The campaign to further discredit the South’s history

I see that the misnamed ‘American Thinker’ website is at it again, spreading rank falsehoods about the South, specifically about the Democrat Party as it existed during the mid-1860s, around the time of the War Between the States.

The piece which is up there on the website is dated 1 October, although I could swear that this is the same slanderous piece which was posted a week or two ago.

The truth matters. I know I always say this but it needs saying. And the American Thinker website, along with other Politically Correct Republican-run websites, seems to be on a campaign to besmirch the reputation of the South.

Why? Don’t we have the Left to do that kind of dirty work? Are the liberal Republicans joining up with the left? Since when are ”conservatives” or Republicans out to make the people of the South into “racist” monsters? I suppose since the Republican mainstream has adopted, wholesale, the antiracist fervor that resurfaced with militant leftists back in the 1950s and 1960s. Now the Republicans seem to be Democrats Lite since they’ve adopted the left’s causes and rhetoric.

This is why I am an independent and not a Republican. The Republicans are running scared from labels like ‘white supremacist’ which the left is now using to describe anyone to the right of Mitt Romney, so the Republican liberals are on a tear, railing about how the Democrat party of the mid-19th century were some kind of terrorists. How’s this for overheated rhetoric:

“The Rebellion, in which Democrats played principal roles in causing, was a century in the rearview mirror. Goes the spin: Democrats vanquished their post-Civil War record of virulent racism, which expressed itself in Jim Crow (Southern apartheid) and the atrocities of the nightriding Ku Klux Klan — the party’s white-garbed brownshirts — who ranged beyond the South, terrorizing blacks in states where Democrats concentrated. As we view the Democratic Party from the vantage point of October, 2020, we see that the party’s character is unchanged. The party of slavery, rebellion, and Jim Crow has found new expressions for its darker inclinations. Antifa and BLM are knockoffs of the KKK.”

American Thinker, 1 October 2020

Connecting antifa and BLM to KKK is absurd. Read any history book written in that era and you will see that the writer has it backwards.

I will write this slowly so the left-leaning Republicans can read it: John Brown (probably a hero of the writer of the American ‘Thinker’ piece) is the one who bears the closest resemblance to Antifa. There is even a John Brown Brigade made up of leftist antiracists. Remember that John Brown committed five murders in the name of antiracism and abolitionism. John Brown thought he was protecting innocent blacks from evil Whites, just as today’s antiracists do, and they believe the end justifies the means, always. Always.

It was Brown, the self-styled savior of the ‘oppressed’, the self-righteous self-appointed ‘hero’ who killed innocent people in Kansas and in Virginia. He was convicted of treason and hanged.

Brown was on the same side as those who, today, insist on idealizing MLK Jr., despite the many damning revelations about him which were in government document dumps of a few years ago. But the liberal Republicans, inspired by the likes of John Brown, refuse to hear any of those revelations about their Saint. It appears a lot of people watched or read the fictional (and plagiarized) series ‘Roots‘ and mistook it for truth. Hollywood and the educational system have force-fed America a lot of lurid fiction about slavery and ‘Jim Crow’ (does anybody even know what Jim Crow was?) and the masses, especially the out-of-touch Republican liberal antiracists, have the real-life history backwards.

If White people were so evil and dangerous as the writer states (‘atrocities…brownshirts…apartheid’, etc.) then separation would be a good thing for the oppressed blacks, would it not? If the White Democrats were just ‘brownshirts’/nazis with Southern accents, why would you ‘integrate’ helpless blacks with evil Whites? There is a big flaw in that narrative.

Brown and his ilk were the wild-eyed zealots and the radicals, and they were the ones with blood on their hands. The Republican Party, with which the writer insists on defending, was radical. It was not just anti-slavery, but anti-White. By contrast, the Democrat Party of that era was reasonable, not fanatical as were the obsessed, monomaniacal abolitionists.

John Brown tried to persuade blacks to murder Whites; some whites died at the hands of Brown and his random rabble. That is beyond dispute. It’s pretty hard to idealize murderers if you have any scruples about violence and killing. So does the end (emancipation and integration via a lot of violence) justify the means? Does this highly divisive rhetoric accomplish anything good?

At the very least it misinforms people. And it further divides an already fractured nation.

And how hard is it to grasp that the two political parties are not the same parties as those of the same names which exist today? Is it necessary to misstate the facts in order to make the Democrats look even worse than they are, and to tie the Democrats’ evil (which is undeniable) to the Democrat party of last century? This tactic is deliberately misleading and inflammatory. This kind of rhetoric and propaganda is just what it would take to ignite another conflict like that of the WBTS. If that’s the case, just let the South secede this time, and don’t keep them in the ‘Union’ by force. If the South is so bad, let them secede.

I don’t understand why there is so little pushback from Southron people; nobody, except for one or two people commenting on this article, responds with any kind of defense, and the responses on the article are half-hearted. Why? Has the negativity become that widespread? Does no one like to defend an unpopular cause? There used to be, not long ago, a group of articulate, even eloquent, defenders of the South who would step up and make a very spirited case. I think that generation has died, leaving no real ‘heirs’ to take up the side of our ancestors. And their likes may not be here again. I miss those older generations.

We do have truth on our side; Reconstruction (which few people seem to know of) was cruel and unjust to the former Confederates, who were stripped of their civil rights and their right to self-defense, and the new ‘freedmen’ were sat in the legislatures and were given the run of the former Confederate states, along with White scallywag partners. That was an era of violence toward Whites, including women and children. The writer of the American Thinker piece depicts an exactly opposite reality, in which evil White men were in command during Reconstruction and were behaving as terrorists. Read history books of that era; the very opposite was true.

It may be that I am wearying some people with my attempts to defend our heritage, but the truth must be upheld. And the uninformed, willfully or not, need to be informed.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s