Lion of the Blogosphere

Hillary’s alt-right speech

Peter Brimelow at has very good comments on Hillary’s speech and Trump’s response.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

August 26, 2016 at 9:30 am

Posted in Uncategorized

176 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. 2 things:

    1. Trump down by 2 in the latest Mason Dixon FLA poll. FLA is a true swing state so this is evidence that the national race is tightening. Ras had Hil up by 4 this week but I expect it to be even or Hil +2 next week. UPI has it tied. Reuters has Trump down by 7 from 5 last week but that is probably just noise.

    2. Hil’s Alt-Right speech was the right move. I really couldn’t understand it at first but it does make sense when you think about it: Team Hillary had realized that Trump’s pivot was for real. If Trump is able to bring back the suburban cuck white Romney voters, the Presidency is his. Also if he can convince people he isn’t racist it will reduce black and Latino turnout, and may even bring some minority voters over to him. Also can help with young voters.

    It’s not that I think team Hillary is worried, I believe that they are supremely confident, but they are getting out ahead of the “new Trump” and trying to change the media narrative which had been very pro Trump/anti Clinton this last week.

    Good job by Team Hillary.

    Otis the Sweaty

    August 26, 2016 at 9:52 am

    • She’s riddled with scandal. Bill’s rapes that she covered, Benghazi and subsequent lies, the email server and subsequent lies, corruption at her foundation, her health which I actually do think is a problem, thousands more documents wikileaks is set to release. And all this is before we even get to how screwed up the middle east got under her watch or that there’s a new wave of terrorist attacks about to break. If she’s not worried then she’s a fool. If she didn’t do something to stem the bleeding she would have bled out.

      Now, you make a valid point about this being about blocking Trump’s outreach. And that was probably part of it. But another part of it was just to get all the negative stories about her off the TV. The media would be more than happy to oblige. But In order to get the media to talk about something else she still had to give them something else to talk about. Now that she has, the media will ignore her scandals and use all their oxygen talking about this. I just hope his campaign is smart enough not to allow themselves to be baited into giving it even more oxygen.


      August 26, 2016 at 1:33 pm

    • Jewish women and the alt-right. It’s a rare combination but I think these two women represent a form of the alt-right:


      And Ilana Mercer.

      You could add them to your blog roll.


      August 28, 2016 at 3:07 am

      • Jewish woman + alt-right = Diana West.

        Lewis Medlock

        August 29, 2016 at 11:12 am

    • You’re an idiot. Nice try with the chin-stroking “sober assessment of things” strategy. Get fucked with a razor.


      August 28, 2016 at 5:58 pm

  2. Hillary’s voice is so grating that I turned the speech off before she said “alt-right.” Come to think of it, I don’t think if ever gotten through an entire speech of hers. From what I saw, she seemed pretty low energy.

    OT: Todd Solondz is back to form in his new movie Wiener-Dog.

    Horace Pinker

    August 26, 2016 at 10:37 am

    • Glengarry

      August 26, 2016 at 12:10 pm

    • As much as I hate Hillary, I actually don’t think her voice is as grating as that of lots of other women. Right now, for example, I’m in a restaurant in S listening to a Huma Abedin lookalike who sounds like Alvin the Chipmunk on speed. I actually don’t know if I can stick it out through my meal.

      West Coast IA

      August 26, 2016 at 10:01 pm

      • Are you from the Great Lakes region or Upstate NY? To the rest of the country, that accent from a woman sounds like nails on a chalkboard.

        Bilbo Baggins

        August 27, 2016 at 7:50 am

  3. I’ve come to have really mixed feelings about the term alt right. I used to think it would tend to include someone like myself or some of my favorite writers, such as Lion; or maybe even someone like the YouTube commenter Sargon of Akkad. But I started to notice the term being used more specifically for white nationalists, people for whom Ram Z Paul constitutes their left wing. At first, I thought of this as a misapprehension, driven by the sensationalism of those types. But I’ve since leaned that the term “alt right” was coined by a white nationalist who I had never heard of but who seems to be good famous in their circles. More significantly, the white nationalist alt right seems to contain a lot of guys who really want to be part of an alt right internet community, which is just not my thing. I like my in-person social life. But those guys seem to want the name alt right a lot more than I do, so I figure they can have it.

    examples: I listen to some of the podcasts from The Right Stuff sometimes. 75% of the time, they seem pretty with it from my perspective, but then they get into stuff that I just don’t see the appeal of, especially what they call the Jewish Question or JQ. I keep wanting to ask, wait, what was the question again? I’ve also heard a little bit of Millennial Woes. He seems really sad. I didn’t get the point. And, like those The Right Stuff guys, he’s really interested in this community they’re putatively building.

    So, at this point, I’m really vague on what “alt right” is supposed to signify.

    Greg Pandatshang

    August 26, 2016 at 10:53 am

    • It’s a very loosely defined term, since there’s no organization that pins the insignia on anybody and there are a lot of people disaffected from mainstream conservatism yet who are still obviously right wing.

      Because of the power of the megaphone, it’s possible the MSM will successfully brand the alt right as a white nationalist movement by causing anybody who isn’t white nationalist to disassociate, even if that’s not really what the alt right is today.


      August 26, 2016 at 12:05 pm

      • It’s not just the MSM, though. The Spencerian alt right is really enthusiastic about using it to mean their thing. We not-so-holocausty alt rightists face a 2 front war (much like my hero, Paul von Hindenburg, did).

        Greg Pandatshang

        August 26, 2016 at 12:57 pm

    • This is pretty much how I feel. As long as the alt-right remains amorphous, I’d be happy to associate myself with it. But the more press the alt-right gets, the more it seems to become Richard Spencer’s white nationalist movement. White nationalism is a non-starter. Even Roissy agreed in a post from yesterday.

      Horace Pinker

      August 26, 2016 at 12:06 pm

      • Roissy is heavily influenced by the discourse on the forum MyPostingCareer, which is racist and antisemitic but also anti-white nationalist. It’s an interesting synthesis:


        August 26, 2016 at 12:16 pm

      • Thanks for the link, IHTG. This comment from PLEASUREMAN is pretty good:

        America is arguably too large for a single strong national identity over the long term–which is partly why it’s had regional identities for so long–but the white nationalism Spencer dreams of doesn’t even have a starting point. It’s purely masturbation.

        In America’s instance, you first have to staunch the bleeding, which in this case is large population movement and unstable demographics, not only from outside the country but across regions and across generations. This mainly happens because of the dominance of cities on the American landscape and the scarcity of anything between them. The cities all begin to take on similar characteristics, like a restaurant chain, with some makeshift regional “culture” added in commercialized form.

        The Hispanics now own the land they’ve invaded. Give it up. Consider it a lesson for a country that expanded too far, too fast. Long term, the focus should be on reconstructing a smaller, more viable America, but the boundaries have to be created first, and the very first boundary is our current national border.

        Horace Pinker

        August 26, 2016 at 5:21 pm

    • Same here. Before Trump the alt-right was mostly a movement critical of liberal democracy, egalitarianism, and related values. But I suppose it was only a matter of time before it was taken over by white nationalists.

      Jason Liu

      August 26, 2016 at 12:27 pm

    • the alt-right is non-liberals who oppose invade the world, invite the world, and don’t see a problem with whites voting as whites (like everyone else).

      of course the establishment will showcase the worst people, because they want to spook “respectable,” whites from voting 90% for one party.

      in other words, the people on this thread worrying about anuda shoah are falling into the left’s frame. you lose.

      • That “invade the world invite the world” meme is BS. Straight outta Sailer. He supported the war in Vietnam, as did Pat Buchanan. Neither man has ever disavowed their support for Vietnam. Vietnam was far more costly to the US than was Iraq.

        It’s only when Jews are involved do they become nationalistic.

        “anuda shoah” – fuck you.


        August 26, 2016 at 4:34 pm

      • Jayziz, where did Steve Sailer even write about the Vietnam War? That’s not really his bailiwick, and he isn’t that old so as to have been a public figure back then. As for Buchanan, I think it was Steve Sailer who commented that he was the only person who actually changed his position on foreign policy in response to the changes in the world (Cold War ending and all that).

        Greg Pandatshang

        August 26, 2016 at 6:36 pm

      • @gothamette,

        you need to calm down. don’t be so hysterical.

      • That “invade the world invite the world” meme is BS.

        No it is not. It’s actual policy and its why Trump is hated. Because he opposes it.

        Straight outta Sailer. He supported the war in Vietnam, as did Pat Buchanan.

        Sailer was born in 1959 I believe.

        Buchanan is a partisan Republican. He served in the Nixon White House so he supported Nixon’s policies. Would he have supported a Vietnam war if Democrats were in the White house from 1969 to 75???


        August 27, 2016 at 6:41 pm

      • @Rifleman,

        You are totally mistaken. Buchanan supported Vietnam from the very beginning, when it was LBJ’s war. Eisenhower, the last truly great Republican, kept us away from that shit. Vietnam was not a Republican war, it was a totally bipartisan cold war liberal war, which the became Nixon’s tar baby. You have it totally wrong.

        In fact, an alternate explanation of the American war in VN is that it was a Catholic war, because the corrupt little dictatorship that we created was largely an artificial entity that was run by and for Vietnamese Catholic quislings. I’ve always been skeptical of that but there is some merit in it.

        Sailer is a little younger but so what? He was a good Republican jerkoff supporter of Vietnam, and has never recanted. The only wars that he thinks are stupid are ones that have some kind of Jewish angle. And he didn’t oppose Iraq, although he wasn’t incredibly enthusiastic.


        August 27, 2016 at 8:18 pm

      • I’ve been reading Sailer for many years. He supported Vietnam when he was a writer at National Review.


        August 27, 2016 at 8:20 pm

      • Invade-the-world-invite-the-world may not be something Sailer’s purely supported since day 1 (as said, he supported the Iraq war), but it does represent a series of policies both sides of the MSM consensus support that one can be opposed to.


        August 27, 2016 at 10:09 pm

      • gothamette — Vietnam was before my time. I don’t know whether I would have had the same opinions at the time as I do in hindsight. And I have mixed feelings about it even now. On the one hand, it was LBJ’s war and he was an idiot. On the other, hippies, leftists and anti-American trash opposed the war. On the one hand, I couldn’t care less about Vietnam. On the other, communist cold war strategy was to foment revolutions to overthrow pro-American governments and replace them with anti-American communist dictatorships.

        Therefore, I’m not sure why you think Sailer and Buchanan were wrong to support the Vietnam war. Even if it was started by idiots, it was still necessary to stop the advance of communism. Not because I care about foreigners or want to “make the world safe for democracy”. But because I care about Americans and know that when they overthrow enough governments they’ll come after us.

        We had a similar situation in the middle east. That’s why we supported Israel and the oil rich Gulf states while Soviets backed Iran and their proxies in Lebanon and Syria. That’s why we supported Hussein as well as other middle eastern dictators. We had them in a stalemate until the neocons ripped the scabs off and let the puss run.

        I won’t pretend to know their true motives. Maybe they thought we were losing the middle east and decided to roll the dice. But if that was the case it backfired. I could understand rolling the dice and losing. But I can’t understand allowing hostile refugees to flood in. And it’s not something that happened by accident. They INVITED them to come. As far as I’m concerned, that’s the smoking gun. They’re definitely pursuing an “invade the world invite the world” strategy. You can’t say it’s not when that’s exactly what they’ve done.


        August 28, 2016 at 5:12 am

      • @destructure,

        You’ve offered reasonable arguments here, which are well beyond the parameters of a blog comment thread.
        Outside of a novel, it’s impossible to communicate How Things Were to a younger generation. Try communicating Iraq to your kids in 25 years. With that in mind. I have a few responses & a windup.

        “On the other, hippies, leftists and anti-American trash opposed the war.”

        Partly true, but so what? Same deal with Iraq, which is one of the reasons I supported Iraq for the first few months. BIG MISTAKE. Lesson learned: be true to yourself, don’t react to provocations, even if sometimes that puts you on the side of assholes you hate. Because it wasn’t only leftist trash who opposed Vietnam. A lot of prudent moderates opposed it but they got shouted down by both sides and gave up trying to talk sense, in frustration. Sound familiar?

        Eisenhower didn’t want to get involved in Vietnam. Eisenhower was leftist trash? The dumb Australians followed us into Vietnam, but the British never got involved and kept warning us against it. So much for only leftist trash being anti-Vietnam.

        “On the one hand, I couldn’t care less about Vietnam. On the other, communist cold war strategy was to foment revolutions to overthrow pro-American governments and replace them with anti-American communist dictatorships.”

        Irrelevant to Vietnam. The Vietnamese just thought of Communism as a vehicle for a long nationalist tradition that went back to fighting the Chinese and then the French. They are Communist to this day. Do you care?

        “Therefore, I’m not sure why you think Sailer and Buchanan were wrong to support the Vietnam war.”

        I do think they were wrong, but that’s not the essence of my point, which is, they were not in favor of the war because some group of people conspiratorially tried to drag them into it. They believed in the myth of Communist expansion worldwide.

        “Even if it was started by idiots, it was still necessary to stop the advance of communism”

        No destructure, a thousand times, no no and no. If that were true, why didn’t we just invade Cuba, a country 90 miles off the coast of the US, and presumably much easier to invade than a country 12K miles away, and very difficult to fight in?

        There was never any monolithic Communist movement. The Russians and the Chinese were simply quite clever about working with legitimate nationalist movements to oppose our colonialism – now known as globalism. Why is the alt-right so opposed to globalism now, but back in the day, their antecedents (the old Right) was all in favor of it?

        Destructure, you sound like a smart guy, but very confused and deluded by right wing horseshit. I hope you grow out of it.

        I’m going to sign off this comment by saying that most of the people who opposed Vietnam weren’t hippie leftist trash, they were people who didn’t want to see normal American boys drafted (yes, remember that – there was a draft in those days) to die a meaningless death in some shitty rice paddy fighting in a colonial war that we inherited from the French. It was not in our interest to do that.

        A lot of middle of the road anti-war activists were Jewish, and guess what, the hard core paleoconservative right used the Jewish card against them.

        Not much changes. Peace out.

        PS, A Rumor of War by Philip Caputo is a good start. That war was unwinnable and not worth the life of one American boy. But over 50 thousand died and Pat Buchanan has never expressed a word of remorse about it.


        August 28, 2016 at 2:26 pm

      • PS to above – I couldn’t think of his name so I posted, but google came to my resume. Got to give those leftist bastards their due….

        The best writing from the soldier’s perspective came from W.D. Ehrhart. I cannot think of a better response to the “hippie leftist trash” nonsense:


        August 28, 2016 at 2:32 pm

      • @destructure,

        The US viewed the Vietnam war through the prism of the cold war. North Vietnam was Communist and was the enemy. Many Vietnamese people viewed the Vietnam war through the prism of colonialism. Ho Chi Minh was a nationalist hero of the war that forced the French to with draw from Vietnam. The treaty that ended that war divided the country, but called for an election to decide if the country should be unified. Eisenhower approved canceling the election because it was clear the South would have voted to join the North.

        The US trained the South Vietnamese army for many years and gave them all the equipment they needed, but when the North invaded after the US withdrawal, the officers deserted their troops and the South Vietnamese army just collapsed in days. This is very similar to what happened in Mosul when ISS attacked. A well equipped Iraqi army force of 20,000+ threw down their arms and fled when an ISS force of 1500 fighters advanced on the city.

        The South Vietnamese were not willing to fight the North and the Iraqi army was not willing to fight ISS. Only the Iranian trained Shia militia are an effective fighting force against ISS.

        The stupid Neocons claimed that the whole Sunni/Shia divide was history and there would be no problem creating a new Iraqi government. The Islamic militants have shown how naive and ignorant the Neocons were.


        August 28, 2016 at 11:03 pm

      • gothamette — “I supported Iraq for the first few months. BIG MISTAKE. Lesson learned: be true to yourself, don’t react to provocations, even if sometimes that puts you on the side of assholes you hate. Because it wasn’t only leftist trash who opposed Vietnam.”>i>

        Don’t misquote me. I did NOT say “only leftist trash opposed Vietnam.” I said, “hippies, leftists and anti-American trash opposed the war.” Which is true. FYI– I never supported the war in Iraq. I never supported the wars in Afghanistan, Libya or Syria either.
        “Eisenhower didn’t want to get involved in Vietnam. Eisenhower was leftist trash?”

        Not exactly. The Eisenhower Docterine held that the U.S. would be “prepared to use armed force … [to counter] aggression from any country controlled by international communism”.

        So why didn’t Eisenhower want to get involved in Vietnam? Because the team he sent to study the situation said it would devour entire divisions. Rather than getting directly involved, he supplied the French with bombers and support personnel instead. After the French were ousted, he created SEATO to oppose further communist encroachment in Vietnam. He backed the South Vietnamese in creating their own state and gave them aid. In other words, he tried to repeat the partitition that ended the fighting in Korea. He even sent hundreds of advisors to South Vietnam to help buttress them against communist incursions. And, when Kennedy was elected, he warned him on the communist threat to SE Asia.

        So, yes, Eisenhower was trying to keep the US out of war in Vietnam because he knew how bad it would get. But he was fully prepared to go to war if it came down to it.

        “The Vietnamese just thought of Communism as a vehicle for a long nationalist tradition that went back to fighting the Chinese and then the French. They are Communist to this day. Do you care?”

        I’m sure a lot of Vietnamese thought so. I’m sure a lot of Cubans and North Koreans thought so, too. But the revolutions were sponsored by the Soviets and Chicomms in order to establish themselves as suzerain.

        No. I don’t care that Vietnam is communist. I care that we stopped the dominoes.
        “They believed in the myth of Communist expansion worldwide.”

        So did Eisenhower. It’s hard to call it a myth when they said it themselves.
        “If that were true, why didn’t we just invade Cuba,”

        We did. It failed. The Bay of Pigs invasian may have happened under Kennedy but it was initiated by Eisenhower.

        Cuba is an island. Its only significance is providing the Soviets a base off the coast of Florida. The US obviously didn’t like that. But let it go after the failed Bay of Pigs… until the Soviets tried to put nukes there.

        Vietnam was different. It wasn’t a small, isolated island. It would have been the first domino in a chain that lost the whole of Asia.
        “There was never any monolithic Communist movement. The Russians and the Chinese were simply quite clever about working with legitimate nationalist movements to oppose our colonialism – now known as globalism. Why is the alt-right so opposed to globalism now, but back in the day, their antecedents (the old Right) was all in favor of it? “

        The Russians and Chinese were clever alright. They backed nationalist movements to overthrow colonialism. But their motives weren’t benevolent. They weren’t trying to help anyone gain independence. They just wanted to replace pro-western colonies with communist colonies.
        “A lot of middle of the road anti-war activists were Jewish,”

        A lot of them were marxists, too.


        August 29, 2016 at 7:52 am

      • Everyone on the right (with the exception of Murray Rothbard and his followers) supported the Vietnam War because they believed that the West was involved in an international struggle against communism.
        During the Cold War, Buchanan backed Israel against the Arabs. He supported the Likud party. When the Cold War ended Buchanan reverted to his Old Right roots and moved in an isolationist direction.

        Lewis Medlock

        August 29, 2016 at 11:32 am

      • @mikeca,

        There are many parallels between the illusions of the Vietnam war supporters and the Iraq war cheerleaders. What’s astonishing is that anyone now is gullible enough to buy the Communist menace theory. Especially in the middle of the 1950s, when the US was so far ahead of everyone else in the world, materially, economically and militarily. Comparing the US to China, a then backwards peasant country, is a real laffer. There was never anything to it. There is, on the other hand, a genuine problem with Islam. The war in Iraq was a huge blunder, but nowhere on the level of Vietnam.

        Oh, and destructure, I am not getting into a slanging match with you about whether you said “hippie trash” or “only hippie trash.” You wrote: “On the one hand, it was LBJ’s war and he was an idiot. On the other, hippies, leftists and anti-American trash opposed the war.” Fuck off.


        August 29, 2016 at 8:59 pm

      • Brimelow himself is still unapologetic about Vietnam. Check out this very critical review he wrote about one of the best anti-Vietnam war books ever written:

        But, you know, on the other hand, I think most of the alt-right kids are equally blind in the other direction: they have no real understanding of pre-9/11 American history. Anything that can’t be spun into some kinda race war direction bore them.


        August 30, 2016 at 12:19 am

      • gothamette — That’s the second time in this thread you’ve told someone “fuck you” or “fuck off”. I’ve gone out of my way to be polite with you. If you don’t have the temperament for rational discussion then perhaps you should take your own advice.


        August 30, 2016 at 12:19 am

      • I can understand gothamette getting pissed off at the antisemitism of the alt-right and using strong language. Maybe it wasn’t called for in the reply to you about the Vietnam war. Please let’s stop using uncivil language with each other.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        August 30, 2016 at 7:27 am

    • Ironically, it reminds me a lot of the term “neo-con” which did have a very precise definition at one point, but then devolved into “any politician who supports using the military.”


      August 26, 2016 at 1:48 pm

      • It meant people who saw the threat of communism. Remember the cold war?

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        August 26, 2016 at 3:37 pm

      • Well, I think back in the day it basically meant Jewish liberals who voted for Ronald Reagan because they hated communism. And then it became associated with hardcore anti-Saddam people in the Bush administration, as there was some overlap there. But I’ve also heard it refer to people like William F. Buckley who made “conservatism” a coherent political philosophy in the post-war age. I think that’s where we get “paleo” conservatives from, the term refers to pre-Buckleyite conservatism.

        But it’s true, by the end it just became a left-wing slur (and now, an alt-right slur, too) to refer to politician who advocates any sort of military action. A lot of Jews have claimed it’s always been an anti-semitic code word, and I could see that.


        August 26, 2016 at 5:54 pm

      • Sorry, but neoconservatism is a mainstream term. Just google it on Google News. It is used by publications across the spectrum. And neocons are distinct from liberal internationalists (e.g. Samantha Powers, Hillary) and realists (Kissinger, Mearsheimer), all of whom want a strong military and US dominance in the world. These three groups hate each other and differ about where to fight wars and for what reason.

        There was a brief period during the height of neocon influence in the Bush administration when they tried to gaslight the public by claiming that they don’t really exist and anybody who thinks otherwise just hates Jews. This was a failed attempt by them to immunize themselves from criticism and to hide in plain sight.


        August 26, 2016 at 10:32 pm

      • The point was despite the fact that the term may have a mainstream definition now, it has gone through many different definitions over the years, with the least flattering one (“warmongering Jew-puppet”) having now emerged supreme. The same could easily happen with alt-right. I can easily imagine it simply becoming a haughty term for racists..


        August 27, 2016 at 10:39 am

      • The split originally came about when Bill Buckley and Co. supported Harry Jaffa (neocon) over Mel Bradford (paleocon) over the directorship of the NEH in the early Reagan administration, as I recall. Jaffa was (you guessed it) Jewish, a Straussian, and a big Lincoln fan…Bradford was a Southerner, and you can guess what he thought of Lincoln. It was bigger than that, of course.

        The neocons won and dragged the country into the Iraq War, so I can’t blame people for being mad at them. I don’t think the paleocons are the same people as the alt-right, though they may be the literal fathers or grandfathers of a few of them…can you see Pat Buchanan sending a Pepe meme?


        August 27, 2016 at 10:23 pm

      • SFG, wasn’t that William Bennett? (now a Trump supporter btw!)


        August 28, 2016 at 5:46 pm

    • Sargon of Akkad is just a 90s liberal. He attacked the alt-right and called them right wing SJWs. Sargon denies racial differences and even sex differences and still subscribes to racial- and gender egalitarianism and opposes any kind of identity politics (He is also a naive big government social democrat).

      The mainstream narrative used to be that most normal people don’t see color and gender and that only some retrograde fringe haters are the exception. Everybody else gets along just fine. Multiracialism and multiculturalism work just fine in practice. Sargon tries to defend this narrative kicking and screaming, even though the left and liberalism has moved past this (disingenuous) stage and gone explicitly anti-white and anti-male.

      Anita Sarkeesian’s analysis is correct. Games are sexist. But there is nothing wrong with this. These “tropes” are based on human nature and games cater to the testosterone based instincts of gamers. Sargon’s shtick is to deny this.

      Sarkeesian says “everything is sexist, everything is racist”. That’s hyperbolic, but it is perfectly understandable that black people want to see themselves in movies. They don’t care about mere accurate statistical reflection and they don’t want to see Mexicans and Asians either. Sargon claims he doesn’t care about who stars in movies. (Number crunching movie executives know better…)

      Alt-right consensus:
      Race is real. Racial strife is unavoidable. Whites should fight for their interests. Fixing the middle east is none of our business. Islam is at war with us.(*) White genocide is a thing. Sex differences and gender roles are real, innate and healthy. Human societies are hierarchical. (Good, as long as the elites are legitimate and elitism is based on correct values), economics is a secondary issue, Alliance of Europeans and European-Americans (vs. conservative anti-europeanism, european anti-americanism).

      There is no consensus on: JQ, abortion (eugenic vs. degenerate), Christianity (root cause of our problems vs. healthy if practiced correctly), homosexuality.

      Richard Spencer coined the term and he and his is still in the center of gravity of the movement.

      Millenial Woes produces some incredible insights in the midst of his depressed videos. His hangouts with Europeans from many countries are very informative.

      (*) Islam is not our ally against the Jews (Stormfront, David Duke). Islam is not and admirable ally and role-model against liberalism (Tradcons, Paleocons, NRx). Islamic terrorism is not a bunch of false flag attacks. (Rense, Infowars).


      August 26, 2016 at 10:16 pm

      • Contrarian- outstanding summation of an “alt-right consensus”

        Sagi Is My Guru

        August 27, 2016 at 3:45 pm

      • Agree, though I have to say there are very few alt-right sources that are not antisemitic. Breitbart isn’t (though we’ll see who they purge after the election). Derbyshire isn’t. Sailer is, mildly. Further than that you’re getting into specific bloggers like Glaivester.


        August 27, 2016 at 10:25 pm

  4. don’t know if this is old news, but Cartoon Network has an alt right show (srs). Here is episode 4:

    Otis the Sweaty

    August 26, 2016 at 11:21 am

    • I’ve tried to watch it, but I admit, I don’t get what’s going on. Maybe I’ve grown out of adult swim.

      Mike Street Station

      August 26, 2016 at 10:39 pm

      • It’s not that you’ve grown out of Adult Swim, it’s that you’re out of touch. This is clever stuff.


        August 28, 2016 at 12:55 am

      • I admit I’m stupid, but what was the point of that? The guy in the wheelchair can’t get laid even if the Mystery-expy redresses him to a ridiculous fashion, fine. But what was with the girls singing? They still seem to like the fat one, I thought the point was going to be that singers have to be thin because guys have to fantasize about them or something.


        August 28, 2016 at 9:28 am

  5. I agree with Scott Adams that both candidates have crossed the line into 24/7 incoherent lying at this point.

    I remember at one time, the alt-right types were on their high horse about how “cuckish” it was to constantly accuse Democrats of being “the real racists.” There was even a much-beloved parody twitter account that said non-stup cuck things with a handle like @demsrtherealracists or something.

    But now, Trump’s whole shtick is Hillary’s a bigot, Hillary hates blacks, I love blacks, crime bills are bad, incarceration bad, yadda yadda. And that’s without even getting into his immigration pivot, which is just utter, utter all-things-to-everyone pandering of the worst, most stereotypically slimy politician sort.


    August 26, 2016 at 11:25 am

    • Well, I’m not at all convinced DemsRRealRacists will work for Trump either. I mean, if you listen in on a black blog, you will after a while realize they don’t trust the slimy SWPLs either. Indeed, some blacks trust the SWPLs less than the racist redneck because the SWPL is being so insincere and untrustworthy. So it’s clearly not that the blacks simply don’t know already.

      Here is how you appeal to one black voter, by the way.


      August 26, 2016 at 12:20 pm

    • @demsrrealracist. He changed the handle to @Onmessageforher and started posting as a fake Hillary PR rep. But it’s the same account; if you scroll back far enough you can still see the old Demsrrealracist posts.


      August 26, 2016 at 12:39 pm

    • Haha. Trump is a very alt right guy. His butler for decades is an interesting character to gauge a hint into his own private thinking, as is his campaign manager, his demeanour and the people he associates with in his personal life…

      He’s obviously doing the “I love our Magic Negroes” routine to suck the power out of the “racist” saliva triggering word association masterminded by Caldiani. It will work. The more Trump keeps negating that word’s hypnotic effect on the dogs (of which we have all been primed to react to since age 10 in our books, media and so forth since the mid 50s), the less effective it becomes. Scott Adams speaks as much about turning his message into “love” for the blacks, gays…even muslims.

      I’ve never seen a political campaign that used this much black belt NLP and general psychological hacking. Its very dark arts and makes me reflect on the NLP that has been going on in our media, academia and culture in general since Edward Bernays introduced the topic in the mid 20th century. It also makes me reflect on the practitioners themselves, who most all be somewhat dark triad.

      The globalist/cuck//SJW jews can’t throw their other dog saliva inducing ‘anti-semitic’ trigger word either at him if he cloaks himself in the fact his daughter is Jewish (though the mostly jewish SJW journaliers have tried very very hard to no avail!!!!).

      To be fair, Trump has shifted the Overton window so much, neocon/Likkud Party Lebensraum wars in Syria, Yemen, Iran and other places are off the table now even if he fails. Future alt right leaders can learn so much here. Cloaking with token minority meatshields against social forcefields, sucking power out of words, attacking the physiognomy of opponents, word association….this election will be studied for decades, maybe centuries by Machiavellian disciples on the populist and plutocrat sides of history.

      For now, one can only hope a coalition of nationalist jews like Carl Icahn, Ron Unz and so on can help nationalist whites and nationalists of other races (mostly Asians) stop the globalists whose desire is a borderless world of constant warfare, financial asset bubbles and busts (bailouts), turning your daughters in feral sex pests, and your towns into Blade Runner human bazaars in the prairie.

      The Philosopher

      August 27, 2016 at 4:12 pm

      • Trump is not antisemitic, but many on the “alt-right” are.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        August 27, 2016 at 4:27 pm

      • “I’ve never seen a political campaign that used this much black belt NLP ”

        Yeah most campaigns are focused making points that gain them votes on election day.

        Lion of the Turambar

        August 27, 2016 at 6:24 pm

      • “neocon/Likkud Party Lebensraum wars in Syria, Yemen, Iran and other places” — your “many on the ‘alt-right'” would include this nasty little creature, Lion. It’s generous of you to allow such things to squat in the darker corners of your house. Much like the West’s open-immigration policy.


        August 28, 2016 at 7:00 am

      • I should have deleted the comment. Without comment moderation, the comment section would turn into a Jew-hating branch of Stormfront.

        Part of their antisemitic beliefs is that all Western governments are controlled by the Jewish Conspiracy for the benefit of Israel. Although we have a lot more troops in Korea than in Israel, none of them worry much about the Korean Conspiracy.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        August 28, 2016 at 8:24 am

    • remember at one time, the alt-right types were on their high horse about how “cuckish” it was to constantly accuse Democrats of being “the real racists.” There was even a much-beloved parody twitter account that said non-stup cuck things with a handle like @demsrtherealracists or something.

      The account was @DemsRRealRacist and they guy who ran it switched to this one:

      But now, Trump’s whole shtick is Hillary’s a bigot, Hillary hates blacks, I love blacks, crime bills are bad, incarceration bad, yadda yadda.

      You haven’t been paying close enough attention. Trump didn’t say incarceration is bad or that crime bills are bad. The “bigot” charge is just Trump hitting back at Hillary rhetorically. His campaign has hit her on her “super predator” comment made during the time the crime bill was passed, but not, AFAIK, on the crime bill itself.

      Trump’s recent outreach to blacks has been different from that of Democrats. It’s been mainly about law & order and jobs. It’s also an implicit appeal to whites (“I’ll make the economy so strong that even blacks will prosper”).

      And that’s without even getting into his immigration pivot, which is just utter, utter all-things-to-everyone pandering of the worst, most stereotypically slimy politician sort.

      It’s not entirely clear he has pivoted.

      David Pinsen

      August 28, 2016 at 3:17 am

      • Nothing Trump says or believes is ever entirely clear.


        August 30, 2016 at 12:21 am

  6. I don’t know how it is on TV, but in other forums the news media didn’t make as big a deal of it as I thought they would. The New York Times’ story on the speech was buried on page A12 or something. I think the problem is that the “alt right” is way too unfamiliar to the general public to whip up with a banner headline. It’s hard to generate a fist-waving crusade against people you had never heard of a day ago. If the point was to make a big splash here and now Clinton probably would have been better off just saying “Trump is emboldening racists,” rather than tying it all together with the tag “alt right,” which is going to require a lot of explanation and background detail from any reporter that writes about it. But everybody knows what a racist is.

    What commentary there is was pretty bad. Wide eyed, crude, uninformed. It was wryly amusing in the way that gasped complaints of “subversive elements in society” must have been to people involved with the counterculture in the 1960s. I hang out in the alt-rightish corner of the web and had never heard of Alex Jones, yet now I find out he’s one of the giants. What the MSM all seems to agree on is that the alt-right is a white nationalist movement, but I think very few people who could be labeled as alt-right (at least in America) are genuine white nationalists. Black people have been living in this country since the 17th century, and the U.S. has always had a sizeable (never lower than 10%) non-white minority. I don’t see advocacy for pogroms. The alt-right doesn’t believe in current shibboleths about race and universal values, but the practical effect of that wouldn’t be Klan lynchings, just a rejection of utopian social engineering projects (which includes the open borders immigration favored by the mainstream elite).


    August 26, 2016 at 11:38 am

    • ” I think the problem is that the “alt right” is way too unfamiliar to the general public to whip up with a banner headline. It’s hard to generate a fist-waving crusade against people you had never heard of a day ago. ”

      At a political forum I post at there had been virtually zero mention of the “alt right” until Hillary’s speech, and now every lefty poster is acting as if it’s the second coming of the Tea Party, with Klan hoods. I’m surprised too, but it turns out that it’s relatively easy to “generate a fist-waving crusade against people you had never heard of a day ago.”

      Mike Street Station

      August 26, 2016 at 10:45 pm

      • Yeah, but that’s political hobbyists like ourselves, not the general public. I’d bet that even today most Americans have still never heard of the alt right, let alone have enough of an idea of what it’s about to fulminate against it.


        August 27, 2016 at 10:59 am

    • It was a ludicrous speech on par with the “vast rightwing conspiracy” Clinton paranoia of yore, but I think the quality wasn’t the point. Instead, the idea was to open up for the media to start harassing these annoying little shits — that’s us — for real.

      Whatever. My recommendation regarding this newfound fame is to give the media zero trust, record everything, decline all interviews, troll them relentlessly. They’re not these educated people with cameras who have recently become interested in an interesting new political ideology and want to give it a fair shake, they are contacting you to see if they can make you seem like an evil idiot in their heavily edited clips.


      August 28, 2016 at 3:48 am

  7. So is the just a alt-right is a bunch of trolls posting cartoon frogs on Twitter, or a political faction that threatens the elections in the most powerful country on Earth?

    Did Gamergate died a long time ago, leaving no effect on society, or did it give birth to an ideological monster that could overturn the liberal world order?

    The left just can’t make up their minds.

    Jason Liu

    August 26, 2016 at 11:47 am

    • Gawker Media is dead, so GamerGate won that battle.

      • I doubt Peter Thiel was part of Gamergate, but I’ll take it.

        Jason Liu

        August 26, 2016 at 9:22 pm

    • Or, they easily made up their minds to just say whatever’s convenient. If they’re especially talented at leftery, to believe whatever’s convenient.

      Greg Pandatshang

      August 26, 2016 at 12:49 pm

  8. What if someone says, “I’m a Christian,” but the agent doesn’t believe them.

    Do they have to prove it? How would they do that?

    Well, are they … cough … uncircumcised?

    The week after 9/11, George W. Bush went to a mosque and declared for everyone to hear that Muslims “love America just as much as I do.”

    The public just misunderstood the intended meaning, that GWB loves America no more than do Muslims.


    August 26, 2016 at 12:25 pm

    • In America, circumcision is pretty commonplace, regardless of religion. It wasn’t until the recent hysteria over ‘mutilating babies’ that it’s taken a dip.
      (Not Jewish, circumcised, as are my 3 sons)

      Half Canadian

      August 26, 2016 at 5:42 pm

      • Sure, but these guys are coming from abroad, where Christian foreskins are proudly retained. Actually, I’m firmly convinced someone can figure out how to separate the sheep from the goats in nearly all cases. At worst, you know, don’t let the applicant in. There can be Christians unsuitable to reside in the US.

        No, at the bottom of it, the whole issue is just another fake ‘impossible hurdle’ to keep the status quo. Did you know we can’t deport the illegals either? They’re too many, it’s impossible, let’s just give up.


        August 27, 2016 at 3:49 am

  9. Everybody chill.

    Trump had a bad few weeks because he allowed his thin skin to get away with him.

    His response to Hillary’s speech was great. Thanks, for the link, Lion.

    He’s not cucking out. He’s just reassuring people that he’s not going to send the storm troopers into the hood, he’s just going to enforce the rule of law.

    If he can keep going like this he might erase the disaster of the last few weeks and do it.


    August 26, 2016 at 12:35 pm

    • “Enforce the rule of law” is no different from what any of the other Republicans claimed to want to do. It’s no different from what Obama says he’s doing — indeed, Trump even compared his (new) immigration agenda of only deporting “the bad ones” to what Obama is already doing in an effort to make it sound less scary.

      Trump’s whole routine was that he was going to be tougher than anyone else on illegal immigrants, and that included rounding up and deporting everyone. Remember his “deportation force” thing? His comparison of himself to Eisenhower? Not just “oh, well, every case is different, you have to have compassion.”


      August 26, 2016 at 6:00 pm

      • “Trump’s whole routine was that he was going to be tougher than anyone else on illegal immigrants, and that included rounding up and deporting everyone. Remember his “deportation force” thing? ”

        This is a common error but it shows how insidious the media is. The term “deportation force” was never used by Trump until Mika Brzezinski made it up in a question to Trump about using a deportation force to round up illegals. Suddenly that became Trump’s problem even though he never suggested the idea. It’s just like the “registering Muslims” bit. Trump didn’t suggest that, a reporter did in a question and therefore in the media it became Trump’s policy. The media has been doing this with Trump all year. Even Hannity started to do it by throwing out Gang of 8 buzzwords during his town hall this week.

        Mike Street Station

        August 26, 2016 at 10:53 pm

      • So was Trump an immigration moderate all along? Is he just an idiot who agrees with everyone in a desperate attempt to be liked/feign competence? You’re right that he was asked about the deportation force, he didn’t suggest it. But he didn’t reply by saying “no, that’s dumb” he said “yeah there’s going to be a force.”

        It was just like with the Chris Matthews abortion thing. He didn’t have to agree, but he’s a bad actor trying to improv a role whose motivations he doesn’t understand.


        August 27, 2016 at 1:56 am

      • “So was Trump an immigration moderate all along? Is he just an idiot who agrees with everyone in a desperate attempt to be liked/feign competence? You’re right that he was asked about the deportation force, he didn’t suggest it. But he didn’t reply by saying “no, that’s dumb” he said “yeah there’s going to be a force.””

        Trump, for all his alleged skill at manipulating media, also gets manipulated. When he’s asked about concepts he’s unfamiliar with, he tends to toss out some sort of “we’re looking into that” or “it’ll be great.” So reporters ask about crazy stuff to get his assent on it to generate a fake story. Trump is a policy amateur so he gets caught on this a lot.

        Mike Street Station

        August 27, 2016 at 12:59 pm

      • Trump is a policy amateur so he gets caught on this a lot.

        I’m less than half of his age and just by being an interested intelligent person who follows the news I know more about policy than he does after a whole lifetime and over a year of campaigning. That’s not good.


        August 28, 2016 at 3:02 pm

      • You know, you’re right. I’m less worried about Trump being a Hitler figure than I am with him filling his administration with closet-Nazis who are the only ones who will be willing to work within a Trump administration.

        That said I’m not sure how much damage they could do. The Jewish community has enough money to lawyer back against any malfeasance or surreptitious discrimination, unlike some. I guess it might be harder to prosecute, say, a swastika painted on a synagogue under a Trump administration in some parts of the country.


        August 28, 2016 at 6:33 pm

  10. PS Hillary’s attack was good politics and to be expected. What else is she going to say? “I am going to destroy this country? I am going to flood the country with illegals? I am going to appoint far left judges to the Supreme Court and destroy this country forever? If you thought you saw changes during the Obama Admin, you ain’t seen nothing yet!”?

    But Trump’s response was better. I think it proves the maxim that you are only as good as your best opponent. I truly hope that this exchange has set the tone for the rest of the campaign. It’s all about immigration, trade & crime. No more pussyfooting!

    The only thing that I see Trump really punting on is black on white crime. He tried that a while ago and it fizzled.


    August 26, 2016 at 12:38 pm

  11. PBS actually had a good discussion of the alt-right

  12. Trump can use “the decent people” of Farage to get out of the racist tag trap . we, american ,are decent people and you dont have à right to insult decent people .
    Scott Adams suggestion this sort of trick ..

    Bruno from Paris

    August 26, 2016 at 1:46 pm

  13. A public acknowledgment by a world famous politician officially ushers in an age where internet dissent has influence on national politics. Though the vague “alt-right” label only applies directly to a narrow slice, she has suddenly legitimized internet personalities across a wide spectrum of underground views as genuine opposition.
    Hillary made an effective speech in that it spoke to its target audience, white women, moderate conservatives, and reassured her base. However, she made a terrible long term decision by mentioning those who could easily have remained nameless.
    This speech was also remarkable in that it discards any remaining vestiges of pretense. A significant minority of the population has been unequivocally branded as the enemy. Politics are beginning to reflect the reality that when you have a pie that’s static or shrinking, you have to play a lot more zero sum games. As I like to say, diversity is easy in times of plenty.

    Giovanni Dannato

    August 26, 2016 at 2:42 pm

  14. Trump down by 1 in Gravis. Yeah it’s a Breitbart poll but they had Trump down by 5 a couple of weeks ago.

    Sean Trende was talking to Brian Beutler (douchebag) on Beutler’s show “Primary Concerns” and Trende, a moderate NeverTrumper, was saying that he was worried Trump was going to beat crooked Hillary.

    Otis the Sweaty

    August 26, 2016 at 4:25 pm

    • Yeah it’s a Breitbart poll

      Do you say the same thing with CNN, ABC, Washington Post polls? Or are all the Corporate media polls gospel?

      Andrew E.

      August 26, 2016 at 5:16 pm

    • Gravis was accurate throughout the primaries.

      Other polls with a good track record are Quinnipiac, SurveyUSA, and Monmouth.

      The Undiscovered Jew

      August 26, 2016 at 8:09 pm

  15. The most trenchant observation of the alt right is that people don’t live or die for bloodless abstractions like truth, democracy and freedom. They live and die for concrete things: home and hearth. I totally agree with this. The problem with them is that they lie about a lot, such as their hatred of Jews and blacks. Not individual Jews or blacks who misbehave, but the groups themselves. They also love Hitler, and slavery. They are, in short, a bunch of intelligent scumbags who have a few good ideas, but whose minds are unsound.


    August 26, 2016 at 4:39 pm

  16. Disappointing. She basically just fleeting mentions the phrase “alt-right” and that’s the extent of it.


    August 26, 2016 at 5:21 pm

  17. The alt-right just seems to boil down to anti-Semitic white nationalism. I’m not saying this as an attack or criticism, just as an observation. That’s sort of the common denominator ideologically.


    August 26, 2016 at 5:30 pm

    • I wish Larry Auster was still alive.


      August 26, 2016 at 9:07 pm

      • Me too.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        August 26, 2016 at 9:19 pm

      • Yes, I’d love to know what Auster would have said about this election cycle, the Republican primaries, Trump and the media onslaught against him, Clinton, the alt-right, and the rest of it. If you search his archives, you can see he had positive things to say about Trump when Trump was toying with the idea of running in 2012. Though he did say “the GOP is not going to nominate a thrice-married man for the presidency.” How much changes in four years!

        Unfortunately, his chosen intellectual heir and protege, Laura Wood, is now a totally crazed conspiracy theorist.


        August 27, 2016 at 12:26 pm

      • Dude was on his way out with pancreatic cancer, sadly. I’m not surprised he made a few bad decisions.


        August 28, 2016 at 9:30 am

    • I don’t mind some intelligent antisemitism. But, the core alt right websites (radix, occidental quarterly, etc.) have stupidly antisemitic articles and viciously anti semitic comments.


      August 27, 2016 at 12:22 pm

      • Yeah, there’s a world of difference between criticizing the Israel lobby and telling people to jump in the oven.


        August 28, 2016 at 11:15 am

      • They make Kevin MacDonald look like Oskar friggin Schindler.


        August 30, 2016 at 10:28 pm

  18. Did FDR really say that? Interesting. Source?


    August 26, 2016 at 8:18 pm

  19. Yeah this was as lame as she is. This is just her “Vast Right Wing Conspiracy” with footnotes. What did she add? A gay guy who speaks at colleges and a conspiracy theorist? Wow. I don’t think any of her followers has any idea of what she was talking about. They were probably expecting something about Bush, War and ending the Drug War/ Police are bad like usual.
    She’s coming off like Dr. Evil with Post Menstrual Syndrome. She wants “Nine Trillion Dollars” in new taxes, or the flying monkeys will get you, and your little dog too. And why do I suddenly have this craving for pickles?

    Joshua Sinistar

    August 26, 2016 at 10:40 pm

  20. The problem with this speech is that it has no relation at all to what Trump supports or what he intends to do. What does Trump have to do with the alt-Right? There is no serious, comprehensive ideology that overlaps Trumpism with the alt-Right.

    But there is something sinister about Hillary’s speech: she fully intends to use Bolshevik techniques against anyone even tangentially associated with the alt-Right. In that sense, her speech is a thinly-veiled threat .


    August 26, 2016 at 10:45 pm

    • That article is worth reading.

      It’s actually the first article of his that I read.

      It’s actually somewhat impressive that Hillary is such a paranoid and unscrupulous political animal.


      August 27, 2016 at 1:24 am

    • I like his “word-thinker” analogy.

      Everyone should read that article.


      August 27, 2016 at 1:27 am

  21. Looks like Trump’s new campaign manager, Stephen Bannon, who said “we’re the platform for the alt-right” and used to be the head of Breitbart, might be anti-Semitic:

    “Trump Chairman’s Ex-Wife: Bannon Said “He Doesn’t Like Jews”

    Former Breitbart News head Stephen Bannon was accused by his ex-wife during divorce proceedings of trying to thwart her efforts to send their children to schools with large Jewish student populations.”


    August 26, 2016 at 11:54 pm

    • Well, if you can’t trust the word of an ex-wife, then who can you trust?


      August 27, 2016 at 1:22 am

    • Very reliable source


      August 27, 2016 at 4:55 am

  22. Praise be to kek for that guy yelling Pepe. Meme magic will get our god emperor elected.

    Mayor of Space

    August 27, 2016 at 12:25 am

  23. Trumps boldness is astonishing. I regret that I could not be as audacious as him. But, perhaps few can. No other R candidate for sure.


    August 27, 2016 at 1:39 am

  24. Jew writes an essay in The Forward about why he’s Alt-Right; antisemitic Alt-Righters tell him to move to Israel.

    David Pinsen

    August 27, 2016 at 2:51 am

    • One of the comments: “He gets a Get Out of Neo-Auschwitz Free Card, but he still has to go back to Israel. @jdforward”

      As for the presidential race, it still amuses me to see people here delude themselves into thinking it’s closer than it is, or that Clinton’s stumbling while Trump’s making all of these clever-like-a-fox moves.


      August 27, 2016 at 1:05 pm

    • Of course, those may also not be real alt-righters.


      August 27, 2016 at 1:26 pm

    • I was going to post that, you beat me to it.

      The comments are really, really nasty–your response to wannabe allies is ‘go jump in the oven’?

      I think the alt-right pretty much represents Nazis at this point. Not to say everyone should start supporting unrestricted immigration and invading Iran, but we need a new word.Soft-alt-right? Nationalist?


      August 27, 2016 at 10:15 pm

      • That poor kid eventually capitulated on Twitter and agreed to stop calling himself an alt righter.


        August 28, 2016 at 4:06 am

      • Are the comments on the Scribe/Forward site? I can’t find them on any browser. I see a number for comments on the upper right corner but when I click on it nothing happens.

        Or are you referring to Twitter?


        August 28, 2016 at 8:01 pm

      • They’re at the bottom. You have to click a button to see them. It’s possible your browser has something installed that’s blocking that functionality.


        August 29, 2016 at 7:15 am

      • I never got the comments to open (can someone help me? Garr?) but I’ll take your word for it – this is what I’ve been harping on here for months.

        “The comments are really, really nasty–your response to wannabe allies is ‘go jump in the oven’?”

        Well yeah, if you think that anyone on the alt-right really thinks of Jews as wannabe allies. They think of Jews as cultural polluters, eternal enemies. This is such an absurd idea that maybe a lot of the nice folks who comment here don’t appreciate it. In their minds no Jew can ever be an ally. There’s no place for Jews on the alt-right. (Or the hard left, but that’s a different story.) We can scream all we want that Darren Wilson was right, that Mike Brown was a punk, but “Zyklona Baby” (an actual twitter handle) will still tell us we should go get gassed.

        What’s truly annoying about the alt-right is that, when confronted about this, they deny it. At this point, they become frauds.


        August 29, 2016 at 7:35 am

      • I believe that populism and nationalism are preferable to alt-right. At the same time, changing the name of the movement doesn’t mean much as long as the extremists are still around.

        Lewis Medlock

        August 29, 2016 at 11:55 am

      • @destructure, I think at this point you’re just arguing against yourself, and I’ll leave it at that. We didn’t stop any dominoes. They won. We were defeated, ignominiously, and slunk out of Vietnam in utter disgrace. And guess what? No further Communist expansion in the SE, and Communism fell apart. Total waste. Read Ehrhart.


        August 29, 2016 at 12:54 pm

      • gothamette — You think that because the communists ended up with control without subsequent expansion that it disproves the domino theory. That’s simplistic.

        Vietnam lost almost twice as many people as the US lost in every war it’s ever fought combined. Communists may have won but it was an Alexandrian victory. After having fought two major and costly wars, the commies realized the US was determined not to allow communist expansion. They realized any country they tried to overthrow would be mired in civil war for years. Whatever they won would be wrecked. Plus, they didn’t have the money or resources to wage wars like we did.

        The international situation had changed as well. As discussed, the commies were exploiting national independence movements to push communism. After WW2, the empires were divesting themselves of colonies and transitioning them to independence. Most of them peacefully. This did away with much of the impetus for revolution.


        August 30, 2016 at 12:08 am

    • @IHTG “They’re at the bottom. You have to click a button to see them. It’s possible your browser has something installed that’s blocking that functionality.”

      I can read the comments of other Forward articles, but not that. It’s annoying. I really want to see them. Oh well.


      August 29, 2016 at 9:01 pm

  25. Altright is what you get when you tell young white males they can’t take what they see and presume is theirs. It’s inevitable. That’s why there’s no coherent ideology. Yet.

    What did the left think? They rly thought the most energetic force of the last 500 years would just roll over and die? To just give up the US & Western Europe?

    The coalition of the fringes tried to shame them into silence. But this only leads to the most shameless people taking the lead and a silent majority supporting them.

    By trolling “cucks” & liberals w/ Pepe memes & smartass tweets, they became a strong force on the net. Imagine what they can do when they get serious, angry and over 30.


    August 27, 2016 at 11:02 am

    • Exactly right. Excellent comment.

      Andrew E.

      August 27, 2016 at 12:08 pm

    • I think most serious Alt-Righters are over 30. Their power though is that they are shaping the 20-25 demographic of disaffected white guys. Basically our country sacrificed the lives and livelihood of the 30+ Alt-Righters on the altar of PC. They are applying an even more stern cuckolding to the 20 year old demographic, but they have the very illustrative example of their elder peers and are waking up.

      Panther of the Blogocube

      August 27, 2016 at 1:21 pm

      • I think most serious Alt-Righters are over 30. Their power though is that they are shaping the 20-25 demographic of disaffected white guys.

        Don’t know if you’d consider Alex Jones as “alt right” but he has a huge following amongst white proles under 30. They are very intrigued by his ability to describe everything in terms of a secretive conspiracy. I’d think the majority of the commenters on Sailer, LotB, Heartiste have a 4-year degree at the very least.


        August 27, 2016 at 7:50 pm

      • “Don’t know if you’d consider Alex Jones as “alt right” but he has a huge following amongst white proles under 30.”

        I’ve seen about a dozen bumper stickers on pickup trucks in the last couple of years.

        Lewis Medlock

        August 29, 2016 at 12:17 pm

  26. Alt-right is really more of a sociological phenomena than a political one. The animating force is a desire to rebel, which is a complex urge young whites are having now for a variety of reasons, some legit, some not.

    This is one of the few pieces I’ve read that actually gets into the psychology of the movement:

    “The savvy have learned to capitalize on this incompleteness. Just as the back pages of comic books aimed at teenage boys once advertised Charles Atlas exercise plans, X-ray specs, and hypnosis lessons, today’s internet is awash in products tailored to fill the voids of the 21st century millennial male. There are supplements to make your muscles grow, insoles to make you taller, colognes to make you irresistible. There are endless ebooks promising ironclad ‘life hacks.’ Abstain from masturbation to gain superhuman virility! ‘Peacock’ and ‘neg’ to scramble women’s brains into sleeping with you! Earn a fortune blogging from Thailand!

    And so too is there alt-right politics (many proponents of which, it must be noted, have side gigs hawking miracle cures for masculine socio-economic impotence).”


    August 27, 2016 at 4:17 pm

    • Hahaha, it’s not as good as “The Authoritarian Personality” but still a fine, condescending smearing effort. More energetic, because it’s shorter.

      Tell me, what are the benefits of diversity again?

      By many metrics, of course, young white men are still doing well. They have access to more helpful technology, exciting entertainment, and eclectic cuisine than any generation in human history.

      Oh lovely (wipes eyes). Anyway, it’s a caricature designed to herd those awful white males back into the progressive line again by a strong dose of shaming. It only works if you allow yourself to be shamed by trannies and bluehaired obese girls though.

      Looking forward to what this “writer and cartoonist living in Vancouver” (non-millionaire part) will do next.


      August 28, 2016 at 3:28 am

    • It’s a good article. Thank you for linking to it. I might add that the alt-right gets what strength it has from telling some hard truths about race. Walt and Mearsheimer continue to contribute to mainstream journals such as Foreign Policy and I recently saw the latter on the PBS Newshour. Mention black crime and you’ll be disappeared.


      August 28, 2016 at 9:08 pm

      • Two thoughts I had reading it again:
        – The internet has really pacified a lot of people. He draws analogies to the hippies, but at least the hippies had marches and stuff. All the alt-right people do is sit around and talk to each other on the internet. There’s something inherently lazy about just “claiming” Trump as their candidate rather than doing any actual political work themselves.
        – Alt-right people are all middle class or possibly higher. Yet the mainstream media has wasted so much time trying to find its roots in prole economic malaise. Middle class people tend to be psychologically screwed up a la “American Beauty.” I wonder if the weirdo alt-right 20-something sitting at his computer in mom’s basement will become a stock character. It sort of already is.


        August 30, 2016 at 12:10 am

      • I wonder how these people get along with their parents. What is thanksgiving like?


        August 30, 2016 at 11:22 am

  27. The alt-right is the denial of the Blank Slate in my interpretation. It is probably more synonymous with the Manosphere, far more than say, David Duke. I hard never even heard of Breitbart or David Duke until CNN brought them up (which is typical, associating the alt right with “our eternal enemy” Emmanual Goldstein/KKK…..Al Qaeda/ISIS/Putin/Saddam/….You….).

    It is a creature that arose and derives its energy from the modern Mad Max deregulated sexual market.

    The alt-right is in essence a social realism movement – women love masculine dangerous men, certain minorities don’t contribute much to civilisation due to previous adaptation in their homelands, the globalists want to asset strip the economy and ply you with drugs and soma, your cubicle desk job is extraction loserdom, the cuckold class sell out their kind for sadomasochistic tingles etc.

    It reminds me of the movie Fight Club. Its the first time I can remember seeing those themes at all in any media. That will be remembered as the first Alt Right mainstream message.

    I cannot disagree with those above conjectures myself. I believe they are true.

    My issue has always been its pretty dire endorsements of Austrian School economics, its denial of climate change and its lack of understanding that most liberal policies, social and economic, are efficient and welfare maximising in relatively homogenous places like Denmark, Germany (pre Merkel) and so on. The libertarian elements calling for deregulating finance, pharma and food are especially intellectually worthless as well. These are the autistic useful idiots that gave the globalists so much wealth and power in the first place. The Russian Oligarchs for instance rubbed their hands at the arrival of Jeffrey Sachs and co.

    The movement does not yet have the clarity to see that the enlightenment necessitates fully accepting the Struggle of the Will over resources, land and women. Our forefathers knew that is what it always all boiled down to. Now, I really don’t know what happens once that point is reached. We are as likely to be pragmatic and close borders, stop bombing Israel’s enemy list and so on as to overreact to the people that have benefited from their slumber. They have planned for that eventuality…what do you think the multi-trillion standing army in a MAD world of nuclear weapons is for

    ….Russia?! Hahaha.

    The Philosopher

    August 27, 2016 at 4:45 pm

    • As an aside, the Russians suffer under their own hypnosis under the psychopath Tsar Putin. In all times, in all of history, with the exception of the elven Scandanavian peoples it seems, all peoples have been ruled by their Extractors to their overall welfare detriment. Marx was not wrong.

      The West was the only place in history where people had the IQ and the testosterone levels to break the Egyptian Pyramid and end the Divine Right of Extraction….aided by Jews no less!

      Without Marx and Trotsky, no free primary education, no ban on child labour, no minimum wage, no maximum work week, no pensions….and therefore no internet, consumer economy, Ford Corporation…..

      The Philosopher

      August 27, 2016 at 4:52 pm

    • Poignant. I think you’ve said it right.

      Two in the Bush

      August 27, 2016 at 9:29 pm

  28. Here are some ideas from Vox Day on the Alt Right.

    In the interest of developing a core Alt Right philosophy upon which others can build.

    The Alt Right is of the political right in both the American and the European sense of the term. Socialists are not Alt Right. Progressives are not Alt Right. Liberals are not Alt Right. Communists, Marxists, Marxians, cultural Marxists, and neocons are not Alt Right.
    The Alt Right is an ALTERNATIVE to the mainstream conservative movement in the USA that is nominally encapsulated by Russel Kirk’s 10 Conservative Principles, but in reality has devolved towards progressivism. It is also an alternative to libertarianism.
    The Alt Right is not a defensive attitude and rejects the concept of noble and principled defeat. It is a forward-thinking philosophy of offense, in every sense of that term. The Alt Right believes in victory through persistence and remaining in harmony with science, reality, cultural tradition, and the lessons of history.
    The Alt Right believes Western civilization is the pinnacle of human achievement and supports its three foundational pillars: Christianity, the European nations, and the Rule of Law.
    The Alt Right is openly and avowedly nationalist. It supports all nationalisms and the right of all nations to exist, homogeneous and unadulterated by foreign invasion and immigration.
    The Alt Right is anti-globalist. It opposes all groups who work for globalist ideals or globalist objectives.
    The Alt Right is anti-equalitarian. It rejects the idea of equality for the same reason it rejects the ideas of unicorns and leprechauns, noting that human equality does not exist in any observable scientific, legal, material, intellectual, sexual, or spiritual form.
    The Alt Right is scientodific. It presumptively accepts the current conclusions of the scientific method (scientody), while understanding a) these conclusions are liable to future revision, b) that scientistry is susceptible to corruption, and c) that the so-called scientific consensus is not based on scientody, but democracy, and is therefore intrinsically unscientific.
    The Alt Right believes identity > culture > politics.
    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.
    The Alt Right understands that diversity + proximity = war.
    The Alt Right doesn’t care what you think of it.
    The Alt Right rejects international free trade and the free movement of peoples that free trade requires. The benefits of intranational free trade is not evidence for the benefits of international free trade.
    The Alt Right believes we must secure the existence of white people and a future for white children.
    The Alt Right does not believe in the general supremacy of any race, nation, people, or sub-species. Every race, nation, people, and human sub-species has its own unique strengths and weaknesses, and possesses the sovereign right to dwell unmolested in the native culture it prefers.
    The Alt Right is a philosophy that values peace among the various nations of the world and opposes wars to impose the values of one nation upon another as well as efforts to exterminate individual nations through war, genocide, immigration, or genetic assimilation.
    TL;DR: The Alt Right is a Western ideology that believes in science, history, reality, and the right of a genetic nation to exist and govern itself in its own interests.


    August 27, 2016 at 4:59 pm

    • “three foundational pillars: Christianity, …”

      Richard Spencer is a nietzschian, pagan anti-christian. The original alternativeright website design prominently featured Yggdrasil, the cosmic tree from Norse mythology. Alt-right blogs published numerous treatises on how Christianity is the root cause of our problems. But there was also a christian faction and the pragmatic consensus has come to be that religion should not be a divisive factor in the movement.

      The members of the alt-right are mostly millenials and Gen-Xers. I don’t believe that they are more or less religious than other members of their generations. Those who are christian have to explain away the globalism and third-worldism of mainstream churches and the Zionism of evangelicals.

      Vox Day moved quickly from Gamergate, anti-SJW to now almost pronouncing himself as the Pope of the alt-right. Hillary’s speech prompted alt-right outlets and activists to define the themselves. Some distance themselves from each other and try to claim the term for themselves. The fallout may cause a split of the movement.


      August 27, 2016 at 8:26 pm

      • Spencer isn’t a pagan, he’s an atheist. The Norse mythology stuff is just aesthetic. It was good for keeping the hardcore Christians out of the comments section.


        August 28, 2016 at 1:01 am

      • I don’t think it is too helpful to try to have an orthodoxy at this point. You are right it will make people enemies. I doubt Trump thought of himself as a member of the Alt Right.

        Alex Jones was mentioned in Hillary’s speech, but does he think of himself as Alt Right? He doesn’t really say much about race, which is something the Alt Right discusses.


        August 28, 2016 at 1:10 am

    • The problem is these aren’t really new ideas. There’s a real lack of appreciation for the trial and error of American history, a belief that where we are now is a product of stupidity, as opposed to a logical end result of a very difficult to govern country with a very difficult heritage.


      August 28, 2016 at 12:17 am

      • I think many in the Alt Right just want to go back to nation- states that were more or less ethnically homogeneous, which really isn’t new as you say. Things did happen in the US and Europe that changed these nations from that.


        August 28, 2016 at 1:14 am

      • Really good conversation here all round. By calling out the alt right she unfortunately leads curious high iq people to google and read the materials…which in the long run means…”I was once a rabid sjw who came to knew”. Repeat.

        And anyone that wont agree wouldnt have read it anyways in their daily “reality”.

        Mentioning the alt right is their opening salvo. They see the significant momentum. As crime and immigration shows the predictable results of human bio diversity it will no longer be alternative.

        Well actually id argue its far more mainstream than globalism.

        Do people realise that most of hilarys followers on social media are bots or most of her donations come from 230 people? They are the true swamp dweller conspiracy.

        And who can say a cuckold can ever be a mainstream political power player now? Even paul ryan, sterling and “respected” in the media, house speaker, needed trumps endorsement not to be primaried. Their golden boy cuckold has no clothes. In time he will be primaried…

        The globalists whose media publications are not read by anyone and have been losing hundreds of millions without bezos and slim to give their journalier priests prostitute allowances because their low t gamma asses cant get laid, present the illusion that they are mainstream. Their economic studies have no logic. Their financial system is unstable and crooked. The economy has stagnated for 30 years despite technology increasing 300%. The scales are falling from peoples eyes. I welcome her endorsement.

        The Philosopher

        August 28, 2016 at 3:28 am

      • I can’t speak to Europe, but when exactly was America ever even close to being “ethnically homogenous”? We stole much of this territory from the Indians, and later the Mexicans, who continued to hang around in the lands where they had been previously living, and imported hundreds of thousands of blacks from Africa. Even before the era of “mass immigration” we had created perhaps the most ethnically diverse empire the world had ever seen.


        August 28, 2016 at 11:02 am

      • “, but when exactly was America ever even close to being “ethnically homogenous?
        We stole much of this territory from the Indians, and later the Mexicans, who continued to hang around in the lands where they had been previously living”

        Spain “stole” the land from the Indians too, which became New Spain The Mexicans, equivalent to Americans, revolted against Spain to gain independence. Americans revolted against England to gain independence. New Spain , which later became Mexico, was occupying California.”

        There were only 8000 people in California in 1840, not counting Indians. Indian population was estimated at 30,000-120,000. So this land was barely controlled by Mexico. There were also Americans living there.

        From wiki:”The Mexican Congress passed the General Law of Expulsion in 1827. This law declared all persons born in Spain to be “illegal immigrants” and ordered them to leave the new country of Mexico.”

        I guess Mexicans had no problems with kicking people out.

        Texas wasn’t settle much either.See below.

        This is from wiki: “The northern area of Mexico was sparsely settled and not well controlled politically by the government based in Mexico City. After independence from Spain in 1821, Mexico contended with internal struggles that sometimes verged on civil war. In the sparsely settled interior of northern Mexico, the end of Spanish colonial rule was marked by the end of financing for presidios and for subsidies to indigenous groups to maintain the peace. There were conflicts between indigenous peoples in the northern region as well. The Comanche were particularly successful in expanding their territory in the Comanche–Mexico Wars and garnering resources. The Apache–Mexico Wars also made Mexico’s north a violent place, with no effective political control.”

        Mexico revolted from Spain,which was European. Mexico when it was Spain also “stole” land from the Indians.

        How come nobody says Mexico stole Indian lands. Mexico didn’t want to give the lands back to the natives when they broke from Spain.

        The US was almost 90% white in the late 60’s. This was a white country with a relatively small black population and a few Hispanics, some of whom were white.


        August 28, 2016 at 6:26 pm

      • Yeah and most of Europe was 100% white. Even at 10%, America’s minority population has caused us outsized problems. What percent of the country was black when we fought a civil war over them?


        August 29, 2016 at 11:41 pm

    • The Alt Right believes Western civilization is the pinnacle of human achievement… The Alt Right does not believe in the general supremacy of any race, nation…

      So trouble maintaining basic internal consistency.

      The Alt Right is anti-equalitarian. It rejects the idea of equality for the same reason it rejects the ideas of unicorns and leprechauns, noting that human equality does not exist in any observable scientific, legal, material, intellectual, sexual, or spiritual form.

      This does not mesh so well with those “foundational pillars” of Christianity, and “Rule of Law.” We are, in theory, equal under the law, a famous turn of phrase enshrined in the Declaration of Independence. Also, Christianity is in someways egalitarian in that everyone can have a personal relationship with Jesus; everyone can achieve salvation by the grace of God.


      August 28, 2016 at 11:43 am

      • White supremacy = whites should rule over other races.
        The British empire and the Nazis were white/aryan/german supremacist.
        Many Japanese consider themselves to be a superior race. But they are currently not interested in ruling over others.

        I think we would should advocate for or own race, even if we were the ugliest, dumbest and clumsiest race on the planet. Jared Taylor has adopted the term “white advocacy” recently.


        August 28, 2016 at 4:13 pm

      • Actually some of the big alt-righters think the Enlightenment was All A Big Mistake.

        That’s the problem with trying to define something as amorphous as the alt-right. About the only thing they all have in common is a pathological hatred of Jews. Oh yeah, blacks. But the big Kahuna is the Jews.


        August 28, 2016 at 8:11 pm

  29. The Alt-Right is made up of 3 separate groups:
    1. White Nationalists: Anglin, DailyStormer
    2. Paleocons: Buchanan
    3. NextCons: Coulter, Milo, Sailer, Breitbart, Drudge

    Some people straddle 2 or even 3 of the groups.

    The WN’s dominate the Alt-Right internet forces, the Paleocons and Paleocon-lites dominate the intellectual core of the Alt-Right, but the overwhelming majority of Alt-Righters are NextCons. 95%+ of the people who post here are NextCons.

    Otis the Sweaty

    August 28, 2016 at 6:32 am

    • That’s basically accurate, although I would say that the Alt-Right is a radicalized subset of what you call the “NextCons”, which is a broader anti-SJW cultural movement that doesn’t really have a catchy name. Populists, nationalists, Trumpists.


      August 28, 2016 at 7:48 am

      • Yes, Populists, Right-Populists or Alt-Populists is a better name than NextCons.

        I think I’ll go with Right-Populists.

        Otis the Sweaty

        August 28, 2016 at 10:40 am

    • Or, in other words, there’s a larger moderate faction that doesn’t get exercised as much, which is true of most movements, I think.

      I’m more interested to see what happens after Trump loses. (No, not NLP or trolling, just reading the polls.)


      August 28, 2016 at 9:38 am

      • Are you “just reading the polls”? If you were you would be aware of how dramatically the race is tightening. In fact, Morning Consult has the race down to a 3 point Hil lead.

        Trump is going to be leading by the first debate. Things don’t look good for Crooked Hillary.

        And if we lose? Honestly, we’re better off. I don’t want Trump owning the next recession. Let Crooked Hillary own it and we’ll come back and stomp her guts in 2020.

        Otis the Sweaty

        August 28, 2016 at 10:59 am

      • A Trump loss will mean an extreme liberal SJW Supreme Court, plus a belief by the mainstream media and the GOPe that the voters repudiated Trumpism. Do you want to see Jeb Bush lose to Hillary in 2020? That’s what’s likely to happen if Trump loses.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        August 28, 2016 at 12:02 pm

      • I was referring to the fallout on the alt-right, not so much the country as a whole–on that you have accurately described what I think the result will be, though I think Jeb will be replaced by someone else.

        So far the polls have gone back and forth, but Trump hasn’t really pulled ahead. Still, he’s got 70 days or so.


        August 28, 2016 at 1:18 pm

      • Otis, you are one hell of an optimist. If Trump loses, the 10% of the populace who supported him most strongly are going to walk away from politics.


        August 28, 2016 at 7:49 pm

      • It seems like Donald’s best case scenario at this point is winning the popular but losing the electoral college. I think his black pandering could help achieve that by increasing his margin of victory in the Deep South.


        August 28, 2016 at 10:32 pm

    • Paleocons like Buchanan are older conservatives who have influenced the Alt-Right, but they’re not some cohesive group that constitute some sort of faction within the Alt-Right.

      Media outlets like Breitbart have staff members who consider themselves part of or sympathetic to the Alt-Right, but I would not say that the other staff members who aren’t or don’t constitute some sort of other faction of the Alt-Right.

      The Alt-Right is basically an anti-Semitic white nationalist movement that has been influenced by certain older conservatives and paleoconservatives like Pat Buchanan, and that has some influence in media outlets like Breitbart.


      August 28, 2016 at 12:17 pm

      • “The Alt-Right is basically an anti-Semitic white nationalist movement that has been influenced by certain older conservatives and paleoconservatives like Pat Buchanan, and that has some influence in media outlets like Breitbart.”

        Right, but the older paleocons were in their minds, patriots. The new alt-right hates America. They pare quite open about it. They reject Enlightenment principles.


        August 28, 2016 at 7:24 pm

    • It’s about the journey, not the destination.

      You gave a broad definition. I produced a narrower definition. I now realize that what really binds all of these groups together is the journey, not the destination. That is after all how left-liberalism, cultural marxism, the coalition of the fringes, etc. managed to gain power and seize the public discourse. We often remark that leftism, liberalism and globalism are incoherent. Environmentalism vs. immigration; cultural relativism vs. feminism; homosexual rights vs. muslim immigration, transgenderism vs. feminism, etc.
      They don’t care. They attack us instead and grab power and resources from us.

      Right wing groups used to quibble and LARP endlessly about how a far distant utopia should exactly look like. That is a waste of time in our blue pilled times. Why pick a fight on the right, as long as there are targets on the left? The overton window must shift into our court, immigration must be stopped, borders enforced, affirmative action abolished, freedom of association restored, the family court system reformed, white guilt dismantled. That is difficult enough. The choice between christian monarchy, swiss style direct democracy or pagan primitivism can be postponed for later.


      August 28, 2016 at 4:41 pm

    • Has anyone seen any data on the numbers/proportion of each group?


      August 29, 2016 at 10:23 am


    Hey Lion, you have a Twitter account, think you can send this poor kid a PM with a link to your site? Sounds like he could use some moral support right now (the comments are nasty, and I was pretty much expecting the Nazis to jump in and trash him, but hadn’t expected the volume).


    August 28, 2016 at 11:18 am

    • Tom

      August 28, 2016 at 12:19 pm

      • That’s some sick shit there at the bottom. Seidel does deserve support.


        August 28, 2016 at 2:18 pm

      • Really don’t have much sympathy for the “Jewish Alt Righter”. Well, I feel bad for him if he really was that ignorant but a Jewish guy publicly proclaiming himself Alt Right is really just provoking the CyberNazis. There is a lot more to the Alt Right than the Nazis, but the Nazis don’t know that yet so to them, saying “I’m a Jewish Alt Righter”, is like saying “I’m a Jewish Nazi”, which quite naturally does not go over well with them.

        If somebody kicks a hornet’s nest, they don’t deserve to get stung to death but they did bring it on themselves.

        Reality is this: The Alt Right includes a massive, absolutely huge, Judeophobic presence. The Alt Right is not all Nazis or Nazi sympathizers, most are not, but it’s loudest and most virulent section are indeed Nazis; and contrary to what Milo says, they are not “doing it for the lols”.

        These people are part of the movement and, like the GamerGaters before them, they have an importance that goes far beyond their numbers, they are very organized and they are not going to go away. They are powerless in the real world but they are a force to be reckoned with on social media. DO NOT PROVOKE THEM.

        Otis the Sweaty

        August 28, 2016 at 6:22 pm

      • @Otis,

        Yeah, but he got Patton Oswalt to argue with him. He got a lot of attention.


        August 29, 2016 at 7:40 am

  31. Also, you might want to comment on either that or this:

    I’m not saying you should agree with the guy, but it’s definitely worth a read.


    August 28, 2016 at 12:45 pm

  32. I don’t worry about state polls, win the popular vote and the states will take care of themselves, but if we are looking at how Trump gets to 270, here it is:

    Romney states: 206
    FLA: 29
    IA: 6
    NV: 6
    OH: 18
    PA: 20
    NH: 4

    Total: 289

    OUT: VA (too much DC scum), CO (too much liberal scum), Wisc, Michigan, Minnesota (too much cuck scum)

    Unlikely but Possible: Oregon (immigrant haters)

    We essentially don’t need IA, NV and NH, so no need to advertise there. No need to advertise in the OUT states either. That saves money. Do need to play defense in NC, but all the other Romney states are safe.

    Lion: re your concerns about the Supreme Court in the case of a Hillary victory: if Trump wins the popular vote but loses the electoral college, the GOP probably holds the senate. In that case you can be sure that they will stonewall and Hillary SC nominees as Hillary will have no legitimacy and Trump will likely be running again in 2020.

    Otis the Sweaty

    August 28, 2016 at 1:38 pm

    • He’s probably not going to win PA. However, he actually only needs to win 269.


      August 28, 2016 at 6:02 pm

    • The senate is not going to stonewall SC candidates for 4 years.


      August 28, 2016 at 7:46 pm

    • I don’t agree with the MSM view that Trump is a down-ticket drag. Quite the opposite. I do think that candidates matter. Brat was a good candidate, Cantor was odious. Nehlen was a jerk; Ryan (give him his due) knew his constituency. No one could have beaten him. But populism can win with the right messenger. I don’t think that all is lost if Trump loses. A populist wave taking Congress can make a huge difference.


      August 29, 2016 at 7:48 am

      • Why do you consider Nehlen a jerk?

        Also even if he is a jerk who cares? This is such a woman thing to say.


        August 30, 2016 at 2:09 pm

  33. Climate change is horseshit pushed by Soros for his schemes. This was revealed in the leaks.


    August 28, 2016 at 5:56 pm

  34. lol trump wont run again – no chance he’d be given anothercshot anyway

    james n.s.w

    August 28, 2016 at 8:52 pm

    • if Trump wins the popular vote but loses the electoral college he absolutely will run again in 4 years.

      Otis the Sweaty

      August 29, 2016 at 6:49 am

      • That won’t happen. The opposite could happen.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        August 29, 2016 at 7:00 am

      • he will not and if he does he wont make it through the primaries again. he managed to get this far because his early momentum was so mindblowing and awesome but he is totally out of fuel at this point, let alone in another four years.

        james n.s.w

        August 29, 2016 at 7:55 am

  35. The difference between the alt-right and the old right is that the alt-right love what Colin Kaepernick did, and the old right is appalled by it.


    August 29, 2016 at 9:02 pm

  36. Regarding the Vietnam War, there’s a tendency among many conservatives and Republicans to be mindlessly pro-war and pro-military, regardless of the circumstances. They’re primarily concerned about not appearing unpatriotic. It’s sort of like how liberals tend to be mindlessly anti-racist.

    Most conservatives supported the Iraq war and only started opposing it after it didn’t turn out that great and it could be blamed on other people like neocons and Jews. Those conservatives who opposed it from the start, like Pat Buchanan, blamed it on neocons and Jews from the start.

    By contrast, the Vietnam War, even if it ended up being pointless and didn’t turn out so well, couldn’t be blamed on other people, which is why it’s still defended by conservatives.


    August 30, 2016 at 2:55 pm

    • It was also a generational thing. Most conservatives of that era defined themselves in opposition to the anti-war left, which they associated with communism, anarchy, terrorism, etc. To this day, they can’t let the anti-war left “win” the Vietnam argument. It’s like an old married couple where the husband cannot concede the wife was right about the need to make that left turn on the trip to Disneyland back in ’68.

      I don’t know what the exactly equivalent would be today, but if it turns out, with the passage of time, that the SWJ set is proved unequivocally correct about something very important to them right now, you could imagine today’s conservatives/alt-righters stubbornly refusing to concede the point for many decades to come.


      August 30, 2016 at 6:07 pm

  37. The anti-Semitism of the alt-right is thick enough to cut with a knife. The alt-right, as it stands, is far removed from genteel blogs like this, Derbyshire, the verbose Moldbug, et al. Rather, it is the children of 4chan’s /pol/ who hold an opinion of Jews on the level of Stormfront with their frogs and Trump memes that have received all the attention.


    August 30, 2016 at 10:51 pm

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: