Category: fisking

A Pretentious Jackass

Let’s look at the “instant classic!”

Laugh at this. Excerpts, emphasis added:

Few things are as amusing to European nationalists as reading American wignat takes on European politics and government. 

Equally true:

Few things are as amusing to American White nationalists as reading European wignat takes on American ethnic relations, politics, and government.  

Amusingly, this author is a prime example of that. In general, the Europeans perceive America – White America that is – as being sort of like a transplanted Europe, in all of its patchwork divisions. They believe that 99% of White Americans are mono-ethnic, of unmixed ethnic ancestry exactly similar to Europe, each with their distinct national characters still intact, each completely segregated from the others, each with their isolated cultures, all squabbling among themselves as if it was 1919 or 1889 or 1849.  Granted, if the only thing you read are American Der Movementers, I can see where you may get that impression, but nevertheless it is absurd. I believe that European misconceptions about America are worse than the reverse.

Wignats, or wigger nationalists, are characterized by their low IQ, binary thinking, lack of nuance, and advocacy of solutions that have already been proven insufficient or ineffective to the predicaments facing whites. These people are often uninformed, misinformed, and ill-informed; they are quite susceptible to deception and manipulation; and they’ll often fall for fedposts.

So, either 99% of “movement” “leaders” and “activists” are “wignats” or the “wignat” behavioral suite is completely mimicked by non-“wignats” in Der Movement.  After all, the preceding sentences describe almost every “movement” hero you can imagine.

In their binary, unnuanced worldview, there are good guys and bad guys. Wignats struggle to comprehend the model of many overlapping, complementary, and contrasting conspiracies that better defines our world. They tend to believe that the camps of good and bad guys are monolithic and acting in concert, guided from some sort of higher authority. The view of men and nations as a mixture of good and bad, of purity and sin, confuses these boys, bless their hearts.

Sound familiar?  Good guys: Trump, Northwest Europeans, Hitler, high-IQ Orientals (for the HBDers); Bad guys: All other Europeans, the Jews (everything is the fault of the Jews – unless it’s the fault of the wops, or unless you are a HBDer and then the Jews are gods).

One of the silliest ideas to come out of this mindset is that Vladimir Putin is based and red-pilled…

He’s playing a deep chess game! (Right, Kevin?).

Additionally, Polish hostility towards the ideas and imagery of National Socialism is interpreted by these types as evidence that Poles aren’t as based and red-pilled as we’d initially thought. 

I don’t know – maybe Polish perfidy in getting (moderate) American racialists banned from the EU is sufficient reason to think that, you ignorant moron.

….anti-Nazism in Poland and other countries is a sign of patriotism and nationalism. 

Jared Taylor is not a Nazi, if you hadn’t noticed.

The wignat will repeat the slogan of “no more brother wars” but not understand that brother wars and betrayals did occur in the past and that the marks they left were deep.

The call of the ethnonationalist!  More intra-European conflict!  Cue Johnson and his “ethnic cleansing” among Europeans.

Many in the West hope that the Slavs and other Eastern Europeans will help them in their battle over demographic destiny. People like me will help.

We can do without your kind of help, thank you very much.

A significant number, however, are still bitter about the Second World War and our subsequent abandonment to Communism. 

Blame the Holy Ones for that. You know, the same folks who today demand you open your borders to the Third World.  And, no, I’m not talking about “the Jews” here.

Many others are disgusted with Western degeneracy and effeminacy and want nothing to do with the West. The wignat in this context is no better than the Boomer who shares the image of the crossed-out swastika and hammer and sickle, believing that the Poles carrying that banner support his brand of color-blind Boomer conservatism. Not only are the Poles not color-blind, but they’d. Not even fellow Slavs are welcome. In fact, speaking Russian in the streets of Warsaw is a good way to get your ass kicked.

Ban Jared Taylor from the EU, that’s a sign of Slavic machismo for you.

Polish support of the EU as a concept (though not in its current form) is understandable. It wants access to the EU labor market so that Poles may go to Western Europe, find work, and send Euros back to Poland, providing foreign currency to the government and helping relieve the pressure on Poland’s lackluster domestic labor markets. 

So, the Poles would “exclude the vast majority of white people from their in-group,” but then demand access to other White nations.  How is that better than Colored behavior?

NATO participation can be very easily explained by hostility towards and apprehension of Russia and Russian ambitions. Like I said, speaking Russian in Warsaw is a very good way to get yourself dragged into an alley and beaten to within an inch of your life. 

And speaking on behalf of White – including Polish – interests “is a very good way” of getting banned from the EU because of these wonderful Poles.

Waking up in a country bordering Russia is what I imagine my short and skinny neighbor feels like when he passes me. Sure, the large man next door whose hobbies include weightlifting, bare-knuckle combat, and target shooting is friendly and polite, but what if . . . what if . . .

What a pretentious juvenile jackass this Jeelvy is.

With all this in mind, it stands to reason that Poland would do anything in order to check Russian power and build up its own defensive capabilities if it is to defend its sovereignty. And sovereignty is important to the Poles. They’ve lived under foreign occupation for long enough to know. They, and all the other countries bordering Russia who would defy her will, value their sovereignty so much that they would break bread with the devil if necessary to remain masters of their own fates.

I suppose it as “the devil” who demanded that Taylor be banned from the EU?

What Poland wants is not very different from what Israel wants…

Banning White nationalism?

I believe we live in a period of history when American global hegemony and the American empire is facing imminent collapse. 

Because of all those disgruntled Scots-Irish warriors, right Jeelvy?

Poland has allied itself to the American empire, but it has not shackled itself to it. Unlike Israel, whose infiltration and lobbying operation has joined it at the hip to the American empire (the same can be said of Saudi Arabia), Poland will not necessarily share the fate of the American Empire because it can defend itself independently, even from a resurgent Russia. It can even form a regional alliance with the Baltic States, Finland, Ukraine, and its historical ally Hungary to counter Russian power. This is the “Intermarium” imagined by Poland’s inter-war geopolitical strategist Marshall Pilsudski. When the time comes, Poland has the option of decoupling itself from the West.

Why don’t they do this now? Because they prefer to “deal with the devil?”

Welcome to Eastern Europe, friends, a very low-trust society, where deceptions are many, overlapping, and make a mockery of the truth. International Jewry has had a ball with deceiving naïve, high-trust Westerners. Here in the East, we’re not only naturally suspicious of outsiders and especially Westerners, Jews, and Western Jews, we’re Jewier than the Jews in our business dealings. Expect to get overcharged for a service you’re never gonna get. And then get sued.

Gee, that sounds very appealing.  Gotta play into that “Outer Hajnal” stereotype now, don’t we?

Brother wars are tragic. Yet in a sense, they are inevitable. The non-whites of the world are only a credible threat to whites in this day and age due to the decadence of the West and our unwillingness to fight back against their predations. However, in the fullness of time, there will be a civilizational resurgence, and that resurgent civilization will beat back the non-white menace with relative ease and turn its attention to worthier foes—other white people, at which point the cycle of degeneration will start again. Perhaps it is our fate to do this forever.

Thus speaks The Eternal Ethnonationalist.  That’s what ethnonationalism is all about, my friends, straight form the horse’s mouth – they WANT brother wars; they WANT “the cycle of degeneration” to start again. They just can’t wait. Maybe throw in a bit of “ethnic cleansing,” as well, right Greg?

In any case, we have to abandon sophomoric moralism and ideas about people halfway across the world being /ourguys/. We are descendants of the Indo-European aristocrats who fought each other to the death for pure prestige. It is in our nature to be warriors, and warriors seek out worthy foes. In the wake of our decadent age, victory and prestige await in combat. There’s never a dull moment on the steppes.

Pretentious jackass.

Then we have:

Greg Johnson

Posted September 9, 2019 at 12:06 pm | Permalink

Wignats:

1. Spencer

2. Parrott

3. Heimbach

4. Stryker

Rewritten for enhanced accuracy:

Wignats:

1. Spencer

2. Parrott

3. Heimbach

4. Stryker

5. Johnson

Advertisements

Gere and Silver

Flip sides of the same problem.

Read this.

Gere’s ancestry, from Wikipedia:

His paternal great-grandfather had changed the spelling of the surname from “Geer”.[1] Both of his parents were Mayflower descendants; Gere’s ancestors include Pilgrims Francis Eaton, John Billington, George Soule, Richard Warren, Degory Priest, Francis Cooke, and William Brewster.[1]

I’m shocked, shocked, I say.  He certainly passes any “extreme vetting” for an Alt Right meeting.  Indeed, he has all the requisite qualifications to be an Alt Right leader.

And now we have our friend Silver:

silviosilver ✓ᵀʳᵘᵐᵖ ˢᵘᵖᵖᵒʳᵗᵉʳ 

To call yourself a “Trump supporter” in 2016 was understandable, albeit naïve.  But to do so in 2019?

I would have liked to hear how the group defines “white.” I suspect they’re not playing by the “latino house rules,” in which 80% of Puerto Ricans get to call themselves white.

If they really believe that, say, 70% of Argentinians are White – in the sense of being the same as the Spanish, Italian, and German immigrant stocks – then they are indeed playing by those house rules.

Nonetheless, even a stricter definition will still be largely arbitrary. 

All they really have to do is reject New World admixture.

It will probably be impossibly difficult for the typical “white” Chilean to turn away someone only slightly less “white” simply because of some new urgency of qualifying oneself as white. 

Perhaps for the general population; I am not familiar with Chilean society.

After all, these are people who get along with each other and who share a common identity; breaking apart those bonds on the basis of an arbitrary racial distinction will surely strike them as absurd and immoral.

The same can be said for America as well.

In attenuated form, the same problem plagues the American scene.

Well, yes, but the solution is to sort out the problems, not revel in them.

Pro-white thinkers have not paid nearly enough attention to this issue. 

Now Silver is gaslighting.  Most “pro-White thinkers” “think” about nothing else.

In the past, there was little need to.

Which is why the entire “movement” is based upon it.

Infamously contemptuous WASP attitudes towards other racial kinds…

That Silver previously “infamously” supported.

…helped to etch comparatively solid racial and cultural lines. 

Didn’t stop them from opening the borders to other types.  Gotta have that cheap labor, I suppose.

And WASP demographic predominance meant that marginal cases could safely be filed away in the too hard basket. 

What is that supposed to mean?  Who knows?

That’s no longer the case. Whites have crossbred among themselves and with others – and continue to, at an accelerating rate – and most whites (and “quasi-whites”) subscribe to a common white culture. WASP contemptuousness has vanished. 

Vanished?  It is alive and well in Der Movement – it is indeed the bedrock of Der Movement.  It hasn’t completely vanished in the general society either – it manifests today as The Speaker Syndrome. The same types who grovel to the Negro may well harbor disdain for the White ethnic. And we have Richard Gere lovingly helping African migrants invade Southern Europe.

The result is blurred racial and cultural distinctions all the way down. 

Solutions to this are rejected out-of-hand by the inherent dogma of Der Movement.

Whites in North America are undoubtedly better positioned to save themselves than whites in Latin America, but the aforementioned issues make what was already a hard task even harder.

And Silver will do what he can to make that hard task even harder.

Gaslighting Greg at It Again

Pathetic.

Hunter Wallace has declared war on President Trump. He’s not the only one, of course, but he’s by far the most articulate.

That “most articulate” (by far!) declaration of war by Wallace is simply his reposting of someone else’s tweets. Laughable. This demonstrates why Johnson has to rank among the most fundamentally dishonest people in the Far Right today. He only addresses the low hanging fruit, and ignores real and legitimate criticism.

Johnson’s dishonesty is on display by comparing the following two paragraphs.

Trump’s America First, National Populist stances on immigration, globalization, and foreign policy resonated with millions of Americans: Republicans, independents, and even Democrats. Enough to win him the nomination and the Presidency.

But, as I never tire of pointing out, Trump did not have to take these positions to win. The whole system is premised on not giving the people what they want. Trump could have played by the system’s rules. Trump could have xeroxed the Jeb! platform and still won, based simply on his celebrity, money, and personality. In fact, it would have been easier for Trump to win that way, because by running a National Populist campaign, he had to fight a two-front war against Hillary Clinton and the Republican Party/Conservative Inc. establishment.

So, on the one hand, Trump’s campaign resonated because of his right-wing populism; on the other hand, he could have won simply by being Jeb II with a bigger personality. Johnson has to pull this sleight-of-hand nonsense because he needs to defend his own naive and simpleton-like belief – put in writing years ago and criticized here – that Trump was “sincere.” You see, the “proof” that Trump was “sincere” is that he ran a right-wing populist campaign even though he could have won by being a vulgar and ignorant version of Jeb Bush. Even though that “Trump’s America First, National Populist stances on immigration, globalization, and foreign policy resonated…Enough to win him the nomination and the Presidency.” The reality of course is that Trump’s personality and personal history was actually an impediment for certain important sections of the Republican electorate, who overlooked these flaws because of the promise of Trump’s right-wing populism.

Johnson keeps on peddling the same stupidity that I’ve refuted here time and again. Particularly the idea that Trump could have won on a Jeb Bush platform is so outrageous, it must win an all-time award for Imperial Gaslighting.

See this, emphasis added:

Johnson doesn’t believe Trump was a fraud from the beginning; after all, that would prove Sallis right and Johnson wrong, and we can’t have that. Johnson promotes the lie that Trump could have “cloned Jeb Bush’s platform” and still have won because of his “personality”- can you believe this? In reality, Trump’s campaign took off only after he started talking about Mexican rapists and started attacking the Bush family and their policies.  

What’s laughable is that right after Johnson makes his gaslighting comment, they all admit that people voted for Trump precisely because of his strong talk about immigration (these guys can’t get their stories straight from minute to minute.) – yes, that’s the point.  It was NOT Trump’s personality, which was actually a turn-off for many people who voted for him.  Does anyone believe that Republican voters, including evangelicals, would support a twice-divorced and thrice-married vulgar New York real estate tycoon and reality TV star who talks about his “big hands” and “grabbing pussies” IF this buffoon was merely a neoconservative clone of Jeb Bush?  Does any sane person believe that the enthusiasm that carried Trump to the nomination and then to the Presidency was based on his obnoxious jackass personality, independent of a hardline position on immigration and his America First domestic and foreign policy positions that were articulated during the campaign?…

…It is entirely possible that Trump has some very vague civic nationalist and populist beliefs. But they are likely not important to him, not crucial to his worldview; he is not serious or sincere about any of it in any hardcore, authentic fashion.  He does in fact embody, as Ted Cruz suggested, New York values. He has Jewish family connections, a deep attachment to Israel, and a fondness for Negroes. He is a self-centered narcissist and if he truly cares about anyone other than himself then it likely is his elder daughter Ivanka and no one else. He certainly doesn’t care about his base.  If Trump was (and is) sincere, then why does he ignore his base (e.g., Antifa attacks, State of the Union address), lie to his base (e.g., “the Wall is being built!”) and constantly betray his base (e.g., hiring Neocons, shilling for increased legal immigration, an aggressive foreign policy, pro-Negro “criminal justice reform”)?  The man cares more about pardoning Jack Johnson than he does about his own supporters being physically attacked in the streets and sent to the hospital. His own DOJ persecutes his followers when they defend themselves and ignores the leftist domestic terrorists running wild in the streets.  For Trump to be sincere and commit all his crimes of omission and commission against his base means that the man must be a psychotic retard. However, while he may be vulgar and ignorant, and may be a psychopath, he is not psychotic and he is not retarded…

…if he were sincere, he’s had 2.5 years to give some demonstration of it, and he has done the exact opposite.  He’s not sincere.  He’s a fraud and Johnson was wrong and Sallis was right.

Now back to Johnson’s screed:

When a man pays a huge price to campaign on issues that he didn’t need to win, that tells me that he is sincere. That’s why I believed Trump could save America. That’s why I did everything in my power to get him elected.

This is all about Johnson defending himself, not Trump. This is all about Johnson defending himself, so all you guys don’t realize how naive and inept he really is, so you keep sending in your “D’Nations” and allow him to live a better life than you do yourselves. How many trips to Europe have you taken recently?  

So what happened to the Trump presidency? Obviously, he encountered forces stronger than his convictions about what is necessary to save America. Many of these forces are external. Blackmail cannot be ruled out. Historians will be puzzling out the enigma of Trump well into the next century.

Or they could have been reading EGI Notes back in 2016.  I told you Trump was a fraud and a moron and I was correct.  Johnson – an affirmative action “leader” – was dead wrong, and can’t admit it without the entire facade he’s erected around himself collapsing.

Donald Trump is a tragic figure in the true sense of the word. We are witnessing the terrifying spectacle of a man of genuine greatness failing because of his own grievous faults.

A man of genuine greatness!  Who talked about his “big hands” at debates, and whose knowledge about America’s nuclear triad revolved around “devastation is really important.” This is a man whose policy decisions are influenced by Kim Kardashian and Kanye West. This is a man who sits back and does nothing while his own supporters are physically attacked with impunity; indeed, his own DOJ persecutes his own supporters. He behaves like a borderline retard, but he must be “a man of genuine greatness,” or else Johnson is exposed as a fool, and we can’t have that!

Now I have a serious question to pose to White Nationalists: 

Why support Greg Johnson?

If you want our movement to be in a position to mobilize the Trump electorate and turn it into a genuinely revolutionary National Populist movement, what should our stance be today and going into the 2020 election?

Der Movement needs to be destroyed.

Should we openly declare war on “Blompf”? Should we pour scorn on the “boomers” and “normies” who still support him? Should we announce our intention to tip the 2020 election to the Democrats?

Who is doing the latter?  Oh, that’s right, Johnson’s fellow Quota Queens.  Tulsi Gabbard!  Andrew Yang!  Thus cry the affirmative action cases.  They’ll be endorsing AOC next.

Believe me, folks, I understand the temptation. The A$AP Rocky fiasco is surely one of the most surreal and undignified episodes in the history of the American Presidency. 

But, let us not forget – Trump is a man of genuine greatness!  I mean, really now, EGI Notes told you, years ago, that Trump was a Negrophilic race cuck.  But keep on supporting Johnson and his impeccable pedigree.

And the entire “A$AP Rocky fiasco” undermines Johnson’s argument, as suggested in my last paragraph.  Why would a man of “genuine greatness” do something so outrageously,  embarrassingly stupid?  Is the “tragic figure” Trump being blackmailed to support Black rappers?  Was he blackmailed to pardon Jack Johnson or to push for “criminal justice reform” to allow Black criminals back on the streets?  Isn’t it more likely that Trump is simply a moron, a juvenile jackass, a fan of Negro entertainers, a man of genuine smallness and mediocrity?

And I understand why the Left would like to exploit the El Paso massacre to grab power, but it boggles the mind that Trump and the Republicans are basically willing to throw power away, undermining the First and Second Amendments merely to appease raving lunatics who think anyone to the Right of Hillary Clinton should be censored, disarmed, and eventually replaced by brown helots.

Hmm…would a man truly sincere in his beliefs do this?

Bashing Trump has several benefits:

1. It helps put a stake in the heart of the Man on White Horse Syndrome.

2. It exposes the pathetic failures of the Quota Queens, who followed up their Trump humiliation with endorsements of Tulsi Gabbard and Andrew Yang.

3. It clearly distinguishes White nationalism from Trumpian fraud and moronic civic nationalism.

These guys had three years to reach out to Trump supporters, and instead gave us Unite the Right, the Pilleater Chronicles, and the usual “movement” stupidities and dogmas.  They are protecting their own income stream.  Send in those “D’Nations”- that’s what it is all about. Defending Trump is all about defending their own record of hysterical Trump support.  MAGA!  Pepe!  Kek!

If average group intelligence defines “supremacy,” this is a “yellow supremacist” publication.

Well, since Amren is always harping on IQ, then it is a yellow supremacist publication, as I have previously stated, and got criticized for by all the usual suspects.

The Counter-Currents and Amren failings together point out the real problem.  The real problem is Der Movement, not Trump.  It never really mattered, in the end, if Trump was sincere or not.  Running that campaign,and being elected, was sufficient to set the stage. The 2016 election handed the baton to the “leaders” of the “movement” – who promptly dropped the baton in the toilet and flushed it away. Instead of building in depth we instead got obsessions over a cartoon frog, tiki torch marches and “Jews will not replace us,” Hermansson and Lewis, Pilleater’s accusations of cocaine use and homosexual sexual harassment at “racialist meetings,” the deranged fetishism of Durocher and Ash Donaldson, declarations that Anglin will be one of the new voices of WN 3.0 (remember that, Greg?), endorsements of Gabbard and Yang, and all the rest.  Trump didn’t fail the “movement,”  The “movement” failed itself.  And it failed you, dear reader.

Delenda Est Ethnonationalism

Against the culture retarders. Or just plain retards?

Take a look at this nonsense. The mendacity there is breathtaking – as if Richard Spencer is the end all and be all of pan-Europeanism.  What a joke.  As if Johnson is not familiar with Francis Parker Yockey or Normal Lowell or myself, who used to write for his blog and whose writings on pan-Europeanism were included in the first edition of his New Right compilation book.

But instead of me repeating all the arguments against Johnson’s ethnonationalist screeds, I’ll first comment on something a pan-Europeanist commentator left at that blog.

GrandioseNationalist
Posted July 31, 2019 at 6:49 am | Permalink
As a grandiose Nationalist, I’ve personally grown tired of repeating the same arguments over and over again…

Yes, welcome to the club, my friend.  Doesn’t it tell you anything that you have to repeat the same arguments over and over again?  Doesn’t it tell you that they are no-character dishonest liars?

…so allow me to make OUR case for extreme Pan-Europeanism. Hence, I’m going to tackle all these points that have been made thus far:

You are wasting your time there, but let’s consider what you have to say.

RICHARD SPENCER: Although his statements about Pan-Euro are admirable, he’s falsely attributed as the sole proponent of our ideas. 

Indeed. That’s a classic debating tactic of the dishonest – they search for the worst representative of an idea to set up straw men to easily knock down.  As a representative of serious pan-Europeanism, Spencer is a joke.  And anyone who would set him up as a major thought leader in this regard has basically abdicated any pretense of being a good faith actor.

Spencer truly is anything but one of us: He’s a fierce proponent of Dugin’s vision of a “United Eurasia” (Greater Israel Inc.), which would’ve United certain White Nations and mixed hem altogether with Mongols and Persians. 

True, and Johnson must know this.

Same goes for Constantine Hoffmeister; a Zionist communist who’s all too excited to include Jews in his vision of Eurasia, and an impostor who pretends to be grandiose. 

I’ve criticized that individual before.

Further proof of Spencer’s hypocrisy is that his ex is an ethnic Georgian from Russia (who’s also a Duginist and a self confessed Stalinist). Last I checked, Kouprianova and Stalin were not White European and neither are the rest of the Georgian people.

And I sharply criticized Kouprianova’s grasping attempt to paint Georgians as “Southern Europeans.” They are not such genetically, culturally, phenotypically, historically, or geographically.  I for one am disgusted by NECs and by admixed “Latinos” who try to pass themselves off as Southern Europeans.

PAN-EUROPEAN TENETS: Pan-Europeanism doesn’t hold that we should head towards homogenizing Europeans: that’s a Ethnonationalist misconceptions.

Better said – ethnonationalist LIES. It doesn’t matter what Yockey (or Lowell) wrote about local sovereignty and maintenance of local cultures, it doesn’t matter what I’ve written on the topic for two decades, no, what “matters” is what Spencer wrote in a tweet or muttered in some Alt Right podcast from an Alexandria loft apartment.

WE BELIEVE THAT WHITE PEOPLE , NO MATTER WHERE THEY COME FROM, FORM AS A WHOLE AN INDIVIDUAL SUPER-ETHNY THAT HAS BEEN BROKEN DOWN OVER THE CENTURIES TO SMALLER POLITICAL UNITS, ONLY FOR THEIR DOMINIONS TO SERVE AS A REGATHERING POINT. Therefore, Pan-Europeanism is more of a consciousness; a way of treating one’s total biological and cultural identity as the most fundamental part of our historical identity. 

Yes, this is an excellent statement: “Pan-Europeanism is more of a consciousness; a way of treating one’s total biological and cultural identity as the most fundamental part of our historical identity.”  It is first and foremost a worldview, an ideology, a consciousness, a foundation of Identity, not some particular Duginist plan for Eurasianist Empire or some Hoffmeisterian plan for panmixia.  Perhaps Johnson should worry more about his HBD buddies and their Jeurasian project if he’s so concerned about losing ethnic identities through mixing.  Maybe “Trevor Lynch” can write about that at the anti-White, pro-Hispanic HBD Jew Unz site.

White Nationalism used to be this ALL ENCOMPASSING THEORY that exalted the primacy of race over nation. For centuries the concept of a “generic” Greece was overshadowed by all the individual identities that constitute it (Spartan, Thracian, etc.). It took centuries of Civil Wars for the Greeks to formally unite and form this more “generic” identity. Same things gonna happen with all Europeans in the face of the grave dangers that await us. A NEW NATION WILL BE BORN OUT OF THE STRUGGLES OF THE OLD.

Fair enough.  Kai Murros says the same thing. Look, China alone has hundreds of millions more people than all the Whites worldwide combined.  Same for India.  Even if Whites save themselves from the current threats, the Yellow Peril (and Brownster Peril) will be all too real.  I suppose the ethnonationalist answer is for Whites to hide away in their snug hobbit holes in the forest, but I do not think that’ll work out too well.

When we say that OUR RACE IS OUR NATION, we mean it. I am a brother to every Swede, Spaniard, Slovene, WASP, and every other White person that exists. These are my compatriots; the, and the entire European diaspora.

I agree.

I don’t really get why other Whites don’t fell that way for their own kinsmen.
Descent and patriotic White people like John Morgan should always be welcome to have their shot in the gene pool of their host White Nation (namely Hungary in his case). Just because Mr. Morgan isn’t (presumably) an Ethnic Magyar that doesn’t mean that he ought to be separated from them and removed from Hungary.

I disagree about Morgan.  He’s an ethnonationalist living in someone else’s nation – a complete hypocrite.  And my vision of pan-Europeanism includes Hungary being for the Hungarians.  Being part of a greater whole does not obligate the part to agree to dissolution.  I agree though that small numbers of fellow Europeans can be assimilated.

AMERICA: America proved to be a centuries-long social experiment about whether all the regathered tribes of Europe would either merge into a life-saving fusion or perish because of their minor differences. Guess who got proved right! The fusion of our nations in America became the source of America’s renaissance in the 20th century (the time between 1920s and the late 80s). America showed that Whites can intermingle with each other, but with non-Whites (like in South America) we cannot.

Fair enough.

BALKANS/CZECHOSLOVAKIA: In a Pan-Europeanist world ther wouldn’t be any point in restoring Czechoslovakia or Yugoslavia. Both of these states were based on uniting different nations of the same ethnic-linguistic group (Slavs). Our state would be based on uniting Europeans based on their race, something that hasn’t really been done before in history (except from our colonies). Serbs and Croats share more than 90% of ethnic kinship with one another. However thanks to Ethno-Nationalism both these peoples have fallen into an endless feud with each other (like with a Germany vs France, Russia vs Ukraine, etc., and people have the AUDACITY to call us imperialists? If anything we are grandiose Nationalists.They greatly resemble the way how the Greek city states once fought each other, in spite of the fact that they are of the same stock. By uniting them based on race and by gradually striving towards this generic White identity, just like it happened with Greece, brother wars will cease to be.

The break-up of Czechoslovakia is an example of a failed nation-state, a nation artificially created after WWI, a nation the Slovaks always felt stifled their national identity by making them subordinate to the Czechs.  The Slovaks tried to break away under Hitler’s umbrella, and they were forced back after WWII.  Yes, Czechoslovakia was a multi-ethnic nation-state, but so are, in many ways, other European nations as well. There are internal differences within Germany, Italy, Spain, even France. The UK would have to break up into its constituent nations. There’s Belgium of course.  There’s nothing in general pan-European theory that would prevent local sovereignty of whatever nations or regions that wish to express their own identity, whether these be currently existing nations or smaller fractions thereof.  In fact, such fractionation would only be realistically stable long term within the confined of a greater overarching structure; otherwise, the micro-states would be ineffectively viable on the world stage. Ironically enough, a pan-European macro-state would be more effective at promoting the establishment of smaller regional identities than would be a system of completely separate atomized nation states each attempting to maximize their territory, status, resources, and region an global influence. Ethnonationalism is therefore self-defeating if what they are really about is allowing ethnic self-expression and ethnic preservation. When the nation state is the largest political entity then it has a vested interest in maximizing its size and influence.  It’s not a perfect correlation of course; for example, Spain is in the EU but doesn’t want to give up Catalonia.  But the EU is not a fair grouping of equals but a German-dominated authoritarian state with French junior partners. The EU disguises German national power interests; in this case, it is understandable that the Spaniards do not want to weaken themselves further compared to the German colossus.  A true pan-European entity would not let one or two nations dominate the rest.

On the other hand, while the EU in practice is a fraud, in theory, it is a European macro-state, and, again, nations joined voluntarily.  The nations of Eastern Europe were ecstatic to join (and not only for the economic benefits; they wanted to “join Europe”). They’ve become disenchanted with the far-left globalist agenda of the EU, but I note that even the ethnonationalist hero Orban does not talk of leaving.

In any case, a European macro-state does not mean that Slovaks have to be subordinate to Czechs, or to anyone else.

America isn’t some kind of rootless place without a distinct identity or place in history. Simply put, the primordial order of what once was, manifested itself again. America didn’t fall like Yugoslavia which was based on Ethic-Slavic identity because it’s fundamental unity was based on race. By providing the White peoples with a national body that commands all aspects of culture, regional styles would be preserved while we would enter the new age of our civilization; the creation of a new culture based on the old (as it happened right here). America served her role as the regathering point for all Europeans and left its mark on human history.

Fair enough.

Soon we won’t have the luxury of dividing ourselves based on some minor differences and historical feuds. The tide of color is coming and no one has the power to stop it (yet). 

The HBDers welcome the Yellow (or Yellow-Brown) tide of color.  That’s what fellows like this don’t realize.  Derbyshire’s “measured groveling” to “Rosie” is a feature, not a bug of HBD.  Of course, they oppose pan-Europeanism.  Divide and conquer.

Only a few of our nations will become beacons of hope for our race and serve as the new regathering points after the colonies. Start focusing not on what thing are, but what they should be. The best way to culturally and linguistically unite Whites is an idea proposed by Ben Klassen, which promoted the use of Latin as a secondary/primary language for all White people. Not only would it help to bring down the barriers that divide us, but it would be perfectly in line with our ancestral European heritage ( considering that the overwhelming majority of White nations once had Latin as one their primary languages, which became the precursor of many of their modern dialects).

WE’VE BEEN IDEOLOGICALLY MARGINALIZED FOR YEARS…

Yes, by the ethnonationalists, ethnic fetishists, Nordicists, Type Is of every stripe.  You are wasting your time trying to reason with them.  They oppose you and they hate you.

…YET THE ALL EMBRACING SPIRIT OF PAN-EUROPEANISM STILL BURNS STRONG IN THE SOULS OF WHITE NATIONALISTS. 

Well, maybe 10% of them – the Type IIs. The Type Is that make up most of the “movement” oppose pan-Europeanism; even the ones who superficially claim to support it are against it. For these latter hypocrites, “Europe” is only that which is north of Vienna and west of Berlin.

EVERY ONE OF US SHOULD SPEAK OUT AND FIGHT FOR WHAT WE BELIEVE IN, NO MATTER HOW “DANGEROUS” OUR “UNREALISTIC SEVERAL PEOPLE WANT IT TO SEEM. 

I agree.   What we are all about is being prescriptive; if you want merely to be descriptive, we can just talk about the status quo and assume the future will be the same as past and present. True, you can argue that the prescriptive has to be somewhat realistic. But we do have an EU, nations joined voluntarily, and they became disenchanted with it only because of the way the EU is being run, not the idea of the Union itself.  So why is pan-Europeanism “unrealistic?”  As far as “dangerous” goes, please remember Johnson advocating ethnic cleansing as part of his ethnonationalism. What’s “dangerous” abbot my vision of pan-Europeanism?

History has already proved that what we re trying to achieve is not only feasible, but the right thing to do. Please contemplate on what has been said.

I agree.

I wish you all nothing but the best.

You are being naïve. They are the enemy.

Now, let’s hear from that enemy, and their crazed accusations:

Andris
Posted July 31, 2019 at 7:24 pm | Permalink
Yes, not only I have audacity to call you imperialists but the RIGHT to do so.

I have the right to call you and your kind the murderers of Europe and of the West.

Your Spencer-ite vision…

Is this obsession with Spencer a homoerotic fixation or what?  After “Grandiose Nationalist” spends a paragraph mostly attacking the details of Spencer’s “vision” (sic), he’s accused of supporting it.  Ethnonationalists are crazed.

…stays the same no matter how you use your mental gymnastics to distance him from yourself. 

Clearly distinguishing your ideology from someone else’s is “mental gymnastics.”  Very well.  Ethnonationalists are far-left anarchists – don’t try to fool us into thinking otherwise with all your mental gymnastics!

Again, today I had to witness flowers on a Soviet Russian monument the same pan-europeans refused to get rid off in fear of offending “our brothers”. Flowers on a monument that celebrated murdering my people, sending children to Siberia in cattle wagons, enslaving us just like their tsarist ancestors did before them. 

I have no idea what this moron is talking about.  What?  Some “Spencer-ite” Duginist types worship Stalin and Soviet Russia?  Eurasianists are not pan-Europeanists, you stupid bastard.

We get called fascists for the mere reason some of us don’t speak Russian in our own country. 

That’s right!  After all, Yockey was an anti-fascist, like me.  Idiot.

They play the victim since the 90s. Soviet Union was a Russian nationalist empire, no matter their flag or your mental gymnastics. Russification and oppression never changed.

Psychosis alert!  This person is gibbering against his own fantasies.  Who is supporting “Russification and oppression?”

I have no doubt you would green light murdering of Ukrainians, Latvians, Estonians, Lithuanians for your ill concieved, romanticised imperialist, revisionist fantasy.

Err…it was the ethnonationalist Johnson who openly endorsed ethnic cleansing of European nations who didn’t play along with his ethnonationalist agenda. See here for a critique, and Johnson’s quotes.  All those “Ukrainians, Latvians, Estonians, Lithuanians” had better watch out – the ethnonationalists are coming!

A quote from Johnson exemplifying the peaceful nature of ethnonationalism (emphasis added):

But what would happen if a sovereign European state signed a treaty to host a gigantic Chinese military base? Or if it fell into the hands of plutocrats who started importing cheap non-white labor? Clearly such policies would endanger all of Europe, therefore, it is not just the business of whatever rogue state adopts those policies. What could the rest of Europe do to stop this? Isn’t this why we need a politically unified Europe?

The answer, of course, is what all sovereign states do when they face existential conflicts of interest: they go to war. Other states would be perfectly justified in declaring war against the rogue state, deposing the offending regime, and ethnically cleansing its territory. But then they would set up a new sovereign regime and go home.

Also note the spectacle of these small nations depending on the American empire, NATO, and the EU to protect them from Russia. If you are all so very fiercely independent, then please go it alone and defend yourselves, you hypocrites.  Moscow and Beijing will tremble before the pronouncements of mighty Tallinn!

Here is a template for the ethnonationalists. Watch closely!

Or making Croats bare the failures and problems of Serbs, etc.

Or making Southern Europeans bare the failures and problems of the pathologically altruistic, eh?

I am GLAD that you are an international joke without any power, the sheer idiocy of the alt-right “grandiose” imperialists that call the EU equal or worse than USSR or any empire before it when they have no idea what non-Russians went through. 

Crazed gibbering.

Same with schizophrenics of Christianity that will gladly murder anyone who’s not bowing down to nonexistant god.

It’s more likely for ethnonationalists to be Christians than it is for pan-Europeanists.

You are just a sheltered fool who ignores that ethnonationalism is dangerous only when the nation is imperialistic. 

That ethnonationalism always leads to intra-European war “just happens” to work that way throughout history.  It’s a coincidence, of course.  Was the violent break-up of Yugoslavia caused by “imperialism?”  Or do you blame the creation of that nation on pan-European imperialism?  That’s really laughable. And let’s forget the 800 lb. Chinese gorilla in the room; after all, Europe encompasses the entire Earth, right?  The only problems Europeans have is with Russia, right?

And EVERY imperialist stays an ethnonationalist, no matter your fantasies of white “brotherhood”.

More true than you know.  And vice versaDefinitely vice versa.

In the 40s, Finland was a “threat to peaceful Soviet Union” and now Ukraine is “dangerous to peace and safety of peaceful Russians and Russian Federation”. Laughable.

Sanity alert – pan-Europeanists have contempt for Dugin and Spencer.  I have no idea what this angry, hate-filled screed is supposed to be about.  Get some help.

Turning on the Gaslight

Greg at it again.

Read this, emphasis added:

The Alt Right is dead.

Not a moment too soon.  And who predicted that? 

But the Alt Right was so useful…

As an example of what NOT to do.

…and so much fun…

Sure, that’s what it was all about, no?  Let’s obsess about a cartoon frog, scream about “Kek” (and I still don’t know what the hell that was all about, nor do I want to know), and act like juvenile jackasses.  Fun, fun, fun!

…that we need to create a replacement for it, the sooner the better. 

Don’t worry Greg.  You and the rest of your fellows will come up with another tragicomic failure in short order.

By the Alt Right, I mean the online movement of White Nationalist podcasters, bloggers, and social media trolls that emerged in 2014, coalesced around the Trump candidacy in 2015

2015…when EGI Notes was already warning you all that Trump was a vulgar ignorant buffoon and a fraud.

…then began to change the parameters of political debate with stinging memes like the “cuckservative” barb…

The only useful thing they did.

…becoming an international media phenomenon in 2016.

At which time I was a voice in the wilderness, preaching against the stupidity of the Alt Right, and predicting its downfall.

As I argue in my essay “What is the Alternative Right?” (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4) this new Alt Right was quite different from the original Alt Right that took its name from the Alternative Right webzine which Richard Spencer founded in 2010 and edited until 2012. The two Alt Rights differed in terms of ethos, intellectual influences, and preferred platforms and media, although they did come to share an ideology and a name. By the beginning of 2015, the new Alt Right was increasingly comfortable with White Nationalism as an ideology and the Alt Right as a brand.

Aside from the fact that #AltRight made a good hashtag, the main utility of the term was its vagueness. It allowed people to signal their dissent from mainstream Republicanism without embracing such stigmatized labels as National Socialism and White Nationalism. The Alt Right was thus an ideal “discursive space” in which White Nationalists could interact with, influence, and convert people who were closer to the political mainstream.

What an outrageous hypocrite. It was Johnson who was publishing pieces telling us that “the Alt Right is White nationalism or it is nothing at all.”  Gaslighting alert!

White Nationalists should always remember how we came to our views.

From Pepe and Kek?  Or from Savitri Devi and The Men Who Can’t Tell Time?

We should never lose sight of the fact that it takes an inner struggle, ended by an act of courage, to seriously consider heretical and highly stigmatized ideas, even online, in the privacy of one’s own home. 

But if you disagree with the Der Movement, Greg and others will stigmatize you.

Thus we need safe spaces for trying on new ideas and building new relationships. 

As long as you don’t criticize Greg and Counter-Currents.

The Alt Right provided that. It allowed people to experiment with being radical and edgy without being one of “those people” or burning one’s bridges to the mainstream.

Pepe!  Kek!

The result was a grassroots online insurgency mobilizing a vast network of highly creative individuals and injecting their memes and talking points into the mainstream, where they began shifting popular consciousness and political debates.

But, as I also argued in “What Is the Alternative Right?” (Part 2), the Alt Right’s success in attracting people led to a crisis. Both versions of the Alt Right were always, at core, White Nationalist outreach projects. But there was a perennial battle in the Alt Right between the people who advocated a “big tent” movement and the “purity spiralers” and Right-wing sectarians who wanted to enforce one ideological orthodoxy or another.

You mean the orthodoxy of the Alt Right being White nationalism, and the orthodoxy that the entire “movement” had to be subsumed into Alt Right “youth culture?”

I was in the big tent camp. I argued that outreach projects by their nature attract people who do not (yet) agree with us. But you can only convert people who don’t already agree with you. The whole point of the movement was to convert rather than repel people who disagreed with us.

No, the whole point of the Alt Right was to convert the entire “movement” into the Alt Right; that is, into a mash-up of Pepe, Kek, drunken podcasts, Arthur Kemp, and “shitposting.”

But the new Alt Right was such a successful outreach project that it was being flooded with large numbers of Trumpian civic nationalists, including non-whites, who rejected White Nationalism. I thought this was a good problem to have, and that we needed to take a deep breath, remind ourselves that truth is on our side, and then get back to the battle of ideas. Others, however, became concerned that the Alt Right brand would be hijacked or coopted by civic nationalists like Milo Yiannopoulos. This was the Alt Right “brand war” of the fall of 2016.

And some of us were concerned that the entire racial nationalist project would be “hijacked or co-opted” by the Alt Right, and that the Alt Right’s inevitable degeneration and/or collapse would ruin the “movement” that had become dependent on the Alt Right “brand.”  Which is exactly what happened.

The brand war came to an end with the Hailgate incident of November 21, 2016, when, before the cameras of the enemy media, Richard Spencer raised his glass with the words “Hail Trump, Hail our People, Hail Victory!” and people in the audience responded with Nazi salutes. This stunt indelibly identified the Alt Right not just with White Nationalism but with neo-Nazism in the minds of the whole world.

Johnson’s obsession with Spencer on display again. 

This led to a split between White Nationalists and civic nationalists, who came to be called the Alt Lite. To differentiate itself from the Alt Right, the Alt Lite dug in its heels on the one issue that White Nationalists most urgently need to destroy: the moral taboo against white identity politics. The great big beautiful tent, where civic nationalism and ethnonationalism could be debated—an argument that White Nationalists always win….

Notice how Johnson equates White nationalism with ethnonationalism, which is, if you think about it, an oxymoron.  

…was replaced by a great big ugly wall, over which only venomous tweet barrages were exchanged.

I thought walls were good? MAGA!

The expanding discursive space….

We’re all impressed by your big words there, Greg.  We defer to your intellectual brilliance.  You own that discursive space!

… in which White Nationalists could influence the mainstream was replaced by a self-marginalizing political sect which in 2017 began to focus on street activism…

Or on Kali Yuga and “traditionalism.”

…even though they were vastly outnumbered and outgunned by the Left, which could count on collaborators in the media and all levels of government, as well as armies of lawyers and effectively unlimited funds. White Nationalists have none of these advantages. Thus, a movement that had grown by attacking the system’s moral and intellectual weaknesses from a position of strength was replaced by a movement that attacked the system’s institutional power centers from a position of weakness. Catastrophic failure was inevitable.

And Sallis predicted all of this, while Johnson, Taylor, and MacDonald were happily jumping on the Alt Right bandwagon.

By the end of 2017, much of the American White Nationalist movement was simply exhausted from the wave of doxings, deplatforming, and lawfare that followed the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville…

Yes, as I predicted, tying White nationalism to the Alt Right turned out to be a disaster.

…Virginia, on August 12, 2017. In the days following Unite the Right, more than one hundred people disappeared from my social media sphere alone. They obviously did not change their political convictions, but they clearly believed that the movement was going in the wrong direction. 

For the last 50 years.

Nevertheless, the rallies and college speaking events continued, hemorrhaging people and money—which were in short supply to begin with—until they finally bled out.

The post-mortem of the activist phase of the Alt Right led to a healthy debate about “optics” and whether it is better for American White Nationalists to embrace American political traditions and symbols or imported ones. There was also a growing consensus that the movement needed to return to our strengths, namely the war of ideas. Even activist events needed to be reconfigured along the lines of the European Identitarian movement, which does not battle antifa but engages in low-risk, high-reward publicity stunts, i.e., “propaganda of the deed.”

Let us not forget the “extreme vetted” private meetings. “Are you Swedish?”

But for many in the American movement, 2018 has simply been a year of watching and waiting. People hunkered down to let the storm pass. Now that it is dying down, they are surveying the damage and wondering what comes next.

More failure.

Wouldn’t it be nice to have a common cause to rally around again? Wouldn’t it be nice to have a new discursive space in which we could again interface with and perhaps influence the political mainstream?

Some people are hoping that Trump’s re-election campaign might provide a rallying point, but most of us have lost our enthusiasm for Trump. Thankfully, there’s something bigger and better than Trump. While there will always be a place for defending Trump’s National Populist policies from critics and detractors, we can’t lose sight of the big picture. We need to look beyond Trump to the forces that made Trump possible.

You mean the forces that created opportunities that were squandered by Quota Queen Ineptitude?

These are the same forces behind the Brexit victory; behind the rise of politicians like Viktor Orbán, Matteo Salvini, and Sebastian Kurz; behind the success of parties like Alternative for Germany, Poland’s Law and Justice, and the Sweden Democrats; and behind the Yellow Vests insurgency in France.

Yellow Vests!  Fuel taxes!  Poland bringing in those Filipino immigrants! Based, Based, Based!

All of these are manifestations of what is called National Populism or the New Nationalism. We need to understand the forces driving the rise of the New Nationalism. Then we need to add our impetus to these forces and try to steer them toward White Nationalism. The New Nationalism should be our new rallying point, our new discursive space in which we can inject our ideas into mainstream discussions.

A new record for the number of times the word “discursive” has been used in a Far Right essay – congratulations!

For starters, I urge every White Nationalist to read National Populism: The Revolt Against Liberal Democracy by Roger Eatwell and Matthew Goodwin,[1] two British political scientists specializing in populism and political extremism.

Eatwell and Goodwin are evidently men of the Left, but they do not seem to be liberals or globalists. Indeed, they relish demolishing liberal and globalist illusions about National Populism, arguing that it cannot be dismissed as mere fascism or racism; nor can it be dismissed as a mere flash in the pan, the product of ephemeral events like the 2008 recession or the migrant crisis; nor is it the last hurrah of “old white males” who will simply die off and be replaced by tolerant millennials; nor, finally, is it merely the product of charismatic politicians.

Instead, Eatwell and Goodwin argue that National Populism is the product of deep social and political trends which they call the four Ds: Distrust, Destruction, Deprivation, and De-Alignment. 

All four D’s also are relevant for Der Movement.

Distrust refers to the breakdown of popular trust in political elites. 

Or the hoped-for breakdown in activist trust for failed “movement” “elites.”

Destruction primarily means destruction of identity, i.e., the destruction of peoples and cultures by immigration and multiculturalism. 

The destruction of racial nationalist identity by Alt Right memetic hegemony.

National Populism is, therefore, a form of white identity politics. 

Except when it becomes Trumpian civic nationalism, or Gallic obsessions about fuel taxes.

Deprivation means the erosion of First World middle-class and working-class living standards due to globalization and neoliberalism. 

Or the erosion of racialist rational thought by both fossilized dogma and by esoteric traditionalism.

De-Alignment is the breakdown of voter identification with dominant political parties.

Or the breakdown of traditional “movement” organizations.

Eatwell and Goodwin marshal impressive empirical studies that indicate that these trends are pervasive in white countries. These trends are deep-seated rather than ephemeral. Not only are they going to continue on into the future, they are likely to grow stronger before they abate.

And no doubt that the “movement” will flounder around helplessly, wasting this opportunity, and let this populism abate without achieving anything of lasting value.

Thus, National Populism is here to stay. 

Until it abates.

National Populism is the wave of the future, not just a ripple in the news cycle, hence the great wave on the cover of their book. 

More victory psychosis. We’ve moved from The Man on White Horse Syndrome to The National Populist on Movement Delusion Syndrome.

Eatwell and Goodwin are so confident of this that in their final chapter, “Towards Post-Populism,” the only post-populist scenario they can imagine is the political establishment adopting National Populist policies. In other words, they think National Populism will likely become the hegemonic political outlook. This is an astonishing concession, since it means that the hegemony of globalism is drawing to a close.

So, populism will be co-opted to serve multiracialism and multiculturalism.

I find this analysis deeply encouraging, and it puts to rest a fear that has been gnawing at me for the last two years.

The fear that Counter-Currents donations will dry up?

I believe that nothing less than White Nationalism can save our race, thus the success of our movement is the supreme moral imperative. Whites are in a state of emergency. This is serious. This is urgent. Thus in 2015 and 2016, I was thrilled to see forces in the broader political realm aligning with White Nationalist ideas and goals, specifically Brexit and the Trump phenomenon.

Brexit: Failure.  Trump: Failure.

But I also thought it likely that this historical moment would be fleeting. Thus we had to capitalize on it while it was still possible. This is why I was so horrified at Hailgate, when instead of giving a statesmanlike speech outlining how the National Policy Institute would serve as the intellectual vanguard for National Populism—a move that would have secured Spencer’s bid for movement leadership and attracted significant resources—he instead chose the path of juvenile buffoonery, pandering to the cool kids at TRS and on the chans.

Wasn’t Johnson a fan of TRS?  Didn’t Johnson eagerly jump on the Alt Right bandwagon of juvenile buffoonery?  I remember Pepe and Kek memes at Counter-Currents.

But that was just the beginning of months of sectarianism, schisms, purges, and purity spirals. In 2017, we saw the birth of toxic, self-marginalizing memes like “white Sharia” 

Johnson has stated that Anglin will be one of the voices of WN 3.0.

…and the return of the worst ideas and attitudes of White Nationalism 1.0. 

Lies.

We had arrived at a moment of decision, and our “leaders” had chosen juvenility and irrelevance. 

That’s because they are all incompetent products of an affirmative action policy. Since Greg himself was on the Alt Right bandwagon, while others presciently pointed out the dangers of the Alt Right, why shouldn’t Greg be included in this cohort of leaders?

They were not ready for prime time. As I explained in my essay “Against Right-Wing Sectarianism,” this could only lead to a smaller, weaker, poorer, and dumber movement. Such a movement would be unable to halt white genocide.

By May of 2017, I started thinking that we needed a new “brand.” The term “New Nationalism” was already being used to describe National Populism. The term was broad and vague enough to encompass everyone from White Nationalists to sitting presidents and ruling parties. I even went so far as to reserve the domain name newnationalism.net. In keeping with my essay “Redefining the Mainstream,” I envisioned a discursive…

This is a very discursive use of the word discursive.  The discursive space of Counter-Currents is the most effective discursive space to analyze – in a properly discursive fashion – the precise discursive use of the word discursive.

…space that was the exact opposite of Right-wing sectarianism. Our movement must prefigure the hegemony we want to create in the broader society, encompassing the full diversity of whites…

Except for critics of Greg.  And we really don’t like all those White ethnics either.

…united only by the central principle of white identity politics and free to differ on all other matters.

You are not free to differ on Greg Johnson and Counter-Currents. 

The most important intellectual battle is over the legitimacy of white identity politics. The greatest political taboo of our times is the idea that…

Greg Johnson may be wrong about something.

…identity politics is immoral for white people—and only for white people. This taboo unites the whole political establishment against us. The political establishment knows this, but many National Populists don’t. This is why the establishment attacks National Populists as fascists, nativists, and racists.

But many National Populists don’t challenge the idea that white identity politics is immoral. Instead, they insist that they are color-blind civic nationalists, concerned only with a common culture. Then they try to turn the tables on Leftism and accusing it of being the real identity politics.

And so the National Populists are useless cucks.

But, of course, the Left is not going to drop identity politics. Why would they drop a winning strategy? Foreswearing identity politics is a losing strategy for the Right, akin to unilateral disarmament, taking a knife to a gunfight, or allowing one’s opponents a trump card but refusing to use it oneself.

The main trump card being The God Emperor himself.

Thus, the New Nationalism platform needed to be a space where one could argue about virtually anything except the moral legitimacy of white identity politics. Instead, our overriding editorial agenda would be to establish that white identity politics is inevitable, necessary, and moral—and to expose the moral illegitimacy of the system.

And the moral illegitimacy of Der Movement, Inc.

I shared this idea with a number of writers, podcasters, and video bloggers who also believed the Alt Right was spiraling into irrelevance.

But not with those who predicted that spiraling into irrelevance as far back as 2016.

They were uniformly enthusiastic. 

Of course they were.  Cherry pick a bunch of yes men, and you’ll get “uniform enthusiasm.”  If they weren’t uniformly enthusiastic, they’d be banned from Counter-Currents.

But there were things I had to take care of first, like…

Feuding with Richard Spencer.

…finishing The White Nationalist Manifesto. I also sensed that it would be some time before the Alt Right would finally exhaust itself and people would be ready for something new. 

Some of us were talking about this back in 2016?  What were you doing back then, Greg?  Pontificating that WN should be subsumed within the Alt Right?

Eventually, though, I decided that I want to stick with Counter-Currents. 

That would maximize the donations.

I still think that a New Nationalism webzine is a good idea. But somebody else needs to create it.

Richard Spencer?

Of course White Nationalists do not need a new platform to contribute to the rise of National Populism. In fact, we have been contributing to it for quite some time. Furthermore, if Eatwell and Goodwin are right, we will be contributing to it well into the future, for white nations will be receptive to National Populism for some time to come. And although nothing has greater moral urgency than stopping white genocide, we’ve got time to get our message and our strategies right. (And if we don’t have time to do it right, doing it wrong won’t save us, anyway.)

So, how can White Nationalists insert ourselves into the broader National Populist phenomenon? Let’s look at Eatwell and Goodwin’s four Ds again.

Yes, let’s.  See above.

Distrust: when people distrust their rulers, the system loses legitimacy and power. 

When will Der Movement lose its power?

White Nationalists are masterful at mocking the lies, hypocrisy, sanctimony, cowardice, and degeneracy of our rulers. 

If you do the same to “movement leaders” they become hysterical. Talk about “lies, hypocrisy, sanctimony, cowardice, and degeneracy!”

Furthermore, nothing destroys trust in the establishment quite like learning that its ultimate agenda is the genocide of the white race.

But our propaganda needs to be truthful as well, because we want people to trust us. For if distrust becomes pervasive throughout society, then the people cannot unite against the establishment. Our goal is to promote a high-trust society. We cannot accomplish that if we cynically resort to lies because “that’s what the establishment does to us.” If we want to replace the establishment, we have to be better than the establishment.

Be truthful?  If you want truth, read EGI Notes.  Lies?  Der Movement.

Destruction: White Nationalists have been raising awareness of the destruction of white nations and cultures through immigration and multiculturalism for decades. Even so, our educational efforts have awakened far fewer people than the negative consequences of immigration and multiculturalism themselves. The system is doing far more to push people toward white identity politics than we are doing to pull them. Thus, white racial consciousness will continue to rise even if our movement is completely censored.

Yes, opinion polls show this.  No, wait….

We should, of course, do everything we can to raise awareness. But I think we have a much more important role to play, namely deepening awareness.

Of your own incompetence.

First, we need to help people understand why multiculturalism is a failure—namely, racial and ethnic diversity in the same state is always a source of weakness—so people are not fobbed off with half-measures like “conservative” multicultural civic nationalism. Moreover, only White Nationalists fully understand the forces promoting mass migrations and multiculturalism and how they fit into the overall agenda of white genocide.

Forces?  You mean the group your buddy Zman defends?

Second, and most importantly, we need to defend the moral legitimacy of white identity politics. Vast numbers of whites are in thrall to the establishment because they believe there is something immoral about taking their own side in ethnic conflicts. This taboo is like a dam, holding back the floodwaters of National Populism. Once we break that dam, the wave of National Populism will sweep away the whole rotten system.

Sure it will.   Just give it another 50 years.  By then, all of our analysis of Guenon and Evola would have turned the tide.

Deprivation: basic economics predicts that globalization will lead to the collapse of middle-class and working-class living standards throughout the First World, although First World elites will benefit quite a lot. 

And “movement leaders” will continue collecting their donations.  Remember, if you contribute, it is like living in the Golden Age today!

Obviously, the masses in any First World society never consented to such policies. Genuine Leftists recognize that globalization has undermined the gains of the Left in the First World. But global socialism is not the answer to global capitalism. Only National Populists understand the natural limit of globalization: the nation-state.

De-Alignment: when voters begin to distrust the establishment, they begin to distrust establishment political parties as well. 

Rewritten – when activists begin to distrust the movement dogma, they begin to distrust movement leaders as well. 

White Nationalists are masterful at showing that electoral politics, in which voters take sides in the battles between mainstream political parties, is only a superficial distraction from real politics. Political power does not lie in voters choosing between Coke and Diet Coke. 

Likewise, choosing between WN 1.0 Kempism and WN 2.0 Kempism is a superficial distraction.

That’s an election that the Coca-Cola Corporation can’t lose. Real power lies in framing all political debates so that, no matter which party ends up in power, the establishment always wins. 

Or…the Quota Queens always win.

Heads they win; tails we lose. Real power lies in establishing the things about which political parties don’t fight and about which the voters are never given a choice. The political establishment, center-Left and center-Right, is of one mind on the goodness of globalization, immigration, and multiculturalism—the very things that National Populists oppose.

What white people want is essentially a socially conservative, interventionist state. We want National Populism. What the establishment wants is socially liberal global capitalism, what Jonathan Bowden called Left-wing oligarchy. The people are never allowed to vote for National Populism straight up. The center-Right packages social conservatism with neoliberal globalization. The center-Left packages the interventionist state with social degeneracy. When the center-Right is in power, they only give the establishment what it wants: lower taxes and freer trade for the oligarchs. When the center-Left is in power, they only give the establishment what it wants: more degeneracy. The parties blame their failures on the opposition and assure their voters that the next time their party is at the helm, the voters will finally get what they want. The people are placated with the illusion of political representation in elections where the establishment parties trade power. But no matter who is elected, the outcomes always drift father and farther from what the people want, namely National Populism—and closer to what the degenerate global elites want.

Very well. What’s the solution?  Savitri Devi?

White Nationalists are also highly aware of how the establishment works to co-opt National Populist uprisings like the Tea Party and now, sadly, Donald Trump. For Trump has fallen into the center-Right establishment pattern of giving the oligarchs what they want (tax cuts), failing to do what the people want (a border wall), and blaming his failure on his opponents (first the establishment Republicans, now the Democrats).

Hey!  I thought Trump as going to be an “American Caesar” who was going to prop up America’s White demographics!  Remember that, Greg?  How soon we all forget, eh?

In sum, White Nationalists can intensify National Populist forces and steer them toward White Nationalism by deepening the people’s Distrust of the establishment; broadening and deepening the people’s awareness of how and why globalization, immigration, and multiculturalism are leading them to Destruction and Deprivation; and creating new political possibilities by encouraging De-Alignment with the establishment’s sham political debates and contests.

That’s great.  Too bad we have no leaders to provide direction.

But to ride the National Populist wave, White Nationalists have to jettison certain incompatible ideological fixations.

Hmmm: Like what?  Traditionalism?  Pseudo-Intellectual Elitism?  Nordicism?

First and foremost, we actually have to be populists. 

And we become populists by being hyper-intellectualized “discursive” elitists, pontificating about the finer points of “traditionalism,” and behaving as if The Lord of the Rings was a blueprint for an overarching strategy.

Eatwell and Goodwin also show that National Populism is not anti-democratic. National Populists want more democracy, not less. They also argue that National Populism is not fascist in its inspirations or goals, although the establishment loves nothing more than to stigmatize National Populism with such labels. We shouldn’t help them. Thus those among us who sneer at populism and democracy, make fetishes out of elitism and hierarchy…

The lack of self-awareness here is simply staggering.

…and try to resurrect inter-war fascist movements are not helping.

Instead: Guenon and Savitri Devi.  The Age of Aluminum!

Second, National Populists really are economic interventionists. Old habits die hard, but those among us who still think in terms of “free market” economics are not helping. Eatwell and Goodwin point out that in the United States, Republican voters are significantly more interventionist than Republican legislators. Which means that all that Koch-funded free-market fundamentalism has simply produced a party headed by ideologues who are out of touch with their constituency. Don’t be one of them.

Instead, follow a “movement” that Revilo Oliver characterized as having 50 years of failure…50 years ago.

Where do we go from here? The most important thing to keep in mind is that National Populism is arising out of the breakdown of the political system. Just like shattering an atom…

Dat dere science!  Means nothing!  Traditionalism!  Back into our hobbit holes, snug as a bug!

…the breakdown of a system releases immense energies. It also creates radical new possibilities, “holes in being” where new actions can take place and new orders can emerge.

Actions such as screaming about “Kek.”

But the breakdown of systems also creates uncertainty and surprises. It is not an environment in which one can expect to unfold grand plans. Thus, the more our movement is tied to long-term plans and fixed ideas, the less adapted we are to the climate we wish to create, and the more brittle and susceptible to catastrophic failure we become. Accordingly, at the present moment, the best overall strategy is not to get ahead of ourselves. We simply need to promote chaos, but also plant the seeds of a new order. 

The Sallis Strategy.  While Counter-Currents has been gibbering about “Kali Yuga,” this blog has been outlining these approaches.  And yet who are your leaders?

Then we need to wait.

For another 50 years.

The Yellow Vests insurgency is a genuine grassroots National Populist movement. But it was nobody’s grand design. It emerged spontaneously, and it surprised everyone. But spontaneous movements of large numbers of people are only possible because the participants share common views and values. Such movements also propagate through existing social networks. Thus, if we want more National Populist insurgencies, we need to promote chaos in the system…

The Sallis Strategy, outlined here years ago.

…seed people’s minds with models of genuine National Populist alternatives, and build real-world social networks through which we can propagate ideas and influence. Beyond that, we simply need to adopt an attitude of maximum openness and flexibility in the face of new possibilities so we can react with fresh provocations.

“…maximum openness and flexibility?”  Gee…maybe you should stop pathologizing honest criticism, and stop obsessing over fossilized dogma?

In short, we need more New Right metapolitics. But this is second-nature to us. We’ve been doing it for years now. 

And failing endlessly.

We have the best ideas, the best memes, and the best people.

Wrong, wrong, and wrong. 

But we need a new focus.

And a new leadership.

If Eatwell and Goodwin are right, though, we now know that we have a vast audience, strong historical winds at our back, and time enough to turn the world around. Let’s make 2019 the year of the New Nationalism.

Sure.  More realistically: 2019, another year of utter failure.

Fisking the Epistles

Ripostes to Zman.

I will very briefly comment on the anti-Semitism epistle, before looking at the Alt Right issue in more detail

This is grossly disappointing, but not surprising from these HBD-oriented types.  Most of the arguments are similar to those of Cofnas, and have been, in that context, addressed by others.  Here I concentrate on the ending:

Obviously, my resistance to antisemitism is not based in ignorance of the material or fear of the morality police. The real issue for me is that anti-Semites taste Jews in their sandwich. They are like a man who has only mastered how to use a hammer. He sees every problem as a nail. In the case of anti-Semites, everything is blamed on the Jews to the point of absurdity. It seems to me that in order to be an anti-Semite, one has to commit their life to it, like joining the priesthood or a religious cult. It must define one’s life.

This is not only wrong, but so obviously wrong it is almost ludicrous.  By mainstream standards, an anti-Semite is simply someone reasonably critical of Jews, someone who knows the answer to the Jewish Question, someone who essentially agrees with MacDonald’s position on the Jews.  While it is true that some “anti-Semites taste Jews in their sandwich” and are obsessive in their single-mindedness, that is not a prerequisite to being an “anti-Semite.”  Being “Jew aware” is simply one component of a well-balanced and informed activist life, it need not “define one’s life.”  I may well be labelled an anti-Semite by most (*), but readers of this blog know I take a nuanced and complex view of the race issue, and certain do not blame everything on “the Jews.”  Zman basically is knocking down a strawman here; it is dishonest.  If anti-Semitism is the hammer in the activist toolkit, it is quite possible to also know how to master the use of screwdrivers and wrenches.  This argument by Zman is just plain stupid.

While I bear no ill will to those of you who have become anti-Semites, I just don’t think it is the place for me. My group evolutionary strategy, as it were, is to enjoy the fullness of life, even the parts that are not so good. Obsessing over Jews all the time seems like a waste of time. If there comes a time when I have to obsess over Jews all the time, then I’ll do what I must, but for now, I have lots of other things that interest me. No hard feelings and I wish you luck in your business, as long as it does not interfere with my business.

This is even more stupid.  How does “enjoying the fullness of life” have to do with being aware of, and honest about, the character and influence of the Jewish people, and their effect on White racial interests? He makes it sound like facing facts about Jews is going to spoil his fun, so he would rather be willfully ignorant (contrary to his assertion that ignorance of the material is not part of his attitude) than have a stray dark cloud obscure, even for a moment, the sunny bliss of his life’s enjoyment.  And again, he conflates, in a dishonest fashion, being an “anti-Semite” with “obsessing over Jews all the time.”  What is it about these HBD types that they are so obstinate?

By all accounts, the alt-right is at a crossroads. The movement that started as an internet phenomenon and blossomed into a full-blown political force in the 2016 election….

Full-blown political force?  Nonsense.  Fantasy.

…has stumbled in the past year. Most people peg the start of the trouble at the Charlottesville riots, which were used to paint the alt-right as a bunch of torch wielding Nazis. Others put the blame on the personalities and their endless bickering. Of course, the troubles are exaggerated, but there’s no doubt that the movement is in a difficult patch.

Exaggerated?  Merely a “difficult patch?”  It’s much worse than that.  And deservedly so.  A full-blown collapse is more like it.

In order for the alt-right to get out of the ditch and become an effective political voice, the leaders of the various groups within the alt-right have to stop screwing up. The number of unforced errors over the last year, by big names in the alt-right, leave people with the impression the movement is not serious. 

Err…the reason that people have that “impression” is because it is true.  Come on now. Pepe?  Kek?  People attacking the idea of uniforms and then going to a rally dressed as if it were a cosplay comic convention?  Half-drunk podcasts?  Juvenile sniggering?  Mindless Trump worship?  When was any of that serious?

Leaders need to be something more than gags on-line. They have to be a respectable face to a skeptical public. That means being careful and prudent in their public actions. That’s not what has happened over the last year.

Because we have failed leaders, chosen by their misfit Type I followers according to strict affirmative action rules.  Garbage in, garbage out.

The first thing the alt-right needs to do is figure out how it got tangled up with people who turned out to be unstable or unreliable. 

Your answer. [Since originally writing this essay, the video in question has been deleted by the System.  And that is in essence the point – all the sound and fury of the Alt Right, and we are worse off than we were two years ago]

Starting with Charlottesville, that has been the thread running through all of the stumbles. There’s always a wacko involved. Whether it was a “crying Nazi” at Charlottesville or a tubby cuckold at Michigan, the source of trouble has been people who should never have been given a place at the table. You cannot make up with enthusiasm what you lack in prudence, maturity and intelligence.

“…you lack in prudence, maturity and intelligence.”  That lack is the defining characteristic of “movement” leadership.  Indeed, possessing prudence, maturity and intelligence would be disqualifying, right?

Fringe politics can be a lonely place, so it is tempting to welcome everyone, but this is why the Libertarian Party is full of goofballs. The trick is to avoid the temptation to embrace all comers and be skeptical of converts. 

Some are sincere and full of enthusiasm. These are the foot soldiers that add energy to a movement. Some are attention whores, looking for a cheap stage. Others are unstable loudmouths who like turmoil. A little skepticism about the new converts allows the movement leaders to avoid getting mixed up with nutjobs.

What happens when the “leaders” are nutjobs themselves?  

Another way of not inviting the troubles of others into your movement is to not get too close to the other movements. Quiet alliances can be quietly dissolved when they become inconvenient. The alt-right, which largely appeals to college educated suburban males, had no business locking shields with groups like the Traditional Workers Party at public events. Their thing is not your thing and the best way to avoid conflict is to keep a healthy distance. That way, you don’t pay for their mistakes, as has been the case with the TWP.

No kidding.

That’s the other thing that has to be front and center. The groups that have been operating on the fringe for generations have been on the fringe because they are either doing something wrong or they like the fringe. It’s always wise to be cautious of the older groups trying to hitch their wagon to your star. Charlottesville was not about “uniting the right”. It was crabs in the bucket pulling you back down into the bucket with them. A successful mass movement, in this age, will be one that is free of those of the prior age.

I call “BS” on this.  While I am 100% in support of deconstructing the Old Movement and building a New Movement, the above paragraph implies that the Alt Right itself is something new and fresh, instead of merely the same old crap dressed up with “youth culture” and sprinkled with Bevis-and-Butthead sniggering.  The raises an important point.  Was the relatively greater success of the Alt Right (short-lived as it was) compared to “WN 1.0” due to better ideals and exaction or just finding itself in more propitious times?  More of the latter, I think.  Whites are mewling cowards, but even cowards will begin to fight back when their back is up against the wall and they are left with no other choice.  The rapidly degenerating racial situation is creating opportunities – opportunities for the most part wasted by Alt Right dimwits.  And the rise of Trump helped them – rather than saying the Alt Right helped elect Trump (a fantasy on par with Roissy’s caravans of Amish horse and buggies converging on voting centers), the truth is that Trump boosted the Alt Right.  If Trump hadn’t run, if we had a Jeb-Hillary election, likely no one outside of Der Movement, Antifa, and the “watchdog groups,” would have had the faintest idea of what the Alt Right is.  So stop making it seem like the wonderful Alt Right juggernaut was stopped by inferring “WN 1.0 Boomers.”  The “younger groups” ruined themselves.  And what’s left of the Alt Right today are people like Taylor who calls himself Alt Right even though he was a major “movement” figure when Spencer was still in high school, and groups like Identity Evropa, who have more in common with NA-style groups than with the Pepe/Kek crowd.

Dissident politics, like revolutionary politics, depends upon reliable communication and operational security. 

Operational security: “Are you Swedish?”  

In all ages, especially this age, these can come into conflict. Making yourself available to speak to the people, make you vulnerable, and not just physically vulnerable. It makes your message vulnerable to corruption by others beyond your control. Effective communications means controlling the message, which is why the people in charge invest so heavily in monopolizing the media platforms.

And as with all monopolies, the “customers” suffer.

Building your own media and supporting the media that supports you is the key. Here is a lesson that can be learned from the New Left. They avoided the mainstream press and instead relied on independent media. They would charge reporters for access to their events. In our age, it means never going on mainstream shows unless they are live, and never agreeing to print interviews. It also means not getting into fights with people on social media. You are the message. Your movement will judged by how you are judged.

Judged as failures.

This has the added benefit of not inviting attacks from the Left. The last year, from the perspective of an outsider, has looked like the alt-right picking a fight with the people in charge, only to be squashed like a bug. That’s bad optics. When you can’t even hold a luncheon for your people, without being harassed by the Left, it’s time to accept reality and become less public. The alt-right needs to be like an iceberg with a small public face above the water line and large rank and file underneath the water line.

Reality and Der Movement is like oil and water.  What else to expect from people who take seriously ramblings about “the Pyramids of Atlantis were built by psychokinesis.” 

Another thing the alt-right needs to understand is this is not 1920’s Germany or 1960’s America. The people in charge are not weak like the Weimar Republic and they are not complacent like the post-war American ruling class. The Nazis filled the vacuum left from the collapse of German ruling class after the war. The New Left was able to roll to victory because the people in charge at the time, were largely sympathetic and even a bit envious. Today, the people in charge are not weak and they are not sympathetic. 

Those movements are not good models for today’s fight. Brawling with state sponsored goons like Antifa is a fool’s errand. Antifa has the backing of the Left and all the money from the billionaires they need. Similarly, demanding to go on campus, on free speech grounds, hoping to shame the Left with their hypocrisy, does nothing but display a fundamental misunderstanding of the opponent. The people running the college campus know that game backward and forward. There’s no beating them at a game they designed.

Agreed.

A better model is something like Irish nationalism. Ultimately, they were effective when they combined a guerrilla movement that operated in the shadows and a political movement that kept its distance from the fighters. We’re not in a world of car bombings and targeted assassinations, but we are in an age when an energetic social media troll can wreak havoc on the prevailing narrative. A guy putting up “It’s OK To Be White” signs around a Progressive hive is the modern version of the car bomb. It does real damage.

Agreed.

That gets to the heart of why the alt-right has stumbled of late. The alt-right had momentum when one wing stuck to making sensible arguments about the demographic reality of our age and what it means for the future. Meanwhile, the other wing took these ideas and used them in the meme war and comment sections of web sites. The reason the people in charge are dumping comment sections and purging social media of anyone with a whiff of heresy is they fear this more than anything. The alt-right needs to get back to what works.

Problem: Did it ever really “work?”

This is a big subject that requires a lot more debate, but effective activism focuses on the effective, not on helping e-celebs get mentioned by Lefty. For dissidents, effective activism makes the strong side look weak and makes the dissidents look smart. If the organizers at Charlottesville had stopped at the Friday night event, and backed out of the rally on Saturday citing safety concerns, the ensuing riot would have been blamed on the other side. You would have effectively used their size against them by being clever.

You cannot expect half-drunk dimwits to be clever.

Of course, the alt-right could only have pulled off such a move at Charlottesville if it was better organized. The overall lack of organization is killing the alt-right. There has to be small local groups of people who trust one another and will cooperate with other local groups, as long as leadership trusts them. This is a basic organizing technique. There should be alt-right clubs all over the country. They should be social clubs that focus on the politics of our age. The alt-right leaders need to focus on this rather than making noise. 

Effective organizing means not airing your laundry on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Instagram. One reason competent people are not going to want to help the cause is the ridiculous habit of drama queens from the alt-right making grand announcements on social media. When Evan McLaren wants to move on to other things, he should tender his resignation in private like a man, not post it on Twitter like he is Milo promoting some new media scheme. High quality people do not want any part of this. It has to stop.

Drama queens are derived from quota queens. Want quality leadership?  Put an end to Der Movement’s ethnic affirmative action program.  Anyone who doesn’t address that elephant in the room is being fundamentally dishonest (and will soon find that room full of elephant dung).

Finally, the leaders of the alt-right need to understand that in an information war, the message has to be effective against the target. When Mike Enoch says, “no one has a right to be around white people,” that is highly effective, because it states a simple truth in a way that gets the target audience to think of themselves as white. It speaks to people at a personal level. The whole point of the alt-right, allegedly, is to get white people to think of themselves as white. Anything that distracts from that must be avoided.

If that is the point of the Alt Right, then I’d advise them to behave in a way that also appeals to people over age 30.

Way back in the olden thymes, Buckley Conservatism got going because it spoke to the masses of people revolted by what they saw going on with the Left. Bill Buckley never would have amounted to anything if there was not a willing audience, waiting for someone to provide intellectual leadership. Whatever that brand of conservatism became in the long run, it started as a group of smart guys, who took their task seriously. Most important, they exploited an eager market looking for an alternative to what was emerging on the Left. 

The alt-right is in a very similar position. There are millions of white people looking around at what is happening in America, wondering why they are doing this to us. Fundamentally, and most importantly, the message of the alt-right is sound. It offers whites a reason to fight for their interests and cheer for their team. What must come next is a class of respectable spokesman and leaders who add weight to this message and organize people as a political force. It’s time for the alt-right leaders to take the next step or step aside.

They need to step aside and take their failed Alt Right brand with them.  These “leaders” and their brand were handed a golden opportunity with Trump, Trump’s election, and its aftermath.  They blew it. Big time.  While I realize that affirmative action and accountability are more or less orthogonal to each other, at some point accountability must be forced onto the quota queens.  They cannot be allowed to endlessly fail with impunity for time without end. Enough is enough.  It’s time for a change.

*Of course, according to the Silkers, I am a philosemitic Jew-lover, a tool of the Jews, someone who – in their own exact words – “sucks Jewish cock.”  That is because I reject their (wet) dream of Asians colonizing Whites nations with the borders of the West guarded by black-booted Chinese girls with guns.  Putting aside that Jews favor Asian immigration to the West, and that Israel is building close ties with both China and India, the demented nature of Silker lunacy should be apparent. To their “minds” anyone (White) who doesn’t pitifully grovel to Asians must, by some law of nature known only to them, pitifully grovel to Jews.  That it is possible to not pitifully grovel to anyone is not part of their ideology, it seems.

Where We Stand, 11/11/18

Riposte.

Counter-Current commentator:

Starlight
Posted November 8, 2018 at 10:27 pm | Permalink
“We became weaker when we decided prematurely that it was time to follow leaders into street confrontations with antifa and the political system that coddles them.”

That system includes Trump and included the execrable Asian-nurturer Sessions.

A third of US billionaires are Jews (see surnames in the Forbes list) and I estimate a quarter of the one percent is Jewish. They and their leftist goy allies have infinite supplies of money to pay infinite numbers of SJWs, brown people, and desperate drug addicts to attack and harass us. Taking their minions head on makes no sense because we are small and they are an infinite mass if evil.

I assume “of evil.”  This is true, but as I’ve written before, it would be useful to understand WHY this is. Yes, there are a lot of Jewish billionaires.  But why are so many White billionaires either leftists, or, at east, indifferent to White racial interests? One can hypothesize that the “money-first” mentality, the greed, the self-centered avarice, that allows the accumulation of such wealth characterizes people who are narcissistic, hyper-individualist hedonists, and are thus unconcerned about group interests.  Note that applies, it seems, only to Whites, as the wealthy of other groups, including and especially the Jews, are ever-so-much concerned with group interests.  So, it is, at least in part, a combination of the White propensity to individualism amplified by the selfish mindset of the wealthy.  Then, the wealthy are “different from you and me” as the saying goes, even besides their mentality; they live in a different world, well-insulated from the racial stress faced by the rest of us.  Finally, truth be told, pro-White activists and advocates are, for the most part, a pitiful bunch, who make a horrid impression, spout irrational dogma, and who would not impress those successful in life.  The last part we can change, so as to reach the White Wealthy to the maximal extent that they can be reached (with all the behavioral caveats above).

However, we have an advantage in debates because we tell the truth and our views are scarce whereas they lie and their lies are ubiquitous. They try to shut us down because they know we’ll win those debates. 

Yes and no.  Compared to the System, Der Movement does tell the truth; compared to Reality, Der Movement lies and is irrational as well. “Truth” would have a greater impact perhaps if it was in more accord with Reality.  After all, if you claim the major advantage of your side is that “we tell the truth,” shouldn’t that be true in the absolute, and not only relative, sense?

They can only rule through psychologically paralyzing and intimidating whites while keeping whites away from the truth. They don’t care about justifying themselves before us in a debate. Only a schmendrick would care about being fair. They just care about winning. The ends justify the means after all, goy.

Agreed.  But, you know, you can have all the truth on your side, and the best memes, but if the other side has the power, you will be silenced. How to get the power if you are silenced? Ah, that’s the conundrum – a problem Der Movement has put us in by squandering opportunity after opportunity, failing to take advantage of times of System weakness, and failing to capitalize on times when the System was not as powerful as it is today.  There are no easy answers, although I have made suggestions on this blog.  The first step would be for Der Movement to acknowledge its own culpability for the situation we are all in today.

I thought Spencer et al gave up too soon. They could have pioneered strategies to outmaneuver ANTIFA and lawfare. They could have not let Jews and and [sic] their allies drag them down to their level, and even when they did, they could have come up with a new strategy, but they failed.

Spencer it seems is busy these days with more important matters, such as posting a “New Profile Pic.”

The cause of racial survival and progress marches ever forward!

Those are your “leaders” Mr. Starlight.  Enjoy.

Another take on the issue here.