Breitbart “News” Finally Goes All-in on White Supremacism

Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs writes:

Of course it’s Milo Yiannopoulos (with his crony Allum Bokhari) who finally takes Breitbart “News” all the way over the line into overt white supremacism, with a lengthy, utterly disgusting article singing the praises of the “alt-right” movement — the latest term neo-Nazis, Gamergate trolls and white nationalists use to describe themselves: An Establishment Conservative’s Guide To The Alt-Right.

We’ve written about the so-called “alt-right” movement many times; the term was coined by infamous white nationalist Richard Spencer sometime around 2010, and has since been wholeheartedly adopted by the kinds of people who pollute sites like Twitter and Facebook with harassment, antisemitism and racist hate speech.

Yiannopoulos’ ugly apologia for racism doesn’t even try to hide that it’s a movement of knuckle-draggers and neo-Nazis; in fact, he openly exults in the fact, praising people like Pat Buchanan, Richard Spencer and Steve Sailer and websites such as VDARE and American Renaissance as “intellectual” — and shrugging off their virulent racism by saying it’s nothing but a leftist smear and doesn’t really exist. And he doesn’t shy away from the outright neo-Nazis who make up the core constituency of this movement, calling them the “1488rs” — a reference that combines two of the ugliest racist memes, the “14 words” of neo-Nazi terrorist David Lane and the number 88, a numerical reference to “Heil Hitler.”

In our many posts on the Breitbart “News” business model of encouraging hate speech and racism among their commenters, we’ve often compared the comment sections to the worst sewers of the Internet, places like Stormfront.

Now Breitbart “News” itself will forever be associated with racism and white supremacism. This is the dead end of right wing media, folks; the final Rubicon has been crossed.

I won’t even get into the comment thread for this one. It’s exactly what you’d expect.

Posted in Alt Right | Comments Off on Breitbart “News” Finally Goes All-in on White Supremacism

Reactions To Breitbart’s Alt-Right Essay

Comments:

* John Podhoretz: Of all the things to carry Andrew’s name, a piece respectful of Nazi scum is the worst. SHONDEH, Larry Solov. SHONDEH.

* RosieGray: Breitbart fully embracing the white nationalist alt-right movement.

* If you’re mystified by Trump and the current election, here’s what you need to know.

* The fun part will be watching the hysteria unfold on Cuck Twitter.

* @woodruffbets: Breitbart describes white supremacist sites as “an eclectic mix of renegades”

* Milo is an opportunistic jew trying to cash in on altright while declawing it ( also breitbart is click bait)

* Breitbart’s alt-right story was a groupie blowing a drummer in a dirty bathroom stall: gross, degrading for everyone involved, unsurprising.

* Sad to see Breitbart post an article defending the Alt-Right. You’d be hard pressed to find a single #altright-er who isn’t a huge racist.

* Was the exodus of Jews from #Breitbart a purge or rats leaving a sinking ship they’d chewed holes in?

From the Roosh forum:

* Gays always make everything into them being fabulous, as we see in real-time with Milo

* This is the first article that I’ve ever encountered, in a semi-mainstream publication or better, that attempted to couch the interests of the alt-right in anything but a foundation of economic insecurity.

Which, if one thinks about this framing strategy as well as the overall economic focus of the establishment Republicans, is just a continuation of the economic frame that communists insist upon. Like the communists, the establishment holds that politics is defined and driven by economics. Merely taking the opposite economic position makes them reinforcers of the communist worldview in their acceptance of the overall framework of the culture denying political model and the discussion. I digress.

Anyway, this is the most incisive and honest article that I’ve ever read on the politics of at least 1/3rd of the Western population. I’ll be curious as to whether the establishment media ignores or addresses it, given their primary strategy of ignoring the truths laid forth in the article and disingenuously reframing motivations as a means of platform denial.

Every time I thought that the authors were going to cop out, they reeled it back in. In addition, these two journalists were impressively objective, in spite of personal stakes, in a manner that I have not witnessed perhaps ever in my adult life. It can now be said that at least two journalists understand modern politics and understand what the difference is between propaganda and journalism. They are choosing the West and the prospect of peace over any other agenda to include that of any possible interest in a particular political group that they might identify with. Good for them and for Breitbart.

* Yep, even though he’s gay, I like Milo a lot. He’s doing some great work for the manosphere. But after the Rubin interview I was under the impression he didn’t understand the seriousness of the matter and what Alt-Righters really think. This article however, is a pretty accurate depiction of what the situation looks like. I’d have some things to add about the 1488ers, but it doesn’t matter all that much. I’d guess his co-author contributed some good insight that clarified a few things for Milo. One thing they still get wrong though… their denial of a certain historic event isn’t just memes to rustle some jimmies.

From Breitbart:

A specter is haunting the dinner parties, fundraisers and think-tanks of the Establishment: the specter of the “alternative right.” Young, creative and eager to commit secular heresies, they have become public enemy number one to beltway conservatives — more hated, even, than Democrats or loopy progressives.

The alternative right, more commonly known as the alt-right, is an amorphous movement. Some — mostly Establishment types — insist it’s little more than a vehicle for the worst dregs of human society: anti-Semites, white supremacists, and other members of the Stormfront set. They’re wrong.

Previously an obscure subculture, the alt-right burst onto the national political scene in 2015. Although initially small in number, the alt-right has a youthful energy and jarring, taboo-defying rhetoric that have boosted its membership and made it impossible to ignore.

It has already triggered a string of fearful op-eds and hit pieces from both Left and Right: Lefties dismiss it as racist, while the conservative press, always desperate to avoid charges of bigotry from the Left, has thrown these young readers and voters to the wolves as well.

National Review attacked them as bitter members of the white working-class who worship “father-Führer” Donald Trump. Betsy Woodruff of The Daily Beast attacked Rush Limbaugh for sympathising with the “white supremacist alt-right.” BuzzFeed begrudgingly acknowledged that the movement has a “great feel for how the internet works,” while simultaneously accusing them of targeting “blacks, Jews, women, Latinos and Muslims.”

The amount of column inches generated by the alt-right is a testament to their cultural punch. But so far, no one has really been able to explain the movement’s appeal and reach without desperate caveats and virtue-signalling to readers.

Posted in Alt Right | Comments Off on Reactions To Breitbart’s Alt-Right Essay

Ben Shapiro: Responding To The Alt Right: Are They Bigots, Or Just Stupid Children?

My sense is that the Alt-Right is neither. It is largely white people who think like Jews when it comes to their own people. They are goyim discovering that they have group interests which often clash with the interests of other groups. All told, they prefer their own kind. Just as Jews ask, is it good for the Jews, Alt-Right gentiles ask if things are good for their group.

The Alt-Right is the equivalent of Tibetans who prefer that Tibet remain Tibetan rather than be overrun by Chinese. They are the equivalent of the Japanese who prefer that Japan remain Japanese rather than a mixture of races.

Ben Shapiro writes: One of the great mouthpieces of the alt right is Milo Yiannopoulos of Breitbart News, whom I consider a friend and with whom I occasionally engage in spirited bouts of insult-fighting.

Milo appeared on Dave Rubin’s podcast today to explain why people like me shouldn’t be bothered by the apparent bigotry of those on the alt right. Here was his explanation:

“Generation Trump, the alt right people, the people who like me, they’re not anti-Semites. They don’t care about Jews. I mean, they may have some assumptions about things, how the Jews run everything; well, we do. How the Jews run the banks; well, we do. How the Jews run the media; well, we do. They’re right about all that stuff…It’s a fact, this is not in debate. It’s a statistical fact….Jews are vastly disproportionately represented in all of these professions. It’s just a fact. It’s not anti-Semitic to point out statistics….The anti-Semitism on the internet, which is really important, I want people to understand this because nobody seems to, when Jonah Goldberg of National Review is bombarded with these memes, and anti-Semitic “take a hike, kike” stuff, it’s not because there’s a spontaneous outpouring of anti-Semitism from 22-year-olds in this country. What it is is it’s a mischievous, dissident, trolly generation who do it because it gets a reaction. Right? That’s been the case for young people for generations….They can get to people in positions of power, and people in positions of power and keep biting, they keep taking the bait….It’s a direct response to the language policing, it’s a direct response to being told they can’t say things.”

So Milo seems to be making two points here. The first: not all stereotypes are rooted in falsehood (true). The second: trolling people with viciously nasty language is a positive good because it rips away taboos surrounding language (false). Then Milo wraps all of this in the mantle of political incorrectness.

As someone who despises political correctness with the fiery hatred of a thousand suns, I find this problematic. Here’s why: I believe there’s a difference between political incorrectness and bigotry, or political incorrectness and vulgarity. I have this problem with Trump, and I have this same problem with the alt right that simplistically embraces Trump because they mesh being a jackass with being politically incorrect. They’re not the same thing. It is politically incorrect to point out that black Americans commit a wildly disproportionate share of crime, or that Jews comprise an outsized percentage of successful media moguls, doctors, and lawyers. It is also politically incorrect to point out that cultural stereotypes are sometimes rooted in reality — Milo’s right about that. It is racist, however, to tweet the word “n*****” at a black person, and it is anti-Semitic to tweet a meme of a stereotypical hook-nosed Jew controlling the world or greedily collecting shekels. There is a difference between the two.

And it actually does the cause of political incorrectness a grave disservice to merge the two. It makes it easy to dismiss solid information and data by writing it all off as the work of bigots. The alt right isn’t tearing down taboos regarding language, if that’s really what they think they’re doing. All they’re doing is re-enshrining in the American mind a basic falsehood about the right itself: that we are bigots who use selective data-picking to back our political viewpoints. The self-aggrandizing belief that trolling Microsoft Artificial Intelligence bots on Twitter into tweeting about the wonders of Hitler somehow strikes a blow for free speech is sheer fantasy. It’s teenage puerility. It’s damn dumb.

There’s another problem, too: the alt right gives cover to actual anti-Semites and racists. I’m glad to grant Milo’s premise that there’s hardly any racism, sexism, homophobia and anti-Semitism in America. I believe that. But when I can’t tell the difference between a David Duke tweet and a tweet from Milo’s biggest fans, that’s not my fault – that’s the fault of the person tweeting like David Duke. When I can’t tell the difference between a trolling tweet and a death threat, perhaps the author ought to be clearer in his verbiage.

Posted in Alt Right | Comments Off on Ben Shapiro: Responding To The Alt Right: Are They Bigots, Or Just Stupid Children?

Benjamin Franklin On Race

Ben Franklin wrote: “All Africa is black or tawny. Asia chiefly tawny. America (exclusive of the new Comers) wholly so. And in Europe, the Spaniards, Italians, French, Russians and Swedes, are generally of what we call a swarthy Complexion; as are the Germans also, the Saxons only excepted, who with the English, make the principal Body of White People on the Face of the Earth.”

Posted in Race | Comments Off on Benjamin Franklin On Race

The Alexander Technique In Movement

12931063_1054703601240137_2666129970313772595_n

Posted in Alexander Technique | Comments Off on The Alexander Technique In Movement

Three Stages Of Jihad

Ce5ZgDjXEAAR65X

What we’re fighting for:

CeBuhM5XEAAtDqV

Whites are already a minority on earth:

Ce5SdKaW4AA9i2J

Ce5STkeW8AAQ0ZV

Posted in Islam | Comments Off on Three Stages Of Jihad

Whom The Gods Want To Destroy

Martin Van Creveld writes: The killing last week by an Israeli soldier of a wounded Palestinian terrorist who was lying helplessly on his back has sent the country into a turmoil. No sooner was the picture published on the Net then the Israeli media mounted a wave of protest. Taking up from there, Prime Minister Netanyahu, Minister of Defense Yeelon, and chief of staff Eisenkot quickly denounced the deed and promised that the soldier in question would be put on trial and punished. This was followed by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) attorney general’s announcement that the charge would be murder.

Israelis like to think that theirs is “the most moral army in the world.” Consequently there was much palaver about the IDF’s “ethos,” its “values,” and so on. But not everyone agreed that the killer was in fact being treated as he deserved to be. Not only did his family and friends stand by him, but images of him, in handcuffs, led to an equally strong wave of protest in his support accompanied by rioting. That caused Netanyahu, a weathervane if ever one there was, to soften his original stance on the case pending a court investigation. Not content with that, right-wing politicians, smelling blood, entered the fray. They lionized the soldier and accused the chief of staff of failing to back his troops. One notorious extreme right-wing activist, Itamar Ben Gvir, demanded that the police investigate Be-Tzelem, the humanitarian organization responsible for taking the image and spreading it. One rabbi has even suggested that, for having the soldier tried, the chief of staff himself should be put on trial.

In his defense, the soldier claimed that the terrorist was moving and that he was afraid that he, the terrorist, might be carrying an explosive belt on his body. This was denied by the man’s commanders and made doubtful by the fact that the terrorist, who had been lying there for no fewer than six minutes before he was killed, had been examined and found unarmed. As always happens in such situations, charges and countercharges quickly multiplied until they congealed into a single opaque, stinking, tissue of truths and falsehoods. I do not know what the outcome is going to be. But I am prepared to bet that the soldier will not be punished as murderers in Israel usually are, i.e. with life in prison. Assuming he is punished at all, almost certainly he will get a pardon of some kind.

All this is still in the future. Meanwhile the fallout from the case is splitting Israeli society from top to bottom. Not to mention other soldiers’ justified fear that, should they be caught in a similar situation or commit a similar deed, their superiors, instead of backing them up, will wash their hands of them. To be sure, the State of Israel and the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) are not the world’s worst human rights offenders. Unfortunately, though, they are bad enough.

Sun Tzu, in the first chapter of his celebrated On War, says that victory will go to the side who keeps the favor of heaven—meaning, the moral advantage—by formulating rules of behavior and sticking to them. I agree. For those of you who have never read my best-known book, The Transformation of War, or who have forgotten its contents, here is what I wrote about this topic a quarter century ago:

“[Suppose a war] where one belligerent is much stronger than the other. Under such circumstances, the conduct of war can become problematic even as a matter of definition… Over the long run… fighting the weak demeans those who engage in it, and therefore undermines its own purpose. He who loses out to the weak loses; he who triumphs over the weak also loses. In such an enterprise there can be neither profit nor honor. Provided only the exercise is repeated often enough, as surely as night follows day the point will come when enterprise collapses… Since the very act of fighting the weak invites excess, in fact is excess, it obliges the strong to impose controls in the forms of laws, regulations, and rules of engagement… The net effect of such regulations is to demoralize the troops who are prevented from operating freely and using their initiative. They are contrary to sound command practice if they are observed and subversive of fighting discipline of they are not. Hence Clausewitz’s dictum, plainly observable in every low-intensity conflict fought since World War I, that regular troops combating a Volkskrieg are like robots to men.

A sword, plunged into salt water, will rust…A strong force made to confront the weak for any length of time will violate its own regulations and commit crimes, some inadvertent and others not. Forced to lie in order to conceal its crimes, it will find the system of military justice undermined, the process of command distorted, and a credibility gap opening up at its feet. In such a process there are neither heroes nor villains, but only victims: whom the gods want to destroy, they first strike blind.”

Mr. Netanyahu, are you listening? For God’s sake, GET OUT OF THE TERRITORIES!!!

Posted in Israel | Comments Off on Whom The Gods Want To Destroy

Is Anti-Semitism Irrational?

I hate the term “anti-Semitism.” It tends to render the hatred of Jews as something mythical and unworldly. I prefer the term anti-Jewish. Just as many people have anti-white and anti-black and anti-Mexican and anti-Japanese sentiments, so too some people have anti-Jewish animus.

Different groups have different interests and they are often engaged in a brutal competition for scarce resources. An Arab or Muslim who does not have some negative feelings about Jews because of the existence of the Jewish state of Israel on land they regard as their own is an outlier.

I can’t think of many examples of a group seizing power without some other group being disadvantaged. That’s how the world works. When Jews move ahead, other groups by definition fall behind. Modern anti-Semitism is largely a reaction to the rise of the Jews.

My bias is that the world is explicable and people make choices in their own interest. I don’t like “irrational” as an answer to why people act as they do.

From the perspective of one sentence in the Talmud, the great hatred of the Jews arises from them getting the Torah from God at Mount Sinai.

All of these responses seem to find anti-Semitism irrational.

JoshuaPundit : Why antisemitism? It survives and will continue to survive because like any other psychosis or fantasy, it provides what appear to be certain necessary benefits, at least in the short run.

For starters, it’s a convenient excuse and rationalization of one’s own miserable circumstances. And a convenient excuse for theft.

After the Roman Diaspora in 70 CE, Jews became an educated, prosperous and powerless minority in both the Muslim and Christian worlds, which made them a convenient target both as a scapegoat and for plunder.

The pattern was repeated over and over; Jews are invited to settle, and improve the local economy with their skills as merchants, artisans and skilled professionals like doctors and architects. In the latter stages, some of them become intermediaries used by the local aristocracy to lend out their capital and as sources of loans for themselves. And when the time is right, you simply rile up the peasants or the fellahin to stage a pogrom..after which the Jews are either murdered or expelled, their wealth and property are confiscated and all loans outstanding get canceled to the rejoicing of all.

Aside from the obvious financial benefits, it also works well for the local clergy as a lesson to the faithful as to what can happen to ‘non believers.’

And a few years later, when the economy tanks again, you simply invite the Jews back, since they always need somewhere to live. And then you can simply repeat the cycle.

Nowadays, the pattern remains similar, although it’s been expanded somewhat by the advent of Israel. The Muslims did their very best to destroy Israel in1948 and even with modern weaponry and British officers lending a helping hand to jihad and genocide against the sparsely armed and outnumbered Jews, they failed.

Posted in Anti-Semitism | Comments Off on Is Anti-Semitism Irrational?

Politico/Religious Madness

Rob emails: Dear Mr. Ford,

Let us assume that there is a modicum of historical accuracy in the Authorized Biographies (a.k.a. “Gospels,” both Canonical and not) of Y’shua bar Joseph ha Nazir. To this “Pagan,” he comes across as delusional. At his time, “sons of G-d” were a dime the dozen in the eastern Mediterranean/western Asia.

According to those “Gospels,” he irritated the Powers That Be in the Jewish community sufficient that they denounced him to the Roman occupation authority. Examining him, Pontius Pilate is recorded to have said, “I find no guilt in this man.” None the less, Pilate allowed him to be executed, as the local Jewish P.T.B. demanded.

With respect, I none the less assert that that was a world-historical error: This made a martyr out of him. Do not you Jewish folk know the power of martyrdom?

In my humble opinion, what should have been done with Y’shua bar Joseph is to invoke Din Meshugga upon him. He is a rabble-rouser, trouble-maker, an all-around pain in the tuchus; but instead of crucifying him, remand him to Beth Meshugga. Whenever he is thirsty, give him cannabis tea; and be sure to cook plenty of the right kind of (hallucinogenic) mushrooms in his food. In short order, symptoms will present themselves more and more blatantly, and the cult-let of his followers will dissipate in disillusion.

I am someone to whom Christianity never made sense. On the other hand, what I have read of your People over the last fifty-six years, shows a core of straight-line sense, covered by your share of any tribal People’s non-canonical mythology, interspersed with suggestions for group survival among other Peoples. Indeed, I personally regard the Jewish People as the Gods’ heuristic example, a.k.a “classroom demonstration model,” of group survival: Other ethnies have been, metaphorically, “tested in the crucible;” with your People, that metaphoric crucible broke, and your People were tested in the fire. It behooves anyone concerned with the survival, and continuity into the future, to learn everything admissible of intellectual apprehension, about your People, in order to discover your success formula, thereafter to appropriate what parts thereof can be tweaked for application to one’s own People.

Having seriously enjoyed your blog since I first discovered it, I urge you, please, keep up the good work.

Posted in Jews, Nationalism | Comments Off on Politico/Religious Madness

The 1488 Crowd

From Breitbart: Anything associated as closely with racism and bigotry as the alternative right will inevitably attract real racists and bigots. Calmer members of the alternative right refer darkly to these people as the “1488ers,” and for all their talk of there being “no enemies to the right,” it’s clear from the many conversations we’ve had with alt-righters that many would rather the 1488ers didn’t exist.

These are the people that the alt-right’s opponents wish constituted the entire movement. They’re less concerned with the welfare of their own tribe than their fantasies of destroying others. 1488ers would likely denounce this article as the product of a degenerate homosexual and an ethnic mongrel.

Why “1488”? It’s a reference to two well-known Neo Nazi slogans, the first being the so-called 14 Words: “We Must Secure The Existence Of Our People And A Future For White Children.” The second part of the number, 88, is a reference to the 8th letter of the alphabet – H. Thus, “88” becomes “HH” which becomes “Heil Hitler.”

Not very edifying stuff. But if you want to use the 1488ers to tarnish the entire alt-right, you need to do the same with Islamist killers and Islam and third-wave feminist wackos with the entire history and purpose of feminism. Which you might well be fine with — but let’s be consistent.

Alt-right vlogger Paul “RamZPaul” Ramsey describes them as “LARPers” or Live-Action Role Players: a disparaging comparison to nerdy nostalgists who dress up as medieval warriors. Paul even goes as far as to suggest some in this “toxic mix of kooks and ex-cons” may be there solely to discredit the more reasonable white identitarians.

Every ideology has them. Humourless ideologues who have no lives beyond their political crusade, and live for the destruction of the great. They can be found on Stormfront and other sites, not just joking about the race war, but eagerly planning it. They are known as “Stormfags” by the rest of the internet.

Based on our research we believe this stands in stark contrast with the rest of the alt-right, who focus more on building communities and lifestyles based around their values than plotting violent revolution.

1488ers are the equivalent of the Black Lives Matter supporters who call for the deaths of policemen, or feminists who unironically want to #KillAllMen. Of course, the difference is that while the media pretend the latter are either non-existent, or a tiny extremist minority, they consider 1488ers to constitute the whole of the alt-right.

Those looking for Nazis under the bed can rest assured that they do exist. On the other hand, there’s just not very many of them, no-one really likes them, and they’re unlikely to achieve anything significant in the alt-right.

What little remains of old-school white supremacy and the KKK in America constitutes a tiny, irrelevant contingent with no purchase on public life and no support even from what the media would call the “far-Right.” (Admittedly, these days that includes anyone who votes Republican.)

THE ESTABLISHMENT’S FRANKENSTEIN

Not all alt-righters will agree with our taxonomy of the movement. Hacker and white nationalist Andrew Auernheimer, better known as weev, responded in typically jaw-dropping fashion to our enquiries: “The tireless attempts of you Jews to smear us decent Nazis is shameful.”

Delving into the depths of the alternative right, it quickly becomes apparent that the movement is best defined by what it stands against rather than what it stands for. There are a myriad of disagreements between its supporters over what they should build, but virtual unity over what they should destroy.

For decades – since the 1960s, in fact – the media and political establishment have held a consensus over what’s acceptable and unacceptable to discuss in polite society. The politics of identity, when it comes from women, LGBT people, blacks and other non-white, non-straight, non-male demographics is seen as acceptable — even when it descends into outright hatred.

Any discussion of white identity, or white interests, is seen as a heretical offence. It’s a fact observed as early as 2008 by Yarvin:

Ethnic pride is one thing. Hostility is another. But – as progressives often observe – they tend to travel together. It strikes me as quite incontrovertible that if an alien anthropologist were to visit Earth and collate expressions of hostility toward human subpopulations in Western culture today, the overwhelming majority would be anti-European. Anti-Europeanism is widely taught in schools and universities today. Its converse most certainly is not.

So here is my challenge for progressives, multiculturalists, “dynamists,” and the like: if your antiracism is what it claims to be, if it is no more than Voltaire 3.0, why do non-European ethnocentrism and anti-European hostility not seem to bother you in the slightest? Do they maybe even strike you as, um, slightly cool?

The current consensus offers, at best, mild condemnation of identity politics on the Left, and zero tolerance for identity politics on the right. Even for us – a gay man of Jewish descent and a mixed-ethnic half-Pakistani – the dangers of writing on this topic loom large. Though we do not identify with the alt-right, even writing an article about them is akin to prancing through a minefield.

The pressure to self-censor must be almost overwhelming for straight white men — and, for most of them, it appears to be, which explains why so much of the alt-right operates anonymously.

While movements like third-wave feminism and Black Lives Matter often draw criticism from conservatives and libertarians, advocacy on behalf of those causes is not a career-ending offence. Quite the reverse. It’s possible to build successful and lucrative careers off the back of those movements. Just look at Al Sharpton, Anita Sarkeesian and Deray Mckesson.

Posted in Nationalism, Nazi | Comments Off on The 1488 Crowd