by Chuck Baldwin

Today, April 19, is rightly identified as “Patriots’ Day.” In truth, April 19, 1775, should be regarded as important a date to Americans as July 4, 1776. It’s a shame that we don’t celebrate Patriots’ Day as enthusiastically as we do Independence Day. It’s even more shameful that many Americans don’t even remember what happened on this day back in 1775.

This was the day the “shot heard ’round the world” was fired. It was the day America’s War for Independence began.

Being warned of approaching British troops by Dr. Joseph Warren (who dispatched Paul Revere and William Dawes to Lexington and Concord with the news), Pastor Jonas Clark alerted his congregants at the Church of Lexington that the British army was on its way to seize the colonists’ weapons and to arrest Sam Adams and John Hancock. Both of these men had taken refuge in Pastor Clark’s home with about a dozen of the pastor’s armed men guarding the house. Other men from the congregation (around 75-80 in number) stood with their muskets on Lexington Green when over 800 British troops appeared before them at barely the break of day. The militia commander, Jonas Parker, told his fellow colonists, “Don’t fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here.”

According to eyewitnesses, British soldiers opened fire on the militiamen without warning (the British command to disperse and the British soldiers’ opening salvo of gunfire were simultaneous), immediately killing eight of the colonists (including Parker), of whom at least seven were Pastor Clark’s parishioners. In self-defense, the Minutemen took cover and returned fire. These were the first shots of the Revolutionary War.

Again, this took place on Lexington Green, which was located in the shadow of the church house where those men worshipped each Sunday. The men that were guarding Adams and Hancock escorted them out of harm’s way shortly before the troops arrived. Without a doubt, the heroic efforts of Pastor Clark and his brave Minutemen at the Church of Lexington saved the lives of Sam Adams and John Hancock. And eight of those brave men gave their lives protecting two men who became two of America’s greatest Founding Fathers. But, mind you, Jonas Clark and his men are as important to the story of America’s independence as any of our Founding Fathers.

It’s obvious that the central tenet of the Democrat Party platform is now hatred and contempt for Normal Americans. Taking their cue from the elites in Europe and Canada who are stripping dissenters of their free speech rights and religious freedoms, the leftist elite is moving to solidify its hold on power here with the eager assistance of tech companies and the moral support of the Fredocons who yearn to return to pseudo-relevance as the ruling class’s slobberingly loyal opposition. In California, the leftist government is practically firing on Fort Sumter. And nationally, these aspiring fascists are especially eager to disarm Normal Americans – doing so would be an object lesson in who’s the boss, as well as solving that frustrating problem of the Normals having the ability to resist.

by John Young

It is not surprising that, in a world where fully 69% of college graduates don't read proficiently, that people would have difficulty separating ideology from goals.

For example, our goal, in a nutshell, is for our Folk to survive and thrive. There are, I suspect, many millions of Americans who would share that goal if they understood it to be an issue. But among those who DO understand the issue, there is often an entanglement such that they mix ideology with the goal.

I have seen numerous people who contend that their particular take on political form, religion, economics or a host of other issues are a precondition for success. For every person who says we must restore Christianity, there is another who wants it supplanted with Odinism. For every person advocating socialism, there is another who claims without capitalism, we cannot succeed. The list of tangential issues goes on and on.

And so what happens is those precious few of our people who understand the necessity for action become divided, estranged and even at odds with each other. They will form organizations around their particular take (e.g. The Right Handed Aryans of the Capitalist Pagan Path) and then war with other organizations for scarce members and activists.

At best, this leads to lost efficiency as each organization has to duplicate all of the functions of all of the others. And because active members are scarce, quite a few organizations will lack members with important competencies. At worst, this leads to infighting as organizations, jealous for dollars and other scarce resources, cannibalize each other.

This is what happens when ideology is placed ahead of goals, especially since many people are used to equating their own self-worth with adoption of a certain ideology.

So it is important to put things in the correct order.

It’s getting harder and harder to be a good leftist these days. As the high priests and priestesses of the PC cult keep narrowing acceptable points of view, reasonable liberals are finding it difficult to toe the line.

Consider the case of Bret Weinstein, the former professor of evolutionary biology at Evergreen State College in Olympia, Washington. Weinstein, a supporter of the Occupy movement, was the victim of leftist mob hysteria for refusing to participate in the college’s racist “Day of Absence," which called for white people, students and faculty alike, to refrain from coming to school for a day. The video of the incident with Weinstein is chilling, because of both the ferocious intensity and the abject stupidity of the student protesters.

President Trump has ordered the National Guard to secure the U.S.-Mexico border in the absence of congressional action on immigration, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen said Wednesday.

"The president has directed that the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security work together with our government to deploy the National Guard to our Southwest border to assist the border patrol," Nielsen told reporters at the White House. "The president will be signing a proclamation to that effect today."

Nielsen said the White House had drafted legislation that would close "loopholes" in immigration laws, such as the requirements for immigrants seeking asylum in the U.S.

The plan to send National Guard troops to the border, she said, was meant to keep illegal immigration levels low until lawmakers could address the problem legislatively.

"We do hope that the deployment begins immediately," Nielsen said.

In the September 1997 issue of American Renaissance there was a debate on whether Christianity is at least partly to blame for the demise of Western Civilization and the suicidal course being pursued by Western peoples. Both positions were ably argued, and on the whole I had to agree that the key to the controversy was a distinction between historical Christianity and contemporary Christianity. As Michael W. Masters (“How Christianity Harms the Race”) acknowledged implicitly and Victor Craig (“Defense of the Faith”) acknowledged explicitly, the two are not the same; and, as Mr. Craig argued persuasively, historical Christianity has not been indifferent to the fate of the European peoples.

The situation today is quite different. Whether Catholic or Protestant, conservative or liberal, all Western churches have embraced leftist dogmas on questions of nationality and race. The only difference appears to be that the more liberal churches openly support the multicultural and anti-white agenda, while the conservative churches ignore it. Of course, ignoring an agenda that pervades everything from politics to advertising is a form of tacit acceptance. The question is not whether Western churches are betraying their predominantly white congregations; they are. The question is whether they have doctrinal justification to do so.

The mass-marketing of interracial relationships, particularly white women with black men, has become so ubiquitous and so militant, even the least observant members of our culture have begun to notice. Walking through a mall recently I noticed three large marketing images of couples in three different stores. Two of the three were interracial couples, depicting a white woman and black man; the third couple was white. Perhaps what struck me as most peculiar was the fact that the city where I was shopping, whites make up about 97% of the population, blacks are less than 2%. I wondered if the purpose of “diverse” advertising was to sell more products, or really to indoctrinate, to condition, and signal how “progressive” they are.

Left-liberal activists have been enraged by an Australian proposal to help South Africa’s persecuted white minority, branding it “ridiculously racist”.

Home Affairs minister Peter Dutton had said his department was considering ways to fast-track visa applications from South African farmers, who are being killed on their homesteads in large numbers, often with extreme brutality.

Indeed, Sky News Australia recently reported how farmers “are being murdered at a rate of more than one per week” in South Africa — and the country’s parliament has just voted through a bill to seize their land without compensation.

This bill was proposed by Julius Malema, a Marxist and black supremacist who said those who did not support it would be “dealt with” during the parliamentary debate, and stated ominously that he was “not calling for the slaughter of white people‚ at least for now” in 2016.

Scientific American continues on its activist leftward path, diluting its scientific brand by transmitting biased anti-gun propaganda under the cover of academic sociology.

The latest entry was posted Wednesday and has become a popular post: “Why Are White Men Stockpiling Guns? -- Research suggests it's largely because they're anxious about their ability to protect their families, insecure about their place in the job market and beset by racial fears.”

If that headline wasn’t a giveaway, writer Jeremy Adam Smith's bio left little hope for an objective take: “....author or co-editor of four books, including The Compassionate Instinct and Are We Born Racist?”

After pointing out that “Since the 2008 election of President Obama, the number of firearms manufactured in the U.S. has tripled....” Smith asked “So, who is buying all these guns -- and why?”

His answer, boiled down: Dumb racists.

The bridge gave way suddenly while the traffic light for motorists on Tamiami Trail was red and the concrete span flattened a row of at least eight stopped vehicles. Police on the scene said at least six people could be dead but the exact number of victims remained unconfirmed.

Motorists scrambled out of their cars to help. At least one woman, Katrina Collazo, escaped from a half-crushed car, pulled out unscathed by rescuers.

How could this have happened? Well, the firm which built the bridge is a construction company owned by a “prominent Cuban-American family” which has won a number of government contracts, despite being cited for shoddy workmanship in the past.

by John Young

In the grand scheme of things, as a GenX-er, I’m not very old. But the destructive grip of our enemies has accelerated and tightened to an enormous degree. Nowhere is this more obvious than in the conduct of ostensibly American corporations.

At one time, America sought to represent an ideal of freedom to the world. If a country had censorship, we would set up a radio station beamed at its people so they could have an alternative to official state narratives. Our corporations were likewise expected to represent our ideals of freedom both at home and abroad.

Obviously, this was an imperfect thing. Maybe some of the things beamed via the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe were false as well, and it’s not unusual for companies to put profit ahead of anything else.

But overall, we presented a united front to the world, and we were a beacon of light and freedom for all to see. We didn’t compromise our message, or what we published, just because some totalitarian regime elsewhere might object.

I present for your edification … exhibit A:

South Africa has dismissed allegations its white farmers are "persecuted" after an Australian minister said they needed help from a "civilised" country.

Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton said he was exploring giving South Africa's white farmers access to fast-track visas on humanitarian grounds.

The suggestion was made amid calls to transfer land ownership from white to black farmers in South Africa, and fears over the number of farm killings.

But South Africa says it is ridiculous.

Government spokesman Ndivhuwo Mabaya told the BBC there was no reason for any country in the world to suspect a section of the South African population was in danger from its democratically elected leaders.

"There's no need for anyone to be scared or to fear anything," he said. "The land redistribution programme will be done according to the law. We want to say to our friends across the world that there's no need to panic."

BEIJING—China will abandon its one-child policy, perhaps the most notorious of the Communist Party’s intrusions into Chinese lives, amid a looming demographic crunch that threatens the long-term health of the world’s second-largest economy.

All Chinese couples will be allowed to have two children, Chinese official media said, showing Beijing isn’t ready to totally relinquish its grip on the homes and bedrooms of its people. Demographers also warn that the move may be too little too late, as China already faces a declining, graying population without the workers it needs for its vast economy.

Still, the move is symbolically significant and amounts to an acknowledgment of the social and demographic problems the 35-year-old policy has created. “This is a historic moment signaling the complete end of the one-child policy,” said Wang Feng, a demographer at Fudan University in Shanghai.

by John Young




When I was a kid, I checked a lot of books out of the library. A lot of books. And some books that I found particularly interesting, I checked out multiple times. Although it isn't widely considered today, librarians have a certain code of ethics. Specifically, they will tell nobody, ever, for any reason, what books you have checked out to read. When recent laws, such as the mis-named "Patriot Act" expanded government surveillance authority, librarians all over the country literally purged their records to maintain their patrons' privacy.

I didn't understand all of the big-brained stuff behind this when I was a kid, and I didn't really realize how important it was, how central it was, to keep this information private. So throughout elementary, middle and high school I blissfully worked my way through The Three Investigator's series, books on relativity, obscure books of poetry, all of the Greek playwrights and even political works like Mein Kampf. I was curious about everything. When I went to college, I got my first taste of how important this privacy was when a classmate of mine reported me for having a checked-out copy of the Communist Manifesto on my bookshelf. (I went to a college where being a commie wasn't cool, but that has since changed.)

I wasn't a communist, of course. But I never take for granted what others say about a subject, and I wanted to understand my enemy in his own words. Nevertheless, that caused me a bit of angst. My next round of angst came from a classmate reporting my possession of Kurt Saxon's "Poor Man's James Bond" -- which I read more for amusement than anything else. This necessitated a meeting with my "advisor" who "advised" me that "people" were getting "concerned." One day I figured out who the classmate was who was reporting me ... But I digress.

The point I am making here is that the switch from reading books checked out from a library in the privacy of my childhood home ... to having those books in a more public dorm room made a big difference in my level of privacy -- and that there are, or can be, reprisals made merely on the basis of totally incorrect assumptions on what your intent "must" be, based solely upon what you read.

So what?

Let's fast forward a bit. With little fanfare or media reporting, big names in the Internet space like Comcast and Verizon have spent a lot of time and money securing certain unprecedented rights. Most relevant to our current discussion is that they have secured the specific right to be able to use your browsing history -- what you search for on the Internet or what websites you visit -- in whatever way they desire.

Because most search engines encrypt your traffic to them by default, your ISP can't directly see what you typed into the search engine. But what they CAN see is the URL of every web site you visit. Using the analogy of a library, they can't see what you typed into the card catalog, but they can see every book you have checked out.

And as of this point, they are free to use that information in whatever way they wish. They are starting to use it for advertising -- and some of the results would be amusing were it not for the privacy implications. It's funny to see my family members getting advertisements for stuff that interests me, but in which they have no interest themselves. But it wouldn't be so funny if it pertained to a medical condition I was keeping private to prevent needless worry.

Like many of you after a school shooting I find myself in a panic hole reading article after article about stats and figures on gun control, sweating bullets as the kids get paraded across the screen telling the viewer how terrible guns are, and generally feeling nervous about the future of one of the most important of our enshrined rights as Americans.

Our opposition is determined in their end goal of our destruction. They have been rebuked many times before and have made the same arguments each time. What has changed, though, is the demographics; these people have brought their Third World subservient mentality to our country. Not only that, they have been trained to think that gun ownership is implicitly racist by their Jewish handlers in the media and education.

Last August, as my wife and I and two of our friends biked through the Great Allegheny Passage in McKeesport, Pa., a city 12 miles from Pittsburgh, I joked that we probably wouldn’t see any more black people until Maryland. I was wrong. In the 150 miles between Pittsburgh and Cumberland, Md., we saw four.

The dearth of black people on the GAP trail should be no surprise to anyone who’s driven through Pennsylvania. A popular joke about the state is that it’s Pittsburgh on one side, Philadelphia on the other and Alabama in between. The “joke,” of course, is that once you leave those metropolitan areas, you’re surrounded by small towns and rural farmland. And “surrounded by small towns and rural farmland” is a euphemistic way of saying “surrounded by whiteness.”

The South African parliament voted a staggering 65.5% to 34.5% to seize white-owned land without compensation. They call it expropriation without compensation.

The move was supported by the ANC, EFF, Agang SA, National Freedom Party, United Democratic Movement, African People’s Convention, and the Inkatha Freedom Party. The move was opposed by the Democratic Alliance, African Christian Democratic Party, Congress of the People, and Freedom Front Plus.

The International media is publishing fake claims that blacks own between 5-9% of agricultural land in South Africa. This is total nonsense. Black ownership of agricultural land has surged since 1994. Some of it was given to blacks by the South African government. However, the lion share was purchased by black people on their own. Since 1994, blacks have purchased 5 million hectares of agricultural land. They have purchased 1.7 million hectares of land for other purposes. In the same time period the South African government only “redistributed” 2.1 million hectares of agricultural land to blacks.

Police in Washington DC arrested at least 100 Jews—including rabbis, members of the Anti-Defamation League, Bend the Arc, T’ruah and other Jewish groups—after they took part in an illegal demonstration and occupation of public space in a Senate office building—demanding legislation to enable the nonwhite invasion of America to continue.

According to a report in the Times of Israel, the Jews sat in concentric circles on Wednesday in the Rotunda of the Russell Senate Office Building until they were removed by police. They sang protest songs in Hebrew and English.

The Israeli newspaper said that the Jews “demanded the passage of a bill that would protect the so-called ‘Dreamers.’” US President Donald Trump removed executive orders put in place by his predecessor, Barack Obama, to protect the so-called “Dreamers”—who number just under one million—from deportation.

The EU jury of the European Capital of Culture contest (EKF 2023), said that one of the participating towns is “too white and there are not enough migrants”, Hungarian news website “888.hu” reports.

With only seven semi-finalists left, the Hungarian town of Székesfehérvár made a promotional film for the jury. The film shows the town’s most beautiful places, a happy couple and some kids playing.

But the EU’s jury rejected the submission of Székesfehérvár’s debut film: “There are too many happy white people and crosses, and not enough migrants,” the jury said.

The film of the town also featured on YouTube and attracted over 3,000 views. One of the European Union’s experts replied with:

“This is the propaganda film for white Christian Europe; everyone is white, happy and dancing in the streets.”

We specifically invite men with vision and women with values, who understand that a stable family unit is very desirable as it not only leads to personal fulfillment and happiness but also represents a core asset to a peaceful and prosperous society.

Traditional men are seeking women who have woken up to the power of femininity embracing beauty, softness, and grace, and who trust men to take initiative during the dating game.

Unfortunately, a lot of work needs to be done to de-program the brainwashed minds from feminism and nihilism telling men and women that sexuality is merely a consumer good and that future generations do not matter.

Nevertheless, we noticed that a general awakening is taking place motivating Millennials and Generation Z to revolt against the narrative imposed by the Western media and education system. They understand that the enforced disconnection from their ancestry and the nudging into consumerism turn them into rootless individuals, like feathers in the wind, always yearning for the next hedonistic stimulus but never finding profound connection nor satisfaction.

by John Young

Those who have been around a while know that warnings of our people being demographically submerged in their own countries have been issued for over 100 years. Whether it was Lothrop Stoddard's "Rising Tide of Color" written in 1920, Madison Grant's "Passing of the Great Race," George Lincoln Rockwell in the 1950's and 1960's, William Pierce in the 1970's through 1990's ... plenty of people with keen intellect and substantial education have recognized the danger and warned us of its coming. And they issued those warnings at substantial personal cost.

Though you might see modern educators or journalists -- or scientists whose jobs depend on it -- "debunking" these men or merely writing them off as "racists," these were all serious men with serious minds. Madison Grant graduated from Yale early, with honors -- long before our educational system was dumbed down. Lothrop Stoddard graduated from Harvard magna cum laude. George Lincoln Rockwell was a naval commander at a time when such ranks were only available to our best and brightest, and William Pierce was a PhD physicist.

These were all well-educated and intelligent men of wide learning and broad experience. They were far from merely ivory tower intellectuals, but men with a commitment to Western civilization and its people. Though, in hindsight, we might disagree with some of what they said or did, the validity and sincerity of their warnings is beyond question because those warnings are coming true right now.

Of course, European Americans United, through our members and through Frank Roman and I, have also issued these warnings. And just as with those who came before us, those warnings have been considered by some, and ignored by most.

And this is to be expected. It is a fact of human nature that Thomas Jefferson recognized so clearly that he put it right in the Declaration of Independence: we will tolerate evil so long as it is tolerable.

Of course, by the time it becomes intolerable, it will be too late to change matters democratically at a national level.

President Trump's proposal to cut legal immigration rates would delay the date that white Americans become a minority of the population by as few as one or as many as five additional years, according to an analysis by The Washington Post.

The plan, released by the White House last month, would scale back a program that allows people residing in the United States to sponsor family members living abroad for green cards, and would eliminate the “diversity visa program” that benefits immigrants in countries with historically low levels of migration to the United States. Together, the changes would disproportionately affect immigrants from Latin America and Africa.

The Census Bureau projects that minority groups will outnumber non-Hispanic whites in the United States in 2044. The Post's analysis projects that, were Trump's plan to be carried out, the date would be between 2045 and 2049, depending on how parts of it are implemented.

Here’s who President Trump’s anti-immigrant policies would hurt the most: his own base. That is, the aging white males without college degrees who form the core of his support system.

Without a vast infusion of youthful, hardworking, tax-paying immigrants, this country will find it much harder to afford the generous benefits promised to these Trump supporters as they age and retire.

Fred Hiatt argues in The Washington Post that “naked self-interest” should prompt Trump supporters to back an increase in immigration, not a rollback. “A vote to choke off immigration is a vote for stagnation and decline,” he writes.

Trump has spent his entire career stirring up resentment against foreigners, particularly nonwhite, non-Christian “others.” Barack Obama was a closet Muslim from Kenya. Mexicans were rapists. Syrians were terrorists. Africa sent the “worst of the worst” to the U.S. Haitians and Salvadorans were from “s---hole” countries. Only white Norwegians seemed to be acceptable — a clear sign of his racist impulses and undertones.

A lone gunman went on the rampage in a town in Italy on Saturday, shooting black migrants in apparent revenge for the brutal murder of a teenage white girl.

The shaven-headed man, who had an Italian flag draped around his shoulders, drove around the central Italian town of Macerata in a dark Alfa Romeo, opening fire with a pistol.

He wounded at least four and as many as six people, all said to be African migrants. One of them was left in a critical condition.

The incident will likely jolt campaigning for a March 4 national election, with a centre-right alliance that leads in the polls promoting a fiercely anti-migrant programme.

The gunman was named by the Italian press as Luca Traini, 28. A local man, he reportedly ran last year as a candidate in municipal elections for the anti-immigrant Northern League, which has since changed its name to the League to broaden its appeal.

by John Young



Every once in a while, a project has me reviewing the founding documents of European Americans United, and finding again how relevant and important they are. Most recently, I have been working on a dark web portal for allowing people to join and collaborate.

A key element of people joining EAU is they must explicitly agree to adopt our code of Ethics, so I had to include it on a prominent page for all to see. Of course, it has always been featured on our organizational site as well, though for the past few years we have lacked the infrastructure for adding new members. Even so, all existing members are bound by that code ... for life.

In reviewing our Ethics, which I have included at the bottom for reference, I'd like to point out something really important that may not be obvious.

When most people think of "ethics" they think of a required college class where they are mostly taught that European Americans are bad, and that they shouldn't be "racist." At least, that's what ethics class in college was like for me. Or they may recall the academic ethics experts who get so tied up in their own logical knots that they conclude killing living, breathing children is okay because they lack some arbitrarily defined level of reason. Or maybe they recall an "ethics" clause pertaining to employment that essentially tells people that if they break the law in a way that brings harm to the company, they will be fired.

But NONE of these describe what the EAU Code of Ethics is about.

Let me digress a moment to set the stage. What is possible in politics (absent deception) is defined by what the culture will accept. And the culture of the people -- up until very recent times -- was defined by an interactive cooperation between genetics and environment. So genes and environment (which also cooperate) lead to culture, leads to politics.

Despite the fact that the modern age short-circuits the process by creating an artificial environment where cultural behaviors that would ordinarily be fatal can be advocated, you can still look all over the world and see this in action. You can literally see the huge difference in artistic sense between the European pre-Raphaelite artists and the paintings in China. You can literally see that in some cultures honor killing is essential while in others it is abhorrent.

So scroll down, read our Code of Ethics, then come back.

Our Code of Ethics does not merely define how an individual behaves or what is required or prohibited. Rather, it defines, in very clear terms, a CULTURE. It defines the culture of the class of leaders -- defined by their moral stature -- who can create and lead a culture by way of example.

We already have our genes -- we were born with them. The EAU Code of Ethics gives us -- European Americans -- a culture. And it is this culture, all by itself, that can and will swing politics where we need them to be.

Does that seem a bit simplistic to you?