The Economist: Alt-Right Q & A

Editor’s Note: The Economist has published a breathless hit piece on the Alt-Right. I think it is actually pretty funny. The keepers of the flame of neo-liberal globalism are baring their fangs here like a wounded beast! I’ve included the entirety of our correspondence below for any readers of The Economist who want to learn more about the Alt-Right.

The Economist: Dear Occidental Dissent

Hello from The Economist magazine. I’m working on–you guessed it–a piece about the Alt-Right–and I’m hoping to ask you a few questions. Could I perhaps email them? Or we could talk on the phone if you’d rather. The contact name I have is Brad Griffin but please say if you think someone else is more appropriate.
Thanks and best
Andrew

BG: Sure.

What do you want to know? Send me your questions. And yes, I am Brad Griffin.

The Economist: Many thanks for your reply. My questions are below. Best, Andrew

The Economist:It seems to me that there are two widespread impressionss of the Alt-Right: one is that it is really a collection of transgressive (but vacuous) online pranksters; the other is that it is just a reincarnation of old-style white supremacism. I imagine that you think it is neither–why are these misapprehensions?

BG: There is an element of truth to both of those impressions.

The term “Alternative Right” was coined in 2008 to describe of number of disparate elements – libertarianism, paleoconservatism, White Nationalism, Neoreaction, men’s rights activism, etc. – that existed outside of mainstream American conservatism. Richard Spencer founded the website “Alternative Right” in 2009 which he hoped would become a gathering point for these heretical ideologies. It was understood at the time by everyone that “alt-right” was an umbrella term.

Anyway, these ideas later spread to some of the more unregulated corners of the internet – 4chan, 8chan, comment sections, Twitter – which is where it found a receptive audience among trolls. The memes, trolling, Pepe the Frog stuff is a later development and innovation of a younger audience of converts.

Very few people who identify with the alt-right think of themselves as “white supremacists.” The vast majority of these people believe racial differences exist and have a biological basis, but that doesn’t necessarily mean Whites are superior. They are also separatists who have little desire to lord it over non-Whites. It is believing that young black males are more likely to engage in robbery while Whites are more likely to engage in drunk driving. American Indians are more likely to be alcoholics.

The Economist: Who would you say were the Alt-Right movement’s chief ideologues?

BG: Jared Taylor, Richard Spencer, Kevin MacDonald, and Peter Brimelow.

The Economist:What is it an alternative to?

BG: The alt-right sees itself as the alternative to mainstream American conservatism and the liberal order in general. In the US, liberalism, conservatism, and libertarianism are all branches of the liberal family tree. The alt-right has reactionary roots.

The EconomistFor your part, do you see a link with neo-Confederate/secessionist nationalism?

BG: Yes, I do.

In the 1850s, there was a similar intellectual movement – the Southern reactionary enlightenment – that generated the Confederacy. The Founding Fathers of the Confederacy were influenced by Sir Walter Scott, Charles Darwin, and Thomas Carlyle among others. Vice President Alexander Stephens, for example, said in his famous Cornerstone Speech that the Confederacy was based on cutting edge developments in natural science which had blown away the ideas of previous generations.

The EconomistI am struck by the internationalism of the movement. Do you think that its American incarnation is inspired by European examples?

BG: Of course.

It’s the same movement. It stems from the same causes. It has always been very international in outlook. To the alt-right, modern day Zimbabwe or South Africa is the dystopia which we wish to avoid.

The EconomistMany Alt-Right activists evidently have affection for Russia and Vladimir Putin. Is that because it values authoritarianism, even monarchism?

BG: The alt-right has drawn some lessons from the 20th century. Foremost among those is that conflict between Europeans is something we wish to avoid because it provides openings for revolutionary leftist movements. We simply see no reason for conflict with Russia and take a harsh view of the Clintons for their war against Serbia. We side with Putin against the likes of George Soros.

The EconomistTo date, has Alt-Right made an impact in the non-virtual world? For example, do you consider WhiteLivesMatter protests to be part of the movement?

BG: The alt-right is heavily repressed even here in the “Land of the Free.” In some countries, you can be thrown in prison for voicing these sentiments. Because of the social and economic penalties of embracing our perspective, there has been very little in the way of real world activism. And yes, White Lives Matter is clearly part of the movement.

The EconomistDoes it trouble you that some Alt-Right tropes and jokes, for example concerning ovens and other aspects of the Holocaust, are bound to be upsetting to some people?

It’s not something that I engage in. I’m not surprised that it is so upsetting to some people, but I understand why people are doing it. If they weren’t doing it, they would be ignored. I had discounted the efficacy of online trolling as a tactic.

The EconomistHow would you characterise the movement’s relationship with Breitbart? Is it really “the platform of the alt-right”, as its former boss said?

BG: We think of Breitbart as the Alt-Lite.

As the alt-right has grown and built an audience, it has become profitable for mainstream conservative websites to tap into our audience. They have adopted aspects of our narrative and use it to generate clicks. In the process, their audience has become a sort of hybrid of the alt-right and mainstream conservatism.

The EconomistDitto Donald Trump. It seems to me that his positions on immigration and Islam chime with your own concerns. And many Alt-Right activists evidently support him. But is he an ally, a soulmate, an inspiration or a beneficiary of the movement?

BG: Donald Trump’s platform happens to coincide with our interests on a number of key issues: political correctness, immigration, trade, campaign finance. He is a bulldozer who is destroying our traditional enemy on the Right.

Is he one of us? There isn’t a single prominent figure in the alt-right who believes Trump is alt-right or a “racist.” He doesn’t have to be to advance our cause.

The EconomistHow do you feel about Hillary Clinton’s reference to Alt-Right in her recent speech?

BG: I thought it was great. She positioned us as the real opposition and gave our enemies on the Right the kiss of death with her embrace. It didn’t help her poll numbers though so I doubt she will do it again.

The EconomistHow big is the Alt-Right movement?

BG: It is so anonymous and online based that no one really knows. My guess is that there is a core of several hundred thousand and a much wider sphere of sympathizers and fellow travelers.

The Economist: Thank you for your time and for these v useful replies.

The Economist: Dear Brad

May I ask a couple of follow-up questions? Last ones, I promise. They are:

— you mentioned that you are wary of war in Europe because of the opportunity it affords to leftist revolutionaries. But, as I understand it, many on the alt-right hope for something like a revolution–ie a sort of year-zero remaking of America, something like a political apocalypse. Is that right?

BG: Sure.

1.) If you look at the 19th and early 20th century, ethnonationalists were at each other’s throats. The French hated the Germans. The Poles hated the Russians. The Irish hated the English. And so on down the list.

That sort of petty nationalism ended in the twin catastrophes of World War I and World War II. It had the effect of discrediting racialism and nationalism. As we see it, the pendulum swung to the opposite extreme and now the great evils of our time are extreme globalism, multiculturalism, ethnomasochism, and political correctness.

The conflict of our time isn’t between nations. It is between nationalists and globalists. It is an internal fight within nations, not an external conflict between them. We have no desire, for example, to engage in an international conflict with Russia.

The Economist:relatedly: do you think of yourself as a democrat (lower-case d), or would you rather dispense with the institutions of democracy in favour of authoritarianism?

BG: I’m skeptical of democracy. I think it works in small, ethnically and culturally homogeneous nations like Iceland or Finland. As nations become more multiracial and multicultural, democracy can become a tool of oppression. No place in the world better symbolizes our fear of democracy than contemporary South Africa.

Our primary concern is the welfare of our people. The form of government we live under is a distant secondary consideration. I would rather live under a dictatorship or a monarchy than the sort of “democracy” that exists in South Africa. They have a “constitution” there, but what use is it?

The Economist:You mention that you do not practise the sort of aggressively insulting trolling that some avowed alt-righters go in for (ovens, concentration-camp imagery). But do you share their implict of explicit belief in a Jewish conspiracy and that Jews are a problem for America? Do you believe that the Holocuast happened?

BG: I don’t believe there is any conspiracy. It is no secret that the Jewish community is extremely organized and well-financed to the tune of billions of dollars. They aggressively lobby the government to advance what they perceive to be Jewish interests in both domestic and foreign policy.

At the same time, I believe that Jews are the wealthiest ethnic group in America. They are drastically overrepresented in culturally sensitive institutions like the media and universities. Basically, I think they have a massive, negative cumulative impact on our culture, but it is all done openly. There is nothing secretive about it.

As for the Holocaust, I think lots of Jews died in the Second World War. I don’t think we will ever know exactly how many. My grandfather was deployed in Italy in World War 2. He wasn’t fighting to bring about what we have today.

The Economist:Is it fair for me to infer that you regret the Confederacy’s defeat in the civil war? If so, should I also assume that you think slavery would have died a natural death some time thereafter?

BG: Yes, I do.

I think the North and South are so ethnically and culturally different that we would be better off as two independent nations. That’s still true 150 years after the demise of slavery and the Confederacy. We’re gearing up for the latest round of sectional conflict which will produce gridlock no matter who wins.

Slavery would have died a natural death at the hands of technology. In 2016, only around 3 percent of the population works in agriculture. Aside from Haiti, we’re the only country in the world where slavery ended so violently.

The Economist:Is Brad Griffin your real name?

BG: Yes, that’s my real name.

The Economist: That’s it. Over & out

About Hunter Wallace 12366 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent

52 Comments

  1. Did they publish that exchange?

    Not much to disagree with really.

    Fascinating to see an English scribe get the gist of the Confederate thing. He didn’t pull a Bonacoursi and show a whipped back. Slavery is obselete. He’s probably as sick of Dindus in London as you are in South.

  2. I don’t think it’s a good idea to ever speak with a reporter from the jewsmedia because they are in a position to manipulate and misquote you.

  3. Birthrate for Black Africa is 6 babies per woman, and there is now never-ending migration of black Africans(mostly men) into Europe.

    These men all lust after white women and want to use white wombs to hatch black babies. And they use the black fist to beat up white males and turn them into scared pussy-boys no longer respected by white women hooked to global rap music.

    And many white women want to go black. We see it all around. At the primal level, women are hormone-ally turned on by bigger man. Just as Asian women lust after white men than for yellow men, we see more white women go nuts over black men.

    Also, the official dogma of the West is that white men should have kids with Asian women while white women have kids with black men. Black men > white men > Asian men.

    Blacks are gaining SEXUAL HEGEMONY or reproductive hegemony over whites.

    THIS is the main threat to the white race.

    In the end, it’s not the battle of pens but of penises.

    After all, a white woman who is lost to communism or feminism can return to nationalism.

    But a white woman lost to jungle fever has genetically surrendered herself to becoming a

    womb-provider to black man and a maker of black children. She and her children cannot be reclaimed.

    This is why Jews push interracism. When Jews win over whites with PC, those ideas in the head can be overturned. Even PC-brainwashed whites can be ‘red-pilled’ and return to racial unity and pride.

    But a mulatto cannot be reclaimed by whites. As a product of a white woman sexually giving herself over to the black race, her children will be black.

    And as she used her white breasts to feed a black child, she will emotionally bond with the niglet.

    The real war is of blood, not of ink.

    You can change ideas in your head, but you can’t change blood in your veins.

    If your white mother had gone black and if you were half-black, you would identify as black, esp as children identify with the figure of authority, the father.

    Also, PC made blackness superior morally cuz of MLK myth.

    Also, sports and pop culture made blacks cooler and more badass.

    ===========

    • This cunt is poison. She/he/it is is a mtf faggot who pushes black ale BS wherever it goes. OUT OUT OUT!

      ADMIN: Ban this freak!

      It also goes by the name:
      Gubbler Chechenova
      Theya
      Jawbone Critic
      Middletown Girl
      Andrea Freiboden
      Andrea Nyx Hemera
      Andrea Ostrov Letania

    • Black-white mixing is virtually non existant above an IQ of 95. Our problems are mass immigration and low birth rates among the top people.

  4. Well done! There was little in your replies that wasn’t superb.

    On the latest Daily Shoah, R Spencer seemed to comprehend many common criticisms of the press conference. They played a clip of M Yianoppolis where he basically tried to describe the alt-right as contemporary neoconservatism. That seemed to trigger Spencer who had upsold Yianoppolis, Jews, Zionism, and Israel at the presser. He said there could be no “Pope” or self proclaimed leadership of the alt right. To that point, I don’t think I have ever read a single significant thing by the four fellows you mentioned as leading intellectuals, three of whom held the presser.

    The “final form” of the historical successor to the current order is yet to be determined – beginnings are very delicate times.

  5. Very, very impressive. I’m probably not alone is saying that we’re lucky to have you as a leading Alt-Right figure.

    The Economist piece was snarky and hysterical. They’re clearly scared.

  6. (((The Economist))) = Rothchilds JEWS.
    Hello Nation Wrecking Kikes, checking in!
    1) Re: your HollowHoax – prove it. Verifiable forensic evidence. Look up those words, if their meaning eludes you.
    2) You may want to make sure your passports are up to date. Of course – awareness of the machinations of your malodorous, malicious Tribe is a global phenomenon. Still you can bugger off to Israel, Birobidjan, Madagascar, or best of all, Hell.
    3)You are not gonna get that 38 Billion.

  7. Answers were literally perfection, all the way down.

    Was there more opportunity to detail the ZA, ZW scenario in the US?

  8. Good answers. I only disagree with saying slavery would have died out naturally had the South won. Not a chance. We could still use slaves today for many things. The fact that much agriculture is mechanized only means that we don’t need slaves for those particular tasks. However, we could use slaves (of any race) to:

    –work in textile mills (spinning yarn, weaving cloth)
    –work in sewing plants (baseball caps, shirts, pants, Confederate flags, etc.)
    –work in tennis shoe factories
    –assemble smartphones, PCs, TVs, etc.
    –manufacture auto parts, assemble into cars
    –pick produce not yet picked by machine
    –work in almost any kind of manufacturing imaginable: ball point pens, sunglasses, tennis balls, paper mills, furniture factories, etc.
    –lawn care/landscaping around government buildings.

    We could also use slaves or prisoners for drug and vaccine research, but that’s not exactly “labor” so I guess it isn’t technically slavery.

    Excepting the papermills and perhaps tennis balls, almost 100% of what I listed has already either been offshored or is done by immigrant labor, so noone should say slave labor for these things would be taking jobs from Southerners. It would help to bring production back to the South from places like China or Mexico. If we used slave labor we could be exporters rather than importers of all these things.

    • The sad thing is you’re probably not even joking. I’d take a scumsucker southern nationalist piece of excrement at his word before a silly little net-nutzi any day. Goddam am I ever glad your turdshit nation was destroyed. I hope it stays destroyed.

      • I presume you are addressing Prez Davis.

        He’s entitled to his opinion without getting abused.

        If you disagree with something on this forum, state it like a gentleman in decent language, don’t react like a spoilt 15 year old schoolgirl with a foul mouth.

    • No.

      First of all, we don’t want race mixing, period — not as chattel, either. That’s how our problems got started. Proximity leads to conflict.

      Second, what you’re describing is just a neocon-like gift to the corporations. Rather, the economy works better when the tasks that you describe are performed by less-intelligent whites (who need to do something in society, not just subsist of a govt. dole), but are paid living wages for those tasks. I mean, union-level wages.

      • Racemixing was definitely a problem w antebellum slavery. A problem that we don’t want to repeat. You’ve definitely got a point there.

        I would be in favor of labor camps for criminals. Sitting in a jail cell for a period of time does dot repay debt to society. It actually accumulates more debt.

        Prisoners could be of any race and I would prefer that blacks either leave or be sterilized just to make our country white. But I suspect that if we started deporting negroes to Africa they would beg us to give them an option to stay as slaves.

        Slavery or de facto slavory is both timeless and universal. It’s as old and as widespread as human civilization. The liberal West is the exception to the rule and is not sustainable.

        But, I’m totally in agreement with you on the point of racemixing. If we do have slavery in the future they should be prevented from reproducing, and preferably sequestered on camps since they would be our most criminal element.

        With today’s ankle bracelt technology we could put black males picking crops, since that is what they are best adapted for and would likely be happiest at anyway. It might even help to let them smoke pot or have sex robots back at camp if it helps to keep them content and out of trouble. If they are sterilized we could even let the males and females be cellmates. They won’t try too hard to run away if they get sex, weed, and maybe kfc back at the camp.

        • Just listen to all of those pricey and logistics-heavy measures that you’re describing. You’re just creating unnecessary problems for a state — problems that it need not have, because the simple and better answer is deportation. Fewer and fewer agricultural jobs are needed, and those that are, should be performed by whites who are paid living wages.

          I agree with you about labor camps, though. Whites prisoners (which is to say, any and all of the state’s prisoners, because we’re talking about a white ethnostate) could indeed be made to perform the tasks that you list. But that’s not slavery. That is a practicality, for the reasons that you cite.

          As for slavery, I agree that it has a long history, but that’s because it had a practical purpose. In today’s economy, it has no material or cultural benefits, only detriments.

          • Sending blacks to labor camps is definitely cheaper than deporting, plus we get to have their labor to boot. Unless we are going to drown them in the ocean or send them into outer space, then deportation necessarily means finding another country willing to take them. I suppose China might take them off our hands pretty cheap and just kill or enslave them when they get there.

            I’m counting labor camps as a form of slavery, and the benefits are enormous. I have already covered several examples of how big a benefit slavery could be. If you think slavery is obsolete, then you aren’t thinking much. There is plenty of use for unskilled agricultural labor and plenty of use for other forms of unskilled labor. The biggest risk is that someone in the future might let them out. That’s why I say sterilize the nonwhites and any whites that get a lifetime sentence. We don’t need them in the genepool, and I don’t care if they have sex or not, as long as they don’t reproduce. Though I suppose old school castration could make some of them more managable.

          • Of course deportation is more economical than “labor camps”: a one-time cost (deportation) versus long-term, never-ending costs of oversight, monitoring, shelter, provision, etc. (your “camps” nonsense), for labor that is increasingly not needed. This is obvious.

            Your examples of “benefits” are NOT benefits, but detriments, because you’d be taking away jobs that should go to less-educated and less-capable whites — who need to do something, labor wise — and simply padding the pockets of corporations. Your thinking is purely Jewish.

            Furthermore, having them in labor camps makes future internal strife with inevitably arising future abolition movements a certainty. You are fabricating problems for no benefit but rather huge cost.

          • No. Labor camps would be more economical, assuming we didn’t have activists inventing regulations to make them less economical like they did with the death penalty. Unless you are going to sink deported negroes in the middle of the ocean, then we would have to pay another country to take them. Nobody wants them, unless they have a chance at profiting from their slave labor, using them for medical research, or grinding them up for fertilizer.

            I have not argued that we *must* have slavery, only that it is not obsolete, and probably will not become obsolete within the next 100 yrs if ever. I am only saying that if we choose not to practice slavery then we are throwing away a huge resource.

            The argument that labor camps could lead to future abolitionist movements is a very real threat and the single biggest argument against having them. As I’ve already stated, I would have the nonwhite campers sterilized so it shouldn’t be a problem. Within 40 yrs the labor camp population would be 100% white except for a few old nonwhites.

            If I were king of the US or the South today I would also put illegal aliens in labor camps for life, either segregated by sex or sterilized and I would put them running sewing machines or whatever, being maintained mostly on beans, rice, oatmeal, etc and not even getting that unless they make their daily quota. Suppose it costs $10/day to keep a slave in a labor camp and suppose they work for 10 hr days. That would be $1 an hour to sew shirts, pants, baseball caps, military uniforms, Confederate flags, or whatever. At the same time the same individuals could also be used for drug and vaccine research on top of working. That would be much smarter policy than deporting them where they just try again, and again, but then people like you would have a problem with it.

            By the way, if labor camps are such a bad idea economically, then why are labor camps still used in North Korea? Why were they used so extensively in the Soviet Union, when all they have to do is shoot and bury (maybe not even bury) the offenders?

            Your argument that labor camps only take jobs away from low skill whites is invalid. They would primarily take the jobs away from China, Vietnam, Bangladesh, Mexico, Honduras, etc. There will still be plenty of jobs for low skilled whites to do. But this point does make me wonder: —Are you against the diesel powered backhoe, since it obviously takes jobs away from low skill white ditchdiggers?
            –Are you against sewing machines, since they obviously take jobs away from women who could have sewn with needle and thread?
            –Are you against Internet, because it obviously takes jobs away from messageboys and letter carriers?
            –Are you against push button elevators, because they obviously take jobs away from the boys who used to operated the elevator control manually?
            –Are you against newspaper machines, because they obviously take jobs away from newsboys who carried and sold papers?

            Shall we invent more jobs by banning all these things? It would create lots of jobs for low skilled white workers, but it wouldn’t make many people any richer would it? Of course the easiest way to create jobs would be to just pay people by the hour to run laps or do jumping jacks. Lots of jobs could easily be created that way, but not much wealth would be generated. Perhaps you would like to take on that endeavor, since nobody is stopping you. Think of all the money your business would make and all the people you would employ! Better hurry before somebody beats you to it!

          • LOL. Your best support for your slave camps are the economies of North Korea and the USSR. Such shining models of economic success.

            Keep trying, Jew. You’re so typical of your kind: always reduce everything to the money-grubbing level, heedless of (or rather, secretly delighting in) the cultural ruin that your supposedly sound fiscal policies inevitably bring. And yet in this, even your shekels smoke-screen is absurd.

            North Korea. The USSR — as supposed support for your ideas. My sides.

          • Wow, this little discussion is “How many angels can dance of the head of a pin.” Here in 2016 Blacks aren’t going anywhere and were hoping against the demographic nightmare electorate and commie youth we can even get Trump elected for some moderate change in direction. All of us here in our old age will most certainly still be living in a United States where some sauntering negress takes our burger orders. I just don’t see a return of black slavery or sending them back to Africa ever happening.

  9. Did you ever stop to think that this particular form of Rothschild agent is just gathering more information for his masters to commandeer the alt right movement? Isn’t that what they do?

    You should have toyed with him. (((They))) don’t deserve anything else. I guess you didn’t want to soil your reputation or your family’s good name. But, think of how much laughter we lost out on. You should have referred him to Denise on the Jewish Question. The only holocaust during WWII was the war itself and that’s what needs to be said.

    • I kinda agree with that. There were trolling opportunities missed.

      But we do have slavery today…factories in China…work gangs of Mexicans…etc.

      Things like that.

    • I think the Holocaust answer was a masterpiece in how it was phrased. It conceded nothing but also gave no opportunity for manipulation.

        • In fact, it didn’t even go that far — it didn’t even concede a mistake. The answer simply acknowledged that “some died” — not saying how many, not saying how (old age? disease?), not even saying whether it was altogether bad that some died.

          Some died. It’s a perfect answer. Any takeaway can only be done on inference. With complete plausible deniability of any such inference.

      • It was a great answer and a safe answer. A little benign mention of Fred Leuchter or Ernst Zundel would have been delightful.

      • Almost Perfect: “As for the Holocaust, I think lots of Jews died in the Second World War.”

        Absolute Perfection: “As for the Holocaust, I think Jews died in the Second World War. I often refer to the Lechter Report for factual figures and details and highly-recommend it to everyone. When it comes to real facts and figures on the death camps, Fred Leuchter is the man to know.”

  10. It occurred to me that they could take this Trump fellow down if he could be tied to MIC or some other industrial sector that is unseemly.

    I often wondered how Hitler wasn’t exposed as a Military Intelligence agent by his opponents, or as a front man for Krupps.

    Why don’t they go there with Trump? Instead they try to shackle him to a Green Frog.

  11. You handled that well, Hunter. As for the columnist, he made a complete joke of himself with that silly article. Like a hysterical old woman calling for her smelling salts, oh, my!

    A good day’s work all around.

  12. Very good info. I see that some Alt-Righters are very open to converting libertarians, while others are openly fascist. It does seem to be an umbrella term for right-ish dissidents. My own WordPress blog, Putnam Liberty Notes, falls with your definition of Alt-Right. I do not do memes, but I do talk about Jews, and that fantasy number 6 million.

  13. Brad that was beautiful !

    I am honored to have written under a young man who can hold his own , get the better of the Economist!

    Well done sir!

Comments are closed.