AFFIRMATIVE RIGHT: Recent Episodes
None
Originally published at NeoKratRichard Spencer: cracked china
by Colin Liddell
To give him credit, Richard Spencer was and possibly still is the central figure of the so-called "Dissident Right." Before him there really was no dissident right, just a lot of weirdos with incoherent takes (actually, not so different from today). However, "BS" (Before Spencer) the DR wasn't even a "thing."
Using his particular skill set, and with the help of quite a few other people, Spencer got the whole DR thing going in 2010, with the foundation of Alternativeright.com, and then shortly afterwards the Vanguard podcast. (What was a "written word" movement, quickly became a "live spoken word" movement, losing about 20-30 IQ points in the process.)But what exactly was Spencer's skill set? This is open to debate, but I would say it included a relatively high intelligence, mixed with with giant nuggets of intense stupidity; a certain amount of flair for the dramatic; and a generally likeable persona, including the ability to talk in an entertaining and often funny way (although often people were laughing at him instead of with him). But, more importantly, it included a charismatic persona and faux intellectualism that could effectively trigger liberals and leftists by being in many ways similar to them and getting under their skin. This also made the "Spencer project" appealing to vital outside actors.
Many of these personal attributes of Spencer, I came to realise, were related to his sub-masculine tendencies, which are no secret to anyone familiar with the DR. After all, a charismatic personality with a sub-masculine nature is hardly a rarity in the dissident right. In fact, it's almost mandatory. Many such cases, as they say...
Typical highly charismatic and witty Diss-Righter
As for his intellectualism, Spencer, while able to engage with relatively complex philosophical and political ideas, has had surprisingly little to offer himself. His intellectual schtick, such as it is, has been characterised by several incoherent and contradictory phases of thought, built around essentially stupid, marginalising, and unworkable ideas.
Initially, he was an anti-Neocon Conservative (which is fine); then just somebody who "kinda sorta" hated America, including its Republicans and Conservatives, from a more right-wing position (also not too bad); and then he became someone who flirted with Duginismand Naziism (disavow), talking about a totally absurd White ethno-empire (batshit crazy)! This latter paradigm was a witty rather than profound amalgam of Fascism and Star Trek Progressivism, presumably calculated to trigger Leftists and create a certain amount of online heat rather than light. In other words, pure troll fodder.
This reminds us that Spencer's trajectory, and maybe even his personal relations, were the playthings of players in a larger game, with early appearances on Kremlin psy-op and polarisation channel Russia Today.
Spencer's "Nazification phase" was also tied up with various bad actors with known links to the Kremlin (Anglin, TRS, TWP, etc), while genuine Nazis, like Greg Johnson, always took issue with him.
The impression given here is that Spencer was played like a violin to stage stupid stunts like the "Heil Trump" NPI Conference in 2016 and the "Unite the Right" Nazi fest at Charlottesville in 2017, where Spencer's then "controller" Daniel Friberg was in attendance.
It seems that in the months and years following Charlottesville, Spencer was "turned" from being a useful idiot for the Kremlin to being a "more domestic asset." His 180-degree turn to respecting liberals and supporting Joe Biden is well known, and is, as usual, yet more proof of his total ideological incoherence.
While Spencer continues to provide odd and often interesting insights into the political scene, there will always be doubts about whether he even believes these takes himself, or will do so next week. Mentally he is the equivalent of cracked china, essentially worthless while still able to display attractive patterns and colours. His latest "intellectual" phase is something called "Apollonianism," which is as trite and absurdly recherché as it sounds.
A generous interpretation is that this is some kind of Post-Nietzschean project, designed to sneer at the philo-semitism encoded in American culture by rustic Protestantism. But it seems that in this latest iteration of ideas, Spencer is merely the sidekick and acolyte of his associate Mark Brahmin.
Read other entries like this in Who's Who in the Dissident Right, an ever-expanding biographical guide to the colourful characters of the Deep Right.
____________________Follow @cbliddell
Colin Liddell is the Chief Editor of Neokrat and the author of Interviews & Obituaries, a collection of encounters with the dead and the famous. Support his work by buying it here (USA), here (UK), and here (Australia).
by Colin Liddell
Under its various incarnations, this site was the founding site of what came to be known as the Alt-Right. It distanced itself from that movement in 2018 (due to well-known reasons) by renaming itself Affirmative Right.In 2022, I decided to shut the site down in terms of new content but keep it up as an archive site. This was motivated by two different reasons:
(1) A lot of the content was actually extremely good and worth preserving online, despite the sad downward spiral of the Alternative Right in general(2) Some of the content had, regardless of its quality, struck a chord and been of some minor metapolitical and historical importance
However, much of the content pushed out by our various writers, including myself, was of limited quality and limited relevance. Some of it was conspiritard, batshit nonsense, but, hey, we were a "big tent" back in the day! Sometimes the work was highly "time sensitive" and tied to a transitory news cycle and just seems dated and pointless today.For these and other reasons, I have decided that all articles on this site will be systematically reviewed, and that a "cull" of the lesser works will take place. They will be removed from the internet, at least at this site. In fact, I have already done a little of this previously on an irregular basis.
Anyone is free to publish anything that may be culled in the coming months and years elsewhere. But at this site I will endeavour to only preserve those pieces of genuine and long lasting quality, although I cannot guarantee that I will always make the best decisions.
The cull will proceed from the earliest published pieces and move forward in time. First up will be articles from 2010, the year the Alt-Right was launched.Time to thin the herd, as they say!
CULLED
¡VIVA LA REVOLUCIÓN! by Vox Day (Naïve accelerationist piece about the Balkanisation of America)
GORDON'S GÖTTERDÄMMERUNG? by Derek Turner (Rather dated round-up of British electoral politics with an unnecessarily Naziesque-sounding title.)
THE EDUCATION OF GLENN BECK by Richard Hoste (Dull, overlong piece about a minor Conservative media figure)
GREEK FIRE by Panayotis Doumas (Short, rather dated piece about migrants causing problems)
FACECRIMES by George Whale (A poor attempt at stoking up Orwellian paranoia)
CAPTIVE MINDS by Joseph Kay (Rather confused article apparently trying to attack intellectuals and the Conservative movement for something.)
MIND THE GAPS by John Derbyshire (Fairly well written but redundant and over-obvious commentary on the usual HBD stuff. Yawn!)
AFTER WAGNER by R.J. Stove (A somewhat tedious, point-and-sputter piece about the media being a bit woke reporting on the death of Wagner's grandson)
SWAN SONG by Derek Turner (Basically "immigrants bad because eat swans")
MOSCOW TURNS RED by Nina Kouprianova (An embarrassing love letter to Russian Imperialism)
WHY I'D BE A PAGAN by Scott Locklin (twee article about sympathising with the LAPR while not believing in it)
THE GUARDIAN ON RACE - THINKING INSIDE THE BOX by Derek Turner (Over-specific attack on an unimportant Guardian journalist)
ALL ABOUT ISRAEL by David Gordon (A dated and overly Jewish-American-centred discussion of Liberalism)
NEOCON VICEROY STILL WRONG by Mark Hackard (Over-specific and now dated attack on a Neocon / lightweight)
THE ONE, THE MANY, AND THE ALTERNATIVE RIGHT by James Kalb (Overgeneralising theocratic garbage)
AN AFRICAN AMERICAN RESPONSE TO ALTERNATIVERIGHT.COM by Alex Kurtagic (Rather try-hard, trite, and defensive)
NEOCONNED by Paul Gottfried (A tedious and over obvious critique of Neocons and "the Conservative movement")
ECSTASY OF VITUPERATION by Alex Kurtagic (Rhetorical and overly defensive article / somewhat dated_
FLIRTING WITH FASCISM? by Illana Mercer (Rather obvious piece of writing on Dutch people voting for Geert Wilders because they don't like Islamification)
THE HARLOT OF BRUSSELS by Srdja Trifkovic (Rather hysterical piece about the supposed "totalitarian tendencies" of the EU)
PRISON OF NATIONS by Srdja Trifkovic (Rather lightweight and hysterical piece about the supposed "totalitarian tendencies" of the EU)
VITRIOL-THROWING - AND THROWING THE ELECTION by Derek Turner (dated and rather light piece of political reportage)
LIBERALISM: INCLUSIVENESS AND THOUGHT CONTROL by James Kalb (trite commentary on the contradictions of Liberalism -- such as "diversity VS equality" and "faith in science."
RECLAIMING HOLLAND? by Derek Turner (short intro blog on Geert Wilders that is now obsolete)
SARAH PALIN, PC PURIST by Elizabeth Wright (overlong piece that labours to say that Sarah Palin was basically woke)
NEWS FROM HOME by Derek Turner (into blurb for a section of the site focusing on Europe that was closed down in 2012)
IS CHRISTIANITY FOR WIMPS? by James Kalb (lightweight blogpost that says medieval Christians were tougher than secular moderns, duh!)
"HATE WATCH" by Paul Gottfried (dated piece about Amren being shut down by Antifa)
THE EXILED by Patrick J. Ford (dated piece about a dissident English-language paper in Russia)
TURKIES by Derek Turner (dated piece about Euro politics making obvious points)
JULIUS EVOLA & RADICAL TRADITIONALISM by E. Christian Kopff (rather tedious piece on an extraneous pseudo intellectual)
ALTERNATIVE UNIVERSE by Alex Kurtagic (lightweight blurb)
"CONSERVATIVES, LIBERALS, AND LIBERTARIANS" by Richard Hoste (trite and lightweight piece making over-obvious points)
NOT CULLED
THE MYTH OF THE OLD REPUBLIC by Andrew Fraser (Rather long-winded but significant reflection on WASP identity and self-loathing within White identity)
WANTED: SOMETHING TO DREAM by Alex Kurtagic (A highly rhetorical and nebulous attempt to create a "positive vision" for the Alt-Right. Some historical importance.)
NEW TRIBE RISING? by Patrick Buchanan (Rather tedious rhetorical piece but interesting reflection of the growing sense of White victimisation in multicultural America.)
WHITEWASH by Kevin Lamb (A reasonably effective critique of weak Leftist arguments used against HBD and racial consciousness.)
PAPER TIGER by Colin Liddell(Article on Tiger Woods and the inherent "Whiteness" of social norms promoted by culture and advertising)
HUNGARIAN SPRING by Derek Turner (A report on the rise of right-wing/ identitarian parties in the Hungarian election of 2010)
ERNST JÜNGER: FROM STORMTROOPER TO ANARCH by Keith Preston (Erudite account of a minor figure who was mainly important to the Alt-Right by an anarchist writer aligned with the Iranian state.)
WE AREN'T THE WORLD by Alex Kurtagic (An attack on the naïve "Feed the World" altruism of 80s pop stars)
THE CASE FOR OPEN BORDERS by Scott Locklin(A light-hearted piece, possibly riffing off Berlusconi's comment that Italy would only accept immigrants who were "pretty girls." Revealing the Alt-Right's tendency towards irony.)
REMAKING THE RIGHT by Kevin MacDonald (Over-convoluted paleoconservative anti-Semitic tosh masquerading as "new" Alt-Rightism / historically interesting example of how the Alt-Right was subverted in its cradle by older agendas.)
WHY I'M A PAGAN by Stephen McNallen (A lightweight and rather LARPy article, only worth retaining as historical evidence of the Neo-Pagan element in the Alt-Right)
THE "BIG TENT" TRADITION by Jack Donovan (Rather confused article about a "lack of faith" but of some historical importance in emphasising the intellectual diversity of the early Alt-Right)
LOTHROP STODDARD: AMERICAN NIETZSCHE (PART II)by Thomas F. Beronneau (Long, erudite piece on Stoddard's career)
THE HOMOSEXUAL QUESTION: WHY SAME-SEX MARRIAGE IS STILL WRONG, BUT REPEALING DADT IS RIGHT by Jack Donovan (Lengthy but nuanced article on gay issues in the military)
LOTHROP STODDARD: AMERICAN NIETZSCHE (PART I) by Thomas F. Beronneau (Long piece on how Stoddard's work was influenced by the experience of Haiti)
THE PROBLEMS OF NEOPAGANISM by Patrick J. Ford (Of historic interests as it shows the tensions between Christianity and Neopaganism in the early Alt-Right)
YOUNG TURKSby Srdja Trifkovic (Interesting piece on Turkey's foray into Neo-Ottomanism)
A BRAND NEW SHADE OF GREEN by Derek Turner (Fairly interesting piece about Ireland and its Muslim population)
THE BAYING OF ALGIERS by Derek Turner (Interesting example of hard rhetoric turning into ineffectual action with Nicolas Sarkozy)
THE ANATOMY OF MELANCHOLY by John Derbyshire (Rambling but fairly erudite piece on mental illness)
BIG BROTHER GOES GREEN by Alex Kurtagic(Fairly interesting piece about how the Left exploits ecological concerns.)
WHICH ALTERNATIVE?by James Kalb (A piece on the definition of the "Alternative Right." Of some historical value.)
THE MYTH OF THE OLD RIGHT by Richard Hoste (reasonably solid piece on US political history)
MODEL MINORITY? by Jason Richwine (rather dull "wonkish" piece of some historical importance. It was picked up on MSNBC by Rachel Maddow to attack the Heritage Foundation after Richwine joined them.
AUTHENTIC BLACK CONSERVATISM by Dylan Hales (interesting piece on how the Black political spectrum is shoehorned into the liberal left)
THE SIREN SONG OF DIVERSITY by Robert Weissberg (informative piece on race and jobs in America)
THE FAILURE OF "CONSERVATISM" by Keith Preston (interesting, possibly Iranian-influenced critique of Conservative support for a strong military)
LIBIDO FOR THE STUPID by Paul Gottfried(interesting commentary on the populism and proto-Trumpism expressed in the GOP's love affair with Sarah Palin)
THE WAR ON OBLIVION: INTERVIEW WITH WELMER FROM "THE SPEARHEAD" by Jack Donovan (balanced and informative discussion of early manosphere issues)
WHY AN ALTERNATIVE RIGHT IS NECESSARY by Richard Hoste (relatively good summary of the flaws of Conservatism circa 2010)
"THE ALTERNATIVE RIGHT AND THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF CONSERVATISM" by Kevin DeAnna (interesting in highlighting the forces that sparked the Alt-Right/ some paranoia)
YouTube has something of a reputation for bluntly suppressing free speech, from time to time; while readily allowing all kinds of fake news, incendiary comment, and even what is called "hate speech." So, in addition to having an Aff-Right archive channel on YouTube, I thought it advisable to also set one up on Odysee. Check it out here, and subscribe for historical and archived content from the original Alternative Right site (2010-18) and Affirmative Right (2018-22).
(1) Christianity is to blame for the "cucking" of the West and mass immigrationActually these trends gained strength after the secularization of the West
(2) If the Axis had won the war we would be living in a pro-White world (unlike today)Actually the Allies were pro-White at the time, and who is say that the same forces that overtook the West would not also overtake an Axis-dominated world
(3) Is it wrong for pro-Whites to enjoy Black-dominated sportsActually even the Nazis were happy to enjoy Black sporting achievements
Also available on Odysee
Links:
ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED AT NEOKRAT
It looks like Academic Agent (aka Neema Parvini), the half Persian "Dissident Right" intellectual, has bailed out on this year’s Millenniyule, the end-of-year, online get-together of largely anonymous Dissident Righters, curated by a gay, pudgy failed art student and "welfare leech" Colin "Luigi" Robertson (aka Millennial Woes).While Parvini has openly and consistently flirted with conspiracy theories and anti-Semitic tropes himself, he has decided that he couldn’t use his relatively large Dissident Right presence to endorse the batshit crazy, sub-Red-Ice crap that now passes for Millenniyule.
According to those who can be bothered to follow any of this trivial, circle-jerking, fart-sniffing shit, the bone of contention is a little beef that AA has had with effeminate Nazi, Keef Woods. Neokrat understands that if it wasn’t for this, AA would have appeared along with all the other pond life on Millenniyule.Another factor in AA's decision may be the long-running feud between Greg Johnson and confirmed Fed and cuckboy Richard Spencer, as Woes is essentially controlled by gay Nazi Greg Johnson, while AA has been friendly with Spencer of late. But for anyone wanting to get some insight into how low the so-called Dissident Right has fallen in recent years, watching the Millenniyules is essential viewing. A short amateur-hour cyber animation made by Woes to promote his annual cash cow (pls donate!) perfectly encapsulates the mindset of this pathetic group of losers.
Taking its cue from the schlocky 1970s sci-fi film "They Live," where special glasses reveal the "hidden" messages behind advertising, it shows train station ad billboards relentlessly promoting the "evil lies" of the "anti-White Jewish" elites, whose only goal, according to the sick Woes mindset, is to "black" every White woman with African cock and turn the World into a giant version of Somalia...because apparently that’s what frail, aging Jewish billionaires crave most of all, even though almost none of them actually live in present day Somalia.
Against this backdrop of race cuck rage porn, other headlines flash up some of the favourite "narratives" of the gang of shit4brains that Woes has managed to assemble this year.
"Palestinians: Barbarian Savages vs Ukrainians Brave Anti-Imperialist Heroes"
Yes, blatant Putinist propaganda!
Actually, mainstream coverage of the Gazan crisis is generally quite balanced and sympathetic to the plight of the Palestinians, and you’re probably more likely to see coverage describing Israeli actions as "barbaric."
"Cut down sacred forests to tackle climate change"
This one doesn’t even make sense.
Reforestation is one thing that can’t be denied, except by circle-jerking fart sniffers wanking each other off in the shadowy darkness of their terminal depression.Forest expansion in Israel, 1905 to 2013OK, next dumb Millennial Woes headline:
"Government to offer cash to White Men to Get Sterilised"
Yes, it wouldn't be "poor wittle Woes"y without the constant pathetic dribble of "poor wittle whyte peepo" narratives. Anyone who actually knows about these things, would know that non-Whites have been the overwhelming -- and I mean like 99% overwhelming -- recipients of paid sterilisation programmes, something that a eugenics-loving Nazi like Millennial Woes should be quite chuffed about (except they would probably get rid of him too on grounds of "imbecility" and "mental derangement" ).
The idiot even gets the simple stuff wrong:
"Falling Numbers Visiting Museums"
Wrong again! You think Woes would get tired of punching himself in the face with one factual error after another, but secretly he loves this kind of sick depraved mastubatory masochism.
Apart from a dip due to the pandemic, museum numbers have been consistently creeping up for decades.Source
Really, almost every single data point in the Woes' world is wrong. This is not surprising because they are selected purely on the bases of how well they can be lubed and inserted into the disgusting anal cavity of Woes’s pathetic victim brain, which that vomits out the crap he feeds to his even more pathetic followers.
It goes on:
"Long Covid Mostly Affecting Vaccinated People (Pfizer Announce New Drug to Combat Liong Covid)"
Another piece of conspiracy theory poop when you can just google for fact-checked sources: "Vaccinated People Are 4 Times Less Likely to Get Long COVID":
"People vaccinated before their first case of COVID-19 are diagnosed with Long COVID almost four times less than unvaccinated people, suggests a large new study published Nov. 22 in the BMJ. That’s not an entirely new finding. For years, studies have shown that, while vaccinated people can and do develop Long COVID, they are at lower risk than people who haven’t had their shots"
The funniest fake headline in the Woes videos has to be this one:
"Science: Mixed Race Children Happier Healthier and More Intelligent"
We are supposed to think, "OMG what total BS! - how can they say that? Everyone knows that mixed race kids are total fuck ups, who, borderline, want to kill themselves..." Even though I’m pretty sure no scientific studies even try to say the contrary to that.
This is just the shitty straw-manning that so much of the DR engages in to score illusionary victories.But wait a minute, Woes himself is mixed race, being a product of race mixing by someone from the very North of Europe and someone from its Deep South. Maybe, after knocking his brains out with a hammer, Woes has finally hit the nail on the head.
The full line up of Millenniyule mental midgets is as follows, the 21st century's equivalent to visiting the "loonies" in Bedlam:Sunday 10thWhite Papers Apostolic MajestyMonday 11thDoctor-Baron 17c Shyteposter, DDSPorphyrogenitusJohn WatersThe Jolly HereticTuesday 12thKeith WoodsGeorge BagbyHarry RobinsonBanthebbcWednesday 13thi-land watchLucas Gage Unity News NetworkGavin BobyThursday 14th0am Auron MacIntyre2am Praise of Folly8pm Kevin MacDonald10pm No ChanceFriday 15th0am Red Ice2am Der Schattenmacher8pm Eugyppius10pm Greg JohnsonSaturday 16th0am Kulture Dads2am Gifts8pm UK Column10pm Lower World DiariesSunday 17th0am Myth of the 20th Century2am Endeavour8pm Stefan Korte10pm Jared TaylorMonday 18th0am Furius Pertinax2am Black-Pilled8pm Survive the Jive10pm History BroTuesday 19th0am Lady of Shalott2am Apollonian Germ8pm Monokulttuuri FM10pm The Wessex NomadWednesday 20th0am Maven Politic2am The Distributist7pm Godfrey Bloom9pm Kvltgames10pm I,HypocriteWinter Solstice (Neo-Nazi name for “Shortest Day of the Year”)0am The Old Glory Club2am The Alternative Hypothesis8pm The Traditional Britain Group10pm Laurence EasemanFriday 22nd0am Collective Dismal1am Zeitgeist Reviews2am Mr Dee8pm Dangerfield10pm Wyatt StaggSaturday 23rd0am Off-Grid Ireland2am Robyn Riley4am AntiDem8pm The Woodlander10pm Homeland InstituteChristmas Eve0am JF Gariepy2am Semiogogue8pm David Scott10pm Frodi MidjordChristmas Day (Neo-Nazi name for "Happy Holidays")0am Pox Populi2am Christmas CardsWednesday 27th10pm SURPRISE GUEST(probably the Ghost of Adolf Hitler, a relatively sane and balanced individual in this cucked and moronic line-up)Thursday 28th8pm Martin LichtmeszSaturday 30th8pm Borgoth
It looks like Academic Agent (aka Neema Parvini), the half Persian "Dissident Right" intellectual, has bailed out on this year’s Millenniyule, the end-of-year, online get-together of largely anonymous Dissident Righters, curated by a gay, pudgy failed art student and "welfare leech" Colin "Luigi" Robertson (aka Millennial Woes).While Parvini has openly and consistently flirted with conspiracy theories and anti-Semitic tropes himself, he has decided that he couldn’t use his relatively large Dissident Right presence to endorse the batshit crazy, sub-Red-Ice crap that now passes for Millenniyule.
According to those who can be bothered to follow any of this trivial, circle-jerking, fart-sniffing shit, the bone of contention is a little beef that AA has had with effeminate Nazi, Keef Woods. Neokrat understands that if it wasn’t for this, AA would have appeared along with all the other pond life on Millenniyule.Another factor in AA's decision may be the long-running feud between Greg Johnson and confirmed Fed and cuckboy Richard Spencer, as Woes is essentially controlled by gay Nazi Greg Johnson, while AA has been friendly with Spencer of late. But for anyone wanting to get some insight into how low the so-called Dissident Right has fallen in recent years, watching the Millenniyules is essential viewing. A short amateur-hour cyber animation made by Woes to promote his annual cash cow (pls donate!) perfectly encapsulates the mindset of this pathetic group of losers.
Taking its cue from the schlocky 1970s sci-fi film "They Live," where special glasses reveal the "hidden" messages behind advertising, it shows train station ad billboards relentlessly promoting the "evil lies" of the "anti-White Jewish" elites, whose only goal, according to the sick Woes mindset, is to "black" every White woman with African cock and turn the World into a giant version of Somalia...because apparently that’s what frail, aging Jewish billionaires crave most of all, even though almost none of them actually live in present day Somalia.
Against this backdrop of race cuck rage porn, other headlines flash up some of the favourite "narratives" of the gang of shit4brains that Woes has managed to assemble this year.
"Palestinians: Barbarian Savages vs Ukrainians Brave Anti-Imperialist Heroes"
Yes, blatant Putinist propaganda!
Actually, mainstream coverage of the Gazan crisis is generally quite balanced and sympathetic to the plight of the Palestinians, and you’re probably more likely to see coverage describing Israeli actions as "barbaric."
"Cut down sacred forests to tackle climate change"
This one doesn’t even make sense.
Reforestation is one thing that can’t be denied, except by circle-jerking fart sniffers wanking each other off in the shadowy darkness of their terminal depression.Forest expansion in Israel, 1905 to 2013OK, next dumb Millennial Woes headline:
"Government to offer cash to White Men to Get Sterilised"
Yes, it wouldn't be "poor wittle Woes"y without the constant pathetic dribble of "poor wittle whyte peepo" narratives. Anyone who actually knows about these things, would know that non-Whites have been the overwhelming -- and I mean like 99% overwhelming -- recipients of paid sterilisation programmes, something that a eugenics-loving Nazi like Millennial Woes should be quite chuffed about (except they would probably get rid of him too on grounds of "imbecility" and "mental derangement" ).
The idiot even gets the simple stuff wrong:
"Falling Numbers Visiting Museums"
Wrong again! You think Woes would get tired of punching himself in the face with one factual error after another, but secretly he loves this kind of sick depraved mastubatory masochism.
Apart from a dip due to the pandemic, museum numbers have been consistently creeping up for decades.Source
Really, almost every single data point in the Woes' world is wrong. This is not surprising because they are selected purely on the bases of how well they can be lubed and inserted into the disgusting anal cavity of Woes’s pathetic victim brain, which that vomits out the crap he feeds to his even more pathetic followers.
It goes on:
"Long Covid Mostly Affecting Vaccinated People (Pfizer Announce New Drug to Combat Liong Covid)"
Another piece of conspiracy theory poop when you can just google for fact-checked sources: "Vaccinated People Are 4 Times Less Likely to Get Long COVID":
"People vaccinated before their first case of COVID-19 are diagnosed with Long COVID almost four times less than unvaccinated people, suggests a large new study published Nov. 22 in the BMJ. That’s not an entirely new finding. For years, studies have shown that, while vaccinated people can and do develop Long COVID, they are at lower risk than people who haven’t had their shots"
The funniest fake headline in the Woes videos has to be this one:
"Science: Mixed Race Children Happier Healthier and More Intelligent"
We are supposed to think, "OMG what total BS! - how can they say that? Everyone knows that mixed race kids are total fuck ups, who, borderline, want to kill themselves..." Even though I’m pretty sure no scientific studies even try to say the contrary to that.
This is just the shitty straw-manning that so much of the DR engages in to score illusionary victories.But wait a minute, Woes himself is mixed race, being a product of race mixing by someone from the very North of Europe and someone from its Deep South. Maybe, after knocking his brains out with a hammer, Woes has finally hit the nail on the head.
The full line up of Millenniyule mental midgets is as follows, the 21st century's equivalent to visiting the "loonies" in Bedlam:Sunday 10thWhite Papers Apostolic MajestyMonday 11thDoctor-Baron 17c Shyteposter, DDSPorphyrogenitusJohn WatersThe Jolly HereticTuesday 12thKeith WoodsGeorge BagbyHarry RobinsonBanthebbcWednesday 13thi-land watchLucas Gage Unity News NetworkGavin BobyThursday 14th0am Auron MacIntyre2am Praise of Folly8pm Kevin MacDonald10pm No ChanceFriday 15th0am Red Ice2am Der Schattenmacher8pm Eugyppius10pm Greg JohnsonSaturday 16th0am Kulture Dads2am Gifts8pm UK Column10pm Lower World DiariesSunday 17th0am Myth of the 20th Century2am Endeavour8pm Stefan Korte10pm Jared TaylorMonday 18th0am Furius Pertinax2am Black-Pilled8pm Survive the Jive10pm History BroTuesday 19th0am Lady of Shalott2am Apollonian Germ8pm Monokulttuuri FM10pm The Wessex NomadWednesday 20th0am Maven Politic2am The Distributist7pm Godfrey Bloom9pm Kvltgames10pm I,HypocriteWinter Solstice (Neo-Nazi name for “Shortest Day of the Year”)0am The Old Glory Club2am The Alternative Hypothesis8pm The Traditional Britain Group10pm Laurence EasemanFriday 22nd0am Collective Dismal1am Zeitgeist Reviews2am Mr Dee8pm Dangerfield10pm Wyatt StaggSaturday 23rd0am Off-Grid Ireland2am Robyn Riley4am AntiDem8pm The Woodlander10pm Homeland InstituteChristmas Eve0am JF Gariepy2am Semiogogue8pm David Scott10pm Frodi MidjordChristmas Day (Neo-Nazi name for "Happy Holidays")0am Pox Populi2am Christmas CardsWednesday 27th10pm SURPRISE GUEST(probably the Ghost of Adolf Hitler, a relatively sane and balanced individual in this cucked and moronic line-up)Thursday 28th8pm Martin LichtmeszSaturday 30th8pm Borgoth
The intellectually-challenged co-founder of the Alt-Right was observed making these frankly cuckoo comments during a monthly check on his YouTube channel by his psychiatric case worker.
Also, Nowicki continues to believe that the "Theys" move South America around without telling anyone and 101 other fruitcake theories.
His meds have hopefully been adjusted accordingly.
Just revisited this old podcast to see what "rubbish" I was spouting back in 2017. All-in-all, I sound quite reasonable and "big tent", which I definitely regret because it made me tolerant of people who, while advocating for the rights of European-descended people, were also irredeemable Nazis and Jew obsessives (Mike Enoch, Greg Johnson) or worse, Putin plants (Daniel Friberg)!!!Anyway, an intriguing snapshot of the Alt-Right in 2017 and movement dynamics. Read here of simply listen (with subtitles) at YouTube (CLICK HERE)Colin Liddell, 2023TAPESCRIPT
Hello this is Colin Liddell the chief editor of Alternative Right and this is designed to be a short five to ten minute long podcast commenting on matters relating to the site and the issues of the day, and today is Saturday the 24th of June 2017. Now regarding the site there's been a bit of a change to the look of things and this was kind of forced on me because the previous set up we had it was working out fine but then a new problem cropped up which was the "read more" links stopped showing for some reason and so basically I had to go into the Blogger back pages and install another template. And this template, it's not too bad, I forget what it's called, but it sort of presents a number of stories with a picture and a headline but without any text or by-lines so it's not it's not exactly ideal, and also it means we don't have the slider feature at the top which I quite liked, and so it's not optimum Alternative Right Blogger site but it's a reasonably good stopgap, and so, when I get time, I'll tinker around with settings and try to get the site looking a bit more like it was a few weeks ago.Anyway for the time being just focus on the content and focus on the wine rather than the bottle. So moving out from immediate site matters to wider issues of the Alt-Right, the last couple of weeks at least the Alt-Right's been engaged in one of its sporadic bouts of infighting, mainly between the AltRight.com side which is Richard Spencer and Daniel Friberg and the Counter-Currents side which is mainly Greg Johnson and the people around him.Now I've had associations with both sides. I used to write quite frequently for Counter-Currents, and of course everybody in the Alt-R***t should know about my association with Richard Spencer. And more recently I've been contributing occasional pieces for the AltRight.com site. Now some of the more informed followers of the Alt-Right might also have noticed that we've had a couple of pieces up on Alt-Right News, our sister site, kind of making fun or mock in this controversy mainly from a kind of slightly anti-Counter Currents point of view, and so I guess some people might be wondering y'know where I stand on this issue and and why.Well, I don't mind being frank and admitting that I do have a bit of a grudge against a Greg Johnson and this basically dates back a few months to when Greg Johnson saw fit to defriend me on Facebook, and y'know this is something he's done with a number of people. It seems that y'know Greg Johnson's way of "building a movement" is to defriend people in the Alt-Right and I think Greg Johnson should try to stop doing that and he should stay in touch with people. I think most of us are quite well intentioned to each other.I think I have a legitimate y'know grudge against Greg Johnson so I don't mind poking fun at him a little bit, but I'd be quite happy to y'know ally and work with people like Johnson in the future. Now the reason I think Johnson defriended me is because around about that time, it was the period following the famous TRS doxxing and I was less than supportive of Greg Johnson's position on the TRS doxxing. Now and my interpretation of Gregg Johnson's actions following the TRS doxxing was that he saw this as an opportunity, both for himself and Richard Spencer, and that he wanted to get in there first with his "support" for Mike Enoch and Seventh Son so when I was less than supportive of that position he decided to signal very hard about how pro-TRS he was by basically kicking me out of his "golden circle." Now having said that I wasn't particularly supportive of the TRS in the period after their doxxing, I wasn't particularly hostile either. Like a lot of people in the Alt-Right I thought there are a lot of their legitimate question marks and there was a lot of explaining to be done and so I was just y'know stepping back and keeping an open mind on that.How do I feel about TRS now? Well y'know I used to be part of the TRS inner circle the secret Facebook group, and I never really saw eye-to-eye with Seventh Son or... I quite like to Mike Enoch. I'm not sure why Seventh Son and I didn't see eye-to-eye. I think he he took an irrational dislike to me for, I don't know, various reasons, which y'know it would be fascinating for me to go into but I don't think it would be very helpful to do, so but mainly psychologically driven reasons, not really based on any positions, although of course there are differences regarding positions and tactics and so on, blahdy blahdy blah. Anyway I think it's healthy to have these various ideological differences and differences of opinion and ideas. Of course inevitably a lot of personal antagonisms and petty egoism gets folded into the mix, and that's y' know that's just to be expected, and regarding the basic split between Johnson and the Spencer Friberg camp, I think that the best thing is not to take it too seriously. A lot of this kerfuffle will blow over in time. As far as I can see, there's been something that kind of business divorce between the people at Arctos and the people who used to be at Arctos, which is John Morgan who's now with Greg Johnson. There's going to be a lot of sniggering and name-calling about the gay thing. Now some people are quite fundamentalist on the gay thing. I mean I think Matt Forney surprisingly enough is quite fundamentalist on this issue. I'm less fundamentalist I believe that y'know gay people can be a positive thing in our movement. Also I don't think they're just going to disappear because certain people disapprove of them. I think there is a rationale behind gay involvement in the Alt-Right.There are legitimate questions to consider when you have a lot of gay people involved in a movement. Gay people are very catty at some level and also whether they want to or not they tend to have a lot of their inside information on each other, which can sometimes lead to an unfortunate and rather twisted networking effect. So there are those issues to bear in mind when you have a lot of gays involved in any movement, and the Alt-Right certainly does have that, so we should be on our guard about that, but we should also be realistic and accept that at a certain level gay people are going to be involved in our movement, and try as much as possible to make that a positive. But right now I don't think I'll be seeing eye-to-eye with Greg Johnson for quite some time, so a little bit of homophobia washing around in the Alt-Right is probably y'know a suitable balancing mechanism. Anyway, so I think I've wasted enough words on this controversy. So, with that, I'll just say over and out.
Now available on the Affirmative Right Archive Channel!In the second part of a podcast originally posted on 18th November, 2012, Richard Spencer, Andy Nowicki, and Colin Liddell discuss the latest Bond movie "Skyfall" and the mystique of the Bond movies.Listen HERE.
Now available on the Affirmative Right Archive Channel!In the first part of a podcast originally posted on 18th November, 2012, Richard Spencer, Andy Nowicki, and Colin Liddell respond to the Presidential election victory of Barack Obama and the inevitable uptick of racial narratives and secessionist chatter. Listen HERE.
From Neokrat:Trolling IRL while facefagging wasn't such a good idea
Peter Cytanovic (formerly Cvjetanovic), a participant at the Unite the Right (UTR) demonstration/riot/rally and a torchlight parade the night before in Charlottesville in 2017, has failed in his attempt to distance himself from the Alt-Right and its dark shadow.
A voice message released on Twitter revealed that Cytanovic, who unluckily became the face of the disastrous event after being captured in an iconic photo, is now facing criminal charges of "intimidation."
i’m not a journalist, but THIS is breaking news.
peter cytanovic, pictured below, is being held as a political prisoner for his peaceful involvement in the charlottesville unite the right rally 6 YEARS AGO.
an inside source received news of his wrongful arrest this morning: pic.twitter.com/wI1UK4UhIQ
— mary morgan (@maryarchived) July 27, 2023
Shortly after UTR, Cytanovic attempted to "optics cuck" himself from the event and the Alt-Right, after pressure from the media. At the time, he had a job as a driver at the University of Nevada, which he managed to keep, however soon afterwards he fled overseas and attempted to re-enter the normiesphere by studying in London at the LSE. He even expressed regret and contrition for his role in Charlottesville, although all he appears to have done is march around on the University of Virginia campus on the night before the main UTR demo, with a tiki torch, chanting dumb stuff, and echoing Richard Spencer, who masterminded the torch rally.
In addition to Cytanovic, several other tiki torch marchers have been indicted on similar felony counts nearly six years after the event.
In April William Zachary Smith of Texas, Tyler Bradley Dykes of South Carolina, and Dallas Medina of Ohio were hit with "burning an object with the intent to intimidate" charges, which carries a maximum penalty of up to five years in prison.
Also, just a few days ago, Augustus Sol Invictus, a relatively well-known Alt-Righter, who was also seen torch in hand on the night before the Unite the Right rally, was similarly charged.
But what about the man mainly responsible for instigating the Nazi-invoking torchlight parade without getting legal permission first, namely Richard Spencer himself?
Spencer was in effective control of both Unite the Right and the tiki torch march on the campus of the University of Virginia the night before. Will he also face charges or will some secret deal he may or may not have done with the Feds protect him?
Originally podcast 18th March 2013. Richard Spencer, Andy Nowicki, and Colin Liddell discuss the selection of Jorge Mario Bergoglio as Pope – a "safe" choice or a signal that the Church's future lies in the "global south"?
Check it out HERE! Like and share!
Ten years ago, the World was choosing a new Pope and noticing slightly odd "political movements" like the Italian Five Star Movement and Rand Paul. Originally posted on the 11th of March, 2013, the Vanguard team comment on these now largely forgotten topics. Check it out HERE! Like and share!
Andy Nowicki's descent into conspiritard delusional thinking started in a relatively normal way, through over-emotionalised feelings of personal insignificance, pop lyrics, and the promiscuous use of collective pronouns. In this video from 2020, recorded at the height of the lockdown, he reflects on some lyrics from Morrissey about how the barrage of negative stories in the media "contrives to frighten you, to make you feel small and alone." Actually, the news is either true or false, and your emotional reaction to it is all your own.
Yes, ten years after it was recorded as a much deleted and deplatformed podcast, the Vanguard team's conversation with "futurist", "transhumanist", and "all-round crazy Jewish chick," Rachel Haywire has been added as a "video" to the Affirmative Right archive channel on Odysee!
Check it out HERE! Like and share!
This site is not active, except as an historical archive of the old Alt-Right. Many of the articles in here have been linked to by academic articles and publications. However, despite no longer playing a frontline role in "metapolitics," the site is still subject to attacks, especially from people in the Alt-Right, as no site has critiqued the Alt-Right more than this one for its obvious untruths, Neo-Naziism, and blatant Russian subversion.
Recently Blogger informed us that an old article by Hewitt Moore had been taken down:
"As you may know, our Community Guidelines (https://blogger.com/go/contentpolicy) describe the boundaries for what we allow-- and don't allow-- on Blogger. Your post titled "THE TRANS/ SOCIOPATH OVERLAP" was flagged to us for review. We have determined that it violates our guidelines and deleted the post, previously at http://affirmativeright.blogspot.com/2017/07/the-trans-sociopath-overlap.html.
Why was your blog post deleted? Your content has violated our Hate Speech policy. Please visit our Community Guidelines page linked in this email to learn more.
The specific reason for the deletion was not specified, nor the individual who "flagged" it. I suspect it may have been the spicy images I included or one or two "unfortunate phrases" rather than the thesis itself, which is clearly not so easily dismissed. I have made made minor changes and appealed. Pretty sure it was some "butthurt" individual in the Alt-Right who actually did the flagging.
Anyone wishing to read the essay in its original glory can view it on Archive.
Alex Fontana's classic 2016 article on the nature of the Alt-Right now transformed into a video on the Affirmative Right archive blog. Also available at Odysee (shortly)
Back in 2013, Peter Brimelow of VDare.com was the guest on the Vanguard Podcast. Here is a transcription of that conversation, with a a few gaps as Brimelow has a rather impenetrable accent due not only to his Northern English origins, but also his rather slurred manner of speaking. The audio of this can be heard here.
Intro man: Welcome to Vanguard a radical podcast on culture society and politics. Here are your hosts: Colin Liddell, Andy Nowicki, and Richard Spencer.
Liddell: Very bright and sunny here. Yesterday I went down to Yokohama to check out the Robert Capa exhibition.
Spencer: Oh fascinating! Were you writing that up?
Liddell: Yeah I'm going to be writing about it somewhere, and, yeah... So it's like time traveling back to the 1930s and 40s.
Spencer: That is interesting. Andy, how are things over in Georgia?
Nowicki: Things are clear and cold here in Georgia. It's nice weather, it's to my taste.
Spencer: That's nice. Well, we've actually had some warm weather out here in the wilderness where I live, although things are now very cold and windy, so I'm sitting here enjoying a nice bourbon on a Saturday night, talking to you folks. But anyway today we have a very special guest, and that is our friend Peter Brimelow. Peter is of course the editor and founder of Vdare.com, and he's really, actually had a fascinating career in journalism that's taken him through financial journalism and the Conservative movement in the United States and immigration activism. So, Peter, thanks for being back on the show.
Brimelow: Thanks for having me, Richard.
Spencer: Well, we... As I mentioned, we're recording this on February 2nd, 2013, and, for better and for worse - mostly for worse, I guess - the immigration/ amnesty debate has reared its head once again. I used to think the last time it was taken seriously was in 2007, and there was a very strong grassroots effort to kill it - I guess - really in infancy, but, you know, it is back, and I think it might be stronger than it was a couple years ago, so that's the main reason why we have Peter on the show. Peter, let me ask the first question, and that is: What has happened to Talk Radio and a lot of the Populist Right? Because, if you remember back in 2007, you had a lot of the Republican higher-ups on board with the McCain Amnesty, but it was really these, the radio, the talk radio guys, who were very populist about it, they had all these people calling into their congressmen, and they supposedly melted the circuit board or something like that, and there are all these stories of this really "hot rage" against immigration, but what I what I've seen now is almost a concerted effort to subvert all these talk radio hosts, and so you have Rush Limbaugh fawning over Marco Rubio and all that kind of stuff, so what's happened to the populist right, and could it maybe have a a comeback, as it were?
Brimelow: Richard you know I'm really an internet person and, I think that uh one of the things that we've seen in talk radio over the last 20 years or 15 years is that it's become increasingly centralized and corporatized and the minds are getting increasing control over the hosts, and one of the big... I mean look what happened to Lou Dobbs, you know, I mean you're not allowed to have any kind of a deviant point of view in the mainstream media, and they've systematically taken out a lot of the leaders of the opposition on talk radio and on television, I mean, Pat Buchanan being another example. On the other hand, it's awfully early in the cycle, you know. We on VDare.com we monitor what Rush Limbaugh says with great interest, not because we have a lot of respect for him as a political thinker, but because, I think, he says as much as he... He is is a balancing act between his audience on the one hand and his sponsors on the other, and, yeah, he obviously feels, and more so than most of Conservativism Inc., that the audience doesn't like it. You know the famous story about market research is looking at dog food he came back and told the [????] the dogs don't like it that's why he won't sell. Well the problem about the entire political establishment has is that the dogs don't like amnesty, and Rush has gone back and to on this. I mean, on the one hand, you're right, talk radio is quiet as it is now I think partly because it was so stunned by the disastrous defeat of the Romney campaign, but on the other hand we see you see people like Charles Krauthammer and so on, somewhat quickly, tacking back tacking back in response to popular discontent. Krauthammer is now saying we have to have a fence and all that kind of thing. I mean it's a complete stupid and symbolic point of course, but he obviously is feeling heat, and the last few days Limbaugh has been throwing a lot of petrol on the issue, so you know we still have some hope for him.
Spencer: But isn't isn't border security in itself a bit of a distraction, you know, in the sense that the real problem is massive legal immigration and the potential of amnestying in all of these illegal immigrants. But, in a way, you know, from our perspective, illegal immigration, which is the thing that everyone's always talking about -- oh we all agree that we need to stop that. Well, I mean, illegal immigrants very often go back home. I mean that's been documented, and they'll cross the border the other way, and so, in a way, that's not the real problem, but Andy...
Nowicki: And, yeah, and more of them I've heard that in the in the last two or three years, there's actually more of them going back because of the stagnant economy in the U.S.
Brimelow: Well, illegal immigration does fluctuate but [???] because the economy's relatively low, but it'll just start up again when and if the economy picks up. I agree of course that that legal immigration is the more serious problem in the long run, and I also think that border security is only a small part of the problem of illegal immigration, and the major issue with illegal immigration is interior enforcement. You know, they ought to be able to stop people from hiring illegals, and the second issue is birth-right citizenship. You've got to stop this population naturalizing all the time, which is what it would otherwise do. And neither of these issues have been raised at all in the current proposals. I mean especially what the political establishment has done here is simply repeat the Bush Amnesty proposals. There's no difference at all between what Bush proposes, Obama proposes, and what Rubio proposes. They're just saying the same thing. It's the famous definition of insanity - you keep on doing the same thing expecting a different result.
Spencer: Yeah, go ahead Andy.
Nowicki: I was just thinking, you know, when Bush was was trying to push through the amnesty plan in 2007 and there was this fierce resistance to it. Of course, you know, the ones behind it, the main ones behind it, the main ones pushing it were Republicans and the GOP was in charge pretty much at that time. Is there anything to... And now, of course, it's the Democrats and Obama... Is there anything... Is it easier for the the Grassroots types to get fired up against you know a member of their own party than it is for them to get fired up against the opposing party? I mean that seems counterintuitive in some ways but I wonder...
Brimelow: Actually I think... One of the things about this amnesty drive, which has obviously been planned long in advance is... It would have happened under Romney. Romney made it very clear he was going to go for amnesty. He said that's in the [???] debate, and he's always saying he's in favour of massively increasing skilled legal immigration, despite the [???] so we would have seen exactly the same drive for amnesty if Romney had been elected, and we would have been worse off, of course, because there are Republicans who would go with the president, and that was the big problem under Bush, you know it was very hard to get a lot of loyalist Republicans angry with their own president, and, in fact, in the areas of spending and so on, and of course the disastrous foreign policy of Bush, you know, Republicans didn't kick. They only started to kick once Obama was in, but on illegal immigration and legal immigration they did kick, and, you know, both in 06 and 07. [In] 06 Bush [and] the Republicans controlled everything -- the Congress and the White House, In 07 they didn't control the Congress, you know, and that... They've had it both ways and, you know, we stopped it both times, and, you know, the people inside the Beltway who I respect, believe it could be stopped again, but it's going to be a huge shock for the political class who've absolutely convinced himself they can get it through this time.
Spencer: Do you think even the grassroots are more demoralized than they were, in the sense that this whole meme that... You know, in a weird way, the meme is 'Demography is Destiny' and so the idea is we... you know, the GOP needs to reach out to Hispanics or it's doomed and it's just going to be 2012 over and over again, and...
Brimelow: You know, Richard, as you know, we consistently run on VDare.com every day coverage of what the polls said that the Republican share of the white vote was, and the poll was terrible. I mean Romney never did well with the white vote. In the end he got about 57%. That's just not enough. In 2010 they got 60%. They need to build on that, they need to get up to the levels you seen in Georgia and the Mississippi and so on, significantly higher than that. As you know, the demographics of Texas are as bad as California, but the Republicans carry Texas because they have a substantial, much stronger white vote. [???] the Republicans again failed to carry the white vote in California. According to Reuters/IPSOS they got 49%. So, you know, the issue is not that the demographics caused by immigration. The Republicans' problem is that they do not turn out the White base, and one of the reasons they don't do that is that they won't run on these national [???] issues like immigration. I think that Conservatism Inc. and a lot of Republicans in the field are very demoralized, and the reason they're demoralized is not because they lost bad - they didn't lose that badly - but because the themes they've been running on for the last 30 years, which are basically just going over... running the 1980 elections over and over again, simply don't work anymore. You know, they're just not having the resonance that they used to have, and that means they've got to come up with new ideas, and, of course, that's very difficult thing to do.
Spencer: Absolutely. Colin, do you want to chime in?
Liddell: Just curious about the percentage figures. Peter, you're talking about the percentage of the white vote. Does that include all the people who absent themselves from the political process, because I guess when you say 50% of the white vote that means 43% for the Democrats 57% for the Republicans and then there's also a large number of white voters that are just not bothering to vote as well.
Brimelow: But there are two issues with the White vote. The first is how many turn out and the second is what share the Republicans get. Now, as it turns out, the White turnout was down in this election, and it was down in the previous general election. McCain didn't turn out the White votes either. So this is the second time Whites simply hasn't turned out very substantially, and the reason for that of course is that they're just thoroughly demoralized. But the other aspect is that even the ones that did turn out, didn't go so sufficiently for Republicans, so Republicans are losing both on the share and on the turnout. But it's obviously, when you look at the crew that they've got there, why people don't bother to vote for them, but they don't realize that. But they just, I guess, that's something that they can't allow themselves to think.
Liddell: This sort of represents the greatest disenfranchisement of the White vote since the period of Reconstruction I'd say.
Brimelow: That's a [good] way to look at it. Yeh, except in this case it's a self-disenfranchisement.
Liddell: In a way, they don't really have a choice, because they're just been given these these two false choices, so... I mean, they don't actually have the option to vote for what they would prefer to vote for.
Brimelow: No, I'm sorry, I mean the great target of opportunity in American politics is the white working class, particularly in the Northern states - the great tier of states, Greater New England, from Portland Maine to Portland Oregon. You know, Republicans did terribly in all of these areas, and they're not heavily minority States. They're white States. But the big problem is the [???] pollsters are just not getting the working class vote, and of course it's not surprising. What do they do to appeal to them? [???] You have very wealthy country club campaigns who have nothing in common with these people. Make that clear.
Brimelow: Absolutely, I mean Ryan of course is a Kempite, he's a follower of Jack Kemp, and he's utterly hopeless on immigration. You know, he's a wonk, he's interested in highly technical issues, none of which are popular with the Republican base. It was a very bad choice. But, you see, as you know, I mean the point of the Romney campaign is, we think, and it's actually true about this row about [???], we think we're looking for a plural contest, where ideas and candidates and so on, are competing with each other. Well, that's not actually true. The Romney campaign was simply a feeding frenzy by campaign consultants, who wished to raise as much money as possible and spend it on themselves, and to do that, they avoided running on issues which were popular and for issues which they could raise money on, and they could raise money with Ryan who's very popular with the hedge fund people, and suddenly I think with this amnesty row at the moment, it's probably not going to go through if you actually look at the numbers and so on, and if you believe the people I respect - the immigration patriots in Washington - it's still very tough to get this thing through, particularly in the relatively short period of time that they have. But, the [???] class doesn't really care because what it wants to do is to raise as much money as possible from Bill Gates, and have a huge row and campaign, and spend the greatest money on lobbying and so on. And whether it wins or whether it doesn't win that's not really important. It's just it's just [???] by the political class against the business class. The business class is essentially helpless in this market. It's fools.
Spencer: Let me ask you, Peter, going forward, what are some of the key, let's say, new vocabulary that a lot of the grassroots need to start learning? Because, you know, one thing that we've talked about together off air is this problem, when you have something like the Tea Party, it was really an implicitly white community, and that was clear, and I think all the Liberals are criticized it as such we're quite perceptive, but, at the same time, all they talked about was all this kind of nonsense from the Buckleyites in the 1950s, so, you know, it was like, "Oh, it's taxes and we need to fight Socialism" or, you know, something like this, and so what you found is that they didn't really know how to speak. They didn't know how to speak for themselves, and so, if you think about going forward, what are some of the key maybe like policy ideas on the one hand but also just kind of language that people should learn how to speak that could replace all this curdled milk that's given us by the Conservative Inc. morons?
Brimelow: In the end, Richard, of course Americans - and by that I mean White Americans because they are Americans because that's what America is - they've got to start defining their own interests. We've got to explicitly say how does this benefit or disadvantage Whites. Now, we're some distance from that, but it can be gotten up as a national issue, you know, I mean you can say... For example, one of the things Republicans should be running on is language legislation. They should take a leap out to the book of the Quebec nationalists and pass laws which prohibit employers from demanding people to be, demanding that employees be bilingual, except in very exceptional circumstances. I get email all the time from people, you know, in the... it's Eastern Washington State and places like that, who say that their kids can't get jobs in hotels or as working fast food operations, because they don't speak Spanish. Well, of course, it's not that there's that many people speaking Spanish. It's just that if you, you know, in a situation like that, employers are inclined to [???] in favor of the minority language community, because they're the only ones who are actually bilingual as a fact of the matter. What the Quebecers did was they simply made that illegal. You can't require, most Quebec employers cannot require employees to speak English, because two-thirds of all Quebecers don't speak English. They're monoglot francophone. That's the kind of thing you have to [???].
Spencer: And also I like the idea of removing birth-right citizenship. I mean that was... That kind of was an issue a couple of years ago, and I think that's an important thing to get across, just so you don't have all these people just being born in the country. Also wasn't it...
Brimelow: One of the interesting things about this debate however, I'd say that they've learned nothing and forgotten nothing, proposed exactly the same thing. If they had come up with a proposal while saying. "Well, look, we will amnesty all these people in, but they will never be citizens, and we will never allow birth-right citizenship," so we will have what is essentially a class of helots in the country who have don't have full political rights, which is what the Swiss have. The Swiss have a very substantial population of Swiss-born people who are never going to be Swiss because the Swiss don't want to have a [???] community. Now, of course, this is just appalling from the point of view of democratic theory, and it's a disaster for American working class. But who cares about them? It's very clear that the ruling class didn't care about them. What it would have done, is it would have gotten the business community out of the debate. Because they don't care about people having political rights. They just want to have cheap labour. I still think that might be a fallback position which we might see emerge. I'm also very intrigued by Rand Paul. I can't make up my mind...
Nowicki: That's what I was about to ask...
Brimelow: I can't decide whether he doesn't know what he's talking about, or he has [an] extremely clever idea. He said... Well, what he said is "We've got to evolve on amnesty," that is basically we've got to amnesty these people in with border security, but, at the same time, he's also... he has said that he'll simply stop legal integration, he'll stop all integration after amnestying these people in. Now that's a very interesting deal. He said just a couple of days ago... We had a blog up on VDare.com with... He told a local talk show host that... He actually quoted this line from Milton Friedman: "You can't have open immigration and the welfare statem" [???] normally get Libertarians to think about
Spencer: Well, yeah, but I'm afraid what he means is that he wants open immigration and no welfare state.
Brimelow: That's not what he's saying. He has actually said he'd like to see no further immigration until everybody assimilates, and he's not proposed, as far as I'm aware, to abolish the welfare state.
Spencer: Well, we don't want them to assimilate. I mean I don't know I don't know... I don't... Well, in the sense, if they assimilate, it's always to what? I mean it's just we would have some weird Hispanic, you know, country that they assimilate to I mean it's not... Anyway, I don't want to argue with... Rand Paul's not here and obviously we're on the same page, Peter, so... But anyway...
Brimelow: The thing is to trade, to have no legal or illegal immigration going forward, well that would be a great prize to stabilize the democratic situation in the country. That would be really something remarkable to achieve, and if you also, to do things on the language front and so on, a lot of these Hispanics would probably leave, so I mean that's a really interesting idea that Paul's proposing. I'm just not sure he knows what he said. I mean, you know, it's such a radical idea and it's got no pickup on it that I wonder if he realized what he said - if he isn't just sparking off a few libertarian platitudes.
Spencer: I don't trust Rand Paul. I see him as a real, just a kind of opportunist type person, and he's also someone who seems much, much more than his father to kind of want to play footsie with Conservatives and be a kind of a part of the movement. His father took on big enemies. Whatever you want to think about him, he took on the military-industrial complex and the establishment, he took on the Federal Reserve Bank. I mean these are huge... You know, you're taking on Goliath, to say the least...
Nowicki: And did pretty well, didn't he? I mean...
Spencer: Yeah I mean, he did, he started a movement among young people. I mean you could you should give credit where credit's due. I think Rand, he just does all this nonsense, like, you know... The stuff he does was like, "We should stop foreign aid to some country because they like didn't tell us something about a Bin Laden," or it was just something where he was always making it 'Work with Conservative In.' He just strikes me as just not at all trustworthy. He's just a kind of opportunist guy who wants to be part of 'the Movement.' But maybe I'm being too harsh.
Brimelow: I think one thing about Paul, you know, Ron Paul was in politics for a long time and he was out of politics for quite a long time you know after he ran for president, so now, what you and I are used to, Richard, the late Paul, he had a... He accumulated a long record [???] the Capitol [???]. I don't know about Rand Paul, which is what... I think it'll be a long time before they'll be able to judge him.
Spencer: Okay, sure, well anyway, Colin, do you want to add any last questions, and we'll let Peter go back to his late night editing routine, which is how he operates?
Liddell: Well just curious how Japan is viewed over in America because obviously they have a completely different approach to the whole question of immigration.
Nowicki: Very restrictionist.
Brimelow: We've run a number of [pieces] on VDare.com on Japan by Jared Taylor, discussing the fact that they moved to mechanization rather than importing lots of Filipinos. Now I have to say that this has had absolutely no effect on public debate, and the general consensus here is that the Japanese are going to have to cave in and have lots of Africans come to, you know, run their industries for them because they're getting old. I should ask you, Colin, you know, I mean there's a great scare at the moment of the [???] about American fertility rate. But I must say it's always occurred to me that, you know, fertility rate... You know, there's nothing wrong with the decline in population if you can manage it. I mean, the population's spiked dramatically in the 19th and 20th century. I don't see any reason why it couldn't come down quite reasonably. The question is how skilled the population is. Are the Japanese panicking about this?
Liddell: I wouldn't say panicking. I mean, I think it's more of a problem in some of the rural areas because in Japan all the young people tend to gravitate towards these cities, and when you go to some of these rural areas, most of the people do seem to be a bit elderly, and so some of those areas are trying very hard to encourage young people to stay there, and this has resulted in various kinds of tax breaks and incentives, so that might be worth keeping an eye on - what do these, you know, rural Japanese communities do to maintain their demographic profile.
Spencer: You know one thing. Peter. I think unfortunately with the Japanese, I mean, I think people like us look at Japan, and Switzerland also, as deeply sensible people, but, you know, I think particularly Conservatives, this American exceptionalism meme is just very strong in their brains, and I think they really think of America as a different kind of society. It's not like a normal country.
Nowicki: It's the greatest country in the world.
Spencer: Well, yeah, they think that, but it's the greatest ever... We're the richest country in the world, even though we're clearly not, but they think of it in terms of "We are a global society, we're the hope to all mankind," and I think in some ways a lot of the...
Nowicki: Proposition nation.
Spencer: Proposition nation, yeah, there are a lot of different varieties of this, and I think in some ways some of these real sensible... "Sensible nationalism" maybe I'll call it, because it's not anything scary or strange, just sensible rational nationalism, it runs up against all this American exceptionalist bullshit that Conservatives seem to believe in.
Liddell: Well, the culture, the culture of the country really dictates its destiny I guess in many ways, and in Japan, one of the one of the things about Japanese culture is there's a lot of emphasis on non-confrontation, and this permeate, you know, almost every area. They try to avoid direct confrontation in all sorts of situations, culturally and socially, and just having a rapidly increasing immigrant population would completely mess that up, so it just cuts across the grain of Japanese culture to start importing lots of different culturally distinct populations.
Brimelow: I mean Taylor, Jared Taylor said of course that he really think[s]... And, of course, you know, he spent his childhood in Japan, so he really thinks that if the Japanese ever confronted with a group making passionately rational arguments in favour of immigration, opening their borders. they would have fallen too. They just... They were lucky that they didn't have a kind of a group operating in their culture.
Liddell: Yeah, I think the pressure point for increasing immigration in Japan, I think you you referred to earlier, Peter, is the nurses, the Filipino nurses. That's because one of the other key points about Japanese Society is that it's a rapidly aging society, so there's a big concern about having enough, you know, nurses to look after all these old people. So, you sometimes hear about efforts to increase the number of nurses coming into the country, but the Japanese unions actually work against that because they maintain very high standards. So, for Filipino nurses to actually qualify to operate in Japan, they have to pass quite rigorous tests that the Japanese nurses have to pass, so there's no kind of affirmative action and allowing people in by lowering standards.
Brimelow: Well, good for them.
Spencer: Well, Peter, let's put a bookmark in the conversation and we['d] certainly love to bring it up again with you at a future date, but anyway we'll certainly be watching this immigration amnesty battle as it unfolds. So, you're predicting that amnesty will fail?
Brimelow: Richard, of course I don't know. All I can tell you is that the people I respect inside the Beltway believe that it will fail. Of course that's very much a minority opinion now. In fact, it's almost an unheard-of opinion in the mainstream media. One of the things that strikes about this last attack is how extraordinarily controlled the mainstream media narrative is. There's just simply no dissent anywhere. We started to run a series on VDare.com, where we find some [???] dissent and we report it. There's a Liberal columnist in Rhode Island from [???] that's just written something asking what about the, you know, White working class. So it's reported, but they're few and far between. The consensus in the media is overwhelming in favour of this thing going through. And the Republicans finally having to pay attention to this.
Spencer: Oh yeah, well I think McCain was on NPR and he said that he could get 88 Senators to support it. He seemed pretty confident.
Brimelow: Well I think that... I mean it's obvious to everybody, I think, that the Republican party is totally corrupt, and, you know, it'll have to be replaced, and immigration's the issue which might very well just break it and displace it. That's you know what [???] predicted, you know, one of Reagan's tools, towards the end of his life, he wrote an article on his own blog, saying that he'd come to conclusion that immigration couldn't be contained in the party system. We'll see a new deal, we'll see a fourth party system arise, a new party will come along.
Spencer: Well that gives us some hope. So why don't we end on that optimistic note? Thank you Peter, we really appreciate it.
Exclusive interview with Peter Cvjetanovic
Leading Swedish right-wing extremists were at the big white power meeting in Charlottesville this weekend.
The encounter — in which a right-wing extremist killed a young woman and injured 19 people as he drove into a group of counter-protesters — is described as one of the larger far-right events in the United States.
"We in the alternative right have a policy of not giving interviews to the media and journalists who spread fake news," writes Daniel Friberg, one of the Swedes on site, in a text message to Expressen.
Heather Heyer, 32, was killed Saturday when a car drove into counter-protesters in Charlottesville, Virginia. The driver of the car was arrested and then identified as 20-year-old James Fields Jr. of Ohio. A former teacher of Fields tells the Washington Post that he had Adolf Hitler as his idol.
The counter-protesters protested against the "Unite the Right" white power rally that gathered hundreds of right-wing extremists, not least from the so-called alt-right movement, in Charlottesville. The alt-right movement became famous during the presidential election campaign in the United States when they gave Donald Trump their support.
During "Unite the Right", several Swedish elements have been seen - including a shield with the Swedish text "Nog är nog" during Saturday's demonstration.
A Swede on site in Charlottesville is Daniel Friberg. He is something of a veteran of Swedish right-wing extremism and has been a driving force in several media projects. Among other things, he is behind the think tank Motpol and the publishing house Arktos.
Earlier this year, it became known that Friberg has a central role in the spread of the alt-right, as European editor of the movement's site. He also serves on the board of alt-right.
When Expressen contacts Friberg, he does not want to answer any questions about his participation in "Unite the Right". He writes in a text message:
"I would have liked to have spoken to you about Charlottesville. However, we in the alternative right have a policy not to give interviews to media and journalists who spread fake news, where Expressen and not least yourself, are on our list of rogue actors. Hope you understand."
Daniel Friberg is also vice chairman of the Nordic Alternative Right, which was launched in late spring. The chairman is Christoffer Dulny - who until recently was the top official for the Sweden Democrats in the Riksdag.
Dulny was a parliamentary candidate and top name for SD in the municipal election in the City of Stockholm in 2014, but he had to leave those posts after Expressen revealed how he wrote comments under a made-up name on hate sites. He had written, among other things, that "Immigrants are absolutely the worst at lying, manipulating, driving foul sales, incitement, etc.", resentment Muslim childbearing and singling out Roma as criminals. In tip-off emails to the hate site Avpixlat's predecessor Politically Incorrect, he also wrote that "Arabs have more violent genes".
Ahead of the meeting in Charlottesville, Dulny said on the far-right YouTube channel Red Ice that he would be going to "Unite the Right":
- Me and he (Daniel Friberg, editor's note) will be at "Unite the Right" in Charlottesville August 12, so check that out too. I think he'll give speeches there too," Dulny said in English.
When Dulny was asked on Twitter on Monday why he was in a march with swastikas and Hitler salutes, he replied that there was no march for him because he "unfortunately did not make it to the torch march in question."
The Expressen has asked Dulny for comment.
We live in an age of oppressive political correctness, where almost anybody of prominence is forced to toe the line, lest they offend, "trigger," or commit "micro-aggressions"; and, if they do, they are required to humbly beg for forgiveness even where none is offered. Such intolerance even includes rock stars, the wild, shamanistic figures we reared up in the spiritual vacuum of the 1960s and 70s, through our appreciation of the Dionysian aspects of a fast-mutating musical culture.
But what about David Bowie and his obvious interest in Nazism and Fascism? Going by comments made in interviews, song lyrics, and stage imagery, the singer clearly had a crush on the 20th century's real counter culture. Why wasn't more made of this? Why was he let off the hook?
First the evidence of Bowie's fascism. Back in his 1970s heyday, he gleefully told reporters that "Hitler was the first pop star" and declared that "the best thing that can happen is for an extreme right government to come."
In his 1971 song Quicksand, he wrote:
I’m living in a silent filmportraying Himmler’s sacred realm of dream reality.
Then there is his 1977 composition China Girl, which became a hit in 1983:
I stumble into town, just like a sacred cowVisions of Swastikas in my head, plans for everyone.
But Bowie had gone even further than that. There are famous pictures of him waving and sieg heiling from an open-top black Mercedes of the kind that Hitler used.
Here's Hitler in a similar car (and with a better crowd response):
Definitely not a coincidence. Then there is the lightning flash mark, a symbol of fascism, that was used for Aladdin Sane, as well as the SS symbols he used onstage for the Ziggy Stardust tour:
Of course, Bowie was an eclectic style stealer and far from being an "actual Nazi." His general sexual and narcotic degeneracy would have precluded that. However, he was at least open to elements and aspects of Nazism and Fascism in a way that made sense for someone in his creative, cerebral, and iconoclastic niche.
His Nazism quotient was certainly high enough to provide endless ammunition for "Social Justice Warriors" and "antifa" with nothing better to do. It is surprising therefore that more was not made of Bowie's flirtations with fascism and his frequent one-night stands with Nazism. Throughout his long career, no public statement or press conference was forced from him, in which he begged for forgiveness for his "hurtful" and "insensitive" comments, lyrics, or actions.
 |
| Communism killed 100 million and all I got was this lousy Manic Street Preachers T-shirt. |
Toying with Nazi imagery was certainly no worse than toying with Communist imagery, and in my opinion a lot less offensive, as Nazism only killed large numbers of people under wartime conditions, whereas Communism did the same and much worse under peacetime conditions.
But, given the hysteria that surrounds such symbols as the swastika and Confederate flag today, and the totalitarian "zero tolerance" attitude of political correctness, it is still surprising that the PC bigots left Bowie and his legacy alone.
Why is this? Probably it was due to a combination of factors – his age, his Somalian wife (perhaps that's one reason he married her), and his past bisexuality and androgyny. All these factors made him a slightly awkward target for SJWs to attack, as did his powerful lawyers.
But there was also some clever PR management. In rock histories and biographies of the man – like the one I read most recently, Christopher Sandford's Bowie: Loving The Alien (a solid, "meat and potatoes" effort) – Bowie's fascistic dalliance is more-or-less explained away as an aspect of his drug-addled years, rather than anything significant. This, of course, is the kind of excuse an average member of the public would not be allowed if he or she tweeted or shared similar words or imagery on social media after a few drinks too many.
But has PC exacted a cost on Bowie?
Some will say that his talent declined simply because of age; while others will ascribe his creative decline to the same cause as his "fascism" – a brain burnt out on massive amounts of drugs. Both explanations are quite feasible. But I would entertain a third possibility, that for an iconoclastic soul like Bowie his creative downturn was related to the growing intolerance of our age and the unrealistic expectation that rock stars be "respectable" and line up their ideological ducks with the establishment.
This trend really started to get going in the 1980s, and it is perhaps the reason why that decade was also the last truly creative decade in the history of popular music. Bowie's dip in creativity almost perfectly matches the growing imposition of political correctness in the 1980s, with his 1983 album Let's Dance being his last potent record (with the possible exception of his just released final album). Alongside the fascistic China Girl, that album also included gestures towards political correctness, like the narrative touting the "oppression" of the Aborigines on the video for the album's title track.
What is a rock star if he cannot exist beyond the taboos that circumscribe the rest of us? Answer: a mere musician with a stupid hair cut. During the lifetime of David Bowie (1947–2016), "visions of swastikas" were incapable of ever bringing back the Third Reich, but they might have helped the occasional taboo-busting rock star find a seam of true creativity.
16.1.11
by Derek Turner
Reading Anthony Powell’s A Dance to the Music of Time can seem a formidable commitment. It is a series of 12 novels (totalling one million words) published between 1951 and 1975, following the lives of over 300 characters during seven decades of the 20th century, as observed by a narrator who is at once involved in the turbulent century and ironically detached from it. This may sound indigestible, but Powell's roman a fleuve manages to be simultaneously captivating and consequential, witty and wise – leading acute critics to see Dance as the “greatest modern novel since Ulysses” (Clive James) and “one of English fiction's few twentieth century masterpieces” (John Lanchester).
Powell (incidentally pronounced Pole) has been called “the English Proust,” and the comparison is appropriate. Like Proust, his themes are time, change, chance and regret, evoked by multitudinous closely observed details and characters whose traits somehow encapsulate whole ‘types.
Powell was born in 1905, the son of an army officer and a mother distantly descended from the Dymoke family of Scrivelsby in Lincolnshire, who were and perhaps still are the hereditary King’s Champions, required to ride fully armoured into the hall during a king's investiture and challenge any pretenders to a duel (a ritual sadly discontinued after George IV’s coronation). Powell’s childhood was spent in London, Aldershot and Sevenoaks, then he went to what he described as “well-deserved obscurity” at Eton (although he was graded ninth in the school in his final examinations). He read history at Balliol, Oxford (he got a third). He worked for the publishers Duckworth, and associated with the likes of Evelyn Waugh, George Orwell, John Betjeman, Malcolm Muggeridge, Augustus John, Tallulah Bankhead, Nina Hamnett, Aleister Crowley, and Constant Lambert. He wrote three novels – Afternoon Men (1931), Venusberg (1932) and From a View to a Death (1934), all of which were well received but sold unspectacularly. He married Lady Violet Pakenham in 1934 (they had two sons). He published his fourth novel, Agents and Patients, in 1936 and that year also visited the Soviet Union on holiday; the experience reinforced an emerging, if always understated, dislike of communism. He worked as a scriptwriter and reviewer, and brought out a fifth novel, What's Become of Waring?, in 1939. That year, he was commissioned into the Welch Regiment, eventually transferring to the Intelligence Corps.
Upon leaving the army, he published a biography of John Aubrey, bought a run-down Regency house in Frome (where he lived for the rest of his life), wrote for the Times Literary Supplement, Daily Telegraph and Spectator, and became literary editor of Punch. He was created CBE in 1956, declined a knighthood in 1973 and became a Companion of Honour in 1988. He published two more novels, O, How The Wheel Becomes It! (1983) and The Fisher King (1986), plus four volumes of memoirs, then became incapacitated and died in 2000.
Dance won immediate admiration, and the fourth volume in the series, At Lady Molly’s, won the James Tait Black Memorial Prize in 1957. The eleventh, Temporary Kings, won the W H Smith Prize. The sequence was adapted for TV in 1997 and shown on Channel 4 (starring Simon Russell Beale), while there were radio adaptations in 1978-81 and 2008.
The title of the sequence is taken from the painting by Poussin that hangs in the Wallace Collection in London, which shows four dancers circling a measure to a tune played by Father Time.
“An almost hypnotic spell seems cast by this masterpiece on the beholder. I knew all at once that Poussin had expressed at least one important aspect of what the novel must be”
Powell recalled in his memoirs To Keep the Ball Rolling.
Writing in the Guardian in 2000, an appreciative Norman Shrapnel called Powell a “fastidious satirist” – “reflective and often melancholic…clinically accurate and searching…comic in the least uproarious way imaginable” – unsentimental, interested in coincidences, and eccentric and ritualistic behaviour. Such stylistic qualities have compelled respect even from readers who do not share his small-c conservatism, and who are predisposed to dislike his real-life and novelistic habitats of public schools, Oxbridge, St James’s, the army and literary studies.
The parlour game of trying to work out on whom Powell based some of his best characters is a fascinating one. For example, some have seen in the humourless leftwing publisher Quiggin a blend of C. P. Snow, F. R. Leavis and Harold Pinter – although the latter identification was always denied by the author, who was related to Pinter by marriage.
Some straightforward borrowings from real life were later admitted to by Powell, such as the manic novelist X Trapnel (based on Julian McLaren-Ross) and the tubercular composer Hugh Morland (Constant Lambert) – and of course Powell’s greatest creation, the unforgettable, unspeakable Kenneth Widmerpool, based apparently on the military bureaucrat Denis Capel-Dunn, under whom Powell had served briefly during the war.
The odd surname Widmerpool was derived from a real-life English Civil War soldier, a Parliamentarian cavalry captain. This selection of a Parliamentarian’s name for the buffoonish yet genuinely nasty central character of Dance implies Powell’s political inclinations.
Like Capel-Dunn, Widmerpool is “a very fat, extremely boring, overwhelmingly ambitious arriviste. His conversations were hideously detailed and humourless” (John Colvin, Daily Telegraph, 30 December 1991). From Dance’s Etonian outset, Widmerpool is always there or always sensed, and always ridiculous – the oikish, shortsighted son of a fertilizer manufacturer (the father’s stock-in-trade hinting at his son's essence), remembered chiefly by his schoolmates for having the “wrong kind of overcoat,” and ever afterwards cropping up everywhere in the narrator’s (Nicholas Jenkins) affairs, and usually to deftly comic effect. He is painfully aware of his physical and social shortcomings, and tries to overcompensate through constant work and by trying to foresee looming trends, so that he can steal a march on his envied, hated contemporaries. He is propelled utterly by ambition, and tries to make himself indispensable to whomsoever happens to be in a position of authority.
He trims his sails constantly to the prevailing winds – at different times, he is (or claims to be) a go-ahead man of business, an admirer of Hitler, a confidant of Mrs Simpson, a senior logistics officer during the war, a Labour MP under Attlee, a Soviet spy, a writer for a leftwing magazine, a life peer, a chancellor of one of the new universities, a supporter of the 1950s and 1960s counter-culture, rejecting his title and joining a New Age cult founded by a new kind of ‘anti-authority’ authority figure. He is quietly unpleasant, seeping Uriah Heep-like through the lives of all the other characters, and all of 20th century Britain, an ambitious and malignant force both following and setting the century’s tone. But whatever he tries fails. Widmerpool is, as Norman Shrapnel noted, “a shade pathetic, a little absurd, more than a little sinister.” Whilst trying to impress his business boss (Sir Magnus Donner, based on Lord Beaverbrook) he drives into one of Donner’s garden statues; he has sugar poured over him in public by a girl he is trying to impress; his vaunted closeness to Wallis Simpson turns out to mean that he once saw her at a pheasant shoot; he is hated even by his parliamentary Labour colleagues; he makes a mess of espionage and falls foul of his KGB handlers; his writing is dreary; he is impotent and a voyeur; his wife hates him for allegedly being responsible for the death of her beloved uncle and has married him solely so that she can make his life a misery; the red-brick university of which he is chancellor is clearly a poor academical relation to the unattainable Oxbridge; he is publicly humiliated by having paint thrown at him; he grovels (possibly homo-erotically) before a charismatic hippie leader, eventually falling dead whilst running naked in the countryside. Whatever he does, it is ludicrous, misplaced and déclassé; his is a lifetime of always wearing the “wrong kind of overcoat.”
Yet this ridiculous personality comes to wield real power at times, even occasionally seeming like ‘the wave of the future.’ He seems to Powell to have in some way personified everything that was wrong with the 20th century, and specifically the political Left during that period. In all his gaucherie, envy, resentment, sycophancy, intrusiveness, insensitivity, humourlessness, ruthlessness, condescension and lack of culture, Widmerpool is brilliantly funny but also loathsome (and pitiable). It says much for Powell’s craft that even Left-leaning litterateurs cannot resent this devastating caricature of the Leftist personality.
Widmerpool is surrounded by characters whose names conjure up obliterated times and places – Dicky Umfraville (spivvish, raffish, White Mischief set), Professor Sillery (precise, bitchy, gossipy academic), Ted Jeavons (chauffeur who took his titled wife’s surname but has retained his unpretentiousness and practicality), St John Clarke (verbose novelist with tediously of-the-moment Leftwing political views), Mark Manners (Modernist poet, snob), “Books-do-Furnish-a-Room” Bagshaw (upper-class Philistine) and Scorpio Mortlock (1960s pagan cult leader). Every name and every incident has been minutely considered, and none are redundant; this gives Dance its totally convincing and sinewy texture, whether Powell is describing Oxford studies, Jazz Age clubs, car crashes, homosexual artists, seedy boarding houses, Berkeley Square mansions, bombing raids, wartime billets or Venice in the 1950s.
It may sound as if Powell has a politico-historical agenda, but there is no evidence of this – the absence of any ‘grand narrative’ suggesting profound impatience with allegedly all-encompassing worldviews and ideologies. Nor is he trying to change anything. His chosen tactic is simply, as Nicholas Birns explained in 2005’s Understanding Anthony Powell, the “amused, reserved acceptance of what happens.”
Arguably, this sceptical stance is itself conservative. Powell tended to avoid discussing his own views, because he feared they might hurt his career, but as a young man he expressed concerns about democracy giving dominion to “the morally and intellectually deficient,” and once said that had he been compelled to choose a side in the Spanish Civil War he would (albeit reluctantly) have opted for Franco. He was an admirer of Margaret Thatcher, and was “broadly sympathetic” to Christian values. He was interested in genealogy and heredity, and aspired to live in a house “with a driveway.” But his philosophy is always kept thankfully well-trimmed and unobtrusive. He does not wish to make a point – but only to record what it felt like to be English, in England during those years.
One of Powell’s favourite books, and one which features largely in the latter parts of Dance, was Robert Burton’s outré 1621 classic, The Anatomy of Melancholy – that strange gentle compendium of depressiveness and madness hovering in the book’s background, like a Purcell ground heard from far away, as the dancers slow down and quit the stage. Soon, they will all have gone, as Powell has gone – but reading Powell reminds us that there will always be new dancers to tread the same steps in different ways, always to the beat and tempo of an always sardonic Father Time.
10.08.05
I had a quick look at one or two or the recorded livestreams from this year's Millenniyules, and something struck me almost at once. It was the way that it's all about nodding along and not challenging each other, and sympathetically listening to each other's moans about the big bad world.
Don't worry, you won't be asked for any moral justifications either. This goes for the ideas/conspiracy theories you espouse, as well as any degeneracy you may practice in your personal life. Woes is understandably generous in his attitude to the latter.
This social dynamic -- as opposed to intellectual dynamic, of which there is none -- explains Woes's petty success in this little niche that he has carved out for himself.
But it's not all sweetness and poor lighting. Behind the bonhomie is the bitchiness, the in-group agreement about who's in and who's out.
I know about this, as I was almost a regular on Millenniyule myself, until my tendency to call out bullshit (actually blatant Naziism) got me put on Woes's blacklist, which even then was being curated by Greg Johnson. Since then Johnson's hold on Woes has tightened, and Woes himself has drifted into ever more vigorous agreement with Johnson's Naziism.
I could give many other examples of other people who are no longer in Woes's good books, the most obvious example, being Richard Spencer, who clearly went through his own Nazi phase a few short years ago, but has always been on Johnson's catty little list of enemies.
So, is everybody on Millenniyule Woes a card-carrying Counter-Currents Neo-Nazi?
The answer is no. The Johnson strategy is to hide his dirty inner circle with a few "normie friendly" dissidents -- dumb conspiracy types, old duffers like Godfrey Bloom, a civ-nat or two, a sprinkling of Christian nationalists, or just a few oddballs and colourful perverts. This year, Woes even had my good friend Richard Wolstencroft on. I won't say to which category or categories he belongs, but Richard's a good guy.
He even told me that Woes would "like to be pals again." I don't think that's going to happen, as anyone who pushes back against the intellectually dishonest cosiness of the Millenniyules, or is in Greg Johnson's hate list, is not going to be allowed on, and then again, why would anyone who wasn't a Nazi want to be involved with a project that is clearly Nazi (just listen to Johnson ranting on about the Jews again as usual)?
As for Richard, he'll jump on any podcast going. God bless him!
While many former guests, like myself, have been "disinvited" from the Millenniyules, a possibly even larger number have sensibly disinvited themselves, after realising what kind of Nazi bathhouse they were in. They made the right decision.
The wider New Right or Dissident Right is essentially dead, and a big tent with Nazis in it soon becomes a collapsed rag in a muddy field, flapping in the wind.
If Woes was serious about the Millenniyules being in any way meaningful, he would do at least three things.
First, he would try to deprogram himself of the growing Naziism or tolerance of Naziism that he has allowed himself to slide into.
Secondly, he would kick Johnson and the Counter-Currents gay Nazi club into the long grass.
And, thirdly, he would get rid of the whole cosy one-on-one vibe of the Millenniyules by making it more about discussing and arguing ideas (in a civilised way obviously), possibly by having two or three guests on at the same time.
A simple Marxist critique -- i.e. understanding which side Woes's bread is buttered on -- tells me this is not going to happen. Johnson's financial hold on the man in the bathrobe is too tight.
Affirmative Right stalwart and true radical Richard Wolstencroft will be presiding as usual at the 22nd Melbourne Underground Film Fair (MUFF), the preeminent counter-culture event in Australia.
DIRECTOR'S STATEMENT
MUFF 22 is here folks! And it’s been a wild ride these past 22 years. We have survived much but still maintain the spirit to rebel, shock, enlighten and offend. The last 2.5 years of Governmental overreach and totalitarian bullshit have left us all shell shocked. But we are coming out of that BS crisis now and the importance of FREEDOM has never been such a hot talking point. So that is the theme of MUFF 22! I’m joined by my old pal and mentor Frank Howson as Fest Patron and new pal Michael Gray Griffith as Fest Producer, with Rohana Hayes to bring you the most wild and kick ass MUFF film festival yet. I’ve even roped in David Thrussell to curate a special section. I hope you enjoy it all and join us to see a few films. My thanks to all the MUFF Team thanked the credits page. Rebel with us in 2022! Storm the ramparts of Freedom and say no to the New Global Elite Totalitarianism!
MUFF website here
MUFF program (PDF) here
No one cast a longer shadow over British nationalist politics than Sir Oswald Mosley, born on the 16th November, 1896.
by Colin LiddellHere in the bars, bazaars, and dens of iniquity that make up the ex-pat Far East, you run into your fair share of cads, chancers, and 'rum' fellows – the sort of chaps whose eccentricities and slight quirks go unnoticed amid the teeming masses of Asia. The broad-minded and perpetually distracted Oriental, it seems, has a nasty habit of lumping all White men in together and glossing over the subtle codes and hierarchies by which we define ourselves.
It was no surprise, therefore, when on a recent trip to Singapore, I ran into an old European acquaintance, whom, I had been reliably informed, had died and been buried a long time ago back in his native Europe, a place where he had never really fitted in, leading, on occasion, to unfortunate excesses of behaviour that saw him blackballed from most of polite society.
As he pressed me for news from home over cocktails at the Raffles, I could see that he had done extremely well for himself out here, and seemed far, far younger than he had any right to be.
The bartender and waiters were clearly in awe of him; while, from across the room, came the deferential glances of the city’s movers and shakers, and the realization that I myself could not be a complete nobody to be in such exalted company.
“It’s really all down to my old chum, Lee Kuan Yew,” he told me warmed by his fifth daiquiri. “Without Harry’s help, god knows what I’d be doing.”
After I had checked into my hotel – definitely not the Raffles on my budget, but somewhere cheap and cheerful with geckos on the wall and Russia Today on the satellite TV – I wondered how he had managed to pull off such a remarkable recovery. Back in the old country he had been reviled, but these people clearly loved and venerated him.
I thought no more of this impenetrable conundrum and spent the next day visiting the sights – Sentosa Island and Changi Prison Museum, with its dioramas of Japanese atrocities. Towards evening, after the usual short, intense tropical downpour, I made my way to the famous Merlion Statue, the symbol of this rootless city state, created by the British as a convenient coaling station and anti-pirate base for their worldwide web of trade. And there he was again!
He was standing next to a gaggle of Western tourists, dressed unbelievably in his trademark black under the still broiling sun, but looking as cool as ever. With my right arm upraised I hailed him from the distance. He turned to look at me as if disturbed from a reverie, then quickly resumed his trademark look of smug strength that always reminded me of a bank manager who had just turned down a loan.
“I often come down here at this time of the day,” he said in a slightly breathy voice. “I seem to be strangely effected by the sight of the sun departing west.”
There was something uncanny about his appearance. While I was drenched in sweat from my touristy exertions, there wasn’t a single bead upon his pale skin. The only sign of the tremendous heat was the glistening sheen of the melted wax in his neatly groomed moustache. Inevitably we resumed our conversation of the night before. I asked him point blankly why he had made so good out here.
“Well, as you know, the movement with which I am associated grew out of the class conflict of the early twentieth century; an antidote to both Communism and the excesses of global capitalism, and a movement at whose heart lay the idea of perpetuating the harmonious interaction of the various classes in society,” he said, starting to relentlessly roll one wordy phrase after another, as if speaking to a large hall of people who had foregone a night at the cinema in order to listen to him.
“Well, I’m sad to say that we were all barking up the wrong tree,” he continued without a pause. “The class conflict, about which so many of us got excited in those far-off, heady days, was a mere mirage, an insane illusion, a tragic misreading of the wider situation. Class, it seems, was not the ultimate factor and only seemed to be so because the preceding political state had been the highest development of ethnically-based national centralization. By positing our whole existence as an antidote to imaginary or temporary class conflict, those of us in our movement historically limited our relevance.”
Since he was speaking voluminously, the tourists, who had been taking pictures with the Merlion, now backed away and started looking askance.
“But why here, in Singapore?” I asked, keen to dampen the ardour of his tirade with the occasional question.
“I said that class conflict, as a historical phenomenon, has been grossly exaggerated, but this does not mean that we live in an inherently peaceful world,” he resumed at slightly reduced volume. “There is still plenty of conflict in the world, but class conflict is the exception; not the rule. The real seed of conflict is race! Hence I am here. Singapore is not riven by potential class conflict – everybody here is just keen to make money to the best of their differing abilities. No! The real danger in a place of this nature, with Chinese, Malays, Indians, and Arabs, all living cheek by jowl, is racial conflict. That’s where our movement, with its ethos of suppressing group conflicts, really comes into its own! Our fellow Westerners are always sniffy about the strict censorship here, the lack of pornography, the draconian anti-litter laws, the birching, et cetra, as if they were referring to the quaint conservatism of a childishly backward Asian state. They don’t realize that this is their own future. Each of these measures reflects the central goal of avoiding mass, brutal, and bloody race riots. Just imagine a Malay reading a pornographic magazine featuring a Chinese girl on a train, or an Arab spitting out chewing gum in front of a Hindu temple, and you will understand why Singapore has to be the way it is; and the rest of the world, too, as each country gradually becomes more and more ethnically diverse and more crowded. Singapore is a rather upmarket version of how the rest of the world will ultimately become, and it will be a world ruled by the spirit of Fa…”
“Sir Oswald, sir,” a voice cut in. We both turned to see a couple of smartly dressed men backed up by two other, bigger, less smartly dressed men. On the lapels of their suits they all wore badges showing a red streak of lightning bisecting a blue circle that looked vaguely familiar.
“Sorry to interrupt, sir,” the smartest dressed man said, “but their Excellencies require your advice on a most important national question and have sent the limousine.”
“Duty calls!” my old acquaintance said, then turned and walked towards the waiting limousine, followed by the four attendants. Alas, that was the last I saw of him.
| | | A million miles from Cable Street.First published 2nd October, 2011 |
Andy Nowicki reads from his novella Under the Nile at a literary event in Brooklyn held on November 12, 2022. Video by Pilleater.
| | | Yup, this again. |
Even though Affirmative Right has existed as a heavily shadow-banned but almost purely intellectual site for all of its nearly nine years on Blogger, we have sometimes been subjected to DIRECT ACTS OF CENSORSHIP from Blogger. Yes, articles have been arbitrarily removed for unspecified reasons.
Blogger merely tells us we have committed "hate speech" but always without quoting the examples. No doubt to do so would make them appear ridiculous, as most of their "thought policing" is done with low-cost unsophisticated bots or cheap Indian labour, cross-referenced with poorly compiled data from overfunded hate groups like the ADL and the SPLC. The latest article to fall foul of the censors in this way is James's Lawrence's critique of democracy "Embrace the Black Pill."
Rather than being some sort of call to engage in mass shootings, as Blogger seem to think, this is a merely a harmless intellectual piece calling into question the efficacy of voting in a deeply compromised pseudo-democratic system. Anyone wishing to comb through the article for "potential incitements to violence" or "dehumanising language engaged in with a view to promoting genocide" can freely view the piece on another site.
A comprehensive look at the career and trajectory of Millennial Woes, from incisive commenter on important issues to Nazi-signalling, scandal-ridden, grifting e-celeb. Perhaps no one encapsulates the failed promise of the Alt-Right better.
by David Hamilton
August 19th marks the anniversary of the death of the Italian economist and political philosopher Vilfredo Pareto.
Sociology has long been dominated by Marxists and Leftists and is no longer seen as a fair or objective discipline. However, there have also been Conservative and right-wing sociologists, like Albert Hobbs and George Bourne. One of the most significant is the Italian thinker Vilfredo Pareto, known in particular for his insights into the nature of elites.
He was first an economist known for two economic concepts named after him: Pareto Optimality and Pareto’s Law of Income Distribution. Pareto Optimality refers to the optimal allocation of resources when it is only possible to make someone better off by making someone else worse off. Pareto’s Law of Income Distribution was derived from British data on income. and showed a hierarchical relationship between each income level and the number of people at the next income level. He found similar results for Prussia, Saxony, Paris, and some Italian cities. Pareto thought his law should be "provisionally accepted as universal" but realised that exceptions were possible. Since then many exceptions have been found. He later changed from economics to sociology, and then became involved with Mussolini due to the political situation of the time.
His work on elites is of great interest and presents a more concrete view than Marxism, drawing from human nature rather than abstract ideology. His idea of the "circulation of elites” examines differences in the temper and style of different aspects of the ruling class, something he explores with his concept of Lions and Foxes. These categories give insight into how we are ruled or misruled. Rather than vague and dated abstractions about class behaviour, they are grounded in how people actually behave.
Why do things not stay the same?
Modernist art critic Herbert Read wrote in Form in Modern Poetry (1932) that the nature of man had changed from character to personality, with character being permanent and having solid traits, while personality was more fluid and changeable.
Why are we decadent and no longer capable of defending ourselves? According to Pareto, the ruling elite is not a stable ruling class but is subject to change, namely the "circulation of elites." He thought this circulation occurs because each of the two categories capable of leadership has inherent weaknesses. Whilst the Lions' act forcefully. they lack imagination and cunning; conversely, the Foxes possess cunning but fail to act coercively.
Pareto disputed that democracy was a progressive form of government; it was, he said, just another form of elite rule. A topical insight was that Foxes often ignore invasions until it is too late. We should know. We are living through one now!
Those who rise to positions of power promote their own kind and demote those who are different until finally one of the two types dominates. A professed support for the dominant ideology is necessary to retain one's social position, and transgressions are usually rewarded with demotion and infamy. Ideological correctness is crucial to whether individuals have influence or are removed from power. I call this dominant group an “ideological caste.”
Pareto believed that in all societies, including democracies, there is a class that rules and a class that is ruled. On weak rulers he wrote:
"Any elite which is not prepared to join in battle to defend its position is in full decadence, and all that is left to it is to give way to another elite having the virile qualities it lacks. It is pure day-dreaming to imagine that the humanitarian principles it may have proclaimed will be applied to it: its vanquishers will stun it with the implacable cry, 'Vae Victis.' ['Woe to the vanquished.'] The knife of the guillotine was being sharpened in the shadows when, at the end of the eighteenth century, the ruling classes in France were engrossed in developing their 'sensibility.' This idle and frivolous society, living like a parasite off the country, discoursed at its elegant supper parties of delivering the world from superstition and of crushing 'l'Infâme,' all unsuspecting that it was itself going to be crushed."
It is similar now with the girly-men running Western countries.
Lions and Foxes
His idea of "Lions and Foxes" originated in Machiavelli's The Prince, a work that sought to formulate a rational plan of “how to rule” for new rulers who had no tradition to guide them. He advised the new ruler to be half beast and half man:
"So, as a Prince is forced to know how to act like a beast, he should learn from the fox and the lion; because the lion is defenceless against traps and a fox is defenceless against wolves. Therefore one must be a fox in order to recognise traps, and a lion to frighten off wolves."
The Lions have what Pareto termed class II residues of group persistence. They have a sense of objectivity and permanence and believe in family, property, nation, church, and tradition. They are cautious in economics and value saving and “sound money.” They esteem character and duty over education and wealth, and will use force to uphold their values. They rely on their strength and stubbornness.
Foxes, tend to work in the talking professions, like journalism or the law, and live by their wits, shrewdness, deceit and fraud.
Pareto's Residues
There are six classes of Residues but the first two are relevant to our time. Class I residue is the Foxes’ instinct for "combination." They tend to manipulate words and construct abstruse theories and ideologies. They do not have a strong attachment to church, family, nation, or tradition, but can exploit these loyalties in others. They are creative in economics and politics, and promote change and novelty. They do not plan far ahead and do not look to a great future for their people. They rely on their wits to thwart challenges and respond with ad lib answers to questions.
Pareto made a distinction between changing elements, which he termed derivations, and relatively permanent ones, which he termed residues. The notion of residues is often misunderstood. He meant manifestations of sentiments or their equivalents, which are intermediate between the sentiments, which we cannot know directly, and the overt belief systems and acts that we can know and analyse. They are related to man's instincts but they do not cover all of them, since we can only discover those instincts that give rise to rationalisations in theories. Others remain hidden.
A feature of Foxes is their distaste for the martial and a stress on economics. They tend to cut back on defences with the elites acting as if we are in a safe world and have no enemies. They think they can buy other countries off with overseas aid and good will!
A Survey of Political Change Over the Last Two Centuries
Looking back over history clarifies the effect that elites changing from Lions to Foxes has had on our lives and the standing of the nation. In the case of Britain, the dominant anti-British tendency that favours "the other" can be traced to the aptly-named Charles James Fox, the original of the type that has persisted and increased down to the present. He exhibited the Foxes' tendency for abstractions and high-sounding ideals, which is evident from his support for the principles of the French Revolution regardless of the horrific realities. He regarded our war with France as an attempt to crush a noble experiment in human liberty. In 1786, speaking against the former Governor-General of Bengal, Warren Hastings' response to an uprising by the Afghan Rohillas, he expressed the kind of universal abstractions that have become commonplace:
"By those laws which are to be found in Europe, Africa, and Asia – that are found among all mankind, those principles of equity and humanity implanted in our hearts which have their existence in the feelings of mankind…"
The radical MP Samuel Whitbread was even more anti-British than Fox, and excused the French while denouncing his own people. It was the dawning of our modern era when abstractions were coming to dominate and practical thinking was losing ground. Heroes like Nelson and Wellington were still at that time “role models” for young men, for their stoical and manly courage, selflessness, and high sense of duty. On the French Revolution, Edmund Burke foresaw the decline of the values that Pareto associated with the Lions:
“It is gone, that sensibility of principle, that chastity of honour, which felt a stain like a wound, which inspired courage whilst it mitigated ferocity, which ennobled whatever it touched…The age of chivalry is gone. The age of sophisters, economists, and calculators has succeeded.”
The Duke of Wellington was a famous Lion. Like Churchill after him, Wellington had been uninterested in education as a schoolboy. Military types are typically less interested in ideas and theories. Although he defeated Napoleon, he was finally defeated by the Foxes, Cobden and Bright, who promoted free trade as a means of bringing about world peace. In 1846, the year the Corn Laws were repealed, Cobden said:
"I believe that the physical gain will be the smallest gain to humanity from the success of this principle. I look farther; I see in the Free Trade principle that which shall act on the moral world as the principle of gravitation in the universe – drawing men together, thrusting aside the antagonism of race, and creed, and language, and uniting us in the bonds of eternal peace."
Victorian historian James Anthony Froude lamented that we had chosen economics over duty. Foxes were taking over from Lions and this can be traced through the century as economics replaced values like "nobility," "duty," and "honour". It was Disraeli who turned the Conservatives into an opportunistic party from one of tradition. He was a progressive Tory, and sympathetic to some of the Chartists' demands, and argued for an alliance between the landed aristocracy and the working class against the increasing power of the middle class. In 1842 he founded the Young England group to promote the view that the rich should use their power to protect the poor from exploitation by the middle class. During the twenty years which separated the Corn Laws and the Second Reform Bill, Disraeli sought Tory-Radical alliances - though unsuccessfully.
His main rival the Liberal Gladstone was a Fox. He was opposed to General Gordon, and tarried while that brave man was murdered in Khartoum. Gordon expressed the values of Lions in his journal, referring to “honour to his country”. The man who finally avenged Gordon and re-took Khartoum, Lord Kitchener, was worshipped by the public but attacked in the Commons as a "butcher" and "imperialist" by the Foxes. He was pushed out of the War Cabinet by Lloyd George, another Fox, who formed the War Cabinet, which had dictatorial powers and took over the running of the war. A reformer, Lloyd George also out-manoeuvred and replaced General Sir William Robertson, Chief of the Imperial Staff with one of his own kind, Sir Henry Wilson, who wrote more about the balls he attended and the dignitaries he met than anything connected to honour and duty. Robertson was forced to resign on 11 February 1918, taking the lesser role of Commander-in-Chief of the British Home Forces. Wilson had connived with Lloyd George to create the Supreme War Council, something which Robertson had vociferously opposed.
Robertson is the only man in history to rise to the position of Field Marshall from private. A staunch supporter of Sir Douglas Haig, Robertson acted to prevent Lloyd George's attempts to divert effort from the Western to the Eastern Front; unlike Lloyd George, Robertson was a keen 'Westerner', believing that the war could only be won on the Western Front. In his book Soldiers and Statesman 1914 – 1916 (1926) Robertson repeatedly stresses “duty”. He highlighted the anti-military bias of Foxes when he wrote of how Lloyd George and his war cabinet took a private house to seclude themselves from the Generals, "where they sit twice a day and occupy their whole time with military policy, which is my job; a little body of politicians quite ignorant of war and all its needs, are trying to run the war themselves."
Stanley Baldwin turned the Conservatives from a party that was a bulwark of the Empire to one focused on offering inducements to voters such as "houses" and "prosperity." A century of disarmament, fueled by both sides of the Commons – Tories preaching appeasement while dozing in their London clubs; Socialists fantasizing about internationalism, disarmament, and submitting to the League of Nations when we were the most powerful country – left us weak and nearly defenceless.
Before being removed or neutralised, Lions are first stigmatised. The Lion Churchill spent a decade in slandered obscurity as a "warmonger" before being needed to fend off Wolves. A Lion called Enoch Powell was sacked from the Shadow Cabinet by the arch-Fox Heath, who has since admitted misleading Parliament and thus the people into the federal state of Europe, saying that it would merely be a trading arrangement. Fox John Major deceived us when he pretended that we would retain control over our borders after his legal advisers had advised him that they had been signed away at Maastricht.
We have had constant moral outrages, such as Blair’s infamous act of sending our troops to war on a lie among his many other lies. Michael Howard, the Conservative leader in the 2005 election, campaigned on immigration control when he knew full well that the European Union would not allow him to implement his plans even had he meant to do so. In June 2004 it was revealed that he was an investor in communications firm Incepta. A subsidiary company, Citigate Lloyd Northover, won two Home Office contracts to develop websites and communications technology to speed up applications from immigrants to enter the UK and also benefitted from work for the Immigration and Nationality Directorate website that helped facilitate the admission and settling of asylum seekers.
Pareto clearly foresaw the deterioration of the Western world:
"The plutocracy has invented countless makeshift programs, such as generating enormous public debt that plutocrats know they will never be able to repay, levies on capital, taxes which exhaust the incomes of those who do not speculate... The principal goal of each of these measures is to deceive the multitudes... When a society's system of values deteriorates to the point where hard work is denigrated and 'easy money' extolled, where authority gives way to anarchy and justice to legal chicanery, such a society stands face to face with ruin... It is a specific trait of weak governments. Among the causes of the weakness two especially are to be noted: humanitarianism and cowardice – the cowardice that comes natural to decadent aristocracies and is in part natural, in part calculated, in "speculator" governments that are primarily concerned with material gain. The humanitarian spirit ... is a malady peculiar to spineless individuals who are richly endowed with certain Class I residues that they have dressed up in sentimental garb."
Cultural Marxists like university educated chief police officers because they are open to politically correct ideas and willing to enforce the Cultural Marxist agenda. The best sort of people to be appointed chief police officers would be former military officers as they understand human nature and how to best curb its excesses. In his autobiography Cloak Without a Dagger, the former chief constable of Sheffield and Glasgow and Director of MI5, Captain Sir Percy Sillitoe, gave this insight into human nature:
"There is only one way to deal with the gangster mentality. You must show that you are not afraid. If you stand up to them and they realise you mean business they will knuckle under. The element of beast in man whether it comes from an unhappy and impoverished background, or from his own undisciplined lustful appetites, will respond exactly as a wild beast of the jungle responds – to nothing but greater force and greater firmness of purpose."
First published here in 2014.
A couple of "would-be Alex Joneses" have a friendly chat about how "conspiracy theory" is just a term cooked up by billionaire Satanic paedophile elites to stop people talking about conspiracies by billionaire Satanic paedophile elites. Hasn't worked. Also expect lots of Nazitardery, as Monoxide is a TRS-vintage "Holocaust debunker."
| | | Joyce's avatar is Louis-Mathieu Molé. |
by Colin Liddell
Read other entries like this in The Dikipedia: Who's Who in the Dissident Right, an ever-expanding biographical guide to the colorful characters of the Right Wing
____________
Not important in himself, Joyce is more useful in revealing the true sympathies of larger figures in the Dissident Right. This is because he is a fervent and obsessive anti-Semite and Jew obsessive with little else to recommend his one-dimensional content.
He has been much featured at The Occidental Observer by Kevin MacDonald, which is at least partly understandable as MacDonald's academic work is on Jewish ethnocentrism, but this also points to the possibility that MacDonald is a hardcore, emotionally-driven anti-Semite, rather than just an academic "noticing patterns."
More tellingly, however, is the fact that Joyce was closely associated with Richard Spencer and Daniel Friberg, during the period of the Alt-Right corporation (2016-18), when Spencer was trying to centralise the Alt-Right around himself. Spencer, despite some gaffes caught on tape, is not generally thought of as a hard-line anti-Semite within nationalist and right-wing circles, but his association with Joyce, along with some of Spencer's other picks for Radix Journal and his later Alt-Right.com site, like (((Vincent Law))) and Greg Conte, suggest that Spencer does indeed have harder core anti-Semitic views, which he played down previously and then subsequently.
Joyce was also Spencer's main weapon in attacking his rival Greg Johnson as a homosexual, with Joyce penning a number of anti-homosexualist articles that were clearly aimed at Johnson.
Fausto Lanser, known as Faust
Note: This is an article from the Dutch newspaper De Volkskrant, described by Wikipedia as a "centre-left Catholic broadsheet." It is about the Dutch Alt-Right in 2017 when the establishment was in "panic mode." Of course it is attempting to portray the Dutch Alt-Right in as negative a light as possible, but it can't avoid presenting us with certain facts and insights that are valid. As the paper is paywalled, this article is auto-translated from an archived version here. ___________________________________Erkenbrand and the white man's rebellionWe have not seen an extreme right-wing group of which a large number of members are highly educated in the Netherlands. Striking, according to the AIVD. What is Erkenbrand, what does it stand for and who are the people behind it?
Annieke Kranenberg19 November 2017, 17:00
With wide arm gestures Fausto, a young man in a suit in his mid-twenties, thanks the audience in a conference room in a Rotterdam hotel. About 80 to 90 percent of the attendees are Dutch, he continues in flexible English. But there are also Italians, Germans, Hungarians, Americans, British, Finns and Greeks. "There are 240 people," says Fausto, who, as usual, wears a pin of the Dutch flag on his lapel. 'That's almost double the number of the conference last year.'
Via the livestream of the conference, provided by the far-right association Suomen Sisu from Finland, a loud applause is heard. Beaming, Fausto walks away from the camera, the only face of the organization that is recognizably portrayed.
It is 14 October 2017 and the very young study society Erkenbrand celebrates the success of its second conference with the title 'Towards a new Golden Age'. American author Jared Taylor, who calls himself not a racist but a "race realist," has just answered the last question from a young man from Germany. "You woke me up about the theme of race," says the German. 'When will the moment come when, for the first time, a European politician can speak as freely as you can?'
"That's absolutely necessary," replies Taylor, a calm sixties with a professorial appearance, whose popular videos about racial differences have been blocked on YouTube for several months. But, Taylor continues to the German questioner, as long as people react angrily and dismayed to talk about race, it may be wiser to achieve the goal through a nationalist discourse. 'We always have to adapt our discourse to our audience.' Controlled: 'But in the end, in the end, the brotherhood of Europe will have to talk about the biology that underlies our civilization.' And then a little louder: "I'm sure some of the young people among you will be elected electorally and can name these things as explicitly as we've said them here today."
The discharge is almost tangible: here you can say what you think. Not anonymously and online, but physically, face to face. Or as an Erkenbrand visitor later puts it to the Volkskrant: 'You notice that people want to crawl together to be able to say what they want.'
A Pim Fortuyn-like energy crackles through the room, although the hard core of Erkenbrand had only just reached puberty when the politician was murdered in 2002 and it would take years before the term Alt-Right would blow over to the Netherlands with the rise of Donald Trump. As in the United States, the right-wing alternative scene in Europe consists of a broad, loose-knit bandage of ultraconservatives, fundamentalist Christians, libertarians, esoteric dissenters, conspiracy theorists, right-wing radicals, racists and anti-Semites. A number of beliefs are common: they stand up for the preservation of a 'white' Europe (one emphatically emphasizes culture, the other emphatically on race), they are against immigration, Islam, cultural Marxism, oikophobia and they are strongly anti-feminist.
Many expect that populations will sooner or later face each other, some are already preparing for a violent confrontation. This is also the case with Erkenbrand, although the addition of the study society may suggest otherwise.
AIVD calls Erkenbrand 'striking'
Erkenbrand - an old Dutch name meaning 'holy sword' or 'pure flame' - is the most important representative of the alt-right in the Netherlands. Last September, the hitherto unknown study society held its first conference and immediately attracted a hundred carefully selected visitors.
'I was surprised by that', says Willem Wagenaar of the Anne Frank House, which researches the extreme right in the Netherlands. Not only the number of visitors surprised him - classic far-right organizations often mess around with banners in the margins - but also the level of education. The core consists of about 25 mainly young people. 'Smart young men and a single woman who are attracted to an ideology that, by Dutch standards, is unadulterated racist and anti-Semitic.'
In April, the AIVD also called the creation of Erkenbrand, a 'xenophobic nationalist group', 'striking'. 'For the first time in decades, an extreme right-wing group is active in the Netherlands of which a large number of sympathizers are highly educated.'
Since then, Erkenbrand seems to have only grown, as evidenced by the turnout at the last conference and their stature within the international alt-right world. The society produces an improbable amount of ideas and beliefs. They fill dozens of hours of podcasts (Radio Evropa) about 'race and realism' and about 'the beginning of the uprising' in the American town of Charlottesville where last August it came to a deadly clash between anti-fascists and right-wing extremists. On the site appear long epistles about Forum for Democracy - 'the only bright spot' in the last elections - and about 'the blood red colour of the antifacists'. Their productions are widely distributed by other alt-right media. In the meantime, Erkenbranders are steadily building a social network, organizing monthly drinks, forest walks and combat training.
This raises the question of what Erkenbrand stands for. Is social resistance to the far right - in the capacity of the alt-right - crumbling? What is the breeding ground? Is the society just a fashionable regurgitation or a radical trailblazer? And who are the people behind it, what do they want to achieve - and how?
It is not easy to identify Erkenbranders and to get in touch with them (some of them do). The society manages to operate quite secretly. If you want to visit a meeting, you have to go through a strict ballotage. First sign up and pay (27.50 euros for the last conference), then answer questions about race and gender by e-mail, and sometimes there is also a live conversation. Like-minded people are not just admitted; one was refused because Erkenbranders discovered on Facebook that he has a dark girlfriend. Conference attendees will only be told where the event is taking place at the last minute via a group app from Telegram.
Almost everyone is alert to unmasking. Most Erkenbranders hide behind pseudonyms on social media. On videos, they appear wearing sunglasses and masks.
The main internet spot for Erkenbrand has always been the rough discussion platform 4chan - just like for the alt-right scene in the US - but for several months they have been stuck in the much more shielded world of Discord, a chat program that is popular with left- and right-wing extremist groups. Here, too, there is a ballot, in which the alt-right ideas are tested (are you for or against 'transgenders'?). De Volkskrant managed to gain access by filling in the desired answers and was able to watch, but did not participate in the discussions.
In this unseen world, they devise strategies to spread their ideology and defy their enemies - 'social justice warriors'. The atmosphere here is grimmer than on 4chan, where people regularly remind each other that the AIVD might be watching or that anti-fascists are 'infiltrating' the forum. Discord speaks more openly about the use of violence and weapons.
Fausto, who studied history and economics, is one of the few who publicly claims to be an Honorary Burner. In many places he simply uses his first name, sometimes abbreviated to Faust, and he comes to the fore without hesitation in several videos. In videos, for example, he leads the popular Scottish alt-right vlogger Millennial Woes ('millennium misery') around the Schilderswijk in The Hague (to show the 'Islamization' of the Netherlands) and the Amsterdam red light district (to outline the moral decay).
Fausto - his last name is known to the editors - is not waiting to explain his ideas in more detail in the Volkskrant. 'How did you get my number?', he asks agitatedly when we contact us via WhatsApp. 'Any publication you make about me is still collaboration (sic) without my permission. Any damage experienced will be recovered by my lawyer on the Volkskrant.' If we approach him again this week, it turns out that he has taken a different number. He also does not respond to his e-mail, in which we ask him to be heard again. On the private chat channel Discord we have come across serious statements. Fausto boasts about gun ownership and threats of violence - more on that later.
Red pill
Fausto was not always preoccupied with Muslims and race. He grew up in a progressive nest, lived for years with his mother and brother in Portugal. On his return to the Netherlands, he got his 'red pill' moment when he accompanied boys of Moroccan origin in Rotterdam-Noord as a community centre worker. In alt-right circles, everyone has their own red pill story, named after the red pill from the movie The Matrix that makes you wake up and see 'the truth'. In Fausto's case, that was the truth about the problematic sides of the multicultural society.
The first time Fausto speaks publicly about his "awakening" happens some time before he fully converts to the alt-right. In October 2015 Fausto is a guest in the TV program Studio PowNed where the popularity of the PVV among the chic VVD electorate in Wassenaar is discussed. Guests are political scientist Meindert Fennema, journalist Annabel Nanninga and Fausto's later political hero Thierry Baudet. Fausto is presented as a highly educated young person who made the jump from D66 to the PVV. After congratulating Baudet on his EU-critical book Attack on the Nation-State, Fausto recounts how his community work in a black neighborhood tilted his opinion on integration.
Two years later, when Fausto says he has worked his way up to become 'erkenbrand's second man', he speaks in an alt-right podcast in sharper terms about his 'red pill'. "It was hopeless. Moroccans are the most terrible people here.'
The shift from D66 to the PVV and then to the 'racially realistic' articles of faith of Erkenbrand takes place in stages. In several podcasts Fausto describes his political quest in 2015 that leads him to the 'politically incorrect' discussion group /pol/ on 4chan. There he tries to encourage people to take action against the refugee crisis that is reaching a peak at that moment. Fausto himself visits some of Pegida's street demonstrations. But street activism doesn't suit him. 'Plebs', he calls the Pegida members in an Erkenbrand podcast.
Fausto desires more intellectual depth. He finds them, among other things, with the Scotsman Millennial Woes - real name Colin Robertson - a shrewd art student in his mid-thirties who has been keeping a vlog about white ethnonationalism since 2013. In recent years, Woes has developed into an important player in the alt-right scene, a leader for young people who have their origins in multiculturalism and mainstream politics, but want to stay away from the uncultivated types of classical right-wing extremism. In one of Woes' vlogs from July 2016, links are made to erkenbrand's site. Fausto seeks direct contact.
White supremacy
Erkenbrand is then just under construction. Spiritual fathers are two students: Bart (a pseudonym) and Michael (real name). In a number of alt-right media, Bart and Michael say that they met on Twitter through a mutual friend. They share the same unease about multiculturalism, the refugee crisis and politics. There needs to be change, they think, but that can only happen by doing "more" than just online activism. Erkenbrand must become a platform that spreads knowledge about white supremacy and forges a highly educated cadre with real political capital.
They actively scour the net in search of kindred spirits. In June 2016, 'Bart' calls himself 'the chairman of Erkenbrand' when he contacts the head of 'meadhall', a right-wing extremist group that is active online on 8chan - also known as the most fiery place online. But they also meet physically. 'Perhaps it is an idea to join forces', he suggests. The response has been positive. Several visitors make plans to visit the Erkenbrand meetings.
Behind 'Bart' is actually Milan. Milan, who studied European Studies at the University of Applied Sciences in The Hague, was 'rescued' at a young age, he says in an interview he gave with Michael at the alt-right station Red Ice in September 2016. His class consisted of 'more than 50 percent foreigners'. He remembers very well how 'they' reacted when Theo van Gogh was 'slaughtered in the middle of the street'. "He asked for it, they said. Unbelievable. That they could be so different. Like a fifth column.'
Before Milan founded Erkenbrand, he published on the site curiales.nl, where pieces carry titles such as 'Why women are destroying Western civilization (and other uncomfortable truths)'. He also writes under a pseudonym for the site American Renaissance of 'race realist' Jared Taylor. It is striking that in 2016, as a college student, he appears among professors such as Paul Cliteur and Erik Jurgens in the yearbook Colonialism and Racism by Civis Mundi (journal for political philosophy and culture). The compiler can no longer remember how Milan became involved in the collection.
Even after the founding of Erkenbrand, Milan continues to write. Earlier this year, from February to June, he did an internship at Elsevier Weekblad. In that period, on February 11, an extensive piece about Erkenbrand appeared in the weekly, in which it is stated that the two founders were also spoken to. "Milan was not one of them," says the Elsevier journalist. She says that she only found out later that their intern was a Badge of Honor. The editor-in-chief had a conversation with him, but he was not out of place. 'There was nothing strange about his pieces.'
When we email Milan and approach him via Facebook, he doesn't respond. Erkenbrand's alleged 'number one' does not want to be found, according to his efforts to erase online traces. For example, on the last day of his internship, he removed his photo from the site and deleted parts of his biography, says the Elsevier journalist.
Just like Milan, Michael is also recognized by several visitors as one of the founders of Erkenbrand, but Michael also does not respond to requests from the Volkskrant to talk. In the aforementioned Red Ice interview, Michael says that he experienced his 'red pill' in the murder of Pim Fortuyn. Despite his sexual orientation, which does not correspond to the alt-right focus on traditional gender roles, a striking number of Erkenbranders speak with praise about Fortuyn's pioneering role. Michael says in the interview that he mainly believes in raising awareness. Everyone needs a red pill.
Neo-Nazis
Erkenbranders should have little of skinheads, according to various discussions online. They think they are stupid, they give white nationalism a bad name. 'We expect a certain intellectual level from our participants', the Erkenbranders write on their site. 'However, a study at university or college is not required.'
That does not alter the fact that classic neo-Nazis also appear in their ranks and that some Erkenbranders develop into pure anti-Semites. Fausto now describes himself unequivocally as a Nazi, who spreads Nazi pictures and symbols. "You can call me a Nazi, that's me," Fausto wrote at the end of October under the Twitter @BorislavBolgar. In a podcast of November 18 last year, Fausto responds to the "Jewish question" with the words: "I will not shed a tear if the train to the East is restarted."
Other Erkenbranders have a longer track record in Nazi and fascist ideas, such as the Brabant twenty-something Quincy (known online as Othala). In the past he was part of Zwart Front, a fascist splinter group that draws its inspiration from the eponymous fascist Black Front of the thirties.
A fixation on "true masculinity" is at the heart of Quincy's worldview. The most important pillar in this is the glorification of physical culture. Together with the boys of his martial arts club Stormram - also webshop - he wants to stop 'the feminization of the western man'. Battering ram is also the strong arm of Erkenbrand. At conferences, Quincy's security team ensures that no photos of the audience are taken and that uninvited guests are shown the door.
Quincy, who does not want to respond to the newspaper's findings, is also trying to stimulate this physical culture at Erkenbrand. In it he finds an ally in 'chairman' Milan, who has been proficient in martial arts for years. In a video that Quincy posted on Facebook, you can see how he gives kickboxing lessons to a bunch of Erkenbranders.
Recognition burners also shine their light on the Swedish nationalist and alt-right celebrity The Golden One. This muscle bundle, which keeps vlogs in which he rails against feminism with his chest bare chest, keeps his followers from practicing martial arts and getting used to weapons. Last October he was erkenbrand's guest of honour at a 'pagan autumn festival' in the middle of a nature reserve. There was a ritual in which special beer was drunk around an oak tree, according to a report at the site. They walked and trained with The Golden One, practicing 'jabs, hooks, low-kicks'.
Violence
Violence is a constant theme within the Erkenbrand environment. For example, an Erkenbrander claims in a podcast (How do you start an ethnostate?) that the Netherlands is being 'ethnically destroyed' by foreigners. 'That's what's going on at the moment. We are in a war. It's just either we survive, or we just don't.'
Erkenbrand visitor Harold, a meek forty-something who serves coffee in a living room full of guitars and Buddha figurines in a village somewhere in the north of the Netherlands, also fears that things like 'the import of a non-own culture' can lead to a violence climax. "At some point there will be violence. Look, we're kind of sweet, like, we all get it together. But at some point someone will say, hey wait a minute, now it's enough.'
'I am against violence, but many people within the alt-right are like this: if I get a blow, I give two blows back', says Daan, a forty-something from the Randstad who also attended an Erkenbrand conference and is convinced that the 'deep state' (the real rulers) is pushing the world in the wrong direction. 'My gut feeling says: there are confrontations coming. White young boys are preparing for self-defense."
Harold hopes that a possible confrontation of violence - a race war, so to speak - will never happen. But for that to happen, the 'war against the white man' will first have to stop.
"It's not that the white race presents itself as a white race," Harold says. "It's more that external parties name the white race and say: you are responsible for slavery, you are responsible for the backwardness of the black population, so you have to pay collectively for that. That is racism. That you lump all white people together because some of their ancestors were involved in slavery. That is racism in its purest form.'
'Why can't white people be proud?', Daan also wonders. 'Art for example, I've been to a lot of museums, but you never see Muslims there. In their home you never see beautiful art on the wall, maybe that is not allowed by their faith. My point is: the white race gets things done.'
Race is not a 'social construction', Daan and Harold know since they were 'rescued' in the field of race. Race, Daan and Harold believe, is a biological reality. Scientific research that follows this line states that there are obvious differences between races. That is not a value judgment, according to Daan and Harold, it is only a scientific fact.
"Of all races, Negroes are the quickest to step on their toes," says Harold, who admits to still feeling uncomfortable with conversations about race. 'They are the first to resort to violence, are the most aggressive, have the shortest fuses. The Asian race, by the way, is more intelligent than the white race. On average, they also commit less violence than whites and blacks.'
In his bookcase, Harold has recently purchased works by 'race realists', such as Jared Taylor, whom Harold met in person during the second Erkenbrand conference. 'A very warm guy who doesn't hurt a fly. And then he is dismissed as a racist.'
For some, discussion about race within Erkenbrand and the alt-right can be a breaking point. As for the highly educated Daisy, who carefully chooses her words. Many themes that were discussed at an Erkenbrand meeting she attended, she found relevant in themselves. Such as talking about the demographic problem facing the Netherlands, 'you don't hear the mainstream media about that'. Because of the explosive population growth in Africa, the arrival of refugees, high birth rates among Muslims and low among original Dutch peoples, Daisy fears that the original Dutch and western freedoms will lose ground on other peoples. 'What will our country look like in 50 years? Are we heading for conflict? We already have so many collisions. I just find that terrifying.' We should be able to talk about that, daisy thinks. "But when you start talking about it, you immediately get a sermon about the persecution of the Jews, as if you were Hitler."
In racial theory, however, lies with her the limit - incidentally, she did not feel equally comfortable with anti-feminism in the alt-right scene. 'You can choose opinions, but not the body you were born into.'
She no longer attends erkenbrand meetings. Daisy now focuses on a 'more moderate' party and attended meetings of Forum for Democracy. 'The party is looking for cooperation, listens carefully to the people.' She has read Thierry Baudet's book Oikophobia and shares his analysis of the fear of one's own. 'There is so much self-criticism. If it's so ugly here, why does everyone want to come here? I understand that it is beautiful here, but that is why we can also protect it.'
Fans of Baudet
The hardcore alt-righters also focus on Thierry Baudet's FvD. Geert Wilders seems to be a passed station. The PVV politician is still appreciated for his pioneering role in the fight against 'Islamization', but he no longer appeals to the imagination. This is partly due to his sleazy rhetoric and his closed party culture. This is partly due to his 'false analysis' - he focuses on religion and not race - and the strong anti-Semitic dimension in the alt-right scene. For despite its contemporary appearance, the alt-right largely builds on old, dark brown ideas about a "global Zionist conspiracy." Wilders, who maintains strong ties with Israel, enjoys little confidence for this reason.
"There is great suspicion towards the PVV; if you see where he gets his money from, Israel, he is not transparent about that', says Daan, who also voted for FvD. "What the alt-right gets so tired of: as soon as you start talking about Israel and Zionism, you are accused of anti-Semitism. I don't hate Jews, but I do hate certain Jews."
Baudet's style of politics, combined with his intellectual pretensions, are much more popular with Erkenbrand. His posts often fit right into the gamut of the alt-right, such as last week when the politician tweeted about the murders of white farmers in South Africa.
Several Erkenbranders attend meetings of FvD, many make efforts to promote the FvD case on Twitter, Facebook, discord's chat channels, on the politically incorrect forum /pol/ of 4chan, or at the even more notorious 8chan. They call Baudet 'our leader', 'our boy' and 'cherry'. In a podcast about FvD - three months before the elections - an Erkenbrander says: 'We have to deploy a memes army. If Trump succeeds in becoming president of America from a position within a year and a half, then we should succeed in helping FvD to two seats. (...) Two seats of the FvD make a much more significant difference than 35 or 37 seats of the PVV.'
Especially in spreading such memes - fabricated images that score on social media - they excel. Like the famous photo of Baudet lying on a piano in which his face has been replaced by that of Pepe The Frog, the mascot of the alt-right. This meme was shared by Baudet on Twitter on January 6 this year with approval. "Our boy just retweets this. Cancer boss', responds an Erkenbrander enthusiastically to 4chan.
Some Erkenbranders also boast that they have a short line to 'our boy' Baudet. Erkenbrand member Sam van der Hyden (a pseudonym) shares on 4chan two photos of books signed by Baudet. Baudet is addressing a signature to '/polder/', the forum on 4chan where many Erkenbranders are present. According to this Sam van der Hyden, Baudet would have told him that he has never been on /pol/ himself, but is familiar with it. Another, anonymous Erkenbrand member tells on 4chan that he could conclude from a conversation with Baudet that FvD has alt-right sympathies and is familiar with Erkenbrand.
Fausto is also happy to emphasize the ties with Baudet on 4chan. In an attempt to impress other 4chan'ers, he says that Baudet has sometimes sent a private message to Erkenbrand on Twitter with a compliment for a certain podcast.
At the same time, they are aware that the connection with the far-right FvD can cause damage. When Constant Kusters, leader of the neo-Nazi party Nederlandse Volks-Unie (NVU), claims in the media last August that he is cooperating with the FvD, it leads to a lot of name-calling in the closed Discord chat. 'God strong Kusters, that mongol', writes Fausto, who fears that association of the NVU with FvD could be detrimental to the latter. Other Erkenbranders swear along and express the suspicion that Kusters is a mole of the AIVD, which was 'planted' to harm white nationalism.
This raises the question of whether love is mutual. On 27 May, Baudet said in the Volkskrant about the Erkenbrand students: 'Sometimes they fly out of the corner, but they are young people who are busy discovering the world.' Baudet now thinks differently, says his spokesman. "At the time, he thought it was a conservative study club, but if this club espouses racist and anti-Semitic ideas, he wants absolutely nothing to do with it." According to the spokesperson, nothing can be sought behind the assignments in the books. These are 'usually off the cuff, because enthusiastic attendees ask for it'. In Baudet's memory, the assignment with '/polder/' was 'a reference to a chat box of which the applicant told that FvD supporters were active'. He does not want to respond to the alleged private message to Erkenbrand about which Fausto wrote and the retweeting of his photo with the alt-right mascot Pepe.
Weapons
The Erkenbranders hope that FvD will promote their ideas in the Netherlands, but they are also trying to build up a broad international network. The conference in October was attended by a delegation from the London Forum (the most important alt-right movement in Britain) and from the Greek neo-Nazi party Golden Dawn (one of them, 'the Spartan', also spoke at a living room meeting of Erkenbranders in October). The study society itself recalled the conference on its website as "undeniably the largest alt-right conference in continental Europe to date." In recent months, Fausto has gathered European kindred spirits in the Discord chat under the name 'European Right'.
However, there is also open speculation about the use of means other than democratic ones to achieve the goal. 'If not ballots, then bullets', Fausto recently tweeted under his pseudonym. Shortly thereafter, he revealed that he owns a weapon himself. If someone in the Discord chat notices that he is sure Fausto has a 'gun', Fausto responds on September 15 with: 'Shhhh, But yes, number of guys in EB have licenses' (a number of guys from Erkenbrand have a gun license). After the attacks in Barcelona, a participant writes: 'Why not attacks in the Netherlands. Would be very healthy in our country.'
Personally, Fausto goes even further. "Just cycling home," he wrote on August 17 on Discord. '2 mocros on a scooter on my neck. Gay yelling at me. Teringlijers. Shouted back and knife drawn and they were gone pretty quickly. But seriously. I'm so tired of mocros.' When someone else compliments him on his reaction, Fausto continues: 'I think I would have stabbed them if they had stepped off. This is why you carry a weapon."
That same day, the left-wing activist Anne Fleur Dekker, a popular target in alt-right circles, is also scolded. 'Chaining to a radiator and getting pregnant', Fausto writes.
How the 'number two' of Erkenbrand means these statements exactly is not clear. If we present him with copies of all these statements about gun ownership, knife-pulling and threats and ask him for rebuttal, he does not respond substantively. However, he starts deleting messages like crazy. Within an hour, he cleaned up Discord's chat channel.
| | | Southern AF in a European sense. |
by Colin Liddell
Read other entries like this in The Dikipedia: Who's Who in the Dissident Right, an ever-expanding biographical guide to the colorful characters of the Right Wing
____________
Yet another possible example of the Quasi-White-to-Neo-Nazi pipeline (see also Mike Enoch, Weev, Anglin, Alex McNabb, Neema Parvini, Mark Collett, Eric Striker, Alex Linder, etc).
Dingo (real name Louis Jeffrey Giovingo) is a soft-spoken, rather eloquent Southerner of Italian American background who lives in Louisiana. While being of Italian background would not cause racial identitarian issues in most parts of America, where Euromuttism is common, a lack of Anglo-Celticness in the Deep South could conceivably create a "quasi-White" identity, i.e. a feeling of "not being White enough." This could then quite understandably lead into a drive to "overcompensate," resulting in the sort of Neo-Nazi, Jew-hating views that Giovingo espouses. Photographic evidence suggests he is on the short side, another common factor is gestating Neo-Nazi views.Giovingo was reportedly at Charlottesville, and soon afterwards, in November 2017, started his "Southern As Fuck" podcast. Note the tone of try-hard identitarianism in the title, although it could also have a double meaning referring to his Mediterranean heritage. The podcast was associated with the TRS group, and promoted a confused philosophy of unrealistic White revolution, based on the shoddy analysis that Whites are passive victims of malevolent "Super Jews."
The show featured many of the usual Neo-Nazi freaks and shit magnets (Paul Nehlan, David Duke, Patrick Little, Chris Cantwell, etc.). Since around 2020 the podcast has become intermittent or dormant, effectively around about the time he was doxxed. Dingo makes frequent appearances on other shows, like the Ralph Retort. Oddly the SPLC and ADL seem uninterested in him, raising more than the usual suspicions that he may be a Fed operation.
Connected Content: Colin Liddell Arguing Against "Wignat" Southern Dingo on the Luke Ford Show ___________________________________Colin Liddell is the Chief Editor of Neokrat and the author of Interviews & Obituaries, a collection of encounters with the dead and the famous. Support his work by buying it here (USA), here (UK), and here (Australia). He is also featured in Arktos's 2016 collection A Fair Hearing: The Alt-Right in the Words of Its Members and Leaders.
Tomorrow is the birthday of Hilaire Belloc, one of the great radical traditionalists.
by Keith Preston
From the beginnings of the Industrial Revolution in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century until the era of the Great Depression immediately preceding the commencement of the Second World War, the most enduring internal conflict within the nations of the West was rooted in what was then called the “social question.” The growth of industrialization and the dispossession of the agrarian peasant classes during the time of the enclosure movement had created within the industrializing nations a massive proletarian class of permanently pauperized laborers and the deplorable social conditions which accompanied the growth of this class.
Throughout the nineteenth century, numerous potential remedies to the condition of the working classes were proposed and the labor, socialist, communist, and anarchist movements developed into powerful political forces during this time. It was into this political and socioeconomic environment that Hilaire Belloc was born in 1870. Belloc was born in France to an English mother and French father and was raised in England. Throughout his eighty-two years of life, Belloc would exhibit many talents. He was an immensely prolific writer (it was once said that he “wrote a library” during his time), poet, and debater. He was an accomplished historian. Belloc was fond of racing yachts and wrote extensively on travel. He was also a politician at one point in his life and for a time held a seat in the English parliament. From his experience as a parliamentarian, Belloc came to regard the pretenses of the liberal democratic state as one rooted in the popular representation of the people as a sham. Parliamentary democracy, in Belloc’s view, was simply a mask for the rule of the plutocratic class. Perhaps above all, Belloc was a staunch defender of Catholic orthodoxy and produced many apologetic works on behalf of his own faith tradition and challenged the secularism of his intellectual contemporaries such as George Bernard Shaw and H. G. Wells. [1]
Though Belloc opposed the secular outlook of the Fabian intellectuals and the more radical Marxists, he shared their concern with solving the problems of labor and the social ills brought about by the industrial age. It was out of this concern that Belloc and his friend, fellow literary figure, and fellow Catholic apologist Gilbert Keith Chesterton formed a unique and always small but intellectually original movement known as “distributism.” The philosophical basis of distributism was outlined in two books, one by Chesterton and one by Belloc. Chesterton’s What’s Wrong with the World was published in 1910. Its thesis was that the paternalistic welfare state proposed by the progressive liberal and social democratic reformers of the era was not inconsistent with the continued rule of the plutocrats. Rather, a welfare state of the kind the Fabians suggested could be utilized by the ruling classes to pacify and further subordinate the working classes. Belloc continued with this theme in his 1912 book The Servile State. Belloc generally accepted the criticisms of capitalism offered by the socialists and Marxists, but argued that socialism would not have the effect of liberating the working classes. Instead, the welfare state would reduce the workers and the masses generally to the level of state dependents with the state continuing to be controlled by the capitalist plutocracy.
| | | Medieval charity |
As devout Catholic traditionalists, both Belloc and Chesterton naturally had the tendency to romanticize the social system of the medieval era, centered as it was in the Catholic Church. The guilds and agrarian peasant traditions of the Middle Ages became the model for Belloc’s and Chesterton’s and by extension the distributist movement’s theoretical foundations for social reform. The ambition of the distributists was not to nationalize the means of productions in the manner favored by the Marxists or to radically expand the level of state intervention into the economy and into society in the name of social welfare. Rather, the distributists preferred the opposite approach of redistributing the means of production into as many hands as possible, essentially making everyone into a capitalist. Distributist ideas continued to be outlined in Chesterton’s paper G. K.’s Weekly and the Distributist League was founded in 1926. Most of the core members of the league were either former socialists who had converted to Catholicism or devout Catholics who were simply concerned with the social question. The league was never a particularly large organization and never held more than two thousand actual members at any one time. Distributism was an intellectual movement rather than a political or activist one.
Distributism is a concept that is more interesting for its ideas than its influence. It was a tendency that offered an uncompromising critique of capitalism yet firmly rejected virtually all efforts or proposals to remedy the ills of capitalism through bureaucracy and statism. Not only the socialist parties but also the labor unions were criticized by the distributists on these grounds. Belloc, Chesterton, and the distributists shared the concern of classical liberals for the preservation of private property and the liberty of the individual against the state while simultaneously expressing concern for the conditions of labor and related social injustices. Capitalism in their view had the effect of a net reduction in liberty not only because the laboring masses were dependent on the capitalists for their subsistence, but also because capitalism was inherently unstable and therefore necessitated state intervention in order to address its social dislocations. Further, the capitalists and plutocrats themselves preferred state regulation of the kind granting monopoly privileges. Contrary to the supposed laissez faire ideal of capitalism, the actual practice of capitalism went hand in hand with the growth of statism.
The distributists’ criticisms of capitalism were not merely economic in nature. In their view, both capitalism and the proposed socialist alternatives were equally deficient in their neglect of the spiritual welfare of mankind and their limitation of social concerns to matters of material interests only. For the capitalists, greed and material acquisition had become the highest values. For the socialists, satisfying the material needs of the working classes was their only concern. Neither perspective satisfactorily addressed the dehumanizing nature of either proletarianism as it existed under capitalism or the proposed statist alternatives offered by the socialists. The distributists were concerned about the effect of capitalism on family, cultural, and communal life. By forcing the workmen to spend long hours laboring in factories, capitalism was essentially taking fathers and husbands away from their families and the distributists noted that the plutocratic classes would at times endorse women’s emancipation movements in order to make female labor more readily exploitable. The concerns of many traditionalists of the era regarding the impact of industrialization and commercial society on high culture were also shared by the distributists and the distributists likewise lamented the decline of small shops and independent craftsmen brought on by the rise of department stores and chain stores.
| | | "Emancipated women" |
Though they were critical of the dehumanizing effects of the machine age, the distributists were not advocates of a return to a pre-industrial state in the manner advocated by the Luddites. Rather, they thought that with a widespread distribution of ownership of productive property, the laboring classes would be able to achieve autonomy and independence through such arrangements as industrial guilds operated as cooperatives of small producers and the reestablishment and growth of small businesses and small farms. Indeed, the economic ideals of the distributists were very similar to those of the classical anarchists and both movements favored many similar economic arrangements such as worker cooperatives, mutual banks, and independent peasant communities. The American social reformer and devout Catholic Dorothy Day even attempted a synthesis of distributist and anarchist ideas with her Catholic Worker movement. Yet the Catholic traditionalists and romantic medievalists who comprised the distributist movement generally found themselves at odds with the anarchists and their anti-clericalism and Enlightenment rationalism. However, the differences were primarily philosophical, cultural, and religious rather than economic.[2]
Belloc advanced an interesting theory concerning the development of capitalism in England and by extension throughout the world during the Industrial Revolution. He argued that capitalism took the particular form that it assumed during its developmental era largely as a consequence of the dissolution of the monasteries by Henry VIII during the sixteenth century. The monasteries had previously been the basis of cultural, educational, and charitable life in England and their suppression had created a gap in the social fabric whose consequences were made manifest during the early industrial age. First, the disappearance of the monasteries had the effect of removing the social safety net and creating the conditions for state assumption of charitable responsibilities in the way first demonstrated by the Poor Laws and which later found their full fruition in the welfare state. Likewise, the decline in the power and influence of the Church that was the natural result of the closure of the monasteries undermined the ability of the Church to serve as a constraining force on the growing power of industrial capitalists. Lastly, the destruction of monastic life had the effect of creating a spiritual vacuum that would later be filled by the materialistic values of the growing commercial society. [3]
| | | No longer challenging Plutocracy. |
George Orwell noted in 1946 that Belloc’s The Servile State had been quite prescient in its analysis of the likely consequences of state socialism when it was published thirty-four year earlier.[4] The legacy of state socialism has been the creation of the hard totalitarian regimes associated with Communism, Fascism, and Nazism, and the soft totalitarianism of the Western welfare states. Belloc has since been demonstrated to have been correct when he suggested that socialism would only have the effect of maintaining plutocratic rule while pacifying the population at large by making them into wards of the provider state. Though living standards have certainly risen in the West since Belloc’s time, all of the modern nations now face severe fiscal crises generated in large part by the prevalence of the provider state. The rise of the global economy has brought with it the advance of proletarianism in previously pre-industrial societies on the periphery and generated a process of re-proletarianization in the nations where industrialization is long established, particularly in the United States. The massive transnational capitalist enterprises and financial institutions are now eclipsing the power of even nation-states themselves. In some ways, it would seem that the problems that Belloc and his distributist colleagues sought to address are now as prevalent as ever.
NOTES:
[1] Jahn, Karl (2000). Distributism. Archived at http://karljahn.tripod.com/tan/distributism.htm. Acccessed on October 8, 2012
[2] Dorothy Day. Articles on Distributism-2. The Catholic Worker, July–August 1948, 1, 2, 6.
[3] Bradshaw, Brendan (1974). The Dissolution of the Religious Orders in Ireland under Henry VIII. London: Cambridge University Press.
[4] George Orwell. Second Thoughts on James Burnham in Polemic No 3 May 1946.
Originally published in Belloc: Thoughts & Perspectives, Volume Twelve (edited by Troy Southgate) published by Black Front Press.
17/7/27
| | | Goad desperately trying to prove he is not gay and boring. |
by Colin Liddell
Read other entries like this in The Dikipedia: Who's Who in the Dissident Right, an ever-expanding biographical guide to the colorful characters of the Right Wing
____________
Goad has long been a presence on the Dissident Right, but he has no real ideology and is only capable of crude ad hominem attacks, larded with low-brow, American naughty words. He is essentially an "edgytarian" Boomer with little or no moral compass and rather tedious atheist views, apparently based on not being loved by his parents as a child.
He is considered an "Alt-Right" figure thanks to his largely forgotten 2019 appearances on Richard Spencer's YouTube channel and being the most popular but least interesting writer at Greg Johnson's Neo-Nazi Counter-Currents site, which he joined after being sacked by Taki's Magazine in 2020. He is a self-confessed wife beater, drug taker, and bisexual, and has an autistic son called Zane, with his divorced second wife Shannon. He often tries to use this child for moral capital, despite spending his whole life mocking the disabled and using terms like "retard" with gay abandon.
Since joining Greg Johnson's stable, he has adopted more obviously anti-Semitic views in order to fit in with his paymaster.
He is also known for a rather ridiculous, long-running feud with Matt Forney, in which Forney is now well ahead on points following this hilarious Luke Ford live stream from 2018, which continually centred back on Jim's self-admitted homosexual experiences some years back with a Black boy. Goad's work has also commented frequently on the homosexual relations that occur in prison, adding to the widely-held suspicion that Jim was subjected, either willingly or unwillingly, to such encounters during his three years in prison.
His most well-known book is the Red Neck Manifesto (1997), which shows his knack of pairing a catchy and promising title with a turgid and overwrought writing style that has little of worth to say. Probably his most significant contribution to the arts has been his coining of the term "Shit magnet" to describe people, rather like himself, who constantly get involved in pointless drama, needless mishaps, and avoidable accidents. The term is particularly useful in categorising a large number of people in the Dissident Right, such as Baked Alaska, Ralph, Milo Yiannopoulos, Matt Heimbach, etc. ___________________________________Colin Liddell is the Chief Editor of Neokrat and the author of Interviews & Obituaries, a collection of encounters with the dead and the famous. Support his work by buying it here (USA), here (UK), and here (Australia). He is also featured in Arktos's 2016 collection A Fair Hearing: The Alt-Right in the Words of Its Members and Leaders.
Like many naïve people in the Alt-Right, Millennial Woes was strongly drawn into the Nazi signalling that overtook the movement in 2015 to 2016. Now, Woes would have you believe that this was just a short-lived blip of irony mainly carried mainly out to explore the parameters of "muh free speech." That is certainly the view he expressed in a recent livestream. But the truth is he seems to have genuinely held the belief that "Jews are to blame" for the ills of the West (low fertility, mass immigration). Nor was it just a blip. As this video shows, he was still posting Nazi content to his followers 3 years after the date he claimed in the recent livestream.
| | | Back to the pill market |
by James Lawrence So it looks like abortion is about to get somewhat less convenient in certain parts of the United States. As in, well, a car journey may be required. Maybe a long one. And at today's fuel prices, and all. Of course, if you believe either the left or the right wing of the democratic activist community, this is the first domino in a chain reaction set to roll the clock back two hundred years. All that I can say for it is that it will surely lift the mood of the Far Alt- Dissident Right, which has been through more than enough to earn a break from the blackpill.
As always, this will last right up until the next big disappointment, but there are broader grounds for optimism. Millions of normies have been radicalised over President Blumpf, Covid, Brexit, etc. White identity is back in fashion, the Great Replacement is a household name, even white nationalism is losing its brand toxicity. You might say that the Alternative Right achieved its mission in the manner of a Roman javelin – injecting its ideas into the public mind even as it was destroyed on impact. I used to think that, if only such a shift in consciousness could be accomplished, it would inevitably put an end to the mainstream conservative racket. No more dog-whistling, taking our votes, doing another round of favours for the donor class and then ritually capitulating to the left. With the kulaks in full racial revolt, those responsible for their plight would no longer tolerate controlled opposition, and the right-wing theatre resistance would be forced into leading, following or getting out of the way. In retrospect, there's really no excuse for such naivety. At least not when you have seen the whole rigmarole play out before. What we see in conservatism today is a case of Carlson in, Charlie out – the entrance of a new nationalist rhetoric, displacing an older libertarian one, which has become associated with weak political pacifism and agitprop for corporate tax cuts. But pure libertarian ideology, on paper, mounts a much more radical challenge to regime authority than white nationalism ever did. The fact that the con party has managed to grift off it for the last fifty years – and crown this achievement by signing off on an unprecedented mass house arrest and bureaucratic-corporate power grab – ought to tell us that the specifics of conservative ideologies are just not that important. They are like intricate, fascinating doodles on the walls of a prison cell, which serve to entertain the prisoners, and (obviously) dissuade them from trying to escape.Why should white nationalism, like libertarianism before it, not be diluted and co-opted to the point at which the con party can grift off it for the next fifty years? After all, it's not like they aren't already doing it. Whites who vote con have long done so in the hope of slowing down non-white colonisation, and getting some protection against the anti-white violence sponsored and tolerated by the progs. And they have long been permitted to move out of heavily colonised cities and flee to marginal, racially-purer areas – 'white reservations' in all but name – where they can continue to do the productive work that keeps the rest of society functioning. Speaking more openly about all of this would merely be a matter of playing some of the quiet notes loud, and allowing some of the loud notes to fall quiet. The Pied Piper never stops plying his trade, but he can always change his tune. And most white nationalists would not have to 'sell out' their beliefs in order to follow him. At the core of their ideology is an obsession with physical survival, which can be expected to motivate the behaviour of a compliant hostage. As long as the cons can keep the scraps coming and the beatings down, they will go on trying to get them into office (and if that condition seems increasingly questionable, well, "just imagine how bad things would be if we hadn't got the cons into office"). Cope, seethe, donate, don't stop voting, and stay away from the blackpill.
Philosopher-activist Greg Johnson – who recently treated us to the White Nationalist Case for Abortion and the White Nationalist Case for Imperial Proxy War – approaches his political activism with an almost religious sense of duty to the virtues of Faith and Hope. In some ways, you could say that he has an admirable ethic there, but why couldn't libertarian-conservatives use the exact same arguments to defend their constant failures? "Arjuna, you have the right to work but not to the fruits of work, so get back to agitating for tax cuts and calling liberals the real racists." (No doubt I say this out of a deficiency in the third theological virtue, that of Love for the White Race.)Somehow, I can't imagine that this unrequited courtship of the con party will motivate anything like the youthful energy the Alt-Right once had. Indeed, one already senses that the energy is slipping away, that the young blood is going elsewhere. We would be guilty of more naivety if we did not expect the vampire to follow it. Imagine a future (maybe not too far away) in which white racial revolt has had the edge worn off it, and comes across as dull to most people on the Right as 'muh freedom' does today. Everyone is sick and tired of hearing the White Nationalist Case for the Current Thing, and the predictable failure of the con party to actually stop colonisation has turned racial purification into a fantasy. How, in this scenario, might conservatism try to reincarnate itself in a healthier ideological body? And how, through conservatism, might the democratic regime continue to feed off the energy of its servilised people, while managing down our expectations and containing all angles of opposition within itself? Can we even predict this sort of thing in advance? Is it possible to skip so many moves ahead in the game? Maybe not – but when I imagine such a future, I can call to mind a very good candidate for the job of parasite host. And a slogan, too, which goes like this: 'only a monarch can control the elites.'This is neocameralism – for the sake of name recognition, let's just say neoreaction – straight from the mind of its leading light, Curtis Yarvin. The basic idea is that the government is just a large corporation, and should be run like any other specimen of its genus. This means concentrating the power of the state in the hands of a CEO (a.k.a. monarch, a.k.a. dictator), who in turn reports to a board of shareholders (i.e. an oligarchy that holds ultimate sovereignty but not direct power). Both of these power-centres would have a vested interest in cracking down on bureaucracy (i.e. the current ruling class), and putting an end to the various astroturf revolutions by which it increases its power (#resistance, social 'justice', 'racial reckoning', etc. etc.)
Yarvin gives a fuller account of neoreaction in a post on his Substack. But if we want to get to the bottom of the idea, and understand the logic behind it, there's no substitute for reading the early posts on his old blog: let's say this one, this one and this one. Here we see the analogy of state and corporation stretched out to breaking point. The sole end of governance should be profit, the self-interest of absentee shareholders will hold bureaucracy in check, and – worst of all – the powerless subjects of the state are its 'customers' who receive the 'customer service' of governance. Every man a customer! It doesn't sound much of an ego-trip, but when everyone's expectations have been kicked down another flight of stairs, it might be the last viable way to invert the political hierarchy and patch up the holes in the populist delusion.
| | | Conservatism allows democracy to take control of any opponent that defeats it in the battle for mass support. |
Of course, it's not usually good form to dredge up blog posts from fifteen years ago, and some of these ideas seem to have been dropped by Yarvin. But I am interested not so much in Yarvin (whom I've reviewed more charitably here) than in the worst uses to which his system might be put by the forces of conservatism and democracy. Yarvin's blog was worth our while because he made a sincere attempt to think his way out of the present era, and read his way into a different one. Democracy will have no use for any of this – all it wants is to mold its own substance into yet another ideological idol, which can be granted a shabby little shrine on the outskirts of its temple, so as to perpetuate that temple's monopoly on everyone's soul.
Of course, the real problem with the analogy of state to corporation is that it is arse-backwards. That is to say, a state is not so much a big corporation as a corporation is a little state, which has been stripped down to a purely economic set of incentives by the power of the actual state. Promote the corporate model to the role of the actual state, and this no longer holds true: for example, you cannot expect sovereign oligarchs to be motivated more by profit than by power when they can print as much money as they like. So bang goes their incentive to streamline the government and submit to the CEO (a situation likely to be compounded by the fact that the shareholders, under formalism, will be none other than the folks who ran the old regime as a democratic co-operative.) In a worst-case scenario, neoreaction could degenerate into a larp, an exercise in changing the names of things while keeping the underlying realities unchanged. This, admittedly, would require the butchery of Yarvin's original programme, which demands a coup d'etat followed by the immediate purging and bulldozing of most state institutions. But as we all know, conservatism is well-practiced in the art of playing the wicked genie, who always grants your wishes and never gives you what you want.
Would the refusal of neoreactionaries to participate in mainstream politics protect them from being co-opted? Well, let's go back to some posts on Yarvin's old blog (this one, this one and this one), in which he outlined what he saw as the optimal neoreactionary strategy. In Stage 1, we would renounce all political participation and concentrate on building the Antiversity, an independent source of truthful information. In Stage 2, the Antiversity would direct the actions of the Plinth, a mass electoral party aimed solely at abolishing democracy and carrying out the transfer of power.
To this day, Yarvin has never got around to laying out a blueprint for the Antiversity, but his early posts on the subject (here, here, here and here) haven't aged well. What we can gather is that the Antiversity would be a sort of dissident Wikipedia, in which all perspectives inside and outside the political spectrum could battle it out in quest of the truth. Not only would this depend on a relatively free internet that no longer exists, but it would also be partially infiltrated from the get-go, and vulnerable to further convergence by the usual combination of bribes and bullying. Given that no progress seems to have been made on the Antiversity beyond the existing neoreactionary blogosphere (whereas Yarvin is now peddling his manifesto everywhere from Unherd to Infowars), I think we can safely do what everyone was always going to do anyway and skip ahead to the Plinth.In some ways, the Eurosceptic movement in Britain can be seen as a trial run for the Plinth. Brexit initially seemed to give us what Yarvin would call a 'boolean' choice: either Britain is in the EU or out of it. Much like the abolition of democracy, it involved doing away with a set of elections and an upper layer of government (the EU political class and bureaucracy), and devolving power upon a lower layer of government (the British nation-state). The catch is that the intended recipient of this power did not actually want it. This, I suspect, is also true of the corporate managers to which Yarvin proposes to devolve USG's power (although admittedly they would stand to gain a lot more power). In any case, the Pyrrhic victory of Brexit is instructive. Once the proposition gained enough popular support, the con party promptly half-inched it from the main Eurosceptic party, and won votes off the back of it while doing its best to half-arse the implementation. The Eurosceptic tribune Nigel Farage stood down his electoral opposition to the cons, and many of us who might otherwise have disengaged from politics went traipsing back to the ballot box for Brexit – after which, as if to really rub the dog's nose in its own vomit, Conservative Prime Minister Blorris followed the EU into lockdowns and coronatardery. As of the present day, the Eurosceptic political machine has fallen apart, and the British ruling class will spend the next decade or so scapegoating Brexit for the economic consequences of its own mass-hypochondria. But let's ease up on the reality blackpilling for a moment and imagine a best-case scenario. Let's say, quite plausibly in my opinion, that democracy proves too intolerant and conservatism too moribund to accommodate the new radical right. Let's imagine that censored neoreactionary documents circulate in banned PDFs among discontented elites, who then turn up at unsurveilled fascist speakeasies to recite them to crowds of grumbling horny-handed kulaks. Let's say the new movement goes on growing until it can persuade USG into granting it a vote on abolition, in which the friends of democracy neglect to cheat hard enough and the neoreactionaries manage to win. Let's say the old regime chooses not to fight, the Great Reboot takes place, and all state power is transferred to the shareholder-CEO axis. Just for the hell of it, let's also say that the political fighting in the aftermath extends to ethnic purges, and ends up fulfilling the white nationalist programme too (let's say, the reduction of non-whites to less than 10% of total population).
Would this change anything? Obviously yes. At a fundamental level, and in an ideal way? The answer can only be yes and no. It seems obvious that the modern total state has certain permanent characteristics that will limit the effects of any change to its constitution, and will even tend to reverse them in time. If every utopia that we dream up and project onto this state seems fragile, unreal and doomed to failure, that could just be because we need to bucko up and think positive. But it could also be because the modern total state is dystopian by its very nature. It represents a vast engine of universal servitude, long disguised by a fantastic increase in wealth (now fast falling prey to Joseph Tainter's law of diminishing returns). Its insatiable will-to-power seems destined to transform every part of society into some combination of prison, boarding-school and human wildlife park.When we apply Aristotelian political categories to the total state, we should remember that they are limited to the new upper class (10-15% of total population?) directly involved in ruling, administering and instructing it. So if the total state is an oligarchy, this means that the new upper class is ruled by one cohesive group or institution (e.g. the Communist Party in China, or the plutocrats/Jews/satanist cabal in the minds of many Western dissidents). To say that it is a monarchy means that it is directed by a single individual. And to say that it is a democracy simply means that the entirety of the new upper class – the bureaucrats, the political elites, the activists and lobbyists, the high managerial elites, and the members of the academy-media complex – enjoys the freedom to direct the total state by free collective deliberation and tribal mob behaviour.As for everyone else under the rule of the total state, they are best described as subjects – a category that can be further divided into servilesand dependents, or workers and wards, i.e. those from whom more is taken and those to whom more is given by the state. The fact that popular sovereignty is also vested in the subjects should not confuse us on this point, because this sovereignty is ceremonial in nature, and has always been divorced from the direct exercise of power. A modern election is a sort of consensus-building ritual, in which rival factions in the new upper class oppose two or more armies of 'sovereign' peasants to each other – they might just as conceivably do this with rival herds of Hindu sacred cows, and yet those cows would have no more chance of ruling the total state than the mass of its subject people.
| | | There is no getting around the basic negativity ofour situation under the total state – but what of it?Past generations had to suffer much, and so mustours, without giving up. |
As Mosca teaches us, direct power in any regime tends to be held by an oligarchy, composed of all those whose business is to operate the most important levers of government. No monarchy can do without the loyalty and (ultimately) consensual support of this oligarchy, because it might always reduce a single individual to impotence by disdaining to carry out his orders. As long as a Great Reboot would leave the modern state standing in some sort of bureaucratised form – and what is a corporate manager but a bureaucrat by another name? – we can expect its core oligarchy to be composed of bureaucrats and synonymous with the top 1% or so of the new upper class.
Giving a monarch more powers might enable him to control individuals in this elite, but he would not be able to antagonise the oligarchy as a whole without jeopardising his rule. Not only would it decide how and whether his orders were carried out, it would also be able to control his supply of information. Here's how Martin van Creveld describes the irrelevance of monarchy to bureaucracy in The Rise and Decline of the State:"Though its pace varied, the growth in the number and power of the bureaucracy [from the sixteenth to nineteenth centuries] took place regardless of the state's lineage, i.e., whether it was absolute, constitutional, or parliamentarian; had been set up by armed coercion, as was mostly the case in France, Austria, and Prussia, or with the aid of capital as in the Netherlands and, in a different way, England; and ultimately even whether it was national or multinational, centralized or federal, monarchical or republican. If lazy rulers such as England's Henry VIII and France's Louis XV found themselves trapped and sidetracked by their own bureaucracies so, though for the opposite reasons, did industrious ones such as Spain's Philip II and Prussia's Frederick the Great. If hereditary rulers enjoying lifetime power failed to master the machinery they themselves had created, so, though again for the opposite reasons, did elected ones with their much shorter terms of office. As Hegel recognized, by the beginning of the nineteenth century the point had been reached where the bureaucracy itself became the state, elevating itself high above civil society and turning itself into the latter's master." (pp.142-3, all emphasis mine)
To change this situation on a permanent basis, we would need not only a new monarch but also a new and distinct oligarchy – perhaps a military Praetorian Guard, perhaps a rival scholarly elite with no existing attachments, perhaps even a sewing circle of ultra-loyal court eunuchs. With the help of such an oligarchy, the monarchy could break up much of the administrative state by force and parcel out its powers among a larger number of its subjects, who would then become its allies in a hammer-and-anvil strategy against the remnants of the bureacracy. The problem is that the administrative types in the new upper class will not swallow this collective suicide pill – so bang goes Yarvin's plan for a clean and consensual transfer of power, and we are back to the larp of overthrowing the total state by force.
Within the state, there seems to be very little will to self-discipline, to getting any sort of grip upon the cancerous growth and self-indulgence of the new upper class. One other corollary of Mosca's reasoning is that the core oligarchy should be able to outmanoeuvre any larger group in political struggle, simply by virtue of its being more tightly organised and closer to the centre of power. In some total states – e.g. modern-day Communist China – this theory seems to hold true, as the top 1% or so keeps the rest of the new upper class on the leash. It does not hold true at the top of the Global American Empire – which, in spite of various theories purporting to identify secret omnipotent oligarchies, works to all intents and purposes as a democracy of the new upper class. On the one hand, we could say with neoreactionaries that the Chinese oligarchy has made its power more secure. But on the other hand, we can assume that this was motivated by insecurity: the need to set up the state in a strong defensive position against a more powerful empire. If the Chinese new upper class were to grant itself a free hand to indulge in revolutionary madness, it would risk losing the support of its subject people and introducing a thousand foreign tentacles into its bureaucracy, academia and corporate elite. To wield this black magic in the shadow of a stronger practitioner would be too dangerous, so the state relies on crude propaganda and hard power, and puts up with the consequent resentment. Much the same can be said for the later Soviet Union, which turned away from revolution under the strain of defensive war.
Alas, no such insecurity troubles the new upper class of the Global American Empire – squatting as it does on a near-impregnable continent-island, and dealing with parochial geopolitical rivals (Russia and China), which can do little more than keep the Empire's power at arm's length and wait for democracy to corrode it to death. Trying to avert this long decline would require a lot of foresight and a lot of energy to act on it, and the foreign beneficiaries of 'Western chaos' – including free access of Chinese students to American universities, cheap purchase of political influence, etc. – have no incentive to do the job themselves by sponsoring anti-democrats.
So why should the latent core oligarchy – I'm assuming the inner bureaucracy and prog party elites – go to the trouble of making its power more secure? Guarding access to power will always be a hard, unpleasant and occasionally dangerous business, because every ambitious sociopath wants a piece of it. As long as there is no pressing need to 'get a grip' on the state, why not take a liberal attitude – allowing the trough at the top to widen and lengthen to its limits, so that anyone who's anyone can take a place there, and eat up the productivity of the subjects while shitting out rules and regulations on our heads? In the event that the nobles' democracy needs its fat pulled out of the fire, it can always pretend to yield before the loyal opposition of conservative politicians, who will take all the hard decisions and accept most of the blame and resentment before gracefully retiring to the subs' bench.
You may not like it, but this is what peak secure power looks like. Or at least, we are getting there – as Yarvin notes, the state will one day be able to make war by means of crypto-locked robot armies, which will never mount a coup d'etat or refuse to fire on the people. Somehow I doubt that the obsolescence of strong men will be good for the cause of sane governance. Just imagine the hubris of the new upper class when it can finally dispense with the conservative military and police, and vest the perennial role of the warrior class in a bunch of technocrats commanding literal hordes of animated dead!
Maybe I'm overstating my case. Maybe when every flu season comes with a call for universal house arrest, and the GAE and Russia have nuked each other over Ukrainian 'sovereignty', we will see some sort of belated crackdown on the anarchy at the top. But this is essentially a toss-up between democracy and republicanism within the new upper class, and dissidents outside the state cannot decide its outcome. So let's focus on something that we can hope to influence by our efforts – the incentive of the modern total state to delude its subject people.
The lies of the academy-media, and its various fantasies about race, sex, etc., are only the outworks of the mass delusion that casts its shadow over the West. The groundwork of the structure consists of a religious cult of the state's power and an invitation to identify with that power – in other words, a false god and a false self, a sort of Brahman and Atman of power. Once again, I'm inclined to think that mass delusion is optimal for the total state, and that failure to generate a deep and expansive dreamworld comes from a deficiency in the power to tell people what to think.But couldn't the state, in theory, just dispense with mass delusion? Didn't the subjects of premodern states – no matter how deeply deceived on some matters – manage to get along just fine without faith in an inverted social hierarchy, ruled by the lower and served by the higher? Maybe they did, but premoderns did not live under the infrastructure of modernity – mass media and schooling, ubiquitous surveillance and policing, instant information turnover, etc. etc. Central power – again, out of weakness, not strength – was obliged to leave the vast majority of its subjects to their own local domains most of the time. Thanks to modern technology and infrastructure (are we noticing a pattern here?), it can now suck up most pockets of autonomous power, and subject all of society to something resembling the atmosphere of a tyrant's court. It would be tedious to go into all the effects of this – the atrophy of the cardinal virtues, the devaluing of the sex, class, nation, etc. of servilised people, the privileging of modern-day eunuchs, mamluks and state-owned women, and the constant use of lies as a test of loyalty. But one obvious one is that the loss of local power can most easily be compensated by delusions of vicarious participation in central power.
| | | Political masturbation often means identifying with the state as it vilifies a Girardian scapegoat. 'Plausible attainability' isimportant to such fantasy: non-upper-class white men makeideal scapegoats because they are not obvious charity cases,yet do not possess the power to fight back with much effect. |
As Yarvin points out, these delusions are basically analogous to those indulged by someone wanking to porn. But is there a 'push' as well as a 'pull' behind the vast modern addiction to political porn? It seems natural to apply Yarvin's analogy of power and sexin the opposite direction, and say that the total state has done to the normal spheres of power in society what a boundlessly lecherous tyrant might have done to the women in society. That is to say, coralled every last one of them into a harem, and reduced every normal man to an incel. Expecting all those political incels to live as strict ascetics is just not reasonable, and yet only weakness could compel the tyrant to let most of his captives go back into society to marry them. So he does the obvious thing – sets up a live porn feed from the harem (i.e. voting, activism, political discourse), rents out some of his captives to his favourite subjects (empowerment, social 'justice', crime tolerance, etc.), and reluctantly grants others a platonic courtship with the most desperate and persistent among the rest (Reaganism, Thatcherism, Trumpism, Brexit, all right-wing reform movements that string us along and end up going nowhere). Political inceldom is not easy, and the temptation to cope is strong. But as individuals, if we want to avoid being utterly degraded by our situation, we must try to do the unreasonable thing and deny ourselves all vestiges of delusion. And collectively, if we ever want to force our tyrant into the desired position of weakness, we must persuade a critical mass of masturbators to accept the same discipline – something that can only involve ruthlessly puncturing their fantasies, courting their hatred, suspicion, and abuse, and not giving up on them unless they are clearly beyond hope.
And that brings me to the point that I am trying to make here. I'm not so much against the ideas for a political solution (most of which are about right at some level) as the idolatry of political solutions, which can only feed into the idolatry of the total state that monopolises political power. I object to the notion that every dissident movement must begin with a 'redpill' or 'awakening', and follow it only as far as is useful, before moving on as quickly as possible to some new programme for political reform. This soon becomes the centre of the movement, and is invested with a fair bit of Faith, Hope and Love, at which point democracy can use it as a means of renegotiating its dreamworld (though not its underlying constitution) and lulling the dissidents back to sleep.
As far as I'm concerned, the rejection of delusion and attainment of clarity is non-negotiable, and more valuable than any political manifesto. It can never be completely harmonised with power (given that this is inseparable from the ability to lie with impunity), and the best that we can hope for politically is that power gravitates more closely to the truth. Regardless of whether it does or it doesn't, the task of dissidents (literally, 'apart-sitters') is to stake out the closest possible position in advance. In other words, the 'awakening' or 'redpill' – as long as it is a true one – is not just a beginning but also an end in itself.
It is also something that takes constant attention and effort. Even if you do manage to unravel the whole dreamworld – including the parts that you would dearly like to be true – you cannot just 'wake up' once and for all and expect to stay awake through the night. And given that sanity can never be wholly reduced to intelligence or knowledge, you cannot hope to sustain it by reading this book or following that guru, learning that fact or believing this theory. Just as the food of today degrades into the excrement of tomorrow, the redpills of today degrade into the bluepills of tomorrow. Presumably this is why we see Yarvin hawking neoreaction as a miracle cure for the coof, and throwing in his passivist strategy to sweeten the deal. Needless to say, most others in the dissident movement have fallen much further and harder off one or other side of the wagon, assuming that they ever got aboard it to begin with. It's time to admit that (in Gracian's words) every man has his thumbscrew, and stop underestimating the difficulty of detaching our minds from the power of a total state.
In the absence of help from outside, the battle can only be a defensive one, conducted on the most important and favourable ground. Our first order of business as dissidents is not to 'win', 'pursue our interests', 'get a better deal', 'make ourselves heard', or even 'survive' – it is to guard our souls against the cult of democratic state power, and to liberate as many other souls as possible. (For the connotations of soul we can substitute those of heart, mind, psyche, etc.; we are not talking about a 'new religion' here – God forbid that – but the negation of a false one, not trying to climb up a mountain to heaven but to swim out of an abyss and up to ground level.)
As long as this is being done, secondary motives can be arranged around it, but those who sell out the core for some peripheral 'strategy' will end up with nothing. All compromise with democratic nonsense will only end up increasing the supply of delusion, and delusion is the engine oil that sloshes around the total state and keeps it from wearing and tearing. Only when delusion has been reduced to a minimum, and almost no-one high or low really believes in the state ideology, might we begin to conceive of the white secession or the neoreactionary coup or anything else.
Moreover, on our own side, a true picture of reality is the strongest-binding glue for the dissident movement – far stronger than any notion of 'common interests'. Unless power is on hand to hold things together – as it does with the leftist coalition of elites and criminals, Muslims and homosexuals, etc. – a movement based on interests will fracture along every social and demographic line imaginable. But no-one male or female, rich or poor, native or foreign wants to be a dupe.
That's not to say that we can ever banish the temptation to go back to sleep. The project of guarding one's soul runs the risk of a retreat into stagnancy – the solipsism of the 'gullible paranoid' type, who squats on a blog or comment account and trusts nothing but the belchings of his long-decayed original redpill. Conversely, the project of converting the deluded comes with the risk of dissolution – the compromise mentality of the 'flexible conservative' type, who throws himself into the Great Larp and thinks that he can move its narrative in some desired direction. The ideal dissident movement would run like a river between guardship and conversion, linking both and losing neither. Like Yarvin's Antiversity, it would be built on the maxim that the truth is the best strategy. But it would recognise the dangers of solidifying the decentralised alt-media into a single institution, and expecting it to relieve us of any need to think for ourselves by always being right about everything.
One way of keeping things fluid, while exercising some sort of quality control, would be to concentrate on developing a set of 'navigation techniques' for the soul riding a sea of delusion. These would be simple, practical extensions of the virtue of prudence – nothing like the rationalist project to indoctrinate everyone into learned autism – and could be field-tested by everyone who trawls through the democratic Cathedral and the dissident Bazaar, trying to glean truths out of a huge slurry of lies. Taken together, they would amount to something like an art of self-defence against mass delusion – and while such an art can always be watered down, it can never be entirely co-opted, because at the end of the day it either works or it doesn't.
One useful technique might be to approach the media as a court of law approaches a claim against a defendant. That is to say, always presume that it is lying until you have reviewed evidence from both sides, and then decide whether to concede or uphold this initial judgement. This avoids the dissolution of the conservative – who accepts every lie on good faith, and only troubles to review the evidence after the defendant has been lynched – and the stagnancy of the conspiratard dissident, who will conjure any amount of bullshit to defend every single challenge to mainstream orthodoxy.
| | | Whether the 'pill' is red or blue, black or white, dependspartly on the mind that takes it. No-one is entirely free ofdelusion, and no path to political sanity is foolproof. |
Another one might be to intermittently detox from all mass media, on the grounds that it is inherently delusive, and try to live on pure experience for a while before braving the marketplace again. Another might be to challenge any ideology that shows signs of becoming calcified as dogma, to see whether it has the integrity to mount a reasoned self-defence. Another might be to rectify our language by superimposing old words on new ones, not because they are absolutely true but because they can exercise a veto on democratic concepts. This means thinking of the free citizens as a servile class, the emancipated woman as a whore, the police service as a military class above the people, the academic and journalist as members of a priesthood, the free world as a global empire and progress as a global church, democracy as being restricted to the new upper class that alone merits the name of demos, and so on, not just in occasional flourishes of rhetoric but in all everyday situations. (All these suggestions are made, to paraphrase Seneca, in the spirit of a sick man swapping remedies with his fellows at the infirmary. It should go without saying that one man's remedy might be another man's poison, and that imprudent overuse will surely turn any remedy into a poison.)
Similar principles apply when we move from thought to action. The most constructive dissident actions are apparently practical, but actually psychical – that is to say, pertaining to the heart and mind. It is obvious that we cannot hope to out-supply, out-fight or out-communicate the total state, and a commitment to strict practicality would induce us not to try. But if we can produce some of the needs of life and trade them with others, if we know the rudiments of physical self-defence, and if we can wield myths, stories, poetry, art and other cultural material that has not been vomited out of the television, then we can say that we are preserving the embryo of normal human life and reducing our state of learned helplessness. Such actions are like physical outworks built around our inner fortresses, which can be linked up with those of others until whole communities are practicing dissidence together. Some might build them out of different and harder-to-come-by materials – such as the attainment of vast wealth, or the renunciation of all but the most basic needs of life. They might also be built from ketman – thinking dissident thoughts while doing no action out of the ordinary – but it is no easy matter to keep the soul detached from the body, and it might always collapse into a cope. ("Go ahead and burn that incense to the god-emperor, it's not going to kill you.")
Conversely, one of the most degrading forms of action is to reduce ourselves to footpads in some democratic political army, troosting the plan and vooting harder when we realise we've been diddled yet again. I've explained why I think non-voting is the best dissident strategy – mainly on the grounds that it devalues leftist votebanks, and separates the concept of popular sovereignty from that of democracy. But what if the conservative protection racket were a little less worthless and fraudulent? And what if we knew there could be no hope of inducing large masses of people not to vote? Would there not still be a case for principled refusal to participate in a fraud? To sell our consent cheaply and make a forced choice between two evils? Voting is the contract by which we let out our souls to the democratic cult, and nothing it could give us in return would really be worth that deal.
We must admit that this would not necessarily be the case in someone sufficiently detached, or in the event that we were voting not for an illusion but for something that would work as promised. One example would be an electee who could actually dismantle the total state; another would be one who was committed to exposing the power structure, and letting everyone know how little power he actually had. Although neither Trump nor the Brexiteers possessed such honesty, they did manage to pull down a few curtains on the charade of popular sovereignty as they blundered about on the stage. There is always a case to be made for this sort of political action, and an ideal dissident movement might still have supported Trump and Brexit in the hope of waking people up – the difference being that it would not have done so at the price of deluding itself. But that is the last I am going to say on the 'ideal dissident movement'. We are stuck with the one that we've got, and I would have gone on leaving it well alone this year, were it not for a sense of obligation to write some sort of epitaph for this site. The habit of referring to 'the movement this' and 'the movement that' goes back to the days when Alternative Right was its flagship site, and this was carried over into the marginal and critical role that it has occupied since the mid-late 2010s. It is a practice that sits ill with the sort of decentralisation that I and others here have always preached.
In any case, 'the movement' has made it all too clear that it doesn't want a gadfly, and is not willing to reflect on the failures of the past in any way that could discourage it from repeating them in the future. So let those still moving it have their activism, their voting, their ideology and strategy and all the rest of the conservative panoply, and let us who warned them against these things have the good grace to shut up and get out of the way. They have chosen their path, so let them go as far and as fast as possible – for perhaps they will finally win this time. Or perhaps they will furnish a cautionary tale for those who will come after them, an encouragement to fight without the help of false hope.Fate, as ever, leads the willing and drags the unwilling. Gæđ a wyrd swa hio scel.
The mausoleum of the Alt-Right by Colin LiddellAs long-term readers of this site will know, Affirmative Right was originally called Alternative Right and was the founding site of the Alternative Right, a movement that initially tried to revive intellectual critique that, by the Twenty-Zeroes, had become stale and backed into a corner. The rise of the internet serendipitously gave us an open door to push at, and a real chance to make a difference.However, the "Original Sin" of the Alternative Right as a a movement was that, even though it attempted to free itself from the stale Left-Right pigeonholing of Anglo-American political, metapolitical, and philosophical thought, it nevertheless embedded one end of that failed system in its very name.
It's second big sin was total naïveté about how it would be subverted and turned increasingly into a feeble caricature of Naziism. For many years, a battle of sorts was fought in these pages both against this cursed legacy and against this constant sabotage. But the Nazifiers were always going to win -- through the combined efforts (whether "ironic" or "sincere") of the likes of Andrew Anglin, TRS, Greg Johnson, Richard Spencer, and many, many others (see the Dikipedia for details). They were of course assisted by the passivity of influential people who should have known better and went along with the apparent "organic upsurge" of trollish energy for their own selfish reasons, people like Jared Taylor and Peter Brimelow. There is also good reason to suppose that the Russian deep state played a considerable role in this process.
In 2018, the Alt-Right name was finally jettisoned here. Sooner would have been better but as the flagship site of the doomed movement we felt that a little stubbornness was called for. At that time, I ditched the name but opted for a degree of continuity, going for a moniker that was relatively close to the original, namely "Affirmative Right." This name remained provisional and quite unsatisfactory, as it partook of the movement's original sin. But we had a duty to our established audience -- and our donors -- to at least keep a semblance of the original Alternative Right site going,But now I feel the time has come to move on. When Alternative Right was created in 2010, it represented virile dissidence that transcended the stale Left-Right party political divide. Richard was really onto something there and in his recent somewhat confused metapolitical meanderings seems to be striving for something similar. In 2010, however, the Alt-Right presented a new intellectual centre and endless possibilities. But now, so much that was termed "dissident politics" has merely been subsumed into the pettiness of mainstream US and occasionally British politics. Anything with the name or identity of being "Right wing" is of course congenitally subject to such a trap. To offer an alternative to that stale system, you first have to reject its most fundamental aspects. The most salient one is the Right vs Left dichotomy that is used to create irresolvable issues that never go away -- gun control, abortion, etc. -- and are merely designed to serve as bipolar tribal shibboleths to keep those who fall for them in their boxes.It is for this reason, and others, that Affirmative Right has had to be mothballed, and a new site created, better geared in its founding fundamentals to the true and original purpose of this site. That site is Neokrat (GO THERE NOW!). In the same way that Affirmative Right rejected the Nazification and emasculation of the Alt-Right, so Neokrat will reject the bipolar delusion of viewing everything as "Leftist insanity" or "Right wing bigotry," the alternating siren calls of our failed political culture. So, what does the mothballing of Affirmative Right mean?
It means that the site will still exist. Its content will still be accessible. It will still continue to be edited in certain ways, and maybe even reposted on appropriate dates and occasions. But the appearance of new material will be greatly limited. Also, some of the content will be "repurposed" for use on Neokrat from time to time, Neokrat will, thus be both a successor to Alternative Right and Affirmative Right, but also a refutation of them and their implicit betrayal of the dissident cause and the necessary critique that the West needs.
Ten years too late, but with at least people who know and understand much, much more, Neokrat is born. Whether it flourishes or not partially depends on YOU.
The Neokrat
Andy Nowicki has written what could very well be regarded as the first true incel classic novel, Muze, a disturbing glimpse at loneliness, sexual manipulation, and drug addiction in modern America. Published by Matt Forney's Terror House Press, Nowicki's novella offers a sympathetic portrait of the men left behind by the sexual revolution, a condemnation of how Big Pharma preys on unhappy people, and an examination of the symbiotic relationship between pharmaceutical companies and the government.
"Andy Nowicki's Muze is a dystopian cautionary tale, tailor-made for zoomers, doomers, and fatal romantics." — Naama Kates, host of the Incel Podcast
"Muze is what happens when you mix Eyes Wide Shut, The Exorcist, and Alex Jones conspiratorial politics. What makes Nowicki's latest novella disturbing is that, as absurd as its premise seems, it's closer to what actually goes on in our modern world than many are comfortable to admit." — T.J. Martinell, author of The Pilgrim's Digress and The Legend of Forenia: The Twilight Kingdom
"When we talk about the 'Great American Writer,' we essentially mean pale shadows of European ones, awkward transplants in a stubbornly alien soil, your Hawthornes, Faulkners, Fitzgeralds, and Wolfes. We do not talk about Andy Nowicki, but we should. American culture, having arrived in the New World in a packing case, has constantly struggled to reverse-engineer its own mythic base while hanging onto some elongated transatlantic bloodline. But Nowicki's work, including this, his latest and possibly darkest novella, is rooted in its own dank soil, in its own effervescent time and space, namely the present-day myth-zone of our godless yet hyper-real age, a world defined more by memes than myths: ‘Who killed the Kennedys?’, 9/11, MKUltra, reptilian rulers, moon landing hoaxes, and the odd, uncanny coincidences that occasionally glitter like dew on a spider’s web. These are our Iliads and Ossians. Muze follows the spiders that creep along such threads into a world of mind-altering substances, blackmailed billionaires, Pizzagate-esque elites, and soul-destroying cabals. Nowicki is a druid in this world, his pen a mighty staff with which he paces through its dark forests, using the pointed shadows of fiction to illuminate and comment on our increasingly errant reality." — Colin Liddell, author of Interviews and Obituaries
To purchase a copy of a work that will one day be regarded as a classic go to Terror House for suitable links. Click here: https://terrorhousepress.com/muze-out-now/
Also published at NeoKrat
"The fact is there are good reasons to be against guns and bad reasons. There are also good reasons to be for guns and bad reasons. But what seems to be happening now is that people are for and against various things increasingly for the wrong reasons."
Colin Liddell at his new site NeoKrat on the impoverishment of the political culture.
| | | Not to be confused with a ray of sunshine. |
142 years ago tomorrow the influential German political philosopher Oswald Spengler was born. To mark this anniversary (and also provide easy content for the site) here, once again is Buffalo Jenkin's 2014 essay on the great man. Worth a read!_______________________by Buffalo JenkinsOne of the problems I wrestle with personally since opening my eyes to the realities of political and natural life is the following conundrum: can western civilization BE saved?After reading The Decline of the West (1922) by Oswald Spengler, I accepted his theory as sound that civilizations are like living things: they are born, have a peak period, and an eventual lingering decline and death. If we accept his theorem then we are looking at being locked into irreversible decline regardless of what we do, so that even if we weren’t facing outsider invasion via immigration, falling birth rates due to feminism, and our host of other problems, we would merely be declining in some other fashion. The West as a concept and as a civilization, is doomed. One way or another.But can that be true, and if so, what would terminal and irreversible decline be like? Is it possible we are merely experiencing a downward turn that can be reversed? A painful, exhausting and perilous transition into some new morality?According to this theory, which seems observable and objective, all human cultures and all they entail (language, religion, morals, art) each have their day in the sun, a peak adolescence, followed by old age and death, never to return again. As Spengler says himself, their "emanations" – meaning their art and architecture, music, politics, achievements, wars and languages – are merely the apparatus or contrivance of their sentience. Greece, Egypt, Rome, Imperial Germany, the Victorians, Persia, and the U.S.A. have all seemed virtually immortal at once stage, and all eventually died (or are currently dying), never to rise again. The same can be said of classical China and the Islamic world. Indeed, curiously, the very moment an essential element of a culture or its art is perfected, then it essentially ends. It only remains for a long, protracted decline and inevitable swallowing by a stronger society. The moment the Greeks perfected the Doric style of architecture, after a long ascending labour, is the moment the style truly ended – metaphysically, idealistically and pragmatically. The importance of the journey and not the destination has never seemed more metaphorically profound.It is, I believe, an observable phenomenon at a more micro level within cultures, to me it brings to mind the theory of 'SickBoy' from the film Trainspotting – for a while you have it, then you don't, and The Name of the Rose is merely a blip in an otherwise downward trajectory for the career of actor Sean Connery. The mortality of culture and art seems an observable trend at the macro level in also, for instance, our favourite bands – there is the early brilliant stage, often leading to a climax of creativity, then a long lingering death of bad albums and self-parody. With the arguable exception of Johnny Cash and those that died young, this seems a universal trend. To grasp this meaning is to understand that truly everything, including ideas, ebb and flow in this cycle – they have a breath of life then must perish. Non manet in æternum.The real disheartening part of the Spengler Theory is his observation that the entirety of 'the West' can now be thought of as one giant culture, or idea, that has been increasingly homogenized in modern times. Starting with the Renaissance onward through our present day global liberal democratic ideals (championed by the U.S.A.), we can arguably now be thought of as one massive culture. Even in Spengler’s day this seemed to be the trend. The theory is chilling, and embraces a kind of hopelessness. However there are a few specific reasons that may suggest the theory is not foolproof, and there may be reason to doubt its implicit totality of negativity. And in doubt, hope.The first reason to doubt is that the death of the West is the death of a certain idea, or a certain conception of the West of itself. It means that in its death there will be fragmentation and new ideas, nothing that likely can even be predicted, something totally alien and strange. Its inhabitants, those that created the West to suit their racial yearnings and requirements, will likely still live (however few in number), and still need new idealisms, new ways to grow. Providing they are not overly mongrelized, that is. If there’s one thing that seems certain about the future, it’s that it is absolutely impossible to predict. You could never have imagined nuclear bombs in the fifteenth century, nor the internet in the nineteen-twenties. Life always takes an unexpected route. Secondly, even if the whole of the west falls, due to the literal truth of Spengler’s theories, then how could it be replaced by cultures that flourished and grew old and have been in lingering death for many centuries now, such as Islam or China? Islam is quite strong again, if only due to the West's own current weakness; and modern-day China appears to be a growing powerhouse with a bright future. These developments are certainly not in keeping with the rules of the Spengler's theory! Indeed, it seems that, these ancient cultures, which flourished long ago, are enjoying a resurgence. Perhaps, though, this is only a kind of illusion. Maybe they are only advantageously skirting the toilet bowl whirlpool that is modernity. Or could it be they have actually now become a fugitive aspect of the West, and – appearances to the contrary – are in fact dying along with us?**
Regardless of where we end up in future, will white people, our progeny, not still be standing on the earth in future centuries if our civilisations collapse? If the entire West dies, as did the Romans, will it not at least merely signify the rise of a new culture, such as we saw in the rise of Christianity after the fall of Rome?
Unless we are all literally annihilated to the man, there will be a need to create something. If we take the best parts of our past experience and mix them together, medievalism and the early 20th-century and ancient Greece, could we not cook up a whole new …thing? A new beginning and a new morality?If everything in this universe has a life and a death, including the cosmos itself, and cultures, and faiths, if even ideas themselves have a lifespan, then could not Spengler’s theory itself die? In fact, should it not upon its own self-realization be assured not* to come true, according to the seeming laws of unpredictability hard-coded into life’s weird patterns? Could a new a scintillating, even neo-classical culture rise in the minds of European man, to live as close to an eternity as to prove dear Oswald wrong? ..And with strange aeons even death may die.** – HP lovecraft.
Previously published here 30/7/12
| | | MSM = Men having sex with monkeys |
by Trad NewsNever mind soaring inflation, supply chain breakdowns, and the prospect of nuclear war with Russia, governments in the West (and health care organisations) have got a much bigger dilemma, following the outbreak of Monkeypox, a disease that so far has mainly affected the gay community.Monkeypox is a "zoonosis", i.e. a virus that spreads between animals (monkeys) and humans and is most common in parts of Central and West Africa and spreads through close physical contact, including sexual intercourse.There, can you see the problem already? I mean how does that sound to the average person?On the one hand, to clamp down on the dreaded monkeypox you have to focus medical resources and attention on the gay community and basically admit that it came from someone presumably shagging a monkey in the Congo, and from there was spread by gay men having anal sex across the World.
On the other, if you decide to focus on "optics" and spare the "blushes" of the gay community, you have to pretend that monkeypox is just something that affects everybody and has nothing in particular to do with the gay community. That means you have to play up every case of non-gay monkeypox, and then spread the medical resources and attention further and wider, to the point where their impact is wasted.
In the first case the result will be an effective "stigmatisation" of the gay lifestyle, while in the second case you will have to take a decision to wilfully neglect gay healthcare in order to preserve the all-important "optics" of the gay community.
In fact, this self-same dilemma comes up every time there is a health issue that disproportionately impacts gay men, AIDs being a prime example. As Dr. Boghuma Kabisen Titanji (MD, MSc., PhD) an infectious disease physician and virologist at Emory University in Atlanta writes:
"The initial homophobia associated with the HIV pandemic led to rhetorical strategies that made HIV appear to affect everyone equally instead of strategies that acknowledge heterogeneity in risk and burden. This not only disappeared gay men from the global HIV responses of the 90s and early 2000s, but IT also created an understanding of the pandemic among heterosexual people that is monolithic and missed opportunities to attend to the particular needs of sub-groups among heterosexual people. It is only recently that we target women of specific age in specific geographies, for example.
Similar patterns of targeted stigma towards a specific group have emerged in the COVID-19 pandemic. Initially we saw stigma directed at people of Asian descent following reports of the first cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection from China and more recently unjustified stigma towards southern African countries following the identification of the omicron variant highlighting intersections with racism."
Yup, it's Catch-22 all over again. Either you've got to focus on the group most tied to the disease and thereby inadvertently stigmatise them (if the disease is somehow tied to their sexual practices), or else you have to adopt "rhetorical strategies" and pretend that it's just a disease that hits everyone from nuns to innocent children, and bury the gay factor altogether, effectively endangering those most affected by it.
This is not just a problem for governments and health organisations. The gay community also faces the same dilemma, and gay publication Pink News is coping hard.
Apparently monkeypox is not a "gay plague," it's just that gays go to clinics more often to be tested so, of course they are overrepresented in the stats, as this article makes out:
"One thing that we don’t know for certain yet is whether the reason we’re seeing it in gay men is because they’re going to clinics,” Dr Dewsnap tells Pink News. “It’s very common for a gay man who’s been sexually active with a new partner to think, ‘I’ve got a funny rash, it could be syphilis, it could be herpes, I’ll go to my clinic.’"
There, take that, bigot! Gays are just more health conscious! In fact, Pink News is not willing to stop there. They are also pushing the idea that it's mainly a "dirty hetero" problem. From the same interview with Dr Dewsnap:
"We need to be very careful to remember that it’s a virus that’s spread through close contact and the vast majority of monkeypox cases have been in the heterosexual community in Africa."
The vast majority! Take that you hetero perverts!
But, sadly for our already fractious society, this clever defence merely opens up a new area of potential embarrassment, namely race and the difference in sexual practices between the First and Third world.
As it happens, in African countries a large amount of male-to-male sex happens that is not classified as "gay" due to social stigma and rampant homophobia. Instead, in those countries health professionals are forced to use the term "MSM" (men who have sex with men). So, when you hear a gay outlet saying that a sexually transmitted disease, like AIDs or Monkeypox, is mainly a "heterosexual" problem in a Third World country, what they really mean is that is that there are very few openly gay men there because they are shit scared. That's all.
Pink News also has another great cope in play. This one is that even though it's an infection transmitted by sex, it's not actually a sexually transmitted infection, because the sex part is just incidental to the closeness part:
"According to the WHO, it is not yet known if monkeypox can be passed on directly through sex – the organisation says more studies are needed to understand the risk – but it’s likely that it’s simply passed on through close contact. Naturally, that means a person could still contract the virus while having sex with somebody who’s carrying it, but that doesn’t make it a sexually transmitted infection."
It looks like Pink News is ready to come down on the "neglect gay health" side of the debate, rather than admitting that the gay life has any negatives or dangers whatsoever.
Audio versionAlso available on BitChute, YouTube and Odysee.
| | | The wedge issue to end all wedge issues? |
by Edwin OslanThe bastards finally did it! They blew it up! After the Supreme Court proved how ineffectual they are during the 2020 election, giving us the impression that they stick with the status quo and only rule on cases which 90% of Americans agree on anyway, or just don’t care about, they went and flipped, or at least plan to flip, the 49 year old decision that codified the supposed “right” to have an abortion into federal law; and the only Supreme Court decision most people under 35 have even heard of.Let’s get one thing out of the way; if you’re someone who considers yourself only “fiscally conservative” -- as in, you’re a GOP member who doesn’t care about abortion, gay marriage, young people smoking pot, illegal immigration, jobs being outsourced to China, leftist cancel culture at big tech, and you’re liberal on everything else -- your arguments have been rendered null and void. Trump’s installation of three socially conservative judges onto the Supreme Court makes you just as complicit in the overturning of Roe V. Wade as if you were a member of the Westboro Baptist Church. I hate to say it like that, but that’s just how it is; you could be a totally free-wheeling, drinkin’, druggin’, slut-screwin’ party animal who just voted for Trump for “fiscal” reasons, but you’re effectively on the same side as all the disparate Christian groups that the left lump together as the “religious right.”
If you’re okay with that, as I am, then congratulations! Aside from the visceral thrill of watching the usual gang of blue-haired land whales and pussy-hat-wearing soccer moms flipping out, reversing Roe V. Wade is the social equivalent of ripping a Band-Aid off an enormous bloody gash and pouring rubbing alcohol all over it. It’s the political equivalent of tearing the floorboards out of a house and cleaning out all the rot, debris, and termites underneath. Regardless of how the 2022 midterms turn out – and I still believe they’ll turn out fairly well for Republicans – reversing Roe V. Wade had to be done in order to bring the “culture war” to a head.
I still maintain that Democrats can lower taxes to zero, close the border, make it mandatory to attend church every Sunday, and insist that every American household keep firearms; but JUST as long as they remain the “pro-choice” party, while the Republicans are the party that, at the very least, looks disdainfully on abortion, the Democrats will always keep their core base of voters, primarily women and overly sympathetic liberal men.The Democrats can suck up to minorities, gays, and transsexuals, they can push for electric cars, offer to pay off student debts, threaten to take away all the guns, and erect all the holy George Floyd shrines they want, but these are disparate issues that really only concern the leftist and progressive wing of the party. The only thing uniting the Nancy Pelosi sect and the “squad” is abortion, and without it, they have nothing. Since women’s lib, abortion has been perceived as the final failsafe which allows women the ability to have sex without consequences. If the condoms and pills fail, and for some reason, a woman fails to obtain the easily obtainable morning after pill, then she can just get an abortion, and it’s like nothing ever happened. Any of those other extenuating circumstances like rape or incest which were used to push the abortion agenda are just that; extenuating circumstances and are thus negligible.Whether abortion is morally wrong or, more specifically, whether abortion is murder is an entirely different matter and one which I find rather boring; after all, for every charge that abortion is murder, one could counter by asking if it’s not justified to commit such a murder if the mother was addicted to crack. So I’m just gonna leave that one alone and say that the main reason women have abortions is simply because they don’t want to have kids. And I think abortion is so central to the Democratic Party at this point that it’s perfectly fair to refer to it as the Abortion Party. That’s why this issue stings so much to liberals and leftists, and why all the leftist infighting, while amusing to watch, adds up to nothing when the quintessential liberal issue is now in question. There’s also the background concern that, if the Supreme Court can flip Roe V. Wade, then they can just as easily flip any other decisions they’ve made in the past and fundamentally reshape the country in all kinds of ways leftists find icky. They could just as easily reshape the country the other way as well, but we’ll save that topic for another time.
| | | Think of all the wars we could have fought if we didn't have abortion. |
Of course, in practice, as anyone familiar with civic issues understands, nullifying Roe V. Wade doesn’t make abortion “illegal.” It just brings the decision back to the States. Obviously, the big concern is that women living in deep red states will immediately be denied access to an abortion and be forced to jump in their Teslas and bolt for blue states to avoid derailing their ultra-important HR careers talking down to people who do real work. On the contrary, I wouldn’t put it past Gavin Newsome to make abortion laws so lax in his state that they’ll allow a mother to donate her newborn baby to a ritual satanic sacrifice; which, of course, will be protected under “religious freedom.”Other than the question of gas mileage, the abortion debate really is just a matter of perception and optics. After all, if you’re married with a family or if you can’t get laid, or if you’re menopausal, or you just never plan on having an abortion, the abortion debate is pretty irrelevant to you. As such, I hear concern from some on the right/GOP claiming that overturning Roe V. Wade will inevitably reverse all the gains the Republicans have made recently and cause them to lose in the mid-terms; if only because certain hardcore pro-life Republicans won’t be able to keep their yaps shut and will immediately push for federal abortion bans or really harsh draconian punishments for anyone who either gets or gives an abortion. I see this mainly as either the talk of the demoralized or of people who grew up in prior generations where abortion was a much more pressing issue; the so called “abortion wars” are over, and statistically fewer people are in favor of abortion than they were in previous generations.
That might have to do with how the abortion discussion magically shifted from “safe, legal, and rare” to:
“Wowee, zowee! I’m on my twenty-seventh abortion! Aren’t you proud of me? You better be, you misogynist pig!”
Also, the quivering fear that some dopey Republicans will inevitably say something cringe-worthy and stupid – and they probably will – doesn’t take anything else going on in the country at the moment into consideration, and makes it seem as though abortion is the only thing on Americans’ minds at all times.This is the era of Joe Biden, a man who has dementia, who wants to send $40,000,000,000 of taxpayer money to Ukraine, who is causing gas prices to skyrocket, who won’t allow oil contractors to drill, who is pushing for “clean energy” “solutions” that most people can’t afford, who refuses to even address the surge of illegal aliens at the border, who is causing disruptions in the supply chain, leading ironically to shortages in baby formula, and who stopped construction of Trump’s border wall, which costs eight times less than how much money Biden wants to send to Ukraine.We’re on the cusp of stagflation, skyrocketing inflation, and foreclosures, and Americans will vote for more of that because abortions? Does that make any sense? I know the vast majority of people are uneducated rubes and bumpkins, but what happened to, “it’s the economy, stupid!”? Is it only the economy, stupid, when Roe V. Wade doesn’t get reversed? Don’t get me wrong; overturning Roe v. Wade has given the Democrats an issue to rally behind, sure. Furthermore, the early leak of this decision was probably done to ignite those “fiery but mostly peaceful protests”, and to intimidate a judge or two to reverse course. In all honesty, when Danny-Elfman-lookalike-with-a-wig Jen Psaki encourages “mostly peaceful” protests outside of judges’ homes, I get the impression she’s hoping some unhinged psycho will take out one of the judges; and then, after a couple of weeks of disingenuous mourning, they replace that judge with another progressive, tipping the majority back the other way. After all, nothing outside of removing one of the judges will change their decision. It’s a done deal.
And, while the leaker of the SCOTUS decision should be dealt with just because, ya know, you’re not supposed to do stuff like that, it’s probably better that the decision did leak two or so months ahead of its official announcement, since it was going to happen anyway, and now the shock won’t be as severe. And now Republicans have some time to strategize and do some damage control. Also, people forget, the midterms are in six months; in this wacky, unpredictable environment, who knows what the hell can happen? Joe Biden might stroke out by then. Wouldn’t you think having Kamala Harris as President would guarantee the Republicans a default victory? Doesn’t every President lose his congress to the rival party in the midterms anyway?
But, regardless of how the midterms go, how does this shake out in the long run? With 26 states set to enact “trigger laws” that immediately make abortion illegal or more restrictive, I think this will also “trigger” the much needed political balkanization between two sides whose differences cannot be reconciled. The red states will get redder as liberals refuse to relocate to them no matter how bad California, New York, and Oregon become, while hardcore progressives and SJW types living in red states will simply either move out of them or be driven into little pockets of obscurity. Furthermore red states will be seen as too retrograde and reactionary for middle of the road liberals and RINOs to move to as well.
Is this where we are heading?
And those dejected Democrats who began voting Republican for lack of any other choices, but who still have some blue-state residue will be forced to do some major soul-searching about how important abortion really is to them. Are they willing to entirely divorce themselves from the leading issue of the Democratic Party in order to enjoy the guns and low taxes that are part and parcel of living in a red state; or is abortion so important to them that they’d rather live in a blue state, which will inevitably be driven further to the left, forcing them to endure rising crime-rates, gay and transsexual pride parades, stupidly high taxes, long waiting periods for guns, super-expensive electric cars, one-room pod apartments, and all-you-can-eat bug buffets?
I know my thesis sounds rather reductive, and there will be outliers; after all, if you’re in a red state that borders a blue state, and you’re just a hop, skip, and a jump away from an abortion clinic, then you get your cake and get to abort it too. Though I hear talks that Greg Abbott plans to make interstate abortion travel a crime too, so who knows? But, in the end, is not the loss of abortion access worth the other perks of living in a safe and prosperous red state?
Some losses to consider, which I’m not trying to trivialize, effect those involved in the arts and entertainment industries, along with more progressive leaning corporations. I can imagine in the near future Bruce Springsteen refusing to perform in “pro-life states.” I can imagine controversy being generated over artists and musicians who make tour stops in these red states; the way Sabbath got shit for playing in South Africa in the late 80s, and how Nick Cave and Public Image Ltd. were criticized more recently for doing shows in Israel.
I can imagine there being major conflicts over red states offering killer tax incentives for Hollywood studios to make movies in their states, and those studios having to decide whether to save money or appease progressives. I can imagine overly privileged actors, writers, directors, and producers having massive strikes against studios that decide to make movies in red states. I can imagine a major Hollywood studio starting to film a picture in Texas only to eat the cost of the project halfway through due to pressure from progressives. I can imagine corporations in general having to make some big decisions about which states they should set up shop in; or what kind of ad campaigns to run in different states.
And, I can imagine states starting to develop their own local cultures devoid of big corporations and the major entertainment industry. I can picture left-leaning corporations staging “starve-out” campaigns, where they refuse to deliver their goods to red states, forcing those states into creating their own local economies and only networking with other red states. I think the abortion issue has the potential to drive progressive universities out of red states, leaving a vacuum for all-new merit-based universities to take their places. And, if internet providers decide to pull their bases of operation out of red states, then that could allow those states to build their own internet as well.
They don’t call abortion a “wedge” issue for no reason. And no matter how many people think it just shouldn’t be, because there are more important concerns, like the economy, immigration, outsourcing of jobs, aggressive leftist censorship, and the overall fundamental push for "Great Reset" scenarios, the fact remains that there are those who feel abortion is “murder” and others who feel abortion is “freedom.” These sides cannot be reconciled; you’re either for abortion – and, yes, if you’re “pro-choice”, you’re for abortion – or you’re against it.
And, if you live in one of the states which errs on the side of being against abortion, then you might just see one less Starbucks on your block. What a loss. Can you survive?
Colin Liddell joins Luke Ford to chat about the recent Buffalo spree shooter, fears of demographic change, our lack of elites and leadership, the problems surrounding Nick Fuentes, the merits and demerits of nationalism, and the growth of hyperreality.
Also available on Odysee and BitChute.
This weekend Australia holds its Parliamentary and Senatorial elections. In this extended Report From Tiger Mountain, Richard Wolstencroft sits down with actor and Cafe Locked Out co-host Damien Richardson to talk about his run for the Australian Senate, the lock down, Australian politics, and 'woke' deplatforming and censorship.
Audio versionAlso available on:BitChute, and Odysee(banned by YouTube)
| | | Justification is the trigger. |
by Colin LiddellWhen shootings like the recent massacre in Buffalo, New York, happen, we need to distinguish between causes and justification. The cause can be anything -- rage, loneliness, mental instability, flu jabs, etc. But, without a justification, the cause is much less likely to have an effect. The oddly named Payton Gendron, the 18-year-old kid responsible for taking 10 lives at a supermarket in a Black neighbourhood, definitely had a justification for his action -- at least one that made plenty of sense to him. Without that, his action may never have got very far; with it, the pieces fell into place and butchery ensued. Yes, the atrocity in Buffalo flew in on its own special pair of wings.
But what were the feathers in those "wings" that carried Gendron to his shocking act of violence? Look no further than his own manifesto. Already the internet, with its NPC hive mind of conspiritards, is doing its work and saying that the Buffalo massacre is "glowy" and a "Fed operation." Heck, who knows, they may even be right! But the fact is that what happened in that supermarket did not need to have a Fed hand behind it. Gendron's explosion of violence had its own relentless logic, one that has its roots firmly embedded in the worldview of the Alt-Right.
Gendron, to be clear, believed -- and said so explicitly in his manifesto -- that his race, civilisation, and society was being wiped out by the machinations of "demonic Jews." In what is a work of an above-average-intelligence young man, he explained his position with crystal clarity:
“The elite”, “The 1%”, “The bankers”, “The capitalists”, (((them))), “The marxist’s” they all refer to the same group: THE JEWS!! When referring to “the Jews” I don’t mean all ethnic or religious Jews. Some can be actually decent, and make significant progress to humanity. However many of them are not. Many are born to exploit the goyim and exploit the Earth for capital gain. They control the mainstream media, many government positions, and international and global banking. They advocate for leftist ideology, and spread propaganda among the right. They spread their lies through all forms of media. They want us to divide ourselves by race, instead of goy and non-goy, like they already do. “Remember the 6 million goyim!” The real war I’m advocating for is the gentiles vs the Jews. We outnumber them 100x, and they are not strong by themselves. But by their Jewish ways, they turn us against each other. When you realize this you will know that the Jews are the biggest problem the Western world has ever had. They must be called out and killed, if they are lucky they will be exiled. We can not show any sympathy towards them again (p24)
This is not a worldview unique to one lone nutcase. The ideas and attitude presented here lie at the core of every single organ of the Alt-Right. Of course, some of them may try to be optical, and not call for actual massacres, but, yes, they all believe the same old thing as Gendron. In fact, Gendron got his views from them, not the other way round.
In his manifesto he namechecks the Daily Stormer, which readers here should know all about. He also included links to Unz and VDare, and cartoons from the Stormer and Stone Toss. Unz is basically the Stormer 2.0 at this moment, while VDare is simply a race realist and immigration restrictionist website, at least in its avowed positions. As for Stone Toss, he is just one guy, but in my Dikipedia, a notebook of who's who in the Dissident Right, I say this about him:
He also frequently dog whistles Alt-Right/Neo-Nazi JQ positions, i.e. promoting the idea of "ZOG," namely the notion that the Jews control America's politics and its media, and have an agenda of promoting mass immigration and degeneracy, implying that none of these things would be happening without Jewish influence. His content is thus rather blackpilling, which is, of course, a means of subtly depressing and demoralising nationalists and dissident righters, or else pushing them into self-defeating extremism.
But it's not just the Stormer and Stone Toss. Patriotic Alternative in the UK, TRS, Counter Currents, Scandza, Tim Kelly, Morgoth, Millennial Woes, and many less prominent groups and individuals push exactly the same analysis and ideology that Gendron expressed in his manifesto, namely that it's all down to the Jews. Greg Johnson who has spent a lifetime pushing just this narrative over at Counter-Currents believes exactly the same premises as Gendron, but comes to, ahem, more "optical" conclusions:
Gendron’s decision to go on a shooting spree was motivated by a false sense of urgency. On the one hand, he knew that the solution to our problems requires a “civilizational paradigm shift”: “We must inevitably correct the disaster of hedonistic, nihilistic individualism. But it will take some time, time we do not have due to the crisis of mass immigration”... There are two problems with this reasoning. First, we have decades to get this right. Payton Gendron could have spent his entire life working to raise consciousness about white replacement. He didn’t have to waste his life this way. Second, as I make clear below, mass shootings are counter-productive anyway. As I never tire of repeating: We’ve got time to do this right, and if we don’t have time, doing something stupid won’t help us anyway.
Yes, the "Demonic Jews" can apparently be defeated by taking out a lifetime's subscription of Counter Currents and buying Greg's books!The chilling reality is that Gendron's act of "terrorism/ asymmetrical warfare" has its own logic IF you accept his premises and believe as he does -- as practically the entire Alt-Right does -- that the Jews exert undue power and have the destruction of Whites and the West at heart.
In fact, I would say it has a clearer logic than Johnson's "do nothing" attitude. Indeed, if I were convinced that a "demonic" group was really behind the demographic decline of the West and the coming extinction of my people, I would find Gendron's actions entirely understandable and even laudable. I might even find myself planning similar or worse scenarios. But, as it happens, I do NOT believe that the Jews are behind most of the evils in the World, or even a great many of them. So the Jews can sleep secure in their beds tonight, at least on my account.The trouble, however, is that a great many people believe exactly what Gendron believes. I have seen this again and again (and again and again) almost everywhere on the internet where people feel free enough to say what they feel. The truth is there is a vast army of Gendrons out there waiting in the wings -- the Buffalo Wings.
| | | Greenblatt and the ADL: the face of total deradicalization failure |
As for those well-funded organisations, like the ADL, the SPLC, and others, seeking to hold back this anti-Semitic tsunami, their strategy of "counter radicalism" has clearly failed. When the Alt-Right was taken over by the Stormer and TRS types in 2015 and '16, the anti-radicalisation forces felt they had the magic bullet: they would simply demonetize and deplatform the Alt-Right. Effectively, force would be used, people doxxed, careers and livelihoods ruined, and the social media space napalmed with censorship. That would win the war, they thought. It was tried and tried again, but did it work? Just ask the ten bodies lying in the morgue in Buffalo; just ask all the edgy kids on the Chans and message boards. The reason this anti-Semitic subculture, or ideology, fails to die is because it is supported by outside actors like Russia, but also because, when it is attacked, it is attacked in a way that suggests those attacking it are afraid of it, and are terrified of its ideas and data. In his manifesto Gendron included plenty of data -- "hate facts" linked to serious studies that point to important scientific differences of race. These cannot be disproved or easily dismissed, as race is real. But the core of his ideology, the notion of the "demonic all-powerful Jew" is much easier to debunk, deconstruct, and discredit. We have done much of that here at this site.
But for groups like the ADL and SPLC to do this, would involve them getting their hands dirty and their knees scuffed, deep in the jungles and trenches of the meme war; instead of just dropping deplatforming bombs from 30,000 feet. They would have to know their stuff, and be able to defuse persistent memes believed in with an almost religious fervour. They simply don't have the guts for that. This, in a nutshell, is why they are losing the deradicalization wars.Another reason is that they don't even recognize that there is a problem. Even though the Alt-Right's analysis is shit and simplistic, they at least recognize that there is an existential problem of advanced Western societies losing core population and gradually becoming extinct.
They spin this as "The Great Replacement" and say it is because of the Jews, who are apparently doing it because they want to live in something resembling Somalia rather than Sweden or Switzerland. Yes, more crap Alt-Right analysis, but the mainstream simply denies that rapid demographic change is or even should be an issue. The fact is that for any sane person it is an issue and should be one.
Until the deradicalizers recognize that and talk about it, they will always be outgunned by the Alt-Right and their dangerous ideas in the heads of people like Gendron. In fact they will probably be massacred.Effortless meme keeping the radicalization drive on schedule__________________________________Colin Liddell is the Editor of Affirmative Right and the author of Interviews & Obituaries, a collection of encounters with the dead and the famous. Support his work by buying it here (USA), here (UK), and here (Australia). He is also featured in Arktos's 2016 collection A Fair Hearing: The Alt-Right in the Words of Its Members and Leaders
by Trad News You'll have heard about "2000 Mules," a film by Dinesh D'Souza that "busts open" all the voter fraud that happened in the 2020 U.S. Presidential election. I haven't seen it but I've heard it's good.This is the kind of documentary that the Right wing should be jumping all over. Yet, strangely, nobody seems even slightly interested in it. Tucker Carlson hasn't mentioned it, and even NewsMax hasn't touched it with a bargepole.
Politicians that you'd think would be up in arms about rampant voter fraud, like Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, and Ron DeSantis, have been oddly silent. I mean these guys go round like they actually want to beat the Dems, don't they?Dinesh is pissed, but also kind of not that pissed.
So, what is really going on here? Why are no big media outlets and politicians picking up on "2000 Mules"?
Really there are only two possibilities. Either:
- all politicians and the entire media are all in on the conspiracy to steal the election, or
- D'Souza's documentary is just a crock of shite that proves nothing important