Print this post Print this post

Summer of Our Discontent:
The Era of Purity Politics

3,242 words

You preachers of equality, thus from you the tyrant-madness of impotence cries for “equality”; thus your most secret tyrant-appetite disguises itself in words of virtue. [1]

We are living through one of those periodic bursts of madness and irrationality that have always afflicted civilized societies. It is not just the fire-eaters who call for a complete rejection of an ancien régime they think is hateful, but the normally clearer-headed also suffer from guilt as they survey their history. So, these people, who in all other times are society’s backbone — the collective voice of reason — hesitate to act in their own interests and save themselves from the pit near which their enemies have cornered them. Knowing that there is nothing new under the sun does precious little to calm nerves and tempers, but it might focus the mind like a scorching swallow of firewater. They have two options: submit or resist. The human tendency is to deny the problems facing the country and Western peoples wherever they may live — to watch the evidence of the cataclysm facing them and read the horror stories online — and then to turn off the television, and exit the browser. Time for a nap.

For some of the timid and comfortable, appeasement will go on until the baying mob arrives, banging on their doors and windows. It is a curious thing that man is often attracted to wild, apocalyptic theories that are obviously false, and yet willfully or ignorantly, he fails to discern the real collapse that threatens his existence. The latter is serious and unnerving, and we prefer the unserious thrill of indulging in dark fantasies. Real problems have always been more banal and yet, more terrifying. I myself believed that the country had several decades before conditions became intolerable. I am still unsure whether recent events signal the beginning of a gradual decline, punctuated by the sorts of convulsions witnessed this summer, or if this era will end soon and dramatically. It will depend on the shape and the level of organization of the still-emerging but increasingly coalescent “unconditional surrender” politics of our enemies.

There is no such thing as politics without losers. Laws do not grant rights to one group without divesting rights from others. Politics is conflict, but it is stable when this conflict is a matter of policy (instead of totalizing worldviews) and when the losers perceive that, in the near future, they can win power legitimately. Thus, they have a meaningful stake in the political system. But politics can turn rapidly, morphing into rebellion, riots, and civil war. Before I explain further, it’s necessary that I give censure where censure is due — namely, to the late political order that until recently governed America. I begin with the faint-hearts and confidence men of the Grand Old Party. In the wake of violent insurrection these past months that included looting, burning, killing, and barricading off sections of Seattle and Washington DC as “autonomous zones” in defiance of the law, what have brave conservative leaders done to protect their constituents? They’ve spent more time and passion attacking colleagues on their side than condemning the destruction of American cities. Perhaps they feel these places are lost causes anyway, but the more likely reason is spinelessness. They’ve cheered mob iconoclasm with calls to tear down “offensive” monuments and symbols of Western achievement.

You can buy The World in Flames: The Shorter Writings of Francis Parker Yockey here.

Meanwhile, George Bush the Younger quit painting his puppies long enough to slander the America of which he was Commander-in-Chief for eight years, calling it a country rife with “systemic racism.” He then refused to endorse the Republican nominee up for reelection in November. He would presumably prefer a senile creep in the White House who can barely articulate what he wants for lunch. Mitt Romney, in between lowering his COVID mask to denounce the president and awkwardly marching with Black Lives Matter protestors, has sneered at police and the people who care about theft and arson. Even military generals have debased themselves in return for tepid and insincere grunts of approval from the media. Just the other day, an overwhelming Congressional majority of Republicans passed a military spending bill mandating that all federal bases named for Confederates be renamed immediately. This, the military welcomed. One could wish that it concerned itself more with winning wars and maintaining the sovereignty of our national borders instead of following the latest social fashions, but the military rewards visionless mercenaries these days, rather than honorable warriors. Rank careerists and cowards, the lot.

It’s hardly surprising, then that both Democrats and Republicans have faced serious insurrection. Voters seem to finally realize that the party system is a script in which the two antagonists select as opponents creatures from the same political “club.” Which to choose, the neoliberal or the neoconservative? A real Sophie’s choice. The Democrat might talk more about the environment or a trendy social movement; the Republican might talk about trade and tax cuts. But enough voters understand that neither of these candidates would make substantive changes or do anything to upset the balance keeping the two-party system — the entities that operate like two crime families — intact. The public realizes that the political process is, in large part, manipulation. The official publications and campaigns gin up the election as a battle royale between opposing forces in which vital national interests are at stake. But nothing of real substance separates a Romney from a Clinton, or a McCain from an Obama.

This brings me now to the situation mentioned above — the situation in which all but the chosen few feel like losers with no stake in the old political process. Like noxious weeds growing fat and foul-smelling on stews of bog water, resentful radicalism proliferates in such climates. The most dangerous of these recent developments is the “total war” purity politics on the rapid ascent. Our military no longer wages meaningful or successful wars, and so war has shifted to the domestic theater of American politics. It is a kind of politics that views the world as a power struggle between an Ultimate Good and an Ultimate Evil. It uses a religious framework to weaponize the movement and to create fanatics dedicated to purifying the state or society, excising it of previous attachments and histories — a process of deracination that involves revolutionary and violent change for a reformed society. A ruthlessly righteous attitude entitles members to do anything in service of that goal. Indeed, in the minds of those engaged in purity politics, losers must suffer complete destruction, and they, the winners, recognized as the only legitimate authorities with the correct answers for organizing and explaining the world, not just for the present moment, but for all time. Such breathtaking lack of humility in these extremists makes purity politics anti-historical, and its entire way of operating ideologically (in the world of rhetoric and ideas) and concretely (in the physical world) is iconoclastic.

Purity politics usually pursues some fantastic utopia that proves impossible to attain. Therefore, the utopia is a constant “process” in which leaders of the movement use the failure to achieve perfect goals as justifications to enact draconian measures, to hoard more power, and to eliminate problem populations or rivals “in the way.” Alternative interpretations do not matter. Science does not matter. There is only belief. Societies dominated by purity politics disallow neutrality; they are, by definition, intolerant. At least outwardly, they demand showy allegiance enforced by surveillance and snitching culture. This benefits the purifiers as internal spying loosens the older bonds of loyalty to family and neighbors, thus making it easier for the movement to control subject populations and to police its own members. It often exalts youth at the expense of older demographics, and one of its weapons is generational division. Yes, readers, I am describing the neo-Puritans of the Woke Left. How did you guess?

These Puritans like to imagine that they are at the vanguard of something never tried. But purification has deep roots in human history. Various cultures understood it as a spiritual journey toward a renewed, superior state of being. And it is often purchased with blood. When politicized, purification takes an even darker form. It involves sundering previous social and historical understandings — making an “un-people” before transforming them into “born-again people” (if they survive the procedure). In a medical framework, purifying can mean literal cleansing or the elimination of harmful germs and parasites from the body. Can it be that the pandemic, which has caused a national obsession with purging the virus literally, has led to shriller obsessions with purging society symbolically? Through whichever lens one views purification — spiritually or bodily — wiping clean often means wiping out. So it is with purification and the body politic. It rejects both the liberal and conservative traditions — the former for its tolerance and individualism and the latter for its restraint and realism about human nature. Both liberals and conservatives will attempt to placate these radicals, still under the impression that their chummy, two-party scam will continue. They will be devoured and unmourned.

As for the rest of us left behind, what will the rites of purification look like? Thanks to history and what we can already see happening, we can reasonably guess. Purification will take the form of inter and intra-group terror. I imagine the inter-group terrorism as advancing along a spectrum of humiliation and violence:

  1. Dehumanizing and demeaning propaganda campaigns
  2. Doxxing, ostracism, threatening livelihoods
  3. Physical intimidation, property destruction, iconoclasm
  4. Physical assaults and legal action; theft and divestment
  5. Imprisonment, exile
  6. Murder

Levels one through three, and arguably, four have occurred with alarming regularity over the summer. After all, the mental leap is modest when iconoclasts escalate from “attack[ing] objects as if they were people” to “attack[ing] people as if they were objects.” [2] In other words, smashing symbols of real (but dead) men will eventually lead the rabid to smash the real (and live) men who remind them of those hated symbols. The living are always the true targets of this outrage. Puritans never did like graven images. The final levels will become frequent after the iconoclasts take over the levers of state power or nullify it. Their own members will not remain unscathed, and perpetual purges and test acts will thin their ranks just as they will sharpen their cruelty. We can expect the continuation of language torture, creeds, chants, and magic words whose definitions change with little warning. There may even be a Woke Puritan dress code and aesthetic that emerges. The Shabby Militant, or something. Perhaps the second coming of the unfortunate sans-culottes pairing of the “liberty cap” and baggy pantalon. Like history, bad fashion repeats itself.

There are several kinds of people involved and drawn to purity politics. Initial leaders of the movement will belong to the class of alienated intelligentsia or the previous elite who felt marginalized or unappreciated. Their ages span from 30 to 45 years, and their motive is retribution against the society that scorned them and were not sufficiently appreciative of their talents. They may spout idealism and even believe some of what they say, but power is their goal. The next group attracted to purity politics are the enthusiasts of the “youth brigade,” students and young people, from 16 to 25 years of age, who are fired by idealism and lead on-the-ground fieldwork. The final group comprises what Professor Lothrop Stoddard (1883-1950) called “under-men”: brutes who lack the skills that were necessary to meaningfully participate in the previous regime due to low impulse control, criminality, character defects, or low intelligence. [3] They join in purity politics for the spoils and the violent chaos revolution promises them. They are civilization’s underachievers and relish taking revenge against the system that kept them leashed and muzzled. Utopian goals are not important to them; the thrill of destruction and the desecration of the old order draws the Under-man like a shark to blood. I’ll flesh out this cast below.

You can buy It’s Okay to Be White: The Best of Greg Johnson here.

The Intelligentsia 

Meet group one: the disaffected malcontents who style themselves as thought-leaders in academia and public office; the self-important cankers and preachers who want to found radical communities of equality, not unlike that shining city on a hill in Guyana. I don’t think it’s much of an exaggeration to say that intellectuals have been behind every bad idea and social catastrophe since their rise as a self-conscious class of expert consultants in the eighteenth century. It has long been the stance of ivory tower residents to take up opposition against whatever beliefs they perceive the public majority to hold, less from a place of sincere conviction and more from one of preening vanity. Only the highly educated could make such banal tradition a fashion statement. Only an anointed class of Pharisees could lack the humility and self-awareness necessary to perceive that they no longer speak truth to power, but instead have assumed power over truth. And now there are too many of them who are unemployed and over-educated.

The Youth Brigade

Group one gives rise to group two: young zealots. Anyone paying attention to history and/or recent events knows that young people are dangerous. Most are easily manipulated into group conformity, and they latch on to the words of older mentors whom they admire and want desperately to impress. They are the most likely demographic to join militant outfits, because they have energy, blind faith in causes, and they are less likely to have jobs and families to think of. They listen and learn the lessons taught them by radicals in group one, and their devotion to the purity cause is religious. The youth brigade makes up the majority of violent protests on and off college campuses. While group one writes books and manifestos, group two creates street pamphlets, murals, signs, and fliers. They are heavily involved in on-the-ground organizations and act as reckless and enthusiastic shock troops for purity politics.

The Under-men

Finally, group three: the morlocks. Lothrop Stoddard, American historian, eugenicist, and writer, was a man obsessed with white fragility — not, of course, the variety peddled by today’s professional diversity exorcists — but the fragility of white civilization and how easily European man could sink into history’s abyss like all the other “countless tribes of men [who] have perished utterly . . . or sunk into decadence. Man’s trail is littered with the wrecks of dead civilizations and dotted with the graves of promising peoples stricken by an untimely end.” [4] Though knowledge of genetics was in its infancy during Stoddard’s career, men of learning had long known that organisms passed on their traits hereditarily, and the collective breeding choices of a given species determined its evolution — its success or failure. Stoddard called the passing on of traits from parent to offspring the “germ-plasm.” Because superior strains of “germ-plasm” led to superior peoples, Stoddard argued that a population’s ability to create and maintain civilization was a function of race. Unless a superior race guarded against dysgenics, it risked forming a bloated underclass of inferiors — the enemies of civilization who, through dull resentment or white-hot envy, wished to lay waste the system reminding them of their inferiority. [5] For those who can contribute nothing of worth, destroying the worthy is one of their few pleasures. These are the under-men, and it’s obvious to all reading this who and where they are. Group one often claims to be fighting for the under-man, but they see him as a mascot — a useful tool in order to garner social capital from peers and sympathy from foolish organizations, like ladies’ groups and churches. They also see him as a means to draw the idealists of group two to their cause. Everywhere man is in chains! How unfair. How hypocritical, how un-Christian — whatever guilt trip works. To this, the under-man grins his predator-grin, and when order collapses because of the efforts of groups one and two, he is finally free — to eat them.

What historical regimes and/or movements have engaged in total war purity politics? Tyrannical theocracies and states embroiled in religious unrest, like the Ayatollah Khomeini’s Iran or Oliver Cromwell’s dreary Protectorate; revolutionary France during its Reign of Terror in Paris and its massacres in the Vendée; China’s Boxer Rebellion and Chairman Mao’s Cultural Revolution; the Russian Bolshevik Revolution and subsequent communist regime. Of course, there are many others. Today’s postmodern Left continues a well-trod path. They are fired by the red fanaticism of zealotry and a good deal of narcissistic sociopathy. Their leaders proliferate in academia, an institution that has gone far beyond the usual oppositional pose intellectuals strike and has since veered into rabid hatred of the citizenry. They have slipped poison into the ears of several generations of young people and thus have inspired the young to hasten their civilization’s doom. In their wake are the under-men of the movement — looters, rapists, and killers of the mostly urban underclass — those who grasp at opportunities to take out their toxic resentments against lawful society. They are a deeply inhumane lot, despite their protestations of “social justice” and pious messages of equality.

I’ll conclude on a bittersweet note, because the reason I write is simple: I love my country and its people. That is all. I am filled with an overwhelming sense of loss when I think of a future America — a future Europe, even — without Europeans, the temperate lands of northerners overrun. Their unmatched beauty, their forests, lakes, and ancient mountains become the grotesque scenes of slums, favelas, and the open sewers so ubiquitous in the Third World. My mother grew up in small-town yesterland during the fifties and sixties, the “golden age of American childhood,” I’ve teased her, with some envy. She has fond memories of graduating high school during the year that the country celebrated its bicentennial, the “Spirit of ‘76.”  It seems less and less likely that America will survive to celebrate its tercentennial. We humans live long enough to regret to see the day we die. The real question now is whether survivors of her fall will keep the memory of Columbia’s “spirit” within their chests. We can take some solace in the fact that after the collapse, only her true sons will remain, and they have always excelled at rebuilding. Until then, we must study those who wish us gone and the nature of their movement. They have many advantages at this point: enthusiasm, political backing, corporate funding, media approval. But we have the traditional weapons of the Right: truth, cool heads, and historical insight. If the Left is the sound and fury of a star that burns brightly and spends itself wildly, the Right is the gravity that will wink it out of existence, having spent only time.

If you want to support Counter-Currents, please send us a donation by going to our Entropy page and selecting “send paid chat.” Entropy allows you to donate any amount from $3 and up. All comments will be read and discussed in the next episode of Counter-Currents Radio, which airs every Friday.

Don’t forget to sign up for the twice-monthly email Counter-Currents Newsletter for exclusive content, offers, and news.

Notes

[1] Friedrich Nietzsche, Nietzsche: Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Adrian Del Caro, and Robert B. Pippin, eds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006, p. 77.

[2] Susan Juster, “Iconoclasm,” in Sacred Violence in Early America, ed. Susan Juster. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 2016, pp. 192-241.

[3] Lothrop Stoddard, Revolt against Civilization: The Menace of the Underman. New York: Scribners, 1922, p. 23.

[4] Stoddard, 2.

[5] Stoddard, 23.

 

10 Comments

  1. bobby
    Posted August 6, 2020 at 11:49 am | Permalink

    It was entirely appropriate, to mention George Bush Jr. , (for he sure is a “junior”) leaving his canvas long enough, to once more slam traditional America and Americans. After all, it’s nothing new for him, the guy who couldn’t repeat same words enough–“the jobs Americans won’t do, even though every time he said this I was reminded of all of the people I have seen doing those same jobs in all the places in the U.S. I have traveled to, before the promise of cheap labor arrived to those places. From a viewpoint of their domestic politics, I have always summed up the Bush clan as liberals at heart and as Neo-Cons in their international politics. Just the kind of poison that damages the U.S. to the greatest degree from a Nationalist’s viewpoint.

  2. Posted August 6, 2020 at 9:40 pm | Permalink

    This is a very good analysis of the problem.

  3. Vehmgericht
    Posted August 7, 2020 at 4:06 am | Permalink

    Certainly in the UK the liberal media, exemplified by those joined-at-the-hip media outlets BBC and the Guardian have begun to develop the narrative that racism (which is synonymous with white supremacy) is exacerbating deaths from covid-19.

    The evidence for this, backwards as usual, is that proportionately more black and minority ethnic persons have been affected. Presumably it will soon become a sackable offence to go against this argument with genetic or physiological data.

    No one in the elite media has seriously advanced the theory that the virus was deliberately engineered as a racial Vergeltungswaffen though doubtless the idea is already entertained by low IQ persons. And there is already murmuring against the latest lockdowns that have stifled the numerous chaotic and noisome ethnic festivals that now festoon the British calendar.

    Who can say whether this irresponsible stoking of the pot by the woke intelligentsia will spill over into fresh violence?

    • KLukor
      Posted August 7, 2020 at 2:37 pm | Permalink

      Yes, you’ve made an important point. The frightening fact is that many black people will believe all manner of conspiracies against them, despite being presented with the truth as backed by evidence. I keep reading medical breakdowns on right-wing websites about the George Floyd autopsy and how it disproves that Officer Chauvin killed him through strangulation–that Floyd instead died because of a “perfect storm” of drugs and health problems. That may be, and it may also save Chauvin from a murder conviction (depending on the jury’s racial make-up), but it will mean nothing to the depressingly-large percentage of blacks who still believe that Tuskegee, AIDS, and cocaine were government-led attempts at black genocide. Why shouldn’t they also believe COVID is a renewal of these efforts? People like Heather MacDonald have consistently shredded the BLM narrative with incontrovertible facts for years–and it doesn’t matter. There is a CC article from some time ago that discussed the O.J. Simpson trial. Its author came to the conclusion that either blacks were: a) too stupid to correctly interpret the evidence, or b) so bent on revenge and alternate reality that they simply didn’t care what the evidence proved. The correct answer is: Yes.

      • Lord Shang
        Posted September 13, 2020 at 9:25 pm | Permalink

        Yes. Blacks are extremely gullible, as well as prone to emotional hyper-overwroughtness allied to extreme sadistic brutality and gross criminality. Why would white idiots have ever thought they could have civilized a race which never on its own produced any civilization? Why did we ignore Jefferson’s warning about the utter historical futility of trying to integrate blacks with whites in America?

        All of this very enlightening summer of 2020 has shown not only how essentially fragile (as Kathryn S sagely notes) white civilization actually is, but that our enemies – and they are enemies (perhaps a new understanding of the concepts of “enemy” and “war” are needed) – do not wish to reason, and thus are not amenable to rational disproofs. They are emotional hysterics and wrecks. America now consists of three groups of citizens, two absolutely in a pre-war stage. Patriotic whites; white race traitors and blacks, along with assorted other nonwhite-antiwhite hostiles; and the dwindling number of the “we just want to get on with our private lives” indifferent among all races. I knew this day was coming, though I remain shocked at the size and virulent malice of the white race traitor forces, as well as the unbelievable spinelessness of so many whites in between traitor and patriot.

        A good essay, with much food for thought.

  4. SRP
    Posted August 7, 2020 at 7:03 am | Permalink

    Well and courageously written, thank you.

  5. Alexandra O.
    Posted August 8, 2020 at 9:26 am | Permalink

    Purity Politics and Iconoclasm are both examples of plain, old-fashioned fanaticism. I have experienced fanaticism in my youth when I was involved with Christianity, and then married a man who was Russian Orthodox, which is the ‘purist’ form of Christianity. I loved the music and the art — he loved the ‘only true religion’ aspect. A few months later in South America as missionaries, we found ourselves in a threatening position in a revolutionary country, where I found that ‘he did not have my back’. A fanatic will only protect their religious or political views, but will leave their loved ones out to hang. That was the biggest lesson of my life, and I can spot a fanatic now in a second., and we are surrounded with them today. So far, I haven’t seen any here on this site, through their writings, only writers with common sense and good powers of observation.

    As for Iconoclasm, I have a degree in Art History, and I can now see its insidious tendrils creeping into museums. In Birmingham, England last summer, several major paintings of the Pre-Raphaelites of the late 19th Century had been removed, and three large video screens of art professors criticizing the entire movement as being racist and anti-feminist were blaring their disdain. I don’t go to Art Museums to be criticized for my love of a school of art! Yet, the fanatics — Iconoclasts who want to destroy what they disagree with — are now making their views known and people who just want to have a lovely Sunday stroll through a series of inspiring paintings are treated to a critique of their taste.

    This is a brilliant and well-thought-out essay on the ‘fanaticism’ of our time, which is indeed an attempt at purity, but which will instead lead to the blood-baths of communist and nazi concentration camps of the near past. Puritans, indeed, do not ‘have your back’.

    • Traddles
      Posted August 8, 2020 at 7:13 pm | Permalink

      “Museum Studies” programs have done lots of damage, along with related fields of study in so-called academia.

      Believe it or not, a lot of people who now work in museums don’t like the artists or subjects of the museum pieces very much, unless the artists or subjects were non-white or somehow depraved. It has been this way for a while now, and it’s obvious that museum collecting, interpretation and programming have suffered terribly as a result.

  6. DJ
    Posted August 8, 2020 at 10:15 am | Permalink

    Good analysis, but the Boxer Rebellion in China was an uprising to rid the country of foreigners that were attempting to colonize and subjugate the country. As a side note, maybe if people knew the sordid history of the 8 powers in China, before during and after the Second World War, there would be more understanding of China’s mistrust of the US and Britain who can be quite vindictive about being evicted. Similar to Cuba, Iran, Venezuela, if you throw the bastards out on behalf of the people you become an enemy for life.

    • KLukor
      Posted August 8, 2020 at 8:41 pm | Permalink

      Perhaps, but the Boxer Rebellion was also a *movement*– a movement to purify Chinese society of any foreign element. Many of the Boxers were quite religious about this. They attacked foreigners, yes, but they also targeted Chinese people whom they considered to be “too friendly” to foreigners, or who had converted to Christianity. This movement terrorized a lot of people apart from the foreign nationals trapped inside their compounds. I think China considers the period of Western imperialism to be an aberration and a source of shame–one that it is determined not to repeat, you’re right about that. They want to sell the opium this time.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.
 
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
 
Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

*
*

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

  • Our Titles

    White Identity Politics

    The World in Flames

    The White Nationalist Manifesto

    From Plato to Postmodernism

    The Gizmo

    Return of the Son of Trevor Lynch's CENSORED Guide to the Movies

    Toward a New Nationalism

    The Smut Book

    The Alternative Right

    My Nationalist Pony

    Dark Right: Batman Viewed From the Right

    The Philatelist

    Novel Folklore

    Confessions of an Anti-Feminist

    East and West

    Though We Be Dead, Yet Our Day Will Come

    White Like You

    The Homo and the Negro, Second Edition

    Numinous Machines

    Venus and Her Thugs

    Cynosura

    North American New Right, vol. 2

    You Asked For It

    More Artists of the Right

    Extremists: Studies in Metapolitics

    Rising

    The Importance of James Bond

    In Defense of Prejudice

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater (2nd ed.)

    The Hypocrisies of Heaven

    Waking Up from the American Dream

    Green Nazis in Space!

    Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country

    Heidegger in Chicago

    The End of an Era

    Sexual Utopia in Power

    What is a Rune? & Other Essays

    Son of Trevor Lynch's White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    The Lightning & the Sun

    The Eldritch Evola

    Western Civilization Bites Back

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles

    Reuben

    The Node

    The New Austerities

    Morning Crafts

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Gold in the Furnace

    Defiance