Tag: #AltRight

Rejecting the Alt-RINOs

Lawrence Murray is alert to the problem of entryism that sank the Tea Party, and provides a useful guide to distinguishing between the genuine Alt-Right and the Alt-Right In Name Onlys:

Civic nationalists

No. NO! REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

Civic nationalism is magic dirt nationalism. It’s the idea that anyone anywhere can be shoved into the blast furnace of America and made into an American. There’s just something about being here that makes you belong here. I mean after all, we’re a nation of immigrants right (no reference as to where most of them came from before the last few decades)? Please invade us, just make sure you adopt our language and love of voting and mindless consumption. Race and religion don’t real; it’s being a good citizen that matters!

When this country becomes “minority-majority” in the 2040s, as it currently is for children under five, it will not be recognizable as a country founded by British people and then populated by waves of pan-European immigration from 1790-1965. The United States will change radically as a result of the third demographic transition. What could be less conservative or nationalistic than letting your people be bred out of existence by foreigners?

Civic nationalists are most certainly not Alt-Right. Nothing they advocate will end the downward trajectory of the United States from a White majoritarian republic (the historical American nation) to a third world shopping mall (Weimerica). It will just make them feel better about their mystery meat grandchildren since at least they wave the flag and speak some variant of English.

The Alt-Right supports ethno-nationalism, not slow death.

Constitutionalists

These are a kind of civic nationalist, I would argue, except even more into legalism and “muh ideas” than they are about an actual identity. They have a paper fetishism for the Constitution and the US legal system, even when it works against them. For example, the (((Supreme Court))), or the Sanhedrin as I call it, currently has three Jews and five Catholics. Justice Antonin Scalia (pbuh) once suggested that there should be more Protestants on the bench, since America has a lot of Protestants and they are totally unrepresented in one of the most powerful organs of the federal government. Obama’s proposed nominee is (((Merrick Garland))), “a white guy, but he’s a really outstanding jurist.” Thankfully he’s being stonewalled by Cuckgressional Republicans, who are doing something useful for once.

For Constitutionalists, not identity, but legal documents are the source of the nation. Tell me how that works out for you when this happens, because the Constitution has glaringly failed to defend the liberty of our posterity.

Now, The Right Stuff may be less than entirely enthusiastic about me, given my Indian and Aztec ancestry as well as my doubts about the prospects for pan-white nationalism in Europe, and I have no problem with those who observe that my identity as a Red reservationist intrinsically disqualifies me as a leader, or even a member, of the Alt-Right. As my longtime readers know, I have zero interest in leadership or belonging to any group; I may be the Supreme Dark Lord of the Evil Legion of Evil, and my Vile Faceless Minions may happen to mindlessly obey me, but that is simply the natural order of things and an incidental consequence of my contemplations. Although some might very much like to put themselves forward as “leaders” of the Alt-Right – particularly the Dick Armeys and Dana Loesches of the world – I think the Alt-Right would do very well to learn from GamerGate and adopt the leaderless strategy that proved so effective in denying the mainstream media the opportunity to “behead the snake”.

As to whether I am a legitimate member of the Alt-Right or not, I will merely observe that the movement is already utilizing words and concepts of my coinage, including in this very article.

The only thing I would add to Murray’s article is that while I understand the need to focus on, and underline, the integral white nationalist element of the Alt-Right, even in this very article it implies the larger aspect of the general pro-nationalism that I believe is vital to the ultimate success of the Alt-Right. I don’t say this because I am as eager to call myself Alt-Right as an immigrant is to call himself as American as anyone else, but for strategic reasons.

If Alt-Right is solely synonymous with Alt-White, it will be readily replaced as the other nationalists, potential allies from Zionists to Chinese, Swedish, and Igbo nationalists, reject the brand and the movement in favor of something that has room for their nationalism. That is why I favor the broader Alt-Right perspective, not one that permits Civic Nationalists, Constitutionalists, Free Marketeers, or Israel-First “Americans”, but one that is as willing to say that China belongs to the Han, Israel belongs to the Jews, and Germany belongs to the Germans as it is willing to declare that America belongs to the Posterity of the Founding Fathers. Hence the 16 points that I proposed the other day.

The best rhetoric is always rooted firmly in truth. Nationalism is not only not supremacism, it is more firmly rooted in historical and scientific fact, and it is a considerably more effective ideology with much better prospects for long-term success.

Alt-Prawica: 16 punktów

1. Alt-Prawica należy do politycznej prawicy, zarówno w amerykańskim, jak i w europejskim znaczeniu “prawicy”. Socjaliści nie należą do ruchu Alt-Prawica. Progresywiści nie należą do ruchu Alt-Prawica. Liberałowie nie należą do ruchu Alt-Prawica. Wreszcie, komuniści, marksiści, zwolennicy kulturowego marksizmu, neo-konserwatyści również nie należą do ruchu Alt-Prawica.

2. Alt-Prawica stanowi ALTERNATYWĘ wobec główno-nurtowej odmiany konserwatyzmu w USA, której ideologia teoretycznie jest zawarta w 10 Zasadach Konserwatyzmu Russela Kirka, ale w praktyce degeneruje się w stronę progresywizmu. Ruch Alt-Prawica stanowi także alternatywę wobec libertarianizmu.
3. Ruch Alt-Prawica nie opiera się na defensywnej postawie i odrzuca koncepcję szlachetnej porażki w imię utrzymania pryncypiów. Ruch ten jest filozofią ofensywną w każdym znaczeniu tego słowa. Alt-Prawica  wierzy w zwycięstwo poprzez wytrwałość, przy pozostaniu w zgodzie z nauką, rzeczywistością, tradycją kulturową i lekcjami historii.
4. Alt-Prawica uważa, że zachodnia cywilizacja stanowi szczytowe osiągnięcie ludzkości i wspiera jej trzy podstawowe kolumny: chrześcijaństwo, narodowości Europy oraz Greko-Romańskie dziedzictwo.
5. Alt-Prawica jest otwarcie i zaprzysięgle nacjonalistyczna. Wspiera wszelskie nacjonalizmy i prawo wszystkich narodów do istnienia, jednolitych i nie zniszczonych przez obce inwazje i imigrację.
6. Alt-Prawica jest anty-globalistyczna. Sprzeciwia się wszystkim grupom pracujących w imię globalistycznych ideałów lub celów.
7. Alt-Prawica jest anty-egalitarystyczna. Nie wierzy w ideę równości dla tego samego powodu, dla którego nie wierz w jednorożce i krasnoludki, zauważając, że równość między ludźmi nie istnieje w dającej się zauważyć naukowej, prawnej, materialnej, intelektualnej, płciowej czy duchowej formie.
8. Alt-Prawica jest scjentyczna. Domniemuje prawdziwość bieżących ustaleń osiągniętych przy pomocy metody naukowej, rozumiejąc jednak, że a) ustalenia te mogą ulec zmianie w przyszłości b) nauka jest podatna na korupcję c) tak zwany konsensus naukowy nie jest oparty na metodzie naukowej, lecz na demokracji i dlatego też z samej swej natury nie jest naukowy.
9. Alt-Prawica wierzy, że tożsamość > kultura > polityka
10. Alt-Prawica sprzeciwia się rządom lub dominacji jakiejkolwiej rodzimej grupy etnicznej przez inną, zwłaszcza w suwerennych ojczyznach dominowanego ludu. Alt-Prawo sprzeciwia się, by jakakolwiek nie-rodzima grupa etniczna zdobyła nadmierny wpływ w jakiejkolwiej społeczności poprzez nepotyzm, trybalizm czy jakiekolwiek inne środki.
12. Alt-Prawica rozumie, że różnorodność + bliskość = wojna
12. Alt-Prawica nie dba o to, co o niej myślisz.
13. Alt-Prawica sprzeciwia się międzynarowemu wolnemu handlowi i wolnemu przepływowi ludzi, którego taki handel wymaga. Korzyści z handlu wewnątrz państw nie są dowodem
na korzyści handlu międzynarodowego.
14. Alt-Prawica wierzy, że musimy zabezpieczyć istnienie białych oraz przyszłość białych dzieci.
15. Alt-Prawica nie wierzy w wyższość jakiekolwiek rasy, narodu, ludzi czy podgatunku. Każda rasa, naród, lud czy podgatunek ludzki ma swoje własne unikalne siły i słabości i posiada prawo do cieszenia się taką kulturą, jaką sobie ceni, bez groźby zewnętrznej ingerencji.
16. Alt-Prawica jest filozofią ceniącą sobie pokój między narodami świata i sprzeciwia się wojnom mającym na celu narzucenia wartości jednego narodu innemu, jak również sprzeciwia się wysiłkom zmierzającym do wyniszczenia narodów poprzez wojnę, ludobójstwo, imigrację lub genetyczną asymilację.

16 Punkte der Alternative Rechte

I expect some will even say that it reads better in the original German. Any corrections to the translation would be welcomed. In any event, it will be useful to see these 16 points translated into many different languages, so that it can serve as a starting point for all the various nationalities to whom it may prove appealing.

1. Die Alternative Rechte steht politisch Rechts, sowohl in der amerikanischen wie auch in der europäischen Deutung des Begriffs. Sozialisten sind keine Alternative Rechte. Progressive sind keine Alternative Rechte. Liberale sind keine Alternative Rechte. Kommunisten, Marxisten, Kulturmarxisten und Neokonservative sind keine Alternative Rechte.

2. Die Alternative Rechte ist eine alternative zur konservativen Hauptbewegung in den USA, die dem Namen nach in Russel Kirk´s 10 konservative Prinzipien eingekapselt ist, aber in Wirklichkeit in Reformpolitik übergegangen ist.

3. Die Alternative Rechte ist keine defensive Haltung und lehnt das Konzept der edlen und prinzipiellen Niederlage ab. Es ist eine zukunftsorientierte Philosophie des Anstoßes, im wahrsten Sinne des Wortes. Die Alternative Rechte glaubt an den Sieg durch Beharrlichkeit und zum Verbleib in Harmonie mit der Wissenschaft, Wirklichkeit, kulturellen Tradition und der Lehren der Geschichte.

4. Die Alternative Rechte glaubt, die westlichen Zivilisation ist der Gipfel der menschlichen Leistung und unterstützt seine drei grundlegenden Säulen: Das Christentum, die europäischen Nationen und das griechisch-römische Erbe.

5. Die Alternative Rechte ist offen und bekennend nationalistisch. Sie unterstützt jeden Nationalismus und das Recht aller Völker zu existieren, homogen und unverfälscht durch ausländische Invasion und Einwanderung.

6. Die Alternative Rechte ist gegen Globalisierung. Es wendet sich gegen alle Gruppen, die für Ideale oder Ziele der Globalisierung arbeiten.

7. Die Alternative Rechte ist anti-egalitär. Sie lehnt die Idee der Gleichheit aus dem gleichen Grund ab, wie sie auch die Ideen von Einhörnern und Kobolden ablehnt, stellt fest, dass die Gleichheit der Menschen in keiner beobachtbaren wissenschaftlichen, rechtlichen, materiellen, intellektuellen, sexuellen oder geistigen Form existiert.

8. Die Alternative Rechte unterstützt die wissenschaftliche Methode. Sie akzeptiert die mutmaßlichen aktuellen Ergebnisse der wissenschaftlichen Methode, während sie versteht das a) diese Schlussfolgerungen anfällig für zukünftige Änderungen sind, b) dass Wissenschaft anfällig für Korruption ist, und c) dass der sogenannte wissenschaftliche Konsens nicht auf Wissenschaftlichkeit beruht, sondern auf Demokratie und daher an sich unwissenschaftlich ist.

9. Die Alternative Rechte glaubt Identität > Kultur > Politik.

10. Die Alternative Rechte lehnt die Regelung oder Herrschaft jeder einheimischen ethnischen Gruppe durch eine andere ab, vor allem in den souveränen Heimatländern der beherrschten Völker. Die Alternative Rechte steht im Gegensatz zu jeder nicht heimischen ethnischen Gruppe in jeder Gesellschaft, die zu starken Einfluss durch Nepotismus, Stammesdenken oder andere Mittel erhält.

11. Die Alternative Rechte versteht, dass Vielfalt + Nähe = Krieg.

12. Der Alternativen Rechten ist es egal, was Sie davon halten.

13. Die Alternative Rechte lehnt den internationalen Freihandel und den freien Verkehr von Menschen ab, die der freie Handel erfordert. Die Vorteile der inner-nationalen Handels ist kein Beweis für die Vorteile des internationalen Freihandels.

14. Die Alternative Rechte glaubt, dass wir die Existenz von weißen Menschen und eine Zukunft für weiße Kinder sichern müssen.

15. Die Alternative Rechte glaubt nicht an der allgemeinen Vorherrschaft einer Rasse, Nation, Menschen oder Unterarten. Jede Rasse, Nation, die Menschen und die menschlichen Unterarten haben ihre eigenen einzigartigen Stärken und Schwächen, und besitzen das Souveräne Recht, unbehelligt in der einheimischen Kultur zu leben, die es bevorzugt.

16. Die Alternative Rechte ist eine Philosophie, die auf den Frieden zwischen den verschiedenen Nationen der Welt Wert legt und stellt sich gegen Kriege, die Werte einer Nation einer anderen aufzwingen sowie die Bemühungen, einzelne Nationen durch Krieg, Völkermord, Einwanderung oder genetische Assimilation auszurotten.

Die Alternative Rechte ist eine westliche Ideologie, die an Wissenschaftlichkeit, Geschichte, Wirklichkeit glaubt und das Recht einer genetischen Nation zu existieren und sich selbst in ihrem eigenen Interesse zu regieren.

Preach, preacher

“Today it is written in the book of fate, that hidden, faceless world powers will eliminate everything that is unique, autonomous, age-old, and national. They will blend cultures, religions, and populations, until our many-faceted and proud Europe will finally become bloodless and docile. If we resign ourselves to this outcome, our fate will be sealed and we will be swallowed up in the enormous belly of the United States of Europe. 


We must therefore drag the ancient virtue of courage out from under the silt of oblivion.


First of all, we must put steel in our spines, and we must answer clearly, with a voice loud enough to be heard far and wide, the single most important question determining out fate. The question upon Europe stands of falls is this:


Shall we be slaves – or men set free?” 

– Viktor Orban, Prime Minister of Hungary

Assimilationist liars

I’ve recently chronicled how various assimilationists, from (((Israel Zangwill))) to (((Ben Shapiro))), (((Ekaterina Jung))), and (((Andrew Klavan))) have either concocted or attempted to pass off self-serving revisionist lies about American history in order to retroactively write their (((tribe))) into it so they can claim to be “every bit as American” as the Posterity whose rights the U.S. Constitution was written to protect.

Considering that the purpose of the U.S. Constitution was to safeguard the rights of that Posterity, their actions in doing so are not only dishonest, but are literally anti-American. They are more cuckoo than the cuckservatives in this regard, in both senses of the term.

These lies include the following concepts:

  • The melting pot
  • A proposition nation
  • A nation of immigrants
  • Judeo-Christian values

Like any effective lie, each is constructed  around a fragment of truth, in this case, the section of the Declaration of Independence which declares: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

However, it is also self-evident that a secular atheist Jew, such as (((Ekaterina Jung))), who does not believe in a Creator, cannot credibly appeal to the Declaration in order to claim to be an American. And it is documentarily evident that, like the U.S. Constitution, the Naturalization Act of 1790, the writings of John Jay, Ben Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, and other Founding Fathers, and the Alt-Right nationalist position, the Declaration of Independence itself is directly opposed to the revisionist interpretation, as the document also refers to:

  • the connection between [the United Colonies] and the State of Great Britain
  • the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages
  • large Armies of foreign Mercenaries
  • the present King of Great Britain
  • the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners
  • the free System of English Laws
  • our Brittish brethren

To cite one phrase of a document in contradiction to the central theme of the entire document, which is that the People of the United Colonies are an English people, unique and distinct from foreigners, Indians, and the English people loyal to the King of Britain, is an outrageous attempt at deceit that relies entirely on the historical ignorance of the audience. To say that anyone can become an American because “all men are created equal” is a shameless lie. One might as readily cite it as evidence to claim it means anyone can become Chinese.

Now, I was aware of this deception because I am half-American, born in Boston, descended in my paternal line from an American revolutionary who died at Valley Forge, and steeped in the history of the American revolution. My family even celebrated Independence Day 1976 in Lexington, Massachusetts. But what I did not know, not being Jewish, is that Jews have also been victimized by the same sort of revisionist Talmudry to which Americans have been subjected by their assimilationist co-religionists.

In Cuckservative, John Red Eagle and I made the connection between Churchianity and the concept of Tikkun Olam, the Jewish mandate to “heal the world”. But, as one of the Jewish readers here helpfully brings to our attention, it turns out that “heal the world” is just another assimilationist lie, no more historically legitimate than the anti-American lies already mentioned.

“The central mitzvah or commandment for our era is the mitzvah of Tikkun Olam.   It is the defining mission of Jews to strive for the repair of the world by making society more just, fair, egalitarian, and sensitive. Judaism demands that we repair the world by striving for social justice.  It is the mission of Jews in the Divine Plan for the universe to repair the world by repairing man, by improving and advancing mankind.”

The above paragraph is a fair representation of what has become the defining raison d’etre of Judaism as conveyed by non-Orthodox liberal Jewish organizations and synagogues in America.  It is not a direct citation from any of them, but is an accurate paraphrase of what has become the canon of non-Orthodox Jewish liberalism in our time.

It is the “modernized” and contemporary “reinterpretation” of “Jewish ethics” as defined and inculcated by much of the Reform and Conservative movements.  It is also the “theology” of Jewish radical leftist groups operating at the fringes of the Jewish community, including the “Renewal/ALEPH” movement, the “Eco-Judaism” groups, the “Tikkun community” of people and groups that are satellites to the magazine by that same name published by tikkun-activist Michael Lerner, and what remains of the “Reconstructionists.”  Lerner, it should be added, discovers “repair of the world” even in LSD consumption.

What are we to make of “Tikkun Olam” proclamations?

The most important thing that must be understood about the Tikkun Olam catechism in the United States is that each and every sentence in the above proclamation is false.

First of all, there is no such thing as a mitzvah or commandment of “Tikkun Olam.”   Jews are nowhere commanded to “repair the world.”  In all the authoritative or traditional compilations of the commandments of Judaism, none list “Tikkun Olam”.  The expression itself does not appear anywhere in the Torah or in the entire Bible.

Those assimilationist liberals who insist that the entire “ethics of the Prophets” can be reduced to the pursuit of “Tikkun Olam” have to explain why none of the Books of the Prophets use the term.  “Tikkun Olam” is used sporadically in the Talmud, but as a technical term for resolution of certain judicial problems that arise before rabbinic courts.

The only place the expression appears in Jewish prayer is in the “Aleinu” and there it clearly has nothing at all to do with social justice.  In the “Aleinu,” Tikkun Olam is explicitly explained in the prayer text itself as the quest to eliminate pagan superstition and to see God’s rule of the universe implemented. It is a theological concept, not a social, political or environmental one.

It is in the interest of Americans and Jews alike, and in the interest of anyone who values either history or the truth, to continue to expose these “assimilationist liberals” for the liars that they are, and to reject their self-serving, ahistorical, revisionist falsehoods. This post also demonstrates why a broad-spectrum Alt-Right is more effective, and informed, than a narrow-gauge, white American-only Alt-Right.

UPDATE: Lies have ALREADY appeared about this post on Twitter. They are truly People of the Lie.

Blue Meanie ‏@BlueMeanie4
@voxday displays general cluelessness and paranoia re. Jews #Zionism #AltRight

Never go full cuck

Andrew Klavan raises the Churchian flag and waves it proudly in defense of globalism:

Fantastic and irrational too is the philosophy of the alt-right with their smarmy pseudo-intellectual white isolationism (it’s their make-believe belief that white people aren’t necessarily better than other people, but only have an equal right to protect their “white” culture and territory). The alt-right website Vox Populi roundly declares “The Alt Right believes Western civilization is the pinnacle of human achievement and supports its three foundational pillars: Christianity, the European nations, and the Graeco-Roman legacy.” What blithering silliness.

Should we leave aside the fact that these nationalist anti-semites revel in the worship of a globalist Jew? Nah, let’s pause here to mock them for it. And these European nations that form one of their “pillars:” since those nations have been at war with one another for the last two thousand years, it seems important to ask which one they mean? The industrious Germans or the delightfully carefree Italians? The Spanish with their part-Muslim inheritance or the English with their pagan Viking mix? And while we’re at it, which one of each of these people is representative? Is Hitler more Aryan than Thomas Mann who detested him? Is John Keats or John Christie the more exemplary Englishman?

The best reason to judge people, actions and belief systems individually is to keep from talking crap. I too believe that Western culture from around 1500 to 1915 was one of the pinnacles of human achievement. Part of its genius — I would say the core of it — lay in the loving universalism of its religion which ultimately led its free nations to welcome all people willing to participate in the secular version of that creed.

The genius of the West is not, and has never been, “the loving universalism of its religion”. Klavan’s grasp of the West doesn’t even rise to the level of Wikipedia.

Western culture, sometimes equated with Western civilization, Western world, Western society or European civilization is a term used very broadly to refer to a heritage of social norms, ethical values, traditional customs, belief systems, political systems, and specific artifacts and technologies that have some origin or association with Europe. The term is applied to European countries and countries whose history is strongly marked by European immigration, colonisation, and influence, such as the continents of the Americas and Australasia, whose current demographic majority is of European ethnicity, and is not restricted to the continent of Europe.


Ancient Greece is considered the birthplace of Western culture, with the world’s first democratic system of government and major advances in philosophy, science and mathematics. Greece was followed by Rome, which made key contributions in law, government and engineering. Western culture continued to develop with the Christianisation of Europe during the Middle Ages, the reform and modernization triggered by the Renaissance, and with globalization by successive European empires, that spread European ways of life and European educational methods around the world between the 16th and 20th centuries.


Christianity. The European nations. The Graeco-Roman legacy. Such “blithering silliness”. Anyhow, it’s clear that the cuckservatives and their (((friends))) are running with “the West is universal” theme in order to sell their globalist anti-nationalism.

And as for his notion of Jesus Christ as “a globalist Jew”, it sounds to this Christian as if Mr. Klavan is more than ready to bow down and worship Antichrist, should he appear and dangle the prospects of world peace in front of everyone.

In defense of 14 words

Now, I don’t usually recommend this sort of dialectical response to a rhetorical attack like the one cited here. However, for those who are sufficiently bilingual in the black arts of philosophical persuasion, this may be a useful example of how to turn an attacker’s rhetorical assault against him.

Notice how he initially attacks Point 14, but when called on his implicit endorsement of their negation, refuses to directly answer what aspect of it he opposes. This is what I mean by dialectic being useful for exposing pseudo-dialectic for rhetorical purposes.

It’s a little confusing, I know, but don’t be misled. This is, from start to finish, a rhetorical engagement. I am merely using dialectic as a rhetorical device to expose and manipulate him into publicly discrediting himself.

Supreme Dark Lord @voxday
Awful attempt by (((@CathyYoung63))) to critique my #AltRight platform. She calls the West “a mongrel culture”.

Charles Ledley ‏@ialmctt
You saw awful, but most would say accurate. @CathyYoung63 has nailed it. The #AltRight are nazis, pure and simple.

Charles Ledley ‏@ialmctt
Here, @voxday means the Jews. (screencap of 10)

Charles Ledley ‏@ialmctt
Here, @voxday uses that well known scientific term: sub-species. No racism to see here. Move along. (screencap of 15)

Charles Ledley ‏@ialmctt
#WhatIsTheAltRight?
Well, the #AltRight are white supremacists. Isn’t that right, @voxday?

Supreme Dark Lord ‏@voxday
Some are, most aren’t. I’m an Indian. What part of this do you oppose? “We must secure the existence of white people and a future for white children”?

Charles Ledley ‏@ialmctt
So you are a white supremacist then. Just another reactionary nazi.

Charles Ledley ‏@ialmctt
You are, it seems. And no, I don’t oppose the existence of PEOPLE.

Supreme Dark Lord ‏@voxday
No, Charlie, I am not. I am an Indian who believes that the continued existence of white people is desirable. Why do you disagree?

Charles Ledley ‏@ialmctt
Stop being disingenuous. It’s a well known White Supremacist slogan. You know that.

Supreme Dark Lord ‏@voxday
Answer the question. What part of it do you oppose? All of it? None of it?

Charles Ledley‏@ialmctt
I’ll answer it if you acknowledge that it’s a well known white supremacist slogan. Do you acknowledge that?

Supreme Dark Lord ‏@voxday
Of course. That’s why it is point 14. Now, answer the question. Do you support all of the 14 words, some of them, or none of them?

Charles Ledley ‏@ialmctt
I’ve answered this.

Supreme Dark Lord ‏@voxday
No, you didn’t. This is going on the blog, so don’t be evasive. Which of the 14 words do you disagree with, if any?

Charles Ledley ‏@ialmctt
Put what you like on your blog. I answered your question

He didn’t, of course, and we all know why. If he actually answered it, he would either be liable to his own charge of being a white supremacist for endorsing the continued existence of white people or he would be put on the record for calling openly for the extermination of the white races.

I believe this should settle the debate about whether Point 14 belongs on the list of core Alt-Right principles or not in favor of the affirmative.

(((Cathy Young))) critiques the #AltRight

Or to be more specific, my 16 points about the Alt-Right, in an article called “The Unbearable Dumbness of Being Alt-Right”.

Unlike my friend Louise Mensch, I’m not very keen on the idea of polemics with Vox Day. In my view, it has about as much value as opening a correspondence with that lawyer who emails offering to make you the heir to his recently deceased childless client if you agree to split up the $100 million

A little rhetorical signaling is never a bad idea. She’s too kind, actually, since correspondence with that lawyer is considerably less likely to result in the methodical evisceration of your intellectual pretensions and the exposure of your sophistry and false syllogisms. The important thing here is that she’s attempting to simultaneously disqualify and explain away why she’s doing something she claims to be of no value. This is conventional female rhetoric meant to create feelbad; one often sees gamma males utilizing it as well.

But the alt-right is suddenly the hot political topic of the day and is said to be Donald Trump’s hardcore base, and Vox — a.k.a. sci-fi writer, publisher and blogger GIVEN NAME — is apparently one of its ideologues. Now, he has a blogpost discussing “what the alt-right is” with a 16-point outline of a “core alt-right philosophy.” (Disappointingly, there’s nothing in it about marital rape or keeping women out of college because too much schooling keeps them from breeding. But hey, according to GIVEN NAME, it’s an early draft.)

See, she’s just going with the flow, apparently. She, certainly doesn’t think the Alt-Right is important, much less me, but since it’s the hot topic of the day and all, she’ll reluctantly play along. Discredit and disqualify. More rhetorical signaling. Then, interestingly enough, a projected fear of exposure. Did you know that “Cathy Young” is actually (((Ekaterina Jung)))? It turns out that of the 16 points, the ones that most bother her are 4, 5, 7, and 10. Especially 10, which states:


10. The Alt Right is opposed to the rule or domination of any native ethnic group by another, particularly in the sovereign homelands of the dominated peoples. The Alt Right is opposed to any non-native ethnic group obtaining excessive influence in any society through nepotism, tribalism, or any other means.

Somebody should do an alt-right Jeopardy skit. “I’ll take ‘ethnic identities’ for $500, Vox.” — “Non-native ethnic group obtaining excessive influence in society through nepotism, tribalism, or by other means.” — “What are Jews?” – “DING!”

The Jews are certainly one of many such groups, as they are known to have obtained excessive influence in the Soviet Union before doing the same in the USA. (((Ekaterina))) herself is an example of that population transfer from the USSR to the USA. But there are also the examples of the British in India, the Chinese in Indonesia and Malaysia, the French in Algeria, the Indians in Fiji, the Lebanese in West Africa, the Tamils in Sri Lanka, the Japanese in Brazil, the Normans in England, and many, many others.

Point 10 is not a targeted matter of anti-Jewish or anti-Tamil prejudice. Thomas Sowell, who has written about the danger of overly influential minorities himself, cites Amy Chua’s book World on Fire, in pointing out that democracy and free markets “are dangerous in those countries where some ethnic minority is dominant in a free market economy, while the majority population dominates politics through their votes.”

If (((Ekaterina))) could pull her head out of her ample Jewish ass long enough to look at the rest of the world, she would realize that everything is not, in fact, about her own little ethnic identity. Non-native ethnic minorities that obtain excessive influence in a society reliably tend to trigger violent ethnic conflict, in Asia, in Africa, in Europe, and in the Americas.

Moreover, one wonders on what grounds she would defend the domination of a native ethnic majority by a foreign ethnic minority. The White Man’s Burden? Money makes right? But she is merely pointing-and-shrieking, she’s not even attempting to provide any rationale for the positions that her critique implies.

No. 15 is an amusing attempt to avoid the unpleasant “white supremacist” label (even though Vox assures us that “The Alt Right doesn’t care what you think of it”). But it seems to contradict No. 4 just a tad. If Western culture is the pinnacle of human achievement and culture is inseparable from genetic heritage, then isn’t the superiority of the white race a logical conclusion? (For what it’s worth, I suspect that not only most mainstream conservatives and libertarians but many liberals would agree with Vox’s estimation of Western culture while emphatically rejecting his equation of culture with genetics.)

There is no attempt to avoid the “white supremacist” label that (((Ekaterina))) and other opponents of the Alt-Right are so desperate to pin on it. I am an Anglo-Aztec-American Indian who is genetically superior to 99 percent of all blacks on the track and intellectually superior to 99 percent of all whites and Jews, so I’m not inclined towards white supremacy myself. Most of the Alt Right is pro-white and pro-Western Civilization, but it is not white supremacist for the obvious reason that it does not believe racial supremacy exists any more than equality does.

(((Ekaterina))) engages in a little Talmudry here by attempting to substitute a general claim of “supremacy” for a specific form of “superiority”. Her syllogism is incorrect. If Western culture is the pinnacle of human achievement and culture is inseparable from genetic heritage, this does not indicate white supremacy, but rather, the necessity of the continued existence of white people if Western culture is to be preserved. 4 does not contradict 15, it explains 14.

The white race is observably superior at creating and maintaining Western culture, just as the Japanese race is superior at creating and maintaining Japanese culture. I have lived in Japan, I have studied its culture, and I even used to speak pretty good Japanese, but I do not understand it sufficiently well to be better able to maintain it or recreate it than a native Japanese, or even a sansei in Brazil, the Philippines, or the United States.

But (((Ekaterina))) is merely playing word games, as she undermines her own false logic in the very next sentence.

An even more salient point, however, is that Western culture is essentially a mongrel culture. To sing plaudits to Western culture while singing the virtues of unmolested ethnic homogeneity is a bit like holding a charity dinner for the promotion of vegetarianism at the Ruth Chris Steakhouse. In a macro sense, Western culture as we know it is the product of the cross-breeding of Christianity, a religion imported from a certain Middle Eastern nation — or, as the alt-right would put it, (((Christianity))) — with Graeco-Roman civilization. By the way, Christianity explicitly proclaims the triumph of universalism over ethnic tribalism, or does Vox’s copy of the Bible somehow miss Galatians 3:28? (That would be the “neither Jew nor Greek” part.)

Of course, Graeco-Roman civilization was itself a rich and varied stew of ethnic and cultural elements. And once we get to European history as such, it’s a history of constant migrations, conquests, shifting borders, and colonialism which meant the import of both people and ideas from outside Europe. Where in Europe was there genetic ethnic purity, long before current migration trends? (Okay, maybe in Finland.) So much for science and history.

(((Ekaterina))) is as ignorant of science and history as she is of Christianity. Western culture is, by no means, “a mongrel culture”. It is the combination of the European nations with Christianity, which is why another, older name for Western Civilization is “Christendom”. The Alt-Right is neither Nietzschean nor historical National Socialism, and we do not equate Christianity with “Jewish Bolshevism or call it (((Christianity))). Christianity is not Judaism and “Judeo-Christianity” is a 20th century anti-Christian invention that was an ecumenical product of post-WWII Holocaustianity.

She engages in more deceptive Talmudry when she claims that “Christianity explicitly proclaims the triumph of universalism over ethnic tribalism”. That is an outright lie, which is one reason why she does not cite the full context of Galatians 3:28:

So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.


It’s a bit ironic that one who glories in her ethnic identity as one of the Chosen People would appeal to the core of replacement theology, but the relevant point here is that this verse represents the triumph of Jesus Christ over sin and salvation through him, not “the triumph of universalism over ethnic tribalism”. In fact, the Bible not only makes it clear that the nations are established by God, but that they have different spirits that rule over them and that those nations will persist to the end.

The material “triumph of universalism” is a Satanic concept, it is neo-Babelism, and it is the religion behind the ideological globalism that the Alt Right, both religious and irreligious, opposes.

It’s interesting that Vox’s manifesto for the alt-right, an American movement, never mentions America per se. America is, after all, the ultimate mongrel culture, and was one long before the shift toward more Third World immigration in the 1960s that many alt-righters see as a fateful turning point. The alt-right is a movement that purports to champion American nationalism yet rejects the opening proposition of the Declaration of Independence and embraces a fantasy of “unmolested” sovereignty/homogeneity that probably has its closest historical counterpart in medieval China — wall and all.

America is not a mongrel culture. America is the Posterity of the English Founding Fathers, whose rights the U.S. constitution was written to secure. The substitution of state for nation, and United States for America is a 20th century lie, and white Americans are genetically the complete opposite of mongrels, as white Americans are genetically 98.6 percent European. This is more projection, as it is, in fact, (((Ekaterina))) who is the mongrel, being a half-Semite, half-Italian “Russian” immigrant now resident in the United States. She incorrectly claims America to be “the ultimate mongrel culture” in order to bolster her false claim to be “American”, when in reality she is merely a United States citizen with, in her own words, “a special attachment to Israel”.

Oh, and because the alt-right is totally not neo-Nazi or anything, Vox’s manifesto includes the “14-word pledge”: “The Alt Right believes we must secure the existence of white people and a future for white children.” And it’s No. 14.

Let it be noted that (((Ekaterina))) opposes the existence of white people and a future for white children. She wishes to portray a monstrous picture of the Alt Right, but all she succeeds in doing is providing everyone with an all-too-revealing self-portrait.

The Netherlands belongs to us!

The Party for Freedom is Geert Wilders’s party and this is the election manifesto which is widely anticipated to lead it to victory this fall. Donald Trump could do a lot worse than to issue a similar manifesto for the Republican Party in the USA. Most of it was translated into English by an opponent here.

THE NETHERLANDS BELONGS TO US!

Millions of Dutch have had enough of the Islamization of our country. Enough of the mass immigration, asylum, terror, violence and lack of safety.

Here is our plan: instead of financing the entire world and the people we do not want here, we give our money back to the common Dutch person.

This is what the PVV will do:

1) de-islamize the Netherlands

  • Zero asylum seekers and no more immigrants from Muslim countries: we are closing our borders.
  • Withdrawal of all residence permits already granted to asylum seekers; asylum seeker centers closed down.
  • No more Muslim veils in public functions
  • Ban of overall Muslim expressions that are against the public order
  • Preventive incarceration of radical Muslims
  • Criminals with double nationality stripped of their Dutch citizenship and deported
  • Syrian fighters not allowed back in The Netherlands
  • All Mosques and Muslim schools are to be closed and the Koran banned.

2) The Netherlands will reclaim its independence. Therefore, we leave the EU.

3) Direct democracy: binding referendums, citizens have the power.

4) Deductible/excess in healthcare insurance is eliminated

5) Rents to be lowered

6) Age of retirement back to 65 years old. Pensions for everyone.

7) No more money for foreign aid, windmills, art, innovation, public broadcasters, etc.

8) Past budget cuts involving care will be reversed.

9) Plenty extra funds for defense and police

10) Lower income taxes

11) 50% reduction for vehicle ownership taxes

Financial benefits per point

  1. + 7.2 billion Euro
  2. to be calculated at a later date
  3. to be calculated at a later date
  4.  — 3.7 billion Euro
  5.  — 1 billion Euro
  6.  — 3.5 billion Euro
  7. + 10 billion Euro
  8.  — 2 billion Euro
  9.  — 2 billion Euro
  10.  — 3 billion Euro
  11.  — 2 billion Euro

This is a wonderful example of #AltRight transnationalism at work. The Party of Freedom manifesto is a uniquely Dutch nationalist program, but it has, I suspect intentionally, taken the motto of the young Sweden Democrats “Salute to the European Youth” as its inspiration and title. The Party of Freedom is expected to become the most popular party in the Dutch elections this fall, and although the other parties vow not to work with it, that refusal will only ensure the eventual dominance of the Dutch nationalists in the subsequent election.

So, to whom does America belong?