Tuesday, December 11, 2012

Daniel Greenfield on the Importance of Cultural Secession

A must read today is a post on the blog Sultan Knish, written by a conservative and traditional Jew, on how the right can retake the culture and the country.  It won't be easy, but it can be done.  It involves cultural secession before physical secession; it involves winning the demographic war and the cultural war.

Here are some salient quotes to whet your appetites, listed by topic:

1.  Demographics:  Third world immigration has greatly contributed to the growth and success of progressive politics:
Taking back America demographically is a matter of having enough children within a cultural structure that passes down the values of adults to the children, while focusing on limiting immigration as much as possible. This isn't an impossible task.
Greenfield gives the Amish,Orthodox Jews and Mormons as examples of tight-knit communities who are producing the children needed, while simultaneously eliminating the progressive programming for those children that occurs from both public education and Hollywood entertainment.

Many Christian families have begun doing the same, by home-schooling their children and restricting their exposure to progressive indoctrination.

2.   Culture War:  We are losing the culture war to progressive programming from media, academia and entertainment.  Forming tight-knit communities with shared traditional values is essential, as well as finding ways to substitute our own education and entertainment that is stripped of progressive content.  Winning the culture was is essential.  Greenfield writes:
The progressive agenda is to destroy the family, to undermine it, ridicule it, economically disadvantage it and burden it until it falls apart and is replaced by the Big Brother of the State. The traditional agenda is to maintain the family and pass along traditional values across the generations. That is what this cultural war is really about; whether the family or the state will the defining unit of human experience.
3.  Cultural Secession:  
Cultural secession means cutting away the educational and entertainment culture of the left out of your home. It means creating your own alternative education and entertainment and grouping in communities that act as a support structure for traditional values. Is it easy? No. It involves sacrifice. But groups such as the Amish and Orthodox Jews have done it and have thrived doing it.
Daniel Greenfield makes a lot of sense and describes the strategies needed for our cultural and demographic survival.  Read the entire article here.

Monday, December 10, 2012

Lawrence Auster on How We Can Form a New Conservative Society

My friend Lawrence Auster of View From the Right posted the article (reproduced below) on how we can start over again, following the loss of western civilization to the far left.  I like his description of where we are now:  free to start over, without hopelessly trying to inject some conservatism into the runaway leftism of the now dead American Republic.   We can now stop beating a dead horse and look for a new steed on which to ride.

Auster often alludes to a kind of internal secession from liberal society, wherein traditional conservatives form their own internal societies in which traditional American values and culture can be preserved, as islands in a sea of multicultualist, leftwing ideology.  From these societies we can eventually find practical ways to govern ourselves, perhaps through actual secession or by slowly retaking the country, maybe by a "reverse march" through the institutions.  All this would be determined later.

Actually, Auster's scenario has been described before, by the League of the South, who advocated such internal secession over a decade ago.  At the time, I didn't like the idea, as it seemed too passive to me, as I wanted to fight for the country.  Now I must admit that we have lost the country to a socialist/fascist ideology and that this form of passive aggression may be all we have left.

Larry concludes his remarks by denying that Lincoln destroyed the Constitutional order of the United States; I fear that Larry was (like most of us) heavily indoctrinated into the Lincoln myth at an early age.  Lincoln surely destroyed the Constitutional order, or at the very least, dealt it a fatal blow that only now is finally killing off the country envisioned by the Founding Fathers.  

Reader observations and remarks are welcome.


STARTING OVER AGAIN - by Lawrence Auster

A correspondent told me this evening that he is working on an article about secession in which, among other things, he will present the laws that would be needed in the new, non-liberal, breakaway society (or societies) to avoid the mistakes of the existing society. This is exactly the kind of work that is needed. It is a complement to my proposed article listing all the things about the existing America that we reject.
The trauma of the decisive takeover of this society by the left and the death of the constitutional republic has a large silver lining: we are now free intellectually of liberal America. We no longer have to keep hopelessly trying to inject some conservatism into a society that is overwhelmingly and unchallengeably liberal. Now we are free to start over again,—intellectually at first, and later, we hope, practically. What the task involves is taking the good principles and components of the old America and dispensing with the bad, and introducing new principles and components that can be the basis of a new, viable, non-liberal society.
- end of initial entry -

Ed H. writes:
Does the model of the South as it existed for almost a hundred years post-Reconstruction, pre-Civil Rights, offer anything as to what a post-liberal American political entity might look like? During that time the South was an almost a de facto separate country existing loosely within the USA. Rather than formal secession, independence was maintained by culture, local laws, and indifference to what others might think. There were no external borders, but it was a no-go zone for the federal government. Strict states rights created a unique, powerful, and defiant culture and people, defined by the principles of the 1787 Constitution and yet a place where no one dared use federal laws to distort the local religious or racial identity. We do not need to accept how liberals looked on the New South, i.e. a cauldron of bigotry, we can look at it as a non-liberal, traditionalist, highly cultured, European, white, American Republic. So we do have at least one rough but workable model from our past to go by. And this seems a much more likely and achievable first step.Arizona with its defiance of Eric Holder provides another example of how this could begin to happen today. The federal judiciary would quickly show up, pure defiance with no backing down would be inevitable.
LA replies:
I think there is much to what you are saying.I would also point out that your accurate picture of the post-Reconstruction South puts the lie to the ridiculous, brain-dead paleoconservative notion that America’s constitutional order [was] destroyed by Lincoln.

Is It Time For a New Political Party?

When anyone brings up the subject of a new political party, they are quickly drowned out with hoots and hollers from the "mainstream," who tell us that a third party can't win.  I used to agree with this.  However, I am totally fed up with the Establishment Republicans.  It would be nice to bury Lincoln's party once and for all.

This past week or so, Boehner, the Republican Speaker of the House, has been removing Tea Party and conservative congressmen from key committees.  I imagine that this is so Boehner and the Establishment GOP can more easily accede to Obama's demands, spend more money and raise taxes.

Starting a new party wouldn't be easy, but what choice do we really have?  A conservative party is what we need.  Why not make the unofficial Tea Party an actual party?

Friday, December 7, 2012

Four States Consider Nullification of Obamacare

The Tenth Amendment Center states that four states are planning to vote on bills that would nullify Obamacare, making the law null and void and unenforceable in those states.  Another ten or so states are mulling over the creation of similar bills.  Nullification, an old American strategy, may yet be the best way to end the so-called Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

The principle of nullification is not new, and is described in Thomas E. Wood's book 33 Questions About American History You're Not Supposed to Ask.  The Virginia Resolutions of 1798 concluded that if the federal government should encroach upon the powers reserved to the states, the states have a right to nullify the offending law and refuse to enforce it—after all, a law that violates the Constitution is no law at all. Taken together, these ideas became known as the “Principles of ’98."

It doesn't matter if a federal court, including the Supreme Court, decides differently.  Ultimately, it is the right of the individual states to determine the constitutionality of any federal laws and choose to obey them or not.

This principle has precedent in American history.  Of course, there is the well-known "Nullification Crisis" of 1833, when South Carolina passed an ordinance of nullification against the 1828 federal Tariff of Abominations that would have greatly increased the tax on imported goods from Britain, resulting in a significant lowering of British demand for Southern cotton.  President Andrew Jackson was prepared to send federal troops to South Carolina to enforce the tariff, but a compromise ended the crisis.

However, that nullification crisis of 1833 wasn't the first time individual states have nullified federal laws.  The first was by Massachusetts, reacting to federal government's Embargo of 1807.  This embargo was designed to punish Britain and France for depredations of American neutrality rights on the seas, and prohibited any American trade with foreign nations whatsoever.  The U.S. Navy was to enforce the embargo by stopping and searching merchant ships -- a clear violation of the 4th Amendment's prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures.  Further, the embargo badly damaged the New England economy.

A federal district court ruled the embargo constitutional, but Massachusetts did not agree, and passed state laws to nullify the federal embargo.  The nullification held.  The important thing to note is that the federal court's decision was not the last word on the matter.   The Massachusetts House explained:
“Were it true, that the measures of government once passed into an act, the constitutionality of that act is stamped with the deal of infallibility, and is no longer a subject for the deliberation or remonstrance of the citizen, to what monstrous lengths might not an arbitrary and tyrannical administration carry its power…. Were such doctrine sound, what species of oppression might not be inflicted on the prostrate liberties of our country? If such a doctrine were true, our Constitution would be nothing but a name—nay, worse, a fatal instrument to sanctify oppression, and legalize the tyranny which inflicts it.”  (Thomas E. Woods, 33 Questions About American History You're Not Supposed to Ask.)
The Governor of Connecticut, John Trumbull, agreed with the Massachusetts legislature, stating:
“Whenever our national legislature is led to overleap the prescribed bounds of their constitutional powers, on the State Legislatures, in great emergencies, devolves the arduous task—it is their right—it becomes their duty, to interpose their protecting shield between the right and liberty of the people, and the assumed power of the General Government.”  (See Woods Jr., Thomas E. (2007-07-10). 33 Questions About American History You're Not Supposed to Ask (p. 30). Random House, Inc.. Kindle Edition.) 
Conclusions:  Nullification of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, is both legal and constitutional, and is undoubtedly the most expedient way to dispose of this unconstitutional and oppressive federal law.  However, each state will have to pass its own separate nullification laws.  Which state will be the first to do so?  Once one does, others will quickly follow.

Thursday, November 29, 2012

Stirrings of Secession: An Essay by Pat Buchanan

Jefferson Davis
Pat Buchanan has an essay at Vdare today entitled "Stirrings of Secession."  Buchanan states what others have observed, e.g. Lawrence Auster at View From the Right, that conservative voters and liberal voters are all intermixed within the states, and that makes secession difficult if not impossible.  I disagree.

A large portion of the American colonists were loyal to the crown in 1776, but the states still successfully seceded from Great Britain. It is fair to say that the loyalists and the patriots were considerably intermixed within the colonies.

Not all Southerners wanted to secede from the union in 1861, but most supported the South when it was invaded.

All a state needs today, in order to legally secede, is a voting majority who wants it.  Those who don't can leave the state or live with the decision.  This is not to say that the federal government would allow it without a fight, but once again their opposition would be in opposition to both constitutional and natural law.

Buchanan also claims that the issue of secession was settled at Appomattox. On this point, Buchanan is dead wrong. The idea that a constitutional question can be settled by force is to deny the rule of law and the long-held principle of "the consent of the governed." As Jefferson Davis wrote while in prison at Fort Monroe: “A question settled by violence or in disregard of law, must remain unsettled forever.” He was speaking of the right to secede. He was partially correct, but not on whether the issue "must remain unsettled forever." As he himself stated previously, “The principle for which we contend [i.e. secession] is bound to reassert itself, though it may be at another time and in another form.”

The principle is reasserting itself, just as Davis predicted.

Read Buchanan's essay here.

See Related Post from American Renaissance here:  Secession:  It's Constitutional

Sunday, November 18, 2012

Obama Puzzles Secession: a Day-By-Day Cartoon

Day-By-Day cartoons are published online daily at http://www.daybydaycartoon.com.  The artist is Chris Muir. Feel free to link to his website and to visit it daily.

Saturday, November 17, 2012

Some Nigerian Span for Ema Nymton

Ema Nymton
Ema Nymton is an older woman, a dedicated leftist who has made it her life's work to post sarcastic and insulting comments on any right wing blogs who will allow it.  I used to allow her comments in the spirit of free speech and all that rot.  Then I got sick of her unending stream of bile and bullshit, and banned her from both of my blogs (the other being Saber Point).

"Ema Nymton" is "Not My Name" spelled backwards, perhaps in keeping with Ema's backward political philosophy.

Lately she has changed her email address to get around the ban, but I simply add the new email address to the ban and delete her comments.

Now I would like to show my appreciation for the oceans of bile this lady has poured out on the right, by publishing her email addresses here.  This is so the Nigerian spammers and scammers can harvest them, and soon she will be receiving all sorts of scammer messages from this African nation.  (Nigeria is famous for online scams.)

So here they are, Nigerians!  Start those endless scammer messages right away!  Because when it comes to false promises of prosperity, Ema is already in your corner.

emanymton69@gmail.com (this email address no longer works, if it ever did).

emanymton1@googlemail.com  (this email address is viable).

Ema blogs at http://emanymton1.blogspot.com/, for anyone who is interested.

Thursday, November 15, 2012

Ron Paul Discusses Secession

Vox Popoli has a post on Ron Paul discussing secession.  It is worth a read.

See it here.

Wednesday, November 14, 2012

Thomas Jefferson on Secession

Alabama Resistance: Governor Says "NO" to Implementing Obamacare

Alabama Governor Robert Bentley said yesterday that Alabama will not be setting up a state insurance exchange to implement the Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare").  The Governor stated that the tax increase that this act imposes on Alabama's citizens is unacceptable.  He also stated that his conversations with other governors indicate that many of them feel the same way.

This is what I have been advocating for some time:  the states must NULLIFY unconstitutional edicts by the federal government and simply REFUSE to go along.  Further, the nullifying states should communicate and coordinate resistance to federal tyranny imposed by Barack Obama.

I am proud to say that my Confederate ancestors were Alabamans.

Read more about it at Moonbattery here.

Monday, November 12, 2012

Defying Leviathan: Radical Resistance May Be Necessary

Monty Pelerin at American Thinker has a very depressing analysis of what Obama's re-election means to Americans (hat tip Donald Douglas at American Power).  Pelerin, like others, is predicting an economic collapse.  He writes:
His election ensures the continuing shift away from the Rule of Law, property rights, free men, and free markets. Obama's vision of how the world works ensures a dire economy until an economic collapse resets everything.
And this:
The United States and Europe have abandoned the fundamentals necessary for progress. Both are hopelessly committed to the failed ideas of Socialism. Both are headed for great catastrophe. The catastrophe extends beyond economic well-being and touches the foundations of society and civilization itself.

We are headed into an economic dark age, where standards of living will continue to decline and may collapse. Societies and civilizations will also regress.
Read the whole depressing article here.

Another article at Doug Ross Journal portrays a similar scenario, "We Have Lost" by Casey.  Casey writes:
The most productive people, the small business owners, the entrepreneurs and the honest wage earners of America are so demoralized right now I am not sure we will recover as a country. We have lost the most important election of our lifetime and did so after giving our best effort, spent the most money ever and working the hardest we have ever worked. The very people that America needs the most to generate a real recovery now have the least motivation to do so and worse, lack the confidence necessary to even justify the effort.
On polarization, he writes:
As a country we are hopelessly divided by a malignant polarization approaching that which divided us prior to the Civil War....The American can-do spirit, our optimism, our traditional dependence on our own ingenuity is now mere kindling on the advancing flame of an insidious yet steadily advancing socialism.
On the feeling of despair many now have:
Those of us who create real jobs, invest our capital, our fortunes and take the risks to build America, feel betrayed. The fundamentals of honest effort and hard work rendering the rewards associated with capitalism seem now like a cruel joke. We are now a targeted enemy not to be governed but coerced into submission by a lazy, corrupt, vindictive, arrogant government that is out for revenge, redistribution -- and to add a final insult -- one we believe is too morally bankrupt to lead.
Do read it all here.

Politics as usual is unlikely to turn the tide in time to avoid financial disaster and societal collapse.  Radical action may be necessary at some point, like the fledgling secession movements now underway.  Political protests of Obama's re-election are said to be proliferating -- that remains to be seen.  We must encourage their growth.  The legislatures of the red states must discuss and coordinate a unified refusal to cooperate with the radical regime now in Washington, including nullification of unconstitutional laws like Obamacare, open defiance of the Supreme Court's unconstitutional edicts, and suspension of the taxing authority of the federal government if that becomes necessary.  Note:  this is NOT a call for violence.  Our actions must proceed mainly through our state and local representatives.  Individual protests should proceed in peaceful ways, like this one.

We will not go gently into the dark night that looms before us.  We have not yet begun to fight.

Veterans Day: A Salute to Two Generations

Twenty States Have Now Filed Petitions to Secede from the United States

World Net Daily has updated the secession petitions story.  There are now twenty state petitions that have been filed with the White House, requesting peaceful secession.  WND writes:
Since WND first reported that residents in the state of Louisiana were petitioning to secede from the U.S., residents in 19 more states have filed requests with the White House to peaceably break from the union.

Furthermore, the Louisiana petition has topped 14,000 signatures, more than halfway to the threshold needed after which the White House has pledged to respond.

And for Texas, one of the new states to join the fray, the signature count now tops 20,000.
The states with secession petitions are these (just now updated to include two more, Arizona and Oklahoma):
  1. Louisiana
  2. Arkansas
  3. South Carolina
  4. Georgia
  5. Missouri
  6. Tennessee
  7. Michigan
  8. New York
  9. Colorado
  10. Oregon
  11. New Jersey
  12. North Dakota
  13. Montana
  14. Indiana
  15. Mississippi
  16. Kentucky
  17. Florida
  18. North Carolina
  19. Alabama
  20. Texas
  21. Arizona
  22. Oklahoma
Also see Southern Nationalist Network for a Fox News video about the secession movement.

Sunday, November 11, 2012

Nineteen States Petition Washington for the Right to Secede

It appears that the Louisiana petition to secede has inspired others.  According to Twitchy.com, another eighteen states have now filed similar petitions (nineteen states in all).

Could Charlie Daniels be right??  "The South is Gonna Do It Again!"

Thank God I just bought a new Confederate kepi.  Now I need to find my musket.  It's in the garage, I think.

Seriously, this is GOOD NEWS.  Even if nothing comes from it, at least it is forcing people to think of secession as a viable alternative to socialist rule....and it doesn't hurt to let our rulers in Washington know we are thinking about it too.

An article at iRoots gives more information.  Eighteen of the states (with links to their petitions) are as follows:
Louisiana, 10,296; Texas, 9196; Florida, 2392; Alabama, 2492; North Carolina, 2434; Kentucky, 1934; Mississippi, 1935; Indiana, 1951; North Dakota, 881; Montana, 1538; Colorado, 1805 Oregon, 1594; New Jersey, 1492; New York, 1727; South Carolina, 117; Arkansas, 86; Georgia, 131; Missouri, 149.

According to iRoots, more states are expected to follow.  (It's interesting to note that not all the states with secession petitions are Southern -- they include New Jersey and New York.)

Here's Charlie's opinion on the matter:

More Talk of Secession; Peter Morrison Reports at VDare

Peter Morrison is a business man in Texas and has concluded that our "sacred union" is not so sacred anymore, that our political alliances with other states have outlived their historical purpose and usefulness, and it is time for the states to go their own way.

He writes:
I think Romney saw the polls last week and decided on a risky strategy of playing for Pennsylvania as his only way out. Just as it was 149 years ago, the fate of the nation was decided in Pennsylvania. The Romney campaign may be remembered as the Pickett's Charge of the conservative movement, a last desperate effort to stave off the cruel arithmetic of superior numbers overcoming principle and valor.
Others have noted the same analogy, noting that the 2012 election may have been "the high water mark" of conservatism -- and it's all downhill from here.

Morrison has concluded what I also did in a prior post:
It would be nice for Republicans if the facts were different and we could build a multi-ethnic, colorblind, conservative America, but the evidence is quite to the contrary.
The awful truth is that non-whites are largely biased against whites and will even vote against their own best interests (as Asians did) in order to punish whites.  Fifty years of slander of whites, in schools from kindergarten to the university, has emphasized the evil of white people, and how we (as a group) are responsible for all the world's ills.  Many whites have become self-hating as a result, and are paralyzed by the cultural bugaboo against "racism" that says whites can never act in their own self-interest.

However, Morrison thinks we should resist to the bitter end, and I agree.  He says:
Like the remainder of Lee's army after Gettysburg, it is our duty to keep fighting to the bitter end, in hopes that Providence might shine upon our cause before it is too late. We must contest every single inch of ground and delay the baby-murdering, tax-raising socialists at every opportunity. But in due time, the maggots will have eaten every morsel of flesh off of the rotting corpse of the Republic.
The long-term solution?  Secession, and again I agree.  Morrison writes
The bond between a husband and wife is sacred. National borders, once they have exhausted their historical purpose, are not.
It is time for an amicable divorce.  Read it all here.

Saturday, November 10, 2012

Lawrence Auster Describes a Possible Rout to Secession

Lawrence Auster, at View From the Right, describes a possible rout to secession.  He writes:
It would seem that the only meaningful cultural/political activity at this point is that which would lead to secession from the tyrannical, lawless, decadent society that America has become. But secession from a nation with which the seceding “nation” is intimately intertwined in the economic, geographical, and every other sense is practically impossible. So where does this leave us?

Here’s a scenario I can visualize. Over time, certain states begin to assert, in relatively small and discrete ways, their independence from the federal government, for example, refusing to obey certain federal mandates, and the federal government, fiscally hamstrung by its reckless spending policies and gradually losing legitimacy, loses the authority and will to force those states to obey. As this process gradually progresses, people who want to be free from the United Socialist States of America move to the more independent states, and people who oppose such independence move to the obedient states. Ultimately, over a period of time that we cannot predict, the two nations would be sufficiently geographically separated that actual secession would become a possibility.
It seems to me that the South is still sufficiently conservative that a new secession could begin where the last one left off.  Which state will be the first to secede?  I see Texas as the best hope for beginning a new secession movement.    Once one has done it successfully, others will be encouraged to follow.

Critics Pan Spielberg's "Lincoln" as Boring, Ahistorical

Rebellion Blog has new information on Spielberg's new film, "Lincoln."

It seems there are folks out there (besides us) that understand real history and don't like seeing it perverted in such obvious ways.

Read "Spielberg's Lincoln a "bloated $50-million history lesson."

Update:  Thomas J. DiLorenzo has written a critical rebuttal to Spielberg's film titled "Lincoln Film Is Propaganda."  Read it here.

Friday, November 9, 2012

Louisiana Residents Petition Obama to Allow Their State to Secede

This just in from World Net Daily:

On Nov. 6, Americans voted to return Barack Obama to the White House; then on Nov. 7, some folks in Louisiana petitioned the White House to peaceably withdraw their state from the Union.


According to the White House website, the petition was created by Michael E. (full last name not provided) of Slidell, La., the day after the election and has since been electronically signed by a few hundred people, most – but not all – of whom hail from the Pelican State.

“We petition the Obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of Louisiana to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government,” the petition reads.

It continues, “As the Founding Fathers of the United States of America made clear in the Declaration of Independence in 1776: ‘When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.’”

The petition concludes with a further quote from the Declaration of Independence: “‘Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and institute new Government.’”

The petition has until Dec. 7 of this year to gather 25,000 signatures, at which time, the White House pledges, it will be placed on a queue for response from the administration.

Moonbattery: A Thought Crime -- It is Bad to be White

David Blount of the blog Moonbattery discusses the new demography of the United States, and how it has ruined us.  He writes:
What would you do to prevent your civilization from being erased from the face of the earth? Whatever it is, you had better do it fast.

It is politically foolish to frame the current losing battle of liberty against collectivist tyranny in racial terms, because oligarchical collectivists have used their control of the media to condition us to cringe in terror of being called racist, even while every other group openly advances its racial interests at our expense. But if we don’t acknowledge what is being done to us, we will die as cowards.

If only whites voted, Romney would have won in a landslide. Among white men, he beat the Manchurian Moonbat by 25 points.

But as a direct result of liberal welfare, border defense, and immigration policies, America is becoming demographically transformed. Without any noticeable attempt to present himself as someone who will do a better job in his second term than he has in the miserable failure of his first, Obama won 93% of the black vote, 71% of the Hispanic vote, and 73% of the Asian vote. No wonder the Democrats who run the media hammer it through our heads at every opportunity that it is bad to be white.
Read it all here.

Should Texas Secede? Online Discussion.

There is an article and online discussion of the Texas secession movement here.

Radio KFYO in Texas ran a poll of its listeners, and over 90% voted for secession.  Here's a screen grab of the poll as it stands right now:

You can go to the link at the top of the page to vote, or to read and make comments.  The Texans there are making some excellent points about the legality and desirability of secession.

Thursday, November 8, 2012

Texas Secession Movement Alive and Well: Wants to Secede Right Now

There's a story in the Dallas Observer about the Texas Secession movement.  In light of Obama's reign in Washington, the Texas secessionists have had enough and are urging the Texas legislature to formally consider the issue of secession.

The Observer, like most liberal rags, is dismissive and derisive of the movement, but in between sarcastic snickers, do relate some current news in light of Obama's re-election.  They write:
Predictably, one of the loudest voices calling for Texas to get the hell out of the union this morning is the Texas Nationalist Movement, a Nederland-based group that's been around since 1995 or so. Several of the posters on Abbott's wall are linking to a petition TNM has created, asking that the Texas Legislature formally consider secession. The petition's been around since February of this year; in the last day, though, it's garnered several dozen new signatures and been shared on Facebook about 200 times.
Read it all here if you can stand it.

Three days ago Texas secession advocates spoke at conference in Washington-on-the-Brazos and voiced their reasons for promoting Texas secession.
Tammy Blair of Tyler, who challenged State Sen. Robert Nichols in the Republican primary for Senate District 3, said too many voters are under the delusion that winning the White House solves everything. "There are people who contend that all is well, that just one more election and we can fix it," she said. "They’re living in a fantasy land."

Blair said that critics of Texas Nationalism are wrong when they maintain that the independence movement wants to "destroy" America.

"We love the idea that WAS America," she said. "America is broken ... it was murdered years ago. America will not survive the fallacies of relativism. The American ideal has been abandoned by those in power."
So far I agree with everything Tammy has to say.  If Texas secedes, I will apply for citizenship.  Read more about this conference here.

The Texas Secession movement has a website here for those who want to know more about it.  I am also adding them to my sidebar.

Texas Judge Fears New Civil War Following Obama's Re-Election

A Lubbock Co. Judge warned of potential dangers due to re-election of Obama:

Judge Head said he and the county must be prepared for many contingencies, one that he particularly fears, is if President Obama is reelected.
“He's going to try to hand over the sovereignty of the United States to the UN, and what is going to happen when that happens?,” Head asked.

“I'm thinking the worst. Civil unrest, civil disobedience, civil war maybe. And we're not just talking a few riots here and demonstrations, we're talking Lexington, Concord, take up arms and get rid of the guy.
Personally, I think such an outcome unlikely...but you never know.  Buy guns and stock up on ammo.  Just in case.

Read it all here

White Racial Identity Reconsidered

I have never seen my primary identity as "white."  I have a multi-ethnic family that includes Hispanics and Asians.  My wife is Filipina; I have a nephew who is half Hispanic and whose wife is full Hispanic (Nicaraguan).  The overwhelming majority of  my family is conservative and opposed Obama's re-election.

I have steered away from my white racial identity because I didn't consider it that important.  I have long considered any man or woman, from whatever ethnicity, who shares my cultural values, to be my friend and my ally.  I still believe that.  However, it is time to give greater emphasis to my race and the political implications thereof.  Jared Taylor makes a good case for it in the video embedded herein.

Consider the racial make-up of the electorate who just condemned America to the dust-bin of history:
Although there are many good conservatives in all the racial groups, conservatives are a small minority in all groups except white.  Therefore, from strictly a political point of view, these non-white voting blocs are my political enemies -- their choice, not mine.  Further, I doubt that any conservative outreach to these non-white groups will yield enough conservatives to preserve the American ethos and avoid the eventual bankruptcy of America from statism and liberalism.  That is the political reality, and it is time for me (and other conservatives) to openly admit this truth and to work within the parameters that this fact imposes.

I therefore conclude that I should work for changes in immigration policies that will increase the number of whites in the electorate and decrease the number of non-whites.  My survival, and that of my country, depend on this.  White people must also bear more children; we are losing demographically to third-world immigrants who are out-producing us in birthrates.

Having said this, I do not believe that being a member of a non-white race automatically makes one a statist or a socialist; it is probably not built into their genes.  It may be built into their culture, their lack of awareness, their lack of education.  The cause, however, is irrelevant.  The fact remains:  America must retain and build on its white majority lest we lose the country bequeathed to us by the Founding Fathers.  How do we do that?  Jared Taylor promises to tell us in a subsequent video.  For the first time, I am listening intently.

Wednesday, November 7, 2012

Conservative Thoughts on the Election Disaster

Many conservatives, including this one, are in a deep blue funk over the election disaster.  Some have posted well-written essays on what it all means.  The first step in a long-term solution is understanding what happened and why, and these essays are soothing to the troubled soul.  Unvarnished truth is liberating and may lead to a better future for those who love liberty.  Once we have an accurate diagnosis, then we can work on a cure.

Here are some quotes from some of these essays.

Lawrence Auster, of View From the Right:
.... even if the historical American order is finished, which I believe it is and have said so repeatedly, the world hasn't ended, we are still living in it and have to try to understand it and make sense of it and figure out how we are going to live in it. Indeed, I and readers are at this moment trying to come to terms with the overwhelming disaster that has come upon us, and that’s part of what VFR is about.
 Flyovercountry, of The Blogmocracy:
There really are two America’s, and the problem is that they are geographically intertwined. One American wishes to live under the rule of law established by our founders, who saw the destructive potential of a democracy, and the lasting virtue of a republic. Protecting individual rights against the tyranny of a majority who would simply vote themselves authority to systematically rob the fruits of the labors of those who chose to be productive. The second American wishes to live in a society that would seek to cede all responsibility and consequence to a federal authority in exchange for having their basic needs provided for. The second America is no longer the land of the free and the home of the brave, but is instead the land of the kept and the home of the clueless. They seek nothing more than to have their freedoms traded one by one for a stream of relatively cheap consumer products and state run reeducation at one of the labor camps known as land grant colleges. Unfortunately, these two Americas live side by side, and have very little if any geographical division, which would be necessary for the divorce that I believe is now inevitable. Said divorce will be a messy affair, but there is no chance of a reconciliation that I can see as being possible.
Kurt Silverfiddle of Western Hero:
If we couldn’t sell a conservative, small-government message with a moderate-friendly candidate running against an imperious ruler many perceived to be a crypto-marxist, or at best constitutionally-challenged, then small-government conservatism is a spent force. Many conservatives will drift to the middle looking for morsels, while the rump right will meet the fate of its European cousins, enduring a meager existence as either principled cranks or angry extremists.
One bright spot: We conservatives and libertarians are now the subversives.
Oh, and GOP, you can kiss my ass. I hate your party more than the Democrats. At least the Donkeys know who they are and aren't suffering a perpetual identity crisis. And they know how to grab what they want. The typical Republican politician couldn't grab his ass with both hands and a mirror.
Melanie Phillips -- "America Goes Into the Darkness":
The greatest satisfaction today over the re-election of Obama is not being felt in the Democratic Party. It is not being felt among the media, who are no longer objective observers but have turned instead into corrupt partisans who ruthlessly censored the truth about Obama and helped peddle his demonising propaganda about his opponent. It is not being felt among the gloating, drooling decadents of the western left who now scent a great blood-letting of all who dare defy their secular inquisition. No, the greatest satisfaction is surely being felt in Iran. 
Four years ago, America put into the White House a sulky narcissist with an unbroken history of involvement in thuggish, corrupt, far-left, black power, Jew-bashing, west-hating politics. Obama’s agenda has been crystal clear from the get-go: to increase the power of the state over the citizen at home, and to neutralise American power abroad. Four more years of this and he’ll almost certainly have succeeded. The impact upon western security could be cataclysmic.
John Hinderaker of Powerline:
Then there is the fact that relatively few Americans actually pay for the government they consume. To a greater extent than any other developed nation, we rely on upper-income people to finance our federal government. When that is combined with the fact that around 40% of our federal spending isn’t paid for at all–it is borrowed–it is small wonder that many self-interested voters are happy to vote themselves more government. Mitt Romney proclaimed that Barack Obama was the candidate of “free stuff,” and voters took him at his word.
The question is, can this vicious cycle ever be broken? Once we are governed by a majority that no longer believes in the America of the Founding, is there any path back to freedom and prosperity? The next four years will bring unprecedented levels of spending, borrowing and taxation. The national debt will rise to $20 trillion or more. When interest rates increase, as they inevitably must, interest costs will squeeze out other government spending. That might not be all bad, except that defense will go first. If Obama’s second term turns into a disaster, fiscal or otherwise, voter revulsion may return the Republicans to power. But that doesn’t mean that America will be saved.
Daniel Greenfield of Sultan Knish:
The left got this far by having a plan. We will either find a plan or we will be gone. America will go the way of Latin America, with gated communities, conservative oligarchs, violent ghettos and red politicians screaming about power to the people. There will be no law, just men with guns and newspapers, and generals in convenient positions, and suitcases full of cocaine in the right hands. If you like this system, it's probably only a generation away. Given enough immigration from south of the border-- maybe less. And then California turns into Brazil and America turns into California.
Revolutions are not born out of success, they are born out of despair. They rise out of the dark hours of the night. They come from the understanding that all the other options are running out. Sometimes you have to fall down to rise and sometimes you have to hit bottom, to gather one last breath and fight to reach the top.
 We live in a very troubling time.  Can America be saved, or is the culture too corrupted by third-world immigration and the demise of the western ethos?  I tend to agree with flyovercountry, that a divorce between two groups of Americans (left vs right) is inevitable.  Yes, I am talking about secession.  I do not believe that America, as we knew it and loved it, can be saved.  It is already gone.

Tuesday, November 6, 2012

America Is Over: Obama Wins Re-Election

I would never have guessed it, but possibly the worst president in U.S. history (next to Lincoln) has won re-election.

The United States has become a socialist country on the European model.  Expect higher taxes, higher energy prices, more unemployment and a worsening standard of living for all Americans who aren't on the dole.  Social security and medicare will go broke.

Now, more than ever, the question of secession become foremost.  America is gone and we aren't getting it back.

Based on this, we will need to formulate new stratagems for the future and consider the need for a new political party, nullification by the individual states of Obamacare and other Marxist nostrums, and a plan to leave the United States if that is at all possible.

The Southern states, with the exception of Florida, voted for Romney.  In spite of that, give up all hope ye who enter here:  America is over.

What is the best alternative for those of us who still love liberty?  That is the question.  What should our goal be and how are we to achieve it?  I wish I knew.

Thursday, November 1, 2012

Falling on Principle (Video)

Many Confederate descendants who love the South and the Confederacy are planning to vote for Gary Johnson or Ron Paul.  However, there are important reasons why they should reconsider.  Bill Whittle of Pajamas Media explains in the video embedded below.

Sunday, October 28, 2012

Andrew Sullivan Worries About the Return of the Confederacy

Andrew Sullivan is an idiot who has made many crazy, far-left claims in the past.  Now he is saying that if Romney wins Virginia and Florida, the Confederacy will come back.

No Sullivan, you ignorant fool, the Confederacy will come back if THEY DON''T WIN.  Because if we must suffer another four years of far-leftist Barack Obama, then many of us are ready to secede.

If America is to become a permanent cesspool of late-term abortion, soaring energy prices, high joblessness,  illegal immigration and Islam-supporting dhimmis, then it will be time to leave America (or what now passes for it) behind.

Of course, Sullivan, being the walking leftist stereotype that he is, assumes the Confederacy was all about "racism" as defined in modern terms and reflects his ignorance of history and his willingness to distort it in support of his modern-day political arguments.

Don't waste your vote on the Libertarian candidate on November 6.  Gary Johnson is a good guy who can't win.  By voting for Romney you will not only fire the ignorant fool currently occupying the White House, you will also mightily annoy Andrew Sullivan.  It's like getting two for one!

Friday, October 19, 2012

Ken Burns, Creator of Yankee Propaganda Film "The Civil War," Endorses Obama

More than twenty years ago, Ken Burns produced the TV series "The Civil War."  It was a complete whitewash of the Lincoln's invasion of the South in 1861 - 1865.  Many Southerners and others were disgusted with the distorted views of that propaganda effort.

Now Burns is endorsing Barack Obama for president.  Apparently, his knowledge of current events is on a par with his knowledge of history.

Read his absurd endorsement here.

Thursday, October 11, 2012

"Despising Dixie" -- A Friendly Yankee Responds to Anti-South Book "Better Off Without 'Em"

Daniel J. Flynn, a writer at the American Spectator, takes author Chuck Thompson to the woodshed for "despising Dixie."  Thompson is the author who wrote the stupid little book, "Better Off Without 'Em," which I panned in a prior post.

Flynn defends the Southern contribution to America, and writes:
Even a Yankee unable to pronounce the letter "r" can articulate the charms of the drawling South. America's military heroes, from George Washington to Alvin York to Dakota Meyer, have disproportionately come from below the Mason-Dixon line. Whether one drinks Coke or Pepsi, Jack Daniel's or Jim Beam, one drinks to the South. Has the CNN travel writer traveled to Savannah, Charleston, or Nashville? The musicians who invented rock 'n' roll -- Chuck Berry, Elvis Presley, Buddy Holly, Little Richard, Fats Domino, Jerry Lee Lewis, the Everly Brothers -- all hailed from the South. It's also a fact that the South has better fiction: Flannery O'Connor, Zora Neale Hurston, William Faulkner, etc.

Who but a hater wants to discard all that?
Read it all here.

Hat tip to Stacy McCain for the link.

Tuesday, October 9, 2012

More Nonsense on Spielberg's Fictional "Lincoln"

There's another discussion online about director Steven Spielberg's new movie, "Lincoln."  I commented there, for anyone who's interested.  See the discussion here.

Having watched the latest ads about this monstrous distortion of history, i.e. Spielberg's "Lincoln," I fear for the future of the American republic.  Many Americans are totally ignorant of the most basic facts of history, and they will readily swallow this Hollywood malarkey as truth.  So much easier to watch a movie than read a book.

The new ads show Lincoln as a passionate purveyor of equality for blacks in America, motivated only by his deep convictions of freedom for slaves and his love of a suffering humanity, with emancipation his major, overriding goal.

In truth, the slaves were not much of a consideration while Lincoln was using military force to destroy Southern independence.  To Lincoln, the slaves were both a nuisance and a political tool; he didn't care for blacks at all, considered them an inferior race, and wanted to get rid of them by deporting them to Africa or Central America.  His attitude per Spielberg was "Oh, let's free black people and make them our social and political equals!"  His actual attitude was, "Let's get these damn inferior Negros outta here."

The facts show that Lincoln was utterly ruthless, politically ambitious and even dictatorial in office.  He knowingly and enthusiastically supported war on civilians, the burning of private homes and universities, and he hoped for a slave rebellion that would murder Southerners in their beds (thus saving him the trouble).  However, that's reality.  Spielberg's fictional Lincoln was a caring, weeping, meek and mild messianic figure who wanted to end the scourge of slavery, all out of the goodness of his heart, for justice, mercy, equality, for puppy dogs and butterflies, for tulips in spring and peppermint candy canes at Christmas.  It's enough to gag a mule.

Update:  This Canadian website has an interesting essay on the Lincoln myth, "Lincoln:  An Invented Hero."

Saturday, September 22, 2012

Dick Morris TV: "A Bold New Theory on What Caused the Civil War"

Dick Morris discusses a new book and a "new theory" of what caused the Civil War.

Hmm, that's funny, I always thought it was the North's invasion.

Watch Morris's discussion here.

Friday, September 14, 2012

Spielberg's "Lincoln" Another Myth-Making Whitewash of America's Bloodiest President

Steven Spielberg, a liberal supporter of Barack Obama, does his best to give new life to the Lincoln myth.  Once again, Old Abe is shown as a sage, a saint, Mother Teresa, Mahatma Gandhi and the Apostle Paul all rolled into one.

Spielberg's Lincoln is all about "ending slavery," and pictured as a sensitive, caring soul, almost a wimp.  The real Lincoln didn't give a hoot in hell about ending slavery; he only wanted to drag the bleeding South back into a Union it no longer wanted, a Union that was no longer voluntary, all so Abe could keep his tax revenues.  Also, Dishonest Abe detested black people, swore like a sailor, didn't believe in the Bible, and told ribald jokes.  That probably won't be in the film.  Also, don't count on the film showing his anti-black speeches in the Lincoln-Douglas debates, or his lecture to blacks visiting the White House (on how inferior they were to whites), or his letter to Horace Greeley regarding his non-stance on slavery.  Also, there is little possibility of the film showing Lincoln approving of total war, the use of Confederate officers as a shield against artillery, the burning of private homes, farms and universities or the random shelling of civilians in Charleston.  No, I suspect the Spielberg Lincoln will be too busy weeping for suffering mankind, feeling deep emotions, and emoting like a bleeding heart on steroids.

We will never be rid of the Lincoln myth.  It will be with us always, like flies on cow pies, mosquitoes in July and ants at a picnic.  Have a look at the trailer below but try not to vomit.

Saturday, September 8, 2012

Has America Passed the Point of No Return? Will Secession Again Be Necessary?

John Hinderaker at Powerline has a rather sobering post today:  Why Is This Election Close?

John believes that the country may have passed a point of no return.  He writes:
On paper, given Obama’s record, this election should be a cakewalk for the Republicans. Why isn’t it? I am afraid the answer may be that the country is closer to the point of no return than most of us believed. With over 100 million Americans receiving federal welfare benefits, millions more going on Social Security disability, and many millions on top of that living on entitlement programs–not to mention enormous numbers of public employees–we may have gotten to the point where the government economy is more important, in the short term, than the real economy. My father, the least cynical of men, used to quote a political philosopher to the effect that democracy will work until people figure out they can vote themselves money. I fear that time may have come.
Hinderaker quotes Andy McCarthy at National Review, who implicitly believes that the Gramsci vision has been realized, that the "long march through the institutions" has been accomplished, and that a large part of our country's culture and institutions, namely the media and academia, are in the firm control of the Left.  What's worse, is that the Republican establishment cannot fight them because it has accepted the Progressive framework, not arguing for its abolishment, but only that it be better executed.  McCarthy writes:
It has always been possible to run against elite opinion and win — if you make a compelling counter-case...Today’s Republicans do not. Indeed, they cannot, because they have accepted the progressive framework. Their argument is not that the welfare state, deficit spending, federalized education, sharia-democracy promotion, and the rest are bad policies. Their argument is not that Washington needs to be dramatically downsized. It is that progressive governance is fine but needs to be better executed.
My friend Lawrence Auster at View From the Right has long argued the same thing -- that the Republican establishment seeks a slightly different approach to liberalism, but not its defeat.  This is a very pessimistic view, but no doubt it contains a lot of truth.

If we do indeed lose the nation to another four years of progressive destruction, it may be time to consider some radical alternatives, e.g. a new political party, state nullification of unconstitutional laws, and even secession.

Read Hinderaker's article here.

Read McCarthy's article here.

Co-Posted at Saber Point

Friday, August 17, 2012

Dumb-Ass Yankee Runs Down the South in "Better Off Without 'Em"

Some Northern jackass has written a book urging that Southern secession finally be allowed to proceed.  Chuck Thompson, a self-proclaimed liberal, believes the South is so backward and culturally inferior that the North would be "Better Off Without 'Em," which is the title of his poisonous little tome.

Thompson toured the South looking for evidence that his preconceived notions and prejudices were true all along.  Southerners are people who believe (bwa-ha-ha!) in God, Fox News and the Republican Party.  How backward can you get?  Don't the Southrons know that such things are uncool in the snooty cocktail parties of Boston and New York?

"Better Off Without "Em" is a narcissistic, Northern exercise in snobbery and conceit, a way of saying "Look how COOL, sophisticated, enlightened and educated WE ARE compared to these laughable Southerners!  We are just SO SUPERIOR!"  However, Thompson's orgy of self-congratulation does underscore an important difference between Yankees and Southrons.  The former (like Thompson) care deeply about their social standing, and desperately need validation, esteem and acceptance from other "sophisticates."  In order to achieve this high level of snobbery, it is important to go to the right schools, hold the right opinions, and vote for the right (which means left) candidates.  Southrons just don't give a damn, viewing such values as superficial and such attitudes as nonsense.

In spite of the book's rampant bigotry, however, it does reach a point we can all agree with.  The South would be much "better off without 'em."  However, the corollary isn't true.  Just as Lincoln could not let the South go, neither can the modern day liberals and leftists of  today, and for the same reason:  they need our tax revenues.  Parasites cannot survive without a host.

Update:  See also the Wall Street Journal's review, reprinted in Southern Partisan.

Wednesday, August 15, 2012

The Southern Poverty Law Center (Photoshop)

                                                 The Southern Poverty Law Center

General Biden Plans Re-Burning of North Carolina...er...Georgia...Whatever

Joe Biden, V.P. of Union Forces in the South and a reincarnation of General William Tecumseh Sherman, wants to repeat his past successes.

The other day, while speaking at a political rally, General Biden opined that he believed the forces of Obama-Biden could once again win in North Carolina.  The only problem was that he was speaking in Virginia.  Whoops!

To further demonstrate his agility with a crowd, General Biden then told a largely black audience in Virginia that Romney-Ryan wanted "to put them back in chains."  The NAACP later stated, that although most everything offends them mightily, this remark did not, since it was made by a political ally who is sworn to giving them free goodies and perpetuating their holy victimhood status.

To further demonstrate his racial sensitivity, General Biden then distributed free watermelons to the crowd, emblazoned with Obama-Biden 2012 bumper stickers. Remember, the next time you want a fiery path burned through the South (not to mention the U.S. economy), you can count on General William Tecumseh Biden.

General Biden is the only known general to march through Georgia with his boot firmly planted in his mouth.  He might have burned it too, but the high command knew better than to trust him with matches.

Sunday, August 12, 2012

Abraham Lincoln Reacts To Dixie Going Republican

Abe Reacts to Southern Capture
of the Republicans
No, the South has not become Republican; the Republican Party has become Southern.

We have not been captured by Abe's party; we have captured HIS party.

Our special reporter contacted Old Abe in the Netherworld to get his reaction to this happy circumstance.  His response is noted at left.

Meanwhile, read all about it here.

Saturday, August 11, 2012

U.S. Army Preparing For Next Civil War?

Some retired Army officer, one Colonel Kevin Benson, has written an article for Small Wars Journal (referenced by the Washington Times) advocating US military preparation for putting down a future rebellion of American citizens.  In other words, some people believe that a new Civil War is possible in our increasingly divided nation, and want to prepare for its suppression.

The Colonel's fictitious scenario involves wicked Tea Partiers taking forcible control of local governments, arresting local politicians and rounding up illegal aliens for deportation.  So far, I'm in with the plan (just kidding).

As our increasingly statist, overreaching federal leviathan slowly imposes socialism on us, removes more of our rights, confiscates our guns and taxes us to the point of desperation, some sort of rebellion is indeed possible (and in my opinion, desirable).  However, such a rebellion, to be effective, should be done through our political leaders at the state level, and preferably in an entirely peaceful manner, such as through nullification of unconstitutional federal laws and even secession.  Of course, it might not remain peaceful, when the federals again try to force their will on the people of the states through armed conflict.

The Washington Times article states:
The article is a choppy patchwork of doctrinal jargon and liberal nightmare. The authors make a quasi-legal case for military action and then apply the Army’s Operating Concept 2016-2028 to the situation. They write bloodlessly that “once it is put into play, Americans will expect the military to execute without pause and as professionally as if it were acting overseas.” They claim that “the Army cannot disappoint the American people, especially in such a moment,” not pausing to consider that using such efficient, deadly force against U.S. citizens would create a monumental political backlash and severely erode government legitimacy.
Yeah, who knows.  It might even lead to secession.

Read it all here. 

Saturday, July 28, 2012

H.L. Mencken: The Calamity of Appomattox, or If the South Had Won the War

With thanks to Brion McClanahan

The Calamity of Appomattox

by H.L. Mencken (American journalist and muckraker)

[From the American Mercury, Sept., 1930, pp. 29-31]

No American historian, so far as I know, has ever tried to work out the probable consequences if Grant instead of Lee had been on the hot spot at Appamattox. How long would the victorious Confederacy have endured? Could it have surmounted the difficulties inherent in the doctrine of States’ Rights, so often inconvenient and even paralyzing to it during the war? Could it have remedied its plain economic deficiencies, and become a self-sustaining nation? How would it have protected itself against such war heroes as Beauregard and Longstreet, Joe Wheeler and Nathan D. Forrest? And what would have been its relations to the United States, socially , economically, spiritually and politically?

I am inclined, on all these counts, to be optimistic. The chief evils in the Federal victory lay in the fact, from which we still suffer abominably, that it was a victory of what we now call Babbitts over what used to be called gentlemen. I am not arguing here, of course, that the whole Confederate army was composed of gentlemen; on the contrary, it was chiefly made up, like the Federal army, of innocent and unwashed peasants, and not a few of them got into its corps of officers. But the impulse behind it, as everyone knows, was essentially aristocratic, and that aristocratic impulse would have fashioned the Confederacy if the fortunes of war had run the other way. Whatever the defects of the new commonwealth below the Potomac, it would have at least been a commonwealth founded upon a concept of human inequality, and with a superior minority at the helm. It might not have produced any more Washingtons, Madisons, Jeffersons, Calhouns and Randolphs of Roanoke, but it would certainly not have yielded itself to the Heflins, Caraways, Bilbos and Tillmans.

The rise of such bounders was a natural and inevitable consequence of the military disaster. That disaster left the Southern gentry deflated and almost helpless. Thousands of the best young men among them had been killed, and thousands of those who survived came North. They commonly did well in the North, and were good citizens. My own native town of Baltimore was greatly enriched by their immigration, both culturally and materially; if it is less corrupt today than most other large American cities, then the credit belongs largely to Virginians, many of whom arrived with no baggage save good manners and empty bellies. Back home they were sorely missed. First the carpetbaggers ravaged the land, and then it fell into the hands of the native white trash, already so poor that war and Reconstruction could not make them any poorer. When things began to improve they seized whatever was seizable, and their heirs and assigns, now poor no longer, hold it to this day. A raw plutocracy owns and operates the New South, with no challenge save from a proletariat, white and black, that is still three-fourths peasant, and hence too stupid to be dangerous. The aristocracy is almost extinct, at least as a force in government. It may survive in backwaters and on puerile levels, but of the men who run the South today, and represent it at Washington, not 5%, by any Southern standard, are gentlemen.

If the war had gone with the Confederates no such vermin would be in the saddle, nor would there be any sign below the Potomac of their chief contributions to American Kultur—Ku Kluxry, political ecclesiasticism, nigger-baiting, and the more homicidal variety of wowserism. Such things might have arisen in America, but they would not have arisen in the South. The old aristocracy, however degenerate it might have become, would have at least retained sufficient decency to see to that. New Orleans, today, would still be a highly charming and civilized (if perhaps somewhat zymotic) city, with a touch of Paris and another of Port Said. Charleston, which even now sprouts lady authors, would also sprout political philosophers. The University of Virginia would be what Jefferson intended it to be, and no shouting Methodist would haunt its campus. Richmond would be, not the dull suburb of nothing that it is now, but a beautiful and consoling second-rate capital, comparable to Budapest, Brussels, Stockholm or The Hague. And all of us, with the Middle West pumping its revolting silo juices into the East and West alike, would be making frequent leaps over the Potomac, to drink the sound red wine there and breathe the free air.

My guess is that the two Republics would be getting on pretty amicably. Perhaps they’d have come to terms as early as 1898, and fought the Spanish-American War together. In 1917 the confiding North might have gone out to save the world for democracy, but the South, vaccinated against both Wall Street and the Liberal whim-wham, would have kept aloof—and maybe rolled up a couple of billions of profit from the holy crusade. It would probably be far richer today, independent, than it is with the clutch of the Yankee mortgage-shark still on its collar. It would be getting and using his money just the same, but his toll would be less. As things stand, he not only exploits the South economically; he also pollutes and debases it spiritually. It suffers damnably from low wages, but it suffers even more from the Chamber of Commerce metaphysic.

No doubt the Confederates, victorious, would have abolished slavery by the middle of the 80s. They were headed that way before the war, and the more sagacious of them were all in favor of it. But they were in favor of it on sound economic grounds, and not on the brummagem moral grounds which persuaded the North. The difference here is immense. In human history a moral victory is always a disaster, for it debauches and degrades both the victor and the vanquished. The triumph of sin in 1865 would have stimulated and helped to civilize both sides.

Today the way out looks painful and hazardous. Civilization in the United States survives only in the big cities, and many of them—notably Boston and Philadelphia—seem to be sliding down to the cow country level. No doubt this standardization will go on until a few of the more resolute towns, headed by New York, take to open revolt, and try to break out of the Union. Already, indeed, it is talked of. But it will be hard to accomplish, for the tradition that the Union is indissoluble is now firmly established. If it had been broken in 1865, life would be far pleasanter today for every American of any noticable decency. There are, to be sure, advantages in Union for everyone, but it must be manifest that they are greatest for the worst kinds of people. All the benefit that a New Yorker gets out of Kansas is no more than what he might get out of Saskatchewan, the Argentine pampas, or Siberia. But New York to a Kansan is not only a place where he may get drunk, look at dirty shows and buy bogus antiques; it is also a place where he may enforce his dunghill ideas upon his betters.