Others on this site have rightly noted that the “cuckfederate” faction of Southern Heritage supporters have done little to defend or preserve anything of significance. While well-intentioned, they have made the tactical error of letting our enemies define the terms of debate, resulting in a futile and demeaning pursuit of approval from those who will never grant it. Earnest cries of “it’s not about race!” have never been effective, and never will.
Racial issues are real and relevant, and our identity is based on our European heritage. However, the issue of race (specifically, anti-black racism) does not define who Southerners are as people, however much the SPLC likes to pretend otherwise. Let me repeat: RACE ISSUES DO NOT DEFINE SOUTHERNERS. Views about race vary widely among white southerners. The only people who equate racial hatred and Southerness are those who hate us anyways, and just want an excuse to justify it.
In my opinion, the important defining characteristics of Southerners include: Abiding Christian faith as a part of daily life. Strong distaste for government interference and excessive rule-making. A chivalrous form of manhood which genuinely cherishes and defends women. Reverence for our brave, determined, and principled ancestors. Of course, we also have distinct language, music, cuisine, and folkways. We are defined by things that we esteem and love; not by what we (purportedly) hate.
We cannot convince non-Southerners of this, and should waste no more breath trying.
However, our Southern brothers and sisters are a different matter. I believe that many of them are suffering from Stockholm syndrome. I frequently encounter Southerners who denounce Confederates, signalling, in effect, “I’m a good person, so I will rebuke my treasonous, racist ancestors!” It it tempting to dismiss these people as disloyal, and perhaps some are, but many more have received a shallow and biased education about Southern history, and have simply absorbed the dominant cultural narrative. They can be educated to see that there is no moral imperative to denounce their Southern nationality. Even without challenging the “racism is bad” paradigm, this can be done by truthfully pointing out that Northerners are brazen hypocrites to whom we should cede no moral high ground.
Non-Southerners ceaselessly condemn us as vile racists full of hate, while failing to live up to their own stated ideals. They have chosen to reinvent unabashed white supremacist and race separatist Abraham Lincoln as an egalitarian progressive hero. They have chosen to ignore the abysmal conditions of blacks in the ghettos of places like Chicago, Detroit and Los Angeles. They have chosen to ignore that racial segregation is, in the modern era, more common outside of the South than within it. They have chosen to ignore the race riots rampant in the urban North in recent years. Where is the racially egalitarian utopia in the enlightened Yankee empire?
Perhaps they should be called out for these shortcomings, (made to live up to their own rules, in Alinsky terms), rather than allowed to point, shriek and condemn every vestige of the Confederacy as an evil abomination. Why not, for a change, play offense? Most importantly, in the process, we will teach our own people that they should not covet Yankee approval.
Are you on Facebook?
The White Race should always come first, then regional, ethnic and national pride. Whites must get their priorities straight.
Not all white Northerners are smug, Starbucks-drinking, Prius-driving urban liberals. There are plenty of white Northerners, such as myself, who support Southerners and their right to defend their heritage. All white people in this country have a target on our backs, no matter if we’re in Alabama or Maine, Virginia or California.
In Australia, the whites are accused of colonizing the Aborigines by the same leftards who are happy to see Muslims, Africans and Asians colonize us in Australia, Europe and North America.
Make no mistake- these vile racists hate white people.
@john
Anti-racist is a code word for anti-White
I am a racist, full of hate, and vile as vile can be to the enemies of Christendom. I’m also a white supremacist (I’ve yet to hear a good argument against white supremacy – pragmatic arguments about optics, notwithstanding). There’s no “re-invention” on the Yankees’ part…”God help me, here I stand.”
While there are new and fancy terms for such a person – sin terms, as it were – mine are the work-a-day views of all 1860’s Southerners (excepting the odd, in-the-closet abolitionists who drank too much jacobonism with their wine).
Which of you feels a knot in the pit of his stomach when reading my self-description? Pull that out – it’s the tap-root of your indoctrination and once it’s gone, you’ll be truly free and able, maybe for the first time, to worry the invaders.
“I’ve yet to hear a good argument against white supremacy – pragmatic arguments about optics, notwithstanding)”
How can you be a White Supremacist and a White Separatist at the same time? Who are you going to be Supreme to, if you only want to live around other Whites?
Unless of course you Prefer non-White company. It might be fine for you living in a brown multi-racial hell hole, but many Whites are tired of that. We just want to live in our own country, with other Whites.
@RB, you are spot on. If I didn’t live in a multi race infested nest, I wouldn’t have to bother being a ‘racist’ or ‘bigot’. I don’t want to concern myself with any of it. I just want a country-and life- where I’m with my own people and culture, and we’re all on the same page. Diversity is division. Diversity is death.
You’re also correct- anti-racist is code for anti-white. And ‘diversity’ is code for white genocide.
Since the 60’s at least, there’s been an absence of leaders with some gumption and principles to go in and bat for us.
@RB,
I think you can be a supremacist and also a separatist. I think many Japanese believe they are a superior race but they want to keep Japan all Japanese rather than import a slave population to rule over. The same is probably true of the Chinese. They probably think they are a superior race.
I view Anglo-Celtic Southerners as a superior people. I prefer to live in a White neighborhood and a mostly White town. Some parts of the South are heavily non-White while others are mostly White. I think the people of the all White areas ought to be able to legally keep it all White (as was the case prior to the Civil Rights movement) and the Whites of the mixed areas ought to govern those areas. And if we were to conquor more territory one day (such as liberating Venezuela or Haiti or Cuba from non-White and/or Leftist rule) then Whites should govern those new areas as well. And efforts should be made in the case of somewhere like Haiti to form White enclaves and incrimentally improve the demographics of that country while maintaining White control. This is LARPing right now but it gets as the duel policy of supremacy and separtism. Essentially, the guiding principle should be that the South and all her lands (native and conquored) belong to the Southern people and should be used to benefit us as an ethnic group. Where possible, if the lands are conquored then we should cooperate with the native White population (I am thinking of the White minority in places such as Nicaragua – which was once Southern-ruled). Again, this part is LARPing at this point. Right now our primary goal is ensuring areas for our people to live and procreate and continue as a unique ethnic group here in our own native land.
The real White Supremacists are the White anti-Whites and non-Whites, because they chase Whites down with Diversity at every opportunity. They demand to live in White communities, because they think White communities are the best places to live, so they chase us down all over the globe.
As for asserting Supremacy over other races, I subscribe to the “Don’t Feed The Bears” policy. Its fine for Whites to go down to Nicaragua, but Don’t Feed The Bears.
Don’t Feed The Bears
I asked a Sudanese immigrant a while back why he believes its OK for his race to take over every white nation on earth when, clearly, they didn’t like us doing it to their nations in the past. I realized that once you trigger this lot off, they waffle on and won’t shut up. I couldn’t complete a sentence without him interrupting constantly. Honestly, they could argue under water with a mouthful of marbles. You’d never get a word in edgeways when these things want to be heard.
I eventually was able to explain to him that when Britain, France, Portugal, etc colonized them, it lifted their nations into the civilized world with real homes, jobs, rail, infrastructure, farming and cities. When we left, we left all that for them-intact- to do whatever with. I also explained that whilst we did use their natural resources, they had no use for it as they were just a collection of tribes who were not industrial, and had no economies.
Its funny how now they’re following whites out of Africa and suddenly want to be doctors, scientists and engineers……why can’t they be those in Africa where they’re needed?
We’re always being told by media, schools and churches how wonderful these people are.
You name it….London, Lisbon, Chicago, Sydney, Glasgow, Paris , New York, Stockholm, Melbourne, Oslo…..every city in the white world are now third world infested nests that the whites built up, but have since been handed over to others by our useless, spineless elites.
I don’t hate other races- nobody can help whatever race they’re born to. They deserve good health, food, happiness and a high standard of living….but I want that for them in their OWN countries. We are full!
@john
May 18, 2017 at 9:11 am
“I asked a Sudanese immigrant a while back why he believes its OK for his race to take over every white nation on earth when, clearly, they didn’t like us doing it to their nations in the past. I realized that once you trigger this lot off, they waffle on and won’t shut up. I couldn’t complete a sentence without him interrupting constantly. Honestly, they could argue under water with a mouthful of marbles. You’d never get a word in edgeways when these things want to be heard.”
I’m afraid these people will not leave White areas, without extreme force being applied. Our situation reminds me of Odysseus King of Ithaca, returning home from the Trojan War to find his home occupied by aggressive suitors.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suitors_of_Penelope
“why can’t they be those in Africa where they’re needed?”
Africa has half the world’s natural resources and half the world’s best farmland. Yet without aid money Blacks still manage to turn the countries there into starvation zones. The reason the come to White countries is they can’t make their own countries livable. A brown country where ever it has been tried is a failure.
“They deserve good health, food, happiness and a high standard of living….but I want that for them in their OWN countries. ”
They only deserve what they can do for themselves. Whites helping them only upsets the balance of nature. Don’t Feed The Bears!
@RB, you’ve nailed it with that one. I can’t really add much to it.
Due to many combining forces unfolding simultaneously, our race and culture is in a dire predicament that is not being foreseen by those that should know better.
Is an African who can’t grow a crop really our problem? Is a Chinaman who speaks out against his government our problem? How about an Indian who merely wants a higher standard of living? Why are we abliged to carry these people?
Todays ‘refugees’= tomorrows majority.
I don’t know if recent comments of mine influenced this article’s writer in some way, but regardless, I’ll ask: how come Trump was able to rally thousands of mostly white americans – especially Southerners – while the League et al have managed to gather only a small group of supporters?
Could it be that the system of race was used to repress the full burgeoning of a middle class, and that therefore most white southerners were poor just like the black slaves?
I think so. I think many less privileged whites, especially those otherwise prone to supporting Trump’s campaign platform, interpret ‘race’ as a means of holding them down. IQ and class have strong correlations. Trying to rally the white working class behind a banner of race/IQ supremacy is like trying to convince them to come shopping at Bloomingdales (or whatever Southern equivalent).
It doesn’t work. And without that segment of society, you’re left with an elite-controlled upper/managerial class and whatever remains of the middle one. The former is paid off and the latter either goes into denial or decides that identifying with their captors will save them from falling into the abyss of impoverishment.
Didn’t someone say dysfunction is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result…
Separation does not need to be premised or justified by supremacy. Yes, just look at the North to see this.
@Shotgunwildatheart…
‘Which of you feels a knot in the pit of his stomach when reading my self-description?’
////////////////////////////////////////////////
I feel no knots in my stomach at your declaration, though, I note you make fine declarations of affinity and loyalty to Christendom and White Supremacy, without any to the South.
Is that on purpose, or merely unwitting happenstance?
@Michael Cushman…
‘I think you can be a supremacist and also a separatist. I think many Japanese believe they are a superior race but they want to keep Japan all Japanese rather than import a slave population to rule over. The same is probably true of the Chinese. They probably think they are a superior race.
I view Anglo-Celtic Southerners as a superior people. I prefer to live in a White neighborhood and a mostly White town. Some parts of the South are heavily non-White while others are mostly White. I think the people of the all White areas ought to be able to legally keep it all White (as was the case prior to the Civil Rights movement) and the Whites of the mixed areas ought to govern those areas…’
/////////////////////////////////////////////////
Southern White Supremacy succeeds as a concept best when it means, ‘the right of Southerners to be superior, in governance, on their own lands’.
I have observed that any other definition is subject to infinite disputation, and to no positive ends.
@RB…
In reference to John’s comments on the Sudanese ‘refugees’…
‘I’m afraid these people will not leave White areas, without extreme force being applied.’
////////////////////////////////////////////////
They would leave The South and go North, if the laws of Dixie made it favourably for them to do so.
With wide open borders over 50 states, people will self-deport, if you give them some legal incentive to do so.
As long as they are treated ‘equally’, and showered with welfare perks, they will stay.
@SpahnRanch…
‘The White Race should always come first, then regional, ethnic and national pride. Whites must get their priorities straight.’
///////////////////////////////////////////////
No, Sir – in Dixie, God must come first and then Southern White Supremacy.
@juniusdaniel1828
Unfortunately thanks to diversity policy, they are increasingly being brought into the governments in all White countries, so they help make and enforce the laws you would try to pass.
“If you think they are giving you your country back without a fight, you are sadly mistaken.” – Bannon
Coming from an economic nationalist like Bannon, who thinks anyone can be an American, it is a hilarious quote, but you get the idea.
Like I said in another article, pro-White people better be extremely diligent and persistent right now or they will get outflanked again. Keep using religion and “North vs South” as a wedge and a club and you will fail to reach an adequate growth level that can outpace the anti-White hordes.
Great example of why, even though I’m a staunch Nationalist and was born and raised in the South, I don’t really identify with most Southern Nationalists. To many of them, it’s just as much—if not more so—about religion than it is race. All adhering to a hokey belief system that Southerners represent an almost mythical, Hollywood production type of honor and chivalry system that didn’t exist anywhere except in the South.
Really, there’s no reason to argue with Neo-Yankee/Abolitionist/Unionist types. They’re simply Northern Nationalists pursuing what they perceive as their (quasi American®) national interests. To them, Blacks are nothing more political weapons which they wield against their perceived enemies, Southrons and traditionalist types in Western states. The real argument is with our fellow Southrons. Those who have yet to be unreconstructed. Patriotism has to be decoupled from an attachment to the Northern Moral/Political Paradigm. Ultimately, Southerners owe no allegiance to hostile, narcissistic, cultural foreigners who claim to be their fellow countrymen. But who define America® as being exclusively the sixteen Civil War Era Union® states, and their Pacific Rim colonies. And who want Southerners dead, and their culture extinct.
Next time a Neo-Yankee/Abolitionist/Unionist type brings up Slavery/1863/Black folks, ask him why he thinks that the Sixteen Civil War® Era Union states are entitled to supra Authority and rights in this supposed Union® of “equals.”
Ask him why he thinks he’s entitled to a monopoly on the Federal Government. Or why he opposes self determination and sovereignty for all but himself. You’ll be surprised at the sputtering non answers you get.
“How can you be a White Supremacist and a White Separatist at the same time? Who are you going to be Supreme to, if you only want to live around other Whites?”
RB, you’ve never heard or read, or been catechized with the concept of the Dominion Mandate, have you?
James,
You forgot to mention the fact that there were TWO Northern Slave States, Delaware (Lower Pennsylvania) and New Jew-sey, and both rejected the 13th Amendment, although Delaware legally had only 900 slaves remaining in it and New Jew-sey 16 they were still there. The textbooks did an amazing job covering up New Jew-sey’s slaves. Delaware rejected secession even before the CSA was born.
We won’t count Kansas, as that state was admitted following the foundation of the CSA nor the federal occupation governments of Maryland and West Virginia nor the illegal government of Nevada, which didn’t even meet the population requirements to become a state according to the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 which established the law that a state had to have 60,000 residents to be admitted to the Union. Nevada had under 40,000 in 1864 making her admission illegal. Strangely Dixie had almost zero support in Nevada which is odd, I assume thats because of the influence of the Utah Mormons nearby but not sure.
The (((Yankee))) leftist who traces his heritage to Massachusetts Bay Colony today is an all but extinct species. Southerners actually will talk about how many Southern men were killed in the war and this is true, but the truth is demographically and culturally DIXIE WON THE WAR. Let me explain this.
In 1700, the largest family size per capita was in New England. Then a little thing called universal education came along and brought with it family planning and liberalized religion and after 1700 the average family size decreased. The further decrease of the Yankee family happened after industrialization in the 1820’s. Almost of the workers in the factories in these early days happened to be girls. Female labor ended in the Yankee plants after the Irish arrived in large number in the 1840’s. The result of all of these things was an extremely low reproductive rate. However after four years of war 61-65, as most of the Yankees served in the Eastern Theater, they sustained casualty rates much higher than their ability to reproduce them. So many men died, that after the war the BOSTON MARRIAGE was the norm in most of New England. This was two unmarried women living together, sometimes as a lesbian couple, sometimes completely in a Christian moral way just to share expenses. The Irish immigrants managed to seize Boston by the 1890’s and the Brahmins began to fade into irrelevance.
The South following the war did the exact opposite of the North. Whether knowingly or unknowingly, Southern women began popping out babies like a pez dispenser. By the 1890’s when the US CENSUS was taken of the South they noticed that the average Southern family was double or better the average Northern family. The only reason the North’s population continued to grow was the Immigrants from Europe.
Today the population we speak of is largely the JEWS and a college educated group of worker drones who have no real idea what they are doing. Many of these people you will find are the children or grandchildren of Irish Italian or even Slavic immigrants who rejected Catholicism, nothing makes for bitter liberals like Ex-Catholics. In fact if you tried to look for a real Yankee among them, it’d be a bit hard to find, they’re still there. I think its amazing though, the Yankees left their culture and the institutions and although most are long gone like a stamping press, you put in anyone and it presses out an identical part
Celestial Time
May 18, 2017 at 11:52 am
“Let me repeat: RACE ISSUES DO NOT DEFINE SOUTHERNERS.
Great example of why, even though I’m a staunch Nationalist and was born and raised in the South, I don’t really identify with most Southern Nationalists. To many of them, it’s just as much—if not more so—about religion than it is race. ”
I see what you mean. I see it as a Conservative undercurrent, and it is in White Nationalism as well.
Bob Whitaker said something like, just when you think you’ve killed Conservatism, it comes clawing back from the grave.
Billy Ray, you’d asserted on another thread that the American Revolution originated almost exclusively in New England, in the North, and that further, that the region’s motives stemmed from trade issues.
I’d like to see some sources for that claim if you have any, because I think the Great Awakening set an ideological foundation for the Revolution all throughout the colonies, and not just simply in New England either. Certainly New York, NJ, and Pa were transformed by the revivalist foment that sought to free colonists from the Crown the Church of England’s control.
“Racial issues are real and relevant, and our identity is based on our European heritage.” Next: “Race issues do not define Southerners.” How does one reconcile those two statements?
Does anyone else think the next Dylann Roof is out there watching these monuments come down and just stewing in his own juice while we wring our hands on the internet?
Guaranteed, this will have blowback.
Onceler
The New England Colonies were the only fundamental Calvinist Colonies in the Americas. The Great Awakening led by Jonathan Edwards and others was a New England phenomenon that spread eventually all the way to Georgia. The South was at this time almost entirely part of the Church of England and in most Southern States you suffered some persecution for refusing to join the Church of England. The Scots-Irish were mostly in Pennsylvania they didn’t really begin to become a large part of the South’s population until the migration under Daniel Boone began. Successive waves of Scots Irish from as far north as Massachusetts then began migrating south with every generation. However at the time of the American Revolution, Scots Irish had almost ZERO political and religious power in the Colonies, the Colonies were almost entirely English-run in other words WASP. Their day came after the war.
The American Revolution is New England’s baby. New England objected to Britain for two reasons. ONE was religious, they saw the Anglican Church as the same as the Roman Catholic Church, the difference being tithes were paid to King George and not the Vatican. As Calvinists to support infidels was akin to supporting Satan himself. TWO was economic, John Hancock and many others made money as smugglers because English trade laws made it difficult to become a wealthy man in trade. The problem was New England started the Revolution, there was a problem. New Englanders were too independent in nature and this made them poor military leaders. Enter the Virginians, who began sympathizing with cause early, but they were completely converted at Dunmore’s Emancipation of the slaves. The Virginians were old English Nobility, they knew how to lead and how to be statesmen. They had the effect of making everyone around them better. George Washington and the Southerners provided organization and culture to the fledgling army which made them a true army.
George Washington established a precedent. After the US was firmly established under the US Constitution almost all of your major military leaders were Southerners and it remained this way up until 1861. This was why Lincoln had so much trouble early on, without a large number of Southerners in the army, there still were some like Gen. George Thomas and others, the US Army had no truly inspiring leaders. After 1865 Southerners slowly drifted back to the US Army and the precedent established by Washington returned and remains until today
As for the Middle Colonies, New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania/Delaware’s contribution to the Revolution was nil compared to New England and the South. New York and New Jersey was heavily loyalist and Pennsylvania’s Quaker leadership wasn’t much for fighting. Over time this changed, true and on the Pennsylvania frontier the Scots Irish did quite a bit of fighting. John Adams fought the Pennsylvania Delegation tooth and nail to bring them to accept independence. In fact John Adams ended up making so many enemies that’s one of the reasons they dispatched him to France and he remained in Europe for a decade.
@RB…
Yes, I completely agree with Bannon’s comment, and wait, impatiently, upon my Southron Brethren to stop it with the ‘America’ nonsense…
@James Owen…
‘Really, there’s no reason to argue with Neo-Yankee/Abolitionist/Unionist types. They’re simply Northern Nationalists pursuing what they perceive as their (quasi American®) national interests. To them, Blacks are nothing more political weapons which they wield against their perceived enemies, Southrons and traditionalist types in Western states. The real argument is with our fellow Southrons. Those who have yet to be unreconstructed. Patriotism has to be decoupled from an attachment to the Northern Moral/Political Paradigm. Ultimately, Southerners owe no allegiance to hostile, narcissistic, cultural foreigners who claim to be their fellow countrymen. But who define America® as being exclusively the sixteen Civil War Era Union® states, and their Pacific Rim colonies. And who want Southerners dead, and their culture extinct…’
/////////////////////////////////////////////////
Yes, the real argument is only amongst Southerners; which, however, is why, in the end, we argue with others – as one of many methods designed to awaken sleeping Confederates.
What you’ve written here, is what so many Southerners struggle desperately to avoid realizing.
I see them squirming every day.
@Truth Corps…
‘Does anyone else think the next Dylann Roof is out there watching these monuments come down and just stewing in his own juice while we wring our hands on the internet? Guaranteed, this will have blowback.’
////////////////////////////////////////////////
God, I hope not – as that ‘blowback’ not only was the work of the Devil, it blew back all over us.
When will folks get it through their heads that bombing and shooting god-fearing Negroes NOT only does not help our cause – it hurts it – both in God’s eyes and in the eyes of our fellow Southerners.
If there is going to be violence, let it be in accordance with our codes of law and honour and against those parties who have inflicted the most damage upon our culture.
Life cannot be successful if it is not played like chess, and in that particular game, you win by going after your enemy’s King and Queen – NOT their pawns.
Dylan Roof was a mental case. Not a rational person. There is no reason to take responsibility for him.
The fact the people responsible for what is happening never get hit is very telling. Fingers are pointed at them daily and yet nothing is done to them. Its always some random person that gets hit. Make of that what you will.
@Junius Daniel
I have always been a little confused with James’s reckoning of the Northern States, we debated this before. He always counted Seven Midwest, Three Middle and Six New England, I always counted twenty-one at least. Delaware was always in that number, it was always counted as a Middle Colony during the Colonial Times part of Lower Pennsylvania and at the time of the war, there were so few slaves in the state they were almost not worth counting. On Jan 3, 1861 before the Confederacy was formed, Delaware voted down Secession unanimously in it’s House of Rep’s but the eight senators split 5-3 on the vote, five to stay and three to leave. The poor little state was just a geographic mistake. Had the entire Delmarva been ceded to Delaware, it would have been the Fourteenth Confederate State, but understandably, Maryland didn’t want to be any smaller than it was already. Plus without her Delmarva Counties, Maryland wouldn’t have had a shot at secession. Still a Confederate Delmarva pointed like a dagger at Philadelphia severing the rail line between Philly and Baltimore would have been GAME OVER for the Union.
Kansas so considers herself part of the Union they have monuments to John Brown for heavens sake and from what I read zero Confederate monuments, Nevada’s almost as bad heck there was no support at all for the Confederacy there it was as loyal as Massachusetts. Only Southern California had a real sustainable Confederate presence
Can’t fully respond now, BRJ, but right off Washington’s troops stationed themselves in Morristown, NJ to keep watch over Manhattan in the pivotal winter of 1780.
Your characterization of NJ is inaccurate. It was a battleground state, one of the few colonies to have two acting governments right up until the end. By 1780, loyalists were either leaving for England, Canada, or keeping as low a profile as possible and hoping to squeak by when the new government would be established.
That Dylann Roof “massacre” was a hoax, a ZOG staged non-event like the Sandy Hook school shooting. Its purpose, like Sandy Hook, was to vilify and disarm Whitey.
Again, the survival / victory of the White race should be of paramount concern. Then we can indulge in the luxury of celebrating regional, ethnic and cultural identity.
The Dylann Roof incident has all the hallmarks of a psy op, or of some combination of black op and psy op. The storyline fits the official narrative…autists and supposed psychotics are racist and violent…no one really knew enough to commit them by present day legal protocol…the solution is that any state commissar who deems someone ‘suspicious’ of ‘mental illness’ or autistic racialism needs to be interned indefinitely for observation and treatment.
Pre-crime intervention to repress white revolution.
Oops, freudian slip. I meant to say the state commissars should be able to commit anyone deemed suspicious even without any evidence of homicidality, etc. according to the narrative being propagated. Instead it reads the commissars should be interned, which is the actual truth.
If Dylann Roof was a mental case then so was Nathan Bedford Forrest, who would have given that young man some fine work to do.
It seems to escape most of y’all that we’re in a War, and we’re losing. Badly.
If 100 such men with the conviction of Dylann Roof lived in New Orleans, not one monument would have been touched, let alone removed.
“Private Joker (Roof) is ignorant and silly, but he’s got guts, and guts is enough”.
-Gunny Hartman, Full Metal Jacket.
@Truth…
‘If Dylann Roof was a mental case then so was Nathan Bedford Forrest, who would have given that young man some fine work to do. ‘
////////////////////////////////////////////////
And that work would have had an ethical, legal, and cultural context, as we were waging a declared war, and, as well, in The Reconstruction, was merely a continuance of it.
My Carolina Klan ancestors were not lone bozos, but, organized men who, with the support of their communities, defended our state.
At this time, however, blowing away anyone, without any warning, declaration, or the agreement of any local government is merely the Devil’s work.
Though I know a few who defend Roof (a few Klansmen) most do not – not even most Klansmen whom I know.
99%+ of White North Carolinians have only disdain for Roof; and, as well, for John Brown and Timothy McVeigh or anyone else who takes to murdering and butchering without a publick declaration and community support.
Call it what you will – Roof well represents mental illness in North Carolina, NOT, The Tarheel State.
@Billy Ray…
‘I have always been a little confused with James’s reckoning of the Northern States, we debated this before. He always counted Seven Midwest, Three Middle and Six New England, I always counted twenty-one at least. Delaware was always in that number, it was always counted as a Middle Colony during the Colonial Times part of Lower Pennsylvania and at the time of the war, there were so few slaves in the state they were almost not worth counting. On Jan 3, 1861 before the Confederacy was formed, Delaware voted down Secession unanimously in it’s House of Rep’s but the eight senators split 5-3 on the vote, five to stay and three to leave. The poor little state was just a geographic mistake. Had the entire Delmarva been ceded to Delaware, it would have been the Fourteenth Confederate State, but understandably, Maryland didn’t want to be any smaller than it was already. Plus without her Delmarva Counties, Maryland wouldn’t have had a shot at secession. Still a Confederate Delmarva pointed like a dagger at Philadelphia severing the rail line between Philly and Baltimore would have been GAME OVER for the Union.
Kansas so considers herself part of the Union they have monuments to John Brown for heavens sake and from what I read zero Confederate monuments, Nevada’s almost as bad heck there was no support at all for the Confederacy there it was as loyal as Massachusetts. Only Southern California had a real sustainable Confederate presence’
//////////////////////////////////////////////////
Dear Billy Ray, I don’t think that I am either you or James’s equal in analysing the minutia of all this, or it’s symbolism.
Presently, I consider that there are 10 Confederate States –
1. Texas
2. Oklahoma
3. Alabama
4. Missouri
5. Georgia
6. Arkansas
7. Louisiana
8. North Carolina
9. South Carolina
10. Tennessee
Virginia, Florida, Kentucky and Missouri are presently in question, for reasons you well know.
Though there are some fine Confederates in Maryland, the state is now a colony of Massachussetts. Delaware is out and out New England of mind.
Areas of Yankeeland I regard as in question are the Southern parts of Illinois, Ohio, and Indiana.
Other states I regard as likely to be in a new Dixie are Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Oklahoma and the Dakotas, and, if California splits – the eastern part to us.
I hope this is of some service to you.
Truth Corps
May 18, 2017 at 4:31 pm
“If Dylann Roof was a mental case then so was Nathan Bedford Forrest, who would have given that young man some fine work to do.
It seems to escape most of y’all that we’re in a War, and we’re losing. Badly.
If 100 such men with the conviction of Dylann Roof lived in New Orleans, not one monument would have been touched, let alone removed.”
Losing? Whites elected Donald Trump didn’t we? Not our fault he turned out to be a cuck. If he was as he appeared in the election campaign, most of our problems would be solved.
As for Roof, 100 of him would be no use in any kind of war, as they wouldn’t have the sense to follow orders. If you can’t tell a boy like Roof is a hopeless case, by looking at him, you would be of no use in politics or war either.
Are people really defining mental illness as some sort of character issue?
Because our criminal justice system wasn’t based on such a notion.
Historically, true mental illness was defined by psychosis, which is very rare in anyone besides manic depressives and schizophrenics. So those were the two real biological diseases. The manic phase of manic depression features elation and psychosis (NOT anger or any other emotion). Psychosis would be material delusions like thinking one is god of some famous dead person, not the type of wishful projection that involves ego and human will, like Donald Trump imagining that he’s sexy to women too young for him, etc.
Schizophrenics might have these material delusions but also hallucinations, usually audial, rarely visual. Occasionally some have delusions of persecution but that is the minority of schizophrenics, and their delusions again aren’t about ego. They think some psychiatrist is casting spells on them when looking down at their fingernails randomly directed at the sufferer, for example.
Trying to call political differences symptoms or expression of some ‘mental illness’ is exactly where those in power are going. They want to sidestep and collapse the Bill of Rights and due process via the ‘mental health’ system.
Roof is being construed as ‘mentally ill’ but somehow no one noticed he was psychotic, supposedly. His profile doesn’t exist in real life. Besides that psychotics only realize people don’t believe in their delusions upon voicing them (so that it’s inevitable some around them would note they exhibit psychosis), they are rarely violent. The inability to grasp the concrete tends strongly to disable aggression, which carries motivation and awareness of oneself in power dynamics with other concrete people.
Roof is said to have been ‘racist’ and ‘hateful’ as a function of some psychosis, which is absurd. He’s also said to have eluded detection, so that the commissars can begin suspending a citizen’s constitutional rights to due process for the ‘safety of everyone.’ The state will be able to intern or force-medicate through Murphy style drug courts anyone they simply don’t like. All politically incorrect views will be symptoms of disease and ‘danger signs.’
“John Brown and Timothy McVeigh” – fine examples, along with Dylan Roof, of the controlled fanatics (similar to ISIS) used to stir trouble on behalf of the usurers in power.
I look at the pictures of Roof on the net and see he’s not playing with a full deck: Never smiling, dead eyes, always on his own. And who is the person taking these strange photos?
The Democratic Party logo up through the early 1960’s as “White Supremacy”. The budding Cucks removed it – but there is nothing wrong with that declaration.
While we can question whether somebody can be a white supremacist and a white separatist as these seem to be contradictory terms one term that is not contradictory is White Separatist Nationalism as we must separate from what is before we can build what should be.
@juniusdaniel1828
“Life cannot be successful if it is not played like chess, and in that particular game, you win by going after your enemy’s King and Queen – NOT their pawns.”
That’s why it’s essential to assail the SJWs who stir up the Negroes. Rather than the Negroes themselves. Except, however, in cases where they are an immediate threat. It’s also necessary to separate the Negroes, politically, from the SJWs.
Junius
The problem with Florida has always been that it was barely settled when the war started in 1861. The panhandle was settled across to Jacksonville and from about Daytona Beach draw a big black southwestern line to Sarasota. Everything below that line was frontier in 1861, Following the war, the band of settlement extended slowly, but still by 1890 settlement had only made its way a bit further south. Henry Flagler’s Railroad to Key West caused South Florida to be settled. Miami Fl in 1900 was made up largely of Yankees and Southern Negroes and West Indian Negroes, who worked there in various occupations. Southern Whites came as well but strangely enough if you look at the list of the Mayors of Miami from the founding in 1896 all of them were Republican, which showed the Northern political influence. In fact they didn’t even elect a Democrat Mayor until 1947 and didnt elect another Democrat until 1957. Definately an oddity in a Southern State, typically before 1954 Republicans in the Deep South were about as popular as tourists from a Leper Colony.
The old joke about Florida getting less Southern the further South you go is true and the old map from 1874 shows why. To this day the pronounciation of MI-AM-EE was the standard Yankee one and Mi-amuh was the Southern one. I remember when I told my elderly aunt I was in Florida and she asked me if I went down to Miamuh. Thats how it was said among the old Southern folk.
Here’s the old map of the USA 1874 and it roughly shows settlement boundaries
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2521611/Wild-West-tamed-MAIL-ORDER-BRIDES.html