Today I am re-posting an interesting article from Instauration Magazine which discusses the two, distinct groups of North/South, racial realist activists. Instauration Magazine was clearly THE BEST White racialist magazine in the United States from the 1970s through the 1990s.
Thanks to the hard work of American patriot Jamie Kelso (http://www.whitenewsnow.com) the complete Instauration Magazine is now online at http://instaurationonline.com
Rebels and Revisionists
Instauration Magazine March 1997
Whoever observes objectively the small number of white Americans struggling to reclaim their nation must sooner or later be struck by the ways in which this activist minority differs from the majority–of the Majority. Even more interesting-and distressing–because less often acknowledged, is the yawning gulf separating the ranks of conscious combatants for the Majority’s supine soul.
it is the difference between the activist and static groups that interests us first, more for its impact on our present potential for rousing the Majority from its suicidal torpor than for the consideration, for historical purposes, of the wider and deeper rifts that have split white American activists in the past. For the purposes of this study, the division among activists consists of two broad affinity groups that will be referred to, somewhat irreverently and imprecisely, as ‘Rebels” and “Revisionists.”
“Rebels” are largely Southern in origin and look to the Confederacy and its precursors (Jefferson, Calhoun, et al.), as well as to subsequent defenders of “the Southern way of life” for inspiration. Even today, with substantial “ethnic” migration southward and Rebel migration elsewhere long a fact of life, Rebels remain largely Anglo-Saxon and Scotch-Irish by descent. They are Protestant by upbringing, if not by active belief, and often Anglophile (but tending more towards Kipling, G.A. Henty and the “thin red line” than E.M. Forster, Bertrand Russell or Benjamin Britten). The chief focus of Rebel watchfulness has been on the Negro and his white “benefactors,” though even today there lingers among Rebels a sentimental attachment to blacks that non-Southern racialists find puzzling. A small minority of Rebels, who feel compelled to embrace more drastic and more violent associations, have gravitated to the Ku Klux Klan and similar groups.
“Revisionists” are mostly non-Southerners, spread far and wide throughout the land. Some live in Dixie, but most still tend to cluster in the cities of the Northeast and Midwest. Many of them are “ethnics”: self-conscious Germans, right-wing Irish and sundry Eastern Europeans, on whom the upheavals and wars of this century have weighed heavily, if not always personally, from the Russian Revolution to the First and Second World Wars. Many are Catholic, at least by heritage. While most are no friends of blacks, their chief incubus has been the Jew. Over the decades Revisionists have swelled the ranks of Coughlinites, America Firsters, Joe McCarthy boostersand, at the extreme, a variety of Nazi and Fascist outfits, from Silvershirts and GermanAmerican Bundists to the fledgling parties of George Rockwell and other latter-day fuhrers. Regardless of their social and economic status,
Revisionists have never really assimilated to the newmodel American state constructed by FDR and his successors.
Attend an American Renaissance conference (Rebel), then an IHR conference (Revisionist) and the differences, not merely in ideology, are plain. Compare the ways the two camps have traditionally tended to look at Woodrow Wilson. For Revisionists he was the president who inveigled America into WWI. For Rebels, he was the president who screened The Birth of a Nation in the White House-and liked it!
Over the past several decades there has been a growing politesse between the two camps on formerly divisive issues (above all religion), along with an increasing willingness to collaborate in a spirit of common defense against the rising onslaught on white America. There are Rebels with strong Revisionist affinities. There are Resionists who honor the South and its traditions.
Still, despite lip service to an overriding unity based on race, the two affinities soldier on mostly independently. We rarely talk about this phenomenon. Why sap our morale with constant allusions to the divisions in our thinning ranks? We assume unity-and much unity there is. But in important, tangible ways our roots are separate, our myths are different, the dragons we try to slay are diverse.
Considered in the current American situation, the Rebels and Revisionists are most intertwined in the overriding difference between them and the rest of the Majority. Unlike most of our fellow American whites, we recognize our dispossession, and call it for what it is. We work–or at least desire-to reclaim our patrimony and master the future for our kind. No less important, we per
ceive this dispossession, despite the burdens of taxation for welfare, affirmative action, aid to Israel and the like, as chiefly a problem of the spirit and a threat to the soul rather than a threat to wealth and prerogative.
It will be no news to Instaurationists that the overwhelming majority of white Americans, driven either by aggressive cupidity or defensive self-preservation, regard our racial idealism with contempt. What we see as a visionary quest conjoining biological survival with societal and cultural transformation, transfiguration, even transcendence, a mighty cohort of our fellow whites sees as wickedness and evil. In neo-Calvinist terms, many of the more successful whites mark our “obsession” with blacks and other nonwhites as the latter-day badge of the non-elect, forced to mingle with the lower races not by predestination, but due to their own insufficiency. (A cruel gibe at us hereditarians!)
Worst of all in the eyes of the Majority at large, we are losers. The popular media unfailingly depict us as such; our candidates or street activists nearly always lose their infrequent electoral or courtroom jousts. We are losers even in our own mythology: Pickett’s Charge and Appomattox; Stalingrad and burning Berlin. Even those “ethnics” whose struggles in their motherlands have culminated in independent nation-states tend more to honor the heroes of their unsuccessful risings and revolts than the colorless bureaucrats who lead Dublin and Kiev and the
rest towards a drab “Euro” present and darker one-world future.
We who regard ourselves as the sentient and active vanguard of the Majority are the smallest and most impotent contingent of racially aware members of white America since the conquest of the continent was undertaken. Perhaps never before have so few members of the Majority’s upper crust been engaged-financially or otherwiseon behalf of the descendants of the nation’s Mayflower, Tidewater and other elites. Nor have the nation’s key institutions for molding leadership and for consolidating power, from the Marine Corps to the boarding schools to the Rotary Club, ever been as hostile to what founded and sustains them.
Well may the reader ask at this point, “Now that Moriarty’s struck up the usual jeremiad about how rotten most white folks are; how hopeless those of us who give a damn are; and on top of it how we’re split off into two different backward-looking sects, is he going to tell us that it’s time for our little Camp of the Saints to stack arms and file off to the strains of The World Turned Upside Down played on a jew’s harp?”
“When vice prevails, the women of the family become unchaste; the corruption of the women leads to mixture of the varnas!” Bhagavad-Gita 1:41
“When justice is crushed, when evil rules supreme, then I come. For the protection of the good, for the destruction of the evil-doers, for the sake of firmly establishing righteousness, I am born in age after age.” Bhagavad-Gita 4.7-8