Hunter hunts the Stormer

The monocausalists on The Daily Stormer, who believe that everything was great with America before Jewish immigration, are being challenged by Hunter Wallace (see his latest article on Occidental Dissent).

Isn’t it funny how the Stormer has metamorphosed itself from the above Nazi logo into the American flag?

Published in: on March 28, 2018 at 12:49 pm  Comments (11)  

11 Comments

  1. America officially died with the closing of its Eugenic Age (1920-1941). Richard Spencer of all people wrote an excellent piece on this. It’s a shame that Grant and Stoddard weren’t savvy enough to defeat Boasian cadres aligned against them.

    • The paper may be excellent, but Spencer is reluctant to see that the eugenicists of those times took Nordicism for granted, as I said in a recent post. Richard has ‘granted amnesty’ to the guys in the above pic.

  2. Another bit of good research and sound reasoning from Hunter Wallace. It’s unfortunate though that he denies the Christian root of all this, which makes his truth-telling in this one area moot. All of the famous abolitionists were fanatic Christians, for example. Is that supposed to have been a coincidence? Insurrectionist John Brown, the most famous of the lot, was a Christian zealot referred to by his friends as “the last Puritan”. Probably the next most famous is Harriet Beecher Stowe, author of Uncle Tom’s Cabin. Lincoln is reported to have exclaimed upon meeting her, “So you’re the little lady who wrote the book that started this great big war!” Her book was a mega-best-seller in that era when America was almost 100% Christian, second only to the Bible, and played a crucial role in stirring up war fever in the North. She was another Christian religious nut from a whole family of them. Her father was the renowned preacher Lyman Beecher, and her brother the star orator, preacher, and abolitionist Henry Ward Beecher.

    Another thing: In his previous essay on this topic, Hunter mentions in passing the American Colonization Society and the effort to return the negro slaves to Africa. but either “forgets” to tell his readers, or is ignorant of the fact that the departure of negroes for colonization was to be entirely voluntary. The Christian abolitionists looked upon it as their religious duty to help their fellow Christians, the freed slaves, return to Africa, but only if they wanted to go. No one ever spoke in terms of rounding them all up and forcibly sending them all back for the benefit of whites! No, such a course of action would have been sinful. Henry Ward Beecher speaks directly to this in his anthology Patriotic Addresses, on page 186:

    I am for colonization. If any one wishes to go to Africa I would give him the means of going, and for the sake of the continent of Africa, colonization is the true scheme; but if colonization is advocated for our sake, I say, Get thee behind me, Satan, thou savorest not of the things that be of God but those that be of men. Do your duty first to the colored people here, educate them, Christianize them, and then colonize them.

    Even in the 19th century the Christian point of view was that whites having any racial concern for themselves in the matter was grievously immoral. “Get thee behind me, Satan!” he says.

    Since importation of slaves had been prohibited by federal law since 1807, by the end of the Civil War in 1865, it would have been only a very old slave indeed that had any memory of Africa. Most of them had been born in this country and knew no other home, making it very unlikely that more than a handful would volunteer to be “colonized”. Indeed, less than 3% ever were. At bottom, the ACS was just another Christian do-gooder organization, largely composed of abolitionists who were obsessed with helping negroes. Indeed, the founding members of this group ratified a constitution for the ACS, the sole object being “to promote and execute a plan for colonizing (with their consent) the Free People of Color residing in our Country, in Africa, or such other place as Congress shall deem most expedient.” Note the caveat “with their consent”, which meant the organization was pretty much a joke from the outset. Yet on the right, all of this is either omitted, or outright lied about. Jared Taylor is especially guilty of this. For example, in his talk entitled “A Brief History of American Race Relations” he quotes only the last sentence in the Beecher paragraph above in support of his statement that Beecher wanted to “expel” all the negroes, while when read in context it’s obvious that more nearly the opposite was true.

    • I am glad that you mentioned Taylor, as this Taylor video originally made me think that the founding American stock were supremacists as those like Anglin et al want us to believe.

      • Yes, there are a lot of misleading statements and flat out lies in Taylor’s video. For example, he says that it was a long time before anyone interpreted the Declaration’s equality phrase as racial egalitarianism. Not so! The hypocrisy of such a statement by slave owners was noted at the time, and roundly derided. This fractious inconsistency was the cancer cell that eventually metastasized into the Civil War, a conflict referred to by some of its participants as “the Second American Revolution”, one that would put the ideal of racial equality fully into practice. Lincoln himself was profoundly influenced by the phrase. As early as 1855, in a letter to his best friend Jonathan Speed, Lincoln revealed himself as a dyed-in-the-wool racial egalitarian. He wrote:

        As a nation, we began by declaring that “all men are created equal.” We now practically read it “all men are created equal, except negroes.” When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read “all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and catholics.” When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretence of loving liberty— to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy.

        This makes it very clear he was a closeted abolitionist all along, despite his many statements to the contrary. Once the war was over, in his last public address, the speech that inspired John Wilkes Booth to assassinate him only a few days later, he urged citizenship and voting rights for the negroes.

        The amount of constituency, so to speak, on which the new Louisiana government rests, would be more satisfactory to all, if it contained fifty, thirty, or even twenty thousand, instead of only about twelve thousand, as it does. It is also unsatisfactory to some that the elective franchise is not given to the colored man. I would myself prefer that it were now conferred on the very intelligent, and on those who serve our cause as soldiers. … The colored man too, in seeing all united for him, is inspired with vigilance, and energy, and daring, to the same end. Grant that he desires the elective franchise, will he not attain it sooner by saving the already advanced steps toward it, than by running backward over them?

        More than any other single individual, Lincoln is responsible for the racial catastrophe American whites are facing today.

    • Christianity at the root of evil, once again. Thanks for the history lesson.

    • @Spahn Ranch. Hard to know what Lincoln actually thought. Politician of course, trimming his sails to the prevailing wind. Lincoln did make public comments that the Negro was not the equal of Whites and supported the proposal to expatriate slaves to the Caribbean and West Africa. His Civil War priority was to maintain the Union, by freeing the slaves or not, behind which was the centralisation of power to Washington.
      Good to know these details of his final speech. Whatever Lincoln truly thought privately about Negroes, with the Civil War won he was going to push ahead with more equality, centralisation.

  3. Don’t forget Lincoln’s fellow guilty Republicans, such as, Seward, Bates, Stanton, and Chase. They wanted war and Lincoln had to give it to them.

  4. Deleting comments — interesting.

    • The sign ⸗ you used frequently in the deleted post is bothering from a purely syntactic POV.

  5. @Spahn Ranch. Hard to know what Lincoln actually thought. Politician of course, trimming his sails to the prevailing wind. Lincoln did make public comments that the Negro was not the equal of Whites and supported the proposal to expatriate slaves to the Caribbean and West Africa. His Civil War priority was to maintain the Union, by freeing the slaves or not, behind which was the centralisation of power to Washington.
    Good to know these details of his final speech. Whatever Lincoln truly thought privately about Negroes, with the Civil War won he was going to push ahead with more equality.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: