Richard Spencer, formerly of Taki's magazine, has launched Alternative Right - "An Online Magazine of Radical Traditionalism". I have high hopes for this site, which represents one answer to the question which we conservatives have asked ourselves here over the past year or so: what is it exactly that we want to conserve? Alternative Right may show us a way to be right, without wishing to defend or conserve most of our rotting power structure and our stupid mainstream conservative leadership. See Richard Hoste's Why an Alternative Right Is Necessary for an elaboration of this theme. Dick Cheney as "Conservative of the Year", as Richard shows, exemplifies why today's mainstream conservatism does not represent us. Eight years of republican leadership in the White House has brought us nothing but invasion, immigration, and insolvency, and the current Democratic leadership appears to be just as conservative as Bush and Cheney.
Here's wishing Alternative Right great success.
Very interesting. I comment more tomorrow.
ReplyDeleteI think the essay "Why an Alternative Right Is Necessary" is exactly the wrong way to approach the issue politically. The left has framed the issue such that anyone who argues that unequal group outcomes don't require govt intervention is racist. For some reason, many HBDers feel compelled to embrace this framing.
ReplyDeleteOne question HBDers looking to influence politics need to answer is how they differ from White Nationalists, etc. Honestly reading that article I don't see the distinction.
There are much better ways to frame the issue which don't require making racial value judgments. Most Americans already are uncomfortable with Affirmative Action. If they knew more about it, I'm willing to bet there would be an outright voter revolt. Similarly, most voters oppose amnesty and open borders. Likewise the practice of using tax dollars to import thugs into middle and working class neighborhoods. All of these ideas are already wildly popular. But voters and more importantly politicians fear being called racist for promoting them. Creating a movement based on declaring some races are on top only makes the problem worse.
Agreed. The page seems to focus entirely on race, and while it approaches the issue as a white nationalist, albeit a better-written one than you usually find. If it can simply argue on the ground of preserving culture, ending government handouts, and (especially) focus on economic issues such as capitalism vs. corporatism, it can take off. If not, it'll be a slicker version of VDARE, sans Sailer.
ReplyDeleteRoissy is right. Our civilization is doomed, from the root up. The idea of conserving anything is simply delusional. After the reckoning - the die off - when the dust settles and the blood dries - maybe some other, more reality-based system will emerge.
ReplyDeleteIf it can simply argue on the ground of preserving culture, ending government handouts, and (especially) focus on economic issues such as capitalism vs. corporatism, it can take off.
ReplyDeleteWell, you can't simply argue "on the ground of preserving culture" -- why would anyone care about that?
Would anyone assent to his own murder if he were sure that his killer would dress like him, mimic his speech, and otherwise "preserve his culture"? As long as you act like me, you can have my money and my wife?
This stuff about "preserving culture" is the most groveling, pathetic argument imaginable.
As for "capitalism vs. corporatism", don't they amount to the same thing: an unhealthy centralization of wealth and thus power?
I visited alternativeright.com and read a couple of interesting articles, listened to the Jared Taylor/Richard Spenser interview, and made a modest donation to them. I intend to try and check the page once-a-week or so, as it looks promising.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to take the opportunity to again float my little idea about "whites". Imagine an association that used a map of Europe+Russia on its stationary and website as a "Trans-European" or "Trans-Eurasian-Coalition".
It would decidedly NOT be a "racist" organization, but one of *boosterism* for peoples of Euro-Russian decent.
Scholarships and articles guiding our youth into fields that will have family-forming-levels of income, IQ tests so those youths can accurately assess their possibilities realistically, scholarships to technical schools, associates degrees, and four-year colleges in fields that expect to have demand would be pro-active things that could be done.
Like a "postive" NAACP, but for whites the world around.
Educational videos on our history that would educate white youths about their ancestors stupendous achievements, and also let them know of the cultural forces currently arrayed against them.
Through social media (facebook, twitter), white youths could be contacted via-Email about this organization numerous times. Lefist white kids would of course send back ugly replies, but over time as they age......I bet even they would be glad such an organization existed to give them aid and comfort in an increasingly unfriendly environment.
"ben tillman said...
ReplyDeleteThis stuff about "preserving culture" is the most groveling, pathetic argument imaginable."
Your assertion makes no sense to me. I see nothing wrong with whites preserving their culture - preserving what we used to call simply "Western Civilization". It is not pathetic, nor is it groveling to simply say "I and my kind have a right to exist".
Good news indeed.
ReplyDeleteThe site looks promising. Richard Spencer has a good sense of what's politically useful and intellectually strong on the right, but not acceptable in the mainstream (yet). I'm going to add this site.
Martin B, you don't understand what Ben Tillman said. I will put it like this. I don't care about European culture as an European at all. The most important thing to me is European people. I could care the less if in 300 years Europe will be inhabited by Africans who speak Dutch, English or French and have the same culture as the people they displaced. I don't see why I should, since I could care the less about them to begin with. Unless you want to preserve something as a place of a certain kind of people, the manifestation of that people's presence(culture) is deeply irrelevant.
ReplyDeleteWhere Ben tiller doesn't make sense is his economic expertise though, considering he doesn't understand the differences in between capitalism and corporatism and why in capitalism actually the poor are better off in the long run. Too lazy to explain it why.
Rum, I agree. Conserving the present day culture is stupid. It needs to be destroyed and rebuilt from a sound foundation - which means deconstructing the stupidity of the last 1.5 centuries.
PeterW, you have to realize that a pussyfoot, inside the box thinking isn't going to do anything. First of all, if you accept the liberal racism definition and political correctness, you lost already because you accept the founding principles of liberalism and you will be exposed as a hypocrite. There's no point in me explaining why that is, since you probably will not accept what I will say regardless.
Dalrock, who cares what the left says about who is racist or not? To me, the word racist has no meaning and is about as offensive as someone calling me stupid - and to me, only a silly person minds being called racist, considering what it means nowadays, which is nothing. This is the most important thing that needs to be taught - the deconstruction of liberalism, including the political correctness related to race. And not wanting your people to become extinct and wanting a place for it own isn't making racial value judgements. Even though my racial group has a 30IQ points on average above Haitians, I don't see Haitians as subhuman.
It's funny to me that people are willing to make all these logical fractures in order to avoid the ultimate truth that some races are on top. Fine, I'll play your game. All races are equal, which means that blacks not achieving as much is the result of discrimination and affirmative action is actually needed to overcome the inherent racism of the society. Now, you admitted that blacks are equal to whites. Since you did that, you admit that the inherent qualities of both races are equal, which means that any unequal outcome is the result of an outside discriminatory force. And if you are unwilling to remove it, then you are racist(and since groups aren't any different, then the discrimination is based on prejudice and it is hateful, which actually makes you a racist for real). So if you accept/think tht all races are on the same level, the left is right, you are a racist.
Concerning e.g. the White - the Other issues, the liberal establishment doesn't use it's methods because it thinks they are based on correct facts, just or reflecting the reality. It uses them precisely because they are faulty and unjust. If society would be simplified to a machine, liberal machine needs many faulty parts to function. If it's faulty parts become replaced with truth-reality-just parts, the whole machine collapses. Faulty White - the Other parts elicits e.g. the following advantages to liberal "elites" (overlapping): It creates and supports an army of bureaucrats managing these issues; it creates jobs in private sector (construction work and estate agents [White flight], consultants, ngo "companies", cheap labor etc.); it pacifies the Other by e.g telling that his problems emanate from demonized Whites and environment, not from him, liberal "elite" is on his side and manages the problem through bureaucratic actions (affirmative action, sensitivity training, speech codes etc.); it prevents the political collective formation and influence of Whites and increases the formation and influence of the collective Other, thus giving balance of powers, where the deciding power is in the hands of the liberals; the demonized and reduced Whites are willing to atone by accepting the legalized state robbery of their money and power/ Whites are the only people who can finance the oversized system; racial ethnic conflicts are swept under the carpet and out of public view, thus supporting the uninterrupted functioning of centralized bureaucracy and capitalism; it buys the elite of the Other to be part of the liberal "elite" (affirmative action), thus preventing the independent leadership of the Other; the possible striving Others exhausts genuine political change energies in the system trying to get position, status and wealth, when liberals tells that they are equal and that liberals give them all the possibilities/ if the Other then fails it was the fault of environment and demonized Whites, liberals are innocent, liberals do their best to punish the problematic Whites and manage the environment/ Thus liberals redirect the possible left over anger towards liberals towards the scapegoat Whites and impersonal environment; demonized Whites are willing to accept their own dispossession and replacement by immigration and fecund Other; balkanization of White countries and the strangling of Whites is necessary preconditions to increased power of the liberals, who are thus freed to pursue their ultimate goal, global, international and cosmopolitan power; etc.
ReplyDeleteBecause of this, merely having the facts, e.g. HBD facts, is not enough in politics. Liberals reject HBD facts precisely because they are facts. Liberal dupes of course sincerely believe liberal lies.
Continued ...
Part 2.
ReplyDeleteWhat is then needed in alternative right?
a) The facts could be generally connected to the methods by which people are governed, thus bringing to light larger reality, not just loose facts. People don't know how they are governed and this is one of the foundations of liberal power.
b) No single issue should be all consuming, whether it is race, religion, Jews (especially compulsions about Jews), HBD information etc. Life is complex and many issues needs to be dealt with to create a compelling political field, where everybody finds many issues that touch them personally in several ways.
c) Reasonable people from as many different fields as possible could be brought under the same political tent. This creates necessary development of ideas and widens the political field.
d) Some obstacles must be confronted directly and resiliently, forever if necessary, but unnecessary obstacles pruned away by e.g. using indirect, system, functional, divisive (to opponents), non-political and/or impersonal methods.
e) There could be political philosophy forum, where intelligent people study and talk about anything that could be used politically, and create an efficient political ideology. In every topic there should be a question; how this can be either used, modified and used or incorporated to our politics or everyday/ practical actions? People study new things (new to them), surprising things, mundane things, scientific things in general, politically opposite views (liberalism, socialism etc.), work related issues, entertainment, family issues, environmental issues, history, conservative political fields, economy, community theory and practice, localism theory and practice, religions, social issues, socialization, social psychology, political psychology, psychology of the individual, marketing, political science, evolutionary psychology, genetics, food, hobbies, holiday activities, traditions, habits, cultures, etc. And of course political philosophy itself. Single topics could be e.g self-deception, boredom, anxiety, social pressure, the coherence of holiday habits, food as a part of the social, how different religions and ethnic groups solve free rider problems, labor organization and methods, liberal philosophy and it's consequences, methods of coherence between parent companies and subsidiaries, how to not being governed, methods of Hutterite communities, social construction of money, chinese stratagems, similarities between physics and politics, local production of energy, transferring individual concerns to collective concerns, artistic creativity, etc.
I give you an example of information that is rarely known, but useful politically. People have fuzzy instructions in their minds how to behave in everyday situations. The instructions are flexible, but if something really surprising and extraordinary, but not too threatening happens, people don't know how to interpret it, how to relate to it and perhaps how to act in the situation. Thus they are more inclined to accept (generally simple) "instructions". This gives e.g. political art and performances possibilities to bypass normal political defenses more than political article can.
f) There could be mentions in articles what small and safe things people can do in practice, i.e. translations of the article contents to action. When people do small things voluntarily, their self-image and identity changes, and this opens the door to possible larger activities. Doom and problems in articles are inefficient if people don't have practical outlet for doing something about them.
What is needed on the right is not another splinter site run by an egomaniac. What is needed is consensus-building, prioritizing, publicity, and public relations.
ReplyDeleteQuite frankly, everybody's tent has to get bigger on the Real Right; people have to start focusing on the common ground more and, at the same time, on getting a good handle on who the real enemies are: the Left and the Neocons.
The least productive thing Right-Wingers could possibly do is get into sectarian squabbles. The people over at secular right might have found a niche to vent their God-hating, but that is all such an enterprise could ever hope to be. Likewise, the religious (or at least theistic) among the right--which remain, at least in terms of the political constituency, the vast majority--have to understand that secularists are just as capable of combating the excesses of Big Government and PC as we/they are.
If I were to throw my hat in the ring first, I would state the priorities thusly:
1.) Gun rights--the police are not on our side, and are more hostile to the working American very day. The time may come when we have to protect ourselves from criminals and cops and lawyers and politicians and bankers.
2.) Immigration Restrictionism
3.) Opposition to racial preferences and the diversity industry in general.
4.) Opposition to needless foreign wars and to the neoconservative democratist agenda in general.
5.)Control of the Legal Profession and total restructuring of Education
6.) Radical Simplification of the tax code, radical reductions in the legal-regulatory mechanism of the corporate state business model.
Notice that there is nothing here about the Jewish State. Israel is only a problem insofar as it drags us into proxy wars. We can handle a few billions in subsidies and gaft.
Also notice immigration restriction's high position. Simply put, anyone who has any reservations about seriously reducing immigration has no place on the right. Objectively, they are endorsing the single most powerful weapon of the Left.
"I don't care about European culture as an European at all. The most important thing to me is European people."
ReplyDeleteSpot on! As an ethnonationalist, I believe that ultimately culture is a product of the people anyway, but it's the people themselves that matter the most.
Spot on, JudgeStone.
ReplyDeleteWhat I'd really like to see is, people who agree with those issue simply agreeing to the ground rule that those are non-negotiable (1 thru 4 at the very least). Once people get on board with those, see which leaders emerge, and see if any other issues fall into place. (For example, I'd like to see opposition to business subsidies; also, new approaches to anti-trust, not because of price-fixing, but as an antidote to the "too big to fail" nightmare.)
But anyway, I agree that egomania and fragmentation are big threats to the development of an alternative right, modern right, moderate nationalism, HBD right, whatever you want to call it.
The reason people who are Euro nationalist focus on IQ is that its all they have to show for biological differences now that Darwinian theory is dead. But of course there is no gene in the body that have been found that determines the IQ a person has. But thats wll they have.
ReplyDeleteThe propblem is that these Nationalist don't know how to ptomote their ethnic identityy without some form of superiority. Ethnic nationalism exist all over the world. But rarely do you see any attempt to focus on IQ. Chinese and orientals have ON AVERAGE higher IQs that Europeans. But when is the last time you hears Chinese talk about such things?
The Quran says:
O mankind, We have created you from a male and a female, and made you into races and tribes, so that you may identify one another. Surely the noblest of you, in God‘s sight, is the one who is most pious of you. Surely God is All-Knowing, All-Aware. 49-13
Among His signs are the creation of Heaven and Earth, as well as the diversity in your tongues and colors. In that are signs for those who know 3.22-23
Ethnic identity and similar features and cultures are normal. But supremacy is not.
"But when is the last time you hears Chinese talk about such things?"
ReplyDeleteAmong themselves? All the time. Ask Asian of Reason
(http://piepointonefour.blogspot.com/)
They're very proud of it.