Alt-Right versus Liberalists3 min read

I am referring to the principles of the Liberalists as are found on liberalists.org with my writing below. I’ve grabbed the archive of the page as it is today, so that any discrepancies can be cleared up if the page changes. The Liberalist movement is new. I want to explain why I feel it is important.

I will be going through how the Alt-Right violates the liberal principles espoused by the Liberalists one by one. A large amount of what I have learned about the Richard Spencer wing has come from speeches he has made. Interestingly, I was unaware of many of his positions on issues that concern liberals until his debate with Sargon. I don’t believe that some of his views were clearly expressed in his manifesto. Most of what I will be discussing below is from that debate, as Richard Spencer seems to avoid topics of liberal freedoms in most other cases.

The Principles

Individual Rights will be violated by creating group rights around the white race and identity. The initial goal of the Alt-Right is to get people to identify with their collective. Once that has been accomplished, if the Alt-Right gets into power they would create laws that protect the collective. The collective would be defined by both genetics and behavior, according to Richard Spencer in the debate with Sargon.

Democracy is violated by the means required to get into power and then enact Alt-Right policies. In the United States, there is no way to enact most of the laws the Alt-Right desires outside of constitutional amendments. There is no way the Alt-Right would get the kind of support throughout the government to enact a constitutional amendment. This means that there would need to be a vanguard party that overthrows the current government and suspend the constitution. This would be in complete violation of democratic principles.

Economic Freedom is something that depends on your definition of economic freedom. The purchaser would have the freedom to buy domestic goods as they would today. They may have to pay taxes on foreign goods. The Alt-Right seems to support a protectionist policy. (Note: I had a previous version that claimed the Alt-Right would end trade with non-white nations that isn’t well supported.)

Freedom of speech is violated when the need for censorship against opposing views is required. Richard Spencer clearly stated that people who are not culturally white would be silenced in this debate. Silencing the left, by force if needed, is required for the Alt-Right to come to power.

Self-reliance does not seem to be strongly violated by the Alt-Right.

Blind Justice doesn’t need to be addressed. A cursory glance at the principles of the Alt-Right makes it obvious that Sharia courts would seem blind in comparison to the Alt-Right doctrines.

Secularism will be rough, since opposing factions within the Alt-Right are either atheists or see atheism as a mental illness. I suspect that this would be a fundamental fracture in the vanguard party that would result in two parties being formed. Which one wins is unknown, but based on the rhetoric I have seen there are many outcomes that would not be considered secular.

3 comments

  1. “Buying from other countries, according to the Alt-Right manifesto laid out by Richard Spencer, is not allowed.”

    I think, that might be “twisting” his views a little.

    “13. Globalization
    International trade and the good-faith exchange of ideas can be beneficial to all. Economic and political globalization, however, has been destructive to authentic cultures. Industrialized countries are being transformed into great “nothings” and “nowheres”: indistinguishable, concrete dumping grounds and shopping centers, divorced from culture, people, and history. Globalization threatens not just Europeans but every unique identity on Earth.”

    “10. Foreign Affairs
    The foreign policies of European states (including immigration, diplomacy, and war) should be based on the safeguarding of its peoples—and not be beholden to special or foreign interests, nor to corporate profit motives, nor to the chimeras of globalism, humanitarianism, or the End of History. Insofar as “chauvinism” means attempting to transform non-Europeans into Europeans, we are not “Western chauvinists.””

    I guess, that he would like trade with non-white countries when it doesn’t harm whites, or in both groups interest.
    Maybe he would like to protect certain jobs in USA, I dont know.

    Off cause I am not unbiased when it comes to North and West Europeans interests and survival.

    • Yeah, I think you’re right. I’ve spoken with a couple people after this who follow Richard Spencer and others with the Alt-Right ideology more closely. They said that protectionism was as far as they would go. If the countries decided it was not worth trading with the US, that was their prerogative.

      I originally read that as “fuck the non-white world, we won’t touch them.” I think it was phrased to say that without the last part that I added myself.

      Thanks for pointing it out. I am more interested in being right in the current moment compared to being right every time I say something.

      • “Thanks for pointing it out. I am more interested in being right in the current moment compared to being right every time I say something.”

        I like that. We all need to be careful getting to invested in our viewpoints and been right.

Leave a Reply