top 200 commentsshow all 386

[–]DrDaniels 69 points70 points  (29 children)

Why do you hate the Jews?

[–]CertifiedRabbi 27 points28 points  (28 children)

They've been at the center of a lot of the ideological movements in the 20th and 21st century that have been turning White Western civilization into a degenerate, 3rd world cesspit. Kevin MacDonald's "The Culture of Critique" is a must-read. I've yet to see a convincing refutation of it.

Here's a quick overview about how Jews are primarily responsible for opening America's borders that's largely based on Kevin MacDonald's writings. So, if you ever wondered who the fuck is responsible for making you feel like a racial minority in your own town, now you know who's ultimately at fault.

A conservative Jew named Lawrence Auster also wrote a really interesting article back in 2004 explaining why Jews support mass non-White and Islamic immigration into White Western countries.

They also control most of the news media and the entertainment industry. And if you think that's a bullshit conspiracy theory, you can see a Jew himself openly admitting it. They even run the porn industry and the comic book industry. And of course everyone knows that Jews dominate the financial sector. It's insane how much power and influence they have - especially in America.

[–]NimpleNavigator 85 points86 points  (9 children)

How can Jews who are like 0.01% of the population control what looks to be pretty much everything? Jews aren't the only group that form cliques so it can't be blamed on that.

[–]Lothar_von_Trotha 25 points26 points  (1 child)

Ethnic nepotism. Corner a market, cheat a few people, buy up a few newspapers, push out the goyim. Control the publishing houses, control the New York Times and other publications, now you've got book reviews. You can promote who you want, you can expand from there into academia, it's all quite simple. The only thing that's more simple is a person who feigns incredulity when he's really just lazy and clueless.

You'd be saying the same thing in the Middle Ages, when the Jews were infamous through ALL of Europe and kicked out, over and over and over and over again. "There's only a few here and there, no way could they do all that." They did, and they are, deal with it.

[–]FUCKjuventus 53 points54 points  (0 children)

u mad

[–]tr56y 12 points13 points  (3 children)

It's more than forming cliques. They help each other to the extreme and promote Jewish interests. They are very intelligent and organized in their methods.

Regardless of how, it's really indisputable. Go to Youtube and type in AIPAC 2016 and watch ALL our politicians commit treason.

It's been going on a long, long time. Hitler had valid concerns just like Henry Ford did when he wrote "The International Jew".

[–]NimpleNavigator 7 points8 points  (2 children)

I liken it to Cortes and his ragtag invasion force taking on the entire Aztec empire. There has to be something in Jewish culture or more likely in Jewish genetics that make them posses a far more capable social intelligence then non-Jewish whites and non-Jewish non-whites. And I'm not talking about a slight edge, such a discrepancy can only be explained by a deeply profound metacognition that as out of reach for non-Jews as seeing naturally in infrared is.

[–]George_RockwellHERE COME DAT GOY 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yes I would agree.

I recommend this podcast on Voltaire's thoughts on the Jewish people.

[–]djhilton79 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Christians have another explanation. They're God's people. Since Christ they've been in rebellion against Him and yes they've brought great evil, but they've also brought great accomplishments. Gone are the Carthaginians, the Vandals, the Spartans and even the Franks. Yet the Hebrews remain.

Of course you will dismiss this explanation, but to me it's much more plausible than some tenuous theory of parasitism based upon evolutionary biology.

[–]ITS_JUST_SATIRE_BRO 33 points34 points  (14 children)

making you feel like a racial minority in your own town

Really? You are going for feelings instead of facts.

[–]GustavClarke 15 points16 points  (0 children)

It's going for feelings as well as facts. 'Feelings' exist for a reason, you should feel uncomfortable that you are being ethnically cleansed.

[–]CertifiedRabbi 13 points14 points  (11 children)

[–]Tap4Red 11 points12 points  (10 children)

Most non alt rights (like myself) are vaguely aware. We just don't actually care. It's just a fundamental difference in belief on how important racial majority is nowadays

[–]CertifiedRabbi 13 points14 points  (8 children)

Have you looked up race and IQ statistics, race and crime statistics, and general quality of life rankings both from within America and around the world? If you did, then you'd know that really only White Western Europeans and East Asians are capable of creating and maintaining highly advanced societies. And if you looked up Robert Putnam's work, then you'd know that racial diversity tends to have a net negative impact on societies.

[–]stay_jelly 4 points5 points  (4 children)

Do you believe those differences are due to skin color or because of long term circumstances?

Or this way, do you agree with the following statement: If black and white culture switched and all black and white people would switch skin color, ie NBA now mainly white, upper class black etc, whites would have, on average, lower education, higher crime rates, single mothers etc. Why do you or don't you agree?

[–]CertifiedRabbi 4 points5 points  (3 children)

I think that racial disparities in IQ, crime rates, and living standards are primarily caused by genetic differences. There isn't a single highly successful black society anywhere on this planet. That strongly points to chronic black failure being genetic. The difference in living standards between the black Haitians and their Mulatto Dominican neighbors also strongly points to a genetic causation. After all, they both share the same island.

And as to the popular argument that chronic and global black failure is caused by White oppression; supporters of that anti-White conspiracy theory need to explain why Ethiopia is such a 3rd world cesspit and why South Africa is one of the most advanced black societies. Ethiopia was barely touched by White people (besides massive amounts of foreign aid and charity work), and South Africa was heavily colonized and ruled by Whites until quite recently. It's pretty obvious that black people are simply too stupid to govern themselves. They need White overlords and White taxpayers to leech off of if they want to create relatively advanced societies.

[–]TheSilverBanger 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We're still a majority and the anti white rhetoric is already rather brazen, do you honestly think that will diminish when we are a [hated] minority?

[–]Shalomalechem 21 points22 points  (2 children)

I don't understand why the US has to stay white. I can see the case for Europe, although I kind of think it's bullshit, I see absolutely no case for a race to be entitled to a country founded on immigration and not on an ethnic principle, such as Italy being a country for the Italian people.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It was founded on what kind of immigration? Japanese? Indian? Indigenous Australian?

[–]Longhornt 49 points50 points  (10 children)

Hi im black and jewish. Can i join your little club?

[–]George_RockwellHERE COME DAT GOY 38 points39 points  (1 child)

is that you, D'marcus Leibowitz?

[–]tr56y 19 points20 points  (5 children)

If you're black, Jews don't really consider you Jewish. Ask the BLM leadership why they don't support Israel. They know the deal.

[–]FollowKick 47 points48 points  (3 children)

BLM doesn't speak for black people as a whole, especially on Israel.

[–]warsie 1 point2 points  (2 children)

black nationalism has a strong anti-israeli outlook

source: am a black nationalist, and basically most black nationalist groups and writers/intellectuals sided with Palestine over Israel after WWII

also Israel =/= Jews, given there is the 'blacks are the real jews' strains among say the hebrew israelites etc

[–]AnarchoElk 7 points8 points  (1 child)

My question is, if blacks are the real jews, and blacks are the real egyptians (because kangz and shiet) does that mean the whole Moses vs Ramses "let my people go" shit was just MORE black on black violence?

[–]warsie 2 points3 points  (0 children)

no, because the historical evidence doesn't show egyptians enslaving jews. and even if they did so, that wasn't a black egyptian dynasty (there were more than the black egyptians as a dynasty)

[–]Francois_Rapiste 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Get back in the oven ungabungastein.

[–]Rokey76 12 points13 points  (39 children)

Hello. I'm curious about "Sorry, but "cuck" is a racial term".

From the way I always understood it, cuckolding is when your wife sleeps with another man even though you know about it. I understand the Donald Trump people use it metaphorically, but I've never heard about the racial component. I know some men have a fetish of being cuckolded by a black man, but I thought the term wasn't exclusive to that.

Just curious as a non-Trump person who checked out this post because I'm interested in learning more about what you guys are about.

Thanks for any clarification!

[–]EdGCanuck 22 points23 points  (31 children)

The term "cuckold" in nature refers to a male that unknowingly raises the offspring of another male, at the expense of its own energy and resources.

The White race built up Western civilization and if it's not our descendants who reap all the benefit then that's what we're like: a cuckold.

[–]astronomy8thlight 58 points59 points  (14 children)

By illegally immigrating on to the land of aboriginal peoples?

And as /u/zellyman says, on the back of slaves, as well.

And why focus on the "racial" element when the American leaders of the "White race" also recognized that "all men are created equal"? Or were the Founding Fathers cucks?

[–]xxxzx 38 points39 points  (4 children)

By illegally immigrating on to the land of aboriginal peoples?

And as /u/zellyman says, on the back of slaves, as well.

Why am I not surprised that they won't answer the hard questions.

[–]Mulche_ 11 points12 points  (2 children)

Those are not hard questions and they were answered, you just have to look past the posts that your buds upvoted.

First of all, "land" and "nation" are two different things. There was no established North American nation, and a vast majority of the land was unoccupied.

John moves onto a plot of land, builds a small shack on it and lives simply and without ambition. Meanwhile Robert is buying up all the land around John and building towns, factories, schools, etc. Eventually, John and Robert have a dispute. Robert, being significantly more intelligent and ambitious than John, overpowers him and takes his land. He inherits the small shack that John had built, but soon replaces it with something with more utility for the modern world. In the end, John's contribution to the land is completely meaningless.

Secondly, slave labor was essentially the low class of previous centuries. So just as Jaquan is doing nothing but serving his corporate master by working his minimum wage McDonald's job, Kunta was doing nothing but serving his aristocratic master by picking cotton in the fields. Slaves were not masons, business owners, or inventors. This nation was not built on their back. Just some of our wilier types exploited them for extra coin.

[–]maLicee 12 points13 points  (1 child)

Old post obviously, but just an FYI. A lot of what you just said is complete nonsense. There have been many great nations that have existed in the Americas. Before Europeans came over there were the Olmec, Teotihuacan, Zapotec, Nazca, Maya, Inca, Aztec. The Maya culture and civilization spanned nearly 3500 years, and rivaled ancient Egypt in many ways. They had an extremely advanced system of mathematics and a very complex writing system.

That's also not at all how the Europeans conquered the Americas. Diseases, which came from livestock/domesticated animals, that Europeans became resistant to after generations killed up to 90% of native populations before the Europeans were even able to explore much of the land at all. By the time they encountered most the indigenous, they were already wiped out. Add on top of that horses and other large, work animals. The Americas had no comparable, large domesticable animals. Europeans also had steel..

This situation is so much more complex than what you're thinking. It's almost like you ignore the entire world's history before white people spread imperialism. Expand that mind to its full capabilities and do some research man.

[–]Mulche_ 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Nothing I said was "nonsense." I also never claimed that there was no civilization in North America.

Nothing else in your post refutes anything I said, so I'm not sure why you wrote up such a big post about it.

[–]Lothar_von_Trotha 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Jefferson wrote that to George III about the rights of White men, Jefferson owned slaves and wanted to deport all blacks from the country. He wrote about the inequality of races over and over and over. Pay attention next time, you twit.

[–]Mulche_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

To copy and paste my other post:

First of all, "land" and "nation" are two different things. There was no established North American nation, and a vast majority of the land was unoccupied.

John moves onto a plot of land, builds a small shack on it and lives simply and without ambition. Meanwhile Robert is buying up all the land around John and building towns, factories, schools, etc. Eventually, John and Robert have a dispute. Robert, being significantly more intelligent and ambitious than John, overpowers him and takes his land. He inherits the small shack that John had built, but soon replaces it with something with more utility for the modern world. In the end, John's contribution to the land is completely meaningless.

Secondly, slave labor was essentially the low class of previous centuries. So just as Jaquan is doing nothing but serving his corporate master by working his minimum wage McDonald's job, Kunta was doing nothing but serving his aristocratic master by picking cotton in the fields. Slaves were not masons, business owners, or inventors. This nation was not built on their back. Just some of our wilier types exploited them for extra coin.

Finally, why would you ignore the racial element when the American founding fathers explicitly forbade citizenship on the basis of race, completely invalidating the claim that they felt "all men are created equal?"

[–]EdGCanuck 1 point2 points  (4 children)

The founding fathers limited citizenship to Whites, but they still fucked up by founding a Republic instead of a monarchy.

[–]fuckswithboats 22 points23 points  (3 children)

The founding fathers limited citizenship to Whites, but they still fucked up by founding a Republic instead of a monarchy.

Do you mean this?

I had no clue in 2016 there were Americans who preferred the idea of kings and queens. TIL.

[–]zellyman 9 points10 points  (14 children)

On the backs of slaves. But you know, details.

[–]EdGCanuck 5 points6 points  (6 children)

[–]zellyman 24 points25 points  (5 children)

[–]EdGCanuck 5 points6 points  (4 children)

Blacks need Whites, not the other way around. It's why blacks always bitch about us but never run back to Africa.

[–]Bewbman 14 points15 points  (2 children)

Whites need Arabs not the other way around its why the US won't stay the fuck out of the Middle East despite everyone clearly not wanting them there. It's why Arabs make up less than a percentage of Americans and the majority of those are Christians.


[–]EdGCanuck 7 points8 points  (1 child)

American foreign policy is controlled by Zionist Jews.

[–]warsie 3 points4 points  (0 children)

those jews are white.

[–]warsie 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Blacks need Whites, not the other way around.

I guess thats why whites went to Africa and took labour and resources from Western Africa?

Or why whites tried to extort post-slaveryblack countries for money for centuries (Haiti)?

Or why whites still intervene in black countries even fucking now?

For fucks sake, you wouldn't grow your own goddamned cotton. Or indigo. Or rice. Or sugar. Or pepper.

It's why blacks always bitch about us but never run back to Africa.

pay the reparations then.

[–]Lothar_von_Trotha 13 points14 points  (6 children)

An entire country made out of cotton and peanut butter. Fuck off, you idiot, slaves are only mentioned because they go against the norm of the white men who built the same kind of country they built back in Europe: safe and prosperous. Meanwhile, blacks contributed as much as they contributed to building great civilizations in Africa: absolutely nothing. They're outdated farming equipment, and physically picking cotton is .01% of the entire process of establishing the crop and the international trade routes necessary to prosper as much as we did.

God damn reddit, no wonder I left after coontown.

[–]warsie 15 points16 points  (1 child)

If the blacks were so worthless, then why did you whites kill 700,000 of yourselves over us? We were so worthless that we were the most invested thing in the American economy in 1860 (yes, even over the incipient railroads or industrial bourgoeise)

eat a dick.

[–]George_RockwellHERE COME DAT GOY 3 points4 points  (0 children)

And now you're antiquated farm equipment.

Seriously though, saying blacks built America is like saying cows built the farm. It's retarded.

[–]bustedcougarHigh Priest of Kek 92 points93 points  (14 children)

Jesus Christ, I think this is the first time an alt-right board has actually had alt-right mods.

[–]Callooh_CalaisOpposing Jewish Supremacy/100% Narod/Now also an American! 38 points39 points  (13 children)

/r/European definitely had great moderators (most of them can be found at /r/uncensorednews, a great uncucked sub), but we were shutdown after we started moving our focus from Muslims to Jews as the perpetual force behind multiculturalism

[–]tits_out_forTheBoys 13 points14 points  (12 children)

Yea I definitely recognize your username from /r/European. I fucking miss that place.

I'm the guy who wrote How to spot a Jew troll. ;)

[–]George_RockwellHERE COME DAT GOY 13 points14 points  (6 children)

And I first saw you and CWM on /r/theredpill.

My, my, what a strange journey this has all been. It all started when I only wanted some decent relationships with women...

[–]Callooh_CalaisOpposing Jewish Supremacy/100% Narod/Now also an American! 10 points11 points  (4 children)

So many good acquaintances I've met through these alt-right circles on reddit--glad to see you back and not banned!

I fucking miss that place.

/r/European was easily my favourite subreddit, as it wasn't just an alternative to /r/Europe and it's anti-Russian, pro-EU slant, it was the only alternative, and so I still miss it: There just isn't any good place for right-minded nationalists from Europe to talk anymore (/r/EuropeanNationalism is alright, but the community never came back together after being purged).

[–]tits_out_forTheBoys 5 points6 points  (3 children)

There just isn't any good place for right-minded nationalists from Europe to talk anymore (/r/EuropeanNationalism is alright, but the community never came back together after being purged).

Well a lot of us have made our way over to Voat. Have you checked out /v/European yet?

[–]Callooh_CalaisOpposing Jewish Supremacy/100% Narod/Now also an American! 6 points7 points  (1 child)

I don't think I will. it's a catch-22--the only way for the userbase to get bigger is for more users to join, yet most users won't join because of the small userbase.

[–]tits_out_forTheBoys 5 points6 points  (0 children)

That's true.

Well at least this place seems to be growing quickly. Hopefully it becomes something similar to what /r/European was.

[–]GoonerSam 17 points18 points  (7 children)

B...b...but Based Milo's articles said that the '1488ers' were just a tiny minority and the alt-right are just trolls!!!!!!!!!

[–]George_RockwellHERE COME DAT GOY 10 points11 points  (6 children)

seriously - FUCK Milo Yianopolous

him getting banned from twitter was the greatest thing to happen to the altright

[–]Letters567 1 point2 points  (5 children)

How so? What was his impact on alt-right?

[–]George_RockwellHERE COME DAT GOY 8 points9 points  (4 children)

Jews cannot call themselves "alt right", and any who do so are either subversives or attention whores.

[–]Letters567 2 points3 points  (3 children)

I thought Milo was catholic? or was Milo saying jews were alt right?

[–]George_RockwellHERE COME DAT GOY 6 points7 points  (2 children)

Yes, this is a common trick.

He's an ethnic Jew, and that's enough for us.

And even if he were a true goy, he's still a faggot.

And even if he were a straight goy with a wife and white kids, he's still an over the top attention whore who doesn't believe in race realism. His association with the alt right is useful insofar as he's a distraction for confused normies.

[–]Letters567 2 points3 points  (1 child)

i see now. interesting

[–]George_RockwellHERE COME DAT GOY 2 points3 points  (0 children)

keep poking around and ask questions as you continue to understand what we're talking about

we don't care about dissenting opinions, just don't be retarded about it.

[–]Danimal876 7 points8 points  (0 children)

There is and will be a huge need to define the alt right and make sure it is not co-opted. As we do this, however, we need to be careful to not alienate and insult "fellow travelers" and possible allies.

The alt right would not be enjoying its current publicity if people and groups like Donald Trump and Breitbart did not touch on our themes or cover us sympathetically. Keep your sense of humor and don't act too bitter, and we'll be surprised at how far we can take this momentum.

[–]martinc31415 44 points45 points  (3 children)

I guess it might be worth mentioning that I and many others here were banned from r/The_Donald because we post here.

The mods of r/The_Donald are just a pack of semi_SJWs that think the worst thing that can happen to them is to be called a racist.

[–]djhilton79 5 points6 points  (20 children)

Neoreactionaries and Christian traditionalists are part of the alt right and acknowledge race realism but emphasise the primacy of beliefs, political structures and faith over genetic determinism. White nationalism is not 'the key component that ties the diverse factions together.'

Vox Day, for example, describes himself as a 'civilisationist'. Is he not on the alt right?

We all agree that race and sex are real biological differences, but it is not the foundational principle for all on the alt right.

[–]EdGCanuck 3 points4 points  (15 children)

Civilizationist = cuckservative.

[–]djhilton79 6 points7 points  (14 children)

The real right over the last fifty years has always failed because the low-IQs set themselves up as the spokesmen. Many of you posting here see only one answer to every question. Race is real, but the restoration of the West will require men with a much broader intellectual basis than just #THEJOOS and #whitegirlsaremagic. Try reading a book sometime and learning about your heritage you suburban poseurs.

You keep using that c-word, lowbrow, and you'll only wear it out.

[–]EdGCanuck 7 points8 points  (13 children)

The Alt Right wants nothing to do with black libertarian Christians, is what I'm saying.

[–]djhilton79 6 points7 points  (12 children)

A drive for ideological purity will ensure the alt right goes back to the fringe. You'll lose the war against the left. If you can't become wise enough to understand that we need an intersectionality of the right, then your grandkids will be transgender vegans chanting Allahu Akbar (urine be upon him).

Aim your guns at the left, not fellow rightists with whom you quibble. Actually, that makes me wonder. How many of you race zombies are paid shills? If I were the DNC, you're exactly who I'd fund.

[–]EdGCanuck 5 points6 points  (11 children)

I'd rather my grand kids be Muslim than mulatto, if it came down to it.

[–]TeaPartySilverbug 13 points14 points  (104 children)

I've been a little confused on what this whole "alt-right" thing is, so please excuse me if I'm asking too many questions. I grew up in a family of Klansmen and Neo-Confederates, voted for Pat Buchanan in the 1996 primary (and supported David Duke in the 1992 primary, even though I wasn't old enough to vote), and hate neocons and the Republican establishment. However, I am fairly moderate when it comes to racial issues (racial realist but not WN, and I think segregation and slavery had their time and place but that time is past). I hate Hitler, Nazism, Fascism, and all forms of socialism or any type of tyrannical government (pretty much a socially conservative libertarian). Would I be considered at all "alt-right"?

What are your basic positions, aside from racial realism?

Are all Alt-Righters White Nationalist?

Is it true that the alt-right thinks of Hitler and the Nazis as great leaders and/or denies the holocaust?

What is the alt-right position on neo-Confederatism or secession?

[–]swagnarok69Capitalism is Jewry incarnate 22 points23 points  (84 children)

Ask yourself what matters more. Having a white nation to call your own, or anything else.

[–]lobf 39 points40 points  (77 children)

Why is that so important to you?

[–]swagnarok69Capitalism is Jewry incarnate 6 points7 points  (75 children)

...because I prefer white people?

[–]lobf 42 points43 points  (67 children)

But why is that important above all other things?

Edit- Banned

[–]Lothar_von_Trotha 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Go live in Baltimore for a year and figure out this question that you know the answer to, but are pretending not to.

[–]George_RockwellHERE COME DAT GOY 14 points15 points  (52 children)

Tribalism and a coherent social hierarchy must come first before we discuss ideals of socialism, capitalism, and other such policy ideals.

Diversity + proximity = conflict, and I'd like to eliminate the need for this conflict from the get go.

[–]lobf 54 points55 points  (51 children)

Diversity + proximity = conflict

There are examples of peaceful pluralistic societies, and divided homogenous societies.

Tribalism and a coherent social hierarchy must come first before we discuss ideals of socialism, capitalism, and other such policy ideals.

Can you clarify?

Edit- was banned

[–]Shortdeath 52 points53 points  (14 children)

LOL banned for facts, the alt right are a bunch of cucks

Edit(since banned) while a few of your links are legitimate, every one that makes an outrageous claims,(Ie race is a better predictor of crime than poverty) are backed up by a site that doesn't allow you to view the actual statistics on what it claims without buying a book. that is probably why that other comment that was deleted said you had some questionable sources because there seems to be quite a few in there. "the color of crime" you state this is about poverty, am i mistaken or are the words poverty not even in that study? also every single image on the page is broken.

holy shit going through them there is a ton of questionable sources here, i'm not even going to bother, you people are delusional and sad(very low energy). I cannot wait for the day when your ignorance is stomped out completely, you are a shit stain on the human race. I think all of your wives must've cheated on you cucks with a black guy to be this degenerate and disgusting.

[–]reid8470 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Turns out The_Donald and altright do have one thing in common after all!

[–]George_RockwellHERE COME DAT GOY 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Looks like someone didn't read my reply down below.

[–]George_RockwellHERE COME DAT GOY 3 points4 points  (10 children)

Go read The Bell Curve:

IQ is not only a huge predictor for the success of a society, but it is heritable. Fuck me for wanting a nation of intelligent people, right?

[–]KdonKAway 5 points6 points  (4 children)

So if you really want a nation chock-full of intelligent people, let's have America become an Asian nation.

[–]BirdLawGuru 2 points3 points  (3 children)

If you want a nation of intelligent people, why don't you kick start the process and kill yourself. That should bring the national average up a point or two.

[–]beenpimpin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The hypocrisy is astounding. They call themselves bastions of free speech yet censorship is their most common tool. First they tried to say /r/the_donald is intentionally a circle-jerk but lo and behold, /r/altright censoring the fuck outta people.

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Rome wasn't peaceful wtf? And Feudal Japan was clan and tribe warfare

You know that Pax Romana means that Rome was the strongest military power, not that it was very nice to live in

[–]George_RockwellHERE COME DAT GOY 25 points26 points  (34 children)

Sure! But first, I present a litany of counter-evidence to the idea that diversity is a good thing:

More diverse neighborhoods have lower social cohesion.

Diversity increases psychotic experiences.

Diversity increases social adversity.

A 10% increase in diversity doubles the chance of psychotic episodes.

Diversity reduces voter registration, political efficacy, charity, and number of friendships.;jsessionid=279C92A7EB0946BBA63D62937FC832A9.f04t03

Ethnic diversity reduces happiness and quality of life.;jsessionid=279C92A7EB0946BBA63D62937FC832A9.f04t03

Diversity reduces trust, civic participation, and civic health.

Ethnocentrism is rational, biological, and genetic in origin.

Ethnic diversity harms health for hispanics and blacks.

Babies demostrate ethnocentrism before exposure to non-whites.

Ethnocentrism is universal and likely evolved in origin.

Diversity primarily hurts the dominant ethnic group.

Ethnic diversity reduces concern for the environment.

Ethnic diversity within 80 meters of a person reduces social trust.

Ethnic diversity directly reduces strong communities.

Ethnically homogenous neighborhoods are beneficial for health.

Diversity in American cities correlates with segregation.

Races are extended families. Ethnocentrism is genetically rational.

It is evolutionary rational to be friends with someone genetically similar to you.

Racism and nationalism are rational and evolutionary advantageous strategies.

Homogeneous polities have less crime, less civil war, and more altruism.

States with little diversity have more democracy, less corruption, and less inequality.

We believe that questions of race, identity, and in-group preferences come before all else because they are the oil in which the machine of society can operate. Having a preference for people that are similar to you is not only natural, but the most efficient way to organize a nation.

Now, this gets confused with white supremacy, which I would define as the hatred of all other outside groups. Yes, there are people here who fall into that category. I, however, wish as much success for the black, hispanic, or asian man as I do for the white man. Except they must do it on their own, in their own terms, on their own ancestral land. No one will do it for them, which is why you see such a guttural hatred of the welfare state on the alt right; it both takes from whites and provides to minorities. Neither of these things should be happening.

For further reading on race:

White immigrants on net improve government revenue, while non-white immigrants cost money.

Race is a better predictor of crime than poverty.

Racial bias against miscegenation is likely biological in origin.

Interracial marriages have a 23.5% chance of divorce, compared to 13% for same-race couples.

Mixed race kids suffer from low self-esteem, social isolation, and poor family dynamics.

The percentage of Blacks in a city, not poverty, is the best predictor of crime.

The purpose of section 8 housing is to move blacks from elite urban areas to middle class suburbs.

15% of the human genome has been under selective pressures since the races separated.

Over 100 White women are raped by blacks every day in the United States.

Europeans and Asians are subject to more recent evolution than Africans.

Interracial people cannot receive organ donations,8599,1993074,00.html

90% of gang members are non-white.

Human races are diverging into separate species, not mixing into one.

Human evolution is not merely ongoing but is in fact accelerating.

Blacks are seven times more likely than whites to commit murder.

Hopefully that helps explain a bit of the philosophy here.

[–]Comeandseemeforonce 26 points27 points  (25 children)

I understand what you're saying but I have two points I want you to clarify. You say you want other racial groups to achieve success in their own terms and in their ancestral land. Whites don't have that right then (in America). They enacted actions that explored the native Americans. Building off of that, other racial groups are now exploiting the success of whites as the whites did earlier, but not violently. What makes it different?

[–]Lothar_von_Trotha 8 points9 points  (7 children)

No group in the world is on the ground that it originally inhabited, you fucking dope. Do you think that even Africans aren't constantly conquering and displacing each other? Do you think Han Chinese or Yamato Japanese didn't displace the Hui and the Ainu, among others? Do you think Bantus are indigenous to South Africa? Do you even know what I'm talking about ( you don't)

Whites DO have that right, they founded America. Natives were sparsely populated savages whose lives were immeasurably improved by having access to modern medicine and technology. Contrary to being "genocided," they suffered at the hands of disease....disease which the white man, alone, cured. Natives weren't "explored," (exploited) there was nothing of them to exploit. They were removed to make way for an advanced race that could actually use the land, and did so, to create the most prosperous nation in world history. Marx and Engels rejoiced that the lazy Mexicans lost the war and got replaced by the more worthwhile Anglo race, how do you think they felt about stone age savages? On race, you are considerably to the Left of a Communist Jew, congratulations.

Meanwhile, "We get to destroy America with brown people because I pretended to care about the natives by recycling a stock argument used every day by useless mediocrities such as myself" is not an argument.

[–]JJBarrister 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Mexo-Colonists, Afro-Chauvanists, and Islamo-zealots not violent Take your sophistry and shove it up your ass! The United States is not the work of the American Indians, it is the product of the Europeans (Whites) who fought for it and created the polity. If the Whites fought as viciously as the Indians in the 17th and 18th Century, the Turner Diaries would be a documentary.

[–]Lord_Circumstein 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Whites took little from the stone age Indians and built this country with our own ingenuity and work for the most part. Other groups take advantage of the civilization and infrastructure and welfare we just hand to them. Before we came this land was a wilderness with savage animals and men without Christian morals or sophisticated culture. They often attempted to stop Whites from taking their ancestral lands but failed unfortunately for them. Why is it we must let our dispossession go unopposed? We only have the right but also moral duty to stop outsiders from taking our land and destroying our way of life. If you think the Indians got a bad deal then you have no idea how Latin Americans treat Indios in their countries or how minorities are treated in black and Arab countries. White South African farmers are tortured and murdered everyday in South Africa by blacks. Muslims relentlessly persecute Christians in the middle East.

[–]CertifiedRabbi 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Thanks for the insane number of links. Very helpful. I saved all of them.

[–]George_RockwellHERE COME DAT GOY 5 points6 points  (0 children)

If you haven't been on TRS yet, come hang out

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because it leads to a nice society

[–]fuckswithboats 2 points3 points  (5 children)

Having a white nation to call your own, or anything else.

I'm brand new to this scene like too so please forgive my ignorance, but what would be considered a white nation?

Is it just being the majority or is there a certain percentage for it to qualify? I'm assuming it's not realistic for 100% anywhere on the planet anymore, right?

[–]zingonexus 8 points9 points  (3 children)

No, he means 100% white. I don't think you truly understand the people you are dealing with here...

[–]George_RockwellHERE COME DAT GOY 0 points1 point  (2 children)

I'm happy with 90% or greater. That's generally been the demographics of America for most of our history.

[–]LetThereBeWhite[S] 16 points17 points  (1 child)

What are your basic positions, aside from racial realism?

Our basic position is that kin is valuable enough to set aside our other positions for. The alt right is where someone hardcore socialist and a laissez faire capitalist can set aside their differences and find common ground based on shared history.

Is it true that the alt-right thinks of Hitler and the Nazis as great leaders and/or denies the holocaust?

It's true of some of us and untrue of some of us. It's hotly discussed, because we form our own ideas of Hitler and the holocaust instead of taking whatever the left pre-made for us.

What is the alt-right position on neo-Confederatism or secession?

Many within the alt right are separatists who think whites should secede.

[–]lobf 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You mean secede?

[–]Throwahoymatie 17 points18 points  (15 children)

You're not Alt Right if you don't support white nationalism and you don't agree the Jewish question has some validity.

[–]Callooh_CalaisOpposing Jewish Supremacy/100% Narod/Now also an American! 9 points10 points  (6 children)

White nationalism is a think for the colonials. Most Europeans have identities that we're very keen on protecting and not seeing homogenised.

[–]Throwahoymatie 12 points13 points  (5 children)

Nobody ever said they had to be homogenized. Don't be subversive.

[–]trueworldtheory 6 points7 points  (4 children)

But you did, you say you can't be Alt Right if you don't support white nationalism. Yet, many Europeans would not want to see their identity be homogenized with the rest of Europe just because they are the same race. I think you're confusing white identity with racial nationalism. Don't be subversive.

[–]Throwahoymatie 7 points8 points  (2 children)

You're intentionally misunderstanding me in order to confuse entrants. It's not working.

[–]atillla 2 points3 points  (1 child)

I love how people like you are absolutely destroying every asshole attempting to get snippy.

They say some dopey regurgitated bullshit, you shoot it down, and they stop responding. It's beautiful.

[–]Throwahoymatie 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Lol, thanks, I have way too much experience debating online.

[–]Lothar_von_Trotha 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Obviously, it means France for the French, Estonia for the Estonians, etc., back in Europe. Quit playing dumb.

[–]madethisforpornn 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Did the joke get real?

[–]GreatCoonsFor the best commie-mocking content check out /r/bestofthecampus 28 points29 points  (1 child)

It's good that the mods here are taking a stance against the edgelords pretending to be alt-right. Can't have them co-opt the movement.

[–]EdGCanuck 12 points13 points  (0 children)

You're not an edgelord if you're not alt-right.

[–]TeaPartySilverbug 3 points4 points  (2 children)

Please join us at /r/AltLite/ if you are a Trump supporter who doesn't support the racial aspects of the Alt Right.

[–]EdGCanuck 7 points8 points  (1 child)

Why wouldn't they just stay on the_donald?

[–]caprimulgidae 8 points9 points  (0 children)

That sub has one subscriber (lol) so it seems they are.

[–]bobop6The myth of the good jew 13 points14 points  (44 children)

Well, many of us hold conservative/traditional values and ideals (i.e. free market, traditional morals).

[–]LetThereBeWhite[S] 33 points34 points  (43 children)

That's true, but many do not. There are fiscal conservatives, there are socialists, and there are people who think any system could work in a homogenous society. The alt right is where they come together and put those things aside to get whites thinking about survival.

[–]TeaPartySilverbug 9 points10 points  (15 children)

there are socialists

Aren't the socialists more "Alt-Left"?

[–]LetThereBeWhite[S] 25 points26 points  (0 children)


The alt right is about identity being real rather than socially constructed and we're less concerned with the positions that a person might hold on policy. The left is about identity being socially constructed or nonbiological. Identity comes first and everything else comes later. Politics and ideology are about PEOPLE and not about policy.

[–]swagnarok69Capitalism is Jewry incarnate 13 points14 points  (1 child)

Hey fam, socialist here. Trust me, I'm not welcome in the left in any way, shape or form.

[–]angrifff 16 points17 points  (2 children)

What you need to understand is that the "socialism" in "National Socialism" is not Marxian socialism. It does not mean handouts or income redistribution via checks to people who don't work.

I wouldn't identify as a NatSoc, but I think it's important to clarify this distinction. The socialism in NatSoc is more about putting people to work building infrastructure and other projects for the common good and building the nation as a big ethnic "family". It's not about entitlements and equality.

[–]GreatApeNiggy 8 points9 points  (1 child)

Some socialists are of the Nationalist variety.

[–]Lothar_von_Trotha 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Feeling some crazy deja vu right now, seeing you here again.

[–]BadGoyWithAGunguess the skypes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not really. The distinction between national socialists and international socialists is analogous to the distinction between "a people" and "the people" - one implicitly acknowledges national/racial identity and deems its enforcement necessary for a lasting social state.

Basically, "socialism" in any form can only work in the long term if you shut the borders and apply it to a racially homogeneous population. Which isn't saying much, since an all-white country can make pretty much any political system "work" in the sense that it won't lead to societal collapse, mostly due to its people's inherent high trust and low time preference, regardless of the virtues and values promoted by the system itself.

[–]wiseprogressivethinkwoke for a decade 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Is there a good primer on the Alt Left?

[–]swagnarok69Capitalism is Jewry incarnate 24 points25 points  (0 children)

Yes. It's not a thing. End of primer.

[–]fuckswithboats 1 point2 points  (4 children)

The alt right is where they come together and put those things aside to get whites thinking about survival.

What does this mean?

Do you just want to stop new immigration, or would you deport all non-whites?

I think I understand the alt-right goals, but I'm trying to understand how they wish to move forward.

[–]LetThereBeWhite[S] 2 points3 points  (3 children)

It's realistically stupid to bank on minorities losing all power and leaving the country, or the US going the way of the USSR or something. However, we can build a racial consciousness like every other race does. We can advocate for our interests. We can stop bending over backwards and all that shit. There's a lot we can do to be better prepared to face the future as a team.

[–]GustavClarke 6 points7 points  (18 children)

" That is what we are and we really do not give a shit about tax cuts or other policy issues."

This is unneeded edginess imo. It's more that those are not a priority nor the main focus.

[–]LeukosFashIngroup Preference Rules 14 points15 points  (16 children)

No, it's that we don't care about (((merchant))) cucservative political issues. If you do care, then eff off back to /r/The_Donald where the (((Mods))) will share your concerns.

[–]GustavClarke 10 points11 points  (15 children)

So you like having your income taken by the government to fund third world immigration and anyone who wants to change that is a cuck? No. If you do not care about policy then you are a cuck.

[–]LeukosFashIngroup Preference Rules 14 points15 points  (14 children)

You're being a good goy. The subject here is the altright, not tax policy. That shit doesn't need to be discussed because the foremost priority of any Altright platform (in the US) is the promotion, care and enriching of white Americans. So, no, whoever cares about tax policy per se is a cuck. The priority of the Altright is white nationals. The Altright doesn't care how much money a white national government of a white nation takes because it will be spending it to improve the lot of the whites of that nation.

I suggest you read the OP again and stop trying to hijack the thread in order to value signal to your (((friends))).

[–]GustavClarke 7 points8 points  (7 children)

" the foremost priority of any Altright platform (in the US) is the promotion, care and enriching of white Americans"

And do you not suppose changing tax policy would help enrich White Americans? They pay most of the taxes, lowering taxes is good for White America.

[–]swagnarok69Capitalism is Jewry incarnate 4 points5 points  (3 children)

Listen man, the house is on fire. I understand you mean well by suggesting we turn up the AC, but that's not what we're here to discuss.

[–]GustavClarke 3 points4 points  (2 children)

Could you not speak entirely through analogies?

[–]swagnarok69Capitalism is Jewry incarnate 5 points6 points  (1 child)

Nah fam. Symptom of my autism.

[–]LeukosFashIngroup Preference Rules 4 points5 points  (2 children)

Are you completely thick or just a troll? You've been answered. Now eff off.

[–]GustavClarke 6 points7 points  (1 child)

There is no need for you to be upset.

[–]LeukosFashIngroup Preference Rules 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I rarely get upset because it is needed.

[–]Market_Feudalism 4 points5 points  (5 children)

The topic of eugenics is obviously pertinent to the alt right. Those of us that are intelligent and empirical recognize that socialism is inherently dysgenic and creates degenerate culture & behavior. We don't just want a nation; we want a great, healthy, industrious, and powerful nation. Call us Jews all you want; I'm only hearing "I still want gibsmedats but I don't want to share with diversity."

[–]SporeTheSaiyan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree, it implies that everyone in the alt right believes the exact same thing.

[–]Callooh_CalaisOpposing Jewish Supremacy/100% Narod/Now also an American! 14 points15 points  (1 child)

I think the best way to describe the alt-right is 'The renaissance of cultural and racial conciousness for White identity'.

People who try to change this focus are our enemy.

[–]Djinneral 2 points3 points  (0 children)

the fucking renaissance?

[–]Inquisitor777 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Everything you have learned about WW2, diversity, social justice and a whole host of other events is lies.

Why were the National Socialists and Hitler tarred as the Devil incarnate? It is not because of a fake genocide. It is because the Germans got rid of usury (a Jewish system) and re-took their currency and got it away from being debt based. It is one if not thee main reason that the German economy went from almost depression levels, to comparable to modern super-powers before the manufactured collapse of '08.

The federal reserve has been stolen from the ownership of the American people and turned into a private corporation. International banking is the most harmful institution known to man, and is the cause of the majority of Earths problems, including social, economic, racial, and environmental.

Who makes up the bulk of international banking cartels and cabals? International Jewry. As well as some shabbos goy who are their minions and compatriots in crime.

"The struggle between the people and the hatred amoungst them is being nurtured by very specific interested parties. It is a small, rootless international clique that is turning people against each other that does not want them to have peace! It is a people who are at home both nowhere and everywhere! Who do not have a soil on which they have grown up but who live in Berlin today, Brussels tomorrow, Paris the day after, then Prague, Vienna or London and who feel at home everywhere. They are the only ones who can really be regarded as international elements because they conduct their business everywhere!"

[–]TemptingTurtle 8 points9 points  (2 children)

Spencer has a 25min video called "What is the Alt Right". I'm guessing that would sort of be the authority on the subject.

[–]EdGCanuck 2 points3 points  (1 child)

He invented the term Alt-Right itself.

[–]EbinMemester420 6 points7 points  (0 children)

No, Spencer popularized and solidified the term. It was originally coined by Paul Gottfried from the HL Mencken society, if I'm not mistaken.

[–]BlooburyPancakes 2 points3 points  (10 children)

I only just heard the term alt-right recently thanks to the Hillary speech and the reactions on /pol and The_Donald. I've been looking on this sub for anything resembling a FAQ page, and I've found many interesting links and topics (some of which I found represented my beliefs and some of which did not) that I've read up on and watched. I'm still left with a few questions, though. I hope this is a good place for them.

  1. I'm of mostly Irish descent. My girlfriend is a Chinese born adopted baby raised from the age of three in the USA by people of Germanic ancestry. Does the alt-right approve of mixed-race relationships? Is the alt-right more concerned with the cultural differences of people as opposed to the genetic differences? How does this work? Is maintaining purity important to the alt-right, or is race something more to be observed and noted rather than manipulated?

  2. Does the alt-right have a representative party in the American political system? I see lots of mentions given to Libertarianism, but I suspect it's different from the Libertarian party. Do alt-right people fall across the spectrum politically? I see mentions that the common thread in alt-right ideology seems to be racial/tribal/ancestral pride and whatnot. Are there other "pillars" of the ideology, or are those somewhat up for debate?

  3. There are mentions that one group cannot be universally better than another; some are better equipped for certain things than others. Assuming this is true, how does the alt-right ideology deal with animosity among these groups? Does might make right? Is it acceptable for an individual's aptitude in a situation to be judged by their race?

Thank you for having this thread up. It's been a real encouragement to look deeper into the ideology rather than just take the summaries of other people as gospel.

[–]14_right_0_left 10 points11 points  (7 children)

  1. Mixed race relationships are frowned upon. The movement is essentially bound to trying to preserve the people. "Purity" is a debate that could go on forever. I like the "pass" model.

  2. There is no political party associated with the alt-right. There is no figure head that can be attacked. Here you will find people across the political spectrum who all agree that the European white heritages should be preserved, and for the most part, other issues or details pale in comparison to that.

  3. I'm confused what you are asking here. Group averages can and do accurately reflect the group being averaged. Individuals can be assessed on an individual basis. Groups can be assessed by statistics and demographics. Does might make right? That's a philosophical question that could also be debated. Ultimately, if our continued survival is threatened, some type of self defense measure is warranted.

[–]BlooburyPancakes 1 point2 points  (6 children)

Does "frowned upon" mean that my relationship is viewed as immoral or just less than optimal? I'd understand the less than optimal view, but I wouldn't see a reason for it being immoral. If ethnicity is how someone is raised and race is genetic, wouldn't we be of the same ethnicity? “An ethnic group is one defined by shared traits that are often passed down within biological families—e.g., language, surname, religion, cuisine, accent, self-identification, historical or mythological heroes, musical styles, etc.—but that don`t require genetic relatedness." -This link from the sidebar

Can you elaborate on the "pass" model?

Also, regarding 3. What I'm asking is very poorly worded and I apologize. What I mean to ask is, would a natural progression of alt right thought be hard-line segregation? Can a melting pot society exist and function, or would this always divulge into infighting where one group will have to emerge victorious over the other?

[–]EdGCanuck 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Race is of primary importance. The Alt-Right is a subculture born out of the White Nationalist movement.

[–]bobop6The myth of the good jew 8 points9 points  (1 child)

Race mixing is betraying your race, and thus is very antithetical to the alt. right. Loyalty to our (your) people is important to the alt. right, and you can see how mixed race relationships are celebrated by our enemies. Also, wouldn't you want to have children who look like you and identify with you and your own people?

[–]BodhisattvaAjita 9 points10 points  (0 children)

That sounds really boring to me honestly.

[–]14_right_0_left 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The pass model of purity is, if you can pass yourself off as being white, then you're white. In other words, do you blend in with everybody else. It's the simplest and least intrusive standard of measure. Like the other guy, I'm ok with the occasional asian, but there are some who would want to give me a free helicopter ride for it (and let me jump without a parachute - if you're not familiar with that joke). I don't think a melting pot can function in the long term, but maybe I'm wrong about that. I'd prefer an ethnostate. It's one of the things that is discussed less. It's a lower priority to ensuring our continued existence.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Lol mods are voting Clinton!

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (1 child)

Thank you for this I was arguing with a (((black))) guy about this on here yesterday. Thank you very much for clarifying things for people.

[–]angrifff 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I think that was the one who called me "insane" when I said it was a problem to give minorities equal rights and to open up immigration to non-Northwestern Europeans.

[–]sunflowerfreedom 1 point2 points  (6 children)

i liked the definition that the alt right was anything on the right outside mainstream right and I think this is a more useful definition

[–]EdGCanuck 7 points8 points  (0 children)

The term Alt Right has been trademarked by us, sorry.

[–]MechaStalin86 1 point2 points  (1 child)

And that's how the Tea Party people got co opted and destroyed. We will not let outsiders try to redefine us in order to subvert us.

[–]sunflowerfreedom 1 point2 points  (0 children)

co-option may be a danger of the broad definition; however one might argue that this has already taken place so it is difficult/impossible to re-define the alt-right back to the narrow definition since the broader one (which I like) is gaining in popularity. The danger of the narrow definition is alienating potential allies or converts, who might be in agreement under the broader definition and then come to the narrow view on their own.