Two takes on Milo and Alt Right

Screen Shot 2015-12-24 at 9.18.04 AM

This reaction to Milo and the Alt Right was written as quickly as it took to type it so it’s definitely not a firm take.

I participated in the birth of the Alt Right, back in 2008. (Nathan Wyatt is a nom de guerre, so you won’t find writing under this name prior to 2010.) For more on the origins and meaning of the Alternative Right, check out Richard Spencer’s reflections here.

The term “Alternative Right” appealed to me immediately when I first heard it. This is partly due to the intellectual reasons Spencer cites in his video–the need for an alternative helped describe a desire to reject multiculturalism and unreflective liberalism, without embracing the dinosaurs of the conservative movement, with their pleated pants and mindless Middle Eastern wars.

It probably also appealed to me because, in my mind, “alternative” was connected to the first music I heard that belonged to my generation–bands like Nirvana and Alice in Chains–and by extension a wider, more diffuse culture and experience. While there certainly isn’t a full analogy to be made between my early auditory experiences and my later political reflections, with a little explanation I could connect the “End of History” desires of Fukuyama and the neocons with the nihilism and revolt of the Seattle grunge scene. (By the way, drugs are bad, mmmkay, but I still enjoy Alice in Chains.)

As Richard indicates in his video, much of what occurred under the “Alternative Right” label was exploratory and experimental. Many of us were passing through, variously, anarcholibertarian and paleoconservative phases of thought, and gaining our first impressions of IQ studies, human biodiversity, and the European New Right, while we continued to study history and civilization in the background. All of us definitely had travelled far upstream in our search for meaning, and having met each other, we debated which direction to take next.

Afterwards I took a long break from blogging and conferencing. In the meantime Spencer continued to promote the Alternative Right, and now the movement has its own life and influence. Case in point: gay catholic journo/iconoclast Milo Yiannopoulos may or may not have traded up on his activity and his Alt Right identity in favor of something closer to mainstream respectability as a Buzzfeed editor.

Whether that’s actually occurred isn’t deeply interesting, but the arc of the Alt Right is. Broadly, there are two takes.

Take one–a likely Spencerite attitude: Our aim is influence. We want our ideas to become part of the background assumptions of the culture at large (see also: Greg Johnson on metapolitics), and we can’t do that if we’re dogmatic and inflexible about how that influence occurs. Milo may be a preening gay attention whore who postures his self-aware homosexuality into a kind of extended pratfall, and it can be argued that he “used” Alt Right to get ahead in some way. But that’s exactly what this project is supposed to look like–other people adopting our ideas and our jargon, even if they don’t fully share our identity. You can pick nits from dusk to dawn about a person’s perceived differences and failings in relation to your ideal, but if he’s to some extent become a foot soldier in your ideological army, you’ve succeeded. In order for someone to “trade up” on Alt Right, Alt Right has to have some value independent of your private ideological fetishizing, and that is a positive sign.

Take two–a likely Linderite attitude: Alt Right was garbage to begin with, and just like every other proxy label ever conceived, it distracts from core truths and necessities. Richard Spencer and his team are milquetoast cowards in the end, and “Alternative Right” is merely an expression of their inability to man up and say what they know: Jews are the enemy, as is anyone who isn’t explicitly and directly pro-white. The fact that their “movement” is now primarily represented by a Jewish faggot and a confused Catholic degenerate illustrates their ultimate value. They are an insidious false flag.

I lack the time to give my own full impression, which is largely provisional anyway. But my reaction to most controversies in my movement is: yes. We should be having them. They’re a sign that we’re maintaining our critical faculties and distance. Personally, I appreciate Milo while also recognizing him for what he is, and I think he does, too–right-wing shit lords might consider whether they’d prefer a self-outed sodomite like Milo to the sort of closeted gays who import their multicult preferences under the labels of apparent normalcy and respectability.

Two takes on Milo and Alt Right

Shame, what happened to your friend Tom …

Screen Shot 2015-12-21 at 3.02.29 PM

Yesterday Steve Sailer noticed reporter Holman Jenkins kind of sort of maybe airing a broad threat against Donald Trump’s business interests.

Meanwhile, Tom Brady has been walking sideways away, towards, and around his friendship with and support for Trump.

Speculation time: This, a report premised on careful scrutiny of Brady’s business practices, tax arrangements, and personal connections, is meant as a proxy demonstration of what could happen to the Donald.

Shame, what happened to your friend Tom …

Leftism means lying

Screen Shot 2015-12-19 at 8.01.52 AM

The medical dictionary definition of a phobia is,

[A] persistent, irrational, intense fear of a specific object, activity, or situation (the phobic stimulus), fear that is recognized as being excessive or unreasonable by the individual himself. When a phobia is a significant source of distress or interferes with social functioning, it is considered a mental disorder …

Someone afflicted with phobia is likely to be manic, unstable, and socially malfunctioning. It’s obvious that whatever liberal types are describing as “Islamophobia” does not qualify. It is the same with “bigot,” “racist,” and other common attack terms.

Vox Day is actively developing and marketing the mantra, “Social justice warriors always lie,” and I am glad, because I am a little desperate for this counter-propaganda to make it out into the marketplace of ideas. An academic and media conversation led by left-minded “critical theorists” and social justice warriors amounts to an elaborate dare–a shit-test, if you will–not to call the propagandists out on their obvious nonsense.

Leftism means lying

White privilege

Screen Shot 2015-12-18 at 6.43.28 AM

I hear a lot of privilege talk. It emanates from respectable figures and influential sources. It seems intended to overwhelm the senses to the point where we begin to forget what the word meant in the first place. Discussions of discrimination, bias, and prejudice have had similar results.

What is privilege? To adapt a phrase from a late sociologist, it is the inherited wisdom and security of the past. An urge exists in all of us to extend ourselves into the future, and one expression of that urge is procreation and raising our children to be strong, wise, and fit. Obviously we try to give our children the best possible chance to succeed and thrive. That way, the immediate future, at least, will know a small part of us, and we’ll have played our role.

Succeeding at this is necessarily defined by cultivating privilege and advantage. Privilege, in various forms, is exactly what the successful pass on to their offspring. One may squander privilege, abuse it, or take it for granted–privilege can be misused, certainly. But the unreflective propagandistic war on privilege itself–white privilege in particular–is an expression of hatred that is plain to those with the senses to perceive it.

White privilege


Just some micro-takes to show I’m paying at least some attention tonight …

  • I was asked today by a respectful liberal-minded classmate whom I would prefer as president after Trump. My next-tier fantasy candidates, among those who actually are running, were Jim Webb, Rand Paul, and Rick Santorum.
  • Kevin MacDonald notices Trump going after Scalia along PC lines, and predicts blacks will vote for Trump in significant numbers. I don’t disagree–persons of African descent seem to find Big Man politics especially appealing.

Screen Shot 2015-12-13 at 7.05.02 PM

  • Can we get signed, sworn affidavits from everyone who is vowing they will leave the country if Trump is elected?

Poll numbers

Screen Shot 2015-12-12 at 1.38.17 PM

Especially on matters like border security and Syrian refugees, I am not greatly invested in poll numbers.

Whatever they are now on any particular issue, as terror attacks increase and war mentality sets in, they will continue to shift in favor of realism.

This, however, amused me:

Screen Shot 2015-12-12 at 1.17.38 PM

Poll numbers