It’s been an exciting week for White Nationalism.
Arizona throws down the gauntlet and passes the toughest anti-illegal immigration law in the country. It is supported by 70% of Arizonans (translate: Whites). Jan Brewer, the Governor of Arizona, receives a 16% bounce of approval in the polls. Obama condemns the popular new law. The Justice Department threatens to sue Arizona to block its implementation. Hispanic groups go crazy. Charges of “racism” fly against a moderate public safety measure.
Mexicans riot in Arizona:
Mexico slams the new law and issues a travel warning for its citizens travelling in Arizona. Illegals plan to self deport from the state. Gavin Newsom, the mayor of San Francisco, trashes Arizona. Liberal cities and states, joined by Mexico, threaten boycotts against Arizona. Conservatives across the country are outraged and threaten retaliatory boycotts of their own. Lawmakers in Georgia, Texas, Utah, Maryland, and Ohio announce plans to introduce similar legislation in their own states. A huge fight between the states and federal government over immigration looms.
It’s like a dream come true: the Union is ripping itself apart!
I can’t emphasize enough: this is exactly what we want. We want polarization between Whites and Hispanics, Mexicans and Americans, the states and the federal government, liberal Whites and conservative Whites, Whites and non-Whites within states. We want the United States to become so internally polarized, delegitimized, and ungovernable that talk of secession enters the mainstream again. We want to frustrate the ambition of non-Whites to the point where they consent to a peaceful divorce.
The Yancey strategy can work in our own times. Introduce moderate legislation and demands supported by a healthy White majority, dress them up in reasonable language, and combine them with conditions that are both infuriating and unacceptable to the opposition. Rely upon the opposition to overreact, inflame the situation, and polarize the electorate. Appeal to the White sense of dignity and self respect. In this way, a moderate majority can gradually be led to an extreme course of action.
Whites in other states are watching the beating Arizona is taking the mainstream media. They are getting angrier and angrier at the Obama administration. The situation could become explosive if the federal government slaps down the new law. Unfortunately, Obama has indicated he will punt on the issue until after the mid-term elections, but pressure from his liberal base might force his hand.
Here’s our patriotic fellow citizens showing their true colors:
It won’t be long now, folks.
Note: Like I told Harold Covington, the Southwest and Southeast will be where the real action happens, as diversity breeds racial conflict. Whites in the pacified Northwest have no incentive to rebel.
The Confederacy was a white supremacist state, not an ethnostate.
South Africa is the result of outside intervention by bleeding heart White liberals. The same is true of Zimbabwe and every other post-colonial African nation. We have the same problem here in the South.
White supremacy is infinitely preferable to the system we have now which is anti-White multiracialism.
From Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens’ Cornerstone Speech:
(Jefferson’s) ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. … Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner–stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the White man; that slavery — subordination to the superior race — is his natural and normal condition.
“Among the Romans emancipation required but one effort. The slave, when made free, might mix with, without staining the blood of his master. But with us a second is necessary, unknown to history. When freed, he is to be removed beyond the reach of mixture.”
Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia
“Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate, than that these people are to be free; nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion has drawn indelible lines of distinction between them. It is still in our power to direct the process of emancipation and deportation peaceably and in such slow degree as that the evil will wear off insensibly, and their place be pari passu filled up by free white laborers.”
Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography
…repatriation or relocation was inevitable.
I seriously doubt that.
Even NS Germany integrated many Jews and mischlings and worked with non-White allies.
WTF? The Confederacy was actually managed, in the highest echelons of leadership, by Jews.
WTF? The Confederacy was actually managed, in the highest echelons of leadership, by Jews.
I don’t think so.
There is a difference between ‘Jew’ singular and ‘the Jews’ plural. With the exception of the foreign-born Judah Benjamin (widely alleged to be Rothschild’s agent) — who else was Jewish?
Charlemagne,
Sure. There’s a difference. But it sure takes the wind out of assertions that the Confederacy was the height of WN purity.
Is there evidence that Judah was working to undermine the Confederacy? Is there evidence that he was an agent?
Nietzsche – I follwed your link there, even left a couple of helpful comments on that site.
Charlemagne,
Sure. There’s a difference. But it sure takes the wind out of assertions that the Confederacy was the height of WN purity.
Matt,
Well, yes, it is a big difference to challenge the notion that the Confederacy ‘was the height of WN purity’ — and assert that it was managed at the highest echelons by Jews, which it was not.
I fully agree with you that while the Confederacy wasn’t a complete White ethnostate, but felt it was a bit gratuitous and inaccurate to claim it was run by anyone or any group other than its more-than-capable indigenous Anglo-Celtic Founding Stock — who themselves were the descendants of America’s Founding Stock.
Regarding Judah Benjamin’s mysterious past, it is interesting that a foreign-born person such as himself received such a fairly prominent position in the incipient state, leading some to surmise that he was a link from the (largely Jewish) bankers of Europe to the Confederacy.
This of course does not necessarily assume that he meant to in any way ‘bring down’ or undermine the CSA — perhaps they even wanted a Victory for the South — so as to ‘split the Union in two’ and make it more manageable, and amenable, to the long-held desire of imposing a European-style central bank on the United States, a goal which was thwarted by President Andrew Jackson in 1836 with his closing the Second Bank of the United States.
Anyway, these are all possibilities that many historians have appropriately suggested.
“White supremacy is infinitely preferable to the system we have now which is anti-White multiracialism.”
But isn’t White Supremacy what we actually have, only on a nationwide scale now instead of just Southern plantation owners?
Who are these non-whites working for? Who are they mowing the lawn for? Who are they maids for?
Is it not financially better off whites using them over native whites for economic reasons?
I would call these white men who we often talk about in such negative terms the real white supremacists. Are men like George Bush and Dick Chaney not actually white supremacists? And the other ones who do the same things and want and hire the non whites at the expense of the rest of us whites?
I will tell you my honest opinion, I believe that these powerful white men are actually more powerful than even the Jews, and if they decided, based upon THEIR personal and COLLECTIVE interests, they would make mince meat out of Jews.
We have Nazi Germany as a lesson that no one ever points out: We KNOW who is boss. Jews never made a pimple on their ass in that country once the Nazis took power.
The Jews know this.
The power today is still overwhelmingly in the hands of some white men. But these white men are true white supremacists, just like what you say about the South pre war. And they feel they are far above the rest of us whites, too. The Jews and their programs just happen to coincide with their interests.
No, I don’t think a policy of white supremacy is better. I think we are actually seeing it in the raw, and feeling it, too. This seems to be the reality instead of some of the fantasies some imagine white supremacy to be. These fantasies did not take into account WHO the whites are who are supreme. We see and read of them everyday on our television sets and news reports. It is just that us whites who consider ourselves in the WN movement call them traitors. But they are smoking big cigars and watching the non whites clean their commodes and mow their yards while they rake in tens, hundreds of millions and even billions of dollars while we are sliding ever more towards total poverty amidst a sea of black and brown faces.
“South Africa is the result of outside intervention by bleeding heart White liberals. The same is true of Zimbabwe and every other post-colonial African nation. We have the same problem here in the South.”
There was no direct outside intervention into SA. The society collapsed because our people are not psychologically cut out for ruling over other races at a 1 to 10 ratio. In fact, no people has ever been able to maintain such a society for long. Invariably, the ruled are deposed or subsumed by the ruled.
The relatively successful modern South is the result of outside intervention that broke up the economically obsolete slave system and then allowed close to half of the blacks to leave. Imagine the South today if no blacks had left and no “Yankees” and white immigrants(or their money) had migrated there. You’d be facing an Israel/Palestine situation, soon to be a South Africa situation and ultimately a Zimbabwe situation down the line.
You’re young. As recently as the 1960’s, much of the South looked like a third world country compared to the North. Young Southerners don’t realize how much the South has gained from Northern investment and the “socialism” of the New Deal and subsequent redistributionist Federal tax policy. I don’t see much reason to believe that an independent South minus white immigrants and plus black emigrants would be a viable place for whites to live long term.
Why can’t Southerners admit that the Old South was an untenable and immoral society driven by the greed of the rich and exactly the kind of “racism” that is used to smear all forms of white group loyalty. This fact is nakedly obvious to the entire rest of the world. Pretending that the Old South was some kind of swell place is laughable. The South was ruined from the beginning by the importation of huge numbers of black slaves and everything that you are lauding was just a mess of imperfect band-aids vainly attempting to cover up the festering sore.
Tying white nationalism to justifying or defending black slavery is just as ludicrous as tying it to apologizing for the actions of Nazi Germany.
Meant “the rulers are deposed or subsumed by the ruled.”
Why do Yankees always make this twisted argument? Sure … I would choose a White ethnostate over Jim Crow any day, but Jim Crow was infinitely preferable to what we have now.
1.) Whites were racially conscious.
2.) Whites understood racial differences.
3.) Miscegenation was illegal.
4.) Whites had their own institutions like schools, restaurants, theaters, swimming pools, etc.
5.) Whites controlled every Southern state.
6.) Anti-Racism was synonymous with communism and subversion.
7.) The negro was under control. There was nothing like the epidemic of black-on-white rape that we have today.
8.) There was no affirmative action.
9.) Whites had the right to discriminate against non-Whites and exclude them.
10.) Political correctness didn’t exist.
11.) Our culture wasn’t a degenerate sewer.
12.) 1/2 of the negroes in America moved to the North.
Yankees always frame the argument as choosing between Jim Crow and a White ethnostate. In fact, the real choice was between Jim Crow and the anti-White, politically correct, Jew-infested, nigger-worshiping, money-loving integrated “post-racial” utopia that was wholly their own creation and export to the rest of the world.
The North abolished slavery, gave blacks citizenship, equal protection of the laws, outlawed racial discrimination in voting, banned anti-miscegenation laws, banned segregation, passed every civil rights act in American history, sanctified MLK with his own federal holiday, crushed every resistance movement with military force, and flung open our borders to the Third World.
This must be the third or fourth time today I have heard the same argument … caste systems are unstable, see Ancient Egypt or the Roman Empire. Every time I point out that it was the Union Army which crushed the Confederacy; the Supreme Court, Congress, and the federalized National Guard which put down Jim Crow.
I can’t imagine what it must be like to live in a part of the country where Whites live in mortal terror that their friends and family might find out they are “racists.” Where I come from, racial consciousness is normal. I would much rather live among blacks than liberal Whites where I have to police my every utterance to conform to political correctness.
Yet another long one.
“Why can’t Southerners admit that the Old South was an untenable and immoral society driven by the greed of the rich and exactly the kind of “racism” that is used to smear all forms of white group loyalty. This fact is nakedly obvious to the entire rest of the world. Pretending that the Old South was some kind of swell place is laughable.”
As a Southerner myself, I’ll take a stab at this. I don’t mind admitting that the Old South was untenable at the racial level. It was. All racially mixed societies are. That’s why I have become so steadfast in my position that, if we are to have our own country, we must do our own work. All of it. No non-white “guest workers” or any similar type of scheme. Whites do all the work, period.
But, having said that, I’ll also say this: in many ways the Old South was in fact a swell place. Yes, it was largely impoverished, that much is true. However, little else that we are told about Dixie is. The modern propaganda machine tries to paint old Dixie as a land of horrors, a tale of woe. It wasn’t as a general rule. As a little kid in the 70’s, I caught the tail end of some of this. My grandparents were from the Lunenburg/Prince Edward area of rural Virginia (ring some bells – Massive Resistance anyone?). I remember going “down to the country” with my grandparents back then during the summers. Some of my happiest childhood memories are of those times, it was wonderful for me.
Just my grandparents, a cousin, and myself – out in the sticks for weeks at a time. That was where I first saw blacks in large numbers, coming as I did from the then still all white suburbs. Keep in mind, this was ground zero of Massive Resistance in Virginia, when Prince Edward shut its public schools down for years rather than integrate them. When I was a child, that was far from ancient history.
So how were race relations on the ground, in the aftermath of Massive Resistance? Well, everyone was polite to one another, and the blacks did not have that angry glint in the eye that we are so accustomed to today. I still remember this beat up old shack on the way to the old family place, and it very much fit the stereotype of the impoverished rural black family. Always tons of blacks on the porch, young and old, some swarming about and others listless. They always gave us a friendly wave, a host of black arms in the air (I had never seen such a large family, I don’t know how they all fit into that place), and my grandparents always waved back.
I noticed this. I also noticed that we never stopped to talk to them, there was no socializing. I remember asking once why we never stopped. I can’t remember the wording of the answer that I got, but I remember it wasn’t harsh, there were no Hollywood “They’re niggers! Why would we stop?” type comments. Instead, the message was simply that such a thing wouldn’t be appropriate or desirable. I understood, sort of.
And yet, blacks and whites helped one another out. It was not uncommon for whites to drop off groceries for a black family if it were known that the family was hard up. Similarly, blacks checked on elderly whites, and helped them out when needed. But no socializing, ever. That would have been unthinkable. The order of the day was friendly, but with some distance.
All of my family from that area, and I mean all of them, were very much racially aware. Not a liberal in the bunch, yet they were far from the Hollywood stereotype. My grandmother was a fantastic women, down to earth yet genteel, intelligent and pleasant. Yes, such women actually existed – it’s not make believe. Really remarkable woman.
She never had a harsh word to say about anyone – but that didn’t mean she wasn’t making distinctions. She was VERY racially aware. I still remember her telling me that if the mixing in the cities continued (it wasn’t happening in the country yet), whites would need to be put on reservations like the Indians. LOL! Well, now it’s gotten to the point where the system wouldn’t even allow us that much.
None of these anecdotes change the bottom line that the racial situation in the South was and is untenable, or that the ethnostate is the only real solution. But it should be pointed out that there was indeed a real Dixie, it was not as portrayed by our Jewish/liberal lords and masters, and it was a far better society than what we have today, at least morally and culturally, if not materially. Most younger people would not accept that what I’ve described could happened, believing instead that life was a steady stream of cross burnings and lynchings, with blacks cowering in fear of sadistic whites. But the truth is, it wasn’t like that at all. There really was a Dixie that meant something, that had honor, that had meaning. It existed, it was real. It was so different from the cesspool that we live in today that it might as well have been on Mars.
Of course, it’s mostly gone now.
Here’s the thing. I hesitated in writing this piece, for the simple reason that I don’t believe that nostalgia trips about the Old South are necessarily helpful for white nationalism. The last thing we need is some Neo-Confederate telling us how multiracialism can work in Dixie (such a moron is as much our enemy as the explicitly anti-white liberal). And yet, there is a lesson to be learned here. My grandparents were extremely racially aware people, but they weren’t revolutionaries – and that’s why they lost. It was the classic case of conservatism meeting a revolutionary force, and eventually losing. The segregationists could foresee the future of racial mixing, while the integrationists of the north were denying that there would be any real problems. History has vindicated the segregationists, as everything that they predicted has come to pass. But they still lost, having brought a knife to a gun fight.
As my walk down memory lane indicates, they saw the racial situation as manageable were it not for the influence of outsiders. And it can be, for a time. But history shows that it is not sustainable, the lessons run from Rome to South Africa. Of course I never discussed white nationalism with my grandparents, maybe they would have gone for it. But their generation as a whole simply didn’t think in those terms, and lost because of it. Yet a new generation is rising, a generation that has had the multiracial filth shoved into our faces. For us it wasn’t a prediction, it was reality. We are no longer beholden to genteel politeness. We are intensely tribal in a way that wouldn’t have made a lot of sense to most segregationists. We demand a nation, not merely a return to a saner version of multiracialism. We aren’t interested in shutting the barn door after the horses have run off.
As sorry as our generation is in so many respects, we’ve at least got the potential for real revoluationary change. We are the first generation to truly grow up in the ruins, as opposed to those preceding us that still had a real America or Dixie to defend. For us, no dice. We never had that, not really. It’s already gone. While this is our tragedy, it will ultimately prove to be a strength, as we are no longer bound or restrained as our fathers and grandfathers were. Let’s hear it for the white nationalist wild child, totally dedicated to victory and nothing else. It will take such men to win, chivalry ain’t gonna cut it.
ATBOTL writes: There was no direct outside intervention into SA. The society collapsed because our people are not psychologically cut out for ruling over other races at a 1 to 10 ratio.
Have you been to South Africa? Visited the Apartheid Museum in Johannesberg?? It’s quite wonderful. When you arrive you are given a color coded ticket: Whites go through one door, blacks and coloreds through another, into separate gallaries. (They join together shortly.)
If you tour the museum you will find that much of the resistance to Apartheid was organized by Communist and “Social Justice” groups that were headed by members of that famous Semitic Tribe often discussed here. You will also see that several of the organizations had direct ties back to the mothership, The Kremlin.
As things moved on essentially the entire world mobalized to force South Africa to change their system of organizing their society. This included sporting boycotts, economic boycotts, travel boycotts, investment boycotts, and educational boycotts.
SA was constantly shown in the world media as evil and corrupt. All of the above certainly qualifies as “outside direct intervention” in my book.
You say: “the Society Collapsed”? Really. They had an election, among Whites, and the Whites voted to enter into discussion with black parties about reforming the political system which shortly resulted in giving blacks the vote. That’s hardly a collapse, unless you would claim that the USA collapsed in 1964 when we passed our civil rights laws.
Or, perhaps in saying that “the Society Collapsed” you meant that it collapsed beginning in 1994 with the transition to black rule. I’m sure many South African Whites would agree with that assessment.
Whether or not Apartheid could have been maintained well into the 21st Century, perhaps with some modifications, had it not become the worldwide ’cause celebre’ of the 1980s we shall never know.
One thing I think we can fairly say is that there was significant external pressure brought on SA to end the system.
“I can’t imagine what it must be like to live in a part of the country where Whites live in mortal terror that their friends and family might find out they are “racists.” Where I come from, racial consciousness is normal. I would much rather live among blacks than liberal Whites where I have to police my every utterance to conform to political correctness.”
Your vision of the North is a characture.
Trainspotter, you make some good points. I will point out that blacks often present a false face to whites when it is in their interests to do so. The same black who smiles and is extremely friendly in public may go home, curse whitey and literally pray for the day when the whip is in the other hand. Obviously, the Old South would have been a place where this was common. There is a tendency for whites to discount the fact that people in inferior social positions resent their status but don’t feel free to speak their minds.
ATBOTL: “I will point out that blacks often present a false face to whites when it is in their interests to do so. The same black who smiles and is extremely friendly in public may go home, curse whitey and literally pray for the day when the whip is in the other hand.”
Yes, you are absolutely correct about this, and it is definitely a point worth repeating. I have known enough non-whites over the years to get some of the inside scoop on what happens when the last white leaves the room. On the other hand, I’ve also had the opportunity to find out how older blacks viewed segregation. A black guy I know makes a point of asking his fellows (those that are old enough to have adult memories of segregation) whether life with segregation was better or worse than integration. He reports that, overwhelmingly, these older blacks do not condemn segregation. Their views on our current situation are mixed at best.
It should be pointed out that these same blacks do in fact tend to dislike whites, as you suggest. The type that smile, but then sing a different tune once you’re out of earshot. But under segregation their communities were far more liveable than today, and that’s something that is not entirely lost upon them. Of course, they all voted for Obama.
So the picture that we are left with is a mixed bag. On the one hand, it is clear that the modern propaganda machine is spewing all matter of lies and misrepresentations about what life was actually like in the South. This is an attempt to induce white guilt, so that whites will go quietly into the night as they are displaced, marginalized, and ultimately genocided out of existence. This is why there is some value in debunking and refuting these lies. Our enemies want to link any hint of white racial consciousness to a house of horrors, a vale of tears. This is why they lie, lie, and then lie some more.
On the other hand, the fact still remains that mixed societies are untenable, and your position on this is absolutely correct.
This puts us in a difficult position: we don’t want to do what some idiot Neo-Confederates do, which is in essence defend a multiracial society. On the other hand, we don’t want to perpetuate the lies and distortions of the modern propaganda machine.
So what to do? It is probably best to keep things clear and focused: multiracial societies are untenable, all peoples should be able to control their own destiny, and the only way to sustainably achieve this is through the ethnostate in which each people controls its own institutions and culture. As to the South in particular, I think it is best to emphasize that the system hates southern whites, lies about them and misrepresents them. We too need control of our destiny, and that will only be sustainable when we win back our lands and never allow the selfish few to import non-white labor again.
Whether it be Africans yesterday, or mestizos today, we can’t allow ourselves to be destroyed as a people simply because the selfish and shortsighted few insist upon “cheap” labor. “Cheap” labor that has led to untold suffering, rape and murder. “Cheap” labor that has led to massive government redistribution of wealth, intrusion into our private lives, and restrictions on our most basic liberties. “Cheap” labor that has destroyed our schools and other important civic institutions, degraded the public realm, effectively put millions of our people under house arrest as they are afraid to leave their houses at night, and ultimately threatens our very existence as a people. Yes, it was very “cheap” labor. Oh, and not to mention a little thing called the Civil War…er…War Between the States. Yes, that was cheap too- only hundreds of thousands of whites slaughtered. If such labor is cheap, I’d hate to see what it would take to be called expensive.
In the history of the world, has there ever been labor that was more expensive than so called “cheap” black labor? I doubt it. “Cheap” black labor is in fact the most expensive labor in the world. I suspect that, in due time, “cheap” mestizo labor will end giving it a run for the money.
Point is, I think it is best to use the South as a cautionary tale as opposed to condemning it per se. The distinction can be subtle, but it is important. Better still, the cautionary tale approach helps establish a foundation for white nationalism and avoids the idiocy of a certain strain of Neo-Confederates. I think it’s the way to go for now.
Why can’t Southerners admit that the Old South was an untenable and immoral society driven by the greed of the rich and exactly the kind of “racism” that is used to smear all forms of white group loyalty.
Thanks for that, Tim Wise. With White nationalists like that who needs enemies.
Talk about negative caricatures… you do realize that African slavery was started by Europeans and began in the North? Massachusetts was the first to legalize slavery. If you’re going to condemn those who practiced slavery then you have a long list to go through.
Good to know that at least some people have sound judgment around here, such as Hunter and Charlemagne.
Some others are really doing a disservice to White nationalism by repeating liberal memes and denigrating NS Germany, the CSA and White South Africans.
…repatriation or relocation was inevitable.
I seriously doubt that.
Africans were used for slave labor, Southerners had no use for free blacks, anymore than they did for Indians, who Southerners removed en masse.
The American Colonization Society, that created Liberia and transported free blacks back to Africa, was supported by Southerners and tended to have Southerners as presidents.
What cinched black suffrage was the use of black soldiers by the Union army. They felt obliged to give them equal rights for their military service.
The Confederacy was a white supremacist state, not an ethnostate.
It was an ethnostate in every way, except for being completely racially geographically exclusive, however it was socially and politically exclusive. In fact it’s more deserving of the full definition of ethno-state than merely a White nation because Southerners have a unique culture.
You’re young. As recently as the 1960’s, much of the South looked like a third world country compared to the North.
Rural does not mean third world.