r/SneerClub archives
newest
bestest
longest
[tangential] Former alt-right grifter on how it works: "And the emphasis on genetics and IQ was appealing as well. 'They see it almost as a moral value. They think that people with high IQ confers them with some kind of super-ability and makes them leaders, natural leaders.'" (https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/rosiegray/katie-mchugh)
50

“I was a racist, certainly,” she said. “And I patted myself on the back, saying, ‘Well, I’m not, you know, some kind of Cro-Magnon racist. I just believe that they’re violent and unruly,’” referring to nonwhite people.

The idea that these were not “Cro-Magnon” racists, but instead cultured and intelligent holders of taboo truths, is essential to their appeal to the lonely and disaffected.

/r/TheMotte in a nutshell

ETA:

The alt-right was, at the time, all about smoothing over its public image, becoming approachable, more mainstream. “They didn’t have swastikas covering their foreheads,” as McHugh put it. The very term “alt-right” represented this effort to rebrand white nationalism. Everything in public was euphemism. The names of the main organizations were bland: National Policy Institute, American Renaissance. People could blend in, and they did. They were “polished, sophisticated,” she said. “There’s a very high culture aspect to it.” The class markers were important to someone like McHugh, who had come from the sticks. And the emphasis on genetics and IQ was appealing as well. “They see it almost as a moral value,” she said. “They think that people with [a] high IQ confers them with some kind of super ability and makes them leaders, natural leaders.”

The emphasis on intelligence endows the whole enterprise with a pseudo-intellectual veneer, and it also provides white supremacists with a way to elide accusations of white supremacy. According to their argument, they can’t be white supremacists because they say that Jews and people of East Asian descent have a higher average IQ. This both whitewashes their bigotry and feeds into the alt-right’s victim mentality, especially as it relates to Jews. The work of the anti-Semitic writer Kevin MacDonald is a cornerstone of the alt-right movement. His Culture of Critique series argues that Jews, using their higher intelligence, employed Judaism as a “group evolutionary strategy” to perpetuate themselves and win out over other groups. MacDonald blames Jews for the very existence of anti-Semitism, arguing that anti-Semitism is a justified response to Jews’ plot to run the world.

> The alt-right was, at the time, all about smoothing over its public image, becoming approachable, more mainstream. I'm always amazed at how much [vox day](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Theodore_Beale) fucks up these basic things. He is like the worst thing that happens to these movements (which is good of course). Every time there is a movement that is doing a sort of crypto fasc thing, and then vox day gets involved, and goes: 'yes, the alt right is like the kkk, 14 words people!'. He is super bad in 'don't say the silent part out loud' and he attaches himself to all these right wing projects.

Even if McHugh no longer ‘aligns’, she’s still a grifter at her core. They’re simply dormant, waiting for another wave of attention to ride out of their misery. We must resist humoring the rehabilitation of glassy-eyed opportunists. She’ll be back to swim with the sharks soon enough.

yep - the piece doesn't have her admit where she was lying, where she was wrong, what she believes now, etc. Do not congratulate.
But is that a smart tactic that leads to good outcomes? If rehabilitation isn't possible, staying a Nazi is the logical conclusion.
you're a really bad reader. the problem is that she hasn't changed, and that's literally what the comment you're responding to says.
but she obviously has changed in what she says and writes.
>We must resist humoring the rehabilitation of glassy-eyed opportunists. I think you are wrong. Opportunism is exactly how you make people stop spewing racist and antisemitic crap.

this is a really interesting article actually

she wrote some awful stuff, and believed in awful things

but it also sounds like genuinely sees the error of her ways and is trying to show others (through this long and extensive read) that the alt-right really isn’t the solution

she owns up to her mistakes-she’s not saying “yea I wasn’t ACTUALLY racist, I just made some mistakes NBD” which isn’t really easy to do

I'm not sure. It looks like her main source of unhappiness is not that she was wrong. Instead, it is that she lost her career.
Essentially a Dapper Nazi piece, complete with a photo of the subject gazing thoughtfully (admittedly not through a window in a dark room, but still).
the new media genre: the "Dapper Reformed Nazi"
"yes, i've learned the error of my ways; fascism simply isn't the right path. recently i've actually been reading a lot of posts by this guy named mencius..."
You guys are all going too far, she repeatedly denounces the racism, and neoreaction comes in for criticism in the article too Scepticism is valid, but this isn't scepticism, it's just assuming the other side
This piece feels like she's saying what she thinks the prescribed words are. Perhaps I'm being too mean, but I'm not inclined to assume good faith here as the default assumption she warrants.
Passages like this: > She was ill equipped for normie life and “still nostalgic for Breitbart,” her other friend said. “She was nostalgic for Steve [Bannon] and how he would call her and somebody else his ‘Valkyries.’ They would just flatter her. And the alt-right did, too. She was like their queen. > “When she was at Breitbart she was a somebody,” this person said. “She was, like, important. And people fawned over her, and people like made her feel affirmed, right?” if the attention returned, she'd be back to the alt right in a second otoh she did get some of her former pals duly and properly fucked over, so that's a point in her favour
[this](https://twitter.com/romapancake/status/1123992352660520964) is also a great Twitter thread from someone who knew her in college. > But it's been years now, and Katie McHugh says she's changed. Because I knew her, I want to believe it. Because I knew her, I'm not sure I can believe it.
[deleted]
>this just makes her a cowardly liberal instead of an honest one. oh spare me the teenage chapo horseshit
Honestly I'm not sure, and I get your skepticism, but I'll take the more optimistic stance, as unfounded as it might be.
Her lucrative career in genocide incitement didn't work out for her, so she's good now!
I'm not condoning her past behavior, and I hope I'm not coming off that way.
No, you're not; I just believe really really strongly that the appropriate response to this is skepticism. Just because the author of the piece is easily convinced (not to say gulled) doesn't mean we have to be.
That's entirely fair. I think I'm biased due to my own experiences. I've seen people fall down a slippery slope to some pretty atrocious views, and have even caught myself at the start of that slope a few times. It's sad to see people go down that path, and to see somebody fall off the end of the slope/cliff and then actually climb back out and say "wow that is awful" is uncommon (again, in my eyes). It doesn't make it right, nor does it automatically mean she's actively taking more steps to combat the ills she wrought...but I *personally* (without condoning that behavior) find that...if not "good", then kinda important? I'm sorry for my wording, it's hard for me to explain how I think about this. I fully understand your skepticism and frankly that's the pragmatic and probably correct response here.
Tactically it makes sense to leave a path open for redemption, as it will encourage others to claw their way out of the racist hole. I don't blame anyone for being skeptical though.
I certainly hope for redemption. Just call back when she's got it.
I'm entirely unconvinced. Instead of saying it out loud, she now talks in the dog whistles as if she meant them sincerely. She seems mostly sorry that she fell off the gravy train and ruined her life.
> she owns up to her mistakes-she's not saying "yea I wasn't ACTUALLY racist, I just made some mistakes NBD" which isn't really easy to do Does she? Does she admit she was lying about, like, pretty much anybody who's not white? What does she believe now? Is she working to fix the evil she did? Maybe, but we don't see that.

I couldn’t care less about her redemption narrative, what’s valuable in this piece is how it traces how she was cultivated through various insitutions and patrons, and how it outs all of these people by publishing personal correspondences.