Thursday, December 29, 2016

Michael Phillips, who is helping do the Reject Racist Robert E. Lee event, has an article on Richard Spencer, (Mr. Alt-Right) and Dallas

The article is online here in Jacobin magazine.

What is really important about this article, besides showing the history of elite racism in the city of Dallas, is that it rejects the stereotype of who a racist is. The stereotype that racists aren't educated and are marginal individuals.

Michael Phillips is helping me do the Reject Racist Robert E. Lee event in Lee Park Dec. 31st, 1pm.

This is the link to the event.

Wednesday, December 28, 2016

He who must not be named.

In the 2014 "Sons of Confederate Veterans 2014 Annual Book of Reports" is the following on page 16 in the "Chief of Heritage Operations Eugene G. Hogan II, page 14 - 17.

"School's are one of the institutions of the community with which we must cultivate a positive relationship ... another are our churches. An infamous cyberbully, whose name would be familiar if I would honor him by putting it in print, was contacting churches which host SCV meetings and attempting to break that bond by his usual fare of toxic speech about this organization."

Unless there was someone else writing churches on this topic, I suspect the person they are referring to is me. Having a different opinion and sharing it is evidently "cyberbullying" according to this speaker. The factual documentation of what the SCV says in the SCV's own words is "toxic speech."

Evidently, I am Voldemort to the neo-Confederates. Indeed I am honored to be so. Years ago I send Columbia University Professor a photo copy of his denunciation in the Southern Partisan by Murray Rothbard. He said he was honored.

There is no real rebuttal of what what I sent to churches. Instead, it appears that the SCV has only name calling in their arsenal.

The Internet Archive has a copy also.

A Letter I sent to the "New York Review of Books"

I am not renewing my subscription. It is lapsing soon or has lapsed. 

My letter: 

March 27, 2016

                                                                                    Edward H. Sebesta

New York Review of Books

Dear Editors:

I read with interest Robert O. Paxton’s review, “The Truth About the Resistance,” of recently published histories of the French Resistance in World War II in the Feb. 25 2016 issue of NYRB. I found it informative in understanding the scope and extent and reality of the French Resistance and its history.

However, I was somewhat taken aback by the concluding paragraph as to the larger historical meaning where Paxton in discussing the humiliation of the French by the occupation quotes Roger Stéphane stating that, “Perhaps it is absurd, but it was by such absurdities that we restored our dignity as men.”

I would state that perhaps, in 1945, in a world where the majority lived under foreign occupying governments, a system of world colonial empires, it was understood that the French were restoring their dignity as white men, in a world where being occupied by a foreign power was something that happened to non-whites.

It would have been interesting had Paxton commented on why the French after living under a foreign occupation which they found horrific and humiliating didn’t reflect on what their occupation of other nations and places might be like for those they dominated. Instead there was war in Algeria, war in Indochina, by a nation very slow to realize that colonial domination was on the way out. I guess Paxton and the NYRB editors will always have Paris.

It is 2016 and we live in not just a long since post-Colonial world, but a multipolar world and I, but perhaps not your other readers, need to learn to live and think in that world. In reading this article and other articles I am realizing that the NYRB is perhaps a form of nostalgia for educated people.

                                                                                                Sincerely Yours,

                                                                                                Edward H. Sebesta

There was a reply letter from Paxton, but it really didn't make much sense. He pointed out multiple sources that many people and movements across the spectrum were racist at the time, thus documenting the point I was making. The whole story about the French Resistance, which was a good thing to have happened in history, avoids the issue that what the French found so horrible was something they were doing to many nations and peoples and they didn't perceive what they were doing as wrong because of their white supremacy. 

What is missed is an important lesson on how history is constructed and how people are blinded by their ideologies. 

South Carolina Rep. Chris Corley, Confederate Flag defender, arrested for domestic violence including hand gun. UPDATES: News has gone global MORE UPDATES. Indicted and suspended from office

South Carolina Rep. Chris Corley, who was a vehement defender of the Confederate flag flying on the South Carolina capitol grounds, was arrested on charges of domestic violence and pointing a hand gun at his wife. NOTE: I am updating this blog posting as more information becomes available.

According to the article:
Corley was arrested by the Aiken County Sheriff's Office early Tuesday morning on felony charges of first-degree domestic violence and pointing and presenting firearms at a person.
According to the Sheriff's report, as reported in the Aiken Standard, a women identified as his wife claimed that Corley was "caught cheating." The news article is not more specific on what she claimed Corley was cheating at, perhaps it was poker or golf rather then sex with other individuals.

Chris Corley has been an advocate of far right efforts. This is an article about him in the Charleston City Paper. It has background information as well as news of his arrest.

Corley was one of the more outspoken defender of the Confederate flag on the capitol grounds. According to the Charleston City Paper article.
Ahead of the holidays last year, Corley made waves for a Christmas card he reportedly sent to GOP colleagues that showed the Confederate flag in front of the Statehouse and read: "May your Christmas be filled with memories of a happier time when South Carolina’s leaders possessed morals, convictions and the principles to stand for what is right."
Sounds like a bad stereotype. Confederate flag flying, wife beating, gun waving, and "cheating" though the articles are not specific about exactly what Corley's wife was talking about in regards to "cheating." Maybe it was gin rummy or something.

These are other articles about Chris Corley and the charges against him.

This article at this link below has a lot of information about Corley.

It seems that the major papers for South Carolina have covered the story.

The story has even gone international.

I will keep this blog posting updated as news come out.

As I have stated before, more and more those left to be advocates for the Confederacy are likely to be persons who are not quite all there.

Ron Wilson, former Commander-in-Chief of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, was convicted for defrauding investors.


As there are more stories about this I will put links below and perhaps some commentary.

Seems that there is a problem in getting the dash cam footage released.

The 911 tape has been released. From the tape as reported in the Aiken Standard.

"Please stop it. Just stop. Just stop. ... Dad, please stop" can be heard on the 911 audio recording released Friday by the Aiken County Sheriff's Office. "Please stop. Stop. Please stop, Chris. Just stop daddy, just stop. Chris, please stop. Daddy. Please help. Please Chris. Chris."
This below is the link to the article.

The news of Chris Corley's arrest and 911 call has gone global and it includes the fact that he is a supporter of the Confederate flag. Some of these stories aren't in English.

The above overseas link is just what my English Language Google News picks up.

And it includes major U.S. Media.

These articles all make the point of Corley's aggressive defense of the Confederate flag. Though all supporters can't be judged by the actions of one person, it will certainly not help the public's perception of the Confederate flag.

The dash cam video hasn't been released and I will up date this posting when it is.


Suspended from office by the South Carolina House. Link below.

Turns out that the Majority Leader of the South Carolina has asked Corley to resign and if he doesn't he wants the South Carolina House to expel him. Link below.

Upgraded charges

Chris Corley resigns.

Saturday, December 24, 2016

United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC) on Christmas Carols, some are by abolitionists and use to have anti-slavery themes.

I did a lengthy blog on an article in UDC Magazine where the UDC writer explains that some Christmas Carols have abolitionist lyrics and themes.

Somewhat indirectly the author of the UDC Magazine article suggests we shouldn't sing songs written by abolitionists.

Wednesday, December 21, 2016

Who supports Robert E. Lee Park

It seems that the condominium associations of the buildings around Robert E. Lee Park are the donors to light up Arlington. The governing boards of these condominium decide to donate money and so the residents have culpability in supporting the normalization of Robert E. Lee.

On the sign you see The Claridge, 21 Turtle Creek, 3525 Turtle Creek, The Mayfair, The Vendome'. There is a caterer, Food Glorious Food. Also it seems the movie La La Land is a sponsor, on the basis that the font matches the ads for the movie.

Note the names James Berry, Janet and Erich Brehm, Ty Burks, Tammy Jo Covert, Kelly and Ryan Kirkham, Barbara Lake, Sonia Maeda, Barb and Bert Maguire.

Elites of Dallas support glorification and normalization of the Confederacy.

My essay on banal white nationalism.

Facebook event for Reject Racist Robert E. Lee

Monday, December 19, 2016

Russian Readership of this blog. Foreign power on the prowl

The readership of my blog is surging. Normally there are 400 to 500 page views. Suddenly it is over 1300 and then yesterday 1793.  This might be good if it were largely American readers and I was informing the American public about the neo-Confederate movement.

However, when looking at it Pageviews by Countries I see that about 50% of my readers are in Russia.  See below. Blog continued after picture.

Now the partisan press that is opposed to Trump is reporting a lot about the Russians and Trump. I am concerned that the reader not think that this blog posting is part of that. I have had surges of Russian readers before recent elections and have blogged on Russian readers in the past. I think Donald Trump will be entirely and energetically opposed to secessionist movements.

Nor do I want to imply any Xenophobia about foreign readers. There might be interest in the neo-Confederate movement elsewhere of a curious or scholarly nature and that is fine. However, the large interest from just one country, widely reported to be interested in fostering separatist movements in the United States, is of concern.

So what exactly do I wish to say? What I wish to say is that there is a large foreign power that is prowling around looking for some means of weakening the United States through separatism. It isn't just an assertion by myself, it has been noted by a variety of media across the political spectrum.

I am not calling for a large major national campaign, but I think that there needs to be some program of modest resources devoted to countering separatism and taking proactive steps. Once a separatist movement gets underway and gets some measure of support among the public, it tends to persist for some time. It is always likely to have a resurgence like a herpes virus.

So what do I think needs to be done? In general all separatism needs to be considered in the context that there is Russian interest in fomenting it. I also suggest the following:

1. Stop reporting on separatist movements as amusing novelties. The Scottish National Party only got single digits in the polls in the 1940s and was a very small marginal movement. Now it seems Scotland might become an independent nation.

The belief in American exceptionalism I think leads to not recognizing that American can be subject to the same dangers as other nations. I suggest that people should consider that pride comes before a fall, or as the Greeks stated it, hubris nemesis, which translates as pride then destruction.

I have noticed that the reporting on secession has been changing. The media has been somewhat quick to report that the California secessionists are headed by a person in Russia.

2. As I have stated earlier we absolutely have to avoid oppressive measures. Nothing would be stupider than locking up a pro-secessionist or other like action. It immediately makes the secessionist a martyr and it makes the secessionist movement seem much more important since otherwise why would you arrest the individual.

Also arresting individuals does prove that the government is an oppressive organization and secession is a solution.

Finally, it attracts people who are against the current government, whatever it is.

3. However, the government should avoid aiding those who are or have worked against the American nation. Trump should not appoint people who have been supportive of secessionist measures to any post. There was a web page of scholars for trump.

At this page of scholars for Trump, I see William Murchison, contributor to Southern Partisan magazine and former officer of the Texas League of the South.  Texas Republic magazine had an issue on whether it was a mistake that Texas jointed the Union and my reading of it is that the articles leave the reader to conclude that it was a mistake. It was published by the Lynn Landrum society, named after a racist columnist for the Dallas Morning News. William Murchison published an article praising Landrum. He was also active in Texas Republic magazine.

This is the masthead of the Sept.-Dec. 1995 Texas Republic double issue which discusses whether Texas should have joined the United States.

The editorial board members were Cathie Adams, John Alvis, William Caruth III, Marco Gilliam, J. Evetts Haley Jr., David Hartman, Charles R. Helms, Joseph Horn, Tex Lazar, Michael Muncy, William Murchison, and Joseph Sullivan.

The publisher was Joseph Sullivan. Senior editors were John Knaggs, Thomas H. Landess, and Michael Muncy. The managing editor was Mitchell Muncy. The assistant publisher was John A. McMillan. The art director was E. Taylor Owens. Correspondents were Marco Gilliam, Kelton Morgan, Kevin Southwick, Sabrina Haley Statton. Proof readers at large were Kathleen Alvis and Marjorie K. Haney.

Contributors listed were Robert Aguirre, Jerry Bartos, Austin Bay, Mark Blackwell, Jack Brocius, Barry Brown, Jane Brown, P.J. Byrnes, Paul Cameron, John Colyandro, Marguerite Starr Crain, John J. Dwyer, T.R. Fehrenbach, Paul Fenech, Evan Fitzmaurice, Richard Ford, Donald S. Frazier, H. Martin Gibson, John Goodman, Charles Goolsby, Lino A. Graglia, David Guenthner, Nancy Halsey, Charles R. Helms, J. Cameron Humphries, William Keffer, Elmer Kelton, Floy Lilley, Merrill Mathews Jr., Roger F. Meiners, Wayne Milstead, Priscilla Montgomery, Gary North, Marvin Olasky, Rob Peebles, Christopher Prawdzik, Sam Ratcliffe, Morgan O. Reynolds, Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr., Matthew Sandel, Valerie Shank, Barbara Stirling, Paul Strohl, Michael Quinn Sullivan, Ken Towery, Yuri Waldo, Caroline Walker, James W. Walker, Thomas G. West, Kathleen Hartnett White, and Jim Wright.

I see more than one name on the list of Scholars for Trump which was on the masthead of the Sept.-Dec. 1995 Texas Republic double issue which discusses whether Texas should have joined the United States.

Not all the contributors should be assumed to be secessionists, but the editorial staff and board clearly approved this issue. For the others they should be rejected for having anything to do with a Lynn Landrum Society. Landrum was a rabid racist.  I have PDFs of some of Landrum's editorials.

These are people who spoke at events of the Lynn Landrum Society. Again the readers should understand that Landrum was a rabid racist.

Phil Gramm
U.S. Senator
Dick Armey
U.S. House of Representatives
W.H. Hutt
William Murchison
Syndicated Columnist
J.Evetts Haley
M.E. Bradford
Univ. of Dallas, Professor of English. (Leading neo-Confederate. Campaigner for George Wallace for president.)
Tom Pauken

Carolyn Wright
M. Stanton Evans
Director National Journalism Center
William Rusher
Former publisher National Review
Donald Hodel
U.S. Interior Secretary
Tom Phillips
Texas Chief Justice
Nathan Hecht
Texas Supreme Court Justice (Currently Chief Justice)
Raul Gonzalez
Texas Supreme Court Justice
Daniel Papeo
Washington Legal Foundation
Peter Huber
Manhatten Institute
Michael McCormick
Paul Pressler
Lino Graglia
University of Texas School of Law
Kenneth Cribb
Heritage Foundation and Intercollegiate Studies Institute
Steve Pejovich
Texas A&M University
Russell Kirk
“author and critic” (Major figure in conservative politics)
Morgan Reynolds
Texas A&M University
John Goodman
President, National Center for Policy Analysis
John Chubb
Brookings Institute
Joe Horn
University of Texas at Austin
Kent Grusendorf
Texas State Representative
Alan Gribben
University of Texas at Austin
Charles Sykes
Jim Wright
Senior columnist, Dallas Morning News
Alan Keyes
Richard Estrada
Dallas Morning News
Richard Rubottom
Michael Wilson
Heritage Foundation
Llewellyn Rockwell
Ludwig von Mises Institute
John Culberson
Texas State Representative
Odie Faulk
“author and historian”
Alan Parker
St. Mary’s Law School
John Alvis
University of Dallas
Rick Perry
Texas Agriculture Commissioner

But I am getting a little off topic here. The president should not appoint those who support secession to national positions.

4. The campaign for American nationality can't be just negatives against other things. It needs to be for something.  A proposal can be judged on its own merits. The fact that a bad person or organization supports it is just reason to examine the proposal very carefully, but if it is a good proposal it is a good proposal. So there needs to be some effort to show the positives of American nationality. It is a big country with a great deal of space and a wide choice of places to live. It has great scientific projects. You can drive for thousands of miles without encountering national boundaries. America's size allows great national enterprises and research institutions. Also, being one nation we don't have a continent with nationalist antagonisms. Large nations can usually protect themselves. 

5. Those who foment national divisions ought to be rejected by the federal government and the pubic. Now this can be subjected to abuse. Criticizing an elected official or the opposition isn't fomenting national division. The tool of dictatorships is to make illegal anything they call unpatriotic and suppress opinion. Also, various political commentators like to call one opinion or argument they don't like as unpatriotic rather than argue the facts of the issue.  The word "divisive" can be use to stigmatize discussing an issue that does need to be discussed.

However, separatist arguments should be recognized as such and rejected. In rejecting them it needs to be carefully shown how they are separatist, and not labeled as such just as an assertion.

Others who promote division also should be recognized as doing such and be rejected. In rejecting them it needs to be shown clearly that it is the intent of the writer to foment division or that the article clearly and dishonestly inflames a situation which results in the division of the American public which would also lead to separatists movements. 

Again, this charge should not be indiscriminatorily be used. If made indiscriminatorily the public will reject any claim of separatism. 

Sunday, December 18, 2016

Neo-Confederates deficient

On Dec. 31st 2016 1pm we are having a Reject Racist Robert E. Lee  Periscope broadcast at the Robert E. Lee Park.

This is the link to the Facebook event.

This is a blog with the reasons to reject Robert E. Lee

As you might imagine, Neo-Confederates are not happy with this event. Some decided to post opposing comments on the Facebook event page. I deleted the comments but did printout Facebook event page to record their comments.

What is surprising is that they didn't have any real arguments in defense of Robert E. Lee. The blog gives the reasons and none of the items listed were addressed.

Instead there were comments like, "Learn your history!"  The question in response would be what item in history did I need to learn. The comment implies that I don't know my history or enough history and if I did I wouldn't have this opinion against Robert E. Lee, and the comment avoids discussing the historical issue or mentioning what the item I needed to know was.

Rather than argue the question the responses generally are implied or direct attacks on the intellectual competency of the organizers of Reject Racist Robert E. Lee, but don't discuss or argue the history.

The other arguments were to throw in irrelevant historical items.

I think that the reason that their arguments are so very deficient is that they aren't arguing the real reason why they support the Confederacy and Confederate monuments which is their support for white nationalism. So they are grasping for reasons to oppose our event.

I think they also don't understand that being outraged isn't a reason in itself. It might be a reason for a Breitbart editorial, it might be an argument for those in their social circle, but it isn't really a reason.

It also shows that the remaining support for the Confederacy is increasingly just the rage of resentment.

Sunday, December 11, 2016

Anti-Neo-Confederate Video on You Tube

This is a video by a cyclist in response to a neo-Confederate protest in South Carolina.

How Presidents and the Federal government aid and abet neo-Confederacy

I am going to be asking President-Elect Donald Trump to end presidential and federal government practises that aid neo-Confederacy.

1. Presidents go to the Alfalfa Club events. This is a club that has an annual event based on Robert E. Lee's birthday. I hope that President-Elect Donald Trump doesn't go. Also, this is a club of the elites which he claimed he was going to reject. Trump stated that he was going to drain the swamp, but going to the Alfalfa club would be like diving into the swamp.

You can read about Robert E. Lee's cruelty, racism and anti-Civil Rights efforts at this blog.

2. Presidents send a wreath to the Arlington Confederate Monument annually. If Confederate soldiers had succeeded, we wouldn't even have a slogan "Make America Great Again." This monument was built by an organization with a white supremacist agenda, the United Daughters of the Confederacy. This monument serves to glorify an attempt to create a nation whose purpose was to preserve slavery and white supremacy.

3. The U.S. military academies allow the United Daughters of the Confederacy to present awards there to cadets. It is my hope that President-Elect Donald Trump will not permit this to continue. The United Daughters of the Confederacy glorifies those who would have destroyed America had they succeeded. Had the Confederate leaders that the United Daughters of the Confederacy glorifies succeeded, there would be no America to make great or great again.

4. The Junior ROTC programs permit both the involvement of the Sons of Confederate Veterans and the United Daughters of the Confederacy. It is my hope that President-Elect Donald Trump will not permit this to continue. Had the Confederate leaders that the United Daughters of the Confederacy and the Sons of Confederate Veterans glorify succeeded, there would be no America to make great or great again.

Saturday, December 10, 2016

No Kevin Levin, the LGBT community absolutely doesn't need "Confederate fabulous."

This is a recent posting by Kevin Levin

The title is "Charlottesville's Lee Park Could Be 'Confederate Fabulous.'"

The LGBT community doesn't need any "Confederate Fabulous." Indeed the concept is inimical to the LGBT community. Levin writes:
Though it was not sanctioned by the organization, at one point someone attached a bright multicolored boa around Traveler’s neck. It was eventually removed after a local resident complained to city officials.

Short of removing the Lee monument, I believe these acts of appropriation offer one way forward – a way for communities and groups to take ownership of public sites dedicated to the memory of the Confederacy.
It seems that the action of putting the gay items on the statue was to subvert it and I think that is okay as an action to subvert the statue.

Levin feels that putting a boa on the Robert E. Lee can reshape the meaning of Robert E. Lee park.

However, the following is a news article on the event.

It isn't the happy appropriation that Levin represents it as being.

This is the response of one leader at the Gay pride event:
Schmidt is unlikely to be convinced. She compares groups that use the park like Cville Pride and Tom Tom to “the nice white people during segregation who continued to patronize segregated establishments and didn’t say anything publicly if they objected to it. Your private regrets, expressed sotto voce, do not make you an ally or promote change. It’s time to stand up and be counted, because silence equals consent.”
Yes, there are LGBT in leadership positions in the South who still have a plantation mentality. Indeed the major gay bar in Dallas used to be called The Old Plantation, and the mentality of the Dallas LGBT community still reflects that to a large extent.

The consequences of this is that many Southern towns have two annual gay pride events, one for white gays and one for African American gays. The LGBT communities all over the South are often quite divided and are separate worlds.

The whole point of the rainbow design of the Gay Pride flag is that the LGBT community necessarily needs to bring together diverse elements of all races, religions, nationalities, etc. Indeed the Gay Pride flag is global in its use from African to Asian from Latin American to Europe and everywhere.

The LGBT community both locally, nationally and internationally don't need to have some local individuals with a white attitude dividing the LGBT community. 

Persons in leadership positions in the LGBT community that still accommodate the Confederacy need to get kicked of the movement.

A couple of us are going to periscope the Robert E. Lee statue in Dallas, Texas on the 31st.

See this blog to learn about the racism of Robert E. Lee.

Kevin Levin's "innocent" Civil War Round Tables. How he enables banal white nationalism

Kevin Levin has this recent posting on his blog.

In discussing how the Civil War Round Table avoided the issues of race and gender he states:
"An innocence about the past that was nurtured and even protected at Civil War Round Tables has been irretrievably lost. 
I am not sure that this is necessarily something that should be lamented."

Was it is an "innocence?" Did the Civil War Round Tables not know?  Many scholars at the time when these Round Tables started were aware that the Civil War was about race and slavery.

The Civil War Round Tables were created by people who chose a "romance of reunion" interpretation  of the Civil War and rejected the idea of the Civil War being about race and slavery and did consciously avoid the issues of race and gender. There was nothing "innocent" about it.

Note the term "lost" instead of "rejected." Then his half-hearted rejection of lamenting for this lost. He couches it in terms of "not sure"

What is really regrettable, is that Levin is an editor of a book on understanding Confederate monuments. This really is an indictment of the history profession that he would be selected as an editor of a publication by an academic society.

A couple of use are going to periscope the Robert E. Lee statue in Dallas, Texas on Dec. 31st. We will have our own interpretation.  There is a wider academic world outside the Civil War history profession.

Kevin Levin might consider that he and his colleagues might come to be thought of as the Eugene Genovese's of the future.

"Breitbart" and the Confederacy. They aren't the "Southern Partisan." They are banal white nationalists with a policy destructive to American nationalism. "Breitbart" reporting could be an aid to Russia

I had said earlier that Breitbart was a modern day Southern Partisan, They are not. After printing out maybe about 100 articles and scanning them and reading for the last few weeks closely what they say I am beginning to see what their strategy is.

The Breitbart view of the Confederacy will please and displease neo-Confederates.

On one hand Breitbart will publish articles like this.

For example this series about the Houston Independent School District in Texas getting rid of Confederate names for schools.

In this article Breitbart claims they are erasing history.

This article says that taxpayers are complaining that changing the name is a waste of money. How many taxpayers isn't mentioned.

Again another article about irate taxpayers, which means that there are at least 2.

On the other hand Breitbart invokes the Confederacy to condemn Democrats and liberals.

In this article Ian Hanchett quotes Charles Krauthhammer saying that the supporters of Sanctuary cities, cities where the police don't go after immigrants, are using "the language of the Confederates."

Then there is this article in which the California Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon is condemned as neo-Confederate. As I blog earlier on, I didn't see exactly how Rendon was neo-Confederate and I am fairly good on determining neo-Confederacy.

Condemning a speaker, writer, author, columnist, politician, celebrity by claiming that they have some element or feature or similarity to the Confederacy is also a condemnation of the Confederacy. Denouncing some statement, policy, position paper, or resolution claiming that it has elements of the Confederacy is necessarily a condemnation of the Confederacy.

Saying that something is bad because is like or similar or derives from something else, necessarily means that the something else is bad.

More interesting is that Breitbart reporting implies neo-Confederate ideology is bad, since it condemns certain thinking as having Confederate affinities or components or elements.

However, if anyone tries to get rid of a Confederate monument or holiday or place name Breitbart is entirely against it. It might seem contradictory and a person might think that it is just that Breitbart has no coherent ideology and is just a maniacal rage machine. Just because it is a rage machine doesn't mean they are stupid or don't have a strategy.

Breitbart supports a banal white nationalist America. So for issues in the present it supports a strong national government in pursuit of its agenda.

However, in the past, all fighting white Americans are held to be heroic and pulling down one statue to one white American might lead to another statue of a white American being pulled down. The Civil War of Breitbart seems to be the Civil War of the 1950s or earlier, a "romance of reunion" Civil War, a white solidarity maintained by the idea that the Civil War was an avoidable mistake or was only about preserving the union, but wasn't about slavery or race, and in any case the Civil War demonstrated white bravery.

Breitbart's concept of patriotism, a white nationalism, is dangerous to the United States, since white nationalism can't be the basis of a strong American national identity in a multiracial America, and instead will work to undermine America.

And there are foreign powers which will be glad to exploit the situation. It has already become clear that Russia is aiding both left wing and right wing nationalist groups, both California and Texas secessionists. They are aiding both left wing and right wing groups in Europe also. Their policy is a pragmatic realpolitik to attack Western democracy and to undermine their geopolitical opponents.

They will be very quick to seize on strategies of exploiting racial nationalist groups. With their support of neo-Confederates and Texas secessionists already supporting white nationalists. The Russians must be reviewing what other racial nationalists that they can support.

National sentiment is always provisional. With a change in a situation individuals will reevaluate their national identity. This is demonstrated by the current secession movements where both left wing and right wing groups feel that they have no prospects of their agenda in the current political unit being successful.

If the Trump administration is dragging hundreds of thousands or even millions of Hispanics out of their homes and dumping them in Mexico where these individuals end up in camps where they are starving there is bound to be a Hispanic nationalist movement. The United States did steal the Southwest United States as President Ulysses S. Grant as explain in his memoir:
"I was bitterly opposed to the measure, and to this day, regard the war, which resulted, as one of the most unjust ever waged by a stronger against a weaker nation. It was an instance of a republic following the bad example of European monarchies in not considering justice in their desire to acquire additional territory." 
Surely some Hispanic nationalist will want to quote this.

As the Trump administration undermines civil rights and voting rights and shows an indifference to cases where police officers shoot African Americans and the Trump administration expresses a hostility towards the Black Lives Matter movement surely some Black Nationalists will seek to capitalize on the situation.

In 2016 the situation regarding reckless and wrongful shooting of African Americans came dangerously close to getting out of control as some individual African Americans sought to take revenge by shooting police officers and some neo-Confederate groups sought to have counter protest at Blasck Lives Matter protests.

I think with Trump being elected we are likely  to see right wing white groups show up with guns at Black Lives Matter protests. At Black Lives Matter protests there are already African American groups parading with guns. A few days ago a young person with guns fired shots in a pizza parlor in Washington, D.C. because of some lunatic right wing news story that the Clinton's were using its back rooms for child sex slavery. These protests with white nationalists, black nationalists, and the Black Lives Matter protesters, some carrying guns, will be combustible.

All we need to have is two groups at a Black Lives Matter protest shooting at each other and the situation could spiral out of control. It might not even be that the two protesting groups set it off, a third party, a lone individual, might decided to shot one of the protesters to set things off.

In any deteriorating situation Black Nationalism will seek to capitalize on the situation.

Then there is the situation of native Americans. How well has the American nation treated these groups historically? Not very well.  We still have Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill. Surely the Russians will find some opportunities.

All racial nationalisms share the same reactionary understanding of nationality. They only differ in which group they see themselves as advocating for. So it won't be that difficult for a white reactionary nationalist Russia to support minority nationalisms in America. They will find that in many ways they think very similarly.

Also, it should be understood to have your movement backed by a major world power gives it credibility.  Also, a major world power has ways of impressing a separatist movement.

When visiting nationalists are hosted by important officials in prestigious buildings the visiting nationalists are certainly impressed and given confidence and faith in their movement. When the nationalist group sees their leader hosted by important officials in an impressive historic building they can't but imagine what they are doing is important since important people with real power see it as important. The photos of these meetings certainly will give the movement credibility.

Our nationalist elites still see separatism as amusing and a novelty and don't take it seriously. This is because they are in many ways vacuous and an intellectually inbred set of people.

It is time for the government to wake up and start counter measures against separatism. As I stated earlier it needs to be NOT oppressive, but a strategy informed by a critical understanding of the theory of nationalism.

Also, government actions and policy needs to be reviewed such that nationalists are not encouraged. This is not to say avoid certain policies because you are afraid to aggravate some separatist nationalist direction, but to make sure that some policy doesn't needlessly enable separatist nationalism when it could easily have been avoided.

I suggest Michael Billig's "Banal Nationalism," and Donald Mitchell's "Cultural Geography: A Critical Introduction." These books are available on the used market. They are not big books, and reading the both of them will give a fairly comprehensive view of the topic and provide most what a an anti-separatist program needs to know.

My paper on banal white nationalism.

Thursday, December 08, 2016

The reactionary idiocy of California secession/ Need for the government to have a counter strategy

The link above is to an article in Bloomberg about the California secessionists getting help from Putin and working with a reactionary group there.

This is also a good example on how some ideas that are put forth as left are really reactionary.

The head of the group, Louis Marinelli, lives in Russia teaching English.

The fundamental measure of support for democracy is the willingness to accept defeat at the polls. You really aren't a believer in democracy if you can't having lost an election. I don't mean that you can't be vocal in expression dissatisfaction with the results.

When an election is run and the results come in there will most often be an uneven distribution of results across the geography of the political unit. In one part of a political unit your faction or party or program will likely have majority support. Breaking up the political unit isn't the solution. Such a plan of secession taken to its logical conclusion results in a republic of a city block or a farm.

According to the article the Russians are working with far-left parties as well as extreme right groups to undermine European states and evidently this program is now extending to California. There is a position paper on Russian support for far-left European parties online by Political Capitol in Hungary. I don't know anything about them, but this is the link in the Bloomberg article.

The secessionists might consider that not everyone will want boundaries and divisions in North America and to divide the continent into many small states that will inevitably quarrel.  One of the great thing about North America is that most of the land mass is divided among three states, Canada, United States of America, and Mexico, and three states on relatively good terms, at least compared to some other areas of the globe.

I  think a lot of the media reporting portrays secessionists in the United States as some type of amusing novelty and doesn't take it seriously. I don't think the United States government is doing anything at all to think of counter strategies.  They should.

A counter strategy should NOT be to oppress secessionists by arresting them or some other act of official oppression. What needs to be done is formulate a strategy that utilizes a theoretical understanding of nationalism and what drives separatism and using that knowledge devise counter strategies.

For example Cinco de Mayo is about Hispanics in California supporting the Union against the Confederacy, which is both anti-secessionist and also a national narrative. The major Hispanic holiday in the United States is about Hispanic Californians defending the American nation against secession.  I don't think the story of the origins of Cinco de Mayo is generally known, it should be as a first step against California secession to make sure that it is more generally known.

In opposing Daniel Miller's program of Texas secession I think it would be relatively easy to show it is really a movement basing itself on a white nationalist history of Texas and negates the African American and Hispanic experience in Texas.

For Southern nationalism I suggest that it ought to be considered where the dividing line is between "Southern Studies" and southern nationalism is. In fact it could be asked whether there is really a boundary at all, and if Southern Studies isn't really the venue  of a Southern nationalist intelligentsia.

Also, an examination of the constructedness of the "South" should be done. John Shelton Reed in an article written under a pseudonym, J.R. Vanover, in Southern Partisan, was denouncing the term Southeastern because it was a term that people were using and he saw it as inimical to Southern nationalism. I think the antidote to Southern nationalism is a program of real regional studies and let states in the southern part of the Unites States out of the prison house of the Confederacy and southern nationalism.

These are just initial ideas I have to oppose separatism in America. I think a small group of academics could probably over a year come up with a fairly good program what would put a stop to various secessionist movements.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Popular Posts Last 30 days

Popular Posts All Time