Novacadia: White European Political and Geographical Redoubt
Redoubt: n. A reinforcing earthwork or breastwork within a permanent rampart. A protected place of refuge or defense. A defence work built inside a fortification as a last defensive position. [from Medieval Latin reductus shelter, from Latin redūcere to withdraw]
Over the last several months the notion of secessionist breakaways has gained considerable traction within the NAmerikan White Nationalist community as a legitimate political option to ensure the continuation of the White Race on the NAmerikan continent. The clarion call of Michael O’Meara’s 2009 TOQ Essay Winner Toward the White Republic begins to take some form. Seasoned secessionists take note with one eye cocked. New secessionist arrivals exuberantly and naively trip over themselves to enter the debate.
Thomas de Pietro reviews Bill Kaufman’s Bye Bye, Miss American Pie on The American Conservative website. Judging from the reviews, Kaufman’s work is yet more Amerikan exceptionalism, as is much secessionist thinking and writing, however for the conservative reader this is next to blasphemy. Chuck Baldwin jumps in with a Christian spin with A Concurring (Biblical) Opinion For Secession. In very conservative tradition, Pat Buchanan opines that “tribalism” may be acceptable and beneficial for many global communities, but fails to extend his argument to the Utied States of Amerika. See Buchanan’s Is Tribalism the Future?
Closer to the NAmerikan White Nationalist home, most recently and surprisingly, Jared Taylor of American Renaissance has entered into the secessionist discourse with an analysis that is slightly valedictorian, but significant all the same in that such a White Nationalist “blue ribbon” as American Renaissance is addressing the issue. Mr. Taylor writes as an impassioned Southron, but keeps to the parameters of jingoistic sentiment only, discarding altogether the socio-political collapse of Amerika. Greg Johnson has opened the floor at Counter-Currents Publishing to Harold Covington of The Northwest Front while ensuring that any contra input and challenge to an isolated Amerikan spin on secession is securely censored.
Excluded from the White Nationalist secessionist debate is the American Third Position which has locked itself in to what must openly be identified as a reactionary political position, i.e. the questionable attempt of “saving” Amerika from imminent social, economic and political collapse via analyses solely anchored in Cultural Marxism, and ensuring the continuation of a purely White Amerika, something that has never actually existed.
So on the upside, there is significant secessionist traction. On the downside, the discourse is intentionally limited to an innate Amerikan exceptionalism with all the political liabilities which that, in turn, carries. If NAmerikan secessionists, of whatever political stripe, are to venture from political identity A towards political identity B, then they must own it and voice it. A type of political shizophrenia serves no purpose. It merely keeps one foot safely in the old while gingerly testing the secessonist waters of the new with the other foot.
Only the Renaissance Party of North America has identified with its Three Pillarsthe continental, bioregional and systemic inter-relationship of NAmerikan White Nationalism with transition to a Post-Peak Oil world and the consequent devolution, i.e. secessions, of the industrial nation-state. As the respected voice of Keith Preston, an ex-RPN Officer, of Attack The System has stated:
“The RPN’s mission statement and philosophical outlook is light years ahead of any of its competitors, as it combines syndicalist/distributist economics, radical decentralization, ‘archeofuturism’ and other ENR-inspired ideas, anti-globalism, peak oil theory, anti-Cultural Marxism, anti-political correctness, anti-imperialism, a Spenglerian view of history, pan-secessionism, race-realism, a strident yet reasonable environmentalism, a social conservatism that is measured and libertarian, neo-paganism within a wider spirit of religious toleration, and criticism of mass immigration in the name of civilizational survival and self-preservation. In other words, all of the best and most far-sighted contemporary ideas are being pulled together into a unified and syncretic whole.”
The two leading proponents of the White secessionist option and strategy for racial preservation on the NAmerikan continent are the NorthWest Front and the Renaissance Party of North America. Outlooks and differences between the two organizations are tactical in nature only, mostly reflective of differing analyses re historical cause and social drivers, and not strategic per se. As a minor example, whereas the NF designates the continental Pacific Northwest (relative to a continental scope it is, in effect, the Pacific “Centralwest”) as the “Northwest American Republic” and running up against the brick wall of the 49th Parallel, the RPN perceives the designation as Cascadia, negating an international boundary directly and implying the negation of two nation-states indirectly via a bioregional designation. The same applies for the RPN’s designation of Novacadia on the East Coast. Both organizations borrow a tactical page from the Free State Project playbook to entice immigration in order to gain electoral leverage. The FN reaches out to Amerikan White Nationalists only for Cascadia; the RPN reaches out to Amerikan White Nationalists, Europeans who are prepared to unload on Eurabia and become ex-pats, and White South African Boers who are prepared to do same for Novacadia immigration. Preliminary discussion has been undertaken to determine how the international legal principles of Jus Sanguinis can be applied.
Of course, a dedicated Novacadia Independence Party with bottom-up politiking to compliment the RPN’s top-down politiking is in order and for which rudimentary “test marketing” has been undertaken.
Several other secessionist organizations could conceivably openly endorse the racial component of the secessionist motive in support of Cascadia and Novacadia over the next year or two. The Alaska Independence Party would have to shift from a predominantly and limited Libertarian stance. Daniel Miller of the Texas Nationalist Movement has recently taken to sending very friendly signals via Facebook exchanges with White Nationalists. The League of The South has always been one motion removed from an openly White stance. TheSecond Vermont Republic, if at its political core is strongly liberal, need merely acknowledge that Vermont is 97% White, as is the average White population for all of Novacadia, three Maritime provinces and three New England states combined. Both the federal Bloc Québecois and the provincial Parti Québecois, facing stagnation and loss of electoral support, could conceivably tap an innate anti-Semitism and “racialist” sentiment in predominantly Roman Catholic Québec.
The potential strength of the White Nationalist faction within the NAmerikan secessionist movement may now be of such degree as to have “captured” the latter movement at best, or be holding it in check, at the least. The leftistMiddlebury Institute, the principle sponsor of the first three NAmerikan Secessionist Conferences and the leading secessionist clearing house and, in partnership with the Second Vermont Republic and the League of The South, one of the three founding organizations of the NAmerikan secessionist “movement”, has not convened a secessionist conference since 2008. Part of this reason could date back to a difference of opinion during 2009 between Kirkpatrick Sale and Sebastian Ernst Ronin over the legal rights to a continental secessionist “Congress” as opposed to a “conference.” Also, it would stand to reason that the Middlebury Institute and the Second Vermont Republic are fully aware of the degree to which the White Nationalist Movement has evolved towards regional secessions. If an inaugural meeting of secessionists was called to officially found a “Congress” under a full recognition of Robert’s Rules, the odds are good that White Nationalists would walk away with control of the Congress, leaving the leftist/liberal Vermonters as an empty and isolated secessionist voice upon the continent.
For all intents and purposes, the NAmerikan secessionist movement would seem to have been captured by the White Nationalist Movement. The former must come to the latter; the latter need not come to nor pander to the former.
On the East Coast, Novacadia is the complimentary geographical designation and propaganda flank to the West Coast’s Cascadia. (Please re-read that last statement; let it sink in.) In a short three-year period the notion of Novacadia has evolved from a spark of creation to occupying a significant spot in the secessionist psyche. The founding of a Novacadia Independence Party, having been thwarted via an attempted reverse takeover of the Green Party of Nova Scotia, is pending. A short historical explanation is in order. (Kindly excuse the transition to first-person narrative.)
During the early summer of 2008, I was asked by the Middlebury Institute to prepare a paper and presentation for that year’s Third North American Secessionist Conference, to be held in Manchester, New Hampshire in the following November. I had already discussed with Thomas Naylor of the Second Vermont Republic the merits of changing his designation of New Acadia to Novacadia. Mr. Naylor had no problem with that.
Mr. Sale had requested the paper based on my prior secessionist work. In 1985, prior to resigning from the party and its executive in 1986, I had put forward a motion to the Vancouver Chapter of the Green Party of British Columbia to incorporate a secessionist policy for the GPBC around the bioregional notion of an independent Cascadia. The motion did not get beyond the Vancouver Chapter. In 1991 (pre-Internet, ergo no link), I had an op-ed article published by one of Vancouver’s two dailies, again promoting the idea for an independent Cascadia.
Within a year of introducing the secessionist concept of Novacadia at the Third North American Secessionist Conference, it received recognition by the Wall Street Journal in June, 2009, Divided We Stand. The WSJ’s secessionist article had been preceded by the global attention generated by the Russian, Prof. Igor Panarin, just three weeks after the Third North American Secessionist Conference. Panarin asserted that the United States would break up into several countries, which in turn generated related traction for the secessionist story by the Amerikan media, in particular, Glenn Beck.
After a 23-year hiatus from direct political involvement and membership with any political party, all of this latter activity paved the way for a run at the leadership of the Green Party of Nova Scotia in October, 2009. My platform was focused on the necessity to acknowledge the advent of Post-Peak Oil with added imperative for the GPNS to break from the Global Greens. Folded into the latter two positions was a cloaked secessionist proposal for the recognition of Novacadia.
My leadership platform also included a proposed merger between the GPNS and the Atlantica Party of Nova Scotia which, at the time, was still not incorporated. Jonathan Dean, the leader of the AP, was informed of my intent. Mr. Dean’s support was crucial for the reverse takeover of the GPNS to work. What I was prepared to ask for in return for engineering the takeover was the constitutional change of the GPNS name to the Novacadia Independence Party with a relative secessionist mandate inclusive.
Mr. Dean did not deliver the bodies and I got smoked by the GPNS membership. Contemporary, by-and-large liberal, Greens are as ill-informed about the globalist co-optation of the Green Movement as they are to their own political roots of decentralization and bioregionalism. A mention of August Haussleiter would fall on deaf ears. Today, Mr. Dean has an incorporated AP, but minus the $87,000 that, due to a fluke of electoral Nova Scotian reform in 2007 (a windfall in excess of $200,000 to the GPNS to public outrage), had been sitting in the GPNS accounts at October, 2009.
The leadership bid for the GPNS was a colossal failure, but it was a failure in the “real” world. The lessons learned and the reverse takeover tactic applied can easily be employed as direct takeover initiatives launched by dedicated, White Nationalist secessionists to target weak parties in respective, regional constituencies. What most NAmerikan White Nationalists need to realize is that if they are about to enter the realpolitik, secessionist pool then they will need to discard their keyboard-warrior water wings and step from the shallow into the deep end of electoral politics. The political window of opportunity to halt and begin to turn things around is likely about 10-20 years. If the window is missed, Whites on the NAmerikan continent can look forward to becoming a minority upon a sea of globalist, socially-engineered racial and ethnic dystopia. If the window is missed, it shuts forever, and forever happens to be a very long time.
Within two months of the disastrous run at the GPNS leadership, in early December, 2009, the only remaining individual holding any kind of an “official” tie to the defunct National Renaissance Party (United States), Maury Knutson, was contacted. Assurance was given by Mr. Knutson, an ex-NRP member, that there was no outstanding paper attached to the party, that it was in fact an empty shell. Official representation of the NRP was willingly surrendered and transferred to me by Mr. Knutson. An inaugural executive was pulled together via the Internet, a chairman elected, and the name change to the Renaissance Party of North America and a Mission Statement were endorsed by the executive. This was all put to bed prior to the public announcement of the launch of the American Third Position in January, 2010. A political synchronicity and abrupt evolution of the NAmerikan White Nationalist Movement were in the air.
Contrary to the opinions expressed by Harold Covington, Novacadia is possibly the most natural bioregion on the continent and a prime contender to play a leading role in the White Nationalist secessionist movement. At the very least, and at the current time, it is on a par for secessionist potential with Alaska, Cascadia and Dixie, while obviously lagging behind Québec, Vermont and Texas, as are the latter others also. Novacadia is home to and potentially partnered with the most organized secessionist movement in NAmerika, the Second Vermont Republic, although the SVR currently shudders at the thought of Vermont being the first new White homeland. Lastly, the three New England states and the three Maritime provinces that constitute Novacadia comprise a total average 97% White population. The racial and ethnic status quo need merely be maintained. With rising Somali penetration in the New England states and a call for a population increase of 70 million in Kanada by century’s end, this challenge is not to be belittled. Certainly not to be misinterpreted is the fact that beneath the liberal veneer of Novacadians runs a staunch conservative backbone.
Politics, when all is said and done, is about turf. Particular rules of law, constitutions, judiciaries, fiscal structures, bureaucracies, social institutions, etc. are all sub-elements of an overriding geographical destination and jurisdiction. For White Nationalist secessionists the fundamental issue lies with the most proper, the most reasonable, the most balanced, or the most optimum size of the jurisdiction, primarily as relates to population size and only secondarily as relates to physical size. The most reasonable and most optimum size, in turn, translates into optimum rights and liberties, optimum safety and civic integrity for its citizens, and the optimum functioning of a free market economic system. This principle of reduced size is the bedrock of secessionist philosophy as laid out by the Austrian economist and jurist, Leopold Kohr in his now-classic, The Breakdown of Nations.
When contemplating optimum size for national re-inventions on the NAmerikan continent, it is essential to identify the regional parameters of secession, as opposed to individual state and provincial secession. To take the Lower 48 Amerikan states as an example, it is somewhat far-fetched to think in terms of 48 independent nations.
The most recent regional designation to be brought into the secessionist discourse is the region of Novacadia. It is the region that consists of the Canadian provinces of Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick, and the Québec region of the Gaspe Peninsula, and the American states of Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont. There is an alternative designation for the same region which further includes Newfoundland and upper New York state that is tentatively called Atlantica.
The Southern states and the region of Cascadia on the West Coast are now well positioned to becoming regional designations as opposed to single state designations for future nationhood. The proposed secessionist designation of Novacadia is barely out of the gate. As the physical term-of-reference for the White Nationalist secessionist movement is the continent of NAmerika and, as the two notions of Cascadia and Novacadia straddle an international boundary, unique and uncharted legal and constitutional challenges abound. The same challenges may hold true for the prairie regions. To this end, a proposed Novacadia Independence Party will likely include a clause in its bylaws for party membership to consist of both Kanadian and Amerikan citizens.
To aid the process of regional identification for the purposes of White Nationalist secession, there exist at least two geographical models.
The first of these models is that put forward by Joel Garreau in his 1981 best seller, The Nine Nations of North America. Within this model, the southern states have been clearly designated as a region called Dixie, although overlapping into Texas. The notion of Mexamerica is likely very contentious. Cascadia still goes by the designation of Ecotopia as first identified by Ernest Callenbach in his novel of the same name. Novacadia is lumped together as an extension of New England (and is called such) and more closely resembles the geographical notion of Atlantica.
The second model is the bioregional model. Within this model, a political designation based solely on geographical factors such as mountain ranges, watersheds, prairie land, rivers, etc. quickly becomes convoluted for practical political purposes. Although the evolution of events and political context over the last two decades have largely made bioregionalism as a concrete political tool redundant, it is not necessary to throw the baby out with the bath water. From wherever it is possible to realistically borrow and most effectively aid secessionist goals surely does no harm. After all, natural and geographical designations have contained since time immemorial the cultural ingredients for nation identification. A hypothetical and very conditional map of new racial and ethnic homelands on the NAmerikan continent is offered:
There is a third geographical model that is of extreme importance. This model recognizes the same field of play of NAmerika, but does so at a polar opposite from the secessionist model. This model is, of course, the globalist-sponsored North American Union. As do secessionists, the advocates of NAU think in long-range terms of a Post-Peak Oil world, but with drastically different motives and goals. That the mandate of NAU is motivated by energy concerns is obvious to the politically astute. Should the NAU agenda be launched, it may very likely be preceded by a regional breakdown of post-collapse Amerika and administered by FEMA.
It is interesting to note that, like the Patriot Act, the FEMA regional breakdown of Amerika was on the books prior to 9/11.
Whatever the situation may be above the political surface, it is reasonable to claim from a White Nationalist perspective that beneath the surface the two nations of Amerika and Kanada are in distress, Amerika more so economically, Kanada more so culturally, i.e. legislated multicultural and political correctness. It is proposed that the pending official recognition of NAU by our respective national governments strategically works to the secessionist advantage, and not against it. This is so for two reasons. Firstly, the likely sanctioning of NAU in several years time is very likely to coincide with the initial stages of Post-Peak Oil, therefore creating a perfect political storm for White Nationalist politics. Secondly, by virtue of eventually finalizing NAU, our respective electorates in Kanada and Amerika will no longer have the option of resorting to their national political representatives (some would claim them to be ZOG puppets) with their outrage. New political and electoral options will be entertained, if not immediately endorsed. There will be opportunity at the federal political levels in both countries, but only via the success of third-party politics. The Renaissance Party of North America recognizes these opportunities.
In the pending era of Post-Peak Oil, physical and social infrastructures will collapse, the infrastructure of the gargantuan state apparatus inclusive; they will grind to gridlock due to severely decreased energy input and flow-through. Business failure and unemployment will be astronomical, and the federal government’s tax coffers will decline relatively. This scenario is a general’s and a mainstream politician’s worst nightmare: the center will not hold. It is the Vesica Piscis meeting ground of the radical left and the radical right.
Within the context of a Post-Peak Oil world, the identification of Novacadia as a future autonomous nation remains an element of conjecture. But we are all as secessionists, with our hopes and our visions, currently constrained by conjecture. We tread on uncharted political territory. There is no secessionist crystal ball. There are no maps, no charts. We are pioneers. We are the mapmakers.
The literature on how to deal with and survive within such a world ranges from marginal to nonexistent. As example, how does a society learn to concretely deal with a constantly contracting economy and exist within its means when all economic theory and discipline are based on growth and related fiat debt creation? No one knows. Literature on regionalism in Amerika is sparse and what there is, as is the case with Kanada, deals with regionalism and economic development. There is no literature on regionalism and economic meltdown.
As a conjectured rationale then for the regional determination of Novacadia, the following preliminary sketch is offered. It is a barely visible point on a blank sheet of paper. It will hopefully contribute towards a degree of endorsement by Novacadian secessionists and the eventual drawing of a map. There is only one place to start and that is at the beginning.
The combined population of the three Maritime provinces and the three New England states of Novacadia is approximately five million people. This is an optimum population size for civic conduct and administration as Leopold Kohr may have recognized it. More importantly, it is an optimum population size to house, feed and employ within greatly reduced economic parameters and expectations. Economic self-sufficiency will be at a premium in a Post-Peak Oil world. Within this regional population of five million, the three largest cities are Halifax, Nova Scotia with a population of 370,000, Saint John, New Brunswick at 122,000, and Manchester, New Hampshire at 108,000. These are not large cities by any stretch of the imagination.
The vast majority of Novacadia’s population is rural. With a pre-determined economic shift to a predominantly agrarian economy complimented by small-scale secondary industry in a Post-Peak Oil world, this is crucial. An agrarian economy, coupled with a small population and compact channels of distribution, makes the economic challenge of self-sufficiency that much easier to attain. Novacadia is novel in that political electoral power already resides in the country, and not in the city. This is a political opportunity of extreme importance.
It is largely due to this particular designation of Novacadia with its rural nature, small population and relatively limited urban sprawl that the New England states of New York, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Connecticut have been excluded. The Second Vermont Republic made the same distinction with its initial hypothesis for New Acadia. In a Post-Peak Oil world, with limited options in the governmental budget, the carrying and maintenance of a large city will be a liability. Also, if and when secession negotiations commence with federal authorities, it will be prudent to keep off the table a book value that the federalists see as an asset and Novacadians see as a liability.
Except for Vermont, Novacadia is endowed with ocean coastline which directly implies a seafaring nation. The craft and skills of shipbuilding are not completely lost. The natural resources to support this industry are in place. A serious development of tidal energy, as opposed to corporate posturing, could make Novacadia energy self-sufficient. The shared coastline more than compensates for a rough, but useable, highway infrastructure. Upgraded and new rail lines would be welcome. Most importantly, the sea is a cultural tie. It is a common point of identity. This cultural tie highlights a bioregional social dynamic that a people “are of place.” A regional identity is innate; it evolves naturally. It does not have to be artificially hammered into minds beginning at kindergarten age and relentlessly reinforced with gaudy symbols and social spectacles for the duration of a lifetime.
In many ways, the economic possibilities for Novacadia are merely a return to the pre-industrial economies of New England and The Maritimes when natural north-south trade relations existed. These economies were primarily agrarian and, due to seafaring capabilities, mercantile in nature and in practice.
As a region that has largely been bypassed by industrial development, the peoples of Novacadia share a relatively undamaged natural environment and a shared history of hardships, of living within material means, and of a condescending arrogance displayed by the “more developed” surrounding metropoles. Again, this shared economic hardship is a cultural bond that unites Novacadians with a common history.
In a Post-Peak Oil world, in many ways, social and economic relations will be turned on their heads. What once was a liability becomes the richest of assets. Underdevelopment becomes an asset; a rural political base becomes an asset; traditional community ties become an asset; small population becomes as asset, and so on. There is almost a poetic justice, a long overdue karma of sorts, to identifying the Novacadian secessionist adventure on the very soil where White European settlers first stepped to embark on continental expansionism. (The Solutrean Hypothesis is here bypassed.)
Lastly, the protection, maintenance and relative prosperity of a White nation can be easily protected against non-White, illegal immigration due to natural defences. To the east and to the north, the vast expanse of the Atlantic Ocean eliminates the arrival of the type of frail craft that is currently arriving in Italy from North Africa. To the west is the secessionist-friendly ally of Québec. This would leave protection of the border against illegal penetration along the southern Vermont-New Hampshire line, a task easily accomplished by an organized militia. Rejection of illegals by a White nation, it would stand to reason, will be reflected by the dictates of its constitution. Novacadia is a White Nationalist redoubt-in-waiting.
In conclusion, it is not necessary for White Nationalist secessionists to advocate a blind and groundless act of secession based on questionable and, quite possibly, reactionary and redundant motivators. There is little, if any, need for animosity that is rooted in past cultural and economic injustices. They are done; they are in the past. What is of greater tactical importance is to acknowledge the historical conditions for secession as they exist in the present, conditions which were not created by White Nationalists and which quickly approach a crisis point and, as such, call to be acted upon. To undo the institutional construct of the large industrial nation-state, an artificial imposition that has been in place for two centuries, is no small task.
Fortunately, White Nationalists need not overly concern themselves with having to “do” such task. It is the historical condition with corresponding opportunities and synergies that will unravel the artificial identity of large-scale nationalism. Secessionists need merely to perceive such and adapt accordingly. This is the unfolding of history; it need not be taken personally. There is a clear and important difference of motives, a difference that may at some point carry crucial legal merit.
There is much work to be done. There are no guarantees and there most certainly are no freebies. Secessionist adversaries are many and have at their disposal the full resources of the state. If, as according to a 2008 Zogby poll, secession is more favorable to traditional liberals than to traditional conservatives remains to be seen and is highly debateable. As offered above, a realistic argument can be made that White Nationalists have now “captured” the NAmerikan secessionist movement. Within the context of an energy-depleted future, Empire implosion and related depletion of a nanny-state social infrastructure, the support of liberal, and largely urban centrists and statists could easily wane while support of conservative, and largely rural decentralists increases. No one yet knows how the hybrid political initiative of “radical right meeting radical left” will actually present and play itself out. However, the political hybrid does slowly begin to come into focus and, as with any other birthing process, will carry like dynamics.
The most dangerous adversary to be faced by secessionists and the one that overlaps all political affiliations is a massive, brain-dead, lumbering brute. This adversary is the Leviathan of large-state nationalism and its blind handmaiden, a fawning patriotism. Fortunately, neither are genetic pre-conditions for human survival and Pavlovian learnt behavior can, over time, be unlearned towards the establishment of new, scaled down, White and regional identities.
For most NAmerikan White Nationalist secessionists it may be time to deal with the political schizophrenia of attempting to be both a secessionist and a national patriot. To borrow a strand from current pop culture: It is time to let it go. Tourists will need to be shown to the tourist compartment of the secessionist vehicle. Once the secessionist Rubicon has been crossed, there is no turning back.
Most of the work to be undertaken over the next two decades by White Nationalists will be to agitate and to educate, as the revolution we propose is largely a revolution of thought, a revolution of perception, a revolution of identity. People fear what they do not understand. Education will be just one of many political responsibilities for secessionists in order to placate those fears. As a simple example, is the public capable of understanding the secessionist dynamics inherent in the Laws of Thermodynamics and cascading entropy? Not very bloody likely, but the public will understand the image of a runaway freight hurtling down the slope of an uncharted mountain. Scolding the public for its lack of comprehension, of course, accomplishes nothing.
What are the odds of infusing White Nationalist secessionism into mainstream NAmerikan politics? They are slim, to say the least. But they are better than they were 25 years ago.
 The notion of the radical left meeting the radical right gained considerable public attention by an Associated Press article written by Bill Poovey on the Second North American Secessionist Convention held in Chattanooga. It has since been greatly expanded on as a philosophical and political “Vesica Piscis” by the RPN.