Who Are The Proud Boys?

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Apparition of Jack said:

@Leo Gura Leo, American nationalism generally puts white people on top. The Proud Boys having black and hispanic people in it is the same thing as a racist misogynist redneck saying "I can't be racist I have black friends!"

It's entirely possible to have close connections with people of other races whilst still maintaining an internal sense of your own racial superiority. It's also possible to have friends of other races whilst still maintaining an sense of your racial inferiority. Anti-minority bias in minorities is a real thing. My family comes from a migrant background and yet my aunt was literally complaining about people from our culture a few months ago. It's internalised racism.

Watch the video again, you'll notice there's a part where they attack a reporter for being part of the "antifa media." WHen she says shes not antifa they just tell her "well you're still an Arab."

That's white supremacy and racialism in a nutshell. If they had an Arab member of the Proud Boys, that wouldn't somehow make their remarks against her OK. They're a racist, white supremacist organisation that accept minorities as a way to deflect from criticism.

No, it's different than a racist having a black friend. Here the black guy subscribes to the philosophy. It's like having a black guy in a KKK hood. Why would the black guy do it? Obviously not for the white supremacy.

It's like when Vaush calls Saagar a white supremacist. It's dumb. Obviously Saagar is not a white supremacist, but he likes nationalism. It's not about race for him.

There is a lack of understandimg here of the nationalist worldview. You just instantly smear them as white supremacists.

[dyslexicCnut]

@Leo Gura Oh I see, you'll take on the easier challenge but won't address the response that thoroughly takes your logic to task.

Your argument now is essentially, you have to be white in order to be a white supremacist. I thoroughly demonstrated how that isn't true in the response you conveniently skipped past, despite myself being the one to initiate this tangent of the discussion.

[Akemrelax]

30 minutes ago, dyslexicCnut said:

There are only 2 possibilities. Black culture developed as it has due to environment, or genetics.

One can believe black culture developed as a result of the environment and simultaneously believe that black people need to take responsibility to change it without seeking outside help or blaming the past. So they do blame the environment but think the solution is individual ownership; "pick yourselves up by the bootstraps" mentality.

 

 

[dyslexicCnut]

1 minute ago, Akemrelax said:

One can believe black culture developed as a result of the environment and simultaneously believe that black people need to take responsibility to change it without seeking outside help or blaming the past. So they do blame the environment but think the solution is individual ownership; "pick yourselves up by the bootstraps" mentality.

No shit. The argument I'm making is that if you explicitly reject external circumstances as a potential culprit for black community issues then you are implicitly ascribing their shortcomings to genetics rather than socioeconomics, which is to affirm the race-realist position that black people are genetically inferior, which obviously denotes racism.

There is no point in responding to this argument with "well black people still need to pull their pants up". It's like saying "criminals just need to stop doing crime". Totally pointless when the discussion pertains to the causal relationship of environment and black crime. 

[Akemrelax]

6 minutes ago, dyslexicCnut said:

The argument I'm making is that if you explicitly reject external circumstances as a potential culprit for black community

No shit. I am arguing they don't reject external circumstances and from what you describe nor does your mother. They just don't want to focus on. 

You are at the Expert stage of ego development buddy.

[No Self]

1 hour ago, hoodrow trillson said:

Honestly?  This might be a toxic view but:

They’re unattractive, sexless men.  They remind me of guys who get into the extreme ends of politics to fill that void of getting zero pussy.  They also remind me of those ‘MGTOW’ guys who use the internet to feel a sense of camaraderie in their lives since they can’t get it through normal means.

Maybe I’m projecting somehow or something but alas that’s what I am observing.

This is definitely an important factor. The traditional role of middle-class father/husband is incompatible with this 'feral' mindset. Lots of this behaviour could be seen as 'letting off steam' in the absence of a healthy community, identity, vision for the future and so forth. It could even be seen as an appetite for destruction having lost all hope.

Regarding the earlier discussion of victimhood, I am a 'person of colour' but I prefer to give extra consideration for the perspectives those who are different to me in order to compensate for any inherent bias I have resulting from being stuck with my physical form 24/7, and only intellectually understanding other people's lives.

There are numerous ways in which these guys are worthy of sympathy and have legitimate victimhood credibility, even if they are not going to win the misery olympics. Understanding these will enable a more effective and more compassionate viewpoint, even if there will also be a place for brute force in response to actual terrorism.

Firstly, these guys are being bombarded with social media disinformation and even psychological warfare, often originating in places like Russia. Add in Fox News, Alex Jones, etc. and the result is going to be psychological mayhem. They are disposable pawns in Trump's game of Divide and Rule.

Presumably, they are also using drugs, porn, thrill-seeking, etc. to compensate for lacking a healthy frame of mind (the fact that they actually talk about opposing masturbation is a red flag here).

In their culture, it is not OK for men to have feelings or to have any sort of feminine energy, which sets up yet more mental dysfunction as their internal environment descends into chaos, trying to deny the truth about themselves.

They have clearly been denied the education that would give them sharp critical thinking skills, a functional intellect, a broader perspective on their own place in the world, appreciation for the grievances of others, not to mention avoiding primitive black/white, us/them, good/bad type of logic, which is caused by excessive anger retarding rational cognition.

Then there's the harsh side of being a low-status male (not to sound like Jordan Peterson). The traditional role of being thrown into the meat grinder of wars has been thwarted by today's relatively nonviolent global community, and if they are not wealthy, respected or at least able to experience positive relationships, they could well conclude that they'd like to be a part of an enraged war against the world that they feel has left them without a place.

Yes, this is a fallacious mentality because they could all work on themselves, but apparently they do not actually know this because no one has educated them. Pity the fool.

I could go on, but needless to say, real progress on these issues will come when we can view sickness and wounded behaviour with understanding and empathy. Love your enemies.

[dyslexicCnut]

40 minutes ago, Akemrelax said:

No shit. I am arguing they don't reject external circumstances and from what you describe nor does your mother. They just don't want to focus on. 

You are at the Expert stage of ego development buddy.

I have some embarrassing information to share with you. The example I provided shows a conversation where she explicitly rejects the external circumstances as a plausible explanation, so try again, next time after having properly comprehended what you're pompously responding to. I get to be pompous since I'm not making any embarrassing oversights.

[Rilles]

"Proud Boys‘ values center on the following tenets:

Minimal Government
Maximum Freedom
Anti-Political Correctness
Anti-Drug War
Closed Borders
Anti-Racial Guilt
Anti-Racism
Pro-Free Speech (1st Amendment)
Pro-Gun Rights (2nd Amendment)
Glorifying the Entrepreneur
Venerating the Housewife
Reinstating a Spirit of Western Chauvinism"

From their website

[Willie]

This sounds like a “nature vs. nurture” argument applied to an entire ethnicity rather than a person. That’s interesting, I never thought about it that way.

If you go all in on the side of nature, you’d be saying they’re naturally inferior. If you go all in on nurture, white Americans don’t deserve any of the material wealth and status they have in society because they used slavery to get it.

The reality is neither of those, of course.

[Hello from Russia]

But the genetics of other races can for sure be worse because their conditions made them develop slower than white people.

It doesn't mean we should hate them for that reason, though, and strip them off of various privileges. Rather the opposite

Edited October 4, 2020 by Hello from Russia

[No Self]

6 minutes ago, Hello from Russia said:

But the genetics of other races can for sure be worse because their conditions made them develop slower than white people.

 

[Leo Gura]

27 minutes ago, Hello from Russia said:

But the genetics of other races can for sure be worse

Genetics are not good or bad. There are pros and cons to each genetic variation depending on environment.

A gorilla has better genetics than you for living in the Congo jungle.

Saying that white people have the best genetics is dumb. It's clearly an ego move. There is no other reason to say such a thing.

[Girzo]

13 minutes ago, Hello from Russia said:

But the genetics of other races can for sure be worse because their conditions made them develop slower than white people.

The genetics of every race are adapted best to their environment. My slavic ass would do terrible on the desert, but arabs live there without too much stress. It's just that some environments have lower ceilings to growth, they couldn't have developed because of lack of natural resources and natural terrain barriers. Only for the last hundred years global trade started to equalize access to rare resources and technology.

[Lyubov]

8 hours ago, Hello from Russia said:

But the genetics of other races can for sure be worse because their conditions made them develop slower than white people.

oooof.... that's not it bruh 

[Lyubov]

I would not use a blanket term and call the Proud Boys a white supremacist group. They are more a nationalist group but also I would say they are part of a greater racist coalition. They claim to be anti-racist but I think their definition would be quite myopic and not as nuanced as one from a more developed perspective. Still not making these distinctions can be a bit of a mistake when discussing these topics because each group requires a different approach to integrate and dissolve. 

[dyslexicCnut]

Leo: You have to be white to be a white supremacist.
Everyone with a brain: *cringe*

[No Self]

4 hours ago, Etherial Cat said:

You've got a fair amount of excellent points here, imo. .

Gracias.

5 hours ago, Lyubov said:

I would not use a blanket term and call the Proud Boys a white supremacist group.

Yes, I hope the futility of the racist label starts to become apparent. It is like arguing whether Russia is in Europe or in Asia. (Russia is 'transcontinental'.)

For a good analogy, the KKK started out as an organisation dedicated to various charitable causes. The original mission statement contained little hint of any racist intentions. Obviously, it drifted over time.

The mechanism behind this drifting phenomenon involves lots of virile men eager to be seen as highly enthusiastic members, leading to the collective slowly descending into what we might call extremism.

Given the rather bland conservative mission statement of the Proud Boys, the ultimate goal seems to be a return to a 1950s-style society when the whole world revolved around their demographic (the 'housewife' thing is a red flag!). This attempted overcompensation also suggests that they feel they are neglected members of society, as per my previous rant. 

They are cherry-picking from their favourite decade. They don't seem to want 1950s nuclear warfare panic. And the isolationism of closed borders is a far cry from the US' extensive international involvement of the '50s, nor would there be any equivalent of working towards putting man on the moon if they are no longer willing to fund anything via taxes.

So whether or not the aspect of black community subordination would be included in their self-centered vision is a matter of interpretation and cannot be established with decisive precision. But it can be predicted that the movement will change, and not necessarily for the better.

[Leo Gura]

5 hours ago, dyslexicCnut said:

Leo: You have to be white to be a white supremacist.
Everyone with a brain: *cringe*

You don't technically have to be, but in practice yes.

Link us a video of a non-white white supremacist which is not a Dave Chappelle skit. I want to see these non-white white supremacists in action.

And you calling them white supremacists doesn't count. THEY have to self-identify as such.

For example, just because you THINK Sagaar is a white supremacist does not make it so. That's your projection, distinct from his self-identification.

[Lyubov]

16 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Link us a video of a non-white white supremacist which is not a Dave Chappelle skit. I want to see these non-white white supremacists in action.

 

 

[Leo Gura]

45 minutes ago, Meta-Man said:

@Leo Gura

09:13

Hehe, that is quite something to behold.

Although racism within sexual preferences is not a very strong case. I definitely have racist sexual preferences. I would not sleep with all races equally. I think this is extremely common and not something we're gonna change.

I guess I would like to know if that Asian gay dude truly believes that whites are better, or he simply prefers to sleep with white guys in the same way that I enjoy Asian girls. If he just prefers to sleep with white guys, I get that. My Asian ex-girlfriend liked to date white guys too. She didn't like Asian guys. But I wouldn't call her white supremacist simply due to that. To me white supremacy has a higher bar to clear.