The Ugliness of Trolls: Comparing the Methodologies of the Alt-Right and the Ku Klux Klan

Nathan Eckstrand
{"title":"The Ugliness of Trolls: Comparing the Methodologies of the Alt-Right and the Ku Klux Klan","authors":"Nathan Eckstrand","doi":"10.5130/CCS.V10.I3.6026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The alt-right claims it responsibly advocates for its positions while the Ku Klux Klan was “ad-hoc.” This allows them to accept the philosophy of white nationalism while rejecting comparisons with prior white nationalist organizations. I confront this by comparing the methodologies of alt-right trolls and the KKK. After studying each movement’s genesis in pranks done for amusement, I demonstrate that each uses threats to police behavior, encourages comradery around ethnic heritage, and manipulates politics to exclude voices from public deliberation. Differences between alt-right trolls and the KKK originate in the technologies they use, not out of a concern for responsible advocacy.","PeriodicalId":43957,"journal":{"name":"Cosmopolitan Civil Societies-An Interdisciplinary Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5130/CCS.V10.I3.6026","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cosmopolitan Civil Societies-An Interdisciplinary Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5130/CCS.V10.I3.6026","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

The alt-right claims it responsibly advocates for its positions while the Ku Klux Klan was “ad-hoc.” This allows them to accept the philosophy of white nationalism while rejecting comparisons with prior white nationalist organizations. I confront this by comparing the methodologies of alt-right trolls and the KKK. After studying each movement’s genesis in pranks done for amusement, I demonstrate that each uses threats to police behavior, encourages comradery around ethnic heritage, and manipulates politics to exclude voices from public deliberation. Differences between alt-right trolls and the KKK originate in the technologies they use, not out of a concern for responsible advocacy.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
巨魔的丑陋:另类右翼和三K党的方法论比较
另类右翼声称它负责地倡导自己的立场,而三k党则是“临时的”。这使他们能够接受白人民族主义的哲学,同时拒绝与之前的白人民族主义组织进行比较。我通过比较另类右翼喷子和三k党的方法来面对这个问题。在研究了每一场运动的起源之后,我证明了每一场运动都对警察行为进行威胁,鼓励围绕民族遗产的同志情谊,并操纵政治将声音排除在公众审议之外。另类右翼喷子和三k党之间的差异源于他们使用的技术,而不是出于对负责任的宣传的担忧。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
审稿时长
9 weeks
期刊介绍: Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal is concerned with developing a better understanding of social change and cultural cohesion in cosmopolitan societies. Its focus lies at the intersection of conflict and cohesion, and in how division can be transformed into dialogue, recognition and inclusion. The Journal takes a grounded approach to cosmopolitanism, linking it to civil society studies. It opens up debate about cosmopolitan engagement in civil societies, addressing a range of sites: social movements and collective action; migration, cultural diversity and responses to racism; the promotion of human rights and social justice; initiatives to strengthen civil societies; the impact of ‘information society’ and the context of environmental change.
期刊最新文献
Silencing the Voice: the fossil-fuelled Atlas Network’s Campaign against Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Australia Fighting Corruption in Kazakhstan by Force of Criminal Law Kokoda People: Mobilization, Marginalization and Their Economic Lives in Sorong, Southwest Papua Universal Values of Pancasila in Managing the Crime of Terrorism Understanding Trust in Contemporary Australia Using Latent Class Analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1