A Matter of Honor

When was the last time you heard someone mention honor? Probably not lately, maybe not ever. Men in the service have likely heard the term mentioned, but civilians and normies? Not hardly – at least, not the true sense of the word. They’re more likely to hear “honoring the contract” rather than, “honoring your family.”

In today’s decaying society, honor is at best considered a curiously quaint, if misunderstood, old-fashioned notion held dear by archaic eccentrics. At worst, if you upheld your honor or spoke freely about honor’s merits – you’d be called a jingoist or crazed reactionary. However, the more probable response would be a head scratch and a puzzled look.

Broadly speaking, honor is alien in our Hollow Empire.

But, it wasn’t always this way – certainly not in the South. Or, even in the North. Aaron Burr springs to mind as man who felt his honor impugned and settled a matter with Alexander Hamilton. Northerners used to hold honor as a worthy and noble virtue. Although, not with the same assuredness, gusto (and, yes, arrogance) of our Southern forefathers. In fact, of all our people’s virtues – honor is our most sacred foundation.

If we are to “retake everything,” as is one of Identity Dixie’s mottos, we must ensure that we, as men of the Alt-South, understand our cultural and moral bedrock. This Southern specific merit has been so marginalized, forgotten and negated by Modernity™ that it’s critical that we reintroduce it to our people.

It is my opinion that if we want to view a comparable civilization to the South, than we should look to ancient Rome – specifically, the Roman Republic. Our mongrelized and bastardized American Empire, that we currently are subjugated by, is more akin to the decadent and ill-fated late Roman Empire.

The Founders of our sadly fallen Republic were certainly inspired by old Rome – of this, there is very little doubt – and, the idea that the Republic’s founding is more related to ancient Greece is absurd (and purposefully so).  For instance, look to the political vocabulary the Framers used: republic, virtue, president, capitol, constitution, Senate — all based on Latin. The legislative process – veto, sine die – Latin. Our early political symbols – the eagle, the fasces, a leader’s face on a coin – these were Roman influences.

Contrary to the egalitarian dogma taught to our children, the Founders designed our fledgling nation to match the Roman Republic, one guided by an educated and cultured aristocracy. The idea of a “pure democracy,” where the people, no matter how uneducated they were, could have a role in government was rejected by our forefathers. We can plainly (and painfully) see the fruits of universal suffrage on a daily basis in the American Empire.

Further on this Roman connection – the Capitol was inspired by Renaissance models that, in turn, were loosely based on the Roman Pantheon. Thomas Jefferson’s stately manner, Monticello, resembles a Roman temple. The Founders’ sculpture and paintings were also inspired by Roman precedents. It is not unusual to see George Washington adorned in a toga – after all, he had been called Cincinnatus, Fabius the Delayer and Cato the Younger.

Image result for Washington in a toga
Washington

But, back to honor – the Roman concept of honor was dignitas. Every man who took on a higher political office during the Roman Republic considered dignitas as comprising much more than just his dignity. It referred to his “good name” (his past and present reputation, achievement, standing and honor).

By our Southern forefathers’ language, you could say honor – or its conception prior to the 20th century – is tantamount to dignitas. The Roman concept is further described as all encompassing of a man’s achievements and virtues:

Dignitas and auctoritas were the end result of displaying the values of the ideal Roman and the service of the state in the forms of priesthoods, military positions, and magistracies. Dignitas was reputation for worth, honor and esteem. Thus, a Roman who displayed their gravitas, constantia [perseverence], fides [trustworthiness], pietas and other values becoming a Roman would possess dignitas among their peers. Similarly, through this path, a Roman could earn auctoritas (“prestige and respect”).

If we look to Southern honor – we see clear reflections of Roman dignitas. Our Southern Code of Honor requires men (1) to be of high moral character, (2) to be of integrity, (3) have a reputation of dependability and bravery, (4) to conduct good stewardship over himself, household and  his People, (5) have the ability and enterprise to use violence to uphold his, or his family’s, “good name” and (6) not tolerate improper actions from others.

Dixians were (are and shall be) more intimately tied to their family, and community, (think People) and the morals and ethics that those society’s require from them. Honor is not compatible with a society consumed by hyper-individualism – it only flourishes within a common People with a common and universally accepted set of principles and virtues. Why do you think honor is so estranged in the deracinated multicultural American Empire?

Again, honor is only congruent with a common People – a people with a shared ethnic and historical identity and common ethics. Does an H1B-visa holder from India understand honor the same way a native Virginian and North Carolinian would? Of course not. Dixie is not his land and Her people are not his people. He does not participate – nor could he ever – in our communal and revered ancestry and bonds.

For this reason, and historically speaking, Southerners authentically and with verve defended their honor – honor for their lineage, honor for their people, honor for their reputation and good standing in their community – honor for their state.

In an atomized society such as ours, where civic responsibility is placed increasingly on the law, it is common for the concept of honor to lose relevance to the law. If man has the law, he has no perceivable need for honor or morals or ethics, for it is the law that tells us what is right and wrong.

Image result for mob in durham

For example, look to the destruction of the Confederate monument in Durham, North Carolina. Whole hosts of people destroyed public property – no one did anything to stop them. The rioters and onlookers (including the cowardly police) were without any semblance of honor – or basic decency and dignity. Eventually, the law was followed, but only because it was required – it had to. We’re not quite at the final stages of anarcho-tyranny. Not yet anyway.

But, to determine right and wrong in such a way is complete laziness. It is inevitable in a society of hyper-individualists also. Honor is incompatible with hyper-individualism. The hyper-individualist cares only for himself – not his People or his history. It is a selfish mindset that easily transforms to self-inflicted suicidal nihilism. Man, to be honorable, must protect society’s obligations (much like his family), and in a society focused on the “individual” instead of the good, the honorable option is at drastic odds with Modernity’s poisonous morality.

To do the honorable thing is to submit the whole of one’s being to the belief that there is underlying all human life and interaction, and indeed all of existence, a universal sense of right and wrong. This is coded in the DNA of Southerners. It is our birthright to be men of honor.

“Let danger never turn you aside from the pursuit of honor or the service to your country … Know that death is inevitable and the fame of virtue is immortal” – Marse Robert

One thought on “A Matter of Honor

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s