The US South through a Colonization Lens - Shower thought about white liberals

[CryoRevival #SJ-112]

Is there any reason that the arguments applied when analysing the state of post colonial Africa can not be reasonably applied in analysis of the American South?

Can you view it as in a post colonial life cycle after the conclusion of the civil war?

This thought cropped up when thinking about how white liberals consider the south the be a cultueral backwater who they must drag into the modern age, a mindset which they would readily condemn when considering European colonialism.

What are your thoughts?

 

[Drkinferno72]

There is no duty to civilise others

 

[Kendall Motor Oil]

Same with the British and Ireland and Russia and.... everything around it. "Whites" are always the oppressor. It was never about colonialism which should be obvious to anyone who's seen how affluent liberal charities operate.

Regarding the American South, specifically, the education system frames it as a good v. evil situation that pulled the real United States into a just war. There are also long standing biases at play. Many northerners still treat the South as backward and treat the cultural differences as a moral travesty. The terms redneck and hick are still considered acceptable in conversations and media. You are telling these people that Cleetus and his incest kids living on a dirt road are victims of liberal enlightenment. Them admitting it was colonialism-by-definition or a moral violation is an attack on the foundation of their belief system.

 

[LeChampion1992]

In a historical perspective the global south has since the mid twentieth century experienced something of an industrial revolution while the west post 1970 has been suffering a mass deindustrialization.

If one looks at Africa it's massively civilizing as a continent you're seeing the formation of trade routes, better more developed highway systems. The global south will be the global hedgemone not sure when it might be a few decades from now it could be a century or two from now. Europe, china and the pax Americana are on the decline at the moment. They're all facing substantial demographic crisis. either though long term migration we see ethnic cleansing or war. because the demographic crisis facing the US, Europe, China and even the middle east will be concerning.

 

[Caesare]

how white liberals consider the south the be a cultueral backwater who they must drag into the modern age,

White liberals just hate black people, that's what their problem is. All the blacks in America live in the Southeast, and they think black people are just like children, no agency of their own or ability to take care of themselves. That's why they see themselves as the ones who have to swoop in and educate them, for their "own good" of course.

 

[soy_king]

People think that the white man's burden died with the British Empire, but has never truly died, just metamorphosis into a different form. It's always been deeply patronizing, but at least 100 years ago it was actually aimed at improving people's quality of life and making them functioning members of an advanced society rather than at tearing down western civilization by making everyone equally miserable.

 

[Wormy]

Whatever, there's a lot about this joint I wish WOULD get dragged into the modern age instead of being perpetually stuck in 1979...

 

[Passing Through Town]

Dixie is effectively an occupied nation. The culture and heritage of White Southerners is deliberately oppressed in every facet of American society. The media dehumanizes the White Southerner in movies and television frequently. They've deliberately made the Southern dialect out to be a sign of being uneducated while simultaneously making Ebonics out to be something of cultural importance. They depict "trailer trash" as horrible, backwards people who don't deserve any sympathy while simultaneously crying about the horrible plight of the poor black man - who is clearly a victim of systemic oppression. Furthermore, Christianity (the primary religion of White Southerners) is becoming increasingly bastardized as the media and government effectively demonize the faith. And all that's not to mention the deliberate demographic replacement of White Southerners, not just by non-Whites today, but also by carpetbaggers immediately following the Civil War.

I'd argue that the progressive, liberal, Marxist, etc. don't have any interest at all in "educating", "reforming", or "reconstructing" the South. They're interested in the cultural and ethnic genocide of the South. Consider that it is taboo for the Southern White man to fly any flag relating to Southern independence, to celebrate men like Robert E. Lee, to argue for his rights as a Southern White man, to so much as suggest that the Civil War narrative is flawed, or even to assert that his race is real. Now consider the situation of the freed blacks: It is NOT taboo for blacks to form explicitly racial organizations of any kind, it is NOT taboo to celebrate murderers like Nat Turner, it is NOT taboo for blacks to argue for their rights as blacks, it is NOT taboo to demonize the Southern White man, and it is most certainly NOT taboo to assert that the black race is real.

In fact, modern American society is essentially built upon the oppression of Southern Whites. The core of American social policy resides not in any document dating back to this country's founding, but rather in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which itself is the descendant of the Supreme Court's Brown v. Board decision, which stripped Southern schools of their freedom of association. The notion that the Civil Rights Act made anyone the equal of anyone else is ludicrous, because it simply did the opposite. Whereas the law previously applied to everyone equally, the Civil Rights Act effectively made minorities into a protected class and gave them the freedom to go where they simply weren't wanted. And what did the federal government do when White Southerners stood up for their right to decide who went to the schools that they built and they paid for? Same things as always, they used force.

And to what end was this done? Black people are in an arguably worse position than before. They can now go and eat in White restaurants and ride in the front of the bus, sure. But has that fixed their communities? No, it didn't. Blacks are less safe than they were back then. All that unleashing them on the rest of us did was make us less safe, degrade our communities, cripple our schools, and destroy our cities. Are we supposed to believe that wasn't intentional? If the issue was that black schools were underfunded, why didn't the feds just give them funding? If the issue was that blacks weren't allowed in White businesses, why didn't the government do anything to help black businesses? If the problem was that blacks had terrible housing, why didn't the government try to improve their housing? Desegregation didn't solve any of these problems because it wasn't designed to. It, just like the emancipation of blacks in the Civil War, was no more than a strategy to disenfranchise the White Southern voter.

On a side note, the idea that segregation was unconstitutional is a total farce. The Founders never intended for blacks to be free, and Thomas Jefferson explicitly stated in his Notes on the State of Virginia that emancipation of blacks would require that they "be removed beyond the reach of mixture". So anyone who wants to argue along the lines of American ideals need not apply.

 

[Wormy]

Dixie is effectively an occupied nation. The culture and heritage of White Southerners is deliberately oppressed in every facet of American society. The media dehumanizes the White Southerner in movies and television frequently. They've deliberately made the Southern dialect out to be a sign of being uneducated while simultaneously making Ebonics out to be something of cultural importance. They depict "trailer trash" as horrible, backwards people who don't deserve any sympathy while simultaneously crying about the horrible plight of the poor black man - who is clearly a victim of systemic oppression. Furthermore, Christianity (the primary religion of White Southerners) is becoming increasingly bastardized as the media and government effectively demonize the faith. And all that's not to mention the deliberate demographic replacement of White Southerners, not just by non-Whites today, but also by carpetbaggers immediately following the Civil War.

I'd argue that the progressive, liberal, Marxist, etc. don't have any interest at all in "educating", "reforming", or "reconstructing" the South. They're interested in the cultural and ethnic genocide of the South. Consider that it is taboo for the Southern White man to fly any flag relating to Southern independence, to celebrate men like Robert E. Lee, to argue for his rights as a Southern White man, to so much as suggest that the Civil War narrative is flawed, or even to assert that his race is real. Now consider the situation of the freed blacks: It is NOT taboo for blacks to form explicitly racial organizations of any kind, it is NOT taboo to celebrate murderers like Nat Turner, it is NOT taboo for blacks to argue for their rights as blacks, it is NOT taboo to demonize the Southern White man, and it is most certainly NOT taboo to assert that the black race is real.

In fact, modern American society is essentially built upon the oppression of Southern Whites. The core of American social policy resides not in any document dating back to this country's founding, but rather in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which itself is the descendant of the Supreme Court's Brown v. Board decision, which stripped Southern schools of their freedom of association. The notion that the Civil Rights Act made anyone the equal of anyone else is ludicrous, because it simply did the opposite. Whereas the law previously applied to everyone equally, the Civil Rights Act effectively made minorities into a protected class and gave them the freedom to go where they simply weren't wanted. And what did the federal government do when White Southerners stood up for their right to decide who went to the schools that they built and they paid for? Same things as always, they used force.

View attachment 3332424

And to what end was this done? Black people are in an arguably worse position than before. They can now go and eat in White restaurants and ride in the front of the bus, sure. But has that fixed their communities? No, it didn't. Blacks are less safe than they were back then. All that unleashing them on the rest of us did was make us less safe, degrade our communities, cripple our schools, and destroy our cities. Are we supposed to believe that wasn't intentional? If the issue was that black schools were underfunded, why didn't the feds just give them funding? If the issue was that blacks weren't allowed in White businesses, why didn't the government do anything to help black businesses? If the problem was that blacks had terrible housing, why didn't the government try to improve their housing? Desegregation didn't solve any of these problems because it wasn't designed to. It, just like the emancipation of blacks in the Civil War, was no more than a strategy to disenfranchise the White Southern voter.

On a side note, the idea that segregation was unconstitutional is a total farce. The Founders never intended for blacks to be free, and Thomas Jefferson explicitly stated in his Notes on the State of Virginia that emancipation of blacks would require that they "be removed beyond the reach of mixture". So anyone who wants to argue along the lines of American ideals need not apply.

Couldn't help that in your "Southern Whites are oppressed!" you mostly focused on a bunch of people with an antebellum mindset having to put up with the atrocity of people with different skin colors that they shit on suddenly getting to eat in the same lunch counters. I notice you didn't say a peep about Appalachian mining communities getting treated like medieval peasants by mining companies and having the US Army unleashed on them when they finally took up their 2nd Amendment rights. They weren't having the army just let blacks near them, the army was fucking shooting at them. SHOOTING AT THEM. They didn't shoot at KKK members down in Biloxi or Tupelo, but you can bet your ass they shot at hillbillies marching to Charleston WV for their rights.

No, that doesn't count. Only the indignity of not treating black like shit triggers you.

Law was applied equally. Yea, tell that to the kid who got murdered because a white woman LIED about him whistling to her.

 

[Manwithn0n0men]

Its the Anglo-English Americans oppressing the heirs to the blood of Scotland and Ulster in the south.

 

[Passing Through Town]

So, MT Foxtrot, you decided to prove my point. Here you are implying that White Southerners don't have a right to our "Antebellum mindset", and claiming that we "shit on" blacks, all the while completely ignoring the erosion of our freedoms. The simple fact of the matter is that the vast majority of Southerners never chose to have blacks around in the first place. The slave owners which imported and bred Africans for labor were a small fraction of the Southern population.

I notice you didn't say a peep about Appalachian mining communities getting treated like medieval peasants by mining companies and having the US Army unleashed on them when they finally took up their 2nd Amendment rights.

Because it's not particularly thread relevant. I'm well aware that the federal government regularly oppresses people all across America, and I'd gladly talk about them in a relevant setting.

No, that doesn't count. Only the indignity of not treating black like shit triggers you.

I never said it didn't count. I wouldn't even discount the mistreatment of blacks under slavery. None of that negates my point, which is the erosion of the freedom of association, which is now being used to push trannies on the population as well. I don't want to treat black people like shit, I just don't want them overrunning my community and filling it with crime, or overrunning local schools and lowering their standards. I don't like minorities being given special treatment. Affirmative action, along with policies like it, are simply anti-White, and it started with the oppression of the South.

Yea, tell that to the kid who got murdered because a white woman LIED about him whistling to her.

You say that the woman lied, but that's not true according to Till's friend. Besides, you only know and care about his killing because it's central to federal propaganda. What about Cannon Hinnant? What about Braxton Cottrill and his baby boy? What about the victims of the attack in Waukesha? Why are career criminal blacks allowed back on the streets where they simply go on to commit more crimes, including murder? What makes one injustice 67 years ago more important than the injustices of today? Well, it's more important because he was black. If he hadn't been, you never would have heard of him.

 

[gang weeder]

I never said it didn't count. I wouldn't even discount the mistreatment of blacks under slavery. None of that negates my point, which is the erosion of the freedom of association, which is now being used to push trannies on the population as well. I don't want to treat black people like shit, I just don't want them overrunning my community and filling it with crime, or overrunning local schools and lowering their standards. I don't like minorities being given special treatment. Affirmative action, along with policies like it, are simply anti-White, and it started with the oppression of the South.

This is the final point against any form of progressive nonsense on race relations. If white and black were not in contact with each other, neither one could "oppress" or otherwise harm the other. At the same time, suggesting that they not mix will get you labeled a Nazi. This is a completely incoherent state of affairs unless the goal were to force them to mix whether they want to or not.

 

[BiggerChungus]

Being from the South, it definitely seems like it. We're constantly told we're obligated to become "progressive" and the powers that be are doing everything they can to get "racist" white people out and brings minorities in. Tennessee for example in recent decades has had a massive influx of black residents, and unfortunately its crime rate has skyrocketed. Yet this is held as the standard for every neighboring southern state. We all need to be as "diverse" as Tennessee, which is becoming a crime-ridden shithole. Even near a place like Gatlinburg, considered a pinnacle of Appalachian culture and/or Americana, if you go into a Walmart you'd think you were either in Mexico, Africa, or Saudi Arabia.

Not that there's something inherently wrong with nonwhites coming in, it's that the people in charge frame there as being something wrong if you don't want them coming in and becoming the majorities, regardless of the fact that stastically speaking crime and economic depression follow the demographic migration. Nonwhites must move to every single corner of the country and become the majority, or move to specific "meccas" of their race (Miami, El Paso, Atlanta, etc.) to be part of the majority there, and that's all fine and commendable. If a white person wants to be somewhere where white people are the majority, they're racist, and they must submit to the "cultural enrichment" of the "civilized" leftist world.

If you asked online where you could go to be with more black people as a black guy, you'd be helped and encouraged, something that's actually pretty common on moving sites. If you asked where you could go as a white guy to be with more white people, you'd be called a Nazi. I remember reading an article from (I think) the NYT talking about solutions to "solve the problem" of whites being the majority in certain New England states. Why was it a problem? Why did it need to be solved? Why did nonwhites need to be the majority, while whites specifically shouldn't have been?

You'd think the root of it is an anti-white agenda, and that's part of it, but that's just one of many tools being used in the overall collapse of Western civilization as we're watching it. Leftists hate every race equally, and it's all about making us also hate each other and stay divided, suspicious, and resentful. Even leftists who're ignorant of what they're doing and genuinely think they're correct still show a completely denigrating and dehumanizing view of nonwhites in the same way they claim colonizers did, seeing nonwhites as some kind of fragile and pathetic animal that needs constantly coddled to survive.

None of it's surprising though. Leftism's lifeblood is hypocrisy and denial or distortion of reality, and progressive leftism - despite ostensibly opposing violence, intolerance, racism, and hatred - is one of the most violent, intolerant, racist, and hateful ideologies in human history.

 

[Wormy]

The slave owners which imported and bred Africans for labor were a small fraction of the Southern population.

And did the larger portion of the southern population rise up and say "STOP THIS SHIT NOW!"? No. We didn't.

Because it's not particularly thread relevant.

Well damn , I didn't know we ceased to be Southern. When did that happen?

You say that the woman lied, but that's not true according to Till's friend.

Did he still deserve to die?

Why are career criminal blacks allowed back on the streets where they simply go on to commit more crimes, including murder?

Same reason whites are. The system is broken.

What makes one injustice 67 years ago more important than the injustices of today?

I wouldn't bring it up at all if you didn't consider the very presence of non whites is some example of oppression. Incidentally, you're the first fella I've seen actually try to live up to the idiotic talking point so many leftist radicals make that the very founding of the country is racist with your "The Founders never wanted blacks to be free". Guess we really were all this time.

Leftists hate every race equally, and it's all about making us also hate each other and stay divided, suspicious, and resentful.

So what's the solution?

 

[Passing Through Town]

And did the larger portion of the southern population rise up and say "STOP THIS SHIT NOW!"? No. We didn't.

It wasn't our responsibility to do so. If you feel so bad about your ancestors choosing to focus on their own communities rather than dedicate their lives to saving Africans, you can donate to BLM here.

Well damn , I didn't know we ceased to be Southern. When did that happen?

West Virginia? It ceased to be Southern when it chose not to be during the Civil War.

Did he still deserve to die?

No, and neither did Cannon Hinnant and the Cottrills. Not that you care about them, since you clearly made the conscious decision to avoid discussing that point.

Same reason whites are. The system is broken.

Whites don't have organizations that are designed to seek them out and pay for their bail, or organizations designed specifically to get them off the hook. Such organizations would quickly be shut down. Not because the system is "broken", but because it's working as intended, which is to be anti-White.

I wouldn't bring it up at all if you didn't consider the very presence of non whites is some example of oppression.

I would greatly appreciate it if you would stop deliberately misrepresenting my argument. They're not simply in our presence, they are actively forced upon us. Besides, I don't believe you. It seems to me that this is all you really care about, because it's the only place you're willing to actually argue from. You're not willing to address our grievances, you're only willing to tell us that we deserve it all because of past injustices. Yet you accuse me of using "leftist radical" talking points. Just answer this simple question: Why should any community be refused the right to decide who is or isn't allowed to participate in it?

Incidentally, you're the first fella I've seen actually try to live up to the idiotic talking point so many leftist radicals make that the very founding of the country is racist with your "The Founders never wanted blacks to be free".

It's not a "talking point", it's the truth, which is why you're incapable of refuting it along with every other point I've made. The Founders were racist. Even Lincoln was racist. You're just going to have to come to terms with those facts.

 

[Wormy]

It wasn't our responsibility to do so. If you feel so bad about your ancestors choosing to focus on their own communities rather than dedicate their lives to saving Africans, you can donate to BLM here.

I reject Christianity for it's notions of original sin. Why would I follow the same principle elsewhere.

West Virginia? It ceased to be Southern when it chose not to be during the Civil War.

Virginia.

You're not willing to address our grievances,

Because to do what you want means screwing over non white people I know and like. Friends of mine mean more to me than the feelings of internet white nationalists.

No, and neither did Cannon Hinnant and the Cottrills. Not that you care about them, since you clearly made the conscious decision to avoid discussing that point.

Looks like we both are doing so.

The Founders were racist. Even Lincoln was racist. You're just going to have to come to terms with those facts.

*Shrug* Alright then.

Why should any community be refused the right to decide who is or isn't allowed to participate in it?

Who is "Your Community"? Let's start with that.

 

[Passing Through Town]

I reject Christianity for it's notions of original sin. Why would I follow the same principle elsewhere.

So what's your point then? Was all of the bitching and moaning about Emmet Till and slavery really nothing more than an emotional tirade? If Southerners shouldn't be held accountable for the sins of our ancestors, then why bring them up?

Virginia

I never said Virginia wasn't Southern. You're starting to become a tad incoherent. I assumed you meant West Virginia because that's the only state you specifically named. And if you brought up the Appalachian stuff as another example of Southerners being oppressed... Why? How does that help your argument?

Because to do what you want means screwing over non white people I know and like.

How? How does allowing people freedom of association screw anyone over? You're welcome to hang out with blacks if you want to. It's not as if Whites and blacks didn't communicate or fraternize when the South was segregated. It was perfectly legal for them to do so, just not at establishments that explicitly stated they didn't want blacks around.

Friends of mine mean more to me than the feelings of internet white nationalists.

Okay? I'm not asking you to disregard the feelings of your friends. I'm sure they'd be happy to know you're out here defending their right to... be around White people?

Looks like we both are doing so.

I directly answered your question. Emmet Till didn't deserve to be murdered, and the men who murdered him should've been lynched after they admitted to what they did. Why can't you answer my question?

Who is "Your Community"? Let's start with that.

How about we start with you answering my question? Why should any community be refused the right to decide who is or isn't allowed to participate in it?

 

[crows in guns]

I want southern independence. Yankees can stay On their side of the potomac.

 

[Wormy]

So what's your point then? Was all of the bitching and moaning about Emmet Till and slavery really nothing more than an emotional tirade? If Southerners shouldn't be held accountable for the sins of our ancestors, then why bring them up?


I never said Virginia wasn't Southern. You're starting to become a tad incoherent. I assumed you meant West Virginia because that's the only state you specifically named. And if you brought up the Appalachian stuff as another example of Southerners being oppressed... Why? How does that help your argument?


How? How does allowing people freedom of association screw anyone over? You're welcome to hang out with blacks if you want to. It's not as if Whites and blacks didn't communicate or fraternize when the South was segregated. It was perfectly legal for them to do so, just not at establishments that explicitly stated they didn't want blacks around.


Okay? I'm not asking you to disregard the feelings of your friends. I'm sure they'd be happy to know you're out here defending their right to... be around White people?


I directly answered your question. Emmet Till didn't deserve to be murdered, and the men who murdered him should've been lynched after they admitted to what they did. Why can't you answer my question?


How about we start with you answering my question? Why should any community be refused the right to decide who is or isn't allowed to participate in it?

Look, let me just give you a nice MATI sum up and we can end this discussion.

I'm done with "causes." White. Black. Liberal. Conservative. Any color in between. All can fuck off and die. All I care about and will fight for is my own circle, some blood related, some not. If something hurts them, and your proposal does, I'm fighting it as needed. If it doesn't, go on with your bad self, you can win the lottery or drop dead both will matter the same to me.

So my stance is simple; you're shitting on my lawn, so I'll fight anything you do in regards to that up to what is needed. You don't matter to me. Whites don't matter to me. Blacks don't either. My friends however do. You're fucking with my friends. I'm defending them as needed.

Now sticker me and respond if you wish.

 

[Passing Through Town]

You're fucking with my friends. I'm defending them as needed.

I'm arguing on the internet. Your friends don't even know I exist, and I don't have any power to harm them.

The question is open for anyone else who feels like they have a good answer.