Interesting fallout over NYT piece on the "Nazi Sympathizer Next Door"
#1
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/25/us/oh...alist.html

The Left is upset about the tone of the piece, which they believe is too low-key and factual.  The article itself wasn't that interesting to me, but the cries from the Left about how the NYT is now biased toward Nazis is... interesting to say the least.  I'll post some images re: The fallout on Twitter below.

[Image: 1511644926826.png]
[Image: 1511644945062.png]
[Image: 1511644993449.jpg]

[Image: 1511647915840.png]
Reply
#2
I know there are Neo-Nazis out there, but does anyone know one? Does anyone know anyone who knows one? What are there, like 500 of them in all? The anti-Nazi and "anti-fascist" hysteria is just that: hysteria.

Of course, when anyone to the right of Stalin is deemed a "Nazi" or "fascist," then all bets are off as to the number of these "Nazi fascists." Brother.
T h e   D u d e t t e   A b i d e s
Reply
#3
I read the article.

This girl Twitter user states Mr. Hovater advocates for murderous racial cleansing.

He no where even indicates anything close to that. Would she say the same of Muhammad Ali?



Nah.

This hysteria has to use exaggeration and projections of "hate" because ((( progressivist liberals))) are terrified that Westerners are deprogramming from the incessant white guilt, forced dispossession and multiculturalism propaganda media .

When regular folks realize WW II was not entirely how the Soviets and U.S. retroactively portrayed it, that the brutality and wanton violence perpetrated on European Americans is actively covered up by the media, that the powers that be are pouring in non Europeans into the U.S. and Europe , they are going to look for some ideology that gives hope for self preservation.

One does not need to be a Neo Nazi to see this, but it is exactly what the media would like to associate.
[-] The following 1 user Likes BC's post:
  • Imperator Caesar Trump
Reply
#4
(11-25-2017, 09:58 PM)BC Wrote: I read the article.

This girl Twitter user states this guy advocates for murderous racial cleansing.

He no where even indicates anything close to that. Would she say the same of Muhammad Ali?



Nah.

This hysteria has to use exaggeration and projections of "hate" because progressivist liberals are terrified that Westerners are deprogramming from the incessant white guilt, forced dispossession and multiculturalism propaganda media .

When regular folks realize WW II was not entirely how the Soviets and U.S. retroactively portrayed it, that the brutality and wanton violence perpetrated on European Americans is actively covered up by the media, that the powers that be are pouring in non Europeans into the U.S. and Europe , they are going to look for some ideology that gives hope for self preservation.

The thing that's really embarrassing for the NYT and the Left in this case is that it's an example of narrative confusion.  The Left simply does not know how to control what people are talking about anymore.  The intention of this piece is clear to me: Make people suspect your average white person is a Nazi.  The mundane language was designed to make you think that every white person who isn't aggressively liberal is hiding genocidal thoughts; they may seem normal, but so did that guy in that NYT article.  The Twitter backlash comes from the average Leftist not understanding this, likely as a result of journalists who simply aren't good at their craft (widescale manipulation) any longer.  There's also too much purity spiraling to allow for that kind of subtlety.  

It reminds me of American History X.  Remember how Ed Norton's character made a lot of really sound, convincing arguments on topics that had nothing to do with "Nazism" proper?  The intention of the film was to connect rational arguments coming from the Right with some form of extremism.  It was a gambit: Condition the viewer to shut down emotionally whenever reasonable concerns about immigration etc. come up.  The reason that is risky is because you're exposing people to the arguments in the first place.  It's the same thing with this piece.  They are using Psych 101 to attempt to connect this guy's ideas with something "abhorrent."  More than that, they're trying to associate mundane white people who do things like grocery shop with Nazis.  

Of course it all fell flat, and no one reads the NYT anyway.
Reply
#5
(11-25-2017, 10:12 PM)Imperator Caesar Trump Wrote: The thing that's really embarrassing for the NYT and the Left in this case is that it's an example of narrative confusion.  The Left simply does not know how to control what people are talking about anymore.  The intention of this piece is clear to me: Make people suspect your average white person is a Nazi.  The mundane language was designed to make you think that every white person who isn't aggressively liberal is hiding genocidal thoughts; they may seem normal, but so did that guy in that NYT article.  The Twitter backlash comes from the average Leftist not understanding this, likely as a result of journalists who simply aren't good at their craft (widescale manipulation) any longer.  There's also too much purity spiraling to allow for that kind of subtlety.  

It reminds me of American History X.  Remember how Ed Norton's character made a lot of really sound, convincing arguments on topics that had nothing to do with "Nazism" proper?  The intention of the film was to connect rational arguments coming from the Right with some form of extremism.  It was a gambit: Condition the viewer to shut down emotionally whenever reasonable concerns about immigration etc. come up.  The reason that is risky is because you're exposing people to the arguments in the first place.  It's the same thing with this piece.  They are using Psych 101 to attempt to connect this guy's ideas with something "abhorrent."  More than that, they're trying to associate mundane white people who do things like grocery shop with Nazis.  

Of course it all fell flat, and no one reads the NYT anyway.

Exactly. You nailed it.

The Left is taking a calculated risk by exposing its audience to rational, reasonable arguments but trying to box those as Naziesque; thereby inextricably connecting seeming normal appearance with "extremism."

Not all Leftists are in on it though so they react like this woman did and Mr. Silver.
Reply
#6
I've observed that the left is just bewildered and fascinated at any existence of groups that are deemed extremists that feed their Puritan cleansing mentality e.g. if there's one neo-Nazi that might live in your town then God Damn It The Country Is Racist. As a non-white I don't fear for my existence over even a singular genuine neo-Nazi living in the Midwest or the South the West or the NE. It's not even a worry of mine.

Note: I enjoy how the NYT gives a warning of it's in the Midwest ... This isn't a surprise zers (or whatever the transgender pronoun is for guys).
Unfortunately I don't have any "fun facts" about me unless being a practicing Catholic counts.

Trying to get better every day week.
Reply
#7
(11-25-2017, 09:26 PM)VoxClamantis Wrote: I know there are Neo-Nazis out there, but does anyone know one? Does anyone know anyone who knows one? 
Oh, I've met several. I had one get very, very upset with me because I had a German surname and I wasn't a good Volksdeutsche, just waiting for der Tag and Germany to revenge herself on the evil allies and sieg Heiling (hailing [German]victory).. 

I've mentioned in another thread, my correspondence with the founder of the 'World Union of Europeans' who lived in Florida, but he was actually a veteran of the NSDAP. They are out there, but the lefties are blowing it all out of proportion.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
  “Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog also.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'


Reply
#8
Daily reminder that according to the SPLC, everyone on this forum is a Nazi.  From their website:

“Radical traditionalist” Catholics, who may make up the largest single group of serious anti-Semites in America, subscribe to an ideology that is rejected by the Vatican and some 70 million mainstream American Catholics. Many of their leaders have been condemned and even excommunicated by the official church.
Adherents of radical traditional Catholicism, or “integrism,” routinely pillory Jews as “the perpetual enemy of Christ” and worse, reject the ecumenical efforts of the Vatican, and sometimes even assert that recent popes have all been illegitimate. They are incensed by the liberalizing reforms of the 1962-65 Second Vatican Council, which condemned hatred for the Jews and rejected the accusation that Jews are collectively responsible for deicide in the form of the crucifixion of Christ.
Radical traditionalists are not the same as Catholics who call themselves “traditionalists” — people who prefer the old Latin Mass to the mass now typically said in vernacular languages — although the radicals, as well, like their liturgy in Latin. They also embrace extremely conservative social ideals with respect to women.
Reply
#9
Just like the word "nazi" has been turned into an absurd charicature through propaganda, "traditional christian" will be turned into the same. And in the future, we will hear people and self-proclaiming christians trying to guilt others by calling them "traditional christians", and the objects of those words will do their best to prove that they are not "traditional christians". And news outlets will reassure readers that they are not "neo-traditional christians". And even people who uphold divine tradition will remind others constantly that they are not "traditional christians", and that they condemn "traditional christians". And the equivalent of this forum will complain that news outlets are trying to make people suspect they are "traditional christians".

And all of this will happen, because jews control the world, and just like they turned other groups that knew too much into charicatures of evil, they will do the same with traditional christianity. Because they can, and they want to, and time has proven once and again that the goyim will do anything to please their jewish overlords.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Mozalbete's post:
  • BC
Reply
#10
Quote:Radical traditionalists are not the same as Catholics who call themselves “traditionalists” — people who prefer the old Latin Mass to the mass now typically said in vernacular languages — although the radicals, as well, like their liturgy in Latin.

This last part of their quote has always bothered me. It’s like a very thinly veiled attempt to link their self-proclaimed “bad guys” with anyone professing a desire to maintain tradition. I’ve spent a good bit of time ime at work countering that line with some liberal minded coworkers.

Let me try: Folks from the SPLC are not the same as sociopaths called  “serial killers” — people like Jeffrey Dahmer — although the psychos in the U.S., as well as the SPLC, generally speak in English.
-sent by howitzer via the breech.

God's love is manifest in the landscape as in a face.  - John Muir

I want creation to penetrate you with so much admiration that wherever you go, the least plant may bring you clear remembrance of the Creator.  A single plant, a blade of grass, or one speck of dust is sufficient to occupy all your intelligence in beholding the art with which it has been made  - Saint Basil

Heaven is under our feet, as well as over our heads. - Thoreau, Walden
[-] The following 1 user Likes Jeeter's post:
  • jovan66102
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)