Today it's the YouTubers. Tomorrow, it's the AI running for office. Welcome to digital age. Do you think this will be for the better? I mean, sure, if these YouTubers studied and know politics, but if they're doing it just because they can, then we're probably still doomed.
It is, but think about what happened in the American politics and who ended up in the position. He did because he can and now look at the situation of the country. It's true they're still people, but we can't deny the fact that there are those who will run for office just because they can. I won't say all of them should stay away from the politics, but one or two of those YouTubers could be running for office just for the sake of "views" and "likes".
It's funny how standards change. During the 1980 campaign, people complained that Ronald Reagan was just an aging pretty-boy actor whose only political experience was 8 years as governor of California.
Probably downvoted because - with respect - your comment didn't really add anything interesting or insightful to the discourse here.
For the future it might be more interesting to state why are you excited about this? What's the reason that this is exciting? Are there interesting things about this that other readers might not have considered or that wasn't covered in the article?
Thoughtful and interesting comments that add to the article with extra content/context/objections/etc are usually what people want to see in the comments section. HN has a really wide and varied readership and there often are a lot of readers who have a lot of experience/qualifications or are experts/semi-experts in a subject so the comments are often extremely insightful and often provide another angle to the story. Probably best to save short comments about how you are feeling for twitter.
Thanks Matt, very appreciated. On the other hand I somewhat feel like if I had put forth my opinion on why I was excited, I would have been even more downvoted. I suppose no comment at all is really what they want.
Upvotes & downvotes are used in a specific way here. They aren't meant to show agreement or support, but rather to recognise that your comment holds some interesting value (or lack thereof) for other readers. A quick comment of excitement is low value to other readers, regardless of it being an authentic feeling. Hope that clarifies.
He's not saying Trump is just a joke now, I think. But Trump really did start off as a mostly joke candidate- wouldn't it be funny? Can you imagine? Etc. And then he used his racism and psychopathic tendencies to win the race.
And that’s was an actual joke candidate who newer took the campaign seriously, an serious candidacy from a known celebrity have a high cance of success at a time when the establishment looks incompetent and corrupt.
Already happened in the UK: Sargon of Akkad and CountDankula joined UKIP and are out there speaking out about their brand of alt right/lite YouTube politics.
PrisonPaul of InfoWars also joined, but it seems he’s still mostly staying in his basement and making endless clips about PC or immigration than making the transition to “IRL” like the other two have.
What kind of impact this will have remains to be seen. UKIP is still a fringe party for now.
> Sargon of Akkad and CountDankula joined UKIP and are out there speaking out about their brand of alt right/lite YouTube politics.
I must say, I'm not so sure it's the British liberals (Sargon) and former unironic communist comedians (Dankula) who are pushing "alt right" politics on YouTube.
To quote Sargon of Akkad in an interview published a few hours ago: “After the 20th century, liberalism is the only [political] ideology left standing with any moral credibility. Communism and fascism have both failed catastrophically, and the worst human disasters in all of human history were because of continental collective ideologies like communism and fascism.”
Given that the alt right is basically defined by a respect for that same continental collective ideology (ethno-national socialism), it seems that Sargon of Akkad is a tremendous critic of their ideology, not a purveyor of it.
I think it's fair to say that Benjamin is somewhere in the alt-right nebula: Anti-feminism, UKIP, 4chan, anti-"political correctness"... If it quacks like a duck
Alt-right is defined by its identity politics. Anti-feminism is not anti-women's-rights. Stuff you are listing (minus UKIP) is shared by everyone to the right of the progressives. Including liberals.
People just have to look at the politicians and parties he's supporting. For example in the last French presidential election he opposed the pro-capitalist liberal (redundant as liberals are by definition pro-capitalism). I wonder what's his opinion on the Brazil one. A moderate social democrat vs. fascist belonging to a party called the "Social Liberal Party"?
He's not even a good source of information as his 3 hours long videos consist of Wikipedia articles he glanced through and repeating extreme right-wing conspiracies (Cultural Marxism, the terrorist attack at the Unite the Right rally).
(Also the only decent anti-idpol people are Marxists.)
“A moderated social democrat” who defends Venezuelan and Cuban dictators and who is running (admittedly!) as a puppet for a convicted corrupt politician who he plans to put out of jail. And the other guy is the fascist?
You are either misinformed about the situation in Brazil or being deliberately misleading.
The alt-right is a loosely connected and somewhat ill-defined - (summery).
The Associated Press advises its journalists to not use the term without providing an internal definition, due to its vagueness. They described the "alt-right" label as "currently embraced by some white supremacists and white nationalists" that "may exist primarily as a public-relations device to make its supporters' actual beliefs less clear and more acceptable to a broader audience". - Etymology and scope
Both funkythings and namdnay comment above assert statements to what alt-right is and who belongs to it that the wikipedia article do not. Labeling anti-"political correctness" as alt-right is not supported. Journalist Mike Wendling says that alt-right share the view of anti-"political correctness" with chan culture, but that is as far as the wikipedia article is willing to go.
I'd say what is typical of the alt-right is not that they dislike 'identity politics' (the discourse as a whole, so including right and left), but rather that they actively take a stand and engage in being anti-'identity politics'.
I know tons of people who mostly just steer clear of identity politics altogether, both left and right. But it's only the alt-right people I know, along with a chunk of the left, who seem to really invest in the whole discussion.
I lost all respect for Boehmermann after he released his twitter block list, and just lumped in every journalist to the right of himself with real Nazis. He's part of the problem
So I looked. Every journalist, you say. I didn't see the names of any FAZ journalists. Would you say the entire staff of FAZ is to the left of Böhmermann? Or perhaps I didn't look hard enough. I admit I didn't spend very long.
Did you even watch the video? The VERY FIRST thing he said was "turn it (his girlfriends dog) into the most unfunny thing I could think of...a Nazi". This was a joke, nothing more, nothing less.
Now, the real scandal was that the courts just assumed his intent and just assumed he wanted to harass jews. Which is ridiculous.
I mean, the law _is_ selectively enforced, and it's the CPS' job to decide who to prosecute. That's not so much a legal issue as a social/structure and purpose of police issue.
Moreover in terms of the general law and how that law should or shouldn't be written, I can only recommend this discussion which is more detailed than any discussion we could have here and a more informed source:
I did. Like I said they assumed his intent, which is exactly the opposite to what courts are supposed to do. Do you really think posting a "grossly offensive video on the internet" is enough to get you fined? People are offended all the time. Would you react the same way if Nazis were triggered by Antifa videos?
Did you watch the video? Do you honestly think he hates Jews. Honest question
> Already happened in the UK: Sargon of Akkad and CountDankula joined UKIP and are out there speaking out about their brand of alt right/lite YouTube politics.
It's so strange to see people parrot media talking points. But that's what the media is there to do I suppose.
> PrisonPaul of InfoWars also joined, but it seems he’s still mostly staying in his basement and making endless clips about PC or immigration than making the transition to “IRL” like the other two have.
You obviously have no bias.
> What kind of impact this will have remains to be seen. UKIP is still a fringe party for now.
Hopefully they will serve as the counterweight to the far-left extremism in media.
> I'm zero'ing in on your use of the word 'extremism' because it's a loaded term meant to paint your target as outrageous and unreasonable.
It's not. I'm using it the same way far-left journalists use it. If sargon and dankula are extremists, so are they.
> That said you also mentioned protests as a form of extremism. That's worrying.
I mention antifa and protests for a reason. Seeing as how invested you seem to be, it's obvious to me you already know what I am talking about. As I said, if you truly don't know what I'm talking about, you could easily google it yourself. There are plenty of evidence of violence by the lunatic extremist left supported by the far left media.
I normally would never link to a washingtonpost article but I suspect it's the only one you'd accept.
BuzzFeed News is one of the more reliable, fair, and balanced channels these days. Typically they have less spin than CNN.
That is, speaking only of news; both BuzzFeed and CNN have steaming hot pools of garbage for you to gorge yourselves on, if you think the opinions of morons and advertisers are more important than the facts.
This comes up every time a BuzzFeed News article makes the front page... BuzzFeed News does real, serious journalism and is separate from BuzzFeed's entertainment/quiz/nonsense site (which funds BuzzFeed News). Whether or not you appreciate their perspective as a journalistic site is a different matter, but BuzzFeed News is not a joke.
They haven't already? YouTube is already a key intellectual touchstone for many people already. Whether or not they're party members, they're already influencing many people's views.
I personally worry about it given the flagrant disregard for rigor in their op-ed style, but it's here to stay.
Not so much "disregard for vigor" as systematic far-right racism, helped along by Youtube's algorithmic suggestions. Not only is there a risk of them in politics but also of them radicalising the already angry to acts of terrorism.
93 comments
[ 4.0 ms ] story [ 139 ms ] threadThese are still people and YouTube just gave them a platform to become popular.
There is a long history of entertainers and cultural icons becoming politicians.
And YouTube and other streaming platforms are merely the newest and recently successful platforms for entertainment and cultural influence.
It should not be surprising that these new cultural icons might enter politics.
In many cases, one could argue that both trades are one and the same.
For the future it might be more interesting to state why are you excited about this? What's the reason that this is exciting? Are there interesting things about this that other readers might not have considered or that wasn't covered in the article?
Thoughtful and interesting comments that add to the article with extra content/context/objections/etc are usually what people want to see in the comments section. HN has a really wide and varied readership and there often are a lot of readers who have a lot of experience/qualifications or are experts/semi-experts in a subject so the comments are often extremely insightful and often provide another angle to the story. Probably best to save short comments about how you are feeling for twitter.
Holy fuck I do not want to live in that world.
And that's the danger. Weirdly.
If so, you’re doing yourself a disservice by dismissing him as a joke. I hate the guy as much as anyone but he does deserve some credit.
He saw the way he could win when everyone else thought he was a joke. By the time anyone realized he was going to win it was way too late.
And Mr. Paul here has both.
And that’s was an actual joke candidate who newer took the campaign seriously, an serious candidacy from a known celebrity have a high cance of success at a time when the establishment looks incompetent and corrupt.
In my opinion, the claim "they were financed by PMDB" is fake news that people who only read headlines fall for, as stated in one of the videos.
It's the 3rd episode of season 2 (6th episode overall). Worth watching.
PrisonPaul of InfoWars also joined, but it seems he’s still mostly staying in his basement and making endless clips about PC or immigration than making the transition to “IRL” like the other two have.
What kind of impact this will have remains to be seen. UKIP is still a fringe party for now.
I must say, I'm not so sure it's the British liberals (Sargon) and former unironic communist comedians (Dankula) who are pushing "alt right" politics on YouTube.
To quote Sargon of Akkad in an interview published a few hours ago: “After the 20th century, liberalism is the only [political] ideology left standing with any moral credibility. Communism and fascism have both failed catastrophically, and the worst human disasters in all of human history were because of continental collective ideologies like communism and fascism.”
Given that the alt right is basically defined by a respect for that same continental collective ideology (ethno-national socialism), it seems that Sargon of Akkad is a tremendous critic of their ideology, not a purveyor of it.
Sargon is anti identity politics and a classic, free speech pro-capitalist liberal. I'm not sure where you take your information from
He's not even a good source of information as his 3 hours long videos consist of Wikipedia articles he glanced through and repeating extreme right-wing conspiracies (Cultural Marxism, the terrorist attack at the Unite the Right rally).
(Also the only decent anti-idpol people are Marxists.)
You are either misinformed about the situation in Brazil or being deliberately misleading.
The term "liberal" has changed in the minds of people, my friend. Liberals are now synonymous with left wingers, who are NOT pro-capitalist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right
The Associated Press advises its journalists to not use the term without providing an internal definition, due to its vagueness. They described the "alt-right" label as "currently embraced by some white supremacists and white nationalists" that "may exist primarily as a public-relations device to make its supporters' actual beliefs less clear and more acceptable to a broader audience". - Etymology and scope
Both funkythings and namdnay comment above assert statements to what alt-right is and who belongs to it that the wikipedia article do not. Labeling anti-"political correctness" as alt-right is not supported. Journalist Mike Wendling says that alt-right share the view of anti-"political correctness" with chan culture, but that is as far as the wikipedia article is willing to go.
I know tons of people who mostly just steer clear of identity politics altogether, both left and right. But it's only the alt-right people I know, along with a chunk of the left, who seem to really invest in the whole discussion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right
(The description mentions Richard Spencer promoting the term, someone who Sargon has debated against - him and his position).
News flash, the vast majority of Americans are anti-"political correctness."
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/large-majo...
They are positively conservative by global standards.
https://twitter.com/janboehm/status/948192229218291714
Take it with a grain of salt. But I find this behaviour from a state sponsored journalist worrying.
Now, the real scandal was that the courts just assumed his intent and just assumed he wanted to harass jews. Which is ridiculous.
They said "WE decide what is YOUR intent and context". Unbelievable.
(The purpose of such offenses was so, for example, companies couldn't say "I didn't intend to break the tax laws so please reduce my sentence")
This is practical demonstration than intent and context matter. The other explanation would be, that the law is selectively enforced. Which is worse?
What do you think his intent was?
Mathews didn't realize what he did, when he cited Dankula in the interview, until Dankula pointed it out.
Moreover in terms of the general law and how that law should or shouldn't be written, I can only recommend this discussion which is more detailed than any discussion we could have here and a more informed source:
http://barristerblogger.com/2018/03/24/its-time-to-change-th...
Did you watch the video? Do you honestly think he hates Jews. Honest question
It's so strange to see people parrot media talking points. But that's what the media is there to do I suppose.
> PrisonPaul of InfoWars also joined, but it seems he’s still mostly staying in his basement and making endless clips about PC or immigration than making the transition to “IRL” like the other two have.
You obviously have no bias.
> What kind of impact this will have remains to be seen. UKIP is still a fringe party for now.
Hopefully they will serve as the counterweight to the far-left extremism in media.
I haven't seen any communist bomb threats lately.
By far-left extremism in the media, I'm saying that the media is far-left extremist.
> I haven't seen any communist bomb threats lately.
Google antifa and protests. But I have a feeling you already knew that.
I would like an example of something you consider extremism in the media because I'm betting we have a different definition of extremism.
That said you also mentioned protests as a form of extremism. That's worrying.
It's not. I'm using it the same way far-left journalists use it. If sargon and dankula are extremists, so are they.
> That said you also mentioned protests as a form of extremism. That's worrying.
I mention antifa and protests for a reason. Seeing as how invested you seem to be, it's obvious to me you already know what I am talking about. As I said, if you truly don't know what I'm talking about, you could easily google it yourself. There are plenty of evidence of violence by the lunatic extremist left supported by the far left media.
I normally would never link to a washingtonpost article but I suspect it's the only one you'd accept.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/08/2...
That is, speaking only of news; both BuzzFeed and CNN have steaming hot pools of garbage for you to gorge yourselves on, if you think the opinions of morons and advertisers are more important than the facts.
hardly a benchmark to set your standards by.
Buzzfeed News and Buzzfeed Youtube are miles apart, the first is considered legitimate journalism by US standards, the second is clickbait trash.
I personally worry about it given the flagrant disregard for rigor in their op-ed style, but it's here to stay.