Print this post Print this post

Stand Your Ground:
Milo, the Alt-Right, & Mainstream Attention

2,386 words

It is hard not to like Milo Yiannopoulos. Watching him is like watching Firing Line if it were being hosted by Noël Coward. He is unquestionably a witty, bright-eyed, and charming individual. Politically, he inhabits the intellectual space in which White Nationalism and conservatism sometimes overlap. That is to say, he is a vocal opponent of feminism in its most flawed manifestations, opposes Muslim immigration, supports Donald Trump, and so on. And he does so fearlessly. Few reading this will not have taken some small delight in one of his particularly cutting phrases or cool trouncing of some hysterical social justice warrior.

For whites, this is often all that it takes to be welcomed into the fold. As a largely politically voiceless group, whites tend to flock towards anyone who has the courage to speak publicly what they think in the privacy of their own minds or dare to say only to close associates.

The problem with Mr. Yiannopoulos is that he is not white. He is in fact half Jewish — a particularly thorny issue indeed. Despite all we know of history, many whites just cannot help themselves but to embrace anyone who is perceived as being supportive of white interests. At the same time, however, it is pure folly to reject the benefits of a sympathetic voice, especially one with such a large audience, just because he is a member of an out-group.

In the article “An Establishment Conservative’s Guide To The Alt-Right,” co-written by Mr. Yiannopoulos and Allum Bokhari, the authors attempt to explain to Breitbart readers (mainstream conservatives who are slightly farther to the right and more open-minded than the average Republican) exactly what this “Alt-Right” they have been hearing so much about actually stands for and why their Twitter timelines are filled with swastikas and “le happy merchant” memes.

The article, well-written and relatively informative, albeit highly selective in its subject matter, has reawakened a debate within our circles about a subject with which we are all familiar: what contributions, if any, can non-whites make to the Alt-Right? Part of the problem is one of terminology. The controversy surrounding the concept of “allies of color” is, in part, that the term itself suggests a far more intimate working relationship between us and non-whites than White Nationalists feel comfortable having. An alternative phrase — “peripheral agents” — might provide a greater intellectual distance between sympathetic non-whites and White Nationalists while allowing us to more objectively and calmly analyze their impact on the movement and public perception.

If we answer the question of the role of peripheral agents simply by emphatically restating our foundational principle — the creation of sovereign white nations — and take all the ultimate restrictions that such a project will necessitate as a given, we are left to deal with three important issues: first, the question of whether sympathetic publicity is always good publicity, even if emanating from non-white voices; second, the question of how White Nationalists should make use of mainstream coverage; and third, who exactly is it that White Nationalists are seeking to attract (a question that is not quite as simple as one might guess).

It is not necessary to provide a complete synopsis of the article here but a short description of a couple of its elements is required. The authors define the Alt-Right very broadly: they mention a number of well-known contemporary names, including Steve Sailer, Curtis Yarvin (the Jewish neoreactionary better known as Mencius Moldbug), Razib Khan, and Richard Spencer, as well as early luminaries such as Julius Evola, H. L. Mencken, and Oswald Spengler. Included in their genealogy of the Alt-Right are various factions or fields of interest such as the human biodiversity movement, libertarianism, neoreaction, and the manosphere. Even a passing mention of the Nouvelle Droite is made. It is an eclectic mix of ideas but each has in common a disdain for and a rejection of the oppressive and ill-informed world of politically correct pearl-clutchers on both the Left and the mainstream Right. Needless to say, most of those who are reading this will likely already have read the article but, if not, it is worth spending a few minutes perusing it because it will attract newcomers. For this reason, it can be seen as a benefit to the movement. But the fact that it will serve as an introduction for many people makes it that much more crucial for White Nationalists to assert our particular message clearly, loudly, and without compromise.

The head, heart, and muscle of the Alt-Right is White Nationalism, a movement which is not mentioned once in the article. Considering the scope of the piece, this can hardly be construed as anything but deliberate. Without the tools of extra sensory perception, we cannot know for certain precisely why the authors have neglected White Nationalism but, with our understanding of Jewish intellectual movements to guide us, we can surmise that they chose to downplay the influence of radical White Nationalist intellectuals in favor of a more inclusive and socially acceptable collection of thinkers in an effort to secure for themselves a niche in the marketplace and a future for non-white writers. To do such a thing makes perfect sense. The authors cannot be faulted for this. It is not even out of the realm of possibility that they are genuinely sympathetic to White Nationalism in the same way some of us are sympathetic to Hindu Nationalism or various other anti- or postcolonial movements — i.e., as movements consistent with our ideology but within which we can play no part other than that of observers and commentators.

There can be no doubt, for example, that the Indologist Koenraad Elst has had a tremendously positive influence on Hindu Nationalism without pretending to be a Hindu Nationalist. His books are widely read and can certainly be seen as good publicity for that particular movement. Though the situation is not strictly analogous (especially considering the fact that he is not Jewish), in the context of Indian politics and demography, Dr. Elst is a “minority” who has devoted his career to a cause that is not, strictly speaking, his own. There are, of course, numerous other examples of this phenomenon but the point is that it is certainly possible for members of an out-group to aid the cause of an in-group provided that the in-group is firmly and explicitly committed to its own principles and that this is understood by both sides.

If we approach the subject from this point of view, it seems clear that sympathetic publicity arising from anyone is good for the movement (with the above caveats). Good publicity is, of course, any publicity that attracts new people to one’s project, whatever that may be. As Greg Paulson points out in his recent related piece at Counter-Currents, for many millennials, involvement with the various factions of the Alt-Right mentioned above provided their introduction to White Nationalism. He writes: “. . . they started out by simply finding our racial, anti-feminist, and un-PC memes funny (but not taking them seriously), and as time and engagement with our memes progressed, they started taking the legitimacy of our points and eventually embraced our ideas.”

The intellectual paths taken by individuals who end up becoming White Nationalists are probably as diverse as White Nationalists themselves. An in-depth study of this process will surely be undertaken someday, but anecdotal evidence abounds and would suggest that Mr. Paulson is correct. Thus it is important to cast as wide a net as possible. After all, we are attempting to undo many years of philosophical and political corruption, as well as — and most importantly — the suicidal psychological distortions inflicted upon a group of people that make up about 18% of the world’s population. Some will, by nature, respond more slowly than others and to them we must show patience (a task that, admittedly, seems to grow more challenging the longer one has been in the movement). However, as long as we are honest about our goals and refuse to temper our basic message, providing a warm welcome to the curious will benefit us all tremendously.

One of the claims made by the Mr. Yiannopoulos and Mr. Bokhari is that many in the Alt-Right are simply being childishly rebellious and lack any real substance to their arguments. They write, for instance, that some are drawn to the movement because “it promises fun, transgression, and a challenge to social norms they just don’t understand [italics mine].” And later: “Young people . . . are drawn to [the Alt-Right] because it seems fresh, daring and funny, while the doctrines of their parents and grandparents seem unexciting, overly-controlling and overly-serious.” This is doubtless true to some extent. But behind this jocularity is a deadly seriousness that risks getting lost in the “amorphous movement,” as the authors term it, if it is not regularly checked and contextualized. It is the job of the older and/or more learned members of the community to ensure that the young do in fact understand the ideas behind the memes.

Though many have arrived on this side of the political spectrum from a variety of backgrounds and political philosophies, it must be remembered that the core ideas that propelled the Alt-Right onto the pages of Breitbart in the first place were those of White Nationalists. We have gained strength and followers precisely because we do not compromise with our enemies. It should be obvious that there is no reason to start now. It is our honesty about everything that has made the movement a dynamic, cutting-edge, and ultimately unavoidable force in contemporary political discourse. One of our greatest powers is that we know we are right and we can prove it. And we do not back down under pressure. Simply put, White Nationalists are the alpha males of politics and this is, without a doubt, partially what draws people towards us.

The question of who our audience actually is and which segments of the white population are most necessary to attract is one that also needs to be considered in the context of any conversation about publicity and mainstream attention. First and foremost, it must be stated that White Nationalism is neither a rebrand of conservatism nor is it a joke, despite sharing some positions with conservatives and having a uniquely talented number of true comedic talents in our ranks. It is now — and always has been — a radical political movement. We are not looking to restore the collapsing architecture of a system that brought us to this point in the first place. We are trying to create a new and healthy culture in which we freely and without sentimentality discard those ideas that have failed us and have helped to maintain the collective state of white psycho-social submission to Jewish elites. It is absolutely necessary to for us to begin to think exclusively as radicals, using the terms and ideas of radical politics, and to distance ourselves from conservatism with no compunction.

Radical political action is almost always the result of the dissemination of a particular ideology by a cadre of older intellectuals whose ideas, refined and crystallized by years of serious study, find traction with military-aged men, especially those on the younger side of this demographic. These people experience the effects of previous generations’ bungles and missteps in ways that are often more immediate and pressing than they are for older, more secure, and less socially flexible individuals. The young tend not only to be more intellectually open but also more willing to undertake risk and to find delight in spiritually fulfilling thrill-seeking. A movement that is not seen as dangerous in some way is not going to attract these people and will always drift towards stagnation.

One of the fears often expressed at times like this is that of mainstreaming. We are all aware of both recent and historical examples of such behavior and rightly fear it. Who does mainstreaming attract? Primarily those with a heavy stake in the current system, people who believe that a few tweaks in the political climate will restore the stability of decades past, and those who long for a world that has either already passed or never actually existed, i.e., hopeless nostalgists. This is not the stuff of which radical political movements are made. Thus any attempt at mainstreaming our message will alienate the precise demographic that is most necessary for the success of any radical political movement. There must be a space for those entrenched in the system to find common ground with White Nationalists (they most certainly have as much to gain from us as we do from them) but at the same time those with youthful energy and a healthy sense of adventure must not be alienated. The “14/88ers,” despite occasionally being crudely over the top (those whom Greg Johnson has famously termed “vantards“) should be corrected when appropriate and necessary but not to the point of demoralization. None of us need look too far to find sources of frustration and ennui. But this should not come from within our community if it can at all be helped. White Nationalists should be supportive and provide a safe haven for those who are pro-White and are not harming the movement either through stupid behavior or fundamentally misguided ideas.

In sum:

  1. Any publicity that is not explicitly negative should be seen as a boon to the movement — even if it comes from a non-white.
  2. In order to use such publicity most effectively, White Nationalists must be gracious and appreciative without ever straying from our fundamental beliefs or trying to downplay some particular aspect of our ideology in order to trick people into accepting us. This will guarantee that our ideas will be accepted by those ready to accept them and increases the likelihood that we will garner respect, however begrudgingly, from all whom we engage.
  3. Replacing the term “allies of color” by the more neutral (and accurate) “peripheral agents” might go a surprisingly long way in reducing knee-jerk reactions to out-group attention in the future.
  4. Finally, it is crucial to maintain a certain level of tolerance for the young and hot-headed so that they learn and progress as individuals and as activists rather than throwing their hands up into the air and gravitating towards unstable and marginal figures within the movement, thereby wasting their talents and energy pursuing chimeras.


  1. R_Moreland
    Posted April 13, 2016 at 4:13 am | Permalink

    I am tempted to go all Sun Tzu and comment that when the enemy is strong, you must divide his alliances. If there are people in the enemy’s camp who are breaking ranks, it is to the benefit of White Nationalists and the rest of the AltRight to exploit those divisions.

    There are two strategies here:
    1: Ideological Purity, in which you maintain a narrow party line; and
    2: Broad Front, in which you form alliances and (by dint of a superior cadre) come out on top after the Revolution.

    Both strategies have their advantages.

    The Objectivists maintain ideological purity, refuse to compromise, and are in no way a mass movement (regardless of the sales of Atlas Shrugged! ). But then again, Objectivism has had a profound influence on the form in which American (and globalized) capitalism has taken over the last several decades.

    The Left has since the 1960s pushed the broad front. This is why otherwise ideologically disparate groups such as radical feminists, black nationalists, Islamist invaders, and etc., can work together. They understand they have a common enemy (i.e., white men) and a common interest in dividing up the goodies. They can get together for a protest or sit-in, and thus a university might end up with a womyn’s resources center, a black studies program, and an Islamic center. Meantime, white men are wondering what happened.

    The objective is the seizure of power. The approaches are means to that end. The Left understands this, which is why they have come out ahead in the struggles of the last half century.

    Nonetheless, the AltRight has much going in its favor. For one thing, it is now in the position of the counterculture. It’s the Young Turks facing the creaking Old Guard. This is a reason that websites like the Daily Stormer work. They are over-the-top irreverent in the way that long-haired-dope-smoking-beatnik-hippies were irreverent way back when. What the Young Turks promote is not so much a particular party line, but rather irreverence for the sacred cows. They’re the Lenny Bruces or Banned in Bostons or Seven Forbidden Words.

    Defying authority has great appeal to the young. Among other things, this positions the AltRight as being the fighters for freedom against censorship, the rebels against oppression, the cool crowd against a hidebound Establishment. We might add those military-age men who are growing alienated from the ways in which the current presidential administration has politicized the armed forces to conform to leftist diktats.

    The question then becomes, how to mobilize these people?

    Gets back to agitprop. The agitation end is in mobilizing large numbers of disaffected people who (for whatever reasons) lack full ideological commitment. This is where videos and posters and pop songs and (heaven help us) tweets come in.

    Here is something that has to be considered: as a result of AltRight memes going mainstream (perhaps prematurely), there are going to be numerous people coming to websites such as Counter-Currents and many more. Supposing someone sends in an e-mail like this: “I do not want to be a keyboard commando. What can I do to stand up for white interests on my campus?” Or, “How can I launch a wrongful termination suit against my company for firing me because my website promoted white nationalism?” Or, “How can I support white people under siege in South Africa, Rotherham or Detroit?”

    Where the Left gets really effective is in running all sorts of fronts. They set up an alternative infrastructure of political advocacy, legal defense, guerrilla theater and street activist organizations. i.e., they create a virtual state within the state in which activists can participate in any number of ways.

    Which is why the AltRight has to provide alternatives:
    * Using these websites to gain further political education.
    * Joining realworld organizations.
    * Contributing money to the cause.
    * Taking it to the streets in demonstrations.
    * Creating artistic and political events for the culture war.
    * Suing a university for censoring pro-white speech.
    * Working in solidarity with the global struggle of White peoples.

    All this implies a cadre which will lead the organizational work. And forming cadre requires propaganda (the hardcore political education). The AltRight has got the cadre, I believe, but the challenge is in creating those fronts.

    I’ll close this out by saying that things are moving a lot faster than anticipated. The Trump phenomenon is one manifestation of this (and this is not an endorsement of a candidate!). With it, there are going to be lots of people open to the AltRight, especially if the Republican Establishment pulls a fast one at the convention. Something to look at is people in the Trump organization who are willing to fund AltRight fronts. Yeah, I know, money, it’s so mundane, but it makes everything else work.

    • Proofreader
      Posted April 14, 2016 at 7:51 am | Permalink

      R. Moreland, have you read Luther P. Gerlach and Virginia H. Hine’s book People, Power, Change: Movements of Social Transformation (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merill, 1970)? Judging by the remarks and references in your comments on Counter-Currents, I’m sure you’d find it extremely interesting. (For example, I believe that you once recommended Networks and Netwars, which includes a chapter by Gerlach.) If you haven’t read it, you might like to track down a copy; you should be able to find an affordable copy in reasonable condition through

  2. Posted April 14, 2016 at 11:50 am | Permalink

    R_Moreland, you ask:

    Suppose someone sends in an e-mail like this: “I do not want to be a keyboard commando. What can I do to stand up for white interests on campus?”

    I would reply like this:

    First, don’t disparage keyboard work. If done reasonably well, in normal times it can have small, positive results that add up over time. Your persistent efforts should result in some public education plus the creation of a knowledgeable, articulate person (yourself) who is able to act effectively in times like now when there is great opportunity.

    Directly “standing up for white interests on campus” could be hazardous. But as a student, you are in a good position to chat with other students. That is a huge opportunity! You can talk about the Trump campaign, focusing on all the crazy reactions to it. You can talk about all the radical #BLM type activism going on recently, especially if it is happening on your campus. You can talk about Milo Yiannopoulos. From these discussions you will end up knowing enough individuals sympathetic to pro-white messages to start having small meetings in dormitory lounges, etc. You can watch Alt-Right videos and then talk. Or whatever, but you end up with the beginnings of organization.

    I discuss these ideas in A White College Student’s Guide to Political Activism and also in some recent blog posts such as White Students at the University of Missouri: What you need to know, what you might do

    The key is to offer ideas on how to start small with do-able, positive steps. Your big ideas are fine, R_Moreland, but there are not too many people in a position to act on them.

  3. Ragnvaldr
    Posted April 16, 2016 at 11:39 pm | Permalink

    White Nationalism is a term I wrestle with, as I will attempt to explain. White implies an individual with no language, culture, history, or indigenous spirituality…one may as well refer to themself as being Black or Hispanic. It generically implies the same monoculture descriptive that reduces an individual and broad spectrum of people to the pigmentation of skin. White offers no clear identity which is irrelevant in consideration of the broader audience who are quite possibly a lot more warm to whatever the terminology invokes in their own minds and sense of identity.

    My paternal ancestors originate from what is now Danmark. Teutoic and Germanic in origin with very minor deviation along the way to Normandy with cousin Rollo, to England with cousin William, to lead the church of the co-opted alien god for cousin Richard I and later Queen Mary who was not of kin. Then onto America where a cousin helped found Providence, RI, my ancestors led Regiments named for my family in the Revolutionary War. I am by personality and behavior along with preferences more Danish than American even though seperated from consious awareness of my people as a majority in the geographic homeland by over 1300 years.

    To my wonder and amazement the gods and ancestors clearly called to me a couple of years ago to come home. Something I had been missing all my life in feeling like an outsider in this White majority culture I was born into. This new journey has me in contact with a fellow Norman descendant in Italy, a Saxon (germanic) in England who all felt at odds with the White majority cultures we were born into and especially Christianity… We’re no longer alone, we’ve all made it home to our indigenous “old ways” and the studies and journey shared in mutual self recognition, reading ideas and concepts in the lore and anthropology of culture, things naturally occuring on the inside…that did not match up with the dominant culture in the outside world. Powerful enough to move one to tears, where that previous sense of self-questioning transforms to pride and appreciation of discovering one’s true identity, the sense of belonging one can feel in their bones. Not fitting with the majority no longer matters…

    Especially, noticing closest friends over time were also ancestors of Germanic peoples who went Viking. To be clear Viking does not describe a people it describes an action and was actually a low point in a 40000 year history.

    I invoke the auspices of my ancestor and kinsmen Baldr in conveying what follows. We are not submissive to or worship the gods and godesses being they are our kin folk. It vastly differs from the Christian concept of God, as does the Jewish perception have more in common with the Norse cosmology vs. Christianity.

    All my life I’ve gotten on more naturally with Jewish folks vs. the White majority. My Norman ancestors designated and facilitated the first Jewish settlements in England. Earlier in life, I did not comprehend the mutual affinity and natural cooperation, but I do now…

    White people could learn a lot from the Jews. They have preserved their own language, culture, heritage, and spirituality…rooted in their god and indigenous traditions which also have not been immune to the plague that is monocultural liberalism.

    Jews I can sit down with and talk about how Norse cosmology and the old ways are very similar yet different, where Christianity is a whole different animal…not a damned thing in common at all. There is an old joke that Christians should refer to their religion as Paulism, because if they were actually Christian, they’d all be practicing Orthodox Jews as Jesus did…

    Comments are intended to inform for purposes of honesty from where I sit vs. an attack on people who hold Christian beliefs.

    So I have a bit of trouble with the White Nationalism perspective on Jews. These people are so successful and smart because of their religion. They are genetically and culturally programmed from an early age to question and examine everything including the Rabbi. It is a religion that is centered of the mind where Christianity is centered of the heart.

    My own way? Is centered in Odin’s pursuit of knowlege, exploration, industriousness, along with Thor’s example of the highest quality being kindness of the warrior…

    My ancestors conquered Normandy, England, and the Americas, they ran the Muslims out of Sicily and changed the course of English history at the battle of Bosworth. We were only a handful and a minority. Perspectively, it is ridiculous for me to consider the Jewish elite a threat in contrast to the POWER of my ancesteral gods and indigenous ways.

    Again I respect the right of others to express and hold onto their Christian beliefs, but respectfully point out that it is the adoption of this alien god that has led to the four most destructive concepts unleashed on the European peoples. Original sin, submissiveness to a god, the culture of victimhood, and the need for a messiah vs. getting off ones duff and emulating their ancestral gods and godesses. The gods will not help those who do not help themselves.

    If you want to see something powerful goggle soldiers of Odin Estonia…

    My suggestion is that White Nationalism needs to offer something more than the false vanilla as an appeal to identity.

    Indigenous European spirituality is infinititly more powerful than Yhewhe or the Jews. Doesn’t matter if it’s Germanic, Celtic, or Gaulic…Basque. Find your roots! Find you balls! Honor your ancestors.

  4. Lokuum
    Posted April 17, 2016 at 12:11 am | Permalink

    This Milo-gate is ten times the ink it deserves. Trump was a big surprise and many of the establishment are trying to get a handle on it. Was Milo interested in us before?

    Writers want to see themselves as having the power to change the world, but words are a minor thing compared to the real. In this election, the Republican nominee will need 70% of the white vote to win. He won’t get it. Republican hopefuls will need even more white voters in the future. Liberals will have free rein in the executive office for all their crazy; the Milo’s of the world aren’t going to be the ones who steer the people to us. And all the worry about how we see “him” demonstrates an inner weakness in us. Milo, effin, who cares?

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  • Our Titles

    White Identity Politics

    The World in Flames

    The White Nationalist Manifesto

    From Plato to Postmodernism

    The Gizmo

    Return of the Son of Trevor Lynch's CENSORED Guide to the Movies

    Toward a New Nationalism

    The Smut Book

    The Alternative Right

    My Nationalist Pony

    Dark Right: Batman Viewed From the Right

    The Philatelist

    Novel Folklore

    Confessions of an Anti-Feminist

    East and West

    Though We Be Dead, Yet Our Day Will Come

    White Like You

    The Homo and the Negro, Second Edition

    Numinous Machines

    Venus and Her Thugs


    North American New Right, vol. 2

    You Asked For It

    More Artists of the Right

    Extremists: Studies in Metapolitics


    The Importance of James Bond

    In Defense of Prejudice

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater (2nd ed.)

    The Hypocrisies of Heaven

    Waking Up from the American Dream

    Green Nazis in Space!

    Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country

    Heidegger in Chicago

    The End of an Era

    Sexual Utopia in Power

    What is a Rune? & Other Essays

    Son of Trevor Lynch's White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    The Lightning & the Sun

    The Eldritch Evola

    Western Civilization Bites Back

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles


    The Node

    The New Austerities

    Morning Crafts

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Gold in the Furnace