Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
Rushdoony and Theocratic Libertarians on Slavery
Rachel Tabachnick
Tue Jul 13, 2010
Today's Christian nationalists are working to recruit minorities with a revisionist history that demonizes liberals as the source of American racism. Simultaneously these same Christian nationalists justify slavery and glorify the Confederacy in the context of promoting biblical law.
Following the fold is a list of quotes from Rushdoony's books and other Christian nationalist texts, provided as documentation to accompany Bruce Wilson's recent article on Glenn Beck's promotion of the worldview which teaches this treatment of the issue of slavery. When Rousas J. Rushdoony died in 2001, Gary North wrote on LewRockwell.com, "Rushdoony's writings are the source of many of the core ideas of the New Christian Right, a voting bloc whose unforeseen arrival in American politics in 1980 caught the media by surprise." Rushdoony provided the intellectual foundations for much of the current war on separation of church and state, as well as the framework for understanding today's theocratic libertarians' paradoxical view of slavery and their fixation with the holiness of the Confederate States of America.
(Lew Rockwell is the founder of the "anti-state, pro-market" Ludwig von Mises Institute, based in Auburn, Alabama, which melds cultural conservatism with Austrian School economics. He served as Ron Paul's congressional chief of staff from 1978 to 1982.)
Rushdoony was the founder of Christian Reconstructionism and described as the father of the modern homeschooling movement. He was forthright in his teaching that the U.S. should be subject to Old Testament law in the most literal sense and mapped this out in his 800-plus page 1973 book Institutes of Biblical Law. He laid the groundwork for today's theocratic libertarianism, or the belief that the ultimate freedom and liberty will be found through the elimination of most of federal government and the uniform imposition of biblical law. In other words, replacing "statism" with Christian dominion would provide a utopian society in which federal regulatory systems and central government are not required. Think of it as a marriage between Ayn Rand's anti-religious, laissez-faire gospel of the free market with theocratic law. I described the timeline of the development of this ideology in my article Biblical Capitalism - The Sacralizing of Political and Economic Issues.
Rushdoony's goal of imposition of biblical law on the U.S. did not neglect issues such as slavery, and he claimed that "some people are by nature slaves and will always be." He argued that socialism tries to give the slave the benefits of freedom, and thus "destroys both the free and the enslaved."
In his article, Bruce Wilson references Wallbuilders, founded by David Barton, and Stephen K. McDowell, co-founder of The Providence Foundation. McDowell is co-author with Mark A. Beliles of America's Providential History, a popular Christian nationalist history textbook which quotes Rushdoony and several other Reconstructionist including Gary North, Gary DeMar, and David Chilton. America's Providential History begins on page one with the following statement,"The goal of America's Providential History is to equip Christians to be able to introduce Biblical principles into the public affairs of America, and every nation in the world, and in so doing bring Godly change throughout the world. We will be learning how to establish a Biblical form (and power) of government in America and we will see how our present governmental structures must be changed."
The Providence Foundation is now working in Asia, Africa, Europe, and Latin America. Barton is author of The Myth of Separation, and is currently featured on "Glenn Beck's University". (See Chris Rodda's weekly articles debunking Barton's revisionist history.) Barton is on the board of directors of the Providence Foundation and McDowell is on the board of directors of Wallbuilders. America's Providential History lists Wallbuilders as a resource and Wallbuilders uses resource material from the Providence Foundation. Despite McDowell's statement that he is not a Reconstructionist, America's Providential History quotes Rushdoony and other leading Reconstructionists and mirrors much of Rushdoony's ideology. McDowell starred on the DVD God's Law and Society produced to spark a "neo-Puritan revival within the church" and also featuring Rushdoony, George Grant, Howard Phillips, Gary DeMar, Jay Grimstead (Coalition on Revival), and Randall Terry.
Bruce Wilson references McDowell's article addressing the subject of slavery on Barton's Wallbuilders site since 2003, which repeatedly quotes Rushdoony. Rushdoony taught that slavery was biblical as long as involuntary slavery was used solely as a punishment and voluntary slavery was by non-Christians only. Rushdoony believed that slavery in its most evil context is slavery to statism, welfare systems, socialism, the Federal Reserve, and the "religion of humanity." His 1973 Institutes of Biblical Law describes his belief that Christians must "subdue all things and all nations to Christ and His law-word."
In order to justify tearing down the wall of separation of church and state, Christian nationalist historians work to legitimize their interpretation of Old Testament law as legally binding to Christians. This does not mean sourcing the bible as one of the foundations for today's secular law but using biblical law as a blueprint for governing, including guidelines for criminal and civil law. They are particularly concerned about economics, taxation, and property rights. For instance Beliles and McDowell's text teaches that property tax and inheritance tax are not biblical and that the only taxes biblically allowed are the head/poll tax and tithe. They criticize the 16th Amendment "which gave us the progressive income tax, which is a non-biblical form of taxation that destroys personal property rights."
The application of biblical law to modern America requires some serious logical contortions on the topic of slavery.
Conserving The Race: Natural Aristocracies, Eugenics, and the U.S. Conservation Movement
Antipode, July 1996
To be a good animal is the first requisite to success in life, and to be a Nation of good animals is the first condition of national prosperity.
— Herbert Spencer [Quoted as epigraph for the Proceedings of the First National Conference on Race Betterment 1914.]
James Paul Wickstrom, posse comitatus leader, dies at 75
March 26, 2018 Adam Sommerstein
James Paul Wickstrom, a leader in the Posse Comitatus and Christian Identity movements, has died at the age of 75 in Michigan, according to sources within the white supremacist movement.
Wickstrom is unquestionably one of the most significant figures within the history of American white supremacy and did as much to influence the movement as William Potter Gale, Richard Butler, William Pierce and George Lincoln Rockwell.
Wickstrom was at the height of his influence during the late 1970s and throughout the 1980s. In 1975, the former Snap-On Tools salesman was recruited by Thomas Stockheimer of the right-wing Posse Comitatus movement. Within several years, he attained a leadership position within the organization, declaring himself the “National Director of Counter-Insurgency” for the Posse Comitatus. In 1980, Wickstrom began spreading Posse Comitatus doctrine to farmers across the Midwest and the Great Plains.
The timing could not have been better for Wickstrom. Already facing rising interest rates and increased debt, the 1980s brought the worst economic crisis that farmers had seen since the Great Depression, resulting in thousands of foreclosures. An effective and bombastic speaker, Wickstrom raged against Jews, the U.S. government, banks, the Trilateral Commission and other nefarious forces that he believed were bent on destroying the livelihood of farmers. Although many rejected Wickstrom’s hateful ideology, thousands of frustrated farmers, their friends and family members accepted the idea their financial problems were caused by greater powers beyond their control.
Wickstrom, born on October 7, 1942, in Munising, Michigan, was also a proponent of the antisemitic Christian Identity doctrine, which holds that Jews are the literal descendants of Satan and Eve. A fellow Christian Identity adherent and Posse Comitatus member, Gordon Kahl, murdered two U.S. Marshals on February 13, 1983 near Medina, North Dakota, as they attempted to arrest him on a parole violation. Kahl escaped but was later tracked down in Arkansas after a nationwide manhunt, where he was killed in a shootout with law enforcement which also claimed the life of a sheriff.
In between Kahl’s murder of the U.S. Marshals, and his death almost four months later, Wickstrom became one of Kahl’s staunchest defenders, using the incident to promote the Posse Comitatus movement. This included an appearance on the hit television talk show Donahue. When asked by the host, Phil Donahue, if Wickstrom would urge Kahl to surrender, he refused, insisting that Kahl’s civil rights had been violated.
Wickstrom inspired thousands of people in the white supremacist movement before and after serving two separate stints in prison. He was convicted in 1984 on two counts of impersonating a public official and was sentenced to 13 ½ months in prison. In 1990, Wickstrom was convicted of counterfeiting currency and illegally possessing firearms. He was sentenced to 38 months.
In the 2000s, Wickstrom continued to promote Christian Identity and hate. The violent rage expressed by Wickstrom is best shown in this quote taken from an interview in 2004:I’d like to see these Jews all be brought to the VA [Veterans Administration hospital] and wooden chairs be put down on the lawn. Tie the Jews in. Bring these veterans down who have been mutilated…and give them baseball bats and let them beat these Jews to death! Every one of them! Take these chairs and Jews after they’re beaten to death, throw ‘em in the wood chipper! And from the wood chipper let the remains go into a big incinerary (sic) truck, which is right behind the wood chipper, and give them the holocaust they rightly deserve!
Professor Brian Levin, director of The Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University, San Bernardino, noted the huge impact that Wickstrom had during the height of his popularity. “You can’t underestimate the impact he had. He was quite visible and had his tentacles in every part of the movement. He had this very aggressive way of promoting Posse Comitatus ideology and antisemitism. Indeed, he was a pioneer in the Posse Comitatus movement at a time when it was becoming its most dangerous. His activities presaged the very kind of phenomenon we are seeing now. The template he helped create still exists.”
When Environmentalism Meets Xenophobia
The conservative conservation movement’s dark history of racism and eugenics.
By Gaby Del Valle
In the latter decades of the 19th century, outspoken nativist environmentalists lobbied for restrictions on hunting and for the creation of national parks, all while warning of the dangers posed by “inferior” people from Southern and Eastern Europe and advocating policies that would prevent them from coming to the United States.
The marriage of nationalism and environmentalism isn’t exclusive to this country. In Latvia, the Union of Greens and Farmers, the liberal-conservative Unity party, and the right-wing populist National Alliance have teamed up to form a center-right coalition. In the United Kingdom, conservatives are trying to win over young votersby banning plastic drinking straws and microbeads. In Mexico, the Ecologist Green Party has become better known for its corruption than for its environmental activism: In 2004, Jorge Emilio González Martínez, the party’s current leader and the son of its founder, Jorge González Torres, was caught discussing a $2 million bribe to secure permits for the construction of a new hotel in Cancún, which would have required the destruction of nearby stands of mangrove trees. (González Martínez later claimed that he was actually attempting to expose corruption himself.)
In most cases, these alliances do not originate in a genuine desire to protect the environment; rather, they seek to make right-wing policies more palatable. In the United States, however, the environmentalist and anti-immigration movements originated in tandem and were often led by the same people.
Madison Grant, an Ivy League–educated lawyer whose family dates back to the earliest days of the colonial era, exemplifies how closely these movements have been linked. His father descended from one of the first settlers in 17th-century New England, his mother from the first colonists in New York. Grant was close friends with early conservationists like Theodore Roosevelt, Henry Fairfield Osborn, and George Bird Grinnell, and he used his wealth and connections to champion their cause. He co-founded a half-dozen conservationist groups, including the National Parks Association, the Save the Redwoods League, and the New York Zoological Society, and despite never having held office, he drafted legislation prohibiting the “unsportsmanlike” hunting of game. He was also instrumental in creating a number of national parks, including Denali National Park in Alaska and Everglades National Park in Florida.
Yet the Nordics, Grant believed, were an endangered species in the United States, their existence threatened by intermarriage and by the immigration of Slavs, Poles, Russians, Greeks, Italians, and Jews. As he explained in The Passing of the Great Race: “The cross between a white man and an Indian is an Indian; the cross between a white man and a Negro is a Negro. The cross between a white man and a Hindu is a Hindu; the cross between any of the three European races and a Jew is a Jew.”At the same time, Grant dabbled in racist pseudoscience: He co-founded the American Eugenics Society, served as president of the Eugenics Research Association and vice president of the Citizens’ Committee on Immigration Legislation, and, in 1916, published The Passing of the Great Race, a since-discredited racial history of the West that Adolf Hitler once referred to as his “Bible.” In it, Grant argued that the peoples of Europe could be divided into three distinct races: Nordic, Mediterranean, and Alpine. The Alpine race, largely made up of Central Europeans, had an “essentially peasant” character and was not fit to rule; the Mediterraneans had a sluggish attitude and “feeble” build. Only the Nordics, who hailed from Northern Europe, constituted the purest form of the white race.
These days, Grant’s dual concerns—conservation and eugenics—might seem like an unusual mix, especially given a political context in which the party of immigration restriction is also the party of deregulation and climate-change denial. But according to Jonathan Spiro, who published the definitive biography of Grant in 2009, these seemingly antithetical ideals were perfectly consistent at the dawn of the 20th century.
For Grant, Spiro explains, eugenics was a way of ensuring the survival of those who had made the United States a prosperous country, while conservation was a way of preserving the land with which nature—and natural selection—had endowed them. “Grant dedicated his life to saving endangered fauna, flora, and natural resources; and it did not seem at all strange to his peers that he would also try to save his own endangered race,” Spiro wrote in his introduction to the provocatively titled Defending the Master Race: Conservation, Eugenics, and the Legacy of Madison Grant. Or as he told me recently: “You and I might disagree with the politics of the immigration-restriction movement 100 years ago, but their love of nature was genuine.”
Grant and his allies considered immigrants an “infestation,” Spiro continued—outsiders who had no respect for American laws or culture or for the country’s natural beauty. They believed that the influx of undesirable immigrants at the turn of the 20th century was the impetus for declining birth rates among native-born Americans, particularly those “old stock” Nordics who could trace their lineage to the colonial era. “One argument was that immigrants are litter and vermin,” Spiro said. “The other argument was that we need to protect our natural resources. That’s the redwood trees, the American bison, the bald eagle, and the blond-haired, blue-eyed white male. These guys were genuinely trying to protect the best and brightest species, whether it’s the redwood tree or the Nordic male.”
In the end, Grant was successful on both counts. Using the same quiet lobbying that gave us national parks, hunting restrictions, and wildlife refuges, Grant and his associates pushed for legislation that sharply limited the number—and, more importantly, the “quality”—of immigrants to the United States.
In February 1917, just three weeks before President Woodrow Wilson authorized the creation of Denali National Park, Congress passed the Immigration Act of 1917, which included a provision barring illiterate immigrants from entering the country. One bill was the result of Grant’s conservationist lobbying; the other was the pet cause of the Immigration Restriction League, which he served as vice president.
Grant’s most decisive legislative victory, however, came with the passage of the 1924 Immigration Act, which, through quotas on nationality, mandated that the bulk of new immigrants must come from Western and Northern Europe. Known as the Johnson-Reed Act, the law stipulated that the number of immigrant visas issued would be 2 percent of the total for each nationality present in the United States as of the 1890 census. Grant and his associates chose 1890 because that year marked a decisive turning point in both the number and the national origin of people coming to the United States. It was after 1890 that Grant’s ideal immigrant, the Nordic male, started being outnumbered by the “inferior” working-class immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe.
The notion of a small coterie of nativists’ wielding such an outsize influence on federal immigration policy should sound familiar to anyone who follows the news. However, these days it’s not the American Eugenics Society pushing restrictionist policies, but rather the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), and NumbersUSA. Much like the network of Grant-affiliated anti-immigrant organizations in the 20th century, today’s most prominent nativist groups can be traced directly to one rich white man: John Tanton, an elderly ophthalmologist and former Sierra Club official from Michigan.
8bitagent » Sun Mar 20, 2011 7:16 pm wrote:Funny how Alex Jones and other "anti NWO" activists are solidly behind anti Mexican(and anti gay) sentiments and or groups...given this is exactly what the PTB want.
Good series of articles spanning back the last year or so, just caught up with this thread.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests