[mirimir]

> For the 'lulz' of course.

So how does one distinguish between a genuine kill-all-the-scum Nazi, and a child who's pretending to be one, for the lulz? You get lulz from people who get upset. And you get lulz from people who agree with you. It's a win-win.

Ultimately, there's no way to tell. It's a textbook example of Poe's Law. And indeed, there's no observable difference. Maybe everyone behind Nazi sites are in it for the lulz. And/or for the money, or fame. You get the same fucked up social impacts, either way.

[jacquesm]

When they start dressing the part, take part in torch carrying marches shouting slogans about mass murder.

[mirimir]

Maybe. But many of them could still be in it for the lulz.

I mean, many gangbangers are fundamentally after lulz.

[jacquesm]

That doesn't mean it is something we need to either encourage or condone.

[mirimir]

No, it's not. But it helps to put the phenomenon in context. The anomie of the young, especially young men, has always been hazardous. But now, with the Internet, it's chaotic around strange attractors. Such as the alt right. And ISIS. And undoubtedly other stuff that I'm not aware of yet.

[jacquesm]

Yes, this is all true. So you recognize there is a problem with 'angry young men', the question then becomes once these angry young men decide to band together guided by smart old men who aim to use them as tools in their arsenal whether or not you hold them responsible. Once they're over 18 as far as I'm concerned they are fair game. Old enough to vote: old enough to think.

[mirimir]

I agree. But there's more to anomie than anger. Angry young men have always been canon fodder. But now we have cynical young men who are posing as angry, but really just in it for the lulz, who can organize themselves through the Internet. It's a new dynamic.