alt-right anti-Semitism antifeminism empathy deficit entitled babies irony alert Islamophobia literal nazis men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny none dare call it conspiracy PUA rape culture rape jokes return of kings rhymes with roosh richard spencer trump

Roosh V: Nazi saluters and rape jokers unite!

Best buds?
Richard Spencer and Roosh Valizadeh: BFFs?

More than a week after an exuberantly Naziesque speech by alt-right hipster Richard Spencer inspired a spate of Nazi salutes from attendees at the National Policy Institute, the assorted factions of the alt-right are still debating whether or not the salutes were super-cool, or maybe not so cool, or just fun little jokes, or part of a secret plot to make the alt-right look not so super-cool. (See here for a more detailed breakdown.)

Now everyone’s favorite repugnant “pickup artist” Roosh Valizadeh has weighed in on the subject, offering what is perhaps the most convoluted sort-of defense of Spencer I’ve seen so far.

Roosh has a bit of a strange history with the so-called alt right. After wading gingerly into the Nazi pond with a blog post hailing the anti-Semitic theories of far-right academic Kevin Macdonald last year, he got an invite to one of Spencer’s previous NPI conventions, only to discover once there that neo-Nazis aren’t exactly fans of middle-eastern looking dudes like him who, as Roosh oh-so-hilariously put it, “have ‘defiled’ six million white women,” which doesn’t even make sense as a Holocaust joke. Thus rebuffed, Roosh counterattacked, declaring that “the alt right is worse than feminism in attempting to control male sexual behavior,” which in Rooshland is an insult of the direst sort.

Now Roosh has decided to defend Spencer, sort of. Sure, he admits, the “Roman” salutes at the NPI conference did make the alt-right look a teensy bit bad, at least when filtered through the lens of the evil lügenpresse. The video of Spencer’s speech put online by The Atlantic,

starts with a white man [Spencer] shouting “Hail” to the new President of the United States, whom the media viscerally hates, while a small minority of attendees exuberantly throw up the Roman salute. Even if you are a conservative, you have been programmed to feel revulsion at this display of “Nazism” and immediately condemn it because of its racism. Not long after, the media forced Donald Trump’s hand and he did disavow Spencer. One viral video, one mission accomplished.

Many alt-right apologists and hangers-on, including a lot of people Roosh admires, also “disavowed” the salutes and the saluters. Roosh, while trying his best not to offend any of them, suggests that they should have defended Spencer and his fans.

Let’s imagine a different scenario. When the viral video came out, instead of attack Spencer, we attacked The Atlantic for taking scenes from the conference out of context.

Er, the context for the Nazi salutes was a neo-Nazi conference. But never mind,

We forced them to reveal the truth of attendees being assaulted by violent liberal thugs.

Not quite. There were protesters, and at least one fight broke out, though it seems to have been started by one of the white supremacists.

We disseminated the truth of the conference far and wide. And most importantly, we defended the right of attendees to put up whatever salute they want as part of their free speech at a private event, even if we find it abhorrent. 

By not defending the saluters, Roosh argues, “we have given up our own ability to do a Roman salute, even as a joke.”

Roosh asks his readers to imagine what might have happened had  “Spencer ‘got away’ with these Roman salutes.” The evil media

wouldn’t be able to attack us for anything. No rape joke, fat joke, or meme would be extreme compared to it. Our free speech would have expanded if we helped Spencer, but that opportunity is lost. We now get to wait for an energized media to attack us, and it most certainly will be for less than a Roman salute. 

In other words:

First they came for the Nazi saluters, and we did not speak out, because we were not Nazi saluters. 

Then they came for the fat-shaming rape jokers and, damn, that’s us!

Nonetheless, Roosh is confident that the alt-right will survive Salutegate, and still thinks highly of them — even though he knows he wouldn’t be welcome in the all-white America of their dreams.

They will lick their wounds and get stronger, because they don’t need the media and they don’t need Trump. Their sales pitch of “America will be better with only white people” is too seductive for marginalized white men to resist, and in spite of their obsession with race, there is intellect and truth-telling underneath it.

Roosh even thinks that the current infighting between hardcore alt-white supremacists and the alt-lite opportunists who’ve glommed onto the movement is a good thing.

Now that the schism has taken place, men like Mike Cernovich, Paul Joseph Watson, and Stefan Molyneux have a clear path to the top as part of their “new right” platform. There is no Nazi taint to hold them back.

You know, aside from the Nazi taint that lingers from the fact that they’ve all been enthusiastically promoting an essentially fascist movement, teeming with full-on Hitler-loving neo-Nazis, for a year?

As far as I’m concerned, they’re all Nazi taints.

The story of this “schism” is almost certainly going to get weirder from here.

90 replies on “Roosh V: Nazi saluters and rape jokers unite!”

Re: The Guardian article, I’m struck by how it appears that men are particularly susceptible to radicalization across various cultures. What is the commonality in their experiences that makes it so?

At a guess, I think it’s a case of patriarchy leading to young men being more easily indoctrinated into the whole toxic cocktail of “people used to respect [your group], now they don’t, but you can go out and fight for it and become a hero/martyr”. Obviously some women fall for that rhetoric too (just like a lot of men don’t, for that matter), but girls are usually raised to be more passive and not see themselves as the action hero in the film of their own lives.

@Christina Nordlander

Men also are not socialized to be receptive to others’ viewpoints to the same extent that women are. It’s much easier to develop an extreme stance when you aren’t expected to absorb a whole range of opinions.

@ Podkayne Lives (Effortless Chicken)

I am new (hello allllll), but as a very, very lapsed Catholic – who has stood up in several Catholic weddings – this hand blessing thing is still a thing. Its not really supposed to looked like a Nazi salute, since its supposed to be like you are putting your hands over the couple (or group of people) – like a priest does when blessing items – but when a lot of people are doing it, and are at a distance, instead of right next to them, it does look a little suspicious.

Here is a photo example of what we are talking about:

I feel like the last few weddings I have attended, most try and bend their elbows and wrist, so that the arm is not so straight, like it would be with the Nazi salute.

I think it’s also that men are socialized to believe that they deserve things. Women are socialized to believe that if they don’t get what they want or if things don’t turn out well, it’s their own fault. So men are more prone to anger if they don’t have a high paying job, don’t feel the government is serving their needs, can not land an attractive partner etc. Some take that anger too far into violence or extremism.

@Podkayne Lives, unfortunately, there’s only a couple of ways to extend one’s right hand. Growing up, I attended christenings and other Catholic sacraments, and saw the congregation reach out toward the child or whoever. Most people seemed to turn their palm outward, so they looked more like the Argonath in The Lord of the Rings.

It’s sad that Hitler and his grisly gang ruined yet another innocent thing.

As for that salute done in jest, I thought of Peter Sellers’ black-gloved freakout in Dr. Strangelove.

@IP: I’m so sorry. Take good care of yourself.

Buttercup Q. Skullpants | November 28, 2016 at 10:12 pm
The salute like Nazis, think like Nazis, praise Hitler like Nazis, advocate for ethnic cleansing like Nazis, but don’t call them Nazis, mmmkay? Nazis are bad.

They force themselves on women, but don’t call them rapists! Rapists are bad!

They make derogatory remarks based on a person’s race, but don’t call them racists! Racists are bad!

They make derogatory remarks about people based on their sexual orientation, but don’t call them homophobes! Homophobes are bad!

Yet another word in a long line of words that bigots hate being called, but they would still like to do the things that are the definition of that fucking word.

@IP: I hope you’re doing okay, or at least a little better. Internet hugs.

Ooglyboggles said

Why do I get the sinking feeling the only thing keeping them in check was general societal disapproval of fascists? Yeah that social disapproval is starting to look a bit shaky. In my eyes sympathizers and enablers of these folk are just as bad if not worse.

IMHO, you’re not wrong, but I don’t think it will last long (at least, I hope not!) It seems to me that I’m seeing an uptick* in inclusive advertising; the newest Cover Girl commercial features not just a woman in a headscarf, but a dude in an ad for mascara! That’s got to ruffle the feathers of alt-wrongers. I’m seeing quite a few interracial couples in ads, too.

The almighty Market sees the direction things are going as inclusive and diverse. They want those dollars and are actively pursuing them.

*Perhaps I’m just more aware of them since the election, though.

Re: Free speech

It is worrying how commonplace it has become to hear people argue that if anyone criticizes them for what they say, that means free speech as a concept is under attack. It has reached the point where if I hear someone complaining about free speech, I stop listening to them immediately, since I find that their view of society and other people will invariably be filtered through the eyes of a bully, through the lens of desire to have full, unrestricted power over others.

It would be easy to chalk it up to people simply not understanding that if they can have an opinion and express it, others are allowed to have an opinion on their opinion and express it as well. However, it would also be a mistake to believe that these people are simply ignorant in the passive sense of the word, since such internally inconsistent logic simply requires too massive active effort to maintain to be self-reliant: evidence to ignore, points of view to discard, outright lies to stubbornly believe, logic to leap, and discussions to derail.

Rather, fascists and bullies only care about keeping up appearances, of maintaining a facade of logic and decency for as long as they do not yet have power, or as long as the power they have could still be taken away from them. That’s why the alt-right is already tearing itself apart (insert obligatory The Room joke here) over whether or not it is okay to reveal themselves as nazis: they do not disagree about the things that are being said or done, only about the manner in which they are communicated to people who do not (yet) agree with their worldview. Some are already gleefully embracing their darkest, truest selves, others are aware of the fact that Trump winning the presidential elections does not (yet) grant them free reign to do whatever they wish without consequences.

People who complain about freeze peach are almost invariably some degree of fascist, since they are not concerned with the right of everyone to be able to express themselves freely; only they and people who think like them and are alike them in other, superficial ways should have that right, hence their twisted, self-centered view of “free speech”, where criticism is “stifling of free speech”. To them, “oppression” is anything that restrains them, “freedom” is anything that allows them to oppress others.

IP and Alan – My dad fell quite a bit because he had a floppy ankle and his foot would get caught on the damnedest things like cracks in the sidewalk or thick carpeting. He never worried about it because he told me he’d figured out how to fall; don’t tense up, try not to break your fall with your hands, but do your best to land on a shoulder and roll (that last part he gleaned from watching years and years of NFL American football.) Dad never suffered anything beyond a few scrapes and/or bruises, clothing tears, and occasionally embarrassment if he fell in public.

Falling lessons sounds like a fantastic idea! For anyone, actually. Another tip from my dad was to just sit after a fall and take stock of any damage before trying to get up again.

Dad’s motto was always “Don’t get excited” whenever things went wrong. It’s my mantra to this day. Damn, but I miss him!

@IP, best wishes and take care of yourself!

About salutes — the Pledge of Allegiance included a right-arm salute with the palm up, followed by the hand over the heart. The salute was dropped around 1940, IIRC.

Wow! Look at Roosh’s beard! He’s looking even more like a stereotypical “Daesh Member” everyday….which is ironic to say the least when you consider Nazism (but not misogyny).

I am agreeing with you so, so hard. Every word of that should be etched onto something.

Eeek. That sounds terrifying. All my sympathies to you and to your Otter.

Re men being radicalised:
This is something I’ve thought about a lot. I think there’s an element to which men in our society, especially young men, are socialised to be prepared to sacrifice themselves (and others) for a cause. Society then tries to steer these men towards choosing causes which it approves of. Occasionally, especially when men are influenced by a subculture or are generally isolated, they pick a cause which society does not approve of.

There’s an element of hypocrisy here: few people in power condemn the radicalisation of young men towards capitalism, say, or towards a violent patriotism, because those are seen as useful. As such, this is something which may be very difficult to confront directly.

argle blargle baaaarg
i shouldn’t be surprised to see it coming from a living garbage pile like Roosh, but that kind of “free speech” defense bullshit drives me fucking bananas. saying “these guys are horrible nazis” isn’t the same as saying “they should be legally prohibited from this behavior” and you can defend someone’s right to say or do a thing while still calling them out as awful trash monsters for saying/doing it.
and really, if they’d “gotten away with it” they’d use it as a defense in the future? “Oh, you don’t like my rape legalization ‘joke’? well, you didn’t have a say anything about me being a nazi, and that’s even worse!” doesn’t strike me as an impenetrable defense…

@ EJ

There’s a New Model Army song for every occasion:

All we wanted was a cause that we could fight for
One chance for the heroes to win the day
All we wanted was a chance to see the world
In black and white instead of a hundred shades of grey

The NPI is a pseudo-academic think tank that’s been trying to build bridges between mainstream conservatism (like the National Review variety) and white nationalism. It’s unlikely they’d team up with Roosh, but maybe Infowars would accept him.

There’s an xkcd for everything:
Free Speech
The alt-text on the image:

I can’t remember where I heard this, but someone once said that defending a position by citing free speech is sort of the ultimate concession; you’re saying that the most compelling thing you can say for your position is that it’s not literally illegal to express.

Hey EJ, don’t know if this is of any interest to you, but St Andrews is offering a taster session that you can do on line. One of the modules is all about radicalisation. If you fancy it there’s a way of getting it at a ‘discounted’ price of £150 (as a Yorkshireman it’s only a discount if it’s free; the Latin backs me up on this)

Hope that link works

Thanks Alan, that’s pretty cool. I am currently at a pub waiting for a quiz to begin, but will review that when I have a chance. Learning more things is always inherently a good thing, and I’d be interested to see what academia says on the topic.

@ EJ

Learning more things is always inherently a good thing

And can also win beer!

Good Luck. (If you get stuck on a sports question just put Red Rum; it nearly always is.)

For free in the meantime you can peruse these pages:

The centre is French, so the translations may not be quite so complete.

Radicalization is definitely not gendered; violence is heavily biased to men (though not exclusively — turns out misogynist attitudes relax quite readily when it comes to recruiting suicide bombers).

@ numerobis

Thanks for that link; that might be a handy additional resource. The videos have that auditory ‘uncanny valley’ thing though where the synthesised voice is almost perfect but keeps slipping up. I wonder if it’s actually a throwback to old sci fi where there’s a sudden reveal that a person is actually a robot and that’s what’s so creepy?

@Falconer: I read about that recently. It was called the Bellamy salute, and FDR axed it in favor of the hand-on-heart posture.

Just like I am weary of fact-checking breathless right-wing hyperbole disguised as news, I’m tired of explaining that the First Amendment protects US citizens from government suppression and has fuck-all to do with Facebook and Twitter deleting and banning users. Thanks for posting that xkcd comic, @Jenora.

Shorter Roosh: ‘I don’t mind being dragged toward the firing squad as long as I can make rape jokes without anyone wrinkling their nose at me while it happens!’

That attutide is at the heart of this whole debacle, and of red state voters in general. I live and have lived in the rural intermountain west US most of my life, and I am so annoyed by all of the ‘poor angry white ppl’ thinkpieces. They didnt just gain the vote this year. They’ve been voting right wing for decades, and it has been hammering nails in their economic coffins for decades, so clearly the way they vote is about something ither than how poor and left behind they feel. They didnt vote Trump to punish the GOP, they voted Trump to punish the rest of us.

‘I don’t mind starving as long as those uppity [minorities] are being dragged to the firing squad!’

I know I’m preaching to the choir here, I’m just so incredibly frustrated by the progressive response of trying to engage the poor, poor white voters in good faith, as if they’ve had NO recourse until this election.

I think that these nazi chucklefucksare so used to the left engaging them with tolerance that they’re panicked at the prospect of a majority of people going ‘walks like a goose, talks like a nazi, salutes like a nazi, is definitely a nazi.’

I just realized that IRON MGTOW left their enigmatic one-word comment and then never bothered to return. What a great contribution to the post.


My Dad’s motto was a similar intent “it is what it is”. I’d give a limb or two to have him here to say it once more.

@opposablethumbs & everyone on radicalisation

Agreed, the radicalisation angle in that article was fascinating. I’m going to do some hunting on Scholar to see if anyone is doing research on it.

As a couple of people here have already noted, it’s possible that certain young men are susceptible to the ‘your rights have been eroded – here’s how to get them back’ type narrative. The idea that white men are now a disadvantaged group is such a common refrain in certain circles.

Re your link on Castro – I had to get Google to translate for me (boring monolingual person here) but wow.

re: other contexts of the roman salute: it’s still used in mexico for flag/allegiance ceremonies, and anything where you’re swearing an oath on the flag–so allegiance but also public servants’ induction oaths. (i think the american equivalent for that is the hand on the bible?)

somehow i doubt they’d be particularly interested in “actually we were saluting the mexican flag” though.

(but now that i live here it adds that extra-extra-extra frisson of distress to interacting with neo-nazis, because i also, y’know, did this every week, albeit nowhere near as well, and now whup! the white supremacists have a monopoly on everything i learned as a feature of interacting with the state!)

I’m so sorry to hear about your fall. I’m glad to hear that you’ll be seeing your physiotherapist soon.



Men also are not socialized to be receptive to others’ viewpoints to the same extent that women are. It’s much easier to develop an extreme stance when you aren’t expected to absorb a whole range of opinions.

You’ve put into words some ideas that were rattling around in my head. Well said!



Dad’s motto was always “Don’t get excited”
whenever things went wrong.

That’s an excellent motto. Thanks!


My Dad’s motto was a similar intent “it is what it is”.

Another pithy, helpful expression. Thanks for that!

I tend to panic because that’s what my father did. On him, however, it didn’t look like panic. It looked like anger. It took me years to realize that the man was filled with fear.

Thanks everyone. I’m fine, but the bruise will be there for a while.


it is what it is

I had a thing with a former friend where we would often say:

Me: It is what it is.
She: ……..Or is it?
Me: ……..yes, it is.

@Christina Nordlander

Re: The Guardian article, I’m struck by how it appears that men are particularly susceptible to radicalization across various cultures. What is the commonality in their experiences that makes it so?

At a guess, I think it’s a case of patriarchy leading to young men being more easily indoctrinated into the whole toxic cocktail of “people used to respect [your group], now they don’t, but you can go out and fight for it and become a hero/martyr”.

When I was a girl, I felt very disrespected by my father and my brothers. I mentally wrote them off as hopelessly ignorant. And I very much looked forward to the respect that I would receive from the world when I became a woman. My attitude was based on the happy women in advertisements, movies, television, and comics, and on the innumerable love songs addressed to women. In addition, it was based on my very active imagination. And it was also based on disregarding the evidence that I saw around me of disrespect toward women. (I’ve seen a few episodes of Mad Men, which takes place in the time that I was growing up. Some of the cruelty exhibited toward women in that show is shockingly, viscerally painful to me because in those years I was either unaware of it, or I was only faintly aware of it, or I was spending my energy trying to deny that it existed.)

When I grew older, I was so disappointed to find out that a certain percentage of men disrespect women in ways large and small. And that in some ways society also disrespects women.

Luckily, I’ve always paid attention to respecting myself. That’s the best kind of respect. And there’s no substitute for it.


assaulted by violent thugs.

(i take out liberal)
You mean like people who clearly say they used muscle to force women they have sex with to not escape, leading to pain and cry ? You don’t say !

Have a nice day.

Just for the record, the first paragraph in my post at the top of the page was quoting Ariblester. My brain completely died and forgot to put it in quotation marks.

And I definitely don’t think women are immune to radicalisation (of any kind). I’m a young-ish woman, and I can totally feel the pull of the “go and fight/die for the Awesome Cause and become a hero/martyr” rhetoric. Hell, I play Imperium in Warhammer 40k. I’m just fortunate that the equivalent of ISIS or MAGA didn’t get hold of me when I was eighteen.

@Everyone who chimed in about radicalisation in men

Thanks to all for your comments, discussion and links. They’ve been a great help in my own thinking about the matter.

Sorry to hear about your fall. I wish you all the best.

the alexis – I sense that this thread is about played out, but just wanted to say that the drills in the video you linked don’t look particularly nazi-ish to me. If anything, they remind me (just a little) of clips I’ve seen of parades in North Korea. More than anything else, though, that looks like fun!

I learned marching and drilling in high school marching band and basic training for the USAF and always enjoyed it.

Wise words from dads. Mine was fond of

Moderation in all things … including moderation.

Basically means be polite, be considerate, but if righteous anger is justified, go right ahead and kick over the tables of the money-changers.

What is it with neo-nazis, why do they admire a totally failed state that lost the war? Thumped, beaten, totally destroyed.

Ok they had a good run for 3 years (1939-1942) after that they lost totally, their air force was destroyed, their ships and U-Boats sunk, their army beaten on every front. Their cities smashed to rubble.

They lost Prussia forever and many other areas with Germans were totally ethnically cleansed of them and the country was split in two for over 50 years.

That’s losing….big time.

Heck the writing was on the wall in 1940 in the Battle of Britain, when their vaunted airforce got hammered into the ground..

It only existed as a regime for 12 years then it was gone. Totally beaten, crushed in fact.

So is it a bunch of losers admiring …a loser regime? Heck of a lot more were far more successful even just by counting how long they lasted. In fact it is hard to find another regime that had such a short life.

Is it the goose stepping, the black uniforms and all the leather that attracts them? Closeted leather boys or something?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.