It’s Der Movement!
On a Radix thread, the following series of comments were made (emphasis added):
Laguna Beach Fogey • a day ago
FYI: I hope I'm not speaking out of turn here, but it has been brought to my attention that Richard has been privately approached by respected Alt-Right figures about the increasingly erratic, destructive behaviour of a certain Alt-Right writer (on display in this comment thread below), and has been urged to distance himself and the brand from him.4 • Reply•Share ›AvatarAlek Laguna Beach Fogey • a day agoJonah Goldberg or Colin Liddell?6 • Reply•Share ›AvatarAlek Alek • a day agoBen Shapiro or Colin Liddell?6 • Reply•Share ›AvatarAlek Alek • a day agoGeorge Will or Colin Liddell?6 • Reply•Share ›AvatarLaguna Beach Fogey Alek • a day agolol that fucking cracked me up5 • Reply•Share ›
Assume for the moment that the initial comment reflects reality. Now, let us consider the various ways this informs us about Der Movement.
1. Who are “respected Alt-Right figures” who can afford to talk about “erratic” or “destructive” behavior of anyone else in their moronic “movement?” The idea is laughable. In this circus of race-mixers and child porn apologists (*), HBDers, juvenile jackasses, incompetent quota queens, civic nationalists, individuals whose every utterance and action displays poor judgment, breathless fanboys worshiping their “God Emperor,” pseudoscientists and ethnic fetishists, anyone stupid enough to say “Donald Trump is the last chance for White America” – who among that morass of flotsam and jetsam could have the nerve – the chutzpah – to point the finger of criticism toward anyone else in their “Alt Right” cult?
2. Again assuming this is all true, note that an individual who is a commentator at various “movement” blogs apparently knows the inner business of “respected Alt-Right figures.” Good self-control and security there among the lip-flapping womanly gossips of Der Movement.
3. Being privy to this private information, said individual then blabs it on a public forum (Radix, being a well known flagship of the "Alt Right," is no doubt intensely scrutinized by the opposition) that is read by anyone and everyone, including those “watchdogs” hostile to pro-White activism. Then all the various commentators make a joke about it.
4. Finally, assuming it is Liddell, I’ve been commenting on his flaws and ethnic fetishism for some time. All that was ignored by Der Movement, which embraced Liddell, hosted his writings, made podcasts with him, etc. Then of course when the comedy descends to depths such as this, then the alarm bells ring.
And these are the “respected” figures and leaders of the “Alt Right,” which will bring us our salvation. Basically, “movement” freakishness, lack of self-control and security, absence of dignity and prudence, and embarrassing feuds and stupidities exemplified by one moronic episode.
The wages of affirmative action go on and on….
*For some inexplicable reason, my response to this nonsense was rejected in moderation, and so is reproduced below:
Before you make your snarky remarks, you probably need to first read what Derbyshire actually wrote.
He doesn't see what's the problem with folks possessing and enjoying child porn. Oh yes, it is "creepy" (much like, in my opinion, a White male, not man, having an East Asian wife), but he does not see any legal or moral problem with it.
Of course, it is the demand for child porn that creates the supply, so that if Derbyshire has his way, and child porn is legalized, demand will increase, causing more children to be viciously sexually abused, raped, sodomized, even murdered, so that freaks can legally enjoy their "creepy" fun.
Derbyshire is a moral turd, a monster. If you cannot understand that, let us know when you are back on Earth.
That Derbyshire is a child porn apologist is an indisputable fact. In his own words, emphasis added:
…there is an anarcho-tyranny angle here that is sufficiently deplorable in itself. Why should it be a crime to have child porn on your computer? (Note that the item on the charge sheet about Bukovsky “making” child-porn images is bogus. As Claire Berlinski explains, under U.K. law just downloading images counts as “making” them.)Enjoying child porn is weird and creepy to be sure. I cleave, however, to the old principle that you can’t go to jail for what you’re thinking. In the Western world of today, as the waters of totalitarian conformity rise all around us, that point of view seems positively quaint.From one member of the Awkward Squad to another, I offer Vladimir Bukovsky my best wishes.