[protomyth]

> I feel like this happened because it seems he accidentally presented himself to the outside world as alt-right.

I would love for you to find one place Ben Shapiro presents as alt-right.

> His Wikipedia article paints him as alt-right

of course it does, Conservatives of all stripes have been complaining about the bias of Wikipedia for some time. It paints anyone who is sorta conservative as alt-right.

If you believe he acts "alt-right" then pretty much every libertarian is alt-right, and that's just wrong.

[eregorn]

You can complain about Wikipedia, but you missed the point of me mentioning it. Here's a question I want answered because otherwise he might as well present as such:

Do you think the Wikipedia page is missing anything important he's done? Specifically anything of note that has to do with the free market.

Otherwise, its basically a "just one goat" situation, except he done like 7 goats. the day to day things are just not gonna stick out as much as the big things so what he says on his podcast isn't enough to change that perception.

[protomyth]

I am trying to figure out what exactly he has done to make him alt-right since they attack him constantly.

From the Wikipedia page: > n May 2016 New York Magazine reported: "Shapiro...has increasingly found himself targeted by the so-called alt-right movement, a loose conglomeration of online personalities—many if not most of them anonymous—currently devoted to tweeting and posting their support for Donald Trump and attacking those who disagree, often in racist and anti-Semitic ways. They have been denigrating Shapiro as a 'pussy', a 'cuck', a 'Jew' and a 'kike'."[54]

He supports Israel which actually isn't an alt-right thing.

I'm trying to find what in that article makes him alt-right.

[eregorn]

Welp, I made a mistake. He's had multiple opinions on Israel, and he's currently pro-Israel at the moment, this was the offending quote:

"A decade later, however, Shapiro reversed his position. In an article published on March 13, 2013, Shapiro wrote, "Some on the right have proposed population transfer from the Gaza Strip or West Bank as a solution. This is both inhumane and impractical. Moving millions of Palestinians out of areas they have known for their entire lives will certainly not pave the way to peace" and while "both right and left agree that a population separation is necessary," he proposes that Israel "has no choice but to weather [the anti-Israeli propaganda]" until a realistic solution comes to light.[37]"

This however was followed by the UCLA section which I misunderstood. Either way, I don't think there's much point on focusing on Israel. The Don himself is probably more pro-Israel than he is. Opinions like that are less identifying of alt right and more as weapons to be used when the alt reich feel betrayed.

That mistake is also why I'm forgiving you on the whole being attacked by the alt right. I've already said why that doesn't matter, it was also in the paragraph right after that one: "I've experienced more pure, unadulterated anti-Semitism since coming out against Trump's candidacy than at any other time in my political career". If he was alt-right he wouldn't be the first to be turned on like with Milo and the Daily Stormer.

I think there's something I need to clarify here. Another poster here posted how alt right means Nazi now. I DONT believe that, and if you may notice I prefer to say Reich for the Nazi side. I see the alt right as someone who has taken to the right socially, possibly being opposites with libertarians with left economics, but are not evangelicals because they're a revolt on social justice (not against it, but specifically a "what about us?") and, most important here, the reaction to such opinions by colleges, news, and businesses. Also, please remember my second comment before you bring up Wikipedia's own article on the alt right.

Which makes the whole discussion a bit funny but confusing. The guy is definitely alt right, despite what everyone's saying here. A bunch of people here are alt right too but, again, don't want to say so. What happened is history has repeated itself as alt right is to alt reich/Nazi as liberal was to socialism/communism.

It doesn't actually matter in the end how I separate them in the end. Much like the mere mention of redistribution was likened to communism, The fact that alt right can be fiscally left has been taken advantage of to frame everything they believe as Nazi under a simplistic understanding of it. The end result is people seeing a thing as alt right, even if they define it differently somehow.

I'd recommend not replying to this comment as quickly as the last, it had to be long to clarify myself and I won't read the reply till tomorrow anyway.

[protomyth]

I'm not bringing up Wikipedia or anything else. I am going to one of the main alt-right people to define their beliefs and membership[0].

Vox Day is alt-right. That probably is not a controversial statement to anyone. I would assume that he knows who is alt-right and who is not. Given that he wrote an article[2] that declares Ben Shapiro and enemy of the alt-right and later tries to classify Mr. Shapiro[3], I am given to believe being someones enemy is a pretty good sign that you are not that same someone.

I think you desperately want to classify Ben Shapiro as alt-right for some weird reason. I would assume so you can ignore any argument he puts forward with a cheap label.

0) having to read some of this stuff to actually reply is truly painful and frankly its bad enough I have to read far left stuff, reading alt-right stuff is just as painful.

1) https://infogalactic.com/info/Vox_Day

2) http://voxday.blogspot.com/2016/03/an-enemy-of-alt-right.htm...

3) https://voxday.blogspot.com/2016/04/does-ben-shapiro-belong-...

[eregorn]

I think you completely misunderstand me. A bit my fault cause I usually plan out how I argue and I honestly did not expect this type of questioning. I'll reiterate my first comment in that I know the guy's libertarian (I think, definitely not alt right)?

I mean shit, this whole argument has nothing to do with whether I want to listen to his arguments. It was an explanation of how silly things like this happen in the first place where a libertarian gets confused for an alt right person.

Maybe the goat metaphor wasn't the best thing to go for, since the goat lover is an actual goat lover regardless of the other things he does. Maybe framed 7 times with a goat makes more sense? Maybe plain words are better: He's advertised the things people consider alt right, but not the things about him that prove he isn't. The actual alt right notice these discrepancies regardless and correctly identify him.

[protomyth]

I'll point out how you started this thread:

> I feel like this happened because it seems he accidentally presented himself to the outside world as alt-right.

Through all this, I still don't understand what you think he did to "present" himself as alt-right? I really hate when people put labels on others just to be able to dismiss them and calling someone alt-right should be backed up with a little bit of evidence.