Mississippi
Nicholas Lemann’s Redemption: The Last Battle of the Civil War can be aptly summarized as another leftwing, anti-Southern tirade by a Jewish revisionist that bewails the demise of Radical Reconstruction. There is no shortage of those these days.
Set in Mississippi, Lemann’s refreshing narrative tells the story of the violent overthrow of Reconstruction in 1875 by armed groups of Confederate veterans. “The Mississippi Plan” later became the model that was used to liberate South Carolina, Florida, and Louisiana from Republican rule.
“The Civil War” didn’t end at Appomattox. It shifted into a second phase of low-intensity guerrilla warfare against the American occupation that culminated in the Redemption of the Southern states in 1877.
Lemann begins his account with the story of the pivotal Battle of Colfax in Louisiana in April 1873. Sheriff Columbus Nash, a former Confederate POW, raised an army of Confederate veterans to fight for the restoration of white supremacy in Grant Parish, a new gerrymandered parish that had been created by the Republican state legislature to place Whites in the Red River valley under negro rule:
“As one of them remembered it, “They were informed that the action about to be taken could result in prosecution for treason and those who were afraid to fight for white supremacy could step out and return home. Some twenty five men took advantage of this offer.” The rest of them, two to three hundred men, rode toward Colfax.”
The Whites engaged the African-American militia and defeated them on the field of battle. In their bloodlust for revenge, they massacred the survivors. The federal government responded by sending troops into Colfax. A federal grand jury indicted three of the White participants, but the Colfax case ended in a mistrial.
After years of American occupation, White Louisiana was emboldened by the heroic resistance to Reconstruction at Colfax. In 1874, three former Confederate officers started a militant newspaper called the Caucasian, which was dedicated to the violent restoration of white supremacy in Louisiana.
“We, having grown weary of tame submission to this most desolating war of the negro upon us, propose to take a bold stand to assert the dignity of our manhood, to say in tones of thunder and with the voice of angry elements STOP! THUS FAR SHALT THOU GO, AND NO FURTHER.”
The Caucasian opened a new chapter in the White resistance to the American occupation. It led to an explosive outburst of similar sentiments in newspapers all across the state that galvanized the demoralized White masses to revolution.
Within a month, a group of Whites established a new paramilitary organization called the White League in Louisiana. Unlike the Klan, the White League operated openly, solicited newspapers for coverage, and was explicitly political in its design to overthrow Reconstruction by means of voter suppression.
The White League considered themselves defenders of “hereditary civilization and Christianity menaced by a stupid Africanization.” In the Battle of Liberty Place, 5,000 members of the White League marched on New Orleans in September 1874 to retake the city and capture control of the state government. They routed an integrated opposition force of 3,500 police and state militia.
President Grant dispatched troops to restore Governor Kellogg (a Yankee carpetbagger from Vermont) to power. The White League retreated from New Orleans, but the point that Whites could resist Reconstruction had been made. The successful capture of the Louisiana state capital emboldened their White counterparts in neighboring Mississippi.
In 1874, Mississippi was smoldering under the rule of Gov. Adelbert Ames, a Yankee carpetbagger from Maine who led the famous 20th Maine Infantry Regiment at the Battle of Fredericksburg. Ames is featured as an unsympathetic prig in Gods and Generals.
In 1868, Ames was appointed provisional Governor of Mississippi by the Radical Republican Congress. The new majority black legislature of Mississippi sent Ames to the Senate where he represented Mississippi in Washington from 1870 to 1874.
While in Washington, Sen. Adelbert Ames married Blanche Butler, the daughter of Beast Butler, the tyrant of New Orleans. He later returned to Mississippi where he served again as the Reconstruction governor from 1874 to 1876.
The White revolution against Republican rule in Mississippi began in Vicksburg in the summer of 1874. A group of Whites shot up a Republican Fourth of July celebration and the Democrats were swept back to power in the August elections.
As in Louisiana, White Mississippi was emboldened by the successful act of resistance to Republican rule in Vicksburg, and Confederate veterans in Mississippi formed their own paramilitary organization called the White Line.
In 1875, Congressman Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus Lamar rallied White Mississippi to restore the Democrats to power in the fall elections. Taxpayer organizations proliferated across the state which opposed Republican corruption on non-racial spending and constitutional grounds.
The White Line used every means at their disposal (violence, fraud, threats, and intimidation) to suppress the negro vote across Mississippi. The Democrats recaptured control of the Mississippi legislature in the 1875 election and quickly moved to impeach Gov. Ames who resigned under pressure and fled to the Midwest.
A year later, Ames told his story of the 1875 election to the New York Times. The demise of Reconstruction in Mississippi was really about, he said:
“In one phrase – hostility to the negro as a citizen. The South cares for no other question. Everything gives way to it. They support or oppose men, advocate or denounce policies, flatter or murder, just as such action will help them as far as possible to recover their old power over the negro. Everything that stands in the line of their march to this end is overthrown.”
In 1895, he further elaborated on his downfall in a letter to Scribner’s magazine:
“There was a time when policy made it advisable for the white men of Mississippi to advance ‘corruption,’ ‘negro mobs,’ anything and everything but the real reason for their conduct. That time has long since passed. There is no good reason why the truth should not be stated in plain terms. It is that they are white men, Anglo-Saxons – a dominant race – educated to believe in negro slavery. To perpetuate their existing order of things they ventured everything and lost. An unjust and tyrannical power (from their standpoint) had filled their state with mourning, beggared them, freed their slaves and as a last insult and injury made the ex-slave a political equal. They resisted by intimidation violence and murder. Excuses by the way of justification were given while the powerful hand of the national government was to be feared. Soon the national government and public opinion ceased to be dreaded. Then they announced boldly that this is a white man’s government and that the negro and ex-slave should forever form no part of it.”
Adelbert Ames was right.
After the demise of Reconstruction in Mississippi, paramilitary groups composed of Confederate veterans like the White League, the White Line, the Red Shirts, and the Regulators used the same violent tactics to overthrow Reconstruction in South Carolina, Florida, and Louisiana.
The Redeemers were fighting for their ubiquitous belief that the South was a “White man’s country.” They rejected multiracial democracy (an alien concept practiced in prewar New England that was imposed by Yankees upon the prostrate Confederacy) because they believed that blacks were an inferior race. They believed that Southern civilization was based primarily on race, religion, and culture and only secondarily on republican political principles.
In South Carolina, wearing the red shirt or the red ribbon was a symbol of resistance to the Yankee occupation and coming of age that was proudly worn by boys and girls who were children during the War Between the States. It was the next generation of Southerners that grew up during the thirty years of forced integration (Black Run Amerika 1.0) that built the Jim Crow South.
In those years, Dixie became the White Republic within the United States, and its racial ideal and memory of Reconstruction spread across the North and West in the early twentieth century, where it remained dominant until the late 1930s when opposition to Hitler’s Germany reawakened the virulent strain of Yankee egalitarianism.
The Reconstruction amendments in the Constitution were never abolished. They were later used as the legal basis to overturn the Plessy decision, dispatch federal troops to Dixie, and to dismantle the Jim Crow South with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
In the year 2011, “White Nationalists” on the internet advocate everything from secession from the United States to the creation of a “White Republic” without realizing that the White revolution is actually behind us. There is an ancestral memory of this because the “White Republic” was a place that actually existed.
Dixie was the White Man’s Country. The Redeemers won the revolution in 1876.
Note: Below you can watch The BRA Experience documentary of Reconstruction told from the mainstream Yankee perspective.
The Civil War did end in 1865, because the fundamental war aim of the North was to keep slavery out of the North and West. The status of blacks afterwards was of some mild interest to many, but of strong interest to only a few. The development of the North and West proceeded as Northerners and Midwesterners wanted- based on free white labor. Some blacks already lived in the North and more came, but they never represented a problem until much later.
The problem the South had and has is regardless of whether blacks are slaves, free people without legal recourse, or as they are today a kind of super-citizen with a wide array of special legal privileges, it still has lots of blacks. The presence of lots of blacks under any circumstances drags down society as a whole. The failure of the South has been to find some effective way of managing blacks and preventing them from dragging down society as a whole, and having the most experience with blacks they should have done that, but it never has.
We need to hear again and again that DIXIE is a White Republic!!!
The problem of the South is and always has been our attachment to the North. The Yankees fought the bloodiest war in American history to conquer the South, to liberate the negro, and elevate him to a level of full civic and political equality. They marched into Richmond, Charleston, and Jackson at the head of negro armies.
Where did the 14th Amendment and 15th Amendment come from? It was imposed on the South at gunpoint by the North as a condition for readmission to the Union. By that time, Congress had passed the Reconstruction Acts and had installed fraudulent puppet governments of negroes, carpetbaggers, and scalawags in the former Confederate states.
It took a thirty year struggle by three generations of Southerners to mitigate the racial damage that had been done to our society and to contain the negro within the Jim Crow system.
In the aftermath of the Second World War, Northern liberals decided to resume the silly project. In 1964, over 90 percent of Northerners in Congress voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. MLK enraptured White audiences in the Northern states with his “I Have a Dream Speech” at the Lincoln Memorial.
In the South, neither Lincoln or MLK or the Republican Party had ever been popular. Giving blacks voting rights and passing authoritarian laws to force society to conform to the utopian delusion of a “colorblind society” and finally putting the negro on a pedestal at the top of the racial pecking order was never our idea.
If we had won our independence, none of this would have ever happened. The only reason it happened and the only reason it has gotten worse is because of the context of the Union.
As a corollary, the only way it will ever stop is to get out of the Union.
Just a note, you can spend 15 years in the LOS and never hear a peep from them about white resistance to the reconstruction. The LOS like any other Mommy Professor outfit is more dedicated to their abstractions then the blood and soil. Shout “racism” at the people of the LOS and you will learn more about black confederate soldiers than you cared to, but you won’t hear a peep about “white men.”
>>The problem of the South is and always has been our attachment to the North. <<
The problem of the South is and always has been its archaic social structure, based on the English system of a land-owning gentry with many tenant farmers and few small freeholders. This isn't conducive to the development of a modern society; the presence of a large population that simply cannot function in a modern society and is a constant drag on its improvement isn't first as I said earlier, but a close second.
The mistake is seeing old conflicts through the lens of current conflicts. Then as now most people in the North didn't give a crap about blacks, but they did not want to live in a slave society. That a slave society existed south of the Ohio and east of the Missisippi did not bother them much; the thought of it moving into western territories they wanted to settle and develop with their own culture (through Dred Scott) and possibly even into the North (Lemmon v. New York) represented an existential threat to them.
The common thread hear is an authoritarian, pro-slavery Supreme Court led by Roger Taney (and before him John Marshall.) Southerners who complain about the Supreme Court should remember it was originally *their* weapon.
Very interesting piece of history. It is almost as though the WEJ writers want to push post-war revolutions in our faces. This tells us how to go about deconstructing the reconstruction era post-Civil War.
And of course another is the reconstruction era in Germany post-World War I which was called Weimar, and was finally deconstructed.
I wonder why they are so interested in educating us about this sort of thing?
@ “….The problem of the South is and always has been its archaic social structure, based on the English system of a land-owning gentry with many tenant farmers and few small freeholders. This isn’t conducive to the development of a modern society; the presence of a large population that simply cannot function in a modern society and is a constant drag on its improvement….”
A matter of perspective, to be sure.
It always stunned me how much Yankees hate their own babies and families, their very own children. They pimp them out without any history. They are born and bred as mere economic units of labor (even as they pretend they have some form of “religion”)— they are taught to hate their own flesh (“America is built on progress and competition” they say— ie, beating out their own neighbors, crapping on others, stealing, taking what you can get and calling that “strong.”)
This is all b/c they don’t value any “heritable” wealth (on any level), as this poster also derides it. Land ownership… is the basis for a “handing down” that yankees are not a part of. The strongest exception in america being the northeast working class Italians and a few of those who now i.d. as ‘celts’ (who do seem to wish to remember something about “who they are”— this inheritance of their identity; with the italians that has much to do with how they got to the country, and being connected to Rome, in reality— as opposed to all their subjugation populations, sadly, much of “europe.” When it comes to ROMAN catholicism, well…they alone are really Roman, (the others subjects, ideologically co-opted). If I was Italian, I would certainly be roman and catholic, and be from the history of my people. So, they are less subjugated, like the some northern populations and much of the colonials.
Anyway—- it is a great pity when one sees the results of a lack of inheritance (in the broadest use of the word)!—having nothing to do with money, but from being landed. It is NO accident that Liberation Theologist Father Plegar (sp) made himself famous hopping up and down in a black church dissing ‘anglos.’ Talk about a gutted man! Who the heck IS a person s/a that??? So go the dispossessed.
Yankees seem left to want nothing more than the “freedom” of free stuff, freedom to shop, and freedom of choice in products. They cannot even envision more.
Without an inheritance of any substance, that’s all you can think. No matter what they say their religion is, it’s just Atheist Materialism (AM). They cannot seemingly imagine the freedom of Being. How can you imagine the Freedom of Being if your only “self” is a shopper and a Northeast “progressiver” after his “improvements” and other little ‘perfectionistic’ business.
Exactly what “improvements” are you being held back from? Just curious?
What is this “modern society” you crave? LOL—- what is this “social structure” you say the “archaic south” social structure is holding you from????
Well, the Southern HAS a society, lol. Yankees have whoever “buys in,” or “wins in the competition by beating a brother,” tres modren. What, exactly, is their “society.”
PS—
To whatever degree I cannot function —(am I a wheel? A sprocket? A bottle opener?— oh LMAO at the stone age Yankee cults of functionality, utility, and usury)— But as I was saying… to whatever degree I cannot function in the yankee tres modren, I can only say thank you to God.
Seriously—- take a look at the USURY underlying the discourse. Improvements, progress, utility, functions, modren, the language of the supposed “sophistication,” (“archaic” he is “held back”), the cosmopolitanism, the internationalism—
It is as if the foreigners brought in to work in the Robber Baron Factories— dreamed of being the very tools they were forced to use in the sweat shops!
…to be… USEFUL. (the height of the yankee vision!— no?)
hahaha @ “…the presence of a large population that simply cannot function in a modern society and is a constant drag on its improvement….”
Well, the south’s FUNCTIONALITY (the yankee’s highest value, evinced in their usual obsessional mantra of usefulness, usury, utility, yields, produce, productivity, getting)—would be a drag if southerners just wanted to be TOOLS.
lol
The word is “deracinated.”
Yeah, in the “best” of the Yankee tradition, there ain’t no such thing as “family.” Unless you want to get the shit kicked out of you. That’s what family is for in Yankeeland.
Ps, ps—
reconstruction is far more interesting than the war. And timely, as many consider thought reform and re-education programs (“reconstruction” as it was called in the u.s.)
The greatest failure in yankee imagination (greatest failure of imagination in the whole Northeast Ethos, really)— is that (due to covering their own tracks) they do not realize a war occurred, and their children do not realize how they have benefitted from Civil War Privilege (especially in regard to land redistribution programs), nor how so many of the “improvements” were built on southern earnings (enslavement of the south).
HOW— if you burn American lands, do war on Americans, “total” war, in fact, and rape Americans, and destroy all the farm tools of americans so they can’t get back on their feet— can you BE an American?
What could it even mean? Yankees rarely have this put to them.
What is their relation (really) to the Americans they killed, en masse. Who does that make them?
“Who does that make them?”
In a word, Winners.
Winners?
Winning at the expense of your biological family to further your own selfish ambition is a pretty short-term vision of Victory.
Would you rather have a long-burning flame or a brilliant firecracker that lasts a split second? I’ll have the former.
I’m saying that is what it boils down to in Yankeedom.
But if more of us had that mindset, that there are winners and there are losers, we might have realized a long time ago that there was something worth fighting for. The people taking from us are winning. What we have lost has not disappeared into the ether. It has gone into the pockets of the winners.
We would be trying harder to beat people like Potok and Dees and the rest of the Destroyers of Western Civilization if it were an AIR HOCKEY GAME! Yet it’s life and death. Our very being. Our souls. And we let them spit in our faces ceaselessly and add victory after victory to their cultural pockets. Most of us would take more offense if they were dissing our favorite football team after a loss, maybe even throw a beer bottle at them. But they stomp on the graves of our great civilization and we near cower. WTF???? They are WINNING. We are LOSING. We are LOSERS. That means our children get to be LOSERS. See how it makes sense to see things in terms of winning and losing? Ultimately, it’s what matters. Everything else we get to enjoy we only get to enjoy if we WIN.
That’s why I called it “refreshing.”
i’ve been reading your site lately, esp. posts on the civil war, but i have a question that has puzzled me and i’m going to ask anyone here to have a crack at it:
we know about the more or less fanatical abolition movement and the more pragmatic free-soilers. were their spokesmen against the civil war? given their position against slavery, weren’t they relieved by the secession? it removed for the abolitionists the embarrassment of being part of the same country as the hated slave power. for the free-soilers, it removed the threat of slavery spreading north and west. but i never hear of resistance to the war in the north except for recent immigrants there who felt this was not their fight.
Some of the most radical abolitionists advocated Northern secession because they were morally opposed to Southern slavery. They weren’t particularly enthusiastic about the cause of “preserving the Union” until the Emancipation Proclamation.
As for the Free Soilers, they were typically racialists from the Border North which at that time still had a strong Appalachian tinge. In order to appease these people, Lincoln had to downplay slavery and appeal to their patriotism.
The Free Soilers wanted the negro to be kept in the South. The abolitionists demanded immediate emancipation and full political equality for the negro within the Union. The Republican Party managed to appeal to White racialists and White racial liberals.
In 1875, Grant refused to send troops to Mississippi because he feared losing Ohio to the Democrats which had voted against the 14th Amendment. Rutherford B. Hayes became Governor of Ohio.
The failure to send troops to Mississippi resulted in the Redemption of Mississippi in 1875. The other heavily black states – Louisiana, Florida, and South Carolina – were overthrown using the Mississippi Plan in 1876.
Rutherford B. Hayes, the Governor of Ohio and Republican candidate in the 1876 election, struck the Compromise of 1877 with the Democrats which resulted in the defeat of Tilden and the withdrawal of federal troops from the South.
Even though the federal troops were gone, the South remained integrated and had black lawmakers until the first Jim Crow laws were passed in the late 1880s. It wasn’t until the Plessy decision in 1896 that the Jim Crow system was stabilized.
As late as 1898, the Red Shirts were fighting to overthrow the Republicans in North Carolina. The campaign was explicitly about white supremacy and Dixie being a “white man’s country.”
Three generations of Southerners lived through integration which lasted for around thirty years in the South before it was finally toppled. In states like South Carolina, Mississippi, and Louisiana, which were black majority states, Whites were forced by Yankee carpetbaggers to live under negro rule.
What happened in South Carolina, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Florida in the 1870s and later North Carolina in the 1890s was a revolution against multiracial democracy.
One might ask why we find ourselves today living through the Second Reconstruction in the 21st century.
Is it because of the Jews? That’s an unsatisfactory answer. We have been through all this before and a revolution was required here to overthrow the system. The Reconstruction Amendments were used to justify toppling Jim Crow.
Blacks were flooding into the Northern states where they enjoyed full citizenship while the Jews were stepping off the boat in NYC in the 1890s and 1900s. Why was this happening?
The better answer is that it is all about the struggle for power within the Union between the rival nations. Yankeedom and its allies support the Hispanic invasion of the Southwest and forcing the Civil Rights Revolution upon Dixie because they see blacks and Hispanics in the Southeast and Southwest as their allies.
Is it unrealistic to believe that Whites would deliberately enfranchise blacks to lord over other Whites? That’s exactly how William Pitt Kellogg of Vermont, Adelbert Ames of Maine, Daniel Chamberlain of Massachusetts, and Harrison Reed of Massachusetts and Marcellus Stearns of Maine wound up posing as the governors of Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Florida during Reconstruction.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Henry_Chamberlain
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adelbert_Ames
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Pitt_Kellogg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcellus_Stearns
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Reed_(politician)
Europeans aren’t foolish enough to believe in “White unity.”
The Poles will always look over their shoulder at the Germans. The Germans will always look over their shoulder at the Russians and the French. The Irish will always look over their shoulder at the English.
In North America, there are rival ethnic groups here too struggling for power to dominate the United States and Canada. That’s what Reconstruction was about.
It was an attempt by Yankeedom, which controlled the Republican Party, to dominate the United States by enfranchising blacks in Dixie. They hoped this whole “civil rights” scheme would allow them to carry the majority black Southern states and permanently dominate their Democratic rivals in the North.
What’s changed? Nothing really.
Why is there an invasion of the Southwest going on? Why have Hispanics been allowed to conquer California? Why were the Cubans allowed to conquer South Florida? Why are there so many government workers in Virginia? Why were blacks giving voting rights in Dixie? Why are blacks put up on a pedestal over Whites?
Someone benefits from this system. There are also losers in this system. The winners are White liberals and the losers are White conservatives who are being displaced from states like California and Arizona.
Who are these White liberals? Where do they live? Mysteriously, they are overwhelmingly concentrated on The Left Coast, the Upper Midwest, and the Northeast.
There is something peculiar about these three sections of the United States that puts them at odds with the rest of the country on any number of issues, especially racial and cultural issues, where those sections line on the side of the counterculture and civil rights and immigration.
The first thing we recognize is that every single Jew in the Senate comes from The Left Coast, the Northeast, or the Upper Midwest. Again, the strange pattern repeats itself.
The second thing we recognize is that the Jews don’t have the numbers to get themselves elected there on their own. They must have allies in these regions who share their agenda.
The third thing we recognize is that these three areas were settled by Yankees. That explains everything.
Thras said:
“The problem of the South is and always has been its archaic social structure, based on the English system of a land-owning gentry with many tenant farmers and few small freeholders.”
Strange. Both the Christian Agrarian movement, and the post-peak oil movement note that we WILL return to an agrarian, regress to 1800’s style life in the world, after the fossil fuels run out. Moreover, the Bible clearly condones and blesses such a worldview that ties man to the land, his family, and his ‘clan’ (kin).
“This isn’t conducive to the development of a modern society; the presence of a large population that simply cannot function in a modern society”
Who the hell WANTS a ‘modern society?’ I’ve been there, done that, seen it all. I’d rather have the entire world grind to a halt and have to use technology of the 1800’s again, which would put ALL non- Whites except meximidgets at a FAR remove from EVER bothering us again. In short, White Nirvana. Without a fallacious ‘rapture’ that isn’t going to happen, (because it’s not biblical) anyway. End of the world, yes. Dispie theology, no…..
Thrasymachus: “This isn’t conducive to the development of a modern society; the presence of a large population that simply cannot function in a modern society…”
It seems to me some people have misread Thrasymachus’ comment and become overly defensive. The population he is referring to is not the White Southerners, or their “archaic social structure”, but the negroes. That population is equally unable to function in an 18th-century agrarian society. “Modern”, in their context, means anything post-stone age.
thank you for you analysis. history when in school and my own reading never touched on what you explain. ‘the victors write the history’.
there’s a sense in everything i’ve read of the inevitability of the war that when you really stop and think about it, isn’t convincing. it’s as if there were no adults in the room when the war was declared. i’m aware the north was worried the northwest would follow suit and it was assumed the war would be short. still, not enough. just 85 years before, the us declared independence from england by citing their right to self-determination. why didn’t the north extend that right to the south?
what a tragedy in retrospect, what with the carnage suffered on both sides but especially the south. and for what?
i’m not aware of any historian who wrote a counterfactual in which the survival of the confederacy is posited because cooler heads prevailed, the north staying its hand. (if you know of any, pls tell me.)
here’s my own counterfactual, given my admittedly incomplete knowledge of that time’s history: the south would continue in its agrarian economy, its population mostly derived from the british isles and africa. the jeffersonian vision of a nation of yeoman farmers not completely realized because of the large number of landless blacks, although some of them would become such farmers. slavery would die out and blacks granted some limited second-class citizenship,( it being recognized in the interests of justice that it wasn’t their fault their ancestors were carried off.)
the north, having no love of blacks (as you say) would forbid their migration there. (recall that many states even in the pre-war midwest only allowed blacks to pass thru but not settle) enforcement would be haphazard at first but then harden, migrant blacks repatriated like we do mexicans. it would continue its trajectory as an industrial powerhouse, fodder for its factories being white ethnics, each group more desperate than the one recruited before. it may have had the power to treat the south as an economic colony even more than during reconstruction, relieved of the responsibility (and expense) of imposing its vision of justice there.
and so the conditions are set up for the evolution of 2 different cultures, much more so than is the case now. the advantage would be that while the north would be strong, it would not be so strong as to become an imperial power throwing its weight around all over the globe. both the north and the confederacy may have been able to sit out the world wars. the ones in the me and na would never have happened.
enough. i’m getting carried away.
No, HW: the second, post WWII Reconstruction was engineered by the Smart Jews who displaced the Stupid Yankee WASPS on Wall Street and simultaneously took over the Democrat Party and made it their instrument. What was once the Jim Crow party of Woodrow Wilson is now the Party of B.H. Obama and his Wall Street Jew-bankster masters. You won’t be able to secede from them now and get away w it any more than could the Old South from Yankeedom. They must first be destroyed. To do this, we will have to exploit ALL the cleavages that now exist in “America” – racial, political, regional, and economic – which extend far beyond the South.
CF,
There was one Jew on the Supreme Court which handed down the Brown decision. The Jews were heavily involved in the push for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Immigration Act of 1965, but their activism on that subject was indistinguishable from that of their Yankee allies like the thousands of Unitarians that came to Selma to march to Montgomery for “civil rights.”
Every single Jew in the U.S. Senate comes from The Left Coast, the Northeast, or the Upper Midwest. Why do radical Jews thrive in those areas? Why not other parts of the country?
Because the Yankees live in that part of America and share the Jewish agenda. They call themselves “progressives.” They share the same agenda of attacking Christianity, centralizing control of the government, redistributing wealth to non-Whites, supporting gay marriage, opening our borders, etc.
What’s the difference between Bernie Sanders and Howard Dean? There isn’t a difference. They are the same force.
The tables have turned since 1865.
Back then, Yankeedom was far stronger and far healthier as a culture. Virtually all the industry in America was in the Northern states. They controlled the Union Navy. They had a massive population advantage that was reinforced by European immigration.
If there was a war today between the South and Yankeedom, it wouldn’t last one year, much less five years. Who would fight for the Union? The only interest Yankeedom has in the military in the 21st century is ensuring that women serve in combat roles, promoting diversity, and getting rid of the DADT policy for homosexuals.
Look at the people at Occupy Wall Street. Are those people going to invade Tennessee? I don’t think so.
If the South decided to secede from the Union to create a more conservative nation-state, it wouldn’t result in a war. Most Northerners would probably be delighted because there wouldn’t be any opposition to their agenda anymore.