I think there is a middle ground between being a doormat of a nation and fascism. So you would prefer to live in an authoritarian dictatorship with one party, speech and censorship laws, and secret police?
I don't see it as that big a leap between what we have now and what you're describing. Personally, I lean more libertarian than authoritarian and would love to depower large portions of the federal government and pass strict corruption and conflict of interest laws with harsh penalties, thereby removing the incentive people like Hillary Clinton have for seeking political power. But if the choice is between an authoritarian government that represents my interests and the one that represents the interests of muslims, Mexican and criminal scum, I'm choosing the former.
Well ideally we should fight against having an authoritarian government period.
You also say civil rights are bad. So you really believe it should be the law to keep people as an underclass or give them less rights?
I didn't say they were bad, per se, but I think a lot of the excesses (gay marriage, a child's right to SRS, racial equity instead of equality, the wage gap, abortion, etc, etc) are the result of people having no economic incentive to oppose them. If things go south economically, people are going to close ranks and a lot of things we think are important today are going to be thrown right out the fucking window.
I absolutely agree with you on that (except gay marriage, I have no issue with that). The SJW push to fuck up kids and pervert the idea of equality as not being enough, etc are huge problems. Now yes, if we were to have a massive collapse, then an authoritarian govt might be the only thing to save us. I've said before and still believe that if Trump loses and we open the borders fully we'll be at The Road Warrior level of dystopia in 10 years. I don't believe that going fascist and authoritarian is the only way to prevent that though, especially because I don't see Trump as the fascist boogeyman the left does.
But do you really think the mainstream people who you could sway from the grip of the SJW are ever going to come around to Nazism? Isn't it more likely to consign the alt right to irrelevance if the "kill Jews/blacks Hitler did nothing wrong" planks are so firmly ensconced in your platform?
If ideological purity is the goal and keeping the lame normies out is desirable, how is the alt right really different from neo Nazis or other WN treehouse fringe groups?
To me, when "the day of the rope" is something you talk about even jokingly, you're gonna push anyone slightly interested in issues of free speech and anti globalism back to the left. "Well maybe Hillary is right, I guess nationalists really are evil Nazis, I'm just gonna support open borders."
Here's the hangup you're having. When people start considering themselves Alt-Right it's not because one of us stomped up to them and did this
People are going Alt-Right because we're telling them that it's perfectly fine and normal to actually believe what they see and hear. We make offensive jokes which certainly can be off-putting to normies, but we're also happy to provide sourced statistics and other hatefact resources. The GAS THE KIKES, RACE WAR NOW stuff might make it hard to approach us objectively and yet every Trayvon and Big Mike nets us new people because we're (on the whole) young, charming, funny, and up front about a lot of uncomfortable things. We're that "open and honest conversation about race" the left keeps disingenuously asking for and boy do they hate it.
True, but you do realize you're alienating a large part of the potential new people who still can't get past the GAS THE KIKES, RACE WAR NOW stuff, right?
I'll be honest, I would never say I'm "alt right" IRL because I think the media is doing an effective job of painting alt right as WN neo nazis, and the alt right (besides Milo) isn't doing a lot to dispute that.
I have a few minor quibbles here and there with a point or two but this sums up the alt-right as I understand it:
See I can agree with pretty much all this except point number 1, which I can get behind--to a point. I believe America has a distinct and unique culture. I do not believe it should be undermined and changed to be more like cultures in other countries. I think immigrants should assimilate as they always did here. But where I break from most alt right people as I understand it, is for them it's "...and that culture is White!"
America did have pretty much one culture for the first couple centuries since settlement up until about 1820 or so. For the pre and post Revolution, the 13 Colonies were White British Protestants. That was the culture. But that went out pretty quickly, when we had Germans moving here, then Irish. We took over Louisana which had a lot of French Canadians. We took over the West which already had a ton of Mexican/Spanish. We imported a lot of Chinese labor. All these cultures assimilated into America and shaped it as well, adding some small parts to it. You can't throw out everything pre-1820 and try to dial back the clock to the 13 Colonies and make our culture exclusively WASP (with some German thrown in, because those guys were pretty cool in the 30s, rite?).
I'm not in favor of us getting Somali enclaves, or majority Islamic cities where nobody assimilates (though to be fair, nobody is really too worried about the Chinatowns that have been in like 20 cities for 100 years). I firmly believe that new immigrants must assimilate to our majority culture. I just feel that a lot of alt right people want to go further, with segregation and deportation or "the day of the rope" and that's a bridge too far for me.