Media

Liberals Utterly Fail To Comprehend AltRight Counterculture

Lana responds to a New York Magazine article written by 18 lefties titled, “Beyond Alt The Extremely Reactionary, Burn-it-down Radical, Newfangled Far Right.”

Comment

116 comments

  1. unpaidpundit 7 May, 2017 at 08:08 Reply

    It’s great to have women speak up for the altright, because women are more difficult to demonize. The left will characterize an altright man as a monstrous, racist beast, but it’s harder to do that to a woman. The worst that New York Magazine could do to Lana Lokteff is to suggest that she is an airhead who is only concerned with appearances.

  2. WR_the_realist 5 May, 2017 at 04:56 Reply

    Without question, the alt right has the hottest women. That’s why the alt right will win. After all, the new left conquered in the 60s because it had all the cute hippy chicks. Today the left has fat blue haired feminists.

  3. David Mulch 4 May, 2017 at 01:12 Reply

    Wow, Lana really knows how to trigger shallow fuckwits who normally go on about food, wine, and fashion.
    Have many smoking-hot sardonic children Lana!

  4. Rhino 🦏🥛🐸 3 May, 2017 at 21:42 Reply

    Can we pretty please with sugar on top have some written content?

    I ain’t got time to listen to these people blather forever.

  5. temmy9 . 3 May, 2017 at 21:32 Reply

    Its funny..what they dont get is that alt right isnt reactionary. Its hypermodern. The alt right is firmly rooted in the here and now and based around modern cultural realities and technologies. It’s the left that is still stuck in the 20th century.

    • Albionic American 4 May, 2017 at 14:23 Reply

      Our adversaries say we look to the ’30’s. But they’ve got the century wrong: The Alt Right looks to the 2030’s and beyond, not to the 1930’s.

  6. Dan Osarchuk 3 May, 2017 at 15:24 Reply

    Never mind that white women are the epitome of beauty. Even if they weren’t, we whites have a right to survive and thrive in our own lands, just like every other race on the planet. The lefties never seem to understand that.

    • Evolver1 4 May, 2017 at 14:01 Reply

      Hmmm. For me, I want the whole world to be White. We are the replacements for the previous models and they should be allowed to go extinct.

  7. JMB 3 May, 2017 at 10:06 Reply

    I love Lana! She is right! Many say we (women) do not exist in the movement. Even in a Youtube comment section I have debated with young boys in their 20s that claim to be Alt Right & you should read their comments LOL!
    They believe the Alt Right is for men only & all white women are horrible people. They think we have a fetish for black & muslim men 😷 (gross!). They claim they’ll bring on white sharia law & the movement is 95% men 5% women. They also want to marry asian & hispanic women.
    This will ultimately send good young white girls heading for the hills!
    Men are the leaders of the Alt Right & I have faith in you guys! Please stay in control, front & center to stop these young punks from destroying us!

    • Joseph Curwen 3 May, 2017 at 15:50 Reply

      Some people here have problems with women because of both past personal experiences and observation of the reality. Now, we need woman in the Alt Right, but in their place as traditional wives and mothers of the Volk.

      The 9 Words: There’s Nothing More Fulfilling for a Woman than Motherhood. (katebushfan66)

      Fantasies about warrior maidens and female fearless leaders are just enemy propaganda infecting the mind of the women here. We need you to play the most important role in our fight: helping us to secure the existence of our people and a future for white children.

      • JMB 3 May, 2017 at 17:22 Reply

        I totally 100% agree with you! Women don’t get it. When you are traditional your husband will do what it takes to take care of your needs & wants! Men need that responsibility because that is what makes him a MAN! Women need to concentrate on the family & enjoy the opportunity & moments of being a mother & wife! That is where we are the strongest & I am very proud of that!

    • George Clark 3 May, 2017 at 23:56 Reply

      I love women that stand up for their white or European Anglo Saxon blood line. I turns me on. They bare intelligent and strong.

    • Deadmau5 Patton 9 May, 2017 at 11:00 Reply

      women should be present as eye candy, support and inspiration. they have no right to impose their views or to take leading roles. this is a war. women, especially the whores you’ve become in the west, will destroy us. you should be commenting on how proud you are of the men, not pushing feminism

        • Deadmau5 Patton 10 May, 2017 at 00:21 Reply

          let me repeat, women have absolutely no place in leadership roles or any place of influence in any culture at all. they destroy and tear down. they make cultures and nations vulnerable. stop interfering and putting us all in danger you vile woman.

          • JMB 10 May, 2017 at 10:38

            Translation: “WHAAA WHAAA I WANT ATTENTION! I am a scrawny virgin in my 20s! No woman will touch me! My mother dates & sleeps with blacks, muslims & mexicans for drugs so now I hate white women! I don’t do anything but troll all day because I have no friends!”

            You’re not tough or scary. You don’t intimidate anyone. Come to Greenbrier TN & repeat everything you said about me to my husband’s face, basement faggot. Until then, go back to your degenerate porn & get out of adult conversation!
            It’s because of pieces of shit like you people want to raise the voting age to 25.

          • Deadmau5 Patton 10 May, 2017 at 11:00

            no, white knight posing as a woman, i’m married. forget voting age, repeal the 19th.

          • JMB 10 May, 2017 at 11:33

            Everyone can read that I called your sorry ass out. Show your face! Use your pic instead of a blank avatar. You know where I live. Here’s your chance to show how tough you are. But you still want to do this in a comment section. Chicken shit! You’re a little bitch! Probably a jew. Got your dick sucked by your rabbi. If you’re a man then make your words & threats a reality. Come & see if I am a man posing as a woman. Do you know how ridiculous you sound using that cop out? You just want to hide behind your screen. You’re not married. If you are then your ass needs to be at work making money to take care of your whore wife. You’re probably scared to leave because she cheats with black men. You’re a pitiful excuse for a man. You want to insult & threaten me but when I call you out you want to stay anonymous & safe at home. Hell, we have vacation time. We will meet you half way. Please tell my husband to his face what you have been saying about me & all white women. PLEASE!

          • Deadmau5 Patton 10 May, 2017 at 14:08

            “everyone can read.” nobody is reading this debate between some fake dude using a whores picture he got online, you, and me, an admitted anon.

            there is no way i’m reading your 200 word essay, man.

          • JMB 10 May, 2017 at 18:59

            I remember when I had my 1st beer.

            What are you? 15? Who writes your comebacks? Coward.

      • Evolver1 4 May, 2017 at 14:08 Reply

        What’s with the name calling? Can’t you argue your point with your fellow Whites without doing that?

          • Evolver1 4 May, 2017 at 14:44

            Calling a fellow White on a site like this “demented,” is name calling. Aim your cannons outward, not inward.

          • Hildi H 4 May, 2017 at 15:35

            Oh stop. Have you seen the people calling each other “cucks”, swearing at each other, and using other pejoratives? Give me a break. And I really doubt that vintologi is on our side posting a link to a site like that repeatedly in our comments section. Sorry if you were triggered by that word but the stuff he writes on there is, imo, demented. I’ll edit my post to call the “content of that website demented” instead of the commenter as long as you promise to stop crying about it. Deal?

          • Evolver1 4 May, 2017 at 15:43

            If you don’t have something nice to say about someone who promotes White interests then just don’t say anything.

          • Evolver1 4 May, 2017 at 16:21

            Did someone appoint you as the arbiter of what is degenerate and what isn’t?

          • Hildi H 4 May, 2017 at 17:07

            I give up. I thought it was pretty accepted around here that rape and anal sex was degenerate but whatever.

        • vintologi 11 May, 2017 at 16:00 Reply

          People often have an issue with my views on these topics(homosexuality, rape, early sex, etc) but i have not yet seen any viable arguments against my current positions.

          I guess it is an emotional thing mostly, but i might still change my view.

        • vintologi 11 May, 2017 at 15:57 Reply

          The alternative is hard patriarchy(females getting raped and having no rights) which i do not view as realistic.

          I am still working on the issue but i do not have a problem with homosexuality, worked for the romans and in ancient greece.

    • eggs 3 May, 2017 at 20:19 Reply

      No. Monogamy is about family, raising children & continuing the nation. Reject the hedonistic Sex & the City fucking around till fourty bullshit. It has neither real purpose or meaning. Growing a family does💑👨‍👩‍👧‍👦🏡.

      • Hildi H 3 May, 2017 at 22:33 Reply

        Monogamy is the natural expression of Europeans for millennia and supported by historical and archaeological evidence. Anyone who says otherwise is either misinformed or deliberately trying to undermine our people.

        • Evolver1 4 May, 2017 at 14:07 Reply

          Monogamy for our species is not natural. Men can produce babies all day long, women are tied up for nine months. Why should men be on a woman’s calendar?

          Nature knows best.

          Nature has designed men to supply slight differences (read novelty) into the genome because men produce new sperm each and every day that can change based on various stresses in the external and internal environments.

          And, nature has designed women to keep too many differences from changing us too fast when changes in the external and internal environments are only temporary.

          It’s a natural system designed to help us adapt, evolve and multiply our kind to its maximum if it is let to work.

          • Hildi H 4 May, 2017 at 15:02

            Western Civilization was based on voluntary monogamous families for centuries. We are unique from other races because of this and part of why our civilizations are (were?) so great. Is it any wonder that the destruction of the traditional nuclear White family is what has brought our people to the beginnings of extinction? Kevin MacDonald wrote a brilliant article on this very topic http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2013/04/monogamy-and-the-uniqueness-of-european-civilization/

          • Evolver1 4 May, 2017 at 15:42

            I’m all for monogamy if it is VOLUNTARY and not forced on people I’m also for other forms of making more like ourselves and they should also be allowed. The goal is to make as many more White people as possible. What works is what should be done. That is what is moral. Having imposed conditions that hold down our birthrate is not moral.

          • Hildi H 4 May, 2017 at 16:07

            Feminism and materialism suppress birthrates not monogamy. Whatever changed that is the problem. It is unwise to heedlessly pursue the goal of “make as many more White people as possible” and lose ourselves along the way.

          • Evolver1 4 May, 2017 at 16:19

            We won’t lose ourselves by making as many more White people as possible.

            And, monogamy reduces the number of children a male can have. A male can impregnate many females in a single day, every day. A female, once impregnated is impregnated for nine months and usually produces just one child.

            If a man wants to expand his particular DNA to the maximum, he needs many women.

            As you probably know, more than half of all White European men can find Charlemagne in their family trees and about an equal number of Irish can find Niall of the Nine Hostages in theirs. Both of them are in my family tree. They are there because they had many children with many different women.

            More than likely, I wouldn’t be here had either Charlemagne or Niall been monogamous.

          • Hildi H 4 May, 2017 at 17:03

            Unfortunately, your analogy doesn’t work. Monogamy vs polygamy is a different means to the same end as there are only a finite amount of white women. Hypothetically, the same amount of women would have the same amount of children whether they were monogamous or polygamous, many more men would not reproduce at all though.

            And as far as Charlemagne, considering his five “wives” and additional concubines, 18 children would be less than average birth rate per “claimed” female for the era: 1 man produces 18 children seems like a lot but 5-? women produce 18 children. That’s only 3.6 children per female maximum.

          • Evolver1 4 May, 2017 at 18:54

            You miss the point. Not every White male who has children will lead to an entire future White civilization, but a few will have the right genes to make it so. Charlemagne was one such White male. Niall was another. Had they only mated with one woman, millions of Whites now alive would never have been born.

            The more Whites who are born, the greater chance we have to survive to go to the stars.

          • Ike35 4 May, 2017 at 19:07

            I hope you appreciate that this line of thinking can be taken too far. I’m not sure if we want a muzzie situation where basically only top alphas have children because they monopolize the women in their harems and the rest of the men don’t get a chance to reproduce. I know that part of the world is fucked up for many other reasons but I believe this is also one of the reasons. Supreme alphas like Charlemagne having several wives and mistresses we can handle as a civilization but I think it may be dangerous to accept this type of polygamy outside of this group.

          • Evolver1 4 May, 2017 at 20:15

            I want whatever will work to bring more White people, and only White people,into existence.

          • Evolver1 4 May, 2017 at 20:39

            Reply 2: When every piece of land in every nation is so full to the brim with White people that there is no room for any other kind, I will rest.

          • Hildi H 4 May, 2017 at 19:32

            I agree that we need to have more White babies. I don’t believe converting to polygamy will change birth rates. The real issue isn’t monogamy vs polygamy. It’s the destruction of White families (of any kind). Polygamy is just another type of family structure. If we don’t get rid of feminism and materialism, it doesn’t matter what family structure we use, White birth rates will still drop.

          • Hildi H 4 May, 2017 at 22:09

            Since we’re being hypothetical, it’s likely that those women Charlemagne hoarded would still have had children. Maybe those 50% of European men that are extended relations to Charlemagne are the reason Europe is in the state it is now.

          • Evolver1 4 May, 2017 at 22:18

            But, they wouldn’t have children with Charlemagne and it was his DNA that seems to have been the reason so many White men have him in their family trees.

          • Hildi H 4 May, 2017 at 22:29

            Go back far enough and we all have each other somewhere in our family tree…

          • Evolver1 5 May, 2017 at 12:09

            Millions of Whites died in the plagues in Europe and in various wars. These could be seen as genetic bottlenecks for our kind. What got through the bottlenecks were the genes of Charlemagne and Niall and this is reflected in the fact that about half of all Whites now have them in their family trees. Meanwhile, many of those who practiced false, man made morality as you suggest are now extinct. It’s called natural selection.

          • Hildi H 5 May, 2017 at 13:25

            Monogamy isn’t anymore manmade than polygamy. Like I said before, it is the natural social and reproductive structure for Europeans (just like polygamy was for the Chinese) and is backed by historical documents as well as archaeological evidence dating as far back as 4600bc. It’s just another aspect of our people that makes us unique compared to other races. “Charlemagne” is the exception that proves the rule. And not to mention, the only reason anyone notes Charlemagne is because he is a well known historical figure. I have several ancestors in my family tree who had 10 children each (in monogamous families) and I’m sure a fair amount of Europeans have them somewhere in their family tree as well but no one cares what their names are. Are you really trying to say that Charlemagne’s genes are the reason that some people survived the plague and that’s your justification for polygamy?

          • Evolver1 5 May, 2017 at 15:19

            Let me try to explain NATURE’S morality for our survival: Human males can impregnate many women each day we are designed that way because human males make new sperm each day. This allows the sperm to change (mutate) the genome as various conditions change so that new children can be born with a better chance to survive new conditions.

            If these new children have a survival advantage as a result of their genome variation they will tend to live longer and breed more and their variation may become the new norm for the type. This is how we became white people. We mutated to be able to thrive in rainy, cloudy areas of the world because our white skin mutation allows us to produce more Vitamin D in those conditions and this helps us to avoid rickets. This allows us to live longer to breed more of our kind.

            It is no coincidence that White people are native to Europe and Black people are native to Africa. Whites have evolved to thrive in European conditions.

            Human females get all their eggs at one time and this causes the eggs to be stable and is a safety measure as it keeps the male sperm from changing the genome when there are only temporary changes in conditions.

            Human females, once impregnated are out of the baby making business for nine months. Monogamy thus forces the male to be on the female’s calendar instead of his own male calendar and this limits the number of children that the best males can produce with their DNA code.

          • Jester 5 May, 2017 at 16:10

            The only men who qualify for polygamy will have both the mental dexterity and the economic capacity to support multiple wives in a manner where each willing woman feels both emotionally fulfilled and physically secure in her destiny. Such situations will be more rare, but given the chance by the acceptance of society, will naturally occur more often than one might imagine today. In order to facilitate such a climate of acceptance, strong and competent men must vigorously ostracize their less competent brethren who may, based on purely selfish and degenerate motive, attempt to abuse the situation by seducing multiple women into a situation where they will be treated poorly. A polygamous situation should be no different than the most stable monogamous situation, and such families will be force multipliers to a great nation.

          • Hildi H 5 May, 2017 at 16:39

            And yet, Europeans still engaged in monogamy and still do. That isn’t a coincidence either. It has a basis in biology and environment that is unique to our people. I’m trying to say that despite your “natures morality” explaination monogamy is how Europeans structured their families. Changing our natural family structure will inevitably change us as a people from genetically to culturally.

            I understand what you’re trying to say with “alpha” males getting to reproduce the most but that doesn’t translate into modern times. The “alphas” nowadays would most likely just be the wealthiest men, not necessarily the most genetically fit. Also, by only allowing a select few “alphas” to reproduce we would greatly reduce our gene pool within just a few generations.

            Btw- I never made this about morality. This is about what is best for White people. I don’t see how forcing polygamy into a culture in which it is historically rare is good for our people. It seems that it would only aid in the break down of families. The monogamy structure worked for our ancestors. The only reason it stopped working is because it was disrupted by feminism.

          • Evolver1 5 May, 2017 at 16:56

            No one is saying that we should only be “allowing a select few ‘alphas’ to reproduce.”

            I am saying in a deeper sense that we need to look at what works to keep us from going extinct and what reproductive strategies we can adopt to fill the whole planet with our kind. And, in thinking along these lines, we need to separate the things such as false morality and secondary things that have been forced on us by some other humans who decided this is the way we should be.

            Your argument that monogamy is right because it has been done for many years is fallacious and is what is called an argument from antiquity. For thousands of years we also believed the Earth was flat, so it must be flat. Same type of fallacy.

          • Hildi H 5 May, 2017 at 17:23

            And your argument that polygamy will fill the world with our people is called baseless speculation.

          • Jester 5 May, 2017 at 17:31

            Indeed, “filling the whole planet” with one’s kind, at this point in history, would need to be accompanied by a tremendous genocide protocol. Though I suspect Evolver’s statement actually meant to reproduce to the point of having at least some substantial numbers and thus influence in all spheres, not to literally wipe out all others.

          • Evolver1 5 May, 2017 at 19:03

            I could link to a photo of a normal Fundamentalist Mormon Family with one father and his 5 wives (I think) and what looks like more than a hundred children, grandchildren, et al. but you can do an Internet search and find many such photos.

            Just to be clear, I am not a Mormon of any stripe. I use the Fundamentalist Mormons as an example about how large families can become with their reproductive strategy.

          • Hildi H 5 May, 2017 at 19:18

            I agree that they have large families. But I don’t agree that they have large families BECAUSE they’re polygamous. I believe they have large families because the fundamentalist mormons have a distinctly anti-feminist culture which encourages women to have children. Apply that same culture to monogamy and the result will be the same.

          • Evolver1 5 May, 2017 at 19:27

            Maybe. Whatever works to increase the number of Whites in the world is good in my view.

          • Hildi H 5 May, 2017 at 20:31

            That we can agree on. Thanks for the intense debate. Have a good weekend. 👌🏻

          • Jester 5 May, 2017 at 17:22

            When you conflate “forcing” polygamy with the actual argument which is allowing without stigma or legal ramification, you reveal your position is actually based upon your sense of morality or what is “best” for the society. Monogamy and polygamy are only mutually exclusive when based on imposition of an artificial moral standard. Consenting adults of good conscience and moral character should not be forcefully prevented from polygamous marriage. Such adults have the capacity to pull it off and add benefit to the nation. Any abuse or unlawful conduct within such a situation should be treated by the judicial system exactly the same as problems in a monogamous marriage. False distinctions are unbecoming.

          • Hildi H 5 May, 2017 at 18:40

            Do you use an artificial moral standard when you decide which adults are of “good conscience moral character”?

          • Jester 5 May, 2017 at 20:30

            Within a tight knit society based upon a tradition of self determination via conscience and shared norms of morality, the majority of adults naturally make beneficial decisions of their own accord. Subsequently, their choice to engage in monogamy or polygamy will have equally beneficial results. Concerning those members of such a society who make the rare mistake and injure another, a judicial system is there to punish and reform them. The government is not meant to forcefully impose a standard in order to “prevent” the possibility of injury. Civilized standards are meant to be passed down by educators and parents. A society which needs a group of adults to forcefully impose standards upon the majority of adults who tend to act in ways injurious to others is one that has lost its way. It is good to know the difference and find a society that works for you.

          • Hildi H 5 May, 2017 at 20:52

            “monogamy or polygamy will have equally beneficial results” except for the males in a polygamist society who are not able to reproduce. Everything else you stated, I agree with.

          • Hildi H 5 May, 2017 at 19:01

            I’m merely trying to explain to evolver that monogamy is the default family structure of Europeans and that removing feminism will raise our birth rates. He’s trying to say that polygamy will raise our birth rates and is eugenic.

          • Evolver1 5 May, 2017 at 15:22

            Reply 2: Yes, it may have been Charlemagne’s genes that helped those who survived various plagues tosurvive and it may be why some people today are virtually immune to many diseases. Genes matter.

          • Hildi H 5 May, 2017 at 16:11

            Charlemagne is one of millions of ancestors… Every person in 800ad whose descendants still live is related to every modern European. Charlemagne is one common ancestor out of many, not the only one lol.

          • Hildi H 5 May, 2017 at 14:49

            I never called polygamy immoral. I’m calling polygamy “not European.”

          • Hildi H 4 May, 2017 at 17:56

            Btw- people are already allowed to have whatever type relationships they want (though they might not be recognized by the gov.) and birthrates are still dropping.

          • Hildi H 4 May, 2017 at 19:13

            I haven’t heard of anyone being prosecuted for polygamy. I have heard of quite a few NBA players having multiple children with multiple women though. No one seems to mind that. Idk.

          • Evolver1 4 May, 2017 at 20:13

            Fundamentalist Mormons are being prosecuted and persecuted as those who want to force their false ideas of how others should live on them.

          • Hildi H 4 May, 2017 at 21:44

            I think I remember hearing about something a while back where the man was prosecuted because one of his “wives” was underage and because it wasn’t a “legal” marriage he was charged with statutory rape. But no one is keeping people from have multiple children with multiple people (unless they’re underage of course).

          • eggs 4 May, 2017 at 19:53

            the current system is not imposing monogamy but rewarding polygamy – single motherhood welfare taken coercively from the taxpayer.

          • eggs 4 May, 2017 at 19:51

            Good to know people have a grasp on this, especially women. The nuclear family is key to teach values, culture, heritage & identity to children, apart from producing them of course. It’s also the best enciroment for a child to grow up in – not in state dependent single motherhood but with a mother and father. With the undermining of the nuclear family the state has partly taken over many of its territory. Children are not taught the aforementioned values, culture, heritage & identity because it might offend some minority group and then the politicians lose votes. So it all gets sunk to the lowest common denominator, an indoctrination of apathy & relativism

          • Evolver1 4 May, 2017 at 20:27

            You argue race-neutral secondary concepts such as: values, culture, heritage, identity, nuclear family. I argue for going forth and multiplying more White people. With more White people the secondary things will happen as surely as a certain type of bird will build a certain type of nest.

          • eggs 4 May, 2017 at 19:44

            Monogamy means choosing the best, most capable high quality partner to have children with. Instead of wandering of for the next fuck you invest highly in your children in order to raise capable people.
            Since you mention biology, monogamy is K-selcteced behaviour in terms of reproductive strategy. I suggest you check out the R/K selection theory and how it applies to human society, Stefan Molyneux for example has an excellent series of presentations on it

          • Evolver1 4 May, 2017 at 20:11

            Check out the number of Whites who have randy Charlemagne and Niall in their family trees. Had they followed your advice, we might be missing about half of all Whites who eventually resulted from their proper idea of going forth and multiplying themselves.

          • eggs 4 May, 2017 at 20:20

            That’s all good if they have the resources to support them, like Charlemagne had. But being raised by your biological father imparts a sense of identity & loyalty to kin that might otherwise go amiss

          • Evolver1 4 May, 2017 at 20:25

            Some of our best Whites came from what we now call broken homes. Have faith in the White genome and have as many White children as possible. That is how we will survive and thrive. Trying to breed Whites for quality is a mistake. It just cuts down on our population and prevents the birth of whole White civilizations that each of us carries in our bodies.

          • Evolver1 4 May, 2017 at 20:22

            R/K selection theory has fallen out of favor and for good reasons. And, it was never a good theory to apply to humans.

    • Robert Bruce 3 May, 2017 at 22:48 Reply

      Are you kidding me, embracing hypersexuality helped create the demographic time bomb we have to contend with now!!!

  8. adopt from your local shelter 3 May, 2017 at 08:57 Reply

    This is a tremendous piece. Red Ice is amazing, they’re taking things to another level.