Richard Spencer should be tarred and feathered

Rirchard Spencer is a leading figure in the Alt-Right, and he possibly even coined the term Alt-Right.  I hadn’t been that well versed in his ideas before as I had only heard a couple of his interviews. He seemed like an intelligent and intellectual person, but I hadn’t looked too deeply into the ideas the he promotes until yesterday when I was listening to the Alt Right 2016 discussion at Red Ice Radio with John Morgan, Greg Johnson, Daniel Friberg, Richard Spencer & RamzPaul.

Listening to the discussion made me realize Richard Spencer is a stooge for the New World Order, or at best he’s a narcissistic pseudo-intellectual who’s in it for the fame. He supports an empire for White people, and opposes ethno-nationalism, which he thinks is about hating the White neighbour. He seems to be against the idea that the countless different ethnic groups in Europe should have their own nation states, instead there should be grand White country for White people. Basically he seems to be for the European Union, but only for White people. Greg Johnson called Richard out on his ideas, and said he vetoes Richard’s idea, and that reality vetoes his idea. Well done, Greg.


Vagueness of Richard Spencer

Richard Spencer says there should be no division in the race, and is aghast for example that Whites are killing Whites in the Ukraine. He seems to think Ukrainians need his White New World Order to fix their problems. The host Henrik Palmgren pointed out that one reason for the troubles in Ukraine is due to outside meddlers such as Victoria Nuland, which is something I agree with. I’m still not clear on what Spencer means by White. Is it anyone who just looks White, is someone who is half-White, half-Asian White, how about if they’re 1/4 Black, or are people White only if they can prove their White ancestors for six generations or what? At best his idea of this White collective is a vague notion. Spencer admitted in the discussion that he’s a “dreamer”, a Utopian thinker. This alone renders his ideas irrelevant. The time for Utopian notion is over, we need practical solutions.

In fact, Richard Spencer sounds like a Cultural Marxist with the exception that he is pro-White, whereas Cultural Marxists hate White people. The similarity is that Cultural Marxists treat their favourite victim groups like women, minorities and Muslims as some sort of Borg-collective. Spencer’s idea on the White race bears a striking resemblance.

Max Marco writing for Noose: The Online Fascist Zine in his article Contra Altright also notes Spencer’s vagueness. He describes Spencer as “a weak, pandering, fence-sitting coward who tries to play all sides of key issues while maintaining plausible deniability when held to any stance or standard”. I can’t help but agree. Marco describes Spencer as someone who seeks to direct attention away from the Jewish Question and exposing the lies told about the Holocaust.



Rirchard Spencer is also blatantly pro-homosexuality. The most obvious example is the fact that Matthew Heimbach was excluded from Spencer’s Become Who We Are conference for his anti-homosexual views.

Carolyn Yeager criticizes Spencer for having the openly gay Jack Donovan as the main speaker in his conference. On top of that Donovan is a former priest in the Church of Satan. I don’t think him being gay would make a big difference if Jack Donovan was a 9/11 or Sandy Hook researcher, for example, but he is supposedly an expert on masculinity and what it means to be a man. I’m sorry but being gay disqualifies you from being a role-model on being a man.

John de Nugent also questioned Spencer’s stance on homosexuality by asking if he’s “a homosexual, homophile or really straight?” De Nugent notes that Spencer is allegedly married and has a year old child, however he questions whether this is true or not. He asks: “Has anyone SEEN the supposed ‘wife and kids’ of Richard Spencer, who supposedly lives out in a small town in Montana.” De Nugent also points out why the issue of homosexuality is relevant: “the Jewish agenda knowns as transhumanism is pro-homosexual”. I would say that transhumanism is more an agenda of Satanists and Jews serve their interests, but that is a minor detail in this case.

A conservative Youtuber called Common Filth has criticized the Altright for being gay in several of his videos. At first I was skeptical of this, but at least Richard Spencer’s allegiances seem to prove that Common Filth is onto something.

Richard Spencer’s Wikipedia page does not mention that he is married. I couldn’t find mention of this in his Radix Journal or National Policy Institue websites either. I did find claims that he is married elsewhere, though.


Spencer’s “wife”

A few different websites mention that Richard Spencer is supposedly married to a Canadian-Russian woman called Nina Kouprianova (alternative name Nina Byzantina). Kouprianova has a couple of different websites. One is for discussing “Russia, Eurasia, meta- and geopolitics, culture”, and the other is about photography. I didn’t find any mention of her being married either.

She has however written a few articles in Spencer’s Radix Journal website, so Kouprianova and Spencer clearly are associates of some sort. This makes it even more curious, if Spencer and Kouprianova are married, why don’t they just state it clearly? If Nina is Richard’s wife, him withholding this information surely isn’t to protect her, since she is already a writer for his website. If they’re not married, where did the internet rumour that they are originate from? I don’t know what the truth is but there are clearly holes in his background.


Spencer’s liberal anti-conservatism

To come back to Richard Spencer’s New World Order ideology, he published a video, When Conservatism Dies, fairly recently. Most of the video is sophistry that has little content, but sounds smart, but I managed to ascertain a few of Spencer’s ideas from it. First of all, he says a couple times in the video that a “New Order” is rising. By itself it does not necessarily mean anything sinister, but in the video Spencer comments that some conservative politician or commentator has described Donald Trump as a bringer of chaos. Spencer agrees with this and says that Trump disrupts conventional politics, which allows for the New Order to be born, or something to that extent. To my mind it’s quite obvious Spencer is all for the old Order out of Chaos.

Spencer also says something like conservatives and Republicans stand for White protestant values, and he is happy to see conservatism destroyed. I disagree. I don’t think that the conservatives and Republicans no-longer stand for the White protestant values. This is the main reason why Altright is gaining traction. My understanding is that the majority of supporters of Altright support traditional and common sense values, and since no-one in main stream politics are standing for those things, people are turning to the Altright. Spencer, on the other hand, seems to agree with the Cultural Marxists that the old must be destroyed for the something new. He does not define clearly what this new things is either. You’re just supposed to take his word for it that this New Order is something you want. Richard Spencer is a Marxist revolutionary of a new breed.



My humble opinion is that the genuine people in the Altright should either politely show Rirchard Spencer the door, or get some tar and feathers for him. Even if my view of him is too conspiratorial for your taste, I still say he is a sophist at best with little or no practical ideas behind his words.



Alt Right 2016:

Contra Altright:

The Rainbow Coalition:

Richard Spencer’s upcoming conference to celebrate White identity is a provocation:

Is posh NPI director Richard Bertrand Spencer a homosexual, homophile or really straight?

Common filth:

Richard B. Spencer:

Radix Journal:

The National Policy Institute:

The Deterioration of the Anti-Semitic Website Alternative Right:

Some Fascists Are More Kremlin-Approved Than Others:

Nina Kouprianova’s geopolitics:


Kouprianova’s articles:

When conservatism dies:


Subversion: How NeoReaction Turned Into AltRight:


8 thoughts on “Richard Spencer should be tarred and feathered”

  1. What bothers me about him more than anything is the imperialism. I’m generally libertarian, and while I don’t have a problem with white or ethnic nationalism, centralized government is too dangerous to tolerate. I also find absurf his “white” identity politics fanciful and tedious, as opposed to Czech, Dutch, etc. With the latter one is talking about real humans, towns, lands and history, “white” is far too much of an abstraction to possibly act as a nucleus for community formation, which is essential to any enduring society.

  2. The article — Concordia Ab Chao: Richard Spencer should be Tarred and Feathered — is referenced as a possible military intelligence psychotronically manipulated EoP observation; and/or background information related to a possible military intelligence psychotronically manipulated event; in EoP v WiP NWO Negotiations correspondence: 23 Nov: Red Ice Radio .. Nina Byzantina; available at:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s