If there is an "alt-left" emerging, what does it refer to?

[bagelman]

Option 3 includes anyone who thinks the first two options are the same.

[Suburbia]

Option 3, in my opinion. However, I need to do some research on the alt-left, but it is pretty clear they are being grown from some college campuses all the way to Salon.com, AlterNet.org, etc.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

People like Michael Tracey and Glenn Greenwald.

[Crumpets]

There are people I know who I would possibly call "alt-leftists," although they don't really have identical sets of values or strategies. Here is roughly what I would say they have in common:

- Obsession with arbitrary purity tests (i.e. did this non-Bernie person at any point voice support of Hillary Clinton? If so, they are unfit to hold office!)
- Casual acceptance of left-wing authoritarianism (i.e. Castro only had a bad reputation because of the capitalist media smearing his administration!)
- Cozying up to the alt-right conspiracy machine, especially when they have similar targets in mind.
- Very dark world view, with many "enemies of the people," and rare praise for anyone, desire to find common ground, or causes for optimism.

[Kingpoleon]

A very scary group of people being fed by Salon, Democratic Underground, and to some extent by the Huffinton Post. TYT and Secular Talk are also partially behind this.

These are to the counterparts ths alt-right has like Milo and Breitbart, with allies like Limbaugh and Levin.

[Figueira]

Option 4: Maoists

[publicunofficial]

I'd say the so-called "Scumbag Left" is this.

[JA]

If you think any kind of organized "alt left" exists that's comparable to the "alt right" in organization, strength, influence, or a likely emergence of any of the aforementioned, then you're delusional. A few kooks does not an "alt left" make.

[Devout Centrist]

There are people I know who I would possibly call "alt-leftists," although they don't really have identical sets of values or strategies. Here is roughly what I would say they have in common:

- Obsession with arbitrary purity tests (i.e. did this non-Bernie person at any point voice support of Hillary Clinton? If so, they are unfit to hold office!)
- Casual acceptance of left-wing authoritarianism (i.e. Castro only had a bad reputation because of the capitalist media smearing his administration!)
- Cozying up to the alt-right conspiracy machine, especially when they have similar targets in mind.
- Very dark world view, with many "enemies of the people," and rare praise for anyone, desire to find common ground, or causes for optimism.

[Orthogonian Society Treasurer]

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

What would the alt-centre be? A responsible way to decrease the structural deficit, which was the Jews fault to begin with?

[Cassius]

If you think any kind of organized "alt left" exists that's comparable to the "alt right" in organization, strength, influence, or a likely emergence of any of the aforementioned, then you're delusional. A few kooks does not an "alt left" make.

The alt-right is not a real thing either.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

Whatever you want it to mean.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

Far-left activists, prone to violence and tolerant of anti-semitism. Generally prone to conspiracy theorists and wild fabulism to justify their violent ends. Think some combination of Michael Moore, Tariq Nasheed, and the Middlebury Mob.

[JA]

If you think any kind of organized "alt left" exists that's comparable to the "alt right" in organization, strength, influence, or a likely emergence of any of the aforementioned, then you're delusional. A few kooks does not an "alt left" make.

The alt-right is not a real thing either.

... yes, it is. We can debate to what extent they influence public policy and government officials, but there is no argument whether or not it exists because it does.

[ApatheticAustrian]

there is kind of an alt-right the only open question would be, if it describes the likes of president trump, milo, bannon or richard spencer more fittingly.

[DPKdebator]

Social justice warriors.

[Devout Centrist]

Social justice warriors.

Lol

[Rjjr77]

If you think any kind of organized "alt left" exists that's comparable to the "alt right" in organization, strength, influence, or a likely emergence of any of the aforementioned, then you're delusional. A few kooks does not an "alt left" make.

The alt-right is not a real thing either.

... yes, it is. We can debate to what extent they influence public policy and government officials, but there is no argument whether or not it exists because it does.

I mean it really isn't a thing. There is no organized alt-right, it's just become a new blanket statement.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

If you think any kind of organized "alt left" exists that's comparable to the "alt right" in organization, strength, influence, or a likely emergence of any of the aforementioned, then you're delusional. A few kooks does not an "alt left" make.

The alt-right is not a real thing either.

... yes, it is. We can debate to what extent they influence public policy and government officials, but there is no argument whether or not it exists because it does.

I mean it really isn't a thing. There is no organized alt-right, it's just become a new blanket statement.

The alt-right exists, but it is on the extreme fringes of society.  These people argue for legal abortion because they think it is necessary to kill minority babies.  I once even saw two alt-righters arguing about whether it was a bigger concern for "Shaniqua" or "Pedro and Mohammed" to reproduce.  I accused some of being racists, and they responded "is that a bad thing" and "yeah, I'm racist- so what?".  The alt-right does not describe any actual politicians or mainstream commentators.

[Rjjr77]

If you think any kind of organized "alt left" exists that's comparable to the "alt right" in organization, strength, influence, or a likely emergence of any of the aforementioned, then you're delusional. A few kooks does not an "alt left" make.

The alt-right is not a real thing either.

... yes, it is. We can debate to what extent they influence public policy and government officials, but there is no argument whether or not it exists because it does.

I mean it really isn't a thing. There is no organized alt-right, it's just become a new blanket statement.

The alt-right exists, but it is on the extreme fringes of society.  These people argue for legal abortion because they think it is necessary to kill minority babies.  I once even saw two alt-righters arguing about whether it was a bigger concern for "Shaniqua" or "Pedro and Mohammed" to reproduce.  I accused some of being racists, and they responded "is that a bad thing" and "yeah, I'm racist- so what?".  The alt-right does not describe any actual politicians or mainstream commentators.

No I mean the alt right actually doesn't exist. It's a created catch all term to grab many different fringe "conservative" groups with many different belief systems and structures. The majority of people deemed "alt right" are probably not white supremacist or white nationalist. What they've done is lumped a whole bunch of fringe groups from white nationalist and  supremacists, internet trolls, pseudo fascists, anarchocapitalists, men's rights activists, and kids into one big group. The term Alt-right as it is currently utilized isn't anything.

Now referring to the older term specifically about white nationalists, there is already an alt left of communist/socialist white nationalists as well.

[parochial boy]

If you think any kind of organized "alt left" exists that's comparable to the "alt right" in organization, strength, influence, or a likely emergence of any of the aforementioned, then you're delusional. A few kooks does not an "alt left" make.

The alt-right is not a real thing either.

... yes, it is. We can debate to what extent they influence public policy and government officials, but there is no argument whether or not it exists because it does.

I mean it really isn't a thing. There is no organized alt-right, it's just become a new blanket statement.

The alt-right exists, but it is on the extreme fringes of society.  These people argue for legal abortion because they think it is necessary to kill minority babies.  I once even saw two alt-righters arguing about whether it was a bigger concern for "Shaniqua" or "Pedro and Mohammed" to reproduce.  I accused some of being racists, and they responded "is that a bad thing" and "yeah, I'm racist- so what?".  The alt-right does not describe any actual politicians or mainstream commentators.

No I mean the alt right actually doesn't exist. It's a created catch all term to grab many different fringe "conservative" groups with many different belief systems and structures. The majority of people deemed "alt right" are probably not white supremacist or white nationalist. What they've done is lumped a whole bunch of fringe groups from white nationalist and  supremacists, internet trolls, pseudo fascists, anarchocapitalists, men's rights activists, and kids into one big group. The term Alt-right as it is currently utilized isn't anything.

Now referring to the older term specifically about white nationalists, there is already an alt left of communist/socialist white nationalists as well.

Just because something isn't organised doesn't mean it doesn't exist. As a catch all term for a certain type of person who focuses on of identity politics which is  highly antagonistic towards what you might call "previously disadvantaged" groups, then it is a useful catch all term.

[ApatheticAustrian]

i would to Rijr77's posts, that those loose groups, only connected by the thinnest of threads, WANT to be connected, or - more to the point - embraced being connected to some kind of "bigger" goal.

Milo is not Bannon, Bannon is not Spencer, Spencer  is not Alex Jones, etc.....but the word "alt-right" is so powerful and creating so much unrest on the left AND the right, that everybody wants to get a piece of it, not least cause of financial reasons. Attention is capital, baby!

There is no ideological reason at all for non-ideological 17-year-old internet trolls, big capitalist crypto-nationalists like Bannon, attention-capitalizing post-ideologues like Milo and radical chic neo-neo-nazis like Spencer to work together on anything or be in the same party/group/club. It's just fun to do it.

[Rjjr77]

i would to Rijr77's posts, that those loose groups, only connected by the thinnest of threads, WANT to be connected, or - more to the point - embraced being connected to some kind of "bigger" goal.

Milo is not Bannon, Bannon is not Spencer, Spencer  is not Alex Jones, etc.....but the word "alt-right" is so powerful and creating so much unrest on the left AND the right, that everybody wants to get a piece of it, not least cause of financial reasons. Attention is capital, baby!

There is no ideological reason at all for non-ideological 17-year-old internet trolls, big capitalist crypto-nationalists like Bannon, attention-capitalizing post-ideologues like Milo and radical chic neo-neo-nazis like Spencer to work together on anything or be in the same party/group/club. It's just fun to do it.

I'm not saying they haven't embraced it, cause heck lulz, but this is not some large wing of the right, it's small movements that have existed for years that this year the media decided to lump together. Name any one of those people as the face of the alt right and the majority of people tossed into this amalgam would claim they aren't represented by those person.

The only thing that makes the alt right in anyway an interconnected thing is the Internet.  It would be as if we took anarchists, hardline Marxists, militant blacks, ecoterrorists, and 14 year olds who like making fun of trumps hair and began referring to them as a wing of the democrat party. It's not really a thing.