Will seeing this picture convert you to Nazism?
The We Hunted the Mammoth Pledge Drive is on! Please consider donating through the PayPal button below. Thanks!
There’s trouble on the really, really far right: Infamous hacker-with-a-giant-swastika-tattoo Weev is squabbling with infamous former-Vice co-founder-who-hates-trans-people Gavin McInnes over which one of them is the real hero of the racist right.
The current contretemps apparently kicked off with this little Twitter exchange:
@RedRovurr I'm further right than @Gavin_McInnes and far braver. I spoke out without billions of vice money to fall back on.
— Andrew Auernheimer (@rabite) August 20, 2015
I'm 100% convinced you're a liberal plant. https://t.co/uQEifUl12j
— Gavin McInnes (@Gavin_McInnes) August 20, 2015
Weev has now followed up with a LiveJournal post denouncing McInnes as, among other things,
a jealous little bitch … a fucking joke … cosplaying in the alternative right for a year … a British born migrant by way of Canada who has mixed race children and sits on a pile of Jew media money from peddling orgy porgy and soma … a ringer … a mongrelizer and a cuckold … You cuck for the black lobby and you cuck for Israel. … You’re to the left of [Rush Limbaugh] … a sheep in wolf’s clothing. … Your shameful attempt to ingratiate yourself with American nationalists is beginning to collapse. Hell, you aren’t even an American, and since you love multiethnic society so much I think perhaps you should return to your country of origin. I think Leicester and Luton are more up to your speed these days.
The last bit is apparently quite the insult in neo-Nazi circles, as 19% of the residents of Leicester, and 25% of Luton, are Muslim. The horror!
Weev finished his rant by suggesting that McInnes kill himself.
It’s quite a display of invective. But far more interesting — for readers of this blog, anyway — is a followup comment Weev left on his LiveJournal post. In it, he accuses McInnes of “talking down to gamergate.” This is a cardinal sin in weev’s mind because
gamergate … is by far the single biggest siren bringing people into the folds of white nationalism. More people have been converted in the past year by things like images of Anita Sarkeesian being rendered as a happy merchant than were in the three before it.
So there you have it. According to America’s best-known neo-Nazi hacker, Gamergate is the gateway drug to white nationalism.
The sad thing is that he may be right. Maybe not about the caricature itself, but about Gamergate, which has been suffused with anti-Semitic and other “alt-right” rhetoric and imagery almost from the start. I would not be surprised to learn that Gamergate has indeed been as fertile a recruiting ground for the far-right as Weev is suggesting.
I’ve been saying for a while that it’s like the Dreyfus Affair all over again. GamerGate is so intent on being right that it would gladly stoop to falsifying stuff if it could help them.
Funny thing is, I tweeted the quote from weev, and concluded by asking “Whither #NotYourShield?” (sorry, couldn’t fit in a link back to you in there, and I’m not sure you would have wanted it); well, the whole thing was retweeted by GamerGate News, the behemoth GamerGate hashtag spammer, bringing it to the attention of, well, everyone, I suppose.
My guess is that whoever runs GamerGate News is deaf to irony, and/or doesn’t know the meaning of “whither”.
I think he means that it has the power to suck your brains out through your eye sockets.
And in that, he may have a point. It most certainly does suck.
One of the biggest problems with GamerGaters is that, when you point out these extremists to them, they just blow them off with, “That’s not the real GG.” By cherry picking what is and isn’t the _real_ GamerGate, they believe they can keep on ranting about their ‘facts’ with impunity.
No, it made me make a disgusted face like this:
right-click
save-as
Yeah… My guess is that the far right’s use of “cuck” is much in line with the pornographic meme, complete with a non-white person cowing over or taking advantage of a white person and a dash of “they’re stealing all of our women.”
These are white nationalists, after all. Of course their go-to insult would be that a white man who’s supposed to be the dominant race is getting dominated by the lesser races.
As for the happy merchant meme, labeling Anita as part of “the jooooos” means attention is drawn away from her as a person and towards jews as a group. If people start blaming the jews for things, they might be more receptive to the idea that the jews are to blame for other things as well, and white nationalism is the end result of that thought.
It’s a vast cornocopia of gross.
Actually Kirbywarp that explanation makes some sense. For some values of sense.
Not a UK’er, here, but after a bit of research, I’m pretty sure the father’s consent was not a requirement. However, as someone who remembers the the 1970s in general, yeah, pretty sure that this was a reflection of patriarchal values. I suspect that, specifically, it would be a kind of secondary or even tertiary control (very common in patriarchies that have officially established a premise of equality under the law). In the case of the UK, I suspect that aborting a pregnancy without her husband’s consent would qualify as “unreasonable behavior”, thus leaving her vulnerable to a petition of divorce, per the Divorce Reform Act of 1969. Given the devastating effect divorce could have on a woman (especially one with a public condemnation like “she aborted our baby”), it’s quite possible she would end up impoverished.
Also, note that Robert is the American Ambassador–politician’s spouses (almost invariably ‘wives’, in the day) are invariably under intense pressure to maintain public ‘fitness’. So she’d be in the habit of deferring to him on almost every major issue, even the birth of the Anti-Christ.
Finally, while set in England, keep in mind that the movie is an American production. Roe v. Wade was both more recent and less populist than the legalization of abortion in the UK. So it would’ve been something that had to be accounted for in the script, but thoroughly shot down, because the plot would require it but the audience would not be willing to tolerate the idea of an abortion.
@ Freemage
Just to be nerdy, there’s no such thing as UK law. Within the UK, England & Wales have one set of laws, Northern Ireland another and Scotland yet another one. The Isle of Man also has its own legal system.
There’s a bit of a debate as to whether Cornwall has its own legal system. Generally most people would say that now it’s part of the English system and on a day to day basis that’s how it operates. There is just enough doubt about that though that we were once able to threaten the invocation of an aspect of Cornish (“Stannery” as it’s called) law to get someone to agree to a contract.
Oh, and as to the abortion thing; no, women have never needed their husband’s permission since it’s been legal here.
Any woman of any age can seek an abortion. In the case of a child, if the child is what we call “Gillick Competent” (i.e. has the capacity to make their own decisions) then not only do they not need their parent’s consent, the parents must not even be notified.
Thanks for the replies, Freemage and Alan. It makes sense that the writers and/or the studio would be afraid to frame abortion as something bad that needs to be stopped. Or something a good woman wouldn’t do without the father’s okay. Especially since it’s a religious horror movie. Blech.
@ WWTH
If you’re one of those people who likes to analyse any sort of enjoyment out of a film (*sticks hand up*) Thorn’s views on abortion become a bit of a Chekov’s Gun for later on when he’s told what he has to do with Damien.
So, the “wife” in this scenario (America/Western civilization) is no longer getting her needs met by the “husband” (white racist reactionary men huddling fearfully in the corner and seeing conspiracy monsters in every passing shadow), so now she’s turning to people who can give her the vigorous democracy and progressive ideals she really craves?
I don’t think they really thought this metaphor through.
Choosing between Gavin McInnes and Andrew Auernheimer as to who’s worst is like choosing between abject poverty and deadly epidemics – because you simply can’t and wish neither existed in the first place.
Warning: gross language ahead
I think it’s much simpler than that. They see cuckolding as a white man getting diminished through the act of a non-white man stealing his property, as a man that should be the dominant person through being the superior race instead acting inferior. They aren’t thinking about things from the woman’s perspective, because pshhh, women don’t have perspectives. It’s not like they’re people.
They already think that allowing interracial marriage is white genocide, and they think that non-white people are all immigrants in what should be a white nation that should be kicked out before they mate with all the white women and make non-white babies. Which they think will totally happen because these assholes hold to really, really gross beliefs about alpha-ness and virility in non-white people.
They see white politicians who don’t act against immigration of non-white people and interracial marriage and who promote diversity, and therefore do not take a dominating position, as being subservient to those non-white people. Hence cucks.
And that’s about as far down this particular rabbit hole I want to go, because jesus christ I need to scrub my brain with a Brillo pad now.
@strivingally:
I believe /pol/ started as edgy dipshits trying to be edgy. Over time, with GG as a major turning point, they became what they pretended to be, as Vonnegut predicted.
Ironic that McInnes’s career as a hipster bullshitter led him to the same pass. A real black fly in your chardonnay.
@Alan Robertshaw:
Just a small clarification: abortion is not actually ‘legal’, per se, in any part of the UK. There are certain exceptions to the illegality though, as follows:
(copy/pasted from the Wikipedia article, which is accurate in the details):
Note that ‘I don’t want to be pregnant’ is not an option on this list, and under all circumstances you need to get 2 doctors to agree to the procedure. In practice, of course, it’s always possible to have one up to 24 weeks provided that your doctor is not an asshole, or you have access to Brook Advisory/Marie Stopes.
Sorry for the off-topic derail, I have SIWOTI syndrome today, apparently.
Just FYI, Alan is a British lawyer, so… I really mean no offense, but I’m going to trust him over Wikipedia.
The phrase “the folds of white nationalism” is conjuring up some frightful Lovecraftian imagery for me… picture some foul subterranean beast, a delirious fusion of man and maggot, pale as the belly of a bottom-dwelling fish, its clammy flanks heaving and gurgling with the fetid juices within; and scores of White Power worshippers nestled in the folds and creases of its foul hide, lapping the hate-filled venom that pools there, their eyes staring and mad… Iä! Iä! Shub-Internet! The Underground Hate-Worm with a Million Man-Baby Young!
… I think I need to lie down. Or the bathroom. Possibly both.
@ SFHC & The formerastronomer
Oh, that piece you’ve quoted brings back happy memories. One of the first things I ever had to do at law school was a paper on that. It was in relation to a case brought by the Royal College of Nurses over the terminology.
It was all about the definition of “terminated by a registered medical practitioner”.
In practice, in certain abortions, it’s a nurse who actually administers the relevant drugs under the direction of a doctor. The RCN was concerned that under the definition in the Act, it could be implied that abortions were only legal where the doctor physically carried out the whole procedure.
The case went all the way to the House of Lords (that’s like our Supreme Court, and just for further confusion it’s now called the Supreme Court!). There were quite a few dissenting judgments on the way.
In the end the court held that ‘terminated by’ just meant ‘under the control and supervision of’ so nurses wouldn’t face prosecution.
So, whilst abortion is a controlled procedure (i.e. certain conditions have to be met and only some people are allowed to carry them out) it’s certainly the case that abortion is legal in England by any standard definition of the word.
To use a crass analogy, you can’t say driving is not legal just because people need to be over 17 years old and have a licence before they’re allowed to do so.
I’ll just say that the image up top reminds me of that time I took one of those “Jew” cartoons and tried to add jewelry and beard styling and makeup to it on MS Paint so it could be my icon on some sites (I’m Jewish and NB, and part of me really wants a beard to style). It didn’t turn out that good.