White nationalism

White nationalism


White nationalism is an ideology that
advocates a racial definition of national identity. These individuals
identify and are attached to the perceived white nation. It ranges from a
preference for one’s ethnic group, to feelings of superiority and forms of
white supremacism, including calls for national citizenship to be reserved for
white people, as in Rhodesia. White separatism and white supremacy are
subgroups within white nationalism. The former seek a separate white state,
while the latter add ideas from social Darwinism and Nazism to their ideology.
Both generally avoid the term supremacy, because it has negative connotations.
Critics have argued that ideas such as white pride and white nationalism exist
merely to provide a sanitized public face for white supremacy, and that most
white nationalist groups promote white separatism and racial violence.
Views White nationalists argue that every
nationality feels a natural affection for its own kind. They advocate racial
self-preservation and claim that culture is a product of race. According to white
nationalist Samuel T. Francis, it is “a movement that rejects equality as an
ideal and insists on an enduring core of human nature transmitted by heredity.”
Jared Taylor, a white nationalist, claims that similar racial views were
held by many mainstream American leaders before the 1950s.
According to Samuel P. Huntington, white nationalists argue that the demographic
shift in the United States towards non-whites brings a new culture that is
intellectually and morally inferior. They argue that with this demographic
shift comes affirmative action, immigrant ghettos and declining
educational standards. Most American white nationalists say immigration
should be restricted to people of European ancestry.
White nationalists embrace a variety of religious and non-religious beliefs,
including various denominations of Christianity, generally Protestant,
although some specifically overlap with white nationalist ideology, Germanic
neopaganism and atheism.=Definitions of whiteness=
Most white nationalists define white people in a restricted way. In the
United States, it often—though not exclusively—implies European ancestry of
non-Jewish descent. Some white nationalists draw on 19th-century racial
taxonomy, which neither reached a consensus on racial categories nor is
accepted by contemporary geneticists. Some white nationalists, such as Jared
Taylor, have argued that Jews can be considered “white”. Though many white
nationalists oppose Israel and Zionism, several white nationalists, such as
William Daniel Johnson and Jared Taylor, have expressed support for Israel and
drawn parallels between their ideology and Zionism.
Different racial theories, such as Nordicism and Germanism, define
different groups as white, both excluding some southern and eastern
Europeans because of a perceived racial taint. Pan-Aryanism defines whites as
individuals native to Europe, the Americas, Australia, New Zealand, South
Africa, and Western Asia who are wholly of Caucasian lineage or are
overwhelmingly from the following Caucasian ethnic groups, or any
combination thereof: Indo-European, Old European, or Hamitic.
Regional movements =Australia=
The White Australia policy was semi-official government policy in
Australia until the mid twentieth century. It restricted non-white
immigration to Australia and gave preference to British migrants over all
others. The Barton Government, which won the
first elections following Federation in 1901, was formed by the Protectionist
Party with the support of the Australian Labor Party. The support of the Labor
Party was contingent upon restricting non-white immigration, reflecting the
attitudes of the Australian Workers’ Union and other labor organizations at
the time, upon whose support the Labor Party was founded. The first Parliament
of Australia quickly moved to restrict immigration to maintain Australia’s
“British character”, passing the Pacific Island Labourers Act and the Immigration
Restriction Act before parliament rose for its first Christmas recess. The
Immigration Restriction Act of 1901 limited immigration to Australia and
required a person seeking entry to Australia to write out a passage of 50
words dictated to them in any European language, not necessarily English, at
the discretion of an immigration officer. Barton argued in favour of the
bill: “The doctrine of the equality of man was never intended to apply to the
equality of the Englishman and the Chinaman.” The passage chosen for the
test could often be very difficult, so that even if the test was given in
English, a person was likely to fail. The test enabled immigration officials
to exclude individuals on the basis of race without explicitly saying so.
Although the test could theoretically be given to any person arriving in
Australia, in practice it was given selectively on the basis of race. This
test was later abolished in 1958. Australian Prime Minister Stanley Bruce
supported the White Australia policy, and made it an issue in his campaign for
the 1925 Australian Federal election. It is necessary that we should determine
what are the ideals towards which every Australian would desire to strive. I
think those ideals might well be stated as being to secure our national safety,
and to ensure the maintenance of our White Australia Policy to continue as an
integral portion of the British Empire. We intend to keep this country white and
not allow its peoples to be faced with the problems that at present are
practically insoluble in many parts of the world.
At the beginning of World War II, Prime Minister John Curtin expressed support
for White Australia policy: “This country shall remain forever the home of
the descendants of those people who came here in peace in order to establish in
the South Seas an outpost of the British race.”
=Canada=The Parliament of Canada passed the
Chinese Immigration Act of 1923 to bar all Chinese from coming to Canada with
the exception of diplomats, students, and those granted special permission by
the Minister of Immigration. Chinese immigration to Canada had already been
heavily regulated by the Chinese Immigration Act of 1885 which required
Chinese immigrants to pay a fifty dollar fee to enter the country. Groups such as
the Asiatic Exclusion League, which had formed in Vancouver, British Columbia on
12 August 1907 under the auspices of the Trades and Labour Council, pressured
Parliament to halt Asian immigration. The Exclusion League’s stated aim was
“to keep Oriental immigrants out of British Columbia.”
The Canadian government also attempted to restrict immigration from British
India by passing an order-in-council on January 8, 1908, that prohibited
immigration of persons who “in the opinion of the Minister of the Interior”
did not “come from the country of their birth or citizenship by a continuous
journey and or through tickets purchased before leaving their country of their
birth or nationality.” In practice this applied only to ships that began their
voyage in India, as the great distance usually necessitated a stopover in Japan
or Hawaii. These regulations came at a time when Canada was accepting massive
numbers of immigrants, almost all of whom came from Europe. This piece of
legislation has been called the “continuous journey regulation”.
=Germany=The Thule Society developed out of the
“Germanic Order” in 1918, and those who wanted to join the Order in 1917 had to
sign a special “blood declaration of faith” concerning their lineage: “The
signer hereby swears to the best of his knowledge and belief that no Jewish or
coloured blood flows in either his or in his wife’s veins, and that among their
ancestors are no members of the coloured races.” Heinrich Himmler, one of the
main perpetrators of the Holocaust, said in a speech in 1937: “The next decades
do in fact not mean some struggle of foreign politics which Germany can
overcome or not … but a question of to be or not to be for the white race …
.” As the Nazi ideologist Alfred Rosenberg said on the 29th of May 1938
on the Steckelburg in Schlüchtern: “It is however certain that all of us share
the fate of Europe, and that we shall regard this common fate as an
obligation, because in the end the very existence of White people depends on the
unity of the European continent.” At the same time Nazis subdivided white people
into groups, viewing the Nordics as the “master race” above groups like Alpine
and Mediterranean peoples. Slavic peoples, such as Russians and Poles,
were considered Untermenschen instead of Aryan. Hitler’s conception of the Aryan
Herrenvolk explicitly excluded the vast majority of Slavs, regarding the Slavs
as having dangerous Jewish and Asiatic influences. The Nazis because of this
declared Slavs to be untermenschen. Hitler described Slavs as “a mass of
born slaves who feel the need of a master”. Hitler declared that because
Slavs were subhumans that the Geneva Conventions were not applicable to them,
and German soldiers in World War II were thus permitted to ignore the Geneva
Conventions in regards to Slavs. Hitler called Slavs “a rabbit family” meaning
they were intrinsically idle and disorganized. Nazi Germany’s propaganda
minister Joseph Goebbels had media speak of Slavs as primitive animals whom were
from the Siberian tundra who were like a “dark wave of filth”. The Nazi notion of
Slavs being inferior was part of the agenda for creating Lebensraum for
Germans and other Germanic people in eastern Europe that was initiated during
World War II under Generalplan Ost, millions of Germans and other Germanic
settlers would be moved into conquered territories of Eastern Europe, while the
original Slavic inhabitants were to be exterminated and enslaved. Nazi
Germany’s ally the Independent State of Croatia rejected the common conception
that Croats were primarily a Slavic people and claimed that Croats were
primarily the descendents of the Germanic Goths. However the Nazi regime
continued to classify Croats as “subhuman” in spite of the alliance.
Even among European cultures and people that were considered Aryan, the Nazis
considered the Nordic race and German culture to be superior to other Aryan
races and cultures, thus making them far less Pan-European than groups that
identify themselves as White Nationalist.
=New Zealand=Following the example of anti-Chinese
poll taxes enacted by California in 1852 and by Australian states in the 1850s,
1860s and 1870s, John Hall’s government passed the Chinese Immigration Act 1881.
This imposed a £10 tax per Chinese person entering New Zealand, and
permitted only one Chinese immigrant for every 10 tons of cargo. Richard Seddon’s
government increased the tax to £100 per head in 1896, and tightened the other
restriction to only one Chinese immigrant for every 200 tons of cargo.
The Immigration Restriction Act of 1899 prohibited the entry of immigrants who
were not of British or Irish parentage and who were unable to fill out an
application form in “any European language.” The Immigration Restriction
Amendment Act of 1920 aimed to further limit Asian immigration into New Zealand
by requiring all potential immigrants not of British or Irish parentage to
apply in writing for a permit to enter the country. The Minister of Customs had
the discretion to determine whether any applicant was “suitable.” Prime Minister
William Massey asserted that the act was “the result of a deep seated sentiment
on the part of a huge majority of the people of this country that this
Dominion shall be what is often called a ‘white’ New Zealand.”
One case of a well known opponent of non-British and non-European immigration
to New Zealand is that of English-born Lionel Terry who, after traveling widely
to South Africa, British Columbia and finally New Zealand and publishing a
book highly critical of capitalism and Asian immigration, shot and killed an
elderly Chinese immigrant in Wellington. Terry was convicted of murder in 1905
and sentenced to death, but the sentence was commuted to life incarceration in
New Zealand psychiatric institutions. A Department of External Affairs
memorandum in 1953 stated: “Our immigration is based firmly on the
principle that we are and intend to remain a country of European
development. It is inevitably discriminatory against Asians – indeed
against all persons who are not wholly of European race and colour. Whereas we
have done much to encourage immigration from Europe, we do everything to
discourage it from Asia.”=Paraguay=
In Paraguay, the New Australian Movement founded New Australia, a utopian
socialist settlement in 1893. Its founder, William Lane, intended the
settlement to be based on a “common-hold” instead of a commonwealth,
life marriage, teetotalism, communism and a brotherhood of Anglophone white
people and the preservation of the “colour-line”. The colony was officially
founded as Colonia Nueva Australia and comprised 238 adults and children.
In July 1893, the first ship left Sydney, Australia for Paraguay, where
the government was keen to get white settlers, and had offered the group a
large area of good land. The settlement had been described as a refuge for
misfits, failures and malcontents of the left wing of Australian democracy.
Notable Australian individuals who joined the colony included Mary Gilmore,
Rose Summerfield and Gilbert Stephen Casey. Summerfield was the mother of
León Cadogan, a noted Paraguayan ethnologist.
Due to poor management and a conflict over the prohibition of alcohol, the
government of Paraguay eventually dissolved New Australia as a
cooperative. Some colonists founded communes elsewhere in Paraguay but
others returned to Australia or moved to England. Around 2,000 descendants of the
New Australia colonists still live in Paraguay.
=South Africa=In South Africa, white nationalism was
championed by the National Party starting in 1948, as opposition to
apartheid heated up. The Promotion of Bantu Self-Government Act, 1959
established homelands for ten different black African tribes. The ultimate goal
of the National Party was to move all Black South Africans into one of these
homelands, leaving what was left of South Africa with what would then be a
White majority, at least on paper. As the homelands were seen by the apartheid
government as embryonic independent nations, all Black South Africans were
registered as citizens of the homelands, not of the nation as a whole, and were
expected to exercise their political rights only in the homelands.
Accordingly, the three token parliamentary seats that had been
reserved for White representatives of black South Africans in Cape Province
were scrapped. The other three provinces – Transvaal, the Orange Free State, and
Natal – had never allowed any Black representation.
Coloureds were removed from the Common Roll of Cape Province in 1953. Instead
of voting for the same representatives as White South Africans, they could now
only vote for four White representatives to speak for them. Later, in 1968, the
Coloureds were disenfranchised altogether. In the place of the four
parliamentary seats, a partially elected body was set up to advise the government
in an amendment to the Separate Representation of Voters Act.
During the 1960s, 1970s, and early 1980s, the government implemented a
policy of “resettlement”, to force people to move to their designated
“group areas”. Millions of people were forced to relocate during this period.
These removals included people relocated due to slum clearance programs, labour
tenants on White-owned farms, the inhabitants of the so-called “black
spots”, areas of Black owned land surrounded by White farms, the families
of workers living in townships close to the homelands, and “surplus people” from
urban areas, including thousands of people from the Western Cape who were
moved to the Transkei and Ciskei homelands. The best-publicised forced
removals of the 1950s occurred in Johannesburg, when 60,000 people were
moved to the new township of Soweto, an abbreviation for South Western
Townships. Until 1955, Sophiatown had been one of
the few urban areas where Blacks were allowed to own land, and was slowly
developing into a multiracial slum. As industry in Johannesburg grew,
Sophiatown became the home of a rapidly expanding black workforce, as it was
convenient and close to town. It could also boast the only swimming pool for
Black children in Johannesburg. As one of the oldest black settlements in
Johannesburg, Sophiatown held an almost symbolic importance for the 50,000
Blacks it contained, both in terms of its sheer vibrancy and its unique
culture. Despite a vigorous ANC protest campaign and worldwide publicity, the
removal of Sophiatown began on 9 February 1955 under the Western Areas
Removal Scheme. In the early hours, heavily armed police entered Sophiatown
to force residents out of their homes and load their belongings onto
government trucks. The residents were taken to a large tract of land, thirteen
miles from the city center, known as Meadowlands. Meadowlands became part of
a new planned Black city called Soweto. The Sophiatown slum was destroyed by
bulldozers, and a new White suburb named Triomf was built in its place. This
pattern of forced removal and destruction was to repeat itself over
the next few years, and was not limited to people of African descent. Forced
removals from areas like Cato Manor in Durban, and District Six in Cape Town,
where 55,000 coloured and Indian people were forced to move to new townships on
the Cape Flats, were carried out under the Group Areas Act of 1950. Ultimately,
nearly 600,000 coloured, Indian and Chinese people were moved in terms of
the Group Areas Act. Some 40,000 White people were also forced to move when
land was transferred from “White South Africa” into the Black homelands.
Before South Africa became a republic, politics among White South Africans was
typified by the division between the chiefly Afrikaner pro-republic
conservative and the largely English anti-republican liberal sentiments, with
the legacy of the Boer War still a factor for some people. Once republican
status was attained, Hendrik Verwoerd called for improved relations and
greater accord between those of British descent and the Afrikaners. He claimed
that the only difference now was between those who supported apartheid and those
in opposition to it. The ethnic divide would no longer be between Afrikaans
speakers and English speakers, but rather White and Black ethnicities. Most
Afrikaners supported the notion of unanimity of White people to ensure
their safety. White voters of British descent were divided. Many had opposed a
republic, leading to a majority “no” vote in Natal. Later, however, some of
them recognized the perceived need for White unity, convinced by the growing
trend of decolonization elsewhere in Africa, which left them apprehensive.
Harold Macmillan’s “Wind of Change” pronouncement left the British faction
feeling that Britain had abandoned them. The more conservative English-speakers
gave support to Verwoerd; others were troubled by the severing of ties with
Britain and remained loyal to the Crown. They were acutely displeased at the
choice between British and South African nationality. Although Verwoerd tried to
bond these different blocs, the subsequent ballot illustrated only a
minor swell of support, indicating that a great many English speakers remained
apathetic and that Verwoerd had not succeeded in uniting the White
population. The Black Homeland Citizenship Act of
1970 was a denaturalization law passed during the apartheid era of South Africa
that changed the status of the inhabitants of the Bantustans so that
they were no longer citizens of South Africa. The aim was to ensure that white
South Africans came to make up the majority of the de jure population.
=United States=The Naturalization Act of 1790 provided
the first rules to be followed by the United States government in granting
national citizenship. This law limited naturalization to immigrants who were
“free white persons” of “good moral character.” Major changes to this racial
requirement for US citizenship did not occur until the years following the
American Civil War. In 1868, the Fourteenth Amendment to the United
States Constitution was passed to grant citizenship to black people born in the
US, but it specifically excluded untaxed Indians, because they were separate
nations. However, citizenship for other non-whites born in the US was not
settled until 1898 with United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, which
concluded with an important precedent in its interpretation of the Citizenship
Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. This racial definition of American
citizenship has had consequences for perceptions of American identity.
Throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries, racial definitions of the
American nation were still common, resulting in race-specific immigration
restrictions, such as the Chinese Exclusion Act. This particular brand of
American nativism allowed even more recent European newcomers, such as the
Irish, to unite with founding-stock white Americans to halt non-European
immigration. Groups such as the Asiatic Exclusion League, formed on 14 May 1905
in San Francisco, California by 67 labor unions and supported by labor leaders
Patrick Henry McCarthy of the Building Trades Council of San Francisco, Andrew
Furuseth and Walter McCarthy of the Sailor’s Union, attempted to influence
legislation restricting Asian immigration.
Following the defeat of the Confederate States of America, the Ku Klux Klan was
founded as an insurgent group with the goal of maintaining the Southern racial
system throughout the Reconstruction Era. Although the first incarnation of
the KKK was focused on maintaining the Antebellum South, its second incarnation
in the 1915-1940s period was much more oriented towards white nationalism and
American nativism, with slogans such as “One Hundred Percent Americanism” and
“America for Americans”, in which “Americans” were understood to be white
and Protestant. The 1915 film Birth of a Nation is an example of an allegorical
invocation of white nationalism during this time, and its positive portrayal of
the KKK is considered to be one of the factors in the emergence of the second
KKK. The second KKK was founded in Atlanta,
Georgia in 1915 and, starting in 1921, it adopted a modern business system of
recruiting. The organization grew rapidly nationwide at a time of
prosperity. Reflecting the social tensions of urban industrialization and
vastly increased immigration, its membership grew most rapidly in cities
and spread out of the South to the Midwest and West. The second KKK called
for strict morality and better enforcement of prohibition. Its rhetoric
promoted anti-Catholicism and nativism. Some local groups took part in attacks
on private houses and carried out other violent activities. The violent episodes
were generally in the South. The second KKK was a formal fraternal
organization, with a national and state structure. At its peak in the mid-1920s,
the organization claimed to include about 15% of the nation’s eligible
population, approximately 4 to 5 million men. Internal divisions, criminal
behavior by leaders, and external opposition brought about a collapse in
membership, which had dropped to about 30,000 by 1930. It faded away in the
1940s. Starting in the 1960s, white nationalism
grew in the US as the conservative movement developed in mainstream
society. Samuel P. Huntington argues that it developed as a reaction to a
perceived decline in the essence of American identity as European,
Anglo-Protestant and English-speaking. The slogan “white power” was popularized
by American Nazi Party leader George Lincoln Rockwell, who used the term in a
debate with Stokely Carmichael of the Black Panther Party after Carmichael
issued a call for “black power”. Rockwell advocated a return to white
control of all American institutions, and violently opposed any minority
advancement. He rejected the Nazi idea of “master race”, however, and accepted
all white European nationalities in his ideology, including Turks.
One of the most influential white nationalists in the United States was
Dr. William Luther Pierce, who founded the National Alliance in 1974.
In the United States a movement calling for white separatism emerged in the
1980s Leonard Zeskind has chronicled the movement in his book Blood and Politics,
in which he argues that it has moved from the “margins to the mainstream”
During the 1980s the United States also saw an increase in the number of
neo-völkisch movements. According to Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke, these
movements cover a wide variety of mutually influencing groups of a
radically ethnocentric character which have emerged, especially in the
English-speaking world, since World War II. These loose networks revive or
imitate the völkisch movement of 19th and early 20th century Germany in their
defensive affirmation of white identity against modernity, liberalism,
immigration, multiracialism, and multiculturalism. Some are neo-fascist,
neo-Nazi or Third Positionist; others are politicised around some form of
white ethnic nationalism or identity politics, and a few have national
anarchist tendencies. One example is the neo-tribalist paganism promoted by Else
Christensen’s Odinist Fellowship Especially notable is the prevalence of
devotional forms and esoteric themes, so neo-völkisch currents often have the
character of new religious movements. Included under the neo-völkisch umbrella
are movements ranging from conservative revolutionary schools of thought to
white supremacist and white separatist interpretations of Christianity and
paganism to neo-Nazi subcultures. Criticism
Anti-racist organizations generally have argued that ideas such as white pride
and white nationalism exist merely to provide a sanitized public face for
white supremacy. Kofi Buenor Hadjor argues that black nationalism is a
response to racial discrimination, while white nationalism is the expression of
white supremacy. Other critics have described white nationalism as a
“…somewhat paranoid ideology” based upon the publication of pseudo-academic
studies. Carol M. Swain argues that the unstated
goal of white nationalism is to appeal to a larger audience, and that most
white nationalist groups promote white separatism and racial violence.
Opponents accuse white nationalists of hatred, racial bigotry and destructive
identity politics. White supremacist groups have a history of perpetrating
hate crimes, particularly against people of Jewish or African descent. Examples
include the lynching of black people by the Ku Klux Klan.
Some critics argue that white nationalists — while posturing as civil
rights groups advocating the interests of their racial group — frequently draw
on the nativist traditions of the KKK and the British National Front. Critics
have noted the anti-semitic rhetoric used by some white nationalists, as
highlighted by the promotion of conspiracy theories such as Zionist
Occupation Government. Notable organizations
Notable individuals Notable media
See also Anti-Zionism
Black nationalism Criticism of multiculturalism
Ethnic nationalism Holocaust denial
Kinism Know Nothing
The Passing of the Great Race List of organizations designated by the
Southern Poverty Law Center as hate groups
List of white nationalist organizations National-Anarchism
White separatism White genocide
Notes References
Josey, Charles Conant [1923]. The Philosophy of Nationalism. Washington,
DC: Cliveden Press. ISBN 1-878465-10-4. Levin, Michael E.. Why Race Matters:
Race Differences and What They Mean. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers. ISBN
0-275-95789-6. McDaniel, George. A Race Against Time:
Racial Heresies for the 21st Century. Oakton, VA: New Century Foundation.
Ankerl, Guy. Coexisting Contemporary Civilizations,. Geneva, INUPRESS. pp.
150–156. ISBN 0-9656383-2-4. Robertson, Wilmot. The Dispossessed
Majority. Cape Canaveral, FL: Howard Allen. ISBN 0-914576-15-1.
Robertson, Wilmot. The Ethnostate. Cape Canaveral, FL: Howard Allen. ISBN
0-914576-22-4. Swain, Carol M.. Contemporary Voices of
White Nationalism in America. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. pp. 312
pages. ISBN 0-521-01693-2.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *