Pacific Standard | The Kids Are Alt-Right Pacific Standard For all the confusion surrounding the alt-rightmost notably, what defines it?we know for certain that it's a movement dedicated to white nationalism. As such, one might argue that the most sensible response to the alt-right, given its hate-based ... |
Read the original here:
The Kids Are Alt-Right - Pacific Standard
Alt-Right (from Urban Dictionary): Alt-Right, short for Alternative Right, is a set of far-right ideologies, groups and individuals whose core belief is that white identity is under attack by multicultural forces using political correctness and social justice to undermine white people.
Characterized by heavy use of social media and online memes, Alt-Righters eschew establishment conservatism, skew young, and embrace white ethno-nationalism as a fundamental value. The Alternative Right is a term coined in 2008 by Richard Bertrand Spencer, who heads the white nationalist think tank known as the National Policy Institute, to describe a loose set of far-right ideals centered on white identity and the preservation of Western civilization. The alt-right is old racism for the tech-savvy generation. -Giles Fraser
The old time religion is stepping into the 21st century.
Led by an African American pastor from Texas, younger members of the denomination, and Dr. Russell Moore who is president of the SBC Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) voted overwhelmingly to condemn the alt-right white supremacy movement.
During their convention that took place in Phoenix earlier this month, the nations largest protestant organization squashed down on the hate group, a move thatwas hailed by the SBCs fellowship of African American pastors as a welcomed statement strongly condemning racism.
The resolution was a move, however, that did not come without controversy.
The vote for approval was followed by a standing ovation from more than 5,000 convention attendees,but the Washington Post reported that it had been a drawn-out process:
Dwight McKissic, a black pastor from Cornerstone Baptist Church in Arlington, Tex., had introduced the resolution calling on the denomination to make it clear it had no sympathy for the alt-right.
I saw people identifying themselves as Southern Baptist and members of the alt-right, so this is horrifying to me, McKissic said. I wanted the Southern Baptist Convention to make it very clear we have no relationship to them.
when the resolution on the alt-right failed to move forward [on Tuesday] because of objections to some of the wording, many younger members and evangelicals of color became upset. I thought it would be a slam dunk, but I misread Southern Baptists apparently, McKissic said.
The Atlantic noted:
Delay notwithstanding, the leaders sense of urgency was obvious. Gaines urged the body to let the world know that we decry, we come against every kind of racism that there is. He encouraged people to grant the new procedural request, allowing the committee to present the resolution again on Wednesday. Ballots went up all over the roomGass said it looked like there wasnt a single no vote. The affirmative has it, Gaines said, praise the living God.
The Post added:
The debate over the resolution highlights the divisions within the denomination. A majority of white evangelicals supported the election of President Trump. But many evangelicals of color have questioned that support and criticized Trumps policies as harmful to minorities, if not racist.
While several Southern Baptist leaders have served on Trumps evangelical advisory board, many younger Southern Baptists including the denominations Ethics and Religious Liberty president Russell Moore, 45 vocally opposed his candidacy.
Indeed, Moore the ethics leader of the denomination balked at supporting Trump due to serious moral problems and, unlike somewho resisted Trump early on but fell into line after he became the Republican nominee, Moore never capitulated. (As I worked on this article, new demeaning tweets from the president mocking Morning Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski hit the airwaves.)
Because of his lack of support for Trump,mainstay Baptist leaders went after Moore and tried to remove him from his ethics position. Just as with the Republican Party, it was obvious Southern Baptists were at a juncture of old versus new with younger members leading the charge for change.
The era of Trump has seen a battle for the heart and soul of the Southern Baptist Convention. Passage of the alt-right resolutionshould give courage to those who continue to hold the ethical line as politics creeps more and more into places of worship. Meanwhile, the disapproval of alt-right leader Richard Spender, seen in a series of tweets as he followed the SBCs on-again, off-again resolution discussions, appeared to confirm that the Southern Baptist Convention had done the right thing.
Lynn Mitchell is the photos editor for Bearing Drift.
POLITICS--On a crisp winter day in early February, a white-haired man with a thick New York accent, ranted to MSNBC decrying the influence of fat-cat political donors and superPACS. He promised the American people that he would be different than the other politicians they had grown tired of, arguing that he was the true voice of the people.
His audience, galvanized and excitable, screamed their support. They waved banners and cheered, eventually erupting in their favorite chant -- one that would become the infamous descriptor of this very campaign:
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.
The 2016 Presidential election brought two anti-establishment populist figures to the forefront of the American psyche. Both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump gained popularity with a sect of voters who seemed disillusioned with the current political landscape. These were people tired of politicians that seemed to cater more towards Wall Street than the American working class. They felt that something they were owed had been taken away from them -- or they felt like the world their parents had promised them didnt really exist anymore. They were angry and desperately wanted change.
So two boisterous, opinionated New Yorkers promised exactly that. They condemned the current political configuration, arguing that Washington had become a sea of corrupt, power-hungry individuals. Establishment became a dirty word. They ran campaigns based on the idea that maintaining the status quo was the greatest threat to the American people.
And the American people loved it.
Lets be clear. Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders are two very different people. They represent different factions of the American public. Trump is a billionaire businessman with a corporate empire known the world over. Sanders is a registered Independent who caucuses with Senate Democrats and repudiates corporate greed and the very billionaire class that Trump exists within. However, those factions they represent -- the groups that scream and holler for them at rallies, whose cries of revolution were heard throughout the entirety of the 2016 campaign season -- look a lot more like each other than the rest of the country.
The Horseshoe Theory
In traditional thought, the political spectrum is considered a straight line, progressing from the liberal left to the conservative right. As our governments have become more complex and interconnected, many scientists have posited other formations to better understand the political spectrum. The horseshoe theory -- I can already hear the Reddit forums screaming -- presents an alternative. The ideology, which has been credited to French writer Jean-Pierre Faye, suggests that the far left and far right share much more in common with each other than they do with the majority of their respective parties. Much like a horseshoe when the iron is bent, the ends of the spectrum are closer to each other than the center.
Faye believed that both political extremes represented totalitarianism of different sorts. While the extreme left often trends towards communism, the extreme right bends towards fascism. This theorem is seen displayed in other categories such as competing monotheistic religions and nationalist groups. It essentially revolves around the fact that the more radical a group becomes, the more isolated it becomes from majority thought. The extremes of any system often reject the status quo of the majority, thereby resulting in comparable outlier values.
Take, for example, the case of Gil Troy, a presidential historian and history professor at McGill University. Right after the election, Troywrotean op-ed in Time Magazine suggesting that Bernie Sanders campaign pushed Hillary Clinton so far to the left that she was unable to swing moderate voters in the general election. He listed this as one of the many reasons Clinton lost.
Now, argue the legitimacy of his claim all you want -- but its still far from the worst Why Clinton Lost hot take I read in November. In response to this relatively nerdy analysis article, Troy was doxxed horrendously by the online community. He was the recipient of a myriad of racist and anti-semitic tweets, some which threatened violence and the release of his personal info.
This reaction is pretty par for the course in the current online dialogue. The kicker, however, is that these messages which called him a kyke and a paid shill, didnt come from the proudly bigoted alt-right, as one might have come to expect. They came from the alt-left, and they were all emphatically Bernie Sanders supporters.
How a Sanders supporter can call someone a kyke, and act as if they truly support Bernies Revolution is beyond me.
Origins of aMovement
So when did this all begin? When did the extreme factions of both the Democrats and the Republicans become so mainstream?
Most would argue this mobilization was born the day Barack Obama was elected President of the United States.
At the heels of the greatest economic crisis since the Great Recession, American conservatives were angry. And while their movement would eventually become a protest against President Obamas progressive policies, it started off with less partisan leanings. They were frustrated with bank bailouts and demanded to know why their tax dollars were subsidizing what seemed to them corrupt government programs. These feelings werent necessarily tied to traditional conservative values, and even contained elements of more liberal philosophies.
John Daniel Davidson, senior correspondent at right-leaning publication, The Federalist,discussedthe origins of the Tea Party movement in an essay determined to understand the surging support for both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump:
Most Americans think the Tea Party movement was a conservative protest against the Obama administrations progressive policies. It certainly became that, but it didnt begin as an outpouring of principled or coherent conservatism -- nor was itonlya movement of the Right.
In its wrath against Wall Street and crony capitalism, for example, the early Tea Party contained elements of the political Left. More than a complaint over any specific grievance, early Tea Party rallies -- hodge-podge affairs featuring tri-cornered hats and, in a few cases, offensive signs -- were an expression of deep anger and disillusionment, not with a particular party but with a political establishment perceived to serve special interests, not the American people.
The Tea Party itself was born out of two moments -- a small protest launched by an online forum and an infamous CNBC reporters on-air call to action. While broadcasting from the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Rick Santelli ranted against the Obama administrations policies, accusing them of subsidizing bad mortgages. The traders seated behind him erupted in cheers when he issued what would become the rallying call of the Tea Party movement:
Were thinking of having a Chicago tea party in July, Im thinking of organizing it.
10 days later, the first Tea Party rally was held.
Conservatives were not the only ones angered and disillusioned by the housing market crash. Although it took them a few more years to create a distinct movement, the left eventually responded to this same disenfranchisement. As the debt-ceiling crisis of 2011 reached its climax, a group called New Yorkers Against Budget Cuts staged a meeting on Wall Street to strategize and organize a protest against the economic state of the nation.
On September 17, 2011 approximately 1000 protesters gathered in Zuccotti Park in lower Manhattan to march on Wall Street and began an occupational sit-in which would last nearly two months.
Its a little hard to talk about what exactly Occupy Wall Street stood for because its message encompassed myriad of frustrations and policy stances. According to the OWS website, the occupation of Wall Street was intended to [fight] back against the corrosive power of major banks and multinational corporations over the democratic process, and the role of Wall Street in creating an economic collapse that has caused the greatest recession in generations.
Its important to note that none of these grievances have particularly partisan leanings.
The Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street were born out of a similar discontent. As disparate as they may have seemed at first glance, both movements were a response to the economic downfall of the early 2000s, and the governments unwillingness to hold members of Wall Street accountable. Their actions would emphatically affect the next few election cycles, creating an influence on policy that no one really expected. The Tea Party -- with the help of some heavy-duty fundraising -- formed their own faction of the Republican party because they felt ignored by the GOP leadership. They were citizens forgotten by an establishment that stopped representing the voice of the people, in order to protect their own gains.
Sound familiar?
Alternative Politics
Fast forward to 2017, and the Tea Party and OWS have evolved into something more adept to the digital age. The alt-left and alt-right have reached most prominence in the online sphere, taking over Twitter and chat boards, respectively. Neither are exactly direct descendants of their predecessors and do have origin stories of their own -- but there is no doubt that they exist as a result of the climate created by that time.
Given that these two factions are subsections of traditional parties without fully structured leadership, their views change depending on the spokesperson espousing them. However, when you break down the tweets, forums, and stump speeches -- you start to see a bit of a pattern.
The two both rely on extremely purist ideology suggesting if you cant change things exactly to your liking, its better to not do anything at all. While this is pretty antithetical to how government actually works, it explains the lack of alt-left figures elected to representative positions. Additionally, it speaks to the inability of the Republican caucus to successfully whip votes regarding certain legislation. With their party split between traditional conservatism and radical extremism, its difficult to create policies that successfully acquiesce to both.
In addition, their stances on many of the issues concerning todays voters are remarkably similar. Take Russia for starters. While the far right is firmly anti-collusion, refusing to even consider the possibility that the Trump campaign collaborated with the Russian government -- the alt-left takes a slightly more subtle take. They argue that #Russiagate is simply an excuse Democrats use to explain why they lost the election, instead of taking responsibility for the faults of Hillary Clintons campaign. Glenn Greenwald, ofThe Intercept -- a paper known for its anti-collusion leanings -- exposedthis belief in no uncertain terms:
It is exceptionally important to Democratic partisans to believe that the reason they lost this election is not because they chose a candidate who was corrupt and who was extremely disliked and who symbolized all of the worst failings of the Democratic Party.
Even our President seems to agree with Greenwald on this one.
When it comes to Hillary Clinton, neither side takes a favorable approach. The alt-left generally sticks to traditional slurs of corporate whore or establishment shill, while the alt-right seriously believes she has ordered the deaths of multiple people. Neither takes into consideration her lifelong dedication to politics, and her track record of working across the aisle -- necessary skills that, regardless of your opinion of her, our current president lacks.
Both sides tend towards sexist epithets when describing her -- perhaps alluding to a deeper misogyny that permeates extremist thinking. Additionally, its well worth remembering that the majority of subscribers to these extreme political beliefs are white men; a categorization which is necessary to make when analyzing the amount of racism and hate speech involved in alt-rhetoric.
Regarding more policy-based subjects, these two factions agree on trade, big money in politics, lobbying, and the breaking up of Wall Street. They even agreed on the expansion of Social Security. Or they did, at least until the House introduced the AHCA. They both ignore the complexity of the reasons behind the current working class distress -- including deindustrialization and globalization.
The alt-left and right even cross party lines in order to support candidates that they believe represent their values. Richard Spencer, the alt-right leader and white nationalist, has become a fervent supporter of Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, (photo left) a Democrat from Hawaii. Gabbard was a strong Sanders supporter during the primaries but is known for political stances that align with Trumps ideology. Shes for increased vetting for refugees, and even backed a Republican-sponsored bill to accomplish such back in 2015.
Gabbard is a woman of color, so shes far from the traditional figurehead for these groups. However, her America First and staunchly non-interventionist beliefs when it comes to foreign policy, have been enough to sway Spencer and his supporters hands.
The alt-left and the alt-right yearn for the same reckoning, and theyll sacrifice whatever and whoever they need to get it.
The Co-Opting of the Two PartySystem
Heres the rub. Neither the alt-left nor the alt-right is actually representative of the two main parties of the American system. The traditional values of the Republican Party dont necessitate racism and sexism the way that one would believe given the current climate. Fiscal conservatism isnt antithetical to minority rights. And the politician the alt-left rallies around isnt even a registered Democrat. Which would be completely fine, were it not the Democratic Party they were trying to restructure.
Both wings are destructive to our current political system -- and its clear this destruction is what they are trying to accomplish. Their calls for a specific form of revolution advocate for the type of chaos that leads to the overhaul of a political system. Steve Bannon himself has argued in support of Leninist thinking -- essentially the full destruction of the state.
This is not how change happens in a democratic system. And while its well known and accepted that our system is flawed -- you dont burn down the house because it needs some fixing up. That doesnt help those who are already disenfranchised and certainly doesnt create economic stability. The extreme sects of the right and left have created a kinship based on delusion and the capitalization of real Americans anger and subjugation.
Of course, there are stipulations to this comparison. While both sides are equally problematic, this does not mean they are equally dangerous. The rise in hate crimes and racist movements since Trumps win has been nearly entirely perpetuated by members of the alt-right. The exceptions, of course, being the horrific shooting in Alexandria in which Majority Whip Steve Scalise was critically injured and the deadly Portland attack by a known white supremacist and Sanders supporter. The irrational rhetoric created by the severe partisanship of these groups is dangerous in a very real way -- which in truth, is the most important take away from these kinds of discussions.
So how do we combat this? How do we continue to push for political change without becoming distracted by the antics of the far left and right? First, we need to call out these factions when we see them. We cannot allow the fringes of a movement to get in the way of real progress and revolution. We need to expose purist ideology that comes from discriminatory thinking. And then we need to address the issues that brought us to this point. We need to fix the economic policies that led us to the instability that bred such distrust in government. We need to take a long, hard look at the uncomfortable discussions surrounding identity politics. In the end, we need to do what neither the alt-left nor the alt-right ever seems to want to do -- get deep in the trenches and get to work.
And as our previous President reminded us, just before the 2016 election, we must remember that there is more that unites us than divides us:
I will never apologize for saying that the future of humanity, the future of the world is going to be defined by what we have in common, [not] those things that separate us and ultimately lead us into conflict.
(Remy Anne is a writer and editor at Rantt.comwhere this piece was first posted.) Prepped for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.
-cw
Read more:
The Alt Left and Alt Right: Two Sides of the Same Coin - City Watch
Although most of our dinner-time conversation tends to orbit around schoolwork, the latest episode of this or that TV series or why in the hell Trump is still in office, we found ourselves the other day chewing on a New York Times op-ed regarding a lesbian march in Chicago where on Saturday, three women carrying Jewish pride flags rainbow flags embossed with a Star of David were kicked out of the celebration on the grounds that their flags were a trigger.
When my 20-year-old rising junior at Tulane offhandedly claimed that at least the Right is clear on its positions, it seemed a profound reversal of his Left-leaning tendencies. So I asked him to explain -- and thought his response interesting enough to share here.
By TJ Simpson
When I look at the recent ejection of proud Jewish lesbians from the annual Dyke March in Chicago, one distinct thought comes to mind: the far Left has created something more concerning than the usually extreme and boorish values of the Far Right, the constant shift of their positions making it unclear exactly what they are.
advertisement
advertisement
The Far Right clearly has some frightening ideologies: anti-gay rights, anti-women's rights, racism, dated economic theory, anti-Islamic, anti-Hispanic, anti-Semitic, etc. These are inherently immoral, and negatively viewed by rational-thinking moderates. But when actions are taken by the Far Right, they are at least consistent with their unfortunate values. Their platform might not be a positive or socially acceptable one in the increasingly progressive world in which we live, but it is seemingly more forthright.
Those aligned with the Far Right fight for what they believe in regardless of who listens and they seem to stick to positions. The same was true when the progressive Left fought for gay rights, ecology, universal medical care, the social safety net, etc. But recently we have seen an increase in dissonance between the values that the Left preaches and the actions that are carried out by those who identify themselves as the Left.
The American public hears about Left values of tolerance, acceptance, freedom of expression, economic equality, etc. But increasingly we have seen the Left act in opposition to their supposed values. The exclusion of the Jewish lesbians at the Dyke March in Chicago on the grounds of intersectionality is only the latest example. The whole left-leaning concept of intersectionality seems to me fraught with contradictions and subject to whatever interpretation is convenient at the time.
The increasing disconnect was seen clearly during and in the aftermath of the 2016 presidential race, when Trump supporters (as wrong as they may have been) were condemned. Doesn't that go against the inherent ideals of liberalism -- that everyone has a right to express their opinions without fear of reprisal? Yet, prominent conservatives were disinvited to speak -- or even in some cases prevented from speaking by liberals on college campuses across the country.
Is it not a main tenet of liberalism and our very country to promote freedom of speech and freedom of ideas? If the Left wants to prove they believe in what they preach, should they not rise above this behavior? What values are too precious to contradict, if any? Is the new liberal platform one where it's acceptable to bully and punish those whom you disagree with? That you dont have to respect someones right to freedom of expression or speech if YOU think its wrong? That if someone belongs to a certain religious group or heritage that you disagree with, its OK to exclude them?
Liberals might want to keep in mind this often-misattributed quotation, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.'"
The rest is here:
Dinner Conversation: Is The Alt-Right More Honest Than The Left ... - MediaPost Communications
"Can I get some sunscreen?" one young Nazi asks another young Nazi near the Lincoln Memorial where the alt-right's "Free Speech" rallythe more edgy of two right-wing rallies scheduled for the same time in Washington, D.C. on June 25is about to kick off.
The second rally, which is supposed to be "against political violence," splintered off from the first once alt-right figurehead Richard Spencer was invited. Spencer and his supporters call Mike Cernovich, Jack Posobiec, and the other viral right-wingers leading the competing march "alt-light" because they are less openly racist and mostly fall in line with Trump. Who these "free speech" Nazis are specifically, their names, where they came from, the specifics of their beliefs, doesn't matter and many don't call themselves Nazis but that doesn't matter either (FWIW: they prefer "tribalists" and/or suggest white pride is like black power or whatever and shouldn't be a big deal).
The Nazi in need of sunscreen eventually gets some from a Baby Huey-like Nazi wearing a baseball helmet and holding a "Join, or Die." flag. Bounding up the steps past Baby Huey is neo-Confederate Jason Kessler, who waves a Confederate flag and yells that Lincoln was a traitor in the direction of D.C. United Against Hate's nearby counter-rally.
"The South will rise again," someone snickers.
"Fuck Palestine," a kid, probably 15, mumbles.
"Bill Clinton is a rapist" another yells.
And then, a bunch of ostensibly grown-ass men, all part of Identity Evropa, a white Nationalist group, most in white polos and khakis and at least onean older guy in a motorcycle helmetsieg heil-ing, arrive with synth-pop of the foggy faded sort playing from portable speakers.
A few of the Identity Evropa guys are Spencer's bodyguardsand their presence signals that he has arrived, which means the media gathers for an impromptu pre-rally Spencer presser.
Spencer tells cameras that he is "not a white supremacist."
"I don't want to rule over other races," he says. He is just worried about whites "not having a safe space for their families."
And unlike the alt-light, Spencer says, he isn't blindly for the Donald: "Donald Trump has been very disappointing and I am very worried about his presidency. He can obviously redeem himself in my eyes, but whether or not he's going to do that, I'm skeptical."
Spencer, it seems, is entering his paunchy Elvis phase, dressed in a white suit (with black buckled shoes truly deserving of a "What are thooooooose?"), sporting long-ish sideburns, big dumb Ray-Bans, and looking a bit bloated. He is a slightly better talker with cameras in his face, which let him be more oppositional than he is during the actual speech where his speaking style is best described as diet, caffeine-free, Dwight Schrute from "The Office" channeling Mussolini.
"The most radical thing for anyone to say is, 'I am white, my life has meaning, my life has dignity, I am part of a family," he says to the crowd of 100 or so. He adds, as though he's filibustering through an S.A.T. prompt, "Free speech really matters and this is why we are here today."
There is so much bad faith and cognitive dissonance here and the D.C. police are trying to keep everyone separated, not allowing the Nazis to get too close to the D.C. United Against Hate rally a little closer to the Lincoln Memorial ("The rally you want to be at is over there" a cop tells a guy in Trump gear) and moving D.C. United Against Hate attendees, including one woman in a wheelchair, away from the Nazis, a presumably wise decision but also one that offers up a false equivalency between the two groups.
A stronger stance is taken by a Parks and Rec. volunteer who silently leaves three Internet-y Nazis hanging after they want to shake his hand and "thank him for [his] service," they say.
We're all soaking in it out herethe 4chan-ing, Reddit-residing, Pepe meme-ing, racist, anti-semitic, alt-right to which Trump is at least adjacent to or making coy goo-goo eyes at (did you see Eric Trump's got the Nazi haircut now?). That its face, Spencer, has become a meme himself, someone who, when he shows up, bloviates about white supremacy and then often gets bopped in the face or glitter-bombed, which is then GIF'd, makes sense: The internet's demands will always devour youlike the sea it will make you small, take you over, and you will eventually lose to it. Right now, Spencer's virality is shrinking because, it turns out, he's got this horrible sincerity that won't make him lasthe is like Mike Pence or something, someone who actually cares, truly believes his bullshit, whereas it is the "alt-light," Cernovich and Posobiec, who are super cynical like Trump or Mitch McConnell, goofy grandstanders, needling nihilists.
Then, Spencer's speech gets loosely inspirational: "The real challenge is within ourselves, we are the ultimate censors of free speech, we aren't willing to be honest even when we are alone. There is a black cloud that hangs over whites around the world," he says, really going for it here, referring to white guilt. Yes, the black cloud is white guilt.
Today, Spencer's another racist doofus and he is far less entertaining than, say, the internet ding-dong and former Buzzfeed employee who goes by the name Baked Alaska, who gives off Guy Fieri vibes and whose tone is bro-running-for-high-school-class-president.
The culture wars of the early '90s have only recently entered Baked Alaska's radarhis story is he became alienated working at Buzzfeed and was confronted by culturally sensitives millennials so he bemoans "SJWs" and political correctness and tells the crowd they've been blind to what's been going on and it has to end.
"We just deflected it all, we had our hater blockers on and we just didn't pay attention to it and now all of a sudden everyone's getting butthurt, everyone's afraid to be called racist to be called anti-semitic to be called all these names," he says. "And, and I think it's garbage, I think it's absolutely garbage."
Not far away, closer to the Lincoln Memorial, the collection of liberals, folkies, leftists, and peaceniks discuss Richard Collins III, a college student murdered for being black, nod to the deaths that are imminent under Trumpcare, and chant "Nazis out!"
Baked Alaska, well, he's bitching about Twitter suspensionsthe stuff that really matters.
"I actually got suspended from Twitter for a week," he says, noting/boasting it was because he shared a "Gas chamber meme." The audience laughs and cheers (they booed when he mentioned Buzzfeed, though). During his speech, he also makes a joke about being part of "Generation Z"Z here for Zyklon B, the cyanide used during the Holocaust.
Meanwhile, tourists here to see D.C. on a sunny Sunday have no time for the alt-righters. Some confront and debate them and police move them away quickly. One man with his family chuckles, and calls them Nazis, shocked but also unimpressed.
"Yeah, we're Nazis," one teenaged Nazi spits back.
"88," another Nazi yells.
One of them is dressed like a Hitler youthor a bizarre Hot Topic cosplay version, everything about him is slack and clean rather than orderly.
The rally wraps up quickly following Spencer's speech. Identity Evropa members get in formation and leave. One guy from the group smiles and shoots another sieg heil at photographers. Some have helmets on and one keeps fucking with a mouthguard. It seems as though they are on a mission, and at times they pick up the pace to a march-jog along the D.C. sidewalks away from the memorial.
Then they stop at a Metro station escalator, ride it down, and pull out their Metro cards to go home. Safety in numbers, that's all it was. No grand statement or action or confrontation. That's what all of this is: an expression of bewildered fear, an excuse for failure, a way to be a part of something, anything, all hating together.
Their leader, Richard Spencer, didn't join them on the Metro. He jumped into a rental car not long after his speech ended more than an hour ago.
Continue reading here:
Alt-Right in Fat Elvis Mode: 100 or so Nazis gather for Freedom of ... - Baltimore City Paper (blog)