By Hunter Wallace
In 1930, when the Southern Agrarians at Vanderbilt published “I’ll Take My Stand,” 54 percent of the White farmers in Alabama were tenants who didn’t own their own land. At the time, there were more White sharecroppers than black sharecroppers.
They may have owned their own home and some acreage, but, they leased, or sharecropped the majority of the acreage they farmed. Would have made sense when markets were weak or down.
The New Deal broke the back of sharecropping and tenancy in Alabama in the 1930s by cutting checks to landowners through the AAA that allowed them to invest in tractors.
A fairly interesting topic I suppose, but I was hoping to read your perspective on a certain Republican frontrunner cheering on the physical removal of a fanatical negro at a campaign rally in your home state last night.
I know you’ve soured on Trump a bit because his economic policy is a bit too pro-White for your taste (yes, yes, I know your position… and I may be inclined to agree with it if we lived in Scandinavia), but that stuff last night is the most remarkable thing we’ve seen from a presidential candidate since George Wallace. And then he directly tied that guy to the niggers who broke up the Sanders rally, because… of course. The “dog whistle” is becoming more and more of an open call every day… I’ve yet to see anyone provide a compelling reason why a White man shouldn’t vote for Trump. We need you back on the train, Hunter!!
Sharecroppers probably had the dream most of the world’s fellaheen have and that is to get the hell off the farm. I’m from Midwestern farm country and I would say that most farm kids here wanted to farm and still have that itch. Though conversely farming these days is mostly operating equipment and that is a semi skilled occupation at best.
I had planned to mention that this evening.
As for Trump, I began to sour on him because he is so heavy on rhetoric and so light on specifics. It was interesting at first mainly because he had stirred up such outrage among the cuckservatives, but I am longer no longer convinced he really means much of what he says he is going to do.
– He is now adamantly opposed to Syrian refugees, but I saw him tell Sean Hannity that they should be let into the country. It’s true he quickly reversed himself, but that told me he is playing politics.
– In the third debate, he didn’t seem to know what he had said about Mark Zuckerberg and H-1Bs in his own immigration plan. Again, he was back on message the next day, but that was another clear sign he was playing politics in immigration.
– He’s said that all illegals should be deported, but that is not in his plan and he has repeatedly said that lots of them will be let back in.
– In his book, he made it clear that most of the outrageous things he says is just to court attention. It gives the media headlines and ratings. It gives him free publicity for his campaign. So it is not that he is opposed to PC so much as he is using the issue as a media strategy to promote himself.
– He complains about how big donors control the political system – because he is self financing his own campaign, and that gives him an edge over his rivals, not because he has any proposal to fix the problem.
– His plan for getting tough on China is literally to file a WTO complaint and label China a currency manipulator. There is no difference here from Romney’s position in 2012.
– The tax plan makes George W. Bush or Mitt Romney look like a populist and wasn’t remotely in substance what it had been promised on the campaign trail.
– Trump has said he has no problem with affirmative action.
– Yeah, Trump ejected a black activist in Birmingham yesterday, but that is meaningless. He worked with Al Sharpton in NYC for years.
– Trump is as pro-Israel as anyone else running and says in his book that we should continue to be the world’s policeman. Just that Japan and Germany and so on should pick up more of the tab.
Go read his new book. In substance, he is running a conventional Republican campaign except on entitlements, where he has a similar position to Huckabee, and immigration where he is positioning himself to the right of the field like Romney did in 2012.
Trump keeps upping the ante on race, 9/11, and immigration.
Ah, I see. You’ve departed the train for good.
You’re correct that he’s light on specifics. He’s a businessman whose position on a whole host of issues is heavily influenced by “advisers”–Jeff Sessions essentially wrote his immigration plan, for instance– and he clearly lacks the polish of some of his professional political rivals, which is why he occasionally contradicts himself or seems to not have a great grasp of the issues– what you have deemed “playing politics”.
It’s also true that he does nothing about the Israel problem (of course, neither does anyone else– Repub or Dem), and my guess is that he would find most of our opinions regarding the JQ rather repugnant. Undoubtedly, he is not some American Hitler who will will save the White race. I also believe his motivations for running are mostly selfish, and that he is a man who is more concerned about his own brand than ideology or the “American people.”
All that being said, unless you subscribe the the “it has to get worse for us before it gets better” school– a concept which I find to be rather defeatist and unrealistic– then Trump is still the obvious and only choice for anyone who prioritizes the interests of White Americans. He’s BUILDING HIS CAMPAIGN AROUND THE DEPORTATION OF NON-WHITES AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A WALL ON THE MEXICAN BORDER. He’s being relentlessly attacked for this by both leftists and cuckservatives on a near-daily basis. He says things like “when I’m President, everyone will be saying ‘Merry Christmas’, believe me”. He’s the only politician who publicly treats the “Black Lives Matter” movement like the contemptible charade that it is, attacking it at every turn, culminating in last night’s classic confrontation (something that you make light of, but something that no other Republican would ever have the guts to do. We’ve already seen how Jew Bernie and friends treat the issue).
And, critically, he’s proving wrong all the skeptics on our side (yourself included? I don’t remember) who uniformly said that he would only become more moderate over time and would therefore “let down” any of his pro-White supporters. Well, the opposite has happened– he seems to drift further to the right on an almost daily basis, to the point where we’re now seeing borderline cartoonish stories about official registries for Muslims and a govt-run “Deportation Force” (his words). At this point he’s only a few skips left of Mussolini.
Point is, he’s the White man’s candidate. An actual, non-Adelson-controlled White man’s candidate. Surely this can’t be argued, even if he’s too much of a “conventional Republican” for your taste, which seems to be the case based on what you said above. He deserves the support of any and all conscientious White men.
Hey, I kinda liked Gunga Din Jindal. LOL.
I agree with every criticism of Trump that Hunter listed. Shamefully he’s the best bet we have. It’s disheartening. It’s at least moving in the right direction. The rest…nothing. More destruction.
Being serious, Brad’s concerns about Trump are all valid. But, as I mentioned above, Trump keeps raising the ante on race, 9/11, immigration, trade, and numerous other issues.
When speaking in Birmingham the other day he brought up the dancing Israeli’s in a round about way, calling them celebrating Arabs, he’s done this before.
Trump tweeted Racial Reality crime stats. The FACT that he’s the only major figure anywhere citing this is really all I need to know. SCREW the financial crapola; if it’s not about Race – NOTHING else matters.
Have you read Trump’s new book, Crippled America? Go read the book and tell me what is different about Trump’s campaign:
– He wants to cut taxes like George W. Bush, John McCain, and Mitt Romney, and all his Republican rivals, except that he would go further than Jeb Bush.
– He is a free-trader like every other Republican running for president. He talks about the issue a lot more, but his solution is to file a WTO complaint and “label China a currency manipulator on Day One.” This is identical to what Mitt Romney planned to do in 2012.
– On entitlements, there isn’t much difference between Trump and Huckabee.
– On energy, build the Keystone pipeline, drill baby drill, and oppose Cap-and-Trade. The standard Republican position.
– On campaign finance, which Trump talks about all the time, he doesn’t propose any changes to the status quo.
– On crime, even FOX News is condemning Black Lives Matter as a hate group. There isn’t much difference between FOX and Trump. Mainstream Republicans from Nixon to George H.W Bush have a long history of using the crime issue. Rudy Giuliani was tough on crime.
– The real difference between Trump and the rest is on immigration, but hold your horses here. The same was true of Mitt Romney in 2012 who was tough on immigration until the day he won the Republican primary. Romney was for self deportation until the issue vanished in the general election.
Is Trump better than the other candidates?
Absolutely, but that is because he has positioned himself to the right on key issues like trade, crime, and immigration. I say positioned himself because all along he has left enough room to pull a Houdini/Romney and drop all of those positions should circumstances change.
Let’s wait to see what he does during the general election. Will he “pivot” to the middle like Mitt Romney tried to do in 2012
Trump is not a professional politician like most of them, so it’s hard to say what he actually is. He has no record of voting. He is helping to strengthen a pro white movement whether on purpose or not.
I remember when Reagan came in and I thought alright, now things will be different, the same thing when Gingrich and his group took over the house in 1995, but things didn’t change, not really. They used the power they got to pass trade deals like NAFTA, and get rid of banking laws. I believe that if recent history tells us anything, it’s that right wing movements can easily be taken over by people who don’t care about anything much except capital gains tax cuts.
This isn’t about firing air traffic controllers, it’s a fight for western civilization, ending immigration and refugee programs, and maybe doing something about ‘civil rights’. I’m hoping people can keep their eye on the ball.
Every four years we go through these cycles of hope. Last time around in 2012, we had a commentator who drove around Detroit to vote for Mitt Romney like 5 or 6 times.
Also keep in mind that usually the best ranked candidate in fall the year before the election collapse during the following spring. Hunter, comments on last topic are closed.
Thanks for the heads up. I don’t know why it keeps doing that.
Trump does it again.
Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump is calling out Hillary Clinton for supporting a protective border wall around Israel while also opposing a protective wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.
“It is clear that the former Senator from New York and former Secretary of State has had a change of heart when it comes to walls and securing borders,” Trump tells Breitbart News.
“She supported a wall for Israel when it was politically expedient,” he said. “Now, she is for open-borders and flooding the country with unvetted refugees from countries that are exporting terrorism.”
“It’s bad enough that she lied to the American people about Benghazi, but now she wants to pander to those who might jeopardize our very homeland security,” he said. “This is hypocrisy at the highest level.”
In 2004, then-Senator Clinton made some of the same arguments that advocates for border-walls use today. She just didn’t happen to be talking about the United States. She was talking about Israel.
Clinton co-sponsored a July 2004 resolution that “urges the United States to vote against any further United Nations action that could delay or prevent the construction of the security fence and to engage in a diplomatic campaign to persuade other countries to do the same.”