Strength Through Unity

Strength through unity is the universal motto for Fascists throughout history, which is why their traditional symbol is a Roman fasces; a bundle of rods bound to an axe.

There are many characteristics that an ideology must encompass to be considered Fascism. Some of these characteristics are agreed upon by historians, political scientists, and scholars but many of them are debated. The degraded and infiltrated state of our academic community within Western Civilization leaves one to endeavor to discover the nature of things without relying on these false intellectuals for guidance in all but the most simple of subjects.

When researching and pondering the nature of the new emergence of American Fascism then, one is left with very little historical data from which to draw any fundamental conclusions. This is because, while more traditional Fascism has some very concrete examples, American Fascism is still taking shape.

The American nation has always been unique and motley compared to its European counterparts, a mix of some of the most entrepreneurial and individualistic Whites on the planet. The nation and its people are still in flux, still evolving. The nature of this evolution, however is being altered by the influx non-whites into our lands coupled with the use of our institutions as weapons against us.

Now the very situation that threatens our survival is molding us into something new, something stronger and something very dangerous to our enemies. In this increasingly unstable world, and this most critical point of human development, we find that which we took for granted previously under direct threat of being lost forever. That is, if we do not act. Our people are under threat of losing political self determination, their way and standard of life, and even their lives in many cases. The ability to be able to choose the future for future generations will be lost if trends continue.

This nation within a nation that now forms inside the American Empire will be something no one has ever seen before. White Americans will have a new nation and that nation’s ideology will be Fascism; born out of necessity. Fascism has always manifested itself from nations facing existential threats from enemies without and traitors within, in America the case will be no different.

In every case, that existential threat was Communism, Cultural Marxism or the invasions of populations with incompatible cultures. The history of the Frankfurt School and of the Soviet Union’s plan to infiltrate and destroy our society from within could be seen as the definitive trickle to the torrential downpour of societal degeneration we see today. American Fascism, grown from the deepest roots of our people, will be expanded upon by the best of our folk and tempered in the flames of struggle against our enemies. In the end, the truth will be victorious, whether that finality comes in this lifetime or the next.

Fascism, simply stated, is merely the adherence to the natural laws that govern all beings under the sun. People, much like countless species of animals, naturally prefer to exist in the company of others who are most like them. That’s why churches, neighborhoods and even seating in high school lunchrooms naturally divide along racial lines. Societies that promote the family and racial homogeneity are normal and visibly healthy societies. Children who have parents that fill traditional gender roles and do not divorce are overwhelmingly more likely to grow up to be stable and successful than children who are raised by parents that practice any deviation from the structure of the nuclear family. Families are the building blocks of any society and that is why our enemies sought to destroy the family above all other things.

Cultural Marxism spreads degeneracy; American Fascism will uplift morality and righteousness. Cultural Marxism isolates and atomizes White men; American Fascism will promote the brotherhood and unity of White men. Cultural Marxism renders our women race mixers and promiscuous rags; American Fascism will teach the women of our race that virtue and modesty are the most desirable traits. Cultural Marxism targets and destroys our families. American Fascism will support and honor our families. This, the cultural side of American Fascism could be described as being alongside traditionalism. The cultural aspects of American Fascism could be argued as the most important aspect of the ideology. A nation is the sum of its parts and a nation built of morally strong, intelligent and determined people will not only survive but thrive.

A system must be implemented in which there is no adherence to individualism or collectivism, but one in which the collective strengthens the individual, and the individual strengthens the collective. The society is to hold its populace to the highest standard, not the lowest common benchmark. Every man’s life will be spent in a constant struggle for human betterment. Stasis is the enemy of the Fascist, and through unity can change become creed.

American Fascism will have a political philosophy unlike any other defining characteristic America has seen. The American people are truly unique in history. We are descended from pioneers and individualists and thus some of the more authoritarian style governments which have been tried successfully in Europe may not work in America if a direct replica is tried.

When the Libertarian comes to the realization that his particular philosophy, although in his mind superior, can only have a chance of success if it excludes many of the things which would be directly allowed by such an ideology, such as moral degeneracy or multiculturalism, authoritarianism becomes not only possible, but inevitable. Some of those within the failed, dwindling Conservative movement are now slowly coming to that realization as well.

The Conservative false idols entered a death spiral in which they could only maintain power by compromising on core beliefs, mostly by giving tacit approval for multiculturalism, and their compromises only gave them breathing room for another election or so in which they would have to compromise more to appeal to the large amounts of Leftist voters imported from abroad.

The Leftists themselves now had the option to import more and more non-Whites in order to maintain power within the State. They may already have passed the number required to not only keep power but also render whites as a minority and eventually only a memory in their own country. Once this impending threat is accepted by White Americans they will have no recourse but to abandon all forms of Leftism and subscribe to the only ideology that can logically work to save them. It won’t be conservatism; this failed ideology that has conserved nothing.

Once the defection of Whites from the center to the fringes of both Left and Right as the nation enters an irreversible plunge of polarization, then so too will the intensification of attacks on Whites. This will require fit, well trained, well-armed and well supported men to provide protection for Whites across the country, to fill the role the State failed to do in protecting them and providing order. Our forefathers envisioned the possibility of a tyrannical State destroying its people, and while they never could have possibly imagined the nightmare we face today, they set us up with the right to become our own protectors in the Second Amendment.

Just being White will not be enough to earn protection; everyone will have to live up to the standards of this budding ultra-nationalist form of Fascism that has sprung up. Everyone will be bound around that axe, in unity. Everyone will once again honor and support the warriors, leaders and exemplary people. This will come to be a social duty. We have been infiltrated and influenced by those who wish us harm. Our people need to have morality and standards and be protected from poisonous and harmful outside influences.

American Fascism begins inside a man’s spirit and grows there. He decides that he will put his family, his people, and his nation before himself. He decides that he will secure a future for his people and he’ll sacrifice himself to accomplish this. He’ll work daily to ready himself for whatever he may be called upon to do for future generations for he knows that the better he is, the better his family, his people, and his nation is. He will improve his mind and his body so that he can be the best version of himself possible. He will help his brothers to do the same. God help anyone who stands opposed to such a man. American Fascism will once again make this nation a bastion of hope for all of Western Civilization and will pave the way to secure the existence of our people and a future for White children.

On Israel: the Church or the Jews?

From the Vanguard America Chaplaincy.

With the advent of popular dispensationalist theology, the American Protestant community has found itself on one side of the Christian response to the Jewish question. Most will say that the Church is distinct from Israel, which ought to be only applied to the Jews. Jews, in their understanding, are still under many, if not all, of the Abrahamic Covenant’s promises, which unlike the Mosaic Law were never abrogated or replaced. They would further contend that to deny this, as the Catholic and Lutheran denominations do, invites anti semitism. Is the Evangelical Church correct in this line of thinking? If one is reading Scripture in a plain literal manner, then the answer is no.ArchChaplainLogo.png

The Body of Christ replaced the Jewish people as the true Israel once the Messiah’s own people rejected Him, reflecting that it is the people, not political matter, which is most important to God in His plan of salvation for all who believe. Regarding the concerns which lead people to deny this on soteriological and eschatological bases, we shall seek to assuage them with a clearer understanding of the Church age and its logical conclusions.

Scripture differentiates between Israel and the Jews, ultimately declaring the latter’s replacement by the Church. Jesus, in his most contentious dialogue with the Pharisees, denies that they are truly descendants of Abraham, stating that their true lineage comes from Satan; otherwise, they would not oppose Him, but “do the deeds of Abraham” (Jn.8:39-47 NASB). After the temple was destroyed in 70 A.D., the Pharisaic sect was all that was left of Judaism; with no temple, the Sadducees were eliminated, and the Zealots and Essenes were killed off or scattered by the Romans; the only Jewish group left were the ones Christ condemned, later called the “synagogue of Satan” (Rev.2:9, 3:9). Paul  later affirms this in his epistle to the Romans, separating Israel as a race from Israel proper: “they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel; nor are they all children because they are Abraham’s descendants” (Rom.9:6-7). He further explains this by separating the fruit of Abraham’s loins from the “children of promise” (9:8), indicating that the assurance God gave to the patriarch regarding a son, in the singular tense, was referring to Christ, not a nationality (Gen.21:12). As if it needed any repeating, Paul states plainly that “if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s descendants, heirs according to promise” (Gal.3:29). The writer of Hebrews reflects this when he tells the Church that they have “come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem” (12:22), not that physical city which existed at the time the epistle was written. Peter would refer to the church as “a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession” (1Pet.2:9); his statement is full of Old Testament references which all originally referred to the nation of Israel, but now apply solely to the Church that is Israel (Ex.19:5-6; Deut.7:6, 14:2; Is.66:21). If this were not the case, the Bible would make some distinction between the two and demonstrate the continuity of promise given to the former, but this is not only absent – if it were present, it would contradict the clear teachings of the apostles.

The ethnic implications which come to mind are likely the most difficult for the one who wishes to connect Israel with the Jews alone, as they present a soteriological difficulty. When Paul states that only a remnant of Jews find themselves in the Church (Rom.9:27), it means that only a few will be saved. Surely this is not surprising; after all, Jesus tells His disciples that “the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it” (Mt.7:14), and “many are called, but few are chosen” (22:14). Out of all peoples, so few are saved, that the remnant of Jews which find themselves putting faith in Christ’s atoning work upon the Cross, and His resurrection, is in line with the rest of humanity. The sticking point against it is that the Jews had their apparent means of salvation, the Law, taken away, whereas the nations of the world never had it to begin with. By taken away, we refer to their hardening (Rom.11:25), God’s intervention in the Jewish collective unconscious, having “a spirit of stupor, eyes to see not and ears to hear not” (11:8), with only a few left among the elect. Furthermore, we know that the Law of Moses was abrogated – no longer applicable for obtaining eternal life. They may point to the same chapter of Romans which states “the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable” (11:29), and contend that the matter cannot be one of supersession, but division; perhaps the covenant of promise to Abraham is still in physical effect for Jews, but not spiritually efficacious for them. This is not the case, for Paul would have made the distinction if such were the case. While he allows for educational advantage that a first century Jew would have had, being entrusted with the rite of circumcision and the Old Testament (Rom.3:1-2), he also teaches that there are many of them who refused to believe (3:3-4). This is not to say that a Jew cannot be saved though. We understand that a man is saved by the Grace of God through faith in Christ Jesus (Eph.2:8-9), and this applies to all of humanity (Gal.3:28), with access to salvation being granted to all. A Jew may find Christ, but he will be in the minority due to the hardening that God wrought upon his people, and will not remain a Jew once he is sanctified by the Holy Spirit, made into a whole new man.

If the Deuteronomic Covenant were still in place, we should see the Covenant Curses taking place among Jews today, and the complete abolition of national Israel within a matter of minutes. Deuteronomy 28 lists the consequences for refusing to follow God, up to and including Exile. Most Jews are atheists, and their actions throughout history are not blameless. Communism, the Holodomor, the Red Terror of Spain, the modern pornography industry and the corruption of the mass media – all have origins directly from, or owing heavily to, Jews. Yet Israel as a nation still stands and the curses outlined in the Covenant have not been realized; it is not in effect, and any Apostle could have told you this, for Christ “came to fulfill the Law” (Mt.5:17). If anything, the Hebrews ought to be thankful that they are not the “chosen people” in the sense they proclaim.Posters (5).png

A central reason for denying supersessionism is the premillennialist view of Eschatology. If the anti-Christ is to take “his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God” (2Thess.2:4), then the temple must be rebuilt, should it not? And if the major last battles are to take place in Armageddon (Rev.16:14-16), and the “beloved city” where the “camp of the saints” is (Rev.20:9), then it stands to reason that Israel must be a place in which these will happen. Will it though? In reference to the temple, it is unclear what exactly Paul means, for formerly he had spoken of the Church corporate and the individual believer’s body as a temple (1Cor.3:16, 2Cor6:16). Furthermore, we understand that Christ refers to His very Body as a Temple (Jn2:19-22), and that the Church is the Body of Christ (Rom.12:5, 1Cor.12:12). This opens interpretation to the understanding that the Church, as the Temple of God and Body of Christ, may be infiltrated or led astray by a lawless authority figure. Also, there is no reason why the landmass called “Israel” should not exist for the final battles to take place; does this change who the true Israel is? Not at all. But while discussing eschatology, is the current nation of Israel, the Jewish state, all that important? John prophesies that the “sons of Israel,” according to their tribes, will comprise the one hundred and forty-four thousand sealed (Rev.7:1-8); this may very well be the number of males who comprise the Remnant of Jewish Christians. Those who contend that, at one point “all Israel will be saved,” in accordance with Romans 11:26, are not reading the previous statements regarding Israel, that “God has not rejected His people whom He foreknew” (11:2, emphasis mine). For Paul, that there were any Jews counted among the elect at all was a marvelous display of His faithfulness, especially in the Apostle’s own heritage as “an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin” (11:1).

Outside of these stipulations, where is the contention against replacement? It cannot be one of different plans of salvation for Jews and Christians, for Jesus is the only way to the Father (Jn.14:6). It cannot be one of Jewish heritage, as John the Baptist warns: “do not suppose that you can say to yourselves, ‘we have Abraham for our father,’ for I say to you that from these stones God is able to raise up children to Abraham” (Mt.3:9). It cannot be one of literal hermeneutic, lest the whole mass of verses rendered in this paper be removed from the Bible; interpreting them literally means accepting supersession to some extent. What, then, motivates the dispensationalist to hold his views?

Earlier, we discussed eschatology. It is this writer’s opinion that the divide between dispensationalist and supersessionist thought is the same, with the same camps, as that of the premillennialist and amillennialist. The man who holds to a thousand-year reign of Christ on this earth will come to the understanding that there will still be nation-states which serve God by bringing their offerings to Jerusalem. If that is the case, then one has a place for various difficult passages, like Ezekiel’s Temple in the Millennium (Ezek.40-48). It would not need to be explained by allegory, and given the sacrifices described, which seem to be in line with Mosaic direction (40:41; 46:7), there would be some group separate from the Church which does not engage in it. Here, the amillennialist takes issue, for offering “spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God” (1Pet.2:5) is our modus operandi, pleasing God more than any ram or bull; Ezekiel’s temple, then, must be at least partially symbolic, having none of the sin offerings described in 40:39. The premillennialist sees the reign of Christ at Jerusalem as the climax of history, of which the Church age is but a parentheses, and fully expects the character of the Old Testament national system (possibly even the Law) to return; the amillennialist keeps the Passion as the center, staying content with the imminent return of Christ. The division appears to be as irreconcilable as the flesh and the spirit.

In conclusion, we must address the accusations of antisemitism, as they reveal the underlying motive of many who would drive a wedge between Israel and the Church. By denying that Jesus “made both groups into one and broke down the barrier of the dividing wall” (Eph.2:14), they are expressing their disappointment that this joining did not include Jews, and thus prefer the separation that was once there. There is a palpable sense that excluding most Jews, in spite of their long history and former direct relationship with God, is offensive. This is not to say that every dispensationalist is so concerned with making Jews feel better, but a good portion of them are fascinated with Judaism as it is presented today, with John Hagee and “Christians United for Israel” being prime examples. That the loving sentiment is not returned by the Jews is ironic, given the amount of support they are receiving, is indicative of the kind of hardening Paul is trying to explain to the Church in Romans nine through eleven (1). The supersessionist may be accused of being anti-semitic, but he is at least aware of how much most Jews hate Christians. If speaking the truth regarding salvation is anti semitic, then so be it; salvation is still found in Christ alone, not in Judaism; and the Church is still founded upon the Gospel of Christ, not in “blessing those who bless the Jews.” May the Bride focus upon her Groom and her King, and continue to be sanctified in preparation for His second coming.


Maryland, Sanctuary of the Criminals

MarylandStateLogoA story has broken through the mainstream media in the last day or so about a rape case concerning a 14 year old girl in Rockville, Maryland. This vile act was committed by two foreign criminals from Central America, one of which was in this country illegally and had been caught previously crossing into our borders. Both of them have outstanding orders from Immigration Customs and Enforcement. These fiends had been placed into our public school system in Montgomery County, Maryland in the freshman class for their poor English skills, and brutally raped a 14 year old classmate in the boys bathroom during school hours. This heinous act and the ones to come have not been quelled, but enabled by the State of Maryland’s leftist legislation.

In the period of time around 2008 the state of Virginia began an illegal immigrant crackdown that forced many of these foreign criminals  to flee out of the state. Montgomery County had been one of the primary destinations of these individuals due to the close proximity to the state border. In fact, the Montgomery county population has always had a very high percentage of foreigners at 32.6% of people being born outside of the United States. The hispanic population also increased by 64.5% in the period between the 2000 and 2010 census.

The local government has gone way too far to protect these criminals especially since the election of Donald Trump as president of the United States. Trump has given ICE more power via a executive order to deport those who have crossed into our lands illegally. Montgomery county has taken to being a sanctuary city in all but name to protect these individuals by cooperating with ICE at bare-minimum requirements to maintain federal funding.

Where the real problem starts right now is that on the day this evil act occurred the leftist controlled Maryland House of Delegates passed the “Maryland Law Enforcement and Trust Act” 83-55 which effectively takes one big step toward making Maryland the first ‘sanctuary state’. This law protects criminals and puts our people at risk by impairing federal immigration enforcement. The Maryland government clearly does not understand the gravity of what it is doing to our people by allowing non-White criminals to run rampant in our state.IllegalsGetOutReee.png

This legislative slap in the face to White America is going to enable these foreign aliens to rape our women, ruin our cities, and destroy our homeland. We as Vanguard America must stand steadfast in the path to protect our families and loved ones from invaders of all foreign races. Lawmakers do not have White Americans in their hearts and minds and must be removed from office if they further seek to destroy our nationhood. We will not, and must not allow this land filled with so much history to degrade into a bastion of degeneracy that it may not recover from.

Vanguard America and Vanguard Maryland highly recommends that all Whites loyal to this nation and the true struggle of our people find any and all illegal non-Whites and report them to the proper authorities. These invaders must not be allowed a moment of solace in our nation, and we must utilize the institutions which have momentarily turned towards our interests.

The Warrior Spirit of American Fascists

We are brothers in arms and put those beside us before ourselves. We face the enemy on equal footing and show them respect where it is due, and deny all mercy when it is not earned. We are men of integrity, honor, and valor.

We are White, we are nationalists, and we are Fascists.

When a challenge is faced, there is less deliberation on potential hardship, as long as the challenge is overcome. Our fight is not for the preservation of some abstract, nebulous ideas of multiculturalism or democracy, but rather the very tactile and real notions of survival and the prosperity of our race. No man can truly dedicate his life and his vigor to a mere idea, a concept. People may “stand up,” for equality, but they may not die for it. If they do, they die for nothing.ShirtDesign1.png

We are of a warrior blood and warrior spirit, just as many generations of our ancestors have been. Our fight is both different and identical to theirs, against an enemy as old as the written word. A foundational standard of ethics must be present in our doctrine. This ethos will teach us shame instead of guilt, where a man is not merely judged by himself or God, but his nationhood and community. Shame for not improving yourself, for failing, for fleeing from danger, for fearing death itself. Self-preservation, found in all creatures, must be cast aside in favor of doing what is necessary to protect our race. Where you can die with honor, surrender is simply not an option.

We must live by loyalty to our race, fellow members of this eternal struggle, and our women.

Having the women of our people become once again proud of their blood and sure in their duties is insurmountably important. The backbone of a civilization is the family, and the backbone of the family is the mother.

Lead from the front, by example, or not at all is what we teach the greatest among us. Tackle a challenge with the intention of doing more than expected, not less. Face your enemy head, on in a fair fight. Know that sometimes you will have to take an initiative to win a battle before it is even fought. When times are bleak and hope seems a distant memory, steel yourself and only grow more resolute in your beliefs of victory at the end of struggle.

The warrior culture is ingrained in all peoples, including Americans. America once had a special society, one where men worked their own land and supported their family, but were ready to take up arms in defense of their homeland at a moment’s notice. Easy times in the second half on the 20th century changed that. Men and women fell into complacency, assuming that their nation would always be safe.

The pride of righteous conflict itself has been taken from the best of our people, as they no longer wage wars for the interests of their nationhood, but the interests of the vested few. Soldiers wage ineffectual wars in distant, foreign lands and die lying in alien soil for uncertain goals, and for what? So the cabal of Jewish-led international finance can gain more capital at the expense of American lives?

Now we have a civilian society, devoid of warrior culture, where former soldiers are considered outcasts by a large portion of our citizens. The lack of a society that fully supports our warriors is one that cannot last. We aim to fix this.
We are the flesh and blood medium in which Fascism flows and manifests itself. Fascism is an idea, and it cannot be killed with bullets or blades. Our men dedicate body and soul to a conflict they very well know could outlive them.

Embracing The Curse

By the Vanguard America Chaplaincy:

Before I begin, let’s dispense with the bad news. One day, we men will die. We will die at the end of what can only be described as a long, long, long work day. We are born, and the day starts. We are raised up as children, and have the morning preparations for work. Then we are adults, and the day’s labor, with its joys and sorrows, takes up most of our conscious time. For a brief period when we (hopefully) retire, our life’s Day sinks into evening, and we relax a little before our mortal coil is shed. Knowing that we shall awake once more, to an eternal Day, is a blessing from God, Jesus having assured it by His Crucifixion and Resurrection. However, that era is not yet upon us, and so we pray for Christ’s return, and learn how to deal with this Day as it is.ArchChaplainLogo.png

Establishing this mindset is absolutely necessary for all who would put themselves on the Right. Ours is not a Utopian idea, promising some classless society or perfect constitutional government, and so we must deal in facts and bet on reality. The temptation for one to become so subsumed by the political battle, by the goals of our Vanguard, without stopping to recognize our own human situation, is perilous to one’s own soul, for we run the risk of running counter to what God has established, and such endeavors never end well.

Let us recognize death for what it is. We know that “it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment” (Heb.9:27 – KJV). Have you thought about your family? Have you fought for your children’s’ future, or at least earned an inheritance for them once you have passed? Have you spent regular time in prayer and service to God? I should hope this latter is indispensable to you already – He decides your fate much more than your wife! Also, are you at peace with it? Have you stopped shaking your fist at the Almighty, and prepared yourself for the possibility of an early death? After all, our struggle for White preservation may cost us our lives, and we may die a martyr’s death for demonstrating Godly love to our own people. Lord knows, our movement is the resurgence of something old and true; Europeans, for once, are standing up for themselves.

Now for the good news! This life we live, as we live it for God, has a rewarding curse – you read that correctly. The same curse which God gave to Adam and all his descendants contains within it something wonderful. Let’s see if you can catch it:


And to Adam he said, “Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, ‘You shall not eat of it,’ cursed is the ground because of you; in toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life;

thorns and thistles it shall bring forth to you; and you shall eat the plants of the field.

In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; you are dust, and to dust you shall return.” – Genesis 3:17-19 -RSV


Did you see it? “In toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life,” and “In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread” – these are not unqualified evils placed upon man. Yes, God cursed men by making their work harder, but the curse is not work itself. Work is rewarded with bread, and we see by our growing muscles and expertise that it is not simply a full belly, but fulfillment that God promises to mankind through this constant effort. It is for this reason Solomon, during his struggle with the apparent meaninglessness in life, states emphatically

“Behold that which I have seen: it is good and comely for one to eat and to drink, and to enjoy the good of all his labour that he taketh under the sun all the days of his life, which God giveth him: for it is his portion.” – Ecclesiastes 5:18 -KJV

If our Lord had simply cursed us with dying on account of our sins, we should be in a worse position, living with no purpose, completely aimless, until we become dust once more. We see this with the atomized youth of America, the poor souls who do nothing in life. They earned nothing, and so all they have and do is counted as nothing; no matter how much they have, they will hate their life, for it is not something God has rewarded them with. If you are under a heavy burden, take courage, for God will deal with you more generously with a rich life no matter how little you have.

Let us use our hands, let us use our minds, and forge something as our European ancestors did. The White Man works harder than any other, having borne the standard of Christ and tirelessly hewn the cathedrals and castles, the spire and parapet, in honor of Him. We see the gift of God in the seventeen hundred years that Europe built civilization up from ashes, homesteaded a whole continent, and gave humanity technology and medicine. Take pride in your heritage, for it is an earned one, and continue the tradition!

Yet also take note that this is just as much a command and it is a benefit. There is a malaise that harms us if we rebel, choosing laziness over embracing the curse, and this destroys a man’s soul. Scripture will continuously condemn sloth, and we see the rotten fruits of rebellion in woman’s refusal to follow her curse; feminism gave us the most bitter, unhappy, angry, and sorrowful women on the planet, three quarters of them on antidepressants and the cat replacing the joy of a child. Learn from their mistake, be strong, and thrive.

If any one will not work, let him not eat. – 2 Thessalonians 3:10 -RSV

A Futile Struggle

The story of the struggle for racial equality in the United States is, coincidentally, the best evidence for the lack of equality between the races.There are two ways you can bring about equality between two groups:, equality of opportunity,and equality of results. The 14th amendment and later Supreme Court decisions targeted the former.

The goal of equality of opportunity is to take away boundaries to employment and education. The theory is that, when there is no discrimination in society the races will perform equally, now that they have a level playing field. The opposite has been the case.
 If anything, allowing African-Americans to compete on the same level as Whites in the
workplace further pronounced differences between the two groups. The complete and utter failure of instilling equality of opportunity is evident when looking at the shift in the means used to obtain this nebulous notion of equality since the 1960’s.
The races could not compete on the same level, given the same opportunity. This is the
textbook definition of two groups not being equal. The fact that more legislation needed to be passed is evident enough of this. Then and there it should have been apparent to the left that the foundation of their worldview had begun to crack under its own farcical qualities.
Since opportunity did not work, the targeting of the results began. Not only must the two races have the same options open to them, they must succeed as well as each other on the basis of how they use those options. Affirmative action was signed by an Executive Order by John F. Kennedy in March of 1961. The act was not passed through Congress for fear that it would be disputed. It was later replaced by another similar Executive order, this one by Lyndon B. Johnson in September of 1965.
The races must not only compete at the same level, but succeed at the same level. Their logic to bring about this equality was make employment and education comparatively harder for whites, but easier for non whites.
The races could not compete on the same level given the same opportunities, therefore they were proven not to be equal. Decades of that did not work, and decades of affirmative action and putting white Americans second has even had marginal effects on the economic status of the races. The movement for equality has failed because the notion of equality as the left presents it simply does not exist.

Standing Firm

Therefore let anyone who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall. – 1 Corinthians 10:12

With everything that has been going on as of late, this verse comes to mind.  You do not have to be of Christian faith in order to apply this message to your life.

Therefore let anyone who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall.


Therefore let anyone who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall.
We have a duty to reject, and abstain from every, and any form of degeneracy.  Whether that degeneracy is a “small” lie or something as egregious as committing adultery.  For those charged with defending the future of their race, there is an overwhelming duty to abstain from such things that jeopardize that final goal.

How can we expect anyone to take our message seriously when we become degenerates ourselves?

I implore everyone who claims any form of White Nationalism to continually show intolerance to degeneracy in your life, and to show intolerance towards degeneracy in the lives of others as well.

The more we reject degeneracy the easier it becomes to abstain from degeneracy.

This is about building healthy habits in our lives.

This is about saving our race and saving our people.

This is about building strong, traditional families.

This is about securing a future for our children.

This is bigger than us.

Will you eliminate any form of degeneracy in your life? Whether it be in your life, or the lives of others you must stand firmly against it with fanatical passion.

Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us… – Hebrews 12:1

Grace and peace.

The Case For One’s Kin

It’s parroted over and over in our media, in our schools, and by our politicians; diversity is not only a strength, but a cultural phenomenon worthy of the sincerest of praise. When diversity comes to mind to the average Westerner, he may picture men and women from all over the world coming together in mutual market interests, sharing their culture with those around them in harmonious living, and through this experience of diverse unification, we gain greater wisdom and greater knowledge.

However, is this truly an accurate depiction of what transpires on the sociological level? Yes, of course, the “rational” egalitarian may expect a few snags in a newly “diverse” society, such as those which irrationally react to the change of their culture; clinging to a whole series of nasty little “isms” to preserve something without irrational justification. Bigots, racists, and many other sorts of modern heretics clinging to a past in which mere simple and honest critical reasoning would dismiss from the individual devoid of fear; to the enlightened mind open to change.

Unfortunately for the “enlightened,” philosophy can only take us so far away from who and what we are – a diverse species with diverse needs. These needs are not raised merely from conditioned and meritless sociocultural nothings, but of our ancestral bloodlines. For example, it is of no mere coincidence that Whites tend to favor culture which is sociologically individualistic, as there are genetic variants associated with individualism which are much more common in White populations than non-White populations (1). It can be argued that perhaps this is the outcome of a shift in survival tactics during the Ice Age, as large collective methods of survival would have been far less effective. Whatever it may be, however, the genetic variants are a reality with far reaching sociological consequences. This desire for a more individualistic lifestyle goes hand-in-hand with our misguided philosophical propositions of a united diversity. Unfortunately for Whites, the desire for a non-uniformed way of living is not a result of enlightenment, but a general result of being a misguided White.

Regardless, White or not, diversity on a collective level has been shown to be detrimental to social cohesion. One example of where this is best shown is in a sociological study conducted by Professor Putnam, a political scientist. On a quest to prove diversity has more pros than cons, Putnam analyzed more than 40 regions in the United States, comparing racially diverse regions with racially segregated regions, and the social capital of these different regions. He controlled for poverty, crime, age, and other variables which may conflict with the outcome. Rather than the results he expected to find, he found that diverse regions were far less trusting of one another. Furthermore, these residents were far less likely to sociologically contribute to their community. They voted less, donated less to charity, were less likely to be involved in local projects, and they were overall much less happy when compared to their segregated counter-parts (2).

These results are not unique to Putnam’s study. Similar results have been replicated over and over, from England (3) to the Netherlands (4), we witness the same lack of social cohesion. Furthermore, in the United States, a meta-analysis of 90 previous papers confirms this social degradation is most common in regions which are most racially diverse, rather than merely ethnically or religiously diverse, and studies conducted which fail to replicate Putnam’s findings are less than 25% (5).

We can see this decline in happiness observed over time, not simply within a vacuum. Take the USA, a nation with an abundance in wealth and high survival rates. We can see as the White population begins to decline, due to the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 forced upon its citizens, so does its happiness and social capital, and popular explanations for this decrease in social capital, economic or otherwise, fall short when put to the test (6). In fact, the United States has only increased in GDP and PPP over time as the happiness of the nation falls over time. On top of this, older individuals are typically happier than younger individuals born into more racially diverse societies, which is to be expected by this analysis (12).  These same trends can be witnessed in other Western nations facing White displacement and racial diversity, such as in Britain (13). Ultimately, there are no compelling studies which suggest racial diversity provides any form of strength to a society; only a deflation of social capital.

One may perhaps point to studies which suggest there is a benefit to racial diversity in work environments as a compelling case for sociological diversity (6). What is usually not understood about these studies is that individuals in these diverse groups were better at coming up with solutions to hypothetical problems in which they were less likely to trust each other, and therefore, largely unaffected by imitation and conformity. Racially homogenous groups were far more likely to place trust one another, where the distrusting diverse groups were less likely to distinguish between wrong and accurate answers to their problems. This may perhaps be beneficial within a workplace vacuum (and then only to employers), but extremely detrimental to society at large.

The “rational” egalitarian may object to this data as a mere irrational human reaction to change in environment; one that must be combat through societal “discussions” of tolerance and diversity. This is a very selfish and irrational objection; that we must subjugate and condition society at large, against their natural desires, to fit our sociological whims. Furthermore, I would point out that yes, while we are often familiar with data which suggests we are more likely to enjoy the company of those more physically similar to us on a phenotypical level (7), it is shockingly true on a genotypical level as well.

The fact of the matter is, friends and spouses of individuals tend to be far more genetically similar to an individual than his outside peers. One may point out that this is to be expected, as individuals regionally develop most friendships, and members of one race tend to be more genetically similar than two members of outside races (8). However, the genotypical relations are shockingly specific. The more heritable a trait is, the more similar friends and spouses tend to be in it (9). De facto, as expected similarity in highly heritable traits is a better predictor of marital success than less heritable traits (10). Because of this, we may conclude that our fondness for our kin is more than mere irrational clings to familiarity; it is our evolutionary inclination.

The racial segregation witnessed in our neighborhoods, schools, and churches is not the result of an underlying hatred of others, but of the natural fondness, trust, and understanding we experience when interacting with our own race. Racially ideological or not, individuals tend to befriend those of the same race, and the closest friends of any individual are, much more often than not, members of the same race. This is true regardless of racial minority or majority status (11). I do not believe this is due to mere racial tension, but mostly due to natural sociological interactions.

It seems that, empirically, a case for racial diversity cannot be made. Rather, it must be argued ethically as a moral good regardless of the end result. This being the case, it would need to be a devastatingly convincing ethical proposition, as promoting something which ultimately destroys happiness and social cohesion is undesirable on all accounts. The ethical good must outweigh the functionality, trust, and peace of a homogenous society. We have yet to hear such an argument.

For some committed advocates of diversity, these objections and answers do not suffice. For the devoted egalitarian, these biological inclinations are a force to surmount. It is here we begin to see the absurdity of these egalitarians; they combat nature tooth and nail as she made us to force her into their ideological frame. This is not a fight that can be won. This is a perpetual struggle with no end in sight forced upon our populace by psychotic sociological utopians. The ignorant civilian must be made aware he is a subject forced into a sociological worldview which is ultimately against his best interests.

Imposing diversity upon a population is demonstrably a net negative.  De facto, maintaining racial homogeneity is in the best interests of all of Western civilization. This is not an “evil,” as so many young men and women have been conditioned to believe by sociological utopians. This is not only good, but sane; just as refusing to swallow poison is not only a “good” decision, but an obvious act of sanity. As sane members of our nation, we have a responsibility to our nation and society. Therefore, we have an interest in maintaining the well-being of our kin; not only physically, but psychologically. The anti-nationalist has no love for his nation, only a fervorous commitment to ideological universality in the name of his conditioned philosophical interests and political aims. The rejection of globalism is an act of rationality. Fighting nationhood is an act of violence against prosperity and happiness itself. Those pushing a globalist philosophy are not seeking the best interests of society, but of themselves.

Reject the anti-homeland conditioning of egalitarian sweet nothings. Embrace your kin, for they have already embraced you, whether they know it or not. A high trust society of high social capital is already in place. It must be defended against arrogant philosophers seeking to morph and alienate society to fit their global egalitarian ethical foundations. Defend your kin from politicians seeking to usurp your nation in the name of ethical dopamine highs. Defend your kin from international “compromises” seeking to undermine your race, identity, and culture. You already have something beautiful to cherish and maintain. Do not toss it to the dogs.



On Race

No topic is more controversial and forbidden from rational discussion than the topic of race.  This is because race, as a valid biological construct, possesses many implications which blaspheme the religious egalitarian worldview of the West. When racial questions are brought up, or racial observations made, the egalitarian intellectual promptly arrives on the scene to either “dispel the myth of race,” or rationalize a way to pin the shortcomings of specific racial populations onto the White race. It’s time we own up to the biological reality of race. How dare we, the West, fancy ourselves an intellectual forefront while denying basic evolution? Ancestral separation carries vast biological consequences, but the moment the human species enters the picture, we adopt some useful race creationist worldview.

As we all know, race as a category was created to categorize humans by their ancestry. This has proven useful far beyond the realm of socio-political ends, although the egalitarian would of course be ignorant of this fact. Indeed, race as a biological categorization of the human species possesses many useful medical ends, predictive behavioral capabilities, and an overall clearer picture of the world as we know it once we own up to the biological implications of race; That shortcomings of certain races are not necessarily the fault of sociological inequality, but of genetic reality.

People are often surprised to find out just how great a role heritable genes play in the intelligence, personality, and behavior of individuals. Consider a study conducted by professor Bouchard on hundreds of identical twins given up for adoption, and separated at birth (1). Often times, the twins were even unaware of the existence of the other twin. Yet, when researchers compared the two twins, they found that the twins were similar in mannerisms and personality. Many had chosen the same professions, and shared the same hobbies. In one case, the twins had a similar psychotic episode around roughly the same age, and around roughly the same amount of time. This study is just one of many which conclude how significant a role heritable genes play in the behavior and personality of an individual.

What about race? First it must be established that, when looking at the whole genome, pairs of people of the same race are almost always more genetically similar than pairs of people from different races (2). So would it follow that members of a specific race are more alike in personality and behavior? The answer is yes. In Race, Evolution, and Behavior, psychologist Phillippe Rushton documented significant racial differences brain size, intelligence, sexuality, personality, growth rate, life span, crime, and family stability (3). On all these measurements, Orientals (East Asians, Mongoloids) fall on one end of the spectrum, and Blacks on the other end of the spectrum. Whites fall somewhere in the middle, often close to Orientals. For example, the average IQ for Blacks in The United States is 85 (70 for African Blacks), while the average IQ of Whites is 100, and 106 for the average Oriental. The gap between American and African Blacks, environmental factors aside, is likely due to the fact that American Blacks are, on average, of mixed racial descent. Rather, they have obtained heritable intelligence genes from White racial mixing.

Objections to these facts typically are, more often than not, objections to IQ as an accurate measurement of intelligence. In defense of IQ as a valid measurement of intelligence, I would point to the fact that IQ often predicts how much money one will be making, and how well one does in school (IQ is also slightly stimulated by being engaged in schooling) (10)(11). Furthermore, occupations which require higher intelligence, such as medical doctors, or lawyers, are far more often than not occupied by individuals with high IQ scores (12). IQ doesn’t seem to fall short for its designed utility; it’s clear IQ measures intelligence.

The next objection which is likely to follow is projection of the ever-unfalsifiable systemic oppression; Blacks must perform poorly because there is an inherent bias in the methods of intelligence testing. After all, the IQ test originated in the West, so perhaps it is best fit for its native peoples. While this objection carries with it a delicious irony, that people of different races think and rationalize differently, I will simply address the substance of the objection at hand. Experts in IQ testing are in agreement; the tests are valid, and generally free of racial bias (13). Even if we were to accept the premise of this objection, it very clumsily forgets that East Asians outperform Whites in “their own” IQ tests.

An objection to this data is typically an appeal to environment; that we ought to consider the economic status of the races involved. It should be known that this data holds true even when controlling for environment. In fact, on average, Whites from poor families have a higher IQ than Blacks coming from rich families. Furthermore, when controlling for fixed IQ [100] and fixed age, Whites, Blacks, and Latinos all three earn roughly the same in annual wages (14). As expected by this data, those with a low IQ score are more often than not below the poverty line. Additionally, those with lower IQ are more likely to dropout from high school, go to jail, be on welfare, and have children out of wedlock (15). The impact of this is also racially correlated, as Blacks seem to suffer heavily from these sociological issues. In other words, while environment certainly does play a role in one’s cognitive development, even more so, one’s cognitive development plays a heavier role in how one constructs his environment. How can we know this to be the case?

Environment is an important factor in the development of an individual, but it should be noted that the intellectual capabilities of individuals are almost entirely due to their genes. As reported by David L. Kirp in a New York Times article (4), “A century’s worth of quantitative-genetics literature concludes that a person’s I.Q. is remarkably stable and that about three-quarters of I.Q. differences between individuals are attributable to heredity.” This also can explain the socio-economic status of these races, as, mentioned earlier, IQ serves as a reliable predictor of one’s financial success (5). Yes, even in White countries, Asians tend to outperform Whites on a financial level.

There are some other less known psychological differences in the races. For example, some races have larger brains than other races. The brain size gaps are consistent with the IQ gaps mentioned above; Blacks on one end of the spectrum, Orientals on the other end of the spectrum, and Whites in the middle for a close second place (6). Large cranial cavity size is needed for a large brain. Because of this, and as expected, females belonging to racial groups of larger brain sizes have larger pelvic anatomy for birthing (7). Some races also physically mature faster than other races (3). Once again, this is consistent with the previously listed patterns. Furthermore, animals with larger brains also tend to have longer lifespans. This is also consistent with, but not entirely explanatory of, the differences in lifespans between the races (3)(8).

It’s clear that race is a valid categorization of taxonomy. The fact that the culturally Left-oriented intellectuals of the West love to point out that categorizations can change depending on the sociological circumstances is irrelevant. The motivations behind such a construction has no bearing on whether or not the concept will be useful for science, or if it pertains to an obvious biological reality. Plenty of scientific concepts have changed and adapted over time, such as mathematical units for measurement. Change within these concepts do not invalidate them. The usefulness remains intact.

How the egalitarian is to deal with dismissing such an obvious truth is beyond my understanding from a rational basis. However, the egalitarian is anything but rational. The religious convictions of the West, both religious and post-religious, keep their rationality forcefully tucked away in a comforting dark blanket. Removing this blanket is to invite heresy into one’s life. To be rational in this age requires expulsion from many facets of life. The racist, the heretic, is the modern witch. Over and over again, society is reminded that today’s racists are everywhere and nowhere. It could be anyone; your mother, your brother, your best friend, or even yourself. We must always be aware, we are taught, of our surroundings and peers; to be on alert at all times for the heretic, for if they are allowed to roam without check, surely society will succumb to the devil’s magic.

This comforting egalitarian bliss has had absolutely detrimental effects upon our society. Where the egalitarian sees inequality, he fights tooth and nail to equalize. No gap is acceptable, and all gaps are the product of mere socio-political structures in the mind of this potato. Of course these “gaps” hardly dissipate with cultural war and legislative efforts. Blacks still underperform when compared to Whites regardless of how much welfare we create, or how many intellectual egalitarian talking points we repeat to impressionable young students. Blacks still commit much more violent crime than Whites, and no amount of blaming the police or Black apologetics have changed this fact (9).

The egalitarian fights a fight that cannot be won. These sociological outcomes are the products of biological reality; not of mere baseless tribalism. He self-righteously pats himself on the back after stirring the fires of cultural and racial tension, and the longer the struggle goes on, the longer he pats himself on the back. It’s an endless cycle of masturbatory self-validation. He violates peace and harmony in the name of this moral mainstream; the self-stroking religion of egalitarianism. Such a parasite seeking moral dopamine highs at the expense of harmony is a plague on our civilizations.

It’s time we grew up, and own up to reality. Race denial has plagued the Western mind for long enough. The moral highs so eagerly sought after from egalitarian religious crusades have torn our society into an everlasting mess of infighting.  As long as we strive for egalitarian “purity,” what we will have, and continue to have, is a state of perpetual cultural war. There will be no end to this struggle, but there will be a continuing degradation of societal cohesion. Let us drop these self-serving ideologies and return to truth once again.


  12. Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein, The Bell Curve, Pg. 52-55
  14. Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein, The Bell Curve, Pg. 323
  15. Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein, The Bell Curve, Pg. 368