Assignment Question

Write a well thought out and edited essay that explains the readings provided by answering the following questions: 1) definition(s) of justice 2) what is the main thesis of the reading 3) what concepts are being used in the reading 4) evidence used to support your main thesis 5) connect the reading to other current related issues in the world NOTE: This is not an opinion essay or an unloading of random thoughts. Instead, the essay should engage each of the five elements outlined above. Book: Kathleen Belew, “Bring the War Home: The White Power Movement and Paramilitary America”, pp. 1-54

Assignment Answer

Introduction

Kathleen Belew’s book, “Bring the War Home: The White Power Movement and Paramilitary America,” delves into the history of the white power movement in the United States between 1979 and 1995. Belew’s work offers a critical examination of the movement, challenging the prevalent “lone wolf” narrative surrounding it. This essay will provide a comprehensive analysis of the readings from pages 1-54, focusing on the definition of justice, the main thesis, key concepts, the evidence used to support the thesis, and the connection of the reading to current issues in the world.

Definition(s) of Justice

Justice, as explored in Belew’s work, is multifaceted and often entwined with the actions and motivations of the white power movement. In the context of this reading, justice encompasses both the pursuit of racial supremacy and the movement’s violent actions aimed at achieving their goals. It also involves examining the response of law enforcement and the legal system to the movement’s activities, highlighting the concept of justice as a societal construct shaped by both official institutions and the ideologies of the movement.

Justice, in this context, pertains to the movement’s perception of rectifying what they see as a wronged society. It is the notion that justice is served by taking matters into their own hands, often in violent and extreme ways, to restore their vision of a racially pure society. In contrast, justice, as understood by law enforcement and the legal system, involves upholding the rule of law and protecting the rights and safety of all citizens. This dichotomy between the two interpretations of justice is a central theme in Belew’s analysis.

Main Thesis of the Reading

The main thesis of the reading is that the white power movement in the United States is a real and organized social movement with a historical context and a strategic approach to achieving its objectives. Belew argues that the movement’s reliance on decentralized, cell-style organizing challenges the conventional narrative of isolated “lone wolves” and presents a far more complex and coordinated phenomenon. This decentralized approach, combined with the promise of violence, is central to the movement’s cohesion and impact on society.

Belew’s main thesis underscores the urgency of understanding the white power movement as a structured and organized entity rather than dismissing it as a collection of disconnected individuals. It emphasizes the need to recognize the movement’s historical roots and strategic objectives, shedding light on the broader implications of its actions on American society.

Concepts Used in the Reading

Several key concepts are employed throughout the reading, shedding light on the white power movement’s dynamics. These concepts include:

Violent Community Formation: Belew introduces the notion of “violent community formation” to describe the process through which various extremist factions, such as the Klan, militias, and neo-Nazis, were brought together under the white power movement (Belew 34). This concept underscores the movement’s focus on violence as a unifying force.

The concept of violent community formation is crucial in understanding the mechanics of the white power movement. It suggests that violence was not just a byproduct but rather a central element in the amalgamation of various extremist groups into a cohesive force. The movement’s ability to unite individuals with disparate ideologies under the banner of violence reveals a calculated strategy aimed at achieving its goals.

Revolutionary Violence vs. Vigilante Violence: Belew distinguishes between revolutionary violence, which aims to overthrow the state, and vigilante violence, which serves to maintain systemic power (Belew 106). This differentiation is essential in understanding the movement’s ultimate goal of undermining the federal government.

This distinction between revolutionary and vigilante violence highlights the movement’s multifaceted nature. The white power movement not only seeks to maintain its vision of racial supremacy but also harbors ambitions to dismantle the existing power structure in the United States. This concept provides insight into the movement’s long-term objectives and its willingness to resort to violence to achieve them.

Formation of the White Power Movement: The reading explores the early years of the white power movement, linking its emergence to the Vietnam War, racial violence, and socioeconomic changes in the 1970s (Belew 20). The concept of “formation” is crucial in tracing the movement’s roots and motivations.

Understanding the formation of the white power movement is essential for grasping its historical context. The movement’s origins in the 1970s are intricately connected to the sociopolitical landscape of the time, marked by the Vietnam War, racial tensions, and economic challenges. This concept underscores the complex interplay of factors that contributed to the movement’s rise.

Evidence Supporting the Main Thesis

Belew provides a wealth of evidence to support her main thesis. She draws from extensive archival research, historical accounts, and primary sources, including the writings and actions of key figures within the white power movement. Examples include:

Paramilitary Training Camps: The author presents the establishment of paramilitary training camps by white power activists. These camps, based on combat experiences in Vietnam, aimed to prepare members for an eventual “race war” and the overthrow of the government (Belew 37).

The existence of paramilitary training camps serves as concrete evidence of the white power movement’s structured approach to achieving its goals. These camps, with their rigorous training and focus on violence, demonstrate the movement’s commitment to organized preparation for a violent confrontation. The training was not an isolated endeavor but an integral part of the movement’s strategy.

Mercenaries and Government Support: Belew explores the involvement of white power activists, such as Tom Posey, in mercenary activities funded by the CIA (Belew 78). This connection between the government and the movement highlights the movement’s deeper reach.

The involvement of white power activists in mercenary activities, supported by government agencies, underscores the movement’s ties to powerful entities. This evidence suggests that the movement was not operating in isolation but had connections that extended beyond its extremist ideologies. The collaboration with government-supported mercenary activities reveals a level of coordination that challenges the lone wolf narrative.

Violent Acts: The reading details various violent incidents, including the Greensboro massacre, Klan Border Watch patrols, and terrorizing of Vietnamese refugees (Belew 45). These actions exemplify the movement’s commitment to violence as a means of advancing its goals.

The documentation of violent acts carried out by white power activists serves as tangible evidence of the movement’s dedication to violence as a tool for achieving its objectives. These actions are not isolated incidents but part of a broader pattern of violence that defines the movement’s activities. This evidence substantiates Belew’s thesis regarding the movement’s reliance on violence.

Oklahoma City Bombing: Belew’s account of the Oklahoma City bombing, orchestrated by Timothy McVeigh, Terry Nichols, and Michael Fortier, serves as a culmination of the movement’s violent activities (Belew 221). The bombing’s tragic consequences underscore the movement’s real-world impact.

The Oklahoma City bombing is a tragic and impactful event that provides a concrete illustration of the white power movement’s ability to carry out devastating acts of violence. This incident represents a culmination of the movement’s activities and the consequences of its violent ideology. It serves as a powerful example of the real-world implications of the movement’s actions.

Connection to Current Issues

The white power movement’s history, as illuminated in Belew’s work, resonates with contemporary issues related to extremism, domestic terrorism, and law enforcement’s response to such threats. The decentralized, cell-style organizing tactics used by the movement have implications for understanding the rise of extremist groups in the digital age, where online platforms facilitate radicalization and coordination.

The contemporary relevance of the white power movement’s organizational tactics cannot be ignored. In the digital age, extremist groups can leverage online platforms and social media to recruit and coordinate their activities. The movement’s use of cell-style organizing serves as a precursor to the challenges faced by law enforcement agencies in identifying and countering extremist networks operating in the shadows of the internet.

Furthermore, the concept of “violent community formation” and the movement’s emphasis on violence as a unifying force can be linked to the challenges of combating hate groups in today’s society. Law enforcement agencies continue to grapple with identifying and countering extremist networks that operate under the radar.

The concept of “violent community formation” sheds light on the process by which individuals with extremist ideologies are brought together through the promise of violence. This concept is relevant in the context of contemporary efforts to understand and combat hate groups and domestic terrorists. It highlights the importance of recognizing the patterns of radicalization and cohesion that lead to the formation of such communities.

The reading also underscores the importance of recognizing and addressing the ideological underpinnings of such movements, as they remain relevant in the context of contemporary debates about racial supremacy, hate crimes, and the role of extremist ideologies in domestic security.

The white power movement’s historical context and ideological foundations have lasting implications for contemporary issues. The movement’s commitment to violence, its structured approach to organizing, and its ability to bring together disparate extremist factions serve as cautionary examples for addressing the challenges of extremism and domestic terrorism in today’s world.

Conclusion

Kathleen Belew’s exploration of the white power movement in “Bring the War Home” offers valuable insights into a dark chapter of American history. This analysis has examined the definition of justice, the main thesis of the reading, key concepts, evidence supporting the thesis, and the reading’s connection to current issues. It highlights the significance of understanding the white power movement as a structured and organized entity rather than dismissing it as a collection of disconnected individuals. It emphasizes the need to recognize the movement’s historical roots and strategic objectives, shedding light on the broader implications of its actions on American society.

The white power movement’s history, as presented by Belew, serves as a critical lesson in understanding the dynamics of extremist movements and the challenges they pose to law enforcement and societal security. It underscores the importance of addressing the ideological underpinnings of such movements and the need for a comprehensive approach to countering domestic extremism. As the world continues to grapple with issues related to extremism, terrorism, and hate crimes, Belew’s work reminds us of the enduring relevance of historical context and organized strategies in confronting these challenges.

Works Cited

Belew, Kathleen. “Bring the War Home: The White Power Movement and Paramilitary America.” Harvard University Press, 2018.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: What is the main focus of Kathleen Belew’s book, “Bring the War Home”?

A: Kathleen Belew’s book primarily focuses on the white power movement in the United States between 1979 and 1995, examining its historical context and organizational strategies.

Q: How does Belew define justice within the context of the white power movement?

A: Justice, as explored in the reading, encompasses both the pursuit of racial supremacy and the movement’s violent actions aimed at achieving their goals. It also involves examining the response of law enforcement and the legal system to the movement’s activities.

Q: What is the main thesis of the reading?

A: The main thesis of the reading is that the white power movement in the United States is a real and organized social movement with a historical context and a strategic approach to achieving its objectives.

Q: What evidence does Belew provide to support her main thesis?

A: Belew draws from extensive archival research, historical accounts, and primary sources, including the writings and actions of key figures within the white power movement. The evidence includes the establishment of paramilitary training camps, government support for mercenaries, documentation of violent acts, and the Oklahoma City bombing.

Q: How does the reading connect to current issues in the world?

A: The reading highlights the contemporary relevance of the white power movement’s organizational tactics in understanding the rise of extremist groups in the digital age. It also underscores the challenges of combating hate groups and domestic terrorists, emphasizing the importance of recognizing patterns of radicalization and cohesion that lead to the formation of such communities.