RSS
Cuckfederacy caves to the ‘Woke’ demands to erase Southern History except as a lesson in shame and guilt
One man’s treason is another man’s reason and vice versa.
Was Southern Secession an act of treason? Yes, if you regard the American Union as inviolable and indivisible. No, if you believe in states’ rights, including the right to secede. It all depends on the premise, the foundational prejudice, of one’s worldview. One could say the US was created out of treason against the Mother Country. Or one can say it was founded on liberty and independence away from Father Tyranny, like with Zeus’ rebellion against his father Cronus.
Besides, if the US is so against treason(or ‘insurrections’), why encourage it around the world? The US cultivates collaborator agents in every country and encourages(and bribes) them to serve US interests than their own national interests. For twenty years, the US remained in Afghanistan by propping up a puppet regime that many Afghans regarded as treasonous.
Also, looking back on US history, was Manifest Destiny a treasonous act? If American values and ideals are about equal respect for all peoples and cultures, then Manifest Destiny violated such a principle by expanding westward and committing ‘genocide’ on the native folks. Was the US conquest of the SW Territories treasonous? After all, if the US was committed to national independence and sovereignty, did it not violate the sovereignty of Mexico by provoking a war to grab a chunk of its territory?
Of course, one can counter-argue that the vision of America has been to spread liberty and expand progress. So, if US expansion led to more freedoms and opportunities, it was justified, not only for Americans but in the eyes of history.
So, on the matter of the Confederacy, one can make a case for or against treason. Depending on the premise, either argument is valid or invalid. It’s like a conscientious objector can be regarded as a traitor/coward or a hero/saint depending on one’s views.
And then, there are matters of dual or higher loyalty. Muhammad Ali considered himself an American but also a BLACK American and a black Muslim. As such, he had a loyalty higher than to what he perceived as White America. He didn’t serve in Vietnam because he saw it as a white man’s war. In a way, one could say he was treasonous, but in another way, he was being true to his higher loyalties, i.e. had he served in the war, he would have been treasonous to Allah(as conceived by the Nation of Islam).
Generally, treason is most despicable when it’s mainly about personal gain, opportunism, and vanity. If you turn against your own people for thirty pieces of silver, you are scum. Or if you switch loyalties to the other side simply because it seems ‘cooler’ and more prestigious to hang with the richer/greater power, then you’re hollow, lacking a core.
In other cases, what may seem treasonous from the traditional perspective may be necessary reforms. Any great social upheaval or revolution is an act of treason against the past, resulting in much crisis and agony. But it makes for the birth of an improved or new order that may well benefit the great majority. Rise of Modern Turkey was an act of treason against the traditional Ottoman order, but it was time for change. Moreover, such a ‘treason’, fueled by idealism and vision, could be construed as a higher loyalty for the preservation of the order in a dangerous and threatening world. (Besides, one could argue arch-conservatism is also an act of treason. If the role of the ruling class is to govern well and improve the lives of its subjects, then its absolute refusal to implement essential reforms could be seen as a dereliction of duty.)
Treason comes in many flavors, the subtle, the ambiguous, and/or the even subconscious. Take mass immigration to the West. Most nonwhites, whether staying put or moving abroad, don’t consider emigration as treasonous. Even the ruling elites of many non-white nations encourage their own kind to emigrate. Partly, it’s due to surplus population, gaining greater economic access to and influence over the metropole, hope for remittances from the immigrant community, and etc. It isn’t regarded as treasonous because emigrants from nation A aren’t going to the US or EU to do harm to their country of origin.
For example, Turks aren’t going to Germany or the US for recruitment against Turkey. And yet, immigration is a kind of treason in the sense that immigrants are abandoning their own nations, pledging allegiance to another nation, forgetting their own identities & cultures, and mixing with other races to dangerous levels of deracination.
Furthermore, given the imperial nature of the US-EU empire under Jewish Power, there is always the chance, not a slight one, that the empire will target, sanction, destroy, and even invade one’s nation of origin. Indeed, what are Iranians to do when the US specifically targets Iran? Some Iranian-Americans in the US military will have to drop bombs on their own ethnic folks if it comes to war. Even Iranian-American civilians must pay taxes that support Jewish supremacist hostilities against Iran. What are Russian-Americans to do when the US, under Jewish control, is relentless in its hate campaigns against Russia? What are Chinese in America to do if a war breaks out between US and China, especially as the ‘American foreign policy’ isn’t decided by the American people but by a tiny cabal at the top?
Look to the past, and how did German-Americans fare during World War I? What did they end up doing under pressure? They were recruited to kill fellow Germans. At least In the case of World War II, Germany declared war on the US, especially after Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, obliging all Americans to unite in the war effort. In contrast, the US entry into WWI was about banker interests, and German-Americans tragically found themselves slaughtering their own ethno-brethren in servility to the interests of Anglo and Jewish elites.
Jews understand this aspect of American History, i.e. it tends to force immigrant groups to join in the hostility against their own kind in the Old World, e.g. German-Americans vs Germans and Japanese-Americans vs Japanese.
It’s no wonder why Jews are resolved to be JEWISH-Americans than Jewish-AMERICANS and why they use media power and political influence to drum all politicians and all Americans with the notion that “Israel is America’s greatest ally”, i.e. Zion is synonymous with America. It hammers the message to Jews and goyim alike that it’s UNTHINKABLE for Americanism to target any Jew in any part of the world, though, of course, it’s America’s Sacred Duty to target any nation that earned the ire of Jews.
Unlike the Jews, German-Americans were such craven cowards that, instead of pushing back against the vile anti-German campaign in the US during WWI, they fully caved to Anglo-American prejudices. In some ways, Jews were more admirable in their resistance to such pressures following World War II when many Jews were under suspicion of sympathizing with World Communism. Jews were wrong to support communism but right to guard Jewish identity from American Power.
The fate of German-Americans and Swedish-Americans should be a powerful lesson about what happens to a people when they lose a strong sense of who they are and where they came from. Of course, the deracination disease has struck not only German-Americans and Swedish-Americans but Germans in Germany and Swedes in Sweden. The fate is Milwaukee, Madison, and Minneapolis. Once wonderful places, now either crime-infested cities or ‘woke’ cuckopolises into globo-homo-mania.
Generally, the story of mass immigration to the US has been a kind of treason. Immigration can only lead to ambivalent feelings about identity. After all, Mexicans have contradictory views of Mexican-Americans. In some ways, they are fellow Mexicanos, fellow Tacoan brethren. Many Mexicans even see Mexican-American immigration, legal and illegal, as a kind of Reconquista.
That said, Mexicans feel that Mexican-Americans who speak only Ingles, serve in the US military, and work as Cuckez agents of Gringo Nation are traitors. One reason why so many Mexicans didn’t warm to Jeb Bush despite his being pro-Mexican and having a Mexican wife was that the couple looked so much like a symbol of the US domination over Mexico. Big Gringo Man and Tiny Brown Woman. What Jeb regarded as his warmth and affection for Mexico was seen by Mexicans as domination and condescension. So, while many white Americans considered Jeb Bush as a symbol of treason — a globalist selling White America to a brown future — , many Mexicans saw Jeb’s wife as the kind of typical Mexican female in Hollywood movies with a gringo boss-man.
The charge of ‘treason’ is never a sure thing as anything can be deemed treasonous simply by moving the goal posts or altering the national code. The current war on the legacy of the Confederacy is essentially a part of the Jewish War on White. Just like Jews say whiteness is not intrinsic to being French or British or Dutch or Swedish or whatever, they say any form of defiant white identity is evil and wrong. Jews used BLM not only to topple Confederate but British statues. Neocons are especially invested in destroying the Confederate legacy because they operate in the GOP. As the GOP relies so heavily on the Deep South, it has become de facto the Neo-Confederate Party, or the Neocon-Federate Party. But that means Neocons in the GOP become associated with Southern ‘racists’, reflecting badly on the GOP’s total support for Zionism.
This is all very ironic because Jews, both Neocons and Liberal Zionists, totally support Israeli tyranny over Palestinians, turn a blind eye to IDF death squads mowing down Palestinian women & children, and support apartheid as integral to Jewish presence in the West Bank. Also, these ‘progressive’ Jews cut deals with theocratic Saudis and ISIS types. They even work well with Sub-Nazis in Ukraine.
The rule of American Politics is, “If Jews want it, they get it.” Not only do Jews demand it but, once the word is out that Jews want it, goy politicos of both parties, at the very least, dare not push back even if they don’t support it. The only choice is ‘get fully on board’ or ‘step out of the way’, e.g. the ‘gay marriage’ issue where one camp pushed for it while the camp(the so-called ‘conservatives’) just bowed their heads low and let the other side march to victory.
No wonder then that both parties have been complicit in the suppression of BDS. Both parties are for more billions to Israel and more sanctions on Iran and Syria. Both are now for globo-homo-mania. Both are for Negrolatry. If Jews want it, they get it. Jews got the power, and the Power decides.
Now, because the US is nominally a democracy, Jews don’t get everything right away, but they eventually get it as they push while no one pushes back. If one side pushes while the other side doesn’t push back, the pusher eventually wins out over time. It’s a simple law of physics, like with a car on neutral gear pushed only one way. Jews made sure there will be no counter-push to their pushiness.
As for the GOP, the attack on the Confederacy is both troubling and relieving. It may lead to backlash from the White South, but as the GOP is the Party of Lincoln, it’s always been inconvenient to rely on Neo-Confederate votes.
But then, the Culture War against the White South has been unrelenting and pervasive that even many white southerners are now finally dropping their ‘shameful’ heritage that insults the new cult of Negrolatry. Lynyrd Skynyrd consented to stop using Confederate flags at their concerts. NASCAR now follows suit. Walmart began in the South, but Confederate flags have been OUT since the church shooting some yrs ago. Dixie Chicks are now just Chicks. While Antifa and BLM thugs ravage memorials and statues, most white Southerners sullenly remain on the plantation of cuckery and do nothing.
Also, white Southern elites are trained in places like Harvard and Yale and other ‘liberal’ colleges. As such, they are little more than mental cucks of Jews and globalists. Besides, the current Southern elite attitudes are, to an extent, in line with traditional ones. The values and agendas are different but the attitudes are much the same. In the past, the Southern elites looked down on the ‘white trash’. Many of them favored House Negroes over poor white farmers.
Today, southern white elites virtue-signal by saying, “WE GOOD REPENTANT haute whites are NOT like those lowlife redneck vermin who still wave Stars & Bars and revere Stonewall Jackson. We wash Negro toes, kiss Jewish ass, and bend over to globo-homo ‘pride’.” Same old elitist attitude in a new attire.
But even white southern masses are changing. Their religion is football dominated by blacks who thump white guys and hump white girls. In integrated schools, many white guys get beaten up by black guys and cuck to blackness in their pathetic roles as worthless ‘whiggers’. And as rap music is big among white southern boys, they imitate blacks and no longer resist jungle-feverization of white women. They are finished. And there is mass immigration of yellows and browns who mostly vote Democratic. The South is really over. Same with Texas, now a land of cuckboys than cowboys, more of queers than steers.
In the end, while anything can be accused of treason, the accusation stings ONLY WHEN made by those in power. If the British had won, Benedict Arnold would have been honored as a patriot who served the crown while Washington and Jefferson would have been hanged as traitors. But the Revolutionaries won, and Washington became the Father of the American Republic whereas Benedict Arnold, at least in US history, became synonymous with ‘traitor’.
So, ‘treason’ is one of those power-words. It gains weight only if made with the power to back up the accusation with penalty. The proof is in the pudding of current politics.
In a way, all of today’s deep state elites are treasonous. The US elites don’t serve the US. They are globalists whose main loyalties are to the oligarchic matrix of Jewish supremacist power, multinational corporations, imperialist military-industrial-complex, the cult of Negrolatry, and globo-homo-mania as the new messianic neo-religion of the West. The Russia Collusion Hoax was one of the greatest acts of treason in US history, but it was spun as patriotism against Donald Trump, the treasonous puppet of evil Vladimir Putin or Putler.
So many people in the Deep State should be sent to prison or even executed for their plot against Trump who came to the presidency by a fair election — if unfair, the wronged side was Trump’s, but it still managed to eke out a win.
But notice the Deep State spins its own narratives and has the power to protect ‘made’ people. Just like Wall Street scum never faced justice after the 2008 fiasco, virtually everyone involved in the Russia Collusion Hoax has been protected and continues to run America.
Men like David Patraeus are traitors. They don’t defend or serve America. They serve Jewish supremacist imperialists and work for the kind of power that encourages Christian churches to drape themselves with ‘gay pride’ colors. In aiding and abetting the Zionist ‘genocide’ of Palestinians and the Wars for Israel(that target Muslims and Arabs), these men are actually violating the principles of ‘anti-racism’ that they claim to represent. They say the US must redeem its ‘racist’ past, but they have a strange way of going about it by aiding Zionist ‘racist’ terror against Palestinians, Arabs, and Iranians. So, ‘treason’ isn’t about truth or justice. It’s about who has the power, who gets to decide the political premise and ‘moral’ foundation, and who has the means to not only accuse others of treason but to use the power of institutions to make the charges stick.
In current the US and EU, the highest ‘loyalty’ and the greatest ‘patriotism’ are about cucking to Jewish supremacism, worshiping globo-homo queertianity, and kissing the black ass as magical. If you reject such notion, then you’re treasonous. But then, being accused of ‘treason’ by vile Jewish supremacists and globalist cucks should be an honor. One should NOT be loyal to such evil powers.
Today, the weasel globalist-generals who serve a globo-homo-ized US military in service to Jewish Supremacism and Jungle Fever/Faith dare charge the great Robert E. Lee, a loyal son of his beloved Virginia, of treason. With Jews, You Lose. Whites were fated to lose everything when they ceded their power and authority to Zion.
Now, a question. Suppose Southern States had more people and a bigger economy than the North in 1860 and suppose the Northern States seceded from the Union and Southern States waged war to restore the Union. Would the Northern States have committed treason?
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
JF is slowing down for no good reason. We the readers demand another 10,000 word article ASAP.
Inshallah, the groom will be smacking up his bitch by Thursday. I personally cannot wait.
One of the few things concepts from Ayn Rand I agree with is that our loyalty must be earned. Just because you are my brother born of the same mother does not obligate me to love you nor do I incur any other duty from that accidental relationship. If my friend would give his life for me and my brother betray me who should I be loyal too? Is blood “thicker than water” in the sense of relationships? Only an idiot would think so; be true to those who would be true to you.
I did not choose to be an American and from a very young age I loathed patriotism and yet I still I served this country for three decades as I thought a responsible citizen should, only to find? Only to find this country I was born into has betrayed me; so am I a traitor for despising the land of my nativity?
Still, were it not for The State of Israel, what country would Americans be patriotic to? Almost nobody is patriotic to America, anymore. Even most Conservatives, so called, are more loyal to The State of Israel than they are to their own country.
The US Military, these days, merely serves as extra cannon fodder, for the Israeli Jews, in The Middle East. Were it not for Israel, the US Military would have no reason for being, and Americans would realize that. Then, they would not enlist, and those already in the US Military would quit their jobs.
“Treason” like “racism” is a word so corrupted it now means nothing. I would say everybody has the right to leave their native land or tribe, as long as another will have them. Opposing the old tribe as part of the new is not treason. Opposing your own tribe’s well-being without having the courage to leave it IS treason. Thus the Confederates were not traitors but 90% of the US Congress ARE traitors.
Only 2900 words. Why didn’t you just tweet it?
The Confederacy was financed by jews, led by a jew, to defend jewish slave traders and jewish plantations.
Iran has the largest jew population in the Middle East. Jews are given permanent seats of power in the Iranian parliament.
“The US Military, these days, merely serves as extra cannon fodder, for the Israeli Jews”
Did you say “extra” cannon fodder? How about all of it.
Jewish Power will use and abuse everything on the basis of “Is it good for the Jews?”
Zionists were allied with apartheid South Africa but dropped it like a hot potato and went with Mandela.
In Goy-Jewish alliances, goyim remain loyal to Jews(even at the expense of their own interests), whereas Jews remain loyal to their own interests. Goyim take the alliance seriously, whereas Jews take it opportunistically.
Jews are smarter and regard alliances are self-serving, whereas goyim, at least in dealing with Jews, forge an alliance where the two sides are equal & mutual or Jews are favored.
Imperial Wizard apologized for using the term “Jew controlled media” in 1982 after being questioned about it by Buchanan.
Video Link
Now owns a resort in Belize
Federal government must have paid him a lot for his troubles and he used the money to start a resort in Belize. He was not even allowed to say”Jew controlled media” while on the federal payroll as a KKK leader.
But there is a difference. Even if your brother isn’t super-loyal to you, IF he doesn’t betray you, you should favor him on the basis of blood.
In contrast, the only reason for being loyal to a friend, non-family member, or stranger is IF he’s extra-considerate towards you.
So, even though you should favor a loyal friend over a treacherous brother, you should favor a neutral brother over a neutral friend.
Likewise, even though a Japanese should admire a virtuous non-Japanese over a lowlife Japanese, he should generally favor the Japanese over non-Japanese.
“But there is a difference. Even if your brother isn’t super-loyal to you, IF he doesn’t betray you, you should favor him on the basis of blood.”
Keep in mind that the official state hero/mascot/namesake of the Jews is the Biblical Jacob, aka Yisrael, who made his name by lying to his own father in order to steal from his own brother.
The question is irrelevant. The facts, historically, are that the South drifted into fantasy about its values, morality, communality, and its identity. In short, it was based on stupidity, a lame brain application of goofball religion, and a dread of Whites being too much like the Negro, making the elite highly neurotic and suffering widespread dissociative disorders. Creating phony personas, florid and flush clothing, overly effective mannerism and comportment, all symptoms of a society of false virtue and low intellectual process and output.
If the South had had a Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, they would have been successful.
True, Jacob pulled a dirty trick. Still, he did it for the good of the Tribe as his older brother wasn’t very dutiful and spent most of his time hunting and having fun. So, even though he betrayed his brother, he was loyal to the Tribe, indeed in ways Esau could never be.
One aspect of life before the “War of Northern Aggression” was the fact that the federal government had little power and was subservient to the states.
In those times, an individual citizen regarded himself to be a citizen of his respective state–NOT a “citizen of the united States”. A person living in Virginia considered himself to be a citizen of Virginia and likewise citizens of other states who were citizens of their respective states.
At the time, the only responsibilities that the federal government had was to coin lawful money, run a post office, and have the ability to gather troops to repel invasions, nothing more.
The “War of Northern Aggression” was illegal on its face, as states always had the right to secede from the “union”.
The requirement that the “states in rebellion” sign a statement recognizing the inviolability of the federal government before readmission was done under duress and were not valid contracts. The only state that never signed a “no secession” clause was Texas. To this day, Texas could tell the feds to “take a hike”. There would be very little the feds could do about it.
That all changed with the conclusion of the “War of Northern Aggression” when the states were subordinated to the federal government, illegal powers being taken by the federal government. It was all downhill from there…
People are loyal to what they perceive are their fellow tribe-members. If that is true, why so much White hatred for the culture and lives of fellow Whites? Obviously, those Whites are loyal to a different tribe, usually a religion, in which Whites believe “race” has no place.
No, not religion, at least in the conventional sense. White Christians favor Jews who terrorize Arab Christians. They favor Jewish globo-homo and their sub-nazi allies in Ukraine against the Orthodox Church.
Jewish race matters more to White Christians than spiritual brotherhood. Assad of Syria has protected Arab Christians whereas Jews in Israel spit on Christians and support ISIS beheaders of Christians, but white Christians in the US favor Jews.
Also, White Christians worship the black RACE. To them, blacks are RACIALLY god-like cuz of bellowing voices and demigodlike athletic skills. It goes for white conservatives too. Rush Limbaugh was all about NFL-worship.
The true religion of the white race, a bunch of wheaks and whummies, is the Jugromo Idolatry of Jews, Negroes, and Homos.
Since when do Whites worship the Black race? Since Lincoln beat up the Zionist slavers? But Lincoln wanted to re-patriate Blacks, and probably would have if he hadn’t been shot, and before that, if the Zionist Southern plantation owners hadn’t fought him tooth and nail in the Civil War.
So Black worship goes back to the “progressive” Zionist-Marxist pact (Brit-Soviet) of WW2 against remnant “racist” Christendom (Axis powers). And we now know that was to usher in neo-slaving Globalism, with Israel as world capital/center of the universe.
So this is all about Zionism. Globalism is about Zionism. Rings of Zionists will protect the center. Rings of race traitors for ZOG (White, Black, Brown, Yellow) will protect ZOG headquarters, aka Kikestan. Nikki Haley is a Zionist. Her Black son in law will be a Zionist. Her mixed race grandchildren will be Zionists. They won’t be Zionist Royalty (that’s for “chosen” kike bloodlines) but they will be a kind of inner circle royalty.
That’s the plan at least. Of course, it’s going to fail as kikes are cursed forever by the mark of Cain.
That’s why the U.S. is failing so spectacularly, and it’s only going to get worse. That’s why the US can’t win any of the ZOG wars (Mideast, Persia/Iran, Ukraine)…
It only won the “Jewish Century” wars and revolutions because Christians got complacent, lazy and lost faith in favor of kike-professed “modernity.” And because they unknowingly and naïvely were pit one against the other by ZOG. But now ZOG has a name, a face, an identifiable history and an identifiable headquarters: Israel/Kikestan. And the entire world can see their essence and exactly what they’re doing with Globalism, how they went about it, and their true intentions.
We’ll see how long these kikes last. But rest assured, not only have they not lost the mark of Cain, but it is now permanently stitched on their ratty little kike hides. And they did to themselves, as always.
They and their STUPID Zoglodyte minions really are forsaken. It’s only a matter of time before they fall again.
Aliyah
here we go again
Aliyah
Is it ever going to end?
Video Link
Sadly, you and I are in the same boat.
“George Floyd, we worship thee!”
“George Floyd, we worship thee!”
That’s just the media talking, spinning their lies. Deep down that’s not what the average American thinks. They know better, even though they might be afraid to say so.
JF, you fashion yourself as an armchair movie critic sometimes. Take a look at the new Netflix series, a British/US piece of propaganda. called Diplomat It is a woke horror show featuring every conceivable contrary to fact actor and plot twist known to man.
One of the founders of the Alt Right…..Evan McLaren…..is now on board with Global Homo and the H1..L1 B visa programs…….as is lisping Richard Spencer……
Add stealing land from the Indians and selling it, and collecting the whiskey tax, two prime sources of revenue. Also the Navy suppressing piracy and illegal transoceanic slave trade and acting as an advance guard in protecting against invaders.
All true but not adequate excuse or pardonable for he gross mistakes and miscalculations of the Southern Leadership. Like a chess game, you have what you have on the chess board. It is up to you to develop tactics and strategy, in order to out maneuver your opponent. As you know, a consistently necessary tactic is to feign attacks or broad movements to trap or sucker in your opponent, if you will.
Southern people, from a Jungian perspective, had thin and fragile personas, not enough intellectual depth and introspection, and were two dimensional materialists. Their collective consciousness was clouded by the fog and mist of romanticism that included adolescent elements. There is much more analysis from a Jungian perspective that is edifying.
I shall say no more but to quote Sam Dickson, contributor and long time friend and associate of Jared Taylor, when talking about Southern Whites. Jared said, “My experience with Southerns have always been very pleasant. They are gracious, welcoming, and very amiable-or something along those lines. To which Sam Dickson, descendant of several Civil War illuminates and seminal figures replied, “Yes, but I wish they had studied more.”. Exactly. Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.
What is the true meaning of karma?
Hinduism identifies karma as the relationship between a person’s mental or physical action and the consequences following that action. It also signifies the consequences of all the actions of a person in their current and previous lives and the chain of cause and effect in morality.
The 3 Types Of Karma Explained
-Sanchitta. This is accumulated past actions or karmas waiting to come to fruition. …
-Parabda. This is the present action: what you are doing now, in this lifetime and its result.
-Agami. Future actions that result from your present actions are called agami karma.
Once you start receiving the true history and chronicles of the United States, and its grotesque sins and unforgivable atrocities, you must, as a spiritual, thinking, and transcendent sentient being KNOW the following:
Any individual or group entity of individuals is responsible for their karma. It is unmistakable. The serial official lies of the American government, its trading of human lives as a currency for material gain, e.g., oil, land, gold, other physical resources has got to first be acknowledged and then atoned for. Karmic scales must be balanced and in harmony. They will not automatically resume due to denial, forgetting, or ignoring .
The JUSA is not and will not proceed upon this restitution path. Many of the institutions that aided or ignored (Christian churches, Jews, Protestants (material acquisition is a sign of Divine blessing), Catholics (determined to convert the New World heathens and “given them a soul”), and the organized sociopathic and psychopathic collective sickness and serial evils. No, there will be no coming clean.
One can put this in different words, but essentially and religiously it comes down to this:
“God punishes and destroys that which is unresolved evil or unrequited”. Karma will shape the attitudes of men and the dissolution and self-destruction will proceed. Karma and Christian theology differ: Karma is an inner process which affects the Outer in unknowable ways. Christian theology-more primitive-emphasizes an anthropological stream of actions, external force(s) punishing the individuals or collective. the Bible tells me so, e.g., Sodom and Gomorrah. Turning people to salt, etc. In my Orthodox Church that I was raised, God is a beatific gray haired man and his minions are men with swords and spears, ready to dish out death and dismemberment.
Perhaps you should learn a thing or two about the meaning of the word ‘facts’ before bandying that word about with reckless abandon. First and foremost, any idea/concept that comports with your own confirmation bias is not necessarily a ‘fact’. “Creating phony personas, florid and flush clothing, overly effective mannerism and comportment, all symptoms of a society of false virtue and low intellectual process and output” Project much?
I was born in Texas. I spent my youth surrounded by Southerners. I worked and lived in New Orleans, sailing therefrom on ocean ships. I am steeped and marinaded in things Southern. I worked for years with Southern men on ships and in maritime related industries. Look up Lakes Bros. Steamship Company.
I have made a special point of my lifelong anthropological research to explore and understand the derivatives, underlying ideals, and values of the Southern People. I admire certain things about the South.
But my opinion is based on several factors. One, my impressions and interpretations as I summarized above. I am a data and observation kind of person. IOW, first hand verification. Second, work backwards from the defeat and humiliation of the South culminating in Gettysburg. Obviously, denial, whimsical beliefs, ungrounded ideas evaporate. In simple terms, when tools and procedures do not get the job done, then it is time to reflect and retro analyze why and what those deficiencies are. Southerners are not willing to do this, preferring to gaze nostalgically in a magical past of pomp and fluff. One very large omission: retro-imaging and revision does not take into account of the poor White Southerner during the heyday and zenith of Southern prosperity. Slavery was a cruel foil against the poor, working Whites. It benefitted the piss elegant, pretentious plantation owners who were parodies of French aristocracy and British effeminate home whore till culture.
If you have different views based on details, I am open to read them objectively.
Perhaps you can flourish and rapture this underreported phenomenon:
Poor Whites and the Labor Crisis in the Slave South
While studies on southern slaveholders, yeomen, and even the enslaved abound, relatively little has been written about the Deep South’s white working-class. My new book, Masterless Men: Poor Whites and Slavery in the Antebellum South, seeks to illuminate the lives of about one-third of the cotton belt’s whites, who owned neither land nor slaves. By doing so, we can understand more about the labor crisis and class tensions that helped to bring on the Civil War.
Although life had never come easy for the region’s poor, the financial upheaval of the Panic of 1837 devastated the vulnerable lower classes and rendering many small landholders landless. Problems for non-slaveholding whites continued accruing throughout the 1840s, right on the heels of the economic recession, as over 800,000 slaves poured into the Deep South, displacing unskilled and semi-skilled white laborers. By this time, the profitability and profusion of plantation slavery had rendered most low-skilled white workers superfluous, except during the bottleneck seasons of planting and harvest. Shut out from much of the Deep South’s agricultural work, many poor white laborers spent the late-antebellum period experiencing long bouts of unemployment or underemployment. Though impoverished whites were never subjected to the daily violence and degrading humiliations of racial slavery, they did suffer tangible socio-economic consequences as a result of living in a slave society.
Whites causing misery to Whites. Sounds familiar, eh? But the Jews in the antebellum South did very well, in league with the Plantation owners?
The South was a region, a zeitgeist, a collective consciousness of stupidity, imbecility, crass affectations, juvenile manners and a clownish comportment. It meant numbing the humanity part of the soul to inflict suffering and not feel a thing about it. All for accumulation of wealth and more wealth.
Consider Robert E. Lee. The Civil War arrived to tear his loyalties apart. He considered himself a Virginian. This is how it went, on down the line. This was not unusual.
It’s a totally alien concept for today’s Americans. It has become completely foreign. How rich is that? To become truly native, one must become completely foreign. A “Virginian”? It’s a notion deprived of any real force anymore. It’s more like an address than anything else today. An administrative zone.
The Union expected Robert E. Lee to war against his own people, his own kith and kin. It did. That is what he would have had to do to avoid the inevitable charges of treason and rebellion.
Civil wars aren’t neat and easy, they are filled with inversions.
“two prime sources of revenue.”
But not as prime as cotton tariffs which I’ve heard characterized as the most significant source of federal revenue or do you know that characterization to be wrong? The characterization puts the importance of Sumpter into perspective.
“Slavery was a cruel foil against the poor, working Whites. It benefitted the piss elegant, pretentious plantation owners who were parodies of French aristocracy and British effeminate home whore till culture.”
In other words, it benefited the cousins of the working whites. Cousins they were by and large proud of. If you’d spent as much time understanding the South as you claim you’d know this. WJ Cash gives a good explanation in Mind of the South.
“Civil wars aren’t neat . . .”
Sure, but it wasn’t a Civil War. It was an invasion.
The thesis of your comment is so fatuous and fantasist, that plain evidence of want and deprivation of Whites during slavery, being an incontestable fact, is synonymous with misery, malnutrition, and passed on misery to innocent children.
You display a lack of comprehension, an inanimate level of stupidity pulled out of the ether of a toilet chamber, small, no fan, and subsequent to a massive crap. What is wrong with you? Telling the big wide world that being cousins of White plantation land owners was enough to compensate for no work, having to be itinerant to seek employment, and having no possessions of significance. These are the exact same folks as the hillbillies of West Virginia, of popular lore.
I declare you a dunce and charlatan. You cannot draw a breath and say you care about the South. This recitation washes away the stench of your argument:
https://www.c-span.org/video/?324064-1/poor-whites-antebellum-south
Cassius Clay (Ali) refused induction into the military because he’d just won the heavyweight title and was at the height of his earnings potential. He was, at first, ruled ineligible for the draft because he couldn’t read or write. That status was changed when his anti-White statements became annoying to the establishment of the time. Clay was a huckster, loyal to himself, not his “brothers”. How much of his earnings did he use to uplift any little black child?
Tucker Carlson calls the forces upon us to be “irrational”. Doesn’t seem to understand it’s rational and the force is Jewish power.
The west’s real enemies are Jews. Always have been.
Were it not for The State of Israel, what country would most Americans be patriotic to?
“The thesis of your comment is so fatuous and fantasist, that plain evidence of want and deprivation of Whites during slavery, being an incontestable fact, is synonymous with misery, malnutrition, and passed on misery to innocent children.”
In other words you are completely unfamiliar with Cash’s work and have an superficial familiarity of the South based on experiences of Texas that by your description suggest not even your own lifespan much less that of many generations. So here’s a short bit on Cash about whom it would be good for you to familiarize yourself.
“Cash delivered the final pages of his manuscript for The Mind of the South to his publisher in late July 1940, over a decade after he first published the article that gave the volume its title. An ambitious work, the book affirmed that the South’s history, as envisioned in the image of “the Old South,” remained a strong influence on twentieth-century southern society. Unlike other regions of the United States, the past bound the South to specific patterns of race relations, gender roles, and community identities that prevailed despite the upheavals of technology, mass marketing, and urbanization. “So far from being modernized,” Cash wrote in his introduction about the region, “In many ways it has actually always marched away, as to this day it continues to do, from the present toward the past.”
“While emphasizing the importance of a frontier mentality on the southern mentality, Cash looked to the cotton boom years from 1820 to 1860 as the crucial years of southern history. It was the latter period that southern elites used after the Civil War to create a mythological past for the South, one based on the dominance of the planter class in unity with other whites, regardless of economic status. This racist bond worked not only to the detriment of African-Americans, but against poor whites as well. As Cash observed, the myths that the southern elites invoked to retain their dominance over the rest of society were so powerful that “The grand outcome was the almost complete disappearance of economic and social focus on the part of the masses.” Translated into a “democracy of feeling” that demanded political and economic deference from poor whites in exchange for recognition of “the common brotherhood of white men,” this bond reinforced the racial hierarchy of slavery well into the twentieth century. As Cash wrote, modern southern society fixed upon a seemingly “ever-growing concern with white superiority and an ever-growing will to mastery of the Negro” in order to reassure poor whites that “a white man, any white man, was in some sense a master.” As in the Old South, “Economic and social considerations remained, as ever, subordinate to those of race—and country.”
If you had ever read his book, which you clearly haven’t, Cash elaborates on the above theme by identifying the strong hold kinship held in the South over generations by kinfolk at all stages of the social hierarchy, a condition that persists in the not yet urbanized parts of the region.
If you were from an old southern family this wouldn’t need to be explained to you, but you clearly do not possess such an heritage.
Addendum: not only are you apparently ignorant of the thesis lying at the heart of perhaps the most celebrated work in history/sociology of the South you offered to support your claims an tv piece focusing on migrant white labor. As if the critical determinant of local culture relations between whites in the South was not its permanent and multigenerational residents but it’s migrant laborers.
“Problems for non-slaveholding whites continued accruing throughout the 1840s, right on the heels of the economic recession, as over 800,000 slaves poured into the Deep South, displacing unskilled and semi-skilled white laborers.”
What? 800,000 slaves poured into the Deep South? I thought they were already there. Was this a new influx? If so, where did they come from? Were they transplanted from the Caribbean, South America or other parts of the U.S.?
Gotta keep those labor costs down! Gee, where have we heard this before? Oh, yeah, with the offshoring of jobs to China for the past 50 years, which again benefitted the upper classes, but destroyed the working class.
Scheme after scheme is hatched in order to make a few people wealthy, and the list is long. Look what bringing Blacks into the country has done. It was disastrous for Black people, but it has also been disastrous for White people.
Destruction of countries. When they’re done, they just move on to the next scheme. The word “country” means nothing to these parasites.
You are correct across the board. Thanks. Your comments are essential reading for me.
The clearing of Alabama as a wilderness didn’t get started until the early 19th century. The states further west were later. Title to most of the land in Alabama, held by the various Yazoo land companies, wasn’t resolved by the US Supreme Court until 1810.
Thanks. I did not know that. So where did the 800,000 Black slaves come from then? Were they still coming in from Africa, or did they come from elsewhere in the States, or were they shipped in from the Caribbean or South America? I mean, prior to 1810, where were the Black Slaves being worked? Was it mostly in Virginia and the Carolinas? How about Mississippi, Georgia, Louisiana at this time? Is there a good resource I can look at showing where the slaves were and how many there were during, say, 1650 to 1860?
You misunderstand class and the origin of the Southern Planters. The wealthy slave owners were descended from the younger sons of the wealthy in England who were granted huge tracts of land by English governors in the colonies. The same rigid class system that existed in England was transported to the Southern colonies. Poor Whites, the vast majority of Southerners, descendents of the Scotch and Scotch-Irish, as well as other poorer people in England were not considered “cousins” by the ruling classes in Dixie. A kinship of sorts developed during and after the War Between the States, but class differences were still strictly enforced. White sharecroppers didn’t get invited to the boss’s table anymore than the dark ones.
“Poor Whites, the vast majority of Southerners, descendents of the Scotch and Scotch-Irish, as well as other poorer people in England were not considered “cousins” by the ruling classes in Dixie.”
You have an underdeveloped notion of what constitutes Dixie and when and who the landowners were.
Tennessee and western GA was unsettled until 1760s/‘70s. There were descendants of Brits who arrived in VA early to mid.17th century but the TN/GA arrivals didn’t get there until 2-3 or more generations had gone by. There were plenty of non inheriting opportunity seekers among them. No, they were not landed aristocracy when they arrived.
The remainder of the South was settled even later. The Indians and their Spanish Allies were still in control as far East as AL as late as 1790s/1800. The US Supreme act didn’t sort out property disputes to most of AL until 1810. The new arrivals creating farms and plantations in these new and undeveloped southern soon to be states were not aristocrats but their poorer cousins and non-aristocratic more recent arrivals.
My own family were among the first settlers of these newly opened territories and they came to be large landowners and yes they and their cousins developed an culture of interrelated sympathy which persists to this day much as described by WJ Cash who was born into an poor family in North Carolina and who had no reason to embellish. I’ve provided just some of the authority supporting my position, if you think you have superior sources of authority please provide it but don’t contradict if you don’t know.
This book would be a good start.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Slavery,_American_Freedom
Do you want to go state by state in this format to find the few examples of poorer Whites being accepted by the upper classes in the South? How about Virginia? The Carolinas? Are you arguing there were no class distinctions in Georgia or Louisiana? Where do you suppose the term “White trash” came from? It wasn’t Philadelphia. The South had a very rigid class system in most cases. There are always exceptions to every rule and because it was America, there was an opportunity to rise out of the poorer classes, then through intermarriage gain some access to the wealthy White culture, just as in England a man of extraordinary talent could be granted a title. Because of the war, many of the wealthy class became poor, or gained a great respect for those who fought under them, but poor Whites were often treated very poorly and class was, and in many cases still is, a dominant feature of Southern society. No matter what this Cash fellow wrote. Johnny Cash probably disagreed with him, too.
“Do you want to go state by state in this format to find the few examples of poorer Whites being accepted by the upper classes in the South?”
You’ve failed to understand the premise of Mind of the South that there was a deliberate effort by the upper class to be seen as a benevolent aristocracy by other Whites. You also fail to understand exactly how small the gene pool was in the characteristic small southern towns inhabited by the same small number of families over generations. Places where political contests often were reduced to loyalty according to degree of relation.
You have a broad bullshit ideation that you want me to disprove. I’m not going to do that because WJ Cash already has. Read the book rather than being pig headed in your ignorance.
No, I don’t have an “ideation” I want you to disprove. I disagree with you. There was an element of benevolence in some of the aristocrats, but I’d say that was a small number. The poor in the South were much poorer than the poor in the North. There was less upward mobility in the South than in the North and the wealthy weren’t above using blacks as a cudgel against any actions taken by poor Whites trying to increase their wages.
There is something in what you say about certain areas of the South, but that isn’t true throughout the South. Do you really believe the descendants of wealthy Englishmen, who in most cases were the Southern aristocrats, felt any kinship to the Scotch and Scotch-Irish? To the poor Welsh-American or Irish-American? There was solidarity between Whites, as long as poor Whites stayed on the reservation.
Just reading the excerpt of your reference demigod, Cash, underwhelms me. Did you not get or apprehend the internal contradiction in his writing? He oozes mediocrity, superficiality, a lack of serious scholarship or robustness of theme or advocacy. Forgettable, Salvation Army repository.,
You are also a dim bulb who has no more toes to stub. That video I posted is made by a university professor of Southern Anthropological History and has referenced, PLURAL. You poltroon.
Charles Bolton
Professor University of North Carolina, Greensboro->History
“Poor Whites of the Antebellum South”
https://www.c-span.org/video/?324064-1/poor-whites-antebellum-south
Poor Whites represented 20 to 30 percent of the Whites of the Antebellum South. Look at the photos and listen to this dispassionate descriptive narrative of his. This is really a commiseration of scholarly research.
Another source book: “The Confessions of Edward Isham. Poor White Life of the Old South”.
It was wonderful, living the simple life of “being so close to Nature, for Whites. Taking cue and nod from Cheeses Kereist hisself, they practiced and welcomed the humility placed upon them as many Negro slaves looked down upon them, because they felt better off. Oh The “Spirit of the South”!! Oh yeah. Who dat?
And according to you they received rapture and satifaction knowing that their White “cousins” were masters of The South and overlords of people coercised by violence, torture, murder and deliberate impregnation of Negro women, to better provide units for working in the fields. And they were happy!! Why else did they sing so often while bending over and picking cotton?
As I mentioned, I had been in and around Southerns my whole life. Immersed but then removed, so I was able to perceive up close and from a distance perspective. Plus, being a big believer in cross-cultural comparisons and analyses, I see into the Southern geist and Rorschach from different angles. You, on the other hand, are a limited horizon, limited intellect-it seems-and don’t have the balls do objectively criticism and apply rigor of analysis of Southerness.
Southerners have a love of flourishing phrases, circumlocutions were direct statements are adequate, and use various personal affectations to draw attention away from their rather overall shallowness of knowledge and lack of study. Form wins out over function, frequently.
Inside every authentic Southerner is a rooted persona of rural, pastoral context and subtle and subliminal basis of thought and action. Years ago while traveling in Spain, I was exposed to Spanish organ music. Typically smaller and operating in the higher register due to size, (think of the Irish Harp in relation to the orchestral variety), my European cathedral and organ tour focused on the Iberian variant. As I read about its origenesis, devleopment, etc, etc, there was a comment by a Spanish composer that put this instrument its composition is context. “He exclaimed that Spain was a simpler culture than that of the Northern Countries and did not have the intense intellectual tradition of those, but the Spanish people were diligent, proud and sincere. Well, that’s OK. But I mention this in relating and comparing the South with the North, then and now.
One notable historical aspect that I remember reading in grade school. It was history in the post Independence epoch. It told of family farmers that cleared forests in the Eastern Seaboard States-like clear cutting in the Amazon-farming until the soil was depleted, and then moving on to virgin forested lane to bleach and extract it nutrients. When there was not more land to farm in this fashion, these dullards and dittoheads were forced to migrate further and further West, supporting the displacement of Native Amercans from their traditional land, through lying, cheating, fraud and genocide. “Shining Light On a Hill”(of skulls of mass killings).
In analagous terms, The South can be compared to contemporary Ukraine, in many respects. Meaning, in many ways, it cannot get some respect.
W. J. Cash
In The Mind of the South, Cash tried to debunk the idea of an “aristocratic” Old South and a “progressive” New South and sought to describe the romanticism, antiintellectualism, and prejudice that he believed arose from a peculiar Southern climate, landscape, frontier violence, clannishness, and Calvinism.
The son of Carolina Piedmont Baptists, Cash graduated in 1922 from Wake Forest College (North Carolina), attended a year of law school, and then taught in college and a boys’ school for two years. He then turned to journalism, working over the years mainly for the Charlotte News (North Carolina) as an editor and contributing articles to H.L. Mencken’s American Mercury. Turning against his inherited values and becoming staunchly liberal, he scorned religious fundamentalism and Prohibition, regretted what he considered a Southern malaise, and attacked fascism overseas. The manuscript of The Mind of the South was completed in July 1940, he married in December, and the book was published in February 1941. The critical acclaim won him, among other things, a Guggenheim Fellowship, which he used to go to Mexico to work on a novel about the South. There, however, he became physically and mentally ill and hanged himself in a Mexico City hotel room.
In The Mind of the South, Cash tried to debunk the idea of an “aristocratic” Old South and a “progressive” New South and sought to describe the romanticism, antiintellectualism, and prejudice that he believed arose from a peculiar Southern climate, landscape, frontier violence, clannishness, and Calvinism.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Mind-of-the-South
Addendum: American Southern Men are cruel and display extreme hatred of cats, leading them to inflict injury and death upon felines. No other region or people, except Latinos exhibit this pathology.
The notion of aristocracy he’s debunking is precisely the kind being promoted in the comments here, namely a British style distant aristocracy with no connection to the common people.
“Do you really believe the descendants of wealthy Englishmen, who in most cases were the Southern aristocrats, felt any kinship to the Scotch and Scotch-Irish?”
Do you really believe family money was passed down proportionately among the sons of the British aristocracy (it wasn’t -primogeniture) who by the turn of the beginning of the 18th century constituted an infinitesimal proportion of the British population in the South? And if you imagine that the majority of large southern landowners by the 19th century were resistant to intermarrying with Scots, Scots Irish and Germans you are delusional.
The descendants of wealthy Englishmen who had substantial inheritances and were unwilling to intermarry with Scots, Irish or Germans were not “in most cases” the Southern aristocrats outside of VA or South Carolina and probably not even in those states. Most were self made.
Poupon writes with the same confident ignorance seen in the comments of Jenner Ickham Errican another commenter on this site. Can’t help wondering . . .
Read the book.
I agree with you that different regions of the South were worse for poor Whites and we’re probably arguing about two different things. I do believe there was a more distinct class system in certain parts of the South than in the rest of the US, mainly because of the vast wealth difference between wealthy and poor Whites. There was, after the War Between the States, a camaraderie between rich and poor Whites, made necessary by the large negro population, that was admirable. There were also a group of rich Southerners who weren’t above using the negro as a weapon against other Whites. Are there any rich Whites left, North or South, who stand with their less wealthy brethren?
In the second quarter of the nineteenth century, a system developed in the South where the greatest need for new slaves was the deep south and Texas. Since importation of new slaves was illegal after 1818, the “new slaves” were bred in places like Virginia, North Carolina, and Tennessee, then “sold down the river” to the deeper south and west. Breeding slaves from existing slaves could be very lucrative.
Priss/JF chose not to try the Twitter amnesty.
A wise choice considering the recent re-banning of many who did, particularly upsetting to Anglin, clearly cut up by it for a week or so.
Not to mock Andre at all, but I never made an account there, it always seemed a little stupid to me.
I would like to hear, from a genuine southerner, with knowledge of the history, an opinion on Cold Mountain, the novel not the poor movie.
I once asked Boyd Cathey, but he doesn’t reply to anything here.
What bullshit. ‘Are more nepostic’, ‘More self-promotional’, ‘into long-term infiltration’, sure.
Got booted off in less than a day.
Sorry to hear it. Glad to hear you tried. So much for ‘amnesty’.