Return to the Land (RTTL) co-founder Eric Orwoll has recently sparked a national debate with a particularly unsettling project: the expansion of a racially exclusive community into Missouri. Located just outside of Springfield, this planned community is exclusively private and specifically excludes Jewish and non-white applicants. That action, which was covered up by legal defenses and patriarchal rhetoric, has sparked a heated discussion among politicians, civil rights activists, and legal experts.
Orwoll is trying to create what he refers to as intentional communities—areas set aside for people who share “European ancestral values”—by calling his organization a “private member association.” Despite being presented as voluntary, this association model bears a striking resemblance to the legal loopholes that were historically employed to maintain segregation in America in the middle of the 20th century.
RTTL thinks it can circumvent the Fair Housing Act by purposefully avoiding real estate sales and instead requiring membership. The Anti-Defamation League and other civil rights watchdogs, however, disagree. As a resurgence of debunked segregation strategies, the ADL has strongly denounced RTTL’s actions, highlighting the possibility that these discriminatory practices could still be considered federal civil rights violations.
Eric Orwoll & Return to the Land (RTTL)
| Item | Details |
|---|---|
| Name | Eric Orwoll |
| Role | Co-founder of Return to the Land (RTTL) |
| Organization Type | Private Member Association |
| Primary Location | 160-acre homestead in Northern Arkansas |
| Expansion Target | Springfield, Missouri (and eventually all 50 U.S. states) |
| Membership Criteria | Exclusively white individuals of European descent; excludes Jewish people |
| Activities Planned | Homeschooling networks, legal advocacy, private healthcare |
| Legal Status Claimed | Operates as a non-commercial private community; no real estate sold |
| Public Website | RTTL Information |
| Public Controversy | Widely condemned as racist and antisemitic by lawmakers and ADL |
Democrats in Missouri are speaking out against it. In reference to Southwest Missouri’s advancements in inclusion, State Representative Betsy Fogle described the group’s existence as “a stain on a beautiful region.” Her tone was very clear: this kind of racial segregation is a gravely damaging regression rather than a cultural preference.
Eric Orwoll, meanwhile, has frequently defended RTTL’s purpose, claiming that it is motivated by a desire for cultural preservation rather than hatred. However, that narrative is undermined by his group’s decision to exclude Jews and all non-white races. Making a conscious distinction between those who belong and those who do not is the goal of the endeavor, not tradition or community safety.
America’s understanding of systemic racism has significantly improved over the last ten years, especially among younger generations. However, fringe organizations like RTTL are undermining that progress by promoting exclusionary ideals through rural isolation and legal ambiguity. This tactic seems uncannily similar to how homeowners’ covenants and redlining allowed white-only communities to flourish.
RTTL is placing its bet on a more subdued, slower kind of social division by using legalese instead of overtly violent methods. Although the group positions itself as centered on homesteading and ancestral values, it is impossible to overlook its fundamental principle of racial exclusion. Lawmakers like Jeremy Dean in Missouri say their ascent is not happening in a vacuum. “Politicians who attack marginalized communities embolden them,” he said, allowing hate to spread through policy silence.
Amazingly, RTTL intends to implement its model in each state in the union. “We want white Americans to have the right to live among like-minded people,” Orwoll said in a recent interview, echoing this objective. Even though that quote seems harmless, it betrays a particularly harmful mindset that aims to normalize segregation as a matter of personal freedom.
Exclusion has frequently been passed off as community preservation throughout history. The language of choice has been used as a weapon to hide oppression, from early American sundown towns to South African enclaves during the apartheid era. The RTTL framework is a contemporary development of that strategy, which riskily uses the law and rural property rights as barriers to scrutiny.
In response, civil society has been particularly vocal in its opposition. Mari Jo Miles and other Springfield locals were worried that such a community would destroy decades of cultural unity. She declared, “We are a melting pot.” “That’s how we want it to remain.” Her subtly intense sentiment captures the general uneasiness felt by many Missourians.
Although pressure is mounting, Missouri’s attorney general has not yet made a public commitment to look into the group. Civil liberties organizations and activists are calling for an urgent legal review, claiming that the existence of RTTL jeopardizes the legal underpinnings of equal opportunity.
By creating private healthcare, legal, and educational programs that are only available to white people, RTTL is effectively creating a shadow society that runs counter to the principles of equity and pluralism. The possibility that this could spread across the entire country is unsettling, especially as similar organizations experiment with different iterations of the same tactic.
RTTL is pushing the boundaries of what private associations can accomplish before violating civil rights through strategic alliances and ambiguous legal definitions. Their attempt to maintain legal protection despite being morally repugnant emphasizes how crucial proactive policy measures are. If prompt action is not taken, this model could lead to imitation groups that are even more resourceful and well-organized.
But the resistance is growing stronger. Legislative committees in a number of states have pledged to consider the issue. According to Representative Fogle, she anticipates that Missouri’s attorney general will follow Arkansas’s example and begin a thorough investigation. Her statement, “I refuse to let history repeat itself,” emphasized the pressing nature of the situation.
Despite the clamor, the fundamental query still stands: Can an egalitarian society permit exclusionary communities to flourish unchecked? This is a serious question that is no longer theoretical. In many respects, Missouri has turned into a test site for that response.
By organizing and utilizing online infrastructure in a remarkably efficient manner, RTTL has been able to further its mission beyond what many had expected. With their sights set on Missouri, the next chapter is rapidly coming to life. How quickly the political and legal systems react may determine whether that chapter ends in resignation or resistance.
