Vox Day: This is Brainstorm. Thank you all for showing up and coming. I’m very pleased to welcome Greg Johnson, the editor of Counter-Currents. I have been a guest on his podcast before and enjoyed talking with him. He’s a very smart guy, and he is here to discuss the Alt Right and the various aspects of the Alt Right, and some of the implications that it’s had for White Nationalism and some of the other issues that are taking place today.
So, Greg, I’ll turn it over to you for a bit and if you’d like to go ahead and answer that question, please feel free.
Greg Johnson: Thank you, Vox! Thanks for having me on. It’s a pleasure. In terms of the question about race-mixing, and specifically how Richard Spencer answered it in his press conference, I couldn’t disagree more strongly. I do believe that it is a real threat to Whites and to White Nationalism for the very simple reason that in every White country in the world, we’re facing severe demographic problems. Our population is shrinking, and when you add interracial marriage to a population that is not reproducing itself in the first place, that is just driving us closer and closer towards ceasing to exist. So, I think it’s a serious problem when you have a shrinking race.
Now, it’s a problem in general whether our race is growing or not simply because it does destroy the uniqueness of whatever races are mixing together, and so if you want to preserve human biodiversity, you have to put up barriers to that.
I think that what Spencer said was somewhat misleading. He made a point about how if you look on television, there’s a lot more race-mixing than there actually is today.
GJ: But the reason why that’s all on television is precisely to promote more race-mixing in the future. Just like having Black presidents and women presidents on TV paves the way for those things in real life. So, the fact that television is promoting race-mixing is not a good thing because it’s enormously influential, and the things that they tend to promote happen. So, I think that television is not meant to reflect the world as it is today. It’s telegraphing the image of the world that the establishment wants to have, and that’s a world where there are fewer and fewer Whites and where White people who do have children at all are reproducing themselves, maybe, but they’re marrying out so they’re not reproducing our race.
VD: Right. I actually tend to agree with that completely despite the fact that, as everybody knows, I’m only part White myself.
Stefan Molyneux and I talked about this and it’s really quite shocking, especially when you look at the advocacy of this race-mixing is absolutely irresponsible when you look at the various statistics regarding whether various fathers of various races support their children, stay married, etcetera, etcetera. The more you look at the reality of these racially mixed relationships and marriages, the more it’s clear that what they’re promoting is not merely dangerous to the White race but it’s actually dangerous to the individuals themselves, and in many cases they’re almost guaranteeing poverty.
I read a shocking study. It was done actually by a black female scientist. We can question how flawless the study was, but what was amazing was that it indicated that ninety-eight percent of the black fathers of mixed race children with White mothers did not financially support those children.
GJ: That’s really remarkable. That surprises even me. And it’s not just financial support, it’s not just the dangers that especially White women face when they consort with blacks, it’s the fact that no matter what kind of mix you’ve got, even if you’re dealing with highly responsible people, you still have children who have identity issues and have trouble fitting in. There have been lots of studies that have been done about people of mixed race and mixed ancestry, including just very radically mixed national ancestries. Even if they grow up in a country foreign to one of their parents, they have identity crises and it makes life more difficult. It makes them more likely to fail in schools, fail in relationships, fail in jobs, to turn to vices and addictions, and things like that.
So, it’s not good for the kids either, although the establishment looks at racially mixed children as foot soldiers in the struggle for their vision of utopia. They’re cannon fodder for this utopia.
VD: Well, if you think about it, what you’re describing there is . . . I think they call it “the third identity.” It’s something that we pay attention to because it’s quite common for the children of immigrants and so, being European immigrants ourselves, we see that sort of thing in our children where they don’t fully belong where we came from, but they don’t necessarily fully belong where they’ve been their whole lives. So, there are legitimate identity issues and I wonder if you’re attempting to construct these new identities — you know, the EU or global citizen of the world identity — it would be pretty useful to have a whole cohort of cannon fodder who don’t have an actual identity to compete with that.
GJ: I agree and I think that is the agenda. That is the agenda for the universal, coffee-colored humanity for these globalists, these one-worlder types.
VD: Yeah, it’s very Arthur C. Clarke. Childhood’s End.
There’s a question for me here that I’ll address: “Do you think your tri-racial status motivates you to want an Alt West instead of an Alt Right?” And he goes on in some detail about whether bi-racial or tri-racial is actually the correct nomenclature.
Well, the answer is pretty simple and that’s no. I think that if you followed my columns and my blog for any reasonable period of time, it’s pretty apparent that I don’t discuss things from my personal perspective. Now, obviously, we’re all prone to being biased by our natural biases and so forth, but in this particular case I grew up not actually knowing what I was for the first 35 or 36 years of my life, and so that sort of identity is not terribly influential in regards to my intellectual conception of things.
Let’s face it, it’s pretty damn useful rhetorically, and obviously I don’t hesitate to make use of that, but in terms of my thinking on the various strains of Alt Right thought, no, it doesn’t have any impact on that at all. Just to make it clear: I have zero interest in subverting anything. I am not in the least bit butthurt by people saying I do or don’t belong to this or that group. I think it’s amusing that anyone thinks that I am that much of a joiner in the first place, and so it’s just not an issue for me.
Now, here’s a question for both of us, but I’ll hand it over to you. “Speaking of race-mixing and Euro/White birth rates, what should be the West’s response to the African birth rate bomb? How much of a threat is it to the Western ethnics?”
GJ: Well, it’s a huge threat, because of course they’re going to outstrip Africa’s carrying capacity. They really already have, and a half billion more Africans are not going to find life any easier there. They’re going to start pouring across the Mediterranean into Europe, they’re going to be brought to the New World, and they’re going to be demographic competitors with Europeans if not outright invaders and colonizers, because of course we’ll let that happen, unfortunately. Given the present leadership that we’ve got, we’re going to let that happen.
Camp of the Saints was a very mild scenario compared to that. Camp of the Saints was about a million people in rust-bucket ships coming from India, at least from the start. Well, that’s already been doubled over the last year, and there are going to be tens and tens and tens of millions of Africans on the move, and we simply cannot allow that to happen.
The best thing, of course, would be to nip their population growth in the bud before they basically despoil every inch of Africa, kill all the wildlife, make the continent uninhabitable, and then start moving like a great swarm of locusts into Europe to do the same.
VD: Right. Obviously, there are numerous strategies that could be pursued to that effect, but let’s keep moving on because we’ve got tons of questions coming through.
Let’s go ahead and address the big one. Greg, I’m curious to know exactly what you mean when you say the Alt Right is White Nationalism or it is nothing at all, because there are two different ways you can read that. One is “all the Alt Right is, is White Nationalism. It has nothing to do with Right-wing politics. It has nothing to do with economics. It has nothing to do with any of the other aspects of the ideological spectrum. It’s just a pure White Nationalism concept.” The other interpretation is that whatever the Alt Right is, White Nationalism must be a core component of it. So, I’m curious to understand which of those two interpretations is the correct one.
GJ: The latter is closer to the way I see things. The way I understand the term Alt Right and the movement, if you will, of the Alt Right is in terms of its history. Richard Spencer started a webzine called Alternative Right at the beginning of 2010, and it really was set up and funded and launched as a kind of entryist vehicle for White Nationalists to interface with various strands of dissident Right-wing thinkers, people who were rejecting the conservative mainstream, with the intention of giving us access to recruits, if you will. It was a kind of outreach and recruiting mechanism by White Nationalists.
Now, Spencer lost interest in the project after a while, and it was taken up by Andy Nowicki and Colin Liddell, and then after a year or so of it being basically their baby, Spencer closed it down around Christmas of 2013, I think it was, and launched Radix Journal. By that time, though, Alt Right had become a kind of generic term and therefore a really valuable brand, and it was valuable because it allowed people to express their interest in edgy Right-wing ideas without tying themselves too specifically to anything like White Nationalism that might scare the horses.
I thought that was great. I thought it was a valuable brand. I thought that it was somewhat foolish to relinquish control of that brand. Portable phones are generically called by people today “iPhones,” right? I sometimes call my Android an “iPhone,” much to the horror of my Android aficionados.
VD: Yeah. I’m not offended by your White Nationalism, but if you’re going to start calling your Samsung an iPhone, we’re going to have a problem here.
GJ: Right! Exactly. And way back when there was the Sony Walkman, right? Which became the sort of generic term for any kind of pocket portable stereo system. Xeroxing is a verb for making photocopies. When you have a particular brand, that becomes a generic term that’s worth gold, and that’s really what happened. The Alt Right brand became the generic term for a movement, and I think it’s very valuable.
I want to keep it functioning the way it was initially set up. So, the way I look at the Alt Right is that at the core of it there is a community of White Nationalist bloggers and writers and conference organizers and things like that, and then around it there’s a periphery of other people who aren’t quite willing to avow being Alt Right in that sense, but they’re comfortable with the term. I look at it as an opportunity for interfacing with new audiences and recruiting new people and bringing them over to our way of thinking, and I think it’s important to maintain that dynamic.
So, when I say the Alt Right is White Nationalism or it’s nothing at all, what I mean is that it consists of a core of White Nationalists and a periphery of non-“White Nationalist” types with spirited, sometimes cordial, sometimes just brutal dialogues going on, and interactions and networking and that we’re making that work for the greater advance of our particular movement.
Now, I am not familiar, however, with the narrative of how you came to be associated with the term Alt Right or, say, Mike Cernovich or Milo. Milo doesn’t claim to be on the Alt Right. Honest to God, I hadn’t heard of you until Ann Sterzinger delivered a review of SJWs Always Lie. I admit to being highly parochial. So, if you can maybe fill in how you came to be associated with that term, that would be very useful to me.
VD: Okay. It’s pretty simple. People started calling me an Alt Right leader.
VD: I wasn’t familiar with the term with the capital letters. Initially, my understanding of it was that it just meant alternative Right in the sense of everybody who has been read out of the conservative movement. You know, so going back to John Birch. I think probably what spurred it was Cuckservative, because both John Red Eagle and I are Native American and White mixes, and that gave us a certain credibility on the immigration invasion issue. It’s very, very difficult for even hardcore Leftists to come at us. They can’t even come at us when we talk about segregation, because we immediately turn it around on them and say, “Are you saying you want to get rid of Indian reservations?”
VD: So, they flee from that. In fact, somebody just commented that it’s my association with the dissident Right that contributed to my being declared Alt Right.
GJ: OK. That makes a lot of sense.
VD: But also, beyond that, the fact that I was a well-known Gamer Gater meant that I was sort of tied to all of the shitposters, shitlords, and so forth. That’s where Cernovich came in, too. Just so you know, Cernovich has never declared himself to be anything but somebody sympathetic to the Alt Right.
GJ: Okay That’s useful.
VD: It’s kind of funny for me, because I’m friends with Milo, I’m friends with Mike, and I can tell you just as a fact that neither one of them has any interest whatsoever in portraying themselves as a leader of the Alt Right.
GJ: Yes, and I get that. I certainly see that’s the case with Milo. Sometimes he can say things that are misleading, but when he’s actually speaking directly to that point, there’s no question about it.
I do think there’s a great deal of, frankly, paranoid ideation floating around about entryists and subversion and take-overs and things like that. In my most recent piece called “Alt Right and Alt Wrong” over at Counter-Currents, I talk about how terms like that don’t have a real meaning when you’re talking about a movement that’s almost entirely virtual. It’s almost entirely memetic.
GJ: The only thing you have to do to “join the Alternative Right” is get an account on some Web platform and start interacting with people. Therefore, the idea that entryism is something that we can worry about . . . Well, the boundaries are so porous that that’s not really an issue. It’s a bad metaphor, in other words.
The same with purges, right? You can’t throw anybody off the Internet. I’m sorry.
So, what we’re really talking about here is simply people with differences of opinion. My attitude about how to deal with people with differences of opinion, if they’re arguing and putting themselves out there in good faith, is to critique them and try to persuade them or whatever, but we have to keep this as a battle of ideas, because that’s what this really is. We can’t stop anybody. We can’t press a pedal and drop somebody into a piranha pool for disagreeing with us. We just have to have better arguments, and that’s what I like.
In terms of whether or not somebody says they’re Alt Right, that doesn’t matter to me. If you’re talking to me — and you are talking to me — I feel that that’s a victory. I feel that that is how this thing of ours, namely White Nationalism, grows. It grows by talking to people, by gaining new audiences, by gaining people’s ears, by converting people to our way of thinking, or converting people into friends of our way of thinking.
VD: Yeah. One of the things that has bothered me most about some of the folks who have wanted to play purity police or whatever is that they don’t seem to understand the basic rule of winning according to Sun Tzu, which is, “The best way to win is to convince people not to fight you.”
VD: And some of them seem to be spoiling for a fight with anyone.
GJ: I know.
VD: But it is interesting to hear that you tend a little bit more toward the big tent side of the Alt Right than the small tent side of the Alt Right.
GJ: Yeah. It only works if there are people talking to us who aren’t us. That’s how it grows. I was very amused when Milo first started paying attention to the Alt Right. A lot of people were upset and felt threatened by it, and I would prod them. I would say, “You know, it’s almost a tautology that the only way that a movement grows is by being noticed by people who are not already in it. And Milo isn’t already in it. He’s so outlandish and cards-on-the-table, over-the-top himself that it’s very difficult for people to mistake him for somebody who’s in it. So, isn’t that great?”
I kept saying to people, “This is what success looks like. When people who aren’t us are starting to give us attention, and not just negative attention and kneejerk shitlib attention like we get from the press, but serious open-minded attention.” That’s how we win, and I’m liking it. I want to win.
Now, I’ve grown weary of Milo after his last couple of speeches, but the fact of the matter is that my initial reaction to him was to look at him as an opportunity, not as a threat, and I still think that he’s really not much of a threat. The reason he’s not much of a threat is because this is a battle of ideas, and I am confident in the strength of our ideas, and the only way that he could be a threat to us really is if he gets so many half-baked and confused cultural libertarians Googling us and coming to our Websites and our Web forums that we simply break down and we can’t assimilate these people. But I’m not worried about that.
VD: Yeah, I bet within a month he gives a speech in full Nazi regalia. Now, for those of you who don’t know what we’re referring to obliquely, I think earlier today Andrew Anglin of The Daily Stormer declared Milo the greatest threat to the Alt Right and announced his intention of showing up at Milo’s events in order to demonstrate the Alt Right’s disapproval of Milo.
My first thought was, “Did Milo just pay him to do that?” I actually e-mailed Milo after I read that and I said, “Congratulations! I think he just got you your Fox News show.”
VD: This is, like, the perfect way for Milo to clean up his image on the mainstream side.
GJ: Oh, exactly. That’s how you use people who are further to the Right of you. They won’t just disappear, and you’re foolish to wish they’ll just go away, so if they’re there you might as well treat them as an opportunity to make you seem more reasonable and centrist, and I think that’s what he’s going to do.
In my piece, I talk about how really the options for dealing with Milo are to ignore him, which isn’t really an option because he’s too big to be ignored; to offer better ideas; or to troll him. I don’t think that trolling is really going to help him. I said, “What are you going to do? Call him a faggot? I mean, that’s what he calls himself, right?” He’s sort of troll-proof in a way. He’s utterly shameless, and he can absorb that energy and grow from it. So, I think if you’re worried about Milo, express your disapproval, yes, but do it in the form of offering a better argument.
Milo has lots of friends in the White Nationalist world, and they say, “No, don’t criticize Milo. He’s doing good. He’s bringing people in our direction.” But even on their model, those people will only come all the way into our camp if we take them away from Milo, and the only way we can do that is by pointing out where we differ and try to give better arguments and stuff like that. So, yeah, I’d love it if people would show up at his events and talk to people, redpill them, chat them up, whatever.
You sent me a link just before this thing started where he has a Hitler Youth parade at the bottom of it. I think that would probably not be a very effective way of showing up at a Milo event. But anyway, Anglin has his take on Milo, and I have a slightly different take on my side. He wants to troll him. I want to beat him in the realm of dialectic, basically. But either way we’re going to mix it up, and the feathers are going to fly, his wig might fly off. I don’t know. It’s going to be exciting.
VD: Now you’re going too far! Oh, you’re talking about the drag wig. Yeah, I was going to say, “You can call the man many things, but it is his own hair.”
When I tell people not to go after Milo, I’m not saying, “Don’t criticize him,” I’m saying, “Understand that he’s going to come out ahead and you’re not.” It’s like trying to take on the crazy guy at the bar.
VD: No matter what you do to him, he’s not going to care, and he’s going to do things that you wouldn’t even imagine.
But the other thing that I think people need to understand is that Milo is not a movement.
GJ: Yeah, he’s a guy!
VD: When you talk about bringing people over to our side versus being on his side . . . He doesn’t have a side.
VD: He speaks either in rhetoric or dialectic as the occasion befits. When he wants to clown it up, he does. When he wants to be serious, he is. But in either case, he switches back and forth between those things so adroitly that just to be able to even follow him is beyond most people, and I’m the one who literally wrote the book on rhetoric and dialectic, and I would hesitate to put myself in that position just because he’s that adroit.
VD: So, my perspective is to just let him do his thing, learn from it what you can, and take advantage of the opportunities that he is going to hand the Alt Right, because he is easily one of the most Alt Right sympathetic people in the media.
VD: Whether you’re concerned about potential subversion or distraction or false definitions or whatever, he does not hate you. Not even secretly.
GJ: Right. And the thing is that false ideas and things like that . . . We can refute those. We can argue those out. In the end, I have gotten to the point where I kind of wish he’d just go away. I feel like it’s becoming a headache. It’s not so much a threat as it is a headache for me at this point.
VD: But if he doesn’t exist, Hillary Clinton never makes that speech.
GJ: This is true. Now, another thing is that wishing he goes away won’t make it so, arguing won’t make him go away, trolling won’t make him go away, we can’t throw him in a piranha pool. Really the only thing that’s going to make Milo go away is if better, more compelling people that want to get up on the campus stage and get in the spotlight and take the heat come along and wrench his audiences and his attention away from him. So, if you want to get rid of him, the best thing to do is just outdo him. That’s just a challenge that he poses to us and that’s not a bad challenge to have, because we should have been wanting to do that for a long, long time now, anyway.
VD: The reality is, knowing Milo, he will get bored of that topic and move on to something else in six months, anyhow.
GJ: Yeah, I kind of had that sense, too.
One thing, Vox, that I would like to do is I would love to just go through point by point your piece on the Alt West and the Alt White, and talk about the distinction that you lay out there. Is that okay?
VD: Sure. That’s just fine. In fact, that was one of the topics that was most asked about. Let’s see. Do you have it handy?
GJ: Yeah. I’ve got it in front of me.
VD: I’ll let you read it and then we can talk about it. Read one point and then we’ll talk about that point.
GJ: Point one: “Alt-White is for whites only. Alt-West is pan-racial and pan-national, which should not be confused with being multicultural or equalitarian or pro-diversity in the egalitarian sense.”
VD: Yeah. What I’m attempting to distinguish there is that Whites are ten percent of the planet. We are going to be most successful in protecting White interests if there is a way of convincing the other ninety percent of the planet that our program is in some way a benefit to them or even a model for them to follow.
When you read Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations, it’s very clear that people all want to do their own thing. It’s not just Whites who want to have White nations. The Japanese want a Japanese nation just as badly, possibly worse. So, I think there is a way to phrase the White Nationalists’ interest in a way saying, “Look, this is what we want for ourselves, and you are under threat from the same globalist forces that want to mix us all together that we are, and so we can support each other in going our mutually separate ways,” rather than turning it into some historical White imperialism that, frankly, I think is extremely disruptive.
GJ: Yeah, well, that basically is the position that I’ve always publicly maintained, what you call Alt West. I don’t see why you should call it “West,” though, because really that’s more specific than it should be.
My view that I lay out is that I’m an ethnonationalist for all nations. I think that nationalism is the best way for all nations, all peoples of the world to preserve their interests by giving them sovereign homelands, and that’s true of Asians and blacks and Hispanics and Amerindians as well as Whites. So, I’m an ethnonationalist in the broadest sense of the term, and I’m a White Nationalist in a more specific sense, because although I think it’s good for everyone . . .
VD: Because that’s your group.
GJ: Yeah, that’s my group.
VD: We’re actually in agreement there, but someone like an Andrew Anglin would not agree with us on that. You’ve got these other folks that are White Nationalists but . . . You know, I get e-mails all the time that go, “You’re not Alt Right, because you’re part Indian, blah blah blah.” That kind of stuff, which is fine. Their perspective is perfectly legitimate, and I respect that, but that was part of my attempt to draw that distinction, because there are a lot of people who support the ideas that you and I are talking about, but they’re not White. But even though they’re not White, they want there to be an England in a hundred years.
VD: Somebody asked me this once. They said, “You’re not even White, so why do you even care about the White nations?” or something. I said, “You know, I don’t really care that much about Seattle and I don’t care that much about San Antonio, but I find it depressing when I go to San Antonio and I go to Seattle and I see the same McDonald’s, Gap, and everything else, and I can’t tell the difference between those two cities.”
GJ: Yeah, exactly. I feel the same way. I’m not a toucan, but I would feel that the world is poorer if toucans ceased to exist.
GJ: I’m not a tiger, but I would feel the world was poorer without tigers. I want to maintain the beauty of the world, including the diversity of its different peoples and species. I look at this as part of a general attitude not just to humanity but to the biosphere, and that’s really the broadest perspective on this that one could take. We’re interested in preserving global biodiversity, and that includes our own race. There are many White people who are fanatically concerned and risk beatings and jail over owls and lab animals and things like that, but they won’t lift a finger or throw their condoms and pills away to save their own race. There’s something ludicrous about that.
VD: I agree. Okay. So, that’s the first point. Second one?
GJ: Okay. “Alt-White is primarily concerned with white nationalism, and secondarily concerned with European nationalisms. Within the Alt-White, there is already a discussion concerning what the difference between a generic white nationalism and the specific European nationalisms are; I suspect there will eventually be a further distinction between American and European branches of the Alt-White. While the Alt-West supports white nationalism, that is not its sole concern, as it supports all nationalism, European or otherwise.”
VD: Yeah, so, the context there was really my appearance on TRS. I was talking to those guys, The Right Stuff, and they just had a fundamentally American perspective. They did not appear to want to accept that Europe was not White Nationalist. It just isn’t. There is a very, very, very small group that is what we would call pan-European, but the nationalisms over here are very, very strongly nationalist. You would not confuse the Polish nationalists for the Swedish nationalists, much less the Scottish nationalists.
The fact that Americans would just consider them all White, that’s not the way the Europeans think at all, and so whereas in America, because the historical national identities are mixed and watered down, the political competition with the other identity groups, whether it’s the Hispanics, the Blacks, the various Asian groups, whatever, there is a more coherent White identity, and so I think that we’re going to see more of a proper White Nationalism in the States, whereas in Europe it’s going to be more in the form of the various European nationalisms.
GJ: Yeah. Well, I wrote a short article at Counter-Currents called “Why White Nationalism?” and the point that I make there is that I call myself an ethnonationalist and a White Nationalist, and it’s a kind of two-level doctrine in a way.
I believe in nation-states for all ethnically distinct peoples, and that includes all the distinct nations of Europe. If they have any ambition to take control of their destiny and they want a nation-state, I say, “Give it to them!” If that’s the Scottish or the Welsh or Ukrainians or whatever. More power to them.
Yet, at the same time, I know that within the ethnonationalist community in Europe that there is a great deal of Europe-wide solidarity. On November 11 in Warsaw, there will be a giant nationalist march, and at this nationalist march there will be forty or fifty thousand Poles. It’s going to be the biggest thing in Europe. Last year, it was, like, fifty thousand people. It will probably be bigger. There were perhaps thousands of Hungarians there, too. The Hungarians sent the biggest outside delegation. There were friends of mine from Sweden. There were friends of mine from the Baltic states, and so on and so forth. I was hoping to be able to get there this fall, but I don’t think I’ll be able to do it.
And so, it’s simultaneously an expression of Polish nationalism and, because European nationalists from around Europe feel that Europe has a common origin and a common destiny in spite of the fact that it has all these different nations which we celebrate, they’re going to be there to cheer the Poles on and their own national self-assertion, and also to establish fraternal ties. It’s just important.
VD: Those things are important, and those things are legitimate, and I’m glad to see it happening, but it’s not the same as that being your only identity.
GJ: Oh, of course. Yeah.
VD: In fact, I would actually argue that a lot of that is what we would call at the civilizational level, because Europe is under threat from the Muslim invasion that’s been forced upon it by the European Union.
VD: And that’s the other thing that a lot of Americans don’t understand. There is a tremendous skepticism among the nationalists of pan-Europeanism, because pan-Europeanism to them is what has been forced on them by the European Union.
GJ: Exactly, and I think that pan-Europeanism, if it’s what Richard Spencer calls “the emergence of a homogeneous European man,” is a horrifying and revolting thought to these people. To them it sounds like that’s just a deracinated American, right?
Now, when you come over to the New World, when you come over to America, what’s happened here is we’ve gotten a kind of blended European, White identity here, but I don’t even want to call that a generically White human being because you’ve got a similar blended European humanity in Canada and Australia and New Zealand, and they’re not all the same either, right? So, I would just say that what we’ve got here in America is a White American nation, which is Anglo in its language and law and many of its cultural elements, but is peopled by peoples from all over Europe who have increasingly blended together into a kind of blended White American identity. There is an Anglo-Canadian White identity, and then there’s the Franco-Canadian White identity. And a similar thing has happened in the southern cone of South America, too, and the creoles residing there.
VD: Right. But the point is that there is definitely a distinction between the more or less generic New World White and the European pan-nationals.
GJ: Oh, yeah, most definitely.
VD: So, that was the point I was trying to get across, because a lot of the American White Nationalists, quite understandably, are not as dialed in to Europe as you or I.
GJ: Exactly, and there’s a sense in which the concept of race is a threatening concept to ethnic nationalists, because it’s a universal thing. It’s almost universal. Well, it’s not universal, because there’s not one race, but it is a more generic notion than, say, a Frenchman. A Frenchman has to be White, but not every White person is a Frenchman, and when you start thinking, “Well, the only really important thing is Whiteness,” that actually undermines the distinct national identities of Europeans.
I gave a paper recently in New York called “Heidegger and Ethnic Nationalism,” and I was going to give a similar couple of talks in Europe this past weekend and next weekend, but I had to cancel because of an injury. But anyway, the basic argument there is that Heidegger was an ethnic nationalist. He thought the ethnic identity of the German people was a concrete, rooted historical identity, and he actually felt threatened by the biological race doctrines that the National Socialists were putting forward.
In one of his notebooks, he said, “They’re mistaking a necessary condition of German identity for a sufficient,” and, sure enough, as soon as that racialist thinking became more influential, the German National Socialists were starting to talk about assimilating other peoples into Germany. They went into Poland and they saw lots of attractive people, and they thought, “Well, we can assimilate a lot of the Polish population,” or “We can assimilate a lot of Ukrainians,” and they started intermarrying with them. Hitler flipped out about this when he found out about it and wanted to give out condoms to soldiers to stop this from happening. But the fact of the matter was the prominence of simply biological race thinking in their mentality undermined, or eventually was going to undermine, the national distinctness of the German people.
GJ: And Heidegger was threatened by that. So, when you just talk about White Nationalism and you start talking like Richard Spencer does about “an ethno-state” or “the ethno-state,” and he’s using it as a singular term for some kind of vast White sovereign entity that stretches all the way from Iceland to Vladivostok or something like that, that is just globalization and homogenization on a smaller scale, and all the European nationalists that I know say, “We veto that. That’s not what we want. We want out of the EU rather than making it something even bigger.”
VD: Exactly right. Speaking of being threatened and so forth, here’s a question, and it’s about Fash McQueen’s comment which you turned into an article. He said, “If this article had simply delineated our allies into separate, uniquely named movements instead of Alt Right tiers, this article would have become a must-share across the Alt Right and beyond, but as it stands any attempt to unfurl a big tent to engulf every potential ally and even enemy under the Alt Right brand must be mercilessly attacked.”
I’m not sure what the question is there, but maybe you can riff on that.
GJ: Yeah. Is that a quote from the piece? I don’t even remember. I published it, but I’ve edited thousands of words since then. Or is it somebody’s statement of what they think?
VD: No, he’s actually quoting the comment. I think what he’s asking about is that if we find it desirable, if we recognize the big tent of the Alt Right and we recognize there are different strains of it, why is there any need to mercilessly attack allies that happen to fall under the Alt Right brand?
GJ: Well, it depends on what you mean by “mercilessly attack,” first of all. If it means sending them gas chamber memes and things like that . . . I’m not for that. It could be wittily done, I suppose, but that’s not my style. My style is argument. Let’s mix it up.
VD: But we’re talking about that right here. I take your point about, dialectically speaking, Alt West is probably a sub-optimal term. It’s obviously just a more rhetorical term playing off and the stress being on Western civilization rather than the White race, per se, even though the White race is, as I have repeatedly reminded people, a necessary but not sufficient condition of Western civilization.
Here’s my point: we have these different strains. You and I don’t exactly see eye-to-eye with each other, we don’t see exactly eye-to-eye with Andrew Anglin, and there’s probably like ten other gradations that could be fit in there somewhere.
My perspective is that it is useful to describe all of them that are more or less in line with regard to the larger objective, to describe them as Alt Right and then to go ahead and label the various strains appropriately as they happen to fit. I’m not wedded to the term Alt White or anything else. It just flowed rather naturally and my point was to distinguish, respectfully — I use the term “swastika panties” when I’m not being respectful — these folks who are generally on the right side, but they’re not necessarily exactly who we are, and to be able to effectively label those folks and to describe those folks in shorthand, because we need to be able to talk about those distinctions for the same reason that you and I understand the difference between a Marxian socialist and a Fabian socialist.
VD: They’re both socialists, but they’re not the same, and so to me it’s useful to be able to refer intelligently via shorthand to these various strains of Alt Right thought. But the only problem is if you’ve got a small group that wants to say, “We’re the one true Alt Right, and no one else is Alt Right, and we’ll fight to the death anyone who says otherwise.” To me, that’s just pointless.
GJ: Well, I think the group that you’re referring to that sends out pictures of anime girls with swastika panties on . . . That’s what we would call the 1488 crowd or the Nazi Troll Army or things like that. I try to be productive in engaging with them, because a lot of them are quite young; they’re creative; they’re quite energetic and idealistic. Some of them are a little half-baked yet, and they need to learn how to take you as an opportunity rather than as a threat, because taking you as a threat doesn’t get them anywhere, whereas taking you as an opportunity does. And so that’s how I try to differentiate my approach to things from what I consider to be less productive approaches.
They have, I think, a non-productive approach. They want to purge people, but you can’t purge people because it’s a virtual movement. You can’t make people go away, because they can always set up another sock account or Web platform or whatever. You’ve got to win the argument, and that’s how I look at it.
But let’s go back to your list because there are a few more points on here that I think are good and worth discussing.
Point three: “Alt-White is neutral to hostile on Christianity. Alt-West is strongly pro-Christian, as it believes Christianity to be one of the three pillars of Western Civilization aka the historical Christendom. Pro-Christian includes, but does not require, actually being a Christian.”
What motivates that?
VD: I’m perfectly aware that a fair number of the Alt Right thinkers are not Christian, and not only not Christian but some of them are culturally Christian. They’re not Christians themselves, but they understand the Christian roots of the West and they want to maintain it. Others are actually much more atheistic and some even want to restore pagan Odinism and whatnot.
Someone asked, “Define what culturally Christian is.” A cultural Christian is someone who does not believe in Jesus Christ, or at least does not accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and savior, but understands that the West was predominantly founded on the principles and actions of people who did and generally support that. It’s the kind of person who doesn’t go to church but might give money to restore the cathedral in town.
GJ: Right. They celebrate Christmas but they don’t actually . . .
VD: They celebrate Christmas but not Jesus’ birth.
GJ: Right, exactly. They listen to Bach’s St. Matthew Passion, and it’s one of the myths that they think is constitutive of civilization, like the Greek myths as well.
GJ: It’s in their art. It’s in their architecture. Yeah. The way I would put it is simply this: I don’t think there’s any reason to make a distinction between Alt White and Alt West here. I would just say that within the White Nationalist world, there is a spectrum between people who are hostile to Christianity, people who are neutral (or culturally Christian, whatever), and people who are fervently Christian, because I know people who fit all of those descriptions.
So, I would just say that there’s no reason to say that there’s a fundamental distinction of categories there. There’s just a spectrum of religious . . .
VD: Yeah, that’s fair except for the fact that I would say that I think that the section that is most hostile to Christianity is . . . It’s not a problem, because frankly I think it’s irrelevant, but they don’t understand Western civilization enough to be actively supportive of it. However, it doesn’t concern me, because they’ve got their hearts in the right place with regard to at least one of the other three constituent components.
VD: I’m not sure I manage to get this across to people, but my idea was not to create some sort of hostility or divisiveness between Alt White and Alt West, but rather to assure the Alt White strain of the Alt Right that the Alt West supports them.
VD: We don’t agree with them and we’re not with them on every issue, but the idea is, “Look, we want to respect your brand.”
VD: Even some of the folks who have shown up on my blog arguing very vociferously against the concept of the Alt West, even they understand that it is potentially a larger movement.
VD: It has a lot more potential to it because there are a lot more people who are willing to say, “I want Western civilization to survive” than “I’m concerned about White babies.”
VD: So, I view the two strains, as I see it, of the Alt Right as being as complementary as a right hand and left hand, because the Alt West needs the Alt White. They need somebody supporting and focusing on the survival of the White race. That’s why I specifically included the 14 Words, because I think that is an absolutely crucial component. Again, if you read Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations, it’s very clear that Western civilization is not going to survive without White people. We know from Liberia that you can send the magic words over to Africa and you’re not going to get America.
VD: But, by the same token, every single serious civilizational scholar has said that the primary component of a major civilization is a religion. Western civilization is not going to survive without its constituent religion, which is Christianity.
The way that I look at it is that Alt West is a superset of Alt White. With this religious gradient that you talk about, there is some potential contradiction there, but again, I don’t see that as very significant because frankly, nobody is going to be running around sacrificing slave girls to Odin.
GJ: Right. So, number four: “Alt-White is neutral to hostile on Israel. Alt-West is pro-Israel, as it supports all nationalist homelands.”
I was reading this and thinking that by all accounts, by all public opinion — if you pull two out of three people, especially at The Daily Stormer — I think people would say, “I’m Alt White, but really, the way you’re setting it up, I’m Alt West.”
I’m not pro-Israel in the sense that I think that . . . Well, put it this way: I don’t favor their continued relationship towards the United States on present terms, where basically they’re the tail that wags the dog, and they control our foreign policy, but the existence of a Jewish state, a Jewish homeland is a consistent application of ethnonationalism.
Years ago, I wrote a piece that got me a bit of flak called “White Nationalism and Jewish Nationalism” where I lay that out. I want there to be a state of Israel, because I want Jews to actually live there.
VD: Right, and what’s funny is that your position as you expressed it there is exactly identical to the position of Martin van Creveld, who is the Israeli military historian that we publish at Castalia House.
VD: Your position, I’m pretty sure, is almost identical to Netanyahu’s position in the sense that he’s come out publically and told the French Jews, “It’s time to come to Israel.”
VD: Now, here’s the thing that I don’t understand about the hardcore Alt White that just hates Jews with a passion. I understand that you don’t want them ruling over you. You don’t want them making all your movies and controlling all the money and that sort of thing. That’s completely legitimate. Nobody in their right mind does want that. But if you don’t want them living with you and ruling over you, they’ve got to go somewhere and do something.
VD: And Israel is where their people have made their homeland, and so it seems to me that you ought to join with the crazy Christian Zionists and help them. In fact, I actually suspect that a lot of the freaking out about the Alt White or the White Nationalists on the part of Jews is almost entirely on the part of American Jews.
GJ: Oh yeah, of course.
VD: The Israelis are self-confident. They’re not paranoid all the time like the American Jews are.
GJ: Yeah. Well, diaspora Jews want to have it both ways. They want to have a homeland that they can run to if things get tight . . .
VD: But they want to pray the prayer of St. Augustine: “Oh Lord, help me be holy, but not today.”
GJ: Not today. Yeah, exactly. I think that they need to be nudged towards Jerusalem. How about this year in Jerusalem rather than next year in Jerusalem? I would like to see that happen.
And I do have to say, Vox, I do appreciate some of the very, very clear and tough-minded stuff that you said in just recent memory on your blog about the Jewish Question. I very much appreciated it. A lot of it was very well put and very quotable, and I’ve been sharing it with people. So, thank you!
VD: You’re welcome. The thing that I think people don’t understand is that there are Jews that I’m close to, there are Jews that I like, there are Jews that I would happily take a bullet for, because they’re my friends, and I know them, and I have excellent reason to trust them. They have proven themselves worthy of trust beyond any shadow of a doubt.
But they’re not the Jews that have been fucking over the American money supply at the Federal Reserve. They’re not the ones who are trying to get America to fight their wars and that sort of thing.
I didn’t know any Jews at all until I got to college. I grew up in Minnesota. But one thing that always bothered me tremendously was why were there Jews being parachuted in from New York in order to become the Senator from Minnesota?
VD: To me, that was the first time I asked what you might call the Jewish Question. I’m visibly different than most of these Germans and Scandinavians. My family was clearly not, either. So, I’m sitting there thinking, “Why are both of our senators Jewish? And how does this Nick Coleman guy, who used to be a Democrat but now he’s a Republican . . .” You know, the whole thing was quite clearly somebody being set up for this office, which he did successfully take.
Here’s the thing that people tend to forget, Americans and Europeans tend to forget that the issue that Whites have with the diaspora Jews is exactly the same issue that the Indonesians have with the Chinese. There are multiple, multiple examples, especially in Asia, of exactly the same issue of a small, self-interested elite ruling over a much larger majority of native people, and the whole thing ending badly for that minority.
GJ: Oh, yes, most definitely. It happened in Indonesia; it happened in Malaysia.
VD: Right. So, it’s possible for us to both strengthen our case and to reduce the emotional rhetorical heat by making it a general point rather than something that is specifically focused on targeting highly sensitive people who are likely to overreact to something that is actually quite perfectly sensible.
VD: Greg, we’ve got a question here that D’Marcus wants to ask with his mic. Let me find him here. Hang on a second. There we are. This interface is a little bit awkward. D’Marcus, your microphone is on. Go ahead and fire away.
D’Marcus Liebowitz: Well, I was just going to say that the reality is that Israel relies on the diaspora to influence other nations into supporting Israel, and also a lot of diaspora Jews gain a lot of wealth from these nations and use that to buttress Israel. Without that mutually reinforcing relationship, Israel would certainly face a difficult task in existing going forward.
I think most Israeli Jews realize this and desire it to continue. In fact, the World Jewish Congress, when they have meetings they give presentations about what proportions of Jews should live outside Israel for this exact purpose.
So, I’m just wondering what you guys would have to say on that in the context of what you had just said earlier, Vox.
VD: Go ahead, Greg. I’ll take it second.
GJ: Well, yeah, clearly this is an advantageous relationship for Israel, and they’re concerned to maintain Jewish communities around the world. If anything, just to keep an eye on us.
Years ago, somebody told me about a chapter of the Caledonian Society in North Carolina, which is like a Scottish cultural group, and he showed up to a Caledonian Society event, and who was there amongst all the Scots-descended people of North Carolina and the mountains but a couple of Hungarian Jews. Apparently they were just there to monitor things, right? They do like to do that. They like to insert themselves in other societies and other groups, especially other ethnically-defined things, just to make sure it doesn’t get out of hand.
I think that is clearly part of their strategy, and I think this is why one has to create incentives for them to up stakes and go to Israel. And I do think that ultimately, yeah, in the short run it would be tougher for Israel because, for one thing, they’d couldn’t be such bad neighbors without the United States paying the bills. They’d have to be better neighbors and better people, and in the long run I think that would be good for them and it would be good for the world.
The dream that Herzl talked about was to make the Jews a normal nation rather than a nation that essentially occupied a parasitic economic niche. He was quite open about that. I loved Yoav Shamir’s movie Defamation, where he was talking to his ninety-something-year-old grandmother, and she was going on, and I thought, “My God, she sounds like me!” She was going on about, “These Jews, they don’t like to work. They like to make loans and sell liquor. They’re parasites. They need to come here and get a life!” And I thought, “Yes! That’s exactly right.” But that is, actually, the Zionist critique of diaspora Jewry.
DL: May I interject here for a second?
VD: Go ahead.
DL: Well, I was just going to say that due to America’s near-perfect, near-sublime geography and its technological advancement and so forth, Israel really relies on American support going forward, and it has for their survival so far. I don’t think it would be better off for them in the long run, because, if you look at the UN Security Council, without the lone single vote from America, it is possible that they would have gone the way of apartheid South Africa.
You might think it’s unfortunate. Frankly, I don’t care, because I identify as White. I think that what’s good for us is actually bad for them, and I think they’re right about that.
VD: It depends on your perspective. Obviously, I’ve talked to this with several of my Jewish friends now. To put it in perspective, we’re talking about people like Martin van Creveld or people who are on his level. People that are highly intelligent, strategic, historically-educated thinkers and they, to a man, believe that the position of the World Jewish Congress is insane and ultimately dangerous to Israel. One of them even said, in an interesting choice of phrases, “The diaspora Jews are willing to fight until the last drop of Israeli blood,” which is obviously a take on the American perspective.
I do suspect that the Israelis who, like Netanyahu, want to bring all the Jews to the homeland . . . Or at least he’s called for the French ones. I don’t think he’s called for the American ones, probably for the reason that you suggested, D’Marcus. I think that they understand that sooner or later, Israel is going to have to stand on its own two feet. I know there are an increasing number of Israelis who believe that the dependence on the US is dangerous, because they know it’s not going to continue forever.
So, anyhow, that’s my perspective on it. I think that possibly what we’re talking about is you’re talking about the existing position, whereas I’m talking about what their future position is going to have to be, because they’re already trying to figure out what to do after the US economy crashes and the US political situation changes.
DL: Well, there are already institutions in Israel that are actually based in Israel that are lobbying Hispanic organizations in America, and I don’t necessarily believe that just because the country is going to become less White that there will necessarily be less support for Israel. Just to use Oakland, California as a microcosm, it’s a super-majority combination of Black and Hispanic, and who’s the mayor of Oakland? It’s a Jewish woman.
VD: Yeah, but that’s all ending. There was a Jewish representative in Minneapolis for forty-four years, and she just got turfed out by the Somalis, and the Somalis don’t give a shit about Israel, the Jews, the Holocaust, anything. All they care about is advancing Somali interests.
DL: That’s a specifically Muslim population, but when you have a very atomized collection of different minorities, it’s easier to make it productive for yourself if you’re a small, influential minority like Jews.
VD: It is until things shift to sufficient identity politics, when people are only willing to support their own, and that’s when I think that things are going to shift. But anyhow, thanks for the question. That was good.
Do you want to continue on to the next point, Greg?
GJ: Yes, let’s do that. We’ve already sort of covered point five: “Alt-White is hostile to very hostile to all Jews everywhere. Alt-West is friendly to Israeli Jews while hostile to globalist Jews and anti-nationalist Jews.”
I think there’s a spectrum of opinion there.
Point six: “Alt-White has a romantic view of National Socialism. Alt-West regards it as a suicidally stupid but semiotically useful form of German nationalism.”
I think there’s a wide spectrum of opinion between those extremes. I call myself a New Rightist because I want to distinguish myself from the old Right. By the old Right, I am basically talking about inter-war fascist movements in Europe and their particular strategies for gaining and keeping power. I don’t think their model of politics works in the post-war world, and I think we need to have a New Right, and the New Right basically recognizes that we’re ruled not by hard Leninist totalitarianism, but by a soft kind of totalitarianism that has created a hegemony in our society by basically leaving pluralistic institutions intact, but then simply hollowing them out and colonizing them so that all the options are basically forms of Jewish-approved Leftist values. That’s happened to the Right in America as well as the Left.
To combat that, we really need to combat the hegemony of Leftist values and create a counter-hegemony of pro-White values. So, that’s how I look at it.
Point seven: “Alt-White is neutral to pro-white imperialism. Alt-West is anti-imperialism, as it regards imperialism as being societally enervating and self-destructive.”
Again, I’ve said this many times. When people defend imperialism and colonialism, they’re basically saying that they’re not above a little theft and murder when it suits them. And I just don’t think that’s going to fly in a world where White people are not going to be running things again anymore. We’re not going to be running the whole world. We’re not going to be running Africa. We’re not going to be running Asia. We have to come to a recognition of that, and it contradicts the basic principle of ethnic nationalism, which is that different peoples need their own homelands and autonomy. So, I’m not an imperialist. I’m an anti-imperialist. That’s what nationalism for me is all about.
I know that in Europe, a lot of times national patriotism is immediately connected with “the Empire,” so the most patriotic Britons look fondly upon the British Empire. I just say, “Look, I understand it was a great story, but the story has two chapters. Chapter Two is the fact that you have been colonized by the detritus of your own damned Empire. And it’s not that glorious when you look at it in a full picture.”
VD: One of the commenters just said, “Look what imperialism and colonialism have done to us.” Even from a race-mixing point of view . . .
GJ: It was always bad.
VD: The aforementioned van Creveld wrote a brilliant essay that we published in There Will Be War, Vol. 10 called “Migration and War,” and one of the things he mentioned was that after World War Two, one million war brides were brought home.
VD: Despite the fact that there are a lot of neo-imperialists, or at least they talk like neo-imperialists . . . And I’m perfectly willing to say that maybe there is no distinction between Alt White and Alt West. Maybe we all understand across the Alt Right that neo-imperialism is a stupid and self-destructive thing for the White Nationalists to pursue.
GJ: Yeah, definitely. We don’t even control our own homelands, and it just seems absurd and grandiose to start talking about controlling other people’s homelands as well.
VD: Right. So, maybe that’s not actually a good distinction between Alt White and Alt West. Maybe we need to make it clear to people that across the Alt Right, we are anti-imperialist and anti-colonialist because of that Chapter Two that you described.
GJ: Yeah, and I would say that ninety-five percent of the people that I talk to about these sorts of things are pretty much on board with that attitude.
VD: Okay. That’s good to know. Again, when I put these together, I’m usually trying not to be prescriptive. I’m trying to be descriptive of what I see other people saying, but I don’t see what everybody’s saying and I don’t see everything, and even the people I pay attention to, I’ve not necessarily seen everything they’ve ever said or written.
GJ: Right. It’s a heuristic, right? It’s to get issues out there and it’s provided a great pretext for discussing this stuff. So, in that it’s quite successful.
VD: Do we have any more points or was that the last one?
GJ: That was number seven. That was the last one.
VD: Okay. Good. I write these things and have no idea.
GJ: I’m like that, too. I write so much stuff, and I edit so much stuff, that I get it out there, and if I’m really, really busy I’ll labor for a while on something, publish it, and then a year later I’ll stumble across it, and I’ll be shocked. I wrote this, and I did not even enter that fact into my long-term memory.
VD: You know, it was funny. I actually wanted to quit writing fiction after I was talking to John C. Wright one day, and he wrote this brilliant short story called “The Parliament of Beasts and Birds.” It’s a fantastic story. One of the best short stories I’ve ever read. I asked him about it and he said, “What are you talking about?” I said, “You know, the short story with the end of man and the animals are talking about the city.” And he said, “I really don’t know what you’re talking about.” I finally got him to realize . . . It turns out it was a story that he had just dashed off one day, threw on his blog, and forgot about. And it was so much better than anything I’d ever written, and he didn’t even remember writing it. It just makes you want to quit!
VD: So, here’s a question for you: “In your opinion and to the best of your knowledge, how many White Nationalists have read and how many agree with The Turner Diaries?”
GJ: Too many. I won’t give you a number on that or a guesstimate, but I will give you a judgment. I think too many people have read that book, and I think it’s had a negative impact, because it’s a kind of jejune, Leninist, race war fantasy. It’s very old Right. Objectively, it’s Leninist in its model of politics.
VD: Right doesn’t even sound like the right description.
“Which country is most likely to have the first Alt Right government?”
GJ: Gosh, it’s looking like Hungary already does, you know, the more I hear from Viktor Orbán. This guy, he’s already on our page.
VD: And he’s the moderate.
GJ: And he’s the moderate. Yeah.
VD: That’s the incredible thing.
GJ: The Fidesz party has basically coopted all the principles of Jobbik except for the dumb things that Jobbik talks about, like Greater Hungary, returning to the borders of 1919, which, I’m sorry, is not going to happen because those borders included basically all of Croatia and big chunks of other countries, Slovakia . . . It’s not going to happen.
VD: Do you really want the Bosniaks?
GJ: Yeah, it would be crazy to do that. And also their Turanism. This mythical history that somehow they’re related to the Turks in a real way because of their language. Those things are kind of retarded, actually, and those things have been jettisoned, and all the really sound stuff that Jobbik stands for has already been not just taken, but a lot of it has been enacted by Fidesz.
VD: Well, that might be a good lesson for some of the more extreme, small-tent elements of the Alt Right to keep in mind. The more that you insist on clinging to every little last thing, no matter how crazy, the more likely it is that you’re just going to be superseded by people who are a bit more reasonable.
GJ: Yeah, but they’re still there as a pressure group at the same time.
GJ: So, they exercise a Rightward pull, which counters the moderating influences of politics as usual.
VD: Actually, somebody said, “A Croatian friend of mine speaks highly of Orbán. They might volunteer.”
GJ: Right. Well, yeah, but the Croatians don’t want to go back to the old system where if you wanted to be a clerk in the town hall of your Croatian town, you had to learn Hungarian, which is a very difficult language to learn.
GJ: The Hungarians exercised a kind of petty, little tyranny over the Croatians as part of their relationship in the hierarchy of the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
VD: Right. Here’s a question for you: “How does Mr. Johnson compare the Alt West and the Alt White in terms of their relative size, age, growth potential, and organizational power?”
GJ: Well, I don’t think the distinction holds up that tightly, and so I’m not really sure, but I would say that what you’re calling Alt White here, I think that tends to be the younger crowd, the Nazi Troll Army, and groups like that. So, they’re young, they’re brash, and they are plastic, though, in a good sense. They’re malleable. They’re educable. They’ll change over time.
In terms of age, I think people who are more in my camp, and that includes a lot of stuff that is being described here as Alt West, New Rightists, White Nationalist types, I think they tend to be a little bit older, but the overall movement is getting younger and younger on average, and I think that’s a really important thing.
VD: Well, I think there’s a good reason for it, and it’s something I’ve noticed, too, over here. Obviously, I’m at the age where my kids are teenagers, and because I play on a football club, I’m around anyone from fourteen to twenty-five age, because our old guys’ team practices at the same time as two of the other teams. What’s really interesting is that they are far, far to the Right of people our age.
VD: And the reason is that for us, the whole concept of being a minority is still kind of abstract. Yes, we know about it, we know about the invasion, but in our day-to-day lives, especially if you’re upper middle class, you just don’t really see it that much other than when you’re walking through the city or something. But for the younger generation, it’s something they deal with all the time. They’re the ones who might actually get beaten up by an immigrant, they might get jumped. We’ve got friends who got jumped by some immigrants who had crossed the border at school. So, for us, the issues tend to be much more abstract. For the younger generation, they’re much more visceral and they’re much more personal, and so I think that is one reason why they will tend to be more extreme than older people like you and I.
GJ: Yeah. There was a poll I saw cited about millennials in Hungary, and seventy-five percent of millennials support either Jobbik or Fidesz, the two major Right-wing parties.
GJ: And there are other Right-wing parties as well. I didn’t see the breakdown with the other Right-wing parties, but it has to be close to eighty percent of millennials in Hungary are Right of center, and that’s astonishing. And you have a similar pattern in Poland, too. So, I think that’s very hopeful. Those countries, I think, will survive, although they are very, very clear when they say, “You know, we can’t survive as little isolated islands if the rest of Europe is destroyed,” so they want to make sure that Europe saves itself. They very much want to do that.
VD: Right. Here’s a comment: “I found that when I avoided using the term ‘White’ and used the term ‘European,’ people are more interested and agree to White Nationalist and Alt Right principles. Is that better rhetoric?”
GJ: It depends on your audience, really.
VD: Yeah. I think that’s probably quite effective in America. Again, because of the European Union, I think that would be much less effective, but “White” is not effective, either. In Europe, it tends to work better just to say, “Scotland for the Scots, Germany for the Germans, Catalunya for the Catalonians . . .”
It’s kind of remarkable. You are obviously aware of it, but I don’t think many Americans are aware of how secessionist the European peoples are becoming. Most people couldn’t tell you what Catalonia is, but I’ve been over there several times in the last few years. They absolutely want their independence from Spain. They do not consider themselves to be Spanish. All the signs are now in Catalonian. Sometimes it’s in both Spanish and Catalonian, which is kind of funny, because to somebody that doesn’t speak either, like me, they look almost identical.
VD: Every sign is like, “Stop, Stop.”
GJ: Yes, exactly.
VD: The first time I saw it I didn’t realize what it was.
GJ: They really want you to stop!
VD: I said, “You guys are really into redundancy here, aren’t you?” And they said, “No, that’s Catalonian and the other one is Spanish.” I was like, “It’s the same word!” And they said, “Well, yes, but it’s the principle.”
GJ: Yeah. And more power to them. I am delighted every time a European people achieves its independence, especially if they do it in a peaceful way. This is why I was really rooting for Scottish independence, just to lay precedents.
GJ: The more precedents you have of peaceful separation along ethnic lines in sovereign states the better. The Czech and Slovak Velvet Divorce is a great model, but I’d like to see more of those.
VD: Absolutely. I couldn’t agree more.
“What should the Alt Right do to keep growing in both the Anglosphere and Europe? Are we at another stage of development yet, such as building alternate platforms, etcetera?”
GJ: I think that we just need to be doing the same things that we’ve been doing and watch the system continue to make own-goals. I mean catastrophic mistakes like what Merkel has done, like putting up with Black Lives Matter and pandering to that kind of sheer insanity and disorder. All of that works in our favor.
Yes, we need to keep building platforms, we need to do more podcasts, but the big thing we need to do to grow is money. We need to get access to large amounts of money. We’ve all been doing this practically as hobbyists. There are very few full-time people in the United States doing this. I am one of a handful of people that I know who does this full-time.
When I first started, I had the feeling that I needed to clone myself, that there needed to be two mes in order to get everything done that I could conceive of doing. I was talking to a friend on Monday, and now I am at the point where I could conceive of an entire army of people to do the stuff that I think needs to be done, because there are so many opportunities. We just need the money to make that happen.
VD: Right, but it’s ironic that people worry about entryism from Milo or from me or something, but that’s probably the most dangerous one of all.
GJ: What? Money?
VD: Money, yeah. Because wherever the money comes from, usually they’re going to want to call the shots, too.
GJ: Oh, yeah. Yeah. And for me it’s always been a struggle. There have been a couple of donors who have come to me with significant amounts of money, and it’s like, “Well, thank you very much, but you have to understand that I’m treating this as an endorsement of exactly what I’m doing now, and this is not going to be a tool for you to start wheedling me into changing the direction in which Counter-Currents is going. So, I will accept this on the assumption that this is an endorsement rather than the opening move in some sort of campaign to change the direction of the Website.” And so far I’ve had no problems with that, but I keep it like that. Cut and dry.
VD: The point is that you’re aware of it. And yeah, it’s always potentially an issue, especially in this day, when the money is just being cranked out of the money factory at the Fed.
One last question, then: “In your opinion, would it be better to simply use the term Alt Right for everything? Do you think it would be better to have more labels of more strains and gradations rather than less?” What’s your opinion on that? Are terms like Alt White and Alt West even useful, or are they irrelevant, or are they even potentially destructive, as some people have claimed?
GJ: My attitude is that I’m happy to have the term Alt Right being a fairly broad umbrella term, but when people really want to get specific about things, then I would say, “Well, I would describe myself as a White Nationalist in terms of my goals and I would describe myself as a New Rightist in terms of my overall strategy for getting there.” So, whenever the broadness of the term seems threatening, you just get specific and concrete, and that tends to dispel the possible problems.
VD: Fair enough. Great. Well, Greg, thank you so much for your time. It’s always a pleasure to talk with you and definitely always interesting. One of these days we’re going to have to get into the whole Christianity and Western civilization thing, because I’m sure we have a lot to talk about there, but given how long we’ve already gone, I don’t think we have time to do that tonight.
Oh, one last question, if you don’t mind.
VD: What is your opinion about Donald Trump?
GJ: Well, I want Donald Trump to become the next President of the United States. I think that this is the most crucial election in the United States in my lifetime. I think that if Trump gets in, he will build a wall, and he will cut off immigration from south of the border. He might just end up doing a moratorium on immigration altogether. I think he’s going to have to do that if he wants to stop it from the Muslim world in particular. And I think that will give White America maybe a couple of decades of breathing space.
If Hillary Clinton gets in, she’s going to legalize and sign up for welfare and citizenship thirty million illegals, if not more, and that will really be the end of any hope for saving White America as a unit through electoral politics, and then we would have to go to Plan B, and Plan B is basically thinking about coming up with new sovereign entities in North America after the breakdown of this multicultural monstrosity, which she just wants to drive forward to its logical extremity.
So, I want him to get elected. I think he is a civic nationalist, not a White Nationalist, of course, but he likes a lot of things that we want, and so I think that if he keeps his promises, he’s going to advance us further down the road to where we can get closer to our goals. So, yeah, I’m a big Trump booster. I’m praying the guy is going to win.
Ask me about God after the election, okay. I might have a completely different attitude then.
VD: Great answer! Well, Greg, thanks again. Just to let everyone know, our intention is to get a recording of this to Greg, and I believe he’ll convert that into a podcast at some point in time. So, thanks very much, Greg, and thanks to all of you for coming, and have a good evening!
Remembering Martin Heidegger:
September 26, 1889–May 26, 1976
Remembering T. S. Eliot:
September 26, 1888–January 4, 1965
Counter-Currents Radio Podcast No. 372 Greg Johnson, Jim Goad, & Thomas Steuben on America’s Decline
Remembering Charles Krafft: September 19, 1947–June 12, 2020
Remembering Francis Parker Yockey: September 18, 1917–June 16, 1960
Is Nicki Minaj Super Bass-ed?
Counter-Currents Radio Podcast No. 370 Greg Johnson, Mark Gullick, & Stephen Paul Foster Ponder The Deep Questions
David Duke’s Bottle of Red Pills