In this respect the black militants were correct: It is easy to dominate a people without cultural pride, but people who are proud of their cultural heritage are not easily dominated and exploited! From this fact arises the irresistible question—if cultural pride is good for some groups, why is it denied to Southerners? The answer is very simple, and it follows the logic of invasion and conquest. Our Southern cultural heritage is being systematically destroyed by the Northern liberal establishment to enhance its domination and exploitation of the Southern middle class. In our political world, culture is not neutral; it has within it the potential to promote a specific political philosophy. Those who control the media, education, and political agendas will use those cultures that help them and will do all within their power to destroy any culture that has within it the potential of threatening their left-of-center ideology.
It should be noted that this campaign of cultural genocide is not a result of some secret conspiracy. It is in fact the result of conquest. All empires have been faced with the problem of how best to keep the conquered people quiet, docile, and pacified. People who are taught from infancy to despise their past will not be quick to revolt. Thus arises the need to dominate the cultural history of a conquered people. Cultural genocide, as practiced by the Northern liberal majority against the Southern people, arises from the necessity to maintain political control of a conquered people.
CULTURAL GENOCIDE IN EDUCATION
An example of how Southern children are taught to despise their heritage is in order. We will look at two different textbooks: one was used to teach Southern students in the early 1900s, and the other is used today in our schools. You will recall that in Chapter 6 we discussed how the South was allowed to maintain the “appearance” of free government after Reconstruction. This situation was acceptable to the Northern majority since the North could reinstitute Reconstruction if it became politically expedient (as a matter of fact, the Northern liberal majority has now done just that very thing). In the early 1900s many local Southern textbooks were teaching the history of the war from the Southern point of view. This, of course, was unacceptable to the Northern liberal majority.
Let us compare the difference between the way Southern children were taught when Southerners were in nominal control of their educational system. We will first look at A History of Louisiana by Harriet Magruder, copyright 1909, and published by D. C. Heath & Company, in Boston, New York, and Chicago. On page 291 begins a chapter titled “The Causes of the Civil War”:
To understand some of the causes which led to this war, we must go back many years. When the Revolutionary War was over and America was free from Great Britain, thoughtful men saw that the States could never prosper or be protected unless they united and formed a strong government. The colonies, however, had felt the power of England. They feared that if they united they would not be able to leave the Union at any time that they wished. They finally decided to join together as the United States of America, but it was understood that any State could withdraw if it chose. All the States, both Northern and Southern, made the same claim. In 1811 Josiah Quincy of Massachusetts said that his State ought to leave the Union if Louisiana were admitted.68
The economic struggle between the two sections is given as a major cause of the war:
The real difficulty lay in the fact that the country had grown until both North and South contained a great many people, and both sections were fighting for power. Their business interests were different, and a tax which would help the Northern manufacturer would perhaps injure the Southern planter. If the Western territories were settled by Northern people, the North would have more power in Congress and could pass laws beneficial to the North and harmful to the South.69
The use of the slavery question as an element of anti-South propaganda is also noted:
Though the slaves, as a rule, had kind masters and were happy, many people in the North began to write articles telling with what horrible cruelty the negroes were treated. The South became more angry than before, and determined to leave the Union. She believed that she had the right to do this, as the States had entered the Union with the understanding that each could withdraw at any time that it chose.70
Now let us compare this record with a textbook currently used in Louisiana schools. (This exercise could substitute textbooks from any Southern state. The authors are using their home state as an example of politically correct indoctrination that is typical of most Southern schools.) The textbook is Our Louisiana Legacy. The authors of this politically correct textbook decided to omit any reference to the threat of Josiah Quincy of Massachusetts that the New England states should secede if the “mixed race Creoles of Louisiana” were admitted to the Union. Strange how the 1909 textbook thought it important to inform the children that it was Northerners who first threatened to secede from the Union while the liberal textbook manages to ignore this embarrassing (to Yankees) fact of history. The liberal textbook then attempts to educate our children about that most vile of institutions—“slavery.” The text reluctantly admits that slaves were “… for the most part sufficiently fed, clothed, and housed. …” It leaves the impression that this was done begrudgingly by the slave owners. The specter of the whip is raised as being the most often used means of punishment, but the fact that on most plantations the whip was very seldom used is conveniently omitted. At last the liberal authors put the question to rest by asking:
When we discuss the life of the slave, we should ask ourselves if we would like to be slaves. The answer provides us with all the arguments against slavery.71
Using the politically correct authors’ logic of applying contemporary standards to nineteenth-century issues, let us review the conditions of the nineteenth-century Northern industrial sweat shops:
When we discuss the life of the nineteenth-century industrial child laborer, we should ask ourselves if we would like to be a child laborer in the New England industrial system. The answer provides us with all the arguments against Yankee capitalism.
Thus, we see the abjectly illogical use of contemporary standards as a measure for nineteenth-century systems. Yet, the politically correct authors find no reason to be embarrassed at their simplistic propaganda techniques used to brainwash and condition Southern children to have low esteem for their Southern heritage.
This modern text devotes twenty-seven lines to explain the opposition to secession and no lines to explain the support for secession! For example, it states that at last Louisiana voted in convention 113 to 17 in favor of secession. The authors then make another attack against the ancestors of the children reading this textbook by declaring:
Louisiana declared itself out of the Union without giving its people the right to vote on the ordinance of secession from the United States.72
The inference is that the secession convention did not represent the wishes of the people and that if given an opportunity the people would have overruled the secession convention. The illogic of this propaganda tactic can be demonstrated by asking, “How many colonies held a plebiscite (statewide vote) to determine if they should declare independence from Great Britain”? None, they seceded from Great Britain at the demand of their legislatures, just as most of the Southern states did when they seceded from the Union.
We have seen how the liberal, politically correct education establishment is using its monopoly of education to brainwash our children. Example after example can be quoted from texts used across the South of this virulent anti-Southern bigotry. Year after year, Southern children are taught to despise their heritage and their ancestors. Year by year, the insidious campaign of cultural genocide continues. Slowly, the great heritage of the South is being erased from our memory and a false, politically correct model is being imposed.
CULTURAL GENOCIDE IN THE MEDIA
Examples of the media (radio, television, movies, and newspapers) engaging in attacks against our Southern heritage are legion. We will select just a few to demonstrate our point. During Black Histo
ry Month in 1992, a radio commentator on public radio made the statement that no blacks ever served voluntarily in the Confederate army. According to this commentator, those who did serve were forced to go with their masters. Note that public radio is financed by our tax monies. The middle-class Southerner is forced to pay for the politically correct slander of his own heritage. What recourse is available to us when such an attack is made? Even though we know the truth, it is of little value to us because the left-of-center, intellectual fascists control access to the media!
During the 1992 presidential primary, Republican candidate Pat Buchanan placed a wreath at a monument honoring his ancestors, who fought for the Confederacy. NBC decided to include this event in its report and, in the process, attempted to smear this conservative candidate by proclaiming to the world that Buchanan was honoring men who “fought to preserve slavery.” The national television media also chose this as an ideal time to report on “flag waving” down South. The story was carried on national news programs during prime time and during a presidential primary election. The story concentrated on the fact that North Carolina, once a year and for a single day, flies the Stars and Bars (the first national CSA flag) over the state capitol to honor her sons who died in the war. The biased report was a rally cry for the left-wing extremist who demanded an end to Confederate Memorial Day. During the night prior to Confederate Memorial Day, the Confederate monument at the state capitol was vandalized. Do you suppose it was merely coincidental, or do you suppose the biased news (propaganda) coverage was a major factor in the attack upon our Southern heritage? Again, what recourse is left to us? How do we reply to the slander against our ancestors? Once again the intellectual fascists control the media to which we, who are not politically correct, are not allowed equal access.
The liberal establishment uses its monopoly of the media to indoctrinate (brainwash) Americans regarding the character of our Southern ancestors and their motive for fighting the War for Southern Independence. The 1991 “made for TV” movie Ironclads is an example of such brainwashing disguised as entertainment. Using an interesting story line, the naval battle between the CSS Virginia and the USS Monitor, the liberal thought-control specialists managed to captivate an unsuspecting audience and skillfully blend in appropriate re-enforcements of Yankee mythology. They made sure one of the leading ladies admitted that even though some Southerners claimed the war had other causes, “slavery is the real reason.” Then to re-enforce the stereotype of Southerners as bigots and racists, and to re-enforce the Yankee version of the treatment of Southern blacks, they showed a scene in which a white Southerner abuses a slave, calling him “boy” and taunting him by exclaiming that the slave must think the Yankee Abolitionist has already freed him. This is an excellent example of how the liberal establishment presents its propaganda in the form of entertainment. It is very efficient, and the liberal media makes a profit off of the very people they are brainwashing!
Political Cultural Genocide
Liberalism, which is really latter-day Yankee imperialism, uses its control of the federal government to exclude conservative Southerners from the decision-making circles in Washington, D.C. A conservative from Dixie is automatically viewed with distrust and antagonism by the liberal establishment. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’ greatest fault was his conservative philosophy. Is there any question what the outcome would have been if Judge Thomas had been so unfortunate as to have been born not only a Southerner but white as well?
In 1967 President Richard Nixon appointed Judge Clement Haynesworth of South Carolina to the Supreme Court. The American Bar Association gave him its highest rating. The liberals had other ideas. They denounced him as being too “insensitive” and having the wrong “judicial philosophy.” Haynesworth was rejected by a vote of fifty-five to forty-three. Nixon’s mistake was that he nominated a white, Southern conservative. Senator Herman Talmadge of Georgia criticized the “geographical discrimination” that defeated Haynesworth. Nearly all Southern senators voted for Haynesworth while most Northern Democrats voted against him.
President Nixon responded by nominating another Southerner, Judge Harrold Carswell. By a vote of fifty-one to forty-five the Senate rejected Carswell. President Nixon concluded that no Southern conservative would be confirmed by the Senate, and nominated Harry Blackmun of Minnesota who was confirmed.
The double standard and hypocrisy of the Northern senators was criticized by Senator Earnest F. Hollings of South Carolina:
Apparently, if one is from South Carolina, the standards … are higher than would be required of a Minnesota Judge. 73
It is not a question of standards, it is a question of political control! The liberal establishment uses its control of the federal government to assure its continued rule over a conquered and occupied Southern nation!
SUMMARY
The vicious ongoing campaign of cultural genocide perpetuated by the forces of the United States during the war and Recon struction, and the current campaign conducted by the liberal establishment that controls the United States government were and are natural outgrowths of invasion, conquest, and subsequent oppression of a formerly free people. Andrew Nelson Lytle, in the 1930s, noted that by the close of the war, “The mercy of God did not bring independence. Nor was the war over. One phase was done. … The avowed purpose [of Northern policy] was the destruction of Southern civilization.”74 Compare the methods currently being employed to control the Southern political system with Machiavelli’s recommendation to a tyrant for maintaining his domination of a people who were formerly free.
The Southern people today have all the trappings of the old government; the symbols, the name, the rituals are all the same. The Constitution is on display as is the Declaration of Independence; the Fourth of July is celebrated with great fanfare; Southerners are allowed to elect their own governors and representatives; generally speaking, all is the same as it was before the War for Southern Independence.
Now recall Machiavelli’s recommendation that the new ruler “must at least retain the semblance of the old forms” and that this myth will suffice because most people are more concerned with appearance than with reality. He also recommends that the conquered people are more easily ruled by means of their own citizens than by any other means.
To paraphrase Machiavelli regarding the new order established by the Northern majority after its conquest of the Southern people: Keep all the trappings but none of the safeguards of the original Constitutional Republic. Allow the Southern people to have nominal control of their states, put Scalawag politicians into power who owe their allegiance to the liberal establishment, and have these Scalawag politicians, elected by Southerners, lead the way in extracting an ever-higher level of taxation from the middle class.
All that is left is for the liberal establishment to follow the example of all tyrants and to move against any local display of cultural pride that might cause the local vassals to remember and desire past freedoms and prosperity. Such memories are dangerous to tyrants because they might cause the conquered to think of themselves as a people with a common heritage, a common bondage, and a common desire to be freel
Rosanne Osterman tending the wounded in Galveston, Texas. Rosanne, a Jewish lady from Galveston, was one of many people of the Jewish faith who assisted the South during the War for Southern Independence. Southerners of all religious faiths joined in a cooperative effort to help in the common struggle. (Image courtesy of The Institute of Texan Cultures, San Antonio, Texas; Bruce Marshall, artist)
* Our reference to one-hundred-percent Americans is not intended as an attack upon the legitimate patriotism demonstrated by Southerners in every war prior to and after the War for Southern Independence. It is intended to remind Southerners that it is the principles of constitutional government and liberty that should drive our patriotism and not blind allegiance to a government that has been controlled by the forces of Northern liberalism since the defeat of the South in the War for Southern Independence.
> CHAPTER 14
Summary and Call to Action
The form of government having been changed by the revolution there are still other acts of the drama to be performed.1
Admiral Raphael Semmes, CSN
We began this book by identifying the propaganda methods used by the Northern majority to brainwash every generation of Southerners since the failure of the War for Southern Independence. We reviewed the Yankee myth of history and saw examples of how Northerners have used lies and half-truths to slander the Southern nation and to assure that each generation of Southerners will go out into the world with the appropriate amount of guilt. We have seen how they have used this sense of guilt to prevent Southerners from asserting their rights and reclaiming their lost estate.
We have seen how the Yankee hated the Southerner from the beginning. We have seen how Northerners treated Southerners during the conduct of their invasion of the free Southern nation. We have seen their deliberate attempts, during war and Reconstruction, to exterminate—if not the Southern people then—the entire Southern culture and political philosophy.
The South Was Right Page 35