Alt-Right: "We're not capitalists, we're not egalitarians, and we dont want democracy".

This came up off-topic in another thread, coming from a "Red Ice" video I've played before but wasn't paying close enough attention to make note.

Note that I cant speak for 'the' "Alt-Right". As far as I can tell if they're a quazi-polar opposite of the SJW's Identity Politics. The topic of this thread isn't SJW's vs. Alt-Right's, which is the typical fodder, the topic here is what are we to make of this "We're not capitalists, we're not egalitarians, and we dont want democracy" statement.

Is there anyone here familiar with 'proper' "Alt-Right" material to explain what this means?

Is there even such a thing as 'proper' "Alt-Right"??

And does this "Red Ice" represent it???

The quote I'm referring to is at 15:40 (you should probably back a couple minutes to get the full context):

"We're not capitalists, we're not egalitarians, and we dont want democracy".
Note that we've discussed the main topic of the video (Milo vs. the Alt-Right) before here.

Scratching my head on this...

Well, there's the Red Ice ideal of what 'it' is, apparently. What that all means I dont even know. Or I'm I mishearing it?

One thing is clear: Red Ice doesn't care for Libertarianism.

As far as I know that piece is the most authoritative + informative bit I've encountered from the 'proper' "Alt-Right".

I tried reading Wikipedia's Alt-Right page just now to figure out what their deal is, but it looks like something someone from CNN wrote so who knows if its even what Red Ice would settle for, or if Red Ice is 'accurate' themselves.

It's all Identity Politics so I'm not particularly intrigued (being "Socio-Agnostic" and viewing "Hyper-Tribalistic" Identity Politics as a catalyzing threat to the survival of our species in this 21st Century), while according to Red Ice this Milo / Breitbart whoever sort of talking about being "Alt-Right" that they're not whatever it is Red Ice is into anyways.

Perhaps nobody even knows; there isn't even a 'proper' 'thing'; that lots of alternate conservative / anti-Republican Party conservative types started adopting the term (we know Hillary labeling ALL her opposition as Alt-Right helped drive that trend); or that whatever it is its been being coopted out by mainstream forces anyways (as Red Ice alludes to).

Google: |"alt-right" "not capitalist"|
Not a very remarkable lot of pages come up. Actually reading the descriptions I'm not seeing where these pages would even fit.

I'd prefer not to post this here in Mud Pit, because I want to see it stay on topic, but dont want to see it get deleted because of a flame war. So lets be adults and try to not just have a daily SJW/anti-SJW flame war, please.

What the hell are Alt-Right 'economics'?

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

The Alt-Right doesn't even exist. The MSM created the term to stir up trouble between both parties and people use that now to troll the Left leaning people. It's not real. I guess the same goes for the Alt-Left.

Okay to be clear:
Egalitarianism
[Egalitarianism – or equalitarianism – is a trend of thought that favors equality for all people. Egalitarian doctrines maintain that all humans are equal in fundamental worth or social status, according to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, the term has two distinct definitions in modern English: either as a political doctrine that all people should be treated as equals and have the same political, economic, social, and civil rights; or as a social philosophy advocating the removal of economic inequalities among people, economic egalitarianism, or the decentralization of power. Some sources define egalitarianism as the point of view that equality reflects the natural state of humanity.]

Now my interpretation of that follows what I call "Ron Paul Libertarianism", which holds everyone gets equal rights & protections as individuals (as human beings), not based on what group we are.

Which by the way, SJW's / collectivists dont want this either (instead minorities groups are to reign supreme over individuals).

As wookiep effectively pointed out, this is starting to sound like some real "Horseshoe Spectrum" stuff (true polar opposites of left/right extremism become more and more indistinguishable aside from black/white male/female binary type aesthetics).

If you've ever sifted through the ex-army blog articles, I believe the general consensus is that the republic is an empire and should start acting like one. Then again, alt-right is an obfuscated term of some amorphous group that I'm not sure really is an actual group, just an assortment of people who identify alt-right in different ways.

I would guess the non-capitalist alt-rights favor economic fascism.

Thanks for the thread iib. I can now breathe a sigh of relief that you now understand what I was trying to tell you, lol.

originally posted by: GodEmperor
If you've ever sifted through the ex-army blog articles, I believe the general consensus is that the republic is an empire and should start acting like one.

It is, and it actually does, except for everybody self-deludes themselves about what it is (er rather what we are) with denial, euphemisms, and so on.
The FIRST Truth | "Freedom" = Imperialism: It's in the Language



Isn't "economic fascism" essentially crony corporatism (which is what we have) [Obama being one of the shiniest examples there ever was COUGH Obamacare]??

a reply to: Wookiep

Yeah. It just kind of seemed like you were just getting tense about that other thing for a minute there. It was late.

originally posted by: Perfectenemy
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

The Alt-Right doesn't even exist. The MSM created the term to stir up trouble between both parties and people use that now to troll the Left leaning people. It's not real. I guess the same goes for the Alt-Left.

Oh ferfuksakes this is type of denial is getting quite annoying , I am sure you or the folks who mindlessly stared you read Breitbart.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
This came up off-topic in another thread, coming from a "Red Ice" video I've played before but wasn't paying close enough attention to make note.

Note that I cant speak for 'the' "Alt-Right". As far as I can tell if they're a quazi-polar opposite of the SJW's Identity Politics. The topic of this thread isn't SJW's vs. Alt-Right's, which is the typical fodder, the topic here is what are we to make of this "We're not capitalists, we're not egalitarians, and we dont want democracy" statement.

Is there anyone here familiar with 'proper' "Alt-Right" material to explain what this means?

Is there even such a thing as 'proper' "Alt-Right"??

And does this "Red Ice" represent it???

The quote I'm referring to is at 15:40 (you should probably back a couple minutes to get the full context):

"We're not capitalists, we're not egalitarians, and we dont want democracy".
Note that we've discussed the main topic of the video (Milo vs. the Alt-Right) before here.

Scratching my head on this...

Well, there's the Red Ice ideal of what 'it' is, apparently. What that all means I dont even know. Or I'm I mishearing it?

One thing is clear: Red Ice doesn't care for Libertarianism.

As far as I know that piece is the most authoritative + informative bit I've encountered from the 'proper' "Alt-Right".

I tried reading Wikipedia's Alt-Right page just now to figure out what their deal is, but it looks like something someone from CNN wrote so who knows if its even what Red Ice would settle for, or if Red Ice is 'accurate' themselves.

It's all Identity Politics so I'm not particularly intrigued (being "Socio-Agnostic" and viewing "Hyper-Tribalistic" Identity Politics as a catalyzing threat to the survival of our species in this 21st Century), while according to Red Ice this Milo / Breitbart whoever sort of talking about being "Alt-Right" that they're not whatever it is Red Ice is into anyways.

Perhaps nobody even knows; there isn't even a 'proper' 'thing'; that lots of alternate conservative / anti-Republican Party conservative types started adopting the term (we know Hillary labeling ALL her opposition as Alt-Right helped drive that trend); or that whatever it is its been being coopted out by mainstream forces anyways (as Red Ice alludes to).

Google: |"alt-right" "not capitalist"|
Not a very remarkable lot of pages come up. Actually reading the descriptions I'm not seeing where these pages would even fit.

I'd prefer not to post this here in Mud Pit, because I want to see it stay on topic, but dont want to see it get deleted because of a flame war. So lets be adults and try to not just have a daily SJW/anti-SJW flame war, please.

What the hell are Alt-Right 'economics'?

Well, if they are proper national socialists, which I am not asserting all alt-right folks are (some are), then this all makes sense. National socialism isn't capitalism, it's not libertarianism, it's not really democracy. It's fascism, as in literally, not figuratively.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

My brother has always said that it's more like an inverted teardrop. Ideologies diverge from a common place, grow further apart, then end up coming back together on an almost parallel line, never quite converging but getting so close together that they are nearly indistinguishable under the surface.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I don't want communism. But I don't want extreme wealth inequality. I don't care what public policies we use. I don't care if we have right wing or left wing public policies. All I want is to see some return to balance and sanity when it comes to wealth inequality. The curve just after the dreaded socialism shown in the video below would outstanding in my opinion:

a reply to: Perfectenemy

The Alt-Right doesn't even exist. The MSM created the term to stir up trouble between both parties and people use that now to troll the Left leaning people. It's not real. I guess the same goes for the Alt-Left.

If there is a true alt-right and left it is in the middle where both are wanting the truth and are willing to have a conversation ...Not saying they always get along and always agree but they both seem to not fall prey to the old political divide . Maybe its just seems to be a safe space from the political confusion ...don't know

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Well according to a lot of lefties on this site, there are a lot of alt-righties on this site.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

It's going to depend on who you talk to but the basic reaction there is against the Alt-Lite and their promotion of American values and such forth, the issue with egalitarianism is that it suggests everyone is the same and the Alt-Right does not accept that, their idea of the ethno-state is based on the uniqueness of a particular group.

The issue with the current form of Democracy is that it is elected representatives that have created the current mess, that a relatively small group are easily compromised and subverted by foreign and untoward interests and act against the greater interests of the people, that can either be replaced by direct Democracy similar to as practised in Switzerland though their Federal Government is elected and compromised, or by a Council of Elders or whatever, but generally it is dangerous to entrust power into the hands of the few and my position is that people should only ever empower themselves.

The problem with Capitalism is that is the system were financial power has become the key to Political Power, the basis for the compromising of elected representatives, the Alt-Right has an issue with the Shekel in general and there is a strong Socialist element in the general movement, that you should be looking to work and co-operate with others and not looking to exploit them through profiteering, that the shekel only ever created debt slavery and the elevation of the lowest to the highest positions, essentially then they would advocate a return to a ration based system which was the earlier basis for civilization in conjunction with free trade and individual endeavour.

The Alt-Right is a broad church so it's difficult to pin any particular ideology on it.

You have actual Nazis who don't believe in democracy.
Libertarians who want less government in every way.
Anti globalists who see the left as a source of globalism now.
Plain old fashioned white supremacist style racists who don't fit anywhere else.
A whole bunch of people for whom the current system seems rigged and irrelevant to them and even some just in it for the LOLZ.


I guess what brings them together the most, is that little frog guy, but that's about it



ETA What kantz said. Much better explanation than my poor effort.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

What the hell are Alt-Right 'economics'?

Read Julius Evola. Economics are secondary to reviving "traditional values," which include spiritually superior men ritualistically exercising their divine mandate to rule. That is the principle way it differs from Fascism on the one hand and Nazism on the other. Presumably, the Superior Men, aristocrats, running things would grant monopolies as they see fit.

I'm not sure anyone knows what alt-right is anymore than anyone actually knows what neo-con is. Both to me seem to be convenient catch-all terms invented to paint the opposition with. Most of "them" are a bunch of neo-cons, but not you. Most of "them" are a bunch of hateful "alt-right" white nationalist ... but not you.

There are or seem to be as many definitions for it as there are people. Both people who are labeled and people who claim to be one themselves.

As far as anit-capitalist ... I think there is a lot of confusion as to what capitalism actually is. A lot of people think it's the current version of cronyist corporatist economics. It's not. Not anymore than what we have is a total fascist or socialist system but it has elements of all three systems as needed to benefit the people in power. People label it whatever they think it is out of ignorance or out of convenience.

*note* That doesn't mean there are not determined elements from within trying to push the system more one way or another.

As far as egalitarian ... I think that's another terms that gets misused quite a bit. Leftist ideology is equal outcome oriented. In that sense, most people on the right are not going to be egalitarian. Simply put, we recognize that no matter how many laws, rules, and regulations you pass, you will not create a perfect Utopia where everyone has a perfectly equal outcome in life, only a lot of misery. The best you can hope for is to create a system where the rules operate the same for everyone.

And as for not wanting democracy ... direct democracy was not the aim of the Founders. We have a Republic for good reason. Direct democracy is sheer tyranny of the majority. For an ideology that claims so much to be all about protecting the rights of minorities, the left seems to be bass ackward when it comes in their calls for direct democracy. The majority can then completely and constantly override the will of all those minorities through simple vote. If you want a stark reminder of why direct democracy is so bad as a system, just look at the Supreme Court where we have voting blocks of justices and an uproar whenever that balance might be upset. Imagine Ginsburg kicking the bucket tomorrow, suddenly and Trump appointing someone like Gorsuch to fill her spot. That would give the Court a fairly reliable 5-vote originalist block, 1 swing vote, and 3 liberal justices. It wouldn't matter much what the left felt on most issues. If they got to SCOTUS ... oh, well, what would count is what COTUS says.

a reply to: SprocketUK

You bring up a good point with the Frog though, as the model they're eventually going to realize is that of the early Theocratic states of Mesopotamia which distributed people within society according to spiritual/personality based archetypes in conjunction with an underlying ration based system that also allowed for private enterprise, thus each Temple precinct was a hub and distribution centre for a certain group each having a specific role within society.

There is a general recognition that religion is going to be what binds the idealized future society together and the debate rages over whether that will be Christianity which some say served the West well or Nordic Neo-Paganism, so far however Kek is the only Deity that has found general acceptance and they're not sure whether that's just irony...but that's the formative period for you.

I didn't know that about Mesopotamia. Its a good day when you learn a new thing

reply to: Kantzveldt

a reply to: SprocketUK

The system would require you to have a Head God, literally the Deity that rules over your mind;

The God of one's head was inherited from your Father, it was most likely not the Head of the local Pantheon, but personal dedication according to family status, daughters would be expected to transfer the God of their head to that of their husbands when they married

It seems likely that the head Gods of the people were first determined according to status and profession, in the surviving evidence there might be found disproportionate bias toward the household Deities of the mercantile class on whose seals the evidence is recorded, and thus families in certain neighbourhoods could be expected to share the same head Gods and local shrines would reflect this.

In effect this was similar to the practise of the Catholic church, were certain Saints represented certain Guilds which represented certain professions, this was the basis for Catholic society that the Protestants overthrew and Freemasonry took over and subverted the Guild system towards their own hidden control.

originally posted by: SprocketUK
The Alt-Right is a broad church so it's difficult to pin any particular ideology on it.

You have actual Nazis who don't believe in democracy.
Libertarians who want less government in every way.
Anti globalists who see the left as a source of globalism now.
Plain old fashioned white supremacist style racists who don't fit anywhere else.
A whole bunch of people for whom the current system seems rigged and irrelevant to them and even some just in it for the LOLZ.


I guess what brings them together the most, is that little frog guy, but that's about it

ETA What kantz said. Much better explanation than my poor effort.

Honestly, this seems to pretty much nail it. The alt right doesn't want to be defined, and seem to enjoy the chaos of people trying to define them. They're right wing absurdists in a way.