Featured Articles

We Invited a Plague into Our Society

/12 Comments/in , /by

An estimated 40% of America’s prison population is comprised of blacks despite representing only about 13% of the total U.S. population. From 1970 to 2020, the black prison population increased by 780% which is significantly higher than all other racial groups. For example, black men are six times more likely than white men to be incarcerated in their lifetimes. Black men are stopped and frisked by police at a rate 8.5 times higher than white men. And black youth are arrested at a rate 6.1 times higher than white youth (see World Metrics Report 2026, Law Justice System, ‘Black People in Prison Statistics’).

The statistical numbers may differ slightly depending on what source or year one reads, but the lesson remains the same – a hugely disproportionate number of black Americans are incarcerated for the crimes they commit, particularly felonious crimes of violence. Unless one wants to believe that blacks are always unjustly framed for their alleged crimes by crooked cops, including a justice system that specifically targets them for racial reasons, it becomes fairly evident that blacks possess strong proclivities toward crime and thus are a massive financial burden to the country.

Prior to the movement, blacks were generally prevented from full acceptance into white society by Jim Crow and Sundown laws. These laws did not prevent black criminality and dysfunction per se. They only prevented it from fully spreading into white neighborhoods, and even then, it did not sufficiently stop it in some instances.

There was a consensus among many white Americans that blacks bring trouble wherever they go even though it may not have been voiced in public that often. It was considered uncouth to say openly such truths in a polite society even though it seemed to have been believed by most Americans (albeit to differing degrees depending on the person’s exposure to black dysfunction). Our cities were generally much safer with menacing blacks kept at a distance by cops who were not afraid to keep them in line.

Most Americans today would find such notions cruel and ‘racist,’ and indeed these are not pleasant ideas nor even convincing to minds formed by political and racial correctness. But that’s only because whites for too long have been lulled to sleep with a deceptive government agenda seeking to convince us that American blacks are a great benefit to society and possess a culture and spirit that we should emulate.

They are portrayed among legacy media outlets and Hollywood as great builders and contributors to America’s success. When one bothers to peel back such lies and half-truths, a different picture emerges that’s not as friendly to government propaganda.

If given the chance, blacks will turn every city and community into another South Side Chicago, Baltimore, Oakland, Atlanta, Detroit, and Jackson Mississippi with all of its accompanying high crime levels, filth, dilapidated buildings, murders and businesses leaving because of continual thievery by the locals.

This is not to suggest that all American blacks are criminals or dysfunctional. There are many decent and honorable blacks in America and throughout much of the world. The problem is that there are not enough decent ones to overturn the long historical record of them as a people possessing low intelligence, temperamental, impulsive, violent and criminal. Even when civilized blacks complain about their own people, there is never any collective change for the good. No visible changes in their conduct or attitudes ever occur. Some perceptive blacks may concede the reality of ‘Black Fatigue,’ but not one of them has the power nor even a carefully constructed strategy to change the conduct of their own people.

That’s because these matters are genetic in nature combined with cultural traits, deeply ingrained attitudes, and environmental factors that strongly produces what we witness among blacks worldwide. This doesn’t mean that individual blacks cannot change or improve certain aspects of their thinking and conduct, but only that it’s an uphill battle at every turn and comparatively few blacks ever succeed at it.

The long history of blacks constantly succumbing to enslavement by various outside groups is at least strongly suggestive that they are inferior in some ways. An estimated 10 to 12 million African slaves were forcibly taken to the Americas during the Atlantic slave trade whereas among Europeans who were enslaved by Barbary pirates in North Africa between the 16th and 19th centuries, the estimated number is around 1 million to 1.25 million.

Such notions are only reinforced when one considers how blacks when left to themselves, are unable to create sophisticated, civilized and technological societies without continual guidance and resources from whites. Even when African blacks are given fully functioning cities and entire countries such as South Africa and Zimbabwe (formerly Rhodesia), they are unable to sustain them. Before long, corruption sets in and everything erodes and returns to the way it was prior to the arrival of the white man. Yet one doesn’t need to look at African countries for proof that blacks destroy all that they touch, simply consider what blacks in the U.S. have done to their own neighborhoods. The squalor, crime, and graffiti are indicators of the caliber of people we are forced to deal with.

The Belgian documentary from 2011, Empire of Dust, illustrates this very reality. “The film documents the struggle of a Chinese railroad logistics worker and his Congolese interpreter attempting to rebuild a crumbling road in Central Africa with local workers who are unmotivated to work” (Wikipedia). The Congolese workers are not just unmotivated to work, but they are hilariously incompetent and disorganized. They literally have no idea what they are doing. They are unable to see the bigger picture though they are surrounded by endless natural resources that could enrich their country for hundreds of years. Even when given tools and costly mechanical equipment, including patient direction by Chinese supervisors, they manage to fail at every task.

These inconvenient truths are known by many, so there’s nothing new in what I’ve written. Due to social media and body-worn cameras by police, an increasing number of Americans are getting a front-row seat to everyday black insanity. Though blacks called for all cops nationwide to wear body cameras during the George Floyd riots in 2020, many of these same blacks are now calling for them to be removed knowing full well how badly it paints their collective character.

Any American at this point who is not aware of how societally damaging blacks are to the U.S. is simply not paying attention or has been so severely twisted by liberal racial dogma that they are unable to see the obvious. Yet only a very foolish and self-destructive nation would knowingly give blacks free rein in their society, including special rights and a fawning media. America’s incremental path to national suicide, however, did not begin during the turbulent 1960s, but took root at its very founding.

Our Founding Fathers contributed to our current situation wherein about half of the delegates to the Constitutional convention owned slaves. George Washington owned over one hundred slaves at his death. The same may be said of James Madison. Patrick Henry owned up to 90 slaves. In a letter he wrote in 1773, he described slavery as repugnant yet never actually freed his slaves at the time. Thomas Jefferson owned more than 620 slaves over his lifetime. Prior to his death, he freed only two of them and after he passed, he freed only five more. The remaining slaves were later sold off to pay his estate debts.

Though our Founders spoke eloquently of such lofty ideas as ‘freedom’ and ‘liberty,’ and even in some instances of slavery as a moral evil, none of it caused them to abandon its practice because of the monetary loss that would occur had they actually followed their conscience on these matters. Many of our Founders professed to follow the Christian religion (actually, most of them were quasi-Christians and Deists), yet the Eighth Commandment of the Mosaic Law expressly forbids stealing: “Thou shalt not steal” (Exodus 20:15). How convenient of them to have ignored the moral implications of such a passage. They knew good and well that their receiving and purchasing of such slaves was based on pure theft and greed, something they had no right to do to another human being.

Our Founders, then, saddled all future generations of Americans with a hugely dysfunctional population of Africans that would prove to be a plague on American society. The Founders knew that slavery was wrong yet did nothing of substance to assure that the institution would be eradicated from the land. No real efforts were administered to repatriate freed slaves to their previous continent of origin.

While Abraham Lincoln may have had some interest in doing so, and even made attempts to organize such an endeavor, it was largely abandoned due to a lack of funds, including virtually no congressional support: “Four days before his death, speaking to Gen. Benjamin Butler, Lincoln still pressed on with deportation as the only peaceable solution to America’s problem. ‘I can hardly believe that the South and North can live in peace, unless we can get rid of the negroes . . . I believe that it would be better to export them all to some fertile country’ . . . Of course this would not happen” (“Lincoln to Slaves: Go Somewhere Else,” U.S. National Archives blog, Pieces of History, by H. Parkins, 12/01/2010).

To show just how obviously out of place Africans are in civilized western nations, consider what bizarre and inhuman practices occur among some African countries. For instance, in Tanzania, Malawi, Burundi and Mozambique, bald-headed albinos are faced with a uniquely terrifying problem of being hunted down in ‘ritual attacks’ and mutilated for their body parts because it’s believed that their heads contain gold inside!

In South Africa, many men adhere to what has become known as the ‘virgin cleansing myth,’ the idea that having sex with a virgin girl will cure a man infected with the HIV/AIDS virus. Public announcements and huge billboards across parts of Africa have been erected to plead with men to not rape little girls.

Thus, when you hear about skyrocketing levels of rape committed by black men in America, or when the black-on-black murder rate is so out of control that one eventually becomes numb to such information, or when entire inner-city campaigns have to be created to tell young black males to pull up their pants, or when blacks commit so much store theft that businesses in their neighborhoods are forced to close and move away, or when blacks brutalize and kill alarming numbers of innocent whites, just know that almost all of it is because our Founders and every presidential administration that came later failed to deal decisively with black slaves and their descendants by sending them back to the Dark Continent.

The racial strife that whites have been forced to endure for the past 250 years could have been avoided had policies been enacted from the beginning that would have peacefully returned blacks to where they originally came from. Did the Founders really think they could import hundreds of thousands of African slaves to America and that there would be no long-term consequences as a result? I don’t think they considered in any serious way the negative impact it would have on future generations of Americans. Like many politicians, they chose to ignore the problem and kick the can down the road.

Don’t worry, though, the American people lack the collective will to do anything like this and have for a very long time. It will never happen. For now, we are expected to be content with enormous crime rates, racial strife and division throughout the land, the ghettoization of American culture, and 13% of the population failing to assimilate and adhere to the civilized norms of our society.

So, what can white Americans do about the plague in our midst?

The first thing we can do is get away from them, at least as much as reasonably possible. Avoid them at all costs if you can. This doesn’t mean we should persecute them or do them any harm. That would serve no purpose, and it would only cause enormous numbers of our own people to sympathize with them. Better to be polite and civil but have nothing to do with them. Smile if you have to but walk away quickly.

Scott Adams, the creator of the Dilbert comic strip, arrived at this very practical truth. In 2023 during his video blog, ‘Real Coffee with Scott Adams,’ he reacted to a Rasmussen Reports poll by stating, “If nearly half of all blacks are not OK with white people, that’s a hate group.” He further stated, “The best advice I would give to white people is to get the hell away from black people. Just get the fuck away. Wherever you have to go, just get away. Because there’s no fixing this. This can’t be fixed.”

The second thing is to avoid their ‘culture,’ and not in any way celebrate it by purchasing their music or imitating their lifestyle. Ghetto culture in America has destroyed black communities throughout the land, and it will do the same to our white communities if we are foolish enough to follow their example.

The third thing to note is to teach your children about black dysfunction and criminality. When the opportunity arises, point out to them how blacks routinely act when they are stopped by the police or when the nightly news reports how many black men were killed over a weekend in Chicago. Blacks in America give us non-stop opportunities to see the ‘content of their character,’ so don’t neglect to use them as part of your children’s life lessons. You don’t have to convey it in an angry tone either. You could even use humor as a way of opening their minds to racial realities.

Never forget that what you’re producing is a future generation of whites who will not make the same mistakes as prior generations when it comes to the blatant lies told to us by a duplicitous government that has turned on Heritage Americans.

Ambrose Kane writes on  Substack. Subscribe to get full access to the newsletter and publication archives.

Women with Borderline Personality Disorder Have Helped Shape Our Culture and Our History

/6 Comments/in /by

There is a common idea that the world is ruled by extremely intelligent male psychopaths. Social status is predicted by intelligence combined with a pro-social personality. But very high status is different. This is a combination of extremely high intelligence and moderately anti-social personality. Low in impulse control, you can think outside the box. Low in Agreeableness, you don’t care if your new ideas offend people. High in mental instability, you are constantly ruminating and desperately want to make sense of a world which you perceive as frightening chaos. Add to this a cut-throat desire for power and the charisma, confidence, self-importance and need for praise that comes from Narcissism, and a pronounced eminence is a result.

A study entitled “Creativity and Psychopathology” actually found that the majority of “great men” were sub-clinally Narcissistic or Psychopathic. But this got me thinking, “What about the great women? What is their psychology? What about the wives and mistresses of great men; the power behind the throne?”

This became the subject of my new book, Borderline Genius/Borderline Insane: Understanding Borderline Personality Disorder and How Female Borderlines Have Shaped History. Now, obviously, there are fewer great women and their influence tends to be weaker than that of great men. This is because females have fewer outliers who have extremely high intelligence, and because females sexually select for status, meaning males have more of an innate drive to achieve it. Women are also more pro-social and they are evolved to adapt to polygamous mating systems where they create cliques of complete equality and trust in order to alloparent your children. The “Queen Bee” is shunned. So, we can expect great women to be psychological outliers to a greater extent than great men.

Drawing on Charles Murray’s Human Accomplishment, where he calculated influence scores for prominent people up until 1950, I focused on Anglophone females, such that I could read the primary sources. What I found was that the majority of great Anglophone females reached the criteria for what is called Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD), marked as we would expect, by low Agreeableness, low Conscientiousness and high Neuroticism; this is a Cluster B disorder, associated with depression, and it is related to the “Dark Triad” of Psychopathy, Narcissism and Machiavellianism.

The stereotypical example of borderline would be Sylvia Plath; dramatic emotional swings, overwhelming depression, oscillating between self-absorbed Narcissism and despair, symbolic suicide attempts, biting the stranger Ted Hughes in an impulsive expression of obsessive love and wedding him shortly after; intense and tempestuous relationships, experimenting with different selves.

The DSM symptoms of BPD are extreme mood swings, fear of abandonment, impulsive risk-taking (such as adultery), an unstable sense of self, chronic emptiness, intense idealising and de-idealising of partners (“splitting”), uncontrollable anger, self-harm (to feel a sense of control of the agony), and dissociation and psychosis under stress. The condition is “on the border” between neurosis and psychosis. Eighty per cent of those who are diagnosed have a comorbid personality disorder (often Narcissism) and 75% of those diagnosed with BPD are women. The BPD figures from Human Accomplishment explored in my book include Virginia Woolf, Charlotte Bronte, Emily Bronte and George Eliot, A number of the great women did not reach the criteria of at least 5 out of the 9 symptoms such as Jane Austen, Emily Dickinson and Willa Cather.

It was noticeable that the majority of these great women were not sub-clinical. They reached the cut-off point for the personality disorder and, in many cases, displayed almost all of the symptoms. This makes sense, in that women tend to be highly socially conformist, lacking in ambition, and are evolved to not stand out, at least socially. BPD is likely causal insomuch as these women were novelists and poets. Expressing their intense negative feelings could act as a kind of therapy and a means of making sense of a chaotic world. Immersing themselves in a world of their creation would be consistent with dissociation. An unstable sense of self means that you experiment with different personas, question who you are, and change your ambitions and ideas. At any one time, you will have an extreme and black and white identity, as a way of controlling a dangerous world. This permits you, as a writer, to convincingly describe different types of people, because you have “been them.”

However, it is important to note that there is a strong genetic component to personality disorders—around 50%. Due to the way in which we select for genetic similarity, in order to pass on more of our genes, the personality disordered tend to be attracted to each other, with suffering from depression being a central factor. In addition, the Narcissistic man will love being idealised by a borderline woman. She idealises her special person—the black and white thinking, again—as her rescuer and regulator of her intense emotions. She is attracted to high-status and much older men (as age is a proxy for status) and she is effectively adapted to a dangerous, unstable ecology in which only the high-status genes survive.

It would follow that a certain kind of “great woman” —an absolute monarch queen regnant—would be likely to have borderline traits. Studies I review have found that the fathers of borderlines tend to have Cluster B traits, certain genes express as violence in men but self-harm in women, and there is evidence that Narcissism is X-linked and, so, more likely to pass from father to daughter. Clearly, we would predict that historical kings, who had to fight against rebellions, would be Cluster B; likely Narcissists. I have found that all four British absolute queens regnant—Lady Jane Grey, Mary I, Elizabeth I and Mary Queen of Scots—met the criteria for BPD, with the latter being very extreme and marrying her rapist. In that only about 2% of women have BPD then, as with the writers, this was highly statistically significant.

My book also explored other kinds of highly influential women and, once more, found that Borderline Personality Disorder, or related Cluster B disorders, was central. This pattern is clear among the wives and mistresses of many “great men.” Anne Boleyn, who essentially caused England’s break with Rome, was seemingly Histrionic, a condition where one is dangerously flirtatious and needs to be the centre of attention. Princess Diana, wife of the future king, was evidently a borderline. Both of the most prominent mistresses of Adolf Hitler—Eva Braun and Unity Mitford—were almost archetypal borderlines, with suicide being strongly elevated among borderlines.

The influence of borderlines, the book argues, is also elevated by the increasing feminisation of society, in which females are increasingly influential and are increasingly taken seriously. In addition, the breakdown of harsh Darwinian conditions since the Industrial Revolution—before which we were selecting for being group-oriented and pro-social—will mean more borderlines, as does a culture obsessed with harm avoidance and emotion. This means that women with borderline traits are not compelled to suppress the related behaviour. In its absence you see eating disorders, gender dysphoria, bisexuality, and pathological lying (as with Virginia Roberts Giuffre), traits that are all robustly associated with BPD.

I argue that female campaigning groups (wherein you deal with you negative feelings by telling yourself you are morally superior, a Narcissistic method) tend to reflect borderline traits—anger (fury at Pro-Life activists), mood swings (such as moving from tantrum to pleading when being arrested), self-harm (gluing yourself to the road to “Just Stop Oil,” Suffragettes going on hunger strikes), identity disturbance (tattoos as a means of asserting a clear self, the way in which many Suffragettes flipped and joined the British Union of Fascists), dangerous impulsivity (ex-fundamentalist Renee Nicole Good driving her car at an ICE officer), and paranoid psychosis (feeling “literally unsafe” in the presence of opponents).

However, the book notes that, if anything, you would expect high levels of BPD among women on the “far right.” Not only are they frequently formerly of the “far left,” implying an unstable sense of self, but, in a Woke world, they are extreme non-conformists, in contrast to leftist super-conformist women. The risk-taking involved in BPD—combined with a strong desire for masculine, high-status men and a realisation that the wind is blowing rightwards—would make sense of this.

It is a common feminist idea that the influence of women in history has been down-played. On this point, I think they are right, though not for the right reasons. High-status men are Narcissists who attract borderline women who, thus, exert indirect influence over them. In modern times, however, the influence of these kinds of women—on the culture, via literature and even on politics—is considerable and is likely to continue growing.

Thoughts on the Fecklessness of the Texas GOP

/9 Comments/in /by

The establishment elites screaming about Bo French’s tweets are the very figures who presided over Texas’ frightening demographic transformation.

Bo French opened the week of September 13 by treating a University of Texas celebration as proof that America had already been lost. The Republican nominee for the Texas Railroad Commission circulated an image of South Asians and wrote, “I heard UT graduation this year looked like this. I didn’t believe it. The problem is now obviously far worse than anyone imagined.” He followed that with a second post. “Like body-cams exposed criminals, social media is exposing how many Americans have been displaced by foreigners. It’s everywhere and far worse than any of us could imagine.”

As a UT Austin alumnus, French’s comments validated a statewide trend I observed from my childhood in an affluent North Dallas suburb all the way through my 2013 graduation from UT. Namely, the demographic transformation of the state, a shift that has only accelerated in the last decade or so.

The demographic shift at UT Austin has been quite stark. The Daily Texan, citing a New York Times analysis, reported that White enrollment at UT Austin fell from 87 percent in 1980 to 44 percent by 2015. Current figures compiled by Data USA put White students at about 31.5 percent, Hispanic or Latino students around 25.5 percent, and Asian students around 22.4 percent. International undergraduates made up about 4 percent in 2025 to 2026, The Texas Tribune noted.

The same pattern defines the state. Texas A&M sociologist Dudley L. Poston noted that Hispanic residents had become the largest group in Texas at 40.2 percent, compared with 39.4 percent for White residents who are not Hispanic. In 1990, those White Texans still made up 60.6 percent of the population, according to the Texas Politics Project. The Texas Demographic Center showed that minority populations accounted for 95.3 percent of nearly 4 million in growth between 2010 and 2020, while White residents who are not Hispanic contributed 4.7 percent. The Bush Center cites projections of a 2050 Texas in which Hispanics comprise 42.7 percent and White residents who are not Hispanic fall to 28.6 percent.

Indian Texans stand at the center of the image French posted. Pew Research Center estimates that roughly 570,000 Indian Americans now reside in Texas, the second largest state population after California. That growth followed the 1965 Immigration Act and the 1990 Immigration Act that created the modern H-1B system, which together enabled employers in Austin, Dallas and Houston to import large waves of cheap labor from South Asia. One caveat: this author and many other disaffected Texans may view these figures as substantially understating the actual scale of demographic change, given how overwhelmed many Texas suburbs have become by South Asian migration in the last two decades.

What French won’t tell you is that his party has presided over the state’s Great Replacement and has done virtually nothing to check it. Ballotpedia records 23 years of Republican trifectas in Texas from 2003 through 2025. After 2010, Republicans reached 101 of 150 House seats. The Railroad Commission position French is running for is a three-member body that regulates oil and gas rather than railroads. It does not write visa caps or pass immigration restriction measures.

He can evoke the played out Southern Strategy and race-bait to turn out the White vote as election day approaches. However, he cannot meaningfully restrict immigration from that governmental position. The man across the ballot is Jon E. Rosenthal, a Jewish mechanical engineer and Texas state representative for House District 135 since January 2019.

The Humanist described him as agnostic and “multireligious,” raised by a Jewish father and a Christian mother, with more than two decades of oil and gas work. At 14 he lived in Israel for a year while his father taught at Hebrew University of Jerusalem and became conversational in Hebrew. The Forward reported that he later took his legislative oath on a Torah he received as a bar mitzvah gift.

Taking advantage of the post-October 7 “vibe shift” that has allowed for public figures to indulge in all manner of antisemitic and racial appeals to disgruntled White voters, French took some thinly veiled shots at Rosenthal’s ethno-religious background. In a fundraising email first reported by Texas Monthly, he circulated an AI generated image of Rosenthal in the room where Russia’s Romanov family was killed. The email claimed Rosenthal has “much in common with the Marxist revolutionaries who brutally executed the Romanov family,” making a reference to the disproportionate role Jews played during the Bolshevik Revolution that set the stage for the Soviet subjugation of the Russian-speaking world.

French has clearly updated the Southern Strategy script for the current year. Perhaps he may even have some groypers on his staff that help craft such race-baiting strategies. Who knows.

Nevertheless, French talks about foreigners and demographic displacement but offers no concrete statute the Railroad Commission could pass. White voters remain the bedrock of the Republican electorate in Texas, and when an election is close, the party will scrounge for any type of White support it can get. French knows the game all too well.

Behind the fiery rhetoric lies a generic pro-Zionist Republican. On his iVoterGuide questionnaire he called Israel “a strategic ally in a region of radical Islamists who hate us” and boasted that he alone had “proposed detailed plans for a stronger partnership between the Railroad Commission and the Israeli energy industry.” That posture sits beside the 2025 social media poll in which, as The Dallas Morning News reported, he asked followers who posed “a bigger threat to America” and listed Jews or Muslims as the options, in a clear ploy to tap into the racial instincts of Texas voters. Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick replied, “Bo French’s words do not reflect my values nor the values of the Republican Party,” and demanded “immediate resignation and replacement.” French refused. “I have always strongly supported Israel and I’m not resigning,” he wrote in response.

Pro-Zionist oil billionaires Tim Dunn and Farris Wilks are key supporters of French’s political campaign. Their political network, then operating as the Texas Freedom Fund for the Advancement of Justice, gave French $225,000 and spent another $150,000 on an ad, more than half of the $637,139 he had raised through late February. Dunn also chairs the Christian Advisory Board of the Israel Allies Foundation, whose stated mission is to “equip and empower pro-Israel legislators.” The foundation credits him with organizing numerous trips to Israel for politicians. Additionally, French received an endorsement from the American Jewish Conservatives, a Dallas-based grassroots organization that describes itself as “fervently Pro-God, Pro-America, Pro-Israel and Pro-Constitution, during the 2026 primary cycle.

The amusing part of this episode is how squeamish the Texas Republican Party remains about French’s otherwise played-out race-baiting script. Even for those empty suits, that’s a bridge too far. Outgoing Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) asked whether Republican officials would “condemn the intolerance and racism, or look the other way while it becomes normalized.”

By September 17 he had ruled out voting for French. “He’s an embarrassment to the Republican Party, and he’s going to drag the whole ticket down because of his racist comments,” Cornyn said, according to Houston Public Media. “I may just leave it blank.” He still declined to back Rosenthal.

Establishment Republican hack Karl Rove went further. After calling French a “bigot” at a private Austin lunch, he used a Wall Street Journal column to pledge his vote to Rosenthal, only the second Democrat he said he had ever supported, after Lt. Gov. Bob Bullock in 1994. “The GOP has a growing number of Bo Frenches—and not only in Texas,” Rove wrote. “This November, I’ll vote for only the second Democrat in my life.” He added, “The GOP’s stables need a cleaning. This is a good place to start.”

Regardless of all the noise being made, French will not move the needle in any meaningful way on immigration restriction. The office he is running for has little to no impact on changing immigration policy—what is actually a federal matter to begin with. His party already held a trifecta while Texas has changed, so there’s scant reason to believe that the situation will change if people vote straight-ticket Republican this election cycle.

From a big picture perspective, politicians come and go, while corporate oligarchs—the key drivers of mass migration policy—remain fixtures in the state’s plutocratic structure. Mark Cuban, one of the most prominent Jewish billionaires in Texas who enthusiastically promotes mass migration, told FOX Business in 2015, “if someone from another country earns a job, more power to them.” In March 2025 he posted, “The H1b Visa game is ridiculous,” and argued that corporations should pay $5 million for immediate citizenship for any employee earning over $500,000.

Dell Technologies CEO Michael Dell, also of Jewish extraction, in a 2017 internal memo quoted by CRN, pledged, “We will advocate for immigration reform that supports our business, our customers, our team members and their families.” Department of Labor data compiled by MyVisaJobs show Dell USA filed 434 H1B labor applications in fiscal 2025, even as FOX Business reported Dell cut its workforce from about 133,000 to 97,000 in 2023.

Between French and Rosenthal, and any other statewide race in Texas for that matter, there are no good choices for Texas. Red meat rhetoric on the campaign won’t change the structural factors that have led to Texas’ demographic transformation.

The path ahead is clear. Unless the prevailing Judeo-capitalist order is dismantled, Texas will inevitably succumb to the same entropy as the rest of the country, becoming little more than an incoherent racial mish-mash. It is a modern Tower of Babel, overseen by a regime of Jewish oligarchs who utilize their loyal South Asian functionaries to manage our collective displacement.

A nightmare scenario by any measure.

The Boss of Poss: Juggling a Jewish and a Gentile Giant of Science Fiction

/7 Comments/in /by

Whether it’s in physics or math or linguistics, compression is a fascinating thing. In physics, the apparently simple act of compressing air and other fluids has led to huge advances in our understanding of matter. In math, compressing data with and without loss draws on brain-daunting theory for barrier-demolishing practice. And in linguistics, using a little to say a lot is a game we can all play. For example, what are the shortest ways of defining science fiction and fantasy fiction? Here’s my attempt: science fiction invokes the possible future, whereas fantasy evokes the impossible past.

Two Time-Trips

And so H.G. Wells looked forward for trips to the Moon and travel through time, while J.R.R. Tolkien looked back to fire-breathing dragons and walking, talking trees. Of course, science fiction can be set in the past and fantasy can be set in the future. And what seems possible or impossible may not actually be so. But I think orientation to future or past, to possibility or impossibility, is what separates the two genres. I’ve written about both science fiction and fantasy before at the Occidental Observer. Now I’d like to write about science fiction again. That’s because I’ve recently emulated one of H.G. Wells’ heroes and made a trip through time. In fact, I’ve made two trips through time. But only in a metaphorical sense. I’ve re-read two books by men who could each be described as a Boss of Poss, as a giant of science fiction and its exploration of what may be possible in the future.

The Bosses: Arthur C. Clarke (left) and Isaac Asimov

Yes, I’ve re-read two SF classics that delighted me as a boy. I wanted to re-visit my memories of the books and see what I think about them now as an adult. And also to see something I didn’t care about as a boy: what each book says about the Boss of Poss who wrote it. In particular, I was interested in the race of each Boss of Poss. Back then I wouldn’t’ve cared about that. I would’ve said: What does it matter that Arthur C. Clarke (1917–2008) is gentile and Isaac Asimov (1920-92) is Jewish? What I say now is: It matters a lot. And I think you can see how it matters in the SF classics I’ve recently re-read: Arthur C. Clarke’s The City and the Stars (1956) and Isaac Asimov’s The Gods Themselves (1972), which I’ll abbreviate as TCaTS and TGT, respectively.

The Books: The City and the Stars (1956) and The Gods Themselves (1972)

I’ll also try some more compression right now and summarize the books as well as I can without giving away spoilers. The City and the Stars is about a dynamic youth born into a static, billion-year-old city-civilization that has turned its back on the Universe. The youth is determined to turn the city back towards the stars and travels out amongst them to discover how. The Gods Themselves is about two universes: this one containing humans and another containing very strange aliens. The laws of physics differ between the two, which is why an alien-arranged link between them seems to offer humans huge benefits without apparent cost.

“Beauty in many forms”

The two books are very different and have very different styles, themes and obsessions. And what are those different themes and obsessions? The first thing that comes to mind is beauty. And its absence. The City and the Stars is beautifully written and has prose that’s a pleasure to read.[1] The Gods Themselves isn’t and doesn’t. And TCaTS repeatedly talks about beauty, which is something that obviously mattered to Clarke:

Men had sought beauty in many forms — in sequences of sound, in lines upon paper, in surfaces of stone, in the movements of the human body, in colours ranged through space. All these media still survived in Diaspar and down the ages others had been added to them. No one was yet certain if all the possibilities of art had been discovered, or if it had any meaning outside the mind of Man. (The City and the Stars, Chapter 5; “Diaspar” is the City of the book’s title)

The planet they were approaching was now only a few million miles away, a beautiful sphere of multicoloured light. There could be no darkness anywhere upon its surface, for as it turned beneath the Central Sun, the other stars would march one by one across its skies. Alvin now saw very clearly the meaning of the Master’s dying words: “It is lovely to watch the coloured shadows on the planets of eternal light.” (Chapter 20)

The Gods Themselves, by contrast is not beautifully written and its prose isn’t a pleasure to read.[2] It’s not painful to read either, but Asimov’s style is much coarser and cruder than Clarke’s. And Asimov doesn’t create pictures in your head in the way Clarke does:

Denison looked about doubtfully. The Moon lay beautiful in the cold light of the Earth. It was black and white; a mild and delicate white as compared with the Sunlit views he had seen when he had taken a trip a week before to inspect the Solar batteries that stretched from horizon to horizon along the floor of Mare Imbrium. And the black was somehow softer, too, through lack of the blazing contrast of true day. The stars were supernally bright and the Earth — the Earth — was infinitely inviting with its swirls of white on blue, and its peeping glimpse of tan. (The Gods Themselves, Section 3, chapter 10)

That odd phrase “peeping glimpse of tan” is either a typo for “peeping glimpse of man” or a reminder that English wasn’t Asimov’s mother-tongue (if “tan” refers to the brown of deserts). He was born in Russia and his Jewish parents spoke Yiddish to him at home even after the family had emigrated to America in 1923. But I don’t think Asimov would’ve written beautifully in Yiddish or Russian either. After all, art is a universal language and American-based Jews from Russia like Mark Rothko and Adolph Gottlieb did not create beautiful art (see Brenton Sanderson’s discussion of Rothko and the central role of Jews in the decline of Western art). Beauty doesn’t matter to Jews as it does to gentiles. As Kevin MacDonald has noted, the Talmud advises Jews not to regard physical beauty as important in marriage: “For ‘false is grace and beauty is vain.’ Pay regard to good breeding, for the object of marriage is to have children” (Taanith 26b and 31a). And I’ve argued before at the Occidental Observer that ugliness is characteristic of Jews in their appearance, art and architecture. I’d argue here that the beauty in TCaTS and the lack of it TGT are truly representative of Clarke as a gentile and Asimov as a Jew.

The Guru and the Guide

But while Asimov’s aesthetics are inferior to Clarke’s, his inventions might’ve been superior. I was dazzled by the ideas in TGT when I read it as a boy and I was dazzled again on my re-read. The alien universe of the book — the parallel Universe or para-Universe, as the human characters call it — didn’t come alive in my head when Asimov took me there, but the central section devoted to it is by far the best and most memorable in the book. Indeed, I’d almost entirely forgotten the human-centered sections that come before and after it. I’d never forgotten the gas-based aliens with their three hugely different sexes or the aliens’ scientific ingenuity whereby they contact humans and arrange what seems a mutually beneficial exchange of matter. As one human character speculates in the first section: “In the parallel Universe, tungsten-186 may be as anomalous as plutonium-186 is here. It may begin as a stable substance and slowly become increasingly radioactive. It may serve as an energy source there just as plutonium-186 would here.”

If you’ve got the science to understand why tungsten-186 and plutonium-186 are “anomalous,” TGT might be just the book for you (if you’ve not already read it). It’s got solid chemistry and physics in it, because Asimov trained as a chemist and was very scientifically knowledgeable. TGT is, indeed, didactic in a way TCaTS isn’t: Asimov acts as a guru for the reader, Clarke acts as a guide. There were millennia of Jewish evolution as students and teachers of Torah and Talmud behind Asimov’s intellect, intelligence and personality. But Clarke’s surname reminds you that evolution for education and literacy has taken place among White gentiles too. Clarke means “clerk,” someone skilled in reading and writing.[3] But “clerk” itself originally meant cleric, and Christian clerics, unlike Jewish rabbis, were supposed to be celibate. In The Descent of Man (1877), the great Charles Darwin followed the even greater Francis Galton, arguing that this Christian celibacy was dysgenic for intelligence and other important intellectual traits:

At that early period, as Mr. Galton has remarked, almost all the men of a gentle nature, those given to meditation or culture of the mind, had no refuge except in the bosom of a Church which demanded celibacy; and this could hardly fail to have had a deteriorating influence on each successive generation. During this same period the Holy Inquisition selected with extreme care the freest and boldest men in order to burn or imprison them. In Spain alone some of the best men—those who doubted and questioned, and without doubting there can be no progress—were eliminated during three centuries at the rate of a thousand a year. The evil which the Catholic Church has thus effected is incalculable, though no doubt counterbalanced to a certain, perhaps to a large, extent in other ways; nevertheless, Europe has progressed at an unparalleled rate. (Darwin’s The Descent of Man, 1877)

Judaism, by contrast, mandated that its holy men marry and so was eugenic for intelligence. Is that part of why the small population of Jews can produce geniuses at a rate not far below that of the much larger population of gentile Whites? The highly intelligent Clarke and Asimov weren’t geniuses, but they were the two biggest names in SF during their lifetimes. Statistically speaking, that’s highly anomalous when it comes to Asimov, from the tiny world-minority of Jews, but much less so when it comes to Clarke, from the much larger world-minority of the White British. However, while Judaism was eugenic for intelligence, it wasn’t eugenic for aesthetics. The literacy of Jews was centered on convolved religious and legal texts until recent times; the literacy of Christian gentiles has ranged much further for centuries, from pagan classics to the Bible to plays, poetry, and novels to science and mathematics. Does all of that help explain why there’s much more wonder and beauty in the gentile Clarke’s book than in the Jewish Asimov’s book? You could also say there’s more width (and depth and height) in Clarke’s book too, although Asimov’s takes you to an entirely different universe.

An obvious Asimovian obsession

The trouble is, as I said above, that Asimov doesn’t evoke that other universe well. The tri-sexed alien gas-beings of the para-universe are excellent inventions, but they don’t come alive on the page any more than Asimov’s human beings do. The rocky, sun-starved planet of the gas-beings doesn’t have solidity and substance on the page either. In some ways, the para-universe seems to have been an excuse for Asimov to pursue his obvious obsession with sex. Threesomes are obligatory for reproduction in the para-universe, because each of the three sexes of alien contributes something essential: intellect, intuition, practicality. And the aliens don’t swap fluids: they merge gases, uniting in an individuality-annihilating ecstasy of oneness-from-threeness. On Earth we have couples; in the para-universe they have what Asimov calls “throuples.” He centers his para-section on a throuple whose names are Odeen, Dua and Tritt (based on the Russian words for “One, Two, Three”). In short, his ideas for the para-universe are excellent, even if his imagery is lacking. And there’s an ingenious twist to the throuple’s final throupling that casts the para-story in a sudden new light.

But Asimov can’t help himself where sex is concerned: beside the obligatory throupling, he invents a new form of masturbation for the para-universe. It involves not rod-rubbing but rock-rubbing. Again, it’s ingenious, but after reading TGT you won’t be surprised to hear that Asimov was a dedicated lecher and habitual groper. He was a true Semitic sex-pest à la Harvey Weinstein. There’s an obsession with sex in both the para-section of TGT and in the much less interesting section that follows it, when Asimov returns to this universe. He takes a male character to a moon-base to learn about the benefits of lower lunar gravity for the female breast:

The Earthman was staring at the nameplate she wore on the blouse covering the upper slope of her high, not-too-large left breast. She decided it was really the name-plate he was looking at, not the breast, though the blouse was semi-transparent when it caught the light at a particular angle and there was no garment beneath it. (Section 3, chapter 1)

No, it was the breast too, not just the nameplate. So you won’t be surprised from Asimov’s book to hear about Asimov’s lechery. And you won’t be surprised from Asimov’s lechery to hear about Asimov’s pornography. That’s the porn of Asimov Jr, Isaac’s son David, and it was “the biggest child pornography collection in Sonoma County, [California], history.” Interestingly, none other than Robert Mueller of the FBI helped David Asimov avoid a prison sentence and serve only home detention. Mueller was also involved when the Jewish child-rapist Jeffrey Epstein was treated with similar leniency. Many people have suggested that Jewish privilege was at work in both cases.

But another kind of privilege very likely explains why Arthur C. Clarke was never prosecuted for pederasty after he moved to Sri Lanka. Asimov fathered a male child; Clarke fornicated with male children. His fame, wealth and official connections seem to have ensured that the Sri Lankan authorities took no notice. I don’t think you would guess Clarke’s perversions from TCaTS, although I’ve realized that they are pretty obvious in some of his other novels. All the same, there is some sexual peculiarity in TCaTS, even if it’s not as obtrusive and obsessive as it is in TGT. As Vox Day has often observed and lamented: science fiction attracts pedophiles and other sexually peculiar people, both as authors and as aficionados (it’s said that when American police raid a pedophile’s home, they always find the pedo is also a Trekkie).

A jellyfish-genius

This may be related to the psychological factors of intelligence and openness, which will both be higher on average among authors and aficionados of science fiction. It may also be related to the psychological factor of autism, which is something I can see now in both TCaTS and TGT. But Asimov’s autism is more obvious: his characters are cardboard in a way Clarke’s aren’t. And Clarke’s most ingenious alien — a self-assembling and —disassembling jellyfish-genius — comes alive on the page in a way that Asimov’s ingenious aliens never do. But Clarke’s human characters don’t have life and vividness like those of Charles Dickens or Evelyn Waugh. Again, science fiction attracts the autistic both as authors and aficionados. That isn’t surprising, because science does the same. Science is about mechanism and it attracts and encourages a mechanistic, mathematizing mindset. I argued in my article “Contra Camera” that J.R.R. Tolkien opposed that mindset in Lord of the Rings (1954-5), where the evil wizard Saruman boasts of splitting white light into colors and the good wizard Gandalf rebukes him for leaving the “path of wisdom.”

I think Saruman is meant to represent Isaac Newton and his experiments with prisms. I also think Lord of the Rings is a much wiser, saner and healthier book than either The City and the Stars or The Gods Themselves. But I’m glad that I can appreciate all three books and I think all three contain things of value for Whites to learn from. And to be warned by. As Asimov might have said: the three books are a throuple and each brings something unique to the mix. But as an adult I’ve kept re-reading my boyhood favorite Lord of the Rings. I haven’t re-read those boyhood favorites among Clarke’s and Asimov’s books. Not until this year. I don’t think Lord of the Rings is as well-written as The City and the Stars and I know it’s not as intellectually stimulating as The Gods Themselves. Tolkien wasn’t a Boss of Poss like Clarke and Asimov. Instead, he was a lord of language and life in a way they weren’t and could never have been.

Juggling the Giants

But who do I think was the Boss of Poss when it comes to Clarke and Asimov? Well, having juggled the strengths and weaknesses of TCaTS and TGT, I think I agree with the SF giants themselves. They decided that Clarke could call himself the better author of science fiction and Asimov could call himself the better author of science fact. TGT is an intellectual adventure, true, but TCaTS is both an intellectual adventure and an aesthetic treat. Clarke could write good science fact himself, but he never matched Asimov and masterpieces of lucidity like Asimov’s The World of Carbon (1958).

I still can say of The World of Carbon what I can’t say of TGT: it’s a delight to read. As an introduction to organic chemistry, it’s unbeatable. But even as a boy I didn’t find Asimov’s science fiction particularly enjoyable to read. All the same, I might re-read his robot-stories in 2026, because I can see how prescient they are of the AI age. I will definitely re-read more by Clarke in 2026, because I know his other novels were prescient and I think they will still be enjoyable to read. The City and the Stars certainly was, jellyfish-genius and all. Clarke calls that ingenious alien “the great polyp” and homes it in a lake. He may have been nodding towards a lake-dwelling polypous monster in Lord of the Rings, but his giant polyp is tragic, not traumatizing:

Alvin realised that he would have to act quickly, or his opportunity would be gone — perhaps only for a few years, perhaps for centuries.

“What have you decided?” he said eagerly. “Is the robot coming with us?”

There was an agonising pause while the polyp tried to force its dissolving body to obey its will. The speech-diaphragm fluttered, but no audible sound came from it. Then, as if in a despairing gesture of farewell, it waved its delicate palps feebly and let them fall back into the water, where they promptly broke adrift and went floating out into the lake. In a matter of minutes, the transformation was over. Nothing of the creature larger than an inch across remained. The water was full of tiny, greenish specks which seemed to have a life and mobility of their own, and which rapidly disappeared into the vastness of the lake. (Chapter 13)

[1] I don’t think Clarke’s prose matches the beauty and pleasure of P.G. Wodehouse’s or Evelyn Waugh’s, but it’s some of the best I’ve ever come across in science fiction. I’d also guess that Clarke was a fan of Wodehouse, because Clarke’s lucidity reminds me of Wodehouse’s.

[2] The Gods Themselves does have a good title, though, taken by Asimov from Schiller’s famous maxim Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens, “Against stupidity, the Gods themselves battle in vain.” I’m still grateful to Asimov, because the title is where I first came across the maxim.

[3] In British English, clerk is still pronounced “clark” like the surname.

On Late Loyalism: Rescuing the Lost Sheep of Greater Britain, Part Two of Two

/5 Comments/in , , , /by

Go To Part 1.

The Invisible Race at the End of the Axial Age

While Maoris still practiced an immanentist religion, white Anglo-Saxon Protestants were already becoming transcendentalists in both politics and religion.  Two-and-a-half centuries later, the fundamental truths guiding spiritual life for American WASPs, even the ethical truths and legal norms governing the secular realm, have become fully universal in scope and effect.  As the universalist logic of the Axial Age unfolded and the global American empire extended its geopolitical hegemony, it became axiomatic among American WASPs that one’s religious identity transcends both politics and ethnicity.  Accordingly, the contemporary rise of interest in Christian nationalism presents WASPs with a problem: how can a universal Christian religion accommodate particularistic national, much less racial and ethnic identities?  Wouldn’t that be akin to squaring a circle?

In 2025 two important American Christian Nationalist conferences were held, the themes of which illustrate the two horns of that dilemma.  One, sponsored by Right Response Ministries in Texas was devoted to discussions of Christ the King: How to Defeat Trash World.  The theme itself echoes seventeenth-century Anabaptists, English dissenters, and reformed American colonists who swore allegiance to “No King but Jesus” as a call for fidelity to Christ, lawful resistance to tyranny, and spiritual freedom.  Clearly, the conference organizers were invoking the transcendent authority of Christ in opposition to those ostensibly in charge of a fallen “Trash World”.

In Utah, a second conference was organized by The New Christendom Press and featured an array of Christian nationalist speakers addressing the theme of “Safety Third,” thereby implicitly calling upon attendees to summon up the courage to combat the forces now waging a spiritual war against both Christianity and Americanism.  For online followers at least, the most striking aspect of the Utah conference, was visual.  On the wall at the rear of the stage a huge screen displayed the famous painting by Emanuel Leutze portraying George Washington as a resolute revolutionary general crossing an ice-choked Delaware river, leading his troops on a victorious assault on British forces.  This iconic image of Washington came to personify the new nation, the American Adam created ab initio in a revolutionary republic thanks to the god-like courage of a conquering hero.

The founding myth of the American nation celebrates the transcendent character of the “glorious” War of Independence.  This has become a central and recurring theme in Christian nationalist rhetoric.  As Steven K. Green puts in his book on Inventing a Christian America: “The American colonies did not simply sever their political ties with Great Britain; they also renounced their identity as British citizens [or “subjects”], with that long national heritage.”  It was essential, therefore, to muster patriotic sentiment not just to avert military defeat but also to meet the challenges associated with creating a new government that had the support of the people.  According to Green, such circumstances called for a narrative of origins to reinforce the idea of national independence.[1]

The road to revolution did not immediately foreshadow the eventual victory of transcendence over the immanent authority of the British past.  At first, the colonists invoked the traditional rights of Englishmen in their struggles with the Crown and Parliament.  The revolutionary leaders who fought and won the War for Independence laid “the foundations for such a narrative in the colonial past … and in the religious predispositions of many who were positioned to influence popular attitudes.”  To “legitimize their cause and unify a new people,” political and religious leaders did celebrate the supposed “contributions” of New England Puritans (such as covenant theory, self-governance, natural law, and human depravity) to the foundation of the new nation.  But Green sees no “direct connection” between the finer points of Puritan political theology and the founding period.[2]

In any case, once the decision for independence was set in stone, appeals to either the colonial or the ancestral English past lost their cachet.  Carl Becker’s classic study described the Declaration of Independence as “an event, or at least the symbol of an event of surpassing historical importance.”  That document “indissolubly associated” the foundation of the American republic “with a theory of politics, a philosophy of human rights which is valid, if at all, not for Americans only, but for all men.”  After American independence became an “accomplished fact,” the Declaration acquired “a distinction, a fame, which could not be ignored, and gave to its philosophy of human rights the support of a concrete historical example.”[3]

As for George Washington, he was an enlightened Freemason as well as, inter alia, a planter, land speculator, soldier, and statesman of the Axial Age.  He certainly did not present himself as a cosmic man bearing mana from the gods of his ancestors.  His theological beliefs and religious terminology indicate the “unmistakable influence of rationalism, if not deistic thought.”  Green cites “Washington’s disdain for church doctrines and religious enthusiasm,” along with the complete lack of any references by him to Jesus or his salvation mission” as evidence that “he rejected many Protestant core teachings.”[4]  In short, he was anything but a poster boy for Christian nationalism.[5]

Modern Christian nationalists beg to differ.  Certainly, the organizers of the Utah conference held up George Washington for public veneration as an iconic figure central to “the myth of the religious founding.”  In their view, the diversity of Anglo-Protestant experience during the colonial era culminated in a founding generation, symbolized by Washington, the creator of what once was and, they hope, will become, again, a Christian nation.[6]

Yet Anglo-Protestantism provides an unstable foundation for American republicans whose roots in the Puritan tradition admit no contradiction between the worship of “no king but Jesus” in his heaven and the sanctification of the Almighty Dollar here on earth.  Civic nationalists to the core, Anglo-American Protestants proudly pretend that their American ethnicity was born of their revolutionary struggle against royal tyranny.  In contrast, the Loyalists grounded their identity in British race patriotism manifested in ancestral loyalty to throne and altar.  American patriots have had only the Constitution (along with the efforts of Emanuel Leutze, Parson Weems, and others devoted to “the sanctification of George Washington and his re-casting as an orthodox or evangelical Protestant”) to provide a functional substitute for the metapersonal image of the Crown at the mythic centre of Power in Great Britain.[7]

The revolution left a permanent spiritual vacuum at the heart of the secular republic: the Divine Economy fills the God-shaped hole in our transient lives here on earth while Christian churches order their flocks to their eternal, heavenly end, humbly praying for the return of King Jesus in fulfillment of his eschatological promise.

Failure of the American Experiment

From a metahistorical perspective, the closing phase of the axial age within the Anglosphere manifests itself most conspicuously in the progressive devolution of the American republic.  The WASP Question discusses the first three stages of that process: The First (Federal) Republic, 1789–1860 was replaced after the War Between the States by the Second (Bourgeois) Republic, 1865–1932, which itself was succeeded by the Third (Managerial-Therapeutic) Republic.  The WASP Question was completed and published in 2011 in the first term of the Obama presidency which, it now seems clear, inaugurated what became the Fourth, and probably final (Transnational/Transracial) Republic.

Spiritual sterility and political corruption have led to widespread recognition that the “American experiment” has failed. What is to be done? At least four major dissident strategies propose remedies for the terminal crisis of the Republic:

  1. American Christian nationalists hope to make America Christian again. But their institutional response to the evident failure of the American experiment goes no further than a call to move beyond denominationalism, while maintaining orthodox unity on primary theological principles. Baptists, Presbyterians, Anglicans, Methodists, and other Protestant churches must put aside their creedal differences on secondary and tertiary theological issues and unite as Protestants (while retaining their historical resistance to Popery and Eastern Orthodoxy). Pastor Joel Webbon dreams of incorporating the Nicene Creed into the preamble of the Constitution.[8] More minimalist approaches focus on Sabbatarian laws, school prayers, outlawing abortion and so on.
  2. Liberal-minded process theology presents a second strategy: struggle against the demonic powers embodied in the global American Empire. This would amount to a globalist campaign waged in the name of universal human rights.[9]
  3. Race realist Jared Taylor prefers a secular strategy focused on secession as one possible mode of ensuring the survival of the White race on the North American continent.[10]
  4. Neo-reaction (NRx) or the Dark Enlightenment proposes a technocratic model of an authoritarian, corporatist monarchy focused on the capture of Power. Curtis Yarvin’s article on “The Situation and the Solution” clearly outlines the strategy necessary to create a one-party state capable of rescuing America from the failure of a constitutional republic grounded in the civic virtues of its citizens.[11]

From Late Loyalist Schadenfreude to the Rebirth of British Race Patriotism

Those of us who grew up with ancestral memories of the Loyalist regime established in Upper and Lower Canada after the American Revolution can perhaps be forgiven for indulging in a bit of Schadenfreude when contemplating the “progressive” mutation of the American Republic into what has long been characterized by the dissident right as the Zionist-Occupied Government (ZOG) now manifest in its final, most grotesque form as the Age of Trump.[12]

None of the major dissident strategies on offer for the salvation of the republic seek to restore the fusion of ethnicity, race, and religion that American Loyalists vainly sought to preserve.  Nor do these strategies recognize or orient themselves towards the tribal future of the West as portrayed in the final chapter of The WASP Question.  The hope held out there for the palingenesis of the founding race of the Anglosphere has taken on a new urgency with the publication of Mike Maxwell’s book on the Tribal Future of the West.

That future, as conceived by Maxwell, will present WASPs with unavoidable, existential challenges as intractable, “essentially ethnic and kin-based” conflicts produce recurrent tribal warfare:

The struggles to come will be non-civic, non-propositional, and non-consensual in character—rooted not in ideological belief or institutional allegiance but in ascriptive bonds of kinship and inherited identity.  Tribal war captures the devolutionary direction of political life: a reversion from the scale of great nations to smaller, more organic groupings.  It emphasizes that lower orders—families, clans, and local loyalties—are the real buttresses of higher structures, and that when those foundations fracture, so too do states.[13]

Looking on the bright side, neo-tribalism holds out some hope of a return to new (hopefully  more refined) incarnations of immanentist ritual and religious discourse, fusing ethnicity and religion across the British diaspora.  Stiff doses of reality as tribal warfare becomes normalized will certainly reconnect “the future to the deep past, acknowledging that nothing fundamental has changed in human organization since prehistory.  Only the outer form and technologies have shifted; the human material remains the same.”[14]  Should Angelcynn tribes revert to immanent forms of religious experience, the world itself may, once again, be filled with gods.[15]

In that advanced model of primordial cosmoreligions, personal adherence to transcendental creedal orthodoxy will no longer suppress ethnoreligious identities.  Instead, a long transition towards the orthopraxis of an Angelcynn ethnoreligion will begin with the emergence of a Broad Church grounded in transnational ethnoreligious unity among WASPs throughout the Anglosphere.  This process will ground neo-Angelcynn identity in institutions and communities outside and apart from the state.  Any such expectations contradict the statist assumptions underlying all the reactionary alternatives on offer.[16]

Gustave Doré “When London is in Ruins”

The reinvention of Angelcynn tribal confederations throughout the post-Christian Anglosphere will draw upon a metapersonal, monarchical myth of Power rooted in an ancestral folk-religion re-embedded in the ritual cult of a Patriot King.

Such a new-modelled Angelcynn Network requires, at a minimum:

  1. The transformation of Anglo-Protestant, especially Anglican, churches into the institutional medium for the emergence of a folkish/ancestral religion with its own ethnohistorical mythology; and
  2. a process theology that recognizes Anglo-Saxon/British identity as a divinized work-in-progress emerging as a process of theosis within the lifeworld of today’s deracinated “heritage Americans,” Anglo-Australians, Anglo-Canadians, etc.; and
  3. the emergence of Angelcynn (formerly WASP) elites capable of countering the crypto-Jewish supremacism of the so-called techno-populism promoted by Yarvin and other leading figures of the Dark Enlightenment; and
  4. “Christian nationalists” who clearly and unambiguously acknowledge that the words “Christ” and “Messiah” in the original Greek and Hebrew meant “anointed” and could, in principle, be applied to historical figures emerging within a self-consciously, ethnoreligious “Angelcynn” tradition at some point in our own future; and
  5. the recognition of Jesus the Christ as a (possibly) historical and/or mythological figure whose universal pre-eminence has long compromised manifold particularistic projects of peoplehood, as varied as the Hebrew Bible, a somewhat suppositious first-century Jewish-Christian movement, the Greek and Roman literary circles which created the New Testament canon, their imperial sponsors, as well as the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and myriad Protestant and other churches over the past two millennia; and
  6. acknowledgement, therefore, that Sola Scriptura cannot serve as the sole inspiration or the foundational text for an Angelcynn ethnotheology in the current post-Christian age; and, finally
  7. WASP churchmen ready, willing, and able to act on Sir John Seeley’s recommendation that the Anglo-Protestant churches create their own Bible. While they are at it, they must infuse folkish themes into liturgies and homiletics.  The intellectual and spiritual armoury of a post-Christian WASP project of peoplehood also requires Anglocentric forms of practical, historical, and geopolitical theology enabling Angelcynn communities the world over to navigate the differences between friends and enemies.

In summary, The WASP Question mourns the collapse of British race patriotism which left Anglo-Saxon Christendom subject to the financialized streams of irresponsible Power emanating from the Divine Economy.  The formerly White Dominions of the British Crown were absorbed seamlessly into the postwar globalist American empire managed by cosmopolitan client regimes rapidly taking on the character of multicultural police states.

The spiritual reformation and temporal survival of the Anglosphere require a post-Christian Angelcynn geopolitical theology adapted to a world in which the core ethnic identities of Western nation-states have been hollowed out.  As a result, the sovereign legitimacy of those regimes is visibly withering away.  Stateless WASPs will have to create and maintain tribal confederations at scale, across land and sea, if they are to survive as a recognizable ethnic group.

The collective strength and unity of widely scattered Anglo-Saxon diaspora communities will be conditional upon the creative re-configuration of constitutional authority on the terrain of civil society, not in the realm of formal state power.  In the tribal future of the Anglosphere, any such institutionalized efflorescence of WASP civic authority will require a profound and continuous cultural revolution.  Paradoxically perhaps, these innovations will call for the restoration of civic virtues pioneered by the republican polities of Greco-Roman antiquity—within which tribal identities and tribal gods still played a prominent role.

Unfortunately, ever since the Puritan Revolution every Anglo-Saxon country has been dominated by mercantile and financial elites driven by the pursuit of wealth rather than civic virtues.  Consequently, our managerial, professional, and political elites are steeped in the social psychology of “hedonic maximization,” valuing short-term gratification over long-term flourishing.  By contrast, ancient Aristotelian ethics prized eudaimonia (lit. good spirit), the divine state of being generated by consistent activity reflecting virtue and excellence.

Successful Angelcynn resistance to the increasingly corrupt (and corrupting) mercantilist regimes of our time must reanimate the good spirits once incarnate in the triadic social structures of early medieval Anglo-Saxon kingdoms—and secure their long-term flourishing.  This will require another “great replacement,” that of the one-dimensional man spawned by the plutocratic, corporate oligarchies now misruling the hollow states and degenerate cultures of the Anglosphere.  A postmodern Angelcynn reformation will reconstitute re-tribalized societies on the model of the three-legged stools which supported the authority of Anglo-Saxon kings: “those who work” will be governed by an alliance of “those who pray” with “those who fight.”

Facing the postmodern descent into decentralized forms of tribal warfare, recovering WASP elites must cultivate the heroic character that, in days of yore, belonged to Anglo-Saxon men of steel in ships of wood.  Only such an archeofuturist model of social order can resurrect the ancestral ethnoreligious spirit which, in the guise of Alfred the Great, brought the sweet dream of a Patriot King down to earth.

Endnotes

[1] Steven K. Green, Inventing Christian America: The Myth of the Religious Founding (New York: Oxford University Press, 2015), 101.

[2] Ibid., 101-102.

[3] Carl L. Becker, The Declaration of Independence: A Study in the History of Political Ideas (New York: Vintage, 1922), 225.

[4] Ibid., 147-148.

[5] Washington, it should be noted, was partly of Huguenot descent, as were Alexander Hamilton and John Jay.  Marco de Wit contends that the “leading Huguenot families were uniformly philosemitic and often connected to Jewish merchants through trade, politics, and Freemasonry.  In fact, the philosemitic Huguenot Freemason from New York, John Jay served as the Revolution’s spymaster” worked closely with a “highly positioned Huguenot-Jewish-Freemason circle to feed information to Washington.” Significantly, there is also “evidence suggesting George Washington oversaw extensive homosexual and bisexual ties among his officers and intelligence agents.”  De Wit suggests as well that Washington’s “opposition to strict conservative Christianity” and advocacy “for the more ‘tolerant’ Freemasonry,” along with a long, childless marriage and an “obsession with clothes” might account for his own “apparent homosexuality.”  See:

https://www.unz.com/article/alexander-hamilton-and-franks-dynasty-jewish-masterminds-of-american-revolution-and-usa/

[6] Green, Inventing Christian America, 101-102; cf., Stephen Wolfe, The Case for Christian Nationalism (Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 2021), 399, 431.

[7] Green, Inventing Christian America, 209.

[8] Pastor Joel Webbon, “Denominationalism is Dead,” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBDrMAYKK2w&t=1751s

[9] David Ray Griffin, The Christian Gospel for Americans: A Systematic Theology (Anoka, MN: Process Century Press, 2019).

[10] Jared Taylor, “The American Experiment Has Failed,” https://www.amren.com/features/2025/11/the-american-experiment-has-failed-2/

[11] Curtis Yarvin, “The Situation and the Solution,” https://substack.com/home/post/p-181216819

[12] The transnational character of the 4th Republic is formalized inter alia “in Section 622 of S. 4615, the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027.  Its title is anodyne: ‘United States-Israel Intelligence Sharing Enhancement.’” This obscure statutory provision routinizes intelligence sharing between the USA and Israel in such a way as to effect “the quiet conversion of an ally into a co-sovereign.” Ronald Dodson, “Section 622 and Israel,” https://rondodson.substack.com/p/section-622-and-israel, June 24, 2026.

[13] Mike Maxwell, Tribal Future of the West (Perth: Imperium Press, 2025), 349.

[14] Ibid., 349.

[15] John Michael Greer, A World Full of Gods: An Inquiry into Polytheism Revised and Expanded Edition (UK: Aeon Books, 2023).

[16] This Preface is not the place to develop a systematic critique of those alternatives. Readers interested in my take on alternative dissident strategies can find such critiques in a series of books that I have published after the appearance of The WASP Question in 2011. See, Dissident Dispatches: An Anglo-Identitarian Guide to Christian Theology (Arktos, 2017); Reinventing Aristocracy in the Age of Woke Capital: How Honourable WASP Elites Could Rescue Our Civilisation from Bad Governance by Irresponsible Corporate Plutocrats (Arktos, 2022); and Christian Nationalism vs Global Jesus: Projects of Peoplehood from Biblical Israel to the Collapse of British Patriotism (Arktos, 2025).

On Late Loyalism: Rescuing the Lost Sheep of Greater Britain, Part One

/10 Comments/in , , /by

When asked sometime in the 1970s what impact the French Revolution had on world history, the Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai replied that it was too early to tell.[1]  The historical significance of the American Revolution, on the other hand, is now coming into sharp relief.  Having reached their 250th anniversary, the WASP epigones of the founding fathers have all-but-exhausted the rich reserves of the biocultural capital their revolutionary ancestors inherited (or wrested away) from the King and country of their fellow British subjects.

The people of the newly independent thirteen colonies were overwhelmingly of Anglo-Protestant stock.    Not surprisingly, when the First Amendment mandated the constitutional separation of church and state, the question whether the American republic was a Christian nation had been thrown open to debate. Today both Anglos and Protestants are shrinking minorities of the American population.

Some historians concede, of course, that whatever the founders may have intended, something resembling an Anglo-Protestant nation emerged out of the mid-nineteenth century revival movements.  Even so, a century and a half later it is difficult to deny that the Anglosphere has entered a post-Christian age.  Given the massive demographic changes that have occurred in every once Anglo-Saxon nation in the postwar era, neither political citizenship nor the Christian religion provided effective solutions to the identity crisis plaguing the dispersed British-descended peoples of the Anglosphere.  

Yet, fifteen years after The WASP Question (Arktos, 2011) was published, it now seems possible that the devolution of the Anglosphere into multicultural tribalism might precipitate the resurrection of a postmodern British race patriotism.  Heightened awareness of the friend-enemy distinction in everyday life could produce an unexpected fusion of the modern WASP bioculture with ancient religious sensibilities throughout the Anglosphere.[2]

If so, the idea of “late loyalism” might take on a metapolitical significance far beyond the significance attached to the label in Upper Canada in the early nineteenth century.  Then it referred to the large influx of American settlers seeking cheap land in the newly opened Upper Canadian wilderness.  Even when the War of 1812 brought the threat of an American invasion of Canada, the late loyalists kept their heads down and minded their own business.[3]

In our own future, an altogether unexpected manifestation of late loyalism may reflect the recovery of a shared sense of British identity among all the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant peoples.  Certainly, they share a common experience, outside and apart from the states deliberately promoting their replacement through mass non-White immigration and forced multiculturalism.  This is true everywhere in the Anglosphere, both in the diaspora and in an ever more dystopian “Yookay”.  Indeed, even within the Anglo-Protestant minority in the rapidly browning Rainbow Republic, late loyalism could (and should) become a real possibility.

Nevertheless, the fundamental problem posed in The WASP Question remains unresolved: the founding peoples of the Anglosphere, white Anglo-Saxon Protestants, suffer from collective amnesia. By way of remedy, this book prescribed a deep cultural and spiritual rebirth—palingenesis—among the descendants of those who created Angelcynn Christendom. Restoring the cultural memory of that folkish faith is the precondition for the resurrection of British race patriotism. Only a spiritually reborn Anglosphere can effectively resist dissolution into the multiracialized mélange of mere “populations” managed by corrupt, irresponsible, and soulless corporatist plutocracies. The “invisible race” of WASPs needs a post-creedal, ethnoreligion capable of generating a geopolitical theology of their own making.

No doubt the American Revolution dealt British race patriotism a crippling blow.  But the English ruling elite had already shot itself in the foot more than a century earlier when it provoked a fiery Puritan revolution which denied the divine right of English kingship.  Not surprisingly, the emigré descendants of those English Puritans took the lead in the abolition of kingship, once and for all, in a revolutionary American republic.

Since the creation of the republic, the historic, vestigially sacred character of the British monarchy has withered away, not just in the United Kingdom itself but also, much more visibly in the old white dominions of the Crown in Australia, Canada, and New Zealand.  Moreover, Christendom itself has become a constitutional dead letter in the English-speaking world. Eventually, as the American revolutionary process ran its full course, a transnational corporate welfare state displaced the sovereign authority of every ostensibly liberal democratic regime throughout the Anglosphere.  Ironically, the American republic itself is now little more than a polite constitutional fiction.

Karl Jaspers (1883–1969)

In this context, it may be that the current decline of the global American empire holds more than merely historical significance.  The Anglosphere (indeed, Western civilization at large) has passed a turning point of metahistorical significance.  Fundamental assumptions grounding politics, government, and religion for centuries, if not millennia, have been reshaped beyond recognition.  In no more than a single human lifetime, the Axial Age, identified in 1949 by a German-Swiss philosopher of religion, Karl Jaspers, as the metaphysical culmination of human history, now seems to be on its ignominious way out.[4]

The Cosmology of the Original Political Society in an Enchanted Universe

To properly understand what may await us in a future post-Axial Age we must understand what came before it.  In Jasper’s narrative of the Axial “breakthrough” in the history of religious discourse, the new age began circa 500 BC with “a profound transformation of religious presuppositions” which in turn carried major social and political consequences.[5] The myth of the Axial Age held that the transcendent “roots of modernity” lay in the more or less clear apprehension of classical civilizations that “there is but One Truth and One Mankind.”  Christianity emerged as the Jewish/Roman religious apprehension of that transcendent Truth.  “In Jasper’s rather tragic view of universal history,” not all those early Axial “breakthroughs” survived “their later institutionalizations.”   Given that so many of the roots of modernity were ploughed under over the passage of time, modernity appears to be a still “unfinished project.”[6]

In contrast to the proto-modernist pursuit of the transcendent divine, archaic, pre-Axial religious discourse imagined the gods belonging to a multiplicity of tribal cultures as immanent in nature .  In sharp contrast, the universalistic “transcendental visions” of the Axial Age laid “claim to absolute, unconditioned Truth, with a capital ‘T’.”  In other words, “an exclusively Axial concept of transcendence” presupposed “a cosmological chasm between a transcendental and a mundane sphere.”  An “immanentist” understanding of the divine is typically much more conditional and relativistic in the sense that the gods immanent in nature belong to “another” world without being “extra-mundane.”[7]

According to C.A. Bond, the Neolithic cultures associated with the development of agriculture, the domestication of animals, and, thus, the change from a hunter-gatherer lifestyle to settlement were “were not states of anarchy, nor were they sovereign orders.”  It seems that they were “uniformly ritualistic and sacrificial in their organisation,” observing “law as handed down by god, ancestors, or spirits.”  The rituals and sacrifices “seem to have been a means of communication with this other world.”  Law givers in these orders were not presented as giving the laws themselves; rather, they functioned as “conduits of the gods”.  Pre-Neolithic cultures did not have domesticated animals at hand for sacrificial purposes.  Nevertheless, for them, too, hunting likely involved “the killing and butchery of the animal in a precise manner so as to mitigate the risk of alienating the animal’s spirit or any tutelary gods linked to the animal.” In all of these pre-Axial cultures, the “gods and spirits of their systems of belief actually exist and inhabit the world.” Indeed, gods and spirits are as much part of such polytheistic social orders as biological people.[8]  Some scholars try to capture this pre-Axial presupposition of the cosmic immanence of the divine by substituting the term cosmotheism for polytheism.[9]

Marshall Sahlins portrays human society in a “state of immanence” as:

a fractional part of a much larger cosmic society populated by a multiplicity of different kinds of persons, many organized in their own societies, and all more or less empowered, and encompassed by the greatest of them, deities of this cosmic polity—this cosmopoliteia.[10]

Clearly, if such cosmic polities were present within what we understand as a primordial “state of nature,” that realm did not correspond to a state of anarchy as imagined by social contract theorists of seventeenth century such as Hobbes and Locke.  Instead, it was a world filled with other-than-human persons [‘metapersons’] endowed with greater-than-human powers.”[11]  In such “immanentist” cultures, as described by Sahlins:

personhood is virtually everywhere and in almost everything.  The universe is full of persons from whom emanate forces that constitute the world as objectifications of their intentions … animistic spirits, demons, ghosts and ancestors, species and place master, and high gods and others.[12]

Marshall Sahlins (1930–2021)

Sahlins adds that in such “enspirited societies, political relations are metahuman relations, and human political authorities are cosmic persons” insofar as they act as intermediaries between other-than-human metapersons (on whom they modelled their own personhood) and the mundane people groups which they govern.  The heil or charisma emanating from chiefs, kings, amounted to “the human appropriation of divinity,” thereby introducing into human society, as their own, “potencies appropriated from the cosmic host.” [13]

On Marshall Sahlins’ interpretation of immanentist cosmology, the universe is enchanted.  Even in the smallest tribal societies, a cosmic state grounded people’s dependence on the “encompassing life-giving and death-dealing powers, essentially persons like themselves, who rule earthly existence.”  Whatever the social contract theorists of the Enlightenment may have thought, in the prehistoric state of nature, from the very beginning, the cosmic state was the general condition of mankind.[14] What has changed? Or, have things changed?

The Persistence of Immanentist Political Theology

Well, Jaspers might say, the Axial Age came along and with it, the disenchantment of the world.  To our more enlightened, modern minds, it seems obvious that prehistoric, primitive peoples “invented” the spirits, simply creating the gods in their own image, thereby according to them the ultimate power to determine their fate.  But, Sahlins insists, it is a mistake to embrace the “enlightened” and “modern” understanding of political theology.  He flatly asserts that:

People did not create the gods out of thin air; they only hypostasized the forces that were already conditions of their existence. I repeat, humans did not imagine the gods, they only objectified, or more precisely, subjectivized, the extra-human forces by which they themselves lived and died.[15]

One might even say that the religious base of society determined the mundane superstructure, at least “until religion went from an imminent infrastructure to a transcendent superstructure.”[16] Once the idea of transcendence established itself as fundamental Truth, residual traces of immanentism were routinely condemned as pagan heresy.  Axiality entailed significant political and social changes, most importantly perhaps, the desacralization of political domination and a growing separation between ethnicity and religion.[17] It is not impossible, however—should the as-yet unfinished project of axiality finally founder—that the separation of ethnicity and religion could be reversed.  If so, future generations might even experience the resacralization of political authority.

Such a transformation would reverse the triumph of Christianity in the Roman Empire, the quintessentially transcendentalist religion.  In principle, the Christian faith separated the universal (albeit triune) God from ethnicity while drawing bright line distinctions between the spiritual realm of the church and the temporal powers vested in the state.  At its peak, Christendom was effectively a metonym for the Axial Age, especially in the West.[18]

All Roads Led to Rome in the Early  Axial Age (https://ar.inspiredpencil.com)

Even in Western Europe, however, especially during the first millennium (described by one Orthodox priest as the Age of Incarnation) transcendentalism developed in an uneven manner.[19]  Sahlins noted that “a transcendent God abides over a human population on familiar terms with saints, ghosts, witches, and ‘nature spirits,’ including monks who were not technically human since they lived the life of angels.”  Nor was the “spiritual” realm sharply divided from the “secular” administration of justice.  As late as the year 1050, “it was possible to use the same pool of water” in Canterbury Cathedral, “on the same day, to baptize an infant as a Christian and immerse an adult to solicit a divine verdict in a judicial case.”[20] In the subsequent Age of Disincarnation, the fate of ordeals by water, fire, and combat became “emblematic of the displacement of divinity from the earthly city in Latin Christianity.”  Such ordeals were abandoned in the thirteenth century when they “came under heavy clerical criticism as an ancient, vulgar, and lower-class custom” tolerated for centuries only “as a concession by the Church to the hard hearts of the German barbarians.”[21]

The Retrojection of Transcendence

By the time of the American Revolution, the idea of divine transcendence had become so entrenched in political theology that those same “German barbarians” were transmogrified, at least in the minds of the social contract theorists then shaping Anglo-American political discourse.  In their imaginations, violent berserkers (engaging in ritual assemblies where horses and humans were sacrificed to propitiate wrathful gods) were distilled, as if by magic, into well-mannered WASPs attending an orderly town meeting in the enlightened American republic.  For prosperous and enlightened elites “at home” and in the American colonies, the supposedly democratic tribal assemblies of the German peoples in the first century AD were the model from which “the English have borrowed the idea of their political government.  This beautiful system was invented first in the woods.”[22]

In fact, both English social contract theorists, and the American revolutionaries influenced by them, simply retrojected the transcendentalist ideals of the Enlightenment in “the claim that English law rested on an unbroken line of pre-Norman customs” dating back to the forests of Germany.  It was the Roman historian Tacitus who first transcendentalized the ritual tribal assemblies in his brief Germania by omitting “details the Romans would have taken for granted—such as animal sacrifice and accompanying ceremonies.”[23]

But their true nature was suggested in Tacitus’ “note that the assembly was overseen by priests and held on a date judged auspicious.”  As Bond remarks, who knows “what people were thinking in such a situation, or how they would have interpreted the proceedings.”  But one thing seems certain: they were not “engaged in what we would call rational, secular deliberation and casting votes as though at a town hall meeting.”  More likely, chiefs or kings presented their proposals as figures regarded as bearing something akin to the will of the gods, or a force comparable to mana,” much like the cannibalistic Maori tribesmen British traders and colonists encountered in New Zealand in the early nineteenth century.[24]

Go to Part 2.

AI Image of Germanic Tribal Democracy

Endnotes

[1] Zhou may have thought the questioner was referring to the 1968 student rebellion in Paris.

[2] According to Carl Schmitt, the distinction between friend and enemy is the essence of “the political.”  The enemy has traditionally been seen as “the alien other, the racial enemy whose threat came from beyond the borders of the state,”  Today, however:

amid the radical demographic transformation and corresponding civilizational decline unfolding throughout the Western world, driven in large measure by “liberal politics” and by the increasingly zero-sum struggle among rival racial and ideological blocs within multicultural societies, the political enemy emerges from within the state itself. Internal divisions have attained such intensity that rival groups no longer recognize one another as members of the same political community, bringing domestic conflict to the threshold of civil war.

See, Chad Crowley, “Carl Schmitt and the Political: The Friend-Enemy Distinction Explained,” Riding the Tiger, July 30, 2026, https://substack.com/inbox/post/209032821

[3] Alan Taylor, “The Late Loyalists: Northern Reflections of the Early American Republic,” (2007) 27(1) Journal of the Early Republic, 1–34.

[4] Karl Jaspers, Vom Ursprung und Ziel der Geschicte, 1949; English: The Origin and Goal of History, (Yale University Press, 1953). Cf., Matthew J. Carlisle, A Simple Introduction to the Axial Age: How Humanity Learned to Think Morally, Philosophically, and Spiritually (Independently Published, 2026). On the concept of “metahistory” (i.e., not just what historical narratives are but also how and why they take particular forms), see Hayden White Metahistory: The Historical Imagination in Nineteenth-Century Europe (Johns Hopkins University Press, 1973).

[5] Hans Joas, “The Axial Age Debate as Religious Discourse,” in Robert N. Bellah & Hans Joas, eds. The Axial Age and its Consequences (Belknap Press, 2012), 12.

[6] Jan Assmann, “Cultural Memory and the Myth of the Axial Age,” in Ibid., 367.In my first book, I examined the sacrifice of classical republican traditions in service to the “unfinished project” of modernity; see, Andrew Fraser, The Spirit of the Laws: Republicanism and the Unfinished Project of Modernity (University of Toronto Press, 1990).

[7] Assmann, “Cultural Memory,” 367, 371.

[8] C.A. Bond, Themis: A Science of Human Orders (Imperium Press, 2025), 10-12, 15, 26.

[9] Assmann, “Cultural Memory,” 371.

[10] Marshall Sahlins, The New Science of the Enchanted Universe: An Anthropology of Most of Humanity (Princeton University Press, 2022), 124.

[11] Ibid., 70.

[12] Ibid., 72–73.

[13] Ibid., 120, 123 (emphasis in original); Bond, Themis, 29, 70.

[14] Sahlins, Enchanted Universe, 137.

[15] Ibid., 174 (emphasis in original).

[16] Ibid., 175.

[17] Joas, “Axial Age Debate,” 11–12.

[18] The birth of Christianity was made possible by the Roman imperial order imposed upon the Mediterranean world by Augustus. “Augustus revolutionised conceptions of space and time. He created a new image of the world centred on Rome, and on his person. … This powerful sense of a unified, centred world stimulated ways of imagining the interconnectedness of humankind—a message that came out in the earliest Christian texts’ vision of a universal alliance in Christ.” Tim Whitmarsh, Rome’s Age of Revolution: Augustus, Empire and the Making of Christianity (The Bodley Head, 2026), 228.

[19] Fr. Andrew Phillips, Orthodox Christianity and the English Tradition (English Orthodox Trust, 1995), 281–284.

[20] Sahlins, Enchanted Universe, 9.

[21] Peter Brown, “Society and the Supernatural: A Medieval Change,” Daedelus 104, no. 2 (1975) 135–36.

[22] Charles Montesquieu, quoted in Bond, Themis, 48–9.

[23] Ibid., 49–50.

[24] Ibid., 51–52; cf., Paul Moon, This Horrid Practice: The Myth and Reality of Traditional Maori Cannibalism (Penguin, 2008).

A Commentary on the Life of Daniel Berrigan

/10 Comments/in /by

It was a little after noon on a warm, sunny spring day on May 17th, 1968 in Catonsville, Maryland, a quiet suburb of Baltimore, when three cars pulled into the parking lot of the Knights of Columbus Hall.   A casual passerby wouldn’t have imagined that a draft board was located on the upper floor of the aging clapboard structure.  Nine passengers emerged from the cars, two women and seven men, one of them wearing a Roman collar.

The group made their way up the stairs to cabinets containing military draft records—the Vietnam war was raging—and began emptying files into two wire-mesh waste baskets they had brought with them. “My files, my files!” shouted Mary Murphy, one of the clerks, as she tried to take charge of one of the wastebaskets.  There was a brief tussle, but one of the men in the group gently subdued her.   Another clerk, Phyllis Morseberger, threw a telephone out the window hoping a passerby would notice and intervene, but there was no response.

The group proceeded to the parking lot with the filled waste paper baskets.   One of them lit a match and a roar of flames engulfed the paper.  Each of the remaining eight struck a match and added it to the blaze.  As the fire burned, the nine stood side by side and recited the Our Father.  The police soon arrived, and all of them were arrested and handcuffed and put in a van bound for processing and arraignment.   According to testimony at the later trial, 378 draft files had been destroyed.

Several reporters, a photographer, and a TV cameraman recorded it all.  They had been tipped off that “a remarkable news event” would occur at Knights of Columbus Hall shortly after noon on that day; exactly what was to happen, they had no idea.

A member of the group, a Jesuit priest named Daniel Berrigan, had prepared a statement about the event that gained wide circulation as a manifesto of resistance to the Vietnam War, which included:

Our apologies, good friends, for the fracture of good order, the burning of paper instead of children, the angering of the orderlies in the front parlor of the charnel house.  We could not, so help us God, do otherwise.  For we are sick at heart.  Our hearts give us no rest for thinking of the Land of Burning Children and for thinking of that other Child of whom the poet Luke speaks.  The infant was taken up in the arms of an old man whose tongue grew resonant and vatic at the touch of that beauty.  Small consolation, a child born to make trouble and to die for it—the First Jew (not the last) to be subject of a “definitive solution.”  All of us who act against the law turn to the poor of the world, to the Vietnamese, to the victims, to the soldiers who kill and die for the wrong reasons, or for no reason at all, because they were so ordered by the authorities of that public order which is in effect a massive institutionalized disorder.  We say: Killing is disorder.  Life and gentleness and community and unselfishness are the only order we recognize.  For the sake of that order we risk our liberty, our good name. The time is past when good men may be silent, when obedience can segregate men from public risk, when the poor can die without defense. How many indeed must die before our voices are heard?  How many must be tortured, dislocated, starved, maddened?  How long must the world’s resources be raped in the service of legalized murder?  When at what point will you say no to this war?  We have chosen to say, with the gift of our liberty, and if necessary our lives: the violence stops here, the death stops here, the suppression of the truth stops here, this war stops here.

*   *   *

Daniel Berrigan (1919–2016) was a priest of the Society of Jesus and a poet, writer, university chaplain, teacher, and, most prominently, social activist.  The opening paragraphs above were taken from pages 25–30 in Jim Forrest’s 2017 biography of him, At Play in the Lion’s Den: A Biography and Memoir of Daniel Berrigan (Orbis Books).  This writing is my response to that book.  It isn’t a review of its merits, though I think enough of it to recommend it to you.  Rather, it is a report of what the book brought up for me as I read through its pages—about Berrigan, about ideas and people, about my own life (page numbers in parentheses).  I haven’t tried to tie things together, paint a complete picture of Berrigan, assess him or put him into perspective, anything like that, though I believe a basic sense of who he was and what he was about emerges in these next paragraphs.

If what’s here piques your interest in Berrigan, you could do what I did, read the Forrest biography and see what it brings up for you.  Another possibility is Berrigan’s autobiography, To Dwell in Peace: An Autobiography (Wipf and Stock, 2007).  A third possibility is to watch the 1982 film directed by Emile de Antonio, “In the King of Prussia,” which is on YouTube.  I saw it on The Criterion Channel, a collection of old films and a smattering of recent ones, around a $100 subscription charge a year, which I highly recommend if you are a film buff.

“In the King of Prussia” is a dramatization of the trial of anti-war activists, which included Berrigan, who on September 9th, 1980 broke into a General Electric weapons plant in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania (odd name for a town) armed with hammers to protest nuclear proliferation.   They shattered parts of two Mark 12-A missile shields with the hammers and poured their own blood onto blueprints and equipment before kneeling in a circle holding hands and singing hymns. Police arrived 45 minutes later to arrest them.

The eight protestors were charged with ten felony and misdemeanor counts.  During the trial they came to be known as the “Plowshares Eight,” plowshares in reference to the book of Isaiah in the Bible: “And He shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore.”

In the film, Martin Sheen plays Judge Salus and the Plowshares Eight play themselves.  During filming, Sheen became friends with Berrigan and often visited him in the years that followed and several times was arrested with him. “Mother Teresa,” Sheen has said, “brought me back into the Church and Dan Berrigan kept me there.”

I found it fascinating to see Berrigan in person in the film.  Dan (I’ll call him Dan, everybody did) was around sixty at this time and greying.  He was smallish, trim, quite handsome, a bit effete but strong, confident, and vital; his was a compelling public presence.

In his testimony on the witness stand in the film, Dan described what inspired the Plowshares’ actions:

The question of why we did our action takes me back to those years when my conscience was being formed, back to a family that was poor, and to a father and mother who taught, quite simply, by living what they taught.  And if I could put their message very shortly, it would go something like this:  You do what is right because it is right, that your conscience is a matter between you and God, that nobody owns you. If I have a precious memory of my mother and father that lasts to this day, it is simply that they lived as though nobody owned them.  They cheated no one. They worked hard for a living.  They were poor, and perhaps most precious of all, they shared what they had. And that was enough, because in the life of a young child, the first steps of conscience are as important as the first steps of one’s feet. They set the direction where life will go.  And I feel that direction was set for my brothers and myself. There is a direct line between the way my parents turned our steps and this action.  (p. 237)

All eight were found guilty.  Dan received a three-to ten-year sentence.  He served 23 months of it before being released, which is just about the same amount of time he spent in prison for the Catonsville, Maryland protest.

A note about what drew me to read about Daniel Berrigan.  While my take on Christianity is generally favorable, I am not a Christian, nor am I religious or even spiritual, so it wasn’t that.  I was drawn to Berrigan because of my impression that he was a good, decent, thoughtful, evolved human being and that I might learn something from his ideas and the way he lived his life and be inspired by his example.  In particular, I was attracted to what I knew about his anti-war posture.   I’ve totally had it with destruction and killing as a way to resolve disputes, I don’t care who’s doing it.

*   *   *

Dan was particularly close to his younger brother Phil, who also became a priest and peace activist.   Phil was in World War II (Dan wasn’t in the military) and spent time in blitzed cities in England.  He wrote of confronting the brutal reality of modern warfare, “children suffocated in the rubble, old people burned to death in firestorms, survivors crippled for life.” (p 36)

My much-older brother Walter was in the famous Battle of the Bulge in Belgium near the end of World War II.  I remember him recalling his horror extracting a headless body from a destroyed tank.

Dan’s father subscribed to The Catholic Worker, an eight-page tabloid edited by Dorothy Day (1897-1980) which focused on social issues and the creation of a society “in which it would be easier for people to be good.”  Dan’s contacts with Dorothy Day as an adult were among the most formative experiences of his life: “She taught me more than all the theologians.  She awakened me to connections I had not thought of nor been instructed in, including the equation of human misery and poverty with war making. She had a basic hope that God created the world with enough for everyone, but that there was not enough for everyone and war making.”  Day’s radical rejection of war had a profound impact on him.  Dan became in large measure the spiritual child of Dorothy Day, committed to a world that excluded no one, from the child in the womb to the prisoner on death row. (p.65)

As I read about Berrigan and Dorothy Day, I asked myself, who influenced me when I was a kid.  What popped up in my mind was Chip Hilton.  Chip Hilton was the central character in a series of novels for adolescent boys written by a former college basketball coach, Clair Bee.  Chip was the star of his high school baseball, basketball, and football teams.  What a guy Chip was: the model of the exemplary, clean cut, morally upright, teenage athletic hero.  And Chip was handsome too; he didn’t have a bulbous nose, bad case of acne, and skinny bowed legs like some people.  The message that came through to me from the Chip Hilton books loud and clear: become Chip Hilton, the dream athlete; that was how I was going to make it in the world.   It’ll really be something.   All the guys will look up to me and the cheerleaders will give me a side glance like they do and my father will acknowledge my presence.  I’ll be a central character in the drama of teenage life like Chip is rather than a nobody over in the corner by myself eating potato chips and drinking Cokes and watching television.

I actually tried to be Chip Hilton, put my all into it, went out for the teams, practiced dribbling a basketball with my left hand, viewed the sport teams and athletes as the main action in my high school, and tried to come on aw-shucks humble and selfless like Chip did so well even as he was hitting home runs to win games in the bottom of the ninth.  Oh, I’ll cut this short, you know where it’s going.  Dead end.  Dorothy Day’s tabloid did infinitely better by young Dan Berrigan than Clair Bee’s Chip Hilton books did by young me.

I’ve never read anything by Dorothy Day or a biography of her.  I just now checked Amazon and see a book that looks promising edited by Robert Ellsburg, Dorothy Day: Selected Writings (Orbis Books, 2004).  I’ll give it a try.

*   *   *

Another person Berrigan admired greatly was Thomas Merton (1915-1968), an American Trappist monk whose 1948 autobiography The Seven Storey Mountain (another book on my reading list) brought him acclaim.   The two began a correspondence that lasted from 1961 until Merton’s death.  They spent time together in retreats on Merton’s property in Kentucky.

Merton wrote of Berrigan, “Father Dan Berrigan is an altogether winning and warm intelligence and a man who, I think, has more than anyone I have ever met the true wide-ranging and simple heart of the Jesuit: zeal, compassion, understanding, and uninhibited religious freedom.  Just seeing him restores one’s hope in the church.” (p.120)

One of Berrigan’s letters prompted Merton to author an essay called “The Root of War Is Fear” in which he declared that the duty of the Christian in a world gearing itself for nuclear war is to

strive with all his power and intelligence, with his faith, his hope in Christ, and love for God and man, to do the one task which God has imposed upon us in the world today. That task is to work for the total abolition of war.

Berrigan asserted that Merton was trying to “clear the rubble, awaken people to the truth, save what could be salvaged of lives and dignity, show that atrophied human parts could indeed be turned on, a very space of anger, indignation, joy, ecstasy, that these were the proper functions of the soul awake.” (p. 118)

On the first day of retreats on his property, Merton shared a prayer.

Domine ut videam—Lord, that I might see: these three words, from St. Jerome’s Latin translation of Mark’s Gospel, were the appeal that Bartimaeus made to Jesus to open his blind eyes.

For Merton, peacemaking begins with seeing, seeing what is really going on around us, seeing ourselves in relation to the world we are part of, seeing our lives in the light of the kingdom of God, seeing those who suffer, and seeing the image of God not only in friends but in enemies. What we see and what we fail to see define who we are and how we live our lives. (152, 153)

Merton, Berrigan wrote,

forced us to consider that protest, if it is to have any hope of constructive impact on others, has to be undertaken not only with great care but with a genuine sympathy and compassion for those who don’t understand or who object to one’s protest, who feel threatened and angered by it, who even regard the protester as a traitor. After all, what protest, at its best, aims at is not just to make a dissenting noise but to help others think freshly about our social order and the direction in which we are going. The protester needs to remember that no one is converted by rage, self-righteousness, contempt, or hatred.  (p. 99)

Reading about Berrigan and Day and Merton, all of them to the left ideologically and whose ideas I had not engaged until now with this Berrigan biography, reminded me to shuck any self-labeling that keeps me from people of their sort and what they might contribute to me.  I’m thinking of categories like, in my case, conservative or dissident right or white advocate, which could make people like Berrigan “other,” “over there,” “not me,” and lead me to think I should only be taking my cues from Russell Kirk and Jared Taylor and such.  In whatever time I have left, I’m going to view myself as Walter and Helen Griffin’s son, nothing else, and see where that takes me, which this past couple of weeks—to my benefit, I believe—has opened me up to Daniel Berrigan and some people he connected to.   I underscore that in putting this forth I’m only speaking for myself.  Others need to do what works for them around self-definition.

*   *   *

Berrigan:

In order to kill and call the killing politics, you must justify the killing.  And the best way to justify killing is to deny that one kills at all.  The hand signs the death warrant, the mind rips it up, denies it exists.  And someone dies—always, inevitably, the children, the old, the defenseless.  Such denials and lies always lay at the root of state creation.  The guns have an altogether uncanny tendency to take over. Eventually they rule the gunmen. One kills, after a while, with a high and even euphoric detachment. As though when a body thuds to earth, and the smoking gun is lowered once more, one sees with elation a cleared space, an obstacle removed. A mirage, no doubt, a utopia, but how seductive! The gunman breathes easier, salvation is at hand. (p.215)

*   *   *

Berrigan:

How are the unborn to live? Have we ever heard of Buddhist abortionists?  In the past five years, it is said, some two million nearly born people in our midst have been so disposed of.  Perhaps someday soon people who did get born may invade centers, where doctors relieve women of the unwelcome burden named You or I (all of us are fetuses before we are Jim, Laura, Daniel) and burn their files or pour blood and thereby draw a line.  Everyone should live.  (p.219)

*   *   *

Berrigan: “I have concluded after 50 years of trying vainly to synchronize with other people’s planets, it is simply no go. I shall have to lose, win or at least run the race on my own.” (p. 359)

I especially related to this quote.  I too was about fifty when I came to this same conclusion and it has resulted in a major boost to the level of integrity and honor in my life and to my peace of mind.

*   *   *

I hadn’t expected to read Berrigan’s criticisms of Jews and Israel in the Forest book.  And it wasn’t subtle.  He took no prisoners.  An example of his rhetoric, Berrigan charged that Jews

have arisen from the dark night of the Holocaust only to turn into warriors armed to the teeth.  They took possession of Palestine.  They exiled and destroyed Arab communities.  They made outsiders of those who were the majority of its citizens.  It is a tragedy beyond calculating that the state of Israel should become the repository, and finally the tomb, of the Jewish soul.  That in place of Jewish compassion are armaments and more armaments. That in place of Jewish concern for the poor and forgotten, Israel should evict, uproot, imprison, and terrorize. That in place of Jewish peacefulness, Israel should expand violence.  That in place of Jewish prophetic wisdom, Israel should launch an Orwellian nightmare of double talk, racism, and fifth-rate sociological jargon aimed at proving its racial superiority to the people it has crushed. (p. 358)

This was in the ‘90s and I don’t remember reading anything of this sort back then.  Though this was pre-internet and public discourse was limited to what CBS, NBC, and ABC, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Time and Newsweek magazines, eight Hollywood movie studios, and a few New York publishers saw fit to let me know about.  They reported Berrigan’s antiwar activities, I remember reading about those, but they kept his views on Jews and Israel to themselves.  It strikes me how different the information and argumentation and imagery flow is now: Joe Rogan, Tucker, YouTubes, websites, podcasts, social media.  A public figure’s views on Jews and Israel are out there now. No hiding what’s going on in Gaza now.   For that matter, to the extent I exist at all as a public being, including this post you’re reading, is due to the changes in modes of communication in recent decades.

*   *   *

Another person Berrigan was drawn to was the English Catholic priest, scholar, and biblical translator Ronald Knox, whose book God and the Atom raised troubling questions for Dan.  Like nearly every American, Dan had seen the atomic bomb shortening the war and saving tens of thousands of American lives.  Knox argued that dropping the atomic bomb on two Japanese cities incinerating their mainly noncombatant populations was a morally atrocious event and made religious faith more difficult, undermined hope, and threatened love among the peoples of the world. What a pity, Knox wrote, that America had not exploded the bomb on an uninhabited island to demonstrate its power without killing the innocent.  For Knox the very existence of such a world-endangering weapon is not only a political challenge but an urgent call to holiness.  (p. 42)

*   *   *

The Forest biography is organized chronologically and Daniel Berrigan turns 80 and then 90.

Time was running out for Dan as it is for me at 86.  I’ve decided that the only currency that really matters in life is time.   Each of us is allocated a certain amount of this currency and we spend it as we do, and when it runs out, it’s over for us, for eternity.  Life comes down to how we spend our time.  Berrigan believed death isn’t the end and I wish I could get there, but I just can’t.

One of Dan’s most enduring friendships was with the Buddhist monk and peace activist Thich Nhat Hanh (1926–2022).   I recommend his book to you, You Are Here: Discovering the Magic of the Present Moment (Shambhala, 2010). Nhat Hanh suggested that Dan’s calmness when confronting death came in good part from his understanding that life and death are interconnected.  One cannot exist apart from the other; they are as joined together as two sides of a coin. “That is why,” he wrote, “when one has seen the real nature of things, he will acquire a kind of fearlessness—an attitude of calm—because he knows his death will bring no end to life.  His existing does not depend on his ‘being alive’ now.”  (p. 359)

Dan recalled his last visit with Thomas Merton not long before Merton’s death.    Merton spoke “with joy” as if anticipating his death.  He said the only thing that relieved the life of a monk from absolute absurdity is that his life is a joyful conquest of death.  The monk lives apart from a world—racist, violent, militaristic—that pays death such tribute, a taxation exacted on people by death itself.  Dan said he learned from Merton what a great privilege it is to live a life of faith in which the possibility of the conquest of death is in our midst every day.  “Most of us are driven by fear-centered idolatries.  Our real shrines are nuclear installations and the Pentagon and war research installations.  This is where we worship, allowing ourselves to hear the command that we kill or be killed, a command which seems to me is anti-Christ.”  (p. 206)

I’ll add that for me old age has been a time of taking stock in a certain way.  I sit on this couch where I spend my life these days–my various health issues have rendered me essentially homebound—and my life from earliest memories to the present time runs through my mind like a movie.   In response to the various “scenes,” I experience gratitude and despair, satisfaction and regret, peace and upset, happiness and sadness.  Basically, I feel good about my movie in its entirety.  Basically, I’ve been responsible to the incredible gift of life I was given.  But the operative word is “basically.”  Especially, there are scenes in my movie with a young woman and two little boys I would re-shoot if I could.

*   *   *

It’s 2016 and Daniel Berrigan is 94 and the end is imminent.  His friends report that in the last days Dan’s most notable quality was his immense compassion, which guided him when it was a challenge just getting out of bed in the Jesuit infirmary at Fordham University that had become his last home.

His friend Maureen McCafferty, one of the frequent visitors at Dan’s bedside, describes his last day, April 30th, 2016.  (p.572)

When I walked into his room about noon, the minute I saw Dan lying in bed, eyes looking upward, breath coming with difficulty, I knew this was it.  I texted Joe Cosgrove that if he wanted to be with Dan, now was the time to come.  Joe Towle called the family—Liz, Frida, Jerry, and Kate who were all doing a retreat together.  They hopped in their car. That these four family members were together was a miracle.  Liz was usually in Baltimore, Jerry in Michigan, Kate in California, and Frida in Connecticut.  Carla and Marc came down from Syracuse. As Patrick, Joe, and I were sitting vigil, I talked to Dan.  I understood that hearing is the last sense to go in a dying person.  I told him his family was on the way.  He would soon be meeting his mother, Frida, his brother Phil, and his other brothers.  I told him that he had led a very good life and that we all loved him and would miss him a lot.   Joe left the room.  Patrick and I were sitting there and I said to Patrick, “I think he has stopped breathing.”  An aide came in, took his blood pressure, and shook her head.  Dan had died.