The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Andrew Hamilton Archive
Shining Some Light on the Invisible Race
The Plymouth 400 Symposium
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks
Gloucester Fisherman’s Memorial overlooking Gloucester Harbor, Gloucester, Massachusetts (Bronze, 1925)
Gloucester Fisherman’s Memorial overlooking Gloucester Harbor, Gloucester, Massachusetts (Bronze, 1925)

The defining characteristic of WASPs is that they are much less ethnocentric than other peoples; indeed for all practical purposes Anglo-Saxon Protestants appear to be all but completely bereft of in-group solidarity. They are therefore open to exploitation by free-riders from other, more ethnocentric, groups.[1]Andrew Fraser, The WASP Question: An Essay on the Biocultural Evolution, Present Predicament, and Future Prospects of the Invisible Race (London: Arktos, 2011), pp. 29-30.

There is a woeful lack of ethnic consciousness and cohesion among Anglo-Saxons worldwide.

In a groundbreaking essay published in 1980, John Tyndall, former head of the British National Party, defined the Anglo-Saxon ethnos as consisting of the English, Scots, Welsh, Anglo- and Scots-Irish communities and their counterparts in Australia, New Zealand, the United States, and Canada.[2]John Tyndall, “In the Cause of Anglo-Saxondom,” Spearhead magazine; republished by Instauration magazine, February 1980. To the foregoing, I would add Anglo-Saxons in Rhodesia and South Africa.

Descendants of New England’s Puritan settlers constitute a subset of this worldwide group. Racial invisibility and the absence of ethnic pride or self-awareness characterize this group as much as the wider Anglo-Saxon ethnos of which it is a part.

I will try to shed some light on the Yankee component of the “invisible race.” Because this symposium is devoted to the Puritans, their influence, and “everything New England,” my focus is on New England Yankees wherever they may live.

What Ethnicon?

The ethnic group has a limited number of ethnicons, all less than satisfactory: WASPs, Brahmins, New Englanders, Old Stock Americans, Northerners, Yankees. The slippery, imprecise term “WASP” is especially objectionable. Prior to the mid-1960s “WASPs” never referred to nor conceived of themselves as “White” “Anglo-Saxon” “Protestants.”

Robert C. Christopher, a journalist and academic with murky intelligence ties, was a member of the Council on Foreign Relations who regularly rubbed shoulders with the post-WWII elite. Of mixed ethnicity, but part-Yankee on his mother’s side, Christopher wrote an anti-Yankee polemic called Crashing the Gates: The De-WASPing of America’s Power Elite (Simon and Schuster, 1989). In Chapter Two he said, “I can still recall, in fact, how puzzled one of my mother’s Yankee aunts was when sometime in the late 1950s I applied the term [WASP] to her.”

As secretary of the Pulitzer Prize Board, Christopher administered the Prizes. He refused to revoke New York Times journalist Walter Duranty’s Pulitzer for dishonest reporting from the Soviet Union in the 1930s. Duranty (“Stalin’s apologist”) and the Times deliberately concealed the Soviet-induced Ukrainian famine from the world.

“WASP” was first formulated and applied privately in the 1950s by academics to describe the American social element Jewry hated and envied the most. Jews coveted its status and possessions (including its women) from the beginning of the 20th century.

Conveniently, the acronym excludes the wealthy, powerful, ultra-privileged, overbearing Jews themselves. Tellingly, though, it describes them to a T. If you’ve ever been attacked by a swarm of wasps you’ll know what I mean.

Before WWII, Jews savagely assailed WASPs as “Nordics” in their multipronged campaign against the 1924 Immigration Act, their oily, underhanded censorship of Madison Grant’s stirring book The Conquest of a Continent (Scribner’s, 1933), and their suppression of American identity, racial consciousness, and pride. Jews enlisted the services of corrupt, envious, gullible, resentful, status-seeking Gentiles in their successful effort to split the ranks of the majority.

An obvious purpose of the clumsy new epithet was to isolate their intended prey, America’s founding stock (strictly speaking, “WASP” applies to Southern whites as much as it does to New Englanders), by ostentatiously excluding newly-arrived white ethnics (“You’re not to blame! You’re fellow victims!”) so they would assist the Jews in their dirty work. Now, with non-whites from everywhere on the planet available to perform the task, white ethnics are being discarded too.

“Brahmin” and “WASP” carry strong connotations of undeserved wealth, power, and privilege — despite the fact that America was their country! Anybody seriously claiming in 2020 that the handful of pathetic, numerically, economically, and socially diminished “WASPs” are anything more than superannuated relics, diverting social baubles, or glorified errand boys (the Bush family) is an intellectual joke.

There are a handful of ruthless, ambitious individuals remaining, but without exception, they identify with and advance the interests of a controlling Jewish-globalist caste in a way that benefits its members and themselves, but is fatal to their race and ethnos.

“WASP” is also an acronym. Acronyms first inundated America during the Jewish Administration of Franklin Roosevelt in the 1930s with its countless alphabet soup agencies. Often they are patently absurd constructions: “USA PATRIOT” Act.

From a racial standpoint nameless farmers, laborers, or anybody else of old New England stock are as much part of the ethnos as any (today, imaginary) elite group, so WASP really does not serve. Consequently, I do not use “WASP” as an analytical term the way Andrew Fraser and so many others do.

On the other hand, E. Digby Baltzell’s popularization of the term in The Protestant Establishment (1964) made sense because he was a glorified multiracialist propagandist, well-remunerated socially and economically for his mercenary services. He advocated a world government ruled by a small, “meritocratic” caste of upper-class Jews, whites, and non-whites who would, he claimed, exhibit Puritan virtues. But mostly he cared about Jews.

“Puritan” is likewise a dirty word. As an Establishment writer noted back when America was still white: “Of the groups composing our ancestry, the Puritans have not been one of the more admired. Writers have habitually referred to them as vindictive and cruel; and to most people “Puritanism” evokes little more than an image of something gloomy and repressive.”

Perhaps the least-bad ethnicon is “Yankee.”

The Puritans in America

The following paragraph provides a useful summary of Puritans and their Yankee descendants as an ethnos rather than a religious group.

Puritanism originated in East Anglia in England, spread to New England, and became the most important cultural influence in the United States beginning in the 18th century down to the mid-20th century. East Anglian Puritans “became the breeding stock for America’s Yankee population” and “multiplied at a rapid rate, doubling every generation for two centuries. Their numbers increased to 100,000 by 1700, to at least one million by 1800, six million by 1900, and more than sixteen million by 1988 — all descended from 21,000 English emigrants who came to Massachusetts in the period from 1629 to 1640” (Fischer 1989, 17).

Actually, subsequent Anglo-Saxon immigrants were also incorporated into the Yankee ethnos.

The quotation is from a monograph entitled Diaspora Peoples by Kevin MacDonald. It was published as a preface to the 2002 paperback reprint of his book A People That Shall Dwell Alone: Judaism as a Group Evolutionary Strategy (Westport, Connecticut: Praeger, 1994). Puritans are one of the diaspora peoples discussed. The paragraph relies upon David Hackett Fischer’s Albion’s Seed: Four British Folkways in America (New York: Oxford University Press, 1989), a secondary source.

Plymouth Plantation (the Pilgrims) was founded in 1620, and the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1630. The Puritan Great Migration to New England occurred during the decades 1620-1640, consisting of a few hundred Pilgrims (though they were not called Pilgrims at the time) who went to Plymouth Colony in the 1620s, and c. 20,000 English men, women, and children who settled in the Massachusetts Bay Colony between 1630 and 1640. It is important to keep the asymmetry between these two communities in mind.

Without access to Fischer’s book, I can’t evaluate the sources and reasoning behind his population math, but such confident precision seems unlikely. As early as 1700 the former commonwealths no longer existed, and the region’s strict religious orthodoxy had seriously eroded.

As for the figures presented for each century, worthwhile approximations might be formulated, but they would become more problematic the farther away from 1700 you move. Hard data would be necessary to support them, and “Yankee population” would need to be precisely defined. What percentage Yankee ethnicity are we talking about? To understand their significance you would have to compare the numbers against the overall size of the American population on each date given. By 1988 you are really at sea ethnically (assuming you mean race, which Fischer, a culturalist, probably did not) and also mathematically.

Despite this, I sense that the Yankee ethnos remained demographically robust until the 1920s-1940s. This impression is reinforced by Yale geographer Ellsworth Huntington, a descendant of a large New England family that originated in 17th-century Massachusetts, who made a detailed statistical survey of living Americans bearing his family surname, the majority of whom were not famous. He concluded that Huntington descendants were still relatively ethnically unmixed at the time he wrote.[3]Ellsworth Huntington & Martha Ragsdale, After Three Centuries: A Typical New England Family (Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins), 1935.

The original Puritans had severe theological disagreements with the Church of England, a state entity formed less than a century earlier (1534) when King Henry VIII split from the Roman Catholic Church. So-called Separatist Puritans insisted on establishing independent congregations of their own outside the state church. A group of Separatists settled in Holland for 12 years but feared losing their Englishness. This was one reason they left for America in 1620.

The Mayflower with 102 passengers departed Plymouth, England late in the year, meaning the ship arrived in America in November and the Pilgrims made landfall in late December — 400 years ago today, December 18, 2020. Their intended destination had been the warmer Colony of Virginia, where their land grant was, but the ship was blown off course. The story of the Pilgrims’ troubled sea voyage and first winter is truly harrowing.

A 1960 book randomly listed among Mayflower descendants Boston’s Adams family, Ralph Waldo Emerson’s wife, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, Ulysses S. Grant, the first Mrs. Jefferson Davis, William Howard Taft, J. P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, Jr.’s first wife Abby Aldrich (they did not divorce, she died) and Franklin D. Roosevelt.

By 1897, when mass non-Anglo-Saxon immigration to the country was completely out of control, the Mayflower Society was founded in New England. At the time membership doubtless tilted heavily to old stock Americans of wholly or primarily Puritan descent. Today membership requires proof of descent from at least one Mayflower passenger in 1620. This doubtless encompasses many non-white, mixed race, and ethnically conglomerate people.

The Society now has over 150,000 members with such proven descent. A 2018 news article claims “There are an estimated 10 million living Americans and as many as 35 million people worldwide who descended from the Pilgrims, according to the General Society of Mayflower Descendants.” Quite a feat, considering that 45 of the ship’s 102 passengers died during the first winter.

The members of any of the groups (150,000, 10 million, or 35 million) that can legitimately be classified as Yankee today, or even more broadly, Anglo-Saxon, must be rather small, though they would numerically concentrate more in the first and second categories.

A larger, higher-status, and more economically prosperous Puritan group did not break with the Church of England but tried to reform it from within. These were the settlers who established the Massachusetts Bay Colony headquartered at Boston.

They were called Non-conformists, but under the influence of Plymouth Colony community leader Samuel Fuller, an original Mayflower passenger, the new Bay Colony residents soon adopted the organizational structure of the Plymouth Church. Every town became an independent Congregational community with its own church, pastor, teacher, and covenant, thus making Bay Colony Non-conformists de facto Separatists.

I’ve previously outlined the sharp demographic, social, and economic differences between Plymouth Colony and the Massachusetts Bay Colony, so there is no need to rehash them here. Despite the superstar status of the Mayflower and Plymouth Colony in American lore, the Bay Colony was the more historically and demographically important of the two.

Puritan New England
Puritan New England

The longevity of the two Puritan commonwealths in America can be illustrated by way of analogy. Plymouth Colony was formally absorbed into the Province of Massachusetts Bay in 1691, after an independent existence of 71 years. Substituting 2020 for the 1691 end date is equivalent to 1949-2020 for us; for Massachusetts Bay Colony the figures are 1959-2020 (61 years).

Robust Population Growth

Returning to Kevin MacDonald’s Diaspora Peoples and David Hackett Fischer, it is said the leading Puritan families of East Anglia (i.e., before they left England) intermarried with great frequency.

In America, New England Puritans

engaged in a much lower incidence of exogamy [here meaning miscegenation] with the native Amerindian population (as was the case in the Spanish and especially the Portuguese colonies in the Americas), or with Black slaves (as in the Southern states), or even other European ethnic and religious groups [emphasis added] (as in the Mid-Atlantic states).


The great majority of the Puritan founders of Massachusetts arrived with their families (Fischer 1989, 25). . . . “Households throughout Massachusetts and Connecticut included large numbers of children, small numbers of servants and high proportions of intact marital unions. In Waltham, Massachusetts, for example, completed marriages formed in the 1730s produced 9.7 children on the average. . .” (Fischer 1989, 71).

This is consistent with historian John Demos’ findings for Plymouth Colony:

The popular impression today that colonial families were extremely large finds the strongest possible confirmation in the case of Plymouth. A sample of some ninety families about whom there is fairly reliable information, suggests that there was an average of seven to eight children per family who actually grew to adulthood. The number of live births was undoubtedly higher, although exactly how much higher we cannot be sure. . . .

The rate of infant mortality in Plymouth seems to have been relatively low. In the case of a few families for which there are unusually complete records, only about one in five children seems to have died before the age of twenty-one. Furthermore, births in the sample come for the most part at roughly two-year intervals with relatively few “gaps” which might indicate a baby who did not survive. All things considered, it appears that the rate of infant and child mortality in Plymouth was no more than 25 per cent — less than half the rate in many parts of the world today.

These figures seem to indicate a surprising standard of health and physical vigor among Plymouth residents, and a study of their longevity — the average life expectancy in the colony — confirms this impression. . . .

The figures are really astonishingly high. Indeed, in the case of the men, they compare quite favorably with what obtains in this country today. (The life expectancy of an American male of twenty-one is now a fraction over seventy, and for a female of the same age, is approximately seventy-six. . . .)

The difference in the results for men and women is mainly due to the dangers attendant in childbirth. A young woman’s life expectancy was seven years less than a man’s, whereas today, with childbirth hazards virtually eliminated by modern medicine, it is six years longer. . . . If a woman survived [her childbearing middle] years, her prospects for long life became at least as good as a man’s, and indeed a little better. A majority of those who lived to a really old age (ninety or more) seem to have been women.[4]John P. Demos, “Notes on Life in Plymouth Colony,” William and Mary Quarterly (April 1965), pp. 270-272.

Note that the figures in the table are averages, meaning many families had more children than the number shown.

Demos expanded his paper into a book, A Little Commonwealth: Family Life in Plymouth Colony (New York: Oxford University Press, 1970; thirtieth-anniversary edition with a new foreword by the author, 2000) that has been called “a classic in early American history.”

The author, who became a professor at Yale, is himself emblematic of the persistence — and demise — of the Yankee ethnos. His Greek father was born and raised in Turkey (then part of the Ottoman Empire), while his Yankee mother was a member of the Putnam family that traced its lineage to Salem in Massachusetts Bay Colony. Consistent with Yankee naming customs, Demos’ middle name is his maternal family name: Putnam.

Yankee Exodus

Pushing first along the coast of the Atlantic Ocean, then inland, Puritans, later Yankees, ultimately spread across the entire northern tier of the U.S. as far as California and Hawaii. Stewart H. Holbrook called this mass migration, coinciding with the settlement of the continental United States, “the Yankee exodus.”[5]Stewart H. Holbrook, The Yankee Exodus: An Account of Migration from New England, New York: Macmillan, 1950.

A self-described “low-brow” popular historian who spent his adult life in the Pacific Northwest, Holbrook noted the invisibility of his ethnic group in the Foreword.

My interest in migration from New England began some forty years ago [1910], when I first became conscious of the many deserted hill farms in my native Vermont, and in New Hampshire where I also lived. . . . The fact that they had been abandoned seemed to me a great tragedy. It still does. . . .

I sought to inform myself on the matter. But although I found several hundred works dealing with the migrations to America of all the many different peoples of Europe, and some from Asia, and although these books told exactly where the Irish, the Germans, the so-called Scotch-Irish, the Scandinavians, and on to include Poles and Russians and Italians and many another group had settled, and of their valuable contributions to America, I could discover in all that welter of books only one dealing with the movements of Yankees. This was a master’s thesis by Lois Kimball Mathews, published as long ago as 1909, which, though able, brought the story down only to 1860 and only as far as the east bank of the Mississippi. . . . [Mathews intended to write a follow-up volume extending her account westward and down to her own time, but never completed it.]

It seemed to me that the lack of a detailed work on the migration of Yankees and their influence constituted a sizable void in the American story. . . .

I started in earnest to set down an account of what by then seemed to me the most influential migration in all our history. The strange race of Yankees not only permeated every last reach of the Republic; but almost always they made their impact felt. Their inventions, at home and elsewhere, changed the whole pattern of settlement in the West and South. Their fanatical respect for education led them to perform prodigies for learning in every state. Their shrewdness and great industry in business and commerce made them both welcome and feared. Only too many of the emigrating Yankees also felt a powerful urge to make others like themselves, especially in the matter of so-called morals — including Temperance — and this was the cause of making them, properly enough, loathed or hated.

Despite the lapse of 70 years, nobody has explored the story further. The fate that befell Mathews’ book in 1909 also befell Holbrook’s in 1950. An Amazon purchaser said of the latter book in 2015: “I think this is the ur-source for the topic. It could benefit from some updating in the light of new discoveries, but its shelf-life expired fifty years ago, so I’m not holding my breath.”

Daniel Chauncey Brewer (1862-1932) wrote,

The New England of the early nineteenth century was fairly bursting with repressed vigor, capacity for constructive upbuilding, and vital power.

This was to find immediate outlet in two directions — first, in the occupation of new fields of activity in the West, and second, through intensive developments. [Emphases in original.]

Curiously enough the effort directed toward each end supplemented the other in hastening the close of Anglo-Saxon domination in New England. One by withdrawing from all of the six States with which we are concerned, the most adventurous of the homogeneous population. The other by bringing foreign labor of all sorts and conditions into the” section.[6]Daniel Chauncey Brewer, The Conquest of New England by the Immigrant, New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1926, p. 58.

English travel writer Frances Trollope, the mother of novelist Anthony Trollope (Barchester Towers, The Way We Live Now), who journeyed up the Mississippi from New Orleans and lived for a time on the Ohio frontier, vividly described the mass westward movement of Yankees she witnessed in its incipient stage in 1830:

[A] vast continent, by far the greater part of which is still in the state in which nature left it, and a busy, bustling, industrious population, hacking and hewing their way through it. . . . The wonderful facility for internal commerce, furnished by the rivers, lakes, and canals, which thread the country in every direction, producing a rapidity of progress in all commercial and agricultural speculation altogether unequalled. This remarkable feature is perceptible in every part of the Union into which the fast spreading population has hitherto found its way, and forms, I think, the most remarkable and interesting peculiarity of the country. I hardly remember a single town where vessels of some description or other may not constantly be seen in full activity. . . .[7]Frances Trollope, Domestic Manners of the Americans, 1832.

Lois Kimball Mathews said in the book Holbrook cited, “Wherever Puritan blood has gone, Puritan traditions have been carried,” imprinting “the influence these transplanted Englishmen have exerted, the institutions they have wrought, the character ingrained by inheritance and altered by environment which differentiates them from any other element in the United States.”[8]Lois Kimball Mathews, The Expansion of New England to the Mississippi, 1620-1865 (Boston: Houghton Mifflin), 1909, p. 250.

The exodus from New England between 1830 and 1840 produced a sharp decline in the Yankee population in its geographic cradle. Unable to successfully compete with Midwestern agriculture, many of those who remained turned to commerce and manufacturing, creating demand for foreign labor to run the new factories.

“By the call of the frontier,” Mathews wrote, “the character of New England was changed. When one notes how many of the cities and towns of New England are to-day [1909] controlled politically by those who have neither Puritan traditions, Puritan background of ancestry, nor Puritan ideals, one feels dismayed . . .” But “The history of New England is not confined to six states; it is contained in a greater and broader New England wherever the children of the Puritans are found.”[9]Ibid., 272.
(Lois Kimball Mathews, The Expansion of New England to the Mississippi, 1620-1865 (Boston: Houghton Mifflin), 1909, p. 250.)

The Conquest of New England by the Immigrant

Two decades later, greatly disturbed by the mass influx of foreigners, attorney Daniel Chauncey Brewer propounded a much more pessimistic view.

The swamping of classic New England by immigration is a matter of the utmost consequence to every inhabitant of this section, and to the Nation. [Brewer’s book chronicled the process.] Yesterday Yankees were a compelling factor in the Republic. As a people they are now of the past. Hundreds of thousands of them remain in their old stamping grounds. Millions as individuals are scattered through the United States. As a community they no longer exist. Hardly had their sun risen than it colored the skies at setting. Today [foreign] men and women of recent European birth physically possess New England, and probably control its vote.[10]Brewer, 4.

Note Brewer’s use of “Yankee” as an ethnicon instead of anything resembling “WASP,” which had not been coined yet. His focus was not on some elite, “Brahmin” subset of people as the Jews’ is, but rather on the entire ethnic group.

Daniel Chauncey Brewer’s forebears arrived in the Bay Colony in 1634. He was born into a prominent Boston family that originally hailed from Springfield, Massachusetts, where a Daniel Brewer was pastor of the First Congregational Church in 1694.

The given names “Daniel” and “Chauncey” reappeared constantly over the generations. To cite one example, Brewer’s father, a prominent nurseryman, and the author’s own son who died in infancy, were both named Daniel Chauncey Brewer too, though without a “Sr.,” “Jr.,” or Roman numeral to distinguish them. Such suffixes, which are common among New Englanders, are another identitarian clue. (“Senior, Junior & Name Suffixes in General.”)

Comparing the U.S. Census tabulations of 1850 to those of 1920 demonstrates “the pitiless suddenness with which a civilization may be blotted out.”

The author harshly criticized his people’s irresponsibility:

It has remained for the descendants of a vigorous British stock to win an unenviable record, without precedent for pusillanimity in the vital matter of race integrity. . . . (p. 7)

For a period which begins with the birth of a middle-aged New Englander now living, to the present moment not only the Eastern States but all industrial America have been joyously and idiotically naturalizing every alien whom they could cram into the body politic. (p. 121)

Because it was “too late to do much for the Yankees as a people,” Brewer hoped a numerically diminished younger generation would impart Yankee values to the newcomers, thereby “perpetuating the culture [emphasis added] that originated” with the Yankee, whose days were numbered.

Citizens concerned with replacement migration and ethnic cleansing today should be aware that mass immigration a century ago closely paralleled our own in many ways.

This truism is forcefully driven home by Lothrop Stoddard’s neglected chronicle of the first inundation, Re-forging America: The Story of Our Nationhood (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1927). Due to the recent passage of the Immigration Act of 1924, he was overly optimistic about the future, but his analysis is still educational and timely. (Another little-known Stoddard work, Into the Darkness: Nazi Germany Today [New York: Duell, Sloan & Pearce, 1940], remains one of the best accounts of NS Germany in English.)

Stoddard’s background was classically Yankee. His ancestry extended back to Solomon Stoddard, an influential Congregationalist minister in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Solomon’s wife (Lothrop’s several times great-grandmother) was the sister of Sir George Downing, after whom Downing Street in London is named.

Theologian Jonathan Edwards was Solomon’s grandson, hence Lothrop Stoddard’s kin, as were numerous other prominent men bearing the family surname of whom Solomon was the progenitor: soldier Amos Stoddard, travelers and authors Charles Stoddard and John Lawson Stoddard (Lothrop’s father), educator John Fair Stoddard, and chemist John Tappan Stoddard.

Multigenerational family configurations like this are a Yankee hallmark that you come instinctively to recognize. Combined with unique family naming patterns they help draw the Yankee ethnos into the light in surprising and unexpected ways.

It helps you “see” them.

Are Puritans-Yankees-“WASPs” Uniquely Evil or Misguided? Are They Responsible for All Our Ills?

The Establishment answers these questions with resounding condescension: “Yes!” An endless stream of sewage attacking WASPs in books, articles, movies, TV shows, and academia has poured forth for a century now. I pay no heed to that. Honest sentiments never issue from forked tongues. They are liars and haters, and that will never change.

It’s so-called “conservatives” I’m focusing on.

In 1991, Richard Brookhiser, a William Buckley employee at National Review, wrote a book called The Way of the WASP. The Conservative Book Club Bulletin devoted a two-page spread to it, breathlessly declaring: “Richard Brookhiser is a brave one. Doesn’t he realize that if you’re pro-WASP you’re likely to be called racist, sexist, elitist, or you-name-it? Yes, he knows all this, yet he plunges in.”

Brookhiser favored open immigration and cited anti-white Jew Norman Mailer as authority for his assertion that “the Negro” ought to emerge as “a dominating force in American life.” WASPdom is merely a set of values, a state of mind, a way of thinking and behaving that anybody can “internally assimilate” — and we’d all be better off if they did. Any alleged racial component is “ethnic humbug.”

Instauration magazine’s review, “A Convoluted Defense of WASPs” (April 1991), called Brookhiser a “miscegenator”: “A German Catholic on his paternal side, English on his maternal, he is married to a Jewess. [He still is. They live in Manhattan, with a second house in the Catskills.] It is not known if he has any children but, if he has, they will not be WASPs and will quite likely be anti-WASPs.”

The good news: the couple had no children.

The bad news: using her credentials as a psychotherapist with access to elite mass media and book publishers, his wife proselytizes white women: Beyond Motherhood: Choosing a Life without Children (1996); Selfish, Shallow and Self-Absorbed: Sixteen Writers on the Decision Not to Have Kids (2015); The Golden Condom and Other Essays (2016).

“Conservative” part-Jew and 100% philo-Semite Michael Lind is a Yankee-hater of the first water. He’s made a lucrative living peddling crack-brained narratives designed to destroy white America and advance Jewish and other non-white racial interests.

Old miscegenator and Mexico expatriate Fred Reed, who is married to a Mexican and sired Mestizo children, hates Yankees — and Nordics — with a passion. While lauding Mestizos and Mexico, he chortles about the racial destruction of his homeland, gleefully rubbing his hands over the comeuppance of “nativists” and white nationalists. But like Lind, he loves Jews.

Reed’s philo-Semitism is so extreme that Jew Paul Gottfried, another conservative pundit who blames Puritans, Yankees, and Protestants for the world’s problems (accompanied by the refrain, Jews aren’t responsible, it’s ridiculous to think so!) patted Reed on the head for rebuking “anti-Semites,” but gently chided him for his excessive pro-Jewish ardor. Gentiles who exhibit too much zeal for Jews make them uncomfortable.

Simultaneously with all this rot, Reed with a straight face struts out his aristocratic Southern ancestry:

My people are the pure Cavalier stock of the Virginia Tidewater. I am Frederick Venable Reed Jr. The Cavalier society of Tidewater was perhaps the high point of American civilization. They bore little resemblance — I might almost say “no resemblance” — to the wild and barbaric Scots-Irish of Appalachia or the communal-minded, meddlesome, and brutally intolerant Puritans of New England.

Sound familiar?

Norman Rockwell, Home for Christmas (Stockbridge Main Street at Christmas), McCall’s (December, 1967). Oil and acrylic on board.
Norman Rockwell, Home for Christmas (Stockbridge Main Street at Christmas), McCall’s (December, 1967). Oil and acrylic on board.

A “conservative” group of neo-Southerners also hates Yankees. Its members sponsor an institute where Jews, black women, and white men lecture about the meaning of “Southern tradition.” Or, rather, “what is true and valuable” in it. Needless to say, white — and only white — “racism” is not “true and valuable.” Nor is “anti-Semitism.”

An Italian American faculty member from the urban Northeast incessantly castigates Lincoln as a white racist. A Southern academic fulminates about The Yankee Problem. He would never entertain the thought of a Jewish Problem, so could never write a book about it.

In a glowing review, his Italian colleague noted approvingly that it describes a problem that “has plagued America (and the world) ever since the Pilgrims landed.” A review on the institute’s website says the author assails “the devilish nature of that New Englander, Anglo-Saxon type known as the Yankee.”

E. Michael Jones, a conservative Irish-German Catholic who, unlike the other Yankee-haters mentioned, can’t be faulted for deifying Jews, nevertheless upbraids Yankees. He’s a Catholic chauvinist, but not a racist (that would be a sin). White genocide is not happening, and can’t happen, because there is no such thing as a white race. There are only Irish, German, and (evil) WASP races.

I think it’s fair to say that Andrew Fraser (Anglo-Saxon), quoted at the outset of this article, and Kevin MacDonald (three-quarters German, one-quarter Scottish), fundamentally agree that “the devilish nature of that New Englander, Anglo-Saxon type known as the Yankee” has “plagued America (and the world) ever since the Pilgrims landed.” They sure sound that way anyway. By comparison, they extol the philo-Semitic “Southern Cavaliers” who blessed America with slavery and a massive, rapidly expanding black population they partially miscegenated with.

As far as I’m concerned, none of the people named have successfully made their anti-Yankee case.

After so much clichéd tedium it’s a relief to find a solitary positive depiction of Yankees in the works of Southern-born journalist Tom Wolfe.

The theme is manifest in his bestselling account of the Mercury Seven astronauts, The Right Stuff (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1979). As Michael Lewis wrote,

Then, on July 20, 1969, Neil Armstrong stepped out of Apollo 11 onto the moon.

Like everyone else, Wolfe took an interest in the moon landing, but less in the mission than in the men. The early astronauts had some traits in common, he noticed. They tended to be born oldest sons, in the mid-1920s, named after their fathers, and raised in small towns, in intact Anglo-Saxon Protestant families. More than half of them had “Jr.” after their names. . . .

The astronauts were all drawn from the officer ranks in the U.S. military. They were indeed invariably Wasps. . . .[11]Michael Lewis, “How Tom Wolfe Became . . . Tom Wolfe,” Vanity Fair, October 8, 2015.

The message is equally pronounced in Wolfe’s outstanding essay “The Tinkerings of Robert Noyce: How the Sun Rose on Silicon Valley” (Esquire, December 1983), a short history of the Valley and its white founders. It was reprinted in his anthology Hooking Up (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2000) as “Two Young Men Who Went West.”

A Final Word from Stewart Holbrook

Libel the Yankee if you will. He is today the most set-upon, the most abused, the most caricatured American of all. He is, in fact, almost the only American who pays no heed to libels about him. Who is the favorite villain of the stage, of the movies, of novels? He is a Yankee banker, name of Peabody or something similar, and not Cohen and Guggenheim. The favorite spiritual mountebank of the stage and movies and novels is not good Father O’Houlihan, but the Reverend Dr. Sears, or something similar, patently a Congregational minister. The simple clown is not Rufus Rastus Johnson Brown, but a clod from Pumpkin Center, Maine. The desire that results in dreadful adulteries is compounded under New England elms. The mourning that so becomes Electra stems from murder and incest, committed on a pretty New England farm. Uncle Tom’s Cabin is not to be shown on the screen because it reminds that Negroes once were slaves — and not because of its cruel Simon Legree, born a Yankee. Oliver Twist is banned because of Fagin, a Jew; and the clever magicians of Hollywood have at last produced The Three Musketeers without the unfrocking of a Cardinal Richelieu [poorly worded: the Jewish filmmakers in 1948 intentionally concealed the fact that villain Richelieu was Catholic, and a prelate, depicting him solely as King Louis XIII’s chief minister — a political position; in effect, they “removed his frock”]. . . .

Aye, the Puritan, the Yankee, the New Englander has indeed been the butt of much sport and ridicule. He has been attacked and demolished for his narrowness, for his calm assurance that he alone was right. But, sir, you must either admit that somehow or other he accomplished prodigies; or you must cite some other group of people who accomplished more, or even as much, in the New World. Such a people does not come readily to mind.

— Stewart H. Holbrook (1950)

Lunar Module Eagle‘s ascent from Tranquility Base as seen from Command Module Columbia, July 21, 1969.
Lunar Module Eagle‘s ascent from Tranquility Base as seen from Command Module Columbia, July 21, 1969.

Readers interested in exploring their New England roots, or the history of the Puritan migration generally, might examine the work of genealogist Robert Charles Anderson, starting with his posts on the New England Historic Genealogical Society blog, then his books. He has written extensively about both the Bay Colony and Plymouth migrations, as well as the English roots of “the ordinary laymen who formed a complex genealogical and intellectual network, extending temporally back to the beginning of the English Reformation and geographically across all of England and even to parts of Wales.”


[1] Andrew Fraser, The WASP Question: An Essay on the Biocultural Evolution, Present Predicament, and Future Prospects of the Invisible Race (London: Arktos, 2011), pp. 29-30.

[2] John Tyndall, “In the Cause of Anglo-Saxondom,” Spearhead magazine; republished by Instauration magazine, February 1980.

[3] Ellsworth Huntington & Martha Ragsdale, After Three Centuries: A Typical New England Family (Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins), 1935.

[4] John P. Demos, “Notes on Life in Plymouth Colony,” William and Mary Quarterly (April 1965), pp. 270-272.

[5] Stewart H. Holbrook, The Yankee Exodus: An Account of Migration from New England, New York: Macmillan, 1950.

[6] Daniel Chauncey Brewer, The Conquest of New England by the Immigrant, New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1926, p. 58.

[7] Frances Trollope, Domestic Manners of the Americans, 1832.

[8] Lois Kimball Mathews, The Expansion of New England to the Mississippi, 1620-1865 (Boston: Houghton Mifflin), 1909, p. 250.

[9] Ibid., 272.

[10] Brewer, 4.

[11] Michael Lewis, “How Tom Wolfe Became . . . Tom Wolfe,” Vanity Fair, October 8, 2015.

(Republished from Counter-Currents Publishing by permission of author or representative)
Hide 82 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Chris Moore says: • Website

    This is a fascinating article, and one that aptly illustrates how Jewry operated to dispossess the founding Protestant population of the targeted U.S. nation by leveraging a patchwork of hostile white minorities against it, and now is leveraging a patchwork of hostile brown, yellow and black minorities against the same amalgamation of whites they used to dispossess the once Protestant majority. The kicker? They’re planning on using the girth of billion and a half Chinese to dispossess these Jew-stooge anti-white racists. And they’re doing it all to kill two birds with one stone: get obscenely rich, and finance Zionism/Greater Israel.

    Let’s start with the demonization of founding Protestants:

    An obvious purpose of the clumsy new epithet was to isolate their intended prey, America’s founding stock (strictly speaking, “WASP” applies to Southern whites as much as it does to New Englanders), by ostentatiously excluding newly-arrived white ethnics (“You’re not to blame! You’re fellow victims!”) so they would assist the Jews in their dirty work.

    Moving on to their former partners in crime, ambitious and greedy “white ethnics”:

    Now, with non-whites from everywhere on the planet available to perform the task, white ethnics are being discarded too.

    So that gets us to the globalists, which is a combination of former WASPs and white ethnics who have betrayed the white race to pander to the Jews and to their own pocket books, in combination with cut-throats of a darker hue:

    There are a handful of ruthless, ambitious individuals remaining, but without exception, they identify with and advance the interests of a controlling Jewish-globalist caste in a way that benefits its members and themselves, but is fatal to their race and ethnos.

    The article doesn’t talk about the Jewish/Chinese Communist plan, but you get the point: Jews need to keep throwing ever more dupes, “smart” moral retards and greedy Jew-stooge cutthroats under the bus in the same way a grifter needs to keep betraying his former partners to keep his unraveling Ponzi scheme alive.

    Eventually, all the “worthy” (most ruthless) Jews will flee to Israel, just as America collapses into anarchy, chaos, and a failed state, or so the plan goes.

    But like all Jewish schemes down through history, this one also was ingenious — until it became too clever by half.

    Similarly to Moses bringing down the long knives on the guilty Hebrew mayhem makers after rescuing them from Egypt, Jewry and its globalist partners in crime are today facing the Sword of Damocles hanging over their heads because they were clever, but not smart; great moral poseurs, but totally immoral; and because their bad will has descended to the level of premeditated evil.

    The wrath is coming, and they did it all to themselves.

    • Thanks: Pheasant, FoSquare
    • Replies: @Sick of Orcs
  2. sher singh [AKA "Jatt Aryaa"] says:

    Throwing more information (or money) at a problem doesn’t solve it.

    You could’ve stopped at the unity of farmers with the upper class, and then outlined strategies to overcome the tension and oppression bearing over them।।

    This article on the intersection and indeed superiority of Kshatriyas over Brahmins would be a good starting point।।

  3. That last line needs repeating.Very good article/great comment.
    Looks like we’re all “in for it” M A D. Hopefully,
    enough of a sane population can survive to do it
    all again.Evolution is a bitch, like roulette,
    round and round it goes,where it stops nobody knows…

  4. Interesting piece, I was amused by the “even to parts of Wales” jab.

  5. John Tyndall, former head of the British National Party, defined the Anglo-Saxon ethnos as consisting of the English, Scots, Welsh, Anglo- and Scots-Irish communities and their counterparts in Australia, New Zealand, the United States, and Canada.

    Strange how Germans were not included, since the Angles and Saxons came from Germany. And why did they seek to destroy their cousins from Germany in mindless wars?

    • Replies: @john nutter
    , @Jake
    , @EldnahYm
  6. Icy Blast says:

    Name names, it’s a lot more fun. Even I know a few of the ones not supplied: The Mises Institute and Thomas J. DiLorenzo, for example. There’s plenty of blame to go around. But ultimately the minds of Euro-Americans fell prey to that great one-two punch: The “Reformation” and the “Enlightenment.” The genealogical stuff is an entertaining diversion. (The mention of the name “Brookhiser” does make one’s skin crawl, however.)

    • Replies: @anarchyst
  7. Donald Trump’s son in law is a JEW —and ISRAEL is Donnie Trumps’s idol. Benny Netanyahu is Turmp’s best overseas admirer as was Roy Cohn earlier and Shapiro wrote Donnie’s College Entrance Exams. Trump is the Elephant in the Room – Or – George Floyd ain’t in heaven?

  8. Skeptikal says:

    I believe WASP originally referred to “wealthy Anglo-Saxon Protestants.”

    Obviously, Anglo-Saxon Protestants are white from the get-go.

    So stipulating “white” is redundant and silly.

    As for Fischer’s population figures, my recollection is that he provides numerous graphs summarizing his findings in all types of archives. The book is *highly* documented. I am looking at it again right now. One of the best books I have ever read.

    Really, if you are going to comment on Albion’s Seed, you might at least have the book to hand.
    You can pick up a paperback edition for under twenty bucks on Amazon.

    Also, you forgot to mention the work of Colin Woodard, American Nations, on the New England diaspora (and other diasporas).

    • Replies: @profnasty
    , @Skeptikal
  9. Another interesting study would be to trace the United Empire Loyalists who went north after the American Revolution. These people were highly influential in forming the country that was eventually to become Canada. The Canadian accent which is pretty well consistent across Canada from Ontario to British Columbia is descended from the United Empire Loyalists.

  10. OK, I give up.
    When was the “half-century of peace”? (As written on the metal plate in the picture.)

    • Agree: Realist
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  11. @Carlton Meyer

    only 20,000-40,000 Angles and Saxons immigrated into a native British population of 3m between 400 and 800AD. The culture became anglo-saxon but the people largely remained the same.

  12. Jake says:
    @Carlton Meyer

    That’s because the definition is one of an imperial sense of English nationality. This definition of WASP and Anglo-Saxon includes the groups that came to be seen – by accepting having been conquered – as supporting and promoting the British Empire and its works. Continental Saxons, obviously, cannot be any part of that. And groups that are not in origin ethnically and culturally Germanic are included, because their groups came to be identified with spread of the British Empire, with the London-based empire.

    It is, then, not a definition of an actual ‘ethnos’ but one of various groups that came to be the support troops for an empire. The specific cultural values and practices of the ELITE of that empire are best described as Anglo-Saxon Puritan, most specifically in its secular form.

    And back to archetypal WASP Oliver Cromwell the bankers for that group of WASP Elites have featured Jews, which fits perfectly, necessarily, with the specific Judaizing heresy that was Anglo-Saxon Puritanism. By the time you get to the widely assumed Golden Age of of the mid-18th century, Jewish financiers are absolutely indispensable to the British Empire and therefore to Brit WASP culture.

  13. Jake says:

    One way to know true crazy, or else to know deceptive role-playing, is to look for a ‘conservative’ writer who froths about the mouth about whites backing the ideas of some Jew like David Cole or Gilad Atzmon or Ilana Mercer. Here, that Jewish writer is Paul Gottfried. These drive-by attacks usually are so over the top that I have trouble believing that the actual writer is what he purports to be but instead is a Jew working for the ADL or SPLC.

    Andrew Hamilton is the perfect non de plume for that game. It is so perfectly WASP-sounding per the author’s definition, slyly so. Hamilton evokes Alexander Hamilton, the bastard of the British Empire now lionized by America’s Globalists precisely because Hamilton desired a unified nation that would ape the UK in everything but monarchy, including imperial banking – which meant then as now, Jewish dominated and Jewish directed banking. Andrew keeps a first name starting with the letter A but evokes a good deal of populism primarily because of Andrew Jackson – who, it cannot be overemphasized, despised the British Empire and even more so its WASP Elites, who saw Hamilton for what he was and knew that the English style banking and politics by commerce that was the heart and soul of Hamilton’s politics would bring great evil to the non-rich of these United States.

    • Thanks: profnasty
    • Replies: @Alden
  14. anarchyst says:
    @Icy Blast

    The “Vatican II Ecumenical Council” completed the jewish takeover by melding Catholicism with “the rest of (pseudo) Christianity”…
    Fortunately, there are some of us who refuse to “go along”…and ARE aware.

    • Thanks: true.enough
  15. It was my understanding that the Virginia Cavaliers, and their close cousins in South Carolina, were essentially Saxons (often mixed with high-caste Scots), and were thus more feudal and warrior-minded than their Yankee mostly Anglo (East Anglian) cousins. This might explain why Virginia’s Tidewater and South Carolina provided the backbone of the Confederacy, in both the officer corps and enlisted men, as well as community support. Celtic people, found in large numbers of Scots-Irish and Welsh in rural Virginia, Georgia, North Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee and Alabama, and more specifically Appalachia appeared to be ready to fight, but not necessarily likely to benefit from slavery.

    The Civil War appeared to be a battle between East Anglia and Sussex.

    • Replies: @Observator
    , @Polecat
  16. @Chris Moore

    The wrath is coming, and they did it all to themselves.

    Your commentary caused a dark epiphany: even if there was a civil shooting war, both the Secessionists and other side will likely pledge to support Israel.

  17. Agent76 says:

    Nov 25, 2015 Thanksgiving to ‘Redskins’ – Dispelling American Myths That Hide Native Genocide

    Each November, Americans celebrate a mythical version of U.S. history. Thanksgiving Day’s portrayal of the experience of Native Americans under the boot of settler-colonialism is one of the Empire’s most cherished falsehoods.

    • LOL: profnasty
    • Replies: @Alden
    , @IProtest
  18. HT says:

    WASPS are the builders of civilization and freedom. Unfortunately their strong point of independence is now becoming their undoing. They have allowed others to enter what they built and steal it from them as they carelessly slept at the wheel. Now they won’t unite to save what is being destroyed. Another sad cycle for humanity in what might have been.

  19. profnasty says:

    Wow! That is one heaping plate. It looks and smells like sht. I wonder if it tastes as same. Don’t step in it!
    But, but, but, what about Americans of German descent? Aren’t we also White/Protestant?
    We’re the useless low level ethnicity of the twenty-first century. We’re now the White Niggers.
    Thank you for your support.

  20. profnasty says:

    Parsing racial groups is stock in trade of the Jew. WASP is a Jewish construct.
    If you’re White, of Christian descent, and speak American english- you’re alright with me.
    America First Jews, and Mexicans who talk perfect English, are OK too. (See, I’m not a bad guy.)

    • Replies: @Skeptikal
  21. Cleburne says:

    Surmounting all of the Yankees’ other achievements is this one:

    The weaponization of egalitarianism, in the form of the fanatic abolitionists who created the “act of history bends toward justice” phrase/ideal by replacing their narrow Calvinism with a mish mash of French revolutionism, esp the “egalite” bit, Hegelianism, trandscentalism. (It’s worth noting that Burke’s great defense of tradition, “Reflections on the Revolution in France,” was written in response to a Unitarian in England, the ideological analogue of the Yankee.

    The Yankee first attacked the South, whose agrarian economy stood in the way of Yankee “progress,” which meant greater profits and political control through industrialization supported by government subsidies and “financialization” through the created of debt and equity securities. Next in line was Imperial Russia — like the South, an agrarian region of wealth that God placed there to be exploited by Yankee ingenuity. Socialists from Europe, be they German ’48ers or shetl socialists, were always eagerly received by the Yankee; “tikkun olam” was something they understood. The marriage of the Yankee and Tikkun Olam can be seen in the neo con movement and the entire propositional nation idea.

    So in other words, fuck the Yankee. I cannot think of a single group of people who have caused so much damage in so little time.

    • Agree: GeneralRipper
  22. @SimplyCelt

    Governor of Berkeley of Virginia gave sanctuary to loyalist Cavaliers fleeing England during the English Civil War and the Commonwealth, while Massachusetts colonials were natural allies of the rebel Puritan faction led by Cromwell. This deep-seated regional enmity would be acted out in two later conflicts, the War of Independence and of course in its final ghastly manifestation of 1861-65.

    A small but fascinating historical aside illustrating this divide involves Robert E. Lee’s father, “Lighthorse” Harry Lee, who was responsible for one of the grimmest atrocities of the Revolution. With his rebel cavalrymen he hooked up with a band of loyal Virginia militiamen who were heading to offer their services to Lord Cornwallis. They then attacked and overpowered the men. Lee chose seven survivors at random and ordered them hacked apart with sabers, charging the rest to report the fate the rebels had in store for all who remained loyal to King and country.

    The Scotch and Irish inhabitants of the South also cherished memories of “lost causes” long before Appomatox, vividly remembering British atrocities at Culloden and the Boyne and identifying New England Yankees as descendants of their ancestral adversary.

    • Troll: GeneralRipper
    • Replies: @Polecat
  23. Very enlightening. It’s too bad that WASPism is dying out. The world is fast reaching the heights of mediocrity.

    • Agree: Fallingwater
  24. Z-man says:

    “WASP” was first formulated and applied privately in the 1950s by academics to describe the American social element Jewry hated and envied the most. Jews coveted its status and possessions (including its women) from the beginning of the 20th century.

    Just as I say that some Jew professor at CCNY, back in the ’40s, coined the term ‘Judeo Christian’.

  25. Z-man says:

    Before WWII, Jews savagely assailed WASPs as “Nordics” in their multipronged campaign against the 1924 Immigration Act, their oily, underhanded censorship of Madison Grant’s stirring book The Conquest of a Continent (Scribner’s, 1933)

    Ah, the great Madison Grant and his seminal work The Passing of the Great Race. Viva Grant!

  26. Z-man says:

    Gentiles who exhibit too much zeal for Jews make them uncomfortable.

    Gentiles like that and Christian Zionists should be beaten to a pulp!
    From your premise I guess the other whites who followed the ‘Wasps’ the Germans, Irish, Italians and Slavs, especially the Germans, defended the white race(s) better than the Wasps and whats happening now might have happened earlier. But when you come down to it it’s the International Jew who will always be at fault.
    Sorry, I only read about a quarter of your long, long, tract.(Grin)

    • Replies: @Fidelios Automata
  27. AndrewR says:
    @john nutter

    Similar phenomenon with the Normans.

    Now the same thing is happening with the Jews.

  28. Alden says:
    @john nutter

    And between 700AD and 1050 AD the angles and Saxons were enslaved massacred and disposed by the Danish Vikings. Who were then dispossessed by their Norwegian/barely French cousins.

  29. Alden says:

    Genocide is the extermination of a people. How can it be genocide when the Indians tripled their population since 1500?

    • Replies: @Fidelios Automata
  30. @john nutter

    In East Anglia, the percentage of Anglo-Saxon genes is close to 40 % to this day (will have been higher in Mayflower times), and not negligeable elsewhere in Britain. It shows up as Dutch/Danish ancestry, because the German coast (same kind of people, many of whom used to be Frisian speakers) is not well sampled and other parts of Germany have different ancestry patterns.

  31. Alden says:

    Author should have gone to some of the Mayflower descendant websites instead of Wikipedia for his inaccurate history of the Plymouth brethren who founded their sect around 1600 Dorking Surrey England, found it impossible to make a living in Holland , and arrived in Massachusetts November 1620.

  32. Skeptikal says:

    Political scientist Andrew Hacker used the term in 1957, with W standing for ‘wealthy’ rather than ‘white’. Describing the class of Americans that held “national power in its economic, political, and social aspects”, Hacker wrote:

    These ‘old’ Americans possess, for the most part, some common characteristics. First of all, they are ‘WASPs’—in the cocktail party jargon of the sociologists. That is, they are wealthy, they are Anglo-Saxon in origin, and they are Protestants (and disproportionately Episcopalian).[12]

    12. Hacker, Andrew (1957). “Liberal Democracy and Social Control”. American Political Science Review. 51 (4): 1009–1026. doi:10.2307/1952449. JSTOR 1952449.

    • Replies: @Alden
  33. Skeptikal says:


    What does your comment have to do with mine??

  34. Skeptikal says:

    Idealizing the Southern slave system is a fool’s errande.

    On the antebellum agricultural system in the South, check out Frederick Law Olmstead, The Cotton Kingdom.

    That system was wholly dependent on the most advanced technologies of banking/finance/debt/credit, etc.

    “The South” was a mosaic of different types of agriculture and hence economic organization.

    Virginia was nothing at all like Mississippi. Louisiana’s sugar industry was run along very different lines from, say, a cotton plantation.

    Most of the owners of profitable cotton plantation were absentee. But things were always very iffy in the financial department. It was a very risky business, and plantations went belly-up on a regular basis.

    Olmstead spoke to everyone—owners, slaves, overseers, hardscrabble farmers, etc. Many in the plantation hierarchy wanted to get out, even abolish slavery, but they couldn’t.

    Olmstead also mentions the many smaller farms of immigrant Germans. These were reliably the most efficient, the most successful, and the most cheerfully run farms anywhere that Olmstead observed. On his travels by horseback, Olmstead had to rely on getting a meal and bed from those whom he encountered along his route. This gave him great insight into the countryside, its natural and altered features, and its people, black and white.

    • Thanks: Alden, Fallingwater
    • Replies: @jala
    , @Cleburne
  35. TaoDao says:

    Massachusetts, first BAR [British Accredited Registry], any person choosing to “Approach the BAR/BENCH” has to acquire a license and pay to in essence violate the US Constitution. ATTORN one’s right meant they were not literate and had to have an Attorney represent them, in Court. Thomas Jefferson went to England and brought back to USA from Inns of Courts, legal language expertise, to represent one’s case. First Jewish from New York that moved to the South, as a lawyer (lie yer), hung a shingle & was indeed enriched from who do we cheat em & how faux barrister. Follow the government of England’s *servant who chose to help commoners in learning to be educated in the law. He was beaten over the head with a metal (silver) top of a cane, by a very rich man, who owned a newspaper. *Boston Teaparty. The majority of Americans are considered idiots, an Apartheid, language separation, Africa knows too.

    • Replies: @anarchyst
    , @Alden
  36. Alden says:

    Surname Hacker Dutch and Ashkenazi Jew occupational name for butcher. Hmmmmm

  37. DaoTao says:

    *James Otis, Jr., a true American Patriot

  38. jala says:

    The author states,”By comparison, they extol the philo-Semitic “Southern Cavaliers” who blessed America with slavery…” The author may want to be honest about the origin of slavery in Massachusetts. If the author wants to be honest he could start with (though by no means comprehensive) these works:
    1. The Negro in colonial New England, 1620-1776 by
    Greene, Lorenzo J. (Lorenzo Johnston), 1899-1988
    2. Blacks in colonial America by Reiss, Oscar
    3. African Slavery in America, C.J. Ingersoll
    4. Southern slavery and its relations to northern industry: a lecture delivered at the Catholic institute, in Cincinnati by Reed, Henry. 1862
    5. The American slave-trade; an account of its origin, growth and suppression
    by Spears, John Randolph, 1850-1936
    6. Correspondence with foreign powers. : relating to the slave trade. 1835
    by Great Britain. Foreign Office
    8. Negroe slavery in the Northern Colonies, (Thesis, Univ of Illinois), Arthur Clinton Boggess, 1902


    He will learn about that it was the Yankee slave traders who “blessed” America with slavery. The South possessed none to few maritime vessels. He will learn the extent of slavery in all the New England States and how the profits funded their largest institutions such as Harvard. And about the massive financing required to support Southern agriculture from the banking houses of Boston, Chicago and New York, without which there would be no slavery in America except those brought into colonial New England in the 17th Century. Or the sham that was the ending of the slave trade in 1820, which continued up until 1860, the vast majority transported in New England slave ships. As well as the participation of the US Navy in guarding this trade.
    A few other facts that may provide the author with some perspective:
    1. The first candidate of the Abolition party for the Presidency of the United States was a Southern man;-‘ so was its second candidate,” and so was its fourth and last and only elected candidate. (James G Birney; John C. Fremont.)
    2. The author‘ of the Emancipation Proclamation was of Southern birth and lineage, and his biographer, who was his intimate friend and law partner, records that Abraham Lincoln said that all his better qualities came from his Southern ancestry
    3. Seven times did the Abolition party during its existence made Presidential nominations;(1) five of these times (including the only times when it was successful) was its standard bearer a Southern man; of the two vice-presidents elected by it one was a Southern man;(2) of its other vice-presidential candidates one was a Southerner (3)‘and the other—who was one of the founders and leaders of the “Free-soil” party and vice-president of the first National Convention of the Republican party—while not a native of the South, was the son of a Southern woman.(4) The organizer and the first president of the “Underground Railroad” were Southern men (), the publisher of the first abolition journal in America was a Southern man, who was the real pioneer of American abolition (6) (not withstanding Henry Ward Beecher’s quoted declaration that John Rankin—another Southerner—“was the father of abolitionism, the Martin Luther of the cause”); and for several years during the first quarter of the nineteenth century the only periodicals devoted exclusively to the cause of abolitionism were published in the South (8), during all of which time neither the papers nor their publishers and editors were interfered with in any manner. On the contrary, they met with more success than similar publications in the North had experienced, and their first encounter with mob violence was when they went North. The only anti- slavery societies that were really active at that period were the manumission societies in the South. It was the denunciatory violence and incendiary fanaticism of the disunion abolitionists of the North, who, later on, under the lead of Garrison, Phillips, Parker and others, made war on the Constitution of the United States, denounced it as “a covenant with death and an agreement with hell, ” vowed they would not regard it, and repeatedly and persistently violated it, with the sanction and encouragement of their State governments,—this it was that balked the movement for abolition in the South, deluged the land with blood and billowed it with graves, and destroyed the Union created by the Constitution which they so denounced- the Constitution made by the Revolutionary fathers, with Washington at their head.
    1. 1840,44,48,52,56,60, & 1864
    2. Andrew Johnson of N.C.
    3. Thomas Morris
    4.George W. Julian
    5. Vest and Levi Cofflin of N.C.
    6. Charles Osborn
    7. In Tennessee

    Perhaps the author may wish to examine the financial relationship between the so called abolitionists and the Goulds and Ames of Boston and Chicago; the establishment of fiat currency and national baking directly after the Southern secession in terms of causality.

    In his examination of the revulsion of Yankeeism the author may wish to consider that there may be a reason for it. Perhaps it is the pernicious worship of money and it’s offspring, Hypocrisy, that is the root of all Yankee evil.

    • Agree: GeneralRipper
    • Replies: @Cleburne
    , @Alden
    , @EldnahYm
  39. jala says:

    Excellent point. Who exactly were the “Planters.” They weren’t all Southern born. They seem to resemble in some respects multi-national corporations. And it certainly wasn’t the 3/4 of poor Southern whites ‘idealizing’ the system. They were barely surviving. So the idea that Southern states were succeeding to protect slavery has always been hogwash. In fact, it guaranteed it’s demise. Plantations required credit to operate. They were akin to modern zombie corporations, without credit they expire. And that credit is predicated on asset values. In that case negroe labor. If the asset value plummets, as it did on secession, no credit, no business. There is a wealth of data showing that all interstate slave trading stopped after secession and slave labor value dropped to nothing. With debts to NY banking houses upwards of 300 million, how were they going to pay their bills and still pay operating costs. The answer, transfer the poor whites to wages for the plantations and emigrate the negroes out west. Can’t grow cotton out west but they can be resettled there. That was the plan, indications of which are in the journals of Congress as well as numerous letters and an excellent article in the NY Times c. 1860. There was no way slavery was going to survive secession.

    • Agree: GeneralRipper
  40. mokum says:

    We the Dutch live’d poeacefull with the Indians on the Island Hoboken, Pieter Stuyfesant wash the first Gouveneur of New Amsterdam, he dit not wanth Jewes setlers from the West Indisch Slave plantations, but they came, and they spoke with their Londen Jewes frinds, when the Englisch came he made no War but packed his bagage and left for home, but we where the first to live in peace with the North American Indians, and their are still living Dutch Americans Protestants in North America, greetings and joly Christmas and a Lucky New Year !

    • Agree: Badger Down
    • Replies: @EldnahYm
  41. anarchyst says:

    Look up “the missing 13th Amendment to the Constitution”. After the “war of northern aggression” the original 13th amendment was “lined out” and replaced with a “civil-rights” amendment.
    Some old textbooks still have the original 13th amendment stated but it is “lined out” and replaced by the current one.

  42. @Cleburne

    Exactly. It’s an interesting article, but Mr Hamilton leaves out lots of inconvenient facts about “the Yankees”. The preceding poster jala does a good job covering some of them.

    While no people are entirely evil or without virtue, Calvinist Puritans are definitely not the kind of folks I’d choose to live around. That much is certain.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  43. Fear not Mr Hamilton!

    We are making “progress”.

    Hopefully, they’ll be coming for The Lincoln Memorial soon…lol

    • Replies: @GeneralRipper
  44. Cleburne says:

    Excellent summation, good sir. I would go so far as to say the Southern cause has been fully vindicated, by God and by history.

  45. Cleburne says:

    Good points, and to clarify by “agricultural” I didn’t mean solely the plantation system.

  46. Rocha says:

    Western civilization was built by the Catholic Church which was the only Christian religion in western Europe for 1500 years. It was the Catholic Church and Catholic monarchs that defended Europe from numerous Muslim invasions.
    The fruits of the Protestant Reformation were the legalization of usury, our slavery to a debt based financial system, capitalism, communism, socialism, fascism, various genocides and world wars.
    Fighting over the rest is just a distraction.

    • Agree: Alden
    • Replies: @Alden
    , @EldnahYm
  47. Cato says:

    Without access to Fischer’s book, I can’t evaluate the sources and reasoning behind his population math…

    Here you are:

  48. Alden says:

    Author should have mentioned that the most profitable slave trading port in colonial times was way up north in Newport Rhode Island and run by Jew Aaron Lopez. Another major slave trading port was Savana Ga , the most Jewish town in colonial America run by Jewish slave traders.

    The Plymouth Brethren didn’t leave Holland because they feared to lose their Englishness. They had to leave because as foreigners they couldn’t obtain the certifications licenses and permits to make a living. They had to be rescued by the Brethren back in Dorking Surrey.

    Only a few went to Holland as an exploratory colony. They felt comfortable in the not Christian wanna be Jew Calvinist Protestant Holland. But due to being unlicensed foreigners unable to work for a living had to be rescued by their co religionists back in Dorking Surrey.

    We don’t call ourselves WASPS. We, children, I, and other direct certified descendants of both Captaine George Kendal ( 1607) and William Mullins ( 1620) call ourselves old Americans. Husband’s a direct descendant if Captaine Kendal so we’re some sort of very distant cousins.

    There’s much in this article that’s just plain not correct. From Dorking Surrey England 1610 to the American civil war just plain wrong.

    Frances Trollope loathed and despised Americans and America. She went all the way down the mighty Mississippi to where it poured into the Gulf of Mexico and found nothing good to say about the river or the Gulf. Her book was a popular British genre at the time. Quick hop skip and jump through America. Note everything bad and nothing good about American and Americans Write a best seller on the way home. She found even the Mighty Missip and the Gulf of Mexico beaches ugly.

  49. Alden says:

    The old German Gothic Celtic laws and folkways, Greek philosophy and Roman organization contributed as much or more than the Catholic religion. What’s the EU but a revival of Roman Catholicism, 800 AD Holy Roman Empire or the 200BC Roman Empire?

    Most important of all, the Roman church defended us from Islamic invasion from 650 to the 1880s. The Eastern Church did nothing to defend E Europe and Byzantium from Islam.

    We’re the mostest bestest civilization of all F..k the rest.

  50. @Alden

    Yes, the “genocide” nonsense always pisses me off. There were occasional massacres but 90% of the job was done by the white man’s germs.
    Also hate the word “miscgenation.” I despise the Semitic anti-white propaganda as much as the next guy, but as long as we take responsibility, it’s also no one’s damn business who we marry and make babies with. That said, the great majority will naturally choose to stick with their own.

    • Replies: @Badger Down
  51. @Z-man

    Jews I don’t mind (though I don’t necessarily trust them.) It’s Christian Zionists who I can’t stand — traitors to their own people.

    • Replies: @Badger Down
  52. @Cleburne

    The weaponization of egalitarianism, in the form of the fanatic abolitionists…

    How is an abolitionist any worse than a planter that imports uncivilizable savages because he doesn’t want to hire white men?

    But, yes our abolitionists, which were an offshoot of a larger, madder movement based in London, weren’t clear about what we were supposed to do with freed slaves. The Colonization Society had plans for them, and it was a great tragedy that they weren’t listened to. Lincoln, once among their number, stabbed them in the back.

    the South, whose agrarian economy

    Negrarian! The hillbillies didn’t side with the Unionists because the agreed with or liked the Yankees.

    The Yankee first attacked the South…

    You neglect the fugitive Negro laws, which made a hash of state sovereignty. Not to mention freedom of association. Hypocrisy, like gun control, was not a Yankee invention.

    Socialists from Europe, be they German ’48ers or shetl socialists, were always eagerly received by the Yankee…

    Support for socialism in the 1936 presidential election:

    South Carolina 98.6%
    Mississippi 97.0%
    Vermont 43.2%
    Maine 41.5%

    • Agree: Alden
    • Replies: @Alden
  53. Alden says:

    The legal term “ bar” does not mean British Accredited Registry” The legal term bar means the actual physical barrier railing and gate or bar between the two sections of a courtroom. Nearest the entrance door, the spectator section.

    Then a railing or bar with a gate. Always a gate even in the most modernistic if court rooms.
    On the other side of the bar railing is the part of the courtroom where the lawyers plaintiffs respondents defendants court reporter and court officials and clerks sit.

    Bench refers to the chair or in the old days bench on which the judge sits. And his table or desk in front of his bench or chair.

    Witnesses and court officials approach the bench all day long. They aren’t attorneys.

    Back 3,000, 2,500 years ago, our pre literate German Celtic gothic warlords and chiefs just sat in a chair or bench when as acting judges and deciding conflicts. Being unable to write, they had no need of a table .

    You have a good imagination

  54. @Fidelios Automata

    I misunderstood that word when I first saw it. I thought decent, upstanding people were cegenating, but then some oiks arrived and started miscegenation, whatever TF any of that meant.
    Now that I’m educated, I see that it’s not necessarily a mistake, just a mixing.

  55. @Fidelios Automata

    “Glorious things of thee are spoken,
    Sion, city of our God!”

    For the longest time, Sion/Jerusalem/al Quds was a Holy City where Jews, Christians, and Muslims could visit and pray peacefully. Then the “is” robbery-murder began.

  56. Lothrop Stoddard’s neglected chronicle of the first inundation

    Stoddard didn’t do his own people any favors by allying with the odious Margaret Sanger and her Birth Control League. Yankee fecundity went down the water closet.

    E. Michael Jones… upbraids Yankees.

    At least he takes the Yankee side against the ACLU in the Comstock cases. From a writer in the magazine he edits:

    The Supreme Court’s assault on the family dates to 1965 when it created a right to privacy that included the right of married couples to use contraceptives. Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479. In 1972, it ruled that unmarried people also had a constitutional right that prevented states from prohibiting distribution of contraceptives to them. Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438.

    So much for the sanctity of marriage and the marital act.

    The quotation is from a monograph entitled Diaspora Peoples by Kevin MacDonald.

    Just curious– which side does MacDonald take in the Scopes trial, the Protestant or the Jewish? And in Epperson, for that matter, and Murray ?

    My people are the pure Cavalier stock of the Virginia Tidewater.

    He’d fit right in in hierarchical Mexico.

    • Replies: @Alden
  57. Alden says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    Great post. About Mississippi and S Carolina 75 years of severe poverty after the civil war turned the south Socialist. South didn’t really recover from the civil war till Johnson’s 1960s Great Society welfare programs.

    Planters who import African savages are infinitely worse than abolitionists. Although importation of slaves was illegal after 1808, Africans were smuggled into the USA right up to 1864. A major occupation of the navy after 1808 was intercepting slave smuggling ships and bringing the cargo back to Africa.

    At least abolitionists realized there was a problem and tried to resolve it.
    By the 1650s there was a man and boy unemployment problem in Boston. It was mostly due to the excess freed African slave men. There was no need for them on the hard scrabble 3 inches of infertile topsoil farms. So they were freed and went to Boston to join the ranks of the unemployed.

    The unemployed boys and men were useful 120 years later as mobs in the run up to the revolution.

    • Agree: EldnahYm
    • Replies: @jala
  58. @Badger Down

    When was the “half-century of peace”? (As written on the metal plate in the picture.)

    Peace with the Wampanoags lasted until 1675. They were allies in the Pequot War, so it wasn’t wall-to-wall peace. Mattapoiset’s son King Philip turned on the Englishmen in his eponymous war, in which the Pequot were the allies of the settlers.

    Proportionally that was America’s deadliest war. New Englanders suffered losses as great as or greater than the South in did 1861-5. And they were the side that won. Nathaniel Philbrick’s Mayflower, despite the name, is mostly about King Philip’s War and is a gripping account thereof.

    • Thanks: Badger Down
  59. EldnahYm says:
    @Carlton Meyer

    Lots of cultural change occurred since the Germanic settlement of Britain, so there is nothing at all strange about not lumping Germans in with groups with a vastly different history.

    Genetically speaking, English people are primarily descended from pre-Germanic Celtic inhabitants of the British Isles, with admixture from Germanic peoples which is highest in eastern England and lowest in the west. This makes English people different from Germans.

    Linguistically speaking, the closest relatives of the Anglic language are Frisian. After this Anglo-Frisian group, the next grouping would also include Old Saxon/low German languages. The point of this, is your comparison of England to Germany really should only apply to northern Germany and parts of the Netherlands.

  60. EldnahYm says:

    Your post is a bit misleading as a response to the author’s criticisms of “philo-Semitic Southern Cavaliers.” On examination those “southerners” you are referencing all end up being from Kentucky or the Appalachian part of Tennessee, or are Quakers. These types of people are hardly the southern elite Cavaliers who Hamilton’s criticisms were directed, or for that matter are such people representative of southerners in general. Incidentally, besides maybe free blacks, Quakers are probably the most overrepresented group of people among abolitionists.

    • Replies: @Alden
    , @jala
  61. dfordoom says: • Website

    While no people are entirely evil or without virtue, Calvinist Puritans are definitely not the kind of folks I’d choose to live around. That much is certain.

    In retrospect it was an extraordinary stroke of good fortune for England, being able to rid itself of so many crazy Puritans.

  62. EldnahYm says:

    There was plenty of violence between the Dutch and the Indians. There was the Peach Tree War, but also lower level conflicts.

    As I understand it, the Dutch West India Company was responsible for rescinding Stuyvesant’s order to prevent Jewish settlement in New Amsterdam. I’m not sure what role if any the English played in any of this. Stuyvesant was not only based on the Jewish question, he also was against religious freedom for Catholics, Quakers, and Lutherans.

    Undoubtedly the Dutch played an integral part in the early settlement and founding of what would be the United States.

    • Agree: Alden
  63. EldnahYm says:

    Fascism was created by an Italian Catholic. The Nazi branch was founded by a bunch of Austrian/southern German papists. Communism was founded by a Jew, and had its largest impact on Orthodox countries, followed by Catholic, least of all in Protestant countries. What you refer to as usury has existed for centuries, the Catholic Church rules did not eliminate it. Modern banking practices originated in northern Italy.

    Blaming Protestantism for the world wars is a bit rich considering the Netherlands was neutral in WW1 and invaded by Nazi Germany in the second, and Scandinavia had nothing to do with either of them. Britain simply picked sides late in WW1.

    • Agree: Alden, Brás Cubas
    • Replies: @Alden
  64. It doesn’t look like you’ve read my chapter on the Puritans in Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition. Much more thorough, and I do believe that they were a big part of the problem. They dominated America until the 1960s but that’s over. In the end their biggest fault was not fighting enough against the rising Jewish elite.

    • Replies: @Alden
  65. For example: The Puritans, the dominant religious group in the United States until the mid-twentieth century were exemplars of this tendency toward creating moral communities based on utopian visions of the future, combined with punishment toward dissenters. Heretics were whipped, burned, and exiled; all the while Puritans believed themselves to be the beleaguered defenders of liberty. Both New England and East Anglia (the center of Puritanism in England) had the lowest relative rates of private crime (murder, theft, mayhem) in their respective societies, but the highest rates of public violence—“the burning of rebellious servants, the maiming of political dissenters, the hanging of Quakers, the execution of witches” (Fischer, 1989, 189).

    Whereas in the early Puritan settlements of Massachusetts the moral fervor was directed at keeping fellow Puritans in line, in the nineteenth century it was secularized and directed at the entire country as their descendants rose to elite status via their domination of the Ivy League universities, commerce, and manufacturing. The moral fervor that had inspired Puritan preachers and magistrates to rigidly enforce laws on fornication, adultery, sleeping in church, or criticizing preachers was universalized and aimed at correcting the perceived ills of capitalism and slavery. Puritan-descended abolitionists, the main promoters of the Civil War in the North, framed it as a holy war based on an ideology of moral righteousness and the evil of enslaving Africans, and they did so even against ethnically similar others—a form of altruistic punishment given the devastating costs to co-ethnics on both sides of the Civil War (Individualism, Ch. 6).

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  66. Ron Unz says:
    @Kevin MacDonald

    I just checked and was very surprised to discover that your Individualism volume doesn’t include any of Nathaniel Weyl’s books in its bibliography, so you really should take a look at them. As I discussed in my very long White Racialism article, Weyl’s developed the extremely powerful tool of surname-based Weyl Analysis to estimate the relative performance of different ethnic groups, and focused heavily upon the Puritan-descended population, which for many generations was absolutely extraordinary in its performance, clearly constituting America’s intellectual elite.

    The relevant Weyl books would include The Creative Elite in America and The Geography of American Achievement, as well as The Geography of Intellect with Stefan Possony. Being “incorrect” all these books were long-forgotten, then recently quasi-plagiarized by Gregory Clark for his best-seller a few years ago:

    Among his various quantitative findings, Weyl demonstrated the long intellectual dominance of Americans of Puritan stock, and their noticeable decline by about 1900. A half-century after Weyl’s sociological breakthrough, economist Gregory Clark relied upon exactly the same methodology in widely-praised best-seller The Son Also Rises, but confined any mention of Weyl to a single brief footnote, which denounced him as a “racist” and expressed surprise that such a powerful sociological technique had been so little used.

    • Replies: @Incitatus
  67. SeanInNYC says:

    Thanks for addressing Mr. Reed. The detail you apply above puts his recent article here on parrotting CCP propaganda to demoralize Americans in perfect context.

  68. Alden says:

    Don’t forget the Catholic monks the Templar usurious money lenders. They did invent letters of credit good. And compound interest balloon payments, and got away with 400 percent interest rates. Templar’s made the Jew shylocks look like angels. No economy can survive Templar interest rates. No wonder the Pope helped get rid of them.

    Nice to see a historian on this site.

  69. Alden says:
    @Kevin MacDonald

    “ They dominated America until the 1960s”

    And when the puritans resigned or gave up leadership the country disintegrated into school bussing high black on White crime, destruction of our great cities by the Jewish black coalition affirmative action giving production to China etc etc etc etc.

    They did a much better job for hundreds of years than the lunatic coalition that rules the country now.

  70. Alden says:

    Agree excellent post

    • Thanks: EldnahYm
  71. Alden says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    Practice what you preach Father of Two or no children

    I’m far more concerned with affirmative action black on White crime unlimited non White affirmative action and the war on Whites that pharmacies selling contraceptives. Condoms are sold in other than pharmacies you know. And vinegar and lemons in every food market. In some areas people even have contraceptive lemon trees in their yards.

    Why don’t you crusade to abolish and criminalize simple cheap universal contraceptives like vinegar and lemon juice? You must like supporting the spawn of feckless reckless useless worthless welfare moms, but I sure don’t.

    • Replies: @IProtest
  72. Alden says:

    It’s my impression that the author knew nothing about his subject till he decided to write about it.
    He skimmed through a few books and put this article together.

  73. jala says:

    “Planters who import African savages are infinitely worse than abolitionists. Although importation of slaves was illegal after 1808, Africans were smuggled into the USA right up to 1864. A major occupation of the navy after 1808 was intercepting slave smuggling ships and bringing the cargo back to Africa.”

    This is a typical misunderstanding and misrepresents the motivations and agendas of the times. To understand those times it must be done by reviewing the original documents and analysis of those times, before everything is distorted and propagandized.

    The goal of abolitionism as Garrison, et al explained was to destroy the Constitution. It was a well funded campaign of sedition. (“Abolition is Sedition by a Northern Man,” PHILADELPHIA GEO. W. DONOHUE, NO. 22, SOUTH FOURTH STREET. 1839).

    Clearly it wasn’t a goal of Lincoln.
    1. (;view=fulltext)

    And who funded the abolitionists?
    1. (Handwritten letter to Barrings & Brothers, London Nov 3, 1846 requesting disbursement of funds to a friend. No withdrawal slip, just a handwritten letter to the actual Barrings & Brothers. B & B is connected to J.P. Morgan all the way back to the Bank of England and the Rothschild’s;

    Who profited really?


    1. (
    2. (
    3. (
    4. (
    5. (

    After the South seceded, the railroads got their grants, the banks got paper money & massive war debts to fund (with interest paid in gold), plenty of inflation and the North had 40,000 plus citizens incarcerated including journalists, political, etc.; the massive loss of farms, unconstitutional currency and their states occupied by their own Union troops! What did the North win exactly?

    There is very little in the historical record about Abolitionists wanting Northern states to free their slaves. Which they did not do until the so called 13th amendment was passed. The Union Army classified slaves as “contraband,” and either utilized their labor or put them into concentration camps.
    1. (

    And by the way, where are these abolitionist hypocrites today? There is still slavery, always has been.

    And when are blacks going to accept their responsibility?

    Incidentally, the Jewish connection is manifestly well established.

    No one in the North wanted slaves freed. Consider the facts: 3/4 of all Federal Revenue came from Southern exports; New England manufacturing existed because of cotton; The New England slave trade, which as you mention continued well into the 1860’s and was enormously profitable.
    (“The South Vindicated,” Hon. James Williams, London, 1862.)

    And what to do with them? Complete emancipation with no political status and no way to feed themselves. Mass crime and starvation. That’s real humane. Lincoln’s colonization plan failed. In the Southern institutions they were cared for and posed no problems.

    Clearly, secession meant emancipation. That was the real solution. Labor as an asset value can be collateralized for loans, but allodial titles to land can’t, banks can’t foreclose. The banks lent based on the productive value of labor not chattel ownership. And they would lend anything for cotton production and that perpetuated the institution. An institution the South wanted to get rid of Since the 18th century during the heyday of the New England profiteering in the Atlantic slave trade. The finance, slave trade, and central government revenue link had to be broken. And the correspondence of the Southern leadership demonstrates conclusively that they knew this very well.
    (review debates in the Globe c. 1800 to 1840).

  74. jala says:

    Indeed. Permit me to add some examples of the Cavaliers of Virginia. These debates encompass the issues of slavery by those who had to deal with the problem and determine a solution. This is hardly a comprehensive list.

    Speeches (

    Virginia House of Delegates
    Thomas J. Randolph (Albermarle) Jan 21 1832
    Thomas Marshall (Fauquier) Jan 14 1832
    William O. Good Jan 24 1832
    John Thompson Brown Jan 18 1832
    James McDowell (Rockbridge) Jan 21 1832
    Henry Berry (Jefferson) Jan 16 1832

  75. Yankees are the Uncle Toms of the Anglo Saxon race.

  76. Incitatus says:
    @Ron Unz

    “As I discussed in my very long White Racialism article…”

    Easily distinct, no doubt, from your very brief White Racialism article(s)?

    Stay well Ron and Kevin. God loves you both!

  77. IProtest says:

    I am here as the result of vinegar contraception; it did not work.

  78. IProtest says:

    Can’t stand it anymore without calling it out: the video is presented by an androgyne presenting as feminised male; given such basic misrepresentation, the contents would follow suit.

  79. @GeneralRipper

    LOL…There he goes!

    In the Yankee stronghold, no less!

    As usual, the Southerners put up a much better fight to their cultural cancelation.

  80. Polecat says:

    Calling the Scots Irish Celtic is a misnomer. They were actually Scots English and were no more Celtic than huge swathes of England. People in the Brythonic Kingdom of Elmet in West Yorkshire were still speaking Cumbric when English was spoken in Edinburgh. Also, from reading historical accounts it would appear that 83% of Virginians had English surnames in 1790. so where did these large numbers of Scots Irish come from.

  81. Polecat says:

    The victory at battle of Culloden and the atrocities that ensued were certainly a British affair but not particularly English. It was more a battle between Protestant Lowland Scots and Catholic Highlanders. The Scots and Irish content of the southern states by surname in 1790 was estimated at11% Scot,2.3% Irish as opposed to 83% English. Tiny Indeed. This was also mirrored in Kentucky and Tennessee although from reading modern day accounts of the Appalachians you would think that nearly every one was Scots Irish.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Andrew Hamilton Comments via RSS
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
How America was neoconned into World War IV