Explaining the Era of Labels; Right, Left, and Alt-Right

A look at the different ways we all see the same things

This above all, to thine own self be true


Do you have an interest in the truth?  Or do you just want your own ideas validated?  Let’s take a step to untangle the cheap weave of political classification as applied in 2017.

  • Liberal
  • Conservative
  • Alt-Right

…are the 3 main classifications we’ll focus on.  This is the era of the “Label”, but many people on all sides of the argument are lazy debaters and don’t look too far into the basic ideas of their opponents (yet alone their own principles) so they can hang a label on the “Liberal” “Conservative” “Alt-Right” and the discussion is over.  I have been labeled all 3 of these in the last week.  How can someone possibly be accused of be “Liberal”, “Conservative”, and “Alt-Right” at the same time?

The first issue we need to sort out is defining what we’re talking about.  Commonly, the labelers are working with different definitions.  The beef is everyone is working with their own set of criteria without understanding a common definition; “Racist” is a good example.  What’s a racist?  Who decides what’s a racist?   Here’s my personal definition of a racist:

A person who judges someone by their race rather than their individuality.

“Judges” not “hates,” so by my definition someone can be racist even if they are trying to paint that person as positive “because of” their race.  I see that as racist because they need to know what color someone is before deciding what to think of them. (Note: you’re still allowed to notice patterns, as long that’s not all you notice)

Let’s define what the difference between “liberal” and “conservative” or “left” and “right” even is.  A liberal can’t simply be a vegan with purple hair and a conservative seems like more than just a rich guy in a polo.  How the hell does the “Alt-Right” fit into this?  If it’s just a checklist of issues, who decided on the list?  Here’s an example question:

“Is the pope conservative or liberal?”

  • Pro- Religion Christian
  • Anti-War Advocate
  • Pro-Life
  • Anti-Death Penitently
  • Rich
  • Advocate for the poor

The answer is that you can’t answer that question by looking at a check list of someone’s opinions.  You’re opinions alone can’t define you as “left” or “right” but how you arrived at those opinions is what puts you in one column or another.  “Conservative” and “Liberal” are the framework of how we see the world.  While being as objective and simple as possible:

A LIBERAL is someone who who puts collectivism first.

“The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.”

A CONSERVATIVE is someone who puts the individual first.

“Each should be judged on his own merits.”

Boiled down, that what we’re arguing about.  Until further notice every time I’m talking about “left” and “right” or “liberal” and “conservative,” those are the definitions I’m using.  No matter which side the the argument you’re on, it’ll be helpful if you used them too so we can all begin to understand what the other is talking about and maybe find a conclusion.

Arguing left vs. right is really trying to answer the question “what is the role of government?”.  Collective vs. Individual. That’s something that we seem to lose sight of in all the rants on Facebook and heated workplace debates. If you’re reading this I charge you with the RESPONSIBILITY to bring it back to that.

The next issue I’ve noticed is we seem to see history differently. This is a problem, especially cause no one actually reads up on what the other side thinks, and everyone thinks they are an expert. The four eras people seem to be utterly obsessed with are:

  1. Christopher Columbus
  2. the Civil War
  3. World War II
  4. Civil Rights into the “Big Switch”

Note: You know there’s been a lot more shit that’s gone on in the past 200,000 years, right?! The Persian Empire? The Mongols?  Do you have any idea how many times Sicily has been invaded? Not one heated debate! But bring up World War II and everyone turns into Ken-fucking-Burns. Not to mention there are people who have decided to take those four things in history very personally (not Rutherford B. Hayes, but those four events they feel).

We can’t come to conclusions cause we are all looking at the same history differently.  The left undeniably dominates the narrative and the way they seem to see these events are:

  1. Christopher Columbus was history’s greatest monster. He didn’t “discover” anything cause people were already here. He raped, robbed, and enslaved everyone he met browner than him for the fame and glory of the white man. That’s what America is built on and we should be ashamed. Stupid idiot thought he was in India and called the loving hippies he met “Indians”.
  2. The Civil War wasn’t really about slavery. The war was a bunch of racist white men fighting and somehow as a bargaining chip the slaves were freed. Too little too late. It didn’t really even end: White people then started the Klan, Jim Crow, and Segregation cause they didn’t want to live near these cool black guys.
  3. World War II was because the extreme right wing in Germany came to power. They were well organized conservative  nationalists. They put the white race first and hated the Jews. Good progressive countries like the United States felt bad for the Jews and defeated the Nazis.  Giving them Israel is a bit unfair nonetheless.
  4. Civil Rights was black people finally catching a break after centuries of torment. They could finally get food stamps and welfare and housing they deserved after building the entire country with stolen labor. LBJ lead the way. The Republicans authored the civil rights act and voted it in, but that was right before “the Big Switch”. After Civil Rights, all racist Democrats became racist Republicans and all liberal Republicans became liberal Democrats.

. . . Somehow all these events seem to blend into each other on their timeline despite the fact that there is more time between Christopher Columbus and the founding of the United States than the founding of the United States and YOU. Yet the four points above comprise the story of “us” that most liberals believe and it’s the version they get to teach us in school. The right thinks it’s more nuanced than that.

There seems to be more context in the history Conservatives see:

  1. Christopher Columbus was an explorer sent from Spain to find a western route to the West Indies. He landed in the New World in 1492. We call this “discovering America” cause in 1492 word traveled slow, most people were illiterate, and record keeping was spotty at best so they were unaware of obscure Chinese & Viking voyages that may have happened generations earlier but Columbus now confirmed land on the other side of the ocean previously unknown.  This was the age of conquest, so Columbus treated the American Indians as he would have treated any European nation and went to war, dominating them with better technology. Germ theory wasn’t discover until 1861, so disease was unknowingly spread (and could have just as easily been spread to the Spanish). Columbus did not think he was in India because in 1492 India was called Hindustan. “Indian” comes from the words “En Dos” which means “in God” in Spanish after Columbus called the Natives “a people in god.”

2. The Civil War was a proud moment when America tested our constitution by declaring equality for all under the law. The United States inherited slavery from past nations, we didn’t start it but we ended it. It was also the beginning of the Republican party which was founded as an abolitionist party lead by Lincoln. The war was between Southern Democrats and Northern Republicans.  Text books were changed in the 50s to say the war was between “Northern Liberals” and “Southern Conservatives” which were not expressions of that time. The Southern Democrat point of view was that North were “rich industrialists” that were out of touch with the working man. They also felt the Union didn’t understand that slaves couldn’t make it in the world without whites. Southern Democrats felt they were showing blacks kindness by keeping them in chains. Once freed, in the 1800s there were several black elected officials, all Republicans. (There wasn’t a black Democrat in the senate until 1999). Democrats founded the Klan, Democrats lobbied for the 1st gun control and marriage laws (to stop freed blacks), Democrats insisted on segregation.

3. Word War II was the case of stopping countries hell bent of taking over the world. The Nazis (which stands for National Socialist German Workers Party) were an extreme leftists (Hitler was very clear about that), Marxist party that also added eugenics which came out the the American Progressive movement at the turn of the century. (These were the people who took Darwin’s work and went awry. They believed in “survival of the fittest” and some races being more “fit” than others.  They were all considered “progressive liberals” for the time and the conservatives trying to stop them were “old fashion” and “religious zealots”). After the war was over and we saw the people walking out of the camps, the world knew where progressive eugenics lead and was sickened. The progressives in academia scrubbed the blood off their hands and suddenly the Nazis somehow became “conservative” in their classrooms. The Jews got Israel cause they were so devastated after the holocaust.

4. Civil Rights was an amazing milestone. The 1964 Civil Rights Act was authored by Republicans and ended segregation. LBJ didn’t so much turn the Democrats “un-racist” as he convinced them to stop filibustering the bill so he can heap government entitlements on the black community, keeping them voting Democrat and convincing them if the Republicans gave them individual freedom they could never make it in this cruel, racist country. These programs effectively destroyed the black family replacing the father with the state. “The Big Switch” is clearly bullshit. Republicans and Democrats didn’t get so mad at each other one day they switched places. Blacks started voting democrat in the 30s to get FDR’s entitlements (which it what inspired LBJ). The south was already voting Republican before the civil rights act (racism was on a downward trend). Very few members of each party “switched.” Strohm Thurman is the only prominent one who did. Robert Byrd was a leader in the Klan and Democrat who stayed a Democrat till his death (and even mentored Hillary Clinton). There is no measurable evidence of a “switch.”

I’m biased cause that is the version of history I understand to be true.  I read enough, listened to enough, and argued enough to hear the same things time and time again (especially from the left).  I was curious enough to want to read more and found out for myself.  I recommend the books Guns, Germs, and Steel, War before Civilization, MarxismBlack Rednecks & White Liberals, the Big Lie, American LionI also recommend the podcast Dan Carlin’s Hardcore History.

Wait… where’s the Alt-Right in all of this? From what I’ve seen, this is the basic gist of how the Alt-Right sees the same points in history:

  1. Columbus came to the New World, took it over, slaughter, raped and stole from anyone browner than him… good.  Fuck them.  Way of the world.  We were stronger, we won.  Sucks to be Indian.  That’s how awesomely ruthless white Europeans are.  That’s what America was build on and we should be proud.
  2. The Civil War wasn’t really about slavery.  The war was about fighting against tyranny and somehow the slaves were freed.  The north were monsters.  The south was totally justified in everything they did.  Lincoln himself was a racist white supremacist, but freeing the slaves was him imposing his will on the South.  He was a tyrant and John Wilkes Booth was a hero patriot.  Conservatives today would be the racist dixie-crats, and the progressive liberals would be the tyrannical north.  White people then started the Klan, Jim Crow, Segregation cause they didn’t want to live near these dangerous black guys.  Plus slavery wasn’t that bad.
  3. World War II was the extreme right Nazi party standing up for themselves to the extreme left commie Soviet Union.  Nazis had some good points.  Germany was being taxed to death after WWI.  Jews were at the center of it all.  Treacherous Jews.  Evil Jews.  Jews, Jews Jews.  Those holocaust numbers may be inflated.  People died, but it was likely the fault of allies bombing supply lines and not gassing.  Stalin was worse.  If we have to pick a side, the Nazis were better than the Commies.  The reason the Nazis look so bad is cause the Jews control everything.  They unfairly got everyone to sign off on Israel and shouldn’t have it.
  4. Civil Rights was given to black people by liberal republicans.  Blacks couldn’t make it on their own and begged for handouts.  LBJ lead the way.  This prompted “the big switch”  the racist democrats became republicans and the liberal republicans became democrats.  That’s why the conservatives are the true inheritors of the confederacy, slavery, genocide, Jim Crow, segregation, eugenics, and we should be proud of it!!  It’s our heritage.


Don’t re-read that, or blood will shoot out of your nose, but I talked to alt-right people so you don’t have to. Anyone denying the holocaust is a great litmus test to see if you’re talking to a fucking boring ‘tard. For better or worse, that’s what they seem to believe. I’ve had this conversation all over social media, and have been cornered in bars and given ear beatings by some of the most insufferable people you can imagine, who get so bummed out when I’m not buying what they’re selling. The Alt-Right believes the narrative put out by the left… they just don’t see it as bad.  All the easily debunked bullshit about “the big switch” that liberals have shoved down our throats, they like it.

Basically, they’re the alternate evil reality in Back to the Future II if liberals really got to change the past to fit their narrative.

Liberals and the Alt-Right both seem to agree that to make something conservative “just add racism”.  When the left demonizes the right and misdirects and casts shade, the Alt-Right embrace it and say “Yeah, that’s exactly who we are”.

  • Problem with Jews?  You must be a conservative.  (Never mind all the liberals who hates Israel).
  • Don’t want blacks in your neighborhood?  You must be a conservative.  (Never mind all the white progressive beta males and feminists who shake with fear about living in the hood)
  • Can’t stand gays?  Definitely a conservative. (Never mind if you’re black or Muslim)

The Alt-Right and the Right seem to have a bit of a different relationship…

  • The Right loves the free market.  The Alt-Right will praise the free market, but usually in a way that says “the free market says I don’t need to associate with black people”.
  • The Right loves free speech.  The Alt-Right loves free speech, usually so they can say the word “Jew” 5,000 in a 3 minute conversation.
  • The right loves the individual.  The Alt Right loves the individual cause there are so few of them.

Conservatives who disagree with what the Alt-Right have to say but will defend their right to say it, are the only ones protecting them and their almost non-existent but loud numbers.  Even the attempts to “Unite the Right” always strike me as the Alt-Right’s ham handed attempt to get regular, free speech conservatives to come to their rally’s so they can bore a new set of people to tears talking about the “Jewish Question” instead if the same five guys they’re used to talking at.  You’ll also notice the “don’t punch right” rule never seems to apply to them.

The man who coined the term Alt-Right is Richard Spencer.  He’s a self described “white nationalist”.  He has stated that when socialism is used correctly it is very good.  He likes the E.U. because it’s a white ethno-state.  He has defended policies that would prop up Al Gore’s “climate change” myths.  Spencer has bragged about having a lot in common with Bernie.  By any measure, he seems to really enjoy the social engineering the left is famous for… just more talk about race.  Does that automatically make someone “right wing” cause that sounds like a leftists narrative to me.  Today’s issue is the left has been so effective at demonizing the right, it’s making regular people on the right believe they’re “Alt-Right”.  They say “fuck it”, whatever you want to call me.

The key word to remember is “principles”.  What is at the core of your beliefs?  I don’t believe anything because I’m trying to be “the most” conservative.

  • I believe in the individual.  I say fuck the collective… fuck the group.  If something is the right thing to do, being outnumbered doesn’t make it wrong.
  • I believe in free speech… not just when I agree with you.  If I’m wrong I want to be convinced, if you’re wrong I don’t need to burn your books because I’ll read them and light you up in a debate.
  • I don’t need to go down a checklist of “what” someone is before I decide what I think of them.  Someones race doesn’t make me pity them, nor does it make me hate them.
  • I believe in the free market. Taxation is theft.

Those are things I believe in.  I’m not saying you have to believe them too.  You can be a principled liberal as well, or a principled “Alt-Righter”… you can be principled wrong.  Before you want to debate on a podcast, please decide how you feel about the role of government, where you fit into the idea of collectivism, and how you look at history.  “Know thyself” before picking a side and know why that’s the side you picked.


PawL BaZiLe

Written by PawL BaZiLe

Pawl is a film director and journalist living in New Jersey. Pawl is a fan of history and avid reader with a background in theater. He has used his debate skills to win over 30 Internet arguments. Pawl Bazile directed a punk rock documentary called “Living the American Nightmare” and is currently working on a motorcycle film called “Savage”. For Proud Boy Magazine, Pawl is in charge of digital media, new programming, and talent relations. He takes his coffee black. Follow him on Twitter @PawLBAZiLe.

Proud Boy’s Official Response to Fred Perry Telling Us To Stop Wearing Their Polos

We Spoke to a Civilian Defense Expert