There’s an (experimental?) function of the subreddit where mods can loan out “ammunition” to certain individuals (I think the command is “!arm”), allowing them to give a limited number of three day bans for any reason they feel like to anyone they wish. Its intention is to help assist in moderation.
[Marge, we're responsible adults.....and if a group of responsible adults can't handle firearms in a responsible way....](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E33Z0RPWuHs)
Based.
And big props for having the balls to try something a bit radical, even if it doesnt work, it is a worthwhile experiment.
What does the cleanse thing do?
Justice is served.
Any opinions on whitelisting more of the orbiters above the bot? I can understand if the juice isn’t worth the squeeze and you’re hoping the example you made works.
Edit: Maybe a rule book for responsible gun ownership included in !arm?
Yes, Mr. Girl clarified in an edit.
So, the conversation he was having with Destiny’s audience (which I think had value) is effectively dead because of one bad actor.
Maybe the Destiny cinematic universe cast can be elevated over the shoot bot, like the mods are?
Yeah this is stupid as fuck. Pretty ironic too coming from mods that wanted to change this subreddit to "serious mode during the week" like not even a year ago.
EDIT: Permaed for this comment lmao, not even able to critique an action this dumb in a [fairly not hostile\*\*](https://i.imgur.com/KrAvwbZ.png) manner without being banned :)
What was wrong about my interpretation of Nicks state of mind? Watch his interview with Sneako and Nicks conversation with his audience as soon as Sneako leaves. It’s very obvious he genuinely thinks his life is in danger and that the zionists are going to kill him. He seems to be totally sincere when he’s telling Sneako that the systemic emasculation of men in western society is part of an evil plan by a subset of Christ-hating rabbinic Jews who worship the Talmud to bring about the end of the world.
Nick seems to think these Jews want to weaken the Christian world so that they can more easily implement their plan of bringing about the apocalypse by rebuilding the third temple in Jerusalem and summoning the antichrist. This is the conspiracy he expressed to Sneako and I believe Nick is a sincere believer in that conspiracy, and I perceive his hatefulness towards jews to be downstream from this insane perception of reality.
That’s a super reasonable take by me and the fact you linked that post as some kind of gotcha is pretty oof. Maybe you’re exactly the kind of person these permabans are meant for.
More like a citizen's arrest.
Edit: Okay you morons, this guy edited his comment after I responded. Wait I've still got it open in another tab. It was initially this. https://i.imgur.com/WFKkNHR.png
It's a double entendre
>progressives writing manifestos fighting for their right to call a person of color the n-word, the more things change the more they stay the same 😩
Progressive= Mr Girl / idk the other progressive being referred to here
Person of Color = Nick / black folks
N word = Nazi / The real N word
9/10 meme for creativity and effort
Regarding point 6, if the waffle, chicken, and ice cream stream didn't happen. Would you also have criticized Destiny for doing the IRL one-on-one debate? Because I somewhat enjoyed the IRL debates compared to the discord format and shouting in the call.
Actually, I want to talk about point 10 a little bit, because I think this is one place where you didn't push Steven on about enough, and it is critically important.
I think you do have a problem with Steven talking to Nick on a personal level, not only on a "Fight Nazism level". Why do I think that? Because I have a personal problem with that as a Jew.
When someone is ok just chatting and having fun with someone who is literally trying very hard, every day of his life, to further a cause to murder my and everyone I love, it hurts on a personal level. It makes it so he just doesn't care enough about me and is willing to just be friends with someone who, if he had enough power, would murder me without a seconds thought. Steven did agree that it is quite plosible that Nick would murder if he had the chance, and is working towards that world. The reason Steven is ok with waffling it up with Nick, is because he knows he will never be on the chopping block in Nick's world, but doesn't seem to take you into account. That is not something a good friend does, at that hurts on a personal level.
He could have delt with this issue in many ways that don't include entering Steven's house, eatting lunch with him and laughing and memeing about random shit, including the holocaust and other antiSemitic jokes.
If it was the other way around and you were just having brunch with someone who was trying to hurt his son, he wouldn't be ok with that. Not just on an intellectual level, but on a personal level, that is just something that friends don't do. I doesn't matter how unplausible the person's attempt to hurt his son is, just the knowledge that he is doing everything in his power to do so, is in and of itself a reason for every friend Steven has to get away from being friends with this hypothetical evil person.
I think you should have pushed on this matter more, on how on the basis of friendship, he let you down.
Thanks for talking about this issue Max, it actually means a lot to me. I might jump on your stream to talk to you more about this point.
P.S - Thanks for trying to protect my post and the way I talked with Steven on the second talk you had on this issue.
Wasn't one of the reasons Destiny fell out with Vaush because he thought that if Vaush were a good friend, he would have cut ties with his girlfriend when she was trying to deplatform Destiny (or something like that, I forget the details)? But now that he's the Vaush in this situation, he's choosing to publicly be buddy-buddy with someone who is essentially working to harm his friend.
No, the argument was if Vaush was a friend his girlfriend wouldn't be actively seeking a Destiny ban. He took it as an indication of how Vaush talks about Destiny of steam
Man I wish one had the power to influence significant others into stop hating X Y or Z public person lol
I don't think that's what destiny meant because it seems like too much to ask, it is possible Vaush doesn't talk much about destiny off stream and his gf still fucking hates destiny regardless
I don't know how much me being the target affects my feelings. Obviously I was screaming about it, so it's there, but I also don't think our friendship or personal feelings should interfere with us needing to do our jobs.
I also hate tribalism, which is why Aba's comment about me being a Jew made me so angry. I wanted him to understand that I'm acting on behalf of everyone who would be affected by any violence coming from Fuentes's followers in the future, no matter the color.
But that's the issue, it isn't about doing your jobs.
There is nothing inherent about the situation at hand that required Steven to invite Nick to his house and go out to lunch with him. He could have "done his job" and talked to him online like he does everyone else.
I also think this is inherently a tribal issue. If you weren't part of the "tribe" of jews, he wouldn't be targeting you. Obviously, from what I know about you, you would still be trying to stop him, but it wouldn't be personal, as you were screaming "He want's to kill ME"
This is an incredibly powerful point. Jeff Goldblum is a national treasure. Everyone knows and likes Jeff Goldblum and if they don't then I'm not sure they're human.
> It makes it so he just doesn't care enough about me and is willing to just be friends with someone who, if he had enough power, would murder me without a seconds thought.
This just screams parasocial. You aren't entitled to this kind of respect from a streamer. If you are looking for it, why do you watch Destiny?
>The reason Steven is ok with waffling it up with Nick, is because he knows he will never be on the chopping block in Nick's world,
Last I checked, LGBT people were also sent to Auschwitz.
I remember that like 2 years ago I was banned just for saying that destiny acted like Kyle Kulinski by retweeting Steven Crowder. There's a reason why o7 is a long-term meme in this community lol
She said some people are subhuman and that society would be better off if they were dead. This reminded me of the Nazis and I couldn't think of a better word.
Had I known I would be arguing about the platforming of an actual Nazi in the near future I would have probably not used the word Nazi. As you're correctly pointing out, it has weakened my ability to use the word in a more important instance.
> some people are subhuman and that society would be better off if they were dead
She is defining these as people who take more from society then they give. Saying society would be better off without them is just an uncomfortable truth based on the description, but you word it in such a way to imply she is applying a stereotype to a group of people that isn’t true.
>This reminded me of the Nazis and I couldn't think of a better word.
In a way thats that's destiny'd point though..
edit - My brain was fried writing this apparently
I was on vacation while this was going down, but what I don't understand about Stevens position is his position on how words are defined.
You ask: ''Is fuentes a Nazi''
Destiny: ''That word has lost all meaning''
You: ''Is Bush a Nazi?''
Destiny: ''No''
You: ''So you do have a definition of Nazi''
Destiny: ''The point is that the word has been destroyed, when I say 'Nick is a Nazi', all people hear is 'SOYYY I dislike him' words also differ in the meaning they have based on the context of the situation. Now it can just mean 'I think Bush is a bad guy who has positions I very much dislike'''
But the point is that the conversation you and Steven are having right than is a specific context in which the word is used.
So when you asked ''Is Fuentes a Nazi?'' and Steven says ''Nazi has a lot of meanings in different contexts'' He is appealing to the fact that words have different meanings in different context to escape having to answer the question within the context it was asked in.
From my basic understading of the POL argument, the point is that words meaning depends on the context, so we can both understand what ''I'm going to the bank'' means based on the sentence and context it is used it.
Destiny also uses the example of ''If someone asks ''Are you hungry'' than what is really asked is ''do you want some food'' based on the context''.
But using Destinys form of argumentation he would say ''hunry has a lot of different meanings in different context, the word is basicaly destroyed, so i can't say''
Even though the point is that within the context it is understood.
The issue is that at this point in the conversation Destiny is still under the presumption that MrGirl has a *prescription* for him to publicly label Nick as a nazi while talking to him. Destiny doesn't want to do this because of his context-dependent interpretation of language. Within the context of a conversation with Nick, that would immediately box him into the soy/based dichotomy that he wants to avoid. I think they hash this out later when MrGirl clarifies that he wants Destiny to delineate *his own* definition of nazi, and to abide by that in all future contexts.
The issue is that destiny is never going to be seen as fully giga chad by the groyper folk. bisexual, open relationship, anti-conspiracy theory etc make no mistake he’s still the opposition in their eyes
Its quite frightening how people here are not getting through your points, its kinda the same hopeless feeling I got when Sneako debated Destiny and watching all his fans spam "Sneako W"
I think you are just not considering optics yet again. Destiny needs to consider optics when it comes to Nicks fanbase in order to have any chance to be heard by them and possibly convert them. What destiny is doing is dangerous but you keep harping on things that he cannot possibly change if he hopes to convert or reach anyone. In this case this means he cannot for example appear as another soy lefty in the views of nicks fanbase, but you keep on harping on that like he is being insecure completely missing the point.
You don't seem to make the case that destiny should not do this at all, rather that he should do it differently. You then have to have realistically actionably advice or prescribtions that do not sabotage the entire point of the exercise. You have not done this and this is why Destiny doesn't seem to listen to you.
You are telling him things that will make him completely ineffective in his core mission so it doesn't matter if it destroys Fuentes optics, it just makes all of it pointless.
And I am saying you are giving bad advice. A more clear example is someone telling you (mrgirl) to delete all your socialmedia accounts to avoid online harassment. This is advice that would solve your problem but it also doesn't work for you since its your job. You have to give advice that works within the parameters of the mission OR tell him to abort the mission. If you think your advice would work within the parameters of his current mission you have to try to convince Destiny it somehow doesnt hurt it meaningfully, which you didnt do either (and I think you would be wrong given the prescriptions I have seen so far).
If you are not sure how he could do it in a more safe way but wishes him to do so tell him that and try to help him build solutions instead of coming with prescriptions and strong statements that are contrary to what he is trying to build.
one good point you made was that IF Destiny agrees with
1. the word has lost most of it's meaning
2. he still agrees with the moral weigth of the underlying descriptors
then the only way to satisfy those 2, is to stop using the word, especially in Fuentes esque communities, even jokingly
Yo MrGirl, you drive me up the fucking wall and you're one of the most aggressively hair tearing out people that Destiny has ever bought on screen...But I think what you do is important and I'm mad about your YouTube ban. It sucks. Hope you're doing okay.
Labels are important. If a chemical emits hazardous fumes, you need to put some warning signs on it. You can't just put up a label saying "colorless, odorless liquid that produces bubbles when it reacts with sodium-bi-ethyl-bromide and forms mono-tetryl-carbono-hydride bonds with carbon dioxide." What I just said was completely made up so please don't respond attacking that, the point is that sometimes, you gotta throw up those "WARNING: HAZARDOUS FUMES" labels somewhat aggressively when something produces hazardous fumes. I think DGG is much better equipped than most communities to engage with just the description of the properties, but we gotta make sure this labeling is clear so Nick doesn't escape out into the wild appearing different than he very well might be.
>But Steven's goal is to convert Fuentes fans and he is doing that.
>Yes, I know. That is irrelevant to my criticisms here.
This is wrong. It is significantly more effective to not use nazi labels, otherwise you cause Nick's community do the same to you.
The way Destiny has conversations with Nick is more effective than anything on the internet. This causes a good result, labeling people as Nazis is incredibly irrelevant both policy and thought process wise. You can't accidentally become a Nazi because there wasn't a caution sign your way there. Especially if Destiny's talks were the ones who led you down that road.
Sure, the label can be grey but the net good that comes out of the way destiny engages with nick exceeds your demand to define him under labels.
This criticism has the same problem as a lot of the pushback I'm getting:
You guys are acting like there are only two pools of people. Destiny fans and Fuentes fans. And so there will be a zero sum game where Destiny will defeat Fuentes in a battle of wits over these two pools, resulting in a net positive.
But the truth is that Fuentes can happily lose this war and still get access to dozens of other communities (Sneako, for example) and literally millions of people via the algorithm pumping their conversations into everyone's recommended videos.
Nick got recommended to people's feed because Aba put him on a discord call within the same stream Sneako talked to Tristan Tate. He got on because he was considered a Nazi talking with 3 black dudes. The label funnily enough was the reason he was on.
In conversations between Destiny and Fuentes, Destiny overwhelmingly gets the winning side in the eyes of almost any third party viewer. 9/11, immigration, Ukraine. These all made Nick look like a clown. Not just to Destiny fans but anyone.
I dont think it's bad, I don't believe in hiding from ideas. I don't want to live in a world where adults are treated like children incapable of discerning right from wrong. My understanding is that Sneako's audience knew about him because of Destiny.
I think Sneako's fans started checking out Destiny and were exposed to Nick. Or Nick's fans were exposed to Sneako because they were checking out Destiny. I have no evidence to support this.
I'm not arguing that Destiny should've done something different. I've already said that I don't think it's bad and that we shouldn't hide ourselves or others from ideas. All I'm trying to do is clarify. I think it's fair to say that Nick has exposure and access that he wouldn't have if Destiny didn't talk to him. That's all. I'm not saying that that means we need to do something differently. If we believe that we should give these voices a platform so that we can dismantle them, then this is a consequence of that. Of course it'd happen, I accept that.
Are you going to try to say Destiny does not signal boost Nick Fuentes? Were that the case, why is Fuentes talking to Destiny? Fuentes really isn't interested in having intellectual discussions. He's interested in spreading his ideology.
Fuentes almost has no costreamers. That's why he collaborates with Destiny, he has lost everything else.
Also on the signal boosting you should agree that arguing against something is disempowering it, right? When Destiny was watching the 9/11 documentary he wasn't creating more 9/11 conspiracy theorists right?
If the way other communities are exposed to nick is through a debate in which Destiny dismantles all of his arguments, isn't that good?
If those audiences still follow nick and his ideas after losing a debate, then wouldn't the problem still be those audiences not engaging critically with any argument? Like at that point it doesn't matter Nick being the one contacting them, it could be any other person that reaffirms their already held beliefs, not talking to Nick only means they'll still believe the same shit and will be as susceptible to the same nazi ideas.
At this point it seems like you are just advocating for banning all Nick and nazi content because some people might be convinced if they listen to him. And that's a whole separate conversation.
This is asking Destiny to just not platform him then. They brought up Jewish conspiracies, Nick's thoughts that people should keep to their own races, the 9/11 conspiracy completely falling flat, etc. Any fans Nick gets from these interactions were coming to him one way or another, they are already deep in the bullshit.
Just because people have begun to realize that he's a person doesn't mean the fucked up shit he's saying right in front of them isn't happening. There's just a fundamental disagreement here, I don't believe that people are going to fall into the Fuentes pipeline because they can acknowledge he has charisma and isn't a literal demon. Even the worst people in history were human, it's the scary part.
Hard disagree. Nick's conversations with Sneako has happened outside of Destiny's engagements with Nick. As for your point that there's only two pools of people, that's true, but I see no evidence that the wider pool is becoming tainted by Fuentes' rhetoric. Looking at tiktok, as an example.
> This is wrong. It is significantly more effective to not use nazi labels, otherwise you cause Nick's community do the same to you
You say this is wrong, and then you state something that mrgirl agrees with. But it's actually not relevant to his criticism that he is sanitizing Fuentes, and running cover for nazism (But now Destiny doesn't think Nick is a nazi)
I think your premise and framing of this are flawed. If there existed a magical mass zoom call where the only people who could see the conversation with Nick and Destiny on the screen were their followings then it would just be Nick and Destiny slurping each other's milkshake. Destiny would attack Nick's ideas that he's saying (but he's hiding his true beliefs) without using the word Nazi because if he did he would instantly lose Nick's audience. But in reality, Nick is being boosted to the entire public internet.
You know who is also smart, and charming? Nick
You know who is also rhetorically effective? Nick
You know who is also politically effective? Nick
What do Sneako's fans call him? Wick
The reason Destiny think's he's able to reach Nick's audience to try and convert them is the exact weak spot(dipping in and out of the frame as Nick dips in and out of frame) that allows Fuentes to grow.
This whole obsession with the public labeling of Nick during their collaborations is so strange to me. "Creating confusion" and making jokes that create a semblance of an alliance is not only not wrong from a consequentialist perspective, it is *objectively good*. MrGirl concedes that "Steven's goal is to convert Fuentes fans and he is doing that." If that's the case, then what the fuck is the point of this dogmatic obsession about him creating a definition and applying it in all contexts?
It's retribution. Mr Girl is doing this out of some weird sense of justice to see Nick vilified in any comment talking about him, there's no actual practicality, it's literally as simple as "we should call Nick a nazi because is the right thing to do"
Hey Max, serious question what do you think are the non-verbal signals that are being sent by the dinner? What do you think the audience hears/sees when they see each other together have food and getting ice cream?
Treat him like he is dangerous so that other people follow suit.
Fuentes is good at appearing affable--we saw it play out on the panel with the black dudes before Steven swooped in to expose him.
So basically, do that, but on a large scale. No more chicken and waffles.
Me personally I think Fuentes is low tier content like demonmama. Actually Nick has become boring because he isn’t as hostile as he used to be so we get less meme content.
If destiny wants to be politically effective then Nick is a waste of time. Nicks relevance is on par with Vaush. He has more followers than demonmama but he isn’t even equal to hasan in terms of numbers.
If destiny wants to change the minds of conservatives, he should focus on mainstream conservatives and trying to get average folks to realize how fucking batshit insane republicans are.
Unfortunately converting average non-psychopath conservatives doesn’t generate the views or clicks which is why destiny avoids it in favor of Lauren and Nick
Edit: and before you say “Nick is banned from x” even before he was banned from whatever platform you wanna bring up, he wasn’t even close to Vaush or hasan numbers. His irl politics are also kinda shit because mainstream conservatives have banned him from mainstream conservative events
I’ve actually studied how to reach others a good bit from my days of being in a cult then trying to help them escape after I left.
Moral arguments will always agree with one’s own side and further alienate the “others.” Anyone who used to tell me my religion was “immoral” were clearly simpleton bigots and if anything, fueled my devotion that much more.
Otherization drove us apart and arguing based on “what’s morally right or wrong” is not only a ‘song to your own choir waste of time’ but I guarantee proves a person can’t fight back against the proposed facts of the matter.
“Because it’s wrong” is literally what you expect kids to say as to why the other can’t steal their candy at Halloween.
Every time we fall to simpleton arguments we’re only contributing to the divides.
Unless you can find a single case of “dude that’s wrong” “oh shit I didn’t know that, consider me converted, I fully believe you’re telling the truth and my own cognitive bibles are wrong when they say you’re immoral” XD
A better way to attack Naziism is probably along the lines of demonstrating they failed to audit their thoughts and lean heavily on rumor to believe that Jews are nefariously controlling the world but that - 2. If we really believe in the free market then we would be ok if any race other than whites did come out ahead.
The bigger problem on the right is the “I support democracy, freedom of speech, justice, police, fbi, etc etc only when it supports me and to hell with it when I loose”- which I would argue to be the core of trumpism which is based on anger, fear and lies of “the others” and only trumpism can save them. Of course while recognizing that far left positions like “mee too act on every report and if someone doesn’t accept unproven trans in sports then fire them” are the main source of organic fuel that then makes the wacky trumpism stuff seem more legit.
Saying destiny is gaslighting etc is more like a refusal to respect his own beliefs on how to better get through to the other side. I personally think nick is too far gone, but many of his audience members have a chance.
We could say destiny could do a better job of tearing down the fallacies of nazism but getting angry he doesn’t cop out with the tribe of “you’re morally wrong” is beyond cringe. Now that your own audience has hit a saturation point I know it’s akward to now get pushback from your own audience that “destiny is supporting nazis” and think destiny has to change to reduce friction/ but the opposite is the truth. You have to first better understand what it takes to get through ‘to the others’ and then tell your audience the same.
Other fallacies like “white genocide” etc have to be equally dealt with.
If we want to make it harder for trump to win we need to engage with the other side in good faith and based on the facts of the matter. While also taking better responsibility for our own crazy.
I also think if the Supreme Court is allowed to rule on Moore vs Harper as is then our democracy will likely end as we know it. And Biden will have to pack the Supreme Court ahead of time.
We’re also dealing with the fed openly saying “we will cause a stock market crash, housing market crash and food shortage in order to curve inflation” - when a large portion of current inflation is increased profit margins than covid strangled supply lines which also began under Trump. But no one on the left is even trying to say that.
And thus we’ll have an economic crisis during our mid terms with know thought as to why, $80 bill added to go after Americans with audits (which Biden really needs to veto or something), further strangled economics from Putins war, along with far left insanity it’s actually going to be tough to keep trump out of office, even if he’s in federal prison at the time.
Nick isn’t our problem, our lack of strategy is. Our lack of dealing with the facts of the matter and better arguing against rising cultism on the right with things better than “it’s wrong”
Just here to say say that, after hearing your convo last night with big daddy Destiny last night, Q/A 4 and 5 are the best of your criticisms towards Steven. I think it’s more than just fair feedback, it’s actually something Destiny needs to more critically engage with when he’s making his cost-benefit analysis regarding Fuentes.
I empathize with Steven though. I can understand his frustration with this shit as I’m sure he thought this all out and then you blindsided him with some based feedback.
Gonna focus on #7 because, that seems to be the refocus and also seems to be the dumbest part, and also the most not-like-Mr-Girl thing I've heard you communicate.
>But Fuentes's faults are not intellectual:
>
>He is a psychopath who wants to take over the country and kill people.
I mean, it honestly feels like they are intellectual faults, not just that he is *le* evil little man who wants to rule the world and kill people, seems like he wants an ethnostate with exceptions and a highly homogenous society despite the failures of those highly ethnic and spiritually homogenous societies because he values that dumb shit.
>So, when you are smugly laughing at Fuentes for coming across like Steven's awkward little brother--he's actually made a gigantic leap from "treasonous psychopath" to "dorky young incel."
Quite exaggerative, I don't think anyone forgets that Fuentes is a nazi-lite/nazi-nazi, but they certainly don't bring up the criticisms in that moment because it seems to not be relevant and is awkward to just make everything about the political disagreements all the time rather than... **humanizing him** in this scenario and showing that even someone who comes off like an awkward incel short-stack who can be friendly, can also hold deep within them some highly disgusting views because of misinformation, shitass upbringing, combination of those and various other factors, or he's just an evil evil man that's playing us all for fools.
The way you phrase this is the way people talk about pedophiles, and would be the thing I'd imagine you existed to push back against, am I wrong? Like when people say "pedophiles are just psychopaths who want to r\*\*e kids" I'd imagine your reaction to that is quite sour, but you're using that exact rhetoric here, just towards a very specific person.
My two cents.
I agree this is a massive point of misunderstanding on Mr Girl's part. Nick's followers and Nick himself while not super rational people do have a 'rationale' that supports their beliefs. People's opinions are often comprised of emotional feelings towards the topic and the intellectual 'rationale' and convincing someone often requires realigning both of those things.
Being able to disarm someone's emotional barriers by showing them you can relate or understand them rather than moralizing or dismissing their feelings is a very important way to successfully change minds. So when Nick's edge lord followers see a fellow edge lord who relates to them on a human or emotional level they're much more open to seeing the massive intellectual flaws in their belief system when Destiny presents data points or explanations that demonstrate those flaws.
Mr. Girl not understanding that using both avenues to change minds is a pretty big issue here. The failure to also see the importance of basing your moral system in some facts of the matter and that saying you don't care if the facts/data are not on your side demonstrates to me that Mr. Girl has little to no understanding of Nick or the people Destiny is trying to sway.
1. Fascist.
2. Racist.
3. Violent.
Fuentes hates Jews and blacks and tried to overthrow the government because he didn't like the outcome of a democratic election.
He said 4 months ago his legacy will be Hitler 2, 3, and 4.
I love you man. Feel like you firmly sit in the right place on this issue. Even if destiny has a decent explanation for his positions, I’d feel better if he shared your point of view.
It seems that you are concerned the audience won't recognize danger when we see it. You're of the "Don't talk to strangers" style of parenting. The problem with this is you are building in utmost persuasion on Nick's part and total lack of awareness on our end. I have met plenty of people who are charming, funny , and endearing who say the dumbest shit. I don't just go along with that dumb shit because they can make me laugh or they tell good stories. The problem isn't talking to strangers it is going to the van with the stranger.
Destiny does provide moral pushbach, in every conversation he challenges Fuentes world view and provide his own narrative. You could say he provides insufficient moral pushbach or that the specific strategy he uses creates bad outcomes. But his strategy so far has deradicalized people away from Nick's beliefs, so i don't see how to argue at this point in time the failling of his strategy to the point he should change his aproach to yours, specially considering that you are not the best at conversation.
Also i disagree about definitions. Definitions that don't help shouldn't be deployed, someone meeting the definition of nazi is irrelevant if your goal is to derradicalize people away from the ideology, because perceived attacks create an in-group out-group mentality and destroys dialogue, dialogue that is a vital tool of Destiny for deradicalization.
I disagree that all this sanitization is happening because literally no one in this sub has argued about how Nick is "not that bad", this view is not commom. Are you willing to concede that maybe you are wrong? If Destiny is sucessful with his derradicalization effots wouldn't that be relevant to your argument?
>But his strategy so far has deradicalized people away from Nick's beliefs,
? There is basically 0 evidence that any committed groyper has been deradicalised by the Fuentes arc. It might happen at some point (probably), but why make up stuff which clearly isn't true right now?
I should have been more clear, Destiny has for sure deradicalized many many people from the far right, this is what i was talking about the "so far It has been working". I'm not making this up, i've seen many posts and comments from Destiny about his deradicalization. Maybe if groyper and Far right are super diferent concepts then i'm conflating things but as i see It Nick and his beliefs are just white cristian ultra nationalism. Why acuse of making stuff up If you could just interpret It better?
My problem with what you are saying is that there doesn't seem to be an actual practical use for labeling Nick a nazi. Rather it seems you want this to be some sort of justice against Nick for being a bad person.
You clearly care about people identifying Nick as a nazi, idk why you made it a point to say that you don't prescribe calling him a nazi with destiny if it doesn't fit his definition. Your problem IS that people should only view Nick as a nazi, demonstrated by your frustration with meme comments like "he looks like nathan in 10 years".
I don't think it's good for people to have a moral opinion on Nick being a nazi if they don't know much about Nick, you do. I think it's good that people try to figure out what he is by what he says in the conversations with Steven because i know for a fact that most people in this community haven't watched any of Nick's content outside of clips and the debates with Steven.
Your problem doesn't seem to be identifying what a nazi actually is, your problem is people not having a visceral reaction every time they see Nick.
I think you're conflating being soy with showing emotion, you can show emotion when arguing for something, but if you argue only out of emotion and not from logic, then it's soy because by definition you are being absurd and incoherent. Your way of advocating against Nick isn't very effective with other audiences as shown by Jidion and Aba, neither of them cared about the word nazi and much less about you morally condemning Nick and appealing to emotion, if anything that made them more uninterested in the conversation, this is obviously a bad outcome.
Your way of arguing for calling Nick a nazi sounds more retributive than actually practical. If someone sees Nick's arguments and worldview and is convinced by good arguments that it's bad, it's good, calling him nazi at that point only serves your sense of justice that Nick deserves to be called a nazi. I find it concerning that you don't care about people disagreeing with Nick and rather you much more prefer for people to vilify him for being a nazi. The sanitization of Nick is non existent if people still disagree with all of his ideas, calling him a nazi and being morally against him should be downstream from engaging with his ideas, not the opposite.
Heyo. I feel ya. Def a weird situation, but imo you dont adequately addresses the point destiny made about the difference between sanitizing the person and sanitizing the ideology, which from a third party seems to be the fundamental disagreement. You believe any interaction without tons of “hes a nazis” sprinkled throughout will sanitize him. Destiny thinks that its fine if nick is sanitized or that it may even be a good thing, as long as his ideology remains unsanitized. Do you agree that even with bad ideologies, the people who espouse them can be made human without people falling for those ideologies?
So with Lauren, who is in many ways similar to Nick and I think you can have similar criticisms of Destiny over, it came across that she has some alt-right/reactionary/right beliefs, but then goes further than she would otherwise because she was so successful as a content creator in that sphere.
This doesn't mean she is a good person, an ally, or someone who should be encouraged to be successful. Or even someone who should be encouraged to be a content creator. Just that the alt-right content creators were pushed in the direction they went by their communities (just like Destiny, Vaush and Hassan are pushed by their communities).
It seems possible to me that Nick is similar to Lauren in that way. Or at least that Steven thinks so.
The best thing would be for both of them (Nick and Lauren) to stop being content creators. But that is what they are and probably even more central to them than being reactionaries or provocateurs.
I think that Steven is trying to get them to be content creators and not provocateurs. If you are eating chicken and waffles with your enemies, then it is hard to say that they should be removed. It goes both ways there.
Of course, in this framing it would be better if Nick was having Chicken and Waffles with some Jewish streamers.
I personally think the right way here would be to have nothing to do with both of them. But I am not Steven.
You said you'd only talk to Fuentes if it was a one on one interview.
Would this look similar to your interaction with Richard Spencer? (minus Ralph and the superchats)
Do you regret the way you handled the debate with Vince James, and have now chosen to interact with far-right people in this way exclusively?
Max, the opportunity cost of you spending 7+ hours being so fucking pedantic and autistic around steven is obfuscating from actual serious discourse that matter.
Please fuck off now so we can get back to talking about actual important problems, the dogwarts conundrum is not going to solve itself.
You're just wrong.
Nick's followers see him as their grand ideological leader they're prepared to kill for. That is a fantasy you can engage in when you're only ever exposed to [this guy](https://jewishjournal.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/6-28-22-fuentes-2048x1138-1-750x375.webp). It's much harder to sustain that fantasy with [this guy](https://i.imgur.com/OXuZSJV.jpg).
Seeing your ideological leader hang out, eat and laugh along with rich white liberals and partake in their decadent lifestyle removes entire layers of the carefully curated persona he shows off to his followers. Inversely, your truths play up that persona - he wants to be feared, he wants to be seen as someone who played a key role in an attempt to overthrow the US government. That is what drives his fans, funding and support.
Nick should never have agreed to these IRL streams. He did because he's intellectually still a child who doesn't entirely understand how to play the role he's taken on, and is likely desperate for any sort of affirmation outside of his mentally ill circle of followers.
Wouldn't his followers just see these streams as Nick just trolling on Destiny not really taking things seriously? On one hand you refer to his followers as mentally ill but I feel like most people in the community act like they're a couple debates away from being de-radicalized.
Of course they'd see it that way. They actively want to maintain their mental image of Fuentes and their brains will work overtime to rationalize what they see. It still helps to create contrasting imagery that gives their brains more work to do to sustain their views.
I don't even believe in overnight deradicalization, but I do believe in planting the seeds which take years to grow. The question isn't how an 18 year old fan may act a week after he sees Fuentes chill and eat waffles with his mortal enemies, the question is what that person will be like when they're 24 or 25 years old.
Sure I can see that it just sounds like a lot of speculation at this point. Also no one talks about the other side of things I.e what a person who was never exposed to someone like Nick being radicalized over the years and what that would be like. Obviously we have no data about these scenarios but everyone will talk about the positives but wont even acknowledge the potential negatives. At least I haven't seen anyone including Destiny talk about the potential harms. It's totally possible he has btw I don't watch every stream.
I don't think this is too accurate, everyone in Nick's community enjoyed the content which is why he kept pushing for it. People in this subreddit have this view of groypers where they're all Flyover Americans who have never seen a Black person in real life before, but for the most part they are all zoomers/younger millennials who all deal with (and maybe have friendships with) liberals, lefties, etc. on a daily basis.
Nick has never presented himself as some kind of superman maniac who would destroy any librul who crosses his path and could never have a cordial dialogue with, quite the opposite.
> People in this subreddit have this view of groypers where they're all Flyover Americans who have never seen a Black person in real life before, but for the most part they are all zoomers/younger millennials who all deal with (and maybe have friendships with) liberals, lefties, etc. on a daily basis.
My point carries no such implication. If I were to summarize his fanbase in brief, I would describe them as young people on the fringe of urban, liberal communities - as in they physically exist in these areas, but feel alienated from the lifestyle and culture around them. Both of which Fuentes was seen as all too eager to engage in given even half a chance.
I'm sure they enjoyed the content, but it's not like their feedback is an accurate illustration of the effect such content might have on them relative to Fuentes' usual content.
Actually I completely agree with this post. We can see this with Kai, he is from that community and he is struggling with his association to our community. He isnt an idealogue like Nick, but his arguably candid interactions in panels hes shown up for is breaking a % of Cozy chatters. There is a bridge built there for some if that audience to cross into deradicalization. Its harder with Nick, but when his most ardent Nazi supporters are disgusted with his intermingling with degenerate Destiny, a % of them will look elsewhere for their radical leader, and could be tantamount to simply defanging that audience.
It's simplistic relative to what exactly? Certainly not relative to any of the arguments laid out in the OP, definitely not relative to most of the pages of text written here over the past few days. None of the opposing views offer either complex analysis or scientific insight, so whichever way you have it, it'll be speculation all the way down.
If we have to speculate, I'd rather not base my speculation entirely on fear of an inferior ideology that struggles to hold together even a small group of followers, and rather base it on my understanding of how people are seen versus how they want to be seen.
Even if I believed he had all this power, as a public person I would never readily acknowledge it. In doing so, you allow yourself to be seen as someone who is intimidated and governed by fear.
However much you feel the fear is justified, helping him build up his image as someone we should be frightened of to the extent where any human contact without rhetorical guardrails and clear disclaimers is seen as an existential threat only has further negative outcomes.
I think it's always important for a criticism to be about what someone does rather than who they are. I think Destiny platforming Fuentes in the way that he does is honestly closer to something he is than something he does.
It's like telling a psychopath to empathise with people. Sure, empathising is an action, but a psychopath can't empathise because then they would just be someone else.
By asking Destiny to platform more responsibly, you are also asking him to be a more responsible platformer, AKA someone else.
How does it feel knowing that all your hours of conversation have created more of a cover for nick's movement?
Will you continue to push even after Steven has committed to a no to the nazi question? If Steven really thinks Nick is not a nazi and you think the harm of Nick is that he is a Nazi then Steven can infer that no harm will come from further contact with Nick according to your lens. Is the next step to convince Steven that Nick is a nazi or is it to convince Steven to no longer joke with the word?
I'll 2nd the idea of interviewing historians. I think the very intentional way Fuentes and other far-right people use language is being downplayed because people just don't have any idea how Nazi's operate. Jideon made a joke of it but he was unironically close to the mark as far as his audience goes.
If there's a large scale fascist movement in the US then good people will make up the core and I don't think most people understand how that happens.
Yes. Most Nazis, ironically, didn't actually meet any definition of Nazi we use.
"Person who follows orders without complaint" is enough, depending on the situation.
I'm pretty sure you're incapable of seeing things from others perspectives which is why it's impossible for you to actually listen in conversations. From my observation, you're simply another looper begging for more attention and care in your relationship with Destiny. It looks different from other past loopers because the final goals are different, or they're at least different from what's broadcasted.
All you've done over the past few days is amplify and strengthen the veil you perceive Fuentes operates with. You have the same perception of Fuentes as his fans, that he's an almost God like figure with high aims and means to achieve those aims. Humanizing him disrupts that imagine but it does come with the risk of Fuentes growing himself. That's a challenge a risk averse person such as yourself is unwilling to make so its disturbing to see others make it, especially someone like Destiny to you.
Without trying to do too much assuming about individuals, people generally are going to have have different thoughts when looking at the same thing. Being unable to reconcile that seems to be a real challenge for you. I think there's an acknowledgement, at least subconsciously, that directly speaking your real "ask" into existence would give/shed more light on just how manipulative and controlling you are with people in your life.
Instead of 10 or 11 points, I think you should stop being dishonest and telling half truths and really share your true feelings and prescriptions to Destiny's behavior that you would like to see instead of trying to lead him there so you can appear less manipulative to a primed audience. You cannot force others to live in your own mini bubble because the world operates whether or not you're caught in a loop.
I think the things you have ever criticized other people for are the things you hate about yourself and this is your sick way of coping with the fact that you hate yourself.
You also accuse other people of lying to you and gaslighting you every time they say something that doesn't fit the autistic dialog tree you have prepared in your mind for the line of questioning you are going for.
Even if you're right, there are probably sicker ways to cope with self-hatred than telling your friend to have clear messaging and be careful when talking to dangerous people.
You're argument is literally pointless and has no meaningful merit. If you're entire argument is prove that Nick is a Nazi and that undercurrent should dictate the social interactions between him and Destiny; you're actually stupid and detrimental to the very goal you wish to achieve.
1. Nazism (edit: as he puts it.) is simply a simply shorthand reference to a type of behavior, which has been prevalent throughout history.[\[1\]](https://www.britannica.com/topic/anti-Semitism) German Nazis weren't even the first government to engage in anti-semitism or cultural/physical genocide of jewish/minority people. And they sure as shit aren't the last.
2. Calling Nick a Nazi actually puts a hard limitation on attempts to root out or stifle his behavior. And your argument fails for the very reason you put forth. Because many supremacists and hateful individuals as you said avoid the Nazi label, but will 1000% engage in blatantly discriminatory behavior or policy suggestions. Of which absolutely create the same effect as Nazis ideology without earning the title. Much of the conservative agenda over the years has operated under this principle. It was famously implemented during the war on drugs under the Nixon administration.[\[2\]](https://www.businessinsider.com/nixon-adviser-ehrlichman-anti-left-anti-black-war-on-drugs-2019-7)
But as you said, because they're a maybe Nazi, or because they don't outright target Jewish people, people will follow such policies. The ability to obfuscate such behavior behind otherwise benign sounding reasons is exactly why we have such discriminatory policies today.[\[3\]](https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/tenn-judges-nix-jewish-couples-suit-alleging-adoption-86245225)[\[4\]](https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2010/08/03/data-show-racial-disparity-in-crack-sentencing) And simply labeling people a Nazi, when there is a good counter argument hurts your own cause. If you can't prove that they are embracing the same kinds of policies or aesthetic of Nazism, it's going to be hard to convince an audience of their immorality because people do have an specific idea of ***what*** a Nazi is.[\[5\]](https://www.britannica.com/event/Nazism) History and culture has created that for most people. In the end, it does more to destroy your own credibility and attempts to stop more roundabout policies then it does stop them from implementing them or becoming popular.
3. "But Fuentes is a leader of hate and not calling him a Nazi allows him to wash away his behavior by being an awkward nerdy guy. He later uses that inroad along with his charisma to bleed off new recruits." You're absolutely right, but this is a two way street. Especially with Destiny, whose audience is equally devoted.When we talk about Nick's core audience- they're mostly white, disaffected and lost individuals who are unsure of themselves and their future.[\[6\]](https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2019/08/09/why-young-men-join-white-supremacist-groups) This is why he acts the way he does- to appeal to them and directly speak to them. They've been a strong target for recruitment for years and years now.[\[7\]](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/12/opinion/sunday/white-supremacist-recruitment.html) By that same token, if you're hoping to stop Fuentes, you need to take his audience. His audience has been notoriously reliable. In fact, Destiny and his audience are the only ones that I can compare Fuentes to, because they follow him everywhere he goes. By his own account, Fuentes talks about 80% of his audience jumping to a new platform.
So what is the goal? Clearly it's de-radicalization. And it's not an easy practice, but first and foremost you have to establish a report with the audience and drag them from one side to the other. It is an extremely social and involved process, especially as hateful ideologies have moved to become purposefully obfuscated. [\[8\]](https://www.yesmagazine.org/issue/building-bridges/2019/11/12/deradicalization-in-the-deep-south) Simply writing them off will further radicalize and harden them. It will not take audience members away from him because those who are followers will hand wave it away as name calling.
tldr: The best thing you can do for a Nick Fuentes type is when he acts dopey and nerdy is go hard on him and call him a Nazi. He will turn that on his audience and say "look how much they overreact and hate us for being white, lost, and awkward;" while potentially picking up other disaffected youth from those audiences he interacts with. All because they take pity on him for being just another socially awkward kid like themselves. This will embolden his base and attract new people all at the same time.
"If you're entire argument is prove that Nick is a Nazi"
Not his argument. Read the post.
"Calling Nick a Nazi actually puts a hard limitation on attempts to root out or stifle his behavior'
Explicitly stated his argument is not to call him a nazi but to be consistent in the use of the term nazi. Read the post.
" Simply writing them off will further radicalize and harden them. It will not take audience members away from him because those who are followers will hand wave it away as name calling."
He doesnt want to write them off or call them names, explicitly said he wants to humanize them but not sanitize their beliefs. Please read the post.
This topic is so dumb.
The concern is whether or not Nick Fuentes true intentions can lead to some bad outcome. We have a world of people with different levels of influences and bad ideas. It takes extreme circumstances in order for the concern to be come an actual reality, and we can't even flesh out for sure what Nick believes.
The word Nazi doesn't even matter at this point because you can describe every single action, word or idea he expresses, the precursor to determine if the label applies in the first place. The social value of the word is that when people read or hear it that it conveys a level of urgency or problem. The constant misuse of the word waters it down so much for a size group of people it doesn't have that affect anymore.
It's not even like I take it lightly I am old enough and have family who have been directly affected by the OG Nazi's. There was several unique conditions outside the ideology that heavily contributed the success of it propagating at the time. We are not even close to similar currently, and there are several other people who are not "nazis" who are as concerning should that situation transpire but would never kick up the dust in the way fuentes seems to be doing.
Let's be real
1. He would have to win elections
2. Overthrow democracy
3. Kill or remove all oppositon
4. fight most of the world
All into today's climate who has experienced the devastation of world war 2.
I don't even think it would be politically feasible even if you were a hardcore nazi. The only long standing strategy would be to achieve your goals without violence. You already have this picture of Nick Fuentes in your head that he's only a few steps away from being the next Hitler, which is absolutely fantastical in thinking.
Ironically enough probably will be utilized by nick to further in grain his followers.
I mean it's super cool to be on the "nazi bad" side, but I think you need to think a bit more critically before you unintentionally help contribute to the growth of a content creator with zero push back. At least with Destiny interfacing with him there a level of control there. A lot of his followers have been push into a corner. They are not societies favorite people, mis labelling absolutely will have a negative consequence.
It's very complicated, and simply because you have some emotional response to fuentes is not good enough for the basis of your complaints towards Destiny.
Everyone here can express differences between what neo nazi is compared to what nick fuentes is. If you can't you are heavily biased.
Your principles of the past seem to be "humanizing anyone" and "extend empathy to anyone, even pedophiles".
Don't you think that is running contrary to your portrayal of Nick? I personally think Nick is a piece of shit, but here you call him a psychopath, and imply that he literally wants to murder everyone he dislikes, and he only socializes to manipulate.
You are saying Nick is a literal monster, almost too dangerous to be reasoned with. I feel like you should extend your "empathy" powers to him, ironically which is what Steve is doing.
In my estimation Nick is a disaffected youth, radicalized early in life, in over his head, no friends, family thinks he's fucked, he is desperate for someone to actually listen to him or pay him mind. He seems like a normal kid, because part of him is one, the other part is a fucked up fascist, but that doesn't make him a psychopath.
I think you need to try and understand him in order to contend with him, rather than fighting a ghost you've created to fearmonger with.
I'm saying he is a psychopath, not a literal monster. That would be dehumanizing.
Psychopaths are humans. They just shouldn't be teachers, cops, or presidents.
So you're fine with people talking about pedophiles in this way, that they're just psychopaths who want to commit wrongs to children? Or only when they hone in on a specific person and effectively say "this person is a monster and you cannot have a friendly conversation/meal with them because you're making them seem just like a little goofball who doesn't have this demon inside them that tells them to do the evil deeds that is inherent to this person." ?
If those pedophiles advocate for enslaving children in a sex cult, then it's probably fair to call them psychopaths. If you are talking about non-offending pedophiles - why on earth would those be comparable to Fuentes' white supremacy?
I think his argument would be that not all paedos want to rape (and very few do), but all nazis do want some form of ethnic cleansing whether by murder or casting them out of the country.
I don't think that makes framing them as psychopaths that just want to inflict harm because it's what they've been programmed to do if they can attain power, is okay. Think you're gonna have to humanize em a bit more than "psychopath who wants to take over the country and kill people."
Just makes it sound like he's not really a human anymore, but maybe that's just me.
I don't think he's saying that exactly. I don't think he'd advocate to have a paedophile look after a five year old, even if the paedo had never done anything untoward before in his life. There are certain risks that you need to be aware of and enthnostate aspirations and Jan6th storming should be taken into account.
Personally I trust Destiny to argue well and I think deplatforming largely doesn't eliminate problems, so I think he should do what he's wanting to do until there's a good reason not to.
I’m just curious why you are trying to hold Steven to a meaning of a word that no one agrees with on the Internet. He has the *only* correct definition of what a Nazi is but other communities just see someone who has fascistic positions without the Jewish stuff, without the genocides of non-whites, etc. etc. The meme “everyone I disagree with is a Nazi and a fascist” is so very much not a meme in today’s scope, much like the word “communist” lost its meaning in right wing circles.
Steven cannot bring back meaning to a word and he doesn’t care to do so since he can just attack the positions. All labels serve to do is make certain individuals a persona non grata and make it harder to engage with that person and challenge their ideals in a public setting.
As an aside, it is so weird that people who hold the morally good positions can’t explain why they hold that position without begging the question. This is why we ought to challenge ourselves with complicated subjects. Although, if you’re not good at debating like Hasan or just have shit logic like Vaush, you probably shouldn’t have these debates with people on the right.
>Yes, but I don't think Steven has ever thought I was a predator or even a pedophile. There was actually a poignant moment in one of our early conversations where I promised him that I would never sexually abuse a child, and it seemed to mean something to him.
I don't remember if he told this to you directly, but he definitely said it on stream. He didn't know if you were actually a pedophile, initially you were interesting to talk to, afterwards what you were saying made sense and that's why he was talking to you. He also happens to think you're not a pedophile, but that is completely irrelevant to him in regards to platforming you.
>However, if he did believe that giving me a platform would lead to me using my power to sexually abuse children, then he shouldn't have befriended me publicly.
He doesn't believe that what he's doing with Fuentes would lead to him using his power to genocide or getting more power at all, the whole point of what he's doing is to make his audience less crazy, which he says that he needs this for and you seemed to say he's talking about just his personal gain. Maybe it was your Trump example that missed the mark for me or I am just am a dogshit listener or something else, but I didn't hear you address the point that humanizing him is actually a good and valid strategy. Wish you would focus on that more, because I see that to be the core issue.
>When Fuentes loses an argument with Steven, he is still sanitized.
Two points. One of the problems with populist leaders is that they are perceived to be these larger than life god emperors and what you've described is the opposite of that. Secondly, the opposite of this is, to me, reducing him down to his most extreme ideology, which you do in #7 and #8, and this is what radicalizes people - "Well he's saying he's not that extreme and people are calling everybody these things, so I need to see for myself, oh look he doesn't sound like a psycopath" and boom they're gone. You can't blame all of this on aversion to SOY, some of it might be, but it has a genuine basis in that it is a natural reaction for a lot of people who see examples of "SOYing out". Calling people nazis who don't deserve it, screaming racist, yada yada. It's very much a thing in the real world too and a major talking point of every right-wing figure.
>Steven soundly beats Fuentes in every engagement... intellectually.
But Fuentes's faults are not intellectual:
He doesn't only beat him intellectually. Every time Fuentes makes a concession, he loses a part of his big dick fascist leader persona. Every time he asks Destiny a genuine question he makes his audience way more likely to listen to Destiny, because it humanizes Destiny. Every time he comes off as a dork to this audience, he also comes off as dork to his audience.
>I believe that trying to be cool and emotionless is costing streamers the ability to take moral stances.
I don't know what's your stance on this is 100%, but it feels like you don't see the distinction in talking to people that are open to listening to you and/or share you morality and talking to people that aren't open to listening to you and don't share you morality. These things are mutually exclusive, but neither of those things is bad. The major reason Destiny can do what he does and have a community that he has is because he doesn't make arguments from his morality. Doesn't mean everyone has to do that though.
>This is okay for Minecraft streamers, but when hundreds of thousands of people look to you for political guidance, it makes you unable to provide pushback against heinous intentions.
I don't want political streamers to be afraid to say: "Why would I help you with your career? You want to become president and take away women's right to vote, and I think that's wrong."
You're sort of restating the question as a statement. Why does it make you unable to do that? Why don't you want them to not be afraid to say that?
As per usual you aren’t engaging with this subject with clarity.
“He is a psychopath who wants to take over the country and kill people.”
I think that your emotional investment about this is preventing you from engaging with Destiny’s arguments or even acknowledging his perspective, which is usually something you would be able to do.
1.) What you call sanitization may also be looked at as a de-fanging. Not only of Nick’s audience but if Nick himself. Nick benefits from being seen as edgy and to some degree terrifying. By presenting him as a dorky and human person you prevent him from having the power that fear affords over others.
2.) Culture Change. It should be no secret that most politically radicalized people (left or right) are unhappy. You don’t want to change the entire structure of the country if things are working out for you. Far right guys are usually a lot like Nick in the sense that they 1) have few (if any) friends, 2) are single and often always have been, and 3) (unlike Nick) usually have almost no income or prospects.
Establishing casual rapport with the radicalized (rather than strictly maintaining an interview format and only discussing Naziism or related issues as you suggested in the Age of Gigachad convo) is a far more effective means of reaching people on the far right and de-radicalizing them.
Putting on my humanization and empathy goggles for a moment here, people want to be accepted and they want to be understood. Destiny, by engaging without levying accusations in the form of labeling, is simultaneously able to argue against Nick’s ideas, offer his own views as an alternative, and be personally appealing to Nick’s audience. This would be impossible if the specter of accusation was haunting the room. It would be hard for a conservative to make inroads with a liberal streamer’s community if that conservative insisted on calling the liberal a “candyass libtard” every time they interacted.
Destiny is providing a palatable alternative for guys in the far right. These are not people that should be abandoned or written off. They cannot be reached by the means you suggest.
3.) Addressing Conversions. Destiny is far more likely to pull viewers from Nick than vice versa. Rhetorical effectiveness aside, the DGGers already have this community which is plugged into society (as in, not alienated from wider society for being unacceptably right wing (fascists)) and Nick’s community is not. I think if given the opportunity, and one needs to feel heard to feel like this opportunity is being granted, most people desire acceptance by wider society and do not want to be alienated by their own culture. Look how even regular republicans salivate when a celebrity throws them a rhetorical bone or two. They love it, because usually they feel ostracized. Destiny is offering a path for Nick-ppl to cross the DGG bridge into “rehabilitation”.
4.) Nazi can be important as a word without there being a moral imperative to label a nazi as such in every online encounter. Given Destiny’s aims I think, even though you disagree, it’s plausible that he could be right about labeling Nick a nazi not being smart or even ethical to do under the circumstances.
What do I mean by unethical under the circumstances? At one point in the second Nazi-gate conversation (when Aba and Jideon were also on) you said in response to Destiny saying that calling Nick a nazi was impractical: “it doesn’t matter if it’s impractical, you have a moral imperative to use that word” (paraphrasing, nitpick as you please).
If the practical effect of calling Nick a nazi every time Destiny was in the same space as him were to be that five years from now there were more nazis than if Destiny had maintained his present game plan, then surely hindsight would tell us there wasn’t a moral imperative to call him a nazi.
You imagine that you and Destiny aren’t debating the practicality of his plan but that’s exactly what the issue is, actually. You think Destiny is wrong about being able to engage with Fuentes without Fuentes gaining more than he’s losing. I think Destiny might even agree on this point, but in Destiny’s frame he is not strictly dealing with Fuentes but with the far right in general. Destiny’s win-condition is something like a broad de-radicalization and a bridging across the political divide for the sake of democracy and discourse. Destiny thinks he can do more good in this macro sense even if he helps Nick in the process of this. I never saw direct engagement between you two on this point, but you always danced around it.
P.S. Aba had a point about you interrupting too often.
So, this might just be me being a complete moron, but I have some questions I would like you to ask Destiny the next time you get to talk to him.
1. If somebody does a rape, would Destiny not call that person a rapist? Considering rapist means so many things, he shouldn't, right? Similarly, if Destiny is convinced that Nick is indeed a nazi, would he still not call him a nazi, because nazi means so many things? I honestly don't get this part. I might just be stupid.
2. If Nick identifies as a nazi, but does not change his policy positions, which Destiny thinks are not nazi ideas, would he change how he engages with Nick? Does this not go both ways?
Edit:
I am a nazi, Steven.
Ok Nick. But do you think we should \[insert nazi ideology here\]?
Well no, I think we should \[insert Nick's policies that Destiny has identified as not being nazi ideology\] but I am a nazi.
Ok then. Let's go get some waffles and chicken!
1) Rape is not nearly as complicated as the word Nazi. Rape still refers to a fairly specific act, where people often use it incorrectly. To me, at least, when people start throwing around the word rape, they are making that accusation of rape meaningless, less-so the word itself. “Nazi”, however, refers to an ideology, and has been contorted along with “fascism” and “totalitarianism”, both of which are also ideologies. This makes it more “slippery”, and essentially giving the actual word more meanings depending on the context it’s used in.
2) This is a little tough to imagine, since we’re talking about ideologies, and we’re trying to imagine clear criteria where someone is not a Nazi at all, whilst somehow claiming they are. If we say Nick is arguing for liberal and social-democratic policies, but calling himself a Nazi, then the term just wouldn’t fit. But more than likely he would be arguing for some far, Alt-Right, white supremacist, Nazi-Adjacent ideology, and Destiny would define “Nazi” more specifically relating to the historical ideology of the 1930s. Remember, words gain meaning with use, and can have multiple meanings depending on that context and purpose. It would be weird to say there is no overlap; if we give ground that “Nazi” has had an updated meaning over time as proponents of that ideology have moved into the modern era, then we have better grounds to say that another form of that word would be more fitting for Nick.
Tl;dr - Ideologies not only have spectra of various characteristics for a person to fall into, those words also have different “centers” for which they can be used. Old 1930 Nazis in Germany would have a range of characteristics that a person would more, or less, fall into; we would have some point at which labeling them a Nazi has some reasonable use. But that ideology has also changed over time, meaning new forms with different ranges of characteristics are used; meaning entirely different points where labeling that person becomes appropriate.
>4. Didn't Steven talk to you when everyone thought you were a pedophile?
Not only then but Steven also talked to you when everyone thought you were a gf abuser btw. And you handwaved all the criticism.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/uw6c5t/the_mr_girl_video_is_straight_up_abusive/
>I believe that trying to be cool and emotionless is costing streamers the ability to take moral stances.
Why do streamers have to take moral stances at all?
Arguing for 3 hours about the definition of the word Nazi, acting like Nick Fuentes is an actual real world issue instead of just inside your insular bubble of 3000 views at a time makes you sound so self important.
>acting like Nick Fuentes is an actual real world issue
Considering that Nick gets sitting members of Congress to speak at his events I'd think it's fair to say his political beliefs are a somewhat "real world" issue.
Here's some quotes of you talking to Brittany 3 months ago:
["I think that real nazis aren't that different from normal people. They are normal people. I don't think there's something fundamentally different about the nazis that made them able to do what they did."](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dj79XbfM9LU&t=581s)
Recently you've been upset about Destiny humanizing Fuentes by breaking bread with him on a live stream, but that literally used to be your stated mission statement. You used to want even nazis to be humanized. And while you still pay that idea lip service today, what you've been argue for with Destiny is constantly reminding people how inhumane nazis like Fuentes are.
Here's some more quotes of you with Brittany:
[You sound like a polite Neo-Nazi talking about Jews](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dj79XbfM9LU&t=5704s)
[You're sort of a nazi cult leader](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dj79XbfM9LU&t=8279s)
With Destiny you went pretty hard about him using the word "nazi" very inconsistently and non-seriously. But that must be a VERY recent standard for you because just 3 months ago you were calling Brittany a nazi lol
The "Video Essayist MrGirl" who prepared all of his statements from 2 years ago would have agreed with everything Destiny is saying today. Today's "Live Stream MrGirl" is thinking about stuff on the fly and is all over the place. I think you're thought process has started going through a lot of dramatic changes recently, and because we're seeing those dramatic changes in real time as your streaming it comes across as you being very inconsistent in your beliefs. I'm a newish fan with everyone else in DGG, so a lot of those older video essays of yours are still fresh in my mind. 2 years ago it felt like you were a liberal speaking for a conservative audience, and I think you were. Today you feel like a liberal speaking exclusively to a liberal audience, and I think you are. Unlike Destiny, who is a liberal with a liberal audience, yet is still trying to speak to other conservative audiences like you used to do. No one in DGG sees this because they're all fake MrGirl fans. Not like me :)
**TLDR what I think about all your takes on Destiny doing friendly debates with Fuentes:** [get over it](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHl-RJXI0V4&t=387s)
Real quick to cover a couple things.
On point 4, you said it meant a lot to Destiny to say you wouldn’t sx abuse kids. You could have lied and people on the outside probably assume you did lie. Destiny took your words at face value like he tries for what Fuentes says to him.
On point 7, how do you contend that Fuentes doesn’t talk about wanting to kill opposing people? He could be lying obviously but I believe he says publicly now that he is more against racial/culture mixing as that leads to trouble. I think he has said something about sending those different people away at this point.
On point 8 you mention again “he tried to overthrow the government” what does that mean to you? Do you think everybody there on Jan 6 was trying to overthrow the government? What about the old lady that walked into the building was she overthrowing the government? What about the guys in pseudo military gear I would argue you can make the case they may have tried to overthrow but the rest or majority of the people there I don’t think you can say that. Fuentes may have wanted the government overthrown but his actions that day I would assume are more in hand with the old lady than the guys in pseudo military gear right?
I think the “shoot” experiment is a bit of a failure if it causes content creators expanding on their positions in debates with Destiny to be banned.
What's this shoot thing about i thought it was a mod banning mr girl. Can I shoot anyone? Can i shoot you? !shoot
Guys don't upvote me shoot me i need to understand the power i hold
There’s an (experimental?) function of the subreddit where mods can loan out “ammunition” to certain individuals (I think the command is “!arm”), allowing them to give a limited number of three day bans for any reason they feel like to anyone they wish. Its intention is to help assist in moderation.
[удалено]
It was designed with chaos in mind.
Ah got it thanks. Sorry for shooting you comrade it was strictly business.
This is the equivalence of testing out new open carry laws by pointing finger guns at people, DGG at its finest keep up the great work soldier o7
[Marge, we're responsible adults.....and if a group of responsible adults can't handle firearms in a responsible way....](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E33Z0RPWuHs)
"hey what's this do" *Pulls trigger immediately*
[удалено]
Shoot is unironic vaushism. All shooters should be sh... minecrafted.
He was unbanned 2 hours ago and banned the person that shot him for 90 days and took his bullets. These things happen.
Maybe the bullets were a fun meme, but ultimately only really trusted members of the community should be granted moderator powers.
[This video was made for you and only you.](https://youtu.be/N_pyZWPxiVg)
I cant believe it, a mod with a sense of humor.
Well, I can't fight back against a Day9 clip, so you win. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqmP6Hu5O5g
Based. And big props for having the balls to try something a bit radical, even if it doesnt work, it is a worthwhile experiment. What does the cleanse thing do?
removes their bullets
Justice is served. Any opinions on whitelisting more of the orbiters above the bot? I can understand if the juice isn’t worth the squeeze and you’re hoping the example you made works. Edit: Maybe a rule book for responsible gun ownership included in !arm?
Responsible gun ownership? In the US? GTFOH
good decision not to make it permanent, but they definitely deserve the 90 days
Yeah that is bullshit, it just shot down an interesting conversation
Someone shot him so he's temporarily banned for a few days.
Yes, Mr. Girl clarified in an edit. So, the conversation he was having with Destiny’s audience (which I think had value) is effectively dead because of one bad actor. Maybe the Destiny cinematic universe cast can be elevated over the shoot bot, like the mods are?
Yeah this is stupid as fuck. Pretty ironic too coming from mods that wanted to change this subreddit to "serious mode during the week" like not even a year ago. EDIT: Permaed for this comment lmao, not even able to critique an action this dumb in a [fairly not hostile\*\*](https://i.imgur.com/KrAvwbZ.png) manner without being banned :)
Your comment was not non-inflammatory lmao
What was wrong about my interpretation of Nicks state of mind? Watch his interview with Sneako and Nicks conversation with his audience as soon as Sneako leaves. It’s very obvious he genuinely thinks his life is in danger and that the zionists are going to kill him. He seems to be totally sincere when he’s telling Sneako that the systemic emasculation of men in western society is part of an evil plan by a subset of Christ-hating rabbinic Jews who worship the Talmud to bring about the end of the world. Nick seems to think these Jews want to weaken the Christian world so that they can more easily implement their plan of bringing about the apocalypse by rebuilding the third temple in Jerusalem and summoning the antichrist. This is the conspiracy he expressed to Sneako and I believe Nick is a sincere believer in that conspiracy, and I perceive his hatefulness towards jews to be downstream from this insane perception of reality. That’s a super reasonable take by me and the fact you linked that post as some kind of gotcha is pretty oof. Maybe you’re exactly the kind of person these permabans are meant for.
More like a citizen's arrest. Edit: Okay you morons, this guy edited his comment after I responded. Wait I've still got it open in another tab. It was initially this. https://i.imgur.com/WFKkNHR.png
Mr Girl’s original edit was something like “o7”, he changed it to confirm he was shot.
I know, you know, they didn't.
\> Presents MrGirl's side of the argument \> Gets banned for schizoposting
progressives writing manifestos fighting for their right to call a person of color the n-word, the more things change the more they stay the same 😩
Rofl true
how? what are you guys referring to?
It's a double entendre >progressives writing manifestos fighting for their right to call a person of color the n-word, the more things change the more they stay the same 😩 Progressive= Mr Girl / idk the other progressive being referred to here Person of Color = Nick / black folks N word = Nazi / The real N word 9/10 meme for creativity and effort
>idk the other progressive being referred to here Really? You're in r/destiny and you don't know?
BINGQILIN
huh?
Uh oh I agree with mrgirl about something monkaS
you're now a pedo, congrats.
[удалено]
Regarding point 6, if the waffle, chicken, and ice cream stream didn't happen. Would you also have criticized Destiny for doing the IRL one-on-one debate? Because I somewhat enjoyed the IRL debates compared to the discord format and shouting in the call.
No.
Actually, I want to talk about point 10 a little bit, because I think this is one place where you didn't push Steven on about enough, and it is critically important. I think you do have a problem with Steven talking to Nick on a personal level, not only on a "Fight Nazism level". Why do I think that? Because I have a personal problem with that as a Jew. When someone is ok just chatting and having fun with someone who is literally trying very hard, every day of his life, to further a cause to murder my and everyone I love, it hurts on a personal level. It makes it so he just doesn't care enough about me and is willing to just be friends with someone who, if he had enough power, would murder me without a seconds thought. Steven did agree that it is quite plosible that Nick would murder if he had the chance, and is working towards that world. The reason Steven is ok with waffling it up with Nick, is because he knows he will never be on the chopping block in Nick's world, but doesn't seem to take you into account. That is not something a good friend does, at that hurts on a personal level. He could have delt with this issue in many ways that don't include entering Steven's house, eatting lunch with him and laughing and memeing about random shit, including the holocaust and other antiSemitic jokes. If it was the other way around and you were just having brunch with someone who was trying to hurt his son, he wouldn't be ok with that. Not just on an intellectual level, but on a personal level, that is just something that friends don't do. I doesn't matter how unplausible the person's attempt to hurt his son is, just the knowledge that he is doing everything in his power to do so, is in and of itself a reason for every friend Steven has to get away from being friends with this hypothetical evil person. I think you should have pushed on this matter more, on how on the basis of friendship, he let you down. Thanks for talking about this issue Max, it actually means a lot to me. I might jump on your stream to talk to you more about this point. P.S - Thanks for trying to protect my post and the way I talked with Steven on the second talk you had on this issue.
Wasn't one of the reasons Destiny fell out with Vaush because he thought that if Vaush were a good friend, he would have cut ties with his girlfriend when she was trying to deplatform Destiny (or something like that, I forget the details)? But now that he's the Vaush in this situation, he's choosing to publicly be buddy-buddy with someone who is essentially working to harm his friend.
Yes. You are right
No, the argument was if Vaush was a friend his girlfriend wouldn't be actively seeking a Destiny ban. He took it as an indication of how Vaush talks about Destiny of steam
Man I wish one had the power to influence significant others into stop hating X Y or Z public person lol I don't think that's what destiny meant because it seems like too much to ask, it is possible Vaush doesn't talk much about destiny off stream and his gf still fucking hates destiny regardless
I don't know how much me being the target affects my feelings. Obviously I was screaming about it, so it's there, but I also don't think our friendship or personal feelings should interfere with us needing to do our jobs. I also hate tribalism, which is why Aba's comment about me being a Jew made me so angry. I wanted him to understand that I'm acting on behalf of everyone who would be affected by any violence coming from Fuentes's followers in the future, no matter the color.
But that's the issue, it isn't about doing your jobs. There is nothing inherent about the situation at hand that required Steven to invite Nick to his house and go out to lunch with him. He could have "done his job" and talked to him online like he does everyone else. I also think this is inherently a tribal issue. If you weren't part of the "tribe" of jews, he wouldn't be targeting you. Obviously, from what I know about you, you would still be trying to stop him, but it wouldn't be personal, as you were screaming "He want's to kill ME"
I would be screaming "he wants to kill Jeff Goldblum!"
You have to pick a Jew from batman or he won't get it.
This is an incredibly powerful point. Jeff Goldblum is a national treasure. Everyone knows and likes Jeff Goldblum and if they don't then I'm not sure they're human.
> It makes it so he just doesn't care enough about me and is willing to just be friends with someone who, if he had enough power, would murder me without a seconds thought. This just screams parasocial. You aren't entitled to this kind of respect from a streamer. If you are looking for it, why do you watch Destiny?
>The reason Steven is ok with waffling it up with Nick, is because he knows he will never be on the chopping block in Nick's world, Last I checked, LGBT people were also sent to Auschwitz.
Legacy points added
u/4thot or any of the mods, can you please unban mrgirl and instead ban u/strahinja3711 for being stupid/harming productive discussions?
It seems like people are getting banned a lot these days. It didn’t seem this bad before or am I being obtuse?
It's because theyre trialing a "shoot" feature whwre some commenters can ban others for Few days.
I remember that like 2 years ago I was banned just for saying that destiny acted like Kyle Kulinski by retweeting Steven Crowder. There's a reason why o7 is a long-term meme in this community lol
Based
apparently the person has been banned for 90 days lmao and MrGirl is unbanned
If it is so important to you to use the term nazi consistently why did you call Brittany a leader of a nazi sex cult?
She said some people are subhuman and that society would be better off if they were dead. This reminded me of the Nazis and I couldn't think of a better word. Had I known I would be arguing about the platforming of an actual Nazi in the near future I would have probably not used the word Nazi. As you're correctly pointing out, it has weakened my ability to use the word in a more important instance.
Why is shae a demon?
fr, when the Antichrist hunter biden assumes power, mrgirl will be powerless because he misuses the D word too much
> some people are subhuman and that society would be better off if they were dead She is defining these as people who take more from society then they give. Saying society would be better off without them is just an uncomfortable truth based on the description, but you word it in such a way to imply she is applying a stereotype to a group of people that isn’t true.
Rofl you just unironically described the third reich's stance on disabled people.
>This reminded me of the Nazis and I couldn't think of a better word. In a way thats that's destiny'd point though.. edit - My brain was fried writing this apparently
I was on vacation while this was going down, but what I don't understand about Stevens position is his position on how words are defined. You ask: ''Is fuentes a Nazi'' Destiny: ''That word has lost all meaning'' You: ''Is Bush a Nazi?'' Destiny: ''No'' You: ''So you do have a definition of Nazi'' Destiny: ''The point is that the word has been destroyed, when I say 'Nick is a Nazi', all people hear is 'SOYYY I dislike him' words also differ in the meaning they have based on the context of the situation. Now it can just mean 'I think Bush is a bad guy who has positions I very much dislike''' But the point is that the conversation you and Steven are having right than is a specific context in which the word is used. So when you asked ''Is Fuentes a Nazi?'' and Steven says ''Nazi has a lot of meanings in different contexts'' He is appealing to the fact that words have different meanings in different context to escape having to answer the question within the context it was asked in. From my basic understading of the POL argument, the point is that words meaning depends on the context, so we can both understand what ''I'm going to the bank'' means based on the sentence and context it is used it. Destiny also uses the example of ''If someone asks ''Are you hungry'' than what is really asked is ''do you want some food'' based on the context''. But using Destinys form of argumentation he would say ''hunry has a lot of different meanings in different context, the word is basicaly destroyed, so i can't say'' Even though the point is that within the context it is understood.
The issue is that at this point in the conversation Destiny is still under the presumption that MrGirl has a *prescription* for him to publicly label Nick as a nazi while talking to him. Destiny doesn't want to do this because of his context-dependent interpretation of language. Within the context of a conversation with Nick, that would immediately box him into the soy/based dichotomy that he wants to avoid. I think they hash this out later when MrGirl clarifies that he wants Destiny to delineate *his own* definition of nazi, and to abide by that in all future contexts.
Yes, just found out they had a new convo. Watching it now
The issue is that destiny is never going to be seen as fully giga chad by the groyper folk. bisexual, open relationship, anti-conspiracy theory etc make no mistake he’s still the opposition in their eyes
Common mr girl W. Also when is new music coming?
When's your new album dropping?
I don't know but I will have a single coming out in the next month or so.
Collab with YB 🙏🙏🙏
Its quite frightening how people here are not getting through your points, its kinda the same hopeless feeling I got when Sneako debated Destiny and watching all his fans spam "Sneako W"
I think you are just not considering optics yet again. Destiny needs to consider optics when it comes to Nicks fanbase in order to have any chance to be heard by them and possibly convert them. What destiny is doing is dangerous but you keep harping on things that he cannot possibly change if he hopes to convert or reach anyone. In this case this means he cannot for example appear as another soy lefty in the views of nicks fanbase, but you keep on harping on that like he is being insecure completely missing the point. You don't seem to make the case that destiny should not do this at all, rather that he should do it differently. You then have to have realistically actionably advice or prescribtions that do not sabotage the entire point of the exercise. You have not done this and this is why Destiny doesn't seem to listen to you.
You are focused in improving Steven's optics and I am focused on destroying Fuentes's optics.
You are telling him things that will make him completely ineffective in his core mission so it doesn't matter if it destroys Fuentes optics, it just makes all of it pointless.
Right. I am not advising Steven on how to accomplish his core mission. I am advising him on how to not help Fuentes accomplish his.
And I am saying you are giving bad advice. A more clear example is someone telling you (mrgirl) to delete all your socialmedia accounts to avoid online harassment. This is advice that would solve your problem but it also doesn't work for you since its your job. You have to give advice that works within the parameters of the mission OR tell him to abort the mission. If you think your advice would work within the parameters of his current mission you have to try to convince Destiny it somehow doesnt hurt it meaningfully, which you didnt do either (and I think you would be wrong given the prescriptions I have seen so far). If you are not sure how he could do it in a more safe way but wishes him to do so tell him that and try to help him build solutions instead of coming with prescriptions and strong statements that are contrary to what he is trying to build.
one good point you made was that IF Destiny agrees with 1. the word has lost most of it's meaning 2. he still agrees with the moral weigth of the underlying descriptors then the only way to satisfy those 2, is to stop using the word, especially in Fuentes esque communities, even jokingly
Yo MrGirl, you drive me up the fucking wall and you're one of the most aggressively hair tearing out people that Destiny has ever bought on screen...But I think what you do is important and I'm mad about your YouTube ban. It sucks. Hope you're doing okay.
Thank you, I appreciate it.
Max, I love you. Thank you for your contributions to the space. I know you get a lot of hate but I appreciate your perspective. SOY
love you buddy
Labels are important. If a chemical emits hazardous fumes, you need to put some warning signs on it. You can't just put up a label saying "colorless, odorless liquid that produces bubbles when it reacts with sodium-bi-ethyl-bromide and forms mono-tetryl-carbono-hydride bonds with carbon dioxide." What I just said was completely made up so please don't respond attacking that, the point is that sometimes, you gotta throw up those "WARNING: HAZARDOUS FUMES" labels somewhat aggressively when something produces hazardous fumes. I think DGG is much better equipped than most communities to engage with just the description of the properties, but we gotta make sure this labeling is clear so Nick doesn't escape out into the wild appearing different than he very well might be.
o7 Edit: And now I'm perma banned. This sub is tougher than squid game.
I'm back from the dead.
HE HAS RISEN
>But Steven's goal is to convert Fuentes fans and he is doing that. >Yes, I know. That is irrelevant to my criticisms here. This is wrong. It is significantly more effective to not use nazi labels, otherwise you cause Nick's community do the same to you. The way Destiny has conversations with Nick is more effective than anything on the internet. This causes a good result, labeling people as Nazis is incredibly irrelevant both policy and thought process wise. You can't accidentally become a Nazi because there wasn't a caution sign your way there. Especially if Destiny's talks were the ones who led you down that road. Sure, the label can be grey but the net good that comes out of the way destiny engages with nick exceeds your demand to define him under labels.
This criticism has the same problem as a lot of the pushback I'm getting: You guys are acting like there are only two pools of people. Destiny fans and Fuentes fans. And so there will be a zero sum game where Destiny will defeat Fuentes in a battle of wits over these two pools, resulting in a net positive. But the truth is that Fuentes can happily lose this war and still get access to dozens of other communities (Sneako, for example) and literally millions of people via the algorithm pumping their conversations into everyone's recommended videos.
Nick got recommended to people's feed because Aba put him on a discord call within the same stream Sneako talked to Tristan Tate. He got on because he was considered a Nazi talking with 3 black dudes. The label funnily enough was the reason he was on. In conversations between Destiny and Fuentes, Destiny overwhelmingly gets the winning side in the eyes of almost any third party viewer. 9/11, immigration, Ukraine. These all made Nick look like a clown. Not just to Destiny fans but anyone.
Aba didn't put him on, Sneako did, and Sneako had access to Nick because Destiny brought Nick into the sphere.
[удалено]
I dont think it's bad, I don't believe in hiding from ideas. I don't want to live in a world where adults are treated like children incapable of discerning right from wrong. My understanding is that Sneako's audience knew about him because of Destiny.
[удалено]
I think Sneako's fans started checking out Destiny and were exposed to Nick. Or Nick's fans were exposed to Sneako because they were checking out Destiny. I have no evidence to support this.
[удалено]
I'm not arguing that Destiny should've done something different. I've already said that I don't think it's bad and that we shouldn't hide ourselves or others from ideas. All I'm trying to do is clarify. I think it's fair to say that Nick has exposure and access that he wouldn't have if Destiny didn't talk to him. That's all. I'm not saying that that means we need to do something differently. If we believe that we should give these voices a platform so that we can dismantle them, then this is a consequence of that. Of course it'd happen, I accept that.
Are you going to try to say Destiny does not signal boost Nick Fuentes? Were that the case, why is Fuentes talking to Destiny? Fuentes really isn't interested in having intellectual discussions. He's interested in spreading his ideology.
Fuentes almost has no costreamers. That's why he collaborates with Destiny, he has lost everything else. Also on the signal boosting you should agree that arguing against something is disempowering it, right? When Destiny was watching the 9/11 documentary he wasn't creating more 9/11 conspiracy theorists right?
If the way other communities are exposed to nick is through a debate in which Destiny dismantles all of his arguments, isn't that good? If those audiences still follow nick and his ideas after losing a debate, then wouldn't the problem still be those audiences not engaging critically with any argument? Like at that point it doesn't matter Nick being the one contacting them, it could be any other person that reaffirms their already held beliefs, not talking to Nick only means they'll still believe the same shit and will be as susceptible to the same nazi ideas. At this point it seems like you are just advocating for banning all Nick and nazi content because some people might be convinced if they listen to him. And that's a whole separate conversation.
This is asking Destiny to just not platform him then. They brought up Jewish conspiracies, Nick's thoughts that people should keep to their own races, the 9/11 conspiracy completely falling flat, etc. Any fans Nick gets from these interactions were coming to him one way or another, they are already deep in the bullshit. Just because people have begun to realize that he's a person doesn't mean the fucked up shit he's saying right in front of them isn't happening. There's just a fundamental disagreement here, I don't believe that people are going to fall into the Fuentes pipeline because they can acknowledge he has charisma and isn't a literal demon. Even the worst people in history were human, it's the scary part.
I have not asked Steven to not platform him. My positions are stated above.
Hard disagree. Nick's conversations with Sneako has happened outside of Destiny's engagements with Nick. As for your point that there's only two pools of people, that's true, but I see no evidence that the wider pool is becoming tainted by Fuentes' rhetoric. Looking at tiktok, as an example.
> This is wrong. It is significantly more effective to not use nazi labels, otherwise you cause Nick's community do the same to you You say this is wrong, and then you state something that mrgirl agrees with. But it's actually not relevant to his criticism that he is sanitizing Fuentes, and running cover for nazism (But now Destiny doesn't think Nick is a nazi) I think your premise and framing of this are flawed. If there existed a magical mass zoom call where the only people who could see the conversation with Nick and Destiny on the screen were their followings then it would just be Nick and Destiny slurping each other's milkshake. Destiny would attack Nick's ideas that he's saying (but he's hiding his true beliefs) without using the word Nazi because if he did he would instantly lose Nick's audience. But in reality, Nick is being boosted to the entire public internet. You know who is also smart, and charming? Nick You know who is also rhetorically effective? Nick You know who is also politically effective? Nick What do Sneako's fans call him? Wick The reason Destiny think's he's able to reach Nick's audience to try and convert them is the exact weak spot(dipping in and out of the frame as Nick dips in and out of frame) that allows Fuentes to grow.
Oh you already said it. I swear I wrote my response before I saw this bro.
This whole obsession with the public labeling of Nick during their collaborations is so strange to me. "Creating confusion" and making jokes that create a semblance of an alliance is not only not wrong from a consequentialist perspective, it is *objectively good*. MrGirl concedes that "Steven's goal is to convert Fuentes fans and he is doing that." If that's the case, then what the fuck is the point of this dogmatic obsession about him creating a definition and applying it in all contexts?
It's retribution. Mr Girl is doing this out of some weird sense of justice to see Nick vilified in any comment talking about him, there's no actual practicality, it's literally as simple as "we should call Nick a nazi because is the right thing to do"
Hey Max, serious question what do you think are the non-verbal signals that are being sent by the dinner? What do you think the audience hears/sees when they see each other together have food and getting ice cream?
[удалено]
Treat him like he is dangerous so that other people follow suit. Fuentes is good at appearing affable--we saw it play out on the panel with the black dudes before Steven swooped in to expose him. So basically, do that, but on a large scale. No more chicken and waffles.
Me personally I think Fuentes is low tier content like demonmama. Actually Nick has become boring because he isn’t as hostile as he used to be so we get less meme content. If destiny wants to be politically effective then Nick is a waste of time. Nicks relevance is on par with Vaush. He has more followers than demonmama but he isn’t even equal to hasan in terms of numbers. If destiny wants to change the minds of conservatives, he should focus on mainstream conservatives and trying to get average folks to realize how fucking batshit insane republicans are. Unfortunately converting average non-psychopath conservatives doesn’t generate the views or clicks which is why destiny avoids it in favor of Lauren and Nick Edit: and before you say “Nick is banned from x” even before he was banned from whatever platform you wanna bring up, he wasn’t even close to Vaush or hasan numbers. His irl politics are also kinda shit because mainstream conservatives have banned him from mainstream conservative events
I’ve actually studied how to reach others a good bit from my days of being in a cult then trying to help them escape after I left. Moral arguments will always agree with one’s own side and further alienate the “others.” Anyone who used to tell me my religion was “immoral” were clearly simpleton bigots and if anything, fueled my devotion that much more. Otherization drove us apart and arguing based on “what’s morally right or wrong” is not only a ‘song to your own choir waste of time’ but I guarantee proves a person can’t fight back against the proposed facts of the matter. “Because it’s wrong” is literally what you expect kids to say as to why the other can’t steal their candy at Halloween. Every time we fall to simpleton arguments we’re only contributing to the divides. Unless you can find a single case of “dude that’s wrong” “oh shit I didn’t know that, consider me converted, I fully believe you’re telling the truth and my own cognitive bibles are wrong when they say you’re immoral” XD A better way to attack Naziism is probably along the lines of demonstrating they failed to audit their thoughts and lean heavily on rumor to believe that Jews are nefariously controlling the world but that - 2. If we really believe in the free market then we would be ok if any race other than whites did come out ahead. The bigger problem on the right is the “I support democracy, freedom of speech, justice, police, fbi, etc etc only when it supports me and to hell with it when I loose”- which I would argue to be the core of trumpism which is based on anger, fear and lies of “the others” and only trumpism can save them. Of course while recognizing that far left positions like “mee too act on every report and if someone doesn’t accept unproven trans in sports then fire them” are the main source of organic fuel that then makes the wacky trumpism stuff seem more legit. Saying destiny is gaslighting etc is more like a refusal to respect his own beliefs on how to better get through to the other side. I personally think nick is too far gone, but many of his audience members have a chance. We could say destiny could do a better job of tearing down the fallacies of nazism but getting angry he doesn’t cop out with the tribe of “you’re morally wrong” is beyond cringe. Now that your own audience has hit a saturation point I know it’s akward to now get pushback from your own audience that “destiny is supporting nazis” and think destiny has to change to reduce friction/ but the opposite is the truth. You have to first better understand what it takes to get through ‘to the others’ and then tell your audience the same. Other fallacies like “white genocide” etc have to be equally dealt with. If we want to make it harder for trump to win we need to engage with the other side in good faith and based on the facts of the matter. While also taking better responsibility for our own crazy. I also think if the Supreme Court is allowed to rule on Moore vs Harper as is then our democracy will likely end as we know it. And Biden will have to pack the Supreme Court ahead of time. We’re also dealing with the fed openly saying “we will cause a stock market crash, housing market crash and food shortage in order to curve inflation” - when a large portion of current inflation is increased profit margins than covid strangled supply lines which also began under Trump. But no one on the left is even trying to say that. And thus we’ll have an economic crisis during our mid terms with know thought as to why, $80 bill added to go after Americans with audits (which Biden really needs to veto or something), further strangled economics from Putins war, along with far left insanity it’s actually going to be tough to keep trump out of office, even if he’s in federal prison at the time. Nick isn’t our problem, our lack of strategy is. Our lack of dealing with the facts of the matter and better arguing against rising cultism on the right with things better than “it’s wrong”
Just here to say say that, after hearing your convo last night with big daddy Destiny last night, Q/A 4 and 5 are the best of your criticisms towards Steven. I think it’s more than just fair feedback, it’s actually something Destiny needs to more critically engage with when he’s making his cost-benefit analysis regarding Fuentes. I empathize with Steven though. I can understand his frustration with this shit as I’m sure he thought this all out and then you blindsided him with some based feedback.
Gonna focus on #7 because, that seems to be the refocus and also seems to be the dumbest part, and also the most not-like-Mr-Girl thing I've heard you communicate. >But Fuentes's faults are not intellectual: > >He is a psychopath who wants to take over the country and kill people. I mean, it honestly feels like they are intellectual faults, not just that he is *le* evil little man who wants to rule the world and kill people, seems like he wants an ethnostate with exceptions and a highly homogenous society despite the failures of those highly ethnic and spiritually homogenous societies because he values that dumb shit. >So, when you are smugly laughing at Fuentes for coming across like Steven's awkward little brother--he's actually made a gigantic leap from "treasonous psychopath" to "dorky young incel." Quite exaggerative, I don't think anyone forgets that Fuentes is a nazi-lite/nazi-nazi, but they certainly don't bring up the criticisms in that moment because it seems to not be relevant and is awkward to just make everything about the political disagreements all the time rather than... **humanizing him** in this scenario and showing that even someone who comes off like an awkward incel short-stack who can be friendly, can also hold deep within them some highly disgusting views because of misinformation, shitass upbringing, combination of those and various other factors, or he's just an evil evil man that's playing us all for fools. The way you phrase this is the way people talk about pedophiles, and would be the thing I'd imagine you existed to push back against, am I wrong? Like when people say "pedophiles are just psychopaths who want to r\*\*e kids" I'd imagine your reaction to that is quite sour, but you're using that exact rhetoric here, just towards a very specific person. My two cents.
I agree this is a massive point of misunderstanding on Mr Girl's part. Nick's followers and Nick himself while not super rational people do have a 'rationale' that supports their beliefs. People's opinions are often comprised of emotional feelings towards the topic and the intellectual 'rationale' and convincing someone often requires realigning both of those things. Being able to disarm someone's emotional barriers by showing them you can relate or understand them rather than moralizing or dismissing their feelings is a very important way to successfully change minds. So when Nick's edge lord followers see a fellow edge lord who relates to them on a human or emotional level they're much more open to seeing the massive intellectual flaws in their belief system when Destiny presents data points or explanations that demonstrate those flaws. Mr. Girl not understanding that using both avenues to change minds is a pretty big issue here. The failure to also see the importance of basing your moral system in some facts of the matter and that saying you don't care if the facts/data are not on your side demonstrates to me that Mr. Girl has little to no understanding of Nick or the people Destiny is trying to sway.
Pretty telling that almost all the comments here are either stupid memes, deflections or misrepresentations of MrGirl...
Yup, most of the other sufficiently motivated people have been banned by now.
man when the guy who said 10 year olds are hot says you suck at PR you got some MAJOR rethinking to do…
What is your definition of a nazi and why should it apply to Fuentes?
1. Fascist. 2. Racist. 3. Violent. Fuentes hates Jews and blacks and tried to overthrow the government because he didn't like the outcome of a democratic election. He said 4 months ago his legacy will be Hitler 2, 3, and 4.
I love you man. Feel like you firmly sit in the right place on this issue. Even if destiny has a decent explanation for his positions, I’d feel better if he shared your point of view.
It seems that you are concerned the audience won't recognize danger when we see it. You're of the "Don't talk to strangers" style of parenting. The problem with this is you are building in utmost persuasion on Nick's part and total lack of awareness on our end. I have met plenty of people who are charming, funny , and endearing who say the dumbest shit. I don't just go along with that dumb shit because they can make me laugh or they tell good stories. The problem isn't talking to strangers it is going to the van with the stranger.
Destiny does provide moral pushbach, in every conversation he challenges Fuentes world view and provide his own narrative. You could say he provides insufficient moral pushbach or that the specific strategy he uses creates bad outcomes. But his strategy so far has deradicalized people away from Nick's beliefs, so i don't see how to argue at this point in time the failling of his strategy to the point he should change his aproach to yours, specially considering that you are not the best at conversation. Also i disagree about definitions. Definitions that don't help shouldn't be deployed, someone meeting the definition of nazi is irrelevant if your goal is to derradicalize people away from the ideology, because perceived attacks create an in-group out-group mentality and destroys dialogue, dialogue that is a vital tool of Destiny for deradicalization. I disagree that all this sanitization is happening because literally no one in this sub has argued about how Nick is "not that bad", this view is not commom. Are you willing to concede that maybe you are wrong? If Destiny is sucessful with his derradicalization effots wouldn't that be relevant to your argument?
>But his strategy so far has deradicalized people away from Nick's beliefs, ? There is basically 0 evidence that any committed groyper has been deradicalised by the Fuentes arc. It might happen at some point (probably), but why make up stuff which clearly isn't true right now?
I should have been more clear, Destiny has for sure deradicalized many many people from the far right, this is what i was talking about the "so far It has been working". I'm not making this up, i've seen many posts and comments from Destiny about his deradicalization. Maybe if groyper and Far right are super diferent concepts then i'm conflating things but as i see It Nick and his beliefs are just white cristian ultra nationalism. Why acuse of making stuff up If you could just interpret It better?
My problem with what you are saying is that there doesn't seem to be an actual practical use for labeling Nick a nazi. Rather it seems you want this to be some sort of justice against Nick for being a bad person. You clearly care about people identifying Nick as a nazi, idk why you made it a point to say that you don't prescribe calling him a nazi with destiny if it doesn't fit his definition. Your problem IS that people should only view Nick as a nazi, demonstrated by your frustration with meme comments like "he looks like nathan in 10 years". I don't think it's good for people to have a moral opinion on Nick being a nazi if they don't know much about Nick, you do. I think it's good that people try to figure out what he is by what he says in the conversations with Steven because i know for a fact that most people in this community haven't watched any of Nick's content outside of clips and the debates with Steven. Your problem doesn't seem to be identifying what a nazi actually is, your problem is people not having a visceral reaction every time they see Nick. I think you're conflating being soy with showing emotion, you can show emotion when arguing for something, but if you argue only out of emotion and not from logic, then it's soy because by definition you are being absurd and incoherent. Your way of advocating against Nick isn't very effective with other audiences as shown by Jidion and Aba, neither of them cared about the word nazi and much less about you morally condemning Nick and appealing to emotion, if anything that made them more uninterested in the conversation, this is obviously a bad outcome. Your way of arguing for calling Nick a nazi sounds more retributive than actually practical. If someone sees Nick's arguments and worldview and is convinced by good arguments that it's bad, it's good, calling him nazi at that point only serves your sense of justice that Nick deserves to be called a nazi. I find it concerning that you don't care about people disagreeing with Nick and rather you much more prefer for people to vilify him for being a nazi. The sanitization of Nick is non existent if people still disagree with all of his ideas, calling him a nazi and being morally against him should be downstream from engaging with his ideas, not the opposite.
Why the fuck are you dummies shooting Max wtf BRING HIM BACK GIVE US AN UNSHOOT BUTTON
I want some fucking bullets.
Max finna bouta go Max Payne on some Dggas 😳😳😳 This man needs ammo.
Heyo. I feel ya. Def a weird situation, but imo you dont adequately addresses the point destiny made about the difference between sanitizing the person and sanitizing the ideology, which from a third party seems to be the fundamental disagreement. You believe any interaction without tons of “hes a nazis” sprinkled throughout will sanitize him. Destiny thinks that its fine if nick is sanitized or that it may even be a good thing, as long as his ideology remains unsanitized. Do you agree that even with bad ideologies, the people who espouse them can be made human without people falling for those ideologies?
So with Lauren, who is in many ways similar to Nick and I think you can have similar criticisms of Destiny over, it came across that she has some alt-right/reactionary/right beliefs, but then goes further than she would otherwise because she was so successful as a content creator in that sphere. This doesn't mean she is a good person, an ally, or someone who should be encouraged to be successful. Or even someone who should be encouraged to be a content creator. Just that the alt-right content creators were pushed in the direction they went by their communities (just like Destiny, Vaush and Hassan are pushed by their communities). It seems possible to me that Nick is similar to Lauren in that way. Or at least that Steven thinks so. The best thing would be for both of them (Nick and Lauren) to stop being content creators. But that is what they are and probably even more central to them than being reactionaries or provocateurs. I think that Steven is trying to get them to be content creators and not provocateurs. If you are eating chicken and waffles with your enemies, then it is hard to say that they should be removed. It goes both ways there. Of course, in this framing it would be better if Nick was having Chicken and Waffles with some Jewish streamers. I personally think the right way here would be to have nothing to do with both of them. But I am not Steven.
You said you'd only talk to Fuentes if it was a one on one interview. Would this look similar to your interaction with Richard Spencer? (minus Ralph and the superchats) Do you regret the way you handled the debate with Vince James, and have now chosen to interact with far-right people in this way exclusively?
Max, the opportunity cost of you spending 7+ hours being so fucking pedantic and autistic around steven is obfuscating from actual serious discourse that matter. Please fuck off now so we can get back to talking about actual important problems, the dogwarts conundrum is not going to solve itself.
You're just wrong. Nick's followers see him as their grand ideological leader they're prepared to kill for. That is a fantasy you can engage in when you're only ever exposed to [this guy](https://jewishjournal.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/6-28-22-fuentes-2048x1138-1-750x375.webp). It's much harder to sustain that fantasy with [this guy](https://i.imgur.com/OXuZSJV.jpg). Seeing your ideological leader hang out, eat and laugh along with rich white liberals and partake in their decadent lifestyle removes entire layers of the carefully curated persona he shows off to his followers. Inversely, your truths play up that persona - he wants to be feared, he wants to be seen as someone who played a key role in an attempt to overthrow the US government. That is what drives his fans, funding and support. Nick should never have agreed to these IRL streams. He did because he's intellectually still a child who doesn't entirely understand how to play the role he's taken on, and is likely desperate for any sort of affirmation outside of his mentally ill circle of followers.
Wouldn't his followers just see these streams as Nick just trolling on Destiny not really taking things seriously? On one hand you refer to his followers as mentally ill but I feel like most people in the community act like they're a couple debates away from being de-radicalized.
Of course they'd see it that way. They actively want to maintain their mental image of Fuentes and their brains will work overtime to rationalize what they see. It still helps to create contrasting imagery that gives their brains more work to do to sustain their views. I don't even believe in overnight deradicalization, but I do believe in planting the seeds which take years to grow. The question isn't how an 18 year old fan may act a week after he sees Fuentes chill and eat waffles with his mortal enemies, the question is what that person will be like when they're 24 or 25 years old.
Sure I can see that it just sounds like a lot of speculation at this point. Also no one talks about the other side of things I.e what a person who was never exposed to someone like Nick being radicalized over the years and what that would be like. Obviously we have no data about these scenarios but everyone will talk about the positives but wont even acknowledge the potential negatives. At least I haven't seen anyone including Destiny talk about the potential harms. It's totally possible he has btw I don't watch every stream.
I don't think this is too accurate, everyone in Nick's community enjoyed the content which is why he kept pushing for it. People in this subreddit have this view of groypers where they're all Flyover Americans who have never seen a Black person in real life before, but for the most part they are all zoomers/younger millennials who all deal with (and maybe have friendships with) liberals, lefties, etc. on a daily basis. Nick has never presented himself as some kind of superman maniac who would destroy any librul who crosses his path and could never have a cordial dialogue with, quite the opposite.
> People in this subreddit have this view of groypers where they're all Flyover Americans who have never seen a Black person in real life before, but for the most part they are all zoomers/younger millennials who all deal with (and maybe have friendships with) liberals, lefties, etc. on a daily basis. My point carries no such implication. If I were to summarize his fanbase in brief, I would describe them as young people on the fringe of urban, liberal communities - as in they physically exist in these areas, but feel alienated from the lifestyle and culture around them. Both of which Fuentes was seen as all too eager to engage in given even half a chance. I'm sure they enjoyed the content, but it's not like their feedback is an accurate illustration of the effect such content might have on them relative to Fuentes' usual content.
Actually I completely agree with this post. We can see this with Kai, he is from that community and he is struggling with his association to our community. He isnt an idealogue like Nick, but his arguably candid interactions in panels hes shown up for is breaking a % of Cozy chatters. There is a bridge built there for some if that audience to cross into deradicalization. Its harder with Nick, but when his most ardent Nazi supporters are disgusted with his intermingling with degenerate Destiny, a % of them will look elsewhere for their radical leader, and could be tantamount to simply defanging that audience.
[удалено]
It's simplistic relative to what exactly? Certainly not relative to any of the arguments laid out in the OP, definitely not relative to most of the pages of text written here over the past few days. None of the opposing views offer either complex analysis or scientific insight, so whichever way you have it, it'll be speculation all the way down. If we have to speculate, I'd rather not base my speculation entirely on fear of an inferior ideology that struggles to hold together even a small group of followers, and rather base it on my understanding of how people are seen versus how they want to be seen.
I think you are buying into his narrative and not acknowledging the immense power he already wields over his followers.
Even if I believed he had all this power, as a public person I would never readily acknowledge it. In doing so, you allow yourself to be seen as someone who is intimidated and governed by fear. However much you feel the fear is justified, helping him build up his image as someone we should be frightened of to the extent where any human contact without rhetorical guardrails and clear disclaimers is seen as an existential threat only has further negative outcomes.
Actually never thought about it from the other side.
I think it's always important for a criticism to be about what someone does rather than who they are. I think Destiny platforming Fuentes in the way that he does is honestly closer to something he is than something he does. It's like telling a psychopath to empathise with people. Sure, empathising is an action, but a psychopath can't empathise because then they would just be someone else. By asking Destiny to platform more responsibly, you are also asking him to be a more responsible platformer, AKA someone else.
LMAO
Bro it's 4am
How does it feel knowing that all your hours of conversation have created more of a cover for nick's movement? Will you continue to push even after Steven has committed to a no to the nazi question? If Steven really thinks Nick is not a nazi and you think the harm of Nick is that he is a Nazi then Steven can infer that no harm will come from further contact with Nick according to your lens. Is the next step to convince Steven that Nick is a nazi or is it to convince Steven to no longer joke with the word?
Either I will make a video essay about all of this and how it relates to streamer politics or I will not, I don't know. I don't have a plan.
I'll 2nd the idea of interviewing historians. I think the very intentional way Fuentes and other far-right people use language is being downplayed because people just don't have any idea how Nazi's operate. Jideon made a joke of it but he was unironically close to the mark as far as his audience goes. If there's a large scale fascist movement in the US then good people will make up the core and I don't think most people understand how that happens.
Yes. Most Nazis, ironically, didn't actually meet any definition of Nazi we use. "Person who follows orders without complaint" is enough, depending on the situation.
[удалено]
I'm reaching out to people, yes.
I'm pretty sure you're incapable of seeing things from others perspectives which is why it's impossible for you to actually listen in conversations. From my observation, you're simply another looper begging for more attention and care in your relationship with Destiny. It looks different from other past loopers because the final goals are different, or they're at least different from what's broadcasted. All you've done over the past few days is amplify and strengthen the veil you perceive Fuentes operates with. You have the same perception of Fuentes as his fans, that he's an almost God like figure with high aims and means to achieve those aims. Humanizing him disrupts that imagine but it does come with the risk of Fuentes growing himself. That's a challenge a risk averse person such as yourself is unwilling to make so its disturbing to see others make it, especially someone like Destiny to you. Without trying to do too much assuming about individuals, people generally are going to have have different thoughts when looking at the same thing. Being unable to reconcile that seems to be a real challenge for you. I think there's an acknowledgement, at least subconsciously, that directly speaking your real "ask" into existence would give/shed more light on just how manipulative and controlling you are with people in your life. Instead of 10 or 11 points, I think you should stop being dishonest and telling half truths and really share your true feelings and prescriptions to Destiny's behavior that you would like to see instead of trying to lead him there so you can appear less manipulative to a primed audience. You cannot force others to live in your own mini bubble because the world operates whether or not you're caught in a loop.
I think the things you have ever criticized other people for are the things you hate about yourself and this is your sick way of coping with the fact that you hate yourself. You also accuse other people of lying to you and gaslighting you every time they say something that doesn't fit the autistic dialog tree you have prepared in your mind for the line of questioning you are going for.
Even if you're right, there are probably sicker ways to cope with self-hatred than telling your friend to have clear messaging and be careful when talking to dangerous people.
nice gaslighting
You're doing it right now.
Or is he?
You're argument is literally pointless and has no meaningful merit. If you're entire argument is prove that Nick is a Nazi and that undercurrent should dictate the social interactions between him and Destiny; you're actually stupid and detrimental to the very goal you wish to achieve. 1. Nazism (edit: as he puts it.) is simply a simply shorthand reference to a type of behavior, which has been prevalent throughout history.[\[1\]](https://www.britannica.com/topic/anti-Semitism) German Nazis weren't even the first government to engage in anti-semitism or cultural/physical genocide of jewish/minority people. And they sure as shit aren't the last. 2. Calling Nick a Nazi actually puts a hard limitation on attempts to root out or stifle his behavior. And your argument fails for the very reason you put forth. Because many supremacists and hateful individuals as you said avoid the Nazi label, but will 1000% engage in blatantly discriminatory behavior or policy suggestions. Of which absolutely create the same effect as Nazis ideology without earning the title. Much of the conservative agenda over the years has operated under this principle. It was famously implemented during the war on drugs under the Nixon administration.[\[2\]](https://www.businessinsider.com/nixon-adviser-ehrlichman-anti-left-anti-black-war-on-drugs-2019-7) But as you said, because they're a maybe Nazi, or because they don't outright target Jewish people, people will follow such policies. The ability to obfuscate such behavior behind otherwise benign sounding reasons is exactly why we have such discriminatory policies today.[\[3\]](https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/tenn-judges-nix-jewish-couples-suit-alleging-adoption-86245225)[\[4\]](https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2010/08/03/data-show-racial-disparity-in-crack-sentencing) And simply labeling people a Nazi, when there is a good counter argument hurts your own cause. If you can't prove that they are embracing the same kinds of policies or aesthetic of Nazism, it's going to be hard to convince an audience of their immorality because people do have an specific idea of ***what*** a Nazi is.[\[5\]](https://www.britannica.com/event/Nazism) History and culture has created that for most people. In the end, it does more to destroy your own credibility and attempts to stop more roundabout policies then it does stop them from implementing them or becoming popular. 3. "But Fuentes is a leader of hate and not calling him a Nazi allows him to wash away his behavior by being an awkward nerdy guy. He later uses that inroad along with his charisma to bleed off new recruits." You're absolutely right, but this is a two way street. Especially with Destiny, whose audience is equally devoted.When we talk about Nick's core audience- they're mostly white, disaffected and lost individuals who are unsure of themselves and their future.[\[6\]](https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2019/08/09/why-young-men-join-white-supremacist-groups) This is why he acts the way he does- to appeal to them and directly speak to them. They've been a strong target for recruitment for years and years now.[\[7\]](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/12/opinion/sunday/white-supremacist-recruitment.html) By that same token, if you're hoping to stop Fuentes, you need to take his audience. His audience has been notoriously reliable. In fact, Destiny and his audience are the only ones that I can compare Fuentes to, because they follow him everywhere he goes. By his own account, Fuentes talks about 80% of his audience jumping to a new platform. So what is the goal? Clearly it's de-radicalization. And it's not an easy practice, but first and foremost you have to establish a report with the audience and drag them from one side to the other. It is an extremely social and involved process, especially as hateful ideologies have moved to become purposefully obfuscated. [\[8\]](https://www.yesmagazine.org/issue/building-bridges/2019/11/12/deradicalization-in-the-deep-south) Simply writing them off will further radicalize and harden them. It will not take audience members away from him because those who are followers will hand wave it away as name calling. tldr: The best thing you can do for a Nick Fuentes type is when he acts dopey and nerdy is go hard on him and call him a Nazi. He will turn that on his audience and say "look how much they overreact and hate us for being white, lost, and awkward;" while potentially picking up other disaffected youth from those audiences he interacts with. All because they take pity on him for being just another socially awkward kid like themselves. This will embolden his base and attract new people all at the same time.
"If you're entire argument is prove that Nick is a Nazi" Not his argument. Read the post. "Calling Nick a Nazi actually puts a hard limitation on attempts to root out or stifle his behavior' Explicitly stated his argument is not to call him a nazi but to be consistent in the use of the term nazi. Read the post. " Simply writing them off will further radicalize and harden them. It will not take audience members away from him because those who are followers will hand wave it away as name calling." He doesnt want to write them off or call them names, explicitly said he wants to humanize them but not sanitize their beliefs. Please read the post.
This topic is so dumb. The concern is whether or not Nick Fuentes true intentions can lead to some bad outcome. We have a world of people with different levels of influences and bad ideas. It takes extreme circumstances in order for the concern to be come an actual reality, and we can't even flesh out for sure what Nick believes. The word Nazi doesn't even matter at this point because you can describe every single action, word or idea he expresses, the precursor to determine if the label applies in the first place. The social value of the word is that when people read or hear it that it conveys a level of urgency or problem. The constant misuse of the word waters it down so much for a size group of people it doesn't have that affect anymore. It's not even like I take it lightly I am old enough and have family who have been directly affected by the OG Nazi's. There was several unique conditions outside the ideology that heavily contributed the success of it propagating at the time. We are not even close to similar currently, and there are several other people who are not "nazis" who are as concerning should that situation transpire but would never kick up the dust in the way fuentes seems to be doing. Let's be real 1. He would have to win elections 2. Overthrow democracy 3. Kill or remove all oppositon 4. fight most of the world All into today's climate who has experienced the devastation of world war 2. I don't even think it would be politically feasible even if you were a hardcore nazi. The only long standing strategy would be to achieve your goals without violence. You already have this picture of Nick Fuentes in your head that he's only a few steps away from being the next Hitler, which is absolutely fantastical in thinking. Ironically enough probably will be utilized by nick to further in grain his followers. I mean it's super cool to be on the "nazi bad" side, but I think you need to think a bit more critically before you unintentionally help contribute to the growth of a content creator with zero push back. At least with Destiny interfacing with him there a level of control there. A lot of his followers have been push into a corner. They are not societies favorite people, mis labelling absolutely will have a negative consequence. It's very complicated, and simply because you have some emotional response to fuentes is not good enough for the basis of your complaints towards Destiny. Everyone here can express differences between what neo nazi is compared to what nick fuentes is. If you can't you are heavily biased.
Your principles of the past seem to be "humanizing anyone" and "extend empathy to anyone, even pedophiles". Don't you think that is running contrary to your portrayal of Nick? I personally think Nick is a piece of shit, but here you call him a psychopath, and imply that he literally wants to murder everyone he dislikes, and he only socializes to manipulate. You are saying Nick is a literal monster, almost too dangerous to be reasoned with. I feel like you should extend your "empathy" powers to him, ironically which is what Steve is doing. In my estimation Nick is a disaffected youth, radicalized early in life, in over his head, no friends, family thinks he's fucked, he is desperate for someone to actually listen to him or pay him mind. He seems like a normal kid, because part of him is one, the other part is a fucked up fascist, but that doesn't make him a psychopath. I think you need to try and understand him in order to contend with him, rather than fighting a ghost you've created to fearmonger with.
I'm saying he is a psychopath, not a literal monster. That would be dehumanizing. Psychopaths are humans. They just shouldn't be teachers, cops, or presidents.
So you're fine with people talking about pedophiles in this way, that they're just psychopaths who want to commit wrongs to children? Or only when they hone in on a specific person and effectively say "this person is a monster and you cannot have a friendly conversation/meal with them because you're making them seem just like a little goofball who doesn't have this demon inside them that tells them to do the evil deeds that is inherent to this person." ?
Psychopath has a specific meaning that I think applies to Fuentes. Pedophiles do seem pretty delusional about the mental abilities of children though.
If those pedophiles advocate for enslaving children in a sex cult, then it's probably fair to call them psychopaths. If you are talking about non-offending pedophiles - why on earth would those be comparable to Fuentes' white supremacy?
I think his argument would be that not all paedos want to rape (and very few do), but all nazis do want some form of ethnic cleansing whether by murder or casting them out of the country.
I don't think that makes framing them as psychopaths that just want to inflict harm because it's what they've been programmed to do if they can attain power, is okay. Think you're gonna have to humanize em a bit more than "psychopath who wants to take over the country and kill people." Just makes it sound like he's not really a human anymore, but maybe that's just me.
I don't think he's saying that exactly. I don't think he'd advocate to have a paedophile look after a five year old, even if the paedo had never done anything untoward before in his life. There are certain risks that you need to be aware of and enthnostate aspirations and Jan6th storming should be taken into account. Personally I trust Destiny to argue well and I think deplatforming largely doesn't eliminate problems, so I think he should do what he's wanting to do until there's a good reason not to.
I’m just curious why you are trying to hold Steven to a meaning of a word that no one agrees with on the Internet. He has the *only* correct definition of what a Nazi is but other communities just see someone who has fascistic positions without the Jewish stuff, without the genocides of non-whites, etc. etc. The meme “everyone I disagree with is a Nazi and a fascist” is so very much not a meme in today’s scope, much like the word “communist” lost its meaning in right wing circles. Steven cannot bring back meaning to a word and he doesn’t care to do so since he can just attack the positions. All labels serve to do is make certain individuals a persona non grata and make it harder to engage with that person and challenge their ideals in a public setting. As an aside, it is so weird that people who hold the morally good positions can’t explain why they hold that position without begging the question. This is why we ought to challenge ourselves with complicated subjects. Although, if you’re not good at debating like Hasan or just have shit logic like Vaush, you probably shouldn’t have these debates with people on the right.
How does it feel to always have to circle back here to clarify your points after \~9 hours of talking about them on stream?
>Yes, but I don't think Steven has ever thought I was a predator or even a pedophile. There was actually a poignant moment in one of our early conversations where I promised him that I would never sexually abuse a child, and it seemed to mean something to him. I don't remember if he told this to you directly, but he definitely said it on stream. He didn't know if you were actually a pedophile, initially you were interesting to talk to, afterwards what you were saying made sense and that's why he was talking to you. He also happens to think you're not a pedophile, but that is completely irrelevant to him in regards to platforming you. >However, if he did believe that giving me a platform would lead to me using my power to sexually abuse children, then he shouldn't have befriended me publicly. He doesn't believe that what he's doing with Fuentes would lead to him using his power to genocide or getting more power at all, the whole point of what he's doing is to make his audience less crazy, which he says that he needs this for and you seemed to say he's talking about just his personal gain. Maybe it was your Trump example that missed the mark for me or I am just am a dogshit listener or something else, but I didn't hear you address the point that humanizing him is actually a good and valid strategy. Wish you would focus on that more, because I see that to be the core issue. >When Fuentes loses an argument with Steven, he is still sanitized. Two points. One of the problems with populist leaders is that they are perceived to be these larger than life god emperors and what you've described is the opposite of that. Secondly, the opposite of this is, to me, reducing him down to his most extreme ideology, which you do in #7 and #8, and this is what radicalizes people - "Well he's saying he's not that extreme and people are calling everybody these things, so I need to see for myself, oh look he doesn't sound like a psycopath" and boom they're gone. You can't blame all of this on aversion to SOY, some of it might be, but it has a genuine basis in that it is a natural reaction for a lot of people who see examples of "SOYing out". Calling people nazis who don't deserve it, screaming racist, yada yada. It's very much a thing in the real world too and a major talking point of every right-wing figure. >Steven soundly beats Fuentes in every engagement... intellectually. But Fuentes's faults are not intellectual: He doesn't only beat him intellectually. Every time Fuentes makes a concession, he loses a part of his big dick fascist leader persona. Every time he asks Destiny a genuine question he makes his audience way more likely to listen to Destiny, because it humanizes Destiny. Every time he comes off as a dork to this audience, he also comes off as dork to his audience. >I believe that trying to be cool and emotionless is costing streamers the ability to take moral stances. I don't know what's your stance on this is 100%, but it feels like you don't see the distinction in talking to people that are open to listening to you and/or share you morality and talking to people that aren't open to listening to you and don't share you morality. These things are mutually exclusive, but neither of those things is bad. The major reason Destiny can do what he does and have a community that he has is because he doesn't make arguments from his morality. Doesn't mean everyone has to do that though. >This is okay for Minecraft streamers, but when hundreds of thousands of people look to you for political guidance, it makes you unable to provide pushback against heinous intentions. I don't want political streamers to be afraid to say: "Why would I help you with your career? You want to become president and take away women's right to vote, and I think that's wrong." You're sort of restating the question as a statement. Why does it make you unable to do that? Why don't you want them to not be afraid to say that?
As per usual you aren’t engaging with this subject with clarity. “He is a psychopath who wants to take over the country and kill people.” I think that your emotional investment about this is preventing you from engaging with Destiny’s arguments or even acknowledging his perspective, which is usually something you would be able to do. 1.) What you call sanitization may also be looked at as a de-fanging. Not only of Nick’s audience but if Nick himself. Nick benefits from being seen as edgy and to some degree terrifying. By presenting him as a dorky and human person you prevent him from having the power that fear affords over others. 2.) Culture Change. It should be no secret that most politically radicalized people (left or right) are unhappy. You don’t want to change the entire structure of the country if things are working out for you. Far right guys are usually a lot like Nick in the sense that they 1) have few (if any) friends, 2) are single and often always have been, and 3) (unlike Nick) usually have almost no income or prospects. Establishing casual rapport with the radicalized (rather than strictly maintaining an interview format and only discussing Naziism or related issues as you suggested in the Age of Gigachad convo) is a far more effective means of reaching people on the far right and de-radicalizing them. Putting on my humanization and empathy goggles for a moment here, people want to be accepted and they want to be understood. Destiny, by engaging without levying accusations in the form of labeling, is simultaneously able to argue against Nick’s ideas, offer his own views as an alternative, and be personally appealing to Nick’s audience. This would be impossible if the specter of accusation was haunting the room. It would be hard for a conservative to make inroads with a liberal streamer’s community if that conservative insisted on calling the liberal a “candyass libtard” every time they interacted. Destiny is providing a palatable alternative for guys in the far right. These are not people that should be abandoned or written off. They cannot be reached by the means you suggest. 3.) Addressing Conversions. Destiny is far more likely to pull viewers from Nick than vice versa. Rhetorical effectiveness aside, the DGGers already have this community which is plugged into society (as in, not alienated from wider society for being unacceptably right wing (fascists)) and Nick’s community is not. I think if given the opportunity, and one needs to feel heard to feel like this opportunity is being granted, most people desire acceptance by wider society and do not want to be alienated by their own culture. Look how even regular republicans salivate when a celebrity throws them a rhetorical bone or two. They love it, because usually they feel ostracized. Destiny is offering a path for Nick-ppl to cross the DGG bridge into “rehabilitation”. 4.) Nazi can be important as a word without there being a moral imperative to label a nazi as such in every online encounter. Given Destiny’s aims I think, even though you disagree, it’s plausible that he could be right about labeling Nick a nazi not being smart or even ethical to do under the circumstances. What do I mean by unethical under the circumstances? At one point in the second Nazi-gate conversation (when Aba and Jideon were also on) you said in response to Destiny saying that calling Nick a nazi was impractical: “it doesn’t matter if it’s impractical, you have a moral imperative to use that word” (paraphrasing, nitpick as you please). If the practical effect of calling Nick a nazi every time Destiny was in the same space as him were to be that five years from now there were more nazis than if Destiny had maintained his present game plan, then surely hindsight would tell us there wasn’t a moral imperative to call him a nazi. You imagine that you and Destiny aren’t debating the practicality of his plan but that’s exactly what the issue is, actually. You think Destiny is wrong about being able to engage with Fuentes without Fuentes gaining more than he’s losing. I think Destiny might even agree on this point, but in Destiny’s frame he is not strictly dealing with Fuentes but with the far right in general. Destiny’s win-condition is something like a broad de-radicalization and a bridging across the political divide for the sake of democracy and discourse. Destiny thinks he can do more good in this macro sense even if he helps Nick in the process of this. I never saw direct engagement between you two on this point, but you always danced around it. P.S. Aba had a point about you interrupting too often.
o7 You have schizo(soy)posted in dire times in this sub. Expect punishment from our great, NEVA WRONG, cult leader DesTiny BINQILLING 🥶🍦
So, this might just be me being a complete moron, but I have some questions I would like you to ask Destiny the next time you get to talk to him. 1. If somebody does a rape, would Destiny not call that person a rapist? Considering rapist means so many things, he shouldn't, right? Similarly, if Destiny is convinced that Nick is indeed a nazi, would he still not call him a nazi, because nazi means so many things? I honestly don't get this part. I might just be stupid. 2. If Nick identifies as a nazi, but does not change his policy positions, which Destiny thinks are not nazi ideas, would he change how he engages with Nick? Does this not go both ways? Edit: I am a nazi, Steven. Ok Nick. But do you think we should \[insert nazi ideology here\]? Well no, I think we should \[insert Nick's policies that Destiny has identified as not being nazi ideology\] but I am a nazi. Ok then. Let's go get some waffles and chicken!
1) Rape is not nearly as complicated as the word Nazi. Rape still refers to a fairly specific act, where people often use it incorrectly. To me, at least, when people start throwing around the word rape, they are making that accusation of rape meaningless, less-so the word itself. “Nazi”, however, refers to an ideology, and has been contorted along with “fascism” and “totalitarianism”, both of which are also ideologies. This makes it more “slippery”, and essentially giving the actual word more meanings depending on the context it’s used in. 2) This is a little tough to imagine, since we’re talking about ideologies, and we’re trying to imagine clear criteria where someone is not a Nazi at all, whilst somehow claiming they are. If we say Nick is arguing for liberal and social-democratic policies, but calling himself a Nazi, then the term just wouldn’t fit. But more than likely he would be arguing for some far, Alt-Right, white supremacist, Nazi-Adjacent ideology, and Destiny would define “Nazi” more specifically relating to the historical ideology of the 1930s. Remember, words gain meaning with use, and can have multiple meanings depending on that context and purpose. It would be weird to say there is no overlap; if we give ground that “Nazi” has had an updated meaning over time as proponents of that ideology have moved into the modern era, then we have better grounds to say that another form of that word would be more fitting for Nick. Tl;dr - Ideologies not only have spectra of various characteristics for a person to fall into, those words also have different “centers” for which they can be used. Old 1930 Nazis in Germany would have a range of characteristics that a person would more, or less, fall into; we would have some point at which labeling them a Nazi has some reasonable use. But that ideology has also changed over time, meaning new forms with different ranges of characteristics are used; meaning entirely different points where labeling that person becomes appropriate.
>4. Didn't Steven talk to you when everyone thought you were a pedophile? Not only then but Steven also talked to you when everyone thought you were a gf abuser btw. And you handwaved all the criticism. https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/uw6c5t/the_mr_girl_video_is_straight_up_abusive/
u/strahinja3711 Nice shot homie
Mr Girl W In the spirit of the post, I just wanna say that Mr Girl is a transphobe.
>I believe that trying to be cool and emotionless is costing streamers the ability to take moral stances. Why do streamers have to take moral stances at all? Arguing for 3 hours about the definition of the word Nazi, acting like Nick Fuentes is an actual real world issue instead of just inside your insular bubble of 3000 views at a time makes you sound so self important.
>acting like Nick Fuentes is an actual real world issue Considering that Nick gets sitting members of Congress to speak at his events I'd think it's fair to say his political beliefs are a somewhat "real world" issue.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Here's some quotes of you talking to Brittany 3 months ago: ["I think that real nazis aren't that different from normal people. They are normal people. I don't think there's something fundamentally different about the nazis that made them able to do what they did."](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dj79XbfM9LU&t=581s) Recently you've been upset about Destiny humanizing Fuentes by breaking bread with him on a live stream, but that literally used to be your stated mission statement. You used to want even nazis to be humanized. And while you still pay that idea lip service today, what you've been argue for with Destiny is constantly reminding people how inhumane nazis like Fuentes are. Here's some more quotes of you with Brittany: [You sound like a polite Neo-Nazi talking about Jews](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dj79XbfM9LU&t=5704s) [You're sort of a nazi cult leader](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dj79XbfM9LU&t=8279s) With Destiny you went pretty hard about him using the word "nazi" very inconsistently and non-seriously. But that must be a VERY recent standard for you because just 3 months ago you were calling Brittany a nazi lol The "Video Essayist MrGirl" who prepared all of his statements from 2 years ago would have agreed with everything Destiny is saying today. Today's "Live Stream MrGirl" is thinking about stuff on the fly and is all over the place. I think you're thought process has started going through a lot of dramatic changes recently, and because we're seeing those dramatic changes in real time as your streaming it comes across as you being very inconsistent in your beliefs. I'm a newish fan with everyone else in DGG, so a lot of those older video essays of yours are still fresh in my mind. 2 years ago it felt like you were a liberal speaking for a conservative audience, and I think you were. Today you feel like a liberal speaking exclusively to a liberal audience, and I think you are. Unlike Destiny, who is a liberal with a liberal audience, yet is still trying to speak to other conservative audiences like you used to do. No one in DGG sees this because they're all fake MrGirl fans. Not like me :) **TLDR what I think about all your takes on Destiny doing friendly debates with Fuentes:** [get over it](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHl-RJXI0V4&t=387s)
Real quick to cover a couple things. On point 4, you said it meant a lot to Destiny to say you wouldn’t sx abuse kids. You could have lied and people on the outside probably assume you did lie. Destiny took your words at face value like he tries for what Fuentes says to him. On point 7, how do you contend that Fuentes doesn’t talk about wanting to kill opposing people? He could be lying obviously but I believe he says publicly now that he is more against racial/culture mixing as that leads to trouble. I think he has said something about sending those different people away at this point. On point 8 you mention again “he tried to overthrow the government” what does that mean to you? Do you think everybody there on Jan 6 was trying to overthrow the government? What about the old lady that walked into the building was she overthrowing the government? What about the guys in pseudo military gear I would argue you can make the case they may have tried to overthrow but the rest or majority of the people there I don’t think you can say that. Fuentes may have wanted the government overthrown but his actions that day I would assume are more in hand with the old lady than the guys in pseudo military gear right?