We Are The Vanguard

Peter Spiliakos has a really dumb blog post about us over at National Review:

“The fascination of liberal-leaning outlets with a fringe character like Richard Spencer is a cowardly attack on Trump voters. Liberal journalists focus on Spencer not because they want to understand why people voted for Trump but to marginalize and stigmatize people who did vote for him by associating them with a white nationalist they had never heard of. …”

Why is the media suddenly so interested in the Alt-Right and a “fringe character” like Richard Spencer? Let us review some of the reasons:

1.) If we are really so fringe on the Right, why is Dan Schneider denouncing us on the floor of CPAC? Why is the executive director of CPAC devoting so much time to making up fanciful stories and calling us out by name? If we were really so marginal, it wouldn’t be worth his time to publicize our movement now would it?

2.) The fact that National Review and CPAC are responding to us illustrates that they have lost their former power to police the Right, that a significant faction of the Right doesn’t even identify with antiquated movement conservatism and that young people increasingly don’t care what these cucks are saying in publications they don’t read.

3.) What is Trumpism? How is it different from movement conservatism? The primary reason the media is so interested in us is because it is our ideas that have entered the political mainstream. For years now, we have been the ones calling for an America First trade policy, an America First foreign policy, an American First immigration policy, rapprochement with Russia, scrapping the refugee resettlement program, stressing our interests as opposed to liberal ideology, strong borders and a crackdown on immigration, assaulting political correctness, making peace with the labor movement, etc., etc. We are the ones who have been writing about the Cathedral and how it operates to police discourse and homogenize thought.

4.) What has National Review been doing? It published the “Against Trump” issue on the eve of the Iowa Caucus. It spent the the whole primary season and general election attacking President Trump in an unsuccessful bid to stop him from winning the presidency. In contrast, the Alt-Right supported President Trump from the moment he announced his candidacy. There was the stillborn David French presidential bid. There was Jonah Goldberg endorsing Egg McMuffin. Do you remember the time Rich Lowry went on Megyn Kelly’s show to say that Carly Fiorina had cut President Trump’s balls off?

5.) Is there a better illustration of National Review‘s declining influence over the Right than this cover?

6.) Let’s be honest with ourselves: the traditional cuckservative organs like National Review and The Weekly Standard now have less influence over the course of the Right than we do whether it is acknowledged or not. Their writers like David French and Peter Spiliakos are living in our world now. They are along for the ride. The tables have turned since a decade ago when these neocons led the country into the quagmire in the Middle East.

7.) CPAC doesn’t matter anymore because the “mainstream” is dead. For decades, you were “mainstream” on the Right if you were on television or if you were writing for some dead tree publication like National Review. Now, we are living in the digital world of social media and young people are watching us on YouTube and Periscope. They are interacting with us on Twitter. We don’t need the “mainstream” to network or spread our ideas. Every Millennial who decides he wants to be a Joe Sobran or Revilo Oliver has all the tools he needs to bypass and skewer National Review.

8.) Peter Spiliakos is writing for National Review. He has been certified as kosher by the “mainstream.” And yet, that doesn’t mean anything anymore. It doesn’t follow that his thoughts and ideas have any real influence over the Right. In the free market of social media, Paul Joseph Watson is a far more influential figure.

We are the vanguard now. The world has changed, the “mainstream” is dead and the media is trying to catch up with the times. Rich Lowry’s National Review and Bill Kristol’s The Weekly Standard are at the nadir of their influence over the Right. Ultimately, it doesn’t matter if flyover country conservatives are familiar with Richard Spencer and the Alt-Right. If our ideas are triumphing over David Frum’s ideas and Bill Kristol’s ideas, it doesn’t matter. If our discourse triumphs over and displaces “mainstream” discourse, then we are having a massive impact whether the “mainstream” cartel acknowledges it or not.

Hunter Wallace
the authorHunter Wallace
Hunter Wallace is the founder and editor of


  • Please note:
    4. NOT A SINGLE ANNOUNCEMENT WILL REACH THE PUBLIC WITHOUT OUR CONTROL. Even now this is already being attained by us inasmuch as all news items are received by a few agencies, in whose offices they are focused from all parts of the world. These agencies will then be already entirely ours and will give publicity only to what we dictate to them.”

    From this point of understanding, Real Resistance will not be publishable (media-not internet) and any mention of it in publications will be, by definition, not it (Real Resistance).

    The last sentence is apparently true and IMO the most important part of the article. But if “our discourse” displaces, in a recognizable form (another media source), wouldn’t that just be the new version/topic in the same old controlled information distribution center?

    Paul Joseph Watson is a great example of popular internet influence, but unable to be of real use since he is completely Kosher Color Blind.

  • Great job trying to turn the movement into a Jew and fag friendly race-mixing intellectual hodge-podge. It’s all so very fuckingg gay. Now we have Indian and Iranians in the white camp how about including some Africans?

  • Just ditch 14/88 morons, and Alt Right is in good shape.

    Free Speech issue has fallen on the lap of the Alt Right, and Alt Right should run with it. The Progs fumbled big time by going for PC touchtown.

    Alt Right now has the energy cuz it is about free-thinking critical right.
    It will grow tiresome if it comes up with dogma of its own.

    14/88 are dogmatic and with really dumb neo-nazi stuff. I suspect half of 14/88 are really paid shills trying to make the White Patriots look bad.

    • “Just ditch 14/88 morons”

      You’re a tactically illiterate fool.

      Our extreme propaganda is what got us here in the first place.

      Our target is the youth. — Not CPAC cucks with one foot in the grave.

      Leave the front-line propaganda and recruitment to people who know what they’re doing.

  • Group IQ or no Group IQ, one’s main identity should be with ethnos, not ability.

    Abilitarianism is fine for professions. We can understand why a German physicist would want to compare notes with an Arab physicist, Israeli physicist, Chinese physicist, Mexican physicist. They are united professionally and scientifically by ability. They know much about science that others do not.

    But does a person have an identity apart from ability or academic/professional knowledge? Yes. Race and nation are extended families. Suppose someone in the family has an IQ of 150. Suppose his parents and siblings aren’t so smart. But does that mean he’s not part of the family? Does that mean he should not identify mainly with family members and identify mainly with high IQ people around the world?

    Abilitarianism or Expertarianism does an efficient and even admirable job of pooling together talents with shared interests and professionalism. But one’s core identity cannot be chemistry, physics, accounting, engineering, and etc. Those are general abilities without specifics. They belong to all peoples with learning and ability.

    One’ s core identity has to be familial, ethnic, racial, and historical. One shares ideas and knowledge with those in the same profession. But one BELONGS to a people of shared nationality, race, culture, and history. Lose that, and you’re nothing.

    If you’re a black boxer and notice that there are many big powerful Slavic boxers, should you identify more with Slavic boxers in the same league than with black folk(especially the ones who aren’t fit for boxing)? No, if you’re black, your main loyalty should be with blacks even if your profession has lots of athletic non-blacks.

    Abilitarianism says the black boxer should identify mainly those with equal ability than with his race and people. So, he should identify more with some elite Slavic boxer than with blacks who can’t make it in boxing.

    Now, in the profession of boxing, the elite boxer will have to deal with elite boxers of all races. But there is life apart from profession, and it is in state-of-being that one’s life has most meaning.

    In the movie THE WRESTLER, we see how empty it is for a man who has lost his sense of family and ethnos. His main identity is with those in the same profession. He helps them, they help him out, but it is a life that has meaning only inside the right. Outside it, he has nothing.

    In our money-and-status-obsessed society, we have gone too far in defining one’s meaning by profession or ability. Everything outside it is seen merely as option when, in fact, family and preservation of race/culture should be the primary obligations of a people.

    Jews in Israel understand this, which is why they have the read-and-breed strategy of maintaining Jewish demography and culture.

    Also, race-nationality-history is vertically unifying. It is open to smart Germans, middle Germans, and dumb Germans. Regardless of ability, they are part of the same collective family. It’s like Michael, Sonny, Fredo, and Connie are all part of the same family in THE GODFATHER despite differences in IQ, temperament, sex, and age. They are united by blood.

    Abilitarianism may be horizontally unifying — anyone with high intelligence and knowledge of advanced physics belongs to the Communist of Physicists — but it is vertically exclusive. If we define a community by high IQ, it means those with lower IQ don’t belong.

    True satisfaction comes from serving one’s race and nation. Israel surely has lots of smart talent, but it also has lots of middling Jews and even some dumb Jews & ignorant Jews who don’t know much about science. But when smart Jews succeed in business and science, their ultimate goal is to serve their own race, culture, nation as a whole. There are blood ties, historical roots, and sense of cultural bond. They find the deepest satisfaction there.

  • Bowel Movement Conservatives, and their ideology of “muh free markets” are trying to take back the party from those of us who gave them this second lease on life, and political relevance. Milo was essentially worthless, but is lumped in with the alt-right and was taken down not by progressive’s, but by a teenage “fiscally conservative”, movement conservative who thinks we’re “too reactionary”. The calls for this are growing stronger with people like Mark Levin, NRO, and Breitbarts London office. These people though are going to blow it on their bullshit free trade, supply side economics, and obsession with privatized healthcare, which is all these fucks care about. There is literally nothing else to their platform, except worn out, illusory, abstractions about “freedom and liberty”.

  • It’s probably more so that with all Western democracies having two or even three “lefts”, that cuckservatism (simply another leftist manifestation) is in a state of decline. There’s no use in having two “lefts”, e.g. a semi-socialistic, feministic left – and an open borders, liberal, free trade left, sometimes with a third equally similar party competing with them. These groups are so similar to each other that even average voters (i.e. politically braindead halfwits) are starting to reject the ridiculous idea that there are significant differences between them.

    Hardline supporters of mainstream parties argue tooth and nail that it’s the “opposite” side responsible for all problems – elect my side and it will all be better again. In reality these parties like the US “Democratic” and “Republican” are virtually the same, i.e. both pro-privatization, pro-immigration; pro-social welfare – generally just pro-status quo. The differences they argue over are purely imaginary (i.e. “my party is less racist than yours”, “my party is for the working class”), and based on false perceptions (i.e. “Democrat plantation owners”, “Republicans are all racists”). Most politicians probably ironically also believe the same lies that they tell the masses. Maybe they told those things once just to fool the politically braindead voters – now they believe it all themselves.

    There is a certain establishment “smugness” that sternly believes the neoliberal-progressive “ideology” is the final stage in human “progression” to some sort of “utopia”. Naturally this smugness leads it to lash out in all directions as it becomes apparent that the people really aren’t all that enamoured with the idea of throwing their descendants’s future to a bunch of third-worlders who will probably desecrate their graves and make life hell for their descendants (if not outright mass murdering or deporting them). So concerned they are with moving “forward” based on some “altruistic”, idiotic, untested (or in certain cases like socialism, outright failed) theories that they have become akin to a bus full of people driving full speed towards a cliff edge.

    Normally it would be very entertaining when they drove off of it – the problem is, of course, the rest of us are passengers in their wild ride. We’re the ones shouting for the fools to stop driving. The question is whether it’s too late to get these nutters out of the driver’s seat simply to avoid the inevitable crash and burn.

    • What “pro social welfare” policies do the Republican Party advocate for? They are hostile to any form of welfare statism, and are obsessed with free markets. Second, are you calling European RW parties like the NF, or Afd “left” because they have welfare state programs like healthcare? Our healthcare system, one that is run by the insurance industry is abysmal, inefficient, too expensive, and frankly, inhumane.

      • How about the 10 million a day they give to Israel? I consider that welfare. The fact that they are pro open borders also makes them pro social welfare. Sure, many don’t advocate writing checks out to people simply for existing, but there are many types of welfare.

      • They are pro-social welfare simply because they won’t roll it back, i.e. simply as they aren’t anti-social welfare they are in practice pro-social welfare (even if they consciously stand against ideas of expanding it). If the left expands it later – and the cucks come back to power at an even later time they will defend whatever expansion the left has made to it.

        “Rolling back social welfare” is just rhetoric of the leftist parties to appeal to the more parasitic segment of the population. No government would dare roll it back as all developed societies has become far too reliant on it. It will only disappear with an overthrow of the system (under which things like “public popularity” have never mattered, rebels have always been minorities).

        Free markets are little to do with welfare. Canada and Australia are both generously welfarist with no sign of it being rolled back. And yet both pursue free trade with sectarian fervor.

        Perhaps you are just arguing “grass is greener” because you are where healthcare is more private (America?). Whereas I am where healthcare is more public. I’m sure French rightists would argue the same way as me (being where healthcare is more-so public).

        FN killed the far-left’s platform by adopting welfarism when the Communists were spiralling down into social justice/LGBT nonsense typical of “Eurocommunism”. Rightists should use different strategies elsewhere (e.g. UKIP should probably adopt welfarism to dethrone the wretched Labour Party, while American rightists probably should not).

    • Cuckservatives wanted to appease the perverted minority because they were not intellectually equipped to handle their loaded pejorative questions, they were behind the curve, in their attempts to maintain the appearance of being the good guys, they got outwitted and outmaneuvered by radicals who use guerrilla warfare and psyops. The radical left will never be appeased, any attempts to appease them will always fail, do not acquiesce to radicals or you give them a foothold. Fight fire with fire, from this day forth we need to outwit them and outmaneuvre them at every turn, something the cucks failed to recognize.
      This is now an all out culture war, it will be defined by the people, not by governments, left wing media or cucked publications such as National Review, (however much they operate under the delusion that they are still in the driving seat) their day in the sun has come to an end, it is the dawn of a new era in public discourse and of self driving buses.

  • All the while telling Whites they need to die, these Trotsky rejects just make themselves less appealing. Change is not for the timid, and they get no more timid than outright cowards. Let them supplicate Mexicans and blacks to fight in Syria. Stupid assholes.

  • Neocons and their useful idiots the Cuckservatives gained a new, albeit brief, lease on life with the 9/11 attacks. But the Freedom Fries and Flag Pin doofuses and Israel Firsters quickly blew their wad on Iraq. Their time is past, they must content themselves with testosterone patches and sniping from the Sidelines.

    Our time is now.

  • Last year, I had no clue what the Alt-Right was…….

    Now……I feel that it’s my Home…..

    But, every White Person is not my Ally……

    And, every Minority is not my Foe……

    We can find common ground with some Jews…..

    We can find common ground with some Latinos…..

    We can find common ground with some Blacks…..

    We can find common ground with many Others……

    I’ll leave it to the Leaders of the Alt-Right to chart the Course…….

    But, my own two cents worth………

    … that this Movement is a Contingent Defense born of Attacks by Others…..

    …..upon our Identity…….

    ……with Individuals suffering from Otherist Competitors……..

    ……deeming Unnatural and Evil……..

    ……and attacking us to the point of Violence……..

    …..for what they would have repeated if they had been us…..

    …..for the last Millenia……

    And in that Vein of Absolute Emptiness and Absolute Hypocrisy…….

    I raise my Head with Pride…..

    And Clench my Fist for any Enemy who approaches with Violence……

    45 Degrees!!

      • He is young, give him time to accept the ultimate red-pill, which is the inherent danger of “finding common ground with some Jews.”

        ))) Depeche Europa ((( , I would recommend that you begin reading Kevin B. MacDonald. You should start with his excellent work, The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements

    • We tried the “expel them and leave them be” approach far too many times in history; it’s embarrassing really. If the Romans would of just repeated Carthage we wouldn’t have this problem.
      Is every last Jew trying to kill us? No. It’s mostly their own elites, by some accounts. But honestly, they really have declared it an “Us or Them” ultimatum and it is not going to be us.
      They made the decision, not us.

      The Blacks, Mexicans, Muslims, etc? They’re pests, not threats. Once we have our nations back they’ll shut up and back down knowing that they stand no realistic military chance.
      So no, no Jew buddies. We gave them hundreds of second chances, and they blew ALL of them. If we give them 6 million chances, they’ll stab us 6 million times.
      Yeah we might have something that could be confused as common ground with the Latinos or something, but the other 99.9999% of their populations would argue that one and it’s not worth combing an entire forest for a single ant.

    • “We can find common ground with some Jews”

      Alt-Right Rule #1: No Jews allowed in the Alt-Right.

      And no Jewish “allies”.

      Jews are our existential enemy.

      No Jew can be trusted. — Not one.

  • Just soak up the earned media. This was a great move by Spencer, he should go to any and all political events he can, I understand he’s still a man and can’t go to everything. Perhaps Jared Taylor could start getting out there, tag team style.

    • Ever since “Heilgate” Jared Taylor has seemed to want to put some distance between himself and Spencer. I don’t think Mr. Taylor desires to join a “tag team” with the most visible proponent of the alt right.

      • I haven’t seen anything from Taylor that would suggest he’s trying to distance himself from Spencer, nobodies interviewing him right now, but he’s talked freely with Red Ice and does his weekly talk with Paul Kirsey who was on The Shoah.

        • Google Jared Taylor, Kristoffer Ronnenberg, and you can listen to a statement from Taylor distancing himself from Spencer.

      • And it would be a mistake. Taylor is not good in those settings. He is not fast off the draw and is too Baby Boomer passive-aggressive. We need GenX edge and aggression. But more importantly Spencer actually has ideas that are more philosophical and interesting than Taylor’s right-leaning version of the Founding backed up by IQ charts. Back in 2008-9, I actually thought (and hoped) that Spencer was the one distancing himself from Taylor’s over-investment in social science. I was wrong, but still, Richard has roots with the more interesting, speculative, Jay Dyer, Red Ice type material, and the depth of Jonathan Bowden, all of which Taylor engages with, sort of, but not in the same way. I respect Mr. Taylor but I would not be involved with this particular scene if it were dominated by that IQ-obsessed, social science Salier materialism. I don’t fully disagree with it, but I invest less in it. Also, having someone out there who likes Depeche Mode for real is better than a high IQ version of Fedora Conservatism, which failed as hard as cuckservatives. Thankfully.

      • It seems strange to me that Ramzpaul and Jared Taylor have been so easily put off by “Heilgate”. At most half a dozen people out of 300 did the Roman salute thing, as a joke, one of whom was Asian. I can understand why the mass media made a big deal about it, I don’t understand why any person with sense would.

      • Jared Taylor is alt right. He isn’t alt right only to those who insist that alt right means exactly the same thing as a White Nationalist who hates every Jew. (In which case, there would be no need for a new word.) Jared Taylor has had Jews speak at Amren, and they were generally sensible people.

  • America is irredeemable and the majority of white people are irredeemable. They caused this fall. Let’s begin anew, a fresh culture and a new ideology with the few whites who still feel pride and strength in their hearts. Let’s leave this culture to rot, let’s even push it so it dies faster! Let’s stop trying to convince “fellow whites”. Fellow whites whites caused this, they’re worse than parasites, they invite parasites to feast on their body! at least the parasites respect their tribe and fight for their own preservation!
    No… weak, insane and defective and spiritually deformed whites are much worse than parasites and invaders, they’re infectious traitors. America deserves to rot. We, the ones who want preserve civilization, need to start anew. Others before us rejected the old under a new name. We cannot save the old because we hate the old. We are the new world.

      • Absolutely, and that’s my point, whites have been such easy victims. Too easy. We haven’t been but we are a tiny minority.

      • As for what I am doing, just what’s expected of a living being. I hate the invading, I loathe the weak and I cry for the loss of everything we built. Muslims feel this, the Chinese feel it and even monkeys feel it. But for us whites, this is a rare feeling. So I am not doing much, I’m not a hero, I’m just a regular person and that is what’s exceptional.

        • Feroxmill, I generally agree with you, but from religious reasons, believe that what you describe is America’s destiny and well deserved fate. There is a lot of the blood of innocents white people that America caused to die or allowed to be killed (think Holdomor, the unnecessary white fratricide of WWI and II, the millions of Germans killed by the USAF and RAF bombing of civilian population centers, the millions of Germans raped and murdered by the Soviets) … so what if this was done on the orders of our Jewish Masters, this will not gain us one moment of mercy when we face God’s righteous fury and wrath. America will be utterly broken and dismembered. The only question is what comes afterward … which is the point I think you are making.

          To asssit you in your arguments with people who cannot or will not face our collective doom, I would recommend that you direct them to Sir John Bagot Glubb’s essay The Fate of Empires.

          This is the anarcho-nationalist Keith Preston essay review of it ->

          I think we all can agree we live in the An Age of Decadence. I will quote at length and verbatim from the end of Keith Preston’s essay in order to give you and others ideas to consider.

          “An Age of Decadence is characterized by many or all of the following: growing pessimism and withdrawal into one’s own private affairs; increased frivolity among masses whose heroes are no longer statesmen or even captains of industry but athletes and celebrities who contribute little or nothing to the actual public good (think of the Roman Empire’s gladiatorial contests; then, think of our Super Bowl). One sees a deepening materialism and pursuit of things, as mindless as it is frantic (think of Black Friday!). One sees, finally, a gradual across-the-board lowering of moral standards and a growing obsession with sex.

          Via the relativism of its intellectuals and the cynicism of its political-corporate class, an Age of Decadence sees an influx of foreigners who settle in and around cities. They refuse to assimilate. The cleverer of them can employ relativists’ own arguments against any such need, or even a need to learn the dominant language. We currently see this in all the advanced nations of the Anglo-European world. An Age of Decadence sees a desire by more and more to live at the expense of an increasingly bloated and bureaucratic welfare state. It sees irrational foreign expansionism and an overextended military (the Roman Empire overextended its borders; the U.S. starts a pointless war in Iraq, and its present “leaders” currently threaten Russia). An Age of Decadence witnesses conspicuous and cynical displays of wealth amidst massive and rising disparities between rich and poor. It suffers from endless dishonest rationalizing as its chatterers struggle to hide the fundamental brokenness of its systems.

          The fall of empires is diverse, as Glubb notes. Some are dismembered by conquest (as was the late Alexander’s empire) or decline following major military losses (as did Spain, which also lost its colonies). Some divide into sections which continue for a while, as did Rome. All, however, fall from within prior to such events. With this in mind, we can ponder the fate of the U.S., its universities hopelessly corrupted, its major media corporatized and controlled, its political class having convinced itself that the money well available for federal spending is bottomless. Its leading “conservatives” have become a controlled loyal opposition with no idea what they want to conserve. There is a general shunning of ideas derided as “conspiracy theories.” These often come down to anything questioning an official government story, although no one with functioning brain cells really believes wealthy and powerful people have never gotten together and conspired against the public interest.

          The point is, if Glubb is right and this trajectory of “the fate of empires” is irreversible, then Patriots who are “trying to take back the republic” or however they describe it are—sadly!—on fools’ missions. Even those of us who write about freedom and liberty have to face the possibility—nay, likelihood—that we are working out a potential foundation of ideas for a people yet unborn, those who will build a civilization able to rise from the ashes of a fallen U.S. following the crisis of legitimacy its central government will doubtless face in the near future, however it comes about.

          I believe we nevertheless have a responsibility to do our best. Perhaps we can increase whatever small hope exists that our descendents will do better than we did. That they will have learned from our mistakes. Whatever our doubts that anyone ever really learns anything from history.”

          • Very interesting point and thanks for your time to reply.
            It’s funny that you mention Spain and Rome because they’re extremely different endings and that difference is essential. When Spain’s empire collapsed, its culture, race, institutions and mainland didn’t end. It was a collapse in wealth but not a complete collapse. Oppose to Spain’s, the collapse of Rome was total since their religion, culture and political structure was completely anhilated and replaced. I think we are living in roman times, Rome is liberal democracy and we are the first christians who can inherit the ruins of the system. From that, we can build a new system like the christians did from the ashes of the classical world.
            The point I want to make is that we should seriously consider not saving the old system, but building anew on the ashes of the old like the early christians did. This means new political system, new culture and probably, new political divisions. Why America when we can dream on a pancontinental Union of white federal states?

          • I believe you misread my comment or I was not clear. The examples of Spain and Rome are from Mr. Preston’s review of Pasha Glubb’s essay. If you do not want to read Mr. Preston’s review linked above, here is a link of a pdf copy of Glubb’s essay ->

      • And the communists and the sjw and the degenerates are white. Do we want to build a nation with them too? Do we want to re-educate them? I say we simply exclude them

    • Have some hope. We will win because our ideas are in line with reality.

      Think about that for a minute.

      In order to suppress our ideas, massive institutions like the media, public schools, universities, Hollywood, etc have to constantly promote a narrative of racial equality that is so flimsy that a simple trip to a Wal-Mart in a multicultural neighborhood is enough to completely annihilate it.

      If a ride on public transportation is enough to discredit your political theory, don’t bet on that theory having long-term viability.

      As racial conflict escalates, getting a white person to vote for their racial interests will be about as difficult as getting a hungry dog to eat a steak. It’s only because of the massive coordinated disinformation campaign that it isn’t currently so. The media is doing our work in that it constantly discredits itself and soon will be completely replaced by the online alternatives.

      I’m so certain of our victory that the thing I worry about most isn’t that the multicultural vision will win, but rather that when the vast majority of whites realize the sheer magnitude of the lies they’ve been told, the blowback will look very much like what the left constantly accuses us of, which is not race realism but rather true racial hatred.

      • I hope you are right! Although, in my defence I have to say that I live in London in an area that is 90% muslim/black where the other 10% are childless hipsters and old cockneys. I live in what the west could become in 2050: brutish, violent, dirty, uncivilised, stupid… it is very easy to loose all hope here! But at least it gives me a good perspective on the future. If things come to pass and the west becomes London, the solutions available are going to be dismal. We better move the discourse to the system itself and forget about the current political parties, they are all part of this imploding system.

      • Absolutely! it’s the same thing that worries me.
        When science began making people disillusioned of religion, people reacted with resentment and rage and this is going to happen again when reality proves multicultural liberal progressivism false. But in this case, the reaction to the death of liberal progressivism will be even more murderous since violence will be required to save civilisation.
        What would the remaining 20% whites do in 2060 when they inherit a civilisation on the verge of total conquest and a live completely empty of meaning, love and identity? They will solve the problem but the solution will be dismal and horrific on an unprecedented scale. That’s what scares me and the only way to avoid it is to change the system now. The system will change in the future via surrender or war or in the present via politics and law. That’s the choice.

        • Does it have to come down to violence? Richard Spencer keeps talking about the Treaty of Versailles as a model. That treaty tried to give every European ethnic group its own nation. As an American, I am not sentimental about the United States. Would it be so bad to partition the U.S.? Blacks and Latinos can have the southern half, which is where they are concentrated. They can have Disney World, the oil in Texas, Hollywood and Silicon Valley. They can have an open border with Mexico, and in time, would probably be annexed by Mexico. Whites could build a new civilization in the north. We would rebuild every industry we lost to the south. Whites from all over the world would flock to the new white ethnostate, bringing their wealth and human capital.

          • Yes it will probably come down to violence. Let’s take France and imagine 2070: the population is 50% muslim and very young, the remaining 50% is white but very old and 30% of it still votes communist. That leaves 35% of white patriots who know they will never win back the country democratically, that their days are numbered and that they are going to loose fifteen centuries of civilisation.
            They will be forced to consider war if they want to reconquer France and if they do, they will because they will have a historical vision where this war will just be one among many. Also, they will know their predicament was caused by the naive pacifism and multiculturalism of their parents and grand parents and it’ll just be natural that they will want to rebel against them by doing the exact opposite.
            In summary, in 2060 they will need to go to war, they will not mind going to war and probably they will love going to war. However, even if the win their country back, they will loose democracy and their humanity. So yeah, looks pretty bleak.

          • “lose democracy and their humanity” – perhaps you like living in a democracy but it has failed as a method for racial survival and is actually the worst possible system because it is totally reliant on brainwashing/lying. if you suggest that killing or hating someone makes you lose your humanity, i contest that as well, killing and hating makes boys into men.

          • Oh yes, I absolutely agree with you. Better to loose it if it comes to what we are living now. However I realise that of course democracy can work but limited to decent men in a homogeneous cohesive society bound by culture and religion. Time to go back to basics and discard democracy as another utopia.

      • White people have been voting their “racial interests” for decades. That’s why white people vote Republican, especially in the South. The problem is that the conservative movement, and the Republican Party, have become trojan horses for oligarchs, plutocrats and pseudointellectual neoconservatives. The plutocrats become richer through globalization, i.e., free trade, and the importation of cheap labor. The Republican Party protects the plutocrats from paying a fair rate of taxation on their ill-gotten gains. Meanwhile, neoconservatives send working class whites to fight all over the world in an effort to “spread our values,” and to gain “influence.” Gaining “influence” essentially amounts to the foreign policy experts being treated like big shots when they visit the developing world, and to making the world safer for global capitalism.

        • What we are saying is that the range of white vote now goes from conservative to liberal progressivist but in sixty years the range of white vote could move to genocidal rage on the radical side and basic authoritarianism on the moderate side of the spectrum.

  • It’s pathetic really. Media is on its deathrows trying to control the narrative of people’s minds. They’re losing so they throw a fit.

    • I hope you’re right, but I am often disheartened to see how many people still credulously believe everything the MSM assert.

      • Did you really think the Alt-Right would just skate into the Mainstream?

        It will take a lot more Brave People like Richard Spencer to pierce fully into that Realm….

        • No, but the Alt-Lite or broad Alt-Right is replacing the Mainstream in terms of influence over non-Leftist thought. Some parts of the mainstream are getting on board; here in the UK the Daily Express (Daily Mail’s less popular cousin) supports Marine Le Pen & FN as well as UKIP. Even the arch-Tory Spectator is not uniformly hostile. And the cuckservative press is increasingly marginalised.
          Of course the Left still has the big battalions, Sauron’s legions are countless. But we have got rid of the Steward of Gondor and are rallying the Men of the West. After 20 years of enslavement, at least there is now a real battle for the soul of our civilisation – and we are not losing.

          • As a fellow Brit, I concur. The Express has gone further right than I thought a daily ever would. In addition, everyone in the UK seems to now be aware of the globalist, multi-cultural agenda of the BBC — I cancelled my licence a couple of years ago to great satisfaction. The tide is turning.

          • This is a bit of a tangent, but on a bus in Dublin yesterday I started chatting with an Afrikaner girl who had recently immigrated to Ireland. She seemed happy with how ‘multicultural’ the city is. I was just thinking that she, of all people, should know better.

          • That’s the level of propaganda we’re up against. Years and years of brainwashing from childhood. We need to build good social, cultural, familial and financial networks, because the battle for the survival of the west is going to be a long fight indeed.

          • A lot of refugee Afrikaners now see themselves as Globalist flotsam, a people without a country, on the traditional Jewish model. For such a people, a cosmopolitan society can seem less threatening and easier to operate in.

          • If we all keep pushing hard, we could make huge strides that would destroy the liberal ideology for good.

          • May I ask, are you television-less or just don’t pay the license? I’d like to do the same, I only watch streamed content of my choosing these days.

          • I don’t have a TV capable of receiving signals. I have an old analogue TV (a 32 year old Sony Trinitron) hooked up to a DVD player, that can play CDs and DVDs. Normally though I just watch Youtube or go to the cinema.

          • I wrote to tv licensing and told them I did not watch any live broadcast television on my TV, only streaming. They pretty much said ‘fair enough’, cancelled for me and said if my circumstances changed to let them know. I even received a pro rata refund! For the record, I find streaming services enough for my needs, picking my own viewing schedules of things I want to watch. I still use a TV for that.

          • Now we have to work out how to get from here to having Phil Shiner’s head on a pike at Traitor’s Gate. 🙂

      • and who are these people you are ‘disheartened’ by? these unthinking dolts that you are concerned about should be of no more concern to you than if they were frogs or squirrels for their importance is no greater. once we take control they will mindlessly line up on our side with the same unthinking stupidity that they exhibit now. they are weak, lazy and stupid. they are drawn only to strength. don’t waste a minute of your valuable time on them. as we grow stronger, they will fall in line naturally.

          • yeh we need a earn ur vote system. should be military and vets only really. do ur 2-4 years or just don’t vote. need to fix the military and throw out the vaccines though

    • “They called us sexists, homophobes, demagogues and populists,.. They don’t realize that millions of people already no longer read their newspapers and no longer watch their television.”

      -Beppe Grillo, the leader of the Five Star Movement in Italy.

  • Several members of the crowd wave small Russian flags at the start of Trump’s speech at C-PAC. That is a symbol of the Alt-Right ideas going mainstream, despite being an anti-Trump prank, and an amusing attempt to create a C-PAC ‘heilgate’ moment.

    Many of the attendees apparently thought they were totally reasonable when the prankster handed them out. (And why not? Mexico flags with “Obama” on them would not be controversial at a liberal event).

    • I’m American…..

      Not Russian……

      Waving Russian Flags isn’t Alt-Right…..

      It’s Stupid……

      • Well I don’t usually credit the C-PAC crowd with being very bright. If they were bright they wouldn’t be cuckservatives. So it’s interesting to speculate on whether they were A.) In on the “protest” and trying to make Trump look bad for the lefty media (sort of a super-cuck move) or B.) Sort well meaning but clueless and didn’t think what the gesture would be interpreted as, like the Roman saluting attendees at the NPI conference or C.) something else … with cucks I think “clueless” is always a very safe choice for motivation.

        • They were conservatives – thus too dumb to know they were being set up.

          Still it probably didn’t matter. Good point about Mexican flags at Obama events.

          We should attack the left as Russophobes any time they complain.

          • They are literally going around using stereotypical fake “Russian” accents – doing the Russian version of a minstrel show. Imagine if someone started using a “Chinese” accent in order to associate one of Obama’s trade policies with foreign influence. It would be called “racist.”

            Maybe Democrats really are the real racists!

      • I don’t know. sounds like just another way to work towards a coronary for Jake the Jew Tapper and his pals in the Judenpresse.

        Maybe someone can set up an America-Russia PAC and demand all politicians bow before it every election campaign. Slogan: ARPAC beats your AIPAC!

    • Buckley was the chief cuck and instigator of the conservative purges. He’d do the exact same were he still with us.

    • Buckley was a clownish poseur and Jew boot-licker.

      Standing athwart history yelling, “Hey, ain’t I swell.”

      Are you old enough to have seen that clown on TV? What a loser he was.

      Absolutely controlled opposition.

      • He infamously did an interview where he admitted as much. It gets mentioned sometimes, but usually in a dismissive and out of context manner, by some cuck.

    • William F. Buckley was a Jew-controlled, Trotskyite socialist.

      National Review is a neo-con publication that was created to redefine “conservatism” and steer it back towards socialism.

      – Frank Chodorov
      – Marvin Liebman
      – Eugene Lyons
      – Frank Meyer
      – Morrie Ryskind
      – William Schlamm
      – and Ralph De Toledano

      Those are the Jews behind their front-man, William F. Buckley, when they launched National Review in 1955.

Leave a Reply