For those who have read Patriots: Surviving the Coming Collapse

[redneckmedic]

Read the first few paragraphs of this review and tell me if you felt the same way about the book. I found this review particularly odd.

On Patriots - Surviving the Coming Collapse

we need to ensure that the perceptive white minority is not confused by hucksters wishing to make a quick buck while offering their own brand of rehashed “love thy mugger” sentiment.

A good friend of the family recently presented me with the book Patriots – Surviving the Coming Collapse – a novel of the turbulent near-future, by James Wesley, [sic] Rawles. It wasn’t too long ago that my friend could best be described as your basic, dyed-in-the-wool, Republican conservative. I will proudly take a bit of the credit for assisting him along the path towards his racial awakening. Loaning books to my friend from my own personal library - books such as The Culture of Critique, by Kevin MacDonald, The Holocaust Industry, by Norman Finkelstein, Which Way Western Man, by William Gayley Simpson and My Awakening, by Dr. David Duke – my friend has gone from very little understanding regarding matters concerning race and the destructive influence wrought by Jewish media control, to a much more appreciative and sophisticated view regarding many of the issues related to white survival.
I guess my friend just wanted to return the favor and share some of his reading material with my family. As he presented me with the book Patriots he lowered his voice to a near whisper and told me that Patriots should be anti-government enough to suit my tastes. At the time I didn’t have the heart to tell my friend that I’m not really anti-government per se, I’m just against our current racially destructive system. While I certainly don’t consider myself an authoritarian type, I also don’t count myself among the fundamentally selfish “down with authority” crowd one so often finds on the fringes of the right wing. You see, I happen to believe that a strong and centralized government is not necessarily a bad thing in and of itself. As long as that strong centralized government is not unnecessarily intrusive into the lives of its citizens; as long as that government allows for individual achievement, and respects the inalienable rights of the individual, then I have no problem with a strong and centralized government in a modern and orderly, white society.
I graciously accepted my friend’s gift of the book, Patriots, and I commenced reading the book almost immediately. It took me a couple of nights to finish reading the book. Before setting the book down and turning off my reading lamp I looked over to my wife and told her that, in the future, I really needed to do a much better job at building understanding.
Now I just needed to find a polite way to tell my friend that Rawles’ book is seriously flawed; his world view, if one can even call it that, is self-serving, sophomoric, and completely unworkable.
From page 340 of the book Patriots – Surviving the Coming Collapse, and I quote: “The Dunlaps invited Teesha and me out to Troy for a two-week visit the summer before the Crash. It was an extension of our honeymoon trip to Yellowstone. It was kind of funny when we got there to Roger’s ranch. You see we had never met face-to-face, or even spoken on the phone – everything was by e-mail, you see – so none of the Templars realized that we were black folks. Roger just said ‘Hey, cyberspace is color blind, and so am I. Welcome!” End quote.
Now I’m not going to waste a whole lot of time criticizing the author’s rampant use of poor grammar or repeatedly chastise him for improper sentence structure, but I will mention that these numerous mistakes do, at times, make for a difficult read.

 

[Armed & Christian]

 

[Ramen]

It sounds like the totalitarian, white supremacist doesn't like other "non-white" people.

 

[flagtag]

I think the person giving the "review" of the book has a problem.
(Seeing things where they don't exist.)

 

[SouthportAce]

Hi all, longtime lurker, first time poster.

I've read the book - I liked it. Like flagtag said above, the "reviewer" of the book is trying to interject race into a book that has nothing to do with race.

 

[Cpt Caveman]

Liked the book and loaned it to a white separatist-type acquaintance of mine. Can't say it changed his mind but might have heaped some coals on his head.

 

[TheDude]

I think the person giving the "review" of the book has a problem.
(Seeing things where they don't exist.)

This seems common on race isssues.

 

[redneckmedic]

I think the person giving the "review" of the book has a problem.
(Seeing things where they don't exist.)

Agreed, thought maybe I missed something to begin with.

Hi all, longtime lurker, first time poster.

I've read the book - I liked it. Like flagtag said above, the "reviewer" of the book is trying to interject race into a book that has nothing to do with race.

2

 

[teh Nub]

My boss loaned me the book and I have read up to chapter 4 and don't feel like the book has anything to do with race, although there was no tin-foil hat included and I was too lazy to make my own so my perception may have been brain washed...

 

[inxs]

I think the quote form the book was intentionally there to preclude any racist interpretation. My problem with the book is that there are some glaring inaccuracies---

 

[redneckpastor]

Reading the book and enjoy it, don't seem to mind the poor grammar maybe because i don't notice it

 

[redneckmedic]

I think the quote form the book was intentionally there to preclude any racist interpretation. My problem with the book is that there are some glaring inaccuracies---

Please expand on this...

 

[HICKMAN]

we're all racist for believing in the Constitution, didn't you all know that?

 

[kycrawler]

It is a fiction book not a step by step instruction manual . Take from it what you will ignore what you wish . Maybe someone will open there eyes just a little bacause of jims book

 

[duke]

I thought it was a good book, but agree it was a bit repetative and in-your-face with the religion. It's a fun "what if," or "prepare now" type of read. However I feel that 'One Second After' is much better.

I don't think there was any racism in the book though. People will see what they want to.

 

[HICKMAN]

I get a laugh sometimes when "preppers/hunters/gunowners" get lumped in to a group and somehow we're racist. Yes, the majority of the above are white, but there are many minorities that do the same.

It would be like calling the NBA racist because the majority of the players are black. I get a kick out of hearing the term "separatist" when you have the NAACP, Black Expo, Ms Black America, Black Churches, etc.

I my mind, racism won't end until we drop all of the crap titles and just act like human beings.

 

[Dr Falken]

Well I think that "Patriots" isn't racisct. I think that Rawles makes an effort in his book to include other races(black) and extend an olive branch in that regards. Some of it does seem a little contrived though.

The reviewer was definately come from some "white-fill in blank" perspective. I don't think any of this detracted from the book. I'm currently re-reading it for the third time.

 

[jdhaines]

I thought it was a decently entertaining fiction book that taught me a few things along the way. It had only two parts that bothered me a bit. Maybe I'm a bit picky.

1) The constant use of antiquated weapons and techniques. He seems to push the point that you need an AR-15 (or clone) as an assault rifle, an m14 for a main battle rifle, and a colt .45 (or clone) for sidearm or else you aren't fit for protection of yourself or anyone else. Also, and this was more in the screenplay, the blatant plugs for gunsight/frontsight/old school modern technique training schools. *Yes I realize there were other guns in the book, but every other line seemed to be "grabbed my CAR-15 etc."*

2) The common framing of the mindset "We are Christians therefore we must do what's right" rather than lets do what's right because it is what's right. The parts where they search everyone and DON'T steal there stuff is explained like we would have taken everything if we weren't Christians...but since we are we will give it back. *Not trying to start a religious debate, just simply stating that that particular mindset bothers me some.*

 

[Armed & Christian]

In my mind, racism won't end until we drop all of the crap titles and just act like human beings.

Amen.

 

[flagtag]

I thought it was a decently entertaining fiction book that taught me a few things along the way. It had only two parts that bothered me a bit. Maybe I'm a bit picky.

1) The constant use of antiquated weapons and techniques. He seems to push the point that you need an AR-15 (or clone) as an assault rifle, an m14 for a main battle rifle, and a colt .45 (or clone) for sidearm or else you aren't fit for protection of yourself or anyone else. Also, and this was more in the screenplay, the blatant plugs for gunsight/frontsight/old school modern technique training schools. *Yes I realize there were other guns in the book, but every other line seemed to be "grabbed my CAR-15 etc."*

2) The common framing of the mindset "We are Christians therefore we must do what's right" rather than lets do what's right because it is what's right. The parts where they search everyone and DON'T steal there stuff is explained like we would have taken everything if we weren't Christians...but since we are we will give it back. *Not trying to start a religious debate, just simply stating that that particular mindset bothers me some.*

It's not the "Christian" reason for doing what is right that bothered me about the "searches" - it was the searches themselves.

I wouldn't care what excuse someone used to do so, I would not allow them to violate my privacy (and the Constitution) and search my stuff. And if they forced the issue at the point of a gun, why should anyone beleive they aren't thieves? I would resist. Probably by telling them to go to Hell while I kept walking. They would have to shoot (murder) me to get their way. Would they? (You might have guessed, I don't like bullies!)

Yes, if it was a private road (was it marked?), they would have a right to determine if I was up to no good, question me, and maybe order me to retrace my steps to get off the property, or even escort me to the closest property line, but no illegal detention and/or searches.

That part of the book really bothered me.