Greg Johnson describes himself as anti-Semitic and a Zionist. He wants Jews to get out of his country and to go to their own country.
I am not at all persuaded that people like Greg Johnson want to slaughter Jews and non-whites. They realize that such mass killings would be dispiriting. Such white nationalists want to expel non-whites and there is a big moral difference between expelling and killing.
As a Jew, I don’t find it nearly as threatening to deal with people who want to dispel my people as opposed to people who want to kill my people.
Different peoples have every right to fight for their own countries and to expel those who are not a good fit.
Jews have been expelled from many countries and lived to daven another day. If America does not work out for us, we can all move to Israel.
Greg Johnson wrote before Hillary’s speech:
I am a White Nationalist, and I want Donald Trump to be the next president of the United States. Trump, however, is not a White Nationalist. He is a civic nationalist. But he supports policies consistent with White Nationalism, most importantly halting and reversing illegal (and primarily non-white) immigration, stopping Muslim immigration, and instituting economic protectionism and an America-first foreign policy.
I want what Trump wants, but Trump does not want what I want. He wants to make America great again. I want to make America white again. I like Trump’s policies not as ends in themselves, but as possible steps in that direction. In short, my endorsement of Trump only goes one way. The fact that I like his policies does not mean that he would like mine.
So if Mr. Trump were to be asked, “What do you think of the endorsement of notorious White Nationalist Greg Johnson?” I would hope that he would say something to this effect:
“If White Nationalists support my efforts to make America great again, that is to their credit. I want their money, votes, and good wishes. But their endorsement of my policies does not imply my endorsement of their policies. We have different political philosophies and goals.”
And that would be that.
But political reality is not so tidy. The Democrats and the press are anxious to tie Mr. Trump to the “Alternative Right,” which includes White Nationalism, because they hope it will scare voters. Certain Alt Rightists are happy to cooperate with them because they are looking for publicity. And Mr. Trump has not been particularly deft in deflecting the efforts of either group.
I believe that Mr. Trump’s views on immigration have been influenced by Ann Coulter’s Adios America. And one influence on Coulter’s book is clearly the immigration restrictionist movement which includes VDare.com, which has been around a lot longer than the Alt Right, but which clearly falls under that umbrella.
But I doubt Trump knows or cares about the pedigree of such ideas. Nor should it matter. The only thing that matters is whether these ideas are true. And it is true that immigration restriction is good for America, whether you are a White Nationalist like me or a civic nationalist like Trump.
But as much as we would love to influence Trump, as soon as the Alt Right came on his radar, his campaign reportedly blacklisted contact with all Alt Right figures.
There is no relationship between Trump and the Alt Right, just a one-way man-crush.
But both Leftists and Alt-Right publicity hounds have selfish interests in proclaiming spurious connections. And American voters are stupid or naive enough to believe them. Which worries me, because this election could be really, really close, and the Alt Right canard might put Hillary Clinton in the White House.
But I really want Mr. Trump to win, so I have been declining invitations from American mainstream media outlets to comment on Trump and the Alt Right, simply because I do not want to give aid to the lying press’ latest “gotcha” campaign. (I did give an interview on the Alt Right to a French Marxist writer, but unlike American journalists, she is a serious intellectual, and her angle has nothing to do with Trump.)
But now Hillary Clinton is preparing another “vast Right-wing conspiracy” speech linking Trump to the Alt Right. This is a sound strategy. Hillary Clinton has never gotten anywhere on her own merit. She owes everything to men. She would never have been senator, Secretary of State, or the Democratic nominee without her marriage to Bill Clinton. So it is natural for her to hope that Donald Trump will put her in the White House.
Hillary can’t run on her record, which includes supporting every foreign policy debacle of the last 15 years. She is both corrupt and incompetent. She lacks warmth and charisma. Her health is obviously failing. She could not even get the Democratic nomination without cheating. So how can she possibly win the presidency in an honest campaign?
Obviously, her campaign strategy is to limit her public exposure as much as possible and hope that Trump loses the election due to dishonest press coverage. However, as Ryan Faulk pointed out, Trump has recently adopted a more disciplined and scripted speaking style, which has disrupted the media’s “gaffe of the day” commentary cycle, so Hillary has been forced to come out of seclusion and press the attack herself.
Hillary is an intellectual lightweight, and so are her speechwriters, so she’ll probably just rehash the lazy-minded, slapdash research of American journalists and the shekel-grubbing hacks at the Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center.
No, the Alt-Right has not arrived. No, the Alt-Right has not finally been taken seriously. The Alt-Right is simply being brandished like a swastika or a flaming cross to scare the goyim and to stigmatize a new and potent threat to liberalism and globalization.
But, as Aedon Cassiel argues, these kinds of attacks tend to backfire and promote the growth of the Alt Right and the Trump campaign. The speech probably won’t hurt Trump or help Hillary, but it will certainly send readers to Alt-Right websites, which is good for us.
So, if this is your first visit to Counter-Currents or any Alt-Right site, welcome. Let me show you around.
First of all, I don’t really like the term “Alternative Right,” which does not refer to a specific political philosophy but is instead a broad umbrella term referring to any tendency that rejects mainstream conservatism, no matter how different they may be in fundamental principles and political goals. I, however, have a very specific political philosophy and agenda, which is simply not compatible with a lot of Alt-Right tendencies.
I prefer to call myself a White Nationalist, because my goal is the creation of racially and ethnically homogeneous homelands for whites. (See Aedon Cassiel’s “Ethnonationalism for Normies” and my Frequently Asked Questions, Part 1.) White ethnonationalism is not compatible with either imperialism or civic nationalism, both of which are represented in the Alt Right.
I also call myself a New Rightist, because I reject the political strategies of inter-war European fascist movements in favor of a “metapolitical” strategy of deconstructing the reigning Leftist ideas and values and creating a new Right-wing intellectual and cultural hegemony. (See my “New Right vs. Old Right,” “On the Necessity of a New Right,” and “Hegemony.”) This approach is not compatible with either “Old Right” (fascist) revivalists or political mainstreamers, both of which are camps in the Alt Right.
Finally, I believe that whites will never regain control of our own destinies without understanding the role of Jewish power in our societies and then freeing ourselves from it, thus I am both an anti-Semite and a Zionist, since I believe that Jews belong in their own homeland, not in ours. (See my “Reframing the Jewish Question” and “White Nationalism and Jewish Nationalism.”) Obviously, this approach is not compatible with those represented by the Jews and philo-Semites in the Alt Right camp.
Of course the very vagueness of the term “Alternative Right” recommends it to a lot of people, who are not comfortable with taking such clear-cut positions. I don’t begrudge them such cover. Indeed, I am glad that they feel comfortable in this movement, and I will support it as long as it functions as a marketplace of ideas that allows me to reach intelligent and open-minded people searching for genuine alternatives to liberalism, multiculturalism, and globalization.
But the same vagueness also allows our enemies to play guilt-by-association games. Steve Bannon of Breitbart now runs the Trump campaign. Breitbart publishes Milo Yiannopolous, who has written positive things about the Alt Right and is loosely associated with it. Thus Bannon, and by extension Trump, are part of the same vast and sinister Right-wing conspiracy as Greg Johnson and David Duke. Yes, it is just that childish.
But luckily you have arrived at a place where we will not insult your intelligence. The Alt Right is not an ideology, in which all participants have a common set of principles. It is a debate about ideology, in which the participants share a common set of enemies but sharply disagree on basic principles and political goals. Unlike the political, academic, and media mainstream, the Alternative Right is a free debate, untrammeled by false sanctimony and Political Correctness. That’s why so many people find it downright addictive.
As an aid to further exploration, I wish to leave you with a desert island list of ten of my articles that can serve as a starting point for exploring White Nationalism and the New Right:
- “Confessions of a Reluctant Hater”
- “White Extinction”
- “White Genocide”
- “Irreconcilable Differences: The Case for Racial Divorce”
- “The Slow Cleanse”
- “Why Conservatives Conserve Nothing”
- “In Defense of Prejudice”
- “The End of Globalization”
- “Money for Nothing”
- “Spend Yourself, Save the World”
Welcome to the best neighborhood of the Alt Right.