This raises another, subtle point (though I doubt McCrean notices). The homosexual is often the homophobic Right’s favorite straw man for “those with no concern for future generations.” And yet isn’t the Right — the non-libertarian, at least — concerned above all with the past, and the preservation thereof? In a word, archeofuturism?
I’m relatively uninterested in the “homosexual question,” and find the “gay baiting” in Der Movement (*) both tiresome and politically or personally motivated (**). But O’Meara here goes too far. No, I – a person of the “Right” – don’t give a goddamn about the dead past and I am uninterested in preserving past failure. Further, the whole breathless “rightist” excitement over archeofuturism leaves me cold as I see it as a juvenile, “dungeons and dragons” sort of fantasy – what someone like Faye wants, not what is a realistic or desirable outcome. And, while it may be just a swarthoid defect, I could never understand the “rightist” fascination with all this “Lord of the Rings” and “Hobbit” nonsense.
And what is most tiresome is all this pro-gay "mannerbund" propaganda.
Some advice for gays in Der Movement:
1. Read Salter’s On Genetic Interests, particularly the brief section on homosexuals. Homosexuals have genetic interests like everyone else and since they typically do not have their own biological children, the importance of ethny (and of course extended family) is even greater for them than for heterosexuals. Therefore, an adaptive-minded homosexual should promote – not oppose – future-looking, pro-natalist attitudes and policies for their ethny, they should promote traditional heterosexual marriage and family formation, and they should place loyalty to ethny ahead of loyalty to their sexual preferences. But just like those who place Christianity above race, the gays place their sexual freedom and identity above race.
2. Be realistic – the most you can expect from the more tolerant factions of the heterosexual far-right is tolerance and not enthusiastic acceptance, much less promotion. Likely, the more tolerant faction is represented by someone like myself: who finds homosexuality personally distasteful, wishes it did not exist, but who is willing to look the other way on it and accept far-right gays who essentially “stay in the closet” and who otherwise behave normally apart from their sexual behavior. But if the gays are going to constantly push and annoy even the more tolerant heterosexuals, the whole thing will not end well. If you annoy and alienate those willing to accept you then you’ll be left with nothing and no one.
* And no, talking about activists’ “homoerotic fixation on Trump” is not “gay baiting.” I do not call people like the hedonistic womanizer Roissy homosexual, I merely point out that their unhealthy fixations on Trump the Man border on the homoerotic. Just telling it like it is.
** I’ve written on this before. There are (credible) rumors about certain “august” “movement” personages – rumors that have even filtered down to someone as disconnected to Der Movement as myself. But one never hears openly and publicly about these people because those precincts of Der Movement most prone to gay baiting either share the same ideology as these “august personages” or they have no personal feud with them. Any principled opposition to homosexuality in White activism would include speaking out against those people whose “closet door” is so open even dumb swarthoids like I notice it. But then the only thing consistent about Der Movement is its hypocrisy.
But while normies, as a rule, veer away from dangers and challenges, and err on the side of unctuous smarm and disingenuous civility when it comes to choosing Presidential candidates, they are by no means attached to a single unvarying course of action. They are also capable of more animated responses when it becomes apparent that this is the necessary course.
Like after Rotherham? After Cologne? After Trump rallies degenerate into outbursts of leftist/minority violence? Truth be told, I’m beginning to wonder if there is anything that would stimulate a White resistance. If our present government would announce that all White Americans are to be exterminated, and should report to the local internment camp for “processing,” the likely reaction would be for humble Whites, with heads downturned, dutifully lining up for elimination, with every other White cuck wearing a “Black Lives Matter” or “I’m With Her” or “Feel the Bern” t-shirt. I’d like any of these “alt-rightists” to paint a picture of a realistic scenario that leads to a mass White resistance.
We see this already with many Trump supporters, most of whom are just semi-redpilled normies, and we will see it with more conservatives, Christians, or people of the “middling sort” who initially “didn’t quite care” for Donald Trump’s tone, as they see Mexican mobs egging White women and Black Lives Matter activists trying to cripple police horses.
We see nothing. They say nothing and they do nothing.
The often repeated analogy with 1968, when Black and Leftist violence contributed to the Nixon landslide, is a good one. Once again, a fight started by leftists will finish at the ballot boxes in their utter defeat. Let us hope that this time the defeat runs even deeper, to the very roots of the Left. It is part of the work of the Alt Right to ensure that it does.
And what is the “Alt Right” actually doing to “ensure that it does?” Practically speaking, nothing. I’ve previously outlined pragmatic and plausible activities that the “right” could pursue to take advantage of the Trump phenomenon and as far as I can see nothing at all is being done (apart from Roissy breathlessly analyzing Trump’s every macho utterance and every alpha hand gesture).
I haven’t been able to find any definitive information online about Steyer’s ancestry, although he does not seem to be in any way Jewish. Lind, Lind, where art thou, Lind? Of course Der Movement would be concerned about whether Steyer is a “Mormon” – or a “high-trust hunter-gatherer.”