by Michael » Fri Jan 25, 2013 10:33 am
Well, with this post I am going to be no-doubt criticised by many in the "Movement" for making the comments that I do. However, in light of the seemingly insurmountable intellectual conflict between DSCI and other elements of white nationalism, and the harm this is doing to any conserted effort that white folk are trying to make to conserve their race, I thought I would wade with some thoughts. Given this is a thread that is dedicated to "White Nationalist Literature": my focus is on analysing Covington's recent publication "Freedom's Sons".
Obviously this discussion touches on a subject and people with much history in Christian Identity, with the main proponent of a white's only territory in the Northwest of course being the old AN headed by Pastor Butler. I did not know him, but know of most of the history surrounding the events.
When one criticises another in WNism, one is usually derided in the usual way by saying ...oh you want it all your way, or no way at all. Like a kindergarten playground this criticism often comes the way of Identity. Whilst many in DSCI suppport the Northwest Imperitive, many don't, for one reason or another. Of course it is their free choice. I personally have never heard anyone criticise the imperitive itself from within CI. From what I have seen in Covington's works, and his other activities, he has done his best to try and balance or dissapate these problems and keep his eye on the goal of a separate white nation. However, as I will attempt to illustrate below, some aspects of his storyline writings play into the jews and liberal's hands.
As an aside I would happily fight along side a white brother for the cause of white preservation even if he believed in Odin, or was an athiest, or otherwise. I will be criticised by some in CI for saying this, but I don't care, as such a person is still a white brother supporting white preservation and separation. I think many in CI take my position. However, from what I see the pagans and athiests etc in WN seem to hate christians more than they love their own kind, and they seem to be the ones raising the conflicts when and where they arise, which is pretty much everywhere in the Movement.
As I see it, it is a problem with deep roots, and has as much to do with any given person's strong personality not wanting to be ruled by any set of life rules, as it has to do with hating a "dead jew on a stick"...as the athiests and pagans scream.
Getting to the analysis of Covington's book. Being the final book of the series that focussed on the years following the gaining of independence of a white homeland, it was reasonably foreseeable that some attempt would be made in the story line to intellectually justify the creation of a whites only territory to the outside world. I for one do not think that is at all necessary, as if you have the force and power to defend your nation from all-comers, then to hell with justifying anything to them. Of course Covington did it to try to show to other whites that did(do) not support separation, that the "racists" are even intellectually correct, (if not at least rational for trying to separate from the growing mud and its resulting degradation of civil society). This is of course is the great challenge, especially in North America where judeo christianity has such a hold, and where in my opinion DSCI stands apart from other positions. Why is it so important to convince other whites that separation is a correct path? Because, lets face it, any conflict of importance is going to be between whites, as was the American Civil War, WWI, and WWII. Taking on non-whites is a turkey shoot, and everyone knows that. But a crazed white Judeo-Christian, or a crazed white Marxist, is a worthy military opponent. History has proven that. Covington's entire collection of books indeed is really about taking on the white Judeo-Christian, liberal and Marxist forces in the USA and Western World. So one can see why Covington veered into this path of trying to build an intellectual justification for separation. Unfortunately, how he did it, in my opinion, is a good example of why non-CI end up loosing an intellectual argument with a lberal. In short, his story line supported the idea of the white caucasian being an evolved species.
As part of the storyline goes, post-Revolution , in the whites only Northwest Republic somewhere near Missoula Montana, an ancient site was being excavated and caucasian remains were discovered that were carben dated and so proven to be pre-Amerindian. This of course supported the Kennewick Man findings, and showed that caucasians had dwelt on the North American continent before the mongoliod Amerindians. This was fine, and the story could have finished there and the point could have been made to the libtards, but unfortunately further down the layers of findings were found cro-magnon man remains, in the same level as caucasian remains no less. A little earlier in the story the evolution of the caucasoid race from the cro-magnon species was intimated as being possible.
Evolution of course lets liberals jump through a number of hoops. The main one here being that..."oh well, yeah, it seems white folk were here in the North American continent first, but as we are all evolved from a common ancestor, there is no real difference between races accept evolutionay chance, and so we must all try to get along in this global village of ours". Game, set, and match for white separatism! ...and so the white war continues between the separatists on one side, and the Judeos, Marxists, and liberals on the other....white man's blood just keeps on getting spilt. Why Covington kept going with making that point about evolution I do not know. Evolution is unproven. He could have quite easily left it with caucasian remains being found, and his to-date fictional point to the liberals would have been made, especially in light of the already existing evidence in North America of pre-Amerindian European habitation.
But this is my point, somehow a white separatist has to make a rational well supported argument as to why they should be separate. Why? For a very pragmatic, rational, and real reason....because the liberal and Judeo forces are so strong at present. Can the separatists separate long enough for the liberal and judeo rest to be overwhelmed by the mud that the liberal and judeo rest are supporting, probably not, as the liberals and Judeos will most definately try to destroy the separatists if not immediately, within at least 15 years...a time frame that still would see the judeos having enough strength to crush a separatist attempt. In Freedom's Sons the separatists were able to defend their territory, as in the 12 years between independence and the attempt to reunify the Union, the separatists developed a defence weapon that shot down the attacking forces etc. Maybe this can be done, maybe it can't. It is of course hypothetical. This of course does not mean a drive for separation should not be begun and grown. However, in my opinion, changing the minds of more of the judeos must be a priority at present given their obvious hegemony. Like it or not, those driving for separation must admit this as a reality.
By and large pagan and athiest whites cannot put forward any well founded argument for separation that cannot be somehow shot down by liberals or judeo-christians (acknowledgement that the very term as "Judeo Christian is a corruption). As said, of course we would all like it if we did not have to justify it to attempt to more judeos on our side, but military realities are what they are. Apart from the rising tide of mud eventually and hopefully turning the opinions of liberals and judeos (such is what is sort of occurring in SA at present), other scholarly methods must be employed unfortunately. DSCI on the otherhand does have those scholarly underpinnings that beat judeos and liberals at their own game. Of course M Dees et al will argue CI developed their positions with such an end goal in mind. Well of course we know, and so does he, that that was not, and is not the, case.
The better approach in North America in my opinion is to keep trying to change the minds of those dam white Judeo Christian idiots.
As said, I don't know why Covington took that extra step and veered into evolution. Maybe others has some ideas on this? Notwithstanding that CI forms the backbone of any drive for white preservation in North America, as well as the history of the Northwest Imperitive itself being mostly CI, Covington continues to refer to jews as hebes etc, and generally agrees that although most jews are of Khazaar ancestry, some ARE of the actual Isrealites of the Scriptures. This last point is upheld by a number of references throughout Freedom's Sons, one in particular where he noted that "Jews" had to be acknowledged for also been early developers of Bronze age technology, as such technology has obviously been found in the Levant!
Overall with Covington I have found it disappointing that he has not availed himself of the much SECULAR evidence ( I do not expect him to use scriptural evidence) that those claiming to be Judeans today, are in fact not AT ALL in any way scriptural Judeans. Maybe I missed it somewhere in his books. If I have, I would be happy to be shown where he has done, and withdraw my criticism. I don't expect him to agree with the movements of the Isrealite peoples into Europe (even though there is also much SECULAR evidence to prove this), but by leaving this out secular evidence that the jews of today are not at all the Isrealites of the Scriptures, he has wasted a grande opportunity to educate those white folks who are stuck in judeo-christianity, and will defend its flawed tenets with their very lives. The problem with the White population in North America today, is that even though a judeo may hate a nigger, beaner, chink, or jew with a passion, because their religion says they should love everyone, and especially protect those claiming to be judeans, they will accept them in their society, and even lay down their very lives for them. Simply put, a judeo loves their PERCIEVED Jesus more than he/she hates niggers, beaners, spiks, chinks and those "retrobate" ones claiming to be joos. By omitting such simple, available, and even secular evidence from his works that those claiming to be jews are in fact NOT IN ANY WAY AT ALL, Covington has done quite a disservice to the movement, in my opinion. Especially when he generally goes to much detail in his books to describe different aspects of history, etc. Again, maybe he has somewhere in his texts, and I missed it. I'm talking evidence such as the historian Josephus clearly describing how the Herod Dynasty in Judea was in fact of the Edomite race that had moved into Judea over the preceeding century or so.
Notwithstanding these few parts of Freedom Son's and Covington's other works, Covington's insights and story lines lay out many very rational and workable storyline actions for a possible separating of white folk from the rest of the world. From how eventual reaction to the overreaching state will occur, and the going to ground of guerilla elements, and the expansion of this, and how the state will deal with this whilst the state's very viability itself comes under pressure due to the growing Third World society and economy. I do not agree however with Covington's assesments that countries such as France will be completely destroyed by Third Worlders before there are nationalist reactions of substance. Nor do I agree that the state of Isreal cannot defend itself without US help. The UK, will certainly drag anyone they can into a defence of the Isreali state. (Indeed, it was Australian and NZ forces that cleared Palestine during WWI to start with, not US forces...Another case of jews using whites for their dirty work).
Additionally, Covington's building of charactors and plot is also very interesting.
Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Matthew 7 16-19 KJV