With any fringe movement, and the far right/alt-right etc. are essentially fringe movements still, there is a balance to be found between purity and compromise.
I find myself frequently frustrated with people who sit on either extreme. There are people willing to compromise their beliefs so much so that they resemble neo-cons just because they don’t want to risk offending anyone. And then there are people so hell bent on never compromising that they criticize you for small victories, or in my case supporting AfD versus other far right movements (who, in Germany, have zero momentum, btw).
I get frustrated with the compromisers because why even fight if you’re going to water down your message? If you’re simply going to continue to be a GOP lapdog, why do you waste your time repeating Fox News soundbites?
And I get frustrated with the purists because while it could theoretically be so noble of them to dig their heels in the sand, real people are suffering in the meantime. The other day I was happy that a political group in Germany isn’t outright banned and someone got mad at me because they thought it was pathetic to celebrate that the Marxist government is perhaps loosening the noose a little. While I understand that an err to that side in a way, I won’t apologize for celebrating that perhaps a few families won’t be torn apart. I won’t feel guilty for enjoying the small victories. Sometimes you have to take what you can get. But please, continue yammering on about how you never compromise, and how brave and noble you are while people suffer.
Anyway, I think the trick is not to get lost in the details. We squabble over details when really at the end of the day we share some of the same big goals. It’s worth it to set aside your own pride and work with people who you don’t always 100% agree with in order to achieve something (which is why I support AfD). There’s always time to hammer out the details and inter-fight later, but I think we fall into the trap of refusing to work together even when it would ultimately benefit us all.
I loathe the alt-right, as many of you know. But, and many of you don’t know this, I’ve started volunteering at a rape crisis center. I’ve now met women who were raped by our Muslim invaders. And I’ll swallow my pride and work with the alt-right types if it means preventing more women from being raped.
We need to know when to stand firm and when to compromise, and I think narrowing our focus, not getting caught up in the details, would help us decide where the draw the lines in the sand.
With the rise of Donald Trump, as a racial demagogue, and champion of their backward cause, this league of ideologically-driven racial hate groups, and their mindless minions, have become more bold, more bitter, and more violent, with each passing week. This former fringe movement, which has now taken center stage in the Republican Party, has also sparked a massive rejuvenation of the Ku Klux Klan, and the formal unification of white supremacist organizations, throwing their support, along with the Fraternal Order of Police, behind Donald Trump’s Presidential candidacy. Their public, and too often violent, support of Donald Trump’s falsehood-ridden campaign suggests that the people in the Alt-Right movement have lost their perspective on reality…if they ever actually had one. This is unfortunate. Also unfortunate is their cult loyalty to Donald Trump.
So I had a thought: MRAs like to say “Oh those guys who want to kill women are a fringe group, nothing to do with us”. If you think about it, it’s not that different than “TERFs don’t represent Feminism, they’re extremists”. Except! Except mainstream feminism actively fight damaging, extremist feminists; just check the “TERF” and “gender critical” tags.
So, my question is: Do MRAs actively fight the most extremist, damaging aspects of their group? Is there a MRA regularly arguing against the misogyny and racism of A Voice for Men, or the Red Pill or the PUA movement?
What are you doing to stop this dangerous fringe movements?
EXCLUSIVE: Why Hugh Dancy's Knowledge of Fake Blood Comes in Surprisingly Good Use on 'The Path'
It’s hardly a comeback, but having Hugh Dancy star in a new series – The Path on Hulu – so quickly after NBC canceled Hannibal has marked a welcome return to TV for the English actor. On the series, created by Jessica Goldberg (writer and producer of Parenthood) and co-executive produced by Friday Night Lights producer Jason Katims, Dancy slowly descends into madness as Cal Roberts, an ambitious leader within a fringe religious movement.
Though, he admittedly was hesitant about diving back into another series so quickly after Hannibal. “That made me doubly cautious, because I loved working on Hannibal,” Dancy tells ET about signing on for the show, which co-stars Aaron Paul (Breaking Bad) and Michelle Monaghan (True Detective). “Basically, lightning doesn’t necessarily strike twice. You have to be really sure, because the odds are against something working out so well.”
After talking with Goldberg and Katims, the actor realized how seriously they were interested in the question of individual faith. “That’s what made me want to commit to it,” Dancy says.
While the script provided the ultimate blueprint for Cal, Dancy decided how heavily to lean on the fault lines that he says are running through the character. “I felt like he was struggling to stay afloat on top of a raging sea,” Dancy says, factoring in layers of Cal’s ambition, alpha attitude and extreme pressures to lead against the tide. For Dancy, he enjoyed the span of the character’s arc in season one and how Cal can focus very intently on an individual, but also has the capacity to preach to a big crowd. “It’s a rare opportunity to flex all those muscles,” Dancy says. “He is a performer. He is theatrical, so I got to indulge in those sermonizing scenes, particularly when he’s recounting the story of Plato’s cave. I mean, it’s daunting, but enjoyable.”
As season one progresses, it’s clear that Cal is drowning as he slips up on his sobriety, preying on a former drug addict and new member of the movement, and attacking a Peruvian shaman who has concerns over Cal’s aggressive nature. The scene, Dancy admits, was the most challenging of the season. “Killing Silas – I mean, spoiler alert – was quite intricately built up to,” the actor says. “I wanted to get to a place where all of Cal’s buttons were pressed, such that you could believe he’d do this thing and believe that it was purely impulsive.”
The moment led to a subsequent breakdown for the character, which “was a lot to pack into a scene,” Dancy says, adding: “I wanted to make sure it was as rich as it could be.”
The scene also resulted in a surprising amount of blood on Cal, which after his previous work, Dancy is quite used to. “I’m comfortable and familiar with different uses of fake blood,” he says. “Truthfully, I will never be covered in as much blood as I was on Hannibal.”