Alt Left: Where Does the Alt Left Stand on Race Realism at the Moment?

Rahul: Robert, I’m a bit confused about thy political stance.
You’re definitely Fiscally Liberal, but I can’t tell when it comes to social shit. For some shit, your extreme right, and for others you are extreme left (some of this shit is really common sense. I mean, why the fuck should incest not be legal)
RL: Where am I extreme right?
Tulio: Probably on the HBD stuff. Whether it’s true or not, it’s still seen as a right wing position. Or at least it’s only right-wingers/libertarians who tend to openly embrace HBD.

Yes! No one on the liberal – Left buys that and most hate it vociferously. The Alt Left is for socially conservative liberals and Leftists, and race realism was one of the original three pillars of the movement. However, all of the Alt Left wings strongly rejected race realism and wanted nothing to with it, so the Alt Left has dropped the race realism stuff.
Interestingly, most anti-race realist Alt Left people didn’t say race realism wasn’t true. They simply said they were agnostic on the question and didn’t know if it was true or not, but they thought that even supporting race realism at all would make the movement poisonous.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

22 thoughts on “Alt Left: Where Does the Alt Left Stand on Race Realism at the Moment?”

  1. The thing is, if race realism is true, i.e. that there are significant differences in distribution of intelligence and behavioral traits between various population groups, this cannot be suppressed forever. If it’s true, it WILL be found out at some point in time. Either we’re going to have mapped out genes so well that we know exactly what genes contribute to intelligence in a way we can quantify, or all the explanation for vast differences in group performance will be exhausted with a barrage of counter evidence.
    It is interesting how everyone is comfortable saying genes are responsible for some differences like athletic ability, but anything behavioral is off limits. Saying blacks are better at sports than Asians raises no eyebrows. But saying Asians are better at math than blacks and all hell breaks loose.

    1. Serious people will acknowledge that we can observe certain differences in intelligence and behavior among populations. What people dispute is causation.

    2. The ironic thing is, people associate stuff to worth many times. Being good at math somehow makes someone “more worthy”?

    3. Blacks of West African or Bantu heritage excel at sports where it is beneficial to be explosive, powerful, fast, AND big, such as football, basketball, soccer, and many short-distance track and field events. But Asians, physically explosive, fast, and powerful — those who work out, that is — and small, outperform just about everybody in gymnastics, figure skating, short track speed skating, and other sports where it is beneficial to be small, and where being big is a detriment. Asians are also quite good at swimming, where Whites seem to be the best. I can’t remember the last Black gold medalist in swimming (some have argued that this is due to the lack of quality swimming facilities in poorer neighborhoods, but I am uncertain about this, as 20-45% of American Blacks are middle class, depending on how you define middle class). Baseball, of course, is predominantly White and Latino, at least today.
      Anyways, I don’t think it is correct to make a blanket statement that Blacks are better than Asians at athletics.
      And, the human mind is a complicated thing. The Black-White IQ gap may now be nonexistent in England, for instance. Moreover, Blacks in England have a higher African genetic content than they do in America.

  2. You use the term “race agnostic” and I suppose that’s where I’d fall. A fellow named Andre Levy was the first, as far as I know, to use it. That seems to be where most alt-left leaning people I know fall.
    I don’t think there’s a denialism surrounding the prospect of genetic differences based on race among alt-left types as much as there is a suspicion of the motives of those who are really avid proponents of the idea that there are. Scratch the surface of many (though not all) so called race realists and you have a very real KKK kind of mentality.
    Personally, I have no problems believing in genetically significant differences in intelligence between the races, it simply doesn’t factor into my views on policy all of that much. It wouldn’t phase my belief in essential meritocracy in any event. There are, after all, significant genetic differences in intellectual capacity within the races as well. If we start making I.Q and genetics the basis of social organization … well, that’s Brave New World. That’s Gattaca. That’s half of Phillip K Dick’s dystopian fiction. That’s not a world I’m interested in.
    Were race realism to be true, it would make complete and across-the-board equality between the races untenable, but complete and across the board equality isn’t and shouldn’t be the goal of the alt-left. Opposition to unjust, rent-seeking systems of power should be our goal. I do oppose racial discrimination because it divides the working class. Racism was used to terrible effect against organized labor in the US south, for instance, and feeds into the overall conservatism of that region to this day.
    I’m against most political applications of critical race theory because this frames issues of structural inequality and oppression entirely in terms of race and seems to ignore class and economics except, perhaps as something subordinate to race in overall importance. Racial oppression would not have been possible without some or another kind of extractive economic system, and most forms of racial ideology come down to rationalizing why some people are (or should be) servants and others masters.
    (sorry not sorry for the long post)

    1. Well if it’s proven that there are genetic differences between races that effect things like intelligence and bad behavior, then it’s hard not to have it effect policy. For one thing any high IQ nation would have to rethink its immigration policy.

      1. 99% of race realists are reactionary assholes. They love race realist theory because they think it will give the stamp of scientific legitimacy to discrimination. But I have already offered up some scenarios where race realism could be great for the Left and terrible for the Right.
        And factoring in IQ in immigration policy is a problem why? Personally, I think it’s a great idea. Immigrants to the US should have an average IQ of no lower than 98. The idea that immigration will lower the nation’s IQ is insane, but that’s what we are doing, I am afraid.

        1. Most low IQ immigrants are illigal anyways. most legal immigrants are whites/crollio from LATAM, smart africans, smart asians, south east asians (maybe these should be screened more) and some random mestizo types.
          The biggest damage these migrants do is not their own behaviour but the fear they envoke on whites, causing more republicanism and less discourse about important subjects leaving space for the Dems to slide in bullshit.

        2. Very good points, Thinking Mouse.
          The majority of our immigration comes from Latin American, average present IQ 90-95, and from East Asia, average present IQ 100-107. This averages out to close to 100 as it is, if you look at those two groups in combination. And this doesn’t take into account the Flynn Effect (though, unfortunately, I doubt Mexican American Barrio culture, as it presently is, at least, is something that would do much to accelerate the Flynn Effect, sorry to say.
          And we get smaller input from places like the Middle East, present average IQ 84-90, if Richard Lynn’s methods for assessing this are valid (highly questionable, at best). However, Arab Americans and Iranian Americans both have average incomes and average levels of educational attainment — both considered to be rough proxies for average IQ — than the White American average. So, it is clear, that within American culture (in stark contrast to the case with Europe) those groups seem to be Flynn-effected upward.
          In short, I am unconvinced that our present immigration policy is dysgenic.

        3. Myself: “However, Arab Americans and Iranian Americans both have average incomes and average levels of educational attainment — both considered to be rough proxies for average IQ — than the White American average. ”
          Both these groups have higher average incomes and levels of educational attainment than White Americans of European heritage, that is

    2. Magnificent post, Ryan.
      One thing which bears examination, is the fact that in Detroit in the 1960’s into the 70’s, when most everybody had a $35-$55/hr (adjusted for present dollars) factory job, Black neighborhoods were very safe, with low crime rates, clean neighborhoods, and solid, nuclear families. As with most all other neighborhoods. There was a reason it was called The Paris of the Midwest. This is a salient fact that dovetails nicely with much of what you wrote in your well-thought-out post.

      1. People say its the chinese or mexicans. but really its the mexicans and automation. And the mexicans probably didn have the largest impact as most of those jobs the illigals do dont pay shit and that they were mainly in the western states. However, if the blacks could have had welfare and work withing the very white neighborhoods, their environment (thus behaviour) improve for around 2-4 generations. The Illigals residing in the states now wouldnt be an issue if Americans could stop the flow of illegals, its the flow that is bad, but the ones currently in america arent to numerous and arent too bad. For every dumb mexican you could compensate with some H1b visas.

  3. Politics is pretty complicated when one is above avarage in fluid intelligence but pretty normal on crystalized intelligence. It makes you see the flaws in your thinking. I think my philosophycall frame-work is decent, but i need more descriptive claims to make it actualized in the real world. Now im just a little confused thanks to an lack of empirical data. This is why so many are a-political, it gets boring or hard. This adversity selects away intelectually honest people, and gives plenty of territory to loudmouths. Thats why internet discourse tends to be vapid or radical.
    I could be out partying, but instead i watch shit like this:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OUXI8JU1Os&feature=youtu.be
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odGk84Uq1ws&feature=youtu.be
    How the fuck am i supposed to argue against this? i need to become an expert! but i dont want to, it takes too much time. Every path in life is unhealthy in this unhealthy/unatural world, unless one is dysgenic or eugenic enough to delude oneself with stimulation.
    No wonder the jews can enslave us, goyim select for master, its that simple. But who am I to talk…

  4. Also, why is this Alt-Left a thing? If it’s just a bunch of fiscally liberal and Socially Conservative folks, it’s not exactly a needed distinction. There’s a term for this, blue dog.
    Also, this is essentially the democratic part pre 1960s (much much better of course, these folks were racist).

    1. Blue dogs aren’t really a thing anymore. And they seemed pretty fiscally centrist. They would not be in favor of something like single payer healthcare.

      1. We hate Blue Dog Democrats. They’re rightwing on economic issues. Anyway, they hardly exist anymore. I despise Joe Manchin, Heidi Heitkamp, Claire McCaskill, and John Tester, and Doug Jones.
        The Alt Left is NOT American centrism!
        We hate DNC Democrats, Third Way poison, and Susan Collins “liberal” Republican American Centrists! With a passion!
        We are not American political Centrists!

    2. Because there’s no such thing! ALL socially conservative liberals and Leftists are immediately banned from all liberal-Left websites, thrown out of all liberal-Left organizations, and suffer all of their liberal-Left friends leaving them. There is no such thing as an anti-SJW liberal-Left, or if there is, it doesn’t have a name. If you hate SJW’s, you are automatically a conservative, Republican, reactionary, fascist, or Nazi. If you are left on economics at all, you have to adopt the full SJW package you are tossed out on your ass.
      If you are socially conservative but left on economics, there is no place for you anywhere on the Right, because the US Right is 100% ultra-capitalist, neoliberal, Libertarian ultra-rightists on economics.
      There is literally no place on the political spectrum for socially conservative liberals and Leftists. We are standing in the middle of a circular firing squad and everyone is shooting at us.
      You say this is a common thing but I have been blogging like this forever, and the only response has been that I am some freak from outer space. The response to my Alt Left politics is that it is insane, incoherent, and irrational. I am “all over the place.”
      When the movement officially got started, the attitude was that no such thing as the Alt Left had existed before and this was the weirdest shit anyone had ever seen. The attitude was also that this was as brand new thing in US politics. There is NO existing Alt Left type movement anywhere in US politics. If there is, let’s see it.
      Kennedy and pre-Kennedy Democrats are dead and gone. They’ve all been voting Republican forever now.
      And if it’s such a normal everyday thing, why does everyone all across the political spectrum hate my guts?

    3. We ARE the pre-Kennedy US Democratic Party, minus the Southern Democrat racism of course. On the other hand, we don’t think much of modern anti-racism. Most Alt Leftists hate Black Lives Matter. With a passion! Modern anti-racists quit fighting racism a long time ago.
      On the other hand though, if anyone wants to fight LEGITIMATE racism in the US, the Alt Left will be right there alongside them, fighting for them. I would like to see a Black Alt Left form. It would be interesting to see what political positions they would take. Actually the leader of one of the largest Facebook Alt Left groups was a Black guy, Samuel Atta.

      1. The best of the Alt-Left is the Old Left — the Democrats of Roosevelt (or even the Republicans of Lincoln’s era), minus the racist Southern Democrat element. The central feature of our platform must be to rebuild up an economic system based on production, rather than one based on speculation — to put way too fine a point on it (necessary, because I am sleepy). And, as Ryan said earlier, and I quote, “Opposition to unjust, rent-seeking systems of power should be our goal.”
        The Rabbit wing of the Alt-Left, however, has to be purged utterly and completely from this movement, if it is to realize its otherwise considerable potential. Impossible to build up a relevant left-wing movement in present-day America if the ideology of a vocal wing of our movement should be utterly off-putting to Black and Latino Americans.

        1. Rabbit’s people are not even really with the rest of the Alt Left anymore. He and his group are more into something called the Alt Center. There were 18,000 members of Alt Left groups on Facebook recently and no one was talking about Rabbit and his wing. They are called the Left of the Alt Right, but for now, they seem to be mostly out of the Alt Left and into their own grouping.
          Anyway, all of the Alt Left wings have rejected even modest race realism, not to mention Rabbit’s project. So the whole race thing is out in the vast majority of the Alt Left. Anyone can form a wing and profess anything they want. I have already renounced the Left of the Alt Right for supporting Trump. No one talks about Rabbit. He’s not important. One of the leaders of one of the largest Alt Left groups on Facebook was a Black man, Samuel Atta. Hardly any Blacks or Hispanics signed on with the Alt Left anyway. They are all off into SJW IP bullshit.
          All the wings have already rejected Rabbit’s Left of the Alt Right anyway, so it’s really not an issue at all.

  5. Robert, I greatly appreciate your highly thoughtful, objective, and, usually unbiased approach to race realism. I don’t always agree with you, but I find your commentary on the subject endlessly fascinating.
    However, having said that, i just do not see how it could be incorporated constructively on any level, much less as a pillar, of a left-wing political movement that aspires to gain any significant traction in contemporary American society.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *