jump to content
my subreddits
more »
Want to join? Log in or sign up in seconds.|
[-]
use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
subreddit:subreddit
find submissions in "subreddit"
author:username
find submissions by "username"
site:example.com
find submissions from "example.com"
url:text
search for "text" in url
selftext:text
search for "text" in self post contents
self:yes (or self:no)
include (or exclude) self posts
nsfw:yes (or nsfw:no)
include (or exclude) results marked as NSFW
e.g. subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
this post was submitted on
2 points (67% upvoted)
shortlink:
reset password

DebateAltRight

subscribeunsubscribe1,603 readers
~12 users here now
What is the Alternative Right?
The Alternative Right is an umbrella term for a variety of ideologies outside of mainstream American conservatism and classical liberalism. It has a deep philosophical and intellectual background and can encompass various economic theories from socialism to libertarianism, and various ideals, from fascism to direct democracy. The Alternative Right does hold a few essential positions, with the primary being:
Racial Realism/Human Inequality
All men are NOT created equal. The races have legitimate and not insignificant differences, both physiological and psychological, and these differences have an important effect on society. Men and Women are not the same, besides the obvious. Finally, identity matters, and society should accept that.
We welcome debate from both the left AND the right. Whether you are a conservative Trump supporter or a progressive, leftist liberal, debate is welcome from all sides of the political spectrum.
If your political ideology is not represented in the flairs, send a bitchy PM to u/WyvernGuildOfAlbion.
RULES
  1. Obey all site-wide Reddit rules.
  2. Be civil: Absolutely no racial slurs. You are here to have a serious and civil factual, philosophical and ideological discussion.
  3. No unwarranted ad hominems. For example, calling someone a racist, or expressing disbelief that someone would have a certain view or ideology is pretty retarded, and will likely result in a ban. Rather, explain why you believe racism is bad, or why you believe that ideological position is illogical or absurd.
  4. Malicious intellectual dishonestly, agitation, trolling, etc. Will result in a ban. Intellectual dishonesty includes dismissing somebody's argument by calling them a Jew.
  5. If your mind was changed, please acknowledge it.
  6. Read the FAQs before asking a question.
Meme Lexicon
((())) - Indicates Jewish origin or heritage.
Counter-Signal Meme - Crudely drawn comics parodying the arguments of the alt. right's opponents.
Cuck - Short for cuckold. In the alt. right it has a more metaphorical/pseudo-philosophical meaning.
Cuckservative - A mainstream 'conservative' who promotes liberal values. Often overlaps with neoconservatives. Examples: Evan McMullin, Bill Kristol, Glenn Beck.
Normie - Anyone within the generally accepted 'mainstream' of politics. Republican, Democrat, liberal, conservative, libertarian, democratic-socialist.
Subs of (possible) Interest:
created by [deleted]a community for
all 22 comments
[–]Saturnine83White Nationalist 7 points8 points9 points  (17 children)
No, however I believe that voting shouldn't be considered a right, but rather a privilege given to those who have proven their worth and loyalty to the country. If you can't pass basic tests gauging your awareness of history, politics and geography then you shouldn't be allowed to vote. If you are unmarried and childless, you don't have the same vested interest in the future of society as someone who is married and has a child, and should not be allowed to vote. If you are perpetually unemployed and depend on society's social safety net to get by, you should not be allowed to vote. If you are unwilling to perform some period of civil service to your nation (doesn't have to be military service), you should not be allowed to vote.
If we were to use this criteria, we'd end up with much more qualified politicians. Politicians who appealed to reason and posterity rather than emotion or short sighted gains.
If such a system was implemented, we'd see fewer female voters and fewer female politicians. We'd also see fewer male voters, but I believe that the gender balance would end up being something like 80/20, favoring males. Accordingly, I would doubt that any more than maybe 5-10% of our politicians would end up being female.
I don't have a problem with women being engaged in politics so much as I do with people who are uninformed or uninvested being involved in politics. Universal suffrage is an absolutely terrible idea, and it leads to having low quality politicians.
[–]lipidslyProtestant 1 point2 points3 points  (4 children)
What are your thoughts on limiting the ability to vote to those who own property and actually pay taxes? I find this to be imminently reasonable, as did the founders.
[–]Saturnine83White Nationalist 0 points1 point2 points  (3 children)
I don't find property ownership to be as relevant as it was in their time. Most people living in cities rent.
Paying taxes, yes. You need to not only support yourself, but also contribute to the nation in order to have a say in government.
[–]lipidslyProtestant 1 point2 points3 points  (2 children)
Paying taxes, yes
This is moreso what I was talking about. Paying taxes is more relevant to today, as the concept in the founders day was that you "have a stake" in how the country does
[–]Saturnine83White Nationalist 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
Yeah, it's the principle that matters more than anything. The details aren't as important.
Does this person contribute to society? Do they have a vested interest in the future of the country? Do they display loyalty? Are they informed on current issues and historical reasons for government policies? Do they have a solid grasp on our nation's political and economic situation in a global sense?
I feel like anyone who doesn't meet that basic criteria should remain outside of politics.
[–]lipidslyProtestant 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
Definitely
[–]jakefromstatefarm10 0 points1 point2 points  (10 children)
If you're going to make a system like this, you better be damn sure lefties don't get a hold of the committee that decides something like that.
[–]google-no-agendaCapitalist 2 points3 points4 points  (1 child)
Its hard to enact laws from a helicopter
[–]Saturnine83White Nationalist 0 points1 point2 points  (7 children)
Pretty sure lefties won't want anything to do with an explicitly WN country. Besides, I am okay with some liberal policies as far as the economy and social services. So long as the nation doesn't relax it's stance on immigration, I'm open to a lot of different manners of governance.
[–]lipidslyProtestant 0 points1 point2 points  (6 children)
Yes they will, they do right now. "America is the most evil, hateful, bigoted country in the world! And everyone should live here!"
[–]Saturnine83White Nationalist 0 points1 point2 points  (5 children)
We aren't an explicitly white nationalist country. That's not a direct comparison. And with there being other options if the US splits apart, they'll be unlikely to move towards the WN one. Even so, race will be featured prominently in our constitution. Stop acting like there is nothing we can do to stop them - we haven't even been trying for decades.
[–]lipidslyProtestant 0 points1 point2 points  (4 children)
We aren't an explicitly white nationalist country
We aren't, but we were.
And I'm not saying there's nothing we can do, I'm just saying that it won't stop them from trying their bullshit in the future.
[–]Saturnine83White Nationalist 0 points1 point2 points  (3 children)
They can try. I would support a law which punishes racial treason. If you are found trying to attack the racial foundation of the country, you could be deported. We'll establish immigration law at the start and only the rate of entry can be modified, not the ethnic origins of groups allowed to enter. Details to work out when the time comes of course.
[–]lipidslyProtestant 0 points1 point2 points  (2 children)
Indeed. I agree with the sentiment, but i feel like that may be an impediment to free speech. There might be a better route, but that is certainly a goal I agree wiht
[–]Saturnine83White Nationalist 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
It certainly would be, however I think true free speech is unattainable in a structured society. You'll always end up with so many exceptions (slander, "fighting words", harassment, etc.) that it renders the term essentially meaningless. It's a noble ideal to strive for, but I don't view it as a required end in itself.
[–]lipidslyProtestant 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
Hmmm, I see your point
[–]FiveofSwordsMonarchist 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
Many of the greatest female leaders in history came from a period when it was okay to be white, and according to 'feminists' was an evil patriarchal culture that oppressed women. Joan of arc, isabella of spain, queen victoria, queen elizabeth, boudicca, and theodora were great female leaders from the alt right past. You may not expect that most women will be a great leader, but there is no reason to deny it when you find one.
This is in fact a significant difference between western culture and others. China had a handful of female leaders...but for the most part the only great female leaders came from the west.
[–]smashmarxism 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
I don't think women should be banned from politics as there are decent female politicians such as Marine Le Pen, although they are few and far between but then again so are male politicians really.
However, what shouldn't be happening is women giving political seats and promoted up the ranks in politics just because they are women, that is when you get the crazy far-left and feminist rhetoric.
Unfortunately most women in politics these days are there exactly because of that, they have been promoted because they are women and not on merit.
This is especially true of younger women in politics, in the UK both Labour and the Conservatives are full of young female MPs who frankly don't have a clue and just spout pro-"refugee" and feminist rhetoric all the time.
[–]ThatGreekLadyGreek Nationalist 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
Democracy sucks anyway, that should be obvious from looking around the world. Give people too much freedom and they start destroying the planet and themselves. Bring back monarchy or dictatorship.
[–]Trump_is_ChristFascist -1 points0 points1 point  (0 children)
Yes
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy (updated). © 2017 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
π Rendered by PID 12843 on app-73 at 2017-03-16 19:31:39.832099+00:00 running b77de60 country code: NL.
Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies.  Learn More
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%