The Alt-South: An Explanation

The SPLC has written a new article about the Alt-South and my role in it. They get several things wrong about what we are trying to do though:

Where does the term “Alt-South” come from? Is it a rebranding?

Actually, it was inspired by my exchange with Vox Day who distinguishes between an Alt-White and Alt-West within the Alt-Right. If there are all these Alts now, I thought to myself: why not an Alt-South? If you think about it, the original Fire-Eaters were an Alt-South in the 1850s.

It sounded to me like a valuable piece of intellectual real estate which is why I seized it. I’m also claiming “Proud Goys” in contrast to Gavin McInnes’s group the “Proud Boys.” Again, I just liked the sound of it, but substantially there is something there. We’ve been building an Alt-South for years now before we had a name for it. Michael Cushman even published a foundational text on Southern identity called Our Southern Nation: Its Origins and Future which was the product of the year or so we spent tracing the origins of Southern culture back to the British Caribbean.

We’ve also talked for a long time about the scene that is larger than the League of the South and Southern Nationalism. At one point, we had planned to host a conference in the Smoky Mountains and the idea was to invite a bunch of people like Jared Taylor, James Edwards and Keith Preston who are not involved with the League, but who we consider allies within our region. Nothing ever came of that, but the idea of focusing on the larger scene and the broader network gave birth to the “Alt-South.”

There are lots of people who are involved with the scene, but who are not members of the League of the South. There are also people who have quit the League for one reason or another, people who are sympathetic but who identify as something other than Southern Nationalist, and the Dixie Deplorables who are American patriots going through the earliest stages of their awakening. Why not include those people in a larger amorphous subculture like the Alt-Right?

It is easier for our opponents to disrupt membership organizations. The Alt-Right has enjoyed a lot of success because it is not an organization. Indeed, it is full of people who hate each other, but what does it matter if they can all agree on, say, supporting President Trump?

What is our relationship to TRS Confederates?

Why wouldn’t we link up with TRS Confederates? Identity Dixie has recently emerged as a powerful voice in our scene. Of course we want to work with them.

What is our relationship with Richard Spencer and the Alt-Right?

As everyone has noticed, I’ve grown tired of the silly beefs and make light of them. It makes more sense to find points of agreement and work together to advance common goals. That’s the only way we will ever get anywhere. When Richard Spencer told me about AltRight.com, I jumped on board. I’ve long thought that some kind of centralized hub site is needed and was happy to contribute.

Why have I remodeled this website?

1.) First, it looks a lot better, and I only switched from the MH Magazine to MH Newsdesk theme.

2.) Second, I had long planned to do it anyway and it was a New Years’ Resolution. I’m going to be filling up the pages with lots of content soon.

3.) Third, I have learned a lot from observing the Alt-Lite brands.

Are we holding real world events?

The Atlanta Forum was a real world event!

Instead of holding public protests which facilitate doxxing, which are always occasions for fellowship anyway, and which are probably unnecessary in the Trump era, we are going to hold private meetups. Basically, we will hold an annual conference – the Atlanta Forum – and a series of small, private meetings in large Southern metros. That way new people can come off the internet, join the network, and get to know other likeminded people in their area in real life at minimum cost. Again, we are focused on building the larger network, not fighting with anyone or siphoning off members.

What is our relationship with the League of the South?

The only problem that I had with the League of the South, which the SPLC blew out of proportion, was on the question of violence. There are hundreds of things we can do to grow our movement, but following in the footsteps of Dylann Roof isn’t one of them. Those incidents are nothing but a distraction from what we ought to be doing. It is a source of division we should avoid.

As for the debate over violence, it is really the Left which is embracing and justifying political violence. They are the ones who are initiating violence. Dylann Roof was the exception, not the rule. In contrast, antifa violence is the rule, not the exception. Everyone in our community agrees that we should arm ourselves, that we have a right to defend ourselves and that we need a security force. We also agree that one day the Left might launch some kind of John Brown-style attack.

I hope it doesn’t come to that. If it does come to a larger conflagration though, it should be on them, not us. That way when we respond to their aggression our actions – like those of our predecessors – will be seen as legitimate and have the sanction of our community.

What should the Alt-South be doing?

As I said in my speech, the main thing we ought to be doing right now is adapting some of the things the Alt-Lite brands have been doing for our own purposes. Richard Spencer, for example, has begun to use Periscope. Vox Day has been using Periscope to do a nightly broadcast on his blog. Ideally, we need to have four or five Alt-Right primetime shows doing punditry on Periscope every night. In the long run, we can replace the talking heads that people get their news from on cable television.

I’ve used a combination of Twitter, WordPress and Periscope to document the condition of Selma in 2017. My friend Paul Kersey has written an e-book about Selma which he is promoting with Twitter. I’m using WordPress to do punditry now. I’m using Twitter to build up a social network and engage in discourse poisoning. We need to have a group of Proud Goys, a social media team, who do nothing but build social networks. Let them sit there and build relationships all day on Facebook and Twitter. That way when we have something we want to fire off to a large audience it will be instantly delivered to hundreds of thousands of people who will share it and spread it to millions.

Fundamentally, we need more people who are generating fresh and interesting content and building up massive social networks, not bickering on Facebook.

What is our relationship to the Trump administration?

As Southern Nationalists, the way that I see it is that we can either choose to be successful in the Trump era, or we can choose to be unsuccessful. This is only a phase. President Trump will be gone in 4 or 8 years and what really matters is the legacy he will leave behind. I’ve been writing for 16 years now and I will still be here when President Trump leaves office.

The Tea Party, for example, is more or less gone. It’s major legacy was polarizing the Republican Party to the point where Donald Trump was able to overthrow the Republican establishment. Just as Trumpism was the successor of the Tea Party, there will be a successor to Trumpism, and something after that, and so on. In the larger scheme of things, Trumpism was a necessary stepping stone.

I’m happy that civic nationalism is being given a trial. It is an advance over mainstream conservatism. I think we can win the argument on the playing field of nationalism. It won’t be difficult for us to show why civic nationalism is a failure and ethnonationalism is the way to go. We don’t have to do anything to show that civic nationalism is failure … just stand back and do nothing and say I told you so.

It hasn’t been two weeks and all the kumbaya happy talk about civic nationalism is already fading under the bright lights of reality. America’s divisions aren’t going away. Instead, the polarization is growing, the various divides are widening into chasms, and the country is becoming more aware every day that nothing unites us anymore. Hell, California might even try to secede in 2018.

So, I’m with President Trump for now. I think he is doing a lot of great things. I’m not going to pretend I don’t enjoy it when President Trump smacks down ‘civil rights icon’ John Lewis or takes action on issues I have long supported. In the long run though, I understand he is going to be gone one day, that all these wackos wearing vagina hats will be restored to power in Washington, that they will come back crazier than ever before, and that ultimately we prefer to rule ourselves (we’re getting a small taste of that now) and that the logic of our cultural disintegration and political polarization will lead to independence.

The Alt-South needs to focus on building Southern identity and stimulating a Southern national consciousness. We spent a lot of time at the Atlanta Forum talking about the racial, cultural, ethnic and religious solidarity of Dixie and how remarkable it is that our political unity has endured, and even seems to be growing, under all of these various disintegrating pressures. Before we can secede, there has to be a sense of an “us” that is different from a “them,” so we got to pick up where our ancestors left off with the defeat of the Confederacy. That’s a major task.

49 Comments

  1. Good stuff, HW. We are at the point where the rapid growth of the Right in reaction to 8 years of Obama and decades of liberal/multicultural supremacy has created conditions which are ripe for a broad coalition such as you describe. The Alt-Right has proven that. Different leaders or poles of influence can all emerge and be supported by Rights – there are more than enough now to support lots of approaches. As long as we have IRL contact between the leaders and groups and focus on our shared values or goals we will move forward. That is what is going on now.

  2. Good Article. I read the SPLC’s article. As usual, they and their fellows are either dumb and deluded, or liars.

  3. Wonder what you think of California going it’s own way? Doubt it will happen as there are a lot of legalities and is more complex than a new constitutional amendment, but if it did it would set a psychological precedent and make your goal of a southern nation much more likely.

    One thing about another dissolution of the union, instead of slavery being the arguing point, this time it seems much more likely liberal politics would be the inflammatory issue. The breaking line might be somewhat different than in 1861. If Texas joins your hypothetical breakaway, I can’t see the column of states to it’s north, all the way to the Canadian border choosing to go with liberal America, rather oil based economies like North Dakota and Wyoming would surely want to stay with Texas. May I mention culturally when driving in the Scottsbluff NE into Torrington WY area the CB radio was ablaze with anti-Obama talk from locals in their pickups when I went through in fall of 2012. Much of the conservative heartland is not really populated enough to stand on it’s own and in a dissolution would have to choose the anti-liberal faction to ally with. Don’t really see a repeat of 1861. Look at the red-blue dividing line by county, mostly a cosmopolitan leftist-thirdworld city vs. traditional rural, smaller city, outer suburb-exurban county America.

    • I believe in self determination for all and enforced inclusion,or mandated diversity, for none. Anything you cannot leave voluntarily is either a toxic relationship, a cult, a criminal enterprise, or a tyrannical government. Thus I support Calexist and self- determination for African-Americans, Tibetans, Palestinians, French Canadians, Native-American, Anglo-Canadians, Afrikaners, and yes even white Americans and any other people who desire it.. Let us back political devolution in all its glory and realign the world into separate spheres of sovereignty based on ethnicity for a people can never be truly happy and truly sovereign unless they are in nations of their own ethnicity firmly in control of their own destiny!

    • Exactly. OK & KS are mainly rural & sympathetic, as are NE, SD, & ND. Speaking for at least 1 of those states, we’d be happy to be considered “honorary South.”

      • Oklahoma is a Southern state. It was settled first off, by Indians removed there from Alabama, Mississippi and Florida. Many towns there are named after towns in Alabama and Mississippi. For instance; Eufala, Tishomingo, Atoka. During the War, General Maxey and his Texans, and General Stand Watie and his Choctaw-Cherokee Brigade, fought it out in Oklahoma, with troops from Wisconsin and Illinois. Missouri Guerrillas operated there, too. Oklahoma was a Confederate Territory with representation in the Confederate Congress. Afterwards, Northwest Oklahoma was settled by Panhandle Texans. Missourians and other Southerners settled there, before and during the land rush. I’ve got family in Oklahoma. They’re Southern, in culture and language, and wouldn’t have it any other way. There are also Confederate memorials to Generals Maxey and Waite’s commands.

        • I thought Oklahoma was just for displaced Cherokees until it became a state in 1907. But you’re right about its Southern-like culture. I noticed it when living in Lawton, near Fort Sill.

          • My wife was from Lawton. Her family came from Texas and settled there. Before that, they came from Georgia to Texas. BTW, I visited Fort Sill and the artillery and fort museum. I also went to the Great Plains Museum in Lawton.

        • I grew up in NE Oklahoma. We considered ourselves Southern, not mid-western. We sang I wish I was in Dixie in grade school. The Ozarks IMO would go the way of the confederacy and Southern succession.

          • I grew up and live on the Texas side of the Red. My family were from Edmon and Woodward. My parents were married in Durant. My wife is from Lawton. When I was a kid, we camped at West Burns Run on Lake Texoma. Anybody that says Oklahoma ain’t a Southern state, doesn’t know what they’re talking about.

    • If Texas leaves, it’ll take the rest of the South and the interior West with it. The interior West and the South are natural allies. Always have been.

  4. I am very ambivalent about SN, as I am about all petty nationalisms. The South is obviously a rather different place, but that is changing and I don’t think it’s such a good idea to exaggerate these differences. Overall, I think it would be for the best if the south were destroyed as a separate identity and culture. At the very least I believe SNs should stop misrepresenting themselves as WNs.

    • While white domination of North America is a good, it remains to be seen if the so constituted US is actually any good for whites in a more general sense. It could have taken another political path with smaller states.

    • 1.) I’m not a petty nationalist. I want to see nationalism triumph everywhere.

      2.) We’re not really exaggerating these differences.

      3.) That’s pretty extreme. It makes more sense to mobilize our Southern identity and greater sense of social solidarity to advance our goals.

      • Why entertain guinea hatred of northwestern europeans, especially WASP’s?

        The weaklings can’t stand on their own so they try to colonize southern identity, just as they invaded the North because their own country was a Third World ghetto. They’re just like the hispanics.

      • Silvio considers Southern Nationalism to be ‘petty’ because it’s a form of Ethnic Nationalism. He basically said that in the other thread on the Alt-South.

          • I’ve also encountered genuinely petty nationalists, but that’s not what Silvio is complaining about.

            He considers all ethnic nationalism to be ‘petty.’ He wants to live in a White melting pot.

      • I’ve been telling folks like Silvio for years that if they want to complain about Southern Nationalism, they should just pick a place (Connecticut, Rhode Island, Jersey, etc.) and start building their own movement.

        And all I’ve ever heard in response are crickets.

        • They simply can’t carry themselves, Arthur. A slender minority of individuals can and do, but as a people they cannot, have never, never will. This should be evident by how threatened they get whenever ‘anglos’ articulate any nationalist identity. Just imagine what it’s like to have to live around a majority of them, how much more entitled and aggressive they get.

          Some slavic french person, Clytemnestra, wrote in the last day a nice note expressing appreciation for the ‘anglos’ as the founders of this country. Contrast that with the salvos coming from Guiseppes.

        • Whenever Northern Leftists on HuffPo complain about the South, or specifically Texas, I tell them: “Why don’t you take your sixteen states and form your own government in Boston, NYC, or Chicago.’ I never get an answer back. However, recently, I’ve seen at least two individuals actually argue for Northern secession.

  5. Southern independence will involve dealing with the coloreds and mestizos. That could mean a race war. ZOG also has most of its major military bases in the South. Would the Federal regime in Washington City be willing to let them go? And what about the White southerners who don’t want to secede, what shall be done with them?

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/79b1312762775e50905c0de263b9fa6d68681c1370a462b36d136391a7360807.png https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/75abccde40bd57d7aca5d5e1f42cf1049084657959227af30f1a711cab783586.png

    • Good ole Jerry Kleinfel. If I didn’t know better I would say he was acting just like a Jewish Hasbara and pushing for the Left Whites to fight the Right Whites like they’re doing in the Ukraine. The whole time they laugh their asses off and print money off the carnage.

  6. Maybe it should be expanded to include all the red states into a secessionist movement. It should start out as a Southern nucleus but ought to be expanded into the heartland states. After all, there is a substantial amount of German and Southern genes in those areas.

    • Which part of the Midwest are you in? There are some places (like southern Ohio, Indiana, and parts of Illinois) which were de facto settled by Southerners.

      • There is also a substantial amount of German genes in the Heartland and should Germany go extinct- should it become a majority non-white Islamic State, then the greatest reservoir of German genes would reside in the Heartland.

        • That’s a good point, mate.

          The most heavily German states are all located in the heartland (the Dakotas, Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, and Nebraska in particular are uber Deutsch: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/German1346.gif/300px-German1346.gif).

          Having spent a lot of time in those states, I’d say that all of the German blood has also impacted the local mindset. For example, a lot of folks in the Heartland have this, ‘I don’t want to argue about politics, I just want to be able to go to work’ attitude that isn’t as common in other regions of the country. It’s definitely a different mindset than the one you encounter in New England, Canada, Dixie, etc.

  7. Well done! The site looks very professional, by the by. Everything is working out beautifully. I laugh at Trump’s trolling every single day. One adversary after another bows down before him. FYI – White Nationalism, White Racial Identity, is the absolute end of the road. There is no where else to go, when we are the absolute global minority. We either become White – or we perish.

  8. Elites invoke Universalism to renege on their Responsibility to the National People

    For most of history, it was difficult for mankind to trek and communicate across great distances. So, the elites of a community developed a strong bond with the people on their allotted territory.

    This bond between elites and people was most resilient among the Jews, not least because their nomadism required strong tribal bonds to keep the community together. The paradoxical nature of the Jews is their preferred mode of existence tended toward the division of elite and people yet their commitment to Tribal Will demanded conservation of unity. The Jewish Will of the Tribe grew stronger against the Jewish Nomadic Drive. Under normal circumstances, the Tribal Will should have weakened under the pressures of Nomadism, but Jews forged for themselves a culture of blessed particularity and unceasing paranoia(and humor of contempt) that militated against the Jewish loss of identity and unity, especially between elites and peoples. Jewish Culture claimed that Jews are a specially chosen people of the only true God and, furthermore, warned of decay and downfall were Jews to give into temptation of assimilation with other peoples and their wicked ways. Thus, even though the Jewish mode of nomadism was naturally most conducive to weakening of identity and unity, the Jewish spiritual worldview fed on that very existence to produce the opposite effect. What should have made Jews weaker as a Tribe made them stronger as a Tribe. The Jewish example illustrates how a people can rise above or triumph against Determinism with a special mindset. It is like the sport of Judo where one channels the force of the opponent against the opponent. What is naturally directed against you ends up favoring you against the opponent. If he pushes, you pull. If he pulls, you push.

    If, in the past, the difficulty of travel, trade, and communication drew the local elites and local masses closer, the ease of worldwide networks has had the effect of pooling together the elites or the best-and-the-brightest all around the world. Thus, globalism acts against the unity of the elites and the masses in any national community(with Israel being an exception because Jews have a special mindset). It is natural for the best-and-brightest to favor other best-and-brightest, just as it is natural for the rich, the famous, and/or the beautiful to seek the company of other people of comparable status or qualities. Since the rich and privileged can travel and communicate easily around the world, they’ve come to disdain the local community of ‘losers’. Why would a rich Briton care much about ‘dumb and dirty’ working class Britons when it’s more fun, thrilling, fulfilling, and glamorous to hang around with rich Hindus, rich Asians, rich Arabs, and rich Russian Jews? (To be sure, the internet has afforded this ‘privilege’ to the masses as well, and this accounts for the rise of the Alt Right made possible through independent worldwide networking of Eurosphere nationalists. Since the white elites no longer care about white masses, the white peoples around the world have formed an international network of voices sharing their disillusionment with the globalist elites and their venal ways, especially in ‘cucking’ out to Jewish Globalists whose advantage depends on white-elite-collaboration with the likes of George Soros. And yet, Alt Right networks, even though international in reach, has an agenda at odds with globalism. If globalism is a neo-aristocratic pact among elites around the world to bond closely with one another than with their own peoples, Alt Right’s neo-nationalism is about mutual pact among different nations and races to respect each other’s borders, histories, and unique narratives.)

    Since the globalist elites have chosen neo-aristocratic privilege over identity-and-unity with their own peoples — Irish elites feel closer to Hindu and African elites than to fellow Irish masses — , they must make up for their moral deficiency. After all, favoring one’s globalist elite privilege above the interests of one’s people sounds rather vain and greedy. An Irish elite member who prefers identifying with rich Asians, Africans, and Muslims has pretty much betrayed his own countrymen.

    So, how does he go about regaining moral legitimacy.

    1. One is universalism over nationalism. The elites may argue that nationalism is too narrow and petty. It’s about us-versus-them, whereas universalism is about the good of all humanity. This may sound nice and noble, but it’s just a pipe dream invoked as an excuse to abandon what is real and doable. It is doable for national elites to look out for the interests of their national people. In contrast, it is impossible for even a nation as powerful and rich as the United States to save and redeem the world. So, lofty rhetoric used by globalists is just a convenient utopian hat-trick to morally excuse their reneging of responsibility to their national folks.

    The truth is the elites of any nation can effectively rule over the nation, but even the grandest project by all the elites of the world cannot fix or redeem the world. It’s like a father and mother can feed their own kids but cannot take care of all the children of the world.

    The lofty-impossible is a useful crutch to excuse one’s dereliction of duty to the real-possible. Parents who neglect their own kids and let them starve in the name of caring for and saving all the kids of the world are just fooling themselves as they throw a party for themselves in the name of saving ALL the kids.

    This is a definitely problem in the black community where leaders are full of Big Talk about ‘social justice’ bu utterly lacking in down-to-earth actual deeds that might make a real difference. So, when a globalist elitist yammers about humanity-over-nationality, it’s just an excuse for him to indulge his own narrow interests. After all, if one’s goal is the lofty-impossible, one can stick to mere rhetoric while doing next-to-nothing since nothing real can be done to save all of humanity. When national leaders take after celebrity phonies like Bono and George Clooney, they no longer care about their own people. Just take a look at Justin Trudeau who can’t tell the difference between Hollywood and nation.

    2. Another is Multi-Culturalism and Diversity. Generally, a nation has a dominant racial, ethnic, religious, or cultural group that defines the essence of the nation. It’s like Greece is defined by its majority Greek population and Turkey by its majority Turkey population. So, the core national duty of the national elites is to be mindful of the interests of the national majority. Greek interests should trump all else in Greece, and Turkish interests should take precedence over all others in Turkey.

    But this is problematic to the globalist elites that now rule many nations, especially advanced ones. The ruling elites don’t much care for their own people since their main identification is with globalist elites they rubbed shoulders with at Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, Stanford, and etc.and whom they meet at globalist gatherings and conferences.

    Still, as national leaders, they come under pressure to look out for the interests of the national masses. So, a kind of tension develops in these globalized national leaders. They feel closer to the diverse membership of the Global neo-aristocracy but are obligated to represent & serve the identity and interest of their national masses.

    So, what is to be done? Multi-culturalism, mass immigration, and Diversity are meant to do the trick. If their own nations are made more diverse and multi-cultural, it means their nations are no longer defined by a dominant history, narrative, or culture. Their nations are now just another globo-diverse nation. Since all nations are to be defined more by multi-cultural ‘minority rights’ than national-majority-interests, the globalized national elites no longer need to be mindful of representing and serving core national interests. After all, if each nation is just a diversified mini-version of the World, there is no such thing as national interests, and national leaders can more legitimately pursue global interests while neglecting national ones.

    If UK is made into a mini-version-of-the-world with its Africans, Hindus, Chinese, Pakistanis, and etc. who are all said to be equally British, then there is no need for British elites to favor British interests since Britain is just one more carbon-copy colony of the Globo-Community.

    Also, the intermarriages among the elites of the world, like intermarriages among the European aristocrats in pre-modern times, tend to favor globalist privileges over national interests. If Chinese in America or Canada marry whites or Jews, they are going to feel closer to globalist empire than to China the motherland.

    3. Pop Culture as Core Culture. In order for the globalist elites to justify their own privileges, they’ve given up on the notion of High Culture and Serious Art. Sure, they might still attend classical concerts once awhile, but they’d rather have fun, like Princess Diana did with celebrities and trash culture. The globalist elites prefer the Pop Art of Andy Warhol and his imitators than serious art or high culture that may be deemed as elitist and ‘exclusionary’. So, with pop culture, Pop Art, dance music, and Hollywood as the centerpiece of globalist elite culture, the impression is created that the richest, most privileged, and the most powerful people are ‘just like us’. After all, there is Hillary at a rap concert. There is Justin Trudeau hanging with famous homo celebrities. There is even the British Queen who’s into ‘hip stuff’ now. There’s some national leader taking a photo with Bono or some Hollywood star. And in some cases, these phony celebrities, like Oprah, become a member of the elite. Elites ‘hipsterize’ themselves to seem like any other consumer.

    But in the end, all of this for the globalist elites and for them alone. For the rest of humanity, there’s just tattoos, piercings, and obsession over 50 genders as the meaning of their life.

    =====================

  9. The Alt South is a good way of promoting both the Alternative Right and South. The South has traditionally been the last line of defense for our Folk in America. The Alt Right and Southerners have much in common on political issues. Another good tool in Defense of the Southern People. WPWW !

1 Trackback / Pingback

  1. The Privilege of Freedom – Occidental Dissent

Comments are closed.