Posts Tagged ‘white nationalism’

Why The Alt Right Is An International Movement

Thursday, November 9th, 2017

You may have heard someone ask this one: “Is the Alt Right a whites-only movement, or can anyone take part?”

And naturally, like the waters of the Red Sea, the audience divides into two. On one side are those who want to argue for civic nationalism or patriotism to some ideology or flag or another, and on the other side, those who argue that this movement is strictly racially-based.

We know that the former group are not quite correct because The Age of Ideology is over, and so we are out of the time of proposition-nations, nation-states, patriotism, “civic nationalism,” “systems” and other comedic attempts to achieve both equality and order (you cannot: those are opposites). But is the second group fully correct, or merely not as wrong as the first group?

Naturally it makes sense also to issue a warning about the second group, which is that “white nationalism” is not something we wish to embrace. As a form of ethno-bolshevism, it seeks to unite different ethnic groups on the basis of race alone and invent culture after that, which is why it has been unstable for years and alienated those with the power to implement it.

At the same time, it makes no sense to swing toward libertarianism, either, as many during the Trump years are attempting to do, because “everybody do whatever they wantthey can afford” is anathema to social order just as equality, communism, democracy, consumerism and anarchism are. Libertarians are right about the economy, but a civilization is more than its economy.

This leaves us in the position of wanting an organic movement, or one that is both based in populations as ethnic groups, and addresses society as a whole, meaning that it is more concerned with social order than individualism. All other systems — libertarianism, communism, democracy — are based in The Renaissance™ notion of individualism.

With that in mind, we face a difficult realization: while anything derived from Leftism, including “civic nationalism,” is the wrong side, white nationalism is not fully the right side either. In fact, it is an artifact of the past that we should leave behind:

A pretty good rule of life is that failure is assured if you follow in the footsteps of previous failures. It’s why adopting Nazi symbols is stupid. The Third Reich was most notable for being a disastrous failure. Associating your thing with failure is just bad marketing.

…Putting all of that aside, prior iterations of white nationalism always suffered from the fact they were reactionary. At their very best, they could only offer a critique of the prevailing order. They had nothing to offer as an alternative, beyond demands to wind the clock backwards. Reactionary movements always fail in the long run for the simple reason that yesterday can never follow tomorrow.

…Whatever comes to define white identity in the age of identity politics will have to appeal to and serve the interests of the vast majority of whites. That can’t just be a visceral hatred of non-whites. Whites in America are mostly from west of the Hajnal line, which means low clannishness. Old fashioned tribal signalling against the next tribe is not going to work. What comes next has to be an ideology that promotes a positive identity offering a promising future.

The two biggest points here are that white nationalism lacks a plan that promises a better future and it needs something more than race to unite people.

In other words, we have to present an alternate vision of history starting tomorrow where we do certain things that not only avoid our present problems, but add something better to inspire people. This is not optics; it is advertising. It also has to be true, because people have had it up to the neck with ideology and its promises that turned out to be lies.

From a practical perspective, it makes sense to start with the economy, and this is where Anarcho-Capitalists, Libertarians and Neoreactionaries have it 100% right: capitalism is the last man standing of the proposed economic systems; everything else destroys your economy and turns your people into zombies addicted to government, as in Europe.

That however is not enough, just like nationalism by itself is not enough.

We are planning a civilization here, not arguing for one economic system over another. We know we need nationalism and capitalism, but those are two items in a list because they address different needs. Nationalism means that culture replaces government as the force that orders our daily lives; capitalism means that reward occurs for practical reasons, not ideological ones.

The Alt Right proves itself unique among all political movements because it seeks not just a contemporary solution, but an epic one that spans the ages; the Alt Right seeks to restore Western Civilization to the greatness of the ancients, whose art and philosophy far surpass our own, with the technology of today. That means ending our corrupt modern age, and then aiming much, much higher.

A starter list for those who wish to restore Western Civilization will likely include the following:

Restorationists desire the four pillars of making civilization functional again:

  1. Rule by culture. Government and police are inferior methods compared to citizens who view society as a cooperative endeavor toward a goal, according to principles held in common. These are a product of culture. To defend culture, all who are not of the ethnic group must be excluded; this is a principle called Nationalism. With nationalism, government is deprecated and day-to-day order is kept through use of shame, ostracism and exclusion to keep outsiders and saboteurs at bay.
  2. Hierarchy and excellence. Society can either take its rich and powerful and assume they are good, or find those among its people who are excellent — superior in ability, leadership, intelligence and moral insight — and give them the wealth and power to use well. 99% of humanity will make these decisions wrong, and all people in groups will choose to avoid facing real issues. We need those who do the opposite to have power and wealth to ensure that it is used well, much as (in theory) we entrust nuclear weapons only to those of excellent character.
  3. Positive reward systems. Again we face a primary division: we either force everyone to conform and look for anomalies to punish, or we diligently reward those who do well so that they ascend to positions of leadership. A heroic culture does some of this, but on a more practical level, so does capitalism: it rewards those who find opportunity and meet needs, as kept in check by culture and hierarchy.
  4. A transcendental goal. No healthy society has merely material goals. It aims to achieve the impossible so that it can constantly improve, such as the motives of ancient societies to achieve balance, harmony, equilibrium and excellence. Religion is part of this, but not the whole. We must collaborate toward a goal again and have it be more than tangible, but eternal.

Each of these four pillars is so massively taboo in our society that mere mention of it sends the people who are vested in the system scurrying for cover. These are the poisons that un-do our current dysfunctional order, which makes them medicine for those who wish to escape certain doom as civilization collapses, including the destruction of all they have worked for.

On top of capitalism and nationalism, this list adds the notion of hierarchy to replace the idea of equality, and the thought that we must have a purpose which is not finite and material, but based in an appreciation of the wisdom of the order of the universe and a desire to be compatible with it and by acting in accord with it, improving ourselves naturally.

Add to that the idea of organicism itself, which is that civilization must be based in innate similarities between people — Samuel Huntington’s “Clash of Civilizations” shows this to be the future — and must address civilization as an organic whole, meaning that it looks for a meaningful social order instead of attempting to defend individualism against realistic obligations, as democracy does.

Stated from a slightly different angle, this looks like redesigning civilization around adaptation to nature, instead of isolating the individual from the need to adapt and confront the core of life, which is finding a reason to exist and pursue virtue:

The Ult Right consists of these basic beliefs:

  • Social order. Some people are good; “people” in general are not good. They may not be fully bad, but they are not pointed toward what is good. As a result we need a hierarchy of categories, known as castes, where we select people by intelligence and moral outlook so that the best are on the top, with layers beneath. This encourages upward motion and ensures that the upper castes, who have more wisdom, make the decisions that influence daily life, products, culture and art. This benefits everyone by improving the quality of these things.
  • Leadership. Politicians are actors presenting fairytales to fool an audience into voting for them so that they can deliver the same thing time and again. Their power comes from the illusion that they are taking care of us. Instead, dispense with this idea, and promote actual leaders with unlimited power to fix problems, and let people take care of themselves as they do in nature, according to self-interest. By recognizing this principle instead of demonizing it, we can accept people as they are, and have our best at the top showing the way. Since dictatorships are unstable, the best method here is hereditary aristocracy, in which we take our best people and breed them as a permanent group from which leaders are chosen.
  • Culture. The root of culture is the ethnic group; when that group is separated from others, it has the ability to make daily choices by a values system, instead of needing a maze of laws and regulations. Citizens enforce rules on each other through social approval for good behavior and fleeing in fear from bad. This enables cooperation because people are similar and moving in similar patterns, so there is no need for the neurotic internal chatter, excessive competition and debate that afflicts democratic societies.
  • Purpose. Early civilizations have a goal: become organized and survive. When civilizations become successful, this goal evaporates and is replaced by looking inward and backward in a quest for meaning. We need meaning through a desire to become not only successful, but to improve our quality and to rise to the point of wisdom and power where we can explore the stars, invent the greatest of arts and philosophies, make our cuisine inspirational, and live well in every sense of the word. At some point, this includes having a metaphysical direction, or a meaning beyond the physical, so that we can understand every aspect of the challenge of existence.

How could this happen? Unite the top 5% of society by natural ability around some form of these ideas, and start removing laws. Eventually replace them with others. These laws would form the basis of our transition. They will also entail the peaceful and generous repatriation of those outside the founding ethnic group, and the gentle removal of those whose values conflict with our own, such as neurotic Leftists and those who engage in destructive behaviors.

Who rules over us that we cannot criticize? It is us. We the people, enshrined by Enlightenment™ ideas of individualism, are the ones making the decisions. We are doing a bad job of it and there is no sense that we will improve in the future, even with momentary thrusts toward sanity like Brexit and Trumprise. Herds make poor decisions; we are dooming ourselves by demanding power.

People — especially those top 5%, who basically hold everything together by being able to make sane decisions — require some vision of the future that is distinctive enough from the present to be a path that delivers us from the evils of the present, but also presents a clear enough vision of something to aspire to, toward which they can push themselves and in which they can see themselves succeeding, where they end up with a good feeling about themselves because they are fighting back bad and replacing it with good.

For us to see this vision, we have to discard the artifacts of the past era. In the Age of Ideology, people “won” by finding whatever simplistic illusion pleased a herd enough for them to vote for it or watch it on television. People are more cynical now, since with the Obama years, we saw how ideology and reality are light years apart, and ended the second Obama term as a divided nation with a ruined economy, inept military, huge drug addiction problem and lost national prestige.

In the future, we will stop looking for one big simple unifying vision because we distrust such things after having seen that they are illusory. Instead, it is time to embrace the complexity: there is no one simple theory that explains everything. Instead, we have a short laundry list of things that work, and everything else we take on a case-by-case basis.

That includes simplistic ideas like “white nationalism.” It is not a whole philosophy; it attempts to use one simple idea, racial separation, to solve every problem, and that is unreasonable. It is contra-Darwinian in that it includes all whites and ignores differences in ethnicity, caste, quality, class and region. It fails to demand necessary things like cultural restoration, hierarchy, something like religion or transcendental philosophy that gives us intangible purpose, and the need for a more functional equality that leaves fewer good people in the dirt.

We know Leftism is dead; when given power, it realized its goals and produced a dystopia instead of Utopia. But we cannot repeat its mistakes or we will throw ourselves on the garbage bin of history.

All of this boils down to a simple idea: the Alt Right is not a white nationalist movement, but a shift in how we view human civilization. We are no longer looking for a universal human order that spans the globe, but every nation is starting to see itself as an ethnic group which needs to figure out what works for itself so it can command its future instead of relying on the globalist trend to take care of it in the way that a Communist government takes care of (maybe put that in scare quotation marks) its citizens.

You can join the Alt Right no matter what ethnic background you have, but if you are Alt Right, you are joining the Alt Right within your ethnic group. We are not a worldwide movement, but a movement of movements, one in each ethnic group, striving to find a responsible structure for their civilization after a few centuries of Leftist insanity.

That will not satisfy anyone whose thinking is locked into that of the previous era. They want a big Leftist-style movement where government seizes all the power and forces people into molds that make them turn out as a mass culture that does what the ideology says is right. But that age, The Age of Ideology, has ended.

Our new future consists of finding a path away from the combined failures of the past and present, choosing the people to implement that, and leading those who can work within that order to set up new forms of civilization that are not failing like our present one. Everyone could participate, but only those who understand it, can.

Why The Alt Right Is Winning

Monday, October 23rd, 2017

Across the media, mass bloviation has broken out. They dislike the Alt Right and want to explain it away as a fluke or a dark gesture of primeval hatred from the unrefined portions of the human psyche. And yet, it and similar movements continue to grow, mainly because they are an organic alternative to the plastic world in which we live.

Humans have a pathology — at least if you pay attention to the stuff written on the outside of boxes of home and body care products — for the “natural.” We like 100% natural ingredients, natural methods, and ancient Indian recipes for hemorrhoid care because we distrust the scented, artificially-flavored, plastic wrapped, safe, corporate and sugar-added world of slick products designed to appeal to our lowest desires and worst impulses.

Implicit in this desire is the idea that somehow, everything wrong with our society is the opposite of the “natural”: the fake, contrived, flavored, over-produced, and deceptive human world common to both extensively-advertised products and human social groups, where little white lies and euphemisms quickly adulterate and divide any logical perspective into mental goo reflecting our simian weaknesses.

We have become accustomed, brave moderns that we are, to a society that is mostly toxic in the guise of being safe and sterile. Pasteurizing milk was a great success, so we pasteurized our brains. We know that most of the products in the grocery store are nearly poisonous fodder for morons, that commuting is a giant waste of time, and that 90% of what we do at our jobs is unnecessary.

We are aware that commercial districts grow like a fungus, that advertising is lies, that newspapers are written to flatter advertisers and dazzle us with addictive nonsense so we want to know more. We know that movies are fake, that anything said in public is probably a lie, that most of our taxes are wasted on counterproductive or outright destructive activity.

When we seek out “natural” products or experiences, we are trying to escape the common experience of an artificially-constructed society, starting with the opinion of the herd that everyone is good and therefore whatever they think is right probably is. If we are honest, we admit that we hate our society, but that it is popular with most people, so we do not expect it to go away.

Countering that notion, the Alt Right shows us a group of people who are intelligent, well-spoken and determined to execute a plan of saving this civilization from itself by reversing that artificiality. They want to restore Western Civilization and to get rid of the pervasive hopelessness that we all have, watching insanity happen and knowing it will never change because “most people” want it that way.

The Alt Right has us asking why every European civilization starts out blonde-haired, blue-eyed, long-faced and high-IQ, and ends up with lots of short dark-haired and dark-eyed people who are good at making money. It asks us why every civilization in human history has self-destructed. It looks deeply into our motivations and finds a dark plastic void.

This ties in to what we have observed about our world: we are run by the wrong group of wealthy people, meaning that we got the scumbag exploiters instead of the noble aristocrats. And they, as a means of keeping the herd pacified, have spun a pack of lies which are as insincere as advertising or any other talk in public:

In the world of the wealthy, liberalism is something you do to offset your rapacious behavior in other spheres.

…Most people on the left think of themselves as resisters of authority, but for certain of their leaders, modern-day liberalism is a way of rationalizing and exercising class power. Specifically, the power of what some like to call the “creative class”, by which they mean well-heeled executives in industries like Wall Street, Silicon Valley and Hollywood.

…This is a form of liberalism that routinely blends self-righteousness with upper-class entitlement. That makes its great pronouncements from Martha’s Vineyard and the Hamptons.

People figured out centuries ago, or maybe always knew, that it is easier to make a large public donation than to do the right thing in every case. Similarly, Leftism teaches that there is one area where one must be moral — making everyone equal — and this, too, is easier to implement than it is to do the right thing in every moment. These are shortcuts, a part standing for the whole.

There are great profits in lying, cheating and stealing. If all it takes is to give a tenth of your income to a church or NGO, but you are able to go from making millions to making billions, then it is all worth it. Consider the Sackler family, who donate lavishly to charity but got their money from hooking America on Valium and Oxycontin.

One of the big stories about the West over the past few decades has been the concentration of wealth. This is not so much a story of people being more competent, but of our tax systems: we zap anyone who realizes income as salary, while those who are able to own companies find themselves able to pay a lot less because they do not take anything more than a nominal salary; their wealth is in the firm itself.

For example, consider Bill Gates and his billions. When people first started talking about him being “worth $60 billion,” that conjured up an image to most people of a man with a huge bank account. In reality, his wealth was almost entirely all Microsoft stock, and while he took a high CEO salary, it was relatively small compared to his holdings.

The average American or European voter understands economics about as well as history, so is oblivious to the fact that over the past four decades, the middle class has been eroding:

Over the same period, however, the nation’s aggregate household income has substantially shifted from middle-income to upper-income households, driven by the growing size of the upper-income tier and more rapid gains in income at the top. Fully 49% of U.S. aggregate income went to upper-income households in 2014, up from 29% in 1970.

When presented in the standard narrative, this makes it sound like those evil rich people just took all the income for themselves. What it really means is that the middle class is being squeezed by taxes to pay for a growing underclass, higher expenses due to taxes and regulations, and pressure from below as a steady flood of immigrants depress wages.

This becomes clear when we look at the fact that real wages have not budged since the mid-1960s, at about the same time we changed our immigration policy, began our welfare state and started shuffling women into the workforce.

It is relatively simple economics: whatever you have more of is less valuable; compare tin to gold, for example. And when you have a workforce, and raise the costs of each worker through unions, taxes, regulations and lawsuits, you will then create a situation where business wants cheaper labor, but providing that cheaper labor will shatter salaries, with all of the money still being frittered away in taxes, union fees, legal costs and hiring of endless bureaucrats within companies to deal with regulatory compliance. In other words, we took the money from the middle class and gave it to government and those who, by working with government, have made themselves quite wealthy. This is the same mistake that humans always make, because of defective wiring apparently, which is that they want government to protect them, so they give it power, forgetting that it is self-interested and provides income opportunities to many who will then enlarge those opportunities. Soon government is an industry in itself, and this takes money out of the functional economy and puts it into the political fantasyland economy.

Your middle class person now has seen their fortunes fall. They are working longer hours for less, in part because the increase in taxes has come not through income tax but through withholding, property taxes, healthcare taxes, sales taxes and other ancillary taxes which increase the total load. In Europe, they rely on the social benefits system to get them through, which it does, but increasingly this means they will enter retirement later and still have a nation in deep debt when they leave the workforce.

In addition, they have seen the fundamental transformation of their nation by liberal social engineering, have been excluded from many opportunities by affirmative action, realize there is a runaway altruism spiral that is propelling big government, have witnessed the rise in existential misery, have become accustomed to political violence as a norm, are waking up to demographic replacement and the failure of liberal democracy, and now they are ready to leave behind liberal democracy so that they can leave the “liberal” part, that seems inextricable from the rest, behind.

The Alt Right appeals to the middle class because it addresses these issues instead of explaining them away with moral justifications. It sees that the fundamental problem of humanity is herd behavior, and that when this takes over, people engage in some kind of group-think that always favors the simplistic, so we find ourselves applying increasing amounts of force to change effects instead of addressing their underlying causes. Across the West, “populist” parties are winning for the same reason.

People have tired of The Age of Ideology, which is based on the idea that we can create a human-only order which is superior to nature. This human order invariably involves the notion of removing differences, akin to pacifism, through equality or other universal acceptance for all humans instead of ranking humans in a hierarchy by how realistic they are, as measured by whether their actions turn out to have positive consequences instead of negative ones. This naturally implicates qualitative thinking, or measuring how much better one result of actions was than another.

After the age of ideology comes The Age of Organicism. In this age, people desire civilization again; they want to have human social order, instead of rampant individualism producing greed and obliviousness to the consequences of our actions. They see a wisdom in the natural order that we abandoned long ago, when we became confident that our pacifism was better than the terrifying Darwinism of nature and its social component, where doing something stupid, selfish or unrealistic marked us as being of lower status. That confidence is gone now, and natural order has returned, bringing with it an inherent desire to restore Western Civilization and recognize that its roots are genetic, not ideological. Ideology springs up from that desire toward pacifism so that a purely human world can exist, where our individual desires and their counterparts in what the social group wants are more important than consequences in reality, which are regulated by the rules of natural law, logic, history and common sense.

Part of this impetus comes from realizing that other groups have an agenda contrary to our own because each group has its own identity and seeks to make itself powerful by conquering other groups. Diversity is a prescription for constant conflict followed by genetic degradation, at which point we have as little hope of restoring civilization as ethnically-mixed groups like Italians, South Americans, Eastern Europeans or the Irish. We need to take a stand for Western identity, which has its roots in the Western European people, the same group that left mummies in the Tarim basin, founded Greece and Rome, invaded or originated in India, and then created the modern nations of Northern and Western Europe which share that Nordic-Germanic genetic root.

The Left has begun to notice this when it realizes belatedly that, by embracing identity politics, it opened the door to European identity politics, which had been suppressed since they were a primary part of the nationalist message in WWII:

“They’re targeting white male students,” said Lecia Brooks, Southern Poverty Law Center’s director of outreach, who worked on a guide about how to deal with the “alt-right” on campus. “For the young white men who feel excluded from the diversity of campus culture — these groups offer an alternative. It’s a counter to the popular culture that they think doesn’t include them.”

Spencer and his allies all claim to be working toward the preservation of “white American culture” — a culture they view as threatened existentially by multiculturalism…Spencer advocates only for creating a whites-only ethnostate.

Naturally, the question of this whites-only ethnostate invokes the question of nationalism, which is generally ethnic (“Germany for Germans”) and not racial (“Germany for all whites”). This issue further threatens the break-up of the modern state, which embraced multi-ethnicism before multiculturalism or multi-racialism, as it might be properly described, possibly causing it. This issue appears tangentially on a regular basis:

“Actually, he probably hates me,” Spencer added, half joking. “Because I’m a WASP and he’s Scots Irish.” I tell him that the Scots Irish didn’t get along with Irish Catholics either—they didn’t even consider us white for a while—so he probably hates me too. Finally, we’re interrupted by his fans, and only later I think to ask Spencer: Does he consider me white?

And yet, if one is to escape the artificial modern world, half-measures will not really work; only going to the roots of organic society and identity will. People do not want imposed identity, like ideology, and they are skeptical of elective identity, like being a Star Trek fan or a radical Christian. They want innate identity, such as only comes with an ethnically-isolated civilization.

The Left has counter-attacked this movement by claiming that, instead of demanding equal rights for European-descended groups, this new movement exists to subjugate other groups. Like all Leftist claims, this is a begging-the-question fallacy: the Left assumes that a multicultural, liberal democratic, and sexually tolerant society is the only acceptable form of civilization, when it is merely a test hypothesis that we have acted out, in increasing degrees, for the last two centuries.

As Leftist commentators gather to try to defuse the situation, they have come up with only one plan: to argue that liberal democracy is the end of history, and therefore, that we are stuck with it and need to make it work. For people who talk about change and progress, they get awfully shifty when the arc of history bends away from their preferred humanistic assumptions, all based in the liberal ideology of equality.

For example, The New York Times wants you to think that our problem is not that our society is falling apart, but that some people have noticed this and begun criticizing the multicultural republic as the ultimate model of human society, because this harms the sensation of well-being that we have in the midst of this decay:

As an ideology, white nationalism poses a significantly greater threat to Western democracies; its proponents and sympathizers have proved, historically and recently, that they can win a sizable share of the vote — as they did this year in France, Germany and the Netherlands — and even win power, as they have in the United States.

Far-right leaders are correct that immigration creates problems; what they miss is that they are the primary problem. The greatest threat to liberal democracies does not come from immigrants and refugees but from the backlash against them by those on the inside who are exploiting fear of outsiders to chip away at the values and institutions that make our societies liberal.

Anti-Semitic and xenophobic movements did not disappear from Europe after the liberation of Auschwitz, just as white supremacist groups have lurked beneath the surface of American politics ever since the Emancipation Proclamation. What has changed is that these groups have now been stirred from their slumber by savvy politicians seeking to stoke anger toward immigrants, refugees and racial minorities for their own benefit. Leaders from Donald Trump to France’s Marine Le Pen have validated the worldview of these groups, implicitly or explicitly encouraging them to promote their hateful opinions openly. As a result, ideas that were once marginal have now gone mainstream.

Left and Right are different things, but in a Leftist time — one originating in democratic, humanist, Enlightenment,™ or Renaissance™ thought — the Right-wing party is part Left-wing. And so you can hear essentially the same message from conservatives, which is that what matters are our rules, not our people, nor continuation of the past through heritage as a repository of values:

Bush’s speech deserves our attention.

Here’s what he said: “Our identity as a nation . . . is not determined by geography or ethnicity, by soil or blood. Being an American involves the embrace of high ideals and civic responsibility. We become the heirs of Thomas Jefferson by accepting the ideal of human dignity found in the Declaration of Independence.”

That’s exactly what Abraham Lincoln said in 1858. What makes us Americans is our allegiance to a creed.

Both of these Left- and Right-wing commentators are saying the same thing: the institution of democracy is our only hope, and so we must reason backward to figure out how to support democracy, instead of thinking toward what we need as a civilization. In other words, civilization itself is a means to an end of democracy and the ideas it enshrines in rules, like equality.

The Age of Ideology has ended, however, and so these fellows are barking at the tail-end of a receding trend. Democracy brought with it many great promises, but what it really meant was that the lowest common denominator always won out over any kind of sensible realistic thinking, and so we are constantly in crisis, with our civilization in decay.

They must think it is normal to turn on the news and read of political, social, economic, military, environmental, and diplomatic crises every day. In reality, this is a sign of our dysfunction, as are the subjugating careers we undertake in order to pay high taxes and fund the permanent underclass, the debt of our national governments, and the ugliness of our cities.

Modernity is a failure. Modernity results upon the Renaissance™ idea of the human individual, not social order or natural law, being the primary focus of humanity. It appeals to a desire in all of us to stop struggling against the endless illogicality, parasitism, venality, and stupidity of the herd, and instead to just be tolerant and retreat to our suburban homes while the madness rages outside.

That has not worked. What you tolerate, you get more of. And so, when we retreated from trying to have a sane and virtuous society, we let the chaos monkeys run free, and they have managed to steal, vandalize, adulterate and bowdlerize every single aspect of our world. It has been a fundamental transformation indeed.

The Alt Right points out a brutal reality, which is that the medium is the message. In other words, how we live is more important than the words we use to rationalize our lives, and we are seeing the failure of that rationalization.

We have also noticed the agenda to replace us, much as equality was a hidden agenda to overthrow higher echelons and replace them with mercantile middle classes:

For Taylor, the endgame of the “alt-right” is create an “ethno-state” for people of European heritage.

“If there is no territory that white Americans can call their own, we will ultimately be shoved aside,” he said. “If that is not done, are what point are white Americans allowed to say it has gone too far? When we’re 20 percent of the population? When we’re five percent of the population?”

He feels that this goal has been misrepresented by the media – and that it is a peaceful movement. He said it is a fundamentally different ethos than white supremacy.

“I’m not even sure what white supremacy means,” he said. “If it means anything it means whites are supposed to be ruling over other races. I don’t think anyone in the ‘alt-right’ wants that.”

He makes a point that any other ethnic or racial group could easily do, but when spoken by a European person, is seen as taboo. This occurs because Europeans, as a strong and creative group, threaten the idea of the worldwide herd being equal. Those who rise above must be cut down in order for equality to occur, and the Left are a neurotic bunch who are driven by the parasitic mental virus that demands they always push for equality and see it as the only form of “good” in our world.

The Alt Right is winning because we have chosen to reject The Age of Ideology, with its creeds and demands for the destruction of quality in order to have equality, and have embraced The Age of Organicism, in which results and traditions matter more than conjectural ideologies and their promises. Those promises have failed. And so now, we venture bravely forth into a new era.

Marginal Groups Attract Marginal People

Wednesday, October 18th, 2017

Another high-profile “Nazi” has defected, mainly because this happens every few years, with the Nazi in question discovering that he is gay, Jewish, part-black or some other “contradictory” aspect that fascinates the Left who truly believe that if you oppose something, you must secretly love it. Never mind that this describes their relationship to power, not how the rest of us work.

In this case, the subject in question really won the lottery. He was not only gay, but part-Jewish, and so he has a get-out-of-jail-free card of unprecedented magnitude. In short, by revealing those details, he was able to erase his Nazi past in a minute and make himself a pet of the ruling elites, who are always Leftist unless they are actually good.

The media adore these sorts of stories:

A prominent neo-Nazi and former organiser of the National Front has given up his far-right views as well as revealed he is gay and has Jewish heritage.

Kevin Wilshaw was a high-profile figure of the National Front in the 1980s and was speaking at extreme right events as recently as this year.

Luckily, our journalists-in-chief are too simple-minded to realize that not just is this not unusual, it is the norm, and fits in with a pattern of anti-social and dysfunctional behavior by white nationalists. Extremist philosophies attract those who only feel accepted when they think their aberrant behavior will not be seen as abnormal.

Consider the case of Frank Collin, née Cohen:

Frank Joseph Collin is most often associated in the public mind as the neo-Nazi who threatened in 1977 to march and rally in Skokie, a predominately Jewish suburb of Chicago.

…The infamous Frank Joseph Collin (the half-Jewish, ex-neo-Nazi, and convicted pederast) is now also a witch.

The Illinois Corrections Department released Collin after three years, a “minimum time served,” from his 1980 conviction of sexually molesting young boys. Since 1983 Collin has established himself as a published author, editor, and anti-science proponent.

But the list goes on. There’s Frazier Glenn Cross, Jr., who shot up a Jewish community center, killing three people — none of whom were Jewish — after falling out with his former comrades because he admitted he was a police informer.

An uncomfortable overlap with drugs, police informers, pedophilia and domestic abuse seems to chase the far-Right around because when you recruit from the most disaffected members of society, you also get some seriously unstable people who look at the movement and think, “Well, no one will notice my weirdness there.”

The only way to beat this is to go legit and have a movement that only advocates policy-level changes, such as abolishing diversity and repatriating those who are not Western European, and does not get into extremist symbolism, violence fetishism or other dysfunctional behaviors.

We fear becoming a mainstream party on the farthest reaches of the Right because every mainstream party has quickly shifted Leftward. That happens when you try to recruit a mass audience, but not when you target the sensible few. It is possible to be mainstream without being corrupted, although you will never be as mainstream as the true McCheeseburger parties which spin scapegoat/victimhood fables for fools.

As the Alt Right rises, it is making the decision to avoid the mistakes of white nationalism, including its over-reliance on the alienated which resulted in it becoming a warm and welcoming host for the mentally unstable. Our future lies in having real ideas, working toward them, and ignoring the human chaos that blights every underground movement.

“American Nationalism” Is Civic Nationalism Rebranded

Saturday, September 30th, 2017

All of human history has played out through cycles: a truth is found, then people complain about how difficult it is, so they invent “truths” that explain why the truth is the opposite of the plain reality, and then everyone gradually goes insane as the anti-truths seep into every area of society, discourse and even the psychological makeup of individuals.

You might think that infiltration events of this nature are rare, but in fact, they are the norm, which is why every organization ultimately drifts Leftward, even when it tries to be Right-wing. When the raw material coming into an organization is indoctrinated in Leftism, they will simply arrange their Right-wing beliefs around that core, which forces all those beliefs to be re-interpreted in a Leftist context.

If everyone thinks the sky is green and the grass is blue, and you set up an organization dedicated to the principle of blue skies and green grass, then you will immediately suffer a flood of people who insist the sky is “green-blue” and the fields are “blue-green,” at which point it is an easy step to full subversion.

In the same way, American mainstream conservatives found themselves, over time, becoming dedicated to “equality” by spreading democracy and capitalism worldwide, and underground conservatives found themselves fighting for white ethnic equality instead of nationalism. They were subverted not by deliberate act, but by the entropy of individual bias as people coming into the groups re-made them into what people were indoctrinated to expect.

Few modern people think about the word, but inversion destroys all meaning. Inversion occurs when people start banning certain accurate ideas. This can be as simple as excluding them through social means, like saying that it is impolite to notice something or another. Inversion changes the definition of words to be their opposite, since something in the original meaning was taboo.

Right now, the Alt Right is under assault by people who want to re-make it as “American Nationalism,” despite the contradiction in terms that this phrase implies. They argue that by adopting the flag, we can further radicalize the Left into revealing itself as anti-American:

Over the past several months, as anti-White condemnation of Confederate monuments and memorials has spilled over to a hatred of all “old, dead, White guys” in American history, we now see the Left equating Americanism with racism in the most vitriolic and bombastic fashion. The recent NFL controversy has attempted—and is succeeding—in painting both the National Anthem and the American flag as naked symbols of White oppression over non-Whites and the systemic White racism inherent in all White-constructed systems. The Left is attempting to complete a final rout of the already gutted late American cultural form-world.

…We need to say that “yes,” America was founded as a racist country. We need to say, “yes,” the flag is a symbol of White conquest and murder. And as our enemies stare confused, we declare the fact that all peoples that have ever lived were just as ruthless. We must move the dialogue beyond moralism, beyond Christianity, beyond right and wrong, good and evil. We need to affirm the right of a people to fight for their existence, putting others under the boot or sword when necessary, as being as natural as a flower stretching towards the sunlight. We need to declare: I am a White American and my people built this country—now get out of my way!

…So, yes, let’s join the liberals in calling America a racist White country. Let’s concede that the American flag is a hate symbol and rally behind it. Let’s be quick to point out to conservative normies whenever we can about just how brutal us Whites were to others, why we were right to do so, and why others will do it to us the moment we become a vulnerable minority. Nice guys always lose. Well, we aren’t nice guys anymore, and we should brag about what bad boys we really were. And our ancestors really were the baddest, most brutal men the world has ever known.

So what could be wrong with this? It sounds strong, bold… visionary. It seems to turn the initiatives of the Left back onto them like captured cannon. It appears to give us a unique identity and goal. But it does none of those things.

Let us look at the many ways that this “American Nationalism” is totally wrong.

  • No New Tale To Tell. Leftists have never hid the fact that they are against America. They do not admit this in public when asked the question directly, but allude to it and flaunt it many different ways. The ultimate goal of Leftism is international, or equality and unity of all the workers of the world.
  • It’s Anti-Nationalism. Nationalism means that one ethnic group equals one nation. Mixed-ethnic “nations” are not nations, but nation-states, unified by political and economic systems alone. Patriotism, sometimes called “civic nationalism,” is the idea that we can unite the nation-state using those abstractions, and replaces the goal of nationalism, which is not just race but ethnic group, which in the case of America is Western Europeans. We have seen this reliance on civic nationalism in the guise of racism before, and it was just as wrong-headed then. Adopt this “American Nationalism,” and invert everything you stand for.
  • It Denies Reality. Modernity is defined by its denial of any facts or truths but those that humans in large groups want to believe are true. The reality denied by equality is that genetics determines our abilities and inclinations, and this is relevant to nationalism because it means that groups of people who are genetically similar are best matched and disparate groups will have problems. Homogeneity works; heterogeneity, only really a thing for the past sixty years, has produced nothing but problems. Genetics defines us at many levels, including race, ethnicity, family and individual traits, with those creating naturally unequal populations that require a hierarchy to make use of their different abilities.
  • Pragmatism Is Not Realism. In a time where nearly everything is unreal, the only strength can be found in asserting reality loudly and clearly at every opportunity. We are fighting the human tendency toward pleasant illusion. Pragmatism states that we should achieve what is most easily achieved in the present system, but it obscures the need for realism. Only radical accuracy in thinking will win in the next era, so pragmatism is dead. We need to say what we want and not play clever games in order to manipulate others with symbols.
  • You Are Taking On The Lesser Symbol. The Left does this time and again, and the Right falls for it: they demonize an accurate symbol so that you will embrace another symbol that is easier for them to subvert. When you endorse the American flag, the Left cheers. They will wait for you to lose momentum, then quickly point out that America has always been mixed-race, and then they will steal away your audience and they will find themselves cheering for diversity and equality. Typical inversion.
  • We Are Not “Racists.” Racism, as it makes sense to define it, is contempt for other races and a desire to subjugate them and keep them as inferiors. Racism is ethnic cruelty. We are both race realists and nationalists, but not “racists.” Race realism means that we recognize that genetics is the root of ability and culture, and therefore that homogeneity works and heterogeneity does not; nationalism means that we believe that each nation should be comprised of only one ethnic group, because that way, the ethnic group is preserved and culture — not laws, economics or government propaganda — guides that population. Nationalism is a way beyond the “money first” and ideological dogma of modern societies.

“American Nationalism” is a meme or trope instead of sensible policy. It sounds good to those who want an easy symbol to unite lots of people, but because it loses meaning in doing so, it defeats itself. Our real goal is the restoration of Western Civilization and since America is only part of that, America is a means to that end.

Keep the Alt Right. It is a good brand, and it has withstood many challenges. It stands for those who are both conservative and realist, which means that we embrace the roots of conservatism including traditionalism, monarchy, hierarchy, nationalism and social order. It is the only force that can challenge modernity, and that is what we need to escape this thoroughly stupid and evil age.

Nationalist Public Radio, Episode 9: Interview With Jared Taylor of American Renaissance

Wednesday, September 27th, 2017

This week Nationalist Public Radio brings you our anticipated guest interview with renowned white advocate Jared Taylor of American Renaissance. The interview runs just over an hour covering a myriad of topics. The majority of the questions and topics of discussions can be seen below.

Download (79 minutes, 190mb)

1:00 – Introduction by Everitt Foster asking Jared Taylor about himself, his work and his inner motivation.
8:00 – Brett remarks on the rise of PC in higher education in the late 80s/early 90s.
9:00 – Brett asks if the problems we face is diversity or specific ethnic groups, and how this problem relates to leftism.
14:00 – Brett asks if we can end diversity and if so how?

17:10 – Roderick asks if there will soon be an inability of government and universities financially due to leftist policies.
21:20 – Everitt asks if the destruction of statues/monuments is directed at white people and not simply confederates.
24:30 – How can we in America compare apartheid and the targeting of whites in South Africa to our future if whites become a minority?
27:00 – Is it possible that the media and higher academia doesn’t represent a white population that is majority conservative?
30:00 – You made a video that went viral semi-recently. What were your reaction to it being removed from YouTube?
34:20 – James asks if censorship on both registrar’s and social media will become more rampant and what course of action should be taken.
40:30 – Roderick asks why Jared thinks leftists condemn white advocacy while glorifying transgenderism in children.
42:40 – James observes how Antifa targets and polarizes people with moderate political affiliations away from leftism.
46:40 – Everitt asks if Trump’s election is progress toward our goals as well as Jared’s take on how he responded to DACA.
51:30 – Roderick asks how Jared responds to feminism and how to reverse declining birth rates in white populations.
57:00 – Roderick asks if it is a waste putting women through college on frivolous degrees and instead focus on children.
59:00 – Brett asks if there is a root to cultural and social change and if it is modernity. As well if white people need to invent or resurrect a more visible culture for themselves.
1:02:30 – Asks if problems demographically harm the middle class due to the tax code.
1:06:20 – James poses a question from the audience regarding the divide in the alt right concerning the Jewish Question.
1:15:25 – James ask what course is best going forward in accordance with freedom of association and wealth distribution.

Why National Socialism and White Nationalism Have Become Obsolete

Tuesday, August 29th, 2017

In the weeks after the Charlottesville protest, which will prove to be a pivotal event in human history, several movements have become obsolete and not because they are being censored by government, media and corporations.

Neo-Nazism, white nationalism, National Socialism and White Supremacy have died. In their place has risen something much more threatening to the status quo: the awakened interest of Western European people in having their own civilization. This includes the knowledge that diversity, democracy, consumerism, tolerance and other equality-based ideas make it impossible to have that civilization.

For many years, WN/NS have coexisted with our media in a symbiotic relationship: when the news gets slow, the Hollywood Nazis show up and do something outrageous, which allows the media to have a conniption fit and sell tons of newspapers and internet ads because people are terrified that Hitler has showed up among us to genocide our Jews and enslave our African-American citizens.

The reality is that the people who have showed up tend to be insignificant, except for the fact that they can get media attention and then, in a mirror image of the SPLC and ADL, solicit donations from those who realize that diversity is unworkable and want an alternative. The whole thing is a big scam on both sides, except for a few True Believers who are worth paying attention to.

But in the last seventy years, WN/NS have done nothing but drive away the normal, well-adjusted upper half of middle class citizens who make all the decisions in our society. When you look out and see angry proles, you do not care if they are Communists or Nazis, because you realize that they are marginal at best and probably unstable.

The rise of a cluster of movements — Neoreaction, the Alt Right, Traditionalism and Identitarianism — show us that people desire the ability to speak in favor of social order, which general includes taboo ideas like nationalism and traditionalism, instead of the barely contained anarchy that is our democratic, consumerist and diverse society.

When the Alt Right showed up in Charlottesville, the Nazis among them did not define the day, although the media and Hollywood Nazis both wanted that to be the case. What defined the day was the the Alt Right, dressed in preppy clothes and snarky like college students, created an even more extreme reaction than WN/NS could garner, and this made the WN/NS elements obsolete.

Consider this as a simple question of economics. If you have two products, and one suddenly does everything that the other does and more, then why keep using the less effective product? WN/NS has been priced out of the market by the Alt Right, which communicates in a language that normal people can appreciate and avoids the extremism, violence and insanity of the majority of WN/NS groups.

The Alt Right is not calling for genocide, warfare and discrimination. The Alt Right simply points out some taboo aspects to reality: the diversity does not work despite centuries of effort and trillions of dollars in aid, that democracy creates a parasitic and tyrannical government, that promiscuous and selfish behavior is ruining our future. These truths themselves terrify egalitarians.

In other words, the Alt Right offers what people wanted from WN/NS, but gives much more. It offers a hopeful future vision, where diversity ends peacefully and a transition of power occurs, and Leftists resettle to the third world. It gives reasons for those ideas, and points out the obvious failings of our society by making fun of them in the grand tradition of savage humor.

Where WN/NS promised instability, the Alt Right offers stability. Part of this is that it did not eject the WN/NS from its ranks, but simply removed their power and made their ideologies obsolete, so that their best option is now to join the Alt Right and give up the unstable and sadistic aspects of their belief systems. They can no longer command the cameras by simply stepping out with flags and regalia. They are obsolete.

It is natural that conflict begins at the edges of society where antisocial behavior thrives. The man who is making a half-million a year notices the same problems that the man making a twentieth of that and living in a trailer does, but the first man has options and chooses to avoid conflict by escaping the problem. That has ended with the accelerating Leftist takeover of government.

The antisocial behaviors common to WN/NS are no longer needed. The upper half of the middle class is open to the idea that Western Europeans should live apart from others, that everyone else must go home, that our behavior needs an upgrade, and even that we need leadership more competent than what democracy can provide. They are not interested in cruelty, bigotry and a proclivity for violence however.

We have bypassed the conventions of those edges of society, including antisocial and cruel behavior, and gone for the middle. People in the middle want function above all else, and respond to practical ideas that are also favorable in the long term. These people have sleeping in them the ancient spirit, and secretly desire a Lord of the Rings style anarcho-monarchist and traditionalist society, which requires rule by culture and not markets or the popularity contest that resembles a market, which in turn requires identitarianism, or selecting the population by both ethnic heritage and cultural compatibility in parallel.

Many of us have for years criticized WN/NS as being excessive about the wrong things and weak about some important things. We were waiting for something better to come along. During the past few months, the Alt Right has had an internal debate about its future, and the issue has been decided by the fact that we neither need WN/NS, nor want their instability. We have a better path.

How Is The Alt Right Different From “White Nationalism”?

Wednesday, August 16th, 2017

The mainstream press, deep state, Establishment, Cathedral, herd or whatever you want to call them — the agglomerate of human failure — wants to equate the Alt Right with Nazis, which as usual is a partial truth. Both Nazis and the Alt Right are nationalists who realize that democracy always tends Leftward, and so they want to junk the whole The Enlightenment™ agenda of equality and pluralism.

It is well and good enough to say that we are not Nazis, neo-Nazis or white supremacists, and while this is true, it still leaves the question of what the Alt Right believes:

I have been asked by multiple people what exactly the ideology of the alt-right is? The short answer is pragmatic nationalism. The alt-right does not really hold a set of conservative or liberal views on any one subject. The primary concern is that the policies chosen benefit America first. This means that on some issues we can side with the left and on others with the right.

The Alt Right does not have an ideology; ideologies are wishful thinking about how nature should operate according to a human-centric and reality-denying position. On the other hand, the Alt Right like conservatives are from the realist camp: we see how nature works, its patterns and the reasons why it does things the way it does, and we adapt to those and then improve ourselves so that we can attain excellence. Our goal is not to redefine reality through a human perspective, but to make humans understand reality.

However, any outlook consists of both beliefs and logical truths (I prefer the phrase “logical facts”) and the Alt Right has a few ideas of its own. These have been oversimplified by various for-profit entities like the Alt Lite, but really, we can boil the Alt Right down to a few realizations about the nature of reality:

  1. People are different. Races, ethnic groups (sometimes called ethnes), castes, social classes, sexes and even political alignments reflect differences that are genetic and inborn. You cannot make someone smarter or improve their character; people are born to a set of alignments in their soul that are expressed in outward characteristics. You can teach them to fake being intelligent or moral, but in the end, when they have power, it will reveal who they really are. Humanity succeeds when it engages in a sorting practice where the more competent rise above the rest, but egalitarianism is dedicated to the opposite idea, which is raising the less competent above the more competent so that everyone “feels” good, safe and pacifistic.
  2. Hubris versus order. In the Alt Right view, what is most important is that civilization have purpose and social order, so that the individual is appreciated for their inner traits instead of their outer traits like obedience, willingness to socialize and the pursuit of trends. We need order, which consists of a hierarchy of leadership, a caste system within society, an understanding of “natural law” or the logic and patterns of nature, and a willingness of each of us to fit within this order at the appropriate place, and not to attempt to rise above our station by pretending to be something we are not. The fundamental idea here is that external reality is more important than human intent, desires, judgments or feelings, and that we can learn from that external order and apply it to ourselves, mostly by understanding the nature of placing the best above the rest and creating hierarchy from that.
  3. Heritage. The formula goes like this: genetics is upstream of culture, and culture is upstream of politics, so for us to have a sensible political result, we need to preserve our heritage. You cannot have Western Civilization without Western European people, and no other population can “have” Western culture. The best they can do is uphold our legal and economic systems, but as we have seen in the third world already, these systems are “re-interpreted” differently by different genetic groups. And so, we reach the conclusion: we do not survive if we do not exist genetically, and if we mix with something else, that genetic profile is destroyed and we cease to exist, as the mixed-race states of the middle east show us.
  4. Entropy and Pathology. In the conventional view, there are two sides in politics, Left (egalitarian) and Right (order/hierarchy/realism/purpose). If we look more closely, however, there are only working behaviors and dysfunctional ones, and at this point we start realizing that many ideas that we have been told that we must accept like equality, pacifism, democracy, individualism, egoism, hubris, collectivism, tolerance, and equality are merely pathologies, or common mentally dysfunctional behaviors into which humans become ensnared. These mental pitfalls trap us because they are easy errors to make, but once we make the error, it is hard to admit it, and so we double down and rationalize the error as “a higher truth” instead of admitting that it was just another defective behavior like gluttony, envy, drug addiction, obesity, denial, obsession, and resentment. In this sense, our personal struggle as human beings is to use self-discipline to achieve sanity and stability, and as a society, our task is to avoid dysfunctional behaviors including Leftism, which may simply have occurred because as we became prosperous, deleterious mutations persisted instead of being filtered by Darwinism.
  5. Economics of reproduction. In order to produce good examples of our people, we need to emphasize the K-strategy of reproduction, which requires stable families. Stable families require an end to the sexual revolution, so not just chastity but an emphasis on family as the only healthy context for sexual activity. That in turn requires different but complementary sexual roles, where men and women have different duties, responsibilities and roles but work together to maintain the family and raise children to be the best that they can be.
  6. Hierarchy. Democracy, or mob rule, operates by the same mechanism as consumerism: whatever most people think is good in the moment is adopted, and then society absorbs the cost of that decision, despite the fact that most people are too far to the left on the Bell Curve to understand the implications of what they are doing, that even intelligent people can be baffled if fed bad information from an early age (GIGO), and that even good people when given the vote tend to select compromises, evasions and half-truths instead of tackling difficult problems. Like a hunting party or military group, we need a constant hierarchy, where the best people are on top and their decisions benefit everyone else. This even applies to social settings, where there need to be some people recognized as having better intelligence and moral character, and they make even seemingly trivial decisions, because those shape the behavior of the rest of us.

These realizations manifest in certain desired outcomes which are designed to restore Western Civilization.

Where the Alt Right and White Nationalism overlap is that both are nationalist, but the Alt Right has a different view: its nationalism is ethnic, works for all population groups, and is designed to let culture lead societies instead of politics. White Nationalism is more based on a defensive outlook. The outlook of the Alt Right, pan-nationalism, is based in a positive outlook, or creating a lasting, organic, resilient and durable social order.

Pan-nationalism sees nationalism and homogeneity as a prerequisite for any society to be successful, and as a result does not target specific ethnic groups as “bad” but suggests that each ethnic group needs its own place:

Pan-nationalism, or world nationalism, is the idea that each ethnic-cultural group (joined by language, heritage and culture) deserves its own nation. Pan-nationalism suggests that no nationalist can afford to work only for his or her own tribe, but must realize that all tribes are joined in the same quest: to bring about a nationalist order on earth. Our enemy is not each other. Our enemy is the system of “modern society” that exploits us. Our goal is to re-structure modern society to keep its good aspects (technology) and weed out its destructive aspects. This is achieved by putting culture before commerce in every nation on earth, and our method of reaching this is Pan-Nationalism.

Nationalism is more than a political idea; it is a form of social order which bonds people to community, nature, history, heritage, customs and future:

Nationalism develops from the idea that the nation, in contrast to the nation-state, is formed of the indigenous people to an area. It is the longest-lasting and most sensible form of government, for it groups together people who have culture, heritage and language in common. The modern nation-state imposes political boundaries on an area, moves people into it, and declares it a “nation,” but without this lack of inherent consensus such states become marketplaces instead of living cultural entities.

Nationalism advocates a more meaningful life through a re-assertion of the organic bond between individual and society.

In a world where human thoughtlessness in the name of enhancing personal wealth is ruining our environment and turning our lives into passages between grey concrete tunnels to fulfill ultimately meaningless tasks, nationalism is a re-assertion of the organic bond between individual and society. By placing culture before commerce, nationalism advocates a more meaningful daily life. It ends the bad judgment and ugly cities justified by someone somewhere being willing to buy something, regardless of its eventual utility or indirect, socialized costs. Nationalism makes the state serve the people, where nation-state systems make the people serve the state.

White nationalism was an older form of pro-white activism. Its goal was to make all of the different white races equal, and within them to erase caste distinctions, much as the National Socialists aspired to in Germany. By doing this, it creates a type of “ethno-Bolshevism” that denies much of what makes people individuals, including their ethnic and regional background, family and individual traits.

We have had enough of such modernist nonsense. The Alt Right is a movement to restore civilization in its organic form, not the managed mass culture nanny state that modernists prefer, and to do so, it reaches outside the narrow scope of white nationalism and applies nationalism in a positive form. For this reason, no matter what the media says, we are distinct and our audience prefers that.

Between Cuck and Sperg

Saturday, July 22nd, 2017

The Alt Right is struggling to define itself. This is natural and healthy for a movement that got a sudden jolt when mentioned by a presidential candidate. But instead of clinging to loyalties as if they were football teams, it might make sense to look into what the Alt Right has been.

One key is found in the word “alternative.” As mentioned by those who influenced its inception and those who guided the way, the Alt Right was designed to be an alternative to both the cuckservative mainstream Right, which is more Left than anything else, and the angry malevolence of the white nationalist underground.

Instead of those narrow visions, the Alt Right aspired to an entirely new concept of what civilization could be. It started with the idea of nationalism and human biodiversity, and combined those into the knowledge that genetics creates culture. At that point, it became clear that homogeneity is a prerequisite to civilization, and after that, we need to design carefully.

This new vision swept up many of those attracted to its influences — men’s rights, libertarianism/neoreaction, monarchists, nationalists, identitarians, traditionalists, and the European New Right — and now they are different lenses through which people see the Alt Right. To a libertarian, it is mostly about freedom; to a nationalist, it is mostly about ethnic homogeneity.

What is interesting is that all of these ideas point to something that is not in the middle of them, but above them, a force that unifies them. This is the idea of the timeless form of human civilization, free from democracy and socialism, united by culture and ethnic group, driven by a desire for virtue and transcendent truth, and free of the ugliness, red tape and futility of modern civilization.

As the Alt Right reaches for that force, it is being pulled in two directions, which we have described here loosely as “cuck versus sperg”:

While the Alt Lite has done much good, namely by forcing the Left to abandon its double standard on free speech, it also misses the point: all politics is identity politics because each group represents its own interests.

We know that the Alt Right wants to navigate between cuck and sperg, or the two extremes of the Right, with “cuck” being the Leftist hybrids in the Republican party and “sperg” being the people who seem to delight in racial cruelty on the White Nationalist front. Neither is a functional model.

In fact, the Alt Right represents a third path: recognize that what the spergs talk about is part of the truth even if it is socially taboo, but that we can understand it in a logical/factual and not emotional/personal way.

These divisions, once external to the Alt Right, are now within it. The cucks want to preserve the present system with a few fixes that are justified with egalitarianism, which legitimizes the Leftist perspective because it is wholly based in egalitarianism; the spergs want to roll the dice on racial violence and dictatorship, which have never gone anywhere but bad places even when well-intended like Hitler, Mussolini, Brezhnev and arguably Napoleon were.

In this way, we can see how the cucks follow the typical middle class bourgeois paradigm: they view the world through a filter of their own success and status, and are not concerned with effects beyond that unless those impede the success of themselves as individuals. Middle classes, especially the upper half, have little loyalty to nations or governments. For them, the world is a question of how to advance their personal power and fortune.

The spergs fall into two groups. The first are honest but misguided; these are “bright sophomores,” or those with a fair amount of intelligence but little experience, and so no depth of analysis. The other half are the same old angry antisocial types who bloated white nationalist and succeeded in making it irrelevant to both decision-makers and voters.

By trying to appease both groups, the Alt Right threatens to make itself unstable. It is fine to sit on the line between cuck and reality so long as it brings over people living in the mainstream, and this has worked so far. But when it goes too far into a fight for “equality,” the Alt Right becomes as poz-converged as the Republicans.

On the same note, the spergs tend toward an egalitarian view of a different sort. They want all whites to be equal at the expense of everyone else. While it makes sense to send all Other away, social hierarchy like caste is essential, and you see very few of these who would accept being a kshatriya or thrall in service to brahmins. This leads us back to the same problems of democracy.

To look toward our future, the Alt Right should consider two vital questions:

1. Why do we have such high turnover?

Hunter Wallace describes this as it influenced white nationalism:

First, it is depressing to comb through the archives of dead vBulletin forums – several of my own included – and see all the people who have disappeared. The vBulletin forum was an amazing tool that allowed our ideas to reach a mass audience, but it wasn’t without its flaws.

People flee social groups — which is what the Alt Right becomes, in the pidgin social framework of our society — because they believe the group is ineffective, because they tire of the same circular arguments, because other people alienate them, or because they feel they are unrecognized. It is the latter that seems most prevalent to me.

Time and time again, someone with a new take on issues or an insightful analysis shows up in the comments section of a blog, a forum or social media. They are shouted down by those who want to affirm the dogma as it stands, and the crowd gravitates toward what it already knows. Feeling like their contributions will do no good here, over time the most promising individuals leave.

It would be great to be able to say that this has improved over the years, but over the last six months, the Alt Right has experienced attrition of some of its most promising writers and commenters. Those who repeat the same old stuff in new forms are sticking around, along with some very talented people who often get far less recognition than they deserve.

2. Why do whites (or any other race) not awaken as a group?

This is the question that terrified white nationalists. Most resolved it by hypothesizing that at some point, conditions between the races would get so bad that race war would break out, and in the ensuing chaos, whites would find identity.

Let us instead look at the worst case scenario which is actually more likely: racial tension gets worse, and individualist whites escape it through white flight, which means that the people who could change the situation do not address the situation. At some point, demographic balance shifts and whites find themselves in the same position as whites in Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, Detroit or Los Angeles: outvoted by the lower classes, they become tax cash cows until trace admixture turns them into people who no longer identify with being European at all, only with having slightly lighter skin and more money. This is the consistent pattern throughout history.

The only way to bridge this divide is to offer a better vision of civilization not just as regards race, but as concerns every problem of modernity: ecocide, debt, idiocracy, corruption, unnecessary war, instability, recessions, existential misery and lack of a decent place for their children to grow up. The only way to take this bull by the horns is to present a society which is more advanced than modernity, but lacking the fundamental characteristics (equality, mass culture, consumerism) of modern society.

Another factor that is important here is recognizing caste. We need a social order with aristocrats, serfs and freeholders so that we can rein in the bad instincts of our people. Most people have bad instincts for leadership, and in groups people make terrible decisions no matter how intelligent they are, so we need this caste division, which also preserves the role of the virtuous but successful among us.

We also need to recognize that there is no such thing as the white race as a political identity. There are white ethnic groups and those tend to stick together, usually at the broadest level by associating into Western, Southern and Eastern Europeans. Any movement that tries to lump these groups together as one will alienate each group, from its most perceptive at the top who are most likely to understand their own identity as complex, all the way down as people discover the need for identity other than generic “huwhite.”

Finally, we need to make it clear that we are not people hellbent on repeating the mistakes of history. We know what happened with national socialism and fascism, and despite whatever good was there, a fundamental instability was also present, as most people are now seeing in democracy. We also have seen how scapegoating and bigotry replace decision-making with a time of team violence. There is also a great and sensible fear of mass movements that empower the unsuccessful to seize power, because whether wealth redistribution or retribution, that means that the successful will become targets, and they will fight this.

Neither cucks nor spergs will acknowledge these truths, so it is important to find a middle path between. From the cucks, it makes sense to take the desire for gradual transition that keeps focus on the essentials of life before all else, and from the spergs, the notion that we cannot make the current system work at all. If we synthesize those, we can formulate a new civilization that will entice our people.

Former White Nationalists Agree On The Demise Of White Nationalism

Wednesday, July 19th, 2017

Weight in on the demise of white nationalism as we know it, which seems to be the issue of the week, Counter-Currents has declared the demise of white nationalism to be followed by something like Billy Roper’s “balkanization” theory:

Without white people having an interest in “white America”—not because it never existed, but because it is dead—and without the advantage of military strength, on what grounds should we call ourselves “white nationalists?” In the most semantically precise sense of the word, it may be accurate: nation, after all, refers to a people, and is separate in meaning from the geopolitical entity we call a state. But for most people, “white nationalist” means “white statist,” especially if that state happens to look similar to the United States in its current shape.

…Towards this end, whites should work at a local level to establish healthy and functional communities: tribes that challenge and enrich each others lives. They are agile, adaptive, and bring out the best in their members, from whom they derive their strength.

This follows a great article by Jack Donovan entitled “Why I Am Not A White Nationalist” in which he lays down roughly the same theory:

In fact, there’s very little new to say, except that, if anything, I’ve learned to hate white people and White Nationalists more than any of their opponents. Not because they are evil monsters, but because they generally suck. I hate white people and White Nationalists because they are weak, broken, phenomenally autistic, or all three.

…As anyone familiar with my work knows, I support tribalism always and everywhere. As the 1970’s motto goes, I believe that “small is beautiful” when it comes to human communities. However, a tribal community has to have a lot more going for it than race. And this is where the idea of White Nationalism falls apart for me. Race alone isn’t enough to unite a people.

…America is pluralistic by design not because the Founding Fathers wanted to protect the rights of women or racial or sexual minorities — but because white European Christian men have spent centuries murdering and imprisoning each other over religious differences. I see no reason why this phenomenon would not immediately become a problem within a “diverse” population of whites.

This follows by twelve years my own critique which takes several forms, but includes the fundamental accusation that white nationalism is a form of ethno-Bolshevism:

White power movements have simple dogmas: “if it’s white, it’s right” and the idea that if all non-whites are excluded, society will somehow become good “again.” They address (what they see as) a symptom, and not the problem. They also ignore almost all other important issues outside of race. It is as if they are more provocateurs than political thinkers, here to hit us with a quick and repellent suggestion before fading away, laughing at our discomfort in their discontent. They are not alone in this, since almost every special interest group from Environmentalists to Pro-Lifers to Black Power groups falls into this category; it may be a failing of our political system itself that makes agreement so difficult that political movements must be distilled to the ultimate simplicity and singular focus. But if all non-whites died tomorrow, what would happen? The basic problems of whites would remain.

We can distill these problems to two things:

  1. Predominance of low-quality whites.
  2. White society in the grips of an insane design of a civilization.

In addressing the first, we have to look at the problem this way: not all things Caucasian are identical. Any society, no matter how wonderful, produces destructive or stupid people; this is the nature of genetic recombination and environmental factors. If you plant a field of corn, you’re going to end up culling the weak plants and the mutants that do not have beneficial attributes. With every generation, some great people are born, and some weaker — inferior — ones. If the culture in question manages to have the great people breed more than the weaker, it rises to a higher overall standard. If not — decline. And what has happened in white culture? First we overthrew the aristocracy and guaranteed universal rights. This places the choices and attributes of the individual beyond criticism. It’s illegal, immoral or some combination thereof to discriminate against people because they are delusional, stupid, corrupt, disgusting, ugly, perverse, etc. This leads to a reversal of the equation of healthy societies, and explains why white societies have gone from producing Beethovens and Shakespeares to Britney Spears and Anne Coulter.

It also includes some more vitriolic criticism:

While we support Nationalism and the Indo-European tribes, the members of this site have nothing to do with neo-Nazi, White Nationalist, or White Power groups. And this isn’t because of social taboo: we agree with said groups on many things, most fundamentally that Indo-Europeans (“Caucasians”,”whites”) have the right to establish nations where no other races are welcome as residents. This is nationalism, by its very definition (nation = a people), and in my belief it should be extended to every ethnic group, from Basque to Eskimo.

…Further, “white power” people want to accept all “whites” as being of the same tribe, which is error. The French are distinct from the Germans and Scotts for historical reasons, and the differences which define them as a tribe are important to preserve in each case. Any “white nationalist” who endorses mixing Indo-European tribes clearly doesn’t understand nationalism, which is the independence and isolation of every ethnic group, not their mixing because of nearby ancestry. I view mixed “white” people as English, and you can find these populations in the majority in the UK, US, Canada and Australia. If these Alpinized Germanocelts wish to create their own ethnicity, they can, by eugenics, eventually define themselves ethnically as well as politically.

I could go on. White nationalists don’t understand caste; they believe in societies without distinction. While I’m no fan of class, which uses the insane doctrine of social Darwinism to rank us by “ability” according to how much money we’re willing to earn, “caste” makes sense to me. Some were born to be warriors, some to be priests, some to be leaders, and some to be cooks. Each job is vital and none is more important than the others. Mixing those together produces people with no specialization who are thus incompetent at any and every job they undertake.

It gets even more extreme:

Mixtures of caste, race and background have produced people of a lowest common denominator, who can agree on sports and television and movies and music, but not much else, and are swayed by the simplest argument presented to them. Therefore, they in every case opt for the most simplistic and idiotic solution to any problem. The “white nationalist” approach is not to change this basic tendency, but to play into it.

I’m not interested in saving the world, or saving “the white race”; I’m interested in solving the ideological split among white people (because this is my race, and for no other reason; were I black, I wouldn’t give a damn at all and it wouldn’t be any of my business; hence, I have the same disinterest in the black race) and in nurturing and giving power to those “white” people who have brains, strength, character and moral leadership ability. Most of you, including the squareskulls who hang around “White Nationalist” outfits, I don’t care about saving or even aiding.

There are some other idiots who reject “white nationalism” and talk about the importance of some “new future movement” but these people are just as stupid: they don’t realize that no new answers are needed, because the answers never change regarding the biggest questions in life. Technology changes; what PDA do I use? But questions of culture, breeding, education and character never do and never will. Nothing will ever change the basic parameters of mortality and thus, a certain amount to accomplish before death, and certain behaviors that are ascendant and others that bring one closer to the lowest common denominator.

Among other things, I criticized white nationalism for avoiding the problem of caste, which is the social order that glues a society together. Without order, we are rabble; mass culture always shifts Leftward, and this has been our problem for centuries. White nationalism does not address this.

My thinking has advanced since that time. I agree with Roper and Donovan that we are going to balkanize into small tribes, but from those are going to come larger nations, united by type of European (Western, Eastern or Southern) and held together by strong culture, a caste system and aristocratic leadership. These are the only way to have civilization, and we are rediscovering it.

The death of white nationalism cannot come too soon. Simplistic solutions will not beat decay; only new life will. New life consists in accepting that humanity has never changed and so, the ideal form of our civilization has never changed, and we only must accept this traditional form and then attempt to improve it qualitatively as we can.

As Bruce Charlton and Mencius Moldbug both point out, modernity is a religion in which there is only one god, the Self. From this comes egalitarianism, where the individualist Self demands that no one can tell it that it is wrong and thus exclude it on that basis, and all other variants of modernity, including band-aids like National Socialism, Communism, Socialism and white nationalism.

We need more than just a band-aid. We need to escape from this entire system. White nationalism will not do it, but more comprehensive civilizational structures will. It is time for all of us to recognize the real enemy, modernity and its root in the ego, and opt for order and virtue instead through a traditional civilization.

What Is The Alt Right?

Tuesday, July 18th, 2017

Despite much writing on the topic, most are confused about what the Alt Right actually is. Most simply follow the mainstream media line that the Alt Right is a revival of white nationalism or national socialism.

However, the Alt Right is actually more nuanced than that, combining elements of traditionalism, the European New Right, extreme libertarianism, human biodiversity, men’s rights, anti-modernism, deep ecology, monarchism, nationalism and the Old Right into what is more a series of discussion points as part of a cultural wave that distrusts globalism and its handmaiden, the string of ideologies emerging from “equality.”

It was formed to get away from both the Republican-In-Name-Only (RINO) “cuckservatives” and the antisocial white nationalists. Let us recap why ordinary and successful people mostly avoided white nationalism, as written elegantly and comprehensively by Hunter Wallace of Occidental Dissent in his penetrating postmortem of white nationalism:

White Nationalism 1.0 was a much smaller movement and disproportionately attracted an audience of edge cases. These people are extreme non-conformists and expressive individualists. This stratum of the population is always found at the fringes of society and have a personality type that is resistant to social conditioning. The same characteristic that initially opened their minds to our message holds back the larger social movement when they reach a critical mass.

There are legions of these ornery people out there who are naturally disagreeable and incapable of finding common ground and working with others to advance a common purpose. They are a familiar figure in all marginalized extremist movements. The low trust, anonymous nature of online messageboards is the perfect breeding ground for their worst tendencies.

…Their message and presentation was stupid, vicious, crazy or ugly. It was easier for the opposition to brand these people with stereotypes and marginalize them. They responded to their rejection by seeing themselves as part of a chosen few.

This is an excellent introduction to why white nationalism drove people away; in addition, as Wallace notes, it was too narrow and had no comprehensive plan for making life better for normal, healthy people. It also focused on being underground politics when it needed to find a presence in culture, including the arts, which it could not do as doctrinaire dogma for life-dropouts.

Starting in the late 1990s, I began writing what I saw as a successor to white nationalism: a movement based on the nationalist idea of the organic society in which people lived for existential greatness instead of materialism, which extended to a type of relaxed but comprehensive roots conservatism. The basis of this was strict realism paired with a question of “what is the best life” for our people.

These ideas developed through an older website and more recently, CORRUPT, a website which featured the Alt Right blend of nationalism, anti-modernism, anti-globalism, transcendental focus and awareness of Austrian economics.

As time went on, these ideas spread through the thoughtful — not necessarily “educated,” as this is not something worth blindly trusting, and many of our best dropped out of high school — wing of the Right and other dissident movements. Eventually, it made its way to many smaller movements who carried on its essential ideas:

First, we don’t think it is useful to have organizations that you can “join.” The internet attracts people who are either using it to get something done, or are hanging out using it to entertain themselves. We don’t want any of the latter, because they will “join” and then do nothing, assuming that having “liked” us means they are being armchair activists. We want those people to go away. The former group, who are here for information, do not need to “join” anything, but need to find some answers.

This leads to the second point: you don’t need to “join” us, but to take our ideas, and join other real-world organizations. Infiltrate the Democratic party, or the local Chamber of Commerce. Show up to technical meetings and inject some ideas. Both the future and the past of National Socialism are built on the independent action of strong people. Be that type of person. You don’t do that by “joining” some internet page. In fact, feeling like all you need to do is join a page makes you more inclined to think your job is done, and to go purchase doughnuts and beer and then go home to watch television.

Here’s a brief list of things you can do to be effective in spreading National Socialism:

  1. Succeed in school and at work. Become a leader that people respect by being successful.
  2. Be active in your community. Get known for your good deeds and wisdom. People will follow you.
  3. Unite people around culture and values. Without being political, you can support classical music, the arts, and traditions in your homeland.
  4. Act independently of others and flaunt it. The biggest political force is conformity. Do what’s right, and laugh at the herd.

This followed a more varied platform that escaped the narrow focus of white nationalism:

Our platform is as follows, and applies to every nation on earth:

  1. Exclude all but the indigenous. Each nation has a founding ethnic group with accompanying culture, religion, language and customs. We will grant citizenship only to full-blooded members of that group.
  2. End all socialist programs. Any program that involves reward before showing results of labor is banned.
  3. Return of Nazi environmental law. In every area except cities, most of the land must be natural and untouched; all freeways must be sheathed in woodland; protection for natural species; limits on size and number of cities.
  4. Support for small business. Give tax breaks, aid and protection to small businesses. Low taxes for all businesses.
  5. Return freedom of association. No person should be forced to hire, sell to, rent to, or even talk to another. This allows government to stop regulating behaviors like deviance and drug use, which can be cured by cultural means, namely ostracization.
  6. Restore the monarchy. As Schopenhauer says, we should take the noblest and most intelligent and breed them to produce a natural elite. This is the best form of government.
  7. Send undesirables elsewhere. Our goal is to protect the good people, not universal rights for all, including the broken. The retarded, criminal, perverse and sociopathic should be sent elsewhere. Their rights do not surpass those of ordinary citizens.
  8. Reduce taxes and size of government. Government is there to protect culture, genetics and environment (blood and soil) not to tell us how to live. Reduce all programs but those.
  9. Support system. Use the power of the taxpayer base to buy job insurance, life insurance and healthcare for citizens and sell to them at these reduced prices.
  10. A new work ethic. The old work ethic is “show us how obedient you are by being here all the time.” The new one will be: show us results, and we don’t care how you did it. Go home and spend time with your family.

Most people are accustomed to the idea that if something needs to be done, government forms a new branch and then sends bureaucrats to make it happen. That doesn’t work! Instead, we use indirect methods because they are less intrusive and work better.

This site is just an example; others spread these terms on further, where uniting with other influences, they produced the brew that is the Alt Right today. There were Nazis endorsing nationalism for both Israel and Europe simultaneously; Neoreactionaries espousing a hyper-libertarianism that rejected democracy; and rumblings about how “equality” always meant Robin Hood programs that impoverished everyone.

Finally, Paul Gottfried — a great writer, entirely worth reading — spoke of the need for an “alternative” to the mainstream Right and underground antisocial Right, and a group at Alternative Right magazine (which since has split into a new version of itself and began writing about the need for this new idea.

Now, these ideas are reaching mainstream publications:

Yesterday’s African nationalists argued, reasonably, that you cannot develop an African civilization if your center of political authority is still in Europe.

Today’s Western nationalists argue, also plausibly, that many European distinctives are unlikely to survive if nation-states are weak, mass immigration constant, Christianity and Judaism replaced by indifferentism and Islam.

…Nor do I have much confidence that the present burst of European nationalism is more than a spasm, a reflex — not when religious practice is so weak, patriotism so attenuated, the continent’s birthrate so staggeringly low.

Our job is to avoid being that mere spasm. We have to rise above what we have been, and become what we were born to be, as Richard Spencer reminds us. A spasm is formed of a reaction to what has already been done, and a desire to remove some bads in the hope that only goods remain. A long-standing movement is formed by having an idea of what we want, knowing what is coming, and designing a plan to protect our people.

If the Alt Right has a unifying idea, it is that Western Civilization is worth preserving and because it has fallen, that we must rebirth it. No civilization can exist without its people, and without genetically Western European people, there is no Western Civilization. But now, they are confused and lost, and need a guide not just away from lies, but to a place of greatness and virtue.

Recommended Reading