Jewish Social Chameleons

June 12, 2013 Hunter Wallace American South, Dixie, The Jewish Question 143

American South

I’m sharing this here with Lew because it touches upon what Richard Thornbourn was saying at The Occidental Observer about Southern Jews:

“Southern Jews became social chameleons, changing their colors so as to blend into the background. Evidence of this need to belong was everywhere. Traditional religious observance was often as low as intermarriage was high.”

Lots of Southern Jews privately supported the Civil Rights Movement, but the vast majority of them were not actively involved in pushing for it:

“Jews understood above all that the continued goodwill of white Gentiles could only be guaranteed through their uncritical acceptance of the southern caste system. Although most southern Jews sympathized with the incipient Civil Rights Movement, political realities compelled their silence. When the northern journalist John Gunther attended a social function in Natchez, Mississippi, shortly after the Second World War, he made the mistake of expressing sympathy for the plight of African Americans. In his words, “Several leading citizens almost broke blood vessels trying to exclaim that I must be a ‘Communist’ or ‘be influenced by Jews’ to hold such views.” Faced with this pervasive sense of suspicion, southern Jews were forced to watch their every word and action. According to an opinion poll conducted in 1959, southern Jews were considerably more supportive of civil rights initiatives than were white Gentiles. So successfully, however, had Jews concealed their true convictions that only 15 percent of Gentiles believed them to be in favor of integration; 67 percent confessed not to know how Jews felt.

Even in cities with a relatively progressive reputation, such as Dallas and Little Rock, Jews carefully avoided controversy. The same was true in Atlanta, arguably the most cosmopolitan city in the South. According to sociologist Solomon Sutker, Jews “were conspicuous by their lack of active political participation.”

The moral of the story is that omnipotent Jews do not exist: the behavior of Jews in any given society is determined in large part by the culture of their host society and its attitude toward Jews.

In places like the South where Whites were extremely racially conscious and militantly policed the color line with Klan bombings, Council boycotts, social ostracism, lynchings, and social disrepute, Jews may have disagreed with the status quo, but it wasn’t “good for the Jews” to challenge it, and self interest dictated that Jews blend in and avoid attracting attention to themselves.

Unlike the North, the South was a very homogeneous society. Dixie was overwhelmingly Protestant, the White population was overwhelmingly Anglo-Celtic, and the South was conservative and monolithic in its racial customs and militant about enforcing them.

In the early twentieth century, the North was ethnically and religiously in chaos. It was liberal in orientation and had civil rights laws dating back to Reconstruction. Racial consciousness was relatively weak there compared to the South. The North’s industrial economy also had Whites far more pitted against each other along class, ethnic, and religious lines than in the South.

Jews thrived in these huge urban ant heaps like New York City. In a place like rural Arkansas, which were the exact opposite of a “melting pot,” Jews much more easily fell under suspicion.

About Hunter Wallace 12380 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent

43 Comments

  1. The white republic was a horrible idea hundreds of years ago and so it remains. The white concept was only meaningful in the context of southern optimates living amongst coffles. Even then it was only a part of a complex vertical social order founded on negro labor. The juxtaposition of Anglican gentry with negro labor resulted in an environment where everyone, top, bottom and in-between knew their place and the requisite social obligations. Fixed moral and social order are intolerable to the Yankee leveller, those are however the bitter roots of conservatism as outlined by Kirk and the fruit is sweet.

  2. “The South was founded by normal, mainstream Anglicans.”

    Normal and mainstream as in “the broad way that leads to destruction” that “many walk thereon”?

    Anglicans are also “HIGH” churchians, versus “LOW church” plebs.

    Christianity can be a useful tool or weapon, but taken too far or taken too seriously, it becomes dangerous or destructive to the user, right? A tiny percentage of whites have been Quakers or Anabaptists, but their influence has been far out of proportion to their numbers even more so than Jews, which proves that Christianity (of a sort) can be a very powerful force for EVIL, more so than mere Talmudism “which can be controlled,” right?

    Christian revival is NOT the answer, after all. If a future Southron ethnostate is to be Christian at all, let it be officially Anglican, or Roman Catholic or something else normal and mainstream, secular and formally traditional.

  3. “Whites both north and south of the Line should have followed King Jesus instead of money, lust and pride, and both would have done what is right.”

    You obviously have nothing productive to offer except this sanctimonious bullshit.

    Like most yankees you assume you know more than you do about a people and a place than you actually do. Anyone with a passing familiarity with the South knows that the poor dirt farmers who made up the overwhelming majority of Southerners were very faithful Christians. Their descendants still are today, however misguided they may be by their pastors and other wolves in sheeps’ clothing.

    Your slander against these people is disgusting. They are the salt of the earth, you pissant. Go peddle your bullshit somewhere else, and try to remember this: Do not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

    Deo Vindice

  4. The only thing I think will work is to make Jews live among themselves. It they are a covert minority living among gentiles the temptation to game the system against the majority will be too great.

  5. The Pharisee and the Publican

    9And He also told this parable to some people who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and viewed others with contempt:10“Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector.11“The Pharisee stood and was praying this to himself: ‘God, I thank You that I am not like other people: swindlers, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector.12‘I fast twice a week; I pay tithes of all that I get.’13“But the tax collector, standing some distance away, was even unwilling to lift up his eyes to heaven, but was beating his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, the sinner!’14“I tell you, this man went to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted.”

    Deo Vindice

  6. “The white republic was a horrible idea hundreds of years ago and so it remains (…)only meaningful in the context of southern optimates living amongst coffles (…) part of a complex vertical social order founded on negro labor. The juxtaposition of Anglican gentry with negro labor resulted in an environment where everyone, top, bottom and in-between knew their place and the requisite social obligations. Fixed moral and social order are intolerable to the Yankee leveler….”

    No Man, you are the consummate interpreter of Hunter’s political philosophy.

    A “fixed moral and social order” is not intolerable to many slaves, who may even “adore and love it.” Of course, the Elite are also satisfied. But “it is the part of freemen to despise and resist it”!

    “Give me liberty or give me death!” The Babel Tower of multiracial caste elitism must be destroyed, levelled to the ground, once for all.

  7. If there had been a Union with Cuba or Jamaica or Barbados, I believe such a Union would have been far less damaging to the South than the Union with Yankees in Vermont, Massachusetts, and New York.

    That depends if such a union accepted mixed-race Cubans as White. That would be a disastrous degeneration of the Confederacy.

    As what happened with Confederates who immigrated to Latin America. The first and second generations maintained their insularity, but eventually they intermarried with the local mixed-race “whites.” I find this unacceptable.

    WNs have this formula that “White = good” and “non-White = bad.”

    Race and culture are both important.

    They believe that race is more important than culture.

    It is.

    As an Alabamian, I would rather have a Union with Mississippi and Georgia, states which share my culture, but which have large numbers of non-Whites, than a Union with Vermont and Maine, which don’t share my culture, but which are constantly agitating to destroy America.

    I find that a bit contradictory. You want to keep non-Whites in your state, yet don’t want to align yourself with Whites who want to destroy this country. How are they destroying it but with non-Whites, who you don’t mind having in your state anyway. Makes no sense.

  8. “the poor dirt farmers who made up the overwhelming majority of Southerners were very faithful Christians. Their descendants still are today, however misguided they may be by their pastors and other wolves in sheeps’ clothing.”

    I don’t doubt or contradict that fact. Why does the recommendation of Christian revival and faithfulness as the right solution for all these problems disturb you so much?

  9. Apuleius, that misapplication of the Pharisee and publican parable and other “all preachers are hypocrites” slanders will NOT succeed in silencing the fiery preaching that the corrupted white population above and below the Line needs to hear. If these were silenced, the stones would cry out.

  11. “I find that a bit contradictory. You want to keep non-Whites in your state, yet don’t want to align yourself with Whites who want to destroy this country. How are they destroying it but with non-Whites, who you don’t mind having in your state anyway. Makes no sense.”

    I agree it is illogical, and also wrong. Multiracial caste elitism will always be wrong, even if it is done over again in the “southern style” — though it might not be as evil as the current “northern” version, at first.

  13. Re: Mark

    1.) Cuba could have easily been absorbed into the South like Louisiana, Texas, and Florida.

    2.) Antebellum Cuba had a plantation based economy and Southern-style anti-miscegenation laws.

    3.) Massachusetts caused us 1000x more problems than Cuba.

    4.) The destruction of the Confederacy shows us what a White enemy is capable of doing to our civilization.

    5.) Sure it does.

    I believe a hostile and powerful White enemy is a greater threat and a less manageable problem than dealing with blacks.

    6.) If we had our own government, we could have dealt with the blacks and any problems they caused at our leisure, but because of the Union with the Northeast, we have the insane society that currently exists here.

  14. Use your intelligence and writing talent for good, not for evil, No Man.

    If only Servetus had taken that advice… Avoid his fate, Mosin.

  16. A “fixed moral and social order” is not intolerable to many slaves, who may even “adore and love it.” Of course, the Elite are also satisfied. But “it is the part of freemen to despise and resist it”!

    “Freedom” is a floating signifier without slavery. “The Elite” included all non-Indian, non-Negro men living in the South. It is the part of freemen to resist slavery, not mentally invalid Negroes that depended on private upkeep then, public assistance now. Freemen resisted slavery when they fought to prevent US-backed negro misrule. Now they, like you are tax-slaves for the nigger underclass.

  19. “If these were silenced, the stones would cry out.”

    Oh, so now you’re Jesus entering Jerusalem. I get it.

    And I thought you were channeling Henry Ward Beecher…

    Deo Vindice

  20. Would you order beheading or burning at the stake, or something worse, for uppity freemen as one of the chief Elite in your Elitist utopia? Are you pleased with the Global abuse of Syria, and do you hope that all the annoying “wacko dissident” fuss about wise and essential “national security” measures comes to an end in a few days? I think you are the best interpreter yet of Hunter’s vision on this blog, making it perfectly clear so that every reader can choose his side, for or against.

  21. Apuleius, by “If these were silenced, the stones would cry out” I referred to the silencing of faithful preachers.

    Jesus meant that the Truth will out, and cannot be erased anywhere forever.

    I noticed that you wrote about faithful southern Christians who are the salt of the earth as though you were an outside observer of their behaviour, not part of their community.

  22. @ Hunter

    Listening to Cubans or Puerto Ricans argue about race is like listening to the pot calling the kettle black. LOL. Remember those Catholic folks from Latino America have terms like mestizo, zambo, negerito, indino, and jibaro to classify race.

  23. You know my positions here have been pretty gosh darn consistent, Mosin. I haven’t said it in a good long time but I still support a cimonian (loose) alliance of a less fettered or better, un-fettered Dixie and the remnants of the USA against Islamic savages and Latin American leftists.

    What is happening in Syria does please me. I was just reading today how Hamas has opportunistically betrayed their old sponsor. Muslims destroying eachother is a very good thing. You, like Servetus are quick to defend the Muslims. You, like Servetus are neither Prot nor Catholic. This is a man you must admire.

  24. “those Catholic folks from Latino America have terms like mestizo, zambo, negerito, indino, and jibaro”

    Hunter, the old saying: “Be careful what you wish for, you might get it.” Suppose that the southern states do unite someday with Cuba, Jamaica et al, having no more contact with those evil white people north of the Line?

  25. I don’t defend Islam, nor do I defend Talmudism. I do not admire Servetus, and neither do I admire Calvin. The Spaniard Servetus was un-Biblical (and perhaps partly of Marrano heritage?) disputing the doctrine of the Trinity etc. Because we don’t consider ourselves either Protestant or Roman Catholic doesn’t mean that we deviate from orthodoxy (with the small “o”) — and you might even misidentify this as Protestantism.

    I agree that your comments have been consistent. I hope you will change your mind about several things.

  26. The annexation of Cuba would have been no different from the annexation of Florida and Texas.

    Pensacola, Mobile, Biloxi, New Orleans and other Gulf Coast cities were founded by the French and Spanish. There was hardly any difference between southern Louisiana and Cuba.

    The rest of the British West Indies would have been a little larger than Connecticut + effectively, a South Carolina in the Caribbean.

  28. “Pensacola, Mobile, Biloxi, New Orleans and other Gulf Coast cities were founded by the French and Spanish. There was hardly any difference between southern Louisiana and Cuba.”

    Hunter, you know the annexation of the Republic of West Florida is one of the great unknown tragedies of American history.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18418696

    Deo Vindice

  29. Very good, substantial comment on the Florida Republic, and I’ve always liked that Johnny Cash selection.

    Good night.

  30. “Remember those Catholic folks from Latino America have terms like mestizo, zambo, negerito, indino, and jibaro to classify race.”

    In Louisiana (nasty Catholic state) and much of the Old South, folks used some of the following classifications: creole, mulatto, quadroon, octaroon, terceron, mustee, mustafino, griffe, and sambo.

    I like those terms, but they have their limitations.
    There is no term for your wigger nephew Marc, for instance.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVL9W9aXI00

    Deo Vindice

  31. Here’s a voice from the past, telling we Evangelical Catholics why we have ‘erred and strayed’ in believing (as Martin Luther said) ‘the Jews and their lies’-

    “I am glad to commend Stephen Sizer’s ground-breaking critique of Christian Zionism. His comprehensive overview of its roots, its theological basis and its political consequences is very timely. I myself believe that Zionism, both political and Christian, is incompatible with biblical faith. Stephen’s book has helped to reinforce this conviction.” Revd John Stott, Rector Emeritus, All Soul’s, Langham Place, London, the principal framer of the Lausanne Covenant (1974) and founder of the Langham Partnership International.”
    – http://stephensizer.blogspot.com

  32. @Tamer

    ““Freedom” is a floating signifier without slavery.”

    I must object. “Freedom” can accurately be described as having the right to bear arms and the right to hold property in allodial title. There is no need for the existence of slavery as some necessary precondition.

    I’m sure that as a doctrinaire Hobbesian you hold that property may only be held in fee simple which acknowledges the primacy of the State.

  33. You acknowledge the primacy of the state when you pay property taxes, regardless of what’s in your gun closet. Someome needn’t be a doctrinaire Hobbesian, nor even a “realist” in this regard, it’s about acknowledging that one fears the consequences (imprisonment/potential death) of tax evasion.

    Rehearse death. To say this is to tell a person to rehearse his freedom. A person who has learned how to die has unlearned how to be a slave. He is above, or at any rate, beyond the reach of, all political powers. – Seneca

  34. ““Freedom” is a floating signifier without slavery.”

    I must object. “Freedom” can accurately be described as having the right to bear arms and the right to hold property in allodial title. There is no need for the existence of slavery as some necessary precondition.”

    Maybe you’re both right. The basis of the State, or any other political entity for that matter rests upon violence and the willingness to do violence on behalf of one’s own.

    Freedom is simply the condition whereby one retains this capability for violence.
    Slavery is the condition whereby one no longer possesses this capability for violence.

    This can easily be shown in the recent Lee Rigby incident and the British government response to it. From black flash mobs to the Zimmerman trial, we can see this dynamic at work. The darks are “allowed” the capacity for violence while the focus of the state is on thwarting this capacity among whites.

    Therefore, we can clearly see that blacks are “free” in Judeo-yankee BRA and its empire throughout the world, whereas the white tax slaves, whose economic effort sustains the empire, are not.

    “Free” South Africans exercising their freedom:
    http://afrikaner-genocide-achives.blogspot.com/2012/11/farm-murders-national-crisis.html

  37. Not-man/Tamer of Savages relishes good-old-time cinematic misogyny to balm his immasculated self-image.

  38. It completely makes sense to dissolve the grip of the ballooning despotism on the Potomac. What doesn’t make sense, is preserving the mistakes of our forefathers who kept slaves and were unable to resist having them set loose in our midst. We need an ethnically coherent Anglo-Celtic South. Peacefully or by violence we must be free, or we are doomed to perpetual predation and exploitation by aliens, be they Jewish porn peddlers, African rapists, or Shariah warlords.

  39. “or we are doomed to perpetual predation and exploitation by aliens, be they Jewish porn peddlers, African rapists, or Shariah warlords”

    in rapidly descending order of danger

    Talmudic porn peddlers, and you forgot Talmudic and allied warlords, lawyers and capitalists

  40. I think what makes the Vanguardist White Nationalists (Alex Linder) and David Duke style intellectual white nationalists different from both Hunter Wallace and I (both of which deny being white nationalists, I think I’m more serious than Hunter) is that we make distinctions between different groups of Jews. We both divide Jews by ideology. I also divide Jews by class, religiosity, type of Jewish background (say Russian Jew vs German Jew) etc. With the Vanguardists wing and David Duke wing, it’s ‘a jew is a jew is a jew.’

Comments are closed.