Alt-psychopathic status maximizers
https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/877563552730562561
A while ago I called myself alt-right because hey, the God-Emperor got elected. Later, the elected has shown himself not to be much of a God, and certainly not an Emperor, and so I've lost my interest. And you would think everybody else had done so too, but then you wouldn't understand politics.
I haven't been following this very much, but apparently there's the alt-right, and now something called the alt-lite. What is the alt-lite?
How to answer this question? I could go on doing some reading about their positions, what they believe in. But that would be missing the point. If that's how you analize political movements then you haven't been reading this blog properly.
The point here is that the "alt-lite" is at the left of the alt-right; but their naming suggests that they want to contest the alt-right space. So by definition, the alt-lite are entryists who want to eat up the political space of the alt-right. And to do so, they will take whatever position, they will do whatever is necessary. Because the difference between left and right is not one of "beliefs". It is one of drive. The left are the psychopatic status maximizers. The right are those who are not. Relatively speaking, of course. So you can expect the alt-lite to be a psychopathic status maximizing version of the alt-right.
So what will they do? They'll keep Trump support, because there's a lot of money there. 60 million people voted for the man after all. They will tone down the Nazi stuff because there's little to gain there. You'll have a lot of women there. A lot of Jews. A lot of gays. A lot of fund-raising. A lot of media promotion. A lot of weird changing of positions according to what the media likes to hear at the moment.
There's a clip here which shows a good example to where this is moving:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLLPTxfm2G8
And you know what? They'll probably win. Because they have way more drive than your average chap on frog-Twitter. In a fight, the guy without scruples always beats the guy with scruples. The common thing to people who have achieved something in life is greed, the drive to achieve something at whatever cost and no matter how many people you should trample over in your way. These sociopaths genes exist for a reason. They work.
Until everything goes to hell and there's no more prosocial chumps to fool.
39 comments
[…] Alt-psychopathic status maximizers […]
The Alt Lite is civic nationalism/citizenism. The_Donaldism. Their hero is "based black guy." The Alt Right recognize that minority births are now a majority in the US and that civic nationalism doesn't have a future. They are ethnonationalists. Identity politics for whites. They So much as it would be comforting to pretend that AL's pretensions towards AR's positions are driven by greed and status maximization - and to a significant extent that's certainly true - there is still a major ideological motive behind it. There are similar divisions in many European countries. For instance, in Russia, with which I am most familiar, it would be the division between basic bitch "vatniks" and "patriots" (of Rossiya), which contain many Jews and minorities in its upper echelons, and nationalists (of ethnic Russians), who are overwhelmingly russkie for obvious reasons.
That’s not an ideological “motive”. It’s an ideological tactic. It’s a result, not a cause. Just look at them. Do they seem honest to you? You've been documenting what a shameless self promoting ass Navalny is. Same thing.
With the exception of chariot racing teams, political divisions can't be 100% arbitrary bull shit. If someone who grew up late in the Cold War says they're a true believer in civic nationalism, they probably are. It was practically the old state religion. Don't get me wrong, you are entirely correct about psychopathic status signaling. I'm just saying it's worth noting, even for just academic reasons, the true believers vs. the plain psychos. Whether Cernovich or Yianopolis ends up with more money indicates something anyway.
But it always descends into chariot racing teams, eventually.
Which bandwagon is next for you spandrell?
I'm waiting for White Sharia to go mainstream.
White Sharia is a thing. It is promulgated by those Florida neighborhood councils that regulate all aspects of the outward appearance of your property to conform to the standards of upwardly mobile whiteness: how often you need to mow your lawn, what trees and shrubs you are allowed to plant, what color you can paint your house. Not mowing your lawn is black, putting an old non-functioning car up on blocks in the front lawn (a common practice in parts of the rural South according to legend) has a connection to disfavored faction in the English Civil War, filling your yard with tall trees is hippie tree-hugger European (called Bohemian when such people actually traced their ancestry to Central Europe). The religious police (neighborhood council) will see to it that such deviations from whiteness are punished
Those 'councils' are everywhere, "putting an old non-functioning car up on blocks in the front lawn (a common practice in parts of the rural South according to legend) has a connection to disfavored faction in the English Civil War" Robbe-Grillet was better on the 'rural South acc. to legend', places they make hoe-cake and fried dough and 'egg gravy'--he probably got if from Faulkner, but it was precise. I guess this is another of your fantasy-jokes, like that Polish to your German about Ms. Weidel. I had to go through high school with such smelly white-trash blueblood-rednecks who do such things: they are Baptists/Primitive Baptists/Holiness/Assembly of God/Church of God, none of whom know even the slightest about the American Civil War, (other than that there were 'Yankees'), much less the English. These people know who Dale Evans was, vaguely remember Geo. Wallace, and listen to 'Alabama' country group. They dip snuff and some have outdoor toilets, many 'quit' after 6th Grade. I went str8 from 12th Grade with these ignorants to Juilliard (Jews of legend, Asians already robots in the 70s.) Your 'Bohemian/C. Eur' is str8 out of Ronald Firbank.
I don't get your point. We'll always have sociopatic status maximizerser on top. Who else could get, has ever gotten a top job? If now there's money to be made and status be gained by being "nationalistic", "patriotic" or something like that, this is a good sign showing that western civilization might still be saved. Being led by a sociopat is usually no problem. Odds are our civilization can survive that. Being overrun and replaced by foreigners is far worse and something we cannot survive. I'd rather have a Franco than a Merkel. Hell, I'll cheer for the right sociopat.
If Franco had been a sociopathic status maximizer he would have sided with the Popular Front; as plenty of generals did. He was certainly cold-blooded but there is nothing shameless in his career. Sociopathic status maximizers will always move left. This alt-lite Jewish women will first make money out of Trump supporters; then after they have name recognition they'll agitate to make Trumpism be all about toilet rights for trannies and jail time for Islamophobia.
OK, Franco was no sociopath. Sociopatic status maximizers signaling will be that they are holy. As times change so does what is holy or "left". Status signaling can be about tranny rights and gay marriage or -for people with different believes- about gas the fags. Sometimes people believe that ist holy to settle hordes of strangers in their midst, sometimes that it is holy to kill all foreigners. Your premiss seems to be that all Westerns have essentially the same religion. I think this is no longer true. Signals work only within one group; it does not work on a group with different believes. For example, signalling about toilet rights makes you holy in progressive circles. It wouldn't work so well for an aspiring leader of IS.
Right now, progressivism is the state religion. It is by far the strongest religion, the one which holds all the power and all the money. It follows that the most dedicated psychopathic status maximizers will all eventually try to find a way to gain status inside progressivism. Compared to the money and fame that progressive status can give you, right-wing status is a pittance. Some people are content with that, but that's because they're not that greedy, or because for some reason they are completely barred from gaining progressive status, so they must seek an alternative; but that's a fairly rare case. Progressives are fairly open.
't is easier to be a big fish in a small pond.
Yeah but the small pond gets very small after a while. Especially when you can see the big pond every day showing of in front of you.
Well, your reason for calling yourself alt-right actually overlaps significantly with the motivations of the so-called "alt-lite." Rallying around Trump as a status symbol and otherwise expressing the Alex Jones platform of the American civic religion souverainism -- the logical view to hold in this circumstance. The alt-right is now paying for its decision to engage the spotlight. Besides, the alt-right has no one to patrol the gates, so it's not so much a case of entryism as it is of homesteading on terra nullius. For a long time the alt-lite were tolerated as useful idiots, but now... And speaking of "a lot of gays," Spandrell, need I remind you: https://imgur.com/a/x4uSX
Remind me of what? Who's that guy?
The guy in top photo is a founding member of TRS (the podcast guys with the ((()))-meme). Turns out he has two moms, is at least bi-sexual has had sex with a teenage boy met through TRS and that there is a homo cotterie within the organization/their circles. Which despite the loud condemnations of fagottry on air the rest of the crew seem very hesitant to want to talk about. There's also Greg Johnson, who's a homo, and have a fairly long history of fights and accusations against various white nationalist figures regarding tolerance of sodomy and again have close connections with TRS and a bunch of other alt-right outfits. He seems to be a bit of a social butterfly being at conferences in both Europe and the US and networking like crazy. Quite catty and quick to call for purges for excessive homophobia and crudeness. The whole situation has led to most of the more prole/radical people being pissed off and started talking about throwing homos into woodchippers. As well as some online slap fights after Johnson publically started a feud with Spencer and a Swedish nationalist publisher as well as publically demanding that people pick sides. Don't know if it amounts to much. If you've got some time and brain cycles to spare worrying about people you'll never meet and who will never impact your life here's a podcast discussing the situation with some former TRS people giving an inside POV: https://soundcloud.com/decimu/the-third-jimpact
In 2016, the alt-right heroically shifted the Overton window. That's a victory. When you shift the Overton window, when among the results of the shift is that some persons who are not on our side colonize the newly open political ground, why, what did we expect to happen? Whether the alt-right enjoys further victories during 2017 depends chiefly on Trump, but if we wish the general center-right public to thank us for introducing them to Kek, we shall be disappointed. Personally, I don't care about Central Park's Ceasar-as-Trump disrupter one way or the other. Moreover, though I like and value free speech as much as the next Anglo-Saxon does, I have ceased to be a pro-free-speech ideologue. Rather, like Molyneux, I have become an ethnonationalist pro-victory ideologue. I mean to win to the extent to which I can. I wish that I better understood the psychopathic status maximizers. Your article illuminates them.
P.S. Richard B. Spencer, whom I admire, does not make many mistakes but I don't see the benefit in his broadside against Central Park’s Ceasar-as-Trump disrupter. To defend the Left is not our job. Let the Left defend the Left. Personally, I am probably too orderly and middle-aged a citizen to materially disturb the peace myself, but I don't buy the notion that U.S. patriots are going to feel sorry for Leftist weasels whose activities are violently disrupted. Unfortunately, it is too late to address these problems nonviolently. The only question is whether we will [a] fight back and [b] fight to win. (I believe that we will.)
"Richard B. Spencer, whom I admire" https://soundcloud.com/pozzcast/ep2-the-unbearable-whiteness-of-being-richard-spencer
I'm no particular fan of Spencer, especially since he got fat, but this podcast is just some lame envious piece of butthurt.
He probably just dislikes the fat Jewess and he has a point.
Best to just call it the entryist Jews. Behind every one of them is a desperate neocon who absolutely will not let status maxing get in the way of toeing the line.
Spandrell: Most of your articles are interesting, but this one particularly so. There are a lot of layers through which to drill down here. I suspect that the question will defy easy explication. Three months ago, you were trying to figure out Gnon's will. Do you remember the two British brothers, the ones who shared edgy genes? I believe that you are right: edginess is a quality all its own. The alt-right wants institutions, but experience suggests that edgy persons don't cooperate well enough to collectively build up and maintain institutions, whereas most alt-rightists have heretofore been edgy persons. Is edginess not partly why, in the Anglo-Saxon countries—whose MPs and Congressmen are elected first-past-the-post—national-coalition parties with soft, blurry ideological foci dominate? Is edginess not wholly why small parties with coherent ideologies fail, torn apart by internal dissent?—or, in the rare cases in which they don't fail, why they rapidly become national-coalition parties with soft, blurry ideological foci? When they don't fail, it is because nonedgers have moved in, taken over, and sidelined the founders. The ultimate triumph of the nonedgers may be a constant of human nature, impossible to fight. Hegel seemed to think so, at any rate.
Every once in a while you need an uber-edgy guy, an evil bully, a brutal sociopath dictator to dominate everyone else. A Roosevelt, a Steve Jobs. Part of that is in restricting access of edgy strivers and promote loyal people. The more open the system is the more strivers are able to get ahead and dismantle cohesion of the system. Which can be a good thing; North Korea is very cohesive.
Later, the elected has shown himself not to be much of a God, and certainly not an Emperor, and so I’ve lost my interest. And you would think everybody else had done so too, but then you wouldn’t understand politics. yeah ..this presidency thus far has been unsurprisingly uneventful especially given all the hype and predictions of how Trump would either destroy or save America.
These people are irrelevant and none of the things they do matter. Alt-trite is predicated upon the notion that not only is democracy ("public" power) still in effect, but that it ever worked as advertised.
^^^ Not completely irrelevant, but sufficiently irrelevant.
Tommy Robinson is Rebel Media. He beat up a Muslim in a prison cell full of Muslims and then went to trial for assault. A Muslim that was going to throw boiling sugar-water in his face. He confronts Muslims in Muslim Neighborhoods. So if Rebel Media isn't good guys nobody is. Plus, Zman supports the Caesar-disrupters. And he's a good guy.
Shakespeare in the Park is a State-supported SWPL institution. So the Trump-assassination Caesar play is State-supported Progressive propaganda. So the disrupters are acting against state-supported Progressive propaganda. "Don't disrupt because free speech is good" is like "Democrats are the real racists" -- what Zman calls a "Boomer-Con" approach that accepts the Progressive paradigm.
In a fight, the guy without scruples always beats the guy with scruples. The common thing to people who have achieved something in life is greed, the drive to achieve something at whatever cost and no matter how many people you should trample over in your way. These sociopaths genes exist for a reason. They work. You are quite a contradiction incarnate, aren't you? 1) You rehearse the importance of being lie-spouting deceivers, all the time, tell how the self--deceiving deceptoaces (your psychopathic status maximizers, most of whom, I maintain, are sociopaths, not psychopaths) Non-1) You look very far from employing their methods. This is normal on second thought... for, self-deception being essential to their mental equilibrium, they'd never talk of their type realistically. So when you see someone describe them realistically, you know they are small, or no deceivers. Now we have this You’ll have a lot of women there. A lot of Jews. A lot of gays. A lot of fund-raising., that you offer as a list of garbage. 1) Women are better neurally equipped for some tasks and some kinds of understanding, as compared to men. 2) No need to say anything about Jews' "neural equipment", I guess 3) Gays have higher average IQs, specially when it comes to verbal adeptness, aesthetical skill, ... it's important assets, in an ever less physical world. 4) Smart people tend to have money, and to understand that it is in their interest to use it to foster some causes. You end up praising them, without knowing it?
In as far as I understand, there are two paths of life: 1) Be a yucky, disgusting, loser-omega nerd, who lives secludedly, to see and understand, delves into questions and finds out one more bit of truth a day, all while being female-less (nobody who is a fully sincere and fully thinking being can be in the company of a female) and occasionally bullied by the true alphazzzzzztz!. 2) Be a sociopathic deceptowizard. Most fall between and betwixt these two extremes. People with a much driven mind fall near one of the two. It's strange to see someone disgusted by 1) and who are also loathe of 2), though!
I'm just lazy.
Yes, you didn't even write the book about Chinese history you once mentioned in your blog.
I had a shitload of things going on last year; but yes, I must apologize.
No, the guy without scruples does not always beat the guy with scruples. The conjecture is widely observed to be counterfactual. You may supply your own examples. They're all around you.
This naming situation is ironic situation, because AFAIK "Alt Lite" is not a self-appellation, it's a term invented by the Alt Right to diss the broad church of pro-Trump, libertarian, republican, anti-SJW, anti-Feminist types on social media that was smeared by Hillary as the "Alt Right" in one of her election speeches!
Gorilla Mind link was hilarious.