Hillary Clinton’s Speech and the AltLeft


I was a guest on The Stark Truth to discuss Hillary’s speech about the AltRight(as well as Trump’s response and the spike in traffic to this site.) Another subject we touched on was the problem of entryism in these various movements. I had actually considered abandoning this site recently, until Hillary sent it a massive amount of publicity and suddenly it seems foolish to throw it all away. My girlfriend claims I have a “fear of success” since I’m always starting up projects and creating things, and as soon as they start to gain traction I decide to bail and work on some new thing. I remember an episode of Quantum Leap with Bob (((Saget))) I once saw that featured a similar theme. Also, I have a tendency to not promote something I’m involved in heavily, in ways that would attract a lot of attention. A big part of this is that I see the kind of attention *others* get, and let’s just say recognition seems overrated in many regards.

The term AltLeft itself may have been ruined by media people who do absolutely zero research on terms they decide to write articles about, as well as by random idiots who lack enough intellectual curiosity to do a “google search.”  Greg Johnson has touched upon this regarding the AltRight in a recent article.

I’ve always maintained it would be difficult for entryists to disassociate my ideas from the AltLeft because:

A. I own the domain altleft.com, so people searching for the term will always end up here. If you own the .com domain name for anything, whether it’s a bizarre ideological offshoot or a product, it gives you a “built in” market share. For example, if someone owns “turtlenecks.com” it would be difficult for competitors to say, “oh that turtlenecks.com site really has nothing to do with authentic turtlenecks, my site ‘Tyrone’s Shirt Mart’ is really the authority on turtlenecks.” If someone owns gold.com and decides to make a website that sells gold, you could never marginalize them from the gold market completely, even if you are able to confuse people. In other words, traffic will still arrive at this site, and what I can do with it is anybody’s guess.

B. This site was one of the earliest AltLeft blogs, maybe the 2nd one that was ever created and it even came with manifestos and outlines unlike whatever random tumblr stuff that may have been floating about. Robert Lindsay’s blog is the only one I know that came before this site, and he’s been at it for several years even before coining the term. There were a couple of national bolshevik groups on the chan sites and reddit that were using it as well.

As I’ve stated before, the problem with identities like “right” and “left” is that they’re not specific and mean many things to many different people. There are people who look at this blog and see all the anti-capitalist, anti-traditionalist, (mild)pro-degeneracy, modernist,  environmentalist, animal rights activist, anti-imperialist views and will say “I don’t see anything left wing there” simply because of my pro-white racial views. It’s the same when you hear conservatives say stuff like “we’re not the AltRight, we’re the real right or new right.”  Well okay, but whose definition of “right” are you going by? That probably means 50 different things depending on whom you talk to. Perhaps there is a correct definition, but the point is that  large swaths of people you attract have the potential to be easily confused by the ambiguity and breadth of historical contexts.

I think Robert Lindsay is accurate when he says that in a way, we are basically the left wing of the AltRight. Perhaps I’ll be reabsorbed back into it at some point or go off and do something else.


Flashback Friday – Wyatt Kaldenberg and The New Aryan Left


Here’s an old episode of Race and Reason from the late 80s(?) featuring Wyatt Kaldenberg. He talks about the New Aryan Left and his experiences in the Young Socialist Alliance as a teenager. Wyatt is probably best known for being the guy who threw a chair and broke Geraldo’s nose on the famous skinhead brawl episode in 1988. He became an Odinist later in life and isn’t really active in racial politics anymore. It happens to a lot of people. He’s still around though and is a nice guy.

As a guest on Race and Reason, he talks about many of the same things we discuss on here, which he seems to have noticed 30 years ago. Mainly that the left has no room for (non self-hating) white people, and economic issues have been totally abandoned for ethnic grievance politics. This is even more true now of course.

I was a socially moderate republican when I was younger, but I remember about 12 or 13 years ago taking a mild interest in communism, but when I went to the CPUSA’s website and read some Green Party type blogs, they were almost totally dedicated to “fighting racism” in the criminal justice system, Peace on Earth as well as an obsession with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Anyway, it was a total turnoff.

Wyatt also mentions how the right wing didn’t care about the working class and was too interested in sending people to pointless wars. Another thing he talks about that I identify with is how when he got into the race movement, all these conservatives were always trying to insert all these other pet issues into the movement that he had no interest in. Wow, the more things change…

Robert Stark and I Discuss Las Vegas Culture on The Stark Truth


Robert and I recently went on a trip to Las Vegas and decided to do a show about it.

You can listen to it here.

It was a great trip, but I wish I could have stayed longer. It was extremely hot during the day to walk around. You can cover a lot more ground and see more in the winter. My girlfriend and I are considering moving there near the strip(such a romantic place for a couple to settle down!) In all seriousness though, I love Las Vegas and have always wanted to live there ever since I saw Diamonds Are Forever when I was a kid. My favorite episode of Charlie’s Angels is the two part season premier(Season 3?) featuring Dean Martin. He has a memorable line at the end:

“He’s been playing ‘Don’t Pass’ and ‘Don’t Pass’ is for non-believers. Sabrina, sooner or later, you have to be a believer.”

I’m not sure how it relates to anything specifically, but I always found it inspiring…in the sense that pessimism and negativity are smart bets, but sooner or later to win you have to be optimistic about something.

Of course, I also own every episode of the mostly forgotten yet highly underrated late 70’s show, “Vega$.” I highly recommend it if you enjoy any of the old private investigator shows like The Rockford Files, Charlie’s Angels, Magnum P.I. etc.(why were there so many in the 70’s and early 80’s?) Also…Robert Urich, RIP. What a great actor.

A Short Trip Through The Long View


Many years ago I saw an interview with Netanyahu of Israel. The reporter asked him something along the lines of would he “ever consider giving up any territories acquired in the Six Day War in 1967.” His response was simply “I don’t  give concessions in advance of negotiations. I get better results that way.” Jewish people are notorious for being shrewd and formidable negotiators, and I have experienced this first hand many times in dealing with them.

I bring this up because Robert Lindsay wrote a brief post outlining his position on race and the AltLeft. First off, I want to say that I think it’s good if we can establish a healthy network of different blogs with a variety of viewpoints. My impression from reading Lindsay’s work semi-regularly is that Robert is more moderate and tolerant than I am on racial issues, while I’m probably more progressive on gender and sex related issues. Since he has articulated his views on race, I will give a brief overview of mine:

I take the long view on race, which is to say I approach it in terms of looking at the end game scenarios of trends and policies,  analyzing and magnifying micro trends through a macro lens.

It’s very easy to be against white nationalism, white separatism and all of that. The logistics and viability of it are questionable even for those who are sympathetic to it or otherwise have no moral objections. I’m not even sure I could/would live my life according to the standards of many proponents of nationalism, many of which rival even fervent bible thumpers in their social conservatism. Whites seem to be naturally inclusive and altruistic. It is likely there would always be exceptions made in one form or another. However, like Netanyahu understands, the starting point affects the end game. We’d have to begin with a highly restrictive group to even hope to achieve an 85% or 90% European society. If one says “I think living in an 80% white state would be sufficient to maintain our culture,” then there’s a good chance you’ll only end up with a 55% majority, which will quickly dwindle to 45% and so on. It’s almost comical that as of right now, whites have basically zero in group racial solidarity or tribal cooperation, yet here we are already making concessions and arguing to include others…even though we don’t even have anything yet! We have nothing. We’re not even out of the gates let alone closing them behind us!

For me, it comes down to this: There is no predominantly black part of a city anywhere in the world that I would desire to live in. Every city in the US that has come to be dominated by nonwhite(excluding east Asian) demographics is a totally miserable place to live if you’re white. Once you come to that realization, the next logical step for someone with self preservation instincts and future time orientation would be to prevent these demographic changes from manifesting in other places we may currently or potentially someday reside in. If having  a 90% black or Mexican population leads to terrible conditions for white people, then working toward white in-group awareness and cooperation in opposing this seems logical and perfectly reasonable.

There are many people in the “race realist” community involved in the esoteric study of racial IQ differences and other aspects of human biological diversity. Some seem content to just say “Hmm, interesting..” at the findings. Okay, but why not actually “do” something with this information? Yes, there is a lot of “hatred for whites,” and this will in fact increase. As whites become a minority, and other groups assume more and more power, they will simply squeeze even tighter until they’ve sucked every last drop of perceived worth out of us. Your children will grow up being lectured about how evil white people are, and if these kids can manage to snag whatever non-outsourced service industry jobs are left, they will be vengefully reprimanded regularly about privilege and oppression by some insufferable affirmative action boss.

With few exceptions, only whites even think in terms of “wanting to help all the races.” Other groups advocate for their own ethnic groups exclusively and will unapologetically exploit your altruism to do so. Let’s say you have a few non-whites who don’t engage in identity politics or don’t openly express hatred for white people. We’ve all worked with individuals from different races that we liked and got along with personally, but that nice black guy or Mexican you work with probably still votes against your interests. I treat people as individuals personally but it’s important to always keep an eye on the big picture:

What happens when there are millions of them? What pressures or incentives would they have to not simply assert their tribal group interests? More importantly, what could I do about it at that point? anything? We saw what happened in countries like South Africa and Zimbabwe when whites became a minority.  It wasn’t pretty.  Yeah, this guy  I worth with seems all right, but maybe diversity just isn’t worth it for us in the end.

A society becoming majority non-white results in it being transformed irreversibly in ways I find undesirable. Not just in obvious examples like violent crime but also in terms of cultural experience. What sort of television programming would exist in a 90% nonwhite society? What kind of music would be on the radio? What sort of movies would be playing in the theater? What would the architecture look like? What kind of clothing would women be able to wear in public? What sort of priority would be given to space exploration and advanced sciences? How would people talk? What would the experience be like at school for your children? What sort of history would be taught to them and how would it be framed? If you import high time preference groups even at low levels, they will reproduce at a faster rate and eventually outnumber and come to dominate the native population.

I happen to like Asian-Americans(though I’ve never been attracted to Asian girls) and find Japanese and Vietnamese people to enhance our culture, but if our society were to become dominated by them demographically I would likely feel like a tourist in my own neighborhood, city and country. Like it or not, identity politics is here to stay. We can actively pursue and embrace our own or passively assimilate into someone else’s. “Being human isn’t always happy.”

Discussing Economic Populism on The Stark Truth


Robert Stark was kind enough to invite me on to co-host with him to discuss economic populism with his guest, Bay Area Guy. The audio can be found here:


Bay Area Guy is well known for writing an article called “The Radical Center,” which was about the growing group of people holding politically centrist views that are radicalizing due to the squeeze from both sides.

More recently he wrote a piece on how the AltRight ignores the economic forces behind white disunity. His views seem to be very similar to my own.


Decoded Transmissions and Receiving Mixed Signals


I had a couple of articles I had about 3/4 finished, but haven’t posted them yet due to events in the news and just generally being busy with other things. I was a guest and co-host on The Stark Truth podcast with Robert Stark for 3 upcoming episodes and will post links to the shows here once they air. They will most likely be up sometime over the next few weeks.

Meanwhile, here are some thoughts on Sanders’ recent statements as well as some overall related observations:

Sanders’ continuous stream of anti-white comments such as those he made at the debate make him unsupportable to any self respecting white person. He appears to have gone all in with the “black lives matter” and the social justice crowd and completely abandoned the white working class demographic. His young ethnomasochist supporters are too naive to realize pandering doesn’t work and that the people their sacrificing their interests for are simply exploiting their altruism to advance their own tribal interests(whether conscious of it or not.)

I support many of Bernie’s economic policies, but any potential benefits are of course cancelled out by his social justice/anti-white commitment. For example, I agree with the $15 minimum wage increase he proposes as a means of countering manipulative corporations and cheap assholes, but you can’t have a $15 minimum wage *and* invite millions of people here from the 3rd world. It’s financially unsustainable. This is the same with free college education. It’s a great idea and works in other countries, but you can’t have government sponsored college *and* take in massive amounts of refugees and other third world migrants. Such noble collective endeavors require a delicate balance to ensure they remain fiscally feasible and everyone is on the same page in terms of their investment in the society. Such programs require high trust, low time preference populations to remain successful. People like Sanders are well intentioned but lack the will to make the difficult choices. They are too afraid of being called racist, heartless, nationalist etc to take the necessary steps to confront politically incorrect obstacles to the success of their own programs.

Of course, I’m not strictly talking about race/immigration. Bernie would no doubt institute environmental reforms in the US, but would he forbid the US from importing goods from countries which have(comparatively) little to no pollution or hazard controls, such as China, India or Mexico? What good is it to tell our companies they can’t pollute, so we can feel good about ourselves here, while at the same time we gladly take in products from countries that don’t care about the environment? It’s hypocritical. Bernie’s positions on trade with China are good, and he seems to understand this. He is also though one of those people that believes the US should be subservient to the “international community,” the will of the United Nations etc. This leads me to believe that as a leader he would be weak in asserting our national interests when faced with opposition from so-called “oppressed” third world nations. If he can’t say no to amnesty for millions of illegal aliens or to the untold number of people around the world who want to flood the US,(even though they will render his domestic programs insolvent and unsustainable) it’s hard to see him putting his foot down on the world stage. Sure, he’s voted against dubious trade deals while in congress and as a senator, but that’s not the same thing as having to face actual foreign leaders and being willing to accept the wrath of cutting them off.  Being the bearer of bad news just doesn’t fit with Bernie’s temperament, but I may be wrong on this issue.

The bottom line for me though is that as a white person, Sanders’ “net anti-white” vision for America would permanently transform it in ways I find undesirable.

From Sanders’ campaign website:

Bernie firmly rejects the idea that America’s standard of living must drop in order to see a raise in the standard of living in China.

This illustrates exactly how I feel about concepts like “white privilege.” I’m not willing to allow the country/state/city/neighborhood I live in to be downgraded so that someone else can upgrade from whatever third world shithole they came from. I reject the idea that I have to forfeit or handicap my own prospects to improve someone else’s and that we must give away what our ancestors sacrificed for and bequeathed to us for people who openly express hatred for us. Many of these advantages are likely a result of genetics anyway. I have no guilt and owe these people nothing. As a biological organism, self preservation instincts(for those of us who still embrace them) trump your feels. I imagine this is how corporations feel about minimum wage laws and wealth redistribution, but it seems to me that community and national interest may conflict with personal economic interests from time to time, and the state must intervene occasionally if nation states themselves are to survive as distinct entities. Everyone hates heavy handed HOAs too, but “anything goes” neighborhoods tend to look like shit. I do believe that collectively humans can build a superior functioning society than a strictly individualist / libertarian one, which lacks any cohesive vision or aesthetic consciousness. Yet when someone starts talking about “checking your privilege” or turning the country over to low IQ people with poor future time orientation, I intuitively get the feeling I’m being scammed. Looking at Oakland, Camden, Memphis, Detroit, Baltimore, South Africa, Zimbabwe, etc. it’s unclear why I should support policies that inevitably lead to more majority nonwhite cities.

photo (7)

We know how that story ends, not with universal humanism but with reduced social capital and increased violence toward whatever whites are too poor, naive or stoic to escape the consequences of some shielded politician’s virtue signaling.