Woke Mob Vows To Tear Down Abraham Lincoln Monument In DC

I will just say this.

While the bastard deserves it for unleashing this, we aren’t fighting the last war in 2020. It is beyond clear this has devolved into an attack on every symbol of White America. The woke mob is now attacking every symbol of White America from Christopher Columbus to Jesus Christ.

Note: I told you anti-racism was going to plunge this country into a major new Crisis.

About Hunter Wallace 9620 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent

21 Comments

  1. Good riddance to the memory of the tyrant. Hopefully more White Americans beyond the South will wake up as a result.

  2. Strange how Trump was playing 3D chess by doing nothing as the Confederate statues were torn down, but when the mob goes after statues the Yankee/GOP care about, the White man’s burden Lincoln, out come military, riot cops, and threats of 10 year sentences. The GOP hates Southerners, but they want their votes.

  3. Only the tiny League of the South types despise Lincoln. Don’t forget the South attacked first and Lincoln wanted to repatriate Negroes while the Southern elite wanted to keep them as labor and consumers.
    You guys can blame the North all you want for the dismantling of Jim Crow during the civil rights movement, but the South wasn’t united in its support for maintaining it. The more prosperous urbanized outer South and Southern suburbanites joined the rest of the nation in supporting desegregation. Only the poorer and more rural deep South wanted to keep Jim Crow. That’s why the outer South went for Ike, LBJ, and Nixon instead of Strom Thurmond, Goldwater, and George Wallace. If the deep Southern segregationists had emulated Goldwater (instead of Wallace) and supported the right of private individuals and institutions to freely associate while opposing government enforced segregation, perhaps the 1964 Civil Rights Act and 1968 Housing Act could’ve been formatted to not have been so intrusive.
    As I tell conservatives who whine about liberals taking over academia, media, and government, you have only yourselves to blame for your sloth and terrible strategy.

    • But the Yankees are decadent and rotten to the core. It is the South that has been the defender of traditional marriage while the perverts up in the North and the west coast promote homosexuality and other deviant sexual behavior. Now these are the real nation destroying sins which defile the land and causes the inhabitants to be vomited out of it and not slavery.

      • The South has much higher rates of STDs than the North, which means only one thing: homosexuality and other deviant sexual behavior is more prevalent in the South.

        • aekan, but they got “Jeeezus!” Don’t forget the disproportionate number of Southerners on Springer and Maury. Real classy and moral people, huh?
          Like affluent limousine leftists living in exclusive urban neighborhoods, these neo-Confederates are clueless about the real world outside their little bubble. Even during the civil rights movement in the ’50s and ’60s, support for neo-Confederacy and Jim Crow was restricted to pockets in the deep South and not shared in the richer and more developed peripheral South. That’s why Ike swept the outer South in ’52 and ’56 and the outer South went for LBJ instead of Goldwater in ’64 and Nixon rather than Wallace in ’68. If you travel through the South, you’ll see way more American flags than Confederate ones. The neo-Confederates are trivial even on their home turf. That doesn’t mean we should put them down, but they’re usually the petty ones who can’t let go of a conflict they started and lost and that nobody cares about anymore.

          • More Free Thinking. ($ 0.00 cents for your thoughts.)

            LINCOLN THE FREETHINKER by JOSEPH LEWIS
            THE FREETHOUGHT PUBLISHING COMPANY
            1658 Broadway New York, N. Y.
            Copyright, 1924

            When Lincoln ran for Congress against the Reverend Peter Cartwright, charges were brought against him by clergymen that he was an infidel, and that he said that Christ was an illegitimate child. And not once did Lincoln deny the truth of these charges. When asked why he did not deny them, Lincoln said he did not do so for two reasons : First, he knew the charges to be true; and second, they could be easily proved.

            Galileo became a heretic when he questioned the truth of Joshua’s influence upon the sun. Were Charles Darwin a Christian, the “Origin of Species” would never have seen the light of day, and William Jennings Bryan would have been denied the great opportunity of making a monkey of himself. And if Abraham Lincoln were a Christian, the emancipation of the Negro slaves would never have entered his mind!

            Slavery is just as much a fundamental part of Christianity as is the Virgin Birth. To contradict one is just as serious as to deny the other. Leviticus, Chapter 25 Verses 44 to 46, is just as much part of the Bible as are the Ten Commandments. If one is “inspired” so is the other, and I quote the former :

            “Both thy bondmen and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen round about you; of them ye shall buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover, of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, which they begat in your land ; and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession ; they shall be your bondmen forever.”

            The following quotations from the New Testament require the same belief and acceptance from Christians as does the resurrection of Christ. I quote Timothy, Chapter 1, Verse 1 :
            “Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their masters worthy of all honor.”

            And Titus, Chapter 2, Verse 9 :
            “Exhort servants to be obedient to their masters.”

            As proof that the emancipation of the Negro slaves was opposed by the Christian Church, I need but quote the testimony of the celebrated divines of that time.

            The Reverend Alexander Campbell said : “There is not one verse in the Bible inhibiting slavery, but many regulating it. It is not then, we conclude, immoral.”

            The Reverend E. D. Simms, professor, Randolph-Macon College, wrote: “The extracts from Holy Writ unequivocally assert the right of property in slaves.”

            The Reverend R. Furman, D.D., Baptist, of South Carolina, said: “The right of holding slaves is clearly established in the Holy Scriptures, both by precept and example.”

            The Reverend Thomas Witherspoon, Presbyterian, of Alabama, said: “I draw my warrant from the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to hold the slave in bondage.”

            The Reverend Nathan Lord (what an authoritative name!), president of Dartmouth College, said: “Slavery was incorporated into the civil institutions of Moses; it was recognized accordingly by Christ and his apostles. They condemned all inter meddlers with it.”

            The Reverend Taylor, principal of the Theological Department of Yale College (and he certainly ought to know,) said: “I have no doubt that if Jesus Christ were on earth, he would, under certain circumstances, become a slaveholder.” And I want to say here and now that I agree absolutely with the Reverend Taylor.

            And Lincoln himself said: “All the powers of the earth seem rapidly combining against the slave, Mammon is after him — and the theology of the day is fast joining in the cry.”

            But the most striking illustration of history, showing the close connection between the Bible and slavery, is the fact that when the Revolutionists of France — Freethinkers all — rejected the Bible as a state book of authority, they also abolished slavery throughout the French possessions. And when the monarchist government came back into power, and the church regained control of the government, the Bible again became a state book of authority and the institution of slavery was re-established.

            To show the close connection between the belief in the Bible and the institution of slavery I need but mention the fact that when a bill was introduced in Parliament to abolish slavery in the British Empire, Lord Chancellor Thurlow characterized the move as “miserable and contemptible” and as being “contrary to the word of God.”

            And I repeat and re-emphasize, that it was utterly impossible for Abraham Lincoln to be a believer in the Bible, and be the author of the Emancipation Proclamation.

            A Christian believes the Bible to be the infallible word of God. He believes that all the knowledge necessary to his well-being, happiness and immortality is contained therein. To question its precepts is heresy to him. It is because of this belief that Christianity has to its credit the Dark Ages. To doubt, to investigate, to improve, to advance, is a principle contrary to the doctrines of religion. “Prove all things, hold fast to that which is true,” means to the religious-minded only what the Bible says is true. Whatever is, is best,” is the brake upon the wheel of progress. “God’s will” is the stereotyped answer to all that is. If Lincoln were a Christian he would have accepted the Negro’s plight in life as in accordance with the “divine plan” as enunciated by the “Holy Bible.”

            It was because Lincoln was not bound by any creed, not hampered by any religious belief, that he felt that the mark of the vicious lash upon the tender skin was not and could not be right by divine sanction, and for that reason he waged the most just war in humanity’s heroic struggle for freedom. “In giving freedom to the slave, we assure freedom to the free,” is the statement that no believer in the, Bible could utter.

            Even those clergymen who claim that Lincoln accepted Christianity in the latter years of his life, admit that in early manhood he was an infidel. His first law partner, John T. Stewart, said: “Lincoln was an avowed and open infidel, and sometimes bordered on Atheism. He went farther against Christian beliefs, doctrines and principles than any other man I ever heard.”

            The impression, now being created in the minds of our school children, that Lincoln’s only sources of knowledge were the Bible and Pilgrim’s Progress is, in view of the facts, a deliberate and malicious falsehood. Lincoln was a reader and lover of Voltaire, Volney and Paine, and was not satisfied with being enlightened himself, but informed others of what he had found out. He thought it miserly to keep that knowledge to himself and was zealous in his heresy. He argued and talked for that which he had discovered to be true. It is said that he never tired of reading Paine; and I ask, who does tire of reading him? Who can read the “Age, of Reason” without being convinced by its logic?

            Oh, what a valuable, what a priceless copy of the “Age of Reason” it was that fell into the hands of Abraham Lincoln! The germ of Lincoln the Emancipator was planted when he read these liberty-loving books. And friends, as a gentle reminder, if you have a son whom you would like to see develop into another Lincoln, you cannot better equip him than by giving him the same mental food upon which Abraham Lincoln thrived.

          • FT: “The neo-Confederates are trivial even on their home turf. That doesn’t mean we should put them down, but they’re usually the petty ones who can’t let go of a conflict they started and lost and that nobody cares about anymore.”

            “Depending on recent polls, 40% of Southerners and 23 % of those polled nation-wide support the former often referred “Lost Cause.” This in an age of pervasive public education where brainwashing of history students is almost formal. But the numbers above are a bit more than “only a few.” And people are thinking more about the subject.”
            — “Tucker and the Confederacy”, by Paul H. Yarbrough. 06/24/2020

        • Banned for life, quoting Xian fundamentalist literature from 96 years ago doesn’t prove your religious dogma. Whether you like it or not, Jefferson was a Southerner and a deist and the Constitution supports separation of church and state. You left this out btw:

          Wikipedia: Donald Livingston founded the Abbeville Institute. Livingston is a convert from Anglicanism to the Orthodox Church.

          The Atlanta Journal-Constitution: 46 percent of all Southerners now hold a “somewhat or very unfavorable” view toward the Confederate battle flag.

          Biloxi-Gulfport Sun Herald reported a poll that found 29 percent of Mississippians would support a new Confederacy if there was a Civil War today; 50 percent would stay loyal to the United States of America; and, 21 percent were undecided.

          So the founder of an obscure institute converts to a non-Southern “foreign” version of Christianity yet you’re willing to overlook that because he’s a fellow neo-Confederate? What a double standard.

          The figure of 40% you cited was by that institute and no primary sources were provided, so it’s dubious at best but even if I were to give you the benefit of the doubt that means 60% wouldn’t side with you.

          The fact that almost twice as many folks in MS (the poorest, fattest, blackest, least educated state in the country) would back the Republic over the Rebellion doesn’t bode well for you. Many of us who reside in the suburbs in the South, especially in the wealthier peripheral South, had ancestors who sided with the Union and voted to remain in the Union whereas your ancestors were probably indentured servants who were swindled by the plutocratic plantation owners to fight for the Confederacy. We voted for Truman, Ike, LBJ, and Nixon, and not Thurmond, Stevenson, Goldwater, or Wallace.

          Keeping whites the majority in America to preserve our First World civilization and yes, some of the progressive reforms that only Western societies make, is a much higher priority for those of us who are logical. Trying to revive a 155-year-old ending to a civil war that the wrong side lost seems to be more important to the neo-Confederate minority. And if other trivial side issues like abortion or homo rights is more important to you than demography, I suggest you relocate to Eastern Europe where those things are still taboo. Then again, the lesser economies, gun control, and bigger government authoritarianism may keep you away lol

    • @Banned Hipster
      Why is it you always blame the people that your liberal friends are destroying? Is it your jewish genes?

      “Only the tiny League of the South types despise Lincoln. Don’t forget the South attacked first and Lincoln wanted to repatriate Negroes while the Southern elite wanted to keep them as labor and consumers.”

      Only the intelligent and informed despise Lincoln. The GOP Boomers brainwashed by their TV’s think he’s awesome.

      If Lincoln was alive today he would be on the streets with your woke mob liberal friends, tearing down the monuments of every White person he could find.

      In 1861 the GOP were the woke crowd. They are still woke, but not woke enough for this new breed of wokies, so now the GOP has to go, so they will be treated the same as the Confederates were. They will be called traitors to the new Union which will be brown and third world .

      The only way to deal with wokies is to squash them before they squash you, like the Confederates tried to do to the original Yankee wokies. If Trump had a brain in his head, he’d send irregular forces to massacre the mobs on the streets. Send drones to destroy anti-White MSM, Google. Twitter, Facebook, Amazon and all their backups. Arrest everyone in Washington D.C.. Arrest or bomb the governments of states who encouraged the riots. Shut down all the woke universities, arrest and disappear their woke professors. Tell the non-Whites to leave or else. Go full Conan the Barbarian.

      But alas like all Yankee liberal wokies he’s too selfish, weak, and liberal, to save his worthless hide, let alone save his civilization.

    • You freethinkers must all love Lincoln it appears.

      The following is taken from
      LINCOLN THE FREETHINKER
      by
      JOSEPH LEWIS (who just happened to be a Jew)

      THE FREETHOUGHT PUBLISHING COMPANY
      1658 Broadway New York, N. Y.
      Copyright, 1924

      Lincoln’s belief in “God” or “Providence” prompted him to say: “Friends, I agree with you in Providence, but I believe in the Providence of the most men, the largest purse and the longest cannon.”

      The use of the word “God” has a thousand interpretations and does not reveal the religious belief of the person using that word. The manner in which Lincoln used the word “God” in his immortal papers should be sufficient proof that he had no faith in the generally accepted sense of that word. I think the following incident as related by Herndon should settle for all time the significance of the use of the word ‘God’ by Lincoln.

      “No man had a stronger or firmer faith in Providence than Lincoln, but the continued use by him late in life of the word ‘God’ must not be interpreted to mean that he believed in a personal God. In 1854 he asked me to erase the word ‘God’ from a speech I had written and read to him for criticism, because my language indicated a personal God, whereas, he insisted, no such personality existed.”

      Herndon goes farther and says: “If Lincoln were asked whether he believed in God, he would have said : ‘I do not know that a God exists.’ ”

      Lincoln’s two most important documents, the Emancipation Proclamation and the Gettysburg Address, were originally written with the idea of God completely left out. It is an historical fact and noteworthy to us that the Emancipation Proclamation was written and printed by Lincoln before he consulted the members of his cabinet. When he called them into conference he handed each a copy, and asked them for any suggestions. One member, the Honorable Salmon P. Chase, after reading it, stated:

      “Mr. Lincoln, this paper is of the utmost importance — greater than any state paper ever made by this government. A paper of so much importance, and involving the liberties of so many people, ought, I think, to make some reference to the Deity. I do not observe anything of the kind in it.”

      “No, I overlooked it,” replied Lincoln. “Won’t you make a draft of what you think ought to be inserted?”

      And the following words as suggested by the Honorable Salmon P. Chase were inserted in the proclamation:

      “I invoke the considerate judgment of mankind and the gracious favor of Almighty God.”

      No doubt a similar circumstance was responsible for the words “under God” being put into the Gettysburg Address as the original draft of the address makes no mention of these words.

      We must not lose sight of the fact that Lincoln was the most misunderstood and hated man of his day. There were conspirators in every branch of the Government, and, it has been intimated, even in his own cabinet. We must not judge him for what he permitted others to do in order to accomplish his glorious undertaking, and if the churches of his day were ready to strike him down on the slightest provocation, the oversentimental references to “God” in his messages can be readily understood and are of little importance.

      When chided about his Thanksgiving messages as being contrary to his known convictions on the subject, Lincoln said to Judge James N. Nelson : “Oh ! this is some of Seward’s nonsense and it pleases the fools !” Lincoln knew the power of the church’s hostility, and was a compromiser in the sense that he believed in “doing a little harm for a great good,” particularly so when the end meant the liberation of thousands of human beings from the bondage of slavery. To the church, it is more important to crush the infidel than to add a step of progress to civilization and for that reason, while president, Lincoln was reticent in public upon the question of religion. By this act of discretion he carried the nation safely through the most trying period of its history.

      It is very curious indeed, that if Lincoln were a Christian, as some say, nowhere in any of his writings does there appear a single solitary mention of Jesus Christ. In his public addresses, official documents and his private correspondence, never once did he express a belief in any doctrine that would even remotely claim him as a Christian. On the contrary, his personal conversations were such as unhesitatingly to classify him an avowed Freethinker. And yet some have the impudence to say that on the presentation of a $500 Bible, which some misguided Negroes of Baltimore gave him as a token of gratitude, he is quoted as saying :

      “In regard to the great book I have only this to say, that it is the best gift which God has given to Man. All the good from the Saviour of the world is communicated to us through this book. But for this book we could not know right from wrong. All those things desirable to man are contained in it.”

      This statement is a lie, the enormity of which I am unable to express. To say that Lincoln said this is too ridiculous for notice, and yet when uttered by a clergyman it is taken to be true. It is utterly impossible that Lincoln, who openly doubted the truth of the Bible and questioned the legitimacy of the birth of Christ, should utter such a puerile statement, especially to a group of people representing a race that had been so mercilessly subjected to a condition of servitude because of the Bible’s precepts. Out of courtesy, Lincoln may have thanked the little group of well-meaning Negroes for their gift, yet thinking in his heart what fools they were to take $500 of their hard-earned money and waste it upon the very instrument that was the greatest obstacle in their struggle for emancipation.

      • “The only way to deal with wokies is to squash them before they squash you
        Arrest or bomb the governments of states who encouraged the riots. Shut down all the woke universities, arrest and disappear their woke professors. Tell the non-Whites to leave or else. Go full Conan the Barbarian.”

        “You freethinkers must all love Lincoln it appears.”

        Evidently, a supporter of terrorism and a religious wacko who are constitutional and historical scholars in their own minds. They hang themselves with their own comments LOL

        • No, there was no prohibition against secession or slavery in the Constitution (and none in the Bible). Lincoln was the traitor who betrayed he Constitution and had no protection (God removed it) when his assassin moved in with a close range execution style shot to the head — justice served. Your agent for change only had a very short period to rejoice over the beaten down South he had personally wasted. Free think on that.

          Keep the Confederate statues up and tear all those to the traitor Lincoln down.

          May God Save the South!

          • “had no protection (God removed it) when his assassin moved in with a close range execution style shot to the head — justice served.”

            And what happened to Booth? He was a lifetime loser, died a loser, and is considered a loser in the eyes of history. You idolize him apparently and as they say, birds of a feather flock together. Oh, and he also prevented a possible repatriation of most Negroes back to mother Africa.

            Yahweh is a Semitic creation myth, and the literal interpretation of the Bible has been disproven by science for over a century (ie young Earth creationism), so you’ve been adhering to myths throughout your boomer life. The South lost the Civil War (and many of us Southerners in the outer South like WV and E.TN were pro-Union btw), you neo-Confederates are considered an antiquated minority to everybody else, Lincoln is regarded as the great uniter throughout our nation, and “Judeo-Christianity” is declining while paganism (the native faith of our ancestors btw) and secularism are rising rapidly among Western millennials and zoomers whether you like it or not. You’re probably nearing the end of your life anyway, so it shouldn’t matter to you too much lol

            “The only way to deal with wokies is to squash them before they squash you
            Arrest or bomb the governments of states who encouraged the riots. Shut down all the woke universities, arrest and disappear their woke professors. Tell the non-Whites to leave or else. Go full Conan the Barbarian.”

            You’re promoting violence and treason. Unlike LBJ who handled the riots of the ’60s more efficiently, Trump has incompetently handled the looting, but he’s more constitutional about it than you are. There’s a reason why you’ll never be an elected official.

        • A state defending itself from an insurrection that is burning its cities, ripping down its history, intimidating its founding population, and taking its territory, is “committing terriorism” only in the wokies mind.

  4. There have been NO good Presidents. President Lincoln was a LAWYER – need I say more – like most of “our” Presidents and too many other important “representatives,” and like too many important professiional “journalists” (presstitutes) of mainstream media including Fox News stars.

    “Lincoln represented the Illinois Central Railroad throughout the 1850’s. In the McLean County Tax case, a case Lincoln won for the railroad, he charged his largest fee ever: $5,000. The case was called Illinois Central Railroad v. McLean County. The Illinois Central Railroad owned 118 acres of land in McLean County, Illinois, and the county assessor levied a tax of $428.57 on the railroad’s property. The railroad argued that the Illinois General Assembly act incorporating the railroad exempted the railroad from taxes. The railroad hired Lincoln and sued McLean County for an injunction to stop the county from selling railroad land to pay taxes. The parties reached an agreement, in which the court would dismiss the bill, thus ruling for McLean County, and the railroad would appeal the case to the Illinois Supreme Court, where the only question would be whether the county had a lawful right to tax the Illinois Central Railroad property. Lincoln continued to represent the railroad in court. The Illinois Supreme Court reversed the judgment. Walter B. Scates, who was chief justice, ruled that the legislature could exempt property from taxation. Therefore, the charter of the Illinois Central Railroad was constitutional. Lincoln received $5,000 for his legal services, but he had to sue the railroad to collect his money”: https://rogerjnorton.com/Lincoln91.html

2 Trackbacks / Pingbacks

  1. The End of the Liberal Right – Occidental Dissent
  2. Response to Thomas Main – Occidental Dissent

Comments are closed.