Some Reflections on the “Alt-Right” and What It means to be a White Rights Advocate in a Time of Great Promise and also Great Danger:

How far we have come as White rights advocates when one major party’s candidate retweets our activists repeatedly and is happy to keep doing it despite being called “racist”, and the other mentions us and White genocide in a major campaign speech. It wasn’t always this way.

This is going to be a reflection partly about my own experience as a White rights advocate, and also my thoughts on the recent “alt-right” terminology that is suddenly sweeping the mainstream political arena.

My History of Interaction in the Pro-White Community:

Given my upbringing with all its exposure to Nature and Natural behavior, I can’t say that I remember a time when race wasn’t important to me in that I didn’t think it was real or was a social identity, and when I didn’t think that being White wasn’t my foundational identity, and White people weren’t my social group in which I functioned and to which I was loyal in defense; though when one functions mostly within one’s racial group, as I did, one usually doesn’t have to think about defending it—or so I thought, when I was small.

But I didn’t have words or terminology for this deeply held—to me very basic, sometimes background—knowledge: the knowledge that you were connected by Nature to other members of your own race, that they were your own kind, your own species, that only they could or should make up your “pack” “pride”, “tribe” etc., and that you ought to love them first, best, and most and to defend them loyally always. I didn’t need words for these concepts. Like most things you learn from Nature, you don’t learn them in words, you learn them in deeds; in patterns of behavior. In this sense then, I think I’ve always been a White Rights advocate—or would have been if given an attack to defend against.

But it wasn’t until I got access to the internet in my mid teens (I was homeschooled and didn’t have access until then), that I was first truly able to look for others who shared my understanding of race—or was inclined to do so. Just a year or so earlier I was gradually becoming aware that the world at large had somehow swallowed a lie. That they did not see things this way. After a year or so of lurking, as we called it on, I joined that site in 2008. From there I preceded to learn a lot about what the pro-White community is like, both from Stormfront interactions and from other pro-White organizations such as the Council of Conservative Citizens, and American Renaissance.  I gained a terminology for speaking about what I understood and advocated for. I started to call myself a White Nationalist.

Thus, my experience is with the pro-White, racialist, White Nationalist segment of the Alt-right.  That’s what I care about the most—by far. That’s where I entered the movement, and that’s where my unequivocal, first and primary focus is. That’s important, because it places me in a certain part of the emerging “alt-right”—the oldest one. It was, after all, the pro-White wing of the Alt-right that coined the name in the first place and started this movement.

What is the Alt-Right?

So what about this Alt-Right movement? What is it? Everybody seems to want to know. So, from someone who has been self-describing as a White Nationalist for practically a decade, here’s my two cents:

I’ll confess its even a relatively new terminology to me, as I only recall really hearing the term used for the first time around a year and half ago. Since then, and as the term has come roaring into mainstream political discourse like a two-ton water buffalo, I have tried to gain a perspective on what exactly it is, and how it relates to us as White rights advocates, and White Nationalists. I’m always thinking strategically about how to make White Nationalism succeed, and so I always try to keep abreast of the current political environment to stay on top of White people’s best options. Which tells you something about the level of active connection between the entire movement, if someone like me who was actively monitoring the political landscape specifically for white rights issues, didn’t really hear much about it until relatively recently.

That’s because, in my experience, the Alt-right isn’t really a single movement. Maybe it’ll get there one day. But I’ll confess I’m a little leery about that prospect, since some of the differences between different segments of the alt-right are as deep and important as our agreements. The biggest thing as far as I can tell, that makes all people who are considered to be on the “alt-right” on the alt-right, is that we see ourselves as facing the same enemy: the radical, unrestrained social-policy oriented left.

The original alt-right was just White Nationalism. Pro-White politics is actually pretty old; older than the other factions that make up the current movement, but slowly, different emerging movements began to see places where they intersected with us, and we began to see it with them. Gradually, perhaps almost imperceptibly, to those of us in the various movements, our movements began to come together.

More importantly though, I think the media—particularly in recent months—has played a role in pushing us all into the same corner. They want to shove all these—in many ways vastly different—movements under one label: the better to smear us, I am sure. It is in some ways true, then, that the “alt-right” exists only as a media creation. Never the less, this means that for political purposes, we are going to have to figure out to how to navigate a political landscape that increasingly sees us all as members of one movement. To that effect, it would be best for everyone—those who fall into any faction on the alt-right, and those outside it—to consider the dynamics of this “movement.” This is the insider impression I have gotten of what the “alt-right” is.

The alt-right, as it is today (i.e. as it is corralled and labeled in the media, and as social scientist will, no doubt, soon begin to study it), is a very loosely connected movement, composed of numerous different factions—some in almost outright contradiction with each other, like the cultural libertarians and the neo-authoritarians—and all, to at least some extent, movements in their own right, independent of this large, and not always useful, umbrella term, “the alt-right”.  What matters most is that they are all “alternatives” to the mainstream left and right, and that in at least some ways, they lean right. I won’t bother trying to define that term here—its sort of relative anyway, in some sense.

From my experience, the main factions of the movement are below. The thing they pretty much all have in common is opposition to the radical left’s policies:

  • White-Rights advocates (WRA’s) and White Nationalists oppose their anti-White (they call it “anti-racist”) ideology and agenda, and their denial of racial differences.
  • Other Racialists/Race realists and Human Biodiversity (HBD) advocates are similar, but focus more on opposing the race-denial aspect of the radical left’s approach to race, than specifically on White issues.
  • Cultural libertarians oppose their speech codes, safe spaces, trigger warnings, and language policing, and their general love of regulation and big government. Most of the “we just want to see the establishment bleed” people and the “trolls” who just want to rile people up, which Milo Yiannopoulos is fond of talking about probably fall into this group. They may not be serious, but the rest of us are.
  • Men’s rights activists (MRAs) oppose their anti-male (they call it “feminist”) ideology and agenda (although from a pro-White perspective, many MRAs still have a long way to go in recognizing that it is primarily White males that are under attack by feminists).
  • National Socialists and other Neo-Authoritarians oppose their Marxism, Jewishness, and/or their willingness to allow some forms of democracy to continue (they often think that democracy allowed them to get the upper hand in the first place).
  • Ethno-Nationalists, like the Southern Nationalists/Neo-Confederates and Nigel Farage’s UKIP, oppose their globalism, immigration policies, and/or their attacks on the Ethno-Nationalist’s own ethnic and cultural heritage.
  • Anti-Islamists like Geert Wilders, oppose their protection and promotion of Islam.

This list should not be read as mutually exclusive: indeed many people in the alt-right oppose most or all of these things about the left (for example, I am a strong supporter of democratic government and sometimes leery of ethnic level nationalism, but other than that, I pretty much agree with all of the criticism here). The key difference, is the reason they oppose them, and the main focus of the opposition; the ideals that lead to that opposition. Even here, of course, the lines are not completely clean and sharp. Many people in this movement could qualify in multiple camps at once (however, due to some contradictions between certain factions, few if any people in the movement are all of these at once).The difference I think, is basically focus, and the underlying ideals.

The focus is going to put you in one camp over the others most likely (although there are some exceptions here too). More important perhaps, are the underlying ideals that led you to the movement. Those will likely be influenced or controlled by the entrance you took (i.e. the faction that you got involved in first or that first brought you into the movement).

As I have come to understand that the key divide, ideologically, in politics right now is equalitarianism v non-equalitarianism (differentialism), I wish I could say that the whole alt-right gets it, and is soundly against equalitarianism. Unfortunately, this is not true. The men’s rights and cultural libertarian factions in particular have a gigantic problem, since many of them continue to cling to social equalitarianism. This puts them actually on what I would consider the left.  National Socialism, because it is socialism, is also a leftist ideology, and also promotes social equality (within the nation, whatever that is determined to be). That said, there is hope (maybe): it does seem that most, even in these factions, disagree with the notion of biological equality (although at the point you admit that, how you can logically continue to argue for social equality is beyond me).

Thus, this is the most salient difference for me, ideologically, between different camps of the movement. You will find that people—like Milo Yiannopoulos for instance—who entered the movement via the men’s rights and/or cultural libertarian factions are significantly more likely to argue for social equality, whereas almost no White Nationalist would ever do so. Then there is the immeasurably important issue of racial identity politics. This movement was born as a White identity movement, but there are certainly some in it or currently speaking for it (Milo) who disagree with identity politics at all, or with racialism. This is definitely a problem also. Of course there are other disagreements as well—many of them deep and important too. I don’t have room here to try and catalog them all, but they are significant.

At the moment, I am both excited about the new developments which are bringing these different movements to fight together, and a little apprehensive. While I think a larger movement could be a great vehicle for advancing White rights in society, I also am keen to avoid a possible outcome  where White rights and interests could lose their central place in the alt-right as it expands to include these other factions, and consolidates them more fully. I believe though, that White rights advocates can make the alt-right treat White people right, if we think strategically—not just outside the alt-right, but within it—and make sure that the pro-White, racial backbone of this movement remains unbroken, and that we work to unify all the factions against social equalitarianism, and into an understanding of the true condition of abuse faced by the White population today.

In the end though, I think it is ultimately a bad idea for this movement to get any more unified than it is—at least with some of the factions. Working together at this limited level could have real benefits, but whatever we do, we must make sure that by lumping White rights in with all these other ideological focuses, the media doesn’t succeed in crowding a discussion of White rights and White Nationalism out of public discourse on the alt-right. Time will tell how this will all turn out, but one thing is for certain: for White people, the opportunities to get justice have never been greater. We should seize them, and not blow them off because they are not just-so perfect. That’s a loser’s strategy.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s