I find
it very annoying when someone decides it is an optimal use of my time to ask me
to contemplate their personal situation and ascertain a) if their current
political position can be characterized as Alt-Right, b) what variant of
Alt-Right best describes their current political perspective, c) what the
Alt-Right makes of their family situation, which inevitably involves some
amount of interracial sex or adoption, d) if the Alt-Right has taken into
account their family situation, which inevitably involves some amount of
interracial sex or adoption, or e) if the Alt-Right is aware that its political
theories violate the individual's current theological perspective.
Allow me to direct your attention to Point 12 of the 16 Points.
12. The Alt-Right doesn't care what you think of it.
Perhaps that needs to be revised. The Alt-Right doesn't care about you. Or made more succinct: The Alt-Right doesn't care.
I certainly don't. These questions are not merely solipsistic and stupid, they are utterly beside the point. They all consist of category errors. This should be totally obvious, but as I am frequently informed that what I consider to be totally obvious is not always, in fact, the case, let me attempt to explain.
Let us say that instead of political philosophy, we are discussing political economy. Let's say that instead of discussing the Alt-Right, we are discussing Keynesianism, I point out that it is in the interest of the economy that interest rates rise. How, then, would one regard an individual who asked the following questions?
Allow me to direct your attention to Point 12 of the 16 Points.
12. The Alt-Right doesn't care what you think of it.
Perhaps that needs to be revised. The Alt-Right doesn't care about you. Or made more succinct: The Alt-Right doesn't care.
I certainly don't. These questions are not merely solipsistic and stupid, they are utterly beside the point. They all consist of category errors. This should be totally obvious, but as I am frequently informed that what I consider to be totally obvious is not always, in fact, the case, let me attempt to explain.
Let us say that instead of political philosophy, we are discussing political economy. Let's say that instead of discussing the Alt-Right, we are discussing Keynesianism, I point out that it is in the interest of the economy that interest rates rise. How, then, would one regard an individual who asked the following questions?
- Can my current financial position be characterized as
Keynesian?
- What variant of Keynesianism best describes my current
financial position?
- What do Keynesians make of my financial situation,
which inevitably involves some amount of debt or investment?
- Have Keynesians taken into account my financial
situation, which inevitably involves some amount of debt or investment?
- Are Keynesians aware that their economic theories
contradict my current theological perspective?
Now does the utter irrelevance
of these questions make a little more sense? The truth or falsehood of
Keynesianism does not depend on the amount one presently owes on ones's student
loan debt or credit card balance. Many people seem to be of the opinion that
the legitimacy of the Alt-Right somehow depends upon whether it is good for
them or not. This is, in three words, stupid, solipsistic, and erroneous.
Communism is either correct or incorrect. It doesn't matter if it is bad for you or not. Free Trade theory is either correct or incorrect. It doesn't matter if it is bad for you or not. And the Alt-Right is either a more correct political philosophy than Communism, Liberalism, Conservatism, or Libertarianism or it is not, regardless of whether you and your mudsharking daughter or rice-chasing son or your Filippino ex-wife or your gay Hispanic uncle or your adopted Haitian son or your adopted Korean daughter or your Jewish-Nigerian granddaughter or your Kenyan-Slovakian grandson are United States citizens or alien invaders from Mars.
Seriously, to preen and posture and pretend that your personal situation is even remotely relevant to whether diversity+proximity=war is just embarrassing. The great social forces are as indifferent to individual specimens of humanity as the Deists' hands-off clockmaker god; as Tolstoy conclusively showed, not even Napoleon's opinions were directly relevant to the outcome of a single battle. As a general rule, Europeans don't want to live in Somalia, Beijing, Manila, Nairobi, or Jeddah, and the more your presence forces them to live in some facsimile of one of those places for any reason, the less they want you or anyone to do with you around them.
Now, I think there is a strong argument to be made for the Alt-Right from an individual perspective. As a mixed-race individual, I will benefit greatly from the continued existence of Western civilization. If that means I cannot live in certain Alt-White-governed areas one day, what of it? It is still of massive benefit to me, as the appearance of mobile phones, fertilizer, and modern medicine in the most hopelessly savage areas of Africa should suffice to prove.
The white nations of Europe are, collectively and historically speaking, humanity's golden geese. It is to the long-term benefit of all Mankind to avoid killing them, or even adulterating them, through immigration, invasion, or assimilation.
Communism is either correct or incorrect. It doesn't matter if it is bad for you or not. Free Trade theory is either correct or incorrect. It doesn't matter if it is bad for you or not. And the Alt-Right is either a more correct political philosophy than Communism, Liberalism, Conservatism, or Libertarianism or it is not, regardless of whether you and your mudsharking daughter or rice-chasing son or your Filippino ex-wife or your gay Hispanic uncle or your adopted Haitian son or your adopted Korean daughter or your Jewish-Nigerian granddaughter or your Kenyan-Slovakian grandson are United States citizens or alien invaders from Mars.
Seriously, to preen and posture and pretend that your personal situation is even remotely relevant to whether diversity+proximity=war is just embarrassing. The great social forces are as indifferent to individual specimens of humanity as the Deists' hands-off clockmaker god; as Tolstoy conclusively showed, not even Napoleon's opinions were directly relevant to the outcome of a single battle. As a general rule, Europeans don't want to live in Somalia, Beijing, Manila, Nairobi, or Jeddah, and the more your presence forces them to live in some facsimile of one of those places for any reason, the less they want you or anyone to do with you around them.
Now, I think there is a strong argument to be made for the Alt-Right from an individual perspective. As a mixed-race individual, I will benefit greatly from the continued existence of Western civilization. If that means I cannot live in certain Alt-White-governed areas one day, what of it? It is still of massive benefit to me, as the appearance of mobile phones, fertilizer, and modern medicine in the most hopelessly savage areas of Africa should suffice to prove.
The white nations of Europe are, collectively and historically speaking, humanity's golden geese. It is to the long-term benefit of all Mankind to avoid killing them, or even adulterating them, through immigration, invasion, or assimilation.
