Not Charlottesville.

Post Reply
User avatar
jakell
Posts: 188
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:10 am

Not Charlottesville.

Post by jakell » Mon Aug 14, 2017 3:30 pm

I don't usually watch Peterson's 'shorts', but this one caught my eye, probably due to the unintended clickbait on his part :



It's a very good example of a considered and rational exchange in the face of a polarising external situation and it's quite heartening to see how Peterson's (slightly dogged) approach actually produced a positive outcome (such folks usually develop selective deafness). There is a poorly edited part at the end where he seems to be ad-libbing, but that is not the core of the video.

I also think this illustrates something I've been trying to pay attention to lately, and that is how the World rolls on outside of the narrow window of topicality that mass media encourages us to adopt. The present drama is not (just) Charlottesville, but there are plenty of other dramas going on too.. and it's not just about drama (something we tend to be biased towards), which is the exact reason why in one thread here I have attempted to focus away from extremes towards the less heated areas.
I'm really suggesting that we should try to make more of the 'multitasking' abilities of our minds. I've mused before that it's the internet that encourages our obsessiveness, but that's still no excuse.

User avatar
jakell
Posts: 188
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:10 am

Re: Not Charlottesville.

Post by jakell » Tue Aug 15, 2017 12:01 pm

In reference to Jordan Peterson's exchange with the journalist, he's not only been called far-right before, but Alt-Right. (Milo too)
(Alt-Right => Nazi => it's ok to punch you (or worse).

I wonder if, in the light of recent events, people will start to take care their use of these labels. Probably not because there are too may clicks and views connected to them. Peterson has the presence of mind to tackle this, others may not and get punched.

I'm probably going to properly comment on the Alt-Right at some point but, related to this 'labeling' issue, thanks to Spencer it looks like that 'Nazi' one is going to properly stick. He's played a fairly dangerous game in not putting any ground between him and the Neo-Nazis.. there were a tiny number of half-hearted salutes at last year's NPI and that got him in deep water (with his own people), at Charlottesville that sort of thing was far more prominent and the optics were damning. This year's NPI (if it even happens) will be telling
He knew how to put some distance between him and the alt-lite, so he knows how to do this. He's lost this present game. Still, I reckon the far-right are playing a meta-game too, they'll make this work for them either way.

User avatar
C_D
Site Admin
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 7:36 pm

Re: Not Charlottesville.

Post by C_D » Tue Aug 15, 2017 12:50 pm

I wonder if, in the light of recent events, people will start to take care their use of these labels
As the battlelines for this reckoning have been drawn over the course the last 10 years at least, I can't see how the now ingrained concept of 'if you disagree with anything I believe to be true, you are an enemy; the enemy; the worst possible enemy; the extreme enemy' can do anything but solidify further, forcing middle-grounders one way or the other.

This dichotemy has been driven by extreme left thinking. There has always been a 'far-right' - exemplified by modern nazi's - but until recently they had remained isolated, barely tolerated and miniscule in number. The extreme left's drive towards acceptance of every dictat issued by their priesthood is forcing the 'centre' to choose one doctrine or the other - and many centrists are seeing 'abolish the white race' as alarming. In effect, they are being forced to the right by the extreme nature of the extreme left. The extreme left has become the new extreme right.

We'll all have to fight it out and see who's the winner - same as always. Unless.

User avatar
jakell
Posts: 188
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:10 am

Re: Not Charlottesville.

Post by jakell » Tue Aug 15, 2017 1:11 pm

I don't know exactly which way this will go. One one hand there is a lot of focus on the Right (especially following Trump's later statement), so some minds will start to hopefully be analytical, on the other hand there is the ongoing propensity for the Left to continue their extremely lazy lumping of everyone together - especially now they are feeling extra confident in CV's aftermath. They aren't even slightly content with Trump's modified remarks which may be a misplaced focus, even he's a Nazi according to some.

For now the mainstream will adopt the Left's position which is their natural default anyway, any deeper analysis will come from alternative media and will take a little longer to come out.

User avatar
jakell
Posts: 188
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:10 am

Re: Not Charlottesville.

Post by jakell » Tue Aug 15, 2017 9:43 pm

Just heard Trump winding back his comments about WN's being solely in the frame for the events at CVille.

So the prospect of a considered narrative (as opposed to a Leftist kneejerk) concerning this looks slightly more promising.. only slightly though and I'm sure there will be a few reverses yet. It's puzzling that Trump took the time to do this when many many people are trying to force a preferred narrative upon him, it's definitely not the path of least resistance.

A proper enquiry will help, especially regarding the State Of Emergency being called prior to the event. If the event was allowed to continue as planned then it's very likely that there would have been fewer problems and very likely no loss of life.

User avatar
C_D
Site Admin
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 7:36 pm

Re: Not Charlottesville.

Post by C_D » Wed Aug 16, 2017 5:22 pm

A proper enquiry will help, especially regarding the State Of Emergency being called prior to the event.
This sounds like wishful thinking on the part of a detatched observer who would like to see balance prevail. A position I hold as well. A proper enquiry would probably yield the outcome we desire - but as a society, there are an increasing number of citizens that are well past retrospective conclusions having an impact on the immediacy of now. The permanent state of frenzy amongst minds that have been driven to experience a feeling of 'nothing left to lose' have neither the capacity, nor the will, to reflect and internalise any subsequent revelations that prove contrary to their core beliefs. This juggernaut has built up a head of steam and must transition to a conclusion.

It's a cliche but I haven't said here before, so - may you live in interesting times.

Where do you stand on Trump, jakell?

User avatar
jakell
Posts: 188
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:10 am

Re: Not Charlottesville.

Post by jakell » Wed Aug 16, 2017 6:53 pm

"Where do you stand on Trump, jakell?"

Thankfully, on this side of the Atlantic. Trump was obviously preferable to Hillary (from a Global security point of view), but other than that I haven't found a lot to like. With him seems to have come a hysteria that just seems to keep feeding itself, and one only has to look on a formerly level-headed forum (I'm being generous) to see that perpetual red-mist, this isn't Trump's fault though, it's obviously existed in the American Psyche all along and he has just been the trigger.
I'm quite pleased that He's not ours and I can be stand-offish, not so easy for Americans though.

This said, I found myself smiling at the radio when I heard the reversals I described above. His initial 'correction' was no surprise at all, it was depressingly predictable, but this latest one came out of the blue. We know that antifa/black-bloc et al are out to provoke trouble and don't mind being extreme, we've seen it at Berkeley, Paris (firebombing policemen) and also in massive numbers in Hamburg (firebombing everything, with added looting), but I don't know how Trump knows sufficiently about this through the layers of elite disinformation he sits upon. His first equivocal statement sounded like someone being careful because they don't know the facts, but this recent one sound a bit more knowing to me.

I wouldn't be surprised if a few Lefties are (maybe silently) pleased that the matter might receive a more balanced examination, the one-sided approach smacked of a whitewash that would have probably backfired. As you say above, there might not be a proper enquiry, but that's an improvement on none at all, which looked likely a few days ago.

BigEyeTenor
Posts: 109
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2017 1:23 am

Re: Not Charlottesville.

Post by BigEyeTenor » Tue Sep 05, 2017 7:18 pm

This is good.


https://consentfactory.org/2017/08/18/a ... ca-update/

A De-Putin-Nazification of America Update

So the de-Putin-Nazification of America couldn’t be going much better at the moment. In terms of emotionally manipulating people (and especially any heretofore wayward members of the American “left”) into forming a mindless, hysterical mob and running around like headless chickens branding anyone who didn’t vote for Hillary Clinton a goose-stepping Nazi, this past week has been a huge success. At this point, if you haven’t yet posted an anti-Nazi loyalty oath on Twitter, Facebook, or some other platform, you’re a potential “Nazi sympathizer” … and you don’t want to be one of those, now do you? No, I didn’t think you did. So, if you haven’t done that, you’d better get on it. Here are few tips to get you started.

Your anti-Nazi loyalty oath should include a clearly-worded statement acknowledging that Donald Trump is Hitler, or at least the leader of the tens of hundreds of imbecilic, neo-Nazi losers who, according to most of the mainstream media, are on the verge of overthrowing the entire American ruling establishment. It should also include a threat to unfollow, de-friend, and otherwise socially ostracize anyone who hasn’t posted such an oath, or who, despite the Charlottesville Kristallnacht, stubbornly continues thinking critically, or maintains any form of historical awareness, or presents any kind of rational arguments challenging the prevailing Nazi hysteria.

It should also include one or more of the following:

(1) If not an outright call for the First Amendment to be repealed, then at least a demand for a ban on “hate speech,” and the removal of every hate-based statue, flag, painting, book, film, song, joke, or other expression of racism, hatred, religious bigotry, misogyny, extremism, general rudeness (and any other forms of speech or expression that you don’t like) from public view. Don’t worry about the ramifications of this ban. It will never, ever, be used against you, or anyone that you agree with, or against any authors or artists that you like. It’ll be a ban on “hate-speech,” after all, and it’s not like that term is completely subjective, or subject to the whims of those in power, or anything like that.

(2) A demand that the already overly-broad definition of “terrorism” now be expanded even further, to include the fascist who drove his car into a crowd of counterprotesters in Charlottesville, killing one and wounding many others. Never mind that this murderous idiot seems to have done this on the spur of the moment (or, if it was a planned attack, that he’s even more of an idiot than he seems, which, judging from his mug shot, is hard to believe). The important thing is to help the Resistance expand the definition of “terrorism” to the point where they can slap it onto anyone. Again, don’t worry about the ramifications. The “terrorist” label will never, ever, be used against groups that you approve of, or innocent people in faraway countries that some future president wants to murder with drones. The Resistance would never, ever, do that. They know who is and who isn’t a terrorist. And if they don’t, they can always check with Obama.

(3) A reference (either veiled or direct) to someone who may be a Nazi-sympathizer. This is crucial in terms of motivating others to post their loyalty oaths, and fostering an atmosphere of paranoia, which is always so helpful at times like this. Surely, you know of someone who has said, tweeted, published, or posted something that could be interpreted as “Nazi-friendly.” Don’t bother with the Trump supporters. The corporate-owned media will take care of them. You want to go after other leftists, specifically leftists who have been reluctant to call Trump Hitler, or a Putinist agent, or who disagree with you about Syria, or, you know, just people who get on your nerves. This is a golden opportunity to pore through their tweets and Facebook posts, find something you can use against them, and then accuse them of harboring Nazi sympathies. Given the current level of hysteria, few people are going to check your facts. This is one you can really have fun with. See how far you can push the paranoia. Make up elaborate conspiracy theories. If you’re not quite sure how to go about that, check The New York Times or The Washington Post … they’re masters of that kind of thing.

Your anti-Nazi loyalty oath should definitely not include any of the following:

(1) Any mention of the Ukrainian Nazis that Obama, Clinton, and the rest of the Resistance (before it was the Resistance, of course) helped regime-change the Ukrainian government when it wouldn’t play ball with the EU and NATO. Mentioning the Resistance’s support of these Nazis would only confuse those reading your oath, who might not understand that there are good Nazis and bad Nazis, and who have probably forgotten how the US government smuggled a number of actual Nazis (i.e., members of the NSDAP) into America after WWII … or how, since the end of that war, the United States has mass murdered countless millions of people all over the planet (but, technically, not in a genocidal fashion, so that doesn’t make us the same as Nazis).

(2) Actual membership figures on neo-Nazi and white supremacist groups, because those figures are pathetically small. Doing this would make your loyalty oath (not to mention the whole Nazi hysteria thing, generally) seem, if not paranoid, then at least absurd, or like part of some manufactured effort to whip up support for a ruling class coup by waving Nazis in front of everyone’s faces. This would be extremely counterproductive. Remember, one of the primary goals of the De-Putin-Nazification program is to convince the public that Richard Spencer (and the handful of other insignificant idiots that the corporate media is showering with publicity) is about to lead an overwhelming force of tiki torch-bearing neo-Nazis into the streets of American cities to battle the hyper-militarized police, the national guard, and the US military, or some other preposterous scenario like that.

(3) Any reference whatsoever to the corporatocracy that runs the country, and that normally decides who can run for president, and which is currently making an example of Trump in order to dissuade any future billionaires from having the audacity to fuck with them. You’ll be better off avoiding this subject entirely, as it only reminds folks how screwed they are, and how, odds are, they’re probably all worked up about something the corporate-owned media wanted to get them all worked up about, neo-Nazis, Russian hackers, nuclear war with North Korea, Syrian gas attacks, lone wolf terrorists, weapons of mass destruction, or whatever. Take it from someone who’s worked in show business. No one likes being made aware of how they are being manipulated … or provided with a binary set of officially acceptable contextual parameters within which they can think and speak.

But don’t worry too much about that binary stuff. There’ll be plenty of time to get into all that after we rid the world of these Nazis, and these racists, and all these Confederate statues. And Trump, of course. That’s the main thing … getting rid of Donald Trump, and getting a Democrat back in office. Oh, yeah … and the books. We need to look at the books. God knows how many Confederate books are still out there in the public libraries, and in people’s homes, where children can read them. We’ll need to get to the books eventually.

In the meantime, focus on Priority One. Go hard on the Nazi hysteria, at least throughout the rest of the weekend, after which they’ll probably need to switch us back to the Russia hysteria, or possibly the North Korea hysteria, or … damn, see? Here I go with that contextual parameter stuff again. I’ve really got to stop doing that. The last thing I need is to get myself accused of being some kind of Nazi sympathizer, or Confederate apologist, or Russian propagandist, or extremist, or terrorist, or, you know … whatever.

CJ Hopkins
(first published in CounterPunch, August 18, 2017)

User avatar
jakell
Posts: 188
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:10 am

Re: Not Charlottesville.

Post by jakell » Tue Sep 05, 2017 8:46 pm

From no. 2 above:
...Remember, one of the primary goals of the De-Putin-Nazification program is to convince the public that Richard Spencer (and the handful of other insignificant idiots that the corporate media is showering with publicity) is about to lead an overwhelming force of tiki torch-bearing neo-Nazis into the streets of American cities to battle the hyper-militarized police, the national guard, and the US military, or some other preposterous scenario like that.
The torchlight parade of the night before had the effect of concentrating all those who have the more uncomfortable views in one place, and with a nice visual spectacle too. The slogan chanting served to amplify this and this is a fairly new behaviour amongst that crowd.. seemingly borrowed wholesale from the SJW element of the Leftists (antifa seem to prefer to be more sinister and relatively silent).
Without this prelude, they would have been diluted amongst the other groups at the event the next day and the Left would have less frightening optics to point to. The car attack after the planned event served to close the brackets on the whole thing for those who were looking for a dramatic conclusion.

I await Berkeley's upcoming Free Speech week. Certainly antifa have blotted their copybook recently there, with even Berkeley's Mayor re-orientating himself slightly (I think I got this from one of Sargon's videos and will check), but I reckon that is mainly for show. I doubt if this will alter their behaviour much and will play to their anti-establishment ethos, if a few milquetoast SJW's get cold feet and don't turn up to provide them with the usual cover, there'll be plenty more milling around.

Countdown and preview courtesy of Milo

User avatar
jakell
Posts: 188
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:10 am

Re: Not Charlottesville.

Post by jakell » Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:49 am

I'm sort of expecting this Free Speech week to be be cancelled. Not in an outright fashion like recently at Ryerson University, but in the mould of Charlottesville where the participants are led right up to the gate and then ordered to disperse. This will be more complicated at Berkeley because the events are multiple, so a more subtle approach is going to be needed anyway.
I reckon the Mayor's acknowledging of antifa's aggression is not so much as a condemnation of antifa (after all, he has links to BAMN and BLM), but as a way of reinforcing in advance that there will be 'uncontrollable' violence and that he will be left with no alternative but to prevent the events.

It's interesting that Milo et al are in the driving seat this time, because the Alt-Right cannot stand him and may not be much of a presence this time. This still leaves plenty of folks that can loosely be described as alt-lite, but will make for quite a different flavour of event, I would expect Jordan Peterson to be invited too and if he gets to speak it would be a nice positve following Ryerson
I don't expect SJW's/antifa** to be cogniscent of any difference though and will behave exactly the same. Everybody there will be condemned as Nazis and subject to as much ire as can be mustered.

**(I keep wanting to retire the 'SJW' term but as I'm regarding them as a necessary prop and normie-base for antifa, I'll be keeping it a bit longer)

User avatar
jakell
Posts: 188
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:10 am

Re: Not Charlottesville.

Post by jakell » Fri Sep 22, 2017 10:03 am

We're getting very close to Free Speech Week now and I'm starting to get a bit concerned over Milo's rhetoric (coke?) One example is his dismissal of Ben Shapiro's recent event as an 'establishment friendly' exercise, which it certainly wasn't. His best approach would be to build upon what happened there, not to present himself as the more 'out there' alternative.

He holds all of the aces and that is a good point to sit back and let things flow, not be flamboyant and egotistical. Granted he has had some fairly substantial last-minute hurdles put in his way by Berkeley's administration, but he seems to have solved them for the time being.
Viewing some Left-leaning commentary on the upcoming events, it seems the non-antifa/SJW types have learned a lesson.. not to interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake.

User avatar
jakell
Posts: 188
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:10 am

Re: Not Charlottesville.

Post by jakell » Mon Sep 25, 2017 9:48 am

Predictably, Milo's event shrunk from the original hyperbolic claims. Holding it over a few days would have been logistically problematic but, more importantly, would have been more dangerous for attendees, who would have been picked of by antifa types away from secure areas and timeslots, especially as darkness falls, another factor being that Berkeley is home turf for a lot of the protestors. I noticed that Yvette Falarca and the lesser known (but seemingly more self-promoting) Sansara Taylor are as loudly vocal, and repetitive as ever, their robotic nature suggests some sort of training to me, conscious or unconscious.

What surprised me though was how Milo managed to significantly shrink his own expectations and still stay (marginally) on top of things. In fact he seemed more at ease with the anticipated smaller one-day event, which shrunk even more on the actual day. I would say that a weakness and a strength of Milo's here are:

1) Assuming that "if you build it they will come"
2) Being able to adapt to No.1 falling apart markedly.

User avatar
greycircle
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2017 12:00 am

Re: Not Charlottesville.

Post by greycircle » Mon Sep 25, 2017 6:23 pm

I noticed that Yvette Falarca and the lesser known (but seemingly more self-promoting) Sansara Taylor are as loudly vocal, and repetitive as ever, their robotic nature suggests some sort of training to me, conscious or unconscious.
Is Yvette the one who got charged with assault for hitting someone at a rally?
exodus refugee

User avatar
jakell
Posts: 188
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:10 am

Re: Not Charlottesville.

Post by jakell » Mon Sep 25, 2017 7:13 pm

greycircle wrote:
Mon Sep 25, 2017 6:23 pm
I noticed that Yvette Falarca and the lesser known (but seemingly more self-promoting) Sansara Taylor are as loudly vocal, and repetitive as ever, their robotic nature suggests some sort of training to me, conscious or unconscious.
Is Yvette the one who got charged with assault for hitting someone at a rally?
Yes, that one. She's small and not capable of doing much damage but spends most of her time inciting others to violence**, she had a position teaching minors which she got fired from because of her political activism but this doesn't seem to have changed her behaviour at all. Sargon did quite a good video on her and BAMN last year.

I first noticed Sansara on a Tucker Carlson video last year but has cropped up again butting into a Berkeley administration meeting (at 3:54)



Both of these women would fade into the hysterical SJW background if they were one-offs, but they are relentless and ever-present, their tenacity is probably a good window into the the presence of an 'old guard' at Berkeley who are supporting younger types. Sargon's video is a good examination of the cultish BAMN.


** If you've seen that video of her 'punching', it can be seen as an attempt at incitement rather than direct violence, or trying to get someone to come and 'protect her.' Not unlike Melissa Click's call for 'some muscle'

User avatar
jakell
Posts: 188
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:10 am

Re: Not Charlottesville.

Post by jakell » Tue Sep 26, 2017 10:04 am

Been watching a few older videos (2012) of Sunsara describing herself as a Revolutionary Communist. As these types rarely mention Communism (strategically?) in the brief moments of 'dialogue' in between the chanting, it's hard to tell whether their views have altered/developed at all.
Here she is though describing herself as a RC over a megaphone, maybe a slip of the tongue because it actually opens the possibility of dialogue. Yvette Falarca appears in this too and eventually rescues Sunsara from descending into dialogue by initiating some chanting, not even a novel one but the tired old Trump one.

I don't often see these two together and I find the contrast interesting. Sunsara seems to feel the need to explain herself (albeit in a loud, repetitive and an abbreviated fashion), but realises the strategic value of noise, more often succumbing to this. Falarca is noticeably more towards the latter of these.
I suspect Sunsara has a Western intellectual cultural background which pulls her in this direction and, behind the shouting, I notice this tension. If she mellows a bit (a lot) then some interesting debates would be possible.

User avatar
greycircle
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2017 12:00 am

Re: Not Charlottesville.

Post by greycircle » Thu Oct 05, 2017 11:15 pm

There is an account on the web somewhere from a young kid about being a BAMN hostage. They had made his financial and emotional condition in life such that escaping from BAMN was near impossible without some outside support. He had arranged for his family, or somebody, to give him enough means to travel home so that he could escape. They tried to steal his plane/bus? tickets, identification, etc...to keep him from leaving. He finally got away and wrote a story about it. In a sense they have their own little MK style cult going but I don't think their methods are as brutal as real life genuine MK Ultra.

Although, I have studied MK a lot and it wouldn't surprise me if Yvette herself has been MK mind controlled.
exodus refugee

User avatar
jakell
Posts: 188
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:10 am

Re: Not Charlottesville.

Post by jakell » Fri Oct 06, 2017 10:23 am

greycircle wrote:
Thu Oct 05, 2017 11:15 pm
There is an account on the web somewhere from a young kid about being a BAMN hostage. They had made his financial and emotional condition in life such that escaping from BAMN was near impossible without some outside support. He had arranged for his family, or somebody, to give him enough means to travel home so that he could escape. They tried to steal his plane/bus? tickets, identification, etc...to keep him from leaving. He finally got away and wrote a story about it. In a sense they have their own little MK style cult going but I don't think their methods are as brutal as real life genuine MK Ultra.
This is recounted in full at 42:40 in Sargon's examination of BAMN that I mentioned above. It's worth watching the whole thing for context though.
Although, I have studied MK a lot and it wouldn't surprise me if Yvette herself has been MK mind controlled.

I don't think of MK as such here, but consider that she has 'had training'. Here she is at 'Free Speech Week' talking to German Television - I find her ability to switch into robot mode and stay there quite uncanny, especially here as we do not have a controlled studio situation (like her Tucker Carlson interview for instance). There are likely to be other interests around the world that are MK-minded and if an organisation is working in a country (oppositional or not) other than its own, it is going to look out for and design 'low maintenance' ** methods of operating and something cult-like can ideal for this as it half-in and half-out of society, all that is needed is for the cult to be disciplined as opposed to being casual. Examples of low-maintenance can be:

1) Self-sustainance, ie producing leaders and programming each other rather than a top down approach that needs considerable external input (getting a foothold in the educational system would be a major plus here). Working with groups and crowds taps into herd-psychology so that individualism (and hence critical thinking) is more easily bypassed.
2) Utilising things that are already around eg taking the Left's penchant for shouted sloganising and turning this further into 'chanting', a brainwashing technique that simultaneously works upon impressionable outsiders by being seductive and hypnotic whilst at the same time providing reinforcement to insiders. I don't think I am the only one that has noticed that this 'chanting' has become excessive and has little content.

** ("The American space program used valuable resources developing a pen that would work in zero gravity, the Russians just used a pencil" - possibly apocryphal, but also funny and instructive)

ETA: First link here went to incorrect time. Now fixed.

User avatar
jakell
Posts: 188
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:10 am

Re: Not Charlottesville.

Post by jakell » Fri Oct 20, 2017 5:35 pm

I'm going to make an unlikely connection between Jordan Peterson, who I started this thread off with, and Richard Spencer.

I've been watching a few versions of Spencer's speech at the University of Florida from yesterday. Those filmed from the crowd don't reveal much apart from sustained bellowing and chanting with bits of Spencer in between, this one though is well recorded (in my band days we called this 'through the mixing desk'), but it still gives an impression of what he was up against. In both instances it shows that perseverance and patience pays off and he goes on right to the end, even with a fairly good Q&A.. he gets a bit shouty early on (quite understandable if you hear the unmixed version), but seems to find his stride after a bit and starts bantering with the crowd, sort of similar to how Milo's events were more about challenging Lefty lunacy than a straight 'talk'.
This sort of demonstrates that a purely mild-mannered Alt-Right speaker (Jared Taylor for instance) would not get through here, even though he makes better arguments.. it seems that the SJW/BLM/antifa types ensure that we get a Spencer, someone who has a certain sort of drive in spite of being less palatable.

and so to Jordan Peterson.. Spencer's determination to endure the onslaught reminded me of Peterson's classroom ordeal earlier this year. The mob were relentless but he went full-Buddha on them and (eventually) prevailed, although taking the whole thing outdoors (23:40) may have fazed them a bit, I'll finish this post on him:


User avatar
jakell
Posts: 188
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:10 am

Re: Not Charlottesville.

Post by jakell » Sat Oct 21, 2017 12:25 pm

It seems that this UF event was definitely 'Not Charlottesville'

It does seem that it was being hyped up to be something similar though. Here the state of emergency was declared well in advance rather than immediately prior to the official event (as in CV) and the antifa machine has been working on the student populace in advance which is discussed in the second video here, it seems they regard whipping up fear/anger/hysteria is as important as the actual confrontation (they do purport to be all about the confrontation), so their incitement can be seen to be more than 'heat of the moment' stuff. and come the day it seems they had the numbers (mostly vague but bullish antifa-lites), just not many people to focus their ire on.
Still not sure about their November 4th thing, I expect that is largely hype and suggestion but that is not to dismiss it, these can be made into significant confrontation if the issues are vague enough.

Tim Pool here is covering the (non) event, commenting on the role of the media too. I notice that it is all in the daytime, hence antifa being subdued, it is after dark when they get more opportunities for mayhem (like the Nov 4th thing maybe?)



This additional video by Tim is more about local background and reflection, no actual coverage

I often wonder what Spencer's game is. Looking at individual events he doesn't seem to be making much progress, although he has solidified the Alt-Right to the extent that other groups tend to define themselves relative to it, and he doesn't seem to get dispirited or forced to make bold moves that have the potential of finishing him. He seems to be playing a long-game to me and those are usually tricky to work out as some cards need to be kept hidden.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest