Jeff Giesea: How To Defend America?

Jeff Giesea:

“Davidson’s reply doesn’t seem accurate. This is probably because Williams, in defining Americanism, isn’t very clear. One the one hand Williams defines Americanism around the founders’ view of justice—an idea. But then he writes: “America is more than an idea—it is a people and a country.” Well, which is it? Williams seems to want a fusion of “civil nationalism with the popular, cultural, and historical touchstones of American greatness.” Whereas Marcus divorces Americanism from Trumpism, Williams conflates them. Are Williams and Marcus really on the same side?

To wage this campaign, we need a clearer view of what we mean by Americanism, and a more aligned coalition behind the campaign. My sense is that this will call for a deeper exploration of American identity and new fusions of ideas about what it means. Perhaps we will need to embrace that Americanism is both a creed and a people. …

The stakes are high for “Defend America.” It’s an effort worthy of passionate support.”

Unfortunately, Jeff Giesea is a deracinated American and obviously doesn’t have a clear-eyed view of what he means by Americanism, so he is unable to defend either the concept, tradition or the American people from the Far Left’s critique and strategy. I’m not even sure he knows where to start. He’s right though to diagnose identity politics and political correctness as the problem.

In his 1997 book Power in the Blood, the Canadian writer John Bentley Mays explored his Southern roots and heritage and described the Southern tradition as “noble, failed attempts to raise on Southern ground a culture rooted in the natural order of our seasons, to build a civilization free of cruel utopianism and metropolitan alienation, sustained by loyalties to place.” Is Jeff Giesea able to sum up the meaning of Americanism or Northern conservatism in a single sentence?

If not, then why is that the case? Isn’t it because Southerners are the natural conservatives and traditionalists in this country? We’re also more homogeneous. Seeing as how we are “the base” of the Republican Party, we’re the ones who need a better version of conservatism, which is highly ironic since our own tradition is vastly superior to mainstream conservatism anyway.

Note: Jeff Giesea is well intentioned.

If I had more time, I would explore and investigate other parts of the country like I have done with the South. In order to defend a place, you need to be well grounded in a variety of subjects.

About Hunter Wallace 9692 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent


  1. The anglo is confused and full of angst. I am simple. My people are simple. You stand for your religion and your people. Outside of committing evil you do not go against your kind. Ideas exist to support humans. They do not determine who you are. A people are a family. And regardless of what ideas some of your family have they are still family. Family members that I disagree with are more important to me than others who have some of my ideas.

    Does this Jeff Giesea understand that only white people care about his nonsense and probably only superficially?

    When we sweep over him and his intellectual kind he will be surprised. The expression that Nero fiddled while Rome burned seems appropriate here. Does he not realize that people like me have all the mercy of a shark in a feeding frenzy?

  2. Well, the big question I’ve been pondering into the future, is what soil would I fight for? Would I fight for Phoenix over Stockholm even though I’ve never been to either? I’m gonna say Stockholm. Would I fight for London over San Francisco? Absolutely.

    I’m still some years from retiring, but honestly I have to ask if that will happen in America. Would I die happier in a modest Latvian cottage than in an urban rust belt garbage hole. To me as a northerner, who has already been chased out of my ancestral home by hispanics and high taxes, I have more loyalty to the idea of Europe than the reality of America. I hate this place,

  3. Gith- I would agree, except London is no longer London; Paris is no longer Paris, etc. Where does one go?

    What we seek, as Whites, is a ‘this-worldly’ home now denied us; refusing to recognize that, because of our sins (individually and collectively) we have torn ourselves from our own racial uniqueness, the earth that created us, and the ‘sense of place’ that informed our memories as families, cities, states, and defined homelands. As the old song says:

    I remember the first time I set foot on English soil- I had a visceral, almost ‘electric’ connection as my foot touched terra firma in that ‘green and pleasant isle.’ But (fast forward forty-ish years) the last time I was in the UK, I saw FOREIGERS from Dover to Inverness, and it SICKENED ME. They were (and are) a visible BLOT on the landscape. Yet England now has a bastard child of mixed race in its Royal line, and no one seems willing to either denounce it, or destroy such blasphemies, but applaud it!

    Closer to home, I long to return to the Upper Midwest, because where I live now, is not ‘home’ to me (though I loathe the winters, the mosquitoes, the smug ‘knownothingism’ of the people ‘up north,’ etc.) Yet what I would do, to be on a lake, in a cabin, just ‘being’ in that homeland, once more. But when the city of my birth now has Omar Ilhan as its’ congresscritter, clearly, SOMETHING IS not just AMISS, but is DEMONICALLY amiss.

    If I were an atomistic Prot, (with all my theology as propositional bullet points, as opposed to a catholic faith, that incarnates Christ in the land of my birth) I could either long for some specious ‘rapture,’ or a pagan, ‘ragnarok.’ But I am neither – I am bound somehow, mystically, incarnationally, to the land of my birth. I either fight the ‘Xenos’ to the death, or leave, and feel like St. John on the isle of Patmos, isolated from kith and kin, covenant and tribe, longing for Christ to ‘take me home.’ Because ‘this world (as it is today) is NOT my home.’

  4. “Defending America” means just defending Yankeedom and everything those sixteen states have done to the rest of the country, since 1830. And to other countries since 1899.

    It’s really no more complicated than that.

1 Trackback / Pingback

  1. Southern History Series: John C. Calhoun on Liberty – Occidental Dissent

Comments are closed.