Confederate Citizenship

How dare you claim to be a distinct European ethnic group!


Brooks D. Simpson, a professional Ulysses S. Grant apologist and Kevin Levin doppelganger, is predictably horrified that White Southerners don’t want to be Yankees.

We stand accused of rejecting the 14th Amendment and inclining more toward the traditional European jus sanguinis definition of citizenship. There are still people in the American South who do not want to be part of the 21st century “Melting Pot.”

Brooks snorts:

“Yup, these folks. The ones who claim that southerners “are a people. Our ancestors came from Europe but we long ago ceased to be Europeans.“ In short, no blacks allowed. Sound familiar?

It should. These are folks who openly proclaim that …

“Southern nationalists … want to conserve a specific people and culture…. We can point to a specific population that is easily defined in terms of ethnicity and culture and say that the betterment of this nation of people is what we support.”

and …

“We are nearly the only group left in society who still defend the classical and common sense notion that inequality and human differences are natural and positive and that society should embrace these differences in a tradition of ordered liberty rather than socially-manipulated equality.”

Interesting that for all this talk about black Confederates supporting the CSA that these southern nationalists explicitly exclude African Americans from their definition of “southerner.”  Wonder what went wrong?

So at least now you know who supports the “flaggers” and that the head of the “flaggers” enjoys having their support.”

Jus soli citizenship is observed by less than 20 percent of the world’s countries. No country in the entire world is more welcoming to foreigners and takes a more liberal view of citizenship than the United States. That is why American citizenship is increasingly perceived as a worthless burden upon natives.

Some have probably noticed by now that we habitually use the term “African-Americans” on this website. I use that term to stress the fact that Negroes are “Americans,” 14th Amendment citizens of the United States, and that by abolishing slavery and seizing Negroes as contraband from Southern slaveowners, the United States has assumed eternal responsibility for their welfare.

So, Negroes can be “African-Americans,” but we would prefer to withdraw our claim to be “Americans,” and organize ourselves into a separate and autonomous White ethnostate called the “Republic of Dixie,” which would be constructed around a Serbian or Hungarian definition of citizenship.

White Southerners were already diverging in this direction in the 1850s. African-Americans were excluded from citizenship in every Confederate state. Southern ethnicity came to be defined negatively in opposition to the Yankee.

Paul Quigley writes:

“The Confederacy’s central government never formally codified a system of national citizenship. As was the case in the United States until the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution in 1868, the terms of citizenship for those born in the states that formed the Confederacy were left to the individual state governments. However, as in the antebellum United States, the Confederate government moved toward defining national citizenship by establishing a line between citizens and non-citizens on an incremental, piecemeal basis. This line was complicated by the presence of slaves, who were denied citizenship status, and who were subject to the authority of Confederate citizenship, as with U.S. citizenship, African-Americans functioned as internal “others” against which the white citizenry was defined.”

The Supreme Court had ruled in the Dred Scott decision in 1857 that the Negro wasn’t an American. Confederate commissioners lobbied the Border States to secede from the Union on the basis that the Republican Party supported miscegenation and racial equality. Alexander Stephens also made it perfectly clear that the Confederacy was the first government in the history of the world to be based on the principle of racial inequality:

“The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the “storm came and the wind blew.”

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. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.”

I believe that settles the matter: Negroes are “African-Americans,” the responsibility of the United States which armed them to destroy the Confederacy, a White Man’s Country, where they were never regarded as citizens. Upon the dissolution of the United States, “African-Americans” will remain the responsibility of Washington, which can resettle them somewhere else in its vast dominions.

Interview: My interview with SNN about Elizabeth Varon’s book Disunion is now available for download.

Note: Alexander Stephens and John C. Calhoun were right. African-Americans are failing to succeed in free society for biological reasons.

The great physical, philosophical, and moral truth that the Negro is not the equal of the White man can be seen almost 150 years later in “Freedom Failed: Birmingham’s Edge 12 Movie Theater Closes Early on Christmas Because 400 Black People Riot” and “Freedom Failed: National Guard Must Fight Black Crime In New Orleans” and “Freedom Failed: The Dictator of Benton Harbor” and “Freedom Failed: The Confessions of a Carpetbagger” and “Freedom Failed: Thunder Rolls into ABRA Detroit.”

About Hunter Wallace 12381 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent


  1. Stonelifter: You are right, there will always be a central government that has power. We had a fairly docile central government in the days before the expansion of the Commerce Commission shoved niggers down all of our throats from every direction. Back then the people’s only daily reminder that we had a central government was when the mail ran. That was tolerable.

    Sure, they were always good at pissing away tax dollars. Did we really need Post Offices and Federal Courthouses that resembled the Taj Mahal? No, but that was still tolerable.

    Then they started doing things that were good for us.

    They funded research that created vaccinations and cures for deadly and crippling diseases. Who could bitch about that? They helped coordinate crops so that we didn’t end up with everybody growing beets one year and corn the next. That was worthwhile, wasn’t it? Who would complain?

    Then they started doing things that didn’t seem to do much good for anyone.

    They subsidized spur lines to every little burg in the nation. They hijacked our industrial base and our men to fight WWl to save Europe from megalomaniacs who was less dangerous than the EU megalomaniacs who are calling the shots today. They harnessed our entire economy to a war machine to save Europe in the 1940’s from the mustachioed fellow that many Americans agreed with then and now.

    We may always have and need a central government, but it needs to be scaled down by transferring power to the states. Nowadays states, or consortiums of states and private companies, could replace most central government functions except national defense and even national defense can be scaled back to true national defense by putting our World Policeman uniform in our dusty old trunk right next to the Volstead Act and some other bad ideas.

    Electing politicians who support State’s Rights is a step in a sane direction.

    When each state is free to create and enforce it’s own laws citizens will naturally relocate to the places that suit their needs. People that love queers and hate guns can move to Massachusetts. People who hate queers and love guns can move to Texas.

    State’s rights will thereby establish a de facto racial and idealogical border down the middle of our union of states. Said union will be held together by a bond based upon shared needs and reciprocal trade agreements. Red Texas can trade oil for Blue Minnesota’s Taconite pellets.

    I recently heard a quote that applies here: If you think you’re too small to make a difference, then you’ve obviously never been in bed with a mosquito.

    It’s time to start buzzing about state’s rights. That is issue number one.

  2. What matters is preserving our racial and ethnic integrity. That means it is a question of numbers and time. Dixie can remain an English-speaking, Anglo-Celtic White nation while absorbing smaller populations of French Cajuns, Irish Catholics, Germans and so forth.

    We can absorb the occassional Italian, the occassional Pole, even the occassional Yankee without any real problems. What we must oppose is the sort of mass immigration of huge numbers of foreigners who come here for economic reasons, not to join our nation and become one people with us.

    France and Germany were not created in a day. It took centuries for those nations to gestate. It is no different in our case. Time, history, intermarriage, and critically control of our cultural institutions will make us one people.

  3. You can all finger-point and call people Yankees all you want. My great grandfather resided in Tennessee during the war. And he fought for the Union because he didn’t want to see his country torn apart by a bunch of politicians. Thats how he upheld his Southern heritage. Even though there were threats on his and his family’s life for years after the war. But he carried his Colt Navy with him everywhere he went. He didn’t give a good damn about people like you. He lived out his final days in the same town in Tennessee. Nobody every touched him.

    His grandfather fought at Cowpens with a North Carolina Regiment, his son fought in WWI, and my Grandfather served on a destroyer in the Pacific. Thats my Southern story. So you can take your gripes and finger-pointing and direct them toward someone else. I’m damn proud he fought for the Union because at the end of the day…looks like my family has never lost a war.

  4. There were people in East Tennessee who fought for the Union in the War Between the States. They were fighting for the abolition of slavery, black citizenship, negro equality, and racial miscegenation.

    Most Whites in West Tennessee and Central Tennessee fought for the Confederacy because they disagreed with those things. They didn’t want to be lorded over by Yankees and African-Americans.

  5. In the Republic of Dixie, the good White men of the Northern and Western states (people who would add strength and value to our society) will be invited to take the place of the Southern scalawags like Morris Dees and Howell Raines.

  6. Of course there were some in East Tennessee (mine) who fought for the South, too. Mostly middle class whites in Knoxville, a few counties around the Chattanooga area, and Sullivan county in upper East Tennessee. Not everyone was a deluded Unionist.

    The fighting in East Tennessee, like most border areas, was internecine and ruthless, more like a blood feud, and did not end until around 1869. Afterwards, the Yankee sympathizers made life so miserable for many of the true Southern patriots that they moved to Atlanta, spurring the growth of that city and its economic development.

    The brain drain caused East Tennessee to become a backwater and an eternal source of amusement for their Yankee countrymen. Yankees do love to mock “hillbillies”, even to this day. Larry the Cable Guy is not too far removed from being a white “Step-N-Fetchit.”

    Deo Vindice

  7. Simpson just banned me from his blog. He and his ilk cannot answer questions. All they do is make threats, and issue insults.

    I asked to to please epxlain why he thinks Negroes are so wonderful. He cannot do this. I pointed out why he cannot do this. And was banned, Oh well,

    I thought there was a shred of hope for him, since he allowed We Racists to post.

    There is no hope for him. His Jew Pals will feed him to the Nigras, as soon as he is no longer useful.

  8. John Maddox says:
    December 30, 2011 at 8:03 pm
    How many on this blog are familiar with The Southern Agrarians from Vanderbilt University who tried to start an Agrarian movement in the 1930s and published a series of pro south essays titled ‘ I’ll Take My Stand’?

    This is a link to it at Amazon:

    Yes, I am very familiar with the Southern Agrarians from Vanderbilt University as I earned a BA in history from Vanderbilt in 1984.

Comments are closed.