Yangster’s Paradise

“That’s cool, but he has no chance,” was my initial reaction when a friend of mine sent me a link to a story about a candidate who was running for president on a platform of “universal basic income.” Admittedly, I had never heard of Andrew Yang until just a couple of weeks ago and had pretty much already made up my mind to support Tulsi Gabbard in 2020 (though with Bernie now entering the race, her chances have been greatly diminished.) I must say that I feel a tad guilty for dismissing Yang out of hand, since even a brief glimpse of his campaign reveals Yang to be the smartest, most impressive and dare I say, the most serious candidate in this race.

While the other candidates spout vague, meaningless buzzword driven platitudes about “hate,” “privilege” “Russia” and engage in unproductive political theatrics, Yang offers up detailed policy proposals which actually address the most pressing issues of our time. Andrew Yang’s optimistic and solutions oriented approach provides a stark contrast with the rest of the candidates, whose political identities have largely been reduced to perpetual outrage at everything Trump says and does (even in the cases where Trump has embraced traditionally democratic positions, such as peace with North Korea, fair trade etc.)

Yang wisely has chosen to bypass the culture wars almost entirely and instead is focused on crafting complex solutions to actual problems. Rather than pandering to various “marginalized” identity groups, he looks at the bigger picture and remains committed to ideas which can improve the lives of everyone. The other candidates pay only superficial lip service to the issues we face, to the extent they have even thought about them at all. Yang has delved into the nitty-gritty of policy. I’m not even just talking about his “Universal Basic Income” proposal. Just take a gander at the treasure trove of policies presented on his website. This guy has thought of everything. He actually has a real plan. If even 1/3 of Yang’s ideas were implemented, the USA would be a vastly improved country. No other candidate has given any serious thought to the everyday issues that matter to Americans. Just the fact that Yang is promising to ban robocalls would be reason enough to vote for him. Yang’s American Mall Act would help to revitalize, repurpose and preserve many of these culturally important structures.

I like Yang because he combines social liberalism with forward-thinking, transhumanist friendly ideas and bold economic policies, all without succumbing to seemingly obligatory, anti-white racial grievance politics. While the rest of the candidates fall over each other to signal their open hostility toward white people (or some similarly maligned bogeyman) Yang emerges as a genuinely positive force, armed with concrete proposals and determined to make life better for everyone.

Conventional wisdom states that relatively unknown candidates run for office with the aim of getting publicity for their ideas, to draw attention to certain issues and get people talking about them. We live in unconventional times though, when obscure candidates can be memed into political juggernauts overnight. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Beto O’Rourke and even David Hogg were complete “nobodies” a year or two ago and now find their influence inflated beyond that of household name politicians who’ve been in office for decades. It may seem like a long shot, but Yang can win. His upbeat, affable persona and substantive campaign have the potential to transcend traditional ideological divides and win over vast swaths of the American public. If even the most disillusioned among us can manage to muster up sufficient enthusiasm for Yang’s candidacy, then imagine what people who actually do things could do for him. Andrew Yang for president, for the win.

Official Response to Trump’s Remarks on the AltLeft

As many of you may well know, President Trump conducted a press conference earlier today in which he specifically made disparaging remarks about the AltLeft. Many of these statements were slanderous and well off the mark. No one that I know who is associated with the AltLeft (which by the way has existed for years) would ever support or engage in violence. As anti-alpha male anti-heroes, we don’t care for brodozers and machismo and people who eat chips loudly. We like our testosterone bound to SHBG, not left unchecked where it is free to bind to receptor sites willy nilly or converted into its more potent forms. I personally don’t even like to attack bugs. In fact, I once had a black widow spider web in my shower and continued to shower next to it for a year, leaving the web completely undisturbed. Occasionally I would glance over at the spider, its red hour glass glistening through the steamy water droplets, and I would say “hey bud. how’s it going?” I have no empirical proof, but to this day I like to think we had an understanding. The idea that we would attend rallies and assault people, could not be further from the truth. I could not harm a fly. Speaking of insects I was as shocked as anyone when in the 1958 version of the film “The Fly,” Vincent Price and the detective just stood there idly watching as Al Hedison was devoured by the spider. They made absolutely no effort to save him despite his desperate cries for help. Militants? Violence? Yeah right. To paraphrase Mike Myers in Wayne’s World “I don’t even own a gun, let alone many guns, which would necessitate a gun rack.”

Trump’s comments are a slap in the face to anyone who believes that the less aggro elements of Antifa and the AltRight should combine forces to get single payer health care passed and a plan for student debt relief. They could focus their dual energies on dismantling the college football industrial complex. Time to get rid of the obsession with national championships, ditch the needless playoffs and restore conference rivalries. Go back to naming bowl games strictly after fruits, plants and other commodities rather than mega-corporations. If the AltRight and Antifa groups are to have skirmishes, they should take the form of squirt gun battles, their classic Super Soaker 50s and translucent squirt guns, filled not with bleach but with Hi-C, Tang and Capri Sun. Yeah that’s right, the red pill is for squares. The AltLeft is all about the orange pill. That’s where instead of spending a bunch of your hard earned mooncoin to attend a rally in Podunk USA and get maced by strange looking subhumans, you simply head on down to the food court at your local dying mall and order up an Orange Julius, quietly(!) slurping it while daydreaming about the cosmos and reminiscing about the Radio Shack you used to buy remote control cars from in the late 80’s, which has now been replaced by some kind of ethnic eyebrow waxing place (thanks to both globalization and greed induced corporate imperial overextension.) Go ahead, call us chic nihilists, fedora nationalists, new suburbanists, retro futurists or snorters of Pixy Stix. We don’t care. Deep down, orange you glad we didn’t take the black pill or the turquoise pill or the periwinkle pill? You know you are. By the way, as I’ve mentioned many times I’ve always disliked the pill analogy. The Matrix is a terrible movie. The camera work practically gave me motion sickness, and the whole cheesy “he’s the one” thing made this cynical GenX’er roll his eyes while mentally barfing at the screen of this melodramatic spectacle. It was a total corn muffin, not a sci-fi movie that I cared for that’s for sure. I hated the digital effects and didn’t even enjoy the overall ambianic aesthetic as much as that of Damnation Alley, which is really saying something.

Trump’s statements are also a violent assault on every intelligent, well meaning, teal haired white feminist beauty who works her ass off in retail and reluctantly complains about how Indian customers are disproportionately cheap, and how they’re constantly demanding discounts and other free shit. Furthermore, Trump’s words betray every Xenu fearing person who has been stuck in line at Starbucks behind someone who couldn’t just simply place a fucking order without asking questions about every item on the menu…the calories, the ingredients, the special requests, the whole shebang.

When Trump condemns the AltLeft, it’s an insult to every person who recognizes that Vegas Vacation is the superior film in the National Lampoon’s Vacation franchise, even though Ethan Embry became kind of an SJW. What is it with former child/teen stars becoming SJWs anyway? I don’t care about Will Wheaton, as I never got into Star Trek. Tristine Skyler (whom I had a brief childhood crush on after seeing her in the film Kidco and who outshined Christian Slater in one of the best ABC Weekend Specials, The Haunted Mansion Mystery) was a little bit more disappointing. She went to Princeton though, so good for her. I really don’t understand how any 70’s or 80’s kid could get more than superficially into social justice. Our childhoods were filled with grossly offensive things, (remember Cabbage Patch Preemies? like ewww wtf I love social justice now) and those same childhoods were radically unmatched in their total awesomeness. Anyhow, suffice to say that Trump’s presser was a personal affront to anybody who found Back to the Future III to be a lackluster finale to the trilogy. I’m not sure how many people that works out to be, but it’s more than a few. You know it’s true. What Trump said is mind boggling for anyone who was inspired by Warren Beatty’s charismatic “Guy Named Porpoise” speech in the 1978 film Heaven Can Wait only to wonder why 40 years later nobody prioritizes these issues.

Trump’s criticism of the behavior of the AltLeft feels like knuckles to the creep to every laid back Beatnik Fascist that doesn’t care much for blabbing the drab gab but rather chatters hep patter on twatter, if you catch my drift. Not everyone wants to take the long trip to Roman Salutesville, but if we decide to rig ourselves a little shindig vessel, what’s the harm in a few kicks? After all, we’re peace loving moonboots, and you’re the tabby cat with the codes to the missiles.

Every left transhumanist who seeks bionic upgrades, mind uploading, immortality and the resurrection of wooly mammoths should be disturbed by Trump’s pontificatory declarations about the fabric of our being. Like Box in Logan’s Run we are “more than machine, more than man, more than a fusion of the two. Don’t you agree? Wait for the winds. Then our birds sing. And the deep grottos whisper our names.” Trump may have “one of the highest IQs,” but he’ll be no match for us after we transcend our earthly bags of bones and fuse our collective consciousnesses to refurbished Tandy 1000s.

People always claim that Trump is playing 4D chess. His moves are so unpredictable and counter-intuitive, and yet you just know the only possible explanation is that it must be because he is 12 moves ahead of you. I know this because I myself have beaten a computer at chess several times on the “very easy” setting. We here on the AltLeft have our own preferred game though. It’s called Hungry Hungry Hippos, and we’re playing for our fair share of all the marbles.

For Donations:
Bitcoin Address 1CDTBhYftHbod16WFhPz65nZmAmbb54Vph

Brandon Adamson is the author of Beatnik Fascism

A Time Beneath the Surface

roman2

I’ve seen a lot of morons on social media celebrating and encouraging political violence against people like Richard Spencer. The consensus among them seems to be something along the lines of “We can’t let this happen again. You saw what happened last time when we stood by as fascists rose to power. We can’t allow these people to have a public platform. They must be relentlessly attacked.” It isn’t surprising that they think this is some innovative or amped up approach, given how superficial most people’s knowledge of history is (Edward Gibbon spent decades of his life studying the fall of the Roman Empire in order to get a complete picture of just that one historical event.) I myself spent a couple of years obsessed with the Vietnam War, reading everything I could get my hands on that covered the subject, and I still feel like I only scratched the surface (maybe I’ll write more about this sometime.)

In any event, far from being an innovative or effective approach, the people encouraging violence are retracing the same steps and ironically are facilitating the expedited rise of nationalism. You always hear people talk about the Brownshirts and the Blackshirts as being these villainous thugs and bullies, jackbooted, Clockwork Orange level sadist gangs in uniform roaming the streets, terrorizing innocent people. Though they were made up mostly of normal working class people, 70 years of relentless post-war propaganda has mythologized them into monstrous legions of evil bogeymen. Yet you rarely hear people talk about why these groups were created. The reason why groups like the Blackshirts were formed in the first place was because nationalists were being heckled and attacked at their rallies. It was determined that protective groups had to be formed to prevent the rallies from being violently disrupted. Watch the 1967 interview below with Oswald Mosley, and tell me we’re not watching history repeat itself before our very eyes:

I doubt most of the people celebrating the gutless sucker punch on Richard Spencer have any clue what historical forces they’re re-unleashing. I doubt most of them would even know who Oswald Mosley was if they heard his name. The framework of most Americans’ understanding of WW2 history appears to be primarily shaped by Indiana (((Jones))) movies and a few weeks of hearing about the holocaust in school.

To get an idea of what we’re possibly headed toward, David Hines recently offered up an excellent Tweetstorm on the potentiality and form of future political violence in the United States. The only issue I would take is that he slightly overemphasizes the left/right paradigm in my opinion. Most major corporations endorsed Hillary. Democrat and Republican have become dated labels and are in the process of being redefined. Identity politics has proven to supersede mere class concerns. Wealthy CEOs who send jobs overseas and outsource are championed by the left so long as they promote non-whites into high positions in their companies and donate to social justice causes. Meanwhile, poor or middle class whites are vilified and now apparently even considered fair game targets for violence if they have they hold the “wrong” opinions on race, gender or just happen to be wearing a Trump hat in public. The divides seem to be more accurately pro-white vs anti-white, globalism vs nationalism or even pro-west vs anti-west. These three separate divides are intertwining to condense confused battle lines. It would seem that any white person who favors restricting immigration and promotes a protectionist trade policy will simply be categorized as far right from now on, no matter what their positions are on other issues.

Just to wrap things up, I support Richard Spencer, and I’m doing my part to move away from all the “factioning,” infighting and signaling, in order to better assist those that are out there taking the heat from people who hate all of us.

The Unreality of “Non-Racist” Race Realism

viewmaster2

Lately I’ve been hearing a lot of talk about “anti-racist” or “non-racist” race realism in certain circles. Basically all it strikes me as is some kind of bizarre euphemistic rationalization for someone who says and believes racist things but wants to insist they are against racism, perhaps by implying that they aren’t going to act upon their thought criminalistic beliefs or take their beliefs to their logical conclusion and advocate for racially based policies or engage in any kind of racial activism.

This kind of approach doesn’t make much sense to me.

The minute you start talking about there being racial IQ differences or pointing out differences in group behavior tendencies among different racial groups, you’ve already crossed the Rubicon into racism. When you start talking about how blacks are loud and hoot and holler in movie theaters, that *is* a racist stereotype and a racist observation, (especially if you believe there is any biological basis for these behavioral differences, but even if you do not.) Racism is a belief or set of them, which can be held even if you take no action.

So what you are really trying to say is that while you are racist on some level and hold racist viewpoints and believe some racial stereotypes are accurate, that you would not want to discriminate against anyone based on these thoughts you hold. That doesn’t mean you’re not racist, it just means you’re against discrimination. Though even this seems hard to swallow. If you believe things about a certain group, why would you refuse to apply the knowledge you’ve accumulated or the beliefs you hold to your everyday life? That just seems remarkably inefficient and counter intuitive. The answer is of course you apply this knowledge in your life. If you know a particular neighborhood is predominantly black, do you just decide to go for a stroll through it in the middle of the night without any hesitation, just as you would in a predominantly Asian or white neighborhood of an equal socioeconomic status? My guess is that you would not, or that at the very least you would consider them each on a different basis. Tailoring your activity in an area based on the racial demographics (not exclusively but among other variables,) is a form of practicing racial discrimination. It is a mild form to be sure, but it is racism. You can even attempt to claim that it isn’t discrimination because there is no “victim,” and that you are not directly discriminating against anyone, yet if there is a store or a business in an area that is not being frequented because the racial demographics in that neighborhood makes people hesitant to conduct their shopping there, then that business is losing potential customers on the basis of racial discrimination (whether justifiably or not.)

So you can make the claim that you want to use these racially based observations and beliefs positively to help these other groups or in some way utilize this knowledge to help us all live together peacefully, but in order to apply this information to society in some useful way, that would entail a racially based policy or action of some kind to put this knowledge to practice. It’s still a racialist action that is taking place. Also the very notion that other groups should adopt the values and cultural norms of European western civilization, and that you can “help” them, is itself a kind of implicit white supremacy. It’s the “White Man’s Burden,” busybody imperialism as opposed to the quiet separatist who would rather just be left alone and isn’t concerned one way or the other with how others wish to live, so long as they do it far away.

Furthermore, identifying as a “non-racist” race realist won’t win you any points or shield you from being branded a racist by 95% of people. It’s a distinction without a meaningful difference.

Imagine your boss calls you into the office one day…

“Excuse me Charlie, we’ve had a complaint that you wrote an internet article back in 2010 that says blacks have a tendency to behave rudely in restaurants…”

“Oh don’t worry about that, sir. You see I’m not racist. I’m against racism. I’m just a race realist.”

“Well whatever, I’m afraid we’re going to have to let you go. Our company cannot tolerate white supremacists. We value diversity here at Globocorp. Security will escort you out of the building.”

Of course, none of this means that if you’re “racist” you by default must embrace white nationalism, separatism, segregation, gentrification or any other proposed “solution.” It just means you’re a racist. There are many different ideological directions one can go once they reach that realization. Racial awareness isn’t a one way street toward white nationalism, (though that’s certainly not an illogical direction to go in for many people.) Nor does this mean that you have to hate every non-white person. To the contrary, being racist allows you to be friends with someone from another race and deal with them from a mutual position of honesty and acceptance if you’re both up for it. The worst people are the ones who claim to be against racism and advocate for mass immigration from places like Somalia, but then move to Portland or send their kids to majority white private schools in Vermont. They’re like the Christians who constantly harp about degeneracy while they’re hypocritically engaging in all kinds of pervy shit in their own lives.
Why is hate considered intrinsically bad anyway? Hate can be good and useful, which is why it is something we’ve evolved to be biologically capable of emoting. Love is overrated. You don’t have to hate, but so what if you do? Hate can get you out of some nasty situations in life, one way or another.

Most people are subconsciously racist to one degree or another and are not aware of it, but they act upon these beliefs constantly. The (((media))) of course loves to point this out, but pushes the narrative that you are supposed to feel guilty about noticing behavioral patterns and using your brain efficiently in learned risk/reward assessment. They want you to repent by bending over and masochistically giving away western civilization to hostile people from the third world, and they pretend this is somehow good for everyone or that it is simply white people’s turn to suffer and be enslaved. Fortunately though, many whites read those propaganda articles about “examining their whiteness” and don’t find the ethnomasochism offer all that tempting. Instead, a growing number of them opt to simply embrace their whiteness and go with their survival instincts.

A Proposal To Go Away

flyme2

Some friendly fellow named “Lord Keynes,” who seems mostly preoccupied with Post-Keynesian economics, made a post on his blog called “Proposal for an Alt Left Political Program.”  In it he makes the claim that my wing “doesn’t even belong in the Alt Left.”

Group (1) doesn’t even belong on the Alt Left at all in my view: these people belong on the Alt Right. The only exception I would make is Robert Lindsay, who seems to have some pretty controversy opinions and is extremely hostile to Cultural Leftism but at least doesn’t seem motivated by Alt Right racial hatred or White Supremacism.

This is of course bizarre, considering I was here long before him and am one of the pioneers of the AltLeft. In fact I wrote my manifesto about a year ago, so if he read it, and it didn’t suit him he is free to make up a new name for whatever *new* movement he wants to be a part of.

I’ve got news for you, I’m not going anywhere. I own AltLeft.com so to the extent anyone uses and popularizes the term, they will inevitably be driving traffic to my site where it will forever be associated with my views he finds so offensive…muahahahahah!

Second, the nerve of this entryist to basically say that “well I guess Robert Lindsay should still be a part of it.” Hello dude, Robert Lindsay is one of the originals and yeah he has “some pretty controversial opinions.” The AltLeft has always been about race realism and things like gender realism. That’s the whole fucking point. It was for people who had a lot of left wing views but who held opinions considered too taboo or “problematic” for the mainstream. If you use the term “controversial opinions” unironically, you aren’t AltLeft or AltRight or alt anything as far as I’m concerned. You’re right in there with the dominant ethos of the PC left. There’s nothing alternative about you, and you’re just looking to latch onto something with some new energy for your esoteric pet economic project. Robert Lindsay has been involved in left race realism for a long time. Heck, I even remember reading Lindsay’s blog like 8 years ago when it was one of the only blogs that honestly dealt with the subject of race.

It’s true that I use the tag line “the left wing of the alt right.” I do this for a number of simple reasons:

1. Lindsay frequently used it to describe himself, and I thought it was catchy. I needed a new tagline for my site. It used to say “the other red pill,” but I’ll confess something…I have always hated the movie “The Matrix.” I never liked it and thought the film was terrible when it came out. I don’t like much of any Sci-Fi from after the 1970’s. I think it’s basically all garbage (with a few exceptions from the 80’s and early 90’s.) So basically I’ve never been much into the pill analogy and find it cringy but have occasionally used it anyway.

2. It doesn’t matter how many issues one is left wing on, (I’m socially liberal, anti-traditionalist and practically a “space communist,”) but if you engage in any kind of pro-white advocacy, race realism, or gender realism…then when you have any kind of debate people will automatically say “dude you’re not left wing, you’re far right.” So by calling it the “left wing of the alt-right” there’s at least a chance I can debate them without having to hear that obligatory tedious remark. Even people like Amazing Atheist, (who is basically an egalitarian free speech activist) get called racist, neo-nazi, far right and so forth all the time.

3. I can’t really ever be anything but a fringe outside figure in the AltRight, because I’m too socially liberal for them. They have their own orthodoxy which is clear to me whenever I visit the comment sections or forums at many of their sites. I’m not religious, and don’t have any similar cultural or personal interests (I can probably count on one hand the number of right wingers I’ve known that had a positive opinion of mid-century modern architecture, minimalist art, or lo-fi music.) I don’t like any of the things they like. The only thing I have in common with them is that I’m racist and don’t care, but on that *one* issue I’m willing to ally with them all the way. Also, even though I’ve tried to get away from the AltRight, some of the respected figures still claim me as their own and haven’t disavowed me.

The AltLeft, at least on this site will continue to occupy the niche for people who are pro-white but don’t fit in with the prudes, Christian neoconfederates, GOP+, and are too culturally and socially liberal to feel completely at home at places like the DailyStormer and VNN. I don’t really have any hate for those other groups, but definitely some ideological differences. Yet, at this point they are the only ones bothering to fight for the interests of white people. Almost everyone else is useless and just talks about PC double standards and complains about free speech being restricted. At least the people at TheRightStuff recognize we’ll have to actually be confrontational toward people that hate us, and sometimes that means getting nasty and being assholes. Simply asking for mercy and understanding isn’t going to work.

So like I said, I’m not going anywhere. If it bothers you that I’m associated with the alternative left, then you can find a new label to associate yourself with. Look up at the title of this site and the URL. That is the brand you are helping to build. So thank you for that.