What Is The Alternative Right?

In 1969 my Dad and Mom loaded my little brother and me into the family station wagon and we took a drive to Boulder, Colorado. Our goal was to drive slowly through the University of Colorado campus. It was our cheap alternative to taking the family to Yellowstone Park to look at the bears. But instead of looking at bears begging for food, we looked at hippies sitting on the campus lawn smoking dope.

At that age I was part of a fundamentalist Christian family. We believed in Jesus, Israel, demons and The Rapture. The world was a scary place full of evil, demonic activity and sins. And some of the greatest sins of that time were rock music and boys with long hair. These long haired, dope smoking freaks were called “hippies.” They were the degenerate counter culture (freaks) that fought against The Establishment (squares).

These hippies opposed the war in Vietnam—the peace symbol was their emblem. They were young and didn’t trust anyone over 30. And their politics was a mishmash of anarchism and Marxism. But, above all, it was about smoking dope and fucking. Sex, drugs and rock & roll baby!

I had a flashback of the hippie era as I read a recent BuzzFeed news article lamenting that the Alt Right is a bunch of degenerate young kids who are the counter culture. As such, I have come full circle. From the “square” kid laughing at the counter culture to now being seen as a leading figure of this movement. Jack Kerouac has become RAMZPAUL.

How to define an informal movement?

hippie 60s 09

Hippie Chick (8/10, WB).

Part of the problem of defining an informal movement is that such an entity lacks precise boundaries. I think most of us have a mental image that comes to mind when we think of “hippie.” I think of some dude with long hair, wearing a tie dye T-shirt with a peace sign in one hand and a marijuana joint in the other. But does that description DEFINE a hippie? Could a man have short hair and be a hippie? Could a Republican be a hippie?

The same debate rages as to who is the “real” Alt Right. Can Christians be Alt Right? Can homosexuals? Jews? Bronies?

Like the hippie movement, it is impossible to make rigid definitions. However, the concept of Alt Right is useful in that it describes a certain political sub culture that is outside of the mainstream. To this end it can be useful to compare and contrast the Alt Right to more old school political movements.

Traditional Republicans

Traditional Republicans tend to see the world as a battle between “Conservatives” vs. “Liberals.” The Alt Right sees the battle in terms of “Nationalism” vs. “Globalism.”

Your typical “conservative” Republican believes in:

  • low taxes
  • smaller government (in theory)
  • a strong military to defend Israel
  • guns
  • opposition to abortion

These conservatives believe that Jesus loves all the little children of the world. And, as such, we are really all the same. We can import a million Somalis and if we just lower their taxes and “get the government off their backs” they will make great Republicans.

Typically these folks are also “pro-morality,” which, in practice, means that their moral compass is whatever the Democrats supported 20 years ago. As such, they tend to oppose gay marriage (for now) and believe race is “only skin color.”  But these moral positions always move to the left as the Republicans “grow” in office. I am sure that the Republicans will soon defend the sanctity of gay marriage as a “conservative value” and claim that race is real and we must fight “white privilege.”

As the Traditional Republicans tend to be older, internet memes and jokes tend to confuse them. Basically the only meme they understand is that of the “kick ass” middle aged woman with big tits holding a rifle. (Women with guns is a fetish for these types.)

dana 11

Boobs and Guns!

The Alt Right Is About Identity

People on the Alt Right are primarily concerned with identity. This means:

  • Hungary belongs to the Hungarians
  • Germany belongs to the Germans
  • France belongs to the French

Syrians that flood into Germany may become citizens but they will never be Germans. For a nation is based on a common blood, language and culture. Years ago this was known as self-determination and common sense. Now it is known as “WHITE SUPREMACY” by the left and establishment Republicans.

However, curiously, the one exception is Israel. Both the Democrats and the Republicans affirm the Israel has the right to remain a Jewish ethno-state.  As such, no Democrat or Republican politician is demanding that Israel accept Syrian refugees. But these same politicians insist that white countries have a moral obligation to accept endless refugees.

It has been something of a pastime for the globalists to excitedly predict when a country will no longer have a white majority. Germany will no longer have a white majority by 2020! The USA will no longer be White by 2030! The destruction of the white majority is always seen as inevitable and a good thing. And to oppose it means you are a “White Supremacist” or a “Nazi.”

But some people no longer want to be dispossessed from their homelands. And, yet, they also don’t want to exploit or harm other races. They just want self-determination for their people as the Jews have self-determination in Israel. These are the ideologically refugees that have migrated to the Alt Right.

14/88, SIEG HEIL, KKK, Neo-Nazis, Racial Holy War, etc.

white girl wheat 09

(Disclaimer – I do not advocate white girls damaging our precious wheat)

“NO ENEMIES TO THE RIGHT!” is the cry I frequently hear when I criticize the Hollywood Nazi styled groups. Of course, that assumes that such people are sincere. Hal Turner, a famous radical on the Right, was an admitted FBI informer. Brian Holland was the Presidential Candidate of the NSM (Neo-Nazi) Party. He later also admitted to being a government informer. Are such informers really to the right?

The above are just two examples of the long history of ADL and SPLC shills and government informers in such groups.  As President Obama has declared the “Radical Right” to be the REAL terrorist threat, you can bet many people are paid to play the neo-Nazi role both on-line and in real life.

I have personally received more threats from the “neo-Nazi” crowd than from anyone on the left. After doing some investigation I discovered that many of these characters previously had zero interest in politics or were actually “anti-racist.”  But prison time (and the promise of an early release) can “flip” such people to play a desired role with the associated funding.

The primary goal of the ADL and SPLC in using such shills is to associate any sort of white identity with “Nazism” and “White Supremacism.” Guilt by association might be a logical fallacy, but it is effective in transforming public opinion and obfuscating the real goals of a movement.

Of course, I often hear the argument that the Democrats and Republicans will call the Alt Right “Nazis” anyway so we might as well embrace the Heil Hitler crowd. But that is a mistake. We must define our own values and live in our own times. Despite the desire of the ADL and SPLC, the world is not perpetually circa 1933 Germany.


Frank Collin (Cohen). The Best Neo-Nazis have been Jews

The future

The Hippies of the 1950s and 1960s were never a formal political movement. But the basic philosophy gave birth to organizations and influenced public policy. Hillary Clinton is basically a relic of the hippie generation. And they are now the establishment.

We on the Alt Right are the hippies of our time. We are the counter culture. And while we are not a formal organization we do have organizations such as American Renaissance (AmRen) and National Policy Institute (NPI) that represent many of our values. The primary of these values being self-determination for all people.

We are also starting to see mainstream pundits such as Ann Coulter and mainstream politicians such as Donald Trump tap into many Alt Right themes. As we continue to grow, we will see more famous people reject the globalism of the Democrats and Republicans and embrace nationalism.

The wheel will turn and we will one day regain the institutions and be the establishment. But for now, enjoy the creative freedom and fun of being part of the counter culture.

Peace and Love.

If you like this article and are concerned about the future of the Western world, check out Roosh’s book Free Speech Isn’t Free. It gives an inside look to how the globalist establishment is attempting to marginalize masculine men with a leftist agenda that promotes censorship, feminism, and sterility. It also shares key knowledge and tools that you can use to defend yourself against social justice attacks. Click here to learn more about the book. Your support will help maintain our operation.

Read Next: 10 Signs You Might Be A Cuckservative

399 thoughts on “What Is The Alternative Right?”

  1. From what I understand Ramzpaul is a golden boy for AMREN and from what I understand AMREN supports jews and israel. WTF? Am I missing something here?
    “To put it more accurately, AR has taken an implicit position on Jews by publishing Jewish authors and inviting Jewish speakers to AR conferences. It should be clear to anyone that Jews have, from the outset, been welcome and equal participants in our efforts.”

    1. I think what you are missing is that Rmz does not speak for such organization completely. He gets invited to talk, plus he has no issue pointing out Is raels hypocrisies as written in this article. Nobody agrees 100% with someone else. Just give the guy a chance, it’s good to hear others from time to time.

    2. So not condemning Israel and all jews makes you and Israel supporter? lol you must be a special kind of you know what

    3. It’s really more along the lines of advocating merely that whites pursue and enjoy the same kind of ethno-nationalism as Zionist Jews do. No more, no less.

    4. It’s really more along the lines of advocating merely that whites pursue and enjoy the same kind of ethno-nationalism as Zionist Jews do. No more, no less.

  2. “The wheel will turn and we will one day regain the institutions and be the establishment. ”
    This is a nice theory, and I enjoyed reading this article. But I must disagree: Before the wheel can turn the world will either go to hell or transcend in to World Government. We can no longer afford to just be “hippies”. We must act aggressively and decisively.

    1. “Before the wheel can turn the world will either go to hell or transcend in to World Government.” I couldn’t agree more. Just read the eschatology of any religion or culture and it states the same thing. Blood will be up to a horses bit before we are through with the mess the jews and their lackeys have subjected us to.

    1. I’m pretty Old School but the one thing I absolutely do not miss is the HAIRY bush. God Bless the bastard who invented the safety razor! I think Tony Soprano states it best around the 1:00 minute marker.

      1. Just disgusting. I remember the first time I saw a cleanly shaved or waxed pussy. It was a road to Damascus moment. It was the greatest thing in the world. I will never go back.

        1. To each their own. In my view there is an evolutionary time line with hairy cave people on one end and bald aliens on the other….I am all for progress.
          I will take the totally smooth please.

        1. Haha, different generations. I’ve actually made girls grow it out. Plus, shaved bush is like the #1 slut tell (besides the fact that you are finding out).

        2. Not sure what generation you are from but I am a child of the 70’s and dealt with the crime that is pubic hair into my late 20’s.
          As for slut tell…I take the fact that they are female as a slut tell. If I am ever wrong it is still inside the margin of error.

        3. Child of the 70’s myself and I started shaving my package back in the late 80’s and all the girls thought it was weird. Who’s laughing now?

        4. a visionary.
          I will say it again
          The timeline looks like this
          We want to evolve…not go backwards.
          Right now there is a huge push for more bush from ugly, fat celebrities who demand to be seen as sex symbols despite not being fit enough to cause a bovine erection……

        5. You are blessed to be into what’s popular. Enjoy it. Shaved twat looks incomplete to me.

        6. To each their own. This current trend, and may it continue forever, is like one of about 10 things that have happened in the last 50 years that I approve of.

        7. I don’t understand how one can find a big bush of pubic hair more appealing than a perfectly groomed pussy.
          It’s like comparing cave drawings to 3D Studio Max.

    2. Looks kind of gaunt. Plus she’s probably harboring a pride of saber-toothed crotch crickets. Ouch!

        1. “Tumblrina”? Don’t know any real words so you have to make some up. Sad.

        2. Naw, you’re reading too much into it. Reverse political-correctness, you might say. What I’m saying is that some of us like something to hold on to, if you get my drift. Don’t want to be bruised by a hip bone! Plus she looks kind of worn out (drugs?). Hence “gaunt” not “thin.” Thanks for the lesson on PC-speak.

    3. Awesome. Keep your five-o-clock-shadowed, razor-burned twat. I’ll make a meal out of that dirty hippie pussy.

  3. It’s OK for China to be for the Chinese, Japan for the Japs, Israel for the Jews, &TC. However, the White countries MUST admit anyone that wants to come here. I call bullshit on this! Trump is the only candidate, so far, that has addressed the immigration issue. This is the most important issue of 2016. If we don’t stop it, all of it, nothing else will matter. Trump is starting to fuck with the Clintons, big time. Good for him! A second Clinton presidency will be the final nail in our coffin, the coffin that was once the USofA.

      1. We would, except it’s been overtaken by Muslims and Cultural Marxists.

        1. And, the European governments make it almost impossible for Americans to emigrate there.

        2. I don’t know. I don’t know why TPTB are encouraging the overrunning of Europe with unattached ME men of fighting age, either. Perhaps the two are linked.

      2. Tell me how long the people telling this to white people would be begging to go to Europe after 2 or 3 years of “freedom.” The models for this are Detroit, Baltimore and DC.

      3. Whites built New York, Johannesburg and San Francisco as much as they built London and Paris … By YOUR reasoning 50 Indians in the eastern US could claim Georgia. The Dutch beat the negroes to S. Africa because they could make ships.
        You have to do something with the dirt besides occupy space nearby. Pilgrims didn’t come for the Indian EBT and Section 8 housing.

        1. Btw, in Southern Africa, when the Dutch arrived, there were but few natives around – most notibly, the Hottentots, who spoke with clicking sounds rather than laguage.
          The Dutch, in the 1600’s and 1700’s, escaped the brutality of their masters, into the wilderness beyond… which was COMPLETETLY EMPTY!!!!
          Yes, completely empty.
          The boers that escaped didn’t encounter blacks, aside from those who followed them inland into the coast, until major black tribes – based on the warfare method – invaded the vast plains to the south.
          These invading tribes did not just conquer – what their method was, was based on pure warfare. They attacked and defeated, then they killed ALL of the males, ate their food, then took the women and bred their “own” into them, thus making the women and their tribe one of their own.
          This went on for a long time in Africa, and is actually WHY they made it so far south as South Africa and the boers, in their innocuppied lands – they had ravaged most of Africa so much, they ventured south, where they rightfully met with boom-sticks, and men who stopped this stupidity.
          All-s ya have to do iz sum re-search.

    1. Yes, the problem with that is American’s do not have a connection to one another in the way that Japanese, French or even Mexicans have.
      The founding fathers conceived of a nation held together by ideology rather than blood ties.
      This seems honky dorey when the ideology isn’t bat shit insane.
      The real analogy here is that a bat shit insane ideology running a country held together by ideology rather than blood is the same as when a batshit crazy monarch would take over. Oh Ceaser’s kid is a lunatic? Well…too bad he is the boss.
      Feminism is our Caligula. Which is funny because Caligula translates to “little boots” which is just what these fucking dykes are wearing.

        1. I agree with them being wrong in the long run. I do think they were well intentioned and they also had a different idea on what constituted men. The idea that all men should be treated equally in the eyes of the law made sense if you define men correctly. Anyway, I think they made a big move, tried their best and as it turns out nothing is perfect. The cracks of this system are showing and will weigh it down to the point of collapse much like the European monarchies of old.

        2. The founders assumed racial and probably religioius homogeneity–John Jay made this very explicit and Benjamin Franklin was suspicious of Germans. Plus the only people who voted were white male landowners (and rich merchants as long as it didn’t go to their heads). The equality business was inserted in the Declaration to appeal to French humanists–no one really took it seriously and the Founders would have been dumbstruck by the concept of universal suffrage mass democracy. There were certainly flaws in the constitutional system (no mechanism of orderly, peaceable sucession or expulsion). But, as Joe Sobran once observed, the Constitution now presents no impediment to the present system of American government.

        3. We were only a nation a few years when Congress pushed thru the “Alien and Sedition Laws” as a reaction to all the French speakers that had started filling our east coast cities.

    2. This isn’t really true. Western liberals have been agitating for diversity in Asian and other countries for quite some time now. Egalitarianism is truly a plague on all of humanity.

      1. Multi-culturalism has been pushed on Western nations by the progressive collectivists as a means to undermine them and inject socialist policies. Western culture, which as been 2000 years in the making, is under attack by those people so that they can derive money and power from their positions in the leadership. The elite class in both parties of the US are more similar than they are different at this point. And we see the same pattern in Europe and elsewhere.
        It should be noted however that a group of people who are focused and determined could turn this around even if they are not in the majority. What is needed is a plurality that is loud, relentless and unwilling to bend to the politically correct common wisdom.

        1. I think 8000 is too large a number to be supported by the evidence. Most historians would, I think, agree that Western civilization has it origins with the Greeks and Romans and that makes it about 2000 or so years old. (A bit older if we include the Illiad and Odyssey as a benchmark and early writings of the Bible.)

        2. All historians/philosophers will AT LEAST say Western Culture predates Christianity by AT LEAST 500 years, saying it roots to Socrates. Plenty of people would say it goes back further. I am to the more extreme and believe that Western Cultures roots lead back to the early development of civilization in the Levant (Syria, Palestine, Jordan, Iraq, Cyprus, Anatolia, and Lebanon).

        3. Truth be told, multiculturalism built America. Where would this great country be today without slave labor?
          And, those who advocate AGAINST foreigners coming here are in reality not against subservient, hard working foreigners per se (e.g. slaves and indentured laborers).
          For the record, I am totally against illegal immigration in every form.

        4. Slavery could have not been a factor if it were not the policy of the government of the time. Both England’s and later the America’s government supported slavery. It is a false narrative that the colonies were filled with both slaves and slave owners. The average early American did not own a slave, and in actuality under 5% did. The average American despised the slavery because it lowered their wages, (sound familiar? Think about this for a minute. Aren’t illegal aliens kept as slaves by the plantation owners, democrats, for the same reasons and with the same tactics?) and were forced to search for escaped slaves for their owners by the government.

      2. Except soon there will be no white people to bring diversity to Asia – unless we act now.

      3. ”Agitating” = whining
        Except Asians haven’t fallen for it – and it’s very doubtful they ever will…all they have to do is look at the ‘West’.

      4. Yes, they occasionally agitate for “diversity” in Asia, but the Asian governments are buying into it. Asian countries aren’t being flooded with non-Asians. I know of no Asian country that predicted to become non-Asian any time in the future. That’s the difference.

    3. Lolol China has 10 times as many Muslims, percentage wise, as the US and half of Israel’s population is Arab

      1. And they cause problems from time to time, even though the Chinese security forces deal brutally with them. But they’re ethnic Turks (Uighurs) who don’t like being ruled from Beijing.

        1. Right all I’m saying is that countries outside Western Europe aren’t exactly a paragon of homogeneity. The right wing believes that Muslims are only in the Near East and migrants from there but that’s b.s.

        2. The only really homogenous countries outside of Europe that spring to mind are Japan and the two Koreas. China gobbled up a lot of ethnic regions over the centuries, and Vietnam for example has Chinese, Hmongs, Montangards etc.

        3. And they’re tiny ass countries. Moreover, the US wasn’t homogeneous before whites migrated either. The US was never homogeneous. From what I know the Olmec Indians were black.

        4. Muslim countries like Morocco, Algeria, and Libya are very homogenous.
          Egypt is homogenous genetically (ie skin colour), while culturally the last Coptic Christians are being slowly driven off.
          The Middle East (with the exception of Israel) – practically entirely Muslim. Native Assyrian (Christian) population is being exterminated, I also doubt any immigrant would want to come there.

        5. Note that that’s a theory (not canon fact, at least not yet).
          Proof of the genetic similarity of Indians (in NA) was how over 90% (some estimates even over 95%) of them died from the same simple European diseases -> no genetic diversity.

        6. America was 100% white, then the indians came and exterminated the whites, at that point america was 100% indian, then whites came and pushed back the indians when american was homogeneous European then America imported slaves and it went from being homogeneous to just being super-majority European. Then the USA government was seized by culturalmarxist/neomarxist and they started a population displacement programs for whites and today whites are barely a majority. And their children are a minority.

        7. Yea, after 1960’s when the immigration laws were changed in USA to import majority none-Europeans instead of majority Europeans. Then during the 1970 mass migration began and today USA has around 12-30 million illegals hispanic.. And that is just counting illegals. Europeans have become a minority in many southern states due to hispanic massimmigration.

        8. In 1960 America was 90% white. To say America was never white is like saying China was never Chinese based on the fact that only 90% of the people in China are Han Chinese.

        9. Bad comparison because China was never supposed to be a nation state but an empire. The term that corresponded to ‘Han Chinese’ in 1200 AD included people that are considered minorities today, and also they consisted of about 50% of the population during that time.
          However the US is trying to be a nation state which is why they are so into demographics.

        10. The point being however you want to describe it, the country of China today is 90% the same ethnic group.
          The US is trying to go from a majority white country to a majority non-white country.

        11. You want to quibble over the percentage of China, my central point is that the elites are deliberately trying to change the racial demographics of America, Europe and Australia. Nobody is doing this to non-white countries.

        12. Right. What should we do to help white countries though? Admittedly, I’m a NW but am concerned.

        13. Stop all non-white immigration and deport all illegals and ultimately all white advocates of white genocide. Abolish all forced integration programs.

      2. China does NOT have 10x the muslim population percentage wise as the US.
        Show proof of this you anti-white bigot.

        1. Wikipedia says 1.5%. I would wager Wikipedia is a better source than a pro-muslim message site.

        2. Please refrain from using the left’s idiotic abstract language (I mean ‘bigot’), unless you really must.
          Words like those are half the reason for the stupid political correctness we have now

        3. I half agree with you, and half agree with confronting it head-on.
          There are cases where you have to reframe the argument, there are other cases where you have to use their own weapon against them in a reframe.
          Different people wake up to different methods and phrases. Some will never wake up.

      3. It’s not half in Israel either. More like 25% without looking to Wikipedia. Are you counting the non Ashkenazi Jewish population as Arab?

        1. There’s that nonsense, what are you, a SJW poorly trying to fit in here? “People of color” is the dumbest term ever invented and I still can’t believe leftists want to replace “blacks” or “ethnic minorities” with it. If they had any grasp on reality they would know that WHITE = ALL COLORS AT ONCE, so the most colorful people are Whites and Asians. Everyone else LACKS color, that’s why they are darker.

        2. They’re not minorities in their own countries. If they don’t like being minorities they can go back to their countries.

        3. Gee, where could they go? It’s not just a country, it’s an entire continent. They can pick a country where the people look most like them.
          It is absolute madness that there are people who feel entitled to more gibsmedats than they’re already getting and who still ignore/deny that crime leads to poverty. These people continue to complain that the system isn’t skewed in their favor ENOUGH yet. Plenty of White nations have been made to implement racist affirmative action, that is, forcing companies to literally hire people for NOT BEING WHITE. Wrap your head around that one. And yet “minorities” are still not done making demands! These people need to visit their countries of origin to gain some perspective. If they’re African descendants they need to visit Africa and look at how well Africans have been doing ever since White people left. Best contemporary example: South Africa. Once a peaceful prosperous nation under the allegedly terrible “apartheid”, under a White government, SA has devolved into another third world shithole since Africans took over. Connect the fucking dots.
          White people built “Western” civilization, creating and maintaining ALL of its benefits. And without White people those benefits go away. Look at any country that was previously more White than it is now (in other words, look anywhere on Earth) and you will see a country in DECLINE. “Western” aka White civilization is in global decline.

        4. “Look at any country that was previously more White than it is now (in other words, look anywhere on Earth)”
          Do you mean look anywhere in Africa? I do take your point though, Uganda was one of the wealthiest and most developed countries before the British left, and same with many other African Colonies that Europeans left. But you obviously left Asia out of the picture.
          Indonesia has one of the world’s fastest growing economies, one of the largest exporters of textiles, cigarettes, tin, steel and cars in the world, and not to mention the world’s 9th or 16th largest economy in the world (depending on the source). Indonesia also has the world’s largest middle class, comprising of almost 140 million people, and consequently, a very large consumer base that has been virtually untouched by the GFC of ’07-08.
          “Fortress” Singapore is one of the greatest bastions of commerce and (independent) intellectual thought. It is also the world’s busiest port with almost one third of all the world’s shipping passing through it each year. Considered as a haven by many wealthy industrialists, Singapore has always rivalled Hong Kong as a prime place to place the headquarters of your multinational-corporate juggernaut.
          The Philippines is emerging as a powerful manufacturer and exporter in the region, and the only country with enough balls (or stupidity) to oppose the Chinese annexation of the oil-rich Spratly islands.
          I’m well aware that there are many other previously colonised countries in Africa and Asia that are unliveable hellholes like Cambodia or Vietnam, who opposed the ideas of capitalism and what their “overlords” left them. The countries above though have embraced capitalism and used infrastructure left to them by former colonial powers to gain a head start. In terms of social progress though they are very backwards, (if you define social progress as an SJW woluld, e.g. no Transgendered people etc.) a famous example is the death penalty for trafficking drugs that these countries all share.
          You could argue that many people in the above countries live in horrendous and abject poverty, but I would argue that those countries are absolute meritocracies. They are great places to live in if you’re educated, entrepreneurial, conservative/religious and tired of white guilt or your country’s self loathing. And don’t worry about obnoxious Australian tourists, they’re only in Bali!

        5. You are correct, I left Asia out of the picture completely. My post was about darker people (middle eastern or african, I don’t care tbh) in originally White nations. When I said look at any nation on Earth that was hyperbole, I meant any nation that was at some point majority White. All White-made countries are now less White than in the past. And they are all worse off for it. In the age of information and automation there is no legitimate reason to import unskilled workers from other countries, let alone non-White ones. The political agenda has more to do with ensuring lasting dominance of whichever party imports the most dindus and with inflating the consumer market in the short term. People are imported as consumers and as voters, not as workers. That is why politicians no longer care AT ALL about whether someone brings any skills or not. In the short term anyone will boost consumption as anyone needs food and shelter, even the internet is starting to be viewed as a necessity although it’s obviously not. Any idiot can be indoctrinated to vote for the party that let him in.
          I have lots of respect for the Asians, they seem to be avoiding some crucial mistakes White people are making. Most importantly, they don’t seem to trust the Jews.

    4. Given time, any people will become a race, as they inter-marry and establish broadly agreeable customs and social norms, but they must be given time. The Russian people are a mix of Nordic and Asiatic people, but they are Russian. The Italians are racially mixed, but they are Italian. Chinese people are integrated into whatever countries they are in, though they may retain some pride in their Chinese heritage. Any country can assimilate foreigners – slowly. The racial composition and the culture will gradually change, but the people maintain their mutual trust based on a sense of shared heritage and identity. They way to destroy or subdue a nation is to flood it with foreigners all at once.

        1. Lol
          Yeah, about your second point, sounds about right. I think Latin America started out like that (with an amalgamation of races).

        2. Almost all Russians who live Eastern of the Ural mountains have strong Asiatic face features. Telling the difference between them and Chinese, Korean or other Asian people would be difficult, unless you have an eye for that, of course.

        3. Plus there was intermixing (Slavic fathers/Asiatic mothers) during the settlement era from the 1400’s onward, not to mention the mongolian, tartar & khazar horsemen that raped their way westward during all of Russian history.

        4. Then perhaps you know that Russia is a federation that occupies over 17 million square kilometers. People from various ethnicities live there. Look up the Wikipedia page about Russia. Only 81% of the people are russians, which seems like a lot, but that’s because a big part of the russian population is focused mainly in the European part of the country, which is located Western of the Ural mountains (look up what I wrote).
          Do you imagine that if you started traveling towards, say, Mongolia, all the people would have European facial features, and then at the border they would suddenly become Asiatic? No, they won’t.

        5. Scratch a Russian and find a standard European.
          All people are exposed to some degree of admixture. America is negroid and indian admixture, Russia is Turkic and asian admixture, southern Europe is moor and arab admixture, France and UK is asian/arab admixiture, Sweden is asian admixture. But all this is on a very small scale that is not visible.

        6. You understand that Russian is a nationality and ethnicity? There live many native asian people inside Russia.. If you are looking at a person with Russian citizenship that looks Korean, you are likely looking at an ethnic Korean and not ethnic Russian.

        7. You are mixing up ethnicity with nationality, there lives all kinds of races and ethnicities inside Russia that all have Russian citizenship ethnic Russian(White Europeans) in the west, turks in the middle asian in the east.. By your logic americans would be black and indian because blacks and indians has american citizenships.

        8. Not more the any other European population.
          American admixture is negroid
          and indian.
          Russian admixture is Turkic and asian.
          Southern Europe, is moor and arab.
          France and UK is asian/arab
          Scandinavia is asian admixture.
          But all this is on a very small
          scale that is not visible.

        9. So, IOW, white people don’t exist. So how can a group that doesn’t exist be eradicated, huh? That’s another shop-worn anti-white rationalization for white genocide. Funny how anti-whites never have a problem identifying whites when it comes to bashing, extracting guilt payments or figuring out what countries to flood with non-white immigrants.

        10. I’d like to teach, the world to sing.
          In perfect harmony
          But this song was made by Coke,
          And if you believe it you’re a dope!

      1. recent immigrants in Western Europe don’t assimilate at all. instead they form they’re own parallel culture

        1. Even more so, they view these ‘ethnic enclaves’ as military outposts in infidel land. Where they will gain a foothold and serve as liaisons to facilitate the conquest of that country. It’s not propaganda or paranoia it’s fact.

      2. Given time, any people will become a race

        Race is biological construct. People/tribes is social construct of biological construct known as race. Nation is political construct by certain ethnicity.
        Japanese is ethnicity but also Japanese is nation and Japanese people are racially mongoloid.
        White man could have Japanese citizenship and be a part of Japanese nation, but he will never be ethnically nor racially Japanese.

        Russian people are a mix of Nordic and Asiatic people, but they are Russian

        Russians racially and ethnically speaking are white people. But Russian is also a nation and large territory with different non-Russian ethnicities and non-white races.

        The Italians are racially mixed, but they are Italian

        Maybe southern Italians to some extent, but generally they are white.

        Any country can assimilate foreigners – slowly.

        This is what actually libtards believe. And fail miserably.

        They way to destroy or subdue a nation is to flood it with foreigners all at once.

        Africa for Africans (negroids, Arabs)
        Asia for Asians (mongoloids)
        Europe and white countries for everyone.
        Antiracist is codeword for antiwhite.
        Di(e)versity is codeword for chasing down the last white person.

      3. Russians, Italians are not mixed, that is just one of those myths going around, very popular among nazists.. They will say Italians are arab mixed due to islamic invasion and Russians are asian mixed due to mongols, that has been disproven thought. But even if it was true, what you said that a mixed European/asian would perceived as Russian is not true. There would have to be very little admixture so the person stilled appeared as European for that to be true, else she would be perceived as an asian or a mixed race.

        1. and what country hasn’t been, really? Who among us is not the product of conquest, invasion, inter-marriage or rape? What percent of humanity has Mongol blood? And how many have Neanderthal ancestry? Man has always and forever coveted his neighbor’s wife, and everything else that belongs to his neighbor.

    5. whites/europeans build vastly superior societies to every other race, that’s why. black, asian, arab, mestizo etc immigrants from the turd world fall over themselves to get into the UK, U.S.A. germany, norway, sweden, denmark, canada, australia, etc. great nations built by the white man.
      most other races simply aren’t capable of doing it by themselves.
      now what do people think will happen if/when white countries lose their white majority? US is well on their way there.
      that is simple fact, but leftists and neo cons are under the delusion that “all men were born equal” and that all human beings are of equal worth and potential. we know that’s not true. it’s strange we can accept that there’s inherent physiological differences, blacks do very well in sports such as boxing, football/soccer, american football, basketball, track, for example, but want to pretend intelligence is not related to race, that some tribal papuans are equally as intelligent as germans… LOL
      as James Watson, the geneticist who was one of the men who discovered the DNA double helix structure said, “”[I am] inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa [because] all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours—whereas all the testing says not really.”
      .. but sure diversity and multiculturalism is good for us. yawn.

      1. “that is simple fact, but leftists and neo cons are under the delusion that “all men were born equal” and that all human beings are of equal worth and potential. ” — Yes but the new mantra of the left is that whites have ‘privilege’ and get all sorts of seen and unseen bonuses as a result, so now all races, instead of being ‘equal’, are equally ‘oppressed’ by whites.

      2. What is considered “Western Civilization” was active while anyone that could be traced to Europe were painting Cave drawings. Ancient Egypt and Ethiopia are the earliest of human civilizations, and are the foundations of Western culture. The foundations upon which Greek society were built. This predates anything European.
        Most of these posters are ignorant to history that is even cited in history books written by the Eurocentric. The Moors ruled in Europe for longer than any European entity has ruled any place outside of Europe.
        It wasn’t European enlightenment that allowed for the expansion of European global control. Remember that Europeans LEFT Europe because European culture and ways of living at the time were not so great. They didn’t even have seasoning for their food, hence their primary reason for travel. Outside of that, using slave labor (no labor costs) is the PRIMARY reason why Europe grew globally. Not because of some inherent greatness associated with European culture itself. Honestly, the reason why European culture is what it is largely due to the contributions of NON Europeans.
        Outside of Scandinavia, you can’t name any places on The continent of Europe that weren’t essentially built by people of color, both willingly and unwillingly.

        1. lol. take your revisionist anti-white left wing “history” where the sun doesn’t shine. grossly overstating the contributions of non-whites have made while downplaying what whites have did is a tiresome but common tactic, can be debunked by minimal research and common sense.
          same with black and arab invention myths. eurocentric history? poor excuse..
          anyone with a brain knows what those wonderful “people of colour” are really like when left to their own devices or the majority. they can’t run a bath. the state of every country they run is proof of that.
          the ancient egyptians weren’t negros – if that’s what you’re insinuating, by the way.
          that claim has been continuously debunked.

      3. LMAO, Whites are so liars and deluded.
        Until the 5th century, all Europe except the Mediterranean lived primitive barbaric way, tribal and nomadic, while multiple other races had their advanced civilizations.
        The boneheads do not know, but the Mediterranean are not the same race as the Germanic / Nordic, much less than the Slavs, Giuseppe Sergi and Madison Grant already said so. And it can be proven historically, as the Greeks and Romans loathed and were racist against the Germanics.
        After the wild barbarians destroy and steal the Roman Empire, the “Europe” experienced a period of chaos and savagery that lasted 10 centuries. Then in the 15th century, they left to steal the whole world as everyone knows, but not only materially, stole also intellectually. They stole technology, science, mathematics and philosophy from other countries, and unlike what is spoken today, until a few centuries ago Europeans knew they were inferior to other races, this only changed with the invention of European nationalism and the wealth obtained from theft and slavery worldwide.
        Even the concept of Europe is fictional and a liar, so this proved with many books. The color terminology for race is also a myth, the old racialist have shown that “Europe” is composed of many different races, the South European is closer to North Africa and Levantine than the North European.
        So rebellious teenagers, that is why racist that you know were influenced by Religion and the occultism, because history and science proves that the “whites” are inferior.

        1. Shut the fuck up, you jewish shill piece of shit. Whites ARE fucking superior, to all Arab goat fuckers, gooks, or niggers.
          Europe had their own fucking technologies, and didn’t gave a fuck about ohers.

        2. you are obviously just another dirty mud with an inferiority complex, you have to rely on revisionist history to make yourself feel better. I shouldn’t waste my time getting into a historic and genetic argument with you because most of what you said is just wrong, you can’t even differentiate between race and ethnicity. It’s only the braindead like you that claim race is skin colour.
          yeah… us Eurotrash are just inferiors who stole from everyone else, right? While you wonderful muds invented the modern world… but somehow we were able to steal it all off you, because “European nationalism” ( no such fucking thing ) — suddenly create advanced societies and leave you in third world shithole status? Cool story bro. Is this what “white privilege” is?
          you live in the U.S. presumably – a nation built by whites. You must be pleased it’s heading towards white minority status, it’ll fall from being a superpower to a third world country, then you worthless ethnics will have no one to keep shit running and your benefits going. Canada will be the only decent place left on that continent.

        3. Simple fact buddy, when the whites did go into the “dark continent what great inventions did they find? Not a wheel, not a building over one story, no mathematics, no written language, even a very limited spoken language, but plenty of tribal violence… Maybe it was a good thing for the blacks that they couldn’t quite muster the intellect to create a weapon that could destroy each other. Egyptians are proven to be of mixed Caucasian and black/african genes.

        4. Can’t even write a retort grammatically correct. Way to go, dipshit. You’re a credit to Unkie Adolf’s Aryan race.

        5. I said, shut your fucktarded face you sub-human filth. Why dodn’t YOU learn fucking English, you cretin?

        6. Where’d you pick that up, Stormfront? Don’t you have to go back to jacking off to Hitler?

    6. You seem to be ignorant of history.
      It was whites, not those other people from those countries, who started the so-called race mixing and multiculturalism?
      Last I checked, Indians, Africans and virtually all other countries of the world were going about their businesses BEFORE white men went to their countries to exploit their natural resources, and took many of them as slaves back to the west. At least, it is on record that Africans did not have the means to cross the wide seas until the British explorers came.
      Chicken has now come home to roost and ill-informed guys are shouting that brainless statement, “Germany for Germans, America for Americans”, and all what not.
      If the west did not go into those foreign countries to disturb them in the first place, chances are those other people would never have known there was a place called America, Britain, etc.

  4. If women show their “empowerment” by rejecting all the men they don’t want in their lives, and the rejects have to accept it and go away, then why don’t we whites show our “empowerment” by rejecting all the Orcs we don’t want in our communities and countries?
    Because in practice, the elite project to smash dissimilar peoples into one big mass of fungible human meat resembles ordering women to put out for men they don’t feel attracted to. The crime wave of rapes in Europe committed by invaders from the world’s Orckistans shows that the new arrivals understand this equivalency.

    1. there is something in what we are seeing as you say treating people as cultureless raceless meat, maybe economic cogs in a wheel or potential voters

    2. Truth is whites are hamstrung by other whites. Minorities tend to be liberals for our own self-interest. Almost every single white-hating, far-left ideologue I’ve encountered has been white (or Jewish, if you care for that distinction) themselves.

      1. Yeah, liberal vs conservative is a civil war between different groups of whites for the most part.
        There are different political factions of blacks as well but most are part of the Democratic coalition so it doesn’t matter in terms of party by party distinction in the current alignment.
        Part of the clash among different black / POC political factions can be found in the reactions to the Cosby crisis as well as the various strains in Black Lives Matter which has its own fault lines as a coalition. As well as the Black Hispanic wing of the party.
        The Black / Jew alliance, which has always been tenuous, has begun to come apart somewhat. Who knows on which side the Jews will land.

      2. Same here, the most time I’ve encountered this insane Leftist drivel, was on part of other whites. It got to the point that I dont want to meet other fellow whites anymore.

      3. True. We call them cuckservatives and libcucks – whites who sell-out their race for political gain.

  5. Hah, Ramzpaul is writing for RoK now. Cool. Been subbed to his channel for like 6 years now.

  6. Sounds like the alt right is just socially conservative and fiscally liberal, like a reverse libertarian, and mostly started by disgruntled ex-libertarians. Former Ayn Rand readers turning to Pat Buchanan because they’re broke are like a bunch of ex-Christians turning to Satanism or Richard Dawkins,
    The version of “alt right” for black people and non-WASP whites has existed for an extremely long time in the US ghetto. It’s called the democratic party machine and they explicitly play on racial issues ranging from black to Irish to Jewish.
    Black and white phaggots alike all mau-mau the flack catchers to get job set-asides in the public sector unions. Other people joining the system is a very recent phenomenon and for a long time these kinds of people on the east coast, including the Hispanic ones were hostile to “Mexicans”.
    There’s nothing sexy about this. It’s ghetto, redneck and groce. Phaggots that vote like this around here listen to Emmure, tan to a state of racial ambiguity, and are relieved to hear that “You are not the father”. If you laugh at Worldstar Hip Hop and Maury, by voting this way you have become what you despise. It doesn’t matter if you’re black or white.

    1. So what your saying is that if we don’t wholeheartedly embrace lassiez-faire, Ayn Rand-style, Jew-created dog-eat-dog capitalism then we’re white trash? Bullshit.

      1. According to the libertarians, yes. I have never seen anyone define libertarian ideology more succinctly! Bravo!

    2. Shitty thought process here.
      Ultimately you’re saying that the alt-right are all poort, which is completely asinine and bull$hit. Peddle your anti-white hatred elsewhere bigot.

  7. At that age I was part of a fundamentalist Christian family. We believed in Jesus,Israel, demons and The Rapture.

    I grew up in “rapture ready” Tulsa in the 1960’s and 1970’s, so I know that culture well. This “end times” nonsense has to stop, because it rationalizes failure and passivity. Barring some kind of material catastrophe, humanity has a long secular future ahead of it, and no supernatural Jew from ancient times will “rapture” anyone.
    Gary North has his own load of Christian bullshit to account for, but he says something reasonable about the foolishness of rapture theology here:
    Left Behind Culturally

    1. If you think about it, the Rapture is just an excuse to be lazy and sit around since Jesus will take you up to heaven. Makes me also wonder if Jesus can lift the fatasses on their scooters to Heaven. Also, the Jesus loves you and accepts you just as you are dogma sounds like something right out of feminist propaganda. No wonder American youth, left or right, are so screwed.

  8. Honestly, I think the hippie comparison is a poor one, especially since we do have a relatively recent example of successful rebellious movements against a degenerate culturally leftist state: the Freikorps and, yes, the NSDAP. which opposed (and eventually toppled) the depraved Weimar Republic.
    We’ve been down the Buckleyite self-policing-for-respectability route before, and all that it leads to is cuckservatism. Just as Buckley was wrong to drum the John Birch Society and Pat Buchanan out of the approved conservative movement, so would it be wrong for us to drive a wedge between ourselves and those who are sympathetic to the NSDAP.
    Obviously we should look out for shills and trolls. No question. Calls to violence are the obvious “tell.” But if someone points out that the NSDAP were right to promote traditional art over modern degenerate art, or that they effectively championed the traditional family, then we should applaud this aspect of the NSDAP and adopt it.
    What makes the NSDAP relevant to our cause is that they were consciously battling the cultural aspect of Marxism before “Cultural Marxism” was even a thing. They fought it and they beat it (domestically). What they did, worked. In this, they are our models.
    But this doesn’t mean that we should only focus on the NSDAP. Rather, we should applaud all identitarian heroes of the West that preceded them (just as they did themselves), from the crusader knights to the Confederacy.
    I’d say that while obviously we should live in “the current year,” in the sense of using the Web and memes and other modern media, we should and indeed must reference and draw inspiration from the past. After all, a big part of the reason why the Communist system fell was because the East forever had before their eyes the preferable example of the more affluent West as a temptation, showing them what they were missing.
    Today, we in the West, living in our Cultural Marxist nations, don’t really have such a thing. We lack a contemporary portion of the world to which we can look as an alternative (albeit Russia and Japan might qualify in some ways — but they are culturally distanced from us, Japan especially).
    Therefore, for the model of our “alternative ideal,” for our ideal of the preferable nations in which we wish to live, we MUST reference the past. And frankly, the 1930s nationalist states of Europe are the closest and most relevant that we have, because they already possessed a good deal of our modern technology, but managed to be traditionalist in their culture and their social structure.

  9. And now Duck Dynasty’s the Robertson family now look like dirty hippies. And they’re Christian. Or as I have said before, rednecks are nothing more than hippies with guns.

  10. The neo-nazi movement as we know it: skinheads, tatoos, run down sheds in the woods where they all heil to a picture of Hitler, is a formula created by the established media (which we all trust so much). People who fall into this group are either government employed (like this article claims) or misinformed, thus joining a movement which is not at all what original National Socialism was like or stood for, but is displayed constantly in the media’s brainwashing and conditioning of Western society.
    True fascism and National Socialism are undergoing the beginning of a revival and are key contributors to the current sentiment we know as “alternative right”, and have no love for “skinhead” culture. The number of NS and fascists increase daily in the movement and are starting to make themselves noticed in social media.
    Republicans are despised in the AltRight movement, known for their lack of spine in dealing with leftist policies (we all know how almost all Republican candidates are in support or “don’t have a problem with” gay marriage, feminism, illegal and muslim immigration (save Trump), etc. Clearly they are no real opposition to the left, “cucks” in every sense.
    The AltRight is also divided internally between the more fascist leaning traditionalists, who emphasize the importance of race, traditional gender roles, and social cohesion, among other things, and more Libertarian groups, who are more about the Constitution and economic and gun rights. This division is clearly evident in the messages of two kinds of outcry that both claim to be AltRight.

  11. I’d rather have the borders open. No gun control or welfare or PC nonsense, obviously, but I personally don’t want to be stuck in my own country, either. Too much else to see and visas are a pain in the ass.

    1. I think we’d find that if we had no welfare (speaking from the USA perspective) that there would be very little need for such border control. Naturally, we’d still want to vet anyone coming in to make sure they weren’t terrorists or criminals, but without the allure of free American money, I’d imagine most would be coming over with intentions of working.

      1. ” still want to vet anyone coming in to make sure they weren’t terrorists or criminals”
        solution: Must eat bacon sandwich in front of witnesses.

        1. I forgot what it’s called, but there’s a religious principle that terrorists use in order to blend in. Basically, they believe they are permitted to eat bacon, drink, whatever if it helps them carry out their “holy” mission. (It’s not a sin if you’re doing it for God).
          Also, there’s a company that makes pork-coated bullets to deter Muslim terrorists. According to the company, “with Jihawg Ammo, you don’t just kill an Islamist terrorist, you also send him to hell,”

        2. bacon bad? dancing afghan boys good? there’s a religion with its priorities straight lolz

      2. Milton Friedman mentions this in a speech about illegal immigration. He points out the difference between historical immigration to get jobs, and modern immigration to get welfare.

  12. “For a nation is based on a common blood, language and culture. Years ago this was known as self-determination and common sense. Now it is known as “WHITE SUPREMACY” by the left and establishment Republicans.”
    That’s because the left has willfully and disingenuously conflated wanting to preserve your own people and culture with wanting to keep a slave underclass.

  13. “Hippie Chick (8/10, WB).” Dunno. Looks kind of gaunt. Plus she’s probably harboring a pride of saber-toothed crotch crickets. Ouch!

  14. Race replacement seemed laughable back in the 90’s when the only people talking about it were skinheads.
    People aren’t laughing anymore.
    And if recent world events have the venire of validating some things said back then, then the left has only itself to blame.

    1. In the late 90’s I was telling everyone that all of this was coming. They just laughed in my face and said “Not here! This is America Jack!” Today they seem to have forgotten all of my “Bullshit Paranoia,” that’s what Fox News will do to you. I have noticed that many Hard-Core rednecks have become quite liberal in their beliefs and thinking. I do not even recognize my own family anymore – aunts, uncles, cousins, sister, brothers. They all talk like a bunch of liberals and they have always been 100% Old School Southern. My barber is an old redneck Southerner and I used to constantly hear grumblings in his shop about the niggers and invading Mexicans. About a month ago I was getting my hair cut when he floored me with “I don’t mind the Mexicans moving in, at least they will work.” Talk about a total 180! The horizontal propaganda we face has affected everyone it seems.

      1. Well, in defense of your barber, anyone is better than niggers. That’s who he’s comparing to, probably. If it’s between them and Mexicans, I’ll take Mexicans any day.

    2. Eh, the powers that be have been race-replacing blacks in the inner city with white hipsters, Hispanics and Asians for longer than Jesse Jackson has been talking about it in the 1970s. Now it’s just beginning to affect rural whites.
      There was also a rumor in my high school that Tropical Fantasy sodas were being sold by the KKK in order to lower black men’s sperm count.
      Consider the source of these rumors, like race replacement.

      1. Flooding Western countries with Third World immigrants who generally do not work, live off social welfare benefits, refuse to assimilate and adhere to a religion which openly hostile to Westerns values, is in no way comparable to people with vested interests in the development of real estate, redeveloping said real estate for new tenants (read: gentrification).

      2. You also need to factor in the prison population ‘locking up’ black male sperm, the amount of black male on black male killings, gangs, shootouts with the law, little ones getting caught in the crossfire, and the ‘professional’ black women who complain there are no ‘black men’ and thus have to mix with other races…black men as a percentage of the population will continue to decline mainly by their own hand…the future will be a buncha mocha skinned Hallie Berries and Alicia Keys’ twerking for the attention of non-black men.

        1. Black men certainly have a tendency to commit crimes and get killed or imprisoned over it but black birth rates are not going down, their overall population is growing in any country, not just African ones. And also you’re kidding yourself if you think black women have a shot at men of other races. That’s just as absurd as the jewish forced meme of white women desiring black men. In reality, blacks are universally deemed the least attractive race by every other race. Black men and women fully depend on each other. When black women are blinded by “welfare queen” life on easy mode black men suffer the consequences. When black men are blinded by “rich gangster” fantasies black women suffer the consequences. Most black violence is directed at other blacks. Every time a black person fucks up other black people pay the price.

    3. I remember the first time I heard the phrase “white genocide” and thought it was a troll job. But then the evidence started being displayed before my eyes.

  15. After 50 years of Hollywood pop culture propaganda any man who is white no matter how successful or un successful is labeled as the high school quarter back bully. It’s pretty much the same narrative that played out in most of these type films, but now the un popular kids have a lot of power and are on a witch hunt for any man fitting this description.

  16. Jews will always be at the helm of whatever social movement. The real leadership of the Left is obviously overwhelmingly Jewish, but so, too, are major GOP donors (Kock Bros, Adelson, etc). Almost all the conservative radio talk show hosts are Jews (Savage, Levin, Rabbi Lapin, Medved, etc.), as are the noteworthy PUA’s and manosphere pundits (Style, Mystery, Heartiste, etc.). So, there is no significant “non-Jewish” right or left anywhere. That is just life. There is nothing inherently wrong with this, accept that a Jew should always be assumed to have tribal loyalty as a personal priority, as each of us is loyal to his own tribe.

    1. Roissy (Heartiste) isn’t jewish. Too many on the Alt-Right are obsessed with jewish surnames and don’t realize “Weidmann” is a German name

      1. I may be guilty of assuming that everyone who’s anyone is Jewish, but I nonetheless stand by my original assertion: you won’t find a social or political movement in America without some Jewish leadership, excepting possibly CAIR, but, even then, who knows?

        1. Are you saying white nationalists need a strong, Jewish leader?
          That would be most amusing to witness

        2. I think I am suggesting that they will inevitably get one, whether they like it or not.

  17. Just watched the “We are altright and are not going away video” My thoughts:
    The host (and I’m going to ignore the fact that he needs some grooming tips), ignores the economic appeal of Trump. If this were a robust, fast-growing economy that needed workers above and beyond what the native birth-rate could accommodate, there wouldn’t be much fuss about immigration, legal or otherwise. It’s because you have, at present an economy *that’s unable to produce enough good-paying, livable jobs for it’s NATIVE population* that the importation of immigrants who either can’t find work (and wind up on the dole or the criminal class) or take jobs for peanut wages that native-born Americans would take IF THE PAY WAS DECENT that Trump’s message has gained such appeal. Man, basically, is driven by economics.

    1. Economics are a critical factor, but not the only one. Spend some time in Second and Third World countries and you’ll see how culture contributes to a nation’s condition.
      There are places steeped in poor work ethic, corruption, and moral cowardice, where influence and social face are more valued than truth and principles.
      Too many immigrants that come over have different, less success-producing cultures. Latinos are the prime example. Poor Asians and Latinos come to the same state (California), and yet Asians fare so much better, while Latinos struggle to become self-sufficient (not on welfare) and to become professionals like scientists, doctors, etc.

  18. It’s becoming harder and harder to stay absolutely reasonable and objective when the near entirety of Social Media + MSM is spewing their propaganda absolutely everywhere. In these strained economic times it can drive any hard working honest man insane.
    Check out Google’s homage to veteran’s day. Where the only white male is stuck alone in the background. Can we admit for a second that the majority of US soldiers in WW2 were white males, and that the majority of living veterans are thus most likely white males?
    We’ve gotten to the point now where it’s politically incorrect to acknowledge the people who sacrificed their lives so we can sit here and complain on the Internet. The stuff people are saying on my Facebook in regards to this is disturbing, calling people Nazis for wanting the death and sacrifice of their grandfathers and grandmothers to mean something.

    1. Haha.. wow, yeah, I remember seeing that and I didn’t even realize what event they were celebrating. Obviously doesn’t look like a group of veterans to me. I wonder if the artist had some sick sense of humor–it’s kind of funny how the lone white guy is waving his hands as if to say “Hey! Look over here! I’m the veteran in this picture! Me!”
      The alternative right has a long road to hoe if they are going to portray white men in any light whatsoever. I have found, more than them even being scapegoated or blamed, they are simply ignored and removed in society, like they barely exist. But social media portrayals are so far gone. I don’t own a tv, so I’m sure such indoctrination is the norm, but someone posted this commercial here yesterday and I find it horrifying and sickening:
      I thought the punchline was gonna be where the new wife can’t quite compare to the prior generation mom, and instead of making soup from scratch, she heats up a can of Campbells, which takes 90 seconds. But they went full sociopath and had her throw a phone at the sick guy, and yell “Bye!” as she runs out the door, presumably to go shopping. I’m a single guy, but this has to be an insult to any married couple, and I can’t imagine how it was greenlighted.
      Their motto is “There when no one else is” implying that if you’re a guy in a committed relationship, you’re really alone. Hell, maybe it’s kinda red pill after all…

      1. These little portrayals are all just drops in the bucket, but the bucket is already overflowing.

      2. If that guy is white what does that make me? Ultra-white? He looks mestizo or something

      1. Exactly.
        Rewriting the past to fit the current narrative.
        Orwell is pretty much a prophet at this point.

    2. Not just WWII vets, Clark. In Iraq a good 80-85% of my unit was white. So were most of the casualties.

        1. So it can be argued that our foreign policy of endless war is an indirect war on white male culture.

        2. every commercial shows ‘Americans’ as being black, Chinese, Mexican…. basically anything other than white. Most whites aren’t aware of what is happening to them.
          The elite are biding their time until the boomer 50+ whites die off, then they can openly come after whites

    3. There’s this book I read called “The Trouble with Canada”, and there’s a chapter called “Who dies for Canada”. The author points out that whereas minorities make up about 25% of all people in Canada, yet they are about 5-7% among killed Canadian soldiers in the past decade or so.

  19. Excellent article, RAMZPAUL. I agree that we Whites do have the right to self-determination and a homeland of our own is the only way to accomplish this.
    I have made mistakes in the past by posting comments on websites that I now believe were run by informants or shills for the SPLC or ADL or some other anti-white group. I never used racial slurs or made any comments that could be deemed illegal, but it is important that we stay away from “nationalist” websites where Hitler is practically worshiped and where racial slurs are used. These websites only discredit the whole nationalist movement.
    We nationalists want to resolve the racial situation peacefully.

  20. Interesting, I had not heard of this term really. Also, I had not thought about how Israel is not expected to take in any refugees–Israel is at the heart of most of the conflicts in the Mideast, and moreover are a fairly wealthy country (despite getting huge annual support from the US taxpayer) so it’s quite odd that they are never expected to help out.
    The main problem I see with Identity politics is in applying it to America. My city, like many in the south, is majority black. As a white male I would always be in the minority, and my city would be seen through an identity politics lens as a “black city”.
    I do agree that Germany is for Germans, France is for French, etc. but that model does not work for America, because it has always been such a mix of people. I suspect the author lives somewhere that is more homogeneous. I could see identity politics working in a place like Montana where 97% of the people look like you, but that’s just not the case in most of America.

    1. America has not always been such. Not too long ago, places like Los Angeles were 90% white, as was the rest of the country overall. Now whites are a minority in L.A., and immigration from the third world has changed what America looks like overall drastically. The Immigration Act of 1965 is chiefly to blame. But you’re right about saying that applying the goal here is indeed a problem.

      1. Immigrants are a small fraction of the population here. It’s mostly a black/white thing. I think that was the same through most of US history. Although with white flight in the 70s, more cities are likely to be majority black today, but it was just moving around populations that were already in similar proportions as they are today.
        And even ignoring immigrants, there is and has been a huge difference in culture and lifestyle between say Miami, New York, Jackson Mississippi, Las Vegas, and Seattle Washington. The country simply lacks any sort of unity or identity. Basically, it is too large a country for nationalism to work here. It’s the equivalent to Europe being one nation.

        1. You’re completely wrong about racial proportions in our history. You’re obviously waaaaayyyy out of the loop on these topics and you’re nowhere near getting any of this.
          The fact is that it wasn’t very long ago when our country did indeed embrace the kind of white identity and nationalism that the alt-right is talking about; it was the very foundation of our nation, in fact, and was intact/taken for granted for generations, until several decades ago.

        2. Even when I disagree with you nujac, I’ve always admired your upholding of objective standards.

        3. I suspect (and it’s just a semi-educated guess) that a lot of blacks weren’t picked up by the 10 year census, so some of the 20th century figures might be low.

        4. You’re fixated on blacks; meanwhile the U.S. has been/is being overrun by non-whites from all over the globe, and whereas whites were the far-overwhelming majority not too long ago, and embraced white identity for the U.S. as a matter of official policy without compunction, now we’re only about 65% and rapidly dwindling, brainwashed against ourselves and officially marginalized as non-whites swarm in and breed like cockroaches, etc. You really just don’t get any of this.

        5. “brainwashed against ourselves and officially marginalized as non-whites
          swarm in and breed like cockroaches, etc. You really just don’t get any
          of this.”
          Yeah, Whites are the majority in the US. They complain about the possibility of being outbred but don’t do their own breeding since this would squash any chance of being overthrown as the majority. Maybe this fear wouldn’t exist if whites didn’t establish their own form of genocidal infanticide(Abortion). Since whites are killing their own progeny, the Cathedral needs to recruit foreign useful idiots to fill in the gaps.

        6. The issue is deeper than skin color. After all, there are white Latinos, descended from Spanish and Portuguese colonists. However, I wouldn’t want them in American unless a) they have required skills, and b) they are culturally compatible with the US. We don’t need people bringing over political corruption, criminality, lack of ambition, etc.

        7. The country simply lacks any sort of unity or identity. Basically, it is too large a country for nationalism to work here
          I would suggest that the American brand of nationalism is based on the Constitution and rule of law. We would allow in immigrants IF:
          1. It happens in small waves in 30 year on/off increments to allow for generational assimilation.
          2. Over 60% of accepted immigrants must have a marketable work related skill.
          3. Reduce/reform the welfare system as not to be the world’s charity office.
          If our Constitution is held in the highest regard it will be considered sedition for any immigrant to attempt to use our freedoms and tolerance to subvert this rule of law to form neighborhood tribes, ergo France and British “no go zones”.
          America is (should be) free markets, democracy, freedom of religion, Bill of Rights and the strict adherence to the Constitution. Any immigrant, organization or religion attempting to subvert that is directly against the American brand of nationalism ergo BLM, Islam, communism, and globalism.
          The issue of white people losing their population majority is a separate issue dealing in racial pride and less about American Nationalism. We must cure feminism’s infection of white American females and the career female can begin to be seen as a secondary/runner up prize to being a stay at home mom. We must bring back the allure of a stable nuclear family to maintain the majority and reclaim the pride of the white race that is under attack daily across the globe.

        8. Of maybe if whites did not have crippling taxes to support those who are breeding like rats?

        9. The reason I haven’t had kids yet is because (1) Can’t trust women in this society, and (2) unstable economic outlook.

        10. The most important fact: White births are now below 50% of all births in America. As soon as the existing population ages out of existence, America will no longer be a white majority nation. No amount of hand wringing or immigration law changes can alter this.

        11. American brand of nationalism is based on the Constitution and rule of law

          The problem with that is that it’s such a vague and weak source of national identity. All nations have a Constitution and a rule of law. That’s not unique enough to create a national identity.

        12. You’re mostly wrong. It’s true that abortion and failure of whites to breed is a lot of the problem, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that our own government policy has to be to allow us to be overrun by third-world darkies swarming in over the border illegally, and swarming in from across the oceans both legally and illegally overstaying visas, etc., all of them breeding like rats while our taxes pay for them to be on welfare, attend our schools and get special ESL programs and all kinds of subsidies, affirmative action, medical care, in-state tuition, etc.
          Prior to 1965 our immigration policy explicitly favored whites coming from Europe. After 1965, it was switched to favoring non-whites from the third world. The best and first thing we can do is switch it back. If we decide we need or want immigrants, then we should welcome those who share our ethnic heritage and values.

        13. It is a suggestion, we need to start somewhere or else we have nothing to latch onto and we become overrun without any identity as a base foundation. This plays directly into globalist agendas.
          Historically we cannot claim to be exclusively white as we imported Mexicans, Africans and Chinese to help us build our nation. Unless we suggest that it was white Europeans that did all the intellectual and dangerous work it took to create this nation: ocean faring technology, colony building, pioneer spirit. revolutionary war, expansion west. Can we then claim that American nationalism is based on white European ingenuity and western ideology?
          I am curious how this second notion would play out in discussion and debate.

        14. “By 1775, Africans made up 20% of the population in the American colonies, which made them the second largest ethnic group after the English”
          The 1800s Northern European and Ellis Island South European immigration wave actually increased the proportion of whites in the US population by a large amount thereby decreasing the population of blacks and Indians.
          A similar thing happened in South America during a policy during the 19th century called Blanqueamento when they tried to lower the proportion of blacks and Indians. That is why there are Germans in Brazil I think.

        15. “Persons of color” have a MUCH higher abortion rate than whites. Maybe accounts for the marked drop in the crime rate over the last 30 years (cf. Freakonomics)

        16. 1650?
          My point is, why are we stuck with picking a point in time to base the appropriate demographics from?

        17. Because at some point in American history, the demographic was 100% Native American and it would be useless to determine what percentage of the residents were black or white unless you’re talking about the Olmecs and Kennewick Man.

        18. Is that why they are considered a different race in South America, and their descendants who are the Mexicans and Hispanics are not considered white in the US?

        19. Aren’t we “all one race” according to your buttfvk leftie theories? Or do the benefits only accrue when you are non-white, and the whites get all of the cons?
          You are trying to pinpoint a time in the US to determine that whites should not have self-determination for their country.
          The Indians aren’t here any longer. It is a white majority country and has been for a long time. WE have the right to the self-determination for our country, not a bunch of faggots who want to get race-cucked. If you want the magic of diversity appendages in your @ss, go move to those places.

        20. Oh and to be more clear, that means that the Europeans were in the Americas first, before they were removed by what you now refer to as the Native Americans.
          That kills your liberal claim that Europeans do not belong here.

        21. That is not true. America has a huge form of nationalism, but when you import those who do not assimilate and by religion their values are and always will be different, THEN you cannot form nationalism……which is what I believe may be the point of bringing in such huge numbers of different people.
          Bottom line, the US is a white Christian style majority and they have every right to retain that identity.

        22. Europeans belong here, what I was arguing was that Africans do too. Look, I’m cognizant of the issues inherent in mass immigration.
          What I’m arguing for is that black lives should matter to the alt right. More like Steve Sailers citizenism.
          To me as a libtard, the question is not about opposing illegal immigration, I agree that illegal is illegal. The main question is about the rights of black Americans in the existing – not imported – racial hierarchy. To me this is like an achilles heel of the altright.

        23. Actually this is nonsense, African Americans don’t have a very high birthrate either, so unless there is an influx of non-whites from outside the country(which there has been), demographics stay the same. This idea that Whites need to compete with poor mentally sub normal third worlder birth rates is BS, if people keep flooding into your country, you lose that game regardless. Better to just kill the invaders if you think you need to “compete”…..or you could just have a sensible immigration policy in the first place

        24. African Americans(and by that I mean the descendants of slaves) actually don’t have a much higher birth rate than whites. Without immigration from the outside demographics would stay the same. White and Black Americans don’t have to compete with an unlimited number of invaders, that’s a losing battle given the world population. They’d literally be better off killing the Chinks, Somalis and Mexicans as they arrive. So instead of suggesting some ridiculous birthing situation that ruins society with too many people(of all kinds), why don’t you suggest that? Or better yet you could simply just have a sane immigration policy.

        25. If blacks cannot as a group abide by western white European rules and expectations, then I argue no, they do NOT belong here.
          When you have an “open sore” like the dual culture system we have in the US today the best thing to do is close it up and resolve it, not pretend it won’t get worse and even further infected.

        26. The point is that white birth rates in America are currently below 50%. Even if you completely stopped all immigration, the demographics indicate that the America of the future will have a white minority, due to new births alone (not immigration). It’s been this way for several years now and this trend will not reverse.

        27. Abortion is actually a largely (disproportionately) Jew-run industry and Jew-backed industry. It was meant to be an assault on *both* Whites and Blacks, and here we are (Whites and Blacks) once again bickering and refusing to name the Jew. Talking about the JQ is the most important thing both Whites and Blacks can be doing right now.
          In my opinion, I think this should be one of the focuses of the alt. right. I suspect that Blacks would be interested to hear of the Jewish role in the Slave trade as well (once again, highly disproportionate). Check out Dr. Tony Martin on YouTube if you’re curious about the Slave trade.
          Abortion Industry: https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=Jewish+abortion+industry

        28. I’m going to go straight for ad hominem to point out that you sound like a Cuck. Take your defeatist attitude elsewhere while the rest of us try to turn this thing around.
          You sound like a Jew pretending to be White.

        29. If it makes you feel better to think of me as a Jew, or anything else, to get the above point across, then please do so. However, I see it has not yet motivated you to think of a solution to the problem. Keep in mind that even if you found a solution and implemented it tomorrow, and had white births at 51% in 2016, it still wouldn’t stop whites from being a minority because that die was cast in 2011 when white births dropped below 50%. Some battles are worth fighting; others are futile.

        30. “League of Shadows” tried to engage you with some good ideas above and you responded by saying that “All nations have a Constitution and a rule of law”.
          I was hoping to see you engage him… But here are my thoughts:
          1.) Deport illegals; including, men, women and children
          2.) Build a wall/secure the southern border (and spare me the “oh but.. but.. but… that’s like tyranny, you’re cutting us off to the rest of the world and they will use it to seal us in!!!!” This is a cucked “libertarian” argument.
          3.) Stop all immigration for a set period of time and focus resources on assimilation programs for current *legal* immigrants.
          4.) Elect Trump so we can heal our relationship with Putin, who is currently seen as an ally to many White Nationalists in eastern Europe. Electing Trump will also help stem the flow of “refugees” because the US is the one funding ISIS and al-Nusra in Syria in the first place, and Trump doesn’t like the idea of removing Assad
          5.) Continue building the alt. right, the manosphere, and other pro-masculine virtues within our society. The great awakening is happening now; I’ve read thousand of comments online and met people on the streets who are pissed and ready to fix this thing!
          6.) Address the Jewish Question. Addressing this question will help kill the main stream media, feminism, abortion industry, pornography industry, big bank usury, multiculturalist thought (highly Jewish-backed school of thought), and other areas of social and economic degeneracy. If you do steps #1-#5, people en masse will finally be ready to do #6.

        31. Those might have been things that could have worked in the past, and indeed some of them are not bad ideas, but still won’t have an effect on the demographic problem of minority white births. Read the stories linked above. Setting aside immigrants or illegals, the demographics of live births of children in the US are now majority non-white. The articles talk about the various reasons for this. This is a separate issue from immigration–ie immigration may reduce the number of whites even further from say 48% to 45%, but the big story is that without immigration at all, domestic births of new babies are majority nonwhite.

        32. “They complain about the possibility of being outbred but don’t do their own breeding”
          You need to learn about r-K reproductive strategy. White people wouldn’t be White people if they engaged in a breeding race. That is not how we function. Most non-whites are more r-strategists, that is quantity over quality. They don’t care if they’re on welfare or they have a job, as long as they have food and shelter they will breed. Whites don’t function like that. We want to make sure we’re prepared to properly raise offspring before we have it. Only the very bottom of the barrle Whites will choose to have children (or have them accidentally) while unemployed.
          And abortion is a good thing. It mostly prevents unwanted non-White pregnancies. You’ve been misinformed on an epic scale.

    2. A lot of folks on the alt right make that point. It was doomed to fail from the start.

  21. Regarding the 1488 crowd….by their fruits you’ll know them. If they spend the majority of their time bashing straight white american males, that tells you who their enemy is.
    The strengths of the alt right in my view are 1) intellectual integrity; 2) attachment to reality; and 3) tribal loyalty. Stay true to these things and you’ll weed out the trouble making interlopers.

    1. I have a moderate view of the Whiteness question.
      I say people like Chris Pine (1/4 jewish), Kate Hudson (1/4 jewish), Kelly Slater (1/8 Lebanese), Jessica Biel (1/8 jewish), Vince Vaughn (1/4 Lebanese), White people with American Indian ancestry, and others like that should be allowed entry to the White ethnostate if they want to join the cause. I think the people who want 100% pure European White (even the NSDAP was practical, with a long-term vision) will not get that far. Whiteness in the USA has always had a bit of gray area. It can’t be all or nothing. Where are these people going to go? An NSDAP-style racial hygiene policy would sort everything out quickly.
      I do see the problem with half-jews, in that they’ll typically take the side of jews, but I even think some of them are White, like Gwyneth Paltrow and Eva Green.
      My point is mainly that it doesn’t have to be all or nothing. there should be some wiggle room. Obviously we can’t accept Asians, blacks, mestizos, etc, but there is gray area for the above type of people.

      1. I’m thinking attractive woman, yes…male, no.
        But that’s just me, I’m pragmatic and willing to negotiate.

        1. Yeah, I get that, and that’s basically what I’m saying. NSDAP had the policy of 1/4 jews were required to marry full-blooded Germans to dilute jewish blood, so I’m thinking along those lines.
          Also, I’m mainly thinking of the groups who’ve been here for a long time under the White rubric: jews, Lebanese, etc. American Indian is a different story, but I think it gets diluted out quickly (Natasha Henstridge is 1/4 American Indian, for example). I’m just saying those who did their best to assimilate back in the golden years (1920s to 1960s, before the borders were opened) shouldn’t be punished.
          Jews who kept themselves separate and worked night and day to destroy our society are a different matter, and they have Israel. Mestizos, blacks, mulattoes, and Asians are another matter entirely.

  22. To be honest white supremacist types like Richard Spencer and David Duke are still kind of the old-fashioned right, so the Buzzfeed article doesn’t fully appreciate what the alt-right is: Young people who broadly reject the fanatical devotion to liberal humanist values, in which white nationalism is only one facet.
    In some countries, the direct pursuit of nationalism, self-interest and social hierarchy is the mainstream right, so much so that it isn’t even considered ideological. It’s the traditionalists, the religious, and the special interest groups that are considered alternative, corollary movements that bolster nationalism from the sides.
    Under this model, social equality has much less room to maneuver and grow. This is the model that should be adopted by the West.

    1. The alt right is people who used to be libertarians before the 2008 crash impoverished them into broke ass bitches, who don’t care to be lumped in with rednecks.

      1. Looks like you get the first “I hate whites” post of the day. Enjoy your heyday while you can, the backlash will cripple your kind.

        1. How do you account for the large amount of ex-libertarians in the altright movement, then?
          Btw, I’m not putting down white nationalism. I’m down on ex-libertarians fleeing libertarianism. Sit your black ass down because guess who was advocating open borders kek

        2. Evolution. Libertarians believe in freedom first and foremost…..the evolution of that thought process leads to the discovery that while freedom is the goal, preservation of the group is a divine right.
          When these two value systems collide, preservation wins out.

    2. “Young people who broadly reject the fanatical devotion to liberal humanist values, of which white nationalism is only one facet.”
      You make no sense. Go back to the drawing board.
      WN is not a “liberal humanist value.”
      And Asians don’t really have a place in the Alt Right. You have your own countries, and nobody’s flooding into them.

      1. Yeah I think it’s pretty ironic that a lot of Alt Right articles are being run on Roosh’s site considering he’s an Iranian.

        1. Yeah, if a White ethnostate were created, I’d be okay with small amounts of minorities like Roosh. It should be at least 90% White, however. And this is where the NSDAP followers bother me. They want a 100% pure European White ethnostate in America, but they don’t understand that the NSDAP considered Iranians Aryans.

        2. The US Census has a broad construct of who is white. Not just Europeans, but Arabs (at least those from the Asian Middle-East), Persians and Central Asians also qualify. Just saying.

        3. I know, but I don’t think anyone considers full-blown Arabs, Persians, or Central Asians White. Their numbers are pretty small here too.

        4. I do. Danny Thomas–white. Korean War fighter ace James Jabara–white. William Saroyan (Armenian)–white. Now if these “Arabs” are from North Africa, as is often the case, then it’s a different story.

        5. Just looked these up. Agree with all except James Jabara.
          Armenian is kind of a gray area between the Middle East and Europe. I’m pretty sure Cher is half-Armenian. I would say some are White, and some aren’t.

        6. Iranians and many Indians were considered Aryan. Slavs, White French, and Russians were not considered Aryan. Japanese were honorary Aryans.
          European does not necessarily mean Aryan from the National Socialist point of view.

      2. White nationalism is a facet of the rejection, not a facet of liberal humanism. I will change the sentence to in which
        Regardless, nationalism is a human pursuit and I will encourage it wherever I please

        1. Maybe I misread you, then. I was simply pointing it out.
          If you’re encouraging nationalism, then I’m on your side.

        2. Terry, you need to UP and REVAMP your understanding of the English language. Yes, you do.
          Run-on sentences (such as “Japan could easily reconcile with China if it took the right steps, our forms of government has nothing to do with it”) are indicative of your limited education. You just can’t seem to stop running sentences together so that they look like twisted noodles in a bowl. That’s another horrible example of your inability to express yourself properly in English.
          In addition that sentence also demonstrates your lack of understanding of syntactic coherence, because “our forms of government has nothing to do with it” is incorrect. It’s not “has” which would correspond with a singular subject. The correct verb form is “have” because the subject of that second-half of your run-on sentence is actually the word “forms” and not the object of the preposition within the subject.
          You obviously thought that “government” was the subject. Only children and the mentally defective in America misunderstand that relationship. As you’ve been instructed by your teachers, the verb form has to correspond with the subject. Why haven’t you learned? Were you too drunk at the time? Were you partying when you should have been learning?
          All of this indicates to me that you were probably educated in an American school but in the lower registers. These are maintained for foreigners who have no hope of learning correct English. Such foreigners often appear on these posts and flaunt their low mentalities with substandard English. You’re beneath contempt for wasting your opportunity to get a good education.
          So, get up off your dead ass and get me a bowl of noodles, boy. Hop to, HopSing!

    3. Spencer and Duke are not supremacists, they are white separatists, just like most of the Alt. Right crowd are. They dont want to rule over other races, they want full, peaceful separation.

  23. The handoff in substantive generational power between the Baby Boomers and Generation X, starting here pretty soon and lasting for about 20 years, will change a whole lot about a whole lot; I think it will be the most drastic and consequential generational power handoff in either side of 100 years of it happening. The time for the Alt-Right to strike will be then.

  24. “Syrians that flood into Germany may become citizens but they will never be Germans”
    This is why it’s hilarious when Roosh calls himself “american”.

        1. First, it’s then, not than. Second, I never said that I was cheering to Trump. As for the wall: I personally think this would be a mistake, but I also don’t believe that Trump was actually serious when he said that.

        2. Right.We are on different sides of the opinion specter thEn. I don’t want “melting pots”.

    1. Oy vey it’s a wonderful melting pot remember you goyim countries are all melting pots

  25. For myself, I’m probably the most sensible, sane, and as conservative as anyone can get; I am a Christian (specifically Catholic) Monarchist. I believe in the theory that a Christian Monarchy is the best form of government there is and ever was, able to secure the rights and freedom of the people. This takes a great deal of explanation, but I’ll throw a few tidbits out there.
    No monarch, regardless of their creed or nationality, has ever held as much power as the President of the United States since FDR, and especially Obama. This is difficult for Americans to wrap their heads around, but understand there is a difference between Authority and Power. Authority means someone has the Right to say what ought to be done. Power is the ability to get it done. A King mainly has supreme authority in a nation, but that didn’t mean he had the power to do anything. This is why a King has to have a creed, and believe in it. His Authority was given to him by God, and therefore it was a religious duty for the faithful to obey his sovereign unless the sovereign ordered anything that was against God’s Law (Henry VIII and Elizabeth I, as an example). No president, really, or governor, really, has anything like this. This is because we’ve diffused Authority to the people, who have no responsibility to anyone for what happens in their name.
    This has led to very irresponsible government today. When our politicians do something the people don’t like, they acquit themselves in the law. When they do something illegal, they acquit themselves to the popular will.
    Which leads me to an anecdote about Theodore Roosevelt, who, after he left the White House, he visited Vienna, and met Franz Josef, Emperor of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. He asked the Emperor what he thought his role as a monarch was, and he said, “To protect the people from their politicians.”
    There are only two forms of government in human affairs, monarchy and oligharchy. Republics/democracies do not exist. Oligharchy means rule by the many, not the most, and those who are oligharchs are what we call Special Interest Groups today (back in the day, we called them Nobles). And they can be in the private and public sector. If you give control of a nation to a bunch of Oligharchs, they’ll turn it into a feeding trough. Because they have no intrinsic loyalty or responsibility to the nation on the whole. It’s not their fault. It’s just the nature of the beast. Why should the CEO of GE or the head of Planned Parenthood care about the nation; it’s not their responsibility. Even for those whose responsibility it is, such as the President, Congress, members of the Defense Department (to include Generals and Admirals), even they don’t hold themselves too accountable to anyone for the nation on the whole, because that’s not really their jobs. Their jobs is to amass money and power for their particular interest. Without a farmer to check the pigs, they will run roughshod.
    Just food for thought.

    1. So the best leaders are these who were lucky enough to squirt out of the right pair of balls?
      I believe political representation should be randomly selected from a qualified pool of candidates like jury duty.

      1. Randomly selected, eh? That might work, except you’re putting too much onus on the public to be both as competent as can be, and as moral as can be. And who gets to determine who is competent enough to be on the list to be randomly selected from? Politics flows out from the Culture, and that flows out from Religion. If the people are as degraded as the politics, which it is now, it doesn’t really matter if they’re randomly selected or not.
        People have the odd idea that you make the institutions and the culture follows. That’s not what happens. Institutions, such as government, businesses, even organized crime, are products of a culture. You may say, and I would agree with you, that our leaders are disgusting. The things they want are loathsome. But it’s what we want. They reflect us.
        In every society, you have the rulers and the ruled. It’s a minority that rule, and a majority that are ruled. It’s just the way it is. What matters, in the end, is the nature of those rulers. For myself, I would rather be ruled by people who thought they were going to fry in Hell forever if they ruled me poorly, than by those who merely saw me as an economic resource to be siphoned off of.
        The primary purpose of being a monarchist is to see things clearly, as they are, to cut through the Gordian Knot of Left/Right politics and the lofty meaningless rhetoric.
        And this isn’t to say that a monarchy would solve all our problems. There are a lot of monarchies today, who are as badly off as the “republics,” for different reasons. But, at least, most of the subjects there aren’t deluded as much as people are in oligharchies, be they capitalist or communist in nature.

      2. Who your parents are has NOTHING to do with LUCK. Get that leftist lie out of your head. Different parents couldn’t have had YOU, you were only possible with your precise set of two parents and noone else. We are not all the same, we are not interchangeable and randomly selecting people for important jobs is fucking retarded.

    2. RadTrads really have this bee in a bonnet when it comes to Monarchy. You really believe that rule by lucky sperm club is best because said product of lucky sperm has divine right to rule? If the POTUS is too powerful–and believe the office is indeed too powerful for modern times–the proper response is a second Constitutional Convention to trim that power back and distribute it to elected members of the lower house, and to the people via referenda, not a Monarch. That’s going from the frying pan to the fire.

      1. Yes, I do. Because it’s a thousand times better than what we have now. This is because you have the illusion of control, that because you can vote, you count for something in the eyes of your masters.
        Your own mistrust of anything hereditary makes monarchy superior. If the President were made into a Hereditary Monarchy, with precisely the same powers outlined in the Constitution, I guarantee you that he wouldn’t be allowed to exercise more than what is allowed.
        As I said, it would take a lot to explain why monarchy is superior to oligharchy. People were a heck of a lot more free under Christian monarchs than they’ve ever been under presidents and prime ministers. It comes down to dynamics, and understandings of what real freedom and real rights are, which most people in the world today, regardless of their political interests, do not know, and this is deliberate.

    3. Well said. The media has us terrified of any religious influence in our leadership. Doesn’t that make us as bad as ISIS? But really, the closer we are to a theocracy, a true theocracy, the better. That means leaders who are sincerely in touch with God and personally led by constructive morals. This is the only way to avoid politicians who are driven by money.

    4. You sound like a reader of Charles Maurras.
      Excellent comment, really. Wish I could upvote it more than once.
      Greetings from France.

      1. Oui. I have read Charles Maurras. I would also recommend Sir Charles Coulombe.
        Arguably, two of my most favorite kings are French. St. Louis IX is a pinnacle and model of both manhood and kingship. The man was phenomenal. I also love King Louis XIV, the Sun King. Over the course of studying him and his rule, I am of the impression that his often acclaimed narcissistic behavior was something of an act, in an effort to control his nobility. The man had them wrapped around his little finger, often quite literally. He had them fighting each other over who was going to put on his robe in the morning.

    5. The writing was on the wall for Christianity when Europe’s monarchs were killed. Christianity only survives in Aristocratic cultures. Hence, the first step towards destroying Christendom was destroying the monarchies and aristocracies. Once the monarchies and aristocracies were destroyed, ideologues ruled in the place of Europe’s natural racial/ethnic leaders. The King is the head of each racial group; The Germanic peoples had roughly 40 kings and princes—all destroyed by WWI and President Woodrow Wilson. Destroying the natural racial leaders, led the way for Marxist/Socialist/Jews to rule over Gentiles.

      1. That’s very true. But I wouldn’t say that killing the monarchs was a first step, but rather a third or fourth step. Because, if you think about it, there’s no such thing as a “grassroots” or spontaneous revolution. Any that can be called a serious revolution, particularly the successful ones, are always well-financed and well-supported, often long before hostilities of any kind break out. The leaders of such revolts would like their people to think that it’s all them, it’s all natural, spontaneous and ephemeral, but they never are.
        For instance, Martin Luther and the Protestant Revolt. Martin Luther wasn’t the first clergyman ever to reject the Papacy. What made Luther different is often accredited to the Printing Press, but that’s only a small part of it, and rather insignificant upon further analysis. Nobles and even monarchs have always been envious of Church possessions and power. Feudalism was on its last legs in Europe, and it was one of the primary ways a noble could keep an income flowing into his coffers. The German nobles saw a way to separate the Church from its possessions through sowing disaffection among the faithful, through Martin Luther’s writing. Without that kind of support, Luther likely would’ve been either consigned to a monastery for his myriad mental issues (the man was throwing his own feces at what he perceived to be the Devil while he was writing his own version of the Holy Bible) or burned as a heretic (which he was – if he had consigned himself only to correcting certain abuses, such as priests improperly selling of Indulgences, he’d be called St. Martin Luther today).
        Our own American Revolution was led by men who already ruled the colonies they lived in, who did not want to be ruled by the British Oligharchy out of London. The taxes were particularly low, and in fact, America was never so lightly taxed as we were when we were under the king. And all the supposed grievances in the Declaration could easily be countered, and were ripped apart in the British press. The point being that what we believe was a just and noble cause for our own separation from the mother country was not as just and noble as we think, and in the end we suffer for want of a king today to rein in the oligharchs who rule over us.

  26. this is a dumb article. if anything, we are the anti-hippies. the hippie movement has always, and will always be associated with the left. as much as i enjoy smoking dope, i don’t think we should be comparing ourselves to the dirty degenerate hippies. fuck that.

    1. The similarity is that we are likewise countercultural. I think few people understand what this truly means. Counterculture is a lot more than distrust for the media and teachers at universities. It is a completely separate culture with all the elements that generate culture, and it actively subverts the establishment.

      1. except that our “counter culture” was the dominant culture in Western civilization since the beginning of Western civilization. the hippies, by contrast, were entirely opposed to traditional civilization and values.

      2. “and it actively subverts the establishment” That’s what the left and the hippy movement was all about. I think subvert is the wrong idea, especially if you’re talking about a conservative movement.

  27. The thing that bugs me about alt-righters is the antisemtism. We aren’t neo-Nazis.

    1. The problem is that so much that is wrong economically (predatory behavior by Wall Street, “too big to fail”, the Federal Reserve) and socially (SJW-ism, pornography) is in large part a product of Jews.

        1. “self-hating Jews”
          I hear this all the time. They don’t hate themselves, they hate *everybody else*, as evidenced by the fact that this warlike Mongoloid tribe has been physically removed from various nations over 100 times throughout recorded history.

    2. Not wanting Jews to destroy your culture while recognizing that they are preserving the Israeli culture does NOT make you an anti-Semite. It makes you a realist who recognizes the root cause of the problem.
      Non-Jew whites have the right to self-preservation and autonomy, just as Israel does for it’s own people.

  28. The problem with this notion in the States is that everyone is descended from immigrants at some point down the line. The minute you talk about immigration control in the States you’re played like a dandy on the old ancestral fiddle:-
    “Give me your tired, your poor,
    Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
    The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
    Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
    I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”
    America was founded on these noble and fine ideas where people left the lands of Europe behind where they were often oppressed for various reasons. This capacity to take in the world’s disposed is, unlike perhaps any other Nation on the planet, an integral part the of America’s identity, ideals and culture. This why emigration control in the States, unlike a homogeneous nation like Poland or Hungary is so very politically and culturally fraught with the majority of Americans idea of what their Nation means in the world.
    I think the ALT right will miss the entire point if you dismiss the majority of these pretty traditional Americans who hold these values highly as left wing Marxists, which they’re anything but. It’s the sense whereby you’ll make the majority of Americans somehow feel “un-american” if their founding values and principles are abandoned for a Fortress State.

        1. Engraved by an obscure poet who you can’t name without looking up, on a gift dated to 1890.
          It does not mean that the “rights” of foreign invaders supercede the right of American citizens to retain their national identity.

    1. “”Give me your tired, your poor,”
      And we’ll let them starve to death in the street because that shitty poem was written long before the creation of the Welfare State. If that’s the standard that you want, I want to see shitty immigrant children starving in the street. No WIC, SNAP, EBT, Section-8 or welfare by any name.
      14 year old Marrrrria will be blocked from birthing her anchor in a public hospital unless she has insurance or cash in hand.
      No ELS classes for shitskins. ‘No speaky the Engrish’? No public school for you.
      I also want legalized discrimination in private businesses “Help Wanted [Whomever] need not apply”. None of this “Civil Rights” nonsense.

      1. Because your ancestors where living in hovels in Germany and being run out of England for their puritan views. Perhaps, the English should have kept it for their aristocrats?

        1. My grandfather’s life was so poor in the Irish ghettos of NYC that he stole his older brother’s birth certificate and joined the army at 15 years old.
          Today’s shit colored immigrant demands that the government provide them with halal food. Cuz that’s a right.
          How many emaciated children are you willing to step over?

        2. That’s a fair point. But, what I’m saying are not my sentiments, I’m just stating the fact that immigration as in your own family’s case brings up these types of issues related to american self identity in so many peoples’ minds.
          The Irish are an excellent example of an ethnicity who worked at anything when they went to the States, and, generations after generations went up the social ladder there, because of hard grafting and education. I have to admit that there is a racial element to many immigrants who arrive in 1st world countries nowadays who arrive with a sense of “natural entitlement” which earlier generations of white immigrants never had or indeed expected.

    2. Key phrases in your statement.
      1. “Left the lands of EUROPE”. In other words, from one racial and religious identity.
      2. For your “give me your tired, your poor, blah blah blah”. The words of an obscure poet (Who I bet you don’t know the name of without looking it up) which are inscribed on a gift from the French in 1890 DO NOT usurp the right of the US citizens to keep their identity.

      1. Well, then give me a definition of american identity that defines its ideals in the modern sense?

        1. The concept and formation of America was done by mainly white western Christians of European heritage.
          That was the intent all along. A free nation of capitalism without “kings” for the European Christian cultures to live.

    3. Italians=White Christians
      Irish=White Christians
      Germans, Poles, Russians, all white Christians. A lot easier to have “multiculturalism” when you’re integrating people of the same race and religion.

      1. “A lot easier to have “multiculturalism” when you’re integrating people of the same race and religion” True, but then it’s not multiculturalism, it more akin to, I don’t know, call it monoculturalism. You’ll always going to have to have some “diversity” in even the most homogeneous cultures, I can’t say that for example the “peas in the pod” monoculturalism pod” of Asiatic countries inspires much excitement in me. It’s all seems boring, conformist and ultimately sterile. Besides, even the guy who owns this site looks like a hippy Zarathustraian hipster because of his Persian/Armenia extraction and heritage.
        People can get hung up on the simplistic notion of race, it’s more about common values, like as you say religion, attitude, the ability to take risks, curiosity, respect for liberty (not equality) that really is the glue that binds otherwise disparate groups together in what could easily be called multiculturalism or monoculturalism.

        1. You’re pushing a SJW narrative and, perhaps, you’ve got a good heart and just don’t realize it. Saying that different races are all capable of sharing the same sets of values en masse is like saying that men = women and 2 + 2 = 5.
          Different races of people are never going to share “common values” en masse. Jews will never assimilate and get along in White nations. Arab Moslems will never assimilate and get along in White nations. African Americans will never do well as a whole in White nations. Mexican Americans will never do well as a whole in White nations. We can come up with excuse after excuse as to why… such as “economics”, but we Whites can no longer to afford to be this naive.
          I don’t propose kicking out legal non-White citizens at this point. But I do propose deporting all illegals and completely shutting down non-White immigration into the US until we can assimilate those that are already here. When Whites become a minority of the voting block, we’ll be well on our way to becoming (insert 3rd world nation here).

        2. once whites are the minority it’s over. Trump is just a stop-gap measure delaying the inevitable. right now there are still a white majority, but many are the boomers aged 55+ who will vote him in. But once they’re gone it’ll be Mexicans, fag millennials, muslims, and a sparse population of white men who want freedom.

    4. You are confusing “immigrants” with “colonists”, which is the stock that Americans are descended from. We are a British colonial nation. Non-Whites have no place here.

      1. Germans, Irish, Poles, Jews, Russians, Scandinavians are all technically white non English colonists who make up the majority of whites in America. Besides, you can’t say all non-whites have no place in it, when the native Americans were there long before the Whigs turned up. Surely, they’ve a right to be Americans?

        1. Native American = Anglo-Saxon Protestant. However, the country was set up to allow in “White persons of good character”, so all those ethnicities you listed (besides Jews) are not a problem at all so long as they assimilate.
          The country was founded by Europeans for Europeans. To deny that is to deny history and its implications. Non-Whites have never been considered part of the historic American nation.

        2. “so all those ethnicities you listed (besides Jews) are not a problem at all so long as they assimilate” But, that’s precisely the issue- it boils down to what you mean by assimilate. By your definition of Anglo-Saxon-Protestant as the superior set of values, Irish, German and Polish white Catholics were seen as inferior white Americans, the same with Italian and as a result these communities quite rightfully didn’t acquiesce to these Anglo-Saxon “superior” values and continue even to this day to maintain their own distinctive heritage within a America.
          This is the problem with demanding assimilation even among a sizable portion of white people in the States, who, want to keep their own Irish, Scottish or Polish values/heritage separate from any Anglo/British Protestant contamination.
          “Non-Whites have never been considered part of the historic American nation” That’s foolish, even in ancient European countries, the pre-Celtic indigenous inhabitants who existed before the “foreign invaders” in places like Brittany and Cornwall are considered integral parts of the cultures of these regions.

        3. The thing about all these immigrant populations is that they are all European Christians. As I have said, the Anglo-Saxon Protestant comprises the founding stock, but similar people groups. For example, most Irish, German, and Polish immigrants have intermarried and assimilated in such a way that they are indistinguishable from old stock Americans. You say they haven’t “properly” assimilated, but I disagree.
          I’m not quite sure what point you are trying to make about the pre-Celtic inhabitants of Europe. That has no bearing upon the United States. I will refer you to the Naturalization Act of 1790 which defines an American as a “free White person of good character”.

        4. By not properly assimilating, I mean that they often still maintain they’re own distinct communities even in large cities like New York. I lived in Brooklyn for a while years ago, and you could see how particular areas were Polish or Italian and how they predominantly married within their own tribes and kept their own costumes, like going to Mass, and speaking their own languages in private.
          Every country to a degree with always be “multicultural” even where the population is homogeneous due to the simple fact that customs can differ vastly even within the same country in a different area (dialects are a good example). The question is how far you can ever expect people to assimilate in the first place? It’s desirable to do so naturally up to a certain point, but, when you say or the ideal State says all people “must believe this and this only” well then you’re in the tyranny business which is no different from the Communism of Stalin.

    5. That “huddled masses” poem was invented in 1883, thus hardly a part of what founded America.

  29. Worrying that Germany or Great Britain may not have a white majority by 2050 is racist.
    Worrying that Germany or Great Britain may have *the attitudes and culture typically associated with whites* replaced with something else is *not* racist.

    1. Who cares if it is “Racist”? Why shouldn’t Germany be German; Britain British etc?
      Why does the white world feel it needs to accommodate every 3rd world nigger who’d otherwise be shitting in his own drinking water?

      1. +2 for missing the point. A fully assimilated Briton who is a CPA and sings “Rule Britannia” on the last night of the Proms but happens to have black skin is a far cry from a raghead from Syria who doesn’t even know who commanded the British Army at Waterloo.

        1. It doesn’t matter how well somebody assimilates. They still have no right to be in a White country. Race and ethnicity is a whole hell of alot more than just skin color my friend.

        2. What you attribute to race and ethnicity is actually culture and values, which are unaffected by skin color.
          The Duke of Wellington, who was born in Ireland, famously said “just because a man is born in a stable does not make him a horse.”

        3. Culture and values are a derivative of race/ethnicity which is far more than just skin color. There is a reason why West Africa never developed past the Stone Age. That Duke of Wellington quote actually proves my point perfectly. An African born in England will never be an “Englishmen”, but a 70 IQ African. Similarly, I (a European) can never be “Chinese” simply by moving to China. Your genetics determine your nationhood.

        4. You misinterpret the Iron Duke. His implication was that merely because one is born in anew undesirable country does not make one a member of that undesirable country.
          You can become Chinese by moving to China and somehow gaining Chinese citizenship.
          An black person can move to London and gain British Citizenship. And thus become a Briton.
          There is zero scientific basis for the existence of race. In fact, science has shown the opposite: race does not exist.
          I would rather see London flooded with a million black-skinned Tories than a million white-skinned Communists. By your logic, it is better to have white communists over black Tories in Englamd, because race trumps culture and values.

        5. Lol you must be trolling. One’s citizenship does not determine their nationality. An African in Britain is still an African regardless of his geographic location. Race does exist and has a scientific basis. You don’t even need science to know this though. Things like IQ, time preference, hormonal levels, temperment, and various physical attributes are all a result of an individual’s race. Saying that “race doesn’t exist” is to deny science. We can tell a person’s race simply by examining their blood.
          The ideological preferences of immigrants into a country is irrelevant. The fact is, Europe belongs to Europeans and Europeans only. Ideally, there would be no immigration in the first place. I don’t think that 1 million sub-Saharans pouring into Britain a year is something you would desire. Not only would they certainly not be tories, but they would quickly turn Britain into Africa with all its trappings. The crime and degeneracy would resemble that of the 3rd world.

        6. Are you retarded?
          Yes, gaining citizenship does determine what country you are a citizen of. A black person who applies for, and is granted, American citizenship, becomes an American.
          This is not a difficult concept.

        7. No, but you apparently are my good sir. Do you not understand the concept of citizenship as opposed to ethnicity? Becoming a citizen of a country does not mean that you are a part of that nation (hint: look up the root word of nation). A black person can never be an American, Brit, or any other European. This is common sense.

        8. Perhaps, but that means a retarded person understands something you don’t: that skin color has zero affect on nationality. Everything you attribute to race and nationality is actually culture and values, which can be adopted by anyone, regardless of skin color.
          Nationality is an identity, and has changed with the overthrow of kings. What stayed was not an arbitrary definition of what “nation” one belonged to, but rather an amalgamation of cultural ideas and values.
          It is common sense that the amount of melanin in one’s skin cannot prevent an individual from adopting the cultures and values most commonly associated with a group that has a differing amount of melanin in their skin.

        9. Have I not already explained to you that race is more than skin pigmentation? Are you just going to completely deny science now? Do you also believe in a flat earth? I have linked you studies and graphics showing that there is indeed a scientific basis for race, yet you will not acknowledge them.
          Since you believe that “culture and values” are all that matter, my question to you is this: Where do culture and values originally come from? What are they a product of? For example, where did English or French culture come from?

        10. No one is arguing that race is no more than skin pigmentation. I have shown, by posting scientific studies, that race does not exist. Why do you continue to deny what has been shown in study after study? By genetic scientists across the world.
          Race does not exist in science. Either you listen to the consensus in the scientific community that race does not exist, or you continue to be ignorant.
          Why do you choose ignorance over wisdom?

        11. It is you that is choosing to deny science here. Whatever may be the “consensus” will undoubtedly be a result of preconceived notions about race as well as pressure from the scientific community not to rock the bost for fear of being called “racist”. It is not wisdom to ignore the clearly obvious. Race is not a “social construct”. Why didn’t you answer my question about culture? Where does culture originally come from?

        12. “I would rather see London flooded with a million black-skinned Tories than a million white-skinned Communists. By your logic, it is better to have white communists over black Tories in Englamd, because race trumps culture and values” This is exactly the same point I made to him in another comment, yet he keeps saying “Race and ethnicity is a whole hell of alot more than just skin color my friend.”
          If it’s more than skin color why does he insist then on a pure white US? He’s views, like many far right people, are completely inconsistent on racial issues.

        13. “It’s not race, it’s culture”
          Culture is a consequence of race. People of different races have different intuitions and different skill sets. When a certain race dominates a society their intuitions and skills shape its “culture”. Where the hell do you idealist types think culture comes from? It comes from race.

        14. There are not millions of black Tories, Tories don’t pander to blacks as much as Labour so blacks will always vote labour. Also LOL at your delusion that the Tories are significantly better than Labour. Same poison, different label.

  30. So I guess America for NATIVE Americans? What about those mixed race people do they become citizens of multiple nations? I mean I know Japanese/German/American where do they go?
    No race is given a land as their own, if that’s the case whoever comes in and conquers makes it there’s.

    1. A “Native American” is an Anglo-Saxon Protestant. You are referring to the red Indian savages who historically were never considered “American”.

  31. The idea that America could be a white homeland is not a good one. My people have been on this continent for thousands of years, way before white people. America was founded after an ideology of freedom and self determination. Just like I thought ROK was based on Men’s Rights, not just white rights. If you don’t want the red man, find a new country.

    1. Too bad your cannibal ancestors never invented the wheel, a written language or metal tools.
      And don’t bother lying about no horses or domesticatable animals. There where 2 species of wild horses that your ancestors hunted to extension because you didn’t have the brains to domesticate them.

      1. See this is why men’s rights is doomed to fail. Because in the end you don’t want us non-whites. And you didn’t invent the wheel personally, so stop taking in another’s accomplishments, I don’t take pride in corn, chocolate cake, or the constitution, Oh you didn’t know our founding father got that from Indians? That because your history books are shit. Don’t bother responding , its all racist bullshit anyways.

        1. The founding father’s get the idea for the Constitution from troglodytes who never invented a written language?
          Wrong. Our Constitution is based off of English common law, the Manga Carta and roots in ancient Greece.
          Better get back to drinking yourself to death.

        2. So an idiot with an Irish pseudonym makes a crack about drinking yourself to death? Is that where you are from? And you are taking pride for something you had nothing to do with. Troglodytes indeed, I guess you can call me Morlock, Eloi bastard.

        3. Well you are certainly right about that. We don’t want you non-Whites. Our countries are for Europeans.

      1. And you are wrong, your own article says a third of the genome of current Native Americans seems to be European. Meaning my people were still here first, where ever they came from originally and whatever the mix is. And it doesn’t change my beef. If you want America to be a white homeland,where do people like me go, when America was my homeland before Amerigo Verspucci was even born?

        1. You can go back to Siberia or stay on your reservations. A “Native American” is an Anglo-Saxon Protestant.

        2. 1/3 of the genome being European has NOTHING to do with who was there first. It only shows which side had the numbers.
          If you go back and reread the article, you will show that the very earliest people in North America were of European DNA. Later, they were overtaken by the invaders…..”your people”. Europeans just came back to take what you stole from them.

        3. I reread the article, 1/3 of the genome of “modern native Americans”, meaning they were my ancestors.Meaning you still have no basis in fact. It’s nice to know that the alternative right really is about racism, this articles attempts to say otherwise, you try to be all scientific about it but fail. It just proves my point. If it was about Nationalism,people here could speak to me like a human being, instead I’ve been called a troglodyte, a cannibal, and told I ” stole” from my own ancestors. Whatever, I’m done responding to ignorant fools.

        4. They were also my ancestors, and when did your ancestors show up there?
          The data shows that my European ancestors (I am also 25% “Native American”) were there at least 17,000 years ago. What does it say about your ancestors?
          But no, wait, in your cowardly fashion, just call names and run away.

    2. oy vey my red brother, you asian, i mean natives are so wonderful, it is so horrible the white man brought horrible things like hospitals and technology to your wise and great people.

    3. You are an Indian, not an American. The United States was founded for “White persons of good character”. It doesn’t matter who was on the North American continent first. The entirety of the US belongs to the Anglo-Saxon by right of conquest.

      1. lol. well if you respect “right of conquest” so much then what are you complaining about? just submit to whoever “conquers” you.

    4. As a white Canadian frequenter of this site, I agree. On this site, racial profiling is simply a waste of energy, as the minor tribal differences between the races are not worth arguing over.
      Now, this doesn’t mean I buy into white guilt, for anyone who accuses me of doing so.

  32. “Enjoy the creative freedom and fun of being a counter-culture”
    Rebelling against the liberal/leftist establishment – the second decade of the 21st century.

  33. As somewhat of a Tradcon, I don’t agree with everything in this article, but it’s not too inaccurate in how it describes Tradcons like myself. (The “Boobs and Guns!” thing is so true, from what I’ve seen. If you want a conservative T-shirt sold, have attractive white women holding guns wear the T-shirt and snap some photos. Instant profit.)

  34. i’ve advocated the third position/nationalism for ages.
    “left & right” today is the choice between muslim loving cultural marxist feminists or israel rear end kissing neo cons who are capitalist but pretty leftist on social issues.

  35. Are American Jews, born in the U.S., their parents and grandparents born in the U.S., who identify as Americans, have the U.S. flag and pledge allegiance to it, fought in the American armed forces in U.S. wars–are they American? Is the U.S. their national identity? Are they white? Thank you.

    1. I believe the people you described are Americans, and lots of them can be considered white.

      1. they are mixed race between Semites and Caucasians, while some may be admixed up to 75% white they way they carry themselvs makes them non white

    2. It depends……do they first hold allegiance to Israel? Regardless of where they were born?

    3. No. Only “White persons of good character” can become Americans. Jews are a Semitic and thus non-White people group.

  36. Left ? Right ?
    Well about the left, I can only say that the Italians have the right word for it , La Sinistra ! That were the English word “Sinister” originate from……
    I rest my case..

  37. “As such, no Democrat or Republican politician is demanding that Israel accept Syrian refugees”
    it doesn’t look like you have a slightest clue about international politics.
    otherwise you’d know that no one in sane mind would expect from Israel to take Syrian refugees. lol. that’s just too funny.
    second, Israel had its own influx of migrants from Africa for years. tens of thousands crossed Israel’s border in Sinai. eventually, Israel built a fence there which stopped the migration – and sent most of them back where they came from (giving each migrant a few thousand dollars). there was a big outrage about it in the UN and international community in general (as well as Israeli left).
    Israel did the right thing. it’s not Israel’s problem that Germany and some other European countries don’t do the same.

    1. But it makes sense for the biggest supporter of Israel to take them in?
      And as long as we are run by jews who hold first allegiance to Israel….then Israel is part of the problem.

      1. who is “the biggest supporter of Israel”? Germany? or Sweden? or maybe Turkey (over 2 mln refugees) and Lebanon (over 1 mln refugees with total population of 4 mln)?
        if you mean the US, then they grudgingly agreed to accept 10,000 highly vetted refugees within 2 years. and even this met strong resistance from people and authorities alike.
        this is an absolutely negligible amount – which is good. and definitely it has nothing to do with Israel. if anything, if it itches you to connect it to Israel, then you can blame – or thank – Israel that US doesn’t really accept any Syrian refugees – but not the other way round.

        1. And who are the biggest proponents of taking in refugees? Who are the mouthpieces saying we must do it?
          It isn’t just George “England breaker” Soros. Every prominent Jew I see in the meida talks about how we must take in these people but that Israel MUST retain it’s identity…..
          Strange that….

        2. Soros hates Israel too – and among other things sponsored an Arab organization that support Palestinian right of return. so he’s pretty consistent. otherwise, i’m sure tons of politicians of all kinds say idiotic things. they’re usually split by their political association, not race or religion.
          i’m commenting on what i see in this article, in particular the ridiculous claim that US politicians don’t demand from Israel to take Syrian refugees. only shows that the author is clueless, if you have a strong point on consistent Jewish hypocrisy on immigration issues maybe you should write an article and we’ll see what it’s all about.

        3. Great dodges from my point.
          I’ll say it again so maybe it can sink in.
          EVERY prominent jew I see in the media talks about how we must take in these people but Israel MUST retain it’s identity.
          Please, start showing me different. Give some examples.

        4. His actions “say” it. Pushing multi-kulti for every land but Israel.
          And yes he DOES verbally push for the western countries to take more “no-western” constituents.

        5. -Soros doesn’t push “multi-culti” for “every land” but only for a very few selected countries. So Israel is just one of the dozens of countries where Soros doesn’t push anything concerning the current refugee crisis.
          -Of course Soros does push western countries to accept hordes of Muslim refugees – that’s what I said – but you claim that he explicitly excludes Israel from this policy, which he doesn’t.
          -But in fact, Soros “pushes” much worse thing for Israel: like I already said, he supports the right of return of Palestinian refugees – millions of them. Entities that support Palestinian right of return don’t support any other immigration into Israel, including Jewish, as they believe that the land belongs to Palestinians anyway.

        6. Soros pushes it for all of western white countries.
          I cannot seem to find anything which directly links Soros to pushing any other multi-kultis into Israel. Can you share this please?

        7. Interesting…..I stand corrected on George Soros….
          However, are there any other prominent Jews you can find who do the same as Soros? Or is he the only example pushing for the death of the west AND Israel, as opposed to just the death of the west?

        8. anyone who’s pushing “for the death of the west” is automatically pushing death to Israel as without the west Israel won’t survive for too long.

      1. No, it’s not being a culture-cuck, it’s just pointing out something that you see all the time on Stormfront or Vanguard News Network. RoK has a hard time deciding if it wants to be a how-to-get-tail site, a female-bashing version of Chimpmania, or Stormfront Jr.

        1. Why does it need to fill only one particular niche? Your disdain for what you term “female bashing” or “Stormfront Jr” is more than apparent.
          It IS culture cucking, but you don’t seem to care two $hits about that, you just want to fvk more women. That’s great, go do that but don’t try and stop others who want to fix long-term structural problems within western civilization.

        1. You think it’ s lame because others make fun of it? The strategy of changing your approach everytime your enemy makes of you is NOT the way to win.
          The way to win is…..to stop giving a fvk what your enemy thinks and take action to secure victory.

    1. There’s a whole harvest of pussy out there. Problem is, it’s awfully hard to separate the wheat from the weeds these days.

  38. oy vey how can you goyim sleep at night being so offensive, think of all the wonderful things feminism and multiculturalism have done for you all countries except for israel are melting pots because we chosen need our own ethnostate

  39. Essentially, what we Alt Rightists want is for our countries to return to their previous homogeneous state. That means we want White countries to be 100% White with no exception. We also reject egalitarianism and much of the “Enightenment” era thought.

    1. “That means we want White countries to be 100% White with no exception” This is nonsense. You need a sense of realism about these matters and not all whites in America (before you say it) are thankfully Anglo-Saxon Protestants. The Protestant faith has no roots, rationality, or depth to it, it produces a type of literal mindedness akin to the female mind in its followers.

      1. It’s not nonsense at all. Prior to the 1960’s, all European countries were completely homogeneous. There is no reason why they cannot be again. In fact, they must or miscegenation will destroy the European people. Nobody is saying that all Americans need specifically Anglo-Saxon Protestants, but that is in fact our founding stock and culture which we should acknowledge.

        1. Yes, but even look at countries like France, Spain and Italy. Historically, these were never homogeneous in the sense you mean as been countries that were composed of some type of mythical founding stock. Spain for example in terms of its populations’ genetics and costumes was greatly influenced by Moorish and Arab peoples. France is composed of Frankish, Gauls, Goths, Vandals, Normans and Celts to name but a few. This has largely been the way of civilization and not just western, where countries are invaded by superior forces who become settled and then become a part of the indigenous population.
          Realistically, how could you create a pure white State in America nowadays? And where would you draw the line? No Hispanics, no Italians, no Greeks because they’ve swallow skin? It’s not just feasible to do this based purely on a person’s skin color, is it? That’s why conservatism should be based on values and not purely on race or ethnicity.

        2. Actually, the Iberians (Spain and Portugal) are mostly celtic and Greco (Greece) in regards genetics, and only about 5% of their DNA is composed of “Arab” dna. Plus that “Arab” DNA mostly came from sheppardic jews who were converted during the Inquisition, not the north african moors. The moors were in the Iberean peninsula for a relatively short time and very little mixing of the people occurred, as the christians lived in the north of iberia, and the jews and muslims in the south of iberia. And unlike the jews, they were not given the option to convert, only to leave or die. Those moors left and founded Morocco. The only real influence the moors had on Iberia was architecture. Italy has far more Arab DNA than Portugal and Spain, and had far fewer jews as well.

  40. we want identity, white countries need to stay white just like arab countries need to stay arab, and asian countries need to stay asian, why is this concept so hard to understand. why do people want to see germany full of africans. is (((white))) guilt really that taxing on you

  41. My roommates in college called me a “conservative hippie”. LOL, I was cool before it was cool to be cool.

  42. Some countries already are governed by Alt Right people, like:
    Hungary under Viktor Orban and
    Poland under PiS
    I’m basically a polish Alt Righter and I can tell you that Polish people elected PiS (41% – majority government) not for the sake of economy , but because it is the most solid guarantee of preserving Polish identity and Poland for Poles.
    Poles right now want a patriotic government in its classic interpretation; the one that will keep “refugees” and Islam away from our precious land, as well as political left and liberals. Poles would like to see a revival of traditionalism and respect for core values
    Young people are even more Alt Right/ Libertarian, in recent years there was a huge upsurge of new wave of patriotism; 100.000 people of the march of independence 2015 (record), young lads wearing patriotic t-shirts on daily basis
    I’m telling you guys, look us up and take our example.
    Semper Fidelis

  43. What can awake and concerned white males age 30 and under put their time toward? When you have spokesmen for the movement comparing the base to retarded people under the banner of “premature populism”, and an elitist intellectual chuckling at his own brilliant observations of James Bond movies in his podcasts, what’s a white 21-year-old man to do? Most are not interested in sitting about discussing the theory of “metapolitics” while Black Lives Matter takes over college campuses.
    What is the Alt Right doing to address the challenges facing white men under 30? Young men have to bite their tongues while university professors and SJWs in the breakroom at work spew hatred about how white men have “destroyed” America.

  44. “The Best Neo-Nazis have been Jews”
    Right on brother! now if you post moronic bullshit on RoK, we’ll do the same shall we?
    Ted Haggard
    Mark Foley
    Larry Craig
    George Rekers
    Troy King
    Glenn Murphy Jr.
    If you need more – just ask!
    Peace and Love.

      1. i have no idea. you need to ask the author of this article. i’m only parodying his ridiculous statement.

  45. In order to prosper and strengthen the alt – right needs to do two things; keep female participation at an absolute minimum and completely exclude the jew. Both groups weaken and destroy everything they touch.

  46. Huh. I’m alt-right America for Americans, whatever an American is, a hippie because long hair in a ponytail, but I mostly gave up dope. Mostly. Traditional right because boobs and guns works for me and I’m just generally confused by internet memes – or memes generally (hell, I’m pushing 60) and a strong military because assholes, but Israel can take care of itself, thanks! I’m not much interested in race or any other superficial crap – it’s all pink in the middle and besides, Amerinds and some of the Mexicans were already here when we drew our borders around them, and I blame blacks on Southerners. You couldn’t have picked your own damned cotton?
    So, what now?

  47. France belongs to the French

    Actually French had it coming. Ius soli.
    They think that negro and Arab speaking French language from former French colonies is part of French nation, but he is not and never will be, because they are not white and more importantly they can’t integrate into French society because of many reasons. They have different mentality and social dynamic.

    1. Have you ever lived in France? What you say is true of the Muslims(Algerians mostly who haven’t gotten over the 1962 war). Blacks however are mostly integrated, they behave like the French and I’m talking about wearing glasses and reading poetry books in the tube. I met scores of French Blacks who were as French as any white native.
      The problem is and will always be, Islam, that’s the main factor that prevents integration.
      In the UK the Hindu Indians are integrated, work and pay taxes, they are a part of society, yet the muslim pakis are all on welfare and refuse to assimilate.
      Islam is the problem, not race

  48. There is a difference between the genotype and the phenotype. The phenotype determines the outward appearance of some body while the genotype determines the kind of organism. Modern humans are the only species in the genius Homo. All human traits are part of the human race. If genotype,or race, was determined by the color of one’s skin or any other trait, then people would not be able to produce offspring biologically, in the natural sense, unless they shared the exact same phenotype(s). Ideally a nation-state is supposed to support that “blood,” although it is usually used when discussing family relations, is inherited (see below) when somebody becomes a citizen, who knows it’s history, customs and language, and upholds and defends Life, Liberty and Property. A nation is a group of people who share the same culture, language and heritage. A strong nation-state, kind of like
    the U.S. once was, should be concerned with culture not phenotype, although there
    are plenty of fine states whose people have similar phenotypes and other states
    whose people have numerous ones. John Lock concluded that all men are born with
    natural rights. As manhood and womanhood regrows in the west and United States thanks in part to globalism, this increasingly globalized world gives the Liberty
    types a chance to spread our bill of rights across the globe to other governments
    in exchange. These two ideas should provide a seemingly unstoppable force to counter the E.U., U.N., and SJW propaganda (note: all three support “human rights”, and “freedom” which is basically anarchy, not natural rights and liberty).
    I remember reading an article about how the SJWs where going to make efforts to infiltrate ROK and the neo-masculine groups. It looks as if the SWJs, who are actual racists since they judge people based on skin color (they “believe” race=skin) then divide them into special categories filled with empty promises and pagan nonsense, are now moving to paint us as racists even though they have no justification. Paul Ramsey and his alternative right seem no different than the other
    parties, particularly with the SWJs. Their beliefs (to believe something is to
    not confirm its existence it is only what one might think is the case) on
    phenotype and genotype, ethnicity, and culture. I know here at ROK we focus
    on Civilization building and counter the feminatzism, sexual equality in the
    sense that females should behave like males and vice versa, political correctness,
    efforts to re-surge the matriarchy, and cultural degeneracy. Ramsey does not
    address any of those things and I do not think his vision is a very strong one
    in terms of creating a powerful nation-state, built on doing the right thing,
    that can spread influence throughout the world. I do not think it is a good
    idea for ROK to ally itself with the alternative right. What he mostly talks about is segregating people based on phenotype, which is really no different then SJWs and the American political parties, and some special interest groups.

  49. Ramzpaul writing for ROK? The year’s off to a good start!
    Now I only wonder how many SPLC shills will get buttmad as they did on his video regarding his second major theme.

  50. “I have personally received more threats from the “neo-Nazi” crowd than from anyone on the left. After doing some investigation I discovered that many of these characters previously had zero interest in politics or were actually ‘anti-racist’.”
    I am calling bullshit on the description “neo-Nazi” (unless it happens to be some of the freaks associated with RamZ’s pal Lardass Covington). I WANT NAMES.
    One of the most vociferous critics of lukewarm types like RamZ is Alex Linder and he’s no “neo-Nazi.”

  51. Overall an excellent, savvy article. Wish I had time to read all the comments. Just 2 points I’d like to make, at the risk of being labelled a cuckservative.
    Immigration is a huge problem that is helping destroy the country–no argument there. However, it’s not the only or even the biggest problem we face. Genetics isn’t the sole determinant in any aspect of our national suicide. People of whatever color can be good citizens if they are willing to assimilate. Trouble is, even people born here are under no pressure to assimilate. From the earliest age we are taught by government schools, Hollywood, the idiot box, and sometimes by SJW parents, to hate this country, have contempt for our Constitutional form of representative government, and to aspire to be thugs or parasitic deadbeats.
    Secondly, fascists and Nazis are not “right-wing,” although that’s what the leftists have been telling us since WWII. They are a flavor of socialist, with less meaningful difference between them and Communists than the difference between Sunnis and Shiites.

  52. “As the Traditional Republicans tend to be older, internet memes and jokes tend to confuse them. Basically the only meme they understand is that of the “kick ass” middle aged woman with big tits holding a rifle. (Women with guns is a fetish for these types.)”
    Paul is on point, i started noticing this and cant help but laugh every time i see it come up now

    1. Wait until these women start getting really empowered and pissed. They will start shooting their men, and then the men will want the 2nd amendment repealed.

  53. I disagree on the nazi point. Exposure to an uncomfortable (and harmless) thing is the only way to make people realize it is harmless. Folks who throw around the nazi related jokes are doing just that; immunizing normies against the “voldemort” of our day and age.

  54. An excellent article RamZ. I’d say you should write more often, but that might distract away from your video-making! Thank you by the way for linking to my article on Twitter. I’ve always been a big fan of yours, especially your transgender gym prank call. Truly inspired.

  55. I disagree with ramzpauls complete disassociation with national socialists, fascists and third positionism. we will never know what kind of world those ideologies would have given us, considering they were obliterated in a world war between the limp dicked capitalist democracies and the international socialist soviet union. Europeans are very open to third positionism, which is in contrast to americans, who cant stand it.

Comments are closed.