Gary Younge interviews Richard Spencer for Channel 4 News - General

[media]https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/927843442457276417[/media] i thought this was a good example of how to interview people with extremist ideologies without making a vapid puff piece about them. spencer came off looking like a deranged idiot here.

fuck richard spencer and fuck nazis

This is a wonderful example of how to properly give a platform to someone with a dangerous ideology. You expose and challenge their ideas, not further spread their ideas in the way that they want them to be spread.

Richard Spencer exists to be laughed at and destroyed in arguments. Sometimes I wonder if he's even a real person, like a plant or something. That's the only possibility I can come up with to explain how awful he is at debates. He runs right into counters by his opponent so many times it almost looks intentional. This man cannot debate to save his life. It wouldn't matter if he was fake anyway, because there are way more people who unironically believe what he says and support him.

[QUOTE=Spacewizard;52867388]This is a wonderful example of how to properly give a platform to someone with a dangerous ideology. You expose and challenge their ideas, not further spread their ideas in the way that they want them to be spread.[/QUOTE] Yep. As much as I think Richard Spencer's a fucking idiot, I don't think punching him is the right thing to do because it lends credence to nonsense. That reporter has the patience of a saint, and I'm glad he was able to uncover some grade-A bullshit.

Oh Jesus that exchange about The White House "Your people did [B]not[/B] build this country" "They literally built the White House and weren't paid for it" "Yeah but only because [B]we made them[/B] do it" :godzing:

I love how literally all Younge needed to beat Spencer was honesty and common sense. No fancy debate strats, just listen and respond. The only thing Spencer was listening for was chances to shoehorn in rehearsed talking points, that's why he jumped to brag about how the White House was built by slaves. He's not trying to have an exchange of ideas, he's only trying to one-up his opponent. Turns out, sometimes the best way to deal with these lunatics is to simply show what they look like next to a normal person.

I thought it was kind of a lackluster debate from both sides and just a spontaneous meetup to spout quips/zingers. Not really sure if this accomplished either side's objective since I can already imagine alt-righters think this is a win for them sadly.

"But that's not [I]really[/I] your home!" :downs: How deluded can you even be?

[QUOTE=Gorgus;52867813]"But that's not [I]really[/I] your home!" :downs: How deluded can you even be?[/QUOTE] The No True Scotsman Fallacy is a non-factor for Spencer it seems.

I think it's important that sensible people keep a keen eye on Spencer in the future. He may be a racist scumbag that can't make an intelligent point to save his life, but he has a deceptive air about him. Just look at how much of a cool and composed stature he keeps when he is on his own turf with his people. He is a charismatic deceiver and that can get you very far in America.

[QUOTE=Combat Wombat;52867817]I think it's important that sensible people keep a keen eye on Spencer in the future. He may be a racist scumbag that can't make an intelligent point to save his life, but he has a deceptive air about him. Just look at how much of a cool and composed stature he keeps when he is on his own turf with his people. He is a charismatic deceiver and that can get you very far in America.[/QUOTE] Just going to interject that he acts like that pretty much all the time. His usual college speech is actually a shit ton of people against him and maybe like 2 rows of supporters. Even in a overtly hostile environment his mannerisms and speech are the same.

[QUOTE=Tudd;52867829]Just going to interject that he acts like that pretty much all the time. His usual college speech is actually a shit ton of people against him and maybe like 2 rows of supporters. Even in a overtly hostile environment his mannerisms and speech is the same.[/QUOTE] Even more reason to be wary. He's a con-man at heart.

[QUOTE=Tudd;52867809]I thought it was kind of a lackluster debate from both sides and just a spontaneous meetup to spout quips/zingers. Not really sure if this accomplished either side's objective since I can already imagine alt-righters think this is a win for them sadly.[/QUOTE] Younge isn't about the zingers here. He's being as honest and down-to-earth as possible, it's just your fucked up view of the world making you see reasonable discourse as leftist snipes.

[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;52867841]Younge isn't about the zingers here. He's being as honest and down-to-earth as possible, it's just your fucked up view of the world making you see reasonable discourse as leftist snipes.[/QUOTE] Not really, it is quite easy to see from a debate standpoint that nobody actually went beyond the most surface level of statements. Also what is my messed up viewpoint? I think Richard Spencer's message is terrible and I am actually biased for Younge to come out on top. I just know there really wasn't anything achieved here. Spencer's side will undoubtedly rally behind his zingers, and both sides will just think they "won," even though this wasn't even really a debate. It's more of a brief confrontation if anything. Also fundamentally giving Richard Spencer exposure is never a winning tactic.

[QUOTE=Tudd;52867903]Not really, it is quite easy to see from a debate standpoint that nobody actually went beyond the most surface level of statements. Also what is my messed up viewpoint? I think Richard Spencer's message is terrible and I am actually biased for Younge to come out on top. I just know there really wasn't anything achieved here. Spencer's side will undoubtedly rally behind his zingers, and both sides will just think they "won," even though this wasn't even really a debate. It's more of a brief confrontation if anything.[/QUOTE] There wasn't anything achieved... beyond displaying Spencer for the absolute lunatic he is. You're making the mistake of equating "bragging about slavery" with "not wanting to give a platform to someone bragging about slavery". Come back to the real world for a second Tudd, do you not have an opinion on slavery? Younge isn't coming back at Spencer with detailed explanations of why it's a bad thing because it doesn't deserve an explanation, this isn't a fucking debate class. Every reasonable person in the world understands why it's a bad thing. Everyone, except racists like you.

[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;52867933]There wasn't anything achieved... beyond displaying Spencer for the absolute lunatic he is. You're making the mistake of equating "bragging about slavery" with "not wanting to give a platform to someone bragging about slavery". [/quote] Problem is that most people don't need anymore reason to think he is a lunatic, but giving him exposure just increases the chances of other people buying into his rhetoric. His speeches are pathetically filled with so little supporters, but huge crowds of protesters that give him the exposure he needs to continue being in the media spotlight. [quote] Come back to the real world for a second Tudd, do you not have an opinion on slavery? Younge isn't coming back at Spencer with detailed explanations of why it's a bad thing because it doesn't deserve an explanation, this isn't a fucking debate class. Every reasonable person in the world understands why it's a bad thing. Everyone, except racists like you.[/QUOTE] 1. I dislike Identitarians of race alot like Richard Spencer. Their ideas are untenable, awful, and lead to dark places historically. Doing work/studies on the Holocaust has given me a far more objective glimpse on why any proponents of racial identity are people with horrible priorities and misguided beliefs. 2. You just admitted that this discussion serves no purpose since you think there is no debate. Spencer's viewpoints are already trash without needing to give him more exposure and chances to zing for his side.

[QUOTE=Tudd;52867903]Also fundamentally giving Richard Spencer exposure is never a winning tactic.[/QUOTE] Wow sick fucking mental gymnastics. It's not the shit Richard Spencer is spewing in the video that's the problem; no, the issue lies in the interviewer having the gall to try to understand Spencer and in doing so, naively giving Spencer "exposure". Also if anything Richard Spencer said in that video was interpreted as a sick "zinger", you may just have some prejudices yourself. Spencer telling a English born black man that he can never be English is [B]not a fucking zinger[/B]. Spencer telling a Black man that it wasn't the slave labour of his people that built the United States, but rather the fact that the white man forced his people to do so, is [B]not a fucking zinger[/B]. These are racist mantras, and if you take them as anything less than despicable, you are [B]racist[/B]. Why do you feel compelled to take the objectively bad side of everything, no matter the scenario?

[QUOTE=Tudd;52867809]I thought it was kind of a lackluster debate from both sides and just a spontaneous meetup to spout quips/zingers. Not really sure if this accomplished either side's objective since I can already imagine alt-righters think this is a win for them sadly.[/QUOTE] Richard Spencer: "Slavery helped slaves. I'm proud of slavery. Black people didn't build America because white people made them build it. You're not British. I'm the ultimate arbitrator of your nationality." Younge: "I cant even debate with that insanity." Tudd: "I'd just like to say that I think BOTH sides did badly in this debate. BOTH sides need to stop with zingers." How are you supposed to debate with what is basically Charles Manson in a suit? This video is necessary because it shows how insane Spencer is.

[QUOTE=Trebgarta;52867958]This isnt a debate, it is a ridicule, and I think there is a point and purpose in that. Does it achieve what it wants, I have no idea. But there indeed are cases where ridicule works.[/QUOTE] I know people on here have a hard time placing themselves in the optics of a Spencer supporter, but if you could imagine it for a bit it isn't hard to see why they might latch on to Spencer's moments and think it is a win. All this did is dig trenches for sides and give Spencer some more attention. The guy wasn't even a mainstream news name until someone filmed his dinky little sieg heil meet-up and decided to make him appear bigger than he and his group actually were. It's actually kind of sad how he has gotten big by the very people who want him to go away.

[QUOTE=Wafflemonstr;52867957]Wow sick fucking mental gymnastics. It's not the shit Richard Spencer is spewing in the video that's the problem; no, the issue lies in the interviewer having the gall to try to understand Spencer and in doing so, naively giving Spencer "exposure". Also if anything Richard Spencer said in that video was interpreted as a sick "zinger", you may just have some prejudices yourself. Spencer telling a English born black man that he can never be English is [B]not a fucking zinger[/B]. Spencer telling a Black man that it wasn't the slave labour of his people that built the United States, but rather the fact that the white man forced his people to do so, is [B]not a fucking zinger[/B]. These are racist mantras, and if you take them as anything less than despicable, you are [B]racist[/B].[/quote] Again, put yourself in a racist Spencer supporter's shoes and they will eat that up. I think they are disgusting points he made, but I can tell this video did nothing to change anyone's mind from either side. [quote] Why do you feel compelled to take the objectively bad side of everything, no matter the scenario?[/QUOTE] I think it is more objective to realize in the grand scheme of things this video does very little.

[QUOTE=Trebgarta;52867978]Gary is using zingers. He uses gotchas and tries to trap Spencer in a slavery debate. Richard can't really win a slavery debate as I doubt there is room in the average American's mind to persuade him that slavery wasn't all THAT bad. Gary came opinionated and emotional, but I think it is good that he did. Richard is visible with some of his worst opinions here in a limited timeframe with not enough time for him to "defend" them. I dont think this will be an exposure with many benefits. Negative exposure can sometimes help, but Richard has all that anyway, the returns there are diminishing, while not everyone has a full breadth knowledge on his awful opinions. I think this was good.[/QUOTE] First, I will say thank you for not coming off hostile and accusatory (calling me a racist and such) like others in this thread. I will also say that Spencer did perform weaker than usual here, but I also think Younge could have done better. Hence why I am saying nothing was really achieved here in the grand scheme of things. I think hitting the slavery bit is correctly assessed by you, in that it is Spencer's hardest topic to tackle. So maybe there is some good for exposure to that, but I think it won't change sides at all still. [editline]7th November 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Trebgarta;52867994]I dont think the audience is a Spencer supporter or even a sympathizer. Nor do I think it is the opposite side with enthrenched opinions on Spencer.[/quote] I can agree with that, but still I think Younge was right on his own statement at the beginning that not giving this guy oxygen was probably a good idea. [quote] Making him go away would also be very good, but that kind of discipline is hard to expect from the media, especially when Spencer and Social Media / alternative news etc. is inserting him into things as much as this.[/quote] Well sadly I think people were ready to spotlight anything that confirmed their worst fears. Even though that same spotlight to an issue is also a display for Spencer. He was previously a nobody except to a very few amount of people online, and look how fast we got to know him within a year when he existed for far longer. In my opinion, racist groups like the KKK, old-school neo-nazis, and the Alt-right will die-out with a lack of attention. Their ideas are simply untenable to maintain unless brought to the spotlight or a social issue stirs them up and their numbers. [quote] There are many more people with no sides rather than either side.[/QUOTE] Eh, I think recent reuters polls accurately [url=http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/2017-Reuters-UVA-Ipsos-Race-Poll-9-11-2017.pdf]show[/url] that a majority of Americans are against Nazism or Alt-right groups outright. So I think it is safe to conclude that America is defaulted against people like Richard Spencer still. There is a semi-big contingent of "I don't know"/"Neither support/oppose" numbers too, but I would need historical polls asking that question to guess if that is normal trend or not.

Tudd might actually not be memeing right now so for both him and anyone that finds themselves partially or even fully agreeing with him I'd like to make a few points. 1. Debate is not the answer to people like Richard Spencer. Their thoughts and ideology are not rooted in rationality and so no matter how well you counter their arguments, they will never change. 2. Because you cannot change people like Richard Spencer, one of the best things that you can do in opposition to Richard Spencer is exposing their ideas to people who are not bigoted or people who are on the fence. 3. The point of this interview was not to make an educated argument against Richard Spencer's ideology, it was to let him make a fool out of himself. People who are not bigoted and people who are on the fence that see this video will see Richard Spencer make excuses for slavery and fail multiple times to condemn it. 4. Giving Richard Spencer exposure is not a negative thing if he is not allowed to control the type of exposure he is given. Ideally we want as much of this kind of exposure as possible because Richard Spencer is not the only white nationalist that is gaining traction in political discourse. When you make Richard Spencer look bad, it makes everyone that associates with Richard Spencer look bad. And that's a very valuable tool for the people that will actually be debating him and other people like him going forward.

I almost thought Younge didn't do enough to really address Spencer's arguments but then I actually watched the video when he completely destroyed what is essentially Spencer entire ideology of "you did not build this nation, this is not your home" by saying that yes, his people DID build it. If you watch this and come away thinking Spencer held his ground and didn't get trounced then you are absolutely showing your true colors. And he replied to Spencer's claim that "this is not your home, you are not an englishman" by stating the FACT that NO ONE can tell you where is your home and where isn't. If you don't think Younge did enough to refute Spencer's points then you must think Spencer's points have some "credibility" that still survives.

I always disliked Tudd for enabling alt-right memery and supporting a treasonous president, but I didn't realize he was just a straight up Nazi apologist dunce until this thread. Spencer was made to look like the fool he really is, he's a man of confidence in place of substance. He sounds more intelligent than your average knuckle-dragging racist but can't back any of it up. His responses to everything were basically "I'm right because I say so", i.e. "wouldn't Africa be better if their natives weren't abused and enslaved for hundreds of years? [I]Durr I don't think so![/I]" and "you don't get to tell me whether or not I'm an Englishman. [I]My name Richard!![/I]". Fuck you Tudd.

[QUOTE=Spacewizard;52868027]Tudd might actually not be memeing right now so for both him and anyone that finds themselves partially or even fully agreeing with him I'd like to make a few points. 1. Debate is not the answer to people like Richard Spencer. Their thoughts and ideology are not rooted in rationality and so no matter how well you counter their arguments, they will never change. 2. Because you cannot change people like Richard Spencer, one of the best things that you can do in opposition to Richard Spencer is exposing their ideas to people who are not bigoted or people who are on the fence. 3. The point of this interview was not to make an educated argument against Richard Spencer's ideology, it was to let him make a fool out of himself. People who are not bigoted and people who are on the fence that see this video will see Richard Spencer make excuses for slavery and fail multiple times to condemn it. 4. Giving Richard Spencer exposure is not a negative thing if he is not allowed to control the type of exposure he is given. Ideally we want as much of this kind of exposure as possible because Richard Spencer is not the only white nationalist that is gaining traction in political discourse. When you make Richard Spencer look bad, it makes everyone that associates with Richard Spencer look bad. And that's a very valuable tool for the people that will actually be debating him and other people like him going forward.[/QUOTE] I don't think Tudd's point isn't wholly untrue though. I think he's moreso trying to say that the bigoted but removed people may potentially see this and thus join the larger network of alt-righters, should they find themselves somehow agreeing with what Spencer says. Those connections would then spread among that individual's friends and other like-minded contacts, thus giving the movement more strength. I don't think it's out of the question that someone who had never heard of Spencer and felt alone in their radical, awful beliefs could see this and act upon it despite how Spencer makes himself appear. As a counterpoint to Tudd, though, I think it's easy to see how this video, especially the lunacy it shows Spencer is committed to, would do more good then harm; most viewers would see the stance he takes on these subjects and directly place Spencer in their internal "shit people" list. The video is much more subdued and leaves very little, relative to other media, for viewers to criticize the interviewer for. Gary Younge maintains a collected and rational position. It's important to oust people like Spencer for their radical views in a public forum. He may have only recently taken off in popularity but I don't believe left wing media is responsible for that. Failing to acknowledge his and his movement's existence in the hopes that ignoring it will make it go away will do nothing but allow them to prosper.

[QUOTE=Mobon1;52868211]I don't think Tudd's point isn't wholly untrue though. I think he's moreso trying to say that the bigoted but removed people may potentially see this and thus join the larger network of alt-righters, should they find themselves somehow agreeing with what Spencer says. Those connections would then spread among that individual's friends and other like-minded contacts, thus giving the movement more strength. I don't think it's out of the question that someone who had never heard of Spencer and felt alone in their radical, awful beliefs could see this and act upon it despite how Spencer makes himself appear. As a counterpoint to Tudd, though, I think it's easy to see how this video, especially the lunacy it shows Spencer is committed to, would do more good then harm; most viewers would see the stance he takes on these subjects and directly place Spencer in their internal "shit people" list. The video is much more subdued and leaves very little, relative to other media, for viewers to criticize the interviewer for. Gary Younge maintains a collected and rational position. It's important to oust people like Spencer for their radical views in a public forum. He may have only recently taken off in popularity but I don't believe left wing media is responsible for that. Failing to acknowledge his and his movement's existence in the hopes that ignoring it will make it go away will do nothing but allow them to prosper.[/QUOTE] Tudd is absolutely entirely full of shit trying to feign concern about Spencer's exposure to possible recruits. In one thread he will advocate that conservative provocateurs and Nazis be allowed and invited to speak at private venues and universities for the sake of free speech and free expression, and then when it backfires and Spencer looks like the ignorant twat that he is, all of a sudden he turns round and says "hm.. I don't think this interview was a good idea. Why give him a platform, am I right??"

[QUOTE=srobins;52868215]Tudd is absolutely entirely full of shit trying to feign concern about Spencer's exposure to possible recruits. In one thread he will advocate that conservative provocateurs and Nazis be allowed and invited to speak at private venues and universities for the sake of free speech and free expression, and then when it backfires and Spencer looks like the ignorant twat that he is, all of a sudden he turns round and says "hm.. I don't think this interview was a good idea. Why give him a platform, am I right??"[/QUOTE] Fair enough, I know very little about Tudd's character outside of the mass hatred that follows him and felt sympathetic here since it seemed he was behaving okay enough.

[QUOTE=Tetracycline;52868198]If you don't think Younge did enough to refute Spencer's points then you must think Spencer's points have some "credibility" that still survives.[/QUOTE] That's taking it to a bit of an extreme but I agree that Spencer was made a fool of. Any criticism towards Younge is minor at best but there is some scrutiny that we could place him under without falling into a white nationalist rabbit hole. To be clear, all of Spencer's arguments are invalid and almost inherently empty. The issue that some people (not Tudd but others that I've seen levying criticism towards Younge) are taking is that although Spencer's arguments have no credibility, Younge himself did not refute some of them. Instead, he relied on Spencer himself to refute his own arguments through his own idiocy. Instead of Younge making a fool out Spencer, Spencer made a fool out of himself, which is an absolutely valid tactic but it can be argued that more could have been done. Of course this wasn't a debate in the first place so it shouldn't be expected of Younge to treat it as one. I could go over the points that Younge failed to refute Spencer's arguments if anyone has any interest.

I could kind of agree that it wasn't a particularly good interview from this clip alone in the sense that I don't think it provoked any deeper insight that I couldn't find elsewhere. I will probably watch the program when it's on though.