Hurrah, Hurrah, for Southern Rights, Hurrah!
| AR Articles on Southern Heritage |
|---|
| The War on White Heritage (Jul. 2000) |
| Poetic Justice (Aug. 2001) |
| The Long Retreat (Jul.1997) |
| More news stories on Southern Heritage |
| The Grey Book: Blueprint for Southern Independence Michael Hill, Editor Traveller Press, 2004 170 pp.; $20.00 |
More than eight decades ago, the Irish poet William Butler Yeats wrote the now-famous lines, “Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold.” That the center of the American Empire cannot hold has at no time been more evident than now, with the current wave of secessionist movements rising up across the country: the Alaskan Independence Party, the California Secessionist Party, the Hawaiian Sovereignty Movement, the New England Confederation Movement, the North Star Republic, the Cascadian National Party, the Aztlan movement, the Republic of Texas, and the Green Mountain Republic of Vermont.
And then there’s Dixie. In 1994, 27 Southern patriots organized the League of the South (then known as The Southern League) around the time-honored principle of Southern independence. Ten years later, their manifesto for a new nation is here, in The Grey Book: Blueprint for Southern Independence.
Why secession? As The Grey Book explains:
“Since the War for Southern Independence, the South has been redefined by an alien and revolutionary vision radiating from Washington, DC: the American Empire. It has imposed on its once-free citizens a vast and oppressive bureaucracy in the form of welfare and affirmative action programs that squander our wealth and incite racial strife… It has assumed control over the education of our children, who are taught little except to hate their ancestors and to despise their own people. It has, while pursuing empire abroad, refused to defend its own people against an epidemic of crime, the invasion of our borders by illegal aliens, and the international agencies that are bit by bit chipping away at the sovereignty of these United States.”
Reform is impossible, according to the League, for these and a dozen other reasons neatly outlined in chapter three. The League understands that because the South is the most “culturally distinct” region of the US, it is often at odds with the rest of the country. For example, representatives of the South voted against the Immigration Reform Acts of 1965 and 1986, both of which passed nonetheless, with disastrous consequences.
The League defends the principle of secession by reminding readers that the United States came into being because the American colonies seceded from England. Furthermore, the League contends that because the US Constitution does not expressly forbid states from seceding from the union, the right of secession is reserved to the people of the states, in accordance with the Tenth Amendment.
A new Confederation of Southern States (CSS) composed of the 11 states of the original Confederate States (Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia) would be home to 80 million people and trail only the remaining United States and Japan in gross domestic product. This new CSS would be based on the foundation of family, faith, and community under a limited and decentralized government. Beyond protecting its borders and its people, the CSS would leave governance to its sovereign states.
“But is it realistic?” members of the League are always asked. Yes, they say. According to a Southern Focus Poll conducted annually by the Odum Institute in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, a full 12 percent of Southerners say they would favor Southern independence if it could be achieved by peaceful means. Another seven percent are not sure. The League asserts that the American Revolution began with not much more support from the colonists (it estimates about one in six colonists were in favor of secession.)
Even so, the League acknowledges that secession it not an immediately practical goal and that the first step toward an independent Dixie is to create a mass base of like-minded Southerners. To this end, members urge cultural secession or “abjuration of the realm.” Culture, according to the League, is the essential organizing principle of a nation, and they reject the Democratic/Republican argument that America is a proposition nation. Rather, the League maintains that a shared culture is “the only legitimate, long-lasting foundation for genuine peace, for genuine order, and genuine, shared prosperity.”
Without a culture, the people perish, and without its core Anglo-Celtic population, the culture of the historic South will be lost. The League understands that Southern heritage and values are under attack by institutions of both the Left and the neoconservative Right, and it points out that the government, the media, and academia are waging a culturally genocidal war against the descendants of the great civilizations of Europe. The League argues that America’s historic population being replaced with “more compliant Third-World peoples” who are accustomed to the kind of government “now being put in place on the ruins of the constitutional, limited government established by the Founders.”
In response, the League promises to act on the following ten points:
“Advance the interests and independence of the Southern people.
“Defend the historic Christian faith of the South.
“Educate Southerners (and other Americans of good will) about our history and our civilisation.
“Protect the symbols and heritage of the traditional South.
“Maintain our link with the great civilisations of Europe, especially that of the Anglo-Celts, from which the South has drawn its inspiration.
“Encourage the development of healthy local communities and institutions by seceding from the mindless materialism and vulgarity of contemporary American society.
“Restore the traditional rights reserved to the States under the Constitution.
“Form friendships and alliances with sympathetic movements striving for devolution of government and independence for authentic nations and regions, both inside and outside of these United States.
“Stimulate the economic vitality and self-sufficiency of the Southern people.
“Pledge our lives, fortunes, and sacred honour to the cause we have undertaken.” (The Grey Book, like the League’s other publications, uses British spelling.)
The authors of this book are what American Renaissance would call racial realists; therefore, they reject the “flawed Jacobin notion” of egalitarianism that underlies America’s current public policy. They would eliminate affirmative action as well as all attempts to “remake society in their image of diversity” and that serve “profiteers with endless streams” of cheap labor:
“Though the Left will claim this as evidence of our ‘racism,’ to allow non-Western peoples and their institutions to dominate the South would destroy our civilization as we know it.”
At the same time, the League “disavows a spirit of malice” towards Southern blacks and welcomes their cooperation “in areas where we can work together as Christians to make life better for all people in the South.”
Much of this 170-page book is an outline of policies for a new Southern nation. Of particular interest are discussions of immigration and race relations, which are worth quoting at length. On immigration, the League states:
“The strength of a country is continuity from the past to the future. Consequently, the CSS immigration policy shall not bring radical changes to an area or its people. Southern immigration policy will limit overall numbers of immigrants to prevent burgeoning population growth and attendant problems of overcrowding, excessive urban and suburban development, and environmental stress. Southern immigration policy also will not permit extensive change of the South’s cultural, ethnic and socio-economic make-up. Change of this sort is not conducive to true good will and tolerance, but rather to mistrust and division which unscrupulous interests will exploit.
“Immigrants wishing to become citizens of the CSS would be required to reside in one of its states for at least a decade.” They would need to renounce “all loyalty to their countries of origin” and obtain character references from leaders of their communities. Mastery of the English language would be required of them as would extensive knowledge of Southern history and civics. The League states unequivocally, “Citizenship will not be granted to the children of foreign parents simply because they are born in the CSS.”
Illegal immigration would not be tolerated. Borders would be well patrolled, and law enforcement officers at all levels would have authority to arrest and deport illegal aliens.
On race relations, the League acknowledges that “historically the interests of Southern blacks and whites have been in part antagonistic.” As a Christian nation, the CSS would look to Scripture for guidance. Blacks would be treated as “brothers in Christ” and would be afforded the same constitutional protections as other law-abiding citizens:
“[The government] shall leave the races alone to work out their problems in private spheres (e.g. between individuals, families, churches, businesses, etc.) Race relations, especially between whites and blacks in the South, have been poisoned by the interference of various agencies of the federal government and by the cultural scourge of ‘political correctness.’ To remedy this problem, government shall have no place in favouring or handicapping one racial group in relation to another. All shall be free to pursue their own interests under the law.”
That being said, the League makes clear that its first duty is to self-preservation. “White Christian Southerners are the blood descendants of the men and women who settled this country and gave us the blessings of freedom and prosperity. To give away this inheritance in the name of ‘equality’ or ‘fairness’ would be unconscionable.”
The CSS would eliminate welfare, in accordance with Second Thessalonians 3:10: “if any would not work, neither should he eat.” Voluntary organizations would attend to those truly in need, whatever their race. “Though many blacks may be taught to hate us in their homes and institutions,” the League cautions, “our response to them must be grounded in Christian charity.”
The Grey Book ends with two appendices. The first is a collection of “snapshots” by various unidentified authors on the growth and development of the League. Although interesting, these short essays are largely restated material covered earlier in the book. The second appendix answers questions most frequently asked about the League, and is a quick overview of the League’s philosophy, goals, and plan for secession.
Southern secession is not the Confederate flag-waving delusion its critics would have us believe. Authors as diverse as Gore Vidal (The Decline and Fall of the American Empire), Robert D. Kaplan (The Coming Anarchy), Thomas W. Chittum (Civil War Two: The Coming Breakup of America), and Michael Hart (in The Real American Dilemma) have warned that secession, partition, or actual civil war may be act three in the drama of American political life. Describing the “disturbing freshness” of Edward Gibbon’s history of the Roman Empire, Mr. Kaplan writes:
“The Decline and Fall instructs that human nature never changes, and that mankind’s predilection for faction, augmented by environmental and cultural differences, is what determines history.”
Since the publication of The Grey Book, a call has gone out to make South Carolina the first state of the new unreconstructed South. Cory Burnell, the former director of the League of the South’s Texas chapter, has founded ChristianExodus.org, an online organization urging fundamentalist Christians to relocate to South Carolina. Rather than try to “redirect the entire nation,” Mr. Burnell hopes to “redeem States one at a time.” Working with the League’s South Carolina chapter, Christian Exodus.org plans to relocate 12,000 Christians annually to South Carolina with a secession date set for 2016.
Yet, there is a problem with the League’s plan for secession that may be more intractable than domination by the American Empire. Reversing a 35-year trend, blacks are now returning to the South in record numbers as they flee the high unemployment and crime rates of northern cities. As appealing as an independent Dixie may be for white Southerners, it is hard to imagine that Southern blacks will share that enthusiasm. Blacks make up nearly 30 percent of the population of South Carolina, according to the 2000 US census, and a high percentage of most of the rest of the South (Alabama, 26 percent; Arkansas, 16; Florida, 15; Georgia, 29; Louisiana, 33; Mississippi, 36; North Carolina, 22; Tennessee, 17; Texas, 12; and Virginia, 20.)
As their population continues to grow, southern blacks will increasingly take political control—first of the major cities—just as they have in Atlanta. Whites will flee to white enclaves and the new black establishment will gorge itself on what is left behind.
Thomas Chittum predicts an independent black nation in the South, with Atlanta as its capital. If that should happen, Mr. Chittum believes whites will abandon the South, but some, like the authors of The Grey Book one suspects, will stay and fight.
Readers of AR may not be ready to join Mr. Burnell when he moves his family to South Carolina next year. Some may not agree with the League’s position on every social and economic issue, and others may find its fundamentalism incompatible with a more scientific worldview. Still, The Grey Book is worth reading, if only for its unwavering defense of white people from a future that looks increasingly dark.
(Posted on November 2, 2007)
Comments
I wonder if “seccession from the union” would have a chance anywhere as a state ballot initiave.
Posted by Michael C. Scott at 6:42 PM on November 2
Thank goodness! I am originally from California and as I became racially aware a lot of my hope was in the strength of the South. As time went by I realized that the South were just as weak as the rest of the country. Perhaps I was wrong and the South will rise again. If anyone can defeat this P.C. nightmare world it’s the good old southern boys. Let’s hope they have had enough and are ready to do something about it.
Posted by Superwhite at 6:59 PM on November 2
I’m ready. I have met so many people in North Carolina who are on “disability”. They ride the gravy train claiming they can’t work, but they are certainly able to do everything else! One woman “proudly” proclaimed her husband was on disability because he has diabetes, and they had two young-uns with them. What is this teaching them? I know two women, older than him, that are also diabetic and BOTH work,. one is a veternarian for large animals. These freeloaders can be working at something to earn their keep!
Posted by Flyboy at 7:40 PM on November 2
I have corresponded with Michael Hill in the past on several occasions. Back in 1980, I was one of the few members of the Southern Nationalist Party, based in Memphis. I have devoted quite a bit of time and effort to the subject of Southern Independence and will make note of some observations.
All of the Southern movements I am aware of are particularly undemocratic. Much like the personality of Jefferson Davis, they have already appointed themselves the new dictators and now work feverishly to create a following. Of course, not many Southerners are interested in exchanging one set of tyrants in Washington for the local variety. I tried to interest some in the Southern movement for years in making the movement more democratic, which IS the Southern tradition, but they were not interested at the time.
The Southern Nationalist Party finally fizzled and died out (to my knowledge) because they focused too much on achieving independence for the South by legal challenge, petitioning recognition by the United Nations, the Helsinki Accords, and the UN Declaration of Human Rights. Peaceful separation would be very much preferred to civil war by any rational person, but we have seen in the past few years that rule by law no longer exists in the USA. Legal challenges may or may not result in judicial opinion, but there is no court that would consider the lawful separation of the Southern states. Even appeals to The Hague would be pointless, since the Bush Administration has plucked all its feathers.
I do believe peaceful separation of the Southern states is possible, by the only means that would be respected by the international community….by plebicite. Lawful authority rests with the electorate and exists by the consent of the governed. Even the Declaration of Independence insists on the ability of a people to throw off the authority of lawful government in favor of a new one, to better serve their own future and happiness. None of the independence movements want a plebicite of the citizens (at this time) so lawful authority will be denied them.
My own plan was to appoint a registrar of confederate voters in every county to register people to vote in confederate elections. It is from this basis, you can claim to represent the will of the people as soon as a majority have willingly registered to vote in confederate elections. Charge five bucks to register to vote, to support and maintain the registrar’s office, and the rest of the government will follow. Make plans for the assumption of Federal agencies and services, such as the post office, air traffic control, lighthouses and coast guard, based on committe recommendations. Have the committees appointed by the Confederate Congress. Where do we get such authority? By the congress being elected from districts of the states….representative democracy. Sound familiar?
Posted by Don Reynolds at 8:15 PM on November 2
“Thomas Chittum predicts an independent black nation in the South, with Atlanta as its capital. If that should happen, Mr. Chittum believes whites will abandon the South, but some, like the authors of The Grey Book one suspects, will stay and fight.”
I think Chittum is half right. Blacks are way too dysfunctional and needy to create a black nation. They will continue to move to the South and unless Whites change their behavior, they will continue to retreat in the face of it. It could eventually be one large black reservation with Mississippi-like poverty and a small 10% White population. These people will be well paid professionals tasked to run critical aspects of the economy.
Posted by Al at 8:25 PM on November 2
Yes, maybe its time. Freedom of religion would be justification enough. Half the people in this nation I no longer recognize as my fellow Americans.
Posted by the Soviet Republic of New Jersey at 8:45 PM on November 2
I would support this movement in every possible way ; when successful, would moved to the South myself.
Posted by Michigan patriot at 10:09 PM on November 2
“On race relations, the League acknowledges that ‘historically the interests of Southern blacks and whites have been in part antagonistic.’ As a Christian nation, the CSS would look to Scripture for guidance. Blacks would be treated as ‘brothers in Christ’ and would be afforded the same constitutional protections as other law-abiding citizens:
‘[The government] shall leave the races alone to work out their problems in private spheres (e.g. between individuals, families, churches, businesses, etc.) Race relations, especially between whites and blacks in the South, have been poisoned by the interference of various agencies of the federal government and by the cultural scourge of ‘political correctness.’ To remedy this problem, government shall have no place in favouring or handicapping one racial group in relation to another. All shall be free to pursue their own interests under the law.”
Political and legal equality for blacks? This won’t work. It is a mindless pipe-dream.
Blacks, taken on average and as a group, simply cannot handle equal liberty; and gratuitously giving it to them necessarily leads to demagoguery and to the inevitable destruction of constitutional government, advance European society, et cetera. Why can’t we learn from American history?
What’s more, Southerners — especially Southern patriots — should know better! For the sake of your children and grandchildren, study your Calhoun! — and wake up!
Blacks are indeed “our brothers and sisters” in Christ. But they are, emphatically, our younger siblings … by about 200,000 years, on an evolutionary grade.
The League is (and always has been) super soft on race. The cause is both intellectual blindness and moral cowardice, but in what proportion?
Dr. Winston L. McCuen
Occupied Southland
Posted by Winston McCuen at 11:05 PM on November 2
“It could eventually be one large black reservation with Mississippi-like poverty and a small 10% White population”
Some whole counties are already like that.
Posted by at 11:20 PM on November 2
To say that the welfare of those truly in need will be a matter for voluntary organizations only, is to ensure that the movement will remain marginal. Many who might otherwise support secession will shrink from doing so if becoming a disciple of Ayn Rand is the price of admission.
Posted by at 11:30 PM on November 2
This is a ridiculous plan. This is so absurd and this is coming from a man usually thought of as the “extremist”.
You want to start a campaign for separation from the government in a region with the largest and growing Black population in the nation and a region right near Washington DC ? White genocide is more probable in that region.
Jared Taylor, please do not support this lunacy. If you want secession choose Alaska or the Pacific Northwest like Chittum said.
Posted by soldat55614 at 12:23 AM on November 3
when you decide to go for it, there are certain people whom must be omitted from living in the CSS. look to benjamin franklin and george washington to see who they are. if you can’t do it, then don’t waste the time to secede.
Posted by at 12:27 AM on November 3
Unless some unforseen future event were to occur, this will likely never happen in our lifetime. I mean honestly, do you think the 20%+ of the population (blacks) that live in the South would allow this to happen without “civil” unrest and incurring the wrath of the Feds and all the crazy Lefty activists? It would be much easier and more productive to accomplish this sort of thing in an area that still has a prominent White majority and fewer blacks already living there (parts of Western US). If it were an ideal world, things would work out the way this author has portrayed them. I’m afraid that in our world of PC, the Feds would rather come after the secessionists in the South with more fury than Lincoln himself than allow such a thing to occur. All for the sake of ‘diversity’ no less.
A place like Idaho would be a good candidate for this, still being predominantly White. This would seem to be a more reasonable place to have a White homeland. Montana would also be a good choice.
Posted by whiteculturewarrior at 1:05 AM on November 3
Wow! They have got it exactly right! It was beautiful just to read the words of strong, calm, reasoning, cleansed of all the suicidal psychosis of Political Correctness.
Even though I was raised a “Yankee” on the east coast and have been moving farther and farther into the Pacific Northwest, maybe I’ll have to start thinking about heading south!
Posted by John Karns at 4:08 AM on November 3
Strong support to people freedom. We were occupied 50 years by Soviet Empire but we never accepted it as own. That didnt mean active resistance by most but rather more passivism to central government initiatives. We even noted this time period as “Russian time” vs. independence period whet we call(ed) “Estonian time”. Soon will also EU socialist utopia collapse but it doesnt matter personally for us.
Posted by Estonian (former Soviet Union) at 7:22 AM on November 3
Southerners would quickly find millions of white northerners moving south to join them as soon as they achieved independence. My guess is that millions of northern Europeans would also quickly apply for citizenship. A brain drain of talent would rapidly ensue. The multicults will do ANYTHING to stop it.
Posted by Xenophon at 9:17 AM on November 3
I support the right of secession 100%. Indeed, massive secession movements around the globe will be the greatest thing that ever happened to this planet as people whittle away at the one world government. But the problem with the LOTS is that it is simply unrealistic at this point in time. In 1861 roughly 90% of the South was in favor of secession and 75% of the men of military age (which then was from 15 to 80) served in some capacity in the Confederate military. Women kept the home fires burning and were loyal to their men. Even the majority of Southern blacks and many Texas and New Mexico hispanics were staunchly Confederate. Still, they were overwhelmed by superior resources and Lincoln’s war- against-civilians policy.
Today things could not be anymore different. You could scarcely find 10% of Southerners who would want to secede. Huge numbers of blacks and illegal immigrants view the federal “gummint” as their best friend and source of sustenance. The majority of white male Southerners now share the “Yankee” mentality that the federal government is Lord and Master and that to secede is treason. Southern white ladies are as extinct as the dodo and have been replaced by black-worshiping hedonists with the mentality of Britney Spears. And the federal government itself is now even more powerful and corrupt than Lincoln ever hoped it could be. Any serious attempt at secession in the South would result in mass arrests of the separatist leaders, followed by show trials to crucify them. And if any of these secession attempts were ever backed by armed men that received some kind of recognition from a foreign government then the US military would do to them what Sherman did to Georgia, only with much better weapons.
Also I have noticed that the LOTS and Southern Party have the mentality that if you aren’t a bible thumping creationist then you must be a Marxist. They alienate a lot of people with their religious rhetoric that is hopelessly outdated. If they want to have a community of religious people that secede from the Union, that would be great and I would wish them well, but they need to focus doing just that and select a small area to claim as their own, not force their views on anyone in the geographic area that was once the Confederacy. And very few Old-Rightist, race realists are bible-thumpers anymore. This day and time, the man who supports secession and independence from massive government also supports independence from organized religion.
So while I wish them well, I also know that their goals are hopelessly unrealistic and, I fear, will harm the serious and credible secession movements that will no doubt arise when the NAU gets here.
Posted by Venom at 10:54 AM on November 3
“Maintain our link with the great civilisations of Europe, especially that of the Anglo-Celts, from which the South has drawn its inspiration.
Southerners are derived from Anglos, “Scotch-Irish,” and Germans, not Celts.
Scotch-Irish are not Celts. The Celtic element in America were the Irish-Catholic immigrants of the potato famine era; and they didn’t settle in the South in any appreciable numbers.
At any rate, modern southerners culturally have more in common with the Midwestern and Plains States than they do the South of 60 years ago, much less antebellum times. So I see no point in a new Southern Confederacy. Besides, the leaders of any such confederacy will be just as politically-correct in dealing with the blacks (and just as greedy and short-sighted with regards to the importation of mestizos for agricultural stoop-labor) as the current crop of crooks that run the U.S. government.
Posted by at 1:16 PM on November 3
Sam Francis was right - we’re in this together and secession talk is puerile nonsense.
Posted by at 1:43 PM on November 3
This will never happen. While I appreciate the romance of the wish to return to the antebellum days of Scarlette O’hara and the graceful Wilkinson Plantation, this is simply unrealistic. The idea represents a bankrupt notion that first, the old CSA was or could have been a success, and that second, it is possible to seperate from the Federal Union without that Federal Union resisting. For one thing, the Federal Government is heavily invested in the region (Duh), and most white southerners have become very much U.S. flag waving patriots themselves. Further, the idea of somehow removing all the people who do not fit the racial, religious and political outlook from the geographic region without a huge, incredible amount of violence is not just unrealistic, it is unfathomable for a reasonable mind to consider.
Part of the history of the “War between the States” was that the CSA in the end, became a centralized, federal body, drafting men from all states (at least the poor men) into the army for the purose of fighting for the sucession. The entire idea of state rule was disproven. This is the core of the “lost cause.” The notion of independent state rule has been disproven by history.
I worry that too many who would save the white race are suffering from delusions of old Southern grandeur. This article rather enforces that read.
The only state I can imagine where this might occur is within a wider social breakdown due to something like a severe financial depression compounded by problems such as the results of global warming (the Southeast is having a pretty tough time right now with a long drought and water shortages), bankrupt insurance companies, and federal government chaos. This scenario is not impossible. We presently have a federal governmnet that really is not working at all. The president is ignoring congress and congress is fighting the president. All the while we have a looming recession that one commentator has predicted will likely be the worst since the Great Depression. A few more Katrinas and LA fires, wider droughts and perhaps a sucessful terrorist act could create the conditions that could allow a true Balkanization within the U.S. at last. But it wouldn’t be as easy or fun to set it up or make it work, either. What I have learned from my little experience with power is that when there is some created notion of power up for grab, people become remarkably divisive - and prone to violence. Don’t think whites wouldn’t turn on whites.
I will continue to argue for a more realistic intellectual movement for white survival. If Jews could do it over two thousand years despite often intense persecution, then white groups, whether religious or not, ought to be able to.. that is, if they are intelligent enough.
Posted by Whiteplight at 2:00 PM on November 3
Sorry guys. But, the blacks have already claimed that area and have a group of 10,000 plus men to take it.
NOI and the NBP also want this area.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Africa
Posted by at 2:42 PM on November 3
I see a big problem. The South would be left with a huge porportion of blacks and hispanics. They could deport the illegal hispanics I suppose.
And the truth is, the South has always, always been the national headquarters of cheap labor, slaves before the civil war, malnourished whites to the 1970’s and now hispanics. An independent South might be Christian and might have good family values but its major employeers would find a way to destroy the middle class and reduce the working class to the conditions of 1910 cotton mill workers, barely fed, clothed and housed and without medical care.
Posted by at 3:01 PM on November 3
Of course, I would support Southern secession from Politically Correct America, but I fear that people won’t do it as long as it is advantageous to be part of the United States—Social Security, Disability benefits, etc. We will need a new depression or economic meltdown before people are really serious about leaving the Union. Things will have to get much worst before they become better.
Posted by Sardonicus at 3:48 PM on November 3
Anonymous:
As someone who engages in near-idolatry of Sam Francis, let me correct you slightly. He was not opposed to secession in general, but to that kind of proposal for the former Confederate states. His reasoning (when he wrote “Infantile Disorder” for Chronicles Mag. in 1997) was that the U.S. Government was already a Southern government, comprised of a President, Vice-President, Speaker of the House, House Majority Leader, Senate Majority Leader, Senate Majority Whip that were all from states that were part of the Confederacy. The results for a “separate” South would not be any better.
Posted by St. Louis CofCC Blogmeister at 4:30 PM on November 3
“A place like Idaho would be a good candidate for this, still being predominantly White. This would seem to be a more reasonable place to have a White homeland. Montana would also be a good choice.”
Most of the land in Idaho and Montana is owned by the federal government. The federal government has its extermination of Whites policy well on its way. The feds would never let us settle on its lands.
The utility companies would cut off the gas and electricity so those of us not in possession of a good woodlot would freeze to death in the nine months of winter. The railroads would probably stop their service. The feds would destroy the freeway system before they let us settle there away from their beloved criminal brown and black hordes.
Posted by at 5:28 PM on November 3
“achieving independence for the South by legal challenge, petitioning recognition by the United Nations, the Helsinki Accords, and the UN Declaration of Human Rights. “
Sounds like a Jerry Seinfield episode, one of Kramer’s ideas.
Didn’t those Southerners realize that the UN hates with a passion because we are White?
Posted by at 5:31 PM on November 3
Despite the high black population of the South, an independent Southern nation would become a white nation in a matter of years. Why? Due to the conservative values of the South most welfare programs will be cut off and crimes will be punished much more strictly. This will result in most of the blacks, especially the ghetto ones, fleeing the South on their own. Not to mention, the greatest racial threat to our nation today is posed by Hispanics, not blacks. A Southern nation would have very strict immigration laws and would deport the illegals who are currently living within its borders. I used to be a part of the Southern Nationalist movement but dropped out because I didn’t see the movement going anywhere. Now that the movement has teamed up with the Vermont and Alaska secessionists, it is starting to get some attention and I am thinking about becoming active in the movement once again.
Posted by Conrad R. at 6:35 PM on November 3
“An independent South might be Christian and might have good family values but its major employers would find a way to destroy the middle class and reduce the working class to the conditions of 1910 cotton mill workers, barely fed, clothed and housed and without medical care.” (Posted by at 3:01 PM on November 3)
I hate to possibly agree with you, but you might be right. In 1957 I lived for a year in Huntsville, Alabama, and was amazed to see two still inhabited dirt “villages” inside Huntsville that were row after row of wretched identically-constructed shacks that had served mill workers (and possibly still did—they gave me the creeps—I was a teenager and I stayed away).
From what little I’ve read, you are correct in your history, but I wonder if conditions were any better in Northern cities. In a novel (I forget its name) Carl Sandburg wrote whose action took place just before the Civil War, a character argues that the Abolitionists were hypocritical in ignoring the conditions of Northern factory workers that he claimed to be as bad or worse than the condition of most Southern slaves.
Whatever form the future takes, I wonder how decent working conditions will be established and maintained. The Left is routinely excoriated on this site for reasons I almost invariably agree with, but am I correct in believing that it was the Left that fought for and won decent working conditions in this country? And, that the Right has generally been in opposition to that movement? If I’m mistaken, I’m sure I will be corrected!
Of course the Left’s support of illegal immigrants today undermines our standards for working conditions. But the FAR Left (in contrast to Hillary, etc.) is very opposed to globalization and out-sourcing, even though it supports illegal immigrants fervently! Go figure.
But ALL of the Left holds integration of the races to be a religious principle, and the Right lines up with them, if with slightly less fervor.
Posted by H. Dumpty at 8:25 PM on November 3
Many writers here have noted the large percentage of blacks in the South. What they don’t realize is this is not a permanent condition. Look at the recent state initiatives against illegal aliens. Their purpose, as even their sponsors have noted, is to induce the illegals to “self-deport” — IOW, go elsewhere. The same thing would happen in the CSS (or Dixie Republic, as I like to call it). A nation with the rule of law, private property rights and freedom of association restored, affirmative action and the welfare state abolished, and a severely downsized government would be hell on earth for at least 90% of blacks (and a majority of Hispanics as well). Therefore, they would flee for greener pastures as fast as humanly possible, leaving a much whiter Dixie.
Several months before she died in 2003, my aunt (who knew of my Southern nationalism) asked me if I still thought secession would occur. I told her no, because I’d decided the US was irreversibly headed for a Soviet-style collapse, and so there would be nothing to secede from. Whiteplight’s post earlier today essentially illustrates this scenario. America grows more divided daily; the Yankee Empire hangs by a fraying thread.
I should also add that I’ve been a LS member since 1998. Anyone sho is interested can join here; Dixie residency is not required. I’ve also written a draft constitution showing my vision for an independent South; e-mail me if you’d like a copy [.pdf]. (This project is not affiliated with the League; I started it before joining.)
Posted by Strider at 8:50 PM on November 3
I live in the heart of the south, and I can tell you that I just don’t see this happening. We have too many blacks down here that would start rioting on a mass scale and they would destroy every southern city. As soon as they went into the rural areas it would be an all out war between whites and blacks which would spill over into northern cities as well. I don’t think the “Union” would give up easily either. We must remember that the northeast gets most of it’s heating oil from southern based oil companies who drill in the Gulf of Mexico. That would almost certainly get cut off if this plan was successful. They couldn’t get oil from Alaska either because Russia would certainly take it over. NASA is also mostly based in southern states, and it would be a big fight over that as well.
Trust me folks, it will never happen. Everybody would lose.
Posted by at 9:56 PM on November 3
“A nation with the rule of law, private property rights and freedom of association restored, affirmative action and the welfare state abolished, and a severely downsized government would be hell on earth for at least 90% of blacks (and a majority of Hispanics as well). Therefore, they would flee for greener pastures as fast as humanly possible, leaving a much whiter Dixie.”
And where would they go? No other region wants these people. The minute a mass migration of blacks out of the South looks likely, the rest of the nation will follow suit by ending their own affirmative action and welfare programs. The blacks will simply stay put.
Posted by Al at 10:21 PM on November 3
Keep in mind that our plan for South Carolina is not to overthrow government or provoke some kind of uprising. We anticipate a peaceful breakup of a bankrupt empire, not unlike the recent dissolution of the Soviet Union or Yugoslavia. Our aim is to preserve Christian culture through community and other para-church support structures. We shall not dissolve the empire. We shall stand still and watch it fall apart all around us. When this happens, God willing, we will not be crying for big government to save us like refugees from New Orleans, but we will embrace the challenge of having to take care of our own problems. We don’t expect that Atlanta will fare so well when the trough dries up, but we don’t plan to live in Atlanta.
Posted by Keith Humphrey at 12:14 AM on November 4
the vermont secession movement is a bunch of leftists marxists from the univ of vermont, so im not interested in joining with them. im trying to get rid of them, maybe to another planet. wherever blacks are in control like detroit, new orleans, atlanta is a big mess of incompetence and corruption so im not interested in that either, plus the crime rate is very high in the areas blacks are in the majority. if we were to seceed, it must be like the days of old, where whites all lived together, helped each other as neighbors, you know, like the good,old days prior to the 60’s.
Posted by at 4:51 AM on November 4
In an effort to control global warming, I propose that all oil burned for heat this winter be taxed an additional thirty percent. Now, which section of the country is ready for secession?
Posted by Robert Binion at 6:30 AM on November 4
The league is certainly a good idea. I was raised and have lived most of my life in Virginia and had at least one relative who fought with the Army of Northern Virginia(an Irishman named Pat Donnelly). I do not think that the league’s position on blacks is tenable, however. In the years before the 2nd war of American Independance many southern statesmen were attempting to deal with the issue of slavery and the consensus view was that expatriation was the only real answer, there being so much intellectual and cultural distance between such widely separated races. I would suggest that the program of the league on race should involve a recognition of this fact. There should be no place for either slavery or blacks in a New South.
As far as just how realistic this project is, most will say that it seems very unlikely. However, many things change and change very rapidly in history so there may well be a place for an independent New South in the future. Clearly the present system is not functioning and is near breaking point as the government morphs into a police state. It may well be in the ashes of resistence to this developing police state that the New South is born. If that time comes, I don’t believe that there will be much sentiment among the remaining southern whites to embrace blacks as their constitutional equals.
Posted by at 10:13 AM on November 4
Great idea and one that the birthplace of the real America (South) who wrote all its founding documents and capital named for its most famous southerner albeit stolen by the Marxists, has believed in 100%.
Fact is the South knew how to deal with African race blacks who worked in their fields and homes for 250 years. The GOP north and west and their Marxist dictator tyrant lying murdering invader forced millions of young whites to do his dirty work for him trying to gain a political legacy using non-white liberation democracy. Where have we heard that before?
The Founders America ceased to exist in 1865.
Posted by at 10:34 AM on November 4
States rarely seperate peacefully. They are ripped apart. The partition between India and Pakistan may prove to be a more realistic scenario than the one envisioned here.
Having said that, I am surprised at the number of people who seem to be arguing that ‘Southern blacks would not let this happen’. If you really believe that black public opinion and their threat of violence is enough to scupper any white-separatist/nationalist movement, then what exactly are you hoping that AmRen can achieve?
Posted by Regulation18b at 2:23 PM on November 4
“The Left is routinely excoriated on this site for reasons I almost invariably agree with, but am I correct in believing that it was the Left that fought for and won decent working conditions in this country? And, that the Right has generally been in opposition to that movement?”
That is very true. But remember, during the 1800 to 1970 period when the working class achieved labor unions, decent wages and working conditions the left was a working class movement. The European labor parties were run by labor unions and the working class. Our Democrats were the party of the working man and women.
But then in the 1950’s and 1960’s the upper class idiot intellectuals infiltrated then took over the labor parties. So then there were 2 parties that represented the economic interests of the upper classes. And no party that represented the interests of the middle and working classes.
In America, there has not been a political movement that represents the working and middle classes since 1968.
The 1968 Democratic party convention was the turning point for the Democratic party. The upper class idiot intellectual red diaper babies, children and grandchildren of the Emma Goldmann generation of communists caused a riot. They battled the working class Chicago police. The working class police won the physical battle but lost the war of words.
Then the Democratic party instituted that at least 50 percent of delegates to their nominating conventions be women.
THAT WAS THE REAL DESTRUCTION OF THE ONLY WORKING CLASS PARTY IN THE HISTORY OF THIS COUNTRY, IDIOT INTELLECTUAL RICH WOMEN.
Instead of working and middle class women, the Democratic party quota women were upper class idiot intellectual marxist, minority, lesbian and ADL types. They drove the labor union leader males out of the Democratic party.
So now we have 2 parties that have been destroying the White middle and working class since the late 1960’s. Remember, affirmative action really got going in 1969 when Republican so called conservative Nixon became President.
From 1965 to that evil day in January of 1969 when Nixon became president, affirmative action was only a quota system for QUALIFIED blacks. Of course if the Democratic had won the outcome would have been the same since both parties were and are determined to exterminate Whites.
Since blacks were maybe 12 percent of the population, and had to meet basic qualifications, the 1965 affirmative action laws would not have hurt Whites that much.
Maybe Whites would have a harder time finding a job, but Whites would not have been banned from so much employment.
White government employees were actually told that the affirmative action laws would not apply to their agencies because due to the merit civil service system of objective testing, most government agencies already had the proper quota of blacks.
But under the Nixon administration government agencies were made 50 to 80 percent black, far over the quota. Within 2 years of his inaugration the hispanic race was invented by the Ford Foundation and validated by an evil black robed wizard. Then came affirmative action for asians, indians and every ethnic group in the world except Whites.
Since there were not enough hispanics, asians pacific islanders etc in the country to drive Whites from employment, the Republicans and Democrats united to import non Whites to overwhelm us. That is the purpose of all this non White immigration, not just cheap labor and jobs for immigrant advocate NGOs, but to just overwhelm Whites and reduce us to an impotent minority.
The Republicans are as anti White as the Democrats. In fact, if you study affirmative action’s history, you will see that the worst blows to Whites were done by Republicans Nixon and Reagan.
And all the powerful wealthy anti White foundations like Ford Foundation, SPLC, ADL, AJC, ACLU, La Raza, Maldef, NOW, on and on and on are supported by the world’s wealthiest corporations.
In summation, Democrats hate us because we are White, Republicans hate us because we created decent wages, working conditions and raised the working class from peons to middle class.
They both want us gone as soon as possible.
Posted by margaret at 5:59 PM on November 4
“If you really believe that black public opinion and their threat of violence is enough to scupper any white-separatist/nationalist movement, then what exactly are you hoping that AmRen can achieve?”
Good comment.
It’s hard for me to imagine a truly popular widespread Southern nationalist movement stopped in its tracks by black people. Just because Chittum warns of a “New Africa” in the Black Belt doesn’t make it so.
Posted by skeptical at 10:08 PM on November 4
I live in the deep South , ( I’m not fond of that term , I see so many liberals stomping around chanting it all the time ) I don’t see it happening , at least not permanently . It’s a beautiful thought to be sure . I do believe Balkanism is coming , soon but not in my lifetime . I think Chittum’s scenario will probably be the most accurate .Southern whites will either have to leave the South or submit to total amalgamation . I do look for laws impeding whites from leaving the south ,especially as more and more blacks fall into positions of authority . Case in point , Albany, Ga (Dougherty Co) All black government and mostly black population , but that’s where the jobs are . Adjacent Lee County , mostly white , for the most part all work in Albany .Black leaders keep bringing to the floor the proposition that to work in Albany you must live in Albany . I believe eventually their freedom hating idiot logic will succeed and will spread across the south and to a lesser extent the whole nation .The government wants this , a raceless society or more accurately a poly-ethnic race of citizens . Even Mr. Nixon touched on it in a round about way in his memoirs . And southern whites and inner city whites are to be the frontline troops in this plan of amalgamation and when they start leaving en masse it will not be tolerated for long .
Posted by at 2:34 AM on November 5
Certainly the South was comprised mostly of an Anglo population in the last century. But the Scots are primarily a Celtic people.There is a great preponderance of Anglo-Saxons in the Scottish lowlands near the English border, however the Scottish nation is a celtic nation.Hence the Scotch-Irish who immigrated fron Ulster in great numbers to the South were primarily Celtic.Also celtic were the thousands of Welsh like Jefferson who also immigrated.Thus the South is filled with names like Williams,Lewis,Hughes,Kelley Murphy,Mcgee and Riley. Where did they all come from? Outer Space?
Posted by at 11:25 AM on November 5
I would suggest to my Southern colleagues that in moving to create an independent South, your biggest hurdle will be liberal Southerners, not militant blacks. Remember that LBJ, Carter, Clinton and many others like Ralph McGill were all bonafide Southerners. They are the ones who will cause you the most trouble in any endeavor toward independence.
Posted by Xenophon at 2:55 PM on November 5
This is not the right approach. Trying to re-create a traditional South is not going to work. What you need to do is exploit the Red-Blue divide.
You need to make red-state America learn to really hate blue-state America. Furthermore, you must make sure that defense contractors, military bases, food and energy suppliers, and men in uniform are firmly pro-Red. You then use those resources to isolate places like New York and California until you’ve squeezed them for everything they’ve got.
While I do not like neo-conservatives, you need to understand that they have successfully consolidated the military-industrial complex and the various food/energy businesses under Republican control. Furthermore, a big chunk of these interests are disproportionately white and Southern. The solution is to maneuver a white nationalist into controlling these resources (say, by engineering a crisis.) Then, such a nationalist can march on Washington and deal with the traitors there.
You will not solve any of these problems peacefully. Liberals have to go.
Btw, the crisis that I am talking about is a greatly expanded middle-east war, plus more mass immigration of hostile foreigners into Democrat, blue-state areas. The idea is to engineer a national security crisis where a nationalist-patriot will take over.
Posted by at 3:51 PM on November 5
“And southern whites and inner city whites are to be the frontline troops in this plan of amalgamation and when they start leaving en masse it will not be tolerated for long.”
There is no way the government could stop the free movement of people in this country without building a massive Berlin Wall on the Mason-Dixon line and staffing it with millions of troops.
Posted by Rodger at 7:00 PM on November 5
I’m surprised of all the naysayers who think secession is not possible. There is a global anti-centralization movement afoot. In the mid to late 19th century, centralization was the order of the day. Bismark in Germany consolidated the German state with Prussia as the primary governing entity. Lincoln consolidated the US with the North as the most powerful section. Both Europe and the US continued to evolve into powerful centralized governments, with Europe developing into the EU and the US government, especially after FDR, becoming a continental and (after WWII) global Leviathan. Now there is secessionist sentiment in Europe as numerous countries are becoming disillusioned with the EU, especially over immigration. Scotland, Wales, Switzerland, and Belgium, among others, are agitating for less EU intrusion and more local autonomy if not outright independence. France elected the conservative Nicolas Sarkozy who promised to reduce immigration and social welfare programs. The Soviet empire broke up, as did Yugoslavia, along ethnic and cultural lines. Things don’t happen in a vacuum, and world trends occur like dominoes falling in a row. We can hope that it will continue and eventually we can peacefully (if not otherwise) separate from the oppressive and tyrannical US federal government.
Posted by at 8:22 PM on November 5
“Since there were not enough hispanics, asians pacific islanders etc in the country to drive Whites from employment, the Republicans and Democrats united to import non Whites to overwhelm us. That is the purpose of all this non White immigration, not just cheap labor and jobs for immigrant advocate NGOs, but to just overwhelm Whites and reduce us to an impotent minority.”
Margaret, very interesting post. I never really thought of it that way, but I think you’re right.
Varina
Posted by Varina at 9:45 PM on November 5
Yeah, I would have to agree with the fact that the Southern Whites of today are always the first ones to wave the US flag and go along with what they have been told is “patriotic” for their country. Most of them still believe that the Republican Party really cares about the interests of White people in this country. The Northwestern region looks like the last hope for the North American continent, but if the libs up there continue to celebrate diversity and allow more Latinos to flow in, it will likewise become hopeless. The best plan would be to encourage the racially aware Whites remaining in the South and Midwest to create a neo-Confederacy out of the Pac-Northwest and overpopulate the liberal Whites who are native to the region. Besides, the Pacific Northwest is much more suitable for our Caucasoid genes and provides the weather conditions which our people were made for. Our overall health and well-being would be most likely fulfilled in said region. Most Southern Whites of today still fail to realize that their organized churches have sold-out to PC, and most would still follow any orders their favorite televangelist gave them. Does anyone honestly believe that white business owners in the South would make sacrifices for the survival of their people anymore, or would they just continue to be sheep and follow the mighty dollar and their own self-gratifying greed? At least the native population in the Pac-Northwest are still open-minded to new ideas and might actually accept the reasons why the eastern Whites are flocking to their region. The late Jerry Falwell still dictates what the average Southern White man does in life, so the South is sadly too far gone now.
Posted by Pac-West at 1:40 AM on November 6
There is no way the government could stop the free movement of people in this country without building a massive Berlin Wall on the Mason-Dixon line and staffing it with millions of troops.
Posted by Rodger
I’m afraid I have to disagree Rodger . You can provide incentives , like unemployment for those who try to leave the south .Keeping up with it all is no problem now that the computer age is upon us . I think what you are referring to is the “old” United States , where we live now is not quite the same place and appears to be getting worse .
Posted by at 1:44 PM on November 11