by Ryan Andrews
You may not want to hear it, but to quote the great man himself, “I only tell the truth.” And the truth is that the Alt Right’s fawning over Trump is embarrassing. Maybe we can ignore his boorish behavior. Let us also leave aside the question of whether he is sincere—in 2012 he complained that Mitt Romney’s “self-deportation” plan was inhumane and alienated Hispanics, then in 2015 he launched his Presidential campaign by claiming that Mexico was sending us criminals and rapists. What is the actual substance of his platform?
It is basically watered-down Buchananism. Pat Buchanan favors an immigration moratorium. Trump merely pledges to stop illegal immigration, and vaguely suggests that immigration policy should be more beneficial to US workers. They are both economic nationalists and both advise a more cautious foreign policy, though Buchanan’s is more cautious than Trump’s.
Sure, I prefer Trump’s policies over those of the other candidates. Ron Paul was also preferable to the rest of the 2012 GOP gaggle, but that does not mean I had any enthusiasm for Paul, and I do not have much for Trump either. I think many on the Alt Right do not pay much attention to US politics, and this is why they exaggerate Trump’s radicalism. On immigration and foreign policy, he and Ted Cruz have basically the same platform. On foreign adventurism in fact, most of the GOP field is closer to Trump than they are to the Neoconservatism of Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush. His warnings about the danger of Islamic immigration to Europe is the kind of thing that mainstream American conservatives have been saying for over a decade. Geert Wilders has been giving speeches to mainstream American conservative audiences for years. His economic protectionism is unique, but that is about it.
Of course, policy is not really the reason people support Trump. Trump is anti-PC and does not apologize for it. He may walk-back some statements, but he seldom issues a conventional apology. And people think he is a man who would get things done.
More than that, for the Alt Right, Trump just had perfect timing. Trump’s candidacy started right around the time that the Alt Right was congratulating itself for coining the term “cuckservative.” Since then, the Alt Right has decided that tactics will be their salvation, and their preferred tactic is meme warfare. And Trump is the greatest meme candidate that God has ever created. If you like that sort of thing, you like that sort of thing. I do not.
Nevertheless, I think Trump’s heart is in the right place. I think he is trying to defend people like us. He is raising issues that would otherwise not be raised. For his efforts, he has lost some serious money. So I have a soft-spot for the Donald, and I want to give him some political advice.
• I know you like to talk about winning and being a winner, and that this aura is part of your appeal, but you need to start talking about the financial sacrifices you have made to “speak truth to power.” It has become clear that, because of your past, Cruz and all the others are going to try to make the election a referendum on whether you can be trusted. Respond with something like this:
• Go after Rubio. Rubio has just as good of a chance—probably better—as Bush to be the establishment candidate, and he has more upside. Rubio is viewed as the most electable general election choice (other than maybe Gov. Kasich, who is not a threat for now), and the death of Justice Scalia has focused the conservative mind that much more on winning in November.
The appeal of Rubio is that he is a fresh face. Paint him as yesterday’s man, a Neoconservative relic from the last decade. And attack his electability. “People remember the Iraq fiasco. A Bush is not going to win the general election, and Marco is even more of a Bush than Jeb.” Everything Rubio says is a Neoconservative talking-point. Point it out every time. And of course, keep reminding people that he is a robot.
• “Mr. Trump, what do you say about studies which show that immigration does not negatively impact American’s wages?”
• For the general election, it may make sense to back-off on your anti-amnesty plan in return for an immigration moratorium, or at least a sharp reduction in legal immigration.
This position is very conservative, but also has immense crossover appeal.
• Again, for the general election:
Is he still going to lose? Probably. And the Alt Right should hope he does lose. The best outcome for us is that he wins the GOP nomination, nudging millions in our direction along the way, and then loses the general election. After all, the establishment—in the broadest sense: the media, academia, the corporate class, the governing class—hates Trump. They could make his presidency a disaster, and they would make us own it. A successful Trump administration might be even worse, a kind of road to white serfdom. Whites learn to assert themselves as a group, but are therefore reconciled to life in multiracial America, because Trump has taught us that the government can be on our side too. We become just another debased minority interest group, holding our hands out for our share of spoils. Government dependence rots the soul, but it also undermines the White Nationalist cause. We need our own state, and America will never be that state. If Trump loses, hopefully more whites will realize that.
Ryan Andrews is the author of The Birth of Prudence, which was published by VDare.
It is basically watered-down Buchananism. Pat Buchanan favors an immigration moratorium. Trump merely pledges to stop illegal immigration, and vaguely suggests that immigration policy should be more beneficial to US workers. They are both economic nationalists and both advise a more cautious foreign policy, though Buchanan’s is more cautious than Trump’s.
Sure, I prefer Trump’s policies over those of the other candidates. Ron Paul was also preferable to the rest of the 2012 GOP gaggle, but that does not mean I had any enthusiasm for Paul, and I do not have much for Trump either. I think many on the Alt Right do not pay much attention to US politics, and this is why they exaggerate Trump’s radicalism. On immigration and foreign policy, he and Ted Cruz have basically the same platform. On foreign adventurism in fact, most of the GOP field is closer to Trump than they are to the Neoconservatism of Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush. His warnings about the danger of Islamic immigration to Europe is the kind of thing that mainstream American conservatives have been saying for over a decade. Geert Wilders has been giving speeches to mainstream American conservative audiences for years. His economic protectionism is unique, but that is about it.
Of course, policy is not really the reason people support Trump. Trump is anti-PC and does not apologize for it. He may walk-back some statements, but he seldom issues a conventional apology. And people think he is a man who would get things done.
More than that, for the Alt Right, Trump just had perfect timing. Trump’s candidacy started right around the time that the Alt Right was congratulating itself for coining the term “cuckservative.” Since then, the Alt Right has decided that tactics will be their salvation, and their preferred tactic is meme warfare. And Trump is the greatest meme candidate that God has ever created. If you like that sort of thing, you like that sort of thing. I do not.
Nevertheless, I think Trump’s heart is in the right place. I think he is trying to defend people like us. He is raising issues that would otherwise not be raised. For his efforts, he has lost some serious money. So I have a soft-spot for the Donald, and I want to give him some political advice.
• I know you like to talk about winning and being a winner, and that this aura is part of your appeal, but you need to start talking about the financial sacrifices you have made to “speak truth to power.” It has become clear that, because of your past, Cruz and all the others are going to try to make the election a referendum on whether you can be trusted. Respond with something like this:
"I can’t be trusted? Look, I’m not bought by special interests, you know that, but I’m also probably losing a lot of money to say these things. The kind of people that can afford to stay at my great resorts, who play at my world-class golf courses, who live in my fabulous condo buildings, most of them hate my message. They want cheap immigrant labor, they want to make their products in low-wage countries and then sell them tariff-free in the US market. I put my neck-out-there to fight for regular Americans. These other guys aren’t risking one cent. Don’t talk to me about trust."
• Lose the tanning-bed raccoon eyes.
• Go after Rubio. Rubio has just as good of a chance—probably better—as Bush to be the establishment candidate, and he has more upside. Rubio is viewed as the most electable general election choice (other than maybe Gov. Kasich, who is not a threat for now), and the death of Justice Scalia has focused the conservative mind that much more on winning in November.
 |
| Rubio being trolled by a man in a robot costume. |
The appeal of Rubio is that he is a fresh face. Paint him as yesterday’s man, a Neoconservative relic from the last decade. And attack his electability. “People remember the Iraq fiasco. A Bush is not going to win the general election, and Marco is even more of a Bush than Jeb.” Everything Rubio says is a Neoconservative talking-point. Point it out every time. And of course, keep reminding people that he is a robot.
• “Mr. Trump, what do you say about studies which show that immigration does not negatively impact American’s wages?”
"Give me a break. Wages have been flat for four decades, and during those four decades immigration has gone up and up. You think that’s a coincidence? We always hear that we need all these new H-1B visas because there is a shortage of tech workers—Rubio supports this idea, probably because he is a puppet of Silicon Valley, but computer programers’ salaries haven’t gone up in fifteen years. Does that sound like a shortage? Get real.
"And you know what? Wages is not even the worst of it. Look, I’m a real estate guy; I know real estate. The worst part about bringing in so many immigrants every year is the effect it has the cost of owning a home. People say, ‘oh there’s so much room in the US,’ but that’s not where people live. 80% of Americans live in metropolitan areas because that’s where the jobs are, and every year we get over a million immigrants, who almost all move to metropolitan areas. So they drive-up the cost of housing. So people either have to pay through-the-nose to live in a nice area near the city, or they have to drive three hours to work every day. This why more Americans can’t afford to start families. It has a lot to do with immigration, let me tell you."
• For the general election, it may make sense to back-off on your anti-amnesty plan in return for an immigration moratorium, or at least a sharp reduction in legal immigration.
"I said I’m going to build a wall, and I am going to build a wall, but I’m also a deal-maker, and so I’m going to make tremendous deals for the American people. After I build the wall, I’ll go to congress and say 'you want amnesty?' Fine, but then you’re going to give me something for the country and the American people, not your big business lobbyists. If I give you amnesty for the people already here, you give American workers an indefinite moratorium on all immigration. You want to be compassionate to illegals, okay, if they don’t have any other criminal record, I have compassion for them too, but I’m going to be compassionate to American workers and home buyers, and give them a break from these record levels of immigration, including legal immigration. And we’re putting in place e-verify and all the rest to make sure illegal immigration never becomes a problem again."
This position is very conservative, but also has immense crossover appeal.
• Again, for the general election:
"I’m a demagogue? I just tell the truth [note: make an effort to stick to the truth going forward]; this demagogue stuff is the worst diversionary tactic I’ve ever seen. Frankly, Hillary/Bernie is the demagogue. She’s been pandering to this Black Lives Matter movement—a very divisive moment—whose entire narrative is a lie. The institutional racism narrative is a dangerous lie. (Maybe cite a few relevant statistics.) I have the stats to support me, and anyone who looks at them knows the narrative is a lie. But Mrs. Clinton/Mr. Sanders thinks it’s worth smearing white Americans for sake of votes. If she really cared about black workers and home buyers, she wouldn’t be proposing to flood the country with a million immigrants every year."
• • • • •
Is he still going to lose? Probably. And the Alt Right should hope he does lose. The best outcome for us is that he wins the GOP nomination, nudging millions in our direction along the way, and then loses the general election. After all, the establishment—in the broadest sense: the media, academia, the corporate class, the governing class—hates Trump. They could make his presidency a disaster, and they would make us own it. A successful Trump administration might be even worse, a kind of road to white serfdom. Whites learn to assert themselves as a group, but are therefore reconciled to life in multiracial America, because Trump has taught us that the government can be on our side too. We become just another debased minority interest group, holding our hands out for our share of spoils. Government dependence rots the soul, but it also undermines the White Nationalist cause. We need our own state, and America will never be that state. If Trump loses, hopefully more whites will realize that.
Ryan Andrews is the author of The Birth of Prudence, which was published by VDare.
