Tag: #AltRight

Det Alternative Højre: 16 punkter

Formålet er at udvikle en filosofisk kerne for det Alternative Højre, som andre kan bygge videre på.

1. Det Alternative Højre tilhører den politiske højrefløj set ud fra både den amerikanske og europæiske forståelse af begrebet. Progressive tilhører ikke det Alternative Højre. Liberale tilhører ikke det Alternative Højre. Kommunister, marxister, marxianere, kulturmarxister og neokonservative tilhører ikke det Alternative Højre.

2. Det Alternative Højre er et ALTERNATIV til den hovedstrømning indenfor konservatisme i USA, som nominelt er gengivet i Russel Kirk’s 10 Konservative Principper, men som i realiteten har udartet sig i retning af progressivisme. Det er også et alternativ til libertarianisme.

3. Det alternative Højre er ikke en defensiv tilgang, og afviser idéen om nobelt og principfast nederlag. Det er en fremadskuende, offensiv filosofi i enhver forståelse af dette begreb. Det Alternative Højre tror på sejr gennem vedholdenhed og ved at forblive i harmoni med videnskab, virkelighed, kulturel tradition og de erfaringer, man kan drage af historien.

4. Det Alternative Højre mener, at den vestlige civilisation er højdepunktet af menneskelig bedrift og støtter dens tre fundamentale søjler: Kristendom, de europæiske nationer og den græsk-romerske arv.

5. Det Alternative Højre er åbent og uforbeholdent nationalistisk. Det støtter alle nationalismer og alle nationers ret til at eksistere; homogene og uden udvanding gennem fremmed invasion  og immigration.

6. Det alternative Højre er anti-globalistisk. Det er i opposition til alle grupper, som arbejder for globalistiske idealer eller globalistiske mål.

7. Det Alternative Højre er anti-egalitært. Det afviser idéen om lighed af samme grund, som det afviser idéen om enhjørninger og nisser, og understreger, at menneskelig lighed ikke eksisterer i nogen observerbar videnskabelig, juridisk, materiel, intellektuel, seksuel eller spirituel form.

8. Det Alternative Højre vedkender sig videnskabelig metode. Det accepterer som forudsætning de nuværende konklusioner, som er nået gennem den videnskabelige metode, samtidig med, at det forstår, at a) disse konklusioner er åbne for fremtidig revision, b) at videnskabeligt arbejde er sårbart for korruption, og c) at den såkaldte videnskabelige konsensus ikke er baseret på videnskabelig metode men demokrati og derfor per definition er uvidenskabelig.

9. Det Alternative Højre mener, at identitet > kultur > politik.

10.  Det Alternative Højre er imod, at nogen oprindelig etnisk gruppe bliver hersket over eller domineret af en anden etnisk gruppe, især i de dominerede folkeslags egne hjemlande. Det Alternative Højre er imod at nogen ikke-hjemhørende etnisk gruppe opnår uforholdsmæssig indflydelse i et samfund gennem nepotisme, stammeloyalitet eller andre midler.

11. Det Alternative Højre forstår, at mangfoldighed + nærhed = krig.

12. Det Alternative Højre er ligeglad med, hvad du mener om det.

13. Det Alternative Højre afviser international frihandel og den frie bevægelighed af folk, som frihandel kræver. Fordelene ved intranational frihandel er ikke bevis for fordelene ved international frihandel.

14. Det Alternative Højre mener, at vi må sikre hvide folkeslags eksistens og en fremtid for hvide børn.

15. Det Alternative Højre tror ikke på nogen races, nations, folkeslags eller underarts ubetingede overherredømme. Enhver race, nation, folkeslag og menneskelig underart har deres egne unikke styrker og svagheder og besidder den uindskrænkede ret til at leve uforstyrret i den oprindelige kultur, som de foretrækker.

16. Det Alternative Højre er en filosofi, som værdsætter fred mellem de forskellige nationer, og som er imod krige for at påtvinge én nation en anden nations værdier, såvel som forsøg på at udrydde individuelle nationer gennem krig, folkemord, immigration eller genetisk assimilation.

I korte træk: Det Alternative Højre er en vestlig ideologi, som tror på videnskab, historie, virkelighed og enhver genetisk nations ret til at eksistere og bestemme over sig selv ud fra dens egne interesser.

Alt-Right or else

Even Rod Dreher is being forced to admit that the Alt-Right is inevitable now:

  1. I agree with Siegel that we can’t go on like this. Something has to give. It might not give next year, or ten years from now, but we can’t muddle through forever.
  2. The rising Left is bound and determined to crush or at least permanently sideline people it deems heretics — in particular, whites, males, orthodox Christians, and skeptics of the LGBT project. It does not want a pluralistic modus vivendi; it wants total domination. The establishment Left lacks the will to stop them. Its members are terrified of appearing un-woke. All a major corporation has to do to buy off the Left is declare itself in favor of Pride, and so forth.
  3. The establishment Right lacks the will to stop them either, for fear of being called bigots. And it lacks the will or the imagination to stand in any way against corporate interests. It tried to stop Donald Trump, but failed.
  4. Neither Republicans nor Democrats know how to address the conditions that gave rise to the Trump presidency. It would offend too many interests within their respective coalitions.
  5. Trump is a reckless man whose presidency is going to end badly for America. It will also end badly for the people who voted for him; he has no principles except self-promotion, and will sell them out. He also will not be able to get anything serious done, in part because of his total lack of discipline. Trump is a symptom of our political crisis, not a solution.
  6. The real glue holding the dynamic Left together is hatred of the Other. You can see this in part from the Dissent editors’ unwillingness to explore any kind of alliance around economic issues with the right-wing dissidents of American Affairs. For them, the culture war is of such paramount importance that it precludes economic-based alliances.
  7. The real glue holding the dynamic Right together is hatred of the Other. The American Affairs guys would like to suspend the culture war and make common cause with the economic Left, but the Left is not interested.
  8. Christianity, in whatever diluted form, was for most of America’s history the ties that bound us together (whether or not we were Christians). Those days are gone.  Liberalism, in the broadest historical sense, is secularized Christianity, and as such is parasitic on Christianity. When Christianity disappears, as it has largely done in Europe and is well on its way to doing in the United States, it takes with it the basis on which liberalism operates. Laws and procedures alone do not hold a people together.
  9. In a post-Christian nation like ours, there is no realistic hope that religion is going to hold the nation together, or even the forces of the Right. The faith that the old Religious Right (= politicized white Evangelicals) has placed in Donald Trump is self-deceptive, to put it mildly.
  10. As American politics becomes more extreme on both sides, serious Christians will be squeezed out. A significant number of conservative Christians will give themselves over to a Christianized version of blood-and-soil politics. The uncritical embrace of Trumpism by many conservative Christians today opens the door to this.
  11. The future of American politics is highly uncertain. Christians have to do the best they can to fight for moral values in our politics, and in particular for religious liberty. But the “imperium” — meaning the American political order — is probably beyond saving at this point.
  12. The most important thing by far to be conserved is the orthodox Christian faith — and that entails a particular set of moral beliefs and customs, including the traditional family.
  13. Contemporary American life is corrosive to this end in many ways, not all of which are understood by the Christian Right at the moment, mostly because they still confuse Christianity with The American Way Of Life™.
  14. Those orthodox Christians who understand the radical nature of the crisis before us will devote themselves to building up their faith, communities, institutions, and ways of life to be resilient and resolute in the face of American decline. I call this the Benedict Option. The politics of the future may be more left-wing or right-wing, but they will be increasingly anti-Christian. Keeping our heads clear and our hearts stout during this long time of trial will be the most important task facing Christians in this new Dark Age. We too will have to bind ourselves together more tightly to Jesus Christ and to each other in his church.

Bottom line: Identity politics will dissolve the traditional bonds that have held Americans together, and re-bind forces of the Left and forces on the Right to each other.

The Left has nothing. It has no truth in it. The mainstream Right has more, but it is cowardly and shies away from the truth wherever and whenever the facts become too uncomfortable for it to acknowledge.

That is why there is no other option. Alt-Right or else.

Alt-Right is inevitable

A cuckservative finally realizes that moral posturing is no substitute for fighting back:

If you’re in a fight with someone, and you never do anything but parry blows and dodge, you can at least hope for him to tire himself out.

But he’ll have regained his endurance by the next morning. And, as he actually enjoys just throwing blows at you, and you’ve done nothing to convince him this is a counterproductive idea — he will be back.

If you never actually hit him right the fuck back — when is he ever going to learn that fighting is not a good idea?

Many of us — and I blame myself here — have been pushing an idea of unilateral disarmament in this arena, hoping they would just learn how awful and venomous they are.

But they don’t. I think they take a rather different lesson from our passive resistance than the one they intended.

We intended that by passively resisting, they would see us as showing moral courage and would learn from us that ceaseless violence and bullying and collectivized political campaigns run against everyday citizens pursuing no public office are wrong.

But they didn’t learn that.

What our self-restraint has taught them is quite the opposite–when we refuse to fight back, they take that as signalling that deep down, we know they’re right and that we are the monsters, and thus, our refusal to engage them in the fight they’ve started does not prove our moral rightness, but instead our moral corruption.

These people would have saved themselves a lot of time and frustration by simply reading SJWAL. And it’s going to take them more time, and more SJW lunacy, before they actually start fighting. Even in this post, Ace feels the need to virtue-signal about how he doesn’t want to fight, and he laments discovering that it is necessary to do so.

He shouldn’t. The Alt-Right enjoys the conflict. We love it when they hand us yet another excuse for a reprisal. We are the happiest of warriors and we like nothing better than to see our enemies in full, panicked flight before us.

The Alt-Right is inevitable because everyone who doesn’t join it will have submitted to the social justice Left. And not every cuck and con and libertarian and liberal is willing to do that. We’re not going to convince them. The SJWs are, because they’re certainly not going to stop on their own.

Alt-Right antecedents

As we’re preparing for the release of The Collected Columns, Vol. 2, it’s interesting to see that an observer, who commented on the conceptual development of the Alt-Right, was correct to note that the ideas were often there prior to the label being applied. Consider this 2006 column, entitled The Vanishing Conservative, which, prior to both the coining of the term and the publication of Cuckservative 10 years later, anticipates the decline of the conservative movement.

I am not a conservative. While I respect genuine conservatives and appreciate the value of conserving cultural traditions, the Christian faith, and the foundations of Western civilization, conservatives have always struck me as the political equivalent of catenaccio.

Invented by the Austrian coach of the Swiss national team, the defense-oriented system was embraced by the Italians and used in Italy for over three decades, hence the name. But over time, attack-minded strategies were developed in response, most notably Holland’s famous Total Football System, which broke down the bolted door. No manager actually implements catenaccio today and references to it are mostly ironic and situational, made, for example, when a team is protecting a lead or is overmatched and playing for a tie.

The problem with both catenaccio and conservatism is that any positive movement is largely the result of luck, not purpose. They are defensive strategies, and as any military historian will tell you; defense never beats offense, it only staves off defeat for a time. In the end, even the most intrepid defenders will weary and the gates will finally fall to the barbarians.

Although it sounds ludicrous in a time when conservatives nominally rule the airwaves, the legislative, judicial and executive branches; 2006 may well be one day viewed as a low point for the American conservative. For politics is not mathematics and it knows no transitive law. It is true that many institutions and individuals are Republican, and certainly the Republican Party is supposed to be America’s conservative party, but this does not equal conservative dominance of the political scene.

For neither the institutions nor the individuals can be relied upon to work toward conservative goals. Most of the conservative actions taken in the last 20 years can be best described as holding actions, not actions intended to lower the rising tide of central government influence or combat societal devolution.

The malaise is movement-wide. Indeed, it is debatable as to which group is in worse shape, the “conservative” politicians or the “conservative” commentariat. While the leftward drift of the administration and the Congress have not escaped notice despite the best efforts of its cheerleaders to play it down; the abandonment of principle in favor of pragmatism has caused many in the so-called conservative media to do the likewise.

Just this week, one could listen to Michael Medved playing the left’s favorite game of denouncing another commentator—me, actually—as a Nazi while watching nominal conservatives falling all over each other in the competition to be the most outraged by Ann Coulter’s precision-guided comments about the ever-grieving “Witches of East Brunswick.”

(Given that there are thousands of people who lost loved ones in the September 11 attacks who Coulter did not criticize, it is more than a little disingenuous to pretend that her criticism is somehow inappropriate or misplaced. And just what is the statute of limitations on celebrity-victim status anyhow?)

Indeed, what with Michelle Malkin pushing FDR’s internment program, Ben Shapiro, Sean Hannity and numerous others pushing Woodrow Wilson’s foreign policy, Larry Kudlow pushing Richard Nixon’s monetary policies and the editors of National Review harboring a Harry Truman-style crush on the United Nations, one has to wonder if a liberal media is redundant these days.

The word “liberal” once meant something very different than it does today. It rather looks as if the concept of a “conservative” is in the process of undergoing similar etymological evolution. Regardless, it appears the bolted door has been unlocked and is hanging open on loose hinges.

Of course, my understanding then was not what it is now. In the original column, I referred to the nonexistent “Judeo-Christian ethic” rather than “Christian faith” and to “civilizations” rather than “Western civilization”.

Ironically, conservatives left behind by the Alt-Right now often defend Judeo-Christian churchianity in the place of genuine Christian values.

Darkstream: Christianity, Paganism, and the Alt-Right

I don’t often direct your attention to the Darkstreams – I usually neglect to post them here at all – but I think this particular Darkstream is a particularly important one for anyone hoping to understand the relationship between Christianity and the Alt-Right, and why the eucivilizational atheists, agnostics, and pagans who support Western Civilization are ultimately going to need to embrace both cultural Christianity as well as support genuine Christian revival.

And let me say that I don’t blame any atheist, agnostic, or pagan who harbors deep contempt for the so-called modern Church. As I said, when I look at the churchian cucks who worship at the altar of Judeo-Christ the Good Samaritan when they aren’t busy welcoming refugees for pay, the first thing that springs to my mind is Jesus clearing the moneylenders out of the Temple.

We, the Dread, Academic Edition

Ultimately, Gamergate demonstrated the refinement of a variety of techniques of gamified public harassment—including doxing (publishing personal information online), revenge porn (spreading intimate photos beyond their intended recipi-ents), social shaming, and intimidation. It also provides insight into gender as a key rallying point for a range of online subcultures. Moreover, it set the conditions for the rise of the alt-right. Several of the most active promoters of Gamergate are now core alt-right figures, including Milo Yiannopolous, Vox Day (Theodore Beale), Matt Forney (of Men’s Rights blog Return of Kings), and Andrew “weev” Auern-heimer. Gamergate’s success at mobilizing gamers to push an ideological agenda indicates the fruitfulness of radicalizing interest-based communities.
– Media Manipulation and Disinformation Online (PDF)


I think the Far Cry 5 version is probably more accurate and relevant.

More cause, more effect

The ever-astute Pat Buchanan knows how the trends are flowing:

You’ve written much about your worries about how demographic changes will negatively affect the nation. What do you think is the political effect that will come from this? We are currently seeing the rise of the alt right, left-wing violence…

If you see more of the cause, you will see more of the effect. How dumb can these people be. Take a look at what’s happening in Europe. You have secessionist movements in more than half a dozen countries. You’ve got nationalism across Europe, you’ve got ethno-nationalism, you’ve got pro-Russian governments rising, autocracy is more attractive to people.

People got to take a look. This isn’t because a couple of guys have been preaching something for a few years. We’ve been predicting it. It’s the events that matter. They decide things. When we ran with these issues in the 90s, you had tremendous support, but the thing people said was what we’re doing right now isn’t that bad so let’s stick with this.

If you don’t address the causes you will get the same results,  and I don’t understand people who don’t realize that.

This is precisely why I have been pointing out that the continued rise of the Alt-Right to ascendance is not merely likely, it is inevitable. Mainstream conservatism not only has no answers for the problems caused by demographic changes, it is part of the problem.

I can’t stress this enough: civic nationalism has failed in the USA. The second immigrant wave destroyed the political foundations of the state, and now the third immigrant wave has destroyed even the semblance of a nation. It’s not even remotely possible to dispute this any longer; those who continue to try will only sacrifice their own credibility and become increasingly irrelevant.

As I mentioned to a friend yesterday, my observations tend to be on the early side of the trends. If we were to compare this to the global financial crisis, we’re probably at around 2003. Right now, people can see the equivalent of the rise in housing prices, but they can’t yet grasp its link to the global financial system. In the same way, people can see the tens of millions of immigrants, their children, and grandchildren, but they can’t yet grasp their link to the dissolution of the nation-state.

But they will. They absolutely will in time.

Swedish threat database

Fascinating. These idiots aren’t concerned about hundreds of thousands of migrants who have actually invaded their country, but they are deeply concerned about the threat I pose to the Swedish people. I’m almost tempted to say “challenge accepted” and see how long it takes to establish my Supreme Dark Rule there. Given what cucks they have proved to be, I figure, maybe, October?