An OD reader has drawn my attention to Lawrence Auster’s attack on the Confederacy.
Unlike Auster, I don’t believe that “fighting liberalism” and lobbying the media to talk about race and crime should be our top priority. These things are only symptoms of the real problem.
I also reject Auster’s premise that there is an “American nation.” Instead, I believe there are anywhere from 9 to 11 rival American nations, and that the clash between these rival nations in Congress is the driving force behind our present racial predicament.
If we desire to restore a nation with a positive and healthy sense of White racial consciousness and a Christian conservative sensibility, then our top priority should be nurturing a separate and autonomous sense of ethnic and cultural identity in Dixie, and reviving the Confederate project of secession from the United States.
It is the context of the Union that is the driving force behind our racial and cultural decline. That is why it is important to defend the Confederacy and its attempt to leave the Union. If White Southerners are going to survive the 21st century, then we are going to have to leave the Union a second time.
Here is my response to Auster:
(1) First, the Confederacy was created to preserve the United States, in the sense that the people of the states had the right to self government and the Union was a voluntary association of states instead of a death pact with a consolidated government in Washington.
(2) Second, there was never a “Civil War,” unless you are describing the partisan warfare in places like Missouri, Kentucky, and Tennessee. There was also a “Civil War” in the Southern backcountry during the American Revolution.
(3) Third, Lincoln started the war by raising troops to invade and destroy the Confederacy. Alternatively, he could have allowed the Confederate states to secede in peace. George Washington didn’t raise an army to attack North Carolina and Rhode Island for refusing to join the Union. Texas wasn’t coerced to join the Union.
(4) Fourth, Lincoln really did invade the South after he was elected. He also really was an abolitionist. Lincoln was even worse than an abolitionist (many of whom were pacifists who supported peaceful disunion) in that he armed 178,000 black slaves to kill Southern Whites.
(5) Fifth, the “act of fanaticism” was John Brown’s raid on Harper’s Ferry in 1859. Brown was described as a hero and a martyr by Northern intellectuals like Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau. The North responded to the John Brown raid by electing the first sectional president in American history on the basis of animosity toward the South.
The John Brown raid was a watershed event in American history. That event more than anything else discredited opponents of secession in the Lower South. The secessionists who had been marginalized for decades became mainstream overnight.
(6) Sixth, Southern secession wasn’t just like secession from the British Empire:
– There was far more popular support for secession from the United States in the Confederacy than there ever was for secession from Britain in the American colonies.
– The Southern states had far greater basis to secede from the United States because the American Revolution was fought to establish the principle that the people of the colonies were sovereign.
– The states had seceded from the “perpetual union” of the Articles of Confederation to reorganize the Union under the Constitution of 1789 which omitted the phrase “perpetual union” from the U.S. Constitution.
– Texas and Virginia explicitly joined the Constitution of 1789 on the basis of reserving the right to secede from the Union.
– North Carolina and Rhode Island were not coerced to join the Union by the First Congress. The Bill of Rights was passed by Congress to appease the Anti-Federalists.
– The Tenth Amendment explicitly acknowledged that all powers not delegated to the federal government were reserved to the people of the states. The people of the states were sovereign because they had delegated a limited set of powers to the federal government.
– It is a delusion to assume that any of the Southern states would have voluntarily joined the Union as it was understood in the North under Abraham Lincoln.
– South Carolina and Georgia would have certainly never joined a Union that was committed to abolishing slavery.
The only reason those two states joined the Union is because the Constitution was a pro-slavery document that (1) included a fugitive slave clause, (2) included the 3/5th clause to determine representation in the House, and (3) refused to ban the slave trade until 1808.
– Georgia refused to send delegates to the First Continental Congress and rejoined the British Empire during the American Revolution.
– In North Carolina, the majority of the population opposed the American Revolution.
– The Union fought to overthrow the principle that the people of the states are sovereign, to abolish slavery, and to establish the absolute supremacy of the federal government over the states.
– After fighting the bloodiest war in American history on the basis of the theory that the states were unable to secede, the Union dissolved 10 Confederate states, overthrew their elected governments by military force, and placed the people of the South under the rule of military dictatorships.
(7) Seventh, it is a waste of time for Southerners to direct their energies toward fighting liberalism because “liberalism” is synonymous with Jews and Yankees.
If the South was an independent country, there would have never have been a 14th Amendment, a 15th Amendment, a Civil Rights of 1964, a Voting Rights Act of 1965, or an Immigration Act of 1965. The only reason that the DREAM Act and “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” haven’t been passed yet is because of Southern opposition in Congress.
In the South, “fighting liberalism” means sending representatives to Washington every four years to argue with Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank, which accomplishes nothing.
(8) Finally, it is an utter waste of time to direct our energy toward naming and identifying the Black Undertow (and we do this all the time here) without first realizing and understanding why there is a Black Undertow in the first place.
Historically speaking, the Black Undertow was the creation of abolitionism, civil rights, the free labor system, and Northern philanthropy. It was Yankees who made negroes into American citizens. It was Yankees and Jews who passed every single major piece of federal civil rights legislation in American history to give negroes “civil rights” and “voting rights.”
Why is there a taboo against open discussion of race and crime? Why are there tyrannical anti-discrimination laws? Why is there is a liberal orthodoxy about racial differences? Why are liberals impervious to rational arguments against these things?
Now you see why defending the Confederate flag and the Southern cause is the most important issue: it is because none of these damn things was ever our idea. The racial system we live under today is the exact opposite of the one that was created by our ancestors.
In our present liberal multiracial democracy, which White Southerners by ourselves would never have created in a million years, “the Blacks” vote with Yankees and Jews in Congress. African-Americans are their most stalwart allies. They are on the same side of the political divide.
Why does the Northeast support the DREAM Act? Why do all these Northern senators support the invasion of America by Asian and Hispanic foreigners? Because the demographic transformation of the South and West advances their political agenda and gives them control over Congress and the White House.
From the perspective of Northern liberals, “African-Americans” and Hispanics and Asians are “on their team.” Correspondingly, Southern conservatives are the leaders of the opposition team. Thus, if there are more African-Americans and Hispanics in the South and West, it means the Northern liberal team is more powerful.
The traditional arguments about black crime, racial differences in intelligence, and the failure of Hispanics to assimilate are not responsive to the core issue: the political self interest within a multiracial liberal democracy that Northern liberals have in supporting changing racial demographics.
Secession addresses the core issue which is the political context of the Union. It eliminates in one decisive stroke the constituency (i.e., Northern liberals) that has always supported these changes. It eliminates the rationale for tearing down Christianity and deifying African-Americans and ennobling Hispanics at the expense of Whites.
Aside from political self interest, there is also the historical question of why White Southerners should have any loyalty whatsoever to the Lincoln Union which was created by murdering or maiming 1 out of every 4 White Southern males of military age.
Abraham Lincoln armed “African-Americans” to burn down our cities and kill our ancestors who were defending their own homes. Shouldn’t we hate the United States for that reason alone? The only reason we are even part of the United States is because we lost the war.
Maybe the time has come to revisit the verdict of that war.
Update: The Confederate flag symbolizes Dixie which is a real nation that is based on blood, soil, culture, religion, and history. “America” is not a nation. It is a fake nation like the USSR that is based on liberal abstractions.
As Lawrence Auster’s commentator points out, it was the Northern states that voted 9 to 1 over the longest filibuster in American history to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The corollary here is that if Dixie were an independent nation there would never have been a Civil Rights Act of 1964 or an Immigration Act of 1965.
If the South seceded from the United States, it could create its own federal government and the indispensable cultural and political context necessary to overthrow the liberal status quo.