Gavin McInnes to Sue The Southern Poverty Law Center

Jun 20, 2018
1,760
1,757
240
#53
I dont care who does it i just care that it is being done the Splc is a joke organization and a democrat mouthpiece who deliberately put conservative organizations and even people on the same level as kkk and nazi with the aim of profiting and actively helping democrats against political opposition and unpersoning conservative voices.
The fact that maajid nawaz is on a hate list from them truly is insane and tells you everything you need to know about these worthless profiteering scammers.

https://www.theatlantic.com/interna...ajid-nawaz-splc-anti-muslim-extremist/505685/
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/a...law-center-gets-creative-to-label-hate-groups
http://thefederalist.com/2018/05/07/5-reasons-southern-poverty-law-center-hate-mongering-scam/
https://www.politico.com/magazine/s...splc-trump-southern-poverty-law-center-215312
 
Last edited:
Jan 12, 2009
16,171
1,447
835
#54
I am unfamiliar. Does it explain how you're deflecting from the point that having a Native American wife is not in fact evidence, that someone is not racist against other races?
Or even against other people the same race as his wife.

She could be the exception to the rule.
He could also still say racist things to her predicated on her own race (ignorant racism type).
She may be white enough to him.

He just wouldn't be the Richard Spencer gene pool optimization racist.
 
Aug 12, 2011
8,376
95
610
#55
Or even against other people the same race as his wife.

She could be the exception to the rule.
He could also still say racist things to her predicated on her own race (ignorant racism type).
She may be white enough to him.

He just wouldn't be the Richard Spencer gene pool optimization racist.
I know, Im just trying to start with, what I thought, was obvious.
 

matt404au

Gold Member
Apr 25, 2009
7,575
7,819
825
Australia
#56
I am unfamiliar. Does it explain how you're deflecting from the point that having a Native American wife is not in fact evidence, that someone is not racist against other races?
You're the one making the assertion that Gavin believes that Western culture is synonymous with white people and therefore excluding all non-white races. Now you're shifting the goalposts to not include Native Americans because his marriage to one is inconvenient for your argument, but you're still assuming he's racist against others. Moreover, you started at the assumption that he is racist and then tried to work backwards to find evidence. Actually, you didn't even try to find evidence, you just continued on with the obstinate assumption that he's racist based on... what exactly? Like I said, Anthony Cumia cleared up the origins of the Proud Boys on the JRE podcast and noted that the group morphed into something other than the meme/satire group Gavin originally founded it as. He subsequently left and is no longer associated with it.

He's a comedian who likes to push boundaries and saying edgy shit is part of his schtick. Get over it and focus on actions instead because the consequences of silencing satire are much worse than anything it could produce. Focusing on words -- satirical words at that -- leaves you susceptible to manipulation by biased sources as we've seen so frequently of late. If you can find evidence of him non-satirically calling for or engaging in violence against non-whites, I'll join you in the "he's a racist" camp. Until then, I will continue to treat racism as the serious accusation that it should be, because frivolous accusations have serious consequences, many of which are unforeseen and unintentional. Not only does it unfairly paint the accused as evil and irredeemable in the court of public opinion (not a real court), it equips ideologues with a very large weapon with which to clobber unbelievers with reckless abandon. Cry wolf too many times and people will stop caring. If they then raise their bar even higher like I have done, that's on the frivolous accusers. The Obama years trained you to be hyper-vigilant about racism to the point that you're seeing specters of white supremacy around every corner. Now is the time to take a step back and start assessing accusations rationally again.

Keeping in mind that racism is a serious accusation, tell me: how confident are you in your belief that Gavin McInnes is a racist?
 
Jan 12, 2009
16,171
1,447
835
#57
You're the one making the assertion that Gavin believes that Western culture is synonymous with white people and therefore excluding all non-white races. Now you're shifting the goalposts to not include Native Americans because his marriage to one is inconvenient for your argument, but you're still assuming he's racist against others. Moreover, you started at the assumption that he is racist and then tried to work backwards to find evidence. Actually, you didn't even try to find evidence, you just continued on with the obstinate assumption that he's racist based on... what exactly? Like I said, Anthony Cumia cleared up the origins of the Proud Boys on the JRE podcast and noted that the group morphed into something other than the meme/satire group Gavin originally founded it as. He subsequently left and is no longer associated with it.

He's a comedian who likes to push boundaries and saying edgy shit is part of his schtick. Get over it and focus on actions instead because the consequences of silencing satire are much worse than anything it could produce. Focusing on words -- satirical words at that -- leaves you susceptible to manipulation by biased sources as we've seen so frequently of late. If you can find evidence of him non-satirically calling for or engaging in violence against non-whites, I'll join you in the "he's a racist" camp. Until then, I will continue to treat racism as the serious accusation that it should be, because frivolous accusations have serious consequences, many of which are unforeseen and unintentional. Not only does it unfairly paint the accused as evil and irredeemable in the court of public opinion (not a real court), it equips ideologues with a very large weapon with which to clobber unbelievers with reckless abandon. Cry wolf too many times and people will stop caring. If they then raise their bar even higher like I have done, that's on the frivolous accusers. The Obama years trained you to be hyper-vigilant about racism to the point that you're seeing specters of white supremacy around every corner. Now is the time to take a step back and start assessing accusations rationally again.

Keeping in mind that racism is a serious accusation, tell me: how confident are you in your belief that Gavin McInnes is a racist?
Uh huh.

When Chris Rock makes a racist joke it is hilarious, when this guy does it is unironic and sounds like your internet racist variety serious 'sarcasm'. This person is racist but likes to hide behind said sarcasm. Very few find his brand of race based jokes funny, I'm sure that you barely do.

Opinions are lovely aren't they.
 
Last edited:

matt404au

Gold Member
Apr 25, 2009
7,575
7,819
825
Australia
#58
Uh huh.

When Chris Rock makes a racist joke it is hilarious, when this guy does it is unironic and sounds like your internet racist variety serious 'sarcasm'. This person is racist but likes to hide behind said sarcasm. Very few find his brand of race based jokes funny, I'm sure that you barely do.

Opinions are lovely aren't they.
Whether you find his jokes funny or not is irrelevant to his right to tell them.

That you think it's ok for Chris Rock to make racial jokes but not Gavin McInnes based on their races tells me all I need to know about your stance on equality. Power+ indeed.
 
Jan 12, 2009
16,171
1,447
835
#59
Whether you find his jokes funny or not is irrelevant to his right to tell them.

That you think it's ok for Chris Rock to make racial jokes but not Gavin McInnes based on their races tells me all I need to know about your stance on equality. Power+ indeed.
Clearly I'm going by the quality of their jokes Mr. Gillette identity politics.

I guess for Gavin it's nice to think that he's funny, when the only thing he comes off as to many is racist.
 
Last edited:
Apr 27, 2018
390
202
195
#61
I love how the SPLC is an "evil" organization for some people here, but a man who fosters a group defined by its xenophobia and unprovoked violence is some poor, hard-done by victim of defamation.

Look, I know the conservatives here practically masturbate to the thought of civil rights groups being punished for merely existing, but it's not as easy as InfoWars (why is anyone trusting a lie factory like that?) would have you believe. McInnes will have to show that the SPLC knew it was exaggerating McInnes' beliefs, and that's not an open-and-shut case.
What conservative do you know does that? They must not be conservative, then. Also, Southern Poverty... A civil rights group? Nowadays the left calls everything they don't like "civil rights" so forgive my skepticism.
 
Feb 22, 2018
1,355
1,311
315
#66
The upcoming Covington legal slam dunk is going to set a precedent. Gavin should have waited and used that as his foundation.
 
Last edited:
Jan 12, 2009
16,171
1,447
835
#67
Can you repeat that in English, please?

Unless the SPLC somehow extremely fucked up he doesn't have anything to go by, because they will easily show that nothing they said outside matters of opinion, was false by the standards of the court. Actually not even that, he has to prove that their statements are false.

As far as work and a platform is concerned he's made himself untouchable several times over, and that isn't the SPLC's fault. Blame the on air butt plugs.

I think that this is merely attention seeking.
 
Last edited:

matt404au

Gold Member
Apr 25, 2009
7,575
7,819
825
Australia
#68
Unless the SPLC somehow extremely fucked up he doesn't have anything to go by, because they will easily show that nothing they said outside matters of opinion, was false by the standards of the court. Actually not even that, he has to prove that their statements are false.

As far as work and a platform is concerned he's made himself untouchable several times over, and that isn't the SPLC's fault. Blame the on air butt plugs.

I think that this is merely attention seeking.
“Unless the SPLC somehow extremely fucked up”

You say that like they didn’t just lose a multi-million dollar defamation lawsuit to Maajid Nawaz. How you people can go about your lives ignoring reality boggles my mind. I suppose that’s probably because I’m actually in control of my mind.
 
Aug 12, 2011
8,376
95
610
#69
You're the one making the assertion that Gavin believes that Western culture is synonymous with white people and therefore excluding all non-white races. Now you're shifting the goalposts to not include Native Americans because his marriage to one is inconvenient for your argument, but you're still assuming he's racist against others. Moreover, you started at the assumption that he is racist and then tried to work backwards to find evidence. Actually, you didn't even try to find evidence, you just continued on with the obstinate assumption that he's racist based on... what exactly? Like I said, Anthony Cumia cleared up the origins of the Proud Boys on the JRE podcast and noted that the group morphed into something other than the meme/satire group Gavin originally founded it as. He subsequently left and is no longer associated with it.

He's a comedian who likes to push boundaries and saying edgy shit is part of his schtick. Get over it and focus on actions instead because the consequences of silencing satire are much worse than anything it could produce. Focusing on words -- satirical words at that -- leaves you susceptible to manipulation by biased sources as we've seen so frequently of late. If you can find evidence of him non-satirically calling for or engaging in violence against non-whites, I'll join you in the "he's a racist" camp. Until then, I will continue to treat racism as the serious accusation that it should be, because frivolous accusations have serious consequences, many of which are unforeseen and unintentional. Not only does it unfairly paint the accused as evil and irredeemable in the court of public opinion (not a real court), it equips ideologues with a very large weapon with which to clobber unbelievers with reckless abandon. Cry wolf too many times and people will stop caring. If they then raise their bar even higher like I have done, that's on the frivolous accusers. The Obama years trained you to be hyper-vigilant about racism to the point that you're seeing specters of white supremacy around every corner. Now is the time to take a step back and start assessing accusations rationally again.

Keeping in mind that racism is a serious accusation, tell me: how confident are you in your belief that Gavin McInnes is a racist?
You are either being disingenuous or well I'm just going to assume that's it.

1. I didn't make the accusation that White Culture = Western Culture that was someone else...sorry

2. I never said he was racist, I just said that him being married to a Native American didn't eliminate the possibility that he was.

3. Being racist against a race of people and being a white supremacists are two separate things that aren't entirely mutual(obviously).

4. My only "argument" was that Western Culture and what it means in this context is still only relevant when considering what Gavin considers Western Culture. I'm not sure how in less than two pages you have lost the plot so thoroughly.

Oh wait. You are either being disingenuous or well I'm just going to assume that's it.
 
Last edited:

matt404au

Gold Member
Apr 25, 2009
7,575
7,819
825
Australia
#70
Now you're being disengenuous or you really can't read.

I wasn't the one who equated the two. That was another poster. I said it would matter what


You are either being disingenuous or well I'm just going to assume that's it.

1. I didn't make the accusation that White Culture = Western Culture that was someone else...sorry

2. I never said he was racist, I just said that him being married to a Native American didn't eliminate the possibility that he was.

3. Being racist against a race of people and being a white supremacists are two separate things that aren't entirely mutual(obviously).

4. My only "argument" was that Western Culture and what it means in this context is still only relevant when considering what Gavin considers Western Culture. I'm not sure how in less than two pages you have lost the plot so thoroughly.

Oh wait. You are either being disingenuous or well I'm just going to assume that's it.
Follow this comment chain and perhaps you can see why I think you are backing up Aurelian's assertion that Western culture and white people are synonymous:

Well, let's see... he sees white men and "Western" (read: white) culture as "under siege" from immigrants. He said "I want violence, I want punching in the face. I'm disappointed in Trump supporters for not punching enough." He and the group regularly celebrate historical murders of left-wing figures. The group shows up at events expecting to fight; there's video evidence that it started the fight outside the Metropolitan Republican Club last fall, beating up protesters outside a McInnes talk.

In other words, I arrived at that conclusion based on what McInnes and his followers have said and done.
No, you don’t just get to insert “(read: white)” in there like that. That’s not what Western culture means. Race and culture are not the same thing. Anyone of any colour can adhere to Western cultural values. What a fucking stupid and dishonest thing to say.

Also, are you unaware of the Maajid Nawaz lawsuit against the SPLC that he won? They’ve got priors, dude. Fucking hell, just handwaving away any criticism of “civil rights” advocacy groups as conservatives masturbating to the thought of them being punished for existing... pull your head out of your ass.
This entire argument hinges on the accepted definition of Western culture or more accurately what Gavin thinks Western culture is.
 
Jan 12, 2009
16,171
1,447
835
#71
“Unless the SPLC somehow extremely fucked up”

You say that like they didn’t just lose a multi-million dollar defamation lawsuit to Maajid Nawaz. How you people can go about your lives ignoring reality boggles my mind. I suppose that’s probably because I’m actually in control of my mind.
I like that you think that this is a mirror case. It seems like you stopped trying a while ago. Fuck the SPLC am I right?
 
Last edited:

matt404au

Gold Member
Apr 25, 2009
7,575
7,819
825
Australia
#72
I like that you think that this is a mirror case. It seems like you stopped trying a while ago. Fuck the SPLC am I right?
What do you mean by mirror case? Are you suggesting that I think every facet of the Nawaz case is exactly the same as the McInnes case?

I'm suggesting that appealing to the spurious authority of the SPLC by default is a mistake. It's not the same organisation it once was and any rational person should be skeptical about its credibility given what the Nawaz case revealed about its practices.
 
Last edited:
Mar 18, 2018
1,436
946
230
#73
Clearly I'm going by the quality of their jokes Mr. Gillette identity politics.

I guess for Gavin it's nice to think that he's funny, when the only thing he comes off as to many is racist.
Many self loathing racists who have absolutely no sense of humor and equate equality with authority as one in the same.

Yeah I am talking about the leftists who live on Twitter and shout down everything they can’t masturbate to.
 
Aug 12, 2011
8,376
95
610
#75
Follow this comment chain and perhaps you can see why I think you are backing up Aurelian's assertion that Western culture and white people are synonymous:
First of all let's not assume that Aurelian and I are cut from the same cloth. I'm not a regular in the political threads and this conversation we are having is why. Everyone's first instinct is to lump anyone that disagrees with them or even makes a contradictory point to be part of the "agenda" and then go into full defensive mode to the point of making accusations based off of that lumping together, while ignoring the content of the posts.

Second Western Culture is White Culture for the most part. Not in the sense that it can only involve white people, but that it is largely based on the religion and ideals of whites, and more specifically Christianity. You might remember a thing in history called the Crusades where Western Culture was trying to spread into the middle east through Christianity. Now apply that to modern day and what you get is people(mainly white) pissed off that other cultures(mainly brown) are not assimilating correctly. So they feel the need to defend "Western Culture". Now is this how Gavin feels? I don't know, but he may very well equate the two and having a Native American wife doesn't eliminate that possibility. I'm not saying he is a racist, but he could be.
 
Last edited:

Cybrwzrd

Anime waifu panty shots are basically the same thing as paintings of the french baroque masters, if you think about it.
Sep 29, 2014
3,792
3,494
460
#76
we must stop this disgusting bigotry and injustice by suing the people who went after *checks writing on palm* the ku klux klan???
Hitler went after the communists too, but that doesn't make him a good guy.
 
Likes: matt404au
May 5, 2013
723
166
375
#77
If the SPLC's methods were used against the left, at least there would be some balance. They take a few truly bad groups, but then look for excuses to lump anyone they disagree with in with them. Guilt by association is the norm; or even guilt by some kind of similarity.

Imagine if you actually viewed communists as being as bad as Nazis (they killed a lot more people). The you started branding everyone who was sympathetic to the communists as being equivalent to Nazis. Then you look at any left-wing march where somebody was wearing communist paraphernalia and brand them all as equivalent to Nazis. Then you look at every slightly fringe left-wing group, find some similarities to communist platforms, and brand them as equivalent to Nazis. Then you keep spreading that until you can essentially brand the entire left the same way.

If the hard core of the left was capable of critical self-examination at that level, at least they'd understand what's wrong with the SPLC and its methods.
 
Jan 12, 2009
16,171
1,447
835
#78
What do you mean by mirror case? Are you suggesting that I think every facet of the Nawaz case is exactly the same as the McInnes case?

I'm suggesting that appealing to the spurious authority of the SPLC by default is a mistake. It's not the same organisation it once was and any rational person should be skeptical about its credibility given what the Nawaz case revealed about its practices.
It's one case, albeit an interesting. One day we'll see won't we.
 
Last edited:

matt404au

Gold Member
Apr 25, 2009
7,575
7,819
825
Australia
#79
First of all let's not assume that Aurelian and I are cut from the same cloth. I'm not a regular in the political threads and this conversation we are having is why. Everyone's first instinct is to lump anyone that disagrees with them or even makes a contradictory point to be part of the "agenda" and then go into full defensive mode to the point of making accusations based off of that lumping together, while ignoring the content of the posts.

Second Western Culture is White Culture for the most part. Not in the sense that it can only involve white people, but that it is largely based on the religion and ideals of whites, and more specifically Christianity. You might remember a thing in history called the Crusades where Western Culture was trying to spread into the middle east through Christianity. Now apply that to modern day and what you get is people(mainly white) pissed off that other cultures(mainly brown) are not assimilating correctly. So they feel the need to defend "Western Culture". Now is this how Gavin feels? I don't know, but he may very well equate the two and having a Native American wife doesn't eliminate that possibility. I'm not saying he is a racist, but he could be.
I'm not assuming that, but in the context of the flow of the exchange with Aurelian, it did seem like you were backing up his assertion at the time. Thank you for elaborating and clarifying.

I agree with what you are saying in that it's a possibility, but it ultimately comes down to innocent until proven guilty. The SPLC has made allegations of racism against him and it's on them to prove their veracity, not on Gavin to disprove that he's a racist. The consequences of being labelled a racist in current_year are significant, and it should not be up to some independent body to operate outside of legal jurisdiction in deciding who should be unpersoned. Given:
  • the recent history of the SPLC;
  • what I saw when I did my own research after Gavin's recent deplatforming saga; and
  • my own natural inclination towards skepticism,
I do not believe that he's a racist and instead believe that he is a completely satirical character who is trolling to provoke absurd reactions from the modern ideological left. My opinion is also bolstered by what Anthony Cumia, who has been friends with him for decades, said about him on the JRE podcast.

I also need to point out that I think you are mistakenly conflating Western culture and white people. This is especially clear when you say "other cultures (mainly brown)". Brown is not a culture, it is a racial characteristic. Culture and race are not the same thing, and that's the entire point of cultural integration. A child born in the US to Chinese immigrant parents will grow up to be racially Chinese but culturally American. What you are pointing to is a correlation because race (biological) and culture (social) historically evolved together in geographical isolation. It does not mean that race is a causal factor in culture, and the correlation is weakening over time as biological evolution is no longer geographically constrained. To a lesser extent, neither is social evolution due to the advent of the internet. This is the main flaw I see in your arguments: you want to dispute what I'm saying about Western culture and white people but you're doing it from a muddled understanding of what race and culture are.
 
May 17, 2012
5,233
1,052
455
Canada
#80
They settled another smaller case recently too. I can't find who it was atm. I had never heard of him. This place has been playing fast and loose but they get so much in donations they could have 30 Maajid Nawaz cases a year and not even sweat it.

Ben Carson was on their list until people went nuts and they took him off. Caused a lot of problems. There was a school with his name on it citing SPLC as a reason to change the name of the school.
 
Last edited:
Dec 3, 2013
17,566
10,487
555
#81
They settled another smaller case recently too. I can't find who it was atm. I had never heard of him. This place has been playing fast and loose but they get so much in donations they could have 30 Maajid Nawaz cases a year and not even sweat it.
Anyone else see the irony that a group with poverty in the name, rakes in millions and I'm sure launders/lines pockets with those at the top.
 
Aug 12, 2011
8,376
95
610
#82
I'm not assuming that, but in the context of the flow of the exchange with Aurelian, it did seem like you were backing up his assertion at the time. Thank you for elaborating and clarifying.

I agree with what you are saying in that it's a possibility, but it ultimately comes down to innocent until proven guilty. The SPLC has made allegations of racism against him and it's on them to prove their veracity, not on Gavin to disprove that he's a racist. The consequences of being labelled a racist in current_year are significant, and it should not be up to some independent body to operate outside of legal jurisdiction in deciding who should be unpersoned. Given:
  • the recent history of the SPLC;
  • what I saw when I did my own research after Gavin's recent deplatforming saga; and
  • my own natural inclination towards skepticism,
I do not believe that he's a racist and instead believe that he is a completely satirical character who is trolling to provoke absurd reactions from the modern ideological left. My opinion is also bolstered by what Anthony Cumia, who has been friends with him for decades, said about him on the JRE podcast.

I also need to point out that I think you are mistakenly conflating Western culture and white people. This is especially clear when you say "other cultures (mainly brown)". Brown is not a culture, it is a racial characteristic. Culture and race are not the same thing, and that's the entire point of cultural integration. A child born in the US to Chinese immigrant parents will grow up to be racially Chinese but culturally American. What you are pointing to is a correlation because race (biological) and culture (social) historically evolved together in geographical isolation. It does not mean that race is a causal factor in culture, and the correlation is weakening over time as biological evolution is no longer geographically constrained. To a lesser extent, neither is social evolution due to the advent of the internet. This is the main flaw I see in your arguments: you want to dispute what I'm saying about Western culture and white people but you're doing it from a muddled understanding of what race and culture are.
I think the current climate is what makes the trolling argument absurd. This is the same defense given for Alex Jones. His intent is not the issue, the reaction is. Example: Alex Jones and his defenders claim he is just goofing, and he may be. The problem occurs when his goofing leads to real world aggression. Someone who is just "goofing" at this point should make an announcement. "I do not advocate violence or harassment of mass shooting victims." but he didn't

If Gavin's creation expanded beyond what he intended(goof), he should have rejected the "bastardization" of his creation and distanced himself sooner.

I understand that brown is not a culture. My point is that most "fearful" whites are only concerned with conflicting cultures from brown people. What are you trying to say about western culture and white people? I don't think you have detailed it yet. What to you is western culture and how does it differ from white culture if at all? I have said what I think it is. It's only fair.
 

matt404au

Gold Member
Apr 25, 2009
7,575
7,819
825
Australia
#83
I think the current climate is what makes the trolling argument absurd. This is the same defense given for Alex Jones. His intent is not the issue, the reaction is. Example: Alex Jones and his defenders claim he is just goofing, and he may be. The problem occurs when his goofing leads to real world aggression. Someone who is just "goofing" at this point should make an announcement. "I do not advocate violence or harassment of mass shooting victims." but he didn't

If Gavin's creation expanded beyond what he intended(goof), he should have rejected the "bastardization" of his creation and distanced himself sooner.

I understand that brown is not a culture. My point is that most "fearful" whites are only concerned with conflicting cultures from brown people. What are you trying to say about western culture and white people? I don't think you have detailed it yet. What to you is western culture and how does it differ from white culture if at all? I have said what I think it is. It's only fair.
The political climate of the day should not dictate how the law is applied. Ideally, it wouldn't dictate social standards either, but that's obviously more difficult to control.

You can criticise Gavin's handling of the hijacking of the Proud Boys, but it's good to remember that hindsight is 20/20 and your view is likely tainted due to the clear biases of many of the outlets that have reported on him. He's not comparable to Alex Jones because he has not been found guilty of a crime by a real court. I will also point out that, if we use legalities as a measuring stick, SPLC and Infowars are on equal footing because they've both settled defamation suits (Nawaz and Sandy Hook). If the SPLC wants to maintain a public database of hate figures, it would be best served to keep only a list of people convicted of crimes. It is not an authority on anything -- it is an activist organisation and is accordingly biased and prone to hijacking by ideologues, which I do believe has happened to some extent (where do you think all the grievance studies graduates go if not to activist organisations?).

People have different ideas on what Western culture means, I agree on that, but to me it is based on enlightenment values including: reason, separation of church and state, liberty and individualism. Humans have been inherently tribal and collectivist throughout our entire evolution because it was necessary to survive in the prevailing conditions. However, in the extremely safe modern era, cultural success is built from the bottom up via accumulative individual success: the sum of the parts is greater than the whole, rising tide, etc.. The history of the 20th century proves this: every collectivist (communist, marxist, socialist) state failed, while the states that adopted capitalism flourished (yes, even the Scandinavians who built their wealth on the exploitation of their abundant natural resources). It is true that Western culture and Christianity have been heavily intertwined in the past, but I don't necessarily see anything wrong with that so long as we have separation of church and state in the present. I'm not religious in that I don't believe in a deity, but I believe that Christianity got a lot of the fundamentals of successful culture right, namely in its empathy, veneration of the family unit, and self-sacrifice / discipline.

Make no mistake, there are many who wish to bring down Western culture from within because they've been convinced that they're oppressed by it. What's worse is they're doing it on the basis of immutable characteristics that have very little bearing on the ability of an individual to succeed in Western culture (identity politics). Postmodern / grievance studies academia, BLM, Antifa, feminism / Women's March -- these are activist groups that hate America, Western culture, and everything they stand for. But they don't see that if they were to succeed in bringing it down, something much worse would inevitably replace it. Name one other successful culture that is as open, empathetic and tolerant, I dare you. The Chinese? They put Muslims in re-education camps and spy on / persecute their own people, including murdering journalists and other dissidents who criticise the government. The Russians? They similarly persecute LGBT. Any of the numerous Islamic majority countries? These cultures are as far right as you can get and the unholy alliance between modern feminists and Islam is therefore baffling.

So, Gavin McInnes founding the Proud Boys to stand up for Western culture has nothing to do with race and everything to do with telling those trying to tear it down from within to fuck off and show some gratitude. Perhaps it was inevitable that it would attract and be hijacked by far right types in the current political climate, but that doesn't retroactively change what it was originally intended to be. I would suggest listening to what Anthony Cumia and Gavin himself had to say about it. My perspective changed when I did.
 
Dec 18, 2010
8,114
775
660
51
washington d.c.
#84
I define western culture as where everyone wants to live. Despite supposedly being warmongering and white supremacist, it doesn’t seem to deter droves of human beings from all races and cultures wanting to come, often at grave personal risk to escape their ‘ great country ‘.
 
Aug 12, 2011
8,376
95
610
#85
The political climate of the day should not dictate how the law is applied. Ideally, it wouldn't dictate social standards either, but that's obviously more difficult to control.

You can criticise Gavin's handling of the hijacking of the Proud Boys, but it's good to remember that hindsight is 20/20 and your view is likely tainted due to the clear biases of many of the outlets that have reported on him. He's not comparable to Alex Jones because he has not been found guilty of a crime by a real court. I will also point out that, if we use legalities as a measuring stick, SPLC and Infowars are on equal footing because they've both settled defamation suits (Nawaz and Sandy Hook). If the SPLC wants to maintain a public database of hate figures, it would be best served to keep only a list of people convicted of crimes. It is not an authority on anything -- it is an activist organisation and is accordingly biased and prone to hijacking by ideologues, which I do believe has happened to some extent (where do you think all the grievance studies graduates go if not to activist organisations?).

People have different ideas on what Western culture means, I agree on that, but to me it is based on enlightenment values including: reason, separation of church and state, liberty and individualism. Humans have been inherently tribal and collectivist throughout our entire evolution because it was necessary to survive in the prevailing conditions. However, in the extremely safe modern era, cultural success is built from the bottom up via accumulative individual success: the sum of the parts is greater than the whole, rising tide, etc.. The history of the 20th century proves this: every collectivist (communist, marxist, socialist) state failed, while the states that adopted capitalism flourished (yes, even the Scandinavians who built their wealth on the exploitation of their abundant natural resources). It is true that Western culture and Christianity have been heavily intertwined in the past, but I don't necessarily see anything wrong with that so long as we have separation of church and state in the present. I'm not religious in that I don't believe in a deity, but I believe that Christianity got a lot of the fundamentals of successful culture right, namely in its empathy, veneration of the family unit, and self-sacrifice / discipline.

Make no mistake, there are many who wish to bring down Western culture from within because they've been convinced that they're oppressed by it. What's worse is they're doing it on the basis of immutable characteristics that have very little bearing on the ability of an individual to succeed in Western culture (identity politics). Postmodern / grievance studies academia, BLM, Antifa, feminism / Women's March -- these are activist groups that hate America, Western culture, and everything they stand for. But they don't see that if they were to succeed in bringing it down, something much worse would inevitably replace it. Name one other successful culture that is as open, empathetic and tolerant, I dare you. The Chinese? They put Muslims in re-education camps and spy on / persecute their own people, including murdering journalists and other dissidents who criticise the government. The Russians? They similarly persecute LGBT. Any of the numerous Islamic majority countries? These cultures are as far right as you can get and the unholy alliance between modern feminists and Islam is therefore baffling.

So, Gavin McInnes founding the Proud Boys to stand up for Western culture has nothing to do with race and everything to do with telling those trying to tear it down from within to fuck off and show some gratitude. Perhaps it was inevitable that it would attract and be hijacked by far right types in the current political climate, but that doesn't retroactively change what it was originally intended to be. I would suggest listening to what Anthony Cumia and Gavin himself had to say about it. My perspective changed when I did.
I guess the lesson here is if you are going to stand up for something you should clearly define what it is you are trying to protect.

Saying you are protecting "Western Culture" is going to be seen as a dog whistle to some and to others a call to action against what they believe is the threat.
 
Apr 18, 2018
7,049
10,843
545
USA
dunpachi.com
#86
I guess the lesson here is if you are going to stand up for something you should clearly define what it is you are trying to protect.

Saying you are protecting "Western Culture" is going to be seen as a dog whistle to some and to others a call to action against what they believe is the threat.
This same standard was not applied to Black Lives Matter (as one example out of many), which is why there was immediate friction between BLM, various media groups, social media, and the public at large.

Saying "Black Lives Matter" is going to be seen as a dog whistle to some and to others a call to action against what they believe is the threat, and the history of the group corroborates your concern.
 

matt404au

Gold Member
Apr 25, 2009
7,575
7,819
825
Australia
#87
I guess the lesson here is if you are going to stand up for something you should clearly define what it is you are trying to protect.

Saying you are protecting "Western Culture" is going to be seen as a dog whistle to some and to others a call to action against what they believe is the threat.
From what I’ve seen, he has clearly defined it several times. If you want to ignore that and listen only to what left wing media hit pieces say about him, that’s on you.
 
Aug 12, 2011
8,376
95
610
#88
This same standard was not applied to Black Lives Matter (as one example out of many), which is why there was immediate friction between BLM, various media groups, social media, and the public at large.

Saying "Black Lives Matter" is going to be seen as a dog whistle to some and to others a call to action against what they believe is the threat, and the history of the group corroborates your concern.
How is this relevant? Is it because you think I am pro BLM? Why would you think that? Why are you all so binary? If I am questioning the Proud Boys why do you assume you can "get" me by equating BLM and the Proud Boys?
My problem with these groups including the now defunct Occupy Wallstreet is that there is no clear leadership structure.

From what I’ve seen, he has clearly defined it several times. If you want to ignore that and listen only to what left wing media hit pieces say about him, that’s on you.
There you go again trying to lump we in. I don't know what left wing hit pieces say. I also don't know what he has defined it as other than what he said on Rogan, which was after the shit storm, so it doesn't really count. Do I have to piece it together or is there a Proud Boy charter I can read? BTW this is reliant on the fact that it was defined before the shit storm, preferably when he started it.
 
Last edited:

matt404au

Gold Member
Apr 25, 2009
7,575
7,819
825
Australia
#89
There you go again trying to lump we in. I don't know what left wing hit pieces say. I also don't know what he has defined it as other than what he said on Rogan, which was after the shit storm, so it doesn't really count. Do I have to piece it together or is there a Proud Boy charter I can read? BTW this is reliant on the fact that it was defined before the shit storm, preferably when he started it.
And you said I was disingenuous :messenger_tears_of_joy:
 

matt404au

Gold Member
Apr 25, 2009
7,575
7,819
825
Australia
#91
Tell me how I am being disengenuous. All you have is snarky replies trying to prove I'm some dyed in the wool ledty lefty, but you cant even answer simple questions. Show me the receipts.
All I have is snarky replies? Did you miss the lengthy replies that I put a lot of effort into in order to elucidate what I meant by Western culture? Seems like you're spinning wheels because you don't know what you're talking about and your ego won't let you admit it.
 
Aug 12, 2011
8,376
95
610
#92
All I have is snarky replies? Did you miss the lengthy replies that I put a lot of effort into in order to elucidate what I meant by Western culture? Seems like you're spinning wheels because you don't know what you're talking about and your ego won't let you admit it.
Same could be said of you. You notice that I respond to you and answer questions, but then you insinuate I'm lying. I never once made a comment about how you are just a right wing drone, because that's deflection. You are accusing me of only subscribing to left wing ideology and failing everytime, so your response is surejan.gif. Why are responding if you already have me pegged as a leftist liar?
 

matt404au

Gold Member
Apr 25, 2009
7,575
7,819
825
Australia
#93
Same could be said of you. You notice that I respond to you and answer questions, but then you insinuate I'm lying. I never once made a comment about how you are just a right wing drone, because that's deflection. You are accusing me of only subscribing to left wing ideology and failing everytime, so your response is surejan.gif. Why are responding if you already have me pegged as a leftist liar?
lol this guy

> Completely ignores the actual points of the long posts that I put a lot of effort into.

> Starts playing the victim and projecting.

Just admit you had no idea what you were talking about then slink back to your corner.
 
Aug 12, 2011
8,376
95
610
#94
lol this guy

> Completely ignores the actual points of the long posts that I put a lot of effort into.

> Starts playing the victim and projecting.

Just admit you had no idea what you were talking about then slink back to your corner.
This guy.

I responded to your previous post. Not sure how your description of Western Civilization relates to the current topic of if Gavin did or did not define the motives of his group clealy at inception. I mean I said I don't know. That's why I asked.

I do know that having a Native wife doesn't excuse you from racism(not saying he is, just that it's not a get out of jail free card) I also know that the definition of "Western Culture" is fluid, but I think you and I are pretty close to an agreement of what it means. Outside of that your entire tactic has been to deflect from answering simple questions like.

Do you believe having a Native wife is proof you can't be racist?

A simple yes or no will work.

Did Gavin define the intent of his group in a detailed manner at inception or soon after, outside of the generic defending Western Culture?

You were the one that declared that he defined it many times, so this should be an easy question.
 
Last edited:

matt404au

Gold Member
Apr 25, 2009
7,575
7,819
825
Australia
#95
This guy.

I responded to your previous post. Not sure how your description of Western Civilization relates to the current topic of if Gavin did or did not define the motives of his group clealy at inception. I mean I said I don't know. That's why I asked. These things

I do know that having a Native wife doesn't excuse you from racism(not saying he is, just that it's not a get out of jail free card) I also know that the definition of "Western Culture" is fluid, but I think you and I are pretty close to an agreement of what it means. Outside of that your entire tactic has been to deflect from answering simple questions like.

Do you believe having a Native wife is proof you can't be racist?

A simple yes or no will work.

Did Gavin define the intent of his group in a detailed manner at inception or soon after, outside of the generic defending Western Culture?

You were the one that declared that he defined it many times, so this should be an easy question.
I don't respond to yes/no gotchas that strip the discussion of nuance to make it easier for you to hammer home a half-baked idea. That tactic make work on oldGAF and Ree, but not here.

You ignored the points made in these posts:

You're the one making the assertion that Gavin believes that Western culture is synonymous with white people and therefore excluding all non-white races. Now you're shifting the goalposts to not include Native Americans because his marriage to one is inconvenient for your argument, but you're still assuming he's racist against others. Moreover, you started at the assumption that he is racist and then tried to work backwards to find evidence. Actually, you didn't even try to find evidence, you just continued on with the obstinate assumption that he's racist based on... what exactly? Like I said, Anthony Cumia cleared up the origins of the Proud Boys on the JRE podcast and noted that the group morphed into something other than the meme/satire group Gavin originally founded it as. He subsequently left and is no longer associated with it.

He's a comedian who likes to push boundaries and saying edgy shit is part of his schtick. Get over it and focus on actions instead because the consequences of silencing satire are much worse than anything it could produce. Focusing on words -- satirical words at that -- leaves you susceptible to manipulation by biased sources as we've seen so frequently of late. If you can find evidence of him non-satirically calling for or engaging in violence against non-whites, I'll join you in the "he's a racist" camp. Until then, I will continue to treat racism as the serious accusation that it should be, because frivolous accusations have serious consequences, many of which are unforeseen and unintentional. Not only does it unfairly paint the accused as evil and irredeemable in the court of public opinion (not a real court), it equips ideologues with a very large weapon with which to clobber unbelievers with reckless abandon. Cry wolf too many times and people will stop caring. If they then raise their bar even higher like I have done, that's on the frivolous accusers. The Obama years trained you to be hyper-vigilant about racism to the point that you're seeing specters of white supremacy around every corner. Now is the time to take a step back and start assessing accusations rationally again.

Keeping in mind that racism is a serious accusation, tell me: how confident are you in your belief that Gavin McInnes is a racist?
I'm not assuming that, but in the context of the flow of the exchange with Aurelian, it did seem like you were backing up his assertion at the time. Thank you for elaborating and clarifying.

I agree with what you are saying in that it's a possibility, but it ultimately comes down to innocent until proven guilty. The SPLC has made allegations of racism against him and it's on them to prove their veracity, not on Gavin to disprove that he's a racist. The consequences of being labelled a racist in current_year are significant, and it should not be up to some independent body to operate outside of legal jurisdiction in deciding who should be unpersoned. Given:
  • the recent history of the SPLC;
  • what I saw when I did my own research after Gavin's recent deplatforming saga; and
  • my own natural inclination towards skepticism,
I do not believe that he's a racist and instead believe that he is a completely satirical character who is trolling to provoke absurd reactions from the modern ideological left. My opinion is also bolstered by what Anthony Cumia, who has been friends with him for decades, said about him on the JRE podcast.

I also need to point out that I think you are mistakenly conflating Western culture and white people. This is especially clear when you say "other cultures (mainly brown)". Brown is not a culture, it is a racial characteristic. Culture and race are not the same thing, and that's the entire point of cultural integration. A child born in the US to Chinese immigrant parents will grow up to be racially Chinese but culturally American. What you are pointing to is a correlation because race (biological) and culture (social) historically evolved together in geographical isolation. It does not mean that race is a causal factor in culture, and the correlation is weakening over time as biological evolution is no longer geographically constrained. To a lesser extent, neither is social evolution due to the advent of the internet. This is the main flaw I see in your arguments: you want to dispute what I'm saying about Western culture and white people but you're doing it from a muddled understanding of what race and culture are.
The political climate of the day should not dictate how the law is applied. Ideally, it wouldn't dictate social standards either, but that's obviously more difficult to control.

You can criticise Gavin's handling of the hijacking of the Proud Boys, but it's good to remember that hindsight is 20/20 and your view is likely tainted due to the clear biases of many of the outlets that have reported on him. He's not comparable to Alex Jones because he has not been found guilty of a crime by a real court. I will also point out that, if we use legalities as a measuring stick, SPLC and Infowars are on equal footing because they've both settled defamation suits (Nawaz and Sandy Hook). If the SPLC wants to maintain a public database of hate figures, it would be best served to keep only a list of people convicted of crimes. It is not an authority on anything -- it is an activist organisation and is accordingly biased and prone to hijacking by ideologues, which I do believe has happened to some extent (where do you think all the grievance studies graduates go if not to activist organisations?).

People have different ideas on what Western culture means, I agree on that, but to me it is based on enlightenment values including: reason, separation of church and state, liberty and individualism. Humans have been inherently tribal and collectivist throughout our entire evolution because it was necessary to survive in the prevailing conditions. However, in the extremely safe modern era, cultural success is built from the bottom up via accumulative individual success: the sum of the parts is greater than the whole, rising tide, etc.. The history of the 20th century proves this: every collectivist (communist, marxist, socialist) state failed, while the states that adopted capitalism flourished (yes, even the Scandinavians who built their wealth on the exploitation of their abundant natural resources). It is true that Western culture and Christianity have been heavily intertwined in the past, but I don't necessarily see anything wrong with that so long as we have separation of church and state in the present. I'm not religious in that I don't believe in a deity, but I believe that Christianity got a lot of the fundamentals of successful culture right, namely in its empathy, veneration of the family unit, and self-sacrifice / discipline.

Make no mistake, there are many who wish to bring down Western culture from within because they've been convinced that they're oppressed by it. What's worse is they're doing it on the basis of immutable characteristics that have very little bearing on the ability of an individual to succeed in Western culture (identity politics). Postmodern / grievance studies academia, BLM, Antifa, feminism / Women's March -- these are activist groups that hate America, Western culture, and everything they stand for. But they don't see that if they were to succeed in bringing it down, something much worse would inevitably replace it. Name one other successful culture that is as open, empathetic and tolerant, I dare you. The Chinese? They put Muslims in re-education camps and spy on / persecute their own people, including murdering journalists and other dissidents who criticise the government. The Russians? They similarly persecute LGBT. Any of the numerous Islamic majority countries? These cultures are as far right as you can get and the unholy alliance between modern feminists and Islam is therefore baffling.

So, Gavin McInnes founding the Proud Boys to stand up for Western culture has nothing to do with race and everything to do with telling those trying to tear it down from within to fuck off and show some gratitude. Perhaps it was inevitable that it would attract and be hijacked by far right types in the current political climate, but that doesn't retroactively change what it was originally intended to be. I would suggest listening to what Anthony Cumia and Gavin himself had to say about it. My perspective changed when I did.

To play the victim over this (conveniently ignoring the fact that the operative word was "if"):

From what I’ve seen, he has clearly defined it several times. If you want to ignore that and listen only to what left wing media hit pieces say about him, that’s on you.

If you actually give a shit about educating yourself on the topic, listen to what he actually had to say himself:



Otherwise, it seems to me that you're not here to actually discuss, you're just here to "win". If that's the case, get lost.
 
Aug 12, 2011
8,376
95
610
#97
I don't respond to yes/no gotchas that strip the discussion of nuance to make it easier for you to hammer home a half-baked idea. That tactic make work on oldGAF and Ree, but not here.

You ignored the points made in these posts:






To play the victim over this (conveniently ignoring the fact that the operative word was "if"):




If you actually give a shit about educating yourself on the topic, listen to what he actually had to say himself:



Otherwise, it seems to me that you're not here to actually discuss, you're just here to "win". If that's the case, get lost.
Ok, so you can't back up your claims that a Native wife makes it impossible to be racist. You also can't seem to realize that I wasn't the one who equated white and western and never claimed Gavin was racist. You also can't admit that properly laying out the great plan for your organization ahead of time to avoid issues like he had is a good lesson.

As to your video I never said he didn't define it, I said he should have from the beginning, then you responded he defined it several times. Then when pushed you post a video of him quitting and explaining himself. Great I knew that. I said I knew that when I said I watched the Rogan episode. I am not claiming that Gavin is lying about his original intentions, I am asking if it was ever defined previously, so that it might have deterred the hijacking.

As for you're massive projection at the end I can see why you're still responding. I won't ask any more questions, because all I'll get is some defenses for things I never claimed, information that I have already stated I have and told to leave, because that's how you "win". You get the other person to leave.
 
I can't really comment on McInnes chance at winning his suit, personally I think he's a creepy mofo that pushed so far that public perception of him is so tainted that I don't think he'll have much chance of winning.

SPLC is a shadow of their former intention, they're a joke organization and should be dismantled, some of the crap they've pulled is simply heinous. Sadly I don't think McInnes will be the cat to do it
 
Last edited: