I have to say I wanted to avoid this debate because I have little faith in this forum as a place for frank debate nor a particular want to be painted as a "alt-right" or "white supremacy"-enabler, or whatever ridiculous insult I see hurled around in these heated debates about identity politics.
I see the nefarious influence of the US political culture online every day. To an extent, debating within it's framework of 'alt-right' vs 'alt-left' and the terms and conflicts that go with it is imo counterproductive and harmful. This is a debate that I primarily relate with the current political and cultural divide in the US. It's not a discourse that I'd wish to promote. This is not to say that the country in which I live has no political division or tensions, but that the amped up, at times completely ludicrous political discourse that is now rampant in the US is of an especially worrying and damaging nature. One that I sincerely hope doesn't gain traction where I live. But i fear that in this (so far) ever globalizing world, and the rising influence of a global internet culture, I'm forced to speak about things like political terrorism in a frame of reference that makes little sense when i take into account my daily reality and the national political debate, but is the dominant discourse Americans get exposed to. As the terrorist attack in Christchurch sadly illustrates, American politics is likely to hook into and carve out other societal issues and thus provide a fertile breeding ground for many terrorist attacks to come.
So I might give up on this conversation if I think it's pointless, unfairly moderated or feeds into the division and 'culture war' the perpetrator of the attacks wished to achieve, but let's attempt to have a civil debate without slurring who we disagree with.
The first sentence of your post (and I don't mean to say this to antagonize) suggests to me a misunderstanding of the issue itself.
It has never been (at least for me) about a "defense" of pewdiepie himself. I don't know him as an individual and to me he is just a youtuber-entertainer like every other, deserving the same fair shake as everyone who gets accused of being anything.
I'm subscribed to him, but only watch him casually. I certainly don't feel devotion towards him. I have a perception of his character, but am aware that view is just based on what we get to see of him on the videos he releases or things I happen to read about him. On the basis of what I've heard him say and do, he's not somebody who I think holds white supremacists views or condones them. Nothing has given me that impression so far. I have heard him denounce racism and make remarks in support of LGBT issues, women's rights, charities etc that offer contra-indications of him being any kind of white supremacist. He was horrified by the attacks and publicly tweeted about them. One can debate whether he should do more and maybe make a special video about it in which he could explain in some more depth his views about the alt-right, white supremacy, and some of his subscribers that might flirt or be part of the alt-right movement. Maybe that video is still to come. Maybe he finds it distasteful in the face of such a tragedy to bring the spotlights on him. It takes after all, quite a self-important and self-centered view to insert yourself in a debate like this. Maybe we should avoid playing into the cards of hateful terrorist that inserted pewdiepie into this. The national debate after all shouldn't be, as identity-politicians wish, about who's to blame or some youtuber. It should be about how we can counter this trend of political violence, how we can impact its root causes and how we can avoid giving to much attention and weight to the agenda of the terrorist.
I hope we can all agree that pewdiepie isn't directly responsible. He can't control it if someone shouts his name during a political attack, much like a good-faith muslim can't control if islamic fundamentalists invoke their religion for the atrocities they commit. In the same way, I think it's also not true to say that pewdiepie is in no way whatsoever connected to this event. The terrorist made it about him by shouting his name, no matter how much Felix personally detests being invoked.
So he does have a certain responsibility even if he isn't directly involved, but the whole question is - like it is with every issue- for what exactly do you think he's responsible, what was under his control, what we can fairly expect of him and how do you think he should wield his influence. Those are all complex issues and will probably be defined differently according to what you think is the right balance and how you interpret his actions.
I am certainly not somebody who thinks that everywhere responsibility could be assumed, it should be assumed. We're all complicit to an extent for everything that's going on. That Michael Jackson CD you enjoy? Supported
a very weird guy at best Those clothes you wear? Might have been made by destitute workers in Bangladesh getting paid pennies an hour. That Iphone you bought? Could have bought a lot of malaria nets and saved tens of lives instead. Oh You only buy fairtrade, have a tiny ecological footprint and donate substantial amounts to charity? Congratulations, that means you're wealthy and that that privilege has been afforded to you by society. You are statistically likely just to inherited a lot of money of if you're really exceptional you've leveraged your privileged starting position to extracted surplus value in a less than perfect capitalist economic system.
These examples serve to illustrate my broader point that responsibility and blame are not black-and-white issues and when we're talking about the responsibility of pewdiepie in this debate, regardless of his character, there is a whole range of conclusions we can draw about him. It's doesn't have to be that he's either 'completely innocent' or 'an evil white supremacist-enabler'.
Personally, I think pewdiepies responsibility is limited. To me he's no different from a movie star, famous member of a boys band or cherished athlete. He's an entertainer at large. He makes videos about games, memes, and whatever is the rage of the day. He's not defending some political platform and he hasn't really promoted anything that I would say is related to the supremacist agenda. Yes, there is a smallish part of his audience that must have sympathy for alt-right. That's not surprising, after all the current "nationalist" in the white house got voted in by roughly half of the voters. Likewise, the 25 percent that voted for Le Pen in France, the 50+ percent that voted for Orban in Hungary, the voters for Lega Nord in Italy, the Bolsero-voters in Brazil, the Duterte voters in the Philippines etc. etc. all seemingly seem to be fine with policies that are deeply troubling and often very ethnocentric and loathsome from a human rights perspective. This is the reality of the world we live in, this is the political fight that really matters and it are or democratic institutions and the people we elect that will have to find solutions for the root causes. The discourse of these terrorists that view themselves as 'white crusaders from a temple-order' is political, and it must be defeated politically. Pewdiepie has 90+ million subs. It is to be expected that among them there will be some radicalized neonazi's because these people also watch youtube. If they didn't watch pewdiepie, they would watch others. If they like to make a rallying cry out of some words pewdiepie has said, or manage to infiltrate one of his videos under the guise of anime, that is cause for concern but it doesn't mean Felix himself is trying to 'mainstream' anything. It's a fringe part of his audience that wants to capture his platform. There is only
only a limited amount of things a video creator can do. Granted, maybe he should have done more. Maybe he should have explicitly denounced that part of his audience, if he already hasn't (I genuinely don't know as I only occasionally watch him and don't feel like watching hundreds of hours of his videos to come to a more informed conclusion about how much he has or hasn't spoken out on this.) I would be careful in jumping to conclusions about his personal beliefs, and to say he has emboldened people to feel comfortable to hold white supremacists beliefs is a claim I see no evidence for. White supremacists in my experience tend to be rather bold in their beliefs to start with, and usually aren't to shy to voice them online.
The bottom line is that i see no evidence that pewdiepie as an entertainer has actively organized some platform for white nationalists. In conjunction with the little i think i know about his character, I find it unfair to call him a white supremacist and i think it trivializes the term which should be reserved for actual white supremacists.
He's done some regrettable things that's for sure. I think he gives way to much space to people I consider bad-faith actors like Jordan Peterson, Charlie Kirk (?), Molynieux (?)... He may have been influenced by them, or he might just be a bit naive on them. I'm not sure, don't forget these are people from the US political culture and get a lot less exposure in for example the UK so it is possible he's only seen 'the best parts' of their shtick. I certainly know of people myself who have seen some debate with the 'intellectual' Peterson and are oblivious to some of the other things he says and does that make his agenda much more clear... If find Felix giving these people a forum much more damaging than the "Bad Words" he said, though it might have been picked up on by white supremacists to rally around a cause. I think Felix isn't necessarily that politically formed, but in the end I think it's a mistake to focus on his every view to begin with. The real problem here are the actual white nationalists that try to use internet culture to spread their racist ideology.
What
really rallies and emboldens these people is the political discourse in the US. So please, I would hope that none are so misguided and blind to think that one youtuber has a significant responsibility in this. Rather than trying to divide youtubers into the 'pure and innocent' vs the 'evil and racist' and partake in this imo toxic witch hunt where the withes are burned first and the evidence is looked for later - if at all, It is my conviction we should focus our attention to what matters most and what is
very clearly feeding into this trend of political violence.
opendoor wrote: ↑Wed Mar 20, 2019 1:42 pm
TW Mentions of terrorism ahead.
I feel like anybody who defends him after this Christchurch tragedy is misunderstanding the issues, or such a devoted fan he could do anything and they'd find a way to excuse it.
Nobody's saying he made the shooter pull the trigger, we are saying that he helped bring hateful and racist alt-right ideas into the mainstream. Through his own statements/actions and through who he chose to follow and support, he created a mainstream space where people holding these views, including the shooter, felt comfortable and emboldened. He needs to denounce this way of thinking to his tens of millions of followers, and he needs to reflect on his own behaviour, and likely his own beliefs (he undoubtedly holds some of these beliefs himself, people do not get so immersed in alt-right life purely for the sake of satire).
Ofc there are more important things to talk about re: Christchurch and I have been thinking and talking about those things, but that doesn't mean Felix Kjellberg should not be held accountable for his own actions.