Sweet Land of Liberty

Thomas J. Sugrue's Sweet Land of Liberty
Thomas J. Sugrue’s Sweet Land of Liberty

American North

I bought this book on sale last month when I was in St. Louis.

It is about the forgotten history of the Civil Rights Movement in the Northern states. I’ve only read the first two chapters.

So far, I haven’t seen anything that contradicts my view of the origins of the Civil Rights Movement.

The existence of the Union is the only reason why the “Civil Rights Movement” triumphed in the South. There was a dramatic shift in White Northern racial attitudes during the Second World War.

It was the Second World War that provided fringe leftists in the Northern states with their historic opportunity to push their “civil rights” ideas into the mainstream:

“That they reached their success in the midst of the Second World War is no coincidence. Advocates of racial equality got a hearing – precisely because their rise coincided with the battle against fascism abroad.

The unexpected shift if the politics of race during World War II was not, as any good Depression-era leftist might have acknowledged in a reflective moment, wholly of the radicals’ own making. The secular and religious lefts forced Americans to confront the pressing and still unresolved question of racial inequality, but they had unwitting allies. The civil rights impulse had been deeply rooted in the American past, yet it came to the surface in America in one particular moment, the 1940s. And it did so because of a shift in national politics and a simultaneous grassroots struggle from below. The left aided and abetted both, but ultimately the interracial left came in from the margins and made its mark on American history because of good timing. Its leaders and activists alike vocally decried injustice when the world was convulsed in a battle against one of history’s most violent and racist regimes.”

Prior to the Second World War, White Northerners didn’t want to hear much about the blacks and their social problems.

The war against Hitler’s Germany reawakened the old crusading spirit of Radicalism in the North that had been unleashed on the Confederacy. White Northerners became more abstract and ideological and the ‘contradictions’ between their ‘American Creed’ and the circumstances of blacks emerged as a social problem.

Note: Much of the North was segregated in custom until the aftermath of the Second World War.

There were civil rights laws in every Northern state that banned segregation, but in practice these laws were often ignored. The Second World War forced the North to choose between its ideals and customs.

About Hunter Wallace 12367 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent


  1. Funny, you just wrote 400 words about the civil rights movement and not a single one begins with the letter J. But then again you’ve only read the first two chapters of that book so maybe the author will reveal the chief culprits later on. Hint: it’s not the damnyankees.

  2. Jews aren’t responsible for the Civil Rights Movement.

    The first “civil rights” bill in American history was the Civil Rights Act of 1866 which granted citizenship to blacks and repealed the North’s antebellum black codes. President Andrew Johnson vetoed it and opposed the 14th Amendment. He was impeached by the Radical Republicans in Congress.

    Massachusetts passed four or five “civil rights” laws between 1865 and 1870. Those laws soon spread in some form or another to every Northern state. The Northern states also repealed their anti-miscegenation laws before 1888.

    The Force Act of 1890, the precursor of the Voting Rights Act, was the last gasp of Reconstruction. Sen. Charles Sumner’s Civil Rights Act of 1875 was the precursor of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

    Throughout the early twentieth century, the Northern states passed all kinds of “civil rights” laws at the state level. Northern representatives in Congress also repeatedly pushed for a federal anti-lynching law during this period only to be blocked by Southern filibusters in the Senate.

    By the 1930s, many of these laws in the North were ignored in practice, but integration and racial equality was still the North’s ideal. The South’s racial ideal was segregation in both theory and practice.

  3. So then, ‘Civil Rights’ is not the original creation of the Talmudists or the Romanists, but of those White Anglo-Saxon, Anglo-Celtic and other Northwestern European PROTESTANTS who settled NORTH of the Line: the Damnyankees ? !

  4. ‘Jews aren’t responsible for the Civil Rights Movement.’

    Oh indeed not. It is nothing but Christianity, especially the Biblical kind, working out its salvation.

  5. Yes.

    It was the logical result of them acting on their universalist impulses and extending their abstract ideology of ‘liberty’ and ‘equality’ to ‘mankind’. The Black Republicans invented ‘civil rights’ during Reconstruction.

  6. But ‘Cavalier’-minded, ‘High Churchian’ white Protestants who didn’t take Christianity too seriously, and used slaves deliberately to create immense wealth, were not responsible for Civil Rights. But those mad Biblicists….

  7. Re: ‘It was the logical result of them acting on their universalist impulses and extending their abstract ideology of “liberty” and “equality” to “mankind”’:

    Could it not also have been the natural result of apostasing from the Faith, and falling under the ‘universalist’ spells of worldly sophists such as Spinoza?

  8. The Civil War was a contest over the development of the western US. Free soil whites were not sympathetic to the social program of the abolitionists, and the feeling was mutual (William Lloyd Garrison contemptuously described free soil as “white manism”. But the free soil whites strategically supported the abolitionists to assure their unhindered access to farmland in the west, and so the matter was settled.

    Devoting farmland to corn and wheat and the establishment of railroads made the industrialization of the Northeast possible. This created another problem for New England, however, the establishment of a huge, restive population of people not terribly receptive to their domination. The initial reaction was hostile- the Progressive program of top-down control. Prohibition was to keep drunken Germans and Irish under control, but it was an overreach that backfired. So in the 20’s they stopped immigration and with the Depression, decided to make a truce with the masses.

    Contempt and hatred for Germans, the Irish and southern and eastern Europeans, and enforced Americanization was replaced with an ideology of the brotherhood of man. This wasn’t intended to include blacks, but communists pushed strongly for it and with the Cold War, and the need to get non-white countries on the US side, it became the policy.

    About this time the non-elite white population had become too big, too affluent and too powerful to be tolerated, so New England shifted to blacks as their key clients, and began many policies hostile to non-elite whites.

    Northern whites and southern whites have little in common but they have the same enemy. Hostility and mistrust between the two groups serves the rulers well, and it should be overcome for the benefit of both.

  9. “The secular and religious lefts forced Americans to confront the pressing and still unresolved question of racial inequality, but they had unwitting allies.”

    Well, I was going to reference the Dzhooos, but Jeppo already did.
    Sorry, HW, but you’re wrong again.
    The importation of the Frankfurt School from Germany to the USA, the importation of the Bolshevik parties into areas such as the Iron Range up near Duluth starting in the 1920’s (remember those ‘white privilege kids’ with the horrfic self-hate messages written on their stupid, brainwashed faces, last year or so? This sort of crap’s straight out of that mindset), as well as organized Jewry organizing the Boycott against Germany starting IMMEDIATELY in 1933, and the amazing analysis of the Lindbergh 9/11 speech in Des Moines, that FLOODED the JEWS MEDIA, the very week he spoke, all indicate and confirm my premise, and the premise of Edgar J. Steele, who wrote (before they put him in prison) ‘It’s the Jews, Stupid.’

    Because you are, if you dont think they were behind EVERY EFFORT since 1933, to demonize Whites, and to elevate Negroes to be their shabbas goyim for world conquest, you’re the Stupid one. And they continue to dredge up utterly dated material and tie it to already discredited iconic figures like Lucky Lindy, merely to keep alive their perennail (Bullshirt) ‘victim status.’


    God, how I HATE and DESPISE the Dzhoos.

  10. Correct.

    In the Old South and the Confederacy, blacks were never citizens, and no one dreamed of making them citizens. Thus, there was never any real debate about the extent of their rights until after the War Between the States.

  11. There was much less intermarriage of Indians with ‘overly’ committed Christians in the northern colonies than with relatively less serious or nominal Christian whites elsewhere.

  12. Religion became less important in the North after the War Between the States. The North entered the Gilded Age and gradually forgot about the negro in an orgy of materialism.

  13. I think ultimate sources like Baruch Spinoza are more logical than the white Christianity of whites who settled north of the Line.

  14. If OD, LOS, CofCC are ever to succeed in ‘going mainstream’ they must at least ignore, if not make excuses for ‘They who must not be criticised’.

  15. Every form of ethnic Christianity does not practice or teach and is naturally opposed to universalism. The LACK of Christianity is the vacuum that drew in false forms and other ‘impulses’ such as ‘Civil Rights’.

  16. Re: ‘they did not create it. Most Northern states already had ‘civil rights’ laws by the 1880s’:

    You aren’t going back far enough in the chain of development and causation, and not considering that apostasy opens the way to delusion.

  17. Elections are happening tomorrow, and I’m very actively involved as usual. Shutting down for tonight.

  18. PP,

    Blaming all our troubles on the Jews is a not an honest or productive way of addressing our problems, Jeppo.

    Jews have been shitting all over you and your project lately. ADL put you on their terrorism list. Yet you censor Jeppo for pointing out the obvious? I don’t get it. Really, not that you’re under any obligation to explain it, but it makes no real sense.

    I’ve gotten to where I despise this fallacious formulation. What is the point of mentioning the notion of that some people supposedly blame ALL troubles on Jews if you’re not going to identify who does this and back it with citations which you didn’t?

    I’ve read Jeppo long enough to surmise he has nuanced views on the issues. Best part is, while giving no evidence that Jeppo or anyone else blames all troubles on Jews, you threw in it’s dishonest way to look at it, essentially accusing people of dishonesty.

    The problem here is that you’re reinforcing the enemy frame that criticism of Jews is unfounded intentionally or not.

    Sececession is a radical proposal. Maybe I’m missing something, but I don’t see how your conservative instincts square with pushing a radical agenda.

    Hunter, Jews weren’t solely responsible for civil rights. They were parties to it and in the top leadership pushing for it which I do believe you know, and probably much better than I do.

  19. Hunter is correct, the Jews didn’t start the civil rights movement. It was started by liberal Protestants in the middle 1800’s. The Jews didn’t come on board until the early 1900’s. See “Savage Ingratitude” by Ari Ben-Tzvi for the full story.

  20. Instead of redebating the role that the Jews have played in creating our present predicament, why not focus on the question: What is the most powerful and hostile group standing in the way of whites regaining control of our destiny and solving our collective problems?

  21. @Greg, I would argue the controlled media is our problem and has been the single most devastating power wielded by our enemies for the last 100 years.

  22. TJ, You made Dr. Johnson’s point with that comment. Certainly his suggestion that the discussion be reframed in that way he suggests is one good one. It’s forward rather than backward oriented.

    Dalton, I had a feeling you’d rise to the occasion with a misleading comment once again deflecting culpability from them.

  23. Lew, the problem is the argument is circular. Arguing that Western ethnic groups are legitimate and have divergent interests always leads confrontation with wealthy elite (and even ordinary) Jews trying to frame our interests as invalid and agitating to hold us down. You may not be interested in them, but they are interested in you (as Stalin said).


    I heard once, someone say something very important, which is partly due to our individualist nature, and partly due to our conditioning:

    For every 100 Western gentiles, there is one organization. For every Jew, 100 organizations. They network for dominance, and while we’re not paying attention, take everything we have. I hate to quote NSDAP propaganda, but if you pay attention to the statistics in the film Der Ewige Jude, they are not kidding about gentile Germans being elbowed out of white collar professions by aggressive tribesmen, particularly the lucrative ones.

    They dominate Hollywood and the mass media, since the invention of film, and that’s how our healthy and normal views came to dwell only in the shadows of the margins. Westerners have been conditioned from birth to adhere to universalist memes and to be blind to out-groups. We need to take our media back (or build up alternatives), or we will always be marginal, and we will always be the bad guys. We can’t even dent public opinion without mass reach.

  24. ‘Civil rights’ was a Yankee project that dates back to antebellum New England. Like temperance and women’s rights, ‘civil rights’ didn’t come to the forefront until abolition and black citizenship was achieved.

  25. Re: TJ

    I was only referring to the United States.

    The history of ‘civil rights’ in Britain, France, Spain, Germany, Canada and other countries varies wildly across time.

    In France, slavery was abolished and blacks became citizens after the French Revolution, but this was later undone by Napoleon. Slavery was definitively abolished again in France in 1848.

    In Britain, White racial attitudes softened in the early 19th century under the influence of evangelical Christianity, but hardened again in the late 19th century under the influence of Darwinism and the spread of the British Empire in Africa and Asia.

  26. That’s fine. I get your point. I’ve tried to add some of the background which is that it is an imported concept, which came from the usual suspects. Prior to the French Revolution you will be hard pressed to find any reference to “Civil Rights” as an expression or concept. It is defective Enlightenment era philosophy.

  27. Palmetto Patriot says: Blaming all our troubles on the Jews is a not an honest or productive way of addressing our problems, Jeppo.

    Lew says: Jews have been shitting all over you and your project lately. ADL put you on their terrorism list. Yet you censor Jeppo for pointing out the obvious? I don’t get it.

    Sam says: I don’t get it either, Lew. It’s puzzling.

    Greg Johnson says: Instead of redebating the role that the Jews have played in creating our present predicament, why not focus on the question: What is the most powerful and hostile group standing in the way of whites regaining control of our destiny and solving our collective problems?

    Sam says: Many people do not have the guts to answer that question honestly.

  28. Those who deny the Jewish role in the decline of the West often point out that there were many degenerate, anti-white tendencies in our societies before they were controlled by Jews. For example, in the 19th century many New England preachers and intellectuals were fervent abolitionists who brought about the slaughter of thousands of Southern whites in the name of “equality”. Many of these same New Englanders taught that the Indians were “noble savages” who should be greeted with open arms. In both cases the delusion of racial equality led to tragic results, as liberated blacks and Indians acted savagely against whites who were not prepared to defend themselves. These deluded egalitarians may be similar to modern day multiculturalists in some respects, but there is a very important point to note: despite the problems caused by 19th century egalitarians, they did not derail white Western civilization or seriously threaten its advancement. While some whites believed the myth of the noble savage, the myth was not strong enough to prevent whites from completely conquering the Indians and dominating the North American continent. While the abolitionist movement did bring about the destruction of Southern slavery, up until the mid-20th century American whites understood perfectly well that blacks are inferior, and enacted legal measures to prevent any mixture between the two races. 19th century gentile egalitarianism was destructive, but it did not ultimately do anything to threaten the survival of the white race either in Europe or the New World. This egalitarian ideology was not powerful enough to trick the majority of whites into accepting beliefs that clearly clashed with reality: once it became obvious to white pioneers that the Indians were indeed savages, they abandoned their false views, and once it became obvious that free blacks could not act like whites, blacks were officially made second class citizens. It was only after the Jews gained complete dominance of our culture in the 20th century that suicidal egalitarianism became widely and permanently accepted.

    Over the decades since the “civil rights” movement we have seen the failure of black rule in Detroit and every other major city where they have taken over, but the media and academia, because they are controlled by Jews, deny that black failure is due to racial differences. This official line of racial equality promoted by the Jews is so powerful that it suppresses the direct perception of reality. While in some cases white people will change their opinion on race after negative first-hand experience, it also often happens that whites will maintain liberal views even after personally being brutalized or witnessing the disintegration of their own communities. The Jew has an overwhelming power over our thoughts and feelings through the control of the media, and the false reality presented in movies and television blocks out the reality of our own experience and causes us to continue to support policies that are obviously causing us harm. Most whites wish to do what is best for their own communities, and will change their opinions if they are allowed to realize how destructive their current trajectory is. The truth is that blacks simply cannot function within our societies, but the Jews do not allow whites to recognize this truth. Utopianism–the false belief that human nature can be perfected in this life and that all men can live together in peace–has its natural appeal and has therefore cropped up throughout history, but in all cases its spread has been modest and short-lived because its tenets are clearly shown to be false as soon as they are put into action. We are living in what is likely the only period of history when Utopian ideals are held on to despite their hellish results, and this is due exclusively to Jewish control.

  29. Crazy destructive ideas get no where unless you have tons of money to throw at it and a critical mass of fanatics to promote it that’s where Jews come in. They have the brains the money and the demonic energy to push through these anti-White anti human schemes of theirs. That’s why it doesn’t matter what evil ideas Charles Sumner or Oliver Cromwell or Robespierre came up with it they all burned themselves out in less than a generation the natural racial anti-bodies kicked in and restored health to the body politic. Jews promote these political diseases and prevents any type of cure they not only injects sickness into our bloodstreams but like AIDS attacks our racial immune system.

  30. The New England Protestants (they were not Puritans by the time the liberal ideas seeped in via the European Enlightenment, Jacobinism, etc.) can’t be made the scapegoats for trends that happened only after mass immigration from Eastern and Southern Europe. And even later events, when a certain ethnic group (abetted by other recent immigrant stock) began to assert their influence, can’t be blamed on the then-scattered Puritan descendants who had mostly moved away from New England and settled Westward where they were not dominated by ‘intellectuals’ such as the Transcendentalists and that crowd which fostered abolitionism.

    The author of this book is a leftist who writes almost exclusively about race issues (from a politically correct perspective, needless to say) and I would guess his background to be of Ellis Island provenance, so he could not by any chance be biased could he? Actually I think he tries to cite WASPs via liberal Protestantism plus Gandhian ideas as the source of the Civil Rights movement, though the face of that movement was very Jewish. The ‘civil rights martyrs’ of the Freedom Rider movement were mostly Jewish (Schwerner and Goodman, for example). Abbie Hoffman wrote of his own experience as a paid agitator/freedom rider. So it won’t do to say that Jews had little involvement; they brag of it.

  31. Interesting points about how the universalists of yesterday did not derail civilization.

    Today they clearly have derailed civilization.

  32. We are living in what is likely the only period of history when Utopian ideals are held on to despite their hellish results, and this is due exclusively to Jewish control.

    Lew, are you listening?


  33. What is the most powerful and hostile group standing in the way of whites regaining control of our destiny and solving our collective problems?

    Jewish influence may well be the single most important factor, but that’s not saying as much as you might think because there is a multiplicity of factors at work. I said “Jewish influence” rather than “the Jews,” because the point is it’s really a question of values, beliefs, outlooks and so on more than it is, for instance, the brute fact of a Jew occupying the position of bank CEO (or what have you) rather than, say, a German or a Pole.

    To be sure, Jews originate a great deal of the views, policies and arguments that keep things headed in the current direction, and to be just as sure they do it because they are extremely resistant to the spread of pro-white ideas and the practice of pro-white politics. So another important question to ask is: why? What brought things to this impasse and what prevents the impasse being overcome?

    For the nazi set it’s very simple. What we’re seeing today is no more than the unfolding of a demonic plan two thousand years or more in the making. Even the very attempt at an analysis that runs deeper than this is considered to detract from the vital necessity of shining the spotlight squarely on the devil Jew.

  34. Jews promote these political diseases and prevents any type of cure they not only injects sickness into our bloodstreams but like AIDS attacks our racial immune system.

    A statement only an internet-based WN could make with a straight face. This “our” racial immune system business is part and parcel of the general WN rewriting of history in which relations between European groups in America were always completely hunky dory. Give it a few more years and the early 20th century in the WN telling will have been transformed into an idyllic time in which all the little Europeans would gaily skip to school singing songs of how wonderful it is to be white… until – cue horror music – the rascally Jew, his soul disfigured by the pain of racial envy, spread his tentacles across the fair land and began to squeeze for all he was worth.

    I’m not being overly dramatic here. Give a WN half a chance and that’s pretty much exactly how he’ll tell it. It’s almost as though he’s positively determined to make acceptance of the racial problems he cites and agreement with the solutions he proposes as humanly difficult as possible.

  35. Silver is on the right track here. Certain Jewish groups and individuals have influence, but contrary to the thesis held by many WN’s and knee-jerk anti-semites, they’re not that powerful in themselves. Reliable histories of Jew-Gentile interactions, such as Newman’s Jewish Influence On Christian Reform Movements”, show that they have to be patronized by the powers that be in a country or empire to gain any influence. If they were as powerful as some WN’s fantasizes them to be, they never would have been kicked out of England in 1290, Spain in 1492, and many other countries besides them. Nope, they’re only as powerful as we let them be.

  36. Typical Stephen Dalton. Deny, minimize, shift primary blame onto whites, all while smearing white nationalists as delusional just as the Jews themselves. With friends like you, well, everyone here knows the rest!

  37. It’s as if the Jews emit some kind of irresistible poison rays which rot our brains and turn us into zombies, making us willful or ignorant participants in their evil plans against us.

    If that or something like it is true what does it say about US?

  38. Read Melville, great writer, and another delusional WASP from NE. Him and others like him ran on parallel tracks with the emancipated jews who took their crank religion and made it a secular racket of “world healing.”

    The term “anti-white” sets borders if we do not have borders in the people sense then we have universalism and that might as well be produced by the jews since they are so good at it and basically they have that market cornered and have all the top floor offices.

    Little history lesson for the Confederates, when Whitaker was involved with some proto-Confederate groups in the early 90s their founders were basically wordists spewing the universalist clap trap. They literally banned speaking of “race.”

  39. Jews are not so much a conspiracy but merely raconteurs using Critical Theory to make a living being assholes and advancing their racket of “world healing” the interchangeable Blank Slate humanoids into better humans.

    Everyone here has taken a bite of that “world healing” apple, because it contains a little bit of truth, and we are dearly afraid of throwing it out because of that little bit of truth.

    So here we are in Big Momma Jew’s Day Care Center waiting for our sweet treats which we whites will not get unless we cheer for our genocide.

  40. Lew, if you believe the Jews are all that powerful, you are minimizing yourself and your beliefs. As for your claim that I’m shifting the blame 100% over to the white people, no I’m not. But, pray tell, who let the Jews into England after the Norman conquest? King William. Who kicked them out in 1290? King Edward I. Who let them back in? Cromwell. The historical pattern is clear. For the Jews to have any power or influence, they have to have the patronage of the powers that be in the countries they live in. All the money and craftiness that they have can’t do a damn thing for them if nobody wants them.

  41. Yeah, the worldwide democratic-Communist victory of 1945 meant that Jim Crow would soon come to the end. The South was slitting its own throat by being the most pro-war part of the country in 1940-41. Lindbergh spoke to massive crowds in NYC and Chicago-but there wasn’t a single America First Committee chapter in the South.

    A decade later, the South made a similar mistake when it failed to support Joe McCarthy:


    Few if any of the people targeted by McCarthy were friendly to the South. I think a handful may have been nominal segregationists.

  42. Stephen Dalton,

    You are so FOS. Since the day you landed here, a major theme with you has been minimizing or denying Jewish impact, blame-shifting onto whites and when challenged distorting WNist position, and peddling the most dishonest of Jewish talking points often verbatim.

  43. The obsession of (especially Internet-based) WN with the Jews, hating them and blaming them for all our problems hurts efforts to deal with real-world problems. It plays into the enemy’s caricature of us. Things like this are why we take strong measures at our LS demonstrations to stick to a consistent message. Imagine if we got a large group together to protest immigration and promote our identity, we were dressed well, on a consistent message and speaking in terms which the public could understand and sympathise…. and then someone pipes up in language similar to Fr. John on here about those devils the ‘Dzhoos’ who supposedly ‘were behind EVERY EFFORT since 1933, to demonize Whites’… and suddenly all our efforts would be wasted. All normal people at that point would want nothing to do with us. Language like this and the obsession with the Jews is an excellent way to ensure that we remain a marginal group.

Comments are closed.