Well, it certainly seems as if my post on the Southern Nationalist Network’s support of the “flagging” protest of certain Confederate heritage advocates against the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts has aroused controversy in some corners. The Southern Nationalist Network itself has decided that I’m a “Leftist” as well as an “anti-nationalist … of the forced-Unionist variety,” which, on the face of it, seems quite an accomplishment. The SNN seems particularly upset that I quoted what it believes in, including the argument that southerners are of European descent, which by definition excludes African Americans. It claims that quoting what it says constitutes an accusation of racism … a term I never employed, but one that seems much on its mind. Moreover, it seems I’ve overlooked something the SNN sees as true:
They are offended that we openly condemn the un-natural socialist pipe-dream of equality, which, as the Left has proven time and time again over the last century, can only be achieved by battering people down to the same common denomination. No two people or groups of people are equal. Even a child can see this, but it is apparently forbidden to utter such a truth in the politically-correct modern America.
I believe I pointed out that the SNN and its followers believe in inequality.
By the way, among the commenters cheering on the SNN was our good friend Connie Chastain: the SNN links to her blog as well. The other comments are pretty funny.
Elsewhere I’ve been dismissed as an “abolitionist” (as if calling for the abolition of slavery was a bad thing) and a “genuine racist” because I don’t see white southerners as a distinct ethnic group. I don’t. Geographical proximity does not define ethnicity, as anyone who pays attention to the world around them can attest. Moreover, I see a lot of diversity among southerners, period, by region, race, and origin. I see a lot of diversity among white southerners, including the men and women who were once my students at South Carolina’s Wofford College and who continue to keep in contact with me. I don’t think they would care to be associated with the views of the SNN … nor with the views of another one of my critics, one Hunter Wallace, who runs Occidental Dissent.
Mr. Wallace is upset with me because I don’t see things the way he does. How does he see things? Glad you asked …
So, Negroes can be “African-Americans,” but we would prefer to withdraw our claim to be “Americans,” and organize ourselves into a separate and autonomous White ethnostate called the “Republic of Dixie,” which would be constructed around a Serbian or Hungarian definition of citizenship.
A “White ethnostate”? Tell us more …
The Supreme Court had ruled in the Dred Scott decision in 1857 that the Negro wasn’t an American. Confederate commissioners lobbied the Border States to secede from the Union on the basis that the Republican Party supported miscegenation and racial equality. Alexander Stephens also made it perfectly clear that the Confederacy was the first government in the history of the world to be based on the principle of racial inequality.
Well, he’s got a point there … right, Confederate heritage advocates?
But wait, there’s more …
Negroes are “African-Americans,” the responsibility of the United States which armed them to destroy the Confederacy, a White Man’s Country, where they were never regarded as citizens. Upon the dissolution of the United States, “African-Americans” will remain the responsibility of Washington, which can resettle them somewhere else in its vast dominions.
Really? What else? Perhaps it’s Mr. Wallace’s declaration of that “great physical, philosophical, and moral truth that the Negro is not the equal of the White man.”
And so there you have it. And, like the head of the flaggers, Mr. Wallace was also interviewed by SNN, and you can listen to both podcasts courtesy of SNN.
I haven’t seen the flaggers object to SNN’s position, and I await to hear what they have to say about Mr. Wallace’s views. After all, they aren’t shy about attacking that which they don’t like.