The eleventh of the Vanguard Podcasts, featuring the original "triumvirate" of Richard Spencer, Andy Nowicki, and Colin Liddell, looks back on 2012 and forward to 2013. Highlights include a tribute to Jonathan Bowden, favourite books and movies of 2012, and predictions for 2013.

Originally uploaded on the original Alternative Right site on the 30th of December, 2012

Running Order

00:00  Intro
05:35  What's everybody drinking?
07:15  Update on the first edition of Radix Journal
11:55  The collapse of the BNP and the fate of British Nationalism
28:30  In memory of Jonathan Bowden
36:30  The phenomenon of mass shootings, suicide clusters, and hikikomori
56:10  Guillaume Faye and the "Freedom Fries Effect"
61:05  Alt-Right books of the year: Andy's Nowicki's Heart Killer, Derek Turner's Sea Changes, and Tom Wolfe's Back to Blood
68:45  Alt-Right film of the year: The Dark Knight Rises
80:39  Predictions

Show Notes

  • Colin's New Year tipple: Ardbeg Islay single malt
  • Kevin Scott's "The Death of the BNP"
  • Juleigh Howard Hobson reviews Andy Nowicki's Heart Killer
  • Andy Nowicki's interview with Derek Turner on Sea Changes
  • Brett Steven's review of Back to Blood
  • When predictions go wrong: The Great Illusion (1913) 
  • Robert Prechter and social mood

  • Predictions for 2013

    Richard Spencer

  • The Republican Party will put forward an immigration amnesty
  • The Conservative movement will double down on its silliness and become "hyper, anti-Darwinian, Christian Zionists"
  • There will be a major financial downturn
  • There will be more angry populism, maybe a synthesis of the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street
  • The $PLC will focus more on gay marriage and less on racism 
  • The Left will become pro-life
  • Dallas Cowboys will win the Superbowl

  • Colin Liddell

  • Iran will announce that it has nuclear weapons sometime in the middle of the year

  • Jonathan Bowden


    1. One must not play loose with the notion of rights.

      Rights should be basic protections of freedom, liberty, and property. Rights must not be demands. When rights turn into material demands, people become lax and lazy. So, people have a right to be free and right to seek work and right to accumulate wealth and right to purchase and hold property. But people don't have a right to own a home. They have a right to be free to work to buy a home. They have no right to demand a free home as a right.

      Rights used to mean freedom and protection under the law. They didn't mean a right-to-free-stuff without having worked to pay for them. But socialist thinking makes people lazy. It makes people feel, "I have a right to free home, free clothes, free food, free medicine, free everything.... because they are my rights."
      If people have all such rights, why should anyone work for a living? They should just demand whatever they want as rights. My right to a computer, my right to a cellphone, my right to a car, my right to this and that and etc.

      Rights must protect freedoms that allows a person to strive, work, achieve, earn, and buy stuff. Rights must not be about how everyone is owed free this or that without any input on his or her part. Such breeds laziness, and this is why current socialism is so lousy.
      At least Past Socialism was about hardworking laborers deserving better pay and working conditions. It was to make work more humane. But current socialism says bums and freeloaders have 'rights' to free stuff.

      This is why we should treat healthcare as a Need, not a Right.
      Yes, we all people need healthcare, and most people should be expected to pay for their own. However, for the needy who can't afford it, the state can provide basic services. This wouldn't be a right but taking care of a need. Need is not a right. State acts on certain needs only when those people cannot afford them.

      If something is a right, it must be offered to ANYONE regardless of wealth. After all, the right to vote means the richest person and poorest person has equal right to vote.
      If health care is to be a right, even rich people should be able to afford it for free. After all, rights must not discriminate between rich and poor. If food is a right, then rich people should qualify for food stamps too. After all, rich people are citizens too and have right to free food if indeed food is a right. Nuts.

      There is a better way. Most people should be expected to purchase health insurance on their own. It should be regarded as a consumer service for most.
      As for those who can't afford it, their basic needs should be met by the state with certain conditions.

      Take food, clothing, and housing. They are more essential to life than medicine. Many people are healthy even though they have't seen a doctor in yrs. But try going for a week without food. Trying going without clothing in winter. Try living without a roof over one's head. So, those are more essential to life than healthcare.
      But we don't treat them as rights. We treat them as Needs. We expect most people to be able to work and pay for their houses, food, and clothes. If food, housing, and clothing were rights, even rich people should be able to demand free food, clothing, and housing as their 'rights'. But they are NOT rights, and they must work and pay their own way. However, some people can't afford those things, and the state provides them as basic needs.


      1. Communist nations argued that housing, clothing, and food are essentials of life, therefore it is wrong for anyone to profit from them. Communist nations said those goods/services should be controlled by the state for the good of humanity. Well, how did that go? Without incentives of profits, economic production and distribution lagged in communist nations. In contrast, it was the profit-motive that led to abundance of food, clothing, and housing in capitalist nations.
        Communist nations suffered from shortages, whereas capitalist nations suffer from over-production and glut. So, capitalism and profit-motive increases production and services. Because incentive-and-profit-driven capitalism leads to over-production, the needs of the poor can be met. But as needs, not as rights. If you tell the people that they have a 'right' to all sorts of free stuff, you spoil and corrupt them into lazy parasitic bums.

        People say it's perverse for people to profit from healthcare. And yet, they have no problem with people profiting from food and housing. Aren't food and housing more essential to life than medicine?