The ads placed on this web site are placed here by the web hosting service and are not endorsed by the Arkansas CofCC!
All Opinions express on this web site are those of the authors not necessarily those of the Arkansas or national Council of Conservative Citizens

What's New?

From the Conservative Citizens Foundation of the Conservative Citizens Foundation Issue Number Two: Balkanization, Separatism, or National Unity? (1998)

What Can European Americans Do Now?

by Brent Nelson

Multicultural America is the label which Michael Lind applies to today's America in his book The Next American Nation. This book presents an interpretation of American history which is unconventional but useful in understanding our situation. According to Lind's reading of history, we are now living in the third American republic, Multicultural America, which emerged around 1965. The first republic, Anglo-America, lasted until the Civil War, and was succeeded by the second republic, Euro-America.

Each republic had its founding document. Each republic was also founded on a constitutional compromise. Anglo-America was founded on the Declaration of Independence. Its great compromise was slavery. Euro-America's founding document was the Emancipation Proclamation. Its compromise was white supremacy based on segregation and restricted immigration. The founding document of Multicultural America is the federal statistical directive which divides the American people into five racial groups. Multicultural America's great constitutional compromise is the federal system of racial preference. New republics emerge when the old compromise breaks down. Thus, the Civil War ended Anglo-America while the civil rights movement ended Euro-America.

The fourth American republic, according to Lind, will be Trans-America. In Trans-America all racial groups will melt down or amalgamate. Social democracy will finally triumph.

We may not think much of Lind's neo-liberalism, but we all probably agree with him that multiculturalism is more than an educational philosophy. It is now, in his words, "the de facto orthodoxy of the present American regime." Lind also admits that, again in his words, "the Third Republic has failed to gain legitimacy in the eyes of most Americans."

If the present republic is one which must pass, what can European Americans do to advance their interests? Is there a way out of Multicultural America for us? If so, which way should we take? Mr. Lind tells us to take the left-hand route which would lead us into racial amalgamation. The right-hand route would lead us back to an attempt to re-establish Euro-America.

The answer is that neither route offers us a clear way out. The leftist way leads to the suicide of our culture and people. But, while we reject the leftist alternative, the rightist one is impossible. We cannot go back to white supremacy, even if we wanted to go back.

If anyone thinks that we can go back to the old America, let him consider this: The old America Euro-America, was challenged by the Supreme Court decision handed down in 1954 in the case of Brown v. Board of Education. The old America was legally destroyed by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Immigration Act of 1965. Is there a U.S. Senator today who would dare to say publicly that the Brown decision was a mistake? Can you name even one prominent politician of either major party who would dare publicly to advocate repeal of the Civil Rights Act and the Immigration Act?

Not even Pat Buchanan, who was supposed to be the right-wing terror par excellence, came close to making such statements. The Republicans now control Congress. What can we expect from them?

That is a rhetorical question.

No, there is no way to go back to where we were fifty years ago. 1968, the year of the great uprising led by Wallace, was the last year when we could have taken back all of America. The components of our population have shifted greatly since then, all to our disadvantage. That ethnic shift is continuing. As most of you know, census' projections show that European Americans will become a minority in the U.S. population by the year 2050.

There is, however, a third possibility. This is a way out which would lead us not into Trans-America or back to Euro-America, but into a New America, our America, an America for ourselves alone. It might not be an America as great in size as the old America, but the sooner we mobilize to achieve it, the greater it will be. The more we delay, in historical terms, the more we will lose.

An America for ourselves alone is far off in the future—if it is ever to be at all. It is too early to attempt to draw up detailed plans for such an America. Today, we must focus our energies on the first stage of the way. We must struggle to win the right to organize in our own name on behalf of our rights and interests.

We are now organized in many groups under many different names. We call ourselves conservatives—although there is not much left to be con served—, or populists—although we do not claim to speak for all of the people—, or nationalists— although the U.S. is now a multi-national state—, or patriots—although we are patriotic about a country that is no more. And, unfortunately, it may be necessary to continue these subterfuges on into the indefinite future.

A day must arrive, however, when we dare to organize in our own name. Today each of the other four groups named in the federal statistical directive has its own organization. African Americans have the NAACP. Hispanics have the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC). Asians have recently founded an Asian American Association. Native Americans have the American Indian Movement. But there is no European American Political Association. And if it did exist today, its organizers would probably insist that they were only concerned with the preservation of European American culture. It will probably be only in the distant future, if ever, when members of such an organization dare to flaunt their own scarlet letter—an "E" not an "A"—and proclaim that its red is blood red because it is the insignia of an organization for Americans of European descent only.

We all know why such an organization does not exist today.

It would be a "racist hate group." And its members today would probably insist that they do not hate any other race, but only love their own race. Let us hope that political realism will finally dawn on our people, that they will begin to reply that love and hate are interpersonal emotions only, irrelevant to politics.

It would be pointless for us to waste our energies in hating other races. None the less, we must organize to compete with them because they are organized to compete with us. We must struggle for our existence. That is a tragic fact of life. Perhaps Martin Luther—the original Martin Luther, please note—was right when he said that the Devil is the god of this world.

The charge of being "racist" is an even bigger deterrent. It is the primary reason why a European American political association does not exist today. To understand why this is charge is so powerful, why it provokes so much fear, we must consider the class structure of our people.

The upper class or elite is the top one percent of the population which owns most of the means of production. The elite fears racism because it fears the destabilization of the whole system. An entire African American elite has been created by Affirmative Action for the express purpose of having an elite which will co-operate with the ruling elite and contain black militancy. So far that strategy has worked rather well it. we leave out of consideration such unpleasant episodes as the recent riots in Los Angeles.

The upper middle class—less than 10 percent of the population—consists of independent professionals and small business owners. They share the elite's fear of racial conflict. Their fear is mixed, however, with a fear of being identified with the great mass of European Americans who are not as successful as they are. Upper middle class people generally are unconcerned about racial matters because they live in areas where the Third World underclass does not threaten them. They generally believe that taxes and business regulations are the only legitimate political issues.

Finally, we come to the greatest portion of the population where tear reigns supreme. Leaving out the retired and unemployed, approximately 90 percent of the adult population consists of employees for a salary or a wage. Working Americans are painfully aware of the fact that their livelihoods depend upon keeping the good will of their supervisors. They also know, because the mass media and all other established institutions repeat the message day after day, that racism is the great taboo of our society. Years of pleasing a supervisor has left the average employee habituated to servility. He knows the threat posed by the Third World underclass, but he also knows that he is not really a free man.

At this time, it is impossible to mount a direct challenge to this servitude. The most that one can do is to raise the question why, if all other governmentally recognized groups have their organizations the European American population cannot have its own organization. Why, in other words, is organization as a racial bloc only an offence when it is attempted by the European Americans, while it is above criticism when it is practiced by the other four groups? Today, it is dangerous even to ask this question. It is a rhetorical question which today will be met with no answer, but only reprisals. As the European American population becomes a minority in more and more areas of the country, the hypocrisy and inequity of the situation will become ever more glaringly apparent.

The best that we can do today is to do all that we dare to build up the sense of group consciousness among our people. We need to develop a sense of community among our people just as a sense of community now exists among the other segments of the population. We need to try new ventures until we find tactics that work. [t would be a mistake to look for some great leader to deliver us. We must work ingloriously and work without end, but never without hope. Edison experimented with a thousand different filaments before he found one that would light up and burn brightly. Let us take that example of Edisonian perseverance as our model.

When crisis comes—and there will be more than one crisis—we need to take advantage of the opportunities which may emerge. There is some danger that an economic collapse will hit us long before we are ready. The collapse might not be caused by the federal debt—after all, corporate debt and personal debt each exceeds the federal debt—but by a collapse of purchasing power as more and more people are thrown out of work by automation. Displaced workers are now moving into the low-paid service sector or finding work as temporary workers, but that transfer has its lim its. Corporate downsizing will produce mass unemployment if corporate leaders plunge head-long into computerization and robotics.

A great danger posed by the prospect of an economic collapse is that it leads potential activists to say that "We can do nothing before the collapse comes." That has everything backwards. You need to be organized before the collapse comes. Afterwards, if you are not organized in advance, you will have no chance. You yourself will be buried under the rubble.

Let us assume the best scenario. Our people begin to develop a group consciousness and organize politically on that basis. A growing sense of community develops among European Americans so that they develop a dedicated leadership and ever-growing ranks of activists. Their openly proclaimed goal becomes separatism. What would be the chance for a New America, our America, an America for ourselves alone?

There are now some factors which promote separatism. The demographer William Frey has found that white working people are leaving California and moving into the Northwest, while blacks are moving back to the South, and Asians are becoming concentrated in cities on the West coast. Assuming that these patterns of settlement continue, and that current levels of immigration and differential birth rates persist, then by the year 2050. the territory available to European Americans for a New America would amount to perhaps as much as two-thirds of the present continental U.S. It is a certainty that by that year the Southeastern states from South Carolina to Louisiana will be dominated by African Americans, while the Southwestern states from California to Texas will be dominated by Mexicans.

A crisis or series of crises could greatly accelerate this process. In any event, this is not the time to speculate or daydream about a distant future that may never come to pass. Today we can only be forerunners. That will not dishearten you because you are not here out of any expectation of a victory. You are here because of what you are. Becoming more yourselves than you have ever been before means winning for our race the right to organize in its own name. If only we can achieve that, we will be halfway towards the goal of national self-determination and the survival of our people.