Ole Miss Taking More Steps for Racial Diversity

Emily Wagster Pettus, Big Story, August 1, 2014

The University of Mississippi, which has long struggled to distance itself from plantation-era imagery, is renaming a street known as Confederate Drive and adding historical context to Old South symbols that have long stood on the Oxford campus.

“Our unique history regarding race provides not only a larger responsibility for providing leadership on race issues, but also a large opportunity–one we should and will embrace,” Chancellor Dan Jones wrote in the report that was developed with the help of a university committee and outside consultants.

The report issued Friday says Confederate Drive, a short street near Fraternity Row, will be renamed Chapel Lane and plaques could be installed to explain the history of symbols such as a Confederate soldier statue near the main administrative building.

The report recommends creating a new job of vice chancellor for diversity and inclusion. It also recommends that the university do more to tell the history of slavery, secession, segregation and their aftermath in Mississippi.

The report says the university will continue to use the nickname Ole Miss but should consider whether to limit its use to the context of athletics and school spirit, favoring the more formal University of Mississippi for academics. The nickname arose from a university yearbook contest in the late 1800s, but the phrase “Ole Miss” originally was a name that slaves used to refer to a plantation owner’s wife.

{snip}

Coliseum Drive, near the basketball arena, will be renamed Roy Lee “Chucky” Mullins Drive, after a black Ole Miss football player who was left a quadriplegic by a 1989 game injury and died in 1991. {snip}

The University of Mississippi had 22,286 students last academic year on its six campuses, including the main one in Oxford. In a state with a 37.4 percent black population, the university’s enrollment was 15.4 percent black. The school’s overall minority enrollment was 24.8 percent.

{snip}

In the 1990s, Jones’ predecessor as chancellor, Robert Khayat, banned people from carrying sticks into the football stadium as a way to discourage fans from carrying Confederate flags that had been waved at games for decades. Although its sports teams are still called the Rebels, the university a few years ago retired the Colonel Rebel mascot, a cane-wielding, white bearded old man who looked to many observers like the caricature of a plantation owner.

In 2009, Jones asked the university band to stop playing “From Dixie With Love,” which blends the Confederate anthem, “Dixie,” with the Union Army’s “Battle Hymn of the Republic.” The band had played the medley for about 20 years, but in about the mid-2000s, some fans started yelling “The South will rise again” during the song. Jones said in 2009 that the chant was associated with “a segregationist movement discredited so many years ago.”

Topics: , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • propagandaoftruth

    Ole Miss Taking More Steps to Obliterate White Heritage

    There, fixed it. Next step – White slaves, black mastas!

    • Bobbala

      Try refusing to serve one at your place of business.

      • propagandaoftruth

        Try even figgerin out what one of them even wants. Always upsell, tempt them beyond their budget.

        Try never giving them a real break, just exactly what they axe for. Cheeze them out when plausibly deniable.

        Try making their lives a tiny bit less pleasant in any way you can and look out for your own.

        Hey, if I’m irrevocably evil, let me be petty as well.

        • SoulInvictus

          Carrot and stick. I agree but also reward the ones that break the stereotypes. I follow Derbyshire’s advice on that one.

  • D.B. Cooper

    If you are unwilling to fight for it, then you deserve to lose it.

    • Oil Can Harry

      Dan Jones = Van Jones

  • MekongDelta69

    “…adding historical context to Old South symbols…”

    Translation(s):
    1.) Wiping out any and every mention of anything good White people ever did.

    2.) Extreme groveling.

  • http://www.ambrosekane.com/ bluffcreek1967

    This is all part of the on-going ‘cleansing’ to eradicate the influences, culture, and historical contributions of whites to our republic. It’s something right out of a KGB subversive tactics textbook.

    • TruthBeTold

      The so called Civil Rights Movement was actually Americas’ second revolution.

      They are purging the United States of everything pre-1964.

      Our original Founding Fathers are being replaced by our second Founding Fathers.

      Make no mistake. This is an orchestrated PURGE of Whites.

      • SoulInvictus

        The Founding Fathers are a few short years away from the same list as Davis, Lee, Forrest, and Jackson.
        It’s simple logic that they have to go away as well. All of their ideals, acts and lifestyles are antithetical to tyranny and white subservience.

        As no one is even taking a significant stand against the removal of southern figures, in the South of all places. It’ll probably pass with a whimper. Cry too loudly and you’re a domestic terrorist. Alex Jones has done numerous vids on the Feds view of Libertarians and patriot groups as domestic terrorists. There’s even one of Fed law enforcement being trained and the lecturer discussing the Founders as America’s first terrorists… and the attendees nodding and voicing agreement.
        Amazing.

        • bilderbuster

          Except Blacks starting purging slave owners Jefferson and Washington in New Orleans back in the 90’s.

          • SoulInvictus

            Well there you go. I stand corrected.
            Highlanders, it has begun!

            (even more hilarious when even way back then, Jefferson submitted a petition to legally end slavery…)

          • model1911

            He was one of the evil Republicans you know.

  • http://saboteur365.wordpress.com/ bigone4u

    Segregation discredited? The WISDOM of segregation is being validated every day as the murderous rampage of blacks continues to inflict itself on white women and men
    .
    Carr would be called a ni66er lover back in the day. And that shoe fits him well. He should use his position to warn white girls to stay away from blacks if they want to not be raped and murdered.

    My fondest wish for Carr is that one of the black students inflicts some serious pain on him, just enough to wake him out of his negro worshipping stupor.

    • Sick of it

      I’ve heard people talk about how nice things were under segregation. I’ve also heard people I’d never imagine talk about secession. Reality trumps ideology.

  • dd121

    Why God, why?

    • Sick of it

      We turned from Him and continue to excuse our sinful behavior rather than turn back.

      • SoulInvictus

        It is beginning to be harder and harder to argue against that.

  • IstvanIN

    From the Wikipedia article on Southern Rhodesia in World War 1
    “Since the country’s reconstitution and recognised independence as Zimbabwe in 1980, Robert Mugabe’s administration has pulled down many monuments and plaques making reference to the fallen of the First and Second World Wars, perceiving them as reminders of white minority rule and colonialism that go against what the modern state stands for.”
    and
    The country’s fallen of the two World Wars today have no official commemoration, either in Zimbabwe or overseas. The national war memorial obelisk still stands, but the relief sculptures and inscriptions have been removed. The stone cross monument near Mutare (as Umtali is now called) is one of the few memorials that remains intact and its place, atop what is now called Cross Kopje; its meaning has been largely forgotten.

    The above, gentlemen, is OUR future.

    • Sick of it

      I imagine him to be more Idi Amin than Robert Mugabe (i.e. far worse).

      • IstvanIN

        The general erasure of history was my actual point.

    • LHathaway

      lol, fighting Hitler is against everything Zimbabwe stands for, if does not somehow promote blacks specifically in Zimbabwe.

  • IKUredux

    I can’t take the slowly heating up the frogs routine. Just come right out and COMPLETELY BANISH EVERY reference to Whites and White civilization RIGHT NOW. F@#$ all you colored bas%$#@&! Because this crap will NEVER stop! Why don’t you just come right out and ban Whites. Why don’t you stick all of us into “re-education” camps, you know you want to. The saddest part, is that these barely literate dumb asses wouldn’t even be doing any of this without the instigation of certain Whites. There is NO way of turning this ship around by peaceful means. Voting? HA! This country has already descended into the corruption of third world countries. And, as we fill up with more coloreds, the further we sink. Maybe if you turn up the heat, my fellow Whites will finally feel the heat under their butts and DO SOMETHING!!!!!

    • SoulInvictus

      If everyone had your reaction, it wouldn’t work. Even the leftiest of leftist whites would say, wait…what? I just like weed and carefree sex man, I didn’t sign on for suicide.

      And that’s precisely why it’s set to slow cultural boil rather than deep fat fry.
      But it’ll get there.

      • IKUredux

        Seriously, what the hell are you talking about? If everyone had my reaction, it absolutely would work. You are right that the “leftiest of leftist whites” wouldn’t care. Of course not, they are the major part of the problem. Did you not read what I said? I’m saying that deep frying now might be a good thing. Oh, and EVERY White country matters. Are you a Negro? You must be, because you have inferred victory based on the White doctrines , in the White established universities, that you learned in a written language most likely developed by Whites, and you are now living in a White country that is way better than your crappy ass native land, which all of your ancestors were too stupid to do anything to change until the White man came along. FU.

        • SoulInvictus

          You misunderstand me… I was saying if they were so overt as to provoke your reaction in everyone, it would be counterproductive their goals.
          Thus the boiling the frog approach.

          Never mind, yes I am the blackest of negroes and bow out to your superior intellect.

          • IKUredux

            Hello! How stupid are you? I did not misunderstand you.And, by the way, at this point, you were misunderstood. Get your tenses correct. You make no sense. First, you say that if everybody had my reaction, “it wouldn’t work”. Now, you say: IT WOULD. Yeah, thanks, you made my argument for me. Oh, and, by the way? Nice try!

          • SoulInvictus

            It was my tiny black brain struggling with the language.
            Apologies…lol.:)

          • IKUredux

            Oh, you are sooo cute! My liberal White friend is looking to adopt another Negro. Are you available?

          • SoulInvictus

            It depends, is she hot?
            Lighten up Francis. Haven’t you ever had a brother (blood not color) give you grief in good fun…

          • IKUredux

            Yup, but hate to disappoint, my friend is male. But, he’s hot! Still interested?

          • SoulInvictus

            lol…maybe. But I’d have to charge double.;)

      • Diana Moon Glampers

        Isn’t that the saddest thing?!
        I am always stupefied by White South Africans who gush over saint Mandela and praise the end of apartheid. The societal pressure to stay within acceptable bounds is incredibly strong, unfortunately.

    • Diana Moon Glampers

      Those “certain whites” are members of a different racial group. They do not consider themselves Whites.

  • Mary

    They had this same ridiculous controversy at the high school from which I graduated. The mascot was also the Rebel. Fortunately, sanity prevailed and the mascot remained.
    For many of us, the University of Mississippi will always be “Ole Miss”, regardless of the revisionist and P.C. nonsense. Mr. Dan Jones should find a nice, left-wing campus elsewhere. He’d have plenty from which to choose.

    • LHathaway

      Including Ole Miss.

  • Long Live Dixie

    It’s always Southern heritage that’s targeted. I won’t hold my breath for the numerous Union soldier statues in the North to be taken down or given plaques to show their ‘historical context’.

  • bilderbuster

    They need to start naming the streets after all of the Ole Miss White students who have been murdered by Blacks through out it’s history.

  • JP Rushton

    “but the phrase “Ole Miss” originally was a name that slaves used to refer to a plantation owner’s wife.”

    This sounds like something civil rights leaders would make up. Anyone know if it’s actually true?

  • LHathaway

    I’d be curious to know the white enrollment numbers at the nearest HBC’s.

  • HE2

    Searching online for info on the origin of “Ole Miss miss” reports the same as the article.
    viz, Ole Miss was the name slaves called their owner’s wife.

    • Long Live Dixie

      Blind Jim Ivy? That’s one theory put forward by Rainbows, but then why is Colonel Reb white if he’s supposed to be a depiction of a black guy?

      • HE2

        @Long Live, um, uh, Rainbow Revisionist History 101?

  • Jefferson

    “In a state with a 37.4 percent black population, the university’s enrollment was 15.4 percent black.”

    Very few Blacks in Mississippi are book smart, this explains their underrepresentation in The University Of Mississippi.

    But if Mississippi has an NBA team, you would see an overrepresentation of Blacks.

  • Augustus3709

    White’s have evolved to be compassionate and to take complaints seriously, but certain groups exploit this without shame. They complain endlessly and obnoxiously, never using the same forbearance and tact that Whites would use, and White people simply don’t know how to mentally filter through the noisy hostility. Almost universally Whites choose to remain calm and give in to all demands, no matter how unreasonable or ridiculous.

    Whites need intense re-education from early childhood to counteract this cultural-ethnic phenomenon, whereby members of our people would learn to stand together, and be boldly stubborn in the face of whiny and noisy opponents. Don’t take them seriously. Show them some spine and some teeth, and many of them will just angrily smack their lips and back down.

    They will keep on taking as long as we keep giving. Stop playing along and good things will happen.

  • Lion’s Mane

    There’s a video on YouTube in which certain Blacks tell our leaders just what they are doing to Whites. Enter ‘ Black Men Discuss White Genocide ‘ into the YouTube search box.

  • SoulInvictus

    This point surfaces every now and then. And not that you’re entirely wrong (and oh how I wish Southern elites would have just paid poor whites to do the damn work), you’re viewing it from the perspective of our time frame.
    Fact is, most didn’t view them as entirely human. Remember, sex with them was considered similar to bestiality, 2/3 a person, etc. To them, it would have definitely been considered a majority white state as those 4 million were like donkeys or work horses with thumbs.

    • Long Live Dixie

      . . . (and oh how I wish Southern elites would have just paid poor whites to do the damn work) . . ..

      Far too many people think slavery was the problem. Slavery may have presented some long-term problems, but given the conditions of the day (large land mass, sub-tropical climate, minimal Southern industry, small population) and the South’s need to compete with the North’s strength, it’s pretty easy to see why African slaves were used.

      Additionally, if we had imported whites to do manual labour – as they did in the North – then we would have become a pan-European melting pot just like the North has become. There would be little to no Southern identity today, much as the original WASPs of the North are now only a tiny minority in their land (having been replaced by Germans, Scandinavians, Greeks, Poles, Italians, Russians, and every conceivable mix thereof).

      • SoulInvictus

        ” Slavery may have presented some long-term problems”

        That is an understatement of epic proportions man.

        “it’s pretty easy to see why African slaves were used.”

        …yep, it’s called greed. Free (close to it anyway after purchase) labor was cheaper. That’s the beginning and ending of the reasoning behind the trade.

        “Additionally, if we had imported whites to do manual labour – as they did in the North – then we would have become a pan-European melting pot just like the North has become. There would be little to no Southern identity today”

        …as opposed to drowning in poor blacks and the effect they have on southern and US culture. I would have taken that tradeoff in a heartbeat. Irish, Italian, & Eastern European melting pot vs. cities like Birmingham, Atlanta, Baltimore, New Orleans, Philly (need I go on) being ceded to the worst possible element and degradation…being filled with even the drunkest of Irishmen would be such an improvement it’s hard to comprehend.

        Sorry, we agree on a lot, even most things, but admiration of southern elites’ business practices or that they were somehow a nobility that had our best interests at heart, is not one of them.
        I can’t see any rationale for preferring the Detroiting of much of the South and US in general over more white people. That makes no sense.

        • Long Live Dixie

          That is an understatement of epic proportions man.

          Not really. Slavery was a maintainable system and tight controls were kept on it. At some point in the 20th century it would have become obsolete, at which point it would not have been tough to begin removing the blacks from the South. It is only because of the interference of Northern do-gooders that slavery (rather, the lack of slavery) caused the problems of today.

          …yep, it’s called greed. Free (close to it anyway after purchase) labor was cheaper. That’s the beginning and ending of the reasoning behind the trade.

          In most cases, slavery was not nearly as profitable as people think. Slaves were expensive to buy and expensive to maintain. You’ve hugely oversimplified the reasoning behind slavery. Southerners had an enormous landmass to settle and civilise and a very small population to do it with.

          …as opposed to drowning in poor blacks and the effect they have on southern and US culture.

          As I said, that’s the result of outsiders coming here and overthrowing slavery. There was nothing within the system that inherently meant that slavery would devolve into equality. Southerners have always had good racial sense. Why would anyone believe that we would be stuck with the same racial mess that we have now if we had been allowed to run the system in our own way?

          I would have taken that tradeoff in a heartbeat.

          I wouldn’t. The pan-European people of the USA have no roots and no identity. They’re not a nation in any meaningful sense of the word. By not mass-importing every imaginable type of European, we Southerners were able to maintain our Anglo-Celtic stock and to forge a strong connection to our land and a sense of folkish identity. We also were able to avoid (with a handful of exceptions that were brought by German ’48ers) the political radicalism that came with Europe’s immigrants.

          If we had followed the path of the North, then there would not be a South today.

          Sorry, we agree on a lot, even most things, but admiration of southern elites’ business practices or that they were somehow a nobility that had our best interests at heart, is not one of them.

          Only a handful of planters were pathologically greedy. There were far more men like Lee and Davis who genuinely cared about their communities and posterity. It was the planters themselves who pushed for anti-miscegenation laws, slave codes, and so on, for example one of the first things that happened when the pro-slavery elements settled Kansas Territory is that they banned miscegenation.

          I can’t see any rationale for preferring the Detroiting of much of the South and US in general over more white people.

          The Detroiting of the South was done by Northerners. Slavery was not its cause. The end of segregation caused it. If Northerners had not interfered, then there is no reason to believe that the South would have spontaneously become anti-white on its own. When the South was ruled by Southerners, our cities were clean and safe. Now that the South is ruled by the equality that came to us from afar, our cities resemble the Third World.

          A hundred years from now I wonder if southwestern farmers will be making the same weak case for illegal immigration, as they’re almost completely ethnically replaced and their cities become favelas. Same. exact. thing.

          First, let’s be clear – we’re talking about the planters, not the slave traffickers. If your analogy is correct, then the planters would be similar to the employers of illegals and the traffickers would be similar to the supporters of more illegal immigration. That said, do the supporters of illegal immigration think that Mexicans should be confined to certain areas of residence; forbidden by law from reading, taking part in political activities, touching white women, or walking on the sidewalk? No, of course not. The similarities between illegal immigration and black slavery are very superficial. In one, whites are losing ground to non-whites. In the other, whites are the unquestioned masters of the land. The political leaders of the planters were openly pro-white and made no apologies for it.

          At the end of the day, the honest ones will admit, our ancestors knowingly sabotaged our future and sold us out… whored out their children’s country and destiny for an easier buck (no pun intended).

          It’s really unfortunate to see someone blaming our ancestors for the policies enacted by Northerners.

          • SoulInvictus

            Sorry, I like you, and swear I’m not devolving into name calling, but that post was about as unhinged as the stuff I read on the southern nationalist comment section.

            ” Slavery was a maintainable system”

            Slavery, in all of human history, has never, ever been a maintainable system over the long term. Inevitably, it has always proved disastrous for the civilization relying excessively upon it.

            “At some point in the 20th century it would have become obsolete, at which point it would not have been tough to begin removing the blacks from the South.”

            Southern elites showed no inclination whatsoever towards scaling back slavery. Quite the opposite as they were battling over territories entering as slave states. Sure…maybe when tractors were invented, they’d have ceased using as much human labor. Even then, not likely, or we wouldn’t have the current migrant laborer situation. Either way, that is not a great argument for allowing ongoing slavery.

            They also showed no inclination, whatsoever, about removing blacks from southern society. Even at the end, with loss of the war easily foreseen by everyone, no preemptive solution… whether as mild as freed and deported, or as extreme as castration or elimination, was ever even contemplated, to my knowledge.

            Then, as now, the elite wealthy knew it wasn’t them that would be faced with the repercussions. It wasn’t like poor blacks were going to buy the mansion next door or move into their neighborhood of the city. They obviously, did not care, at all, about the social ramifications of freed slaves for poor whites.

            “In most cases, slavery was not nearly as profitable as people think. Slaves were expensive to buy and expensive to maintain.”

            Again, What? Purchase, food and a shack vs. decent weekly pay. Hmmm.

            Medical care was virtually nonexistent and primitive in those days, so I don’t understand this supposed high maintenance cost. Of course it was enormously profitable, thus the popularity among wealthy land owners for up until the day it was pried out of their dead bloody hands.

            Paid employees also don’t breed you additional free employees…

            ” You’ve hugely oversimplified the reasoning behind slavery.”

            No, I think I’ve got an accurate grasp of it. As always, I follow the money. That safely leads me to the right conclusions 100% of the time.

            ” Southerners had an enormous landmass to settle and civilise and a very small population to do it with.”

            Any other group of people would solve that with the simplest solution, time. No one forces you to look at the countryside and say, I’ve got to utilize every bit of this tomorrow. Yeah, it’d be nice, and profitable, but expansion isn’t an instant process. Unless you import or buy large numbers of ignorant poor people alien to your group… Both of which, typically disastrous.

            “I wouldn’t. The pan-European people of the USA have no roots and no identity.”

            Really? Even now, on a site devoted basically to the fall of the western world and the demise of Europeans, you would still pick a deluge of blacks (and by extension of that rationale, hispanics) for cheap labor, to enrich the elite, over having to integrate europeans into the structure of southern society.
            Sorry but I can’t understand that rationale…at all.

            “If we had followed the path of the North, then there would not be a South today.”

            If we had followed the path of the North, our inner cities would like like Dublin instead of Mogadishu.

            “Only a handful of planters were pathologically greedy.”

            Owning a person to make more money and cut costs, that is the definition of pathologically greedy.

            “The Detroiting of the South was done by Northerners. Slavery was not its cause. The end of segregation caused it.”

            The North merely prematurely detonated the black time bomb. Once slave population, organization, and social sentiment had reached critical mass, there would have been slave revolts with mass bloodshed. Ancient world and more recent South American history demonstrate that, without fail.

            The Detroiting that follows freedom of black slaves was inevitable from the day they first set foot here and the last day Civil War era owners refused to divest of them and rid us of the problem in favor of slower expansion and better treatment of their own kind.

            “That said, do the supporters of illegal immigration think that Mexicans should be confined to certain areas of residence; forbidden by law from…”

            In their own way, Yes, yes they do. They don’t want them to be citizens, they don’t want them to be equal in the eyes of the law, they don’t want to have to pay taxes to support them, vote, etc etc etc.

            Is it as extreme as, we’ll hang you if you step out of line and consider you subhuman, mostly not no. But in the modern first world, it is absolutely the closest you can get. Otherwise, again, they wouldn’t do it because there’d be no money in it. Same (or at least VERY comparable) thing.

            “In one, whites are losing ground to non-whites. In the other, whites are the unquestioned masters of the land.”

            One, is to non-whites that take over neighborhood and city after city, the other is importing or breeding millions until they inevitably do the same. It’s a fine distinction.

            “The political leaders of the planters were openly pro-white and made no apologies for it.”

            They were unapologetically pro-white, but as with today’s wealthy elite, they were much more pro-money. 100% pro-white would have meant not importing african slaves and sharing wealth with poor whites, of which there were many. That didn’t happen, so obviously their pro-whiteness stopped short at the sign of more gold to be made. 30 pieces of silver on a grand scale.

            “It’s really unfortunate to see someone blaming our ancestors for the policies enacted by Northerners.”

            It is really unfortunate to see someone not realizing a scant few of our ancestors sold our race and country up the river for an easier buck and more quickly capitalizing on open real estate.
            Anyone of the old American aristocracy that read of Rome, or Civil War contemporaries that kept abreast of what was happening to South American slave owners, should have realized, this is a spectacularly bad idea… aside from every other reason that it was.

          • http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4333982.stm Augur Mayson

            I think Southern Nationalism as it exists today is a fake, presumably kosher, movement meant to splinter and distract white nationalists, for more or less the reasons you cite. All that insanity makes a lot more sense when viewed from the perspective I think is appropriate.

          • SoulInvictus

            I hadn’t really even put that much thought into it, merely researched a little and talking some with their folks on the website and finding myself unimpressed with the thought process and general strategy.
            LLD is probably the brightest one I’ve ever discussed it all with and that’s why I’ll bother with these long exchanges. I like his passion for the South and he’s obviously literate on the history (probably more than I am honestly) but he doesn’t fit it into a world context like I do, so it skews things unrealistically in my eyes.

            But to your point, “fake, presumably kosher”… it is precisely the kind of CoIntelPro op that intelligence would run. Not saying it is… but giant billboards that say “Secede” as opposed to … I don’t know, something inspiring. Everyone knows the connotation a southerner saying secede has (blacks in chains) so it has no hopes of gaining any serious political clout. But it would suck air out of the room for more mainstream patriot/Constitutionalist movements and provide a handy list to the Feds of people that might go for violent insurrection.
            Of course, you’re talking to some that wonders if AmRen (don’t mod edit this and prove me wrong please) is the same sort of thing because Taylor attended Yale and has exactly the kind of international background Skull and Bones spooks love. If he’s ever said directly that he was never in Bones or worked for intelligence, I would like a link to the video.

            Maybe to the uninitiated that sounds overly paranoid (well, probably not to this audience), but once you learn enough about the manipulation of media and counterculture in this country, nothing would surprise you either.

          • Long Live Dixie

            White nationalism is splintered and distracted already. Why would you think Southern nationalism would need to do something that white nationalists do themselves?

          • Rommel15

            Southern Nationalism is 100% fake because modern Southerners don’t have what it takes to morally and culturally resurrect the Confederacy.

          • Nicholas I

            And they’re generally buddybuddy with The K.

          • SoulInvictus

            I don’t care about the buddy buddy with “The K.” other than the fact that it’s documented that the more modern K (not the Reconstruction era) was heavily Fed infiltrated and operated. Exactly the kind of thing I was talking about that they do.

          • SoulInvictus

            A. I wouldn’t say 100% fake as some (LLD for example) are real people that genuinely believe in it.
            B. I don’t see Germans eagerly planning European domination again anytime in the near future, militarily anyway.
            Getting your back broken by the US military tends to have that effect. Dresden and Gettysburg are the kind of hard lessons that really stick for a while…

            I may disagree with LLD on that particular movement’s potential for success, but not the sentiment. The time for it was just more…say, the George C. Wallace era. That generation might have rallied to it.
            Even then, it earned Wallace a bullet.
            And that’s what I was talking about in my other posts. When you’re serious, you’ll get push back. At best, audits and intimidation, at worst, the Wallace treatment.

          • Long Live Dixie

            The time for it was just more…say, the George C. Wallace era.

            For the first time since that era, Southern nationalists are taking the message to the streets. I honestly don’t see any reason to talk defeat online instead of getting out there and helping us.

          • Long Live Dixie

            - Southern nationalism isn’t trying to resurrect the Confederacy. If you had spent even a few moments reading about Southern nationalism, then you would know that.

            – No whites anywhere have what it takes to create a racial state, thus by your own reasoning, white racialism is 100% fake.

  • Long Live Dixie

    The Confederacy and Old South weren’t white.

    The Confederacy was a white country with a large underclass population of non-whites. That does not equate to being a non-white country.

    They brought Bantus en masse to North America.

    The slave trade to North America was banned by the US in 1807 and the ban was continued by the Confederacy, which wrote the ban into the Confederate constitution. The ships that brought the slaves here before 1807 primarily originated in New England. The Confederacy did not even have enough ships to break the US blockade, so it certainly didn’t have ships and sailors to spare to engage in a slave trade that was already banned.

    They loved their darkies.

    You completely misunderstand traditional Southern race relations and you ignore the indisputable fact of white dominance in the Old South.

    In 1860, their free white population was either the minority or close to it.

    The figures you posted show this to be false. You also left out two states –

    KENTUCKY
    919,484 (79.6%)/225,483 (19.5%)/10,684 (0.9%)
    1,155,651

    and

    MISSOURI
    1,063,489 (90.0%)/114,931 (9.7%)/3,572 (0.3%)
    1,182,012

    Just like today.

    There is only one Southern state today that has a non-white majority. Before the North pushed the 1965 immigration law on us, that state (Texas) was overwhelmingly white. The blackest Southern state (Mississippi) is slightly more than 1/3 black. The whitest Southern state (West Virginia) is as white as Vermont.

  • Long Live Dixie

    PS, of the 8 million living in the South at the time of the 1860 census, 4 million were slaves, and 262,000 free blacks.

    The population of the thirteen states that joined the Confederacy according to the 1860 US census was 12,315,373. Of those, 8,097,462 were white, 3,953,696 were slaves and 261,918 were free blacks.

    South Carolina was never a majority white state.

    That’s relatively unimportant. The South was a hierarchical civilisation that used menial African labourers. A racial caste system had been established by the early years of settlement in the South. This system of slavery, heirarchy, and separation was not a threat to the integrity of Southern blood. It was the overthrow of the system by outside whites that put Southern blood in danger.

    Of the 19 to 20 million living in the North at the time of the 1860 census, under half a million were black.

    So? The North was dominated by anti-white elements from New England who were the political descendants of the Cromwellian Puritans. We don’t need to look far to see the damage these meddlesome busybodies have done.

    Now just who was protecting and who destroying the white race?

    Which side opposed anti-miscegenation laws, talked of uplifting their black brothers, armed and trained blacks, overthrew racial norms, encouraged blacks to rape Southern women, gave blacks the vote, installed black governors, and marched into battle singing ‘John Brown’s Body‘?

    • SoulInvictus

      ” A racial caste system had been established by the early years of settlement in the South.”

      At best, it was unbelievably shortsighted and ignorant of ancient history to think a slave caste system would be eternal. Knowing that, you’d be willingly creating a massive problem for your descendants.
      Aside from being obviously immoral to even early slave holders like Jefferson (even if the race is on a retarded children level of intelligence, “owning” someone is glaringly bad to anyone but a power mad elitist), it provided easy ammunition for destroying the South for the parties you describe above.
      Rather than lose that easier dollar and deport slaves, off to the meat-grinder of Civil War for the poor. Just idiotic all the way around.

      And you know I’m in no way painting the Northern elites in a rosy light. Yes, our guys were stupid and greedy… but unquestionably the northern powers were just looking for an excuse to break the back of southern independence.

      • Long Live Dixie

        - By the 19th century, there was much support among Southern planters for a gradual removal of the free blacks to Africa. I doubt anyone expected the system to last forever. We’ll never know how it would have turned out because equality came our way instead.

        – You might have a point about slavery providing ammunition for destroying the South, however the South’s power was in its agriculture. Without slavery, the South would have had no chance to compete with the North in the 19th century and probably would have been easier to conquer.

        – I’m not an economist, but I don’t think diverting Southerners from the jobs they already had to the cotton fields would have worked out. Who would then replace the Southerners whose jobs would now be empty?

        – The war was about far more than slavery. Ending slavery would not have ended or averted the war. The North had wanted to dominate the South since the early days of the misguided union and they would have made their move one way or another, slavery or no slavery. Slavery isn’t even an issue now, but Northerners still talk of destroying the South every time they hear about Southern nationalism. You should read some of the Northern blogs that have covered League of the South events.

        • SoulInvictus

          “- By the 19th century, there was much support among Southern planters for a gradual removal of the free blacks to Africa.”

          I’ve never seen any evidence of that. Definitely never heard of an owner deporting any voluntarily on principle.

          “I doubt anyone expected the system to last forever.”

          After that many years, I think most all of them were delusional that it would. Thus fighting over opening the territories up to slavery.

          “… however the South’s power was in its agriculture.
          Without slavery, the South would have had no chance to compete with the North in the 19th century”

          I don’t disagree there at all. Money and power would have shifted northward significantly. But as it did anyway, the net result was the same but with mountains of dead. So futile effort and wasted lives in the end.

          “probably would have been easier to conquer.”

          Poorer and less influential yes, burned to the ground and conquered, no.

          “I’m not an economist, but I don’t think diverting Southerners from the jobs they already had to the cotton fields would have worked out. Who would then replace the Southerners whose jobs would now be empty?”

          Slower expansion, and babies. Like every other nation that didn’t use mass immigration or imported slaves before them.
          It’s not any more complicated than that.

          It would basically be a tractorless version of the southern society that followed anyway. Not to harp on it since I know I’ve mentioned it to you before, but it would have been similar to my family’s sharecropping cotton experience.

          It took exactly one generation for them to go from dirt poor and picking for someone else, to owner of a decent number of acres and having their kids do much of the labor, some cattle, then branching out into rental property, etc. You know, prosperity and class mobility.

          Slavery not only screwed Africans, but millions of poor whites that would have advanced rapidly like my immediate ancestors given that same opportunity.
          Yet another reason why I loath the “noble” planter elite concept.
          It’s like peasant serfs admiring the nobles boots on their throats to me.

          “The war was about far more than slavery.”

          It was about an overall elite power struggle and differences on Federal authority, but anyone that pretends that slavery wasn’t a key element of that, is being disingenuous. I only wish they’d have cut it out of the picture to expose the naked totalitarian nature of northern elite aggression. It would have been an entirely different war then and in all likelihood, the north would have lost or imploded.

          ” Without slavery, what excuse is there? The truth is they don’t need an excuse – it’s just outright hatred of Southerners. Nothing has changed.”

          Yeah, I really don’t understand it. I mean, why. I get the power struggles of back in the day over Federal leadership and State authority, but grunt level hostility is baseless. Maybe they just hate any manifestation of identity like that beyond much harder to assail things like Irish or Italian pride.
          Don’t ask me…I just live here.

          One thing significant has changed though, now the anti-Fed (which is basically anti-Yankee/banker/industrial power) is nationwide . That’s why I keep harping about SN’s missing the boat on that wide, beyond southern region, support base.

          • Long Live Dixie

            That’s why I keep harping about SN’s missing the boat on that wide, beyond southern region, support base.

            There’s just too much in your last posts for me to have time to write detailed replies. Needless to say, I disagree with most of your conclusions about past events and we may have to just agree to disagree on those things. However, I am especially interested in your comments above, so maybe we can keep our discussion focused on this narrow topic. What support base is the Southern nationalist movement missing outside of the South?

          • SoulInvictus

            “What support base is the Southern nationalist movement missing outside of the South?”

            Tapping into the 1776 spirit rather than 1861, which the CSA was primarily attempting to replicate besides. It’s a much easier sale, even in the South. “The South will rise again” carries too much negative imagery as well as…well, failure. People like a winner, even among ideas and movements.

            Movements oriented around that are having some tangible success, and the net result is the same. It might not be palatable to SN’s since it uses revolutionary US themes, but that seems kind of dumb as even Confederates viewed themselves as a particular kind of “American”. Confederate States… of America and all that.
            It could very easily be marketed in such a way to still have a unique southern flavor but avoiding the shadows of the past. Playing up the Virginia dynasty comes to mind.

          • Long Live Dixie

            Tapping into the 1776 spirit rather than 1861, which the CSA was primarily attempting to replicate besides.

            1776 united us with Yankees and it ripped the South in half.. Southern nationalism is not attempting to recreate that fatal error. If our cause is to re-establish the American union of 1789, then we are not Southern nationalists at all. Instead, we would be paleo-conservative constitutionalists. Southern nationalism also is not attempting to recreate the Confederacy. As Dr. Hill has said, “The past lives in us, but we do not live in the past.”

            The fundamental message of Southern nationalism is simple: the independence of the Southern people in a Southern nation-state. People who support the principles of the Enlightenment and the American Republic have many places to turn, such as the Tea Party. Our target audience is different than theirs and our message is appealling to many more people than it did even five years ago.

            I don’t know what to make of your ‘push-back’ test. The League of the South has been classified as a ‘hate group’ for the past 20 years, it has been slandered repeatedly in the mainstream media and by Jewish organisations, it is protested against by Marxists at some of its rallies, and the SPLC even sent a spy to a rally last year (there certainly have been other spies that have not been outed).

          • SoulInvictus

            “1776 united us with Yankees and it ripped the South in half.”

            1776 was lead if not dominated by southerners, as evidenced by the Virgina dynasty. Even most of the non-southerners would have probably fit into the “planter” caste. The early US was largely “southern” up until later immigration, industrialization, and the rift over slavery.
            The split over which was essentially viewed as similar to the taxation without representation problem.

            “Southern nationalism is not attempting to recreate that fatal error.”

            SN doesn’t seem to be recreating much of anything, and there isn’t a widespread support base of southerners that would even be drawn to it. The same can’t be said of 1776, again, as they’re already putting people in office. Do you go with what erects billboards, or do you go with what agrees with much of what you believe and works. Realism, pragmatism, that’s all I’m saying.

            “paleo-conservative constitutionalists.”

            Which would perfectly describe the leaders that split from the Union. Don’t see what the issue is with it then.

            “Southern nationalism also is not attempting to recreate the Confederacy.”

            In symbolism, in geography, (from what you usually espouse I’d infer) in law. It’s a fine distinction.

            ” ‘push-back’ test. The League of the South has been classified as a
            ‘hate group’ for the past 20 years, it has been slandered repeatedly in
            the mainstream media and by Jewish organisations, it is protested
            against by Marxists at some of its rallies, and the SPLC”

            That’s certainly a good start. I like that. But then the Klan was in a similar situation and the Feds owned that almost outright. Probably still do if it’s of any use.
            Trust is hard to establish in this day of government weirdness, so I don’t know what to tell you.

            “why don’t you show up at the next League event in your area?”

            Because it’s not for me.
            Barring a national movement to support secession, it has no possible chance for success (which is why I don’t understand not participating in successful groups in that vein of reasoning instead). It likely has no chance to elect anyone to office within the current system to enact reform, partly because that doesn’t even seem to be a goal of the group and partly because even if it were, they’d get crucified even worse than Republicans already do as racists.

            So in light of that, it seems like protesting just to be seen waving a flag. Which I don’t get at all.
            I mean, do they at least protest heritage attacks like get mentioned on this site. That would at least seem to be a goal, raising public consciousness over erasing southern history and culture, that I could understand and get behind, but it doesn’t seem to be their purpose.

          • Long Live Dixie

            Man, that’s a lot of defeatism.

          • SoulInvictus

            No man lol…, unfortunately that’s the sound of reality and truth crashing into idealism. It’s rarely pretty, pleasant, or generally what you’d like to hear.

            Not anymore than acknowledging the demographic reality that, short of incredibly lopsided losses due to conflict or disease, whites will be enormously outnumbered in the near future and the unpleasantness that will result from that fact.
            Doesn’t change the ugly truth to deny it.

          • Long Live Dixie

            It’s not reality. The Southern nationalist movement has grown exponentially since 2011. It is hitting the streets for the first time in my lifetime.

          • SoulInvictus

            Let me take the reverse tact and see if this sells you, because this is how it comes across to someone who has not drunk the koolaid.

            A small group, with no substantial backing, that hasn’t accomplished anything tangible in 20 years, that has no effort or chance at electing and reforming the current body politic, without a nationwide consensus on allowing secession, without a large number of the people it claims to represent being likely to support it, living in the midst of millions of minorities and transplants that would be violently hostile to the idea…
            wants to somehow, secede, expel the North/Feds/most powerful military force on the planet, and set up an (I’d assume) quasi-ethnostate (in a world that would be violently hostile to it, i.e. apartheid S Africa) based around a culture that most of the regional population only vaguely identifies with now.

            Saying that has little chance of success is not defeatism.

          • Long Live Dixie

            - The League has been focused on nationalism for only three years, not twenty. For its first 17 years, the League was mainly a heritage group that talked about the past, attracted people whose average age was 50+, and wore Victorian-era clothing. Many younger and more radical activists have changed the League’s direction since 2011. The League has held more demonstrations in the last year than in the previous 19 years.

            – Southern independence is much more mainstream now than it was before Obama was elected and then re-elected by the North. For example, the secession petitions of 2012 would have been unthinkable a few years earlier. People are angry, fed up, and talking independence. The time is right now to begin guiding them to radical nationalism.

            – Overcoming the blacks and Mexicans will be relatively easy once Southerners have the political power to do so. The Yankee migrants will be a bigger problem, but except for the cities, they are the majority in only a few areas of the South.

            – Each Southern state has a military. A substantial chunk of the US military is Southern.

            – There’s no telling how things will play out internationally, but the South is far better equipped to weather international isolation than South Africa was. We have a much larger land area, a population that is ten times their number, and many more natural resources. It’s also possible that nationalism will domino, so we may end up with allies in Europe.

            – It won’t take much for Southerners to re-embrace their Southernness once the South is free. Southerners have only stopped acting Southern in the last couple of generations.

            – Every complaint or objection you have had could be applied to every other white population, thus giving the message that we all might as well just forget about white survival and concede defeat.

            – Southern independence is not a fantasy. When the USA inevitably weakens and collapses, the USA will break into ethnostates.

            – All I ever see from you is complaints. Southerners are ogranising for their ethnic interests while you sit here typing away about it. Do you want to participate or do you want to jeer at us from the sidelines?

          • SoulInvictus

            “- Overcoming the blacks and Mexicans will be relatively easy once Southerners have the political power to do so.”

            I would love to know how millions of blacks, mexicans, transplants, and brainwashed whites will be easily dealt with.

            “- Each Southern state has a military. A substantial chunk of the US military is Southern.”

            The key part of what you just said is “US military”.

            “- There’s no telling how things will play out internationally, but the
            South is far better equipped to weather international isolation than
            South Africa was.”

            If willing to return to poverty and a standard of living most wouldn’t accept. No imported uranium for nuclear reactors means no power for most of the south. No oil for fuel (think the US would let us have the Gulf oil, I don’t). And so on.

            “so we may end up with allies in Europe.”

            That was not a winning strategy for us last time.

            “Southerners have only stopped acting Southern in the last couple of generations.”

            And those are the generations that matter.

            “- Nearly every complaint or objection you have had could be applied to every other white population”

            Yes and no. In Europe, whites have an undeniable claim to their lands. And budding political parties obtaining real power that favor that view. Whereas in the US, shifting demographics will render that moot.

            It’s not defeatist or even difficult to foresee the US demographic path as firmly set towards a S. Africa/Brazil future.

            “- Southern independence is not a fantasy. When the USA inevitably weakens and collapses, the USA will break into ethnostates.”

            The dependence on unpredictable collapse is not a good plan. It probably will break at some point. But the aftermath will probably yield an even more militarized police state finishing the work of shredding the Constitution and even the potential for secession. Even if the Federal government were to completely evaporate, it doesn’t change demographic trends.

            “- All I ever see from you is complaints.”

            I can’t control or change the minds of millions of brainwashed whites. I can’t change the birth rates that set the future in stone.
            I can only observe, gauge likely outcomes, and prepare myself.
            Which I do.
            Am I standing on the corner, waving a flag, trying to empty the ocean with a tea spoon, no. But am I doing more to prepare myself and my family than most, probably.
            It’s not doing nothing, and pointing out the facts of reality isn’t jeering from the sidelines.

          • Long Live Dixie

            Defeatists bring nothing but hopelessness and despair to a nationalist movement. I feel confidence and growing support from the Southern public for our cause. For the first time in my lifetime, Southerners are building a nationalist infrastructure and are talking (successfully) with members of the public. Five years ago, there was no Southern nationalist movement. Now, there is a strong enough SN movement to hold a public event every month. A year from now, we’ll have further increased our strength and our support from the public. We are not yet strong enough to shake the establishment, but we are initely stronger than anyone could have foreseen only a short time ago. Where are you in all of this? Sitting behind your computer wringing your hands and telling us that it’s hopeless. Either roll up your sleeves and get to work or get out of the way.

          • SoulInvictus

            That is some strong koolaid… and in no way negated any of the laundry list of things I listed that makes what you’re buying into impossible in the real world.
            Your only response when faced with discouraging fact, is to say it’s defeatist and trying to deny my realism as being obstructionist in some way. If you could step back from the picture and look at it from the perspective of someone not in the religion (because this is beginning to seem very much like that kind of fixed mindset), I think you’d see it differently.
            I don’t expect to change your mind, but mostly my intention was to lay out why you run into resistance and that the idea comes off as a bit kooky and absurd.

            Which you obviously disagree with, yet fail to point out even one specific way of how the very real obstacle I pointed out, would be overcome.

          • Long Live Dixie

            That is some strong koolaid… and in no way negated any of the laundry list of things I listed that makes what you’re buying into impossible in the real world.

            I was not attempting to negate anything you said. This is not a debate club. You made your disinterest in Southern nationalism quite clear, so I see very little reason to sit here arguing with you about it. You can have your opinion and I will have mine. The things you call ‘facts’, I call ‘spin’, so we don’t even agree on the basics. I’m not interested in spending hours of my time trying to tell a very negative person who has no interest in Southern nationalism to completely change his way of thinking. There are plenty of people who are not chronic pessimists and are much more open to Southern nationalism. I’d prefer to have a detailed discussion with them.

            Besides, nearly everything you have said already has been answered at SNN.

          • Long Live Dixie

            The CSA was dominated by conservatives, not by nationalists. Trying to re-establish the CSA or the original American Republic is not what Southern nationalism is about. Southern nationalism does not want to repeat past mistakes of union with strangers. Union with strangers is not nationalism. 1776 led directly to 1861.

          • SoulInvictus

            You kind of go a little Engleman on this topic and nothing really seems to get in no matter how well reasoned.I’ll repeat what I said before though.

            “Southern nationalism also is not attempting to recreate the Confederacy.”

            In secession, symbolism, geography, demography, (from what you usually espouse regarding race relations, I’d infer) in law. It’s a fine distinction.

          • Long Live Dixie

            Not sure what you’re saying – what’s a fine distinction?

          • SoulInvictus

            That it’s virtually the same concept and that in it’s ideal form, would differ little from the CSA. It would be the CSA, with computers.

            If there would be a dramatic difference, I don’t see it.

          • Long Live Dixie

            The CSA was a conservative society that relied on Enlightenment principles of government. I envision something more radically illiberal for the Southern folk-state of the future.

  • Long Live Dixie

    I hope to hear of the League making inroads with the conservative heritage types.

  • none of your business

    Check the Occidental Dissent website. There will be a protest about the destruction of southern heritage at Ole Miss this weekend.

    Posted on August 6, 2014 by Hunter Wallace

    Change of plans …

    It is short notice, but several of us are going to Oxford, MS this weekend to protest decades of political correctness that has eaten away at Southern heritage at Ole Miss:

    – Renaming “Confederate Drive”
    – Appointing a “Vice Chancellor of Diversity”
    – Abandoning Colonel Reb for a politically correct mascot
    – Installing plaques to “explain” Southern landmarks
    – Banning “Dixie,” the chant “The South Will Rise Again,” and the Confederate Battle Flag at Ole Miss football games

    I’m willing to take a stand. Who is with me?

  • SoulInvictus

    “I wonder how long it will be until the battlefields of Gettysburg and
    Antietam are paved over to build housing projects, basketball courts and
    liquor stores….”

    I’d say, not long, except that Union dead were killed there as well. So that probably leaves the battlefields preserved. Places like the White House of the Confederacy and such, probably not so much.

    • http://countenance.wordpress.com/ Question Diversity

      “Stone Mountain gets dynamited”

      In a way, it has. If not dynamited, then mocked and disgraced.

      I don’t know if this still happens, but there was and maybe still is an almost nightly laser show on the carved side of Stone Mountain, for the entertainment of little Bellcurvii.

      I wonder what the reaction would be if Martin Luther King’s statue was used for a laser show.

      • SoulInvictus

        Hey now…the laser & fireworks show there is awesome.;)
        And not a dry eye on the lawn when Dixie starts playing.

        “I wonder what the reaction would be if Martin Luther King’s statue was used for a laser show.”
        Valid point. But to make a true apples-apples comparison, you mean to say if there were subwoofers mounted to the statues’ base and an impromptu block party was conducted. In which case, it would be the most popular statue in all of black-dom.

  • Long Live Dixie

    Why is there so much re-writing and erasing of american history these days

    Southern heritage, not American heritage.

    • PesachPatriot

      Please pardon my faux pas there, I did not mean to cause offense…but isn’t southern heritage part of american heritage? Washington and Jefferson were both virginians, but they are held in high regard by many northerners and westerners as well as southerners….

      • SoulInvictus

        You’re opening a bag of worms there. Probably easier to just read through LLD’s post history.

  • none of your business

    I have to agree with guest on the south and blacks. Long Live Dixie is my favorite amren commentator. I agree with everything he or she says, especially about medieval and early Christianity and our real enemies and just everything.

    I fully realize that the OFEs were brought by New England slave traders and that the main industry of the state of Rhode Island was the slave trade. But, it was the south that had the most use for farm equipment. A lot of the political ferment of the pre revolutionary period was caused by the rent a mobs of unemployed men and boys in Boston, NYC, Philly and other northern cities where the male slaves were useless because there were no large scale plantations and crops that needed a lot of bi-pedal farm equipment.

    Much as I respect the southern heritage and the confederate battle flag as the most beautiful flag in existence, most of the blacks were in the south, S. Carolina was always majority black and if the southerners had not bought the slaves from the New Englanders the black plague would not be destroying the country.

    As a northerner, I only wish the south had won and put up a soviet style iron curtain and kept their blacks.

    OFE pronounced OFEE obsolete farm equipment.

  • none of your business

    The real economic benefit of slavery is that a slave is property that can be sold for a lot of money. Even an older woman just doing housework was worth more than the average worker earned in a year. The slaves had children and the children grew up to be valuable property as well. I realize the slaves got more in food, shelter, medical care,leisure and everything than poorly paid White workers, but the slave owners got big profits when they sold the slaves. Especially in towns slaves often were basically rented out, like trucks and bulldozers are and the owners got that money. In fact unmarried and widowed daughters were often given slaves who they rented out. The owners received a comfortable income from the rental income.

    I have read some books about the war. Economists have figured out that the prosperity of the south rested not so much on king cotton, rice and sugar but the value of the slaves.
    I really don’t know much about it but blacks are a curse on this country.

    Non slaving owning Whites in the south were very poor compared to the working class in the north. Southern slave owners despised the poor Whites of the south more than they despised the black slaves. Remember it was originally rich southern Whites who coined the derogatory terms cracker and redneck. Redneck meant a White man who did farm work and got sunburned and tanned. Cracker comes from crackerjack originally a complimentary term for a mechanic,construction worker or manual laborer who was highly skilled at his job.

  • Gentleman Jim Crow

    Sure. What every college needs is more negroes. They are the cream of the intellectual crop.