This weekend I read the Turner Diaries, a famous and influential right-wing apocalyptic insurrection fantasy written in 1978. I picked up this nasty little piece of racist literature because of the recent events in the US, thinking to get a bit of background on the white nationalist terror threat in the USA, but I was amazed reading it by the similarities in ideology, vision and practice between US white nationalists terrorists and “Islamic State” (ISIS). In this post I want to review the book and explore some of these similarities.
Background: Don’t try this at home
The Turner Diaries were written in 1978 by William Luther Pierce, founder of a white nationalist organization called the National Alliance, and quickly became an inspiration for many white nationalist terrorists. The most striking influence was on Timothy McVeigh, whose truck bombing of a federal government building in Oklahoma City in 1995 almost exactly mirrors the first major action described in the book, but the Diaries also inspired many other people: the Anti-Defamation League has a page on the Diaries that charts their widespread influence in the white nationalist movement. I first discovered them in my early twenties, when I had a lover who grew up amongst Australia’s neo-Nazis, and although too young at the time to understand their politics was familiar with much of their iconography and inspirations. For many years the book was on sale at a famous alternative bookstore in Melbourne, Polyester, though I imagine it’s unavailable now if the warning on the internet archive version is any guide:
Ownership of this book might be illegal in the European Union, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. You must be at least 21 years or older in order to read this book because of the sexual and violent content. Parental Discretion is Advised!
Fortunately it’s not illegal in Japan as far as I know, and really easy to read on a smartphone, so a few hours later here I am better educated and definitely more disgusted. I read this book so you don’t have to, kids.
The book is the literary equivalent of found footage, purporting to be diaries from a revolutionary war in the USA that were found about 100 years later, and cast light on central events of the time through the eyes of an activist who rose to legendary status in the movement through his sacrifice. It is short, and has that property of narrative coherence and good pace that makes it a page turner (or, I guess, in the modern era, swiper) even though its characterization is shallow and its story devices occasionally ridiculous. No one in this story is likable – and trust me, until you read what these people think and are willing to do, you really haven’t plumbed the depths of what unlikable means – but the plot will keep you involved in their horrid schemes and potential successes even while you are mentally urgently in need of serious disinfection. I guess this is why it was popular with the kind of “visionaries” who blow up kindergartens …
The diaries describe the actions of members of a racist insurrectionist movement called “the Organization” that starts off small and ultimately takes over the US and then the world, using a mixture of terrorism and then nuclear warfare. To give an idea of the vision that this book describes:
- Once they win the USA they solve “the Chinese problem” by nuking everything between the Urals and the Pacific Ocean, creating what they call the “Eastern Wasteland”
- They don’t have a racial model based on heirarchies and slavery, as the Nazis did: anyone not white is killed across the whole planet. There are no untermenschen here, just white people and dead people
- They “win” their battle with the US government by starting a nuclear war with the Soviet Union, leading to the destruction of most major cities in the USA and the death of upwards of 60 million people, but they consider to be a worthwhile sacrifice
Being found footage, this book has parenthetical notes describing the “past” depicted in the book: this includes a note telling the reader what “negroes” are, since this race has been exterminated from the entire planet. The book also has a couple of chilling asides in which the diarist describes Nazi Germany as good and decries the fact that they were stopped in their project. It also has a vicious scene where every mixed-race, non-black and non-white person in California – i.e. every Asian, every American of southern European descent, every native American and anyone of dubious heritage is marched into a canyon and murdered. This is racial purity of the most extreme form, and make no mistake: this was the visionary novel that America’s white nationalist terrorists were inspired by.
It also has some ridiculous plot devices, such as the silly idea that the white nationalist Californian enclave is able to start a nuclear war with the Soviet Union but doesn’t itself get nuked back to the stone age. But for analytical purposes, I’m willing to overlook these slips in the interests of understanding exterminationist ideology.
The Diaries’ Similarities with ISIS
The Diaries have certainly stood the test of time, in that some of the scenes described in them have been enacted by various terrorist groups over time. Obviously they have a striking similarity with the Oklahoma bombing, since they inspired it, but that is just the start of their inventiveness. Other similarities include:
- The Organization detonates a huge bomb on September 11th that kills 4000 people and leaves a part of a city burning for several days
- They attack a newspaper they dislike, culminating in killing its editorial writer [at his house, not the offices, but I think the similarities should be clear]
- They deploy a dirty bomb to render a major power station inoperable
- Beheading is one of their favourite tactics once they become operational in the field
The tactics described in the Diaries also have specific commonalities with ISIS tactics. In addition to the beheadings, they are very fond of filming executions and broadcasting them:
That’s where we were taking the big-shots to be hanged: the well-known politicians, a number of prominent Hollywood actors and actresses, and several TV personalities. If we had strung them up in front of their homes like everyone else, only a few people would have seen them, and we wanted their example to be instructive to a much wider audience. For the same reason many of the priests on our lists were taken to one of three large churches where we had TV crews set up to broadcast their executions.
This is a new, very modern phenomenon in mass murder, which we see from ISIS a lot. Government regimes like to hide their massacres, but terrorists need to broadcast them. Note also the choice of targets: not agents, technical staff and those who are implacably ideologically opposed to the force, but people whose actions and lifestyles represent a moral transgression. States kill people who threaten them materially, or fit into a category of useless people conveniently-scapegoated; modern terrorists murder people who have symbolic value, but who might otherwise be valuable. Their ideology doesn’t care whether you could be converted to the cause and used, because it is far more interested in making a spectacle out of punishing you for your transgressions.
These transgressions, note, are racial, or derive from crimes against race that the “criminals” didn’t even know were illegal until the new order swept over them – just as many of ISIS’s victims didn’t know they were doing anything wrong until ISIS arrived. On Monday you’re a tobacco salesperson, on Tuesday you’re a criminal about to be executed. This is ideological purity at its craziest.
Descriptions of cities “liberated” from racial miscegenation by the Organization also seem eerily similar to what we have heard of ISIS territory. They are depopulated, full of dead bodies, and struggling to find food and basic supplies, often for weeks, as the Organization is tiny, rules by terror and doesn’t have the manpower to maintain security and distribute food. It has also made clear that it isn’t interested in capitalism or markets, and its activities are completely disruptive of any kind of economic activity. At one point – having nuked much of America – the Organization’s enclaves are so desperate for food that they cannot take in even white survivors. Here is their solution:
In Detroit the practice was first established (and it was later adopted elsewhere) of providing any able-bodied White male who sought admittance to the Organization’s enclave with one hot meal and a bayonet or other edged weapon. His forehead was then marked with an indelible dye, and he was turned out and could be readmitted permanently only by bringing back the head of a freshly killed Black or other non-White. This practice assured that precious food would not be wasted on those who would not or could not add to the Organization’s fighting strength, but it took a terrible toll of the weaker and more decadent White elements.
Welcome to your racially-pure wonderland, honky… The similarities between this desperation and the desperation we are told is common in ISIS-held areas is noticeable. These people think they hold the key to the promised land but their millenial rage has so destroyed the world around them that they cannot help their own.
The “terrible toll of the weaker” alluded to in the above passage is another common element of ISIS and Organization tactics, though it points more to a moral than an organizational failing. Both organizations have an ideology of purity so extreme and powerful that they have developed a position of harsh judgment on almost everyone they are supposed to be helping. It is very clear in the Turner Diaries that the Organization considers the majority of white people to be stupid chumps who have brought about their own decay, and they are responsible for their own bad position through a lack of racial awareness. Although salvation of the white race is their aim, they don’t have any sympathy or compassion for individuals. The Diaries’ putative writer and his girlfriend at one point manage to ambush four black men and two “white sluts” with them, and kill all six, even though two are white, because those two have degenerated – no effort is made to explain to them how they have transgressed against a code they didn’t even know existed. This is early in the book; later this scales to the complete destruction of New York, the white population of which is dismissed because it allowed itself to be miscegenated. There are several passages in the book that justify this in terms of both racial survival and moral laxity: only those white people who can show they are able to “wake up” to the sick and insane racial fantasies of the Organization are guaranteed salvation, with the rest only offered salvation where it is convenient. This is very consistent with ISIS’s extreme ideology, which both punishes people for any kind of minor past infractions against a strict religious standard, and treats Sunni adherents as cheap collateral in its war goals: those who didn’t think to get enlightened and join ISIS are expendable, because they don’t have the purity and commitment that would justify any effort to spare them.
Finally, there is a similarity in targets. In addition to newspapers and politicians, the Organization targets actors and actresses, supreme court justices, and conservative politicians. There are multiple passages in the book railing against conservative politicians, who are racist but not willing to make the extreme steps necessary to see in the new world order. This is similar to ISIS, who consider Hamas and the Islamic Brotherhood to be apostates for considering the use of democracy or negotiation to achieve their aims. The Diaries have an early scene where a cell member is revealed to be “merely” a conservative: they execute him because he doesn’t support their nihilistic form of revolutionary activity. Later on, too, they have to fight a military enclave in Washington State that is run by “conservative” military folks, who want to restore the constitution: they deal with such anathema in an appropriately brutal way. All rival political ideologies, no matter how similar to theirs in goals, are judged impure and dealt with in the same vengeful and exterminationist way. The battle between the Organization and “conservatives” (and libertarians!) in the Diaries is similar to that between ISIS and al Qaeda. There is also a striking similarity in attitude towards people who share the Organization’s broad beliefs but were willing to compromise in order to get rich – these men get very short shrift, and strike me as very similar to the way some of the Sunni sheikhs were treated by ISIS.
The eternal terrorist
This would be simply fanciful rhetoric, except that the Diaries have inspired serious terrorists, and are very popular amongst white nationalists: they represent a real and genuine expression of the vision and goals of the white nationalist movement, which is also the oldest terrorist threat in the USA. The KKK, the original white terrorist movement, formed during the reconstruction era and was around until the end of the civil rights movement, only to be replaced by the network of arseholes that produced Timothy McVeigh. Since then the movement has subsided, and seems to have collapsed into just lone wolf idiots, but historically it was the greatest threat to American domestic security for 100 years. Now a similar movement of nihilistic, destructive purity has arisen in the Middle East, with similarly apocalyptic and violently exclusionary goals, and most analyses of this phenomenon are treating it as if it were unique. My reading of the Turner Diaries suggests that it is not unique at all: it is actually a sadly derivative form of terrorism, just terrorism, with the same ideological framework as white nationalism, and remarkably similar targets. Of course it has been more successful than white nationalism in the USA, but that’s because it sprang up in a situation closely resembling chapter 25 of the Turner Diaries rather than chapter 1.
I don’t know what produces this apocalyptic vision of society, and this antagonistic understanding of the causes of society’s problems, but it looks to me like a lot of terrorists hold it in common, and that people as vastly different as Baghdadi and Turner can have a very similar vision of who their enemies are and how to deal with them. It must be something very common to the human condition, and I don’t know what should be done about it, but my reading of the Turner Diaries, and my understanding of their influence, tells me one simple thing: ISIS aren’t new, or alien to western experience, although we might like to think so. They share a lot with the dark heart of our own racist past, and maybe if we look back there we can find ways to stop these movements from happening in future. Maybe the enemy really is us.
July 1, 2015 at 12:31 pm
Very right. But I’m glad you read this and summarised – it’s not work I would be prepared to do.
July 1, 2015 at 1:12 pm
It’s a dirty job Peter, but someone’s got to do it! If you want more objective reviews however, there’s always Stormfront …
July 1, 2015 at 3:58 pm
Ich. That makes Ayn Rand sound like a decent read [1].
“I don’t know what produces this apocalyptic vision of society, and this antagonistic understanding of the causes of society’s problems”
Beliefs in the “end times” and revolutionary upheaval are incredibly common. Cults of one form or another will always be with us, we should just be grateful that most don’t catch on or get that much follow through.
“They share a lot with the dark heart of our own racist past”
Not that I’d disagree, but I’d say that there are parallels with lots of non-racist historical groups too. Communists immediately spring to mind, but anyone who justifies crimes in the name of a greater good is potentially a parallel.
“maybe if we look back there we can find ways to stop these movements from happening in future.”
This I’m not sure about. We forget about these things to protect ourselves. No one willingly remembers the time they went through some great pain and at a societal level we do something similar by whitewashing our history. Because who can get out of bed when faced with the bedtime story they were told was “And then we were assholes to other people huge numbers of times for various poorly thought out reasons. And probably will be again. Sleep tight.”
[1] Atlas Shrugged is an (at times) seemingly endless slog through a rant that repeats itself like a modern internet debate on whether Lord of the Rings is racist (to drag up a nearby example) 😉
July 1, 2015 at 4:26 pm
If I have to slog through a racist extermination fantasy, I don’t think I should also need to slog through a libertarian objectivist exile fantasy too. I leave that for someone else …
I actually thought of touching on the communist versions of the same behavior. The only book about communist insurgency I have read is Che’s autobiography, in which he is callous but not bloodthirsty or exterminationist[1]. I was going to touch on the earlier Stalinist excesses, which are obviously very wide in their scope and deep in their brutality [and I think I was hinting at this with the scapegoat aside] but I’m not sure if they’re the same at all in their motivation and ideological purpose – maybe they’re covered by a different set of concerns. For example, Nazism and this white power stuff and ISIS are very much focused on purification, they have in some sense turned an inner vision of purity (the racial purity of one’s own family or heritage; jihad in its original sense) into an outward drive to purify. But this isn’t necessarily the case with Stalinism, maybe that is more about turning a vision of economic man and the inexorability of history into a mechanism for achieving it – somehow it seems based in some kind of more pragmatic or rationalist vision, though I’m struggling to find the words to explain the distinction I can feel. Obviously for the millions of people Stalin killed this distinction is irrelevant, but from the point of view of how history works and how these movements and phenomena spring up, it feels like it is somehow different. One of my long-held criticisms of all the different streams of Marxist thought is that they deny the spiritual, the cultural and the social factors that make societies work – they think that tinkering with the machinery of the economic structures will change everything else. In a way ISIS and the Turner diaries seem to be saying the opposite – that it doesn’t matter how much you rearrange social systems to handle the racial differences they believe they have identified, these racial-spiritual differences (ie Jews are evil!) will still cause insoluble problems, so the bearers of that racial impurity need to be destroyed.
This isn’t to say that the Stalinist vision and practice isn’t equally evil – just that it seems to come from a very different place.
—
fn1: Once you’ve read Che’s autobiography it’s really hard to look at those t-shirts the same way again … such a dreamy idealist … such a callous killer!
July 2, 2015 at 6:10 am
As an atheist, I don’t see a difference between a religion and an ideology. They’re both belief structures you impose on yourself. If Communism insisted that chickens be sacrificed to the Sky Father then it’d be a religion even if nothing else changed. If Catholicism dropped all the stuff about God and said “We just get off on demonising homosexuals” it’d be a political hate group (with some good outreach programs).
As for communist imposition of purity, the Chinese Cultural Revolution and Cambodia’s Year 0 both appear to match against ISIS and white racism in terms of killing those who don’t sign up for the charter and a willingness to “break a few eggs”.
The concept of whether you can be redeemed from your previous decadent existence is equally built into religions. ISIS will take you if you rock up, shoot a couple of bullets, bow the right way and are willing to blow yourself into smithereens. The concept of redemption doesn’t apply as much to racism, but does come through in some places (e.g. Hitler’s good Jew(s?))
July 2, 2015 at 10:19 am
While I agree about the possibility of ideology and religion acting at the same level, I’m not convinced that this applies to communism in general or Stalin’s Soviet Union in particular [I agree about the Khmer Rouge especially, and the cultural revolution – see below]. I don’t think the famine in Ukraine and associated dekulakization were driven first and foremost by notions of ideological purity – they were the means to an end, the end being a shift to intensive industry and agriculture that needed to be done rapidly to prepare for war with Nazi Germany, and the methods used were judged by Stalin and his clique to be the most effective. I am basing my opinion of this sad era in history on the Architects of Annihilation book I sometimes reference here. So I guess I’m saying that Stalin didn’t care at all whether kulaks and Ukrainians remained within the body politic, he just needed them to be more productive, and he needed less mouths to feed. Another example of this is in the contrasting treatment of dissident scientists in the Soviet Union and Cambodia/Nazi Germany: in the Soviet Union they were held in special camps where they worked on their scientific projects (see e.g. Solzhenitsyn’s The First Circle) where they would have been simply executed in those other places. I guess I’m thinking of Stalin’s actions more as like the behavior of the British in Ireland during the famine: they didn’t actually care whether Irish people reorganized their social and economic life in a way that enabled them to weather the crop shortages, and thus not die in large numbers, so long as they kept feeding the British. This is racist insensitivity but it’s not a drive for purity – there is no sense in which the British were aiming to depopulate Ireland because they saw the Irish as a stain on humanity [as far as I understand this era of British colonialism – I could be wrong about intentions through lack of knowledge].
I guess my argument here is that if there had been a way to achieve Stalin’s goals that didn’t involve killing those 20 million people, he would have followed it (if it were more effective), whereas there was no way to achieve the Nazi/Turner Diary/Khmer Rouge goals that did not involve those killings. Hence the ongoing debate about whether the Nazis perpetrated the Holocaust even when it hindered their war goals – I don’t think Stalin would have pursued dekulakization if it had been bad for his industrial goals. This isn’t to say that his actions were more or less evil, just that they are characterized by different motives and institutional processes. In the case of the Irish famine, this leads to the possibility that with the right combination of awareness raising and rhetoric it could have been stopped or its impact reduced – as opposed to any similar famine that would have been induced in the Turner Diaries.
There are interesting questions in all that about how it is that ideologies switch from being pragmatic but ruthless (e.g. Cuba, some periods of British colonialism) to vicious at the expense of pragmatism (the Cultural Revolution, Khmer Rouge). It’s especially interesting given that the Chinese government somehow managed to find its way back from its period of insanity, whereas most never do. Perhaps another interesting comparison is the Iranian revolution with ISIS: they are both born out of Islam, they both have their own specific interpretations of Islam, they’re both radical, but one is not insanely pursuing a purificationist goal at any cost. What are the specific factors that generate the switch from one to another, can they be predicted, and is intervention possible? This is perhaps useful in the modern world as it pertains to states like Iran, Israel, Eritrea, Sudan and Gaza, where an underlying ideological or religious imperative plus external pressures might potentially cause them to set off down the wrong road towards batshit insanity – could their allies and friends see that switch and find a way to get them off that path before it is too late?