The Jacksonian Club

40 Comments

1. Language such as referring to rule and social engineering by New York Intellectuals works, using the term “jew” doesn’t. (Just listen to how poorly Winston Smith comes across with his hostile angry tone when he appears on the Political Cesspool, That Bombardier fellow and his conspiracy theories also ruins any hour he’s on. James and Keith Alexander’s discussions work, other segments don’t on that Show.) Those who are smart enough to figure out just who the New York Intellectuals are will get it. Those that can’t figure it out don’t need to know.

   By the way the server is dropping a lot of comments for the last few days and I don’t know why, they don’t contain any cuss words, slurs, or violent words? Anyone else having that issue? It happened to both my Mac and PC so it can’t be software related on my end. Maybe there is a length limit that I exceeded?

2. Wallace, in another thread you told me that “The conservative movement is like a chicken that runs around with its head cut off. The White Nationalist movement is like a free floating brain absorbed by its own fantasy world.” I replied that it was a brilliant metaphor, and without sarcasm I added that all we need now is a surgeon like Victor Frankenstein to “glue” one with the other.

   Perhaps the means to create soon the brained monster are not so beyond the Realpolitiks as I originally thought. Attaching the mindless body of conservatism with our head is exactly what the West needs. If the club achieves that it will surely be the most significant turning point in the history of the 21st century. I cannot say cross your fingers because it’s about hard work, courage, stripping us from the fig leaves and finally show our balls in public.

3. “The problem is the success of White Nationalism requires men of extraordinary character who are capable of rising above their own limitations and putting themselves in real danger. It means giving up a comfortable middle class lifestyle in American suburbia.”
   -This is the single greatest obstacle that you face; not white unawareness, but the fact that too many whites are still reasonably comfortable. Though I sincerely hope that I am wrong about this, I believe that the economic situation will have to get extreme to move these people into wanting to take action in the real world. For example, the events that led to the radical German governmental coup in the 1930’s was preceded by the worst depresssion ever experienced there.

   “a diluted version of the Jacksonian Club, one that takes root within the Tea Party, could enjoy more success. The people who are involved with the Tea Party already subscribe to a number of the key premises of the Jacksonian Club.”
   – The Tea Party people are mainly middle aged and older white folks (I see many who were in their youth in the 1960’s), and I suspect that there are definite limits to how much that crowd will “rock the boat”. In any case, as Harold Covington has also said on his podcasts: “revolution is a young man’s game”. In spite of these objections, anything to get whites moving in the right direction is a start and a good thing, and this is a good idea, a beginning in the “real world”.

4. Middle Aged and Old People have historically run every society.

5. Others have hammered on this, but let me say that it is not an organization per se that is needed, nor is it issue talk, so much as it is the demonstration that we can remove the taboo from saying, “As a white American, I insist….” or “As one of the diverse white American peoples, I’m concerned that…”

   Speaking out of our white voice in white-centric issues will do more to free the language of silenced white Americans than the principal cures put forth on this blog. Once we learn to speak in this way, many things will unfold because this is the essence of the silencing we have endured….an inability to name ourselves.

6. @ Hunter

   Go back and read George Washington Plunkitt’s “How to Become A Statesman”.
   Chapter 2 of Plunkitt of Tammany Hall.

   Btw, what happened to Jefferson. It was the “Jefferson & Jackson” club or society in the old days before political correctness.

7. @ Nightowl;

   “Middle Aged and Old People have historically run every society.”

   – Perhaps so, but they don’t make very viable revolutionaries.Helping to run it once it is established and fighting for its establishment are two different scenarios. There is a reason why the military doesn’t (or didn’t) take people over the age of 26 (I not talking about “reups” here of course). Are an army of codgers with their walkers going to establish this new ethnostate?

8. Biased Observer: The reason that revolutionaries are generally young is that they have generally been (A) Marxists, in childish revolt against normal society, and (B) unoccupied with normal adult concerns, like work or supporting families. However, revolutionary leaders, Left, Right, or our own Founders, are almost always middle aged.
   Part of the revolutionary potential in middle aged Whites lies in (B): They are becoming unemployed, and have time for activism, just like young people. But unlike Marxist punks, their grievances are real, not some nonsense about some injustice towards people they’ve never met and would never really want to. They really have something to fight for.

   Regarding the soldierly potential of the middle aged: No, they’re not your first choice for assault infantry, but armies have been making good use of them for centuries. From American colonial militias to the Third Reich’s police battalions and stationary divisions, armed 45 year olds have earned their keep.

9. Hunter, I know I’ve made this point to you before:

   “In reality, explicit White Nationalists themselves will not act without the fig leaf of mainstream legitimacy. They will not risk social ostracism or employment discrimination. ”

   You’ve run the cycle on the internet and the nom de plume, so we know you speak from experience. Why do you renounce the former and keep the latter? Huh, Hunter Wallace?

   Mike
   (and for new readers to lazy to search, but quick to accuse:
   Michael A. Smith, M.D.
   Low Country Internal Medicine of S.C., P.A.
   2845 Tricom Street
   N. Charleston, SC 29406
   (843) 797-1770)

10. “The reason that revolutionaries are generally young is that they have generally been (A) Marxists, in childish revolt against normal society, and (B) unoccupied with normal adult concerns, like work or supporting families. ”
    So by that logic, the leaders being middle aged were mature, but the young revolutionaries were in “childish revolt”? Revolts and revolution have been around a lot longer than Marxism, going back farther than Spartacus. Couldn’t you find a broader brush to paint those strokes with, Discard?
    Let’s see; Hitler was 31 when he became politcally active (his was by no means a Marxist movement), Alexander Hamilton (author of about half the Federalist Papers) was 21 when the Declaration of Independance was signed, James Madison was 25 at that time, Stonewall Jackson was about 36 years old in 1860, J.E.B. Stuart was 27 in 1860, Nathan Bedford Forrest was 40 (yeah, I guess he qualified as being nearing middle age) in 1861 when he was a private in the Confederacy, General Joeseph Wheeler was a ripe old 24 in 1860, General George Pickett would have been 35 years old at the start of the “Civil” War. Earlier examples? There is Sam Houston who became the leader of the Texas Revolution of 1832 when it was trying to divorce itself from Mexico-he was 39 at the time. Were these men ” in childish revolt against normal society, and unoccupied with normal adult concerns, like work or supporting families.”? Prior to the beginning of the last century (the early 1900’s) normal life expectancy was not too much more than about 40 years. Men and women had short childhoods and became adults much sooner than today’s coddled kids.
    Going back farther we can site the French Revolution of 1830, and the Merthyr Rising in Wales, and so on, dozens of revolutions for each century, as a matter of fact. Since life expectancy was nothing like it is today, you can be certain that there were few “middle aged” people in those conflicts. I am not saying that middle aged people do not have a place in all of this, but it is hardly realistic to say that they have been at the forefront of these events in history or that they can be such now- that is a position for the young to take.

11. I, for one, am fighting the fight in the real world. Couple of days ago I picked up a middle-echelon corporate apparatchik in my cab. The subject of Arizona came up. She made some remarks about “racism” and “ethnic profiling”. I set her straight on these and related issues. Later in the day, she called up my company and tried to get me fired. She failed. Point is, the globalist bell will eventually toll for her too. When her job gets outsourced, merger-redunted, H1-B’d, she’ll be more receptive to the truth. For now, we’ll just have to keep rolling the rock uphill.

12. I want to be careful about being critical of parts of Hunter’ Wallace’s article not because I don’t think he can take it but because in regard to people who do a great deal for the movement, we want to be careful of criticism in their direction. So let me say that in Hunter Wallace’s articles are plenty of special good ideas, both generally and specifically. Instead of developing my points logically, I am going to speak based on strong feelings in me, without knowing why I have those feelings.

    The people who are involved with the Tea Party already subscribe to a number of the key premises of the Jacksonian Club.
    – They believe an alien elite controls America.
    – They believe they have lost their country.
    and so on

    I feel this is the most right-on most accurate most valuable most powerful part of the article.

    I feel the rest of Wallace’s article has a kind of repetitive quality with writings by other people where sufficient answers haven’t been found but where there is increasing strident urging of the reader, out of a felt need (accurate) of great disaster befalling us. I feel Harold Covington’s writings have that in a greater degree.

    I feel the Jacksonian club so far has tremendous potential for fresh air. Yes, it hasn’t really started. But still. The feeling of openess, potential, and excitement is there. That is important. If a brand new idea is successfully toxified – that isn’t good. I look forward to see what the big tent approach will produce. I think what you listed in common with the Jacksonian club as well as the full list of items in the club’s initial statement, especially the last half, are almost all totally insightful and right-on.
    http://jacksonianclub.wordpress.com/2010/08/13/the-jacksonian-club-a-new-forum-for-new-right-activists/

13. Who has your censorship button?

14. This site vasilates between criticizing intellectuals and true-believers in the WN movement. It has been both frustrating and humorous to read here on a daily basis. I hope that Hunter and the crew here can figure out the direction, as this blog has much readership.

    The recent bent regarding morons such as Beck and cozying up with the tea party is where the humor can be found.

15. Biased Observer: I limit myself to revolutions since 1776, since prior revolts are not nearly so well documented. How old was Spartacus? Who knows?
    Yes, most active revolutionaries have been young, and they have been the followers, not the leaders. Many of them are in it for the thrill, with no real idea of any ideology. For example, in the early 1930s in Germany, there was an expression: “Beefsteak Nazis”. They were brown on the outside, red on the inside. Nazi style and swagger trumped their leftist politics. That is what childish revolt is about. Or read Mark Twain’s “History of a Campaign That Failed”, about his brief time as a Confederate soldier.
    OTOH, the leaders have mostly been middle-aged, by which I mean about 35+ years of age. Taking the American Revolution as an example, George Washington was 44 in 1776, John Hancock was 39, Ben Franklin was 70, John Adams was 40, Sam Adams was 54, Francis Marion was 44. The average age of the signers of the Declaration of Independence was about 42. The younger men you mention, Hamilton and Madison were not revolutionary leaders. Hamilton was Washington’s military secretary. Madison was a lawyer, junior member of the Virginia assembly, and a protege of Thomas Jefferson. Taking another revolution, in 1917, the five members of the first Soviet Poliburo, Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, Kamenev, and Krestinsky, were respectively 47, 38, 39, 34, and 34, for an average of 38. As for the Confederacy, its generals were not its revolutionary leaders, any more than U.S. Grant or George Meade were counter-revolutionary leaders. The politicians declared for secession and the soldiers pretty much followed their own state’s government. The leading political figures of the Confederate government were Jeff Davis, Alex Stephens, Robert Toombs, and Judah Benjamin, ages 53, 49, 51, and 50, in 1861.
    Historically, young men have been the dominant demographic in revolutionary movements, as cannon fodder. But their success has depended on the leadership of more experienced, middle aged men.

16. Epic Fail.

17. Discard:

    “Revolution”; ” the overthrow of a government by those who are governed”.

    “As for the Confederacy, its generals were not its revolutionary leaders, any more than U.S. Grant or George Meade were counter-revolutionary leaders”. This is splitting hairs and playing with semantics and I believe you know that. Unless you want to define a revolution as a revolt with no defined leadership at all (and we know that this does not really happen, there is always a pecking order and a “command center” even in a revolutionary force comprised of “cells”)- just a rabble storming the Bastille, then the Confederate military was a revolutionary force, since prior to secession they had acknowledged the Federal government as the defining authority (they even referred to themselves as rebels).
    “OTOH, the leaders have mostly been middle-aged, by which I mean about 35+ years of age” – Well, as long as we are splitting hairs, the current definition of middle age is 40-60 (which in itself is laughable, as it is a reflection of the greater lifespan made possible by modern medical science – men in their 50’s were considered old not too many years ago and there is much that a person in his or her 50’s can no longer do or do nearly as well as when younger).
    “Historically, young men have been the dominant demographic in revolutionary movements, as cannon fodder. But their success has depended on the leadership of more experienced, middle aged men.”
    – Well Discard, it will be very interesting to see what kind of “experienced, middle aged leaders” the Tea Party produces, or how well it will all go without all that “cannon fodder”.

18. Biased Observer: The Confederate generals did not lead the South out of the Union. They followed the political leaders of their states. R.E. Lee remained loyal to the Union until Virginia voted for secession, after Lincoln called for troops to suppress the rebellion in South Carolina. Had Lee been in command at Fort Sumter, he would have fought back against the Confederate forces. George Thomas, Union general from Virginia, is the only West Pointer I know of that did not follow his state, though there must be others. That is not revolutionary leadership.
    I count 35 as middle age because by that time, a man has likely married, had children, finished school and begun his career, and in every respect taken on the responsibilities of adulthood, if he’s ever going to. He has also begun his physical decline. It’s the minimum age for the Presidency, and among some Indian tribes, close to the age of retirement from active raiding and admittance to tribal councils. It’s the age when military men get command of ships and battalions. It is the age of active, mature leadership.
    The Tea Party is not a gathering of government employees, instead it has a large proportion of independent businessmen, the natural leaders of a community. They are people who act independently, direct other people, and bear the consequences of their actions. They are aroused by taxes because they are the ones who set money aside and write out checks to the government every quarter, unlike most people who have their money taken before they ever see it. How many leaders will arise from them I don’t know, but that is the place to look.

19. “The Confederate generals did not lead the South out of the Union. They followed the political leaders of their states”
    – And those political leaders were professional politicians and lawyers, many of whom were strikingly inept (middle aged or older!) as leaders. Most notable was Jefferson Davis, whose inept military strategy was due to wanting to defend all the Southern territory equally, with limited resources. He was unwilling to appoint a general-in-chief until it was too late (general Lee assumed the role). Davis was a poor diplomat and exhibited even poorer economic sense in that he printed money until it was worthless. He couldn’t delegate responsibility and ignored pressing civil matters.
    Vice President Alexander Stephens was at odds with Davis’ military policy, conscription and financial and taxation policies. Robert Toombs, first Confederate Secretary of State was so peeved at not winning the Presidency that he stepped down from office within just a few months after his appointment. First Secretary of War for the Confederacy, LeRoy Walker was famous for this ridiculous statement: “all of the blood shed in the Civil War could be wiped up with a pocket handkerchief.” And the first Attorney General for the Confederacy was Judah P. Benjamin- a Jew. More need not even be said of him.
    Were these the “leaders” you were referring to? To this day, the Confederate “leaders” of that war are considered to be the generals who were in charge- the men actually participating in the battle, or at least near to the conflict and to some degree in danger themselves. Men like Beauregard, Braxton, Johnston, Lee, Wheeler, Leonidas Polk, Cleburne and Jubal Early, and an especial example of this breed was Nathan Bedford Forrest (both a fighter and general) not some politicians esconced in a safe office somewhere hundreds of miles from “what is happening”. Even in battles between the armies of nations, no one “remembers” the men in the war room, it is the men like Patton who capture the public’s imagination and who are thought of as leaders, or in the case of modern revolutionaries; people like Mao or the admittedly much overused example of Castro and Ernesto Guevara.
    “The Tea Party…….has a large proportion of independent businessmen, the natural leaders of a community.” – Running a successful pastry shop or Burger King does not make a man a natural leader in war efforts.

20. Also, those Southern pols who “led the South out of the Union” were merely voting the will of their constituency. Nothing special there.

21. HW, I found this article of yours very thought provoking. What you have written is true (unfortunately). The unaffliated white nationalists I knew in the past (myself included) were indeed smarter, more perceptive, more honest, and more moral in an abstract sense (we knew what was right unlike the evil leftists and the lemmings who tended to have problems telling right from wrong) then our non-movement counterparts. But, as you correctly noted, we ALL were just as flawed as our unenlightened neighbors. I wish this wasn’t the case but it was.
    Having said this, I guess I will try to give my thoughts and give a bit of a defense I can provide for myself and others for our inaction. Dr. Robert Frenz once wrote on Faem.com a statement on the future that affected my thoughts greatly. The good doctor said something to the effect of “Things are hopeless in this world but not serious. Soon enough things will be serious and then they will no longer be hopeless.” I was VERY impressed with this. What he was saying was that we are prisoners of external events. That as long as the current regime could provide what Frenz called “the slop train” (first world living standards), the public would not be receptive to a white advocate message and only when meltdown catastrophe fit the current regime would white advocacy cease to be ‘hopeless.’
    This has precedents I think. Prior to the depression and famine of the 1787-1789 period, the people that became the Jacobins could not have organized a successful revolution. They were busy trying to change the climate culturally of France by acting in secret societies and masonic lodges and agitating in salons (I am tempted to say our equivalent of the former is internet sites like this and the latter is real space groups like the Jacksonian Club). Nevertheless, events in the hands of Louis XVI and his government and not the would-be revolutionaries set in motion the revolution. In Russia, in spite of the large network of mostly Jewish bloodthirsty terrorists he organized and commanded, Lenin did not bring down the Tsarist government. Nicholas II and his decision fight Austria-Hungary and by extension Germany is what doomed the Romanov Government. Adolf Hitler was unable to capture Germany in 1923 by force of tremendous will. He had to wait until the Great Depression coupled with the earlier Versailles caused deprevations made the Weimar system no longer tenable.
    Even the earlier episodes of these revolutions were in the hands of other people. This part fits perfectly with HW’s concept of trying to build the more acceptable right wing elements into groups that can gain power and change the culture and political landscape to our advantage. The Feuillants had to gain popularity first and then take power in order to cause the monarchy to panic and react (the attempted Royal Flight) that in turn brought the Girondists to power which in turn created an atmosphere that allowed the Jacobins to take power. Likewise, Lvov’s Kadets and Kerensky’s Socialist Revolutionaries had to have their turns before the socio-political atmosphere was cleared for the Bolsheviks. Even in Germany, the Weimar Republic was not totally recognized as collapsing until Chancellor Heinrich Brüning tried to rule as a dictator in order to suppress the Nazis and Communists and really ended the veneer of Weimar “democracy.”
    I think events are going in our favor ever so slowly. I want to see how the economy plays out and what kind of inflation the Federal Reserve possibly brings forth in the couple years. I also want to see if the neocons get their mad way and have the country invade Iran or anywhere else and perhaps create a draft. I think we live in interesting times. 🙂

22. Also, remember the Fire Eaters? They could not get the secession they knew was desireable in the 1840s and 1850s. Only when it became apparent to moderate Southerners that northern extremists had gained the executive office were they able to finally persuade the Southron population of the necessity of leaving the Union.

23. Good post Hunter.

    I very much subscribe to the concept of “Incrementalism”. In the creation of transitional clubs and such, I think that the one position that must not be compromised is that of explicit Whiteness. The following statement is air tight, and should be our main assertion:

    “We as European Americans are a unique people with a unique heritage and have the same right as other Americans to come together as a community.“

    The battle line is therefore drawn thusly;

    Our goal is to define ourselves as closely as possible to the statement above, while distancing ourselves with any opposition manufactured historical “guilt” or “hate” memes. We then gain legitimacy among our people and move into the mainstream.

    Our enemies goal is to define us as far as possible from the statement above, while linking us with their manufactured historical “guilt” or “hate” memes. We then DO NOT gain legitimacy among our people and remain marginalized.

    We hear much about the “character issue” in our movement, and as I see it, it is a direct result of our marginalization. I compare the marginalization of our movement to a ship that has sank to the bottom of the ocean. As we know, ships at the bottom of the ocean tend to gather barnacles, rust, other things like that. The Sub-culturalists and that we tend to attract represent barnacles and rust on our movement and are the source of the character issue. Try as we may to clean them off, as long as we remain at the bottom of the ocean, we will continue to attract those at the bottom.

    The solution to the character issue then is for those of us who follow the game plan above to assert ourselves and claim not the leadership of the barnacles, but rather the right to define our movement. We will then reclaim our legitimacy in the eyes of our people, and raise our ship from the bottom. Once on the surface, the “barnacles” will fall of on their own.

    Make no mistake, the barnacles will complain. They will not want our ship to move out of their environment. We know what is at stake, the survival of our very DNA on this planet and the civilization and technological achievements that flow from it.

    Let us not fail!

    Sincerely,

    Jason Lawrence
    Coordinator
    South Puget Sound Chapter
    European Americans United
    http://www.europeanamericansunited.org/home/
    http://www.wvwnews.net/

24. Biased Observer: Regardless of how one might, in hindsight, view the competence of the Confederacy’s political leadership, they still WERE the Confederacy’s political leadership, the men who led them out of the Union. Nor does ethnicity have any bearing on the matter. Benjamin Judah was still the most capable member of Jefferson Davis’s cabinet, and therefore a leader of the Confederacy. And if they were incompetent, how would replacing them with inexperienced 25 year olds have improved things?
    Of the generals you mentioned, in 1861, Beauregard was 43, Braxton Bragg was 44, Albert Sidney Johnston was 58, R.E. Lee was 54, Wheeler was 24, Polk was 57, Cleburne was 33, Early was 45, and Forrest was 40. That’s an average age of 44 at the beginning of the war, clearly middle-aged.
    Middle aged independent business owners are the natural leaders of any community. Who else? Take, for example, General Nathan Bedford Forrest. He went into business with his uncle as a shopkeeper in his early twenties. He later became a real estate broker, ran a stagecoach line, started a brickmaking business, and bought and sold horses and slaves. He was elected an Alderman in the city of Memphis, and sold off his various business to become a cotton planter, becoming a regular pillar of the community. That’s why influential citizens of Memphis went to visit the Governor of Tennessee to persuade him to promote Private Forrest, not because they had any idea of his military talents.
    You are right that running a successful pastry shop or Burger King doesn’t make a man a successful leader in war, but would you look instead for such leaders among janitors, store clerks, or music students? BTW, if sissy businesses like pastry shops and fast food franchises don’t seem likely to provide the virile sort of commanders needed, look in the Yellow Pages under “motorcycles” or “auto repair” or “plumbers”.
    Be it the American Revolution, the Russian Revolution, or the War Between the States, capable middle aged men have been the leaders, younger men the willing followers. If there is to be any sort of revolution here, it will be led by middle aged men who have the will to take control of their own future, and demonstrated the ability to run something besides their mouths. The Tea Party has lots of such people.

25. One situation where young ideologues ran Amok and were eventually reigned in by the older generation was when Mao turned the college kids loose on China during the cultural revolution. Elderly elements of the party eventually got the upper hand and Deng ZhioPing restructured the nation resulting in elderly pragmatists running things ever since. They don’t have to deal with silly things like 18 year old voters though.

26. Discard: Indulge me here for a moment:
    What would such a “struggle” be likely to look like? I refer here not to any period of attempting to establish an effective lobbying force within the existing political system (vis-a-vis “voting the bastards out” or even the establishment of an effective “white advocacy agency” or a political party for the advancement of the interests of Caucasians-that is not going to happen, as we have been slated for extinction), but I am looking at the end game scenario: do you imagine to yourself “civilian forces” contending with US armed forces? That is the militia mentality. I don’t care what degree of competant middle-aged leadership you find for that event, semi-auto civilian weapons and molotov cocktails will not make an effective countering force to what the government has for its troops and then you can count on Blackwater mercenaries being hired “to keep the peace” (they were present in New Orleans during the Katrina event).And the Federal government will not stand by and simply allow states to secede peacefully, they didn’t the first time, why would they now? Such a struggle with the Federal government would most likely take the form of guerilla warfare. Are middle-aged men up to the task of moving from one location to another (and engaging in the other “activities” that such a force would be occupied with) every 24 hours for months or even years on end, moving from one “safe house to another” to stay ahead of those looking for them?
    Of course, if you are speaking of establishing the equivalent of a ” National Association for the Advancement of White People”, then by all means look to the Tea Party. Yes, there will be good organizers for such a movement there, or perhaps even the “Gray Panthers” would lend a hand. The media would turn that effort into a howl of laughter and participants will be called “racists” at every turn (which itself is enough to deter most whites from joining in). Even if successfully established, such an entity would be outlawed as “racist” since a double-standard applies to us.
    Regarding Bejamin Judah being “the most capable member of Jeff Davis’ cabinet”, that does not say much for the cabinet as a whole then as the populace was not happy with his performance, especially when Roanoke Island was lost to the Union forces , (I quote from Wikipedia here, though I am not fond of that source on the whole):
    “Roanoke’s commander, Brig. Gen. Henry A. Wise was in desperate need of reinforcements when he was informed of the imminent Federal attack. He begged for the 13,000 idle men under the control of Maj. Gen. Benjamin Huger in nearby Norfolk, Va, but his pleas to Huger and secretary of war Benjamin went unheeded. The heavily outnumbered Confederate force of some 2,500 surrendered and were taken prisoner after losing nearly a hundred of their number — which was incorrectly presented in the South as their having “surrendered without a shot being fired” (See Battle of Roanoke Island).”
    As for his (Benjamin’s) ethnicity not having any bearing on the matter simply because he was a Confederate leader, well our present illustrious President’s cabinet is full of Benjamin’s ethnic kin, and it seems that their ethnic interests and national loyalty are always at odds with those of Americans in general (why are we fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan?) and white Americans and Europeans especially. Consequently, his ethnicity would have a bearing on the matter, at least to me. That is one of the reasons that I chose “Biased Observer” for my forum name.

27. “Regardless of how one might, in hindsight, view the competence of the Confederacy’s political leadership, they still WERE the Confederacy’s political leadership, the men who led them out of the Union.”
    – Yes, for an entire 5 year period, at a cost of hundreds of thousands of men and their best genetic material, and if Benjamin Judah was the best of Davis’ cabinet, then that is not saying much for his cabinet at all, because as Secretary of War his performance was not stellar as exemplified by the loss of Roanoke Island under his tenure:
    “Roanoke’s commander, Brig. Gen. Henry A. Wise was in desperate need of reinforcements when he was informed of the imminent Federal attack. He begged for the 13,000 idle men under the control of Maj. Gen. Benjamin Huger in nearby Norfolk, Va, but his pleas to Huger and secretary of war Benjamin went unheeded. The heavily outnumbered Confederate force of some 2,500 surrendered and were taken prisoner after losing nearly a hundred of their number — which was incorrectly presented in the South as their having “surrendered without a shot being fired” (See Battle of Roanoke Island). (from Wikipedia). After the war he fled to England under an assumed name.
    I beg to differ about his ethnicity having no bearing on the matter. Our present illustrious President, BO has a cabinet full of Benjamin’s ethnic kin and we see where their interest lies (why are we fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq, could it be to keep the middle east safe for Israel?).
    Of course, I do not know what your mental image of the end-game of this struggle for a separatist ethnostate looks like, but I cannot imagine that it would take the form of a “civilian force” confronting the US military. That is the militia mentality. Civilian arms are no match for what the military can field. Perhaps the goverment would hire Blackwater (Xe) for the job-after all they were present in New Orleans during the Katrina event. Much more likely would be some sort of guerilla warfare, since the US is as unlikely to allow states to secede this time around as it was the last time. In a guerilla scenario I cannot imagine middle-aged men moving constantly from one safe-house to another every 24 to 48 hours to stay ahead of those looking for them. I also cannot imagine Tea Partiers contributing to any such effort in a meaningful way. Now if you are talking about organizing a white man’s version of the NAACP or some other sort of white advocacy political group, then you will likely find good organizers at within the Tea Party. Until that political entity was outlawed by the regime since a double-standard applies to whites advocating for whites. Or the Gray Panthers might help, if they are still around.

28. Well Discard, I was going to reply in length to your last post to me, but there must be a time-limit feature or malfunction because my posts won’t take (tried twice), I’ll make it short so maybe it will work in this way:
    Benjamin Judah was responsible for the loss of Roanoke Island:
    “Roanoke’s commander, Brig. Gen. Henry A. Wise was in desperate need of reinforcements when he was informed of the imminent Federal attack. He begged for the 13,000 idle men under the control of Maj. Gen. Benjamin Huger in nearby Norfolk, Va, but his pleas to Huger and secretary of war Benjamin went unheeded. The heavily outnumbered Confederate force of some 2,500 surrendered and were taken prisoner after losing nearly a hundred of their number — which was incorrectly presented in the South as their having “surrendered without a shot being fired” (See Battle of Roanoke Island).” As a Secretary of War he was not popular and ended up fleeing the country after the war. And he was the best of Davis’ cabinet you say? Hmm… the present President, BO has a cabinet full of Bejamin’s ethnic kin and we have solid evidence that their interest lies solely with “what is good for the Jews” and not America’s interests. That is why Benjamin’s ethnicity matters, at least to me. As for appointing “inexperienced” younger men to those posts; as I pointed out in an earlier post- there were younger military men with “experience” and/or native ability; J.E.B. Stuart was one such, Pickett was another. You don’t have to be middle-aged to be an effective leader, and being middle-aged does not assure such (many people loose mental acuity as they age, BTW).

29. Biased Observer, you have quoted Wikipedia at some length, but left off the paragraph immediately following your quote: “Cries of indignation were heard throughout the South. Rather than publicly reveal the pressing shortage of military manpower that had led to the decision not to defend Roanoke, Benjamin accepted Congressional censure for the action and resigned without protest.” Apparently, Benjamin was not responsible, but took the blame for the good of his country, at least according to your source.
    Again, regardless of his ability or lack of it, or his ancestry, he was a U.S. Senator from Louisiana, the Confederate Attorney General, Secretary of War, and Secretary of State. That makes him a leader of the South. Were Braxton Bragg and Leonidas Polk any less Confederate generals because they were inept?
    And what of it if he fled the country after its defeat? The Union would have clapped him in prison, as they did Jefferson Davis, who also tried to flee but was caught. Was Jeff Davis not a leader of the South?

    The two generals you mention, J.E.B. Stuart and George Pickett, lacked judgement and were given to frivolous distractions, a failing common to younger men, even capable ones. Both of them were absent from duty at critical moments for personal reasons, Stuart at Gettysburg and Pickett at Five Forks. That’s exactly the reason that mature men are the leaders in battle and elsewhere. BTW, the decline in mental acuity generally begins much later in life, which is why institutions that have mandatory retirement usually set the age at 65 or 70.

    Middle age does not ensure leadership ability, nor does youth preclude it, but the place to look for it is among mature men who have demonstrated ability and good judgement. In civilian life, independent businessmen are the bulk of the leadership talent pool for any movement that opposes this government. Where else would you look? The military, perhaps, but again, coups are led by middle-aged colonels and generals, not sergeants and lieutenants. Except in Africa.

30. ”
    “In nine out of 12 tests the average age at which the top performance was achieved was 22.”
    The first signs of decline began to show up at age 27. However, memory hung in undiminished for another decade, starting to drop off at the age of 37, on average.
    – Source for this is here:http://www.suite101.com/content/brainpower-starts-to-decline-at-age-27-a103072
    – Not from Wikipedia, if that matters to you. Same source does say that people tend to make up for this as they age with “experience”. For every source that you name that states otherwise, I can probably find a counter to it- just as with statistics.
    Of course you are correct that most institutions that have mandatory retirement set the age at 65 or 70 excepting of course, Supreme Court Justices and Congressmen (Strom Thurmond?) which is a provision written into the constitution by the “experienced” and well-intentioned Founders . Getting off on something of a tangent to the topic of this article, “Jacksonian Club”, I am wondering just how you envision the END-GAME of this “struggle” to form a separatist white ethnostate; are you picturing an armed civilian populace facing off with the US military? (the usual “militia” movement fantasy) or are you expecting the Tea Party to form some sort of NAACP for white people? The former would end quickly in a lot of dead civilians (considering the hardware the US government could bring to bear, not to mention that they could simply hire Blackwater Mercenaries to do the job for them – Blackwater was present in New Orleans during Katrina), the latter “solution” would likely be laughed off by the media while at the same time labelling such an organization as “racist”, since we all know that a double-standard applies to whites in this sense. The most likely and probably the only potentially successful effort would be a guerilla warfare scenario and I cannot imagine middle-aged men moving from one safe-house to another every 24 to 48 hours for months and years on end while engaging in the kind of “activities” that such an organization specializes in. Nor can I imagine Tea Partiers in such a role. I am just curious as to your vision of this scenario.

31. ”
    “In nine out of 12 tests the average age at which the top performance was achieved was 22.”
    The first signs of decline began to show up at age 27. However, memory hung in undiminished for another decade, starting to drop off at the age of 37, on average.”
    – From this source; http://www.suite101.com/content/brainpower-starts-to-decline-at-age-27-a103072 , not Wikipedia, in case that matters to you. The same source goes on to say that people tend to make up for this age-related decline with “experience”. For every source that you can quote that says otherwise, I can probably find one to support mine, kind of like statistics. You are right that ” the decline in mental acuity generally begins much later in life, which is why institutions that have mandatory retirement usually set the age at 65 or 70.” Except for the Supreme Court and Congress (ex: Strom Thurmond and several others) thanks to the Founders, and goverment is where mental acuity (and intelligence) is needed most.

32. I need to self-correct here I meant to state: you are right to state that mental acuity begins to decline with age, but NOT “much” later in life. Mandatory retirement age has as much to do with coinciding with Social Security and age-descrimination laws and “custom” (prior precedent) as anything else. Besides that, just try to start a new career (or even simply find a job) if you are male and over the age of 40. Middle-age is when companies start to look for excuses to fire a male employee. Same for military service, get close to having 20 years in (as an enlisted man) and the pressure is on to kick you out of the service (unless of course, you are a “person of color”, in which case the usual rules never apply).

33. Biased Observer: I am a White man, well over 40, and starting a new career in a field that has required me to learn all the math I ignored in high school, and some beyond that. I chose a line of work that required math, because that limits the competition from Darks on quotas. Not easy, but life isn’t.
    The customary retirement age and voting age and so on, are based on centuries of experience, not arbitrary decisions of kings or gurus or legislatures. For example, the age of legal adulthood, at which you can buy liquor and handguns in most states, is 21. That also used to be the voting age in most states. Recent research has indicated that the brain is not fully functional (particularly the frontal cortex, I think it is, where judgments are formed) in most people until that age. Science has simply confirmed tradition. And apparently your source further confirms that people make up for a decline in mental agility with experience. I would guess that the decline in mental agility is more than compensated for by experience until somewheres between the ages of 40 and 60, in most intelligent people, which is why men between those ages run the world,
    BTW, the military has earlier compulsory retirement than most lines of work because it is so physically demanding. Those who reach higher rank, where more thinking is needed, are allowed to remain for longer periods.

34. Thanks CompassionateFascist for your post on setting someone straight on the Arizona immigration law, and the person trying to get you fired but your boss wouldn’t.

    Thanks Biased Observer and Discard on the examples of ages of leaders in some different wars (whether or not they were military on the battle field). A few actual numbers (and your other stuff) gives a reality perspective on youth and age.

35. Biased Observer, I just spotted your two missing posts. I do not envision greybeards like myself facing off with the U.S. Army. We’d be eaten alive were that to happen. A 30-30 is no match for an M16, let alone a minigun bearing helicopter, and an electrician with a stiff back is no match for well-trained, well-led, infantrymen. No, any armed struggle will be between non-White gangs and White citizens, a large scale ethnic cleansing. It will, in fact already has, been started by the non-Whites, and will only be acknowledged as a racial conflict when Whites begin to actively resist. For now, it is called “crime” and “White flight” and “riots” and “bringing down property values”, and resistance is called “racism”.
    In such a conflict, middle-aged White men who have some nerve and sense have the advantage on dumb ass gang punks. Confronted by mobs of Mexicans deprived of their welfare checks, White homeowners can easily organize, because we live organized lives. Turning chaos into order is what we do. Darks do the opposite, turning order into chaos, and your Civil War reading has surely taught you which sort of forces will prevail.
    The military will not intervene on the side of dumb violent Darks against Whites. The regime has no hope of getting the White infantry, or the White pilots, or the White Special Forces, to attack White America. They keep the generals PC just so they don’t overthrow the government. Any struggle will be up to ordinary Whites, protecting their families, homes, and businesses. The youth will follow.

36. I don’t know what is wrong with this website, strange goings on as I swear those two posts of mine did not “take” and were not there yesterday.
    “I am a White man, well over 40, and starting a new career in a field” -good luck with that, and I am not being facetious, I mean it sincerely. I know several other gentlemen in your situation who have been searching endlessly…
    “which is why men between those ages run the world,” – Have you noticed how poorly the world is being run? I can think of more examples than I could possibly list here, but the Gulf oil “spill” (and the decision to drill in water too deep to effect a speedy repair) is but one example. The Persian Gulf wars we are participating in right now to keep the middle east “safe for Israel” and Bush’s and cronies pocket’s lined are another. Experienced politicians like Ed Kennedy (may he rot in hell) brought us the Mexican “immigrants”, and his Euro counterparts have been responsible for their version of same with 3rd world Muslims….I could go on and on….

37. BO,

    The filter keeps sucking up comments. I’m quite sure I approved your comments yesterday afternoon or last night.

38. Yah, I had several comments in a row sucked up, but then I think they all appeared all at once. I assume that was due to me changing my email. Same thing happened in some other OD discussion groups.
    Discard: No, any armed struggle will be .. to end of paragraph.

    Really good, except I don’t trust to overconfidence. But a nice high-level focused accurate statement, which will never get repeated in the MSM of today.

39. Biased Observer Have you noticed how poorly the world is being run? I can think of more examples than I could possibly list here, but the Gulf oil “spill” (and the decision to drill in water too deep to effect a speedy repair)

    I’ve started to think about that too. That Gulf oil spill. Standard engineering practice when roaming into large, untested, areas where there will be serious consequences if something goes wrong is to do considerable testing for all the methods that will be used to handle all kinds of such situations. That wasn’t done at all. Very strange. In my somewhat own prejudiced way I started to wonder if a factor was women being pushed into all kinds of important positions. I’ve certainly known some destructive losers and I assume that the only reason they were given such staying leeway is because of the social and governmental pressure to have women throughout the hierarchy, no matter what, and no matter how high the eventual cost. “Anything a man can do a woman can do and better,” I’ve heard this a number of times, though the women who are ready to puppet this statement at the drop of a hat, are in my opinion the ones as dumb as molasses. (On the other hand, there are intelligent competent women, just as there are such men.)

40. Bob in Idaho;
    “In my somewhat own prejudiced way I started to wonder if a factor was women being pushed into all kinds of important positions.”
    I don’t consider it prejudice at all. You are simply noting a fact; women, some of whom are not qualified for their positions, are being given those positions anyway (as a most obvious example, I would not want to call the police in an emergency and have a female cop show up at my door). Biology dictates that they are not suited for some jobs, yet they are given them simply in the interest of politics.