Media Attack Trump, Insist It Was Necessary to Kill Hundreds of Thousands of Southerners

The mainstream US media has been busy in recent days signaling hard to their elderly, Progressive base that President Trump was wrong when he recently said that Lincoln’s War upon the South should and could have been avoided. The Hill reports:

President Trump during an interview that airs Monday questioned why the country had a Civil War and suggested former President Andrew Jackson could have prevented it had he served later.

“I mean had Andrew Jackson been a little bit later you wouldn’t have had the Civil War. He was a very tough person, but he had a big heart,” Trump said during an interview with the Washington Examiner’s Salena Zito.

“He was really angry that he saw what was happening with regard to the Civil War, he said, ‘There’s no reason for this.'”

The Hill also reports:

President Trump on Monday spurred outrage and mockery by questioning why the Civil War happened and suggesting that President Andrew Jackson could have prevented it.

Democrats and political pundits ripped Trump for his comments, published Monday in the Washington Examiner, and advised him to brush up on his history.

“President Trump doesn’t understand why there was a Civil war,” tweeted Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.).

“It’s because my ancestors and millions of others were enslaved.”

…Some journalists mocked the president, questioning his knowledge of history and criticizing him for claiming no one ever asks why the Civil War began.

Don’t ask questions like that, goy. The history is settled. Trust us. Your ancestors were evil and had to be killed. Your cities had to be burned. Your country had to be placed under a military occupation and then reconstructed in our image.

Even geriatric Leftist icon Dan Rather, has hobbled back onto the scene to mock Trump and insist it was necessary to subjugate Dixie. The Hill once again reports:

Former CBS News anchor Dan Rather is dismissing President Trump’s remarks this week on the Civil War, calling it “sheer craziness” to be questioning whether the conflict needed to occur at all.

…”But the sheer craziness of this obsession by Donald Trump with Andrew Jackson and the Civil War is carnival act unlike anything I have ever seen at the White House,” Rather wrote on Facebook Monday.

“Nevermind that Mr. Trump’s knowledge of American history seems below that of most gradeschoolers. These are the rantings of someone who really should be focused on the job of governing.”

Believe me, sonny. If you question our historical narrative then you are crazy, ignorant and probably evil. I know. Because I am a dying journalist who indocrinated the public for decades prior to the advent of the Internet. Listen to me!

About Palmetto Patriot 242 Articles
South Carolinian. Southern Nationalist. Anglican.

50 Comments

  1. Barbara Lee, honey babe… I don’t own slaves, you don’t pick cotton. Get over it already!

  2. Unfortunately Abraham Lincoln followed the Precedents set by George Washington and Andrew Jackson. Washington believed that it was Constitutional to send the US Army to attack the Whiskey Rebels and even commanded the troops, after which he returned to Philadelphia and left General Light Horse Harry Lee in charge AKA General Robert E Lee’s father. Andrew Jackson believed that it was Constitutional to invade South Carolina and hold mass arrests and execution for the South Carolinians daring to nullify what they felt was an unfair law.

    EXCERPT FROM JACKSON’s NULLIFICATION SPEECH 12/10/1832

    Fellow-citizens of the United States! the threat of unhallowed disunion-the names of those, once respected, by whom it is uttered–the array of military force to support it-denote the approach of a crisis in our affairs on which the continuance of our unexampled prosperity, our political existence, and perhaps that of all free governments, may depend. The conjuncture demanded a free, a full, and explicit enunciation, not only of my intentions, but of my principles of action, and as the claim was asserted of a right by a State to annul the laws of the Union, and even to secede from it at pleasure, a frank exposition of my opinions in relation to the origin and form of our government, and the construction I give to the instrument by which it was created, seemed to be proper. Having the fullest confidence in the justness of the legal and constitutional opinion of my duties which has been expressed, I rely with equal confidence on your undivided support in my determination to execute the laws-to preserve the Union by all constitutional means-to arrest, if possible, by moderate but firm measures, the necessity of a recourse to force; and, if it be the will of Heaven that the recurrence of its primeval curse on man for the shedding of a brother’s blood should fall upon our land, that it be not called down by any offensive act on the part of the United States.

    More nuggets from Andrew Jackson. This is supposedly one message he sent to John C Calhoun

    “John Calhoun, if you secede from my nation, I will secede your head from the rest of your body.”

    John C Calhoun was right when he told Jackson that OUR LIBERTIES MOST DEAR were more important than any UNION. Jackson felt the opposite and said that a President had the right to execute the Preservation of the Constitution by any means available to him. General Zachary Taylor echoed Old Hickory in 1850 when he told Calhoun and his allies that Persons “taken in rebellion against the Union, he would hang … with less reluctance than he had hanged deserters and spies in Mexico.” John C Calhoun died shortly after this confrontation. Calhoun was right when he opposed Jackson and he was right when he opposed Taylor.

    NOTICE WHO LINCOLN CITES WHEN HE SPEAKS WITH THE BALTIMORE PEACE DELEGATION of REV Richard Fuller April 22 1861

    The President told the Baltimore delegation: “You, gentlemen, come here to me and ask for peace on any terms, and yet have no word of condemnation for those who are making war on us. You express great horror of bloodshed, and yet would not lay a straw in the way of those who are organizing in Virginia and elsewhere to capture this city. The rebels attack Fort Sumter, and your citizens attack troops sent to the defense of the Government, and the lives and property in Washington, and yet you would have me break my oath and surrender the Government without a blow. There is no Washington in that — no Jackson in that — no manhood nor honor in that

    Notice it, GEORGE WASHINGTON did it with the Whiskey Rebellion, JACKSON did it with Nullification I thus have precedent and legal right on my side to do as I dang well please.

  3. Once the South seceded, there was no more Union®. The United States® didn’t exist anymore. If one or other of the parties in a contract leave, there is no more contract.
    Lincoln was enforcing the will of a dissolved government. But you know Judeo-Puritan heretics, they always have to have things their way.

  4. James Owen
    MAY 2, 2017 AT 7:35 PM
    Once the South seceded, there was no more Union®. The United States® didn’t exist anymore. If one or other of the parties in a contract leave, there is no more contract.
    Lincoln was enforcing the will of a dissolved government. But you know Judeo-Puritan heretics, they always have to have things their way.

    Secession was the WORST solution but the only Constitutional solution. The preferred solution would have been a coup, mass arrests of the Abolitionists Representatives Senators Judges followed by mass executions. The problem with this solution is YES although it could have worked, the (((Conservatives))) in the South and in the Military would have found this unsavory and probably would have ended up supporting the other side. all that tripe about peaceful transitions of power. The Knights of the Golden Circle wanted to mass murder the Northern government, of course we know (((WHO))) stopped that. Jefferson Davis’s (((FRIEND))) and adviser Judah P Benjamin made it absolutely impossible for anyone with real ideas of how to win the war to be allowed to execute them. All of the Confederate Intel guys and most of the military knew that to win the war, Washington would have to be burned and all of the Yankee Politicians and their Southern Unionist collaborators would have to be executed. Every last one of them. The South had enough double agents in the Union Army and agents working in Washington and in the North itself that it would have been easy with the North’s lax security to pull off some unconventional warfare. Unfortunately this was barely tried, except for a couple foiled plots and the Saint Albans bank robbery, absolutely nothing.

    Almost makes you wonder if the CSA wasn’t so Jewed at the top level from the beginning that it was being made to fight the war with two hands tied behind its back.

  5. They insist it was about slavery: the division still exists. It existed before as Cavaliers vs Roundheads, again, no slavery there either.

    Trump actually made a subtle and sound point, but the Enemy attacked him anyway for either heresy or stupidity, as the audience may prefer.

    They are beyond out of touch: their doom is sealed.

  6. I think we all forget that the UNION aka the UNITED STATES was founded as a Proposition Nation. The founding document states ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL. Now if I say ALL WHITE MEN even this is a lie. In 1776 the ideas of race were similar to those of Georges Cuvier, who established 3 races, Caucasiod, Ethiopian (negro) and Mongoloid. Jews, Arabs, Turks, Gypsies, Subcontinent Indians, all fall in the category of WHITE MEN under the Cuvier model, which was our model for our racial laws. The US Constitution establishes a nation that is built upon the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation. The proposition of ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL was cited to allow for universal white male sufferage in the 1830s.

    Something happened along the way to 1861, Science moved beyond the understandings of Thomas Jefferson, who while noting basic racial differences in Notes On The State of Virginia, made no effort as US President to enshrine them into law. John C. Calhoun eviscerated Jeffersons vision in the Oregon Speech. Still among the uneducated there existed a common idea that dated from the American Revolution that the Negro was simply a White Man with black skin. This was the basis of abolitonism. However science by the time of ORIGIN OF SPECIES proved that the Negro was an entirely separate breed of human a genetic throwback if you will. The Confederacy was thus founded as a nation based upon modern science.

    The Gettysburg Address of Lincoln is factual. Lincoln was right when he said that the nation was conceived in liberty and built upon the proposition of equality. However by 1863 this proposition was proven a lie by modern science. The sad part is when the North won, draconian laws had to be put into place to enforce this Proposition of Equality which everyone could tell just by meeting Negroes was a lie. This relic of the Enlightenment which was outdated by the 1850’s thus survives until today with brutal laws to enforce a FALSE PROPOSITION and that is everyone is entitled to equality before the law. When you get past talking about the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence as sacred documents and begin seeing them AS THE PROBLEM then you become truly red-pilled.

    The question is why do we espouse to support science yet we also support a government that isn’t based in science at all but emotional tripe about natural rights?

  7. “Never be haughty to the humble or humble to the haughty.”
    –President Jefferson Davis

    Slavery is not a sin…This nation has made it the unpardonable sin and have promoted the false theology of abolition over every religion on earth and our government has taken the authority to itself to put to death individuals or invade and conquer foreign nations who dare violate this false religion. Yet, when Christ returns and regathered Israel is settled back in the region around Jerusalem Christ and the resurrected King David ruling under Him will allow Israel to take and possess servants and handmaids once again — “For the LORD will have mercy on Jacob, and will yet choose Israel, and set them in their own land: and the strangers shall be joined with them, and they shall cleave to the house of Jacob. And the people shall take them, and bring them to their place: and the house of Israel shall possess them in the land of the LORD for servants and handmaids: and they shall take them captives, whose captives they were; and they shall rule over their oppressors…”

    “…Israel shall possess them in the land of the LORD for servants and handmaids…” And God never told King David to free all the slaves in Israel which means the god that inspired Lincoln was NOT the real God….

    Jefferson Davis and the South were right — slavery issues and all….

  8. How many signers of the Declaration of Independence owned slaves?

    41 owned slaves

    only 15 did not

  9. @billyrayjenkins

    The Declaration of Independence is a diplomatic address to the powers and potentates of Europe. It carries no legal weight whatsoever. It’s not a pre-preamble to the Constitution. It’s not a concordance for interpreting the Constitution. It belongs in a drawer at the National Archives. The Constitution says nothing about Equality. The Yankees had to put that in after the war. Imagine using a letter Obama wrote to the heads of state of the members of NATO being used a basis for governance. It would be nonsense. Using The Declaration of Independence as such, is nonsense, too.

  10. Whoever has touched slavery is it…

    Amerigo Vespucci (1454-1512) was an Italian born explorer for whom America was named. He claimed to have explored what is now the American mainland in 1497 and believed he had reached a “New World”. During the voyage in 1499 Vespucci stopped in the Bahammas and captured 200 natives which he brought back to Spain as slaves.

    OK PC liberals…start trying to rid two whole continents of the name “America”….

  11. On the surface, it was more of a war on Southern Christianity – read white men, even back then – and perserverance but the primary motivation was (((financial control))). I wonder if the continued attack on the Confederacy is to completely eradicate it from history in the future. But, I doubt they want to eliminate the facade of evil whitey while the (((real culprits))) remain the saviors of the oppressed while continuing to oppress black and brown people in present times. Jews prove they can have cake and eat it too! Your cake.

  12. Richard ap Meryk, anglicised to Richard Amerike (c. 1440–1503) was an Anglo-Welsh merchant, royal customs officer and, at the end of his life, sheriff of Bristol. Several claims have been made for Amerike by popular writers of the late twentieth century. One was that he was the major funder of the voyage of exploration launched from Bristol by the Venetian John Cabot in 1497, and that Amerike was the owner of Cabot’s ship, the Matthew. The other claim revived a theory first proposed in 1908 by a Bristolian scholar and amateur historian, Alfred Hudd. Hudd’s theory, greatly elaborated by later writers, suggested that the continental name America was derived from Amerike’s surname in gratitude for his sponsorship of Cabot’s successful discovery expedition to the ‘New World’. However, neither claim is backed up by hard evidence, and the consensus view is that America is named after Amerigo Vespucci, the Italian explorer.
    –Wikipedia

  13. Yes, we know Southerners had to be killed, because it’s the standard treatment for anyone standing in the way of The New England Yankee Empire – something of which Syrian children have most recently become apprized.

  14. That said, I DO understand why President Trump feels The War of Northern Aggression ought not to have been fought.

    He’s like my daddy, this being that, in his heart of hearts, he believes that life is about Wine, Women, and Song, and, therefore, about making the money necessary to pursue that in style. Thus, he has a very difficult time imagining why anyone would fight for anything else.

    This is not historick Northern values, per se, but, rather, classical ‘Manhatten’ values, if you will,

  15. @Billy Ray Jenkins…

    ‘NOTICE WHO LINCOLN CITES WHEN HE SPEAKS WITH THE BALTIMORE PEACE DELEGATION of REV Richard Fuller April 22 1861

    The President told the Baltimore delegation: “You, gentlemen, come here to me and ask for peace on any terms, and yet have no word of condemnation for those who are making war on us. You express great horror of bloodshed, and yet would not lay a straw in the way of those who are organizing in Virginia and elsewhere to capture this city. The rebels attack Fort Sumter, and your citizens attack troops sent to the defense of the Government, and the lives and property in Washington, and yet you would have me break my oath and surrender the Government without a blow. There is no Washington in that — no Jackson in that — no manhood nor honor in that

    Notice it, GEORGE WASHINGTON did it with the Whiskey Rebellion, JACKSON did it with Nullification I thus have precedent and legal right on my side to do as I dang well please.’

    As always, Mr. Jenkins, I love your fascinating posts. That said, i really must disagree with your analysis.

    My analysis?

    Washington, Jackson, and Lincoln were all classick Southern males of their time, and, that so, were simply disinclined to brook anything they regarded as disobedience to THEIR authority.

    Authoritarianism is one of the cardinal characteristicks of The Historick White Southern Male.

    Although, as one negress friend of mine recently stated : we, in the’hood, have noticet a sharp diminishment of White males taking authority and being men.’

    To that, I reminded her that The White Southern Male has been under assault from every corner, since I was born, and, hence, were now the weakest vintage in that vineyard’s history.

  16. @James Owen…

    ‘The Declaration of Independence is a diplomatic address to the powers and potentates of Europe. It carries no legal weight whatsoever. It’s not a pre-preamble to the Constitution. It’s not a concordance for interpreting the Constitution. It belongs in a drawer at the National Archives. The Constitution says nothing about Equality. The Yankees had to put that in after the war. Imagine using a letter Obama wrote to the heads of state of the members of NATO being used a basis for governance. It would be nonsense. Using The Declaration of Independence as such, is nonsense, too’

    Sir, it does not matter what we wrote or did not write – one way or the other The New England Yankee culture was going to do what IT wanted to do, because this is the way they are.

    And, as such, they are a perfect bride-submissive for their now Jewish husbands…

  17. @Billy Ray Jenkins….’

    ‘Almost makes you wonder if the CSA wasn’t so Jewed at the top level from the beginning that it was being made to fight the war with two hands tied behind its back.’

    If Jews are at the top of something, anything, Mr. Jenkins, fighting with ‘two hands behind it’s back’, is NOT their characteristick, at anytime in their history.

    To the contrary, they would hire an octopus, and then pay it to fight with all tentacles in front of it, whilst recommending to it’s foes to place one behind your back – if they said anything to their foes, at all.

  18. @ Turn Hearts…

    ‘“Never be haughty to the humble or humble to the haughty.”
    –President Jefferson Davis’

    Great quote – great comment.

  19. Theoretically the slavers have been bought out as they were in other Empires. Or they could have been allowed to go their own way. Trump is just pandering now though.

  20. @Afterthought…

    ‘They insist it was about slavery: the division still exists.’

    Of course – they have created a dupet audience, and they know that this is the correct chord to strike…

  21. @SnowWhitey…

    ‘I wonder if the continued attack on the Confederacy is to completely eradicate it from history in the future.’

    The attacks on The Southern Confederacy are NOT about The Confederacy, Snow, but, rather, about A. destroying the notion of any national concept as valid BUT, total central control – and B. about completely subjugating the will of The Southern White Race.

  22. Going by this the North would have attacked the South had there not been any slaves at all. They were looking for an excuse to plunder the South. The NOrthern elites that is.

  23. @billyrayjenkins

    The Declaration of Independence is a diplomatic address to the powers and potentates of Europe. It carries no legal weight whatsoever. It’s not a pre-preamble to the Constitution. It’s not a concordance for interpreting the Constitution. It belongs in a drawer at the National Archives. The Constitution says nothing about Equality. The Yankees had to put that in after the war. Imagine using a letter Obama wrote to the heads of state of the members of NATO being used a basis for governance. It would be nonsense. Using The Declaration of Independence as such, is nonsense, too.

    James

    I realize that the Declaration carries no legal weight and it never has. Unfortunately for us even before the Constitution, using the Declaration as a template many of the Northern states wrote new state constitutions that incorporated the (((liberty and equality))) idea within them and as the Constitution could not invalidate state law, at the 1787 Convention, everyone else was roped in with them whether they liked it or not. The (((liberty and equality))) idea was strong enough before the Constitution that even Thomas Jefferson himself got the idea that slavery could be regulated by the US Congress because supposedly slavery was somehow an issue of liberty or whatnot.

    The use of the Declaration of Independence to push the equality meme began in the 1820’s with those men advocating universal white male sufferage and an end to all poll taxation. The Jacksonians took this up and pushed it, eventually it became so bad that John C Calhoun addressed it in his speech on the Oregon Bill and explained both from a Biblical and a logical standpoint why the use of the Declaration for anything was foolish and why the document itself was a lie.

    The entire irony of the situation is this. The Declaration and the US Constitution were both documents written before scientific understanding of racial differences became truly understood. As to the subject of race, both were wholly outdated. The Southern Confederacy attempted to be a modern government with some basic understanding of science wrapped in Christian tradition. The sad thing is when the North won, these outdated founding principles of liberty and equality were then enshrined in law with the Federal govt now having the power to force the liberty and the equality down your throat. Literally two ideas, which should have died in the 1860s at the latest are now forced upon us.

  24. I’ve always thought, that there’s something not quite White with Dan Rather. Really.

  25. If it was legitimate for the 13 colonies to revolt against and declare independence from Great Britain and their sovereign HM George III then it was equally legitimate for the CSA to declare independence from the government in Washington, DC, which no longer represented their interests or treated them as equal partners with the northern states. Period.

  26. @IstvanN1961

    “or treated them as equal partners with the northern states.”

    Even now, many Northerners behave as if THEIR states ARE America® and like they have superior authority in all matters pertaining to national interest. Which they see as being their interests, nationalised.

    For instance, their insistence that that nobody south of the Ohio river, west of Minnesota, Iowa and Illinois, or outside the PacRim colonies, works or pays taxes.

    Or when Southern or interior Western states talk of secession. They insist they THEY are owed monies for THEIR Federal installations. The people living in the state(s) where the installation(s) actually exist, according to them, had no agency in the creation and maintenance of these installations. They don’t work or pay taxes, after all. Thus an Air force base in Texas, has nothing to do with Texas. It’s for the defence of Illinois, or Ohio or Massachusetts, etc.

    It’s because of these people, that the rest of the country is given short shrift in the government, and why the country is essentially ungovernable.

  27. @Bobbi

    “Going by this the North would have attacked the South had there not been any slaves at all.

    The war was going to happen, sooner or later. The North was hostile to the South, long before the complaints about slavery. That’s what happens when you force two different nations to live under the same government.

  28. @ Turn Hearts…‘“Never be haughty to the humble or humble to the haughty.”–President Jefferson Davis’Great quote – great comment.

    @juniusdaniel1828

    I had read that many years ago. In my social dealings, I had taken that and modified it.

    Give the haughty the respect they think they deserve and it will be there reward. Give the humble the respect they don’t think they will receive and will be your reward.

  29. Thus an Air force base in Texas, has nothing to do with Texas. It’s for the defence of Illinois, or Ohio or Massachusetts,

    James you and I know the two reasons these installations are in the Sun Belt South to begin with. ONE is to keep it under control and TWO is year-round operating weather. That was one of the reasons even before 1861 the Military kept forts in the South. What did people think it was only coincidental that the US Marines have Parris Island in SC, Camp Lejune in NC, the Army has Fort Jackson in SC Fort Bragg NC, Fort Benning, Fort Stewart in GA Fort Rucker in AL Fort Polk in LA. and Fort Hood and Fort Bliss in Texas? Not to mention Fort Sill in Oklahoma. I won’t even name the small instillations nor will I name the bases in KY, VA, MO as those are technically above the Sun Belt.

    I personally believe the Antebellum Southern Politicians at least until 1850 were aside from Calhoun a gaggle of fools. They constantly gambled away their advantages with silly compromises for their pet projects. Even Calhoun made a great misstep in 1815 over the New England Hartford Convention when it was clear New England had in effect taken efforts to secede from the Union and ally themselves with our enemy (ENGLAND). They should’ve kicked them out of the Union then and told them to take New York State with them. Unfortunately this didnt happen.

    The lower Midwest was making millions sending hay and grain to the Southern plantations they would have continued their existence as the South’s grainery without NY and NE in the Union.

  30. The WBTS was not primarily about slavery -it was about two different groups of whites with two diametrically political and cultural philosophy worldviews. The Yankee was industrial and merchant oriented, and busybody. The South was agrarian and republican government oriented. New England wanted universal democracy with town meetings, the South wanted representative democracy with county level government. Yes, the South enslaved Negroes to work the fields, but the wealthy among the North enslaved Negroes to serve them in also. The South was the righteous side. In retrospect, I am not sure that the North and South could have ever lived in harmony in the same country.

  31. @Mark Saint,
    Hello Mark,
    Nice avatar, both image and slogan. I might have used an M14 for the pic instead of an FAL, but that is just a personal preference between two fine rifles.
    Joe

  32. @Joe Putnam

    This is worth noting and that is that the Midwestern Township government system was copied a bit from the New England town but it does differ in some regards mostly in this way. In New England towns powers are absolute in the Midwest the township typically only handles basic matters such as snow removal on third-tier roads. You usually have a state route, a county road and a township road, the township is solely concerned with the third.

    Thomas Jefferson designed the township model, Virginia had county subdivisions ie parishes originally organized by the Anglican Church. As a parish resident, you were required to pay taxes to your parish and the county. While Jefferson saw these disestablished, he used the New England town and the Parish as both a model for the township. Jefferson’s original idea being that the more decentralized local government is, the better. All the Northwest Territory States, and the Southern states of AL, MISS, FL, ARK and MO were all surveyed originally with Jefferson’s system and had survey townships as were almost all of the states west of the Mississippi. The Southern states as a rule didn’t make their survey townships civil townships, but I believe they did use them to mark voting district boundaries. Today the entire Midwest meaning OH, IN IL MI WIS, MN ND SD NE and KS all keep civil townships, normally only for cleaning third tier roads and deliniating school district boundaries. Iowa devolved their townships to the counties in the sixties.

    All things come down to money at the end of the day. Had there never been slavery in the United States there would have never been a United States, point blank. This was because from 1619 until 1775 the slave system allowed us to become a wealthy nation which gave us enough money to fund the revolution at an early enough period in history when Britain didnt have modern weapons yet. Why didnt Canada or Australia become independent of Britain? Because they were poor for a long period of time and by the time they became wealthy, technology had caught up enough that made any rebellion too difficult to pull off. Think about it this way. By the time Britain got steamships, it took about two weeks or less to cross from Southhampton to New York. Do you think we could have rebelled against Britain when Britain could have flooded us with thousands of troops? No. The thing about 1775 was it took them months to assemble troops to get here. By that time we were dug in.

    Thus the entire argument stating that without slavery that the North would have opposed the South anyway is a facetious argument because NEITHER would have existed as anything but British subdivisions in the British Empire without the wealth generated by plantation slavery and slave trading. By the time Britain emancipated the slaves in 1833 neither the North or the South would have fought, they would have both rolled over like a dog. I am afraid that we would today be a mulatto colony completely enslaved to England today, had England managed to win the War.

  33. “consensus view” ? “Wikipedia” ? LOL! I thought this was Occidental Dissent not Salon. You’ll have to read the book.

  34. The Union® as James so wisely types it was a concept foisted upon us by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, long before any New England Yankee did much of anything. We must remember the world view of the Thirteen Colonies. New England and the South ie MD to GA had genuine cultures based upon a Religious worldview and tradition. New York, New Jersey Pennsylvania and Delaware were a mixture of different cultures. In the case of New York, you had NYC, the Dutch Hudson Valley and the New England hinterlands. In New Jersey you had a plantation culture little different than Virginia, with defined New England colonies scatted throughout. In Pennsylvania, you had the nonviolent Quakers who controlled the Colonial government but the population of the state was piestic Germans, Scots-Irish, and in Northeast Pennsylvania a New England contingent. Maryland’s backcountry was largely German with a Scots Irish and a tiny Yankee contingent. The Southrons remained on the Chesapeake.

    Thomas Jefferson believed that under American principles and with American laws, these populations could be blended together to form ONE AMERICA, however Jefferson didn’t want this happening in the South, where he did want it to maintain its culture. His experimental laboratory was the Northwest Territory. What happened was that starting in Ohio, the three settlement streams, Southerners, Pennsylvanians and their Maryland backcountry relatives, a mixture of Scots Irish Welsh Germans and others, along with immigrants directly from Europe came into the Northwest. When OH, IN and IL came into the Union, they were uniquely American as not one culture dominated in them. Michigan and Wisconsin were dominated by New England culture, later mixing with German and Scandinavian immigrants and in Michigans case, lots of Canadians. The same pattern held in Kansas, Nebraska and the Dakotas what is known today as the Midwest. The pattern repeated in California as well, although Northern California to British Columbia border is New England west.

    With no culture to unify them, there was a great push to unify them by American Ideas, the Proposition Nation. White racial equality between all the other races, Protestant Christian equality of Denominations, and a push toward being the Average American. From the time this culture solidified in the 1840’s it was typically dominated by small freeholding farmers, tradesmen and an educated urban class, which was largely drawn from New England, The one thing Midwestern folks identified upon was their hatred of Roman Catholics and the idea that they were a new people an American one.

    The War of Northern Aggression was all about this American concept an educated urban New England class and a large unremarkable population of average folks serving them. The idea that Negroes could be incorporated into this class was pushed over the common whites by this urbane New England clique although this horde of Common whites resisted it and in their counties away from the tiny New England clique there was no question that it was a White Protestant Christian Nation only. Jews Catholics and Negroes need not apply.

    What has happened since 1865 was a huge influx of immigration to these areas, centralization of urban power and the replacement of the New England clique by Jews. After the War, the common folks began to unite and threw the New England clique out of power, but the clique, changing from Republican to Democrats united themselves to the Immigrants they secretly hated to form a new power base, although it took them until the 1930’s in the Midwest to gain some power again. Since 1945 the clique has largely become an arm of Jewry, but being outnumbered they decided to bring in more Immigrants, Negroes and others to bolster their aims. White Genocide

  35. The situation as in relates to the South is this. The New England clique, funded by London Jewish Bankster money realized after Lincoln’s re-election in 1864 that too much power had been centralized by the Executive Branch due to the war. The only real way they could have true power was via Congress. They murdered Lincoln to begin Phase Two. Phase One had begun in Kansas in 1854 and ended with Lincoln’s death.

    Phase Two involved passing amendments that would give Congress unfettered power over the states. The thing was an unintended consequence of the war and their Reconstruction was that hordes of Negroes fled the Upper South to Ohio and Pennsylvania, which radicalized their white population and by 1877 the clique was out of power, however they had accomplished what they needed to do via passing their laws ie enabling acts. Phase two ended in 1877

    Faux Conservative phase 1877-1933 Benign Neglect

    Phase Three began incrementally with Woodrow Wilson putting Brandeis on the Supreme Court and filling our judiciary with Leftists. However the Midwest ie flyover country was still racist enough that it couldn’t take supreme control. Phase Three entered its active phase with President Roosevelt in 1933 and ceased with Lyndon Johnson leaving office in 1969. The Second Reconstruction 1933-1969.

    Benign Neglect 1969-1992

    Phase Four, what I like to call the Third Reconstruction began with the election of Bill Clinton in 1992. Since that time the ugly ANTIWHITE- ANTI SOUTHERN narrative has finally revealed itself publicly and now shouts it from the rooftops. The White Genocide project,started in the Second Reconstruction, carried on subtley through the Benign Neglect period is now out in the open.

    Phase Five???????????????????????

  36. You could say that the beginning of the Second Reconstruction’s first real case was the first Scottsboro Case POWELL v ALABAMA which was decided during the end of the Hoover Administration but before FDR took office. By this time we had both ((((BRANDEIS)))) and (((CARDOZO))) on the USSC. The second case PATTERSON v ALABAMA was also a (((BRANDEIS and CARDOZO)))) production

  37. The State of Alabama was wrong for giving the Scottsboro Boys death anyway, when they all could have been sent to a Prison Camp and the matter taken care of by the prison guards. All it took was a little Strychnine in the soup beans.

  38. Dear Mr. Jenkins –

    I don’t know of many North Carolinians who would want to live in a country where, any ole time one feels like it, strychnine can be slippt into someone’s soup, and that’s that.

  39. @Mark Saint…

    ‘@ Turn Hearts…‘“Never be haughty to the humble or humble to the haughty.”–President Jefferson Davis’Great quote – great comment.

    @juniusdaniel1828

    I had read that many years ago. In my social dealings, I had taken that and modified it.

    (((Give the haughty the respect they think they deserve and there will be a reward. Give the humble the respect they don’t think they will receive and, too, you will be rewarded.)))

    Hey, Mark – I edited your comment. Was that what you wisht to say?

  40. @Mark Saint…

    ‘Shit…you can’t edit this damn thing.’

    Yes, sir – this is much less fun than Discus, BUT, we certainly don’t wish to be where we must agree to be gagged.

  41. @juniusdaniel

    I agree with you I am not one to support poisonings, HOWEVER, it is a fact that had someone slipped some strychnine on MLK’s bolonga sandwich in the Montgomery Jail in 1955, we would sure have all been better off.

  42. @Billy Ray Jenkins…

    I agree with you that our government ought to have licensed our troops to go North and bring the fight to them.

    That said, we have no assurance that would have brought Northerners to heel – even if we had burned down Washington and lyncht every Yankee politician there.

    Sometimes I think you underestimate Yankees. Yes, I have seen them in quite a few walks of life, including military, and they can, as a whole, be very brave, idealogical, and relentless.

    The obvious proof of this, even if you have not seen it with your own eyes, is that our granddaddies made them pay so very dearly, for four years, and, even, kickt their unholy asses on occasions too numerous to mention.

    Yet, they kept coming.

    Thus, it was not unreasonable for Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis (all advisors aside, to conclude that, to win, they would have to defeat the Yankee armies in the field, and, thus, look formidable enough to attract allies.

    In the end, I don’t think that The Yankees would have thrown in the towel at any time.

    They are far more stubborn than that, which, by the way, shows their resemblance to their cousins – us.

    In the end, we can Monday-morning quarterback this to death, but, we lost.

    In the next round, we won The War of Reconstruction – a victory which held up until the New England Government spouses, The Jews, began an undeclared war against us, in the courts, in the late 1940s.

    Can you see a pattern here?

    It’s time for us to bear the burden and up the ante.

    If we don’t, we will show ourselves to be inferior, and the only future for that is submission.

  43. @Billy Ray Jenkins…

    ‘@juniusdaniel

    I agree with you I am not one to support poisonings, HOWEVER, it is a fact that had someone slipped some strychnine on MLK’s bolonga sandwich in the Montgomery Jail in 1955, we would sure have all been better off.’

    ///////////////////////////////////////////////

    Yes, sir, I think there is something to this, but, may I point out what Louis Beam said (you recommended him to me and, since, I have listened to him studiously,)

    ‘There is no such thing as Black Power, only White Weakness, and their is no such thing as Jewish Dominance, but, only White Submission.’

    May I remind you that my daddy’s people never stop, and, even if MLK had not been there, they would have found and propped up someone else.

    Unfortunately, the Jewish community, by their aggressive tenacity, only give you two options, when dealing with them – submit or throw them out.

    The South, of my childhood days, no longer wanted to really fight. We had come to dream Yankee dreams and preferred eating our lunches at the counters of Woolworths and listening to Don Meredith and Howard Cosell fight the culture wars on Monday Night Football.

    That, Sir, is the truth as I saw it. Nobody taught it to me, nobody indoctrinated it in me.

    The White Southern Man, as my beloved Alabama wife is apt to say, has become weak-willed and, in general a selfish chicken-shit.

  44. @juniusdaniel

    That is why I have always said Secession was not the ideal solution, the ideal one would have been a coup followed by trials before the North knew what hit them. This would have been preferrable however the problem was, no one had the sand to do this. With the tiny size of the US Army in 1860 and the fact that it was scattered largely in the west, Governor Letcher and the Virginia Militia could have captured Washington right after the 1860 Election, and although the Governor of Maryland, Hicks was a submissionist, I predict that enough men would have risen up in Maryland to help with the enterprise. The problem was that all of the great men, Lee, Jackson, Stuart, Johnston, etc all were fanatical AMERICAN PATRIOTS and would have seen such an endeavor as an attack on all they held dear. I doubt even the Southern Reps and Senators would have ever went along with a Junta because of their fanatical devotion to the US Constitution. The Knights of the Golden Circle proposed something along these lines, but again it was rejected for being too radical. Thus Secession was the only solution that satisfied the Constitutionalists and the Military.

    I do disagree on whether the Yankees would have collapsed. Remember in 1861 the Northeast ie Pennsylvania/Delaware to Maine and the Northwest States didnt particularly like one another, I think major attacks would have been a wedge that drove it all apart. However that didnt happen.

    The South in the 1940’s and 1950’s why no one knows exactly had been largely tamed. Sixty years before, brawls, knife fights, shootings dog fights, horse racing making moonshine, gambling was an everyday thing in some places but between 1890 and 1950 there was a slow process of taming the Southern Barbarian (YANKEE TERM NOT MINE). Was it schooling? In part. Was it increased law enforcement prosecuting lawbreakers for doing such wild things? Possibly. Was it the Baptist Church? I reckon it played a part. I estimate it was many different things plus radio movies womens liberation all coming together, plus a large drop in the Southern White birthrate. In 1890 if your wife had less than 10 babies, she was slacking, by 1950 10 babies were considered excessive, the average had gotten down to about 6. All these things did it. The Civil Rights Movement saw the common folks remember this, look down on the Sam Bowers types and why did they? Sam Bowers and the Klan represented the violent past, they had been conditioned to reject that slowly over time.

    Its downright bizarre the mind control that was placed on Dixie incrementally between the Spanish American War and the Korean War. You can see the film of the Jacksonville Confederate Convention of 1914 and American Flags were everywhere. This was only 37 years since Reconstruction ended.

Comments are closed.