This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.
NOTICE: Some online security services are reporting that information for a limited number of users from this site is for sale on the "dark web." As of right now, there is no direct evidence of this, but change your password just to be safe.
The RPGPundit's Own Forum Rules
This part of the site is controlled by the RPGPundit. This is where he discusses topics that he finds interesting. You may post here, but understand that there are limits. The RPGPundit can shut down any thread, topic of discussion, or user in a thread at his pleasure. This part of the site is essentially his house, so keep that in mind. Note that this is the only part of the site where political discussion is permitted, but is regulated by the RPGPundit.

Author Topic: Turning the corner on "woke"?  (Read 5672 times)

Pat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • P
  • Posts: 3600
  • Rats do 0 damage
Re: Turning the corner on "woke"?
« Reply #30 on: July 02, 2021, 03:35:04 AM »
I think I know what's going on, now. Someone seems to have conflated Anti-Racism Training and Critical Race Theory in the Foxosphere's minds.
Nope, never listened to Fox News. My only exposure to any of their shows is watching the (not complimentary) Outfoxed documentary.

And you're the one who's claiming that Critical Race Theory is behind the Civil Rights Movement, when in fact it was created by Harvard scholars in the 60s and 70s, after, and in response to the successes of, the Civil Right Movement. And you can't weasel your way of the out the timing by claiming you were referring to something broader, because another poster referred back to the older Critical Theory, and you rejected that and said you're referring to Critical Race Theory in specific.

So your entire first post, which tries to credit all kinds of earlier historical events to Critical Race Theory, is completely and objectively wrong. Which you can't defend, so you're just making unsubstantiated claims that everybody else knows nothing.

Critical Race Theory explores how the surrounding structures of laws allowed those things to happen. I didn't claim that it was behind the Civil Rights Movement. That would be absurd, and you probably got the idea from the individual who conflated Critical Race Theory (mostly started in the 1970s) with Critical Theory/the Frankfurt School (that got its start in 1920's Germany). I don't get how you managed to misread me that badly.
I didn't misread anything. You literally said: "In order to argue against Critical Race Theory, you have to ignore all of the Jim Crow laws...."

That's an explicit claim that Critical Race Theory owns those events, and all the other ones you named elsewhere in the paragraph. That Critical Race Theory is so enwrapped in those events, that arguing against Critical Race Theory is tantamount to supporting those events.

But, as I pointed out, all those events occurred, and were overcome, before Critical Race Theory even existed. They were defeated by the liberal principles, like equal treatment under the law, that Critical Race Theory has come to completely reject.

Again, Critical Race Theory is a historical study of how laws in the United States were used, and continue to be used, to keep White folks above folks who were/are seen as not-White. The Jim Crow laws are a clear case of laws that were used for right near a century to keep non-White folks below White folks in society. The fact that most of the Jim Crow laws were struck down by Federal Courts (including the Supreme Court) over the objections of state-level courts, and why that was, is part of the question.

As far as I know, Critical Race Theory doesn't reject the *principle* of equal treatment under the law, but it deeply questions whether the current United States criminal justice system actually *practices* equal treatment under the law (for instance, the difference in incarceration rates for black males vs. white males on non-distribution possession of a controlled substance laws, which is vast).
None of that has anything to do with what I said. Once again, you avoid the issue, this time by being a patronizing little asshole.

The actual topic: You literally claimed that anyone who argues against your racist hate ideology is denying Jim Crow.

And Critical Race Theory certainly rejects the principle of equality under the law. It initially took its lead from liberal principles, but almost instantly abandoned them in favor of rejecting evidence and assuming guilt.

deathknight4044

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • d
  • Posts: 71
Re: Turning the corner on "woke"?
« Reply #31 on: July 02, 2021, 03:39:43 AM »
I think I know what's going on, now. Someone seems to have conflated Anti-Racism Training and Critical Race Theory in the Foxosphere's minds.
Nope, never listened to Fox News. My only exposure to any of their shows is watching the (not complimentary) Outfoxed documentary.

And you're the one who's claiming that Critical Race Theory is behind the Civil Rights Movement, when in fact it was created by Harvard scholars in the 60s and 70s, after, and in response to the successes of, the Civil Right Movement. And you can't weasel your way of the out the timing by claiming you were referring to something broader, because another poster referred back to the older Critical Theory, and you rejected that and said you're referring to Critical Race Theory in specific.

So your entire first post, which tries to credit all kinds of earlier historical events to Critical Race Theory, is completely and objectively wrong. Which you can't defend, so you're just making unsubstantiated claims that everybody else knows nothing.

Critical Race Theory explores how the surrounding structures of laws allowed those things to happen. I didn't claim that it was behind the Civil Rights Movement. That would be absurd, and you probably got the idea from the individual who conflated Critical Race Theory (mostly started in the 1970s) with Critical Theory/the Frankfurt School (that got its start in 1920's Germany). I don't get how you managed to misread me that badly.
I didn't misread anything. You literally said: "In order to argue against Critical Race Theory, you have to ignore all of the Jim Crow laws...."

That's an explicit claim that Critical Race Theory owns those events, and all the other ones you named elsewhere in the paragraph. That Critical Race Theory is so enwrapped in those events, that arguing against Critical Race Theory is tantamount to supporting those events.

But, as I pointed out, all those events occurred, and were overcome, before Critical Race Theory even existed. They were defeated by the liberal principles, like equal treatment under the law, that Critical Race Theory has come to completely reject.

Again, Critical Race Theory is a historical study of how laws in the United States were used, and continue to be used, to keep White folks above folks who were/are seen as not-White. The Jim Crow laws are a clear case of laws that were used for right near a century to keep non-White folks below White folks in society. The fact that most of the Jim Crow laws were struck down by Federal Courts (including the Supreme Court) over the objections of state-level courts, and why that was, is part of the question.

As far as I know, Critical Race Theory doesn't reject the *principle* of equal treatment under the law, but it deeply questions whether the current United States criminal justice system actually *practices* equal treatment under the law (for instance, the difference in incarceration rates for black males vs. white males on non-distribution possession of a controlled substance laws, which is vast).

To portray laws that were in effect before most people were born or getting arrested more often for drugs as being more deserving of attention than the abhorrent amount of disproportionate interracial violence that Whites have faced for the last several generations is pure black fragility. If you disagree with me it is indicative of you being fragile and ignorant.

ScytheSong

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 124
Re: Turning the corner on "woke"?
« Reply #32 on: July 02, 2021, 03:40:09 AM »

"Unless youve been indoctrinated as I have, you arent allowed to have an opinion about our systemic vilification of White western people". Yeah man its so esoteric it's not like we can read the works of proponents of critical race theory like Robin DeAngelo, or the training material that teachers are being given, or the training corporation's like Disney and coca cola are pushing on to their employees.

Not what I was saying, but you do you. You can have any opinion you want, you can feel as vilified as you want, but I put it down to jargon. I mean, "white fragility" and "non-whites are better at this than whites are" (which are entirely from one person's academic work, mind you) are jarring to hear without a lot of context and conversations that need to occur in a better setting than with online randos like me.

But, no, it isn't supposed to be a vilification. It's part of a conversation about race that noticed, like you've shown, as soon as racial issues come up, a lot of white folk get really defensive. Why is that? I've seen it happen again and again in conversations I've had -- in fact, until I got my nose rubbed in it when I was 20, I was much the same way -- and "white fragility" is one way to shorthand what's going on.

White fragility is a deflection from criticism by accusing, either implicitly or explicitly, that the subject is racist and in denial. It's a very sophisticated version of "Have you stopped beating your wife?" It's also a term made popular by a women who is an admitted racist and, in my opinion, projects her racism onto white people in general.

*shrug* well, yes. Everyone's a little bit racist (as "Avenue Q" puts it (Great show, I'd recommended it to anyone who wouldn't be freaked out by R-rated muppets)), but White fragility is an awful term that is poorly deployed in almost all of the places I've seen it. It does a reasonable job of putting a label on something I've experienced (and Deathknight4044 has been evincing with his "what about *me*? What about *my race*?" repetitions) It's nowhere near as universal as what you're saying DiAngelo claims, but it's there, right alongside the black woman waving her finger and saying, "Uh-UH! You did NOT just say that!"

deathknight4044

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • d
  • Posts: 71
Re: Turning the corner on "woke"?
« Reply #33 on: July 02, 2021, 03:42:44 AM »

"Unless youve been indoctrinated as I have, you arent allowed to have an opinion about our systemic vilification of White western people". Yeah man its so esoteric it's not like we can read the works of proponents of critical race theory like Robin DeAngelo, or the training material that teachers are being given, or the training corporation's like Disney and coca cola are pushing on to their employees.

Not what I was saying, but you do you. You can have any opinion you want, you can feel as vilified as you want, but I put it down to jargon. I mean, "white fragility" and "non-whites are better at this than whites are" (which are entirely from one person's academic work, mind you) are jarring to hear without a lot of context and conversations that need to occur in a better setting than with online randos like me.

But, no, it isn't supposed to be a vilification. It's part of a conversation about race that noticed, like you've shown, as soon as racial issues come up, a lot of white folk get really defensive. Why is that? I've seen it happen again and again in conversations I've had -- in fact, until I got my nose rubbed in it when I was 20, I was much the same way -- and "white fragility" is one way to shorthand what's going on.

White fragility is a deflection from criticism by accusing, either implicitly or explicitly, that the subject is racist and in denial. It's a very sophisticated version of "Have you stopped beating your wife?" It's also a term made popular by a women who is an admitted racist and, in my opinion, projects her racism onto white people in general.

*shrug* well, yes. Everyone's a little bit racist (as "Avenue Q" puts it (Great show, I'd recommended it to anyone who wouldn't be freaked out by R-rated muppets)), but White fragility is an awful term that is poorly deployed in almost all of the places I've seen it. It does a reasonable job of putting a label on something I've experienced (and Deathknight4044 has been evincing with his "what about *me*? What about *my race*?" repetitions) It's nowhere near as universal as what you're saying DiAngelo claims, but it's there, right alongside the black woman waving her finger and saying, "Uh-UH! You did NOT just say that!"


Yes indeed. What about us?

ScytheSong

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 124
Re: Turning the corner on "woke"?
« Reply #34 on: July 02, 2021, 03:46:21 AM »
None of that has anything to do with what I said. Once again, you avoid the issue, this time by being a patronizing little asshole.

The actual topic: You literally claimed that anyone who argues against your racist hate ideology is denying Jim Crow.

And Critical Race Theory certainly rejects the principle of equality under the law. It initially took its lead from liberal principles, but almost instantly abandoned them in favor of rejecting evidence and assuming guilt.

What I came here to say is this: There may be a racist hate ideology out there, and something that feels uncomfortably like anti-White racism certainly shows up in anti-racism training, but the actual racist hate ideology is not Critical Race Theory, which is much more limited than what Christopher Rufo (see: https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-inquiry/how-a-conservative-activist-invented-the-conflict-over-critical-race-theory ) would like you to believe.

deathknight4044

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • d
  • Posts: 71
Re: Turning the corner on "woke"?
« Reply #35 on: July 02, 2021, 04:01:16 AM »
None of that has anything to do with what I said. Once again, you avoid the issue, this time by being a patronizing little asshole.

The actual topic: You literally claimed that anyone who argues against your racist hate ideology is denying Jim Crow.

And Critical Race Theory certainly rejects the principle of equality under the law. It initially took its lead from liberal principles, but almost instantly abandoned them in favor of rejecting evidence and assuming guilt.

What I came here to say is this: There may be a racist hate ideology out there, and something that feels uncomfortably like anti-White racism certainly shows up in anti-racism training, but the actual racist hate ideology is not Critical Race Theory, which is much more limited than what Christopher Rufo (see: https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-inquiry/how-a-conservative-activist-invented-the-conflict-over-critical-race-theory ) would like you to believe.

"Real critical race theory has never been tried! All of these examples arent real critical race theory, but at the same time it's wrong and fragile of you to reject the content of those CRT lessons (that are actually not really CRT)"
« Last Edit: July 02, 2021, 04:04:39 AM by deathknight4044 »

Ratman_tf

  • Alt-Reich Shitlord
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6690
Re: Turning the corner on "woke"?
« Reply #36 on: July 02, 2021, 04:51:27 AM »
None of that has anything to do with what I said. Once again, you avoid the issue, this time by being a patronizing little asshole.

The actual topic: You literally claimed that anyone who argues against your racist hate ideology is denying Jim Crow.

And Critical Race Theory certainly rejects the principle of equality under the law. It initially took its lead from liberal principles, but almost instantly abandoned them in favor of rejecting evidence and assuming guilt.

What I came here to say is this: There may be a racist hate ideology out there, and something that feels uncomfortably like anti-White racism certainly shows up in anti-racism training, but the actual racist hate ideology is not Critical Race Theory, which is much more limited than what Christopher Rufo (see: https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-inquiry/how-a-conservative-activist-invented-the-conflict-over-critical-race-theory ) would like you to believe.

Personally, I prefer James Lindsay.

The notion of an exclusionary and hostile RPG community is a fever dream of zealots who view all social dynamics through a narrow keyhole of structural oppression.
-Haffrung

SHARK

  • Great White Hope
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3203
Re: Turning the corner on "woke"?
« Reply #37 on: July 02, 2021, 07:02:29 AM »
Greetings!

Critical Race Theory is pure anti-white RACISM deeply rooted in Marxist ideology and given an academic glossed paintjob.

All of the piggy-squealing in defense of Critical Race Theory amounts to nothing more than obtuse gaslighting promoted by anti-white racists, race-grifting charlatans, demagogues, and other malevolent agent-provocateurs that seek the corruption and degradation of America.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
"It is the Marine Corps that will strip away the fa├žade so easily confused with self. It is the Corps that will offer the pain needed to buy the truth. And at last, each will own the privilege of looking inside himself  to discover what truly resides there. Comfort is an illusion. A false security bred from familiar things and familiar ways. It narrows the mind. Weakens the body. And robs the soul of spirit and determination. Comfort is neither welcome nor tolerated here."

"Courage is not the absence of fear, but is doing what you have to, in spite of the fear."
"Let Death and Fire Be Their Portion!"
"Delenda Est Parthia!"

Ghostmaker

  • Chlorine trifluoride
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2204
Re: Turning the corner on "woke"?
« Reply #38 on: July 02, 2021, 08:01:04 AM »
This may be relevant.

During the oughts and teens (2000-2010's), one of the big criticisms from the left about armed response against radical Islamism was that it would simply radicalize more Muslims and create more terrorists.

Now, skip forward to present day and we're told 'well, if you become radicalized by our racial agenda, you were probably already a bigot/Nazi/etc'.

Which is it? Because neither is a particularly good look for the left. Either the Islamists were always radicals, in which case we should have been putting the fear of Allah in them; or their agenda is radicalizing people and they don't want to admit it.

moonsweeper

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 870
Re: Turning the corner on "woke"?
« Reply #39 on: July 02, 2021, 08:20:18 AM »
I think I know what's going on, now. Someone seems to have conflated Anti-Racism Training and Critical Race Theory in the Foxosphere's minds.

Gee, so someone who disagrees with you can only be getting their information from a 'bad source'...and you manage to lump everyone who disagrees into a 'category'...kind of reminds me of the same type of arguments that racists use...

Unless you've had the 15 semester-hours that I've had on Critical Race Theory, Cultural Encounters and Reflection, Clinical Pastoral Education, and Imago Dei (M.Div. branch of understanding these things) that build a picture of just how fucked up the United States is on race relations.

Its an rpg gaming forum...RPG gamers have a tendency to be fairly well read...You might want to have more than the equivalent of 1 semester's worth of classes before you try the big 'appeal to authority' reveal...

I had one class that was led by a Tejano whose family had lived in the San Antonio area since the 1500's, had an ancestor who got out of the Alamo before the Mexicans closed in, and was told by a guy whose parents were refugees from WWII Poland that he should "Leave the US to us Americans." in my presence. These things are really, really tricky and need some time to work through and nuanced discussion. They don't work so well in soundbites or "trainings" that are designed (even by well-meaning people) to make a buck and cover HR-required Continuing Education hours.

So you met someone who is racist?  Wow! Tell us more...I doubt anyone here has ever met someone who was an actual honest-to-God racist...  ::)
....and yet again with the appeal to authority...

Sundown towns? Isn't it weird how we have all these scary names for things white people allegedly did a century ago (I'm sure there's some truth to it, but also a lot of motivated exaggeration), but our lexicon of ominous phrases doesn't have a word for the same phenomenon happening to whites?

Just on this one: I'm curious if you know of any US townships or counties where, by law, if you were white, you couldn't stay overnight (even in a payed lodging) without being arrested and thrown in jail for vagrancy. There were several of those for nonwhites in the early-to-mid twentieth century US.

Yeah, but none of them were more recent than about 70 years ago...
You do realize that some of us knew about the 'Green Book' decades before the movie came out, right?

In fact, Washington Territory (now Washington State) actually declared a handful of Black families "officially white" when they passed their restrictive "anti-Negro" laws preventing any black person from owning real property.

Washington became a state in 1889...


But, no, it isn't supposed to be a vilification. It's part of a conversation about race that noticed, like you've shown, as soon as racial issues come up, a lot of white folk get really defensive. Why is that? I've seen it happen again and again in conversations I've had -- in fact, until I got my nose rubbed in it when I was 20, I was much the same way -- and "white fragility" is one way to shorthand what's going on.

So until fairly recently, then...

One wonders...Do you lecture your German friends on their Nazi heritage or your Japanese friends on how to absolve themselves for Korea and Nanking?
« Last Edit: July 02, 2021, 08:23:24 AM by moonsweeper »
"I have a very hard time taking seriously someone who has the time and resources to protest capitalism, while walking around in Nike shoes and drinking Starbucks, while filming it on their iPhone."  --  Alderaan Crumbs

"Just, can you make it The Ramones at least? I only listen to Abba when I want to fuck a stripper." -- Jeff37923

"Government is the only entity that relies on its failures to justify the expansion of its powers." -- David Freiheit (Viva Frei)

Pat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • P
  • Posts: 3600
  • Rats do 0 damage
Re: Turning the corner on "woke"?
« Reply #40 on: July 02, 2021, 10:43:03 AM »
None of that has anything to do with what I said. Once again, you avoid the issue, this time by being a patronizing little asshole.

The actual topic: You literally claimed that anyone who argues against your racist hate ideology is denying Jim Crow.

And Critical Race Theory certainly rejects the principle of equality under the law. It initially took its lead from liberal principles, but almost instantly abandoned them in favor of rejecting evidence and assuming guilt.

What I came here to say is this: There may be a racist hate ideology out there, and something that feels uncomfortably like anti-White racism certainly shows up in anti-racism training, but the actual racist hate ideology is not Critical Race Theory, which is much more limited than what Christopher Rufo (see: https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-inquiry/how-a-conservative-activist-invented-the-conflict-over-critical-race-theory ) would like you to believe.
I'm not a fan of the anti-white racism because I'm not a fan of racism, but I think it's a relatively small part of the problem. The real issue is segregation. Dividing everyone into identity groups with their own grudges and pitting them against each other is resinstituting Jim Crow. 

That article seem to end halfway through.

ScytheSong

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 124
Re: Turning the corner on "woke"?
« Reply #41 on: July 02, 2021, 11:13:49 AM »
So until fairly recently, then...

One wonders...Do you lecture your German friends on their Nazi heritage or your Japanese friends on how to absolve themselves for Korea and Nanking?

Heh. Born in 1970, thank you very much. But then, I went to a community college (1988-1990) where the two largest groups were the Black Student Union and the Gay and Lesbian Alliance.  Fundamentalist white boy goes to college and meets people who aren't like him, it's an old, old story.

And, no. My German friends get more crap for the entire Wars of Religion and Cuius regio, eius religio thing. I had Japanese Nissei and Issei friends growing up, but we mostly talked about Judo and what the best Japanese food was.

ScytheSong

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 124
Re: Turning the corner on "woke"?
« Reply #42 on: July 02, 2021, 11:31:48 AM »
This may be relevant.

During the oughts and teens (2000-2010's), one of the big criticisms from the left about armed response against radical Islamism was that it would simply radicalize more Muslims and create more terrorists.

Now, skip forward to present day and we're told 'well, if you become radicalized by our racial agenda, you were probably already a bigot/Nazi/etc'.

Which is it? Because neither is a particularly good look for the left. Either the Islamists were always radicals, in which case we should have been putting the fear of Allah in them; or their agenda is radicalizing people and they don't want to admit it.

A lot of Western Liberals *still* have no clue about the divisions and tensions in Islam.  The Wahhabist sect is founded on the concept of "Jihad is preemptive self-defence". It also aggressively proselytizes, including other sects of Islam (those madrassas set up in poorer countries by Saudi Arabia? Almost universally Wahhabist, because the House of Saud is Wahhabist). The mainline Sunni and Shi'a sects are much less militant, but are significantly less likely to proselytize. This is similar to the actions of the White Nationalist/White Supremacist movements in the United States, who have been actively recruiting white folks, especially white law enforcement and (ex-)military, into their movements since just shortly after Ruby Ridge. Does anyone else here remember the Aryan Nations changing to "White Separatists" from "White Supremacists" because "We aren't as crazy as those The Order people?" They were actively looking for ways to make themselves more palatable to Middle America -- and today we have the Oathkeepers and Proud Boys as their spiritual descendants.

So, no, neither group was radicalized by any one else. They simply were aggressively recruiting and then radicalizing the kind of people they thought would be useful to their cause.

ScytheSong

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 124
Re: Turning the corner on "woke"?
« Reply #43 on: July 02, 2021, 11:38:07 AM »
Greetings!

Critical Race Theory is pure anti-white RACISM deeply rooted in Marxist ideology and given an academic glossed paintjob.

All of the piggy-squealing in defense of Critical Race Theory amounts to nothing more than obtuse gaslighting promoted by anti-white racists, race-grifting charlatans, demagogues, and other malevolent agent-provocateurs that seek the corruption and degradation of America.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

You are wrong. But  then, what are you "always faithful" to, Mr. Shark? The United States of America, its people and Constitution, or just the kind of people who look and think like you? You seemed to be plenty happy when the constitution was being trampled on by a bunch of White Supremacist idiots back in January.

Ghostmaker

  • Chlorine trifluoride
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2204
Re: Turning the corner on "woke"?
« Reply #44 on: July 02, 2021, 11:40:01 AM »
This may be relevant.

During the oughts and teens (2000-2010's), one of the big criticisms from the left about armed response against radical Islamism was that it would simply radicalize more Muslims and create more terrorists.

Now, skip forward to present day and we're told 'well, if you become radicalized by our racial agenda, you were probably already a bigot/Nazi/etc'.

Which is it? Because neither is a particularly good look for the left. Either the Islamists were always radicals, in which case we should have been putting the fear of Allah in them; or their agenda is radicalizing people and they don't want to admit it.

A lot of Western Liberals *still* have no clue about the divisions and tensions in Islam.  The Wahhabist sect is founded on the concept of "Jihad is preemptive self-defence". It also aggressively proselytizes, including other sects of Islam (those madrassas set up in poorer countries by Saudi Arabia? Almost universally Wahhabist, because the House of Saud is Wahhabist). The mainline Sunni and Shi'a sects are much less militant, but are significantly less likely to proselytize. This is similar to the actions of the White Nationalist/White Supremacist movements in the United States, who have been actively recruiting white folks, especially white law enforcement and (ex-)military, into their movements since just shortly after Ruby Ridge. Does anyone else here remember the Aryan Nations changing to "White Separatists" from "White Supremacists" because "We aren't as crazy as those The Order people?" They were actively looking for ways to make themselves more palatable to Middle America -- and today we have the Oathkeepers and Proud Boys as their spiritual descendants.

So, no, neither group was radicalized by any one else. They simply were aggressively recruiting and then radicalizing the kind of people they thought would be useful to their cause.

That's nice. You didn't refute a thing I said.

The left has managed to generate its own radical-right opposition. Good job!