ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Tuesday, September 20, 2016

The growth of the Alt-Lite

The power of the Alt-Right message can be seen in those who are rejecting conservatism, classical liberalism, and other pure ideologies in favor of watered-down versions of the Alt-Right that Richard Spencer and others have collectively labeled the Alt-Lite. This is one thoughtful Alt-Lite piece by a self-declared Liberal Christian Nationalist who has, in his own words, embraced identity politics.
I think I am a “Liberal Christian Nationalist,” and, now that Christians arguably have no real influence in this country – just as they, particularly nationalists, have little influence in Europe (first see here ; then here and here) – this shouldn’t scare anyone.[i] I don’t expect to get too many of my fellow Americans to identify with me in this, nor does it mean I expect to see a LCN party arise. I suspect that the list that I have put together below though – explaining what I mean by “Liberal Christian Nationalism”, might be of more use to countries who are young when it comes to their Christian commitment.

Please note that these points deal with issues of “race” in some detail, since that is, I think, always the elephant in the room and demands thoughtful engagement. Further, in full disclosure, I put together this 32 point list in part in response to a list that the “Alt Right” leader, Vox Day (author of The Irrational Atheist), put together.

Before jumping into my list, a key point: in my view, the Leftism of today includes many who would consider themselves on the political right. Their philosophy is ultimately deferential to the language used in the 1992 Planned Parenthood vs. Casey decision of the Supreme Court: “At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.” (of course, logic tells us that “private beliefs” will ultimately only be permitted to be translated into action for some persons – others’ actions will inevitably be determined to be “out of bounds” – see below). A person who is conservative, on the other hand – including those who find room to account for the importance of identity in politics – would continue to agree with the words of the late Russel Kirk – or, perhaps, at least want to agree with him: “[conservatives are] all those people who recognize an enduring moral order in the universe, a constant human nature, and high duties toward the order spiritual and the order temporal.” “Conservatives” who say that what Kirk says is “no longer true” or irrelevant are being anything but conservative. After all, if what Kirk says it is no longer true, how was it ever more than an illusion to begin with (given that he speaks of the words “constant” and “enduring” as if these terms mean something)?

My list:
  1. The history of the world teaches us that the separation of religion and politics is ultimately untenable. Ironically, the possibility of conceiving of a “separation of church and state” could have only taken place in a nation that is largely made up of an influenced by Christians (“give to God what is God’s, to Caesar what is Caesar’s”), who justifiably, at their best, have a reputation for both being simple, humble, content, and not apt to glorify strength.
  2. The Bible is the Word of God. Whoever you are, Jesus Christ is your Creator, your God, your King. This is what Christians have always believed and taught. It is only for the sake of conversation and common ground with the world – all of whom we are to love with Christ’s love – that we might start by talking about how the Bible “contains God’s Word”, “contains the Gospel”, how Jesus is “our God,” or how we consider the Bible to be authoritative.
  3. If “true patriotism” means “freedom and equality not only for Americans but for all people on earth,” as Eleanor Roosevelt said, one should consider supporting Christian missionaries who share the Gospel of Jesus Christ – His defeat of sin, death and the devil for us through the (unlikely) victory at the cross vindicated by the resurrection – out of sincere conviction and not with any colonial-esque designs.
  4. Those countries who have attained a high level of political liberty, including freedoms of speech, press, assembly and religion – as well as greater effectiveness, mobility, and choice when it comes to economic issues (made possible by increased trust) – are nations that have been greatly influenced by Christianity.
  5. Greco-Roman culture, as well as the Renaissance and Enlightenment which drew from it, forced Western forms of Christianity to become much more reflective and nuanced in their understanding of biblical truths. Christianity also seeks to appreciate what is good, true, and beautiful from all cultures (see Philippians 4:8).
  6. Christians are first and foremost citizens of heaven, not earth. In, but not of the world, their “dual ethnicity” means that they belong first to the kingdom of heaven, and are members of “God’s chosen ethnos” (I Peter 2:9). Though all are one “in Adam,” God has, post-fall, also ordained a diversity of nations (see Acts 17:26), from whom He will obtain worship (Rev. 7:9).
  7. Biblically, earthly nations are inseparable from the concept of “ethnos,” from which we get “ethnicity”. In like fashion “genos”, from where we get “genes,” can be translated as offspring, family, race, nation, kind, or even sex. We see that these terms involve notions of blood and parentage, even if “ethnos” is more closely connected than “genos” with our notions of culture.
  8. Ultimately, the Church is a new Nation that re-unites, by faith in Christ, persons not just from this or that race, tribe, or nation, but from the entire human family – making one Nation, or, more accurately, Kingdom, to whom all the earthly nations will stream in the life to come, “Kingdom come”.
  9. The idea to rather sharply distinguish “church and state” comes from Jesus Christ Himself. He said to “give to God what is God’s and Caesar what is Caesar’s”. It is desirable that the Church and earthly nations support one another even as it is also desirable that each stay out of the other’s core business – the Church forgiving sin and giving eternal life, nations protecting their people while seeking truth and justice.
  10. It may indeed be better to be governed by a wise Turk than a stupid Christian (mis-attributed to the 16th Church Reformer Martin Luther, though it might seem to sum up his thinking well) though even with this consideration (which seems not to be mindful about continuity), the ideal or preferred persons to lead a nation are, in general, Christians with political gifts – not the leaders of the Church, but Christians nonetheless.
  11. In contrast to some, there is nothing in the Christian religion that demands we, in our earthly sojourn, must have Christian rulers or even a certain kind of government. If a beloved Christian chieftain or king were to step down to establish a democracy, even with the caveat that the elected ruler must be Christian (e.g. “firm Nicean”) – or at least persons sympathetic to Christianity – it is reasonable to debate whether or not this would, generally speaking, be a responsible move.
  12. Nevertheless, there is no theological reason, in theory, that a Democratic or Republican (understood classically, not in terms of the American political parties) Liberal Christian Nation should not be desirable – along with the desire to keep it thusly (Ben Franklin: “A Republic – if you can keep it” – see here).
  13. But if this is the case, here, a “balance of powers” is only one part of the puzzle. Collective theological – and hence cultural – formation must be seen as being absolutely critical: in order to have equality under the law, real respect for the dignity and rights of each individual, a wise degree of cultural tolerance, etc., one must, simply, have Christian teaching. “Liberal Christianity” and their progressive allies are, in fact, parasitical here (see here).
  14. As “childless men who had forgotten their childhoods” (Bertand de Jovenel), Hobbes and Locke (largely followed by Leo Strauss, the father of “neo-conservatism”) believed the false philosophy that we are by nature “free and independent,” naturally “ungoverned and even non-relational.” (see here) Hypothesizing “states” (personal and corporate!) that are devoid of nationality, ethnicity, and religion is simply unreasonable, and can’t not result in expressions of social Darwinism, glorifying the powerful and attractive, and impatient with, and dismissive towards (or worse) “losers”.
  15. When it comes to the sexes, the Left has, in essence, rejected fatherhood as a category. Might not the rejection of the notion of “fatherland” by related? (this article is worth pondering) America cannot be “an idea,” however much that statement might force us to consider its seemingly unique qualities.
The list actually consists of 32 points, but you can read the whole thing there. Unlike the intellectually autistic spergs of the Alt-White, I welcome the rapid expansion of the Alt-Lite, as it drives even more nails in the coffin of ineffective ideology politics in general and American conservatism in particular.

Labels: ,

109 Comments:

Blogger Old Ez September 20, 2016 11:11 AM  

The #1 unspoken rule of the Alt Right has always been "Never punch Right publicly." In my opinion, anyone who wants to consider themselves part of the AltRight, AltWhite, AltLite, AltWest or AltWhatever should follow that rule religiously. The second we start writing off and denouncing this or that faction, its over folks. Constructive criticism is one thing, but if you don't like what some part of the AltRight is saying/doing, don't engage them. If you think they're doing damage to the movement, talk about it in private to your AltRight friends and contacts. That's how a movement-wide consensus is reached, and that is the *only* way. Any sort of public lashing out, attacking, blaming, ultimata etc. serves no purpose other than to weaken morale and integrity. I agree with Vox that the bigger the AltLite tent the better, but if expanding the AltLite tent means jettisoning the hard-right/AltWhite (i.e., the people who built the movement from the ground up and been in the trenches) then no way. The AltWhite is not going to be SA'd, not without neutering the whole movement in the process.

Blogger Lovekraft September 20, 2016 11:11 AM  

If we keep on message, call out infiltration/dilution, we will be able to capture the minority vote. Working-class minorities also suffer from cultural marxism, even though it has an appealing message.

First, the elementary schools need to be overhauled. The legacy media is dying all by itself.

Anonymous Deplorable Jack Amok September 20, 2016 11:18 AM  

There are important political differences between various groups on the Alt-Right, Alt-Lite, Alt-White, etc., but our unifying goal should be making sure our sons and grandsons inherit a nation in which they can debate those differences.

Blogger JaimeInTexas September 20, 2016 11:25 AM  

Unrelated.

More in Hillary's email crimes


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-20/house-committee-demands-interview-oh-shit-guy-friday-noon-over-reddit-thread

Blogger Brian H September 20, 2016 11:25 AM  

I'd say that an alt-christian naturally leads one unavoidably into some amount of white identity politics, but 1) it's a good primer / gateway drug for those not yet ready for the hard stuff and 2) it is just inclusive enough for that small sub-section of non-whites who do understand what makes the 1st world tick and want it to remain doing so.

Anonymous Emmanuel M September 20, 2016 11:26 AM  

Unlike cuckservatives, we should have no ennemy on the right.

Let's fight against the lefty shit, not amongst each other

Anonymous M.W. Peak September 20, 2016 11:27 AM  

At first, I was not sure what made this Alt-Lite, but as I read through the list, phrases like "... what is good, true, and beautiful from all cultures" and "... first and foremost citizens of heaven, not earth" reveal the echoes of utopian thought.

Anonymous Instasetting September 20, 2016 11:30 AM  

Can't say in one place that Conservatism is not an ideology, and in another that it is.

The correct answer is Conservatism is not an ideology. This makes it different from Liberals, Commies, Libertarians, and so forth.

Blogger Old Ez September 20, 2016 11:41 AM  

@8 - Capital-C "Movement" Conservatism did not start out as an ideology (it claimed to be anti-ideology incarnate), but it is most definitely an ideology today. Anyone who claims to be free of ideology is lying to you or lying to themselves. All human beings necessarily have "ideology", i.e., a non-empirical story they tell themselves about how the world fundamentally works. Show me a man without an ideology and I'll show you a beast walking on two legs.

Blogger Nick S September 20, 2016 11:41 AM  

I guess I need help dissociating identity and ideology.

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Deplorable Cents September 20, 2016 11:43 AM  

That guy needs an editor. Seriously. It's ok to think on paper in a draft. Posting it as a finished document? Not so good.

But at least he's thinking. That's more than can be said for a whole lot of Patheos writers and readers.

OpenID boardroomal September 20, 2016 11:43 AM  

Vox

Say can we hurry up, you know a "Little Quicker" on this whole, uhhh "New Forks & Platforms" thing....WTF Google!?! http://www.vdare.com/posts/great-moments-in-google-american-inventors-almost-all-black

Blogger John Regan September 20, 2016 11:46 AM  

The Bible is "the word" of God, yet Christ was "the word" made flesh, according to......the Bible?

What is this "word" business, anyway?

In any event, constitutions seemed like a good idea at the time. Maybe they still are. You can have a constitutional monarchy.

It does appear, however, that a completely secularized government will tend to degenerate into a predatory entity with the "governed" as the main prey. Conservatism has not addressed this problem any more than liberalism, or for that matter any other alternative.

Anonymous purge September 20, 2016 11:46 AM  

Unlike the intellectually autistic spergs of the Alt-White, I welcome the rapid expansion of the Alt-Lite
It's clearly the old Alt-Right who is doing purges.

Blogger Melampus the Seer September 20, 2016 11:47 AM  

Thie triangularization thing here is genius. Trumpian, even.

Blogger Desillusionerad September 20, 2016 11:48 AM  

Is there a primer on the distinction between the the alt-west, and alt-white?
Regardless i hope the alt-west catches on as a name instead of alt right, its more inclusive and international (yes, i appreciate the irony) as well as a better descriptor (at least in my mind).

Anyway related to the alt right, is this article:
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/09/donald-trump-ideas-2016-214244#ixzz4KiGWUTUE

It would be more correct to say it talks about the fertile soil than about the alt right, but i liked it.
There is going to be a reshuffle in US politics.

Blogger S1AL September 20, 2016 11:50 AM  

'At first, I was not sure what made this Alt-Lite, but as I read through the list, phrases like "... what is good, true, and beautiful from all cultures" and "... first and foremost citizens of heaven, not earth" reveal the echoes of utopian thought.'

The reference to being "citizens of heaven" is (a) fundamental to Christianity, (b) intrinsically anti-utopian (this is one major difference between Islam and Christianity).

Anonymous Broken Arrow September 20, 2016 11:51 AM  

"The history of the world teaches us that the separation of religion and politics is ultimately untenable."

I think the Two Kingdoms approach taken by some Protestants is an illusion brought about by living in a Christian culture which they confused with some sort of neutral ground. As we've seen in the last few years the Left has the set goal to politicize every possible facet of life.

If pressed to describe the neutral ground it always sounds like a nominal Christian culture which focuses on liberty and democracy. That's anything but neutral.

Many will never give up this belief as it's as core to their faith as the Trinity or Justification, but many more will see it for the illusion that it is.

Anonymous johnc September 20, 2016 11:53 AM  

I guess it's a start.

I'm always frustrated with Christians who, for whatever reasons, are reluctant to go "all in" on Christianity. It's like they have some kind of dear attachment to a modern liberal freemasonic framework that they can't let go of.

Blogger Earl September 20, 2016 12:01 PM  

I am alt-F U. I am alt-Alt.

Blogger Noah B September 20, 2016 12:07 PM  

Although the author asserts the need for nations in #14, he quickly backslides by the time he's reached point #18 as he attacks nationalism as an embodiment of hatred, supporting instead a nebulous "patriotism."

Then comes the defense "racial and religious diversity" in #28. This, coupled with the statement that it's "better to be governed by a wise Turk than a stupid Christian" in #10 leaves the reader to ponder what conditions of the modern West, if any, Rinne actually objects to, other than being called a racist.

In all, it's obsessive hand-wringing chock-full of contradictions. There may be a kernel of an effective Christian parallel to the alt-right buried here, but this is so poorly developed that it cannot be reasonably considered the foundation of an ideology yet. The last sentence of #27 is an appropriate synopsis for the entire document: "In reality, difficult decisions – including many we may possibly come to regret – need to be made."

Perhaps someone else will do that.

Blogger Shimshon September 20, 2016 12:10 PM  

Vox, regarding the term and its derivations, I think this is why distilling what Alt-Right is down to your original three-item list is so useful.

The #AltRight believes in three things:
Nationalism.
Western civilization.
Winning.

Does nathanrinne agree with each of those? Why, I believe he does. Call yourself something else if you prefer. "Winning" itself is just a summation of "shoot left" (why use 2 words when 1 suffices?). The left is anti-anti-fragile. They count on noble opponents denouncing each other for various things that the left cares about. Without that, they lose most of their power. And start losing.

Blogger Noah B September 20, 2016 12:10 PM  

@11 Yes. This looks more like the result of a brainstorming session than an essay ready for publication.

Anonymous Bagger Vance September 20, 2016 12:13 PM  

Ricky Vaughn had a great list on just one tweet of just a half-dozen points that (as he pointed out) the majority of America already agrees with. I thought that was a great starting point to pass out--but can't find it now. :(

Blogger Knights of the West September 20, 2016 12:16 PM  

In-fighting is disastrous, but what exactly the Alt-Right stands for, is obviously still up for debate. At this point we should still continue to push against the left in any and all ways. knightsofthewest.com

Anonymous ZhukovG September 20, 2016 12:18 PM  

The Alt-White dream of Hermann(Arminius)Cherusci.

The Alt-Lite dream of Dwight D. Eisenhower.

The Alt-West dream of Her Britannic Majesty, Queen Victoria

Anonymous BGKB September 20, 2016 12:19 PM  

Despite the Orland PULSE shooters dad visiting the State dept where Hilldog worked & supporting her candidacy Moslem Terrorists don't want here to win. http://www.vdare.com/posts/hillary-terrorists-are-plotting-to-keep-me-from-getting-my-precious

Blogger RobertT September 20, 2016 12:26 PM  

"There go my people. I must follow them, for I am their leader." (AAL-R)
Killed the Tea Party.

Blogger Aeoli Pera September 20, 2016 12:36 PM  

purge wrote:Unlike the intellectually autistic spergs of the Alt-White, I welcome the rapid expansion of the Alt-Lite

It's clearly the old Alt-Right who is doing purges.


German-Americans don't fall far from the tree. Purity spiraling is a German vice that needs to be understood and minimized by alt-white leaders as much as possible, for pragmatic reasons.

If you enjoy reading German Idealist philosophy, that's on you.

Blogger Deplorable Gaiseric September 20, 2016 12:55 PM  

Noah B wrote:Although the author asserts the need for nations in #14, he quickly backslides by the time he's reached point #18 as he attacks nationalism as an embodiment of hatred, supporting instead a nebulous "patriotism."

Then comes the defense "racial and religious diversity" in #28. This, coupled with the statement that it's "better to be governed by a wise Turk than a stupid Christian" in #10 leaves the reader to ponder what conditions of the modern West, if any, Rinne actually objects to, other than being called a racist.

For the first; he's trying to justify his feelings of nationalism with his indoctrination against it. Be patient. He'll get there. If he has to split a few pedantic hairs in the meantime, that's not the worst thing in the world.

For the second, the "wise Turk" quote, you misunderstood that completely. He rejects the notion that it is, in fact, ideal to be governed by a wise Turk vs. a foolish Christian.

Anonymous Oye September 20, 2016 12:55 PM  

"It may indeed be better to be governed by a wise Turk than a stupid Christian (mis-attributed to the 16th Church Reformer Martin Luther, though it might seem to sum up his thinking well) though even with this consideration (which seems not to be mindful about continuity), the ideal or preferred persons to lead a nation are, in general, Christians with political gifts – not the leaders of the Church, but Christians nonetheless."

The converse of this (better under just and wise Christian rule than inept and oppressive Muslim rule) dates to a 13th century Muslim jurist and theologian. The context was the Crusades and Mongol threat.

As for “give to God what is God’s and Caesar what is Caesar’s” ... Islam has it. A little reading into the subject is advisable.

Blogger Steampunk Koala September 20, 2016 12:56 PM  

This is excellent, I know a lot of people who will be a lot more receptive to this. The hardest part is convincing them not to attack the rest of the Right.

Blogger Natalie September 20, 2016 12:59 PM  

Maybe I'm being midwit-ish, but it looked like a pretty decent entry level stab at "polite" alt-west principles. The racism and nationalism does get a little fuzzy, but thinking through Christendon vs nationalism can feel a little fuzzy when you aren't used to it. He certainly didn't denounce racial or national identity or the desire to preserve these things.

Blogger Natalie September 20, 2016 1:02 PM  

ZhukovG wrote:The Alt-White dream of Hermann(Arminius)Cherusci.

The Alt-Lite dream of Dwight D. Eisenhower.

The Alt-West dream of Her Britannic Majesty, Queen Victoria



Queen Victoria or Queen Elizabeth? (I mean the old one) I thought the alt-right was anti-colonialism?

Blogger Robert What? September 20, 2016 1:09 PM  

As an aside, it is hilarious how the Left in this country still act like they are the "counter culture". For the last twenty years they have been The System, The Establishment, The Man, if you will. Well I say it's time to stick it to the man!

Anonymous Adriano September 20, 2016 1:14 PM  

I must be missing some attacks from within the alt right against you Vox, because you've attacked a large number of the people who established the foundations of the alt right with this post. Richard Spencer, /pol/ and TRS are "spergs" now? Without more context it appears that you're trying to write the base out of your group.

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey September 20, 2016 1:24 PM  

Looks like Churchianity.

Alt-Lite = cucks

Anonymous ZhukovG September 20, 2016 1:30 PM  

@34 Natalie, I think of the Victorian period as a high point for the West. That does not mean that I advocate doing everything as they did. No period of history was perfect.

Anonymous A Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents September 20, 2016 1:32 PM  

@29

If you enjoy reading German Idealist philosophy, that's on you.



Just do it in private where no one else can see, and be sure to wash your hands afterwards.

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Deplorable Cents September 20, 2016 1:36 PM  

As for “give to God what is God’s and Caesar what is Caesar’s” ... Islam has it.

Maybe. Maybe not. Either way, Do. Not. Care.

A little reading into the subject is advisable.

Only useful so far as "know your enemy" in the Sun Tzu sense.
Otherwise, nah. Better things to do.

Anonymous ZhukovG September 20, 2016 1:43 PM  

@36 No one is writing anybody out. But we are not going to kiss your asses either. So don't expect us to invest in 'boxcar' futures.

This is Nationalism vs Globalism, for now, everything else is tangential.

Anonymous Rhino September 20, 2016 1:44 PM  

Exactly

Blogger Noah B September 20, 2016 1:53 PM  

@30 For the second, the "wise Turk" quote, you misunderstood that completely. He rejects the notion that it is, in fact, ideal to be governed by a wise Turk vs. a foolish Christian.

He said what he said, not what you wish he'd said. No misunderstanding on my part there, and you're obviously trying to conflate his notion of idealism vs. his choice between the lesser of two evils.

Anonymous Adriano September 20, 2016 1:58 PM  

@ZhukovG

Gas yourself, Chaim.

Blogger Bodo Staron September 20, 2016 2:02 PM  

Are you testing readers with posts like this? I see no reason for 32 points from a "Liberal Christian Nationalist".

Point 4 of your own definition captures the essence and everything that follows is a logical conclusion.

Anonymous ZhukovG September 20, 2016 2:16 PM  

@43 A bit hypersensitive are we?

Blogger Timmy3 September 20, 2016 2:17 PM  

The Alt-Lite list isn't bad although I don't consider myself to be a Liberal Christian. Can we get the difference between the Alt-Lite and Alt-Right in one line or paragraph? Makes it easier to figure out.

Blogger Markku September 20, 2016 2:24 PM  

Just in case someone doesn't realize this: When we Europeans say "liberal", what we mean is what Americans mean when they say "libertarian". Sometimes we forget to make the distinction because we are used to "liberal" being a mild pejorative here about the right-wing.

He clarifies at the beginning of the article that he means it in the European sense, Vox just didn't quote that part. So, he is the opposite of a progressive Christian.

Blogger Markku September 20, 2016 2:26 PM  

The leftists say "liberal" about right-wing parties with exactly the same thinly-veiled disgust in their voices as American right-wingers say "liberal" about the left. It's a funny word.

Anonymous ZhukovG September 20, 2016 2:27 PM  

@46 I think this is right.

Alt-Right = Alt-Lite -> Alt-West -> Alt-White

Nationalism = Good Globalism = Bad

Blogger S1AL September 20, 2016 2:34 PM  

@Markku - Silly Europeans, forgetting America is the hegemon now.

Anonymous Bellator Mortalis September 20, 2016 2:43 PM  

Assume: Alt-Right = Alt-West + Alt-White + Alt-Lite.
This then expands the Alt-Right to the point where it can effect political change. And the Alt-Right will have the power. This is especially true in the USA where the citizenry is heavily armed, as no minority group can take power "at the point of the gun" as they have done in disarmed countries.

Blogger Escoffier September 20, 2016 2:44 PM  

Brian H wrote:I'd say that an alt-christian naturally leads one unavoidably into some amount of white identity politics, but 1) it's a good primer / gateway drug for those not yet ready for the hard stuff and 2) it is just inclusive enough for that small sub-section of non-whites who do understand what makes the 1st world tick and want it to remain doing so.

I very much agree. I think most people would find that ironic on some way but Christianity at it's core should be about the search for truth. And truth can lead you to strange and wonderful places.

Blogger Markku September 20, 2016 2:59 PM  

Spencer is, of course, American but it looks like he wants to take the word back to its historical meaning ("classic liberal"). Me, I don't consider this a hill to die on, or to even get a flesh wound on. But, if someone wants to fight that battle, I won't mind.

Blogger Austin Ballast September 20, 2016 3:03 PM  

Much of this sounds like the "No True Scotsman" arguments. No one is really good enough for most of you if they don't perfectly toe the line. Did any of you read what Vox wrote?

Blogger S1AL September 20, 2016 3:03 PM  

"Spencer is, of course, American but it looks like he wants to take the word back to its historical meaning ("classic liberal"). Me, I don't consider this a hill to die on, or to even get a flesh wound on. But, if someone wants to fight that battle, I won't mind."

Words change so quickly these days that I don't see the point. At one point I had taken to referring to leftists as "libertines" to play off the word, then the whole neo-puritan nonsense started and I can't even.

Anonymous ZhukovG September 20, 2016 3:06 PM  

@54 Critique does not equal rejection.

Blogger tz September 20, 2016 3:13 PM  

@50 Maybe in the dev class we need to develop alt-reality "Hegemon Go!"

The non-liberals who used to hate 40% of what government did now hate 80% or more (as a minarchist, for me it was 95% to 99%).

The first and foremost point is WINNING.

And if SJWs insists on throwing themselves under the current juggernaut known as the Trump Train, I ask them to be polite and include whom to contact to collect the body and maybe dog-tags to avoid the cost of running DNA on the splat.

Once Government is 1/5th its current size and shrinking (being replaced by the fraternal and charitable community institutions of Western Civilization and Christendom) we can have rational and peaceful arguments on how much else we need to get rid of or alter.

The best part is the discovery that triggering is fun. The milquetoasts that shriek and cry and never learned to handle the most tepid disagreement, much less actual physical bullying are now all SJWs, and it is another fun game to see who can trigger them to shriek the loudest, longest, or most strident.

One thing the SJWs forgot is for themselves to be respectable. It is one thing for a learned and erudite professor wearing a conservative suit to explain that you are being rude from the apex of politeness. It is another thing entirely for something like Trigglypuf (I won't bother with a description as her very presence is rude, then she shrieks and flaps about, her unnaturally colored hair undulating when it isn't sticking). It is like a video game that you want to keep zapping something just to see the animation.

Even going back, you had the old (and rejected) true power feminists like Paglia, and you had the respectable feminists. Now you have badly concocted sub-villians whose removal can be something like getting rid of insects or mice.

Liberalism has long ago gone into its dotage. Not that it isn't capable of harm, only that it isn't capable of thought. However the Prions have infected the Cuckservatives and Losertarians.

Anonymous zack September 20, 2016 3:13 PM  

I thought we as the alt-right were not supposed to be punching right? Autistic spergs of the alt-white means what exactly? Someone must have had their feelings hurt. Tell me again how this movement is going to survive when we can't help but attack one another.

Blogger tz September 20, 2016 3:27 PM  

@58 - If the white sperger purgers are punching right, they need to stop. And pure "white nationalism" is to the left of many in the Alt-West. Even Lincoln's war they fought against was to be free, not to impose something as tyrannical but different.

For example, gay marriage v.s. miscegany. Letting individuals recognize marriages or not on the basis of their own ideas and use persuasion. If the alt-white demands anti-miscegany laws and attacks those who don't go along, it violates the first point: winning.

Blogger tz September 20, 2016 3:38 PM  

We've had identity politics on the Left since before Reagan, so it has been a game where they are assembling a coalition of identities while demanding the right - Christians, Men, Whites don't. It was a subtle and seductive appeal to insure there would be no attacks and little defense.

The problem is THEY have identified Christians and Christianity as evil. Men and the Patriarchical society as evil. Whites as evil. There were a few who pushed the identity before but now everything the Left does is to complain about identity - white privilege, male privilege, christian privilege.

That has caused many to pause and ask if it is privilege or reality. Oh, technology has been done by white Christian males in the west. K-selected privilege?

OK, we can play on your field. The Left is entirely about identity politics and victimhood. We will win by playing your game and ignoring that we politely stay on the sidelines while you take the field and score goals

Anonymous zack September 20, 2016 3:47 PM  

@59 I thought most people were under the same impression that the alt-right is mainly a white nationalist movement with slight differences on how to achieve this. If the alt-west you are talking about is some sort of rainbow coalition based on nothing but ideology then this movement is already doomed. The mainline conservatives have already tried the approach you seem to be advocating, and it has gotten them nowhere. Ethnic tribalism trumps ideology every time. History has proven this over and over again.

Anonymous ZhukovG September 20, 2016 3:53 PM  

@58 Critique does not equal rejection.

The Alt-Right consists of Alt-Lite, Alt-West, and Alt-White.

It is a Nationalist movement. Its most dangerous enemy is the Globalist Elite.

Once this war is, hopefully, won; then we can discuss whether our factions must peacefully separate or if we can remain united.

Anonymous David September 20, 2016 3:54 PM  

The guy that penned this list is a Christcuck,or a person who uses "biblical values" rather than "muh human rights and democracy" as the underlying justification for swamping White nations with infinity mud people from anywhere.You can be one nation with dindus,durkas,gooks,and beaners in heaven.White nations are for White people.Anyone welcoming niggers,spics,kikes,towelheads,or gooks into the Alt-Right is an enemy of the Alt-Right and a subversive,whether this subversion is being done intentionally,or unintentionally,out of weakness,intemperance,impatience,or just plain stupidity.The Alt-Right is a vehicle for White people's political goals ONLY.That's all it ever has been and all it ever will be.Anyone trying to say otherwise is a retard,a liar,or an opponent of our movement who we will deal with without mercy.

Anonymous zack September 20, 2016 3:56 PM  

@62 I agree. We must stand united for victory.

Blogger Noah B September 20, 2016 4:00 PM  

This is not the time to be arguing over nonessential issues like gay marriage, one way or the other. No rearranging deck chairs.

Anonymous CatholicOne September 20, 2016 4:02 PM  

@1The #1 unspoken rule of the Alt Right has always been "Never punch Right publicly

The problem is that some on the Alt-White see everyone to the Left of them. You can't punch Right when there is literally no one to your Right.

Blogger Noah B September 20, 2016 4:05 PM  

@63 This logic breaks down at some point though. The challenge for us is to find a tenable sweet spot between total tolerance and total intolerance.

Blogger Deplorable Gaiseric September 20, 2016 4:09 PM  

Noah B wrote:@30He said what he said, not what you wish he'd said. No misunderstanding on my part there, and you're obviously trying to conflate his notion of idealism vs. his choice between the lesser of two evils.
No, I'm not conflating anything. I just read what he said, and he merely said that while it's theoretically possible that a wise Turk would be better as a ruler than a foolish Christian, he still wants to see Christian rulers in the West.

Blogger Deplorable Gaiseric September 20, 2016 4:12 PM  

CatholicOne wrote:@1
The problem is that some on the Alt-White see everyone to the Left of them. You can't punch Right when there is literally no one to your Right.

Plenty of the alt-White are literally socialists. They're not punching right or left, they're just punching all over the map. They're monomaniacs.

There's something to be said for prioritizing on a handful of core issues, but they've literally only got the one.

Anonymous David September 20, 2016 4:14 PM  

Oh,you mean like the Tea Party did? Gee,how's that Tea Party revolution doing these days?

NO KIKES
NO NIGGERS
NO SPICS
NO CHINKS
NO ASSLIFTERS
NO VOTES FOR WOMEN
NO FAGGOTS OUT OF THE CLOSET(none period as far as I'm concerned,but their numbers will shrink when they are unable to convert via child molestation since the penalty for that will be death)
WHITE NATIONS FOR WHITE PEOPLE

If you can't agree on that,you're not one of us.

Anonymous CatholicOne September 20, 2016 4:20 PM  

@69They're not punching right or left, they're just punching all over the map.

Good point.

Anonymous ZhukovG September 20, 2016 4:30 PM  

@64 Zach, from various posts it appears you identify as Alt-White. I am Alt-West. But we should both agree with the following:

"We must secure the existence of white people and a future for white children."

For without the White Race, descended from the European nations, there is no West.

Now for me, that means that other Nations may also secure their futures, but not at the expense of our own.

Blogger Patriotic Canadian September 20, 2016 4:32 PM  

I personally like both alt white and alt west. I want a white nation that follows western philosophy and is intrinsically Christian. I do not want any non whites. They can have their country and I want mine for myself and my posterity. I'm not very enthsed about the most radical elements in the movement the fascists but every movement needs its radicals and they are ours. I have no interest in an autocratic government however I do think the franchise should be severely limited. I'm biased towards the starship troopers model personally. Those are my foundational views on alt right.

Blogger Noah B September 20, 2016 4:34 PM  

@68 No, I'm not conflating anything. I just read what he said, and he merely said that while it's theoretically possible that a wise Turk would be better as a ruler than a foolish Christian, he still wants to see Christian rulers in the West.

Pause briefly to consider why he didn't simply say, "The West should be ruled by wise Christians." Here's a hint: he's already signalling compromise and surrender.

Blogger Patriotic Canadian September 20, 2016 4:40 PM  

I personally like both alt white and alt west. I want a white nation that follows western philosophy and is intrinsically Christian. I do not want any non whites. They can have their country and I want mine for myself and my posterity. I'm not very enthsed about the most radical elements in the movement the fascists but every movement needs its radicals and they are ours. I have no interest in an autocratic government however I do think the franchise should be severely limited. I'm biased towards the starship troopers model personally. Those are my foundational views on alt right.

Anonymous Ominous Cowherd September 20, 2016 5:50 PM  

David wrote:White nations are for White people.Anyone welcoming niggers,spics,kikes,towelheads,or gooks into the Alt-Right is an enemy of the Alt-Right and a subversive ...

OK. Still, here we are, all of us, and some of us aren't as lilly white as others of us. Some folks who call themselves American, and act American, and even raise their children to be American, aren't white at all. A few of them are even black!

Those non-white folks can maybe never be us, but they can certainly hate the left and work with us to displace the left. They can never be us, but they can be respectable, and we can respect them and vise-versa. They can live peacefully in their neighborhoods while we live peacefully in ours, and so on.

Or, we could declare them not only Other, but Enemy Other. If you think we don't have enough enemies, that would look like a good idea.

Suit yourself. As for me, I'm going to remember ``no enemies to the right,'' and ``shut up and shoot left.'' I really don't care whether you're my people, if you're on my side for now.

Anonymous Pennywise September 20, 2016 5:54 PM  

The Christian Alt-Right has the duty by God's command to denounce any and all positions by their Alt-Right brethren which are evil in thought and action. Active engagement in this instance is a requirement.

Anonymous Ominous Cowherd September 20, 2016 6:06 PM  

ZhukovG wrote:"We must secure the existence of white people and a future for white children."

Now for me, that means that other Nations may also secure their futures, but not at the expense of our own.


That's my take, too. Every nation should take those same 14 words to heart, changing ``white'' to be their own race. I'll wish them all well in their own lands.

Afganistan for the Afganis, and so on, all the way down to Zaire for the Zaire-ians. God bless them, and keep them, far from us.

Let's don't forget America for Americans. If there is some doubt about who is an American, let us first repatriate the definite non-Americans before we begin to argue the doubtful cases.

Anonymous Ominous Cowherd September 20, 2016 6:18 PM  

Pennywise wrote:The Christian Alt-Right has the duty by God's command to denounce any and all positions by their Alt-Right brethren which are evil in thought and action. Active engagement in this instance is a requirement.

Don't be Poundfoolish, Pennywise. Don't attack anyone to your right publically, ever. Engage allies privately, when you can, and remember that if we don't make alliance with sinners, we won't have allies at all. For example, if Planned Parenthood came out against immigration, I would agree with them in that one area, even though their infant sacrifices make them anathema.

Anonymous ZhukovG September 20, 2016 6:18 PM  

@77 Pennywise, what version of Christianity do you propose as a yardstick for this endeavor?

I hear Amish is nice.

Anonymous zack September 20, 2016 7:05 PM  

@72 I totally agree with those statements.

Blogger Alexandros September 20, 2016 7:35 PM  

Drop all the superfluous labels like alt lite, alt white, .etc and laser focus on the most important points. Long lists like this one won't be a gateway because people simply won't read them.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash September 20, 2016 7:46 PM  

Pennywise wrote:The Christian Alt-Right has the duty by God's command to denounce any and all positions by their Alt-Right brethren which are evil in thought and action. Active engagement in this instance is a requirement.
Simply wrong.
We have an absolute duty to secure a future and a nation for our children and grandchildren. To attack someone who is helping to secure their future is in itself evil.
And if you want to root out evil, start in your own heart, for it is desperately wicked. Who can understand it?

Blogger Leo Littlebook in Shenzhen September 20, 2016 8:03 PM  

Another name for the Alt Lite would be the Alt Middle, followed by the Alt Left.

What's common is the Alt, not the Right.

Mm that tasty Mono Middle.

Blogger S1AL September 20, 2016 8:06 PM  

@Snidely - And since we're playing the amateur theology game: Proverbs 13:22. An inheritance ain't just money.

Blogger Unknown September 20, 2016 8:51 PM  

Not to purity spiral, but Milo is playing a game with the alt right that is bullshit. He's claiming not to be alt right, all the while trying to define it and co-opt it as conservatism 3.0. We're not conservative. To conserve what currently exists would be death. I have no problem with people like Milo being fellow travelers, but he has not right to say that the alt right is only ironic about its "white identity" core. People like Milo are just as bad for the alt right as extremists like WEEV and The Daily Stormer, as both the alt-light and the the literal 14/88ers harm our broad vision. Milo is just a slightly more right wing version of HeatSt "coolservatives" and the 14/88ers are neo-nazis. The real alt right is between the two.

Blogger CM September 20, 2016 9:13 PM  

Snidely Whiplash wrote:Pennywise wrote:The Christian Alt-Right has the duty by God's command to denounce any and all positions by their Alt-Right brethren which are evil in thought and action. Active engagement in this instance is a requirement.

Simply wrong.

We have an absolute duty to secure a future and a nation for our children and grandchildren. To attack someone who is helping to secure their future is in itself evil.

And if you want to root out evil, start in your own heart, for it is desperately wicked. Who can understand it?


If we disagree with the tactic, we can simply pursue a different course of action. No need to vilify the allies.

I'm wondering about the implications of 1 Corinthians 5:12 concerning this.

Blogger Can't wait September 20, 2016 9:27 PM  

@13..."What is The Word?"
A fundamental question with a foundational answer. If your interested might I suggest John MacArthur's lesson on this point at http://www.gty.org/resources/articles/A379/what-is-truth
I hope you find what your looking for.

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents September 21, 2016 12:24 AM  

Not necessarily off topic.

Frauke Petry has four children while Sau Merkel has none.

I have four children, Merkel has none,” said Petry in an interview with stern.

“Kids help you see beyond your own periphery. And that’s what Merkel doesn’t do.”


If Sau Merkel would quit importing rotting kebab, the future would belong to those like Petry. Maybe that is a clue about the true purpose of Merkel's kinder?

Blogger Bosefus September 21, 2016 12:27 AM  

Let's not speak in parables here:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

The same was in the beginning with God.

All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

Blogger EscapeVelocity September 21, 2016 12:33 AM  

Im probably Alt Lite.

Im more Alt West though.

Im more Christian Traditionalist like Auster and Vox...but not hostile to European Ethno-Nationalists.

Blogger Were-Puppy September 21, 2016 1:02 AM  

@41 ZhukovG
@36 No one is writing anybody out. But we are not going to kiss your asses either. So don't expect us to invest in 'boxcar' futures.

This is Nationalism vs Globalism, for now, everything else is tangential.
---

That's what I'm talking about

Blogger Phillip George September 21, 2016 2:43 AM  

sorry to have to say it but point 9 is total garbage.

the render to Caesar that which is Caesar's is entirely to do with property rights and was Jesus simply foot faulting his competitors.\

1. Caesar could and did convert to Christianity
2. A Christian is encouraged to become Caesar
3. Common law rights of inheritance were to be preserved
4. Salt all things
5. Go into all the World includes politics
5. Bring all things into subjection to Jesus Christ is a promise and command.

6. God bless Him, but he very much mistaken

Blogger Nick S September 21, 2016 2:48 AM  

David wrote:If you can't agree on that,you're not one of us.
Who is the "us" you purport to speak for?

Blogger Ben Sanderson September 21, 2016 7:02 AM  

Ahhhh Vox, Spencer created the Alt-right, and you'll never take that away from him.

Blogger Aeoli Pera September 21, 2016 8:43 AM  

It's a good thing none of this friendly fire matters because if it did we might have a problem. Trump isn't even president yet.

Blogger Aeoli Pera September 21, 2016 8:57 AM  

David wrote:Oh,you mean like the Tea Party did? Gee,how's that Tea Party revolution doing these days?

NO KIKES

NO NIGGERS

NO SPICS

NO CHINKS

NO ASSLIFTERS

NO VOTES FOR WOMEN

NO FAGGOTS OUT OF THE CLOSET(none period as far as I'm concerned,but their numbers will shrink when they are unable to convert via child molestation since the penalty for that will be death)

WHITE NATIONS FOR WHITE PEOPLE

If you can't agree on that,you're not one of us.


Can I please talk to your manager?

Blogger Jimmy The Freak September 21, 2016 9:54 AM  

ZhukovG wrote:@46 I think this is right.

Alt-Right = Alt-Lite -> Alt-West -> Alt-White

Nationalism = Good Globalism = Bad


So the Alt-West ar the centrists on the Alt-Right. Well, fuck those guys. :)

Blogger Jaded Diaspora September 21, 2016 10:01 AM  

This guy's perimeters for a "Liberal Christian Nationalist" perspective are interesting. As I continue to lean further toward the Alt-Right I haven't yet worked out how that fits in with my Christianity. My thoughts on the matter thus far have revolve around a verse that he mentions, Revelation 7:9:

"a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb,"

If Nations and Tribes and Peoples and Languages are meant to stretch from Babel forward into eternity, then it stands to reason that attempts to amalgamate the must be a fool's errand.

Blogger Jaded Diaspora September 21, 2016 10:02 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Anonymous Pennywise September 21, 2016 10:40 AM  

We don't care.

Milo is only looking out for himself, not white families. The Christian Alt-Righter has the duty to attack him publicly for his utter disregard for the Bible. He dares to call himself a Christian, when clearly he does not adhere to its values. To refrain from calling him out publicly on his immorality is wicked. Distancing oneself from his own vices is absolutely more important than supporting his position on immigration.

Blogger Nathan September 21, 2016 2:41 PM  

Noah B #21,

"Although the author asserts the need for nations in #14, he quickly backslides by the time he's reached point #18 as he attacks nationalism as an embodiment of hatred, supporting instead a nebulous "patriotism.""

That's not right. My whole post says nationalism is good. Note the title.

Blogger Nathan September 21, 2016 2:46 PM  

Natalie #33,

"Maybe I'm being midwit-ish, but it looked like a pretty decent entry level stab at "polite" alt-west principles. The racism and nationalism does get a little fuzzy, but thinking through Christendon vs nationalism can feel a little fuzzy when you aren't used to it. He certainly didn't denounce racial or national identity or the desire to preserve these things."

Thanks for noticing. Unless AltWest is fundamentally opposed to the notion of democracy, I'm not sure what makes my post "AltLight"

Blogger Nathan September 21, 2016 2:58 PM  

Noah B #75,

"Pause briefly to consider why he didn't simply say, "The West should be ruled by wise Christians." Here's a hint: he's already signalling compromise and surrender."

The point: unlike Islam, there is nothing in the Bible that would assert that the nations of the world should be forced to be Christian and therefore need Christian rulers who can enact this. I would prefer Christian rules, but I would be happy to be ruled by persons friendly to Christianity who will not outlaw normal Christian activity. Still, there is no reason that once a nation is predominantly Christian that it should not look to keep itself so.

Blogger Noah B September 21, 2016 4:47 PM  

I would prefer Christian rules, but I would be happy to be ruled by persons friendly to Christianity who will not outlaw normal Christian activity.

This, once again, demonstrates my point. If you aren't willing to insist that West consists of Christian nations that should be ruled by Christians, you've sacrificed a great deal and achieved nothing in return.

Blogger Noah B September 21, 2016 5:02 PM  

@102 Re-reading #18, I may have misunderstood your point. At any rate, I hope you will continue with this work and I look forward to reading more of your thoughts in the future.

Blogger Nathan September 22, 2016 8:04 AM  

Noah,

"If you aren't willing to insist that West consists of Christian nations that should be ruled by Christians, you've sacrificed a great deal and achieved nothing in return."

I am willing to insist on it - and to fight very hard for it. I am not willing to say that as a Christian I need to do this or be concerned about my salvation. Paul in Romans 13 is dealing with Nero. Furthermore, Christianity's foremost concern is the true conversion of pagans - not "conversion" by the sword. Christianity does not aim to spread itself by the sword, by force, by overpowering. Christians who wish to remain Christian - and who want their lands to remain Christian - should do everything they can to assure that they have Christian leaders and use every bit of force necessary to defend the free practice of their faith.

Blogger Nathan September 22, 2016 8:06 AM  

Christianity overpowered Rome by the truth of the Gospel, not by any physical force. This the world will never understand, for it is spiritually discerned.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts