Last week I was reminded by a call from Associated Press that I had invented the term “Alternative Right.” When I asked about how I had accomplished that, the woman on the other end of the phone referred to a speech I had given in November 2008 in which I urged the creation of an “Alternative Right.” The same caller said that I was considered the “godfather” of what had become Altright, something that the Democratic presidential candidate would be denouncing later in the week. Thereupon I tried to explain in what modest ways I may have inspired the movement that Hillary was about to go after (namely, in a quadrennial ritual in presidential races in which the Democratic candidate accuses her GOP rival of being the second coming of Adolf Hitler).
I pointed out that Altright authors, some of whom I knew, shared my revulsion for the neoconservatives and deplored their influence on the American Right. I also noted that Altright publicists believed that modern liberal democracies had become dangerously fixated on promoting equality; and I’ve made this observation repeatedly in my books. Finally, as someone who had published entire works on the European Right in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries (and most recently a book on the career of fascism as a concept), I had provided the Altright with food for thought. This was the case, even if the writers in question didn’t bother to look at my qualifying phrases.
Except for being a very occasional contributor to vdare.com, I am not exactly part of the Altright stable of writers. Recently I expressed interest in an email in writing for Breitbart, which is rumored to have some connection to Altright. Alas, I may have to wait until Hell freezes over before hearing from this website. More importantly, I couldn’t recall until a few days ago that I had spoken to fifty attendants at the H.L. Mencken Club eight years ago on the subject of the “Alternative Right.” I am president of the Mencken Club, and in November 2008 gave an inaugural address, in which I called for an “Alternative Right” to combat the high degree of neoconservative control over the intellectual Right.
This speech may have been a rousing affair, but until someone in the national news service retrieved it a few weeks ago, I had forgotten about my oration…
I know well perhaps the most controversial member of this group, Richard Spencer, and once enjoyed a close personal relation with him. Richard has a charismatic presence, in contrast to the nebbishes for Hillary; and he possesses the self-confidence of a genuine leader. I fully share his contemptuous attitude toward multicultural totalitarianism, and unlike conservatism inc. Richard is fearless in going after our self-appointed thought censors. But I wish Richard would think more often before he blurts out reckless indiscretions. Shocking one’s listener has its limits, certainly in terms of traditional standards of taste. There is merit in what the Delphic Oracle taught: “Nothing in excess.”
…The shamelessness with which the establishment plays the “prejudice” card was on display again Saturday morning, when we were greeted with new evidence that Donald Trump is a prejudiced candidate. It seems that Trump’s campaign manager Steve Bannon may (or may not) have said, depending on whether one believes his former wife, that the Jewish kids at the private school that their daughter attended were “whiney brats.” Is this supposed to prove a Nazi mentality? Really! My Israeli son-in-law has said worse things about my grandchildren’s classmates. This latest charge of bigotry hurled at Trump by the biased media, including (to their shame) the establishment GOP Fox-news webpage, was clearly generated to divert attention from Hillary’s ongoing scandals.
* The whispered rumors are we will see a TV show (modeled off the European version) where some insufferable media hack (secretly working with the government and internet providers) brings a camera crew and goes to the doors of internet Twitter Trolls and exposes them as tearful losers.
* BBC has tried this. It was pathetic.
The idiotic female YouTuber they used to front it interviewed a really nasty guy who had been trolling the family of a dead girl and . . . he bleated he was afflicted by drink (or drugs?) and thus he dindu nuffin (he was white btw). She agreed that essentially he was another victim. Instead of demanding he be horsewhipped.
Then she tracked down another guy who had been trolling an MP and other celebs. He was supposed be mortified, instead he was completely unapologetic and said he only attacked the rich/powerful etc. Not ‘civilians’. Also he was a total leftie and thus only attacked the sort of people the BBC has been telling him to attack all his life.
So the trick they tried to pull was to equate the disgusting, nihilistic trolling of ordinary people with the legitimate challenging of the powerful. And then give the scumbag a free pass while failing in any way to shame the political troll who, ironically, believes the BBC’s editorial line.
Epic fail.
The Southern Poverty Law Center, with its $302.8 million endowment, is America's most lucrative hate group. https://t.co/yfTZEG1euk
— Steve Sailer (@Steve_Sailer) August 31, 2016
They've vertically integrated the incitement and monetization of Jewish paranoia. It's quite a business model. https://t.co/fcnK88XzUj
— Senator Blutarsky (@USSenBlutarsky) August 31, 2016
The SPLC is actually an affinity scam being run by Jews on some other, more gullible Jews. It reminds me of Madoff. https://t.co/Zm04YEVXtL
— Pax Dickinson ♔ (@paxdickinson) August 31, 2016
Giuliani and Sessions will go with Trump to Mexico City tomorrow, per campaign source. @JenniferJJacobs calls them the Three Amigos. Olé!
— David Martosko (@dmartosko) August 31, 2016
* It may be that Trump’s intent is to demonstrate that he is a reasonable sort of man, who meets with foreign leaders who oppose his proposed policies to hear out their point of view. If so, this strikes me as a potentially very potent and rather brilliant political move (depending of course on it not blowing up into an ugly public shouting match, or the Mexican leaders suckering him into some kind of ambush).
It would go a great distance in showing Trump can do Presidential — addressing by far his greatest weakness in this race.
Of course, that’s if that’s his intent.
But I’d guess that this interpretation would make the most sense. Trump has been doing a very good job lately suppressing his inner Trump, and this would be more of same. I’m sure he has been suitably impressed by his rise in the polls, and willing to continue what’s been working for him. He’s certainly seems like a pragmatic man, and this is the required pivot.
Will his policies on immigration itself materially change? I’d guess not, but I’d also expect some tweaks.
* It would really be a coup if Nieto hands him a giant check for the wall.
* This ain’t kayfabe, bro. Let’s assume, as a thought experiment, that he’s playing Trumpian fourth dimension gamesmanship.
He’s been harassing Hillary for her health very effectively for a while. She takes 3 to 4 day weekends every week at the height of the election? Weird. Mexico’s President invites them both (why? who knows.), so Trump says “OK, let’s do it tomorrow.”
If he and Pena come out with a deal he wins. If Hillary can’t get there for a while (because of health) he wins. If Pena hates him, he has a new enemy in the WWE style (what does Alinsky say? “make it entertaining”?) and he wins.
* Rush Limbaugh predicts Donald Trump is going to fold to peer pressure and disappoint his supporters. We’ll see what happens tomorrow.
Donald Trump is in a damn if you do and damn if you don’t situation. If he caves in, he loses a lot of his supporters who voted for him in the primaries. If he sticks to his guns, he won’t win over any new voters because they will see him as racist and anti-immigrant.
Unless Julian Assange has an October surprise that Crooked Hildabeast pays people to murder her enemies or that she has cancer for example, Donald Trump is not going to become the next president of The United States.
Donald Trump is evidence that no politician can win The White House on an uninvite the world platform. America has way too many White Liberals and Nonwhites. When you add up Nonwhites and White Liberals together, they definitely makeup over 50 percent of The U.S population.
The Democratic Party has a huge advantage in that right off the bat they already start out with over 90 percent of the African American vote, over 70 percent of the Hispanic vote, and 40 to 45 percent of the White vote. How the hell is Donald Trump going to beat that? For every 10 White voters, at least 4 of them will vote for Crooked Hildabeast. For Donald Trump nowhere near 4 out of every 10 Nonwhite voters will vote for him.
Whites do not vote in a large enough racial bloc to off set monolithic Nonwhite support for The Democratic Party.
The Democratic Party’s strength is that they win a large sizable minority of the White vote while The GOP wins a paltry share of the Nonwhite vote.
Every American personally knows at least one White person who plans to vote for Crooked Hildabeast. Most Americans do not personally know at least one Nonwhite person who plans to vote for Donald Trump.
George W. Bush will go down in American history as the last Republican president ever.
* Trump is basically Heisenberg. His true nature cannot be determined and upon microscopic inspection nothing exactly makes sense. Wave or particle? The true nature of Trump cannot exactly be determined which makes him so intriguing (and dangerous). Trump also embodies the Observer Effect, what I see in Trump is completely different from what others see in/project upon him.
* He could hammer the hell out of the Mexican president merely by treating Mexico as an equal: Mexicans cannot demonstrate in the US since Americans cannot demonstrate in Mexico. Mexicans cannot buy land in America since Americans cannot buy land in Mexico. Mexicans cannot get free government medical care in the US since Americans cannot get free government medical care in Mexico. Mexicans in America must prove their citizenship before voting in America since Mexicans demand proof of citizenship before voting in Mexico. Americans get to rape Mexican illegals since Mexicans get to rape Guatemalan illegals.
Mexicans are such ruthless discriminators against their own people (not to mention Americans!) that any honest comparison of our laws would make us seem openhearted chumps in comparison.
* I can’t turn away from the news without Trump doing something. Let’s hope this is not a giant sellout. The guy has several winning issues to play in this election, but seems determined to throw them away or focus on non-issues like Mika and Joe.
In regards to the illegals, I don’t know why he is getting checkmated by the naysayers saying you can’t deport 11 million. He doesn’t have to since self-deportations would occur if existing laws were enforced. As chief executive, he’d be able to make life harder for illegals and their employers and could facilitate said self-deportations. Yet he seems afraid to mention the term. It is amazing that self-deportation has become a kooky term, when in reality is has already been taking place.
* If a right-wing President cannot be elected in the United States, it is time for right-wingers to cease to support the government as currently constituted. We have no obligation to pander our way to being a hated and “privileged” minority. Instead, a movement for self-determination and a civil divorce of the existing 50 states. An intellectually honest conservative must admit that the rights and culture of traditional America will never be preserved by a non-white and anti-Christian leftist government.
* “Self-deportation” isn’t a well understood term, so Dems were able to easily spin it as if Romney was calling for blockading food and medicine to Latino neighborhoods to starve people out.
Trump so far has actually been pretty good at using simple words to describe his policies so that even a stupid person can understand. Other politicians should learn from that.
If Trump wants to promote self-deportation he should say “require proof of legal status for jobs and public benefits” or some jazzier version of that phrase. That’s basically how Prop 187 was described and it passed overwhelmingly in a Dem-leaning state.
* Any kind of resistance to the left’s project of demographic transformation, is de facto white identity politics. By resisting immigration, and directly challenging the media, Trump has achieved more in his campaign, than was achieved in the entirety of the last four Republican presidential administrations.
The phrase “White Nationalist” is incendiary and mythological, in the same way that “Black Nationalist” as relating to the New Black Panthers, or “Nacionalista Raza” would be in the case of Mecha.
* It’s interesting to consider things from the Mexican president’s perspective. If Trump gets elected and follows through with a wall + a crackdown on illegal immigration, you’re going to be out a lot of money in remittances, plus an escape valve for your underclass. You’ll be even worse off if he cracks down on NAFTA outsourcing.
So what can you ask for from Trump in return? What can Trump offer? Help building a wall on the Guatemalan border? Help in rounding up drug gangs? A mega real estate deal where Trump negotiates the right to develop the Baja coast for U.S. retirees? Or maybe even buying the whole peninsula from Mexico?
