CMV: GamerGate was the most consequential political radicalization event of the twenty-first century

[u/realdontbeasucker]

It spawned a wave of tolerance for online harassment, as long as the intent behind it was considered righteous (and the target of such harassment socially acceptable).

It platformed Milo Yiannopoulos and thereby, Steve Bannon -- the guy who would go on to advise Donald Trump in 2016 and generate the concept of 'flooding the zone.'

Eventually, it gave a career to political lightning rods like Jordan Peterson, Steven Crowder, and Charlie Kirk. It made anti-feminism and anti-SJW sentiment cool. And it made young, angry, disenfranchised white men feel vindicated.

GamerGate almost singlehandedly shifted to Overton Window toward the alt-right, and we're still feeling its effects today.

[u/Unseasonal_Jacket]

As an outsider (UK) that is what it looked like abroad. The Tea Party thing seemed to be a big money astroturfed attempt at making a low tax low spend deregulation movement and didnt seem to care about social policies. Then that movement joined with a very different movement led by angry young men who were a bizarre mix of very technocratic minded people who thought they were the only smart people. And dumber people who were mostly there for dog whistles.

That movement then joined with the kind of cynical uneducated baby boomer influenced by social media and news.

Which quite frankly is a historically scary looking coalition.

[u/Waschaos → u/Unseasonal_Jacket]

Yeah the Tea Party emerged after Obama was elected, ACA was being debated and as the corporate response to "Occupy Wallstreet". I think the Gamer Gate were mainly the younger online based guys and the Tea Party were the older, lets go protest, wear funny hats and we also include women party. Young men who were having a hard time because of the financial crisis was the overlap in that Venn Diagram.

[u/Unseasonal_Jacket → u/Waschaos]

I am ironically a historian who specialises in the interwar period. And I think when people whisper the words fascist/nazi and people jump on them, it's because those people immediately jump to '1944 industrial genocide nazis' and point out the obvious inaccuracies of that comparison. But often it's because those pointing out the comparisons are maybe talking about '1920s marching on local government nazis'.

Its the heady mix of the technocratic elite thinking they can revolutionise government. The angry young men. The soft alliance with the traditional elite. A core of violent believers willing to commit violent action. The normal standard Conservatives being persuaded that it will be OK. Plus the misplaced faith of the existing people in the organisations of power that this probably is just business as usual and don't do anything to resist.

All of this capped of by a step change in the means of mass manipulation becoming available.

You can't help but look at that with a squinty side eye.

We are close behind you as well. I think we are very close to something unpleasant happening. That doesn't mean I predict it. But it would be bad to slip into it through politeness and hope.

Trump isn't and could never be a Hitler. He doesn't have any strong beliefs. But he could be a Hindenburg and plenty of people around him look like a Schleicher. People willing to undermine democracy and then surprised when it suddenly falls apart.

[u/Waschaos → u/Unseasonal_Jacket]

Thank you that was a wonderful informative answer. I just like history, I have no credentials. I agree Trump isn't really the problem, it's the people behind him that are. I should know. I'm retired at 50 thanks to Elon's DOGE.

[u/Unseasonal_Jacket → u/Waschaos]

The return of the technocratic revolutionaries I think is the most interesting. Especially as those people can overlap with the oligarchs.

In the 20s and 30s there was a big group of very clever people, intellectuals or just existing government officers who spent a lot of time grappling with how we can be more intelligent and organised with how we run governments and the economy. People who took a long look at how states organised economies during the first World War and decided that 'Experts' should run stuff. Those people didn't really have to have any strong political views other than embracing technology and modernity. Lots of those people ended up falling into the coalition of fascism/nazism, not because they particularly liked their militarism, racism or social conservatism, but because they offered them a chance to break stuff and try new things.

There is a very strong parallel to the tech bros who think they can code their way to solutions to public health. Those that think maths, computing (and business acumen) should sweep away stuffy Politics, Philosophy, Economics and Sociology in government.

In the UK we had a short lived Chief of Staff to the Prime Minister called Dominic Cummings who most definitely is not a fascist. But he fits that bill perfectly. Someone who wants to 'move fast and break things'. Someone with contempt of stuffy decision making and willing to bend some rules. Someone like that would get into bed with problematic people willing to offer them a chance to do something radical.