I’ve started reading Rich Lowry’s new book The Case for Nationalism: How It Made Us Powerful, United, and Free which came out this morning.
“In an anti-nationalist speech in 2017, George W. Bush said, “Our identity as a nation, unlike other nations, is not determined by geography or ethnicity, by soil or blood.” It is certainly true that “blood and soil,” the rallying cry of ethno-nationalists and the Charlottesville Nazis, is deeply inimical to the American project. Yet denying the contribution of geography and land to our identity is willful ignorance.”
By the American project, Rich Lowry means the New England project. After all, it was only in New England where citizenship wasn’t tied to race before the War Between the States. The American project as it existed outside of the East was certainly tied to “blood and soil.” The South thought of itself as a “White Man’s Country” and was determined to stay that way. The Southern social order was based on whiteness, patriarchy and authoritarianism and rested on the foundation of slavery. Boston was perceived in the South as “a City of Notions.” It was a place which had by then developed a reputation for having stupid, fanatical ideas about everything.
“Of course, America has made itself anew across history, especially regarding race. A country that, at its beginning, granted suffrage only to white males and tolerated chattel slavery gradually opened up, abolishing slavery and recognizing the rights of African-Americans. The national government was the (obviously much-belated) vehicle of this progress, crushing a bigoted regionalism both during the Civil War and in the civil rights era.”
What happened to America?
From the American Founding until the War Between the States, the South was the dominant section of the Union. New England was the deviant and disgruntled section. American Nationalism in the era of Manifest Destiny was dominated by its Southern pole.
When the federal government crushed the “bigoted regionalism” of the South in the War Between the States and the Civil Rights Movement, the country was dominated by its Eastern pole. The Yankee captured American Nationalism and harnessed it to abolish slavery and segregation and extend the scope of liberty and equality. This version of America was equally a bigoted regionalism albeit one that is devoted to liberalism which is a leveling ideology.
There is no such thing as a single, coherent American Nationalism. There are two major versions of it. From the beginning, the country has always been dominated by the rivalry between the South and the East. Southern Nationalism is a version of American Nationalism that sought to discard the liberalism of the East and replace it with organic nationalism.
Our first Cheif Justice caught shouting “blood and soil”:
“Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people–a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, by their joint counsels, arms, and efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly established general liberty and independence . . . an inheritance so proper and convenient for a band of brethren, united to each other by the strongest ties”
John Jay, Federalist #2
>>When the federal government crushed the “bigoted regionalism” of the South in the War Between the States and the Civil Rights Movement, the country was dominated by its Eastern pole<<
This is nonsense. After the war, we've had many Southern presidents and every Southern president has been a cuck. It was that Texas-born Eisenhower who "integrated" White schoolgirls with negroes at bayonet points.
Yep. I see your point.
Rich Lowry, cannot go or does not want to go down the extra mile, and complete the circle.
He is happy in pushing a type of civic Nationalism – It is a plus that though, that he at least admits and promotes Constitutional Republicanism and not ‘democracy’.
(when ever I hear that word ‘democracy’ I feel like Arthur Fleck)
Personally I believe that a “Blood & Soil” nationalism is quite within the acceptable norms and sensibilities of the American Psyche. The Constitution shows the way.
But all that is for you guys, White Americans, to sort out.
I want to establish a California Reich. The rest of the Union can do whatever it wants.
I vote for eureka, Redding or SF as the capital.
*Socal isn’t California
Sorry, Calif is Tijuana del Norte.
Spahn,
Have you ever visited the NS structures that were built in California in hope of a German victory in WWII?
Tell me more.
George Will, David French, Rich Lowry, Kevin Williamson…..apparently no men are allowed to work at the National Jew Review.
It seems like there are too many people trying to squeeze some “new take nationalism” inside the kosher window. Not a single public figure is simply openly stating what we want. Fuck liberalism, that is just another compromise he’s attaching to Nationalism. There cannot be any compromise with liberalism.
This is the kosher attempt tp hijack nationalism.
(They) see the trend and want to get out in front and lead the parade.
Spot on the mark !
They want to hijack any real opposition to (((their))) dominance in society and morph it into a kosher & controlled “resistance” movement.
That’s because not a single public figure is a nationalist. We in the American alt-right have failed. We did not build our own party. We tried to use the GOP and got used. Hopefully, we will learn from this, but I’m not seeing it yet. Most people in the alt-right are still focused on infiltrating conservatism rather than building a pro-white political party.
European nationalists solved this problem by having their own parties. So when they win, it’s really a win.
The South was Colonized much like Scotland. Although the Southern does most of the imperial enforcement just like the Scots.
“American Nationalism Crushed “Bigoted Regionalisms”
No. The Yankees crushed America, the Constitution, and the Republic it underpinned. Then they managed to conflate Northern Nationalism with American Nationalism, Northern interests with national interests, and the North itself, with “America.”
Now we live under the dictatorship of Boston, New York and Chicago, and millions of Northerners are puzzled by the fact that Texas isn’t just Iowa, but with cotton, high heat and funny accents. Or that Alabama isn’t Pennsylvania, and that Alabamians don’t think like, or believe in, or want the same things as Michiganders and New Yorkers.
Yes, because the upper Midwest is JUST like the northeast lmao
The Northeast is waaaaaaaay more similar to the south than it is to the midwest.
What’s the difference between Philly and Baltimore? Nothing, even though for some reason Maryland is considered quasi southern??? Despite it being further north than most places in the Midwest.
There has always been more wasps and jews in the Northeast and the south than in the Midwest. Both the Northeast and the south being ruled by wasps and Jews who value civility and form over substance. If you can weave your argument around existing norms and present them in the acceptable posture of civility you will win the argument over someone who makes an uncouthed manner. Even if the substance of argument is more inline with how the people actually live or would benefit them.
You could see this in the souths rejection of evolution, which at the time would’ve bolstered segregation, while southern civility was used to crush objections to desegregation.
This played a large role into the dumb backwaters hick racist. Rednecks eg the lower class of the south were less moved by arguments of civility because the wasp/Jewish elites stopped treating rednecks with any civility themselves long before then. So they were willing to break the civil society taboos the way the southern middle/professional class were not. It also was the line of attack southern wasps could use on the middle/professional class to keep them in line. As any wasp dominated region or country is obsessed with status and civility
“You could see this in the souths rejection of evolution, which at the time would’ve bolstered segregation…”
This is a monumentally important point. The rise of Evangelical religion among Southern and Western WASPs was comorbid with declining racial consciousness. The more non-elite WASPs got into this kind of religion, the further they moved away from a world view that was fertile ground for being pro-white. The collapse was inevitable, if delayed.
The most self-aware, pro-white elites we ever had in America were secular Northern and Southern WASP racialist intellectuals in the early 1900’s. By far, they would be the most ideal leaders we have ever produced as a nation from the modern pro-white perspective. They were far more clear headed than the Confederate leaders, who wanted even more blacks to pour into the South for cheap labor. Had the Confederates won, the South today would resemble South Africa demographically. As the slave population exploded, there would have been a mass migration of non-slave owning whites to the North as they were forced off their land by greedy slave owners seeking to expand their plantations.
The funny thing is Hunter’s pro-Confederate line has no appeal to modern Southerners, who have been totally ZOGwashed into loving the Yankee Empire and hating their heritage. If he wants to reach his people, he needs to talk about loving Israel and Jesus more, maybe hype up 95% black SEC football too.
There are probably more Rebel sympathizers in Pennsylvania and Ohio than there are in Alabama and Georgia.
Up until the late 80s it was common to see Confederate flag license plates and bumper stickers on cars and trucks in rural PA.
Ape Lincoln was a bigoted nationalist–and a bloody one too.
HW: look up the book North Over South: Northern Nationalism and American Identity in the Antebellum Era by Susan-Mary Grant. It demonstrates there was also two nationalisms in play and illustrates how the North became the dominant nationalism after the Civil War despite the fact Jamestown was here before Plymouth Rock.
Lowry is playing a bait and switch with the word “nationalism.” It shows we have won the debate though.
No doubt about it.
The kosher ‘right’ be it Lowry or Hazony are attempting to co-op nationalism because the (((tribe))) fears where it could (hopefully) lead.