For those new to the Alt-Right, The Alt-Right’s Settled Debates
This a list of points that the six sigma spread in the Alt-Right would agree on.
Between 2008 and 2013. The great debates on male-female dynamics, race, and the future of our nations shifted into high gear in 2008 at Chateau Heartiste and related blogs. I single out the Chateau because that’s where the passion and the new ideas churned and then fanned out to the broader culture.
So here is the Alt-Right consensus:
Blacks. They require assistance in achieving and maintaining a level of civic and material comfort on par with that of other races. Quantity + Equality = Can’t Have Nice Things.
Christianity. It is not an internally settled matter. For some, Christian faith is a non-negotiable foundation of our identity with implications on the afterlife. Others see it as detrimental to our vitality.
Democracy. In its present form, it is the rule by those who control the formation of public opinion and whose interests are not aligned with the interests of the voters. The two-party system in the United States is real, just like pro wrestling.
Family. While the role of extended families varies by culture, the traditional patriarchal model is the only one that provides a healthy environment for raising children.
Immigration. It is harmful to Western nations at present levels, low-skill immigration in particular. Manifest incompatibility between host and guest populations belie the economic- or demography-based arguments in favor of mass immigration.
Institutions. Traditionally conservative or masculine institutions such as the Republican party, the military, large corporations, mainline churches, and professional sports have been coopted by liberalism.
Islam. Don’t let it in.
Jews. As self-identified minorities with an enduring identity, they have acquired — justly or not — a reputation for subverting their host nations. Israel is a model of practical nationalism.
Multiculturalism. Diversity is not our strength. The involuntary comingling of disparate peoples is not “enriching.”
Race. It is a fundamental element of a human being’s identity. The human biodiversity model is predictive on the macro scale.
Religion. A purely materialist philosophy is insufficient as a pillar of a culture or an ethical system. Nobody wants to die over a contract.
Russia. It is not a potential threat to any Western nation beyond her near-abroad European neighbors. An enemy-of-an-enemy is an ally, and our common adversary is U.S.-led globalism.
Sex. The female is attracted to male power, charm, and confidence. She has contempt for male weakness or supplication. The male is attracted to the female’s youth, beauty, and femininity and is repulsed by her physical or moral decay.
USA. Her foreign and domestic policy is controlled by interests whose ambitions are at odds with the welfare of her own citizens, the existential question of Western nations, and geopolitical stability.
Whites. Interracial obligations do not justify self-destructive sacrifice on the part of the White benefactor, nor are they mandated by any notion of historic debt. Charges of racism fail to explain the disparity between the achievements of Whites and others.
Women. They crave male leadership and go batshit without it. Given the power, they will destroy their world, especially from the voting booth. Don’t listen to what she says — watch what she does.
Comments are the gold mine of any great blog. If you are unacustomed to browsing comments, you are missing the true gems.
As Lucius wrote in his linked commentary on this post, this post is in fact is “an ecumenical consensus in view,” which is why most of it sounds more moderate than my other writing. This post is not a list of demands, which would take an extreme starting point as per normal negotiation strategy. Rather, the points in it are (as I noted) areas of agreement.