New England and Dixie – A Very Different People

In this short article, I will lay down the case for a separation between North and South, particularly between New England and Dixie.  There are two major areas in which I feel these differences justify separate governments and institutions for these distinct peoples.

1) Core Values

Yankee: Education, civic virtue, localism
Southron: Tradition, martial virtue, tribalism

Image result for Card Players, Fryeburg, Maine, 1865
Card Players, Fryeburg, Maine (ca 1865)

How do these core values manifest themselves?  For starters, the Yankee’s emphasis on education is the foundation of civic involvement, and thus of governments focused upon localities.  Therefore, government actors are seen not as foreign entities, but as members of the community upon whom the same social pressures which apply to everyone else can be placed.  The core values of the Yankee inform his view of government as an institution.

Localism influences the manner in which New Englanders vote.  Although Yankees pay more taxes on average than their Southron cousins, the Yankee’s tax dollars are much more likely to be spent in his locality.  Therefore, Yankees are much more willing to pay taxes than Southrons, or northerners outside of New England for that matter.

The Southron’s emphasis on tradition binds him to his family and his God.  Let us focus on the family bit, by asking this question.  How are families run?  Families are run as a benevolent hierarchy, not as democracies.  Considering the fact that the family is the basic societal unit of the Southron, as opposed to the community for the Yankee, this leads to a very different view of government on his part.

The US government, to a Southron, is not only a conquering and occupying entity, but also one which does not establish its hierarchy on religion or family.

In short, the optimal government for the Southron is a hierarchical one, and the optimal government for the Yankee is a localized and participatory one.

2) Predispositions

Yankee: Universalism, efficiency, irreligion, literacy
Southron: Recalcitrance, religion, aliteracy, honor

Image result for The Old Mount Vernon, 1857
The Old Mount Vernon, 1857

The Yankee predisposition toward universalism leads to a projection of the values of New England communities onto the rest of the world.  These values, which include civic involvement and a well educated populace, are perfect for New England but poisonous to other societies and cultures, especially hierarchical ones like the the South.

The Southern predisposition toward recalcitrance, it can be argued, contributed to her defeat during the War Between the States.  The South was sorely lacking in arms manufacturers, and was often forced to rely on captured federal stores.  Meanwhile, the North was an industrial powerhouse, and thus after years of bloody warfare conquered and occupied the South.

This Southern recalcitrance does not necessarily extend toward territorial ambitions.  The War of 1812 (1812 – 1815) and Mexican War (1846-1848) were both wars of conquest that were popular in Dixie and less so in New England (The unpopularity of the former conflict nearly led to the secession of New England from the Union entirely).

In conclusion:  Every white nation has positive and negative predispositions.

The goal of a government should be to channel these predispositions to better the lot of their people.

Set aside for a moment the impossibility of pursuing the interests of 300 million people. Set aside the current “United States,” with it’s anti-white government and incredibly diverse population.

One government cannot hope to best channel the predispositions and the needs of both southerner and northerner. We have been left, over the past one hundred and fifty years since the invasion of conquest of the South, with a government see-sawing between parties and unable to meet the needs of the citizens of her regions.

These different values, cultural traits, and predispositions inform the voting patterns of both Yankees and Southrons. They inform the optimal system of government for both ethnocultural groups. A different government for each would best suit the needs of each.