Most of the issues raised were more projection than explanation.
Clinton attempted a "reset" with Russia while Secretary of State. Her State Department helped to establish a 'technology center' in Russia that virtually everyone acknowledges is a way for Russia to 'steal', co-opt American technology. She helped Russia gain access and control over America's uranium supplies. She and Obama called Romney's characterization of Russia as our geo-political enemy laughable and dangerous. Russia was our partner against Iran, then ISIS.
Now Russia is the bogey man. Projecting Putin into Trump's head and campaign. Trump said that Putin's focus on Russia First was something we could emulate. Putting America First, not some pan-globalist ideal. Putin's aggressive stance against anti-Russia elements within his boards was another. Again, not something to oppose.
But the underlying reason to hate both Trump and Putin is their focus on 'nationalism'. Somehow, being for your own nation is bad. No, of course not, they (Clinton and the sycophants) want you to believe that they are acting in our best interest but that populism, support for a grassroots political(democratic) movement combined with nationalism is the root of an American NAZI awakening. Bullshit. And they know that, so, they have to tie in the one other piece to make their picture complete:
Do you think Japan should be for Japanese?
Do you think China should be for Chinese?
Do you think Israel should be for Israelis?
Most of the Alt-right categorically denies any allegiance to white supremacy. Only white sovereignty. And while I don't disagree in principle with that - after all, don't you support Black Lives Matter? Don't white lives matter also?
But, the issue (that I have) with alt-right is the general principle that alt-right stands for a christian, european, rule of law culture that is dominantly white. And that this country, the United States is the embodiment of the pinnacle of such culture that has lead the world in democracy, capitalism and innovation for two centuries.
There is some support for their positions that have historical support:
John Jay, author of the Federalist Paper #2-5 and 62, wrote:
It has often given me pleasure to observe that independent America was not composed of detached and distant territories, but that one connected, fertile, widespreading country was the portion of our western sons of liberty. Providence has in a particular manner blessed it with a variety of soils and productions, and watered it with innumerable streams, for the delight and accommodation of its inhabitants. A succession of navigable waters forms a kind of chain round its borders, as if to bind it together; while the most noble rivers in the world, running at convenient distances, present them with highways for the easy communication of friendly aids, and the mutual transportation and exchange of their various commodities.
With equal pleasure I have as often taken notice that Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people--a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, by their joint counsels, arms, and efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly established general liberty and independence.
My own agnosticism is tweeked by the idea that we need to be a Christian nation. If by that we mean that it is populated by a supermajority of Christians, then I am ok with that. If it means to be governed by Scripture, then obviously I have a problem. But in discussions, the majority seem inclined to the former rather than the later.
So, while there are those that cheer the Alt-Right that are assuredly poisonous, that is not in itself bad. After all, the Communist Party of the United States backs Hillary Clinton wholeheartedly!! No one is claiming Clinton is the party of Communists....socialists maybe...!!
Many of the policy arguments tend to be highly supportive of Trump: limited trade agreements, very limited immigration, and certainly not of those that can't stomach our secular, humane society where everyone is 'equal'. That means that those that don't subscribe to women's rights and gay's rights can hardly be quietly dumped into small communities with no tangible ties to the refugees. It means that we stay out of the affairs of other countries.
The other place I have a problem with alt-right...and also with a portion of the economic landscape I am generally supportive of....is their opposition to free-trade. Although I am thinking there is a difference of opinion as to what that means. To the alt-right it means the free movement of immigrants. And I don't think it necessarily means that. But I am also having issues with my support of unfettered free trade. More on that elsewhere.
The significant point that Clinton generally hinted at, but those opposed to Alt-right have hit upon is this:
We must secure the existence of white people and a future for white children
You are going to read that and think white supremacy. And Clinton wants you to. But let me change it and see what your opinion becomes:
We must secure the existence of black people and a future for black children
We must secure the existence of Jewish people and a future for Jewish children
Any change in character?
To the first one: Black adoptees speak out
To the second one: Evangelical support of Israel
Iraq and Egypt and Syria have seen the slaughter of Christians. Many countries in the Middle East will not allow Christian churches.
Why are many Middle Eastern refugees not Christian, but Moslem? Are there no Moslem countries in the Middle East not at war and with significant financial resources....like Kuwait or Saudi Arabia?
I don't oppose legal immigration - my parents are legal immigrants as is my daughter. I want those that see the United States as a place for children to grow up with unlimited opportunities - I fully support the culture, the european, christian, rule of law culture. For that reason, I support the alt-right in principle. I do have some issues, but then, I wouldn't be me if I didn't want to reserve my own sovereignty....