Radix Journal

Radix Journal

A radical journal

Author: Richard Spencer

Yuletide Greetings!

On behalf of everyone involved with The National Policy Institute, Washington Summit Publishers, and Radix, we wish you and yours a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! 

On behalf of everyone involved with The National Policy Institute, Washington Summit Publishers, and Radix, we wish you and yours a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

 

No Comments on Yuletide Greetings!

Our First Conference for 2015

Conferences are important. First, they are the public faces of our movement, and they mark some of the few times that our ideas are discussed in mainstream sources. Some politicians are so fearful of this prospect that they arrest us for holding conferences. 

More important, conferences are for us. They are ways for our movement to meet, network, and build a community. The Internet has been a godsend for every dissident movement around the world . . . but we can’t live on pixels alone.  

So, it’s with pleasure that I announce NPI’s first conference for 2015.  

Conferences are important. First, they are the public faces of our movement, and they mark some of the few times that our ideas are discussed in mainstream sources. Some politicians are so fearful of this prospect that they arrest us for holding conferences.

More important, conferences are for us. They are ways for our movement to meet, network, and build a community. The Internet has been a godsend for every dissident movement around the world . . . but we can’t live on pixels alone.

So, it’s with pleasure that I announce NPI’s first conference for 2015.

On February 27, we will host an evening event in Washington, DC, at The National Press Club—“Beyond Conservatism.”


Beyond Conservatism

Friday // February 27, 2014 // 6-9 PM

The National Press Club

Washington, DC


Confirmed Speakers

Peter Brimelow

Richard Spencer

Jared Taylor

An additional speaker will be announced soon.


Registration—$65

“Early Bird” Registration—$45

Millennial Registration—$25

Registration is now open!



Registration includes a dinner of heavy hors d’oeuvres. A cash bar will be available for the evening.

At the door, tickets will be $65; however, we are offering “Early Bird” tickets at a reduced rate of $45, for as long as they last.

As usual, we’re offering Millennial Registration, in limited number, for attendees who are 30-years-old and younger. These tickets are equivalent to full registration (that is, they include dinner) but are only $25.


The Summit Dinner

Saturday // February 28, 2014 // 7-10 PM

Washington, DC

For 2015 and beyond, we are establishing a special club called The Summit. This is for those who want to take an active role in the future of NPI, Radix, and everything we do. Members of The Summit have pledged at least $1,000 for the upcoming year.

On Saturday, February 28—the day after our event at the Press Club—we will host a private steak dinner. All of the speakers will be there, as well as other activists and writers connected with NPI. The evening will be a chance to relax, enjoy good food and drink, meet new friends, and talk about the future of our movement.

Also, 2015 marks the 10th anniversary of the death of Samuel T. Francis, one of NPI’s co-founders. We will celebrate his legacy in a couple of ways this year, including issuing an original, hitherto unknown volume written by Sam (more on that soon). And on the evening of February 28, our speakers and guests will offer their remembrances and appreciations of the great man.

To join The Summit, please donate to our Yuletide giving campaign. You will then be informed about details and registration.



Note that we offer recurring donations, on an annual, quarterly, monthly, and weekly basis. So, if you prefer, you could break up a larger donation into more management pieces.

More To Come…

And we have a lot more planned for 2015, though at the moment, we’re not ready to announce details. But we can announce you that we will host a major conference on the east coast in the early fall of 2015, just as we did in 2011 and 2013. And there will be more . . . so stay tuned.

No Comments on Our First Conference for 2015

Jews, Europeans, and “Whiteness”

Writing in The Times of Israel, Hila Hershkoviz takes on a prickly question—Are Jews White?

Writing in The Times of Israel, Hila Hershkoviz takes on a prickly question—Are Jews White?

In response to Haaretz article “Jews, white privilege and the fight against racism in America” (by Benjy Cannon 4/12/14) I would like to say loud and clear: Ashkenazi Jews are not white.

Every time I read about a Jew somewhere identifying as a white person, I cringe. As an Israeli Jew, who like most other Israeli Jews, is completely foreign to the concept of Jews being “white” I would like to address this article to my Jewish brothers and sisters in America.

Ashkenazi Jews who identify as “white”, please understand the following:

1.History and identity – As late as 1987 the US legally defined Jews as non-white. To the best of my knowledge, 50 years ago Jews had the same skin color as they do today. I deduce that white is not skin color, it is first and foremost an issue history and identity. The “white people world” is represented by its European (often colonial) history, it’s culture, heroes, it’s Kings, ethos, faith etc. – and Ashkenazi Jews are not part of that world. Their heroes are the Maccabees and not the Vikings or Joan of Arc, their Kings are David King of Israel and Hezekiah King of Judah (both archeologically confirmed historical figures) and not Kings Edward and George.

Secondly, Jews are not a “religion”. While in the Western world identities fall under the categories of religion or race, Middle Eastern people have tribal identities that are based neither the former nor the latter. Jews, similar to Pashtuns (who also often have pale skin and yet would not identify as white people) and other Middle Eastern Tribes, are neither religion nor race but a tribe. Jewish identity since the days of the Kingdoms of Judah and Israel had always been a tribal/national peoplehood. While tribal practices and customs (which is often incorrectly referred to as “Judaism”) and a strong biological link between many of the members are certainly present, Israelite identity was never based on either of these. Israelite identity has always been a tribal membership that goes by lineage (being born into the Tribes of Israel) or tribal acceptance (which is incorrectly translated as “conversion”). The identity Ashkenazi Jews have today is identical to that of King David whose great grandmother was a Moabite convert, but was nonetheless a Jew by virtue of being born into the Tribes of Israel by lineage.

You are Jews not because of your “religion” (are you even religious?), but because you were born into a tribe/people called the Nation of Israel. You are not “white people” with a “Jewish religion”, you are Jews – members of a people who origniated in Judea, whether you adhere to the laws of the tribe or not.

Thirdly, Ashkenazi Jews have been the victims of Europeans and Western imperialism for centuries precisely because they were not perceived as part of the “white people world”, beginning with the Roman colonialism of their nation state and ending with 6 million of them being killed precisely because they were non-whites.

2.Culture – Whether it’s the Hebrew calendar, the tefillin they put on at their Bar Mitzvah identical to the ancient second Temple tefillin found in Qumran and across Israel or celebrating the Judean revolt for independence in our historic homeland on Hanukkah – Ashkenazi Jews have kept the entire indigenous culture, customs, traditions, books, and to a high extant language and of their ancestors – Judeans and other Israelites.

3.Biology – Although biology is not the main part of the issue, Ashkenazi Jews are not genetically white either. An extensive number of genetic studies show they originated in the Middle East, that despite European admixture they are genetic brothers of other Jews, Palestinians, Druze and Lebanese Arabs and share a highly significant amount of ancestry with Sephardi Jews to whom they are genetically almost identical. Tests also show Ahskenazi Levites are descendants of Hebrews, and Ashkenazi Cohanim share lineage with Sephardi Cohanim.

Lastly, Ashkenazi Jews, whether the world likes it or not (and apparently it does not), are direct descendants of the Tribes of Israel, as we know from history, culture, science and a little something I like to call reality. Those who wish to deny it for political or theological reasons, should try forming an alliance with holocaust deniers because the two are no different.

Jews are not white. People who try to argue otherwise are not only abrogating history and denying our people’s authentic identity, they are in fact (even if unintentionally) also practicing a form of Western imperialism, as nobody has the right to superimpose an artificial Western identity on a people with an ancient Middle Eastern-tribal identity. Nobody has the right to try and make Jews, or any other Middle Eastern people, feel they “need” to fit into the “neat” Western categories of religion and race. Nobody has the right to force Jews into identifying as white people when they are clearly not. As for Jews who identify as white without being forced to do so – please decolonize your identities and understand that the identity your claim to express is a falsification of who you really are.

Ashkenazi Jews have influenced European culture—and been influenced by European culture (perhaps more than this author would like). There has also been a large amount of intermarriage between Ashkenazi (and Sephardic) Jews and Europeans, resulting in a genetic similarity.

That said, as Hershkoviz writes, Ashkenazi Jews have been in Europe, without quite being of Europe.

Pigmentation really is “just skin deep.” it’s a significant, but by no means definitive element of race. Identity is formed by a combination of race, culture, spirituality, and history. And Ashkenazi Jews have an identity apart from Europeans.

In thinking about this issue, a good place to start is Richard Lynn’s The Chosen People: A Stidy of Jewish Intelligence and Achievement.

No Comments on Jews, Europeans, and “Whiteness”

Extreme Moderation

Last week, I appeared on “The Stark Truth” podcast to discuss some interesting topics: the need to go beyond Left and Right, why our movement should disassociate itself from “conservatism,”…

Last week, I appeared on “The Stark Truth” podcast to discuss some interesting topics: the need to go beyond Left and Right, why our movement should disassociate itself from “conservatism,” why millennial hispters are better than you think, and why the immigration reform movement never really had a soul.

Hear it all here.

No Comments on Extreme Moderation

The End of Immigration Reform

Barack Obama’s executive action on immigration isn’t exactly the “amnesty” that those in the reform movement feared: some five million people who are in the United States illegally won’t be deported, but won’t be granted citizenship either (at least not yet). 

So, it’s not quite the “end of America,” for better and for worse. We can expect the current dispensation to slouch along for a few more decades.

Obama’s action does, however, punctuate the end of the immigration-reform movement, the point at which standard restriction has become truly irrelevant. We must be mature enough to recognize this reality.

Barack Obama’s executive action on immigration isn’t exactly the “amnesty” that those in the reform movement feared: some five million people who are in the United States illegally won’t be deported, but won’t be granted citizenship either (at least not yet).

So, it’s not quite the “end of America,” for better and for worse. We should expect the current dispensation to slouch along for a few more decades.

Obama’s action does, however, punctuate the end of the immigration-reform movement, the point at which standard restriction has become truly irrelevant. We must be mature enough to recognize this reality.

Immigration reform, as it has been defined, was destined to lose, because, for at least the past five decades, it never held a high status in our imagination and self-understanding.

As Byron Roth has written, the immigration “debate” in the U.S. (if it’s taken place at all) has been between “assimilation” and “multiculturalism,” between those who demand that millions of people of other races and cultures adopt “American values” and those who encourage them to maintain some boundaries and loyalties.

The notion that there is a real American identity—which is derived from Europe and which is inseparable from European peoples—has been unspeakable, worse, unthinkable in the minds of most White Americans.

The fact that immigration reformers have been caught up on legality—“illegal immigrants” or the putative “un-Constitutionality” of Obama’s action—only reveals their inner feelings of illegitimacy.

A people with identity is not particularly concerned with whether or not a migrant filled out all the paperwork correctly or passed some civics exam.

A people with identity does not worry that an influx of foreigners might “change the culture.” Culture, in the deepest sense, is carried by people. Europa will exist so long as conscious, resolute Europeans walk the earth . . . or explore the stars. And Europa can flourish even if half the channels on cable are “en espaniol.”

Obama’s action marks an end and a beginning.

It marks the end of “immigration reform,” a movement that never had a soul.

We await the beginning of a movement of Identity.

No Comments on The End of Immigration Reform

Facing the Future

Tonight’s executive action on immigration should make us aware of something we should have recognized many years ago—that our movement must move beyond immigration reform as our chief concern.

From “Facing the Future As a Minority:

In the summer 2011, the Census Bureau reported that the majority of children born in the United States are non-White. Thus, from our perspective, any future immigration-restriction efforts are meaningless. Even if all immigration, legal and illegal, were miraculously halted tomorrow morning, our country’s demographic destiny would merely be delayed by a decade or two. Put another way, we could win the immigration battle and nevertheless lose the country, and lose it completely.

And we shouldn’t focus too much on the “2050” date, when Whites will become a minority, as if once Whites drop to 49 percent, a bell will go after announcing the end of the American Dream. We are at a major crisis point now. And we are well past the point of no return with regards to “patriotic immigration reform.”

Furthermore, this insight into the irrelevance of immigration reform holds for the whole kit-and-caboodle of “conservative” causes.

Read the rest here.

No Comments on Facing the Future

Am I Not Being Outrageous Enough?

As someone who’s written and published some rather controversial material over the years, I’m disappointed that Rachel Maddow continues to associate me with things that I have nothing to do with.

Surely, a simple Google search would reveal plenty of pieces—pieces that I’ve actually authored—that would offend Rachel’s sensibilities? So what gives? 

As someone who’s written and published some rather controversial material over the years, I’m disappointed that Rachel Maddow continues to associate me with things that I have nothing to do with.

Surely, a simple Google search would reveal plenty of pieces—pieces that I’ve actually authored—that would offend Rachel’s sensibilities? So what gives?

In a segment from last night’s Rachel Maddow Show ("Fresh Powder"), which meandered from the irrelevant to the illogical to the absurd, more than once, Rachel displayed a screenshot of “Alternative Right” and a provocatively titled essay written by Colin Liddell.1

What was shown was not my website, and I did not write, edit, or publish that essay. (Also, the essay doesn’t argue what Rachel intimates it argues; but I’ll let the author defend himself.)

For the record, let me retell the background story.

I founded AlternativeRight.com in March of 2010; this was before I joined The National Policy Institute.

I had previously worked at The American Conservative and had edited Taki’s Magazine for two years. I wanted to strike out on my own and create something that did not exist at the time—a right-wing webzine that was not burdened by the “American Conservative movement” and that was inspired by European currents, particularly the European New Right.

I considered the new website an experiment, and not really an institution.

In my tenure, I took great care in editing AltRight. I commissioned and published Jason Richwine’s article on Hispanic crime; I would defend every word of it.

In the spring of 2012, I was hard at work with NPI and Washington Summit Publishers, and I simply felt burned out with AltRight. I walked away from it, and published a farewell. Colin Liddell and Andy Nowicki wanted to continue posting, though without my editorial input. I let them.

The problem with this arrangement was that my name—and even NPI’s—were indelibly linked to AltRight. In other words, NPI and I were being blamed and praised for things that were out of our control.

My resolution to this problem certainly caused some hurt feelings, but I concluded it was the only way to move forward: AlternativeRight.com was brought to an end; if Colin and Andy wanted to continue, they would have to do so without using the Web infrastructure I had created. As it turns out, the pair have continued: They appropriated the title (I never owned it) and have a new URL and hosting service. I have had no control over AltRight since the spring of 2012. I say this objectively, not critically. This is simply a matter of authorship and ownership.

Anyway, one principle of journalism is to try to present as many perspectives on a subject or event as possible. Rachel Maddow has now dedicated some 30-45 minutes of her news programming to The Richard Spencer Question. Yet at no point have I been contacted for comment or input.

So let’s make a deal, Rachel. The next time you want to do a story on me . . . and I imagine there will be a next time . . . have your staff contact me: I’ll send over some articles, which I’ve authored or published and which include lots of outlandish opinions that will send you and your audience into fits of righteous indignation. I’m talking real juicy stuff. And best of all, your reports will actually be accurate. Think of it!

  1. Rachel also linked me to the “Aryan Nations.” That I have nothing to do with this group is clear enough, so I’ll focus on the less obvious mischaracterization.
No Comments on Am I Not Being Outrageous Enough?

Taking a Stand

Never in my life have I faced such adversity . . . never have I been so inspired.    

By now, you’ve probably heard the stories coming out Budapest: our conference being [banned] by the Hungarian Prime Minister . . . our [perseverance and willingness to take a stand] for our ideals . . . our speakers being [threatened] with deportation . . . my arrest and imprisonment by the Hungarian state for [thought-crimes] . . . and our event taking place, against all odds.   

Never in my life have I faced such adversity . . . never have I been so inspired.

By now, you’ve probably heard the stories coming out Budapest: our conference being banned by the Hungarian Prime Minister . . . our perseverance and willingness to take a stand for our ideals . . . our speakers being threatened with deportation . . . my arrest and imprisonment by the Hungarian state for thought-crimes . . . and our event taking place, against all odds.

Crises reveal character. And I am tremendously proud of our how our institution and broader movement responded. Despite the government’s ban, attendees came from around the world to meet fellow Europeans and have a conversation about our future. After I was arrested and detained, Jared Taylor, aided by comrades, stepped into my place and hosted what was, from what I hear, a joyous and stimulating gathering.

The night of my arrest encapsulated the dual nature of this past weekend—adversity and inspiration. I was apprehended by police in a Budapest pub, where dozens of attendees and I had gathered to build fellowship before the next day’s conference. The room was filled with our European family: Britons, Canadians, Scandinavians, Flemish, Croatians, and more. We instantly became old friends, though most of us were meeting each other for the first time.

I was reminded of the need for groups like The European Congress, a forum and meeting point for European identitarians and traditionalists.

And I was reminded of the necessity of The National Policy Institute.

At NPI, we produce original writings on RadixJournal.com, featuring the work of Gregory Hood, Michael McGregor, and all the regulars. We publish new books, with a lineup that ranges from Richard Lynn to Piero San Giorgio to Tito Perdue to Alexander Dugin. We host conferences and public events, which have featured, among many others, Alain de Benoist, Tomislav Sunic, and Jack Donovan.

We are doing things that are powerful, things that are getting noticed, and things that rock the boat.

We are willing to take risks. And we are willing to take hits.

There are certainly more pleasant ways of spending a weekend than in a Hungarian jail; however, if I were to do it over again, I wouldn’t change a thing. We must never lose our nerve as our adversaries react . . . and overreact . . . and try to shut down our projects. (And if we’re not upsetting the establishment a litte bit, then we’re probably doing it wrong.)

We’re more powerful than we might believe. Our power stems from our resolve, from our pride, and from our audacity.

And you make it possible. Your tax-deductible donations to NPI are the lifeblood of everything we do. Giving to us is a direct way of aiding your comrades who have taken risks and made sacrifices. It’s a way to “do something.”

Over the past week, our movement and our ideas have received a tremendous amount of coverage, and generated sympathy and good will from surprising sources. Our challenge is to ensure that this doesn’t become just another passing moment, but instead becomes a watershed in the rediscovery of European consciousness.

Fill out my online form.

No Comments on Taking a Stand

Perseverance in Budapest

The conference is not cancelled. We will meet in Budapest on October 3-5. We will share ideas. We will make new friends and have a good time.

As you might have heard, the forces of tolerance and diversity have declared that we must not be allowed to speak. Our organization and our upcoming event have been attacked on social media and blogs for months. From what I understand, these originated from the Hungarian Socialist Party (MSZP), which is the successor to the Hungarian Communist Party. Now these attacks are coming from the highest levels of government. This morning, the “conservative” Prime Minister, Viktor Orbán, declared that he will use “all legal means at his disposal” to ban our conference. (I guess we should be happy that illegal means are off the table.)

It’s important to remember that neither Orbán nor anyone else has accused us of actually breaking any laws, because we haven’t. To the contrary, it is the Hungarian government that might potentially break a law—in this case, one of its own. Our conference will be a forum for ideas—it is an opportunity for Hungarians, and people from around the world, to freely gather and freely speak their minds. These rights are explicitly guaranteed to all Hungarian citizens in their recently enacted Constitution. The very notion that Hungary’s Prime Minister—who claims to embrace European, pluralist values—would even talk about censoring the speech of citizens and international guests is depressing, indeed.

Sometimes you can find profound statements in pop culture. The lines are from Game of Thrones:

When you rip out a man’s tongue, you’re not proving him a liar. You’re only telling the world you fear what he might say.

Words have power. And I can only conclude that Viktor Orbán and everyone attacking our conference fear what we have to say.

The conference is not cancelled. We will meet in Budapest on October 3-5. We will share ideas. We will make new friends and have a good time. (That’s what these events are really about.)

It’s true that the government’s actions are going to make our meeting a little more inconvenient than it otherwise would be. But life is full of such challenges.

I’ve been inspired by the response to our gathering—in terms of registrants and general interest—and I’m confident that The European Congress has a bright future.

To all those who have registered to attend, either as a guest or journalist covering the event—check your email. I will keep you abreast of our ongoing plans.

We shall overcome.

No Comments on Perseverance in Budapest

The Scottish Play

For the past 200 years, Europe has been coming together. It might seem strange to write this in light of the ethnic hatreds of the last century’s World Wars, or even those of the World Cup. It might seem strange to write this with the ongoing ethnic conflict in eastern Ukraine, especially strange now on the eve of a referendum for Scottish independence. 

For the past 200 years, Europe has been coming together. It might seem strange to write this in light of the ethnic hatreds of the last century’s World Wars, or those of the World Cup. Or in light of the ongoing ethnic conflict in eastern Ukraine. And especially strange today on the eve of a referendum for Scottish independence.

But the geopolitical trajectory of Europe is unambiguous. The European continent—including the British isles—were once a patchwork of competing principalities and states. Today, it is defined by broad national and imperial blocs: France, Italy, Russia, Germany, and Britain being the models. Europe’s history has been, to a great degree, a history of state formation: from a multitude to many to a few . . . maybe soon to one.

More important than this political development has been the birth of a homogenous European Man. He is a man who might call someplace—maybe a little place—“home,” somewhere with a language and way of life all its own: Wales, Bavaria, Talin. . . But he is demonstrably European in his character, values, and being, especially to outsiders. Who could deny that today the differences that separate a Scotsman from an Englishman, or a Russian from a Italian—though certainly real—are easily outweighed but what they share in common? Who could deny that the mass immigration of non-Europeans has intensified our awareness of this unity, allowed us to understand ourselves in ways that we might not have otherwise?

There is, without question, a cost to this historical process, for “European Man” is, to a large degree, the “Last Man” as Nietzsche imagined him: the homogenous consumer and worker, who sees little of value above comfort and acquiring more stuff. For better and for worse, we are all becoming “good Europeans”. . . and we must understand something like the Scotts’ bid for independence in this wake.

Describing the referendum, the American commentator Patrick Buchanan wrote:

The call of blood, history, faith, culture and memory is winning the struggle against Economism, the Western materialist ideology that holds that the desire for money and things is what ultimately motivates mankind.

This can only be wishful thinking. It’s worth remembering that the Scottish National Party is not a traditionalist organization by any stretch. A perusal of its agenda reveals that it would be better described as “retro-liberal” or “Old Labor.” (For what it’s worth, the SNP wants to keep the Queen as the symbolic Head of State.)

Moreover, for every died-in-the-wool Scottish nationalist (or Anglophobe) who supports independence, there are legions who view breaking away from London in a very different way. Exiting the geopolitical world of the UK and “Anglo-sphere” would be a means of better implementing a post-historical, egalitarian welfare state . . . of becoming another “European” country, like Sweden or Iceland . . . of finding an “independent” path to the same liberal dispensation.

The SNP defines its “nationalism” as such:

to create a just, caring and enterprising society by releasing Scotland’s full potential as a independent nation in the mainstream of modern Europe.

Though the SNP desires to break from the UK (and NATO), it seeks to join the European Union. This seeming contradiction between secession and federalism reveals both the meaning and meaningless of Scottish “independence.”

Fittingly, as the vote looms, much of the discussion has been taken up with purely technical matters:

  • “What currency would the Scots use?”
  • “What about the highway, rail, and plumbing systems?”
  • “Would the financial district relocate?”
  • “Would we have to create a new suffix for Scottish websites—dot.Scot?

Technical matters like these are truly the only things at stake.


Born in 1978, I was a child during the last decade of the Cold War. The Berlin Wall existed as a powerful symbol of the ideological and imaginary “inside” and “outside” of that conflict. I envisioned that my world was “in” America and freedom and “out” of socialism and oppression. Some who were “in” Communism could escape and get “out” over here.

The events of 1989-91 turned the world “inside out” . . . and “outside in.” For the past 25 years, no European nation or state has been “outside” liberalism. Secession would change none of this. To choose another metaphor, a droplet of a liberal society (what an “independent” Scotland would become) has the same constitution as a whole gallon of one in the UK or EU.

No Comments on The Scottish Play

Type on the field below and hit Enter/Return to search