The Line in the Sand

 

MemorialDayBlogPic

In this Memorial Day post I had thought about discussing what the term American means, and whether or not it (now or in the past) applies to nonwhites. I had also thought about discussing the difference between conservatives and patriots. But to keep this article at a manageable length, I have decided to confine myself to analysis of the hard core patriot types, the only ones (professedly) against the system.

The recent disgusting actions of some American patriot types in regard to Confederate monuments has prompted this essay. Recently, some patriot groups like Oathkeepers, III Percenters, and American Warrior Revolution have showed up at Confederate monuments –and refused to stand with the League of the South and other racially conscious Southerners. One piece I read stated that that one Thomas Baxter of AWR face-to-face called a Southern activist a “white supremacist”, and refused to stand with him for such reason. What does this Baxter dude think George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and Patrick Henry were? These four Founders lived on something called a plantation, in a country in which Negroes could not be citizens.

Race is the line in the sand of which patriots must decide which side to stand on.

Race is the building block of any sane and stable society. I covered this in my March 6, 2017 post The Three Principles. Thus race is the most basic, and most important, element in the formation of any country/political entity. That I believe this is not a surprise to those who have read me for a while. But I did not always know this.

Starting in my early teens, I spent about twenty years in the loose knit ideological coalition known as the patriot movement. I intellectually exited the patriot movement in late 2016. I have recently been thinking about the patriot groups and personalities that I am familiar with, and I have come to realize that they do not truly represent white interests, let alone represent Dixie. Let me elaborate.

To proclaim love of the Founders and the Confederate flag, while rejecting the core social structure ideology of these men, is not a logically tenable potion. When push comes to shove, one must either reject civic/proposition nationalism or reject the legacy of the Founders. It is that simple. If this stuns you, perhaps you should check out Hunter Wallace’s May 27 piece Rainbow Confederates Are Wrong About History over at Occidental Dissent. (http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2017/05/27/rainbow-confederates-are-wrong-about-history/ )

To further this examination, I will point out that, as best as I can tell, the American patriot movement was never really strong down in Dixie. From the websites that I used to frequent, and the radio programs I used to devotedly listen to, I can tell you that there appears to have been little hard core Constitutionalist, militia, or sovereign citizen stuff in the deep South. The core of these movements seems to have been the upper Midwest (Michigan) and the western states. Not that Texas and the South do not have American patriot activities, but they did not seem to be the hub of the activity. For just a few examples, think of Mark Koernke and the militias in Michigan, James Wesley, Rawles in the Mountain Redoubt, Baptist preacher Chuck Baldwin (now) in Montana, the Bundys in Nevada, internet and KU band radio stations like AVR (Oregon) and the Microeffect (Idaho), and Red Beckman and the income tax protest movement in Montana. Mark Koernke’s co-host is Don “Yankee D” Boettcher; I suppose that he does not realize what that signifies in the South. James Wesley, Rawles is a public anti-racist and fervent supporter of Israel. And do not get me started on historian David Barton’s thoughts on race and the JQ.

At the same time, the patriot movement seems to be basically nonexistent in the New England states. Light in the South, and absent in New England? Why not centered in the area of the thirteen original states? Hmm. Could it be that the patriot movement, at its core, is not an attempt to recreate the Constitutional Republic of the Founders, but is an ideological construct that embraces a manifest destiny and post-1865 vision of a continent wide American Empire bound together by an ideal about liberty guaranteed by a piece of paper? To embrace such a dream is to set oneself up for a multicultural civic nationalism, unified around nothing but an idea and the English language. That is a foundation of sand.

I understand that the modern American patriot movement is basically a post-1970 phenomenon. While implicitly white, and populated primarily by white males, the patriot movement is definitely not White Nationalist. Some will criticize Abraham Lincoln as a tyrant. Some, like Mark Koernke will even talk about the JQ. But they falter because they are not built on solid ground.

The Founders of America, and the Confederate statesmen, lived in and supported a hierarchical society. They were not egalitarians. They generally held that man was the creation of deity, and lived in an unequal world. While basic rights applied to all, they held that full political rights only applied to adult white males. Negroes and Indian tribes generally did not vote, even if they were free. Women did not vote, or hold political office. Children were in submission to their parents until legal adulthood.

When one discards cultural and political systems that are based on deity, nature, or thousands of years of ones peoples’ culture –they have opened the door to the destruction of their society. If Negroes, based upon ballot, shall lead our government, then why should women (also voting and holding office) stay at home to bear children and care for domestic concerns? And while theology and cultural tradition are being ignored for all this egalitarianism and liberation, why should a woman have to carry a pregnancy to term if she changes her mind? Liberation! –all the way to chaos.

If all are equal and to be in the same country, then must not all vote? If all are equal, not only Negroes and women can vote, but why not children and illegals too? Why *oppress* the infant or the poverty stricken border crosser (who cannot even speak your language but would like some welfare)? Do you see where this madness goes?

The blurring of racial distinctions that our ancestors held in favor of a “we are all the same” ideology in turn opens the door to the blurring of gender distinctions -to the feminism movement and the breakdown of families. Further, the embrace of miscegenation, universal suffrage, and flexible gender roles opens the door for the mainstreaming of sexual perversion. If God ordained racial and gender distinctions (that have been held by civilized people for millennia) no longer matter, why “discriminate” against sodomites. The train of thought that made Negroes citizens was the first step towards open sodomites holding political office and teen girls getting abortions without their parents even being notified. When the heroine pusher tries to get healthy and attractive young people to try his drugs, he does not show them the miserable end of addiction –of prison, death by overdose, or literally rotting away on the streets. Ideas have MAJOR consequences.

Four years ago, when I indie published my first book in May 2013, I was a hard core Constitutional patriot –and libertarian. I liked being white like America’s Founders, and greatly disliked Spanish speaking Mexicans walking around WalMart, but I was still in the “immigrate legally, speak English, and be like us” proposition nation camp. Like many patriots, I tried to defend the (patriarchal, white male, and slave owning) Founders and the Confederacy. The proposition nation and our white heritage cannot be logically and simultaneously defended. One must eventually choose between them. I chose the Founders.

I was never libertarian enough for true libertarians, who are basically market anarchists. Opposing the coming police state and excessive taxation is good, but libertarianism goes far beyond that. Open borders and refusal to address the JQ are what severed me from libertarian thought. Libertarian arguments for private corporate police and court systems, and governments without borders, are nothing but fantasy. The late George Lincoln Rockwell may have been too authoritarian, but Lew Rockwell and crew (no relation) is straight up peddling fantasy.

In late 2014 I had my racial awakening, and have not looked back; this took me away from not only libertarianism, but eventually from the American patriot movement.

When I published my second book in March 2016, I was a full out White Nationalist, who desired to restore the Constitution for white Americans. Fourteen months of study, thought, and current events have killed that dream. In this time I played with the Amerikaner concept for awhile, before moving towards Southern Nationalism. (In the near future I intend to put up a post on what I thought the Amerikaner ideal {not Lawrence Murray’s postulated AFS} was, and why I am no longer promoting the Amerikaner concept).

My embrace of Dixie is a combination of things, the result of my political ideology, my ancestry, my culture, my geographical location, and my thoughts on Imperial America’s inevitable balkanization. Raise that Dixie flag!

Yes, this is Memorial Day, a day when most Americans are off from their corporate jobs and pay homage to all veterans of all of Imperial America’s wars. Veterans will be thanked for protecting the freedom that we (no longer) enjoy. The surviving veterans of the European theater of WWII –who launched an unprovoked invasion of Europe and wantonly slaughtered their German brothers and fire bombed cities of German children- will be proclaimed the “greatest generation”. Last week I was at a Lowe’s store, and witnessed a young couple. The woman was wearing short shorts almost up to her rear –and a Jesus t-shirt; her man was wearing a Chris Kyle American Sniper t-shirt. I bet you that dude would tell you that he is an American patriot. America is lost. Today I will be thinking about the boys of 1776 and the boys in gray in 1861 -not WWII vets.

I will close by stating that not all private people need speak out publically to be pro-white, as long as they teach their families the truth. But all public speakers do need to do so. If any figure –author, blogger, radio host, activist, or preacher- who has chosen to speak out publically on politics, culture, or current events will not *publically* declare that they are (1) pro-white and (2) against miscegenation –than they are not pro-white. This is the line in the sand that American patriot types, and all Americans, must face. Which side are you on?

© Copyright 2017 by Joseph Charles Putnam of Orange County, Indiana. All rights reserved.

Advertisements

Author: Joe Putnam

I am a Christian (Reformed/Sovereign Grace Baptist type), white American of Western European bloodline, advocate of an agrarian social order, Kinist, White Nationalist, admirer of America’s Founding Fathers and the Boys in Gray, homesteader, indie published author, and amateur historian. I have indie published several books, all of which are available from Amazon. I am a life long resident of rural Orange County, IN –in the part of the Upper South that many would term Greater Appalachia or the Dixie Frontier. In addition to my own blog "Putnam Liberty Notes", from May through July of 2017 I dual published many of my posts at the popular multi-author Alt-South blog Identity Dixie. In addition to my blog writings, I am currently gearing up for (at least) two more book projects –one theological and one historical. The theological one will cover the three interpretational views of Daniel’s 70th Week. I hope to have this book in print in late summer 2017. (Hint: I am, not a Dispensational Futurist). The historical book will be a biography of George Rogers Clark (1752-1818). Clark was a noted Virginia militia officer who’s campaigns, including his successful siege of Vincennes, basically took the Old Northwest from Britain during the American Revolution. Clark spent the rest of his life around the river that separates Clarksville, IN from Louisville, Kentucky. I hope to have my Clark bio in print in early 2018.

2 thoughts on “The Line in the Sand”

  1. I hate to be a comment hog.. but here I am again.
    When I was a research physicist at IBM in Burlington,
    Vermont (actually, Essex Junction, VT.), our family
    of 5 children lived next to our dear friend, Lucien and
    his 2 girls. Lucien was a pathologist who worked at the
    medical center – and a dual(?) Canadian citizen. He paid
    into the Quebec gov’t and US social security.
    His family was interesting, with the girls speaking little
    French, even though Lucien and his wife spoke it all the time.
    The girls were far more influenced by the publik skool
    than their parent’s language and strict Catholic culture.
    Lucien was interested in our homeschooling – he saw
    that it was transmitting our values and not the govt
    values – but they didn’t follow through..
    Lucien went every year in the dead of the winter
    to the rally for life in DC, a real commitment. I was never
    able to go with him, sadly, because IBM had us working
    24/7 on exciting new science. His girls grew up to be
    typical left-wing drones, both of them getting married
    and divorced due to ‘substance abuse’ problems. It broke
    their parents’ hearts.
    Lesson 1.. beware of losing your children to the govt skool.

    Language was an interesting area, since IBM had people from
    all over the planet working at our leading-edge plant. It was
    understood that English was the language of business there,
    even on conference calls to China. No translators. At the
    local COSTCO, it was another story. I remember 1968 in
    a country far away, where the people spoke in a squeaky
    language I knew I would never understand. It was the most
    unsettling part of being there and knowing that I was a total
    foreigner. But then I started feeling the same way at the
    local big box store…. a foreigner in my own country?????
    In the early 1990s, IBM was pushing ‘multiculturalism’
    in meetings with management… I remember a high-ranking
    friend telling me privately that if that crap made such good
    sense, how come the Japanese and Chinese monocultures
    were kicking our butts? Our round-eye multiculture thing
    wasn’t working so well if we had to import them.
    Lesson 2.. beware of multiculturalism.

    And finally, a war story. In a land far away, in 1968, some
    soldiers did some bad things. As justice was being rendered,
    a line-up of some suspects was placed in front of the wronged.
    They were asked what color were the people who hurt you, since
    there were blacks and whites in the line-up. The natives replied
    that they had no idea about color, just that the perps all had
    ‘ROUND EYES’! In this story, the eyes had it. If an identity like
    that can be so overpowering that other seemingly obvious things
    can be missed, it tells us things about God’s plan to scatter us
    across the planet. We don’t always understand what make us
    ‘different’.

    And the horrible results we’ll get if we try to overpower His plan….
    Lesson 3.. Acts 5: 33-39

    Like

    1. Hello Willy,
      Thanks for the comments. I found you final one particularly interesting. The thought that eye shape would stand out to Vietnamese more than skin color is fascinating. We are very different internally, and Neo-Babelism is madness.
      Joe

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s