The Empire is dying and certain questions naturally emerge. These are questions which all who have lived in the 11th hour of empires ask themselves. Should we stay and fight for a homeland or flee the smoldering ruins like Aeneas to find a new homeland? The decision to stay and rebuild in the land of our ancestors is most likely the best path, not only because our ancestors are buried here, but also because there are few places we could flee to.
There are two main regions that many have considered could be our new home. One is somewhere underneath Slavic control, likely Russia, and the other is to build a New Dixie south of the border. In both scenarios, New Dixie would be intended as an autonomous land, but this likely isn’t viable. Undoubtedly, either “Castizo Futurism” or “Slavo-Aryanism” would be the outcome. Exogamy (breeding outside the in-group) would realistically occur within several generations. Additionally, the fact that Iberians see race with more gradation and nuance than those in the Anglosphere makes that exogamy riskier long-term in South America.
Various South American countries have been picked out as potential new homelands, but I’m going to focus on Brazil for two reasons. The first is that Brazil has an interesting racial heritage which should shed a light on why this path isn’t viable for us and why Castizo Futurism, more broadly, is a bad idea. The second reason is that Southerners already tried to build a colony in Brazil.
Brazil, officially, has nearly a 50% white population. To some optimists it means that America could still elect a “Far Right” populist, even after our demographics get worse (ignoring that Brazil has a parliamentary system, rather than a winner-take-all one). To pessimists, it means that as soon as the demographics get below 50% white, everything is lost, based partially on the fact that Brazil has 60,000 murders per year (meaning more murders than the USA, Canada, Europe, Russia, Australia, Northern Africa, China, Mongolia, Korea, Japan, and North Africa have combined). Both stances miss the point because that official number is misleading.
The reality is Brazil is closer to 20% white than 50% white. Edward E. Telles’ book, Race in Another America: The Significance of Skin Color in Brazil, explains this issue. Essentially, there is a lot of nuance about race in Brazil, but the long and short of it is that while 47.73% of Brazilians identified as white in 2010, that number is largely meaningless.
Of those who self-identified as “white,” roughly 10% were identified as “brown” by the interviewers. Likewise, of those who identified as brown/mixed, roughly 19% were identified as white and 10% were identified as black by the interviewers. Rather than going off appearance and identity, there is an actual scientific issue with how these people identified. When looking at the ancestry of self-identified “whites” in Rio, 48% of whites have “European only” ancestry (whereas 6% of browns have it). Additionally, 23% of whites have African and European ancestry, 14% indigenous and European, and 15% African, indigenous, and European (which Gilberto Freyre would likely say are true “Brazilians”).
What does all that mean? If Rio is representative of the rest of the country in terms of identification vs ancestry, it means that less than half of so-called “white people” are of only European ancestry. It also means 6% of the brown people would actually be what we would call white. Admittedly, it is unclear how far back they go for ancestry. Obviously, there is a difference between a person having a black great-great-great-great grandfather and having a black grandfather, but the obvious inference made with the book is that many “white” Brazilians are far browner than they would be in the Anglosphere.
Now, you may say this doesn’t matter for New Dixie. “Sure, Brazil may be mostly mixed, but the exclave will stay pure.” My question to you is “why?” That was not the case for the Confederados.
São Paulo has an Americana municipality and this is where Confederate refugees settled after the War Between the States. There are several important things about this area. While yes, the area was originally very pro-Confederate, and they still do an annual festival to celebrate those roots, many things have changed. The flag of the municipality used to have the Confederate crest, but this changed in 1998. This was removed, at least in part, because Confederados only make up 10% of the area and the people of the region are now primarily of Italian descent. Additionally, what was once an insular community spread out and intermixed with Brazilians within 3 generations. You can tell that by looking at the groups today. This shouldn’t be that surprising. After all, Robert E Lee’s great-great-grandson denounced his ancestor and heritage. Exogamy is less extreme than that.
To be completely fair, you can look at the videos of the Confederate festival and see that many of these people do still look like they’d fit in Dixie (though there are also those who look like they have little to no white ancestry). An additional question is whether they have any real link to their Southern heritage. We all know people who have some Irish ancestry who love St. Patrick’s Day but neither speak the native tongue nor have any genuine connection to their Irish heritage. Most of the younger Confederados apparently don’t speak any English, which calls into question the connection even more. They may play the songs, but just as me playing a Swedish folk song doesn’t make me authentically Swedish, nor does an 85% Pardo playing Dixie make him a Southerner.
Some, clinging onto some idea of a new homeland, may want to pretend that this intermixing isn’t an issue. However, this is just Castizo Futurism with a new label. The problem with that ideology is it requires you to ignore how tribalism functions and is essentially a right-wing version of “mixed babies will end racism.” It ignores the real history of inter-ethnic tensions. Anyone who needs a refresher on how that looks can just look at the War of Knives between the blacks and mixed-race people of Haiti. Brazil, particularly, is a funny pick for a homeland because of a common comment: “When people say, ‘mixed babies will end racism’ what I hear is ‘I’m completely unfamiliar with the concept of Brazil.’”
I’m not going to go into detail about the inter-ethnic conflict in Brazil today (as that’s not the point of the article) but rest assured, it’s present. You can go to Brazil, talk to Brazilians, or just watch various interviews to see that yes, inter-ethnic tension is there. Discussions over affirmative action in Brazil exemplify this tension perfectly. While there is a sense of being “Brazilian,” there is also racial identity. You can also look at South Africa to see how this inter-ethnic tension will likely play out in the long-term.
I also want to address one other issue with this and Castizo Futurism more generally. Do not forget that the white elite south of the border sent their lowest tier citizens to America. I don’t wish to be overly critical. I don’t think they meant it as a form of biological warfare or to intentionally harm us. However, they did send them here knowing and not caring that it would harm us. If your neighbor lets his dog poop in your yard so he doesn’t have to clean it himself, is he a good neighbor? No. So why be hopeful about building a future with him? That’s Castizo Futurism – allying with people who are indifferent at best and malicious at worst about our future.
A Southern man trying to make a good Southern plan.
Deo vindice!
Most of us don’t speak english or give time to study the reasons that cause the War of Northern Agression, but we’ve learned to preserve our indentity, our culture, our faith. The americans that travel to Brazil wanted a fresh start.
We always teach our kids about the south and the war, but for years we have suffer the same evil that you americans have to deal it: misinformation.
I don’t wish to be overly critical, but it seems unlikely you preserve those things. Your name, for instance, is the Portuguese version of “John” and your last name is either Italian or Portuguese. While there were likely some Italian and Portuguese people in the South before the War (and some who fought), you are a product of exogamy…that marriage outside of the cultural and ethnic group. Obviously, exogamy happens on the margins in most civilizations, but exogamy is the norm, not the marginal case, for the Confederados. You cannot say you are preserving the identity or culture when you cannot even preserve the stock. Additionally, while you certainly have the blood of Confederados, you have the blood of numerous other groups. As a point of contrast: I have some Swedish or Norwegian heritage but do not speak either of those tongues. I could arrange an annual folk festival, make sure everyone dresses in folkish Swedish garb, play their folk music, and sell merchandise with Scandiavian folk symbols on it. No one in Sweden would pretend I’m a Swede because of that.
Blood and soil, we only have one home.
Don’t waste your time and energy on some large scale version of white flight, that’s just cowardice by a different name. Your fantasy is just that, a fantasy, a coping mechanism for the weak, there is nowhere to run and abandoning your people and forcing your family and descendents to live as 3rd rate outcasts in a foreign land, to be hated if they prosper and scorned if they don’t, but never truly being of the people of their “home”, is as yellow as it gets.
If it makes you feel any better, there is no place to run, that’s why its called globalism.
Those who traveled to Brazil also did so because they did not want to live in a country where their rights were not respected.
Here they were able to start over, they were responsible for great achievements that are still perceived today.
what you see as a coward, I see as courage and character.
a coward is to let ignorant people spray paint and destroy statues of their ancestors while staying at home choosing which mask to use
There is no “let” about it hombre. Those cities are overun with foreigners and the Governments do not allow us to protect them or even clean them. You must remember that a lot of the people you think are Southerners are not, just as those you think of “American” are not, nor will they ever be.
You must come to understand we have been through all of this before, the National Guard shows up, FBI agents dressed as KKK arrive to act embarrassingly, Black leaders arrive with Yankee camera crews to brainwash the masses etc. Its a clown show whose purpose is to provoke us, we are well aware of the reality of the situation and have become savvy enough not to jump through hoops that they lay out for us.
White flight is absolutely cowardice. Its not a fighting retreat, its not a regrouping or strategic withdrawal, its running scared and leaving behind your people, abandoning them as we soon found out when there were no supply lines coming in from the rear, so to speak. They were not busy preserving our culture, making sure those left behind were not forgotten, persevering our education and ensuring our children where educated by us… or well anything really. The best I can tell they just forgot about everything and worried about themselves, their hunting camps and voting for the local Republican so their tax breaks went through, broadly speaking of course.
Which is also another reason we don’t show up to the monuments, as has been discussed here before, those hiding behind us in the woods need to be made to feel the lash and chains we live with more heavily. They need to have the comfort their cowardice afforded them stripped away, pivoting and allowing the hordes to run into their country clubs and subdivsions unimpeded serves that purpose well, and no I don’t feel sorry for them or have any stirrings to defend them whatsoever, not anymore.
I could go on, but white flight is cowardice, by and large, I have lived through it multiple times and it is just the self serving serving themselves, our people be damned. It has led to the upside down situation we find ourselves in now, the best of us cannot orgianze the fight or much of anything for that matter, and those who can do not and we would not welcome them anyway at this point. Those who can won’t, those who would can’t. All due to white flight and the abandonment of those left behind.
This article is proof of the fanatical attachment to “Whiteness” that now dominates Southern Nationalism. Whiteness simply will eventually cease to be dominate, and there isn’t a damn thing you can do about it. Whether you stay in Dixie or you leave to another country the end result will be the same.
If all the people of Alabama were magically replaced overnight with Japanese, would Alabama still be (ethnically, culturally, etc.) Alabama?
Nobody on this page is in a position of power to stop interracial marriage or mixing though. Face the facts Jim Crowe is not coming back, Blacks aren’t going back to Africa, Mexicans aren’t going back to Mexico, and people fall in love with who they fall in love with. The hardcore racialist worldview is a tiny fringe subculture now.
Since no one on this blog has any institutional power to save our people from demographic displacement and cultural destruction, what would you recommend we do to ensure the Southern people survive?
IF you have the power then re-institute Jim Crow. Holler at me when it’s the law of the land. I’ll wait.
You misunderstand the article if you think it’s an attachment to “whiteness.” The concern is the destruction of the people. Mass exogamy in Russia would lead to the same result (the destruction of the ethnic group), only without as many additional negative after-effects as in a brown or black country (such as the resulting offspring being generally of lower IQ).
I fail to see how it is “fanatical” to not want to see your ethnic group cease to exist. Would you react the same way to Jews who want to maintain their people, Japanese who want to maintain theirs, or of any other group’s desire to exist?
Admittedly, Whiteness is valuable as a predictor. Just as Asian-ness or blackness. It should come as no surprise that Asian societies have low crime and brown ones have high crime. To dismiss these trends is to dismiss reality.
I’m all for protection my heritage and culture, but the ideas like bringing back Jim Crowe, and making interracial marriage illegal again, or the South being a Whites only homeland are a waste of thought processes. My point being is that “Who” is Southern is going to have to include people that are not White. If you can’t accept that then it’s time for you to change your ideas.
If a Korean, Turk, and Ethiopian moved to Mobile, would they be “Southern”?
Conversely, if I relocated to Ankara, would I be “Turkish”?
I’m talking about non-White Southerners who are already here. I’m against mass immigration as it is something that can be halted. Though I would say a small amount of assimilation is possible.
I don’t know if you are arguing in bad faith or just very confused, but I will given you the benefit of the doubt for the time being. Who is Southern does not have to change simply because of the fact that other ethnic groups live here or have lived here a long time. You can look at Europe, Asia, and Africa to see that while multiple ethnic groups may inhabit the same area, in some cases for as long as the majority ethnic group of the country, that does not make them one ethnic group. The Lemkos in Poland one such example, but there are numerous others (you also would not want to call them just “Polish”). Now what can or should be done about out-group people who have lived in the South for a long time is a tough question and one I see no point in trying to answer because that’s such a distant question. We must win first. However, to claim that we must redefine what it means to be Southern to be more inclusive of other ethnic groups is frankly a call to genocide the Southern people and is completely unacceptable.
I highly recommend these links for the truth about race from a traditional Southern viewpoint. Today’s contemporary SN movement overwhelmingly has been highjacked by people with a WN worldview and views that are not consistent with traditional Southern worldview. The Old South did not have a concrete racial determinist view. There was flexibility with the social hierarchy in the pre-Reconstruction South. The federal government via Yankee occupation forced the segregation of the races in the South. The Old South was integrated and had the Confederacy won it would have maintained integration in a multi-racial society though still with a hierarchy. I have yet to hear these truths on this site because of your WN bent. It’s actually sad. Educate yourself with the podcasts and links.
https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/lectures/what-was-the-construction-in-reconstruction-by-eric-richardson/
https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/lectures/the-victors-definition-of-race-how-radical-reconstruction-divided-southern-society-along-the-color-line-by-eric-richardson/
https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/blog/the-strange-career-of-segregation/
https://youtu.be/PHT6T-nyNfE
https://shotwellpublishing.com/catalogue/segregation/
Unfortunately, I cannot reply directly to Kevin’s most recent comment directly, but regarding the links posted, they don’t say what he implies they say. The point of this article was to demonstrate that fleeing the south would destroy our cultural identity, largely through the process of exogamy, using Brazil as an example. Nothing shared contradicts that claim. Those articles and clips shared by Kevin merely point to things such as blacks and whites both fighting on the side of the confederacy (true) and a racial dynamic and definition different in the antebellum period than in reconstruction or today (also true).
They do not point, as Kevin seemingly implies, to a notion of the distinction between white and black being meaningless.
Additionally, even in the most liberal historical accounts cited, it is clear that there were strong notions of racial identity in the antebellum South. Admittedly, the rules were not as harsh as the later “one-drop” rule, but still, the norm was to exclude people from white society who 12.5%-25% black (depending on the state).
The fact that some people believed that a post-war Confederacy could have been multiracial, while interesting, is also irrelevant. We have centuries of history to demonstrate that such polities are weak and end up fracturing along ethnic lines.
Whether you wish to look at the weaknesses of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Ottoman Empire, or any other multiethnic polity, it is a historical fact that such polities are weaker than ones which maintain either homogeneity or clear division on regional lines. It is also a historical fact that the tribal identities emerge as more significant than the “civic.” This is a lesson learned as far back from Arminius in Rome.
I always find it far too funny to listen to someone who even as he speaks is being lead around by the balls like a serf, watching his family be farmed like cattle, burderned with debt, blown to pieces, replaced and controlled to the point of being nothing more than living puppets, all so that a miniscule population of people, that don’t even live there can have an ethno state on the other side of the planet, then lecture people that are already living in their own home on the impossible dream of reclaiming it. They don’t even really bother to hide it, the whole world is laughing at you 😂
“Just roll over and genocide yourself racist, its pointless to fight.” 😂 Ok, I dare you to tell your greatest ally that Amerifat.
Kindly, fuck off back to Twitter with that nonsense. Reclaiming our home is child’s play compared to what they are doing to you on a daily basis.
The ppl in the header pic may have some small quantum of Dixian blood but the ones I can see good all look Latin to me. Brazil, including the Confederados is a case study in why we should raise our children against exogamy. Can it be tolerated on some small (and I do mean very small) scale? Why yes, of course. I’m not going to make the case scientifically because I’m not in the mood right now and nobody cares anyway, but at the micro (Let’s make that pico) level it could actually be a good thing. But we have already had enough mixing in the last 50 years to serve us for another ten thousand years, so that is moot anyway.
By contrast, look at how well the Amish have maintained their purity. Unfortunately they are also bottleneck victims due not to their inbreeding in America, but such a small founding population of ppl that were already a bunch of cousins to begin with. Even despite the bottleneck they are thriving. They don’t have more genetic diseases overall, but more of some diseases and less of others, and btw, their suicide rate is quite low, as if they were doing something right.
Even the Jews did pretty well considering their 2k years in diaspora (and some exiles in the OT).
Moral: Keep the ethnic divide wide (preferably a different religion), group identity high w taboo on exogamy, and keep young women far out of sight of outsiders. I’ve dealt w Amish before and unless it’s a public facing business you won’t be getting close to any women. You drive up on their property and the women quickly escort the children into the house and the men come out to talk to you. They aren’t fools.
“I’ve dealt w Amish before and unless it’s a public facing business you won’t be getting close to any women. You drive up on their property and the women quickly escort the children into the house and the men come out to talk to you. They aren’t fools.”
Husbanding community resources.
@Ethan at the end of the day what this link says is all that matters.
http://fatherjohn.blogspot.com/2017/08/the-sin-and-heresy-of-racial-separatism.html?m=1
That is a laughable argument. Others have addressed why that argument makes little sense on the site and on the podcast. One reason is it obviously doesn’t mean what you want it to mean because *if* there is “neither Jew nor Greek, male nor female” means we are all the same/race doesn’t matter, then it also means that there is no difference between men and women. Again, others have addressed that argument at length who have a far greater scriptural background than I (again, both in other articles and in the podcasts).
I’ve listened to the arguments made on other podcasts and articles. I am not convinced because Christianity does not support racial separation, racial purity, or supremacy, etc…..
Read the entire article and the statements made by the church council and saints. Racial separatism is a sin and heresy period!!!! The one verse you picked out is not then entirety of the link either. It means that in Christ there is no distinction in the spirit. Spiritual unity takes precedence over anykind of unity in the flesh. It leaves no room for racism.