To the initiated the following statements will sound extremely basic. But than again basic talking points are all average people can wrap their heads around.
We will become the third world. We give out more Visas every year than there are job openings. The media then tells these people that the traditional American population is a bunch of “evil” racist rednecks for opposing their own replacement. Americans as defined by the 1965 demographics, are being replaced by people who will not have the same sense of unity, honesty or fair play. And Im not speaking about the lower class immigrant groups like Mexicans, and other mixed race Latin Americans but the rich ethnocentric Tamil Indians, East Asians and Arabs who see White America as a bunch of useful idiots who will give them whatever they want no matter how much it destroys any future for their own families in terms of college admission, job creation or resources.
Of course the second traditional America raises any sort of opposition to their own replacement they are shut up by accusations of racism. There are plenty of rich ethnic groups who come here set up a bussiness and are allowed to hire only their own people or given preference in hiring by existing corporations. If a so called “White” American was to do the same they would be run out of bussiness finned or thrown in jail. The hypocrisy must end. I would not be allowed to move to their countries and take over so why should they be allowed to do it in my homeland?
So perhaps the best way to get cucked Civic minded White Americans to change their views is to point out a double standard. The current Trump administration should be coaxed to move toward an immigration policy based on equilibrium. Since an overtly racial preservationist or even Nationalist one will not be successful due to the evolved pathological altruism among Whites. If a country does not allow Americans to travel or emigrate there, than the United States should not allow citizens of such a country to come here for travel or immigration.
A strictly tit for tat strategy might be one way if not the only way to bring upper middle class cucks to oppose their own destruction.
YES! WE WIN! After a grueling, 18-month campaign, in the face of bitter opposition at every turn, the God-Emperor has smashed his way into power. And the alt-right has been with him the whole way. Did we make the difference?
Reports are pouring in from around the globe: Washington, Boston, Stockholm, St. Petersburg, and Lancaster County PA. The goyim are jubilant! Greg reprises his daylong sojourn among the Amish, and Vince has some ideas about what to do next.
Intro: Greg sings Adeste Fideles. If anyone who can actually sing and audio-edit wants to redo this, feel free to appropriate it. Here’re the lyrics:
Alex Jones was right… ABOUT EVERYTHING! Our elites really are part of a pederastic Satan-cult. Damn them all to hell. The Whore of Babylon has nothing on K Street and Pennsylvania Avenue.
As the FBI and the press abandon their posts, the cyber-footsoldiers of h8chan /pol/ continue the mission. The stakes are nothing less than the survival of civilization. Can we defeat this monstrous Evil?
The AI bros intended to cover India, but got side-tracked by the Jews. Ritter, Singh and Storminnorman break down the ethnogenesis of this unique people. How did their evolutionary strategy develop? How did they spread throughout Europe? What is the secret of their… uh… (((success)))?
Rome was not founded as a city. Like the platonic state, it was founded, not on some cucked structure like “the family,” but on something far stronger–the MÃ¤nnerbund. The city was just the backdrop to what was, at its core, a politically ordered brofest.
What an awesome arrangement. But all good things must come to an end. One morning, Romulus woke up with a forehead-searing, wine-induced hangover (those are the worst) and, like Jupiter, his temple gave birth to an Idea: To continue the brofest, we need to have another generation. New generations require chicks. Therefore, we need girls.
So the Romans went to the next tribe over and abducted their daughters. This event went down in history by the hyper-triggering name “The Rape of the Sabine Women.”
The alt-right MÃ¤nnerbund is at this same juncture. We need to get girls to support our political goals, as much as it pains me to say so. This does not mean that we need thousands of SWPL American females shit-posting on /pol/. That will never happen, nor do we want it to. The alt-right needs to remain a MÃ¤nnerbund–the ideological shock troops of our people. Just as it is preposterous to have women on the front-line in war, it is so in metapolitics (Ann Coulter and Lana are cool though).
But white womenÂ have a role to play. They need to vote for Trump. They are the demographic where The Emperor has the richest prospects for gains. But despite our early optimism, it does not look like Trump will be able to break a significant number of blacks off of the democratic “coalition of the fringes,” to use Steve Sailer’s phrase. The democrats and the press have succeeded in pushing the BLM bullshit enough to quash any interest on the part of blacksÂ in having a fair shot in the low-wage labor market. Asian minorities are too few to matter much, and they are smart enough to know their political and economic interests are served by importing more of their co-ethnics. So, it’s come to this. Whites vs all.
So how do we get white girls to get on board? Trump seems to be making moves in this direction.Â How can the alt-right help?
Psychology. Let’s put those years of Chateau-reading and gaming to good use. This is our big advantage. We understand girls, and they can never understand us.Â Women will vote for someone who either 1) is an alpha male, 2) has the sanction of the establishment. Obviously we’re good on #1. Unfortunately, Hillary has #2. So we need to tip the scales in his favor. It’s all about perception. Women need toÂ feel that Trump is more powerful, more likely to win.
To that end, I propose:
Public and obsequious pro-Trumpism.
We need to turn America into a continent-spanning pro-Trump echo-chamber. Memes are great for online interactions. Dropping hatefacts and pithy arguments on Facebook and Twitter have gotten us where we are. But I’m sorry autistes, Real Life still matters more to women. We need to immerse them in our mental world. We need to make it so thatÂ women cannot escape our meme-space, our “memensraum.” And because the Platonic woman has no being or interests, what little being Real women do have will be inadequate to resist the pro-Trumpism. They will believe. IRL.
Let yourself be overheard having outrageously pro-Trump conversations on your cell. “Hey bro, did you hear The Emperor’s speech? Man, when he said he’d enforce immigration law, I was sieg heiling so hard, for realz.” Naturally, this sort of rhetoric will cause any liberal goodgirl to recoil, at least the first time. But she’ll come around the tenth time she hears a swoll, well dressed, confident man commenting casually about “Vishnu’s American incarnation.”
“Accidentally” let women see your phone/computer background. I vacillateÂ between:
mmm… dreamy.Â The reaction from females is invariably faux-outrage, which is really just an invitation to double down in the expression of your schoolgirl-like crush. “I just get lost in those eyes. MAGA.”
FanboydomÂ is, of course, usually a vibe-killer, as le Chateau has taught us. But over-the-top fanboydom for a super-alpha is intriguing. The only problem is her interest won’t be directed exclusively at Trump. But that’s a piddling concern. Her mental process will register, “This guys is such a jerk to me, but he loved DJT…” Â And, by transitive property of girl-syllogism, this means “Trump must be high status. I should vote for him.”
It is now clear. The purpose of us–the alt-right–learning game was not to get laid. Ok, so some of us, not pointing fingers, had a lot of fun in the hyper-degeneracy of 2008-14/15. But those days are over. Now it should be obvious to all of us that the “hookup culture” leads to social and racial pollution. The more random bros a girl hooks up with, the less suitable she is for motherhood. But game can be used for good too. It is how we will win our women back to our (and their) own side.
We are now engaged in a society-wide act of seduction.Â Convincing your girlfriend or wife is not nearly enough. There are too many cucks out there, and too many single sluts. We have to make a mass-effort. The flocks ofÂ manless women need a shitlord to be like a shepherd onto them.
So, in this act of mass-seduction, it’s time to move from Tinder and fuck-close. Put less time into Twatter and more into real-life. Be publicly andÂ obsequiously pro-Trump. Saturate the public sphere. The endgame is not getting laid. The stakes are way higher. We must reassert control over our societies if we are to ensureÂ our collective survival. Convincing our women is the next step.
Once we take back our women, the alt-right will have control of the political landscape. When the cucks come to get their women back, we won’t even have to fight. It’ll be 753 BC all over again.
The Great Debate continues: Regionalism vs Empire. Natt is back to defend local loyalties. The AI regulars gang up on him and argue for super-nationalism. Natt then danesplains why he would rather live in a Zealander-free world.
Vince brings the discussion back to earth. How is the alt-right going to achieve any of this? Greg and Singh weigh in.
The alt-right has a crush on Russia. We admire their political unity, their social normalcy, their stoic stand against Modernist degeneracy. Donald Trump has also expressed attitudes that are less than rabidly russophobic. The alt-right wagers that his administration would pursue detente with Moscow. A welcome change from the reflexive antagonism of Hillary Clinton and her neocon supporters.
But having a positive attitude toward Russia, and especially President Vladimir Putin, is a political liability in the West. Clinton knows this, which is why she tried to tie Trump and the alt-right to Putin in her August 25th speech.
The accusation is part of a larger pattern. Clinton and her backers in the media and political establishment have made a habit of trying to tar Trump and the alt-right as Russian stooges. The Clinton Campaign has (without presenting evidence) blamed Russia for hacking the DNCâ€™s email servers, and insinuated that Trump was responsible, somehow. Trump was also accused of treason for suggesting that Russia could provide Hillaryâ€™s 30,000 lost emails to the public. Trumpâ€™s campaign manager, Paul Manafort, was sidelined by the allegation that he had corrupt dealings when he was a businessman in Ukraine before the â€œEuromaidanâ€ revolution. (See our latest podcast, detailing the Ukrainian situation).
As usual, this is mostly just posturing from Clinton and her allies in the Neocon establishment. To the Neocons, this is evidence of right-wing treachery. In their minds, Western and Russian interests are always opposed, and therefore anyone who would cooperate with Russia must be a traitor. Â But the Neocons are flaunting their habitual black-and-white sophistry. They have no real arguments, so they screech â€œguilt by association.â€ Clinton pulled out this logical fallacy in her August 25 speech, quoting a Mexican proverb: “Tell me with whom you walk, and I will tell you who you are.â€
The rhetoric is nevertheless damaging to Trump, and the alt-right needs to be careful. The liberals and neocons are running out of rhetorical ammunition. Incessant accusations of racism seem to be losing their potency. So they have turned to Russia bashing. What better way to cast your opponent as weak than by posturing as the anti-Russia hard-liner? The tactic is a classic in American politics.
But it is not just rhetoric. There is something to liberal and neocon allegations. For the moment, the alt-rightâ€™s interests align with those of Russia. The alt-right would prefer for the US to adopt a less confrontational foreign policy. We see no reason to risk WWIII over the Donbas or Crimea. The alt-right also agrees with the vast majority of Russians in favoring tradition and the socially conservative policies that support it.
Whatâ€™s more, Russia has every reason to support the alt-right, including the nationalists of Western Europe. (Indeed, Franceâ€™s Front National has taken loans from Russian banks. Other far-right parties are often accused of accepting Russian money. The accusations have the ring of truth, as the European far-right is generally well disposed to Russia.) The more the alt-rightâ€™s influence grows, the better for Russiaâ€™s foreign interests. The rising right is also a boon to Russia domestically. Unlike the neocons, Trump and the alt-right have no reason to antagonize Russia over its social policies.
But if Russia supports the alt-right, why does RT, Moscowâ€™s main media outlet in the West, not take a hard-right editorial line? RTâ€™s programing often promotes leftist and libertarian views. It is broadly critical of corporatism and neoconservatism. ItÂ is certainly not alt-right. Similar attitudes prevail at Sputnik, another Russian media outlet aimed at an international audience.
Russiaâ€™s strategy is double-edged. Like any great power, it seeks to mold the political climate of its rivals. While Russia would prefer nationalists to hold power in the West, it is prepared for other outcomes. A right-wing West would be more amenable to Moscow. As it is, the ever leftward trend in Western society suits Russia just fine. A strong partner would be great, but Moscow will settle for a weak competitor.
As the Soviet defector Yuri Bezmenov explained: the key to political propaganda is not resisting your rivalsâ€™ ideological punches, but side-stepping them. Even better, one should pull the punch through, to let your opponentâ€™s momentum put him in a compromising position. This is why Russian news does not take an anti-liberal line. In an ideological fight, it is best to encourage your rival to indulge his own worst inclinations. If the West continues to follow liberalism and equalism to their reductiones ad absurdum, it is doomed.
The alt-right is on the correct path. Just because some of our interests happen to align with Russiaâ€™s, does not mean we must abandon them. Reflexive russophobia, like that of the neocons, reflects our interests just as poorly as a slavishly pro-Russia attitude would. We can agree with Russia without being traitors. The alt-right–and Trump–speak for the vast majority of Americans when they advocate traditional values at home a more restrained policy abroad.
Some commentators suspect Russia will pull out all the stops to get Trump elected. There is even speculation that Russia will unleash an â€œOctober surprise.â€ I doubt it. Even if Moscow has damaging information on Clinton, why blow it before the election? Better to hold on to it to use as leverage if she wins. Moscow would prefer a President Trump, but they are prepared to deal with a Hillary victory.
So while Trump and the alt-right offer a fresh and reasonable position on Russia, we must remember a few things. Russia is a powerful, robust culture that sees itself in exceptional terms. As much as we admire and respect the Russians–they are our racial kin after all–they are rivals of Euro-American civilization. We wish them the best, but not at our expense.
Are the Muslims just dull, or does random terrorism help their demographic jihad? The Alt-Right notices who the perps are, but what about the victims? Why are bobo, liberal Westerners the target of most attacks, and not patriots? Join the discussion with Vince the Slav, Sven the Swede and Greg the orientalizing Italo-German.
The bros also tackle the American political scene. The press is trying to derail the Trump Train with pessimistic and mendacious headlines. Does the Right have the wherewithal to wait them out?
Pat Buchanan says The God-Emperor is still in the game! Unz commentariat has defeatist melt-down.
(The following essay is also available as a lecture on AI’s Soundcloud. It is republished as an article because the editor felt that its thesis has gained relevance since its original publication. Plus some people prefer reading to listening.)
Three generations after crushing its main economic rival in two bloody wars, expanding its power across the sea, and coming into conflict with major eastern empires, the republic finds itself in a political crisis at home. All of its military success has brought streams of low-wage foreign labor to the homeland, undercutting the economic prospects of the native lower classes and allowing the rich to accumulate ever vaster stores of wealth. At the same time, the military establishment finds recruiting more and more difficult, as the sturdy and loyal native small-holders are driven off their property and forced into the cities to live on the dole.
If this sounds to you like a description of early 21st century America, youâ€™d be right. But it also describes the Roman Republic in the last decades of the 2nd century BC. Bu the 130s, Rome could look back on a century of uninterrupted success. Instead of Germany, Romeâ€™s world wars had been fought against Carthage. Instead of the USSR, her eastward imperial expansion had come at the expense of the Hellenistic kingdoms. But like in the US, Roman imperial success had the same destructive effects at home, leading to the rise of a populist reaction in the mold of Donald Trump.
In this lecture, I will describe the situation in Rome in the late 2nd century BC. I will focus on the the economic and political circumstances that lead to popular discontent, and the eventual rise of a pair of populist politicians–the Brothers Gracchi, who managed to implement some reforms. I will assess the effectiveness of these reforms. Finally I will compare the rise of the Gracchi at Rome to recent American history, and offer some predictions about how â€œThe Trumpeningâ€ will play out.
Three forces allowed the rise of the Gracchi-imperial overreach, economic centralization and imposed diversity. First, to explain the terminology. I realize these terms have a modern ring to them. I think these three terms–imperialism, economic centralization and imposed diversity–are appropriate to the Roman situation in that they describe the Republicâ€™s problems in a general way, and provide ready analogies to our world. I do not mean to suggest any particular historico-philosophical Cause. The factors are of course interrelated and their effects were reciprocal. So you autistes can put the Hegel and von Mises away, at least for the first part of this lecture. Toward the end, Iâ€™ll indulge you with some macro-historical speculation. But for now–imperialism, economic centralization and imposed diversity.
First, imperial overreach. Rome defeated Carthage–her major rival for domination of the Western Mediterranean–at Zama in 202 BC–the Roman 1945. She then embarked on a program of accelerated expansion in the lands that had comprised the Carthaginian Empire. Roman Armies, following in the footsteps of Scipio Africanus, spent the better part of the next two centuries reducing the Iberian Peninsula. The Spanish campaigns were grueling, but there was no shortage of Roman patricians eager to lead a few legions into the abyss. The temptation of martial glory was simply too great for anyone to bother with cost-benefit-analysis. Besides, Spainâ€™s silver mines were making a lot of powerful men obscenely rich, so no one objected to throwing a few thousand more legionaries into the meat-grinder.
Itâ€™s fucking happening Goyim, another jihad in France, a Coup dâ€™etat in Istanbul, and congress dumps the 9-11 reportâ€™s redacted 22 pages.Â Itâ€™s all going out with the trash, because itâ€™s Friday, and the Jews think they can get away with it. But AI is on point and on air with this special episode, featuring George Singh in Washington, DC, and Greg Ritter in some Eastern European shit-hole.
Elin Krantz was a young Swedish woman who was raped and murdered by an Ethiopian named Ephrem Tadele Yohannes. A photo of her contorted body was leaked (probably from the police investigation) and has been floating around on the internet (Editor’s note: No link posted. The reader is invited to do a google image search. The picture is extremely disturbing).
A different woman is featured in a music videoÂ having sex with a black while singing the Swedish national anthem. The clip “blanda upp” is from a ‘comedy’ show named Grotesco. The video promotes race mixing and is intended to mockÂ the Sweden Democrats.