Tuesday, March 28, 2017

Is the So-Called 'Alt-Right' Really THAT Big of a Problem?

According to the MSM, the "alt-right" is a consortium of hateful bigots, misogynists, racists, homophobes and white supremacists, whose forum memes and Twitter trolling will undoubtedly bring about the Fourth Reich and rampant lynchings, coast-to-coast. But is there just a teeny, tiny off-chance that maybe - just maybe - the media has exaggerated the "alt-right" threat to civility and democracy? 

By: Jimbo X

I'm not entirely sure when I heard the term "alt-right" for the first time. Initially, I thought it was the terminology used to describe Gen Y and Gen Z conservatives and economic nationalists, whose entire political allegiance to Republicanism stems from a constant bombardment of pro multiculturalist, pro feminist and pro globalist propaganda they've been force-fed LITERALLY their whole lives. I viewed them as the ideological antithesis of "the social justice warrior," the inevitable post-reactionary response to the inescapable P.C. thought-crime state proliferating across college campuses and high schools throughout America. 

They didn't hate blacks, or women, or gays, or transsexuals or Hispanics. What they hated was this cultural diktat that they couldn't say anything less than glowing praise of anybody and anything post-Obama liberals championed, be it #BlackLivesMatter or transgender bathrooms or affirmative action policies or DACA or what have you. And what they REALLY hated was this P.C. thought-crime state mandate that - simply because they were white, or straight, or a man, or a Christian - they were responsible for the failings and misdoings of ALL blacks and gays and Muslims and women by sheer default of having a penis, or a near total lack of melanin, or not personally finding the idea of HIV cum flooding into their bloodied rectal cavities appetizing, or not praying to an invisible brown man who purportedly married a nine-year-old

So you had an entire generation of (predominantly) white boys growing up being told they had cultural privileges they didn't really have and that they were personally responsible for prejudicial, persecutory actions against minorities they themselves aren't personally responsible for and to top it all off, the entire education/media/entertainment industrial complex told them they ought to feel ashamed for simply existing and that to make amends for the original sins they never personally committed, they have to dedicate themselves to this cultural jihad against nationalism and capitalism and heteronormativity and the patriarchy and whatever else the Democrats tell them is evil incarnate. Oh, and also, they are supposed to celebrate their own demographical death and be super cool - if not downright exuberant - about the idea of their ethnicity being statistically and genetically subsumed by an international potpourri of competing third world racial groups.

"For every action, there is both an equal yet opposite reaction." Not only was the idea of the "alt-right" I thought I had a totally expected phenomenon, considering the nonstop societal antipathy hoisted upon them, it was hard to see them as anything other than justified in their cultural counterattack.

But then, I clicked onto presidential failure Hillary Clinton's web page, and I learned the horrible, horrible truth about these "alt-righters" - they were all a bunch of covert white supremacists who worshiped a Mandaean cartoon frog figure as a symbol of their pathetic and pitiful ethnocentric hatred

Let's hear it from the ghost of the Clinton campaign itself, why don't we?
Here’s the short version: Pepe is a cartoon frog who began his internet life as an innocent meme enjoyed by teenagers and pop stars alike. 
But in recent months, Pepe’s been almost entirely co-opted by the white supremacists who call themselves the “alt-right.” They’ve decided to take back Pepe by adding swastikas and other symbols of anti-semitism and white supremacy.
“We basically mixed Pepe in with Nazi propaganda, etc. We built that association,” one prominent white supremacist told the Daily BeastTrump has retweeted his white supremacist supporters with regularity, but the connection between the alt-right and his campaign continues to strengthen. Trump has been slow to disavow support from Ku Klux Klansmen and white supremacy groups, and he recently hired Breitbart.com’s Steve Bannon as his campaign CEO (and Bannon isn’t shy about the fact that his “news” organization is the “platform for the alt-right”).
Well, all I can say is golly gee, I had no idea that thing I thought wasn't made up entirely of top-secret KKK members actually WAS made up entirely of top-secret KKK members! I mean, just one The Daily Beast article was all I needed to convince me that guys like Steve Bannon and Milo Yiannapoulos and Alex Jones are ALL neo-neo-Nazis ... and Trump is literally their new Hitler. 

But just to be on the safe side, I decided to go on over to that there Wikipedia and see what they had to say about the "alt-right" scourge. Get you a good gander of this shit right here:
The alt-right, or alternative right, is a loose group of people with far-right ideologies who reject mainstream conservatism in the United States. White supremacist Richard Spencer coined the term in 2010 to define a movement centered on white nationalism, and has been accused of doing so to whitewash overt racism, white supremacism, and neo-Nazism.[1][2][3][4][5] Spencer has repeatedly quoted from Nazi propaganda and spoken critically of the Jewish people,[5][6] although he has denied being a neo-Nazi. Alt-right beliefs have been described as white supremacist,[7][8][9] frequently overlapping with antisemitism and Neo-Nazism,[10][11][12] nativism and Islamophobia,[13][14][15][16][17] antifeminism and homophobia,[10][18][19][20] white nationalism, right-wing populism,[21][22] and the neoreactionary movement.[7][23] The concept has further been associated with multiple groups from American nationalists, neo-monarchists, men's rights advocates, and the 2016 presidential campaign of Donald Trump.[13][17][24][22][23][25] 
The term drew considerable media attention and controversy during and after the 2016 presidential election. 
The alt-right has its roots on websites such as 4chan and 8chan, where anonymous members create and use Internet memes to express themselves.[7][12][26]It is difficult to tell how much of what people write in these venues is serious and how much is intended to provoke outrage.[21][27] Members of the alt-right use websites like Twitter and Breitbart to convey their message.[28][29] Alt-right postings generally support Donald Trump[30] and oppose immigration, multiculturalism and political correctness.[11][18][31]
So wait a minute, you mean to tell me this alt-right Nazi business actually has a founding father in the form of one Richard Spencer, who is such a hardcore neo-Nazi piece of shit that he keeps telling everybody he really isn't actually a neo-Nazi? And what's with all of this homophobic and anti-Jewish sentiment? Who do these alt-right folks think they are, anyway ... Al Sharpton?

From what I gathered from that initial paragraph, the alt-right is actually way more than white supremacists. It's also a rag tag collection of anti-Semites (you know, like Ice Cube and that one guy from Public Enemy), nativists (i.e., anybody who has the audacity to take civic pride in his or her country), Islamophobes (how DARE anybody be uncomfortable hanging around people who worship a god-figure who claims Jews are no better than apes and ordered his adherents to drink camel pee pee?) anti-feminists (how come no one ever uses the term "anti-masculinists?"), right wing populists (basically, everybody who voted for Donald Trump) and anti-democratic monarchists who literally want to revert back to unicameral government rule. Now, at this point, I just had to take a step back and ponder something: how exactly can the "alt-right" encompass all of these competing ideologies when they're all so dadgum incompatible? Per whoever writes Wikipedia, this terrifying alt-right Behemoth is made up of majority-rules capitalists AND anti-free market authoritarians, hard-line Jew-haters and economic nationalist Jew conservatives, pussy-obsessed Men's Rights Activists and evangelical born-again Christians. I hate to break it to you, but Richard Spencer, Alex Jones, Milo Y. and Steve Bannon don't share the exact same perspective on socioeconomics, foreign policy or domestic governance. Indeed, you could even say their political ideals are inherently oppositional. So - outside of a basic disdain for political correctness and globalist trade policies (the absolute bedrock of modern neoliberalism, naturally) - what the hell do these people have in common? 

Oh, that's right - hatred of gays, Jews, Muslims, blacks, women, Hispanics, Asians, communists, weed smokers and furries ... all of which are traditional Democrat voting blocs. Which - of course - sorta' begs the question: do all these people soundly condemned as "alt-right" bigots and supremacists really hate the great liberal electoral Rainbow Coalition, or do they just dislike their political views and de facto promotion of big government, open borders, free trade and especially the expansion of the welfare state?

That third paragraph, though, is what really piqued my curiosity. So after Hillary Clinton saying Breitbart and Prison Planet started the alt-right and then somebody else on Wikipedia saying Richard Spencer started it, along comes a third creation myth that puts the blame squarely on 4Chan and 8Chan meme-makers and forum-dwellers. This one, we have to explore a little more in-depth. 

Until the alt-right became a thing people said, pretty much the only place online legitimate white supremacists could meet up was at Stormfront. Generally, the users on that site skewed older - middle aged and senior citizen - and there was some sort of concentrated effort to turn the organization into a real lobbying group. Of course, since that means outing themselves as Hitler-lovers and negro-haters, I suppose you can figure it out for yourself why it never became a truly powerful special interests group.

Huh ... I wonder what erroneous information in an article that literally accuses the President of being a white supremacist in its headline had to be amended?

Then along came /Pol/ on 4Chan, which many individuals who self-identify as "alt-right" consider the real birthplace of the "movement." In a sharp contrast to the Stormfront community, the people on /Pol/ generally skewed younger - we're talking high school and college kids - and there was no intentions of forming any sort of real world special interests bloc, a'la something like NARAL or the NRA. And while the Stormfront hoi polli generally consisted of 40 and 50 year old dudes with hard-ons for guns and black-on-white crime stories, the /Pol/ brain trust comprised mostly a gaggle of anti-P.C. shit-posters, who saw smashing the multiculturalism-uber-alles Tao as the last great cultural taboo. If Stormfront was a social mixer for the fat-assed, radically approaching middle aged survivalist gun nut nigger-hater demographic and bona-fide skinhead Nazi punks, /Pol/ was basically a post-P.C.-reactionary soundboard for cynical NEETS who realized the intrinsic shock value of ironic hipster racist humor was pretty much the last domain of classical punk rock rebellion in this, the great gilded age of government-mandated diversity.

So, from the literal get-go, nobody knows whether the pioneering /Pol/ "alt-righters" were serious. Is the "alt-right" the junior cub scoust version of Stormfront, or is it a post-post-post-post-modern parody poking fun at the paper-thin skin of our contemporary, liberal corporatist-forged multulcuturalism-and-globalism-obsessed society? Even now, no one can say for sure which answer is the right one ... or if either of them are right to begin with. 

Now, it's pretty hard to vamoose on over to something like The Daily Stormer or Amerika or hyper blunt Voat communities like v/Niggers and not see the remorseless, unabashed white supremacy on display. But in that, you have to take a step back. Are guys anonymously posting Hitler GIFS and saying "dindu nuffin" on a forum really the same thing as something like the Covenant, the Sword and the Arm of the Lord, a real white supremacist outfit that convened in person and trained actual militias to go out and commit actual crimes? Are Fash the Nation and TheRightStuff fans REALLY a societal menace on par with the group of white nationalists who killed Alan Berg, or the organization that ACTUALLY killed civil rights workers in Mississippi in the '60s? The self-avowed "proud to be racist" alt-right forums and sites may use the "n-word" a lot and talk about how much they admire Hitler (although I've never understood how they could hate the Jews so much and celebrate the Nazis so much yet never accept the Holocaust as historical fact), but outside of posting Pepe the Frog memes on their niche online hot spots, I'm assuming these people are also unlikely to ever commit an actual hate crime against anybody. After all, people too terrified to dox someone on Reddit - despite their declared ethnocentric vehemence - are probably going to be too terrified to spray paint a swastika on someone's house or light a cross on fire in somebody's backyard, let alone lynch somebody or beat somebody to death for being non-white. Indeed, pretty much all of the "racist" alt-right sites make issuing violent threats an insta-ban offense, and showing us just how much anti-racist sentiment has truly permeated the mass consciousness, even Stormfront bans users for saying "nigger" or posting Nazi imagery. So yes, even on the nation's largest white supremacist network, you can be exiled for being too racist.

What gets me the most, however, is how the mainstream media oh-so carelessly lumps everybody they don't like into the "alt-right" ash heap. To them, Breitbart and InfoWars are the exact same thing as The Occidental Observer or whatever the fuck David Duke calls his website. Milo Y. is "alt-right" even though he's gay and the "alt-right" over at The Daily Stormer are homophobic as fuck. Steve Bannon is "alt-right" even though he hired Jewish writers like David Horowitz for his site, while the "alt-right" over at The Daily Shoah make their fuming resentment of the Jews apparent to anybody with a working set of cochleas. "Alt-right" is deemed intrinsically racist, but then the MSM turns right around and declares African dissenters like Malik Obama ... you guessed it ... "alt-right." "Alt-right" is roundly criticized as intrinsically misogynistic and transphobic, but the MSM has no problem labeling female conservative commentators like T.S. Pettibone and transgender conservative commentators like Blaire White as ... surprise, surprise ... alt right activists and/or advocates.  All narratives are bound by reason, not unthinking emotion: and sorry, MSM, but your "alt-right" umbrella for the opposition is logically impossible, using your own set definition for what the "alt-right" supposedly entails.

Sure, you might get a few guys out there like Andrew Anglin who make their racist sentiments anything but a mystery, but it's an act of downright malfeasance to say something like The_Donald subreddit or Breitbart shares the exact same ideological virtues as The Daily Stormer or American Renaissance. Indeed, the term "alt-right" has kinda' become the new "fascist," that catch-all for nefarious, authoritarian scumbags oh so easy to ascribe on others but virtually impossible to uniformly define as an objective concrete term. 

Is John Derbyshire "alt-right?" Is the dude who created Dilbert "alt-right?" Is David Duke "alt-right?" Is Pat Buchanan "alt-right?" Is Sean Hannity "alt-right?" Are the Asian and black kids who made this video "alt-right?" And are the Latinos who made this video "alt-right," too?

I mean, they all support the same core socioeconomic principles. They're all anti-globalization, they're all anti-free-trade, they're all anti-political-correctness and they're all anti-big-government. But you see, the MSM just can't wrap their heads around the idea that all of the disparate people above voted for Trump based on such rudimentary socioeconomic issues. No, there has to be something deeper than the simple fact that Trump voters thought the nation - and by proxy, themselves - would fare better ECONOMICALLY under him instead of Hillary. There has to be something much more insidious, that - naturally - the Democrats can exploit in 2018 and 2020. Hence, the universal derision of that perplexing "alt-right" label that just seemed to pop up overnight when shit started getting real during last year's election.

...so, uh, when do we tell them there haven't been any actual Nazis since 1945, guys?

So how do you respond as the losing side? Well, shit, how else - by decrying everybody who doesn't agree with you as racists, homophobes, Islamophobes, Mexican-phobes, women-phobes and dope-smoker-phobes. Hence, the cultural construct known as the "alt-right" was effectively manufactured to automatically discount, dispel and discredit any and all people with more than valid socioeconomic concerns over open trade and open borders as nothing more than frenzied, pathetic, perpetually wailing bigots, Jew-haters and tranny-bashers.

Now, are there some people who've adopted/appropriated the "alt-right" moniker who are indeed racist, hate-filled people? Yeah, but show me one ideological/identatarian organization of any political affiliation or doctrine that doesn't have at least one or seventeen fringe sub-networks of violent, rage-obsessed idealists. Hey, say what you will about the so-called "alt-right," unlike the Black Lives Matter movement, none of their fearless leaders (to the best of my knowledge) have actually been arrested for owning slaves.

Shit, even the SPLC fucks up and accidentally reveals what the "alt-right" REALLY is in one of their long-winded press releases meant to drive the media into a tizzy over all that white nationalist hate running wild throughout Middle America (which, as a matter of reality, may or may not actually be happening.) 
"At the heart of the Alt-Right is a break with establishment conservatism that favors experimentation with the ideas of the French New Right; libertarian thought as exemplified by former U.S. Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas); anarcho-capitalism, which advocates individual sovereignty and open markets in place of an organized state; Catholic traditionalism, which seeks a return to Roman Catholicism before the liberalizing reforms of the Second Vatican Council; and other ideologies. It is a reaction to the conservative establishment as exemplified by the nomination of Barry Goldwater for the presidency in 1964. According to Spencer, that solidified several aspects of contemporary conservatism, including an emphasis on liberty, freedom, free markets and capitalism. Spencer considers these ideas to be 'anti-ideals' and says the Alt-Right is redefining categories for a new kind of conservative. 
Spencer describes Alt-Right adherents as younger people, often recent college graduates, who recognize the 'uselessness of mainstream conservatism' in what he describes as a 'hyper-racialized' world."
And that, effectively, sums up what I thought the whole "alt-right" shtick was about before everybody in the media told me (well, more like commanded me) to equate the term with neo-Nazi execution squads. In the passage above, where does racism or homophobia or Islamophobia or antisemitism or misogyny or anti-immigrant sentiment come into play? Simply put, it doesn't - rather, it summarily identifies the alleged alt-right as nothing more than anti-modernists who prefer the societal values of 100 years ago to the cultural mores of today and simply want the goddamn motherfucking state to keep its hand out of private enterprise. So basically, all this "alt-right" is are libertarians with traditional conservative stances on social issues who also think globalization is an economic raw deal for themselves and, inevitably, the entire nation.

But of course, it's hard to find a way to scare the living shit out of the traditional liberal base with idle chatter of the next generation of "pro-free-market, yet economic-nationalist-protectionist men in the 18-34 demographic," so instead, the entirety of the reactionary, Millennial and Gen Z conservative movement HAS to be denigrated with an ill-fitting, over-broad "alt-right" label that reduces everything they believe in, politically, into nothing more than odious rhetoric smacking of "toxic masculinity" and "lite fascism."

Of course, the pro-globalists and pro-multiculturalists and pro-progressivists are ultimately shooting themselves in the feet by attempting to transform Pepe the Frog into a literal white nationalist emblem. You see, kids have a natural tendency to flock to the marginalized and the misrepresented. If they see a media account decry something as the absolute worst fucking thing in the world, they NATURALLY want to see it for themselves to see if it lives up to the hype. And what these kids looking into the "alt-right" abyss are liable to find is the one thing the liberal cultural tempo setters should be MOST afraid they will uncover - that being, some hard, indisputable evidence of the way the world really works. 

You see, identity politics groups and their overarching political financing apparatuses aren't worried about people encountering phony disinformation or blatant lies. Why? Because the objective truth is the objective fucking truth, and most non-retards out there have enough gumption to determine whether a claim has enough substantial proof to be considered credible or just run of the mill Internet bullshit. What they're REALLY afraid of is that people might take a step out of the mainstream and enter an entirely different echo chamber, totally devoid of their political influence, and there, they will come face-to-face with an indisputable truth the liberals have been telling them is a big fat lie their entire lives. And where there's one dispelled tenet of the Great Liberal Mythology, there's bound to be another, and another, and another ... until anyone with a half-functioning brain realizes "you know, maybe there's enough concrete info here to make me question everything the mainstream people DEMAND I accept as unwavering truth."

And that, in a nutshell, is why the MSM wants you to immediately recoil from anything and anybody they deem "alt-right" with great (albeit, suspiciously unreasonable) disdain and disgust ... because odds are, they're going to be saying at least one or two totally factual things they don't want you to ever fuckin' hear.


  1. This blog should be renamed 'the internet is hyperbolic' Ever heard of policing your own? When shit posting is encouraged, memes centered around blatant racism are not disavowed... Donht worry its all for the lulz! When individuals act on racist rhetoric in the actual murder of innocent people and a community does not condemn such things, it makes you wonder. And for me I dont wonder is this group racist / sexist etc etc no I wonder is this group capable of any empathy? Or are sociopaths running the show?

    1. You mean like that guy in Orlando who killed 49 gay people for Allah and that black dude in Dallas who killed five police officers for Black Lives Matter? If you think ideology alone is lethal, you can't be selective; if you want to condemn the alt-right for encouraging murder, you've sure as hell gotta' condemn the Islamic community and the radical left or else you're a hypocrite.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.