Here is the Alex Jones vignette I spoke about in the thread below. Remember this is circa 2001. It is conspiratorial (them vs. us) but not specifically so (as in 9/11 was an inside job) and perhaps more easily embraced by liberals since he attacks “corporate slavery,” but these populist anti-elite themes are still there today. That is how he can be embraced by liberals like Charlie Sheen. Whatever you may think of the guy, you have to admit he has a certain talent for oratory.
Here is Richard Spencer talking about his recent arrest in Hungary.
So have Spencer and Alt-Right put their differences behind them? They say they have at the beginning of the podcast.
This is interesting. It is an article by Justin Raimondo describing the interaction he had with Alex Jones at a conference they both spoke at. Raimondo is not a fan.
I get Raimondo’s point, but as I have observed before, when you reside on the political fringes as we do, conspiracy theorists are a fact of life. I’m sure all of us believe things that many mainstream conventional wisdom types would consider conspiratorial or otherwise “out there.” So I don’t know how you police this kind of thing. How conspiratorial is too conspiratorial? The way I see it is we should make common cause with people when we can and don’t when we can’t. And when our enemies say that the presence of conspiratorialists among us taints the whole, we should call them out for their simple-mindedness.
Here is a Salon article by Keegan Hankes on some disputes within the “white nationalist” community. The most interesting part of the article is this: “This article was originally published by The Southern Poverty Law Center.” So Salon, which already has a reputation as a PC thought policing organ, is now just reprinting articles straight from the SPLC? Was Jamie Kirchick not available to write a separate article to at least give some pretense of objectivity? The PC police at Salon are laughably intellectually unserious.
Of note, the article is based off a Hunter Wallace post at Occidental Dissent about “beefs” among white nationalists.
And in other news, a bear just…
James Kirchick has just churned out another formulaic PC hit piece against Richard Spencer. Kirchick, of Ron Paul newsletters “exposé” fame, appears to be the go-to guy for PC hit pieces. Seriously James? You went to Yale University. Is this really how you envisioned your “journalistic” career going? Writing trashy insert-a-smear hit pieces for a sensationalistic leftist website? Did you really as a little kid think, “Gee, I want to grow up and be a thought policer?” Only intellectual cowards make their main strategy against their ideological enemies calling them a “big fat poopie-head.” Here’s an idea James: actually make an argument.
Can’t you just image little Jamie on the playground? “Woo woo! I heard that! I’m telling Teacher! Teacher, teacher, Ricky just said a naughty word!” Kirchick is a glorified tattletale. How did he allow himself to become a hitman for the thought police? Isn’t he demeaned by this intellectually unserious role at least a little bit? Here’s another idea James: investigate something, report on something. You know, do what real journalists do.
Bill Kaufman describes the problem:
We are, today, subjects of an empire, not citizens of a republic. The idea of “citizenship” has been diluted from one of membership in an organic body in which each person matters, takes part in civic affairs, to the current condition, in which you are a cog in a machine, just another brick in the wall. The role of an American citizen, as viewed by our rulers in Washington, D.C., is to pay your taxes, cast a meaningless vote every four years, and shut the hell up. You have almost—almost—no say in U.S. foreign policy. As Dick Cheney once replied when told that the vast majority of Americans wanted our soldiers home from Iraq: “So?”
And, being the brave soul that he is, Kaufman outlines a response to the problem. Anything we can do to decentralize, to devolve, to reclaim local control of our lives — since we all live locally, not globally — is a step in the right direction. The good news Kaufman seeks to share is that those of us who grasp what the great problem of our time is and have an idea about how to tackle it are no longer alone. There are a number of movements afoot coming from different directions but heading toward a similar goal:
Wendell Berry, one of our age’s sages, has noted that hopeful signs are sprouting everywhere: life-giving, life-affirming movements… everything from community-supported agriculture to homeschooling to the New Urbanism to the return of the natives that is going on all over this homesick land. People are rediscovering—reclaiming—citizenship. Berry calls this a “redemptive” movement, though he acknowledges that “in terms of standing and influence [it] is hardly a side at all. It doesn’t have a significant political presence. It is virtually unrepresented in our state and federal governments. Most of its concerns are not on the agenda of either major party.”
As I’ve noted previously, the breakup of the DC Empire is inevitable. It has already begun in the minds of its subjects. As the administration of Barack Obama has made clear to all who will see, it makes no difference which organized gang is in power. The Empire will go on dropping bombs on innocent civilians in the name of spreading democracy, subsidizing billionaires in the name of prosperity for all, and illegally spying on us in the name of protecting our liberty.
As the man said, “Every day the bucket goes down to the well. One day the bottom will drop out.”
In many years of posting on rightwing sites of a higher level of understanding, I have reminded that the “Trilats” and CFR crowd are not as hostile to our points of view as might be assumed. If you read the publications of the CFR—which I do from time to time—there are a few nuggets of surprise.
Justin Raimondo notes that the Council on Foreign Relations suggests staying out of the ISIS/Syria mess; let Assad have a free hand, and trust Iran and Russia can restore the status quo. Seems reasonable. Raimondo goes further to point out the limits of American Conservative resident non-interventionist, Daniel Larison’s critique in AmConMag.
Note Larison’s reflex anti-Assad position against Raimondo’s profoundly Rightwing argument for “optimal solution:”
As dark as that may be, Bashar al Assad is the best Syria can do at the moment, and acknowledging that is key to freeing oneself of the liberal guilt Americans are so prone to suffer.
What this might have to do with the 2016 election–this being the CFR–is anyone’s guess, but the hint is pretty obvious.