1,503 words
“We need a white Jesse Jackson.”
That was my first thought when I confronted racial reality in the late 1980s. After growing up in a nearly all-white New England town, I quickly realized that blacks weren’t like they were portrayed in movies and on TV. The reverse was true as well: white Southerners, in general, were the nicest, most friendly, and most helpful people I had ever met—not the mean, violent monsters Hollywood depicts.
So, I learned early on that all American institutions were anti-white. I wanted to push back, so I decided to get involved. In 1996, after seeing an ad in American Renaissance, I joined the Council of Conservative Citizens (CofCC).
The CofCC was the only white advocacy group around at that time. I would later learn that many of its leaders had previously belonged to the Citizens Councils of America, a group that opposed the “civil rights” movement in the 1960s.
Through its local chapters across the country, the CofCC eventually built a network of dues-paying members in all 50 states, with active chapters in many of them. The organization distributed a bi-monthly newspaper, The Citizens Informer, to members, detailing the activities of each chapter. Meetings frequently featured speakers and local politicians who addressed the group. Some of the more active chapters organized rallies and protests either supporting or opposing legislation. The CofCC became especially known for defending Confederate flags and monuments threatened with removal by Leftists. It also protested immigration and demographic replacement, anti-white crimes, and affirmative action.
Though people mostly associated the CofCC with the South, the organization was headquartered in Missouri. Gordon Baum served as the group’s president, and I came to know him quite well. A veteran of George Wallace’s 1968 presidential campaign, he assumed much of the day-to-day leadership when the Council formed in the late 1980s. Gregarious and folksy, yet smart and dedicated, Gordon seemed like a character from a Mark Twain novel. He managed the organization while maintaining a career as a lawyer. Skilled at navigating the petty infighting that seems to plague all Right-wing movements, he also represented the group effectively in media interviews. Although he passed away in 2015, Gordon Baum remains an unsung hero of the Dissident Right.
The CofCC hosted two annual national meetings that drew hundreds of attendees. Sam Francis, Jared Taylor, and Sam Dickson regularly spoke at these events, while politicians such as Bob Barr and Kirk Fordice also addressed the group alongside numerous state-level representatives. Though retired from politics by then, John Rarick, Lester Maddox, and John Schmitz attended and spoke at several national and local meetings. Jesse Helms and Trent Lott never appeared as speakers, but both published columns (almost certainly written by their staff) in The Citizens Informer.
Sam Francis was in his element at CofCC events and consistently drew large crowds. As editor of The Citizens Informer, he played a central role in the organization, but more importantly, the Council embodied his grand strategy of mobilizing Middle American Radicals (MARs). In his 1997 book Revolution from the Middle, Sam defined MARs voters in terms that resembled the CofCC members I knew during the late 1990s and early 2000s:
Middle American Radicals are essentially middle-income, white, often ethnic voters who see themselves as an exploited and dispossessed group, excluded from meaningful political participation, threatened by the tax and trade policies of the government, victimized by its tolerance of crime, immigration, and social deviance, and ignored or ridiculed by the major cultural institutions of the media and education.
Sam Francis wrote a column about the CofCC that they used in recruiting efforts.
Much like Sam himself, the group embraced conservative positions on most issues. What set it apart, however, was its explicit defense of white people. Because of this, the CofCC attracted powerful enemies and was monitored by witch finders like the ADL and SPLC. In 1999, the organization attracted national attention—and condemnation from President Clinton—after reports surfaced that Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia had spoken at a 1998 meeting. Barr, of course, quickly backed down saying, “the racial views of the C.C.C. are repugnant to me, and I would never have spoken to the group had I known beforehand of its stand.”
This elicited the following quip from Joe Sobran: “It’s true I addressed them [the CofCC] some years ago. But I should state here, for the record, that I would never have accepted their invitation if I had known then of their associations with Republican leaders.”
Perhaps because of this media firestorm, C-SPAN covered the CofCC’s 1999 national conference in northern Virginia.
Today, the CofCC appears to be defunct as links to the website do not work. They last appeared in the news in 2015 when Dylan Roof revealed in his manifesto that he first learned the truth about black-on-white crime from the CofCC website. When pressed by the media, Earl Holt III, the president of the group at the time, condemned the attack but stated that their website “accurately and honestly reports black-on-white violent crime.”
The CofCC fought back for whites at a time when few did. Members of the group were ordinary middle- and working-class Americans. Yet they told the truth about race without regard to the consequences.
White Advocacy Today
A slogan the CofCC often used in its advertisements was “Fighting Back—and Winning!” While the CofCC certainly fought back, in truth they seldom won. White advocacy was taboo and there was not one institution on our side. But times are changing for the better.
The White Civil Advocacy Group was launched in March of this year. Under their mission statement they proclaim, “We believe that by working together for our own interests we can push back against discrimination and bias faced by White Americans in many areas of society. Our mission is to make White advocacy socially acceptable, politically relevant, and free from economic repercussions. We will lay the groundwork and pave the way for a new generation of professional and effective White advocacy in the United States.”
This certainly sounds promising. A look at the group’s website shows they are still in the organizing phase. Yet they plan to focus on things such as building a legal network to defend whites, organizing pressure campaigns targeting legislation and corporate initiatives, creating a political lobbying group for whites, and holding schools and universities accountable for anti-white discrimination.
They are recruiting volunteers and those interested can sign up for a newsletter or follow on X to keep track of their progress.
You can buy Greg Johnson’s The White Nationalist Manifesto here.
The founder of the group is C. Jay Engel, a paleoconservative who is a frequent guest on podcasts across the Dissident Right. In a recent interview with Kevin DeAnna, Engel explained that he asked Grok to identify organizations advocating for groups such as blacks, Asians, Muslims, Hispanics, and others. The AI tool quickly produced multiple organizations representing those interests. But when he asked it to identify groups advocating for whites, Grok couldn’t name any and instead directed him to the SPLC website!
Can the White Civil Advocacy Group succeed where previous white advocacy organizations failed? I believe there are three reasons for optimism.
First, the rise of social media and a growing Dissident Right sphere of influence means literally millions can be reached with pro-white messaging. Thirty years ago, white advocates were completely shut out of the media. Print newsletters and some talk radio shows were the only ways to spread the facts about anti-whiteness. This recent ability to bypass the media means that groups like the SPLC—who controlled discussions about race through their connections to journalists—can do far less damage. In fact, as I write this The House Judiciary Committee is holding hearings on how the SPLC “manufactured hate.”
Second, unlike the 1990s when there were zero elites who supported whites, today there are several. Elon Musk, President Trump, and numerous politicians and influencers now regularly criticize anti-whiteness on social media and elsewhere. Only a few years ago, Matt Walsh likely would have lost his job for producing documentaries that challenged prevailing narratives about slavery and the civil rights movement. Today, millions watch and share his work.
Third, rather than centering its efforts on protests, meetings, and rallies, the White Civil Advocacy Group appears focused on exercising power within institutions. By pursuing influence within politics, government, education, the legal system, corporations, and elsewhere, the group aims to ensure that white interests—as defined by whites—have organized representation.
It is surprising that a white advocacy group has not emerged over the past decade. Every single week now, I come across a new pro-white podcast, You Tube streamer or writer I had never heard of before. Many are quite young, which is an excellent sign for our movement. What is lacking is a unified advocacy group that can speak for whites and unite these efforts. If the White Civil Advocacy Group succeeds it will fill a major void. It will also signal that whites are now truly ready to fight back – and win.
13 comments
Thank you so much for starting my day on a positive note. Even on X it’s easy to find many unknowns speaking on behalf of our people.
I had a brief interaction with one of my first “red pill “guys. He made himself a public figure so I’m not outing him , Bernard chapin of chapins inferno, a wandering cauldron of politically incorrect commentary. He was more of a migtow libertarian sort but I’m sure he could define himself more nuanced whatever
anyway he was driven off YouTube or something as is publically a shell of his former greatness.
what’s sad is he put up a memorial of the zman. I was kinda shocked that he even listened to him because he vehemently disagrees with race realism . But he is very black pilled and I think that’s the only logical response of a race blind conservative to what’s happening
Our thing IS a white pill . Not the only one , but a big one. Great article
JT on YouTube at a Maryland college, unthinkable 7-8 years ago:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=E39N6rTPnig&pp=ugUEEgJlbg%3D%3D&ra=m
only difference is there is a noticeable increase in brown people in places they never would have been before ; so that’s a real numbers kinda thing, but I’ve always been of the mind that a few million stone cold racists like me are all it would take to take everything back and more
I wonder if it is possible to publish old Sam Francis columns from his Washington Times (and then syndicated columnist) days?
Great article! We don’t need a White Jesse Jackson; he lacked oratorical skills, and charisma. What we need is an American Adolf Hitler. 🙃
You could not be more correct, brother.
I doubt Mr. Hitler would waste a second of his time on amerikans.
Uncle Semantic: May 30, 2026 I doubt Mr. Hitler would waste a second of his time on amerikans.
—
Early on, Mr. Hitler admired some of America’s views on race, eugenics, race-mixing and Jews — until, that is, America lost her collective White mind between the world wars. See the astute Negro, William Spivey’s piece: How America Shaped Hitler’s Racist Views – The Good Men Project
Hitler admired American criminal laws forbidding miscegenation, particularly the mixed marriages or sexual relations between white and Black citizens. He admired Jim Crow segregation laws and other white supremacist provisions that effectively robbed African Americans of civil rights and made them second-class citizens. He especially admired American eugenics that prized white supremacy, and led to laws that encouraged sterilization of the “feebleminded,” and others found somehow defective. Hitler admired the mass extermination of Native Americans by “Nordic” settlers in the nineteenth century and the subsequent isolation of most Indigenous survivors on reservations.
I’ll repeat something I wrote earlier. After Hitler took power in 1933, Nazi lawyers carefully studied the American example as they crafted the Nuremberg Laws, the most reviled race legislation of the twentieth century. Those laws included the Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honour, which forbade marriages and extramarital intercourse between Jews and Germans and the employment of German females under 45 in Jewish households, and the Reich Citizenship Law, which declared that only those of German or related blood were eligible to be Reich citizens. Those laws were later expanded to place gypsies and Black people into the same categories as Jews…
Later, Mr. Hitler wised up after seeing what had happened to America between the world wars. He observed in his Secret Conversations, 1941-1944:
“I don’t see much future for the Americans … it’s a decayed country. And they have their racial problem, and the problem of social inequalities … my feelings against Americanism are feelings of hatred and deep repugnance … everything about the behaviour of American society reveals that it’s half Judaised, and the other half negrified. How can one expect a State like that to hold together?” – Adolf Hitler
Check this out , this is from a perhaps middle school reader from the 30s. Gens is simply race . It’s possible then that American whites can begin again to understand first that an American is a species of the European genus, and second they can love their own race, that is the American race. That’s what this says. The only sophist move would be use nation as ssn card holders but there’s no sensible way to see that the author meant that:
“Ita,” respondit puer. “Diū ab Americā āfuī et omnium terrārum America est mihi grātissima et cārissima. Gēns bona et magna est, et per omnēs terrās fāma eius est magna. Cīvis Americānus sum et gentem meam amō.”
what was the topic?
The CofC sounds like it was an admirable organization, but I don’t like the name. The original WHITE Citizens Council had a better name. Rebranding as “conservatives” rather than as unapologetic White advocates will not work.
Tying the cause of defending the White race in America to political conservatism is a big mistake. It will scare away many good, decent White people whose views on issues like taxation, military spending, guns, homosexuality, and abortion do not align with the Republican party.
What do you think of the view of Bob Whitaker? His view was that pro-White organizations with membership lists were a security risk and a waste of energy, and the best idea was to spread pro-White language and memes without doing any preliminaries that only offer our antiwhite enemies legally identifiable targets to attack. I assume you disagree with that, but I want to know why you disagree.
Joe Gould: May 28, 2026 What do you think of the view of Bob Whitaker? His view was that pro-White organizations with membership lists were a security risk and a waste of energy, and the best idea was to spread pro-White language and memes without doing any preliminaries that only offer our antiwhite enemies legally identifiable targets to attack. I assume you disagree with that, but I want to know why you disagree.
—
I take it that you are asking Mr. Bradley about Bob Whitiker. He can answer that from his perspective.
I met Bob a couple of times at your standard meet/eat/and retreat gatherings. Your assessment of his view of pro-White membership organizations as a “waste of energy” is essentially correct — but what did he create of lasting importance by simply “spreading pro-White language”?
Bob was a very smart, outstanding White man, but could not clearly see the necessity of our people organizing, despite perceived “security risks.” We must organize!
He told me to my face that William Pierce’s National Alliance was good except that Pierce did not make provisions for NA to last after he was gone. I thought to myself, “then why did you not join with him instead of criticizing him for daring to organize our people?”
The fact is, the ventures Bob started or were involved in — American Freedom Party, CoCC, his ‘Mantra’, etc. — are all defunct now, whereas Pierce’s Alliance is still relevant and lives on, despite a rough patch after the founder’s death — because Pierce’s superior ideas will not die as long as they have a strong following. His National Alliance, but especially his belief system, Cosmotheism, has the best chance to prevail as the alternative to the Christian conservative, democratic movement that is still much larger, but floundering.
Current National Alliance Media Director Kevin A. Strom honored Bob with an interesting interview in July 2004, nearly two years after Pierce’s death: “A White Future is Coming: An Interview with Bob Whitaker” at nationalvanguard.org
…Academia is a totally inbred group of people. All a professor does for a living is sign a piece of paper that says you took a course. Everything else a professor does is pleasing other professors. A professor gets his PhD by pleasing professors. He gets his job by pleasing professors. He gets published by pleasing professors. And he gets tenure by a vote of the faculty. So essentially what you have here is a totally inbred group of people. And when you have that in any bureaucracy they just go nuts.
KAS: Is it from the ‘professor class’ that we get the ideas that the survival of the European race is somehow ‘evil’; and that strangely illogical corollary that ‘race does not exist’?
BW: Yes. I go into that in some detail in the book. If you talk about nurture and nature — nurture is social science: sociology, psychology, education. All these things constitute nurture. And so the professors teach that there’s no such thing as nature, as heredity. Now these days, since we’ve made so many advances in genetics, they can’t actually say, as they did when I was young, that there’s simply no such thing as heredity. But they now say, ‘Well, there is heredity,’ but you will never hear one single word about heredity in any social science classroom in this country. First they’ll say there is heredity and environment, then they’ll completely ignore heredity.
KAS: Our college students, then, are being miseducated… KAS: You’re not a ‘respectable’ conservative, are you, Bob?
BW: Well, a ‘respectable’ conservative is the kind of nitwit that we have speaking on the media. In order to become a ‘respectable’ conservative, you have to get that word ‘respectable’ from the liberals.
KAS: They’re the conferrers of ‘respectability’?
BW: Yes. The minute someone steps out of line, he is denounced as a ‘racist,’ a ‘nut,’ or whatever. If he laughs at a liberal, he no longer is invited back. Joe Sobran did the foreword for Why Johnny Can’t Think: America’s Professor Priesthood. And Joe Sobran said that anyone who gives leftists the horselaugh they deserve does not get invited back. That’s the way you become a ‘respectable’ conservative: You don’t hit them where it hurts. Because they’ll get you if you do…
Jessie Jackson, the nigger who would spit in White people’s food when he worked in the Greenville, SC, Jack Tar Hotel restaurant in his youth because he said it empowered him. Is that what Whites need, really?
My favorite for a White leader of those mentioned in this article was Joe Sobran: “It’s true I addressed them [the CofCC] some years ago. But I should state here, for the record, that I would never have accepted their invitation if I had known then of their associations with Republican leaders.” A great quote from an honest White man. I used to attend CoCC gatherings in the 90s to recruit some of its more outstanding attendees to the National Alliance.
“The CofCC was the only white advocacy group around at that time.[1996].”. Wrong! William Pierce’s Alliance had been around for 25 years by then, unapologetically holding the hard line on racial loyalty and the JQ, but opposed to the declared mission statement in CoCC’s Citizens Informer tabloid: “Ours is a Christian movement based on Christian principles.” No wonder CoCC failed — one foot on the gas, the other firmly on the brake.
As I listened to David Sims’ words this morning on our weekly American Dissident Voices broadcast I thought, now here’s a subject that C-C’s House Negro essayist, Lipton Matthews could use to advise Whites to wake up and listen to some of his Negro wisdom:
Africans, though not as intelligent as Western Whites, are also less subject to Jewish media indoctrination, and, one could argue, more in touch with their natural instincts. In an interview with the press, a CNN reporter asked Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni whether he, personally, disliked homosexuals. Museveni replied: “Of course! They are disgusting.” Another reporter asked Kenya’s President Uhuru Kenyatta about the topic, and he explained at some length that “gay rights” have no particular importance in his country. In an interview with Sky News, a reporter asked the (then) President of Zambia, Edgar Chagwa Lungu, what he thought about “gay rights.” Lungu said he believed that decriminalizing homosexual acts would not be the right thing for Zambia and that the West should not judge Zambians as uncivilized because their culture did not favor the tolerance of “men having sex with other men.” In most African countries where homosexuality is legally frowned upon, meddlesome US ambassadors and leftist media representatives travel around trying to stir up trouble for African politicians who don’t favor “gay rights” and aren’t open to persuasion (i.e. aren’t corrupt enough to change their minds)…
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
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.