Dixie defamed again

The governor of what was once the state of Virginia, a state founded by my own ancestors (and yours, probably, if you are an original Southron), has now ended the holiday which honored Generals Lee and Jackson.

This, according to the governor, makes his People’s Republic of Virginia “a more representative and inclusive Commonwealth”. Representative and inclusive of what, or whom? Certainly not the oldest inhabitants of the Old Dominion. And by what rights can it now be called ”The Old Dominion”? You can read the history of that nickname here, but clearly it has to do with the origins of the state of Virginia, its founders, and its population, its history and heritage, in short.

The people who ‘elected’ the present governor of the current ‘state of Virginia’ constitute a group of people very unlike those who have populated Virginia since the English colonists first arrived, some 400+ years ago. This is not by happenstance; it’s by design. It’s an agenda, like Trudeau’s Grand Remplacement. The great ‘god’ diversity must be served.

Looking at a website which is supposed to be a biographical site for Northam, the only “memorable quote” attributed to him is the following, which I could have guessed at without knowing anything more about him than I do:

We live in a very diverse society — it is getting more diverse every day. It is that diverse society that makes this country great.”

quoted here

Now, if that’s not an original quote or thought. Imagine.

We’re additionally told that he was voted ‘most likely to succeed’ in high school or college or somewhere. Again, how predictable. But likely to succeed at what, exactly? Being the first to suggest legalizing post-natal infanticide? To succeed at pushing for demographic change in your own state, so that the original founding-stock are pushed out, or outnumbered at the polls? Or to make a run at abolishing the historical memories of Virginia’s greatest men? His ‘success’ is at the expense of history, heritage, tradition, memory. A country and a folk cannot thrive without those things.

Northam’s changeling Virginia (how long until the original name has to go?) is made up of a congeries of vastly disparate peoples who have little to nothing in common, except for an envy and covetousness that motivates the purposeful demographic changes which have transmuted Virginia to another mini-Babel. This kind of cobbled-together ‘state’ cannot thrive.

For those diversity-bots who go around parroting ‘diversity makes us strong’ or ‘diversity is our strength’ — prove it. Just saying it does not make it true. Just repeating nonsense does not make it sensible, much less factual. Yet we let every two-bit charlatan who gets behind a microphone or in front of a camera get away with uttering this tiresome drivel. Why, in heaven’s name, do we let them go unchallenged or unquestioned?

It’s a tragedy for us that we no longer seem to produce leaders of any calibre to challenge the demagogues and fakes. Where are our men of the talent of Thomas Jefferson, or any General Lee, or Rev. Dabney or any of the great orators or thinkers of our past? None of today’s leaders can hold a candle to any of them.

Still, it goes on: our country is being subjected to a ‘great replacement’, as are all of the countries of former Christendom. And to our shame, it’s people who are nominally of our own folk who are facilitating this compulsory transformation.

Worst, the ‘state of Virginia’ was trying to pass laws forbidding criticism of elected officials. How shameful and how very — shall I say it? — un-American. Yes, it is against the very principles laid down by our forefathers who created this country, but then few people seem to know those principles, much less to care to preserve them.

Theoretically my opinions would make me ‘guilty’ of refusing to bow down to the self-declared godlets who sit in legislatures or inhabit some public office. And that in itself is wrong. If such becomes law then America will well and truly be done.

‘What the Old South can teach us’

The following was published in 1903, written by Cephas Shelburne:

What the Old South Can Teach Us

SIMPLICITY, CULTURE AND BEAUTY IN COLONIAL AND SOUTHERN LIFE

In this busy, rushing, grasping day of commerce Americans might find much instruction and inspiration, and learn a valuable lesson, if they would turn for a moment once in a while to consider the stately, generous and beauty-loving order which marked the later colonial and earlier national period of our history, particularly in the South. The present owes a real debt to the South of the past and to the early colonial period of our history — a debt that cannot be ignored as long as faith, courage, beauty, culture, and unselfish devotion and hospitality may be reckoned among a people’s virtues. Separated from us by the chasm of the heroic “late unpleasantness” and by four decades of time, both the South and North have entirely put the past behind them, except in so far as both may learn from past history. And the range is now long enough for correct perspective.

Shall we not today find something sweet and sound in the South that will yet be a powerful, conservative influence in the republic? “Will it not be strange,” asks, a distinguished biblical scholar and an old-time anti-slavery radical, “if we have to depend, after all, upon the orthodox conservatism of the South?”

The word “Southerner” carries with it as distinctive traits and characteristics as the words Scotchman or Frenchman. Isolated from the ultra-industrial spirit, undisturbed by “isms” of any sort, “born of a stock that planted itself with like vigor and purity nowhere else outside of its island home,” it was bred under separate and unique conditions. And, though the old South is a thing of the past, a new era of freedom has set in, and we are one people and inseparable, the South has left a legacy and memory invaluable to this
generation.

The old Southern life and civilization was full of power and inspiration. At no other time perhaps in the history of America do we find a period so fraught with sincerity, openness and frankness of manner, charm and graces of cultivation. It was a time of simple faith, honesty, and open simplicity. The voice of the scoffer at religion was seldom heard and never heeded in the Southland. There were no disintegrating influences of modern skeptical thought. The conservatism of the South refused to pipe to the mad dance of the times.

While this cultured generation is elsewhere framing artistic prayers to an “eternal not ourselves” or asking unanswerable questions of the “Unknowable’
and puzzling itself over “Two Isaiahs,” everywhere in the Southland there were, and are, earnest men and women reverently thanking God for sunshine and rain, seedtime and harvest, and “into every corner of whose homes shines the light of God by day and by night.”

The old days in the Sonth was a time of faith, of reverence, of simple honesty. In every land but the South good and wise men are mourning the decay of reverence, of the religious spirit. Reverence is the need of our time, of all times. As long as a healthful reverence for the beautiful, the good and true, for God and the manifestations of God, in man remain, we are safe, let creeds change as they may.

Now while this religious revolution is working, some land, some people must stand out as a light, must bear the ark of the covenant. In our boasted industrial and commercial supremacy, in our mad rush for the dollar — when we are forgetting that there are stars in the heavens, flowers in the fields, and beauty in the landscape, and virtues of soul — it is well that some land and people stand a beacon-light, content to live soberly, righteously and godly in this present evil world, and to remember that the kingdom of God and of man is not altogether “meat and drink, but righteousness, joy and peace.”

A thriving, pushing, hustling Northwesterner, just returning from a trip into Old Virginia and the South, in the course of which an “immense ennui” possessed him, remarked, “Oh, the South is behind the times, out of date, a back number.” By which he meant that the material, commercial and industrial interests of the South were not in keeping with that of the Northwest. “But,” he added, “the ‘New South’ is manifesting some life, and is coming up to date.” And by the “New South” and “up to date” is meant that the South of today, the new industrial South, “has joined the procession,” and has turned her mind to the development of her resources, to business, to enterprise, to money-making. By the “New South” is meant the South of today, busy developing coal, timber and mineral lands, drilling oil wells, building factories, towns, cities, railroads, forging to the front — bringing herself up to date.

This is all very well in its way, but to the thoughtful observer it is inadequate, one-sided, unsymmetrical. Along certain finer lines of development, such as beauty, culture and refinement, we are sadly lacking. Our machine-shops, factories, labor-saving tools, railroads and other means of communication, such as the electric telegraph and telephone, and electrical appliances generally are not matched by a mental, spiritual and esthetic progress. The activities have outgrown the finer things of life. The body has out-flourished the soul.

The course taken by our civilization since the war has been toward developing and perfecting the material contents of life; whereas the culture, the mind and heart, the esthetic and ethical nature of our people themselves have by no means progressed in the same degree. It has been a vulgar struggle, a spirit of plutocracy, in which, by slangy phrase, we are told to “join the procession,^’ to “be alive,” “hustle,” “catch on,” “get there, Eli.”

What was finest and best in the old Southern, colonial regime has been eliminated to make room for the materialistic spirit, and a very disagreeable atmosphere has been created for people who value the higher things of life more than money and vulgar display. We have drifted into materialism, a mere struggle for wealth. Money, the almighty dollar, is the circle within which everything moves, the center around which everything revolves. This is our aristocracy, the altar at which we bow, the purpose for which we are educated and live. All else, we are told, is mere sentiment, romance, impractical, “a back number.” Inventions, machinery, the forms of commerce and of finance, industrial training — all these forms of life have developed to an unprecedented degree; yet no one will assert that the mind, the soul, of our people has been thereby correspondingly refined, uplifted and spiritually enriched. The real refinement of living does not go along with this mad rush — certainly has not kept pace with it.

The refinement, manners and culture of today cannot compare favorably with those of former times; and it is certain that intellectual and social life generally has not reached so high a level as in the old colonial and old ante-bellum days. The American genius for beauty, culture, refinement and the fine arts has not kept pace with the advance of a mighty material progress.

Is humanity to be measured by wealth, by power, by material prosperity? We are told to get rich, to fight, to win the game to be smart, to use tact and be up to date. Are these worthy motives? Are the seeds of godlike power in them? There is a sensible debasement of tone, a lowering of our ideals, a marked decline in simplicity, purity and culture as compared with a few generations back. A lit- erary man and student of history gives it as his conviction that “our immediate generation has been sinking of late to meaner ideals, to coarser ways of life, to more vulgar types of literature and art, to more open craving after wealth, and to a more insolent assertion of pride and force.’ “Take the decade which closes the century,’ says Frederick Harrison, ‘can anyone pretend that it equals in power either of the middle decades of the century (1840-1860) in poetry, in literature, in science, in philosophy, in religions, and in manners?”

There needs to be a general awakening and revival along certain finer lines of thought and life. There never was a time in the history of our country when we needed so much to encourage a spirit of beauty, culture and refinement. We need to look to a greater dignity of citizenship, a larger and more fruitful culture, to the best that has been thought and said by the wise and great, and lived by the most refined and cultured. Something yet higher in pitch, and larger in scope, and finer in quality and tone, than this ultra-material progress, is needed to express the fulness of the American life, to voice the aspirations and thought of the American mind, and to perpetuate the memory and glory of American history. Let us pause in this busy rush to look backward once in a while. Speak to the past and it shall teach thee.

Lord, God of hosts, be with us yet. Lest we forget, lest we forget.

Published in Home and Flowers Magazine, March 1903

The booming South

According to the Washington Times, the South is still ‘booming’ economically, and continues to be a magnet for non-Southrons wanting to find a more congenial home.

The popular wisdom has it that most of the newcomers to the South are ‘conservative’ and looking for a new home with lower taxes, pleasanter weather, and ‘smaller government.’ This may be true in many cases, or even most cases. But is a continuing wave of migration good for the South, or more specifically for the people of the South, that is, the ‘heritage Southrons’ if I may use that term?

And before I go further, I don’t write from any malice towards people from the North. My mother was from the North, and I’m no stranger to that culture.

Large-scale migration of people from outside the South began in earnest in the 1970s. When I search on this subject, the vast majority of hits I get are strictly about black migration back to the South in the 20th century. However the influx of Whites from outside the South seemed most visible in the 1970s and later, and with the ‘tech’ industry (Dell, et al) later. I don’t know that the migration ever really slowed down; the presence of Northerners (including many from Western States) is very evident.

Certainly there are ‘conservatives’ migrating there, or at least conservatives in the broadest sense — but no matter how conservative their politics may be they do change the culture of the South, and have changed it.

To be fair, some of the changes were the result of the omnipresent and intrusive ‘mass media’, with the requisite load of propaganda. The media also exerted a big effect on local ways of speaking — the Southron accent has all but vanished amongst most of the younger generations (Gen X on downward). This I find sad.

When I studied linguistics in college there was a lot of discussion of how language, that is, the language we use, affects our thought processes.
I am no professional linguist, but I’m very familiar with the differences between the Southron dialect, as it existed for centuries, and the sort of mainstream American English accents, as modeled in the media. There used to be considerable differences between traditional Southron dialect speakers and Northern American English speakers, though those differences are quickly being erased, with a consequent loss of a great deal of color and nuance in the English language.

There are of course pockets of people here and there in the South who retain much of their dialect and vocabulary, but they are becoming harder to find. The Southron accent has long been an object of ridicule from non-Southrons, with a prevailing attitude that the accent and dialect sound ‘backward’ or ignorant. That attitude has been very harmful and may explain the wish of some Southern-born people to lose or at least downplay their ‘drawl.’

Language is not the only thing that has been changed by the ongoing influx of people from outside the South; the culture of the South was always very Christian by comparison with the rest of the country. Of course the Bible Belt for a long time included parts of the Midwest and the Western, more rural areas, but the South held out the longest as far as their Christian culture was concerned. Now, though, with the great falling-away in most of the Western world, the influence of Christianity is waning in the South, and the presence of so many non-churched people from outside plays a part.

My state, Texas, is these days often erroneously lumped with ‘the Southwest’, though it used to be considered a Southern state — by virtue of its having been settled mostly by Southrons, as well as because of its solid ‘Bible belt’ status, and very importantly, as being part of the Confederacy. Texas has much more in common with the South than with the ‘Southwest’, that is, New Mexico, Arizona, California, et al.

Texas is obviously on the verge of changing to a far less conservative and traditional place than it used to be. I find this tragic, because it need not have happened, yet the change may be irrevocable, just as the changes to our country as a whole may never be reversed.

And yet — those who look only at economics and see ‘booming’ states in the South don’t ever look at the far more important ramifications of this willy-nilly, top-down imposed change: the loss of the culture, of the heritage, and above all, a change in the very people of the South. People, as I’ve said ever since I started blogging, are not interchangeable. The people make the place. The place, once populated by different people — no matter how ‘conservative’ or Republican they are, will never be the same. And a population of people with vastly different languages, religions, and cultures will eradicate the places we once knew and loved, and will make a mockery of the sacrifices of our forefathers. But this is of no moment to the decision makers, who make these decisions over our heads in our ”democracy” demockracy.

But then we’re not supposed to notice, much less question or mention these things. In parts of Europe it’s criminal to criticize such changes, or even to mention them. And how much longer will we be permitted the luxury to speak or write about it?