What do y’all think? This is obviously based on Bob Whitaker’s mantra and a mini-manta variation used by many folks. I’m looking for something that would be good cut-and-paste material – an easy reply to the anti-Southern elements that would reverse the fields and put them on the defensive. How can this be improved without making it longer?
MANTRA
The South was already 100% diverse before ‘diversity’ was forced upon us. Think about it. We had Appalachian folks, Lowcountry folks, Cajun folks, Texans and all other sorts of sub-cultures and micro-cultures. What has the ‘New South’ done to our 100% diversity? It has pushed all of this aside in favour of ‘diversity.’ Clearly, ‘diversity’ means a South that is non-Southern – just as it means a Europe that is non-European. Globalists hate organic cultures and peoples. Our enemies say they are for ‘diversity’ but what they are is anti-Southern. ‘Diversity’ is just a code word for anti-Southern.
MINI-MANTRA
(Just substitute the right word in the blanks)
MR/Mrs X says he/she is for ‘diversity.’ But from his/her actions we can see that what he/she is really just anti-Southern. ‘Diversity’ is just a code-word for anti-Southern.
Diversity is just another trait of humanism, that being a part of the Marxist ideology(agenda) of a classless moral-less society. This opposes every understanding and concept of Southern Heritage and culture and God.
Michael– Deo Vindicabamur
Honestly—- I think it undercuts Mr. Whitaker’s work. It shifts the ground of race and genocide to soft terms and also shifts race onto a location-based word: south.
If I were going to use it, it would go more like this:
The “South” refers not to a location but to A PEOPLE. These PEOPLE were part of the American Founding and are among the most Generational Americans. Sherman made what he called total war on them, burning everything, targeting civilians, making sure this PEOPLE would never be able to get on their feet again. They were put under military occupation. Land was seized and never returned for Military bases many times, even unto this day. Economic acts continued to be passed against them, for instance, targeting crops only grown among them, such as the Tobacco Acts of 1965, and land further redistributed. This PEOPLE is continually degraded in books, radio, t.v. and film, in a way similar to the propaganda campaigns against populations such as the kulaks. IT IS GENOCIDE. And it is against international law.
(Why did you see that Tarantino Django Film? or whatever—- why are you pro genocide?)
More along that line
— Unless you’re wanting to unite various southern sub-ethnic groups, I wouldn’t go into what you do (and there’s no real need to “unite” the southerners as they already know who they are.
The REAL South problem, in a sense, is the existing Southerners, still there, but who have “forgotten” their identity.
Shift it to the list of genocidal acts, and point out that they are the targets of genocide, not only in the past, but currently.
They are after Genocide. Genocide is this “forgetting” —-this loss of self, of identity.
You are being genocided— is stronger
And the “diversity” program is not so much what’s being used on the south (although that too).
Working on building a strong sense in the public mind that the south is NOT A LOCATION but A PEOPLE, strengthens the message on this. A people can be genocided, not a location. And the war clarified that a NATION was being destroyed (the south). The war continued in various campaigns (like the media vilification of today).
Genocide does not get much clearer. It is against the law. AND ALSO, many who are clearly “A People” have been awarded land grants by the Federals. (Such as the Indians).
If people are opposed to THIS people receiving such a land grant… why? Are they pro-genocide? Did they approve the Indians having this, but not they Southrons? Why are they pro genocide? (make them answer)
Mr./ Ms. X watched Django Unchained. (Deliverance, Mississipi Burning, did not protest at the PSA (public service announcement before the movie continuing to vilify the Southern-grown crop of tobacco in the “anti smoking” ad before the movie, a campaign of the Tobacco Acts in which 450,000 southern farms were dispossessed), supported mass immigration into South Florida by moving there, or Central north carolina, etc…. (take your pick…)
I see that you have done these things! Why are you pro genocide? Have you always been pro genocide?
Oh, so you are not pro genocide? Liar! if you really are not, are you willing to petition in DC this moment to help us receive a LAND GRANT, reservation space, free and clear, wherein we can live, as a reparation for your genocide?
“What has the ‘New South’ done to our 100% diversity?”
I think I would put it as….
“What has the ‘New South’ done to our 100% organic diversity? Where is the honoring and celebration of the cultures that are the backbone of the South? Those Celtic cultures were planted here just as surely as the people were planting their first crops and establishing their homes and towns, which blossomed into the the way of life that the South is distinctly known for and which are to be found nowhere else on earth. That ‘organic diversity’ is the heritage, legacy, and present-day reality of the South. To tamper with that means intentional destruction of a well established and vibrant culture. There is no other reason to promote ‘neo-diversity’ other than to bring about the destruction of this established heritage and culture.”
And to that I add… “three cheers for Moon Pies”!!
You may have a point, Dixiegirl, and I was hesitant to post this piece due to not wanting to undercut Whitaker’s mantra (since I use it all the time).
I completely agree on the ‘genocide’ issue and its use. I have incorporated into my articles.
Since Whitaker’s mantra is solely about race and leaves out the question of nationality though, I wonder about how we can use it more locally. For example, where I live we are being replaced not so much by Mexicans or other non-Whites but by Yankees. And they have destroyed our culture every bit as effectively as would Mexicans. Many other areas of the eastern South are like this.
Michael… in answer to Yankees destroying southern culture by moving in, the one term that comes to mind is “CLANS.”
It’s an anti-southern enough cultures (as said above, in terms of media, films, land grabs, etc)—- so each and every person has contributed to the genocide.
Just find what they, themselves, did that you can discuss…. name a few popular anti-southern movies, and if they went to any of them, call them pro genocide for contributing.
mention: This pro-genocide campaign to which you are contributing, surely is connected to the murders of southerns that have occurred and are suppressed and that you may not have heard of (your opportunity to expose that, and ethnic violence caused in the real world by the cultural tone and climate to which they contribute)— Shannon-Newsome, perhaps, whatever.
(sp) Channon
I would just stick with anti-Southern when it comes to the white immigrants that are hostile to us. The ones that hate the South know they aren’t Southern, because they are trying to destroy anything that resembles the old South.
Thus: New South is code word for anti-Southern and anti-white.
I guess you could substitute New South with diversity and it would still work.
That mantra covers both white and non-white immigrants. Just my opinion.
I think we should re-focus the diversity polemic upon Israel by asking why do the American multi-culturalists and diversity advocates not require the very same diversity of the nation of Israel. It is a known fact that Jews of Russian Jewish descent, chiefly in NYC, are behind much of the multi-cultural and diversity advocacy. Yet these same groups, such as the ADL, do not require the same diversity or immigration policy for the state of Israel.
“…Thus: New South is code word for anti-Southern and anti-white….”
That is more succinct.
Michael:
Idk, this sort of will hinge on the black question. As one with Southern heritage, my feelings about blacks are complex and TOTALLY not reflected in t.v. (Real Southerners simply don’t have a voice in the mainstream). There we’re just a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionBLACKS, lol. We exist only as “masters with whips!” Our leading cultural role, lol
Personally, I’m fairly capable of separating out HOW populations are used by PTB (e.g.. non-black creation of Naacp), how it has effected me personally, the legacy of real black people –very unlike us, especially at the time— brought to a strange place.
In some ways, it’s like that old book “How the Irish Became White” (by a black anti-white)—- American blacks have slowly become their own thing, with a southern legacy that overlaps, but with a very different history and legacy and oral tradition and writings about it.
(The southwest question just isn’t my own— from the Anglo-Celt/ black end of the south)
Anyway, in other words on the BQ, in what way are they still “our people”—- connected to us as southern? Or is their southern legacy a different one?
We connect over a shared part of history—- but we are very different people in it, and even more so, after the 60s. Wasn’t that the whole message— they ceased to “belong” to us… to be our proxies (and politically, the jews took them up and just used them, right?)
The “SOUTH” as it is vilified today is the WHITE South. (The black south is not vilified— well, sort of, in that the “black southerner, must always be seen as a “victim of a master” —this is their only t.v. role!!! lol–talk about not being treated as “real people”.) Or they BECOME the master, like in the sickest movie of all time: Edmond.
So— riding the wave of white genocide makes sense By pointing out that The Vilified Southerner (this is the WHITE southerner only) is a sub-set category of the overall white genocide.
And— the whole thing has teeth largely because it is legally actionable, was my understanding.
You use the word, “National.”
The root of this is natal, native, BIRTH. Usually, I tend to push against the co-option of the term to mean “culture” separate from kinship group.
There is a North-Euro South (largely protestant anglo-celt) and the South Euro South (largely catholic latin)— e.g.: Richmond and New Orleans. Ultimately, the european south.
This is the only south slated for genocide— racially and THEREFORE culturally.
Our culture was and is a racial expression, imo.
Look at the difference between our handling of the BQ and how the jews have handled it. By making separations (and in a way people don’t think about) IT WAS ACTUALLY THE SOUTH that was acknowledging the different realities of “A People” and making allowance for it.
In other words, it was White Southerners who were a NON-GENOCIDAL people. They enslaved, but surely did not WIPE OUT another group (in fact blacks increased exponentially, lol)
GENOCIDE is worse than slavery!
Get there— and your opposition is toast.
The point should be to hold your opposition accountable for your attempted genocide.
Southern is a sub-group of the overall white genocide.
An attempt at really dumbed down “pan whiteness” (where because people are just WHITE, they are “like you,” and make that case in order to justify totally overrunning your home area without even thinking you should have a neighborhood— would be “pro white genocide” (wiping out a white sub-group)
What you’ll see on the “yankees” that you see now, most probably—- is they are the front runners, what comes right before mexicans.
They ARE NOT the old Puritans—- and many would rather have mexican workers around than southern whites or blacks.
Another thing, Michael—
Seems to me our lives have been caught up with the BQ— blacks are what we have been with in our culture.
But today’s Northeastern (having wiped out, not only the puritans, but almost ALL the protestant north)— is of populations whose internal worlds are full of other characters (in the ways we have a consciousness of blacks).
To the more recently transported Irish— the Anglo-Scots south IS MERELY a reflection of the North Irish question. They treat you like you’re the Queen, lol. Which is very strange if you’ve been around it and experience it (i.e. the IRA sees my type is ‘british loyalist.”)
Same with Jews— we are naziswhowanttokillsixmillionjews. Teutonics… Saxons. Evil Germans.
Same with catholics– why Hollywood (which isn’t all jewish, btw) concentrates on the Virginia slavers (i.e. YOU HEAR NOTHING of slavery by Spain or Portugal in HOLLYWOOD movies, although they had like 90% of the Transatlantic trade)
African blacks—- were not slaves in America. They do not share the American black experience.
Southerners, in my cosmology, do themselves a bit of disservice by hanging on so strongly to the old yankee paradigm— under all these new circumstances— and an inundation by populations whose understanding of “what southern is” has zero to do with puritans.
Don’t put new wine in old wine skins, as the book says—
These new populations are framing US in accordance with Hollywood, yes BUT ALSO through the lens of the politics they come from. To jews, we are nazis. To northeast catholics, we are heretics (unless you’re deep south, and catholic, like the french legacy, etc., or southwest) To Irish, we are possibly celts, and can connect, or anglos (and thereby EVIL)
We have to attend to how they frame US— in accordance with their own internal worlds
@Dixigirl…
“To the more recently transported Irish— the Anglo-Scots south IS MERELY a reflection of the North Irish question. They treat you like you’re the Queen, lol. Which is very strange if you’ve been around it and experience it (i.e. the IRA sees my type is ‘british loyalist.”)”
All the Irish I know would disagree with you on this. Have you seen the movie “Hidden Agenda”? I highly recommend it. Also, the IRA is who is pushing for “multiculturalism” in Ireland and N. Ireland today. The true “republicans” do not back the existing IRA and have formed another group, the RIRA. Jerry Adams and Sinn Fein are not seen as anything but lackey’s for the Brits.
There’s your succinct response: (I always write way too much to get to it, lol) “Genocide is worse than Slavery!!!”
You may be on to something here Dixiegirl.
We are in a position whereby we are accepting the Yankee position as true and are constantly defending against that. We need to take ourselves out of the argument and go on offence. We know that the Yankees lie about us, so why argue with them? We need to concentrate in building up our own, and those who did move South and want to assimilate (Copperheads) and educate. This website is a good place to start. There’s also the LOS. I believe there should be county chapters that are subsets of the State chapters, which are subsets of the main chapter headed by Dr. Hill.
As far as blacks…I have found that many southern blacks have been corrupted and changed for the worse by the hip-hop culture of LA, NYC and Chicago. Real Southern blacks (most of them the oldsters) are appalled at what’s happened as much as we are, and unfortunately, Gen X (sic) Southern blacks were the first ones to accept and spread this attitude. There are many that are still not tainted by the “culture” and, although we’re culturally different, we had a sense of respect of each other.
That being said, I’d rather hang out with a Southern black than with a white Yankee any day.
I can pretty closely identify with Dixiegirl’s statements and a lot of the others, but in creating a mantra, I’m afraid there is no right or definitive way of doing such.
There is so much more to be a real Southerner than any words can describe, everyone including those true Southerners holds their own views as to what constitutes Southern and Southern values, heritage and culture. Many of these views overlap but there can be no catch all defining phrase, nor should there be.
It is a terrible mistake to regulate being a true Southern to simply being born in the South and holding true Southerner views. Southern history itself shows the Southern people to be more diversified than this. Although there are strict limits on this diversity. The ONLY over-riding fact concerning being Southern is being born in the South while holding those Old Southern views in greatest part.
All of us through our ancestry came from somewhere with many differing influences molding the Old Southern character and what remains of it today. Sure it can be stated that the majority of Southerners originated from the Celts, but it took much more than just the Celts to form the Southern Culture with the heritage we know today.
In the totality of life and the specific part as it concerns Old Line Southerners, there had to be a basis of thought that transcended nationalities and even cultures of people in order that the Southern Culture be created and exist. I would think no one here would debate the point that the top most inspirational ideology in comprising the Southern culture is the rational of freedom and being a sovereign people. This is clearly shown from the Scots even before William Wallace, BUT it is not strictly a view and ideology held by them.
We can ask anyone from anywhere the general question; What does freedom mean to you? You will almost always get a similar response, however it is the details that sets Southerns apart, and it is those details that is shared by ANYONE who holds Southern sympathies, regardless where they live. Very similar can be stated concerning religion, which is why Catholics plays a large part in Southern culture, especially in the deep South. What people share is more than just being Southern, but of having like minds and views of life.
You cannot regulate the culture and heritage of Old Line Southerners to just the South, for if you do you alienate many people who otherwise would wish to share your and partake of this philosophy and ideology, all in order to survive and even thrive. There are many people in the North, and I have seen it myself, that shares our deepest views concerning life and culture, and there are people from all over the world that feels likewise. And it would be such people that would help continue our heritage and culture after we are gone.
Sven Niebler is a German who frequents these Southern pages, and he is very sincere and dedicated in his beliefs towards our old Southern culture and heritage. His religious views also closely match. He wasn’t born here as far as I know; but; does that make him an outsider, someone to be regulated as a stranger, especially after he has proven himself so noble to our cause and beliefs? Does this mean the previous Germans that claimed to be of the Old Southern beliefs, and being born here are also strangers to us? Does not their contributions help make us what we are today?
I am afraid by painting yourself with mantras and phrases, trying to establish Southern culture and heritage to just a few defining statements is not only unjust and wrong, but it is a hazard and trap that can actually help in the genocide of our culture and people! We have to be all inclusive to all that *Believes* as we do, and shows the *faith* that we do. Else we might as well get in a box and wait until we are totally assimilated and gone.
I got into a discussion with our *good* friend Brooks Simpson before I cremated him a couple of times. (He most likely is reading this as Michael’s site, SNN is one of his favorites.)
The exchange started when he had posted concerning; what was Southern Heritage and Culture? He gave examples of what some of you had previously stated. I thought, this is a good topic to challenge him on, so I wrote him my understanding. After a few exchanges of posts Simpson stated he would have to think on my comments as he had never considered them before.
He could not pin me simply because you cannot pin someone who doesn’t place themselves in a corner, giving the opposition mantras and statements defining themselves as just one thing. At the same time this shows the flexibility and inclusion of what we are and why we became what we are, and no one is left out that wishes to believe and have the faith that we do. It leaves us room to grow and to add believers unto us, and in the process it also shows we are not as biased, prejudiced and racist as we are made out to be. The more people can adapt this understanding and apply it and be accepting of others, the better this works, the more we thrive as a people and the more people we attract with like minds and faith.
Michael– Deo Vindicabamur
@mike360000… you have just explained my “nic”… I believe “being Southern” is more about a mind-set than geography. Raised by a Southern Mother and a Southern-at-heart Father, I am southern in sensibilities even though I grew up in southern california and now reside in southern oregon…
My husband shares all the same values as I do, yet was raised in a culture he rejected which mirrors the “Empire.” So it is not really about geography (although I would love to be placed physically in the South), but it is about how you perceive—shall we say—”life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”? I also think that the culture comes from the mindset—not the mindset comes from the culture which explains why Yankees who “emigrate” to the south stay Yankees.
@SouthernAtHeart
Believe it or not, in so many words you just stated a creed of the South, plus your testimony. Personally I put much more respect and emphasis on one’s creed than in any motto or mantra or any simple statement. It is much more involving while stated in general terms. If we look up the term “creed” we would see that it concerns a person’s faith, religious as well as sociological. It really places a burden on people who tries to oppose anothers’ creed!
How about, “When in Rome do as the Romans do.” Everybody should know that one! But what about the rest of it? The ways it can be expanded and discerned? What about when one is NOT in Rome; How would they do? Surly some people would still do as the Romans do. Are they not Romans at heart? What about the people in Rome that does not do as the Romans do? Are they still Romans? Remember in Scripture that the main discerning differencing between Israelites and Jews was the fact that Israelites were ALL the people of Israel while the Jews were distinctly the people that practiced Judaism observing the Covenant with God. And note, to be a Jew did not mean you definitely had to live in Israel either!
Yes absolutely, culture comes from the mindset one has and not vice versa, for one has to believe in something before they can practice it or become a part of it. To deny this only limits one’s understanding and reality of the rest of the world.
A many a time I’ve had to distinguish for people the BIG difference in being a yankee and a Northerner. There is nothing bad about being a Northerner, it is a good thing in its’ own way, but it is being a yankee that is among the highest of insults! And yankees can and do come from the South! Yankees are no different today than they were before Lincoln’s War.
I am blessed with being born and raised in North Carolina, my dad’s folks from Tennessee. However, even with that, it does not give me some superior state of thought and faith concerning what I believe. It does give me a direct inheritance and connection to the only culture I’ve known and accepted. (Yes I’ve observed many other cultures.) I only got the benefit of a good head start and teaching in the right ways by being born into a Southern culture. Another way for all others born outside the South is to think of themselves as being adopted.
I fall away from the League of the South and the Southern National Congress, or anyone when they try and portray only themselves as a certain group worthy to lead all others as a country or nation. Matter of fact I can say I have more blacks that I feel closer to and would defend as my dear friends than the majority of whites. I would rather be associated with these like minded people than others who oppose my faith, regardless of color. For one should learn with enough wisdom, that when 2 or more people agree in creed, faith, culture and heritage, that TRANSCENDS all colors… Then there becomes no color between those people. If only other people here and elsewhere had the wisdom and judgement to understand and accept this…. (Yes I also believe there MUST be a set way, a litmus test in order to vote, that the vote MUST be limited, but color or race is NOT the way to go about it.)
Michael– Deo Vindicabamur
We always hear about all these Blacks that supposedly have the same passion to preserve Southern culture and civilization as we do, but where is the activism? Look at pro-Southern blogs and social media groups. Look at pro-Southern organizations like the League of the South. How many Blacks do you see in these places? With a couple of isolated exceptions, the only support from Blacks you ever hear about is from Whites who talk about them via their personal experiences and acquaintances.
Getting back to the topic at hand…I’m having a lot of trouble getting behind the “Southern mantra” that was proposed here, but unfortunately I can’t really put my finger on why and I don’t have much in the way of suggestions to improve it. I tend to agree with a previous commenter that being Southern is quite a bit more complicated than being White, and perhaps that is why coming up with a catchy and concise Mantra is problematic. Maybe the direction we should go in is running with Whitaker’s mantra and pushing the idea that Southerners are on the front lines of White genocide in America, and that Southern nationalism is part of the solution to stopping it. We can point out the historical spirited resistance of the Southern people in the 1960s when the genocide began. And so on. That’s just my feeling.
I kind of like the addition of “anti-Southern” along side “anti-White” though.
Anti-racism is a code word for anti-Southern and anti-White.