Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old March 3rd, 2015 #41
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,756
Blog Entries: 34
Default

[will put this here...i have my alt-fright & personages stuff spread out too widely, probably should be in 1 thread, or maybe not. anyway... this is the Meh Spencer/Barnum Taylor/VDontDare NPI conference, someone's report on it]

Report from the Beyond Conservatism Conference Sponsored by the NPI

Yesterday my colleague and I drove to Washington DC to attend a set of lectures called Beyond Conservatism, organized by the National Policy Institute (NPI) and held at the National Press Club. NPI is described as a think tank, and its primary activities include managing the Radix Journal web site, the publication of some books, and the organization of a conference about once per year. Does this constitute a think tank? I’m not sure. I would describe NPI as pro-white or identitarian, but of course you will find mainstream media outlets and leftist organizations describing it in nastier ways.

Upon arriving at the National Press Club I thought there might be protesters outside as was the case at the last NPI conference held in DC in 2013, but there were none to be seen. It is interesting to note that everybody employed by the National Press Club was non-white, from the receptionist, to the security guard, to the bartender and the wait staff. I wondered if this was deliberate. In researching the conference, I found several web sites urging activists to contact the venue and demand that NPI not be allowed to meet there. But the show went on as planned.

Um...been in it many times when i was out there, the NPC is just a building for people to put out press releases in. Not some majestic body. Whether those releases are paid and self-important or actually important. Just a rental hall, essentially.

Still, the conspiratorial side of me wondered if the assignment non-white staff to the event was an attempt to be provocative. Or perhaps it is simply that the staff at the National Press Club is entirely non-white, which is provocative for other reasons. Well, all journalists are leftist, so that satisfies Occam. You're in DC, which is majority coon. These alone are enough. But add a third, nobody cares about NPI, not even those who sometimes demonstrate against it. In either case, a reporter biased against NPI could easily spin the situation in an unfavorable light. They might say, This was a meeting of old white men being served by people of color; how ironic that they are dependent upon the people they despise. Or another spin could be, Look at this old white men being served by people of color; it harkens back to the days of segregation. Or lastly, How terrible that these people of color are forced to be subjected to the hostile rhetoric of old white men; how oppressive! This is why some types of speech should not be protected. More like no one gives a shit about any of this.

Describing the event as a meeting of “old white men” would be typical of the media, but would also be inaccurate. The vast majority of attendees were under the age of 40 and a substantial portion of them were in their 20s. Furthermore, these men were not basement-dwelling loser-types (well, some were). There were many smart-looking, and smart-sounding professionals from a variety of fields. If you have to specifically talk about this rather than assume this, you've lost your point. But they were mostly men. Of about a hundred people, my guess was that only 5 to 10 attendees were women. I state this fact without judgment, merely to note the demographics.

I had the opportunity to meet one of the women there, or at least shake her hand. I noticed her when she first walked into the room because she seemed out of place. She had a lip-piercing, a sultry gait, and was wearing a jacket that said “Marlboro” on the back. Later, I saw her standing with a group of men that included my colleague. I walked over and realized immediately that she was not one of us when I heard her say to the men, “So are you guys going to try to convert me?” I introduced myself. I heard her say her name was Martha, but my colleague swears that it was Margaret. He probably knows better as he stayed and talked to her, whereas I had other things to do. Yeah, there's one of these, at least, at most right-wing meetings I've been to. Women like male attention. Far more than they like politics, of any position.

My goal was to explain my community organizing strategy and gather some contacts who might assist me. I spoke with some of the big name people, but they were preoccupied with so many others who wanted to speak with them and the conversations weren’t very fruitful. I did meet with some success in speaking to other attendees. It would have been nice to have more time to mingle, but the event began and we all directed our attention to the front of the room.

There were three speeches, one by Jared Taylor of American Renaissance, one by Peter Brimelow of VDare.com, and one by Richard Spencer, the president of the National Policy Institute. As the title of the event indicates, the theme of all three speeches was Beyond Conservatism. Can you think of three less likely people to deliver such speeches? Jared Taylor spoke about how the issue of race and identity should be one that goes beyond the politics of the right or the left. He argued that conservation is a value promoted by both sides, but that there is a double-standard when it comes to the conservation of the white race. We need to emphasize the uniqueness of our culture and traditions in order to make the case that it deserves to survive. We need to make a case that we deserve to survive? Who's listening? We either fight or die. There's no god or human judge to persuade, or even listening. "We need to make a case" - this is the conservative mentality in a nutshell. Behaving as though we're in a debate rather than a fight. "Defend your existence - using reason" - idiot.

Peter Brimelow’s speech was about the rise of conservatism as a movement that seemed to be succeeding in the 1980s and 90s, and its subsequent decline in recent years. For example, two decades ago a book like The Bell Curve was a major topic of conversation in all intellectual circles, whereas today such a work would be suppressed by all mainstream outlets and relegated to the dark corners of the “far right.” The implication is that conservatism has failed and something new is needed to save our people from genocide. Two decades ago, why, you could sorta argue the sky is blue in public. Now you can't. Again, the assumptions are what matters here. Anyone who thinks there is some body of people who need it proved that niggers are retarded, and that persuading them of this will lead to serious political change. Does such a fool even exist? Brimelow and Taylor are talking about the reception of their books, which is a different and unrelated to thing to the matter of serious racial politics.

Richard Spencer spoke about the mishmash of seemingly contradictory issues that now make up what is called the conservative platform. He critiqued these as a negative form of identity in which we define ourselves by the things were are against. Our people must reclaim a positive identity. He made a somewhat controversial statement that facing the future as a minority may be the galvanizing event that brings about this change in white racial consciousness, and in this way, encountering “the other” may be a good thing even though this is what we are trying to prevent. In the discussion that followed Jared Taylor challenged this assertion as being too defeatist, and expressed hope that white racial consciousness could be rekindled without our people being brought to the brink of extinction. This dilemma of when and how whites will finally wake up and claim their identity is at the heart of our movement. The mass of whites will never wake up. South Africa's history proves this. Whites went through the whole cycle there, from being alone as whites (yes, there were virtually no niggers in their communities when the Boers first settled); to being the dominant majority with a system called apart-ness set up to safeguard their racial life, to being a despised and democratically diselected and disenfranchised and disempowered and did I say hated tiny-minority, fit only to be object of hush crimes never reported outside the continent. Have these white Africans awakened? They have not. They blame themselves for not reading the bible hard enough. Many of them, cringed as far into the corner as a human can possibly get, still retain their glazed liberalism. They went from being awake to being asleep. So why would the other whites of the world, who were never awake in the first place, go from being asleep to being awake -- when SA whites went from awake to asleep? I hate to say this, of course, but isn't it what the evidence shows?

A question and answer session followed Richard Spencer’s speech. People raised their hands and Richard called on them. The second person to be called upon was the woman named Martha or Margaret. She said she had a question for the entire audience and he said that’s fine. Then she walked to the front and stood right next to Richard facing the audience. She said something like, “So it seems like you guys don’t like sex very much.”

“That’s not true,” said Richard, interrupting her. He went on to say that nobody here had spoken about sex and part of the point of his own speech was implying that conservative views about sexuality need to be abandoned by our movement.

She seemed to be flustered and said, “Well, do you like strippers?” Richard appeared to be taken aback by the question. He began to beckon to the security guard in the back of the room. It seemed clear to me that we were about a witness some kind of FEMEN style activism. Martha or Margaret was fingering the the hem of her relatively short dress as if she were about to rip it off at any moment. The audience seemed to pick up on this and several lecherous comments were made. She was saying something about how there weren’t any good strip clubs in DC and all the best ones were in Baltimore. “Then to Baltimore!” Richard cried in jest while still attempting to get the security guard’s attention.

Someone yelled out, “She’s a troll!” She turned to the voice and said, “No, I’m not but . . .” At this point, Richard took control of the situation and said to her, “Okay, I think we are going to move on, but thank you for having your say.” Then he called on the next person with a raised hand. She continued stand in front of the audience for another ten minutes or so, but you could see that she had lost her nerve. She wasn’t going to strip without making her political point, which was obviously off-base anyway, and she was not going to be given the opportunity to speak again. Eventually, she left the front, and lingered in the back of the room for some time, getting chatted up by one of the lechers.

After a while, she made a final attempt to assert herself by interrupting Jared Taylor as he answered someone’s question. “Okay. I’m leaving. You’re all a bunch of racists!” she yelled before walking out the door. “Okay, sweetheart! Have a good night!” responded Jared with genuine sincerity. I was happy that a serious disruption had been avoided, but I felt very sad for her. She had made her point. Nobody was going to convert her. Sounds like some idiot put up to it by the usual losers.

The question and answer session conducted informally with many people inclined to give speeches rather than ask question. It seemed that the audience was very much beyond conservatism and a revolutionary spirit was in the air. There were calls for right wing socialism and critics of capitalism. There was also the familiar debate about the merits of ethnonationalism versus imperium. It was interesting, but many of the arguments I had heard before.

One woman asked the question of what we can be doing besides giving money to organizations that champion our cause. Richard’s response was that we must live as authentically as we can. Had I been called on, I would have said it’s more complicated than that, but there are strategies we can take and if people wanted to know more they could come talk to me. But I was never called on. Perhaps the next conference should be entitled Beyond Websites and Conferences, because this is a topic that people really want to know more about. I’m joking of course. It’s too dangerous to discuss such topics in a public forum.

Overall, I’d say the NPI mini-conference was a success. I had a truly wonderful time and wished that I could have gone out to the bar with the many of the others, but my colleague had to work early this morning so we drove back to our home city with much to talk about on the way.

http://praxis-mag.blogspot.in/2015/0...servatism.html

What's needed is a party representing whites. And for undeniably serious (professional-level speaking/writing/advocating skills) treating with the public...in public. Not speaking to old men who already heard/know/agree with everything you're saying. Indoor private conferences are political masturbation, an alt-tv form of entertainment.

Last edited by Alex Linder; March 3rd, 2015 at 02:20 PM.
 
Old March 4th, 2015 #42
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,756
Blog Entries: 34
Default

[radix on canny sammy on star trek in light of death of jew spock leonard nimoy.]

[here's the best film representation of the jew vs the Aryan, featuring Nimoy as this jew psychiatrist who is continually gaslighting people that there's nothing to see here folks, you're imagining it it all. this is past that, where the truth comes out: they are genociding normal humans, and turning them into a "new life form" ie pod people. parallel to blather about diversity as a strength rather than morbid weakness. pods = jews, destroying all they encounter in order to survive, which is the "function of life"
]


BEAM US OUT

Samuel T. Francis · February 28, 2015

FROM CHRONICLES, APRIL, 1994

On a morning in April, 1990, practitioners of the journalistic craft received in their mail a communication from one Jack Lichtenstein, at that time the director of public affairs for the National Endowment for the Arts, an agency then embroiled in a desperate onslaught by an army of Philistines, voters, and taxpayers who imagined that they ought to have some voice in determining what their government does. Mr. Lichtenstein's purpose in reaching out to the purveyors of news and opinion was to do whatever he could to keep the hordes at bay and save the NEA and his own job from the appointment with a brick wall that the outraged citizens had in mind for them. In the course of expatiating upon all the good things the federal art munchkins had spawned upon the Republic, Mr. Lichtenstein let slip his insight that "The arts, once found only in metropolitan areas, today are flourishing in Alaska and Alabama, in Maine and Montana, and everywhere in between."

So far as I know, the editors and editorial writers who were the objects of Mr. Lichtenstein's solicitations ignored his entire package, and to this day the awesome banality he emitted in the above passage has remained undiscovered. It apparently occurred to no one to upbraid the director of public affairs for the ignorance of "the arts" that he betrayed, the contempt in which he evidently held the rest of the country, or—most interesting of all perhaps—the facile conceit his insight revealed. That conceit, of course, is the assumption that the only civilized parts of the country are Mr. Lichtenstein's beloved "metropolitan areas" and that the non-metropolitan portions of the land—Alaska, Alabama, Maine, Montana, and all those unnameable and unpronounceable regions "in between"—are naturally immersed in such an impenetrable cultural darkness that only the bureaucratic enlightenment of the federal leviathan could lift them out. The whole burden of Mr. Lichtenstein's impassioned communication to journalists was that if the rubes and yahoos then besieging his beloved endowment should succeed, the nether portions of the land would once again be delivered into the iron grip of Chaos and Old Night.

It does not occur to those of Mr. Lichtenstein's persuasion that art, so far from being dependent upon or the invention of the state and the monopoly of "metropolitan areas," is inherent in man's nature and that it will flourish and does flourish even when the state and the metropolitan areas with which the state naturally allies itself do not exist. If the famous prehistoric paintings in the paleolithic cave dwellings of central France prove nothing else, they confirm that no sooner had human beings separated themselves from their tree-swinging ancestors than they began to create art, and the careful depictions on that dark stone by primeval Raphaels and Michaelangelos of elk and bison, religious ritual and hunting adventures, display a developed technique of art that most of the recipients of NEA grants today are unable to match. Had Cro-Magnon men enjoyed the assistance of Mr. Lichtenstein and the U.S. government in their aesthetic efforts, it is likely that the emergence of human civilization would have been retarded for several millennia and that even today the whole planet would remain engrossed in the same darkness that Mr. Lichtenstein imagines still holds sway in Maine and Montana.

Mr. Lichtenstein, of course, is not alone in harboring this conceit, and the main reason his banality passed unnoticed was that most of the journalists who received it share the conceit with him and never entertained an inkling that he had made a fool of himself by disclosing it. The idea that the arts, and with them the whole of human civilization, are the exclusive inventions of metropolitan areas and the federal government is one of the central assumptions of the body of men and women who in recent years have come to be known as the "cultural elite," and it is through this idea that the elite not only legitimizes its existence and activities but also establishes the rationale for its continuing war against the real culture of the American Outback. It is precisely for the waging of that war that the NEA was created in the first place, and the more bizarre eroto- digestive escapades in which the endowment indulged in the 1980s (and which it continues to this day) when the Stupid Party took it over are only the most extreme examples of its continuing mission.

It is entirely appropriate that the cultural elite the NEA serves should entrench itself in bureaucratic form. Earlier cultural elites—of Periclean Athens, Augustan Rome, Renaissance Florence, Elizabethan England, 17th-century France, etc.—also often allied with the state, but the state in those regimes was not bureaucratic but a personal despotism of one kind or another, and neither the elites nor the despots employed themselves in the destruction of the culture of the peoples they ruled. Today, however, all elites typically assume bureaucratic forms, not only because bureaucracy provides the most efficient means yet invented for organizing power but also because, lacking any deep support or roots in the civil society, today's cultural elites have no other organizational basis for their power. Unable to peddle its garbage on the market, incapable of duping or flattering wealthy patrons into supporting it, and despising the prospect of working for a living like everyone else, the cultural elite has no other recourse but to rely on bureaucratic mechanisms to sustain itself, its privileges, its productions, and its power.

Indeed, what is true of that part of the cultural elite supported by the NEA and similar federal agencies is true of the cultural elite as a whole, even those parts not directly subsidized by the state. The expression "popular culture" originally meant those elements of culture produced by the people.

Today, it means nothing of the sort but rather culture produced for the people by elites, and the elites, whether "publicly" or "privately" endowed, are invariably entwined with bureaucratic organizations. A number of scholars, from Daniel Bell to Jacques Barzun to Russell Jacoby, have remarked on the singularity of a culture that is increasingly lodged in bureaucratized universities in the forms of art departments, literature departments, writers and artists and poets in residence, and so forth. Outside the universities, what passes as popular culture manifests itself in television, films, journalism, publishing, music, museums, galleries, and amusement parks, all of which are bureaucratic and professionalized in form, most of which are almost always directly or indirectly dependent on the state, and all of which claim to provide for the people a culture that is so superior to what the people can produce for themselves that no one needs to worry about producing their own.

Moreover, the incessant message of this culture is a thematic development of the conceit Mr. Lichtenstein revealed. My personal favorite of it is the seriesStar Trek, though any number of other television series also exemplify the pattern. Star Trek, however, has been plastered on the screens of American living rooms for some 30 years, and despite the vapidity of its plots and characters the show seems destined to attain at least as much immortality as paleolithic cave paintings. Week after week during those 30 years, the crew of the starship Enterprise has bustled back and forth about the universe violating its own laws that forbid interference in other planet's business and performing deeds of liberated derring-do. Usually the cosmic conundrums it encounters and speedily resolves are transparent allegorical representations of whatever social crisis preoccupies the real cultural elite at the moment. In the 1960s, racial discrimination was a favorite target of the series, later variegated by the iniquities of war, ecological catastrophe, sexism, and the psychological problems of children. The constant butt of Star Trek jokes are the obsolete customs and sometimes obnoxious beliefs and habits of 20th century man, who is nothing more than a metaphor for Mr. Lichtenstein's Maine and Montana, and the typical and predictable "irony" the series inevitably presents is that the monstrous aliens and androids who populate its cast are more morally responsible beings than the backward humans of either our own time or the progressive and emancipated world of the future.

The public orthodoxy of the world of Star Trek is virtually identical to that sappy and syrupy credo concocted by Francis Fukuyama in his ill-advised "end of history" thesis, though the TV series is better science fiction. The planet Earth and much of the inhabited universe have been unified under a mysterious, omnipotent, but benevolent "Federation," and there seem to be no wars, no political or social conflicts, and no wants in this warp- speed utopia unified by Global Democratic Capitalism gone galactic. Indeed, what else does the human race in the Star Trek cosmos have to do but stick its nose into the affairs of other species? They can zip about the galaxy at velocities faster than light and "beam" themselves from one place to another instantaneously, and there never seems to be any question of food, clothing, money, disease, aging, or even of career advancement in this placid paradise. Having resolved all conceivable material problems of the human race, the only woes that remain to it in the world of Star Trek are those perennially invented by the cultural elite, of which the Enterprise's crew is an equally transparent representation, and, of course, armed with energy weapons and beamer-uppers, the elite always solves these problems as quickly and as happily as it discovers them.

Star Trek represents what the cultural elite thinks America and the world should and would be like if only the Philistines would get out of the way and let the Federation (i.e., the leviathan) spend their money as the elite wants, and the enduring popularity of the series suggests that no small number of viewers at least unconsciously share this vision or have absorbed its premises. That, of course, is what comes of surrendering the production and even the meaning of "popular culture" to the elite.

Long ago, sometime between the sketching of the paleolithic cave paintings and the beginnings of real history in 1965 when the NEA was foisted upon us, there used to be a real popular culture in America, not only in Maine and Montana but even in metropolitan areas like New York and Boston. In that veiled and lost epoch, many Americans played musical instruments they were raised to play instead of buying recordings produced by European musicians and Japanese corporations, wrote poetry for themselves instead of puzzling over thin volumes of crippled and bitter verse cranked out by whatever Lesbian poetess-in-residence New York publishing houses have decided to make a celebrity for a week, and acted in and sometimes even wrote plays that they produced themselves in local theaters instead of packing the house to gibber over Madonna, Michael Jackson, Wayne's World, and Nightmare on Elm Street, Part 79.” Today, in most American cities and towns, locally owned bookstores that sell anything but second-hand books are almost extinct, and the Crown's, Walden's, and B. Dalton's that dominate professional bookselling offer exactly the same stock in every city in the country, almost none of which would have complied with the conventional and moderate obscenity laws of the 1950s.

The transference of cultural power and cultural production from the people who consume it to bureaucratized elites that despise and fear their own audiences is of course an aspect of the continuing destruction of republican self-government, no less than the transference of political and economic power to similar bureaucratized elites in the centralized government and economy. Indeed, it is hardly an accident that the corporate, governmental, and academic bureaucracies that house and support the cultural elite also provide lodgings for the elites in the state and economy. The function of the cultural elite in the managerial system is to provide legitimation, not only for itself but also for its siblings in government and corporation, and the calculated insults to and debunking of the culture of the American Heartland are an integral part of the revolutionary strategy the elite pursues and practices. Only by portraying those parts of the country not totally under managerial control—namely, Alabama and Alaska, Maine and Montana—as dark-age wastelands isolated from the metropolitan and cosmopolitan centers of managed mass culture can the elite purport that what it is and what it does is useful or necessary, and when it so portrays the rest of the country, it also paves the highway by which the rest of the managerial apparatus will one day ride into town. The result, so far from the interstellar utopia of Star Trek, is an emsaculated population unable either to produce an enduring civilization in the shape of a culture of its own or to understand what civilizations of the past have already produced, a passive and continuously entertained and continuously managed mob that has already surrendered its capacity to govern itself and is now busily and merrily in the process of surrendering its capacity to think and create for itself. The final and unpredictable irony of our civilization may be that at the dawn of its history we were more civilized than at the end of it. The paleolithic savages who painted the walls of the caverns they lived in with pictures of the beasts they hunted created a higher and better civilization than Captain Kirk and his preposterous band of progressive monsters and robots promise us, and those savages were far more civilized than the Mapplethorpes and Serranos financed by the NEA or the Lichtensteins who make their livings defending them. If Americans who still know what a culture is would like to have one of their own, the most revolutionary act they could perpetrate would be simply to turn off the television, cancel their subscriptions to most magazines, and start looking for a cave with some bare space on its walls.

Last edited by Alex Linder; March 5th, 2015 at 01:08 PM.
 
Old March 5th, 2015 #43
Joe_Smith
Senior Member
 
Joe_Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,778
Default

NPI is playing pretend, it's political LARPing. They emulate systematic forces, put on their clothes, and even waste probably exorbitant amounts of money that ought to be going towards better things to use their venues, but policy conferences are irrelevant unless you have political clout. This isn't a "fake it til you make it" issue.

Why not use the encounter to found a political party there and then? Use funds collected to develop an ideology, create teach-ins for activists, develop tactical neutralization of Jews, leftists, and conservatives, etc. This isn't gratifying for the organizers in the short-term, which is the real reason it's not happening. These stiff upper lip elitists are circle jerking with their orchestra of violins as Rome burns to the ground.
__________________
"The favorite slogan of the reds is: 'No Pasarán!: Yes we have passed! And we tell them...and we tell them, we will pass again!'"
― Benito Mussolini after the Communist capitulation in Barcelona
 
Old November 5th, 2015 #44
Robbie Key
Senior Member
 
Robbie Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 4,399
Blog Entries: 8
Default

YOUTH TURN OUT IN LARGE NUMBERS FOR NPI’S RAINBOW RACIST GATHERING

Hatewatch Staff
November 03, 2015

Quote:
And he did something else white nationalists aren’t known for: Spencer made it clear that anti-LGBT voices would not be invited. Every other kind of extremism, and in particular anti-Semitism, was perfectly welcome.
---

Anti-Semites were welcomed to the NPI event, but in a move not normal in these circles, anti-gay voices were kept away. White nationalist Matthew Heimbach of the Traditionalist Youth Network (TYN) was disinvited. According to his close friend Scott Terry, Heimbach was “booted” from the NPI conference for his anti-gay views. While Heimbach was kept at bay, Jack Donovan, an openly gay white nationalist, served as one of the key speakers.
https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/...cist-gathering
 
Old November 5th, 2015 #45
Robbie Key
Senior Member
 
Robbie Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 4,399
Blog Entries: 8
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie Key View Post
YOUTH TURN OUT IN LARGE NUMBERS FOR NPI’S RAINBOW RACIST GATHERING

Hatewatch Staff
November 03, 2015



https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/...cist-gathering
Spencer comments on it:

Quote:
Another theme the SPLC stressed was that the conference was “LGBT friendly.”

Quote:
[I]n a move not normal in these circles, anti-gay voices were kept away. White nationalist Matthew Heimbach of the Traditionalist Youth Network (TYN) was disinvited. According to his close friend Scott Terry, Heimbach was “booted” from the NPI conference for his anti-gay views.
In hosting an event of this size, we have to make many decisions regarding personnel and attendees. These are private matters and will remain so.

I will comment, however, about a general principle we try to adhere to in making such decisions.

Our conferences will include people who hold many different views on religious, social, sexual, historical, and political matters. We do not exclude anyone for, say, being a Buddhist, Pagan, Catholic, or atheist, or for being passionate about gay issues or thinking that they are not important. We hope that such questions can be discussed respectfully at our conferences.

NPI will, however, exclude those who show reckless disregard with the media, or those who've made morally indefensible public statements. Such people make our movement look bad. We choose not to grant them a platform. It’s as simple as that.
http://www.radixjournal.com/blog/201...b0635b7da0c22a

Edit: Very interesting comment section on that article.

Last edited by Robbie Key; November 5th, 2015 at 12:27 PM.
 
Old November 6th, 2015 #46
Sam Emerson
Diversity = White Genocide
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Doom Fort II
Posts: 2,800
Default

Matthew Heimbach could be a great WN if he dropped the Orthodox Christianity for a pro-White religion. Spencer is a backstabbing flake who trashed his previous website. Advantage: Heimbach.
 
Old November 8th, 2015 #47
Joe_Smith
Senior Member
 
Joe_Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,778
Default

Alt-fright sissies go after Anglin in the most grotesque and dishonest way. Daily Stormer gets millions of readers per month, how many does Colin Liddell? LOL.

http://alternative-right.blogspot.co...ew-anglin.html
__________________
"The favorite slogan of the reds is: 'No Pasarán!: Yes we have passed! And we tell them...and we tell them, we will pass again!'"
― Benito Mussolini after the Communist capitulation in Barcelona
 
Old November 8th, 2015 #48
Crowe
Senior Member
 
Crowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,089
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe_Smith View Post
Alt-fright sissies go after Anglin in the most grotesque and dishonest way. Daily Stormer gets millions of readers per month, how many does Colin Liddell? LOL.

http://alternative-right.blogspot.co...ew-anglin.html
Daily Stormer has proven to be successful in its own way, and some of the lesser, unsuccessful people like Liddell come across as butthurt to me. I think what pisses Liddell off the most is Daily Stormer is succeeding for all the reasons that Liddell insists are bad, and cannot work. This hit piece just proves how butthurt he really is:



The strategy of "lets sugar coat everything" for the lowest common denominator which amounts to White conservative christ tard hasn't worked up to this point any more than the ones dressing up into Nazi uniforms and marching down main street. Its about time someone figured out that neither of those methods are going to work and decided to experiment with something different. In that regard, Andrew Anglin is a success.
 
Old November 8th, 2015 #49
Vance Stubbs
Hatespeaker
 
Vance Stubbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,281
Default

What's maybe most ironic is that people like Liddell trash their own strategy of being "cool and presentable to normal White people" when they hurr durr about Anglin being a secret agent sent by ZOG to "discredit the movement" with a comedy newspaper.

I mean really, if you don't think it's funny or informative don't visit the site, don't get rectally wounded because it's popular. That doesn't make you look like a serious political figure.
__________________
"Surely people differ in their biologically determined qualities. But discovery of a correlation between some of these qualities is of no scientific interest and of no social significance, except to racists, sexists and the like."
 
Old November 8th, 2015 #50
Robbie Key
Senior Member
 
Robbie Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 4,399
Blog Entries: 8
Default

Funny that the British faggot recommends The Right Stuff and The Daily Shoah, podcasts(?) that are barely known outside a very small subset of anglophonic WN's. Daily Stormer has been a huge success with its approach, there are a lot of Europeans reading that site.
 
Old November 8th, 2015 #51
Robbie Key
Senior Member
 
Robbie Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 4,399
Blog Entries: 8
Default

By the way, Anglin wrote about the latest Spencerfest and is absolutely right in my mind. Too long of a piece to quote and put on here. Read it for yourself:

http://www.dailystormer.com/huffingt...ssed-they-are/
 
Old November 8th, 2015 #52
Joe_Smith
Senior Member
 
Joe_Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,778
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie Key View Post
Funny that the British faggot recommends The Right Stuff and The Daily Shoah, podcasts(?) that are barely known outside a very small subset of anglophonic WN's. Daily Stormer has been a huge success with its approach, there are a lot of Europeans reading that site.
I won't bad mouth TRS , because they do a good job, but it's definitely got a harder conservative/libertarian tinge than The Daily Stormer, which is a flaw. Seeing fawning eulogies about Jew tool Augusto Pinochet on their website is disappointing to say the least, shows how uninformed they are about this history.
__________________
"The favorite slogan of the reds is: 'No Pasarán!: Yes we have passed! And we tell them...and we tell them, we will pass again!'"
― Benito Mussolini after the Communist capitulation in Barcelona
 
Old November 8th, 2015 #53
Vance Stubbs
Hatespeaker
 
Vance Stubbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,281
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anglin
A DS-approved conference headline would read: “White Nationalists Gather On Hitler’s Birthday To Discuss How To Stop These Kikes.”

But the response, every time I have interacted with these people: “ooooh, no one will ever listen to you if you talk about Hitler and the Holocaust and deporting all Jews” – well then, why do so many more people listen to me than listen to Richard Spencer? Why is my reach so much greater than all of these people’s combined, if the message is less popular than theirs? Am I just a better marketer, capable of marketing a less appealing message more effectively?
ten characters
__________________
"Surely people differ in their biologically determined qualities. But discovery of a correlation between some of these qualities is of no scientific interest and of no social significance, except to racists, sexists and the like."
 
Old November 9th, 2015 #54
Robbie Key
Senior Member
 
Robbie Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 4,399
Blog Entries: 8
Default

Anglin responds to the latest attack from Liddell:

http://www.dailystormer.com/alt-righ...daily-stormer/
 
Old February 9th, 2016 #55
varg
...
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 9,741
Default Contra-altright

[read article at source for proper formatting]

“Conservatives are sissies” -George Lincoln Rockwell

In response to fallout over the latest Spencerfest, I can’t say I’m surprised regarding the “content” of the National Policy Institute conference; this is Dickie Spencer after all. I guess he got bored of arrogantly parachuting in to lecture the Hungarians on how to be Hungarian and is back to his usual routine of buzzword-laden, content-devoid TED Talk nationalism and promoting repellent weirdos.

Spencer, as per his ingrained faileoconservative sentimentality, is a weak, pandering, fence-sitting coward who tries to play all sides of key issues while maintaining plausible deniability when held to any stance or standard, kinda like Grindr Greggie and the Alt-Gay Mafia in that regard, but wider in the scope of his offenses and more stupid. Spencer brings absolutely nothing to the table beyond repackaging the same old conservative/mainstreaming approach that’s been argued, tried, and refuted a million times already, pretending he’s doing something “new” and “different”, while busing in homosexual freaks and jew-appeasing cowards. Dickie blacklisting Matthew Heimbach for rightfully opposing homosexuality and allegedly supporting violence – like Dopey McGodboy is any threat to anything or anyone as he’s laying 6 million wreaths of white Christian guilt on the graves of dead niggers – was also particularly funny.

When not cucking for Trump, vouching for disgusting fags and attempting to silence all criticism on that matter, Dickie will go out of his way to exculpate jews from blame and argue for their inclusion, while throwing the occasional, vaguest insinuation in the other direction to retain the loyalty and cashflows of some of his other supporters. Weak, pretentious, and stupid. It seems that Dickie “please don’t quote paranoia” lil Dick Spencer was finally able to the muster the minimal amount of courage required at this latest conference to state that jews “aren’t us”, barely addressing the scope of the jewish problem and why it matters. Dickie, with all his prissy concern over the media calling him names, doesn’t need the media to look bad. He makes himself look worse than they ever could with his cowardly backtracking right in front of them like the stupid, simpering idiot he is. Whatever one may think of them, the cartoon klansmen that NPI’s branded as no matter what they do at least have the balls to stand by their convictions. Look, mom! I’m a thought criminal!

Spencer’s previous inclusion of alibi jews to avoid being called mean names by their media and continued hesitance when forced to discuss the subject bring his most recent declaration into question. With no public disavowal of his past stances and actions, and with the inclusion of Jew appeasers like Guillaume Faye, his audience is sent an unclear, confusing message to internalize regarding the role of Jews. This sets them up to be co-opted by Jewry and ultimately is the result of Dickie’s cowardice and continued prissiness when it comes to “difficult” subject matter. At the end of the day, Dickie’s more concerned about maintaining his appearance and not being even vaguely affiliated with anything remotely “fascist” than he is with the truth and leading people in the direction they need to go. For that reason alone, he’s a despicable coward and a weakling. One is left wondering where his continual, subservient fawning over jew, Paul Gottfreid, and pathetic adoration of various other jews like Rothbard and Mises fits in here, and what conclusions his audience draws from that.

It’s hilarious how alt-right postures as some radical alternative while pussing out on things like naming the Jew, attacking the holohoax, making a clean and explicit break from conservatism, and adopting anything even vaguely resembling a vanguard strategy. They just sit around and play girly little parlor word games – buzzword-laden and pretentious enough to retain their audience’s attention and $$$ but vague enough to avoid committing to anything tangible – so they can all congratulate each other on being oh-so-clever and “above” those vulgar philistines who consistently out-compete and out-achieve them in pretty much everything. They want the image without actually owning it. Repackaged faileocons. It’s a big fashion statement for them as they all play another round of pin the evasive buzzword to the champagne glass with Sam Dickson whining about equal rights for Whites.

It’s all vague, evasive bullshit defining itself on what it’s not – yeah we’re not fascists, but we’re not conservative either – and by its own big tent design, is incapable of developing any internal consensus and corresponding goals. Self-indulgent, directionless, overanalytical bullshit put out by smart people with no balls with a serving of hobby horse bullshit needlessly thrown in. It’s a big tent structure paradoxically pitched to a very narrow niche audience – a handful of nerds whining over inconsequential bullshit and arbitrarily redefining themselves to avoid being called mean names by their enemies. As a result, they can’t agree on any concrete set of standards, making them unable to mobilize any consistent platform, and unable to defend themselves from hostiles and homosexual Fifth Columnists intent on co-opting them. Hell, they can’t even agree on who their enemies are. A prime example of this in action is the vapid jewish skank Rachel Haywire, who’s allowed to fester (and generate $$$) as a result of the alt/new right’s explicit rejection of fascist politics and insistence on liberal principles like free speech – except when they’re being attacked over Haywire. Funnier yet is how the big tent idea is used to justify the inclusion of jews, jew-appeasers, faggots, and all range of unrelated tangential subcultures while radical, fascist elements are denounced as icky extremists and “disinvited.” All while they co-opt the imagery behind fascism for the purpose of vibing out to an aesthetic and maintaining a false image of radicalism while shitting all over the ideology and related goals behind it.

In the end, it ends up functioning as the same failed, capitulating conservatism it nominally opposes, minus the real world presence and institutional power. Forever on the defense; forever trying to justify itself in accord to liberal/jewish precedents; forever prefacing itself with faggy disclaimers; forever pandering to people’s existing viewpoints and getting co-opted; forever ceding ground; forever splitting hairs over irrelevant minutiae and boring everyone to fucking tears with needlessly esoteric wordplay in an attempt to make itself look profound and relevant when it has no reason to be.

The usage of the term “identitarian” as a self-descriptor is another perfect example of this chickenshit mentality in action. The term is vague and flexible enough to mean anything, to offer plausible deniability whenever called a mean name. I D E N T I D Y. Yeah well wtf’s that? Who’s identity? Who’s excluded? What clear reference points and course of action is the term establishing beside directionless, self-serving obfuscation. The original Generation Identity primer by Markus Willinger was already cringeworthy enough, going out of its way to explicitly condemn and downplay the nationalist focus on race and ethnicity in favor of I D E N T I D Y, going out of its way to condemn Germany’s National Socialists and Fascism as whole as “extremism.” These happen to be the only forces who were historically capable of resisting the Jewish-led onslaught of liberalism whom the alt-right routinely caterwauls about while marinating in a level of angst reminiscent of some fat emo bitch’s livejournal. It’s only fitting these cowards would want to emulate Generation Identity. The concept of the “Overton window” is a frequent defense used by the alt right to justify their approach.

However as correctly pointed out by Alex Linder “The alt-right shit has absolutely nothing to do with our cause, it merely sucks potential supporters away from it. Overton window is wrong. It’s a zero-sum game.”

Acting in terms of the Overton window is just ceding immense ground while pretending you’re moving things in the direction you want. At the end of the day, it’s a theoretical model that nerds use to sound superficially smrt while rationalizing their inability to hold a concrete, clear, consistent stance of anything. It’s a model, not an immutable law of nature. The idea that we need to gradually convince people to the point of radicalization overplays the degree to which people actually think, and ignores the fact that there’s no such thing as “gradual radicalization”. They side with whatever puts food on the table and with what they think the neighbors are doing. What people “think” they want at this immediate current point in time doesn’t really matter. People don’t think, they respond to authority, which requires acting as our own unit of authority. Stemming from that, to a large degree all politics is local. Which requires building up local, PHYSICAL on the ground units to serve a variety of community interests as well as actively challenging for power. See Golden Dawn. How did they do it? Providing community services tailored to their specific localities. Providing recreational meetups. Providing security escorts in dangerous neighborhoods. Providing food drives, medical supplies and other charity services. Staging public demos, leafeletting, and all the usual IRL promo activities. Maintaining an unwavering, unphased image of confidence and consistency while beating the living shit out of immigrant invaders and anything standing in their way. Basically acting as a state within a state and doing the exact opposite of everything the alt right claims is necessary. All while fielding candidates, who started out getting fractions of %’s of votes. But, that signaled a serious intent to actually challenge for power. They’re now the third biggest party, and because their support’s coming largely from the police and military going up to the highest levels, they can’t be shut down because they can leverage a credible threat of violence against the state if it breaks its own rules. They’re basically running the whole show now to where both the left and the right are trying to co-opt their support, and failing. What they didn’t do – publicly support figures that were hostile to their interests or sell out out of some mistaken notion of expediency. They lumped EVERYTHING that wasn’t them in with the System, populist conservatives included, and attacked it as a whole, capitalizing off the growing disenfranchisement of their voter base. A large segment of the population’s already disillusioned, voter non-participation’s on its way up. There’s an opening, if it’s acted on and taken advantage of by an unapologetically fascist vanguard. Let’s look at some numbers – when William Johnson half-assedly ran for congress in MI on nothing more than lazy robocolls, he got 0.9% of the vote in his district. Think that’s like 3,000 or so people already willing to ditch the two party system under an openly racial line. That’s a small segment of the larger population in that frame of mind. Now if ~10% of those local 3,000 were actively coordinated into an ideologically and politically relevant unit , you know where that could snowball? Going from that, what would those numbers look like decade or two down the line as conditions get worse?

The A3P wasn’t that unit, as it never sought to fully differentiate itself from failed conservatism, and increasingly tried to copy it. No one wants a shitty knockoff version of an already failing product. Its membership numbers tanked accordingly. The same applies to the alt right as it’s just another incoherent rehash of conservatism for repulsive degenerates who want to play Nietzschean crossword.

The success of Greece’s Golden Dawn, Hungary’s Jobbik, the prior organizational success of the US’s National Alliance is a direct refutation to everything these people claim, and puts them to shame. They are pandering cowards trying to rationalize their cowardice, they want the radical image without actually owning it in any capacity. All these design flaws are why all this shit will never make it past the blogosphere and occasional self-important dinner parties into any concrete organization/movement. Oh, but here’s an inspirational game of thrones reference. Dude, I’m like fuckn Voltaire or somethin.

As for Guillaume Faye’s claims on holocaust revisionism being ineffective and unnecessary, that’s demonstrably false, as several prominent figures came into racial politics via learning the truth about the holohoax and the jewish problem – which remain our primary institutional obstacles. The holohoax, in particular, is the enemy’s primary propaganda point to keep the public away from any Ethno Nationalist stance; we have the tools to counter and disprove it, exposing the enemy for what they are and further harming public sympathy for their antics, which is already tanking. The holohoax happens to be both the enemy’s strongest point of psychologically disarming whites, and their weakest point of defense. Disproving it and pointing out how the jewish control of the media allows such a lie to be institutionalized quickly opens the door for people to understand the rest of the jewish problem. When they see the extent they’ve been LIED to and EXTORTED, any sympathy towards the jews goes right out the window, being replaced by righteous contempt and distrust, opening the door for public examination of other areas of the Jewish problem. Revisionism is our greatest tool for tackling the jewish problem; sacrificing truth out of some misplaced notion of expediency is a hallmark of corruption and cowardice, only making our work harder.

Avoiding crucial material out of fear of negative framing, that will happen regardless, and has already happened simply giving the enemy power, resulting in ceded ground. If we lure people in under false pretenses and insinuations couched in plausible deniability in hopes of later radicalizing them, that just creates a risk for a hostile takeover the second the envelope is pushed too far; it creates an ideological prison, pandering to and reinforcing their current misconceptions, drives them away from the direction they need to go, and prevents them from perceiving and defending against external threats. No way out but through the jew and it’s depraved existential playground, America. The basic mechanics of media control and the holohoax can be easily understood in an hour by pretty much anyone, and is absolutely necessary introductory material. This isn’t graduate level course work, so it isn’t complexity that holds the audience back from these points, as various alt right figures sometimes claim in regard to revisionism. It’s fear of punishment from authority figures that holds them back. This requires us to champion these points and act as our own unit of authority instead of beating around the bush – which frames the subject as dirty and shameful – undermining morale and reinforcing cowardice in our audience, further making the audience even more reluctant to approach it, as well as appearing fundamentally dishonest, like we’re trying to slip poison into the food. Avoiding this subject out of fear it will alienate the audience, pandering to their misconceptions and giving that power. This isn’t a complicated subject. Snapping that the audience already knows about the jewish problem, as Dickie did when Mike Enoch briefly mentioned the subject, is a cowardly lie, especially when the alt right goes to great lengths to redirect from all aspects of the jewish problem whenever it is brought up, all out of concern of how it’ll make them look to a hostile media that hates them anyway and brands them as klansmen and dressup Nazis regardless of what they do. The inclusion of Kevin MacDonald on the panel at the recent NPI event was an attempt to retain credibility in the eyes of more radical elements and related revenue streams, an attempt to maintain plausible deniability when accused of going soft on the jewish problem. KMac’s content was devoted entirely to a fantastical “pathological altruism” with not a single word mentioned in regard to his previous primary area of focus.

As fascists, we’re responsible for setting parameters of ethnonationalism manifestations to come. This requires delineating “us” and “not us.” A jew of any kind will never be us, and will always be an alien entity both in terms of biological composition and cultural function/identity. “European Jews” may physically look closer to us due to admixture, and can outwardly mimic our cultural expressions/forms, but, internally, will still be hyper-aware of their jewish status with accompanying motives, cloaked actions, internal ruminations/content, etc. They will always act in accord with their ingroup interests at our expense. Codewords do not cover that, and leave too many loopholes, and for that reason, the jew needs to be named, excluded, and attacked as a whole. Anything that does not address this crucial aspect of ethnonationalism in full will be co-opted by jews and taken out. Initial task for Ethno Nationalists: branding the “we”, from which jews must be identified as a cohesive biological entity and unilaterally excluded. Part of the exclusion requires instilling a very clear sense in members who the “we” is, otherwise, you end up with jews getting caught in the mix and causing their usual problems, thus necessitating regular attacks on the jew. Anything that fails this will be infiltrated and co-opted by them, secessionist breakaways included. The same applies to fags, and the alt right is living proof as to why they must be treated exactly the same as jews, as their function is identical. Just like jews, fags infiltrate rising movements, form their own internal power blocs and start jockeying for positions of power and influence to ensure their interests are carried out within a new context.

The problems with Faye and Donovan should be obvious, and it speaks to White Nationalism’s lack of principles and coherent direction that aside from being rightfully attacked by Carolyn Yeager, this garbage is going on relatively unopposed, with no organized response. Spencer should be attacked until he picks a side, his conferences boycotted until he stops bringing in homos and outright enemies as shining examples for us to follow. Meanwhile, the resulting Zionist and faggot influx from the alt right needs to be spat on and shown the door in no uncertain terms. Their attempt to run with and dredge ethnonationalism with their reactionary, cowardly conservative bullshit cannot go ignored. All such efforts, when spotted, will be immediately and publicly kicked to the curb by us.


Article by Max Macro

http://ropeculture.org/2016/02/05/contra-altright/
 
Old February 9th, 2016 #56
Joe_Smith
Senior Member
 
Joe_Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,778
Default

Max Macro is right about quite a bit of that. But his hardcore act is pretty humorous. He himself is one of the freakiest attractions at the circus by being a faithful follower of this useless, drama-loving, mentally ill old guy :
__________________
"The favorite slogan of the reds is: 'No Pasarán!: Yes we have passed! And we tell them...and we tell them, we will pass again!'"
― Benito Mussolini after the Communist capitulation in Barcelona
 
Old February 10th, 2016 #57
Robbie Key
Senior Member
 
Robbie Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 4,399
Blog Entries: 8
Default

I've never heard of Max Macro before, but that was a good piece and sorely needed.

I've started to grow suspicious of people who promote the 'White suicide' argument first and foremost. That MacDonald seems to have taken that path (even writing a book on it, I think) in recent years makes me very disappointed. I wonder where that idea originates from, because all it does is it take away the blame from the Jews and put it on Whites being 'suicidal'.

Last edited by Robbie Key; February 12th, 2016 at 11:59 AM.
 
Old February 10th, 2016 #58
Jimmy Marr
Moderator
 
Jimmy Marr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Jew S. A.
Posts: 3,679
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie Key View Post
I've never heard of Max Macro before, but that was a good piece and sorely needed.

I've started to grow suspicious of people who promote the 'White suicide' argument first and foremost. That MacDonald seems to have taken that path (even writing a book on it, I think) in recent years makes me very disappointed. I wonder where that idea originates from, because all it does it take away the blame from the Jews and put in on Whites being 'suicidal'.
As a result of the recent Roosh brouhaha, I have developed a slightly different perception of Spencer, his organization and its more tolerant view toward homosexuality. The alt-right showed a higher level of resistance to the outpouring of knee-jerk, anti-Roosh hysteria which revealed a feministic and social justice mentality implicit in old school White Nationalism.

In mammals, cuckoldry is only possible through the cooperation of the female. Homosexuals, for all their social liabilities, are resistant to the subversion of White nationalism by implicit feminism.

I think it no accident that harpies and their sex starved WN groupies are at the forefront of the attack against the alt-right.

Show me a White man who's willing to line up behind a "line drawn in the sand" by a flat earth feminist and I'll show you a quintessential cuck.

 
Old February 11th, 2016 #59
Joe_Smith
Senior Member
 
Joe_Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,778
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie Key View Post

I've started to grow suspicious of people who promote the 'White suicide' argument first and foremost. That MacDonald seems to have taken that path (even writing a book on it, I think) in recent years makes me very disappointed. I wonder where that idea originates from, because all it does it take away the blame from the Jews and put in on Whites being 'suicidal'.
Macdonalds a good guy surrounded by bad people. These people control the platforms from which he can speak to the world, so he has to meet them half way to keep his projects afloat (Occidental Observer, an excellent website mostly dedicated to the Jewish question). Hence why when you go to NPI/Taylor/ or any event hosted by the WASP country club Jew-obfuscators, the man famous for a three volume groundbreaking study on jewish race psychology doesn't mention Jews even once.

They're instructions he's given.
__________________
"The favorite slogan of the reds is: 'No Pasarán!: Yes we have passed! And we tell them...and we tell them, we will pass again!'"
― Benito Mussolini after the Communist capitulation in Barcelona
 
Old February 12th, 2016 #60
Crowe
Senior Member
 
Crowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,089
Default

This Trump enthusiasm has gotten out of hand. You can agree, or disagree, but I'm ready to lump in the Trump chumps with the alt-right movement.

My take on the alt-right is they're simply conservatives with a wink wink, nudge nudge nuanced approach trying to bump people in the right direction, but I don't think their approach is working and is actually working to the contrary, especially if they're like Ramzpaul and attacking legitimate Nationalists who don't pull any punches when it comes to the jews. If they think they can prove their method is more successful in steering people to a more jew-wise direction than people simply telling the unapologetic truth, more power to them, but as things stand right now I'm not convinced their method is working, if that is even their intention at all.

The alt-right movement is geared toward neoconservative knuckleheads who aren't the sharpest tools in the box. So the problem with the wink wink, nudge nudge approach succeeding is clear. This requires sparking cognitive dissonance, the later of which only works on reasonably intelligent people, but the alt-right is targeted toward the lowest common denominator. Expecting a targeted group to start to think when they haven't shown a capacity for thinking independently their entire lives (especially christ tards) is not just a failure, but will lead only to political dead ends while competing with legitimate nationalist movements that offer more potential. So I say fuck the alt-right. For the same reasons Alex says we should attack the Conservatives, we should also attack the alt-right.
__________________
Low-IQ bible scholars are legion, the big book o' bullshit is catnip to the underbrained. --ALEX LINDER

Last edited by Crowe; February 12th, 2016 at 06:46 PM. Reason: I decided to add more to this post.
 
Reply

Tags
#1 thread, altright, andrew anglin, richard spencer, vox day

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:36 PM.
Page generated in 0.25290 seconds.