Frank Conner concludes his book The South Under Siege: 1830-2000 with some advice for Southerners about how to save the traditional South and move towards independence. One of the many points he makes is to warn against an unfortunate and self-destructive trend that was emerging at the time. Connor could not have known that this trend would continue and eventually have a huge impact on the Southern heritage crowd. Since then, the folks now known to us as Rainbow Confederates (or PC Confederates) have found a fair number of Baby Boomers (especially online) eager to buy into the values of the 1960s cloaked in a Confederate flag and a lot of talk about heritage. Their plans to convince the broader public that the Confederacy was really a universalist, multicultural and egalitarian propositional nation have not fared nearly as well, despite sometimes elaborate and underhanded efforts. They have succeeded in pushing away a lot of traditional Southerners though. As well, they have moved from one defeat to another in the battle to preserve Confederate symbols and flags. Connor predicted this and warned against the Rainbows’ defeatist strategy back in 2000:
Many conservative Southerners believe that they can best preserve the surviving remnants of our culture and our history by persuading the black civil-rights activists (and the liberals) to stop attacking us; and they believe they can work that miracle by embracing multiculturalism. Toward that end, some members of Southern-patriot organizations have written books about blacks who served the Confederate Army; and some Southern-patriot organizations devote inordinate amounts of their public memorial services to discussions of blacks in the Confederate Army, or use black spokesmen to deliver their organizations’ public speeches. However, we can see from the steadily-increasing attacks in recent years by the black activists and liberals against the history and culture of the traditional white South that this policy of appeasement has been a total failure.
In addition, by accepting the liberals’ concept of multiculturalism, those Southern patriots are necessarily signalling to the general public their acceptance of: the preferential treatment of the blacks; the black activists’ inexcusable vituperations against the white Southerners; the destruction of the white Southerners as a people; the deliberate balkanization of the nation [sic]; and everything else that results from multiculturalism. By accepting the cynical double standard of multiculturalism, those Southern patriots are repudiating the values and culture of the traditional South, and thus are helping the liberals/black activsts to destroy our heritage just that much faster.
In the video below, Dr Michael Hill, President of the League of the South, speaks out against the Rainbow Confederates:
I would agree that it is a waste of time to pander to a particular ethnic group, especially in regards to this movement.
As a matter of fact, it’s time we all stop pandering to folks for any reason….
Treat people the way you want to be treated, and don’t be a phony…..
It is not a waste of time to enlist the energies of H.K. Edgerton or other black Confederates. It is not a waste of time to emphasize the extent of black participation on behalf of the South during her struggle for independence. It is, however, wasted effort if one’s goal is to gain the acceptance by those actions by the national civil rights groups. One must not think that such actions will do so. That, I think, is Conner’s meaning.
It has nothing to do with race and everything to do with enlisting those who are with us in this movement. The idea that no black man would be an honest proponent of Southern heritage is nonsense. We should be colorblind in such matters, neither seeking out blacks and trying to convince them of our position in order to show that we’re not “racist,” nor turning away blacks who are proponents of our position because some folks are unwilling to admit that such people exist! As St. Paul says, we are “earthen vessels” and our bodies will be translated on that Glorious Day. If Our Lord pays attention only to our hearts and our minds, who are we to be distracted by such ephemera as skin color?
VP, he didn’t say that no Black man should be an honest proponent of Southern heritage. He noted that ‘some Southern-patriot organizations devote inordinate amounts of their public memorial services to discussions of blacks in the Confederate Army, or use black spokesmen to deliver their organizations’ public speeches.’
Why is it that we’re always getting accused of wanting to ban Blacks from Southern nationalist circles? All we’re doing is recognizing that the overwhelming majority of the “Black community” is NOT on our side, and Blacks have generally gone their own way with their own culture and values, which are not the same as ours. Aggressively trying to recruit non-Whites and non-Southrons for our cause is not a worthwhile endeavor, and we will also refute the dishonest attempts by those who disagree with us to project an image on our ancestors that is pure fantasy.
I am the one who has pooh-poohed the push to “discover” black Confederates, pointing out that whether there were actual soldiers, and if so, how many of them, in no way validates our cause, nor does their absence INvalidate it. With regard to this issue, I simply say that let them come to us if they agree. We should not be recruiting. However, I DO say that we need to EDUCATE. That is not the same as recruiting. If an objective minority (black or otherwise), LEARNS about our cause and finds empathy with it, well and good. But that is all that we should do; that is, make our case KNOWN to objective people. Unfortunately, sometimes we have to do that by responding to idiots who post nonsense and lies. But when we do so, we should ALWAYS be aiming for the objective, intelligent person who may happen across the debate.
Gee Michael; Do you really want me to comment?
I will say this before you answer.
In our posts the other day I did mention the several cultures of the old Antebellum South. If you also remember I stated that any state today would not qualify as a country but rather a nation due to cultures. I also stated that no laws need be passed in order to force any cultures to exist, live together or apart…etc… And finally I said nature had a way of working these things out.
I did state that I was somewhere between the rainbows and the LoS groups in how I address this problem.
Now I’ll add, the Antebellum South did in fact have different cultures at different times in different places. HOWEVER, all of these people voluntarily assimilated themselves, except for the vast majority of blacks, without any government interference. This process was continuing even past the war itself. The result is that while cultures can live together they must want to of their own accord. In the process this relationship will bring the better traits of both cultures together. (The opposite can be also be true but is the exception.)
Here is a quick post from Tim Manning I just read this morning.
“I certainly agree with your sentiment here, but the USA is an empire and in many respects not a country. From the time of our founding a persons “State” was referred to as his country and not the centralized conglomerate of States. That is why we have State flags. As with all empires they tend to break up into their conglomorate parts which return to the ethos as countries. This may be what happens to the USA.”
And that was what I was referring to the other day in my posts and what was in the process of happening in the South right up to the end of the war. All participating cultures were combining to form ONE Southern culture. BUT it was voluntary NOT forced. That is the trick. The black culture otoh presents a whole different set of circumstances. Under a righteous government the same thing can happen again. What we have now ONLY breeds class and cultural warfare, which destroys nations, not in any way enhancing them.
Michael– Deo Vindicabamur
Pandering is pandering. If it wasn’t happening, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
Pandering is not the same as educating. It is not pandering to take the time to refute lies and mistaken beliefs. From time to time such efforts result in conversion – if not immediately, then in time (I myself am one such). We must beware of being as rigid as our enemies, believing that blacks CANNOT be made to understand the facts and arrive at correct conclusions when that is patently untrue.
Until we know that an individual is either intellectually incapable or morally unwilling to accept the truth, we should be more than willing to provide that truth. When the former situations exist, however, we should desist any attempt at discourse because we are then truly, “casting our pearls before swine.”
I agree Val,
“…Until we know that an individual is either intellectually incapable or morally unwilling to accept the truth, we should be more than willing to provide that truth. When the former situations exist, however, we should desist any attempt at discourse because we are then truly, “casting our pearls before swine.”
One cannot “PREJUDGE” one person based on the actions of an entire group. However one can prejudge an entire group and treat the group accordingly with any exceptions being applied where necessary. If on a personal level a person shows to be lacking, then society and the culture of that society will naturally shun and avoid such a person. This also applies to groups if they refuse to assimilate into the culture. This is nothing more than a universal and natural truism.
Many devout Southerners seem to forget or over look the fact that while they claim, say, Celt ancestry and claim certain other cultural values from Europe, that the South is no more European or Celt in its’ culture than blacks are African. It’s like blacks calling themselves “Afro Americans” or “African Americans”. Each may have originated in their respective places, but neither holds the true culture of either, only bits and pieces at best.
The differences can only be established by the fact that the white Europeans were much more willing to assimilate and embrace their respective cultures than were the blacks who have tried or pretended to try and claim their own culture and association with Africa. Yet the liberal black person will claim it is they who are shunned by white society, especially claiming such by Southerners. The street runs TWO ways!
I will note that in certain circumstances as duly noted as the exceptions above, many blacks have in fact assimilated into society, both in the North and South, and they have contributed much to the now common culture they are a part of. It does NOT take government and law to accomplish this, as that actually hurts the process. What it does take is a willingness and desire to become one culture and one people. No law can make that so and that is another universal truism of nature.
Michael– Deo Vindicabamur
I certainly would not suggest attending an NAACP meeting (something that Waite Rawls wishes to hold in the Museum of the Confederacy!), but I would certainly respond at least ONCE to any decent inquiries or even misguided comments by blacks. Obviously, their intellectual ability will be exposed by their comments and we can simply ignore the Black Panther types. But more educated and interested minorities should be given a well considered response if and when the opportunity presents itself. Far too much of these issues have descended into name calling by BOTH sides and that enlightens no one.
It seems these Rainbow CON-federates after all these years of trying to peddle their “black Confederate” b.s. can’t get it through their thick skulls that no matter how much you try the “respectable” route, there will never be large numbers of blacks or nonwhites joing the ranks of Southern nationalism (I for one don’t see this as a bad thing though, but thats just me). And those who still believe in that garbage, they are not only making themselves look like dumbasses, but they spit on their ancestors who never belived in such nonsense as racial equality, multiculturalism, or “diversity is our strength.” How the heck can anyone claim pride in their Confederate ancestors, yey buy into the same rhetoric that sprang out of the Civil Rights movement (which was neither civil or right) is beyond me.
While I’m still on the fence about whether or not the South should secede a second time, I applaud Dr. Hill for telling the Rainbow CON-federates and “civic nationalists” types to get lost. I can only hope that they take Hill’s advice.
Multiculturalism is a very DESTRUCTIVE practice and ideology. So much so that it goes against commensense and morality. It is NOT in any way a truism of nature. It should be obvious to all but the one’s who have an “agenda” for other purposes.
Multiculturalism DESTROYS nations, NOT builds them! otoh, multiculturalism can be a good thing when all parties wishes to work for the common good and embrace each other as true equals. Then the multi cultures starts reverting into their own form of ethos, and that was what the South was actually transforming into until, er, they got interrupted.
The United States started out as a nation of distinct countries. Within those countries there were some multiculturalism among the localities, BUT it was changing and evolving in the South, into what we know today as Southern Culture! It didn’t work so well in the North.
Michael– Deo Vindicabamur
I don’t think that they are necessarily trying to recruit blacks. I believe that they are trying to PROVE that they are not “racists” which, frankly, is as useless as trying to recruit blacks! These are people who suffer from “white guilt.” They may love the South and their “heritage,” but they fundamentally believe that the South fought for slavery, that white people in general and white Southerners in particular are bigots and so they make very attempt to “appeal” to liberals by proving what nice folks they are, never realizing that the really NOT nice folks, the real racists and haters ARE THE LIBERALS THEMSELVES, white AND black!
These “rainbow” types are fools because they have fallen for the liberal contention that everything Southern is rotten and treasonous and should be consigned to oblivion. They KNOW that this is not true and they are trying to convince liberals that such is the case never realizing that THE LIBS DON’T BELIEVE IT THEMSELVES! This liberal contention about the South and Southerners is nothing more than a mantra to keep the blacks in line and voting Democrat while shutting down all discourse and debate.
These “rainbow” types need to read Frank Conner’s _The South Under Siege: 1830-2000_. I just recently finished this book, and it is enlightening. But the rainbow types need to read Conner’s discussion of Reconstruction II and the different phases. In the chapter on Reconstruction II Conner states that in the early 20th century the Soviet Union issued a directive to the Communist Party in the USA to cause racial tension in the US as a way to bring about a marxist revolution, and that in obedience to that directive some New Yorkers of Russian-Jewish ancestry established the NAACP. The national civil rights organizations exist for that reason alone, to cause racial strife, and there will never be any rapproachement with them. They are not here to improve the lives of minorities, and only secondarily are they to obtain legislation to help minorities. The primary goal in whatever they do is to increase racial tensions as this follows Lenin’s directive to “heighten the inconsistencies” in order to bring about revolution. I’d say they are still following that game plan.
Final thoughts:
I think this is what Michael and others on this sight were talking about when they discussed Wade Hampton and “throwing off the shackles” over government imposed black rule in 1876.
This Empire policy/mindset continued well into the 20th century, and evolved into “multiculturalism”, especially in the last 40 years.
While I understand what is being said here, we all have to watch for “wolves in sheep’s clothing”, so to speak. The same people that try to tell us that thousands of blacks fought for the Confederacy at Gettysburg, will next tell us that thousands of gays fought for the South at Gettysburg!
Sadly, this truly is the “Yankee mindset”, and I have seen it first hand having lived my whole life in the North (I have Southern relatives and Confederate ancestors that make up one half of my family). This “rainbow mentality” has gone from accepting all things in black culture, to accepting all things in gay culture, Muslim culture, ect..
There is a very fine line with all that is defended by folks in this section of writing, and we need to be very careful.
You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make him drink. If you lead someone to the truth and if they partake of it and reject it, then send them on their way with good tidings. It they partake and do not reject it, then feed them, but do so in small amounts so as to not overwhelm them. Jus thinkin.
Deo Vindice
Question:
Has appeasement, in any form, ever been shown to improve the status of, or further the cause of, the appeasers.
If yes, please enlighten me as to the answer.
If no, please explain why we continue to tolerate it as practiced by Rainbows or others, instead of calling them what they are, which is traitors to the cause, and denouncing them to the heavens.
Deo Vindice!!
tonyj
For my part, I already denounce them, and do my best to distance myself from them in every respect possible.