Greg Johnson has a new article at Counter-Currents which argues that American Nationalism “is a form of White Nationalism.”
He argues that “American civic nationalism is a fundamentally false interpretation of American history and identity.” In this view of American history, Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address is just “another piece of high-minded rhetorical flummery” like the Declaration of Independence “which is not a legal document of the United States.” The Constitution was only written for the posterity of the Founding Fathers and as a result “a free and orderly white society is every American’s birthright.”
While this fairy tale will be music to the ears of the American Nationalist crowd on the internet, I think we should revisit the history of American Nationalism. We have to understand that history to grasp how American Nationalism evolved into the toxic ideology it is today.
The American Revolution Was About Civic Nationalism
American Nationalism has always been grounded in the symbols, documents, outcome and ideology of the American Revolution. The American Revolution had nothing to do with White Nationalism. In the American colonies, the conflict was a bitter civil war between Patriots and Loyalists over republican ideology. It was British subjects killing each other over the desire of one group to establish an independent state based on the fashionable 18th century ideology of civic nationalism.
Civic Nationalism was at the core of the American Revolution. The American colonists fought on both sides of the conflict. Blacks and Indians fought on both sides of the conflict. France and Spain entered the war on the side of the American Patriots. The result of the war was the defeat of Britain and the Loyalists, the ascendance of the Patriots and civic nationalism and the independence of the United States which was a loose confederation of republics organized under the Articles of Confederation.
The Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation and the US Constitution are all products of civic nationalism. They justify or establish republican governments. At the very beginning, these documents laid down the foundation of American Nationalism, which is liberal republicanism or civic nationalism, with its axioms of liberty, equality, tolerance, individual rights and constitutionalism. They became the touchstones for future generations of Americans who sought to create “a more perfect Union” by eliminating inherited inconsistencies with American Nationalism.
American Nationalism Instantly Undermined And Destabilized Traditional Values
The result of the American Revolution and the triumph of American Nationalism was to create an independent state based on an ideology that undermined traditional values. Ethnicity was the most obviously undermined value as the American Revolution was a bitter civil war between Englishmen. Religion was undermined too and the Anglican Church was disestablished. Racial solidarity was undermined in an international conflict between Britain, France, Spain and between the American colonists. These conflicts would continue through the Age of Revolution.
Prior to the American Revolution, John Locke and his liberal theories were unknown in the American colonies even though Locke himself had written the constitution of South Carolina, which was later revised and ignored by the colonists. It was only during the American Revolution that Locke’s theories about government were seized on and popularized in New England to justify the revolt against Britain. Locke had argued that the human mind was a tabula rasa (a blank slate) and the implication of this was that all measurable differences between human beings are environmental in origin.
Before the American Revolution, slavery had been legal in all the American colonies and no one but the most radical Quaker sects subscribed to the theory of racial equality. Even in Cotton Mather’s New England, the consensus view was that blacks were an inferior race for hereditary reasons. They were born that way. Maybe they suffered from the Curse of Ham. After the American Revolution, slavery was abolished in New England and racial equality triumphed and became the dominant enlightened view in the region. Its leading intellectuals like Samuel Stanhope Smith argued against Thomas Jefferson.
The Founding Fathers Weren’t White Nationalists
The Founding Fathers were not White Nationalists and bitterly disagreed on race and slavery. Generally speaking, Southerners like Jefferson and Madison saw slavery as an evil that would fade away over time, but tended to believe in racial inequality. Northerners like Samuel Stanhope Smith, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin and Alexander Hamilton believed in racial equality and were inclined toward emancipation. By this point, the Northern intelligentsia were coming to believe that blacks were inferior, but this was a result of their environment. It was slavery that had imbruted them and made them that way. This is a species of anti-racism known as the doctrine of assimilationism.
The US Constitution and the Naturalization Act of 1790 were compromises between the North and the South. It was Southerners who insisted on things like the Fugitive Slave Clause in the Constitution, the 3/5ths Compromise and basing American naturalization laws on whiteness. American citizenship was based on state citizenship at the time. Before the War Between the States, blacks were citizens of Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode Island and Pennsylvania. Blacks were stripped of voting rights in Pennsylvania in 1838. They were allowed to vote in New York as long as they owned $250 worth of property. They also lost voting rights in New Jersey, Connecticut and Maryland.
There Was Never A Rise In White Nationalism In The Northeast
In the Northeast, there was never a rise in White Nationalism. From the Founding through the antebellum era, the consensus view among the educated Northern elite was that blacks were American citizens who ought to be allowed to vote. They were the equals of White people, but had been degraded by slavery. Education would solve the problem and uplift them to racial equality. Pennsylvania repealed its anti-miscegenation law in 1780. Massachusetts repealed its anti-miscegenation law in 1834. New Jersey, New York, New Hampshire, Connecticut and Vermont never passed anti-miscegenation laws.
This disagreement between North and South over the nature of American Nationalism, racial equality and civic nationalism came to a boiling point in the antebellum era. Northerners cried over Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin. John Brown was celebrated as a hero. In the Dred Scott decision, Justice Roger Taney ruled that blacks were not American citizens. This was considered outrageous in the Northeast where blacks were already citizens and voters in most states.
The Origins of White Nationalism
If the Founding Fathers were not White Nationalists, then where did White Nationalism come from?
The roots of White Nationalism trace back to the colonization movement in the Early Republic to resettle free blacks in Africa. We’ve already seen how Liberia was founded for this purpose. It was Thomas Jefferson who first argued for resettling blacks in their native habitat in his Notes on the State of Virginia. The capital of Liberia was named after James Monroe. A number of prominent Americans including James Madison, James Monroe and Henry Clay were involved with the American Colonization Society.
Led by Virginia, fourteen state legislatures endorsed the colonization movement. It was most popular in the Upper South, Border South and the Midwest. Several slave states invested in Liberia and resettled about 11,000 blacks there. Blacks were banned or heavily fined to prevent their settlement in Ohio and Illinois. Oregon excluded free blacks when it was a territory. The cause of reserving the West to free, White settlers was later taken up in the Wilmot Proviso which was intensely polarizing.
White supremacy was the dominant form of racial nationalism in the United States from the Founding until the 1970s. The lineage of White Nationalism traces back to Jefferson and the Early Republic, but it was more of a deviant view. It was most popular in states like Kentucky and Ohio. The African colonization movement collapsed in the antebellum era after the rise of William Lloyd Garrison and the abolitionists polarized the Union over the issue of slavery. After the 1830s, Southern support for gradual emancipation and colonization waned as Southerners circled the wagons and responded to abolitionist attacks by embracing John C. Calhoun’s argument that slavery was a positive good.
Southern Nationalism and the Confederacy
The rise of Southern Nationalism in the antebellum era, the creation of the Confederacy and the War Between the States was all driven by the collapse of American Nationalism and was rooted in regional differences between the North and South that had existed since the Founding.
In the South, blacks were still considered an inferior race. Every Southern state was a slave state. Every Southern state practiced white supremacy. Manumission had been curtailed. Several Southern state legislatures had passed laws requiring free blacks to move out of state. Patriarchy was unchallenged. Southerners were moving away from the older view that slavery was an inherited evil to the newer view that it was a blessing or positive good.
In the Northeast, blacks were citizens in every New England state except Connecticut. Many Northern states like New York and New Jersey had never passed anti-miscegenation laws. Massachusetts and Pennsylvania had repealed their anti-miscegenation laws. The dominant view among educated Northeastern elites was that blacks were capable of assimilating and becoming the equals of Whites. Segregation existed to some extent in New York, Pennsylvania and New Jersey while much of the rest of the region was already integrated by the antebellum era. Northern women were already holding women’s rights conventions and were agitating for suffrage.
In the Midwest, blacks were banned or heavily fined from immigrating to Ohio, Indiana and Illinois due to the presence of so many Southern Whites from Kentucky and Virginia who settled the Lower Midwest. Blacks weren’t citizens in the Midwestern states, but states like Wisconsin and Minnesota didn’t have anti-miscegenation laws. Iowa and Kansas repealed their anti-miscegenation laws in 1851 and 1859 as settlers from New England became more predominant there.
Greg Johnson tries to dismiss the relevance of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution to American Nationalism. He waves away the former as just a legal document and the latter as only applying to the posterity of the White Founders. He does this to sidestep the fact that differences of opinion over these documents were the source of a bitter conflict over civic nationalism between John C. Calhoun – who represented the Southern view of American Nationalism – and Daniel Webster who articulated the Northern version of American Nationalism in their generation.
In Webster’s view, the Union was created by the Declaration of Independence while Calhoun argued it was created by the sovereign and independent states that ratified the US Constitution. Webster believed the Union created the states. Calhoun believed the states created the Union. In Calhoun’s view, sovereign states could withdraw from the Union since they created it. In Webster’s view, the Union was sovereign and had created the states at the time of the Declaration of Independence.
Like the American Revolution, the War Between the States was another conflict over civic nationalism. It resolved a number of burning constitutional questions:
1.) Do states have the right to withdraw from the Union?
2.) Are the states sovereign or is the federal government sovereign?
3.) Do slaveowners have the constitutional right to bring their slaves into the common territories?
4.) Did the states create the Union or did the Union create the states?
5.) What is the status of blacks in America?
Every single one of these questions was a byproduct of arguments on both sides over the civic nationalism that is and always has been the central feature of American Nationalism.
THE MISCEGENATION BALL
Civil War and Reconstruction
The long term result of the Civil War and Reconstruction was the bifurcation of America into two incompatible racial orders. The Radical Republicans passed the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments which established black citizenship and voting rights. The Civil Rights Acts of 1866 and 1875 and the Force Acts of 1870 and 1871 attempted to impose the North’s racial system on the entire country.
In the antebellum era, only New England with the exception of Connecticut had black citizenship and voting rights. A Northern version of Jim Crow had been practiced in New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and the Midwest. This was swept away during the Reconstruction era. The Northeast and Midwest were integrated in this era. Anti-miscegenation laws were repealed in New Mexico (1866), Washington (1868), Illinois (1874), Rhode Island (1881), Wyoming (1882), Maine (1883), Michigan (1883), Ohio (1887).
The South was placed under the rule of scalawags, carpetbaggers and former black slaves. The system wasn’t fully shaken off in the South until George White gave his farewell address as the last black congressman in 1901. The Jim Crow system which was created in the 1890s and 1900s never existed in the Northeast or Midwest. The South would have undoubtedly went further but this was as far as Northern public opinion would tolerate the effective nullification of the Reconstruction amendments.
The Western states created their own weaker version of Jim Crow which applied to Asians, Hispanics and American Indians. There were segregation statutes and anti-miscegenation laws in the Western states until the Second World War. At the same time, there was integration in some states like Washington and New Mexico. In the Midwest, Indiana was an outlier and had its own version of Jim Crow.
Greg Johnson also wants to dismiss the importance of Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address to American Nationalism. The Gettysburg Address simply built on the Northern view of civic nationalism which Daniel Webster had developed out of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. It is an understatement to say this is ahistorical and the postbellum Northern system of race relations only emerged after Abraham Lincoln had redefined American Nationalism.
UNCLE SAM’S DEBUT
“Our popular image of Uncle Sam (As seen in the image on the top of this page) was defined in large part by Thomas Nast, who was one of the most popular artists of the 1800’s. Nast was also responsible for our popular images of Santa Claus, the Republican Elephant, and the Democratic Donkey. Nast’s first illustration of Uncle Sam appeared in the November 20, 1869 edition of Harper’s Weekly.
“While Uncle Sam does not show the top hat and striped pants that we have come to associate with him, he shows something much more important in this image. In this image, Uncle Sam is a symbol of unity and equality. The image shows many people welcomed at Uncle Sam’s Thanksgiving table . . . Black, White, Chinese, and Indian, as wall as many others are seen sitting around the table. The image is captioned, “Uncle Sam’s Thanksgiving Dinner; Come One, Come All, Free and Equal.” The image clearly shows that Uncle Sam was originally a symbol of freedom, and equality. Uncle Sam was a unifying symbol.
By 1876, Nast’s Image of Uncle Sam had evolved into one that we would recognize today. The image to the left is the cover of the November 24, 1876 Harper’s Weekly. The image features Uncle Sam with striped pants, a long overcoat, and a top hat. In this image, the top hat also has feathers. This image deals with Reform of the Civil Service System.
While the exact image of Uncle Sam has evolved over the years, one thing remains constant. He is a symbol of the best ideals of the United States. From the earliest days until today, he has stood for Freedom, Equality, and Justice. While as a Nation, we do not always perfectly achieve these ideals, Uncle Sam remains a poignant symbol and reminder of the goal and objective . . . One Nation, Under God, Indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for All.”
Uncle Sam is a super patriotic Yankee American Nationalist whose ideology is civic nationalism. He is a symbol of the Second Republic that was defined in the Reconstruction era by the German immigrant cartoonist Thomas Nast.
Reconciliation
The 20th century opened up in the period that is known as the Nadir of the Negro.
It inaugurated a period that lasted about thirty years in which Northerners tried to forget about the foolishness of Reconstruction. Even before the Jews arrived en masse in the Great Wave, Northerners had already created the system we live under today in their own states. The Jews who arrived in the New York of the 1880s found a place that was already integrated. Northern states already had their own civil rights laws which were the precursors of federal civil rights laws.
It was the Black Republicans like Thaddeus Stevens and Charles Sumner who had pioneered racial equality, racial integration and civil rights laws during Reconstruction. They had already succeeded in writing racial equality into the Constitution which was undone in the South by two generations of Southerners. By the time of the Spanish-American War, Northerners and Southerners tried to put the past behind them and for a time the sectional peace endured until the Second World War.
Woodrow Wilson was the first Southern president to be elected since the War Between the States. Among his lesser known acts, Wilson resegregated the federal government. It had been integrated since the Lincoln administration. Black troops had fought for the Union in the War Between the States. They fought in segregated units in France in the First World War and largely in support roles during the Second World War. The US military wasn’t reintegrated until the Korean War.
The Second World War
The Second World War was another huge turning point in American Nationalism.
In both the American Revolution and the War Between the States, the wars against Britain and the Confederacy had been ideological wars waged in the name of civic nationalism. In both cases, the result of the wars in the North had been a sharp diminution in racial consciousness and an upsurge in ideological fanaticism. The Black Republicans during the Reconstruction era are the best example of this.
In the late 19th century and early 20th century, the Spanish-American War and the First World War didn’t have this effect on domestic politics and racial attitudes even though the latter had been waged as a crusade to “make the world safe for democracy.” This wasn’t true of the Second World War. The war against the Third Reich and later the Cold War with the Soviet Union were ideological wars which exacerbated the worst tendencies of American Nationalism.
The Yankee style of war has always been about demonizing the enemy as evil and invoking the American Nationalist ideology of civic nationalism. The war against the Third Reich was no different and the result of the war was predictable. It was a noble war waged in the name of civic nationalism. It was a war against racism and imperialism, but a war for human rights and democracy and liberty and equality and religious tolerance. It was a war not unlike the total war that had been waged against the Confederacy.
After the war, Americans predictably put themselves under the moral microscope. They judged their own conduct by their own professed standards. If the Third Reich was evil and immoral for being racist, how could Americans indict the Third Reich while upholding white supremacy in the South? From the end of the Second World War until the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Western states repealed their anti-miscegenation laws and desegregated. Once again, racial attitudes in the North completely changed between 1938 and 1945 while the South alone committed itself to massive resistance.
The Cold War
The Cold War with the Soviet Union was another ideological war.
Unlike the previous wars, this war began when the Second World War ended in 1945 and lasted until 1991. For 52 years, the United States was embroiled in these ideological wars with the Third Reich and Soviet Union. American Nationalism was forever changed by them.
In the geopolitical rivalry between the United States and the Soviet Union, the Soviets indicted Americans on the grounds of “racism” in order to win support in the Third World. The US State Department was acutely sensitive to the charge and led the push for desegregation which culminated in the Brown decision in 1954. Jim Crow was an albatross for American leadership of the “Free World” and was dismantled from the top down, not the bottom up for that reason.
The Jewish Question
Jews aren’t the primary driving force of America’s decline.
The real culprit is the civic nationalism that is the ideological core of American Nationalism. From the beginning in 1789, Jews have been welcomed into the fold as American citizens. They have never had any other status than being equal to White Americans. George Washington embraced the Jews in the name of civic nationalism. In his letter to Newport’s Touro Synagogue, Washington boasted the Government of the United States was one that “gives to bigotry no sanction.”
The Jewish Question is simply the result of the logic of American Nationalism working itself out over the course of two centuries. The ideology of civic nationalism has always blinded White Americans to how Jews operate as a group, not as individuals. As American citizens, Jews have always had the right and liberty to, say, take over the universities, buy up the newspapers and publishing houses, corner the market in finance, build lobbies to exert power and influence over the government, etc.
How did the Jews in the 20th century convince White Americans that the United States has no inherent racial, cultural, religious or ethnic basis? They simply took the doctrines of American Nationalism as developed by Franklin, Webster and Lincoln to its logical conclusion. They used their media platforms to invoke American nationalism to undermine and marginalize the White majority. Southerners were bad because they were intolerant. They weren’t treating blacks equally. Blacks in the South didn’t have the rights and freedoms of other Americans. Southerners were violating liberal democracy by denying them the right to vote. These were the arguments which Martin Luther King, Jr. successfully made to triumph over Jim Crow. He appealed to American Nationalism.
American Nationalism Isn’t Ethnonationalism
American Nationalism is 18th century civic nationalism.
It isn’t like German nationalism, Hungarian nationalism, Greek nationalism or the other ethnonationalist movements which came later and were grounded in 19th century romanticism. It is closely related to French nationalism. Ethnonationalism was a reaction against French civic nationalism.
Civic Nationalism has always brought about racial equality and integration. During the French Revolution, slavery was abolished and all blacks were made into free and equal citizens of the French Republic. The French Second Republic abolished slavery in 1848 in the French Caribbean for the second time after it had been restored by Napoleon. The French Third Republic which was overthrown by Hitler had black citizens that sat as representatives in the French Parliament.
The driving force that brought about the demise of White America has always been the civic nationalism at the core of American Nationalism. The Jewish Question is merely a symptom and outcome of American Nationalism. The presence of non-Whites lends itself more to caste societies like the white supremacy of the Old South than to racial equality and integration. Christianity has been displaced as our cultural center of gravity by liberalism. It has no problem accommodating racialism and did so for centuries.
No, the force which has driven America to this point wasn’t Christianity, which in many cases like the Southern Baptists was late in adjusting to the new status quo. It wasn’t really the Jews either who only took the center stage late in American history. From the beginning, the driving force toward racial equality in both the United States and France has been their doctrine of civic nationalism. It was already evident during the American Revolution and War Between the States and unquestionably so during the Second World War and Cold War when it reached its climax.
American Nationalism Today
99.99% of our fellow Americans agree that American Nationalism is synonymous with civic nationalism because the history of Americanism has been the destruction and elimination of every other aspect of national identity. The people who style themselves as “American Nationalists” are spitting in the wind and their ship sailed generations ago. They are just as marginalized as anyone else and waving a federal flag around isn’t going to change their status or make them any less stigmatized as “racists.” You could even say it is karma since they were the progenitors of this Frankenstein.
Donald Trump hasn’t changed this equation of American Nationalism with civic nationalism. Instead, he has affirmed it at every point in his campaign and throughout his presidency. He has never once even drawn attention to his White supporters, but has affirmed on countless occasions the triumphant narrative of American civic nationalism that is rooted in the Civil Rights Movement. He has repeatedly talked about how Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King, Jr. redeemed America from White racism. Donald Trump and the Republican Congress explicitly condemned White Nationalism in the Charlottesville resolution.
Fortunately, we only have to endure this idiocy for at most one or two more presidential election cycles. When Texas or Florida reach their demographic tipping point in the 2020s and become blue states like Virginia, a Republican will never win the presidency again and the window will forever close on “Taking Back America” through voting for the Republican Party. The United States will become California writ large. The people who are talking now about how much they love America and identify with its symbols as super Patriots will be singing a different tune when they find themselves under permanent Democratic rule and effectively thrust back into the days of the Reconstruction South.
In reality, American Nationalism is already dead as a doornail. Donald Trump was the last chance to reform the system. He has unquestionably failed and nothing of significance will be accomplished before the midterms. As things stand today, Democrats once again have a 10 point lead in the congressional ballot. The Republican Congress is likely to get blown out in the 2018 midterm elections. The Trump agenda will die with it. American Nationalism is also going to die with the Republican majority.
In the long run, White Americans are destined to live under a Democratic majority with a feckless and dwindling, cucked Republican opposition. It is only going to get worse too as the electorate continues to brown. The fruits of civic nationalism are going to ripen on young White people who come of age in the 2020s and 2030s. They won’t have any use for American Nationalism because voting by that point will be as hopeless as it is in South Africa. They’re already growing up now as a racial minority.
American Nationalism in the 2020s and 2030s will be various non-White presidents like President Kamala Harris sticking it to White man. I would rather not jump on that sinking ship.
UPDATE: Here’s a good old post about The Lincoln Catechism.
Lesson The First
I. What is the Constitution?
A compact with hell – now obsolete.
II. By whom hath the Constitution been made obsolete?
By Abraham Africanus the First.
III. To what end?
That his days may be long in office – and that he may make himself and his people the equal of the negroes.
IV. What is a president?
A general agent for negroes.
VI. What is an army?
A provost guard, to arrest white men, and set negroes free.
X. What is meant by the word Liberty?
Incarceration in a vermin-infested Bastille.
XV. What is the meaning of the word “patriot?”
A man who loves his country less, and the negro more.
XIX. What is the meaning of the word “law?”
The will of the president.
XXII. Have the people any rights?
None but such as the president gives.
Lesson The Second
IX. What is the meaning of the declaration that, “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed?”
That a man’s house may be searched, and when he be stripped of his arms, whenever and wherever a provost marshal shall dare attempt it.
XVII. What is the meaning of the declaration that, “the United States shall guarantee to every state a Republican form of government?”
That Congress shall assist the President in destroying the Republican form of government in the states, and substituting a military government wherever he pleases – witness Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland, and Delaware.
Lesson The Third
II. What are the Ten Commandments?
Thou shalt have no other God but the negro.
Thou shalt make an image of a negro, and place it on the Capitol as the type of the new American man.
Thou shalt swear that the negro shall be the equal of the white man.
Thou shalt fight thy battles on the Sabbath day, and thy generals, and thy captains, and thy privates, and thy servants, shall do all manner of murders, and thefts as on the other six days.
Thou shalt not honor or obey thy father nor thy mother if they are Copperheads; but thou shall serve, honor, and obey Abraham Lincoln.
Thou shalt commit murder – of slaveholders.
Thou mayest commit adultery – with the contrabands.
Thou shalt steal – everything that belongeth to a slaveholder.
Thou shalt bear false witness – against all slaveholders.
Thou shalt covet the slaveholders man-servant and his maid-servant, and shalt steal his ox and his ass, and everything that belongeth to him.
For on these commandments hang all the law and honor of loyal leaguers.
X. Have the loyal leaguers a prayer?
They have.
XI. Repeat it.
Father Abraham, who art in Washington, of glorious memory – since the date of thy proclamation to free negroes.
Thy kingdom come, and overthrow the republic; they will be done, and the laws perish.
Give us this day our daily supply of greenbacks.
Forgive us our plunders, but destroy the Copperheads.
Lead us into fat pastures; but deliver us from the eye of detectives; and make us the equal of the negro; for such shall be our kingdom, and the glory of thy administration.
Lesson The Sixth
II. What are States?
Colonies of the federal government.
VII. What is a Governor?
A general agent for the president.
VIII. What is a negro?
A white man with black skin.
IX. What is a white man?
A negro with white skin.
Lesson The Eighth
XXVI. What will become of all who believe in the Union as it was, and the Constitution as it is?
They shall be damned
XXVII. What shall be the reward of all such as believe the Union was a covenant with death, and the Constitution a compact with Hell?
They shall be received into a negro paradise.
Lesson The Ninth
I. Is the United States a consolidated government?
Yes, it is.
II. Who consolidated it?
Abraham Lincoln.
III. Does consolidation mean to annihilate the States?
Yes – to a great extent.
XII. Does the Republican Party intend to change the name of the United States?
It does.
XIII. What do they intend to call it?
New Africa.
XVII. What do the Republicans mean by the word people?
Abolitionists, mesmerisers, spiritual mediums, free-lovers and negroes.
Great article. The inherent contradiction between the ideology v blood and it is terrifying to contemplate the consequences.
When the break with the Jews comes to the US, they’ll enact/makeup a bloody story that makes the events in Exodus look like summer manouvers.
Terrifying.
Brad, you and I are both on the same sinking ship, whether you want to acknowledge that fact or not.
So give me the answer to the challenge that I posed in my article:
American White Nationalism is far more likely to win the battle for a white homeland than anti-American forms of White Nationalism. The white Americans who lean toward white identity politics, even implicitly, overwhelmingly vote for the Republican Party. They also tend to be conservative and patriotic. They identify with America and feel a strong attachment to American symbols.
Like everyone else in our society, they have been miseducated about America’s nature and history and think it was founded as a color-blind propositional nation.
But they are also increasingly aware of the catastrophic consequences of diversity. Thus as white demographic displacement accelerates, these Americans will become increasingly receptive to our account of America’s real identity, how our country has been hijacked by hostile aliens, and how we can Make America White Again.
By contrast, anti-American White Nationalists will have to convince our people of all the same facts about race, diversity, and demographic displacement. But, as if that were not already enough of an uphill battle, they will also have to sell Americans a raft of anti-American ideas: cranky conspiracy theories about Jews and Freemasons, Southern Nationalism, and the like. The anti-Americans will also have to convince Americans of a whole host of historical revisionist theses about the Civil War, the Third Reich, and the Holocaust, none of them really necessary for white survival in America. Finally, the anti-Americans will have to explain away their use of symbols which are at best alien to Americans and at worst are freighted with highly negative connotations.
Both forms of White Nationalism communicate the same truths. But American nationalists relate them to ideas that feel authentic to our target audience, while anti-American nationalists link them to ideas that at best strike most Americans as alien and inauthentic and at worse seem downright repugnant.
Which approach is likely to make more converts? Which approach is more likely to save the white race in America, which is really the only thing that matters? Clearly, anti-American White Nationalism is self-marginalizing and self-defeating. American nationalism is the only way forward.
The gamble that ordinary American whites will make, even as the US becomes more black, brown and yellow is that the white bloc sitting inside the US, is still in control of the largest arsenal on earth. That Whites are still going to be the engine of the largest economic machine ever conceived, with Tribute pouring in from every global money stream.
“Hegemony or death” they’ll say.
Very well said.
Indeed.
I sincerely wish Hunter was capable of engaging in good faith on this topic but he is not. He has preexisting ideological commitments and they are not open for debate or interpretation. It’s an emotional attachment, not a rational one. Anti-American white nationalism (a contradiction in terms when you think about it) is already a ghetto and it will only continue to grow more insular, disconnected and grotesque-looking to normal people.
Nothing that I have written here wasn’t my stated view of American Nationalism on this website 5 or 6 years ago before Daily Stormer or TRS existed.
Actually Hunter, as I remember, back then you were lambasting Greg for importing “weird European philosophies” while you presented yourself as a true blue traditional American who could “talk to his neighbors.”
Just tell the truth Greg.
The truth is not Anglin’s American Nationalism. He’s blatantly ignorant of American history, basing his entire ideology on some misleading internet memes and half truths that we foolishly allowed to fester in our movement.
American Nationalism is NOT White Nationalism. Never has been.
In reality non-whites had citizenship quite early on in American society.
Some Cherokees were given citizenship by 1817 and during the era of Indian removal citizenship was ROUTINELY used as a way to weaken the allegiance to the tribes. Individual Indians could stay behind and become citizens, but the tribal political entity had to move West.
Was the American experiment good? Or bad? Who cares, that’s a matter of opinion. The plain fact of the matter is that it didn’t work out.
And now it’s a solved game. And we’re not the ones who solved it. Bring in a new people to vote for you, that’s how you win bigly in American politics.
The correct frame is DISPOSSESSED American Nationalism.
Just explain to White Americans that their country has been stolen from them through mass immigration, used to elect a new people.
They can try to take it back through voting but major systemic flaws (and the fundamentally anti-white nature of the people involved) will make this very difficult.
We can’t encourage White Americans to continue identifying with the American geo-political unit that they have lost control over. And we can’t implicitly encourage them to identify with their fellow Americans of all races. We have to move them away from thinking in those ways.
We have to encourage White Americans to recognize the reality that their country has been stolen, that the system is fundamentally hostile to them and that they’re on their own.
People pushing in this direction are doing a good thing for White Americans. People who are “white pilling”, legitimizing the system and telling fairy tales about how responsive it is to our political grievances are doing immense harm.
I am not sure how what you say differs from my recommendation that our message be that a free and orderly white society was meant to be the birthright of every American, before it was stolen from us by plantation capitalists, high-minded fools, and scheming Jews, and the goal of White Nationalism in America is to secure that birthright for all Americans.
Anglin has nothing to do with this.
I was on record about this long before he changed his thinking.
Greg, the problem of your argumentation is that fundamentally relies on Optics as its base. It may be more intelligent than the retarded ‘red tennis shoes’ of the Daily Stormer, but the underlying logic is the same.
We must appeals to normies by using their symbols that they cherish. But Brad is making a more profound point than you are: he’s cutting straight to the source. He understands that White Nationalism was never concensus. The 1790 amendment was a compromise that was successfully and gradually weakened until it was overturned. The long arc of America’s trajectory, including before Jews, was for a gradual liberalisation. Jews are a parasitic minority who exploited inherent weaknessess they could already sense. But the process began long before they came ashore.
Say we get what you want. The problem is that normies may be easy to fool, initially, but not everyone is. It will be a VERY easy argument for someone opposed to WN to argue that American Nationalism is race-blind in its origins. Just re-read Brad’s text. There’s plenty of evidence.
Are you suddenly going to turn around to normies and claim that, by the way, we were just kidding. We were always white nationalists first. We just conceive of American Nationalism as synonymous. The problem is that such a view has fragile hold once you actually look at the history of the US. It was founded based on liberal, enlightenment principles.
When you dismiss evidence, you sound a lot like a Christian apologist trying to defend Christianity from the fact that, it too, is fundamentally race-blind in its origins. Christianity may accomodate a racialist outlook, just as American nationalism may do so, but it is only tolerance at best, never a rooted conviction.
The evolution of both AmNat and Christianity underlines this point.
You should read my article before commenting on this.
My claim is that America was a white man’s country from the start, but that it was deflected from this course by plantation capitalists, high-minded fools, and self-seeking Jews. Obviously, the people who should have held fast on race were too often compromising and morally confused.
Are we more likely to create a white man’s country on this continent by grafting it on policies and attitudes that already existed in America — or by rejecting America en bloc and trying to persuade people of something that seems alien?
This is true, it is a white colony.
But because of the rhetoric surrounding the rather straightforward War of Independence, The American Revolution is radically liberal.
Liberals have a legitimate claim to pushing the project leftward.
It seems to me that the battle for the minds of Civic nationalist versus White nationalists cannot be won in the short term. We have hundreds of years of conditioning favoring the civic nationalist side and now worse, open borders, as Mr Wallace has quite amply revealed. The attack must be one of metaphysics. We must philosophically using the best data available undermine the notion of Tabla Rasa. We must counterattack the idea of radical individualism, and additionally reintroduce a proper idea of Liberty which today is totally misconstrued as license. To my mind we need to as well engage the metaphysics of beleif in God as an objective source of law and place Him on the side of the good. And here is my partisan perspective, the Catholic church has historical arguements interestingly developed against Americanism and as well Capitalism both of which thrive on revolutionary change. Catholicism as well has fully elaborated a truer philosophic sense of liberty and individualism available for our use. Perhaps it would be wise to become fully versed in those arguements again and reinstate them. We are now in a battle of basic philosophical thinking, something recently purged from our minds. We have imbibed the English schools of pragmaticism and must move back toward continental thinking based on ontological foundations. Sadly time is against us so the arguements must be of utmost precision and placed everywhere in forms which can be fitted to different audiences. In the end if we succeed I suspect we will find that in truth peoples of like mind will become our allies and it is possible that race may become inconsequential and we can have the culture we all wish to have.
Greg,
Do you really believe we are going to vote our way to a White homeland by supporting the Republican Party? If so, how do you explain the GOP Congress unanimously condemning White Nationalism while exempting Antifa from blame in the Charlottesville resolution?
If Trump and the GOP are doing such a great job as the American Nationalists hold, why should anyone bother with White Nationalism? What is there to gain from committing to White Nationalism? Trump supporters believe they have already won. They have succeeded in Taking Back America and as a result have no incentive to bother with “American Nationalism.” Anyone can support Trump without attaching himself to such a heavily stigmatized movement like White Nationalism. Normies are individualists and materialists and they will avoid conflict and stick with the MAGA cult of personality.
American White Nationalism isn’t going to go anywhere because Trump supporters are already content to be MAGApedes. You’re right they are patriotic conservatives. You’re right they identify with America and have a strong attachment to American symbols. You omit the part about how America is civic nationalism to virtually all of these people. They strongly disagree with American White Nationalism. Show up at any Patriot event in the US and you will find how strongly they disagree with American White Nationalism and how emphatically they reject “racism.” The Oathkeepers were physically removing Identity Evropa members from their rallies last summer.
The fact is, Donald Trump has missed his window to fundamentally change anything about the direction in which we are going. Nothing controversial gets through Congress without going through the budget reconciliation process. The GOP has already given up on that for the next two years. The Republican majority in Congress is also likely to get blow out in the midterm elections. Even if by some miracle Trump had managed to enact his immigration plan, it would have only delayed White minority status by four years. It wouldn’t have changed the long term trajectory.
As I see our likely future, we’re in the bottom of the 9th inning of American Nationalism. The GOP will likely lose Congress in the 2018 midterms. Trump will likely lose his reelection bid in 2020. The Democrats will come back to power more radicalized than ever before. The GOP inevitably blame its misfortunes on Trump and nominate candidates like Nikki Haley and Tim Scott. We will see how hard you guys will be waving the flag then.
This is just a passing fad and you know it.
Brad, you are basically declaring the argument about whether America is essentially a white country or a universal nation open to all the world’s wretched refuse to be over, and whites to have lost.
You seem to have put a great deal of faith in Trump (and before that you were enthused about Romney), and now you are black-pilled because Trump has not performed up to your expectations.
You have erected a straw man here, namely that American (White) Nationalism lives or dies with Donald Trump. That is not true. Trump may well fail, but we are still going to need to create a white homeland.
I am not sure we will vote our way out of this mess. No options should be off the table. But no matter what option we end up choosing, please explain to me, Brad, how we are going to get to a white homeland in North America without persuading as many persuadable whites (and non-whites for that matter) as possible that White Nationalism is the best political philosophy?
Obviously, we have a better chance of winning in any scenario if more people agree with us.
So which strategy is more likely to convert persuadable people, A (American Nationalism) or B (anti-American White Nationalism)?
#1
A. Make American Great Again: Build the Wall
B. Death to the Judeo-Masonic Insect: Build the Wall
#2
A. We need a whites-only immigration policy, like we had throughout most of American history.
B. We need a whites-only immigration policy, like they had in the Third Reich.
#3
A. We need to deport millions of Mexican invaders, in an orderly and humane way, like Americans already did twice in the 20th century. (The fact that they came back is reason enough to build the wall.)
B. We need to deport millions of non-whites in cattle cars, like they did in the Third Reich.
#4
A. Join the White Nationalist movement and receive a red MAGA hat absolutely free! (Because we truly will Make America Great Again.)
B. Join the White Nationalist movement and receive a plastic replica Stahlhelm emblazoned with a fork! (Apparently phase two of the plan was to eat our way to the ethnostate.)
#5: To borrow one from TRS:
A. It’s OK to be White.
B. National Socialism or Death
As more persuadable whites see that multiculturalism, even in its more conservative civic nationalist form, is not working, will they be more receptive to White Nationalism:
A. If they learn that it is actually congruent with laws and attitudes that already existed in American history — and that a free and orderly white society was the birthright of every true American before plantation capitalists, high-minded liberal fools, and cunning Jews stole it from them — OR
B. If they are presented with the same basic ideas about race and politics, but decked out in anti-American rhetoric and alien, stigmatized, and repugnant symbols?
Again, as I said in my article, persuading our people of White Nationalism is an uphill battle
Obviously linking White Nationalism to authentic elements of the American tradition is the most fruitful path.
We are making real progress in the intellectual and cultural war. More and more persuadable Americans are receptive to our message. The civic nationalists in the Republican Party and conservative movement are intellectually bankrupt. We are winning the argument, Brad, and it troubles me that you, one of our most gifted polemicists, have declared the argument lost and the ship sinking.
But you and your family are on this sinking ship the same as the rest of us. You can’t choose to jump overboard. What would that mean, practically speaking? Your only choice is to fight or quit. If you quit, you are more likely to lose than if you fight. So why not do the honorable thing and fight? Besides, you like to fight. Unfortunately, you are fighting on the wrong side now. American civic nationalism is a tissue of high-minded delusions and low-down lies. And we are making real progress against it. We’d be stronger with you on the team. Join the American Nationalist fight.
Greg,
Brad, you are basically declaring the argument about whether America is essentially a white country or a universal nation open to all the world’s wretched refuse to be over, and whites to have lost.
It was over in the 1960s when race was finally expunged from the American national identity, racism became taboo (at least for Whites) and America was transformed into a universal nation as a kind of miniature United Nations that would serve as a shining city on a hill for the rest of the world to emulate.
You seem to have put a great deal of faith in Trump (and before that you were enthused about Romney), and now you are black-pilled because Trump has not performed up to your expectations.
That’s not the case.
Feel free to check with the reporters who interviewed me. I put the least faith in Trump of anyone in the movement. I supported Trump because I saw him as a win-win scenario. If he won and actually implemented his MAGA agenda, it would be a positive step forward. If he won and betrayed everything he stood for, then the argument that we can “Take Back America” would be exhausted and finally discredited. The latter scenario has played out.
You have erected a straw man here, namely that American (White) Nationalism lives or dies with Donald Trump. That is not true. Trump may well fail, but we are still going to need to create a white homeland.
As I understand the argument, American Nationalism is the idea that we are going to capture the Republican Party and reform the system. I don’t see how anyone can look at the last year and come away from the evidence with any other conclusion that this has been a colossal failure. The demographics to do this will be over in the 2020s.
I am not sure we will vote our way out of this mess. No options should be off the table. But no matter what option we end up choosing, please explain to me, Brad, how we are going to get to a white homeland in North America without persuading as many persuadable whites (and non-whites for that matter) as possible that White Nationalism is the best political philosophy?
American patriotism isn’t what attracts people to White Nationalism. If you want to be a conservative American patriot, you can just be a MAGApede normie without ever having to take any risks or associate yourself with such a stigmatized movement. We attract people who are interested in hard truths and aren’t finding answers and solutions in that stuff.
Obviously, we have a better chance of winning in any scenario if more people agree with us.
Have you seen the headlines lately? All the “optics” right now in the press are stories like “The Alt-Right is Dead” or “The Alt-Right Is Falling Apart.” I can’t remember a time when the Alt-Right has had worse optics than it has had over the last few months.
#1
A. Make American Great Again: Build the Wall
B. Death to the Judeo-Masonic Insect: Build the Wall
A. is an argument for MAGA, not for American White Nationalism. B. isn’t an argument I have ever made on this website. My real argument is there is no wall. It was all a scam to get Trump elected for he could do other things like tax cuts.
#2
A. We need a whites-only immigration policy, like we had throughout most of American history.
B. We need a whites-only immigration policy, like they had in the Third Reich.
I’ve spent years on this website writing about the history of American immigration policy. In 17 years of writing on the internet, I have never at any point been interested in the Third Reich. You’re the one who is interested in fascism. Just look at the countless books and articles you have published on Counter-Currents. I’ve never been interested in fascism.
#3
A. We need to deport millions of Mexican invaders, in an orderly and humane way, like Americans already did twice in the 20th century. (The fact that they came back is reason enough to build the wall.)
B. We need to deport millions of non-whites in cattle cars, like they did in the Third Reich.
I’ve written articles in the OD archives about Hoover and Eisenhower’s deportations of illegal aliens. I’ve never been interested in Hitler or Nazism.
#4
A. Join the White Nationalist movement and receive a red MAGA hat absolutely free! (Because we truly will Make America Great Again.)
B. Join the White Nationalist movement and receive a plastic replica Stahlhelm emblazoned with a fork! (Apparently phase two of the plan was to eat our way to the ethnostate.)
Why would anyone who supports MAGA join the White Nationalist movement? Anyone can support Trump without being a White Nationalist.
I’ve never worn a Stahlhelm and had to Google the phrase to find out what it even meant. Also, it was Enoch & Co. who were responsible for Hailgate. Weev has a gigantic swastika tattoo on his chest. Weev sent tens of thousands of fliers to public universities emblazoned with swastikas and calling for the rape and murder of children. I’ve never done anything remotely like that. This is someone who makes YouTube videos about torturing Lauren Southern.
#5: To borrow one from TRS:
A. It’s OK to be White.
B. National Socialism or Death
Isn’t The Daily Shoah another way of saying The Daily Holocaust? Isn’t The Daily Stormer inspired by Der Sturmer?
American civic nationalism is a tissue of high-minded delusions and low-down lies. And we are making real progress against it. We’d be stronger with you on the team. Join the American Nationalist fight.
I don’t want to be associated with Weev and Andrew Anglin. I’m surprised that would be willing so willing to join forces with those two in light of the fact that they are responsible for by far the most toxic, extreme shit pumped out of the Alt-Right. Just a few months ago, their pet cause was alienating and driving out all women in the movement.
Taboos are made to be broken. Policies are made to be overturned. Demographic trends can be turned around. If it was possible for the browns to come here, it is possible for them to leave. It is really only a matter of will. We need the will to bring enough of our people around to pro-white policies, and to keep these policies in place until we have a white homeland again. You are basically surrendering to liberal and Jewish lies and social engineering.
You are Denethor. I am Gandalf. It is wrong to despair.
Don’t quote Tolkien. America is not Gondor, it is Mordor
Actually it may be more accurate to call it the realm of (((Saruman))), a Fake White
… to paraphrase Tolkien, “There is no doubt that in the Kali Yuga, (((Saruman))) rediscovered this, or learned of it in lore, and in his lust for mastery committed this, his wickedest deed: the interbreeding of Orcs and Men, producing both Men-orcs (Dindus) large and cunning, and Orc-men (Whiggers) treacherous and vile.”
Re: Greg Johnson’s comments – I do not care for Johnson’s effete form of white nationalism but I believe he is right that American white nationalism has a better chance of succeeding with still-unconverted whites. Here’s why:
1) We are trying to gain supporters nationwide, wherever they may live. So-called “Southern WN” is a pursuit that excludes 2/3 of the country, since it is regional in its appeal. Time and again, Neo-Confederates (which is what the League of the South is) fail because they want to refight the Civil War and this time come out the winner, if only in chat rooms and forums. But the truth is the South lost, and those who fought in it are, by definition – losers. They lost. Get it? Game over. So Southern white nationalism is a vain attempt by SOUTHERNERS to control the white nationalist narrative by excluding the rest of the country. Since then, the South has had the Confederate flag stripped from state capitols, Confederate statues of their heroes removed, torn down, and vandalized, and Southern white nationalists like Dylan Roof smeared our Cause by his maniacal actions. Throw in the last remnants of the KKK, with their ineffectual and antiquated white activism, and it is clear that white nationalism as a SOUTHERN thing is extinct.
2) Along with Neo-Confederatism, we have Neo-Nazi white nationalism, best exemplified in recent days by Matt “Traditionalist Values” Heimbach. Once again, take note that these people, like the Neo-Confederates, worship the losing side in a bygone conflict. Instead of striking out into new territory, like Robert E. Lee and Adolf Hitler did in their time, Neo-Nazis and Neo-Confederates are so bereft of fresh ideas that they must rob the past in a feeble attempt to promote white nationalism. Worshipping losers is not the path we must take.
3) Then there’s the “ya gotta come here and here alone!” type of white nationalists, who proclaim that ONLY a certain region of the country is conducive to our survival. Proponents of this idea are Harold Covington’s Northwest Front, which insists our only chance to “survive” just so happens to be where he’s conveniently living. Likewise, there is Billy Roper’s Ozark Project (or whatever it’s called) that insists that you must move ONLY there if the white race is to “survive”. And, also by “coincidence” , Billy Roper is the only one who doesn’t have to pull up stakes and move – just you. And both of these projects are proponents of Regional White Nationalism – and both have utterly failed. So have the ridiculous PLE’s. None of these ideas have worked.
4) And writing history lessons that drone on and on has been done to death. Again, we’re robbing the past in order to supposedly promote our future. Most Americans don’t want history lessons! They want us to come up with a nationwide movement that all whites can get behind – not just “Southerners” or “Nazis” or whatever. White nationalism must drop those pursuits, along with overt religious connections of every kind, and just promote the survival of white America, without all the extra “isms” attached.
“your repugnant apologetics for the slave system…”
It is funny Greg, that you claim to be anti-Christian, or at the very least are critical of Christianity, yet your moral compass is completely Christian. I simply cannot understand how any self-respecting White person can feel sorry for a Negro at any point in their lives. Cesar Tort is critical of slavery because it leads to miscegenation in the long run. If one would only read March of the Titans by Arthur Kemp or Who We Are by William Pierce, then they could understand that this has been shown throughout White history. Using non-White labour is bad for Whites in the long run.
Of course, you have read these books, and ignore them because they make you uncomfortable. You feel uncomfortable because of your moral compass which is inherently Christian and therefore inherently self-destructive. It also makes me laugh that you like to quote Nietzsche yet your talks about Nordicism and Homosexuality point towards a character of Slave Morality. You feel a deep, brotherly empathy for the inferiors and think they should be equal and that it is counterproductive to spit upon freaks and non-Whites. This is shown in your endorsements of the Tranny pederast James O Meara.
I won’t even get into your lunatic standard for Whiteness, but you exemplify what a White Nationalist/National Socialist shouldn’t be, which is made clear enough when you piss on the swastika, the symbol of our Race’s universal struggle.
Christianity has nothing to do with it. I oppose slavery because I have a capacity for empathy. Unlike the sociopaths who imported African slaves to undermine laborers of their own race and nation.
Christianity has everything to do with it. It is pure weakness to feel sorry for an obsolete race of savages who cause so many headaches for our race. The Aryans of the past never would stoop so low as you do, because Christian axiology did not have such a strong hold of the White race as it does now. The death of Hitler was the mark where Aryan values 1945 was the year of the total inversion of Aryan values into Christian values, specifically the moment when Hitler died. Christianity is like a Star – Only now, when it has become a supernova, will it be at its most destructive stage. And this is seen in a Universalist, Globalist and nihilist degenerated West
Question: If the Negro race disappeared from the face of the Earth tomorrow would you cry for them? What would the Earth have lost that would not be replaced by that which is infinitely better?
Charles Darwin himself stated that the “Anglo-Saxon race” would one day exterminate the inferior races on this Planet. What is wrong with this? If you told the Vikings that they had to feel “empathy” for the Black race, they would have laughed at you. These were a people free from Christianity and who were notorious for massacring Xtian monks. Their freedom from this religion was precisely why they had such a will, and did not kowtow to lesser men because said lesser “men” are offended by the very symbols which offend you.
Like I said, you can quote Nietzsche without realising that you are a perpetrator of the very Slave Morality which he hated so much.
“And this is seen in a Universalist, Globalist and nihilist degenerated West”
Haha!!! Friedrich Nietzsche INVENTED nihilism, and YOU love him. You racists are so dumb! 😛
@Gothic Joe
Keep your petty insults to yourself. Me using the term nihilist was just one small detail of my entire comment, and what about it? What is wrong with the actual comment that I made? Is the West not any of those things? There is something wrong with you if you are content with things as they are. Actually try to debunk what I say rather than being superfluous. Despite what your mummy tells you, you being able to complete the Impossible Quiz doesn’t make you a smart boy.
I am going to assume – hence why you call me a racist, as if that is supposed to hurt my feelings – that you are not even a race realist and are here just to shitpost, because you clearly have nothing better to do with your life. You might be happier watching the drug addict, race cuckold freak, Gavin Mcinnes, or the fat, useless Brit, Carl Benjamin, who thinks he is a Negro… but only some days.
I personally think Nietzsche was a very flawed person, and wrong about a lot of things, but his points about Christianity and Master/Slave Morality still stands, him being a “nihilist” like you say, which I think is debatable, is irrelevant. It is clear you are an advocate for Slave Morality, hence why my “racism” is so painful for you.
You are a child, and your use of a “silly face” emoji is evident of this.
Mr. Halliday…
You’re on a mad search to find a guilty scapegoat for your personal reluctance to strive towards (S)upremacy.
Before Tort surmised the “Aryan problem,” I informed his that the operating paradigm was a mass “white” self-annihilation.
Under your paradigm, “Christianity” preaches white racial self-annihilation.
BUT…
Christianity IS AN EMPIRICAL CLAIM.
An empirical claim that states:
The Perfect Man exists.
Cesar believes that he can hand-wave this empirical fact into obscene mythology and he has settled the case against white (S)upremacy. Of course, he has done nothing of the sort. In fact, he has made his anti-white (S)upremacy EVEN MORE evident.
And jew do know what it memes to be an anti-white (S)upremacist?
It memes you are a jewniggermigger homodyke sandjigger.
The Perfect Man CANNOT PREACH self-annihilation unless you are that perverse fool?
An ethnostate IS NOT a Racist State.
Know the difference.
European ethno-chauvinists are a mess of self-annihilation.
And American has a heck of a lot more real racists.
Slavery doesn’t exist anymore. It is a moot issue.
We are all enslaved to the Federal Reserve and the Internal Revenue Service.
This is not true… Slavery is as pervasive as ever. Slavery just has a “higher standard” of “living” and an evermore invisible “master.”
You are also using different senses of “White Nationalism” and “Civic Nationalism” than I am using, which helps you miss the substance of my argument.
Thanks for this lucid historical explanation.
Great article, plenty of food for thought and debate.
A great article Hunter. OD is a large part of the reason that I left America focused White Nationalism about a year ago for Southern Nationalism. This is historical truth that we were not taught in public schools, or even in “conservative” Christian home-school curriculum. America was flawed from it’s inception.
I appreciate your statements that “In the Midwest, Indiana was an outlier and had its own version of Jim Crow” and also that it was “Southern Whites from Kentucky and Virginia who settled the Lower Midwest”. I live in Southern Indiana, with the bulk of my pre-Indiana ancestors being from Virginia, Kentucky, and North Carolina. Most call it the Midwest, but I think of it as the Edge of Dixie…
@Joe Putnam
“Most call it the Midwest, but I think of it as the Edge of Dixie…”
It’s actually the Dixie Frontier.
I recommend: The Dixie Frontier: A Social History.
In colonial times, it was a part of Virginia, and administered from there.
@James Owen,
Thanks for the recommendation Mr. Owen. i have that book, and have flipped through it, though not yet fully read it.
I do love local history., and have visited historic Vincennes, Corydon, and Clarksville many times. My 4th great uncles founded Shively, Kentucky, which is now a (Negro dominated) suburb of Louisville.
I hasten to add that my 4th great uncles who founded Shively about 200 years ago were White pioneers, no connection to the current inhabitants!
Joe, I’m here in Southern Ohio along the Ohio River. Same sentiments. My ancestors were originally from Kentucky & settled around these parts after the War For Southern Independence. (What happened between 1861-65 was not a civil war). Many of the people in this region consider themselves Southerners. Confederate flags are flown without apology. Virtually everyone speaks with a Southern Appalachian dialect & uses lingo such as kinfolk, fetch me, y’all, etc. I think more people root for UK than Ohio State. In essence, it’s the South or as you put it, the Edge of Dixie & you experience that on both sides of the Ohio River in the small towns & rural areas. My observation is that most folks in the region would break away from the rest of the Buckeye State when secession happens. Or just leave & return to back to Kentucky,Tennessee, etc.
@Johnny Paytoilet
Nice to make you electronic acquaintance. I have spent little time in Ohio, but it sounds like we have more in common in history and culture than I would with my states capital 100 miles north of me.
regional differences between the North and South that had existed since the Founding.
It’s also why America is ungovernable, except by force majeure on the part of the Federal Government, under the control of the Northeast.
“Thou shalt have no other God but the negro.”
What about thy Lord God Massachusetts and his only begotten Son, New York?
Jewish power is simply a symptom of Yankee rule. They took over the machinery built by Yankees, and now the Yankees have been reduced to higher status servants. Higher than the white, non people of the South and West.
But at least they get the privilege of voting themselves out of existence.
It simply is not true that the South was always the most reactionary part of America.
The first pamphlet in which Benjamin Franklin called for the end of the slave trade was his “Concerning the Increase of Mankind”.
He was motivated by a desire to see North America populated by people of English, not African, race – much closer to White Nationalism than the Southern planter’s purely economic desire for cheap labor.
In the early years of independence, American ethno-nationalism was blatantly embraced by the most reactionary faction in American politics, Northeastern Federalists such as John Jay and Elias Boudinout.
Federalist #2 is THE classic statement of American ethno-nationalism. Jay regarded America as a nation defined by White race, English language, low church Protestant religion, Anglo-Saxon constitutional political traditions, and ways of life spawned by the settler experience.
Northeastern Federalists, especially in ultra-reactionary Connecticut, furiously rejected the French Revolution, which they considered to be the work of the Antichrist.
In those days, the Virginia gentry rivaled the Boston Unitarians as America’s most godless leftists, and South Carolina had the most influential Jewish community in America.
The Fire-eaters included disproportionate numbers of Jews in their ranks. They wanted to restart the trans-Atlantic slave trade and annex Cuba, Nicaragua and other overwhelmingly non-White tropical countries. They were buccaneers with their eyes fixed firmly on potential loot rather than on the racial well-being of their kin.
By 1856, it was the Upper South rather than the Deep South which replaced the rural Northeast as the most reactionary section (only Maryland voted for Fillmore).
In more recent times, the Deep South and especially Alabama have had the honor of being the most reactionary region of America. This undoubted fact deeply colors Hunter Wallace’s perceptions. His legitimate pride in the excellent record of Alabamans in recent decades causes him to incorrectly project this state of affairs backwards into American history.
Excellent piece, Mr. Wallace.
Not as good of a piece as you were while you were in prison Jim…
“Locke had argued that the human mind was a tabula rasa (a blank slate) and the implication of this was that all measurable differences between human beings are environmental in origin.”
You COULD draw that idea from the blank slate, but it is hardly fair to Locke to suggest that this was his thought process.
Both Locke and Hobbes and many others were Brits writing to other Brits/Irish, not to the nogs, not even the frogs.
Prior to technology resulting in instant mass migrations, as we have seen post-WWII, it would be natural for a writer in the late 17th century to assume a largely settled homogeneous society. It was within that assumption that these writers were working.
They weren’t discussing the perils of multiculturalism for the obvious reason that they had no anticipation that millions of foreigners would be imported into Britain in the near future (and they weren’t).
“Multiculturalism” in Locke’s day was divisions within a common culture; i.e. sectarianism, and that type of division was a focus of his work – the idea that we not kill/imprison people over minor differences.
That Locke has been used by 20th century Progressives to advance an agenda is true, in a way, but only because of power and media control.
In the same way that separation of church and state (a Lockean idea?) magically transformed into separation of religion and state, Locke’s ideas can be used as a jumping off point to Equalism by dishonest Progressives who do not and did not really have to argue the point (i.e. they controlled the institutions, so they controlled the debate).
And anyway, the only one of the 13 colonies with a constitution written by John Locke was . . . South Carolina!
Also the colony in which Jews were most influential, and the state which argued most fiercely against restricting the immigration of Africans.
“The fruits of civic nationalism are going to ripen on young White people who come of age in the 2020s and 2030s. They won’t have any use for American Nationalism because voting by that point will be as hopeless as it is in South Africa. They’re already growing up now as a racial minority.
American Nationalism in the 2020s and 2030s will be various non-White presidents like President Kamala Harris sticking it to White man. I would rather not jump on that sinking ship.”
Yes, and nobody is going to change that. Your son, HW, is going to have to take up arms to defend his race.
History shows that human societies never act when there is still time, but wait until all hell has broken loose, and the price to be paid, in blood, is going to be very steep indeed.
But, cheer up, I’m sure the kikes will find a way to make money from it.
White Americans do constitute an ethnicity and they do regard themselves as whites, even the liberals. “American Nationalism” as we would have it is about getting people to really understand that America is indeed an implicitly white nation and that the consequences of going non-white will be catastrophic. The ideological genealogy of judeo-masonic originated shitliberalism is not really relevant to the fact that white Americans are basically a people who have common interests which are very seriously threatened by multiculturalism.
Precisely. Glad to see that there are people on here with sense.
Excellent article. Those who continue to argue that we need to abandon our cause and fly the flag of our Federal overlords don’t understand how truly deep the anger is. I don’t care how many people who vote for Anti-White candidates love the American flag or the Constitution, I have no love for either of those things and pretending that I do to try to convince people would be dishonest.
Greg is conflating style and substance. Sure, it might be smart to market Partition with eagles and old glory, but you aren’t going to “take back America” through anything less than a genocidal war, which is a harder sell than Partition.
Steps for the movement:
Bloody nose the GOP in 2018, make 2020 a de facto vote on “in or out” of America. Fashion a plausible before, middle, and after of partition (maps, money, laws, defense etc.) And then fight like hell for our children’s future.
Occidental Dissent: the last ones standing in the movement.
Occidental Dissent: Great again.
You live in a fantasy world of your own idyllic creation.
His timeline is a little bit optimistic, but the fundamentals are right
– We won’t take back America by voting
– Sooner or later, Republican politics will visibly fail
– At this point there is the POTENTIAL for White Americans to consider another alternative, besides just submitting
Our odds will be better if the secession meme is in people’s heads and the conditions are ripe for it. Conditions can be influenced, you don’t have to passively accept them.
If you ran a simulation of this era of American history, it would be relatively surprising to see Whites gradually fade away into nothingness, without any sort of crisis. On the other hand, it would not be particularly surprising to see them end up with some kind of break away nation, sooner or later. It would confirm what we claim to believe about history; diversity + proximity = conflict.
We should facilitate that, to the extent that we can.
The only reason that people on our side embrace anti-Americanism is to absolve themselves of the responsibility of having to do something. They tell themselves there’s nothing to be done solely to assuage their guilt at being quitters and depressives.
American Nationalists haven’t been doing anything but disrupting the movement and preventing us from doing stuff for the last 9-ish months. They certainly haven’t been getting ready to primary the GOPe.
Imagine telling the owner of this website that he is trying to get out of doing stuff, hasn’t his organization been among the most active?
This is laughable. Nobody prevented Charlottesville, Pikeville, and Shelbyville. Though I wish sensible people had.
Some American Nationalists are pretty disruptive. The person who writes under the pseudonym Ricky Vaughn dedicates as much time to aggressively fomenting division as he does to making a positive case for his ideas, while the American Nationalist and publisher of the American version of Der Sturmer has of late taken to calling people terrorists.
The systems’ authorities are responsible for the outcome at Charlottesville. The UTR protesters were not responsible for what happened .It is only apparent with the benefit of hindsight that UTR was a premature idea.
Ricky Vaughan is a highly intelligent character. I don’t care about division. When you have a gangrenous limb, you cut it off. When you have a cancer, you cut it out.
I predicted that UTR would be a disaster because (1) it was announced well in advance, to give the enemy time to counter it, and (2) it was too ecumenical.
Too bad most people only realized that in hindsight.
I poked around Charlottesville and visited Monticello.
It’s got to be the most jewed city imaginable. Monticello is owned in trust by relatives of Commodore Levi and the big donor is David Rubinstein (Carlyle Group)
Jefferson was in a sense a prime race traitor when you get down to it. “All men are created equal.” ffs, I know what he meant but it was insane of him to formulate it like that.
“Colonialists and their colonies are the equal of the mother country” for example. Why not just say that?
“Jews aren’t the primary driving force of America’s decline.” I would disagree with that especially post-WW2. As bad as Yankees and Cuck Islanders are, I don’t believe they willfully want to destroy their own countries. Jews do as Jews think of themselves as Jews first and generally care more about Israel than the white countries they live in.
Yankees tend to be white cultural supremacists such as Richard H. Pratt who was the first person on record to use the term racism even before Jews and communists. He coined the phrase, “kill the Indian (race) and save the man.” Like current Yankees and West Coast liberals, he promoted white cultural supremacy to make us all equal just like the Proud Boys and Gavin McInnes do today.
The South historically was racially white supremacist in contrast and still is to a significant degree.
So I don’t think it’s a matter of America being one or the other, that’s a false dichotomy. It was both and still is both. The white racial supremacists unfortunately have been losing to the white cultural supremacists who Jews exploit to further their own agenda.
SPLC informant Brad Griffin a.k.a. Hunter Wallace is getting BTFO’d, yet again, at TRS forum. A place he swore he wouldn’t go back to, after he got humiliated there a couple weeks ago.
Posting under his sockpuppets “Harkonnen” and “abstractentities”, Wallace/Griffin is being exposed for the agent provocateur that he always was.
https://forum.therightstuff.biz/topic/83949/american-nationalism-isn-t-white-nationalism?page=1
You’ve got me.
I’m a secret SPLC agent because I am not a retarded, uneducated shitposter who is literally posting about the smell of his own turds on the TRS forum
American nationalism can’t work the way French, German, Greek and other forms of European nationalism and identitarianism work because people of color in the United States have credible claims on American identity and legal protections that people of color in Europe do not have.
The 14th amendment guaranteeing equal protection under the law for non-whites has been part of the Constitution since 1863 which creates a real quandary for American Nationalists of good will who think they can appeal to American traditions to advance the pro-white cause.
No they don’t. They don’t think of themselves as Americans. They don’t act like Americans. They are Americans only in a legal sense, which is great, because laws can be changed. White Americans are the only real Americans. We created this society. They just live here.
We are not bound by the 14th Amendment. There is nothing more Constitutional than scrapping Amendments that don’t work. I would scrap the 14th and women’s suffrage and bring back prohibition, while we are at it. The Alc Right needs prohibition and the war on drugs as much as blacks and American Indians, I am afraid.
But there are obviously plenty who do. Patriotic white Americans interact with these people and come to like them and tell themselves that “they’re just as American as I am” (or words to that effect), and they imagine that if only the right policies were in place, all non-whites could be as likable. You can’t just wave away this phenomenon. It really is a serious quandary for American nationalist WN.
Also, your American nationalism ignores the mammoth assimilation narrative that even American patriots buy into – that people from, initially, all over Europe came to America and eventually shed their ethnic identities and became Americans. So American patriots with marked preferences for white people are keenly aware that some of the people they accept as “completely American” are of different backgrounds to themselves. That is very different to the way that ethnic mythology works in Europe, which holds that “all Germans” or “all Italians” or what have you are “of the same blood.”
I don’t want to completely pooh-pooh the American nationalism = White nationalism idea. I think it has some potential. I wouldn’t oppose pursuing this angle. I just think American nationalists should allow other approaches to make their case unmolested – such as the Amren-style race-realists, or fascist-style anti-American rejectionists. Ultimately, all these approaches intend to take advantage of a patriotic white electorate which feels that it has been had and is now looking for answers and guidance. Whichever of these approaches proves the most effective, the result is going to be much the same – white solidarity and a pursuit of white interests.
GJ
You ought to be horsewhipped for writing that filth.
In terms of balancing White power with the power of the government, America was on the right track during the 1920s with its Immigration Act of 1924, the resurgence of the Klan, numerous eugenics and miscegenation laws, public hangings of Negroes and “sundown towns”. It was also during that era that the fasces and swazi were widely used. Great racialist writers like Madison Grant and Lothrop Stoddard were widely read, as was Henry Ford’s Dearborn Independent. And Prohibition was the law of the land. If only this country had continued on that track we could have had a
“Nazi” government before Germany did!
The National Socialists we’re copying a lot of American policy as it turns out.
Nobody thought of blacks as human when the Declaration of Independence was written, nor even when I was a boy for that matter. So much of what we supposedly think nowadays is very, very recent historically.
Nice article well written but the part ” Jews aren’t the problem” is so far off it makes an otherwise decent article fall flat. All of you proWhites appear to be ignorant of Jewish crypsis and cryptos polluting minds. Never mind the Christian (read Jewish) element in its universalism. Jews have been here since the beginning working and corrupting…
One day you’ll get it, Hunter instead of shifting blame to civic nationalists or any other Jew cover.
Every US president up to Kennedy was a ‘white nationalist’ of the ‘American nationalist’ variety, to certain degrees. Generally (white) and specifically (American) nationalist. Chew on that.
Anyone who believes that the entirety of American can be saved and made white again is LARPing. It is strategically impossible. Anyone who believes this can be done through voting is even more retarded. Anyone who believes that the 14th amendment will be repealed by these same methods is insane. Greg Johnson is insane.
The only path to victory is secession, which is accomplished through methods similar to the IRA or maoists. You need a revolutionary base area and networks that are a legitimate threat to the union. “American nationalism” doesn’t fit the bill in that regard, even if it is only a deceptive cover. The propaganda there doesn’t mesh.
There will be no solutions of any kind until the international monetary hegemon is ruined.
btw Does anyone know if jews were viewed as a race , or as a religion? Were they viewed as White?
Were they understood to be a potential large threat?
I would consider myself a Southern Nationalist on one hand but I’m supportive of American Nationalism for non-southerners. Others have said it already, but Nazism or Paganism is retarded. You can’t make up a new identity. Northerners need to embrace the good parts of early America history and embrace that heritage. Just because some of the elites were egalitarian universalists doesn’t mean everyone was. Afterall many of the moderate abolitionists (including Lincoln) were against slavery only because they didn’t want blacks in their white communities.