You’re F*CK-ING wrong! The way to fix things is to vote the right people into office!
The impassioned statements forming my epigraph were extracted from an exchange between yours truly and an elder (Boomer) cousin of mine some years back (2010 or thereabouts, if memory serves.). That my mistaken cousin was “beside himself” when he made those statements to me would be an understatement; he was literally yelling it at me rather than calmly making his case at a reasonable volume. Which was fine and all, because I tend to be one of those people who possesses an uncanny ability to keep his cool in such exchanges no matter how animated or impassioned (or even enraged) my interlocutor gets. Especially when it happens in a phone conversation.
Anyway, the point (my point) my cousin was angrily disputing in that exchange was that sometimes laws and government mandates are so egregiously wrong and immoral, and avenues for redress so utterly useless and ineffective, that the only option left us is to act in direct defiance thereof. Ol’ Shackleford and I share the same conviction when he says that he’d rather be shot in the head than take “the shot” or allow the government schools to turn his child into a tranny. But I digress. Since I know I’ve piqued your curiosity, I’ll share with you how the rest of the conversation went once I was able to coerce my cousin into calming back down:
Me: “Take a deep breath and calm down so’s I can talk to you.”
Cousin: (long pause) “Okay, I’m calm. Shoot.”
Me: “So, tell me: what are your thoughts about the founding fathers – lawbreakers or no?”
Cousin: “Hell no! They were good and honorable God-fearing men!”
Me: “I beg to differ. But they were in fact lawbreakers, who were acting in defiance of their King and what they deemed to be unjust laws and acts proceeding therefrom. Moreover, they knew they were lawbreakers and were subject to being hanged for it. You of all people should know this.”
Cousin: (long pause) “Well, my point is that if you’re going to act in defiance of the law and the government, you’d better be ready to face the consequences.” [That wasn’t his point, but I did not dispute it with him in the interest of staying on point.]
Me: “I never said or even implied anything different. In point of fact, inherent to my argument is that we’d better be as ready as we can possibly be to face the consequences.”
Cousin: “Hmm. Yeah, I see what you’re saying, and I guess you are right. Sorry I got so angry and yelled at you.”
Me: “Hey, no problem, cuz; thanks for calming down and not slamming the phone down on me.”
The conversation then moved on to other stuff more or less trivial and unrelated to that particular subject. My conviction today is the same as it was then, however. Not that I’m advocating violence or saying we shouldn’t be smart about it. Not at all. But do keep in mind, gentle reader, that there are worse things than going to prison or even becoming a martyr. e.g., spending eternity in Hell.
Moreover, if there is any truth to the old adage stating that “there is strength in numbers,” then “the way forward,” or at least one way forward is to come together as a people and begin to act in unison on the things a large majority of us tend to agree on. The inspiration for this little write-up comes from the pen (or, keyboard) of Father Dabney, wherein that true Son of the South and staunch Southern Nationalist provided his readers hopeful anecdotal evidence showing that Southern whites can in fact retake everything we have lost if we have the courage of our convictions, as displayed by the white Southerners in his story. But as I wrote in a comment to his article, we need bigger, more important, more effective victories to our purposes. I then went on to denominate one vitally important issue that meets these criteria. This is a subject I’ve written about “a million times,” so I know of that of which I speak. Here is the remainder of the comment in question, for your edification, dear reader:
When the Southern States began to reassert their native and Constitutional prerogative to control or regulate immigration within their own jurisdictions some few years back, the so called “federal” courts immediately went to work striking down our duly enacted laws, or of otherwise gutting them of their teeth, leaving us with legislation on the books utterly ineffective and useless to their purposes. What should have happened as a direct result is that the States in question should have, individually and collectively, told the federal courts to “take a hike” on this one, and let the devil take the hindmost. Indeed, that is precisely what we should be doing *right now*!, as we speak. Border wall and all that notwithstanding.
As Dr. Dabney rightly insisted and warned so many decades ago, the greatest threat to our existence and perpetuation as a distinct people is the amalgamation that cannot but happen when native Southern boys and girls are forced to attend government schools with foreigners and aliens subject to a foreign and/or alien jurisdiction.
Miscegenation is a problem, and a big one indeed, but it is not THE problem, nor is TikTok or any other “social media” outlet; the source of the problem is the mixing of the races in the government schools and in general society at large. One effective way to stop that existential threat in its tracks in lieu of separation from the broader “United States” is to, as I said above, tell the “federal” courts to take a proverbial hike on the immigration stuff, and to begin enforcing those duly enacted laws forthwith. Otherwise, we’re doomed.
Now, there are several reasons immigration restriction is such a vital issue to the South and our purposes as Southern Nationalists. A couple of which I spoke to in the foregoing comment. There are others as well. For example, this is one issue that Southerners are in broad agreement on. Indeed, internal polling consistently showed at the time that our immigration restriction bill in my state, H.B. 1804 – then touted as the “toughest immigration restriction law in the country,” boasted upwards of an eighty percent (80%) approval rating, and never waned by more than a couple of percentage points during the time it was suspended in the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals. That’s significant when you consider that the “conservative” presidential candidate can only muster slightly under a 2/3s majority in Oklahoma at the presidential elections, regardless of who he or his opponent is.
My recollection from back then is that the immigration legislation of other Southern and/or border states enjoyed similar internal approval numbers, but am open to being corrected. A second reason is that we’re clearly on the right side of the Constitution on this one, regardless of what the U.S. Courts of Appeal have said. Not that that matters a whit to our mortal enemies, but that’s not my point; it’s however important because it is important to Heritage Americans and “Constitutional Originalists” that they be on the right side of the Constitution. Most of whom don’t know what the right side of the Constitution is in many cases, but we can easily teach it to them on this particular issue.
Well, I could go on and on about this, but I should probably bring this article to a close and let y’all chew on the points herein already made. I’ll consider writing a follow-up article in the future and therein discuss other points in this connection. We can discuss it more in the comments in lieu of publication of that possible future article if y’all like.
God save the Southland!
“if we have the courage of our convictions”.
Ah, there’s the rub.
There are many who are with us in their sentiments, but wouldn’t dare stand beside us when it threatens their personal peace and affluence. The spirit may be willing, but the flesh is weak.
As an aside (as I’m sure you know) Dabney was also opposed to there being racial integration in the church. He cites well-reasoned and unprejudiced reasons for this, and I agree with him, but there are many Christians, with whom I have much in common otherwise, who are shocked and offended by my thinking here. I can’t make myself understood when I tell them that “Differentiation of treatment is not motivated by the difference of value of the two races, but of the fundamental difference of their respective natures.”
Don’t I know it! You wrote:
I flatter myself that, within my little circle(s) of influence, my opinions on such matters carry a good deal of weight by comparison to others. Without those circles, not s’much. Anyway, whenever those kinds of subjects come up within those circles of influence, I usually approach it by first pointing out what they already know to be true to begin with – namely that blacks and whites for example tend to think very differently, and therefore conduct themselves very differently on fundamental ideas and values and so on. Once we’ve agreed on that, then we can move onto the natural outcomes of this incompatibility when we start to mix the races in various ways. When a white girl stupidly gets herself mixed up with a black man, she has essentially, and for all intents and purposes, married his entire family and vice versa. This is of course why, within my little world, such a thing is a deal breaker with me. I don’t want to deal with blacks on that level, and, moreover, I’m not going to deal with blacks on that level. As I tell my kids, “I like myself too much for that.”
Thanks for the comments, sir.
This has been my experience for nearly 15 years.
Very few on our side will actually live the principles they claim if that means a hit to their livelihood or social status.
Those that will are already doing it and are likely paying that price every day.
The Covid revealed much in this as well. “I’m gonna get mine” and good luck to the rest.
The truth is most men just follow when the path is clear. Expecting otherwise is not just futile but dangerous. The smallness of our numbers will aggregate but those costs will be disproportionately levied to those men who move first and cut the path.
I don’t blame the men who value their social station and material life above their people. We have all been inculcated in that psyop. I do, however, expect him to be honest about it. To be forthright in where his principles end and his actual desires begin.
It is in that dishonesty where the cause is ripped asunder.
Anyone who has ever started a small business with a partner or few will see the same pattern reveal. Talk is, as they say, cheap. Divorce is expensive.
There are plenty of days when I wished I would have held my own status and income as sacred above the truth of our cause. I’d have a decent pickup truck and a roof that doesn’t leak. Ha.
My faith wavers greatly. But I remind myself that we all have own own path and reckonings. God works through all of us in different ways.
Thanks for the comment, Sir Lawrence. I’m in large agreement with everything you wrote.
Over simplified and distilled down to the lowest common denominator … the only thing that will save the south is forming “communities” then “connecting, networking and coordinating them,” which includes militias within each “community.”
The proverbial (((they))) are laughing at all of us with our freedom of speech we do nothing with. What if everyone knew the truth? Everyone went down all rabbit holes and became “informed?” So what … unless we were united … coordinated … networked. Use a prison as an example ( since that’s what we’re really in ), if each inmate knew they were railroaded and shouldn’t be there what could they do “as individuals?” Not a damn thing. But what if they united?
We the people basically out number the bad guys about 100,000 to 1!!! That’s a packed Rose Bowl Stadium filled with patriots looking at “1” possessed traitor all by himself in the middle of the field. That “1” traitor is poisoning us, setting us up for enemy invasions and literally killing us with a variety of tech. What are we 100,000 DOING about it? Well, we’re talking … and waiting for grown men in tights to come onto the field to toss a ball around ( cause I guess that’s more important ), and continuing to allow the “1” scumbag to kill us and our children.
When we coordinate and network and shut the stupid game off tyranny ends and liberty begins.
What are we waiting for? Think how stupid and pansyish we ( supposedly the greatest people in the greatest nation ), look to the world and especially to the evil freaks who themselves ARE coordinating! The time for “talk” and “relying only on votes” has been over for awhile now.
Carefully coordinate with other white patriots in your area … YESTERDAY.
Not to insult you by saying so, ST, but you’re kind of rambling in your comments above. Therefore I haven’t much interest in addressing every point you raise (we’ve been through all of this before, after all). However, I’ll address part of it, namely this:
There are plenty of historical examples to look to in answer to your hypothetical. E.g., Hitler and National Socialist Germany. Or if you prefer, go a little farther back in time and witness what happened to the South in the so called “Civil War,” and its “Reconstruction” aftermath. But if you insist on a prison analogy, I can cite a “prime example” of one of those too. In 1973, the inmates of the Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester, OK organized and “united” under the pretense that they were being “railroaded” in various and sundry ways, and demanded a redress of those grievances. Twelve years later a bunch of them organized again and decided to repeat the procedure, since it didn’t seem to work the first time. The end result at length of which was that TPTB over the prison decided it best, and as a final and decisive measure to prevent future prisoner organization and riots, to turn the institution into a “supermax” prison and put the inmates on 23-hour lockdown. I haven’t looked into it lately, but as far as I know that policy is still in place. It was at least just a few short years ago.
Since I’m feeling generous this morning, I’ll address one more item in your post. You wrote:
.
I won’t question your ratio but, speaking of “oversimplifying” things! Dang, man! I trust I needn’t remind you that that “1%” of traitorous scum you allude to owns and controls virtually all the media, controls the “education” apparatus bottom-to-top in the good ol’ U.S. of A., controls the economic system, occupies a disproportionate number of seats in Congress and the “federal” courts, etc., etc., ad infinitum. In other words, that 1% you’re talking about wields a great deal of power and influence, just as those hundreds of prisoners in my example above had to face the hard reality at length that they did not and do not control prison policy at the institution in question, no matter their disproportionate numbers compared to their overseers. See Shackleford’s incessant, yet welcome, reminders in this connection.
Anyway, it seems like you and I tend to talk around one another more than we ever come to terms on any given question, so I’m not really seeing the point to these exchanges between us, if you know what I mean. I’ll just point out that the purpose of the O.P. was to raise the question of whether we as a people possess the “courage of our convictions” on a thing we’re in broad agreement on and might actually be able to do something about (and gain a little confidence and momentum in the process) if in fact we did exhibit the courage of our convictions; that if we can’t do it on something we’re in broad agreement on, everything else is just a waste of time and bandwidth. I know what the phrase “distilled down to its lowest common denominator” means, but I fail to see how it applies to this article. Maybe you can explain it to me downthread.
Sincerely, etc.
Has the phony scamdemic not taught you anything? How can you possibly think that we outnumber our enemy 100,000 to 1??? The vast majority of the populace showed that they are nothing more than trained seals with absolutely no critical thinking skills whatsoever during that whole mess. They are not even close to being on our side. They are just as much my enemy as those that control the levers of power. If anything, we are outnumbered 100,000 to 1. And that’s at an absolute minimum, I’m sure the real ratio is far worse than that, sadly.
I’ve had this same conversation with my relatives, friends, colleagues, etc. They all want something done about X ( fill in blank). But are afraid they will get on a watch list…lol, which is hilarious knowing that our government regularly collects our data through third parties, or directly.
Always excellence in your writing, sir.
I’ve said many times that if I’m not on several watch lists, I’m pretty ashamed of and disappointed in myself. Most people I have any real interactions with at all might be accurately described as ‘salt of the earth’ types who know we’re in dire straights, yet who are deathly afraid of getting a visit from the sheriff and going to jail for minor things like, e.g., ignoring a summons for jury selection, or failing to answer the questions on an “American Community Survey.” It takes at least a modicum of courage to buck those directives. I can hardly see how those without that much courage at least could ever be counted on to stand side-by-side with us on the more important issues.
Thanks for the comment, and for the compliment, sir.
‘I can hardly see how those without that much courage at least could ever be counted on to stand side-by-side with us on the more important issues.’
Well said. Almost a paraphrase of Jer. 12:5:
“If thou hast run with the footmen, and they have wearied thee, then how canst thou contend with horses? and if in the land of peace, wherein thou trustedst, they wearied thee, then how wilt thou do in the swelling of Jordan?” -Jer. 12:5
Thank you, sir. I of course was not referencing Jeremiah 12: 5 in my musings on the subject, but see now (with your help) that mine was indeed a very apt paraphrase of that scripture. I also wish herein to make a distinction between *jury selection* and *jury duty* in my previous comment. My meaning having been that *jury selection* processes, as opposed to *jury duty* are almost outside the same category; that throwing a summons for *jury selection* in the trash is about as serious an offense as failing to stop twice at a four-way intersection. Same with the “American Community Survey,” all the bullsh*t associated for failing to do so notwithstanding. I’ve had this conversation with multible ‘salt of the earth’ types, and they all, to the man (or woman) display the same cowardice. Cowardice to the point that they’re not even willing to “test the waters” to see whether or not their fears of jail time and whatnot have any basis in reality. …
“The Southern Thinker’s (aka JoeyW’s, aka Michael”s) numbers are obviously far from accurate in this vein. BTW, I wrote “1%” in my iterations of Josey’s estimates because it was much simpler to nail it down to “1%” than to talk about his 100,000 to 1 idiocy. I mean, his would require a bunch of zeros ahead of the “1” just numbers-wise, and I ain’t into all that. You’re right to point out that we’re in the small minority on all of this. If, as you say, COVID nonsense didn’t serve to convince us of this, nothing else will.
“I’ll consider writing a follow-up article in the future and therein discuss other points in this connection. We can discuss it more in the comments in lieu of publication of that possible future article if y’all like.”
My vote is for another article. This was a good read and I’d like to hear the follow-up points.
I think we’ve all had convo’s like that with our boomer-minded relatives/friends at one point or another. It’s the usual mental programming, hard to break, but piece-by-piece it can be chipped away.
This part especially rings true, even though many forget it:
“But do keep in mind, gentle reader, that there are worse things than going to prison or even becoming a martyr. e.g., spending eternity in Hell.”
Thank you for the positive feedback on the article, sir. As Alladin might have said, “your wish is my command.” I’ll get on it shortly.
One of the things I like to do is talk with people about withdrawing their consent. I especially like to ask them to begin to observe the Sabbath day more faithfully, not to shop or eat out on that day, for instance. I think of it God’s own weekly general strike. Because I’ve heard so many excuses why that’s just not possible, I am extremely depressed about the likelihood of any real societal change at all.
How do you have a revolution when people who weren’t up in arms a moment before can’t be bothered to figure out a way to stop going to Chipotles every Sunday?
Hello, Jane. I’m 100% in agreement with you on your point about strictly obeying the 4th commandment. This would come as something of a surprise to certain persons who know me intimately, since I’m not exactly a “church-goer” per se. I’m not a church-goer per se at this point in my life because, in part, I tire of being lectured incessantly from the pulpit about my inherent “racism,” “sexism,” “xenophobia,” “homophobia,” and so on and so forth. I mean, heck, if I want to subject myself that bullsh*t (I coined the term “truthophobia” many years ago to deal with it on an intellectual level), what need have I to go to church to hear it, from a “pastor” who knows less about the gospel than I do?
Thanks for the comment, madam!