Mediaboss Marketing

Alexander Dugin says Trumps a traitor to the alt-right because of his unforgivable attack on Syria, and Putins a big disappointment. But Dugin still digs Bannon.

MOSCOWThe Russian political philosopher Alexander Dugin is banned from traveling to the United States because his calls for violence helped inspire the pro-Moscow insurgency in eastern Ukraine in 2014. But if Americas leading ideologue today, Steve Bannon, were to visit Moscow, Dugin, a 55-year-old with a long beard and ultra-conservative views, would gladly sit down and talk with him. Dugin says he sees Bannon, President Donald Trumps chief strategist, as his ideological ally.

One day would not be enough for them to cover all the geopolitics they have in common, Dugin told The Daily Beast in an exclusive interview. First their conversation would be purely philosophical, Dugin imagined, as Bannon and I read the same authors, we are united by the entire treasury of European conservative culture and history.

Dugin, famous in Russia for his deep disrespect for the worlds liberals, looks at Bannon as his last hope in Washingtons conservative political circles.

For a long time, Dugin said he had counted on President Donald Trump as he could see Bannons hand all over the presidential campaign. But Dugins scenario for Russias future ties with the United States crumbled on the day the mad neo-con Trump authorized firing Tomahawk missile at Syria.

Dugin, who forgave Trumps tough on Russia comments, and even Trumps expectations of Russia to give Crimea back to Ukraine, said he tolerated, supported Trump, while many here gave up. But not any longer.

In the interview, Dugin insisted that unlike liberals, who forgave Barack Obamas failed promises, conservative politicians were now turning away from Trump. That is the main difference between liberals and conservatives. We have a deep sense of dignity: The moment the right-wing politicians Marine Le Pen [in France] and Matteo Salvini [in Italy], and all of the alt-right supporters [in the U.S.], saw that Trump was a puppet, they stopped supporting him.

Dugin agreed with a recent Newsweek piece describing his deep ideological connections with Trumps strategist Bannon. Newsweek quoted Bannons words (originally reported by BuzzFeed) at a Vatican conference in 2014. We, the Judeo-Christian West, really have to look at what [Putin] is talking about as far as traditionalism goes, particularly the sense of where it supports the underpinnings of nationalism, Bannon said. When you really look at some of the underpinnings of some of [Putins] beliefs today, a lot of those come from what I call Eurasianism.

Russians associate Eurasianism with Dugins name. He was using the term long before Bannon.

So, even though the two never had a chance to meet, Dugin told The Daily Beast, I connect with Bannons focus of the entire presidential campaign: the denial of globalism, rejection of Americas hegemony, the return of religious and national interests, his criticism of liberals and respect for traditional values, Dugin said. Bannon is a bright personality, his team published my books in the United States, including The Fourth Political Theory.

It was never easy to catch up with Dugins viewshe sometimes says things that, when pressed, he denies later. Readers of his English language website, geopolitica.ru, might think that the ideologue of the Russian Spring lives with the West on his mind. But Dugin celebrates the gap between Russian and Western development, insisting that Western civilization is death and mocks Europeans as Euromonkeys: We should throw away the entire Wests racism, we are people of Asia, of Eurasia, we should stop heading towards European culture.

As leader of the Eurasian movement, Dugin likes to call for destruction of everybody who did not support traditionalist values. He also mocked supporters of Western human rights.

His unforgettable face and Rasputin-like beard have been seen for decades at Russian ultra-nationalist rallies, where he pronounced big, radically anti-Western words into the microphones.

Thank You!

You are now subscribed to the Daily Digest and Cheat Sheet. We will not share your email with anyone for any reason

Dugin is talking about creating some new cross-cultural nation [of Slavs and Turkish people] of anti-Atlantic, traditional ideologyhis theory often sounds like a pretty fascist approach, said Alexander Verkhovsky, director of Russian SOVA, a Moscow-based NGO monitoring ultra-nationalist groups. He said and wrote a lot, calling for a war in Ukraine; many Russian nationalists who listened or read Dugins texts actually joined the insurgencies in Ukraine afterward.

In April of 2014, I reported on pro-Russian protests and the so-called Novorossiya Movement in Odessa, a city in the south of Ukraine. One of the movements leaders, Yegor Kvasnyuk, explained to me that long before the Kremlins officials began to speak about the Russian Spring and Novorossiya, new Russia, he had heard the words from the Eurasian revolutionary Alexander Dugin: As early as last September, during a meeting in Russia, Dugin told us that Novorossiya, a sovereign republic, should have devoted, honest Russians to lead it to revive our Russian roots. Kvasnyuk called Dugin the greatest predictor of Russias future.

The same month in 2014, Vladimir Putin spoke about Novorossiya along Dugin lines: Here is Novorossiya: Kharkiv, Luhansk, Donetsk, Kherson, Nikolayev, Odessa were not a part of Ukraine during the Tsars times, all these territories were passed to Ukraine in the 1920s by the Soviet government. Putin spoke about a referendum to decentralize power in these regions.

In his public speeches during the first weeks of the war in Donbas, Dugin promised that hundreds of thousands of people would come out in all Novorossiya cities in support of pro-Russian militants. But that did not happen, and Dugin started to fall out of Putins favor.

Now, according to Anton Shekhovtsov, a Vienna-based expert on right-wing movements, Dugin is not connected with the Kremlin at all, otherwise he would have never been fired from Moscow State University.

Shekhovtsov notes that even Russian businessman Anton Malofeyev, a major supporter of the Ukraine rebels got rid of Dugin entirely.

Sergei Markov, a pro-Kremlin ideologue working on political tactics around the world, says he understands why Dugin failed to become a mainstream figure in Russia.

Dugin never bends, never compromises, and that is why political elites cannot forgive him, Markov tells The Daily Beast. But somehow he always manages to slip in and leave a trace: On my recent trip to Ankara, officials referred to Putins adviser Dugin visiting them recently.

Dugin admitted that Trump was not his only disappointment latelyVladimir Putin has also made unforgettable mistakes for Dugin, the true believer.

When Putin walks away from the right politics, I do not support him, as we conservatives do not support opportunists, Dugin told The Daily Beast. The most serious contradictions began when the Kremlin disowned Novorossiya. We should not have stoppedI reject the decision of freezing the conflict, Dugin said. By giving up on Novorossiya, they failed the dignity challenge, but unfortunately, Putins supporters have a slaves mentality, and live by the principle, Whatever Master orders is the law.

Dugin added that he was not in the opposition, but that he would rather down-size to some remote part of Russia and out of the spotlight, than bend to Putin.

Earlier this month, Dugin wrote on his website about yet another war: What happened on April 7th, 2017 could be the beginning of a Third World War, he commented on the U.S. attacking Syria with cruise missiles. As a rule, nobody wants war, but, alas, wars happen, and sometimes world ones. Therefore, I posit that first and foremost, as in the case of any disaster, it is necessary to remain calm and gather ones thoughts.

It looked like for now Dugin was not leaving the spotlight, he was working in his office on Moscows main Tverskaya Avenue, making predictions and political forecasts, so if Bannon stops by, they would have plenty of time to talk.

Read more:
Russia's Alt-Right Rasputin Says He's Steve Bannon's Ideological ... - Daily Beast

Steve Bannon. Photo: Mark Wilson/Getty Images

Now that Steve Bannon has been temporarily or permanently sidelined by President Donald Trump, his nationalist allies people who formerly identified as alt-right, but now reject that label as it has become synonymous with white supremacy are debating what their man in the White House did wrong and what he might do to salvage the situation. One of the key questions up for debate is whether Bannon should have made better use of ideologically sympathetic media outlets when he ran Breitbart News, he described it as the platform for the alt-right to get out his side of the story.

He really doesnt talk to all of us outside who would be inclined to help him, said Charles Johnson, who asked to be identified as a Bannon ally and entrepreneur. The editor-in-chief of GotNews.com, the flame-haired media flame-thrower may be better known for getting kicked off of Twitter and for his lawsuit against the now-defunct Gawker.

The chief strategist to the president might have done better job of holding onto power, the thinking goes, if he were talking to those who want what he wants and have the benefit of seeing things the way they appear outside of the bubble of his war room, the name Bannons given his West Wing office.

He has a lot of friends out on the internet who love him, but we are all still waiting for him to unleash the beast, Johnson said. He added that Bannon had never been in touch with him and his cohorts, and that he should mobilize us but he is playing too nice.

A source close to the White House agreed with Johnson that Bannon needs to change if he wants to survive. Hes not achieving anything! Whats he achieving? Hes a zero. Hes incompetent! the source said. He doesnt get back to the people at the Daily Caller. He doesnt get back to the people at Infowars, the source said, I dont care what you think of their politics, they reach millions of people. Why would you not respond to them?

Paul Joseph Watson, Infowars editor-at-large, told me hed never been in touch with Bannon but disagreed that it was a problem, saying he should concentrate on running the country. Of course, the president himself has been in contact with Infowars founder, Alex Jones, appearing on his radio program via Skype during the campaign and speaking to him privately thereafter. (Jones, who is in the midst of a theatrical custody battle in court, didnt respond to a text message seeking comment.)

Now, as with all matters that require talking to the people both populating the current administration and propping it up, there is the risk that this particular argument is more diversionary than literal that accusing Bannon of ignoring controversial, far-right nationalists is in fact a means of protecting him.

If we were lying, how would you know, right? Mike Cernovich said, addressing that question directly.

A social-media agitator known for spreading conspiracy theories about Pizzagate and Hillary Clintons health during the election who now says hes new-right or American nationalist, Cernovich also claims that Bannon doesnt talk to anybody. He said proof of Bannons lack of communication with nationalists was Breitbarts coverage of the administration, which has been both sporadically critical and seemingly out of the loop. Thats why Breitbart missed the Susan Rice thing, he said, that kind of says it all. But Cernovich didnt miss the Susan Rice thing in fact, he broke the story that, during her stint as a national-security adviser to Barack Obama, Rice had requested from classified intelligence reports the names of officials associated with the Trump campaign implying that he, at least, has some highly placed sources. (Asked to disclose where he obtained the scoop, he didnt respond.)

Still, Cernovich doesnt accept the prescription of his ideological confrere Johnson he sees too much downside for Bannon in talking to alt-right journalists. Its gonna create drama, he said. Bannon should definitely not talk to anybody.

Keep in mind though that Cernovich claims he didnt even know who Bannon was until, like, nine months ago. He says he learned of him through Joshua Greens Bloomberg profile which came out in October of 2015, or 18 months ago. (Cernovich remembers his first impression: Wow, this guys a G.)

In some ways, the question of whether Bannon should be cultivating more allies in the press is part of a larger debate over his operating style in the White House which is to operate in isolation. Im not doing this to have friends, he told me. I dont socialize a lot, I dont bring people into my life. This is like being in the Navy, this is like a duty. I dont enjoy this every day. This is not living; this is a kind of existence.

Though he brought into the White House some of his own staff Julia Hahn from Breitbart; Andrew Surabian from the Tea Party Express and Alexandra Preate, his personal flack he has spent little political capital fighting for high-level strategists with whom he could align in ideological disputes.

He has also, according to a source close to the president, not weighed in on behalf of nationalist appointments or principles. The source added, I dont care what he says: He never objected to the bombing in Syria never. Tells people he did, but thats a fucking lie. My source is as high as you can go. Bannon did not respond to a text about Syria, and when I ran into him in the West Wing on Friday afternoon, he darted off before I could ask a question.

Salma Hayek Takes Us on the Tumultuous Journey of Her Husbands Maybe-Maybe-Not Affair

Michael Moore Predicts Trump Will Be Impeached In the Middle of His Second Term

Conservative Pundit Claims Hannity Invited Her Back to His Hotel Once, But Says It Wasnt Sexual Harassment

The 100th day is coming. Look busy!

Possibly a government shutdown crisis, the return of Trumpcare, and the unveiling of the presidents tax-reform plan or none of the above.

Debbie Schlussel says the incident was weird and creepy but that she wouldnt call it sexual harassment.

As a Navy strike group heads toward North Korea, Pyongyang promises to turn arrogant aircraft carriers into scrap metal if they get too close.

But her new Sunday show wont debut until June.

Jeff Sessions wont like this one.

Emmanuel Macron and Marine Le Pen are headed into a historic race.

In all the talk about Trump becoming normal or centrist, it is illuminating to realize how little would have changed if Ted Cruz had defeated him.

Still, theres no question that the voting public across the West is terribly alienated from their governments.

The centrist Macron and far-right Le Pen will go head-to-head on May 7.

There is little good news for President Trump in two new polls measuring Americans opinions about his first 100 days.

He has a lot of friends out on the internet who love him, but we are all still waiting for him to unleash the beast.

Gail Sheehy reports: Theyre saying its time to ditch the Goldwater Rule.

Sources say that seven black Fox News employees plan to join a racial-discrimination suit against the company.

Large crowds championing reality and evidence took to the streets in hundreds of cities on Saturday and nerds definitely make the best signs.

The president will celebrate his first 100 days in office by toasting himself and his many accomplishments.

But when the Obama administration later wanted to confirm Russias efforts, Comey kept his distance.

Behold this unorthodox aerial-transport plan.

The presidents son usually prefers to kill much bigger animals.

Original post:
The Alt-Right Is Debating Whether Bannon Needs a Better Press Strategy - New York Magazine

Over the past few weeks, there have been two major controversies regarding far-right speakers and their potential to speak at universities. Richard Spencer was supposed to speak at Auburn University, but the university decided to cancel the event. Subsequently, a federal judge overturned the decision to cancel the event, deciding that Spencer did indeed have the right to speak at the university, andprotests ensued. The following week, U.C. Berkeley cancelled an event with Ann Coulter due to safety concerns.

In these cases, and in cases like these, many opinions come out on the side of protecting free speech. The thing is, only one kind of free speech has champions of its protection. The far-right racists opinions and ability to express themselves take precedence over the opinions and concerns of the protesters.

Of course, this makes sense. Based on the precedents set in this nation, we protect all kinds of speech, unless that speech directly and immediately endangers the physical safety of the people that hear it. These precedents created this situation in which alt-right free speech is heavily protected. The problem with having a legal system based on precedent is that it is inherently conservative. It is resistant to change and preserves systemic abilities to maintain injustice.

At another level, though, the fact that these particular protections are happening at universities is deeply troubling. Arguments for hearing the arguments of the far-right often include a line or two about the importance of students learning about perspectives that arent their own. This would make sense if this perspective didnt represent majority opinions that are present in our daily interactions. Sure, most people arent actively advocating for the KKK or alt-righters, but racism in America is the norm. Hate toward people based on specific identity categories (race, class, gender, sexual orientation, ability, socioeconomic status, etc.) is our norm. We dont need to hear perspectives articulating that this exists because we know it. We see this hate coming from our peers, our superiors and our elected officials.

When students protest far-right speakers on their campuses, they arent trying to hide away from the hate of those speakers. They are (we are) trying to guide our own educations and get the most out of the time that we and the people around us are paying so much for. It is a waste of time, money and energy to entertain hate when we already so obviously know about its existence. It is also true that if there is any space in which it is appropriate for students to take charge of their own learning, it is a university context. While it is true that no one forces anyone to attend lectures, the statement of complicity says something significant about how the university feels about protecting its students as compared to the free speech of those not even party to the institution.

Folks seem to forget sometimes that, while we are still young, we are adults. Adults who can get married without our parents permission, vote, be conscripted in the case of a draft, make major medical decisions about our healthcare and, presumably, make decisions about the work that we want our education to do on us and for us. We are not young children whining about eating our vegetables, nor are we adolescents complaining about algebra.

In fact, having some of these speakers on campus can actually harm our educations. By creating a space that allows for the alt-right to speak freely without adequate critique, those hosting the speaker are also opening the space to real violence against people from historically marginalized backgrounds.

Furthermore, is not the purpose of attending university to get us to become better adults who can think critically? And shouldnt many people who critique whiny college students be pleased with this fact? In his indictment of students attending elite institutions, Bill Deresiewicz discusses the problem of students getting through an entire tertiary degree without developing critical reasoning skills. Students making decisions about the kinds of people and kinds of thought they want to support is a demonstration against that idea. We are not simply excellent sheep. We develop moral compasses and stick to ours, even when our administrations leave theirs at the door for the sake of growing endowments or being provocative.

The outcomes of these two cases are devastating for the future of building a better, less racist society. A federal judge said that is important for someone from the alt-right to spew his hatred and racism in institutions of learning. He didnt make a point about how its important to learn the logic of the alt-right in order to combat it. There was no move to push readers of his decision to think about how hearing opinions like that can help us refute them in the future.

The rationale given for canceling Coulters event is equally problematic. Canceling the speech for safety reasons is essentially a rejection of the concerns of the student voices speaking out against her presence. It says that if they werent worried about the safety of the speaker, it would be fine for her to defend the racist ideologies she espouses and those of the people she works with.

There is certainly an argument to be made that in order to get things in this nation clean, we must air all of our dirty laundry. And in some ways, this is true. We do need to be able to have open communication about these things. However, we need to talk about them with the understanding that we are getting them out in the open in order to get rid of such hateful thoughts for the rest of eternity. We cannot talk about these ideas or create space for them for the mere sake of doing so. We must create that space if, and only if, the goal is to build a better future by correcting the logic and subsequent behaviors of the people who are hateful towards anyone because of an identity that is a part of who they are.

Sure, the logical progression of arguments from the far right may work. However, a progression of logic that starts from faulty assumptions cannot possibly end with correct conclusions. Those arguments start from faulty premises and completely ignore the fact that historical inequalities have created a system in which the deck is stacked. The dice are weighted. And until we can get to a point where the die are no longer weighted and the deck is no longer stacked, we cannot be so complicit in the spread of hatred, and we must support students in their endeavors to think critically.

Contact Mina Shah at minashah at stanford.edu.

Original post:
Spread your hate elsewhere: in defense of student protesters of alt-right speakers - The Stanford Daily

|

Posted: Apr 23, 2017 12:01 AM

As a regular reader, you would know that after the election I spent some time investigating the Alt-Right which was supposedly a major force in the Trump election. Mycolumnput a damper on the relevance of this group despite all the hoopla. Since the election, the Black Bloc has become a major disrupter in our country yet it is barely written or spoken about.

A friend asked me if I was aware of the group which in itself speaks volumes. The group traces its roots back to Europe during the 1980s. It had its most pronounced debut in the United States during the 1999 Seattle riots during the World Trade Organization meeting, but really traces back to 1991 protests at the World Bank building during the Persian War.

To be fair, while doing research I did find that the MSM has written about the Black Bloc. But in their inimitable style, the publications write one or two columns to cover their butts and say they have addressed the issue only to drop the subject. Reading accounts in the beacons of the MSM the New York Times and the Washington Post -- did not really address the lawlessness of the group and tended to romanticize the group because of their anti-Trump strains.

It is fascinating how, when covering Republican activities, the MSM almost always injects colorful adjectives or adverbs to characterize the subject. When addressing the Black Bloc, they seem to revert to being reporters. A February 2nd NYT article gave the Black Bloc a platform to define and defend their actions. They quoted the following about their actions in Berkeley, CA, on February 1: Yes, what the black bloc did last night was destructive to property wrote Eric Laursen, a writer in Massachusetts who has helped publicize anarchist protests, using another name for the black-clad demonstrators. But do you just let someone like Milo go wherever he wants and spread his hate? That kind of argument can devolve into just sit on your hands and wait for it to pass. And it doesnt.

The group is characterized by showing up to events dressed head-to-toe in black. The only thing you might see are their eyes. The idea is that the players retain anonymity. They typically meet near a planned protest like the one that occurred in Berkeley to protest Milo Yiannopoulos' speech. They were the ones responsible for the violence there and the violence at the Trump Inauguration. Though the police were near useless in stopping the violence in Berkeley, over 200 people were arrested in D.C.

A recurrent theme that the press repeats is that the group is not an organization, but kind of an ad hoc spontaneous activity. An article in The Nation by Natasha Lennard who participated in the January 20th violent protests amplifies this idea. She starts her column by heralding the beauty of actual Alt-Right leader Richard Spencer being sucker punched in the face. She goes on to state The black bloc is not a group but an anarchist tacticmarching as a confrontational united force, uniformed in black and anonymized for security. Once deployed, the tactic has an alchemic quality, turning into a temporary objecttheblack bloc. This theme was repeated throughout multiple articles in the MSM as if it were fact. Notice elements of the MSM who abhor violence throughout the pages of their publications accept violence against Trump supporters, Republicans and in general white men.

If we may, let us go over some concepts regarding the Black Bloc:

The police need to get serious about apprehending and imprisoning these criminals. If there is a protest planned, they can count on the fact that the Black Bloc will piggyback onto that protest and the police need to plan accordingly. The FBI should also be tracking the activities of the ring leaders. If some of these anonymous people are tried and imprisoned, it could deter the others from diverting their lives into this organized hooliganism. Also, the peaceful protesters have an obligation to either help the police or disband once these criminals show up.

The police and the MSM need to start some hysteria about these people before the violence escalates even further. That is what we do in a civilized society.

WATCH LIVE: White House Daily Press Briefing

See the article here:
While MSM Focuses on Insignificant Alt-Right, They Should Be All Over the Black Bloc - Townhall

French presidential candidate Marine Le Pen has been an alt-right favorite for a long time. Serving as the head of Frances right-wing nationalist party the National Front, the countrys hardcore conservatives want her in power.

And on the Internet, the alt-right thinks feminists should vote for her, too. Why? Because she would bethe first woman to serve as Frances president.

So-called feminists are trying to block people voting for a woman, Infowars editor-at-largePaul Joseph Watson tweeted. She would be the first female president of France. Let that sink in.

In reality, feminists largely disprove of Le Pens platform due to the socioeconomic damage she would create for immigrants, women of color, and Muslim residents.

But thealt-right wants to pit feminists against each other, suggesting that Western feminists cannot truly support women if they dont support every single woman that runs for office. Its an attempt to point out supposed hypocrisies in feminism, even though Le Pen isnt exactly a feministcandidate.

Other alt-right users quickly chimed in after Watsons post, claiming that Le Pen would make the best type of woman for the presidency. Some proceeded to attack Islam, connecting the election back to xenophobic fears against refugees in France.

Ironically enough, Watson proceeded to attackcontroversial feminist figureChristina Hoff Sommers,claiming that she is shilling for an establishment puppet in refusing to support Le Pen.

A Pew Research Center report on the French National Front revealsthat the National Front is popular among Catholics, men, and French citizens who have not gone to college. National Front supporters are more likely to dislike Muslims, fear refugees, reject the European Union, and view globalization as an unfavorable phenomenon.

Its safe to say that the alt-right has found apleasant home with the National Front.

Le Pen now is onto the second round of the French presidential election,facing off against Emmanuel Macrona pro-European Union candidate who will be in direct opposition to Le Pens anti-EU sentiments. Whether Le Pen will win or not is unclear, although it seems like the alt-right is bolstered by Sundays news.

H/T Rossalyn Warren

Original post:
Twitter's alt-right wants feminists to vote for Marine Le Pen because she's a woman - The Daily Dot