My Town in the Slavery Archive

The other day I mentioned a documentary by a professor from Washington State University. Dr. Mike Hayes documented some of Doug Wilson’s slavery scandal that darkened the Palouse from October 2003 to February 2004. The Moscow-Pullman Daily News reported the making of the film and announced its premier (June 16, 2005). It showed one night at the Kenworthy Performing Arts Centre; I believe it sold out. The line to buy tickets went around the block.

We received several requests to open this post. You may view it here, in the Slavery archive. Be sure to let it stream a bit — it’s a slow loader.

My Town provides a good baseline to measure how far Douglas Wilson has advanced in his culture war against Moscow. He started with race-based chattel slavery 2003–04. Since then he has directly overseen one freed serial pedophile, one violent predator on the loose, and multiple plagiarized textbooks.

And he’s trying to “save civilization.”

10 Comments

  1. Proud to say that I am the “Carl” of the long ago “Auntie Establishment and Brother Carl” weekly KRFP program that “sponsored” the movie, though we had nothing to do with the expertise required to produce the film. We simply turned out to be the “sponsors” because Mr. Wilson was our favorite, uh “topic” every Sunday all those years ago.

  2. Any idea of the identity of the man who marched across the room and grabbed the arm of the woman with whom he disagreed? (Minute 29?) I’m amazed he wasn’t taken down by any of the other men in the crowd.

    1. Hi Janet — He was a former employee of the UI. Not a member of the Kirk, which does not mean the Kirk did not retain him to bully. Notice that no one on stage told him “hands off!” They appeared comfortable with, if not prepared for, the manhandling.

  3. hmmm. . . . I have a question that might sound weird. Do you think that Wilson was serious in all this neo-confederate garbage or was it just a ploy to strengthen the bond between him and his congregation? An us versus them mentality and a, “see, I told you so,” moment.

    1. @Jonathan—
      Both: Wilson was drop-dead serious and he used the scandal to promote an “us vs. them” mentality in the Kirk. Wilson embraced all things Confederate long before he co-wrote, plagiarized, edited, and published SSAIW. The timeline demonstrates this. And when he had multiple opportunities to soften his stance — even a little — he doubled down each time, giving a stiff middle finger to the community. He adopted the name “paleo-Confederate” to describe himself, which is a name he still uses and an aggravating circumstance because of the definition of “paleo.”

      Now, to be fair, this MO is true of every scandal. With slavery, he rewrote SSAIW under the title of Black & Tan and did not repudiate one falsehood in his original book. He threatened that those who charged him with plagiarism were in danger of going to hell and he even inserted a not-so-subtle commendation for the first Grand Wizard of the KKK.

      We have not seen him back down a tiny bit on Jamin Wight or Steven Sitler. Last week, when he rejected the name “Federal Vision,” he still clung to each doctrine of the FV, including baptismal union with Christ and baptismal regeneration. He simply ditched the name (which means he’s likely getting ready for a split in the CREC).

      No one — no historian, no theologian, no expert on pedophilia — will ever correct him or prove him wrong. And he’s bent on doing wrong.

    2. “(which means he’s likely getting ready for a split in the CREC).”
      Time has a way of correcting these wackadoos, just look at the recon church in Tyler Tx.

      But why split from the CREC? It doesn’t make any sense, in a way isn’t he the CREC? Don’t tell me it’s all about power…:-)

    1. @Jonathan & CJ: Just guessing. But I see few reasons to split from the name Federal Vision but not its doctrines unless he’s positioning himself to split from the CREC. As CJ wrote, it’s possible the report won’t whitewash Wilson. It’s understandable that even the CREC doesn’t want to defend the marriage and fatherhood of Steven Sitler or the missionary journey of Jamin Wight, which would force them to criticize Doug Wilson’s pastoral ministry. But since he served notice that he will not tolerate criticism on these scandals, he put the CREC on the horns of a dilemma. He insists he did no wrong. He told Rod Dreher that he would fellowship with him on the condition that Rod retracted his statement calling Wilson’s actions “insane.” If the CREC concurs with Dreher, I don’t see an amicable resolution.

      Then I kick myself. This is the CREC. They did join ranks with Wilson for a reason. It’s hard to imagine these men suddenly grew a conscience in the last 18 months and will do the right thing.

Comments are closed.