YouTubers Will Enter Politics
buzzfeednews.com
buzzfeednews.com
I personally worry about it given the flagrant disregard for rigor in their op-ed style, but it's here to stay.
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.
It's the 3rd episode of season 2 (6th episode overall). Worth watching.
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.
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 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.
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.
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...
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.
These are still people and YouTube just gave them a platform to become popular.