Why wasn’t there a “Jewish Question” in the South?
Why do White Southerners struggle so hard to understand this issue? I would say that to ask such a question is to answer it. Historically speaking, there wasn’t a “Judenfrage” in the South because the American South was really nothing like the places Jews came from in Europe.
The American South was a slave society with a caste system that was based on race. This had the strange side effect of being “good for the Jews.” It was also good for other European minorities. In the South, a Jewish merchant or an Irish Catholic planter was a White man. They were coded as belonging to the master caste and were automatically granted citizenship and higher social status than non-Whites. Jews always had all the same rights and liberties as other White people in the Southern states.
By the time of the Confederacy, Jews were getting elected to Congress in the South and had become part of the Southern establishment like Judah Benjamin. The same was true of other minorities. Sen. Pierre Soulé, for example, who represented Louisiana in the Senate was born in France. There were too many Scots-Irish Presbyterians to count who held elected office in the South alongside Southerners of English ancestry. Slavery gave all of them a stake in preserving the social and economic order.
Think of Scarlett O’Hara in Gone With The Wind growing up on her bucolic plantation Tara on the outskirts of Atlanta in the Old South. Scarlett’s character was of Irish Catholic and French Huguenot ancestry and her plantation was plopped smack in the middle of a vast sea of White people descended from Irish Protestants who came to this country from Ulster. The same was true of my ancestors from Dublin in Laurens County, GA who were Irish on one side and Scots-Irish on the other side. Those Old World hatreds faded away and became less relevant in the social context of the Georgia countryside.
The first English plantations were in Ireland. Ulster is a gigantic plantation. The Irish had been dispossessed of their land and sovereignty for generations by the English. Protestantism had been forced on Ireland. The great Irish Famine of 1845 to 1852 was within living memory, but here the Irish had been cut into and integrated into our social order. The Irish and Jews were treated as settlers like the Huguenots and Scots-Irish and were granted the rank of White. This is why neither group was problematic for us.
Slavery was a great integrationist. The most troublesome and disaffected parts of the South were the mountains of Appalachia and parts of Texas that were thinly enslaved. There was no need for antisemitism in the South because the Jews that came here easily assimilated into our social system and became invested in slavery. White supremacy was “good for the Jews” for centuries. That’s why the ones who lived here and who were born here never attempted to overthrow that system.
In Ireland, there was an Irish Question because the people who lived there were sharply divided over ethnicity and religion. They identified as English and Irish, Protestant and Catholic. They didn’t see themselves as White. Ireland is still divided. Similarly, a Jew in Germany or in the ghettoes of Poland, Ukraine and Russia was first and foremost a Jew. The Jewish Question existed because social conditions in southern, central and eastern Europe were totally different than they were here. Europe in the late 19th century and early 20th century was a boiling cauldron of radical leftwing politics.
The same was true of our Free States.
By the time of the Civil War, it was becoming a problem there too due to the absence of slavery. The Irish never rioted against us in the South. The Irish also enthusiastically supported the Confederacy. The North has always been far more ethnically and religiously divided than the South. It has always been more of a hotbed of radical and revolutionary politics. It has a weaker sectional identity. Northerners just don’t love their states and section like White Southerners of all backgrounds seem to do.
Eventually, we *did* get saddled with a Jewish Question, not the South, but America at large … which thoughtlessly imported millions of Jews from the ghettos of southern, central and eastern Europe between the 1880s and 1920s, and millions of other people from all sorts of European backgrounds. Those people who came here fresh off the boat from Poland and Ukraine didn’t stop nursing grudges that go back a thousand years after stepping foot on American soil. World War II made it worse. There was nothing like slavery to integrate them which was successful in integrating earlier waves of immigrants.
We talk about the “Jewish Question” or Judenfrage because the NS fandom prefers to use that ideological frame to understand our problems in early 21st century America. I think it is misleading for a number of reasons. It is a poor way of understanding education polarization. The elites aren’t simply Jews. They come from all racial and ethnic backgrounds. Jews are smart and overrepresented among this class of college graduates, but they all share the same worldview and preferences. Jews are also melting into this generic secular urbanite bugman class. A huge percentage of them already have mixed ancestry or children. I don’t see it as being much like the problem facing the Nazis in mid-20th century Germany.
Trying to understand the American past through the lens of the Jewish Question is even more highly misleading. It is trying to force a round peg into a square hole. There was no Irish Question here either because we don’t live in Ireland, but in a society that was fundamentally different.
Note: This tendency to strip out the historical context seems essential to “NS.” If you can dispense with German ethnicity and culture, you can mislead yourself about anything
I think the plague, even before it is ethnic and ideological, that is Marxism, particularly that which developed from the 1960s onward. Regarding the Irish I think they understand the Southern cause well because they too have always sought independence and secession from England.
Great summary of the profound difference between North and South. While the fairly large numbers of black slave owners tends to argue against a strictly racial caste-system, it does support your position about a gradual integration process. The southern society described is indeed now gone with the wind, however. The migration of the hostiles in the 1880-1920 era, plus the Yankee elites’ simultaneous rejection of Christianity and embrace of Jewish debt-racketeering indeed created a Jewish problem in the south that previously was not there. Hence the mess described in Georgia, where the authorities think it’s fine to send in a paramilitary goon squad over “littering” because Jews don’t approve of the message found on the “litter”.
Wallace being mostly Irish explains a lot. Irish-Americans have always made for the best Shabbos Goy.
I’m not mostly Irish.
I do have Irish ancestry though on my great-grandmother’s side who was an O’Neil from a wealthy family in Dublin, GA. My grandmother who was born in the 1930s LOVED Gone With The Wind because of this
The South and slavery made it good for the jews to become white, but they are not white, they’re jewish.
Trying to extend to the Jews an understanding of them and their relationship with White Gentiles that they do not currently have. The NS conception of the Jew-White relationship is closer to what the Jews themselves feel.
This is a good article that spells out a dozen truths and facts but we still have on our hands not slave owning southern Jews from 165 years ago but Jews who will when provoked openly tell you they regard themselves as superior and ordained to rule us cattle, or if not that then foaming at the mouth with anti-White leftism. The existence of limo-left White Gentiles does not obviate the devastation of being dominated by neocon Jews, Marxist Jews, media Jews, finance Jews, etc. And I’ll tell you one more thing, you won’t find Jews writing articles like this trying to warm feeings toward White Southerners!
@Brian,
“The NS conception of the Jew-White relationship is closer to what the Jews themselves feel.”
Sorry, but no. Categorically not true. Anglo-Judeans didn’t see their fellow American citizens the way Nazis saw Jews. Even today, most Jews do not look at Gentiles and think Nazi thoughts on subhuman Gentiles. Israelis don’t go, “I wish, I could use all the Gentiles as a slave labor in my secret salt caves near the Red Sea.” It appears, Antisemitism has turned Nazism into a religion of self identity with folks such as yourself.
In reality, most Jews in America are so deracinated of their ethnicity they rarely even think of themselves as Jews. In reality, these Jews are constantly asking who or what they are. There is an entire industry devoted to it. I guess there might be a point where enough deracinated American Jews get together and then realize they are all Jews. Conversely, what is the number of Jews in one single location that is required before they finally realize they secretly want to be Southron Country Gentiles and believe they were adopted maybe even Jewnapped? That should be a sociological experiment more than a Larry David episode.
https://youtu.be/FnbNQwWUHhg?si=MLt7bLrS7XaIQECJ
Yes, we know that neuroticism is one of their primary characteristics. And yes, there are jews in Israel who acknowledge that each jew will have 2700 goy slaves after their moshiach arrives, because the Talmud says so.
“The Jewish Question” in Germany did not arose in vacuum. It was born, in its modern form, after the French Revolution and Napoleonic invasion of German states, when the Jews who were emancipated by the revolution, became some of the most fanatical supporters of Liberal modernity that this invasion meant. When the German nationalist-conservative counter-strike against the Jacobin revolution arose, with the 1813 “War of Liberation,” the Jews, besides all the old prejudices against them, now also came to be seen as sort of Carpetbagger-Scalawag traitor elements, who were collaborating with France against German nationalists.
This is how the Germans came to see the Jews as a treacherous “fifth column” in their country, and it became exponentially worse after the 1917 Bolshevik revolution, which had such heavy Jewish ties. Jews came to be seen as cancer cells living inside the German national body.
I think you are right.
There *was* a Jewish Question in Germany. The reasons for that go back centuries. The same is true of the Irish Question given the long and tortured history of the British Isles going back to the Middle Ages.
I think the mistake is assuming that European frames of reference must map perfectly on to American conditions. They don’t. Jews had been here for three centuries before World War II and there wasn’t any big problem with them that Americans thought much about
This changed, of course, after the Great Wave of immigration and it accelerated after the fallout from WW2
People try explain away antisemitism with historical causes too much. You’re right that big historical developments, e.g. communism played a big role in increasing the fever pitch of antisemitism (note that almost every name behind November Revolution was Jewish), but antisemitism was always there following “emancipation” and it arose simply because the narrative behind so-called “emancipation” was a lie – that German Jews were German just like everyone else, and that it was merely a different faith, that if they were “emancipated” the differences would dissolve. Every elite with any loyalty to their German nationality noted that Jews were ruthlessly ethnocentric and self-promoting/nepotistic. One anecdote I like to mention is Robert Schumann and his wife. They were extremely philosemitic relative to the times, noted for vouching for Jews publicly whenever they needed defending. One day Clara Schumann attended some event hosted by a Jewish friend of hers. She eventually began to notice that literally everyone at the party except her was Jewish, and she was horrified by it. She spoke with her husband and the implications shook their moral foundations regarding the Jewish Question greatly. They didn’t become outwardly antisemitic but privately they started noticing. This is all writen about in Clara Schumann’s diary entries. This was fundamentally what the Jewish Question was about, rather than specific historical factoids or conspiracy theories.
Emancipation can be seen as a similarly problematic answer to the Jewish Question as the Spanish Inquisition was. It insufficiently addresses the racial component to Jews. I think this is why people get frustrated with the latest attempts at “stepping over” Hitler and NS. I personally don’t care if people disavow the Third Reich because of this or that factoid. But they were 100% on the money when it came to the Jewish Question, and race generally. And no, I’m not referring to the Holocaust, I’m referring to the Nuremburg Laws. People seem to think that accusing Jews of assassinating JFK or doing 9/11 is answering the Jewish Question. It’s not. We need a clear position towards the Jewish diaspora. How do you define a Jew? What restrictions should be placed on them, if any?
In a way, it sounds like the conditions for the South facilitated a sort of Southern ethnogenesis facilitated by the otherness of the African slave class.
@ Smiley McFadden
Re: https://occidentaldissent.com/2025/03/27/the-irish-question/#comment-3694644
You are correct…
They are ancient Akkadian’s who entered Egypt (Hyksos) and later admixed with subsaharan’s after expulsion …
The secret relationship … as they are son’s of the subsaharan Nubian “princess” Tharbis!
More to this invasive ruse on Europe and the West “than meets the eye” …
https://mysearchforpoliticalmary.com/2014/10/22/my-history-of-the-queens-of-israel-part-i/
https://armstronginstitute.org/2-evidence-of-mosess-conquest-of-ethiopia
https://library.biblicalarchaeology.org/article/phoenicia-and-its-special-relationship-with-israel/
In 2011, Moorjani et al. detected 3%-5% sub-Saharan African ancestry in all eight of the diverse Jewish populations (Ashkenazi Jews, Syrian Jews, Iranian Jews, Iraqi Jews, Greek Jews, Turkish Jews, Italian Jews) that they analyzed. The timing of this African admixture among all Jewish populations was identical. The exact date was not determined, but it was estimated to have taken place between 1,600 and 3,400 years ago.. These findings the authors explained as evidence regarding the common origin of these 8 main Jewish groups. “It is intriguing that the Mizrahi Irani and Iraqi Jews-who are thought to descend at least in part from Jews who were exiled to Babylon about 2,600 years ago share the signal of African admixture. A parsimonious explanation for these observations is that they reflect a history in which many of the Jewish groups descend from a common ancestral population which was itself admixed with Africans, before the beginning of the Jewish diaspora that occurred in 8th to 6th century BC” the authors concluded.
Palmer, Gianna (2 August 2011). “Genes Tell Tale of Jewish Ties to Africa”. The Forward. Archived from the original on 16 November 2016. Retrieved 8 August 2022.
Moorjani P, Patterson N, Hirschhorn JN, Keinan A, Hao L, Atzmon G, Burns E, Ostrer H, Price AL, Reich D (April 2011). “The history of African gene flow into Southern Europeans, Levantines, and Jews”. PLOS
Genetics. 7 (4): e1001373. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1001373. PMC 3080861. PMID 21533020.
Ostrer H, Skorecki K (February 2013). “The population genetics of the Jewish people”. Human Genetics. 132
(2): 119-27. doi:10.1007/s00439-012-1235-6. PMC 3543766. PMID 23052947.
But there most definitely WAS the JQ during Reconstruction.
Read Mark Twain’s heavily censored “Observations” about the JQ Carpetbaggers that was originally published in a mainstream American magazine “Harpers”.
The JQ with the specific history of “These People” being “Money Getters” is very relevant today.
https://www.colchestercollection.com/titles/pdf/A/antizion.pdf
@Jaye Ryan,
This is correct. General Grant and other Generals issued their orders prohibiting these types of Jews. I say these types because they are different types.
The Ashkenazi wave thst started hitting the US as far back as the 1840s, was fundamentally a different ethno-national Jewish group than the Anglo-Judeans who had settled in the US starting in the colonial period and up to the 1820s. Acknowledging this differences helps navigate the World Jewry, as does knowing the difference between Israelis and non-Israeli Jews.
During the sharecropper years in the postwar South, landlords and sharecroppers both complained about the presence of Jewish merchants running stores in the area who price-gouged the farmers remorselessly and roped them into severe usury arrangements.
Greedy carpetbaggers were mostly Yankees looking to make a quick buck. Some were Jewish, but this wasn’t like an attempt to overthrow our social order. It was personal aggrandizement
Fascinating article Hunter. We are flattered you went down this route. You posed a question as a means of juxtapositioning the JQ NatSocers and Southern Identity all into one. Superb!
You asked at the beginning: Why wasn’t there a “Jewish Question” in the South?
You gave a pretty good answer. But, the main one was there just wasn’t that many Jews. Anywhere from 20,000-40,000 in the South at the time of the war. Secondarily, as I wrote earlier, the Jews have their own ethno-national differences which are divided under the Sephardic and Ashkenazi racial groups. The South, and the North for a time, got the best of the lot, the Anglo-Judeans.
The Anglo-Judeans had a long history within the High Chivalric homeland of our civilization between the Sein, Rhine, and Thames Rivers. This is the original fount of post-Roman Western Civilization. The Jews who like little scattered pieces of star dust and asteroids and comets got caught up in its gravitational weight over the centuries found a stasis in this area that was lacking elsewhere. Such an early origination also made them culturally integrated for the most part into the Anglo milieu.
Thirdly, unlike the North which slowly dissolved its original British rural aristocratic folk ways, the South managed to expand its own, mostly thru the use of indenturehood and later slavery. As late as the Civil War, Southern aristocratic houses were still using the medieval era factatum system for their trade and financing. This placed them in direct contact with the British merchant and rural aristocraties many of whom they were related. In turn, the old elite folkways of dealing with the Anglo-Judeans was easily transmitted.
Jews were always a small minority in the Protestant areas of the this heartland of Europe. The Dutch captured a large segment when they successfully beat back the Spanish Papists. The old Hanseatic League network had its Jewish segment, again quiet small, and which also was well integrated into the Scandinavian and North German areas. In turn, this Jewish community all knew and married with one another and periodically brought in Protestant outsiders further hastening their assimilation.
The above was the origin of practically all the Jews in America, before the 1840s, aside from the distinctly Hispano-Sephardic element that transfered from the Portuguese to the Anglo-Dutch West Indies. This group was the largest origination of Jewish slave holders. Most went from the Brazil and Portugal up to the West Indies, then to New York, Rhode Island, and the Carolinas. There they were joined by Jewish elite adventurers from the British and Dutch homelands. Together they all intermingled in America and spread chiefly toward the South-West.
This Jewish group was distinctly different than all of the other Judeo-ethno-nationals. They spoke Hebrew and English and Dutch, and oftenFrench, and German, but not Yiddish. These Anglo-Judeans were a very small minority and covered their Judaism to a high degree. Most Jewish ethnic folk ways we know of today stem from the Ashkenazi Ghettos.
These Anglo-American Jews were not ghetto. Their synagogues weren’t as elaborate as other Jewish Synagogues and approximated their Protestant brethren in simplicity. Not accidentally, most present day Anglo-America Synagogues follow thus pattern, thanks to the B’Nai B’Rith reforms, themselves a product of Anglo-American Jews.
Lastly, the wandering itinerant Jew, the artisan and craftsmen Jew, the Butcher and Baker Jew, etc, which was more common in Catholic and Continenental Europe, simply wasn’t well represented in this Anglo-Dutch cultural origin. Most Jews in this Anglo-Dutch milieu were upper middle class and above. Common Jews weren’t common enough in the British homeland to support even Jewish households let alone those in the American colonies.
Simply put, there were few Jews in the British Isles and even Dutch Provinces and especially the Scandinavian Kingdoms which were the chief motherlands of the American colonies. Even the not insubstantial Huguenot population from France brought few French Jews with them. These Anglo-American Jews, unlike their Ellis Island Rif Raf co-religionists were too Anglophile to pose a challenge to our folkways.
In conclusion, the South was an elite rural British aristocratic dominated society and the Anglo-Judeans found it easy to set up house there. Few Anglo-Judeans chose to be butchers in such a society. Other Jews simply weren’t welcomed. The South, even the North at first, was a place for upper middle class Jews to achieve a higher class and fortune. The Northern Yankees changed that paradigm first slowly then fastly with their immigration policies. Not only did they bring in Papists but also those flea ridden Roger Dangerfield types. They did it just to spite and outcompete their Southern betters and ruined America in the process. Thanks a lot!
https://youtu.be/xPaClGpIfK4?si=xrnuJivAUkfkpuob
https://youtu.be/5M-tgHivx6s?si=wAiwS6QEEXGttaGb
The Club that seals the deal…wait for it…..
https://youtu.be/m8Ht_nsQ7Hs?si=p-Jjf_KPxQJmkrP5
P.S. Hunter, just remember to say which club you are member of to get into one of the oldies.
There is a big difference between the Irish Protestants who were for the most part English or Scots, and the Irish Roman Catholics who would have turned Ireland into a Spain or Africa like they are today.
Aside from religion, I don’t see a lot of political outcomes between the Irish Catholics and the Jews. Both hate White people. Our ancestors for the most part didn’t understand this fact of life.
“There is a big difference between the Irish Protestants who were for the most part English or Scots, and the Irish Roman Catholics who would have turned Ireland into a Spain or Africa like they are today.”
Excellent point Morris Harvey. Additionally, the Gaelo-Irish were heavily acculturated to English norms and vice versa. Some of the hardest core Pro-Gaelic Irish were the Old English Settlers and even older Anglo-Norman settlers. Seeing people named Allister Fitzgerald bomb throwing British soldiers and speaking some poetry in English on behalf of pure Ireland is too funny. Another one is Irish Catholic Americans complaining about the heavy boot of English discrimination keeping Irishmen from voting who couldn’t pay 100 dollars. Meanwhile, in England, an Englishman had to pay twice as much.
In these behaviors, Irish Catholic Anglophobes are little different than N@ggers. Only a dumb as door nails Irish Catholic couldn’t miss the irony in above two examples. In the end, Keith Woods supported bombing the British out of Northern Ireland as a child just to make Dublin safe for a Black African Mayors and now Hindu-Moslem Prime Ministers. Its almost as bad as having to use the English word Republic when writing the Republic of Ireland in Gaelic. But the Pope gets his new stream of Peter’s pence and Keith Woods can continue talking about “Duh, Jews” but ignore Nazis. Only an Irishman could get away with that b.s.
What did the Nazis ever do on Ireland or the Irish?
Good points. I think it would have been far different though had large numbers of hyphenated Whites who were Catholic moved to the South. Since they were here in small numbers they assimilated into the larger British Protestant culture more easily.
On the Jewish Question, the power of Jewish identity varies from individual to individual. I think hardcore conspiracy theorists underestimate that many ethnic Jews are religious atheists/deists. Judaism tries to force you to identify as a Jew if you have a Jewish mother, but people do indeed defect. My guess is that most anti-nationalists are sincere in their views, not part of a secret conspiracy.
On the Irish Question, I expected a slam that would make Ixabert proud but this article wasn’t really that.
The actress there is an Anglo-Indian btw.
Some very good points made here, but the argument remans something of a straw man. The fact that there was no Jewish Question in the antebellum or Reconstruction South is irrelevant.
The Jewish Question exists today because in the post-WWII period the Eastern European/Ellis Island Jews assumed a dominant role in American culture, media, business, and eventually foreign policy, placing the U.S. essentially subservient to Israel and counterproductive to American national interests (this is Mearsheimer’s thesis). As George Lincoln Rockwell observed over sixty years ago, Jews were also prominent among American communists and were responsible for the most prominent postwar act of treason committed by the Rosenbergs.
Additionally, Jews were prominent in the “Cultural Marxist” Revolution of the 1960s, aligning themselves with sexual promiscuity, abortion, miscegenation, homosexuality, “civil rights,” pornography, immigration, and so on. The Frankfurt School academics were all Jewish. Marcuse championed “repressive tolerance,” which has become the de facto policy of the media, the universities, and even the government.
I fully agree that the NSDAP was sui generis to Germany of the 1930s, and anyone trying to emulate them today is deluded and counterproductive.
That being said, I can understand why some people remain fascinated by them, because they were the only Europeans in the past century to take on both global capitalism and global Bolshevism, and to try to liberate their country from the shackles of Versailles and the threat of Bolshevism. They were wrong about a number of things but they weren’t wrong about everything.
Also I think it is the case that people who emulate Nazis today are so alienated from society that they take pleasure in the shock value of presenting themselves as “Nazis,” much the same way that fat, tattooed, ugly liberal women take pleasure in the shock value of being unfeminine, disgusting and obnoxious and in your face.
Why southern US philosemitism?
The Jews in the south saw the planters as useful. The US constitution gave Jews full citizenship, by default.
I once was told a story, about young military age migrant Irish men. The story was that during the usa Civil War!
These military age Irish men migrants were sent to war landing in Union yankee sea ports.
Hence on reason Dixie became a victim of attrition?
The Jews should have been sent in as cannon folder!
That’s how you wage war!
Win!
@Captain John Charity Spring,
“The actress there is an Anglo-Indian btw.”
BRAVO Captain! Yes, few people realize Vivian Leigh was part Persian. In some circles, such as that Iranian dude Hunter discussed at one time, Vivian Leigh is considered an epitome of what the original Aryans of Central Asia looked like before they married into the mud people and Moslem Arabs further ruined them.
Also, Vivien’s family backstory illuminates a history of the British Raj almost completely ignored by historians today: The Anglo-Indian nation (British or British Indian mixed). That nation was not insubstantial at one point. At least a million British born colonist graves dot India from the period between 1820-1850. The Indian Sepoy mutiny mass genocide ended that phase. Although reduced from its peak, it was substantial enough that a significant proportion of British are descendents of former colonial settlers of India whose descendents returned to the UK over their centuries of rule and helped guide British imperial policy until within living memory.
https://youtu.be/4VCpkplKUf8?si=RCQBtqTtKiuQ-pQU
But it was dangerous for many. Disease carried the majority away. War and terror another segment. The main setback was the Indian Sepoy mutiny. That murderous rampage by the Indians killed far more British and European settlers and British Indians than modern historians care to admit, upwards of 200,000. That is what permanently ended Britain’s settler intentions from the 1860s until the turn of the century they made another attempt.
Vivian Leigh’s family arose from this tumultuous Oriental Empire. Her father was Scottish, and settled in India becoming a broker, he was named Ernest Richard Hartley, and was an adventurous British trader in Bombay. Her mother appears to be the daughter of an Anglo-Parsi settler-merchant in India named Michael John Yackjee. Michael John Yackjee’s father appears to have been an Anglo-Irish merchant adventurer with the East India Company who had married or made as his mistress a Parsi (Persian of India) who had likely converted at some point to Catholicism. Together they created a kind of hybrid Anglo-Oriental trading network. This type of Anglo-Oriental trading network was the theme of James Clavell’s novels such as “Taipan.”
https://youtu.be/h5k5Gh_jdh8?si=taj0WMOW9g8MRbbb
The Anglo-Irishman’s and Parsi’s son Michael John, took the last name Yackjee, which seems some form of a last name, a type of colequialism often used by children of liaisons between English and powerful Asian families. Such concubinages of convenience as existed for Mchael John Yackjee Father and Mother were often the only way Europeans could gain access to the segregated and highly anti-White bigoted world of Eastern potentates, whether Asian Indian or Chinese. In turn, the potentates gained access to Western capital while keeping Westerners as bay, meanwhile, the Westerners were protected in their colonial city’s under their laws.
Michael John Yackjee in turn met a young woman who was the only survivor of another Irish family that had been massacred in the Great Sepoy Mutiny. Mary Teresa Robinson was either Catholic or Protestant. Apparentely her entire family had been murdered in Calcutta. Its estimated upwards of 1/3rd of all British Colonial India was massacred. This mutiny is what really retarded British settlement of India for two maybe three generations. Its totally whitewashed today. Instead, the Anglophobes just like to talk about how the British met out justice when they defeated the mutineers. Totally appropriate justice regardless.
https://youtu.be/GV_6LTyTNFw?si=D5M742Zy7YPthxqw
Thats the interesting background of Vivien Leigh. Eventually, her Scottish born merchant father and her Anglo-Parsee-Armenian mother moved around India. They met acrress Maureen O’Hara and lived among the tea plantation of Darjaleeng and Ceylon and stayed at Hill Stations like “Snooty Ooty” at the same time as Thomas Rowsell’s family. His family history closes matches Vivian’s and he unknowingly traces their steps in this feature of his.
https://youtu.be/6WxtDribi7I?si=4oL8wrZks3ZMQEXI
These places like Bombay, Singapore, Hong Kong, Calcutta, Madras, Macau, Batavia, etc became these segregated places were trade could be completed with racists Asians who considered Whites almost sub human, and where equally chauvinistic British could trade under their far more just laws. Thru war, genocide, trade, skullguggery, fighting eachother they made a global commercial empire. Vivien Lee grew up in this world and made her way back to London until finally ending in Hollywood. There she made history remaking a novel of an entirely different realm, which not accidentally was similar to the one she left. Today, the world she left has moved on, but the trading houses that helped create it still exist to this day.
https://youtu.be/vJYihpcdfu8?si=nBC7Iwfx4l6sDqu7