What Law Enforcement and First Responders Need to Know about White Nationalism

3,918 words

White Nationalism has been quite a hot topic in political discourse lately. There have been high-level politicians who have declared it to be the United States’ number one threat. It’s important for people like you — police, first responders, and federal agents — to get some clarity and accurate information about the subject. This will be long, since it’s an important topic.

What White Nationalists believe

You’ve heard White Nationalists described as troublemakers, or maybe even domestic terrorists. So what’s all the fuss about? What are their motives? There are several different schools of thought within White Nationalism. Still, the basics are pretty simple. They all do have certain beliefs in common, which generally accord with other forms of nationalism as well.

Properly understood, a nation is a folk related both by ancestry and by culture. (“Nation” comes from a Latin word implying common birth.) In this sense of the word, a nation isn’t just a government or lines drawn on a map. Nationalism is the idea that each nation deserves to have its own living space which is ruled by its own people, for their own benefit, and according to their own customs and sensibilities. Where these conditions do not exist, creating such conditions is a necessary goal to be carried out via the normal process of political change. This is what Mahatma Gandhi wanted for India, though it’s pretty hard to call him a domestic terrorist. If you agree with him that it makes sense for India to be run by Indians and for their benefit, then that makes you an Indian nationalist!

In practice, one kind of sovereign nation is a self-governing country inhabited by a single ethnicity, such as Japan. In a sovereign nation where there are significant populations of permanent residents other than the majority, they will be closely-related ethnicities within the same race that have compatible cultures and who, together, regard themselves together as a united folk. One example of this is Switzerland before the advent of mass migration.

So that’s the basic concept. Nationalists say that this is important because countries tend to be the most stable and harmonious when a country’s public is united and gets along together. This sort of functional compatibility results from genetic similarity, common culture, and a history of harmonious relations. As much as some might wish things were different, this cohesion isn’t something that can be legislated, taught in schools, promoted on TV, or the like; it’s been tried endlessly. If incompatible populations are allowed into a country in significant numbers, then trouble inevitably follows that was entirely avoidable. The more this is the case, the more dysfunctional a country will become.

These concepts of kinship and sovereignty described above are in fact usually widely accepted. These arguments were used in support of Third World national independence movements. (Unfortunately, decolonization efforts were often led by Marxist-Leninists and Maoists toting AK-47s who didn’t have a clue how to run a country, but that’s another matter.) You may have heard of some famous black nationalists like Jomo Kenyatta, Kwame Nkrumah, and Nelson Mandela. Despite certain Communist ties and less-than-peaceful moments which never ran afoul of good liberal opinion, these individuals are celebrated for their beliefs rather than being called “extremists” or “hatemongers.” Everyone agrees that Asia is for Asians, Africa is for Africans, and Latin America is for Hispanics.

The single exception is that it’s now become anathema to say that whites should also have sovereign nations of their own — not in the settlements they transformed from wilderness into developed countries that are the envy of the world, nor even Europe, which has been the white homeland from the very beginning. You realize this, of course. Surely you’re aware of some other double standards, too. For one thing, advocacy organizations for non-whites (and other protected categories) are called civil rights groups, but any white advocacy organizations are called “hate groups.” White Nationalists say that kinship and sovereignty are essential for whites, just as they are for anyone else. You may decide for yourself whether that’s anything particularly radical or extreme.

The USA was intended to be a sovereign white nation

The Founding Fathers created this country for “ourselves and our posterity,” which is stated clearly in the Preamble to the Constitution. Immigration was limited to “free white persons” of good character. (These are historical facts which can be easily verified.) For that reason, this founding population of English colonists, whites assimilated to Anglo-American culture, and others like them who arrived later are sometimes called heritage Americans, or the historic American nation. Until the 14th Amendment, blacks were considered citizens of their states, but not of the United States. Indian tribes were considered independent nations, though were gradually incorporated into the US. Despite these changes, whites remained the core nation within the US. The idea that whites are supposed to become a minority in the country their forefathers built for them, or should be ruled by another people, would have been unthinkable until recently.

By today’s standards, America’s Founding Fathers would be considered White Nationalists. So would Abraham Lincoln, who until his untimely death had planned to create a separate nation for the freedmen to forge their own destiny as they pleased. In fact, all American presidents were pro-white prior to John F. Kennedy. They didn’t call themselves White Nationalists, since nationalism was widely held to be a natural and normal condition back then and was hardly controversial. The Founders created this country for benefit of their descendants and for whites who later came to our shores.

Recently, some have begun saying that America is just an “idea,” or that it was created as a “proposition nation” in which immigrants of any background could be welcomed after which they would adapt to American norms. However, this modern feel-good yarn isn’t backed by historical fact, and some recently-arriving populations aren’t very interested in assimilating, along with several other problems they pose. Lately, the same mythology is being pushed in Europe, where it makes even less sense.

The 1965 Hart-Celler Immigration Act effectively deconstructed America, allowing mass migration from anywhere. (The public was never consulted, of course, just as in every other white country in which globalist politicians opened the borders for colonization by the Third World.) This was sold under blatantly false promises; for one thing, Senator Ted Kennedy lied shamelessly, swearing that it wouldn’t change America’s ethnic composition. At the time, the US was about 90% white; now the figure is just under 60% and declining. The end result will obviously make whites a minority in their own country, which might happen in about two decades if nothing changes.

This opening was treasonable, because it was fraudulently enacted and changed America without any popular mandate. Furthermore, the results have been incalculably destructive and threaten the country’s future. Both mainstream political parties have nevertheless allowed this population replacement to continue ever since, despite occasional promises from Republicans that always amount to nothing. Democratic politicians want the extra votes from immigrants, which is a legalized form of stuffing the ballot box, while Republican politicians answer to big business, which wants cheap labor to keep wages down.

Why the Great Replacement should be avoided

As a law enforcement officer, surely you’ve noticed how the country is already becoming increasingly difficult to govern. Even during the 1960s, when the minority population was barely above 10%, massive race riots occurred amid the politically charged climate of the time. Simply put, those who say that “diversity is our greatest strength” are engaging in wishful thinking. Multiculturalism means many cultures; the problem is that the more incompatible cultures there are within a society, the more conflicts there will be. Unless you’re an absolute greenhorn rookie, surely you are already aware of how races differ in average behavior and how well they get along — or not!

Although whites have been receiving endless trash talk from the usual suspects, it’s undeniable that white countries tend to be prosperous and orderly. However one might wish to explain it, whites have a talent for this, which is why endless millions from elsewhere are trying to gain entry. Wherever whites become a minority, however, Third World conditions become the norm. (South Africa provides a remarkable example of what can happen.) Those who expect peace and harmony to ever result from this are engaging in wishful thinking. Already a racial spoils system is in effect; to take just one example, perhaps race is a primary factor in determining who gets promotions in your department. This sort of graft can be expected to get worse. Also, the more that demographics change, the more this will affect your future and that of your family.

You can buy Greg Johnson’s It’s Okay to Be White here.

Other than that, the European homeland is likewise afflicted with mass immigration, thanks to their treasonous politicians. (Their major parties take payola from globalist billionaires, too.) Unless things change, many of these countries will become majority non-white later in the century as well. Population replacement migration has also come to Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Just as in the US and Europe, the public never was consulted about this change and politicians allow this to continue contrary to the will of the people.

Note well that a nation which does not have a stable homeland also does not have control over its own destiny. Unless this unprecedented social experiment stops, the eventual result will be that whites won’t have a homeland anywhere in the world, not even in the ancestral European nations. There are those who tell us that it’s inevitable. Some in fact gloat about it quite immodestly. White Nationalists disagree; this fate is inevitable only if nothing is done about it.

Other than that, the white fertility rate is in decline because of a number of factors such as race-mixing, feminism, alternative lifestyles, and (most recently) the transsexuality fad. These destructive trends didn’t “just happen” all by themselves; they have been encouraged throughout the world by the same dark forces. There’s much more that can be said about globalism, Leftist social engineering, and so forth, but those are very long discussions of their own. Obviously there’s a major ideological conflict in progress, and whether you like it or not, you might find yourself embroiled in it. In the future, there may be some decisions to be made.

When law enforcement is misused for repression

Every advanced society needs institutions empowered with the official sanction to enforce the law. These are the men who protect the public from the criminal element. This is why you signed up for your job, one that you might have dreamed of since your youth.

There have been occasions in history where governments have used law enforcement agencies for a secondary purpose. Although their proper mission is protecting the public from crime, oppressive governments typically misuse them to punish dissidents and critics. This is quite common in banana republics and Communist dictatorships, in which the police become in part an instrument to enforce the official ideology. The result is that they are generally loathed by the public, or at best regarded as just another criminal gang. The Committee for State Security became most famous such politicized law enforcement agency in the Soviet Union, an anodyne-sounding name better known by its Russian initials: KGB. When police forces are repurposed as political enforcers and citizens start being treated like criminals because of differences of opinion, this should be a troubling development for obvious reasons.

The US hasn’t yet reached that point, but there have been troubling developments. There are certain foundations generally calling themselves “watchdog” groups that are quite notorious for promoting online censorship. They also encourage police agencies to take on a politicized role. (They’re lavishly funded, with their executives making salaries that would make your jaw drop in disbelief. Some of them have very shady fundraising practices, like scaring wealthy retirees into believing that donating to them will help prevent a massacre, but that’s another matter.) These foundations are hardly impartial or moderate, which is obvious from who they target or not. Ostensibly, their operating principles are about inclusivity and tolerance, but the truth is that they’re highly partisan Leftist organizations motivated by their own ideology and ethnic priorities.

Some of the big “watchdog” outfits have convinced government agencies and police departments to regard them as consultants on what they call “hate groups.” I’ve seen some of their bulletins, noting several errors and inaccuracies as well as the “guilt by association” trick, reliance on innuendo, and outright distortions. Of course, you’re very well aware that there are strict rules the government is supposed to follow concerning surveillance, data gathering, and privacy of citizens. At the same time, these “watchdog” outfits get away with compiling lists of naughty people whose politics they don’t like while presenting their smears and sloppy research to the authorities as if it were diligent investigation into “extremism.”

At least one of these groups produces videos purported to be educational materials for police. Maybe you’ve seen some. I saw a sample on their website; it was indeed pretty slick, even as blatantly biased as it was. It would have no value in helping you do your job, however. Its only purpose is to encourage you to treat citizens differently based on their political views. They want you to assume that White Nationalists are up to no good, should receive extra scrutiny, and perhaps even deserve worse treatment than that. Simply put, these Leftist foundations want to enlist you as muscle to fight their battles for them. Now ask yourself: Is this what you signed up for?

They also offer training courses for law enforcement officers and federal agents, sometimes sponsored in another country. Their students will be indoctrinated into the organization’s biases about white advocates (nationalist or otherwise) and others targeted as political opponents, trying to get you to believe that they are uniquely dangerous. Perhaps you’ve been to one of these training sessions already! (I say the money would have been better spent buying protective equipment.) The intended result is to make you believe that white advocates are criminals and should be treated as such because of their viewpoints. Even if these Leftist foundations fool you into becoming an unofficial street enforcer for them, however, you can bet that their obscenely wealthy directors will still privately hold you in the same contempt they have for everyone else outside of their own ethnic group.

Unjust use of deadly force

There have already been occasions when the politicization of American police and security forces has resulted in deadly violence. I’ll discuss a couple of notorious examples.

During the late 1960s, Adolph Ira Botnick bribed officials $36,500 (equivalent to about a quarter million dollars today) to conduct a politically motivated entrapment scheme of some Ku Klux Klan members. This would have gone differently than the usual sort of “FBI foils FBI plot” setup; the intention was to kill those targeted, leaving no survivors. The ambush resulted in the death of a teacher, Kathy Ainsworth, who was shot in the neck while sitting in the passenger seat of a car. A Los Angeles Times article by Jack Nelson dated February 13, 1970 indicates that she had no criminal record and was plausibly just along for the ride and was not engaged in anything nefarious. As for the driver, the article quoted an officer at the scene who had attempted to assassinate him:

Sgt. L. D. Joyner of the Meridian, Miss. police dept., after finding Tarrants lying in the bush, seriously wounded said, “We opened up on him. All four of us were firing shotguns from about 15 feet away. We had in mind killing him, I don’t mind telling you. We dragged him out of the bushes and figured he was dead, but the sonofagun was still alive.” Joyner said that by the time the officers dragged Tarrants into the yard, a crowd of neighbors had gathered around them. “We knew we had to stop then,” said Joyner.

How’s that for professionalism? Nobody was punished for orchestrating this murder-for-hire setup, the likes of which might be expected in some corrupt banana republic — and certainly not Botnick, who had bribed them to do so. The “watchdog” outfit for which he was an officer still collaborates with law enforcement, and its reputation remained untarnished after the killing.

Then there was the Ruby Ridge siege of 1992. Randy Weaver was set up on bogus charges involving the sale of a shotgun that allegedly was sawed off by 1/4″ under a certain limit for which he didn’t obtain the required $250 tax stamp. (Could someone have tampered with the shotgun after the sale to shorten it further?) As planned, because of the tax stamp technicality, federal agents tried to pressure Mr. Weaver into becoming an informant. He refused and was given an incorrect court date, which got him charged with failure to appear. This led to a siege in which Weaver’s 14-year-old son was shot in the back, and Weaver’s wife was shot while holding their baby.

Unfortunately, this is the sort of thuggery that can happen when political pressures are brought to bear on law enforcement, encouraging rough treatment (or worse) of those at odds with the ruling ideology. Presently, police forces tend to enjoy a high popularity in the white community. You’re already aware that white and Asian neighborhoods are safer and less trouble for you than other neighborhoods. In these other neighborhoods, you don’t tend to get a friendly reception, do you? Please be aware, though, that continued goodwill depends on both sides. Submitting to pressure to carry out anti-white agendas could cause relations to sour with the demographic with which you’re the most popular. If you let these people down, you’ll lose their support.

Our common enemies

The globalist/Leftist coalition presently has some new allies effectively serving in a volunteer capacity to help them make war on Middle America. These are your enemies, too. Antifa is one of them, notorious for rioting — though the “watchdog” outfits have little to say about them, of course. How exactly they’re funded and organized remains a mystery. (If some of America’s Three Letter Agencies would care to investigate, they’d have all that figured out in a few mouse clicks, since they’re spying on the public nine ways from Sunday. Apparently they have some other priorities!) Antifa are some real troublemakers, but they get off easy.

You can buy Greg Johnson’s The Year America Died here.

Another one is Black Lives Matter, which is associated with many demonstrations that became very violent. (They get off easy, too, partly because of liberal prosecutors heavily promoted by Leftist foundations.) Chances are you’ve heard one of their slogans: “Pigs in a blanket, fry ’em like bacon.” These fine gentlemen are talking about you, of course. They mean it, too. I should add that the big corporations with their big hearts donated about one and a half billion dollars to those clowns.

You might recall when one of their fans massacred several police officers in Dallas. (Normally, public officials take a pretty dim view of criminals rubbing out police, leaving no stone unturned to bring the perps to justice — but not this time.) This is not to say that BLM endorses the violence that all too often occurs in the wake of their “peaceful protests.” They have created certain false narratives about police officers, however, which have made doing your job a lot more dangerous.

Surely you recall the wave of riots that engulfed America for three months in 2020 following the George Floyd incident. Rather than waiting for the facts to come in, the mainstream media created a certain narrative about that one, and the rest is history. (The truth is that he was a career criminal who died of a drug overdose, but the mainstream media doesn’t always let facts get in the way.) Rioting, looting, and arson resulted in several deaths, even more injuries, billions of dollars in property damage, and the destruction of countless small businesses. In many big cities, police were given “stand down” orders from above. Whether or not this happened in your city, how did you feel about all that in general? In some other places, police knelt to BLM. Hopefully they didn’t make you do so; surely self-abasement before trash like that feels worse than doing nothing! There were also calls to defund the police, as well as oceans of ignorant criticism. Perhaps some of your colleagues quit in disgust afterwards.

In light of all this, are White Nationalists really the country’s greatest threat, like the overpaid bureaucrats and the meddlesome “watchdog” outfits have been trying to get you to believe? Regarding the comparatively little trouble that comes from those quarters, note that much of it was instigated by the government. Hopefully that clears up some things!

Choices

Courtesy of Stonetoss

It’s true that things have become very difficult in your profession lately. Still, in the coming years there’s a chance that you’re eventually going to have to decide which side of the ideological divide you stand on. Will you side with whites who want America to be their nation — the nation it was before, who want the government to be accountable to the public rather than to billionaire crooks, and who want the same freedom to express their opinions as anyone else? Or will you side with the “watchdog” outfits that demonize them, street radicals like BLM and antifa who endanger your lives, and the lying media?

Sure, you want to keep your job, as long as it lasts. You care about your pension, too — but have you thought about what kind of a country you want to retire in? You’re just following orders; we get it. Still, think about where the sympathies of some of the top brass lie in certain cities, which definitely isn’t on your side. Those types will throw someone like you under the bus without a second thought, and you know it. The System left Officer Derek Chauvin to twist in the wind in order to preserve the martyrdom narrative of a career criminal who had a heart attack from a drug overdose at a very inconvenient moment. I sure hope that’s not how it rolls in your department, but if it does, I’ll just say that you owe them just as much loyalty as the loyalty they’ll give you.

In the future, things are likely to get more politicized. The things I discussed might very well get worse. Britain provides an example of what this looks like. Presently, they have large police units that do nothing but monitor social media to punish citizens who write something politically incorrect or criticize the wrong people online. This is despite the fact that for decades they did nothing about Pakistani grooming gangs preying on underage British girls. A government’s number one duty is to protect its citizens. They failed.

What if political pressures intensify in the times to come? Remember that you serve justice, not somebody else’s political agenda. This is the message that White Nationalism has for you, even if you find the rest unconvincing or don’t care about what happens to your country. Also, remember that you have the power of agency: the ability to act according to your own free will and according to your own discretion and discernment. For example, suppose that in some future time, things become more repressive, and you’re told to bust someone for felony jaywalking, which will incur a 50-year sentence, even though you know it’s a bogus charge that has been made up for political reasons. You could spend your time catching real criminals instead.

*  *  *

Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.

• First, donor comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
• Second, donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Non-donors will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days.

To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:

Paywall Gift Subscriptions

If you are already behind the paywall and want to share the benefits, Counter-Currents also offers paywall gift subscriptions. We need just five things from you:

• your payment
• the recipient’s name
• the recipient’s email address
• your name
• your email address

To register, just fill out this form and we will walk you through the payment and registration process. There are a number of different payment options.