The term was coined in 2008 by Richard Spencer, a white supremacist whose National Policy Institute says it is “dedicated to the heritage, identity and future of people of European descent in the United States, and around the world.” Through his online writings and YouTube channel, Mr. Spencer is a key player in the social-media universe where this core group of Trump supporters get their “news,” from sources with which most people aren’t familiar. A quick scan shows that immigration is not only their most important issue, it’s pretty much their only issue.
“Immigration is a kind of proxy war — and maybe a last stand — for White Americans, who are undergoing a painful recognition that, unless dramatic action is taken, their grandchildren will live in a country that is alien and hostile,” Mr. Spencer wrote in a National Policy Institute column.
Infowars is another website that puts immigration front and center. The site was created by the radio commentator/conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, who is the source of Mr. Trump’s false claim that thousands of New Jersey Muslims celebrated 9/11, and on whose show Mr. Trump said: “Your reputation is amazing. I will not let you down.” Infowars called Mr. Trump’s slashing anti-immigrant rant on Wednesday “an excellent speech sure to win him support from those who’ve been conned by the lying media into thinking he’s some evil demon creature when the truth is he’s a man with a heart of gold.”
Mr. Trump says he isn’t signaling the alt-right when he says of immigrants, as he did again on Wednesday: “We have no idea who these people are, where they come from. I always say Trojan Horse. Watch what’s going to happen, folks. It’s not going to be pretty.” Or when he said — in a line widely quoted on alt-right websites — “There is only one core issue in the immigration debate and it is this: the well-being of the American people.” Mr. Trump’s white supremacist followers don’t take his disavowals too seriously. After all, he has enthusiastically retweeted bogus crime statistics and incendiary imagery from these websites and hired one of their biggest lights, Stephen Bannon of Breitbart News, to manage his campaign.
There aren’t enough of these people to put Mr. Trump in the White House. But his candidacy has granted them the legitimacy they have craved for years. For the first time, a candidate is using a major-party megaphone to shout the ideas they once could only mutter among themselves in the shadowy fringes of national debate.
Posted inAlt Right|Comments Off on Donald Trump’s Alt-Right Brain
President Obama said Monday that Colin Kaepernick, the San Francisco 49ers quarterback, is “exercising his constitutional right” by refusing to stand during the national anthem, a decision that has created considerable controversy since he first took the action 10 days ago.
While noting the meaning of the flag and the national anthem, the president said there was a long history of sports figures making political statements.
“I think he cares about some real, legitimate issues that have to be talked about,” President Obama said during a news conference in China. “And if nothing else, what he’s done is he’s generated more conversation around some topics that need to be talked about.”
Speaking of sports stars being allowed to exercise their constitutional rights, here are a couple of other New York Times articles, but these are from 16 years ago:
Baseball has ordered John Rocker, the Atlanta Braves pitcher, to undergo psychological testing before deciding whether he will be disciplined for the disparaging remarks that he made about gays and minority-group members in a magazine article last month.
Commissioner Bud Selig, saying John Rocker had dishonored Major League Baseball by disparaging many groups of society with his harsh comments in a magazine interview, suspended the Atlanta Braves’ No. 1 relief pitcher yesterday for 73 days, marking the first time a baseball player has been disciplined for speech. …
Selig said that Rocker could not participate in spring training with the Braves, a 45-day period, and could not play during the first 28 days of the season. The commissioner also fined Rocker, a 25-year-old Georgian, $20,000 and ordered him to undergo sensitivity training. …
”Major League Baseball takes seriously its role as an American institution and the important social responsibility that goes with it,” Selig said in a statement. ”We will not dodge our responsibility. Mr. Rocker should understand that his remarks offended practically every element of society and brought dishonor to himself, the Atlanta Braves and Major League Baseball.”
Rocker, who initially gained notoriety by lashing out at Mets fans during the National League Championship Series last October, expanded his target group in a Sports Illustrated article in December. He disparaged an assortment of foreign people — ”I’m not a very big fan of foreigners,” he said, adding, ”How the hell did they get in this country?”– as well as gays and others.
In the grand tradition of the Brezhnev regime, Major League Baseball is forcing Atlanta Braves relief pitcher John Rocker to undergo psychiatric testing for expressing dissident political and social opinions.
Rocker is on the rack for the neo-Orwellian crime of hating New York. “It’s the most hectic, nerve-racking city. Imagine having to take the [Number] 7 train to the ballpark, looking like you’re [riding through] Beirut next to some kid with purple hair next to some queer with AIDS right next to some dude who just got out of jail for the fourth time right next to some 20-year-old mom with four kids. It’s depressing.”
Saturday Night Live’s Colin Quinn commented, “I hate Rocker, but I have to admit the guy has ridden the 7 train.”
Of course, when the charge is “multicultural insensitivity,” the fact that one is telling the truth only worsens one’s guilt.
No doubt, baseball commissioner Bud Selig and the rest of the thought police will be shocked, shocked, to learn from the shrinks that a young closer whose job is to intimidate batters by throwing 95 mph fastballs right under their chins is hot-headed and hostile.
But the rest of us should be shocked by the chilling effect that “sensitivity” is having on free speech.
It doesn’t appear that in the current ten days of controversy over Kaepernick that anybody has previously brought up the Rocker analogy, even though they have obvious parallels beyond the obvious Who? Whom? differences
Update: As commenter Hepp suggests, in parallel to Obama defending Colin Kaepernick in China, here is Obama denouncing Donald Sterling in Malaysia for what Sterling said in private:
COMMENTS:
* Has President Barry ever had a Sister Souljah moment? Seems like he’s too insecure about his black brother bonafides to risk offending a constituency that might finally recognize he’s not really authentically one of them.
Whatever the obstacles to blacks overcoming their tough situations, too few are willing to stick their necks out to coach these citizens that most of their challenges are homemade and that the key to any change is in their grasp.
* Kaepernick is mulatto AND was adopted and cared for by nice white parents, so he has to signal blackness extra hard. (I assume all veteran iSteve readers understand the phenomenon of mulattoes always identifying with their deadbeat black fathers as well as being the most vocal and obnoxious activists, compounded by a slight boost of intelligence.)
Of course Obama, a fellow mulatto let down by blacks and uplifted by whites, took time out to speak about Kaepernick.
* The US flag’s days might be numbered. When they banned the Rebel battle flag, people pointed out that no slave ship ever came here flying that banner. The US banner flew over many slave ships though.
Kaepernick just confirms that the left really does dislike the US flag because to them it does represent white America. What’s the point of changing the composition of the nation and chipping away at the Constitution that they publicly think is flawed if you are not going to change the symbols and emblems?
We’ve already seen the renaming of buildings, streets and other public places. We are about to see Andy Jackson taken off the $20. So why not, in their words, come up with a flag that represents the new America?
Now of course this would be a drastic move given our current demographic makeup. We still need to be further along with the population replacement. But Kaepernick and BLM show that some of the left are becoming impatient with the pace of change. After all it is supposedly set in stone that their side has won. So why do they have to wait?
Personally I wish they would demand a new flag today. It would push many over to the Trump side.
Posted inAmerica, Censorship|Comments Off on Colin Kaepernick vs. John Rocker: Some Speech Is More Free Than Other Speech
ABCNEWS: A group of men wearing a Ku Klux Klan outfit, a motorbike helmet and a Muslim niqab have tried to enter Parliament House in Canberra to argue in favour of a nationwide ban on the burka.
They were met by a security official outside the building, who advised the men that the helmet and the KKK hat were not allowed inside.
He told the protester wearing the niqab that his face would have to be revealed during the normal security screening process.
The media was unable to witness the security process, but all three men emerged without their head coverings.
“It seems that you’re allowed to wear a full-faced covering into Parliament if you’re a Muslim woman, but no other group is allowed to have that same privilege,” Sergio Redegalli told reporters.
“We, as males, are not allowed to wear any face coverings in Parliament House.”
Posted inAustralia|Comments Off on Men wearing Ku Klux Klan outfit, motorbike helmet and niqab try to enter Parliament House in Canberra
Because they are such an imitative society, they even copied the practice of the American doctors who came over during the Korean War and then they made those American practices aka Jewish practices standard.
Virtually no circumcision was performed before the year 1945 as it is against Korea’s long and strong tradition of preserving the body as a gift from parents.[36] A 2001 study of 20-year-old South Korean men found that 78% were circumcised.[37] At the time, the authors commented that “South Korea has possibly the largest absolute number of teenage or adult circumcisions anywhere in the world. Because circumcision started through contact with the American military during the Korean War, South Korea has an unusual history of circumcision.” According to a 2002 study, 86.3% of South Korean males aged 14–29 were circumcised.[38] In 2012, it’s the case of 75.8% of the same age group. Only after 1999 has some information against circumcision become available (at the time of the 2012 study, only 3% of Korean internet sites, using the most popular Korean search engine Naver, are against indiscriminate circumcision and 97% are for).[36] The authors of the study speculate “that the very existence of information about the history of Korean circumcision, its contrary nature relative to a longstanding tradition, its introduction by the US military, etc., has been extremely influential on the decision-making process regarding circumcision.”
Posted inCircumcision, Korea|Comments Off on Who Does South Korea Have A High Rate Of Circumcision?
Dave Weigel’s otherwise solid analysis linked Steve Sailer and Jared Taylor as “alt right” or “race realists”, which made me very nervous. Yes, Steve is an influential writer at Taki and VDare, and I thought he was well-represented in that piece. But Steve is a writer whose primary sin is that of noticing, as he often says. He’s snarky and sarcastic and occasionally brutal, but if he’s a racial separatist, the sentiments don’t make their way into his writing. Jared Taylor is a political activist with explicit goals of giving individuals and businesses the legal right to self-segregate. If these two are in the same region, it should be a very large one. Weigel makes it sound small.
A December piece by Rosie Gray that I reread after listening to her on NPR does the best job of capturing “alt-right” beliefs. Jared Taylor, who I heard for the first time on that same NPR show, strongly approved of Gray’s work and didn’t mention anything about the reassuring (to me) fact that Gray omits Steve Sailer. She gives plenty of space to some major players in what is clearly a fringe movement, capturing both the beliefs and the behavior, while allowing conservative pro-Trump folks like Coulter and Limbaugh a chance to clarify whether or not they were part of the alt-right, rather than just assuming it. I learned a few things–that The Cathedral , as Moldbug calls it, is their Synagogue, and how “echo” links to the multiple parentheses. Gray even explains the frog.
Up last is my favorite of the three alt-right descriptions by TA Frank, How the Alt Right Became the Party of Hate. While Gray reports from the inside, Frank examines the movement’s path from unknown to mainstream, spotting this Evan Osnos piece as the initial piece connecting Trump to the alt-right, and pointing out that Breitbart is “nowhere near” the alt-right, linked to them only through its “biggest provocateur, Milo”. Frank’s piece often delights, for example: He was not reading Carl Schmitt. Neither is Bannon. And neither is the 70-year-old billionaire for whom Bannon is now working. (Trump’s staffers would be lucky to get their boss to read his own policy papers.)
But more importantly, from my admittedly self-absorbed perspective, Frank likewise portrays the “alt-right issue” as one of different regions. The alt-right–white-nationalist, anti-Semitic, democracy doubting– is fringe, a tiny country with rocky terrain and few friendly neighbors. Another region, according to Franks, is white resentment and tension as more whites struggle economically, while thanks to continuing progressive disparagement makes them feel under attack. In my geography the men’s rights movement, neoreaction, the Dark Enlightenment proper, all live here. This region is, I believe, consistent with what Breitbart writer Milo considers the alt-right–and, possibly, accounts for the behavior problems mentioned above.
The third region contains the people who notice and describe the denial ferociously practiced by those responsible for our nation’s social policies. In this world lives Ron Unz, hbdchick, Razib Khan, Jason Richwine, JayMan, Greg Cochrane, VDare magazine (I think), John Derbyshire, Steve Sailer, and, yeah, me. People in this space have either suffered professionally for their opinions and writings, or are anonymous because they fear repercussions. But it’s their opinions, not their political objectives or behaviors, that are at issue.
The three regions don’t overlap much. The first two read the third, but the reverse is less common. The first two are safely described as alt-right. The third is the one that is cause for disagreement.
What binds the three regions, why they think of themselves as related in some way, is not anti-Semitism, not racism, (or “race realism”), not men’s rights, not separatism, not political objectives. I can’t stress this enough.
The common factor is utter disdain for the aforementioned Cathedral, the fortress-like canon controlling the dogma of the neighboring region called The Mainstream.Read on.
Posted inAlt Right|Comments Off on Defining the Alt Right
"This guy knows all the gossip, the ins and outs, the lashon hara of the Orthodox world. He’s an [expert] in... all the inner workings of the Orthodox world." (Rabbi Aaron Rakeffet-Rothkoff)
