By Hunter Wallace
This has been building for a while now.
After the Dylann Roof shooting in Charleston, there was a frenzy by the Left to erase every last vestige of the Confederacy in the Southern public landscape. We threw ourselves into the middle of that fight. In hindsight, it was the right thing to do because we should honor our ancestors and preserve their memory for future generations.
At the same time, I couldn’t help but feel that all these heritage battles are on the same level as fighting over ancient Rome, Greece, or Egypt. It just seems to me like that era is incredibly distant from what I see in the present day South. Slavery hasn’t existed here in 150 years. Jim Crow hasn’t existed here in 50 years. Nothing about this area – the Alabama Black Belt – is reminiscent of the Confederacy.
While it is true that I dream of Southern independence, I don’t believe in restoring anything resembling the Confederacy. Slavery, for example, was rendered obsolete generations ago. Because of the mechanization of agriculture, black slaves are no longer necessary to harvest cotton, tobacco, or sugar, and our economy is no longer based on the production of those commodities. In fact, we now grow far more timber and peanuts in the heart of the old cotton belt. Even the textile mills which came to the South decades after the war are ancient history.
What does “restoring the Confederacy” even mean? The historical Confederacy was defeated by the Union because it was vastly inferior in infrastructure, manufacturing, agriculture, shipping and population. We naively believed we could just secede and continue to trade our cash crops for Northern and British manufactured goods. Supposedly, a weak central government of quarreling sovereign states presiding over this hopelessly disorganized mess was going to catch-up to the North in all these areas on the fly and preserve our independence.
It didn’t work. It never could have worked. That model couldn’t work today for all sorts of reasons. Forget slavery, which no one is proposing to bring back. Few White people still work in agriculture. By and large, the family farm has been made obsolete by corporate agribusiness and its economies of scale which deliver the products in your local supermarket.
Yesterday, I was talking to my friend Michael Cushman about the dominance of Jeffersonianism in Southern Nationalism, largely due to the influence of the Abbeville Institute which still seems to mentally live in the Confederacy. It occurred to me that Cushman lives in Aiken, SC which I know happens to be where most of the workers at the Department of Energy’s Savannah River Site also live. To put this in perspective, the nuclear reactors at the Savannah River Site were shutdown after the end of the Cold War, but we are more focused on and know more about the economy and politics of the South Carolina of 1861.
This post got me thinking: do I really believe in all the Jeffersonian doctrines on which the Confederacy was founded? Do I really believe in the American political theory based on radical individualism, social contracts, constitutional compacts between sovereign states, an agrarian economy, equal rights and so forth? Not really, it sounds to me like something a bunch of lawyers conjured into existence.
Instead, I would rather look around the world, see what works, and apply those insights here. My sympathies are much more in tune with the Chinese whose attitude is “a great nation needs a large aircraft industry.” I think Finland has a better education system, South Korea has better broadband internet, Denmark has less income inequality, Japan has a superior immigration policy. Whereas Taiwan has a semiconductor industry and sees itself as a silicon island, Alabama specializes in the export of poultry products. What’s wrong with this picture?
Take a look at three cities in Alabama: Birmingham, Selma, and Tuskegee. What do you see? If you are a liberal ideologue, you might see a glorious triumph for civil rights and equality in the American story of progress, but if you are a practical minded realist, you might see an unmitigated racial, cultural and economic disaster.
I don’t want a weak, caretaker, nightwatchman federal government and a laissez-faire economy built around a lawyer’s narrow political theory of individual rights and constitutional government. I would rather have a strong state that fosters education, infrastructure and commerce, a tax and trade policy that fosters broad based economic prosperity, ideally led by practical minded businessmen and engineers.
A strong state will be necessary anyway to secure our independence, deal with countless internal enemies who will attempt to sabotage us from the outset, and to clean up the mess of fifty years of open borders and civil rights. In commerce, the Southern states already nurture foreign corporations – looking at you Airbus, Hyundai, BMW, Mercedes-Benz – with lavish incentive packages to encourage them to build factories here. Why can’t we do the same for our own industries?
All this really requires is that we stop lying to ourselves: the prosperity of the Sunbelt South has far less to do with Jeffersonianism than New Deal, World War II, and Cold War military spending. Where did the TVA and rural electrification come from? Oak Ridge National Laboratory and Great Smoky Mountains National Park in Appalachia? NASA in Alabama, Texas and Florida? Nuclear power, biotechnology, the internet, computers, or genomics? The interstates that opened our commerce or all the land grant colleges? From Northern textile mills to Japanese automobiles, “the state” has strategically fostered industrialization. Who brought back the iconic wild turkey and the whitetail deer? And where did polio, smallpox, malaria and pellagra go anyway?
I’m not citing these examples to argue that “government is always good” and the “free market is always bad.” A government policy can be constructive or destructive and it usually depends on the nature of elites and whatever is motivating them. We might place kudzu, civil rights, China’s one child policy and the Iraq War in the minus column. At the same time, we could place a lot of R&D, space exploration, and aerospace technology in the plus column.
Is that a radical centrist point of view? I’m not sure. All I know is that the independent South that I envision isn’t a place where the majority of our people will be poorer, less educated, and less healthy than they are now. We ought to be open to solutions that work and not be held back by an ideology that has already failed us once.
Here is a partial list of semiconductor plants throughout the world. Note that although Taiwan and Singapore has a lot of semiconductor manufacturing, a lot still resides here in the US. Also note that the vast majority of the countries that produce semiconductors are wealthy 1st world countries. That doesn’t align with the narrative that all manufacturing and all good jobs are in poor 3rd world countries.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_semiconductor_fabrication_plants
Same here. Thanks for letting me contribute.
1.) Because, Taiwan figured out a long time ago that semiconductors were a growth industry, and the Taiwanese government subsidized the creation of its now world class semiconductor industry from scratch. Now, Taiwan is so far ahead and has developed so many new industries around its industrial base from spillover effects that it is much harder to break into the market and compete.
2.) Fewer Americans are getting into science and engineering because they know their jobs will be outsourced or taken over domestically by foreigners.
3.) America “innovated” and created semiconductors, but just like consumer electronics, automobiles, commercial satellites, the airplane, nuclear power, the internet and so on, foreigners were quick to capitalize and establish their dominance in the new industries.
Hell, isn’t the celebrated iPhone made entirely in Asia now?
Not all manufacturing jobs are labor intensive. I’ve read that Germany has the highest labor costs in the world.
The success of private sector-government cooperation is going to be directly proportional to the quality of it’s population.
This wasn’t a problem in pre-1964 America or today in most of Asia.
In an independent South, the voting requirements had better be very high or the black and mestizo influence will throw a monkey wrench into any government action.
Good comment, Thorfinnsson.
Didn’t Reagan also save Harley Davidson?
As for the 2008 financial crash, see financial deregulation, the Greenspan-Bernanke-Rubin-Summers era, the “derivatives industry,” the “hedge fund industry,” etc. Those are actually the kind of industries we are good at creating these days in America.
Who is “we?”
I mean the modern USA.
It’s not entirely true that foreign countries have a lot of private sector-government partnerships in industry whereas the US has gone full laissez-faire. Just look at how much the financial services sector has grown since we have showered our love on Wall Street.
“They can always buy their poultry products, potato chips, and peanuts from Alabama.”
LMAO. Sarcasm really is the only way to combat this stupidity at this point. I think it is the only thing that people can understand. They have been parroting free trade and free market nonsense for so long that they forget that there are actual realities in the real world created by these ideologies.
The three absolutely necessary elements to a successful economy are scientific progress, group evolutionary strategy and access to natural resources. No system will make you prosperous if you don’t have those elements, and if you have those elements, whatever system you put in place almost doesn’t matter.
Personally, if I was you, HW, I’d work on eugenics to help raise the IQ of white Southerners.
And I’ve said it here before, and I’ll say it again. White kids in Alabama want to win a football game, white kids in Minnesota want to win a robotics contest. Southern nationalism really won’t have a chance at being serious until white kids in Alabama want to win a robotics contest more than winning a football game.
It’s sad.
In Alabama, they truly believe the free-market, free-trade nonsense. Think about it for a minute.
1.) Huntsville, the fastest growing metro in the state, has the economy most driven by government spending on NASA and Redstone Arsenal. Many of the other industries it has attracted showcase the spillover effects of advanced manufacturing.
2.) Auburn and Tuscaloosa are college towns. It just so happens that Auburn started out as a land grant college created by the Morrill Act which was signed into law by Abraham Lincoln. According to many cuckfederates, the Morrill tariff is the real reason why the South seceded from the Union.
3.) Birmingham, the former steel town, is a rotting husk of its former greatness, but its current economy is anchored by UAB.
4.) Mobile was a sleepy Southern small town until WW2 military spending transformed its shipping industry and made it a major port.
5.) Montgomery is kept afloat by the state government and Maxwell Air force Base.
Across the state, the free-market, free-trade laissez-faire doctrine is contradicted in all kinds of ways:
1.) North Alabama gets its electricity from the TVA which literally turned the lights on in that region.
2.) Much of South Alabama got electricity as a result of the Rural Electrification Act which was passed during the New Deal.
3.) You can drive down countless paved country roads in Alabama which were all built by the CCC during the Great Depression.
4.) Alabama’s agriculture depends on federal farm subsidies and disaster relief programs.
5.) We’re more than happy to benefit from federal military spending on veterans, active duty troops and military installations.
6.) Finally, the pride and joy – the apple of the eye of Alabama’s leadership class – are the foreign automobile and aircraft plants that were lured here, not by the free-market, but by lavish state incentive packages, relentless courtship and the conscious decision to intervene in the free-market – just like Singapore and China – to foster industrialization in Alabama.
In addition to Auburn, the land grant colleges in the South include:
– Auburn
– LSU
– Mississippi State
– Texas A&M
– University of Arkansas
That’s 5 out of 7 colleges in the SEC West right there.
– Mizzou
– University of Tennesssee
– University of Kentucky
– University of Florida
– University of Georgia
– Clemson University
– North Carolina State
– Virginia Tech
That’s 5 out of 7 colleges in the SEC East including the University of Florida which is the largest university in the South.
According to cuckfederates, the South seceded from the Union over the Morrill tariff. Ironically, the Morrill Act signed by Abraham Lincoln established much of higher education in the South.
There seems to be a view that the sort of government-business partnership necessarily goes against economic freedom.
This is only true in the strict Austro-libertarian sense.
Some commenters have pointed out that Singapore scores highly on statistical survevys of economic freedom.
This is true. Singapore enjoys low taxes and great freedom for business managers.
But Singapore also uses its social insurance scheme, the Central Provident Fund, to channel the wealth of its citizenry into infrastructure and industry. The state’s sovereign wealth fund, Temasek, is in fact the largest investor in the country and owns more capital than all private corporations in the city-state combined.
It’s also silly to consider economic freedom as something that even exists apart from the state. The state provides much of the physical and legal infrastructure needed for business to thrive in all countries. Who exactly do economic freedom advocates think enforces and upholds contracts? Who builds and maintains the roads that businesses depend on to ship and receive goods? Who prevents bandits, brigands, and pirates from preying on legal commerce?
Libertarians are correct that in many areas state interference is harmful. But it does not follow from this that all state action is harmful. Intervening in business hiring decisions to force the hiring of unqualified women and minorities is bad. Does it follow from this that using taxpayer money to fund advanced scientific research is also bad? Of course not.
We should also not forget that the quality of the American state has been greatly diminished by liberalism. Libertarians often wrongly conclude that the state can never get anything right, but in reality the American state was highly effective before meritocratic hiring was abolished in favor of diversity quotas.
‘I don’t want a weak, caretaker, nightwatchman federal government and a laissez-faire economy built around a lawyer’s narrow political theory of individual rights and constitutional government. I would rather have a strong state that fosters education, infrastructure and commerce, a tax and trade policy that fosters broad based economic prosperity, ideally led by practical minded businessmen and engineers.’
Abstractly, Sir, i agree with you; but, because governments are, inevitably, composed of people easily to be corrupted, I have to stand with Mr. Cushman – and most of our founding fathers … that the best government, in (as you like to say) a very real and practical sense is one that is fairly weak and decentralized.
Tyranny is our greatest enemy, and a government, like you envision, would be full of the same problems that the present one is; that, though it’s idealogical direction would, ostensibly, be different, in real terms, it would be no different.
‘ For those in favor of the American model, take a stroll through the post-apocalyptic wasteland that is Detroit. Compare Detroit to Shanghai or Dubai or Seoul or Taipei or Singapore in the 21st century.
Two words. Black people.’
Pardon me, but, that statement is not correct.
Why?
Because it does not take into account that genes are translated by environment; that neither individual nor collective development is dictated, but only influenced, by blood.
What would be closer to a correct statement?
9 words. ‘Black people, in Detroit, operating under the current system.’
Conclusion :
No fruit, no matter how splendid, can fulfill it’s potential as wine or jelly, if it is droppt into a mouldy barrel, and left in a dark and damp storehouse, for a time, before use.
Proof?
They were many many blackpeople, in Detroit, during the 1930s, 40s, and 50s, BUT, without the present system, the city had quite a different personality.
Welcome back, Junius.
Dear Mr. Griffin,
I thank you for your kindness and for your unflinching bravery to do what you do, on behalf of us, your fellow Southerners.
It’s a dark time, but, you, Sir, are a bright light – a beacon of unabasht patriotism, incessant concern, unflappable objectivity, and brutal honesty, in an era of compulsed and conditioned self-absorption, diffidence, decadence, tyrannical subjectivity, subverted and false community, and all the rampant dishonesty and denial that it takes to undergird all that.
Your writing, earlier this year, on the true ‘multicultural’ community of Selma, and how it went from a fine place to an infernal place, as a result of ‘Civil Rights’ & ‘The Great Society’ stays with me as anthemick for all that has occurred in my neck of the woods – northeastern North Carolina.
My best wishes, Sir, for you and yours.
People have to think for themselves and not become slaves to ideology. One thing that bothers me is the concept that the ‘producers’ of society should not be overly burdened by paying federal taxes. What productivity meant to Henry Ford and Andrew Carnegie seems to be different than what productivity means to todays hedge fund managers. Whatever you might think about them, the old robber barons were builders, they made things. The modern billionaires seem to make their money through gamed markets and currency manipulation, not to mention the American obsession with continuing to build suburbia.
There seems to be loads of people who think we can run our economy forever on building one crap house after another with cheap labor and borrowed money.
That seems to be all they know and can’t even imagine anything else.
the obvious counterpoint to this is that the USG has all of these things you want, and is trying to throw them all away as quickly as possible.
For my part though, the south can sort its own problems out via self determination, what it would ideally look like is up for it to decide.
I’m doing a podcast on all this tonight.
“They were many many blackpeople, in Detroit, during the 1930s, 40s, and 50s, BUT, without the present system, the city had quite a different personality.” – it wasn’t their city, today it is. They are going to have to succeed on their own, if only because whites are going to be in increasingly short supply as the years go forward.
To state that the Confederacy was “built on Jeffersonianism” is a bit of a mischaracterization. Certainly there remained significant strains of J-ism in 1860, but they were much weaker than in 1785 and growing weaker. Conservative vanguards like George Fitzhugh and Albert Bledsoe had, before the War, rejected Jefferson’s poisonous doctrines in full and there isn’t much evidence that an independent CSA would have experienced a revival of liberalism. Much of the J-ism associated with the CSA today is a result of postwar revisionism, an effort to make the CSA more palatable to mainstream America. Anyway, I don’t mean to be pedantic.
I think for today’s Southern Rightists, the primary reason it is important to keep the memory of the CSA alive is pragmatic – every distinct people requires myth. The CSA fits the mold perfectly, assuming it is interpreted in the proper light. It is quite simple, theoretically at least, to preserve the memory of the CSA while shaking off elements that are deemed undesirable, like states’ rights. It is my belief that the Old Southern “states’ rights” battle cry was simply a shallow tactic pursued in light of our peculiar historical situation. The CSA founders certainly bought in to their own rhetoric a bit too much in this respect. An independent CSA founded on the principles expounded by Fitzhugh et al would have had little need for a decentralized, (S)tate-led national government. The Old South was plenty homogeneous enough, ethnically and ideologically, for a well-run centralized national government.
Anyway, myth. The CSA (again, viewed in the proper light) serves to fill the ideal-myth necessity, the philosophical center which strengthens thede-ties and provides something of a loose endstate towards which we can work. That doesn’t mean we need to (or should) adopt every single part of the CSA whole-hog; thinkers can critique to their hearts’ content, reinterpreting the Rightist principles which the CSA represented for modern times and providing general direction, while the masses get ready-made battle cries.
I should hope that it is apparent that any modern Southern movement which repudiates the CSA fully is undeserving of our attention and bound to fall in the modernist-demotist trap.
By saying the CSA was built on Jeffersonianism, I am contrasting the Confederacy with the Union, which took its direction from Hamilton.
What did we inherit from the antebellum era? Let’s be honest: we inherited an extremely weak central government, an agricultural economy based on the export of a single commodity, an infrastructure that was vastly inferior due to our hostility to “internal improvements,” unfavorable racial demographics, a much smaller population, nothing in the way of a navy or merchant marine, and a country that was internally divided over the issue of slavery.
The Confederacy was inferior in agriculture, inferior in manufacturing, inferior in infrastructure, inferior in shipping, and inferior in population. That’s why we lost our independence. We had brave soldiers and excellent generals, but they were starving and fighting in rags because of an abstract ideology that for generations had retarded our economy.
There were far sighted men in the South who supported industrialization like James DeBow, but they were marginalized until it was too late by the reigning orthodoxy.
Good points. It really boils down to the big modernist/traditionalist question: traditionalism is more spiritually fulfilling (IMO anyway), but modernism increases Power at such a rate as to conquer traditionalism and bring about all the social evils which modernism entails. I fall on the traditionalist side, though I understand how the argument for sacrificing big-T Tradition in favor of Power can be compelling. I also understand how modernist-leaning people will see traditionalism as romantic hogwash.
I understand the historical obstacles which the CSA grappled with, but I doubt they have much bearing on how we should interpret the CSA to our benefit today. The rubble of the CSA can be sifted through, and perfectly pragmatic and timeless principles dug up, dusted off, and put on display. It’s a matter of finding them. For better or worse, the CSA really was our high-water mark as a people, by far, and to cast it aside as obsolete rubbish in favor of newer, shiny toys would seem irrational and short-sighted.
Judging by the Abbeville Institute, I am afraid we haven’t learned anything from the Confederacy’s defeat. They had all the guns, food, ships, railroads, and factories. It is really that simple.
What’s even more disturbing is how little we have learned from more recent history. As I pointed out above, most the SEC universities are land grant colleges which were created by the Morrill Act which was signed into law by Lincoln. Much of what passes for higher education in the South can be attributed to our worst enemy because our own leaders didn’t believe in investing in public education.
That’s the tip of the iceberg. Large swathes of the rural South didn’t have electricity until the New Deal. We drive around on country roads that were built by the CCC during the Great Depression and interstates that were constructed under Eisenhower and JFK. We rely on nuclear power while condemning “big government” that created the internet and split the atom. We have people who condemn the vaccines that eliminated smallpox, measles and polio.
Yeah, I want to secede too, but not because of the National Science Foundation or the National Institute of Health, or the TVA and the National Park System, or because of the Army Corps of Engineers that built levees to prevent the Mississippi River from flooding New Orleans, or because NASA put a man on the moon, etc.
The sad truth is, as much as I hate to say it, is that the South would likely be poorer, less educated, and less healthy than it is today if it were not for the Yankees who do occasionally have some good ideas from which the South has benefited. Sadly, many of our own downhome cuckservative goober leaders have not wanted to invest in infrastructure and education and promote commerce and industry to the degree they should have.
Look around the world and you will find countries like South Korea, China and Taiwan that were vastly poorer than Mississippi and Arkansas until recently but which are now some of the most advanced economies on earth. And here in Alabama we are a superpower of poultry, peanuts and potato chips. We don’t even really make steel anymore in one of the most geologically suited places on earth.
Can’t we do better than all these Wal-Marts and dollar stores? Unfortunately, the false doctrine that led to this disaster is alive and well. I’m just giving it some much needed pushback.
By the way, the timeless principles to which I refer are certainly not Jeffersonian in character, lest I be misunderstood.
The biggest thing that makes me laugh in modern politics in the South is the witch hunts for any who is *gasp* a socialist!!
The GOP has really capitalized on this attitude in the South and have made complete mincemeat out of our naivete. Meanwhile, most of the south is living in a time freeze where nothing has changed in the way of modernization in centuries. As Hunter points out, any changes that have been made are mostly due to government initiatives.
A good modern day example of this is my county which is mostly still on dial up internet. I have a Verizon wireless connection where I can only get 10 gigs per month for 60 bucks but it is only because I live near a highway which has cell phone towers nearby. There is no unlimited option.
How in the hell can my county compete in the modern world with a fucking dial up connection? Just ask the people screaming about socialism while waiting decades for Verizon to tell them that there is not enough profit in it for them to run line to my county.
‘What did we inherit from the antebellum era? Let’s be honest: we inherited an extremely weak central government, an agricultural economy based on the export of a single commodity, an infrastructure that was vastly inferior due to our hostility to “internal improvements,” unfavorable racial demographics, a much smaller population, nothing in the way of a navy or merchant marine, and a country that was internally divided over the issue of slavery.’
Sir, we, for better or worse, an ancient agrarian society.
That we have, and have had, weaknesses is to exist –
‘The Confederacy was inferior in agriculture, inferior in manufacturing, inferior in infrastructure, inferior in shipping, and inferior in population. That’s why we lost our independence.’
I agree with you that this is a contributing factor, but, do not agree that it exists in a vacuum.
I would say that the strategy, that we practiced, as a community, in 1861-1865, was not effective.
We could have chosen to secede, and been non-violent. Non-cooperation, with the North would have gotten better results, and had God’s blessing.
Furthermore, even if we rule out ‘non-cooperation & non-violence’, we have to look at other scenarios, from the point of view of your analysis.
Vietnam was hopelessly inferior to us, yet they beat us in a long, vicious and protracted war.
Russia was hopelessly inferior to Germany, in 1941, yet, they won the war.
Great Britain was inferior to France, during the Naspoleonick days, yet, leveraged it’s power in such a way as to overcome that.
Conclusion? :
Yes, we had material disadvantages, but, it was that our strategy did not best suit our circumstance, that led to the result.
Just the sheer amount of men, wasted by General’s Lee and Bragg outmoded tacticks, condemned us.
If Forrest had been in command, or Mosby, it would have been different – something to which Jefferson Davis alluded, in his memoirs.
Thank you, however, Sir, for your interesting analysis.
‘Judging by the Abbeville Institute, I am afraid we haven’t learned anything from the Confederacy’s defeat.’
Our principle foe, and, indeed, scenario, today, are quite different.
Today, our opponent is apathy and a lack of independent vision for ourselves.
Those were not the issues of our community, then.
Most of our countrymen do not, nor will, not, nowadays, think of themselves outside of being Washington vassals – grumble though they may.
‘The sad truth is, as much as I hate to say it, is that the South would likely be poorer, less educated, and less healthy than it is today if it were not for the Yankees who do occasionally have some good ideas from which the South has benefited. Sadly, many of our own downhome cuckservative goober leaders have not wanted to invest in infrastructure and education and promote commerce and industry to the degree they should have.’
Sir, another one of your brilliantly honest, and ironick observations.
Yes, Sir – we have benefitted, in many ways, from our relationship with the Northern man – and, as such, you are right, he ought not be demonized.
He has been, at the very least, a gracious conqueror, though, a conqueror, of us, he remains.
Sir, I would say that you opinions and conclusions hold better water from the perspective of 40,50,60 years ago.
Today, our continued fealty to being vassals of Washington is undermining every aspect of our existence.
Northerners, as a group, have become a very different people than they once were, when I was as a child.
They have, in my view, run off the rails – and, that being so, we are not obliged to keep riding with them.
Time to get off this self-destructive train.
I used to believe that Hamilton had it right, and Jefferson was wrong, but Hamilton wanted to bring in the central bankers. at that point it is not your country anymore.
The south was slower to industrialize because of climate issues, the north was simply more favorable to europeans, and it was not until climate controlled infrastructure that this changed.
“It’s not entirely true that foreign countries have a lot of private sector-government partnerships in industry whereas the US has gone full laissez-faire. Just look at how much the financial services sector has grown since we have showered our love on Wall Street.”
Quite.
The US has a Washington / Wall St. partnership which has been extremely effective at making the banking mafia very rich.
(it’s just been at the expense of everyone else)
The key thing is somebody in the hivemind needs to be thinking long term about the best interests of the nation as a whole. Democracy, academia, media etc are all supposed to do that but the oligarchs bought them all.
Well, it looks like OD is finally giving up the ghost, with this article.
Not that this is a bad thing… in some respects. All of your initial writings, HW, and all of your analysis of ethnicity and differences (your best articles were the ones on the 11 ‘nations’ that are already present in the USA, based on that one author’s book ) were leading (I thought, when I first stumbled on to this site) to a man whose racial awakening was going to seek an incarnational element in the restoration of a Christian civilization in a revivified South, much as the great men of the South would have desired it… even if it were majority protestant, and somewhat rurally-focused.
I watched men like Stonelifter come on, and Denise, and I thought, ‘damn, some solid White Self-aware Menschen’- finally. When you began to complain about the ‘rainbow’ confederates, I thought, Yee-haw, the South is gonna rise again.’ When you began to call Lindsey a queer, I thought, great: :”Truth to power.”
And then the ne’er-do-wells, the libertarians, the status quo folks, and the ‘I can’t tolerate this, and that, and you shouldn’t say that, and this, and I don’t ‘feel’ good about such and such,’ asses began to dominate the comments. Then I read you were getting married. “Great, he’s going to continue the Race.”
But I began to see more and more of the ‘go along to get along’ Pietism of the LCMS creep into your writings, bit by bit. I was worried, but knew that you weren’t your father-in-law.
Then you began to pooh-pooh each of the politicos who had a vision, and wouldn’t get behind them, using your website as a ‘bully pulpit’ to help give some impetus for them. More and more, you started to sound like the men in feed caps at my local McD’s who don’t do a damn thing, but bitch and complain like old biddies… because they are. Even close to their age, such myopia and stupidity from White men, sickens me.
But with the recent capitulation (ideologically speaking) to the Spenser side in the NPI ‘for fear of the Fags’ debacle, I realized that you were no Matt Heimbach. You were content to picket in your nice little enclaves, but never wield a cross as a weapon against the ungodly. You are, in short, more like the ‘rich young ruler,’ than a ‘son of thunder.’
Your growing disgust on the site for strong language, direct appeals to righteous anger, and your less than Christian attitudes wherein overt Christian use of Scriptures to justify the inevitable, and permissable use of force aginst a godless, satanic, and utterly demonic government, run by an antichrist bastard of a whoring mother (who is most likely also a sodomite), is yet another example of this cuckholding you seem to be exhibiting. Truly, ‘He who is unmarried cares for the things of the Lord; how he may please the Lord. But he who is married cares about the things of the world; how he may please his wife. ‘
You are no longer thinking like a single man, a warrior, but like a house husband. Granted, you have to make a living. Your wife and children come first. I know that, full well. But it were better to have shut down this website, before becoming, or changing your views, simply because it is no longer ‘safe’ for you to do so. I have no website of my own, precisely because I am as tied down as you. But I am also four decades or more OLDER than you. The day I could have done much was during Reagan’s era, when we still thought/bought the lie, that we lived in a great country.
Well, that image died somewhere between Monica Lewinsky’s knees, about 20 years ago. We are ripe unto destruction, and we need leaders. I had hoped you might have been one…
You and men like you, are living in an era, where the hope AND the possibility of overthrowing a godless and corrupt govenment (as Jefferson advised us to do!) has never been more possible; and yet, what this article seems to be saying, is that you would rather consent to the faggotry position of the current administration, revamp it for a ‘new multiculti South (because, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO GET RID OF THE NIGGERS? is the question you never posed. So, I assume you want to keep them. For what ends? To help whom? With all the data showing how UTTERLY WORTHLESS THEY ARE? Yet, you never mentioned that, ONCE in this article, and it is “the MEGATHERIUM in the Living Room”- not just an elephant!!!)
While the NPI’s recent denial of admittance to someone more or less your own age seemed ‘intellectually valid’ I would ask the questions: – helped who, was beneficial for which group, and served for what purpose? [ Cui bono, in other words] The World’s approbation? The world is going to HELL, HW!
I hope I am wrong. I fear I may be right. And leaving this sorry ass nation, unless Trump can deliver on all he has promised, still appears to be the ‘great white hope’ for those of us who would rather leave, than watch America become what she already is… I’ll still come by from time to time, but the vision is dead. The South is dead. The White man… well, he’s gonna be, if you don’t take up arms and kill the ‘goyim’ as our ancestors were commanded to do, for THEIR ‘promised land.’
Frankly, I’d rather retire to some rural locale with the Missus, garden, and some books of John Buchan, (when White Men knew who they were) rather than read on this or any other site, about sodomites and transsexuals, God damned peverts that they are. May God bless you, and have mercy on you, HW. I’m just not a fan anymore.
Misericordie, Domine.
Sorry, but I’m not following you.
What are you saying here? Do you think Trump supports executing homosexuals? I just bought his new book which is next in the queue for a review here. Judging by what I have read, it is pretty mild stuff about all the terrific Hispanics who work for him.
Why on earth should I start cheerleading for Trump? It is November and most of his speeches are still vague boilerplate. He’s only released three position papers on guns, taxes, and immigration. I liked 2 out of 3, but I am not convinced he isn’t playing a game like all the rest of the politicians.
Wow! All I can say is this post is political dynamite. Had the South won undoubtedly it would have suffered a constitutional crisis (especially as its Constitution enshrines free trade) and it would have had to renegotiate the relationship between states and the national government. America won the revolution because the French navy counteracted the Royal Navy. The South had no such allies. But the South is a demographic nightmare and even if a new Confederacy arose it would be living on borrowed time. The future is in fly over country.
As regards States rights and individualism that may have worked in a rural majority white nation with a common culture. Such is not the case now so the State will have to be proactive in the defense and preservation of our people. If Liberal Democracy was the thesis and Fascism and National Socialism was the antithesis then the synthesis(and the future) is a form of Progressive Fascism. (Read Heinlein sometimes)
That’s a good topic for another post.
‘We threw ourselves into the middle of that fight. In hindsight, it was the right thing to do because we should honor our ancestors and preserve their memory for future generations.
At the same time, I couldn’t help but feel that all these heritage battles are on the same level as fighting over ancient Rome, Greece, or Egypt.’
Sir, fighting over our ancestors, in the case you put forth : our first Southern attempt to get away from this ‘union’, is merely a proxy symbolism for the issue of today, which is –
Are we to continue on in this union?
Thus, it is not an abstract such as debating over ancient Rome and Greece – because, even on the theoretical plain, those possibilites are dead.
It is not, however, a dead topick how we ought go one, in this country.
‘While it is true that I dream of Southern independence, I don’t believe in restoring anything resembling the Confederacy. Slavery, for example, was rendered obsolete generations ago. Because of the mechanization of agriculture, black slaves are no longer necessary to harvest cotton, tobacco, or sugar, and our economy is no longer based on the production of those commodities.’
Sir, may I politely take issue with this?
Slavery is, apparently, still as necessary today as it was 150 years ago.
If it were not so, then all the Targets, K-Marts, Walmart, Bon-Tons, and what not, would no be filled full of goods manufactured by sweat-shoppe labour or, indeed, slave labourers –
The Yankee Federal system we are forcet to be still using, is the same Yankee system of 1860 – that of importing immigrant labour, exploiting it – only nowadays, the system incorporates subcontracting out slave labour, all across the world, and enforcing it with the Petro-Dollar and IMF, & World Bank scams, that have been run by the Yankee government for decades.
No, Sir – business as usual, and, that so, slaves are just as necessary as before.
There is no substantive difference between Southern Slavery, of old, and the Yankee ‘free-market’ system of today.
Stylistically, however, there is a huge difference; that being that the Northern system maintains a facade of respectability – by keeping the salve labourers well out of view.
It’s hypocrisy – rank hypocrisy of the worst kind.
Sir, do you not see that, too?
‘Your growing disgust on the site for strong language, direct appeals to righteous anger, and your less than Christian attitudes wherein overt Christian use of Scriptures to justify the inevitable, and permissable use of force aginst a godless, satanic, and utterly demonic government, run by an antichrist bastard of a whoring mother (who is most likely also a sodomite), is yet another example of this cuckholding you seem to be exhibiting.’
Father, the ‘Christian scriptures you are referring to, that ‘justify the use of force’, are ‘borrowed’ Jewish scripture – which, as you may well hypothesize, is bit ironick.
Be that as it may,Sir,I have another take on Mr. Griffin – after having read him for several years.
He is becoming more and more consciously Southern – looking for ways to promote our culture that are decent, and in the mainstream of our traditional values and practices.
He is no long a Nazi or a White Nationalist – suggesting the death, or dispossession, of untold tens of millions of people whose existences do not match his own criteria.
Father, Mr. Griffin is no longer a young man who does not really know the transformative beauty of a true woman’s love, nor has any of The Holy Ghost moving in him.
Father, he is a Southern patriot, now, and some agitating for plausible, realistick, and non-diabolical methodologies for us to create a society most of us would wish our children to inhabit.
I thank God for his transformation – and, in no way, consider that he has sold out.
That said, certainly I understand Mr. Griffin’s position, as when, in recent years, I took stock of my progressive background and chuckt it, I was gravely censored and, even, excoriated, by many of my childhood friends, who refuse to countenance the fact that I have become a Southern Nationalist.
My changes have been painful – not the least because I find myself allied with many who cannot accept anyone with Jewish blood in their midst.
In the end, however, I have the same inclinations that the Secretary of the Treasury, the Head of Supply, the Surgeon General, and the S4ecretary of the Confederate government had, they all Jewish, and that is to stand by my fellow white Southerners who ancestors created the most wonderful place in the world to be, not a perfect place – as no human place can be – but a beautiful place.
I stand with Dr. Hill and the ghost of NC hero, General Junius Daniel, to fight to preserve our way of life; and, if it is not already clear, I very much appreciate Mr. Griffin’s determined efforts, on our behalf – even though this has, undoubtedly earned him a high place of Yankee government terrorist surveillance list.
He’s a quiet literary Southern hero, whose investigative journalism has unearthed the REAL modern history of our beloved South – NOT the history taught by the socialist dominated media or that of white nationalist websites…
Junius Daniel
‘There is no substantive difference between Southern Slavery, of old, and the Yankee ‘free-market’ system of today.’
Hyperbole much?
Dear Sam,
If your eyes are taken up by style, then, by all means, consider it ‘hyperbole’.
Certainly, I realize the realize the analogy would not be pleasing to any Yankee who had grown up steept in notions of ‘evil Southern exploitation.’
I give the Yankee system one kudo, though ; and that is the marvelous advantage, in the realm of publick relations, the slavery it protagonizes and carries out – subjugating people, throughout the globe daily, and using open borders to undermine even the limited sovereignty granted to us southerners, by the unconstitutional Yankee praxis.
An antebellum quote, by James Hammond of South Carolin, that holds just as true for the Yankee system today…
“I endorse, without reserve, the much abused sentiment of Governor McDuffie, that : ‘slavery is the corner-stone of our republican edifice;’ while I repudiate, as ridiculously absurd, that much lauded but nowhere accredited dogma of Mr. Jefferson that ‘all men are born equal.'”
Another James Hammond quote – and while it is no longer apropos for the lower white working classes of The North, it is certainly so for their 3rd World labourers…
‘The very mudsills of society. . . . We call them slaves. . . . But, I will not characterize that class at the North with that term; but you have it. It is there, it is everywhere, it is eternal.
Leo Nikolaevich Tolstoy, inadvertently about the Yankee system…
‘Money is a new form of slavery, and distinguishable from the old simply by the fact that it is impersonal – that there is no human relation between master and slave’
“In the end, however, I have the same inclinations that the Secretary of the Treasury, the Head of Supply, the Surgeon General, and the S4ecretary of the Confederate government had, they all Jewish,”
/\/\/\ Why the Confederacy lost.
Another quote by Tolstoy – perfectly apropos of the Yankee system…
‘The essence of all slavery consists in taking the product of another’s labor by force. It is immaterial whether this force be founded upon ownership of the slave or ownership of the money that he must get to live.’
Henry George…
‘The man who gives me employment, which I must have or suffer, that man is my master, let me call him what I will.’
The famous negress, singer, Billie Holiday…
‘You can be up to your boobies in white satin, with gardenias in your hair and no sugar cane for miles, but you can still be working on a plantation.’
Great cheek, Miss Denise!
Junius Daniel
‘If your eyes are taken up by style, then, by all means, consider it ‘hyperbole’.’
Not referring to style.
You wrote, ‘There is no substantive difference between Southern Slavery, of old, and the Yankee ‘free-market’
Definition of substantive
2substantive
adjective sub·stan·tive \?s?b-st?n-tiv; 2c & 3 also s?b-?stan-tiv\
: important, real, or meaningful
: supported by facts or logic
Junius Daniel
‘Certainly, I realize the realize the analogy would not be pleasing to any Yankee who had grown up steept in notions of ‘evil Southern exploitation.’
I was not being judgmental. Whether it was evil or not had nothing to do with my comment.
In other words, I believe it would be more accurate to say, there are important, real, meaningful, differences between Southern Slavery and the Yankee ‘free market’ systems supported by facts and logic.
We can discuss the pros and cons of free trade, capitalism, business and economics till the cows come home.
However, it is ridiculous to claim there is no substantive difference between So. Slavery and free markets.
I think most people would agree.
Dear Sam,
As contentious as my rebuttal of your rebuttal seemed, I was not feeling piqued.
I appreciate your point of view, but, as someone who, has long watched the Latin illegals pour in, in the spring, and take up living in the ancient abandoned negro sharecroppers huts, lacking most modern facilities – save for a satellite dish, all in all, I am no more convincet by your belief in the facade of modernity, than you are by my lack of belief in it.
For whatever it’s worth, I know a lot of folks who cotton to my view – including some Southern negroes and more than a few Yankees.
All the best to you, on this night, Sir.
At AnAnon…
‘
I used to believe that Hamilton had it right, and Jefferson was wrong, but Hamilton wanted to bring in the central bankers. at that point it is not your country anymore.’
Amen to that. It is the one thing I could agree with the Andrew Jackson administration. His bitter fight against the Hamiltonians won a victory for sovereignty that endured for 3/4 of a century.
Sadly, in 1913 it died, and with it, the entire American Revolution was made farce – as we wound up back in the hands of the Brits – they, with the help of Rothschild, the greatest, save possibly for ancient Rome, the greatest Imperialist exploiters of all time.
“Slavery is, apparently, still as necessary today as it was 150 years ago. If it were not so, then all the Targets, K-Marts, Walmart, Bon-Tons, and what not, would no be filled full of goods manufactured by sweat-shoppe labour or, indeed, slave labourers”
The thing about Jewish evil is it’s both evil and stupid.
Jews self-induce paranoia to maintain group cohesion. This paranoia makes them crave security and this craving for security leads to their insane greed and their insane greed leads them to want labor to get the absolute minimum reward – just enough to keep them alive.
The problem with that – and why they always destroy economies with their evil nonsense – is if labor has no money to spend then there is NO ECONOMY.
What they did with off-shoring is create an arbitrage of eastern wages and western prices and pocketed the difference. However the newly under employed in the west couldn’t pay for the goods anymore because they no longer had the jobs while the people in the east with the jobs weren’t paid enough to buy the goods either – so how could it work when there’s no basis for an economy?
Debt.
And that is why with the US trillions in debt the entire globalization scam is falling apart.
A quick point on the Jefferson vs Hamilton thing.
I think there’s a distinction here between politics and economics.
Politically Jefferson was right (imo) that a republic requires a large percentage of independently minded people and that requires a lot of people with a large degree of economic independence. Historically that meant free farmers.
However economically Hamilton was right that in the modern era you need industry or your free farmers will lose the first war they’re involved in against an industrial power.
If there’s no compromise possible between the two positions then there’s no long term solution except rule by the money lenders.
I’d suggest the compromise is what are the closest modern era equivalents of the classical era free farmer?
small businesses?
self-employed knowledge workers?
I’d say that would be the modern equivalent of southern agrarianism.
(Although on top of that I’d also have the state control or subsidize strategic industries where “strategic” was meant literally i.e. those industries necessary to defend yourself.)
After Obama got into the White House, Ralph Nader wrote a public letter urging Obama to stop jews from bombing Lebanon. Could you please tell me where the South fits into that picture? A Lebanese lecturing a Kenyan about jews and israel? Where are the interests of the North involved when Obama is dealing with israel on behalf of Lebanon?
You’re putting the horse before the cart, we need to win our freedom and make self determination possible and get control of government first, because this is not about the extent to which government is beneficial or harmful.
We need a small central government and we need one that is controlled by Nordic White people and the rest will fall into place.
The problem is that diversity doesn’t work and semites are exhibit number one.
It cannot be refuted that jews cause wars and that international jewry gets richer every time White people fight one another. They also get stronger as we get weaker with every war. When the bankers realized the threat that the United States posed to their banker monopoly didn’t they stir things up and bring about a war between the states in order to be dealing with two weak regions rather than a United States? Who controls the propaganda machines that relentlessly stereotype and attack the South?
Races create cultures that reflect who they are and we have no problem creating successful states. The problems arise when we begin to be controlled by jews or are left to accept the advice of Lebanese or others who benefit from living off of us whose advice or presence we don’t need.
Northerners, Southerners and Europeans, we are the same people. The problems between us result from the interference of self interested jewish trouble makers whom we have failed over the centuries to rid ourselves of permanently.
China is not the next rising economy, that’s our economy being liquidated in China. White men didn’t wake up one day and suddenly were unable to run auto manufacturing. Our auto industry was destroyed deliberately and so was our steel industry. This is not Northern White people doing this. It is international jewry.
We didn’t wake up one day and find that oh gee we can’t defend our borders any more. Open borders are deliberate and it is being done by the people who tell us diversity is our strength but they have a right to a state of their own bought with our blood and treasury from its beginning and still dependent upon us right up to this very moment.
Don’t make this more complicated than it is and don’t go off on tangents.