American Reconstruction — circa 1919

When we hear or read the term ‘Reconstruction’, those of us from the South at least, tend to think of the process that was inflicted on the former CSA, but in 1919 or so, the R-word of that day was more likely to refer to the planned process of re-making not just the world map post WWI, but remaking the minds and hearts of the former combatant nations, specifically the Western/European world.

Nowadays many people, lacking a good education in 20th century history, think that the Left’s current offensive is peculiar to our day, whereas when we look at books of the early 20th century we find that the Left was already barking mad back then. For example; there were leftist parties in America which were very much active , and in the wake of WWI there were violent episodes, such as incidents involving the out-of-control Industrial Workers or the World (IWW, also known as ‘Wobblies’). In a shocking episode, IWW members lynched and castrated a military veteran, and killed four other men in a separate shooting episode, in Centralia, Washington. The Pacific Northwest has long been a hotbed of this kind of fanaticism. Of course current sources say that IWW violence is a ”myth” but then myths don’t kill people.

The antifas, aggressive and brutish as they are, are kiddies compared to their counterparts of a hundred years ago. This is not to downplay the malice of the antifas but to remind us that the violence and unrest are not peculiar to our troubled time, but another instance of a recurrent, chronic phenomenon.

The unrest of the post-WWI era also manifested in the form of — well, manifestos. Lost of rhetoric appeared involving how humanity must learn to live together in harmony, or else — or else humanity would destroy itself in rampant senseless wars. The answer, according to our betters, who were writing book upon book urging peace at all costs, was for us all to transcend nationalism and learn to join together.

A few examples of the many books that appeared circa 1919 were: Reconstructing America (subtitle: Sociologically and Economically) by one Benjamin J. Rosenthal, and another tome, also called Reconstructing America, subtitled ‘Our Next Big Job‘. It was a compilation of essays by ‘respected’ invidivuals including Woodrow Wilson, Paul Warburg, and John D. Rockefeller Jr., From the introduction:

“We are in the throes of a new order, conscious of a new spirit of toleration and mutual interest…

Yet another book, by Cecil Fairfield Lavell, also printed in 1919, also used the word ‘Reconstruction’ in its title – (Reconstruction and National Life). Among the ideas promoted in that book were the ‘fusion’ of different ethnic and racial groups, suggesting that this would be the best answer, a sure deterrent to future conflicts. Another odd idea there: that intensified nationalism, though feared by the intelligentsia, might in fact fuel internationalism. I suppose this meant that they thought people were so war-weary (understandably so, after the horrors of WWI) that they would reject nationalism. Or were they intending to try a kind of aversion therapy by allowing nationalism to go to such excesses that people would reject it in favor of the ‘One World’ nostrum?

Shades of the Kalergists.

In all my reading of old books in the last year or two, focusing on the WWI era and earlier, it becomes obvious that the situation in which we find ourselves is not of recent origin; it’s been brewing for at least the better part of a century, and much longer than that if you go back at least to the era of the rise of the Jacobins. Yet we can only seem to see causes in much more recent times.

But these things, having deeper roots than we have imagined, will be harder to deal with if we don’t consider their long-established presence in our country and in Europe.

Uncharted waters

Does it seem as though the world is getting darker and darker? I mean, in the sense of becoming murkier, more uncertain, more unsettled. I’ve been saying this to people for some years now. It’s just something that’s palpable to me, and it’s distressing.

It seems so many recent events are odd, unprecedented, and things are spiralling out of control. Maybe some few don’t feel it, and think I am exaggerating or magnifying things.

The line from Yeats, ‘Things fall apart; the center cannot hold‘ comes to mind. Well, for years I’ve been quoting the rest of that poem, especially the part about ‘the best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.

Was Yeats prophetic? I ask rhetorically, though Yeats was unlikely to have been divinely inspired; he was a dabbler in the occult — more than a dabbler, actually; he was involved with the Aleister Crowley cult, Crowley touting himself as the world’s most evil man, or something of the sort.

At this point, it’s people who dissent from the present day’s orthodoxy who are considered ‘evil’ — people who question the leftist, PC consensus. It’s they and their subservient media who control the narrative and the dialectic.

Thinking back to when I began blogging — that was 13 years ago, I think — there still seemed to be reason to hope that America might wake up from its stupor and see what was transpiring, but no; it seems in retrospect that people were reluctant to open their eyes, and wanted to remain in the dark.

But when I began, I thought there was hope in trying to awaken our folk to our history, our heritage, our traditions — and yes, we did and do have a culture. I hoped to exhort people to some kind of healthy pride and awareness of where we came from, and what we had in our way of life and our very identity. But as time went on, and with the changing of the guard — the passing of the older generations and the new ‘young adult’ generations — there no longer seemed to be a receptive audience to the message I tried to convey. Cynicism is the order of the day, and to be honest it’s partly the fact that some of the younger ones never learned the history of their folk or of this country. History and heritage don’t sell. There is no demand for that it seems.

The pietas to which Cambria Will Not Yield often alludes must be found and restored. But are we ready to do that?

If I had my wish, I would focus on our history, and on our fellow-feeling, our love for our own, for our folk. That, to me, is of value; the political situation is very worrying and maddening at times. I don’t believe there will be a political solution to our crisis.

It seems we’re far from home, without a compass or a map.

Acknowledging we are lost is hard in times like these, at least for those who, like me, tend to be optimistic — though cautiously, much more cautiously so, in these times. We have to be honest and acknowledge that we are in uncharted waters. But then we can’t lose heart and lose hope.

Having just read CWNY’s latest post, his last paragraph says some of what I am thinking:

There are no supports left for the Christian European. Everything Christian and European has been torn asunder. Only our hearts are left. Inside His Kingdom of the heart, we must find the strength to resist liberalism and cling to our European hearth fire. All is indeed cheerless, dark, and deadly – we have only our “trembling faith,” and His promise that He will be with us “alway, even unto the ending of the world.” +

Who said “America: love it or…”

What with all the furor over the President’s comments — suggesting that those who ‘hate’ our country might like to leave — those of us who were around in the 1970s likely remember the saying ‘America: love it or leave it.’

That phrase seems to be along the same line as what the President said, but somehow I don’t remember that older phrase stirring up such a hornets’ nest of anger and invective. It seems we’ve changed since those relatively peaceful days of the 1970s. I seem to remember that later, during the Reagan years, the phrase ‘love it or leave it‘ enjoyed a certain popularity, though the usual legions of the disgruntled may have muttered and grumbled about ‘jingoism’ or something.

People back then, even the leftists, hadn’t yet developed the habit of throwing the ‘r’-word around with such profligacy. It’s hard to imagine it was ever like that in America.

Incidentally, it seems that the phrase ‘America: love it or leave it‘ was coined by old-time radio reporter Walter Winchell, back in 1940, before Pearl Harbor and our entry into World War II.

The slogan persisted and was revived during the Vietnam War era, as a response to the far-left’s constant agitprop.

It may be that the President’s words were a little more incendiary than the Winchell slogan, but it seems that he has some ‘Wormtongues” close to him who are trying to induce him to recant what he said. I think that would be a mistake and it wouldn’t appease those who say they are offended. Apologies in cases like these appear as weakness.

And if any of us were resident in a foreign country whose people and whose policies we harshly criticized, I think we’d expect to be given a rough reception by the leaders and citizens of said country. And in the first place, why would anybody want to move to a country which they saw as ‘racist’ and oppressive? That’s the height of irrationality, or sheer perversity. Yet it seems that many of our new ‘neighbors’ and newly elected officials don’t like us very much, despite their determination to settle down amongst us deplorable people. I find that really odd, yet nobody ever asks the obvious question ‘why’? I suppose it would be too politically incorrect. Truth and frankness are dangerous these days.

Another Founding Father falls prey to the usual suspects

You’ve no doubt read the stories of how the ‘city fathers’ (is that sexist?) of Charlottesville, Virginia have dropped their Thomas Jefferson holiday. Why? Need we ask?

This was bound to happen, given that even George Washington has been declared unfit to be honored, as he once was, as the Father of our Country.

So on Unz.com, there is a discussion thread about the Thomas Jefferson situation, and predictably several people are repeating the slanders about Sally Hemings, treating the allegations as established fact. This riles me. Is it wrong to object to one’s ancestors being slandered in this way? It seems to me that the smears are a blot on the whole family line, not to say on Thomas Jefferson himself. Up until a certain impeached president resurrected the scurrilous allegations (back in the 1990s) few people even knew of the rumors — which originated with some of Thomas Jefferson’s political enemies, who happened to be unprincipled and lewd-minded men.

I’ve begun to be cynical enough to believe that anybody who repeats those rumors and calumnies now is also guilty of being lewd-minded, getting some kind of leg-tingle from imagining the scenario. Some people have read too many of the old-fashioned pulp novels about such liaisons, or seen too many sleazy Hollywood films about miscegeny. Otherwise why are they so eager to believe accusations with no proof? I hope those people never sit on juries; we like to think, perhaps too optimistically, that in our country people are reasonable and objective in their judgments, but I wonder.

From all I’ve read of Thomas Jefferson, the supposed relationship between him and Sally would have been greatly out of character for him. I suspect the people who believe him guilty have never learned much about him, never read any of his correspondence and other writings, never read a biography by an old-fashioned, objective historian. Of course he was not a saint but neither was he an exploiter, a liar, or a man of excessive carnal appetites. But in today’s world, everyone is assumed to be lecherous and lewd because that’s the nature of the society we live in, sadly. People today can’t comprehend that it was not always so, that there were once people of integrity, who lived by standards and morals.

It seems I am one of the last to defend his name, at least online, and I like to think I’d do so even were I not connected to him by blood. There was an older gentleman, also a descendant, who used to speak up in Jefferson’s defense on the Internet, but I think he’s no longer with us, so it seems Jefferson has fewer and fewer defenders these days. It’s sad, because it’s also an indication of how traditional America, along with our old standards, our old culture and its symbols, our heroes, and our history, all are under attack if not destroyed. The young like to label anyone who tries to defend the ‘old America’ as a ‘patriotard’ or (depending on age) as a ‘boomertard’ but someone has to speak up, or just passively watch it all crumble before our eyes.

One of the worst losses of the war on old America is the loss of our free speech, the loss of the right to speak our minds freely, even to criticize the powerful. Of course it’s always politically correct to slander our Founding Fathers and our ancestors generally, or to criticize those who are now society’s underdogs, not quite outnumbered yet, but already all but silenced. Thomas Jefferson was a great champion of free speech, and I think he would be greatly grieved to see the America that has replaced the one he and his contemporaries created for us.

White guilt month

As it’s now Anti-White History Month, for another week at least, it’s no surprise to read that there is a remake of Alex Haley’s Roots miniseries, originally aired in the late 1970s.

The original miniseries, from what I recall, had quite a large audience. In 1977 there was a large segment of the White population that had been softened up by a couple of decades of hectoring and shaming about ‘racism’, and it also helped Roots‘ ratings that many teachers and college professors required their students to watch the miniseries.
Remember, too, that many people did not have cable TV in that era, so the only choices available were the alphabet networks, all three of them, plus PBS and maybe a local independent channel. So most of the White TV audience (a majority still in those long-ago days) saw the series and if not, heard discussion of it at work or school.

I remember my sociology teacher, who was black and Afrocentric,  requiring us to watch it and discuss it. Back then political correctness had not yet ‘got our tongues’, so I remember some White students actually complaining that the series made all Whites look vicious, ignorant, and ugly. I remember our Sociology teacher telling us that the shoe needed to be on the other foot for a change, and that seemed to squelch any further criticism of the series’ anti-White tone.

Since I saw Roots back in those days, I’ve told many people that the “writer” Alex Haley was a plagiarist, and that the series was a propaganda piece, not history, but few people are able to accept that, at least not the usual brainwashed PC crowd — just as they are not able to process the heresy that a certain other black ‘icon’ was a plagiarist. They don’t want to entertain such blasphemous thoughts.

In recent years there has been a barrage of anti-White movies, among them that ‘Django’ movie. Aside: what’s the story with giving the character a gypsy name? Django Reinhardt, the famous gypsy guitarist has said his name was s gypsy name. The movie writers were ignoramuses; I guess ‘Django’ sounded cool to them and sounded ‘African’ so they went with it. Facts? Irrelevant. They always are with lefties.

Facts never matter in these propaganda pieces. The sad thing is that the audience (which seems to include a distressingly large percentage of the White population) seems not to care. They accept movies as gospel truth in most cases, and can’t be bothered to seek out the truth for themselves. Not that there are many history books around that tell the truth, anyway.

The fact that, thanks to decades of anti-White propaganda, we now have a population of politically-corrected (read: misinformed and stupid) anti-White Whites. That’s bad enough, but the tragedy of it is that blacks who believe the media lies about the past are now acting out in ways that are physically injurious to Whites. How many flash mob attacks, how many ”random” murders, rapes, and assorted other crimes have resulted, if only indirectly, due to the hate-Whitey propaganda coming out of Hollywood and TV and popular music — which has also carried its share of anti-White messages? However many there have been, it’s too many. And it was all avoidable. All predictable, and therefore 100 percent preventable. But obviously there are interests wishing to incite hatred (though they project hatred onto us) and to provoke violence. So they continue with their relentless warfare against us via their slickly-produced lies.

And when will it stop?

Another instance of this phenomenon is the book and later, movie, To Kill a Mockingbird. This book is now required reading for many high-schoolers, even in Christian schools, and probably is part of some home-schooling curricula, too. The author, or putative author, Harper Lee, recently died, and on social media like Tumblr, primarily the province of very young, very PC users, there has been so much hagiolatry, so much fawning, over Lee. (Incidentally, is Harper Lee any kin to the Lees of Virginia? I rather have hoped not, because she may be kin of mine.) The young and the witless venerate writers like her. Of course it is only the White young people, not the blacks, who idolize her.

It’s always said to be bad form to speak ill of the dead, so I will restrain myself; or maybe I will give her the benefit of the doubt: she may not have written To Kill a Mockingbird anyway. It’s been rumored for a long time that her lifelong friend Truman Capote actually wrote the book, or at least heavily contributed to it, and the fact that she never produced anything else in print except for the recent ‘prequel’ fueled that rumor. But whoever wrote it, there’s no doubt that it was a big contributor to White guilt. Even ”conservative” White women often say the book is their favorite. So ‘Mockingbird’ has done its part to create today’s anti-White, politically correct, racially-charged world, and yes, indirectly, to incite violence against Whites. Every little bit hurts.

And what is it with this particular kind of Southerner, Harper Lee and Truman Capote (and some other ‘literary’ Southrons) who seem to hate their own “roots” and their own folk? This is a problem that Southrons have to address. What does one call the White equivalent of an ‘Uncle Tom’? The older generations had a name for them that is too politically correct to utter.

Remember back in 2009 White Americans were subjected to a diatribe about how we were a ‘nation of cowards’ who refuse to dialogue on race? When have we ever been given a choice? Even in my sociology class, back in the late 70s, we were being silenced and told that our opinions did not count. We were told that it was our ‘turn’ to be slandered as we supposedly had it coming. Well, when will the score be evened? Our side is not being heard, and things get uglier and uglier, as the lies mount up to the heavens.

Boycott the lies, and answer them with the truth whenever possible. We can’t let only one side be heard forever.