On September 21, 2017, The Intercept published an article touching on the historical development of the alt-right movement. In the article, the incredibly accurate and objective news outlet, Mother Jones, is cited to support several factually erroneous statements.
In the article, titled, “After Charlottesville, The American Far Right Is Tearing Itself Apart,” Leighton Woodhouse makes the assertion that the media career of Gavin McInnes, co-founder of Vice Media, is somehow telling of the entirety of the far-right’s trajectory in relation to success.
Hot tensions between McInnes and white nationalist activist Jason Kessler surfaced after the Charlottesville rally, with a rather functional relationship evident in the tone and mood of the overall interview (the source of this video is behind a paywall). However, this is not a sign of the far right destroying itself after a failed rallying attempt; rather, it is simply the expression of a divide in right-wing politics that has nearly always existed.
If we were to take our head of our ass and look at the Rally for Free Speech that was held in June 2016, it is clear that a constant distinction in right-wing politics has always been held. At the Rally for Free Speech, alt-right leader Richard Spencer found himself at odds with the conservative Republican Jack Posobiec, who then splintered the protest on the basis of protesting free speech. A picture of Posobiec holding a sign that says, “Free speech ain’t hate speech,” can be seen here.
The division between the “alt lite” and the “alt right” is a division that has existed for quite some time. Pointing at unique instances of conflict between the two ideologies progresses nothing except for a false narrative that the far right is devouring itself. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The rally in Charlottesville marked the cry of a nurturing child, generating for itself an identity to defend itself from the defamation of its opposition. The regressive left has without fail created a collectivist movement of far right ideologues dedicated to preserving their people and ideology. Charlottesville marked the existence of the “alt-right” as more than a festering cesspool of white supremacists, and revealed that the media is happy to include any white Trump-supporter as a neo-Nazi. Because of this awful conflation, anybody who is remotely more conservative than the Frankfurt School, is socially rejected as a “fascist.” And because, according to leftists, it is appropriate to punch Nazis in the face, broadly condoned violent action against the average conservative have escalated to new heights.
This had led to the development of a new identity. The insistence for a prominent collectivist identity for race, gender, and sexuality has extended to the white, male, conservatives, who happen to be the majority demographic in the United States. Charlottesville has not hurt the alt-right, it has merely broadened its definition, because the media is extremely loose with how it applies the title. Charlottesville marks the movement’s identitarian absorption of otherwise moderate conservatives and the entrance of the movement the scope of the mainstream.