My discussion with VoxDay about the future of the alt-right is finally available. Ivan Throne at DarkTriadMan.com worked diligently to create the transcript and podcast package. Unfortunately, there was an issue with the audio starting about 30 minutes in, so please make sure to download the PDF from Ivan’s site.
Richard Spencer pusses out (again)
The origin of this discussion is interesting. After my confrontation with Richard Spencer at the Deploraball afterparty, Ivan sensed an opportunity to have a worthy debate which would benefit folks on all sides. He issued a debate challenge to both Spencer and myself.
I, of course, accepted right away. Spencer, of course, declined (consistent with his brand).
VoxDay stepped up and asked to be involved, which lead us to where we are today.
My plans for Spencer were much more aggressive and hostile than with Vox. I respect Vox’s writings and his intellect, so the tone of this is more academic discussion than a contentious debate. I think you’ll find this to be more informative than some yelling and ad hominem.
A fundamental difference I see between VoxDay and others like Spencer and the LARP’ing 1488’ers is that Vox doesn’t appear to be calling for a white ethnostate but rather he sees it as inevitable. This significant difference provides the space for a thoughtful discussion. Call me idealistic, but I’d rather address the issues he cites and work to avoid separation, war, or even ‘cleansing.’ Thus, we are talking about these matters as a way to learn and move forward.
We covered a lot of ground from Antifa protests, BLM, Richard Spencer, New Media, and of course – the alt-right.
While Vox was able to lend a historical perspective to many of the broader alt-right’s positions, I still don’t see how the inherent contradictions within their ideology are overcome. Most importantly there is what I consider to be the “origination issue”. The alt-right fails to see the link between the founders, the system they created, and the permissible outcomes of such system. They also seem to think there is unanimity of thought amongst white Americans in the US.
“JACK MURPHY: I think there are wider disagreements in those of a similar identity than tariffs. The immigration policy that we adopted are the product of white Christian Europeans in a country founded by their ancestors is it not?
VOX DAY: No, it isn’t. it is a product of the early twentieth century immigrants wanting to challenge their progenitors.
JACK MURPHY: Who were those immigrants?
VOX DAY: They were primarily German, Italian, Irish and Jewish. The groups that really pushed to change the rules in 1965 were a group of Jews lead by Immanuel Cellar. He was allied with the Irish as well. They also had their allies among the Anglo-Saxons like Andrew Johnson. Johnson believed that he could enlist them to make the Democrat party dominant.
What happened historically is that for about every thirty years there would be a complete pause in immigration. They would open the channel and then shut it off.”
White Anglo Christians created this country, and Vox alleges they did so for the benefit of Englishmen only. Assuming that is true, they also governed according to the laws they established and they elected leaders and legislators according to the same. Then those legislators decided to allow immigration.
First, it was folks like Irish, German, Russian, and Scandinavian people. When they landed, they were foreigners and something apart from the traditional US. But eventually, they became a part of the country. Time passed and those folks mixed with the founding groups to become the new US. And then that new United States voted for and passed the 1965 immigration laws which have led us to where we are today.
Therefore, today’s environment is a direct product of the founder’s vision.
It adhered to the rules they established. While the alt-right may not be happy with the outcome, there is no disputing the immigration situation we find ourselves in today occurred wholly within the institutions and processes established in 1789.
Was there an invasion by a foreign power who implemented their rules and laws? Did we swear fealty to another country and accept their will imposed from afar? No, we voted people into power who then made decisions which have results.
The results are as much a part of the identity of the founders as the color of their skin or their religion.
If you don’t like the results today, that’s fine, but then you’re admitting the founder’s vision was flawed. And if it was flawed, returning to the original state is a worthless panacea.
Part of what separates me from the alt-right is an acceptance of the current situation. The cake is baked. Yes, we should limit immigration and figure out how to assimilate everyone, but accepting the legal immigrants we have today is part of the healing process. Fighting against their presence is anti-American, as it was the American way which brought them here in the first place.
In fact, VoxDay admits that historically the US would open immigration for 30 years, then shut it off for assimilation purposes. This time we may have overshot our 30 year period by 22. 1965 to 2017 is too long to keep the gates open. In that Vox and I agree.
Vision for Future
At the end of the debate, I outlined my vision for the future. It is simple. Halt immigration. Build the wall (either real or in spirit). And most importantly, embark on a 25-year assimilation program designed to create inter-community trust and communication. Call it “One America” or “America First” or…”Make America Great Again.” We need a quarter century of propaganda, psyops, and memetic influence. Once we do that, then we as a unified country can figure out what to do next.
Check out the discussion, listen, read, think. I suspect there will be more of these talks to come in the future. Vox is a smart guy, and I enjoyed the dialogue. People are already calling for round 2!
NOTE: The Audio does get garbled half way through – please do download the free PDF from DarkTriadMan.com.