Kumar and Fuentes

Considerations.

I would like to make some definitive statements on my position, re: Neil Kumar and Nick Fuentes, so that my somewhat negative views cannot be legitimately dismissed as just being from a “bitter old crank.”

First, and this should go without saying, but I’ll say it anyway, I have nothing personal against either gentleman. The same holds for my criticism of people on the Far Right in general, whether those are core “movement” figures (e.g., Johnson, Taylor, Spencer, Strom, and the deceased Pierce) or peripheral figures to be placed in the general Far Right but not in Der Movement itself (e.g., Kumar and Fuentes).

Kumar himself I see as having two problems. First, his ancestry. That’s no fault of his of course but is nevertheless an issue. After all, if we oppose non-European immigration into European lands, the non-European ancestry of the migrants is no fault of theirs, but it is an issue – the issue – nevertheless. Second, Kumar is associated with elements of the “movement” of which I disapprove – the Amren race realists (and he’s been supported by Counter-Currents, etc.).  Those are problems he does have control over and he has chosen to affiliate with those elements. Maybe he has no choice – maybe others would reject him because of his ancestry, but, again, the situation is what it is, even if we want to avoid pinning blame for it. So, given those affiliations, even if he was of full White ancestry, I would still have serious reservations about him and his candidacy. That he is half-South Asian only multiplies those reservations.

Nevertheless, I wish him well in his campaign, I hope he wins (however unlikely that is) and he is no doubt sincere. Again, nothing personal. Ultimately, the biggest problem with Kumar is nothing to do with himself directly, but instead it is Der Movement’s reaction to his campaign (at least the reaction of those elements to which he is associated). They promote him openly; he is in their words “our man in Arkansas.” Retards like van de Camp try to spin away Kumar's South Asian ancestry by historically and genetically illiterate ramblings about “Aryans” and Y chromosome haplotypes, trying to falsely equate Kumar’s ancestry with that of a full-blooded European. This fits into all my criticism of multiracial WN 3.0 - Rosie and the Kids White Nationalism.

The proper reaction to the Kumar campaign would be polite distance, positive commentary to the extent warranted, criticism where warranted, and wishing him well. The full embrace of this half-South Asian, and the unprincipled exception attitudes leading to absurd racial spin – I see that as counter-productive.

As regards Fuentes, putting aside questions about his ancestry, the issue is that he is, in my opinion, an immature civic nationalist, making many moronic statements and expressing dumb opinions, and the proper attitude of White nationalists toward Fuentes and America First should be – just like with the Kumar case – polite distance.  

The multiracial nature of America First alone should give pause; however, given that Amren has had a Filipina conference speaker and Der Movement embraces Kumar, then I suppose that WN 3.0 has already jumped the multiracial shark.  But in a sane movement, the multiracialism alone should be a deal breaker for any close association. That’s aside from my general opposition to “big tent” mainstreaming and close association with Alt Lite-style civic nationalists (apart from supporting explicitly pro-White White right-wing populists).

Then we have the immaturity previously alluded to.  

The legend Michelle Malkin. Can we give it up? For Michelle? Here she is—she is brilliant. She is beautiful. She is the Mommy of this movement. And nobody is going to mess with Mommy! Am I right? Nobody messes with Mommy. 

I remember when I was in my 20s. I was less mature than I am now, but there is no way I would be calling out anyone – much less an aging Filipina – as “Mommy” at a public meeting, much less a meeting of a political nature.  What kind of leader behaves like that?  What kind of followers accept it?  What kind of serious “movement” “leaders” praise it and associate with it?

Didn’t the Quota Queens learn anything from their involvement in the Alt Right fiasco?  Didn’t they learn to be skeptical of juvenile “youth culture?” Didn’t they learn not to jump on a bandwagon without knowing for damn sure that the bandwagon is not headed off of a cliff?  Don’t they have any judgment, any prudence, any reservations?  You know – the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce. Even if you want to label the farce of the Alt Right as a tragedy, given its very public collapse and the damage that did to pro-White activism, you must at this point realize that having the Quota Queens repeat the same mistakes with America First will indeed be a farce.

So, my attitude is this.  Best wishes to Kumar with his campaign, but I am not endorsing him, and I am keeping my distance and I am criticizing Der Movement’s attitude toward Kumar. If Fuentes is successful, fine, maybe that could do some good (or maybe not, if America First and Fuentes’ antics taint White nationalism by association), but America First and what it stands for really doesn’t have much to do with the agenda of the Sallis Groupuscule. I do think that America First will crash and burn eventually, just like the Alt Right, and it will be another humiliation for pro-White activism.

Finally, I note some incoherence in "movement" attitudes toward Kumar and Fuentes compared to other ideas they promote. For example, some "movement" "leaders" tell pro-White White Americans that if they plan to run for political office, they should not be openly affiliated with and associated with the "movement" in any way.  Now, I don't necessarily agree with that advice, particularly today, when that advice is becoming increasingly outdated as the American political scene fragments and America becomes more balkanized and polarized. But, anyway, that's their advice; I recall Hood saying that on some Counter-Currents livestream. But here comes Kumar, running for political office with various "movement" associations, and Der Movement thinks he's the best thing since sliced bread (whole wheat, not white).  So, if being a political candidate openly associated with Der Movement is all fine and dandy for the light brown goose, then why isn't it equally fine and dandy for the white gander?  Then, the same "movement" that looks benignly at Fuentes' very public antics blacklists the "insane bitter old crank" Sallis for comments written while blogging.  

Of course, this incoherence becomes much more coherent once one realizes "movement" agendas in promoting Rosie and the Kids White Nationalism (re: Kumar) and their interests in "movement" "leader" egos and revenue streams, as well as website page views (re: Fuentes). The Quota Queens will promote only those people who they see as no threat to the Queens' personal interests (including their bank accounts). 

Odds and Ends, 12/16/21

In der news.

See this.  OK, but I have already made most of these points previously, including in the "racial purity" essay at Counter-Currents.

In the end, it doesn't really matter how current populations came to be. It matters what they are today and what they will be tomorrow. EGI is forward looking. The EGI of ancient peoples were their concern, not ours.

Following up on this, look at this astonishing lack of self-awareness:

See this.

And this.

Much of what Johnson says about Spencer can apply to Johnson himself. And, again, if Spencer was and is such an obvious "tool" why did Taylor, Johnson, Brimelow, Derbyshire, Regnery et al. take him seriously and associate with him at one point?

Johnson can't and won't answer that. He is a fraud...in his own words, a "tool."

The deeper question is this. Why talk about Spencer? If it is just to "pile on" Spencer as an individual, then that shows how petty Greggy is. However, if one criticizes Spencer has representative of the fundamental problems of Der Movement, then much of the Counter-Currents criticism of Spencer applies to Johnson himself. My criticism of these people is not personal; I could care less about them personally. But, to paraphrase Nietzsche, they are a lens through which I focus on "movement" defects.

And if you want to see what an outrageous hypocrite Johnson is, here is a comment excerpt by Johnson from that Spencer article comment thread:

The very idea that people might have principled disagreements is foreign to people who think entirely in terms of personalities.

Remember: That is from a person who "bans" people from his blog who disagree with him or criticize him in the slightest, followed by defamation of those people as suffering from "insanity."

I keep on beating the drum about covid and the vaccine in response to the insanity of Der Movement on those subjects.  The “movement” apparently doesn’t realize the damage it is doing with this.  From the standpoint of practical issues and optics, Der Movement’s attitude alienates both normies – the majority of whom are vaccinated – and, especially, educated STEM people, who mostly would be aghast at the “movement” “take” on these issues. On a more basic standpoint, the “movement’s” attitude reflects deeper problems – irrational, ignorant, crazed behavior that demonstrates poor judgment and cognitive and behavioral deficiencies. “Movement” “leaders” either actually believe that viruses don’t exist and that the vaccine (a “toxin”) is more dangerous than covid itself, or, possibly worse, they know better, but cater to the worst stupidities of their followers so as to build the “brand” of the “leaders” so as to maximize “D’Nations.” So, “movement” “leaders” either are crazed and ignorant or they are mendacious grifters of zero character who sacrifice intellectual and moral integrity to make a buck.

More on Dickie Spinster

Spencer.

[Note: "Dickie Spinster" comes from this book review]

Briefly following up on this, what lessons can be learned?

For the American rank-and-file - your "leaders" are essentially meritless affirmative action cases who have led you from one disaster to another; they all criticize each other, but one Quota Queen is as bad as the next.  And your "movement" is a complete catastrophe.

What lessons can be learned for individuals who wish to rise to leadership in dissident politics?  Basing your rise on actual merit rather than ethnic quotas would help, as the latter approach eventually leads to disaster as one hits the wall of their limitations. Speaking of which, remember the Clint Eastwood Magnum Force movie phrase -  "a man's got to know his limitations." Rather than being head of NPI, or any other sort of Grand Poobah in Der Movement, Spencer would have been best suited as a spokesman or political candidate - the "face" of the "movement" representing the older and more experienced Quota Queens (who, although inept as well, relatively speaking are bit more wise and more prudent) who could have told him what to do and say.  But if you have the attitude that people need to "bend their knee" to you, obviously such a secondary role would not be personally acceptable.

If you want to follow the strategy of emphasizing networking rather than content creation, then it is (obviously) imperative to cultivate, and not alienate, your most influential contacts and supporters. The ultimate problem with Hailgate was not the incident itself - which I thought was, while unfortunate and reflecting poor judgment, not the sort of catastrophe others made it out to be - but the inevitable, easily expected, reaction of people like Taylor and Brimelow. Losing - at least publicly - their support, coupled with the feud with Johnson (which we really cannot blame Spencer for since Johnson eventually ends up feuding with almost everyone), left Spencer with a limited number of networking options, many of them sub-optimal. The collapse of the Alt Right corporation led to more "breaks" in his networking, and other various events led to problems with Conte, Kessler, etc. 

Johnson can survive his many feuds and catastrophes because he is a content creator (if you like what he produces, which I do not), and manages a stable of other content creators. Johnson, despite his propensity for feuding, is fairly good at networking and "movement" politics (to the extent that he can control his tropism for fighting and feuding).  Spencer, it seems, lacks these skills as well as not being a significant content creator. In summary, if you put most of your eggs in the networking basket, you had better be sure your behavior doesn't smash those eggs.

Needless to say, if you are going to be a high-publicity leader, you need to control your personal behavior to limit scandal and to create an image of prudence and probity. Obviously, that's not what happened in Spencer's case, but to be fair, some of Spencer's Quota Queen critics are not any better in this regard.  Two wrongs do not make a right, however.

And, of course, sound judgment, good strategy and tactics, operational security, etc. are all important to build confidence so as to be accepted as a leader and to maintain that position. Seriousness is also crucial; the Beavis-and-Butthead aspects of the Alt Right may have been plenty of fun for its participants at the time, but how can you build and maintain a network of influential contacts and supporters if you behave like a juvenile jackass? And if you want loyalty from supporters you need to give loyalty back - and this inability is a fundamental and fatal flaw for almost all of the Quota Queens.

There's more to be said on this issue, but that is enough for now.

You Can’t Take the Quota Out of the Queens

Der Movement.

Laugh at this. OK, once again I ask Johnson the question that the coward will continue to ignore - what qualifications did Spencer have to be made the head of NPI? Johnson can't address that because the answer leads to the same "movement" ethnic affirmative action program that elevated a meritless empty vessel like Johnson himself to be another "movement" "leader." Fact is, an essay like LeBlanc's could just as easily be made about Johnson or any of the other Quota Queens. They have nothing to offer other than their WASPness. Absolutely nothing.

Fisking the article:

Spencer, for his part, who was once the face of the most exciting and talked-about news story in the world, now finds himself a broke and broken man with nothing to show for his adventures but a trail of burned bridges and broken lives that he left in his wake. He has long since surpassed in relevance by a 23-year-old who lives with his parents, and he is now even shunned by White Nationalists.

This is the fellow who was named the head of NPI and who hobnobbed with high-level “movement” “leaders” – at least before they got scared off by Hailgate. I also seem to recall a Spencer-Johnson podcast episode before their feud erupted full scale.

If there were any lingering doubts as to whether or not Richard Spencer is the poster child for Narcissistic Personality Disorder, the 8-minute interview should seal the deal. Right out of the gate, Spencer tries to distance himself from the movement and dodge any blame for how things turned out.

I’m no fan of Spencer, but please stop this cheap psychobabble pathologization. Right…and I’m a “paranoid piece of crap” suffering from “insanity,” right? Everyone is mentally maladjusted except Gaslighting Greg and his merry little band of sycophants.

Richard: I was trying to unite everything to where it would be simply me, and it would have been better if they had fucking bent the knee and shut the fuck up.

Spencer isn’t the only “movement” “leader” who expects people to “had fucking bent the knee and shut the fuck up.”  What about folks who “ban” anyone who dares disagree with them?

There’s a lot to unpack here. Basically, Spencer thinks that the Alt Right should have been a Richard Spencer cult of personality. 

Is it supposed to be a Greg Johnson "cult of personality" instead? Of course, a “cult of personality” requires a personality, so there may be a problem with that.

But at the same time, Spencer acknowledges that he did not create the movement. This raises the obvious question: “If you didn’t create the movement, then what is your claim to leadership?” 

Anglo-Nord affirmative action. Same with Johnson.

He didn’t create the movement. He’s never written a book. He ran a blog, but it was one of many blogs. It wasn’t the biggest blog, nor was it light-years better than other blogs. His fan base was miniscule compared to that of TRS or The Daily Stormer. So why him as leader? 

Why was he made the head of NPI?  I’ve been giving the answer to all of these questions, right here, for years.

The simple answer is that better candidates didn’t want the job. 

Bullshit.

Spencer says as much in the interview.

So, you believe that?

Richard: The whole 2016-2017 experience was quite something, wasn’t it? I was making headlines every week. Trump was also reaching people online, and the Alt Right became a kind of advertising wing. And the Alt Right’s anonymous, and I am not anonymous, and if I dare say so, I think I am interesting.

Yes, he's very interesting. Like a carbuncle.

Well, that part is true, but only in the same sense as someone like Ted Bundy is interesting. However, he is on to something. The main reason Spencer was able to land the job of Alt Right spokesman is because most of the movement was anonymous and no one else wanted the job. If the TRS doxes had happened a year earlier, Mike Enoch probably would have wound up with that job.

Enoch – the guy many people call a “Jew?” The guy who, regardless of his exact ancestry, is not an Anglo-Nord?  Fantasy.

That’s not really a strong claim to leadership. That’s like becoming the heavyweight boxing champion because the last champ retired. It’s not really proof that you’re the best.

Sounds a lot like Johnson’s situation.

To a narcissistic sociopath, what you feel about him is not as important as the fact that you feel something and feel it intensely. To a narcissistic sociopath, being admired is of course the ideal, but failing that, being hated is the next-best thing. More than anything, a narcissist wants to be the center of your world. Thus, to Spencer, “love to hate” and “hate to love” are basically the same things. In both cases, he is the center of your world. They both fulfill the need for narcissistic supply.

Stop the psychobabble crap.  

Richard: There was “the punch of Richard Spencer” in 2017.

Yes, he referred to the event in the third person. I’m sorry, but I find that funny. He doesn’t say, “There was the time when I was punched in 2017.” He calls it “The Punch of Richard Spencer” as if it was a major historical event on par with “The Sinking of the Lusitania.” I wonder if Abraham Lincoln is up there in heaven talking about his death and saying, “I wanted to enjoy a play, but then The Assassination of Abraham Lincoln happened.”

So what?  Making much ado about nothing.  What a nitpicking idiot.

Similarly, Spencer wanted to be respected as a serious intellectual like Jared Taylor, but he also wanted the street cred of Mike Enoch.

That’s like saying someone wants to have the muscularity of Pee Wee Herman and the humble sensitivity of Arnold Schwarzenegger in Pumping Iron.

One cannot help but consider it an insult that Spencer would refer to associating with the greater Alt Right as “slumming,” but to be fair, compared to the days when he was doing conferences with Peter Brimelow, Paul Gottfried, and Jared Taylor and working alongside Steve Sailor, John Derbyshire, and other Dissident Right legends…

OK, so if Spencer is so bad and is a “narcissistic sociopath” then what does that say about the judgment of all those “Dissident Right legends” for associating with him?

…Spencer was indeed kind of slumming throughout most of 2016 and 2017. That’s not a diss on the Alt Right so much as it is a reflection of the high-class characters Spencer used to run with. 

I think you have it backwards, but never mind.

Can you imagine Jared Taylor “bending the knee” to Richard Spencer?

No, he’s too busy “bending the knee” to Jews and Asians.

Let me ask the readers of Counter-Currents a question: Can you think of a Richard Spencer rip-off?

Can you think of a Greg Johnson rip-off?

I remember a time when every podcaster was trying to be Mike Enoch, and I’ve seen a million bloggers trying to write like Andrew Anglin, but I have never seen a content creator who made me say “Man, this guy is totally ripping off Richard Spencer. He’s jacking all of his talking points. He’s shilling for the EU and advocating for ethical child pornography. 

But when “Dissident Right legends” implicitly advocate for the possession of child porn to be legal, that’s OK, right?  Disgusting hypocrites.

That Spencer had any amount of influence at all was due to the fact that he had the goodwill of all the bigwigs who did have substantial fan bases, and who were willing to vouch for him.

OK, here we have the $64,000 question – why did he have their “goodwill” if he’s such an obvious fuckup?  Only I am willing to provide the answer.

This is one of the reasons Spencer has crashed so hard. He put all his eggs in the networking basket and no eggs into the “cultivating a fan base” basket. This is probably because cultivating a loyal base of support is hard and tedious work that often involves being nice to people who are not important, but who will support you forever and follow you to the gates of Hell in exchange for a morsel of respect. But Spencer was never the type to soil his hands by engaging with unimportant people.

Then we have Johnson who “soiled his hands” (or whatever) with Hermansson, Lewis, and Pilleater.  How did that all work out?

Instead, Spencer networked and won over the key bigwigs in the movement who did have large followings. 

Great judgment on their part.

But when those aforementioned bigwigs withdrew their support…

Because Hailgate offended Jews and imperiled fundraising.

Richard: At the end of the day, Unite the Right meant putting me next to, like, Azzmador, who is just disgusting and gross.

Again, this is because Spencer did not actually have a fan base of his own. Thus, he needed people like Azzmador of The Daily Stormer — people who actually did have significant fanbases — if he wanted to have his picture taken speaking in front of a large crowd, which was all he ever wanted.

I’ll admit that I initially wasn’t too hot on Azzmador. He was a little too edgelordy for my taste, but I must say, he has really grown on me. Post-Charlottesville, he has improved his style a lot. Rather than being an edgelord, he now gives off a dad-like vibe and tries to be more of a positive role model and mentor for the youth. It’s quite a remarkable turnaround.

Despite currently being a fugitive from the law, Azzmador still streams regularly. You can find him on Odysee. Do listen and support.

Does Sallis every support any of the freakshow brigade?  No, because I actually have some degree of judgment.

Back to Spencer:

Richard: I don’t like ugly, stupid freaks. It always just should have been about Richard Spencer.

Sort of self-contradictory there, no?  OK, he’s not ugly, but the rest of it…

So here, Richard “Hailgate” Spencer is claiming that it was the movement that made him look bad.

The sense of entitlement is really breathtaking here. After all this time, I should not be surprised by Spencer’s narcissism, and yet I am. I never dreamed that he would ever take his mask off to this extent.

Did someone take the “mask” – or anything else – off in a Budapest men’s room?

Spencer isn’t wrong, but he makes it sound like he did not actively participate in it himself. If you didn’t know who Richard Spencer was, and then saw this interview, you would think like that Nazi humor was something Spencer himself was above and that he dirtied his hands by hanging around people who made Nazi jokes. In reality, Spencer did quite a bit of Nazi LARPing himself. Aside from Hailgate, Spencer reportedly made people give him Roman salutes when he entered the room.

I – and not Der Movement – was criticizing the Beavis-and-Butthead Spencerian Alt Right at its peak.

I try to imagine a world where Richard Spencer never existed, and it’s frankly infuriating to think of what might have been. No Spencer, no Hailgate. “Alt Right” becomes a catch-all term for anyone who is not liberal or neocon. No Alt Right/Alt Lite schism.

As if being welded to the Alt Lite is a good thing.

There are other people who could have done as good a job or better debating Sargon…

At least Spencer was willing to debate semi-competent opponents, which is more than I can say about a certain other “movement” “leader.”

All in all, I therefore have no choice but to declare that Richard Spencer was a gigantic net loss for the movement for white survival.

As is Der Movement as a whole.

I wrote “similar,” because when Matt Heimbach took his mask off, he was already banished from the movement, anyway. It was an epilogue to a story that had already ended. But with Spencer, I had been worried that we might have to deal with carrying that guy on our backs forever.

I am worried the same way about Johnson.

I wish I had the energy for Schadenfreude. I would love nothing more right now than to spike the football and yell at the wignats, “I was right all along!” 

It was I, not you, who was warning about the Alt Right as far back as late 2016/early 2017. Mendacity by omission.

See this. Do you need any more evidence that I am correct about Rosie and the Kids White nationalism, and that Nikandros is also correct?  Now non-White HapaPerspective is being given a forum on Counter-Currents. Remember that both Sallis and Nikandros are "banned" from Counter-Currents.

Rosie and the Kids!

Speaking of which. Asian teens are more anti-White than are Hispanics. How's that "Arctic Alliance" working out, Derb?

Odds and Ends, 11/30/21

In der news.

See this. That's a mixed bag. As usual for that site, it's short on prescription (and whatever prescription that occurs there is usually off base), but the description is at least half correct. Yes, the Alt Right is a disaster. A problem with that is that 20-20 hindsight is easy. When people like Liddell were part of the Alt Right - and featured in Arktos books on that subject - I was critiquing the Alt Right and predicting its downfall (starting in 2016 and definitely I was openly hostile by early 2017). Then we have the thesis that the West's problems are innate and should not be blamed on the Jews. Yes and no. On the one hand, Der Movement goes overboard on the Jew thing and needs to bin more blame on White foibles (with the High Trusters at the head of line). On the other hand, complex thinking understands that it is possible for both to be true - many of the West's problems are innate, but, at the same time, they are being enhanced and amplified by Jews as an influential minority with interests that conflict with the White majority. Blaming all on the Jews is foolish. It is equally foolish to dismiss the role played by Jews as a "sociopolitical/cultural enzyme" speeding up the rate of rot and decay.

Liddell states that Japan is starting to go down the road to multiracialism without a real Jewish presence, but it is astonishing that he doesn't admit that his own presence in that nation is contributing to the problem. Saying "it's a matter of numbers" doesn't excuse it, not only from the standpoint of hypocrisy, but from a psychological standpoint - the presence of White faces in Japan creates to the Japanese the idea that they are somewhat of a cosmopolitan society, and breaks down barriers to more significant numbers of immigrant

My riposte to those who label me as "insane" and "paranoid" because I keep on beating the drum about the White ethnic question - I gave Der Movement more than twenty years to exhibit some sort of significant progress on this issue, and, if anything, things have gotten worse, particularly after the rise of the Alt Right and HBD. 20+ years is long enough. Patience has its limits.

The pitiful ignorance of Hippocrates:

In the year 410 the German Visigoth Alaric and his army sacked Rome and destroyed the Roman Empire in the West.

No. The sack in 410 AD occurred, but the end of the Western Roman Empire was 476 AD:

In 476, the Germanic barbarian king Odoacer deposed the last emperor of the Western Roman Empire in Italy, Romulus Augustulus, and the Senate sent the imperial insignia to the Eastern Roman Emperor Flavius Zeno.

Wrong, wrong, Der Movement is always, ALWAYS wrong.

Four facts:

1. Israel has been aggressively vaccinating its own citizens against covid.

2. The System wants to prioritize Coloreds over Whites for the vaccination.

3. Jew doctors promote vaccine hesitancy among Gab/Trump supporters.

4. Trump himself pushed for the rapid development of the vaccine, wants it called a "Trumpcine," has been vaccinated, and told his followers to get vaccinated.

Based on all of that, Der Right - heavily composed of High Trusters - concludes that the vaccine is a toxin, part of a Globalist conspiracy to poison White Christians.

Thus, the last 100 or so years of American history becomes more easily explained. Jews taking America away from the High Trusters is like an adult taking candy away from a (retarded) baby.

See this - a perfect example of the smug, self-satisfied, arrogant, complete ignorance of the Luddite Right. Please explain to me the biological law that states that in all circumstances "mutations grow weaker" (I don't even know what "weaker" is even supposed to mean in this context). Mutation is random, and selection of mutation depends on the environmental context - there's no "law" that says that mutations always get "weaker"(or "stronger" whatever that means). And who is the "everyone" that "knows" this idiot's nonsense? Creationist Jaysus freaks who say ("everyone knows!") that the universe was created by Big Daddy Sky God (or the flying spaghetti monster, take your pick) 6000 years ago?

The new variant is being reported, Gab right-wing dumbfuck (I realize "dumbfuck" is superfluous after "Gab right-wing"), because it exists. Not everything is a conspiracy to satisfy the cravings of your fevered "brain."

Good luck building a viable rightist movement while alienating STEM professionals.

And don't listen to some dumb cunt, re: science. I usually don't like using such vulgar language in my work, but in this case it is justified.

Behold Der Movement: 

WN 1.0 = Sieg Heil and Pass the Beer White nationalism

WN 2.0 = Beavis-and-Butthead White nationalism

WN 3.0 = Rosie and the Kids White nationalism

Odds and Ends, 10/22/21

In der news.

Der Movement’s hatred of Southern Europeans is borderline psychotic. The self-obsessed egomaniacal Nordicism is also deranged.  See this.  Emphasis added:

…if Nino wins, he gets to bring his family up from impoverished, dead-end Sicily.

He likes the Swiss. They’re calm, rational, affluent, and ordered; so unlike the screwed-up Italy that offers him nothing.

Then, Nino is getting on the train to go back to Italy. He’s broken and annoyed by the other Italians on the train: chummy, cocky, singing songs like O Sole Mio; all that sun, sea, and happiness.

She’s a cut above him in that she’s educated…

shrugging off the usual Italian songs of sun, happiness, and Bella Italia. Yeah, right.

…the workers stare as the Swiss enjoy a beautiful lake. They stroll, kiss, shed their clothes, and swim, contemplating beauty like the Eloi in H.G. Wells’ The Time Machine as we hear a delicate oboe solo, almost like the opening scene of the movie with its quartet and the placid Swiss by a lake. We see blonde hair and firm, naked bodies, tall and poetic on horseback, while the runty Italians stare. The Commedia dell Arte meets Wagner.

Nino, like his fellow workers, are transfixed by the Swiss. It is a defining moment in the film and our age of the relations between north and south. People come to northern Europe to work, compelled by conditions in their homelands, but there is another draw to the north as well: it’s orderly, rational, blonde, quiet, poetic, and beautiful. The southerner can’t resist it; in fact, the world can’t. Despite the south’s inefficiency and resentment against the north and its economic power, the south can’t take its eyes off the Nordic types. They are beautiful and serene.

If the Swiss as like the Eloi in Wells’ The Time Machine, the Italians are the Morlocks, but hardly savage and brutal; they’re rather penned up like chickens who are awed by the swans.

Germany and northern Europe are still the predominant economic powers, now filled with guest workers. It recalls the Taverni brothers’ film Padre Padrone, where a Sardinian farmer keeps his son in illiterate servitude. When the Germans come looking for guest workers, the son’s hopes of finding freedom up north is ended as the father drags him away from the recruiters and back to herding goats — goats who shit in his milk pail.

…he is served by a dark-haired Italian, and for a moment, he blinks . . . but he goes on. Live the vision!...He looks at himself in the mirror. That blonde hair. That strength. Beauty. Vision. His eyes widen, and he dashes his head in the mirror.

The blonde girl, who hasn’t taken her eyes off him, comes out and offers help. Nino, embarrassed, swats her away. But it’s okay, she says; I’m not one of them. I’m one of you. She whips off her blonde wig, and a cascade of black hair tumbles out. “España!” she cries in triumph.

Nino groans. “Would you believe it?” he cries, and passes out.

As the train rolls south, a man plays his guitar and sings. Yes, of happy Sicily; all we need is the sun, the warmth, the blue sea, a pretty girl . . .

That look comes to Nino again. The train rolls on, chugging away, and enters a tunnel. A pause. Nino emerges from the tunnel with his pet suitcase, eyes haunted, a zombie…

If Nino could bring his family, they would be Sicilians in Switzerland, like the Turk…

But we can still appreciate Nino and his struggle: A tramp being pulled one way and another like Sicilian taffy…

Comment from that post:

I saw “Bread and Chocolate” back when it came out, and enjoyed it, but it is truly a sad and demoralizing movie.  The setting was, of course, chosen to heighten the racial and cultural disparities between the Italians and the Swiss.  Not all Italians are Sicilians or short or dark; there is an Italian part of Switzerland that is presumably neither as dysfunctional as Sicily…

Of course, Johnson avers that there is no affirmative action in Der Movement. Obviously, a S. Italian has an equal chance of being accepted as a “movement” “leader” as a WASP, right?

The Alt Right is dead.  Those are your "leaders." Please keep in mind this is not 20-20 hindsight. I was criticizing the Alt Right before Unite the Right, and I was promoting the idea of behind the scenes quite organizing and infrastructure building during the Trump interregnum. At the very least, if you are going to have public rallies, plan for contingencies and have proper operational security. Screaming about "octoroons" isn't quite satisfactory for that.

Priority number one for any rightist dissident movement is a robust and aggressive legal infrastructure. You need that BEFORE you do your public rallies and speeches. And, yes, that costs money - better to spend $340,000 on that than for someone's "executive compensation" to "maintain an online publication." Or for "fundraising" to support the "work" of Counter-Currents. Der Movement simply is not serious.

Lawfare should be illegal. But it exists. In that context, consider this comment from Amren:

I read Parts I and II. My final assessment of the Unite the Right Rally was that it was poorly organized, involved too many clown-show racists, and was not adequately thought out. This is not to say that the government and police department of Charlottesville, as well as then-governor Terry McAuliffe, were not all despicable scum. They were - and are. But in retrospect, having Richard Spencer (who later came out of the closet as a left-wing Democrat) and Matt Parrott, a cuck and a goofball who stood by while fat boy Matt Heimbach screwed his wife, just reveals the true character of so many who attended this fiasco.

Is that who you want to have in charge?

I don't like people telling me what to do; I don't like mandatory activities. So, I don't think the vaccine mandate is ethically and morally optimal. I would rather have people do as they please, but be held accountable for their choice. So, folks who refuse the vaccination would in turn be refused medical care if they contract covid, and would be held legally responsible if they infect others. Unfortunately, that is not practical according to medical laws as well as so-called medical ethics. But it is theoretically preferable from a moral and ethical standpoint, although from a public health standpoint the mandates do have some validity.

Remember when I wrote up about the Etruscan study? Italianthro now has an analysis on that, which is reasonable.  See this quote form a paper mentioned in that analysis.

Multiple Iron Age populations characterized by different languages and cultures lived in Italy but, genetically speaking, they started to approximate the modern Italians (Aneli et al. 2021; Antonio et al. 2019).

Essentially, much of the genetics of Italy, and of Europe as a whole, were already in place in the ancient world.

Amren 2021: Jews and Filipinas.

Does White nationalism really actually exist any more? Today, Der Movement is a mash-up of HBD race realism, Trumpian populism, spiced up with a dash of Nordicism and the crazy crap of Counter-Currents. The hardcore White nationalism that existed in the 1990s (for better or worse) is gone.

Would Pierce have invited Filipinas and Jews to speak at NA meetings? Would Asian girlfriends been welcome at Rahowa concerts? Did the Creativity movement talk about Asian superiority?

Things are quite different today than in the 90s.  Back then, the bulk of the "movement" was, for better or worse, NS-oriented.  Amren stuck out like a sore thumb back then for being non-NS and moderate; today, Amren is considered "extreme" compared to America First and Trumpism. As someone who lived through all of these events, in retrospect, the death of Pierce was a dividing line between the old WN-oriented, NS-focused "movement" and today's HBD crap. I was visited by an activist, by coincidence the very day Pierce's death was reported in the media. Upon meeting, we just stared at each other for a moment without saying anything.  We knew an era ended and things would never again be the same.

Others now seem to agree. See these comments from Counter-Currents:

DonqyWashOctober 21, 2021 at 7:29 am

This is now what, the fourth or fifth article posted about this film? Does this website have some kind of stake in the ticket sales or something? There’s no such thing as a “pro-white” movie coming out of any Hollywood studio in 2021, and one would think the contributors on Counter Currents would be well aware of that fact. Why in the hell would I want to watch yet more racial replacement garbage prominently featuring a prominent hypercompetent negress character? This is a staple of virtually every movie and television show produced now, and I’ll gladly opt out. Wokeshit propaganda wearing once-enjoyable IP’s as a skinsuit isn’t something you’d expect to see promoted on a dissident platform.

Vagrant RightistOctober 21, 2021 at 8:50 am

My guess is topical film reviews help recruit new people in a gentle way. But yes it might be at the expense of focusing on other frankly more important topics. I don’t think these articles about Bond are for the converted personally.

There is a broad trend on the Right now to move ever more towards meta; film reviews, music, analysis of other people in the movement (which was mentioned critically in a comment on the podcast article about America First), philosophy, based Christianity and paganism, while some of our people are even saying that race and the JQ are passé, old news, WN 1.5 or something. I’ve even heard people apparently in our circles say we need to be less ‘about race’.

And it’s not just people like Fuentes that are an issue here. There are really smart people who only a year ago were presenting themselves as hardcore pro-white third positionists, now they present themselves as Christian theologians.

To me it looks like for many of our people – their content, frankly even their beliefs in some cases, are being shaped by our oppressors; internet censorship, fear of losing accounts and in a number of European countries harsh laws, but they are telling themselves “I’m sophisticated, I’m not just about race like you dated wignats”. I don’t buy that.

I’m not saying this is the case here though, but film reviews are like the ‘good cop’ aren’t they ? They need to be accompanied by the ‘bad cop’ or we’re not really delivering a payload.

See this.  Sallis right, and prescient, once again.

The Alt Right is a callow, superficial, moderate, intellectually and ideologically shallow version of pro-White activism; lacking seriousness and depth; oriented toward millennial snark, trolling, and social media; taking breathless excitement over discovering “rightist” truths that the rest of us knew long ago and which to a large extent are nothing more than plain fact and common sense; marked weakness with respect to science and other forms of empirical thought; prizing style over substance; and prone to exhibit, often in an enhanced form, all of the fossilized dogma, bizarre fetishes, and poor judgment of the “movement” as a whole.

Interestingly, back in 2014, Johnson reproduced one of my EGI Notes essays attacking Amren and Amren meetings. Later on, I suppose, Greggy and Sammy got a long better, so Sallis's complaints suddenly became "insanity" - a "paranoid piece of crap." Note who was it who changed based on circumstance and who has been consistent

China now has a new hypersonic nuclear-capable missile. Meanwhile, the USA uses 1960s-1980s era nuclear weapons, and our vaunted "new" GBSD ICBM will be nothing more than a souped-up Minuteman III. And many Democrats don't even think we need a ICBM leg to the triad. America is becoming a Third World country in every way. I was reading a book about American nuclear weapons history by a fellow named Goetz. He terms the "new" GBSD as an "enormous disappointment" as it just an upgraded Minuteman III (1960-70s missile), and also outlines how "new" American bombers and missile submarines are merely upgrades of old technology. He also notes an issue I have raised as a concern - the ever-diminishing yields of American nuclear bombs, to absurdly low levels. Essentially, I see the USA as undergoing de facto piecemeal unilateral nuclear disarmament. Popgun yields coupled to aging delivery systems will deter no one.

A Real Moral Hazard

Gaslighting Greg rides again.

Laugh at this.

Race-conscious whites believe that our race as a whole is too individualistic compared to other races. We would do well to cultivate a feeling of white solidarity and brotherhood. This sentiment should be even stronger among race-conscious whites, lest we offer the world the absurd spectacle of a movement that preaches white solidarity but in practice is polarized by sectarian wedge issues…

Like questioning, every ten minutes, whether certain European-derived people are “White.”

…and petty personal rivalries.

Johnson vs. Spencer, Friberg, Griffin, Sallis, Parrott, Heimbach, etc.

But we have to be careful here. Too much solidarity can be a bad thing. 

Time for Johnson to now justify all of his bad behavior.

If you make wrongdoing safer, you’ll get more of it. 

Like sexual harassment at Alt Right meetings?

This is the meaning of “moral hazard.” Usually, moral hazards involve forcing other people to pay the costs of an individual’s bad decisions. For instance, if the government bails out lenders, they will take more risks. 

Or, if the “movement” rank-and-file keep on bailing out Quota Queen bad judgment and utter incompetence, they’ll just get more of it.

Obviously, a well-run society creates incentives to reduce rather than increase bad decisions. The same is true of a well-run movement. 

Which does not exist.

This is why we have to be careful of appeals to solidarity.

Therefore, we must tolerate Johnson’s eternal feuding.

Unconditional solidarity with the wrongdoers among us is a moral hazard.

I agree. That is why I have no solidarity with “movement” liars, gaslighters, morons, grifters, and frauds.

We should not extend unconditional solidarity to race-conscious whites who harm other members of our movement. 

Like Greg Johnson?

These harms can range from promoting bad ideas…

The entire ideological content of the recent version of Counter-Currents.

…and having bad manners…

Like defaming critics as suffering from “insanity” and calling one of your past writers a “paranoid piece of crap” on a livestream?

…— which should be called out and criticized, preferably with better ideas and better manners — to treasonous behaviors like doxing and snitching to our enemies, to outright criminal behavior. 

Does “criminal behavior” include sexual harassment or cocaine use?

If solidarity is important to us, then we should feel solidarity with the victims. 

Oh, indeed. 

Nor should we extend unconditional solidarity to whites — whether movement members or “normies” — who harm other members of our race at large. There are misanthropes in our cause who don’t “love white people.” They look upon white “normies” merely as raw material for their megalomaniac fantasies. 

Is he talking about himself here?

But they’ll still appeal to normies for white solidarity when it is convenient. Even a whiff of such sociopathic elitism is deadly for a populist movement. 

By “sociopathic elitism” do you mean gibbering about Yogi Bear, The Age of Aluminum, and The Men Who Can’t Tell Time?  Is an obsession with “Savitri Devi” any part of “sociopathic elitism?”

If solidarity is important to us, then we should reserve it for the vast majority of decent white people, not anti-social misfits who prey upon them. 

How about folks who use their children as props for fundraising?  Do they fit into that negative category?

Finally, we should not extend unconditional solidarity to whites who commit crimes against our racial enemies, for instance, terrorists like Brenton Tarrant. Even our racial enemies have basic human rights. 

Huh?

But even if you deny that — even if you profess to care only about white people….

Yes.

… — whites like Tarrant also harm our movement and our race as a whole. 

I agree, but your “movement,” in aggregate, over the many decades of failure, harms the race more.

...And when a conflict emerges between members of our cause and white well-being as a whole, solidarity with our race as a whole should win out. We must always choose the greater good. 

Yes. That is why I oppose Counter-Currents.

Now let’s apply this to some concrete questions from readers...All three of these issues are related to the question of solidarity and moral hazards.

As is the question of donating money to Counter-Currents, VDARE, American Renaissance, etc.

Let’s deal with the Fuentes question first. Nobody in the movement is above criticism for bad ideas, bad decisions, or bad character. 

Including Greg Johnson.

Suppressing criticism in the name of solidarity creates a moral hazard. It creates an atmosphere in which bad ideas, bad decisions, and bad characters flourish. But we can’t afford that. Our cause is too important, our enemies are too powerful, our ranks are too small, and our time is too short.

Indeed. That’s why Johnson is a hypocrite when he bans people from his blog who have the temerity to criticize him. But, hey. it’s just a “brand,” after all.

However, when people like Fuentes are attacked by our enemies for being courageous and effective in advocating sound ideas…

“...for being courageous and effective in advocating sound ideas." - Let me know when that occurs.

There were plenty of problems with Unite the Right. There were some terrible people, terrible ideas, and terrible optics. I know what is coming in the trial. I know that we will cringe with embarrassment at the testimony, depositions, emails, forum posts, and text messages that will be offered as evidence and broadcast to the entire world.

Johnson’s “big tent.”

The same is true of the post-Charlottesville lawfare directed at the march’s organizers and participants...we should set aside our differences — since those don’t really matter here, anyway — and we should offer them moral support, at the very least.

Hey, we could be offering them financial support, but all dem dere “D’Nations” are flowing in other directions, eh?

...It is not illegal to be evil-minded fantasists and foul-mouthed jerks. 

Yes, we know that Counter-Currents is not illegal.

It is not illegal to be an asshole. 

After all, Greg Johnson is still walking around free.

All the defendants, good and bad, are on trial simply for being white advocates. Make very clear that your support is not a blanket endorsement of the marchers — how could it be? — but simply a defense of their constitutional rights, as well as the basic principles of white racial activism, namely that white people are under attack, and we have the right to take our own side. On these points, at least, Unite the Right did nothing wrong.

All of this lip service is meaningless. Real support would have come from a sound legal infrastructure and proper finances, both of which do not exist because of the ineptness of "movement" “leaders.”

Just as solidarity with wrongdoers within our ranks creates a moral hazard, so does a lack of solidarity...Thus I wish the Charlottesville defendants the best. If they win, our cause will be a bit safer from lawfare. If they lose, we can only expect more of the same.

OK, then, if you believe that, then take all of your fundraising proceeds for the year 2021 and donate it to their legal defense. Talk is cheap. After all, it’s only money, right? Or is supporting Quota Queen financial greed a real moral hazard?

Another Big Tent Fail

White nationalists should have nothing to do with these folks.

Laugh at this.

I have been following the downward trajectory of the America First movement for some time now. The initial Bleeding Kansas of the infighting within Nick Fuentes’ movement has escalated into what people online are beginning to call the Groyper Civil War.

Consider the “optics” of all of this to the “normies” you want to recruit.

After I wrote my previous article on the issue, it seemed as though things were calming down, and so the America First (AF) movement would continue to slowly decline as it has been since AFPAC II, and eventually fizzle out. However, it is now clear that AF is in a dramatic downward spiral. 

Who would have ever guessed?

Indeed, the “movement” has degenerated into nothing more than the equivalent of an online discord fan club or gaming group.

When I criticize the “movement,” Johnson labels me as a “paranoid piece of crap” suffering from “insanity.”  Guess I was right, huh?

Shortly after my last article on the issue was published, political activist Ryan Sanchez, also known as Culture War Criminal or CWC, let bygones be bygones with Fuentes. 

Sanchez and Fuentes. That's the Alt Lite. The Alt Right is Spencer, Johnson, and Taylor.  From one ethnic extreme to another. What's missing?  Where are the wops and hunkies?

The tides of war seemed quelled in AF. Everyone seemed to agree, at least outwardly, that the goal was to continue activism in the US against COVID tyranny…

Of course. Public health measures during a pandemic are the “tyranny” we must oppose. Genocidal mass migration and enforced racial integration – who cares about that?

…In those texts, CWC called it a “big grift”…

The entire “movement” is a “big grift.”

Within hours of announcing his plan to attend, AF leaders were jumping down CWC’s throat. Both Beardson and Baked Alaska announced on a public livestream that they planned on “pressing” CWC. Beardson went so far as to shamelessly state that he planned on trying to trigger CWC into physically attacking him so that he could then press federal charges. This is a tactic straight out of an Antifa playbook. The game was on. CWC still made the choice to attend the rally, regardless of the drama. This test of wills is what ignited the Groyper Civil War.

Optics!

There seems to be a misunderstanding as to what AF is. Most rank-and-file Groypers see it as a movement, and therefore a scene. The AF hierarchy clearly sees it as a brand first and foremost. There is an inherent dissonance between these two viewpoints. The AF movement has always been referred to as just that, although the rhetoric has slowly changed to shoehorn “AF brand” into the lingo.

How about this – AF is a bunch of stupid bastards wasting everyone’s time and effort. That’s the “big tent” that the Quota Queens have promoted and that I opposed. Can you guess who was right?

Furthermore, Fuentes’ “plan,” which he always harps on about, now seems to boil down to nothing more than growing the AF brand, and by extension, himself. 

How is that different from Counter-Currents and Greg Johnson?

It devolved into a shouting match in which a multitude of accusations were thrown both ways. The Baked-Beard duo had a crowd of dozens supporting them and shouting down CWC. Eventually, CWC became tired of the situation and simply walked off smirking. Later on, a similar interaction occurred in which Beardson was verbally reprimanded by MAGA-moms for being a nuisance at the rally and causing infighting. Even the most ordinary of normies seem to recognize this jerk for what he is: A troll who stokes division for thirty pieces of silver. Even among his supposed base, the far Right, it is quite difficult to find anyone who doesn’t hate this bearded hobbit man, whether online or in the real world.

Bearded hobbit man! To the hobbit hole!  The fact that this nonsense represents the current state of the public face of Der Movement tells you all you need to know about the total and utter failure of the “movement” and its affirmative action “leadership.”

This can mean only one thing: that the website, the show, and the movement are dying.

We can only hope.

In my last article, I wrote against these tendencies toward NEETism, misogyny, inceldom, and so on. 

How about Nordicism, HBD, traditionalism, and ethnonationalism?

However, I was naïve to the fact that not only have these anti-social tendencies been allowed, or even encouraged, but enforced. In the months since January 6 and AFPAC II, Fuentes’ group has fallen from a cutting-edge, energetic political vanguard of the new and young Dissident Right to an incel support group. It is pathetic. It’s no wonder that the old guard of quality Groypers has backed off, along with quality movement leaders such as Jake Lloyd and Scott Greer…

If you want ten words that sum up the catastrophic failure of Der Movement they are:

...quality movement leaders such as Jake Lloyd and Scott Greer...

That’s quality????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The distinctly negative reaction towards the movement’s proclaimed leader, when juxtaposed with the positive reaction towards the relatively new CWC, indicates that the youth of the New Right are yearning for a strong leader who demonstrates accountability and action. 

Err, “a strong leader who demonstrates accountability and action” is not something one is going to find in Der Movement. That’s a complete incompatibility.

Many of them were boomers who probably learned of the rally from various crossover-friendly activists, like Michelle Malkin.

A Filipina married to a Jew.  What’s not to like?

What can we learn from the death knells of America First? 

That Sallis is always, always, ALWAYS right.  How long have I been warning you about all of these moronic, juvenile buffoons? How long have I opposed “big tent” and “amnats?”

The lessons are not much different from past iterations of the grassroots right such as the Alt Right. Perhaps the greatest new lesson is that quality should not be sacrificed in pursuit of quantity. 

Der Movement hasn’t learned that since the days of Rockwell. What makes you think that “big tent” Quota Queens will learn it now?  Why did anyone EVER take Fuentes seriously to begin with?  Remember all my previous comments, for years, about poor judgment?

Fuentes remarked earlier in the debacle that CWC’s revolutionary ethos and “over-serious” demeanor don’t work in his experience. 

Sure!  Acting like Beavis-and-Butthead juvenile jackasses sure worked for the Alt-Right, huh?

It has become clear that Fuentes wants to focus on marketing the AF brand, but not America itself. He has sunk to scraping the barrel and appealing to the lowest common denominator. 

The perfect “movement” “leader”- apart from his unacceptable “Low Trust” ancestry.

We can also learn – again — the folly of trusting a man above all else. 

Like any of the Quota Queens?  Assuming of course that you consider them to be "men."

Fuentes has claimed, with some truth behind it, that people follow a person, not an idea. However, until we find the person, which may be all but impossible, we will be led again and again into dead-ends by megalomaniacs like Richard Spencer.

Or like Greg Johnson, George Lincoln Rockwell, William Pierce, Jared Taylor, David Duke, or any of them.

The Right has been heading towards a coalescence. You yourself may have noticed that an idea you independently came up with was soon later repeated by someone else and then popularized. 

Like the idea that the “movement” is a fraud and a grift?

We are all coming closer together ideologically as more pieces of the truth are revealed by the powers-that-be as they conceal less and less of their true nature. Also, so-called “meme magic” only seems to be intensifying. Even complete normies and centrists are coming around to secession, an idea which only a year ago was exclusively on the fringe. Now, a decisive supermajority of 84% of Trump voters are worried about anti-white discrimination.

Onward to victory!  Now, time for fundraising!

Unless a literal Jesus figure emerges, it not only can but must be an idea which guides us, and not an egomaniac with his own motivations.

By "egomaniac" you can substitute the name of any of your fearless leaders.

Another lesson to this iteration of the Dissident Right is the association question. As I wrote in the previous article, you are the company you choose to keep. 

This is just too easy to criticize.

Fuentes’ folly, very much like Trump’s, was allowing bad or unserious people near power and influence. 

Ditto.

Fuentes’ almost exclusive association with losers and sycophants...

What major "movement" "leader" is not a loser and what "movement" follower is not a sycophant?

...despite having a multitude of experienced personalities near him...

Who? 

...the embarrassment of a plethora of respectable commentators who are now associated with an incel nationalist gamer brand that only pretends to be a serious movement when it suits them.

Who are these "respectable commentators?"  Are those the same people who didn't realize from the beginning (as I did) that AF was no more or less than "an incel nationalist gamer brand that only pretends to be a serious movement when it suits them."

Furthermore, not only does keeping and inviting those of low quality dilute quality in itself, it also drives those quality men who already there out. Quality is attracted to quality. When it becomes apparent that a group has lowered its quality, the high-quality individuals will naturally look elsewhere for a scene which fits what they are looking for. 

I have been saying that for years, as any long-time reader of this blog well knows.  I've written post after post about this.  But it's a useless exercise in Der Movement because those Quota Queen "activists" who talk about "quality" are precisely the same people responsible for the quality problem to begin with.

There is a vacuum forming. Let us hope and pray this vacuum is filled soon.

That would have to be from outside of Der Movement.

To conclude, this Groyper Civil War will inevitably lead to the disintegration of AF’s last vestiges. However, it can still teach us some lessons about how not to run a dissident movement. Some of these are new, while others are already known:

Yes, known for decades. So how come your "leaders" keep on making the same mistakes over and over again?

Lesson 1: Appealing to the lowest common denominator is a failing strategy in a dissident movement that relies on quality over quantity.

I've been saying that for years. That was one of my primary complaints about the same Alt Right that all of the Quota Queens eagerly joined.

Lesson 2: It is easier, and yet counter-productive, to run a movement through a cult of personality rather than a creed that everyone agrees on. We must follow national movements, not personal brands.

For example, the National Alliance was a William Pierce personality cult, which is one reason that it collapsed so quickly after he died.

Lesson 3: You — and your movement — are the company you keep.

Promoting books like The Homo and The Negro and My Nationalist Pony defines "you and your movement."

Lesson 4: Choosing low-quality people causes high-quality people to scatter.

Again, this is precisely the exact point I've been hammering away at year after year. This is Gresham's Law of activism. By the way, focusing so much attention on people like Fuentes is driving away quality people from your "movement" - so keep on doing it.

Lesson 5: Shunning criticism and good advice is folly.

Tell that to Johnson who "bans" critics and calls them "insane."

The Sun is sadly setting on young Fuentes. I am not alone in having once been optimistic about his prospects. He seemed destined for much more, but what has happened cannot be undone. May we remember these lessons when a new, and hopefully better, iteration of American Dissident Right activism sprouts up. We don’t have time for more screwups.

Hey!  I thought we had "fifty years" - or is that just the "feel good" talk required to prompt "D'Nations?"

Failed Brands

Der Movement, Inc.

Laugh at this.

Good to see that a Counter-Currents writer has admitted that the “movement” is composed of “brands,” within which one cannot critique either the “brand” or the “boss.”  That sounds like an almost Sallisian critique; hopefully, this fellow will not get labelled “insane.”

An article by Aquilonius was recently published here at Counter-Currents, ”Is America First Cracking Up?” While I am a regular viewer of Nick Fuentes’ nightly show, America First with Nicholas J. Fuentes, I don’t pay much attention to the broader America First Extended Universe, so I was a bit slow in getting up to speed on the most recent drama going on there.

What?  “Movement drama?”  Gee, that’s a surprise. When is Gaslighting Greg going to get involved?  Handbags at dawn!

The short version of the story is that Ryan Sanchez, aka Culture War Criminal (CWC), had been a part of the America First (AF) movement…

Note that the author of this moronic article characterizes AF as a “movement,” but soon we’ll learn it is a “brand,” you know, just like MacDonald’s or Coca-Cola.  Or maybe it is a "scene." Read on…

…but was recently expelled for criticizing Fuentes and other high-profile AF members. In addition to this, CWC was subjected to an intense online struggle session where Beardson Beardly and Baked Alaska…

“Beardson Beardly and Baked Alaska” – we are supposed to take all these guys seriously, right?

…acted as the grand inquisitors. There is likewise another America First streamer who goes by the name of Red Pill Gaming (RPG)…

Anyone there named "Anime Masturbator?”

…who has also earned Fuentes’ ire by questioning his methods and decisions. He was similarly subjected to a hot grilling by Fuentes on a Killstream episode.

Gee, that must have been tough.  A battle of wits between unarmed opponents.

The controversy stems from the fact that many people consider some of the critiques made by CWC and RPG to be valid. These include questioning why a nominally pro-white operation employs so much black music in their content…

Maybe because the whole Amnat-Gab-FOX News “mainstreaming” Christian scene worships Blacks and other such non-human featherless bipeds as “God’s children.”

…the wisdom of Fuentes participating in a documentary made by Louis Theroux, a notorious liberal hatchet man with a long record of hostility towards pro-whites…

Maybe the Amnats are just civic nationalists and don’t care about Whites in a racial sense.

…the tendency of some AF streamers to do gaming streams rather than more serious political content…

Well then, all of this nonsense is the latest iteration of the “big tent” “youth culture” we are all supposed to support. After all, it gave us the stunning success of the Alt Right, so what can go wrong, amirite?

…and the utility of having a time bomb like Baked Alaska associated with the AF brand.

AF went from being a “movement” to a “brand.”  More about this shortly.

Many people’s perception is that Fuentes and company are lashing out very aggressively at people who are in fact offering legitimate criticisms. Some believe that this is evidence that Fuentes is becoming megalomaniacal. He’s expelling people from his movement for being honest and telling the truth!

I have a somewhat different take on this, but first I have to discuss another matter.

Counter-Currents has its share of detractors. 

Indeed.

Around the net, I have encountered people who say, “How could you write for Counter-Currents? One time Greg Johnson said blah blah blah.” This doesn’t bother me, since I would be getting some kind of grief no matter who I was writing for. If I wrote for American Renaissance, I would be hearing, “Jared Taylor won’t talk about the JQ!” If I wrote for The Daily Stormer, it would be “Weev’s a Jew!” If I wrote for VDare, if would be “race-mixing boomers!” Some people will always find something to complain about.

And the complaining would be legitimate. The difference between them and myself is that I have my own platform; I'm not just leaving comments around the Internet.

It’s true that I could have just started my own blog and then I would not have to deal with any of that. I would only have to answer for the things I said and did. But building an audience from scratch is a lot of work. Why would I do that when I could write for an established brand that already has one?

So, this idiot admits to being a lazy bastard who wants to parasitize off of the work others have done building their own platforms.

But there are some trade-offs when creating content for an established brand. 

As promised, I will now dig deeper into this “brand” thing.  As should be obvious, and as some on the comments thread to this imbecilic article have already noted, AF is not supposed to be a “brand” but a revolutionary movement.  What those commentators won’t say, for fear of being “banned” by Gaslighting Greg, is that the same applies to Counter-Currents and all the other “movement” sites mentioned. In theory, they are all supposed to be part of a political/metapolitical revolutionary movement, aimed at world historical societal change.  They are not supposed to be “brands.” 

But I agree that, in actuality, they are brands, because Der Movement, Inc. (a money-making enterprise) is a giant grift that panders to the stupidity of its followers and has as its primary objective enriching the Quota Queens who preen and prance as its “leaders.”

You have to be a brand ambassador. Every brand is going to have a party line…

Yes, indeed. Don’t criticize Gaslighting Greg. Be hostile to Spencer, Friberg, and Sallis. Gaslight about everything and anything. Be a petty nationalist.  Insult Italians.  Have a liberal attitude toward homosexuality.  Be an esoteric traditionalist.  Sound familiar?

…and you have to work within those parameters. The heads of the brand will also have friends and enemies, and while you don’t have to make all of them your own, you certainly can’t go around trashing their friends or praising their enemies. In short, you have to be a team player.

See above.

On platforms like YouTube or Dlive, everyone is essentially an independent operator. But even there, there are cliques of like-minded content creators who support and promote each other. Getting in with such a clique might help you grow an audience faster, but it will still function as an informal quasi-brand, with all the same advantages and disadvantages.

Advertise your brand!  Bring in dem shekels!  Fundraising!

When I talk about brands, this can be juxtaposed with a “scene.” The Dissident Right is not a brand; it’s a scene encompassing many brands, sub-scenes, and individual actors. Anyone can come along and call themselves “Dissident Right,” and there is no central authority who can refute that claim or expel the claimant.

Now, we start confusing “brands” with “scenes.”  We’ve come a long way from “AF is a movement” from the beginning of this “essay,” eh?

When you look at the drama in the AF scene, it boils down to the simple question: Is AF a brand or is it a scene? Nick Fuentes apparently believes that it is a brand. He believes that it is his brand that he created, and that he gets to decide who is and is not part of that brand.

OK, it’s a “brand.”

It might be helpful to look at Fuentes’ career arc thus far. He began his political streaming career making content for an established brand: the Right Side Broadcasting Network. He was later dropped by them for attending Charlottesville –i.e., for going off brand. After a brief partnership with James Allsup, he spent the next couple years as a solo operation. Sometime around 2019, he decided to turn his solo operation into a brand.

As a brand, America First works differently from all the other brands I have mentioned so far because it is not based on one website, but rather across multiple streaming services. There are certain people who Fuentes blesses as Nick Fuentes-approved content creators, and they become representatives of the AF brand. There are a lot of benefits in doing so. While Fuentes is not paying his creators, his clout is such being on his team guarantees audience interest and, by extension, superchat money.

The key word – MONEY.  Thar’s what it’s all about, my friends.  Der Movement is all about Der Money.

If we are to take the view that AF is for all intents and purposes a brand, which I do, then yes, Fuentes is entirely within his rights to get angry about being criticized by people who are using his brand. Asking whether or not such criticisms are legitimate is beside the point.

But of course. Who cares about the legitimacy of criticism of Der Movement?

“He doesn’t talk about Jews” is one criticism of Jared Taylor. Is it legitimate? Maybe it is and maybe it isn’t. I could see how one could argue that by not talking about Jews, Taylor is not giving people the full picture. But if you want to write for American Renaissance, you are essentially forfeiting your right to complain about that.

The problem with Amren is the hypocrisy; they historically have quoted Jefferson about not wanting to hide any truths from the world, but they do not allow truths about the JQ there, while at the same time defaming Italians, Romanians, and Hungarians, including promoting Lynn’s lies.

Similarly, John Derbyshire at VDare is in an interracial marriage. One might say that it is bad optics or looks hypocritical for an outlet dedicated to white survival. Is that a valid criticism? Maybe it is and maybe it isn’t. But do you think Peter Brimelow would tolerate anyone on his own staff complaining about it?

Err...it's not only VDARE and Brimelow. Derbyshire is broadly protected and enabled throughout Der Movement, particularly at Amren, where he is invited to speak at their conferences (after calling Amren conference attendees "latrine flies" by repeating that characterization), promoting his Arctic Alliance nonsense and other destructive memes.  Be honest. The protection of the Quota Queens is not only a local "our brand" thing but a "movement"-wide Old Boys Network of affirmative action-supported Herrenvolk.

Further, looking at the blog where this idiot writes, the “protection” at Counter-Currents seems limited to Johnson and perhaps a few favorites.  When I was part of that “brand,” I certainly was not protected from having my “whiteness” (indirectly) questioned by Andrew Hamilton, and Jef Costello was fair game for essentially being labeled a pseudonymous coward by Jim Goad (I note that Costello hasn’t posted there for a long time, good for him).

And Majority Rights was known for having Guessedworker allowing commentators to subject blog posters to vile abuse.

So, not everyone has enjoyed the protection from lese majeste than, say, His Holiness John Derbyshire.

I therefore have to side with Fuentes here. Whether CWC or RPG’s criticisms of Fuentes are legitimate or not doesn’t matter. That’s the trade-off when you want to be a content creator for an established brand. Portraying Fuentes as “not being able to handle criticism” is unfair. No one who operates a brand is going to allow the content creators on their own brand to publicly criticize them, legitimately or otherwise. If something comes up that is such a big deal, you don’t make content for that brand.

Note that I’m no longer involved with any of those “brands.”  I suppose I have my own “brand” – the “insane paranoid piece of crap” “brand,” I suppose.

RPG disputes this and claims that rather than being a brand, America First is more like a scene. 

A "scene", not a "movement."  After all, everyone is tacitly admitting that none of this is serious. Apart from making money, that is.

He says AF is more of an idea or a collection of beliefs, and that anyone can call themselves America First with or without Fuentes’ approval. After all, Fuentes didn’t invent the terms “America First” or “groyper,” so who is he to police those who refer to themselves by those labels? In theory, RPG is right, but in practice, if a twentysomething white male starts a YouTube channel and calls himself “America First,” he is probably not marketing his content to Seinfeld enthusiasts. Rather, he is trying to tap into Nick Fuentes’ audience.

Tap into audience = tap into revenue stream.

When it comes to the claim that these AF disputes are being handled poorly and with bad optics, I think Fuentes’ detractors are making a stronger point. The streams of CWC getting chewed out by Beardson Beardly and Baked Alaska (who came off as particularly unhinged), or Nick Fuentes’ shouting match with RPG on the Killstream, are not pleasant to hear.

Beardson and CWC met in person at an anti-vax rally…

Of course.  We have to appeal to the Gab/FOX News yahoos after all….

…in Springfield, Illinois over the weekend, and a heated exchange ensued. Beardson was so aggressive towards CWC that some normie MAGA moms in attendance…

You know, the kind that will scream about vaccines but smile benignly when their children come home from school bloody and beaten after being attacked by feral Negros. We’re all “Children of God” after all.

…actually came out in defense of CWC. This is a sign that these extremely bombastic humiliation rituals are not appealing to normies. Maybe AF feels that it is necessary to make an example of CWC, but there is nevertheless a subset of their target audience who find their methods distasteful.

Some of this may be due to the nature of America First as a brand. If AF was centered on one website, to drop someone from the brand you could just drop the person from the site. 

Like Greggy does.

With AF, however, you become part of the brand by being endorsed by Fuentes, and dropped by being disavowed. Regardless, over-the-top aggression being employed to accomplish this is less than ideal.

As a result of these humiliation sessions, some people have started describing America First as a cult. I would dispute this, but the fact remains that there are people who see these developments as a bad sign. If someone were a newcomer to America, and the first thing they heard was the video of Beardson Beardly and Baked Alaska screaming at CWC for disagreeing with the boss, no one could fault them for thinking that they had just stumbled across a cult.

And now we have moved from “movement” to “brand” to “scene” back to “brand” and now to “cult.”  Well, yes, many “movement” “brands” are indeed personality cults. Counter-Currents is a Gaslighting Greg personality cult.  Not much of a personality, true enough, but there you go.

Comments:

If Nick Fuentes is accomplishing nothing then the rest of us are accomplishing nothing times a million.

Yes, Travis, that's correct, you at Counter-Currents are "accomplishing nothing times a million."

Lord Jim:

I can also think of at least one person—one whom Fuentes never missed an opportunity to bash and who is persona non grata on this website—who got tons more national attention than Fuentes ever did or ever will.

It seems like plain-speaking tough guy Jim Goad is afraid to write the name "Richard Spencer" over there at the Counter-Currents brand. I suppose he doesn't want to get smacked in the head with a pink purse. Understandable.

Note that Fuentes does not invalidate my concept of "movement" affirmative action. America First/Alt Lite/civic nationalist right-wing populism/Trumpism is part of the broad "big tent" Der Movement, but it is peripheral, it is NOT any part of the WN/racialist/race realist core. The extent to which Fuentes would be accepted as a "leader" in that core is best exemplified by Rodney Martin's designation of Fuentes as "Nick the spic."

Tommasi was killed, Calabro was mocked behind his back as "racially mixed" and "omnidominant" - the affirmative action program won't allow non-Nordic Europeans, much less someone part-Hispanic.

Great optics!  How can any of these people, and their websites, talk about anyone else?