Weatherford, Texas clash

There was some ‘violence’, as the media called it, at a protest in Weatherford, Texas over the past weekend. There was a group of citizens who were there to try to protect yet another endangered Confederate monument, when antifas, apparently from Dallas-Fort Worth, showed up in support of BLM. Unsurprisingly disagreements led to scuffles and clashes between the two groups.

The mostly-young antifas carried signs describing those who favored keeping the monument as being ‘traitors’. It seems almost humorous for antifas to call the people of Weatherford who were there as traitors; just what are they loyal to? Certainly not the country of their birth, and most certainly not their own kindred.

I mean, do they even know what the term ‘traitor’ means? Lately it’s “in” to call Confederates and their descendants ”traitors.” Quite the contrary; they were loyal to the death to their states, their Christian faith, their leaders (mostly good men, no matter what the ignorant say) and above all, loyal to their folk, their kin, their hearths and their homes.

What are antifas ‘loyal’ to? Anything at all? What do they believe in? Destruction and malice? Or are they ‘loyal’ to whoever gives them their pay for what they do?

And incidentally it seems the antifas found it hard to spell ‘traitor’, and some of their handmade signs read ‘traiter’ or ‘traiterist’, (I think they meant to write ‘traitorous’, the adjective, but oh well. Schools don’t teach spelling, grammar, or any such old-fashioned subjects.)

Apparently no one was seriously hurt during the scuffle, as the police dispersed the crowd of 200 or so people.

I am heartened somewhat to see that the people in Weatherford still have some spirit, to exercise their right to object to the removal of the monument — and to stand up to the antifas who crashed the party.

Discussion at the OD blog

At his blog, Hunter Wallace has been having a very intense discussion with a leftist who responded to a post of Hunter’s, centering on the differences between the left and the (alt)-right, or the alt-right as was. I think it’s one of the most in-depth discussions of the respective belief systems or outlooks, and worth reading. As of now it looks like Hunter and his interlocutor are on part 3 of the exchange. I found it very thought-provoking. Hunter has certainly done his homework with respect to history, especially Southern vs. Northern viewpoints.

I think this series of posts is one of the best I’ve seen on the OD blog. This is the kind of thing that should be done more. It’s always good to put the truth out there even though the left seems incapable or unwilling to hear or accept it.

More thoughts on ‘American icons’, and on Stone Mountain

I have more irate thoughts about the ‘American icons’ chosen to be commemorated in this ‘National Garden’: a blog commenter called our attention to the fact that Trump chose from a list of NON-Confederate origin. Confederates or anyone associated with the Confederacy was apparently eliminated in advance. I have a feeling Trump will eventually cave and remove the names of Confederate officers from the military bases, though he left it alone — for now. He is not favorably disposed towards the Confederacy though generations of people both North and South believed in reconciliation and in burying the hatchet as it were. That policy seems to have died the death, curiously on Trump’s watch. Why did it happen just now? Why did things suddenly change so that our the government was so anti-South and anti-Confederacy?

I also have questions about why some of these ‘icons’ were chosen. Amelia Earhart? A nod to feminists? What did she do to earn her fame except disappear? Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain? I had to look him up; I honestly never heard the man’s name though he was evidently a Union army hero. I guess a lot of books will have to be rewritten to make him eclipse Gen. Lee, who was considered a great soldier and military strategist who was admired by (unbiased) people North and South. My English acquaintances hold General Lee in high esteem, while America is now going to remember him, if at all, as a “slave-owner” and “racist” and probably literally Hitler.

Sad.

So Dolley Madison is now an icon, because married to James Madison. Another nod to the ladies.

Harriet Beecher Stowe: author of the maudlin ‘Uncle Tom’s Cabin’. Lincoln himself reputedly said of Miss Stowe, “So this is the little lady that started the War.’‘ He was right; her fantasy-based book led to the deaths of over half a million.

Miss Stowe never set foot in the South; her book was based on lurid hearsay and fantasy, though the schools make her out to be heroic.

The whole list is a civic nationalist’s dream list; appropriately ‘diverse’, people who are famous for being famous, and the usual Political Correct ideas of what constitutes a ‘hero’ or an icon. This list alone makes me see how the U.S. is mired in PC and cannot extricate itself. Until we can find our way out of this dead end philosophy of the ‘rainbow’ egalitarian society we will sink slowly into the quicksand and not even know how we got there.

I have to quote Solzhenitsyn again, with his famous admonition: Live not by lies. That’s the trouble with our country now; lies are part and parcel of the American hagiolatry, with ‘heroes and icons’ like these.

Postscript: Reuters reports a large number of armed black ‘protesters’ marched through Stone Mountain Park in Georgia. Is this meant to be intimidation, or a prelude to destroying the carved images of the CSA heroes on the Mountain? What next?

New ‘American icons’

I’ve just read the list of “American Icons” whose statues will supposedly be erected in the proposed ‘Garden of American Heroes.’

It’s just as I imagined or expected: Political Correctness, Republican version. I knew instinctively that figures such as MLK would surely be there before anyone else. I would bet that he was the first chosen ‘icon’, for political reasons where some are concerned, and for sentimental reasons with those who really believe the aforesaid individual was a “Saint.” Many GOPers fall into the latter category.

Did anyone, anyone on the ‘right’ read the document dumps from the USG a while back? I remember on Steve Sailer’s blog, when those documents were discussed, someone naively asked “I wonder what the Left will think about these documents?” Answer: they will say nothing and think nothing: they close their eyes and their minds and “deny, deny, deny”, as Bill Clinton urged Democrats to do in general.

And it appears that the ‘right’ is practiced at denying, too, as MLK passes into the pantheon of American Heroes.

General Lee, of course, will not be an American icon; it appears most Southrons don’t meet the criteria. To think that a great Christian gentleman like General Lee or General Thomas Jackson were passed up for lesser men. The South should never have rejoined the Union.

Interestingly Trump’s version of American history and its handpicked ‘icons’ matches the ‘rainbow, diverse and inclusive’ vision put forth by ‘Q’. The Q patriots have a distorted picture of the War Between the States; they seem to have learned their history from the $PLC and Hollywood. They are supposedly researchers and ‘diggers’ who ferret out information but they need to ferret out some factual history. Instead they learn it from each other.

And yes, I know Trump is the best we are going to get, which makes me sad. Once we had lots of great men who were inspired leaders.
And some will think a little compromise with Political Correctness, a little more compromise with the race-hucksters is a small price to pay if we can all just ‘try to get along’ but that is precisely how we got to where we are now. This continuing compromising and accommodating will just turn the clock back a tiny bit if we try it. But we are still on the same path, going the same direction, and we will end up just as boxed-in as we are now. Even more so, as demographics inexorably change.

I honestly wish I felt more optimistic as we just celebrated (!) our independence but there it is.

Who will defend the truth?

Anybody?

So far Patrick Buchanan has been one person at least offering a sort-of defense of Woodrow Wilson, who is now another name and face being banished from our public square and our national memory, thanks to the aggression and venom from BLM and Antifa and all their little helpers.

Among their ‘helpers’, though they are probably too clueless to see it, are the unthinking Republican faithful, for whom the greatest good is always the good of the Grand Old Party, even when it is obviously against the ordinary people of this country. People like those strange creatures who are always shrilly concerned about the Democrats; it appears that (in their eyes) the Democrats are “Keeping African-Americans On The Plantation”, forcing them to vote Democrat and believe in leftist politics. I will say that they themselves, these ‘concerned’ people who see themselves as the champions and protectors of victims everywhere, are being paternalistic and treating a group of people as though they are children, in need of White folks to speak up for them and fight their battles, and it seems as if the enemy is other whites — Democrats, to be precise.

So Wilson was a “Progressive’ but in his time, though we find it hard to envision, most ”Progressives” or ‘liberals’ held social views much like those of normal people; in other words they were much more socially traditional and not fond of the crazy-quilt of radical ideas they hold now. As Buchanan points out in his article, most Democrats, most people then supported segregation. Today’s uninformed can’t fathom this; anybody who supported such policies are now equivalent to Nazis, and the battle flag that flew over the Confederate states is now regarded with the same contempt as the German flag of WWII.

But Wilson lived in a time in which there was not one monolithic worldview and people were not threatened with ‘hate crime’ charges for differing from the acceptable dogma, as today. In other words they were freer than we are now.

I’ll say it again — it needs to be said: people of 100 years ago were freer people than we are, and that was so before our modern Jacobins started their mob rule. People could speak their minds more freely than we can. Look at all the de-platformings and bans that have just happened, and probably more to come.

I think Woodrow Wilson will go down the leftist memory hole because he was ‘one of them’, meaning a ‘progressive’ in most ways,, but his crime was being a ‘thought criminal’ according to the distorted vision of today’s left. He not only viewed the film “Birth of a Nation” but praised it as a great film. Incidentally the film was a box office hit, and was revived again in the 1920s I believe. Wilson also presided over a parade of members of a certain ‘secret society’, though that organization was not illegal or secret then, contrary to some confused stories. In its beginnings it sought to protect those who had been disenfranchised and disarmed. I refer here to the Whites. I know some will disbelieve me but the information is in old history books, which of course will probably go down the memory hole too.

In fact a lot of Americans are now repeating falsehoods about that history and who is correcting this? I don’t hear any such voices. Southrons?

Some of the self-righteous Republicans who promulgate the ”Dems R the Real Racists’ silliness are now denouncing anybody to their right. It is just wrong that these same people have worked up a hatred for the Founding Fathers (because they were ‘slave owners’, all of whom were evil) and many prominent and accomplished people who helped make our country what it was at its best. If we condemn them we condemn most of our Founding Fathers; even the Northerners participated. Do we regard them as human trash to be discarded because of this? Why are we required to use a single lens, a single criterion, with which to judge (and condemn) people of the past? Why are we not granted the ‘right’ to judge by our own standards, and why are we compelled by ourselves or others to condemn our own folk so quickly and harshly?

These attitudes match those of the antifas who are demolishing the statues of many of these great individuals, most of whom were Christian men. So when these self-righteous Republicans think they are being chivalrous toward the downtrodden, they are simply further discrediting our history, our great men, and our culture. They are helping the violent left to do their ugly job of ‘burning it all down’, as they promised they will do.

There is more than one way of destroying a society and a people and a nation. The self-righteous ‘right’ ought to think about what part they are playing. In the name of political correctness they are aligning, whether aware of it or not, with our enemies.

From R.L. Dabney’s Defence of Virginia

For various reasons, the South has suddenly been the target of some venomous statements from ‘conservatives’ lately; it seems that overnight the cause of the South in the Late Unpleasantness is now considered as immoral and evil. It appears that people born in the last half-century or so either were not taught the history of that conflict or they did not comprehend it. No one in the North seems to want to defend the Confederacy, though there was a time when the South was formally “forgiven” and cleared of the North’s accusations of ‘treason’, and even formally pardoned for their actions in fighting against the Holy Union Army, I mean, the Grand National Army. But now that period of reconciliation seems to have disappeared, shall I say ‘gone with the wind?’

Just to see what I mean, do a web search and look at the kinds of condemnatory statements being made about the South. Maybe I’ve been asleep but I haven’t seem this kind of harsh judgment before. It looks as though a new Reconstruction/Punishment phase is being rolled out.

Obviously we are only allowed to look at that chapter of history through one viewpoint, and it is not a matter of freedom of conscience; our viewpoint is given to us, and we accept it and parrot it, or we are subject to being silenced and called names. We are not given the option to take the side of our own forefathers, especially as they have been made villains.

History classes seem to be in order, especially for the young ones, but I forget that schools are not there to teach history or facts. Few people seek out the truth for themselves. But for those who have ears to hear, I will quote some Dabney passages.

The Rev. R.L. Dabney was a brilliant man and a staunch defender of his state and of the South. I’m afraid he is too truthful for this present time, in which even the mildest lapse of ‘political correctness’ (which is in no way correct) brings down serious consequences, tension rather than understanding.

Dabney also predicted that equality would bring about escalating racial tension rather than racial harmony.

Davis Carlton, Faith and Heritage

As our society seems to be plunging toward more stringent subjection to political correctness Dabney seems to have been right about the escalation of tensions.

From the introduction to Dabney’s Defence of Virginia, his thoughts about ‘subjugated nations’ and ‘victims of arbitrary rulership’:

“The weapon of arbitrary rulers is physical force; the shield of its victims is usually evasion and duplicity. Again: few minds and consciences have that stable independence which remains erect and undebauched amidst the disappointments, anguish, and losses of defeat, and the desertion of numbers, and the obloquy of a lost cause. Hence it has usually been found, in the history of subjugated nations, that they receive at the hands of their conquerors this crowning woe — a depraved, cringing, and cowardly spirit. The wisest, kindest, most patriotic thing which any man can do for his country, amidst such calamities, is to aid in preserving and reinstating the tottering principles of his countrymen; to teach them, while they give place to inexorable force, to abate nothing of righteous convictions and self-respect. And in this work he is as really a benefactor of the conquerors as of the conquered. For thus he aids in preserving that precious seed of men, who are men of principle, and not of expediency; who alone (if any can) are able to reconstruct society, after the tumult of faction shall have spent its rage, upon the foundations of truth and justice. The men at the North who have stood firmly aloof from the errors and crimes of this revolution, and the men at the South who have not been unmanned and debauched by defeat — these are the men whom Providence will call forth from their seclusion, when the fury of fanaticism shall have done its worst, to repair its mischiefs, and save America from chronic anarchy and barbarism; if, indeed, any rescue is designed for us. It is this audience, “few but fit,” with which I would chiefly commune. They will appreciate this humble effort to justify the history of our native States, and to sustain the hearts of their sons in the hour of cruel reproach.”

Hampden Sidney, Virginia, June 1867

Why

I was just reading a discussion as to why it’s difficult to find conservative candidates for the Supreme Court these days. There is probably no single explanation for it, but it seems that one factor is overlooked whenever a subject like this comes up.

I might point out the obvious, that in the year 2020 there are few real right-wing people in our society, contrary to the left’s insistence that ‘Supremacists’ and right-wing extremists lurk everywhere. Those who call themselves conservatives or rightists fall far short of that definition as it was even one generation ago. Liberal/left/globalist/multicult ideas have taken a firm hold on our society, even on the ”right”.

Maybe this article helps by pointing out the obvious fact that it is a generational thing, this scarcity of conservatives and the concomitant trend towards conforming to the cultural/social trend, which is ever-leftward.

There is a ‘changing of the guard.’ Those who upheld the classic Christian-inspired standards are aging, or are already gone, along with any influence they wielded during their day. Those people were better-educated, being taught by classical and more rigorous standards. They had more extensive life-experience. The older generations were often well-read and informed — even those with only 8th grade educations. They were less susceptible, it seems, to the lure of socialism/Communism.

Some Republicans/Conservatives (they are not always synonymous) don’t even realize or won’t acknowledge that they, like the left, have absorbed a great deal of liberal/left propaganda via media and peer pressure. How much effect has social media, like Facebook, had in leading people to join the herd in some social/cultural trend which is based on leftist influence?

Just think of how quickly the LGBTQXYZ movement got approval, or at least passive tolerance, from the so-called ‘right’? Or feminism, along with women in combat, women as police officers, etc. ?

It is seldom mentioned or credited that each generation becomes more liberal and left-wing. Of the generations that are alive now, the older the generation, the more conservative, and conversely the younger generations more liberal. They are driving the trends toward a more left-wing, less traditional population. This is not just my personal view; it’s documented in studies and polls.

It seems that unless something happens to reverse the direction among the younger generations, those most affected by the propaganda machine, our society will likely continue down the path it is on, with the Gordian Knot of the ‘racial issue’ being at the center of most of the crises. As long as the present dominant way of addressing (or not addressing) the question prevails, as it looks impossible to challenge, where is the way out of the intractable situation? It seems increasingly unlikely that those steeped in today’s dogmas could ever even imagine any other way of thinking.

There will be no more ‘conservative’ Supreme Court Justices if our society is not able to question the ironclad dogmas that have people’s minds captured. Yes, there are still ‘heartland’ Americans who retain some of the old attitudes, but to use a turn of phrase ”they don’t make ’em like that anymore.” Our society looks capable only of producing more of what we now have.

It looks as though the best we can hope for is simply crazy-far-left and not-quite-as-crazy-far-left, as the Hobson’s Choice of our political system. It’s becoming undeniable that what passes as ‘right-wing’ now is far from right; it is just a slightly more attenuated form of ‘progressivism’, very much driven by ideas of ‘social justice’ and ‘racial equality’ as the heart and center of American principles. And that’s a labyrinth from which nobody can seem to find a realistic way out.

What ails us?

“It is character that rules in nations as in individuals. Only in loyalty to the old can we serve the new; only in understanding the Past, can we interpret and use the Present; for history is not made but unfolded, and the Old World is ever present in the New.”

— Benjamin Ide Wheeler.

I constantly hear it said that ‘America is dead’, and that we should just get over it, not even grieve for what was lost, or what is being lost.

These flippant statements, I suppose, are just more proof that America is, in fact, dead. A country cannot survive if the people of a country no longer care if their homeland survives, or if they greet its demise with no apparent feeling of regret, grief, or sign of bereavement. There are even people who seem glad to hear of the death of their country because they saw only its flaws and none of its strengths. This category of people includes not just embittered, rage-filled malcontents like those we’ve seen in the news of the past couple of weeks, but people who call themselves right-wing.

In the normal state of things, the right represents the patriotic and loyal element, while the left often has no feelings of loyalty to country and citizens, nor do they feel much attachment to the land. And they are not ethnopatriots, which to my mind is the only real patriotism; they are often the kind who hate their land of birth.

I see a lot of the same inverted sentiments among the disaffected right (the alt-right as was). Some of the young right are among those who want to see their homeland fall and be no more. What do they think will replace it? They seem indifferent about what will replace the U.S. The idea that something much worse may fill the vacuum doesn’t seem to trouble them.

The left, however, have plans and their ‘utopia’ will be everyone else’s nightmare.
The situation in Seattle, with the ‘Chaz’ charade, may be a laughable attempt at creating an enclave or even a separate ‘state’ within a state but it is not something we should just shrug off. Never underestimate the left’s ability to create destruction and chaos. I hear people saying we should just let them go on with their plan and ignore them because it will fail anyway. Or people talk about the ‘optics’ of interfering; it will make Trump ”look bad” if he acts (which he has not shown signs of doing anyway) so let them do what they like so nobody can condemn Trump.

As I understand it, both the lefty Mayoress of Seattle, Miss Durkan, and the governor of Washington State, were pointedly nasty and disrespectful in talking to the President about the situation in Seattle. My readers know that I was a Trump skeptic but I abhor the way in which all the enemies of Trump address him or talk about him. They are uncouth, ill-bred, coarse, and ignorant — this kind of openly hostile and crude discourse is something new in our increasingly nasty political scene. Maybe this low behavior went on behind closed doors but not in the public square. It is not good; it further degrades our political discourse and it makes us that much less civil and mature a people.

Politics of course is war by other means, but some degree of collegial civility used to be de rigueur, but now there are no holds barred. Another sign of a moribund America.

I don’t question that the America I loved is gone. I have always said, though, that the people make the place. Bad people, bad country, no matter its wealth or natural beauty; if the reigning spirit is that of hostility, suspicion, anger, vindictiveness, division — which are all increasing in this country — how can such a country continue? And if there is no public will to reverse the dangerous trends, there’s not much hope of salvaging a country. However, it seems a lot of Americans now have a kind of passivist/fatalist attitude, as if no human effort can change things; it’s all ‘Karma’, which many post-Christian Americans think, or Fate. Hence it’s beyond any human effort.

The guilty-minded and mind-conditioned Americans think America is deserving of death because Reasons. (Politically Correct reasons, of course.) Some embittered young rightists think we deserve destruction because we shouldn’t have fought the two world wars. We were the bad guys in all cases. Hence we deserve the death penalty as a nation. The left — well, we know what they “think” and why they want America destroyed. They’ve been slowly killing the nation and destroying the minds of its people for generations — the Gramscian approach.

Still, despite our country being under siege and denounced every day on the ”News”, there seems to be little response from the public other than sporadic grumbling but little will to do anything more practical. It seems the right has us stymied, and people seem resigned. The left finds ways to box us in, or to silence us and we have no counter-response of any significance. It seems the President embodies this stance; he spoke of ending the Seattle situation but after his ‘conversation’ with the spinster Mayoress of Seattle and the governor, nothing was done.

Sometimes I half-wonder if those ‘witches’ who say they are directing curses at the President(and probably the rest of us) are having some success in with their efforts to harm this country as well as those in authority. It seems like we’re all under some kind of spell making us apathetic.

I started out blogging as a patriot, or as one early commenter called me, a ”Hyper-Americanist.’ Maybe that’s what I was. This country was once a great country in which to grow up and to raise a family. Sure, it was never perfect; nothing run by human beings can be. But it was a wonderful country; it’s a shame that all who criticize and jeer at the ‘old America’ didn’t live there and see it as it was. But the sour grapes approach is just wrong. My heart breaks to think that America is gone, and can never be what it once was. But must we sit and passively watch it happen, like some kind of Eastern fatalist? We used to be a can-do people, a people who believed in being more pro-active and willing to give it the old school try. If we hadn’t been that kind, this country would never have existed. My ancestors and many of yours would have never survived the first winter or the first famine or epidemic or Indian attack — but they did, by sheer grit and by faith in God. Do we still possess the genes or the will for that kind of determination and fortitude? Maybe not. I have less and less faith in us.

We are also missing what some philosophers said a nation needs: pietas, what blogger Cambria Will Not Yield often writes of. It seems a lot of us don’t like our fellow Americans. The young — not all, but many — have developed a loathing for their elders. POCs blame Whites for all their difficulties or problems, or just dislike the latter because of their successes. Envy, in other words. Men and women are at odds as never before. And then people blame outside forces for this: ”They want us divided” — so Q and his/their followers say — but nature divides us. Others may stir up more division or exploit existing division, but what’s the answer, Q? More forcible ‘multiculturalism and inclusion” under the guise of ”Unity” ? More of what ails us? Globalism? More concessions? We’re on that road now, where we will be under greater pressure to conform to the multicult and cultural Marxism. More weakening of America.

I don’t know the answers, except that I am certain that going further down the treacherous road we are on is not the answer and will only lead to far worse situations.

And if we can’t bring back ‘dead’ America? Well, let’s not pronounce the patient dead while there’s still a pulse, and let’s not administer euthanasia yet.

This world is not ”home” for Christians; we’re pilgrims and strangers — but we’re called to ‘occupy’ until the final curtain rings down.

Demonizing the South

“By all means let us care for them and keep their memory fresh. The glory won by these men and their leaders on many a hard-fought field belongs to the American nation, and should be perpetuated by monuments of granite and marble on each and all of these fields, but especially should we insist that the deeds of all our soldiers should be carefully and truthfully enshrined in the pages of history, and proudly celebrated by orator and poet.”

quote from President McKinley, from God’s War by Wilson Vance

The bronze statue of General Robert E. Lee is now removed from its place. General Lee is now anathema to the barbarians who apparently hold power in this nation once known as America. These events are painful for me to write about. Our heroes are now anathema to those in control, and they want to rub our faces in the defeat this symbolizes.

The reference to President McKinley’s concern for the graves of Confederate soldiers — and remember, this was not that long after the War Between the States; many of the combatants were still alive — shows that people then had more understanding of the situation, and the Northern side, at least in part, accepted that the Confederates were doing what was right for their homeland, by their lights.

Now, in their deep ignorance, those who hate the South and the Confederacy are emboldened to punish and degrade the South. So far there has been little effort to prevent the destruction of our monuments or even to answer the slanders against our ancestors and heritage. Why? I know that many younger people seem ashamed of the South and were more than willing to discard our flag or other emblems of South. Again, why? Because they thought the “optics” of displaying the flag were bad, and that it ”makes us look bad” to opponents. This is just defeatism.

I knew that the vandals who have been destroying Confederate monuments and symbols were planning on removing the Lee statue. Next will probably be Jefferson, as they have forever stained his character by false accusations — and shame on any and all Americans who chose to believe those canards, or worse, to repeat them.

In his book, Lee at Appomattox, Charles Francis Adams, in 1903, muses about a future in which the Confederates would be accepted as part of our American story.

He visualizes the Lee Monument — now removed of course — and writes of the positive qualities of the Confederate soldier. Mind you, Adams had little sympathy for the Southern cause, but was willing to see good in the ‘enemy’, as the war receded into the past.

“…the Confederate had many great and generous qualities; he also was brave, chivalrous, self-sacrificing, sincere, and patriotic. So I look forward to the time when he, too, will be represented in our national Pantheon.
[…]
The bronze effigy of Robert E. Lee, mounted on his charger and with the insignia of his Confederate rank, will from its pedestal in the nation’s capital gaze across the Potomac at his old home at Arlington.
[…]
When that time comes, Lee’s monument will be educational, — it will typify the historical appreciation of all that goes to make up the loftiest type of character, military and civic, exemplified in an opponent, once dreaded but ever respected, and above all, it will symbolize and commemorate that loyal acceptance of the consequences of defeat, and the patient upbuilding of a people under new conditions by constitutional means, which I hold to be the greatest educational lesson America has yet taught to a once skeptical but now silenced world.”

– Charles Francis Adams, Lee at Appomattox

The talk of the acceptance of defeat is a little hard to take. Yes, Lee did accept his defeat in a dignified and manly way. But the defeat the South seems to be suffering now is a bitter pill to swallow. Adams was too hopeful in his vision of a future in which Robert E. Lee’s monument would still be standing, in its place of honor, and a world in which reasonable and civilized people would still honor General Lee and his soldiers, and ‘historical appreciation’ would quell any bitterness about the War.

The hope for such a world to exist seems unlikely now. ‘Historical appreciation’ is in very short supply today.

Elusive unity

Reading Q’s latest messages on Anonymous Conservative’s blog, I’m noticing some things that I didn’t realize before. I haven’t followed Q consistently, just sporadically here and there.

It’s evident that Q, whoever he or ‘they’ may be, is more or less a civic ‘nationalist’ of sorts. The messages sometimes stress the idea that ‘we’re all in this together’, ‘WWG1WGA’, etc. Unity, union, solidarity seem to be persistent themes.

But in a country so sorely divided is it realistic to expect so many disparate and disconnected “Americans” to all pull together and behave as a family? Q says we are ”all children of God’; this sounds like it’s aimed at Christians who have rather casual beliefs. Most good old Bible teachers or preachers will tell you that not all are ‘children of God’; that only comes with committing one’s life to our Lord. It isn’t an automatic process.

Q emphasizes our ‘civic nationalist’ brotherhood; we’re all Americans and we must not be divided by anything, and we must not even notice race, as the latest message said.

But the differences that divide us are not differences that are chosen, nor can we just wave them away. Genetics and culture, language and religion, regional ties and loyalties, all these factors divide us. And then Scripture tells us that God sets the bounds of nations; he created dividing markers, in our external environment as well as in our minds and hearts — and DNA.

As I said, I haven’t read every word from Q et al, but I have noticed the recurring themes. Nevertheless, I am all for the idea of trying to retrieve and restore what is left of our society and our body politic after the Left and their globalist overlords have taken the wrecking ball to it. Yet I don’t see how the ‘swamp’ can be drained given the fact that the nation-wreckers seem so numerous and so deeply established in the system so that they can withstand any efforts on the part of Patriots. And suppose the ‘White Hats’, whoever they are, do succeed? Will a new agenda be promoted to reverse the damage done by the fanatics on the left?

Q is promoting ‘Free Thought’ which is, in my opinion, based in Scientism, secularism, and for many people who identify with it, atheism or libertarianism. In Q’s words, logic and reason should predominate over what he deems ‘groupthink.’ This is what we often hear from libertarians and atheists. And it may sound good; I think reason and logic should be valued, and adult people should be grounded in those things, and be fit to exercise those faculties in everyday life. Sad to say few people in this 21st century seem to have been educated to think logically or to even argue their point in a cogent way. Blame the school system and the media or society; whoever is to blame, they’ve succeeded in keeping people mal-educated and misinformed.

Q says that authority, tradition, dogma, or revelation should not play any part.

What kind of country would we be living in if the above elements are to be excluded?
Whatever it would be, it would bear little resemblance to the country that our forebears created.

Along about this time someone will say that the Founding Fathers were mostly atheists or ‘Freethinkers’ or Masons or Rosicrucians. Some of them were to an extent ‘Freethinkers’ of some sort, but it can be said that they were not anti-Christian, and they were not trying to remove Christianity from our society.

But without the tradition, authority, and revelation it would seem that Q’s ideal society would be a secularist and sterile kind of society in which we would have some kind of feigned Unity, in a multicultural and ‘colorblind’ civic nationalist world.

Patriotism in this case would seem to meean loyalty to the System, the Flag, or to a set of ”Freethinking” beliefs. Ethnonationalism, by contrast, means we identify with the heritage and the culture of our folk, including honoring our history and our distinctive traditions.

Would that be enough to restore what Q et al regard as our natural and rightful Unity? Did we ever have that kind of unity and solidarity before? I would say yes, but that was in the early days of this country, before it became so disparate and fragmented, with many cultures and languages and customs.

There can only be unity in Truth; as of now we live in what I’ve called an Edifice of Lies. We are compelled to believe obvious untruths (about HBD, among other things) and some of us won’t or can’t speak lies in order to conform to PC.

If a system is based on lies and pretend ‘unity’, in which we all have to censor our thoughts and speech, and be party to falsehoods, then that can never be true Unity. Unity is genuine only if is not coerced or artificially created; otherwise it is just one more pretense among many.

Just as Christianity remains fragmented because of differing beliefs and traditions, so is our Western society. The causes of the divisions are real and they won’t disappear overnight.

‘Diversity’ brings disunity, which I think is more than obvious to anybody with the eyes to see and the ears to hear.

I am certain that Q’s efforts, insofar as we can perceive them, would be preferred to staying on the runaway fast train to Babel. But I think we have to exercise some discernment about where the Q train would take us — assuming a patriot remnant prevails.