We Are The Alt-Right

I've noticed this term "alt-right" really become widely used since Trump got elected and it got me wondering exactly where it came from and what it means. It's often used by people on the left in a derogatory manner and many seem to think it's synonymous with white supremacy. Lets break down the word into it's separate parts and consider their meaning. Alt is short for alternative, so we're talking about an "alternative right", something outside of the mainstream right. But what is the mainstream right, is it old school neo-con Republicans like McCain? That's the sort of implication I infer, what they're saying is if you support Trump you must be alt-right but if you support the liberal narrative then you're an honorable mainstream Republican.

That is obviously not a legitimate description of the alt-right, that's just convenient labeling aimed at pushing a political agenda. I would argue the alt-right is something much more nuanced than that, it's a label for right leaning people who are willing to embrace alternative narratives and alternative methods of doing things. It's the outcasts like Ron Paul who are willing the challenge the status quo, it's easy to see how the mainstream detests such politicians, just look how they ignored and mocked him when he ran in '12. Crazy old uncle Paul couldn't possibly get elected their polls said, and his ideas were far too crazy and radical to ever work. He just wasn't mainstream enough at the end of the day.

Over the last 4 years of Obama it seems the momentum that was growing for alternative candidates such as Ron Paul finally manifested its self in the form of someone much less ideal but nevertheless someone that people felt wasn't a mainstream politician. What I think many people on the left fail to realize is that the alternative right is made up of people who truly want to challenge the status quo and make the world a better place by doing so, they aren't evil demons. They are actually the exact type of conservatives and libertarians you will find on ATS, and in my experience most right leaning members here are not raving white supremacists, but at the same time we're not going to embrace white guilt.

Just because some far-right groups have racist ideologies does not mean they represent all people on the right or even the alt-right. The same goes for far-left groups which use violence to push their agenda, I'm not going to judge everyone on the left based on the actions of a small extremist group. And I have to admit I've been a bit guilty of this recently with all the Antifa topics going viral. It's easy to get caught in your own little echo chamber and lose track of how reality actually is. It's also very easy to deny reality if you don't look at arguments from the other side... many people on the left seem to be supporting and defending Antifa as if they cannot possibly do anything wrong because their ideals are righteous.

Clearly these aren't the type of people who take the time to watch videos criticizing SJW's or groups like Antifa, it just don't have the same comedic value for them. So they are much less likely to witness the absolutely horrendous behavior such far-left groups often engage in, but they often feel an ideological alliance with any leftist group and so they ignorantly defend them. Likewise, the people who enjoy watching videos of insane liberals get roasted don't spend much time watching videos from sensible liberals and they get a world view that all leftists must be mentally ill, which obviously isn't a fair or true assessment of reality, it's not much different to saying someone is nazi because they think differently to you.

The point I think I'm trying to get at here is that we're really not so different at the end of day... we all seek real change so that the world can be a better place. People have shown they are willing to completely abandon the mainstream if that's what it's takes, regardless of the MSM or their polls. Almost half the nation voted for Trump, that's a lot of people who decided to give the system a big middle finger, and you can't just slap a single label on all of them. If the best option presented is the "alternative" option then people are going to choose it and it shouldn't come as a shock they didn't decide to elect the option shoved down their throat, especially when that option has such a bad taste, it simply wont be swallowed by people.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Almost half the nation voted for Trump

It is a tale. Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing. SJW's or groups like Antifa

Indulge me please

All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players:
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts,
...ETC.
* From Shakespeare's As You Like It
I guess what I'm saying is that eventually it will grow old and out of fashion and they will disappear into the annals of time.

A key element is to put you on a platform so they can attack you. They must identify you in a manner conducive to their attack, simple really. You have the option of participating or not, or the option of cleaning their clock. That sometimes involves legal counsel lol..



There is merit in what you say.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

It is a term used as a pejorative by the ctrl-Left.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder


Well thought out and stated.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

I've noticed this term "alt-right" really become widely used since Trump got elected and it got me wondering exactly where it came from and what it means. It's often used by people on the left in a derogatory manner and many seem to think it's synonymous with white supremacy. Lets break down the word into it's separate parts and consider their meaning. Alt is short for alternative, so we're talking about an "alternative right", something outside of the mainstream right. But what is the mainstream right, is it old school neo-con Republicans like McCain? That's the sort of implication I infer, what they're saying is if you support Trump you must be alt-right but if you support the liberal narrative then you're an honorable mainstream Republican.

So you noticed a term, wanted to know what it meant and instead of actually researching it, you made up your own definition? And then in your self-imposed confusion, you decided you were a victim?

That is obviously not a legitimate description of the alt-right,

You're right, because you just made it up.

that's just convenient labeling aimed at pushing a political agenda. I would argue the alt-right is something much more nuanced than that, it's a label for right leaning people who are willing to embrace alternative narratives and alternative methods of doing things. It's the outcasts like Ron Paul who are willing the challenge the status quo, it's easy to see how the mainstream detests such politicians, just look how they ignored and mocked him when he ran in '12. Crazy old uncle Paul couldn't possibly get elected their polls said, and his ideas were far too crazy and radical to ever work. He just wasn't mainstream enough at the end of the day.

And you would be wrong. "Alt-Right" isn't a pejorative term that was created by the Left or even the mainstream Right. Alt-Right is a term coined be Richard Bertrand Spencer, a white nationalist, to describe his clique of white nationalists. If you're not a white nationalist and you're labeling yourself "Alt-Right," it's because you're confused.

The people in the Alt-Right, wouldn't consider you Alt-Right. You're only perpetuating confusion among other people who don't know any better either.

a reply to: theantediluvian

"Alt-Right" isn't a pejorative term that was created by the Left or even the mainstream Right. Alt-Right is a term coined be Richard Bertrand Spencer, a white nationalist, to describe his clique of white nationalists.

That's odd, Wikipedia seems to imply the term was used several years prior and was hijacked by Richard Spencer and the MSM:

Paul Gottfried was the first person to use the term "alternative right", when referring specifically to developments within American right-wing politics, in 2008.[5] The term has since gained wide currency with the rise of the so-called "alt-right". White supremacist[6] Richard Spencer used the term in 2010 in reference to a movement centered on white nationalism, and did so according to the Associated Press to disguise overt racism, white supremacism, and neo-Nazism.

Alt-right - Wikipedia

So it looks to me, like most slang and newly invented words, the meaning is highly subjective and easily changed. I didn't attempt to look up the origin of the word because I already knew there would be no clear consensus on who used it first or with what meaning they used it, however there is actually much more history than I was expecting, but at the end of the day words mean what we want them to mean. This thread is an attempt to reclaim the meaning of the word and give it some integrity and honor. Being outside the mainstream is not a bad thing, it's something I take pride in and always will.

So you denounce the recognized alt-right label so that you can usurp it? That makes no sense.

originally posted by: redtic
So you denounce the recognized alt-right label so that you can usurp it? That makes no sense.

I would argue the only people who recognize it as having that meaning ascribe it that meaning to push a political agenda and generalize people. I do not recognize their meaning of the word and never have accepted the way in which they use the term. I recognize the term for what the separate words actually mean. If you're talking about racists then say racists or white supremacists, don't use some low brow political phrase that casts a wide net over a large group of people in an attempt to delegitimize the view point of people who aren't racist.

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder

originally posted by: redtic
So you denounce the recognized alt-right label so that you can usurp it? That makes no sense.

I would argue the only people who recognize it as having that meaning only ascribe it that meaning to push a political agenda and generalize people. I do not recognize their meaning of their word and never have accepted the way in which they use the term. I recognize the term for what the words actually mean. If you're talking about racists then say racists or white supremacists, don't use some low brow political phrase that casts a wide net over a large group of people in an attempt to delegitimize their view point.

You sound like a reasonable person. I think you need another term for representing your views, rather than trying to redefine a term that has a well-known negative connotation.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Alt-right is just a lazy term used with a negative connotation when the person can't figure out why somebody has a different opinion or has the capacity to tolerate something they can't.

Because why think when you can just throw labels around and feel good about yourself?

originally posted by: redtic
You sound like a reasonable person. I think you need another term for representing your views, rather than trying to redefine a term that has a well-known negative connotation.

There are many terms I already use to describe my views, libertarian being the most applicable. This isn't about trying to find a label to describe my views. I just find it highly insulting when two words which partially describe my view points are slapped together and then made synonymous with racism... oddly enough it comes into popularity just after the right was able to win the election due to the rise of alternative view points. The MSM didn't just decide to make the term popular for no reason, there's clever logic behind it.

originally posted by: knowledgehunter0986
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Alt-right is just a lazy term used with a negative connotation when the person can't figure out why somebody has a different opinion or has the capacity to tolerate something they can't.

Exactly, that's more to the point I'm getting at. They don't even really know what the term means when they use it, they just know it's a convenient way to dismiss someones argument and label them a racist at the same time. I've seen the term thrown around far too loosely as a method of attacking people on the right even when they clearly are not racist in any regard.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

The term "alt-right" has a very specific origin and very specific meaning. Why anyone who proclaims not to be racist would want to associate themselves with the term is really beyond me.

Here:

en.wikipedia.org...

If you can refute the origins of the word and willfully would like to represent yourself with the word based on that, then have at it. I know many scoff at wikipedia, but that article has numerous references, so again, if you can refute it and want to continue labeling yourself as such, then good luck to you.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

The term comes from a speech by Paul Gottfried in 2008.

transcript

this thread is dumb.

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder
a reply to: theantediluvian

"Alt-Right" isn't a pejorative term that was created by the Left or even the mainstream Right. Alt-Right is a term coined be Richard Bertrand Spencer, a white nationalist, to describe his clique of white nationalists.

That's odd, Wikipedia seems to imply the term was used several years prior and was hijacked by Richard Spencer and the MSM:

Paul Gottfried was the first person to use the term "alternative right", when referring specifically to developments within American right-wing politics, in 2008.[5] The term has since gained wide currency with the rise of the so-called "alt-right". White supremacist[6] Richard Spencer used the term in 2010 in reference to a movement centered on white nationalism, and did so according to the Associated Press to disguise overt racism, white supremacism, and neo-Nazism.

Alt-right - Wikipedia

So it looks to me, like most slang and newly invented words, the meaning is highly subjective and easily changed. I didn't attempt to look up the origin of the word because I already knew there would be no clear consensus on who used it first or with what meaning they used it, however there is actually much more history than I was expecting, but at the end of the day words mean what we want them to mean. This thread is an attempt to reclaim the meaning of the word and give it some integrity and honor. Being outside the mainstream is not a bad thing, it's something I take pride in and always will.

According to the author Paul Gottfried:

But equally significantly, the curmudgeonly personalities that had allowed the paleos to stand up to those from the Left who had occupied the Right prevented them from carrying their war further. Although spirited and highly intelligent, they were temperamentally unfit for a counterinsurgency. They quarreled to such a degree that they eventually fell out among themselves. Soon they were trying to throw each other out of the shaky lifeboat to which their endangered cause had been confined. Of course considerable disparities in resources and contacts put these partisans into a weaker position than that of their enemies. But their breakdown into rival groups, led by competing heads, commenced early in the conservative wars, and (alas) it has been going on up until the present hour. The founding of our club came out of such a fissiparous event, of the kind that had occurred with some regularity on the Right during the preceding two decades.

Source

Therein lies the problem of belonging to a group or movement.

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

It is a term used as a pejorative by the ctrl-Left.

They coined it themselves.

a reply to: redtic

If you can refute the origins of the word and willfully would like to represent yourself with the word based on that, then have at it. I know many scoff at wikipedia

Well I posted that link in this thread already so I obviously have read the page. Cannot say I'm surprised at all, it says just about what I'd expect Wikipedia to say... I don't scoff at Wikipedia for the reason you may think, it's often a great source of information in this day and age, I scoff at it for the obvious bias and agenda pushing present on a website which is supposed to be open and free for all to contribute. What a joke that is.

I'm not even going to begin to attempt to deconstruct the nonsense on that Wikipedia page, it's so obviously worded in a way which is biased towards only one perspective. This thread is not the first time, nor will it be the last, where I refute a narrative presented by mainstream establishments or sites like Wikipedia. Obviously I'm a nobody and my opinion means nothing though when compared to the mighty authority of Wikipedia.

Ummm... Ms. Crowne, I don't see that in the book...

No, it's not in the book...

Are you saying that the text book is wrong?

Well, uh, what do you think?

How would I know, I don't know more than the world consensus text book, neither do you, you're just one person, who do you think you are?

Nobody.

~ Scene from Brave New World (1998)

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

It is a term used as a pejorative by the ctrl-Left.

Hardly. It was coined by Gottfried and Spencer.

The fight over the degree of adherence to white-nationalist doctrines was an open one within the alt-right. “The Alt-Right Means White Nationalism … or Nothing at All” read the headline of an August 2016 editorial by Greg Johnson, editor of the influential alt-right publication Counter Currents. Johnson was responding to attempts to redefine the movement away from that position by people like Milo Yiannopoulos, the Breitbart journalist who insists he’s only a fellow traveler and not a member of the alt-right. “Milo seems to be defining European identity as hyperliberalism,” Richard Spencer tweeted in June. “This leads nowhere.”

Source

That is the true meaning of Alt-Right.

From Richard Spencer's mouth:

“American society today is so just fundamentally bourgeois,” Spencer told me over the phone. “It’s just so, pardon my French … it’s so *redacted* middle-class in its values. There is no value higher than having a pension and dying in bed. I find that profoundly pathetic. So, yeah, I think we might need a little more chaos in our politics, we might need a bit of that fascist spirit in our politics.”

From the same source as above.

To the OP: Thanks for sending me down this rabbit hole tonight...I've learned a ton about what "Alternative Right" really means...from those that created both the term and the movement.

There is a shearing, centrifugal force to Gottfried’s intellect. It splits the center and flings ideas out; they land where they will. For more than 20 years, he has tried to build a postfascist, postconservative politics of the far-right. That Spencer and his acolytes wanted to cross the threshold into fascist thought and beliefs can’t really be a surprise. And unlike Gottfried, whose relentless iconoclasm has also helped insulate him from certain temptations, most people, and especially those with strong interests in fascism, are turned on by power. If he has unleashed a force in the alt-right that will finally destroy the detested managerial state, it’s a force that has people like Richard Spencer at its core. Since last week, when Spencer declared “Hail Trump” at a valedictory press conference at which attendees were photographed sieg heil-ing, there have been attempts by others on the alt-right to write him off as marginal and to rebrand their movement. If they are able to successfully rename themselves, it won’t change this: Neo-nazism, while not the whole story, is one part of the alt-right, just as the alt-right is not nearly the whole story of Trump’s victory but played a crucial part.

Even if one refuses to believe it, the Alt-Right movement has it's roots in fascism, racism and a fundamental believe that equality is "an unhealthy obsession."

Labels.
People like to label people.
Put them in a tidy little box and use a word to define what you believe them to be.

We come up with new terms to label people we disagree with.
We use social media buzzwords to catergorize and seperate.

Where were all the alts and antis and nazis 2 years ago?

Sticks and stones....