#this is what we get for continually allowing this cultural shift of the overton window to fascism being a-ok | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

fashiontrendin-blog · 6 years

Text

Tribalism: The Rising Phenomenon You Can’t Unsee

http://fashion-trendin.com/tribalism-the-rising-phenomenon-you-cant-unsee/

Tribalism: The Rising Phenomenon You Can’t Unsee

“If the enemy of my enemy is always your friend, you’re opening yourself up to friends you’re really better off not having.” -Ezra Klein

First, an introduction: I believe that whiskey drinkers care more about symbolism than taste.

When I first moved to Portland from Chicago, a friend made the kind gesture to invite me out to meet her local friend group. It turned out to be a cohort of post-college adults who I later learned refer to themselves as a “clique” and buttress their self-appointed label by doing things like work for the same company, date each other and exclusively wear black.

We met up at a cool bar. The type of place with a vintage photo booth used primarily for making out and taking topless pictures behind the parodied privacy of a half-curtain while a DJ spins the Drive soundtrack across the dance floor. As we shuffled through the order line I was introduced by my friend as a mom, which is never a great conversation starter.

That night, in keeping with my aforementioned ideology, I eschewed what everyone else was ordering (whiskey soda) in favor of a Piña Colada. It was a decision made firmly with the understanding that it would 1.) taste good and 2.) sport an umbrella (which I confirmed with the bartender because I’m the worst). If my drink costs north of $14, I prefer it to come with festive accouterments — e.g. fruit stuck through with a tiny bamboo sword adorning a mai tai, or a half a banana cut into the shape of a dolphin swimming in a daiquiri, maybe even a miniature Ty Beanie Baby clutching the stem of a glass of Franzia. I’m tacky, not picky.

We continued to chat as whiskey after whiskey was handed from bartender to clique and I had successfully begun to steer the focus off of being a mom and onto more relatable topics. Then my drink landed on the counter — umbrella, violently proud, stood conspicuous. The vibe shifted sharply from minimalist chit chat to early 90s sitcom after one of them loudly scoffed, “Who ordered the Piña Colada?” When everyone laughed pointedly, I realized I wouldn’t be making any friends that night. After a few half-hearted attempts at furthering the conversation, I finished my island escape, pocketed the umbrella and bounced.

Ultimately, that moment and the people in it held no influence over my life. I was turned off by their judgment and insensitivity toward a newcomer and they were turned off by what I can only assume was me in all of my Jimmy Buffet glory. It’s fine. I made other friends.

But this memory does exist to serve as a reminder that humans often feel more comfortable placing artificial values around certain acts or preferences rather than welcoming something or someone different, even if they pose no apparent threat. Even when they are in a vulnerable situation. My experience as an outsider to a tribe in this instance was annoying, but nothing further. This, unfortunately, is not always the case. Tribalism is nothing if not expansive in its scope, shifting from harmless inclinations to dangerous policy in a heartbeat.

Postmodern society broke the thick black lines we had previously drawn around what was socially acceptable, like the unquestioned reverence of capitalism or the willful ignorance of inequality in America. This progress has largely been for the better, but it hasn’t been without its growing pains. One critique of postmodernism is that it signaled the end of the individual. American literary critic Fredric Jameson referred to this notion as the “death of the subject,” which has lead to today’s cultural ache of tribalism.

My experience with cliquish attitudes was trivial, but there is an entire end of the spectrum that breeds far more nefarious attitudes. The recent example of the family separation crisis has been particularly illuminating for me in how the community around arbitrary markers (party affiliation) can take precedence over what I once believed to be a universal truth (do not harm kids). I can’t help but feel like the Overton window (the boundaries society places around acceptable discourse) is being stretched to a breaking point, while the arc of justice flatlines.

We all have the capacity to set aside reason in support of the tribe. That’s why a whiskey neat is okay, but a Piña Colada is an embarrassment. That’s why Grimes and Elon Musk confound us as a match. That is why my white child is precious, while brown children aren’t our concern.

That’s the thing with tribalism (or, as modern parlance would have it, cognitive bias): It’s hardwired into us, making it seem natural and valid. But people tend to forget that evolution isn’t intentional. It’s inefficient and random, which may mean that our instinct to team up is as necessary today as our appendix. And given that it pairs so easily with the artifice of advertisers or politicians, this instinct, like the appendix, can be just as dangerous when infected. Because what bias does most mercilessly is strip us of our reason.

In “Why Pure Reason Won’t End American Tribalism,” author Robert Wright presents the concept of tribal antagonism by explaining that “people in opposing tribes don’t like each other.” Wright posits that “the more you dislike the other tribe, the more uncritically you trust your experts and the more suspiciously you view the other tribe’s experts.” This, he says, is easily observable in your own self by a simple scroll through an ideologically mixed social media channel. How does it make you feel when you see evidence presented from a perspective you don’t agree with? It probably makes you mad, or perhaps you’ll feel superior. I know that I’ve certainly felt those things. What it often doesn’t make you feel is considerate or empathetic.

Wright’s piece was written in response to Steven Pinker’s Enlightenment Now, a book that focuses on the Age of Enlightenment from a secular humanist perspective. Wright’s critique is that this particular work focuses too much on the idea that you can sway someone with facts, science and reason. But what sway do those Enlightenment-era qualities hold over a post-truth world? One that will arguably become harder to navigate when advancements in machine learning and technology mean it will become more difficult to discern reality from manipulated audio and video. He goes on to suggest that only by teaching the Buddhist practice of mindfulness alongside the scientific method do we have even a glimmer of getting back our reason.

Mindfulness is the act of being aware of your thoughts and emotions and choosing to explore why you may be having them. It’s critical analysis of the self. Wright suggests that as “long as you remain truly mindful, you will be less inclined to reflexively reject evidence at odds with your views, less inclined to uncritically embrace—and impulsively retweet—evidence supportive of your views.”

I, especially lately, have struggled with the impulsive retweet. It’s difficult not to given the tenor of this administration. Even now, I don’t know how two people can hear the tape of imprisoned kids crying and not feel the same horror and disgust that I feel. But there is credence to what Wright is saying, even in situations like these, where tribalism is being manipulated and used to support the oppression of the most vulnerable. Allowing emotion to overwhelm reason, when they should live in balance with one another, is to risk causing additional convolution. Those missteps, made from the emotional act of unchecked trust, ultimately undercut and distract from the very real tragedy at hand.

With all of this bad-mouthing of tribalism, I do want to clarify that I believe community is important. A healthy one provides material and emotional support, brings out the best in its members and encourages service, love, humility, artistry and ingenuity. But I wonder if it’s possible to take the best parts of a community and weed out the parts of ourselves that tend toward acts of othering.

Truly, who do those “othering” acts serve? What inherent value does a storied glass of scotch hold over its raffish cousin, the Piña Colada? What justice is served in blindly trusting the draconian policies of your party? What is gained from sacrificing arguably the most human trait — our sense of reason — on the altar of association?

Not much from where me and my tiny umbrella are sitting.

Photos by Carsten Schanter and Tomas del Amo via Getty Images.

0 notes

republicstandard · 6 years

Text

Populism is the Future for the Alt-Right

The infamous Charlottesville ‘Unite the Right’ rally, which took place last August, was intended to help unify the various political factions of the dissident right. But as we all know things did not go to plan. The authorities not only revoked the permit for the rally at the last minute, but they also funnelled attendees into the path of Antifa and other violent left wing protesters which caused conflict on the streets which was shown on news bulletins all around the world.

Various members of the pro-white community suffered numerous problems both on the day and in the weeks and months afterwards. Some had their homes broken into; others were de-platformed on social media, whilst others are still currently battling in the courts. And in a historic first several websites had their domains seized and were forced into the dark web for months. To put it simply, the Charlottesville rally was an unmitigated disaster for the pro-white movement; but I also think it was the reckoning that the movement badly needed.

The following months after the rally were a mixture of infighting, self-reflection and change. It was clear that the momentum that had built up during 2015, 2016, and the first 8 months of 2017, was gone. Looking back it is clear that prominent members of the pro-white movement should have been more active in reorganizing and leading during this crucial period. However at the same time I recognise the very difficult situation many of these people were in and how little spare time they had.

More controversy later followed. Pro-white political candidates like Paul Nehlen and Patrick Little descending into meltdowns the likes of which have not been seen this side of Britney Spears shaving her head and beating a car with an umbrella. There are so many twists and turns in their stories that it would require an entire article just to write about them; and who has time for that?

Britain is in the process of leaving the EU, Trump has become the President of the United States of America, and anti-immigration Governments have been elected in Italy, Austria, Hungary, Poland and Czechia.

My conclusion from everything mentioned above is that the pro-white movement has energy, online presence and some potential, yet it is floundering due to its own faults and is simply not going to change anything anytime soon.

My sympathies with the populist movement grow by the day, not just because of their ability to get elected into power, but also because they have a large number of coherent and well thought-out policies that can actually be implemented in the near future. Not to mention the fact that they actually have political parties and a long list of financial backers with deep pockets.

It is easy to forget but in the last two years the populist wave has achieved many things. Britain is in the process of leaving the EU, Trump has become the President of the United States of America, and anti-immigration Governments have been elected in Italy, Austria, Hungary, Poland and Czechia.

I think that a pro-white movement of some kind is always necessary; simply because all other races have their advocacy groups and so logically whites will need their own as a counter and to represent their interests. It is the tragedy of identity politics that this is so, as we move from high-trust societies to ones which are weighted towards groups who can leverage moral authority through state infrastructure, such as diversity quotas and the risible affirmative action program. I also think that such a community is necessary because it helps shift the Overton Window to the right. Whether you agree with the Alt-Right or not, nobody can deny the influence it has had in moving certain topics into the public sphere over the past two years.

My main issue is that I still have no idea why people in the Alt-Right and other pro-white groups have not done more to support the populist movements. I read a lot of white nationalists on social media continuously claim that: ‘Elections don’t matter, if you vote your just feeding the system. We need to let everything collapse and rebuild from scratch.’ This way of thinking is patently absurd for a number of reasons; I think it stems from a mindset of wanting to be as edgy as possible and maintaining a ‘distance’ from the so called ‘normies’.

Obviously these same people would rather see Matteo Salvini, the new interior minister of Italy, continue to turn back migrant boats then allow them to dock at Italian ports. Yet at the same time they claim voting doesn’t change anything, even though Salvini’s policies are reversing Italy’s pro-immigration agenda. This mentality of rejecting the democratic process and working only in overtly pro-white activism needs to end. Even if you don’t agree with democracy, this is the system you have to work in and you must act accordingly. Rejecting the process and simply not voting will only bring victory to your enemies, because I can guarantee that the left will turn out in droves, and they certainly don’t play fair either.

Throughout the 2015-2016 election campaign of Donald Trump identitarians and civic nationalists worked together online to help him get elected. There is no reason why this should not continue, and it was silly from a tactical perspective when these two groups diverged so much after November 2016. In Poland, Hungary and now Italy, what could be described as ‘pro-white’ factions work in harmony with civic nationalist entities on a daily basis – and this partnership achieves results.

No matter how much propaganda you spread or how many immigrants arrive, the likelihood of a pro-white candidate let alone a party being elected in our lifetimes is very slim. Even in South Africa, where whites face rape, torture and murder on their own farms, the majority of whites still vote for mainstream parties. Indeed many liberal whites in Cape Town still deny that the farm murders phenomenon even exists.

The majority of white people by their very nature seem to be instinctively repulsed by ethnic nationalism to some degree, and in any given white country only a small minority of people seem aligned with pro-white causes. This is why I think populism is the way forward, because it provides a form of nationalism which not only solves most of the West’s problems, but is also amenable to the mentality of the average person in the street.

Brexit and Trump’s election were implicitly white events; framed as such more by the actions of the nay-sayers than the advocates. Despite all the media programming, these countries are the product of European peoples, and they still are the majority populations in thes lands, for now. Yet, not one of the major figures in either of these causes made it an explicitly white event- a very wise tactical choice. Populism allows you to save the white man and his family without actually saying that you are saving the white man and his family. Yes; sometimes the populists cuck and you identitarians may cringe with resentment, but if that cuck lowers immigration by 50% then there is no reason not to get behind him.

In the modern world, where an Englishman can be locked up for saying something controversial or a parent can have their child taken by social services simply because they have a bruise on their arm, a certain flexibility is needed. You need to achieve your goals without ever stating what your true goals are. The left have always done this; their centre-left candidates are quite often secretly communist, yet they will never admit that. You need to enter movements and help push through legislation that is similar to your beliefs or which will help lead to the implementation of your goals. Populism is the ‘big tent’ that allows you to do this.

Purity spiralling will get you nowhere, and cutting yourself off from the political process or people who even slightly disagree with you is stupid.

In other words, it is time for the Alt-Right to be pragmatic, as well as idealistic.

Thank you for reading Republic Standard. We publish this magazine and the Freebird Forum because we believe in free speech. Make a donation towards our running costs by clicking here.

The Republic Standard Web Shop is now open! Every piece of merchandise you buy is a victory against the nerds.

from Republic Standard | Conservative Thought & Culture Magazine https://ift.tt/2t7u1T8 via IFTTT

#IFTTT #Republic Standard | Conservative Thought & Culture Magazine

0 notes