Category Archives: Conservatism

Liberal Race Realism, Precursor to the Alt Left

This was actually the precursor to the Alt Left. I started this ill-fated movement in 2009, seven years ago. I must say it was a complete flop. Virtually nobody signed on. And the few who called themselves Liberal Race Realists on here generally spent all their time engaging in the worst racist abuse and race-baiting of each other. Disgusting.

LRR ran into all of the same problems that the Alt Left is running into except more so. The Race Realist Alt Left and the Left Wing of the Alt Right (sort of the same thing) are both running into the same problems that LRR ran into. A good part of the Alt Left is already chucking the race realist part, which was actually one of the founding tenets of the Alt Left, but whatever. If people want to make some Alt Left minus the race realist part, I could care less.

There’s nothing to be gained for the Left in talking about race realism anyway. There’s nothing to be done about it, and all talking about it does is create more rightwingers and turn more liberals rightwing. What’s the point? Why feed the enemy and starve ourselves? Are we masochists? Are we bent on losing as part of some “beautiful loser” Romanticism?

I can see why a lot of the Alt Left wants to chuck the race realist part. It stands to tar our movement, which is already going to be called racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, etc., with the racist moniker in a bad way by painting a target right on our heads and calling it “Racist – Come Hit Me Please.”

At some point, I said that LRR had flopped, and I folded it up, only to turn it much more expansively into the Alt Left later on. The Alt Left has a Helluva lot more potential than LRR did, and let’s hope it grows!

What was LRR all about? The best definitions of it so far is from Hunter Wallace, the fine writer of Occidental Dissent:

A dash of race realism, positive White racial identity, the Leftist view of American history, anti-racism, and a base of liberalism.

Well, that is exactly what it was. And that is probably not a bad definition of my version of the Alt Left too. I could not write a more perfect summation.

More Wallace, summing up the problems inherent in the movement and predicting, accurately, that the movement would go nowhere, which is exactly where it went:

Robert Lindsay is still trying to bake his political cake out of incompatible ingredients: a dash of race realism, positive white racial identity, the leftist view of American history, anti-racism, and a base of liberalism. Needless to say, this unusual combination is almost never found on sale. His brand of race realism rules out about “95% of the pro-White crowd.” It’s probably more than that, really.

Which is odd. Lindsay has attracted many racialist readers (myself included) with his incisive observations. His blog entries have been featured on Amren. He is very fascinated with the pro-White scene and writes about it quite regularly. We agree on many points and matters of fact but tend to draw different conclusions. I don’t sense any duplicity in his writings that wafts off the likes of Lawrence Auster (Jew) or Ian Jobling.

In this post, Lindsay again talks about his anecdotal experience with the liberal stratum of White Californians and reiterates his often-stated view that White Nationalism is simply impossible in America. I don’t believe his sweeping conclusions are warranted by the sample size he is using.

Here in the South, I find most people around my age to be either “casual racists” or otherwise receptive to racialism. These people have never heard of White Nationalism. They tend to be uninterested in politics. Most are thinly Protestant Christians (rarely attend church). None are haunted by any sense of guilt over the Holocaust, Jim Crow, slavery, extermination of the Indians, oppression of women, etc. Most hold at least negative views about Negroes, illegal immigration, and affirmative action.

There is no organization on the ground trying to recruit them to White Nationalism. Instead, the movement is bottled up in cyberspace. Perhaps it will remain there indefinitely. Maybe that will change.

I would wager that White Nationalism has a better chance of breaking out into the mainstream (in the South) than Lindsay’s version of race realism. These days liberalism and racialism are mutually exclusive. Racialists don’t have much use for the Left and tend to jettison its neurotic obsessions with racism, feminism, homophobia, political correctness, all its talk about “freedom” and “equality,” and so on. Liberals don’t have any use for White racial consciousness (except in the negative sense), immigration restriction, opposition to affirmative action and multiculturalism, or any of ideas that animate White Nationalists.

After 1965, there is no longer any middle ground between the two. Whether it be neocon race realism (Jobling) or Liberal Race Realism (Lindsay), I don’t see much of an audience for a third way.

And here:

Robert Lindsay, the most interesting liberal in cyberspace, has done two interviews with Voice of Reason. He used to be a regular commentator on OD in 2009.

Lindsay is notable for his attempt to integrate communism, anti-racism, race realism, and White Advocacy. He is a critic of Zionist Jews and White Nationalism. His rhetorical scatter shot hits targets on both the Right and Left.

LRR remains in part of the Alt Left – for the most part in the Left Wing of the Alt Left. I was thinking that Rabbit’s movement was sort of the stepchild of LRR. In fact, Rabbit is LRR with some modifications, but he’s taking it a lot further than I did. Indeed, Rabbit has said that he read my site for many years while I was writing pre-Alt Left stuff, and he links back to a report of an early interview with me that was discussed on Occidental Dissent.

But people might want to read about LRR to see a movement that laid the groundwork for the Alt Left and was in fact the Alt Left in its initial limited manifestation. So LRR is interesting for historical reasons if for no other.

Liberal Race Realism Starting to Grow

New Liberal Race Realist Blog

Liberal Race Realism: The Facts and the Project

Liberal Race Realism Trashed on Craigslist

Liberal Race Realism: Clearing Up a Few Things

Liberal Race Realism: Where We Are Coming From

Excellent New Piece on Liberal Race Realism

Liberal Race Realism – A Brief Definition

In Defense of Liberal Race Realism

Liberal Race Realism: Concepts and Conundrums

What Liberal Race Realism Is and What It Is Not

29 Comments

Filed under Anti-Racism, Conservatism, Left, Liberalism, Political Science, Race Realism, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Vanity, White Nationalism

Some Basic Guaranteed Rights in the US: Health Care, Food and a Phone

If course health care is a right. That goes without saying. And it’s not true that health care is always horrible in 3rd World places that now offer Health Care Tourism. Cuba has been offering that lately. You can go to Cuba, and for an affordable price, they will do about anything you want, and it will be excellent medicine. Their medicine is top notch in terms of how well trained they are, etc. The rightwingers say you get what you pay for in health care. But this is not true either. Health care in Canada and Europe is cheap to free, and the quality is top notch. They even live longer than we do.

People absolutely have a right to food. This is obvious. We already do this to some extent anyway. There is a lot of free food handed out, and a lot of it is handed out by the government.

I think a phone is a right, a basic human right. Everyone has a right to a phone. We already do this. Phones are free to the poor.

How about some more? Is Internet access a human right? I suppose it isn’t. I’m not sure if everyone deserves an Internet, probably not. I do not have a problem with people not having it due to not affording it. Everyone has it on their cell phones anyway.

However the Net is artificially expensive, and the service is unnaturally horrible because there is little or no competition in the market. I would like to see the cable and DSL markets opened up to capitalist competition.

The only thing worse than capitalism is monopoly capitalism. It’s odd that 100% of rightwingers support monopoly capitalism despite the fact that it is not really capitalist at all, as there is no competition.

I will say that the competition factor is the one really great thing about capitalism. You get a lot of players in any industry, and they will compete to see who treats customers better, who stocks more stuff they want, who is nicer, or who has better customer service. They will also compete on price and even on quality. If you get a hell of a lot of competition, they will even compete on workers’ wages and benefits! I love it! Competition is great, but there’s nothing a capitalist hates more than competition. They all wish to be monopolists.

 

26 Comments

Filed under Canada, Capitalism, Caribbean, Conservatism, Cuba, Economics, Europe, Government, Health, Labor, Latin America, North America, Nutrition, Political Science, Regional, USA

One of the Worst Accusations So Far Is Leveled at Drumpf

Here.

Multiple sources too. Multiple people who attended these parties said that Trump regularly had sex with 14-17 year old girls (jailbaits or JB’s) there. It’s not common to have witnesses in a statutory rape case. More like he said, she said.

What I love about this is that these rightwing morons have been some of the worst at abusing the pedophile label for men having sex with JB’s.

Of course it isn’t pedophilia. It’s perfectly normal behavior for a human male. It’s not pathological in the slightest, unlike true pedophilia. Human males have been doing this since the beginning of our race, and no one cared up until now.

However, society hates it and has made it illegal, and honestly seeing how easy it is for these rich men to manipulate these JB’s, I would not mind seeing these girls protected in some way myself. A JB is simply going to be overwhelmed by some rich guy throwing money and a plate of cocaine in her face. It’s a classic case of an adult man abusing his power differential over a JB.

There is a clause making such manipulation illegal in most European states that have lowered the age of consent. None of these countries are having serious problems with men in droves screwing JB’s.

JB’s mostly screw teenage boys and very young men. JB’s screwing older men is a lot less common. The fact that everyone thinks this behavior is as common as weeds is the result of a moral panic about this behavior.

So now all these rightwing morons who have been self-righteously throwing the book at guys screwing JB’s and tarring them with the pedophile label are going to have to look in the mirror at their Fuhrer Drumpf being a what they call a pedophile. I wonder how they will rationalize this? I am hoping they might develop a saner definition of adult-JB sex, but I have not gotten my hopes up.

Spin away, Trumpers, spin away!

26 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Girls, Heterosexuality, Jailbait, Law, Mass Hysterias, Pedophile Mass Hysteria, Political Science, Politics, Republicans, Sex, US Politics

The “Obamacare Raised Insurance Premiums by Double Digits” Lie

This is the news item that is causing the rightwingers to go nuts all over the country. The headline is, Obama Administration Confirms Double Digit Premium Hikes. Those hikes are in premiums for health insurance, if you were wondering. The rightwingers are running with this, saying, “Look! Obamacare made insurance rates double in the US!”
Problem like almost everything rightwingers say, that’s a lie. Obamacare didn’t do any of that. Can’t these rightwingers understand that somehow? Obamacare is nothing but Insurance Reform. That’s all it is. The whole health care sector of the economy is in the private sector. The US has private medicine. Yes, the government pays for some medical care, but only Medicare and Medicaid, and that’s it. Everybody else has to go buy private insurance on the private market. Obamacare is not “a government takeover of health care” because it leaves the whole market in private hands. We have a private, capitalist medical care system.

Now the insurance companies sat down and wrote that Obamacare law with Obama. I really don’t know who is yelling about this law because it sure isn’t the insurance companies. Obamacare meant that the insurance companies got millions of new customers. That’s right, millions. Like maybe 20 million. So it’s a windfall for the insurance companies. Now, no cost controls were put on Obamacare because 100% of the Republicans and rightwing Democrats were opposed to them. So Obama caved on cost controls, and none were put in. The rates are going up in part because the government has not yet imposed price controls on this capitalist industry.

The companies that raised those rates are all capitalist companies! They are private, capitalist companies who decided to raise their rates outrageously for no apparent reason except that they are capitalists out to ream the customer. The government didn’t raise those rates. Obamacare did not raise those raise those rates either because Obamacare says not one single word about rates. So if you have a problem with the rates going up so much, take it up with the capitalist insurance companies who raised those rates in the first place. Why are rightwingers attacking the government for capitalist companies that decided to raise their rates. How is that the government’s fault?

9 Comments

Filed under Capitalism, Conservatism, Democrats, Economics, Government, Health, Law, Obama, Political Science, Politics, Republicans, US Politics

New Comments Rule: No Anti-Communist Fanatics

I don’t allow anti-Communist rightwing fanatics on this board. If you attack Communism, you have to do so from somewhere on the Left of Center, in other words, you have to at the very least support social liberalism like we have in the Democratic Party in the US or the Labor Party in Canada. You can’t attack Communism from a rightwing position.

Now granted there were a lot of lousy things about Communism. You’re free to discuss that, preferably in some sort of a balanced manner.

In fact, I don’t think I will allow anti-Communist fanatics from anywhere on the spectrum. I have know liberal Democrats and social democrats in Europe who were anti-Communist fanatics. So no anti-Communist fanatics period. You commenters know what an anti-Communist fanatic is, and you know what sort of talk constitutes one, so I will just leave it at that.

And I won’t allow people to post endless lies about Communism. Anticommunist fanatics almost always lie like crazy about Communism. Communism has all sorts of problems, so you would think they would have enough ammo even just using the facts, but no, they still have to lie like crazy like all fanatics. Also, anti-Communist fanatics will never admit to one good thing  about Communism. And of course the were some good things about it. That is because they are fanatics.

Almost all of them also hate socialism or social democracy or anything that smells like that. Most of them even hate social liberalism and the Democratic Party.

3 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Democrats, Economics, Left, Liberalism, Marxism, Meta, Political Science, Politics, Socialism, US Politics

New Interview with Me Up: Robert Stark Interviews Alt Left Blogger Ryan Englund

I am actually one of the interviewers on the show along with Rabbit, von Goldstein and Stark. All in all, this was a truly fantastic show ,and I have a great deal of respect for all three of these men.

Rabbit has always been very nice and respectful towards me, and I respect him for that. I also think he is a fine writer with some good ideas.

Alex von Goldstein was also on. Although he is Jewish, he is probably the most Alt Right of all of us. He also is quite smart, and I gained new respect for him on this show.

Ryan Englund is a brilliant new member of the Alt Left who has rapidly risen to become one of its stars. I honestly cannot believe how smart and learned he is. Of all four of us on the show, he may well have been the smartest and most educated person there. He’s a really nice guy, he’s very easy to get along with, he’s sane, rational, stable and calm, and he’s also a very smart political strategist (I’m not the most diplomatic person out there, so I’m probably not really great at politics). At the moment, I would say that Ryan is one of the leaders of the movement. Although I founded it and Rabbit was the next early adopter, nearly Rabbit nor I put in nearly the work on it that Ryan does.

Robert Stark Interviews Alt Left Blogger Ryan Englund

Robert Stark, Alex von Goldstein, Rabbit, and Alt Left founder Robert Lindsay talk to Ryan Englund. Ryan is from Alberta, Canada, and blogs at Samizdat Chronicles.

Topics include:

Ryan’s political journey and his early experiences with censorship from both the Right and Left.
The political situation in Canada.
How Ryan’s interest has always been in labor and economic issues rather than Identity Politics.
Ryan discovered the Alt Left through Rabbit’s Alt Left Manifesto and Robert Lindsay‘s blog.
Ryan’s manifesto The Alternative Left – What It Is.
Subtypes on the Alternative Left.
The Left Wing of the Alt Right, who are most open to race realism and opposed to mass immigration but are also inclined towards some kind of economic socialism or social democracy.
The Red Enlightenment, which includes Transhumanism, Fututirsm, and an outlook based on science and reason.
The brocialistsRyan’s article on on Warren Farrell‘s book The Myth of Male Power and how it relates to Marxist theory.
The Gamergate Left including The Amazing Atheist and Sargon of Akkad.
The new Alt Left entryists who are trying to impose SJW Political Correctness on the movement and purge some of the original members.
Life of Brian – The People’s Front of Judea.
The Regressive Left and how SJW’s are the new fascists.
The effects of mass immigration on workers and how the labor movement was historically for immigration restriction.
How corporations have no loyalty to their nations.
Ryan points out a quote from the Communist Manifesto.

9 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Cultural Marxists, Economics, Fascism, Gender Studies, Immigration, Labor, Left, Marxism, Masculinism, Political Science, Politics, Race Realism, Socialism, Vanity

Blink 182, “Adam’s Song,” Plus Parody

Boy, that is some damn cool music. I never heard any of their songs before, and I had no idea if they were any good or not. I think this came out in ~1998, so good music was being made up until 20 years ago at least. But the 90’s were not a lost musical decade. I happen to like a lot of late 80’s-90’s bands. Grunge was great, and Nirvana were brilliant. This Blink 182 seems to be either a Nirvana ripoff or they are heavily influenced by the band, depending on whether you want to be kind or not. Even if they are Nirvana ripoffs though, they sure do a damn good job of it.

This song is controversial, as it is in part about suicide. The inspiration was a newspaper article about 17 year old boy who committed suicide that the songwriter read. The suicidal theme inspired at least one suicide by a 17 year old boy. He put this single on endless repeat and then killed himself. He went to Columbine high school and was a survivor of the massacre, but he lost a good friend to the shooters. The thing about homicide is that there are often quite a few more victims of this crime than just the dead victims. The loved ones of the victims are often victims themselves and commonly suffer for years or even decades after the homicide.

Blink 1488, “Saddam’s Song”

Here is a brilliant Alt Right parody of the song. This is off an album of songs by this “band,” which is really just one guy taking song tracks, pulling out the vocals and then putting his own parody vocals in. It’s legal to use parts of songs for parody purposes. The name of the outfit is Right Wing Death Squad, and Blink 1488 is one of his side projects. He does a good job on the videos too.

I never knew Nazis could be so entertaining. Such fun-loving fellows. Oh you crazy Nazis! Playing practical jokes again! Oh you big sillies!

17 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Crime, Fascism, Humor, Morbid, Music, Nazism, Political Science, Rock

Equality and Inequality under Capitalism, Socialism and Communism

Hizzle writes:

Rob,

Two honest questions:

Are there different manifestations of capitalism just as there are of communism? For instance, the kind of “Capitalism for the rich, socialism for the poor” that has afflicted us for a long time along with crony capitalism (people in Gottfried’s managerial state helping each other out with no-bid contracts and quid pro quo) is pretty sick and poisonous.

But what about my local hardware store owner whose perception of capitalism is that he works hard for his middle-class lifestyle so he should live better than someone who doesn’t work hard? Why in any moral, sane system, would all people be rewarded equally when they don’t work equally hard? I understand plenty of wealth is inherited, and the reality of capitalism doesn’t fit the model, but there’s always a gulf between model and instantiation, isn’t there, even in communism?

Other question: I think humans are generally selfish or at least somewhat obviously motivated by their own interests, so what do you think would happen tomorrow if someone poured blandishments on you, and you woke up as a billionaire on your own island with your own mansion and jet, titty-fucking the supermodel of your choice, while two concubines fed you grapes? Would you rail against capitalism? The question isn’t rhetorical because I believe some leftists (like Lukacs) came from bourgeois to upper class backgrounds.

Thanks in advance.

Sure, there are all sorts of different capitalist models.

One I like very much is called Fordism, named after Henry Ford who is often called far rightwing and racist, but he really wasn’t. He wasn’t even much of an antisemite really. The Jews acted pretty bad here back then and he was appalled by their behavior. He said they were out for themselves and not for everyone. At the end of the supposedly antisemitic The International Jew, in which he forcefully condemns pogroms, Ford writes, “Come, Jews! I call on you to come join us to build a better America!” He wanted Jews to be Americans first and Jews second but Jews don’t tend to think like that.

Anyway Ford was hardly a reactionary. At the time, cars were quite expensive and out of the reach of most people. I would argue that they still are. He looked out at his auto plant and he thought, “Wouldn’t it be nice if the average worker could afford to buy one of my nice cars here?” So Ford said, “You know what? I am going to pay my workers high enough wages so they can afford to buy my cars.”

So that is Fordism. Pay workers good wages so they can afford to buy the stuff you make or sell. There was a strong Fordist element to our society for many years, but that went out maybe in the 1970’s and now there is a vicious capitalism that thinks only of profits and never asks itself if people can still afford to buy their stuff. It’s all about paying your worker as little as possible to maximize profits. Hell a lot of companies outsource all their manufacturing so they don’t pay US workers one nickel to buy any of their nice products that they import back here from their plant. I guess paying the workers to buy your overseas built stuff is someone else’s job.

There are many other varieties that I need not go into here. Anyway almost all if not all countries are a mixture of capitalism and socialism in some form or another. The “capitalist” countries of the world are usually not that capitalist, but one can argue that maybe they have less socialism than other places. The socialist or Communist countries are just places that have a lot more socialism mixed in with their capitalism.

So it’s a bit retarded to talk about pure capitalism and pure socialism or Communism but everyone does it really because people are not well educated and also there is a tendency to think of things in their most stripped down, easiest to understand form, which helps neural efficiency but also leads to many concepts being poorly or falsely understood. Humans don’t like to think much. They want to think as little as possible and most do a great job of it. I think maybe your brain wants shortcuts too. Why not? Most other things do.

Rich Communists are rare indeed. Carlos the famous terrorist had a millionaire father who was a Communist, but that is an exception. The rich are almost always conservative, and rich liberals are often not all that rich. The rich generally want to keep as much of their money as possible no matter how they obtained, which is normal. The thing is, let’s face facts, wealthy socialists are working against their own economic interests. We rail against the class-cucked poor and working class who do the same thing, but it’s a bit more noble for a rich man do it as it’s more rational for a rich man to want to share with poorer people than it is for poor or working people to advocate giving lots of their money to the rich. The former seems like a saint; the latter seems like a moron.

I’ve long been in favor of small businesses. They cause very little damage to society. Cuba is full of small businesses now. However, your hardware store owner is deluded because he will claim that he works harder than some field worker or ditchdigger, but he really doesn’t. In fact, those outdoor workers probably work quite a bit harder than he does.

There’s a lot of silly self-justification going on with people who have managed to make a fair amount of money. Somehow they deserve every nickel of it because they did such and such noble thing (work, study, whatever) and others didn’t. And capitalist fanboys often say that the rich work harder than poor workers. Bull. I guess they figured out how stupid that was so the latest one is that the rich “worked harder and worked smarter” than others. There’s no answer to that because no one even knows what working smarter even means.

I have never believed that everyone should be equal. Why should a ditchdigger be paid the same as a surgeon? It’s crazy. Why would anyone be a surgeon. Also the surgeon is obviously contributing more to society and he studied for much longer to be a surgeon. Should he not be monetarily awarded for that.

The problem in capitalism is not inequality, which is fine by me, but instead it is the degree of it. The inequality under capitalism is so vast that it is preposterous. Doesn’t Bill Gates have as much money as 40% of the planet? If aliens landed tomorrow and you told them that one guy owns as much wealth as almost half the 8 billion population, they would shake their heads, say they’re insane morons here, and there’s obviously no sign of intelligent life, so we’re taking off.

Only in this crazy planet could there be hundreds of millions of humans who actually nod their heads like that’s normal and even stand up and cheer for it. It’s absurd the way humans think here on Earth. I doubt if it is even normal either. Earthly humans are quite idiotic. Maybe it is all down to selfishness. Humans are incredibly selfish. It’s adaptive in a sense. If you don’t put your own interests first most of the time, you will soon be dead – but it is also one of the worst traits of this supposedly highly intelligent species.

How about a pay scale? Even in Communism, pay the surgeon say eight times more than the ditchdigger. Fair? Communist societies all had pay scales. In Cuba right now the average monthly wage is ~$25. But no problem as most everything is cheap or free. For instance your rent on that salary would be $1.50/month (!) and a bowl of ice cream costs 2 cents (!). However, IT workers are being paid $2,000/month in Cuba for some reason. No idea why. Maybe to encourage people to work in the field. So you see there is fair amount of inequality in Cuba. It’s just that there people are so much more equal and less unequal there than in most places.

Communist societies need not be so poor. Belarus has an economy that is 80% Soviet style, maybe upgraded for the times. Belarus and Ukraine always had by far the highest incomes in the USSR, and it seems those are two places where Communism sort of worked. Somehow those two places figured out how to make it work. On the other hand, much of the manufacturing in the USSR was located in those two countries. The average income in what is basically Communist Belarus is $16,000/year. Almost every family has a computer and a car. Does that sound like privation to you? Communism need not lead to privation.

And Swedish society is not as equal as you think. The Swedish rich have an unbelievable amount of money. Some are among the richest people in the world. The thing about Sweden is that just about everyone is afforded a decent living. There are few very rich in Sweden, but there are also few very poor. So most everyone is somewhat more towards the middle. And Belarus and Finland have wiped out homelessness. There are zero homeless people in either country.

12 Comments

Filed under Belarus, Capitalism, Caribbean, Conservatism, Cuba, Economics, Europe, Finland, History, Labor, Latin America, Left, Liberalism, Marxism, Modern, Political Science, Regional, Social Problems, Socialism, Sociology, Sweden, Ukraine, US, USSR

“I Am a Cuck”

Great Alt Right song, set to the tune of Paul Simon’s great, “I Am a Rock.”

52 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Humor, Music, Political Science

The Alt Left, Leftypol and Third Positionism

Nebulous Maximus: I’ve noticed the Alt-Left group on Facefuck seems like it’s settled into being a /leftypol/ kind of crowd…mostly Socialists, Social Democrats and even Anarcho-Communists who happen to have a disdain for SJW’s and IdPol bullshit. But few people seem to want to touch HBD issues at all. I dunno, to me HBD seems like an effective normie-repellent. The Alt Left becomes a lot lest Alt in groups that are unwilling to at least entertain HBD issues.

As you may be aware, I started a movement called Liberal Race Realism a long time ago, maybe seven years ago. It was notable mostly for being a complete failure. It was a disaster. Basically nobody signed onto it. The few people who called themselves Liberal Race Realists assembled in the Comments Section and hurled racist rhetoric at each other forever. The whole idea of Liberal Race Realism was that antiracism was supposed to be a component. Well, antiracism and HBD go mix like oil and water – they don’t mix at all. Liberal Race Realism collapsed under the crushing weight of its own contradictions.

 

Nebulous Maximus: So the question is, is /leftpol/ culture even Alt Left or is it just a Cultural Libertarian -meets- Social Democratic movement?

Some say that leftypol is a type of Alt Left, but their only known position on the Alt Left is that we can go to Hell, so I am thinking that whatever they are, they are not us.

Just for the record, leftypol has linked to my website and Rabbit’s in the early days when we were the only ones. They absolutely hated both of us and called us fascists and the usual crap. I think maybe they called us National Bolsheviks or Third Positionists, whom they hate.

Third Positionists also linked here and were a lot more positive, but some of them really hated the race stuff because as 3P’s, they were only into nationalism, and they figure a nationalist of any X nation can be of any Y race. In other words, race is irrelevant to nationalism. They added a well known photo of a Black man who lives in Brittany and dresses in traditional Breton garb that looks rather unusual because you never see people dressed like that. Closest thing might be Scottish Celtic dress such as kilts and knee-high socks. The implication being there is no such thing as a racial Breton if a Black man can be a Breton.

They were more positive about Rabbit’s site and they described me as somewhere in between leftypol and 3P but closer to 3P at times. As a leftwing nationalist, that would probably be correct. Leftypol rejects me heatedly and says I am not one of them so I guess I am out with those guys, and I don’t really identify with 3P which sounds fash to me. I’m a nationalist, but I don’t like fash, and no, that’s not a contradiction. I believe you can be a nationalist without being fash, and I assume that is what a leftwing nationalist is.

Nebulous Maximus: I do understand the existential threat that a friendly stance toward HBD poses; go deep enough down that rabbit hole, and it starts unraveling the massive rat’s nest of fallacies the past century or so of the Left’s egalitarianism orthodoxy completely depends on.

It’s fine with me to unravel these fallacies, but I think they are going to stick around a long time anyway. People just don’t want to believe HBD. They simply cannot handle  it. As long as they cannot handle it, they will keep throwing up the fallacies forever.

Nebulous Maximus: And then of course there’s the obvious, as Robert has pointed out so many times, HBD attracts the deplorables crowd like maggots on dog shit. But…in the end, the truth is the truth, as ugly as it is. It’s a very rare breed that can handle inconvenient truths in a responsible manner.

It’s hard to find an HBD’er who is not some sort of deplorable. I hope I’m one of those rare breeds. Tulio is a great example of a Black HBD’er who has not gone nuts.

Finding Left HBD’ers is quite uncommon. I don’t like the liberal HBD bloggers like Jayman because for starters, they are not very liberal. When leftwingers do go HBD, they typically become a lot less leftwing over time. There is something about HBD that seems to destroy any progressive thinking. It’s like pouring anti-progressive corrosive into your brain. It’s as if the human brain can be either HBD or progressive, but it can’t be both.

Nearly every HBD’er who comes here is a rightwinger – usually a Libertarian, loves capitalism, and embraces Social Darwinism as a religion. I might add that they are a particularly vicious type of rightwinger, as many HBD’ers’ ideas for how to deal with “inferior” races including phasing them out, withholding food and medicine from them until they all die, throwing them out of the country, or some sort of segregation. They seem to think that mercy is some suicidal form of weakness and they say just this many times. Even most conservatives aren’t that ugly. HBD’ers are nastier than even 90% of conservatives. Vicious little shits, most of them.

Also almost all HBD’ers with the notable exception of Race Realist here are hard hereditarians. They always say that they believe that both environment and genes play a role in phenotypic behavioral expression, but then whenever you throw up any environmental evidence for behavioral variation, they jump up and shoot it down. So I think they just say “environment is part of the picture” as rhetorical cover because when you get down to the nitty-gritty, most of them seem to allow no room for environmental effects on behavior at all. Even culture does nothing because culture is entirely mediated by genes.

It’s such crap. I’m an HBD’er, but I am a soft HBD’er. Soft HBD is the only thing that makes sense. Anything more implies that humans lack willpower or even agency. It’s absurd.

 

19 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Fascism, Left, Liberalism, Libertarianism, Nationalism, Political Science, Race Realism, Race/Ethnicity, Racism