READ MY NOTICE TO EXPRESS MYSELF
AS A FREE ADULT CITIZEN
OF THE STATE OF TEXAS

Introduction

Karl Jaspers, in Reason and Anti-Reason in Our Time (1952), warned that “the enemy is the unphilosophical spirit which knows nothing and wants to know nothing of truth.” He observed that human beings often yearn not for reason but for mystery, preferring comforting myths to uncomfortable truths. Jaspers calls this impulse “anti-reason”: a rejection of genuine critical thought in favor of dogma and irrational certainties. In contemporary America, the resurgence of white supremacist movements illustrates Jaspers’ concept with unsettling clarity. These groups exhibit a rigid ideology closed to debate, manipulate fear and myth, and even reject the existential freedom of individuals. Using Matson and Tawni Browning’s The Hate Next Door (2023) as a primary source on these movements, we can trace how white supremacism embodies the philosophical structure of anti-reason – and consider what a Jaspersian response might entail.

White Supremacist Ideology as Jaspers’ “Anti-Reason”

Jaspers defined anti-reason as a will to dominate and deceive rather than to seek truth . Instead of open inquiry, anti-reason uses propaganda, charisma, and ideology to seduce people into a fixed worldview . White supremacist ideologies exemplify this pattern in their ideological rigidity and rejection of dialogue. Adherents cling to an absolute belief in racial hierarchy (e.g. the innate superiority of the white race) that brooks no questioning. Browning’s undercover work revealed white nationalists and even certain churchgoers twisting religion into totalizing dogma – “interpreting their scriptures in such a way that they were confident Jesus agreed with their hateful and xenophobic opinions” . This reflects the illusion of absolute certainty that Jaspers saw at the heart of anti-reason: believers convince themselves they possess an unquestionable truth, foreclosing any critical discourse. Within these circles, dissent or independent thought is stifled; Browning had to adopt fake identities and ideologies just to be accepted, indicating how little tolerance there was for any view outside the racist party line . The result is an echo chamber of hate that, in Jaspers’ terms, “knows nothing and wants to know nothing of truth” .

Jaspers also notes that anti-reason feeds on fear and false certainty. It “wears the mask of righteousness, but beneath it lies fear, resentment, and a flight from the very responsibility of freedom” . White supremacist movements vividly illustrate this dynamic. They cultivate a siege mentality – fear of other races, immigrants, or Jews – often through wild conspiracy theories and myths. For example, Browning recounts border vigilante groups that took it upon themselves to “patrol the border” with no legal authority except the presumed supremacy of their skin color . Fueled by the myth that America is under invasion, some extremists even organized “hunting trips” to murder migrants at the border . Such atrocities are driven by a paranoid narrative rather than reasoned analysis: anti-reason converts anxiety into grandiose myth. Browning and his wife Tawni even discovered overlaps between white supremacists and a polygamist cult – the cult’s incestuous worldview was motivated by keeping their “seed” racially pure . Here the myth of racial puritybecomes an all-consuming dogma, elevating biological fantasy to a guiding “truth.” In Jaspers’ view, these myths provide false certainty and pseudo-meaning, allowing individuals to flee from the ambiguity and freedom of real life into a simple, if grotesque, vision of the world .

Equally, white supremacist ideology entails a denial of existential freedom. Jaspers, as an existential philosopher, believed human beings have the responsibility of freedom – the task of choosing meaning and engaging with others in truth. Anti-reason denies this freedom by subjugating the individual to a collective dogma. White supremacist groups demand conformity to the racial creed; one’s value and identity are pre-determined by race, not chosen by oneself. Members often surrender personal moral agency to the group’s dictates, merging into what Jaspers would call a mass identity. In Browning’s narrative, it is striking how people from all walks of life – “pastors, teachers, members of the military… and police officers” – get absorbed into white nationalist circles . This suggests a kind of mass surrender of individuality: people who might otherwise think for themselves instead submerge into an extremist community, relinquishing the burden of independent moral choice. Jaspers would likely view this as a tragic flight from authentic Existenz (true selfhood) into what he termed the “unphilosophical spirit,” a state of being where one refuses the hard work of critical self-reflection and opts to be lived by an ideology .

Authoritarianism, Mass Identity, and Myth as Expressions of Anti-Reason

Jaspers emphasized that anti-reason thrives in authoritarian and collective forms. It seeks to “dominate, obscure, or seduce” rather than to communicate openly . White supremacist movements express this authoritarian bent both in their internal structure and their political aspirations. Internally, they often revolve around strongman figures or a rigid chain of command; dissent is punished and obedience valorized – much like a cult. Observers have noted the “cult-like vibe”of many extremist groups, from neo-Nazis to QAnon-style Christian nationalists . Charismatic leaders or propagandists become sources of truth, and followers suspend their own judgment in favor of the leader’s dictates. Externally, these movements typically yearn for a society governed by authoritarian principles: they idolize past regimes like Nazi Germany or advocate for a future “ethno-state” where minority rights and democratic debate would be eliminated. This aligns with what Jaspers identified as false “illusions of absolute moral certainty”, often under religious or nationalist guises . Indeed, many modern white supremacists blend Christian nationalist rhetoric with racism, asserting dominion “under the illusion of absolute moral certainty” . Such an authoritarian mindset is the antithesis of Jaspers’ “philosophical reason,” which requires humility and openness; instead, anti-reason claims infallibility and seeks to control others.

A related feature is the creation of a mass identity bound by myth. Jaspers warned that anti-reason exploits the human desire to belong to something larger by offering false histories and myths of collective purity . White supremacist groups excel at forging a mythic group identity – e.g. the notion of a pure white nation, a legendary past to “take back,” or a grand battle against nefarious enemies. These narratives are inherently mythological rather than factual. In Jaspers’ analysis, anti-reasoning systems peddle “seductive myths of national purity, the glorification of leaders as saviors, [and] false histories of community” . We see exactly this in white nationalist propaganda: they speak of an idealized (and largely fictional) past when their race reigned supreme, elevate figures like Adolf Hitler or modern demagogues as heroic redeemers, and weave conspiratorial histories (for example, claims that “Jews secretly control everything” or that “white genocide” is underway). These myths bind the group together emotionally. Browning’s accounts show how even ostensibly mainstream settings were infiltrated by such mythic thinking – for instance, some extremist militias presented themselves as ordinary “patriotic” civic groups or church ministries, masking their true agenda . This deception is strategic: by adopting the symbols and stories of community and faith, they normalize their hate. Jaspers would note how anti-reason “obscures and seduces” by wrapping itself in familiar cultural mythos . The mass identityformed in these movements is thus shored up by grand illusions. Individuals find in it a sense of purpose and belonging, but only by accepting a distorted hermeneutic lens – interpreting the world exclusively through the movement’s mythic narrative. The result is a communal “flight from reality”: participants jointly turn away from pluralistic, complex reality toward a simpler collective fantasy. This, Jaspers argues, is spiritually dangerous, for it destroys genuine communication and authentic selfhood in favor of collective delusion .

It’s important to recognize how these elements coalesce into a total anti-reason worldview. Authoritarian structure provides the will to dominate, mass identity provides the comfort of belonging, and myth provides the simplified explanation of the world. White supremacist ideology thus becomes a closed system that answers every existential question with the same formula (the destiny of the white race, the evil of the Other) – allowing no fresh questions or counter-evidence. Browning quickly realized that what many dismissed as isolated “fringe” hate groups were in fact “large and interconnected organizations permeating every facet of American society, effectively spreading their dangerous and repugnant rhetoric at unprecedented speeds” . In other words, this anti-reason collective has become extensive; it recruits from police forces, military veterans, churches, and communities across the nation . Its myths and authoritarian ethos have seeped into mainstream politics at times, gaining mainstream acceptance for ideas and candidates that would once have been unthinkable. Jaspers’ insight that anti-reason is not just an external threat but one that can take root “inside each one of us” rings true here . Decent, educated people – even community leaders – can be “seduced” by the siren song of false certainty and group hatred. This is the philosophically tragic aspect of white supremacy: it represents not just a social or political problem, but a spiritual and existential collapse, a surrender of reason and freedom to the darkness of myth and domination.

Browning’s Encounters with “Anti-Reason” in The Hate Next Door

Matson Browning’s memoir-investigation The Hate Next Door provides a ground-level, human perspective on these abstract ideas. Through decades of infiltrating white supremacist circles, Browning essentially journeyed through an landscape of living anti-reason. His stories document how these groups operate and the personal encounters that highlight Jaspers’ points. For instance, Browning describes meetings with Ku Klux Klan members, neo-Nazis, and skinhead gangs where conversation revolved around paranoid conspiracies and vile slurs – a closed loop of hate reinforcing itself. He witnessed how critical thought was actively suppressed in such gatherings. To fit in, he had to mimic their bigoted beliefs; any disagreement or independent thinking would have blown his cover and likely provoked hostility. This mirrors Jaspers’ claim that anti-reason is anti-dialogue: it cannot tolerate genuine questioning. In these groups, anyone who voices doubt about racist doctrine is seen as a traitor or enemy. Browning’s need to “adopt fake IDs and ideologies” was literally a survival tactic in an anti-reason milieu where authenticity and truth-telling were dangerous .

Browning’s encounters also put a spotlight on the use of fear and myth as social glue. He recounts how hate groups would constantly invoke threats or enemies to keep members in line – whether it was an embellished fear of crime by minorities, paranoid fantasies about “Zionist Occupied Government,” or apocalyptic predictions of a coming race war. In one vivid episode, Browning pursued a neo-Nazi figure, J.T. Ready, who staged armed “border hunts” for migrants under the pretense of defending the nation . Ready’s activities were driven by the myth of invasion and the dehumanization of immigrants. He even gained local political legitimacy for a time, showing how persuasive such fear-laden myths can be when cloaked in pseudo-patriotism . On another front, Tawni Browning’s work on Escaping Polygamy uncovered the ideological crossover between a fundamentalist cult and white supremacist notions of purity – one polygamist sect justified incest as a way to maintain racial purity . This astonishing rationalization lays bare the anti-reason logic: moral reasoning and factual reality are twisted beyond recognition to serve an idée fixe (in this case, that “pure” white blood must be preserved at any cost). Browning’s narrative thus provides concrete cases of how mythic thinking overrides ethical and rational constraints. Fear is transmuted into hatred, and hatred is sacralized by myth.

Another theme in Browning’s experience is the draw of mass identity and the submergence of self. He observed people who, outside the hate group context, might be ordinary neighbors or colleagues, yet in the group they took on a different persona fueled by collective rage. The book notes how surprisingly common the extremists were: “white supremacists are all around us”, sometimes hidden in plain sight . Browning interacted with individuals who had surrendered their better judgment to group dogma – men and women who found a sense of brotherhood, excitement, and purpose in the white power scene. These are people who likely felt dislocated or disempowered in their lives, and the movement gave them an intoxicating certainty and camaraderie. Jaspers would interpret this as people fleeing from the anxiety of freedom into the arms of an all-explaining ideology. In existential terms, many of Browning’s subjects were escaping personal responsibility by “becoming what they normalize, trading their capacity for independent thought for the role of foot-soldiers in a grand myth.

The suppression of critical reflection was often self-imposed: Browning saw how group members would silence their own doubts in order to belong. Even when confronted with contradictions or the immoral consequences of their actions (like murders or plots), they doubled down on the ideology – because to do otherwise would shatter the entire meaning-system they had embraced. Browning’s journey through these circles is effectively a tour of what Jaspers called the “dissolution of reason’s ethical function” . Normal ethical barriers (against violence, prejudice, inhumanity) dissolve under the pressure of the group’s anti-reasoning. As a result, horrific acts become thinkable and even praiseworthy within the echo chamber. Browning’s harrowing stories of violence (and the chilling nonchalance with which some members greeted news of murder) underscore just how far from genuine reason – which includes empathy and moral insight – these communities strayed . His work documents encounters with anti-reason not in theory but in practice, showing the real human cost of philosophy gone awry.

Notably, Browning also encountered moments of light amid the darkness – instances where an individual left the movement or expressed regret. The Hate Next Door even shares that some people do manage to break out of the anti-reason trap, and it offers strategies for reaching those ensnared by hate. Browning provides “a basic list of things you can do to maybe steer a friend or colleague away from this path”, acknowledging it’s a long, patient effort . Such moments are significant: they suggest that even those deep in the clutches of anti-reason retain a spark of freedom that can be rekindled. This insight paves the way toward imagining what a response informed by Jaspers’ philosophy might look like.

Toward a Jaspersian Response to White Supremacy

How might Karl Jaspers suggest we respond to these manifestations of anti-reason in our midst? First and foremost, Jaspers would counsel a recommitment to Reason in its fullest sense – not just as cold logic or facts, but as what he calls “philosophical reason,” a mode of thinking marked by humility, openness, and dialogue . In contrast to the monologues of hatred, reason is dialogical: it requires listening and genuine encounter with others as fellow human beings . A Jaspersian response would thus emphasize restoring communication where anti-reason has shut it down. This means creating opportunities for dialogue with those tempted by extremist ideology – not to endorse their views, but to unmask the false certainties and invite them into a more authentic quest for truth. Jaspers believed that truth is best approached through honest exchange and mutual understanding, whereas anti-reason “refuses the burden of thought” and opts for slogans . Therefore, confronting white supremacism Jaspersianly would involve patient conversation, education, and the courageous presentation of truth, even if it “fractures comfort” . It requires what Jaspers calls “philosophical faith”: a faith in the power of truth and communication over propaganda and violence . This faith is not naïve – it does not assume quick conversions of extremists – but it commits to never giving up on reason or on the humanity of those on the other side.

Jaspers also insists that we must address the spiritual emptiness and fear that make anti-reason attractive . White supremacist mythologies often fill a void – providing scapegoats for personal frustrations or a sense of belonging for the alienated. A Jaspersian approach would seek to fill that void with more genuine sources of meaning. This could involve supporting community dialogues that foster inclusion, helping individuals find purpose in constructive civic or spiritual pursuits rather than destructive ones, and exposing the myths for what they are. Importantly, Jaspers does not advocate suppressing ideas by force alone; he knew that simply silencing the propaganda without curing the underlying disorientation can backfire. Instead, he would likely agree with approaches that combine firm opposition to hate (law enforcement must certainly stop violent crimes, as Browning’s work itself did) with efforts at rehumanization. In practice, this might look like deradicalization programs, education that teaches critical thinking and accurate history, and platforms for those who have left hate groups to speak out. Browning’s own advice for steering people away from extremism aligns with this: it’s a “long game” of patient engagement, chipping away at the closed ideological system over time with facts, empathy, and alternative narratives . Such efforts embody Jaspers’ call to “resist intellectual cowardice, and choose the burden of thought over the seduction of ideology.“

On a broader societal level, a Jaspersian response would champion what he termed the “ethical function” of reason – the role of reason in upholding human dignity and freedom. This means actively defending the institutions and norms that facilitate open discussion, pluralism, and respect for persons. Jaspers, writing in the shadow of Nazi totalitarianism, argued that we must never surrender to despair even in dark times . Instead, he urged a “quiet defiance” of unreason – a refusal to harden our hearts or mirror the hatred of the haters . In today’s context, that might translate into everything from protecting free speech and a free press (so that lies can be challenged publicly), to practicing what Jaspers called “dialogical courage” in our daily lives . Dialogical courage is the bravery to engage patiently with those who seem lost to anti-reason, and also the bravery to stand firm in one’s commitment to truth and humanity even when threatened by the fury of hate. Jaspers beckons us “to stand in the storm, to refuse seduction by anti-reason’s ease, and to reassert the soft power of dialogical courage.” This “soft power” is not the power of coercion, but of integrity and reasoned witness – it’s the teacher who counters racist pseudo-history with real history, the neighbor who refuses to be intimidated by bigoted rhetoric and instead models compassion, the community that rallies around those targeted by hate to show that the supremacists’ narrative of division is false.

Finally, a Jaspersian response holds to the conviction that individuals are free and capable of change, however submerged in anti-reason they may be. Jaspers never lost sight of the human capacity for transcendence – the ability to become more than we are, to grasp truth and freedom. Thus, while we must combat white supremacist movements through law, education, and public censure, we should also remember that each person in those movements retains an inner freedom that could awaken. Jaspers would likely applaud Browning’s dual strategy of both disrupting hate groups (through undercover police work) and reaching out to help people exit them . In existential terms, the ultimate victory over anti-reason is helping its captives reclaim their Existenz – their authentic selfhood and conscience – from the false collective identity that has overtaken them. This is painstaking, often thankless work. But it is necessary if we aim not just to defeat the symptoms of anti-reason, but to cure it at its root.

In summary, contemporary white supremacist movements provide a sobering case study of Jaspers’ concept of anti-reason. Their ideological rigidity, authoritarian ethos, mythic scapegoating, and suppression of freedom echo the very tendencies Jaspers diagnosed in the mid-20th century as threats to humanity’s spiritual health. Yet, as Jaspers reminds us, against the “whisperings of the irrational” we are not helpless . The counter-force is the philosophy of reason – a commitment to truth-seeking, open dialogue, and the courage to remain human in the face of dehumanization. By applying these principles, we affirm that however loud the hate next door may shout, thoughtful humanity can still answer with reason and hope. Our task, in Jaspers’ view, is to keep the lamp of reason alight, to refuse the seductions of anti-reason both around us and within us, and thus to safeguard the freedom and dignity at the core of our existence .

Sources:

• Karl Jaspers, Reason and Anti-Reason in Our Time (1952). 
• Matson Browning & Tawni Browning, The Hate Next Door: Undercover Within the New Face of White Supremacy (2024).