Devlin Reviews Hawley

One of the items on my vacation list is to read Making Sense of the Alt-Right, by Alabama political science professor George Hawley. His book, Right-Wing Critics of American Conservatism, was well received. It is refreshing when someone from the academy looks over the walls of the hive and not only sees what is on the other side but makes an honest effort to understand it. I do not know anything about the man’s politics, but he does not appear to be a guy spending his nights howling at the moon.

That came to mind reading F. Roger Devlin’s review of Hawley’s latest, posted on the other day. Devlin is a serious guy, who is largely responsible for the whole man-o-sphere subculture. He literally wrote the book on critiquing feminism. That is not a small accomplishment. He has also been involved with the alt-right from the start, so he has observed and interacted with all of the big shots of the movement. That positions him to be a good critic of a book written by an outsider, attempting to understand the alt-right.

The review is worth reading, even if you are not interested in a book length treatment of the alt-right. Devlin’s four key points that define the alt-right are excellent and precise. I think the fourth point cannot be emphasized enough, mostly because it is a point I often make about dissident politics. When I write about peaceful separation, it is not intended to be a road map or political treatise. The point of the exercise is to break free of the old moral paradigm and get readers to start thinking outside of those restrictions.

Before I get off onto another point, I would take some issue with Devlin’s criticism of Hawley’s use of scare words like “racism” to describe the alt-right. Paul Gottfried, in reviewing Hawley’s previous book, made the point that it is a requirement of every academic. “If I were young enough to be considered for tenure in the average political science department at an American university, I too would spray my books with PC bromides in order to keep the Leftist lunatics off my back.”

This is a point that cannot be overstated. Every university is infested with feminist rage-heads, writing autoethnographic “research” papers about how toxic masculinity makes them angry. In departments like political science, feminist “scholars” demand that the white males take a version of the Voight-Kampff test, to make sure they are replicants. “If you see a white person and black person in a photo, how much do you hate the white person?” My guess is Hawley salts his lunch orders with PC jargon, just to be safe.

Putting that aside, Devlin makes a point that is always missed when people discuss the alt-right or the larger ummah of the dissident right. There are layers to it. The guys posting frog cartoons into the timelines of Progressive media people are not the alt-right or any part of the dissident right. They are part of this cultural phenomenon, in the same way that hippies were part of the 1960’s counterculture. Hippies played no role in the intellectual side of the New Left, just as Milo has no role in the intellectual side of the alt-right.

It is one of the things I learned over this past year, attending the hate festivals of the dissident right. There are a lot of smart people having second thoughts about the modern world and the intellectual traditions that created it. Roger Devlin is a good example. He is not spending his evenings trying to promote his brand on Periscope. He’s reading books and writing essays on sites like AmRen and Counter-Currents. There is a lot of intellectual capital in this thing that is concealed by the pranksters and self-promoters.

That said, I would take issue with this bit in Devlin’s review:

The Alt-Right is a political movement which seeks to ensure the continued existence and well-being of European descended people. As such, it neither implies nor precludes any particular religious beliefs. We are not opposed to Evangelical Christianity as such, but some figures the Evangelical leadership (notably Russell Moore of the Southern Baptist Convention) are our declared enemies and we treat them as such.

The alt-right, like the larger dissident right, is a cultural phenomenon, not a political movement. Smart young males, mostly out of necessity, are picking up paleo-conservative ideas and questioning the prevailing orthodoxy. These ideas are being extended to question the core assumptions of modern American political order. It is more akin to the Scientific Revolution than a political movement. The former was about rethinking our place in nature. The latter is about rethinking who gets to be in charge.

It is why it feels like the alt-right is hostile to Christianity. It has to be. What is generally understood to be mainstream Christianity in America, has been hollowed out by Progressivism, and is now worn like an animal skin by crackpots and degenerates from the fringes of the Left. Even the more culturally conservative parts of the country practice a form of Private Protestantism than embraces extreme egalitarianism, anti-racism and universalism. It is not an accident that these churches are deep into the refugee rackets.

I think most big names in the alt-right avoid the subject, mostly because it results in howls about how this is not real Episcopalianism or this is not real Christianity. It is reminiscent of the days when academic Marxists would say the Soviet Union was not real Marxism. It may be theologically true that the current iterations of Christianity are outside the traditions and teachings of the faith, the fact remains that the people running mainstream Christianity these days look a lot like the faculty of your local gender studies department.

That is not a small thing. The reason the New Left was able to sweep the field in the culture war, which included deposing the Old Left, is that their thing took on a quasi-religious tone. Humans are built to be believing machines. That is a part of biological reality our side has yet to face, but it must be faced eventually. Something is going to have to fill the spiritual vacuum if this cultural phenomenon is going to be a cultural and then political movement. An Alt-Right form of Christianity would be a welcome development.

Those quibbles aside, the review is worth reading if you are interested in a sober rendering of alt-right thinking. A part of the development of an intellectual movement is learning how to engage with critics. If your thing cannot hold up to scrutiny, your thing is not going to be a thing for long. Having intellectuals from outside this thing engage with elements of the alt-right is healthy. When serious people start to take dissident politics seriously, it means these ideas are starting to penetrate the mainstream.

90 thoughts on “Devlin Reviews Hawley

  1. Z Man;
    Your great-rhetoric Episcopal pic is an illustration of another lesson. That is, the importance of having solid standards, maintaining confidence in them and consistently enforcing them.

    There is *no* biblical warrant for embracing homosexuality (or any other sin, for that matter) as the Episcopal’s in the pic obviously do. At some point the hierarchy decided to ditch the biblical standards because some biblically-defined sin was now culturally more special than the rest.*

    But the current attack on Christian standards began about 200 years ago with the higher criticism movement in Enlightenment era German universities (where else). That movement to deconstruct the historical scriptures had/has elite appeal (just like Gnosticism at the time of the Apostle Paul) because it allows the ‘front row kids’ to pretend to superior, secret knowledge. IOW, it feeds the sin of pride.

    Higher criticism and its many ramifications is essentially all that is taught at big-name Cloud seminaries from the ’30s on. So their prestigious graduates in the hierarchies of the main-line denominations lacked the spiritual and intellectual confidence to maintain the Historical Church’s 2,000 year old standards when challenged by the Cultural Marxists. The result is there for all to see.

    *Can you imagine a main-line protestant theft-acceptance movement_? Oh wait, it’s called Progressivism.

    • Agree, but I wouldn’t call it an attack.
      I call it decent archaeology.

      The German Catholic scholars resurrected history all around the world, such as the forgotten Indian emperor Asoka. He repented of the ten million deaths his wars had caused, and converted his six million soldiers into Buddhist monks, spreading Buddhism across the Eastern half of the world.

      The old harvest-festival religion of an agricutural world began crumbling under the Ages of Exploration and Industrial Revolution, undone by modernity.
      It has some tips on in-group cohesion, and some on successful slaveraiding.

      This new, strange gospel updating and replacing it has not yet congealed.
      It may not be questioned, but is the half-formed product of our artificial urban environment. We have never had these conditions before- and we are ever farther from the farm.

    • Except the American republic was based on the Roman republic. Can you quote the parts of the Constitution and Bill of Rights that specifically mention Christ or Christianity? Also, please reconcile your position with the concept of freedom of religion.

      • Can you quote the writings where the Roman Empire had even a tenth the population of the United States?

      • Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

        “Freedom of Religion’ is a misnomer. You have the right to establish a religion, the government does not.

        What your religion does, how it interacts with the government, is ABSOLUTELY the bailiwick of the public. It is ALSO the exclusive right of the states, the president, or any other politician NOT acting as a member of congress to do whatever the hell they want religiously.

        ‘reconciling your position’ with a fantasy is unnecessary.

      • This is pretty bad. Go over to and read the treatises on rights and government written by Reformation era Protestants that formed the basis for Northern European political thought for the next 300 years. Our Bill of Rights is based on the English Bill of Rights of 1689 which was written by Protestants to secure their rights. Calvin and Beza cast a long shadow over the thinking of our Founders (whether or not they were aware) and the Christian men who did the fighting to establish our republic.

  2. Trump should go after the parasites big time.
    He should build up the inspector general offices of every agency with instructions to go hot and heavy.
    He should dedicate a couple of thousand FBI guys to investigate every example of the million or so cases of fraud and abuse (including the secret service and FBI use of prostitutes paid for by the drug importers) and charge every one of them.
    They should be summarily dismissed with loss of all accrued pension benefits and dragged before a pre-selected, pre-briefed judge.

    • Bile;
      Like your thinking. But it would be a waste of time without decertifying all the fed. employee unions first. You’d be tied up forever in grievance mongering, etc.

      IIRC, Kennedy certified them by executive order in the early ’60s. So they could be decertified by one as well. But that step would be rightly seen as a declaration of war by the swamp. Might work after a crisis. It would surely cause one otherwise.

      Easier to cut off the money flows to the prog parallel economy by cancelling grants and contracts.

  3. Man is an economic animal, and religion is just an expression of this biological foundation. Who were the first christians — the slaves and poor in Rome. When did christianity start to fade as a binding idea in the West — when the industrial age provided widespread prosperity. Who are the people drawn to progressivism — those whose chances in the free economy are poor. So as long as the government teat is up for grabs, you are going to have a strong prog movement. Trump is getting the economy heated up, and if that continues he will have a landslide re-election. It’s always about money Always.

    • It’s instructive and clarifying to read Nietzche on this. See Beyond Good and Evil. Don’t have to read the whole thing. Just flip through for the parts that specifically address Christianity and master/slave morality.

      All Christians ought to read this and address the arguments therein, at least in their own minds.

      • Well, I would say the master virtues of courage, truthfulness, trust and an accurate sense of self worth are certainly valued in Christianity, as well as an acknowledgement of (free) will. The slave’s envy is regarded as a vice and the pessimism and cynicism of the slave are contrary to the theological virtues of hope and faith.

    • Man as primarily an economic animal is kind of Marxist, isn’t it? Granted, we are all conditioned by necessity, but one could as easily say man is primarily a spiritual animal. There were some well to do sympathizers and followers among the early Christians, e.g., Joseph of Arimathea, the rich young ruler, Philemon, Joseph called Barnabus, Ananias and Sapphira, etc.

    • When the human spirit is fed with materialism and post-modernism, you end up with the results we see before us. Christianity addresses the spirit, which is the essence of humans. From Christianity (and Greek philosophy and Roman law) sprang western civilization, the most beautiful and desirable civilization the world has ever known.

  4. Bah. Why bring back something that did so much damage? Cuckchianity brought us Marxism, which is basically Cuckchianity without Jesus ffs. So no, let it die already. All universal religions a la Abrahamist strains should die out, let every culture manifest its religious impulse in a way that is most appropriate to that culture.

    EDIT: Oh, and Vox Day’s influence ain’t doing any service to you. That guy’s as fake as they get, and sooner the people get that, the better.

    • Like most moderns, including Christian moderns, you got the wrong message. It’s Christ the King, not Christ the kitten. The Church has chosen to inflect its emphasis on a therapeutic compassion rather than the totality of the teaching of the Gospel. See Peter Kreeft and the concept of spiritual warfare. “Western Church culture on the cusp of the 20th/21st Centuries has had a bad case of what Peter Kreeft calls ‘the warm fuzzies, the fur coats of psychology-disguised-as-religion’ caught up in the false dichotomy of sweet and gentle Jesus as a sensitive, New Age kind of guy as opposed to a terribly old fashioned wrathful and warlike Jehovah-exemplified in the notion that the New Testament somehow cancelled and repudiated the supposed excesses and political incorrectness of the Old”. And Christ said He did not come to change one jot or tittle of it. “In fact, every page of the Bible bristles with spears, from Genesis 3 through Revelation 20.”
      The culture, left to its own devices after the death of God and the defeat of the Church as a cultural force to be reckoned with, is manifesting its religious impulse in Leftism. How’s that working out?

      • Exactly. Anyone who thinks Christ was a mealy mouthed SJW, try reading Matthew 23. “Ye generation of vipers…”
        I’ve been reading J. Vernon McGee’s bible commentary along with the Bible. Like his west Texas accent and ways of thinking, even if my skeptical mind has a problem with faith, etc.

  5. If your thing cannot hold up to scrutiny, your thing is not going to be a thing for very long

    I disagree. You need a coherent message, sure. But it doesn’t have to stand up to scrutiny.

    Look at the left for Christ’s sake. Their message makes no sense now, and made a lot less when they started promulgating it in earnest back in the late 60s/early 70s.

    What you need is an emotional appeal. It helps if you can tie it in with sex. Getting rock and roll or some other primal music tied in with it helps to.

    This was the left’s formula, and it worked back in the day and is still working because the masses don’t care about the logic of your position. They want to feel good and shout “wooo wooo” at some rock concert or riot or demonstration where they can meet members of the opposite sex and maybe get laid for the movement.

    Your thing can get a lot of mileage out of this. Sure, you need some mumbo jumbo for the guys who want to play intellectual to read and ponder, but it’s emotion that rules and carries day after day after day with the masses, especially the young masses, and they’re the ones who really count.

    The tiny minority of the kind of guys who read this forum might need some rationale, but the masses don’t. And critics don’t matter as long as you have this going on and snowballing along.

  6. Alt-right has its religious aspect. That aspect concerns restoration of our original pagan faiths, one that are integrated with our surroundings and that came from our cultures whose values they exemplify. It is christianity that is to be blamed for western liberal modernity with all its ills, and it has to go.

    • In my search for the truest ‘religion’,,the identity branch filled in my needs.Always racist in beliefs,and has been a common thread in all the ‘right’ movements.Though it spawned a lot of the ‘extremist groups,,it is the only ‘Christian’ movement that fits the needs of today..Since my journey to find the Truth,,I have moved on to what we call,’Far Beyond Identity’..we jokingly call it FBI,,no fun intended..YMMV

    • You’re half right, but Christianity was also the strength of Western civilization. Frankly I think this is because most people weren’t able to read the New Testament back then, because if they had, and if they were honest about it, they wouldn’t have had much impetus for turning back the Muslim hordes or doing anything else except sacrificing themselves for their fellow men.

      So literacy and intellectual honesty is going to wipe us out, unless maybe we can somehow arrange to bamboozle everybody into accepting the Book of Mormon maybe.

      I don’t like this any better than anyone else, but the fact is that the New Testament is all about sacrificing, and suffering for the other guy, even if the other guy is your enemy.

      Guys can pretend like it’s not, and quote verses out of context, or perform contortionist exegesis to try to justify race realism and the like, but it really doesn’t work in total context.

      Of course it could work, if you could get people to read their bibles less and just listen to some demogogue out their preaching a new message.

      Paganism is a total non-starter. Besides, the left has already coopted it. What do you think the whole envivonmental movement is about? Of course, maybe we could steal it from them. If I recall correctly Hitler was a big environmentalist. Just kidding. Or am I?

      • “the fact is that the New Testament is all about sacrificing, and suffering for the other guy, even if the other guy is your enemy.”

        Oh? That’s a nice strawman you’ve constructed there.

        Sacrifice by men to the common good is what builds families and civilzations. It is also what helps an army to fight successfully.

        So, maybe you can give your anarcho-libertarian view on why sacrifice is a vice in a man.

        Suffering for your enemy? You might want to give us a citation for that one. And, never mind, ‘turn the other cheek.’ The New Testament is not about nations but about individuals and their relations with each other and with their God. ‘Turn the other cheek’ is about keeping the peace in one’s own community. Love thine enemy, similarly, is in keeping with strictures of not judging another man’s heart, of accepting that your enemy is also human and is also flawed…none of that can be extrapolated to mean that we must accept endless hordes of foreigners overrunning our societies, our communities.

        You write like a Hasbara troll, but, thanks for coming out.

        • I always do. You try to build a civilization without Christianity. Good luck, I am sure that Mao, Stalin, and the other atheist ‘luminaries’ can give you all sorts of useful pointers.

          But then, we have already had this conversation on Taki’s.

  7. Excellent article.

    The alt-right being a cultural movement means it has something the old Conservative Inc never had – legitimacy with the population.

    When alt-right becomes a political movement, as long as it stays true to culture side, they’ll have a strong party.

    As for Christianity, started going bad in the 60’s as the lefties and gays . wormed their way into the seminaries and theology schools.With the Catholics it was Vatican II and the liberation theology movement. Now we have churchianity vs. Christianity. They are totally different animals.

    It was not helped by the secular intellectual side that had begun to embrace Nihilism and Post-Modern thinking when they appeared. These were the universal solvents of rationality and morality. As a result our intellectuals could not offer a rational defense of the West against Islam(which is really a philosophical battle) Or for that matter say that Shakespeare is qualitatively better than some feminist rant from the Vagina monologues.

    The progs in essence created a disqualified universe one without qualities and hierarchies whatsoever. They threw 4000 years of human development in the trash.

    • Rod;
      One little-noted aspect of the convergence of main-line protestant denominations* was the fact that during the ’60s a man could gain draft exemption by going to seminary during the Vietnam years. It was striking how many ‘highly unlikely’ (i.e. previously impious) aspirants there were during my college years. And, they had to stay there for the duration (until Nixon ended the draft in 1972) to maintain their exemption.

      While it *is* possible that a number these became believers once there, my conjecture is that, having taken that route for dishonorable reasons, their need to justify their conduct to themselves lead to their becoming prog. moles.

      *Might apply to Roman Catholics too, I just don’t know.

      • And many, once they had a gig or track record, kept milking it. They made charitable fund raising an industry.

        Good, good call. I think you’ve just explained the majority of it.

  8. It seems to me that the Alt-Right can be more easily summed up as what it is not. I.e., 1) Not Democrat, 2) Not Republican, 3) Not communist. The Alt-Right has spent almost as much time subdividing itself into various factions–Alt-Reich, Alt-Lite, Alt-White, Alt-etc.–as it spent posting memes on the Internet. I suspect that the vast majority of those who would even bother to describe themselves as Alt-Right don’t do so because they agree with somebody’s bullet-point manifesto. They instead looked out at the prevailing landscape and said, “Democrat? I’m not that. Republican? I’m not that. And I’m not a goddamned communist either.”

    The race realism thing may be oversold. It’s entirely true that white people as a rule will perform whatever financial and cognitive dissonance gymnastics are necessary to ensure that they live in an area that is majority white with majority white schools. Black people do the same thing, and therefore white people are ever reminded that Not All Blacks Are Like That.

    Christians are doubly reminded. I know of a few salvation-by-grace-not-works folks–Calvinists, though they would disagree with that label–who go and do missionary works in craphole countries. They tend to adopt black and brown and tan orphans if they can manage it. Race realism doesn’t resonate with these people, because they operate largely on the spiritual level, which is orthogonal to data and statistics. This matters because Christian beliefs–and perhaps the other major religious beliefs–are stronger and more resilient than any statistic or any graph.

  9. “Protestantism naturally begets toleration of error. Rejecting the principle of authority in religion, it has neither criterion nor definition of faith. On the principle that every individual or sect may interpret the deposit of Revelation according to the dictates of private judgment, it gives birth to endless differences and contradictions. Impelled by the law of its own impotence, through lack of any decisive voice of authority in matters of faith, it is forced to recognize as valid and orthodox any belief that springs from the exercise of private judgment. Therefore does it finally arrive, by force of its own premises, at the conclusion that one creed is as good as another; it then seeks to shelter its inconsistency under the false plea of liberty of conscience. Belief is not imposed by a legitimately and divinely constituted authority, but springs directly and freely from the unrestricted exercise of the individual’s reason or caprice upon the subject matter of Revelation. The individual or sect interprets as it pleases—rejecting or accepting what it chooses. This is popularly called liberty of conscience. Accepting this principle, Infidelity, on the same plea, rejects all Revelation, and Protestantism, which handed over the premise, is powerless to protest against the conclusion; for it is clear that one who, under the plea of rational liberty, has the right to repudiate any part of Revelation that may displease him, cannot logically quarrel with one who, on the same ground, repudiates the whole. If one creed is as good as another, on the plea of rational liberty, on the same plea, no creed is as good as any. Taking the field with this fatal weapon of Rationalism, Infidelity has stormed and taken the very citadel of Protestantism, helpless against the foe of its own making.”

    -From “Liberalism is a Sin” by Dr. Don Felix Sarda Y Salvany, 1886

    Protestantism is dead. All that’s left of it is a vague feeling that God is important. The conservative protestants of today are every bit as bad as the progressives when it comes to projecting their own pet ideologies onto the ‘christian’ label.

    Liberalism has penetrated deep into the human element of the Catholic Church, but if Christianity is for real*, then the dogmas of the faith and the sacraments instituted by Christ will remain intact. The question is will the civilization built by the Catholic Church survive? That will depend on how quickly people realize that religious (and therefore moral) liberty flat out doesn’t work. You need to establish the Catholic Church. If not the Church, then you’d need to invent a better, internally consistent, moral framework out of whole cloth. Catholicism took the barbarians who sacked Rome, and forged them into the greatest civilization the world has ever seen. You think you can do better? Good luck.

    You don’t have to be Catholic to realize this, you just have to look at where we used to be, and where we are headed. Religious liberty and individual conscience used to work when there was shared moral momentum left over from Christendom, and all the different christian sects and non-religious largely agreed when it came to public morality. Now that capital is gone, and we have nothing but increasing levels of chaos to look forward to. European ethnic consciousness and genetics research alone won’t be enough to save you. It has to be placed in its proper context within the natural law, or else it will end up just as nutty as progressivism.

    Regardless of whether or not you are religious, if you care about the West, you should be praying for a Roman Catholic revival. A long shot if ever there was one.

    *: You laugh? Well I’m sorry for you, man. Hope that pagan LARP is worth it.

    “Our Lady showed us a great sea of fire which seemed to be under the earth. Plunged in this fire were demons and souls in human form, like transparent burning embers, all blackened or burnished bronze, floating about in the conflagration, now raised into the air by the flames that issued from within themselves together with great clouds of smoke, now falling back on every side like sparks in a huge fire, without weight or equilibrium, and amid shrieks and groans of pain and despair, which horrified us and made us tremble with fear. The demons could be distinguished by their terrifying and repulsive likeness to frightful and unknown animals, all black and transparent. This vision lasted but an instant. How can we ever be grateful enough to our kind heavenly Mother, who had already prepared us by promising, in the first Apparition, to take us to heaven. Otherwise, I think we would have died of fear and terror.”

    • I don’t accept intellectual/spiritual leadership from organizations run by Marxist homosexual pedophiles.

      The RCC is a human organization. As such, it too suffers from original sin. It too is capable of being captured by those who hate the faith – and it has been.

      The strength of the RCC, organization and hierarchy, is also its weakness.

      The strength of the Protestant church, individual conscience and free inquiry, is also, as you have identified, its weakness.

      Your “team” is not the way, the truth, and the life. Only Jesus Christ is.

      Christian sectarianism is just a wee bit irrelevant in 2017, so, if you want to contribute to a stronger future, it’s time for you to get off your high horse and accept the flaws of your preferred model of religion, Father.

  10. People who are neutral or not actively hostile can always be converted (sometimes they already are, but are concealing that fact in order to protect their careers). Years ago I read a book by Robert Griffin, “The Fame of a Dead Man’s Deeds” about white nationalist William Luther Pierce. Griffin was a tenure-track prof at University of Vermont who seemed slightly hostile or at least suspicious of Pierce in his book. Now he’s openly writing for sites like The Occidental Observer. I admire people who can live and work in the shadow of the beast and bite their tongues (sometimes for decades) in order to understand the enemy and gain their own perch of power. Kevin Macdonald putting up with CSU Long Beach comes to mind, as does Steve Bannon somehow emerging from both the Ivies and Wall-Street and still being a nationalist. I personally tapped out after getting my master’s and wouldn’t have spent five minutes in college if the GI bill hadn’t paid for it.

  11. What percentage of our citizenry has the intellectual capacity to understand complex topics and interactions in this modern world of enormous knowledge resources? My guess is that the fraction is quite small. Erudite debate may be enjoyable for the smart set, but I doubt that it can move the specie’s mean belief matrix very far in any particular direction. If you really want to redirect the herd, then you must either resort to brainwashing techniques or fundamentally alter the environmental drivers that shape long-term evolutionary change. This is the root lesson of our biology.

      • The Founders established a republican form of government based upon representative democracy and also limited voting rights to a productive cohort of the population. We are now being ruled by a parasitic majority borne of unrestrained voting and affluence-driven welfarism. As such, we are selecting for maximum dependence and hive conformity.

        • Right, because it comes to you and a select few of your brethren knowing what is best for the rest of us. No thanks, that ship has sailed. Either we have liberty or we are restrained. I choose freedom. Because what YOU believe to be “parasitic”, I look at the majority exercising their free will to live. Gone are the days of the “elite” demanding that we think a certain way, which would be the end result of your type of government you desire to install.

  12. Devlin is extremely important because he understands how society has been feminized. Analytical thinking and the scientific method which resulted from it tend to be masculine traits. Society is dominated by universities and media. Both of these institutions are dominated by feminine thinking. The female mind has a desire to get all of the right answers. Did I memorize all the expected answers? Dig I regurgitate what was expected on the exam? Was I a good little girl?

    I love horses, but I also understand that they are herd animals. A headline in today’s paper stated that there is an epidemic of sexual harassment claims against state legislators. A stampede might be a better term. Each accuser was quiet until she sensed the direction of the herd, and then when she felt safe, she came forward.

    Conformist thinking has its place in bureaucratic societies, but conformity did not build western civilization. Many people today think of intelligence as a measure of the ability to memorize stuff.

    Richard Spencer is an interesting case study. He majored in political science. I think Richard would have been happy to remain in the academic world wearing a tweed jacket all day. He probably would have loved being on a college debate team in the 1950’s. Today a man like Spencer finds that there is nothing of substance to discuss in academia. Sophistry rules the day. The only place for intellectual curiosity is the Alt Right.

    • “Society is dominated by universities and media. Both of these institutions are dominated by feminine thinking.”

      No, it is dominated by people who have their own way of thinking, which may differ than your own reasoning. When you put a label on it as being “masculine” or “feminine”, it is rooted in confirmation bias. I recommend dropping the sophist facade.

  13. The hippy movement, funny enough, is an extension of the german movement.

    All this talk of philosophies and movements is a fun way to spend idle moments, but surely no one here thinks/believes it will ever influence events on the ground. And getting “christians” to ever do anything remotely helpful is just plain fantasy.

      • The key issue was voiced by my brother-in-law the day before the election
        “I’m just tired of people telling me what to do.”

        I have no doubt as to how he voted.

    • “The alt-right, like the larger dissident right, is a cultural phenomenon, not a political movement.”

      Whoa. Key insight here. Like all those seekers who keep asking “yes, but what should we do?!”, which is a political question you don’t answer. Unask the question, I guess, because the cultural phenomenon is upstream from any concrete political activism. We ain’t there yet, in other words. Do I have that right?

      Why I stop here in the morning and bitch during the day because it’s blocked at work.

  14. To be alt-right you must be pro-white and you must be anti-Jew. And as anti-Jew as Traditional Catholics who hold Jews fully responsible for the cold blooded murder of Jesus Christ.

    • As a seventy-seven year old life long Roman Catholic, I report that I haven’t met a Catholic who held Jews responsible for the cold blooded murder of Christ in at least half a century.

      • What does the Holy water mean Catholic??? Is it not a reminder the second you enter a church, of Pilate washing his hands of the murder of an innocent man and that full responsibility belong to the Jews. ?? Here is the quote—-Matthew 27:25.

        Vatican 2 was 1962-1965. Traditional Catholics reject Vatican 2. Traditional Catholics blame the Jews for the killing of Christ.

        • Holy water at the entrance of a church has nothing g to do with Pillate washing his hands…it is a reminder of the Sacrament of baptism . Any genuine mackerel snapper could tell you that

    • I disagree. However, I think one has to recognize the fact that Jews, who although as individuals have made great contributions to mankind, have also played an inordinate role comparative to their numbers in bringing about the reign of antichrist (Marx, Soros).

    • If you’d been there you might have thought, “self-obsessed childless single 33-year-old who roams around with a gang of younger guys he’s lured away from their jobs and families; he basically wants to destroy everything, wants our society to crumble and collapse — would someone please kill this A-hole?”

      • “he basically wants to destroy everything, wants our society to crumble and collapse…”

        Oh? Please do elaborate. With biblical quotes in context, please.

  15. Eastern Orthodox Christianity has resonated with a number of alt.right figures. It is uncucked, manly, decidedly anti-feminist and retains hymns that would be hysterically denounced as “anti-Semitic.”

    I’ve spent time in Russia and am amazed at how a normal, Christian, European (ok, Eurasian) country feels. Returning to ClownWorld is always depressing.

    • I’d add the caveat that it’s -less- cucked than the vast majority of the other options. For a really uncucked version, you need a Old-Believer, Old-Calendrist Orthodox priest like Dr. Matthew Raphael Johnson. Listen to (or read) some of what he has to say on the state of the modern patriarchates and their connections to big globalist money if you’d like to feel blackpilled about contemporary Orthodoxy.

    • The problem with making claims that some Christians are “cucked” or are “Churchians” is that the label is subjective in nature, with the criteria developed by men. We know man is fallen, prone to sin. It is therefore easy to be duped into thinking one “brand” of Christianity is observably “better”, or “worse”, than another brand. In the end, there is faith. To Him, our Lord, He and only He will judge Us.

  16. “Hippies played no role in the intellectual side of the new left…” only if you ignore the Port Huron Statement.

    • By “hippies” was thinking off guys growing their hair long and smoking weed in their dorms. I’m not sure you can call SDS a “hippy” movement, given its roots pre-date hippies and beats.

  17. The primacy of ideas is what characterizes all other western cultural and political camps. The alt-right is based around the preservation of a people(s). Therefor the alt-right is orthogonal to all such organizations and movements.

  18. This on the heels of the column on civil religion. You say, “An alt-right form of Christianity would be a welcome development.” This may be what you mean: .

    I didn’t point it out the other day, but Robespierre’s Cult of The Supreme Being was an attempt to bridge the gap between the dechristianizers and the believers within the revolutionary government. The French Revolution was a cultural revolution, too. And while the dechristianizers had control for a while, eventually Napoleon achieved comity between the revolution and the Catholic Church in his concordat with the pope, and even got the pope to attend to his coronation as emperor (although he did not allow the pope to crown him. He took the crown out of the hands of the pope and placed it upon his own head.)

    My point is that without Christianity the alt right has no future. It must become appealing to Christians to be successful, and to do so it must go around the gatekeepers who have set themselves up as those in charge of the churches. This can easily be accomplished through social media. Many if not most Christians are disgusted at what has become of their churches. Myself, I attend only a few times a year and that is mostly to endorse what someone else in the family or extended relationships are doing, marriages, christening, etc.

    So even if religion has been relegated to a lesser status here as it was in the France of the revolution, it isn’t going to be easy to create a new political culture without taking it very seriously.

    • My thoughts on this are incomplete, but I think there are two issues, at least. On the one hand, the alt-right (or whatever it becomes in time) has to figure out how to talk to modern Christians in the language of modern Christianity. The people I call “Bible readers” have become ghettoized and silo’d. On the other hand, there needs to be a movement within this community that begins to question the orthodoxy. Southern Baptists, for example, appear to have internalized anti-racism and philosemitism, despite neither having a Biblical root.

      It’s something I’m thinking about writing about next year.

    • I’ve never heard anyone say that it is unchristian for (say) Koreans, or Blacks to take pride in their cultures or unchristian to promote the interests of their co-ethnics. Denying White people the same latitude on religious grounds is a fairly recent heresy. And it is a heresy that has been promoted and enforced fanatically during its comparatively brief existence.

      BS needs to be called on the churchly bigots who promote this heresy.

      • You start with the idea that God is about hierarchy, not equality. I am entitled to live at a certain station, in accordance with the gifts God granted me. I am not entitled to live according to the level of someone endowed with superior gifts. How God decides to distribute those gifts is none of my dang business (reference parable of the workers in the vineyard). It really boils down to knowing that envy is a serious, serious sin … second in depravity only to pride. Catholics used to know this.

        • Assuming that those gifts God gave us are indeed superior. True, a person may have a higher IQ or can run faster, but that does not mean that those “gifts” indicate a person in His eyes is “better” or “more worthy” of His grace.

  19. i think Andrew Fraser has already laid a foundation for an Alt Right form of Christianity in his “WASP Question” and “Dissident Dispatches: an Alt Right Guide to Christianity.

  20. We are “believing machines”. My belief cop-out is that the prevailing cultural beliefs are so consistently and so far off the rails that I don’t need much of a belief system yet, for myself. I can safely question everything our culture feeds us, and that is enough for me, for now. Once things begin to roll over a bit further towards some semblance of broad recognition of the reality we all live in, then I’ll need to bake up a belief system to live by. In the meantime, culturally, I am a “man without a country”, recognizing that many others are similarly afflicted.

      • Keep telling yourself that. You are halfway to being a leftist reality-denier if you think a book publisher has no influence.

        • hahah yes, i can see hints of Julius Caesar in a “man” who deals in comic books and Japanese baby rock. Why are you here anyway, when your dear leader’s nuts need washing again?

          • Me? I am a critic. I think Vox would make a terrible leader. I am simply saying that your observation that he has no influence is patently false. Possibly he has too MUCH influence, but men with Egos the size of his always have power and often do great and terrible things.

            You want to meme, be my guest… but a meme is best when it doesn’t make you look like a fool.

          • Men with Gigantic ego always have power. I don’t like vox but I am not stupid enough to ignore the influence he has outside of his VFM crew.

            It must be difficult to type with only one hand. I am impressed.

Comments are closed.