CUCK, CPAC cucked, cuckingly

CPAC conservatives are going to beat the Left by fighting the Alt-Right.

In a hard-hitting speech, the head of a major conservative organization argued that the so-called "alt-right" is actually just a cover for a "hate-filled left-wing fascist group" seeking to undermine conservatism.

Speaking at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference just outside Washington, D.C., American Conservative Union Executive Director Dan Schneider sought to cast the loosely organized movement with ties to white nationalists that played a role in last year's elections out of the conservative coalition.

"There is a sinister organization that is trying to worm its way into our ranks and we must not be duped," he told thousands of grassroots conservatives. "Just a few years ago, this hate-filled left-wing fascist group hijacked the very term 'alt-right.' That term has been used for a long time in a very good and normal way."

The speech was the latest salvo in an ongoing war among conservatives about what to do about the alt-right, which was galvanized by President Trump's populist campaign for the White House. Some members of the American Conservative Union's board, including President Matt Schlapp, rallied around Trump despite concerns about his breaks from conservative ideology.

Seriously, who listens to these idiots anymore? We're not trying to worm our way into their ranks. We reject conservativism and we reject conservatives just as we reject noble defeat, futility, and failure. Do you know how to confirm that Milo truly isn't Alt-Right? Because he agreed to speak at CPAC. I'd no more agree to speak there than to a meeting of Whigs or Popolares.

Conservatism is mortally wounded. It is conceptually cancer-stricken. It clings desperately to its pseudo-ideology in a world of identity. It is an outdated and irrelevant posture, nothing more.

UPDATE: Did a Darkstream on Periscope about the cucks and cons attacking the Alt-Right. Longest, best-attended one yet! The replay is here.

Mailvox: Alt-Right allies

Because of the rise of the Alt-Right around the world, it is not going to be possible for SJWs and cuckservatives to continue to deny the fact that the Alt-Right is neither Neo-Nazi nor White Supremacist, but a broad-spectrum nationalist movement that upholds the rights of Europeans and white Americans to self-determination, freedom of association, and self-defined nationalism.

White nationalism is Alt-Right. Imperialist Teutonic supremacism is not. Anti-globalism is Alt Right. Eine Welt, Ein Reich, Ein Gedanke is not.

Scriba Dei writes of his experience being a black man who is largely in agreement with the Alt-Right, and how he was treated by racist white SJWs as a result.

I wrote for a SJW converged website. Theoretically, the site claims to be politically neutral and welcoming of all perspectives among its writers on one condition: they must be written politely, without purposeful intent to insult or deride any one group or individual.

Failure to heed the rule results in progressive sanctions up to and including a permanent ban.

I am sure you understand how this rule works in practice, for its conservative writers: they constantly walk on eggshells, in a world where only the cuckest of the cucks can seemingly escape unscathed.

And so it came as no surprise that the SJW inner circle was not too happy about my surging popularity by pimping alt-right talking points to their cucky conservative readership. Even for this group, the ideas we peddle proved too seductive, and as it turns out, I have been marked for deletion.

Now, being Black allowed me to get away with far more than the average Straight White Male writer could. But in the end, as one of my last pieces for them made it clear, there is no reasoning with the left. If you break the narrative, you get slashed. I was a thorn in their side, constantly reminding them that nope, these beliefs are not the domain of mindless, hateful, neo-nazi Supremacists and they were the mindless ones for denying them; and in the long run, the heartless ones, too.

No matter how nicely said--how well sourced--my pieces were, they suddenly became offensive in and off themselves, regardless of intent. And so I've been thrown out the window.

The last time we spoke, you said something which marked me: it is important for those of us who couldn't as easily be dismissed as Nazis and supremacists to serve as allies for the Alt-Right.

In my own small way, I've decided to do it. I know that the usual suspects will have dismissed my last mail to you as a sham; I've made it a little harder for them to do so this time.

Remember, cucky, if you criticize him or what he is saying, you're raciss! So brave. Thank you for this.

The opposition media is fake news

Mike Cernovich explains how it works when the opposition media wants to create a false narrative:

Years ago I viewed the media as biased. The conclusions were questioned, but the underlying factual basis of the story was taken for granted.

• Then we had the Rolling Stone rape hoax.
• Hate crime hoaxes are breathlessly repeated.
• Russians are falsely accused of hacking a power grid.
• Anonymous bloggers at PropOrNot are allowed to smear other bloggers (many of them liberal) in the pages of the WaPo.
• WaPo admits it publishes stories where it “does not itself vouch for the validity” of its sources.

Even if you assume these nine people exist, why isn’t this information disclosed:

• Did these 9 people work for Obama at the time of the alleged conversation? If so, how many? This bias and conflict-of-interest should be disclosed.
• Why haven’t these 9 truth tellers resigned in protest? Man or woman up, be a whistle blower!

Since you’re liberal, maybe you don’t know what it’s like to be lied about. In the world of Trump supporters, we distrust the media because they lie about us daily.

On August 31, 2016, I wrote an article: Is Mike Cernovich Part of the Alt-Right? If you don’t want to read it all, note this concluding sentence: “No, Mike Cernovich is not part of the alt-right.”

On December 15, 2016, a WaPo blogger reported: “In an interview with alt-right writer Mike Cernovich, Hyde said the channel had ‘nine months’ to decide the show’s future.”

The blogger of that piece, David Weigel, is obsessed with me. He snarkily name drops my book “Gorilla Mindset,” and reads my Twitter religiously. He knows I am not “alt-right,” and lies about me. WaPo has never issued a retraction.

We saw examples of this last night at the Darkstream. Seven times, a troll tried to call me a "white supremacist", which is something they picked up from the false narrative established originally by Jeet Heer during #GamerGate. Now, I know better than to bother pointing out to trolls and SJWs that what they're saying isn't true, much less argue with them; the object of the troll is to distract and to disrupt so I simply block them.

That is, by the way, evidence that the attempt to conflate the Alt-Right with white supremacism and neo-nazism has failed. Wikipedia now has an Alt-Right page; while it is a Richard Spencer-obsessed hit piece, it least it is no longer a simple redirect to the Neo-Nazi page. The fact that they feel the need to call me something other than Alt-Right, a political identity I readily embrace, suffices to show that their attempt to redefine the term was unsuccessful. If Weigel switches terms in his continued attacks on Cernovich, that will be further evidence in support of the observation.

Unlike SJWs, the media doesn't always lie. But they regularly lie, they always attempt to push a narrative that may or may not be in reasonable harmony with the truth, and they often invent nonexistent sources. Even those who were previously dubious now agree, after experiencing being in the media spotlight themselves:

I have always been a little sceptical of the right wing’s opinion about ‘fake news’ – the ‘mainstream media’s agenda’. A lot of people in the right wing community completely distrust what the mainstream media report and believe that the companies that are part of it (BBC, CNN, Channel 4 to name a few) are using their left wing agenda to bring down the right. Honestly, despite seeing what they mean after watching a few videos and noticing bias in some areas, I thought that everyone was over reacting a little bit. Because after all, there are plenty of ‘right wing’ news sources now that pride themselves on looking at news from a neutral perspective. I’m now deciding to detract my original thoughts because of my personal experience with Channel 4, a popular UK news outlet.

Note that she made the same mistake that everyone does, of thinking that they're going to be clever and careful, and that by doing so, they'll somehow magically avoid the fate of every sacrificial lamb who has gone before them.

I was careful and conscious of the fact that this could all go very wrong. I’d like to mention at this point that I was assured that it was going to be a ‘fair’ piece to ‘get my perspective’.

We arranged to meet to film soon after Christmas. We filmed for about 4 hours and I feel that I spoke very well and managed to share my thoughts on a range of topics. I like to think I’m quite clever and quite the blossoming businesswomen, considering my editor status at BPS so I did catch GH out on a few things she asked and refused to answer. I also made a special effort to not talk about anything I wasn’t completely knowledgeable about, so that it would minimise the chances of being used to make me seem dumb....

I feel compelled to write this to warn others that despite how much precaution you take, how clever you are and how nice the filmmaker is – you will get targeted. I was made to look bad (as were my on screen counterparts). I was told that this would be unbiased, I was told that my words would not be cut and edited and I was told that I would have to sign release papers. Which for the record, I did not. I wasn’t shown the tape beforehand as promised, either.

They always tell you that they just want to tell both sides and want to give you the opportunity to sell your story. They don't tell you that because you're so special and smart. They tell that to everyone... because nearly everyone falls for it. Seriously, what part of DON'T TALK TO THE MEDIA is hard to understand? Let me see if I can put this in very simple terms that anyone can grasp: DO. NOT. TALK. TO. THE. FUCKING. MEDIA. EVER.

You're not smarter than I am. You're not more articulate than Stefan Molyneux. You don't have a better handle on the media than Mike Cernovich. But I won't communicate with the media except in writing, Stefan doesn't talk to them at all, and Mike only talks to journalists on a extremely strategic and selective basis.

Don't dance for the media. Don't talk to the media. They are the enemy. Build your own platforms instead and bypass them entirely.

Identity in action

This account of a former landlord in East Cleveland explains why blacks and other non-whites will never stop chasing down whites and trying to live in white societies until segregation prevents them from doing so:

East Cleveland has its own black-run municipal court. Sitting in that courtroom as the only white person was probably the most unpleasant part of my East Cleveland experience. It was even worse than hearing gun shots; that was over in an instant. But going to court, I always felt like the white outsider—and that everyone assumed I was there to screw over the brothers. You had to sit in a small room—a very small room—with a woman and her family whom you were trying to throw out on the street. I can’t entirely explain why, but I dreaded it beyond belief. The derelict city hall building and courtroom—typical of any black enterprise I have ever known—had a miserable, oppressive atmosphere that added to my misery.

The blacks in court had a strange informality among themselves that made it clear that they were in charge, and that whites were second-class citizens. Once, I was sitting in the courtroom awaiting my case when my tenant walked in as another case was being heard. He yelled out, “How ya doin’, judge?” The judge replied, “Larry, we’ll be with you shortly.” My lawyer looked at me and said, “Prepare to be screwed.”

Another time I heard a person in court for a traffic violation have a lively discussion with the judge about the movie Drum Line. They both thought the band at local Shaw High School compared favorably to the band in the movie.

Our black municipal judge seemed to do anything possible to favor the poor black residents of East Cleveland, and had no apparent respect for the property rights of white landlords. By Ohio law, when a tenant fails to pay rent, the landlord may give the tenant a notice whereby the tenant has three days to pay, after which the landlord may file in court for an eviction. If the tenant has not paid the rent by the appointed court hearing, a move-out date is set, usually ten days after the hearing. The whole process takes about five or six weeks. Once, after going through the trouble and expense of this process to evict a non-paying tenant, I went to the court clerk to arrange a move-out, whereby the landlord and bailiff go to the unit and remove the tenant and his possessions.

The black clerk told me the judge had put a hold on the move-out date because the tenant had filed a “motion to stay.” I asked how this could be; I had never heard of a motion to stay. I had not received any rent for two months and had gone to the trouble and expense of this legal proceeding only to have it ignored. The clerk responded, “Tenants have rights, too,” and explained that in a “motion to stay,” the black judge granted a poor tenant extra time to get her affairs in order; the landlord was never informed of this proceeding. He didn’t explicitly say that this was something the black judge did just for black tenants who owed money to white landlords, but it sure seemed that way.

I lost my temper and yelled, “Look at your city! It’s a dump because of actions like this.” East Cleveland is the only court in Ohio that honors the “motion to stay;” it is something the judge made up and is not based on Ohio law. Other landlords have told me they have had tenants skip rent for another six months because of this scam.

Most of the time, blacks put on a show of solidarity with their brethren, but in private their true feelings sometimes come out: “Please don’t send that black repairman again, he never fixes it right,” or, “If I ever move from here I’m not moving to another black area, I only want to move to a white area.” I also heard, “I’m not going there. It’s too black.”

Once a thriving city of 40,000, East Cleveland now has a population of 17,000 and is in ruins, with street after street of abandoned and decaying homes and buildings. Former mayors and city officials are in prison for corruption. Schools that were once excellent now pass only two or three of 24 state tests, even though they receive more funding per pupil than most suburban schools. The police and fire departments are reduced to skeleton staffs, and many city services have disappeared. The mayor and city council president have recently been recalled, and the city’s only hope of survival is either declaring bankruptcy or merging with Cleveland. At one time, blacks moved to East Cleveland for a better life; now it is a destination of last resort.

Is that what you want for your hometown? Is it really worth the knowledge that no one ever... actually, you know, they'll call you racist anyhow.

People who lived in East Cleveland as late as the 1970s have told me what a great town it was, and how they loved Shaw High School. Now there are no stores or businesses. Instead of living in an affordable community close to Cleveland’s cultural center, whites choose one-hour commutes and mortgages they can’t afford in order to escape from blacks. East Cleveland today is the result of a black population with black leadership, and until America begins to understand race, there are more East Clevelands in our future.

Fake News cuts deep

CNN's reaction to Bernie Sanders saying "CNN Fake News" is certainly informative. Combined with Cuomo's assertion that saying "Fake News" is as insulting as an ethnic slur, it's clear that this is truly magical meme that badly wounds the opposition media. Meme harder!

A failure to understand identity

John Wright attempts to criticize identity politics and the Alt-Right, and in doing so, demonstrates that he does not correctly grasp what identity is, or how identity politics tend to function in modern multiracial societies:

Some say that the success of identity politics trumped up by the Left proves that a man will always side with his inborn tribal group, grievance group, and identity politics group rather than with any political doctrine or party or nation into which education, experience, or personal decision might lead him.

No, literally no one says that. First, identity is not limited to race. Religion, too, is an identity, and one of the most powerful. Second, while men can, and do, surmount their racial, grievance, and religious identities in favor of other identities and ideologies, the salient point is that the vast majority will not. One habitual weakness of John's arguments I have observed is that he tends to be inclined towards binary thinking, and binary thinkers are particularly prone to the Ricardian Vice, which Joseph Schumpeter described in the History of Economic Analysis:

He then piled one simplifying assumption upon another until, having really settled everything by these assumptions, he was left with only a few aggregative variables between which, given these assumptions, he set up simple one-way relations so that, in the end, the desired results emerged almost as tautologies.... The habit of applying results of this character to the solution of practical problems we shall call the Ricardian Vice.

John continues with an drive-by implied defense of the fictional concept of the so-called "proposition nation".

Nations are never built on a proposition that all men are created equal and never have been: they are only build on tribes and clans. So runs the theory.

No, that is not the theory, that is the literal historical definition of "nation". The concept is defined as: "an aggregation of persons of the same ethnic family, often speaking the same language or cognate languages." 1250-1300; Middle English < Latin nātiōn- (stem of nātiō) birth, tribe, equivalent to nāt (us) (past participle of nāscī to be born).

The "proposition nation" concept is entirely false. Neither concurring with any proposition nor contradicting one will cause one to be part of the American nation, or cause one to be separated from it. It is simply incorrect to claim that the United States is fundamentally built on the principle of equality or any other idea; one need only read the entire Declaration of Independence to know that Jefferson's flight of rhetoric was nothing more than a rhetorical flourish. "All men are created equal" is not the founding principle of the United States of America nor the basis for any nation.

The irony, of course, is that one might as just as meaningfully cite the statement as grounds for claiming that anyone can become Chinese or Polish.

Those who believe this say that the way to defeat Leftwing Anti-White identity politics is by adopting Pro-White identity politics. They are seduced into making a simple error. It is an error so simple that even a highly intelligent partisan of that movement might not see it. The identity-grievance politics groups on the Left are all about Leftism and nothing about identity.

The only people who ever side with their tribal group and identity politics group are people who have been indoctrinated by the Left. They are Leftists. Identity politics is their stock in trade. It is the only product remaining on their intellectually bankrupt shelves.

First, it is true that for some, their Leftism is their dominant identity. Second, it is apparent that a number of identity groups have concluded that Leftism is in their tribal interest, which may be a source of the causal confusion. Third, it is absolutely and observably absurd to claim that the only people who ever side with their tribal group have been indoctrinated by the Left. Tribalism and identity long precede Leftism, moreover, it is very, very easy to provide examples of those on the Right who practice identity politics. Identity consistently provides a much more accurate predictive model for one's positions and behavior than one's nominal place on the political spectrum. But again, it must be understood that there are multiple kinds of identities; ethnicity merely tends to be the strongest and most powerful form.

Tribalism says that the loyalties one has toward genetically similar groups will eventually overwhelm all other loyalties of religion, culture, language community, political philosophy, and self interest, and that therefore one must abandon loyalty to religion and culture and state but adhere instead to one’s tribe. A more naive reading of history is difficult to imagine: as if civil wars never happened, and nothing but race wars did.

It is strange to see John claim that identity politics and tribalism is a naive reading of history when he is simultaneously denying one of the primary engines of history. Again, he relies on simplistic binary thinking in order to reach a false conclusion. People have multiple loyalties, many of which are not related to their genetic inheritance; the homosexual is loyal to the gay community and hostile to the religious communities for reasons of sexual orientation, the Christian Zionist is loyal to the Jewish community for theological reasons, and so forth. But none of this changes the observable fact that Somalis in Minnesota reliably vote for Somalis, Indians in Quebec reliably vote for Indians, and African-Americans reliably vote for blacks.

John also fails to understand the Alt-Right. Because he seeks compromise and is willing to let the Left live, he implies the Alt-Right it is of the Left. This is a confusion of etiquette with objectives.

The lobbyist of the Right, by way of contrast, is not a religious zealot. He is willing to live and let live, and to compromise when need be. The Right thinks the Left are foolish, but not evil. The Left think the Right are an abomination, literally Hitler, and must be exterminated from the Earth as soon as this is practical.

The Alt-Right thinks the Left is both foolish and evil. The Alt-Right thinks the Left is a collection of rabid, feral, incoherent, irrational barbarians who are observably incapable of participating in any civilized society without destroying it. We're not religious zealots, we are simply educated observers of the entire history of the Left, from the French Revolution to the Killing Fields of Cambodia, who have reached certain logical conclusions on the basis of those observations.

The Alt-Right is most certainly not willing to compromise with the Left. We have witnessed the conservative Right live and let live, and compromise, to the point that Western civilization itself is at risk. And we are not willing to allow conservatives to meekly permit the destruction of Western civilization simply so they can go down to noble defeat in the sacred names of equality and not being racist.

I note in passing that every time, every single time, the roots of the Democrat Party are mentioned, the Alt-Right goes into a tizzy of sneers and scorn, scoffing that one should never say that Democrats are the real racists. Why one should never say it, they never say.  But it does undermine their whole race-is-politics theory, because the race of the Dems did not change their race before and after Johnson’s ‘Great Society’ programs, but only changed their political tactics. The utility of accusing the Party of Lincoln and Nixon of racism only started then, and so the Democrats only because the advocates of anti-racism then.

This is simply absurd. Again, John is stating something observably false, then using his false statement as the basis of reaching an incorrect conclusion. It's trivially easy to show that what he's saying is not true. On this blog, and in Cuckservative, I have explained why one should not bother saying that Democrats are the real racists: it is ineffective and toothless dialectic that has no effect on a group of rhetorical speakers. I have also pointed out that it is ineffective rhetoric for the Right because no one but cucks and cons fears being called racist.

And the race of the Democrats has most certainly changed since LBJ instituted the Great Society. That's why the Atlantic asks if the Democratic Party even has room for what it calls "less-educated white voters" anymore.

So in asking the Right to accept pro-White tribalism into its political platform, the advocate of race-based politics is attempting to fight a religion with a lobbyist group. This is the same mistake the mainstream Right has been making for decades, if not centuries.

No, we're not asking. We are predicting it will happen as a natural result of the USA becoming a multiracial, multicultural, multinational state. And it will be easy to determine who is correct. If the Alt-Right is correct, whites will continue to gravitate right across the West. The likes of Jack Murphy, who voted for Obama, will vote for Trump in 2020. And the Democratic Party will continue to move Left, as the various non-white immigrants fill its ranks being depleted by the exiting whites.

We're not making the same mistake the mainstream Right has made; quite the opposite. And it is the fact that we refuse to continue making their mistake of holding to the sacred, nonsensical symbolism that has led to their defeat that makes them uncomfortable.

Now, all that being said, John is correct to say that federalism is one solution to tribalism. But it is a solution that accepts and utilizes the reality of tribalism and identity politics, not one that rejects them. In any event, read the whole thing there, including the comments.

I close with a pair of quotes, and leave it to you to decide whether it is identity politics or proposition politics that are more firmly rooted in truth and historical reality:

"In multiracial societies, you don't vote in accordance with your economic interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion."
- Lee Kuan Yew

"America has never been united by blood or birth or soil. We are bound by ideals that move us beyond our backgrounds, lift us above our interests and teach us what it means to be citizens.... Every immigrant, by embracing these ideals, makes our country more, not less, American."
- George W. Bush

The end of dual-citizenship

A man cannot serve two masters. Jesus Christ knew it. So does Marine Le Pen:

French Jews who have dual Israeli nationality will have to give up one of their nationalities if far-right candidate Marine Le Pen is elected. The Front National leader said she would not allow citizens to hold dual citizenship in two non-European countries.
She will, however, not include Russia in the policy, stating she considers it to be part of the 'Europe of nations'. Speaking on France 2 TV, she said immigrants, and those who hold two passports, would have to surrender one of their passports - but added that this would not mean they would be deported.

Good for France. The USA and every other Western nation should institute a similar policy. Saudis and Israelis and Nigerians are no more Americans than they are Chinese or Martian. "Dual-citizenship" is a nonsensical postmodern concept that is every bit as incoherent as "gay marriage" and "sex as social construct"

After all, it's not much of a "proposition" if you don't even have to give up your previous national proposition. But I think it is a mistake to permit ANY dual-citizenship at all.

Debate: Jack Murphy vs Vox Day

Here is a brief selection from the recent debate on the future of the Alt-Right  between Jack Murphy and me that was hosted by Ivan Throne, the author of The Nine Laws:

Ivan Throne: Vox, do you advocate a white ethno-state? If so, what is the proper white homeland?

Vox Day: I wouldn’t say that I advocate for the white ethno-state so much as I see it as inevitable. First of all, white ethno-state is somewhat of a misnomer. White American is not the same as a European nationality. This is something that I have had to explain to a lot of white nationalists. White nationalism makes no sense in Europe because over here we have distinct white ethnic groups that are completely separate.

In the US, however, where the original American nation has been adulterated to the point that you have a generic white race, there you will see the same move towards homogeneity that we have traditionally seen throughout history. People tend to forget that homogenous nations do not spring into existence from the ground. They emerge from heterogeneous, multinational, multicultural empires. The US went from an Anglo-Protestant nation to a multinational, multicultural, multiracial empire. It was an empire that was imposed by force during the Civil War, and it will go the way of all empires. We are already seeing, in the American southwest, the rise of La Raza Cosmica, who want their own independent state in the southwest.

It’s going to be a mess. These situations are always a mess, but in terms of what is right or wrong, my tribe has its own reservation, and I support them having that reservation, and I don’t see any reason that self-identified white people should not have the same self-determination that the US has defended around the world for a hundred years.

Jack Murphy: That is a very interesting representation. I am a lifelong Democrat. I voted for Bill Clinton and proudly for Obama during the first election. I live in Washington DC, the bluest of all blue districts in the US. It is sort of a democratic ideal. I have come into the exploration of white identity politics from a belief that there is a feminist/Marxist overreach combined with intersectionality that has deemed victim culture here in the US as where we are. Every minority group, self-identified to some intersection, has become a victim. By virtue of them being a victim there must be a perpetrator. That perpetrator according to them is me. A straight white male. Russian Jewish and Catholic Irish, but that doesn’t matter. Through intersectionality I become the perpetrator of all evils in the Us.

This is my entre for identity politics. From there I explore why and how our people representing themselves in groups and based around identity functions. I explore the identities and advocacy that our people entertain. My perspective, as I explore new political groups after being abandoned by the democrats in their move to the left, the world shifts and the center passes me by and I find myself on the left. I must figure out where I fit into in this new reality. The term alt-right came up. From my perspective, the alt-right was exciting. It wasn’t stodgy and unappealing to a counterculture person. It wasn’t boring. I didn’t really understand or have any notion about its history. I began to explore with the perspective of “I am now the bad guy.” Just ten years ago, I was part of the “good team.” I was questioning how I would find my way in the future when being a straight white male in the US makes you the villain.

This conversation is to me an exploration. The conversation I wanted to have with Spencer, who has been very vocal advocate for white amnesty by any means possible, was going to seek direct answers to the question of what means he wanted to use. For me, I am less concerned about theory, less concerned about broad subjects that are not really about what I am going to do today. How am I going to manage day to day?

Vox Day: Just so you understand, we are not talking about theory here.

There is nothing more pragmatic and realistic than what I am describing. What I am describing is about as optional as gravity. What has fundamentally changed is the US, and the reason that people like Richard Spencer and people who have long been completely ignored on the Right, people who were pushed out and pushed aside by William F. Buckley and the conservative movement. Those people saw this coming. Since 1965, when the Immigration and Naturalization Act was pushed through, the die was cast. Ever since 1965, the US has been on a clock, and the clock is running out of time. The clock has now run out.

What I mean by running out is this: it is only possible to have ideological or political disagreements when you have people who are more or less the same in identity. As the founder of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, said, in any multiracial state, all politics is identity. This is not a white thing, or a European thing. This is not even a right-wing thing. This is straightforward history and political science.

Someone like Richard, or some of the people who are out there more aggressively advocating for white nationalism, or whatever you want to call it, they are a symptom. Even your move to the right was a result of people hating you. They didn't allow you into the party anymore. At the DNC, they kicked out a guy running for chairman because he was criticizing a Muslim. That, too, is identity politics. It doesn’t matter if you do not know your identity, you know you are different because they kicked you out.

This is all part of the same very large cyclical process. The end result of that process is, as the Alt-Right likes to say, diversity plus proximity equals war. And the end result of that process is ethnically homogenous ethno-states.

Welcome to the Alt-Right

Even Townhall conservatives are waking up to the fact that the SJW Left hates them, will not negotiate or engage in rational discussion with them, and they have to act accordingly:

They hate you.

Leftists don’t merely disagree with you. They don’t merely feel you are misguided. They don’t think you are merely wrong. They hate you. They want you enslaved and obedient, if not dead. Once you get that, everything that is happening now will make sense. And you will understand what you need to be ready to do.

You are normal, and therefore a heretic. You refuse to bow to their idols, to subscribe to their twisted catechisms, to praise their false gods. This is unforgivable. You must burn.

Crazy talk? Just ask them. Go ahead. Go on social media. Find a leftist – it’s easy. Just say something positive about America or Jesus and they’ll come swarming like locusts. Engage them and very quickly they will drop their masks and tell you what they really think. I know. I keep a rapidly expanding file of Twitter leftist death wish screenshots.

They will tell you that Christians are idiots and vets are scum.

That normals are subhumans whose role is to labor as serfs to subsidize the progressive elite and its clients.

That you should die to make way for the New Progressive Man/Woman/Other.

Understand that when they call Donald Trump “illegitimate,” what they are really saying is that our desire to govern ourselves is illegitimate. Their beef isn’t with him – it’s with us, the normal people who dared rise up and demand their right to participate in the rule of this country and this culture....

We must ensure they do. Understand your enemy. Understand that the Left will exploit your principles and morals to make you disarm yourself – figuratively and literally. Don’t play their game; don’t fall for their manufactured outrages. Never concede their lies, never take their side against the people defending your liberty. Most of all, accept the truth that if we let them win we will spend the rest of our lives on our backs with a giant Birkenstock pressed into our collective face.

They hate us. And however they come at us, we need to be prepared to fight.

You'd almost think he read SJWs Always Lie. As I told Jack Murphy after our debate concerning the prospects for the Alt-Right, every conservative who doesn't cuck out and cower will be with us sooner or later. Some sooner, some later, but eventually, they will all be proudly, defiantly Alt-Right. Just like us.

Because the alternative is surrender and submission to the Left.

Imagine what our mic is worth

Considering that in the UK alone, they're willing to spend $75 million in what will be a futile attempt to counter it:

The UK government is to pay an advertising giant, which campaigned against Brexit, £60 million to fight so-called “far right” extremism online, including “going against people who read Breitbart”. Government sources revealed the plans to The Times, explaining how the Home Office aims to counter “far-right and extreme right-wing narratives” by working with Saatchi and Saatchi.

So-called “anti-hate speech experts” said the government department will effectively wage a propaganda war on the “alt-right” across social media, specifically said to include Breitbart readers.

“They are going against people who read Breitbart and stuff like that, the conspiratorial media. They want people to be critical about what they read,” the insider said.

The extent of the planned campaign was disclosed by Whitehall sources in response to documents uncovered by Freedom of Information Act requests, The Times explains.

The Home Office said last night: “This government is determined to challenge extremism in all its forms including the evil of far-right extremism and the terrible damage it can cause to individuals, families and communities.”

They failed to stop Brexit. They will fail to stop the Alt-Right. How can I say that with any degree of confidence?

Because they have to eliminate science, history, and people noticing what is happening in front of their faces in order to stop the Alt-Right. They have to convince everyone that black is white, that war is peace, and that England has always been a nation of immigrants, a proposition, and a melting pot founded on Judeo-Christian values.

They have to lie. We only need people to open their eyes and acknowledge the societal devastation they see happening all around them.

They can stop the signal. But they can't prevent the very existence of the wavelengths. Which is why once the nationalists are in power, Reconquista 2.0 will sweep the West and free it from the chains of diversity.

Why conservatives always lose

John Wright pens a long and thoughtful piece on why conservatives always lose. He contemplates the perspective of a hypothetical Rip van Conservative, a conservative who fell asleep in 1945 and awoke 72 years later, in 2017, only to discover that all many of the victories he thought won had been lost in the meantime:

One main reason why a Last Crusade must be called is that Conservatism, while perfectly sound when facing Commies in a Cold War, Nazis in a World War, or Slavers in a Civil War, has no defense to offer when the fascistic cultural Marxism seeps peacefully into the ivory tower, the theater, the press, the halls of power.... Now, as a conservative, you point out that all these things are simply illogical, paradoxes even a schoolboy could see cannot possibly be true. A thing cannot be itself and be the opposite of itself at the same time. A sentence that contradicts the same idea it affirms is a self-refuting sentence. Reality cannot be unreal.

You are answered that modern progress has proven that truth is untrue, for all things are matters of mere opinion that each man decides for himself. To say truth is truth offends the liberty of each man to invent his own truth.

You are answered that modern progress has proven that logic is merely a social adaptation mechanism formed by evolution, and has no authority to compel men to obey it. To say that logic is logical offends the liberty of each man to enjoy whichever of the personal and invented truths he sees fit.

You are answered that modern progress has proven that morality consists of the single rule that all must toleration any abridgement of morality anyone sees fit, aside, of course, from hate speech and badthink. Avoiding badthink is an absolute moral prohibition applied to all rightwing angloamerican white male heterosexual Christians. To say that morals cannot be defined as immorality is badthink. It offends the liberty of men to be evil, condone evil, promote evil, and worship evil.

You are answered with a fullthroated defense of unreality so complete that even Buddha would be shamed. The Progressive thinks that all life is an illusion, but that the illusion can be peaceful and pleasing, or the opposite, depending on the discipline and disposition of the subjective observer. You make your own reality.

This reality is called “a Narrative.” It is not based on fact, nor meant to be. It is based on emotion, whim, psychological defense mechanism.

Unlike the Buddhist, the Progressive seeks not to escape the illusion. There is nothing outside the illusion, no reality, no nirvana, to which to escape. There is no red pill to take.

The Narrative is an all encompassing world of illusion. It is an empire of lies.

And the first lie in the empire of lies is the lie that the Narrative does not exist. Only truths, as told by conservatives and anyone else looking at reality, are called Narratives.

Now, at the end of these answers, Rip van Conservative realizes that debate is impossible with a creature who cannot and will not speak in a coherent sentence, cannot and will not think a logical thought, and whose sole verbal reply to any criticism, no matter how true and trenchant, is merely to accuse his accuser of the flaws he himself possesses.

The stupid calls his smarter critic stupid. The fool calls his wiser critic foolish. The bigot calls his open-minded critic bigoted. The fascist calls his freedom loving critic a fascist. And on and on ad nauseam.

And so the conservative loses every battle. Why?

When conservativism is not only obvious, but self-evident, why does it falter?

When conservatism is not only a self-evident position, but the sole position seen not to contradict itself, why does it lose the field?

If all positions other than the conservative one are not merely incorrect, but immoral, illogical and insane, how is it that conservatism is soundly swept from the field, and no one polite society dares utter a word in its defense?

Conservatism falters, fails, and finds itself utterly effaced because and only because it fights the wrong battle on the wrong battlefield.

Now, I do not disagree with John here in the slightest, except to observe that there are competing explanations for the reason why conservatives are always fighting the wrong battle on the wrong battlefield. My explanation is the Alt-Right one, which is that immigrants wielding identity politics against an unsuspecting America have misled conservatives into believing false history and defending imaginary philosophical ground rather than defending their national interests. Of course, I expect John, being dubious about identity politics, would tend to disagree. At no little length.

Which is fine. Because regardless of why conservativism fights the wrong battle on the wrong battlefield, this piece serves as an informative illustration explaining why conservativism has so reliably failed to provide a philosophical bulwark against the Left, and why it will continue to do so. The more conservatives understand that more conservatism is not the answer, the more the winning will continue.

Nationalism intensifies

Geert Wilders and the Party for Freedom are rising to power in the Netherlands:

A shocking new poll has been released in the Netherlands. According to Kantar Public, PVV has opened a large lead over the second largest party in the polls, the VVD, which is currently part of the governing coalition. This makes Wilders the absolute favorite to succeed current Prime Minister Mark Rutte as the political leader of the country.

According to the Kantar Public poll, the PVV would get 35 seats in the 150-seat Dutch Parliament if elections were held today. By Dutch standards, that's an impressive result. This is especially true because of the significant gap between PVV and the VVD. The party led by current Prime Minister Mark Rutte wold have to settle for a mere 22 seats, 19 fewer seats than they currently occupy.

Yes, they'll face obstacles in the Dutch Parliament. But the more the other parties resist the will of the Dutch people to Make Holland Great Again, the more power PVV will have.

The globalist monstrosity known as the European Union will fall. The European nations will be restored and cleansed. The pendulum is swinging back, and it is going to swing back hard. And while there will be bloodshed, never forget that all the responsibility, and the moral culpability, falls on the evil people who took advantage of the positive socionomic mood to encourage multiculturalism, societal adulteration, and literal invasion.

One should never confuse the surgeon who excises a cancer with the assailant who stabs with the intent to kill. One is attempting to save, the other is attempting to slay.

Darkstream: winning the war in the streets

I'll be doing a Darkstream tonight at 7 PM Eastern on how the Alt-Right and Alt-Lite can go about winning the war on the streets with the jackals of Black Bloc.

UPDATE: The replay is here. Comments were not permitted, but I don't know the reason.

The Left in denial

They don't want to disavow their Black Bloc allies, but they certainly don't want to admit to being allied with them.

“I was there for part of last night, and I know what I saw and those people were not Berkeley students,” Reich said. “Those people were outside agitators. I have never seen them before.”

“There’s rumors that they actually were right-wingers. They were a part of a kind of group that was organized and ready to create the kind of tumult and danger you saw that forced the police to cancel the event,” Reich insisted. “So Donald Trump, when he says Berkeley doesn’t respect free speech rights, that’s a complete distortion of the truth.”

“You think it’s a strategy by [Milo Yiannopoulos] or right-wingers?” asked host Don Lemon.

“I wouldn’t bet against it,” Reich said. “I saw these people. They all looked very– almost paramilitary. They were not from the campus. I don’t want to say factually, but I’ve heard there was some relationship here between these people and the right-wing movement that is affiliated with Breitbart News.”

Meanwhile, back in the non-delusional world, the alleged agitators are being unmasked for who we already knew they were: paid Left-wing agitators and university employees, such as this gentleman who works for UC-Berkeley since 2008. The indefatigable Chuck Johnson has already set up a mechanism for identifying Black Bloc. It's focused on those arrested at the Inauguration riots, but it can, and will, be easily expanded.

While it doesn't work to argue that Dems are the real racists, it's going to be very easy to prove, conclusively, that SJWs and Black Bloc are the real violent fascists.

Mailvox: Feels good

A reader is enjoying the cultural war:

I had an interesting experience today. A guy I knew in college, a rather left wing jew got all hot and bother over my posting of Pepe the Frog memes. Today he posted on my wall the ADL has condemned Pepe as racist. My response was "Feels good man" and then I posted a link to your 16 points of the Alt-Right.

The guy unfriended me. I knew this was going to happen sooner or later. I had previously unfollowed him and about 10 people for their incessant left wing political postings. Despite this, this guy, typical of the left, invades my space to put me on the spot and publicly berate me. When I did not buckle and beg forgiveness that I am not a racist or anti-semite, he exited. Like you said, these people fold if you stand up to them.

I am hearing from others that on Facebook there is all sorts of unfriendings by leftists of anyone they think supported President Donald J. Trump. If things do devolve into some sort of Civil War, it is going to make it easier by having people segregated by ideology (or allegiance).

Some talk that 1860 must have felt like today. I am thinking more Spain around 1934.

Feels good man.

Don't hesitate to stand up proudly for the God-Emperor. Victory goes to the bold, not the cowardly.

The God-Emperor is not your win

The Last Refuge hammers #NeverTrumpers trying to surreptitiously board the Trump Train in light of the God-Emperor's well-received Supreme Court nomination:

Sorry #NeverTrumpers, but you don”t get to dismount your high horse and celebrate the nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch today.  This is NOT your victory, this is ours!

There is a gobsmacking level of pontificating self-righteousness visible from the collective proletariat within your crony-conservative movement who made the decision to formulate their political argument from a position of opposition.

Perhaps it would be different if you framed your antagonism from a position of advocacy, but that wasn’t the direction you chose.  No, you chose a specific position of opposition as clearly evident within your chosen mantra “Never Trump”.

Perhaps it would be different if you ever had a come-to-Jesus moment and apologized immediately following the November election.  Then again, when your opinion of your own self-importance is this high, those humble words are just as foreign as your understanding of the movement that won.

You don’t get to frame the entire construct of your argument around opposition to a team, and then claim benefit to the outcome of victory.  Stay on your high-horse, move along and ride off into that proverbial land of irrelevance; you’re dead here.

Save your dismount for another defining “conservative” assembly where you can gather at CPAC again and give a standing ovation to House Speaker Paul Ryan a month after he eliminates the debt ceiling and passes a $2 trillion OmniBus spending bill, funding all of the progressive priorities you hypocritically claim to oppose; you’re good at that....

You had a choice. You chose a direction, you lost; and you damn near lost the entire friggin’ country. Just because the team you ridiculed and attacked has overcome all opposition and gained victory, that doesn’t mean you get to backtrack now and expect the bruised and bloodied recipients to forget those who launched the stones and arrows.

Abase yourself before the God-Emperor, #NeverTrump. Shed copious tears of self-remorse and flagellate yourself in public. Then you will be forgiven. Provisionally.

But you will never be trusted. Nor will you lead anyone's opinions ever again. Remember, the God-Emperor's inquisitors are watching, and they can scent heresy.

Now, get on board the Trump Train, find a turret, take the safety off, and shoot left.

What is best in life?

The God-Emperor is best in life! Thus spake Pepe.

Be ready, be prepared

The Left is getting increasingly violent, especially in places where they know people are likely to be unarmed:

The clip shows anti-Trump protesters pushing and shoving their way into the airport aggressively as they yell “peace! peace!”

A confrontation then quickly arises before one of the anti-Trump radicals punches a man from behind, knocking him out cold. The footage appears to show two anti-Trump protesters taking a swing at the same victim.

While some of the anti-Trump protesters appear shocked at the violence and denounce it, others are heard quite clearly celebrating the attack.

“That’s how you talk to a Nazi! That’s right!” screams one, before gloating, “Your boy got knocked out!”

“Don’t lose the propaganda war!” shouts another, presumably aware that the attack makes anti-Trump demonstrators look bad.

“Wooo! Hunt the Nazis!” screams another man in celebration of the vicious assault.

“That’s right Nazi boy! Where’s your f***ing fuhrer now bitch!” yells another.

To add insult to injury, the demonstrators then began chanting “peaceful protest!” as the victim lay prostrate on the floor of the airport.

As always, they are utterly shameless liars. It doesn't matter if you think you're a conservative, Alt Lite, or Alt-Right. If you support the God-Emperor, they will call you a Nazi and they will attack you if they think they can get away with it. Be ready. Be prepared. Don't hesitate to defend yourself.

And if you've got SJWs in your life, it's time to start cutting them out of it now. They WILL turn on you. Don't think that they won't. Don't think that you're special, or that you are too important to them. You CANNOT trust them. They will ALWAYS value their self-perception more than their relationship with you. Always.

UPDATE: If you think the Left has gone bonkers, just wait until the next executive order today. It sounds as if the God-Emperor is going after H1B visas next. Considering how it is mostly the social media giants who are his sworn enemy that benefit from them, how great would it be if he simply canceled the program and ordered all H1B-holders to return home?

Alt-Right vs New Right

Ivan Throne, the Dark Triad Man, is hosting a debate between Jack Murphy and me concerning the future of the Alt-Right next Saturday night.

Vox Day is an American publisher, science fiction writer, philosopher, musician and video game designer. He is a former nationally syndicated columnist with Chronicle Features and Universal Press Syndicate. He is known as the Supreme Dark Lord of the Evil Legion of Evil by his supporters, who describe themselves as Vile Faceless Minions and the Dread Ilk. He is also the lead editor at Castalia House, publisher of my bestseller The Nine Laws. 

Notably for this debate, Vox Day is also the author of the 16 Points of the #AltRight.

Jack Murphy is a senior executive, accomplished athlete and writer. He covers men’s issues, current events, and personal development at Jack Murphy Live. He is also a father of three. Jack’s recent advocacy of the NewRight and its differences from the #AltRright lead to a recent confrontation with Richard Spencer as covered by The Atlantic and Business Insider.

 The topic is the future of the #AltRight.

Vox Day and Jack Murphy will cover a range of topics including white nationalism, identity politics, the tension between the #AltRight and other groups, including what Mike Cernovich calls the New Right.

Both men are intelligent, accomplished, passionate and educated. And with moderation from Dark Triad Man we are sure to have a very powerful Brutal Clips podcast.

 Subscribe today and take part in shaping the debate. Once you are subscribed you can submit your questions and I will ensure that the best of them are covered within our alloted hour:

Stay tuned for the debate that will shape the narrative.

The discussion between Vox Day and Jack Murphy will change the way you look at the #AltRight and the future of identity politics in not just the United States, but in the West.

I'll be genuinely interested in what Jack has to say, because I cannot see what sort of civic nationalist case he's going to be able to present that I have not only considered, but subscribed to in the past. To me, this is rather like a debate between a tadpole and a frog; it doesn't really matter what the tadpole thinks, or what sort of future he imagines, because he's eventually going to become a frog regardless.

These things take time, observation, and experience. Consider what Mike Cernovich, whose inclinations are strongly civic nationalist, and whose in-laws are affected by the travel ban, has to say on the subject. His words might surprise some; they don't surprise me in the slightest because I know how realistic he is.

If people keep telling whites that they hate them, then they shouldn’t feign outrage when the native population listens, and closes to the doors to the U.S.

The outlook for America’s future is grim. Hatred from the left will only continue, and violence will increase. While the left wears the symbols of the Soviets, they lack their secret police. While the left has the media, the right has the guns. The U.S. is not the U.S.S.R. We will not go silently into the gulags.

People wonder why I’m so militant, and now you see why. We are in a war, and it’s one declared by the left. I am a target for violence in my own country.

Alt-Right or surrender

This is a trenchant observation that explains the emptiness of civic nationalism and why there is no actual alternative to the Alt-Right anymore. Identity politics are no more a choice than war is a choice once the enemy is marching. It is demographics, and awareness of demographics, that distinguish between identity and ideology, and the post-1965 US demographics no longer permit one to ignore the reality of identity politics:

This is, in the realm of practical politics, why the Buckley crowd is circling the drain as a political force. Way back in the 60’s, they could not bring themselves to challenge the implausible claims by the Left with regards to civil rights. Instead, they picked the losing hand of state’s rights, hoping to avoid facing the Left over the “negro question.” As a result, they ceded the moral high ground to the Left with regards to race and identity. No amount of legal precedent could stand in the way of social justice!

Ever since, the Buckley-ites have had to fight the Left while acknowledging that the Left is their moral superior and the arbiter of civil morality. That’s a battle that can never be won as the other side will simply declare your latest position to be heresy and out of bounds. No matter how logical and right your position, it can never withstand the moral authorities saying it is wrong. That’s why the Left has won every battle in the culture war. They can thunder, “you may have facts, but we have righteousness!”

There’s another problem with what Milo and Sam Harris are saying. Let’s stipulate that identity politics are a bad thing. Is playing that card better or worse than losing to the Left as they relentlessly play the identity politics game? Unless you have a serious mental illness, you have to see that the Left is nothing but identity politics now and they are winning. Just turn on the TV. Just look at the best seller list. The people of the New Religion hate white people, particularly white men and they will not be talked out of it.

The question that faces every man is not “what sort of society do I want for myself and my children?” That’s a lie and it has always been a lie. The question is “What are my choices and how do I achieve my preferred option?” The choice pushed by our betters is a world run by Black Lives Matters and women dressed as vaginas. If the other option is white pride, white nationalism and white supremacy, it is not hard to see how this is going to go.

All of the howling and complaining from the Official Right about the rise of the so-called alt-right is due to the unanswered question from the Milo piece. If the identity politics of the alt-right are bad, what’s the other option? If the answer is submission, which has been the case for the last three decades, at least, then the response is not just going to be “no” it is going to be “hell no!” No amount of moral preening is going to work because that is the thing people are rebelling against. What’s left is what is always what’s left and that’s force.

And that is why I have been saying that the Alt-Right Revolution is inevitable. I'm not trying to talk anyone into it. I'm not proselytizing or preaching. I am observing the historical trends playing out the way they reliably do.

Civic nationalism was stricken and fatally wounded in 1965. It has been bleeding out ever since, and both the conservatives and the New Right are fighting a hopeless battle to prevent not only the people of the Right, but the white nations, from abandoning ideology for identity because that is what they have to do if they, and the Western civilization they created, are going to survive.

There is no real conflict between the Alt-Right and the Alt-Lite. The latter are going to join us in time. It's actually testimony to their human decency that they struggle with accepting the dark reality that the post-1965 demographics have thrust upon us. They are like the nice white people in Iowa who can't understand why people in Texas or California might have any problem with those hard-working Mexicans with their exotic food coming to America in search of a better life. Once a few thousand metaphorical Somalis and Nigerians move into their conceptual neighborhood, they'll not only understand, they'll become even more militant than we are.

Look, merely encountering Somalis at the mall convinced hundreds of thousands of Minnesotans to vote for a Republican presidential candidate that the media called racist. Unless you've grown up in Lutheran Scandihoovia, you can't possibly understand the significance of that. That is the power of identity politics.

"The reality is, if you force everyone to play identity politics, if you insist in pitting whites against blacks, women against men, straights against gays, the reality is you guys are gonna win."
- Milo Yiannopoulos

Precisely. In fact, the only flaw in Milo's analysis is the idea that we have a choice. We don't. This isn't a recent observation on my part, as I specifically warned everyone four years ago that identity politics were, not only inevitable, but already the dominant form of US politics.

US politics are now an identity game.  Democrats have already established that they are the brown, black, and yellow party, so unless Republicans realize that they are, whether they like it or not, the white party, and begin to plan their strategy accordingly, they not only cannot win intentionally, they aren't really even in the game.  It's like watching a rugby team trying to play football without bothering to learn what the rules are. It is long past time for conservatives to realize that one cannot continue to play by centuries-old Anglo-Saxon rules after one permits a large quantity of non-Anglos who neither know nor care about those rules to invade the playing field.  The great irony is that the Republicans of the sort one finds on the Wall Street Journal editorial page, who cling to the outdated notion of a creedal United States, genuinely consider themselves to be pragmatists.