One thing that has been of keen interest to me as of late has been analyzing the differences between societies of the past and our dreary present, so as to not only trace their decline but understand the factors, when combined with others, that played into it. The subject that has been on my radar, specifically, is of the high society of the Old South and the important role that period played in ensuring stability and growth.
It’s no secret that our current “high class” (usually called “the elites” in today’s parlance) are generally detestable creatures for a variety of reasons. This was not always the case and it led me to an interesting question I’ve seen very few ask, what happened to our old aristocratic society?
Historically, and in the South, when we discuss the Antebellum society, we associate the high class with those responsible for steering a great deal of societal culture. And, this was typically the planter or “plantation class.” The men of this aristocratic class (which can be interchangeably used to describe the planter or high class) were the South’s statesmen, her generals, and Dixie’s political philosophers, generally speaking. Think of men like Jefferson, Lee, and Calhoun, plus many more.
Unfortunately, this important class of Southern society met its demise at the hands of the Union Army, as well as, Reconstruction that followed and the permanent death of the Old Republic. The War, along with the deprivations implemented on the South, stripped the aristocrats not only of political power and influence, but also their very material possessions and their ability to provide hierarchical functions and responsibilities. The destruction of both a Northern and Southern (combined American) form of a constitutional republic gave rise to our universal mass democracy with imperial ambitions. Such a new system cannot allow for an aristocratic order to lead it, only the demagogues can manipulate the masses in a democracy.
The planter class never recovered from the War, and agrarian republicanism languished without its stewards. While some small elements of the aristocracy survived, the task to destroy it as a political entity was complete by the end of Reconstruction. Despite some political gains during the Redemption period following Reconstruction, the planters of the Old South were no more. The fragmented remnants of the aristocracy that limped on into the 1900s were further erased due to family misfortune, marrying into Yankee bloodlines or abandoning their station for more personal comfort and decadence (all aristocracies are prone to degeneration).
Give pause to that for a moment and just think. If your forbearers had not given everything, you most likely would not be here reading this article. In the South, we love God, we love Dixie, and, more importantly, we love our family; so much so, that we will give everything if needed to ensure it survives. It is a sense of nobility left over from a time long gone. But, many can still remember that “old times there are not forgotten” is more than just lyrics, it is encapsulated into Southern culture.
Tracing the transition of the high society classes, which once ruled over various regions within the United States, but also the United States as a whole, we can see how gradually these high class societies were targeted for destruction by progressives (see communists). An aristocracy is hierarchal in nature; as such, it is antithetical to egalitarianism. The high class tends to set the trends of an era, with the people following them in an effort to emulate them; thus, creating a culture and, by default, “bringing up” the rest of society. The foundational bedrock high class society provides to the overall culture of a nation is important in the sense it helps fuel its identity. While it is not solely responsible, it does play a critical part.
Today, when we look at the so-called “high class society” what do we see? Look at the CEO of Twitter, for instance. In a recent appearance on a Zoom call during Senate hearings regarding Twitter censorship, his appearance was akin to a bizarre homeless person. Not only is this a slap to class and decorum, it’s a slap to everyone else because it reveals a deeper carelessness of the position he holds in society. Even if I do not agree with the man at all, there is no doubt that his power, wealth, and position affords him a position within our modern “aristocratic” class. The major difference between old and new is that our modern iteration of the aristocracy has zero feelings of attachment to their people and nation. Noblesse oblige does not apply to men like Jack Dorsey.
So, what changed? What happened to our high class society that once felt beholden to their nation and the welfare of their people? The answer is rather simple – the aristocracy was destroyed, either through force or cultural subversion, and taken over by progressives.
This was done through a number of schemes that benefited leftists – ranging from breaking up the aristocrats’ power and control, but also their wealth. In addition, progressives infiltrated Ivy League schools, traditionally attended by the children of the old order, for the purpose to manipulate, indoctrinate, and, subsequently, brainwash them to act not only against their own interests, but against their very country and people. Piece by piece, the old high class society was carefully dismantled to prod them down the path to egalitarian progressivism.
Without a genuine aristocracy, it is far easier for the communists and radical socialists to control the people. Without hierarchy, good order, and virtue, the masses will be controlled by those without their interests as a concern. This is why the detrimental impacts of modernity and egalitarianism must destroy the high class, so it can dominate the remaining classes.
God bless you and God bless Dixie.
I have seen three emperors in their nakedness, and the sight was not inspiring.
They, the several sovereign Republics, did bring themselves together into an “alliance” of confederates, ie. a “union” of sovereigns for common purposes, ie. the common defense of their individual Republic’s sovereignties’ against foreign powers invasion (aka England, France, Spain) and not a monolithic consolidated democracy (aka communism), which consolidated government, no longer a union, was formed by conquest by the enclave agent of the confederation (the constitution FOR the “United States”) some parties within the congress assembled, and the enclave’s standing army, … committing treason against the sovereign Republics by waging war against them (see ARTICLE 3, SECTION 3 of the constitution FOR the federal enclave) who’s sole duty is to act as agent of the Confederacy union of sovereign’s, …but the enclave was usurped for a global power and global governance of, by and for a foreign monetary power by the treasonous conquest of the several sovereign Republics!
Read the Articles of Confederation and it’s lawful derivative the constitution FOR the “United States” (congress assembled) (the federal enclave agent) … the enclave and congress assembled is not the lawful Confederation of sovereigns styled the “United States of America”!!
… PS, is not the monetary power still waging wars of conquest across the globe against other sovereign nations (classically defined!)
The Articles of Confederation is still the law of the land and they must put their former agent and invasive counquering usurper Frankenstein daughter to rest …
We are in this mess because nobody understand’s the “hierarchy’ of the law of the land, hierarchical representative republicanism), the Article’s of Confederation of sovereign’s Republics, it’s subordinate derivative the constitution FOR the “United States” enclave, formerly to act as subordinate agent for the Confederacy union styled the “united States of America” in congressed assembled.
The hierarchy is top to bottom:
the several sovereign Republics (of the land of north America)
——The Confederates union of sovereign’s for specific delegated purposes , the united States of America in congress assembled
————the sea agent of the soveriegn’s Confederacy union of delegated purposes, the “United States” an enclave on the Potomac, for use of the law of the sea, for common defense of the landed several sovereign Republics against foreign sea born invasive powers
Clearly it has been inverted …
If you understand this aspect “ Hierarchy of property and the free” you understand who is at the top of the hierarchy of the landed and it’s governmental form: hierarchical “representative republicanism”.
Final comment, between the true soveriegn’s and their agent, the Republic of the nation, a family write large:: https://identitydixie.com/2020/11/20/counting-counties/
Nice article
Always be cautious around those who do not have a blood connection to the soil of a nation, yet feel at liberty to preach to you about what it means to be a “patriot”. And always be cautious of men whose hands have never tilled that soil. A wise Austrian war veteran once noted that he trusted the people in the countryside more than those in the cities, for it is there that the true heart of a nation dwells — in those close to the soil, close to Nature (and by extension, closer to the will of God). Cities become breeding grounds for degeneracy, with even the best of cities hiding a deep, dark underbelly. They attract degenerates, too, as it is easier to be odd when you are surrounded by multitudes of unfamiliar faces who do not know you or any member of your extended family. When you add in good helping of “diversity”, it just puts that whole process into hyper drive.
Agree. The leaders should all invest some good sweat equity in this land, and bear their share of combat risks whenever applicable. Off they should be tied by blood as well.
There is an aristocrat I hold above all others, even Marcus Aurelius – Lycurgus The Lawgiver.
Although Lycurgus is more an apocryphal or mythological figure than flesh and blood man, he exemplified the noble spirit a man should aspire to. First and foremost, he was wise, he understood that decadence was as corrosive to kings as it was commoners. The Spartan values of austerity and strength would spare them from asking the questions you have asked in this very post.
Where did it all go wrong?
We became weak, soft, and acquisitive. More delicious foods, finer wines, softer linens. All the external trappings and finery doomed us to being defeated by merchants who can slate our neverending avarice for the finer things and novelty.
A king should be able to endure hardships and austerity that would atomize a lesser man – and should do it with regal grace and élan. Being that the old aristocracy has devolved into base hedonism the task of nobility falls onto the shoulders of those strong enough to carry the weight of leadership.
Much like Beowulf or Arthurian legend, a true king must be noble of spirit first and foremost, incorruptible by the world around him. The throne is wherever you sit, if you are only recognized as regal by a crown or title you are little more than a bureaucrat.
Never ask of others what you are unwilling or incapable of yourself.
Agree. We have enough fine things. Most of our people could use more discipline, fasting and toil. It would probably get the suicide rate down.
“The high class tends to set the trends of an era, with the people following them in an effort to emulate them; thus, creating a culture and, by default, “bringing up” the rest of society.”
So today it’s the low class that sets the trends. RAP music, tattoos, piercings, sagging pants, foul language … ‘bringing down’ the rest of society.
Society idolizes creatures like Obama rather than … who? Where are the Lee’s, the Jefferson’s, the Jackson’s in our day? Alas, they must arise from a self-reliant and moral people; a people, I fear, that are no more. At least not in numbers sufficient enough to make a difference.
Malachi, one correction. The lower class does not “set” most, if any, trends. The trends are marketed and pushed to the lower classes (just like drugs are) by the men behind the curtains, because the lower classes (because of poorer education, lower IQ and/or lowered social skills), are the ones most susceptible to actually accepting/adopting these new “trends”, no matter how degenerate or destructive they are to themselves, or to their ‘in-group’. For example, “gangsta rap” was financed and marketed by non-blacks. That is how it got big — not on its own. It needed a lot of money, marketing schemes, record label deals, and varying media sources to make it spread and become popular. Who has all of those resources? It was not the black community in the 1980s and 1990s, I can tell you that much. But, it served its mission in bringing the black communities down even further in crime, poverty, and drug usage, making them permanent slaves to the system. Gangsta rap, crack cocaine, and single-parent families (headed by women), all working hand in hand to serve a greater secret mission planned decades ago. Sort of like how meth abuse spread like wildfire in poor White areas over the past few years, coinciding nicely with the downturn in the economy. That is not an accident, and not merely a coincidence. It is well-planned, and put into effect on purpose.
All of the things you mentioned, above, did not organically originate from the bottom and work its way up. Very few, if any, of these destructive trends that you see in society today are organic, in fact. They are created in deep dark places, by very evil men, who are very intelligent and wealthy, and connected to the government at various levels. They are all created for a purpose, and passed on to the weakest and most susceptible minds to adopt. From there, it spreads among the lower classes until it reaches such a visible point that it becomes copied (i.e., marketed to) the middle class folks in suburbia, as cool, trendy, hip, etc. It is all directed marketing and manipulation. This started long ago. In fact, the whole hippie movement in the 1960s (along with the associated drug culture) was a big psyop by deep state government alphabet organizations to bring down the established, generally conservative, power structures in the USA (especially in the South) and Europe, and start to reform and reshape these societies to their own needs.