UKC

Bret Weinstein on his view of the regressive left, both working alongside them and being one of their victims:

youtube.com/watch?v=bz0oxIZ3xIg&

Weinstein is a biologist and evolutionary theorist who taught at Evergreen College during its SJW meltdown.  He's a careful and precise thinker with some interesting observations.  

The video is an hour and seven minutes, so make yourself a brew before settling in 

Looks like more Alt right guff to me (see link below) but I'll watch and judge for myself.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/evergreen-state-college-another-side_b_598cd...

Oh man. If Weinsteins experience can be judged as alt-right then we are truly lost. The guy is solidly left wing but (as is becoming so normal these days) was ejected for failing to be doctrinal enough.

The footage is all there. The Evergreen State debacle had cultural revolution China and Lord Of The Flies written all over it. The Huff Posts reading of it is as much "alternative facts" and fake news as anything Trump could dream up.

On Evergreens "Day of Absence" , as all the whites leave campus it just needs Jon Snow on the school gate to say "....

A guy from some swamp university in a Washington state backwoods village (that also happens to be the state capital, I know...) defending a group of Trumpsters called "PatriotPrayer" or some such idiocy, at  a conference organized by a bunch of right wing thicko Incels calling themselves "Students for Liberty"? 

No thanks, there is not enough mind bleach for what I would need after watching ten minutes of that pathetic whining.

Here is the grandiose mission statement of the conference organizers:

"Students For Liberty is a rapidly growing network of pro-liberty students from all over the world. Our mission is to educate, develop, and empower the next generation of leaders of liberty. We are the largest libertarian student organization in the world. We accomplish this through a strategy of empowerment, identifying the top student leaders and training them to be agents of change in their communities. What began as a small meeting of young leaders has become an international movement of students with thousands of leaders around the world and with operations on every inhabited continent. The numbers above represent SFL's impact since its founding."

Well, f*ck them.

CB

What does the term "alt right" mean to you?  

As it was originally coined, it meant "white supremacists/white nationalists".  E.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right

But the term seems to have quickly morphed to be used for anyone who is in any way critical of identity politics and the woke, SJW far-left. 

I suggest you do some background reading on Brett Weinstein and the Evergreen scandal.  Pop in to YouTube and see what occurred.

You might get a better understanding of why he is such a proponent of free speech.

I wasn't refering to Weinstein as I hadn't listened to any of the video at that point. I was referring to where most of the fuss was made on the internet and the more  liberal responses to that (as I linked). If people are on the left they are likely to disavow pretty much anything Tucker Carlson says.

So far the Youtube clip is OK... however he doesn't seem very left to me ... looks in UK terms like a straight up liberal with libertarian leanings. I'm really struggling to understnd what happened to his management's responsibilities in all this so (like your history) he is blaming the left for being allowed to do such stuff by their managers. Crazy left ideas (assuming he is truthful) can't thrive unless someone in charge allows them to.

The normal modern meaning ... stuff like the majority of content and comment on Breitbart and similar web sites rather than the more extremist beginnings. I was fully aware of the signalling (that so annoys libertarians) so should probably have stuck an ironic upside down smiley on it.

It's quite a remarkable case to not know much about.  Then again, in left-wing circles it probably isn't particularly remarkable and may even be celebrated (a lot of SOAS students seemed keen to do the same).  Its no surprise you are oblivious to what went on in that obscure UK institution when Evergreen, having made international news and a story that millions will be aware of, barely registers with you.

That's a scary statement.  If you are must not agree with someone from the other side of the fence on anything?

Your inability to call a spade-a-spade and not see a modern day lynching of someone's career, for simply having taken a consistent approach to racism, is disappointing.  Rather than pointing to the top of the hierarchy, why not accept that the paying students and their sheer numbers may just get the management they desire.  In this case one that was willing to support mob-rule.

Compare and contrast with the Huff Post: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/01/opinion/when-the-left-turns-on-its-own.h...

He may be solidly left-wing but also stupid enough to allow himself to be used by people like Tucker Carlson. And your Cultural Revolution hyperbole is absolutely ridiculous - estimates vary but it's thought upwards of 750, 000 people were killed during the Cultural Revolution. 

How many libertarians does it take to change a light bulb?

Answer: One, but he doesn't have to turn it, he just waits for the world to revolve around him.

Maybe at the weekend I'd indulge an hour to check it out but no time during the week so if you cant wait until then for your argument with a leftist then write some point from the vid and I'll give it a go. 

Estimates range from 100 to 750,000 so westerners pick which one? 

Estimates range up to 7.5 million. I've never seen one as low as 100, 000. Try the second paragraph in this article - 

https://www.sciencespo.fr/mass-violence-war-massacre-resistance/en/document...

Your point about westerners is irrelevant and in poor taste anyway. 

Different take on things

https://psmag.com/education/the-real-free-speech-story-at-evergreen-college

I like Bret Weistein, and I think there's a perfectly valid point being made by academics in the US like him, Jonathan Haidt and others about the insane behaviour of students. I've just never seen the relevance to anything in my life.

Of course I had heard about it and seen a variety of opinions. I had just not listened to that video clip before or heard more than sound bites from him. I think its always worthwhile dipping into opposing thinkers presentations before we curl up in our slippers of our own views (we are all normally difficult to shift in our opinions ....apart from, rather oddly, extremists some of whom seem to be able to flip flop quite amazingly).

His ideas hit some sensible points on the head and I am no fan of authoritarian thought of any political alignment, especially not in universities.  His local SJW points match far left SWP actions I've had to suffer... and ring true ... yet these people are minority nutcases who need system failures to progress. I cannot believe this is likely for all those labelled by the US right as SJW nor possible under the vast majority of University management systems. So for a man of intellect he sure seems to fall into some easy traps. All these assertions he makes around the 50 minute mark need pinning down with evidence and how power forms from them otherwise beyond his own unfortunate experience (iif true)  are naught but rhetoric and hyperbole. The idea of a silent majority of staff supporting his views is weird.... in the modern world we can just run an anonymous survey in a few hours and evidence it. 

I know he is cautious in his support for The Political Compass (TPC) but he then uses it to make what look like several dubious and some erroneous statements. Hitler had a pact with Stalin so authoritarians of right and left can work together. He claims bottom  left positions for himself on TPC but nothing I'm aware if that he has ever said looks remotely socialist to me. His alliance with the libertarian right is assumed to be a good thing (in direct contradiction to his earlier critiques of similar SJW groupthink)

TPC is based on opaque and probably bullshit methodology. Under his own terms we should say its use is unacceptable until it's evidence based.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Political_Compass

Except that his views simply don't square with that Tucker Carlson appearance nor the faked photo of students (linked in Duncan's post)  which certainly look like standard Alt Right distortions.

Your view on Tucker Carlson is the scary one. Once we broadly accept liars in journalism it is dead, irrespective of one's political views. Tucker in particular on Fox News  (and Fox News in general) is a cess pit precisely because it delivers lies so often, not because it is right wing. This is what the wonderful freedom of speech in the US gives us... too much right to lie and no responsibility

When you see the name Rummel mentioned you know lies will follow and then you see so called  "Secret documents", which are the usual tired methods in any piece of Western propaganda. Yes mistakes were made, no one says different and I would certainly not defend harming people but from many years studying western figures when writing about socialist countries it is safe to say they are always so vastly exaggerated as to render them meaningless. 

Perhaps you didn't read the piece but just turned off when you saw Rummel's name. If you had you'd have seen a range of estimates from different people, all higher than your 100,000. 

I have no time for the 'yes mistakes were made' line. It's morally reprehensible. And your evidence-are big generalisation at the end is worthless. 

Would you apply that reasoning to someone on the other side?  They should not be interviewed by Owen Jones, for example, as to do so makes them a hard-left bigot?

Its the same mentality I'm afraid.  Fortunately these are just dozens of students so no deaths.  But if they can destroy two people's careers on the strength of their offended minds, that should be cause for concern.

I've heard Tucker Carlson give some surprisingly good interviews.  When Channel 4, the BBC, or the Guardian have failed entirely to do their job, he has (on the rare occasion I've gone near Fox) done what left-leaning media should have done.

Writing him off because you don't agree with his network or his views is one thing.  Writing off anyone willing to talk to him is quite another.  All the more so when levelling any accusation at the left results in claims of unfairly viewing them as a singular entity, but a blanket viewpoint of the right or their news sources is seemingly ok. 

Are you suggesting Owen Jones is a far left bigot?

Yes a range of people who are all westerners and I'm sure you will be the first to admit that "mistakes were made", in the course of capitalism but of course that wouldn't be "Morally reprehensible", would it? 

Well good for you., however, some good work doesn't mean we forgive common lies. There are plenty of websites in the US that monitor the press and show clear facts in opposition to what he says on a number of regular occasions. Again this is nothing to do with him being right wing or just being a right wing problem: RT makes shit up as well. Although the UK press has its faults and biases, they cannot lie with impunity. Sky News is hugely better than US Fox News for instance.

This is a variation on the 'tu quoque' fallacy, one without any basis in fact at all. Where the hell do you get the idea I'm defending capitalism? And what on earth  gives you the idea I'd use the 'mistakes were made'' argument? 

I'm no fan of much of Owen Jones' stuff despite being broadly on the same side, but he and Tucker Carlson are hardly comparable.  And 'the same mentality' amongst those students? How do you know that? Have you seen psychological profiles of the participants in each situation? No, of course you haven't. You're just making it up on the basis of a few articles and video clips. 

Of course when it comes to Russia, China, Venezuela or when the British media are planning a regime change/genocide/weeks of bombings then lies rather than being... Wait a minute. 

Did you just say the British gutter press don't lie? Even about domestic politics? 

I mean obviously when it comes to physically destroying other countries and our false flag ops they lie all the time but they also lie about unemployment figures and such like, just like their political representatives. 

I can't believe you wrote that the British gutter press (which is the lot) don't lie all the time and get away with it. 

Once upon a time Carlson was a proper journalist, and quite well regarded, until he took the Fox dollar. It may be that Owen Jones does end like that the way things are being polarised - I am not impressed by some of his more recent stuff at all - but he's a long way from being a left-wing Carlson. Can't shout for one thing...

I said they don't lie with impunity. The penalties are not usually very strict but they are there and notified apologies are required. What the UK gutter press do well is spin nasty rhetoric without quite lying (and they are not the only ones).  When a society accepts clear lies from the press I see that as a broken society. 

I hate the British gutter press but it's just stupid to say they lie 'all  the time'. They do lie, a lot, but it's not the whole story. The Daily Mail in particular employs quite a few proper journalists and some of their investigative work is actually good quality.

As a general point you undermine your case(s) by acting like Seumas Milne on steroids and being so rabidly dogmatic all the time. 

This is quite enlightening about Tucker Carlson

youtube.com/watch?v=6_nFI2Zb7qE&

Gaaargh, this kind of post makes me feel physically sick. Use of the word woke in a pejorative way. SJW? Identity politics as something only to oppose.

You say that as though there was a "normal modern meaning" of "alt-right", when in fact the term is very much in flux with all sorts of different people using it in different ways.

You seem to be using the term as meaning pretty much the same as "right". 

I won't watch that. The name Tucker Carlson is almost enlightening enough.

CB

Alt-right is the far right trying to hide their real ideology behind a trendy name. 

It’s an interview with Rutger Bregman, it didn’t get aired, because Carlson seriously loses his shit. 

That's satisfying viewing.