Once again, whatever one thinks of alt-right ideology, this article is consistent with something I have noticed for a while, i.e. the convergence of a capitalism with left-wing ideology. I think this has to do with changes in the capitalist class that have taken place over the past few decades, where we now have a rising left-wing of the capitalist class that is rooted in the “newly rich,” and outside the traditional American plutocracy (i.e. the right-wing of the ruling class). In fact, I interpret much of the left/right red/blue divide at present as representing the fracturing of the capitalist class between its traditional upper class sectors, and a rising upper middle class and newly rich with a different set of social and cultural values that are shaped more by the 1960s than by 18th and 19th century America, and the efforts of both of these to rally constituents for themselves on the ground level (hence, the MSMBC/FOX dichotomy in the media).
By Vincent Law
To those who have not been keeping up to date on all the happenings post-Charlottesville, the most disturbing trends has been the great Shuttening of Alt-Right sites, accounts, and communications.
We’ve been getting attacked on all fronts from the Corporate leviathan. From Airbnb to Paypal, GoDaddy to Cloudfare, we are under attack by the bugmen running these corporations. Even TOR, the world’s largest enabler of child pornography and narco-trafficking decided to come out and denounce the Alt-Right.
I am currently of the view that the alt-right has lost whatever potential it ever had to be a genuine radical force in domestic US politics. While the alt-right started out with a certain amount of promise seven or eight years ago, over time it has degenerated into reactionary 1920s style white nationalism, idiotic slogans and memes, support for Donald Trump, and apparently more recently, full-blown neo-Nazism. Sorry, folks, but that’s a serious dead end. However, this analysis of the “neoliberal police state” by an alt-rightist who is a veteran of other movements is actually quite accurate, irrespective of what one thinks of the ideological content of this piece.
The truth about Charlottesville is finally starting to come out, but there are still far too many in America who don’t yet seem to be aware of it, or of the magnitude of its implications.
The first violation of our basic civil rights occurred the week before, when our totally lawful permit to hold a rally protesting the planned removal of the Robert E. Lee statue, located Emancipation Park in the downtown, was unconstitutionally moved to another park located nearly two miles outside of town and out of sight of the Lee statue.
Some great points in this, particularly her points that most homicides are intraracial rather than interracial, that most people don’t want anything to do with this kind of racist/anti-racist fanaticism, and that the state is the real enemy of African-Americans.
Black people have scarier things on the horizon than the almost endangered species of white supremacy.
It’s interesting to see where the general public actually stands in all this nonsense.
By Rod Dreher
The American Conservative
Results of the new NPR/PBS Marist poll are pretty surprising for we who have relied on the media to accurately report on the mindset of the country. It’s not that the numbers are good for Trump; they’re not. It’s that it hasn’t been nearly the disaster you would have expected. Here are the complete results. Highlights:
In light of tensions and violence in Charlottesville, a secessionist and a black nationalist from Charleston, South Carolina, came together to make sure that what happened is not repeated in their hometown. Jonathan Thrower of the Charleston Black Nationalist Movement and James Bessenger of the South Carolina Secessionist Party join Hari Sreenivasan to discuss what led them to open a dialogue.
Keith Preston, whose writing I always find interesting and challenging, wrote an excellent overview and analysis of what happened in Charlottesville last weekend. He does the impossible here: this is as dispassionate as it gets. Enjoy.
About the Guest
Keith Preston is (more or less) a left-anarchist and the author of numerous books, and operates AttackTheSystem.com.
Get a free trial set (just pay shipping) from Harry’s razors — handle, five-blade cartridge, and shave gel — when you sign up at Harrys.com/woods.
[Update: This assessment of the events in Charlottesville was originally posted on Monday, August 14. As of August 16, I have added some additional comments where indicated.]
[Updated: Additional comments have been added as of August 19.]
I’m still trying to find out more about what happened in Charlottesville on Saturday. But from reviewing news reports on the incident from across the ideological spectrum, and speaking with people on “both sides” who were present at the melee, here are my initial thoughts.
Because a few hundred people having an Un-PC theme party in the park threatens civilization, says antifa intellectual Matthew Lyons of the (ironically named) Ford Foundation-supported Political Research Associates. While I agree with much of this analysis, particularly points 2, 3, and 4 (with 1 being plausible and 5 being more often instigated by the antifa), here’s the money quote:
“And even a strong leader wouldn’t necessarily overcome the basic political differences separating Alt Rightists from their conservative fellow travelers. In the long run, if the Alt Right wants to coalesce with system-loyal rightists, it either has to win more people to its dream of right-wing revolution, or abandon it.”
In other words, there will be no right-wing revolution. The Alt-Right will become another Republican interest group, like the religious right before them. Look for the Alt-Right/Alt-Lite configuration to become the xenophobe and white identity politics wing of the Republican Party along side the foreign policy hawks, neocons, economic conservatives, social conservatives, and the religious right. And like the religious right, the right-wing establishment will throw them an occasional rhetorical bone and do nothing for them. As a Facebook commentator has said:
Not sure though why the GOP will ally with guys who largely don’t go to church, are economically left, oppose US intervention, and make for the least loyal Republicans. Ain’t gonna happen.
If the religious right couldn’t even restore school prayer, ban abortion, or prevent homosexual marriage, there is no way the Alt-Right will be successful in halting immigration. As the commentator said, it ain’t gonna happen.
I can’t think of any time since the conspiracy trials of the late 1960s and early 1970s that there has been an effort to attack political freedom on this magnitude and in such a direct manner.
By David Cole and Faiz Shakir
David Cole is national legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union. Faiz Shakir is national political director of the ACLU.
The right to boycott has a long history in the United States, from the American Revolution to Martin Luther King Jr.’s Montgomery bus boycott to the campaign for divestment from businesses serving apartheid South Africa. Nowadays we celebrate those efforts. But precisely because boycotts are such a powerful form of expression, governments have long sought to interfere with them — from King George III to the police in Alabama, and now to the U.S. Congress.
The latest far-right march in Portland quickly staked a claim as the most violent.
The gathering of alt-right and white nationalist groups in Tom McCall Waterfront Park today immediately descended into brawling with antifascist counter-protesters that left several men bleeding and soaked in pepper spray.
“There is something not normal about a person who can read a defense of the stateless society and decentralization, secession, and self-determination as means of achieving it and immediately think Nazi because of a reference to the obvious reality of blood and soil.”
By Dan Phillips
The Liberty Conservative
Certain quarters of the libertarian universe are in an absolute tizzy because Mises Institute President Jeff Deist invoked “blood and soil” in a recent speech. In the minds of some PC brain-addled libertarians, this is clearly an indication that the speaker was dog whistling to Nazis. This is both profoundly clueless and shameless PC grandstanding.
The reason that the United States is presently so politically divided is that the power elite/ruling class are very divided, and the different factions of the power elite are trying to rally constituencies for themselves. Unfortunately, quite a few people seem stupid enough to fall for that shit.
The FBI raided the home of Paul Manafort, who had served as one of President Trump’s campaign chairs during the 2016 presidential race, late last month.
“FBI agents executed a search warrant at one of Mr. Manafort’s residences. Mr. Manafort has consistently cooperated with law enforcement and other serious inquiries and did so on this occasion as well,” said Manafort spokesman Jason Maloni.
Federal agents came to his home in Alexandria, Virginia last month in the predawn hours of July 26, The Washington Post reported Wednesday. This would have been a day after he met privately with the Senate Intelligence Committee. According to the Post’s report, the search warrant was wide-ranging and FBI agents left his home with various records.
The Senate Judiciary Committee had also subpoenaed Manafort to appear at a public hearing last month, but his attorney said that Manafort would be willing to provide a “single transcribed interview to Congress.”
Oregon: Soon to be a Pan-Anarchist homeland for druggies?
This bill isn’t as radical as it sounds but it’s a start.
By Nicole Lewis
An Oregon bill that passed last week makes possession of small amounts of drugs such as cocaine, shown here, a misdemeanor instead of a felony. (istock photo)
First-time offenders caught with small amounts of heroin, cocaine, methamphetamine and other illegal drugs will face less jail time and smaller fines under a new bill approved by the Oregon legislature that aims to curb mass incarceration.
Here we have an interesting spectacle where a culturally conservative paleolibertarian is criticizing a big corporation in the name of anti-political correctness, and a culturally leftist left-libertarian is defending a big corporation in the name of political correctness.
Drug addiction and overdose deaths in the United States are a “serious problem” and the administration of President Donald Trump lacks any viable solutions to resolve the country’s opioid epidemic, according to an American analyst.
“It’s obviously true that drug addiction is a serious problem as far as the abuse of opioids and opioid-derivative substances like heroin and others,” said Keith Preston, chief editor of AttacktheSystem.com.
“There’s a lot of reasons for that; a lot of it has to do with the fact that a lot of these drugs are used in the treatment as pain killers in medical treatment and people get addicted,” Preston told Press TV on Wednesday.
“As far as how to go about addressing the problem, the United States has been waging its war on drugs for about half a century now with absolutely no results,” he added. “The United States has just as much of a drug addiction problem today as it did way back in the late 1960s when President Richard Nixon first declared the war on drugs.”
“And if anything, the drug addiction issue is more serious now than it was back then, because not only do we have the opioid addiction problems, but we also have new kinds of opioids that are extremely lethal in terms of their potency,” he noted.
I’ve always thought that those were inept analogies for exactly the reasons outlined here. There are some well thought-outarguments coming from the restrictionist side, but those most certainly aren’t amongst them.
If you follow debates over immigration, it is hard to avoid arguments for restrictionism that analogize a nation to a house or a club. Such claims are ubiquitous in public debate, and are sometimes advanced by professional political philosophers as well. The intuition behind these analogies is simple: As a homeowner, I generally have the right to exclude whoever I want from my property. I don’t even have to have a good justification for the exclusion. I can choose to bar you from my home for virtually any reason I want, or even just no reason at all. Similarly, a nation has the right to bar foreigners from its land for almost any reason it wants, or perhaps even for no reason at all. All it is doing is exercising its property rights, much like the homeowner who bars strangers from entering her house. In the words of a leading academic defender of this theory, “My right to freedom of movement does not entitle me to enter your house without your permission… so why think that this right gives me a valid claim to enter a foreign country without that country’s permission?”
Jared Taylor of American Renaissance tries to understand the concept of “institutional racism.” Racism is said to be what holds back blacks and whites in American society, but there just don’t seem to be enough racist people or deliberately racist practices to explain large gaps in achievement. The culprit must therefore be institutions, or the structure of society. Jared Taylor shows why this explanation makes no sense, and explains what the real problem is.
Are blacks more likely to be arrested for drug offenses despite using drugs at the same rates as whites? Conventional wisdom has it that the war on drugs is inherently discriminatory, but a closer look at black crime statistics undermines explanations that rely exclusively on racial bias or police discrimination. Jared Taylor, editor of American Renaissance, discusses several empirical studies that support a more nuanced understanding of differential arrest rates for drug-related crimes, one that avoids the pitfalls of the typically reductive explanations that emphasize systemic anti-black discrimination by a hopelessly racist police force.
Are you familiar with the 10,000 hour rule that Malcolm Gladwell shares in his book, “Outliers?” It basically states that it takes about 10,000 hours of time and effort in a field to become an expert in it. I’m now nearing my 10,000 hours on police brutality and injustice in America. Going on four straight years, it’s dominated my life as I’ve studied not hundreds, but thousands of cases from top to bottom. I’ve written over a thousand articles on the topic. I’ve organized, agonized, strategized, fundraised, recorded, presented, brainstormed, protested, researched, counseled, and dreamed about how we can solve this crisis — or at least drastically improve it.
And in all of those hours, in all of those cases, I’ve never seen what I’m seeing in Minnesota at this very moment surrounding the horrific police killing of Justine Damond — an Australian immigrant and yoga instructor who was just weeks away from getting married when she called 911 to report suspicious noises outside of her Minneapolis home. The police showed up. Justine, in her pajamas, went outside to meet them, but was fatally shot by one of the reporting officers.
All of that is textbook police brutality. I could name a dozen cases off the top of my head where a family called 911 for help but ended up being victimized by the police instead. Everything about what happened to Justine Damond is normal in America — except the demographics.
She’s white — a sweet, popular, peaceful, blonde-haired, blue-eyed white woman at that.
Almost daily I encounter messages saying that conservative Christians should stop “pretending” to be victims of discrimination. I encounter these messages about as often as messages arguing in favor of discriminating against Christians. Why the cognitive dissonance?
“Christians haven’t been discriminated against like blacks, gays and Muslims, and they aren’t being persecuted like Christians in China or the Middle East,” I often hear in response, which is both true and beside the point. Discrimination doesn’t have to be the worst ever for it to still be a cause of concern.
Here are a few examples of Christian discrimination.
Christians who post biblical yet unpopular views on social media can be subject to business losses or unemployment. Steve Tennes posted a message consistent with his Christian views to his Facebook page and because of that his business was excluded from the East Lansing farmer’s market.
It’s acceptable to exclude Christians from governmental positions. Sens. Bernie Sanders and Chris Van Hollen voted against a Trump appointee due to his orthodox Christian beliefs. When the Department of Education recently hosted a panel discussion on fatherhood, LGBT groups protested its inclusion of conservative viewpoints.
An interesting discussion of the church/state separation issue. I generally agree with the arguments made by this author.
By Millennial Transmissions
Libertarianism Without Adjectives
I’m not a very “principled” person. I am in the sense that my actions are guided by a number of principles defined loosely and amorphously, but I’m not dogmatic, I don’t subscribe to Kant’s categorical imperative, I’m not a utopian or an idealist. I’m a realist and a pragmatist before I’m even a libertarian.
I was recently considering a conversation between Penn Jillette and Glenn Beck on the subject of libertarianism. If you haven’t watched it, I urge you to, it’s very good viewing. Penn Jillette was one of the guiding lights that lead me out of my socialist slumber, and Glenn Beck himself makes some great contributions too. They don’t just discuss libertarianism; a friendly conversation about atheism also takes place. Glenn Beck raises an example:
“In Pennsylvania, a mostly Catholic Italian town had to relocate their nativity scene…it was outside of city hall…because of an outside atheist group, the ‘Freedom from Religion Foundation’, they came in and threatened legal action. Thomas Jefferson, in his writings, was proud that city hall was being used for meetings, church meetings on Sundays, four different ones. He thought that was not a problem…it’s not freedom from religion it’s freedom of…if I can put a menorah and everything else on the town square, why do atheists get so pissy about this…as long as it’s not the endorsement of one religion?” (lightly paraphrased)