A Critique of the Leftist Response to the Alt-Right

Many denigrate white nationalists as being racist and stupid — or at least variations of those terms. The claim is made by many that even just talking to these people causes one to be a racist-enabler.

A significant portion of individuals within that general political bubble will believe that, regardless of any evidence. However, another portion of individuals, out of mere curiosity or for other reasons, will seek out the horrible “alt-right” white nationalists online.

What will one discover? You will discover Dr. David Duke, a man who speaks out against violence against Palestinians and expresses a desire for “true equal rights”; a soft-spoken, intellectual-sounding man who provides scientific evidence for his position. You will find Richard Spencer, who dropped out of his Duke University PhD program to found the NPI; he is also a soft-spoken individual with an exceptional command of the English language who expresses a desire for all races to live in peace (within ethno-states, ideally). Jared Taylor? Similar. Alternative Hypothesis? Another individual with a seemingly boundless knowledge of human genetics research related to racial / ethnic differences.

What will the conclusion of a person looking at this without strong ties to either side? One side is hysterical, threatening, and demeaning. The other side — soft-spoken, well-educated, and seemingly looking out for the interest of others. What about someone who is seeking to belong, with one group heavily criticizing any deviation from the group, while the other is willing to accept, or at least entertain conversation?

The answer should be obvious. Over and over again, I listen to classical liberals, British liberals, centrists, and libertarians (with a few exceptions such as Styx) engage in passive aggressive attacks during debate, while the alt-right / white nationalist side engages in calm debate, focusing on academic research that suits their interests.

Is the goal to virtue signal among progressives, with an air of elitist snobbery, or is the goal to discredit the idea of an ethno-state in favor of a true liberal state? One will not discredit these ideas to those on the fence while looking unhinged.

Also, if the goal is to defeat any opponent, should one not be well-versed in not only their aims, goals, and ideas, but also their tactical approach? Perhaps you can win a battle through brute force given adequate numerical advantage, but you will, with time, eventually lose the war, without appropriate and adequate strategy.