Posts Tagged ‘alternative right’
Saturday, November 26th, 2016
Why is using NSDAP imagery a bad strategy?
First, the Alt Right does not equal National Socialism, so Alt Rightists would be misrepresenting themselves. But we also aren’t Libertarians, yet there is no outrage when Alt Rightists use Libertarian sources. So this is not the real reason why using NSDAP imagery is a bad strategy.
The real reason is that people in the political mainstream have a conditioned repulsive response to NSDAP imagery: their minds shut down when they see a swastika, and they become unable to consider any ideas with such branding or association. This is reinforced by mainstream media that actively vilify and attack NSDAP symbols and ideas. Because of this, introducing anti-progressive, anti-liberal, and anti-modern ideas to them generally works more smoothly without it because it denies them that excuse to stop listening.
However, there is a problem with this. That conditioned response is not triggered only by NSDAP imagery. It is also triggered — though to a duller degree — by any hint of suggestion that significant racial or sex differences exist, by critiques of democracy as a fundamentally flawed system, and any lack of support for egalitarianism. Even expressing the desire for the continued existence of European people can cause alarms and inhibit thought in those who are in the political mainstream.
Further, the mainstream media make no distinction between genuine NSDAP convictions and any anti-egalitarian ideas. Those who make purely scientific observations about racial differences are still called “Nazis.”
And so the same reasoning that suggests complete rejection of any symbol associated with the NSDAP in any way would also seem to suggest avoidance of the very ideas that are at the heart of our cause. In order to not be shut out of mainstream discourse, and in order to avoid being tarred with incorrect labels that reinforce that censure, it seems we must water down our communication to the point that anything substantial is lost, and simply hope that one day WWII propaganda and the mass media that reinforces it will fade away on its own.
This is obviously not a sound strategy. We have two routes around this impasse.
With the first, we can charge ahead boldly and speak openly, honestly, and unapologetically the truths that need to be said. We will be vilified and attacked, and many will shut off their minds when they hear us, but the conditioning is not absolute, and brighter minds (which are more important to us) will have a chance of breaking through. We will never convince everyone, but we don’t need to or want to. This is the path that has been taken by this site.
With the second, we can meet Hitler in a warm embrace, emblazon the swastika on hitherto innocuous cartoon frogs, and crank up the death camp ovens to 6,000,000 degrees. Take the Nazi straw man that has been wielded against us, pump him full of post-ironic steroids and send him back to the enemy so that their absurd hysteria entertains and delights us. Create such an over-the top scathingly mocking caricature of the left’s caricature of us that the epithet “Nazi” falls limp and impotent from their hateful lips. This is the path taken by sites like The Daily Stormer.
What must be recognized is that those in the first path do not benefit by attacking those in the second. Doing so will not save them from being labeled “Nazis” — nothing will. Now is not the time to be tip-toeing around the left in the hope that they’ll leave us alone. Even the flimsy excuse of not wanting to hurt Trump’s image has become completely irrelevant now that he has won.
On the contrary, those who take the first path have much to gain from the success of the second path. If these trolls and jokers succeed in breaking the NSDAP taboo they will have opened a wide space of ideas in which all the principles and ideals that lead to an ascendant civilization can breathe freely and thrive.
The left has absolutely no credibility. At this point, this rare chance we have with Trump, this narrow opening through which we may possibly use political means to save our civilization it would be utterly foolish for us to pay any attention to leftist hysteria except as an opportunity for exploitation.
Realize that any leftist, any mass media outlet that would attack the Alt Right because of a few audience members raising Roman salutes would have attacked the Alt Right in any case. Instead of succumbing to your their hysteria and bickering with your allies, focus your martial energies on your enemies!
Friday, November 25th, 2016
In the 1990s, Francis Fukuyama and Samuel Huntington battled for the future theory of Western Civilization. Fukuyama believed that liberal democracy was the ultimate evolution of humanity, but Huntington saw the chaotic formation of groups based on religion, culture, and ethnicity warring against each other for dominance.
As it turned out, Huntington was right and Fukuyama got the “also ran” award. The point is that there is no perfect society, only a clash between approximations. People fight over the possibility of identity, which is an intersectional hybrid between ethnic group, religion, political group and social caste. There are no easy answers.
The “clash of civilizations,” Huntington’s vision in which identifiable groups separated, won out over the “end of history,” in which we all ended up being safe and uncontroversial by joining the trend of liberal democracy. Fukuyama’s vision was safe; Huntington’s, disturbing and as lawless as the American frontier.
As the dust settles, it becomes clear that Huntington won. Fukuyama predicted a future of endless liberal democracy, and bravely revealed the emptiness of this option; Huntington, as if anticipating this, projected a future of endless warfare in which group identity would be more important than individual identity.
Time passed. “The end of history” (sensu Fukuyama) gave way to the Huntingtonian vision of world tribalism with the rise of terrorism and clash between West and Islam. This new tribalism invalidated old concepts, like liberal democracy, equality, diversity and the nation-state.
“The end of history” was, after all, a hopeful vision. Perhaps we could stop struggling and see a certain form factor as the basis for politics forevermore. But that made no sense. Nature abhors a vacuum and it also hates the static. Instead, we have endless conflict, from which clarity emerges, much as it does through Natural Selection.
The world is far from static. Instead, constant conflict allows the sanest among us to suppress the rest so that the minority viewpoint of sanity can prevail above the usual monkey dynamics, drama, neurosis, attention whoring, victimhood pimping, passive aggression and other distractions.
In this new reality, the humans who have some sense of reality are looking toward avoiding the nonsense warfare of those caught in symbolism, and instead are hoping to find a pragmatic balance where even the isolated can have political interests simply by standing up for what they want, outside of the public drama.
This creates not a void, but a momentum which demands that clarity arrive. The Alt Right has triumphed with the election of Donald J. Trump, but where to go from here? Clearly the candidate needs support but the public is at a loss for how to articulate what is needed.
Fellows at Alternative Right give us, as always, a clear direction where the rest of media is fetishing choas. Their outlook sees a the Alt Right as one step toward an ultimate evolution of politics, one in which clarity needs to beat out trends for a sense of direction and purpose:
Also remember this: the Alt-Right can inspire its chosen and future audience—and also trigger its opponents—simply by focusing on moral and mature European identitarianism and Western traditionalism, and by addressing the awkward issues of race and excessive Jewish power in a spirit of honesty and humaneness. Our opponents are so extreme that we can trigger them merely with our common sense and moderation.
The point is this: end the Enlightenment™ notion that good intentions are good policy, and replace it with the core of the Right, which is uncompromising intense Realism that urges us to find transcendental goals above focus on human egos and intent. Speak that in plain language, and apply it in every policy question, and people will find themselves drawn to it.
Realism works. The policy of “good intentions” does not. If we speak this in a neutral and informed way, for example saying “Diversity does not work because it denies each group the ability to set standards and values, creating a constant conflict over that topic,” instead of ranting on about inferior races that we hate like Hollywood Nutzis, then we crush illusions and convert people.
There it gets more complex however. The Alt Right is an ecosystem. This means that instead of all of us doing the same thing, like cogs in a machine or Communists marching in uniform, we all have unique roles and we exist as a “big tent” with much internal variation so that we do not need external critics to keep ourselves consistent.
For that reason, we obey a “no enemies to the Right” motto which means we allow people to be themselves in our big tent, and express whatever extremities they wish, as long as those extremities serve in some what to advance the “transcendental realist” outlook of the Right. Let the left attack them, but we should not be attacking those who are helping us to advance our ideals, whether they are mass murder fetishists or just 400 lb naked basement trolls.
This does not mean we must endorse their viewpoints, or claim that they speak for us. We can criticize those viewpoints, and this is commonly done by pointing out the inconsistencies in those philosophies. It is also fair game where certain beliefs have been tried to bring up the past and infer a connection between philosophical inconsistencies and bad results in reality. This can be done without attacking any person as the Left does, even when quoting them and disagreeing; such behavior is part of informed debate and is how the Right thrives. We need constant inner war to clarify where our values overlap and where we should be advancing in order to keep consistent with those most basic shared values.
This gives at least two fronts. On the facing end there is the responsible Alt Right:
People who come to the Alt-Right (if I’m any indication) are usually a bit uneasy at first with ideas they have been taught to despise their whole life. Months ago, when I first started exploring these new ideas I was still cautious, and seeing Spencer yelling ‘Hail Victory’ back then might have turned me off. While I had been questioning what I had been taught about race for some time before coming to the Alt-Right, it took a while for me to get comfortable with my own thoughtcrimes. Normies have to be eased into this.
On the back end however, we need more of the “bad boy” appeal that made the Alt Right so powerful during this election. In the West, we have a mythos of informed outsiders telling us the plain truth that cannot be spoken in society, so has been forgotten. Whether that truth-teller is Beowulf or Zarathustra, we are accustomed to civilization inserting its head in its posterior and becoming oblivious only to the vital facts it needs to know.
This rowdy and uncivilized behavior — including trolling, provocation, mockery and irreverence — is what allows the Alt Right to keep widening the Overton Window and going beyond it. The goal of this type of behavior, including edgy Hitler references at NPI conferences, is to force acceptance of previously taboo ideas. This aims to throw away the Overton Window entirely, to finally end World War II by terminating the guilt and shame heaped on the losers, and to allow us to once again openly discuss previously censored ideas like eugenics, nationalism, the different IQ levels of different social castes, the failure of liberal democracy and other topics that were commonly discussed before WWII but not after.
What is vitally important is that this second wing not disrupt the first. Many who were advancing the “Alt Right = White Nationalism” trope allowed this symbolism to become a replacement for ideation and direction. This is symbolism, and we need to approach it as being only what it is, which is putting certain previously-taboo topics back on the table so we can finally figure out what we think about them.
Huntington, Nietzsche and Houellebecq should probably be named patron saints of the Alt Right. Huntington told us that nationalism was going to emerge naturally, not through ideology, as the world linked up. Nietzsche told us that a morality of pacifism, equality, tolerance and non-violence would make us weak and existentially miserable. Houellebecq pointed out that Western Civilization is falling apart because we have made life an ugly and overly-sensualized obligation, removing any sense of pleasure found in the natural process of living itself.
This is the direction the Alt Right now needs to push: nationalism from Huntington, a new morality from Nietzsche, and a renovation of joy in life itself from Houellebecq. We must cross another taboo barrier, which is the taboo against Social Conservative ideas because anything which does not encourage constant sex, drugs/drink and media consumption must be un-fun. The problem is that while “fun” might be had in the short term with the constant prole party atmosphere of the dying West, it also crushes us inside, and so makes us weaker and ultimately, self-hating.
We need to turn this society around. Trump/Brexit was just the first step, peeling the outside layer of an onion composed of many layers. At the heart of the onion is this: societies that succeed lose their sense of purpose because they have achieved the goal of creating civilization. Then, they allow too many less-useful people to breed while the wealth empowers people to become special interest groups who do not view their future as bound up with that of the civilization. This produces an alliance between the wealthy and the proles to essentially abolish all laws, standards and morality, replacing them with “anarchy with grocery stores” so that profits can be high and behavior low. The problem with this type of society is that it immediately reverts to third world levels.
The raging egomania of this time was caused by allowing people to have power outside of the hierarchy or in opposition to the goals of that society. This in turn is caused by lack of a purpose outside the reactive, a type of stasis where we assume that everything is basically right except for small problems that then can be fixed with direct action. This has us reacting to material details, instead of noticing patterns, and so decline sneaks up on us.
To escape this pattern, we need to restore the notion of civilization having a purpose again, so that instead of reacting we have inner momentum toward a semi-attainable but ultimately never fully attainable goal, such as the transcendentals (goodness, beauty, excellence, virtue, truth/realism).
This is what Bruce Charlton explains as a struggle to find a will toward goodness in our hearts which is the basis of the revolution against modernity:
To analyse Life (including politics) in terms of power-differentials, economics, nationalism, racialism, or sex-politics is objectively and historically Leftism; hence the Alt-Right are (merely) Leftist heretics – and this can be seen by the clear motivation of the movement to take-over The State Apparatus in order to sort-out the economy, harness and encourage national pride, reverse the racism and sexism of the Left and so on.
It’s not that these objectives are bad, actually or necessarily, but that these are all Leftist objectives which merely tweak the system without reversing its direction – all of them were historical objectives of radical political movements, mostly in the 18th or 19th century, and all flowed-into modern New Leftism (political correctness, SJWs) for the simple reason that they are this-wordly and gratification-orientated and justified (i.e. utilitarian).
…Perhaps/ Probably we cannot at this point and from here, go directly to Christianity (although that is the eventual goal); but at least, and as a first-step, we absolutely-must reject the materialism, scientism, positivist, hedonic focus of modernity; and restore spiritual objectives as the natural and universal focus and motivation of human life.
Another way of phrasing the above: modernity — and this is what we are warring against, the civilization created by The Enlightenment™ after years of decline — consists of purely material reactions because it has negated the ability to have a purpose.
The philosophy written about on this site, parallelism, emphasizes an opposite to rationalism, or the tendency to zero in on a single attribute of a situation and to derive a cause that will create it. Parallelism instead uses cause-effect reasoning in a historical sense as a means of understanding the likely consequences of any given act, and suggests that we pay attention to patterns, especially those that manifest in parallel in multiple areas.
Now this is where it gets interesting.
Wanting a spiritual revival makes sense, but we will achieve it indirectly. We cannot demand the effect we want directly and have it occur because we will not have done the groundwork for it. Instead, we need to awaken the desire to do good in a general sense, and have that manifest in parallel in politics, culture, religion and socializing. That will produce an emergent spiritual revival as we innovate new methods for achieving the changes we desire, including simple ones like Nationalism.
In other words, we cannot have a spiritual revival by working directly toward one. Instead we need a mentality that understands why a spiritual revival would be a good thing, and by implementing that across the board in society by demanding realist programs that achieve good results, instead of merely good intentions, we will awaken that revival.
This comes at a time when the Alt Right is wavering in its purpose because having achieved one big goal, its consensus is now fraying. This can be stopped with a simple prescription: we want to end Modernity because it is an existential horror that has caused our people to stop breeding, and implement a society free from policies designed around anti-realist thinking.
It is fortunate, too, because the Left will retaliate as they usually do. For them, equality is Utopia and any means to that end is a morally good act, even if the method is immoral like guillotines, gulags and concentration camps. This Utopian ideology makes them willing to go to greater extremes, ones that the Right generally cannot comprehend because they are corrupt and destructive. As Matt Briggs writes, the Leftist counterattack will be an attempt to silence us:
The Left has already purged all mainline offline institutions, and so it was natural enough for them to move online.
Yet all their efforts online would if not abetted largely come to naught, because the (Alt) Right adapts as quickly to the tactics of the Left as the Left moves to attack. If unaided by external forces, the Left would at best come to a stalemate, if not endure outright losses, as they have with Brexit, Hungary’s reform, the success of Marie Le Pen, the rise of Trump, and other versions of elite-rejecting “populism” (losers in democracies always call their enemies populists, but democracies by definition are populist).
…The effect will be twofold. Governments themselves silencing critics, and companies using stringent interpretations of government rules and laws to increase banishment. The Internet itself is (more or less) in the hands of the United Nations, and if there is one consistency of the UN since its inception, it is that it uses its powers to stifle dissent.
He makes a good point. Already the Leftist press is beginning the witch hunts. They will not stop at a single event, but keep pushing until they are able to once again destroy lives as a warning to others: conform or be shattered.
In response to this, it seems that there is only one reasonable response: counterattack!
The positive reason is that if we press the attack into real-world arenas, we cannot lose! Let that sink in. If we establish a beachhead in meatspace, then two things happen. One, our various enemies, both organizations and individual ideologues, will be forced to divide their efforts between attempting to squelch an online community and attempting to stop it from growing further into the material plane, which will only become more and more difficult as our numbers increase. The second effect is a reciprocal one; those who join the alt-right as a result of real-world actions will participate in the online community and vice versa. Note that the first and second events here show us an even larger feedback loop.
This process requires a singular step: we must legitimize all political ideas and all methods so that they can be discussed without the willingness to take up the topic being seen as proof of being evil like Hitler. When the Alt Right desensitizes this world to Hitler-like behavior, and if it does not get absorbed by its own symbolism, its victory will be that we can finally talk reasonably about these ideas, and not be forced to swing toward Hitlerism because it is the only zone where such things are acceptable.
Marginalizing the Right has created that type of dichotomy, between mainstream cucks who will not mention anything smacking of these things, and an underground drugged on ideology who talks only of these things. The Alt Right has begun to end the marginalization of the Right, and in its place will come a newly liberated dialogue.
Bruce Charlton again, with perhaps most important advice for the Right, which is to be obstinate in asserting that what we see is real, and what they say is all lies, so we cannot back down. It starts, for him, with accurate perception of Reality, i.e. realism:
Perhaps the most important thing we can do, is not to do – to cease to help, to stop actively assisting the false-reality Matrix in its interaction with the false-selves of the mass of people. Being reasonable helps The System – while being un-reasonable, ceasing to fear, being uncompromising in of personal support of The Good so far as we understand it… all such helps Reality, which is divine, and operates by many, including unknown, pathways.
Also – our main ‘act’ in this world is thinking – I mean conscious thinking that comes from our real selves: that is the primary act; without which no behaviour, words, nothing can possible be of positive value.
The Alt Right needs to clarify its position. We hate Modernity. It is all lies. It starts with Enlightenment™ thought in recent history, but really, anything which reeks of individualism (intentions of the self > reality) is toxic. We aim to defeat these things and restore Western Civilization, and it begins with being able to be introspective enough to know our intuition, despite living in a civilization that is addicted to distraction for the very purpose of crushing any introspection or intuition.
With that in mind, we are fortunate that Richard Spencer and the NPI decided to push harder and invoke the Hitler taboo instead of pretending to be respectable and getting co-opted that way. Much of the Alt Right is now being forced into virtue signaling its disapproval of Spencer, and this has forced upon us the need to figure out what we stand for — and quickly.
Thursday, November 24th, 2016
As predicted in these pages for the past two decades, white nationalism has died because it met a mainstream version of itself which did not have the Hollywood Nazi fetishism that kept white nationalism in the shadows for years.
Many have mistaken this death as the death of the Alt Right, which is more of a meme than an actuality, but if we had to define it, could be seen as the Nietzschean realist Right. Some notable sources are already predicting its death:
Annoying the (impending) Trump Regime at this point would be pointless, so that prospect isn’t any source of leverage. The 1488 nut cases, due to their marriage of convenience with the legacy media, have the ability to define it in the public mind, so those supporters without a Nazi-fetish will gradually drift away. It’s done.
Fascism isn’t cool, and Anglosphere cultures will never find it so. In Continental Europe it’s different, but that’s a whole other topic. We’re not them, which is one of the crucial things the Alt-Right ultras won’t ever get. We’re Atlanteans. There’s expanded space for a right-populist American nationalist movement, but it won’t call itself the Alt-Right, and if it’s remotely sensible it will be pre-emptively immunized against ruinous European ideas. It will probably be far more Tea-Party flavored, though a lot tougher.
These observations are correct but do not lead where people think they will. Brexit/Trump formalized (1) paleconservatism of the “classical liberal” or libertarian variety, but also brought forth (2) an intense Social Conservative wave including traditional loci of interest such as ethnic nationalism and (3) the end of the liberal democracy winning sweep as diversity and globalization have melted down and left an economic wasteland with no discernible social order.
Most people, when they stage revolutions, make the mistake of not getting far enough from the original state which provoked their ire. That is, they recapitulate what their masters did to them, but in a new form so that it is unrecognizable. Sadly, libertarianism is another form of demotism, and while capitalism is obviously the winner over all other alternatives, it is not a system of government in itself.
We need social order. The Alt Right is stagnating because it has lost the initiative, having achieved its temporary ends (Brexit/Trump). It now needs to refocus, and the only remaining taboo is stating that we need social order instead of yet another form of slightly modified anarchy based on the modern notion of individualism with a ton of rules to keep the monkeys in line.
With Trump, as Milo Yiannopoulos says, “Daddy” has returned. The monkeys have been engaged in extended naughtiness and distraction for several centuries, but now the realism principle has returned. With Daddy back in charge — the metaphor usually used here is of a teacher returning to the classroom — the monkeys are realizing that playtime is over, and now, they want guidance, because they do not want to be blamed for what follows.
This is what it means to need social order: we want purpose, a hierarchy, and some system of values that — in the exact opposite of diversity — is particular to us and peculiar to Us. The idea of society as a machine, including Adam Smith’s invisible hand, has failed. The machine adapts to its own convenience, not our best interests, and the EU and USA have proved this is equally true in free capitalist societies as in closed Communist ones.
With this in mind, the new frontier for conservatives is standing up to demand social order including its basis in culture and values, which requires nationalism. There is no other path forward. The Alt Right is doing something useful right now which is mainstreaming white nationalism and Nazi symbolism. This is necessary because we need to part with the idea of an ultimate taboo here in the Anglo-Saxon world.
This requires accepting that Hitler was right about a lot of things, and he did wrong with others. He was right about Communism and diversity; the Allies were wrong, and became nuclear and incendiary bomb murderers for their stupidity. He was wrong about how to handle Jewish people, but no one really cares that he may have gassed gypsies and flagrant, possibly perverse homosexuals, because plenty of homosexuals made it through the war by simply being semi-discreet, including some leading Nazis. Gypsies? Since this group has continued its crime and welfare scamming ways for the past seventy years, no one really cares when they get gassed. He was right about the need for strong leadership, and good symbolism, but wrong about the “socialist” and “classless society” planks of his platform.
OK, now we have Hitler out of the way. Great. Time to move forward! No longer will it be the kiss of death to compare someone to Hitler. We can make jokes about Nazism again. The Germans and Japanese can stop feeling so bloody guilty all of the time. We can admit that it is not a problem to recognize that diversity has failed just because Hitler did the same. We can chill out about expressing our self-interest as classes, castes, ethnic groups and races, because such behavior is not just normal but the only functional option, and it has hidden for too long behind our fear of being Hitler.
This is what Richard Spencer and the Alt Right are going on about when they throw Roman salutes with Tila Tequila, or whatever happened. The Alt Right is pure provocation. Its goal is to legitimize all of the things that are made taboo by egalitarianism, as a means of creating alternatives to egalitarianism, which we know from the Greeks is a path to civilizational heat death. The Alt Right jokes about eugenics, genocide, sodomy, molestation, murder, nuclear weapons and slavery because we need to widen the window of discussion generally, not just the Overton window. We want to make realism legitimate again and waken our people from the horrible dream of The Enlightenment™ thought.
In other words, the Alt Right is finally ending the Second World War. It turns out the Allies were not right, either, so we now need something else. We know that something else cannot be Communism, National Socialism, or (now) liberal democracy. This means we must look outside of Systems, or variants of modern society, and instead renovate what it means to have a civilization on a cultural, moral and spiritual level.
Bruce Charlton gives us another piece of the puzzle, which is that we are aiming for civilization renewal by first deciding we will pursue the good, and then doing so in simultaneous parallel among religion, politics and culture. In his view, the West is turning toward the transcendentals, starting with The Good:
Being reasonable helps The System – while being un-reasonable, ceasing to fear, being uncompromising in of personal support of The Good so far as we understand it… all such helps Reality, which is divine, and operates by many, including unknown, pathways.
Also – our main ‘act’ in this world is thinking – I mean conscious thinking that comes from our real selves: that is the primary act; without which no behaviour, words, nothing can possible be of positive value.
The Alt Right is the political defense wing of The Good. It recognizes that what appears Good rarely is, and what appears Bad sometimes is in fact Good. In other words, you sometimes need to do Bad to get Good, which means that Good is a question of purpose and results instead of intent and method. Principle is important, but ends-over-means is better than means-over-ends. We must aim toward the Good and do so in a Realistic way so that we actually achieve it.
That is where the Alt Right is now. We are about to smash through the last barrier and assert the need for social conservatism at the core of what we do. Hitler stands in our way, and both helps the media by giving them some way to attack us, and helps lunatics by giving them a method to express their anti-social behavior. The only solution is to mainstream Hitler, and that is what the Alt Right is going, not trying to become white nationalism, because white nationalism has just quietly died as the mainstream absorbed it.
Tuesday, November 15th, 2016
Image Credit: CBC.
Like clockwork, the Leftist news hysteria explodes over the Alt Right flyers that recently showed up in Toronto. The CBC reports on this terrifying dissemination of information:
A Toronto resident who says she was horrified to see a racist poster on a pole while walking to her children’s school on Monday is blaming it partly on Donald Trump’s victory in the U.S. presidential election last week.
Not having learned their lesson from the recent presidential campaign, leftist media continue to stubbornly refuse to understand the current year in hopes that if they repeatedly misreport on it, it will just go away. In reality, Donald Trump is not the cause of these growing cultural forces, he is the result of them; he astutely took advantage of them. These flyers would of course have gone up whether or not Trump won.
One woman’s response is quoted as “It is racist. All cultures should be respected.” If she had visited the sites shown on the flyer instead of letting herself be spooked out of thinking, she may have learned that the Alt Right largely agrees with the later. Cramming a plethora of incompatible cultures into a geographically tight space, like Toronto, where conflict will inevitably arise, is not respect, it is a meat grinder. This is why we advocate ethno-nationalism, which allows each culture to chose its own path and flourish in its own space.
The thought control police “have yet to determine if the posters will be investigated as a hate crime”, but until then, Canadians can be relieved to learn that, for once, their tax dollars are going to a worthy cause: advertising the Alt Right and Amerika.org.
The Stories Keep Rolling in…
Monday, November 14th, 2016
The election of Donald Trump caught the media and pundits by surprise, and they have followed it with the tacit admission that they are incompetent by wondering aloud how it could happen or repeating tired clichés about economic problems.
In reality, this election — like Brexit, and the European ones hopefully to come — is refutation of liberal democracy. We were willing to try to pie before we saw the filling, but when we cut into it, what came out was an endless procession of Fergusons and Trayvon Martins, illegal aliens shooting people, Hispanic immigrants waving Mexican flags and burning American ones, Leftist pundits proclaiming the end of white people, and elites who got wealthy through their connections in the political system telling us that we were just ignorant racist dirt people in the flyover states.
If not the arrogance of this approach, its incorrectness rankled Americans. White people had been doing their best to be both non-racist and afford normal lives, but according to the Clinton-Obama gang, it is impossible to do both. Being non-racist means giving up your country and being taxed into oblivion while rioters destroy your cities and talking heads tell you how terrible you are and how your children should not look like you at all.
That was enough for the dirt people. We — many of us highly educated — said nothing and waited silently, then marched to the voting booths. As it turned out, there were still enough of us to win, and that signaled the end of the free-for-all on whitey’s dime. Immigration has dropped, the political elites are moving away from their more ambitious globalist programs, and nations across the globe are affirming nationalism, which is inevitably based in the race of the founding group, instead of the previous mix of egalitarianism, diversity and globalism that has collapsed as its programs matured and revealed unending bad results.
That is what put Mr. Trump into office. It was not the usual Leftist chant of “racism, homophobia, sexism and Islamophobia” but a desire to not be obliterated by the liberal democratic tendency to abolish borders and invite everyone in, destroying the group that created that society by taxing them to death and crushing them with racial preferences in hiring, renting, buying and business.
Most of the city people are oblivious to the fact that government construction contracts always go to woman-owned and minority-owned firms. Or that the fear of affirmative action lawsuits means that if a white person and a plausible non-white candidate apply for the same job, it goes to the non-white person, even in a totally white community. They might not know that our society pays out billions a year in anti-discrimination lawsuits, or that people lose their jobs and end up in the poorhouse for one joke on Twitter. But we, the dirt people, experience this reality every day.
The pundits and elite classes, who went from schools where they were the best memorizers to internships and then a series of comfortable jobs to which they commuted from gated city communities, do not experience this reality. They do not want to, and they view anyone who does as a loser, instead of as someone for whom becoming powerful in an increasingly vile society is not desirable. Most of us dirt people are more competent than our elites, but have no interest in fake jobs and power in a system that always chooses wrong. We went for real jobs and more time on real life instead, and that means we have souls, where the pundits and city people seem to lack them.
The chattering classes cannot admit this reality. To do so would destroy the single pillar on which they base their perceived legitimacy, which is that they are warriors for egalitarianism. Instead, it appears they are self-interested people who want to get rich off the backs of the rest of us, all while talking a good game about how egalitarian they are while scrupulously avoiding anyone who earns under $100,000 a year. They are high on their own self-importance, drugged on wealth, delusional with power, and they proved it in their reaction to the Trump election.
In particular, they like to claim that Donald Trump is the second coming of Hitler and will plunge our society into darkness. Instead, as Amerika writer Joshua Seidel opines, they got a gentle but firm rebuke of the liberal democracy, egalitarianism, globalism and diversity agenda:
The “Trumpenreich” isn’t going to “name the Jew,” women are still going to be allowed to vote, Black people aren’t going to be enslaved. Jews will occupy high places in the Trump administration. More than likely, Trump isn’t as focused on issues of identity as the Alt Right would like him to be. The extreme members will be disappointed and likely drop out, while more nuanced thinkers will continue, with perhaps a greater “air of respectability.”
So, for the less extreme ideas? White identity politics? Reaction to globalism? Trump’s victory gives them a place at the table. No longer can the concerns of White Americans be mocked and ignored. No longer can the mainstream media claim to represent the views of the country. The echo chamber has been breached, and the right wing is on its way in. I expect this will take the form of reaction to the identity politics of the left. The Alt Right has built its following pointing out the Liberal Establishment’s hypocrisy on the issues of race, gender, and other identities. They will still win points here, particularly if liberals double down on identity politics. If we continue moving down the path of racial division, the Alt Right will be well placed as leaders of “the White faction.”
The Alt Right has its core a simple idea: realism is more important than ideology. This means that we can recognize details of the world outside us, such as that homogeneity works and equality creates spoiled angry brats, that diversity does not work no matter how nice or talented the groups involved are, and that our society needs a purpose quickly or Western Civilization will fall. The Alt Right is an anti-pathology movement looking for an escape from the rote thinking that conveys empires into the dustbin of history. That thinking is egalitarian ideology, and much as it drove the Soviet Union to failure, it will collapse the modern West.
We do not want to go out like that. In fact, we want to make Western Civilization greater than it ever has been, using the technology cultivated in the last three hundred years and the methods of social order from the thousands before that. We have no need of ideology; we have reality, and it is our only yardstick. Not feelings, social pretense, emotional judgments, crowd sentiment or political appearances. We want what works. Liberal democracy does not work and so we cut it down a peg.
Expect the pundits to continue raving pointlessly as their various gambits fail. They have made themselves obsolete. In the meantime, a new future opens which is not doomed to failure like the old path — liberal democracy is not only 227 years old, dating to the French Revolution, but was tried before 2500 years ago in Ancient Athens and more recently in pre-collapse Rome — and we want it. For ourselves, our children, our great-grandchildren, our natural world and most of all, for our pride. We are tired of being put down and trampled by those who could not make in a lifetime what we do every day.
Monday, November 14th, 2016
Robert Burns, The Poet Laureate of Scotland once wrote the following towards the end of “To a Louse”:
O wad some Pow’r the giftie gie us
To see oursels as others see us!
It wad frae monie a blunder free us
This is great advice. It teaches us empathy. It teaches us humility. Maybe it instills a certain patience and grace, allowing us to follow the sage advice of Stoic Emperor Marcus Aurelius. Festina Lente spoke the Great Roman Emperor.
It also teaches us to properly take the measure of our enemies. Even the ones who claim our ideological ground. Since the Scots Poet broached the subject of vermin, we read the crawlings of a verminous cuckservative and learn what those on The Not-So_Alternative Right have to say in between hyperventilations.
1. Racism is not a fringe element of the Alt-Right; it’s the movement’s central premise.
2. It’s also explicitly anti-Semitic.
3. The Alt-Right is tech savvy, with roots in Silicon Valley.
4. The Alt-Right loves The Matrix.
5. The Alt-Right loves Christendom but rejects Christianity.
6. Kek, cucks, and meme-magic.
7. The Alt-Right wants to burn American politics to the ground.
8. Even the Alt-Right’s most prominent media cheerleader doesn’t actually count himself a member.
And then, Oh Sweet Green Nazi Frog Jeebus, he actually wrote the following conclusion.
The Alternative Right asks conservatives to trade God for racial identity, liberty for strongman statism, and the unique American idea that “all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights” for a cartoon Nazi frog.
So there is a valid question of why waste any time on this. Refuting this pile of pungent stench require a gas mask and fairly sturdy shovel. Some take the Red Pill, others choose the Blue. This article was undoubtedly inspired by the Mail-Order Probiotic.
I’ll clear away the painfully obvious. The whole racism thing. Are there racists who identify as Alt-Right. Sure? Is the entire movement inherently racist as a fundamental result of being race-conscious? Only if the Gynecological profession is inherently sexist for recognizing gender variations. Human Bio-Diversity exists, is scientifically documented and does occur as a result of race. Recognizing this does not absolutely equate to hating others because they do, in fact differ.
Recognizing that they differ does, in fact, lead to a politically incorrect conclusion: the only functional societies are the homogeneous ones. This could never be seen as racist, since it opposes not certain races, but the importation of any ethnic groups other than the founding group. That is common sense realism, not racism.
He accuses us of wanting to burn America down. That after an election where perhaps three million non-citizens illegally voted. We aren’t allowed to, you know, mention that three million non-citizens voted in that election because that would be, Pepe forfend, ¡RACIST! We are not “burning America down.” We are telling people at the top of our lungs, “Hey idiot! America is on fire.”
As for the remainder of this effluvium, I remember riding back and forth to Grad School on the LA Metro 301 Bus. You’d hear the occasional disordered whack-jobs telling you how Spiderman worked for The New World Order. You just can’t argue with them and won’t win many accolades if you try. The Cucks hate the Alternative Right and they don’t feel particularly bound by the rules of logic or honor when they write their dyspeptic, disparaging polemics.
We get the gift that Robert Burns requested in meter and rhyme. We truly see ourselves as the Cuckservative sees us. This image looks ugly, but I can’t help but think it reflects as much on the viewer as it does on us. These cucks hate us and wish us nothing but the most putrid of cess.
Tuesday, November 1st, 2016
The messages started almost immediately.
As my piece went live, new Twitter accounts begun for this purpose began reaching out. “I’m a Jew, and I’ve always felt this way but I’m afraid to say it” was one common refrain. This was followed up by Facebook messages, invitations to shadowy right-wing Jewish forums, and furtive Kahane supporters verifying my right-wing credentials. Was I really a spy? The right wing Jew is such a rare breed in the wild, some simply didn’t believe it.
The comment section of my article attracted a not-so-rare breed: the “get in the oven” trolls, there to let me know they weren’t cutting me any slack and a Jew remains a Jew. Even here there were gems. One insightful commentator noted that I wasn’t a REAL racist like they were, I’d merely made the calculation that the modern right was less dangerous to Jews than the modern left. While this fellow underestimated my genuine support of the West qua West, he wasn’t totally wrong, and his next observation was keen: “Do you realize how incredibly neurotic your people are, including yourself?”
There are those in the alt-right who define their movement entirely in respect to White Nationalism. To them, the alt-right is the political vehicle in the battle for white “ethno-states” which will replace current democracies in Europe and possibly North America/Australia. Many self-consciously model these states on the example of Israel. The least extreme version of an “ethno-state” need not be racially homogeneous, but the political, economic, and cultural power in the state will remain in the hands of the dominant race/ethnicity, who will decide for themselves what will constitute citizenship. As some call this “white supremacy,” the alt-right points out that it’s simply how most of the world works:
So what is an “ethno-state” and why would figures in the Alt-Right look to Israel for an example?
The idea has been around for some time, in different names and reiterations. For Alt-Right leaders such as Richard Spencer, (head of the National Policy Institute, a “pro white think tank”) defining European and North American states using racial criteria is necessary. Spencer, called the “Karl Marx of the Alt-Right” by Glenn Beck, has written at length about the situation facing American and European Whites. What situation? Minority status, loss of culture, and loss of identity in a multi-ethnic state where the standard of living has fallen for everyone. The solution? Make race or ethnic identity the core organizing principle of the state. Germany for the Germans, France for the French, Japan for the Japanese, etc. The policies of these states can vary, but the bedrock principle would be the maintenance of a majority for the dominant ethnic group.
Israel has chosen to extend certain rights to non-Jewish citizens, including the right to vote; there are Arabs in the Knesset. This is all true, yet between ethno-states, policies can differ greatly.
To the Alt-Right, this solves many problems at once. In his book The Ethnostate, Wilmot Robertson (deceased, 2005) talks about what such a state would look like and what policies it would have. The specifics are less important than the idea that race is a “shortcut” to fix other issues. Problems with Wall Street? Less of a problem in a White ethno-state, where high trust and cultural/ethnic pride lead to better behavior from executives. There’s less of a need for regulation in the first place. Where to put educational resources? Easier question when we aren’t dealing with issues of race and immigration, isn’t it? In an ethno-state, the focus of the government will be a more efficient affair. The time and effort put into bridging ethnic and racial divides in our public institutions will evaporate, leaving societies’ energy focused on more productive issues. The well-being of such a country could be more objectively measured. What’s the standard of living? What’s the pay gap? How’s inequality? These questions are easier to answer without issues of race.
Does any of this sound familiar? Do any states exist with policies intended to keep one ethnic/racial group as a majority? Policies that favor this group? The example given by many Alt-Right figures is Israel. Spencer claims to “respect Israel” as a “homogenous ethno-state.” Israeli policies discouraging non-Jewish immigration and encouraging Palestinians to move away from disputed areas are cited by alt-right leaders as examples for their own ethno-state.
Immigration/emigration are part of the story for Israel, but its commitment to the Jewish population is deeper than that. A good description comes from author Sammy Smooha, in the Journal “Nations and Nationalism”. Smooha writes:
Contrary to its self–image and international reputation as a Western liberal democracy, Israel is an ethnic democracy in which the Jews appropriate the state and make it a tool for advancing their national security, demography, public space, culture and interests.
This is what the Alt-Right theoretically wants. A state in which White people, however defined, have control over the public spaces, the culture, the politics, and the demographic future of their country.
What’s that you say? Israel’s not really an ethno-state? They have minorities? Well, of course. Israel has chosen to extend certain rights to non-Jewish citizens, including the right to vote; there are Arabs in the Knesset. This is all true, yet between ethno-states, policies can differ greatly. There’s no need for such a state to be free of minorities, as long as the state itself is defined around the majority. Israel, which encourages (and pays for) large orthodox Jewish families, and calls itself the “Jewish State” is certainly such a country.
So why isn’t the alt-right thrilled to have more Jews among its ranks? Surely we could provide the guidance they need to set up their ethno-states. If they are impressed with Israel, why not more engagement with sympathetic diaspora Jews?
Many in the Alt-Right fear Jewish influence on their movement, citing the Neoconservative “takeover” of traditional Conservatism, and the change in the movement’s character as a result. They fear that Jews may “dilute” the ethno-state they ultimately want to build.
Kevin McDonald, ex Cal State professor and Alt-Right theorist, has written a piece on Jews and the Alt-Right that mentions nineteenth century Austrian-Jewish politician Victor Adler. Adler’s Austria was the seat of the multinational Austro-Hungarian Empire, and was under strain from the repeated influx of “Slavic” immigrants and refugees.
Merely preserving German language and administrative customs wasn’t enough. Actual German people needed protection as well.
Difficult questions of identity revolved around German-speaking Austrians. Should “German” policies, German language, German culture, predominate? Should loyalty to the Emperor and the state trump ethnic loyalty? Adler was a “cultural” nationalist, part of the Linz Program of 1882, explicitly calling for the primacy of German culture, language, and policies in the Austrian State. One of Adler’s co-signers to the Linz Program was Georg Schönerer, who advocated for the inclusion of an “Aryan Paragraph” which would make explicit the connection between German culture and people of German ethnicity.
So what does this have to do with the ethno-state? Schönerer’s concerns are a model for the concerns of the Alt-Right today. As Austria took in more and more refugees from the east, the relative power of the German-speaking population was reduced. To Schönerer and even Adler, the Slavic “Hungarian” side of the Empire was distinctly inferior to the “German” side. To allow more Slavic influence at court, and to allow more Slavic people into the intuitions of the state would invariably weaken and degrade Austro-Hungary. The Linz Program signers made their feelings explicit:
We protest against all attempts to convert Austria into a Slavic state. We shall continue to agitate for the maintenance of German as the official language and to oppose the extension of federalism…[W]e are steadfast supporters of the alliance with Germany and the foreign policy now being followed by the empire.
Adler agreed with Schönerer regarding the “inferiority” of Slavic culture to German culture, but Schönerer took things a step further. Merely preserving German language and administrative customs wasn’t enough. Actual German people needed protection as well. His “Aryan Paragraph” provided that Germans would receive privileges in the empire including more access to government positions.
Schönerer also advocated for a breakup on the Empire along ethnic lines, and his ideas are said to have motivated Polish and Hungarian Nationalists, as well as providing a model for Zionism. Today’s Alt-Right also feels the need to go beyond “cultural nationalism” as well — which means that their ethno-state will not be welcome to any but those who are genetically of its founding ethnic group. To them, race and ethnicity are biological facts.
There’s something genetically distinct, for example, about a German person, and this genetic distinctiveness expresses itself in German culture, which then influences what will be the German state. A majority Black country in Africa could attempt to become a German “culturally nationalist” state, but in the eyes of the Alt-Right, this would end in failure. Only Jews can make a Jewish state, only Zulus a Zulu State. We can speak each other’s languages, eat each other’s food, but there will always be a deep distinction between us.
There’s something genetically distinct, for example, about a German person, and this genetic distinctiveness expresses itself in German culture, which then influences what will be the German state.
Adler broke with Schönerer over the Aryan Paragraph and soon ended up leading the Austrian Labour Movement and publishing an influential Marxist journal. MacDonald and other Alt-Eight commentators fear that Jews in the Alt-Right would exert a similar influence to that of Adler. It’s not the disagreement between cultural/ethnic nationalism in and of itself that bothers them, but the possibility that Jews will push the former and vilify the latter, all while taking on the mantle of the alt-right. Seems a bit farfetched? Perhaps, but who would have thought that Neoconservatives would take the mantle of American Conservatism from John Birch?
The Alt-Right is mixed on Jewish help, but nuanced. MacDonald is still open to the idea of Jews “allied” to the alt-right, assuming they are “vocal critics of the Jewish community and its role in the dispossession of European-Americans.” More nuance comes from a recent press conference given by top alt-right luminaries including Spencer and Jared Taylor. In Taylor’s own words:
“I tend to believe that European Jews are part of our movement,” Taylor said. “I think it is unquestionable there has been an overrepresentation by Jews [among] individuals that have tried to undermine white legitimacy.”
But, he said, the same is true of Episcopalians.
“Does that mean all Jews are enemies of the white race? I reject that,” Taylor said.
Taylor has long been a “white nationalist” writer, well known for being one of the “moderates” in the movement. His views were well-expressed in a recent NPR interview. What he wants is fairly simple: freedom of association on private property. If (non-Jewish) whites wish to have an all-white club, private school, or neighborhood, government shouldn’t intrude. Is this, in and of itself, anti-Semitic? Will I be on my way to the oven? Not sure, but I managed to avoid oppressing the Goyim on my way to Jewish Summer Camp, so who’s to say Whites couldn’t exhibit similar restraint? This really isn’t terribly different than current American policies. Taylor’s “ethno-state” would be far milder than Israel!
Israel has chosen to extend certain rights to non-Jewish citizens, including the right to vote; there are Arabs in the Knesset. This is all true, yet between ethno-states, policies can differ greatly.
Regardless of individual feelings on the Alt-Right, White People, or ethno-states, there is more nuance here than most will give credit for. Media accounts (Betsy Woodruff in Daily Beast) of the NPI Press Conference claim the participants “hate Jews”, despite Taylor’s clear stance to the contrary:
Covering the NPI Press Conference for the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Ron Kampeas writes:
“I want my grandchildren to look like my grandparents,” Taylor said, “not like Fu Manchu or Whoopi Goldberg or Anwar Sadat.”
There were nods of agreement and more pledges to continue the conversation in the Willard bar.
As the room emptied, I prayed silently that Taylor would enjoy good health long enough to behold a grandchild with a pointed goatee, thick braids, foot-long fingernails and a prayer bump, and I recalled his opening remarks, and his overarching predicate for the existence of racial differences.
Most Jewish people would have a similar reaction to Woodruff and Kampeas. Hostility, referring to the Alt-Right leaders as “racist”, mocking their desire for racial and ethnic purity. But why? Are figures like Spencer racist for wanting a White ethno-state? Is Taylor to be condemned for wanting his grandchildren to look like him? (and, it could be assumed, wanting the same or better standard of living for them?) Why can’t we turn the lens around for a moment? What are we really quibbling over? Is it the location of Spencer’s hypothetical ethno-state? What if it was Norway? Is it a problem that White people want to be around other White people? Want their grandchildren to be like them?
I want my grandchildren to be Jewish, I want the Jewish state of Israel to retain its majority Jewish population and character. I want Israel to be there for me and my grandchildren. I want Judaism and the Jewish people to survive. Am I any different than Spencer? Are you?
Saturday, October 29th, 2016
As the Alt Right grows, it depends more on the voices who can insert clarity and purpose into what otherwise becomes an emotionally-charged, symbol-driven conversation that inevitably drifts from its meaning. Paul Warkin is one of those writers who always gets a firm grip on the original meaning and then translates it into more detailed interpretations. You can find some of his work on Amerika. He was kind enough to take a few moments with us to speak about his worldview and interpretation of the Alt Right.
When did you become aware of being different than others? How did this disturb or complement your upbringing?
From as young as I can remember, I was repeatedly told how strange I was for rarely speaking. It seemed natural that upon entering an unfamiliar environment (being born and becoming aware), the first action would be to observe and learn. Others were content to repeat or state the obvious as a means of socializing. This was an early hint to me that I may be less socially influenced than the average.
What, in your view, is your primary issue or direction? What problems does this solve?
In the abstract: the defense, nurturing and creation of the beautiful, the true, and the virtuous, achieved primarily, in the long term, by evolutionarily improving humans. More concretely: defending, nurturing, and creating the people I love, and those I know who are of excellent character, talent, and beauty.
You seem to approach your thinking from a philosophical viewpoint more than a political one. What is the relationship between politics and philosophy? How do the two converge in your mind?
I have a preference for fundamentals, and philosophy is more fundamental than politics. Understanding a concept requires understanding its predicates. Philosophy explains politics. Politics helps us understand what to fight for and why, politics shows us how.
The Alt Right seems to be getting “large” at this point in time. Do you see this as the culmination of the past, or something entirely new?
Prior to 2015 the Alt Right was a combination of existing schools of thought and intellectual right wing movements like the European New Right, paleoconservatism, Fascism, Radical Traditionalism, Libertarianism, Neoreaction, and so on. Since then it has been joined by an increasing influx of people “red pilled by life” as Richard Spencer says. People who, for example, due to being born into diversity, always knew about racial differences but were explicitly commanded not say anything about it, and were forbidden from even noticing.
2015 saw the unopposed mass invasion of Europe and an American presidential candidate openly condemning illegal immigrant rapists. One white corner of the world saw a sharp spike in the arrival of their replacements, and another saw the first real political opposition to this. These events likely shook many Westerners around the world into an awareness of present conditions: we’re losing our nations, and that means our culture, our art, our order, and our unique view of the universe — our civilization — is going with them. 2015 made these problems that much more difficult to ignore.
At the same time, with the start of campaigning for the 2016 election, 2015 marked the terminal phase of the reign of the left’s race messiah, the one who was destined to unify the races. Undoubtedly many felt as though if there truly was a path to intra-national racial harmony, then Obama should have shown the way. A lack of progress in this direction, a failure to ease racial tensions, could hypothetically be excused or explained as being due to the presence of strong opposition, but he didn’t even point to a pathway. After one instance of a whitish man killing a black man, but before the judicially relevant details emerged, Obama revealed his true motivation and allegiance by announcing that if he had a son, he would look like the killed black man. This means that to Obama — the man who was hoped would bring racial harmony due in large part to the strong symbolism of his half-white, half-black ancestry — a person’s race was of primary importance when choosing sides. Obama’s legacy will be remembered as the culmination and conclusion of the civil rights era.
This is the type of naked leftism that forces a choice. The corresponding phenomenon on the lower level, on the scale of the useful idiot, is the rise of the social justice warrior to the point that any random man on the street likely knows what “SJW” means, and likely has some experience with them, either through their attacks on video games, their takeover of a science fiction award, or their forcing the cancellation of a band’s performance. The SJW’s imperative to out-virtue signal their peers has laid bare the logical conclusions of leftism, and has done so in a way that has personally impacted a significant segment of the population who would otherwise be uninterested in politics. The SJW phenomenon has demonstrated that anything that is good must actively be fought for or it will rot, decay, and die.
When people see this and recognize leftism for what it is, they look for alternatives. From here, there’s no going back, and it’s difficult to say what specific form the effects will take, but there is a real possibility for a new renaissance.
What influence did underground metal music have on your thinking? Were there other artistic influences, including literary? What are your favorite artists and works from underground metal?
The ethos manifest in underground metal of ruthless, vigorous, uncompromising pursuit of some cosmic end despite the onslaught of bitter tribulations imposed by a casually cruel or uncaring universe is beautiful and inspiring. These are some albums that stand out in my mind:
Incantation – Onward to Golgotha
Adramelech – Pure Blood Doom
Morbid Angel – Altars of Madness
Enslaved – Vikingligr Veldi
Tolkien’s works are a continual influence.
What, in your view, are the benefits and pitfalls of an engineering-based approach to civilization design?
easy to understand, which can allow rapid buy-in
easy to administer due to explicit rules which don’t require deep insight to apply and enforce
obvious junk is tossed, including superstitions and degeneracy
loss of good that is not understood, can’t be described, or is not readily quantifiable
successful to the degree that it is founded on true and practical knowledge of how humans work on the individual and group level — more limited or delusional knowledge results more readily in failure
subtlety is lost: rigid rules steamroll exceptions
must be manually tuned, which blocks the opportunity for automatic organic adjustments and refinements
Will you be voting for Donald J. Trump, or are you joining the accelerationists and voting Clinton to hasten the end? What do you think Brexit and Trump mean for Western politics, and will any good come of it?
I’m with the Trump accelerationists. Democracy is a terrible joke, this election makes that abundantly clear. Every form of government is rule by some type of elite. With monarchy or dictatorship, power comes from the top and flows fairly directly: it’s clear who’s in power and who’s enforcing the power. Democracy too has elites, but they are not as visible and there is an awkward intermediary in that power must be routed through the masses. So oligarchs who wish to rule use mass media to manipulate the people into voting for their puppet, that is, the candidate over whom they can exert influence in their favor. Ideally, for them, they wield influence over both candidates, and constrain the opinions of the masses into the range represented by the approved candidates. That was the norm until now.
This election appears to be different. Either choice is a threat. Clinton would threaten the current governing system by using and twisting it to maximize and maintain her wealth and power, and this would likely strain it to the breaking point. We can see this in action as the news outlets burn off their remaining reserves of public trust in an effort to desperately push Clinton to victory. Since the system is evil, that would be good. That is Clinton accelerationism. But though we would like to destroy evil, we also would like to look past its destruction and aim for favorable conditions in its fall.
Assuming Trump is sincere, and he does seems to be, he would be a threat to the current governing system because his determined efforts to fix the system would provoke strong backlash from the forces that have corrupted it. If both sides refuse to back down, this could very possibly lead to a civil war. That sounds alarmist and perhaps outlandish, and certainly the majority will choose whatever comfortable option they have in order to avoid violence, but we must remember that over the scale of centuries, far from being an unlikely aberration, war is in fact the norm.
Bush or Rubio would not have provoked this response.
So a vote for Trump is in that sense accelerationist. Conflict is coming; with a Trump victory, the ones holding the reigns of power, the official source of power to whom the middle may defer to by default, are more sympathetic with us, and have the possibility of becoming more closely aligned with us.
What do you think defines the boundaries of modernity?
Modernism means believing the primary determinant of the success of a society is the formal system used rather than the quality of humans (as individuals and in aggregate). This boundary lies somewhere between monarchism and democracy. The rationalization, or flawed assumption, that allows modernism to “make sense” is equality: when working with a set of identical components, how they’re put together is most important. Knowing that the components of society are unequal in important ways makes rejecting modernism easy.
How did you end up writing for Amerika? Was it a risky decision, trusting this hacked together site full of reprobates?
I’ve never revealed information that could lead to Hilary Clinton’s arrest, so for me putting disembodied words on the Internet is relatively low-risk. I honestly can’t remember whether I found the American Nihilist Underground Society by seeking metal recommendations or nihilist philosophy, but I’m fairly sure it wasn’t by searching the acronym. Either way, my interest was piqued by a philosophy that seemed to emanate from the ethos I described above, and eventually I responded to a request for submissions for Amerika, partly out of a desire to help the site grow if I could, and partly as a means of further exploring its ideas. Writing forces one to explicate vague thoughts and opens them to potentially useful criticism. It can also be more fun than the passive entertainment and empty pleasures the modern world offers. Becoming a thought criminal reprobate in the process is a small price to pay.
If all went exactly according to your desires, what would the future of Western Civilization look like, both globally and locally?
Western nations would embrace their heritage and return to ethnic homogeneity
a significant proportion of the geography of these nations, ideally the majority, would become technology-free zones to which individuals could be exiled, voluntarily or otherwise, when they are poor fits in their communities
art would be appreciated locally and idealized globally: it would be more common to personally know great performers nearby than for the few greatest performers to monopolize attention through mass media, and artists look toward replicating and improving works of the highest excellence across the history of the globe
automation would replace slavery and other similar arrangements, rendering an underclass obsolete
human reproduction would be natural (which ensures species and racial survival by preventing reproductive dependence on technology that may fail) but augmented with knowledge of phenotype made possible from reputation that can exist only in strong communities, and with knowledge made possible with genetic advancements indicating the likely phenotype (intelligence, height, ailments, etc.) of a given pairing
castes would be mostly downwardly mobile, with those falling off the lowest caste allowed to live out their child-free lives in peace to enjoy as they like if they cause no problems
extraterrestrial colonization succeeds and prevents the only source of life we know of from being snuffed out
Thank you for taking the time to communicate with our readers yet again. There is a lot to think about and be inspired by in what you have said.
Thursday, October 27th, 2016
The Alt Right rose, then tried to figure out what it was. It knew a general direction, which was that it said the stuff that the mainstream Right wanted to but could not and still keep its jobs, but beyond that, it was confused.
It arose from a mishmash of philosophies. The New Right, Traditionalism, White Nationalism, Paleoconservatives, Neoreaction, Nietzschean conservatives and Dark Enlightenment met in a blender. Some have suggested that the intersection among them is right, but more likely, it is their shared forward ideal: a resurrection of the greatness of Western Civilization, and to that end, the means and methods required to achieve it.
Many have contemplated it. Among the best:
And that is only a small sampling of all that has been written on this topic, although these pieces at least cover all topics and link to all major articles. And still, the definition remains fuzzy… let us look at some recent sources:
“Will The Real Alt-Right Please Stand Up?”:
It seems to me that, if anything, the Alt-Right is a blanket term applied to all non-mainstream conservatives of all stripes that serves more as a negation than a positive claim. In other words, if anything, the Alt-Right brings people together based on what they mutually dislike, not a shared set of ideas.
Mr. Heft makes an essential basic point here: the Alt Right is formed in opposition to modernity, and there are many degrees of this. On the farthest Right, people want a restoration of traditional civilization to provide a new golden age of Pericles, as Arthur Schopenhauer suggested. We know what we do not want: the soul-killing, environment-killing, culture-destroying, pointless and tedious modern age, despite its good shopping and wide variety of ethnic food.
And what distinguishes those views?
“The Rise Of The Radical Right: The Alt Right, Neoreaction And The Trump Campaign”:
Meanwhile, the movement itself is an amalgamation of all ‘alternative’ right wing views that are today considered heterodoxy. This means that the views of one person who considers himself to be part of the ‘Alt-Right’ can be, though do not necessarily have to be, radically different to another.
Summary: these views are socially unacceptable. Taboo, in other words, they are forbidden by informal social rules from being uttered. All of the people who are currently thriving in this wasteland think that these things should not be mentioned. So: speakers of hidden, or dare we say… occult… notions of reality.
A New Right thinker of note expands on this:
“A Talk With Daniel Friberg, Co-Founder Of Arktos and RightOn“:
What I mean with the Real Right are those people, organisations and ideologies who do not accept the framework that the Left has set on the public debate.
…The success of the Alt Right illustrates the effectiveness of metapolitical methods. Via cultural means they have changed discourse and the boundaries of the public debate; they have changed the restraints of how we are allowed to think and eroded the shared dogmas of the Left and Old Right.
Two points here: first, this is a cultural revolution, and second, it rejects Leftist vocabulary. This is important because social pressures invert terms or reverse their meanings in order to control a population of faceless equals. Cultural revolution means that instead of fighting over existing political symbols, we decide what we want first and then cause it to rise organically through many avenues.
And then follows an attempt to simplify…
“We Are The Alt-Right”
Equality is bullshit. Hierarchy is essential. The races are different. The sexes are different. Morality matters and degeneracy is real. All cultures are not equal and we are not obligated to think they are. Man is a fallen creature and there is more to life than hollow materialism. Finally, the white race matters, and civilization is precious. This is the Alt-Right.
This expresses the formula that Alex Birch and I worked up for CORRUPT back in 2008:
Anti-democracy. Realizing that mob rule and trends do not successfully substitute for leadership by quality people.
Human Biodiversity (HBD). Recognizing the differences between groups, and more importantly individuals, and that every ability fits a normal distribution pattern in every population.
Ethnic Self-Determination. Every ethnic group needs its own self-rule and its own continent. This is not an argument against any specific ethnic group but a recognition that each group has its own self-interest and that under diversity these clash. Diversity does not work, no matter which groups are the ingredients.
Transcendental Purpose. We must find some way to connect to the beauty of this world and understand nature as an order superior to our own intentions, possibly including the metaphysical side of nature which is described by the various religions.
Anti-equality. Equality works for arithmetic, not people and not groups, including social castes, races, ethnic groups and families. People are different, with different abilities that are mostly genetic if not all genetic.
In a time when many people want to enter the Alt Right, and control it by redefining it, it is important to remember this bottom line: The Alt Right is against equality.
That dividing line separates the wannabes from the real deal. The wannabes will accept everything else but that; they want to eject certain ethnic groups, but are not against diversity itself; they want to throw out the elites, and then hold more elections to get new rotten elites. They want us to all be Orthodox Medieval Crusader Catholics, but then, equality is the basis of their social order (as long as one prays twice a day whilst facing Mecca, or, perhaps Pennsylvania). All of them get it wrong.
The Alt Right is a revolution against the past millennium. We do not believe in equality. From that, all else flows; equality is the illusion of our time dating back to before the Peasant Revolutions and the Magna Carta. It is the basis of all modernity, all Leftism, and the type of collectivized individualism that creates these things (which in turn arises from civilization success which enables lower orders to outnumber the higher).
This brings us back to the first opinion cited above: the Alt Right is a rejection of Modernity, with modernity not being a span of years or a type of technology, but a type of civilization design based in equality. Modernity is the cold night of the moon to the warm sun of the golden ages of humankind.
The Alt Right formed in order to get away from both mainstream conservatism, which is a hybrid of Leftism called “liberalism” or “neoconservatism,” as well as White Nationalism which essentially wants a classless society in the Leftist model in which all white people are merged together into a grey white race, sometimes called “ethno-Bolshevism.”
White Nationalism is filled with crazies and is at least 50% informants. It failed for a reason. If anything, White Nationalism is a stepping stone to reach the Alt Right. White Nationalism, and its precursor National Socialism, are still stuck in the modern paradigm of equality, “Systems” of rules and regulations, and allowing material orders like demotism — consumerism, democracy and social popularity/peer pressure — to determine what is right. The Alt Right wants us to find what is right, and then have society pursue that, instead of the other way around.
If anything, the Alt Right is more Nationalist than White Nationalism. It recognizes the need for national and regional identity in the identitarian model; it rejects the idea of forming a generic white race and then allowing modernity to exist as it has. It throws down the Constitution and burns the Declaration of Independence. The Alt Right is total rejection of modernity.
Unlike Neoreaction, the Alt Right gives a nod to Radical Traditionalism, the system of thought espoused by Rene Guenon, Aldous Huxley and Julius Evola. It wants a rising civilization against, capable of the greatness of the past.
For this reason, the Alt Right is challenging to define, because first and foremost it requires people to accept an entirely different view of civilization than anything they see around them. Then it leads them through rejection of what exists now, and some basic ideas of what they want instead. Then it shows them the substructure required to support those ideas, and suddenly, we have left modernity far behind, like Peter Pan sailing over London at night.
Those who want to control the Alt Right are trying to boil it down to a single principle, like how the Leftist ideology has “equality” at its core. This takes what is not-modern and places it back within the modern, effectively neutering it. This amounts to entryism by Leftism into the Alt Right and will sabotage it as surely as making it a Justin Bieber fan club.
Instead, the Alt Right suggests we keep going past all boundaries and all expectations. Our societies are doomed if they stay on the current path; this is a good time to dream, and for the first instance, to get it right. We are facing an evolutionary hurdle here: either we surpass modernity, or it buries us.
Perhaps the above will help some intrepid venturers make the journey.