Post: #1

Surprised there was no thread on this.

After events of the past two weeks, as explained by ROK article, both groups held competing rallies in D.C. today a few blocks away from each other. The force of Trump that brought everyone together is now completely gone (actually made a quick reappearance after Syria strikes in April). The question remains, which movement will survive and lives long enough to make a meaningful impact.


Some photos:

Alt-Lite:

Alt-Right:

----------------------------------
Roosh' take:

Post: #2

Neither event seemed to have more than 150 people tops.

This was not an "alt-right" victory. From what can be seen in the videos, much of the crowd at the alt-right rally were either tourists or journalists (and yes, I'm using that term very lightly). This was just... weak. On both sides. This accomplished nothing.

Post: #3

Biggest problem for the alt lite is that their rally appeared politically correct. There were older women, families, signs against "hate speech", and so on, that made it more like a Trump rally. Their positions are just too moderate and mainstream to be a leading-edge shitlord movement that they want to be. I think they should pack up the efforts to combat the alt right through counter-signaling and just do what they do best: fight the media and leftist politicians/celebrities.

Post: #4

Alt-Lite seems to piggyback on the Alt-Right, there doesn't seem to be any innovation coming at all from the Alt-Lite, if anyone knows, can you point it out?

If the Alt-Right didn't exist, my guess is Alt-Lite would be gone in a year or two, its leading figures paid off and incorporated into Conservatism Inc. It's the Tea Party all over again.

Here's what you get from Tea Party Movement (pre-2010) in Google:









Notice in particular the quintessential cuck use of comparing the left to Nazis and the use of jewish as a symbol of the innocent victim. This is a hallmark cuck behavior, which perpetuates the WW2/Holocaust white guilt paradigm.

Exactly what Jack Prosobiec and Laura Loomer did recently:

Quote:As the audience at Shakespeare in the Park at The Public Theater applauded, Posobiec stood up in the crowd, pointing and accusing audience members of being Nazis and inciting terrorism” against the president.

http://heavy.com/news/2017/06/laura-loom...ald-trump/

Here's what Laura Loomer looks like:







The Tea Party got easily co-opted by Israel first hawks like Michelle Bachmann. A safe, Israel first, muslims bad, jews good, free speech, feminism and capitalism for everyone, kind of brand.

You could ask "what Tea Party?", because the movement is essentially dead. My guess is the same would happen to Alt-Lite very quickly too, people bought out like Milo and then fade to irrelevance.

Post: #5

I am no expert in this arena, but I do live in an incredibly left wing town, attend an incredibly left-wing college in a west coast blue state. I have been to free speech rallies and have seen antifa in action, both masked on the streets and unmasked in the classroom.
It would appear to me that the "left" has just as many ideologies as the "right" does. The left does a pretty good job of being able to cobble together alliances in order to fight the either the "most right" or at least "least left" threat they feel is most pressing at that moment. The hardcore antifa thugs are able to enlist and/or cooperate with a moderate Democrat.
It appears to me that the right is less capable of cooperating to fight the common threat.
This is just my opinion, but it seems like anyone falling into the right spectrum of politics should agree that socialism is the ultimate threat and work together to defeat that first before settling doctrinal differences. For instance, where I live I see all the different right wing groups showing just as much scorn for other right wing groups as they do for towards the commies and anarchist. Anyway, I don't really understand this so maybe I am questioning if this is indeed what is happening?

Post: #6

(06-25-2017 08:06 PM)Peekay Wrote:  I am no expert in this arena, but I do live in an incredibly left wing town, attend an incredibly left-wing college in a west coast blue state. I have been to free speech rallies and have seen antifa in action, both masked on the streets and unmasked in the classroom.
It would appear to me that the "left" has just as many ideologies as the "right" does. The left does a pretty good job of being able to cobble together alliances in order to fight the either the "most right" or at least "least left" threat they feel is most pressing at that moment. The hardcore antifa thugs are able to enlist and/or cooperate with a moderate Democrat.
It appears to me that the right is less capable of cooperating to fight the common threat.
This is just my opinion, but it seems like anyone falling into the right spectrum of politics should agree that socialism is the ultimate threat and work together to defeat that first before settling doctrinal differences. For instance, where I live I see all the different right wing groups showing just as much scorn for other right wing groups as they do for towards the commies and anarchist. Anyway, I don't really understand this so maybe I am questioning if this is indeed what is happening?

Yes, this was the Trump coalition, exactly as the left "No enemies to the left" which they stick to today as well. On the other hand, Conservatives came to be Cucks because they cared more about attacking the "far right" than they did attacking the left. That's what these Alt-Lite are doing now. They're cucking basically. Which is ironic as their great hero Trump didn't do that during the election.

Post: #7

The problem with the alt lite (or the "New Right" as they've tried to call themselves) is that they're a movement defined in the negative.

I've got plenty of criticisms of the alt right (which is why I've dissociated with the movement, though I have not disavowed them and won't disavow them), but one thing they will always have going for them is that they stand for something: white identity and white nationalism. You don't have to agree with what they stand for, but they have actual beliefs to stand for. See the blog post below:

http://mattforney.com/statement-greg-johnson/

The alt-lite is defined not by any positive beliefs, but by what it's opposed to. It's a catch-all "movement" for people who are too edgy for mainstream conservatism but don't want to be associated with those icky "racists" on the alt right. The alt lite's center of gravity is not self-defined, but determined by the people they're fighting against. The fact that the most common name people use for them is "alt lite"---a term that was created by their enemies to insult them---instead of their chosen sobriquet "New Right" is indicative of this.

It was inevitable that they'd break apart and start drifting back towards the left.

Post: #8

And so it begins.

The purity matches will start. In the end. Neither the alt-lite nor the alt-lite will be left standing.

But even here the alt-right has the advantage of actually having an ideological basis, while the alt-lite is simply a reactionary movement.

Even with the more than likely demise of the alt-lite, the alt-right will not stand the test of time if they carry on with the purity matches. We all know what happens, who is the "purer" white, are Mediterraneans white, are Africans even humans or something like that? It has the potential to get into some VERY unsavory talking points that will inevitably drive people away and keep it a fringe movement.

I'm against mass migration as any other guy here, but we'll see how effective these groups end up being. This has the makings of a trip. Remember the Hegelian dialectics, thesis (SJWs and Cultural Marxismo rougly speaking) antithesis (Alt-Right) and synthesis.

Too bad the synthesis isn't looking very promising. Dark times ahead, times of conflict. Winter is coming.

Post: #9

(06-25-2017 08:06 PM)Peekay Wrote:  ...
It appears to me that the right is less capable of cooperating to fight the common threat.
This is just my opinion, but it seems like anyone falling into the right spectrum of politics should agree that socialism is the ultimate threat and work together to defeat that first before settling doctrinal differences. For instance, where I live I see all the different right wing groups showing just as much scorn for other right wing groups as they do for towards the commies and anarchist. Anyway, I don't really understand this so maybe I am questioning if this is indeed what is happening?

I think this is actually the wrong way to go, and has proven to be wrong for many decades now. Socialism on some level has been a major factor in American life since FDR's new deal and as such the Republicans wailing about socialism tend to look like idiots because socialism has been around for many decades and the sky hasn't fallen. On the contrary many republican supporters are tied to socialism either directly through welfare or through government contracts and the econonmic runoff that flows in their fetid wake.

In fact, I guarantee you that a great number of lower and lower-middle class republicans feel a strong degree of nausea when they hear some fat, rich republican senator frothing at the mouth about socialism while hoovering up his huge salary and getting thousand dollar lunches or million dollar stock options from lobbyists while Joe Roughneck is relying on his dreaded socialist food stamps just to keep his kids fed each week.

"Uniting against socialism" is a lost cause, for reasons not the least of which is that the mechanisation of industry and the pursuant job losses mean that without some level of socialism you would be facing a social crisis of epic proportions. You would be trying essentially trying to unite people in the effort to slash their own wrists, which is why it's been a dead-end rallying call ever since Regan left the Whitehouse.

If you want to rally people around an idea then it has to be something that they feel negatively impacts their day to day life and furthermore something they feel they have a moral high ground on. That's why people are uniting around resisting government tyranny over their words and their actions, or in other cases uniting around resisting the degradation of their regions through the forced influx of hostile foreigners that don't share their cultural values. Or in short, the main issues that made a Trump election possible.

If Trump had campaigned on "stopping socialism" then Hillary would have won, flat out. If you want people to rally to a cause you can't tell them what that cause is going to be. You have to sense a underlying urgency in the crowd and tap into it.

Freedom from tyranny and a safe nation absent hostile foreigners. That's not a hard line to push, and though the alt-right might be far more the latter and less the former (while the alt-light is far more the former and far less the latter) they are just different expressions of that same widespread political yearning.

Freedom from tyranny and a safe nation absent hostile foreigners.

Post: #10

(06-25-2017 07:15 PM)Roosh Wrote:  Biggest problem for the alt lite is that their rally appeared politically correct. There were older women, families, signs against "hate speech", and so on, that made it more like a Trump rally. Their positions are just too moderate and mainstream to be a leading-edge shitlord movement that they want to be. I think they should pack up the efforts to combat the alt right through counter-signaling and just do what they do best: fight the media and leftist politicians/celebrities.

I agree, though I think equally important is that by splitting from alt-right, alt-lite has allowed Richard Spencer and the MSM to successfully brand alt-right as essentially white nationalists.

Whatever you think of Spencer's positions, the term "alt-right" had great potential to be a large umbrella for the various right-leaning positions that fall outside mainstream conservatism. Limiting it to the white nationalist platform is unfortunate. Vox Day might insist that it's too late to stop identity politics, but a great many right-leaning people reject identity politics altogether and are quite willing to be inclusive and race-blind in order to focus on other important issues like border security and resistance to encroaching left-wing authoritarian ideologies.

Post: #11

Spencer interview:

Post: #12

(06-25-2017 08:26 PM)Matt Forney Wrote:  The problem with the alt lite (or the "New Right" as they've tried to call themselves) is that they're a movement defined in the negative.

I've got plenty of criticisms of the alt right (which is why I've dissociated with the movement, though I have not disavowed them and won't disavow them), but one thing they will always have going for them is that they stand for something: white identity and white nationalism. You don't have to agree with what they stand for, but they have actual beliefs to stand for. See the blog post below:

http://mattforney.com/statement-greg-johnson/

The alt-lite is defined not by any positive beliefs, but by what it's opposed to. It's a catch-all "movement" for people who are too edgy for mainstream conservatism but don't want to be associated with those icky "racists" on the alt right. The alt lite's center of gravity is not self-defined, but determined by the people they're fighting against. The fact that the most common name people use for them is "alt lite"---a term that was created by their enemies to insult them---instead of their chosen sobriquet "New Right" is indicative of this.

It was inevitable that they'd break apart and start drifting back towards the left.

Points 4 and 5 on Vox Day's "16 points" of the alt right:

Quote:4. The Alt Right believes Western civilization is the pinnacle of human achievement and supports its three foundational pillars: Christianity, the European nations, and the Graeco-Roman legacy.

5. The Alt Right is openly and avowedly nationalist. It supports all nationalisms and the right of all nations to exist, homogeneous and unadulterated by foreign invasion and immigration.

Excerpts from Jordan Peterson's 12 principles for a 21st century conservatism. JBP is not alt-right, and in fact may not even be particularly conservative. But he articulates a number of reasonable concepts that could unite the alt-right besides white identity.

Quote:1. The fundamental assumptions of Western civilization are valid.

Quote:3. Hierarchies of competence are desirable and should be promoted.

Quote:4. Borders are reasonable. Likewise, limits on immigration are reasonable. Furthermore, it should not be assumed that citizens of societies that have not evolved functional individual-rights predicated polities will hold values in keeping with such polities.

Quote:11. Intact heterosexual two-parent families constitute the necessary bedrock for a stable polity.

Note that Vox Day has a point similar to JBP's point 3.

Quote:The Alt Right is anti-equalitarian. It rejects the idea of equality for the same reason it rejects the ideas of unicorns and leprechauns, noting that human equality does not exist in any observable scientific, legal, material, intellectual, sexual, or spiritual form.

I don't really like Vox's articulation because it's negative and can be taken to mean rejection of "equality under the law" and the concept of inalienable certain limited human rights of Western Civilization. But regardless, it's clearly aimed at the equalist/equity-oriented left-wing radical Marxist types. I like Peterson's because it's positive and the sensibility of it should be self-evident.

Post: #13

(06-25-2017 08:31 PM)LEMONed IScream Wrote:  And so it begins.

The purity matches will start. In the end. Neither the alt-lite nor the alt-lite will be left standing.

But even here the alt-right has the advantage of actually having an ideological basis, while the alt-lite is simply a reactionary movement.

Even with the more than likely demise of the alt-lite, the alt-right will not stand the test of time if they carry on with the purity matches. We all know what happens, who is the "purer" white, are Mediterraneans white, are Africans even humans or something like that? It has the potential to get into some VERY unsavory talking points that will inevitably drive people away and keep it a fringe movement.

I'm against mass migration as any other guy here, but we'll see how effective these groups end up being. This has the makings of a trip. Remember the Hegelian dialectics, thesis (SJWs and Cultural Marxismo rougly speaking) antithesis (Alt-Right) and synthesis.

Too bad the synthesis isn't looking very promising. Dark times ahead, times of conflict. Winter is coming.

Would it help if you thought of the Alt-Right as the loony university marxists of the 70s? And Trump of someone like Obama? In their respective positions in a movement, not literally of course.

I'm sceptical of the Alt-Lite's motivations (grin grin, nudge nudge), because they should recognize their position in the game as the mainstream acceptable to the Alt-Right's radicalism. If the Alt-Right goes away, then Alt-Lite becomes far right. Remember the Tea Party was also racist and white supremacist and misogynist and all those things.

From 2009:

Quote:In essence, Congressional Republicans were merging with a movement that gives open expression to racist and anti-Semitic sentiments.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2009...eover-gop/

From 2010:

https://www.irehr.org/2010/10/20/tea-par...a-impulse/

Quote:Tea Party leaders have promoted and provided a platform to known racists and anti-Semites on multiple occasions.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/21/us/pol...naacp.html

Quote:The report released by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People argues that Tea Party groups “have given platform to anti-Semites, racists and bigots,” and have attracted white nationalists looking for recruits.

If only there was a way to prove your right-wing movement wasn't anti-semittic? I got it! Maybe become an unrelenting neocon Israel firster, that will show them calling me racist and anti-semittic

Post: #14

The WN were never going to fall in with a larger crowd. Making the jump to race-based exclusion after fifty years of hardcore progressive indoctrination is no small mental leap. It's not a nuance in philosophy among like minded conservatives. These guys were always going to segregate themselves from the rest of the group so this sort of separation was inevitable.

The WN alt-right whether rational or delusional is a movement devoted to self defence, and when you're trying to build a fortress you don't trust your East wall to a bunch of people who are going to "let the barbarians in".

They are on their own from now on, which is the way they want it. Personally I don't see any reason to waste energy fighting them. The enemy of my enemy might not be my friend but they're a handy energy sink for my enemy and I sure as hell don't see a point trying to fight on multiple fronts unless the alt-right become a regional danger to my safety which is not going to happen for a long time, or probably ever.

For all of their rhetoric they're yet to lynch a single black man. Anyone who fears them more than the murderous left is delusional.

Post: #15

Average Trump voter has probably never heard of the alt-right or alt-lite.

Average Trump voter doesn't care if its a black, white or mexican working next to him as long as the guy is pulling his own weight.

Alt-lite pushback against media lies, etc is useful though people like Posobiec are extremely cringe. Cernovich needs to be more careful who he promotes and with whom he associates. Baked Alaska turned out to be a headcase and so is Posobiec imo. If I could give Cernovich one piece of advise its to stop trying to help people below him. In the age of social media you don't need an army, all you need is YOUR megaphone and Cernovich shouldn't give his to entryists like Loomer or rookies like Posobiec.

Alt-right will never be useful in any meaningful way as too few people will accept their views. If we had a parliamentary system with many parties and the alt-right could take some congressional seats maybe I would change my mind but overall the alt-right movement is doa. Almost no one in my social circle has even heard of the bell-curve FFS, and once they heard the executive summary would dismiss it as racist with zero engagement.

Post: #16

(06-25-2017 09:20 PM)Blaster Wrote:  

(06-25-2017 08:26 PM)Matt Forney Wrote:  The problem with the alt lite (or the "New Right" as they've tried to call themselves) is that they're a movement defined in the negative.

I've got plenty of criticisms of the alt right (which is why I've dissociated with the movement, though I have not disavowed them and won't disavow them), but one thing they will always have going for them is that they stand for something: white identity and white nationalism. You don't have to agree with what they stand for, but they have actual beliefs to stand for. See the blog post below:

http://mattforney.com/statement-greg-johnson/

The alt-lite is defined not by any positive beliefs, but by what it's opposed to. It's a catch-all "movement" for people who are too edgy for mainstream conservatism but don't want to be associated with those icky "racists" on the alt right. The alt lite's center of gravity is not self-defined, but determined by the people they're fighting against. The fact that the most common name people use for them is "alt lite"---a term that was created by their enemies to insult them---instead of their chosen sobriquet "New Right" is indicative of this.

It was inevitable that they'd break apart and start drifting back towards the left.

Points 4 and 5 on Vox Day's "16 points" of the alt right:

Quote:4. The Alt Right believes Western civilization is the pinnacle of human achievement and supports its three foundational pillars: Christianity, the European nations, and the Graeco-Roman legacy.

5. The Alt Right is openly and avowedly nationalist. It supports all nationalisms and the right of all nations to exist, homogeneous and unadulterated by foreign invasion and immigration.

Excerpts from Jordan Peterson's 12 principles for a 21st century conservatism. JBP is not alt-right, and in fact may not even be particularly conservative. But he articulates a number of reasonable concepts that could unite the alt-right besides white identity.

Quote:1. The fundamental assumptions of Western civilization are valid.

Quote:3. Hierarchies of competence are desirable and should be promoted.

Quote:4. Borders are reasonable. Likewise, limits on immigration are reasonable. Furthermore, it should not be assumed that citizens of societies that have not evolved functional individual-rights predicated polities will hold values in keeping with such polities.

Quote:11. Intact heterosexual two-parent families constitute the necessary bedrock for a stable polity.

Note that Vox Day has a point similar to JBP's point 3.

Quote:The Alt Right is anti-equalitarian. It rejects the idea of equality for the same reason it rejects the ideas of unicorns and leprechauns, noting that human equality does not exist in any observable scientific, legal, material, intellectual, sexual, or spiritual form.

I don't really like Vox's articulation because it's negative and can be taken to mean rejection of "equality under the law" and the concept of inalienable certain limited human rights of Western Civilization. But regardless, it's clearly aimed at the equalist/equity-oriented left-wing radical Marxist types. I like Peterson's because it's positive and the sensibility of it should be self-evident.

to add to this:

The alt-lite is more of a media movement than a political movement. While Cernovich is undeniably pro-Trump, it's clear that what really animates him is taking down legacy media. Similarly, Paul Joseph Watson is at his best when trashing the MSM. Milo is out triggering as many as possible to stretch the overton window rightward. The Tea Party was a political movement. Fox News was a business venture. The alt-lite is a broad movement to decentralize media and liberate information from the globalist and corporate gatekeepers. And also to provide an alternative to the media companies selling progressiveness to kids because that's what market research tells them to do.

The alt-right is primarily a political movement, although it is young and ill-defined. It's probably going nowhere because Richard Spencer (with the constant help of the left-wing Media) clearly has zero ability to lead anything but a white nationalist movement and that's not going anywhere.

Post: #17

Here's a thought experiment for y'all:

So, there's three groups: Antifa, The Alt-Lite and the Alt-Right.

I tell you I'm thinking of one of them.

Now, if i say:

"This group I'm thinking of acts dishonestly, can't be trusted to tell the truth, is opportunistic, thrives on the addictive high of emotional drama, desperately craves attention and validation by wider society, and is lead by Jewish and Homosexual Degenerates."

... then which group am I talking about?

Post: #18

(06-25-2017 09:52 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  Here's a thought experiment for y'all:

So, there's three groups: Antifa, The Alt-Lite and the Alt-Right.

I tell you I'm thinking of one of them.

Now, if i say:

"This group I'm thinking of acts dishonestly, can't be trusted to tell the truth, is opportunistic, thrives on the addictive high of emotional drama, desperately craves attention and validation by wider society, and is lead by Jewish and Homosexual Degenerates."

... then which group am I talking about?

I'd say you're making uncharitable generalizations and don't really care which one you're thinking about.

Post: #19

(06-25-2017 09:51 PM)Blaster Wrote:  ...
The alt-right is primarily a political movement, although it is young and ill-defined. It's probably going nowhere because Richard Spencer (with the constant help of the left-wing Media) clearly has zero ability to lead anything but a white nationalist movement and that's not going anywhere.

On the contrary unless the core issues underlying native discontent in the West are not only addressed but reversed then WN is only going to grow.

Spencer didn't grow WN from a seed and there's little to no evidence that he's really leading it anywhere. He's sitting on top a small hill that's pushed it's way up out of the ground. That hill has the potential to grow into a mountain. One that might topple him off or raise him to the stratosphere.

But make no mistake. WN was not cultured and grown in a lab. It's an expression of fear and survival based instinct that will only grow in strength and power if the underlying trends that awoke it are not curtailed.

Post: #20

Looks like the alt-right, alt-lite / new-right, whosits; need a new target / focus.

Trump is in office.
The Russia-collusion scandal is just about done (even to the point where low-key Democrat party folk are saying enough is enough).

Otherwise these petty, personality clashes will continue.

Post: #21

I have literally no idea what any of this is about or what it's significance is. I consider myself quite well versed in politics and this sounds like complete gibberish to me. How exactly is "alt lite" a descriptive political term?

At least with "communism" I know its something related to communes, or with "conservative" I know it's about conserving something.

"Alt lite" sounds like a brand of yogurt.

Post: #22

Well I am not a particular supporter of either though they can be good allies towards certain causes. The thing is how effective will they really be if it continues like this. I know any sort of right wing movement will be painted in a racist or anti-semitic light when possible, but I also believe that sort of thing is waning down. The shock effect is wearing out and at a given point people will simply stop caring. The problem is that, while it has already been said the alt-lite defines themselves in the negative and stand for nothing in particular, the alt-right while having more defined beliefs has every chance to descend into purity matches and alienate potential allies. What good would it be to just exclude all blacks, latinos, etc. I mean, plenty of those people have been victims of illegal/mass migration as well in terms of their employment, they can surely be aggrieved as well. Frankly I'm not into the whole ethnostate deal. I don't mean that countries can't have a STRICT migration policy that would eventually keep them an ethnostate like Japan or Korea. Just don't think we should ostracize all minorities on basis of race and colour alone. I mean, hasn't there been enough "dividing" to use a bit of an SJW term in the past years? It is actively known that the US govt per example seems to enjoy putting in place measures that will cause societal unrest, either with positive or negative discrimination. These alt-righters are mostly national socialists or whatever. They want to solve government problems with....more government. Yeah. I'm sure it will turn out just fine. So, indeed, if they have the redeeming quality of not being masochistic cucks that want to be invaded by the third world, that's about it, in my book.

(06-25-2017 09:22 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:  

(06-25-2017 08:31 PM)LEMONed IScream Wrote:  And so it begins.

The purity matches will start. In the end. Neither the alt-lite nor the alt-lite will be left standing.

But even here the alt-right has the advantage of actually having an ideological basis, while the alt-lite is simply a reactionary movement.

Even with the more than likely demise of the alt-lite, the alt-right will not stand the test of time if they carry on with the purity matches. We all know what happens, who is the "purer" white, are Mediterraneans white, are Africans even humans or something like that? It has the potential to get into some VERY unsavory talking points that will inevitably drive people away and keep it a fringe movement.

I'm against mass migration as any other guy here, but we'll see how effective these groups end up being. This has the makings of a trip. Remember the Hegelian dialectics, thesis (SJWs and Cultural Marxismo rougly speaking) antithesis (Alt-Right) and synthesis.

Too bad the synthesis isn't looking very promising. Dark times ahead, times of conflict. Winter is coming.

Would it help if you thought of the Alt-Right as the loony university marxists of the 70s? And Trump of someone like Obama? In their respective positions in a movement, not literally of course.

I'm sceptical of the Alt-Lite's motivations (grin grin, nudge nudge), because they should recognize their position in the game as the mainstream acceptable to the Alt-Right's radicalism. If the Alt-Right goes away, then Alt-Lite becomes far right. Remember the Tea Party was also racist and white supremacist and misogynist and all those things.

From 2009:

Quote:In essence, Congressional Republicans were merging with a movement that gives open expression to racist and anti-Semitic sentiments.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2009...eover-gop/

From 2010:

https://www.irehr.org/2010/10/20/tea-par...a-impulse/

Quote:Tea Party leaders have promoted and provided a platform to known racists and anti-Semites on multiple occasions.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/21/us/pol...naacp.html

Quote:The report released by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People argues that Tea Party groups “have given platform to anti-Semites, racists and bigots,” and have attracted white nationalists looking for recruits.

If only there was a way to prove your right-wing movement wasn't anti-semittic? I got it! Maybe become an unrelenting neocon Israel firster, that will show them calling me racist and anti-semittic

Post: #23

(06-25-2017 09:52 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  Here's a thought experiment for y'all:

So, there's three groups: Antifa, The Alt-Lite and the Alt-Right.

I tell you I'm thinking of one of them.

Now, if i say:

"This group I'm thinking of acts dishonestly, can't be trusted to tell the truth, is opportunistic, thrives on the addictive high of emotional drama, desperately craves attention and validation by wider society, and is lead by Jewish and Homosexual Degenerates."

... then which group am I talking about?

The Alt-Right? They've got (((Mike Enoch))) and Grindr Greg Johnson on their crew, for starters.

Post: #24

Spencer re-tweeted this. If true, the significance could not be greater. Posobiec was a Navy Information Warfare expert. He clearly tries to derail true free speech, the AltRight message etc.

Post: #25

This alt lite shit is ridiculous. Just call it like it is, red pilled.

"Alt right" are nothing more than white nationalist/nazis.

Alt right is just slowing alt light down with its racist bullshit. They should stop trying to ride Milos/cernovich's wave, Trump has already disavowed them.