[ SECRET POST #3853 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3853 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.
















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 43 secrets from Secret Submission Post #551.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

And the people who defined it aren't the people who use it. Their agenda is far from pure.

[(Anonymous)]

except if you read the first sentence, they are quoting directly the alt right person who coined the term, Richard Bertrand Spencer? the whole thing is centered around "white identity"

[(Anonymous)]

Be that as it may, an awful lot of not white Americans took up the alt right banner during the last election cycle. Like,a lot of terms, it's been co-opted to mean something else. And nearly all of the people who took up the name had no idea it was,already in use by a guy with fringe beliefs, and moreover, didn't especially care.

[(Anonymous)]

What percentage of non-white Americans took up the alt-right banner last election cycle

And what percentage of non-white Americans constitutes "a lot"

[(Anonymous)]

You want me to quantify my anecdotal experience for you? Fat chance. Any numbers I could come up with would be dismissed out of hand.

If you care to do your own research, look up videos of rallies from the presidential campaign. There were many examples. They were the ones the left were deriding for 'voting against their own self interests' and having the nerve to 'get off the plantation'.

[(Anonymous)]

Numbers are useful because they help quantify how meaningful those experiences are, and how central those people are to the alt-right as a general movement. Whereas anecdotal experience is not generally that meaningful, because it's isolated and small in number. If the number of people who are non-white in the alt-right movement is very small, they're probably not central to the movement or to defining the movement, and therefore not a good argument against the idea that the alt-right is racist.

And, I mean, this is not something that is specific to this particular instance. You want to get a sense of the magnitude of something before you can usefully talk about how significant it is. Very small numbers of people doing things are usually not very representative or significant. Very small numbers of people behave in unusual ways all the time without it being meaningful.

[(Anonymous)]

eh partially agreed, mostly not agreed. if you say something like "feminism" a core group comes to mind for most people and defines the basics of the idea and movement, just like when you say "alt right" a core group comes to mind and defines the basics of the idea and movement.

other groups besides the core exist for sure and may be worse or better and are certainly different within the same banner and not have all the core traits but the banner is held by the core and foremost group and when the label is applied, it generally carries the traits of that core group, and people that believe that white identities and societies are being attacked or ignored are a big part of that core