Hunter Wallace, formerly known as “Prozium,” blogs at Occidental Dissent. Before he picked fights with nationalist intellectuals he had written a series of fairly good articles, which I’ll be republishing in this blog. I read the following article, “Sans Jews,” at The Occidental Quarterly.
If Jews had never immigrated to the United States, we would undoubtedly be much better off than we are now, but we would still have a racial problem. Although Jews are clearly a menace, I don’t lay all of America’s problems at their door.
(1) Racialism never put down firm roots in much of the North. States like Vermont, New Hampshire, New York, New Jersey, and Minnesota never had anti-miscegenation laws. Before Dred Scott, negroes were already citizens of many of these states. They had voting rights. There was little formal segregation. When Dred Scott was handed down, there were howls of protest across the North about the rights of black citizens.
(2) In the North, racialism was already in decline. Pennsylvania repudiated its anti-miscegenation law before the Constitution was even signed. Massachusetts followed in the 1830s. In every Northern state, Jim Crow laws were systematically torn down after the Civil War. Segregation in education and public accommodations was outlawed.
(3) The Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution effectively destroyed the White Republic that was created by the Founders. Negroes were given full citizenship, voting rights, and a federal guarantee of equal protection under the law. See also the Civil Rights Acts of 1866, 1871, and 1875.
(4) The U.S. federal government has been in the business of repressing White Nationalists since the Grant Administration. Witness the fate of the Ku Klux Klan or the White League in the 1870s. See also the crackdown on the filibusters.
(5) In the North of the 1850s, the terrorist John Brown was embraced as a martyr and a hero. Uncle Tom’s Cabin was a best seller. Frederick Douglass was a respected and admired intellectual.
(6) In the nineteenth century, the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives was already graced by anti-racist luminaries such as Charles Sumner and Thaddeus Stevens.
(7) Abolitionism grew into a mass movement. Whites are entirely capable of producing and leading destructive egalitarian social crusades on their own intiative. Why wouldn’t they have continued to do so?
(8) The Civil War was fought to destroy the Confederacy.
(9) Thomas Jefferson’s racial theories were controversial even in his day. Samuel Stanhope Smith (the president of Princeton University) was one his famous opponents. Smith was arguing for environmentalism and cultural relativism over a hundred years before Franz Boas started teaching at Columbia.
(10) Religious groups like the Quakers and Unitarians would still have been around to promote universalism and egalitarianism.
(11) The colonization of what later became the United States was botched from the start. The Southern colonies were founded with a commercial purpose in mind. Hundreds of thousands of slaves were imported from Africa which grew through natural increase into millions.
(12) In the South, the planter class was addicted to servile non-white cheap labor before and after the Civil War, and often at odds with white interests.
(13) The United States was already flirting with third world immigration in the nineteenth century. Chinese immigrants settled in the Western states. The Japanese were allowed to colonize Hawaii. Mexicans worked as cheap labor in the Southwest when Arizona was still a territory.
(14) The ideological commitment of Americans to liberal democracy would still have invariably clashed with their racial nationalism. Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt all wrestled with the issue.
3 comments:
Chechar, I too am an admirer of the work of the brilliant Hunter Wallace. I too am sad that his writing has declined into infighting, which makes Occidental-Dissent much less enjoyable than in the past. Hopefully he will get back to normal soon.
He makes good points in the essay you've posted here.
However: All authors have their biases, myself and yourself both included. HW also included. One of HW's biases is what was called in the late 1800s the "Lost-Causer": A Southern white that clings to Confederate romanticism as a paradise lost.
HW's emphasis in the list is clearly on opponents of the CSA. There are fair points there, but #11 and #12 and #13 need to be given more magnitude than he gives them: Business interests want(ed) cheap labor. The Chinese didn't enter the west because Thaddeus Stevens personally financed their ship voyages. They came and were accepted (until white backlash closed the door in the 1880s) because they worked for pennies when a white man would demand a dollar.
Instead, HW focuses mostly on alleged Race-liberalism by northeastern whites.
Consider this: Despite the alleged crazed-liberalism on the question of Race by northeastern-whites, that region remained the whitest region of the USA. Upper-New-England is still the whitest region of the USA.
Yet for all that we ended up in, say, the 1950s with a country that most conscious whites can only dream of, racially speaking. The difference is between liberals who boosted their own egos with a paternalistic attitude toward blacks and the Jewish led actual racial holocaust against whites that we see today. That change came when Jewish media was freed from all constraints in the 1970s. They always pushed genocide but were restrained by public opinion and the threat of government action (e.g., the Hays Code) in the past. Most of the whites who champion the American Holocaust today (those that count anyway) are upper middle class/wealthy people who go along for reasons of personal or class profit, or out of fashion, and what they go along with is set by the Jewish media. If that media had my views on history and society our laws would be very different from what they are today, and most of the whites you complain about would be agreeing with the media/me. It's just that simple. No one argues that the Jews are solely to blame for the disaster that has befallen Western Civilization, but they are, by far, the chief instigators of it.
So do you agree with something I wrote once at Counter-Currents?:
"Jihadist Muslims in Europe are the invading Orcs. But the real enemy is Sauron (the subversive Jew)."
Post a Comment