Yesterday, the Alt-Right came to Charlottesville to defend Southern heritage.
It makes sense when you think about it. As Richard Spencer has repeatedly said, the Alt-Right is about identity. These Confederate monuments are expressions of Southern identity. They were erected by the sons and grandsons of the Confederate generation and were put in prominent public spaces in the South as a tribute to the sacrifices of our fathers in the War Between the States.
Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson are Southern heroes. 1 out of every 4 Southern White men died in the War Between the States. 1 out of every 3 were maimed or killed. The horrific toll of that war has no parallel in our history. It’s not like there are only Confederate monuments in the South. There are Union monuments in the North which were erected for the same reasons.
Those monuments were built as an act of love. They are about us, our identity and how we remember our ancestors. The people who want to destroy those monuments to our dead also want to destroy and replace us, their living descendants, and make life miserable here for future generations. It’s not about the Confederacy. The same communist logic will eventually be used to destroy Union monuments.
Abraham Lincoln was a racist and white supremacist. The American flag represents slavery, white supremacy and settler-colonialism just as much if not more so than the Confederate flag. The Union Army was full of racists and white supremacists. The whole conflict was provoked by the desire of the Republican Party to keep blacks out of the Western territories. But that’s history.
We see where this is going. That is the reason why there were Northerners in attendance at that vigil last night in Lee Park. This is about wiping all of us out – all of us for being White. This isn’t about history so much as it is about the modern day Mao Zedong’s and their Cultural Revolution. As I was watching the vigil last night, I was also following #WhitePeople which was trending on Twitter.
This cultural genocide isn’t going to end with monuments. It never does.
Note: The Alt-Right rally in Charlottesville last night was a vigil about defending Southern monuments. The message was you will not replace us. It was defensive.
The idea of pulling down historical monuments because they no longer represent a currently popular ideology is wrong. Even the old Soviet era monuments to Lenin and Stalin should be kept in place as a reminder of how things used to be. First they want to erase your past, they they will want to erase YOU.
Hunter you are 100% right. Either we stop Jewry now or it’s over.
“The Union Army was full of racists and white supremacists. The whole conflict was provoked by the desire of the Republican Party to keep blacks out of the Western territories.”
Whether or not that’s true, it’s irrelevant. The Confederacy fought to preserve Negro slavery. That’s the cause that the Confederate flag and the Confederate monuments represent. Insofar as Richard Spencer represents the alt-right, that’s what the alt-right represents.
Negroes are naturally disposed to be a race of slaves and servants, everyone knows that.
Please try to follow up this great demo with contacts to Southern students currently attending UVA Charlottesville.
These guys should be very receptive after they were viciously smeared by that Jewess writer for Rolling Stone Magazine that lied about Southern fraternities doing gang rape pledge initiations.
Here’s the UVA Frat Page
https://virginiaifc.com
The optics of the Alt Right Großer Zapfenstreich were amazing. Spencer has done some great work in 2017 converting our online momentum into open, out in the streets political activism in 2017. We need to continue with events like Auburn and Charlottesville and keep our momentum on the upswing.
There was a lot of wealth in the South that the North wanted to steal. Slavery was only an excuse for the theft. @Bonaccorsi
The Confederacy fought to preserve Negro slavery.
The South resisted an unprovoked and unconstitutional war of aggression. The Yankee invaders wanted to crush us economically and incite a slave insurrection. We fought to deal with the issue of slavery in our own way and in our own time, peacefully.
damn the lazy southron cavaliers to hell and back for bringing the niggers to ‘Murka in the first place. HW is right about the monuments, though. First the Jews and their ethnic henchmen destroy White history….and then the Whites. During the 1967 War in the Middle East, the Zionists burned and bulldozed the Palestinian archives in Jerusalem and in Lebanon. And now they say “Palestine”? What “Palestine”? (((They)))’ve got the same plans for us.
“damn the lazy southron cavaliers to hell and back for bringing the niggers to ‘Murka in the first place.”
They weren’t lazy. They were typical white louts, frat boys: Fuck everybody but me.
@John Bonaccorsi…
‘“The Union Army was full of racists and white supremacists. The whole conflict was provoked by the desire of the Republican Party to keep blacks out of the Western territories.”
Whether or not that’s true, it’s irrelevant. The Confederacy fought to preserve Negro slavery. That’s the cause that the Confederate flag and the Confederate monuments represent. Insofar as Richard Spencer represents the alt-right, that’s what the alt-right represents.
///////////////////////////////////////////////
John, defending Southern slavery is code for something else – defending the rights of Southern Whites on Southern Land to determine who will be allowed to come here and under what circumstance they stay.
Certainly, Southern slavery is one manifestation of our belief that no one in the world has the right to tread as equals on our land with us, lest they be our personal guest visiting on our social invitation.
These are the reason is why Mr. Spencer has to defend Southern slavery.
I defend it, too.
More importantly, in fact, God The Father and His Son, Jesus Chryst, all sanctioned slavery – anywhere.
And, on a side note – we still have the Northern form of slavery; one which parades as if it were not, but, feels free to enslave anyone in the world – via outsourcing and or importing immigrant niggers, of any stripe, it calls ‘free’, meanwhile rendering most Working Class Whites to niggers, as well.
All the best, your friend, Junius.
Slavery was incidental to the greater theft. It was then, it is now. @Bonaccorsi
@John Bonaccorsi…
History is on the side of slavery. If you condemn the South for slavery then you must condemn every nation/civilization/human that ever had anything to do with slavery….The North and all their theories are in the minority and they are actually even condemning God Himself because God in the pages of the Bible reveals that He does allow slavery and even has laws to regulate it…
Maryland and Kentucky were slave states, were they not? Yet they (at least nominally) remained in the Union. Lincoln was personally opposed to slavery but that was really a side issue. His primary goal was preserving the Union at all costs. Slavery would have been phased out by the 1880s anyway, because of technological advances in agricultural production and changing social attitudes.
I can’t believe Spence never points out that there is no historical evidence of a White man taking slaves from Africa by force. That is because White men bought slaves from Blacks, who enslaved other Blacks.
Time to stop playing defense and go on the offensive against the anti-Whites. We have to destroy their narrative.
“History is on the side of slavery. If you condemn the South for slavery then you must condemn every nation/civilization/human that ever had anything to do with slavery….The North and all their theories are in the minority and they are actually even condemning God Himself because God in the pages of the Bible reveals that He does allow slavery and even has laws to regulate it…”
Fine–if that’s your position, say it. Advise Richard Spencer to say it. Advise Southern Nationalists to quit invoking “heritage” and all their other evasions. Advise them simply to say it: “We fought for slavery. We thought it a good cause. We still think it that.”
“Maryland and Kentucky were slave states, were they not? Yet they (at least nominally) remained in the Union.”
Correct. They didn’t fight for slavery. The Confederacy did. So, what?
You know we have to agree to disagree on this one, Junius–but you know, too, that I always wish you all the best as well, friend.
@ John Bonaccorsi
John, negro slavery is the Jews’ propaganda piece for The Civil War.
Except for his earliest work, Mullins did all of his research at The Library of Congress until (((Senator Herbert H. Lehman))) of New York had him permanently banned. What many fail to understand is The Brotherhood of Darkness rules the world. Those cancerous secret societies that have crept into every crevice of humanity, the handiwork of the biblical Canaanites aka Phoenicians, Venetians, Khazars and everything in between.
“The tragic Civil War which the Canaanites planned and executed against the people of Shem in the Southern states actually began in 1859, with the invasion of the South by the homicidal maniac, John Brown. The abolitionists had already spent millions of dollars to promote slave rebellions in the South, but this expensive propaganda had very little effect. As Day and other observers had reported, the slaves were leading very comfortable lives. After this tactic failed, it became obvious to the conspirators that an actual military invasion was the only solution to their campaign. The merchant bankers of New England, who were directly controlled by the Rothschilds, were now instructed to finance a military attack against the South. Their instrumentality was the already well-known terrorist, John Brown. He was financed by a group famed as “the Secret Six,” which was composed of “Thomas Wentworth Higginson, Rev. Theodore Parker, Dr. Samuel Gridley Howe (married to Julia Ward, from a wealthy banking family who later wrote “Battle Hymn of the
Republic”), Franklin Benjamin Sanborn, George Luther Stearns, and Gerrit Smith. Smith had been John Brown’s first financial angel.”
(c) 1987 The Curse of Canaan, Eustace Mullins, Page 98
“In order to arouse provocation for the Fort Sumter attack, Lincoln now dispatched heavy reinforcements to the fort. Even his Secretary of War, Seward, objected to his move, suggesting instead that Fort Sumter be yielded peacefully to the state of South Carolina. Lincoln himself was eagerly anticipating the approaching bloodbath and would hear of no compromise. He is known to have suffered from hereditary insanity, which did not come from the Lincoln family, for they were not his actual forebears. His mother, Nancy Hanks, being homeless, had been taken in as a charitable act by the Enloe family; she was thrown out by Mrs. Enloe after she had become pregnant by Abraham Enloe. Ward H. Lame, Lincoln’s law partner, later wrote a biography of Lincoln stating that Lincoln was of illegal parentage, and referring to his real father as Abraham Enloe. The Yorkville Enquirer, April 8, 1863, noted that Lincoln’s mother, Nancy Hanks, was “a single woman of low degree [Canaan means ‘low’. Ed.] … generally reputed to have from one-eighth
to one-sixteenth Negro blood in her veins, and who always associated with Negroes on terms of equality.” The Atlanta Intelligencer in 1863 noted of his vice president, Hannibal Hamlin, who had been named after the historic leader of the Canaanite forces of Carthage, Hannibal, that Hamlin was identified by State Senator Hon. John Burham, of Hancock County, Maine, who lived in the area and knew of Hamlin’s ancestry. The Senator reported that Hamlin’s great grandfather was a mulatto who had married a Canadian woman; his grandfather during the Revolutionary War commanded a company composed only of mulattoes, Negroes, and Indians under Generals Sullivan and Green. This Captain Hamlin is recorded as having embezzled the funds sent to pay his troops; he also was said to have stolen wine and other supplies. The father of Hannibal Hamlin’s father lived in Paris, Maine, and had a brother named Africa. When Hannibal Hamlin was born, one of his uncles peered into his cradle and exclaimed, “For God’s sake, how long will this damned black blood remain in our family?”
In Louisiana, John Slidell, who was also a New Yorker, was the leader of the state’s secessionist party; his second in command was one Judah P. Benjamin. Slidell was the Masonic protege of the Grand Master, Edward Livingston, also of New York, a key member of the Aaron Burr treason apparat. Benjamin, from the West Indies, was a British subject. He was hired as a law clerk by Slidell. He later became the Secretary of State in the Confederate Government. After the Civil War, he was permitted to leave the United States without hindrance, and he lived his later years in splendid luxury as one of the highest paid Queen’s Counsels in London, while his former superior, Jefferson Davis, languished in a federal prison, burdened with heavy chains.
In Texas, the secessionist conspirators were blocked for a time by Sam Houston, a Virginian who was the founder of Texas. Houston ruled that the secessionist efforts were illegal. The conspirators then succeeded in deposing Governor Houston by a “rump” election, which was similar to the tactics which the Cromwellians had used to condemn King Charles I in England. The conspirators then claimed that their secessionist delegates had received 40,000 votes, as compared to only 10,000 for Houston’s supporters. This was later cited as the “popular” support for the “insurrection,” as the action taken by the Southern states was later termed.
The Confederacy was officially established at Montgomery, Alabama, chaired by Scottish Rite Supreme Commander Howell Cobb. He was ably assisted by Scottish Rite backers from the Charleston Mother Lodge and representatives from other Masonic groups.Thus the American people were maneuvered into a Civil War which they neither envisioned nor desired. They were manipulated by Masonic Canaanite conspirators working together in the Northern and the Southern states. The resulting bloodbath proved to be the greatest disaster ever suffered by the people of Shem. The great civilization which they had spent some two hundred years building in this land was now swept away, “Gone with the Wind”; the Constitution which they had written to protect their existence as the people of Shem was scrapped, being replaced by “Amendments” which reduced them to the status of serfs, while giving the Canaanites total power to set up a tyrannical dictatorship.”
(c) 1987 The Curse of Canaan, Eustace Mullins, Pages 101-102
No matter how you view Farrakhan, the book is based upon the writings of many Jews:
http://noirg.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/TSR.HighlightsKeyPoints1.pdf
The book is sometimes available online in PDF, if you can find it.
You know that whenever a book is (((attacked))), and this one sure was, it has to peak your interest as to why (((they))) always do their best to remove things from circulation.
@John Bonaccorsi…
Fine–if that’s your position, say it. Advise Richard Spencer to say it. Advise Southern Nationalists to quit invoking “heritage” and all their other evasions. Advise them simply to say it: “We fought for slavery. We thought it a good cause. We still think it that.”
———————————————-
Slavery was one of the reasons that the states seceded — the Cotton states much more so than the northern tier that came out after the firing on Ft. Sumter. However the actual beginning of the war itself was caused by two potential combatants who just could not separate in a polite manner. The secretary of state (USA) was telling the South privately that Sumter would be evacuated while Lincoln had developed a different plan…in the end of this tense period the South fired on Sumter and Lincoln made a call for 75,000 volunteers to subdue the South and preserve the Union and other states joined the Confederacy soon after. I checked in all the Congressional Records I could in the few months around this period of Ft Sumter and there was no mention of slavery, there was a mention of states rights and preserving the union but slavery was not being discussed, in fact there was some enticement to bring the states back into the Union by guaranteeing slavery in these states would never be abolished. Slavery actually did not get into the war effort until at least a year after the war started and eventually resulted in the EP which was only to affect the Southern states in rebellion. (Lincoln was really trying to help the North’s war effort more than anything else.)
But the guilt of slavery is still being forced on the South as if they invented slavery and they must suffer all the punishment of all the evils done in the context of slavery and these self appointed priests of abolition today contend that the South was the one not complying with tradition and enforcing that status quo of abolition. No, it was abolition that was the new kid on the block and not slavery. History is on the side of slavery, the Bible allows slavery, it was the abolitionists who were the ones rocking the boat and fomenting all the friction between the North and South. The South was continuing the historically acceptable practice of slavery.
Notice the way Abraham Lincoln greeted Harriet Beecher Stowe, the sister of one these rabid abolitionists (Henry Ward Beecher) who is associated with “Beecher Bibles” (Sharps rifles used to shoot pro-slavery people in the territories.) HBS had written an inflammatory novel “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” which outraged the South because of how exaggerated it was in the mistreatment of black slaves — she had never even visited a plantation in the deep South but the North believed it. Here is how Lincoln greeted her November of 1862:, “So you are the little woman who wrote the book that started this great war.”
It is the same old usual fanatics, the Northern busy-bodies who can’t leave other people alone and want to slander someone/make a false accusation just to start a fight. I guess you must live around those nuts and know exactly what I am talking about.
If the North wants to claim it was all over slavery then let them examine both sides of the issue and take half the blame and say it was their radical sjw busybody sectional hostility provoking nuts who were constantly attacking the South over the historically accepted practice of slavery.
Then both regions can share the blame for fighting over this issue…but there were other reasons besides slavery for secession which cannot and should not be ignored.
80% of the slaves from Africa were sent to Brazil, not the US. And they didn’t abolish slavery until 1881. So all you shitlibs who have a problem with slavery should go down there and lecture them about it.
@spahnranch1969
” So all you shitlibs who have a problem with slavery should go down there and lecture them about it.”
They’d be shot on sight. The rest if the world doesn’t believe their nonsense. That’s why they don’t go to China or Japan, either.
“80% of the slaves from Africa were sent to Brazil, not the US. And they didn’t abolish slavery until 1881. So all you shitlibs who have a problem with slavery should go down there and lecture them about it.”
Oh, shut up, chowderhead. “spahnranch1969”–ooh, scary. I’ve forgotten more details of the Manson crimes than you’ll ever know. “You shitlibs”–your tired vulgarisms epitomize Southron political effectiveness, which is to say, the lack thereof. If you had any fucking brains, you’d realize I’m trying to do you boys a favor, trying to wake you up to the basic fact that your century-and-a-half of dissembling and evasion do not look as if they’re going to start working for you, at last, anytime soon. Get your heads out of your asses.
“does not”
Thanks for you concern trolling, John Bonaccorsi from SPLC.
John Bonaccorsi, I don’t care what we fought for. we fought the good fight, It happened and is real history. Trying to erase history or change it to fit the PC narrative will only work with those who hate the south and never with the people of the south who’s ancestor’s fought for the confederacy. It just make you appear anti-southern and really, just look like sore-winners… We in the south just don’t give a damn what you think, don’t like it? Stay up in Yankeeland.Your kind of overbearing attitude is why we Really fought you to start with….
Buonocoursi is the kind of fellow who makes the rest of us Yankees look bad. I’ll bet he doesn’t even have the Stars and Bars waving from the tiny front yard of his Philadelphia row-house.
@juniusdaniel1828
If the fight had been over wagon wheels, it wouldn’t have mattered. The New Englanders thought that they had supra rights and authority in the Union® and that the rest of America®, including the other Northern states, were bound to respect and obey them, or else. They still do. Unfortunately, this attitude trickled down to folks way out (from New England) in places like Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, etc. Simple fact, slavery was legal. Like it or not. If a man wanted to take his wagon, his mules and his niggers to Kansas, then he damn well could. Some people think the death penalty is immoral, too. But it’s legal. What’s legal, isn’t always moral. What’s moral, isn’t legal. But it’s the law. Whatever spoiled, angry, entitled Massholes think.
Spenser is a real pro-White leader. No more apologizing for being White! Every race on the planet held slaves but our race is the only one that abolished the practice. Yet, anti-Whites expect our race to do never ending atonement for it through Diversity. Screw those bastards! I’m proud to be White.
Diversity means #ChasingDownWhites.
Great piece Mr. Wallace. It is totally correct to state that the attack on Confederate monuments will accelerate into an attack on all white monuments in America -including those to George Washington and the Founding Fathers. I put up a piece about that concept on my blog on Friday in an attempt to jar American patriot types awake to what is happening, entitled “When Dixie Goes, So Do The Founders”. https://putnamlibertynotes.wordpress.com/2017/05/12/when-dixie-goes-so-do-the-founding-fathers/
“The Confederacy fought to preserve Negro slavery.
John,
The North fought to defend the Morrill tariff. Lincoln never gave a damn about slavery until he decided it could be used for propaganda purposes.
Correct, Mr. Putnam. Anti-Whites know that a people with no past has no future. All the old White guys must go!
@John Bonaccorsi…
‘You know we have to agree to disagree on this one, Junius–but you know, too, that I always wish you all the best as well, friend.’
Thank you, John, for your civil reply. I respect your manners, and we’ll leave it at that.
All the best on this beautiful Spring Monday!
@Snowhitey…
‘The Confederacy was officially established at Montgomery, Alabama, chaired by Scottish Rite Supreme Commander Howell Cobb. He was ably assisted by Scottish Rite backers from the Charleston Mother Lodge and representatives from other Masonic groups.Thus the American people were maneuvered into a Civil War which they neither envisioned nor desired. They were manipulated by Masonic Canaanite conspirators working together in the Northern and the Southern states. ‘
//////////////////////////////////////////////
Snow, while I respect you’re having quoted from Eustace Mullins – I can assure you that Southerners fought that war for our own reasons.
The notion the The Masons (Jewish dupes) were the smoking gun may be tantalizing, in order to sell books in 2017, but, it’s so far-fetched from reality, as to make me wonder why I am even typing.
Yes, Southerners can be influencet, and yes, Southerners do not get everything right, but, the notion that we are a bunch of unconscious sheep, endlessly being led by the nose, without a thought as to our own interests, is a bit much.
@James Owen…
‘If the fight had been over wagon wheels, it wouldn’t have mattered. The New Englanders thought that they had supra rights and authority in the Union® and that the rest of America®, including the other Northern states, were bound to respect and obey them, or else. They still do. Unfortunately, this attitude trickled down to folks way out (from New England) in places like Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, etc. Simple fact, slavery was legal. Like it or not. If a man wanted to take his wagon, his mules and his niggers to Kansas, then he damn well could. Some people think the death penalty is immoral, too. But it’s legal. What’s legal, isn’t always moral. What’s moral, isn’t legal. But it’s the law. Whatever spoiled, angry, entitled Massholes think.’
////////////////////////////////////////////////
As usual, Mr. Owen, I entirely agree with you.
Shelby Foote described that war as a competition born of the outgrowth of a competition between two civilizations.
I certainly believe as you do that Federalists, and, in general, the New England Establishment, was amblin’ for a fight with us; and that they had been in that direction for decades previous.
I do entirely agree with you that the war, below the surface, had nothing to do with Slavery or the law, but, was solely about ‘Massholes’ telling us that THEY would maintain the final veto over any aspect of Southern life.
If it were not so, then why would there be so many examples of this – from integration, prayer in school, abortion, gay marriage, transgender accomodations, and on and on.
I also entirely agree with you that ‘the law’ has nothing to do with what is right, or, more specifically, what is good for the Southern White Race. In fact, the law is a construct of the Jew England Government as a kind of psychick barbed wire around The South.
As I often end in reply to you, I can only say this – I am every day engaged in the political and cultural fights for our survival, and the moment my fellow Southerners are willing to take to something else, I will be ready for that, too.
All the best, Junius!
@SpahnRanch…
‘Buonocoursi is the kind of fellow who makes the rest of us Yankees look bad. I’ll bet he doesn’t even have the Stars and Bars waving from the tiny front yard of his Philadelphia row-house.’
Spahn – the wife I spent a 12 year exile up in New England, and John’s opinions are what practically every one, up yonder, thinks.
That you are an exception to this, I do appreciate. Maybe you ought think about moving down here with us?
@More of The Same…
‘Spenser is a real pro-White leader. ‘
Yes, and, I think, he is a harbinger of what is soon to come.
Resistance is mandatory. We will not be assimilated!
Cousins, explain to me exactly why @John Bonaccorsi is here anyway? I don’t think he’s an ADL/SPLC plant but his bizarre obsession with trying to claim to be PRO-WHITE and hating upon our historic symbols and culture bothers me to no end. Speaking as a common man John, wouldn’t you be much happier with Alex Linder or somewhere else? I understand what you say and I partially agree with you, it would have been better in some ways had we never brought Negroes here, HOWEVER you are missing the point.
John, we live in an air-conditioned world where Gatorade and Powerade are available to us and asthma medication is available. In the 1700’s and 1800’s, the average white man had only water and hopefully an occasional breeze. Living in the pre- air conditioned tropical hell of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Florida, Louisiana, and Texas was incredibly hard on the White man’s body, especially in a time in which we didnt have Gatorade, Powerade, air conditioning and medications. Thus Negro labor was not only preferrable, it was necessary. Over the generations, poor Southern whites evolved and occasional mixed their blood with Native Americans who had long since adapted to the hellish climate and your typical Cracker was born. The Cracker had a high heat tolerance, almost as high as the Negro. Still if he had fair skin he would sicken from sunstroke, so he had to be careful as well.
Slavery was not only RIGHT it was economically NECESSARY. Now had we had innovations such as air conditioning, asthma medications, Gatorade. and heavy machinery in 1700 we wouldn’t have needed the slaves. Unfortunately these inventions took until the 1950’s to arrive. GET SOME PERSPECTIVE
John Bonaccorsi, Philadelphia
MAY 14, 2017 AT 7:43 PM
Whether or not that’s true, it’s irrelevant. The Confederacy fought to preserve Negro slavery. That’s the cause that the Confederate flag and the Confederate monuments represent. Insofar as Richard Spencer represents the alt-right, that’s what the alt-right represents.
John
May I ask you a question? Why is it you have a problem with all things Southern yet you post here? Slavery was unfortunate TRUE, but it was necessary economically and also because WE LACKED THE TECHNOLOGY. Cotton harvesting was almost all done by hand until after WWII. Although it is true the upper South could have freed all her slaves, MD, VA. NC, KY, TN, MO, AR and economically survived, not to mention the two YANKEE Slave States Delaware and New Jersey which still had slavery until the 13th Amendment the Cotton Confederacy could NOT.
Cotton and in the case of LA and FL Sugarcane are very labor intensive and both need a great deal of handwork. Not to mention fruit and vegetable harvesting. Effective cotton pickers didn’t come into existence until the 1950’s, Fruits and vegetables still must be picked and sugarcane still needs to be chopped. There is simply no way around this. Whites couldn’t live in these climates when they were rife with Yellow Fever, Malaria and heat exhaustion. Over time Southern whites evolved to tolerate the heat but 250 years ago, more white people died in Dixie than were born because of the heat. Knowing this explain to me exactly what the South could have done without slavery?
Another thing, the entire United States exists because of slavery. Without slavery we would have developed slow like Australia/Canada and by the time our colonies would have become economically strong enough to rebel against Great Britain, which it would have taken without slavery until likely the 1870’s to become a wealthy colony, by that time Britain had modern weapons and would have slaughtered us. Slavery allowed the economy to become rich early enough in a time period when rebellion was much easier to do.
Get some perspective
@juniusdaniel1828
If the fight had been over wagon wheels, it wouldn’t have mattered. The New Englanders thought that they had supra rights and authority in the Union® and that the rest of America®, including the other Northern states, were bound to respect and obey them, or else. They still do. Unfortunately, this attitude trickled down to folks way out (from New England) in places like Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, etc. Simple fact, slavery was legal. Like it or not. If a man wanted to take his wagon, his mules and his niggers to Kansas, then he damn well could. Some people think the death penalty is immoral, too. But it’s legal. What’s legal, isn’t always moral. What’s moral, isn’t legal. But it’s the law. Whatever spoiled, angry, entitled Massholes think.
James
The idea that Slavery could be regulated wasn’t a Yankee idea, it was a Jeffersonian one that was entirely wrong. Thomas Jefferson got it in his mind in 1784 that slavery was the wheelhouse of Congress and that Congress could regulate it. Long before anyone stepped foot in the Northwest Territory, Jefferson decided with his Northwest Ordinance of 1787 that Slavery would be illegal there. Of course if you read the document he calls them PERSONS. His good friend James Madison also when writing the Constitution used the word PERSONS. Now under the Common Law which Jefferson considered himself knowledgeable PERSONS who are naturalized in your nation or who are born there are in effect citizens. This one word was the source of all the trouble. Although Jefferson did change his beliefs on the subject later in life, the damage was already done. One cannot under the Common Law be both PERSON and SLAVE.
I need not go into the Missouri Compromise or Kansas-Nebraska which was an effort to correct a previous wrong. The Dred Scott Decision attempted to right the wrong, but the problem Taney faced was that although he could in theory find the Missouri Compromise Unconstitutional and correct the error of Jefferson and Madison, calling slaves SLAVES instead of PERSONS, he couldn’t reverse statutes such as the Northwest Ordinance or Negro State Citizenship as both existed before the US Supreme Court was established by the US Constitution. Thus when Judge Curtis and Judge McLean dissented, stating that Negroes were counted as citizens and could vote at the time of the Constitution’s ratification, they were also right. In theory no state established after 1789 could in theory declare Negroes equal citizens with Whites, however those preexisting before 1789 could. Thus under their original laws, MASS, RI, VT, NH and ME which existed as part of Massachusetts in 1789 could allow Negroes to be equal citizens, and New York could allow them in theory partial citizenship which their laws did.
Thomas Jefferson and James Madison did have a misunderstanding of citizenship as their understanding inherited from Great Britain devolved from the idea of Free-Born men and Serfs. Thus anyone born free, was a citizen and anyone born a Serf or slave remained so unless officially freed. Thus in theory under the Common Law a free born Negro=free born White. Neither Jefferson nor Madison believed this, but their terminology used at the time was broad enough that any corrupt lawyer worth his salt could exploit it.
The Yankee ideas of which you speak were communicated and spread via the school textbooks, universities and in the urban centers. They are like Jews an essentially urban people who networked and intermarried with one another. The South was an abject failure in the way of understanding communication. From the early days of the Republic, Virginia and South Carolina were just fine leaving the book publishing enterprises to Boston, not realizing until too late he who controls the flow of information makes things happen. There were still sending their sons to the Ivy League in 1861 never once questioning the propriety of doing this nor did they question the propriety of employing Yankee tutors.
Think about this. In Cincinnati he owned dry goods stores and slaughterhouses and sold to the Southern planters, in Saint Louis he was a fur trader, in Milwaukee a knife grinder or a banker, he traveled every back road in the North and the South selling fine knives and gold watches. In Texas he was the tenderfoot who likely ran a store or post office. In New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, Northern California he was selling tools to the miners and in Washington he likely ran a lumber camp. Always establishing towns, buying railroad right of ways, that was him. Almost never working the land.
Orry Main described the Yankee so to George Hazard in NORTH AND SOUTH
A Yankees always ready to invent some new thingamajig or outwit his neighbor in court. He’s a pert sort who wants to sell you jacknives and tinware but what he likes best is skinning you.
Does anyone know what the Commander of the Sons of Confederate Veterans receives in the way of salary and benefits? His name is Thomas Stain, I believe.
“If the fight had been over wagon wheels, it wouldn’t have mattered. The New Englanders thought that they had supra rights and authority in the Union® and that the rest of America®, including the other Northern states, were bound to respect and obey them, or else. They still do. Unfortunately, this attitude trickled down to folks way out (from New England) in places like Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, etc. Simple fact, slavery was legal. Like it or not. If a man wanted to take his wagon, his mules and his niggers to Kansas, then he damn well could. Some people think the death penalty is immoral, too. But it’s legal. What’s legal, isn’t always moral. What’s moral, isn’t legal. But it’s the law. Whatever spoiled, angry, entitled Massholes think.”
Yeah, James. But, the addition of the various White & non-White ethnics hasn’t improved the attitude any.
After making numerous attempts to contact Buonocoursi he DM’d me on Twitter the other night. Here is the text of what he said (typing in all caps, just like his original message):
“DON’T EVER SPEAK TO ME OR MY WIFE’S MULATTO SON EVER AGAIN!!!!!!!!!”
Torch light parades are always impressive, those guys in Germany in the thirties used them to great advantage!
“John
May I ask you a question? Why is it you have a problem with all things Southern yet you post here?”
I don’t know, Billy Ray. You’re probably right that I’m more on the wavelength of Alex Linder.
My objection to Negro slavery is moral and racial. How “necessary” it might have been is, to me, irrelevant.
If you think the white man’s traditional ways–which have led him into an historical cul-de-sac–are to be embraced uncritically, you are, in my view, mistaken.
spahnranch1969
MAY 15, 2017 AT 9:12 PM
After making numerous attempts to contact Buonocoursi he DM’d me on Twitter the other night. Here is the text of what he said (typing in all caps, just like his original message):
“DON’T EVER SPEAK TO ME OR MY WIFE’S MULATTO SON EVER AGAIN!!!!!!!!!”
John Bonaccorsi
I don’t know, Billy Ray. You’re probably right that I’m more on the wavelength of Alex Linder.
My objection to Negro slavery is moral and racial. How “necessary” it might have been is, to me, irrelevant.If you think the white man’s traditional ways–which have led him into an historical cul-de-sac–are to be embraced uncritically, you are, in my view, mistaken.
Spahnranch–That old one never gets old. Makes me think of our friend Bjorn from He Will Not Divide Us.
John-I would be the last person to say the Southern system was PERFECT nor above REPROACH. However I will say overall that it was all things considered superior and still is today, There are problems to every system of government or economics. Yes I agree it’d have been better overall if no Negroes were ever slaves. HOWEVER you must consider TIME AND PLACE. In a period in which we lacked Air Conditioning and medical technology and considering all of the lowlands were inundated with mosquito borne diseases such as malaria and yellow fever, you couldn’t very well ship over thousands of White Europeans forcibly and dump them in South Carolina and work them in the rice fields. The weather and mosquitoes would have killed them and you’d have been no further ahead. The Negro was in this pre-mechanical era the only way to get things done. Your refusal to see both sides is really disturbing to me. I can see both.