Hey guys. Not sure where to ask this, but I wanted to talk about it.
Is this a fair portrayal of how the alt-right operates?
They will take something that would seem like a valid premise to someone not well versed (we will call them Judy here) in the literature. Something like "We are concerned that due to increasing acceptance of the transgender community, more and more confused and alienated teens looking for a acceptance and a group that welcomes them will start undergoing hormone therapy with irreversible effects."
I know how wrong that statement is, but someone who has never really considered trans issues and has never read any literature on it could be excused for possibly thinking its something to be concerned about.
They then surround that "valid premise" with well known (to those who pay attention to these things) rhetoric and anecdotal evidence or non sourced statements.
Then Judy talks to her liberal friend about this how this article she read on the net made her concerned about this.
The liberal friend challenges the premise, so Judy falls back on the talking points in the article. The liberal friend, recognizing the talking points as the classic anti trans rhetoric that they are, has no patience for it and tells Judy to fuck off, she has no time for transphobic rhetoric. Judy then feels like she had a valid, moral concern, and when trying to talk about it, was not allowed to have a voice or an opinion, and fuck those nasty judgemental liberals.
She is now ripe for indoctrination.
So yeah, I was just curious if that is a seemingly fair assessment of how they have seemingly indoctrinated people who would not just sign up for a hateful cause.
Disclaimer, please do not think I am asking anyone to have any sympathy for Judy at all. I am not saying her liberal friend should listen to her, or explain to her or anything like that.
I am just musing on how the alt right plays us against each other and sets people up for full indoctrination.
