A good way to see this is to analyze the military, political and social problems that Harold Covington’s Pacific Northwest secession movement would face. He suggests that Whites gather in Idaho, Oregon and Washington and use guerrilla warfare to form an independent homeland that is free of non-Whites.

He describes the homeland and the guerrilla warfare, in The Brigade, a tense, suspenseful thriller (Harold A. Covington, The Brigade [Bloomington, Ind.: Xlibris Corporation, 2008]).

The first critical problem with the homeland is that it would be too weak to survive. There are several test cases for this. These are small countries, not much different in size from the Pacific Northwest homeland.

The three Baltic countries, Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia have a combined population of just over 8 million people, similar to the number that the Pacific Northwest homeland would have. (Today the combined population of Idaho, Oregon and Washington is under 12 million.)

Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia once were parts of the Russian Empire. They seceded after the collapse of the Romanov dynasty, during the period of confusion, weakness and disorganization that the Russian Revolution caused. Joseph Stalin annexed all three of these countries in 1940. All it took him was a few meetings and phone calls. See Anatol Lieven, The Baltic Revolution: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and the Path to Independence (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1994).

Finland is another good test case. Like Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, it was part of the Russian Empire until it collapsed. Then Finland seceded, too. Finland, a larger country than Estonia or Latvia or Lithuania, was able to hold off a Soviet invasion for a while during the Winter War of 1939-1940.

Finland started with some big advantages. It had a large territory. It had deep snow and dense forests that confined Soviet invaders to roads. It had soldiers who could travel cross-country on skis, surround road-bound columns of Soviet troops and kill them. It had an excellent submachine gun which its soldiers used against Soviet invaders armed with outdated bolt-action rifles. It had an army with great courage and patriotism. Plus, Stalin had recently annihilated his army officer corps in a bloody purge.

Finland still had to sue for peace after a few weeks.

So, how powerful must a secessionist movement be in order to survive? How much industrial power must it have? How much territory? How many people?

Here in North America, the Northern conquest of the South is a definitive test of the possibility of secession.

By 1860 the South had lost control of the Presidency. It had also lost control of the House of Representatives because the voting population of the North was larger than the voting population of the South. The South still retained control of the Senate by a narrow margin, because the number of senators depended on the number of states.

Southern planters feared that, if they lost control of the Senate, the North would prevent them from expanding slave agriculture to any new states. They also feared that the North would outlaw slavery, once it took control of the Senate. See Marc Egnal, Clash of Extremes The Economic Origins of the Civil War (New York: Hill and Wang, a division of Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2009).

Southern plantation agriculture wore out the land. Planters abandoned worn out land and resettled new lands, further west. This made it very important to them that they could freely bring their slaves to new states.

Unable to solve this political problem, the South seceded. Lincoln decided that he must have his tariffs, so he called for 70,000 volunteers and launched what is so far the bloodiest war ever fought in the Western Hemisphere. The South was enough weaker than the North that it could not afford to make political or military mistakes. But it made them.

Four years of bloodshed proved that the South was not strong enough to secede without the permission of the North. It steadily and gradually lost, militarily, a battle that it had already lost politically before it seceded. Had the South been strong enough to secede without permission, it would also have been strong enough to defend its political interests without seceding.

Secession is an attempt by the politically weaker of two parties to solve, by leaving the field, a political problem that it is too weak to solve, either politically or militarily.

Only the weaker party in a political conflict would want to secede. Only the stronger party would be strong enough to secede without the permission of the other. However, the stronger party would not want to secede because it could force the weaker party to do whatever it wanted.

Covington suggests that military disaster at some distant part of the empire might make the United States too weak to hold on to the Pacific Northwest in the face of guerilla warfare. Maybe so. But this would give the homeland the kind of temporary safety that a Thanksgiving turkey enjoys.

Any place where a secessionist might want to live would be too valuable for the larger, stronger party to give up.

The Pacific Northwest, in particular, is far too valuable to secede in peace. It has valuable hydroelectric power, in a world hungry for cheap energy. The Columbia, its most important river, is 1,243 miles long. Puget Sound gives the Pacific Northwest well-sheltered, world-class harbors. It has a major naval base. Nuclear submarines silently travel its waterways.

What tactics would the United Sates use to keep anyone from forming any independent homeland in such a valuable place, without its permission?

Anything.

Writing in a neocon publication, US Army Colonel Ralph Peters (Ret.) said, “The point of all this is simple: Win. In warfare, nothing else matters. If you cannot win clean, win dirty. But win.”

Anyone who hopes to secede from the United States should expect it to use the same tactics that it has used before, whichever ones promise to work, whatever they might be.

What are these tactics?

Guatemala is a model case. Niall Ferguson, writing in The War of the World, described what happened there after a carefully-planned CIA coup d’etat that overthrew a democratically-elected Guatemalan government. (Niall Ferguson, The War of the World Twentieth-Century Conflict and the Descent of the West [New York: Penguin, 2006], 610-617.)

Paramilitary death squads, the Mano Blanca, roamed the cities and countryside. In the 30 years after the 1954 coup, some 40,000 people disappeared. Mayan Indian tribes were relocated and forced into “strategic hamlets.”

Ferguson says hundreds of villages identified as ‘red’ were obliterated and their inhabitants tortured, raped and murdered. Surrounding forests were burned. He says there was mass slaughter of civilians. By the end of the 1990s the death toll had reached around 200,000. Because there were so many Mayan victims a UN commission deemed that these deaths were genocide.

Afghanistan and Pakistan are two more models that we can use to predict what the United State government would do to secessionists. Eric Margolis, writing in World News Daily Information Clearing House, said that “Pakistan finally bowed to Washington’s angry demands last week by unleashing its military against rebellious Pushtun tribesmen of North-West Province . . .”

He said, “The Obama administration had threatened to stop $2 billion US annual cash payments to bankrupt Pakistan’s political and military leadership and block $6.5 billion future aid, unless Islamabad sent its soldiers into Pakistan’s turbulent NWFP along the Afghan frontier.” Pakistani armed forces used heavy artillery and gunfire from helicopters to kill Pushtun civilians.

Results came quickly.

Andrew Buncombe, writing in The Independent, said that as many as 2.4 million people fled Swat Valley. One man, aged 90, said that,” because there had been no warning to leave, when the gunfire erupted around them they gathered what they could carry and fled.”

The speed of the displacement, as helicopter gun ships fired on civilians fleeing the Swat Valley, reached 85,000 a day.

This terrorist tactic-firing heavy artillery at little villages and then pursuing fleeing villagers with gunfire from helicopters-could empty out every village and small town in the Pacific Northwest in a few weeks.

Where would refugees go after they were driven from secessionist villages and towns? They would go to camps, drawn there by promises of food, shelter and safety.

Most of these camps would be open-air prisons like the Gaza Strip, or the city of Fallujah, in Iraq, or the concentration camps where the British Army put Boer women and children during the Boer war. There would be harsh control of the perimeters of these camps, using earthen or concrete walls, razor wire, guard dogs, electrified fences, towers, mine fields and high-powered search lights.

All of these tools have been perfected and used. Any guerrilla fighters who remained outside the camps would be pressured to surrender when the women, children and old men in the camps began to die after being deprived of food, water, medicine and sanitation.

Torturers and assassins would visit the camps to cull interesting prisoners. They operated this way during the Phoenix Program in Vietnam. The founder of the Phoenix program, CIA officer William Colby, told a Congressional committee in 1971 that the Phoenix operation had killed 20,587 Vietcong suspects in two years (Hayden, 2008).

Writing in Small Wars Journal, Lt. Col. David Kilcullen advocated a world-wide Phoenix program. He went on to become chief strategist in the State Department’s counterterrorism office in 2005 and 2006 and was chief adviser on counterinsurgency operations to General Petraeus, in planning the 2007 US troop surge in Iraq.

Justin Raimondo reported that high officials at the top of the United States Government have operated an assassination ring. He says that Defense Secretary Gates, acting under the authority of President Obama, has appointed the operational leader of this assassination ring, Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, to head U.S. forces in Afghanistan.

It is a huge piece of good luck that government strategy and tactics would make secession impossible. Secession would be a terrible, self-inflicted disaster.

Secession gives the enemy the location of a small, compact target where it can land a fatal blow. It lets the enemy organize its own territory without interference and then use all of the resources of that territory for aggression.

Secession always means the voluntary loss of valuable territory. It loses strategic depth for fighting a war. It loses rivers, ocean front and harbors. It loses road grids and railroad networks. It loses power stations and hydroelectric dams. It loses minerals and arable land. It loses defensible terrain features such as mountain ranges. It loses industrial plants and built up areas.

Secession also loses people. For example a Pacific Northwest homeland would leave out most members of the largest White ethnic group — Germans. They mostly live in a huge semi-circle of land in the middle of the United States, with its diameter on the Canadian border. Their key cities are Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, Indianapolis, Milwaukee, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Pittsburgh, and St. Louis.

A Pacific Northwest homeland would also leave out most of the next-largest white ethnic group–the Irish. Oregon and Idaho are not even mentioned on the Wikipedia list of the twenty states with the largest population of Irish-Americans. Washington State has the 20th largest number of Irish-Americans.

And so it goes with all whites, whether they call themselves just plain Americans or mention descent from a specific white ethnic group. All whites are important. So any population transfer to implement any secession plan, of any sort, would be impossible. And that’s a good thing because secession would create hostile borders that would splinter families, kindreds, and ethnic groups.

There are three good, recent models for this: Berlin was partitioned into East- and West Berlin. Germany was partitioned into East- and West Germany. Korea was — and still is — partitioned into North- and South Korea. All of these have had — or still have — hostile borders that featured guard towers, road barriers, barbed wire, death strips enforced by mines, machine guns and guard dogs, passport & visa requirements, body searches and other snooping, as well as confiscations, arbitrary arrests and mysterious disappearances.

Borders destroy social capital. Population transfers from one place to another also destroy social capital. There are two different cases here. In the first case, a border partitions an area, leaving a population divided in two, with large numbers of people passively staying in place. In the second case, numbers of people respond to special appeals to move to an area that plans to secede.

People who would be willing to move, as single individuals, to some distant place where a movement is afoot to secede are especially likely to be loners, High Plains drifters — people not tied down by strong emotional commitments to others. They are especially vulnerable to exploitation by agent provocateurs, because so many of their interactions are with strangers.They can be entrapped by honey pots. Their social networks are likely to be relatively impoverished and easily penetrated by malicious strangers. Collections of them are likely to lack small unit cohesion.

People who stay in one place for several generations are likely to be embedded in a rich network of social relationships. Groups of these people have Einheit, the mutual trust and common outlook built by shared experience. They have agreed frameworks for doing things. They have a capacity for deep emotional attachments to each other. Their social arrangements are based on ancient acquaintance, so they are hard for malicious strangers to penetrate and exploit. People who stay in one place have rich mental maps of their physical and social territory. The value of their social networks is very high.

This makes them difficult for a social parasite to exploit.

A lot of thought and effort has been spent to destroy the social networks of American whites, to ruin our Einheit, make us flee from the centers of our cities and turn us into atomized individuals or tiny nuclear families. The key to this destruction has been alien control of the mass media.

Decades of hate speech about whites, in the mass media, has enraged Negroes and made them more and more bold in attacking whites. Mass media participated in these attacks by motivating them, giving them ideological cover, and carefully concealing their nature and full extent from whites. Monopoly ownership of mass media made it impossible for whites to organize a hue and cry to prevent further predation.

As a result, unorganized, individual white families fled from violent crime near the centers of cities to suburbs on the distant outskirts. They abandoned center-city land worth as much as a million dollars an acre, in today’s dollars, for land at the outskirts worth ten-thousand dollars an acre today. The economic loss to whites from this one factor alone is in the trillions of dollars. Typically whites sold sound, sturdy old houses on extremely valuable center-city land and bought brand-new houses on small parcels of nearly-worthless semi-rural land. Then their new houses began to depreciate to zero, while the land that they had abandoned in the center city skyrocketed.

The loss of social capital shows up in the reduced roaming radius that parents allow their children. A while ago, I talked with an older white man who probably was 65- to 70-years-old at the time we talked. He said that, as a 12-year-old boy, he rode his bicycle four or five miles to a hardware store. There he bought a 12-gauge shotgun for himself. Then he held it on his bicycle’s handlebars and rode home. Nobody thought anything about it, he said.

This would never happen now.

The loss of social capital also shows up in the loss of informal play. Mothers drive their children from one carefully-protected, formally-scheduled activity to another.

White flight — the individual search for safety from ethnic cleansing — has spread from cities to whole states. For example, whites are fleeing ethnic cleansing in California.

Secession is white flight extended to multi-state regions. Flight to a promised Pacific Northwest homeland, for example, is white flight to a multi-state region.

No matter how large the region to which whites flee, it cannot work. A key reason is that white people are wealth, like herds of cattle or flocks of sheep. White people provide valuable habitat and nourishment for parasites of all kinds. So these parasites follow us everywhere.

South Africa is a fine example. The first major permanent white settlement anywhere in Africa started in 1652 when the Dutch East India Company built a supply station for its ships in the vicinity of present-day Cape Town, South Africa. At that stage the nearest Bantu tribes were more than 1,000 kilometers from the Cape.

By the time the British occupied the Cape for the first time in 1795 it had a white population of about 26,000, an estimated Cape Colored population of 20,000 and a slave population of around 30,000.

During the lifetime of the Republic of South Africa Bantu colonists also flooded South Africa, drawn by labor contracts.

South African farmers — the Boers — fled from British control. Everywhere they went, the British followed them and annexed their territory as soon as they had done the hard, dangerous work of settling it. The Boers and their territory were too valuable for the British to leave alone.

In the beginning South African whites had a chance to create an all-white country of their own. However, relying on non-white labor gave white habitat away to non-whites. It gave non-whites a chance to out-breed whites and displace them.

The very slow, slow growth of the white population in the pre-Revolutionary thirteen colonies, of North America, is a measure of how hard and dangerous it is to convert wilderness to urban, improved habitat.

It took 150 years, from 1650 to 1780, for the population of the 13 colonies to grow from 4,600 to 2,780,000.That is an increase of only18,502 a year.

It took just 30 years, from 1970 to 2000, for the Hispanic population of the United States to grow from an estimated 9.6 million to an estimated 35.3 million. This is an increase of more 856,666 Hispanics a year, a mark of how free, easy and safe their increase is. http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/hispanic/hispanic.html

Early America offered slim pickings for Jews, except in the slave trade. There were an estimated 1,243 to 3,000 in the United States in 1790. When Whites finished the difficult, dangerous work of settlement, the Jewish population suddenly leapt from 230,000 to 280,000 in 1880 to 1,508,000 to 2,349,754 in 1910. This was just three years before they took control of the United States banking system with their Federal Reserve system. (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/usjewpop1.html)

None of these millions of newcomers paid their share of the cost of developing a high technological civilization in North America. None had built any roads, laid any railroad tracks, or built any bridges, dams or tall sky scrapers.

We Whites have helped non-whites dispossess us by giving our habitat away for free, after developing it at such cost. If we keep doing this, we will be extinct.

We must stop helping non-whites dispossess us. We must stop running away. We must stop giving free habitat to those who seek to dispossess us. We must take back our land.

This essay was originally published on Sep 3, 2009

The most problematic feature of the Northwest Quartet, like The Turner Diaries, is the author’s penchant for genocidal fantasies, directed not just at non-whites, but at white people as well. The most famous such passage in The Turner Diaries tells of the “day of the rope” in which white race-traitors, particularly those who engaged in inter-racial sex, are lynched by the thousands.

Covington makes clear that the creation of a white homeland would not, and indeed could not, require the mass killing of non-whites, even though moral qualms about mass murder of civilians tend to be set aside during warfare. Such killing would be logistically impossible for a small guerrilla army, and it would be unnecessary, since Covington thinks that most non-whites could be induced to flee simply by destroying their employment and social support networks through targeted killings, beatings, and property destruction, mostly aimed at the whites who profit from and facilitate their presence.

He is less surgical and discerning in choosing his white victims, both during the war of liberation and the subsequent “cleanup.” Covington’s death list contains not just white operatives and allies of the regime, but three whole categories of individuals: lawyers, race-mixers (meaning anyone who has had interracial sex, regardless of issue), and homosexuals. This is problematic, because if white nationalism begins making progress in the Northwest, these views will be broadcast far and wide to scare white people away from white nationalism and into conformity with the system that is killing us. Beyond that, these lapses are at odds with the generally rational and pragmatic character of Covington’s political thought.

First, spare the lawyers. Although killing lawyers has the authority of the Bard, and everyone enjoys a good lawyer joke, among white nationalists of my acquaintance, lawyers are the best represented profession. Thus it seems foolish to treat all lawyers as enemies, since this will drive otherwise sympathetic and useful individuals into the arms of the system for protection.

Second, it is easy to understand why white nationalists see homosexuals as enemies, since the organized homosexual community is an integral part of the anti-white governing coalition. Beyond that, white nationalism is steeped in a right-wing, conservative subculture with strong currents of anti-homosexual sentiment, which are constantly stoked by the organized homosexual community.

But Covington’s stated rationale for murdering homosexuals is that homosexuality is a mental illness. I think that homosexuality is neither a sin (an offense against the God of the Jews) nor an illness, but rather it is something that might be called a “natural suboptimal condition,” like baldness or myopia or a propensity to pack on the pounds.

But let’s just grant Covington’s premise for the sake of argument. So what about all the other mental illnesses? Covington does not mention if melancholics, manic depressives, schizophrenics, paranoiacs, compulsive liars, kleptomaniacs, alcoholics, and other sufferers of mental maladies will be marked for death.

The reason for this is obvious: homosexuals are marked for death not because they suffer from a mental illness, but because the Bible—the Jewish Torah—tells us so. This is probably the source of the extreme animus toward race-mixers as well. It is, to put it mildly, a rather astonishing lapse. It makes it all too easy to parody white nationalists as Bible-thumping hayseeds and hillbilly psychopaths.

It also serves to drive otherwise sympathetic and useful individuals—who might be guilty of nothing more than an experimental homosexual or inter-racial dalliance while in college or the military, where such experimentation is common—into the arms of the system for protection.

What would Aryan reason, as opposed to Jewish superstition, dictate in dealing with homosexuals and race-mixers?

First, it is no policy or solution to postulate that when a white nationalist state is founded it will simply chase away or kill the homosexuals on its territory, for inevitably new homosexuals will appear (it does not matter whether by nature or nurture or both). Furthermore, these individuals will manifestly not be “one of them” (the anti-white ruling coalition) but “one of us” (a racially-conscious white person, raised in a racially homogenous and self-conscious society).

On Covington’s premise, the policy a rational society adopts to homosexuality is an instance of the larger policy it should adopt toward mental illness. The appropriate attitude toward mental illness is not hatred but pity and compassion. It is reasonable to fear the unknown, but unreasonable to persist in one’s ignorance. The idea that homosexuality should be treated as a crime is a relic of benighted times when people thought that other mental illnesses were evidence of witchcraft or demonic possession and should be “treated” by torture and burning at the stake.

Mental illness is not a crime. If mentally ill people commit crimes, we punish the crimes, not the illness. Thus it would be inhuman to exile or kill our relatives simply because they suffer from manic depression or paranoia. It would be arbitrary to treat homosexuality any differently. If homosexuality is a mental illness, not a crime, then it should be treated as an illness. If it can be cured, then cure it. If it cannot be cured but can be lived with, then live with it. If it is genetically determined, then screen for it and try to decrease its representation in the next generation. (If homosexuality has a genetic component, then homosexuals should not be encouraged to “pass” as straight and pass on their genes to their children, but to live as homosexuals and take their genes out of the next generation.)

In a healthy society, people should, of course, be free to associate with or avoid homosexuals just as they are free to associate with or avoid people who suffer from other mental maladies. But to determine rational policies and attitudes toward homosexuality, one would have to compare it to other such illnesses. One would have to determine whether homosexuals are more or less reliable friends, colleagues, and comrades than, say, manic depressives, alcoholics, or compulsive liars.

Of course there would be no problems excluding homosexuals from the pup tents of boy scouts, the locker rooms of school children, or the barracks of the military. There would be no nonsense about homosexuals marrying or adopting children, which seeks to erase the distinction between the normal and the abnormal. Should society also be expected to provide everyone who thinks himself Napoleon a coronation and everyone who thinks himself Jesus a crucifixion?

The question of race-mixing is more complicated. First, the problem is not interracial sex or marriage per se. The problem is interracial babies. Of course there are no interracial babies without interracial sex, but not all interracial sex produces babies. The problem with multi-racial societies is that inter-racial sex is inevitable, because it is perfectly natural and normal for people to take advantage of a wider range of possible mates and sexual partners.

Many racialists claim that they are immune to inter-racial attractions, that they have some sort of genetic aversion. This may well be true of a tiny percentage of people, but it is surely not true of most. There may well be an instinct for mating with one’s kind, but there is no reason to think that this instinct will always trump the other instincts under certain circumstances, particularly given the power of the sex drive.

For instance, the person who had the single greatest influence on my awakening on race and the Jewish question obviously had a great deal of instinctive feeling for his own kind. But that feeling was insufficient to trump his conflicting desires for a home and a family with a woman who has not corrupted by feminism and American junk culture. So he ended up marrying a woman from the Philippines. The marriage was without issue, thank goodness, and it did not last. Now he is married to a white woman who has given him three sons. Yes, he made a potentially terrible mistake, but the idea that this man has committed a capital offense is ludicrous.

Interracial sex is not only inevitable in a multi-racial society, it is being relentlessly promoted by every organ of the establishment. (The same is true of the normalization of homosexuality.) The propaganda is particularly intense on college campuses, where sexual experimentation has always been more common. The number of college students who have had interracial dalliances is already quite high, and if present conditions continue, it will rapidly reach the point of saturation. (We will soon have a better idea if some are genetically immune to the lure of exotic flesh.)

But the percentage of these dalliances that turn into long-term interracial relationships, much less marriage and child-rearing, is still small. Indeed, some such encounters may be the first steps down the road to a full racial awakening. (This is true of one young woman of my acquaintance, who was raped by her black boyfriend.) Again, the idea that these people have committed not just a mistake but a capital crime is offensive to reason. These people are victims of our present regime, not criminals.

What then should be the attitude of a white nationalist regime to race-mixers? First, all whites who produce offspring with members of other races have, in effect, left our race for another. One cannot mix one’s blood without mixing one’s loyalties. We cannot reasonably expect that such people will be more loyal to their extended racial family than to their mixed-race children, and no white nationalist would ask them to. They could not, therefore, be citizens of a white ethnostate (much less would-be white nationalist leaders). Whites who have married non-whites without offspring or prospects of offspring clearly belong to a different category, but it is not clear that a different policy should apply.

As for whites who have had sexual relations with non-whites, or who married but then divorced non-whites without producing children: they should be able to become citizens of a white ethnostate without penalty. But this would not be possible without somehow addressing the irrational yet powerful antipathy they arouse in some racialists.

For the offenders, there needs to be a process of confession, contrition, cleansing, and atonement to incorporate them into a self-conscious white nation. Ideally, such a truth and reconciliation process should be modeled on a religious ceremony (how about a bath, for starters) rather than a legal proceeding if the atonement it produces is to be heartfelt and enduring.

But racialists need to change too. There is a larger principle here that applies to more than just sexual matters. A healthy new society can be made only by and from the products of today’s sick society. White nationalists are not an Elect, chosen by genes or by God to be immune to the corruptions of our age, thus licensing us to smugly look down upon and condemn the rest of humanity.

If there is any hope of our people at all, then most of them are capable of seeing the light, and the only thing that sets today’s white nationalists apart from them is . . . time. We saw first, but we will never be saved until they see as well.

This means that there is no room self-righteousness and much room for compassion. Indeed, the leaders of any revolution are likely to be worse rather than better than the average person in important respects. Not only are they imperfect to begin with, but given the dark necessities of revolution, they are likely to be monsters in the end. They may be creating a better world—but not for themselves.

Covington shows that he understands this in many subtle and funny ways. For instance, in The Hill of the Ravens, he remarks on how the veterans who created the Northwest American Republic shock their own grandchildren with the vulgar language and tastes inherited from Amurrica. Also, Covington’s self-portrait as “the Old Man” is hardly flattering and shows that he too is out of place in the republic he helped create.

Until we breed a race of flawless Nietzschean Supermen, we will have to muddle through with people who have a short list of essential virtues (honesty, courage, intelligence, loyalty, good-judgment, initiative) and a rather longer list of inessential flaws and past mistakes. No, I am not recommending that we try to get mileage out of creeps and kooks. Just virtuous, talented, committed, imperfect people.

Within the movement, we need to be willing to tolerate inessential flaws and past mistakes on the condition that people are honest and transparent about them. One can build with flawed materials, but only if one knows where the flaws are. We don’t want to put the guy who is hiding his dyslexia in charge of editing, the guy who is hiding his agoraphobia out distributing literature, an insecure buffoon in charge of picking up a VIP, or a creepy compulsive womanizer among the wives and daughters of comrades, etc.

A weakness is compounded by concealment. It does not become a virtue by being flaunted. But when one is willing to acknowledge one’s flaws, that is the first step toward rising above them. It is an opportunity for moral growth, a way of strengthening one’s character. Thus we have to penalize concealment and reward transparency.

For a white nationalist revolution to have any moral authority, its leaders must not just lead us to regaining control of our racial destiny. They must also lead us in self-criticism, self-purification, and atonement with the greater racial body.

Bibliographical Note:

The novels of the Northwest Quartet are:

The Hill of the Ravens
H. A. Covington
Lincoln, Nebr.: 1stBooks Library, 2003

A Distant Thunder
H. A. Covington
Bloomington, Ind.: Authorhouse, 2004

A Mighty Fortress
H. A. Covington
Bloomington, Ind.: Authorhouse, 2005

The Brigade
H. A. Covington
Philadelphia: Xlibris, 2008

Basically, I am skeptical of the idea of a Northwest Homeland, but not opposed to the movement. If White Nationalists want to relocate to the Pacific Northwest, I wish them the best of luck. A comrade of mine is a frequent traveler in the region. He is very impressed with Wyoming and Idaho. I think he plans to relocate there eventually. The Northwest has some of the best scenery in America: Crater Lake, Yellowstone, Glacier National Park. If we could establish a base in the region, it would undoubtedly be a huge victory for us.

Therein lies the problem: the Northwest’s great advantage (its relative whiteness) is also its greatest disadvantage. Non-Whites are less numerous in the region. As a consequence, Whites in the area have less daily exposure to the horrors of diversity and are less racially conscious than their counterparts elsewhere. It is easy for Whites to ignore America’s racial decline and live a quiet life in Northwest suburbia. There is no material incentive to take the risk of joining a revolutionary organization like the Northwest Volunteer Army.

The people who “get it” in the Northwest – who are explicitly racial – are often migrants from other parts of the Union. Covington himself is from North Carolina. According to Leonard Zeskind, there are about 30,000 hardcore White Nationalists in America. If every single one of these people moved to the Northwest tomorrow, an extremely unlikely scenario, and united behind a single dynamic leader and common political platform, an even more unlikely scenario, they would be roughly the size of a small town. White Nationalists are not sufficiently cohesive or numerous to form a viable secessionist movement in Oregon, Idaho, and Washington.

Local resistance could prove an insurmountable problem. The Democrats have carried Washington and Oregon in every presidential election since 1988. Millions of White liberals live in the Vancouver-Seattle-Portland corridor. The coastal region of the Pacific Northwest is one of the most liberal regions of the United States. Obama won 70% of the vote in King County, Washington (Seattle) and 77% of the vote in Multnomah County, Oregon (Portland). I can’t envision a scenario in which diehard Obama voters would flock to the Northwest Front.

The Pacific Northwest doesn’t have a cultural, regional, or ethnic identity comparable to the American South. Whites in Seattle, Tacoma, and Portland don’t feel a sense of kinship with Whites in Boise, Couer d’Alene, and Helena. They didn’t flock to the side of Randy Weaver at Ruby Ridge, Bob Mathews in his shootout in Whidbey Island, or Gordon Kahl in Montana. The Northwest might have a history of Aryan enclave radicalism, but it hasn’t penetrated the surrounding local culture. There isn’t a pre-existing cultural foundation for Whites to rally around.

This can be contrasted to the Antebellum South in the 1850s. Southerners were committed to the preservation of white supremacy. A broad consensus existed in the South that the Union was a compact of sovereign states. A revolutionary vanguard had worked for thirty years to sow the seeds of disunion in South Carolina. The planter class was committed to the preservation of their “domestic institution.” Slavery divided Americans along geographic lines. Secessionists held elected office in all the Southern states. Southerners were united by culture and kinship. Southerners, with their large non-White servile population, had many reasons to fear a “Black Republican” takeover of the federal government.

These vital ingredients are missing in the Pacific Northwest. The region isn’t Ireland, Ukraine, or the Confederacy. Perhaps a band of idealistic Aryan warriors could take up arms against the government and inspire the apathetic masses? The track record of White Nationalist groups like The Order or White Patriot Party doesn’t inspire confidence. The most likely outcome of a government crackdown on an underground vanguardist army would be White Nationalists turning on each and cooperating with the feds like what happened at the Fort Smith Trial.

To his credit, Harold Covington has stressed the importance of character. He is right to focus on this. You can’t build a sand castle with manure. White Nationalists don’t have a sufficient number of men of character to launch a successful secessionist movement anywhere in the United States. Only a fraction of the most diehard White Nationalists would be willing to uproot themselves and relocate to the Pacific Northwest with their families. Only a smaller fraction of them would be willing to risk life and limb for a White homeland.

The federal government is too powerful. I’m less inclined than ever before to believe the system will collapse in the near future. Some have claimed the feds are incompetent. I would argue that they have had a lot of success in penetrating the White Nationalist underground and disrupting our organizations from within. Bill White is going to prison merely for running his mouth. I don’t see anything like a sustained White Nationalist resistance to the federal government (crack one cell, another takes its place) emerging anytime soon.

In our own times, the Northwest Volunteer Army and Northwest Republic properly belong to the realm of fiction. If Covington is serious about this idea, he should focus his energies on practical achievable goals. It would be a huge step forward to get all the racialists who currently reside in the Northwest in regular communication with each other. To my knowledge, the Northwest Front hasn’t progressed that far yet. The next step would be holding state and regional meetings in the real world. The next step after that would be recruiting candidates for a new regional organization.

This organization could then do an exhaustive investigation of local racial attitudes and voting preferences. The Northwest Front could send out some professionally designed direct mail to targeted households sympathetic to traditional cultural values and anti-government rhetoric. It could design a political platform that appeals to a significant cross section of voters in the Northwest and start building a fundraising base. This makes more sense than lashing out at black helicopters with a bazooka. There are a number of steps that come before White Revolution.

I think a Northwest Homeland would be a much tougher mountain to climb than a Southern Homeland. It would be easier to create a base in states like Alabama, Mississippi, and South Carolina where the locals are already receptive to racialism and resent the federal government. The racial diversity of the Deep South provides more opportunity for confrontation and racial combustion. Southerners also have an ethnic identity to fall back on and a tradition of secession.

If Harold Covington is interested, this is a debate we should be having.

Occidental Dissent, March 8, 2010

Other Occidental Dissent articles on the same topic:

Gregory Hood, “What the ‘Old Man’ Gets Right — And Wrong,” March 8, 2010
Gregory Hood, “RE: Covington — An Apology,” March 8, 2010

Zeskind notes that there has been an increase in discussion of secession and racial partition. He mentions the creation of Harold Covington’s Northwest Front, but predicts nothing will come of it because of Covington’s controversial past.

Zeskind also mentions TOQ and our “Secession and Racial Nationalism” essay contest:

The Occidental Quarterly, with half a dozen PhDs on its advisory board, has emerged as the central address for the most advanced strategic thinking among intellectual antisemites, scientific racists and anti-immigrant white nationalists.

Zeskind then mentions Michael O’Meara’s prize essay “Toward the White Republic.”

I have been editing our special issue on Secession and Racial nationalism, and I have been again impressed by the quality of the entries. Dr. O’Meara’s prize essay was the best, but the best in a crowded and highly competitive field. Of the 19 entries, nine will be published in TOQ, including the prize essay, and a tenth has already been published on TOQ Online.

The purpose of TOQ‘s essay competitions is precisely to solidify our position as “the central address for the most advanced strategic thinking among intellectual antisemites, scientific racists and anti-immigrant white nationalists” by encouraging the best minds in our movement to apply themselves to issues of vital importance to our people’s survival and flourishing.

Click here for details on our next essay contest, on “Libertarianism and Racial Nationalism.”

For reviews of Zeskind’s Blood and Politics: The History of the White Nationalist Movement from the Margins to the Mainstream, click here and here.

TOQ: I really enjoy your novels. I have reviewed the Northwest Quartet, and I have also read Slow Coming Dark, Fire And Rain, and most recently The Stars In Their Path, as well as the collection Other Voices, Darker Rooms. Who are your main literary influences? Which of your works are your favorites and why?

Harold Covington: My father was a reader of pulp science fiction back in the 1950s and 1960s, and he had these big cardboard cartons of old sci-fi paperbacks in the basement, including a lot of the old Ace doubles that went for 50 cents in those days and would probably go for a couple of hundred bucks apiece today if you could get hold of an intact copy. They were written by all the sci-fi greats of the 50s and 60s: Robert A. Heinlein, Brian Aldiss, Philip K. Dick, Alfred Bester, Edmond Hamilton, Alan E. Nourse, Andre Norton, Ray Bradbury, etc. Those were my first bulk reading, and then starting about age 14 I somehow (don’t remember how) discovered H. P. Lovecraft, and that was love at first sight. I still lug around three-volume Arkham House set of his complete works with me wherever I go.

My Northwest novels are purely political polemics, wherein I say things that wouldn’t be politic to say openly in any other context. They are for the purpose of imparting ideas and disseminating practical information using what Lenin called “Aesopian Language,” the language of fable. My actual fiction as such, novels like The Stars In Their Path, The Renegade, Vindictus, etc. aren’t really “influenced” by anyone or anything. They’re just stories I get into my febrile brain and which I have to purge by telling them and letting them out.

As to my favorites, excluding the Quartet, which don’t count because they’re not really novels in the true sense of the word, I’d have to say that The Madman and Marina [in Other Voices, Darker Rooms] is the best short piece I’ve ever done. It may possibly even be the best piece, period—I once had an e-mail correspondent in St. Petersburg tell me he didn’t believe that my name is Covington, that I had to be a Russian writing under an American pseudonym, because only a Russian could produce such a Dostoyevskyan story. I consider that to be the best review I’ve ever had.

Personal favorite among the long novels? The Stars In Their Path, I’d say. Like all my other books it tells a story, but I use reincarnation as a device to keep on telling the same story over and over and over again, a different way each time and with different characters, rather than draw the same plot out to 100,000 words of padding. I think that was neat, if I do say so myself.

TOQ: In the Northwest Quartet and Fire And Rain, I was especially impressed with how you can blend intense drama with light comedy, classical eloquence with pop-culture slang and vulgarity. Joss Whedon and Quentin Tarantino came to mind. Do you pay attention to popular culture? Do you watch movies or television? Name some favorite writers, directors, movies, TV shows.

Harold Covington: I don’t watch television any more, and haven’t for a long time. It’s not just that it’s Judaized to the max and politically nauseating, it’s just stupid. Moronic. I glance over hulu.com every now and then, and I don’t see anything on there that prompts me to get cable again. Why pay $75 a month for drivel?

Movies are another matter. DVDs from the Blockbuster bargain racks are about the only form of recreation I can afford, besides a library card. In that sense yes, I have managed to keep up with enough popular culture, especially among young White people (negrofied though that culture is) so that I can make my young characters believable. I think so, anyway. None of my youthful readers have complained so far.

There are certain movies that just plain creep me out, like Naked Lunch, and there are certain flicks I find fascinating because they’re just plain bizarre, like Dark Star and the American version of Kingdom Hospital, which IMHO is the just plain weirdest thing ever shown on television. My own DVD collection includes Henry the Fifth, (Kenneth Branagh version), Zulu, The 13th Warrior, The Outlaw Josey Wales, and a few oddballs from the 70s like Time After Time and Absolution. I gave some friends of mine the first five episodes of Sharpe’s Rifles. I like a lot of escapist swashbuckling stuff, as you can tell.

TOQ: Do you plan to write any more novels?

Harold Covington: At this point I would say probably not. I’m pretty much NVA’ed out. There is a limit to what can be accomplished through fantasy and the creation of a fictional mythos. If I have not yet succeeded in imparting a vision of possibility to our people in the four Northwest novels already extant, I probably never will. I am concentrating henceforth on trying to turn the vision into reality through the Northwest Front, the “Party” of the novels, and it’s a five-star bitch. Getting “our” people to peep out from behind their computers and commit a real live physical act out here in the real world is like pulling teeth. Half of my contacts I can’t even get to respond to an e-mail.

I still have some bits and pieces of novels and stories lying around in manuscript form and on my computer, plus some ideas I’d like to play with if I ever get the time and the right situation (like the long prison sentence on some ridiculous fabricated charge which I’m sure our lords and masters would like to oblige me with). The main one is a kind of adult version of the Harry Potter series where a secret society of powerful Aryan spirits operating in a kind of nether world one step above this dimension use their magical powers to try and reverse the destruction of our people wrought by the Sauron-like Jewish overlord of the Dark World, although it would hopefully come across a little more convincing than that. I doubt I’ll ever get around to it, though. I need to concentrate what time I have left on building something in the real world.

Read Part 4 here.

Harold Covington: The internet is a reality of 21st century life. I understand and accept that. It can no more be un-invented than gunpowder or nuclear power can be un-invented. The Net has become a necessary evil, but an evil nonetheless, in my opinion.

For one thing, the internet is largely sterile politically. It produces almost nothing except more Net. Somebody sees a great pro-White web site and they are inspired with enthusiasm—to build another web site. There is this immense disconnect between what is essentially a fantasy world in cyber-space and the real world out here where White people are unemployed and foreclosed White families are beginning to live in tent cities called Obamavilles.

The internet gives the White male a feel-good factor which he doesn’t have to earn. He sits down at his computer after work with a bowl of nachos and a few cold brewskis, he plays around on VNN or surfs the web looking for racial stuff, maybe he makes a post or two, and then at the end of the evening he gets up and staggers off to bed with the feeling that he has accomplished something, but he hasn’t. All he has done is to generate words, and words are no good on earth if they never translate into physical action.

The internet provides the White male with a substitute for action, and with a place where he can hide. Yes, I understand that most of us have jobs and families and homes we have to protect, but the fact remains that at some point in time we are going to have to stand erect once more, like men, and not with our heads hung down and our eyes lowered and our feet shuffling in the presence of our Jewish and liberal lords and masters. The internet does not facilitate the strengthening of the one ancient virtue of our people which we need most of all to re-discover: simple physical courage.

Finally, the internet provides something that our highly dysfunctional people cannot resist: consequences-free misbehavior. This is not just a Movement phenomenon; it’s a White thing. The internet is a looney bin, and everyone knows it. The internet is where sick and twisted and often quite deranged people go to vomit. I have never seen anything like some of the filth, the depravity, the idiocy, and the just plain raving madness that I find on the internet every day. I know quite ordinary and apparently stable, functional, and successful people who sit down behind that keyboard, and all of a sudden they get a visit from Mr. Hyde. You’ve heard of discovering one’s Inner Child? It’s like the lure of consequences-free misbehavior on the internet unlocks some people’s Inner Nut.

All of this having been said, the internet remains the only medium of mass communication we have access to, the only place that provides anything remotely resembling a level playing field, which is probably why the Jews and the government hate it so much. Love the internet or hate it, we seem to be stuck with it.

TOQ: Many of our people dwell on negative signs, and there are plenty of them. Do you see positive signs? Do you think there are good reasons for hope?

Harold Covington: Oh, yes, certainly. So long as one doesn’t confuse hope with optimism.

For one thing, it is a historical truism that nothing last forever. This Francis Fukuyama rap about liberal democracy being the “end of history” is horse dung. Everything ends, and the present Zionist world order will end as well, quite possibly within the lifetime of those now born. It may not end the way we want it to end, and it may drag the White race and Western civilization down with it, but oh, yes, it will end. Our task in this and coming generations is to make sure that we survive the collapse of this massive evil, along with at least some semblance of Western civilization.

For another thing, for all our weaknesses and flaws we are still the most intelligent and potentially the bravest and most hardy race on earth. It takes more than 100 years of liberal brainwashing, political correctness, and McDonalds’ Happy Meals to contaminate and extinguish a whole human genotype. Deep down we are still the men our ancestors were, it’s just sometimes it’s so deep down we can’t read our genetic script.

We can do this thing. We can beat these bastards, any time we so choose. The question is, will we so choose? The Weltfiend is counting on his ability to obscure our racial light in a murk of questions, indecision, introspection, corruption, and apathy, to drag the whole world into the shades of grey in which the Jew thrives. If we can achieve moral clarity in our souls we will recover our courage, and when we recover our courage we will rip their hearts out.

TOQ: One of the things that most struck me about your Northwest Quartet is the attitude of high moral seriousness that these novels communicate, which I think is a valuable corrective to the movement’s general ethos of emotional self-indulgence. But you are better at communicating this than I am. Most white nationalists accept that our race is facing oblivion. What more do they need to get serious?

Harold Covington: The stock answer to that is that things have to get so bad that every White man, woman and child is personally affected in their own lives by the current crisis of civilization. They must lose their houses, their jobs, their SUVs and their plasma TVs and all that nice cold beer in the fridge. This is certainly true as far as it goes, and it is now at long last beginning to happen during this onset of the Obama Depression.

But I believe that more has to happen. There has to be a genuine spiritual awakening that burns away the past several generations of excrement that the Jews have caked around our souls. Our people must once more learn to value something higher than their own private lives and their own creature comforts. I personally found this in National Socialism, others find it in religion, but one of the advantages of turning this into a colonial war is that it allows for the creation of a new (or rather old) idealism in our hearts, a secular nationalism that aspires to the creation of a new country, free of alien oppressors. That will work. Ask the Irish.

TOQ: Early in your career, you were an avowed National Socialist. How has your thinking changed since then? In your view, what are the enduring truths in National Socialism, and what are its limitations?

Harold Covington: I am just as much a National Socialist now as I ever was. The enduring truth of National Socialism lies in one slogan: “Our race is our nation.” National Socialism affirms the primacy of race over lesser aspects of human existence such as religion and nationality.

I have, however, come to realize that most Americans are totally spiritually unequipped to accept such a doctrine. They don’t speak the language. They simply haven’t been engineered that way, and of course 70 years of Jewish hate propaganda, misrepresentation, and distortion hasn’t helped. Back in my youth in the old Party, we had the idea that through a process of long and slow education we could wean a sufficient number of our people away from the Jewish narrative and make them see the truth, but we didn’t do so hot at that, and now we are out of time. Simply and starkly, it’s about racial survival now, and that has to take first place in our strategy.

In order to convince people, you must first put yourself on a credible basis of communication with them, and you can’t do that by immediately confronting them with symbols and ideas that they have been conditioned from birth to reject. Every essential principle of National Socialism has a perfectly reasonable and understandable circumlocution that can be used within the American context so as to bypass the socially-engineered rejection mechanisms which have been implanted in White people’s brains. Call it National Socialism Lite, if you will. I don’t like it, but the urgency of our racial crisis overrides my personal feelings.

TOQ: What are the books, writers, and historical events that have most shaped your particular version of white nationalism?

Harold Covington: Besides National Socialist works and history? First and foremost there is the life and work of Commander George Lincoln Rockwell. There’s the American Civil War, of course. I was born and raised in the last of the Old South, when it was considered entirely normal to have Confederate flags on one’s possessions and when it was still possible to see Confederate heroes positively portrayed on TV and in comic books, etc.

Easter 1916 and the Irish War of Independence is another obvious example. I think the situation in Ireland in the 1920s is probably as close a parallel to our situation today as can be drawn. Later on we may draw some insight from the Spanish Civil War, which I always liked—the last war the good guys actually won.

My main Movement mentors were Major William Gaedtke, the last head of the old America First Committee (the Lindbergh one) and Pastor Robert Miles. They taught me the ropes. I learned a lot from Matt Koehl as well. I never thought I’d say this, and I still don’t agree with what Koehl did to the NSWPP, but after three decades I now understand why Koehl did a lot of the things he did.

Read Part 3 here.

Read Greg Johnson’s review of Harold Covington’s Northwest Quartet here.

Harold Covington: I was born in Burlington, North Carolina in 1953. I had my first dose of racial reality at age 15 when I was thrown into an integrated high school in Chapel Hill, NC which was bad by the standards of the day (1968) but which of course was a kindergarten compared to the racial situation that exists in our schools today. All we had to worry about back in my time was blacks with knives rather than organized gangs and drug dealers armed with semi-autos, and of course there were the hippy-dippy SDS type radicals, many of whom I noticed even at the time appeared to be Jews. Homosexuals didn’t even come into the equation back in those days, and the drugs at school were just beer and grass and LSD, not ecstasy or coke or crack.

I won’t go off into a long digression about the various horrible racial experiences I had in high school, but on the day I finally left there, I looked back and made a silent personal vow that I would devote my life somehow to making sure that no young White person ever again had to go through what I had to go through in that place. Again, I didn’t realize how relatively mild my problems had been and how terrible things would become in my lifetime.

For reasons I won’t get into, basically having to do with the fact that my father was a psychopath, he ordered me out of the family home and I went into the United States army at 17. My experiences in the military provided a further dose of racial reality, although once again I understand they were nothing compared to what young White enlistees go through nowadays when the military has in desperation lowered the recruitment criteria to include drug addicts, criminals, gang-bangers, etc.

I did my basic at Fort Polk, Louisiana and then was sent for infantry training at Fort Jackson, South Carolina and Ranger School at Fort Benning, Georgia. At Fort Jackson I picked up a paperback book in the day room called The Order of the Death’s Head, by a German named Heinze Höhne. Rare among studies of the Third Reich, the book was actually reasonably objective, and it had the effect of more or less converting me to National Socialism. I remain a National Socialist in my personal outlook to this day. While I was stationed at Schofield Barracks, Hawaii I joined the National Socialist White People’s Party (NSWPP), which was founded by George Lincoln Rockwell, and was then run by a man named Matt Koehl. I formed a unit of a Party front group called the White Servicemen’s League and ended up getting discharged early, albeit under honorable conditions. Nowadays, of course, I’d probably end up in Leavenworth for it.

After I got out of the army I served on permanent NSWPP staff at the headquarters in El Monte, California under the now-legendary Lt. Joseph Tommasi, who was murdered in 1975. I then became editor of the Party newspaper White Power in Arlington, Virginia. In 1974 I worked for a construction company in Johannesburg, South Africa for about six months, and then went to Rhodesia and joined the Rhodesian Army. In 1976 I was deported from Rhodesia for my activities with the proto-NS Rhodesia White People’s Party, along with two of my fellow Americans, Eric Thomson and Jeffrey Spencer. That’s an interesting example of conservatives being our true worst enemy. I was deported on the personal orders of Ian Smith, and we all know what Mr. Smith’s conservatism did to Rhodesia.

From then on it was the usual long Movement history of different groups, different approaches, all of them pretty much dead ends because there basically isn’t anything that can be done on an all-America basis in order to reverse the terminal decline of Western civilization on this continent, at least not without the use of a level of armed force which practically speaking, the Movement will never have at its disposal.

In 1982 I more or less went on the run for five years due to a legal situation which I’m still not certain it’s completely safe for me to get into, given the paranoid nature of our lords and masters these days and their eagerness to find something, anything, to use as an excuse to plop me down in the cell next to Bill White and Matt Hale. I ended up in Ireland, which at that time had no extradition treaty with the USA, due to the embarrassment and political complications for the Dublin government which would be caused by possibly extraditing IRA men back and forth across the Atlantic.

I learned a lot in Ireland. I didn’t just hang out in pubs guzzling Guinness; I read all the newspapers and watched RTE and BBC Northern Ireland, I made trips into the North, I talked to certain people (very carefully) and I sat quietly in certain known IRA pubs nursing a pint or two of Smithwick’s, listening and observing very carefully. Basically, in Ireland, I saw how it’s done in the modern world, not in 1930s Germany, and it was an invaluable education.

It’s true the IRA didn’t win in the main sense of the term, but Communists though they are (and I know that) this small band of dedicated White working class men and women fought a major Western democratic military power to a standstill, and forced the Brits to buy them off instead of crushing them. Like Rocky Balboa, they went a full fifteen rounds with Godzilla and they were still standing at the end of it. The lesson I draw from this and other events in the past 20 years is that it can be done.

In 2000, in the aftermath of what Morris Dees did to Pastor Butler, I finally came out openly for territorial White separatism in the form of the Northwest Imperative.

TOQ: Can you explain the Northwest Imperative, and tell us how you came to believe in it?

Harold Covington: The Northwest Imperative is based on the conviction, an accurate one, that the United States of America in its present form is doomed, and that it is necessary to the physical survival of the White race that we establish a Homeland for all of our people worldwide somewhere on the North American continent. Economics, demographics, and logistics dictate that the best location for such a Homeland is here in the Pacific Northwest. In addition, we have a long history here of commitment and martyrdom here in the Northwest: Bob Mathews and the Order men, Sam and Vicky Weaver, Gordon Kahl, and our latest martyr from the Northwest Front, Jeff Hughes of Vancouver, Canada.

The essence of the Northwest Idea is to reduce the problem to manageable proportions. We are simply too weak, disorganized, and too few to take over the United States, and we need to accept that just ain’t gonna happen. Instead of a whole huge continent and 300 million mostly hostile people to worry about, we reduce the problem geographically and demographically to three and a half states with about 12 million people, mostly White. Given the inevitable coming implosion of the United States and the collapse of the central authority in Washington D.C., when they run out of money to pay their mercenaries, bureaucrats, and enforcers, the Northwest Imperative is do-able in a way that no other plan we’ve ever come up with is do-able.

The Northwest Imperative also reduces the problem to that of a colonial war, and there are numerous models from the last century as to how to wage and win a colonial war. The objective is to make the disputed territory ungovernable and turn it into a massive rathole down which the occupying power bleeds money, manpower, and resources until it can’t stand the hemorrhage any longer and cuts its losses. The most important statement in any of my Northwest novels, so important that I have various characters say it over and over again in all four books, is this: “In a colonial war, it’s never the generals who surrender. It’s the accountants.”

TOQ: Can you tell us what you are doing to promote the idea of a Northwest homeland and to prepare for its concrete realization?

Harold Covington: We have formed the “Party” of the Northwest novels, called the Northwest Front, although it isn’t really a Party yet and probably won’t be for some time. Right now it’s just what the name says, a broad front rather than a party. We have participation from people who are involved with other groups and from people who are involved with none. There is no formal membership status, no chain of command, and no hierarchy. We provide what support we can to anyone who lives here or who is willing to come here to the Homeland and work for Northwest independence.

Eventually that will have to change, of course. Eventually there must be a disciplined, fighting revolutionary Party of political soldiers, but that’s going to take us a while. White Americans are the sloppiest, laziest, most narcissistic and most undisciplined people in the world, and they simply can’t wrap their minds around a European concept such as the political soldier. Not yet. They will have to change, or they will perish from the earth.

Read Part 2 here.

Read Greg Johnson’s review of Harold Covington’s Northwest Quartet here.

Wouldn't it be nice if THEY would seceede from us?

“Is America, Too, Breaking Up? Or, Nothing Succeeds Like Secession”
from The Occidental Observer, September 16, 2009

To say that the last few generations have been a demographic disaster for many White populations around the world is an understatement. That Whites in America are now slated to fall to a mere half of the population by 2042 is but one of the more telling signs of this sad truth.

Firebrand Pat Buchanan has been aware of this threat for a long time and even wrote a searing book on the subject, The Death of the West: How Dying Populations and Immigrant Invasions Imperil Our Country and Civilization.

Recently, while returning from a conference in Europe, he had the chance to reflect on trends in America, and came to a possibly pessimistic conclusion, “Is America Coming Apart?”

We seem not only to disagree with each other more than ever, but to have come almost to detest one another. Politically, culturally, racially, we seem ever ready to go for each others’ throats….

In what sense are we one nation and one people anymore? For what is a nation if not a people of a common ancestry, faith, culture and language, who worship the same God, revere the same heroes, cherish the same history, celebrate the same holidays, and share the same music, poetry, art and literature?

Tellingly — for those who didn’t already know — Buchanan is talking about what most of us think of when we say “Whites.” And this pointedly excludes Jews, as indicated by the following: “The European-Christian core of the country that once defined us is shrinking.” Trust me, he has my full agreement on that definition of Whites.

Buchanan then asks us, “If a married couple disagreed as broadly and deeply as Americans do on such basic issues, they would have divorced and gone their separate ways long ago.”

And that, in short, is what I would like to write about today: Should America break up into more homogeneous parts, in large measure to assure the survival and eventual prosperity of Whites? In other words, is secession of one or more sectors of America a viable option?

Writers for The Occidental Quarterly (print and online) as well as those here at TOO have weighed in on the issue before. For example, a year ago editor Kevin MacDonald explicitly stated his case in the editorial “Secession and implicit whiteness,” writing, “Secession is certainly an option that has occurred to whites intent on preserving the traditional people and culture of the US.”

A chief reason that secession is an option is the widespread sense that the American system is beyond repair, at least with respect to the interests of Whites. As the TOO editorial noted, “44% agreed that ‘the United States’ system is broken and cannot be fixed by traditional two-party politics and elections.’” Further, in a 2006 poll released by CNN, 71% of Americans agreed that “our system of government is broken and cannot be fixed.”

The present system is indeed broken and cannot be fixed. And like it or not, it will continue to get worse either at the present rate or at an increasing rate as far as Whites are concerned. What to do, then?

First, study the problem and consider options. One could do worse than turn to Michael O’Meara’s award-winning TOQ essay “Toward the White Republic” for both. He wrote that

white nationalists at present have no hope of actually mobilizing the white populace in opposition to the existing anti-white regime. Rather, their immediate goal is to prepare the way for the development of a revolutionary nationalist vanguard to lead the struggle for white liberation. They aspire thus not to recapture the rotting corpse of the US government, but to free themselves from it — in order to be themselves, in their own land, in their own way.

Sam Dickson’s point at last year’s American Renaissance conference parallels this:

What I want is a homeland for my race, on this continent, and homelands for our people in Europe, in our lands of ancestral origin. . . . Is it extreme for us to ask for a homeland for our own people?

Note O’Meara’s take on how the system broke:

When the post-1945 National Security State, armed with its newly acquired “mandate of heaven,” endeavored to turn Roosevelt’s liberal-managerial state system into a world empire, premised on the belief that it was based on an idea, not a people, it launched what amounted to an assault on America’s historic identity — an assault whose overarching aim has been to undermine the population’s racial consciousness and promote ethnocidal practices facilitating its “demographic” reconstitution. The state’s “anti-racism” came thus to serve as an instrument of its social engineers, who sought to turn whites into herds of “tamed sheep [who] care not in which flock [they] are driven.”

O’Meara offers a growing framework for addressing this problem:

Secessionists surrender nothing but the slow death of their people. For among other things, secession is about survival — and the prospect of being able to fight another day.

To do that, one must live. But where, how?

For all practical purposes whites have lost the United States. Though still a near majority, we are surrounded by armed forces seeking our destruction; we are running out of ammunition, and the ground troops are being ordered in to clean up the remaining pockets of resistance. It looks as if we’re doomed.

Secession is a way of avoiding the deadly pincers closing in on white life.

In the last sixty years, absolutely NOTHING — not one little thing — has been accomplished to interrupt the programmed destruction of European America. . . .

But even if [reform is] feasible, what self-respecting white man would want to take back the United States, this monstrous, bureaucratic Leviathan whose Jewish, race-mixing, homophile, feminist, fraudulent, anti-Christian, and degenerate practices stand as an affront to everything his ancestors stood for.

The next question is, which sections should break away? Having grown up in one of the thousands of small White towns still left in America (look at the figures for Whites in such places even now: 94.25%, 95.41%, 98.14%, 93.13%), I know there is an enormous pool of potential recruits in this struggle, since these towns are at a minimum full of “implicit Whiteness” — the often unconscious attraction of Whites to other White people and to White culture. We were and are the people Buchanan and others are writing about. We’re part of “Red State” America, the landlocked eastern sector of “flyover country,” derisively named by those who think only New York, Los Angeles, and possibly San Francisco are worth their time.

Frankly, where I grew up, people didn’t think a whole lot of New York and New Yorkers, pretty much considering it and its inhabitants a foreign country — the John Rocker worldview, if you’d like.

Oh, I understand that our contempt for much of the Blue State world is returned by those who despise us. Sadly, they are largely in control of our culture (or what’s left of it, as they say), and we’ve had to endure their open hatred for decades now. Take novelist Philip Roth, for example. Today the geriatric Roth has become the paranoid and hate-filled Jew he had railed against forty years ago. This was abundantly clear by the time he released The Plot Against America (2005). Never mind that white Christian boys and men went to die for the Jews’ enemy in World War II in a very unnecessary war. Roth is still consumed with a vision of a Jew-hating goyish nation led by Charles Lindbergh.

Roth’s hatred has become so palpable that the review of The Plot Against America in The American Conservative concluded, “This is a repellent novel, bigoted and libelous of the dead, dripping with hatred of rural America, of Catholics, of any Middle American who has ever dared stand against the war machine.”

Last year we were treated to yet more goy hatred in Roth’s latest, Indignation, a book that even half-Jewish Christopher Hitchens hated. Attending a college in small-town America not unlike the ones I wrote about above, Roth’s Jewish protagonist can barely stand the locals:

More than a few times during the first weeks, I thought I heard myself being summoned to one of the rowdier tables with the words “Hey, Jew! Over here!” But, preferring to believe the words spoken had been simply “Hey, you! Over here!” I persisted with my duties, determined to abide by the butcher-shop lesson learned from my father: slit the ass open and stick your hand up and grab the viscera and pull them out; nauseating and disgusting, but it had to be done.

Years ago, Hollywood insider Ben Stein detailed what the coastal elites thought about the rest of the country. In his essay, “Whatever happened to small-town America?” he explored television’s pronounced hostility toward rural (read Christian) America. Overwhelmingly Jewish, the television elite, like its Hollywood counterpart, imagined that small-town goyim naturally meant harm to the Jews. “As a result, when he [a Jewish TV writer] gets the chance, he attacks the small town on television or the movies.” (See here for my thoughts on this phenomenon.)

As I said, it is Jews of Stein’s and Roth’s milieu that rule America, occupying the top ranks of academia, journalism, the legal system, Wall Street, Washington, as well as Hollywood and TV. Doesn’t this represent the kind of broken marriage Pat Buchanan alluded to? Might not it be past time for a divorce?

Respected military strategist William S. Lind thinks such split — secession in political terms — has a future in America. His important article, “Calling President Davis,” begins succinctly: ”Secession is in the air.” One of the many good points he makes is this:

If America breaks up it is likely to do so along non-geographic lines. Fourth Generation theory suggests that the new primary identities for which people are likely to vote, work and fight will not be geographical. Rather, they will be cultural, religious, racial or ethnic, ideological, etc. Following the sorts of massacres, ethnic cleansings, pogroms and genocides such Fourth Generation civil wars usually involve, new geographically defined states may emerge. But their borders will derive from cultural divides more than geographic ones.

Several White Nationalist thinkers such as the late National Alliance leader William Pierce, have turned to fiction to reach an audience not likely to sit through measured rational arguments calling for rebellion against the forces that oppress them. Lind too turned to the novel. Called Victoria, it incorporated Lind’s ideas about Fourth Generation warfare, positing a second American Civil War. It never found a publisher, however, which Lind blamed on Political Correctness. Be that as it may, “the idea of an American break-up,” he wrote, “is no longer off the charts.”

While Lind feels secession will come about along non-geographical fault lines, most other secessionists feel it will be based on contiguous territory. One of the leading writers in this camp is Harold Covington, a rather unusual individual, to say the least. Still, if we can learn from his novels, then it might be worth taking his ideas seriously. Besides, numerous pro-White bloggers have been making the case that reasoned argument will never move the masses. What is needed is style, or myth, as O’Meara argued:

All great movements . . . are driven not by rational arguments or party programs, but by their myths . . . For it is myth — and the memories and hopes animating it — that shape a nation, that turn a “motley horde” into a people with a shared sense of purpose and identity, that mobilize them against the state of things, and prepare them for self-sacrifice and self-rule.

TOQ editor Greg Johnson recently wrote a brilliant review of Covington’s secessionist novels, the so-called Northwest Quartet. Like O’Meara, he sees working within the current American system as a dead end:

Fortunately, we know that the US system is moving full steam toward catastrophes on a number of different tracks. The political system is captive to minority and foreign interests and cannot pursue the common good. Our Israel-first foreign adventurism and profligate welfare spending are economically unsustainable. Multiculturalism and non-white immigration are leading to the ever-intensified degradation and dispossession of whites, which can only lead to increased ethnic conflict. Affirmative action and corruption have filled the government with incompetent employees who are parasites at best and actively throttle productivity and sow social chaos at worst. Education and popular culture continue their descent. The system is dependent on ever-increasing technological sophistication to exploit diminishing natural resources, yet the demographic trends are profoundly dysgenic. Morons are reproducing faster than geniuses, and the political system enfranchises and caters to the morons, with their high time preferences and ignorance of the causes of order and wealth. Furthermore, as Sam Dickson has pointed out, the system apparently has no brakes. For example, even before Social Security was enacted, it was known to be unsustainable, but nothing has been done to solve the problem, only to postpone the final crash by a few election cycles. Of course the system might be able to survive one crisis at a time. But eventually several crises will converge, and the United States will not be able to survive intact.

I’ve begun A Mighty Fortress, the novel Johnson recommends as a good introduction to Covington’s work. One thing is for sure — Covington knows how to turn a phrase. For instance, he describes an attack on Federal troops this way:

The other major tickle out on Highway 169 was a simple Baghdad banger in a recycle bin beside the road. Humvee blown off the asphalt just out of Maplewood Heights. Three dead Fatties [Federal troops]. Pyrotechnics courtesy of Doctor Doom, some good old bathtub gelignite just like Mom used to make.

Or this rebel’s dialogue: “We may have to do another off-Broadway production, sir, as in offing somebody on Broadway.”

Or this apt contrast between the America of old and now. Rebels are fighting so that a girl “can grow up in the world of Jane Austen again, instead of A Clockwork Orange.”

Like other White Nationalist fiction writers, Covington notes the target of the current liberal regime: White males. He writes:

In the America of the early twenty-first century, it didn’t pay for a white man to look too sharp. White males weren’t supposed to hold their heads up, especially in the Northwest, where some alert FBI agent or Fattie might wonder just what the hell a white boy was looking so chipper about.

Ain’t that the truth.

To say Covington is politically incorrect is an understatement, at least judging by his prose. The worldview he creates in A Mighty Fortress is one in which Whites and Jews are at war with each other, as indicated in this dialogue about dealing with the U.S. government:

Some people might advocate that we accept some kind of half a loaf as a springboard for something better in the future, but history proves that doesn’t work with ZOG. With liberal democracy, you start at a certain level of moral and decent existence and then everything decays from there, kind of like radioactive half life. The United States started at an exalted level in 1783 and it decayed from that point on. Anywhere there are Jews, things only go downhill. The only hope that our people have for any kind of continued existence is the absolute removal of the Jew and everything the Jew has created from our lives, our consciousnesses, our hearts and our souls. We’re like the wolves, the buffalo, the damned spotted owls. We’re an endangered species. White people have to have their own safe habitat, clean and uncontaminated, if we are to raise our young, build up our numbers and thrive once again.

(Speaking of ZOG, readers have to see former Congressman James Traficant’s first post-prison interview on Fox. Beginning at about 6:30 he says “I believe that Israel has a powerful stranglehold on the American government. They control both members of the House, the House and the Senate. They have us involved in wars in which we have little or no interest. Our children are coming back in body bags. Our nation is bankrupt over these wars. And if you open your mouth, you get targeted. And if they don’t beat you at the poll, they’ll put you in prison.” See full transcript here.)

From what I’ve read so far in this novel, the rebel movement is heavily composed of working class Whites, which is not a surprise considering how hard they have been hit by globalization. I can sympathize because small towns like mine have been decimated by the offshoring of so much of our industry.

Still, there is a resilience that was echoed in a previous TOO editorial on secession:

An excellent recent example is the video “A Country Boy Can Survive” by Hank Williams Jr. All the people in the video are working class whites from ‘little towns all around this land’ far from the city: ‘You only get mugged if you go downtown.’ And there is the confederate flag—a remnant of traditional Southern culture. The theme is that country people can survive because of their ability to live off the land. The US political system is broken and can’t be fixed within the present political structure. But they will survive.

So too in A Mighty Fortress. The fighters are men like “Farmer Brown” who have paid a heavy price under the current regime. Meanwhile, elite Whites such as cardiologist Edward Shipman support the system because they benefit from it. I suspect, however, that as the novels progress, more and more high status Whites will join the secession movement as they realize that at a minimum the lives of the children and grandchildren will be greatly diminished under an anti-White regime.

Lest the point about the reality of the anti-White regime in North America is not getting through, I will offer three versions of it, in increasing severity.

*

First, Kevin MacDonald wrote:

In the multicultural America of the near future, gulags and anti-White totalitarian controls are at least as likely as [a] multicultural utopia. . . . And if they can’t be ruled out, there is a compelling moral case to be made that Whites should not enter willingly into such a world. If there is one thing we should have learned by thinking about the history of the 20th century, it’s that we should not believe in utopias.

*

Next, as Sam Dickson said at last year’s American Renaissance conference, “We need to understand that as far as the establishment that misrules our people all over the world is concerned, the only acceptable position on the future of the white race is genocide.”

*

Finally, consider the words of Andrew Hamilton:

Whether white survival ultimately takes the form of secession, reconquest, or even some newly-evolved type of genetically-based, non-territorial “peoplehood” . . . is less important, perhaps, than the realization of the obsessive hatred of the System for the white race. Whites can actively or passively accept it — and die — or they can fight it. The essential thing is to recognize with absolute clarity the uncompromising, nonnegotiable, genocidal character of the alien, anti-white System, and to oppose it with every fiber of one’s being on moral grounds.

Personally, I take these descriptions literally, as I’ve written about before (see also here).

But I wonder what could serve as a catalyst for the break-up of America, a galvanizing event that would set spark to fuel? A commentator on O’Meara’s essay painted this scenario:

What may be a true catalyst for Whites to find their opening to rebel—without fear of looking back and seeing no one behind them, is a full economic collapse, as simplistic as that may appear. Once some pot-bellied, PC-brainwashed, NFL-following White fool is scrambling to find a quart of milk for his children while seeing Uncle Sam take care of non-Whites to ensure their breeding, along with comfortable, arrogant Jews who will not be able to abstain from rubbing it in, all bets are off. I have been surprised over the last 18 months as to how many “regular people”— Whites whom I would not have thought aware of the level of Jewish responsibility for our current situation — remark privately on things that show they do have a grasp of what’s up, and who’s the major force behind it. People need a situation as catalyst, they need to feel a good number of people are in it with them, and they need leaders. Right now, it is tough for Whites to speak up, as “The Machine” goes in high gear against them. There goes your job. There go your friends. They might agree, but they have to feed their kids.

The time may indeed be near for that break-up. As Buchanan concluded: “E pluribus unum” — out of many, one — was the national motto the men of ‘76 settled upon. One sees the pluribus. But where is the unum? One sees the diversity. But where is the unity?”

When he asks, “Is America, too, breaking up?” one suspects the answer is “Yes.” But maybe that’s not such a bad thing. Time will tell.

A good way to see this is to analyze the military, political and social problems that Harold Covington’s Pacific Northwest secession movement would face. He suggests that Whites gather in Idaho, Oregon and Washington and use guerrilla warfare to form an independent homeland that is free of non-Whites.

He describes the homeland and the guerrilla warfare, in The Brigade, a tense, suspenseful thriller (Harold A. Covington, The Brigade [Bloomington, Ind.: Xlibris Corporation, 2008]).

The first critical problem with the homeland is that it would be too weak to survive. There are several test cases for this. These are small countries, not much different in size from the Pacific Northwest homeland.

The three Baltic countries, Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia have a combined population of just over 8 million people, similar to the number that the Pacific Northwest homeland would have. (Today the combined population of Idaho, Oregon and Washington is under 12 million.)

Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia once were parts of the Russian Empire. They seceded after the collapse of the Romanov dynasty, during the period of confusion, weakness and disorganization that the Russian Revolution caused. Joseph Stalin annexed all three of these countries in 1940. All it took him was a few meetings and phone calls. See Anatol Lieven, The Baltic Revolution: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and the Path to Independence (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1994).

Finland is another good test case. Like Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, it was part of the Russian Empire until it collapsed. Then Finland seceded, too. Finland, a larger country than Estonia or Latvia or Lithuania, was able to hold off a Soviet invasion for a while during the Winter War of 1939-1940.

Finland started with some big advantages. It had a large territory. It had deep snow and dense forests that confined Soviet invaders to roads. It had soldiers who could travel cross-country on skis, surround road-bound columns of Soviet troops and kill them. It had an excellent submachine gun which its soldiers used against Soviet invaders armed with outdated bolt-action rifles. It had an army with great courage and patriotism. Plus, Stalin had recently annihilated his army officer corps in a bloody purge.

Finland still had to sue for peace after a few weeks.

So, how powerful must a secessionist movement be in order to survive? How much industrial power must it have? How much territory? How many people?

Here in North America, the Northern conquest of the South is a definitive test of the possibility of secession.

By 1860 the South had lost control of the Presidency. It had also lost control of the House of Representatives because the voting population of the North was larger than the voting population of the South. The South still retained control of the Senate by a narrow margin, because the number of senators depended on the number of states.

Southern planters feared that, if they lost control of the Senate, the North would prevent them from expanding slave agriculture to any new states. They also feared that the North would outlaw slavery, once it took control of the Senate. See Marc Egnal, Clash of Extremes The Economic Origins of the Civil War (New York: Hill and Wang, a division of Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2009).

Southern plantation agriculture wore out the land. Planters abandoned worn out land and resettled new lands, further west. This made it very important to them that they could freely bring their slaves to new states.

Unable to solve this political problem, the South seceded. Lincoln decided that he must have his tariffs, so he called for 70,000 volunteers and launched what is so far the bloodiest war ever fought in the Western Hemisphere. The South was enough weaker than the North that it could not afford to make political or military mistakes. But it made them.

Four years of bloodshed proved that the South was not strong enough to secede without the permission of the North. It steadily and gradually lost, militarily, a battle that it had already lost politically before it seceded. Had the South been strong enough to secede without permission, it would also have been strong enough to defend its political interests without seceding.

Secession is an attempt by the politically weaker of two parties to solve, by leaving the field, a political problem that it is too weak to solve, either politically or militarily.

Only the weaker party in a political conflict would want to secede. Only the stronger party would be strong enough to secede without the permission of the other. However, the stronger party would not want to secede because it could force the weaker party to do whatever it wanted.

Covington suggests that military disaster at some distant part of the empire might make the United States too weak to hold on to the Pacific Northwest in the face of guerilla warfare. Maybe so. But this would give the homeland the kind of temporary safety that a Thanksgiving turkey enjoys.

Any place where a secessionist might want to live would be too valuable for the larger, stronger party to give up.

The Pacific Northwest, in particular, is far too valuable to secede in peace. It has valuable hydroelectric power, in a world hungry for cheap energy. The Columbia, its most important river, is 1,243 miles long. Puget Sound gives the Pacific Northwest well-sheltered, world-class harbors. It has a major naval base. Nuclear submarines silently travel its waterways.

What tactics would the United Sates use to keep anyone from forming any independent homeland in such a valuable place, without its permission?

Anything.

Writing in a neocon publication, US Army Colonel Ralph Peters (Ret.) said, “The point of all this is simple: Win. In warfare, nothing else matters. If you cannot win clean, win dirty. But win.”

Anyone who hopes to secede from the United States should expect it to use the same tactics that it has used before, whichever ones promise to work, whatever they might be.

What are these tactics?

Guatemala is a model case. Niall Ferguson, writing in The War of the World, described what happened there after a carefully-planned CIA coup d’etat that overthrew a democratically-elected Guatemalan government. (Niall Ferguson, The War of the World Twentieth-Century Conflict and the Descent of the West [New York: Penguin, 2006], 610-617.)

Paramilitary death squads, the Mano Blanca, roamed the cities and countryside. In the 30 years after the 1954 coup, some 40,000 people disappeared. Mayan Indian tribes were relocated and forced into “strategic hamlets.”

Ferguson says hundreds of villages identified as ‘red’ were obliterated and their inhabitants tortured, raped and murdered. Surrounding forests were burned. He says there was mass slaughter of civilians. By the end of the 1990s the death toll had reached around 200,000. Because there were so many Mayan victims a UN commission deemed that these deaths were genocide.

Afghanistan and Pakistan are two more models that we can use to predict what the United State government would do to secessionists. Eric Margolis, writing in World News Daily Information Clearing House, said that “Pakistan finally bowed to Washington’s angry demands last week by unleashing its military against rebellious Pushtun tribesmen of North-West Province . . .”

He said, “The Obama administration had threatened to stop $2 billion US annual cash payments to bankrupt Pakistan’s political and military leadership and block $6.5 billion future aid, unless Islamabad sent its soldiers into Pakistan’s turbulent NWFP along the Afghan frontier.” Pakistani armed forces used heavy artillery and gunfire from helicopters to kill Pushtun civilians.

Results came quickly.

Andrew Buncombe, writing in The Independent, said that as many as 2.4 million people fled Swat Valley. One man, aged 90, said that,” because there had been no warning to leave, when the gunfire erupted around them they gathered what they could carry and fled.”

The speed of the displacement, as helicopter gun ships fired on civilians fleeing the Swat Valley, reached 85,000 a day.

This terrorist tactic-firing heavy artillery at little villages and then pursuing fleeing villagers with gunfire from helicopters-could empty out every village and small town in the Pacific Northwest in a few weeks.

Where would refugees go after they were driven from secessionist villages and towns? They would go to camps, drawn there by promises of food, shelter and safety.

Most of these camps would be open-air prisons like the Gaza Strip, or the city of Fallujah, in Iraq, or the concentration camps where the British Army put Boer women and children during the Boer war. There would be harsh control of the perimeters of these camps, using earthen or concrete walls, razor wire, guard dogs, electrified fences, towers, mine fields and high-powered search lights.

All of these tools have been perfected and used. Any guerrilla fighters who remained outside the camps would be pressured to surrender when the women, children and old men in the camps began to die after being deprived of food, water, medicine and sanitation.

Torturers and assassins would visit the camps to cull interesting prisoners. They operated this way during the Phoenix Program in Vietnam. The founder of the Phoenix program, CIA officer William Colby, told a Congressional committee in 1971 that the Phoenix operation had killed 20,587 Vietcong suspects in two years (Hayden, 2008).

Writing in Small Wars Journal, Lt. Col. David Kilcullen advocated a world-wide Phoenix program. He went on to become chief strategist in the State Department’s counterterrorism office in 2005 and 2006 and was chief adviser on counterinsurgency operations to General Petraeus, in planning the 2007 US troop surge in Iraq.

Justin Raimondo reported that high officials at the top of the United States Government have operated an assassination ring. He says that Defense Secretary Gates, acting under the authority of President Obama, has appointed the operational leader of this assassination ring, Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, to head U.S. forces in Afghanistan.

It is a huge piece of good luck that government strategy and tactics would make secession impossible. Secession would be a terrible, self-inflicted disaster.

Secession gives the enemy the location of a small, compact target where it can land a fatal blow. It lets the enemy organize its own territory without interference and then use all of the resources of that territory for aggression.

Secession always means the voluntary loss of valuable territory. It loses strategic depth for fighting a war. It loses rivers, ocean front and harbors. It loses road grids and railroad networks. It loses power stations and hydroelectric dams. It loses minerals and arable land. It loses defensible terrain features such as mountain ranges. It loses industrial plants and built up areas.

Secession also loses people. For example a Pacific Northwest homeland would leave out most members of the largest White ethnic group — Germans. They mostly live in a huge semi-circle of land in the middle of the United States, with its diameter on the Canadian border. Their key cities are Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, Indianapolis, Milwaukee, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Pittsburgh, and St. Louis.

A Pacific Northwest homeland would also leave out most of the next-largest white ethnic group–the Irish. Oregon and Idaho are not even mentioned on the Wikipedia list of the twenty states with the largest population of Irish-Americans. Washington State has the 20th largest number of Irish-Americans.

And so it goes with all whites, whether they call themselves just plain Americans or mention descent from a specific white ethnic group. All whites are important. So any population transfer to implement any secession plan, of any sort, would be impossible. And that’s a good thing because secession would create hostile borders that would splinter families, kindreds, and ethnic groups.

There are three good, recent models for this: Berlin was partitioned into East- and West Berlin. Germany was partitioned into East- and West Germany. Korea was — and still is — partitioned into North- and South Korea. All of these have had — or still have — hostile borders that featured guard towers, road barriers, barbed wire, death strips enforced by mines, machine guns and guard dogs, passport & visa requirements, body searches and other snooping, as well as confiscations, arbitrary arrests and mysterious disappearances.

Borders destroy social capital. Population transfers from one place to another also destroy social capital. There are two different cases here. In the first case, a border partitions an area, leaving a population divided in two, with large numbers of people passively staying in place. In the second case, numbers of people respond to special appeals to move to an area that plans to secede.

People who would be willing to move, as single individuals, to some distant place where a movement is afoot to secede are especially likely to be loners, High Plains drifters — people not tied down by strong emotional commitments to others. They are especially vulnerable to exploitation by agent provocateurs, because so many of their interactions are with strangers.They can be entrapped by honey pots. Their social networks are likely to be relatively impoverished and easily penetrated by malicious strangers. Collections of them are likely to lack small unit cohesion.

People who stay in one place for several generations are likely to be embedded in a rich network of social relationships. Groups of these people have Einheit, the mutual trust and common outlook built by shared experience. They have agreed frameworks for doing things. They have a capacity for deep emotional attachments to each other. Their social arrangements are based on ancient acquaintance, so they are hard for malicious strangers to penetrate and exploit. People who stay in one place have rich mental maps of their physical and social territory. The value of their social networks is very high.

This makes them difficult for a social parasite to exploit.

A lot of thought and effort has been spent to destroy the social networks of American whites, to ruin our Einheit, make us flee from the centers of our cities and turn us into atomized individuals or tiny nuclear families. The key to this destruction has been alien control of the mass media.

Decades of hate speech about whites, in the mass media, has enraged Negroes and made them more and more bold in attacking whites. Mass media participated in these attacks by motivating them, giving them ideological cover, and carefully concealing their nature and full extent from whites. Monopoly ownership of mass media made it impossible for whites to organize a hue and cry to prevent further predation.

As a result, unorganized, individual white families fled from violent crime near the centers of cities to suburbs on the distant outskirts. They abandoned center-city land worth as much as a million dollars an acre, in today’s dollars, for land at the outskirts worth ten-thousand dollars an acre today. The economic loss to whites from this one factor alone is in the trillions of dollars. Typically whites sold sound, sturdy old houses on extremely valuable center-city land and bought brand-new houses on small parcels of nearly-worthless semi-rural land. Then their new houses began to depreciate to zero, while the land that they had abandoned in the center city skyrocketed.

The loss of social capital shows up in the reduced roaming radius that parents allow their children. A while ago, I talked with an older white man who probably was 65- to 70-years-old at the time we talked. He said that, as a 12-year-old boy, he rode his bicycle four or five miles to a hardware store. There he bought a 12-gauge shotgun for himself. Then he held it on his bicycle’s handlebars and rode home. Nobody thought anything about it, he said.

This would never happen now.

The loss of social capital also shows up in the loss of informal play. Mothers drive their children from one carefully-protected, formally-scheduled activity to another.

White flight — the individual search for safety from ethnic cleansing — has spread from cities to whole states. For example, whites are fleeing ethnic cleansing in California.

Secession is white flight extended to multi-state regions. Flight to a promised Pacific Northwest homeland, for example, is white flight to a multi-state region.

No matter how large the region to which whites flee, it cannot work. A key reason is that white people are wealth, like herds of cattle or flocks of sheep. White people provide valuable habitat and nourishment for parasites of all kinds. So these parasites follow us everywhere.

South Africa is a fine example. The first major permanent white settlement anywhere in Africa started in 1652 when the Dutch East India Company built a supply station for its ships in the vicinity of present-day Cape Town, South Africa. At that stage the nearest Bantu tribes were more than 1,000 kilometers from the Cape.

By the time the British occupied the Cape for the first time in 1795 it had a white population of about 26,000, an estimated Cape Colored population of 20,000 and a slave population of around 30,000.

During the lifetime of the Republic of South Africa Bantu colonists also flooded South Africa, drawn by labor contracts.

South African farmers — the Boers — fled from British control. Everywhere they went, the British followed them and annexed their territory as soon as they had done the hard, dangerous work of settling it. The Boers and their territory were too valuable for the British to leave alone.

In the beginning South African whites had a chance to create an all-white country of their own. However, relying on non-white labor gave white habitat away to non-whites. It gave non-whites a chance to out-breed whites and displace them.

The very slow, slow growth of the white population in the pre-Revolutionary thirteen colonies, of North America, is a measure of how hard and dangerous it is to convert wilderness to urban, improved habitat.

It took 150 years, from 1650 to 1780, for the population of the 13 colonies to grow from 4,600 to 2,780,000.That is an increase of only18,502 a year.

It took just 30 years, from 1970 to 2000, for the Hispanic population of the United States to grow from an estimated 9.6 million to an estimated 35.3 million. This is an increase of more 856,666 Hispanics a year, a mark of how free, easy and safe their increase is. http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/hispanic/hispanic.html

Early America offered slim pickings for Jews, except in the slave trade. There were an estimated 1,243 to 3,000 in the United States in 1790. When Whites finished the difficult, dangerous work of settlement, the Jewish population suddenly leapt from 230,000 to 280,000 in 1880 to 1,508,000 to 2,349,754 in 1910. This was just three years before they took control of the United States banking system with their Federal Reserve system. (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/usjewpop1.html)

None of these millions of newcomers paid their share of the cost of developing a high technological civilization in North America. None had built any roads, laid any railroad tracks, or built any bridges, dams or tall sky scrapers.

We Whites have helped non-whites dispossess us by giving our habitat away for free, after developing it at such cost. If we keep doing this, we will be extinct.

We must stop helping non-whites dispossess us. We must stop running away. We must stop giving free habitat to those who seek to dispossess us. We must take back our land.

Mister

Mister is available in the TOQ Online Bookshop

Imagine a novel that is a marriage of George Orwell’s classic Nineteen Eighty-Four and Jean Raspail’s depressing account of the genocide of Europeans, The Camp of the Saints.

As the definitive dystopian novel of our age, Nineteen Eighty-Four conjures up a world that has far too many parallels to our own day for comfort. For starters, the technocratic totalitarian State of the novel echoes loudly in forms we see today such as the Department of Homeland Security and Federal programs such as the Clinton-era Carnivore that could sift through all e-mail traffic.

The protagonist of Nineteen Eighty-Four, a government functionary named Winston Smith, develops an intense dislike of the cynical regime under which he must live, so he sets out to personally foil the omnipresent and omnipotent system of Big Brother. As is famously known, Smith is naïve in believing he can escape the system’s notice and is arrested, tortured and re-educated to love The Party like all other good citizens.

Raspail’s The Camp of the Saints (read the Preface here) is cut from different cloth. Unlike Nineteen Eighty-Four, it focuses on race and racial differences, where European whites are on the verge of extinction . . . “encircled by seven billion people, only seven hundred million of them white, hardly a third of them in our little Europe, and those no longer in bloom but quite old.” Boatloads of starving refugees from India head for the shores of southern France, packed onto the ship’s deck:

[I]t was like trying to count all the trees in the forest, those arms raised high in the air, waving and shaking together, all outstretched toward the nearby shore. Scraggy branches, brown and black, quickened by a breath of hope. All bare, those fleshless Gandhi-arms. And they rose up out of scraps of cloth, white cloth that must have been tunics once, and togas, and pilgrims’ saris.

In the end, these non-white multitudes overwhelm the native Europeans whose sentimental liberalism has prevented them from making the effort needed to save even themselves. The last holdout — mountainous Switzerland — succumbs as well, destined to suffer the fate of its fellow European nations, overrun by “the howling, swarming horde. Thousands of human ants, streaming down the zigzag path from Fontgembar, in an endless column, bristling with fists, and sticks, and scythes, and guns . . .”

Alex Kurtagic’s Mister features both the Orwellian logic of a highly technologized but dehumanized society and the inundation of Europe by non-white swarms. It is the story of an unnamed Brit who leaves his comfortable home outside London for a business trip to Spain. Known only as “Mister,” the protagonist is highly intelligent, at least in the fields of technology, business, and tax evasion. An apolitical gentleman, as Tomislav Sunic describes him in the book’s foreword, Mister exhibits a shocking shallowness that turns out to be central to both his impending predicament, as well as what has already befallen his less intelligent fellow white Europeans.

Kurtagic’s blog describes Mister and his setting:

A status-conscious IT consultant travels to Madrid for a week of meetings at Scoptic, who have hired him to implement a fiendishly arcane accounting system equipped with artificial intelligence, in an effort to keep the company one step ahead of the government’s rapacious tax authorities. Renowned within the catacombs of the scientific community, and with an impressive publishing record in the most prestigious trade and academic journals, he expects to do serious business with a serious organisation. The only problem is that he lives in a hot, overcrowded world where nothing works: hyperinflation, crumbling infrastructure, rampant crime, political correctness, corruption at all levels, and a new world order globalist government, determined to regulate, monitor, and tax every aspect of a person’s life; opposed to the forces of totalitarian democracy are occult underground movements, most notably the Esoteric Hitlerists. As a result, nothing goes according to plan, and frustrations mount as things go only from bad to worse . . .

Kurtagic is a master at creating a living, breathing impression of this nightmarish world, beginning on the very first pages where Mister prepares to board his British Airways flight:

By the time the announcement had been made in English, it was almost impossible to hear anything beyond the foreground murmur of human conversation. The gate had by then long disappeared behind a forest of boubous, abayas, burqas, and business suits, rising above a chaotic undergrowth of push-chairs, plastic bags, rucksacks, handbags, briefcases, and screaming children. Of course, the pre-boarding announcement had invited only a fraction of those standing, but it was clear to him that they all thought themselves in competition for space inside the overhead compartments inside the aircraft; their strategising had begun the moment they had entered the departure lounge, their eyes darting towards the front of the enclousure, scanning for empty seats and cunningly calculating optimal positions.

This Hobbesian sense of war of all against all never leaves us in the novel, which at 531 pages means the reader feels like he has dragged himself into the 23rd inning and still faces the prospect of more. Or, as Kurtagic noted in an interview with Sunic, it was meant to show “a process of strangulation” that would “overwhelm the reader.” That it does — in spades.

As mentioned, the central character is a shallow man, confusing fundamentally important things with superficial social standing and attire. Obsessed with brand-name clothing, Mister prides himself on his Gieves and Hawkes grey chalkstripe suit and sneers at those who possess less. Further, he appears clueless to the fact that the social norms operant in the recent past have little sway in the multi-racial, multicultural world of 2022.

Thus, when he is at first denied boarding of his flight, he bellows:

You did not follow correct procedure. You have not made the proper announcements, so the flight is not closed. So, please, log back on, swipe my boarding pass, check my passport, and let me through!… I paid for a service and you are refusing to provide it. If you do not let me through, I will make a formal complaint and sue British Airways for breach of contract.

While such threats from a “serious man” are successful this time, they appear comic once Mister has arrived in Madrid, the site of perpetual confirmation that nature is indeed red in tooth and claw. For now, however, he finds his seat back at Heathrow. Sad to say, his discomfort has only begun, for, as Kurtagic portrays, Mister is about to endure the assault on civilized senses that modern air travel has become.

One of 853 passengers, Mister shares his row in œconomy (Kurtagic favors archaic English spellings) with “a colourfully attired Afro-Caribbean woman, holding a crying infant on one of her prodigious mammaries, which rested on her giant thigh,” and an obese Chinese student who vomits into his airsickness bag before the plane has ever left the gate.

Mister’s growing thirst amidst the heat of the airline cabin foreshadows the heat and dryness of Spain. On the plane, “He pressed the cabin call button once more. It had no effect. His throat itched with desiccated asperity.” And this is even before take-off (and a long delay in which passengers must deplane). Once in the air, he is prevented from buying two small cans of juice (at €20 a pop) because airline rules limit passengers to one can only. Musing about the past, Mister recalls, “The ordinary cup of yesteryear had fallen victim to the rising cost of potable water. With Southern England’s reservoirs now in permanent crisis, and water consumption subject to a battery of climate levies, any beverage containing water had become an Oriental luxury.”

Having finally arrived at the airport in Madrid, Mister encounters the use of Spanish — as does the reader. Here Kurtagic begins his gambit of scripting conversations in Spanish: “‘Pare. ¿No lleva equipaje?’ said the first número. ‘No. No llevo,’ he replied.”

These conversations continue sometimes for half a page, with translations in 7-point font at the bottom. While this is a burden for the reader, it does add to the sense of being in a foreign country, as well as in a world that doesn’t quite make sense. In addition, it is a harsh reminder that our own English-speaking world is shrinking (“Press one for English, two for Spanish.”) Further, this first encounter with Spanish is with two brutal members of the Guardia Civil, who constantly scream at Mister because he has brought no luggage with him. Can such a situation be far off for LAX?

Kurtagic spent some of his youth growing up in Latin America, so his command of Spanish is convincing. Further, he claims that many of the Madrid scenes he scripted were based on street life he observed in South America. If so, the rising tide of color bodes ill for those of us in the North.

Once out of the airport, the sense of claustrophobia and chaos only increases. Jammed into a cab, Mister is accosted by Europe’s Blade-Runner future. “A cacophony of horns suddenly erupted around them. The cabbie had decided to abandon the lane, but a driver on the target lane, a Mestizo in his thirties wearing a cowboy hat, had been determined not to allow him access.” A fight ensues:

“¡Te voy a matar, negro maricón!” screamed the Mestizo, with an Ecuadorian accent.

The cabbie used his right hand to slam Cowboy’s head against the dashboard. . . . Cowboy responded by grabbing the cabbie’s face, as if to rip its flesh; however, he was in an awkward position, and the cabbie was able to grab Cowboy by the hair and once again and repeatedly slam his attacker’s head against the dashboard. Angry horns flared around them, followed by angry shouting from the motorists behind them. . . . Cowboy managed again to grab hold of the cabbie’s shirt, and, holding the two-way radio’s microphone by the cable, smashed it against the cabbie’s forehead as hard as he could. The blow was weak, however, because Cowboy’s torso was still in a horizontal position and there was not enough room to properly swing the device. Realising this, Cowboy then decided to pull his torso out of the vehicle and rip the microphone out of the radio. The cabbie was unable to prevent Cowboy’s vandalism, and, before her had time to think of an appropriate act of retaliation, witnessed Cowboy climbing over the cab’s bonnet, and repeatedly kicking the windscreen with his high-heeled boot. The cabbie burst out of his vehicle and jumped onto the bonnet, where he pushed Cowboy with violent force. Cowboy landed on his back, slamming against the bonnet of his car.

At this point, two racially-indeterminate  men materialised, running in to join in the brawl.

We quickly realize that this passes for “sport” in the gladiator-filled world of 2022. Cars spew out their drivers and passengers as everyone strives to gain a better view of the fight. A man riding a scooter stops, “obviously hoping to witness sufficient spilling of blood, rupturing of septa, and loss of teeth to titillate his cruelty.” Additional people enroll in the fight, but eventually it winds down, as the cabbie retrieves a crowbar from the trunk of his car, causing the defeated Cowboy to call it quits. Alas, such random violence is rife throughout the novel.

The non-whites in Mister are different from the immigrants in Raspail’s novel, however. In Camp of the Saints the immigrants were frail and numerous: “They were there! A million wretches, armed only with their weakness and their numbers, overwhelmed by misery, encumbered with starving brown and black children, ready to disembark on our soil, the vanguard of the multitudes pressing hard against every part of the tired and overfed West.” In Mister the non-whites are certainly numerous, too, but they are far from weak. On the contrary, the abundance of food found in Europe, along with the savage conditions of life on the streets, allows them to become powerful predators, always willing to use maximum violence to rob, rape, or just relieve the day’s boredom.

In addition to the violence, there exists a pervasive sense of the shortages of life’s most basic needs. This is paired with oppressive heat and always — always — manners of the jungle, as revealed in a Madrid street scene:

All competed for space with a remarkable absence of civility, none above using elbows and shoulders to force or ram their way through. Above them, the sun beat their heads without mercy, burning their skins, blinding their eyes, scorching their scalps, melting the tarmac [pavement] – so strong was the light that it bleached out the grey urban landscape of cement and baked brick; the trees and bushes that had once adorned the avenue had long been dead, desiccated, and cut down, their past existence only evident through the stumps that had been left in the pots and circles of caked dirt lining the pavement. The street thermometer read 46°C [115°F]. It was 8 o’clock in the morning. . . .

If it was teeming above surface, there was no room for an atom beneath the surface. Commuters were packed into the Metro system at a pressure of 1.1 megaPascals, or approximately 11 atmospheres. The queues were interminable, and moved at geological time-scales. It took millions of slow-moving seconds to purchase a ticket, just as long to get to the ticket gates, and again as long to get past security. This entire interval he spent with his feet burning, in a standing position, with his chest pressed against a warm commuter’s back, and someone’s warm chest pressed against his own back, his nose never more than two inches from someone’s head. . . . The air had the consistency of lentil soup, and the stink of body odor and halitosis.

Mister never really gets to spend much time on business, instead using most of his energy and wits simply to stay alive and keep his money and possessions intact. When he does manage to meet with clients, he’s disappointed to learn that their office is in a violent and derelict section of town. At this point, however, Kurtagic is able to mimic another Orwellian construct. In Nineteen Eighty-Four, Orwell introduces Emmanuel Goldstein, the elusive author of The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism and the major enemy of The Party. As such, he is the subject of the daily Two Minutes Hate, a period during which loyal citizens of the State watch the scripted depiction of Goldstein on State television and indulge in a mindless frenzy of hate toward this object of State scorn.

In Mister this object is “The Monster of Long Beach, “an American evolutionary psychologist and columnist, about to be tried at the Human Rights Tribunal in The Hague for crimes against humanity.” Having harmed no one violently, this defendant was unique: He was “a peaceful, urbane, soft-spoken university professor and author of seven books, who had, until his legal troubles began, lived a quiet life, teaching and writing from his base at California State University, Long Beach.”

In the novel, this “monster” is Dr. Kevin MacDonald.

Kurtagic explains how MacDonald’s three books on Judaism — A People That Shall Dwell Alone: Judaism as a Group Evolutionary Strategy, Separation and Its Discontents: Toward an Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism, and The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements — had been deemed racist and likely to encourage genocidal policies. His tenure has been revoked and his books banned and burned; possession of the books was now illegal.

To show they were serious, the European government staged sting operations in which they would offer underground copies of MacDonald’s works, but in fact would only be interested in collecting the names of people looking for such banned literature.

This development in the novel allows Kurtagic to present a disquisition on MacDonald’s theories, particularly those found in the third book, Culture of Critique. Thus we learn about Freud’s fraudulent concepts, which were always intended to undermine Western culture, and tracts from the Frankfurt School and Franz Boas, which pursued similar goals. Mister begins to catch on, as his business client explains to him how Freud et al. had always been nothing but “ethnopolitical activists masquerading as scientists.”

For such a soft-spoken university professor, MacDonald sure finds himself at the center of a lot of action. As reported by CNN, MacDonald manages to escape from prison in The Hague, prompting an international search and capture operation. “The so-called Monster of Long Beach was not thought to have left the EU. One of the talking heads commenting on the breakout — a rabbi — vehemently asserted that Dr. MacDonald’s writings were poisonous and extremely dangerous: it was vital that he be captured before he gained the opportunity to access a computer or the internet.”

As with Nineteen Eighty-Four‘s Goldstein, MacDonald is an obsession of the State. Newspapers carry unflattering photos of him on the front pages, with headlines screaming “MOBUS: DID HE BANKROLL MACDONALD’S BREAKOUT?”

Later, Mister actually shares a ride with MacDonald, but there is no dialogue. In fact, Mister cannot be sure that his fellow passenger was really the escapee, MacDonald. Mister’s fervent hope that it is not MacDonald becomes important when Mister is suddenly and unceremoniously arrested by the Unidad Especial de Intervención, a special police unit used for only the most dangerous missions. Mister stands no chance and is violently arrested.

Here Mister becomes Winston Smith, locked up for his thought crimes. The all-seeing State has detailed records of everything Mister has done, said, or purchased over decades, and uses these to construct a case that Mister is a dangerous racist. At the police station, he is interrogated by two non-white goons, who mercilessly taunt and mock him, clearly showing one of Kurtagic’s important themes: “The former conquerors now behave like the conquered, and the former conquered are devouring their former conquerors.”

As Mister’s freedom is taken away and his psyche gradually broken down, Mister finally begins to reflect more deeply upon what has happened both to himself and to European man. In his cell in the gulag, with the prospect of a decades-long sentence, he asks himself, “How did he end up in that cell?”

The answer speaks to all modern white men. Mister begins to admit that he had known all along about the corruption of society, the nincompoops who passed for politicians, and the slide into chaos throughout Europe. Despite his exceptional intelligence, though, Mister had taken the selfish route:

He had railed against the mediocrity of the common man, fulminated against their choice of political leaders, ranted against the cowardice of politicians beholden to œconomic interest, and raged against the supine addiction to comfort and safety of the general voting public, because they would rather make small concessions here and there than actively defend their freedoms. . . . He had expressed himself on the subject in no uncertain term — except he had done so privately, strictly among trusted friends and family, where there was no risk and therefore where it did not count, while acting in the outside world just like the common man . . . [emphasis added]

Apparently, this is a turning point in the character’s development, as he abandons the position he had previously prided himself on always taking: “Best to keep quiet, make money, live well, and be safe.” Now he faces years in the gulag among resentful non-whites seething with the desire for revenge against the Oppressor. Laws throughout Europe privilege these non-whites, while white men like Mister are apt to trigger the trip-wire on fiendish hate crime laws that have been enacted.

Clearly, Mister is a man taken from Raspail’s Camp of the Saints, where

many Frenchmen of true lineage are no longer anything but hermit-crabs that live in shells abandoned by representatives of a species, now disappeared, that was known as ‘French’. . . They are content to just endure. . . . Under the flag of an illusory internal solidarity and security, they are no longer in solidarity with anything, or even cognizant of anything that would constitute the essential commonalities of a people.

Mister is willing to accept the blame, however, for “he had withheld his talents, withheld his opinions, withheld his energy; in short, opted out, and focused on being comfortable within the domesticity of his life, watching his civilisation being devoured by anarchy, brutality, corruption, incompetence, misguided ideology, and hyperinflation, in an inexorable descent from the light of the stars to the mud of the jungle.” In short, he had by default given the Zionists and corrupt politicians “carte blanche to destroy the world” — his world and our world.

The ending of the novel is disappointing, for the protagonist, instead of using his chance release from prison as an opportunity to finally act, instead reverts immediately to his former selfish, shallow mode, evidenced most starkly by his plaint while trying to get back to England, “I’d give anything for a jar of pomade!”

This is a shame, for the System has finally broken down and Spain is in chaos, giving the native inhabitants the opportunity to throw off their totalitarian oppressors. This should have been the point where the newly enlightened Mister joins them in enacting scenes of revolution, scenes similar to those in the opening pages of William Pierce’s classic novel of white revolution, The Turner Diaries: “Today it finally began! After all these years of talking — and nothing but talking — we have finally taken our first action. We are at war with the System, and it is no longer a war of words. . . . We have finally acted!”

Given Kurtagic’s obvious intelligence, he could have allowed his protagonist to develop into a role model for his race, one who clearly understands the origins of the problems whites face and what must be done to correct them. Pierce did this with his second Andrew Macdonald novel, Hunter, creating the character of Oscar Yeager, a former combat pilot who experiences the “malaise” so common to Western men of his era. The difference is that Yeager acts. In contrast, Mister beats a retreat back to London, tail between his legs.

Does Kurtagic mean for it to end this way? Or might there be a sequel in which Mister regains his jail-cell convictions and actually does something to improve the miserable situation of whites in the Western world?

Kurtagic offers hints that solutions are at hand, one being political involvement. For instance, Kurtagic has the real-life radio show host James Edwards (The Political Cesspool) appear as Governor James Edwards or Tennessee, whose motto about white activism is “No retreat, no surrender, no apologies.”

When a Congressman commits suicide because he was hounded for purported anti-Semitism, Governor Edwards explodes at reporters:

Look: your network helped conduct a hate campaign that drove this man to suicide. Are you going to apologize to his children? Are you going to pay them compensation for the loss of their father? We all know that if the Congressman had not been White he would not have been faced with a vile hate campaign – I am offended by that. When do you plan to say you are sorry? When do you plan to make your donation to American Renaissance and the Council of Conservative Citizens? When do you plan to campaign for a museum honoring the memory of the tens of millions of victims of Soviet terror? Why aren’t you outraged by the fact that not one has been built? Will you now turn yourself in to the authorities so that you can be charged with racism and serve your prison term?

Another available avenue is secession from central governments. In Mister we see resort to this in America, where David Duke (briefly a cellmate of Mister in Spain) has now become President of the newly seceded Confederate States of America. Meanwhile, Vermont had also seceded, while Aztlan, as in other novels, has reverted back to Mexican control.

Harold Covington, in his “Northwest Quartet” novels The Hill of the Ravens, A Distant Thunder, A Mighty Fortress, and The Brigade, covers the fictional story of white secession most extensively. In his books, whites create “the Northwest American Republic,”  40 million racially-conscious white people from all over the world. As in Mister, Aztlan is a Mexican-controlled nation in the American Southwest and California. A similar situation prevails in The Savaged States of America: A Futuristic Fantasy by Kevin Beary. Here, not only is Aztlan where it is supposed to be, but another nation formed out of the American South has been ceded to blacks. It bears the name “Malcolmland.” A rump state called “The Corridor” is all that is left of white America, but it is run by illogical women and populated with emasculated white men who are forced to take anti-testosterone pills. Needless to say, its days are numbered.

Perhaps I am too hard on Kurtagic, for the disease Western men like Mister face is advanced. In fact, it is very much as Raspail describes in Camp of the Saints:

For the West is empty, even if it has not yet become really aware of it. An extraordinarily inventive civilization, surely the only one capable of meeting the challenges of the third millennium, the West has no soul left. At every level — nations, races, cultures, as well as individuals — it is always the soul that wins the decisive battles. It is the only the soul that forms the weave of gold and brass from which the shields that save the strong are fashioned. I can hardly discern any soul in us.

By having Mister abandon his promises to stand and fight like a man, does Kurtagic conclude — with Raspail — that there is hardly any soul left in us? If true, the fate of the Roman Empire may be our fate, but only in some ways: “The Roman empire did not die any differently, though, it’s true, more slowly, whereas this time we can expect a more sudden conflagration.”

Finally, a few comments on the structure of the novel are in order. Like any good postmodernist, Kurtagic includes in the text a hearty wink at himself. In a conversation with a woman he meets in his hotel, Mister hears about her husband’s story of a genius IT consultant who goes to Spain on business. The book is called Mister. Mister allows that the story sounds familiar, prompting the woman to blurt “There you go. Reality imitates fiction. Hey, you might even be a character in someone’s novel!”

Second, Mister desperately needs a stern editor. For starters, the book is too long. Pruning shaers should be able to bring it down to a more digestible four hundred pages. Next, the spelling errors, missing words, and duplicated phrases (pp. 482-3, for example) have to go. And then there are the marathon paragraphs. Fine, the author means to “overwhelm the reader” with his descriptions of heat and thirst and masses of human bodies, but that does not justify paragraphs that span three pages (see, for instance, the start of chapter 34).

Mostly, however, the eclectic vocabulary has to go. When even a reader with a Ph.D. in the humanities is mystified by the meaning of over a hundred words, it’s time to jettison the steroid-saturated thesaurus. Canescent, consputing, phenolic, contortuplications, catosopher, ephectic, absquatulation, pullulated, eidetic, hypertelic, delectate, paedomorphic, gluttei (it’s spelled correctly the next time it appears), thelyphantic, etc. & etc. Alright already!

On the whole, however, this is a book worth reading, if only to test a hypothesis Kurtagic advances elsewhere:

Of course, were it purely a matter of logic, we would easily win the debate over White displacement and multiculturalism, because our arguments are amply substantiated by science and history. The problem is, however, that we are not dealing with rational processes: we are dealing with psychological processes that stem from an innate human need for belonging and self-esteem, which have been successfully exploited by the masters of discourse, and which are notoriously impervious to logical argument.

Will his novel, then, trigger the desired responses? Like the works by Covington, Beary, and Pierce mentioned above, I do think they help. But where Kurtagic can really contribute is in transforming his novel into other media, particularly visual media. As people throughout the world born after, say, 1970 are famously averse to reading extended arguments, other message forms are needed. Kurtagic, who has experience the music business, understands this, especially the power of style, as he demonstrates here.

As he writes, “The end product to aim for is a parallel universe, comprised of alternative institutions, media, and markets, that legitimates Whiteness and is poised for a cultural reconquista once the present establishment is sufficiently weakened by its own cultural bankruptcy and corruption.”

I look forward, then, to watching Mister as he makes his debut on the big screen or perhaps in an underground Internet video. Kurtagic has spent immense time and effort to create this story, so let’s hope it grows. After all, the White race deserves it.

Mister is available in the TOQ Online Bookshop.