Far-right group establishes ‘whites-only' community with 40 residents
Return to the Land's first settlement site in rural Arkansas (Aarvoll/YouTube)
Return to the Land (RTTL), a far-right ethnonationalist group, has established a "whites-only" community in remote Arkansas and is reportedly planning expansion into Missouri.
Describing itself as a private membership association, RTTL welcomes only individuals of "European ancestry" with "traditional views," aiming to separate from modern society.
RTTL's flagship community spans approximately 150 acres of land, is home to 40 inhabitants, and features its own cabins, roads, wells, a community center, and a schoolhouse.
A second community was established near the first in January this year and the group lists aspirations to move into the Appalachian mountains on its website.
Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin, the NAACP, and the Anti-Defamation League have raised significant concerns, accusing RTTL of racial discrimination and attempting to revive segregation. In full
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
9 minutes ago
- The Independent
Donald Trump must put himself at the forefront of peace-building
Nobody expects consistency from Donald Trump, nor the Trump administration, dominated as it is by capricious personalities, but America's latest diplomatic moves in Middle Eastern policy are especially bewildering. The Palestinian Authority (PA) has latterly become a target for US sanctions, for which it is hardly the most deserving of candidates. It is not Hamas, for example – far from it, in fact: the terrorist organisation is a bitter rival, having effectively ceded Gaza from PA control many years ago. In contrast to so many other entities in the region, it has renounced violence and has even recognised the state of Israel. And yet Marco Rubio, secretary of state, has imposed new visa restrictions on PA officials, such that they cannot visit the US, which would include, ironically, peace conferences such as the one currently organised by the United Nations and being held in New York. Can the Trump administration be so resentful about the unexpected success of the conference that it could be so spiteful? It seems so – but it is counterproductive and unhelpful to the peace process. The conference, boycotted by Israel and the United States, is the result of a joint French and Saudi Arabian initiative, and has enjoyed great success in further securing international recognition for the state of Palestine while demanding Hamas disarm and give up its grip on Gaza. Virtually the entire Arab world has endorsed that concept of Palestinian nationhood, without Hamas – as has, in effect, the UK. Yet despite President Trump giving the green light to the British and French to recognise Palestine, and never having raised any retrospective objections to some 140 other nations that have previously done so, including India and China, he has thrown a tantrum. The latest country to recognise Palestinian statehood is Canada. This has provoked an unusually harsh reaction from Mr Trump, who once again is threatening Canada with a trade war in retaliation, itself an attack on Canadian sovereignty. Then again, given that President Trump doesn't recognise the legitimacy of the state of Canada itself, that is not so surprising. By contrast, he has shown no such vengeance – yet – towards Britain or France, nor Saudi Arabia or the rest of the Arab League. Or Mexico, for that matter, which is also joining the diplomatic wave. The world has had to act now, not because it wishes to reward Hamas for the atrocities it committed on 7 October 2023, but to try to preserve life in Gaza and advance the cause of a two-state solution to the conflict. At its simplest, the act of recognising Palestine is a way of pressuring Israel into declaring a ceasefire, ending the military actions, and preventing the famine from worsening. It is not about putting Hamas back into power; any viable two-state solution by definition cannot allow Hamas, or any Hamas-like organisation, to have a role in the governance of any part of the state of Palestine. That is why it is in the interests of Israel and America to support the creation of such an entity. An independent Palestine, by its own actions and with international guarantees, cannot be allowed to exist as a threat to Israel; nor, however, can Israel follow policies that force the Palestinian people to suffer and drive them from their homeland, as defined as the occupied territories. 'From the river to the sea' cannot be the slogan of either side if peace, stability and prosperity are to prevail. With a sustainable Israeli ceasefire, the hostages are far more likely to be released. Not so very long ago, that was the avowed and consistent aim of US policy under successive administrations. It was also, from time to time, the policy of Israeli prime ministers. There were successes – international treaties, peace accords, smaller deals and, in President Trump's first term, the Abraham accords, which saw more regional players normalising full diplomatic relations with Israel. That process was interrupted by the murderous attacks and hostage taking of 7 October, but it must be resumed, as another part of the peace process. Like presidents before him, Mr Trump could and should be at the forefront of peace-building. Indeed, he can hardly avoid it, given the geopolitics, and he ran for office on a pledge that he would end the war in Gaza. He has sent another envoy, Steve Witkoff, to see the situation on the ground, and Mr Witkoff should confirm the dire humanitarian situation. That is but the first step in a process that takes in a permanent ceasefire, the establishment of Hamas-free governance in Gaza, a plan to rebuild Gaza – with American investment along the lines of Mr Trump's Mediterranean resort plan – and the aim of a Palestinian nation peacefully co-existing with its neighbour, with both peoples free from fear and secure in their respective homelands. The expulsion of the population of Gaza, a continuation of the war and a return to terrorism isn't good for anyone, and certainly not the people of Israel, who yearn for permanent safety and security for themselves and their families, and no future '7 Octobers'. That vision is surely something that President Trump could get behind – preferably with a dogged determination and consistency.
Reuters
9 minutes ago
- Reuters
Trump gives Mexico 90-day tariff reprieve as deadline for higher duties looms
July 31 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump gave Mexico a 90-day reprieve from higher tariffs to negotiate a broader trade deal but was expected to issue higher final duty rates for most other countries as the clock wound down on his Friday deal deadline. The extension, which avoids a 30% tariff on most Mexican non-automotive and non-metal goods compliant with the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement on trade, came after a Thursday morning call between Trump and Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum. "We avoided the tariff increase announced for tomorrow," Sheinbaum wrote in an X social media post, adding that the Trump call was "very good." Approximately 85% of Mexican exports comply with the rules of origin outlined in the USMCA, shielding them from 25% tariffs related to fentanyl, according to Mexico's economy ministry. Trump said that the U.S. would continue to levy a 50% tariff on Mexican steel, aluminum and copper and a 25% tariff on Mexican autos and on non-USMCA-compliant goods subject to tariffs related to the U.S. fentanyl crisis. "Additionally, Mexico has agreed to immediately terminate its Non Tariff Trade Barriers, of which there were many," Trump said in a Truth Social post without providing details. Trump is expected to issue tariff rate proclamations later on Thursday for countries that have not struck trade deals by a 12:01 a.m. EDT (0401 GMT) deadline. South Korea agreed on Wednesday to accept a 15% tariff on its exports to the U.S., including autos, down from a threatened 25%, as part of a deal that includes a pledge to invest $350 billion in U.S. projects to be chosen by Trump. But goods from India appeared to be headed for a 25% tariff after talks bogged down over access to India's agriculture sector, drawing a higher-rate threat from Trump that also included an unspecified penalty for India's purchases of Russian oil. Although negotiations with India were continuing, New Delhi vowed to protect the country's labor-intensive farm sector, triggering outrage from the opposition party and a slump in the rupee. Trump hit Brazil on Wednesday with a steep 50% tariff as he escalated his fight with Latin America's largest economy over its prosecution of his friend and former President Jair Bolsonaro, but softened the blow by excluding sectors such as aircraft, energy and orange juice from heavier levies. The run-up to Trump's tariff deadline was unfolding as federal appeals court judges sharply questioned Trump's use of a sweeping emergency powers law to justify his sweeping tariffs of up to 50% on nearly all trading partners. Trump invoked the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act to declare an emergency over the growing U.S. trade deficit and impose his "reciprocal" tariffs and a separate fentanyl emergency. The Court of International Trade ruled in May that the actions exceeded his executive authority, and questions from judges during oral arguments before the U.S. Appeals Court for the Federal Circuit in Washington indicated further skepticism. "IEEPA doesn't even say tariffs, doesn't even mention them," Judge Jimmie Reyna said at one point during the hearing. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the United States believes it has the makings of a trade deal with China, but it is "not 100% done," and still needs Trump's approval. U.S. negotiators "pushed back quite a bit" over two days of trade talks with the Chinese in Stockholm this week, Bessent said in an interview with CNBC. China is facing an August 12 deadline to reach a durable tariff agreement with Trump's administration, after Beijing and Washington reached preliminary deals in May and June to end escalating tit-for-tat tariffs and a cut-off of rare earth minerals.
Daily Mail
9 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Critics like me predicted Trump's trade war would tank the economy: Now, in a stunning mea culpa, DAN MCLAUGHLIN reveals why he was so wrong
One-hundred and twenty days out from President Donald Trump 's self-declared 'Liberation Day,' you can't blame the administration for wanting to crow, 'I told you so.' On April 2, Trump rolled out a vast slate of taxes on about sixty countries in the most expansive US tariffs policy in nearly a century, triggering a flood of apocalyptic predictions of everything from an uncontrollable trade war to US recession to global financial doom. In March, in anticipation of the tariff rollout, Goldman Sachs slashed its forecast for US GDP growth in 2025 from 2.4 percent to 1.7 percent. Two days after Trump's Rose Garden address, JP Morgan predicted a 60 percent chance of recession in 2025. And even I, your humble Daily Mail contributor, sounded the alarm in April: 'Donald Trump has made a complete hash of economic policy. His tariffs are a bad idea, badly implemented, and badly explained.' To be honest, I still believe that. But Trump has demonstrated an ability to adjust on the fly that many failed to appreciate. And now – while I won't dismiss the spectre of worldwide cataclysm just yet – things are looking pretty good. US GDP growth surged between April and June, increasing at an annual rate of three percent, beating estimates. The US stock markets have notched historic climbs. Consumer sentiment is rising, as is consumer spending, which grew at 1.4 percent between April and June – despite Trump's tariffs – up from 0.5 percent from January to March. Unemployment remains in check and recession fears have subsided. JP Morgan now puts the chances of a downturn in 2025 at 40 percent. A unified front of aggrieved US trading partners hasn't formed to force Trump to back down, nor have they hobbled American influence abroad. And while the president's position in the polls isn't great, it has stabilized, and more Americans are telling pollsters that they approve of his handling of the economy. Now, with the administration announcing new trade deals, notably with the European Union, nearly everything appears to be coming up Trump. On Sunday, EU negotiators agreed to a 15 percent tariff. That's less than Trump's punitive threats, but up significantly from around 5 percent tariffs before Trump took office, and more painful than the 10 percent deal that the United Kingdom inked in May. The European bloc had to make promises of nearly $2 trillion in new investments in the United States and new purchases of American energy and weapons. Selling American-built weapons is also a better way for the government to create jobs than trying to use tariffs to reinvigorate industries that will never return to the US soil. But all this doesn't mean the EU deal is flawless. Higher tariffs are still a cost on American consumers (the US inflation rate, which excludes the cost of tariffs, has been ticking up from 2.3 percent in June) and companies that have been hesitant to pass those added costs to their customers are likelier to do so now that the tariffs are permanent. Additionally, many of the promises of new EU purchases may not be enforceable, because the EU doesn't have the full powers of a sovereign government to guarantee compliance. Finally, if the point of Trump's tariffs was to break down import barriers to create greater access for American goods in the European market, Trump left a lot on the table, from digital and carbon levies to GMO restrictions on American agriculture. But it is clear that Trump got the better of the EU, which swallowed much higher tariffs just to avoid a harsher deal, while doing little to improve its position. There's an old poker saying: if you can't spot the sucker at the table, you're the sucker. Well, we've spotted the sucker: it's the EU with its cumbersome multi-national structure, unable to act decisively or resist Trump's overwhelming pressure campaign. So, are these developments proof that sky-high tariffs work? No. But it is a tribute to Trump's flexibility. He believes more strongly in tariffs than in any other idea in politics, but he's still willing to throw them overboard to get what he wants. When markets and opinion polls were hitting the panic button, Trump didn't dig in; he shifted course and climbed down from his most extreme tariffs. Trump doesn't plan. He negotiates by feel and gut instinct. And there are plenty of dangers ahead for Trump's trade strategy. The toughest trade deals, from China to Canada and Mexico, are yet to be inked. And the Federal Reserve again declined to lower interest rates – signaling persistent fears of a return to high inflation. However, the worst predictions of recessionary ruin were overstated. Trump is a master of hype, and he's driven his critics to a lot of overhype. At least, some of us have enough sense to take a step back – and reconsider.
