Reason – October 2018

field was shared far beyond both move-

ments, bringing in mainstream Ameri-

cans across the political spectrum.

BELEW’S EVIDENCE FOR treating the mili-
tias as an outgrowth of the white power
movement largely rests on two points.
The first is that militia groups in Idaho
and Montana had racist orientations.
But most militia scholars recognize
the Idaho Christian Patriot group as
an overtly religious and supremacist
organization—and while the Militia of
Montana included “militia” in its name,
it had no firearms proficiency require-
ments and little in the way of formal
military-style training, both of which
rapidly became central to other mili-
tias’ identities.
The second piece of evidence
relates to conservative radio host and
conspiracy theorist Mark Koernke,
whom she identifies as a Michigan
Militia leader. Koernke successfully
framed himself that way, but his name
is absent from the original 3,000-plus
pages of fax records—including lists
of leaders—provided to me in 2010 by
Michigan Militia founder Norm Olson.
Members who were active in the ’90s
described Koernke to me as a “wannabe
Alex Jones” who had little interest in
anything except his own status, which
he severely damaged by jumping into a
lake while running from police search-
ing for an unrelated marijuana grow.
Belew mentions a possible con-
nection between Koernke and Okla-
homa City bomber Timothy McVeigh,
although unlike many authors, she is
careful to note that McVeigh merely
attended some militia meetings rather
than calling him a member. To dem-
onstrate the McVeigh-militia connec-
tion, Belew cites a 1995 news article
where unnamed witnesses recalled
that McVeigh had acted as Koernke’s
bodyguard a year prior. At least one
journalist—ABC’s Jonathan Karl, then
of the New York Post—has reported that
this was a case of mistaken identity, and

that Koernke’s bodyguard was actu-

ally a man named McKay. But even if

the McVeigh report is true, it says more

about Koernke and his small personal-

ity cult than it does about McVeigh’s

relationship to the militia movement

as a whole. Koernke has a reputation

for maintaining unpaid “bodyguards,”

drawing when he can from veterans and

others he perceives as boosting his own

status by proximity.

There is also evidence that groups

under the white power umbrella tend

not to accept militias as part of their

movement. White Aryan Resistance

founder Tom Metzger (a recurring figure

in Belew’s book) stated his opinion of the

militias in 2001: “They are mostly uni-

form freaks that wanted to play war. The

minute McVeigh committed a real act of

war, the militias disappeared quickly.

Most backtracked [on their anti-govern-

ment ideology] and affirmed allegiance

to the Iron Heel. Most now work directly

with the FBI.” Similar rants can be found

in other publications from the ’90s and

on online message boards through the

present day.

TREATING THE MILITIAS as a separate

movement may seem like splitting

trivial academic hairs, but the distinc-

tion has practical importance. Research

suggests that overbroad labeling,

especially from law enforcement, can

help push people into violence or other

extremism. A notable example came

when the Department of Homeland

Security released a report on “rightwing

extremism” in 2009 that called the mili-

tias “violent,” and that offended vet-

erans by warning that former soldiers

may be susceptible to terrorist recruit-

ment. Attendance spiked at Michigan

Militia events immediately following

this report, and leaders of other states’

militias reported the same response—

presumably the exact opposite of what

the writers had intended.

The label “white power” carries

a race-focused orientation that isn’t

present in the militia movement as a

whole. Applying it to nonracist militias

undermines our understanding of both

movements, making it harder to use our

limited resources to address racism and

extremist violence. But despite these

problems, Bring the War Home is an

excellent resource for anyone interested

in the history of America’s white power

movement—whether for academic pur-

suits or to inform opposition to white

supremacy. I wish the book had been

available when I started my own studies

in this area.

AM Y COOTER is a senior lec turer in sociology at

Vanderbilt University.

B ring the War Home: The White P owe r Move me nt

and Paramilitary America, by Kathleen Belew,

Harvard University Press, 339 pages, $29.95

REASON 63

Treating the militias

as a separate

movement may seem

like splitting trivial

academic hairs, but

the distinction has

practical importance.