There are different people of different beliefs in every Church; I don't think it's fair to judge an entire group based on what a few laymen or priests or even bishops believe. I think that Fr. James Thorton is with Met. Cyprian's Greek Old Calendarist group, though I'm not positive.
Thanks for the information. I'm not judging any group by the words of a few laymen, or even this James Thorton individual. I do know that talking about preserving European bloodlines and an "Anglo/Irish" national character against "miscegenation" and immigration is anti-Orthodox and anti-Christian. Such ideas are right out of the KKK handbook. Any priest teaching such things should be ashamed. Just for the record, the article statesthat Thornton was speaking at the American Renaissance Conference. A little note on what that is, which makes you wonder what an "Orthodox" priest of any stripe was doing there:
America's Biennial Gathering of Academic Racists: The 2002 American Renaissance Conference
"Renaissance" is a favorite American name for banks, venture capital firms, and innovative educational organizations. It is also the name of the most vicious collection of academic racists who assemble every two years to discuss among themselves how blacks and other racial minorities are destroying Western civilization. Here is an account of their most recent meeting, which was held this past February in Herndon, Virginia.
by Mike Hill
The antiseptic setting of the Hyatt Dulles hotel must have reassured the suits and ties that, whatever else might be said, they were gathered in a courteous way on behalf of "white genetic solidarity." That archaic phrase summed up the American Renaissance convocation of bigots held in Herndon, Virginia, during an oddly mild winter weekend, late in February. As the largest assembly since founder, newsletter editor, and organizer Jared Taylor, a Yale graduate, first summoned the congregation in 1994, the 2002 event proclaimed a newly invigorated goal: the racial awakening of an Anglocentric nation in crisis.
In line with the previous four conferences, the American Renaissance Web site pitched the affair as "an opportunity to hear some of the most courageous academics, journalists, and scientists of our time discuss the forces that will determine our future." The question of that future, torn open by the events of last September, is what speakers sought to whip into racially recognizable shape this year. In the supercharged political atmosphere after September 11, the general claim was that foreign violence from within, and now from without, the nation's borders, is finally setting back on course the long march of white supremacy. The overt aggression in New York and Washington, D.C., was clear enough. But now, by extension, white Americans must confront immigration, black-on-white crime, and the unholiest form of bioterrorism yet known in the fatherland — "rampant miscegenation." "Genetic kinfolk" must answer the call for "racial solidarity" and work to hold the eroding line of "biological supremacy."
Those were just a few of the terms Jared Taylor used in his afternoon session midway through day one. "Keep the bastards out," he pleaded, being careful not to shout. "Nonwhites hate us. We are a different degree of civilization, [and our] hated group has lost its solidarity. [This] must inevitably lead to violence." As in other sessions in the Hyatt's Grand Ballroom, the 250-plus audience members, a record high from previous years, offered their applause. That they did so, reservedly, so as not to disturb the chess tournament going on across the hall, was only further proof to themselves of a generally superior pedigree.
Taylor's presentation identified the wounded condition of whiteness, and the future for white men that he wanted to win, with equal measures of urgency. In this he provided a model for those who preceded and followed him. During two days of high-minded bigotry, 11 other speakers would recreate the same biological loyalty pitch. The task now, in response to would-be annihilation, was to hasten the inevitable mainstreaming of racial self-interest, as well as to celebrate the premonitions of white nationalism already in our midst.
There was no FBI surveillance here that could be spotted, and unlike in years past when the conference was held in a less remote three-star hotel, no protesters were outside. This was Homeland Security, a click or two further right — not just the repeal of democratic jurisprudence, the surrender of habeas corpus, the forced segregation of communities and schools, but mass deportation, forcible repatriation, and racially based fertility control. This was the rebirth of a nation from within its most superficially respectable and buttoned-down core. With the merely conservative sounding conference subtitle, "In Defense of Western Man," the eugenically based cri de coeur of past American Renaissance conferences attempted this time to reach out, like a properly civic-minded shake of the hand, to the panicky white guy next door.
Friday night, barside, in the chummy confines of a spontaneous pre-conference cocktail party, the headliners and paying customers met in small groups. Blue blazers and gray tweeds rubbed elbows with the less well put together, but far more appreciative members of the rank and file. Glass in hand, the academic and lawyer, the banker and realtor, the political adviser and the elected school board member, the journalist, the college kid, and the odd juvenile skinhead, casually hummed their same just cause: "In Defense of Western Man." Yes, they were men. They were very self-consciously Western. And with a certain hazy combination of agony and satisfaction, they were assembled for the defense of a national ideal about to go maliciously awry.
So, too, began the formal proceedings in the groggy sunshine of Saturday morning. Former Patrick Buchanan adviser and demoted Washington Times columnist Samuel Francis got things rolling in his talk, "Immigration and National Security." Francis, an American Renaissance speaker since the first meeting in 1994, began a message he would develop during a roundtable session the next day. Everything about the growing U.S. nationalist movement is in order, according to Francis, except the formation of widespread white racial commitment. That too will come. Witness equally September 11 and would-be President Pat Buchanan's rueful choice in running mate, Ezola Foster, "a black woman high school teacher." For Francis, these were twin symptoms, foreign and domestic, of a single, all-but-fatal flaw. The U.S. had failed to base its national interests on fundamentally white racial grounds.
Next, Glen Spencer, a retired computer consultant from the San Fernando Valley, served up the kind of anti-Mexican vitriol that has become standard fare in his home state of California. The rhetoric of race warfare as national defense turned here to Mexico's apocalyptic "reconquista" of the once pale Golden State. Spencer's argument in "The Second Mexican-American War" expectedly mourned the storied demise of whiteness. Rewarming past arguments from his nationwide radio broadcast, "American Patrol," Spencer hinted more bombastically towards an eventual invasion of Mexico. In the wake of that victory, the establishment of a U.S. protectorate would stave off Mexico's stealth annexation of land made forcefully "ours" in the glory days of the late 1840s.
As a point of pride at American Renaissance conferences, the vast majority of speakers boast postgraduate degrees. Many hold master's or doctorates from leading research institutions. Yale University, Cambridge University, the University of North Carolina, California State University at Northridge, and the University of London were just some of the alma maters claimed at the 2002 conference.
Along this line the next two speakers, Michael Levin and Philippe Rushton, co-belligerents of the eugenics revival, were touted as tenured university professors. Levin teaches philosophy at the City University of New York, while Rushton enlightens young Canadians in psychology at the University of Western Ontario. A fixture at all four past American Renaissance meetings, Levin achieved some fame in the mid-1990s for his genetically based study of the intelligence differences between the Caucasoid, Negroid, and Asiatic races, a la Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein in their bestseller, The Bell Curve. On this day, Levin's intellectual talents were solicited for defending whites against reparations for slavery. Against the victims' sweepstakes of black poverty and liberal white guilt, Levin promised to break ranks with the gentility of previous speakers. He wanted to ask rude questions, as if no one thought he ever would. Levin cited the need to shock mainstream white Americans (and presumably, his students at CUNY) into a properly scientific understanding of the "intrinsic defects of the mutagenically disabled Negroid" species. "Biology is the better explanation that must be deployed," Levin opined, in order to fathom the "shallowness of their [poor black American] pockets. The truth is the truth, and that's the thing about the truth," he later mused.
In the talk that followed, Rushton merely confirmed Levin's vapid and spurious "science." An overhead projector was used to erect a wall of graduated bar graphs, standard deviations, flow charts, and other illustrations of the new-old polemic for fascism in the cloak of empirical knowledge. The genetic argument remained the same. And a few attendees appeared to doze at the unarguable news.
Levin's and Rushton's presentations fit together fist-in-glove, which should be of no real surprise. The research of both professors has been bankrolled in the past by the Pioneer Fund, a New York City-based foundation headed by Harvard Law school graduate and tax attorney, Harry F. Weyher. Through his white-collar contacts in New York and elsewhere, Weyher has funneled more than $3.5 million into research supporting eugenics. The Pioneer Fund has warm relations with other aspects of the American Renaissance organization. Through New Century Foundation, the Pioneer Fund provides financial responsibility for the American Renaissance newsletter. And it has extended a lucrative subvention on behalf of Frank Borzellieri's two racist books. Borzellieri, a regular speaker at American Renaissance, was featured on the second day of presentations. He is also an elected New York City school board member and a popular columnist for the Queens Ledger.
The biological loyalty speech made by American Renaissance impresario Jared Taylor followed the two academics. A self-described "uptown bad guy," Yale graduate, former international banker, and one-time director of the aforementioned New Century Foundation, Taylor here assumed the coordinating role veterans in the audience had come to expect. In his presentation, "Ethnic Conflict: Race, Sex, and Violence," Taylor maintained the defense of white genetic preservation. If the delivery was Tom Brokaw, the substance was David Duke. More than once Taylor coaxed an eager audience to their sensibly wing-tipped feet. He beckoned wistfully for impenetrable borders, as Francis mentioned before. He patiently tallied the demographic assaults on the order of Spencer's California bad dream. And the nasty numbers compiled by Levin and Rushton seemed only to drive the conference subtitle, "In Defense of Western Man," that much more comfortably home.
Things got spicier as Taylor's presentation developed. "In the homespun wisdom of my grandmother," he began by recollecting, "race was our most extended family." Nothing much new in this reverie, so far. But in what followed, Taylor's call for biological loyalty was juiced up by descriptions of graphically sexualized racial transgressions. Against his better judgment, he claimed he had to include this material, for it provided mighty inspiration for fixing the anti-white outrages documented at the conference so far. No, not miscegenation this time. Something (almost) unmentionably other than that, something Taylor "had to talk about no matter how horrible." The emblem and the outcome of post-white America, as he would now reveal, was "black-on-white male rape."
His apologies before confiding this suitably torrid hypothesis seemed to produce an odd anticipation, a sort of one-eyed fascination, for most of the men in the room. Having accomplished this high-dramatic tension, Taylor then made what to some may have sounded like a rather twisted call. He appealed to his audience to identify with, to in some sense embody, the long-lost figure of white male solidarity which he evidently found in the allegory of rape. This solidarity was best achieved, the frail logic seemed to run, as a direct consequence of the black-white homosexual violation that he begged his audience to envision. "Group solidarity in prison," Taylor rallied, "means that rape of one is rape of all." "Whites [have] become blacks' personal property [in prison]." And there, like here, "nonwhites hate us." So "keep the bastards out." "Commit to each other," or risk a form of "long-term suicide" that puts our manhood and our whiteness inextricably at stake.
During Taylor's Q&A a beleaguered-looking, late-middle-aged white man approached the microphone. Next to Taylor's athletic six-foot frame, he looked risibly diminutive. The man was sweating, and had an air of fealty that seemed to bring him to the brink of tears. "I commit to you, Jared Taylor," he muttered. "If somebody attacks you, or anybody in this room, I will come to your aid." The Christians came to Taylor's aid with the same brand of heartfelt testimonial. The one skinhead kid from the neo-Nazi group National Alliance was not to be outdone. (This group was given prominence, recall, by its founder, William Pierce, who penned Timothy McVeigh's terrorist bible, The Turner Diaries.)
On that second night, as Taylor's session ended, an uncanny sense of masculine intimacy pervaded the Grand Ballroom. The conference was, after all, an almost entirely male event, with perhaps not even half a dozen women among the nearly 300 attendees. In the afterglow of Taylor's heterosexist panic, the multicultural Christian men's group, Promise Keepers, came to mind. Only here, the attention to color was inverted. It was homosocial aggression towards, rather than attraction to, blackness that insured the necessarily masculine nature of whiteness. And this, just in time for dinner and drinks.
Later, following the banquet and heavily patronized cash bar, matters turned from personal commitment to explicitly political concerns. Jared Taylor resumed the dais, as was his way by now, and introduced "a man whose talk would go down best after a few beers." The reveler in question was Nick Griffin, a well-known activist in the 1970s British National Front. Tonight Griffin was in attendance to address the recent electoral successes of the new British National Party, which he currently chairs. Barely concealed twitters and mild guffaws from a well-lubricated and convivial audience congratulated Griffin on being found guilty for "inciting racial hatred" of late. With irresistible Cambridge University prose and in the king's best English, the usual missives, "not [of our] conservative, but [of our] revolutionary movement," were proclaimed without delay. "We white racialists must put away our boots, and put on our suits," he commanded, affirming the dress code already enforced. "There is nothing left to preserve except the color of our children's skin," he added. "And I want white genocide trials for the likes of Blair and Clinton, [and would see them] hanging from the nearest lamppost." And so on, and so forth, to the roar of applause mixed with backslapping, foot stomping, and laughter.
The chess tournament from the earlier part of the day was clearly long past. So for the rest of Griffin's speech, the guys proceeded to unwind. But another beer, another Chardonnay, and two standing ovations later, it became clear the common center of the two forms of white racialism, British and American, would not hold. Somewhere in the midst of the good cheer, for an awkward moment, the British Nationalist Party's nationalism and whatever it was that American Renaissance imagined to the right of Pat Buchanan and David Duke were, in fact, not at all the same species of hate. Griffin's distinctly U.S. audience, in spite of the strong desire to make merry, appeared to choke on the bitter, European-inspired pill that he called, without flinching, "class struggle." (He even ended with a quotation from Marx.)
To the deaf ears of his (mostly) white-collar audience, Griffin insisted that contemporary politics across all its spectrums had "betrayed the working class." By the end of his oratory, Griffin assured an audience grown restless that "third-worlders intended to destroy us [that is, white people]." Whites must unite, fight. It was a message by now repeated with metronomic regularity. But in his defense of Western civilization, white workers had rights that were not only racial, but were economically based. Griffin wanted to peddle a version of racism located squarely in opposition to globalization, and he meant to comment at length on "the reduction in the wages of the ordinary worker." It was clear during his Q&A period that, in the minds of a relatively well-off U.S. audience like this one, anticapitalist ressentiment would be presumed to fix itself in an all-white America to come. In the end, Griffin chose not to press the economic point, and the emphasis on racism soon enough won back its former prominence of place. With a half-day of presentations yet to be made, Griffin appeared willing to leave the rich Yankees with the pure racial hatred they could more palatably stomach.
Sunday morning Jared Taylor made an announcement. It seemed to bring order to whatever ideological messiness might have lingered from the previous night's post-banquet discussion with Griffin. Due to the "anti-free speech laws in France," Guillaume Faye, who was to speak on "The Rise of Islam," would not be presenting. With prison charges pending, his visa was denied. To those in the know, this could only mean that the man had earned his stripes. As one of the principal organizers of GRECE (Groupment de Recherche et d'etudes sur la Civilisation Europeenne), and a leader in the French New Right, Faye would have brought the group back to the September attacks, to the fact that "civilization is in crisis." The "egalitarian hallucination" of multiracial democracy would have to be shattered that Sunday without him.
Three sessions remained. First, a roundtable discussion of Buchanan's new book, which goes by the American Renaissance-sounding title, The Death of the West. Included here were previous conference presenters, Samuel Francis and Jared Taylor, with retired lawyer, "our beloved brother of the South," Sam G. Dickson, bringing up the rear. These veterans were joined by the director of a think tank with the dubiously sanitized name, Institute for Western Civilization, doe-eyed young newcomer, James Russell. All members of the panel agreed that Buchanan's book was insufficiently race conscious. But having read the manuscript in galley form, Francis revealed that the original title was more desirably conceived as: The Death of Whitey. And besides, the editors at St. Martin's Press had removed all the good stuff on whiteness once the book was snatched by crafty editors from the saner hands of its author. So it was agreed. All panelists save Dickson, our "beloved brother of the South," insisted that Pat be let back in the club.
There was one more presentation, and then finally, mercifully, a few inconsequential closing remarks from Sam Dickson, the anti-Buchanan, and then the thing was over for another two short years.
In a wandering, excited, and self-congratulating overview of his career as a New York school board official, Frank Borzellieri pitched his New Century Foundation book, a collection of various Eurocentric screeds from his column in the Queens Ledger. This book could be purchased at a discount, along with titles ranging from those appearing on respected university presses to vanity pamphlets on the virtues of the Reich, at an open table in front of the room. "Intelligence is genetic in origin." "Different races have different intelligence." "Blacks are the least assimilable."
Neither Borzellieri's enthusiasm for his own writing, nor the unconscionable fact that the voting people of his district had placed Borzellieri in a position to funnel this venom into schools, seemed to get many nods of approval at this point.
The audience was thinning out. Western Men had planes to catch. And they seemed only too eager to get home, get home and defend those embattled positions of their unremarkable but respectable lives.
Copyright -Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â¬ 2002. The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education. All rights reserved.