When an intellectual, a privileged position in society, writes "Only someone who has always had enough privilege to never have to reckon with the consequences of one’s words could participate in such a movement and keep up with the profound disengagement it demands. Kierkegaard’s ironist, in other words, has to be a straight white man." about guys who work in gas stations in rural America, I have a hard time taking them seriously.
This author clearly doesn't understand what it is to do something <i>for the lulz</i>. FWIW, it's not a masculine v. feminine thing, or a white vs. nonwhite thing--it's the same urge that helps children across the globe torture animals and set things on fire out of boredom. That's perhaps one of the few truly universal human quirks.<p>Throughout the article, the author really really wants to present the 'channers, the alt-right, and white supremacists as being the same groups, interchangeable in motive and person. Further, the author invokes a lot of Western (like, cowboy-western) imagery with references to the Alamo, Lone Ranger, and other shibboleths in a pretty naked attempt to go painting the folks as searching for lost masculinity. Finally, in a cheap shot, she then basically calls them cowards for not dying for their memes while still lamenting that their candidate (Trump) won.<p>It sure reads nicely, but it misses--in my opinion--a big part of the context these actions are taking place in.<p>These folks are reacting to a world where truth is really just another convenience to use or alter as a selling point, where systemic issues with politics and corruption are ignored beyond being used to build peoples' careers as progressives, where racism is suddenly <i>de jure</i> no longer an issue but <i>de facto</i> pretty obviously used to prevent critical speech, and where sexism and misogyny have been so widely and indiscriminately accused that they no longer have real and common meaning.<p>So, in the deepest throes of nihilism (which the author should've explored further instead of deciding to play the "mean young white male" card) this culture has evolved.
It's too bad that the author conflates /pol/ (known to many other 4chan users as a "containment board" for the most racist users) with the entirety of the site.<p>While pol may be the most active board on 4chan for the time being, it hasn't always been and may not always continue to be (sadly, painting the entire site as a club for nihilistic Trump supporters makes it less likely to attract different users). Much of the rest of the website offers a great discussion format for focused topics, and I wish I could admit to enjoying the other sections of 4chan without needing to qualify my statements by explaining that the entire site isn't dedicated to racism and porn.
I've met a handful of people via 4chan. All of them have been kind, intelligent, and thoughtful people. And a lot of fun. I'd much rather hang out with a random 4channer than someone from the US population at large, assuming both are around my age.<p>I think the really nasty ones avoid meeting irl though.
There is so much promise here. Unfortunately, the author is horribly undermined by her own ignorance, and also, somewhat ironically, by trying to attribute larger aspects of internet culture to a specific group of racists, misogynists, and Trump supporters.