The Alt-Right

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* Here is the Alt-Right’s “big tent”, or “consensus”, as summarized by paworldandtimes. I numbered them for convenience.

1) Blacks. They require assistance in achieving and maintaining a level of civic and material comfort on par with that of other races. Quantity + Equality = Can’t Have Nice Things.

2) Christianity. It is not an internally settled matter. For some, Christian faith is a non-negotiable foundation of our identity with implications on the afterlife. Others see it as detrimental to our vitality.

3) Democracy. In its present form, it is the rule by those who control the formation of public opinion and whose interests are not aligned with the interests of the voters. The two-party system in the United States is real, just like pro wrestling.

4) Family. While the role of extended families varies by culture, the traditional patriarchal model is the only one that provides a healthy environment for raising children.

5) Immigration. It is harmful to Western nations at present levels, low-skill immigration in particular. Manifest incompatibility between host and guest populations belie the economic- or demography-based arguments in favor of mass immigration.

6) Institutions. Traditionally conservative or masculine institutions such as the Republican party, the military, large corporations, mainline churches, and professional sports have been coopted by liberalism.

7) Islam. Don’t let it in.

8) Jews. As self-identified minorities with an enduring identity, they have acquired — justly or not — a reputation for subverting their host nations. Israel is a model of practical nationalism.

9) Multiculturalism. Diversity is not our strength. The involuntary comingling of disparate peoples is not “enriching.”

10) Race. It is a fundamental element of a human being’s identity. The human biodiversity model is predictive on the macro scale.

11) Religion. A purely materialist philosophy is insufficient as a pillar of a culture or an ethical system. Nobody wants to die over a contract.

12) Russia. It is not a potential threat to any Western nation beyond her near-abroad European neighbors. An enemy-of-an-enemy is an ally, and our common adversary is U.S.-led globalism.

13) Sex. The female is attracted to male power, charm, and confidence. She has contempt for male weakness or supplication. The male is attracted to the female’s youth, beauty, and femininity and is repulsed by her physical or moral decay.

14) USA. Her foreign and domestic policy is controlled by interests whose ambitions are at odds with the welfare of her own citizens, the existential question of Western nations, and geopolitical stability.

15) Whites. Interracial obligations do not justify self-destructive sacrifice on the part of the White benefactor, nor are they mandated by any notion of historic debt. Charges of racism fail to explain the disparity between the achievements of Whites and others.

16) Women. They crave male leadership and go batshit without it. Given the power, they will destroy their world, especially from the voting booth. Don’t listen to what she says — watch what she does.

* What sort of society would you personally would want to live in, and what sort of society do you want your children to live in?

Do you want to live in the slums of Chicago, Miami, LA, New York, Cleveland, Baltimore, Newark, and a hundred other god-forsaken places, or rather would you live in Vermont, the small towns of the mid west, Oregon etc?

* What matters here is that different immigrants behave differently towards the people which is already present (in our case, the WASPs). I suppose that every immigrant tends to feel “underprivileged” and tends to have a chip on his shoulder, to a degree – but most of the immigrant tribes overcome this feelings and don’t indulge in them. Only very particular subcultures bathe in self-victimization und cultivate their hostility against the people already present.

That’s partly a matter of aggressive competitiveness (or rivalry). Neither the Germans nor the Irish had an urge to replace the WASPs. The Germans were content building breweries and the Irish were content becoming cops. But in order to really replace the WASPs in their banks and universities you must be much more aggressively competitive.

And as Sailer has explained elsewhere, very insightful: It’s not as if hostility is the motive for aggressive competitiveness. Hostility is rather something you cultivate IN ORDER to be aggressively competitive. It is not a causal connection, but a functional.

* Vox Day: The Alt Right is an ALTERNATIVE to the mainstream conservative movement in the USA that is nominally encapsulated by Russel Kirk’s 10 Conservative Principles, but in reality has devolved towards progressivism. It is also an alternative to libertarianism.
The Alt Right is not a defensive attitude and rejects the concept of noble and principled defeat. It is a forward-thinking philosophy of offense, in every sense of that term. The Alt Right believes in victory through persistence and remaining in harmony with science, reality, cultural tradition, and the lessons of history.
The Alt Right believes Western civilization is the pinnacle of human achievement and supports its three foundational pillars: Christianity, the European nations, and the Rule of Law.
The Alt Right is openly and avowedly nationalist. It supports all nationalisms and the right of all nations to exist, homogeneous and unadulterated by foreign invasion and immigration.
The Alt Right is anti-globalist. It opposes all groups who work for globalist ideals or globalist objectives.
The Alt Right is anti-equalitarian. It rejects the idea of equality for the same reason it rejects the ideas of unicorns and leprechauns, noting that human equality does not exist in any observable scientific, legal, material, intellectual, sexual, or spiritual form.
The Alt Right is scientodific. It presumptively accepts the current conclusions of the scientific method (scientody), while understanding a) these conclusions are liable to future revision, b) that scientistry is susceptible to corruption, and c) that the so-called scientific consensus is not based on scientody, but democracy, and is therefore intrinsically unscientific.
The Alt Right believes identity > culture > politics.
The Alt Right is opposed to the rule or domination of any native ethnic group by another, particularly in the sovereign homelands of the dominated peoples. The Alt Right is opposed to any non-native ethnic group obtaining excessive influence in any society through nepotism, tribalism, or any other means.
The Alt Right understands that diversity + proximity = war.
The Alt Right doesn’t care what you think of it.
The Alt Right rejects international free trade and the free movement of peoples that free trade requires. The benefits of intranational free trade is not evidence for the benefits of international free trade.
The Alt Right believes we must secure the existence of white people and a future for white children.
The Alt Right does not believe in the general supremacy of any race, nation, people, or sub-species. Every race, nation, people, and human sub-species has its own unique strengths and weaknesses, and possesses the sovereign right to dwell unmolested in the native culture it prefers.
The Alt Right is a philosophy that values peace among the various nations of the world and opposes wars to impose the values of one nation upon another as well as efforts to exterminate individual nations through war, genocide, immigration.

* A quote I saw on Z Man’s site the other day: “When I was a conservative, they called me a racist. When I was a libertarian, they called me a racist. When I was a Tea Partier, they called me a racist. Now I’m Alt-Right, and I don’t care what they call me.”

Posted in Alt Right | Comments Off on The Alt-Right

Steve Sailer: Who Were the Racist Tenants Who Insisted Fred Trump Not Rent to Blacks in Coney Island and Brighton Beach? Jews

Just as most landlords don’t want to rent to people with young children (because they raise havoc), so too most landlords don’t want to rent to groups with high crime rates, low credit scores, and anti-social behavior. Most landlords would rather rent to women than to men because women commit less crime and wreak less destruction.

Steve Sailer writes:

As part of the big push behind Hillary’s Alt-Right speech, the NYT is rolling out breaking news articles about how nearly a half century ago Trump’s dad, with the young Donald’s assistance, tried to prevent white flight from his apartment complexes in places like Coney Island, Brighton Beach, and Forest Hills. As Hillary said on Thursday:

When he was getting his start in business, he was sued by the Justice Department for refusing to rent apartments to black and Latino tenants. Their applications would be marked with a ‘C’ – ‘C’ for ‘colored’ – and then rejected. Three years later, the Justice Department took Trump back to court because he hadn’t changed.

This subject has been gone over repeatedly over the years, but one little explored question about this old story however is: Who exactly were these white racist tenants who were renting in Trump properties in Coney, Island, Brighton Beach, and Forest Hills but who would have white-flighted out to Long Island if too many blacks had flooded in to the Trump buildings? The young Jared Taylor? The unborn Richard Spencer? Haven Monahan’s grandpa?

COMMENTS:

* Another point here is that essentially Hillary is pointing out that Donald Trump’s actually done something *useful* with his life, building stuff. Engagement with reality and being successful\productive inevitably gets you into trouble with the rent-seekers (or you pay shake down money of some sort).

Hillary has never done anything useful in her entire life, so she doesn’t have this sort of thing on her resume. Yet somehow she nonetheless manages to have actually dubious and evil “discriminatory” behavior on her resume–basically going around to various women Bill molested and telling them to shut the f*** up or else.

* This is further proof that the Trumps have always been good to Jews. Unfortunately, we won’t hear about this in the NYT, since you’re not supposed to know that Jews are also guiltily of white flight and having bad thoughts about blacks.

* In a building my friend lives in, he said when he first moved there, it was at a fairly reasonable rent. Not cheap, but not outrageous. Somewhat upscale. The rents there, since 10 years ago, has almost tripled, owing to it’s location.

When he first moved there, there were a number of… “personalities.” Something silly went on there monthly. Usually a neurotic tenant angered by some perceived slight, that usually wasn’t, calling for a tenants meeting to organize strategies to annoy the landlord. Often times, it was trustifarians, but also a few black wannabe rappers who got an advance check from whomever. They were easily the most dysfunctional. Almost non-existent coping skills. The notion of consequences was like a silly rumor to them.

Since the rents went up, my friend says his building is like a library. No “personalities” spicing up the place. They had to move. Could no longer afford it. Even trustifarians are no longer landing there. The building used to have quite a few of the little shitheads.

It seems the higher the rent, the more tenants you have with better things to do. It seems the coping skills needed to keep a regular job needed to acquire the rent tends to be a big plus in being a functional tenant.

When you bring in a tenant on Section 8, it’s the same as bringing in a trustifarian. The reason both are thus classified is because both are de facto socially dysfunctional.

If you inject the socially dysfunctional in a community without governing the numbers, you blow up communities.

People who work in jobs that demand personal responsibility–yes, even middle-class Jews–don’t appreciate everything they’ve invested in as a community member blow up in their faces, thanks to somebody living miles away in a gated community decreeing that it should be so. Even if they mean well, they’re evil.

They are bad people.

They should be collectively shamed at every opportunity as such. If you hear anyone trying to make a case for Section 8 housing, such as it is, take off your gloves and tell him/her to go fuck themselves to his/her face. Cast aspersions on their ancestry. Take a shit in their soup. Whatever it takes to make them at least take pause.

* The cosmological constant of sociology is that blacks bring down property values, test scores and academic, social and economic attainment while increasing social pathology and the general decline of households, neighborhoods and communities.

Who knows why this is but the how of it, how it happens, is very well established.

If this offset is acceptable to you then the decline and fall of your civilization is inevitable since you accept its decline.

If it is not acceptable, and you are prepared to adopt policies that treat unacceptable people as unacceptable, you may retain your society–your civilization–but this will occur with a very large imposition of social disability upon those unacceptable persons–and you will not have an equal society.

Social equality is likely to destroy Western Civilization.

* Hillary’s attack and the NYT response is effective because it is not about logic, it is about raw emotion among Nice White Ladies and those supplicate them.

Blacks are sacred objects ala the late Lawrence Auster, because they are useful for Nice White Ladies to distinguish just WHO is truly Upper Class, “dahling,” and who is just White Trash.

Hillary and the NYT are effectively labeling Trump and his father as BadWhites who were Bad Thinkers and did not sufficiently pay obeisance to Sacred Blacks the way a TRUE Upper Class person would.

Most of America’s conflicts around race and everything else are centered on carefully sublimated Class conflicts, driven by its Nice White Ladies, the more powerful emotionally because it is not based on logic, reason, or anything but a raw and visceral resentment by the Nice White Ladies that they are Upper Class, but not running everything.

Think a wealthy, powerful writer/producer/show-runner railing against “the Man” when they are in fact, the Man. The real beef being they are not running a studio and making all their pet projects no one wants to see or fund.

* This Irish lad in the mid 1980s once drove home a young lady to her apartment in Trump Village after an evening of a Doors cover band and several adult beverages. She was Jewish.

In law school worked for an attorney that did many coop closings there. Even met Fred Trump. My boss and all his clients buying and selling there were Jewish.

Have since had occasion to represent a retired cop selling his Trump Village coop. He and the buyer were Jewish.

To their credit, the Trump Village buildings are spotless, clean and well-maintained, unlike the nearby NYCHA buildings, which are crime-infested shitholes.

Fred Trump only cared about making a buck. When the City of New York stopped subsidizing middle class housing, he and his son moved on to high end Manhattan.

* “On the other hand, judging from The Warriors, even the street gangs from Coney Island are delightfully multicultural.”

None of the street gangs in 1970s New York City were Multicultural. The Italians had The Golden Guineas, Puerto Ricans had The Savage Nomads, African Americans had The Black Disciples, etc. That’s the only unrealistic part about The Warriors.

* I am Jewish and grew up in a large co-op apartment complex in Queens. The percentage of blacks in our nearly all-Jewish development was considerably less than that of Chappaqua. It was decent, affordable housing for the lower-middle class, and surely blacks could have qualified, but the word was that the board of directors wouldn’t have it. This was the ’50s and ’60s, and, having grown up in a very liberal family, I was shocked at how many of my neighbors used racial slurs. There were a lonely few who suggested the discriminatory policy of our development was wrong, but I never heard of anyone bringing that to the next level, as it was clear that most of the neighbors were content with things as they were.

* Fred Trump was Woody Guthrie’s landlord. Woody wrote songs about Fred being a racist but of course Woody could have moved or could have lived in Harlem instead of Besch Haven. Woody’s dad supposedly took part in a lynching. So I guess Trump is guilty of inherited racism just like Woody.

* That sounds like a more entertaining version of “Inside Lewyn Davis:” Okie Communist folk singer moves to New York, gets cheap apartment, can’t understand why his Jewish neighbors are happy that Donald Trump’s dad keeps blacks out of their building.

* There are a number of towns in West/Central MA that have been torched (sometimes literally) by Section 8 Housing. Ware, MA, comes to mind. These were not upscale suburbs, mind you, but modest, mostly blue collar towns, where people kept up their property and cared about the value of their homes and the town. Not any more.

Posted in Blacks, Jews | Comments Off on Steve Sailer: Who Were the Racist Tenants Who Insisted Fred Trump Not Rent to Blacks in Coney Island and Brighton Beach? Jews

Eminent Minds

Most days I have the opportunity to talk to someone with an IQ around 180. It is usually the highlight of my day. I rarely get to finish a joke with this guy because he has already seen the punchline.

You might think that such a person is a nerd and socially awkward. You would be wrong. Everybody loves him. His beautiful brain makes it effortless for him to see things from another person’s point of view. He has amazing empathy. He has never been stopped by police. He has never had a parking ticket nor a moving violation. He seems to know everybody in Los Angeles with similar brain power. He frequently takes time to do nice things for other people and he seeks out win-win solutions.

James Thompson writes: More likely, they will leave town and search out other eminent people just for the fun of exchanging ideas. Their vocabularies will be above 40,000 words. They are unlikely to believe in gods or superstitions, and can calculate coincidences. (Dick Feynman used to begin his lectures by saying: “As I parked my car today I noticed that the licence plate of the car in front of me was 79346229. What’s the chance of that?”). They may be seen as unconventional, and can be difficult to understand. In IQ terms they are 155. Call them the Three Sigmas.
When such eminent intellects leave town, they soon learn that they are not that bright. After all, even the United Kingdom has 6,500 of them, and they soon work out which the really bright ones are. So, for really interesting minds, we are looking at those who, in open competition, tested on very hard subjects, can show other scary bright people that they are closer to 1 in a million. In IQ terms this would be 160, but it would be simpler to say that they are well above conventional testing limits. Call them the Four Sigmas.
Think of Bertrand Russell going up to Cambridge University and finding very few intelligent people there, but later observing that every conversation with John Maynard Keynes was exhausting, and noting he always came away feeling defeated. Or consider John Von Neumann, (from Steve Hsu’s very good account) who made fundamental contributions in mathematics, physics, nuclear weapons research, computer architecture, game theory and automata, and also had formidable powers of mental calculation and a photographic memory. Laureate Eugene Wigner who knew Planck, Heisenberg, Paul Dirac, Leo Szilard, Edward Teller, and Albert Einstein ranked von Neumann the highest in intellect, and the aforementioned luminaries did not question this judgement. A little uncharitably, Enrico Fermi said to Herb Anderson, with whom he ran the first ever nuclear reaction: “You know, Herb, how much faster I am in thinking than you are. That is how much faster von Neumann is compared to me”. Laureate Hans Bethe, whom I revere, went so far as to say: “I always thought Von Neumann’s brain indicated that he was from another species, an evolution beyond man”.

Posted in IQ | Comments Off on Eminent Minds

We Need To Educate Journalists About Intelligence

James Thompson writes: The Economist is not a reliable guide to human ability. It believes in homo-economicus: all-purpose, equipotential beings without inherent differences, any such adventitious peculiarities to be smoothed away by compensatory education and the amelioration of unfavourable circumstances.

Very occasionally, like a maiden aunt reluctantly acknowledging the existence of sexual arousal, they refer to genetic differences, but soon revert to their standard mantra: with more education, earlier education, and more flexible education those nasty gaps between one person and another, and one group and another, can be washed away. Perhaps so.

As part of a holiday ritual I buy The Economist to take to the beach and find out if it has improved. The issue of June 25th looked promising, in that it had a special report on artificial intelligence, in which they said that the intelligent response to the dislocation caused by this development would be “making education and training flexible enough to teach new skills quickly and efficiently”. Quite so. They should have added “but the intelligent will always learn more quickly and will generalise their learning more widely, and to greater advantage”. Learning speed is correlated with general ability. The US armed forces have all the data, and Linda Gottfredson has dug it up. The Wonderlic data also show that training a person in one simple task in one ability domain does not generalise to improved ability in simple tasks in other ability domains. A task is learned, but the individual is no brighter or faster at learning the next task…

The Economist is confused about human beings, but if we are to accept their shaky presumptions about the power of pre-school education, then even journalists can be educated, if they can be caught young.

Posted in IQ | Comments Off on We Need To Educate Journalists About Intelligence

Islam calling: troublesome minorities

James Thompson blogs: “The paradox comes thus: any state which guarantees the rights of citizens must also grant them to those who would destroy the state and injure its people. Our interpretation of Magna Carta is that the big letter demands that no-one be arrested without due cause. A noble aim, though of course the original did not apply to all citizens, only to free men, say about 40% of the population at most. It did not contemplate millions of non-Christian non-Europeans, with perhaps 10% of them at least passively in favour of establishing the dominion of another religion and another system of law. That which would have been considered treason is now considered a right which must be defended by the very State which is the target of the attack.”

Larry Auster had some ideas:

What to do about Islam in the West


A Real Islam Policy for a Real America [My speech at the Febuary 2009 conference on Preserving Western Civilization. Culminates in an imaginary speech by a future U.S. president laying out the steps for the removal of Muslims from America and for a constitutional amendment banning the practice of Islam in America.]

How to Defeat Jihad in America [A step by step plan to force or encourage the departure of most Muslims from America. FrontPage Magazine, May 2004.]

Laying out the Civilizationist Strategy [The strategy consists of speaking the truth about Islam, stopping and reversing the immigration of Islam, isolating Islam, and destroying dangerous Islamic regimes and groups. It is concluding web page of The Search for Moderate Islam, Part II: If it doesn’t exist, then what?, FrontPage Magazine, January 2005.]

Draft manifesto: Together facing the new Islamic jihad [My alternative manifesto to the secularist manifesto. March 2006.]

Separationism [December 2006. Briefly summarizing the separationist position and quoting various writers with similar positions.]

What is to be done about Islam [Draft statement, Feb. 2007, focuses on sharia, rather than jihad. Breaks down the various types of “moderate” Muslims depending on their relation to sharia, and shows how all moderate Muslims as well as radical Muslims are part of the problem. Says what is to be done about various categories of Muslims, defined by their adherence to sharia, and their legal status in the U.S. Thus it strips citizenship of naturalized citizens who adhere to sharia, while it strips citizenship of natural born citizens who actively advocate sharia. It says that this is not about Muslims being morally bad people, but about Muslims being Muslims ]

The Islamic plan to take over America, and a Constitutional amendment to stop it [September 2007. A constitutional amendment that, paralleling the language of the 13th amendment, prohibits the practice of Islam in the United State. The approach is the opposite and complement of “What is to be done about Islam.” Instead of focusing on precise categories of Muslims defined by their relation to sharia and stating which categories shall be stripped of citizenship and/or deported, this amendment doesn’t deal with individuals at all but outlaws the religion.]

The “Islamist” penetration of America that we are doing nothing to prevent

Another Modest Proposal: Impose America’s Decadent Culture on the Muslims

Jihadist says the West can kick out the Muslims any time it wants [The reform of Islam is impossible, but the removal of Islam from the West is not.]

Islamization in Reverse! [Italian city bulldozes Islamic center, replaces by square named after Oriana Fallaci.]

How to tell Muslims that we don’t want them around [Paragraph from “What is to be done about Islam” where I say the problem with Muslims is not that they are bad people, but that they are good Muslims.]

Is my hard line on Islam unrealistic? [“I suppose there are instances in which a “noble lie,” an approximate truth, can help lead toward the good. I don’t think that the Islam issue is such an instance. When it comes to Islam, only the plain truth can save us. Anything short of the plain truth about Islam leads to Muslims taking us over…. For the same price we could tell the truth. Since we will be rejected and excluded for speaking the noble lie that only radical Islamism is the problem and that Islam per se is not the problem, why not be rejected and excluded for speaking the truth that Islam per se is the problem?… It’s tough enough to wear yourself to skin and bone for the sake of the truth. Could anything be more ridiculous and absurd than to wear yourself to skin and bone for the sake of a lie?” May 2007]


Separationism and Civilizationism

Separationism (December 2006. I define Separationism as a doctrine and quote several writers with similar positions.]

If we can’t democratize Islam, and we can’t destroy it, then what? [August 2006. My most concise statement of Separationism.]

Separationism, restated [Nov. 2008. Following the Bombay attack, I quote several key jihadist verses in Koran, and conclude that it’s the Koran’s sacred call to kill unbelievers that is the source of terrorism, not any secondary social or economic factors. “[T]he only way the non-Muslim countries can make themselves safe from jihadism is by excluding Muslims and quarantining them in their own lands. If non-Muslim humanity is to be safe and free, Muslim humanity must be permanently separated from the rest of mankind and be deprived of any means of having any effect on the rest of us. There is no other way.”]

Proposing disengagement from Muslim world, September 2001 [My first statement of Separationism, before it was called that..]

The Search for Moderate Islam, Part I Does it exist? [FrontPage Magazine, January 2005]

The Search for Moderate Islam, Part II: If it doesn’t exist, then what?

Concluding page of Part II [This is where I lay out the civilizationist/separationist strategy]

Better Living Through Separationism

Kemalization and other strategies [Considering Hugh Fitzgerald’s idea of forcing Islam to change by isolating it.]

Dreher on Separationism

All we really need to do [Reversing Bob Dylan’s “All I really want to do,” I get at the logical and obvious solution to the Islam problem—far simpler and more effective than British columnist Minette Marrin’s incredibly involved action plan that involves the constant surveillance, evaluation, and control of almost every activity of virtually every Muslim in Britain for all future time.]

Posted in Islam | Comments Off on Islam calling: troublesome minorities