I am an Australian nationalist who has nonetheless commented on Caitlin’s articles several times in positive terms, and I will do so again here. She is one of the few people who hold strongly held beliefs very distant from the political centre, while nonetheless being able to maintain impressively objective standards, reject partisan idiocy, and hold herself and others to a standard of truth seeking. So I wanted to go down all of the points in this article one by one, and say what I thought of them, but I want it to be clear I personally like and respect her.

1. No problem with that.
2. Indeed they would, for many people blinded by partisan dynamics, only the most unbalanced and intellectually bankrupt criticism of their opponents and excuses for their allies will suffice as a moral stand.
3. I am not 100% sure what you mean by this. Are you saying that some leftists think that the left was partially to blame for the violence, and that they could do better, but are afraid to say so? If that is what you are saying, naturally I agree.
4. I may go on a bit of a tangent here, as this is something I have had a lot of debates online about. I do not think that America is a racist country, or at least not in the way most people think. I believe that there are systemic forces keeping black people poor and undereducated, but if you look at the cities where all of the of the bad schools, police violence, and rampant crime are, they are all places who have been under the control of democrats for decades. As many people like Jesse Lee Peterson and Sonnie Johnson point out, the black-white income disparity was closing, until Democrats bribed the people they were still lynching to vote for them with welfare. With the advent of a welfare state that incentivised single motherhood, a drug war that further criminalised black fathers, and countless other factors, the decline of black wealth and happiness was inevitable. The America of the Jim Crow south was an unabashedly racist society, and yet for the most part blacks dressed well, got married, and were more successful than they are now. You see, any ethnic minority will always face discrimination and difficulty. They will be seen as outsiders, their culture, behaviour, music etc… will always be seen at some level to be weird and abnormal, no matter how tolerant and progressive the majority ethnic group is. White Americans, even those who are extremely progressive and leftist, will probably still feel that way, at least subconsciously. And it is non-white progressives becoming aware of this that has led to so much hateful disdain and spite from them directed at white progressives, with imperious demands that white people who want to help combat racism need to sit down, shut up, and generally prostrate themselves as an underclass of “allies” in the movement. The point I am trying to make, is that at least unconscious bias toward your own group is inevitable for all human beings, and white people who talk about how they wish to attack other whites for being racist, or how they want to shut other whites down when they try to talk, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BsM2AJT6Ot0 Are living, even subconsciously, a lie which causes them to be violently despised by both the alt-right and POC progressives.
5. Ah yes, and who was responsible for the apartheid state? Who inspired the Nuremberg laws, and many other of the Nazi’s racial purification policies? Thats right, the same party pushing for racial division and hatred today, the Jackass party.
6. I will give you that one, they do look ridiculous at times.
7. They are certainly few in number, so you are probably right, but there are so many stupid ideas in America that they are far from being the bottom of the barrel.
8. I am so glad you bought this up. The level of ignorance and misunderstanding about what those people stood for is mind-boggling.
9. Certainly that is a common feeling among the Alt-right, although many are mad at being attacked, it is usually not the attack itself and instead the way the media covers for left wing extremist violence.
10. Again, this is why I respect you. You are willing to point out something which is probably true even though it involves criticising those ostensibly on your “side”
11. You understand the Alt-right so much better than almost everyone else commenting on this, even the Daily Stormer advocated for non-violence.
12. There are a couple of things which I don’t think are quite accurate which you bring up. For starters the Alt-right uses victimology the exact same way the Nazis did. That is one of the only accurate things in the Dan Radcliffe movie Imperium. The rhetoric for white advocates goes like this. “We are a great people. We are better than anyone at basically everything. Our women are super hot, we build the best societies, we invent the best technology, and we have the best religion. (there has always been atheist and pagan elements in any white nationalist movement, but you know what I mean). Unfortunately, we have a bunch of flaws. We are too nice. We try to help non-white people too much. We are too idealistic and naive, and too easy to take advantage of. So you see what is commonly referred to as White Supremacy is more accurately characterised as a mix between pride and fear, supremacy and vulnerability, a belief that white people are in a uniquely vulnerable position. These kinds of movements are always based on two main emotions, fear and disgust. In Germany it was the very real fear of an imminent Communist revolution, combined with the disgust the population felt toward the degenerate nature of the Weimar republic, that led to Hitlers rise. And as a final note, your not quite right about the whole getting punched for propaganda thing. Members of the Alt-lite and establishment conservatives are hugely in favour of getting decked by a vegan for good optics, the Alt-right likes a favourable narrative as much as the next right wing group, but believes that ultimately punching back is more important than looking like innocent, as the media will always falsely portray them as the villains regardless of wether they maintain a strict policy of turning the other cheek or not.
13. I don’t really know what to add to this, seems dead on to me.
14. This is kind of a continuation of number 4, let me rephrase the way you defined whats happening in a way that makes it seem more truthful to me. The rise of the alt-right was the inevitable result of free speech on the internet. Societies new found ability to network and share information means a vastly more democratised economy of ideas, and some of these ideas were bound to be ones which the anti-white political culture of the mainstream media had suppressed, and were therefore going to get a lot of attention from people desperate for a movement to represent their interests. Western society, like any other society, is one in which the majority subconsciously wishes to retain their control over the society and to maintain their culture, beliefs, and way of life. The internet provided an opportunity for young white people to express their advocacy for these things consciously in an culture otherwise openly hostility to the very people who had founded and established the nations they lived in. As long as those who oppose these young people continue to threats, dismissive insults, and violence, instead on intellectual debate, the movement will only grow in power and extremism.
15. The exact same public embarrassment would take place if the target was an Anti-fa member, a Bernie supporter, or honestly almost anyone involved in a political stance they barely understand, which is most people. Extreme views on the left and the right both have hazy hard to define and impossible to implement policies. The reason why the alt-right pushes for the things they do is the same reason their idealogical opponents do. They know the system is rigged against them, and that the specifics of what replaces the system are unimportant as long as its a far cry from what it currently is. The confusion and lack of detail in the alt-right policy positions has less do with individuals being confused though, and more to do with the wide and varied amount of disagreement among the movement. Some believe in simply limiting further immigration, others in banning it altogether, some think it is fine to have some non-whites living in their countries as long as they are the right sort of non-white, some believe in 100% hegemony, others believe in the absolute sovereignty of nation states, others believe in a global pan-European superstate. Why on earth would such a fractured and schism prone community which frequently disagrees about almost everything be such a surprisingly cohesive movement? The answer of course, is the two main emotional drivers I talked about earlier. Fear and Disgust. The situation across the Western World had to get so bad, that it would fill people with enough fear and disgust that they would side with anyone who felt the same way they did even if their thoughts on correct solutions varied widely.
16. I must be truly comedic, because there absolutely is (A) white culture in America, (B) it absolutely is in jeopardy, and (C ), your damn right it’s worth saving.
17. Of course it has. The calls for impeachment where always based on hysterical hatred, not a specific case of wrongdoing.
18. I think we have gotten to the point where the only questions are going to be what government agencies were involved, where, why and how.
19. Why do you consider it obscene? genuinely curious.
20. The problem with reparations is that they explicitly confirm generational victimhood, and thereby implicitly confirm generational culpability. The moral and ethical bag of worms unleashed by something like that would be massively damaging, the kind of precedent it sets, absolutely horrifying.
21. Well I wish you the best of luck. But even the most hardcore of leftists seem so willing to quickly abandon principle and toe the mainstream line, that a genuinely counter-cultural left seems pretty unlikely.
22. Very true.
23. Well I can’t reply in kind, but as I have said before, I do respect you. Sayonara.