Pennsylvania
As John Bonaccorsi gives us poor ignorant Southerners a lecture about the true history of the War Between the States, this is what is going on in Philadelphia in the year 2011. It is black people practicing MLK’s philosophy of “non-violence.”
Watch this woman find out the “content of their character”:
Yes, I am a race realist, and because I am a race realist, I can only applaud as blacks piss on the bourgeois class in Philadelphia and I watch from the suburbs. I think they are doing more to destroy the order than bloggers and white nationalists on the internet.
I am unable to see the point of your sarcastic reference to me, Mr. Wallace. Have I defended the so-called civil rights movement? Do you think I’m happy about the current condition of Philadelphia?
It’s just amazing: You haven’t listened to a single word I’ve said. You simply can not listen. The moment somebody says anything that might require you to think, you just go on the attack. That, I’m pretty sure, is the essence of Southern culture — as you understand it.
It was actually just a coincidence that this story broke as you were arguing with us here about the War Between the States. I posted it here for your benefit.
Why are you arguing with us in the South when these people are doing this to your own city? Isn’t it obvious now that George Wallace was right in his inaugural address?
Now Philadelphia has been transformed into a black hole like Detroit and Birmingham.
To Mr. Wallace (at 6:03 am, Aug 19):
You write:
“Why are you arguing with us in the South when these people are doing this to your own city? Isn’t it obvious now that George Wallace was right in his inaugural address?”
I don’t know what George Wallace said in his inaugural address. For all I know, I’d agree with every word of it. I’m not arguing with you in the South. I’m trying to tell you that you’re complicating discussions of race by tying them to notions of “Southern culture,” which means the Confederacy, which means the Civil War, which means support for slavery.
There were plenty of Northern whites, before the Civil War, who didn’t want blacks living among them. They were opposed to extension of slavery into the new territories for that very reason — but the South, which was insisting on maintaining slavery, couldn’t afford to let the new territories become non-slave. If the number of non-slave states were to grow great enough, in relation to the number of slave states, slavery would be abolished, Union-wide, by Constitutional amendment.
Consequently, the South had to fight for the expansion of slavery every time a new state was going to be admitted to the Union. That’s why there were all those “compromises,” which simply deferred the question’s settlement. You’re probably right that the Republican party, in 1860, was opposing, in its platform, only slavery in some new western states or whatever — I don’t know; but everybody — particularly everybody in the South — knew what that meant: the eventual end of slavery, Union-wide.
This is what I’m trying to tell you. By insisting on maintaining slavery — which was entangled with race — the South was making discussion of the racial question impossible. What was a Northerner — or even a Southerner — to do if he was concerned about the mingling of the races? Was he to side with the slave party or with the abolitionists? Well, he doesn’t want to side with the abolitionists, because if they win, the egalitarians among them will succeed in setting blacks free among whites — but he also doesn’t want to side with the slave party, against the abolitionists, because the slave party is going to bring Negroes into the new states, where he wants to live. Also, he might be opposed to slavery, but not be in sympathy with those abolitionists who want blacks to be living among whites. The politics, from his standpoint, are impossible — because the race question and the slavery question are thoroughly entangled.
So, what happened? The war finally came; the blacks were set free among the Southern whites, who certainly weren’t going to simply let the blacks mingle with them. The Jim Crow laws were erected as a racial barrier, which the blacks avoided by coming North. There, they also weren’t welcome among whites, who managed to contain them in certain neighborhoods of the Northern cities; but eventually, the civil-rights whites, who were the spiritual descendants of the egalitarian abolitionists, overcame Jim Crow and the various mechanisms that Northern whites had used to keep the races separate.
The whole thing could have been avoided if the South had just had the courage to abandon slavery, to say, in effect, “This was a bad idea, whose time has passed; now, we will work with our fellow Americans of the non-slave states to effect separation of the races. We of the South will be able to reconstruct our economic life without slavery.”
That didn’t happen; and what I’m saying is that every time you start talking about “Southern culture” in connection with America’s race problems, you’re simply repeating — perpetuating — the error of John C. Calhoun and all the others. America could have been a great white country; but Calhoun made that — as you are continuing to make that — impossible.
Really — I have no sympathy when that “Southern culture” talk starts being thrown around. Calhoun and those others were just bullheaded — and all they caused was frustration and ruin for whites, frustration and humiliation for blacks.
John,
(1) That was the famous speech in which George Wallace made his “segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever” statement.
(2) It is a historical fact that “White racial consciousness” is a marker of Southern ethnicity. It is a product of our own history as a people. We have been “White people” since the 1650s when our ancestors created Virginia.
(3) I’m not sure when your ancestors arrived in the United States. My ancestors were in Virginia in the 1600s.
(4) Why should I oppose the Confederacy? It was the glorious Union that fought for racial equality, the 14th Amendment, the consolidated tyranny of Washington over the states,military dictatorship over the South, etc.
(5) It was the glorious Union and its system of debt slavery to banks and turning White people into serfs to corporations that triumphed in 1865.
Now everyone works like a serf to pay off the student loan debt, to pay for the Countrywide mortgage, to pay the interest on the Wall Street credit card, to work for Federal Reserve’s magic money machine, and they all live in a society that has been rotted by Yankee materialism where nearly every woman has to work for a corporation to support the household.
(6) The only reason Lincoln emancipated the slaves was to incite a race war out of pure military and diplomatic desperation.
(7) Your mantra makes no sense whatsoever: by seceding from the Union, the Confederacy withdrew its claim to all the territories.
(8) That is a myth.
If that were true, then every Northern senator would have been a Republican and an enemy of the South. In fact, after California and Oregon were admitted to the Union, they often sided with the South in the Senate, as did Stephen Douglas in Illinois and other Northern senators.
(9) Lincoln himself sponsored a constitutional amendment that would have legalized slavery in the South for all time. Plainly, the North didn’t care about slavery in the South. What it really cared about was an independent South with its own currency.
(10) The Dred Scott decision had completely upheld the Southern point of view on the subject of slavery. The Supreme Court declared that blacks were not U.S. citizens. Much to the disappointment of Yankees in the North who believed they were citizens.
(11) Wasn’t there a “Compromise of 1877” which came 12 years after the end of slavery in the American South? Wasn’t there another “Compromise of 1896” in the Plessy decision?
(12) For the last time, the Republican Party had no intention whatsoever of abolishing slavery in the South. It was a non-issue. Lincoln himself didn’t even abolish slavery in the Union with the Emancipation Proclamation.
(13) The North’s ideas of a discussion of the “racial question” was … drumroll … the immediate abolition of slavery and making negroes into American citizens … something which was codified in the Reconstruction Amendments.
(14) From our standpoint, the problem was Northern fanaticism as it was represented in the abolitionist movement and every single one of its genealogical successors done to the present day “LBGT rights” movement to end the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Policy” in the military.
(15) If you think the problem of Northern ideological fanaticism was limited to the slavery question, you obviously aren’t familiar with the story of what happened to the former abolitionists after that issue had been resolved in their favor.
What happened? They moved on to the next frontiers of fanaticism: the women’s suffrage movement, the temperance movement, the civil rights movement, etc.
(16) Here’s what happened: after having enough of the North after John Brown attacked Harper’s Ferry in order to set off a genocidal slave rebellion in Virginia, the South realized that the North was enthralled to fanatics like Thoreau and Emerson and Garrison and Harriet Beecher Stowe and all their fellow travelers like Frederick Douglass.
In hindsight, it was absolutely the right decision. As we saw after the War Between the States, even the direst warnings of the pre-war secessionists about the fanatical obsession with abstractions and racial equality in the North proved insufficiently pessimistic.
(17) The blacks moved to the North to work for the Washington dollar in the North’s industries. Just like the Italians, the Poles, the Jews and so forth.
(18) Who supported the “Civil Rights Movement” in the 1960s? Well, if you look at the vote in Congress, you will find that 80 percent to 90 percent of Northern Democrats and Northern Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which is the only reason we have it because the South filibustered every single one of the civil rights bills in the Senate.
(19) Bullshit.
Once again, chattel slavery hasn’t existed in the American South in almost 150 years. Yet Barack Hussein Obama sits in the White House in 2011 because all of Yankeedom wanted him there.
(20) Having won the War Between the States, why didn’t the North simply use the Union Army and the Union Navy to deport blacks to Africa? Couldn’t they have deported blacks to Africa with their huge Navy?
Why didn’t the North use the Union Navy to send the blacks back to Africa? Because the North thought it was a much better idea to make them American citizens for they could retain control of Congress and the White House.
(21) John C. Calhoun was absolutely right.
Do you think Calhoun himself could have imaged that the mulatto bastard son of a Kenyan communist would sit in the White House? Do you think Calhoun could have imagined the federal government being anywhere near as big as it is today?
Of course!
The society that we live in today is nothing but a very peculiar vision of America that triumphed with Abraham Lincoln and the Union Army in 1965. Back then, it was a contested vision, but now it is taken for granted.
(22) How did John C. Calhoun prevent America from being a great country? Why couldn’t the North have used the Union Army and Union Navy to deport the blacks to Africa?
It was the Northern vision of America than triumphed in 1865, the 14th Amendment vision, the consolidated Empire vision, the “civil rights” vision, the vision of the corporations and the banks, etc.
(23) Would you like to discuss your culture?
Where should we start? Feminism, political correctness, anti-racism, gay rights, multiculturalism, Barack Hussein Obama, the Civil Rights Movement, Wall Street, the Federal Reserve? Where should we start?
(24) Speaking of ruining White people, what about Abraham Lincoln? Shouldn’t he be given some credit for ruining White people? I mean it was the Republican Party that made blacks U.S. citizens and which tried to integrate the whole country – unsuccessfully – in the 1870s.
Not John C. Calhoun. It was Calhoun who famously said, “our is a government of the White race.”
“they were kind of like dancing and screaming”
LOL
All sheboons too.
Hunter is addressing how European Americans in the South dealt with the black population who were already there. Mr. Bonaccorsi points out that the Northerners didn’t want to deal with blacks in the first place. Many northerners oppossed slavery because it meant that large numbers of blacks would be brought into their area. I think that is Mr. Bonaccorsi’s point. Northerners didn’t even want to get to the point that they would have to address how to live with blacks- the northerners didn’t want blacks in their area. Hunter is talking about how Europeans in the South dealt with their black population. Mr. Bonaccorsi is pointing out that slavery is what brought blacks to the USA, and the spread of slavery would have have brought blacks to more U.S. states.
Mr. Bonaccorsi and Hunter are arguing about two different things. Hunter is talking about how Europeans Americans in the South dealt with their black population. Mr. Bonaccorsi is saying that Northerners opposed slavery partly because it would bring large numbers of blacks into their states. And Northerners at that time didn’t even want to live with blacks. Mr. Bonaccorsi’s point is that it is slavery itself that brought in large numbers of blacks to the USA.
I always think of blacks as the Jews own army. Instead of attacking European-American themselves, Jews use blacks as their violent army. American blacks are the jews Golem.
In South Africa it is similar. Jews used blacks to destroy the Germanic Afrikaner society. Read about that here: (http://www.rense.com/general85/jcom.htm)
“Do you think I’m happy about the current condition of Philadelphia?”
I am. And not all Blacks are cut from the same mold. Blacks with a northeast attitude do far more to bring down society than southern blacks, except in cosmopolitan places like NYC.
Yo Vinnie – instead of lecturing Hunter on the errancy of Southern Whites, re: slavery (which would have ended on it’s own. slavery was already running out of steam by the time the North attacked the South) 0 why don’t you pop over ot Afreaka, and lecture the Afreakan Niggras on the moral rectitude of abolition. slavery had thrived in Afreaka for thousands of years, and slavery, as well as cannibalism, is growing and expanding. Afreakens being Afreakans, and all. Careful not to offend, though. They might percieve you saintly efforts as an attempt to “push Blacks around”, and cook ya and eat ya. Or at least hack you up, and dance around with your body parts, whilst screamng “Allah Ackbar”.
Go there, though. Go to the Congo, or Somalia, and tell us what happens, if you return.
To all you Southrons – all kinds of people are moving in to Dixie. The wealthy Yanquis are fleeing the MESS they’ve created. They WILL try to do what Yo Vinnie is doing now – lecturing you on what YOU’SE guys did wrong.
Make sure they disappear, out in the woods, somewhere. When they get too mouthy.
I fear Denise is a representative specimen of white womanhood.
Denise,
Quite right.
How many Yankees have moved to Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, Texas, and Georgia? It must be millions. The North itself is depopulating and losing representation in Congress because its own people are moving to the South.
It’s not just the blacks either. If anything is true, probably more Whites from the North have moved to cities like Atlanta and Charlotte and Houston and Tampa. White California has relocated to Arizona, Colorado, Oregon and other Western states.
In John’s Philadelphia, we can see the superior Northern wisdom of the “Civil Rights Movement” being played out in the North itself now. Again, it was George Wallace who explained to them why the South had its system of segregation, how it was a practical and necessary arrangement to deal with the unique problem posed by black people to civilization.
In the year 2011, Philadelphia has been transformed into Birmingham and Detroit. Why are the flash mobs terrorizing people in Philadelphia? Why does Philadelphia have a black city government?
It is because the North convinced itself that blacks were really Yankees with a different skin color and with the right government programs (i.e., Head Start, TANF welfare, EBT cards, etc) they could be transformed into White people.
For that reason, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed and the 14th Amendment was passed. It certainly wasn’t our idea as we waged a literal revolution to stop the 14th Amendment in its tracks and their resisted the “Civil Rights Movement” for 10 years on national television.
As a wise man once said, you “reap what you sow.” Now the North is reaping the whirlwind of Barack Hussein Obama and the Civil Rights Movement. Yet people like John are simply unable to figure out that the South (which had centuries of experience in dealing with black people) understood them better than the wise sages of Harvard and Yale.
Phil,
Why didn’t the North simply deport blacks to Africa after its great victory in the War Between the States? It could have rounded them up with the Union Army. It could have sent them home with the Union Navy.
No one here was stopping them from sending blacks back to Africa. In the North, the War Between the States led to the triumph of the fanatics like Charles Sumner and Thaddeus Stevens, who made sure the 14th Amendment was put in the U.S. Constitution.
It was Sumner of Massachusetts who forced the Civil Rights Act of 1875 on the United States. Fortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court saved us from that mistake, and we had to wait until 1965 to enjoy “integration” as it had been practiced in the North for most of the twentieth century.
Having just read your comment of 4:29 am, Aug 19, Mr. Wallace, I am astonished that you have still not understood a single thing I’ve said. I’m beginning to understand why the white race is in the situation it’s in. You are frightfully stupid.
If Denise were a blogger, I’d rate her right next to Hunter as an absolute ‘must read’.
I completely understand why the White race find itself in this situation.
Where would you like to start?
(1) Barack Hussein Obama – Why is Barack Hussein Obama the President of the United States? Because all of Yankeedom thought he would be a good president and that it would be a good thing to elect a black president because he was black.
(2) Immigration – Why are tons of illegal aliens and aliens from all across the world flooding into the United States? Because in 1965, the North changed America’s immigration laws to get rid of the national origins policy, which the North thought was racist and incompatible with our national commitment to “civil rights.”
As it happens, the record shows that the South strongly voted against the Immigration Act of 1965. That was not our idea. We knew better at the time.
(3) Civil Rights – Why is every public school in America integrated? Why do black people have access to every private business? Again, it is because the North thought the Civil Rights Movement was a great idea, and that they were helping out Selma and Birmingham by forcing “integration” on these cities.
(4) Brown vs. Board of Education – What is the legal basis of the Brown decision? Oh wait … it is the 14th Amendment which the North thought was a great idea and which the North put into the U.S. Constitution at gunpoint as a condition for representation in our national government.
(5) Gay Marriage – What the hell is gay marriage? It is the latest fashionable form of ideological fanaticism in the North. The State of New York just followed in the footsteps of Vermont in legalizing “gay marriage.”
(6) Demographics – Why are we ruled by the NAACP, La Raza, the ADL, the SPLC and so forth? Because the North thought these organizations were “civil rights organizations.”
(7) Jewish Question – Why is there a Jewish Question in the United States? Because after the War Between the United States, the North thought it would be a good idea to let millions of Eastern European Jews immigrate to the United States to work as a cheap labor force in its industries.
(8) Wall Street – Why is everyone enslaved to the credit card and the mortgage and the time clock and to the student loan debt? Because the Northern system of White slavery in America triumphed in 1865.
I agree with being racist in that we realize blacks have a certain effect on society as a group.
But I don’t see the problem. People basically chose their own neighborhoods and society needs a little bit of rebellion. My views have changed. I am more a nativist and not really a racial separatist. Just opposed to too much miscegenation.
Nope – thanks! I’m too ADD to run my own blog, so I just blab on Hunter’s. He is a very gracious host. That – ad I’d spend 90% of my waking hours trying to correct all my typos.
Yo Vinnie – I am NOT representative of American White womanhood, alas. Were I – we wouldn’t be suffering ANY of these problems at all.
I’ll admit, Denise, you’re not like the white women among whom I grew up.
Anyway — interesting exchange, Mr. Wallace. Should I learn the white race is flourishing, I shall be very pleased.
John:
It was not slavery that brought blacks into the North; it was the end of slavery that did that. With the pyrrhic victory over the South and the passing of 14th Amendment, the laws in many Northern states against the settling of free blacks within their borders collapsed. If Northerners wanted to keep blacks out, when Lincoln issued his call for troops, they should have stayed home.
Bill
The Northern states had their own Jim Crow laws in the Antebellum era.
Oregon, for example, barred free blacks from moving there in its state constitution. I’m pretty sure that Ohio and Illinois did as well. If they didn’t ban them outright, many of the Northern states made them pay a huge fine to move there, which deterred the settlement of free blacks.
Who forced them to change their laws? It certainly wasn’t the South. They repealed their own black codes under the influence of the abolitionist fanatics and the Radical Republican fools in their own section.
In fact, the Northern states passed “personal liberty laws” to allow fugitive slaves to take up residence in the North. They were opposed to Southerners coming to the North to capture the negroes. Fanatics like William Lloyd Garrison advocated disunion on the basis of Massachusetts failure to practice complete racial equality.
This was “morally wrong” in the eyes of the North. It was morally wrong for the South to manage its black population. The South had to become just like the North. Every black had to be free … like they are today in the year 2011 in Chicago and Detroit.
Insofar as the North has a racial problem in the 21st century, it is entirely the fault of the North because the worst ideas about race triumphed in that section of the United States, not in our section.
It was the Jews and Yankees that felt it necessary to come to Alabama on the “Freedom Ride” to integrate bus terminals in Montgomery and Birmingham. They were supported by Northerners who thought segregation was horrible because they watched the ever so reliable CBS, NBC, and ABC.
Northerners read the New York Times and Newsweek which reported on the racial problem in the South. That is why the blacks are out of control in the Midwest and New England in the 21st century.
It is because Northerners succumbed to the point of view of the New York Times and Newsweek and CBS News. They didn’t listen to George Wallace or William Lowndes Yancey when they warned the North of the chaos that idolizing the negro would cause.
Why are there are a million Puerto Ricans in New York City? Why are there so many Jews in New York City? Why are there so many blacks in Chicago and Detroit?
Whose idea was that? It certainly wasn’t our idea.
Metal Gear/Iceman – get off the the fence. We can NOT just “choose our own neighborhoods”; straight Whites are legally FORCED to accept any-one and anything that crawls in. And pay for the invasion, via confiscatory taxation. You can NOT HAVE “your own neighborhood” without segregation. And the force majuer to back it up. And some sub-moronic retardates – usually women, but the Yo Vinnies “I know a Good One” will do, in a pinch – will always f”eel sorry” for “them”, and miscegenate away.
No separation No PEACE – or Civilization, really.
There are a million Puerto Ricans in New York because of the stupid Spanish-American War when in disregard of the Constitution it was decided we had to have our own empire.
Ah yes, white people…
I mean, really, who has time to deal with nigger flash mobs and burning cities and illegitimate nigger tyrants when, *crosses himself*, THERE’S A FIGHT ABOUT THE CIVIL WAR GOING ON THE INTERNET ?!
In the distant future, the headstone for the collective grave of the white race might say – “They conquered the world and everything in it, but then one them said something another didn’t like.”
Sorry to digress, but that first video just gets me. Why is it that it’s always a black news reporter interviewing a white victim of black violence? Actually, I know, and it’s predictable and disgusting.
Chris,
I also think fighting about the War Between the States is a waste of time. No one will ever convince me though that the South wasn’t right to secede from the Union.
Quite honestly, I have nothing against Michigan or Pennsylvania. I would like to believe that the people who live there in the year 2011 can understand our racial predicament in the American South and why Jim Crow was necessary to maintain civilization here.
Detroit lies in ruin because of black people. Philadelphia is being destroyed by black people. Clearly, there is some common ground here. In an ideal world, we could work together to solve a mutual problem.
The purpose of the black reporter is to defuse the racial attack on Whites by putting blacks in a position of understanding and sympathy. It is BRA racial etiquette. The same is true of the questioning.
You’re right Chris. The Yankees need to stop attacking Southern whites who love their homeland, stop establishing and funding organizations like the NAACP/ACLU, stop “freedom riding”, stop electing nigger tyrants, and start defending their own burned out cities. That’s when we know their war against us will be over.