Skip to main content

Gregory R. Johnson is a Seattle, Washington-based white nationalist vanguardist, author and activist. Johnson runs the white nationalist publishing outfit Counter-Currents Publishing, boasts a Ph.D. in philosophy from the Washington D.C.-based Catholic University of America and briefly served as a visiting professor at the Berkeley, California Pacific School of Religion in the early 2000s.[1] Johnson also served as editor of the white nationalist Occidental Quarterly before being fired in 2010 amidst a conflict with Georgia racist Sam Dickson.

Johnson boasts between 100,000 to 200,000 unique visitors to the Counter-Currents website monthly since mid-2015. In September 2019 Johnson claimed the site had more than 230,000 different visitors.[2]  Counter-Currents publishes and distributes a host of books on political and cultural topics of interest to white nationalists. Beginning in 2010, the reclusive Johnson began publishing some 40 to 90 articles a month through the outlet. Contemporary authors published on his site include such figures as French New Rightists Alain de Benoist and Guillame Faye, and American Freedom Party directors Kevin MacDonald and Tomislav Sunic, among many others.

“Classic authors” promoted by Counter-Currents include Francis Parker Yockey, the racist whose 1948 book Imperium inspired white nationalist mainstreamer Willis Carto, WWII-era British fascist Oswald Mosely, former brown-shirt-wearing British national socialist John Tyndall, and William Pierce, the deceased National Vanguard founder who led the way among early white nationalist vanguardists and whose Turner Diaries became the roadmap for the 1980s terror group, The Order.

Johnson is also the author of the not-so-subtly named 2018 book, The White Nationalist Manifesto. Johnson’s thoughts on the movement highlight how his strategies have been shaped by the European New Right concept of “metapolitics,” American figures such as Sam Francis and Humphrey Ireland (aka Wilmot Robertson), and a critical analysis of both white nationalist vanguardists and mainstreamers.

“Metapolitics” is a term that developed in the context of the post-WWII European New Right, an “intellectual” movement that emerged in an effort to revive various European nationalisms in light of the atrocities of German Nazis and other fascists.  In short, metapolitics refers to a strategy of building long-term cultural hegemony for ethnic nationalism – its pined for political dimensions expected to follow in the wake.

In Johnson’s case, this means white nationalism.

In the service of white nationalist “metapolitics,” Johnson recommends both Sam Francis’ Essential Writings on Race and Wilmot Robertson’s (actual name Humphrey Ireland) The Dispossessed Majority and The Ethnostate as “essential works on White Nationalism.” Johnson also includes Suicide of a Superpower by Francis’ longtime friend and fellow paleoconservative, Patrick Buchanan.[3]

Before his death in 1994, Sam Francis was a leading national advocate of a cultural approach to racial politics. Robertson/Ireland’s work built a foundation for the idea of white dispossession that helped transform the white supremacist movement of the 1950s and 1960s into the white nationalist, ethno-state-seeking, movement of the 1970s to the present.[4] While Johnson views Francis as having “basically advocated white supremacy” rather than white nationalism, the Seattle racist takes Sam’s writing as offering “facts and arguments sufficient to establish White Nationalist conclusions.” Robertson’s works, on the other hand, “provide explicit cases for white ethnostate,” Johnson explains. F. Roger Devlin, an American who appeared at a 2018 Scandza event credited Sam Francis with introducing him to the works of Robertson.[5]

On an international level, Johnson works through entities such as the white nationalist Scandza Forum, created in 2017 and modeled on the London Forum. These forums serve as vehicles for strategy development and relationship building among white nationalists internationally. Johnson runs his own Northwest Forum along the same lines, an invitation only event that has brought a host of white nationalists to the Seattle area. Past Northwest Forums have featured Identity Evropa founder Nathan Damigo, anti-Semite Kevin MacDonald and white nationalist Jared Taylor of American Renaissance, according to an expose in The Stranger.[6] A September 28 Northwest Forum was scheduled to include Taylor and Patrick Casey, head of the white nationalist group, American Identity Movement (formerly Identity Evropa).[7]

In defending white nationalism, Johnson has written,

“White Nationalism is about the creation of racially homogeneous homelands for all white peoples. White Nationalism is, therefore, incompatible with all types of multiracial societies, regardless of whether whites are supreme or subordinate.”[8]

Elsewhere, Johnson has articulated the “four political absolutes” in his white nationalist vision:

(1) “Europeans constitute a distinct race, the white race;” (2) “the white race is threatened with simple biological extinction;” (3) “the only tenable solution to the threat of white extinction is White Nationalism: the creation of homogeneously white homelands for all white peoples, with will require the alteration of political borders and the mass resettlement of non-whites;” and 4) “Jews are not Europeans…[T]he organized Jewish community is the principal enemy…of every attempt to halt and reverse white extinction…Therefore, White Nationalism is inescapably anti-Semitic.”[9]

Johnson’s devotion to biological racism and anti-Semitism echo core elements of national socialism. It is unsurprising, therefore, that Johnson has written that some racists can say that “Adolph Hitler did, in fact, agree with our principles. That is true of course, and to Hitler’s credit.” Johnson also holds that Hitler’s “greatest flaw” was an “excess of kindness” toward Jews.[10]

If Johnson’s strategy draws on such cultural politics, the Seattle racist also crafts his approach from a critique of both white nationalist vanguardists and mainstreamers.  As IRHER’s Leonard Zeskind recounts in Blood and Politics, as white nationalism developed, vanguardists such as William Pierce argued that winning a mass base of whites to the white nationalist cause was unlikely, necessitating the recruitment and development on elite, armed vanguard to overthrow the United States and create a white ethno-state. Conversely, mainstreamers like Willis Carto and, later, David Duke, argued that a mass of whites might be won to the cause by crafting a palatable message and entering the electoral arena.

Johnson starts with a critique of the what he terms “Old Right” vanguardism, making clear that “By the ‘Old Right,’ I mean classical Fascism and National Socialism and their contemporary imitators who believe that White Nationalism can be advanced through such means as one party-politics, terrorism, totalitarianism, imperialism, and genocide.”[11] Referring to longtime national socialist Frazier Glenn Miller’s 2014 murder of three people when he opened fire on two separate Kansas Jewish institutions, Johnson argues that the such acts harm the movement by bringing sympathy to its intended targets:

“There’s no point in lingering too long over the layer upon layer of idiocy and evil in this act. Miller wanted to strike at Jews, whom he blames with good reason for the ongoing destruction of our people, and he killed three of our people, hastening the day when whites become extinct, increasing public sympathy for Jews, and putting White Nationalism in an even worse light.”[12]

Of Brenton Tarrant’s white nationalism-motivated massacre of 50 people at two Christchurch, New Zealand mosques in August 2019, Johnson wrote, “This kind of violence is worse than a crime. It is a mistake. It does nothing to advance our cause and much to set us back… Tarrant’s “solution” to his rage and alienation — killing innocent people — just makes the racial situation worse rather than better.”[13] Johnson concludes “if anyone talks about committing such acts in our circles, we need to be the ones to call the police” [emphasis in original].[14]

“Furthermore,” Greg Johnson clarifies, “the only form of violence that even has a chance to be productive in halting multiculturalism and non-white immigration would target the people responsible for these policies, not random innocents.” Here Johnson echoes the views of former Texas Klansman and vanguardist Louis Beam whose Essays of a Klansman awarded “Aryan warriors” one one-thousandth of a point for murdering an ordinary black person, while giving a full point for Jews and policy makers he considered more powerful.[15]

Johnson also criticizes “Old Right” vanguardists for openly identifying with Adolph Hitler. It was in this context that the Seattle racist offered the qualification that, “Of course vantards [his derogatory term of crass vanguardists such as the Daily Stormer’s Andrew Anglin] can protest that Adolph Hitler did, in fact, agree with our principles. That is true of course, and to Hitler’s credit.”[16]

Johnson’s strategy also draws on a critique of white nationalist mainstreamers, arguing in Counter-Currents in 2014 their key flaw is the willingness to two quickly abandon the principles of white nationalism:

Mainstreaming is not just the use of slick communications techniques. Nobody objects to that. Mainstreaming is objectionable simply because it entails the abandonment of any of these core principles [the “four political absolutes” described at the outset]. The British National Party under Nick Griffin abandoned repatriation of non-whites and the whiteness of British identity. The National Front under Marine Le Pen has abandoned repatriation and the whiteness of French identity…

I fully agree that we will never change our people’s thinking and pull the mainstream in our direction unless we communicate with them effectively. Thus we need to be maximally flexible and pragmatic in crafting White Nationalist messages that appeal to every white constituency. We need to colonize every shade of the political spectrum with white-friendly alternatives, so that no matter what party wins, white interests are sacrosanct. Our aim is full-spectrum intellectual and political hegemony, in order to move the mainstream toward White Nationalist policies.

But we will never pull the rest of the world in our direction if we also abandon our direction, i.e., our guiding principles. The error of mainstreaming is to abandon essential principles in the name of broader political appeal. This is self-defeating, because instead of leading the mainstream, we let the mainstream lead us…For nearly 70 years, post-war White Nationalism has been dominated by conservative mainstreamers and self-marginalizing vantards. The record of failure speaks for itself. Its (sic) time we think our way outside that box. Let’s try genuine vanguardism — for a change.”[17]

In lieu of these perceived shortcomings, Johnson offers a “North American New Right” approach that, “stands for a vanguardism that is absolutely dogmatic about core principles but also maximally flexible and pragmatic — and thus potentially effective — about ways to communicate and actualize our principles.”[18] Johnson thus advocates a staunch and open commitment to the “four political absolutes” of biological racism, white nationalism, fantasies of impending white extinction and anti-Semitism. [19]

In this brand of vanguardism, Johnson envisions a core of activists mobilizing around such ideas with the aim of shaping a set of expanding concentric circles of support for white nationalism:

“[T]he core of vanguardism is metapolitical, meaning that vanguardists hold that certain political principles and goals are absolute and non-negotiable. And because we will not budge on these principles, we will have persuaded the rest of society to think like we do. A rational minority [the vanguard] must accept our principles as truths; a broader minority must accept them as articles of faith; the majority must accept them because we will consistently deliver prosperity, security, and peace; and a sullen minority of dissidents must accept them because they simply have no choice.”

At an April 2018 Scandza Forum, Johnson elaborated on his cadre approach to political messaging, arguing for a cultural approach that seeks to spread white nationalism on both sides of the left-right divide. “[W]hite identity politics,” he writes, “has the best chance of winning if it breaks out of the Right-wing ghetto to which it is confined today and becomes the common sense of the entire cultural and political mainstream.” To this end he argued, that “When the far Left and the far Right are united on issues connected with immigration and identity, whites need not fear political pluralism.” This can be achieved, Johnson continued, by recruiting “apostles” from the ranks of different groups, because “their target audiences can better identify with them. Thus we need to convert white identitarians of all shades and stripes and send them forth to set up platforms and communicate our message to others of their kind.”

“Identitiariasm” is a European New Right-derived term that means little more than that white identity is central to their nationalism – that is, white nationalism.

With an aim to “colonize every niche in the cultural and political ecosystem with custom-tailored pro-white messages;” and a strategy of dropping those issues that divided constituencies along a left-right axis; Johnsons concludes that,

“[W]e simply have to learn to work with people who share our views of white identity politics, but may not share our views on a whole range of other issues… By contrast, people who insist on combining White Nationalism with a list of Right-wing add-ons — who try to up-sell you a side dish of Orthodox Christianity, or Nordic paganism, or radical Traditionalism with your ethnoburger — who insist that these peripheral issues are essential to white preservationism, and who turn them into polarizing litmus tests and shibboleths, are guaranteed to create a smaller, weaker, dumber, poorer, and less effective — but more ‘pure’ — movement, when we need to go in precisely the opposite direction… If our movement is to grow, we need to discourage such sectarian tendencies.”[20]

Ironically, despite his call for unity, Greg Johnson spends considerable effort criticizing other movement leaders. Johnson’s articulation of the a “New Right” white nationalist vanguardism also appears similar to the “Cultural Vanguardism” espoused by League of the South Public Relations Chief Brad Griffin, aka Hunter Wallace. Rejecting both mainstreaming and “stupid vanguardism,” Griffin argues for targeting white-dominated rural areas so as to build a “cultural vanguard” of ten percent of the population that can then push society toward the movement’s views.

These emerging developments in white nationalist vanguardism indicate that movement leaders are developing new mobilization strategies in the wake of the failure of mainstreaming or vanguardism to achieve the end game of a white ethno-state.

If Greg Johnson tends to publicly eschew violence in pursuit of a vanguard-driven aim of achieving mass support for a white ethnostate, he nonetheless has a place for violence in his ideology. In addition to mimicking Louis Beam’s view that elites make the best targets, Johnson exhibits definite sympathies with those same vanguardists he criticizes. For instance, Johnson places the ultimate blame for Brent Tarrant’s massacre at the door of multicultural polices, dubbing Tarrants’ “underlying motive” to be “a healthy reaction to objective facts”:

“[T]his [Tarrant’s shooting] could not have happened in a homogeneously white society… [H]e would not be a killer, and his victims would not be dead, if New Zealand were not pursuing a policy of multiculturalism and race-replacement, and if Moslems had not taken a leading role in invading and colonizing European lands, committing heinous acts of terrorism and mass sexual assault….When different peoples are forced to live together in the same system, frictions are inevitable…Tarrant’s actions are predictable consequences of multiculturalism. Sadly, we will only see more such violence until white nations regain their sanity and reverse multiculturalism…Yes, Tarrant did something evil and stupid. But Tarrant’s underlying motive — fear of white race replacement — is not irrational or insane. It is a healthy reaction to objective facts… Tarrant and people like him may be nothing more than canaries in a coal mine: the first to sense the presence of a threat to the survival of us all.”[21]

Johnson also argues that violence may be necessary in those countries that “ban parties that make explicit appeals to racial identity, or explicit calls for repatriation of non-whites, or explicit references to the Jewish problem.” In such countries, he writes,

“there should be no question in anyone’s mind that such parties intend to change the system by whatever means necessary. If they are allowed to speak freely and pursue power through legal political channels, they will do so. But, lest their enemies consider jailing their leaders or outlawing them entirely, they need to present a credible threat of violence. If forced by the system, perhaps every White Nationalist political party should be ready and willing to follow the example of the Communists and immediately switch to armed struggle. A party that presents a credible threat of disciplined, sustained, and effective violence is less likely to be banned in the first place. Who wants to remove the stopper from the mouth of hell?”[22]

In a 2003 written under the name T.C. Lynch, and republished in edited form in 2010 as Greg Johnson for Counter-Currents, the Seattle racist makes clear that his ultimate goal is a purge of people of color and Jews that will inherently involve violence:

“To rid ourselves of the millions of non-Whites who are here illegally, but who are not already incarcerated, we should first levy fines of $10,000 per day per alien on any business that employs them and any landlord who rents to them…After six months or so, the police and the military can scour out the ones who remain and deport them. After another six months, the government can offer a bounty of $1,000 per head for those who slipped through the cracks.As for the ones here legally: They should be immediately stripped of their citizenship and all the benefits that come from it. They should be denied any government or government subsidized benefits, e.g., education, welfare, unemployment insurance, health care. Yet they should be made to pay exorbitantly high taxes. We should allow them to sell their property and take the proceeds with them. But to make a quick departure even more appealing, we should declare that after a year, we will allow them to leave with only their lives and the clothes on their backs. Those who cannot take a hint would then be arrested and deported, with a $1,000 per head bounty for those who remain.

As for the Jews: There would have to be an entirely different policy. At the very least, all their property should be confiscated…[I]f they were allowed to keep their wealth, they would immediately use it to stir up trouble against us. Just look at what happened when Adolf Hitler, with the typical excess of kindness that was his greatest flaw, allowed the Jews of Germany to emigrate with their fortunes….

‘But there would be violence! There would be race war!’ the defeatists will bleat. Of course there would be. There already is violence. There already is race war. There already is ethnic cleansing… It is just that we are not fighting back. And if we don’t start fighting back, we are going to be destroyed. Yes, there would be thousands of White race traitors marching and holding candlelight vigils. That’s why we have rubber bullets and fire hoses. Yes, Blacks and Mexicans would riot and burn down their neighborhoods and Korean convenience stores. But that’s why we have police and the National Guard. What? Do White men no longer know how to crack heads and fire guns? In the end, non-White lawlessness would simply allow us to accelerate their expulsion.

Yes, violence would have economic costs, but they would be nothing compared to the costs in crime, chaos, ugliness, and inefficiency of keeping these people here. Yes, there would be White casualties. But the White death toll would be nothing compared to the White death toll that is inevitable if we do nothing: namely, extinction.”[23]

As Johnson makes crystal clear, whatever nod he gives to building a mass-based constituency through the development of a cultural vanguard, white nationalist violence is forever his endgame.




[1] Sherover, Charles. Are We In Time? Northwestern University Press.

[2] Johnson, Greg. The Counter-Currents Newsletter, September 2019.

[3] Johnson, Greg. Six Essential Works on White Nationalism. Counter-Currents. 2016.

[4] For a detailed look at Sam Francis and Wilmot Robertson’s role in the transition from a white supremacist to a white nationalist political movement, see Zeskind, Leonard. 2009. Blood and Politics: The History of the White Nationalist Movement from the Margins to the Mainstream. New York: Farrar Straus Group.

[5] Devlin, F. Roger. On Wilmot Robertson. Counter-Currents. November 2013.

[6] Lewis, David. We Nuck into Seattle’s Sper Secret White Nationalist Convention. The Stranger. October 4, 2017.

[7] Counter-Currents. Jared Taylor and Patrick Casey to Speak at the Northwest Forum. Counter-Currents. September 10, 2019.

[8] Johnson, Greg. Six Essential Works on White Nationalism. Counter-Currents. 2016.

[9] Johnson, Greg. Vanguardism, Vantardism &Mainstreaming. Counter-Currents. October 9, 2014.

[10] Johnson, Greg. Vanguardism, Vantardism &Mainstreaming. Counter-Currents. October 9, 2014.

[11] Johnson, Greg. Understanding the New Zealand Mosque Massacre. Counter-Currents. March 15, 2019.

[12] Johnson, Greg. On the Necessity of a New Right. Counter-Currents. April 15, 2014.

[13] Johnson, Greg. Understanding the New Zealand Mosque Massacre. Counter-Currents. March 15, 2019.

[14] Johnson, Greg. Understanding the New Zealand Mosque Massacre. Counter-Currents. March 15, 2019.

[15] Zeskind, Leonard. 2009. Blood and Politics: The History of the White Nationalist Movement from the Margins to the Mainstream. New York: Farrar Straus Group, p. 89-90.

[16] Johnson, Greg. Vanguardism, Vantardism &Mainstreaming. Counter-Currents. October 9, 2014.

[17] Johnson, Greg. Vanguardism, Vantardism &Mainstreaming. Counter-Currents. October 9, 2014.

[18] Johnson, Greg. Vanguardism, Vantardism &Mainstreaming. Counter-Currents. October 9, 2014.

[19] Johnson, Greg. Vanguardism, Vantardism &Mainstreaming. Counter-Currents. October 9, 2014.

[20] Johnson, Greg. Redefining the Mainstream. Counter-Currents. April 2018.

[21] Johnson, Greg. Understanding the New Zealand Mosque Massacre. Counter-Currents. March 15, 2019.

[22] Johnson, Greg. Vanguardism, Vantardism &Mainstreaming. Counter-Currents. October 9, 2014.

[23] Johnson, Greg (as T.C. Lynch). To Cleanse America: Some Practical Proposals. Vanguard News Network. 2003.; see the article edited and reprinted at Counter-Currents under the name Greg Johnson here:

Chuck Tanner

Author Chuck Tanner

Chuck Tanner is an Advisory Board member and researcher for the Institute for Research and Education on Human Rights. He lives in Washington State where he researches and works to counter white nationalism and the anti-Indian and other far right social movements.

More posts by Chuck Tanner