About Hunter Wallace 12366 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent


  1. Well, the South wanted to keep blacks around for labour so more blacks was really a good thing in their book. In the antebellum North, blacks could hardly make enough money to live so the idea that they weren’t wanted was pretty clear. If you think New England was some integrated area since the 19th century look at what happened in Southie when the Federal gov’t enforced busing.

  2. Its social system spread to the Midwest after the Civil War, to the West after WW2, and was imposed on the South by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act.

  3. I agree with what you’re saying historically. My point was that de facto segregation wasn’t offically ended in Boston ’till the 1970s and that was by Executive force.

  4. Yes, even though Boston and (Metro) Massachusetts typifies liberal statist lunacy and all the accompanying multiculti pandering, racism is there under the surface, like other parts of the country it has different words like ‘ghetto’ or ‘unsafe’ to describe Negro areas. The West however is still very rural and white.

  5. You also can’t forget that America’s most popular racialist, HP Lovecraft, was a tried and true New Englander.

  6. “New England was integrated for about a century before the Deep South.”

    That’s a misleading thing to say without mentioning that there were extremely few blacks in New England or anywhere in the North during that time. Before blacks began migrating from the South in the 20th Century, most large northern cities had one SMALL neighborhood where blacks lived along with immigrants and transients. All the blacks in New York City or Boston in the 19th Century lived in areas that were the size of a few census tracts, and these areas weren’t all or necessarily even mostly black. There were so few blacks in the north prior to the southern migration that there is no such thing, as far as I know, as person who is wholly descended from pre-migration northern blacks. I’ve only heard of a couple people in my entire life who claim any such descent at all.

    The north is still much more segregated than the South in terms of housing patterns and school enrollments.

  7. That’s not the point. John Quincy Adams generation was toying around with the idea of racial equality as early as the 1830s. The North might have fewer blacks, but it came up with these bad ideas and used force to impose them on the rest of the nation.

  8. ‘In 1922 the grandson of Blanche K. Bruce, the first African American to serve in the United States Senate, came to Harvard. He, like other blacks before him, was not permitted to live in the freshman dormitories. In fact, he received a letter from Harvard President Lowell stating, “I am sure you will understand why, from the beginning, we have not thought it possible to compel men of different races to reside together.”‘

  9. Just because the north didn’t think keeping blacks as slaves was a good idea, doesn’t mean they advocated full racial equality. That didn’t happen until well into the 20th Century. Even most abolitionists regarded blacks as childlike inferior beings.

    The Confederacy had a jewish Secretary of State, and jews in its army, so that must mean it was racially integrated too.

    If you think you are going to get anywhere with this yankee-hating, you are sadly mistaken. Yankees are not the origin of all America’s racial problems. If if wasn’t for the neo-feudal slavery system that the Southerners set up, for cultural as well as economic/climatic reasons, we would have maybe 5% of the blacks we have now.

    Your heroes in the segregated south were also having blacks living in their houses, and keeping black, mulata and quadroon mistresses. So much for segregation. Call it segregation Strom Thurmond style.

  10. The North repealed all of its anti-miscegenation laws, outlawed segregation in education and public accomodations, extended citizenship and voting rights to blacks, and then attempted to force their social system on the rest of the country with the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments and the civil rights acts of the Reconstruction era. The system we have in place today was pioneered by New England in the early nineteenth century and was implemented in the Midwest during the late nineteenth century.

    We think of the “Civil Rights Movement” as a national struggle over race. That wasn’t the case at all. Only the South and a few Western states were segregated. New England had been integrated for over a century; the Midwest for about eighty years or so.

  11. New England had so few blacks that de jure integreation was meaningless and de facto segregation is still the rule of the day there, much more so than in the modern south. Boston is still one of the most segregated major metropolitan areas in the country and one of the few places where blacks are afraid of the white people and stay in their little ghetto in Roxbury and Dorchester. If the whole country had the same proportion of blacks as antebellum New England, we would not have a black problem today.

  12. Interesting note from Democracy in America (posted by TGGP):

    “One day I asked a Pennsylvanian to “explain to me, please, how in a state founded by Quakers and renowned for its tolerance, freed Negroes are not allowed to exercise the rights of citizens. They pay taxes. Is it not right that they should vote?” – “Do not insult us,” he replied, “by thinking that our legislators would commit an act of such gross injustice and intolerance.” – “So, Blacks have the right to vote in your state?” – “Certainly.” – “Then why is it that in the electoral college this morning I did not see a single one?” – “That is not the fault of the law,” the American told me. “Negroes have the right to go to the polls, but they voluntarily abstain.” – “How extraordinarily modest of them!” – “Oh! It isn’t that the refuse to vote, but they are afraid of being mistreated if they do. The law here has no teeth if the majority refuses to support it. But the majority harbors strong prejudices against the Negroes, and our officials do not feel strong enough to guarantee the rights that the legislature has bestowed on them.” “What! Do you mean to say that the majority, which enjoys the privilege of making the law, also insists on the privilege of disobeying it?””

Comments are closed.