TheSouthernNationalist

I salute you Trace Adkins, keep up the good work and never let them get you down.

TheSouthernNationalist

Seems they pulled the internet kill switch on this story or it's just a bad link. Admin, can you provide an alternate link?

TheSouthernNationalist

To answer the writers question I would have to say it depends on which part of North Carolina you are talking about. A lot of this fine State has been invaded by those people from west virgina, ohio, wisconsin,new york,pennsyvania,washing dc,connecticut, and probable a few more yankee states as well. These people bring with them their culture and way of life and expect us natives to be like them, I say HELL NO!! I speak the truth and will always defend what we fought for!! If they don't like it they can move back up north and take that filthy yankee rag back with them!! My Grandchildren are being instructed in the truth and hopefully they too will continue the good fight!! Deo Vindice!!!

LabMan

Takimag.com website continues to impress,glad to see that admin.here feels the same way!

No Comments Yet.

JamesinUSA

Do I smell the faint acrid oder of black powder?

Luke

May I strongly recommend the December 27th, 2011 Voice of Reason Network podcast of the Tom Sunic interview with the always outstanding Professor Kevin MacDonald? I'm about half way through it, and it is exceptional. They discuss the idea of a White Ethnostate at several points during their discussion, although neither Sunic or MacDonald said what needed to be said regarding the residency requirements for living inside this White Ethnostate. Which is, namely, there will be zero tolerance for self-hating White liberals or for Whites who harbor these suicidal notions of cross-racial group altruism. This is something that must be non-negotiable. Race must trump everything. Betraying the White race must be grounds for permanent eviction from the new White homeland. End of story. Don't let the door hit you on your fanny on the way out, pal.

yancey ames

The comments on the southerners being largely Scots and Irish are well founded. These people were also known for their endless clan feuding and tendencies to fight in their home lands.I think this had something to do with the belligerence of the Southern secessionists although I will not deny that the provocations of the psychopathic Abolitionists added a lot of fuel to the fire. I will also comment that large numbers of ordinary Southerners were opposed to secession, particularly in the border states like Kentucky and North Carolina. Roughly half the southern population, according to polls of the time, did not want to fight a war for the planter class. I am not a liberal of any sort although I am a Yankee and intend to remain so. As to the eruption of the war I think it was a disgrace. Lincoln was not blameless, although he was always willing to tolerate slavery in the South if it did not add slave states in the expanding west. He also opposed northern laws, especially in his home state of Illinois where escaped slaves were exempt from return to their owners.Lincoln wanted them remitted so as not to unnecessarily antagonize the South. Was Abe Lincoln therefore a good guy? I would hardly go that far. The Civil War was one of those things that happened mainly because the shouting preceded the shooting. In that respect it was much similar to World Wars One and Two. When men disagree too vehemently and the issue cannot be compromised, men (and women) will always resort to the ultimate recourse.I can't say I'm sorry that the South lost but the issue before us now is whether white America shall be lost. As to the great War Between the States,may the dead of both sides rest in peace.

Luke

Brother Yancey: The purported agreement between White Yankees and my Southern Confederate ancestors on the undesirability of sharing the same geographic territory with blacks that you cite - tends to overlook another, very important cultural - and I suspect, genetic - difference between Yankee born Northern Whites and Whites born and raised in the beloved Southland. As you are probably aware, the South was populated by huge numbers of Scots and Irish - Celtics - who tended to excel in the area of agriculture and other endeavors that were suited to warmer climates. This important difference between the Whites in the North and those in the South, I believe, played an important role in how these two biologically different, but similar, ethnic strains of White European people formed their opinions on racial matters. Northern Whites of that era, or even today for that matter, as you say, weren't any more enamored with living among large numbers of blacks than were the vast majority of White Southerners. The key difference is that Northern Whites are afflicted with a disease called competitive altruism, or just plain old fashioned racial hypocrisy. Yankees love to sit on their high horses and lecture White Southern people on how they treated blacks and declare their indignation over perceived inequalities and over the once established pecking order, but these same White Yankees will do just about anything to avoid living in an all-black or majority black community. So, in essence, Northern Whites were then, and still are, raving, two-faced, hypocrites when the subject involves race. Today we have largely replaced the derogatory term "Yankee" with the equally derogatory term "White liberal", but these two vile creatures are one and the same. Personally, I can not forsee any future substantial alliance between Northern Whites and Southern Whites - although I wish I could be proven wrong about this opinion. Each race of human on the planet has its percentage of defectives, and White liberals are most certainly ours. The good news, however, is that White liberals have lots of abortions and are more prone to miscegenate, and are heavy users of various sorts of drugs and tend to live their lives in the most degenerate and dysfunctional manner possible - so, nature will eventually solve this problem for the rest of the sane and racially healthy Whites.

yancey ames

This is an absolutely brilliant article that every American white should be required to read. It emphasizes in exactly the right way the key point: our ancestors, both Northern and Southern, were united on the undesireability of whites and blacks living together on an equal basis. They only disagred on the preserving of the Union. I think the North was right in that respect, although the South had good Constitutional reasons for its position.The Southern position simply ignores the big power realities of the time.The French under Maximillian were in Mexico; the British very nearly intervened on the Confederate side. The U.S. was not a unified continent at this point and to have split the US up into two nations would very likely have split America into two weakened halves to be played off, one against the other, by the rival European colonial powers. That would have inhibited US western expansion and increased war threats considerably. I know I shall be attacked by the Southern wing of the Nationalist Times for writing these things but I think they need to be said. There is too much wishful thinking in the Confederate position.However, there is so much commonality in the southern and northern positions on race that this is what needs to be emphasized, not a political issue long since decided. And, along the same lines, although the South detests Abraham Lincoln, he was a white supremacist who worked long and hard, both before, during and after the war, to deport blacks to Liberia, Central America, the Carribean, or any other place he could dump them. Finally, before the Southerners jump all over my Yankee heresies on the Civil War, please remember that I am not William Tecumseh Sherman, I have no intention of burning Atlanta a second time (I would rather burn Mexico City on a southward march)and I would rather war with more up-to-date enemies than to refight issues that were hotly debated at the time and have remained hotly disputed ever since.

Luke

Divisions still exist because the evil side 'won', at least on paper. They sure didn't win in any moral or righteous sense, and I can flatly state that I despise the meddlesome, arrogant, intrusive, obnoxious Yankees today every bit as much as my Confederate ancestors hated them in 1861. Lee was a fool for not pursuing a guerrilla war, which would have been deadly effective and which could have gone on for a decade or longer, until every last Yankee rat was either in the ground or had high-tailed it back over the Mason-Dixon line.

JamesL

All of this bickering is really getting us off the point. I thought we were supposed to be in this together. No one here is going to change anyone elses mind. That much is obvious. Lets agree to disagree and get back to fighting the real enemies of our people, and not each other.

JamesL

Dont know how much more of this yankee attitude I can take before my head explodes! Yancey, I'm glad you love the north so much. Really am happy for you, but there are many of us who love the south just as much. We dont care to hear you or anyone else bad mouth where we live or who we are. I'm sure you would feel the same. Trust me, after spending more than ten years driving a tractor-trailer over the road, there is plenty bad I could say about the north, but I'll keep it to myself. Would appreciate it if you would do the same about my home. Besides, all this bickering is really getting us off the point. I thought we were supposed to be in this together. Lets just agree to disagree so we can get back to fighting the real enemies of our people, and not each other.

yancey ames

Since when did I ever support America's overseas wars for Israel? Did you ever read anything I ever wrote in the Nationalist Times? And for your information, the man you Southerners fought and vilified did try to do something about the blacks that you cotton picking idiots brought into the country in the first place. IN DEFENSE OF HONEST ABE Southern propagandists have presented a generally unfavorable picture of Abraham Lincoln. He has been accused of having provoked the war, of interfering with a divine right of secession and of being a hypocrite on the subject of slavery. All of this is demonstrably untrue. Lincoln�™s position on slavery was consistently misrepresented by the press. Lincoln never had the slightest intent of abolishing slavery in the slave states; he only insisted that slavery not be permitted to spread westward. When the northern states passed “free men” laws to prevent the repatriation of escaped slaves, Lincoln sought to repeal such laws so that the slaves could be returned to their rightful owners. Lincoln was an unabashed white supremacist. Again and again in his Illinois political debates with Stephen Douglas, Lincoln denounced any suggestion that the inferior black race should be placed on an equal footing with the superior white race. He dreaded the thought of racial crossing and feared miscegenation as a threat to the survival of the white race. Lincoln�™s statements to this effect are so numerous and well documented, both before, during and after the war, that it is a tribute to historical white wash that his real views have been erased from public consciousness. Early in the war in 1862 Lincoln invited a delegation of black leaders to the White House to listen to his proposals for deporting blacks to the Caribbean or Africa. Honest Abe considered numerous plans along these lines, including a plan to send blacks to the Chiriqui region in Central America, a failed attempt to send them to islands off Haiti and encouraging immigration to Liberia on the west coast of Africa. Lincoln has received much criticism from Southerners over his Emancipation Proclamation. They denounce it as purely hypocritical, freeing the slaves who were under Southern control but not freeing the slaves who were under Northern control. But this objection misses the point. The Emancipation Proclamation was designed to disrupt the Southern war effort by undermining the loyalties of the blacks who were manning the Confederate arms and munitions industries. In that, it succeeded admirably. Lincoln continued with his plans for black deportation after the war. He unsuccessfully solicited the British Empire to allow black migration to Guinea and other South American colonies. Lincoln was literally obsessed with solving America�™s “Negro problem” and gave it his highest priority until his death by assassination. There were major impediments to Lincoln�™s scheme aside from the reluctance of foreign countries to accept black deportees. The radical Republicans wanted to use black voters to intimidate and control the defeated white Southerners. Business leaders of the emerging industrial economy wanted cheap black labor. Lincoln faced a daunting and difficult task. But he was determined that the task should be accomplished �" for the future good of white America. Many legitimate criticisms of Lincoln can be made. He was a wartime dictator, he did suppress civil liberties and the freedom of the press, he did allow Northern armies to commit large scale atrocities. But all this pales beside one fact �" Abraham Lincoln was preoccupied with one overriding concern �" ridding the white United States of its black plague. Even more than preserving the Union, Lincoln wanted a future America of racially homogeneous whites. Let us consider the problems which would have been avoided had he succeeded. Had blacks been expelled from America, then the hordes of Communist Jews who poured into the United States in the 1880�™s would not have been able to use the “Negro problem” to promote their aims. There would not have been a gigantic “Civil Rights” campaign to uplift the Negro from presumed white oppression. There would never have been created a vast government bureaucracy to deal with this so-called problem and no federal interference with state and private property rights Neither would other groups, such as Hispanics and feminists, have been able to jump on the Civil Rights bandwagon. In short, America would be a free white nation. Abe Lincoln was a merciless man in wartime. But there was no reason to suppose that he would have been any less merciful in time of peace. It was Thaddeus Stevens and the radical Republicans who imposed Reconstruction, not Lincoln. Abraham Lincoln was no saint. But he was a white supremacist, a preserver of the Union and the man who worked harder than any other to solve America�™s racial disease. He deserves to be remembered and honored, although for reasons much different from those the Zionist media suggest.

anonymous

I'm sure I don't need to remind SN that Lee later stated that had he known what the Union would do to the South ("reconstruction") he would have fought to the death. Yanc, I'm afraid it's the USA that's the lost cause now. Americans have been talking about taking it back for a century, to no avail. It's beyond the possible now. Bye bye Soviet "Union". The smelly carcass will eventually be broken up, that different peoples in different regions can fight for their own. Oh, and Yanc, look into August Belmont, Wall Street, Ellis Island, things like that. Hell, at least Southerners put up a fight for their country. What's the matter, don't you have another country to invade right now? Your USA is the most hated empire on earth, except maybe for its employers in Israel.

TheSouthernNationalist

[quote]I suggest a blue/gray army to butcher the present day enemy. Ulysses S. Grant and Robert E. Lee shook hands at Appamatox; I suggest we do the same[/quote] Agreed.

yancey ames

I can see that this is a hot subject. But I stand on my opinions. As for surrendering the southwest I will only say that surrender leads to more surrender. It does not lead to a counterattack from a regrouped position. I agree with the late Virginian Sam Francis. Don't give a damn inch to the Mexican mud faces. Kill by the millions, if necessary, but not one inch of soil. As to comparing Southerners with Jews, I will point out that a great many Jews in the South supported the confederacy. Need I mention Judah Benjamin? Comparisons are always odious, particularly if they hurt. The South has more right to complain than the Jews ever did but Southerners are worshipping their experience in the great War Between the States the same way the Jews are worshipping their WW2 experience. I suggest a blue/gray army to butcher the present day enemy. Ulysses S. Grant and Robert E. Lee shook hands at Appamatox; I suggest we do the same.

Bobzilla

Correction, we cannot give the Southwest back to Mexico since it wasn't theirs to start with. However, we can give the Southwest to Mexico and rid our selves of a lot of problems. (I'm splitting hairs but it is an important historical distinction to make)

Bobzilla

Southern Nationalist brings up some interesting points but in particular his pointing out the difference between a Civil War and a Separatist movement are worth noting and getting a hold of. Way, way, to many people in the White Nationalist movement want to fight a Civil War. FORGET IT! The U.S.A that many of us grew up in and keep in our heart is long gone! In order to move forward and secure a future for White people in the U.S your are going to HAVE to let go of the notion of the America of the past. As of today, you can write the Southewest, and much of the West, off for good (or at least for a very long time). In fact, given the demographics of the Southwest right now, I don't want it. Give it back to Mexico and save ourselves a lot of money and frustration.

JamesL

yancey ames, regardless of what your opinion of southerners may be, I would ask that you do not, ever, compare us to the jews. You are free to have your own opinion. Although I disagree with you, I respect your right to your opinion. But to compare us to a parasitical race like the jews is going too far. Again, I respectfully ask that you refrain from doing so in the future. Thank you

Michael Dean Miller

. The painting of the soldier looking at the celestial Stars and Stripes reminds me of the evening I saw the very same thing in the sky from my warehouse. I swear to you all it was one of the most beautiful sights ever. .

JamesinUSA

I agree with yancey that it's time for our Southern people to move forward for the good of our people and for all of us to unite against our common enemies. I've been a member of the SCV and the League of the South in the past, and I found there's entirely too much Hobby,History and Religion involved in both, instead of them working toward achieving a New Revolution in this country, their busy trying to keep those dues coming in. One could make the point, that that is what the Son's of Confederate Veterans should be about, and that's studing the history of the times and honoring our Confederate ancestors, and I would that's all well and good. And I do feel the SCV serves a good educational mission. But I also feel that there are too many good White men hiding behind the SCV logo serving 'History', instead of our peoples 'Future'! They are so busy studing what happened over a hundred and fifty years ago they seem oblivious to what's happening to our people today and give little attention to what kind of shape our nations going to be in, in a hundred and fifty years from today! There are those in the SCV who are still fighting against our White brothers and sisters in the North, who are in denial that the real enemy, is more than likely living in their own communities, sometimes right next door, rather than above the Mason Dixion Line. Just as I support our troops today in war whether I agree with that war or not, I support the memory of those Confederate troops during THE 'WAR',which included a few of my own ancestors. But I have a tendency to look upon the Plantation owner of the past in somewhat the same light I look upon the Mega-Corporations of today. Those who are indicing and hiring literally millions of non-whites,in many cases illegal aliens in this country, and who are going to be the bane of future generations of White people, just as the institution of slavery and Blacks have turned out to be the 'PAIN IN THE ASS to most of our people today! And as for the LOS. It is led by a few intellectuals, followed by even fewer members, who all too often are fanatical 'Holy Rollers'and who generally represents more division among our people,than unity. I acknowledge the fact that the United States is a 'Christian' nation, if for no other reason than that 80% of the people of this nation calls themselves such. And I can appreciate our rich Christian traditions in this country. But let's leave all the "Holy Rolling" in our churches. We can't rely upon religious fanatics who might one day read one scripture that would have them fight against our enemies one day, and then flip the page of the good book and suddenly find another scripture that tells them to'love thy enemy'. What we need are political revolutionaries. And if you can square that with your religion than fine. But let's be up front, the task before our people will probably one day require that many good Christians commit what some may call unchristian acts, but who would also be wrong! The day is fast approaching when all of us will have to harden our hearts to the realities of true revolution in order fight against our enemies and to restore our nation to those people our founding fathers intended it for. And in many instances it may get very UGLY! But we must work to achieve a Political and Nationalist Revolution, not a Religious Revival! In order to do this, I would urge all true Nationalist to join the A3P, the American Third Position today!

yancey ames

Southern Nationalist is quibbling over terminology. The only point I agree with is that the tarrif was far more of a factor than slavery. I note that none of my objections to the Southern position have been rebutted. Once again, we are "singing Dixie" instead of looking at facts. It is a fact, noted by recent scholarship, that roughly 50% of the white southern population was opposed to the war. This figure comes from a public survey held by the South itself prior to the war to gauge potential support for the war, if it came. The South was no more united in its desire for a war of secession than the American colonials were united in desire for separation from England. I must say that the South has made a historical religion of the Confederacy the same way that the Jews have made a historical religion out of the Second World War and Auschwitz. So let's stop "singing Dixie" and concentrate on the Third Worlders who do not belong here.

TheSouthernNationalist

First off let's get this fact straight, this Country has never had a civil war. A civil war involves two or more sides fighting for control of the same Country which is not what happened here. The South wanted to be free from the north and start her own Country which we did. We had our own currency, our own military, our own culture. We were and are separate. The only reason the north invaded us is because they were losing tariff money from the South. It had nothing to do with slavery. Slavery was never even mentioned at the beginning of the war, it was later used to curry sympathy for this northern invasion of a free and peaceful Country and to turn the people of the north against the South. Something else that northerners don't realise is roughly 93% of the Southern people owned no slaves. Now think about this, if you and I were standing on a battlefield and you were a slave owner and I was not, do you think for one minute that I'm going to risk my life just so you can keep your slaves? I'm sure everyone knows the answer to that one! In closing I must say too many of our white brothers and sisters died in this war, from both sides. These are losses we must never endure again if we are to maintain our United Country.

yancey ames

Needless to say, I disagree. Abraham Lincoln was working very hard to expel blacks to the Carribean after the war, as a recent book has documented. No one nedded the Confederacy to abolish slavery. I believe the geopolitical realities were exactly as I described them. However, the Civil War has remained hotly disputed for years after its end, just as it was hotly disputed on the battlefield. No one needs to refight the Civil War. What we need is Ulysses S.Grant and Robert E. Lee working together to drive Mexicans down to Yucatan. Lee,of course, was fighting for the Union in the 1848 war against Mexico, as I recall. Whites need to work together, now, not to rehash those things that were settled long ago.

CASPER

These two bring up great points in their comments because in the end, we are going to have to gear up for war against these parasite sob spicks because they are beating war drums and the dumb bastards are going to get it yet again....damn they are stupid!

dennis

i disagree.if the south would have won we would not be divided we would then be the C.S.A from coast to coast.rebels believe in the bill of rights and the constitution(literally).slavery would have still ended, only difference is the freed slaves would have been sent back to thier motherland africa and there would be no mexican invasion going on right now.southern rebels were not and are not present day "evil"

yancey ames

SINGING DIXIE There is an unfortunate tendency in the American right wing to glorify the old South. This view is based on a purely romantic and uninformed view of the plantation “civilization”. The South before the war was totally anachronistic. Its economy was agricultural, based on slave labor and completely unsuited to an emerging industrial nation. Had it been allowed to survive, the unification of the United States as the greatest industrial power of the mid-nineteenth to mid-twentieth century would have been impossible. Before the war, there was great controversy over so-called “free” versus slave states. It was a question of primary political importance for the dominance of either the north or south. The United States could not have survived half free and half slave. The South had to go for the future development of the nation. It is idle to argue over whether the destruction of slavery and southern political independence could have been achieved without the war. The fact is that the attempted compromises failed and the issue came down to force, as it usually does. Southerners singing Dixie always live in a fantasy world of states rights and strict constitutionality where the ugly realities of big power politics are never allowed to interfere with the reveries. Let�™s examine what these Southerners ignore. If the South had succeeded in breaking up the United States into two nations, then the only half formed U.S. would have been at the mercy of the European powers and their balance-of-politics ploys. The French were in Mexico at this time under Maximillian. A divided U.S would have allowed the French to block U.S. expansion westward across the Mississippi. They could have formed an alliance with either the North or the Confederacy to block either of the two U.S. powers from moving into lands coveted by the French. The British Empire, world famous for playing one rival off against another, could have done the same, provoking either the North or the South and then picking up the pieces. (And, indeed, during the Civil War itself the British considered intervening to aid the South militarily.) No one knows how these imperial scenarios would have played out but a divided U.S. would have been very susceptible to such schemes. Confederates with misty eyes simply assume that the Confederacy, once established, would have avoided all these snares. Presumably the great General Lee and the glorious Army of Northern Virginia would have solved all problems, as they did at Appamatox. The lack of reality in this kind of thinking is amazing. The old problem of “free” versus slave states would also have reemerged after a southern victory. If the United States had been allowed to expand westward despite the intervention of the British and French, then every new state or territory would have been up for grabs, exactly as before the war. The old struggle would have reemerged, threatening to revive the war once more. In short, the Confederate Southerners are kidding themselves. There is no doubt whatever that the great War Between the States greatly accelerated government power and led to other undesirable results, as great wars always do. But the fact of the matter is that the North was right. A Confederate victory would have had disastrous results for the future of America. It is idle to object that the South was only seceding as their forefathers seceded from England. There is no logical consistency in politics. The Confederacy had to go. Secession is not the solution to present day American problems either. The solution to darkening America is not to retreat from the racial invasion by “seceding”. The solution is to fight for every inch of the land to preserve the Union. And if it takes William Tecumseh Sherman to burn Mexico City to the ground and scorch the earth of La Raza, so much the better.

No Comments Yet.

No Comments Yet.