannon to Trump. A broad illustration of genealogy of ideas.

The geneology of the Ideas are shown in old Threads right on this forum, The Alt Right for anyone that Understands them knows they stole their debating tactics straight off the loose change forum of the 9/11truther infact many of the Alt Right are former 9/11Conspiracy Theorists Like the 9/11No Planer Jerome Corsi.
To defeat them in debate one only need totally Humilliate them.

[uke2se]

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf

This isn't the case at all. The Alt-Right have always been in the dark shadows of the Far Right, just under different names. All that has happened now is that instead of being the crazy uncle in the corner that no-one wants to acknowledge, they are infiltrating the Republican Party and forcing out those that were moderate conservatives. They are an invasion force in the Republican Party, and a parasite. But hey, I guess as long as they don't wear their white hoods and burn crosses in public, but continue to vote for Trump, a lot of Republicans will be happy to have them taking over.

Like Luchdog said above, Brainster's comment is a prime example of the type of rhetorical tactic that should not be engaged with.

[ChristianProgressive]

Originally Posted by dudalb

Well, if the GOP Had not been so eager to embrace them as allies.....

Problem is I think the GOP Has gone totally off the tracks in since 2012; you apparently have not. I have seen GOP politicians..not just Trump do things I did not think any mainstream politician would do.
You think the GOP is the party you might have grown up with in the Reagan era. It's not.
Time to quit the denial. The GOP has made a deal with the devil, and eventually he will come around to collect.

The GOP has been rocketing down this path at least since the 1980 presidential campaign. Remember that Reagan used Treason to help win that race with the October Surprise.

America has to face the fact that our democracy has been under systemic attack for the last 40 years by disloyal elements at home colluding with foreign enemies abroad.

[Donal]

Originally Posted by uke2se

Have been arguing this for a while. Hopefully this thread'll go in a different direction than my last thread about this.

I actually wanted to link to the Alt-Right playbook in your thread, but it was already 4 pages deep when I saw it and off the rails.

[Donal]

Originally Posted by rockysmith76

Almost a valid point but by doing what you're doing you're also part of the problem. By hiding away in your own little reality bubble (And yes, BOTH sides have one), both sides entrench and no discussion of any kind occurs.

You completely missed the point. The point is not to avoid having discussion with anyone who disagrees with you. The point is to recognize when someone is just trolling and trying to derail the conversation.

Remember, those trolls are trying to stifle intelligent discussion and cause further rifts. By not engaging them directly, you are denying them that ability. Once the signal to noise ratio has been adjusting by getting rid of the malicious actors, you can have a real discussion with people you disagree with.

[llwyd]

Originally Posted by luchog

And this is yet another example of the tactics that was well-addressed in the video series you posted. Short, simple, emotionally-loaded, accusatory statements intended to put opponents on the defensive by forcing them to engage in corrections.

The video essay very explicitly and effectively differentiates between conservative, neocon, and alt.right individuals and philosophies, where the overlaps are between them, and how the latter work to emulate and imitate the former to cloak their own goals and aims.

The only purpose of a statement like Brainster's is to engage in exactly the sort of dishonest reframing and misdirecting of the debate described in Innuendo Studios' video essay. And, as usual, their opponents are allowing, even enabling, them to do that.

The overwhelming majority of the right-wing of the spectrum has abandoned honest, reasoned debate, to varying degrees, and engages in the same or similar tactics for shifting, reframing, and evading critical examination of their worldview and goals. Unfortunately, a sizable fraction of the left has as well, but fortunately not yet the majority.

Excellent post. I have seen this dynamic for countless times around the social media. These types throw these intellectually empty rhetorical bombs and then the progressives and liberals dutiful start to dissect and argue against them. While the trolls then happily throw the next bomb and so drive and control the discussion. I would never address trolls directly but to use irony and ridicule and continue the discussion regardless. These people are not interested in reasoned debate, they are interested in destroying and sabotaging all reasoned debate - and they are really good at it. We really should think about messaging and rhetorics more seriously and not believe that mere facts, that mere logic is all you need in political debate. They really are not by a long reach.

[ChristianProgressive]

Originally Posted by Donal

You completely missed the point. The point is not to avoid having discussion with anyone who disagrees with you. The point is to recognize when someone is just trolling and trying to derail the conversation.

Remember, those trolls are trying to stifle intelligent discussion and cause further rifts. By not engaging them directly, you are denying them that ability. Once the signal to noise ratio has been adjusting by getting rid of the malicious actors, you can have a real discussion with people you disagree with.

That is why containment and removal is an important part of the process of keeping online fora from being corrupted. Let them scream their crap into the Ban Void.