Tim Mak of Frum Forum has a new hit piece on Alternative Right. The article is called “The New Racist Right.” It is standard fare conservative boilerplate.
I would have responded to this trash yesterday, but I am on the road again in Raleigh, NC. Oddly enough, David Frum is also in town. Yesterday, he spoke at a free public lecture at NC State. If I had known about it at the time, I would have shown up and asked him a few uncomfortable questions.
The thrust of Mak’s article is that Alt Right is “racist,” “sexist,” and “reactionary.” Excuse me, I can’t help but laugh here. When my roommate read this piece, his dismissive reaction was “Frum Forum is such a gay ass website.” That concise statement encapsulates everything I had to say.
Mainstream conservatives are just so, well, pathetic. Frum Forum is a retread of mainstream liberal garbage from twenty years ago repackaged as the latest, cutting edge form of “conservatism.” All the terms of abuse used against Alt Right were imported into “conservatism” from the Left. “Conservatism” has been so completely co-opted by its enemies that the term is more or less useless.
I’m increasingly of the view that “conservatives” have a certain look about them. Jim Giles introduced me to this theory. I’ve begun to notice it myself since I have been in Virginia. Conservatives are always smiling. They also look like … there is no polite way to say this … but they usually look like pussies!
Check out Tim Mak. This Beltway hack couldn’t fight his way out of a wet paperbag. These people are going to preserve our culture? Please.
Note: I wrote this article yesterday but passed out before I could post it.
“…but they usually look like pussies!”
That’s what I thought when I heard and saw Richard Spencer, formerly of Taki Mag. “Gay ass” is also an excellent description.
“These people are going to preserve our culture? Please.”
Exactly!
To the guys who like Spencer and his new website. Apologies. I really find him distasteful. He is verbose and his language is empty, oh, and he won’t be tackling the JQ by his own admission.
A Jew calling a white website “racist” – who could have seen that one coming? Next they will be calling it “anti-semitic.”
Not that I have any idea whether Mak or FrumForum are literally Jews – or Gays – but if I had to bet?
Bad link … or conspiracy???
@See Something Say Something:
There is an error in the html coding. Just delete the “” in the address bar and type return/enter.
Your link to the source got hosed; corrected link HERE. After reading the story, perhaps you now understand why Alex Linder takes such umbrage with people like Pat Buchanan and the personalities at Takimag, even if he may have gone overboard a bit.
I lost respect for Buchanan a long while back; he’s nothing but a tease who flirted with us and then ran away at crucial times, leaving us with the political version of “blue balls”. He threw away his Presidential campaign in 2000 when he selected the unknown black woman Ezola Foster. All he cares about now is selling books.
Oops!
Here it is: Gay Ass Tim Mak
I’ve never read anything by Richard Spencer that caused me to bury my face in my hand.
Honestly – for mostly casual online writing, there’s no need white people to refrain from simply mocking this sort of thing:
Compare the blogs, and the comments. Inventory the words here “ironic” “conservative” “movement” (snicker) “political correctness” “hide their sexist and racist ideologies” “sweet-sounding, pseudo-intellectual.”
Is this not the white liberal version of a gangster rap “Answer Record?” Yo’ mamma’s racis’.
Irony, conservative, PC, sexism, racism, hiding, pseudo – exactly what are we reading here? I think this sort of thing may deserve some deconstruction, at least on a comedic level.
In any case, I don’t see how these “mainstream” “non-racism” conservatives have *any* influence outside of whatever target market they have enough money to get access to.
If I was paying big money to attack sites like OD and the “new racist movement” I would be infuriated that this sort of crap was all I got for my money.
Heh, the Jew-led “conservatives.”
Like Hunter said, these “conservatives” would have been considered “radical leftists” a few decades ago. Our public discourse has gradually been shifted. At the time of the Civil War, even Union generals spoke out in favor of White supremacy. That’s right – not white separation or segregation – but outright supremacy.
“Of course I have nothing to do with the Status of the Negro after the war. That for the law making power, but if my opinion were consulted I would Say that the negro should be a free race, but not put on an equality with the whites. My knowledge of them is practical, and the effect of equality is illustrated in the character of the Mixed race in Mexico and South America. Indeed it appears to me that the right of suffrage in our Country should be rather abridged than enlarged.”
Letter to Salmon P. Chase, January 11 1865
(Sherman’s Civil War: Selected Correspondence)
Uh, he’s Mongoloid, of course he looks like a pussy, a pussy with Down syndrome.
I expect non-whites to call whites with a backbone racist, this shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone.
Forget it, Hunter. It’s Chinatown.
There is some good dialogue in the comments section, though. with several commentators ably defending pro-white or race realist ideas. OD writers ought to jump into the fray. Growing as a movement will doubtlessly entail thousands upon thousands of arguments with people enamoured with neocon ideas. Hint: if your goal is to get people to see that they ought to make 180 degree changes in their ideology, don’t begin the conversation by making it clear you think they’re an idiot.
While I was disgusting by the images of Whores Frum has decided to adorn his disgusting brothel of a website, it must be said that a few days ago he published an article that was very sensible and well argued:
http://statsaholic.blogspot.com/2010/03/frumforum-finally-starts-talking-sense.html
Yawn. I’m not interested in reading what the Jew & Roman Catholic political alliance thinks.
Irish Roman Catholic blowhard politicians are the worst. Followed by greasy Italian Roman Catholics politicians. LOL.
One of the Frumbots approves of ethnic solidarity for whites, white ethnics that is:
The founding Americans are notably absent. No ethnic solidarity allowed for them.
I’m sure Resisting Defamation with their “diverse white” rhetoric would approve of this Frumbot’s comment. They too advocate solidarity for white ethnics and engage in attacks on the real Americans.
Meanwhile, Wikitopian tells us those of us who want to preserve the founding stock Americans and who are not pan-Europeanist white nationalists that we are “an insidious threat” and “shouldn’t be regarded as true citizens or countrymen.” He also says our “asses need to be elsewhere” and we “should really go back to Europe.”
I am of the Founding stock. Although my family and I, as are most White Americans, a bit mongrel. I mostly English, on my Father’s side (Welsh is in there, but it’s mainly English, and my family surname is as English as any-one can get. I am an American, but I think I have a greater right to claim English soil, due to my bloodlines, than those degenerate Windsors do).
My Mom’s side is Celt, and German. I identify primarily as a Celt, due to my temperament, and appearance. My sister got all the German genes.
We are solid yoeman stock. My sister was always terribly disappointed to discover that we weren’t descended from royalty. I never cared about this; I am an American to the core. We don’t have royalty. I’ve now learned of the corruption of European aristocracy. Especially the hideously Jewed up Windsors. I’m now thrilled by, and grateful for, my ploughman’s and coal miner’s heritage.
Regarding other White Americans – I think it’s terrific if Whites retain their genetic legacy, and seek to preserve same. However – as a White Nationalist – I agree with Wiki. We have bigger fish to fry, as a Race, right now. As in our very existence.
After we free ourselves from the scourge of non-Whites, we can go back to fighting each other.
MGLS,
I firmly stand behind what I said. Those who direct their tribal sympathies toward people from a specific area in Europe ought to go back to that area in Europe. We must reject the historians and hobbyists who feign dual ethnonational loyalties as readily as we reject Jews who feign dual ethnonational loyalties. We have very little time (if there’s still time left at all) for White Americans to coalesce into a true “people” and those with Nordic, Celtic, Germanic, Slavic, Mediterranean, and even Anglo fetishes are stumbling blocks.
As for America’s particular blend of White people, I prefer to keep the blend as it is and am generally opposed to immigration even from Western Europe. This position naturally favors those of us who are of the “Founding Stock”, as we’re the firm majority. Basically, your ass and your heart need to be in the same place. If your heart belongs to the idyllic forests and peoples of Northwestern Europe, then your ass belongs in the idyllic forests of Northwestern Europe.
Matt Parrott,
Northwestern Europeans (chiefly the British) settled and built America. This country belongs to them and not to all Europeans. If you don’t value this heritage and wish to preserve it then you should be the one to leave.
“Conservatives are always smiling.”
I know, they are always treating our enemies with the utmost of politeness and civility. Everyone is an “American’ and people who want to destroy us are simply people with “another point of view.” They do not have a clue on what it means to destroy your enemies and actually achieve victory.
The only people they do not extend the nice guy act to is us on the far right; the “racists.” We do not get the same level of politeness they show hardcore marxists.
But really, all you need to do is look at this guys picture and it tells you everything you need to know. The guy is picture perfect example for why asians are not our allies and never will be.
….but the real reason they are always smiling is because they have had total success in subverting the Republican party while performing their role as the controlled dissent.
John Armstrong,
I’m sure all the chiefs who defied Tecumseh’s call to unite had their ideas about why their tribe is too good to join the alliance. Their pride and failure to reorient themselves to the new reality was as responsible as my ancestors for the death of that race.
But the bottom line is that not a single person who participates in an ethnic adventure club ever leaves their house. Can you imagine trying to get something done but qualifying that your group must only include men and women of Anglo-Saxon descent? It can’t be imagined because it can’t be done because it doesn’t interface with the real world. Not that you or your trusty falcon can be bothered with such trifles.
MGLS,
what I think is happening is that people here are hoping for the creation of A NEW PEOPLE, one having an explicit identity and self-consciousness that, contrary to what some will insist, did not exist as such before and does not exist at least explicitely even now. Germans don’t sit around debating who is a German, and if you go by citizenship alone, Americans don’t sit around debating who is an American. But it is telling that when debating “who we are,” there is much disagreement on whether to admit certain caucasoid groups (portugese, sicilians, georgians, armenians, jews, arabs, persians, indians). Sometimes the sub-group in controversy is too mixed, sometimes too culturally different from europe, sometimes its neither mixed nor culturally alien but rather suspected of having an innate hostility towards other caucasoids.
Why the confusion? Because the fact is that humans generally do not self-define themselves on the basis of race. Japanese call themselves Japanese, not Asians. They’re only Asians when they’re on enemy turf. And so forth. The ONLY exception that comes to mind are the descendents of the sub-Saharan Africans that came to America. (Actually, that’s not an exception, they’re sort of on enemy turf too.) And the members of the budding “white nationalist” movements.
I agree that the creation of a people who call themselves first and foremost “white” or at least “white American” and who feel a closer kinship and solidarity with each other than with outsiders is necessary and inevitable. And potentially a good thing. What I would humbly urge is that the group being created ought to have as their foundation a core group that everyone agrees is white — “founding stock” if you will — but that the outer boundaries of group membership it be as flexible and inclusive as possible. This is a question that is going to need to be decided upon by a critical mass of people – it has not happened yet. “We” do not know “who we are,” in the sense that Germans or Turks or Russians or Jews know who they are. It will take time. And I don’t frankly see much progress being made until a consensus emerges.
“Can you imagine trying to get something done but qualifying that your group must only include men and women of Anglo-Saxon descent?”
Straw man. American whites remain overwhelmingly Northwestern European in ancestry.
n/a,
Mr. Armstrong here indicated that it was mostly the British that founded the U.S. There’s a guy in this forum who regularly rants from an Anglophile perspective against the German Huns. There’s a guy in here who rails against the Irish as if they’re some kind of McJews. A fair number openly or privately harbor the NS-style Nordic bias. Slavophiles are abound. I attended a meeting where folks regularly noted that the “South will rise again”.
This stuckment is a veritable Terracotta Army of these strawmen.
Matt,
“There’s a guy in this forum who regularly rants from an Anglophile perspective against the German Huns.”
I see much more invective in the opposite direction (the German-identified ranting against “WASPs” or the English). If you got your wish, and everyone who strongly identified with a particular area of Europe was sent back, the most affected nationalities would include in roughly descending order: Italian, Polish, Irish, and German. I think most Americans of Northwestern European ancestry (excepting those who strongly identify as Irish) do identify primarily as American. There is an incipient American tribe, but various national origin groups are not equally perceived as members by themselves or others. I see you attacking the groups with the least narrow ethnic concerns and demanding they unquestioningly accept the groups which have the narrowest ethnic identities, while remaining silent about the ethnic particularism of the latter. This reeks of exactly the sort of behavior that got us here to begin with.
At this late date, I don’t necessarily see narrower identities (where they’re based in reality) as a problem, or see that attempting to merge all European-descendants in America into one homogeneous group is useful. Certainly I have no problem with Southerners identifying with the South, though I do find it annoying and counterproductive when Northerners decide to do so, or when Southerners decide to ally themselves with northern “ethnics” to attack Yankees. Likewise, I think it’s unproductive when someone with one German grandparent decides he is German, or when someone like Denise who is half-English decides to identify as “Celtic”. These are cases where identifying as simply (Northwestern European) American makes sense.
n/a,
I wasn’t silent about the ethnic particularism of any group sizable group. Did I miss one? To be prepared to die for one another, to have a unified will, we must be a unified people. Meds unfortunately have reason to suspect that they’re not considered entirely White American by some and White Americans have reason to suspect that some Med don’t intend to fully integrate.
Maintaining a particular identity is sold as being compatible with pursuing a unified White American agenda. But this is only because identity isn’t being taken seriously.
My first preference is that people who’ve maintained a specific European ethnic identity will recognize the primacy of thinking of themselves as Americans, White Americans; First and last. I don’t actually want anybody to go back to Europe. I suppose the constant drip of inter-ethnic catfighting has provoked a more spiteful reaction out of me than is appropriate or necessary.
Some of you guys sound like raving Mexicans with this “go back to Europe” nonsense. If you advocate pan-Aryanism akin to Diablo and Guy White, where we should accept quadroons, mestizos, North Africans, Semites and Eurasians, then I have a big problem with that. That is nothing like the founding stock or the modern core of white America. It’s you who should leave.
Mark,
No no no. Let me explain. What I’m saying is that everybody who is White and American should unify behind the identity of being a White American. I also explicitly stated that America’s current ethnic balance ought to be retained.
There’s a question this leaves unanswered, “Who is White?”
That’s a separate debate. I was throwing a tantrum that pertains to the White nationalities and individuals that aren’t in dispute.
You have my permission to remain in America for now.
[Edit]
I also explicitly stated that White America’s current ethnic balance ought to be retained.
Meds unfortunately have reason to suspect that they’re not considered entirely White American by some and White Americans have reason to suspect that some Med don’t intend to fully integrate.
If they look like they’re from North Africa or Western Asia, as many of them do, then they don’t fit in. Is Tony Shalhoub, “Monk” white? No.
Lebanon is an Asian country, so I don’t really know if Tony’s an appropriate edge case. I grew up watching Wings constantly and am a fan of his work, so I’ll be sure to get an autograph from him before deporting him.
Matt, you’re conflating ethnicity with race or subrace, as Guy White does. The argument of retaining your ethnic and cultural ties, having a dual loyalty, is a different argument than what I am saying and some others here. We’re talking about race, not nationality.
The ethnic or subracial composition is already out of balance from the founding stock of Northwest Europeans. It must be restored.
A review of your citizenship is forthcoming.
If they look like they’re from North Africa or Western Asia, as many of them do, then they don’t fit in. Is Tony Shalhoub, “Monk” white? No
So much for big swathes of the Spanish, Italians, French, and Portugese as well as Greeks, Serbians, and Bulgarians.
You think you’ll win anything with that view? Good luck with that.
There’s a question this leaves unanswered, “Who is White?”
A question that is long overdue to be answered. You want a White ethnic group that has a feeling of identity you need to know who is in and who is out. This MUST be resolved, the sooner the better.
Notice: I am changing my name from ‘Polygynous Evolutionist’ to Lockeford. I still support Polygyny as the single best proven strategy to breed in a way congruent with spiritual revelation, evolution, and empirical evidence; however I prefer a simpler name with isn’t focused on only one issue.
Matt,
What is your ethnic background? I thought I remembered you saying it was Greek, but something you wrote recently led me to think it might in fact be Scotch-Irish.
Mark,
I’ve got my racial and ethnic stuff sewn up tight, TYVM. I’m entirely of founding stock, with a family tree devoid of branches for easy reference. I’m bonafide.
Lockeford,
Attempting to define it is incredibly sticky. Just look at how hard it is to define male and female. If you lose the privates in an unfortunate farm equipment episode, do you cease being a man? What if you lose them surgically? What if your chromosomes are XX but you’ve been given male hormones your entire life? What if what if what if?
I have my own thoughts on the matter, but I really don’t even know if I want to go there. That’s asking for a rhetorical bloodbath.
Lebanon is an Asian country, so I don’t really know if Tony’s an appropriate edge case.
Oh I think he is, and Lebanon borders the Mediterranean Sea, it is Eastern Mediterranean. I’m sure he passes for white and Southern European as other Semites do.
Dasein,
The surname Parrott is from England, having hopped over from Normandy around the time of the Norman invasions. The rest are Irish and British. My grandfather got a haplogroup test done, so presuming the fine character of my mom and grandma, I’m R1b. That’s as indigenous to Western Europe as it gets.
It’s possible, having Appalachian heritage, that I have some negligible Amerindian admixture. But even if it’s confirmed that I do, I promise that I won’t be like Chuck Norris or Dog the Bounty Hunter about it.
Ironically, Lebanon comes from the Semitic root lbn, meaning “white.” So maybe we should let them in?
The surname Parrott is from England, having hopped over from Normandy around the time of the Norman invasions. The rest are Irish and British.
You should be on board then, what’s the problem?
Matt,
Thanks for that information.
Mark,
My goal isn’t to live in the Whitest possible country. My goal is to live in the best possible White country.
To me those are synonymous.
Perhaps you enjoy multiracialism a little bit, whites are too boring by themselves? You want some ethnic flavor?
Northwestern Europeans (chiefly the British) settled and built America. This country belongs to them and not to all Europeans. If you don’t value this heritage and wish to preserve it then you should be the one to leave.
It belongs to whoever the fuck takes it. It won’t be “Northwest Europeans” either.
Northwestern Europeans (chiefly the British) settled and built America.
They might have did Indian removal but they certainly didn’t build the railroads. They may have created Silicon Valley, but they certainly couldn’t hold on to it.
To adapt an old adage, you can have Nordicism or America but you can’t have both.
Matt and n/a both make sense.
“Perhaps you enjoy multiracialism a little bit, whites are too boring by themselves? You want some ethnic flavor?”
Well, yes, for the most part, but not necessarily in the flesh.
In Finland when I was child, in the seventies, there were only about ten or fifteen non-whites in the entire country — I heard they were the children of Finnish girls who hooked up with African men at the 1952 Olympics. Aside from that, it was an almost “jew-free White ethnostate.” It was fine, because the Finns have a rich national culture that enriches one’s being. And you could get the BBC Radio and Radio Luxembourg for rock and jazz and so forth. But of course, in the early eighties, people did “got bored,” or needed reassurance they were moral, and they voted to brin in Somali refugees, up to around 2-3% of total popularion. And the rest as they say is history. Similarly, Jared Taylor often points how the Japanese add spice to their lives — they have a smorgasbord of multicultural enticements, produced largely by and entirely for the Japanese alone.
On the other hand, for many, life in the all-white hinterlands of America is often bleak and oppressive. Lonely and atomistic, too.
As to multiracial, whites can usually live alongside blacks pretty decently in cities up to 25% black as long as they remain segregated by neighborhood and as long as the blacks don’t have to compete with Hispanics for jobs.
Mark,
That’s kind of slimy of you to take my rejection of Nordicism as an endorsement of out-n-out admixture.
I heard that Frum’s little ladyboy bottom Tim Mak knows kung-fu.
Anybody know Tim Mak’s phone number? I need some lo-mein delivered pronto.
Matt Parrott,
You’ve completely misunderstood what I said. I don’t think that we should exclude everyone who isn’t Anglo-Saxon. I just think that we should be dedicated to preserving America as a predominantly Northwestern European country. (Northwestern Europe doesn’t only include Britain.) Moreover, I’m not even opposed to assimilating small numbers of Americans who are of Slavic or even Southern European descent (as long as those numbers truly are small enough to be assimilated without negative consequences for the Northwestern European majority).
That’s because it’s true. America was founded chiefly by the British. However, there were significant numbers of other Northwestern Europeans present in this country during the earliest times. In fact, today a large percentage of our population is Irish and German. Once again, I’m not in favor of excluding everyone who isn’t Anglo-Saxon.
John,
I was guilty of strawmanning you with the Anglo-Saxon thing, but I believe your present position is nearly as threatening to unity and cohesion. Whites who aren’t Northwestern European won’t be truly loyal to or trusting of a movement which regards them as inferiors. If one rejects an alteration of White America’s ethnic balance through additional mass migration, then your concerns about Med or Slavic inundation would be mute.
If you’re in favor of excluding anybody who’s White and American, then my general critique still stands.