Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
199503 American Renaissance

199503 American Renaissance

Ratings: (0)|Views: 42|Likes:
American Renaissance, March 1995. Prospects for Racial and Cultural Survival; Book Review: False Victims; O Tempora, O Mores!; Letters from Readers
American Renaissance, March 1995. Prospects for Racial and Cultural Survival; Book Review: False Victims; O Tempora, O Mores!; Letters from Readers

More info:

Published by: American Renaissance on Dec 19, 2010
Copyright:Traditional Copyright: All rights reserved


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF or read online from Scribd
See more
See less



Separation, as proposedin the previous issue,would not work but thereis a better solution.
by Samuel Francis
t is all very well to say, asMr. McCulloch and RabbiSchiller do in the February is-sue of 
, that racial separa-tion is necessary for the sur-vival of whites and the civili-zation whites have created. It isquite different to spell out ex-actly how separation couldcome about and be successful. Neither they nor most other advocates of separatism seemto offer much in the way of concrete proposals, perhaps in part because they know that racialseparation involves problems that to-day are virtually insurmountable, andthat until those problems are solvedneither separation nor any other en-during solution to the racial crisis is possible.I do not question the arguments for the desirability of separation thatRabbi Schiller and Mr. McCullochhave mounted. Even if the survival of whites as a people and a civilizationwere not threatened, I am willing togrant at least a pragmatic right of every self-conscious people to governitself and to create and live within itsown institutions—a right that liberalideals of assimilation refuse to recog-nize despite their deference to theDeclaration of Independence. Never-theless, I do question whether separa-tion as Rabbi Schiller and Mr.McCulloch have described it cancome about or even whether it shouldcome about. Racial separation meansthe relocation of the different races(let us limit the discussion here to thetwo main races in America, whitesand blacks) either to areas of the coun-try that would become politically in-dependent and self-governing or toother countries. It can therefore take place in only two different ways: (1)as Rabbi Schiller seems to propose,through the establishment of “racially based nations within the territory of the United States,” “dividing the na-tion into racial zones”—in a word, the political breakup of the United States;or (2) through relocation of one race by its removal (voluntary or not) tosome other territory outside the pre-sent United States. In either case, thereare three problems: (a) Where is eachor either race actually going to go; (b)How is separation going to be imple-mented; and (c) How are the separatedraces going to be induced to staywhere they are once they get there?If racial separatism is to be a seri-ous movement and not just one moreescape hatch for whites who refuse todeal with political and social reality,these questions will have to be an-swered. Avoiding answering themwith responses such as, “It’s too earlyto tell how it’s going to happen,” sug-gests that separatism is just another fantasy for whites who refuse to facethe threats to their survival.
Patriotic Loyalties
 Rabbi Schiller’s proposalfor breaking up the UnitedStates is one that whites oughtnot to embrace readily and atthe present time will not em- brace, since it involves surren-dering large parts of their owncountry to nonwhites. Mostwhite Americans retain toomuch sense of nationality andtoo much allegiance to their countryand their own communities to acceptthe proposal of giving up large partsof the United States to others (raciallydifferent or not). For defenders of thewhite race and its heritage to adoptthis strategy at this point would simplyincrease their problems because itwould place them in antagonism to the patriotic and nationalist loyalties of most of their fellow whites and wouldallow their enemies to brand them asliterally “un-American.”By embracing a strategy that in-volved breaking up the United States,not only would whites be abandoningtheir own country but also they would be forced to give up appeals to its his-tory, its traditions, and its interests asa nation. We could no longer cite thewords of Jefferson and Lincoln (andother American statesmen) on racialmatters; we could no longer invokethe U.S. Constitution as an authority;we could no longer argue that immi-
Continued on page 3
By embracing a breakupof the United States,whites would beabandoning their owncountry.
American Renaissance - 1 - March 1995
Vol. 6, No. 3 March 1995
Prospects for Racial and Cultural Survival
There is not a truth existing which I fear, or would wish unknown to the whole world. – 
Thomas Jefferson
lor – replied to his concern that in amaterialist world there is nothing tokeep whites from viewing nonwhitesas biological competitors who may beexterminated if necessary.My suspicion is that Fr. Tacellithinks quite naturally and instinctivelyin racial terms, but believes that only atranscendent morality would be a suf-ficient check upon the excesses thatmight be committed in the name of the racial consciousness AR proposes.He may or may not be right, but therisk of excess must be run if we arenot simply to be displaced by otherswho do not have the same scruples.Chris Kingsly, Raonoke, Va.Sir – I take issue with the Februaryissue's "O Tempora" item about theJapanese relocation camps during theSecond World War. The people whowere interned were not Japanese, butAmerican citizens of Japanese ances-try. All were either legal immigrantsor the American-born children of these people. Their Constitutionalrights were thrown out the window.With all the personal property that theU.S. government "legally" seizedfrom them, $20,000 each in compen-sation wasn't nearly enough. NoAmerican of German or Italian de-scent was locked up for being in thatcategory, nor were any Americans of Korean descent locked up during theKorean War. As for keeping one campopen as a memorial: Good idea. It willhelp prevent such a thing from ever happening again.W. Dranem, Huber Heights, Oh.Sir – I read with great interest your review of 
 Race, Evolution and Behav-ior 
in the December issue. Could you be more specific, however, about whatyou mean by "Asians?" In this coun-try, "Asian" usually means anyonewho comes from the Asian continent,and covers a wide range of racialtypes, from Arabs to Japanese. I haveguessed from the context that youmean Chinese/Japanese/Koreans, butit would make for more clarity, cer-tainly on this side of the Atlantic, if you were more specific.S. E. Parker, London, England
You have guessed correctly. We sometimes write about North Asiansin order to avoid ambiguity. – Ed.
Sir – I suggest that the majority of white Gentiles who openly supportracial separation in this country blameJewish leadership for much of thecountry's present racial situation andmoral decay. In assigning blame, theydo not distinguish between Jewishliberals and conservatives, religiousand atheist Jews, Jews as a religion or a race, etc. Consequently, I suspectthat many of your readers would have preferred that Rabbi Mayer Schiller'sarticle deal with the Jewish involve-ment in bringing about our currentsituation and why white Gentiles andthe Jewish right should unite in a sa- paratist movement.I have wondered for some timehow AR was going to handle "theJewish question." The number of Jewswho will support racial separation inthis country is infinitesimal and theJews who do not will be in the fore-front of the opposition. The inclusionof Jews in a separatist movement islikely to result in internal conflict be-tween anti-Semites and philo-Semites.I suspect there may even be those whothink that AR is deliberately trying todivide white separatists in order toensure that their movement will fail.Robert Grooms, Michigan City,Ind.Sir – AR has finally departed fromracialism and joined the ranks of other minority pets, such as Rush Limbaughand Newt Gingrich. Keep it up andmaybe you can get Sam Newhouse todistribute your paper. Wake up andsmell the matzos. You're being used.H.K.I., St. Louis, Mo.American Renaissance - 2 - March 1995
 Letters from Readers
 Sir – Rabbi Schiller's article inyour February 1995 issue was marvel-ous. He covered just about every-thing. Jewish notables have addedspice to many Western endeavorsover the centuries, and I'm glad yousee the desirability of including themin the coalition you are trying to build.Erik Peterson, Gresham, Or.Sir – In light of Rabbi Schiller'sarticle I would point out that in everyissue of 
The Final Call,
Louis Farra-khan's newspaper, there is a fullpagesummary of what is called The Mus-lim Program. Parts of it are very inter-esting:"We want our people in Americawhose parents or grandparents weredescendants from slaves, to be al-lowed to establish a separate state or territory of their own – either on thiscontinent or elsewhere."So far, so good, but the Muslimswant something more:"We believe that our former slavemasters are obligated to provide suchland and that the area must be fertileand minerally rich. We believe thatour former slave masters are obligatedto maintain and supply our needs inthis separate territory for the next 20to 25 years – until we are able to pro-duce and supply our own needs."The Muslim Program also calls for racially segregated schools and legal prohibition of miscegenation.Paul Tomlinson, Carson City, Nev.Sir – I read Fr. Tacelli's excellentarticle as well as the large number of letters it appears to have prompted.However, no one – not even Mr. Tay-
Continued from page 1
gration threatens our national interests because there would be no nation tohave interests; we could no longer mention the settlement and conquestof North America by whites, if only because we would have confessedthat that settlement and conquest have been failures from which we are nowrunning as fast as we could. By con-senting to national disintegration andseparatism, in short, we would have tostart all over in the project of con-structing a culture, a country, and a political order. If only for practicalreasons, it is much easier to stay withthose we already have than it is to in-vent new ones that do not exist savein the mind’s eye.Moreover, whites should not em- brace this proposal because at the pre-sent time and for a long time to come,there is no need to. There may wellcome a time when partition is the onlyrecourse left to whites, but that time isfar off. The fact is that descendants of Europeans are still a large majority of the American population and still re-tain far more wealth, political power,and even cultural dominance thannonwhites.
 If whites wanted to do so
,they could dictate a solution to theracial problem tomorrow—by curtail-ing immigration and sealing the bor-der, by imposing adequate fertilitycontrols on nonwhites and encourag-ing a higher white birth rate, by refus-ing to be bullied into enduring“multiculturalism,” affirmative action,civil rights laws and policies; and byrefusing to submit to cultural dissolu-tion, inter-racial violence and insults,and the guilt that multiracialists incul-cate.Ending all of these threats to thewhite European character of theUnited States would involve no vastconstitutional or political changes, butit would involve an uncompromisingassertion of white will and identity.The fundamental problem with whitestoday will not be solved by givingaway any more of what remains of their country and their heritage but byasserting their own will and identityin order to retain the primacy of their heritage in their own country. It isthat lack of will and identity, that lack of racial and cultural consciousness,that must be remedied before we re-sort to any dissolution of the country(or indeed any other resolution of theracial crisis).If national breakup is a plan thatwe neither can nor should accept,there remains the other kind of racialseparatism in the form of the reloca-tion of one race by its removal tosome other territory outside theUnited States. Rabbi Schiller consid-ers this contingency in his suggestion(and subsequent rejection) of whiteremoval to Europe. He rejects this proposal, rightly, in reflecting thatEurope would not particularly wantanother 100 million residents. Whilethat is a powerful reason for rejectingthe suggestion, there is another that isat least as compelling: However much
American Renaissance
Jared Taylor, Editor Stephen Webster, Assistant Editor James P. Lubinskas Contributing Editor George McDaniel, Web Page Editor  — — — — — — American Renaissance is published monthly by the New Century Foundation. NCF is governed by section501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code; contribu-tions to it are tax deductible.Subscriptions to American Renaissance are $24.00 per year. First-class postage isan additional $6.00. Subscriptions to Canada (first class) and overseas (surface mail)are $30.00. Overseas airmail subscriptions are $40.00. Back issues are $3.00 each.Foreign subscribers should send U.S. dollars or equivalent in convertible bank notes.Please make checks payable to: American Renaissance, PO. Box 527, Oakton, VA22124. ISSN No. 1086-9905, Telephone: (703) 716-0900, Facsimile: (703) 716-0932,Web Page Address: www.amren.com Electronic Mail: AR@amren.com
 American Renaissance - 3 - March 1995they may deplore their acceleratingdispossession, most whites might notwant to jump ship from the nationthey created, and live in countrieswhere they have no roots.Yet, if emigration to Europe is not practical for whites, emigration to Af-rica or other black majority regions isnot practical for American blacks ei-ther. It is highly unlikely that verymany black African countries wouldwelcome large numbers of American black emigres and even more unlikelythat very many American blackswould want to go. “Back to Africa”may have been feasible in the days of the American Colonization Society,when Africa was a diplomatic toy of European and American imperialism, but today, with independent and sov-ereign (however dilapidated and re- pressive) nation-states in Africa, massmigration there is not possible unlessthe African states were simply forcedto accept it. Moreover, in the unlikelyevent that foreign nations were willingto receive large numbers of black American immigrants, none (except perhaps for other white majority na-tions) has the infrastructural capacityto assimilate them.
Maintaining Separation
 Yet even if physical relocation(within or without the United States)were to occur, and even if it were vol-untary on all sides, there remains the problem, which is hardly ever consid-ered, of how the separated raceswould be induced to remain separate.Let us assume that Rabbi Schiller’s proposal has been implemented, that black and white “racial zones” have been established, and that democrati-cally chosen representatives of bothraces have accepted such a partition.The brute fact is that there will stillremain immense pressures for the breakdown of this separation—for thesame reasons that the United Statestoday finds itself practically unable tocontrol its own borders. (These rea-sons, as I shall argue presently, aredeeply rooted in the white race.)Whites will want cheap labor, andmany nonwhites will want to supplyit. If the black zone in any way resem- bles most of the black majority nation-states or American cities today(detailed accounts of which
If whites wanted to do so,they could dictatea solution tothe racial problemtomorrow.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->