Whites-Only Community Plots/Plans Expansion to Other States as They Build a ‘pure white nation state’

army judge

Super Moderator


1753449044312.png
Return to the Land co-founder Eric Orwoll

A far-right ethnonationalist group that has set up a "whites-only" community in a remote part of the Ozarks in northeastern Arkansas is reportedly exploring the possibility of expanding north into Missouri.


Return to the Land (RTTL), which describes itself as a private membership association (PMA) for individuals with "traditional views and European ancestry," opened its first community in Arkansas in October 2023 and is now considering entering a second state, likely near Springfield, according to NBC's regional affiliate KSNT.

The group is opposed to mass immigration, multiculturalism and "forced integration" and reportedly does not welcome non-white, non-Christian or LGBT+ people, explaining that its members are seeking to "separate ourselves from a failing modern society" and return to pastoral living.

"You want a white nation? Build a white town?" RTTL's co-founder Eric Orwoll asks in an X video promoting the initiative. "It can be done. We're doing it."

RTTL's flagship community spans approximately 150 acres of land, is home to 40 inhabitants, and features its own cabins, roads, wells, a community center, and a schoolhouse.

It was followed by a second site nearby that opened in January this year, with the group listing a further Ozarks site as upcoming and aspirations to move into the Appalachian mountains on its website.

Speaking to Sky News journalist Tom Cheshire – who visited RTTL's first "fortress for the white race" and found a world of fresh goat's milk, flute recitals, family kickball games and creek swimming – Orwoll expressed a nostalgia for the America of the 17th century encountered by the Virginia settlers.

"I would probably feel more comfortable there because I'm white and that's the way this country was when my ancestors came there," he said, overlooking the Native Americans soon to be displaced by the colonists.

"Even if an individual has all the same values that I have, if they have an ethnic identity that other people share and care about, their children will also have that identity, and their children might not necessarily have all the same beliefs that they have."

On his ambitions for RTTL's expansion, he said: "I would like to have more communities so that people in all parts of the U.S. have this as an option if they want. I would also like us to network and branch out internationally."

Part of that branching out includes online fundraising campaigns, one of which seeks donations to enable the group to pay "cash rewards to parents of newborns as a means to incentivize population growth," which was halfway towards its modest $10,000 goal at the time of writing.

For a back-to-nature movement, RTTL is surprisingly active on social media, posting updates on the progress of its construction projects, wildlife photography, and even illustrations from children's books to promote its vision of rural idyll.

Orwoll – who frames the debate surrounding his project as a "First Amendment issue" and a "freedom issue" about "doing what we want on our own private land" – has invested tens of thousands of dollars into research on its legality.


 
They haven't been sued yet?

I suspect the "pure white leaders" were keeping a LOW profile, flying under the radar, until their leaders were bitten by the "publicity bug".

My "spidey" senses are tingling, because the state and federal government lawsuits will sooner or later begin.

That'll occur as soon as the local and national media outlets get wind of the story, and the left leaning "do gooders" light up the texting and mobile phone universe.

I bet that storm is brewing as I post my response.
 
They haven't been sued yet?

Not as far as I can tell, and the lawsuit would fail so long as the group remains private association. Tje lawsuits will start when the group starts to resemble a government or one of its members wants to sell their land to someone who isn't a white Christain and the group tries to prevent that sale. The Supreme Court has made it clear in a series of ruling that deed or contract restrictions based on race are not enforceable in court because of the express provisions against support of racial discrimination by the government set out in the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution and the various civil rights laws passed by Congress after the Civil War. Private individuals can decide to get together in an all White community if they want. But governments and businesses open to the public are not free to discriminate on the basis of race. That prohibition extends to the courts, which are government entities. As a result, courts may not enforce racially discriminatory contracts, deed restrictions, etc.
 

Ask a Question

Back
Top