Category Archives: White Nationalism

Why Is Alt-Right Called the “Alt” Right? Is There an “Alt-Left”?

Question asked on Quora. Here are some of the answers:

The Alt-Right is properly the Alternative Right. It refers to a loose collection of dissident groups and intellectuals who have either been kicked out of, or have little interest in, the mainstream right as represented by the Republican Party, National Review, and Fox News.

Is there an Alt-Left? Yes. There is a Race-Realist Left centered around AltLeft.com.

This is probably the best answer of them all. And he does call out Rabbit’s site, which is very nice.

The Alt Right is an extremely loose movement, made up of different strands of people connected to white supremacy. One body of adherents is the ostensibly “intellectual” racists who create many of the doctrines and principles of the white supremacist movement. They seek to attract young educated whites to the movement by highlighting the achievements and alleged intellectual and cultural superiority of whites.

They run a number of small white supremacist enterprises that include think tanks, online publications and publishing houses. These include Radix and Washington Summit Publishers, both run by Richard Spencer; Counter Currents Publishing, run by Greg Johnson; American Renaissance, run by Jared Taylor; and The Right Stuff, a political and social blog with a number of contributors.

Another strand of the Alt Right consists of younger racists savvy with social media and Internet communications. In recent months, a number of these Alt Righters have promoted Donald Trump’s* presidential bid, seeing the populist candidate as someone tougher than so-called “cuckservatives,” thanks to his controversial stands on issues ranging from immigration to Muslims in America.

Alt Righters like to try to use terms such as “culture” as substitutes for more lightning rod terms such as “race,” or promote “Western Civilization” as a code word for white culture or identity. They do not make explicit references to white supremacy like the “14 words” a slogan used by Neo-Nazis and other hardcore white supremacists. The “14 words” refers to the expression, “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children.” Even though Alt Righters share the sentiment behind the “14 words” they’re more inclined to talk about preserving European-American identity.

This is an excellent answer, although he does not mention the Alt Left. Is it not true though that there are some nonracist parts of the Alt Right such as the HBDsphere and the Manosphere?

Hillary Clinton started calling everyone who opposed her alt-right and now the fake news story about some fake alt right news story is the ammo the censors need/want to censor sites like Breitbart, InfoWars with some legit fake sites sprinkled in. Welcome to censorship part 2 in America. One person’s fake news (insert something like man made global warming or how awesome Trump is here) is another’s truth (insert something like man made global warming or how awesome Trump is here as well.) People should be able to read whatever they want and decode if it’s real or fake or propaganda or not. Don’t need our government becoming like China in this regard.

Edit: There is a real Alt Left & Right.

Alt Left and Alt Right agree on many things like Bernie Sanders and Donald Trumps platform of what’s wrong with America they differ in how you want it fixed.

The first paragraph is completely idiotic, along with the pointless and insane use of the disgusting term “fake news.” Butt the next two paragraphs are at least somewhat correct, although the number of Alt-Rightists who supported Sanders must be very small.

It is an alternative to traditional rightwing conservatives. They are less religious and more socially conservative. They care far less about taxes and are fighting the Regressive Left.

This is correct, although I am really getting sick and tired of the Regressive Left phrase. It’s time to put this crap phrase in the trash can where it belongs. At one time it meant something, but now it’s turning into poison, and idiotic poison at that. The main problem with this phrase is that it is absolutely senseless. I do not see the point in parroting slogans that are completely senseless and irrational right on their face.

There currently is no Alt Left. Although many leftists have fled the Regressive Left into the Alt Right.

The first sentence is not true. And there is that horrible Regressive Left phrase again. I am wondering how many Leftists or even liberals did indeed flee the Regressive Left for the Alt Right. Rabbit seems like one. Were there others?

Alt-Right is a self-selected title which their members started using to distance themselves from the Republican Party

This is straight up correct.

83 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Democrats, Journalism, Left, Liberalism, Political Science, Politics, Race Realism, Racism, Republicans, US Politics, White Nationalism, White Racism

Israelis Have Managed to Drive Hundreds of Millions of Their Nearest Neighbors to Near Homicidal Hatred of Them

Barack Thatcher: Robert, I am not criticizing the Palestinians.

I’m just saying logically, assuming the Jews aren’t going anywhere could protect them by taking them out of the range of Israeli missiles; taking them into the Gulf nations or wherever.

The problem is that it’s about hatred of the Jews (whether right or wrong), not a pragmatic defense of the Jews.

The Jews aren’t going anywhere.

I was just saying why not actually look for a pragmatic solution for this instead of idealistically holding out and waiting to right the wrongs of 40 years ago?

It was 70 years ago.

Israel does not generally shoot missiles or even drop bombs on Palestinian areas in the Gaza and West Bank. Sometimes they bomb some Hamas training camp in response to a rocket attack. The rocket attacks these days are never even done by Hamas. They are done by more radical groups, and Hamas does not approve of shooting rockets at Israel. But Israel says its Hamas’ fault whenever some nignog shoots a rocket!

When the battles in Syria carry over into the Golan via stray bullets, mortars or whatever, the Israelis will shell or bomb the Syrian Army in response! Israel says it is the Syrian government’s fault whenever the shooting war accidentally carries over to Gaza. Syria just has to sit there and let Israel shoot missiles and drop bombs on it all the time because if they shoot one bullet in response, Israel says they will level Syria. They bomb Lebanon all the time too, and they constantly fly jets over Lebanon to harass the Lebanese. Lebanon cannot do anything about it because if they shoot one bullet, Israel says they will turn Lebanon into Carthage. Lebanese hate Israel so much that to this day, Israel and Lebanon are still officially at war. No peace treaty or armistice was ever signed and of course Lebanon has no relations with Israel at all.

The Israelis are scum. I have nothing but the most sheer utmost hate for them. I wish they would just disappear of the planet. Israel is one of the most evil nations on Earth. I cheer whenever some Arab kills some of them. They deserve it.

They’re bullies. They’re not victims at all. They are the biggest bullies in the whole planet, and they scream all the time that they are the biggest victims on the planet. Bullies always do this. Bullies always say they are victims and they blame the person they are bullying, claiming that the victim attacked the bully first when that never happens. The bully attacks the victim, and then when the victim fights back, the bully screams, “You are an evil aggressor maniac attacking poor peaceful me for no reason.”

And then they retaliate against the victim even more because it drives bullies insane with hate whenever their victims start fighting back. I am not sure why that is, but maybe they see it as a “slave rebellion” of some sort.  Look at how harsh slave rebellions (rebellions of the victims) were put down by slaveholders (the bullies). Israel follows the exact same bully-victim paradigm that plays out in the day to day world among individuals.

Now I could pretty much care less about Jews in the Diaspora because to me they’re not the problem. Those scumbags squatting in Palestine are the problem. Sure some Diaspora Jews strongly support Israel, but most secular American Jews can hardly care less about the place. I have known many Jews and I had a Jewish girlfriend for many years. She and a number of other Jews acted like Israel was a huge headache that they wished would go away. They also said that Israel was full of Orthodox Jews, and you have no idea how many hate secular Jews have for those Ultra-Orthodox ones. They hate them! I do not know if the feeling is mutual. Most people are not aware of this intra-Jewish strife.

So the Jews who are the issue are the ones over in Palestine. These ones here are not squatting in Palestine, so I have no issues with them. I also do not really care about many of the criticisms of Diaspora Jews laid out by anti-Semites. The main arguments of the antisemites seem to rightwing or even reactionary in nature. A lot of antisemitism is coming from White racism or White Supremacism/White Nationalism.

I could care less what Jews think of White Gentiles and I doubt if Jews are the enemies of the Whites. Frankly, I would rather be ruled by the Jewish rich than by the US Gentile rich. See that Trump Administration? That’s what the Gentile rich act like in this country. The Jewish rich are not exactly wonderful people and the New York Times Jews make me ill, but I would much rather be ruled by Mr. Sulzberger than Mr.Trump. For an elite group, rich Jews are markedly leftwing. In fact, rich Jews may be one of the most progressive groups of rich elites on Earth.

The Israelis are the worst bullies on Earth. Everyone in the region absolutely hates them. All the Sunnis factions and all the Shia factions hate them, and some of those Shia factions are barely even Muslims. Hell, even the Druze hate them! The Druze in Syria, the Golan and Lebanon despise Israel.

A lot of Middle Eastern Christians are not wild about Islam, but a lot of them hate Israel too. This idiot Ted Cruz gave a speech to the Christian Arab Association of America. Perhaps he said something about Muslims. Those Christians might not be real wild about Muslims but they do not usually hate them as much as your average Trumpster Republican. I have known Christian Arabs from Palestine, Lebanon, Egypt, Syria, Iraq and Iran. Most of them did not have much to say against Muslims, but they all (except for some Lebanese Maronites) hated Israel in a huge way.

Cruz made some mention of Israel saying something like our great friends in Israel, and the whole place turned into a mob scene. They stood up and booed him for whole minutes, and they nearly chased him off the stage to where he would have had to end the speech prematurely. Cruz had ignorantly thought that since Arab Christians were not wild about Muslims that they must like Jews like most US evangelicals, but he was sorely mistaken.

My local store got taken over by Syrian Christians and they hate Israel. I mean they hate hate hate hate hate hate hate them. They don’t say anything bad about Muslims and in fact they work alongside Yemeni Muslims right now. And those are Christians! If the Christians hate Israel that much, can you imagine how much Muslims must hate them. There are quite a few Commie atheist Arabs, especially Palestinians, Iraqis and Lebanese. I used to know some of them. They probably hate Israel more than anyone!Most of them were Arab nationalists and Arab nationalists hate Israel as much as the Islamists. I used to know an Iranian Assyrian Christian woman. In fact, I dated her for a bit. She basically hated Muslims for good reason. But she hated Israel just as much! She hated Israel. And she didn’t like Jews too much either. She was a bit of an antisemite. I knew a Syrian Christian once who was a wild, raving antisemite. I mean he sounded like a Nazi.

Even non-Arab Muslims hate Israel. I have heard that Turks really despise them and for some reason, I have heard that a lot of Greeks hate Israel too, maybe because there are Greek Orthodox Christians over there. Inside Israel itself, even the Arab Christians do not like Israel. The Greek Orthodox Priest of Jerusalem named Father Hanna used to praise Hamas and cheer for suicide bombings. I knew a Pakistani woman whose hatred of Israel was off the charts and he was an extreme antisemite to boot.

No Iranians like Israel. Even the secular Iranian nationalists who despise Arabs and Islam and claim to be Zoroastrians if they are religious at all have an extreme hatred of Israel. And a lot of them don’t like Jews either – the ones I knew were serious antisemites. I knew an Moroccan Muslim woman, relatively secular, who was always posting stuff about the Palestinians.

I knew an Egyptian Muslim man who told me that there would have to be another war to take out Israel once and for all. During the Arab Spring, at one  point a huge mob attacked the Israeli Embassy in Cairo. The Israelis were spirited out of there soon enough, but the riot went on for most of the day, and at the end, the embassy had been burnt to the ground. And I was told that many of those attacking the embassy were secular Arab Spring anti-Mubarak types, not radical Muslims at all.

Nobody likes those people! They’ve acted like such scumbags since they set up shop there that they are managed to earn the near-homicidal hatred of almost all of the hundreds of millions of neighbors for quite a few miles around.

100 Comments

Filed under Anti-Semitism, Arabs, Christianity, Druze, Europeans, Greeks, Iranians, Islam, Israel, Israel-Palestine Conflict, Jews, Judaism, Lebanon, Liberalism, Middle East, Near Easterners, Palestine, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Religion, Republicans, Shiism, Sunnism, Syria, The Jewish Question, Turks, US Politics, War, White Nationalism

Amren Talks about Me

New article on the Anti-Anti-White Left, a follow-up to a previous article on the same theme, discusses me, Rabbit and some other Lefties and liberals writing along somewhat the same lines that liberalism and the Left has to quit beating up White workers, calling them names and lecturing them about privilege.

From the piece:

2) There is some confusion about the term “alt-left.”

Among racially conscious whites, “alt-left” refers to the handful of race realists who also support leftist policies such as the welfare state and gun control. There are a few websites dedicated to their ideas, such as Robert Lindsay’s blog and AltLeft.com.

Outside of these circles, “alt-left” means something else. Once Hillary Clinton promoted the term “alt-right,” pro-Clinton writers began using “alt-left” to smear other leftist writers—generally pro-Sanders people—who criticized Mrs. Clinton’s derision of Trump supporters or her focus on identity politics. In short, “alt-left” is a Clintonite smear of what I am calling the anti-anti-white left.

The first two paragraphs are correct, but the third is completely wrong. But oh well.

One piece points out that while Trump did not offer laid-off Rust Belt workers much, Hillary offered them absolutely nothing at all other “retraining.” Retraining has been the go-to liberal solution to globalization and horrific trade deals by neoliberal Democrats like the Clintons and Obama for decades now. It didn’t work back then, and it’s not working now. For one thing, it appears that this retraining was never even implemented. For another thing, it is dubious if it will ever be implemented, especially in this climate. More importantly,  saying “We are going to retrain all the workers fired by these horrible trade deals,” is just liberal handwaving and virtue signaling. How bout never throwing them out of their jobs in the first place? How bout that?

Clintonian Democrat: “Hey, we are going to throw all you White people out of your good-paying jobs so the top 10% of the population can get even richer, but don’t worry, we will retrain you to do something else, like, um…I dunno? But don’t worry! We love you! Don’t forget to vote Democrat!”

White worker: “Why are you throwing me out of work to enrich one of my class enemies in the first place though? Whose side are you on anyway? Are you on the side of me or my class enemies? Make up your mind.”

Clintonian Democrat: Bla bla neoliberalism, bla bla free markets, bla bla failed socialism, bla bla socialist failure, bla bla the budget deficit, bla bla trade deals are good for consumers, bla bla the world is changing, bla bla you can’t run away from globalization, bla bla globalization is great and helps build strong bodies 12 different ways, bla bla didn’t you know that.

Bla bla of course you are our friends, bla bla but the rich are our friends too, bla bla these are wealth creator, bla bla these are the people who give you your jobs, bla bla what are you racist or something, bla bla protectionism doesn’t work, bla bla protectionism caused the Great Depression lie, bla bla we have to get hip and get with the program, bla bla we are part of a globalized world now there is no avoiding that.

Bla bla free trade deals are good for the “economy”, bla bla trade deals are good for “economic growth,” bla bla trade deals are good for the stock market, bla bla most people are now invested in the stock market, bla bla mom and pop investors, bla bla most workers are investors now through their 401K’s and pensions, bla bla the stock market is about all of us, bla bla we all get hurt when the stock market goes down,

Bla bla financialization is the future, bla bla FIRE industry is the future, bla bla sell debt and get rich, bla bla destroy companies for no reason and get rich, bla bla fire lots of workers and get rich, bla bla why don’t you go back to school, bla bla anyone can get rich, bla bla Horatio Alger, bla bla the American Way, the business of America is business, bla bla automation is killing your jobs not trade deals.

If you lost your job to an illegal that shows you’re a loser lol, bla bla you are all deplorable White people, bla bla check your privilege, bla bla vote for us we are for women, bla bla vote for us we are for gay people, bla bla vote for us we are for trannies and every other freak,  bla bla vote for us we are for Hispanics, bla bla vote for us we are for illegals, bla bla vote for us we are for immigrants, bla bla vote for us support diversity, bla bla vote for us support Black Lives Matter, bla bla don’t be racist now, bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla.

White worker: Bye, you’re not even talking to me. Trump’s awful, but at least he’s talking to me. Maybe what he’s selling won’t work, but you aren’t selling me a thing. So I’m voting for Trump. I may be a fool, but I’m not an idiot.

93 Comments

Filed under Democrats, Economics, Left, Liberalism, Neoliberalism, Political Science, Politics, Race Realism, Race/Ethnicity, Republicans, Sane Pro-White, US Politics, Useless Western Left, Vanity, White Nationalism, Whites

More Marxists Against the Alt Left

Well, against my Alt Left anyway.

This is from Lost Generation, a reddit purportedly about the economic troubles of the Millennial Generation, but which seems to be populated mostly by Marxists for some odd reason.

All of the usual charges that get leveled against me by the Hard Left types are here: I’m a racist, sexist, fascist, crypto-Nazi Alt Right guy masquerading as being on the Left. What’s ridiculous is that I hate all of these people and have never felt at home at any of their websites. I am usually appalled by their racism, sexism, fascism, Nazism, etc. and I really cannot stand most Alt Right sites for similar reasons.

There is just about no one I hate as much as fascists, and I’ve never found a racist website where I felt at home and was not bothered by their hard racism. I also hate Nazis. And one of the main reasons that I hate the Manosphere so much is  because it is so misogynistic and sexist. In other words, I cannot stand sexist Manosphere sites. They’re awful and it’s their misogyny that I hate so much. I love women, I don’t hate them.

All of the attacks on me and my ideology are italicized.

Here’s the critique:

digdog303: Why isn’t there any alt-left?

Get_Erkt: I saw some dudes using that, but they seem keen to ignore everything we’ve learned in the past 100 years about how patriarchy and white supremacy/ imperialism are more effective impediments to revolution than police repression. Like they’re mad they might have to stop macking on comrades or share the spot light with others, and they think socialism means having a PS4 pro and $4K TV.

SayingStuffOnReddit: Ugh, exactly this.

I found this guy’s WordPress blog the other day, first one I’ve seen that was an “Alt Left” blog. He regularly bans people for very petty things, and it’s always race-related. He’s always hurling racially or religiously charged insults at people who say the slightest thing that makes HIM uncomfortable, and he always points out how someone is “ARAB” or a “JEW” even if there is zero evidence of them being that, it’s like “Hey, I think you look like you’re from X, so I’m going to call you a name associated with that area of the world.”

It was fucking ridiculous. Very little discussion of actual socialist theory and a whole lot of whining about “SJWs” and “feminism” while not really putting forth anything that really distances his views from a typical Alt-Righter.

For a self proclaimed Leftist (he had pictured of Stalin and Lenin, for example) it is pretty disgusting to see this kind of crap being spread as “valid” forms of agitprop for “socialism.”

Dude identified as a “race realist” and basically spews Nazi propaganda 50% less of the time than an actual fascist would.

I mean, I hate being called a brocialist, because I’m not one, but I’ve had people irresponsibly throw this at me when I’ve tried to critique Identity Politics and such in good faith. This guy, however, totally fits the bill and totally showed me why the term exists and is used as an insult to begin with.
They want “liberation,” but just none of that icky stuff that has to do with race, gender, or anything outside of class.

It is truly strange and something I cannot remotely relate to. I can only imagine that his “activist” group (if he even has that) is just a bunch of angry White dudes, which, in spite of me being a White male, I simply can’t get down with.

I live in a predominantly Black area, and this kind of shit would never fly in public, it is the product of upper-middle class White folks playing the role of revolutionary from their gated-in communities in the ‘burbs.

I hate sounding so condescending too, because I know it isn’t helping, but sometimes people really do need to meet you half way, and this guy is one of them; he’d do better to just shut up and read a book than spew more of this incoherent “Alt Left” bullshit.

pikapizza: The double-edged sword of the Internet is that it gives any idiot or socially-marginalized weirdo a voice. Embracing the ‘brocialist’ smear (anyone to the left of Hillary = hates women and likes the KKK) because you found one such idiot or socially- marginalized weirdo is not the way to go.

SayingStuffOnReddit: I don’t embrace it as a smear, I was just saying that I now understand why people might so easily sling it around when people like that guy are basically fascists appropriating left-wing aesthetics and terminology.

pikapizza: People using that epithet aren’t thinking of this guy. The whole ‘class politics = racist and sexist’ meme only got traction because millions of young Americans weren’t doing what they were told and started voting for the evil brocialist Bernie instead of the devout feminist and anti-racist progressive Hillary.

They have in mind the 22 year-old college student who has the disgusting, privileged audacity to think economic justice might be more important than smashing the patriarchy, and insults like this are their way of telling him to fuck off, that left-wing politics are not for him, and to go vote for Trump.

SayingStuffOnReddit: I know what you’re talking about, but I’ve seen it used in many other forms than the one you just mention. I was citing one instance.

And tbf “smashing the patriarchy” and “economic justice” have to go hand in hand. I don’t see them as at odds with one another, that’s all I was saying. Hillary supporters obviously can’t make the connection there, and doubly so for the right wing. People like Robert Lindsay see them as “polar opposites” which really just shows his lack of understanding of what actual feminists (the socialist ones, at least) believe. Instead, he lambastes caricatures of what feminism actually is or just takes pot shots at random individual actors without grappling with any real ideas.

He and his ilk spend more time talking about what a woman decided to wear to a “Slut Walk” than what her views are on “patriarchy,” how she might define it, and why she came to such an event in the first place. In a way, he doesn’t “dismantle” feminist critiques of society; he inevitably proves their legitimacy.

pikapizza: But they clearly don’t go hand in hand. We’ve just witnessed an election where the self-described feminist and standard bearer for progressive Identity Politics in the US was also a multimillionaire, staunch neoliberal and hardline imperialist who openly spoke for the interests of business and the very wealthy. Her campaign overtly used gender politics to dismiss economic justice as a sideshow issue (if not a sneaky cover for the Left’s closet racism and sexism) and smear any criticism from her left as veiled misogyny.

This is the new political reality. Thinking you can ignore it and keep on pandering to identitarianism with ‘oh, that’s not MY kind of feminism!’ or whatever is quite stupid.

SayingStuffOnReddit: Dude whatever i’m not gonna argue with you about the importance of gender and race and its relationship to class.

There’re books that talk about the significance of these, even when people try to insist class is some kind of “be-all” “end-all.”

If your idea of progressivism is “don’t talk about gender or race,” and you essentially equate any discussion of gender or race as “Identitarianism” then you’re just driving away people.

I feel like we’re talking about two different things, and you seem to be insisting that I’m promoting some kind of neoliberal Identity Politics. That’s not the same as taking an intersectional approach where we acknowledge that class is the key unifier of all oppressed identities.

Furthermore, Hillary isn’t nor has she ever been the “standard bearer” for progressive anything.

That is catering to and propagating neoliberal media narratives and ultimately capital interests.

There’s many different angles one can discuss gender and race, which I’m completely fine with so long as they’re rooted in anti-capitalist critiques.

Get_Erkt: Brosocialism existed before Sanders but referred to men who didn’t care about women’s issues, like whether we ought to discipline or expel men who preyed on women from socialist organizations. There were several high profile cases of rape cover-ups in Leftist organizations recently, but marginalizing women and relegating them to “women’s work” was something even the Panthers and Soviets were guilty of.

Patriarchy was the first form of economic class and exploitation, but brosocialists don’t want to hear it. Our organizations aren’t dating services, and comrades are held to a professional, disciplined standard of behavior in our personal interaction, but brosocialists don’t want to hear it.

The people who used Clinton’s gender as a lasso or whip against opponents were cynical opportunists. Clinton is no friend of women or anyone. But the Left has to struggle against internal sexism and racism nonetheless because we are products of a racist, sexist society and understanding the struggle revolving around class is only the first step to liberation. Patriarchy and White supremacy/settlerism/imperialism are manifestations of class across physical human characteristics.

pikapizza: Brocialism has been around for awhile, sure, but it’s never had that sort of narrow definition. It’s always been an ideological pejorative for any left-wing politics critical of or hostile to Identity Politics (you can be a woman and be a brocialist). So it was very much consistent and predictable that it was picked up by the Hillary campaign. The ruling class’ embrace of ‘Leftist’ Identitarian ideology and politics in support of imperialist policy, state repression, curtailing civil freedoms, divide-and-conquer political strategies et al. has been ongoing for many years.

And Clinton’s Identity Politics were only cynical opportunism if you’re still clinging to shitty and delusional assessment of Identity Politics that hasn’t moved past the 1960’s where racial and gender politics are still radical and revolutionary and haven’t been thoroughly integrated into modern bourgeois ideology and the daily functioning of big business and liberal bourgeois democracies.

It’s based on this completely unfounded premise that there is some secret and intrinsic connection between Identity Politics and the Left when the plain reality is that these are basically right-wing, anti-Marxist conceptions that dovetail perfectly with neoliberal politics and ideology. A right-wing multimillionaire shill for Wall Street like Hillary becoming the standard bearer for Identity Politics isn’t an aberration or a ploy, it’s a perfectly logical outcome.

SayingStuffOnReddit: There is an Alt Left, but it’s basically a bunch of “left” wingers in denial of their White Nationalism. They claim to be separate from the Alt Right, but it’s all propaganda that any well read socialist can point out.

An easy one is they have a distaste for “Cultural Marxism” in common with Alt-Righters.

Yet nobody seems to want to admit that “Cultural Marxism” is just a nice dog whistle for actual Nazi propaganda that was used during WWII.

It’s just that back then, it was called “Cultural Bolshevism“.

It’s funny how much this phenomenon has in common with the modern Alt-Right as well. Any symbols representing the authorities of the current prevailing order, if disrespected through art or expression bring shame and derision from the Alt-Right types, yet these are the people who are supposed to be the “revolutionaries” and “rebels” of the current time.

You’d think a bunch of revolutionaries would be more interested in disrespecting and subverting authority than supporting (let alone protecting) it.

60 Comments

Filed under Capitalism, Conservatism, Democrats, Economics, Fascism, Gender Studies, Left, Marxism, Nazism, Neoliberalism, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Revolution, Sane Pro-Woman, Socialism, US Politics, Useless Western Left, White Nationalism, Whites

The “Jews Help Fund the Bolshevik Revolution” Canard

From the comments:

While it’s true that wealthy interests from America and Western Europe helped fund the Russian Revolution, this was not the BOLSHEVIK Revolution. True, Bolsheviks fought in the initial revolution to overthrow the Czar (the February Revolution), but after that the (Pro-Western) Provisional Government was set up (which is what the wealthy interests such as Jacob Schiff wanted), so the Bolsheviks initiated a second revolution (the October Revolution) against the Provisional Government.

Western forces from 21 different nations then invaded Russia to protect the Provisional Government but ultimately failed (to the Bolsheviks’ credit). If the Western elites wanted the Bolsheviks in power, why would they support such an invasion of Russia? Again, they funded the February Revolution to get rid of the Czar and open up Russia’s resources to Western capitalists, but the October (Bolshevik) Revolution was not at all part of the plan.

I always wondered about this odd charge which seemed so nonsensical to me. Why would very rich Jews want to fund a Communist revolution which was going to do away with most of their wealth? It never made any sense. Nevertheless, this has always been a favorite of rightwing antisemites, including Nazi types. This ties into the whole “Jews are Communists” thing which was one of the main reasons that Hitler wanted to kill them in first place. He was fighting a war against “Jewish Communism” remember?

The canard continues long past WW2, when Jews are charged with being behind every Communist movement that arose on Earth, including the Chinese one I suppose. “Jews are Communists”, “Jews push Communism”, “Jews push Leftism”, and “Jews are behind the Western Left.” It goes on and on. According to the Nazi types, this is one of the main reasons why Jews need to be killed – because they were and are behind Leftism in the West which is seen as corrosive.

\This Jewish-sponsored Leftism is purportedly a plot to destroy the White race in various ways, including by subverting the traditional institutions of the West and therefore undermining out moral culture and causing the decline of our civilization. This is what is behind the whole Frankfurt School and Cultural Marxism Theory, which I find a bit silly, though I would like to look  into it a lot deeper. A bunch of Jews screaming “conspiracy theory” and “It’s a lie – an anti-Semitic!” just doesn’t cut it for me as it does for most people. If it’s a big lie, how about proving it?

Now we have the answer to the riddle. The Jews only funded the initial revolution to get rid of the Czar because they hated the Royals so much. And this was not a Communist revolution in any way, shape or form. It was a democratic revolution, and it had some progressive and even socialist elements about it, but this government did not want to seize private property or anything like that. Another one of the reasons behind it of course was the desire of these very rich Jews to open up Russia’s resources to these capitalists so they could make money off of them.

19 Comments

Filed under Anti-Semitism, Capitalism, Conservatism, Conspiracy Theories, Economics, Eurasia, European, Government, History, Jews, Left, Marxism, Modern, Nazism, Political Science, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Revolution, Russia, Sociology, The Jewish Conspiracy To Subject Humankind, The Jewish Question, White Nationalism, Whites

Africans Are Not “Stone Age” People

Now I am not defending the United States. It’s actually inferior to Canada, New Zealand or Australian white settler colonies in many ways.

But this is mostly because a great deal of stone-age people were imported as slaves or Spanish soldiers raped Red Women in the Southwest 5 times a day back in the 1700’s to create a vast Mixed underclass.

Please do not call African Blacks “Stone Age people.” That is how the White Nationalists talk. Africans had had agriculture for 12,000 years when they were imported to the US. Stone Age people don’t have agriculture. I get so tired of listening to White Nationalists call Africans Stone Age people.

Agriculture itself rose in Africa. Africans were probably the first humans to practice agriculture.

There was little if any breeding between Spaniards and Indians in the US Southwest. That was all happening south of the border.

171 Comments

Filed under Africa, African, Agricutlure, Amerindians, Anthropology, Blacks, Cultural, History, North America, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Spaniards, The Americas, USA, West, White Nationalism

Richard Spencer Addressing the National Policy Institute

Jared Taylor’s organization sponsored their annual confab, and I must say this was one of the worst ones yet. Wait, it was the worst one yet. The NPI has now gone full Nazi. I wonder what Mr. Taylor’s wife thinks about that? Jared watered these strange little plants for years no doubt knowing full well what sort of a nasty garden he was cultivating, and now that the crop is ready to harvest, is he surprised at what bloomed? Right what it said on the seed package, right?

The white sheets are coming off these guys in a big way. I recognized a few of the people there. Harlem Venison was there. I know why he went there, but I say he made a big mistake. Sometimes you just walk in the wrong party, you know? In that case, you say, sorry, wrong address. Do you stay for a drink? Maybe you do, and maybe you don’t. But with some accidental parties, you’re glad you wrote the address down once you take a good look a the revelers. Parties are usually good fun, but some folks are so seedy you don’t even want to have a beer with them, you know? And some parties are not all good fun. Some wild parties are downright dangerous, and it’s smarter to just stay home alone. Case in point.

Harlem says he’s not a White nationalist, and I agree with that. So what’s he doing here? Bad choice. He only wants to take down antiracism as a dogma. Which sort of makes sense considering what sort of weeds have sprung up in that once well-tended community garden. But really, in life you have to choose your enemies. Either antiracist dogma is the enemy that needs to be fought, and doing so by making alliance with these jugend is the right thing to do in terms of the enemy of my enemy is my friend, or it’s the other way around. And yeah, that’s a moral question all right. Not such a simple one either.

The antis hate me as much as they ever did, but that’s too bad because much as the feelings are mutual on my end, I would very much prefer to ally with the Cultural Left against this NPI malignancy than the other way around.

You pick your “enemies” in life. And so with your “friends.” Half of your enemies are really frenemies, and it’s even worse than that with your friends. First you brutally sort them into two calculatingly amoral piles. If you have any sense, you do so strategically. Sometimes allying with the bad guys against the worst guys is not only cynical realpolitik and situation ethics but also moral high reason if not moral righteousness of the highest order.

If you sit around waiting for the good guys versus bad guys war, you’ll sit out every fight because there are no good guys in war. And in so doing, you will allow your world to be potentially overrun by the worst Orcs of your nightmares all because the good guys couldn’t pass your petty purity test.

Virginity tests went out a long time ago in the West. In a world where we all sullied, they never made sense anyway. There are crystalline whores singing in the lofty crags and black-eyes virgins grunting in the boiling mud. A hymen’s a piece of flesh, not an honor badge. It’s about as meaningful as a hangnail. There’s a reason prigs are so hated. They demand purity and chastity in in a world where few humans measure up, not that anyone should anyway. Priggism is a con, a lie, a scam, a shield for projecting sinners with weighted hearts.

In real life, you get your hands dirty, you don’t always get to wash up right away, and the stains don’t always wash out. Cloisters are for nuns, and they have earned the privilege of residence. The rest of us don’t have that luxury. We have to wrestle in the mud like everyone else. A man chooses his battles wisely, and almost almost no one wears black or white in war anymore. Every army is a shade of one or the other or both or neither, and that’s when the colors are discernible at all. Roll them unfiltered,  drink it straight, and die with your boots on. Dead is dead, but at least you went down fighting.

Pick your poison and head to the front. Some wars can’t be sat out.

48 Comments

Filed under Anti-Racism, Conservatism, Ethics, Fascism, Nazism, Philosophy, Political Science, Racism, White Nationalism

Why I Call Trump Supporters Fascists

Jaby Gamer: Hmm. I often find your essays insightful. This is not one of those. “Everyone who disagrees with me is Hitler.” I get that you’re upset, but that’s not a way to learn new things.

I never said that. Of course it’s not true that everyone who disagrees with me is Hitler.

I am reporting to you on everyone I know who voted for Trump. That is all I am doing. Now, my sample may very well be biased or selected in some way. I have no idea. I gather most Trump supporters are not overt fascists, but let’s get real. The man ran on an openly fascist platform. So even if Trumpsters were not overtly or self-identifyingly fascist (and most are probably not), nevertheless, these “non-fascists just voted for an out and out fascist. So what is there to say about that?

The people I know who voted for Trump:

They were all rightwingers, 100%. I know one leftwinger who voted Trump, but he calls himself a “leftwing fascist,” and he’s a White nationalist. Ok? I gather that’s as left as they get.

They were all serious racists, except one, but he is an MRA, so he’s sexist as Hell.

Most people I know who supported Trump were either White nationalists or something along those lines. At the very least, they were highly racist White people. Most of them were Alt Right supporters. And yes, most of them were fascists of one sort of another, and quite a few of them seemed way too Nazi-leaning for comfort.

Now look, I have no idea if that is most of his supporters. I gather it’s not. I’m just reporting to you on the people I know who voted for him.

  1. Wingnuts
  2. Racists or sexists.
  3. Mostly fash or one sort or another and quite a few Nazi types.

If any of the rest of you know people who voted Trump, I urge to report in so we can get some variability with these reports.

66 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Fascism, Political Science, Racism, White Nationalism, White Racism

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

“A Guide for Minorities for Exploring Racial Differences,” by Phil

Just a concept I’ve held onto a while ago and figured now would be a good time to use it.

I can speak from experience that accepting racial differences while being a minority (U.S perspective anyway) is something that’s hard to swallow even after sometime coming to terms with the data. Sure, you have your troubles from a White perspective (basically being on the receiving end of Cultural Left Identities agendas), but if you wanted to be more engaged in HBD, you’re going to be at a disadvantage depending on your background, to put it lightly. To put it bluntly, you probably want to keep reading if you want your sanity secured.

#1. Ignorance is bliss as much as denial is delusion. Not by lack of trying in the past though, I’m not going to go through the trouble of convincing in 500 comments. I may respond to several comments at most regarding the more controversial HBD concepts, but if you want to stay comfortable in zero innate differences between races or somehow massaging the differences, then so be it. The more furious ones about it typically don’t stay long nowadays on this blog aside from Jason Y, and he’s White!

#2. Buddy System applies. Aside from some mildly pro-white HBD blogs, you’re best bet for both learning and having a relatively civil club of people to talk about stuff would be here. The owner here has already posted much on the topic of typical HBD blog behavior, and he tries hard to deviate as far as possible before hitting Denialism.

#3. Don’t redo the 4th Grade; remember what an average is. This is without a doubt the number one detail that, when unnoticed, has caused strawmen among non-sequituri in mountains of fallacies in efforts of debunking HBD. Second runner-up is to overplay the environment factor ,and the grand champ of defense mechanisms of course is just to claim racism.

#4. Keep up with the class and study. I can also tell you from experience that not everyone is going to be accurate. For example, a blogger named “Modern heretic 3000” often talks about Blacks having browridges as a low IQ development, but that’s incorrect. Even if you look it up in Erectus Walks Among Us, the measurement show Blacks have lower values of browridge prominence compared to Caucasians. What may commonly appear to be one is just an averagely smaller height in of the forehead. These types of mistakes are going to be common among those who lean towards the higher ends of White Nationalist lunacy. Other milder HBD’ers typically just stick to the basics of HBD and politics. You may come across opportunities to use “scientific racism” to your advantage.

#5. Don’t miss it “all” just for the “warts”. Believe or not, reading about tribes in Africa from actual 19th century books for information of these tribes’ capabilities was far better than reading either typical Afrocentric propaganda or typical Black-bashing. If you’re uncomfortable with what you find, use it as an opportunity to learn both the negatives and positives of your race. However don’t dive into Romanticism as tempted you may be because chances are the stats will wake you up if you don’t.

#6. Self hate is no way to live. While this could be said of any other advice I’ve given, follow this step if you can help it. Chances are there’s a good number of years ahead of you, and you’ll get sick of the routine after a day. I know I did. Also it’s a waste of your potential for to aspiring to better yourself. If you can believe and get worked up over racial flaws that may apply to you, you could have a higher chance of somehow getting around them one way or another.

These 6 steps are really the only major ones that come to mind that will get you some footing in HBD. If anyone has any question or suggestions, feel free to share.

15 Comments

Filed under Anthropology, Blacks, Guest Posts, Left, Race Realism, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, White Nationalism