Print this post Print this post

Implicit Whiteness & the Republicans

1,584 words

Translations: FrenchGerman

Kevin MacDonald’s work on the concept of “implicit whiteness” in his essay “Psychology and White Ethnocentrism” is a major breakthrough for White Nationalism. Ethnocentrism—usually stigmatized as “xenophobia” and “racism”— is a preference to be around genetically similar people. Anti-ethnocentrism—a preference for people unlike ourselves—is sold today as “diversity,” the secret ingredient that adds “strength” wherever it is found.

According to MacDonald, ethnocentrism is a natural phenomenon, hard-wired into the oldest and deepest levels of the brain. Anti-ethnocentrism, however, exists as a conscious moral conviction. From a psychological point of view, therefore, anti-ethnocentrism is relatively superficial, even though it currently dominates our culture and politics.

Anti-ethnocentrism is dominant because its advocates control the forces that shape our explicit consciousness: education, the arts, the news and entertainment media. But unconscious ethnocentrism persists and can never be extirpated because it is hard-wired into the brain.

Thus when leftists accuse whites of “unconscious” racism, they are correct. Unconscious white ethnocentrism manifests itself in affiliation patterns. In particular, MacDonald cites country music, NASCAR, and the Republican Party as foci of implicitly white affiliation.

But because ethnocentrism is hard-wired, anti-racists can’t really do anything about it. At best, anti-racist “consciousness raising” can only institute a permanent state of inner psychological conflict.

The leftists thought that by controlling the explicit culture, they could eliminate ethnocentrism once and for all. But they can’t. They can only create a psychologically draining conflict between our conscious convictions and our conscious instincts. And they can never rest, because if they let up on the conditioning for just a minute, they may see all their gains—and all their power—swept away.

Contrary to enemy propaganda, ethnocentrism is a perfectly normal and healthy psychological trait. A racially aware individual who consciously believes that his ethnocentric instincts are morally right, enjoys inner psychological harmony, the peace of mind that is denied to anti-racists, who exist in a constant state of inner conflict between their natural instincts and their unnatural moral convictions.

Anti-racists are, in a real sense, mentally ill, whereas those of us who are self-consciously and proudly ethnocentric are mentally healthy (at least in that respect). And, because so much of the mental energy of anti-racists is drained away in internal conflict, other things being equal, we “racists” are stronger, happier, and more capable of transforming the world.

Thus MacDonald’s research is cause for hope:

1. The left cannot win, because they can only control our conscious convictions but not our unconscious instincts.

2. Nature is on our side, because in their hearts, people want what we want.

3. Time is on our side, because anti-racism introduces internal psychological conflicts that are bound to be debilitating over the long run.

What is the path to racial salvation? Ultimately, it is a metapolitical struggle to gain control of the forces that shape people’s conscious convictions about what is right. Once we can bring people’s conscious convictions in line with their deepest instincts, the resistance to the political changes we seek will fall as a matter of course.

Unfortunately, the import of MacDonald’s research is often misunderstood when applied to party politics. The euphoric reaction of some White Nationalists to the Republican gains in the recent midterm elections is a case in point. White Nationalists are claiming that “we” have taken control of the House, that “we” have made significant progress toward immigration restriction, that “whites” are taking our country back.

White Nationalists were, of course, mostly spectators in the last election. “We” White Nationalists did not take control of the House, the Republicans did. So this talk about what “we” won is based on the power of make believe, in exactly the same way that a Giants fan says that “we” won the World Series. Fans form an imaginative identification with “their” team and vicariously experience their triumphs and tragedies as their own.

Boys will be boys

I have seen obese couch potatoes pantomiming touchdowns and toddling around beer sodden rec rooms in victory laps, pumping their fists in the air as if they were star athletes. I have seen rock concerts where countless teenage boys, bombed out of their minds, play air guitar and feel like the crowd is cheering for them. In men, testosterone production actually rises and falls based on the performance of their sports teams. It may be good, clean fun. But it is not the foundation of sober political analysis.

The misuse of the idea of “implicit whiteness” is another factor contributing to giddiness about the Republicans and the Tea Party. Yes, the Republicans may be benefitting from implicit ethnocentrism on the part of Whites, but that is a far cry from explicit White Nationalists enjoying any sort of political power or influence.

First of all, the fact that Republican voters may be motivated by unconscious ethnocentrism does not imply that they are receptive to explicit White Nationalism. Most Republicans would vehemently reject the “accusation” that they have any racial fellow-feeling at all. Yes, this resistance to white racial consciousness is waning, partly because it is just tiring to fight against one’s natural instincts, and partly because White Nationalists are slowly getting our message out through the internet and through personal interactions. But we have a long metapolitical educational process ahead of us before we can turn implicit whiteness into widespread explicit whiteness.

Second, the fact that Republican voters may be motivated by implicit racial consciousness does not mean that Republican politicians will serve white interests. Quite the contrary, they would be the first to deny any hint of racism. They would deny it strenuously.

Republicans have a long history of taking the money, efforts, and votes of explicitly conservative and pro-life voters . . . and then betraying them. Why, then, would one expect them to be responsive to the merely implicit racial consciousness of white voters—many of whom would deny they are racially conscious altogether?

The sad truth is that Republicans will not cater to the interests of whites even out of the “base” motive of self-preservation. In their hearts, Republicans know that their party is doomed by the rising tide of color. But they will do anything rather than admit this fact and work to preserve the white majority.

Just as their corporate masters are committed to the racial replacement of white workers, Republicans are committed to the racial replacement of white voters by winning the votes of responsible, hard-working blacks and browns. Sure, most of them know it is a pipe dream. But they are more afraid of being called racists today than of their party disappearing in a generation.

Other Republicans are committed to staving off political death through racial gerrymandering and ever more intense exploitation of the shrinking white voter base. They are praying for the left to rile up Republican voters by promoting further “progress” toward insanity: socialized medicine for pets, tax-funded sex change operations, the right to marry one’s pet, and the like. Republicans will do just about anything but speak the dreaded “W” word.

The barriers to moving the Republicans toward explicit whiteness can be appreciated with an analogy. Imagine an organization consisting largely of unmarried men that has an explicitly anti-homosexual culture yet a pattern of recruiting and promoting young men based largely on sex appeal. Such an organization could accurately be described as “implicitly” or “latently” homosexual. Would such an organization, therefore, be a likely ally for the homosexual lobby?

Of course not. Its members would frantically rebuff any proffered alliance. Individually, many of the members might be sympathetic. But any sympathies would be cancelled by fear of the disapproval of their peers, because status in the organization depends on conformity to the explicit culture, and those who dissent from the party line will be replaced by those who toe it.

The same is true of explicitly white Nationalists trying to reach out to latently white Republicans. Status in Republican circles depends on adherence to anti-racism (except, of course, in the case of Zionism, which must be subsidized with tax dollars). Even if every leading Republican felt, in the privacy of his or her own mind, that anti-racism is nonsense, what are the chances that they would all level with one another at the same time? Because if a courageous individual stuck his neck out on his own, he might find his honesty turned against him by somebody who believes the exact same thing but is more concerned with gaining advantage over him in a struggle for personal advancement.

In fact, I believe that White Nationalists are more likely to find allies on some issues among Black and Hispanic nationalist groups, since members of these organizations don’t need to constantly prove their anti-white credentials like Republicans do. And that is the full measure of Republican depravity.

As I have argued elsewhere, the 2010 Midterm elections turned out about as well as could be expected for White Nationalists, given that racially conscious whites are a tiny, despised, and almost voiceless minority. Let’s not forget that of the hundreds of candidates who ran, only Jim Russell in New York’s 18th district is an explicit advocate for white interests, and he lost by a landslide.

Kevin MacDonald’s work on implicit whiteness is a conceptual breakthrough for White Nationalism, a source of hope for the long run viability of our cause. But let’s not get carried away by elections. But there is still a vast gulf between implicit and explicit whiteness, a gulf that politics alone cannot bridge.

Source: The Occidental Observer, http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2010/11/gregory-johnson-implicit-whiteness-and-the-republicans/

If you enjoyed this piece, and wish to encourage more like it, give a tip through Paypal. You can earmark your tip directly to the author or translator, or you can put it in a general fund. (Be sure to specify which in the "Add special instructions to seller" box at Paypal.)
This entry was posted in North American New Right and tagged , , , , , , , , , , . Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

20 Comments

  1. Posted November 12, 2010 at 12:56 am | Permalink

    “In fact, I believe that White Nationalists are more likely to find allies on some issues among Black and Hispanic nationalist groups, since members of these organizations don’t need to constantly prove their anti-white credentials like Republicans do. And that is the full measure of Republican depravity.”

    That was a very bold statement and one I have waited a long time to read. There are many talented talented nationalist writers and thinkers in South America, I know, I spent much time there. I am really tired of all the ranting on WN sites proclaiming how stupid these people are. They are not, and certainly are allies in fighting Global Zionism. Good on you.

  2. Posted November 12, 2010 at 12:39 pm | Permalink

    There’s no point at all in any white American of being a “conservative”. As Uncle Covington states in a 7-minute YouTube surviving clip (the YT mafia has cancelled the YT Northwest account), “You cannot bring the Old America back by voting Republican. My God!… Quit screwing around with conservatives and accept the fact that only a Second American Revolutions holds out any hope for our people.”

  3. LSto
    Posted November 12, 2010 at 3:27 pm | Permalink

    It is obvious: The future is open to manipulation. Who will do the manipulating? Will it be the new elite on the side of an Establishment totalitarianism or the Left Wing elite? Whichever side wins-or whoever achieves political or cultural power in the future-will have at his disposal manipulations that no totalitarian ruler in the past has ever had. None of these are only future; they all exist today waiting to be used by the coming manipulators … Manipulation is on every side, and nowhere more so than in liberal theology and religion. Modern theology with its religious connotation words takes the words Christ or God or the other great Christian words and makes them a banner which has high motivation value but no content. The man who wishes to do the manipulation can simply grab the flag, march in the direction he wishes, and you are supposed to follow —The Church at the End of the 20th Century (1970) by Francis Schaeffer

  4. Captainchaos
    Posted November 13, 2010 at 5:52 am | Permalink

    “Boys will be boys”

    Is that guy pictured on the right Hunter Wallace on election night?

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted November 13, 2010 at 8:50 am | Permalink

      It is a History Channel reenactment.

  5. FORP
    Posted November 13, 2010 at 3:19 pm | Permalink

    Very powerful. The left, I think, is aware of natural racialist tendencies – they use the tactic of guilt to repress racial awareness in Whites – only Whites are viewed as dumb or evil for not being able to “overcome” their racialist tendencies. The superior man of the future is portrayed as someone with the intellect and capacity to overcome these base racist inner views. Hollywood will be working overtime to reinforce this if racialist views start popping up in online stories/videos that go viral.

    The fact that racial awareness is natural is very important for us in establishing a new spirituality/morality. Understanding our nature and articulating a system for living life in harmony with it is part of the process of dropping our reliance on other religions for morality and guidance in ethical, and even political, matters.

    Our new group of Republicans will be bought like all the others, and I do think the situation is worse because the Republicans have switched from being only able to block legislation, to now being in charge, in one chamber, of passing legislation. The pressure to compromise will be significant.

    When the Republicans were just blockers, we didn’t get immigration reform. Now that they can pass legislation, I’m sure we’ll get it.

    Due to interracial relationships, immigration and the power of the media, I’m not sure I can agree that time is on our side. The smaller we get relative to the non-White world, the harder it will be to stop the race mixing. The goal of the left is to remove the racial identity by not having a defined race (i.e. a world of mixed race people). Interracial relationships, I think, will only increase in rate so more and more Whites will be producing non-White children. That process is a killer.

    Japanese and Korean nationalists should be considered “allies” in the sense that they don’t want their countries ruined by immigration or free trade, and they are very aware racially. Hispanics of the Chavez-type of nationalism I wouldn’t trust, but those of the Pinochet-type I would.

    • LEW
      Posted November 14, 2010 at 3:04 pm | Permalink

      Pinochet had an advantage. He was in a position to speak the only language the Left understands.

  6. Posted November 13, 2010 at 3:50 pm | Permalink

    It doesn’t take a scientific study to tell people that they feel most comfortable with their own.
    It DOES take a scientific study to prove the myth of multiculturalism.
    Sad, isn’t it?

    http://malevolentfreedom.org/

  7. LSto
    Posted November 13, 2010 at 5:14 pm | Permalink

    Important White author’s 160th birthday today.

    Robert Louis Balfour Stevenson (13 November 1850 – 3 December 1894)

    When students are reading Stevenson, they’re not demoralizing their vitality with fantasy stories about Rosa Liar Parks and Michael King Fake Reverend.

  8. Sevec
    Posted November 13, 2010 at 5:23 pm | Permalink

    Whenever I see photos like this, I always wonder if they are implicit or explicit. Clearly, they all have benefited from thousands of years of good breeding, but do they make that distinction in their minds when they encounter a 21st century race reality that ever other tribe is trying to steal genes from their bloodlines? What will this same gathering look like in the next 50 years? How many mongrels?

    http://www.colfremantle.com/family_groups.html

  9. Uncle Fritz
    Posted November 14, 2010 at 4:10 am | Permalink

    Excellent article. Given one once promising WN blog’s rather abrupt (and not a little baffling) turn to the mainstream-middle in the run-up to this election, it is quite timely as well! The hallelujahs and hosannas over GOP victory now emanating from that quarter border on full-blown parody, so apparently intense and intoxicating is this new-found connection to mainstream America! As soon as the term “we” was pressed into service to describe this Republican surge, I lost all interest in what was being said on that site.

    • Posted November 14, 2010 at 5:42 pm | Permalink

      Uncle F: Click on my moniker and search to what “Lurker” said a couple of months ago in that once promising blog.

      • Uncle Fritz
        Posted November 16, 2010 at 9:55 am | Permalink

        Thanks for that link. Lurker and others obviously covered this quite well – nothing much more need be said. Apparently, the delusion has grown quite powerful now…

        • Posted November 16, 2010 at 11:56 am | Permalink

          I am tempted to quote from O’Meara’s pamphlet, which in my opinion is must-read for any nationalist (and I hope a White Nationalist Manifesto will be written soon).

          Meanwhile one should remember Linder’s acid test about whether a posture is white nationalist or not. It must be (1) explicitly racial, (2) it must name the Jew and (3) its ultimate goal must be an ethno-state.

          C-C, TOQ, OO and other blogs pass this test, but other blogs don’t. Now that I am reading the Northwest Quartet I wish those very young nationalists (I’m middle-aged) start reading it too. Instead, the young ones have gone astray…

          O’Meara wrote:

          What is to be done?

          The development of an alternative media, consciousness rising, various local activities to defend white interest must, to start, give no credence to the reformist snare that the system can be made receptive to white interests. This illusion is the greatest treason. For it is the system itself, communicating vessel of the Jews’ lunar spirit, that de-Aryanizes us, contaminates our blood, and seeks our destruction. It is the enemy. It cannot be reformed, only destroyed—if we are to live. All talk of working through it is but utopian chatter, better left to sheenies, darkies, and school teachers.



          The notion that racialists follow the Left’s Gramscian “march through the institutions” is equally unserious. Covington’s Northwest Volunteer Army is a hundred time more realistic than the thought of re-establishing the integrity of white life through elections or an expanded media.

    • White Upright
      Posted November 15, 2010 at 2:45 pm | Permalink

      H.R. Helper is definitely in the Pantheon of White Humanity, glorified within the Temple of White Expliciticity.

      Edmund Burke is firmly fixed there, as well. He added our greatest treasure to the Liturgy of Rightful Whiteness:

      “Many of our men of speculation, instead of exploding general prejudices, employ their sagacity to discover the latent wisdom which prevails in them. If they find what they seek, and they seldom fail, they think it more wise to continue the prejudice, with the reason involved, than to cast away the coat of prejudice, and to leave nothing but the naked reason; because prejudice, with its reason, has a motive to give action to that reason, and an affection which will give it permanence. Prejudice is of ready application in the emergency; it previously engages the mind in a steady course of wisdom and virtue, and does not leave the man hesitating in the moment of decision, skeptical, puzzled, and unresolved. Prejudice renders a man’s virtue his habit; and not a series of unconnected acts. Through just prejudice, his duty becomes a part of his nature.”

      Reflections on the Revolution in France

      And William Gayley Simpson’s Which Way Western Man? is so full of Explicit White Wisdom, that he, too, becomes White God to us. Unfortunately, his book is so big, that it intimidates most of those who should read it. We need a condensed version of just his quotations.

      Who has his obituary and knows where he’s buried?

  10. MaddyG
    Posted November 15, 2010 at 8:22 am | Permalink

    So, I went to one of these new community churches last night, hoping to find Whiteness. The church appeals to the hipsters and bopsters. Lots of talk about love and even sexual purity. The girls all had wide faces, and some were pretty. Where are our Nordics with lean faces and pure beauty? The music was Christian folk rock, and the girl who sang had such a pretty, soaring voice that I really did feel the emotion, but I didn’t stand in front of the stage and sway back and forth, do a little dancing jig while clasping my hands over my heart, or wave my hands in the air.

    But I did have a nice conversation with a pretty White girl, and a couple of things she said were uplifting.

    But they had too many blacks, so I didn’t really feel in the presence of the White Christ, my Lord and Savior.

    They brought one huge, coal black buck up front, and he spoke about his calling for mission work. Far too many Whites came down to lay their hands on him to pray for him. It was sickening.

    Then later, I saw my pretty White girl talking to him, and they were hugging. The music was blaring, so none of these race mixing Christians heard my stream of “g.d., g.d., g.d., g.d!!!”

    I felt violated and deeply offendend to my core. I know how the Southern Segregationists, the heroes of Christ’s Whiteness, felt when the blacks started swarming into their schools and restaurants.

    I was disgusted and heartbroken that White women don’t have enough self respect to not hug blacks in Christ’s church.

    But it’s all my fault. I live in a maj. black city, and decent Whites wouldn’t come here to live, anyway. What did I expect from an intown church? I was just hoping for Whiteness, and I should have expected none. But just seeing the revolting sexual integration up close was more than I could handle, so I left in a huff.

    Explicit Hinton Rowan Helper’s encountering blacks in a place they shouldn’t be set him off, as well, so I’m in good historical company. Read is intro of Negroes in Negroland- http://www.archive.org/details/negroesinnegrola00helpiala

    • MaddyG
      Posted November 15, 2010 at 8:43 am | Permalink

      Mr. Helper is as explicitly White as a White Man can be. In the Liturgical Rite of White Rightness, we often read aloud his account of an envigorating encounter with the Diversity Privileged blacks during Reconstruction:

      “Never will it be possible for the compiler to erase from his
      memory the feelings of weighty sadness and disgust which
      overcame him, a few months since, when, while sojourning
      in the city of Washington, he walked, one day, into the Cap-
      itol, and, leisurely passing into the galleries of the two houses
      of Congress, beheld there, uncouthly lounging and dozing
      upon the seats, a horde of vile, ignorant, and foul-scented
      negroes. He was perplexed, shocked, humiliated, and indig-
      nant, and could not sit down. With merited emotions of
      bitterness and contempt for those narrow-minded white men,
      through whose detestable folly and selfishness so great an
      outrage against public propriety and decency had been per-
      petrated, he turned away ; indeed, it was not in his power
      to contemplate with calmness that motley and monstrous
      manifestation of national incongruity, ugliness, and disgrace.
      Then it was that, for the first time in his life, he wished him-
      self a Hercules, in order that he might be able to clean,
      thoroughly and at once, those Augean stables of the black
      ordure and Radical filth which, therein and elsewhere, had
      already accumulated to an almost insufferable excess.”

      • Penelope Stayed True
        Posted November 15, 2010 at 7:46 pm | Permalink

        I like the Hinton Helper quotation, and will endeavor memorizing it. Shouldn’t be hard- he’s describing my own life in AfroTown.

        I particularly like his use of “insufferable excess”. My own version is “We suffer under a dangerous oversupply of blacks.” And I don’t say “blacks,” ef you know wha’ um say’n?

        Every time I read William Pierce, I and further strengthened in my commitment to help White Humanity.

        http://www.natvan.com/free-speech/fs993b.html

        Odysseus was an intact, resourceful, and heroic warrior. He wasn’t tainted by the feminists’ and Jews’ insistence that we live into the Sermon on the Mount. He knew what to do with the insufferable excess and dangerous oversupply of suitors in his own home. Penelope was a heroine to White Woman Worldwide. She stayed true to her White Man.

  11. Silver
    Posted November 29, 2010 at 11:05 pm | Permalink

    Greg, there’s no doubting you have clear-eyed perspective on the world. But amid all that lucidity it’s evident you still have your blinkers.

    A racially aware individual who consciously believes that his ethnocentric instincts are morally right, enjoys inner psychological harmony, the peace of mind that is denied to anti-racists, who exist in a constant state of inner conflict between their natural instincts and their unnatural moral convictions.

    There’s no necessary conflict between being “self-consciously and proudly ethnocentric” and “anti-racism.” You said yourself, “I really do hate other races” — can hatred really be reconciled with peace-of-mind? I can see no reason to think I’m any less racially/ethnocentrically conscious than you (albeit in a different direction) but this feeling simply isn’t accompanied by a sense of despair or loathing per se regarding other race kinds. The problems that arise from living nearby other racial kinds (ie those problems which can be directly associated with it) are, of course, still there, which is why I’ll occasionally make comments that one would typically associate with “hatred,” but on a deeper level there’s a serenity and acceptance that’s probably entirely unknown to the average white racial fundamentalist. The best evidence I can proffer to substantiate this is the easy attitude I have towards racial critiques of, and even rank racial animosity towards, my own kind, such as that on display in discussions like this one.

    The game-changing realization is that “it can’t last.” Multiracialism can’t last. It inevitably leads to mixing which leads to (at least) white extinction. And it’s because that process is accompanied by so little in the way of recompense (none whatsoever, to hear the hardliners tell it) that I agree it should be undone or reversed; whatever good could be claimed to have come from multiracialism, it’s not good enough to justify the price it ultimately exacts. Clearly for many this does (and will, increasingly) mean a lapse into a hard-edged “hatred,” but it doesn’t necessarily< have to. The process can be stopped and reversed and the best of what has been achieved from allowing (or pursuing) that process can be preserved. That is my ideal and an ideal I believe could be attractive to many others; certainly it stands in stark opposition to that which you uphold.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted November 30, 2010 at 1:28 am | Permalink

      (1) Jews are masters at combining ethnocentrism for them with anti-racism for others. Apparently an inner revulsion against hypocrisy has long ago been bred out of Jews. Christianity, exogamy, and other forms of apostasy provide an exit for those throwbacks who cannot tolerate hypocrisy.

      (2) I am free of inner psychological conflicts between my moral convictions and ethnocentric impulses. The conflict I feel with other races is not an “inner” psychological conflict. It is directed at people and situations in the real world.

  • Video of the Day:

  • Kindle Subscription
  • Our Titles

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    The Lightning and the Sun

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Forever and Ever

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles

    Demon

    Proofs of a Conspiracy

    Fascism viewed from the Right

    The Wagnerian Drama

    Fascism viewed from the Right

    Notes on the Third Reich

    Morning Crafts

    New Culture, New Right

    An eagle with a shield soaring upwards

    A Life in the Political Wilderness

    The Fourth Political Theory

    The Passing of the Great Race

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Fighting for the Essence

    The Arctic Home in the Vedas

    The Prison Notes

    It Cannot Be Stormed

    Revolution from Above

    The Proclamation of London

    Beyond Human Rights

    The WASP Question

    Can Life Prevail?

    The Jewish Strategy

    The Metaphysics of War

    A Handbook of Traditional Living

    The French Revolution in San Domingo

    The Revolt Against Civilization

    Why We Fight

    The Problem of Democracy

    The Path of Cinnabar

    Archeofuturism

    Tyr

    Siege

    On Being a Pagan

    The Lost Philosopher

    The Dispossessed Majority

    Might is Right

    Impeachment of Man

    Gold in the Furnace

    Defiance