The Case for Trump: Fear and Apathy

August 19, 2016 Hunter Wallace Alternative Right, Politics 32

The headlines are coming almost daily now:

“What is there left to say about the alt-right? Let’s just start with the basics.

Their numbers are hard to quantify, but they have a large social media presence, particularly on Twitter, which they use to harass journalists and conservatives, particularly Jewish ones. They’re fond of internet memes, have their own little shibboleths (such as their tactic of putting parenthesis around the names of Jewish users?), and are generally young, white, and male. …

But it’s also very serious, Yiannopolous and the alt-right will tell you, because the West in under attack and conservatives, locked in the straight-jacket of respectability, won’t do anything about it. The Muslims are coming, and so are the Mexicans. Blacks are out of control in the cities. The feminists are trying to upset gender norms, which is why you can’t get a date. Smart as you are, young white man, you can’t get rich, because of globalists, who “just happen” to be Jew …”

Something has changed.

The Alt-Right has been on a spectacular run since last June. The movement has gotten more publicity over the last year than at any time in memory. Usually, White Nationalists are only covered by the media when some vanguardist goes on a shooting spree and we get a lot of bad press. I don’t know of any hard figures, but Trump’s presidential campaign has coincided with a dramatic upswing in Alt-Right activity and visibility.

Can you remember a better year than 2015-2016? Why are we suddenly on the radar screen? Why is Weev on the cover of Time magazine?

For as long as I can remember, the “worse is better” theory has held sway over the White Nationalist community. According to this theory, every defeat is a secret victory for White Nationalists. As the multiracial society pushes White people to their limits, they will become alienated from the mainstream. They will get angrier and angrier and in their desperation they will turn into White Nationalists. This is what eight years of Barack Obama in the White House was supposed to accomplish.

The fact is, if Donald Trump hadn’t come along and made this amazing run, Ted Cruz would probably be the Republican nominee. No one would be talking about the Alt-Right or White Nationalists. Weev wouldn’t be on the cover of Time magazine. Instead of being on its knees, #TruConservatism would be experiencing a Renaissance.

The “worse is better” theory was right in the sense that White people have been pushed to their limits and are increasingly desperate. Obama was successful in polarizing the country and antagonizing them. It is unquestionably true that White people have become angrier and more alienated. The problem is that White America is like a drowning man and White Nationalists have a lot of competition from potential saviors.

In 2008, White people were tired of the Bush wars and Bush economy, and Obama sold himself as their savior. In 2010, the Tea Party captured the angry mood of the electorate. In 2012, White people turned to Mitt Romney after he won the Republican nomination. In 2014, the Republicans benefited from another tantrum election and retook the Senate. In 2016, Donald Trump ran for president and the anger and energy was captured by his campaign. We’re lucky Trump won the nomination instead of Ted Cruz.

Why didn’t White people turn to White Nationalists? Why would anyone turn to a group of potential saviors who are promising more devastating defeats and punishment? If there is a lot of angst about immigration, job losses, terrorism and refugees, why would anyone turn to a bunch of “worse is better” masochists?

The fatal flaw in the “worse is better” theory is that it bets everything on anger and alienation, but it ignores fear and apathy. If people are too afraid of confronting the enemy, they will cower in fear and conform to the status quo. If they suffer nothing but the shock treatment of one devastating defeat after another, they will lose their spirit and grow apathetic. Why even bother if all is lost?

Trump’s keenest insight into the malaise of White America is when he said that our people have “lost their spirit.” They’ve been beaten down so low that they had grown apathetic. As he put it, “we don’t win anymore.” How do you respond to a bully? Do you encourage the bully to beat up a kid over and over again until he learns his lesson? Do you tell the kid to look forward to tomorrow’s ass-kicking? No, you fight back.

That’s what Trump has done here. He took a bunch of disaffected, demoralized, disorganized people on the Right, who are accustomed to losing, rallied them behind his campaign, and inflicted a devastating defeat on the #TruCons. It is a lesson they will never forget.

The dog was always angry. It always resented being kicked around, but what is different is that it has tasted blood for the first time. It won a round and has a new spirit. It has gained confidence and will never be same.

Note: Saying people will go back to sleep if Trump wins has it backwards. They had been asleep for 15 years. Cowed by fear and paralyzed by apathy, they were inert and doing little more than carping on the internet and fighting with each other! I have the vBulletin forum databases to prove it. Believe me!

I think it is fair to say that if the candidate of such a repressed social group were to actually win the White House that we can expect them to move beyond trolling.

About Hunter Wallace 12392 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent

32 Comments

  1. Pat Buchanan said. “It Ain’t Over Till It’s Over”

    At this point, it’s more accurate to say it ain’t over even after it’s over.

    Like an article said, Trumpism is here to stay EVEN IF Trump loses.

    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/08/why-trumpism-will-outlast-donald-trump-214166

    GOP cannot go back to its old self again. No way.

    Sure, Neocons and the ‘principled cucks’ will say I TOLD YOU SO if Trump loses, but the idea that GOP voters are gonna line up behind more Wars for Israel is absurd. That worked during Bush yrs only because of 9/11. Even though GOP voters are overwhelmingly pro-Israel and pro-Zionist, they don’t like the idea of overseas wars where their children come home in body bags or kill foreigners. They got behind 9/11 because it was sold as new Pearl Harbor, and it seemed unpatriotic to fight this War on Terror.

    If Trump’s anti-Muslim message appeals to GOP base, it’s no because he’s making a case for War but for the Wall. Neocons say ‘Muslims are crazy, so we gotta whup them and make them civilized’. Trump says, ‘Muslims are crazy, so let them stay there, and let us stay here.’

    So, even if Trump loses, neoconism has no future for GOP base.

    What about low-taxes-for-the-rich-ism, free-trade-ism, and Wall-Street-ism?

    That won’t appeal to GOP base either. Many feel fleeced by Wall Street and Free Trade. They think ‘Free Trade for the globo-elites and Flea Market for us.’

    Also, this pro-rich strategy is pointless now that most of the super-rich vote Democratic. And look at the richest centers of US power and industry: Wall Street, Hollywood, Silicon Valley, and Las Vegas. They are all Liberal. Some might be ‘fiscally conservative’, but there is nothing socially conservative about any of them.

    When Democrats were into Big Labor, angry minorities(most blacks), intellectual eggheads, radicals, and etc, the GOP could forge an alliance of the Rich and the social conservatives(like what they have India with BJP). The rich are too few in number to win elections. The social conservatives don’t have the money, talent, and organizational skills to lead a movement. Because of their common enemy, they came together in the GOP, and there was a time when bulk of Rich money went to GOP.

    But under Clinton’s Davos-Man triangulation, the Rich were brought over to the Democratic Side. Clinton stabbed Big Labor in the back. He came up with ways to renew big cities via gentrification and pushing blacks out. This was wonderful for the Rich because many of them didn’t like social conservatives. Jewish Rich saw them as Christian dummies. Educated elite Rich saw them as ignorami and bigots, the Archie Bunkers. (GOP became even less ‘cool’ as it became a southern white party, or ‘redneck’ party. That turned off all the new money and new talents on the rise. Southern whites provide the votes, but they don’t provide the talent and money.) Social conservatives were ‘uncool’. The Rich wanted to rub shoulders with intellectuals and academics with Big Ideas. They wanted to rub shoulders with Hollywood glamour. They wanted to be associated with Saving the World with smart ideas, like what Bill Gates talks about all the time.

    Given this new alliance of Libs and the Rich, GOP lost a crucial asset.

    GOP continued to praise the rich, but the rich weren’t listening anymore. They no longer had anything to fear from Davos-Man Democrats. Goldman Sachs loves Billy Boy Clinton, Obama, and Hillary. The ‘creative class’ are conceited ‘progs’ who also dominate the systems of affluence.

    And since elite colleges are so overwhelmingly PC and since such institutions produce the richest and most successful people, almost all the new elites are ‘progs’.

    So, no matter how much GOP talked about supporting ‘free enterprise’ and ‘lowering taxes for business’, no one was listening. It’s like most Jews don’t listen to GOP when it says it will protect and love Jews from their enemies. When Jews have it so good in the Democratic Party, why do they need GOP?

    GOP had the Rich-Folks-and-Social-Conservative Alliance. As long as big money poured into GOP from the Rich class, it could win and push some token social conservatism as well to placate the voters, the base.

    But when big money went to the Dems, the GOP was only left with social conservatives. So, GOP tried to get some more money by going totally pro-business and pro-Neocon-wars, but this alienated the GOP base that was feeling the pinch of globalism and all those crazy wars.

    GOP has tried to keep the social conservative base while trying to regain the support of the rich class. But for the GOP to win over the rich, it has to be for stuff like ‘even more tax cuts for the rich’, and this makes the base angry. Look how many whites stayed home in 2012 because of Romney the Bane. But such efforts not only alienate the GOP base but fail to convince the rich to come over to the GOP. With Democrats being so pro-free-trade and pro-TPP, the rich don’t need the GOP and its associations(with dumb southern rednecks who hump their sisters).

    Of course, there are some very rich people who support the GOP, but it’s mainly to deregulate more and to fight more Wars for Israel. Hardly compelling issues for the base. Jews like Adelson surely know Dems are fully supportive of Israel. So, why do they remain in the GOP. One reason is they are ultra-Zionist and may want war with Iran. Or, they fear that if ALL Jews go Democratic, then GOP will have no choice but to become an Angry Goy Party. It’s smart for Jews to hedge their bets. Go mostly Democratic but give some to GOP to remain pro-Zionist. If GOP gets NOTHING from Jews, it will have no choice but to turn anti-Zionist and really appeal to white gentile base that increasingly sees Jews as the enemy.

    What with Hillary ascendant as the favored candidate of Neocons, Wall Street, and Liberals, GOP needs a whole new plan even if Trump loses. It cannot go back to what it once was. It is a flimsy edifice that Trump shook to its foundations. It is so flimsy that if Trump doesn’t destroy it by winning, it will be destroyed by coming events because there is no way neocons or cucks can ever appeal to the conservative base.

    The fact that Trump, a total newcomer so easily blew away all the GOP candidates, shows that GOP as it used to be is over. Some of the organs will continue to work but it’s a dead beast with no chance of recovery.

    So, if Trump wins, it’s a new start. If he loses, it will still call for a new start since Grand Old Party is gone for good. It has to be Grand New Party.

    So, what is there after Trump? Alt Right? Alt Right has some good core ideas on race and identity and such. But it is too young, too moneyless, too inexperienced in politics, and too big a tent. And it has too many 14/88 types who halfway validate the claim that Alt Right is hipster Nazi. That will be its destruction… unless there is a Buckley-like purge of the Alt Right that rejects the extremists.

  2. It’s also fair to say that your site has half a dozen “John Engleman Award Hall Monitor” winners.

  4. The media establishment is in the beginning phase of attempting to sway public opinion against the Alt-Right, as they did to the Tea Party. But unlike the Tea Party, I think they will be dealing with the proverbial Tar Baby.

    • Incorrect the way they cover some bloggers and not others indicates that they are attempting to sow divisions. Milo Queerjew again gets a chunk of the column inches. An outlaw like Weev gets some then Anglin/TRS DS and FTN the two most easy accessible sites and trending are ignored.

      Divide and rule.

    • Yes. The Tea Party is all about Muh Constitooshun, drooling over non-Whites to Virtue Signal I am Not a Racist, and shekels. And Standing with Israel.
      Real Alt Right Fascists HATE all of that. We’ll fight BACK.

  5. Hunter, if you still have somewhere in your vBulletin database the posting of that old, skinny insane yet funny German. Please do post.. Cant remember his username.. Was it “Wehrmacht”? Anyhow we know what vBull forum we are talking about here. The feuds over there then were a blast!

  6. “Why didn’t White people turn to White Nationalists? (…) why would anyone turn to a bunch of “worse is better” masochists?”

    The real question is why didn’t more people openly adopt pro-White racial views. Why didn’t they create new organizations with a positive outlook? White Nationalism is not a bunch of organizations and internet websites. WN is the natural reaction and outlook of White people who realize the government is destroying their nation. Their reaction is that they want to protect White people’s interests.

    The reason people are afraid so speak up for White interests comes down to ZOG’s intimidation, censorship and brainwashing. It has nothing to do with WN masochism, infighting and low spirits.

    “That’s what Trump has done here. He took a bunch of disaffected, demoralized, disorganized people on the Right, who are accustomed to losing, rallied them behind his campaign, and inflicted a devastating defeat on the #TruCons. It is a lesson they will never forget.”

    Those people were losing because the system is rigged. The media is in Jewish hands, and so was the Republican establishment, until Trump came along. He was able to overcome ZOG thanks to being a famous billionaire.

    As the racial situation deteriorates, White people are more likely to ignore the media propaganda and vote for pro-White politicians. But I would like to think that the internet has helped White people to become more assertive. Specifically, I wonder if the internet WN activism has helped Trump or not.

    The anti-Trump White Nationalists like to say that we shouldn’t waste any energy on Trump because he isn’t one of us and he doesn’t need us anyway. But I think the enthusiasm that comes from internet WNs can actually improve his chances.

  7. Get a load of this. She says UK is not gonna be white again,and whites just have to accept it.

    Of course, Pakistan will always be Pakistan, and Pakistanis want it that way and see nothing wrong with it.

    She says it is a ‘big loss’ or equal sacrifice for both sides: Native whites lose white UK, and immigrants lose their original culture. BUT, the bitch doesn’t mention that the native countries of the immigrants will remain Paki, Somali, or whatever.

    In contrast, white Brits lose everything since their very homeland is lost for good to the foreign tide.

    BUT, they demand that white nations no longer be white and accept their fate of demographic displacement. Diversity Chauvinism.

    But we can’t just blame the darkies.

    It is the white virtue-signaling smugots who indoctrinated these immigrants to think and feel this way.

    Smugots want to put their arms around such POC and feel moral supremacism over whites who want to keep UK ‘white’.

    According to Globalism, ‘whiteness’ = racism and evil and etc. Therefore, a nation wanting to remain white is treated like a diseased patient who doesn’t want to be cured.

    By the way, there is a way to make UK white again. Kick bitches like her back to their home countries. But we have to deal with Jews who tell us that Diversity is so enriching. Why is it good to lose your homeland to masses of foreigners?

    It is demographic imperialism.

    It’s like what Ron Rosenbaum said of ‘whiteness’ even in a turkey.

    http://www.slate.com/articles/life/the_spectator/2010/11/the_unbearable_whiteness_of_white_meat.html

    Well, fuc* the Bagel. It’s starchy and tasteless anyway.

    =============

    • “According to Globalism, ‘whiteness’ = racism and evil and etc. Therefore, a nation wanting to remain white is treated like a diseased patient who doesn’t want to be cured.”

      Bingo.

    • Funny how those Mohammedan squaws are so meek and submissive in their own heathen countries, but once they get over here they become real bold and brassy. Send them back to their brothers in East Bantustan for a good old-fashioned “Honor Killing”, I say.

    • This video exemplifies more or less what I was stating in my above comment. The shemud in the video projects defeatism onto the British people with her opening line. She says very brazenly “The fact of the matter is the UK is never going to be white again.” This is a demoralizing blow to most whites that hear it, and with enough repetition, the Brits will be half defeated with words alone.
      We need an opposing voice. We need to be able to tell people how realistic it would be for our countries to be white again, if only we will do it. We need a channel to tell the muds that they have to get used to the idea of being repatriated, and to tell liberals that they need to get used to the idea of losing power, and tell our traitors that they need to get used to the idea of being sent to prisons to spend the rest of their lives sewing Confederate flags. We need to put defeat into their hearts and hope into our own peoples’ hearts.

      • Yes, Larry, it’s been established here, at Occidental Dissent, that Carpenter is a Cruz partisan. If we need any more Funny Fotos, we’ll let you know.

        • She’s more than a “partisan”, you guinea, she’s having the sexy-time with Cruz. Are you one of his last remaining supporters, or something?

          • It’s amazing how much brainlessness you concentrated into those two dozen words. I’d say it’s an Occidental Dissent record, but your competition is fierce.

          • If the fine people who post here fill you with nothing but loathing and contempt, then why do frequent this site?

            It was a rhetorical question, so you needn’t answer. Now, I would like to order a Philly cheese steak, some onion rings, a large Pepsi…Hey, you cafone! Are you taking all this down?

          • In fairness, Larry, it’s not the fine people who fill me with loathing and contempt. It’s the dolts–like you.

            As for “cafone”–you sent me to Google with that one. I give no attention to your American slang.

          • Yes, unlike Ryan Lochte and the rest of you Teutons, I often use a men’s room, as a place to urinate.

  9. I guess your opinion depends partly on how you define the “worse is better” theory. I don’t think of it as masochistic, that’s for sure. I don’t want things to get bad in the first place, but as long as things are going peachy, fewer people are going to be motivated.

    The point about “tasting blood” is valid though. Defeatism will kill us as the federal government just keeps slowly genociding us.

    The magic formula is incorporating both principles:
    1) The people experience forced integration, immigration, Islamization, excited negroes(aka BLM), imposed gay marriage, Affirmative Action, and other tactics of white genocide. This leaves them resentful and serves as the “stick method of motivation.”

    2) Someone offers hope, a solution, usually in the form of a strong and charismatic leader(s). He convinces the people that they can win and that their victory will be glorious. His message may or may not be grounded in reason, and may be true or false (obviously we prefer his message to be true and his solutions valid), but he has the gift of rallying people, for better or worse. This is the “carrot form of motivation.”

    We have had the stick for years, and it has been a crucial component of the birth and growth of a movement, but limited to a small percentage of the population. Trump presents first carrot the South (and other sane Americans) has seen in a long time.

    Most adult Southern men do not need any convincing to see that we would be better off independent, and agree with our message entirely, but we have experienced a lot of hard defeat over the last 150+ years. A LOT.

    Defeatism is a major problem that we must overcome or all is lost. If we do not present a message of hope, of how doable our secession is, and how wonderful it will be (and I truly think it can be wonderful) then the movement is bound to fail.

    In other words, we must make Southern men feel EMPOWERED to secede rather than just acknowledge that we ought to be able to secede.

    On a related note, we need to make sure to appeal to men. Should we welcome women? Sure. Can women be helpful? Sure. But we will either win or fail based on our ability to recruit young men, and I don’t just mean to carry guns. I mean we need young men who see the vision to create media channels, memes, and all sorts of creative outreach methods, and at some point, we may need young men to tote guns also. Imagine if a small, sharp group of Southern Nationalists created our own Internet media channel comparable to Infowars, The Young Turks, Breitbart, etc. Imagine the explosive growth we could have from that. Right now Therightstuff.biz is doing a pretty good job for the generic altright, w blogging, podcasting, but it’s not dedicated to Southern Nationalism. A channel like this would be very low cost to get started, but it would require a group of talented individuals that were dedicated to keep it rolling. But they must put a lot of thought into their messaging, not just into their facts.

  11. The fact is, if Donald Trump hadn’t come along and made this amazing run, Ted Cruz would probably be the Republican nominee.

    The only part I don’t agree with. When Trump announced, my initial analysis is that he was going to start a demolition derby within the party that would do three things: (1) Force what were then considered to be top tier candidates out of the race way earlier than they expected, if they didn’t expect to win, (2) Keep what were then considered to be lower rung candidates in the race longer than they would have thought, if they didn’t think they were in it to leverage a book deal or media deal or pad the resume, and (3) Result in a surprising nominee not named Trump.

    I was right about all three things, except the surprising nominee turned out to be Trump himself.

    Point is, the contention that Cruz wins if Trump doesn’t get in is just based on the simple minded conclusion that since Cruz was the place horse, taking away the win horse means the place horse becomes the win horse. In reality, the only reason Cruz finished in second was because Trump got in and caused the demolition derby. Which, among other things, forced Republicans who hated Trump but otherwise had no use for Cruz to reluctantly get behind Cruz to try to stop Trump.

    I think that if Trump didn’t get in, Jeb! would have won, and Cruz probably would have been a mid-spring dropout. Which goes back to another older prediction I made about this past spring as early as about the end of 2013, that the Republican nominee in 2016 would either be the party establishment favorite (which even then was Jeb!), or some militant outsider populist who, while known as a Republican and running as one, would campaign in a triangulatory sense against the party (at the time, I was thinking Jeff Sessions). That’s another prediction that turned out to be right, except for the identity of the latter figure.

Comments are closed.