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.

Will Hillary Clinton honor Jefferson Davis' birthday like Bill Clinton did?

Bill Clinton did send a wreath to the Confederate Memorial at Arlington Cemetery.

Bill Clinton did write three congratulatory letters to the United Daughters of the Confederacy.

Will Hillary Clinton write letters of congratulations to the United Daughters of the Confederacy or other neo-Confederate groups?

I have Bill Clinton's letters to the United Daughters of the Confederacy online at http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/presidentialcandidates2008.htm

Just go down to Hillary Clinton's entry.

I am unable to get this item out to the press. Perhaps the blogosphere can get the word out.

A Confederate organization that the Bush family belongs to.

The Alfalfa Club's sole purpose is to have an annual dinner on a Saturday following Robert E. Lee's birthday. The Washington Post has an article about it here.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/26/AR2008012602893.html

It seems the whole Bush family is fairly involved and enthusiastic supporters.

It seems that George W. Bush's support for the Museum of the Confederacy while governor of Texas is a part of a larger support for the Confederacy.

In the news, Ed Sebesta referenced as source in article on Huckabee and the Council of Conservative Citizens./ Who wrote Ron Paul's newsletters?

You can see the article about Huckabee and the Council of Conservative Citizens at:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20080118/cm_thenation/45272545

or at this link

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters?pid=272545

The group which is running the ads about Huckabee and the Confederate flag is a PAC run by the Sons of Confederate Veterans.

Check this link:

http://preservingamericanculture.com/2007/july/the_charge.php?SessID=36598

and this link:

http://preservingamericanculture.com/2007/july/mobile_july_27.php?SessID=36598


The claim is being put out that Lew Rockwell of www.lewrockwell.com and the Ludwig von Mises Institute www.mises.org wrote much of them as claimed at this link:

No Black Confederate soldiers per the United Confederate Veterans

One of the enabling factors in fraudulent history is that historians write what happened and don't write about what didn't happened.

For example in reading a history about the Battle of Gettysburg we are unlikely to read the following sentence.

"There were no tornadoes during Pickett's charge or any other phase of the battle. Nor were there any meteor showers striking the ground or soldiers. Neither were there any geysers or volcanic eruptions or earthquakes. There were no battalions of the Thai royal army, Russian Imperial army, Chinese Imperial army, Prussian or contingents of Inuits, Tahitians, Burmese. The Dali Lama wasn't an observer, as well as 3,421 names which we have in an appendix at the end of the book. "

History is long enough with describing what happened and would be impossible if describing what didn't happen was also required.

However, once in a while you do get lucky and someone will go on at great length at what didn't happen when they want to make a point.

The following are extracts from the Minutes of the Sixteenth Annual Convention of the United Daughters of the Confederacy held in Houston, Texas, October 19-22, 1909, pages 6-8, speech by Colonel Phillip H. Fall, Commander of Dick Dowling Camp, United Confederate Veterans, to the United Daughters of the Confederacy. Hessians technically would be inhabitants of Hesse, a principality of the Holy Roman Empire before being consolidated into Germany. During the American Revolution, the British employed Hessian soldiers. So in this speech Colonel Fall is complaining about immigrants from Europe who enlisted in the American army during the Civil War.

"... Had you not thrown down the gauntlet and assumed the offensive for the old soldiers of the Confederacy, their names would have gone down in a partisan Northern history as rebels and traitors; who tried to disrupt what they call the greatest and best government on earth, when in fact, they in arbitrary, puritanical spirit, brought about the disruption, causing a war such as the world has never known, hiring nearly a million Hessians and nearly two hundred thousand Africans, to slaughter their brethren of the South. Nothing but a civil war could have ever satisfied the John Brown stripe of abolitionists, especially after their leader John Brown was hung. ..."

"... There were no hired Hessians or negroes in the Southern army. All fought for a principle they knew to be right and thousands upon thousands gave up their lives in defense of truth."

Besides the fact that Colonel Fall is bragging that there were no Africans in the Confederate army, there is another assertion, that immigrants and African Americans didn't fight for principle in the American army.

So it is a denial of the existence of Afro-Confederate soldiers and a racist assertion concerning African Americans. Did Colonel Fall miss seeing the Afro-Confederate soldiers that supposedly made up 10 to 30% of the Confederate army (Has a higher percentage been put out by the neo-Confederates?). I don't think so. However, the usefulness of the myth of the Afro-Confederate soldier is so great, I am sure some rationalization will be made to dispense with this part of the historical record.

Ron Paul's Racist Newsletters Make CNN political coverage

They have Ron Paul's racist and homophobic rants as the lead story at www.cnn.com .

The CNN direct link is at:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/10/paul.newsletters/?iref=mpstoryview

I have more information in the preceding post.

I notice that the Ludwig von Mises Institute involvement of Ron Paul is not getting much notice.

The Ron Paul supporters are coming up with many ingenious rationalizations. Really loopy rationalizations.

Ron Paul news coming up! A story I contributed to. Update.

Update: This is a link to the article. http://www.newrepublic.com/article/politics/angry-white-man. It originally was either behind a paywall or didn't have a link specifically to it.

I am updating this as I find items all day today. 1/8/08.

The article and the newsletters and the other documents are online now at www.tnr.com .

The video of Jamie Kirchick is at http://www.msnbc.com/ in the video section.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/22545697#22545697

It is also online at YouTube at:

http://youtube.com/profile?user=antironpaulcom

Radio interview with Jamie Kirchick http://youtube.com/watch?v=Whqtv9D9g-Y

I helped supply material for this story. In particular the secession convention information and a lot of the Ludwig von Mises Institute information. http://www.mises.org/

I have been holding back until Jamie Kirchick story went public.

The head of the Ludwig von Mises Institute is Lew Rockwell and he has a web site http://www.lewrockwell.com/ which you can see is a sort of Ron Paul Internet headquarters.

Jamie Kirchick's story is going online tomorrow afternoon at the http://www.tnr.com/ website.

I hope they have the secession convention mailing with Ron Paul's picture on it up on the web site.

Neo-Confederates support Ron Paul because he is one of their own.

Of course the Ron Paul supporters will have all sorts of rationalizations and excuses. Here is a link to a web site with the loopy rationalizations of Ron Paul supporters.
http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/01/07/ron-paul-just-trashed-on-msnbc/

Evidently Ron Paul supporters are given to Brownshirt tactics as shown in this video. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1d4_1199722032&p=1 Not a lot of "love" or "evol" is it?

One reason they think that they can rationalize that Ron Paul is not a racist, is the stereotype that racists are only belligerent rude people lacking middle class decorum. I explain this in my essay on banal white nationalism. www.templeofdemocracy.com/breaking.htm

I am non-partisan and readers can read information on Bill Clinton at my website at this URL.

http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/presidentialcandidates2008.htm

Chip Pickering and the Council of Conservative Citizens

The May-June 2002, Vol. 33 No. 3, issue of Citizen Informer, official publication of the Council of Conservative Citizens, has a short report on one of their meetings in Mississippi on page 14.

They report that Congressmen Chip Pickering and Ronnie Snow sent representatives to the July 25th CofCC meeting at Bo-Don's seafood in Jackson to get their support.

Mike Huckabee and the Council of Conservative Citizens

This is an extract from the Citizens Informer, official publication of the Council of Conservative Citizens, Vol. 24 No. 3, 1993.

"Ark. Lt. Governor Mike Huckabee, unable to leave Arkansas by law because the Governor was absent from the state, sent a terrific videotape speech, which was viewed and extremely well received by the audience. The celebrities and candidates present were introduced, including Dan Ivy, esq., Republican primary candidate for Arkansas Governor."

Now the Council of Conservative Citizens www.cofcc.org has rejected Huckabee for his stances on the issues. Too bad Huckabee didn't reject the Council of Conservative Citizens then for their stance on the issues.

Someone should see if they can find Arkansas Council of Conservative Citizens publications to see if there was more involvement by Huckabee with the Council of Conservative Citizens.

Ron Paul whistles Dixie

Normally politicians with links to neo-Confederates keep it under the table. George Allen didn't bring it up his fraternization with the Council of Conservative Citizens in his last campaign, and Trent Lott initially denied active involvement with the Council of Conservative Citizens.

However, Ron Paul, on meet the press, was up front with his neo-Confederate beliefs. This is the link to the story and at that web page you can get the entire transcript.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22342301/

I am not surprised by this. If you want to learn about the libertarian wing of the neo-Confederate movement go to http://www.mises.org/ or http://www.lewrockwell.com/.

Not surprisingly, they are big supporters of Ron Paul.

In regards to the historical arguments that Ron Paul makes.

1. There was a proposal to sell the public lands and use the money to purchase the slaves and free them. The State of Georgia was livid over the proposal and fulminated against it, passing a resolution against it.

One reason the United States didn't use funds to free the slaves is that the slave states were against it.

2. Ron Paul comments about the abolition of slavery elsewhere misrepresents history. In Brazil the Imperial Army was called out to support slavery towards the end, and slavery began to end when the army announced that it would refuse to capture runaway slaves.

There was violence against abolitionists in Brazil. The whole process of abolition in Brazil wasn't as peaceful as neo-Confederate apologists like to make out.

However, the thing to consider is that abolition of slavery elsewhere falls under one or more of these five categories.

A. The slave holders in many Latin American countries were a small minority of the larger polity and didn't have the political strength or resources to fight abolitionism and certainly not the resources to carry out an insurrection.

B. Some slave holders were dependent on the larger polity to maintain slavery. Without the British Empire the British West Indies slave holders would not be able to maintain their systems of slavery. When the Empire decided to abolish slavery, they could hardly resist militarily, and being tiny white elites over large slave populations they could hardly risk disorder of any type or the lack of the law supplied by the British empire.

C. Slavery in many cases was abolished after the Civil War as the blockade of trans-Atlantic slave trade became more efficient and slavery couldn't support itself without the easy importation of slaves.

D. Unfortunately, in some cases the abolition of slavery was merely the founding of some other type of bondage, such as peonage.

E. After the American Civil War it was fairly obvious that slavery was on the way out and abolitionism meant modernism for nations.

The United States on the other hand had a body of slave holders that represented a large geographic region of major economic resources with a population to raise an army, they had the means to resist. At the time of the Civil War it wasn't obvious that slavery was the dead past. The trans-Atlantic slave trade was still going since the slave states would block effective American actions against it. The American slave owners were also of violent temperament as shown in the case of Preston Brooks.

The slave states also made it clear from the Constitutional Convention onward that any effort at abolition in their states would result in violent resistance. The proposals to avoid a Civil War during 1861 involved adding more amendments on the Constitution to fasten slavery on America forever. Reading the Crittenden Convention minutes makes you glad that the compromise didn't go through, because it would have eventually resulted in the discrediting and end of America.

It would of course been better that the United States didn't not have a Civil War, but the slave states were committed to violence.

Interesting article from Charleston "City Paper'

An interesting article from the Charleston "City Paper"

http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A37621

It shows how selective and self-serving neo-Confederate heritage is.

I see that I have had quite a break in my blogging. Busy writing and writing and writing.

Got a copy from one of my co-editors of the final manuscript going to the publishers with the acknowledgements and table of contents etc. all put together. It will appear in the Fall 2008 catalog of a major university press.

Screening Trial venues for white supremacy

Defense attorneys, when they have a minority client do screen prospective jurors for membership in the KKK and other like groups. However, they don't screen for banal white nationalism. www.templeofdemocracy.com/breaking.htm

For example is the juror a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, League of the South, United Daughters of the Confederacy. It is a fairly obvious screening for a public defender to do, and one has to ask why isn't it being done. Is the public defender defending the client or defending his or her career?

Well, it seems that Wesley Snipes' lawyers are doing their job and screening a venue for banal white nationalism as reported in this article.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/orl-snipes0907nov09,0,7302864.story

http://www.wftv.com/news/14539134/detail.html?rss=orlc&psp=irresistible

Of course the local leaders are bawling about how it is not a fair characterization of their community.

Seems rather obvious, in an area where they celebrate the white nationalist Confederacy an African American won't get a fair trial because the jury pool is full of white nationalists.

I would also like to see public defenders question jurors on their attitudes towards the Confederacy.

Also, why aren't judges screened also? If they are members of neo-Confederate groups, why should anyone suffer to have them a judge in their trial, black or white?

This brings up the larger question of what is the relationship of the citizen to Confederate identified government. If the municipality is Confederate identified should they not be treated as an occupier and not something you belong to? You will pay your taxes as a practical necessity, but give no more than what is the law. However, for what you are able to withhold, you will.

I think that jurors should consider the trial carefully. Does the public defender screen for banal white nationalism in the jurors, or is the public defender just following the established methods and defending his or her career. Did the public defender check the background of the judge?

If not, then the juror ought to consider if it is fair trial and act accordingly. If our so-called public defenders can't do their job, they someone needs to.