Counter-Currents
2,387 words
With the recent firing of James Comey, the Trump-driven media cycle is complete and the inability of the Alt Right to grasp geopolitical leadership has become apparent.
In this article, I will put forward why I think the Syrian missile strike was A Good Thing, and why the Alt Right reaction was not merely self-defeating, but actually exposed critical flaws within the movement. The extreme negativity in response to the Syria strike was, at its peak, ridiculous, and showed a brittle inability to compromise with reality.
Trump has always been a one-way man-crush for the Alternative Right. Like a beta orbiter fuming in his bedroom that a girl who is only dimly aware of him has “betrayed” him by acting on her own initiative and taking someone else to the prom, the “Honeymoon is definitely over” (Mike Enoch’s phrase) is only of the Alt Right’s volition. The Honeymoon is only over insofar as the Alt Right has read motivations into Trump’s Syria strike that are purely speculative and likely do not exist. The Alt Right can only remain TrumpTrain passengers, able to pile on weight to increase momentum, but not much else. So why bail now, so early into his Presidency?
The one-way, ideologically blinkered rationale that Trump has bent the knee to the “kikes” is an allegation born of circumstance. However, Trump cannot afford ideology. He is the President of the United States, and Richard Spencer is an otherwise unemployed activist. Trump has responsibilities that are formalized by holding office, and the figures of the Alt Right are able to freewheel and dispense speculation and ideology as they please. Trump was elected to MAGA, not to immediately force through an isolationist agenda because it suits the Alt Right’s prejudices and one-track thinking. Trump, according to TRS, Spencer, and Counter-Currents (I don’t keep up with the Stormer) has betrayed his loyal fans and acquiesced to Israeli influence. I don’t believe he has done any such thing, and now that the last debris of the last Hebrew Hammers has been swept away, I think it is clear that the Alt Right’s hysterics have been totally premature and unjustified.
Let us consider some geopolitical realities. The United States is a maritime power whose strength is primarily projected through its allies. The only reason it can rack up trillions of dollars in debt is because of the strength of the petrodollar, which BRICS and those in their spheres of influence have been gradually building the infrastructure and alliances to circumvent. The dollar and the stability of NATO and North America as an economic whole is constantly under direct threat of being knocked off the perch of world leadership by a multipolar alliance. The Alternative Right is also blinkered to the point of idiocy if it believes that the subsequent economic stagnation and eventual collapse would be to its benefit. Should the West’s standing on the world stage diminish to the point of dollar and euro irrelevance – two currencies wedded on a multi-tier cake of military adventurism, arms sales, and technical innovation – the Alt Right would likely succumb to retrograde paramilitary, revolutionary fanatics, and get utterly smashed in a failed stab against “ZOG.” For those that read the Saker, who rail against “AngloZionists,” the good news is that we are the AngloZionists. The only reason a few of us are able to support ourselves through Web readership and Alt Right pursuits is because military dominance keeps the lights on.
I subscribe strongly to the narrative that Syrian intervention is “another pipeline war” based on securing Middle Eastern real estate to allow for a Qatari-Turkish natural gas pipeline to be built through western Syria that would in turn feed central Europe and the UK. The UK produces roughly half its own natural gas, with about forty percent coming from Europe. Russia, in turn, supplies Europe with between thirty to forty percent of its natural gas. It’s a big chunk. From 2010 until 2015, we (Brits) had a string of very hard winters that pushed us almost to the point of the gas running out entirely. Only about a fifth of our gas comes through liquefied natural gas tankers due to the prohibitive cost, likely chiefly from Qatar, the world’s top LNG exporter. This is a measure of necessity to stop our pensioners freezing to death in the winter months. The cost and supply of energy is critical to geopolitical independence and quality of life for anyone in the world, and especially Brits and Scots. Winter Fuel Allowance for pensioners appears as a pledge in every UK political party manifesto.
Access to Qatari gas is a very real concern in the UK as it breaks a dependence on Russian supplies – a country that has struck at Europe’s heart before, and considers Eastern European states to be de facto Russian property by virtue of its military reach and former colonization. This aside, UK arms sales are essential to retaining the industrial capacity needed to maintain the ability to project power worldwide. Guns, aircraft, and aircraft maintenance and expertise go to Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and understandably they want pipeline access to the European gas market in return. These sales sustain the US-UK coalition of arms manufacture that would otherwise be overtaken by Sino-Russian cooperation.
Trump is pursuing this and making deals. He is bringing billions to the US and protecting Western European coalition partners, and getting the Saudis their pipeline, or at least encouraging them to think so, which is essential to closing arms deals. Aside from expensive planes, the United States, at least until Trump brings back Apple manufacturing, makes . . . nothing. Without these arms sales, the human capital in the industry dissipates and doesn’t come back, by which time our nations would be even further behind than we already are in the critical game of electronic warfare.
Investment in future platforms for conventional and emerging fifth-generation warfare should be seen as critical. Demographic warfare is not the only warfare, and the Alt Right needs to understand that should our nations find themselves unable to fight a conventional war against longstanding rivals, then whites in the West will be jeopardized. The relative financial security of the West is not a given and comes at the expense of alliance-building and military investment.
The Qatari pipeline was stumped by Assad, which triggered the flow of both lethal and non-lethal aid from Western powers into Syria in support of “moderate rebels,” including ISIS’ iconic Toyota Hilux trucks (distributed through NGO cover groups), satellite phones, medical supplies, and wire-guided TOW missiles – a real pick-and-mix of goodies for the organ-munching Syrian opposition. Obama allowed the Russians to play him and removed the “chemical weapons” pretext for intervention by making a deal with Assad, and the UN supervised the destruction of the Syrian stockpiles, thus illustrating that he cared little for the blood and treasure that had been spent in Iraq to secure US-UK stability in years to come.
At this point, readers are probably disgusted with me for being sympathetic to multi-billion dollar/pound arms companies and their (our) strategic partners in the Middle East. But consider.
Before the Tomahawk strike was launched, the White House was in confusion about what their policy on Syria was, and it was generally agreed that the United States would abandon its strategic interests and slink away, allowing Russia to militarize Syria and escalate its sales of air defense systems off the back of that, and bring those around it – China, Iran, and India – deeper into cooperation.
Having shown that the US lacked the will to fight, applying pressure on China to cooperate on trade would be a non-starter. The Chinese Premier was present for the strikes for the specific reason of showing that Trump would no longer allow Russian expansionism and creating a stranglehold on the European gas market.
A Syria led by Assad that has defeated ISIS and settled into peace is also no friend to the West, having established military independence through cooperation with Moscow and become a no-fly zone to it. And what to do with the literally millions of “refugees” who have travelled through the region to arrive on Europe’s doorstep? There is no reason to think that Assad would welcome these people back, given that they opted to Syrexit. He could simply refuse to take them. Then where would these displaced peoples go? And in what way could he be made to accept them?
The “red line” in the region has nothing to do with chemical weapons. It’s the red line where Russian expansion sabotages trade deals that could otherwise be negotiated. Assad has been put under enormous pressure by Putin to remain stable and refuse the West, otherwise Russia’s economic mainstay would suffer. Yes, Russian and Iranian gas might be cheaper, and yes, the Turks might be trying their damned best to demographically destroy us, even as they fund our aerospace industry by enlisting the UK to develop their planes. But the Turks don’t supply the Taliban with IEDs to blow up British soldiers. Russia does.
The Alt Right, especially its American mainstay, is in a malaise. Since the Syria strikes, its intellectual leaders have been licking their wounds and feeling sorry for themselves that Trump would (seemingly) listen to The Jew (((Kushner))) instead of their unrealistic, principles-first American isolationism policy.
I have every sympathy for those who want peace. But there is nothing I detest more than peaceniks – those who refuse to acknowledge that life is a struggle, and that sometimes war is necessary to secure future prosperity, or even basic survival. Without Middle Eastern wars on the neocon hitlist, American hegemony is threatened, and our “way of life” – read: First World luxury – is directly threatened. There is a reason these wars are waged, and that reason isn’t simply “the Jews.” A tangential, correlating benefit does not translate into a direct cause. To imply that (((ethnocentric networking))) is responsible for all our military adventurism and interventionism is to flatly deny that we have any autonomy at all, and to reason oneself into a position of revolutionary fervor. There is no way a collapse of our energy security or arms industries helps us. The Alt Right has been throwing a tantrum over principles of non-interventionism, and the death of Syrian brown people who are alleged not to matter to us anyway.
Trump, exploiting a shock-horror video produced for this explicit purpose, undid the legacy of Obama’s weakness and willingness to make a losing compromise in the face of determined opposition. The cost of the Tomahawk missiles that were launched is nothing in comparison to the money saved by securing a multi-billion dollar arms deal by checking Russian advancement in the region. Through a single decisive act, Trump has set America back on a course for military dominance through being agile, volatile, and assertive in our interests. He has brought jobs to America, restored American hegemony, and shored up the normie vote. This has all been accomplished without putting a single white American soldier in the Middle East or committing to a quagmire and eventual meat grinder of “bringing democracy” through occupation. Trump has capitalized on this win and swiftly pursued greater gains by leaning on North Korea, and the Chinese are now applying pressure to the Norks independently to end their nuclear program, all by using assets the US already has, and all with the minimum loss of life.
It is probably in Trump’s interest to distance himself from the Alt Right and collaborate with the deep state and media agencies to a degree to end the continual media hounding that threatens to make his a one-term Presidency. The same news agencies that were breathlessly reporting on a Tomahawk strike against a Russian ally a few weeks ago are now trying to revive their Russian Connection narrative. While not yet humiliated, they are floundering and on the back foot. The deep state, enlisted in the Tomahawk strike, probably thought they could count on Trump as one of their own. But Comey’s firing puts them on the back foot also, and proves that they have not assimilated him. Those in Camp Clinton are probably looking over their shoulders, as the possibility remains that they can now be fired without warning. The stage for this was set with the Syria strike, a firm statement that he is acting in America’s interest, not Russia’s.
The Alt Right grew from recognizing demographic realities. But there are geopolitical realities that cannot be simply ignored or dismissed as Jewish manipulation. As a politically immature movement, the Alt Right bailed on Trump before the results of the strike had shaken out. Political leadership and international bullying to ensure compliance requires constant camouflage, shapeshifting, deal-cutting, and pressing tactical advantages.
Plenty of ink has been spilled about how the United States has reduced Europe to “vassal states,” but the Alt Right is an Anglospherian entity, cross-pollinated and in cooperation with the European New Right. This is who we are. Our culture is parallel to our international cooperation.
When Richard Spencer took to the streets with a megaphone to protest against Trump, he betrayed a political animal who has done more than anyone else to make America aware of Richard Spencer. He also painted himself into a corner as a peacenik, someone on the cultural fringe with an anti-state ideology who is prepared to sacrifice America’s interests for his own sensibilities. When Mike Enoch knee-jerkingly reacted that the Alt Right’s tenure in Trumpian politics was “fucking over,” he signaled to TRS listeners that the Alt Right is not prepared to compromise with reality, not prepared to deal with, enter, or negotiate with existing power structures, existing alliances, or really existing facts on the ground about who the hell buys American products, and what has to be done to deliver the trade deals, the winning, and the great quality of life that he promised.
Trump is now in a position to accelerate his brand of implicitly white civic nationalism, with acquiescence from the deep state that he is not going to compromise the vital national security interest whilst doing so. Like the MOAB (Mother of All Blessings), the Tomahawk strike flattened the opposition – domestically and internationally. Trump has set policy, set leadership, and established dominance with effectively zero cost. The Syria strike was a win, and America is winning again.
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
73 comments
Your analysis is very interesting and certainly more geopolitically astute than most others I’ve seen from the Alt Right. However, with all due respect, your conclusions are just as speculative as everyone else’s. The strike may have been carried out for the reasons you suggest. Or it may really be that Trump simply thought it would boost his flagging popularity ratings, or that he was persuaded by Kushner’s urgings or the photos of beautiful dead babies. The fact that there were persistent rumors at the time that Steve Bannon, who can hardly be called nothing more than a naive idealist, was considering resigning further suggests to me that Trump is flirting with neocondom. The True Right is established on a set of principles. We are indeed idealists; that’s why people are interested in us, since we don’t just offer up the usual rhetoric they find in the mainstream media. So when Trump did something that violated our non-interventionist beliefs, we had to call bullshit on it, since we only have the facts that are available to us to pass judgments. Everything else is speculation. Maybe this really was all about arms and pipeline deals. Or maybe it was the first step towards Trump becoming George Bush III and an invasion of Syria and/or Iran is in the offing. We have to call things as we see them, in keeping with our principles. If Trump does something in the future that is worthy of our praise, I will be the first to give it, but we can’t just become his cheerleaders in the faith that everything he’s doing has some deeper, unseen purpose.
Also, I think YOU are the one who is being naive if you think that the future of Western civilization is dependent on us maintaining the current (unsustainable in any eventuality) lifestyle that we enjoy to the extent that we do. I see your point about the importance of maintaining the resources and weapons we need to avoid being pushed around by others. But when it comes to lifestyle, the decadent lifestyle our peoples lead now is to a large extent what led to our current predicament in the first place. Personally, I am not fighting to maintain civilization as it is. I want to see our people reborn as something more than just the sort of people who frequent shopping malls, which is what the West has become.
I was also baffled by this line: “[Obama] illustrat[ed] that he cared little for the blood and treasure that had been spent in Iraq to secure US-UK stability in years to come.” Are you seriously suggesting that the Iraq War was about securing stability? And even if we believe the neocons on that score, quite obviously the effect of the war has been quite the reverse – aside from all the senseless losses the participating countries took during the Iraq War itself, we’re nearly 15 years on from the invasion and the country still can’t stand on its two feet without massive aid from the West, and might have succumbed to ISIS in 2014. Besides which the ultimate outcome of the war was to put Iraq firmly into Iran’s camp, which, if I understand your general geopolitical outlook correctly, isn’t something you’d call a good thing. I don’t believe that those of us on the True Right should ally ourselves with the neocons by buying into their ideas about what needs to be done to maintain Western power. In that case we might as well all just become mainstream conservatives.
Great comment John. This lifestyle of our civilization is the real problem, maintaining it will only make it more difficult to maintain it later. I don’t know that mestizos and mulattoes will care to do so. Also, the furtherance of it practically guarantees the continuance of the soft communism we are under. This analysis above, while interesting and making sense from the post-1789 point of view, is just a few notches better than Col. Ralph Peters’ articles. As for the phrase “sometimes war is necessary,” well, the people who say that tend to this “sometimes” means constantly, and only if the wars are done with electronics and distance bombings only (and only if they do nothing to bolster the numbers or the position of Caucasians, only). The USA has been at war almost constantly from its inception, most of those elective. No, my dear Mr. De Witt, sometimes peace is necessary.
“Without Middle Eastern wars on the neocon hitlist, American hegemony is threatened, and our “way of life” – read: First World luxury – is directly threatened.”
Though I hate to use Newspeak, the alt-right is not “monolithic.” There are a great many of us who do not care a damn for American hegemony nor for our “way of life.” If anything, I pity those in the third world who are faced with the prospect of joining America’s sphere of influence. Inevitably they will trade their traditions and value sets for those of (((Hollywood))) – “liberated” women, transgenders, effeminate men, and pervasive materialism and secularism.
Embracing pragmatism and compromising on rightist principles does not seem to me a good plan. That is precisely how the alt-right could fizzle out and become another Tea Party: edgy cucks in other words.
Most people in this sphere think racially/ethnically, that is why they want better relations with Russia. The system you are describing is viewed as the one most likely to erase our race. Most in this sphere want the entire system you’ve described to go away. I think you are coming at this from the standard conservative viewpoint, while the Alt-Righters want a completely new paradigm and a multipolar world- that would actually be a real ‘struggle’ to create, maintaining the status quo is a lot less of a struggle. Also, lobbing missiles from far away and bombing bomberless peoples does not show willingness to fight; it shows weakness, to most folks at least.
The ‘multipolar world’ is a smokescreen phrase used to describe the economic and military overtaking of primarily America, UK, France and Germany by Russ-China and allied powers. Through a process never properly explained or described, this is allegedly going to convert a lot of people to the mission of creating a new ethnostate. Hordes of refugees didn’t make things bad enough, damnit, if only our whole financial system collasped!
Being against ‘the system’ is a worse-is-better thinking, but worse is just worse. A white man without a job can’t buy a house and start a family. The economic decline of the West does not make people automatically racist. If Islamic trucks of peace aren’t generating Islamophobia, why would empty shelves make people White Nationalists? These are assumptions that need to be challenged. More often than not, they are wishful thinking that somehow a crisis will turn out in our favour.
News Flash: A white man [or enough people in the nearly extinct ‘middle class’] without an [adequate] job can’t buy a house and start a family. Check out the data. Then tell us more about how that is just the basket of deplorables’ and pitiable losers’ own fault, and not the result of an intentional function of ‘the system’.
I don’t know that Mr. DeWitt has considered that continuing this system will lead to less and less family formation among the people who would be instrumental in propping it up. It already has had that effect. In essence, it is multiculturalism.
You seem to ignore the fact that every one of these foreign adventures since 9-11 have been failures. Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and now Syria have all fallen into chaos which in turn has led directly to the never ending waves of brown hordes washing up on Europe’s shores. If it was mainly about these pipelines, the neocons would have replaced these regimes with another secularish strongmen who were more amendable to their plans but of course they haven’t done that. How is creating Thunderdome in these areas going to make it easier to lay down and maintain these pipelines? Also, it seems you think that the deep state is going to eventually send these invaders back? They’ll never do that of their own volition. Finally, the Syria strikes are not the only thing the Alt-Right is upset about. What about all the cucka doodle dooing Trump has done since then? Should we get back to the 4-d mahjong in regards to that as well?
A British person trying to get Americans to use American blood and American treasure to secure British interests…who could have imagined or predicted such a thing?
What interests might these be?
Eh, this article reeks of arm chair warrior hysteria and neocon drivel. I can’t help but think of the various “experts” on fox news calling for war and other people to die reading this, the oil pipeline theory leaves out greater Israel.
As far as “geopolitical imperatives” go, I’ll only say that Jews were conquered for thousands of years, yet persisted as an ethnicity. Whites meanwhile conquered everyone, yet are at the doorstep of being completely extinct, as with many a glorious people in the past. I’d rather we choose the other path.
For a moment the article appeared to be an attempt at sarcasm of the neocon ways of thought, but no, Bain Dewitt appears to be serious. We are expected to believe that British governments care about the welfare of their pensioners and would be distressed to see them die of cold owing to an interruption of natural gas supplies! Mr Dewitt, what color is the sky of the Zio planet you hail from? I have news for you, all Western governments couldn’t give a shit about their White unemployed and pensioners, they want them off the planet asap and replaced by more ‘diversity’.
Well put.
The United States is struggling to develop export market for its own LNG from fracking wells. Replacing US exports with Qatari exports of gas only hobbles America.
I doubt very much the alt-right would have throw their hands up in such a fashion had Trump been delivering on other implicitly white goods from his campaign. What you saw was a reaction from people who might or might not appreciate the geopolitical angle, but are far more concerned about the fact of their demographic erasure while their tax dollars and vulnerable children pay for the process in spades.
Answers to the question of foreign policy are not uniform in the alt-right. Even TRS is home to those who supported the Syrian intervention and mock the idea that Russia is anything but self-interested. The question has always been one of demographics and the related culture war. So if the Empire continues to neglect white interests, they can only expect white advocates to ignore the interests of the Empire in turn.
Looks like the comments hit on most of the flaws in this article. I would just say this about one point the author makes among the plethora of justifications he has thrown against the wall without enough substance to make them stick. He mentions preserving “a way of life”. Yes, this is usually a legitimate reason to go to war, whether offensive or defensive. But the author forgets or dismisses, just as neoconservatives and neoliberals do and did in this election to their detriment, that this phrase is describing part of a social contract between the mass of people and the elites that lead them. It follows, we take from others to live the way we do here. Well okay. But someone needs to tell this author that the way many Trump voters/working class/Alt-right live here is difficult and altogether unsustainable. There is no shame is stating this group, we, are the economic and cultural losers, and the consequence of this losing is devastation to each loser’s standard of living. We are losers in this system, and yes it is radicalizing us (according to the Saint Louis Fed, 22% of middle age Americans with a college degree are millionaires. They’re not in the Alt-right to be sure). I say all this so as to head off any appeal to ego or attempt to shame.
And I am sure this author’s response without missing a beat would be basically “you don’t know how bad it can get”. Well thanks dad, but believe it or not there is a point when rational adults are willing to fight and possibly lose all that’s left because they do not see it as worth much anymore. They may be wrong, but that’s where we stand today.
This comes across as something a Boomer conservative would write for The Weekly Standard.
He is basically trying to argue that we somehow benefit from the current system of international finance and Zionist foreign policy being preserved and perpetuated.
Mr. Dewitt, fuck our “lifestyle” if it means that this system must go on. As for Assad not taking back the migrants…well….most of them
aren’t even Syrian! Why should he? They should just be returned to the Mediterranean.
@Michael Bell
I gave him the benefit of the doubt, because that is obviously a radioactive opinion to come into counter-currents with; but yeah, it does sound conservative-boomery. Our lifestyle has made us all existentially miserable, propping it up can’t last forever. As for Syria, you are absolutely correct: most of the “migrants” are about as “Syrian” as James Brown.
Hmm… just about every Syrian I’ve personally encountered were Arabanid Caucasoids. Most of those refugees were actually sub-Saharan & mulatto types. Anyway, I found the above article to be excessively materialistic at the expense of obviously higher concerns. That’s all I have to say about it.
“When Richard Spencer took to the streets with a megaphone to protest against Trump, he betrayed a political animal who has done more than anyone else to make America aware of Richard Spencer. He also painted himself into a corner as a peacenik, someone on the cultural fringe with an anti-state ideology who is prepared to sacrifice America’s interests for his own sensibilities.”
With all do respect Mr. Dewitt, one can say that you are willing to sacrifice the future just to stay a warm for a few months. Just saying.
That which is not expanding is being overtaken. Retreating from defending our interests is just that, retreating. It serves no purpose. Speculation about Jewish control is hearsay, but a multi-billion arms deal is concrete. Frankly, it’s laughable that a bunch of alleged White Nationalists would want to throw away the last remaining real industry of the UK & US. It isn’t Jews making those planes, it’s blue collar white guys.
Jewish control is Speculation? Look at the names, pal.
When you say “defending our interests,” you are talking about the interest of the American globalist system, not about white interests.
As for military material being the only industry we have left….yea…that’s because our JEWED system sent the rest of our industry overseas. Yet you want to preserve this system!
Well, writing as an “alleged White nationalist,” I wouldn’t surprised if, as was argued by the late Chalmers Johnson, the arms industry is actually a net drain on the economy, diverting and squandering resources that would be better used elsewhere. That means that this “real industry” is positively harmful to the interests of the nation and its people. It may create employment for a few, but it may also create unemployment for many through its large-scale malinvestment of resources. (Indeed, it is fitting that the illustration at the top of this article is of an F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, an aircraft that exemplifies everything that’s wrong with the military-industrial-congressional complex. It’s way behind schedule, way over budget, way over-sold, and way under-performing. One wonders if the “joint strike” in its name means “double whammy.”)
It would make sense to divert much or most of the money spent on “defense” (actually, armed forces that are never used to defend national interests) into rebuilding industries. But such a policy may be so common-sensical as to be “laughable.”
Supplying sand niggers with weapons is one thing…taking sides in their civil wars is another. And “we” ain’t the Anglo-Zionists(I’m English and I detest America)
HOW such a disgusting piece of “Kosher Konservative” GARBAGE was ever allowed to be published on “Counter-Currents”??!! The sheer stupidity of this article is simply amazing! As a White European, I prefer A THOUSAND TIMES Russia and the Russian People over America, and its terminally degenerated, mongrel population! Racially speaking, the USA is about the same as Brazil now(I traveled to Brazilian Amazonia recently, and was very surprised to see that the population there was at least about 30 percent White!…), and has for all practical purpose lost its previous, culturally White caracter… Fact is: America today is now the NUMBER ONE ENNEMY of the White Race! The sooner America’s disgusting geopolitical and cultural hegemony is gone, the better!…
I am sure this perspective will go down well with the majority of white Americans.
White Nationalists want a homeland for white people. They don’t necessarily care much – or at all – for muh flag, muh constitution, muh patriotism, muh USA, and many would happily see it all burn to achieve that goal.
If white nationalists remain unsympathetic to the masses, then the masses will remain unsympathetic to white nationalists.
“If white nationalists remain unsympathetic to the masses, then the masses will remain unsympathetic to white nationalists.”
These aren’t the peaceful, prosperous and racially homogenous post-war decades anymore, when one could still have the luxury of political apathy. The white masses are turning WN/racialist in droves at this very moment for the simple reason they don’t have anywhere else to go, because they realize that “the system” – your vaunted US empire – is actively working against the interests of its founding peoples.
“If white nationalists remain unsympathetic to the masses, then the masses will remain unsympathetic to white nationalists.”
LOL. That is EXACTLY the argument that the Jews have been using for decades to, successfully, turn the Republican party into an anti-white tool of Jewish interests.
“Minority outreach.” “Anti-racism.” “The ‘conservative’ case for gay ‘marriage.'” “Amnesty.” All of these anti-white policies are sold on the basis of that sly Jewish mantra, “We need to make ourselves more ‘inclusive.'” And the result has been entirely predictable: A fully cucked “right-wing” party that’s just as much Leftist and anti-white, culturally, as the Democrats.
Didn’t Evola say something about appealing to the masses? This article is profoundly misguided. Neocon wars in the Middle East, for material interests, directly harm Europe, through the flow of refugees. In effect, the author is an advocate for further damage to Europe, and since Russian nationalists aren’t advocating such a thing, I tend to think it may actually be Americans who are /notourguys/ over here on the mother continent. By all means, pursue your ((( interests ))) but all you’re doing is increasing our sympathy to Moscow’s position, which is already huge in France, Italy, and elsewhere. Richard Spencer is right on this issue. You are wrong.
The only thing about this article that is agreeable is the rejection of it by CC readers. It’s like being in the 1930s and jumping on a pro-war bandwagon against the Axis, and accepting all the cliches for doing so. The Right blundered during the Cold War with the same banal rhetoric about ‘our way of life’, the excrescence of which was – and still is – avidly dumped over the world in the name of democracy, as per Ty’s allusion to Ralph Peters’ epistles. Now it’s Cold War II and Mr DeWitt seems to be suggesting a re-run.
We cannot allow the boomer lifestyle to be threatened! No price is to great to accomplish this most noble objective!
Is **Jared Kushner** mentioned once in this verbose, inexplicably defensive article? Is this Counter-Currents’ first attempt at clickbait?
I’ll re-read tomorrow with a slow-burning Padron, but surely the author is tossing chum for knee-jerk bites. In the run-up to the Syria strike, which wasn’t so much a “run-up” as winkingly telegraphed Zionism Rising, Ivanka Trump (Yael Kushner) and Jared (Yoel Chaim) were filling champagne glasses with media limelight. Suddenly, Ivanka was officially part of the admin, and tweeting about foreign policy in Syria (wtf?), as Kushner was in Iraq, in a meme-ready metro-hipster photo-op, then photographed in a helicopter. This was no accident. It reeked of NYC Jew media optics. Which Trump is a Wizard of ZOG at. He invested decades into shaping and reshaping Ivanka into her final form, via plastic surgery and media surgery.
The Syria strike and “JaVanka” push occurred at the same time that Steve Bannon was being pushed, no, shoved out. Now, one could say it was simply wishful bullshit on behalf the media to drum up this Kushner vs Bannon narrative. But Trump actually **denied knowing Bannon** prior to the campaign, to the MSM. His statement made national headlines. It was a Comey-drama-tier quote. And shortly before, NY Mag and the (((rest))) were boldly presenting Kushner as the Zuckerberg-esque mysterious mastermind of the campaign, with Bannon reduced to the overrated, pompous drunkard (re: White, racist America Firster). The subtext was that elite Jews in Trump’s family/cabinet (and by proxy, NeoCons in the White House / Knesset) had the upperhand over the alt-right, the “fly-over whites” and the Pat Buchanans.
The alt-right’s stingers were launched at Trump during the Syria strike due to what I stated above. But they weren’t so much gunning at Trump, as at Trump’s self-pleased, unabashed anointing of JaVanka.
Millennials matured in the shadow of the traitorous Neocon Iraq occupation. We were told it was about 9/11 and anthrax. Then WMDs. Then “freedom.” Then, “muh US oil hegemony.” It was about Zionism. It was about Greater Israel. Just as ousting Assad from Syria, leveling Iran, broadcasting Gaddafi’s murder live on CNN, accepting wildcard Muslim immigrants into the US, is about, ding ding ding: Greater Israel. (A much larger fuss was raised when Obama and Kerry tried to invade Syria in 2013, for the same *muh chem weapons tragedy.* Joe Rogan went as apeshit on his podcast in 2013 as most 4channers did this time.)
To argue that the alt-right was premature, or silly, or wrong to spitfire at Trump, in real time via social media and 4chan, during the Syria strike is incredulous. #FireKushner trended on Twitter, thanks to us. Big whup? Everyone noticed. Donald Jr definitely noticed (he let slip that Ivanka was responsible for Daddy’s temper tantrum at Assad; Donald Jr is a media addict like his dad). Kushner, being le kewl Zionist Hackerman, certainly noticed. He’s been laying relatively low since.
Not only did the alt-right keep Bannon in the White House, we sent a message to ZOG. For the first time ever, ever, the cool kids are able to call out Neocons and Zionists as traitorous kikes with a Greater Israel/Israel First agenda. And do it with frog cartoons. Jared Kushner wants Greater Israel to occur in his lifetime. We want MAGA to occur ASAP. One or the other can happen. Kushner has Trump’s daughter in his bed (and Bibi), under Rothschild ltd edition sheets. We have the internet in mom’s basement and enough money for tendies and Death Squad tshirts. The Syria strike was Kushner lifting his demonic leg on the world. So we potty trained the dead-eyed SOB. For now.
I agree with a lot of what you say, but this “cool kids” mantra some in the Alt-Right seem to be interposing into their discussions reeks of adolescent posturing.
In my mind, the desire to pat oneself on the back and proclaim one’s group to be “the cool kids” smacks of exactly the attitude the author speaks of.
Let’s all become like the feminists and wrap ourselves in our comfy little perspective, toot our own bleating horns, and smugly watch while the Alt-Right falls to dust.
“I told you so!” (Well… at least we were the cool ones…)
Aren’t we sick of ‘compromising with reality’? This is more snake oil but it is pleasing to see this level of concern trolling, tbh.
US good….Russia bad bullshit
Pleased to see Bain Dewitt’s thought provoking contribution on Counter Currents.
There’s a danger for us old cynics to see everything in terms of Jewish manipulation. For one thing such thinking tends to be self-defeating because it leads to our regarding Jewish influence as invincible, besides which Aryan interests are powerless. Furthermore, it’s just not true to judge all Jews as inimically opposed to our Aryan race and culture. Most of us could cite examples of individual Jews who stand out, heroically in some cases, against the main stream.
If we’re to make an informed political choice it’s vitally important we leave our comfort zones of political or religious bias and make distinctions based on present day reality. This is what Bain Dewitt has tried to do. Although not sufficiently knowledgeable to give a conclusive opinion on Donald Trump’s Presidency, I would caution against throwing the “baby out with the bath water” because of Trumps dubious attack on Syria. It’s quite possible we haven’t heard the end of this particular story.
Thanks for your support Mike. I think reading through the comments here can justify my concern that opposition to ‘the system’ can be so strong as to lead WN’s to support impoverishment of whites and abandoning fighting for our own interests.
The “interests” you speak of are really just “comfort.” If the entire system were to fall apart tomorrow, it would be very uncomfortable, for sure, but it would be more in our long term interests. It won’t necessarily lead to a failed alt right insurrection. Systemic collapse opens up multiple possibilities and paths, I’m sure.
It would probably imperil your pension, sorry to say.
If the system fell apart tomorrow, whites would simply try to rebuild it exactly as it was.
What do you mean by ‘Aryan race’? The Brits have been meddling in the Middle East long before oil pipelines and by Brits I mean fronts for jewish finance interests. It is crazy for Britain to be pouring millions into wind power and hollering about Russian oil/gas. i suppose there are geopolitical angles, but i am sure this is more about pouring money into elite pockets. the jews might refer to whites as aryans, gentiles or goyim, but white encompasses the european diaspora.
Dear Hibiscus,
I use the term Aryan Race in much the same way that the word Albion is used as a poetic term for Britain, or Hibernia is used as a poetic name for Ireland. Aryan epitomises the noble and aspirational aspect of our bloodline and is not meant to be a scientific definition. As I understand it this is the same way that the word Aryan was understood in National Socialist Germany. Hope this answers your question Hibiscus, although I owe Bain an apology for digressing from his subject.
“But the Turks don’t supply the Taliban with IEDs to blow up British soldiers. Russia does.” Where did the author get this bit of intelligence? Even the mainstream media has been careful to say that Russia “may” be supporting the Taliban, without giving details of this supposed aid. And the Taliban probably need no help in making improvised explosive devices (IEDs) to kill Tommy Atkinses or anyone else in Afghanistan.
If perpetual war or arms spending justification/market cultivation is what you desire (or to give Dewitt the benefit of doubt is your best case scenario) then you’d want to arm your enemies sufficiently so as to be able to point to them as a credible threat, no?
The author misses the point entirely that the Alt-Right is not interested in bolstering unsustainable boomer lifestyles and Brazil style plantation white affluence. All of these geo-political intrigues are very much the province of the people my 70 year old father talks and listens to. They are just the kind of thing that the nice white country we all want to see someday needs to take several steps back from.
“Without Middle Eastern wars on the neocon hitlist, American hegemony is threatened, and our “way of life” – read: First World luxury – is directly threatened.”
Oy vey, my boomer shekels are threatened!!! Oh my Gawd, if the economy goes to shit, those nasty nawtzies might rise to power again, just like they did after the great depression!
I think Dewitt is a pseudonym for Brzezinski. Same effect: decent enough writing to make you consider the proposition that American hegemony is good, but ultimately spiritually hollow and evil for whites.
We need less money and more discomfort if we are to change course as a society. I for one embrace economic depression as a opportunity for change, though personally I wouldn’t benefit.
Just another Brit who can’t get over empire, and has no understanding of America as already being a post-white society.
Limp men with grey hairs living in the past. You see this time and time again.
‘Without Middle East wars on the neo-con hitlist … our … ‘First World luxury’ is directly threatened.’
A fairly mainstream perspective, but I wonder how accurate it is. In my view, the supreme threat to national hegemony in Australia, the US and most of Europe is the globalist system of corporate capitalism as practiced since about 1975.
Back in the 1980’s Australia’s neo-cons were frothing at the mouth about the threat of communism as represented by the Soviet Union. Outside of some influence over the trade union movement, there is no evidence to suggest that the USSR had any interest in influencing Australian politics or undermining our sovereignty, other than to counteract the unquestionable (and far greater) American influence that was being exerted here at the time.
This collective hysteria about Communism enabled an environment where global corporate finance got the free pass it needed to open borders, disposses native workers and transfer wealth from the nation to international big business. The boomer Right was comfortable with all of this, because there weren’t Soviet tanks in the streets of Melbourne.
But here’s a thought. Perhaps the banking and finance systems that we’ve taken for granted since WW2 – and especially since the 70’s – pose a far greater threat to our sovereignty AND our first world lifestyles than Russia or all the secular Arabic dictatorships put together.
Perhaps, too, the notion that Middle East wars are necessary for prosperity is based on an assumed dependency on imported oil that’s already looking less likely as technology advances.
If Western nations were to throw off the yoke of money created by corporate banks as interest bearing debt, our first world lifestyles could be protected and even advanced without foreign wars for oil. Those who argue otherwise are – in my opinion – either ignorant of the greater forces that shape our collective futures, or a part of those very forces.
.
.
Assad did call for Syrians to come home. He probably needs the cannon fodder to finish the reconquest of the country he is president of. And you know, a tax base for when things settle down. So at least one assertion incorrect.
Russia views the east European countries as its property – this challenges the US elite’s view that they are in fact US property. No thought is spared for the why – Russia, based on experience, wishes to have some strategic depth vis-a-vis Western Europe, which tends to strike at the heart of Russia before the inevitable Russian counter-strike at the heart of Europe. Honestly, can’t we figure this out already? It never ends well.
Finally, did a boomer cuck write this? Is the only principle a comfortable existence? Is there no ability to connect events with the past? Somehow Russia’s action to shore up a longtime ally is expansionism. Trump’s act of unprovoked military aggression against another country which posed no threat to the US has no perceived downside. Of course the downside is there, Trump basically did a 180 on his Syria position – which was one of the reasons I supported him. Not sure how it played on the geopolitical side, Russians didn’t seem too impressed. Not sure what the Chinese got out of it.
I know Greg Johnson is a Russophobe, but is that an excuse for publishing NeoCon screed?
American Empire must be destroyed if Europe, the West and the white race are to survive. Unless you really think Trump is God-Emperor.
Since when did neocons start writing for counter currents?
Since the alt-right forgot they are meant to represent the material interests of whites, instead of a bunch of abstract principles like isolationalism, international law and campaign promises.
Not “the material interests of whites.” The racial interests of whites. Putting material interests first can easily lead to the destruction of whites and their culture. Which is exactly what has been happening.
Being duped into putting “material interests” is how we got Jewed.
You’ve said it all. That’s the great Anglo blind spot.
“Since the alt-right forgot they are meant to represent the material interests of whites, instead of a bunch of abstract principles like isolationalism, international law and campaign promises.”
Why do you conflate white interests with those of US empire?
Bain is conflating white supremacy with white nationalism. Actually the alt-right should thank him for doing so since it is about time to have this debate. The western elite are really white supremacists. They are whiter than the general populations they lead, and they mostly aim to keep the elite demographics as they are. Bain expects alt-right whites to take existential pride (Hinduism btw is all about this) in that the elites that “are winning” will be more white, and have always been more white (He rightly counts Jews in this group, since they intermarried long ago and many are crypto), even as the system decimates the non-elite populations the world over, including non-elite whites.
Probably the worst article I’ve ever read on CC. This is Colin Liddell tier utter condescending shit. If you’re so concerned about US/UK military hegemony and defense industry jobs for the little White ppl, then suit up and go fight your White economic jihad yourself. FYI, we do have uniformed troops on the ground in Syria. Trump sent a Marine Expeditionary Unit ashore in Syria. This is an obvious violation of commonly held international law as the Syrian gov’t has not invited nor approved of such an invasion by armed US troops. What happens when some of these US Marines are attacked and killed by our Judeo-Wahabi allies…derrr I mean brutal dictator Assad’s forces? Well, obviously tough guy Trump will have to play some more multi-dimensional chess and prove to the world and the (((press))) that he’s not a weakling like Obama and lead us into another unwinnable war for Israel. But hey, wave that flag goy and be grateful for your factory job machining that tiny metal gizmo in order that we don’t lose our military dominance vis a vis the BRIC countries.
Also, wasn’t it possible for Trump to simply hold to his 2013 position of not attacking Syria over a highly suspicious alleged gas attack? Couldn’t he have simply told the press that he would wait for an investigation to determine the origin of the supposed gas attack and then bring those responsible to justice? Wouldn’t that have sent a message to China et al that Trump is firm in his convictions and not prone to political pandering and catering to special lobby groups? The author seems to believe that this wasn’t possible and/or desirable from our perspective and based on our interests. The US/UK defense and energy industries would have carried on as usual. Trump’s attack on Syria may not have been a nation-building war for muh democracy etc but it was absolutely a betrayal of his campaign promises and his base of supporters. If he is willing to do a 180 on this…what next? Glad to see that virtually no one in our camp is buying this bullshit….Mr. DeWitt not withstanding.
Trump’s ratings went up after the strike. China lifts decade long ban on US beef, resulting in many happy gweilo farmer. This is how these things work.
I mostly disagree with you Bain, although I appreciate your contrarian take.
You are correct in saying that Trump has betrayed no one, since he was never an Alt-Righter. Also, the idea that TRS and others have floated according to which the Alt-Right played a crucial role in his election is simply false.
It does not really matter, since only extreme naïvité could await radical change from the new President. Ever since his cabinet was anounced (which was far, far worse news that the Syria strike), I was convinced that Trump is basically the new Reagan. The only difference is that, unlike Reagan, Trump is probably smart and does have some ideas, based on those newspaper ads he paid for in the past, and his record of public statements.
But his Administration will probably follow the Reagan path: tax cuts for the rich, lots of military spending and debt, some wars (which might be fought through proxies, just like Reagan did) and plenty of symbolic gestures that ultimately mean nothing. A new narrative will be put together by the emerging (alt-lite) right-wing media similar to the on-going canonization of Reagan, but at the end of the day the chances that something really changed are slim. The immigration question will be the real test.
The problem with your article Brian, is that you fall for the usual conservative tropes, such as Obama’s “weakness”. Give me a break. Obama has ruled as a moderate Republican of the past, which is also why Dems lost the 2016 run: why bother with the copy when you can get the original?
All in all, your piece strongly reminds me of the Spengler articles from David P. Goldman, in which he often demands American investment in war technology to keep an edge over Russia and China. You also display a lot of that crude geopolitical realism he is known for.
But at the end of the day, what are you? A civic-nationalist-cum-American-exceptionalist like Goldman or a white nationalist?
One of the most frustating things within this community is to see how close to the jingoism of old many people still are. You end your piece stating that “America is winning”. It is not, the American Empire might be winning, but not America. Just like the British Empire won WW1 and Britain lost the war. All your countrymen, sadly, died for nothing. That’s why your derision about Spencer being a “peacenik” rings so hollow.
Any nation loses the moment it becomes an empire.
FWIW, the landing of Marines on foreign soil does not violate international law in the conventional or common sense use of the phrase. However, the landing of Marines may constitute a private criminal act on the part of the respective head of state who ordered the Marines to land on foreign soil. The landing of Army soldiers corresponds to an act of war; whereas, the landing of Marines may correspond to a police action, an embassy rescue, a private criminal act by a head of state, etc, etc. In that light, then, the attempt to rescue the American hostages held by Iran during the Carter administration constituted an act of war, since it utilized elements from the Army, Air Force and Navy, in addition to Marines. Had the rescue effort utilized only Marines, it would have fallen short of an act of war and would then have constituted a criminal act by President Carter, had anyone sought to press charges. The American presidents have used US Marines many times in the past as an extension of foreign policy, short of war; notably Panama and the various islands of the Caribbean in the 1920’s and ’30’s. Moral, ethical? Probably not. Violation of international law? Arguably not. Now, something illegal and unconstitutional did happen in Syria by the act of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (a four star Marine Corps General) physically visiting Syria and giving direct orders to Marine commanders in the field. THAT violated US law. If the American republic still existed (it died in 1913), someone should have brought criminal charges against both the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the President (then Obama). But the landing of Marines on foreign soil? Defensible. Not ethical or moral, but legally defensible under international law and the law of the high seas.
Woooow… Such a level of cuckoldry is beyond imagination !
I think Counter Currents has been attacked by a professional troll of the NewYorkTimes… I want to believe it at least.
I’m reminded of Samuel Huntington’s list of great civilizations in his great work Clash of Civilizations. In it, the civilizations were largely delimited by race or religion (in the case of Islam). One exception was the European West (Western/Central Europe, the US, Canada, Australia/NZ) vs Russia. Russia was its own civilization despite being as white as the European West.
I wasn’t sold on that, and I am still not. But Bain’s post shook that belief a little bit, suggesting that perhaps the Russians, as Asiatic white people always looking as much to the east as to the west, are indeed different enough from the rest of us to have significantly differing political priorities.
As an amateur Russophile, I *hope* that’s not true, but I really don’t know enough about it to opine further.
The only thing in Dewitt’s article that indicates that is the title. The rest is just standard boomer conservative apologism for supporting the present system.
Crazy how the neo-con stuff takes its moral light from the “Winter Fuel Allowance”….
Imperialism is just “bad”…we simply need to stop it. We have the people and resources to defend ourselves (if we wish) and to lead a prosperous existence. That’s all we need….
The author makes a cargory error, I believe, in criticizing Enoch and Spencer while defending Trump. He correctly indentifies Trump as a political entity without also indentifiying Enoch and Spencer as ideological entites. It is the function of, even the duty of ideologues to push political actors as close as possible to ideological consistency. The left understands this well; we should too! If we can’t dream our future, who in hell will ever follow us?
Also, it does not follow that becuase Spencer and Enoch protest the Syria strike that they are painted into a corer as “peaceniks” forever. Does the author honestly believe that there are no circumstances under which these two would call to arms or themselves fight? I invite him to use his imagination.
How is civic nationalism different from wiggers? You cannot paint a nigger white and say that he is European. America is already a Congo country of quadroons (Jeff Sessions) and twerking sheboons. It is too late. You are already Brazil.
The least thing we can afford is to retreat and revert back to the banal, shopworn, repeatedly tried and failed idea under the banner of maintaining “national interest”, “American hegemony”, “our life style” and so on that have drained and atrophied the Western White men to the breaking point in the last thirty years. Such a thing only served the oligarchic and Jewish Interest (Israeli and the diaspora Jews) but somehow remains persistently and hauntingly deceptive and attractive to some susceptible and superficial minds of ostensibly White Nationalist elements. This article that looks indubitably and diametrically opposed to the theme of CC but was nonetheless accepted and published on great website, thanks to the kind generosity of Dr. Johnson in showing an as broad range of varied voices as possible from the White Nationalist camp, is a telling example. Mr. Dewitt sang high praises of Trump’s missile attack on Assad, calls for a more confrontational stance against Syria, Iran and Russia, and argues exactly for more foreign wars of interventionism and more imperial endeavors to “advance the Anglo and American geopolitical interest” in the Middle East and to clench arms and pipeline deals, indeed an unabashed and flagrant brandishing of the lurid and jaw-dropping neocon imperial war and Israel-First ideology and apology. For all conceivable denial of the author, it is factually so.
Wrong, dead wrong, and absolutely WRONG! Wrong because it does not recognize that nation states are dead and ethno-nationalism is the only policy that can save the White Genome. Our Race Is Our Nation. PERIOD. The Russians are the best hope for a resurgent White race. Geo-politics upon the model in the article is based upon merely contemporary concerns – all of which are survivable by a White middle class once it realizes the U.S. is its enemy. We are the niggers now! The death of this nation is the only means by which we can attain political autonomy and take back what our Forefathers created. Depression, civil war, environmental havoc, international war – even a nuclear winter- ALL are preferable to the slow destruction of our communities and the enticement of our women to miscegenation. Whatever havoc ensues, we have within us the capacity to remake our civilization in two generations. Liberalism will die the moment our women and children are hungry. Our manliness will return. Necessity is the mother of invention – and considering the power of the Zog establishment and our social weakness it is only when the power turns off and the country is in shreds that we as a people will rise anew.
Is there anyone at all that is #OurGuys?
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
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.
Paywall Access
Lost your password?Edit your comment