Category: Uncategorized

另类右派：16点 (中文)

以下为另类右派哲学思想的十六项核心点，供大家参考改善：
  1. 另类右派（又称“另类右翼”或“非主流右派”，英语为“Alternative
    Right”）是一个属于右派的政治思想，不管从美国或从欧洲所谓“右派”的意义上来讲。社会主义者不属于另类右派，进步主义者不属于另类右派，自由主义者不属于另类右派。信从共产主义、马克思主义、马克思哲学、马克思主义文化主义（即，法兰克福学派的马克思主义）或新保守主义的人一律都不属于另类右派。
  2. 另类右派是有别于美国主流保守主义运动的一种另类选择。美国主流保守主义思想名义上可以以罗素·柯克所撰的“十大保守主义原则”为思想概要，实际上其已逐步地向进步主义退化。另类右派也是有别于自由意志主义的一种另类选择。
  3. 另类右派不是一种防守的态度。它拒绝所谓“君子式的有原则性的失败”这样的消极态度。另类右派在各个方面都是具有瞻前性进攻性的哲学思想。另类右派坚信以坚忍不拔的态度取得胜利，也认为应当遵循科学、现实、文化传统并吸取历史的教训。
  4. 另类右派认为西方文明是人类成就的巅峰，并支持西方文明的三大基本支柱，即：基督教、欧洲各民族和希臘羅馬文化遗产。
  5. 另类右派是公开的、大张旗鼓的民族主义。另类右派支持各民族的民族主义，并支持所有民族以单一民族形式、未经异族侵入或移民掺杂而存在的权利。
  6. 另类右派反对全球化。另类右派反对所有致力于全球化理想或全球化目标的团体。
  7. 另类右派是反平等主义的。另类右派拒绝平等这个概念，就像拒绝麒麟和妖精的真实存在一样。换句话说，所有人平等的概念，在科学上、法律上、物质上、智力上、性别上或精神等形式上都是不存在的。
  8. 另类右派主张遵循科学方法
    (scientodific)。另类右派暂且接受通过科学方法(scientody)目前得出的结论，但同时也认为a）该等结论未来或被修正；b）科学研究行业
    (scientistry) 易受腐败侵袭；
    而且c）所谓科学共识并不是按照科学方法
    (scientody) 所达成的，而是为民主所左右的，因此科学共识该概念本身就是不科学的。
  9. 另类右派认为：身份认同（identity）
    > 文化 >
    政治。
  10. 另类右派反对一个本土民族被另一个民族所统治或主宰，尤其是发生在被统治民族的自治领土上。另类右派反对任何非本地民族通过裙带关系、部落主义或任何其他手段，来取得在社会中过度的影响力。
  11. 另类右派认为：不同民族文化
    + 近距离混杂
    = 战争。
  12. 另类右派并不在意他人对其观点的看法。
  13. 另类右派不承认国际自由贸易以及自由贸易所需要的无疆移民。本国贸易自由的益处并不证明跨国贸易自由会有益处。
  14. 另类右派认为我们需要确保白种人的存在和白种人儿童的未来。
  15. 另类右派不认为任何种族、民族、人民或人种具有总体上的优越性。每一个种族、民族、人民和人种均具有其独特的优势和弱势，应有权自主选择在本民族文化聚居地不受外来干扰地居住。
  16. 另类右派的哲学思想珍视世界各国之间的和平，反对一个民族用武力或战争将其价值观念强加给另一民族，也反对一个民族用战争、种族清洗、移民或基因同化等方式以毁灭其他民族。
总而言之：另类右派这一西方思想体系，尊崇科学、历史和现实，并相信每个民族都应该有权利独立存在，有权利为其自身利益自己治理自己的民族。

China warns Pyongyang

When reading this editorial, understand that The Global Times is essentially a foreign vehicle for the Chinese government, being published by “the ruling Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) paramount mouthpiece”, the People’s Daily.

US President Donald Trump tweeted Tuesday that “North Korea is looking for trouble. If China decides to help, that would be great. If not, we will solve the problem without them!”

North Korea’s Supreme People’s Assembly convened on Tuesday. A few days later, North Korea will mark the birth anniversary of the late leader Kim Il-sung on April 15, also known as the Day of the Sun. Pyongyang likes to launch nuclear activities as a political salute around this date. Therefore, April is widely seen as a high-risk period for new nuclear tests by North Korea.

The US aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson is headed toward the Korean Peninsula after abruptly turning back from sailing to Australia, and Trump sent a warning via his tweet. These are probably related to reports that satellite surveillance shows North Korea is likely to conduct new nuclear tests. Washington’s latest threat to Pyongyang is more credible given its just launched missile attack at an air base in Syria. The Korean Peninsula has never been so close to a military clash since the North conducted its first nuclear test in 2006.

If Pyongyang conducts its sixth nuclear test in the near future, the possibility of US military action against it will be higher than ever. Not only Washington brimming with confidence and arrogance following the missile attacks on Syria, but Trump is also willing to be regarded as a man who honors his promises.

Now the Trump team seems to have decided to solve the North Korean nuclear crisis. As the discussion runs deeper, a situation of no-solution will not be accepted. A new nuclear test or an intercontinental ballistic missile test, if conducted by Pyongyang at this time, will be a slap in the face of the US government and will intensify the confrontation between North Korea and the US.

Presumably Beijing will react strongly to Pyongyang’s new nuclear actions. China will not remain indifferent to Pyongyang’s aggravating violation of the UN Security Council (UNSC) resolution.

Translation: China is utilizing US bellicosity as an excuse to save face in Asia and use force if necessary to resolve the North Korean situation. It is unlikely that this result is an accident or was unforeseen by the President.

Mailvox: Convergence and the Presbyterian Church

A reader writes up a very informative summary of Gary North’s detailed account of how the Presbyterian Church was successfully converged over a period of 60 years.

Given how reliably organizations get captured by the left, there’s an amazing lack of curiosity about how it happens. I recently read Gary North’s 1996 book Crossed Fingers: How Liberals Captured the Presbyterian Church, a rare case study of liberal takeover. North provides a detailed – at 1100 pages too detailed – case study of how the left took over the northern Presbyterian church between 1875 and 1936.

This books echoes many of the same themes of SJWs Always Lie. It’s uncanny how little things have changed, including the failures of conservatives. I’m attaching three docs: a one page summary, a writeup of lessons learned from the book, and a collection of substantial quotations from the book that pulls key points out of this monster. I thought you might be interested in other researchers who validate your SJW analysis, and am providing multiple length options depending on your interest level.

Crossed Fingers: How Liberals Captured the Presbyterian Church
By Gary North / Institute for Christian Economics (September 1996)

1. The single most important cause of the liberal capture of the Presbyterian Church was the conservatives’ failure to kick out liberal heretics and impose negative sanctions while they had the chance.

2. Liberal strategies and characteristics that led to their victory:

  • Willingness to lie (they had their “fingers crossed” when swearing that they held to the Westminster Confession): “SJWs always lie”
  • Intense public calls for freedom of inquiry, tolerance, pluralism, unity while weak or assimilating power
  • Deliberate focus on institutional capture, which included the property, money, and brand prestige.
  • Long game perspective (the takeover took 60 years: 1875-1936)
  • Far superior skills at bureaucratic maneuvering, including an analog of a “code of conduct”.
  • Presence of amenable authorities (the WASP establishment, media) & outside money (esp. from John D. Rockefeller, Jr.)
  • The liberals “took care of their wounded” – anyone who suffered in the fight got a cushy job somewhere else.
  • Once they consolidated power they were willing to kick out conservative leaders like Machen.

3. Conservative strategies and characteristics that led to their failure:

  • They also had “crossed fingers” and did not themselves fully support the Westminster Confession (e.g., they rejected six day creationism). This limited their ability to call out others for heresy.
  • They were on the “wrong side of history” with slavery (i.e., took a stance of neutrality on what the Bible said about it), which weakened their moral authority, rather like modern political conservatives and the Civil Right Act.
  • Initial inability to respond compellingly to key challenges to orthodoxy: Darwinism and Higher Criticism
  • Strategy was purely defensive – nothing on offense (“surrender on the installment plan”)
  • Focused on ideas, theology and church mission, not institutions and bureaucracy, and had a very weak understanding of bureaucratic warfare.
  • Were incredibly polite, charitable, and moderate in their rhetoric – they rarely dared to directly confront heretics

4. Other lessons and implications

  • The modernists were fighting to win the war; the conservatives didn’t even understand they were in one
  • High standards people tend to lose out vs. low standards people. Key: conflict between orthodoxy and church growth mindset, stay pure but small or grow large but compromise on beliefs.
  • The more bureaucratic and complex an organization, the more vulnerable to liberal takeover (Confessional documents and hierarchical structures were perceived as strengths but were – and are – really weaknesses)
  • Confessional documents are irrelevant when faced with liars (cf: today’s US Constitutional law)
  • Presbyterian takeover pre-dated Gramsci and could not have been inspired by him
  • Presbyterian takeover pre-dated the modern political Conservative movement
  • You can’t fight the tape – the tides of history were with the liberals
  • Despite best efforts of smart but flawed conservatives, the liberals won: God preserved only a remnant and the Presbyterian church was lost
  • The winners write history; noxious liberal causes like eugenics were memory holed.

Diversity and comic sales

Jon Del Arroz looks deeper into the decline of Marvel as it relates to the comic giant’s descent into diversity:

A comic book retailer in the San Francisco Bay Area voiced his frustration, saying Marvel went from 48 percent to 25 percent of his sales. His shop and livelihood are at risk because of Marvel’s continued dedication to their shallow faux-diversity. If this type of cheap virtue signaling doesn’t work in San Francisco, what audience do they think they’re selling to?

Hearing the poor sales figures from a retailer prompted me to look into Marvel’s writers. Over a period of two weeks, I dug through the Twitter accounts of every current Marvel writer listed on marvel.com‘s new releases page, to see where they stood on politics. What I found would have been shocking, if I hadn’t already seen the extreme left-wing preaching posing as superhero adventures from their products. Even with that, the sheer lockstep and groupthink that these social media profiles display is unthinkable.

Out of 30 writers, every single one made bitter posts attacking President Trump and conservatives. There were no dissenters. Not one had a difference of opinion, not one even saw the sense in refraining from posting about politics… As a business, one would think that a company the size of Marvel would keep their customers’ demographics in mind. But as we’ve seen above, a large portion of their customer base has been told they’re not wanted. Their problem: the new, diverse crowd they desire didn’t come into comic shops to purchase their books to replace those they shunned.

I ran a Twitter search again, this time to investigate Marvel’s religious leanings. Marvel has writers who profess to be atheist, Jewish, and they even have a Muslim writer. Most writers, eager to speak out on their left-wing politics, don’t talk about their religion at all.

I did find one oddity: out of the entire group, I did not find one writer that openly professed Christianity. On the contrary, many of the writers made comments mocking Christians or the Bible. It begs the question: does Marvel hold a latent religious intolerance toward Christians? Based on this research, it would appear so.

No wonder the response to the idea of Castalia House Comics has been so strong. Marvel has completely turned its backs on most of its audience. Increasingly, it appears that disruption is the natural consequence of diversity in the corporate world.

This is what “Zero Fucks” looks like

John Scalzi goes into great detail explaining that he doesn’t care that people hate him, that only a few dozen people hate him anyhow, that it doesn’t matter that people hate him, and also, it totally doesn’t bother him at all that people hate him:

Specific, embarrassingly devoted hater and his pals:

I don’t have much time for this dude anymore, and I suspect it really bothers him. Cultivating the idea of a feud between us is a cornerstone of his publishing strategy, and asserting equivalency in our careers is how he tries to convince others he’s important. And while it’s nice every now and again to raise lots of money for charitable causes off his obsession with me, in a general sense I’ve been kind of busy. I pretty much don’t think of him unless he’s jumping up and down to get my attention, or trying to make a buck off my name. It’s a lopsided deal — he needs me, but I don’t need him for anything. My real annoyance at this point is that other folks are unintentionally doing this jerk’s desperately attention-seeking work for him, sending me updates on the latest nonsense he’s saying or doing, involving the version of me he peddles to his pals. If all y’all could resist the temptation, I’d be obliged. I don’t actually care about this dude.

“Don’t actually care” is where I mostly am with my haters these days, in fact, and I acknowledge it’s a nice place to be in. I’m blessed with work I like and people in my life I love, and the time I have now is all the time I’ll ever have. I plan to spend as much of it focusing on the things I like and people I love as I can, and rather little of it on the people who get off on hating me. Go on and hate me, dudes. It’s your karma. I have better things to do with my time.

First, SJWs always lie. And John Scalzi lies more than most. Scalzi is an insecure poser, which is why you can be certain that whatever the truth might be, it is not whatever he is saying.

Second, I never paid any attention whatsoever to John Scalzi until he began attacking me in 2005 in order to curry favor with Patrick Nielsen Hayden. I had no idea who he was. If Scalzi disappeared tomorrow, it wouldn’t bother me in the slightest. I don’t need him, I don’t want his attention, and I don’t even hate him. He’s nothing but PNH’s tool; his entire career is entirely dependent upon PNH. PNH and Tor Books are the disease, Scalzi is merely the symptom. I don’t read his blogs. I don’t read his books. I don’t read his Twitter account. I almost certainly pay less attention to him than he does to me; if nothing else, I don’t have the time.

Third, John Scalzi was so indifferent that he took the time to narrate the audiobook of a parody of SJWs Always Lie in 2015. (I found this somewhat remarkable given that I couldn’t be bothered to do the same for my own book.) This uncomfortable fact was completely swept under the table and ignored by those who found it utterly outrageous that Castalia House would dare to publish a parody of his most recent novel. Those who run with the ridiculous “envy” and “obsession” themes always skate over the fact that my responses to Scalzi are just that: responses to his little forays.

Fourth, I will always find the time to hammer John Scalzi. He is a horrible, dishonest little creature, and very nearly Plato’s Form of everything that a man should not be. If he didn’t exist, we’d have to manufacture negative examples.

Fifth, this long post indicates that Mr. Scalzi is rattled by the failure of The Collapsing Empire to break out in a manner justifying his book contract. Tor Books pushed it as hard as they could, but once more, they discovered that while you can call a midlister a “bestselling author” all you want, that’s not going to make his book a hit. The book sucks; even his fans don’t think much of it. Which is why the over/under on the contract being “renegotiated” moves from Book Four to Book Three.

From the comments:

I didn’t mention the name of my specific, embarrassingly devoted hater in the piece because it amuses me not to, but I don’t mind if you name him in the comment thread here. With that said, don’t turn your mentions of him into a two-minute hate, please. We all know he’s an awful person. Let’s not reiterate it endlessly.

So very amusing! See: First Law of SJW. What’s fascinating is the idea that their pretending not to pay attention to me is somehow “infuriating”. I didn’t pay any notice to these weird little losers in high school, what on Earth makes them think I am desperate for their attention now?

Syria, because North Korea

It increasingly appears that the Syrian attack was intended to put pressure on China to end the North Korean nuclear threat.

April 11, 2017: A Chinese daily newspaper (Global Times) known for being a state-controlled media outlet used to test new ideas published an item today pointing out that if North Korea does not abandon its nuclear weapons program (which is seen as a threat to China) then China will bomb the nuclear facilities and North Korea will have to live with that or suffer further military and economic consequences they cannot respond to (by attacking China). This article also warned the United States not to contemplate doing this, as North Korea was for neighbor China to deal with, not some distant superpower. Within hours the article was removed from the Global Times website, but many people had seen it and it still existed in Google cache. In other words, China was telling North Korea that stronger measures from China were now a possibility. At the same time the U.S. was making it clear that the kind of attack on Syria the U.S. recently carried out could be tried on North Korea. China agrees that it might come to that but they insist that the bombs or missiles be Chinese.

My current thinking is that the attack on Syria was intended to let Premier Xi know that Trump meant what he was saying about North Korea, and that if China did not swiftly address the situation, the US naval forces being sent to the Sea of Japan would be utilized instead. This also means that the US will have additional assets in place if North Korea were to respond to a Chinese attack by attacking South Korea.

I’ve never thought it was an accident that the attack took place during the meeting between Trump and Xi. It also tends to answer the question that has been plaguing the Trump-doubters, which is why Trump would suddenly appear to do an about-face on Syria. But Trump still doesn’t care about Syria or see it in the national interest, he simply needed something to blow up in order to make it clear to Xi that he would actually follow through on his threats. And I think Trump actually agrees with the Chinese in that he, too, would prefer that any bombs or missiles dropped on North Korea be Chinese rather than American.

If this is the correct interpretation of events, and if the Syria attack causes the Chinese to remove the Kim dynasty from power in North Korea, it will be seen as a brilliant grand strategic move on the God-Emperor’s part. It will also demonstrate that Trump not only is not controlled by the neocons, but that he doesn’t need them at all.

The horror scenario

It’s interesting to see that the core concept of Infogalactic is Sir Tim Berners-Lee’s horror scenario:

I talk about the horror scenario of going to a candidate’s webpage and depending on who you were you get a different message and that is just marketing 101 for the political websites out there. So we need to rethink the way we have built society on top of the web.

But why shouldn’t people see what they prefer to see? Why should they be forced to see what Sir Tim, or the 512 Wikipedia admins want them to see?

CITY BEYOND TIME now in paperback

Metachronopolis is the golden city beyond time. Ruled by the Masters of Time, who can travel freely throughout the multitudinous time lines of Man’s history, the city is a shining society of heroes and horrors. For the arrogant Masters, who steal famous men and women out of the past and bring them to the eternal city for their amusement, are not only beyond time, but beyond remorse and retribution too.

CITY BEYOND TIME: Tales of the Fall of Metachronopolis is John C. Wright’s mind-bending and astonishingly brilliant take on time travel. Utilizing a centuries-spanning perspective, Wright expertly weaves a larger tale out of a series of smaller ones. Part anthology and part novel, CITY BEYOND TIME is fascinating, melancholy, frightening, and a true masterpiece of story-telling by one of the most important and audacious authors in science fiction today.

John C. Wright is the Dragon Award-winning author of SOMEWHITHER, THE GOLDEN AGE and AWAKE IN THE NIGHT LAND. CITY BEYOND TIME: Tales of the Fall of Metachronopolis is 192 pages and retails for $12.99. From the reviews:

  1. This collection of stories is amazing, and, true to form, incredibly deep and convoluted, (although well thought out). The vagaries of time when time travel is a part of the equation, when cause and effect are disassociated from one another, when paradoxes are used and abused by the ruling class is positively mind-bending.
  2. There are a lot of time travel books out there, the best and enduring being ones that examine questions of why or how or who. John C Wright has done what I’ve never seen before and examined time travel by “ought”; only with questions far deeper than just “ought you kill baby Hitler?”
  3. I would recommend this book to anyone who loves time travel science fiction. It is better then most time travel books that are linear in style and movement. It is by no means predictable and keeps you reading for more.
  4. Time travel has been a staple of science fiction for decades, as has the usual paradoxes. But Wright has tried a new twist – the morality of time travel. What is right and wrong when you can go back in time, rerun the past, and create the future? And what horrors can you conceal? Wright tells these stories with an elegant phrasing rarely seen today. Highly recommended.
  5. He writes as if Ray Bradbury and G.K. Chesterton stepped into an oddly shimmering portal, fractured the timelines, and produced an amalgamation, bent on one thing and one thing only: to produce engaging and enlightening entertainment disguised as books.

SJW doesn’t like being identified as such

The amusing thing about SJWs taking offense to being called SJWs is that they clearly don’t understand that it was originally their own label adopted by their own kind that was weaponized by the Alt-Right’s sarcasm. Also: Every.Single.Time.

I’ve always said that I appreciate all my readers, both those who agree with me and those who don’t. But lately I’ve been puzzled by the new slurs directed at me by some of the latter. Many I didn’t even understand, so I did some digging.

Apparently, tried-and-true insults such as “fag,” “fairy,” “kike” and “hebe” (yes, I’m Jewish) are old-school, especially among the alt-right. That small, far-right movement that seeks a whites-only state is developing new coded language, much as the Nazis once did, says noted linguist George Lakoff, a professor emeritus at the University of California at Berkeley.

For instance, in February I wrote about Milo Yiannopoulos, the now-disgraced Breitbart News editor and alt-right poster boy. I heard from many readers about that column, which took Yiannopoulos to task for his incendiary language. But one email caught my eye: “Milo is far less bigoted, misogynist, and hateful than those of you sick sociopathic and psychotic SJW’s who smear him so desperately.” Sick, sociopathic and psychotic, I knew. But SJW? I had no clue. In a personal ad it might mean “straight Jewish woman,” but two of those don’t apply to me. So what was this snarky new gem of an insult?

I emailed back, “What is an SJW?” The reply: “An SJW is a social justice warrior. In the press, this particular public predator tends to be big on PC [political correctness] virtue signaling but happy to smear others viciously with false accusations of sexism, racism, white nationalism, hate speech, etc.”

Well, that was certainly clear — I’m a “public predator” allegedly guilty of smearing Yiannopoulos by referring to his very own, widely reported hateful language.

I started looking into other slurs readers hurled at me. There was “libtard,” and one I really liked at first — “snowflake,” because they’re magical, in moderation.

But here’s the nasty undercurrent: These new words are intrinsic to the alt-right’s rise, according to Lakoff. He connects this to the Nazis and the coded language (prime example: “the master race”) that eventually allowed them to topple governmental institutions. “The strategy is to control discourse,” Lakoff points out. “One way you do that is preemptive name calling . . . based on a moral hierarchy.”

First, the Alt-Right is much bigger than the Alt-White, much less the Alt-Reich. As evidence of this contention, I note that I’ve just been sent translations of the 16 Points in Ukrainian and, of all things, Esperanto. Second, Milo is Alt-Lite, not Alt-Right.

Third, the incessant whining about name-calling by people who don’t hesitate to hurl “Nazi” and “anti-semitic” at a pizza delivery driver who arrives thirty second late with their Veggie Supreme with extra eggplant and tofu is both pathetic as well as indicative of the extreme susceptibility of SJWs to rhetoric.

Fourth, they’re not “codewords”. As one of Steve’s commenters pointed out: ” The alt right is small but has power and this is for one reason only – the alt right is the one group that Calls Things By Their True Name.” And fifth, it’s not hard to understand why Steve Sailer’s appeal remains self-limited, he’s the classic example of the dialectic speaker who simply can’t bring himself to accept the necessity of rhetoric. I mean, if you’re still loftily sperging at this point about using the term “warrior” for SJWs, you simply don’t grasp the way rhetoric works.

Steven Petrow’s column is prima facie evidence of why you should simply utilize SJW instead of whatever your preferred dialectic alternative might be.

“We’re not going into Syria”

The God-Emperor spells it out:

Amid complaints that his aides are saying different things about Syria and his policy is confusing, President Trump emphatically cleared the air. “We’re not going into Syria,” he told me yesterday in an exclusive interview. “Our policy is the same — it hasn’t changed. We’re not going into Syria.”

He was especially upset that Syria had used chemical weapons after supposedly destroying all its stockpiles under a deal President Obama signed in 2013 and repeatedly boasted about. I asked whether that fact gave him more pause about Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran.

“I don’t need more pause about Iran,” Trump said. “It was the single worst deal ever. It’s a disgrace that a deal like that was even signed. It made Iran a power from a country that was ready to fall apart.”

He wasn’t finished. “Iran won’t honor its deal. Instead of saying, ‘Thank you very much for saving our country,’ they’ve been emboldened.”

Noting those problems and North Korea’s threatening aggression, Trump said, “I knew I was left a mess, but it’s worse than I thought.”

We’ll see whether he stands by that statement. But regardless, it’s clear that he hasn’t been entirely captured or convinced by the neocons, or he wouldn’t come out publicly and say that.