This is a work in progress. Check for updates.
I shall offer retorts to many of the points Hunter Wallace raised in response to my comment, but before doing so, I’d like to explain a few things about myself. I saw the post that Hunter wrote on February 16, 2011 called “Old Soldiers.”
I used to be a White Nationalist.
“Old Soldiers” was the post in which I announced that I was quitting White Nationalism. I had seen enough of the White Nationalist movement to discern that a “White ethnostate” is a fantasy that appeals to alienated people on the internet.
These people are not a nation in any real sense of the word. The “White ethnostate” is a proposition nation that fills the void of American nationalism which has been discredited in their eyes.
The proof of this is that White Nationalists don’t even have a name for their proposed nation and can’t even tell you where it is located or what ethnicity is to be the basis of their ethnostate. That’s because it is a barren abstraction that exists only in their own minds.
What kind of “nation” is that?
WNs spend most of their time fighting with each other because all they really have in common is racial grievances – they lack a common ethnicity, a common culture, a common religion, and a common history that could be the foundation – “the substantial homogeneity,” as Schmitt would call it – of their proposed White ethnostate.
I don’t have any regrets about leaving White Nationalism behind. Dixie is my real nation. White Southerners are my real people. We have a strong sense of racial identity because that is part of our own heritage.
Secession is also part of our heritage. We have attempted to leave this Glorious Union before. We’re still the only people in America who have a strong regional identity and an organized secessionist movement.
If anyone rebels against BRA, it will be us.
“In that post, Hunter linked to an article by Michael O’Meara titled “What is the American Nation?” Apparently that article was written a long time ago, and as Hunter explained, O’Meara himself left a comment in which he basically retracted that entire article, saying, “What I repudiate here are my former concessions to the Americanist superstitions that suppose we have been what we are not — a nation in the European sense.”
Michael O’Meara is an interesting guy who has been heavily influenced by the European New Right.
Counter-Currents is an excellent example of the difficulty Johnson and O’Meara have had trying to build a “North American New Right.” The major problem there being that there is nothing really “North American” about the project which is why it fails to resonate with the American historical experience.
“I just want everyone here to know that “What is the American Nation?” articulates my thoughts exactly. What O’Meara said here gets to the core of what I’ve come to believe: “American identity gradually extended beyond its original Anglo-Protestant core to become a European-American Christian identity. Race as such remained primary, for only on the basis of the immigrants’ racial compatibility with Anglo-Americans were they able to assimilate. The later advent of Black nationalism, as Walker Connor argues, testifies to the fact that American nationalism has always been a White nationalism.”
Here’s what I believe:
(1) First, the Anglo-Protestants in America won their independence in the American Revolution in which republican ideology was seized upon to justify the overthrow of royalist control by Anglo-Protestant Britain.
(2) Second, the American Republic later attempted to build a nation-state out of whiteness and republican ideology in the early nineteenth century.
(3) Third, Irish and German immigration to the United States brought millions of Catholics to America, which would eventually result in the dilution of American national identity in the twentieth century from “Anglo-Protestant” to “White Christian.”
(4) Fourth, the American Revolution had not been an uprising by a united “American” people – in reality, 1/3 of the colonists were patriots, 1/3 were loyalists, and 1/3 were indifferent or neutral or just wanted to survive the conflict.
The American colonies had different origins and were composed of people who had never felt much solidarity with each other before the Revolution and who had very different cultures and very different economic interests.
In New England, there was an ideological revolution by a very homogeneous and relatively united people. In the South, there was a bitter civil war between royalists and republicans, and the Revolution was more of an existential crisis that was brought about by fears of slave insurrections.
(5) It is absurd to identify American nationalism with White Nationalism: the conflict with Britain was ideological, not racial, and it polarized “White people” along ideological lines as being for or against the Patriot cause.
In the aftermath of the war, the sovereignty of each colony was recognized by Britain, and the most the “American people” were able agree to in the Constitution was that citizenship was reserved to the states, that federal citizenship was derived from state citizenship, and a few years later that naturalized immigrants had to be “free White persons.”
That was the way it was until Lincoln’s war and Reconstruction brought about “birthright citizenship” in the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the 14th Amendment.
Of course the American project had collapsed by that point due to the smoldering ethnic, cultural, and economic differences that the glue of whiteness and republicanism had barely contained.
The North and South had rival theories of republicanism – liberal republicanism vs. classical republicanism – that exploded into armed conflict in 1861.
As Ulfric so aptly put it, I believe that one can be a nationalist and an American at the same time.
Like many people here, I believe there is a conflict between my ethnic allegiance to White Southerners and the preservation of the Union, and I wish to expedite the demise of the latter to preserve the former.
“I believe that American nationalism and white nationalism are synonymous, and throughout U.S. history all the way until the 1960s, most Americans believed the same thing (Jared Taylor has explained this in detail).”
Then you have a facile understanding of American history:
(1) American citizenship was derived from state citizenship until the War Between the States – before the war, blacks were citizens with voting rights in Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Maine, and New Hampshire.
(2) In the Dred Scott decision in 1859, the ambiguity surrounding black citizenship was finally eliminated: blacks could not be American citizens. Unfortunately, the Dred Scott decision outraged New England and much of the North, where Yankee Republicans tended to support black citizenship.
(3) In what you call the “Civil War,” the Union armed 180,000 negroes to destroy the Confederacy, and after the war gave them citizenship in the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the 14th Amendmemt which stripped ex-Confederates of their voting rights.
Blacks have been American citizens since 1866 and 1867. It was Yankees who destroyed the White Republic and who impeached President Andrew Johnson for opposing their creation of our present day multiracial society.
“I fully understand that in Europe, ethnicity reigns supreme. England is for the English, Ireland for the Irish, Poland for the Poles, etc.”
It wasn’t always like that either. As I explained in my review of Shifting Grounds: Nationalism and the American South, 1848-1865, the European ethnostates were created in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries as a result of the ethnonationalism and romantic nationalism that emerged in Germany in the backlash against the French Revolution.
White Southerners were swept up in the same romantic nationalist movement. Confederate propaganda emphasized that the Southern race was ethnically distinct from Yankees and were “a race of Cavaliers” descended from the Normans.
The Confederacy was an explicit attempt to create a Southern ethnostate in the mold of Germany, Hungary, Ireland, or Italy. There were a number of failed ethnonationalist rebellions during this period.
“At the same time, the United States is a nation where the different white ethnic groups of Europe have successfully interbred and assimilated to form an organic American identity with our own distinct culture, mores, traditions, and customs.”
I don’t believe that at all:
(1) The North is the “Nation of Immigrants.” Southerners are overwhelming an Anglo-Celtic or a British people descended from the founding stock.
(2) We don’t share your culture, mores, traditions, and customs – abortion and fag marriage, for example. Southern culture stretches from Maryland to Texas and from Missouri to Florida.
(3) White Southerners are deeply alienated from the American culture that has been imposed on Dixie. The Chick-fil-A solidarity buycott is the most recent example of this feeling of alienation.
“We also have a universal language (English) to unite us. I believe unequivocally that the United States has not only been a successful nation, but has been the most successful nation in the history of the world.”
My view is just the opposite: the United States is a proposition nation and a failure that is now in an advanced state of degeneration.
The English language could just as easily unite us with Australia or Kenya or Botswana. Lots of people speak English who otherwise have nothing in common with us.
Blacks speak English. Jews speak English. Most of the other tribes of the Rainbow Nation speak English. That doesn’t mean they are our co-ethnics.
“I also believe that America is currently on the precipice of history, and that our fate as a first world or third world nation will be decided in the coming years. I do not know what this fate will be, but I choose to remain optimistic. I believe that you miss 100% of the shots you don’t take.”
I believe that the North is driving us down to Third World status because Yankees have a much lower level of racial consciousness – unlike us, they were not blessed by centuries of African slavery – and see Hispanics and Asian immigrants as their political allies in the Democrat Party like their negro lackeys. Sambo is their most loyal friend in America.
I believe that the South and much of the West is desperately trying to seize control of the U.S.S. Titanic and turn the ship around through mainstream conservative politics because we can perceive the disaster ahead.
Ultimately, I think his attempt will end in failure because we are outnumbered and are always betrayed by the GOP and we will be left with no choice but to secede from the United States or be submerged into the emerging Third World despotism.
“Most of you will dismiss this as blind faith, and you may be right. Perhaps there will come a day where I see what O’Meara now sees, and where I abandon my faith in America.”
I have zero faith in America. Honestly, I only wonder how much worse can it get. I know from history and experience that this is due to the limits of my own imagination.
What’s beyond fag marriage, open borders, explicit racial discrimination against Whites, our debased Jewish pop culture, and the Obama presidency?
What’s the next level of “progress”? I’m sure more of these great ideas will bubble up out of the Northeast as always.
“Perhaps the U.S. was doomed to fail from the start, and that the country has been unraveling in slow motion for over 200 years.”
The French Revolution compressed those 200 years into 10 years – abolition, full blown negro equality, the destruction of Christianity – before Jacobinism flamed out into reaction under Napoleon.
“Perhaps my entire belief system is false. Perhaps white nationalism was never meant to be. Perhaps ethnic nationalism is the only thing that matters.”
White Nationalism suffers from the same flaw as humanism – racial identity is only weakly felt, and it is a byproduct of close proximity to racial diversity.
The North supports flooding the South and West with non-White immigrants and supporting the allies the blacks as voters because it works to their advantage in dominanting the Union and centralizing the government under their control.
“1. I’m a Northerner, not a Southerner. As such, I have no allegiance whatsoever to Dixie. The existence of Dixie as a sovereign, independent nation means nothing to me. I certainly don’t have a problem with Southern pride, it’s just that i don’t share that pride myself. (I also think there’s a huge difference between Southern pride and Confederate Nationalism, but that’s for another day).”
I’m a Southerner. I have no loyalty to the United States. For 150 years now, the Northeast has been trying to force negro equality and other crank ideas down our throats, and will undoubtedly continue to inflict further devastating reforms upon the South as long as the Union continues to exist.
” 2. Should America collapse into third world status thanks to liberalism, then I will pack my bags and do what I can to save my family. I like the snow, so I’d probably head north. (I understand that there may be nowhere to run, and if that’s the case, then sobeit. God is in charge of my ultimate fate).”
The South voted against the Immigration Act of 1965, the IRCA Amnesty of 1986, and the Immigration Act of 1990. We blocked the Bush amnesties and the DREAM Act.
OTOH, every Democrat congressman but one in New England voted for the DREAM Act in the 2010 lameduck secession. Now Obama has issued an executive order to implement the DREAM Act amnesty.
Every Northern state voted for Obama in 2008 as a solid phalanx. Now the same states are gearing up to reelect Obama after the last four years of pushing amnesty and gay marriage in the White House.
Why in the world would any White Southerner want to preserve the Union when the existence of the Union is the driving force behind Third World immigration in Dixie?
3. But no matter what happens to America, I will never…ever….EVER… raise my arms for Dixie. Why you ask? Because the vision of society that Hunter has articulated here – agrarianism over capitalism, an Ayatollah style of government over the Constitution of the Framers, aristocracy over meritocracy, etc – is thorough REPUGNANT to me. If it comes down to Dixie vs. Liberalism, then the ship has already sunk, and I will try to go somewhere else where I can live out the rest of my life in freedom. There is only one slave master in this universe, and his name is Jesus Christ. I will not submit to the tyranny of Marxism or the tyranny of Dixie, and I will die before a degraded standard of living is forced upon me (more on this in a minute)
(1) To my knowledge, no one invited you here and requested that you “raise your arm for Dixie.” So why are you here complaining?
(2) I do not believe in a “free market” or a “meritocracy” that allows hostile aliens to hijack and control culturally sensitive institutions like our schools, universities, newspapers, televison stations, and film industry.
Perhaps you believe in the “freedom” and the “rights” of such people to shit all over us from their perches in Los Angeles and Manhattan – like the Iranians, the Arabs, the Chinese, and the Russians, I would discard liberal theories and act without hesitation to preserve our culture.
(3) You’re free to continue living in Jewish-dominated Yankeeland. My proposals would obviously not apply to the North.
(4) We will.take Robert E. Lee and Wade Hampton III and you can keep Lady Gaga, Madonna, and Obama and Hollywood celebrities like Sean Penn and Sarah Jessica Parker.
(5) I have never felt the slightest desire to live an ant heap like Los Angeles or the Northeast Corridor. In fact, I wish Sherman would come back and burn down Atlanta and Houston which are urban sewers of liberalism.
4. I am a 100% European American male of multiple ethnic backgrounds. In the small, all white suburban community that I live in, everyone else is just like me: A mix of multiple European nationalities. Therefore, I have no loyalties to any one ethnic group. I am a white man and only a white man. I am not anything else.
I’m a proud White Southerner of English, Welsh, and German ancestry. Unlike you, I consider myself a lot more than just “a white man” because my ancestors have lived here for hundreds of years.
Dixie is my nation. I think of my people as stretching from here to Texas and Missouri and down to Florida and up to Kentucky and parts of Maryland.
I identify with the Southern tradition and historical experience. I think of myself as belonging to a distinct European nation in the same way that the Germans or Irish think of themselves.
“I speak English, but I have no English blood in me. I could not move to England and call myself authentically English. I could not move to any country in Europe and claim I’m one of their own. I am an American and an American only. I pledge my allegiance to the United States of America, and if that allegiance is shattered, then I don’t have any other nation to turn to. My identity is defined as an American and as a white European.”
I have lots of English blood in me – English, Welsh, Scots-Irish, even some Georgia Irish ancestry, the Deans and O’Neals. I have an English surname. I have an English complexion and would fit in quite easily in Britain.
“One more thing before I get to Hunter’s arguments: Ulfric was also right about me when he said that I’m a new convert to nationalism.”
“I consider myself proof that racially unconscious white conservatives can have their minds transformed. If you already oppose illegal immigration and Islam, then it’s only a few short steps – and knowledge of a few simple facts – to becoming a nationalist. I know exactly what its like to be a mainstream conservative, and I can PROMISE all of you that your support of what Hunter Wallace stands for dooms you to failure.”
Is that so?
Far more people in the South identify with the Confederacy and their Southern heritage than with White Nationalism.
“And the reason it dooms you is because the far majority of white Americans will not stand for backward, murderous, retrograde policies such as an Ayatollah style of government.”
Do I act like I care what “the majority” of White Americans think?
“I promise you they will join me in fleeing for freedom before they fight for the oppressive, phony “nation” otherwise known as the Confederate States of America (and I don’t say “oppressive” because of slavery, I say “oppressive” because the standard of living for white farmers was a total sack of shit compared to what free market capitalism has wrought. What you agrarians call self-sufficiency is in fact misery and despotism).”
(1) In 1860, the average per capita income in the South was nearly twice that of the North. Half the millionaires in America lived in Mississippi.
(2) No one assumed or asked you to fight for the Confederate States of America. Go fight with your fellow patridiots to “Take Back America.”
(3) The free market capitalist system created wonders in every slave society in which it was imposed by force: Dixie, Jamaica, the British West Indies, etc.
He also prides himself as the only mainstream voice for white Americans. One of these days he’s going to have to decide where his loyalties truly lie, because as we both know, America and the Dixie you envision are incompatible. Either the South will exist as a subculture of America like it always has, or it won’t exist at all. It will NEVER exist as a sovereign independent nation. Without the support of normal white people like me, liberalism will crush Dixie. And the reason we won’t support Dixie isn’t because we support liberalism, its because the calculated ends of your policies are NO DIFFERENT then the calculated ends of liberal policies
I already know that James Edwards is loyal to the South.
As for the South, we can either secede from the Union, or we can be overwhelmed by the demographic tidal wave of Third World immigration and welfare state subsidized non-White birthrates that is supported by the Northern-based Democratic Party.
Liberalism is crushing the South … the liberalism of the North, which is constantly imposed on us by federal courts and by the U.S. Congress and by the Obama White House, and all the other political institutions of the Union.
BTW, the idea that my ends are the same ends as “liburalism” is laughable and unworthy of response.
Your choice then. You will live or die believing what you believe, as will I. I have no retort to the four justifications you gave because none is needed. For example, I can’t convince you that the United States is a success anymore then I can convince a Muslim that female genital mutilation is wrong. Some things are just so obvious that if you don’t see it, then no once can help you. You are as foreign to me as Osama Bin Laden. May God have mercy on your soul, because God didn’t intend for whites to live under the tyranny that you stand for.
You think BRA is a success?
” Speak for yourself Ayatollah Wallace! You do more then throw the baby out with the bathwater. You put a bomb in the tub and blow the whole house to hell.”
We actually voted against virtually everything we resent … the Reconstruction amendments, all the Yankee-sponsored Civil Rights Acts, the open borders immigration laws, things like abortion and fag marriage, Obama and Obamacare and DADT repeal.
The only reason we have any of it is because of the existence of the Glorious Union.
” Which means 66% of whites are still on the right side, even if they are racially unconscious. But they can be converted. And if they aren’t, then sobeit. At least we gave it our best shot.”
No, it means that racialists and conservatives are the minority in the North, and they are outvoted by all the liberals up there who are allied with the Jew and with blacks and Hispanics.
It means that Obama is president and Holder is the Attorney General. That’s the reality of the Union when the White majority in every Southern state voted against that tag team.
The destruction of the South is a consequence of the Union.
Which a billion times better then you and your Ayatollah fantasies. Thanks to free market capitalism, more economic progress has been made in the last 200 years then the previous 10,000 years of human existence combined. But you would abandon free market capitalism. Good luck trying to convince would-be converts to do that!
No, thanks to the exploitation of two sparsely populated virgin continents, a geological jackpot of cheap and abundant hydrocarbon energy, the application of European technology, and then a brief ascendancy over the rest of the world which was made possible by all of the above, America enjoyed a good run of about 400 years of economic prosperity.
But hey, the magic engine of “free market capitalism” isn’t working like it used to for some odd reason anymore. How strange, right?
Indeed. And you want to know? Because until 1945, you held steadfast to your agrarian ways.
Gosh, I thought it had something to do with the Crash of ’29 and the Great Depression which discredited the Republicans who had controlled America since the War Between the States.
I thought it was New Deal government spending and WW2 military spending and especially the lowering of trade barriers that stimulated manufacturing and agriculture in the South.
But now-a-days, Southern states are some of the best states in the union. Southern states have right-to-work laws and a sensible regulatory system that creates middle class jobs. Imagine how much BETTER you’d be if we could just get rid of the legislation passed in the 60s, most notably the so-called Civil Rights Act!
(1) Yankees passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 over 9 to 1 Southern opposition.
(2) Imagine how much better it would have been if the Union Army hadn’t invaded the South, killed hundreds of thousands of people here, imposed negro equality here and their own unworkable free lbaor system.
(3) Since when has there not been “a right to work” in the South? New England textile mills set up shop here during the Jim Crow South.
(4) Imagine how much better it would have been if the Yankee hadn’t controlled the federal government from Lincoln to FDR.
Imagine if we could deport who we want and have the immigration laws we had from 1924 to 1965! But that’s not good enough for you. You want an Ayatollah style of government. Again I say, good luck with that!
Are you aware that the tidal wave of immigrants that were coming here before 1924 were coming to work in your industrialized economy?
Are you aware that you are the ones who voted for the Immigration Act of 1965 and that we were the ones who opposed it?
And yet those same northern industrialists successfully abolished those tariffs, and your kind smeared them for that as well. Even Pat Buchanan, God bless his soul, has fallen for the anti-free trade canards. Hunter, you’re not anti-tariff, you’re anti-capitalist.
No, I am pro-South.
I’m pro-South and pro-White before anything else. The trade policy, taxation policy, and spending policies that we had from Lincoln to Wilson was designed to systematically enrich the industrializing North at the expense of the agricultural South and West.
And moreover, you’re just plain wrong. The Northern economy was more successful because we embraced capitalism and you didn’t. We embraced industrialization and you didn’t.”
Richard Bensel has demolished that nonsense in the three books cited in the previous thread. The Northern economy was “more successful” because, for starters, the Southern economy was annihilated by the war, then it was starved of capital after the Union was restored, and finally because it was heavily subsidized by a trade policy, taxation policy, and spending policy put in place by the dominant Republicans to enrich the Northeast and Midwest at the expense of other areas.
Southerners were literally paying taxes for decades to subsidize Union Army pensions in the Northern states. The vast majority of Southern wealth was destroyed by the Emancipation Proclamation.
There’s not a single first world nation anywhere on earth that has agriculture as its primary basis.
The Antebellum South was richer than the Antebellum North – so prosperous, in fact, that Yankees were driven to such a murderous rage that they invaded the South at the head of negro armies to burn plantations to the ground and steal everything in sight.
Industrialization is part and parcel with a first world standard of living, and industrialization happens whether a nation has tariffs or not. It wasn’t because of tariffs that Henry Ford became a legend. It was because of his own ingenuity. And I could go on and on about all the heroic entrepreneurs that made life better for every American.
The South could have easily grown cotton, tobacco, rice, indigo, and other agricultural commodities and engaged in peaceful and mutually beneficial trade with Britain and France.
Of course, if that had been allowed to continue, then the North and South would have exchanged places in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and history would have unfolded in a very different way.
And if the South had also industrialized, then you guys would have been the beneficiaries too. Just look at the 1950s. (=
It is hard to industrialize when Yankee armies are annihilating your wealth and capital and using black soldiers to destroy your economy and then imposing negro and carpetbag rule on you to fleece what little remaining wealth you got left.
Oh, and forcing you to pay taxes for generations to pay for the pensions and healthcare of your conquerors.
But whites reached their apex in the 100 year period between 1865 and 1965. Whites were a higher percentage of the world population then at any other time in world history, and because of significantly lower mortality rates, there was also a giant increase in the absolute number of whites. These lower mortality rates were a DIRECT RESULT of free market capitalism and the abundance of food, housing, energy and medicine that it created. It wasn’t until the cultural revolution of the 60s that white birthrates began to plummet to below replacement levels. That can be fixed by reclaiming our culture, NOT by destroying the United States and replacing it with a third world Islamic-style state.
Actually, the White birthrate in Europe and America declined in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries – see fin de siècle France, where this was a subject of much discussion – as America became less agricultural and more urbanized.
The White population increased due to immigration and longer life expectancy, but that doesn’t imply that the birthrate increased because of industrialization, or that it was increasing until the “Cultural Revolution of the 1960s” which was ridiculous.
The White family of the 1950s was significantly downsized from the average White family of the 1850s.
NOPE. The family farm was rapidly shrinking throughout the 1800s. Agriculture was 90% of the American economy in 1790 but was down to 41% by 1900. Somebody in the comment section smeared Joseph Schumpeter, but in reality, creative destruction is what drives new and improved increases in the standard living, which in turn produces more and more white people. Even with today’s low birthrates, the non-Hispanic white population in America increased from 194 million to 196 million between 2000 and 2010. Given that virtually no European immigrants are allowed to come here anymore, the only conclusion is that there were more white babies. Of course, I want to see birthrates return to the levels they were before, but again, that simply requires taking back our culture. It doesn’t necessitate the abandonment of the free market like you absurdly believe.
The vast majority of that decline occurred in the Northeast and Midwest from 1850 to 1900. The birthrate in the North declined significantly in that period and continued declining into the twentieth century.
Why should this trouble you? Birth control and abortion are free market transactions. Mass non-White immigration is also a response to market forces.
American success and American prosperity! White success and white prosperity! Sucks to be you that your precious Dixie chose agrarianism over capitalism! You reaped what you sowed! And your bitching makes you sound like a Marxist!
It had nothing to do with that war which economically and politically destroyed the South and subordinated Dixie to our Yankee friends for a hundred years. We simply “reaped what we sowed” due to our bad choices. Silly fool we are.
Nope. Not all. I was referring to the unprecedented success of white Europeans (Jews aren’t white Europeans. Jews are a semitic people from the Middle East)
Few Americans have fond memories of the Gilded Age. Especially those in the South and West who were its primary victims.
100% or 90%, the point is that it was a dominant white majority, and it was way whiter then the South.
The North was being flooded by millions of blacks in the Great Migration and Second Great Migration.
I love how you think I actually agree with Reconstruction, because I don’t.
Both Reconstruction 1 in the 1860s and 1870s and Reconstruction 2 in the 1950s and 1960s were your handiwork. Where would we be without the Glorious Union?
You can trace the roots of liberalism all the way back to the 1880s. The fact is that liberalism didn’t become full bore until the 1960s.
Like I said above, the Northeast and Midwest have had integration, black citizenship, racial equality, racial miscegenation and intermarriage since the 1860s-1880s.
In the 1960s, you imposed it on us, but that system was around a century old in parts of the North by then.
For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction, and liberalism was the reaction to the unprecedented success white European nations were having in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Liberalism was devised by organized Jewry, with Karl Marx as the source of fuel.
(1) Marx was not a liberal.
(2) Liberalism was created by Whites like John Locke, John Stuart Mill, Adam Smith, Condorcet, Richard Cobden, etc.
(3) Jewish emancipation was an effect of liberalism, not a cause.
Jews don’t “control” everything, but they’ve always been at war with white Europeans, who are the Chosen People that Jews falsely claim to be. Organized Jewry is an invasive force that can metastasize into a controlling force like it did in Russia if whites don’t watch their backs. But Jews didn’t create America and the Enlightenment. White Europeans did that.
How different are the Jews from you people?
So? The North had defacto segregation and defacto Jim Crow laws. Northern whites in urban cities like Detroit and Boston had conniption fits when forced integration started in the 60s. Then white flight happened once whites realized this was a battle they had lost. You sit here and pretend like the South was a white mans paradise whereas the North was a hell hole of integration, and reality belies you.
The North had laws that banned segregation, banned “anti-miscegenation laws,” required integrated public facilities, even laws that banned “racial defamation” … anywhere from 140 to 120 years ago.
BUSING in the 1970s was something new. Integration was not new in the North. It was only a radical idea in the South.
You missed the point, which is that a homogeneous white society is:
1. The natural order of things in European nations.
2. Commanded by the Bible (see the Tower of Bable).
You missed the point:
France had been a White Republic under King Louis XVI, who was beheaded by the Republicans in the name of liberty and equality, who made every negro in the French Caribbean into a French citizen with equal rights, and that only changed after Napoleon Bonaparte overthrew the Directory in 1799 and went on to become emperor of the French.
Any problems in a homogeneous white society have nothing to do with whiteness being a problem. There’s not a single internal problem that a homogeneous white society can’t solve without destroying its white population.
The problem is that the republican ideology of universal human rights and liberty, equality, and fraternity is a natural antagonist of racialism, religion, and conservatism.
The choice isn’t between the French Revolution and Aristocracy. The choice is between aristocracy and free market capitalism, where entrepreneurs like Henry Ford become the rightful Lords of society based on their merit
(1) Your “natural Lord” Henry Ford brought millions of free negroes to Michigan to bust the unions.
(2) Ever since the American Revolution, Yankees have been pushing the envelope of “liberty and equality” and have now surpassed even Robespierre and the Jacobins in their Black Republican radicalism with feminism, free love, and fag marriage.
(3) First they came for the king and the aristocrats. Then they came for the slave owner and segregationist. Now they are coming after the Christian patriarch and traditionalist and all of the insidious beneficiaries of “white privilege” and “structural racism.”
200 years of unprecedented prosperity vs. 10,000 years of people working in the fields 12 hours per day. You make the call.
I say that the reason people worked in the fields for centuries is not because they were dumb, but because they lacked machines that run on cheap hydrocarbon energy.
I say they would be back working in the fields tomorrow if they were deprived of those natural resources which power those machines.
Actually, Jews have been in the business of trying to hijack culturally sensitive institutions for centuries. In the cases where they were successful, they were eventually expelled (such as King Edward I’s expulsion of Jews from England in 1290). Jews have been kicked out of 109 different nations for a damn good reason, and that’s regardless of whether a nation has a meritocracy or not.
They were kicked out of 109 non-liberal nations. Have they ever been kicked out of a liberal democracy that practices free market capitalism, meritocracy, and human rights?
Jews are going to try – and sometimes succeed – at infiltrating white nations no matter what system of government those nations have.
The type of government that nations have seems to make a great deal of difference in the relative success of Jews – notice how the Jew thrives in Yankeeland under Americanism, free market capitalism, liberal democracy, human rights, and secularism and meritocracy, but much less so in Dixie.
But a meritocracy allows legendary heroes like Ford, John Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, etc. to rise to power as opposed to some incompetent or tyrannical aristocrat who usually doesn’t have any merit to speak of. Successful businessmen are the rightful superiors of society, and I’d put my faith in them before I ever put my faith in a stinking aristocrat or bureaucrat who claims to have my “best intentions” at heart!
Is Sheldon Adelson one of the rightful superiors of society? How about the Jewish Hollywood media moguls? What about Michael Bloomberg and George Soros?
Why aren’t they part of your Knights of the Roundtable?