I Sang Dixie pic.twitter.com/UiNpXFi6Yy
— Real Country Music (@real_kuntry) March 26, 2025
I’ve never been interested in “NS.”
I have always written from a Southern perspective.
Yesterday, I highlighted some of the differences that I see between the “NS” fandom and Southern Nationalism, but I barely scratched the surface of it when it comes to the Jewish Question. I would say the heart of our disagreement is the stories that we tell ourselves about the past.
The “NS” fandom is convinced that “IT’S THE JEWS!!!” White people are in racial and cultural decline in America and Europe because of the Jews. That is the long and short of their worldview. It takes about five seconds of interacting with these people to realize that they are in the grip of an all consuming monomaniacal obsession with Jews that borders on parody. I have been informed in the comments, for example, that Jews are behind Levi Strauss blue jeans and Kraft macaroni and cheese. Maybe there is some truth to that but what does it say about the mindset of the people who are vexed by it?
Here is how I would respond to this narrative:
For the vast majority of our history, there wasn’t a “Jewish Question” in the South. Jews were a tiny minority that settled in the colonial South. South Carolina had the largest Jewish population in America at the time of the American Revolution. By and large, Southerners did not perceive Jews as a bunch of bomb throwing utopian revolutionaries who were trying to overthrow our social order. On the contrary, Jews tended to assimilate and integrate well into Southern culture. Jews were also slave owners. Jews also supported white supremacy. Jews also identified as White people and Southerners.
The Confederacy is a hilarious example of this inconvenient truth. Judah Benjamin, the Confederate Secretary of State, was Jewish. He was the first Jewish senator. He was the first Jew to hold a Cabinet position in America … appointed by President Jefferson Davis to serve in the Confederate government. Judah Benjamin resigned his U.S. Senate seat in Louisiana and supported the Confederacy. He wasn’t alone in this. Sen. David Yulee of Florida was the first Jew elected to the House of Representatives. He also resigned his U.S. Senate seat from Florida and supported the Confederacy.
Here is an excerpt from Sen. Judah Benjamin’s resignation speech:
“And now, Senators, within a very few weeks we part, to meet again as Senators in one common council chamber of the nation, no more forever. We desire, we beseech you, to let this parting be in peace. I conjure you to indulge in no vain delusion, that duty, or conscience, or interest, or honor, impose upon you the necessity of invading our States, and shedding the blood of our people. You have no possible justification for it. I trust it is from no craven spirit, or any sacrifice of the dignity or honor of my own State, that I make this last appeal, but from far higher and holier motives. If, however, it shall prove vain — if you are resclute to pervert the Government, framed by the fathers for the protection of our rights, into an instrument for subjugating and enslaving us, then, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the universe, for the rectitude of our intentions, we must meet the issue you force upon us as best becomes freemen defending all that is dear to man.
What may be the fate of this horrible contest none can foretell; but this much I will say, the fortunes of war may be adverse to our arms; you may carry desolation into our peaceful land, and with torch and firebrand may set our cities in flames; you may even emulate the atrocities of those who, in the days of the Revolution, hounded on the bloodthirsty savage; you may give the protection of your advancing armies to the furious fanatics who desire nothing more than to add the horrors of servile insurrection to civil war; you may do all this, and more, but you never can subjugate us; you never can subjugate the free sons of the oil into vassals. paying tribute to your power; you never, can degrade them to a servile and inferior race; never-never, never. …”
Here is a fascinating excerpt from Fight Against Fear: Southern Jews and Black Civil Rights on how southern Jews reacted to the demise of the Confederacy and Reconstruction:
“Notwithstanding the general response of southern Jews, a number of individuals expressed vehement opposition to the new social order. According to David Yulee, the Reconstructionist policies of the Republican Party were an unwarranted assault upon the proud people of the South that would provoke “a conflict that will end in the extermination of one of the races.” Outrage at the enforced imposition of equal rights for African-Americans was shared by many southern Jews. J.H. Levy of Savannah wrote to his daughters in March 1868 that federal troops would not listen to local leaders, their sole purpose being “to direct and change” the region “to negro ascendancy making in time the south unfit for white people, should we not be fortunate enough to succeed so that common sense & common decency reverse the country from disgrace.” “Our political situation here is now altogether frightful,” Meyer Goldman’s son wrote to a friend in October 1874. “It seems that negroes are streaming into Louisiana from other states far and wide, and are building up here the so-called ‘Republican Party,’ and are also stirring up much trouble.” Almost every office in the state government, exclaimed Goldman, was occupied by an African-American, and those whites who did hold power were the most base and corrupt of their kind. The situation had become so intolerable that he was closing his law practice and moving north to Louisville, Kentucky.
Other Jews were determined to stand and fight. Driven by anger and resentment, they engaged in acts of terrorist violence against the Republican state governments. A small number of southern Jews, for instance, enlisted in the Ku Klux Klan. Others, including Edwin Moise and H.H. De Leon, were members of the Red Shirts, and organization that used violence to restore Democratic rule in South Carolina. …
Jews actively contributed to the Lost Cause. Like their Gentile neighbors, they constructed elaborate memorials to the Confederate dead. The soldiers’ section of the Jewish cemetery in Richmond offered such solemn celebration, its railings adorned with swords and sabers, wreathed with laurel. Seventeen years of Civil War and Reconstruction only served to strengthen the emotional bond that southern Jews felt for their adopted homeland. Their sense of loyalty to the southern social order remained unshakeable. Newspaper editor Herbert Ezekiel was not alone in his assertion that there was a special kinship between the Jewish people and the South. As he argued, the fate of the former Confederates was akin to that of God’s chosen people, an oppressed minority who had suffered unjustly at the hands of a tyrannical majority. “Like Jews have often been, they were crushed by irresistable odds, but the cause is still alive. … its sacredness will be inviolable so long as the sun shines in this fair land of ours.”
Southern Nationalism was not antisemitic.
There was no demand for antisemitism because there wasn’t a “Jewish Question.”
Jews fought for the Confederacy.
Jews served at the highest levels of the Confederate government.
Jews tended to be more supportive of secession and led Florida and Louisiana out of the United States.
Jews even joined the original Klan during Reconstruction. Montgomery, Alabama was redeemed by Mordechai Moses who ran as “the true White Man’s Candidate.”
Throughout the entire 19th century, antisemitism never took root in the South because every Southerner correctly associated attempts to destroy our social order and turn the world upside down with Northern White liberal fanatics – people like William Lloyd Garrison, John Brown, Harriet Beecher Stowe and Thaddeus Stevens – who in the Southern mind were the menace of “Black Republicanism.”
This is what partisan American politics was already like in 1864 and 1866:
The Miscegenation Ball at the Headquarters of the Lincoln Central Campaign Club, Corner of Broadway and Twenty Third Street New York Sept. 22d. 1864 being a perfect fac simile of the room &c. &c.
In all of these heated debates over race around the Civil War and Reconstruction, it never occurred to anyone that IT’S THE JEWS!!! The enemies of Reconstruction, North and South, never saw it as a Jewish plot, but rather as a Republican plot to cling to power because of the demise of the 3/5th clause.
Summary: Another in a series of racist posters attacking Radical Republican exponents of black suffrage, issued during the 1866 Pennsylvania gubernatorial race. (See “The Constitutional Amendment,” no. 1866-5.) The poster specifically characterizes Democratic candidate Hiester Clymer’s platform as “for the White Man,” represented here by the idealized head of a young man. (Clymer ran on a white-supremacy platform.) In contrast a stereotyped black head represents Clymer’s opponent James White Geary’s platform, “for the Negro.” Below the portraits are the words, “Read the platforms. Congress says, The Negro must be allowed to vote, or the states be punished.” Above is an explanation: “Every Radical in Congress Voted for Negro Suffrage. Every Radical in the Pennsylvania Senate Voted for Negro Suffrage. Stevens [Pennsylvania Representative Thaddeus Stevens], Forney [John W. Forney, editor of the ” Philadelphia Press”:], and Cameron [Pennsylvania Republican boss Simon Cameron] are for Negro Suffrage; they are all Candidates for the United States Senate. No Radical Newspaper Opposes Negro Suffrage. “Geary” said in a Speech at Harrisburg, 11th of August, 1866–“There Can Be No Possible Objection to Negro Suffrage.”
These cartoons illustrate how Northern Democrats characterized Northern Republicans.
In 1868, Horatio Seymour and Francis Blair, Jr. were the Democratic candidates for president and vice president, and they ran on the slogan “This is a White Man’s Country. Let White Men Rule.” They lost every state in New England and the Midwest to Ulysses S. Grant. America ceased to be a “White Man’s Country” when they lost and the 14th and 15th Amendments were ratified by Republicans.
By the turn of the 20th century, slavery had been violently overthrown in the South. Blacks had been transformed into American citizens by forcing Southern states to ratify the 14th Amendment at gunpoint. Blacks were voting in Northern states. Most Northern states had passed civil rights laws and overturned their anti-miscegenation laws. Negro worship entered a cultural recession in the Gilded Age, but at the state level Northern states continued to churn out anti-discrimination laws. Blacks had been armed and served in the Union Army to put down “the rebellion.” The federal government wasn’t resegregated until Woodrow Wilson, a Southerner with traditional racial attitudes, was elected president.
John Brown, a fanatic in the grip of “ni***er worship,” went to Kansas to kill Southerners and attacked the federal arsenal Harper’s Ferry in 1859 in order to incite a race war to liberate blacks
It is worth noting here that everything we complain about today – the denial of racial differences, the insistence that “the environment” or “prejudice” explains racial differences, attempts to level all racial distinctions in law and society, the worship of blacks, White racial guilt, the glorification of Noble Savages, and so on – has been with us since the earliest days of the Republic. Previous generations of Southerners knew it as “ni**er worship” or “Black Republicanism” and associated it with the culture of the Eastern states. The same is true of feminism or what was previously known as “Bloomerism.” It was well known in the 19th century South and other countries in Europe that Yankee men had surrendered power in their marriages to their wives who lorded over them and treated them like doormats. Southern intellectuals like George Fitzhugh attributed it to the excessive liberalism and democracy pulsating through their culture. Slavery had stopped the South from going too far down this destructive road.
“The fact was that in less than a generation, the American woman, still discreet in the works of writers like Gaillardet and absent from those of Mandat-Grancey, had taken center stage in French descriptions and analyses. The feminist movement and “suffragism” certainly had a hand in this, at least indirectly. It is hard to confirm, other than militant literature, most French texts written before 1914 do not mention the topic. Le Correspondant, generally attentive to all things American, flippantly evoked “the gynocratic movement,” confirming that in America it had “its most important base of operations. That is where its general staff holds its deliberations and where its assault columns against male tyranny receive their orders.” But on the whole, the French press did not bring up the topic, not even ironically. Most books about America gave it no space at all. Male chroniclers’ probable lack of interest or enthusiasm was coupled with the unshakable conviction that woman was the “real sovereign of the great Republic,” as Urbain Gohier would repeat ten years after Crosnier de Varigny.
North America was a gynocracy. This affirmation was dogmatic or at least axiomatic in France as of the 1890s. The American woman’s supremacy was thus twofold. The superiority of her “type” also corresponded to the empire she had taken over the opposite sex. The same cliche was tirelessly repeated, somewhere between fascination, fear, and reproach: the American woman ruled over the country just as she governed her home. The American man was her servant, or even her slave. The Yankee husband was not master of the house. He was lucky if he was not treated too badly! What Frédéric Gaillardet had once called the “republican duchess” had moved up from the footstool to the throne. And she occupied it as a despot rather than a sovereign.
The omnipotence the French saw American women wielding did not make them laugh, even at the husbands’ expense. This was not time for sly witticisms or colorful pleasantries; this upside-down world did not enchant its explorers. … But it was clear that their heart was not in it – that they feared the American woman was setting a bad example, and a contagious one. …
The author of La Femme aux Etats-Unis firmly believed that “the ‘dame,’ not satisfied with having also conquered the New World, is well on the way to Americanizing the old one. ” One more push and that born dominatrix would substitute the right to flirt for the rights of man and the citizen, because “the freedom to flirt is as sacred and inalienable in the United States as are the immortal principles of 1789 are in our country. …
“Mrs. Flora Thompson wants to colonize France – and probably Europe, too. Here, she is imprudently betraying the secret wishes of the most notorious of her imperialist compatriots, who not only dream of making the Old World the outlet for their industrial overproduction, but also a vacation spot! The question is whether Europe will comply.
On this point, the French clearly failed to get the joke. That Le Figaro‘s correspondent could transform a New York socialite into a Valkyrie of yankeesme speaks volumes about the place American women held in belle epoque France’s imagination. . .
A type within a type, the East Coast American woman, the supreme stage of Yankee femininity, was an icy sphinx: “There is a type of East Coast American woman, neither young nor old, with golden spectacles, I will particularly remember, as I met several examples. She has thin lips, any icy gaze, an impassive face. We can easily see in this New England gorgon the Frenchman’s classic nightmare: an unpleasant cross between the Americano-Puritan and the prudish Englishwoman “with thin lips.” The anti-Miss Betsy …
Ten years later, the 1920s would bring along the Fitzgerald era, of emancipated flappers, short hair, and crazy ideas – a little too crazy for the French. The American girl’s excessively liberated attitude rekindled blame and censure: she still embodied the “type’s perfection,” but now she was tyrannical, egotistical, arrogant, and all the more pernicious because she was desirable and cynically deployed her flagrant sexual freedom. …”
A century after the Civil War, Southerners were still failing to grasp the Jewish Question, and for a good reason. Most Southern Jews didn’t support the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s. There was never any uprising among Southern Jews against white supremacy and segregation. Gov. George Wallace of Alabama, for example, didn’t see the Jews trying to destroy the Jim Crow South. Wallace supported Israel and repeatedly spoke fondly of all the Jews who supported him during his campaigns for governor and the presidency. Jews also joined the Citizens Councils in Mississippi in the 1950s and 1960s. MLK destroyed Selma to get the Voting Rights Act passed in 1965. The segregated town had three Jewish mayors. Sol Tepper, a local activist, was one of the most outspoken segregationists in Alabama.
Robert B. Patterson, the founder of the Citizens Councils, didn’t see Jews as being the hidden hand behind desegregation. In his words, “Some of these groups are anti-Semitic. However, all of the religious groups, including the Protestant, Catholic and Jewish — have been pushing the anti-segregation issue and it is time for all of us to speak out for separation of the black and white races, regardless of our race or creed.” Wallace and Patterson were correct in failing to see “IT’S THE JEWS” as the problem because Northern Jews, Protestants and Catholics were all outspoken supporters of MLK and racial integration. Catholic priests and Orthodox archbishops marched for integration and locked arms with MLK.
Here is the House and Senate votes on the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Here is the House and Senate votes on the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Here is the House and Senate votes on the Immigration Act of 1965.
The truth is that both of these laws passed Congress over Southern filibusters because they had overwhelming bipartisan support among both Northern Democrats and Republicans. The Immigration Act of 1965 was passed to honor JFK, America’s first Catholic president, who had campaigned on abolishing racial distinctions in American immigration law because America was a “Nation of Immigrants.” Southerners never bought into “IT’S THE JEWS” because most Northerners supported MLK. Evidently, Jewish media brainwashing didn’t work here, as Southern governors like Wallace, Barnett and Maddox all defied the demands of the Civil Rights Movement and resisted the Kennedy administration. The New Deal coalition collapsed over forced integration and never recovered its previous standing. Georgia added the Confederate Battle Flag to its state flag in the 1950s after the Brown decision in response to what was perceived as the latest Northern attack on the Southern social order.
If you ever visit Selma, stop and think about their civil rights martyrs like the Rev. James J. Reeb, a Unitarian minister from Kansas, who was beaten to death there in 1965.
Here is the Freedom Rider James Zwerg of Wisconsin who was an activist for the Congress of Race Equality (CORE) who was beat up in Montgomery in 1960 for trying to integrate a bus stop.
“Outside agitators” came to the South to overthrow our social order
The Leo Frank case in Georgia in 1915 is notable for being an exception to the rule. It was the only incident of note involving a clash between Jews and Southerners in the century after the Civil War. It is also exaggerated in that there were around 1,300 Whites who were lynched between the 1880s and 1960s. Frank was lynched for being a murderer, not for being Jewish.
It is worth reflecting on why our Southern ancestors were so unsympathetic to Hitler and National Socialism and why the message “IT’S THE JEWS” fell so flat here. Jews were not the people that President Jefferson Davis once labeled “the disturbers of the peace of the world.” Jews were not resented in the South because Jews were conforming to the Southern social order. Southerners had little contact with Jews, the few interactions they did have were usually positive and they associated them with the Israelites of the Bible. They have always thought of Jews this way even before the rise of Dispensationalism.
In 1940, the Jim Crow South was racially segregated. Most American states had passed some type of eugenic sterilization laws. The racial inferiority of blacks was accepted as a fact by nearly all White Americans. The United States had an immigration system designed to preserve Nordics and quell immigration from southern and eastern Europe. The British Empire lorded over India and most Africa and upheld white supremacy across the world. Australia had the White Australia policy. There was no taboo on “racism” in the United States or in any Western country before Hitler. And yet, National Socialist Germany took such an extreme position on race and such a dim view of its European neighbors and this was so intensely polarizing that most racists across the world recoiled in horror from it.
Needless to say, Southerners were not fans of Hitler’s brutal conquest of the Czechs and the Poles and its war with Britain. It was easy to characterize the National Socialist regime as chauvinistic and tyrannical. Southerners had always admired and sympathized with the Poles since Thaddeus Kosciuszko and Casimir Pulaski played a role in the American Revolution. Pulaski saved George Washington’s life at the Battle of Brandywine in 1777. The original Southern nationalists had admired Joachim Lelewel and Southerners identified with Poland after their own crushing defeat and loss of independence in the War Between the States. I won’t elaborate on Hitler’s agenda of reenacting cowboys and Indians and the Wild West in Poland, Ukraine and Russia with Germans playing the role of American settlers except to say that Keith Woods and Greg Johnson are correct to highlight the role this played in creating the cloud over nationalism. The backlash and burning moral feeling that this was wrong created the cultural atmosphere which caused non-Germans to question existing their racial hierarchies and science.
After thinking about this issue for 25 years now, I do think there is a Jewish Question, but I do not think of it in the same way that most antisemites do. The real issue is that millions of Jews immigrated here in the late 19th and early 20th centuries from the ghettoes of southern, central and eastern Europe. Those Jews brought with them to the United States the culture and radical politics of southern, central and eastern Europe. Those who came to America earlier via Germany or the Caribbean had a different trajectory. They were not alone in this respect. The same was true of Leon Czolgosz, the Polish anarchist who assassinated President William McKinley in 1901, or later Sacco and Vanzetti. Previous waves of failed European revolutionaries like the German Forty-eighters had done the same thing. Jews were heavily immersed in radical leftwing European politics which had no real parallel in America where socialism, communism and anarchism had fallen on deaf ears. Like the Italian mob, it carried over from the Old World for really all of the Ellis Islander immigrant groups including the Jews. They all voted the same way too for people like JFK and other liberal Democrats who wrecked the country in the 1960s.
Virtually all of these immigrants settled in Northern or Western cities and bypassed the South which was mired in the malaise of sharecropping and tenant farming at the time. They did not create the problems there so much as they linked up with native born radicals and exacerbated or aggravated preexisting negative trends. Jews did not create the American obsession with individual rights, equality or civil rights. The trope of the Magic Negro has deep roots in Yankee culture that goes back centuries. Jews took this crap which was already present in the culture and put it in film and in television.
“IT’S THE JEWS” appeals to people who don’t want to think too much about their own history and who are too lazy to investigate the origin of modern American culture. It is for New Yorkers who have never heard of the Wide Awakes, the Union League or Sen. Roscoe Conkling. For the most part, antisemites have this hazy view of the past where everything was fine until the Jews came here and ruined it. It is the belief that everything I don’t like is the fault of the Jews and I am not interested in learning much about it.
Historical National Socialism, not to be confused with the mutant “NS” fandom, was in my view too extreme and polarizing, especially on race and foreign policy. It became a foil for Western liberalism. Then it lost to Western liberalism. For the generation which fought in that war and the postwar generations who were the most shaped by it, the memory of Hitler became a substitute for Satan. The Nazis were “racists” and “nationalists” and “antisemites.” As a result, racism, nationalism and antisemitism and anything associated with the Nazis became taboo in the West. It reshaped and strengthened Western liberalism. We’re only now finally getting over it due to the fact that everyone who lived through the war or who were shaped by it are either dead or dying and losing their grip on the culture.
It is time to step over the 20th century and its crumbling taboos, not to breathe new life into them. We should seize this opportunity.
Note: According to Greg Johnson, he was told by top revisionists that the Holocaust happened. I’ve never been interested in the issue and have no strong opinion on it. I don’t need to have a historical opinion on the merit of the claims to know that “NS” has always been a ball and chain for us or that wignats like Robert Bowers engage in periodic outbursts of violence.
I’ll tell you what I think did in racialism. Public schooling and education. It’s easier to be racialist when cultural and linguistic barriers approximate racial ones. The problem is that non-Whites are English speaking and educated now. That’s the problem for hardcore racialists. Back in the day Indians couldn’t speak English and Black Slaves weren’t educated.
No. Racialism was done in by Christian egalitarians siding with the largely Jewish Marxist revival of Jacobin and Radical Abolitionist racial leveling. Consumerism played a major role too.
Racialism was thriving until World War II. You could say that the Third Reich took it to an extreme.
This created a backlash and the devastating war which liberals won. Triumphant liberals had the political capital to impose their values on society. That’s why and how racialism became taboo for generations
BTW, we recovered from abolitionism. The Jim Crow system was created in the 1890s and 1990s.
Most White Nationalists argue that you can have separatism without supremacism. What history proves is that this is difficult. Once the lower group becomes more cultured, it’s difficult to maintain racialism. At least that’s my position. I really don’t have a good answer and if I did I’d write a substack about it.
I think I have a solution. War on the intellectuals, Pol Pot style. Intellectuals are problem.
WWII cannot be dismissed but I still think assimilation threatens racialism. It’s easier to justify racialism when non-whites are unassimilated. However, it’s probably true that WWII gave liberals a major victory. Part of the moral high ground liberals claim is that Hitler started the war.
I’ve always said that if you’re going to blame the Jews, you might as well blame the Irish Catholics too.
It’s bizarre how you twist it so that nazis are the cause of all our problems. Not the liberals who won and imposed their morality, but the nazis who fought against the liberals and lost. If you fight your enemies they win!
I didn’t put it that way.
I said that National Socialism was deeply polarizing (true), became a foil for Western liberalism (true), got into a war with liberalism (true), lost to liberalism (true) and then as a scarecrow or the villain of history became the moral compass that guided the postwar generations (true)
Yeah, the Bolsheviks, their sh!tlib allies, and the (((financiers))) who backed both groups lit Western Civilization on fire, the Axis powers got killed attempting to put out the fire, and we are supposed to condemn the firefighters who committed the ultimate sacrifice to prevent that catastrophe. FDR envisioned complete Soviet control over all of Europe, and he was perfectly OK with that. Churchill’s famous Iron Curtain speech in Missouri plagiarized the same warnings that Goebbels had made during the war.
The Nazis actually examined Southern Jim Crow legislation and thought THAT was too extreme for the Third Reich, particularly the one-drop rule. Nazi racial legislation provided more flexibility, enabling mischlings and non-Germans to participate in German society. Some of them even became high-ranking officers in the Wehrmacht.
I’m pretty sure Afro-Germans were sterilized. Jim Crow also obviously didnt apply to Jews who were citizens and coded as White
Very interesting post. Pretty informative too. The white libs of the era were by far the majority of the bad actors in the civil war tragedy. It’s also true that the tiny number of Southern Jews were largely assimilated and sympathetic to their white neighbors. Many strong points made. My own position is that while jews are a major part of the problem, especially starting with the large influx of those from Europe in the latter half of the 19th century, they could not have gotten to where they are now were it not for whites who had turned their backs upon Christ and upon their neighbors – instead worshipping a three-headed Golden Calf of mammon, negrolatry and feminism. The epicenter was indeed New England, which can gone full retard by the 1840s.
The crucial part that’s often left out by people who repeat the “it’s our fault for letting Jews take advantage of us” line is that it still necessarily returns to calling out Jews with a view to taking our destiny back into our own hands, it’s a necessity to acknowledge the real Jewish Question. That’s what us taking responsibility for ourselves means.
Great article, I feel, however, In case anyone pulls the “most slave owners were Jewish” line that it should be pointed out that according to the 1860 US census only 20,000 Jews lived in the Southern States at the time, a quarter of whom owned slaves.
It’s a per capita issue: the percentage of Jevvs owning slaves in the antebellum South was several times higher than that of their White Christian counterparts. Jevvs also played a massive role in the trans-Atlantic slave trade, which sowed the seeds of the racial demographic catastrophe that we are all now reaping.
Slavery was the occasion of the War; jews were the occasion of slavery. Got it, no more questions.
HW !
God Bless Dixie!
Win!
Trying to divorce counter-Judaism from pro-White in a time normie Whites are widely coming to understand Jews collectively hate White Gentiles and are the brains, money, and backbone of anti-White mania is WILD. I can’t find a Jew who has anything but venom in them for White Southerners. You’re spot on, but a bit too optimistic, that Jew power is waning. But then why let up on the Jew hate when this is finally the era of Jew hate. An optics appeal to Evangelical boomers? An optics appeal or olive branch to Jews themselves? I don’t get it. Is it because Trump is kosher and you’re enamoured with the mildly pro-White policies coming out of his 2nd term?
The Jews remain the problem, you don’t let up
on them now that they are letting up on us to save themselves from a massive backlash.
He has given up on dissident politics. He just wants to larp as a normie. I don’t know why. I’d say it has more to do with his family life than anything political.
I’m having my third kid this weekend and I am arguing with you. It has nothing to do with my family.
Exactly right, IF Jevvish power really is in decline, and IF we currently have the ability to push back against (((their))) power, why not press our advantage and destroy it forever? Reading articles like this always conjures an image of Johnston and Beauregard at the first battle of Manassas, watching the yankees fleeing in disorganized panic, with neither general bothering to think about how smart it would be to follow through with a robust counterattack that could have ended the northern menace once and for all. Same with Bragg at Chickamauga, and Hitler at Dunkirk….
Be equal opportunity offenders regarding enemies whether Jew, Gentile, Yankee, Southern sellouts, white, black, brown, etc. Name them while not getting fixated on just one out of many enemies.
is done… stick a fork in it… welcome to the IngSoc North American Union Golden Circle …
At some point, no one will believe your lies either.
Where’s the lie?
Brad, since you mentioned the issue, you do acknowledge that the jew leo frank was in fact guilty of the murder of little Mary Phagan (RIP), right?
Yes, he was lynched for being a murderer, not for being Jewish. They weren’t too particular about meting out mob justice in those days. Blacks and Whites alike were lynched for committing terrible crimes
Not quite. A jury convicted him and the conviction was overturned via activism (by the ADL in effect). The mob broke in the jail and hanged the guy before he could be released. So the activism that sprang him was the problem. The mob was okay with a conviction.
“jury convicted him and the conviction was overturn”
No, it was never overturned .
He was pardoned, there’s a major difference.
Hunter you’re clearly a post-WW2 liberal just wearing your Southern identity as a LARP. All of your posturing about hating “n**gers” is fooling no one.
I don’t hate my own race.
I don’t hate black people. I don’t put them up on a pedestal and worship them either.
It is funny to me how you people don’t seem to realize how long this has been going on. Frederick Douglass was a celebrity in his time and was married to a White woman who was an activist for feminism. She is buried next to him in New York
Blue jeans, the riveted workwear as a modern unisex uniform, became America’s export hit, alongside Hollywood, Coke, fast food, Madonna, Elvis, Michael Jackson and skyscrapers with the aesthetics of shoe catons made of steel, glass and concrete, which cast plenty of shade even when the sun is high in the sky. It takes around 50 bathtubs full of water to produce a single pair of jeans.
The German Wurlitzer and the Swede Seeberg fought for the jukebox market. The bubble gum that fits in with the “American lifestyle” was developed by German-derived Walter Diemer. After all, wherever America is involved, it’s all about speech bubbles, as in the “superhero” comics perfected by the Jews of America (who copied Nietzsche’s Übermensch concept).
(translation error: “shoe catons” => shoeboxs)
“because Northern Jews, Protestants and Catholics were all outspoken supporters of MLK and racial integration. Catholic priests and Orthodox archbishops marched for integration and locked arms with MLK.”
So, you are admitting that Christianity is anti-White and is part of the problem? That Christians (spiritual jews) have been just as committed to destroying the White race as actual jews?
I don’t think this is the “own” you think it is.
That said, you clearly overlook historical facts to push your agenda. Like the fact that the Second Klan was explicitly anti-jew and formed in response to the murder of Mary Phagan, and people absolutely did care that Frank was a jew. Or the fact that Southern Populists like Tom Watson openly named the jew. If you read archived segregationist literature from the 20th century, quite a few of them were jew-wise.
What is true is that the Anglosphere IN GENERAL, not just the US South, has a long standing blind spot about the jew. This is mainly a product of the Freemasonic mentality of the Anglo upper classes that has been a breeding ground for philosemitism for several centuries. There hasn’t been any widespread “antisemitic” movement in modern British or “Yankee” history either.
The only people who ever cared about the White race and found it meaningful and made it the centerpiece of their social order was people like my White Protestant Southern ancestors.
That’s not fully true.
The strongest race laws in the nation were in California. The first governor of California stated that his laws were to make California an exclusively WHITE state. California’s land covenants were probably the strictest in the nation.
They were still Christians and many of them were Southerners. Oregon started out as a White ethnostate
“What is true is that the Anglosphere IN GENERAL, not just the US South, has a long standing blind spot about the jew.”
Yet, amazingly for the Paposphere, their well attuned Jewdar explains why most Italians and Spaniards and many French have considerable Jewish blood in them. Upwards of 1/3rds of Spaniards are part Jew. Meanwhile, amongst the Southrons, British, Dutch, and Germans, especially the Protestant ones, very little. Same for Southrons, despite Jews being mostly assimilated into Southron Society. To this day, most interreligious and interethnic marriages between Jews and Christians are between Jews and Catholics. Just go talk to the Bidens.
Same holds true for Black blood. Like around 85-90% of Black Slave trade went to Latin America. Today there are almost as many Blacks in America as there are in Latinoland. Where did they all go? Most Hispanics have N@gger blood in them as a result. The same holds true for many other Catholic nationalities.
Thats also why more and more numbers of Irish bloodline descendents are increasingly showing up with having Black spots in their genetic profiles. This is due to so many Irish Papists marrying other Papists, many of which are descended from Spaniards, Italians, and French which were spotted themselves. Southern German Catholics also have more N@gger blood in them than Protestant German. Friends don’t let friends marry Papists.
“This is mainly a product of the Freemasonic mentality of the Anglo upper classes that has been a breeding ground for philosemitism for several centuries. There hasn’t been any widespread “antisemitic” movement in modern British or “Yankee” history either.”
Masonry doesn’t make someone Philosemetic. Thats insane. Mozart wasn’t philosemetic. Neither was Garibaldi. Nor were the Germans such as King Frederick the Great. You are just regurgitating typically false Papist Propoganda disguised as Nazi whatever.
Speaking of Hollywood and skyscrapers, just imagine: There are people who claim that 9/11 or Hollywood, like blue jeans, have something to do with Jews! It’s all really laughable. This is about the brown or white Dixie South, nothing else at all. After all, brown slaves no longer have to toil in cotton fields so that Levi Strauss can make his jeans.
Of course Hollywood had something to do with the Jews. Gone With The Wind came out in 1939. The whole culture shifted during World War II including Hollywood
The Pedowood movie was basically a parody of Mitchell’s book, which was an extremely well-written historical novel. Many of the facets of southern life in the novel dovetail with your account above, especially about the guilty parties in the reconstruction era. It was overwhelmingly northern whites whose latest utopian crusade was full equality for negroes, not jews.
They always cool it with the demoralization propaganda when they’re pushing for another patriotic war
And yet, 9/11 had everything to do with Israel
The South never hated the Jews, but ever since the Leo Frank case most Jews have hated the South.
At various times in the past White liberals, conservative White evangelicals, and even Blacks, have been powerful forces within one or both of the major political parties, but now it is an observable fact that Jewish supremacy dominates both political parties.
This is most clearly seen with foreign policy.
If White liberals or Blacks dominated the Democratic party, the Biden administration wouldn’t have helped Israel commit genocide in Gaza.
If White conservatives, Christians, or American nationalists dominated the Republican party, the first Trump administration wouldn’t have enacted the Cesar sanctions, explicitly designed to help Al-Qaeda, our only real foreign enemy, take over Syria, despite the fact that it was obvious that this would lead to the ethnic cleansing of Christians from the country where Christianity originated.
In both cases, the most cherished ostensible values of both parties were tossed aside and dragged through the gutter for the benefit of Israel.
There is a similar dynamic at work on all the other major issues. There is a narrow bipartisan consensus, and the common factor in every case is Jewish interests.
Immigration – Both parties, including Trump, defacto support large scale immigration. Both defacto oppose serious immigration restriction along the lines of the 1924 quota system, or serious mass deportations along the lines of Operation Wetback. The Democrats want defacto open borders. In actual practice, Trump only deports a very small select number of immigrants – illegal immigrants who also happen to be violent criminals, and “antisemites”. Trump’s plan to “staple a green card to every diploma” would result in virtually unlimited immigration, combined with a massive subsidy for liberal academia. (Stephen Miller is an honorable exception on this issue.)
Culture – Both parties accept the core results of the cultural revolution, including the end of Christianity’s privileged position as the foundation of our culture, and the consolidation of the most significant results of the sexual revolution (porn, abortion, gay rights etc.)
Unlike Marcus Garvey and Abraham Lincoln, both parties also vehemently reject White pride – not because they want to raise Blacks up to a position of equality with Whites, but because they want to degrade Whites into a position beneath Jews. (The Abolitionists never used dehumanizing language against Whites the way Susan Sontag, Tim Wise, Dana Milbank, and Noel Ignatiev do.)
Constitutional rights – Both parties reject free speech, especially if the topic is Jews or Israel.
Economics – Both parties transfer the tax burden from the rich to the lower middle class, and both deregulate Wall Street while strangling the real economy.
On all these issues, the people Biden deferred to (Bloomberg, Schumer, Blinken, Garland, Yellen and Mayorkas) are almost indistinguishable from the people Trump defers to (Kushner, Adelson, Singer, Karp and Ackman).
To free ourselves, we should concentrate on the issues which unite White conservatives, White liberals and Blacks against the Bloomberg/Schumer/Kushner/Singer consensus – not relitigate obsolete issues from 200 years ago.
Nothing says “caring about the White race” like bringing 4M blacks to America.
You have this backwards.
It was bringing a few hundred thousand blacks to America that created White identity and racial consciousness. The original settlers didn’t come here to create some type of racial utopia
So bringing 4M blacks to America was actually a positive so we now can identify as Whites? The Southerners should have brought 50M or 100M over so we can really identify as Whites. And it could have been a racial utopia except for – you know – the blacks that the Southerners brought over.
We didn’t always identify as Whites.
English colonists came here for a number of reasons. Some were religious sectarians like the founders of New England. Some were commercially motivated like the normal Englishmem who came to the South, Middle colonies and the Caribbean. No one came here to create a racial utopia.
After blacks were brought here as slaves and countless wars with Indian tribes like the Powhatans, native born English settlers began to identify as Whites and think in racial terms. White identity developed in response to these conditions. So did the desire to push aside all the Indians and settle America with Europeans which is what happened over the next two centuries
Are you saying that White people cannot possess a positive racial identity unless there is a massive population of nons living among us? The Japanese never needed the presence of gaijin on their islands to establish and maintain their own racial character very early in their long history, and a lot of it still remains in defiance of the diversity pressure constantly applied by the GAE (Global American Empire). If they can do that, why can’t we?
I was describing how White identity historically developed. No one came here to create a racial utopia. White identity developed in response to colonial conditions among creoles or North American born Whites.
It is also something to be concerned about. It is no coincidence that we experienced this collapse in the 1960s when America was whiter than it ever had been in all of its history. The people who supported it, who weren’t Southerners, were out of touch with reality because of this
Personally, I believe we are on the cusp of a rebound in White identity and that demographic change and a return to earlier conditions is driving it
Not only Levi’s, also Wrangler and HIS Jewish.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrangler_(brand)
https://de.zxc.wiki/wiki/HIS_(Jeans)
Rockenfeld, where Rockefeller is said to
have come from, is burned down here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rL7CJeK2s_M
The Brits think their Doc Martens,
Schweppes beverages or Rolex are
British. But they were all German.
When Americans go to “Trader Joe’s”, they
actually go to Aldi, like the Brits go to Lidl.
Whether Boeing or Studebaker, Rickenbaker
or Martin Guitars, whether Heinz Ketchup or
almost all “American” Breweries, all German.
They buy their books from Penguin or Springer,
their music from BMG, all German. MINI and
Rolls-Royce belong to BMW, Bentley is owned
by VW, Opel has a stake in Chryler, Jeep, Dodge.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden_champions
German “Henry Villard” completed the
transcontinental railway, Fort Astoria was
the first American-owned settlement on the
Pacific, Henry Flagler made Miami what it is.
PS: Even Chrysler himself was
German, this was his ancestor.
https://de.zxc.wiki/wiki/Johann_Philipp_Krei%C3%9Fler
Germans have made many great contributions to America. I’m a Lutheran. I love German history. Just not the depressing World War II era
Sounds good. My answer below, but should actually appear here. WKR
Well hell, 2/3rds of American WHITES have some degree of German ancestory or closely allied race, Dutch, Danish, Austrian etc.
While the position you take of “It’s not always the Jews” is correct, and the so called “activists” believing that White Liberals are natural allies that are uninformed (such as the thinking of TRS) is incorrect, I believe this essay swings too far in the opposite direction.
It reminds me of the sorts of things you’d hear from Boer Nationalists. Its worldview is centered entirely around your cultural heritage and minimizes the broader problems at hand. Like the Boers, it’s a line of thinking that can destroy the very thing you wish to protect.
The reason why Jewish power in the 19th century was less of an obvious issue in the South is likely a result of the lack of relative Jewish power in the South and the lesser role of the United States on the world stage. Jewish power was obvious in Russia, Germany and Great Britain.
…why the German piano maker called
himself Steinway instead of Stoneway
lacks logic. I once read that he had
the first subway station built in NY.
HW,
I agree that Sephardic Jews (like Sen. Yulee and Sen. Benjamin) of the Old South had largely aligned themselves with the planter class as these Jews operated plantations, owned slaves, and identified themselves racially as White men because they had an economic incentive to maintain the institution of slavery. I also agree that the most revolutionary Jews in American History emigrated from the Pale of Settlement in the late 19th and early 20th century, and I believe that you would agree with me that these Ashkenazi Jews were instrumental in the success of the Civil Rights movement. However, this historical distinction (which seeks to demonstrate that the Jewish people taken as a whole and understood historically are not revolutionaries who seek to transform European societies) that you draw omits the world-shaping revolutionary moral teachings of a particular Jew who lived in Palestine during the 1st Century: Jesus of Nazareth. The European Americans who participated in the Abolitionist Movement (and later the Civil Rights Movement) did so on the basis that slavery was morally wrong (and later segregation was morally wrong). From where did this morality come from? The Jewish religion of Christianity. Christian slave morality taught egalitarian and universalist values to the Abolitionists (and Civil Rights supporters). Both leaders and followers of the Movement explicitly justified their goals in moral language and based that moral language squarely in the Judeo-Christian system of good and evil (often doing so by citing Bible verses in support of their moral claims.)
I have two premises that are historically undeniable: (1) Jewish people created the value system of Christianity. (2) The value system of Christianity inspired and empowered the Abolitionist movement.
(3) The sound conclusion is that the Jewish people (indirectly) inspired and empowered the Abolitionist movement through their creation of the value system of Christianity. When one has a historical understanding of the Jewish question, one can come to no other conclusion.
Provide a counter-argument. I know that you have read Nietzsche (and I assume The Genealogy of Morality.)
This was another great article. Hunter is correctly framing the debate over Whiteness, Southerness, Juedeness, Negroness, etc. It should be pointed out that Northern Jews started out populating Southern Jews around the time of the Civil War. The Northern Jews were mostly recent immigrants who came with the wave of Europeans in 1848. They came even before the Ellis Island Rif Raf Jews. Interestingly enough, the later think their story is the totality of Judeo-American history with victimization and glorification all mixed together. Understanding the difference is key to ending the leftwing Juden myth and the rightwing Judenhate.
https://youtu.be/4bGtpfRtIAw?si=BMW3JO9gKXP0nEsQ
The 1848 year was a watershed year for the North, for America, and for Europe. The entire world experienced a climatic change that was brought about by earth-solar changes and earth-geographic changes. It also brought crop failures, especially among the potato family. The Patoto famine in Ireland wasn’t an Irish only event, despite what Darby O’Gill’s little king friend said when he referenced holding one of the “Sídhe” Royalty hostage as the cause of the blight. In fact it effected all of Europe. The result was a flood of refugees and immigrants to the US, but also other counties.
There was also a series of nationalist revolutions, that attempted to end Absolute Catholic tyranny and/or re-establish national liberties. Anglo-American Freemasons were in fact an avante guard force in those movements with many leaders of the Czechs, Poles, Italy and Hungarian Nationalists having Masonic ties to the US and/or the UK. Southern members of America’s first intelligence agency, whose name is still undisclosed, figured prominently in organizing revolts and covert actions on behalf of those nations. Most of the revolutions were crushed by the Papist authorities. The result was another flood of refugees and immigrants to the US. In turn a number of memorials were erected to these foreign Patriots. Many still exist, despite otuers being torn down in Anti-Masonic Papist run cities like New York City, Chicago, and San Francisco during the Anti-American Kulturekampf between 2014-2021.
Aside from the Irish, the largest contingent were Germans. There in Germany, a series of soft revolutions, mostly by Protestants, had been organized to recreate a new Reich, since the old one had been terminated by Napoleon. Austria’s Papist Hapsburgs were angered by this as it threatened their traditional predominance in Germany. However, the Hapsburgs were faced with revolts in Polish Galicia, German Bohemia and Slavic Moravia (Czech), Hungary, and evwn allied Papist Bavaria faced unrest as well. As a result, the Hapsburgs could do little to stop the Protestant Masonic German Nationalist Rennaisance.
After their initial success, the German revolutionaries offered the Hohenzallern King of Prussia, the High Kingship of a re-united Germany and even Bavaria and other German Papist ruled states acquiesced to this new over-crown held by a Protestant King. In a case of blind stubbornness that portended future catastrophe by this dynasty, the Prussian King Frederick William IV, refused the offer because he would be legitimizing popular acclamation instead of divine rule or rule by conquest. The was the first case of the old Protestant dynasty turning into a mirror image of its Papist ancient enemies. The Germans did however succeed in getting the right to leave the realms of their petty rulers in Germany, which until then strictly limited emigration. They also fled to America.
With these patriotic and economic refugees also came an assorted crew of leftists. Various communards, early anarchists, syndicalists, labor reformers, and artisans and craftsmen radicalized by growing corporate capitalism toom the opportunity to emigrate to the US. These various ethnic groups descended chiefly upon the North. The reason was simple, the most lax immigration rules by the States were in the North. In other words, States specifically controlled immigration to a huge extent in Antebellum America. With these new immigrants also came a bunch of Jews.
These Jews were looked down upon by America’s Jews, both North and South. They were viewed as ghetto; better than the Eastern European Jews, but still considered trapped on old Jewish superstition and ghetto lord mentality. In contrast the old American, British, Dutch, and French Jews weren’t ghetto. The Anglo-Judahans looked down on the German Jews, who in turn looked down on the Austrian Jews, who in turn looked down on the Russian Jews. So, yes, even Jews have ethno-nationalist divisions, which is often the cause of interminable arguments among Jews. Its so endemic, Larry David made a fortune off softly explaining it in his shows.
https://youtu.be/huWsKN1Vtmo?si=Cr235XYRPzjwkNOf
Steve Sailer references this when he shows how modern American Jews, heavily influenced by Russian Jewry and Communism have retconned their national differences with their Anglo-Judahan betters by stating their grandfathers were discriminated against by WASP country clubs. In fact, they (The Russian Jewry) was discriminated against by WASPish Jews who didn’t want “Duh, BIG JEW” kind in their Anglo-Jew country clubs, a society satirized into the modern movie Cadyshack.
https://youtube.com/shorts/pXBAc1VI6j0?si=CtTgD0_H3esDWPnc
Understanding this goes a long way toward explaining why Monomaniacal Jewdenhate is retarded. It also makes it impossible to manage inter ethnic differences favorably for gentiles who are trained to see Jews as one all single and all powerful monolithic force instead of one with ethno-national divisions. Worst of all, it lets off the hook all the other historical negative characteristics found in Gentile nations which are the true origin of many of their afflictions.
Hunter pointing out the history of feminism amd negro love in the Yankees is a perfect example of these negative characteristics. Another one is ennobling “The Other.” Before the Yankees had Blacks to ennoble, they had Indians. The idea of the noble savage in the Indian didn’t come from Jews, it came from Yankees. Ironically, Yankee frontiersmen in the West were united with their Southern counterparts in denouncing this feeble headed thinking showing there is/was common cause to be had between Yankees and Dixies. Interestingly, such “Noble Savage” thinking even predates the Yankees, originating in the very first colonists at Jamestown and Plymouth Rock. There, the early colonial love of the Indian repeatedly caused the early colonists to be almost wiped out by savage murderous genocide by the Indians.
Accordingly, it would be wise to stop this monomaniacle focus on Jews. It literally enables the worst behavior among our Gentile brethren both Christian, heathen, and atheist. It also deflects from other interest groups who have actively subverted the fall of Anglo-Protestant and other Euro-Protestant nations, chiefly the Papists. Most importantly, it disguises the Anglo-Protestants own vulnerabilities in essentially being too nice. Thankfully, the Southerners traditionally haven’t had this problem. The question is why. The search will not just explain, it but uncover the best and most even keeled cultural characteristics in the South, which should be emulated by their ethnic Anglo-Protestant cousins. Ultimately, the only way to end the Puritans insanity is to breed it and educated them out of it. Make the Yankees into Northern Dixiecrats.
It’s not Christianity which is the opioid of the masses, but “equality” – the greatest lie ever told. Jews – typically – have taken full advantage of the white gynecuckracies who believe in this enormous lie and thus have ruled over them to their great advantage for over a century now.
# ” So bringing 4M blacks to America was actually a positive ” In some ways yes and some ways no, them in the fields, kept my Indentured servant forbears out of someone else’s fields and in their own, the genie was out of the bottle and the cotton gin was making a lot of our good folks rich, we didn’t have any race issues, or race issues, we couldn’t handle, till the don’t know how to mind their own business YANKEE’S and their German friends, decided to interject themselves into the affairs of a happy and content people, who were minding their own business and not bothering anyone, so yankees, Germans explain ourselves, before you apologize.
‘kept my Indentured servant forbears out of someone else’s fields ‘ and their wages in the dirt. There’s a very good reason poor WHITES despised both blacks and rich planters, they kept many WHITES impoverished.
A fateful chain of fatal events. But the roots of the evil lie beyond the non-stop Jewish history lies and media propaganda. They even managed to make the whole world hate “Americans”, although it is they who are primarily behind its disastrous policies.
Since ZOGermoney’s “transatlantic friends” (who in turn consider Israel to be their “best ally”) destroyed its energy supply by sabataging Nordstream, i.e. an act of warfare, without this having any consequences or even being clarified, they have resorted to completely ruining their country.
Not only through mass immigration from Africa, the Near and Middle East, which was triggered by US-Israeli wars that Europe has to pay for, but also as payments to all other EU countries, to Israel and the Jewish-controlled, highly corrupt Ukraine.
But “the Jews are not the real and actual problem”? Neither Garland, Mayorkas, Dershowitz, Schumer, Blinken, Schiff, and whatever their names are, nor the “American” Congress, which grotesquely gives a non-stop standing ovation to the greatest mass murderer of the 21st century, Satanyahu.
https://linkmix.co/36154851
“wignats like Robert Bowers engage in periodic outbursts of violence.”
Do you think it’s rhetorically effective to randomly bring stuff like this up out of nowhere, when it’s not even relevant? Your entire article is transparently minimizing friction between Whites and Jews and you randomly bring up Robert Bowers, or how much Southerners supposedly hated the nazis because Southerners love Polish people because some Polish guy did something during the American Revolution. Do you think this helps your case? I’d stick to just defending Jews and leave the rest out, for your own sake.
I think it is a great question.
Why was National Socialism so controversial among the world’s leading racists? Why did British and American white supremacists enthusiastically go to war with Germany? Shouldn’t we have been on their side? Why didn’t the people who lived back then see it that way?
Why Northern White supremacists enthusiastically march with Grant and Sherman through the Confederacy? Pro-White Americans and Britons went to war with the Germans in both world wars because they allowed their dishonest political leaders to manipulate their sense of patriotism, and they believed the lurid Germanophobic propaganda spewed by their governments.
During the war a US Army survey indicated that most of the troops agreed with Hitler about the Jevvs and would rather see him win before they would allow the armed forces to be racially integrated. They thought their participation in the war would improve and preserve their status in their respective nations, but the British went home to face the Windrush demographic displacement, and the Americans went home to have bayonets pointed at them by paratroopers under the command of their own former commander Ike, who forced them to integrate their schools.
What historical evidence do you have that suggests that the “world’s leading racists” in the U.S. recoiled from or saw as controversial the political system of National Socialism? Your claim is utterly ahistorical if one includes (which you logically must) leading American eugenicists as among the “world’s [chief or] leading racists.”
The modern Eugenics Movement began in the United States (in both the North and the South), and the Eugenic legal system (including racial hygiene/integrity laws) of the Southern states was best exemplified by the Jim Crow legal regime of the State of Virginia. Virginia’s eugenic legal system was very harsh (see the one-drop rule) by historical standards as it was intended to be by the wise statesmen of that State. The racialist legal regime of the Jim Crow South was adopted by the National Socialists in the form of the Nuremberg laws. American Eugenicists (the world’s leading racists) were very supportive of (and even bragged about their influence towards achieving) the National Socialist adoption of American Eugenic legal frameworks.
Hitler referred to The Passing of the Great Race by Madison Grant as his personal Bible. American Eugenicists like Harry Laughlin where honored in Germany for their contributions to the legal system of National Socialism. Henry Ford, the leading industrialist in the United States, created propaganda supportive of peace with Germany and the National Socialist approach towards the solution of the Jewish question.
Support your claims with historical evidence.
And yes. The U.S. should have either remained neutral in the War (which was promised by FDR in his 1940 campaign) or supported the German war effort to save Western Europe from the twin scourge of Judeo-Capitalism and Judeo-Bolshevism. The White race would not be in the predicament that it is in today if the National Socialists had prevailed. The victory of the Capitalist and Communists Empires empowered the elites of those Empires (namely the organized Jewish community and its goyim-servants) to commit White genocide. The American people and the British people like lambs were led by their elite political class of Judas goats (Churchill and FDR chief among them) to slaughter. The people who lived back then were under the control of the elites of their societies. Read Pareto and Mosca.
By the world’s leading racists, I was referring to White Southerners, as our entire social order was built on a complex racial caste system that was three centuries old in 1940. Stop and think for a moment about what was done to colonize the North American continent and how that compares to the Third Reich which wasn’t even a decade old in 1940.
The British Empire upheld white supremacy from Australia to Singapore to India to most of Africa. Nearly the entire world was colonized by Europeans at the time. Doesn’t this beg the obvious question why the world’s biggest racists were so unsympathetic to the Third Reich? What was it about the Third Reich which provoked such a hostile response?
You are skating over a number of key issues here: the Nazi euthanasia program, the fact that there was no discrimination against Jews in the United States or Britain, the fact that Germany did not simply copy American eugenic laws and Jim Crow laws and above all the fact that German racial hygiene was focused on other Europeans like Slavs, not non-Whites, who were seen as untermenschen and who were brutally conquered by the Third Reich. Americans were horrified by Germany’s attempt to reenact the Wild West in eastern Europe.
Oh, and Germany also conquered Belgium again and the Netherlands as a bonus, which was the issue that had triggered war with Britain in World War I.
Because Southerners and Northeastern Yankees cannot help themselves when it comes to ‘Mother’ England.
David Duke cites that in both World Wars the South had the highest manpower participation in the country.
Poor Pollacks. The same Pollacks that England gave their very first war guarantee to in British history and then had the Pollacks do everything they could to antagonize the Germans including massacres in Bamberg and Danzig.
The same Poland that Churchill gave to Stalin at Yalta along with the rest of Eastern Europe.
wow! Poland couldn’t have had a more backstabbing friend than the British.
I am sure that you and many others are not aware of Stalin’s “Torch Man” Order #0428.
This is the English translation.
“All settlements, in which German troops are found, up to a depth of 40 – 60km from the main lines of battle, are to be destroyed and set on fire, also 20-30km from the roads. For the destruction of the settled areas in the required radius, the air force will be made available, also artillery and rocket-launchers will be used extensively, as well as intelligence units, skiers and Partisan divisions, who are equipped with bottles with flammable liquid. These hunting expeditions in their activities of destruction are to be dressed to the greatest extent in German soldier’s uniforms and uniforms of the Waffen-SS looted from the German army.
This will ignite hatred toward all fascist occupiers and make the conscription of partisans from the outlaying areas of fascist territories easier. It is important to have survivors who will tell about “German atrocities”. For this purpose every regiment is to form hunter-units of about 20- 30 men strong with the task to detonate and incinerate the villages. We have to select brave fighters for this action of destruction of settled areas. These men will be especially recommended to receive bravery awards when working in German uniforms behind enemy lines and destroying those settlement outposts. Among the population we have to spread the rumor that the Germans are burning the villages in order to punish the Partisans.”
-(Archive Series 429, Rolle 461, General’s Headquarters of the Army, Division, foreign Units East II H 3/70 Fr 6439568. Filed: National Archive Washington) [1] [in progress] “Fackelmänner Befehl” (torch men-order) confirmed. Russian Security Service FSB published Stalin’s order No. 0428.
Here is the original document in Russian.
https://archive.org/details/torch-men-order-document-scans
Much of the mistreatment of Slavs were done by jews and communist Slavs using German uniforms.
Hitler himself, in “Mein Kampf”, argued at length that it had been a very bad mistake for the Second Reich to pick a fight with the British Empire. And indeed, in hindsight it should have been so obvious to German leaders that if they were really going to fight a fateful battle against both France AND Russia at the same time, they absolutely could not have afforded to take on England as well.
Germany should have stayed out of Belgium, kept on defence in the West against the French and whipped the Russian forces in Poland and Ukraine. This way they cold have avoided conflict with the British.
“Southern Nationalism was not antisemitic.
There was no demand for antisemitism because there wasn’t a “Jewish Question.”
You are not stating anything unknown to any nationalist domestic or international in Western nations.
American foundering Free Masons Washington, Adams, and Jefferson bore no ill will towards jews, the South’s collaboration with sephardic jewry in bringing West African slaves to colonial and post-revolutionary war time in America, as with Mother of the Anglospere England’s contemptable philosemitism have been a staple what was and continues to be millstone that everything you all touch is soiled by that alien people and culture you cling to your bosom’s so tightly.
Not that it was ever a wonder why Jared Taylor veered so sharply away from the JQ/JP was because of his Southern birth and Anglo ancestry.
The South needs to take their cultural, religious, societal, and regional predilections far away from the rest of what remains of European’s historical heritage, cultures, mores, values, and traditions. It would be best if we amicably went our own ways.
It wasn’t and isn’t “NS fandom, ” activists,” or any other negative loaded term of identity that caused the 2025 current conditions in the West. It was being involved with others that made common cause with the enemies of our collective folk for well over two millennia.
I’m not so sure, November
I would say our way of handling the issue was more effective than the Holocaust. You could say it wasn’t even a problem here until the mess you made
There was no “holocaust.”
That you still stick to the kosher blood libel is willful ignorant or malice.
Auschwitz was not a death camp, at its worst,it still treated its prisoners better than Union P.O.W.s at Andersonville.
I’m not going to dive into that. I have no interest in the subject
Regardless, most people believe the Holocaust happened, and that fact was enough to sink nationalism and race realism for almost a century. Jews played the Holocaust card for decades to neutralize any and all criticism of their actions. It greatly empowered Jews and gave them the ammunition to play the world’s biggest victim card.
We’re only now beginning to climb out of the hole because everyone who lived through era is dead now or dying. There is no doubt that how Germans handled the Jewish Question was a terrible blow to our civilization. Hopefully, it wasn’t a fatal one
Jews will always find a safe and comfortable home in the Anglosphere from which they will conspire to incite further brother wars between European ethnicities.
That is the Achilles heel of our civilization.
Nice to know that ‘Evil Nazis treated Slavs horribly and the holocaust is legit’ are the eunuch nationalist’s talking points to be ‘respectable’ patriots for their respective ZOGs.
Sure, November
Hitler invaded Poland, conquered much of Europe, started the war with the Soviet Union, invaded Greece and North Africa before we were ever involved in the conflict. What did Belgium and Denmark do to warrant his invasion?
Hitler’s plan for Poland was to deport the Poles like we deported the Cherokees to Oklahoma. It was a disturbing, twisted echo of our history. He saw the Slavs as being like India
‘it still treated its prisoners better than … Union camps freezing Confederate troops to death in Michigan or declaring Missouri a free fire zone and imprisoning the wives of Confederate soldiers and burning them to death in an ‘accidentally’ fire.
Just saying that if conditions during a war with food shortages and disease due to rats carrying typhus infected fleas caused the deaths of prisoners at German labor camps during WWII are called “death camps,” but the same conditions that happened at Andersonville and Union P.O.W. camps are not tarred with the same brush.
The fact that both North and South treated their prisoners so cruelly, it should come as no surprise that both Yankees and Southerners were responsible for the deaths of upwards of one million German soldiers that killed by shootings, exposure, disease, and starvation in Eisenhower’s death camps.
https://ihr.org/journal/v10p161_brech-html (Eisenhower’s Death Camps)
https://ihr.org/journal/v02p137_weber (Civil War Concentration Camps)
There was no “holocaust.”
Sure it was.
Whenever jwz don’t get 5 star accommodations, “iz annuda holocausts, oy vey!”
Auschwitz had a swimming pool and an opera hall!
World War One Prime Minister David Lloyd George on Adolf Hitler.
“Chancellor Adolf Hitler is one of the greatest of the many great men I have ever met,” declared David Lloyd George in an interview with the News-Chronicle.
The wartime British Prime Minister, who saw Hitler twice on a recent trip to Germany, said that “I have never seen a happier people than the Germans,” adding that the Nazi system is “a great achievement.” He expressed himself as impressed by the “universal adoration” of Hitler throughout the Reich.
Quite the redemption arc for Mr. George, eh?
https://www.jta.org/archive/lloyd-george-calls-hitler-among-greatest-hes-met
Ahhh yes. Southerners are the problem. Whites in all other regions voted for Kamala in higher percentages than Southerners, especially in the Northeast , Upper Midwest and Pacific Coast, but elsewhere as well even though to a lesser degree. But yes Southerners are the problem here. lol. Even though even Southern White women voted against Kamala in higher percentages than White men elsewhere, which also means we voted against abortion more too….. but Southerners are the problem folks. Before anyone asks me where I am getting the data, look at the state by state exit polls. This really isn’t difficult to do.
https://www.foxnews.com/elections/2024/general-results/states
Still chirping about voting at a higher percentage for basically liberal Democrats circa 2008 in hardly an achievement worth celebrating IMHO.
Based on the Trump administration’s glaring incompetence so far (I concede he did good job on sealing the Southern border, but has done no construction of a border wall), it looks as though his collection of unqualified ‘yes men and women ‘ won’t give us a four year repreive of unforced errors.
How long do you think Whites in America can just keep kicking the can?
For the sake of your children, you best hope that the Southern gains its independence because minority majority USA is going to be a third world nightmare, not to mention anti-White hated unchecked.
‘But Southerners are the problem folks. ‘
That’s kinda pushing blame far over the edge of reason. I can’t think of any fault Southerners have in excess of any other regional WHITE. In fact, they seem a good deal less offensive than most.
United States of AIPAC, I agree of course. I was using sarcasm in response to November.
I know.
I think November goes to excess on fault finding in Southerners.
@US of AIPAC,
Your sympathies are lost on me.
Agree!! @ November MARCH 27, 2025 AT 4:50 AM
European Apostasy: The Role of Religion in the European New Right by Pawel Bielawski
The Right in Europe is traditionally associated with Christianity, and opposition to this tradition is typically equated with revolution. The New Right, however, as initiated by Alain de Benoist, is founded on different axiological premises. According to its proponents, the true bedrock of European civilisation was not Christianity but ancient paganism — Greco-Roman as well as Slavic, Germanic, Celtic, and others. From this standpoint, it is Christianity that constitutes the revolutionary force, having overthrown the authentic European pagan ancien régime.
The New Right represents an effort to reclaim not only the heritage of the past two millennia of the Christian era but also to recover much older strata of European tradition. Triumphant Christianity constructed itself atop an already existing, fully developed civilisation. For adherents of the New Right, the sacred text of Europeans is not the Bible but Homer’s Iliad.
“According to Greg Johnson, he was told by top revisionists that the Holocaust happened.”
Grindr Greg Johnson is a lying sodomite that continues to spread the lie that he beat both E. Michael Jones and Mark Collett in their debates on the war between Ukraine and Russia.
Johnson continues the blood libel of the holohoax perhaps because he is a homosexual and would be sent to a labor camp in NS Germany.
Not one historical revisionist of any credibility believes in the homicidal gas chambers, masturbation machines, cages with eagles and bears, rollercoaster into ovens, or any of the endless lies that has been used a cudgel against Germans and White Gentiles to keep them from having in-group preferences, homogenous homelands, ect.
The “Holocaust” did happen during WWII in Dresden Germany, so if that what that butthole surfer is referring to, he is correct for once.
Agreed. Grindr Greg has a slave-eunuch’s view of history and morality as he vociferously believes in and hysterically argues for universal human rights, the ideal of universal peace among nations, anti-imperialism, the tolerance of homosexuality, and other highly novel liberal ideas which are nothing but progressive modernist moral and emotive non-sense. That’s not surprising given that he is a filthy (and lying) sodomite. I am honestly surprised that he calls himself a White nationalist and equally surprised that other people within our movement take his self-labeling seriously.
Wow, how touching and heartwarming to know my deep South brothers love polish people,in the Midwest, their is friction with the hyphenates/ethnic whites and the Appalachian folk, who have migrated there for the jobs, that were available, granted it’s not as bad as it used to be, but the disdain is still there, me thinks the hyphenate issue, should be examined and addressed, I would suggest the friction down home , with the transplants, is because a great many of the transplants, who have went South are hyphenate whites, not all hyphenates are anti-Southern or anti-Protestant but many are, I will also suggest that not all founding stock YANKEE’S are anti-Southern or anti-Protestant, I am also of thee opinion, that their is no love in the North country, between Irish Catholics and the Ulster people either ……. I don’t think Southern people now or then accept national socialism, but I don’t think there has ever been much anti-German feeling at all, but we have always identified with England first . We’ve always been very partial to the French also, especially among the educated, wealthy, Southern class, this can probably be traced back to French assistance in 1776 and the fact that the Cavalier class in the South, had much appreciation for the finer aspects of French culture, one of my great grandmother’s was of Hugenot ancestry, she lived a long time, I still remember her …..
I agree that the French are a big part of Southern culture. Always considered them well at home here.
French is a big part of English culture, official court language of England was French for 4 centuries.
Greybacks was part and parcel “Political economy” which was Southern nationalist and socialist. Compared to Northern “Greenback” notes (also political economy of socialism, Confederate money was known as “Greyback” or “Blueback” notes.
However their was also a communistic bent (ie. global temple usury monarchical imperial socialism contra ethno-national socialism ) within Dixie and Yankee America. We ate now seeing them build the North America Union Golden Circle Ingsoc Oceania…
Why are these two systems socialist?
There are two ways in which a monetary system can be organized: either the market chooses what is money, or the state (national or a global monarchy) does.
The money of the free market, of capitalism, has always been commodity money that is outside of political control. Wherever the trading public was free to choose, it picked commodities of fairly inelastic supply as monetary assets. Almost all societies, throughout all cultures and civilizations, have come to use precious metals as money.
Commodity money is apolitical money. Nobody can create it at will and use it to fund himself or to manipulate the economy.
By contrast, complete fiat paper or digital money systems that have no link to an underlying commodity are always creations of politics, mational or globalist (ie. communism). In such systems, money can be “printed” at essentially no cost and thus practically without limit. But not by everybody. Money printing is the privilege of the state and or by “delegation” to a globalist temple central bank. Money, in this system, is entirely elastic. But it is political money and closely linked to political authority, either erjno-national or global
Temple usury communist domionist monarchism.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederate_States_dollar
https://study.com/academy/lesson/greenbacks-definition-lesson.html
“If you ever visit Selma, stop and think about their civil rights martyrs like the Rev. James J. Reeb, a Unitarian minister from Kansas, who was beaten to death there in 1965.”
Based on the fact that he wears glasses and has not-perfectly-straight hair I’m going to declare him Jewish!
@ Thank you Miss Courtney
Socialist Confederacy
Greybacks was part and parcel “Political economy” which was Southern nationalist and socialist. Compared to Northern “Greenback” notes (also political economy of socialism, Confederate money was known as “Greyback” or “Blueback” notes.
However there was also a treasonous communistic bent (ie. global temple usury imperialist monarchical socialism contra ethno-national socialism ) within Dixie and Yankee America. We are now seeing the consummation of their treason against the Republic’s of Dixie and Yankee America with them building the Golden Circle North America Union or as Orwell called it, IngSoc Oceania… https://images.app.goo.gl/RZr7s7ksL2Qa7St26
Why are these two systems, “Greybacks” and Greenbacks” socialist?
There are two ways in which a monetary system can be organized: either the market chooses what is money, or the state (national or alternatively a global monarchy) does.
The money of the free market, of capitalism, has always been commodity money that is outside of political control. Wherever the trading public was free to choose, it picked commodities of fairly inelastic supply as monetary assets. Almost all societies, throughout all cultures and civilizations, have come to use precious metals as money.
Commodity money is apolitical money. Nobody can create it at will and use it to fund himself or to manipulate the economy (for political ends).
By contrast, complete fiat paper or digital money systems that have no link to an underlying commodity are always creations of politics, national or globalist (ie. communism). In such systems, money can be “printed” at essentially no cost and thus practically without limit. But not by everybody. Money printing is the privilege of the state and or by “delegation” to a globalist temple central bank. Money, in this system, is entirely elastic. But it is political money and closely linked to political authority, either ethno-national or globalTemple usury communistic, dominionist and totalitarian “ruling with a rod of iron” monarchism.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederate_States_dollar
https://study.com/academy/lesson/greenbacks-definition-lesson.html
The French gave us that beautiful Statue to Liberty and the fkn jwz desecrated it with that sicko poem on the base.
How many centuries have jews in the Anglosphere been able to dodge being regarded as ‘Christ killers’ due to Anglo indifference?
Sounds like an aberrant behavior.