"Washington Post" columnist, "The GOP Goes South"

Another article on the Republican party becoming a sectional party by David S. Broder.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/26/AR2008122601129.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

Trent Lott said in a Southern Partisan interview that the Republican party was the party for the descendants of Jefferson Davis. It seems that it is becoming truer by the day. This is an extract from the Southern Partisan interview, Vol. 4 No. 4 Fall 1984.

Page 44

Partisan: At the convention of the Sons of Confederate Veterans in Biloxi, Mississippi you made the statement that "the spirit of Jefferson Davis lives in the 1984 Republican Platform." What did you mean by that?

Lott: I think that a lot of the fundamental principals that Jefferson Davis believed in are very important today to people all across the country, and they apply to the Republican Party. .... After the War between the States, a lot of Southerners identified with the Democrat Party because of the radical Republicans we had at the time, particularly in the Senate. The South was wedded to that party for years and years and years. But we have seen the Republican Party become more conservative and more oriented toward traditional family values, the religious values that we hold dear in the South. And the Democratic party has been going in the other direction. As a result of that, more and more of The South's sons, Jefferson Davis' descendants, direct or indirect, are becoming involved in the Republican Party. The platform we had in Dallas, the 1984 Republican platform, all the ideas we supported there --- from tax policy, to foriegn policy: from individual rights, to neighborhood security --- are things that Jefferson Davis believed in.

Obama Appoints Ron Kirk, pro-Confederate African American

Obama has appointed Ron Kirk to the post of U.S. Trade Representative. Ron Kirk declared a Confederate heritage day for the City of Dallas. He was able to do this, but never get a human rights commission started for Dallas. You can read about his dubious past by pulling up articles from his term of mayor at the Dallas Observer website. http://www.dallasobserver.com/search/archive_search

This column in the Dallas Observer details how Ron Kirk tried to take stands on both sides of the issue of the Confederacy. Weasel is the word that comes to mind.
http://www.dallasobserver.com/2000-02-24/news/buzz/

I wrote this letter to Ron Kirk asking him to retract his declaration of a Confederate heritage day for Dallas. I never got a reply and there never was a retraction of the declaration.

---------------------

June 24, 2000

Mayor Ron Kirk

Dear Mayor Kirk:

As you know, you declared October 12, 1997, a Confederate heritage day for Dallas. It was reported in the UDC Magazine, Dec. 1998, page 28. I know because I do research on the neo-Confederate movement. Worse yet, you gave Edward Smith, notorious promoter of the Black Confederate myth the keys to the city.

As most everyone knows, John McCain recently publicly apologized for his support for the Confederate flag in South Carolina. I am sure it was difficult for John McCain to admit being wrong, given he is strong willed, but nevertheless he did.

I ask you to publicly retract your declaration of Confederate Heritage day for Dallas.

I have amply documented the pernicious nature of this civil religion of white supremacy at my website .

Texas Governor George W. Bush has gone from being a booster of the Museum of the Confederacy to realizing that the Confederacy should not be part of our civic faith. I think you can consider coming to a similar realization and help make this a city with a democratic civic tradition, not a Confederate one.


Sincerely Yours,



Edward H. Sebesta

CC: Dallas City Council members

-------------------------

GOP concerned about being too Southern.

The article is online at politico.com and is a front page article there for the moment. You can read it here: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1208/16269.html

Evidently there is a struggle within the Republican party to keep it from becoming the party of the Confederacy. The code word here is "regional." Some quotes:

"As the GOP wrestles with criticism that it is in danger of becoming a regional party rooted in the South, rather than one with broad appeal across the nation, the contest for chairman is shaping up in no small part as a referendum on just how much Southern flavor the party should have at the top in the wake of a sound electoral defeat in every other region of the country."

and

"For RNC contenders, any misgivings about the party's Southern bent may take a back seat to short-term political necessity. Every candidate running for chair would love to draw support from social conservatives, who make up a sizable proportion of the 168 voters that will select the next party chair-and many of them hail from the South."

So some Republicans are worried about the party being a Confederate party, but it seems that the former states of the Confederacy is where a lot of the political power is. No matter how Republicans try to finesse this, it seems somewhat insulting to persons with southern nationalist sensibilities. I think it could provoke a reaction in the South. This would force some southern Republicans to become more publicly southern identified.

However, it could be that nothing is really needed to force any southern Republicans to be more publicly southern identified. In a crowded field of candidates looking to be Republican party leaders, one candidate could stand out from the pack, escape from obscurity, and capture a sizable base by being southern identified. This applies to other possible political ambitions in the Republican party. Being a defeated Republican party presidential candidate in the national election is better than being nobody. Being selected as the Vice-Presidential candidate would be better than being nobody. Having a regional political base is better than being nobody. Some southern Republican will figure that out. Huckabee was picking up on that by supporting the Confederate flag in South Carolina during the Republican primary there.

If one Republican candidate or leader picks up the Confederate flag there might be a lot of pressure on other Republican leaders in the south to move in a direction of supporting the Confederate flag.

Another factor in the direction of the Republican party will be how Obama performs as president, in particular the currently crashing economy.

If the public thinks Obama is performing poorly then I think there will be a lot of discontent nationally and the Republican party will pick up outside the South and not be regionally based.

If the public thinks Obama is doing a good job with the economy the Republicans will continue to be regionally based. However, many individuals will avoid the Republican party to pursue a political career in the Democratic party leaving the Republican party to be dominated by its more hard core elements.

I am not sure what will happen if there is a mixed perception regarding Obama's handling of the economy. I think there will be conflict and discontent. This I think would radicalize the Republican party also.

I think though these thoughts I write here may be superseded by events. If real unemployment reaches 15 or 20% and an even larger fraction of the American public starts losing their homes or become homeless we will enter uncharted political territory. I can only predict that extremism will flourish. This is of course what is exciting the neo-Confederates.

I am not sure we will know which way the Republican party is moving relative to the Confederacy. Perhaps it will be in Republican primaries in the south in 2010. Perhaps it will be revealed in campaigns starting now for the Republican nomination in 2012. Perhaps it will be in local and state elections. I will just have to watch and wait.

Preview "Neo-Confederacy: A Critical Introduction" online

Google books has a limited preview of "Neo-Confederacy: A Critical Introduction" online at this link:

http://books.google.com/books?as_q=&num=10&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_brr=0&lr=&as_vt=&as_auth=sebesta+hague&as_pub=&as_sub=&as_drrb=c&as_miny=&as_maxy=&as_isbn=

Just search Google books with the author set to "sebesta" and "hague" and it is the online book that shows up in the search.

You can also read the introduction at this url:

http://www.utexas.edu/utpress/excerpts/exhagneo.html

If you order it online at Univ. of Texas it is discounted.

Copies of "Neo-Confederacy: A Critical Introduction" show up in the mail.

I got a package with the author copies of the books in the mail yesterday. You know intellectually that the book is going to be published, but there is something about holding it in your hands and opening it up and reading it that makes it real.

I have spent my life reading books. Now I am the editor and an author for a book and I have joined the world of ideas. Books once in circulation circulate a long time. I purchase books from the 19th century. With this book, the contributors, and the other editors and I initiate a dialogue that goes into the future long after we are gone.

Finally, after all these years there is a book on the neo-Confederates and by a major academic press. People are going to find out what this movement is all about and once understanding what it is they will recognize it when they see it. One of neo-Confederacy's advantages has been is that it isn't recognized for what it is, so it is able to do things unopposed. That advantage will be soon gone. Also, Confederate symbols and monuments will be perceived differently once people realize that there is a neo-Confederate movement.

You can pre-order a copy at this URL. The book is released on Dec. 1, 2008 which is next Monday. http://www.utexas.edu/utpress/excerpts/exhagneo.html

Russian professor Igor Panarin predicts U.S.A. to break up, neo-Confederates excited. Real issue missed by media and bloggers.

The Drudge Report http://www.drudgereport.com/ had an item about an Igor Panarin, member of the the diplomatic academy of the Russian ministry of foreign affairs predicting that the United States would suffer financial collapse and then break up into six states.

Bloomberg has an article about Panarin's prediction here.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=a3sayDZz.QKc&refer=us

The UK's right wing paper, The Telegraph has an article here:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/3521671/US-will-collapse-and-break-up-Russian-analyst-predicts.html

The neo-Confederates saw this report as validating their fringe ideas. They have been promoting the idea that the United States would collapse. See this blog for a typical neo-Confederate view: http://dixienet.org/rebellion/rebellion.html

Frank James of the Chicago Tribune points out that Panarin's prediction is silly in this posting.
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/11/us_disintegration_a_russian_fa.html

I am not interested in discussing the possibility of the United States breaking up. I think it is a very remote possibility even with a severe economic crisis. I think the media and bloggers are missing the important issue of Panarin's prediction. Why did he make it and to what purpose?

Panarin is closely associated with the Russian foreign ministry as a member of its diplomatic academy. The article was published in Izvestia, a major paper in Russia. I don't think he would say something that he thought would annoy the Russian government and neither would Izvestia likely print it. Major media in Russia we are told is beholden to the Russian government.

It might be possible that Panarin's interview published in Izvestia is to undermine foreign confidence in the United States and its abilities to make payments on its debts. Perhaps Panarin and the Russian government takes seriously American secessionists, not realizing that they are little more than web pages, excepting the neo-Confederates, and hope to encourage secessionists in the United States.

I think Panarin's article was some attempt to irritate the United States and poke fun at the United States. Of course if the Russians attempt to give aid or comfort to secessionist groups in the United States that would be another thing entirely.

It will be interesting what other media outside the United States make of it.

Nieman Marcus sells the Confederacy. Boycott Nieman Marcus. Or Nieman Marcus is dreaming of a "White" Christmas

Nieman Marcus is selling the Confederacy. Boycott Nieman Marcus.

It turns out that Nieman Marcus is selling the Confederate Fighter Motorcycle from Confederate Motor Works.

http://www.neimanmarcus.com/store/sitelets/christmasbook/fantasy.jhtml?cid=OCBF9_NMO3594&cmcat=Christmas

http://dailyabsurdities.com/2008/11/18/confederate-fighter-bike/

This is very Dallas, where the upper class wouldn't see any problem in celebrating the Confederacy. Dallas, unlike most major cities in America, and unlike Fort Worth, doesn't have a human rights commission.

This also should inform the reader that the love of the Confederacy isn't confined to lower income whites, who I think are maligned by stereotypes, but extends to educated upper class whites.

There are still companies that sell consumer goods with a Confederate identity.

Boycott Nieman Marcus

Fear of a Black President

A fraternity was penalized for flying a Confederate flag at a North Carolina University. The story is here.

http://townhall.com/columnists/MikeSAdams/2008/11/10/the_president_is_black,_hide_the_confederate_flag

This puts Mr. Adams in a rage. What is interesting is that he relates this university matter to the election of an African American president. It is a fear of the loss of white privilege.

It is the theme of the article also, that whites are being persecuted by having separate standards applied to them versus African Americans. It is the loss of white privilege and worse yet in Adams' mind, subordination of whites. Adams is thinking "the bottom rail is on top."

Adams' approach could have been that the university should not have Rap music with such obviously offensive lyrics. It would be an article about his visit and the lyrics and how the lyrics are contrary to the values of Obama and feminism. However, Adam's discussion of the Rap music is just a device to defend the fraternity's flying the Confederate flag and express through his column a fear of a loss of white privilege with the election of Obama.

Republican Party becoming a Confederate Party?

An interesting article in the New York Times, titled "For South, a Waning Hold on National Politics." http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/11/us/politics/11south.html?hp

Discusses how the Republican party is becoming a regional party of the South.

Some comments from the article:

"The Republicans, meanwhile, have “become a Southernized party,” said Mr. Schaller, who teaches at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. “They have completely marginalized themselves to a mostly regional party,” he said, pointing out that nearly half of the current Republican House delegation is now Southern."

And

"Even the Democrats made use of the Southern strategy, as the party’s two presidents in the last 40 years, Jimmy Carter and Mr. Clinton, were Southerners whose presence on the ticket served to assuage regional anxieties. Mr. Obama has now proved it is no longer necessary to include a Southerner on the national ticket — to quiet racial fears, for example — in order to win, in the view of analysts."

It will be interesting to observe and see if the Republican Party continues to evolve into Dixiecrats.

Will Obama place a wreath at the Confederate Memorial in the Arlington Cemetery next June 2009?

Will Barack Obama place a wreath at the Confederate Memorial in the Arlington Cemetery next June 2009?

Every president has placed a wreath there since the Woodrow Wilson administration. Wilson both started sending wreaths to the memorial and started segregation in the Federal government and went after African American federal employees. I have started to read "Jim Crow and the Wilson Administration: Protesting Federal Segregation in the Early Twentieth Century," by Nicholas Patler.

As to the question, I am not sure whether Obama will or won't send a wreath to the Confederate Memorial on or near Jefferson Davis' birthday next June 2009. I certainly plan on writing Barack Obama asking him not to send a wreath and encourage others to write him also asking that he not send a wreath.

I am also going to write some letters about some other issues, such as the UDC Confederate awards at the nation's military academies.

Obama's campaign is undoubtedly aware of this web page:

http://www.blackcommentator.com/274/274_clinton_udc.html

I don't think it is impossible that Barack Obama will send the wreath to the Confederate Memorial. However, I don't think Barack Obama will want a web page like this for himself and I am sure I will be able to find someone to do such a web page if Barack Obama proves to be indulgent of the Confederacy.

However, it may not be such an effort to get Barack Obama to stop the wreath and stop Confederate activities in the U.S. Military. An Barack Obama election victory will show that the influence of a certain reactionary crankiness, such as neo-Confederates are over as a political force in this country. In fact I may be asked as to what else needs to be done to remove neo-Confederacy from the Federal government and its programs, projects, parks, and properties. I will be willing to help out if they ask.

COMPLETELY DIFFERENT TOPIC

Here are some fun YouTubes of Eastern music I found which I think are quite interesting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldPMifPbngc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hncJzoAiAw&feature=related

I thought I would add a few fun things to the blog once in a while.

Ed Sebesta interviewed for a"National Post" article on the election of Obama

At this link is an article on the response to the likely election of Obama as president of the United States in the Canadian National Post.

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/world/uselection/story.html?id=924369

I was interviewed regarding the neo-Confederate response to Obama's election.

This is the section relating to my interview:

Edward Sebesta, who tracks neo-Confederate groups, said that in recent weeks, he's seen a huge shift away from issues of immigration to the election of Obama. "A climate of hysteria has taken over," said Mr. Sebesata, who co-edited the book Neo-Confederacy: A Critical Introduction.

An article in the far-right Southern Mercury pointed out that if Mr. Obama were elected, his "rhetoric and anti-white legislative proposals would stir up racial riots. If he were running for re-election, these riots would turn into an exceedingly violent nature that would seriously damage race relations in America, and leave entire sections of our cities in ruins."

What I meant exactly was that animosity against McCain on immigration become less of a focus and a sort of hysteria over Obama's election had become the dominant focus. In the interview I also said that the neo-Confederates would fuse the issues of Obama's election and immigration.

Unfortunately the article doesn't mention that the "Southern Mercury" is the publication of the Educational PAC of the Sons of Confederate Veterans.

I have realized with this interview that the election of Obama is going to make the issue of neo-Confederacy more prominent. Also, I am going to have to make sure my name gets spelled correctly.

After the Election & Neo-Confederacy

I am going to assume that the election is going to go badly for the Republicans and they are going to lose the White House, the House and the Democrats are possibly going to get their 60+ majority in the Senate. I am not going to go over the polls and arguments state by state. There are other websites which do a good job of reviewing the polls and analyzing the polls and politics much better than I. I am not necessarily assured that the election will be a great Democratic party win either. I will be watching election night on the Internet to see what happens while I am doing other work around the house. I don't own a television. However, for sake of discussion let's say that it is going to be a big win for the Democrats as I assumed above.

I am not sure if it such a prize to win this election. The economy is in terrible shape and getting worse and handling the economy is going to be like trying to catch a falling anvil. Though the policies of the last 8 years or more have resulted in this economic debacle, the public will hold the current office holder accountable for results.

One consequence of the 2008 defeat of the Republicans is going to be a struggle for its future and recrimination who are to blame for the defeat. These are a few interesting articles relevant to these two topics.

"The Party of Yesterday" by Timothy Egan http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/26/opinion/26egan.html

"Ceding the Center" by David Brooks
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/26/opinion/26brooks.html

"Republican fears of historic Obama landslide unleash civil war for the future of the party" by Tim Shipman
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/3260074/Republican-fears-of-historic-Obama-landslide-unleash-civil-war-for-the-future-of-the-party.html

After the election I don't think there is going to be a coherent direction for the Republican party. They will be fighting it out. There won't be a popular Republican president and a powerful national Republican party establishment to set the direction. The most prominent Republican is going to be Sarah Palin and she is not going to be pushing the agenda of the Republican establishment, though I am sure she is willing to deal with them. Palin derives her political base on themes oppositional to the national Republican party establishment. Even prior to this coming election defeat, the Republicans have chosen a campaign plan of fear mongering, anti-intellectualism, and calling others un-American. It is not surprising that it has reminded some of George Wallace.

The surviving Republican party will be even more heavily centered in the former Confederate states than before. Palin will be driving the Republican party further to the right. Ann Coulter must by now be realizing that Palin is her competitor. Palin will be the natural person for a hard right Republican party politics to assemble around. She already has a ready made base for reactionary Republicans to base their efforts to capture the Republican party. I think that Palin would rather be the head of a Reactionary Republican party out of power, than have a moderate Republican party that sends her into retirement laughing at her.

Republican elected officials in the former Confederate states will need to consider what they need to do to survive a potential challenge in the Republican party from reactionary Republicans. The national Republican establishment is somewhat discredited and won't be able to offer as much help to a Republican facing a challenge in the Republican primary. Imagine a moderate Republican in the South running against a reactionary Republican challenger who has Palin visiting the district to support the challenger. However, even without Palin, I think Republican congressional representatives are going to be concerned about what gets them elected locally and will have little concern about the national Republican establishment agenda.

I think the election of an African American president is going to have an impact. There is a fraction of Americans who will find this galling, I think most are in the Republican party and others might leave the Democratic party for the Republican party. Obama's election will represent the end to them of white privilege, in particular what they imagine should be their own privilege in the system. They will represent a force for a reactionary politics in the Republican party. Also, I think that having an African American president will tend to racialize politics with some. If someone is upset with Obama's policy on lets say national infrastructure, bridges etc., they won't be angry with a Democratic president, for some people they will be angry with a African American president. For reactionaries that are angry with George W. Bush and Democrats in general anyways, the fact that Obama is African American will further gall them.

Then there will be the Republican base having to face defeat. I don't think they will take it very well. They are going to have an agenda that the rest of the nation is going to consider extreme and they are going to be aware of this rejection and feel very frustrated.

The very bad and worsening economy is going to drive a large fraction of the public to be very discontented. People are going to be really angry. For a lot of people this will drive the search for scape goats. Certainly there are individuals whose behavior was reprehensible and have responsibility for the present financial crisis. However, the question could be asked who put the current administration in power for the last eight years? However, telling the public that they are responsible for their own problems is hardly a plan calculated to bring political success. Instead Others will be seen to the source of problems.

I think in the former Confederate states the Republican Party will move towards being a sort of Dixiecrat party and the party of the reactionaries. The neo-Confederates might find a role in this Republican party or they might find that they are on the outside and the Republican party has stolen some of their themes. I think that the Council of Conservative Citizens will find that they
are inside the Republican party, but the League of the South (LOS) will find they are competing with a Republican Party that has taken for themselves policies from the LOS agenda. This doesn't preclude that there will be Republicans seeking their endorsement.

I don't think it is impossible that some Republicans will run for office flying Confederate flags, at least in the primaries. In 2012 I think there will be more than one Republican presidential candidate endorsing the Confederate flag in South Carolina. Barbour ran for governor of Mississippi with the Confederate flag even though there was a national Republican establishment that had real strength. On the other hand, I have a hunch that Palin won't be communicating much, if at all, with the Alaska Independence Party in the future. They won't fit into her plans unless secession becomes big in the Republican base.

In summary, I think we are going to see a Republican party going reactionary, and picking up agenda items that the neo-Confederates support. Neo-Confederates may find influence within the Republican party in the former Confederate states. In other cases neo-Confederate groups may find they are marginalized because the Republicans have picked up their agenda items. I also see in some of the former Confederate states a Republican politics that is shrill and angry.

This is of course just one possible future. If Obama and the Democrats get the economy going again soon, it will difuse a lot of discontent. The national Republican establishment does have a lot of the potential campaign money and they will be organizing to prevent a reactionary shift in the Republican party.

Max Blumenthal on Radio Program "Democracy Now" on Sarah Palin and the neo-Confederate Alaska Independence Party.

The radio interview is online at this link:

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/10/13/max_blumenthal_on_sarah_palins_radical

Transcript of the radio interview is here:

http://maxblumenthal.com/2008/10/palintology-on-democracy-now/

Article on the Neo-Confederacy of the Alaska Independence Party

As I think almost everyone knows, Sarah Palin has spoken to the convention of the Alaska Independence Party (AIP) praising them in a video she sent to their convention.

This article by Max Blumenthal and David Neiwert describes the AIP party and the beliefs of its members. They have a neo-Confederate view of the Civil War. The article is at this link.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/10/10/palin_chryson/

This isn't surprising since the AIP is the Alaska branch of the Constitution Party which is an organization of Christian Reconstructionists and Christian Reconstructionists have a neo-Confederate view of American history. The two movements have a lot of overlap in beliefs and individual members. My co-author and I have an article on Confederate Christian nationalism at this link.

http://gis.depaul.edu/ehague/Articles/PUBLISHED%20CRAS%20ARTICLE.pdf

It is a milestone for mainstreaming neo-Confederacy in that a Vice-Presidential candidate for the Republican party is involved with and a supporter of a neo-Confederate secessionist group.

I plan to blog on the financial crisis and the neo-Confederates, but want to get this posted first.

Why the Voting Rights Act is still needed

The following news article will make it clear why the Voting Rights Act is still needed.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/politics/5992338.html

Neo-Confederates constantly complain about the Voting Rights Act and come up with rationalizations and clever arguments as to why it isn't needed.

HP Note book screen black outs./Some recovery procedures.

I have a Hewlett-Packard notebook computer. The screen unpredictably blacks out.

Evidently there is a class-action lawsuit regarding this at this link.

http://www.download3k.com/Press-Consumer-Files-Class-Action-Alleging-Defective-HP.html

Some may ask why I bought an HP notebook computer at all, given HP's other products. The reason was that I needed a computer and at that time Dell had problems with delivery. That is you paid your money and the computer didn't show up. It seems they couldn't get the computer out the door in their factories. I think that when you purchase a computer they should actually deliver the computer.

To get out of this don't just turn off the computer. Evidently there is some dim screen lighting in some situations and you should turn off the lights in the room so you can see the screen and then reboot. Some say they can see the screen with a flashlight. So with a flashlight you could read the screen and reboot. Next time I have the HP screen black out I will try both methods and report back.

When rebooting with Vista you can do chores like wash the dishes, clean up around the room, pay bills, make coffee, fold laundry or vacuum a room.

Would I wish HP computers on my worst enemy? Well yes I would. Neo-Confederates please purchase HP computers. While you are at it purchase Vista also. Well maybe I should not recommend getting either one, I am feeling guilty already. So maybe I wouldn't wish either HP or Vista on my worst enemy.

One time I did try to call HP help. The phone call didn't get far since the person on the other end of the line really didn't seem to understand spoken English and after three or four attempts at reciting my phone number and getting it understood I gave up. I have standard American pronunciation. I am sure some spokesperson from HP will say "blah blah blah" and have some Powerpoint presentation on how their service is so great.

I work with engineers and technicians from around the world, sometimes in web conferences and I hear heavily accented speech and can get by. So I know the difference between a heavy accent and novel pronunciations and just not being able to speak English.

Sarah Palin Secessionist?

This is a rush posting of an important development.

Google Blog alert tipped me off to one blog which tipped me off to another blog which had documentation of Sarah Palin being involved with the Alaska Independence Party. They claim she was a member. I haven't had time to check all this out. However, there is a You Tube video with her talking about the Alaska Independence Party.

This is the link. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/1/4231/18477

This is another link with the videos:

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/09/the_alaska_independence_party.php

This is the website for the Alaska Independence Party:

http://www.akip.org/

The conservative Telegraph in Britain reports on it here:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/johnmccain/2667214/John-McCains-running-mate-Sarah-Palin-was-in-Alaskan-independence-party.html

I will be watching what this group's response will be.

http://www.vermontrepublic.org/

and this group's

http://www.middleburyinstitute.org/

John McCain's idiotic choice will encourage all these types of groups, especially if he doesn't drop her from his ticket.

"Southern Partisan" and McCain in the News.

Quick blog here.

KPFA Los Angeles has an interview with Irwin Tang about John McCain's racism.

Richard Quinn and Southern Partisan comes up in the interview as well as McCain's support for George Wallace Jr. who speaks to the Council of Conservative Citizens.

The link is here:

http://ia311226.us.archive.org/2/items/DailyDigest_08_27_08/2008_08_27_tang.mp3

I wonder who gave Irwin Tang the information about the Southern Partisan?

An amusing You Tube video.

I came across this You Tube Video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQZCoA_T_zM

How the South Was Lost - Anniversary Edition

I think it is a great satirization of patriotic speech that is used to get people to go to war and get themselves killed. Also, secondarily it is a satirization of Lost Cause rationalizations.

Divisions in the Confederacy: Racism is key element of Lost Cause memory erasing memory of divisions.

This is an interesting article at the "Atlantic Constitution."

http://www.ajc.com/living/content/living/stories/2008/08/24/south_confederacy_civil.html

It is titled, "Historian suggests Southerners defeated Confederacy." What the historian points out is that a lot of Southerners didn't support the Confederacy, but generations later the memory of that opposition was erased in support of white supremacy.

I wonder how many Southerners will discover their ancestors opposed the Confederacy and adopt that historical memory in defining themselves.

In reading about this book I can also see why the Sons of Confederate Veterans don't consider or review whether a Confederate ancestor was also a deserter as well as a veteran. It might thin the ranks down a lot.

I think I will purchase a copy, "Bitterly Divided: The South's Inner Civil War," by David Williamas.

Corsi on Political Cesspool radio show

Corsi is the author of "Obama Nation," a book that attacks Obama.

Corsi is scheduled to be on the Political Cesspool radio show. This radio program is one of the Council of Conservative Citizens favorite radio shows. They report on it at this link.

http://cofcc.org/?p=2202

The CofCC reports that Corsi is to be on the show August 10th, but the Political Cesspool website says August 17th. The name of the radio show seems so apt. It is a Cesspool of rabid extremism.

http://www.thepoliticalcesspool.org/

The CofCC is one of their sponsors.

Toby Keith's says song is about the West and not the South

Toby Keith has responded to Max Blumenthal's blog post calling him a moron.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,400084,00.html

Toby Keith says it is about the "Old West" and not the South. So is Toby Keith saying lynching okay in the West!?

Despite Toby Keith's denials let's not kid ourselves about what his lyrics mean.

"Grandpappy told my pappy back in my day, son, A man had to answer for the wicked that he'd done, Take all the rope in Texas, Find a tall oak tree, round up all of them bad boys, Hang them high in the street."

"Find a tall oak tree," then round up who the public thinks are villains and hang them. Where is the trial and law in this process? I am not an expert on the old west, but did lawful governments use "tall oak trees" or did they use gallows? I think they used gallows.

Toby Keith song then talks about saddling up the horses and smoking guns and after his preferred type of "justice" is handed out, the group handing out this "justice," meeting afterwards at a saloon to celebrate with drinks.

Go to Max's blog on the song to read the lyrics.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-blumenthal/toby-keiths-pro-lynching_b_115526.html

Doesn't sound like any judicial system I am familiar with. Toby Keith's song is about lynching. I don't think lynching is good anywhere and is dispicable anywhere it happens.

Fox News very selectively quotes from the song.

There should not be complacency about lynching. It is kept at bay by the knowledge that law enforcement will not tolerate it, and that intolerance by law enforcement is driven by public opinion against lynching and support for the law. If the view of the public becomes tolerant of lynching, it could come back.

Max Blumenthal Reports on Pro-Lynching Country Western Singer

Max Blumenthal reports on the pro-lynching song by country western singer Toby Keith here in this blog at Huffington Post.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-blumenthal/toby-keiths-pro-lynching_b_115526.html

It is a good blog since it reminds people what lynching was all about. I would further add that it took some effort and doing to get rid of lynching. It persisted a long time in American life and wasn't restricted to the South, though it was Southern congressional representatives which were the loudest and most determined opponents of national anti-lynching legislation. You only have to read the debates over the Dyer anti-lynching act in the House in the early 1920's to realize how there can be a substantial pro-lynching political force. It is probably the creepiest section of the Congressional Record.

What is the most shocking thing about Toby Keith's song isn't the song itself which is appalling, it is the tolerance for the song and acceptance of Toby Keith by major media despite him singing and promoting this song.

Max Blumenthal has done the public a service by reminding people what lynching is in concrete terms.

The neo-Confederates are strong supporters of being violent as a southern quality. League of the South president Michael Hill called the IRA the equivalent to a Medieval Scottish clan. Former League of the South member of the board of directors, Thomas Fleming has pushed the idea of violence in Chronicles magazine.

Max Blumenthal has a follow up blog on Toby Keith and his comments concerning Obama.

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/notion/342063

With the economy going bad there will be a lot of discontent. Having a song which legitimatizes lynching is appalling at all times, but especially dangerous now.

James Webb and his neo-Confederate thinking in "The Scotsman"

Euan Hague, editor of "Neo-Confederacy: A Critical Introduction," had an Op Ed published in The Scotsman regarding James Webb's neo-Confederate Celtic theories. The Scotsman is the leading newspaper of Scotland and read by most everyone.

The link to the article is:

http://news.scotsman.com/opinion/Celtic-warrior--poised-to.4182509.jp

You have to register for the full article, but it is free.

I think Alexander H. Stephens was one Confederate Vice-President too many and we don't need another one.

I think the Democrats need to conside that the 150th anniversary of the Civil War is coming up and do they want a Democratic Vice-President going on and on with a Lost Cause interpretation of the Civil War period. If it is like the Civil War Centennial, activities will start in 2009 and last until 2015.

James Webb and his Confederacy problem hit the news

David Mark has an article "Webb's rebel roots: An Affinity for the Confederacy," on James Webb and his Confederate Celtic theories and pro-Confederate viewpoints.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/10994.html

The question that needs to be asked is whether James Webb is a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, a racist group.

I have a paper on the Confederate Celtic identity theory that was published in Scottish Affairs, at the University of Edinburgh. http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/ScottishAffairs.htm It has a section that explains the bogusness of this Confederate Celtic theory.

There is also Diane Robert's article in Oxford American. http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/YourClanOrOurs.htm

Though these article focus on Scotland, the basis of this Confederate Celtic identity theory is the same as for James Webb. They both quote Grady McWhiney and the others in the Confederate Celtic movement to support their theories.

I am mentioned, though I am not the author, but one of three editors for "Neo-Confederacy: A Critical Introduction." The web page for the book is at:

http://www.utexas.edu/utpress/excerpts/exhagneo.html

Incidentally, I contributed the research materials for this article on Bill Clinton and the United Daughters of the Confederacy.

http://www.blackcommentator.com/274/274_clinton_udc.html

Signing another book contract soon

I will be signing another book contract soon. Negotiations are in progress. The book manuscript is to be delivered Oct. 15th this year. I will have more details somewhat later.

After this book, I have a couple other books projects to finish up and an article I am writing might become book length also. It is at least the length of a small book now.

Updated: Bill Clinton UDC story to be on Sirius Talk Left Radio Channel 146

The editorial staff at http://www.blackcommentator.com/ will be on Sirius Left channel 146 http://www.sirius.com/siriusleft on the Mark Thompson show tomorrow, Thursday, to talk about Bill Clinton and his letters of praise for the United Daughters of the Confederacy. The story is the lead story of their web page. If the interview gets posted to YouTube or something I would like to know.

The direct link to the Bill Clinton UDC story is:

http://www.blackcommentator.com/274/274_clinton_udc.html

The story has appeared in the Michigan Chronicle, the Detroit African American newspaper as a front page story, by Bankole Thompson, senior editor. Vol. 71 No. 32, April 23-29, front page, with follow up to page 3. The article is online at the following link:
http://www.michronicleonline.com/articlelive/articles/2638/1/In-report-Clinton-praises-KKK-supporters/Page1.html

Blogs are beginning to pick up on the story and it seems to be getting around the blogosphere.

Bill Clinton and the United Daughters of the Confederacy story on www.blackcommentator.com

The story of Bill Clinton and the United Daughters of the Confederacy is on http://www.blackcommentator.com/

Click on the link to go to the lead in to the story or click on this link to go directly to the story.

http://www.blackcommentator.com/274/274_clinton_udc.html

I will have more information later.

Updated: Book on neo-Confederate announced by the University of Texas Press

The book, of which, I am one of three editors, has been announced by the University of Texas Press.

The link describing it and its contents is at:

http://www.utexas.edu/utpress/excerpts/exhagneo.html

The Introduction to the book is on the web page.

James W. Loewen, author of "Lies My Teacher Taught Me," "Lies on the Landscape" wrote the Foreword. I think he has sold about a million copies of his book.

Ed

Bill Clinton Enables Neo-Confederates & Betrays Carol Moseley-Braun: UPDATED

http://www.blackcommentator.com/ has picked up this story with all the documentation. 4/20/08 Direct link to story is: http://www.blackcommentator.com/274/274_clinton_udc.html

I have updated this essay.

BILL CLINTON ENABLES NEO-CONFEDERATES & BETRAYAL OF CAROL MOSELEY-BRAUN

On July 24, 1993 in a New York Times’ editorial, “Ms. Moseley Braun’s Majestic Moment,” the editors praised the U.S. Senator Braun from Illinois as follows:

“On Thursday, Carol Moseley Braun woke up a sleepy Senate to the unthinking way the white majority can offend minority Americans. Before Ms. Moseley Braun interrupted, that body was about to renew the patent of the United Daughters of the Confederacy. Alone at first, then joined on the Senate floor by others whose awareness she raised, the Senate’s only black member stopped the renewal of the Daughters’ design patent with the Confederate flag insignia.”

Moseley-Braun’s oratory was eloquent and persuasive. In an article titled, “Daughter of Slavery Hushes Senate,” writer Adam Clymer in the July 23, 1993, New York Times writes:

“The Senate’s only black member, Carol Moseley Braun, made the chamber listen today as freshman seldom do. Her oratory of impassioned tears and shouts, stopped Jesse Helms in his tracks as he defended the Confederate flag.”

The U.S. Senate reversed itself from a 52 to 48 vote in favor of the United Daughters of the Confederacy to a 75 to 25 vote against the United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC) and the patent was not renewed.

However, one powerful white politician wasn’t touched by Moseley-Braun’s oratory. U.S. President Bill Clinton, Toni Morrison’s “first black president,” wrote his first letter, dated June 21, 1994, of congratulations to the UDC celebrating their 100th anniversary. Later Clinton wrote a letter September 8, 1994 letter of congratulation to the Georgia Division of the UDC celebrating their 100th anniversary, then August 9, 1995 welcoming to Washington, D.C. for their 1995 national convention. Each letter was given a full page with Clinton’s picture in the United Daughters of the Confederacy Magazine (UDC Magazine) giving legitimacy to the UDC.

What type of organization is the UDC? Some might say that they are just a harmless organization of “little old ladies.” However, racism isn’t heavy lifting and doesn’t require physical strength. One recent example is in the Nov. 2007 issue of UDC Magazine, where in an article titled, “Confederate Classics,” in her regular column, “Confederate Notes,” Retta D. Tindal writes:

“Some books are classics that never go out of style. As we approach the gift-giving season, there are four books that I treasure and use over and over, whether for research or reference or just to refresh my memory of the special heritage I have.”

Tindal recommends these books for UDC members children and grandchildren, friends, and family members saying that “these books are sure to become their treasures too.” The first book which Tindal recommends is the white supremacist racist text, “Southern By the Grace of God,” by Michael Andrew Grissom, a Ku Klux Klan praising book, not just the Klan of Reconstruction but the Klan of the 1920s, a book which recommends the racist books of Thomas Dixon, “The Clansman” which later was made into the notorious movie “Birth of a Nation,” and the movie itself, and recommends the organization of the Council Conservative Citizens, praises a lynching and much, much more. The UDC helped launch this book when it was first published by running a segment of the book in its September 1988 issue of UDC Magazine.

Nor is this a unique example of the UDC’s promotion of racism. The prior columnist for “Confederate Notes” Clara Erath promoted the neo-Confederate magazine Southern Partisan and the books it published. Erath promotes and praises Richard Weavers’ book “Southern Tradition at Bay,” an anti-democratic racist book defending slavery. Other neo-Confederate texts are also promoted, such as “Secession, State & Liberty” by David Gordon of the neo-Confederate Ludwig von Mises Institute. The horrors of the Transatlantic slave trade are minimized in a speech by Walter W. Lee III printed in the April UDC Magazine. The Red Shirts, violent white terrorists of Reconstruction in South Carolina are held up as heroes in the June/July 2001 issue of the UDC Magazine.

The racism of the UDC isn’t a new phenomenon but goes back generations of Klan praising and white supremacy to the early 20th century. In the late 1950s the UDC Magazines were clogged with denunciations of Brown vs. Brown, integration and civil rights. A typical article is “Jefferson Davis – The Man America Needs Today, an address by Bruce Dunstan printed in the June 1958 UDC Magazine. The article explains that Jefferson Davis was for states’ rights, and the nation needs states’ rights for local control of education for the following reasons:

This constant waste of America’s wealth, together with forced shameful race-mixing, that causes lowered educational standards, immorality, and finally a mongrelized people, will bring about the down fall of America, as integration of races doomed the once cultured, and prosperous cities and nations of Carthage, Athens, Rome, and Sparta; and made of Egypt the weak world power that she is today.

This is the organization that Bill Clinton congratulated. These are the “special memories,” “traditions,” and “community spirit” which Clinton’s letters congratulated. That the UDC is a proponent of racism and white supremacy is not surprising. It is the Confederacy and did not Bill Clinton or anyone in the Clinton administration know what the Confederacy was about. This well known and infamous speech by Alexander H. Stephens should have given them a clue.

The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old Constitution were, that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with; but the general opinion of the men of that day was, that, somehow or other, in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the Constitution, was the prevailing idea at the time. The Constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly used against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it; when the “storm came and wind blew, it fell.”

Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery―subordination to the superior race―is his natural and moral condition. (Applause.)

This, our new Government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.

The larger issue is the empowerment by elected officials of neo-Confederate organizations. When a public official, whether president or governor or mayor or senator or other elected office, writes a letter to a neo-Confederate organization they lend the prestige of their office and their name to legitimatize neo-Confederate organizations and to normalize the Confederacy. Elected officials enable neo-Confederate organizations and normalize the Confederacy in other ways, by participating in ceremonies and events to celebrate the Confederacy or take actions on their own to celebrate the Confederacy.

Will the next president of the United States praise and honor the Confederacy. Will the next president of the United States annually around the time of Jefferson Davis’ birthday send a wreath annually to the Confederate monument in Arlington cemetery? When will the president of the United States serve as an example that public officials shouldn’t by their actions normalize the Confederacy and empower neo-Confederate organizations.

"Washington Times" gives neo-Confederate editors the boot.

The Washington Times has given its neo-Confederate editors the boot. Both Wesley Pruden and Robert Stacy McCain are gone.

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=895

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/11/business/media/11times.html?ref=business

Interestingly enough, the new editor is John Solomon, who I think is the same John Solomon who has done some excellent reporting on the neo-Confederates.

Also, it is interesting that The Washington Times is ditching its neo-Confederates while The Charleston City Paper is putting on its staff The Southern Avenger http://southernavenger.ccpblogs.com/. Of course The Washington Times, for all its failings, isn't likely to have columnists for the amusement of its readers. Well at least not intentionally.

Leonard Pitts, columnist explains, "Nazis have a heritage too." Students harass anti-Confederate student editor

The article is at this link:

http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/ci_8429894 or this link

http://www.azstarnet.com/allheadlines/227589

Leonard Pitts in his column introduces the story as follows:

"Last week, a fellow journalist wrote to ask me for help. His name is David Tintner, and he's a senior at Cooper City (Fla.) High South, where he's the editor of the school paper. Recently, he wrote a column criticizing those who wear what he regards as "an extremely offensive symbol": the Confederate battle flag. David says a group of students known on campus as "the Redneck Nation" took exception. A gang of them cornered him at lunch to yell at him. They've made threats and tried to stare him down."

Leonard Pitts explains in his column:

"They will tell you the flag just celebrates heritage. Remind them that "heritage" is not a synonym for "good." After all, Nazis have a heritage, too."

My sense is that a group that harasses people and calls themselves "the redneck nation" are truly representative of "Confederate heritage."

I doubt the Southern Avenger will comment on this story since it does reveal what the issue of Confederate heritage is all about.

Hilarious cartoon on automobile license plate with the Confederate flag.

http://www.floridatoday.com/blogs/jeffparkertoonsin/2008/02/0228-cartoon.html

The above is a link to a hilarious cartoon.

Is Southern Avenger calling me politically incorrect?

That is essentially what Southern Avenger is doing. I am pointing out the possibility that Southern Avenger is a new Joe Bog Briggs for the Charleston City Paper, and in response, besides some gratuitous name calling, he is calling me elitist.

There is yet another blog by the Southern Avenger on my assertion that he is possibly hired as a colorful character for the amusement of the Charleston City Paper.

http://southernavenger.ccpblogs.com/2008/03/04/neo-confederate-hunter-sebestas-elitism-continues/

Southern Avenger writes:

Regardless, Sebesta’s latest blog suggests that the Charleston City Paper only publishes my stuff (and CP readers only read it) for pure amusement. His proof is that the CP also features articles on the arts and wine tasting - cosmopolitan tastes, worlds apart apparently, from the redneck diatribes of “da Suthern Avingerr.” Woodoggies!

However, in my blog I made no such claim that these interests are worlds apart.
http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2008/03/southern-avengers-serious-interest-in.html

What I do claim is that people who are engaged in these things often, though not always, think that these things are worlds apart. In regards to art galleries, expensive resturants, the people interested are often, though not always, are young professionals with various roles relating to class status which can be enacted through various activities. They may not be at all conscious of it, but it is true. Modern consumerism is about purchasing identities through the purchase of a style of clothes, cars, wine, art, etc. It may be politically incorrect to point this out, but the readers of The Charleston City Paper can be understood to some extent from the advertising and articles directed towards them.

In the 19th century, one Southern magazine, either the "Southern Review" or "Southern Magazine," I think it was the later, had a serial with a fictional speaker with heavily dialectical language, colorful and comical speaking, speak on the Civil War and other things. I think Moses Adams was the characters name, but when he spoke it it was spelled Mozas Adums or some such thing. Southern publications have been doing this for some time. It is nothing new. Maybe Southern Avenger is continuing a southern tradition.

Publications do parade around some fictional characters or real people in their publications thinking it will amuse their readers.

Evidently, it is politically incorrect for me to bring up that publications do this. That the alternative weeklies have a readership that would like to think they are avant guard, chic, cool, hip or whatever and these readerships might find Southern Avenger amusing.

Finally, I never said Southern Avenger was a redneck. My paper on banal white nationalism specifically points out the problems with such stereotypes. http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/breaking.htm

Let me see, Southern Avenger episode No. 101, in the last episode, Pauline Pureheart was being cornered by Bart Blackheart, when the Southern Avenger spoke out, "Never fear, Miss Pureheart, I am here to save you." "My hero, replies Pauline Pureheart."

Like I said, who is kidding who?

John McCain's South Carolina Presidential campaign head Richard M. Quinn, another Hagee.

As people may remember, John McCain got a lot of political heat over the employee of Richard Quinn, editor of the Southern Partisan, as the director of his South Carolina campaign in 2000.

Later Quinn left the editorship and some erroneous information is circulating out there that the Southern Partisan doesn't exist anymore. It does exist and seems to be doing as well as ever. Another piece of misinformation that seems to be out there, is that Richard Quinn is no longer associated with the Southern Partisan.

Quinn is still involved with the Southern Partisan, he is one of two owners of Southern Partisan.

In the Vol. 24 No. 5, Sept./Oct. 2004, published date Oct. 2005, on page 34, has a statement of circulation. In the statement of circulation the owners are given as Charles Hamel, and Richard M. Quinn. The Southern Partisan now has a dual dating system, one date given is an "official" date and the other is a published date.

John McCain never has rejected Richard M. Quinn despite the expose' of the Southern Partisan. It seems odd that Obama is questioned about Farrakhan, but McCain is not questioned about Quinn.

Kevin R. Gutzman, author of "The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution" claims not be a neo-Confederate.

Some how Kevin Gutzman, author of "The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution" found out that I had blogged a reference to a review of his book at the Claremont Institute. The blog is here: http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2008/02/bizarre-claremont-institute-calls.html

The review of his book is here:

http://www.claremont.org/publications/crb/id.1513/article_detail.asp

Gutzman emailed me and in a short email he said that he wasn't neo-Confederate as claimed in the Claremont Institute review. The claim didn't have a lot of credibility with me, because he refered to an article at the www.lewrockwell.com site where in an article he denies that he is a neo-Confederate.

His name seemed familiar. So I searched my indexes and he came up as a contributor to Southern Partisan for several book reviews and a letter to the editor about a book review in Southern Partisan.

I replied that I would form an opinion based on reading his book reviews in the "Southern Partisan."

I have ordered his book, and I have also ordered the books he reviewed that I didn't already own. The books I have ordered have started to come in. I going to be reading his Southern Partisan book reviews this week.

I am thinking that I will blog something on Gutzman in a couple weeks. I need to write up something on who is and isn't a neo-Confederate. I suppose when the book, "Neo-Confederacy: A Critical Introduction," is published there will likely be some people who will deny that they are neo-Confederate for one reason or another.

Southern Avenger's serious interest in professional wrestling. Avenger's further response to my idea that he might be on the papers staff for laughs.

Southern Avenger has this item as one of his latest blog entries.

http://southernavenger.ccpblogs.com/2008/03/01/multiculturalism-in-practice/

He thinks it is hilarious, but I am sure he will be outraged that I think it just reveals his neo-Confederate racism. (His blog is at http://southernavenger.ccpblogs.com/)

Southern Avenger did another blog continuing his theme that I am elitist. This time it was because I couldn't imagine him as merely being on the staff of the paper for his ideas.

http://southernavenger.ccpblogs.com/2008/02/27/neo-confederate-hunter-sebesta-responds-to-sa-with-even-more-elitism/

All I can say is come off your soap box. The name of your blog and column is "Southern Avenger." It isn't Southern Conservative, Southern Heritage, Southern Viewpoint, or some other name, it is "Southern Avenger." Some people who read the Charleston City Paper are reading you for amusement.

This is a few of the articles that run in the paper:

http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A40632

http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A41002

http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A40987

I am sure to the readers of these articles the Southern Avenger is delightful local color. Perhaps they will talk about him at the arts and wine festival or at Starbucks after seeing an art house movie.

William Buckley, the real story

Some years ago I went through all the issues of National Review from 1955 to 1964. (Or did they start in 1956?) William Buckley & National Review were opponents of the Civil Rights movement. There was no need for a Southern Partisan magazine then, because you had the National Review pushing what was called southern conservatism, or racism wrapped up with fine sounding rhetoric.

There is some effort to portray him as some gentleman conservative.

Here are some articles about him that see him clearly.

This article is about William Buckley white washing the reputation of a nasty racist reactionary Westbrook Pegler in the New Yorker.

http://www.slate.com/id/2096673/

This is an article by the racist American Renaissance from the Internet archive about when the National Review held their views.

http://web.archive.org/web/20001018141517/http:/www.amren.com/natlreview.htm

A lot is said about William F. Buckley later rejecting racism, but I don't think he would want to be brought down and the National Review brought down by a losing cause. Certainly he new what happened to American Mercury magazine.

Buckley's white washing of Westbrook Pegler I think shows where his heart was in 2004 and that he would promote racists if he thought no one would be the wiser.

Southern Avenger misrepresents my blog on Southern Avenger.

I think I have a classic example of a major tactic of neo-Confederate argumentation.

I recently blogged on Southern Avenger, a neo-Confederate blogger and writer for the "Charleston City Paper." It is the alternative weekly paper for that city, much like the "Dallas Observer" is for Dallas. This is the link to the blog.

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2008/02/neo-confederate-ranter-columnist-for.html

This is the link to his blog. http://southernavenger.ccpblogs.com/

In my previous blog I was somewhat perplexed as to why the Charleston City Paper had him on their staff. Then it occurred to me that they might had him for amusement of their readers as some colorful character. This has been done by other papers, such as Joe Bob Briggs for the Dallas Observer. The other question is whether Southern Avenger understands this or not, and if he understands it, is he playing to his audience. That is consciously choosing topics and themes and writing his column to play to that audience. I blogged on Southern Avenger Feb. 19, 2008, and yesterday, Feb. 26, 2008, I get an email which just a heading, "Thanks for the Plug" and this link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgwWhPFsz5I

It is a You Tube video, which after describing me, goes on to take umbrage at this sentence in my blog, in fact Southern Avenger has it on screen in his video.

"Southern Avenger recently has had a couple columns on professional wrestling as if it is a serious topic. Perhaps Southern Avenger is trying to be the professionally colorful southerner."

I didn't actually say anything about my opinion about professional wrestling. I am discussing how Southern Avenger portrays it. Obviously saying "as if it is a serious topic" implies that others might write about professional wrestling differently. I want to make it clear how Southern Avenger writes on professional wrestling.

However, for the Southern Avenger, this means I am elitist for an opinion which I didn't express. This is a key tactic used by neo-Confederates.

You argue position A.

The neo-Confederate argues position anti-B, which implies you argued position B, when you did no such thing. Position B usually is some position which is indefensible and if you can lose the argument if you don't realize that the neo-Confederate has misrepresented your position or really fall for it and start defending position B. The best reply is simply to say to his argument, "What does that have to do with the question at hand?"

The other tactic here is to take one sentence and focus all attention on it to exclude attention from the major questions of the blog.

1. Why is the Charleston City Paper having him on the staff. Is it for amusement of its readers?

2. If the Southern Avenger is on the staff of the Charleston City Paper for their readers amusement is Southern Avenger aware of this, and even playing to it?

Inquiring minds want to know, however, I don't think I will get an answer to this. Some other issue will be pulled out of thin air on some rational and SA will go on and on.

There are other minor items. Southern Avenger claims I am angry, which I am not. Perhaps the SA's telepathy is on the blink. Also, claims I am a leftist, which is a surprise to me. Of course, when Thomas Fleming, editor of Chronicles has an issue, with the cover title, "Turn Left at the Renaissance," your realize that you are probably a leftist to someone. I like the Italian Renaissance.

At least the Southern Avenger isn't denying that he is a neo-Confederate like some others.

"The New Republic" article. I am mentioned in it.

The article is here about the white supremacist reponse to Obama.

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=907272c4-54db-4fba-9149-e95b7293d6a0



I still haven't gotten the Bill Clinton story about his letters to the UDC in the news.The whole story is at this blog:http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2008/02/will-hillary-clinton-honor-jefferson.html

Another news story about neo-Confederates coming up, this blogger mentioned.

I will be posting when the news story is published. I am mentioned in it.

2/22/08 Update: The story is published here:

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=907272c4-54db-4fba-9149-e95b7293d6a0

I still haven't gotten the Bill Clinton story about his letters to the UDC in the news.

The whole story is at this blog:

http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2008/02/will-hillary-clinton-honor-jefferson.html

Neo-Confederate Ranter a Columnist for the "Charleston City Paper"

Surprisingly enough, the Charleston City Paper has a neo-Confederate columnist who titles his column "Southern Avenger." Though it is a column title that might remind you of a character in a comic book, and even perhaps a title of a comic book, the picture of the columnist doesn't show someone in tights and sporting a cap.

In this column "Southern Avenger" is ranting and making Stalin and Lincoln comparisons. Kosovo independence is setting him off.

http://southernavenger.ccpblogs.com/2008/02/18/sa-radio-lincoln-and-secession/ (click on this link for column).

Perhaps the Charleston City Paper has him as a columnist to amuse their readers. Perhaps Southern Avenger knows this. Southern Avenger recently has had a couple columns on professional wrestling as if it is a serious topic. Perhaps Southern Avenger is trying to be the professionally colorful southerner.

http://southernavenger.ccpblogs.com/2008/02/15/the-post-couriers-mike-mooneyham-on-the-passing-of-johnny-weaver/

http://southernavenger.ccpblogs.com/2008/02/15/carolina-wrestling-legend-johnny-weaver-1935-2008-rip/

Or perhaps Southern Avenger isn't doing anything self-consciously, but the editors find it a classic stereotype southerner to add amusement to their paper. Who knows.

This isn't a good sign that Southern Avenger is published. He is mainstreaming neo-Confederacy. He might have a column because the editors are sympathetic to his view points.

The Dallas Observer used to have a guy like Southern Avenger called Joe Bob Briggs for the public's amusement. Then there is the whole Greater Tuna comedy that has proven to be popular, http://greatertuna.com/. Perhaps Southern Avenger is published by the Charleston City Paper for similar amusement.

Vermont Secession Reports Vermont Secession movement going nowhere.

A good blog to be kept abreast of the Vermont Secession movement is Vermont Secession. However, the writer of this blog isn't advocating secession, just reporting on it and the antics and bogus claims of the Vermont Secession movement.

I recommend this latest blog:

http://vermontsecession.blogspot.com/2008/02/finally-poll-on-secession-in-vermont.html

The blog reports that the Vermont Secession movement failed to get a single townhall vote for secession.

There are comical elements in tracking the Vermont Secessionists, in that they are engaged in various dubious representations of themselves and the strength of their movement.

"American Idol" Or "Confederate Idol" creepy video by Kristy Lee Cook

http://www.rendleman.net/dvd.htm

One of the American Idol contestants is a country western singer and stars in a video with the Confederate flag. Sort of creepy video with fairly heavy handed symbolism.

The video does take time to load and the web page asks you to be patient, you will have to be.

Yes, I have decided to include popular elements in this blog.

Incidently, if you know of some interesting item to blog about, let me know. I can't promise to undertake each one, but I would like to have a choice to consider items.

Update: I am beginning to pin point why this video is strange or creepy. First thing, it opens with the singer singing into a sleeping man's face. I can see a visual in which a man is sleeping in the background and the singer singing in the foreground. However, singing right in the face reminds me of when you are in a deep sleep and some idiot wakes you with noise.

Secondly, I think singing how devoted your are is conceited. Others may think you are devoted, but I think a person doesn't brag how devoted they are. It would be like a singer going on and on how modest they were or how good they were.

Thirdly, why is she so devoted? Is her love object kind, tender, thoughtful? The song could have him giving her flowers or some such. However, the theme is that he is a military hunk with his shirt off who picks her up and throws her into the lake where she can then have a brief wet shirt scene.

"Bizarre," Claremont Institute calls Gutzman's "Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution"

The excellent review of the book is here:

http://www.claremont.org/publications/crb/id.1513/article_detail.asp

Not every conservative sees Confederate and conservative as synonymous.

The Claremont Institute takes on the neo-Confederates and the neo-Confederates criticize them.

On violent so-called anti-racists; For the Record

I don't support violence against racism. It is wrong in so many ways. It underminds criticism of racist violence. Racists use it to legitimize their own violence. Violence always has the potential to spiral out of control. I don't think violence is effective against racism. It can give racists public sympathy and make public opinion negative towards anti-racism. Almost everyone has had an unpopular opinion at some point and can imagine themselves being the target of violence.

If you want to be violent in your so-called anti-racism please keep away from me and don't contact me. I also don't want to associate with those who associate with violent people.

I think some people that are all fired up at using violence against racism, are really people who just want a justification to engage in violence.

Also, I think it is because real activism against racism takes hard work. You have to do reading, wrestle with difficult questions, do research, and think through complex questions and issues. So much easier for people to just show up and have a hollar at an anti-KKK ralley and feel self-righteous.

So, as I said, if you think anti-racism is some form of violence and vandalism, I don't want to have anything to do with you.

The world is too full of people who think violence is the method to deal with those they really dislike.

Also, I think there is no need for violence. Ultimately it is a conflict of ideas, and if you don't have a mind and just a fist, you are worthless in fighting racism.

Unfortunately, when I first got on the net, I just contacted various anti-racist groups without much understanding of who was who. So I have had contact with some groups, that I regret, but I have rejected them as I have come to understand what they were up to.