The “Alternative Right"

Moderators: DrVolin, Wombaticus Rex, Jeff

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby American Dream » Tue Jun 13, 2017 5:05 pm

Fox interviews anti-Muslim "protester" without identifying him as a regular "alt-right" Fox guest


Fox’s Pete Hegseth interviewed a “protester” at an event organized by the anti-Muslim group ACT for America without disclosing that he was actually talking to Gavin McInnes, who has frequently appeared on Fox News in the past and who is a player in the “alt-right” ecosystem. McInnes, who co-founded Vice but left the company in 2008, reportedly because he was considered a liability, has appeared on Fox several times saying racist, anti-immigrant, and sexist things. He also has a long track record of anti-Muslim statements.


https://www.mediamatters.org/video/2017 ... est/216867
User avatar
American Dream
 
Posts: 17049
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby American Dream » Wed Jun 14, 2017 6:17 am

Don’t Feed the Trolls

Image
An alt-right meme that first circulated on the message board 4chan

If the meaning of the “alt-right” is up for grabs among the movement’s leadership, the rank-and-file is even more divided. When Richard Spencer gave interviews to pitch his new website altright.com as a “one-stop shop” for the “alt-right,” 4chan’s politics message board was ablaze with speculation that the clean-cut neo-Nazi had been in the pocket of the CIA from the beginning. “Literally no one here likes Richard Spencer and we believe he is controlled opposition,” summarized one contributor. When Spencer was punched by an Antifa protester outside of Trump’s inauguration ceremony, many on the “alt-right” rejoiced.

This level of distrust is not reserved for Spencer alone. On the eve of Trump’s inauguration, 4chan contributors wrote that Milo Yiannopoulos is a “race-mixing Jew who prefers blacks”; that Jared Taylor is “obviously a controlled opposition crypto kike”; that Steve Bannon is “a literal CIA ZOG [Zionist Occupation Government] media mogul Goldman Sachs banker”; that Mike Enoch, founder of neo-Nazi website the Right Stuff, ex-co-host of the Daily Shoah podcast, and originator of the (((echo))), is “a fat coward with no self-awareness who should kill himself” because of a January 2017 revelation that he had been married to a Jewish woman. Any effort to consolidate or legitimize the burgeoning movement is inevitably seen by some as a plot to distract, discredit, or dissolve it.

The “alt-right’s” base is thus the body of an inverted ouroboros, always devouring its own head. Lacking a cogent political platform, the movement’s disparate factions are instead bound together by a shared politics of negation: against liberalism, egalitarianism, “political correctness,” and the like. This has made them into equal-opportunity villains for political commentators across the ideological spectrum: while fiscal conservatives point to the “alt-right” as a way of excusing the subtler racism of their politics, liberals—and many on the left—paint it as the intellectual vanguard of the GOP, an exposition of the filthy underbelly of the American conservative movement. Ironically, both of these negative representations tend to give the “alt-right” exactly what it wants: exaggerated influence, an intimidating image, and a deliberate political project. (Many members are simply amused at the fact that they are taken seriously at all.) Rather than being unified around a coherent politics, the “alt-right” is more easily identified by a common cultural shorthand: a thick stew of memes, inside jokes, and recurring phrases like “shitlord,” “fashy goy,” and “cuckservative” that satirize liberals, conservatives, and even themselves. The “alt-right” may have gained attention for its association with a newly ascendant reactionary populism, but the online movement is really a product of an older internet culture that revels in the political nihilism that online anonymity permits.

Almost every quality that characterizes the culture, structure, and tactics of the “alt-right”—its distaste for authority, its meme fluency, and its love of trouble for trouble’s sake—are part and parcel of the sequestered forums that nurtured its rise. Indeed, they are traits shared by the freewheeling hacktivist collective Anonymous, whose radically decentered structure is well formulated by the old internet meme, “Not Your Personal Army.” While Anonymous’s anarchic politics are a far cry from the white nationalism of the “alt-right,” their common 4chan roots have manifested in certain similarities. Many of the strategies employed by the “alt-right”—coordinated Twitter harassment or Reddit upvote manipulation—are reminiscent of early Anonymous operations. As with Anonymous, internet culture and a love of memes are fundamental conditions of the “alt-right,” and not merely tactics or incidental manifestations.

The “alt-right’s” penchant for conspiracy similarly evokes an older tradition of collective investigation. Long before /pol/ (4chan’s politics board) had become a site for sifting through leaked emails to iron out the details of imagined Clinton scandals, amateur investigators were using it as a space to spin conspiracy theories about almost every major news event with political implications. The board near-unanimously accepted events like the Boston Marathon Bombing and the 2016 Turkish coup d’état attempt as false flag operations, while Chris Dorner, the homicidal ex-cop who declared “unconventional and asymmetric warfare” against the LAPD, was widely believed to have survived the brutal manhunt that ended in his incineration in a Southern California cabin. This conspiratorial tendency was merely refitted to the 2016 election cycle, where it resurfaced in the form of delusional fantasies surrounding Pizzagate, Spirit Cooking, and the puzzling insistence that Hillary Clinton had used a body double during many of her major campaign events. Given that the “alt-right” milieu tends to doubt the official narrative in almost every case, it is not difficult to see how they have come to believe that their own leaders are controlled by the government. Owing to the movement’s “lulzy” cultural heritage, the rank-and-file is often driven to action by the same catalyst of distrust and paranoia that dissolves any semblance of a firm ideological center.

In addition to a vague set of racist and pro-Western ideals, the “alt-right” is built upon an utter refusal to take political consequences seriously. While its leaders are committed white supremacists, a significant portion of the “alt-right” base simply gets a rise out of pushing MSNBC to run segments on racist memes, or the Anti-Defamation League to add 4chan slang to its hate symbol database. A good example of this tendency lies in the history of Pepe the Frog’s connection to the “alt-right,” which dates back to a late-night /pol/ thread from the beginning of 2016. When one poster noticed that GOP consultant Cheri Jacobus had tweeted that “the green frog symbol is what white supremacists use in their propaganda,” they were amused that someone would think such a thing. After some conversation about how the meme had been coopted by “normies” (one user noted that Katy Perry had recently tweeted a Pepe), the thread decided to make Jacobus’s observation true, in order to reclaim 4chan’s intellectual property and ensure that nobody would want to be associated with the depressed green frog. Harassing people with racist images on Twitter thus became something of an inside joke, with a gaggle of nihilistic troublemakers indistinguishably aligning themselves with committed racists.


Read more at: https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article ... ure-4chan/
User avatar
American Dream
 
Posts: 17049
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby American Dream » Mon Jun 19, 2017 10:44 am

Bannon in the High Castle

by Amar Diwakar 23rd Feb, 2017

Image

The great normalisation has commenced. The universal belief amongst the establishment that Trump would be catastrophic for the Republic has given way to sycophantic supplications that the grandiosity of the highest office in the land will eventually mollify much of his incendiary proposals. Whether it is Hillary Clinton declaring that Americans “owe Trump a chance” in her post-mortem concession speech, or Nancy Pelosi promising to engage with him on policy issues related to infrastructure, childcare, and early childhood education.

Trump’s poujadist campaign, rife as it was with a cornucopia of racist dog whistles, braggadocious masculinity, flagrant misogyny and copious sexcapades, effectively mainstreamed bigotry and rode it all the way to Pennsylvania Avenue. Libidinal fantasies that both shocked and satisfied were eagerly channelled into trollish posturing against the alt-right’s bugbears of political correctness, social justice, reptilian globalists and their cuckservative bedfellows. The transgressive enjoyment of publicly stating what is not usually said openly, taps into what Lacan terms jouissance – a form of enjoyment that goes beyond the pleasure principle, even to the point of self-destruction. This has become the alt-right’s calling card, and characterizes the imperviousness to fact-checking Trump amongst his base in the hopes of the payoff to sticking it to the liberal media establishment.

The frenzied transition to the Trump era has displayed not only administrative incompetence, but also a deliberate calculus aimed at rupture and generating institutional fissures (see the purging of the State Department). Chaos can allow for an initial disorientation period, whereby discord within the state apparatuses might solicit a swing in the balance of forces to foster a more favourable assemblage, which can then be disciplined by the executive. Whether this comes to fruition is another matter. What we do know is that mass civil opposition and judicial intervention have begun to play early spoilers to a dizzying spurt of executive orders.

In the short term, the system is likely to adapt and absorb. Adjusting towards the current rupture, it will attempt to warp Trump into its orbit, demonstrating capitalism’s intrinsic malleability. Already, in the aftermath of his election, we witnessed a bullish Wall Street and a rising greenback. Nevertheless, the systemic shock that reverberated across the state apparatuses of the Republic reflects an acute crisis inherited from an entrenched, hard centre ruling-class consensus, and its failure to manage protracted decline through a punishing diet of austerity.

The crisis of ruling legitimacy is coupled with the pressures that remain for a healthy level and direction of the profitability of capital: when profitability falls and corporate profits decline, business investment eventually contracts and another recession looms ever larger. Trump’s economic panaceas necessarily amount to cutting taxes, reducing government spending and, potentially, raising tariffs on imports, rather than stimulating anemic global trade. Policy tools such as quantitative easing and slashing interest rates have exhausted their efficacy, and with public sector debt ballooning to effectively 100% of GDP, little room for fiscal maneuvering exists.

It is worth noting that corporate America remains divided on its attitude to Trump, which is not surprising considering the capitalist class is always split between various factions, all with their own competing interests. Any alliance at the moment will primarily be forged from sectoral interests coalescing around fossil fuels, real estate to portions of financial capital, and those cynical and opportunistic enough to get to the front of the line at Trump Tower. This much is clear: neoliberalism’s hegemony is being contested, as it has to compete with the provincialism of the reactionary right and the class politics of the millennial left...



...Nationalism, in Bannon’s estimation, is the mechanism through which Judeo-Christian values can rehabilitate and re-anchor society. He reads nationalism as an engineering of inclusivity, in the sense that it dissolves minority identities – thus preventing oppressed groups from claiming special rights – so as to merge under a collective ‘American’ sense of self. Following this logic, Bannon’s opposition to refugees and immigrants can then be cast as discarding those who do not share the same value system, going as far to even indicate a deeper level of unrequited genetic deficiency (given most are unlikely to be “Jeffersonian Democrats”), which would ultimately undermine his tenuous moral-civic framework of American regeneration and fortification.

That Bannon wishes to imbue the re-established Republic with a Judeo-Christian traditionalism to advance an economic program of neo-mercantilism should give us pause. ‘Traditionalism’, in the sense Bannon invokes it, is problematic seeing as he references one of the intellectual progenitors of European fascism, Julius Evola – who promoted a racist, hierarchical spiritualism as a tonic to combat the illusions of progress and egalitarianism, and whose influence continues to resonate upon parties like Golden Dawn and Jobbik. Moreover, Bannon shares an ideological overlap with the Russian ultranationalist philosopher Alexandr Dugin’s ‘fourth position Eurasianism’ critique of liberalism and globalization. Himself an intellectual descendant of Evola, Dugin’s repackaged fascism can be detected in the geopolitical outlook of the radical right, who are inspired by his endorsement of a multipolar system apartheid-style ethnostates, and see Russia as a vanguard shielding European Traditionalism from the Evolian bêtes noires of liberal democracy, individualism, and materialism.

Concomitantly, an old geopolitical obsession of the US far right is resurfacing. Bannon appears keen to redeploy the next iteration of the ‘Asia First’ platform – one that shaped conservative internationalism’s entire defence platform during the Cold War – by insouciantly ratifying that the US would be going to war in the South China Sea in “five to ten years.” It is here that Bannon’s peculiar interpretation of American history comes into focus. It has been well documented that he is a devotee of Strauss-Howe’s “generational theory”, which posits that a repeated 80-year cycle of crises occur periodically over four “turnings” – intervals of 20 years that are each characterised by a particular mood (“high,” “awakening,” “unravelling,” and “crisis”), before inevitably culminating in apocalyptic resolution. Ambiguous, but superficially compelling, the suggestion of preordained upheaval leading to cataclysmic transformation speaks directly to the experience of a traumatized, hypervigilant subject. Bannon, in taking generational theory seriously, believes that inevitable conflict is in the offing as the present crisis – signalled by 2008 – represents the “Fourth Turning,” and the termination of a cycle that roughly began with the New Deal. This is the macro context that animates Bannon’s urgency to reconstruct the social order by grounding his program of restoration on the conviction that rapture is around the corner.

One of the reasons why Bannon gestures towards defending Judeo-Christian civilisation, and is in favour of developing twenty-first century Christendom in the Western hemisphere, is because this sort of politics is ostensibly oriented towards identifying with a ‘civilisation’ rather than a ‘race’. In doing so, a racial identitarianism is resuscitated in the contemporary political context: seeing as the ‘clash of civilisation’ narrative is much less tainted and fundamentally more compelling for the far right to utilize than appeals to explicit racial supremacy, especially in the context of the ‘war on terror’ and the refugee crisis.

However, this neat political division between civilisation and race is to be historically found wanting. In fact, many theorists of white civilisation from Oswald Spengler to Lothrop Stoddard postulated ‘whiteness’ and ‘Western civilisation’ as one and the same. The period of the Belle Époque (1871-1914) saw the prominence of transnational political affinities in movements that sought to connect peoples across national or imperial boundaries, which were being articulated in explicit racial terms. Such affinities were not mutually exclusive: they could and did coexist with others, from the most hermetic nationalisms to the most internationalist anarchisms. Combined with the extension of formal imperialism and its associated global hierarchies came what Jürgen Osterhammel called “a general strengthening of the ‘white’ position in the world.” The onset of World War I then shattered this white solidarity, and its visibility in conceptions of nationalism remain crucial if we are to situate the importance of race within the emerging world order of our present political conjuncture.

Likening his economic populism to that of Andrew Jackson, Bannon favours recalibrating the state through massive infrastructure spending (a policy that contradicts the administration’s plans to brutally cut spending), suggesting that he favours a broadly Keynesian economic policy – not to mention signalling a pre-emptive boost to the war economy, seeing as a chunk of Trump’s appointees are drawn from the military-industrial complex. After all, the election demonstrated that the liberal wonkery, whose bread and butter is everything policy, failed – but not policy in and of itself.

In pursuing an anti-modern (counter) revolution, Bannon’s traditionalism demands a return to a cultural and divinely ordained supremacy by overthrowing the hegemonic yet decaying liberal order of the post-war period. Bannon’s blueprint for American redemption through the prism of an enlightened capitalism steeped in Judeo-Christian spirituality, if ever realized, will create the foundations for neo-fascism of the twenty-first century. Through what specific class coalitions, mass mobilisations, and state coercions (and combinations) it emerges from, will remain to be seen.

That there is division in the capitalist class over how much room to allow Trump and his administration to manoeuvre – and fissures are already starting to surface within the US state – should inform us that oppositional cleavages will emerge early and often. We must guard against succumbing to conspiracism when confronted with exceptional standards of blundering statecraft. From lurid fantasies of trial coups to false flag operations, Trump (and Bannon) will only stand to benefit from a steady dose of paranoia, fear, and fatalism in an age of fragmentation, rupture, and insurgency.


Excerpted from: http://salvage.zone/online-exclusive/ba ... gh-castle/
User avatar
American Dream
 
Posts: 17049
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby American Dream » Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:14 am

The anthropologist of the alt-right: An interview with Angela Nagle

Image

One of the things you talk about is the banner that unites these different groups, and that is Trump. How are they reviewing the presidency so far?

They’re definitely disappointed in him because of the strikes in Syria, because of the pandering to Saudi Arabia and because he hasn’t really seen through any of the extreme anti-immigrant stuff that they hoped he would so far. In many ways the presidency is playing out at as a pretty typical presidency, it’s not as far right as they would have wanted.

Image
Richard Spencer speaks at Texas A&M University in December 2016.

If Trump can’t do it for them, where do these communities go going forward? Who do they look to, and for those who do have a political aim what’s their path for trying to enact it?

So far their whole approach has been there’s no point in just trying to move into formal politics; you have to change the culture. They’re constantly breaking taboos and making the way they speak about race more acceptable to pave the way for formal politics, trying to change the electorate. I mean NPI, Richard Spencer’s organization, is actually trying to be a policy institute — really propose particular policies — and while obviously they’re marginal, they are always kind of knocking on the door of establishment-right politics, showing up at CPAC and things like that.

So they definitely have aims in the long term to influence formal politics, but they’re still at the stage of influencing culture. In terms of policy, they would advocate for as little immigration as possible from outside of Europe and I think as little immigration as possible in general. To deport illegal immigrants and eventually to make it extremely difficult to gain citizenship, to incrementally have it so that the immigration rates to America fall.


More at: https://www.yahoo.com/news/anthropologi ... 57529.html
User avatar
American Dream
 
Posts: 17049
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby American Dream » Fri Sep 22, 2017 11:08 am

http://idavox.com/index.php/2017/09/21/ ... in-europe/

NJ College Lecturer is Pushing for ‘Concentration Camps’, ‘Expulsions’ of People of Color in Europe
September 21, 2017

Image

Yeah, this idiot Jason Jorjani is teaching college students at the New Jersey Institute of Technology.

NEWARK, NJ – A college lecturer that was until recently the president of a neo-Fascist publishing company and a partner of Richard Spencer and Daniel Friburg in forming the Altright Corporation, is coming under fire for recent remarks where he envisioned a Europe free of people of color by the year 2050 and how it will end with concentration camps and expulsion of minorities.

According to news reports, Jason Reza Jorjani, the Iranian-American onetime Editor-In-Chief of Arktos Media, which is referred to on altright.com as the “biggest publisher of traditionalist, conservative, nationalist, identitarian and overall alt-right literature in the World,” was recorded by Patrik Hermansson, an undercover reporter from Sweden, discussing his vision for Europe in the future. “It’s gonna end with the expulsion of the majority of the migrants, including [Muslim] citizens,” Jorjani told Hermansson in a video published by the New York Times during a meeting at a pub in New York City. “It’s gonna end with concentration camps and expulsions and war at the cost of a few hundred million people.”

“We will have a Europe, in 2050, where the bank notes have Adolf Hitler, Napoleon Bonaparte, Alexander the Great,” he continued. “And Hitler will be seen like that: like Napoleon, like Alexander, not like some weird monster who is unique in his own category — no, he is just going to be seen as a great European leader.”

Image
Jason Jorjani with Mining Executive Daniel Friburg,
the CEO of the neo-Fascist Arktos Media



Jorjani is a lecturer in the Humanities Dept. at the New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT), but has been making a name for himself in neo-Fascist circles, not just taking the head position at Arktos, but also starting the Altright Corporation earlier this year with National Policy Institute President Richard Spencer and Swedish mining executive Daniel Friburg which was established to foster cooperation and coordination among so-called “alt-right” groups around the world. In August however, just after the “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, VA, Jorjani announced his resignation from both Arktos and the Altright Corporation to focus on another organization he has founded called Jebheyé Irângarâyân, which is Persian for Iranist Front, which he hopes to serve as a vehicle for a neo-Fascist movement in Iran. Jorjani did not attend the Aug. 12 rally in Charlottesville because he was in Los Angeles shaping his new organization.

Matthew Goldman, the Chief Strategy Officer at NJIT, told One People’s Project that Jorjani has indeed been working as a lecturer this fall, but his latest remarks have caused some concern. “NJIT is a university that embraces diversity and sees it as a source of strength,” Goldman said in a statement. “The statements made by Mr. Jorjani in a video recently published by The New York Times are repugnant and antithetical to our institution’s core values. We presently are conducting a review of this matter and will provide additional information as soon as that review is complete.”

In a statement, Jorjani says that his words in the video were taken out of context and it was “ deceptively edited to make it appear as if I am advocating genocidal extreme right-wing policies.”
User avatar
American Dream
 
Posts: 17049
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby American Dream » Wed Sep 27, 2017 10:08 am

Identity Evropa and Arktos Media — Likely Bedfellows

September 26, 2017 Hatewatch Staff

Image

As college campuses across the nation settle into the fall semester, many are being confronted by the realities of white supremacy.

Identity Evropa, a self-described “generation of awakened Europeans” who peddle the delusion of white genocide, has reinvigorated their college recruitment efforts. To do so they’ve enlisted the help of Aktos Media, a Europe-based publishing house with close ties to Richard Spencer’s altright.com.

Officially established in 2016, Identity Evropa was created by Nathan Damigo, a former Marine enrolled at the California State University, Stanislaus. A close associate of outspoken white nationalist, Richard Spencer, Damigo’s focus has remained largely on packaging his racist message as intellectualized identity politics. However, unlike the relative fluidity with which Spencer addresses his supporters and opponents alike, Damigo relies more heavily on his “fashy haircut,” flared nostrils and furrowed brow to convey his political message, or lack thereof.

Despite Damigo’s position as founder and CEO of Identity Evropa, he recently announced his resignation on August 27, 2017. His successor, Elliot Kline, aka Eli Mosley, reportedly joined the movement “because of the level of professionalism, intelligence and discipline displayed by its members.” Under Mosley/Kline, college campus recruitment has experienced a significant resurgence. Identity Evropa’s efforts to recruit young white college students have coalesced as #ProjectSiege.

Initially introduced on September 27, 2016 in a YouTube video featuring Damigo, #ProjectSiege aims to challenge the “false anti-white narrative” that he claims has been advanced in academia. Throughout 2016, the organization posted fliers on college campuses in an estimated 41 separate instances. However, with the spring 2017 semester, #ProjectSiege experienced a resurgence in fliering, concentrated primarily in February. The current fall semester has also seen an uptick in #ProjectSiege actions, with 26 fliering incidents thus far in September alone and an estimated 95 in all of 2017.

While #ProjectSiege’s recent rejuvenation could be attributed to the change in leadership, a new publishing partnership may also play a key role. On September 7 Identity Evropa announced via Twitter that it had teamed up with Arktos Media “to promote identitarian literature with university students.”

The new partnership is far from unpredictable for many reasons. Beginning with the history of Arktos Media, the publishing house was first established in 2009 as a collaborative effort between several identitarian publishing personalities. The inception of Arktos is a bit murky, with reports that it began in India in 2010 as a joint venture between Swedish businessman, Daniel Friberg and John B. Morgan, the American editor-in-chief of Integral Tradition Publishing Ltd. However, in an interview published on altright.com, Friberg adamantly claims that Arktos was solely the brainchild of Scandinavians. Only after the idea initially came to fruition in Aarhus, Denmark, in 2009 did Arktos move to Mumbai, India, as two of the Nordic collaborators had started the aforementioned publishing company with John B. Morgan. Upon the relocation, Arktos absorbed Tradition Publishing, and in doing so, appointed Morgan as the editor-in-chief.

In its infancy, Arktos Media allegedly began an aggressive campaign to establish itself as the arbiter of European New Right literature. According to Friberg, they developed an investment strategy in which they “acquired the rights to the most important books by Guillaume Faye and Alan de Benoist.” However, after several years of operating out of Mumbai, Friberg had had enough of the “adventure [of] operating out of a Third World country,” and moved their “main operations back to [their] own civilization, Europe, in early 2014."

While Friberg only vaguely refers to their relocation as returning to Europe, reports indicate that Arktos Media moved to Budapest. The location and timing of such a move is certainly no accident, as Hungary has been experiencing a resurgence in conservative politics based largely on the influx of Muslim refugees to Europe for several years. Prior to Arktos’ move, two right-wing parties, Fidesz and Jobbik gained significant prominence in the Hungarian parliament, thus aiding in the passage of a new, largely anti-democratic constitution. Around the time Arktos relocated, Budapest was roiled in conflict over Fidesz’s decisive parliamentary win in an unfair election, as well as Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s belief that liberal democracy was archaic. More recently, in May 2017, the European Parliament has taken issue with the Hungarian government’s efforts to close the liberal Central European University in Budapest. Thus, the atmosphere in Hungary has become a bastion of white supremacy, and has served as an inspiration to groups such as Identity Evropa.

Throughout this time period, Arktos began to stretch its legs as one of the foremost publishers of identitarian literature. In addition to Faye and Benoist, both of whom are far right French thinkers who support variations of Samuel Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations, Arktos has issued translations and original texts from numerous conservative figures. Amongst the most notable are Russian geopolitical author Alexander Dugin, who was a vocal supporter of Russia’s annexation of Crimea; Professor Paul Gottfried, arguably one of the architects of the alt-right and founder of the right-wing academic H.L. Mencken Club; and Julius Evola, an Italian fascist who inspired such figures as Benito Mussolini, Heinrich Himmler and Steve Bannon. In all, the publishers project that they will have put out 180 texts by the end of 2017.

As the number of publications and translations grew, so too did Arktos’ professional affiliations. In October 2016, Morgan was replaced by Jason Reza Jorjani as editor-in-chief. Jorjani, an Iranian-American with a PhD in philosophy and teaching career at the New Jersey Institute of Technology, gained alt-right notoriety due in large part to the success of his book, Prometheus and Atlas. A June 2016 interview on Red Ice Radio accelerated his rise amongst the alt-right media syndicate. Red Ice has been providing online “news” from a Euro-centric standpoint since 2003. Some of its staying power can be attributed to founder, Henrik Palmgren’s Swedish origins, as much of the identitarian movement surpasses exaltation and borders on the fetishization of Scandinavian heritage. Jorjani’s interview was well received by viewers and undoubtedly played a role in garnering his new position at Arktos Media.

Jorjani’s vision for the future of Arktos was one of ambitious expansion, albeit too much expansion. In November 2016, Jorjani met Richard Spencer and quickly formed a bond based on a shared interest in the “total integration of the European New Right and the North American alt-right.” Their similar aspirations were made evident in a speech Jorjani gave at the National Policy Institute in which he labeled the alt-right as "the decisive factor" in the election of Donald Trump, thus setting the stage for an alt-right media conglomerate. The pair subsequently bought the altright.com domain name and Spencer launched the website on January 16, 2017. Altright.com, Arktos Media and Red Ice Radio substantiated their ideological and professional ties under the AltRight Corporation with significant overlap between the altright.com masthead and Arktos Media staff. Notable figures include Daniel Friberg, acting as altright.com’s European editor and Artkos’ CEO; Tor Westman as altright.com’s technical director and Arktos’ chief marketing officer; Henrik Palmgren of Red Ice Radio as media director for altright.com; and Jorjani as a fomer altright.com board member and former editor-in-chief of Arktos Media.

However, as self-aggrandizement is intrinsic to the radical right, commensurate collaboration is difficult, if not impossible. Thus, as is to be expected, egos and diverging interests plagued the AltRight Corporation from the inception of altright.com to Jorjani’s resignation on August 15. In the same aforementioned November 2016 speech, Jorjani spoke of his envisioned future for Arktos as the vanguard of the "Indo-European tradition." His affirmation that the Aryan populations of Europe, Greater Iran, Hindu India and the Buddhist East were the sources of all great human creations remained his guiding principle throughout his time at Arktos, which did not sit well with the AltRight Corporation’s puppet masters.

Jorjani was further criticized following the publication of an op-ed in The New York Times in which a Swedish graduate student went undercover to infiltrate the alt-right. In a recorded conversation, Jorjani predicts the expulsion of Muslim migrants and citizens alike to create a dystopian 2050 Europe where “the bank notes have Adolf Hitler, Napoleon Bonaparte, Alexander the Great. And Hitler will be seem like that: like Napoleon, like Alexander, not like some weird monster who is unique in his own category—no, he is just going to be seen as a great European leader.” He goes on to divulge his connections to the Trump administration via Steve Bannon, stating that his initial hope was to “become like a policy group for the Trump administration.”

Both Jorjani and Spencer’s egotism were on full display in their hasty responses to the publication of the New York Times article. In his September 20th post, Jorjani asserted that he was the “real brain installed at the pinnacle of the [AltRight Corporation] hierarchy.” However, he had chosen to step away from that alleged role due to his increasing involvement with the Iranian Renaissance movement. In addition, he sought to clarify how his Iranian Renaissance associates “facilitated some initially promising private meetings with the incoming Trump Administration policy makers” to discuss shared interests in “an inclusively identitarian Indo-European Community [that] would be strong enough to take on China and Islam in the battle for planetary hegemony.” Nevermind the obvious issue of equating a nation and a religion under the moniker of common enemy, Jorjani’s continuous claims of Trump administration affiliates are alarming given the administration’s inability to unequivocally denounce white supremacists. He then goes on to assert that revealing the identities of his mystery investors, whose contributions never materialized, “would catalyze for a mainstream media scandal.”

In his response the next day, Spencer ridiculed Jorjani for speaking so openly, yet vaguely about his supposed Trump connections in addition to his unfruitful promises of mysterious funding. However, Spencer’s sharpest criticism targeted the series of events that culminated in Jorjani’s resignation from the AltRight Corporation. Following the events in Charlottesville, Virginia on August 12, Jorjani was given an ultimatum to either “leave the Alt-Right or leave the Iranian resistance.” Given Jorjani’s devotion to the “long-term revitalization and liberation of Europe — linked to a future, post-Islamic Greater Iran via the Caucasus” he chose the former in favor of upholding ties to the latter.

In a not-so-subtle retort to Jorjani’s “preferred interest of a Middle Eastern country over a movement that represents the identities of White people in America and Europe,” altright.com published an article by Identity Evropa's Mosley/Kline on the same day. In this quasi-motivational fluff piece Mosley/Kline describes Charlottesville as a watershed moment that separated the alt-right devotees from the “unnecessary baggage.” The piece then takes a cautionary tone in regards to leaving the movement that can only be read as a direct reference to Jorjani’s actions. He warns that, while they “all know that there’s no real quitting … the only acceptable way to back away is through silence.” Don’t provide any insight to the media or a synopsis on the causes of broken morale; simply fade away. However, while Mosley/Kline did conclude by encouraging participants to offer concerns and suggestions to the nascent movement, the takeaway from Jorjani’s experience can be to do so sparingly, as the commitment to a radical right agenda owes no responsibility to reason.

As evidenced by Spencer’s participation in an Identity Evropa protest on Saturday, the group’s partnership with Arktos Media and the larger AltRight Corporation was couched in predictability. As their backs were already firmly against the wall of extremism, there was no room for negotiating the stances of those at the helm of the Corporation. Jorjani’s more expansive — yet still undoubtedly white supremacist — view of the Aryan identity proved too similar to the globalist agenda that the alt-right seeks to mitigate. Thus, he was relinquished back to the liberal halls of academia while Identity Evropa rose in rank amongst the alt-right publishing syndicate. The #ProjectSiege partnership could prove to be symbiotic by reaffirming Arktos Media’s commitment to European identitarianism, as well as establishing Identity Evropa’s place amongst the most “fashy” of the alt-right, if they stick to the agenda.


https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2017/09/26/identity-evropa-and-arktos-media-—-likely-bedfellows
User avatar
American Dream
 
Posts: 17049
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby American Dream » Fri Sep 29, 2017 10:06 am

http://idavox.com/index.php/2017/09/28/ ... b-at-njit/

Neo-Fascist is Out of a Job at NJIT
September 28, 2017

Image

The New Jersey Institute of Technology is in the town DLJ was friggin’ born in! Its mayor is the son of revolutionary poet Amiri Baraka. He wasn’t going to be around long!


NEWARK, NJ – Jason Reza Jorjani, the university lecturer who worked closely, albeit briefly with White supremacist Richard Spencer, has been suspended following remarks made in a video where he waxes poetic about the return of concentration camps and how Adolf Hitler will be seen as a “great European leader”.

According to NJ.com, the New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT) released a statement Monday evening announcing Jorjani had been placed on administrative leave pending the conclusion of a review. “NJIT is a university that draws great strength from the diversity of its campus community, and statements made by Mr. Jorjani in a video published by ‘The New York Times’ are antithetical to our institution’s core values,” the statement read.

Jorjani, who worked in the Humanities Dept. and says that his words were taken out of context, took over the Editor-in-Chief position last year at the neo-Fascist Arktos Media, and then started the Altright Corporation earlier this year with National Policy Institute President Richard Spencer and Swedish mining executive Daniel Friburg established to build coordination among so-called “alt-right” groups globally. He left both just after the “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, VA, which he did not attend because he was in Los Angeles at a meeting that formed an Iranian neo-Fascist organization called Jebheyé Irângarâyân, which is Persian for Iranist Front. Both Spencer and Friburg publicly denounced Jorjani as a charlatan.

“Jason has always strongly identified with what he calls the Iranian Renaissance movement,” Spencer wrote in a statement. “Jason informed us that, after Charlottesville, he had been given an ultimatum: leave the Alt-Right or leave the Iranian resistance. It reveals much that Jason preferred the interests of a Middle Eastern country over a movement that represents the identities of White people in America and Europe.”
User avatar
American Dream
 
Posts: 17049
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby American Dream » Sat Sep 30, 2017 1:34 pm

https://fischerzed.wordpress.com/2017/0 ... opponents/

The New Nazism and its Opponents

September 30, 2017
Originally published on the Internationalist Perspective site, September 2017
.

Charlottesville was not the first time in recent memory the Nazis, the Klan and other “white nationalist” organizations have marched in the streets brazenly proclaiming their vile creed of white supremacy, anti-Semitism and race hatred. Yet, the events in Charlottesville seemed to mark a qualitative difference: A torch light rally accompanied by openly Nazi slogans of “Blood and Soil” and “Jews will not replace us” on August 11 was followed by a daylight rally of hatred which culminated in James Fields, a neo-Nazi who was photographed marching with the Vanguard America group, ramming a car into a crowd of counter-protesters murdering a protester, Heather Heyer.

The Klan was once a powerful force in American politics boasting over 4 million members with senators, governors and even a supreme court judge among its members. However a decades-long decline has reduced the Klan to squabbling factions; explicitly Nazi organizations have never been more than a momentary blip on the news feed. Yet, here were emboldened rightists, seemingly in ascendance. What could account for this resurgence? Perhaps the belief that one of “their” supporters was in the White House. Former Klan Imperial Grand Wizard David Duke, who was present in Charlottesville, remarked that the neo-Nazis were in Charlottesville to “To take our country back. To fulfill the promises of Donald Trump. ”

But is Trump a fascist? Certainly Trump’s chauvinist “Make American Great Again” and “America First” rhetoric echo the far-right’s nationalism, and Trump’s seemingly bottomless narcissism is reminiscent of the fascist cult of the leader. In addition, Trump has shown an eagerness to engage in dog whistle politics for his base: his defence of Confederate statues as (white) heritage and the continued use of the term “globalism” (eerily reminiscent of Nazi code for Jews) have only encouraged the far-right. Yet, Trump remains within the framework of bourgeois democratic politics albeit with an authoritarian bent.

For bourgeois politicians, pro-forma denunciations of explicitly Nazi or racist groups is not unusual, even though successive Republican and Democratic politicians have felt free to plunder elements of the program to suit their needs as well as engaging in nudges and winks to their supporters. The Republican National Committee unanimously adopted a resolution against white supremacy August 25, yet its platform contains many of the same ideas.

Trump however has broken with this unofficial policy. Much to the delight of the neo-Nazis, such as the Daily Stormer Trump’s initial response was to equivocate between the neo-Nazis and Antifa, arguing that there was violence in Charlottesville, “on many sides.” Responding to the pressure from the media his own party, and even within his administration, a tight-lipped Trump read a stronger statement on August 14 denouncing the Nazis and the Klan. This obviously forced-upon statement stood a single day before Trump went back to his original position statement, but went further, arguing that there were “very fine people on both sides” and reiterating the notion that rightists were simply defending history and the heritage of the south. This, like the rhetoric around state’s rights, is a talking point for White supremacists who argue that statues of Lee and his ilk represent the (white) south’s history – a history of lynching and white supremacy. David Duke tweeted to thank Trump for his remarks in identifying the “terrorists” of the left.

The reaction of the media and the political establishment was swift and savage, denouncing Trump for his even-handed equation of the two sides. Yet, this was a curious reaction, and certainly not an expected one. While in the period since the Second World War, the US has shown revulsion for fascism, it has only been when it suited its purpose to do so. Indeed, the US has shown a marked preference for authoritarian and neo-fascist regimes ever since the war; instead a revulsion for “communism” or leftist regimes has been a much more consistent policy.

So why then, did the US ruling class react so strongly against this position? A significant section of the US ruling class, extending beyond the Democratic Party, does not support Trump and would rather have him, if not replaced by a more malleable figure such as Mike Pence, then at least have Trump’s authority reduced in favour of trusted elements within Trump’s administration such as the military.

Since the events of Charlottesville, the state has presented a front of ‘democratic citizens standing up against fascism,’ idealizing and glorifying the Second World War and America ever since as leading the struggle for democracy against fascism. When John McCain is able to write in The Washington Post on September 1, “Most of us share Heather Heyer’s values, not the depravity of the man who took her life, ” there can be no other conclusion.

By concentrating criticism on the neo-Nazi right, the capitalist state (and here we mean not just the state itself, but also the media, the political parties, business, the unions etc.) seek to further cement that alliance by drawing in protest groups such as Black Lives Matter or Antifa – the embrace of a BLM leader and the Mayor of Boston prior to an anti-White nationalist rally in that city illustrates the point.

With the visible resurgence of organized fascist groups, the flood of patriotic and nostalgic anti-fascism across the internet and social media has been inescapable. Yet, the Second World War was a war between imperialist powers; it was not a war to fight fascism, not a war to save the Jews, not a war to save the world for democracy, but rather a war to divide the world into new spheres of influence. The workers on all sides were merely cannon fodder.

The real enemy of the state is not neo-Nazi elements. Rather they are being utilized as a pretext to reinforce the state with democracy as the “glue” that holds it together.

What then of Antifa? In a sense it is wrong to speak of Antifa as an organization since, beyond a common commitment to confronting fascist groups, Antifa is locally organized into collectives in a national network. With its current media prominence, Antifa may become a shorthanded for a broad opposite to racism or fascism, an ideology as ultimately supportive of the liberal state democratic despite Trump’s continued efforts as demonstrated by his bellow at a rally in Phoenix:

“They show up in the helmets and the black masks and they have clubs and everything. Antifa!”

Yet, Fascism is not a mass movement in the United States. Nor is it likely to become one. Trump uses racism, and the cult of a strong leader not to undermine democracy but to divide the exploited and to reinforce nationalism. His friend Steve Bannon, now supporting Trump from outside the government, is not an ideological brother of the Nazis of Charlottesville, whom he was quick to dismiss as “clowns” and “losers, ” but that should give us no comfort. Trump and Bannon are using democracy and all its tools to push the US and the world further on a path towards greater exploitation, more war, more ecological destruction.

The choice today is not fascism or democracy. Both are tools of capital; both are murderous and repressive. The fight against white supremacist and other racist ideologies bears only a perspective of liberation if it’s connected to the struggle to end capitalism. Otherwise, it will be recuperated and turned into an instrument to purify democracy and thereby to reinforce the capitalist state.

Fischer

September 2017
User avatar
American Dream
 
Posts: 17049
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby American Dream » Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:05 pm

User avatar
American Dream
 
Posts: 17049
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby American Dream » Sun Oct 01, 2017 9:20 am

On Cryptofascism: The Fracturing of the Alt-Right & the GOP

Image

Harebrained 4chan memes can be identified by anybody, but revisionism can inform the decisions of an entire state government. If fascism can be spun as a left-wing anomaly, gullible conservatives will take the bait and applaud while their government persecutes the antifascist movement, a clear instance of the state arranging its laws to quash public dissent. Anti-masking laws are suddenly being strictly enforced. New Jersey was the first state to declare antifascism a terrorist organization, and the far-right has crowed about that success ever since.

The second form of successful fascist camouflage is a reframing of the struggle against fascism itself. This has already emerged in numerous forms throughout the discourse of the right, the center, and liberal bloc, in articles and think pieces that lay the blame for the continued violence of the right at the doorstep of antifascists themselves. This underhanded interpretation of the growing conflict remains the most ubiquitous form of fascist apologism, and one of the fascist movement’s greatest assets. No matter how vicious and murderous the Alt-Right has become, the majority of MSM outlets have found ways to accuse leftists of starting this new wave of street violence on a whim. According to FAIR, in the month after the murder of Heather Heyer and the attempted lynching of Deandre Harris, the most widely-circulated papers in America spent as much time condemning antifascists as they did the white nationalists responsible for the death and bloodshed of that day:

“A month after a leftist protester was killed by a self-professed neo-Nazi, it’s notable that a slim majority of opinion in major newspapers focused on those devoted to combating racism rather than to those advancing it. Bear in mind that one side kills more people than any other ideology in the country and openly promotes genocide, while the other supports aggressive tactics to prevent the promotion of genocide, and hasn’t killed anyone. As FAIR has noted before, the media’s “both sides” fetish is uniquely unsuited for the Trump era, and their peculiar evenhandedness in the wake of Charlottesville illustrates this with stark clarity.

With a major publication like Politico expressly telling its reporters to avoid criticism of “physical attacks on journalists and white supremacy” on social media—so as to not appear “partisan” — one is compelled to ask, of what use is the pretense of “objectivity”? In an attempt to balance the scale, the media put their thumb on it, overemphasizing the threat of antifa while playing down an emerging far right that, in addition to having just killed someone, is in tacit alliance with the most powerful man on earth.” [5]


This reframing mechanism, dedicating a larger portion of media criticism towards the antifascist movement and thereby equivocating it with fascists, can even be weaponized and deliberately employed to take heat off of the fascist movement. The widely-circulated petition to label antifascists as a terrorist organization – a laughable notion for more reasons than one – is acknowledged by its own author as an effort to hijack the discussion around antifa participants:

“Microchip is an online provocateur who is routinely kicked off Twitter and claims to direct legions of automated bot accounts. He said getting conservatives to share and discuss the petition is the entire point, and not to prompt concrete action by the government. He called the petition “a waste of time” but a useful distraction from recent infighting among conservative factions.

He created the petition on Aug. 17, the day after Trump made controversial remarks in which he blamed “both sides” after white nationalist rallies in Charlottesville. Microchip told POLITICO he wrote it with the explicit intent of stoking conservative rage and forcing the GOP establishment to take a stand or risk becoming targets themselves. “It was to bring our broken right side together” after Charlottesville, he said, “and prop up antifa as a punching bag. So the narrative changed from ‘I hate myself because we have neo-Nazis on our side’ to ‘I really hate antifa, let’s get along and tackle the terrorists,’” he explained.” [6]


“FREE SPEECH” AND THE FASCIST CREEP

Prior to the large-scale spread of antifascism in the US, the Alt-Right had already gained cultural influence by infiltrating college campuses across the country. Most memorably, it was College Republicans who paired with the Alt-Right to platform their speakers, advance an ur-fascist agenda, and combat social progressivism in youth culture. Other groups, like Turning Point and the YAF, lent a hand by inviting similarly reactionary speakers who attracted different strains of conservatism and libertarianism, and commingled them under a larger banner. It was a product the same admixture of “satirical” social transgression and deliberate opposition to human equality which had birthed GamerGate, the pseudo-ideological swamp which allowed “alt-lite” celebrities like Milo Yiannopoulos to achieve cultural significance by simply vomiting as many bigoted remarks as they could think up. What probably never occurred to most of Milo’s 18-22-year-old college demographic, as they listened to his rambling diatribes on why feminists are ugly and how white people “invented all the good shit” in the world, was that their gleeful rejection of social equality was also a hallmark of fascism: the open disdain of human rights.

Among the defining features of fascism examined by both Umberto Eco and Lawrence Britt, we find that practically all of them were already finding an audience during 2014; a disregard for civil rights, a culture of mass elitism, and rampant sexism to name a few. Even lowly GamerGate, the vehicle of Milo’s popularity, contained the raw material of a fascist movement: an explicitly anti-female reaction to a previously male-dominated space, which gradually fused with white supremacist and cishetero supremacist rhetoric in a total rejection of modernity and human equality. It disguised itself with the memorable, and laughable, motif of “ethics in journalism,” conveniently eschewing the fact that the movement itself had been born from deliberately engineered rumors around game developer Zoe Quinn.

As Milo graduated from internet ur-fascism to the main stage, so too did collegiate cryptofascism. Surrounding the campaign of Donald Trump was a circus of college conservative groups which boosted his image, encouraged his nationalistic ideology, and in the case of Charlie Kirk, worked directly with the campaign to attract college-age voters. Others, like the Berkeley chapter of the College Republicans, had already been sheltering white nationalists in their ranks, and merely needed a broader coalition to work with. The SPLC would eventually publish a lengthy article examining the burgeoning presence of the Alt-Right on campuses, as the newfound enthusiasm of white supremacists spilled into the open:

“On the day Donald Trump was elected president, students at the University of Central Florida awoke to find posters of white men and women with the headline, “We Have a Right to Exist.” Distributed by Vanguard America, one of several new hate groups active on U.S. campuses, it claims nonwhite immigrants are causing “the genocide of our people.” Its posters read: “Imagine a Muslim Free America,” “Free Yourself from Cultural Marxism,” and “Protect the Family – Reject Degeneracy.”


Within days of the election, white nationalist leader Richard Spencer, who is often credited with coining the term Alt-Right, parlayed a raucous appearance at Texas A&M into a national audience.His theme: “America belongs to white men.” At a Washington rally that drew 300 white nationalists shortly after the presidential election, he led a chant of “Hail Trump! Hail our people! Hail victory,” as many in the audience sieg heiled.


https://itsgoingdown.org/cryptofascism- ... right-gop/
User avatar
American Dream
 
Posts: 17049
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby American Dream » Wed Oct 04, 2017 8:17 am

Reddit's Trumpkins on the Vegas shooting, before and after they learned it was a rich old white man

Image

r/The_Donald, before: "Fuck the travel ban, forced deportation. 1 week or 10 years in jail. GTFO." After: "Antifa? This smells like a false flag. Research this."

Image



https://boingboing.net/2017/10/03/murde ... e-men.html
User avatar
American Dream
 
Posts: 17049
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby American Dream » Wed Oct 04, 2017 9:21 am

It Doesn’t Have to Be Like This

Image


Neo-nazis exist in Russia today, but they are more or less confined to online agitation and comment sections; they certainly don’t invade punk rock spaces anymore. Russia’s various radical rightwing and neo-Nazi groups have been listed (along with antifa, it should be noted) as terrorists by Russia’s Department for Combating Extremism, or Center “E.” However, although this designation was accompanied by heavy repression in some cases, the authorities in practice also handed other extreme rightists a new disguise in the form of acceptable Russian nationalism (whereas antifa, of course, has no alternate state-sanctioned identity to hide behind). Today, Russian antifa combats Russian nationalism cloaked as pro-Putinism, rather than public displays of open Nazi sympathy. This allows the government to label antifa as criminals, while leaving many nationalist ideologues with the ability to present themselves as “patriots.” Sound familiar?


Good night white pride You keep silence, while they shout, They are heard, and you are not. Do not sit aside, Do not obey stupidly. With your inactivity you dig a grave for yourself, Now you do not care, but it will also concern you, Fascists will never know rest until you show the strength, Resist, speak aloud about your views. GOOD NIGHT WHITE PRIDE! Has fascism already become a norm? Did YOU forget, what millions of people died for? Do not dissemble the problem of Nazism, Do not believe in all these ravings. GOOD NIGHT WHITE PRIDE!
—What We Feel, “Good Night White Pride,” off the album Last War (2007)



https://antidotezine.com/2017/10/04/it- ... like-this/
User avatar
American Dream
 
Posts: 17049
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby American Dream » Wed Oct 04, 2017 9:53 pm

MY YEAR INSIDE THE INTERNATIONAL ALT-RIGHT

The Croatian writer Tomislav Sunić, an important figure in the European New Right and author of the influential book Against Democracy and Equality, sat next to me discussing the prospect of mass-scale expulsion of non-white British citizens. He asserted that it was possible to “fly everybody home” and that a plane could leave Heathrow every three minutes!

At any normal dinner the prospect of forcibly removing all non-whites would be greeted with shock, but repatriation was a relatively uncontroversial topic around this table.

The rest of the night I talked with Brits, Swedes, Lithuanians and Americans. Some of these were super-stars within the movement, such as the never-before-photographed American alt-right figure, Greg Johnson.

Above the sound of clinking glasses men in rented tuxedos discussed eugenics, the coming “race war” and the supposedly ongoing genocide of white people. Smugly they congratulated themselves on managing to keep the dinner a secret, away from the prying eyes of anti-fascists. Little did they know, I was secretly filming the whole thing.

GETTING IN
For almost a year I’ve been at the heart of a world of extreme racism, antisemitism, Holocaust denial, esoteric nazi rituals and wild conspiracy theories. What I found was a movement that sometimes glorifies Nazi Germany, openly supports genocidal ideas and is unrelentingly racist, sexist and homophobic.


More at: https://alternativeright.hopenothate.co ... -alt-right
User avatar
American Dream
 
Posts: 17049
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The “Alternative Right"

Postby American Dream » Sat Oct 07, 2017 7:44 am

HOW TO STOP THE ALT-RIGHT? TROLL MILO YIANNOPOULOS COULD BE BARRED FROM AUSTRALIA

"There are certainly people who are capable of giving consent at a younger age, I certainly consider myself to be one of them, people who are sexually active younger,” said Yiannopoulos on the Drunken Peasants podcast in February. "Some of those relationships between younger boys and older men, the sort of coming-of-age relationships, the relationships in which those older men help those young boys to discover who they are, and give them security and safety and provide them with love and a reliable, and sort of a rock where they can’t speak to their parents…"


http://www.newsweek.com/australians-wan ... try-678657
User avatar
American Dream
 
Posts: 17049
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to Data Dump

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests