Politics

Dear god I'm so glad I'm old enough to have missed all this.

As a guy whom Simone de Beauvoir's The Second Sex appealed to in high school because I was a big tall guy who just wanted to read and write poetry, the whole alt-right pipeline seems wild to me. The book spoke to me deeply about societal expectations of what "man" and "woman" are and it's clearly all performative. Reading the book allowed me to be comfortable in my own skin, knowing that people trying to hurt me by calling me slurs and insinuating I must be "queer" are people who are stuck in performative mode, and they clearly are unwilling to accept other people as they are (thus the willingness to ridicule others for being "different").

Also, slight aside, it definitely feels like reading is a better way to find yourself than watching videos. I remember watching "What the Bleep do We Know" in college and the shocking realization just how much information was being left out of the film. There were a number of scientists interviewed for the film who condemned it saying their words had been purposefully twisted into supporting the absolute bullshit thesis of the film. I have always preferred books with footnotes and references, so you can actually dig for more information instead of just "trusting" the source is being honest. Videos often have a type of "truthiness" to them, where all they offer is sounding like something that would be true.

Arguably, it's why Fahrenheit 451 is one of my favorite books. Captain Beatty's monologue about how all books contradicted each other is absolutely choice, and Beatty nearly succeeds in convincing the reader he is correct, but there's just enough wiggle room for the reader to continue siding with the protagonist. Utterly brilliant antagonist, and I think a figure more deserving of analysis in regards to the alt-right pipeline, because it feels like they've taken Beatty's argument to heart: All the books disagree with each other, so you can't trust any of it. You can only trust this group of men who all agree with each other.

I was there 15 years ago as well. There were no Shapiros or Petersons because online video was still in its infancy, but a conservative upbringing and online spaces definitely pushed me down the path that the author writes about.

I changed when I went to university as well. It wasn't liberal arts courses that got me out, it was simply being around a wide variety of different peoples and ideas. Universities don't teach you to be "woke," it forces you into contact with people outside your bubble.

Me too as a younger guy in my early 20s. I was failing university and my parents cut me off and life hit me real hard all at once. Fortunately I had a mental breakdown which forced me to reconcile with it all and the most supportive girlfriend (now wife). I climbed out too but damn.

I almost fell down it around 3 years ago, watching "SJWs and feminists against video games" type videos and actively searching for them but then one day I just stopped. I really am thankful that the Youtube algorithm didn't hit me that hard.

I kinda feel like that's a journey many young men take. Mine was luckily really brief. I watched a bit of Dave Rubin (I believe that was his name) and his interview show. In the beginning it was all quite interesting and made some sense, but then he invited more extreme interviewees and it all quickly unravelled.

This article is a shining example of the right's obsession with attacking educational institutions. Educated folks actively challenge and test their beliefs in an effort to grow, and this usually involves questioning what they were taught when young.

I remember watching What the Bleep do we Know in high school. As someone who basically watched The Matrix on a loop, I would have been a likely target for right wing grifters. Luckily the Bush years thoroughly pushed me very far away from any right leaning ideology. I probably have the daily show to thank for that.