Customer Reviews

American Militias: Rebellion, Racism & Religion

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

First, let me state that I am not a racist nor a member of any militia or neo-nazi group. I never have been and never will be.
I read this book by Abanes and Innis soon after it came out. It was during the time in the early 90's when the issue of militias was a hot topic and I was doing research for a novel about militias. I had read a lot of primary sources during my research and was shocked at the lack of primary sources sited in American Militias: Rebellion, Racism & Religion. The vast majority of quotes and sited sources were secondary, and at great conflict with what I found in my research. Most of these authors' sources were organizations that can only be described far left in political orientation. Sources found on either extreme of the political yard stick should never be used as sources when primary sources are available. They lack objectivity and tend to discredit one's work. I don't know if the authors' dependence upon biased sources was an indication of their own political bias, the result of laziness, or an attempt to rush a hot topic book to a publisher. Whatever the reason, I found the book to be highly biased, lacking in objectivity (read having an agenda), and poorly researched.
I'm not saying there is no value in the book. But, I would say read it if you want to study how not to properly research a topic but still "look" credible.

This book can best be judged (prior to reading it) by theinarticulate and wrong-headed criticism it takes here in Amazon.com bythose with an obvious pro-militia bias. Where Abanes reaches rational conclusions and then supports them with numerous cites, quotes, etc (roughly 60 pages of notes citing sources and quotes), his critics call him "lazy" or claim that he is a "liar." Of course these opponents fail to do more than snipe. Abanes has laid out his path for all to examine how he has reached his conclussions, which is far more than what his critics have provided.

When his detractors attempt to articulate a criticism, they get their facts wrong.

Abanes' work is thorough, well-reasoned and supported. I found his coverage of "religion," such as Christian Identity, and it's role in some militia groups fascinating. His chronology of Jewish persecution and the role that some militia goups have played in this history was valuable as well.

There is much good to say about this book, not least of which is my opinion that it will increase one's interest in the subject and inspire even more study. Unlike some of Abanes' critics, I believe that inquiry is a good thing. Do read this book, regardless of your beliefs concerning militias.

This book can be used as a sourcebook for material on both the militia movement and various racist groups, but like many other such books, it has an agenda of trying to lump the two distinct and opposed movements in order to discredit the militia movement. An example of the way the author pursues this agenda can be found on page 181, in a section on the racist Louis Beam. He references an article written by Beam calling for "leaderless resistance", then quotes the Militia Day Proclamation of 1994, without citing its author, which also discusses leaderless resistance, and says it "makes a clear reference to Beam's organizational structure". Well, I am the author of the Militia Day Proclamation, and at the time I had never heard of Beam, read any of his writings, or read any other racist literature of this kind. My discussion of the idea was based on a knowledge of the history of various resistance movements, especially the French Resistance to German occupation during World War II and various resistance efforts in the Soviet Union. Presumably Beam got the idea from a study of the same historical efforts. Abanes could hardly be unaware of this historical background. It has been mentioned in numerous histories, novels, and movies. He is trying to make his readers believe that this shows the militia movement grew out of racism. Nothing could be further from the truth.

I recently read Abanes' American Militias: Rebellion, Racism, and Religion book and enjoyed it very much. In fact, it helped me to escape the trap of conspiracy theories that I was just entering into. I also liked how Abanes dismantled the Protocols plagiarism. Get your supremacist friends to read it. One critique though, Abanes fails to address Jesus' whipping of the money changers in his critique of the violent actions of conservative Christian extremists and White supremacists. That's my only criticism though.

I am constantly amazed at how members of the patriot / militia community who read my book "American Militias" are unable (or unwilling) to accurately represent the volume's contents. They consistently misquote, misinterpret, and misrepresent (perhaps deliberately) my position on the movement, the statements I make, and the book's overall theme. All of this is perfectly illustrated by the two online (amazon.com) reviews posted by persons who are part of the conspiracy-driven patriot/militia movement, which tends to draw individuals so paranoid that they can no longer use their powers of reason and logic. Apparently, they also cannot (or will not) accept the fact that there is anything wrong with their movement because this would threaten the psychological security/comfort it gives them in a world marked by uncertainty, fear, hopelessness, anger, and bitterness. In the first patriot review by Jon Rolands, who happens to be the founder of the Texas Militia, states that my book is "Propaganda attempting to discredit the militia movement -- This book can be used as a sourcebook for material on both the militia movement and various racist groups, but like many other such books, it has an agenda of trying to lump the two distinct and opposed movements in order to discredit the militia movement." In reality, my book proposes that there is both good and bad in the patriot/militia movement, which I define as an extremely diverse, loosely-connected movement that harbors many kinds of groups INCLUDES racists/anti-Semites. I even cite a John Birch Society article against racist Pete Peters in an effort to show: 1) that all patriot-related groups are not racist; and 2) that the John Birch Society, specifically, is not racist (p. 182). In order to clearly demonstrate that I see more than just racists in the militia movement, I quote a definition of the militia movement by Ridgeway and Zeskind which erroneously focuses entirely on racism. I respond to it by stating: "[T]his description does not adequately account for the many non-racists in the movement" (p. 9). I repeatedly stress that the patriot movement as a whole is NOT composed of racists. I actually commend some militias (p. 25). Consider also the following excerpts: * "[P]atriots appear to be no different than most other Americans who are tired of getting pushed and pulled by a federal government rife with red tape, two-faced bureaucrats and out-of-touch legislation. . . . Many patriots want only to return to a simpler era, one in which big government interfered very little in citizens' lives" (p. 8). * "According to Rick Donaldson, the patriot movement to which he belongs consists primarily of `middle class regulars . . . whose eyes mist up when they see the American flag.' These people simply want to understand why they can no longer maintain a comfortable standard of living. Their financial security has somehow disappeared overnight, along with any hope of enjoying the reward that every red-blooded American envisions: twilight years of bliss and contentment earned by a life of honest, hard work" (p. 10). * "The patriot movement consists largely of Americans who have simply reached the end of their rope." (pp. 18-19). Roland's review also mentions my discussion of "leaderless resistance" and then goes on to state that I build my entire case about the militia movement's origins around this one issue. Roland comments: "He is trying to make his readers believe that this shows the militia movement grew out of racism." Roland's assertion is simply untrue. I devote an entire chapter filled with numerous examples that show how the origins of the patriot/militia movement is inseparably linked to the white supremacist community. Roland understandably fails to mention all of my arguments. He also fails to admit the importance of Beam's teachings on "leaderless resistance" even though that particular philosophy of rebellion may have indeed originated from a time earlier. It is Beam, to a great extent, who has popularized it in the far right community. It is not surprising that Roland would seek to discredit my book. It is his agenda to further his own conspiracy theories about the New World Order, black helicopters, concentration camps, and other bizarre ideas. He, of course, knows that such issues sound rather oddball. Consequently, he has advised his fellow patriots to stay away from these topics when seeking to make converts to the movement. In one E-mail message, for instance, he wrote these instructions: "Forget all the rhetoric about foreign troops, New World Order and all the rest of the stuff that sounds bizarre to ordinary Americans . . . . Stick to the basics and hammer it over and over: corruption and abuse . . . corruption and abuse." In my opinion, Roland does not like my book because it discusses these "bizarre" patriot/militia ideas in-depth and lays them out for all the world to see. Amazon.com also received a review from a patriot so paranoid that he/she would not even give their E-mail address or the state from which they are writing. In reference to my book this patriot says: "This book is obviously another Anti-American, Anti-Militia smear job." Actually, I not only criticize the militias, but I also condemn the government (pp. 13-14, 17-19, 227, 228), especially for its outrageous conduct at Ruby Ridge and Waco (pp. 47-49, 60-61). As early as my introduction I state: "Making the current situation even worse has been the government's refusal to ease the justifiable fears and frustrations of patriots" (p. 4). This confused review goes on to say: "Old Anti-Semetic stories are used to trash the descendants of brave American patriots who saved Jewish people from extinction during WWII by defeating Adolf Hitler." In all honesty, I have no idea what this statement is referring to. I don't even mention patriots saving Jews in WWII, let alone criticize them. This patriot's inability to clearly reason is obvious in the following accusation: "If anything Mr. Abanes, you're perpetuating Anti-Semitism by using it as a propaganda weapon in the first place." If I am an anti-Semite, then perhaps this patriot should alert the well-known Simon Wiesenthal Center / Holocaust Museam in Los Angeles, an organization that has not only endorsed my book, but has had me as a guest speaker twice! The review ends by stating: "For all patriots reading this, avoid this book at all costs, it is a brainwashing tool of the NWO." Thus we receive the foundational philosophy of the patriot / militia movement - DON'T THINK, DON'T READ ANYTHING CONTRARY TO WHAT YUO'VE LEARNED FOM MILITIA LITERATURE, AND AVOID ANYONE OR ANYTHING THAT DISAGREES WITH YOU. (The paranoia is so thick you can cut it with a knife.) In conclusion, "American Militias" is a 296-page book containing 1,421 endnotes, most of which are primary documents of patriot/militia groups, Christians, conservatives, and racist/anti-Semites. I let the patriots speak for themselves about what they do and do not believe. Historical facts show how the movement began and why it has engulfed so many communities. The documentation is there for all to see. Check it out and form your own opinion. --Richard Abanes/ author, "American Militias"

For decades, the government has had agendas. Controlling the public is only one of them. All it takes is for a few people to say something is immoral and illegal and if anyone does such an act...shame on you!!! If that statement goes national, then, everyone all of a sudden starts to question their own mindset and will gladly give in to the whim in order to take off the newfound label of "criminal". The right to bear arms is being attacked by the same method. Freedom of religion is right up there with it too. It seems that most that lean to the hard left are the ones trying to change the constitution to suit their beliefs which are usually emotionally driven by personal experience of either themself or a friend. Never lean on emotion as a cruth. Decissions get dealt foolishly and logic plays no apparent role. When the consequence hits the fan, there will be no one else to blame for such ignorant deployment. CHeck the ratings for gun control as a matter of fact. The less restricted a state is, the less crime you have to put up with. It only makes sence. If anyone from your uncle, neighbor, store clerk, gas station attendent to your granny is able pack a firearm there is proof that it detours would-be criminals t orethink the attempt. There has been proof that some militia members came forward and revealed government tyranny from under the blackness and they "suspiciously" die within a mere couple of months. Hmmm. Now why would that happen? Would that kind of thing happen because the people were lying? NO! Even if the government feared these peoples' beliefs, they had no right to start a war with them in such a misled manner. I may not agree with what the members do in their privacy (molest children in the name of "religion" and such), and I firmly believe that should be handled like any crime would have been handled. But...to eliminate such a source using deception and media support to cover a mistake is disgusting on their part. How could you trust them when this is a repeat offence on their part. CIA cover ups in the 70s is a start. Also, not every militia group is racist. From studies I have read into, alot of the groups accept people of color. There are quite a number of people that belong to these groups from many races and walks of life. I for one have no interest in becoming a member of any militia group, but am an open-minded individual with an unbiased view. When I see bias, it must be scrutinized and dissected. All this reveiw is doing is putting some ballance into the equation where few are terrified to step in due to possible repercussion from the dreaded "Neo-Con", "Liberal scholar" or government backer. Most of these "government influenced" books are non-fiction at best and poorly researched by individuals with a pre-judged bias. They feel there will be immediate support for their cause so there should be no need of unbiased circulation digs. It is up to everyone to do their own research and not just let a slanted author tell you what to believe. You will be decieved and you will follow them blindly unless you become more aware of your current government's accountability! Be cautious.

Abanes makes fun of serious people he describes as stupids, dummies. He completely ignores the issues that are at stake. I recommend instead books such as Why Race matters (by Michael Levin), Duke's My Awakening, The Descent of Man (by Darwin), Mein Kampf, The Real American Dilemma: Race, Immigration, and the Future of America (by Jared Taylor.)

Richard Abane's contribution, "patriot" reviewers notwithstanding, is an excellent addition to the current spate of books on right-wing extremism, especially as it relates to religious groups and militias. To not understand the religious underpinnings of many of today's "patriot" extremists, is to miss the boat on where such ideology comes from and where it is going. Abanes's book relates how, in many cases, sincere Americans have become duped by religious bigots, posing as Christians, only to find themselves involved in quasi-paramilitary or anti-government activities that may lead down a path to violence and jail. I highly recommend this book to clergy, journalists, law enforcement and educators.

As one has come to expect from Richard Abanes, this work is nothing short of superb. It is an easy read and at the same time could (should) be used in seminars on both the undergraduate and graduate level. It has been said that the greatness of a man can be measured by his enemies: well, Mr. Abanes has made enemies of the conspiracy buffs, militia members, New World Order paranoids,and just about every other right-wing fringe group out there. I suspect his critics scarcely have an high school diploma among them and are, sadly, suckered into this philosophy of hate. Way to go, Richard, keep up the Good Work!