The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Following Up the Acclaimed "1619 Project," the New "1620 Project" Is Off to an Enthusiastic Start!
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
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

From CBS News Boston:

Plymouth Rock Among Town Landmarks Vandalized Ahead Of 400th Anniversary Celebration

February 17, 2020

PLYMOUTH (CBS) — Vandals hit Plymouth Rock and other landmarks in town overnight. The vandalism comes as Plymouth prepares to celebrate the 400th anniversary of the Pilgrims arriving on the Mayflower.

 
Hide 98 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Taking all bets on the race, immigration-status, gender identity, number of generations in America, and(/or) religious-ancestry of the culprit(s). And preferred Dem-2020 candidate.

    • Replies: @Lot
    Plymouth? Likely old stock white, at least 2nd gen secular of puritan background. Technically and apologetically cishet, but not exactly a model example of their sex. Bernie or Poca supporter of course.
    , @HammerJack
    Read in the comments an APB for a pajama boy, parents check your basements. And what did they scrawl in red paint? Something about l'chaim la vida loca?
  2. Can we switch to celebrating Roanoke, which anticipated the disappearance of whites civilization from the Americas?

    • LOL: Daniel H
    • Replies: @Oswald Spengler
    We've discovered the eventual 2020 Democratic Presidential nominee's campaign slogan.

    "MARA -- Make America Roanoke Again."
    , @syonredux
    https://i.pinimg.com/236x/5c/75/e0/5c75e0baeedd99614e5930d20f2188a2--roanoke-island-walter-raleigh.jpg

    https://cdn.lib.unc.edu/commemorative-landscapes/media/monument/377_full.jpg


    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/68/The_Lost_Colony_Portrait_2008.jpg
    , @Hippopotamusdrome
    So, does the genocide at Roanoke of all English residing in America mean that Native Americans need to have a guilt complex that can only by salved by importing millions of English refugees, and for good measure, millions of non-English refugees from all over the World?
  3. What kind of vandalism?

    • Replies: @Hail
    Covered completely in red paint.
  4. A bunch of Jesus Freaks who eventually rebelled against a country that has a better welfare state than we do? They need to remove Plymouth Rock and drop it off the coastal shelf!
    #ellisislandimmigrantsdideverythingimportant

    • Replies: @Ian Smith
    The UK might be the only NW European country that doesn’t have a better welfare state than the US.
  5. That was probably a practice run in preparation for the semiquincentennial in 2026.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    Heh. Don’t bet on it.

    They stick to soft/willing targets.

  6. @guest
    Can we switch to celebrating Roanoke, which anticipated the disappearance of whites civilization from the Americas?

    We’ve discovered the eventual 2020 Democratic Presidential nominee’s campaign slogan.

    “MARA — Make America Roanoke Again.”

  7. Leftists have been critical of Europeans immigrating to America for a long time now…never do they celebrate the diversity the English brought to America.

    They also opposed celebrating 1492 , even though Columbus introduced diverse Latin culture to the Caribbean. The Spaniards brought their culture to America and the leftist favor giving special privileges to the descendants of the spanish conquistadors today, yet they attack the Spanish for coming to the America and many localities across the U.S. have decided to change Columbus Day to Indigenous Peoples Day. Why do the woke oppose celebrating the Spanish coming to America in the 15th century but applaud the same Spanish for coming to the United States today ?

    • Replies: @International Jew
    It reflects a weird sort of selective ancestor worship. Blacks whine and expect sympathy for their great^10 grandmother having been raped by her master, while ignoring the fact that they are just as much the descendants of the man who raped her.
    , @Peter D. Bredon
    We all know the answer, but in case it needs to be made explicit:

    Because "diversity" is code for "anti-white."
  8. @Hail
    Taking all bets on the race, immigration-status, gender identity, number of generations in America, and(/or) religious-ancestry of the culprit(s). And preferred Dem-2020 candidate.

    Plymouth? Likely old stock white, at least 2nd gen secular of puritan background. Technically and apologetically cishet, but not exactly a model example of their sex. Bernie or Poca supporter of course.

    • Replies: @Lot
    Plymouth today is a whiter (94%), older, and less wealthy (but also low poverty) than the rest of coastal MA. I don’t know of antiwhite hate crimes like this involving long distance travel, though it isn’t that far from ghetto/SJW areas of Boston. But there are plenty of pilgrim heritage sites closer by for them.

    So likely a local.

    Regarding the rock itself, how about a new font for the 1620? Looks like it was a 1970s daisy-wheel printer.

  9. Smash the Four Olds!

    The Great Intersectionalitarian Cultural Revolution!

  10. Times have changed
    And we’ve often rewound the clock
    Since the Puritans got a shock
    When they landed on Plymouth Rock.
    If today
    Any shock they should try to stem
    ‘Stead of landing on Plymouth Rock,
    Plymouth Rock would land on them.

    • Replies: @Bubba
    Cole Porter's lyrics of "Anything Goes" should be Bernie's rally song...

    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2020/02/18/00/24818766-8014361-Topless_women_mounted_the_stage_and_poured_colored_liquids_over_-a-22_1581985369129.jpg
    , @kihowi
    Written by P.G. Wodehouse.
  11. @Kronos
    What kind of vandalism?

    Covered completely in red paint.

    • Replies: @Kronos
    Thanks! I’m not too lazy to read it. I just don’t want to give CBS click-money.
  12. @Lot
    Plymouth? Likely old stock white, at least 2nd gen secular of puritan background. Technically and apologetically cishet, but not exactly a model example of their sex. Bernie or Poca supporter of course.

    Plymouth today is a whiter (94%), older, and less wealthy (but also low poverty) than the rest of coastal MA. I don’t know of antiwhite hate crimes like this involving long distance travel, though it isn’t that far from ghetto/SJW areas of Boston. But there are plenty of pilgrim heritage sites closer by for them.

    So likely a local.

    Regarding the rock itself, how about a new font for the 1620? Looks like it was a 1970s daisy-wheel printer.

    • Replies: @Hail
    It's being reported that the vandal(s) spray-painted "508," a Massachusetts area code, on one or more of the several targets. The other message was "MOF." Meaning?

    Area code graffiti suggests a local but also doesn't seem like the MO of a white left-winger, doesn't seem like the same cut of person as those who with the marketable talents of rushing the stage, grabbing the mic from Bernie, and yelling slogans at people.

    The local police chief or an equivalent official has come out and denied it was politically motivated.

    , @JimB

    Regarding the rock itself, how about a new font for the 1620? Looks like it was a 1970s daisy-wheel printer.
     
    The rock should be sent to the Smithsonian and replaced with a reproduction.
  13. @guest
    Can we switch to celebrating Roanoke, which anticipated the disappearance of whites civilization from the Americas?

  14. Regardless of who did it (almost certainly not a Mayflower descendant, unless an obnoxious virtue signaller), I doubt it was anyone descended from any tribe actually native to Massachusetts or the United States.

    In all likelihood it’s a member of a more recent conquering “tribe” angry at an earlier arriving “tribe” for the crime of having gotten here before them.

    Conquest of the United States was immoral when the English did it but fine when Jews, Italians, Irish, Puerto Ricans, Mexicans, Chinese & South Asians did it.

    And people who left their poor home countries in vans or airplanes to reach the world’s richest welfare state were taking the exact same risk (or a greater one, even!) as those who left one of the world’s richest countries and crossed a dangerous ocean on a rickety sailing ship in order to build a new civilization in a cold, unfriendly wilderness from scratch. Exactly the same risk, I tell ya!

  15. This all really began back in the early 90s, with the attack on the Confederate battle flag. That was when you first began to see attempts to abolish historic symbols. Before then, America was a very different country.

    • Replies: @Hail
    Q. "What does the Confederate Flag symbolize?" (actually the battle flag)

    2015, Whites
    66% symbol of Southern Pride
    25% symbol of Racism

    = The Trump-Hillary white vote split.

    ______________

    Will this video be banned from Youtube for Racism? :

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GxWmSVv-cY

    Not the song contents, but for the huuuge Rebel Flag draped at the rear of the stage.

    Note, this was summer 1977 in Oakland, California (Steve Sailer was at age 18 somewhere in the same state at the time, I think). Oh times have changed.

    On top of the enormous "Confederate flag," the crowd is almost all white (see, e.g., 3:10-3:20; 6:20-6:40).

    , @HammerJack
    Charts should be weighted according to the proportion of the population represented.* Otherwise (for example) a tiny minority of say 2% could readily tip the scales, just going by appearances.

    PS: 1991? Antediluvian
    PPS: "Actions around" symbols? Huh?

    _________________
    *Attn Sailer Spergs: I do realize that the second set of bar graphs includes composite scores

  16. @Lot
    Plymouth today is a whiter (94%), older, and less wealthy (but also low poverty) than the rest of coastal MA. I don’t know of antiwhite hate crimes like this involving long distance travel, though it isn’t that far from ghetto/SJW areas of Boston. But there are plenty of pilgrim heritage sites closer by for them.

    So likely a local.

    Regarding the rock itself, how about a new font for the 1620? Looks like it was a 1970s daisy-wheel printer.

    It’s being reported that the vandal(s) spray-painted “508,” a Massachusetts area code, on one or more of the several targets. The other message was “MOF.” Meaning?

    Area code graffiti suggests a local but also doesn’t seem like the MO of a white left-winger, doesn’t seem like the same cut of person as those who with the marketable talents of rushing the stage, grabbing the mic from Bernie, and yelling slogans at people.

    The local police chief or an equivalent official has come out and denied it was politically motivated.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    This certifies that it was political, as in all those other cases. Still no motive for Vegas.
    , @J.Ross
    Here's an example of mof referring to neither a ministry of finance nor a metal-organic framework, from the time of the NYC public transport riot:

    Decolonize This Place. November 6 · Jump Turnstiles, Free Transit, %$#& the Police, NYPD out of the Subway. Related Videos. ... NYPD OUT OF THE MOF MTA. PERIOD💥 SWIPELEFT FOR EYE WITNESS ACCOUNT BY @deadnazis 💥BOOST THIS POST BECAUSE WE ARE STILL BEING SHADOW-BANNED BY IG. #ftp.
     
    It would be clearer if they went with "muv." It means mother%$#&er here in the sense of a place. "Whites out da muv."
    So yeah, not political at all. Racial.
  17. A more appropriate target

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    That's pretty gay. Mayor Pete should have a photo op there.
  18. So likely a local.

    Or an Indian. Perhaps a fan of Liz.

    There is a thicket of casinos in the area.

    Plymouth is the hub of the “Irish Riviera”:

    • LOL: Coemgen, sayless
    • Replies: @Ripple Earthdevil
    The rotary at the foot of the Sagamore Bridge was long ago eliminated. Not sure of the one by the Bourne Bridge southwest of there, haven't driven that way in a gazillion years.
    , @Foreign Expert
    The rotaries don’t exist anymore, just the traffic jams.
  19. @JohnnyWalker123
    This all really began back in the early 90s, with the attack on the Confederate battle flag. That was when you first began to see attempts to abolish historic symbols. Before then, America was a very different country.

    https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/sites/default/files/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Confederate-flagupdated.gif

    https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/sites/default/files/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/support-for-actions.gif

    Q. “What does the Confederate Flag symbolize?” (actually the battle flag)

    2015, Whites
    66% symbol of Southern Pride
    25% symbol of Racism

    = The Trump-Hillary white vote split.

    ______________

    Will this video be banned from Youtube for Racism? :

    Not the song contents, but for the huuuge Rebel Flag draped at the rear of the stage.

    Note, this was summer 1977 in Oakland, California (Steve Sailer was at age 18 somewhere in the same state at the time, I think). Oh times have changed.

    On top of the enormous “Confederate flag,” the crowd is almost all white (see, e.g., 3:10-3:20; 6:20-6:40).

    • Replies: @Wilkey

    Q. “What does the Confederate Flag symbolize?” (actually the battle flag)
     
    If you asked people who actually fly the Confederate flag most would honestly tell you that it symbolizes Southern pride/heritage and the rebellious American spirit (i.e., refusal to listen to people who insist they're better than you). The Confederate flag has long been useful for such purposes, even for people with little or no Confederate ancestry, though the Gadsden flag has lately replaced it for those who want symbol of rebelliousness without the racial baggage.

    It used to be that most people, even Yankees (see "The Dukes of Hazzard"), accepted that explanation. The real sea change seems to have come with the advent of the internet echo chamber, and especially Twitter, where SJWs take it upon themselves to tell you what your symbols mean.

    Just last week I read an article where someone suggested that the Founding Fathers' love of Roman architectural styles was in part because Rome was a slaveholding society, as if that ever even crossed their minds. You see, what matter isn't what Ancient Rome means to you, but what some SJW tells you Ancient Rome means to him.
  20. It’s funny that none of the virtue signalers complaining about the way Americans stole Indian land ever actually propose giving any of it back to the Indians we stole it from. Why not give them back New York City, or Boston, or maybe a hundred miles or so of coastal California?

    The reason they don’t suggest it, of course, is because bashing the Pilgrims and other early settlers has nothing to do with trying to solve a problem and everything to do with using the past to attack their racial, ethnic and/or religious enemies.

    Meanwhile no one is attacking Chinese immigrants for the way China treats the Uighurs and Tibetans. No one is attacking Muslim immigrants for the way gays, women and religious minorities are treated in most Muslim countries. And on and on it goes. Whites today are to be held accountable for shit that happened nearly half a millennium ago, while brown people are innocent of shit happening in their home countries this very minute.

    • Agree: sayless
    • Replies: @Corn
    “It’s funny that none of the virtue signalers complaining about the way Americans stole Indian land ever actually propose giving any of it back to the Indians we stole it from. Why not give them back New York City, or Boston, or maybe a hundred miles or so of coastal California?

    The reason they don’t suggest it, of course, is because bashing the Pilgrims and other early settlers has nothing to do with trying to solve a problem and everything to do with using the past to attack their racial, ethnic and/or religious enemies.”

    Agreed. I’m not a lawyer but this “America is stolen property, therefore it belongs to everyone” doctrine the Left is pushing doesn’t seem particularly logical or coherent. But it does allow one to display anti-white animus.
    , @James Speaks
    If we return native lands to natives, then must we also return natives to their native lands, e.g. blacks to whence they came? (b/c the killing has to stop)
    , @Yngvar

    Whites today are to be held accountable for shit that happened nearly half a millennium ago
     
    Whites are the worldly Jesus -- they bear the sins of the world. But the sacrificial lamb is like the cat...

    https://i.ytimg.com/vi/R-EcYvh5a80/hqdefault.jpg

    ...where was I? Yea right; it always land on its feet.

  21. @Redneck farmer
    A bunch of Jesus Freaks who eventually rebelled against a country that has a better welfare state than we do? They need to remove Plymouth Rock and drop it off the coastal shelf!
    #ellisislandimmigrantsdideverythingimportant

    The UK might be the only NW European country that doesn’t have a better welfare state than the US.

  22. White man brawls with Black man at Bernie rally in Colorado.

    • Replies: @HammerJack
    Perfect cover. Bernie Bros be racist! Voting for Bernie is just like voting for Trump. Please send a contribution to Michael Bloomberg for president, he's our only hope.
    , @Reg Cæsar
    "Black Guns Matter". We should make the most of that.

    Islam is right about women. Democrats are right about blacks and guns. And always have been.

    People here whine about "DR3". But I say, adapt it to "YRDR3?"

    Because they know too much. Make them admit as much.
  23. @Hail
    It's being reported that the vandal(s) spray-painted "508," a Massachusetts area code, on one or more of the several targets. The other message was "MOF." Meaning?

    Area code graffiti suggests a local but also doesn't seem like the MO of a white left-winger, doesn't seem like the same cut of person as those who with the marketable talents of rushing the stage, grabbing the mic from Bernie, and yelling slogans at people.

    The local police chief or an equivalent official has come out and denied it was politically motivated.

    This certifies that it was political, as in all those other cases. Still no motive for Vegas.

  24. OT: Bloomberg Hires 1000s To Stop Black Men On Street And Force Them To Hear Campaign Pitch

    https://www.zerohedge.com/commodities/monday-humor-bloomberg-hires-1000s-stop-black-men-street-and-force-them-hear-campaign

    Bloomberg has replaced stop-and-frisk with stop-and-lecture. I’m sure it will be just about as popular, too.

  25. If the vandal is caught they’ll probably be given the same treatment as many of those leftist mobs that were knocking down Confederate statues last year: he’ll be given a slap on the wrist or never see the inside of a courtroom.

  26. @Hail
    Taking all bets on the race, immigration-status, gender identity, number of generations in America, and(/or) religious-ancestry of the culprit(s). And preferred Dem-2020 candidate.

    Read in the comments an APB for a pajama boy, parents check your basements. And what did they scrawl in red paint? Something about l’chaim la vida loca?

  27. @Wilkey
    It's funny that none of the virtue signalers complaining about the way Americans stole Indian land ever actually propose giving any of it back to the Indians we stole it from. Why not give them back New York City, or Boston, or maybe a hundred miles or so of coastal California?

    The reason they don't suggest it, of course, is because bashing the Pilgrims and other early settlers has nothing to do with trying to solve a problem and everything to do with using the past to attack their racial, ethnic and/or religious enemies.

    Meanwhile no one is attacking Chinese immigrants for the way China treats the Uighurs and Tibetans. No one is attacking Muslim immigrants for the way gays, women and religious minorities are treated in most Muslim countries. And on and on it goes. Whites today are to be held accountable for shit that happened nearly half a millennium ago, while brown people are innocent of shit happening in their home countries this very minute.

    “It’s funny that none of the virtue signalers complaining about the way Americans stole Indian land ever actually propose giving any of it back to the Indians we stole it from. Why not give them back New York City, or Boston, or maybe a hundred miles or so of coastal California?

    The reason they don’t suggest it, of course, is because bashing the Pilgrims and other early settlers has nothing to do with trying to solve a problem and everything to do with using the past to attack their racial, ethnic and/or religious enemies.”

    Agreed. I’m not a lawyer but this “America is stolen property, therefore it belongs to everyone” doctrine the Left is pushing doesn’t seem particularly logical or coherent. But it does allow one to display anti-white animus.

  28. @Hail
    It's being reported that the vandal(s) spray-painted "508," a Massachusetts area code, on one or more of the several targets. The other message was "MOF." Meaning?

    Area code graffiti suggests a local but also doesn't seem like the MO of a white left-winger, doesn't seem like the same cut of person as those who with the marketable talents of rushing the stage, grabbing the mic from Bernie, and yelling slogans at people.

    The local police chief or an equivalent official has come out and denied it was politically motivated.

    Here’s an example of mof referring to neither a ministry of finance nor a metal-organic framework, from the time of the NYC public transport riot:

    Decolonize This Place. November 6 · Jump Turnstiles, Free Transit, %$#& the Police, NYPD out of the Subway. Related Videos. … NYPD OUT OF THE MOF MTA. PERIOD💥 SWIPELEFT FOR EYE WITNESS ACCOUNT BY @deadnazis 💥BOOST THIS POST BECAUSE WE ARE STILL BEING SHADOW-BANNED BY IG. #ftp.

    It would be clearer if they went with “muv.” It means mother%$#&er here in the sense of a place. “Whites out da muv.”
    So yeah, not political at all. Racial.

    • Thanks: Hail
  29. @JohnnyWalker123
    White man brawls with Black man at Bernie rally in Colorado.

    https://twitter.com/nonspamming/status/1229584466181525511

    Perfect cover. Bernie Bros be racist! Voting for Bernie is just like voting for Trump. Please send a contribution to Michael Bloomberg for president, he’s our only hope.

  30. @Hail
    Q. "What does the Confederate Flag symbolize?" (actually the battle flag)

    2015, Whites
    66% symbol of Southern Pride
    25% symbol of Racism

    = The Trump-Hillary white vote split.

    ______________

    Will this video be banned from Youtube for Racism? :

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GxWmSVv-cY

    Not the song contents, but for the huuuge Rebel Flag draped at the rear of the stage.

    Note, this was summer 1977 in Oakland, California (Steve Sailer was at age 18 somewhere in the same state at the time, I think). Oh times have changed.

    On top of the enormous "Confederate flag," the crowd is almost all white (see, e.g., 3:10-3:20; 6:20-6:40).

    Q. “What does the Confederate Flag symbolize?” (actually the battle flag)

    If you asked people who actually fly the Confederate flag most would honestly tell you that it symbolizes Southern pride/heritage and the rebellious American spirit (i.e., refusal to listen to people who insist they’re better than you). The Confederate flag has long been useful for such purposes, even for people with little or no Confederate ancestry, though the Gadsden flag has lately replaced it for those who want symbol of rebelliousness without the racial baggage.

    It used to be that most people, even Yankees (see “The Dukes of Hazzard”), accepted that explanation. The real sea change seems to have come with the advent of the internet echo chamber, and especially Twitter, where SJWs take it upon themselves to tell you what your symbols mean.

    Just last week I read an article where someone suggested that the Founding Fathers’ love of Roman architectural styles was in part because Rome was a slaveholding society, as if that ever even crossed their minds. You see, what matter isn’t what Ancient Rome means to you, but what some SJW tells you Ancient Rome means to him.

    • Replies: @Hail

    The Founding Fathers’ love of Roman architectural styles was in part because Rome was a slaveholding society
     
    Hereby nominated for "worst take of the year."
    , @guest
    No, the "sea change" came with PC, which was in force long before Twitter. The 90s at least.
    , @J.Ross
    I would love to receive from that author an example of an ancient civilization known to the Founders which did not use slaves and developed notable architecture. In fact, I would settle for a known ancient society which did not use slaves.
  31. @Hail
    Covered completely in red paint.

    Thanks! I’m not too lazy to read it. I just don’t want to give CBS click-money.

  32. @JohnnyWalker123
    This all really began back in the early 90s, with the attack on the Confederate battle flag. That was when you first began to see attempts to abolish historic symbols. Before then, America was a very different country.

    https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/sites/default/files/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Confederate-flagupdated.gif

    https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/sites/default/files/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/support-for-actions.gif

    Charts should be weighted according to the proportion of the population represented.* Otherwise (for example) a tiny minority of say 2% could readily tip the scales, just going by appearances.

    PS: 1991? Antediluvian
    PPS: “Actions around” symbols? Huh?

    _________________
    *Attn Sailer Spergs: I do realize that the second set of bar graphs includes composite scores

  33. @Reg Cæsar
    Times have changed
    And we've often rewound the clock
    Since the Puritans got a shock
    When they landed on Plymouth Rock.
    If today
    Any shock they should try to stem
    'Stead of landing on Plymouth Rock,
    Plymouth Rock would land on them.




    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Wd1w5tn040g

    Cole Porter’s lyrics of “Anything Goes” should be Bernie’s rally song…

    • Replies: @Kronos
    Any guesses on which rival campaign funded/organized this stunt?
  34. @Wilkey
    It's funny that none of the virtue signalers complaining about the way Americans stole Indian land ever actually propose giving any of it back to the Indians we stole it from. Why not give them back New York City, or Boston, or maybe a hundred miles or so of coastal California?

    The reason they don't suggest it, of course, is because bashing the Pilgrims and other early settlers has nothing to do with trying to solve a problem and everything to do with using the past to attack their racial, ethnic and/or religious enemies.

    Meanwhile no one is attacking Chinese immigrants for the way China treats the Uighurs and Tibetans. No one is attacking Muslim immigrants for the way gays, women and religious minorities are treated in most Muslim countries. And on and on it goes. Whites today are to be held accountable for shit that happened nearly half a millennium ago, while brown people are innocent of shit happening in their home countries this very minute.

    If we return native lands to natives, then must we also return natives to their native lands, e.g. blacks to whence they came? (b/c the killing has to stop)

    • Replies: @bruce county
    In what order should that commence?
  35. @Travis
    Leftists have been critical of Europeans immigrating to America for a long time now...never do they celebrate the diversity the English brought to America.

    They also opposed celebrating 1492 , even though Columbus introduced diverse Latin culture to the Caribbean. The Spaniards brought their culture to America and the leftist favor giving special privileges to the descendants of the spanish conquistadors today, yet they attack the Spanish for coming to the America and many localities across the U.S. have decided to change Columbus Day to Indigenous Peoples Day. Why do the woke oppose celebrating the Spanish coming to America in the 15th century but applaud the same Spanish for coming to the United States today ?

    It reflects a weird sort of selective ancestor worship. Blacks whine and expect sympathy for their great^10 grandmother having been raped by her master, while ignoring the fact that they are just as much the descendants of the man who raped her.

  36. @Wilkey

    Q. “What does the Confederate Flag symbolize?” (actually the battle flag)
     
    If you asked people who actually fly the Confederate flag most would honestly tell you that it symbolizes Southern pride/heritage and the rebellious American spirit (i.e., refusal to listen to people who insist they're better than you). The Confederate flag has long been useful for such purposes, even for people with little or no Confederate ancestry, though the Gadsden flag has lately replaced it for those who want symbol of rebelliousness without the racial baggage.

    It used to be that most people, even Yankees (see "The Dukes of Hazzard"), accepted that explanation. The real sea change seems to have come with the advent of the internet echo chamber, and especially Twitter, where SJWs take it upon themselves to tell you what your symbols mean.

    Just last week I read an article where someone suggested that the Founding Fathers' love of Roman architectural styles was in part because Rome was a slaveholding society, as if that ever even crossed their minds. You see, what matter isn't what Ancient Rome means to you, but what some SJW tells you Ancient Rome means to him.

    The Founding Fathers’ love of Roman architectural styles was in part because Rome was a slaveholding society

    Hereby nominated for “worst take of the year.”

  37. Good

    We don’t need monuments to white supremacy

    • Replies: @TheMediumIsTheMassage
    Agreed, most of the modern world is already a self-evident monument to the utter superiority of white intellect throughout the last 500 years.
  38. @Wilkey

    Q. “What does the Confederate Flag symbolize?” (actually the battle flag)
     
    If you asked people who actually fly the Confederate flag most would honestly tell you that it symbolizes Southern pride/heritage and the rebellious American spirit (i.e., refusal to listen to people who insist they're better than you). The Confederate flag has long been useful for such purposes, even for people with little or no Confederate ancestry, though the Gadsden flag has lately replaced it for those who want symbol of rebelliousness without the racial baggage.

    It used to be that most people, even Yankees (see "The Dukes of Hazzard"), accepted that explanation. The real sea change seems to have come with the advent of the internet echo chamber, and especially Twitter, where SJWs take it upon themselves to tell you what your symbols mean.

    Just last week I read an article where someone suggested that the Founding Fathers' love of Roman architectural styles was in part because Rome was a slaveholding society, as if that ever even crossed their minds. You see, what matter isn't what Ancient Rome means to you, but what some SJW tells you Ancient Rome means to him.

    No, the “sea change” came with PC, which was in force long before Twitter. The 90s at least.

  39. @Reg Cæsar

    So likely a local.
     
    Or an Indian. Perhaps a fan of Liz.

    There is a thicket of casinos in the area.



    Plymouth is the hub of the "Irish Riviera":



    https://dtjew9b6f6zyn.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/lMmNRAp4RnqpoqmroWE4S-ptrln1glpeTgxopiXFTtQ-700x478.jpg

    The rotary at the foot of the Sagamore Bridge was long ago eliminated. Not sure of the one by the Bourne Bridge southwest of there, haven’t driven that way in a gazillion years.

    • Replies: @Pierre de Craon
    The Bourne Bridge rotary is alive and well. I wish the same could be said for the Sagamore one. The high-speed cloverleaf jungle that replaced it ten or so years ago is insane. At least with a rotary, if you miss your turnoff, another trip around will get you back where you want to be in five or ten seconds.
  40. @Reg Cæsar
    Times have changed
    And we've often rewound the clock
    Since the Puritans got a shock
    When they landed on Plymouth Rock.
    If today
    Any shock they should try to stem
    'Stead of landing on Plymouth Rock,
    Plymouth Rock would land on them.




    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Wd1w5tn040g

    Written by P.G. Wodehouse.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Written by P.G. Wodehouse.

     

    The show, not the song. Porter was quite capable of writing his own lyrics, and did so for forty years or so.
  41. @guest
    Can we switch to celebrating Roanoke, which anticipated the disappearance of whites civilization from the Americas?

    So, does the genocide at Roanoke of all English residing in America mean that Native Americans need to have a guilt complex that can only by salved by importing millions of English refugees, and for good measure, millions of non-English refugees from all over the World?

  42. @Wilkey

    Q. “What does the Confederate Flag symbolize?” (actually the battle flag)
     
    If you asked people who actually fly the Confederate flag most would honestly tell you that it symbolizes Southern pride/heritage and the rebellious American spirit (i.e., refusal to listen to people who insist they're better than you). The Confederate flag has long been useful for such purposes, even for people with little or no Confederate ancestry, though the Gadsden flag has lately replaced it for those who want symbol of rebelliousness without the racial baggage.

    It used to be that most people, even Yankees (see "The Dukes of Hazzard"), accepted that explanation. The real sea change seems to have come with the advent of the internet echo chamber, and especially Twitter, where SJWs take it upon themselves to tell you what your symbols mean.

    Just last week I read an article where someone suggested that the Founding Fathers' love of Roman architectural styles was in part because Rome was a slaveholding society, as if that ever even crossed their minds. You see, what matter isn't what Ancient Rome means to you, but what some SJW tells you Ancient Rome means to him.

    I would love to receive from that author an example of an ancient civilization known to the Founders which did not use slaves and developed notable architecture. In fact, I would settle for a known ancient society which did not use slaves.

  43. Funny how white man took the land from the red man but all we hear is about the black man.

    I guess the black man as the first (forced)immigrant.

  44. @Lot
    Plymouth today is a whiter (94%), older, and less wealthy (but also low poverty) than the rest of coastal MA. I don’t know of antiwhite hate crimes like this involving long distance travel, though it isn’t that far from ghetto/SJW areas of Boston. But there are plenty of pilgrim heritage sites closer by for them.

    So likely a local.

    Regarding the rock itself, how about a new font for the 1620? Looks like it was a 1970s daisy-wheel printer.

    Regarding the rock itself, how about a new font for the 1620? Looks like it was a 1970s daisy-wheel printer.

    The rock should be sent to the Smithsonian and replaced with a reproduction.

  45. My Boy Scout troop visited Plymouth Rock before the 1976 Bicentennial celebrations. We were all taking in the scene when our beloved patrol leader spit down on the thing.

    Call me a normie boomerconnish boob, but that made me mad.

  46. Jamestown was the first English colony in America. Over a decade before Plymouth Rock. However, after the war of 1861-1865 ended, the victors decided it sounded bad to recognize Jamestown as the first (since it was in Virginia, you know, the South), so history books were rewritten to emphasize Plymouth Rock as the founding.

    Don’t ever lose a war!

    • Agree: HammerJack
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Jamestown was the first English colony in America. Over a decade before Plymouth Rock. However, after the war of 1861-1865 ended, the victors decided it sounded bad to recognize Jamestown as the first (since it was in Virginia, you know, the South), so history books were rewritten to emphasize Plymouth Rock as the founding.

     

    Roanoke was.

    What was notable about Plymouth is that families were brought over. To work and to breed. Jamestown brought gentlemen, who did nothing.

    Plymouth had a Thanksgiving dinner twelve months after arriving. Jamestown's Thanksgiving came twelve years after their arrival. And it was put on by an off-and-on settler, John Woodlief. Why did it take twelve years to get around to it?

    A Woodlief descendant, Graham Woodlief, says the Plymouth folk had "better PR than we did". No doubt. They had the Winslow* and Alden marriages to point to. Virginia? Pocahontas and John Rolfe-- miscegenation! That would have been illegal in 1966.



    Then there's John Smith, not a Puritan but from a Puritan town in England. He had the nerve to barge in and say if you don't work, you don't eat. How puritanical of him. The gentlemen were horrified.

    *Yes, which was highly suspect, as William Bradford vocally denied the sacramentality of the rite, stating explicitly that he was acting in his capacity as a peace officer, not as a clergyman. Of course, the couple themselves, not the priest, perform the sacrament.

  47. @kihowi
    Written by P.G. Wodehouse.

    Written by P.G. Wodehouse.

    The show, not the song. Porter was quite capable of writing his own lyrics, and did so for forty years or so.

    • Replies: @kihowi
    I'm shocked! I believed this for ages because the lyrics are so...Wodehousian. Cole Porter must have been a great style mimic...or they did a little deal involving the writing credits.
  48. @RichardTaylor
    Jamestown was the first English colony in America. Over a decade before Plymouth Rock. However, after the war of 1861-1865 ended, the victors decided it sounded bad to recognize Jamestown as the first (since it was in Virginia, you know, the South), so history books were rewritten to emphasize Plymouth Rock as the founding.

    Don't ever lose a war!

    Jamestown was the first English colony in America. Over a decade before Plymouth Rock. However, after the war of 1861-1865 ended, the victors decided it sounded bad to recognize Jamestown as the first (since it was in Virginia, you know, the South), so history books were rewritten to emphasize Plymouth Rock as the founding.

    Roanoke was.

    What was notable about Plymouth is that families were brought over. To work and to breed. Jamestown brought gentlemen, who did nothing.

    Plymouth had a Thanksgiving dinner twelve months after arriving. Jamestown’s Thanksgiving came twelve years after their arrival. And it was put on by an off-and-on settler, John Woodlief. Why did it take twelve years to get around to it?

    A Woodlief descendant, Graham Woodlief, says the Plymouth folk had “better PR than we did”. No doubt. They had the Winslow* and Alden marriages to point to. Virginia? Pocahontas and John Rolfe– miscegenation! That would have been illegal in 1966.

    Then there’s John Smith, not a Puritan but from a Puritan town in England. He had the nerve to barge in and say if you don’t work, you don’t eat. How puritanical of him. The gentlemen were horrified.

    *Yes, which was highly suspect, as William Bradford vocally denied the sacramentality of the rite, stating explicitly that he was acting in his capacity as a peace officer, not as a clergyman. Of course, the couple themselves, not the priest, perform the sacrament.

    • Replies: @Hail
    I often think the people who make a hobby of bashing the Puritans have created a giant Strawman for themselves, and bash at it for their own purposes, which are sundry, very often differing from person to person. The thing about bashing the Puritans is, so few will defend them that one can score hit after hit, and look smart about it, without taking return fire.

    Anyway, if the Puritans were anything like the caricatured version Moldbug and his followers push, well, needless to say they would not have created a new nation, in the process dispossessing the Red Man of a huge amount of more-or-less good land (New England soil is not at all the best in North America, but that's a minor point); the discipline and drive of the civilization-construction program in which they were engaged is impressive.

    , @RichardTaylor

    Plymouth had a Thanksgiving dinner twelve months after arriving.
     
    The Pilgrims had something to celebrate. It's interesting that they were a distinct group from the Puritans who came in later large numbers. Pilgrims actually believed people should be able to practice their own religion as they saw fit (more or less, as I understand it). But the Puritans put an end to that. They knew the only true way to worship. They were eager to use the methods of political correctness to enforce obedience.
    , @RebelWriter
    "Jamestown was the first permanent English colony in America."

    FIFY

    It's always been a curiosity for me, as a Southerner, that so many people draw a timeline to the Pilgrims and Plymouth when discussing the founding of America. References to the "Pilgrim Fathers," and such, seemed intentionally obtuse until I did some reading about the subject.

    The New Englanders, particularly the Puritans, viewed their founding as the beginning of what became the United States, born with a different vision than that financial venture going on in the Mid-Atlantic and Southern colonies. Calvinists through and through, they believed they were ordained by God, predestined to settle in North America. It didn't matter who got here first, American didn't begin until they arrived. These views pre-dated the Civil War by about 200 years, or from the very beginnings of New England.
  49. @Bubba
    Cole Porter's lyrics of "Anything Goes" should be Bernie's rally song...

    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2020/02/18/00/24818766-8014361-Topless_women_mounted_the_stage_and_poured_colored_liquids_over_-a-22_1581985369129.jpg

    Any guesses on which rival campaign funded/organized this stunt?

    • Replies: @Bubba
    What stunt? Looks to me this was a typical, normal Bernie rally! :-)
  50. @Reg Cæsar

    Jamestown was the first English colony in America. Over a decade before Plymouth Rock. However, after the war of 1861-1865 ended, the victors decided it sounded bad to recognize Jamestown as the first (since it was in Virginia, you know, the South), so history books were rewritten to emphasize Plymouth Rock as the founding.

     

    Roanoke was.

    What was notable about Plymouth is that families were brought over. To work and to breed. Jamestown brought gentlemen, who did nothing.

    Plymouth had a Thanksgiving dinner twelve months after arriving. Jamestown's Thanksgiving came twelve years after their arrival. And it was put on by an off-and-on settler, John Woodlief. Why did it take twelve years to get around to it?

    A Woodlief descendant, Graham Woodlief, says the Plymouth folk had "better PR than we did". No doubt. They had the Winslow* and Alden marriages to point to. Virginia? Pocahontas and John Rolfe-- miscegenation! That would have been illegal in 1966.



    Then there's John Smith, not a Puritan but from a Puritan town in England. He had the nerve to barge in and say if you don't work, you don't eat. How puritanical of him. The gentlemen were horrified.

    *Yes, which was highly suspect, as William Bradford vocally denied the sacramentality of the rite, stating explicitly that he was acting in his capacity as a peace officer, not as a clergyman. Of course, the couple themselves, not the priest, perform the sacrament.

    I often think the people who make a hobby of bashing the Puritans have created a giant Strawman for themselves, and bash at it for their own purposes, which are sundry, very often differing from person to person. The thing about bashing the Puritans is, so few will defend them that one can score hit after hit, and look smart about it, without taking return fire.

    Anyway, if the Puritans were anything like the caricatured version Moldbug and his followers push, well, needless to say they would not have created a new nation, in the process dispossessing the Red Man of a huge amount of more-or-less good land (New England soil is not at all the best in North America, but that’s a minor point); the discipline and drive of the civilization-construction program in which they were engaged is impressive.

    • Replies: @RichardTaylor

    ... if the Puritans were anything like the caricatured version Moldbug and his followers push, well, needless to say they would not have created a new nation, in the process dispossessing the Red Man of a huge amount of more-or-less good land
     
    In fact, Puritans generally opposed the westward expansion of America. I don't know how populated New England was with Red Folks but it must not have been much, and certainly they were no fierce Comanches to contend with.

    The Whites who conquered the West, Midwest, and the South were decidedly non-Puritan.
    , @Desiderius
    You don’t understand the first thing about Moldbug. You’ve conflated him with the usual tired Footloose prude-bashing.
  51. @JohnnyWalker123
    White man brawls with Black man at Bernie rally in Colorado.

    https://twitter.com/nonspamming/status/1229584466181525511

    “Black Guns Matter”. We should make the most of that.

    Islam is right about women. Democrats are right about blacks and guns. And always have been.

    People here whine about “DR3”. But I say, adapt it to “YRDR3?”

    Because they know too much. Make them admit as much.

  52. @Reg Cæsar

    Jamestown was the first English colony in America. Over a decade before Plymouth Rock. However, after the war of 1861-1865 ended, the victors decided it sounded bad to recognize Jamestown as the first (since it was in Virginia, you know, the South), so history books were rewritten to emphasize Plymouth Rock as the founding.

     

    Roanoke was.

    What was notable about Plymouth is that families were brought over. To work and to breed. Jamestown brought gentlemen, who did nothing.

    Plymouth had a Thanksgiving dinner twelve months after arriving. Jamestown's Thanksgiving came twelve years after their arrival. And it was put on by an off-and-on settler, John Woodlief. Why did it take twelve years to get around to it?

    A Woodlief descendant, Graham Woodlief, says the Plymouth folk had "better PR than we did". No doubt. They had the Winslow* and Alden marriages to point to. Virginia? Pocahontas and John Rolfe-- miscegenation! That would have been illegal in 1966.



    Then there's John Smith, not a Puritan but from a Puritan town in England. He had the nerve to barge in and say if you don't work, you don't eat. How puritanical of him. The gentlemen were horrified.

    *Yes, which was highly suspect, as William Bradford vocally denied the sacramentality of the rite, stating explicitly that he was acting in his capacity as a peace officer, not as a clergyman. Of course, the couple themselves, not the priest, perform the sacrament.

    Plymouth had a Thanksgiving dinner twelve months after arriving.

    The Pilgrims had something to celebrate. It’s interesting that they were a distinct group from the Puritans who came in later large numbers. Pilgrims actually believed people should be able to practice their own religion as they saw fit (more or less, as I understand it). But the Puritans put an end to that. They knew the only true way to worship. They were eager to use the methods of political correctness to enforce obedience.

  53. @Vinceg
    Good

    We don't need monuments to white supremacy

    Agreed, most of the modern world is already a self-evident monument to the utter superiority of white intellect throughout the last 500 years.

  54. I’m iffy on the historical legacy of the Pilgrims but this crime is a true outrage.

  55. @James Speaks
    A more appropriate target
    https://ih1.redbubble.net/image.10617946.4141/flat,1000x1000,075,f.jpg

    That’s pretty gay. Mayor Pete should have a photo op there.

    • Replies: @James Speaks
    That is a photo of the Charleston slave market, so mebbe a better photo op for Bloomberg
  56. @Hail
    I often think the people who make a hobby of bashing the Puritans have created a giant Strawman for themselves, and bash at it for their own purposes, which are sundry, very often differing from person to person. The thing about bashing the Puritans is, so few will defend them that one can score hit after hit, and look smart about it, without taking return fire.

    Anyway, if the Puritans were anything like the caricatured version Moldbug and his followers push, well, needless to say they would not have created a new nation, in the process dispossessing the Red Man of a huge amount of more-or-less good land (New England soil is not at all the best in North America, but that's a minor point); the discipline and drive of the civilization-construction program in which they were engaged is impressive.

    … if the Puritans were anything like the caricatured version Moldbug and his followers push, well, needless to say they would not have created a new nation, in the process dispossessing the Red Man of a huge amount of more-or-less good land

    In fact, Puritans generally opposed the westward expansion of America. I don’t know how populated New England was with Red Folks but it must not have been much, and certainly they were no fierce Comanches to contend with.

    The Whites who conquered the West, Midwest, and the South were decidedly non-Puritan.

    • Replies: @West Reanimator

    In fact, Puritans generally opposed the westward expansion of America. I don’t know how populated New England was with Red Folks but it must not have been much, and certainly they were no fierce Comanches to contend with.

    The Whites who conquered the West, Midwest, and the South were decidedly non-Puritan.
     
    In fact, the largest and bloodiest Indian War was fought in New England: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Philip's_War
    , @Hail
    You might be referring to opposition to the expansion of new slave-holding states. A characteristic case was the Kansas–Nebraska Act debacle of 1854 which many see as triggering the Civil War seven years later (a war which, from a very-narrow ending-slavery point of view, was wholly unnecessary and unfortunate since slavery was becoming obsolete so quickly).

    Probably you're not referring to this, but New England also definitely opposed the schemes being floated to annex Cuba or elsewhere in broader Latin America, some of which later went through in other forms, including the Puerto Rican albatross still with us which has done real damage in the pasty seventy years to the US mainland.

    In practical terms, it was New Englanders who were often at the very forefront of expansion, from the time of the loss of the French by 1760 and over the next century and more. They never had the numbers to fully occupy so vast a continent-wide space, and plenty of others of kindred NW-European origin came, most notably Germans in most places, and lots Scandinavians in one region (of which my father is a descendant), and other groups here and there filling in the gaps.

    If you don't believe me, look up the history of the small or large town of your choice across the Farm Belt or Rust Belt; odds are, if the history of the town is comprehensive (and not a lazy wiki writer's "the town was founded in 18__, period, end of section), first settlement is often associated with New Englanders; Congregational churches or other related churches among the first set up.

    , @Jenner Ickham Errican

    In fact, Puritans generally opposed the westward expansion of America.
     
    Hmm. Apparently you haven’t seen this particular map (see Yankeedom):

    https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2013/11/11/map_custom-7636b2427382cc547b583285526a2f3f0adeed13-s800-c85.jpg

    https://jaymans.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/north-american-nations-4-3.png
    , @Reg Cæsar

    The Whites who conquered the West, Midwest, and the South were decidedly non-Puritan.
     
    They had to-- there was no place for them in their cheap-alien-labour homeland. imported

    Yankees did indeed move west, but more slowly, state-by-state, generation-by-generation. They moved when they ran out of room to farm. They swamped the mostly single Frenchmen and Southerners who had preceded them. Then they were swamped themselves.

    My favorite Yankee settlement is Honolulu. Just the right balance of imported talent and local color.
  57. @Reg Cæsar

    Written by P.G. Wodehouse.

     

    The show, not the song. Porter was quite capable of writing his own lyrics, and did so for forty years or so.

    I’m shocked! I believed this for ages because the lyrics are so…Wodehousian. Cole Porter must have been a great style mimic…or they did a little deal involving the writing credits.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    I believed this for ages because the lyrics are so…Wodehousian. Cole Porter must have been a great style mimic…or they did a little deal involving the writing credits.
     
    Wodehouse could also have been mimicking Porter, who'd already had a decade of hits by 1934.

    More likely, since they were brought together somewhat randomly by a producer who wanted a show written for particular stars, one of whom was Ethel Merman, the similarities might just be due to their writing for the same people.

    Don't forget, too, that Cole Albert Porter and Pelham Grenville Wodehouse had had elevated upbringings.
  58. I think this song belongs here. The Beach Boys and the mid 20th century fascination for Polynesian culture.

  59. @RichardTaylor

    ... if the Puritans were anything like the caricatured version Moldbug and his followers push, well, needless to say they would not have created a new nation, in the process dispossessing the Red Man of a huge amount of more-or-less good land
     
    In fact, Puritans generally opposed the westward expansion of America. I don't know how populated New England was with Red Folks but it must not have been much, and certainly they were no fierce Comanches to contend with.

    The Whites who conquered the West, Midwest, and the South were decidedly non-Puritan.

    In fact, Puritans generally opposed the westward expansion of America. I don’t know how populated New England was with Red Folks but it must not have been much, and certainly they were no fierce Comanches to contend with.

    The Whites who conquered the West, Midwest, and the South were decidedly non-Puritan.

    In fact, the largest and bloodiest Indian War was fought in New England: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Philip’s_War

    • Replies: @RichardTaylor

    In fact, the largest and bloodiest Indian War was fought in New England:
     
    Interesting, it will take some research. That mentions 1,000 causalities among the Whites. Not sure if that means dead or dead & wounded. But over the coming centuries, I believe the death toll for Whites was far higher.
    , @Hail
    What is remarkable about King Philip's War is how much of an overt race war it was.

    That war remains the most significant one in the recorded history of the North American continent in terms of white population loss. It is said that as much as 10% of the New England population was killed in the period of little over a year.

    The War Between the States, as bad as it was, is said to have knocked off up to 4.5% of the White population of the states that seceded (dead as a result of war, many more by virus and germ than bullet or cannon-shot, but anyway who should have lived), and 1.5%+ of the states that did not secede.

    The political consequences of 'loss' in King Philip's War, the perhaps-permanent-hobbling of the New England colonies, would have also been much more significant than the loss of the war by the Confederate States of America war effort was for the Southern states. A far better Civil War-era analogue would have been if the fanatic and Charles-Manson-like John Brown had really been able to raise a Black Slave revolt in 1859 and somehow it became spread over the the entire South, with the Black insurgent army aiming for the Haiti Model, killing hundreds of thousands of whites from Maryland to north Florida to Arkansas.

    A present-day analog (attempt) to King Philip's War: Imagine Mexico invading the four border states in 2021, targeting Whites, and killing five million of us between the SF Bay Area and Dallas and all points in between and below, by 2022. Imagine the collapse of all four border-state governments. Imagine white militias forming on a local basis and carrying out revenge attacks and counter-offensives against all Latin Americans in the area, hostile and neutral alike, with even more killed on their side and many Hispanics fleeing entirely, to safer pastures to the south, in the later stages of the conflict. That would be a rough analog to King Philip's War in proportional terms scaled to today and applied to the Texas-to-California area.

    (The invasion by Mexico scenario is an imperfect analogy because the New England colonies in the 1670s were essentially ethnostates with a deep sense of mission, engaged in a major but shaky new-nation project; the US southwest today is more analogous in political terms to the late Roman Empire.)

    , @Reg Cæsar

    In fact, the largest and bloodiest Indian War was fought in New England:
     
    The New Englanders suffered losses commensurate with or higher than the CSA in the Civil War. And they were the winning side.

    It was never purely Indians vs whites. The allied and enemy tribes were reversed from the earlier Pequot War. And the English were wedged in between the Dutch and the French. Racial solidarity wasn't a big thing in those days.
  60. @Reg Cæsar

    Jamestown was the first English colony in America. Over a decade before Plymouth Rock. However, after the war of 1861-1865 ended, the victors decided it sounded bad to recognize Jamestown as the first (since it was in Virginia, you know, the South), so history books were rewritten to emphasize Plymouth Rock as the founding.

     

    Roanoke was.

    What was notable about Plymouth is that families were brought over. To work and to breed. Jamestown brought gentlemen, who did nothing.

    Plymouth had a Thanksgiving dinner twelve months after arriving. Jamestown's Thanksgiving came twelve years after their arrival. And it was put on by an off-and-on settler, John Woodlief. Why did it take twelve years to get around to it?

    A Woodlief descendant, Graham Woodlief, says the Plymouth folk had "better PR than we did". No doubt. They had the Winslow* and Alden marriages to point to. Virginia? Pocahontas and John Rolfe-- miscegenation! That would have been illegal in 1966.



    Then there's John Smith, not a Puritan but from a Puritan town in England. He had the nerve to barge in and say if you don't work, you don't eat. How puritanical of him. The gentlemen were horrified.

    *Yes, which was highly suspect, as William Bradford vocally denied the sacramentality of the rite, stating explicitly that he was acting in his capacity as a peace officer, not as a clergyman. Of course, the couple themselves, not the priest, perform the sacrament.

    “Jamestown was the first permanent English colony in America.”

    FIFY

    It’s always been a curiosity for me, as a Southerner, that so many people draw a timeline to the Pilgrims and Plymouth when discussing the founding of America. References to the “Pilgrim Fathers,” and such, seemed intentionally obtuse until I did some reading about the subject.

    The New Englanders, particularly the Puritans, viewed their founding as the beginning of what became the United States, born with a different vision than that financial venture going on in the Mid-Atlantic and Southern colonies. Calvinists through and through, they believed they were ordained by God, predestined to settle in North America. It didn’t matter who got here first, American didn’t begin until they arrived. These views pre-dated the Civil War by about 200 years, or from the very beginnings of New England.

    • Thanks: RichardTaylor
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    Wesley and Whitefield may have been too Arminian for the hoity-toity Plymouth Rock Puritans (for that matter so we’re Hooker and Williams in New England proper) but it wasn’t like they were drawing all those crowds with incense and idolatry either. The Method to their madness was more ad fontes Reform than High Church clericalism. Not many stained glass windows in the middle of a field.

    The only real non-Calvinists were the Menckens in the middle.
    , @Jenner Ickham Errican

    The New Englanders, particularly the Puritans, viewed their founding as the beginning of what became the United States, born with a different vision than that financial venture going on in the Mid-Atlantic and Southern colonies. Calvinists through and through, they believed they were ordained by God, predestined to settle in North America. It didn’t matter who got here first, America didn’t begin until they arrived. These views pre-dated the Civil War by about 200 years, or from the very beginnings of New England.

     

    Indeed.

    https://live.staticflickr.com/3214/3151975794_fa7f6cb101_z.jpg
    , @Reg Cæsar

    “Jamestown was the first permanent English colony in America.”
     
    Jamestown didn't survive into the 18th century. That's not most people's idea of "permanent".

    If you mean "Virginia", that's different.
  61. @Coemgen
    That was probably a practice run in preparation for the semiquincentennial in 2026.

    Heh. Don’t bet on it.

    They stick to soft/willing targets.

  62. @James Speaks
    If we return native lands to natives, then must we also return natives to their native lands, e.g. blacks to whence they came? (b/c the killing has to stop)

    In what order should that commence?

  63. @RichardTaylor

    ... if the Puritans were anything like the caricatured version Moldbug and his followers push, well, needless to say they would not have created a new nation, in the process dispossessing the Red Man of a huge amount of more-or-less good land
     
    In fact, Puritans generally opposed the westward expansion of America. I don't know how populated New England was with Red Folks but it must not have been much, and certainly they were no fierce Comanches to contend with.

    The Whites who conquered the West, Midwest, and the South were decidedly non-Puritan.

    You might be referring to opposition to the expansion of new slave-holding states. A characteristic case was the Kansas–Nebraska Act debacle of 1854 which many see as triggering the Civil War seven years later (a war which, from a very-narrow ending-slavery point of view, was wholly unnecessary and unfortunate since slavery was becoming obsolete so quickly).

    Probably you’re not referring to this, but New England also definitely opposed the schemes being floated to annex Cuba or elsewhere in broader Latin America, some of which later went through in other forms, including the Puerto Rican albatross still with us which has done real damage in the pasty seventy years to the US mainland.

    In practical terms, it was New Englanders who were often at the very forefront of expansion, from the time of the loss of the French by 1760 and over the next century and more. They never had the numbers to fully occupy so vast a continent-wide space, and plenty of others of kindred NW-European origin came, most notably Germans in most places, and lots Scandinavians in one region (of which my father is a descendant), and other groups here and there filling in the gaps.

    If you don’t believe me, look up the history of the small or large town of your choice across the Farm Belt or Rust Belt; odds are, if the history of the town is comprehensive (and not a lazy wiki writer’s “the town was founded in 18__, period, end of section), first settlement is often associated with New Englanders; Congregational churches or other related churches among the first set up.

    • Replies: @RichardTaylor
    Very interesting, it would be nice to develop a more high definition view of what was happening with an eye toward the various ethnic groups (mainly Whites from different backgrounds). It would be nice to know if a general "worldview" and temperament survive over centuries in a people. I think the answer is yes.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albion%27s_Seed#Four_folkways
    , @Corn
    “If you don’t believe me, look up the history of the small or large town of your choice across the Farm Belt or Rust Belt; odds are, if the history of the town is comprehensive (and not a lazy wiki writer’s “the town was founded in 18__, period, end of section), first settlement is often associated with New Englanders; Congregational churches or other related churches among the first set up.”

    Quite true. When reading histories of the rural township in which I live, it seems Massachusetts men were quite prominent in the white settlement of my patch of Illinois.
  64. @West Reanimator

    In fact, Puritans generally opposed the westward expansion of America. I don’t know how populated New England was with Red Folks but it must not have been much, and certainly they were no fierce Comanches to contend with.

    The Whites who conquered the West, Midwest, and the South were decidedly non-Puritan.
     
    In fact, the largest and bloodiest Indian War was fought in New England: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Philip's_War

    In fact, the largest and bloodiest Indian War was fought in New England:

    Interesting, it will take some research. That mentions 1,000 causalities among the Whites. Not sure if that means dead or dead & wounded. But over the coming centuries, I believe the death toll for Whites was far higher.

  65. @RebelWriter
    "Jamestown was the first permanent English colony in America."

    FIFY

    It's always been a curiosity for me, as a Southerner, that so many people draw a timeline to the Pilgrims and Plymouth when discussing the founding of America. References to the "Pilgrim Fathers," and such, seemed intentionally obtuse until I did some reading about the subject.

    The New Englanders, particularly the Puritans, viewed their founding as the beginning of what became the United States, born with a different vision than that financial venture going on in the Mid-Atlantic and Southern colonies. Calvinists through and through, they believed they were ordained by God, predestined to settle in North America. It didn't matter who got here first, American didn't begin until they arrived. These views pre-dated the Civil War by about 200 years, or from the very beginnings of New England.

    Wesley and Whitefield may have been too Arminian for the hoity-toity Plymouth Rock Puritans (for that matter so we’re Hooker and Williams in New England proper) but it wasn’t like they were drawing all those crowds with incense and idolatry either. The Method to their madness was more ad fontes Reform than High Church clericalism. Not many stained glass windows in the middle of a field.

    The only real non-Calvinists were the Menckens in the middle.

    • Replies: @RebelWriter
    It would take a nit comb to untangle the various sects of Protestants that came to these shores, as well as those that arose here. Think snake-handling Baptists Pentecostals, for instance. I've never had a desire to dig into it, or to dwell on it much. I can understand the reformation easily enough, but overall it was unfortunate for Northern Europeans to split into ever smaller groups over disagreement about minor points of doctrine, and what hymns were sung on Sunday mornings, and then to kill each other over these (in my mind) quibbles.

    The move to true religious freedom was historically in the Middle Colonies (Virginia's Statute for Religious Freedom), but Rhode Island was the first colony without an established church, and opened itself up to settlers regardless of religion. Most people, when they think of New England, think of Massachusetts Bay and the Puritans, who were decidedly not in favor of general religious freedom, but the rest of New England was more open, think of that what you will.
  66. @Hail
    You might be referring to opposition to the expansion of new slave-holding states. A characteristic case was the Kansas–Nebraska Act debacle of 1854 which many see as triggering the Civil War seven years later (a war which, from a very-narrow ending-slavery point of view, was wholly unnecessary and unfortunate since slavery was becoming obsolete so quickly).

    Probably you're not referring to this, but New England also definitely opposed the schemes being floated to annex Cuba or elsewhere in broader Latin America, some of which later went through in other forms, including the Puerto Rican albatross still with us which has done real damage in the pasty seventy years to the US mainland.

    In practical terms, it was New Englanders who were often at the very forefront of expansion, from the time of the loss of the French by 1760 and over the next century and more. They never had the numbers to fully occupy so vast a continent-wide space, and plenty of others of kindred NW-European origin came, most notably Germans in most places, and lots Scandinavians in one region (of which my father is a descendant), and other groups here and there filling in the gaps.

    If you don't believe me, look up the history of the small or large town of your choice across the Farm Belt or Rust Belt; odds are, if the history of the town is comprehensive (and not a lazy wiki writer's "the town was founded in 18__, period, end of section), first settlement is often associated with New Englanders; Congregational churches or other related churches among the first set up.

    Very interesting, it would be nice to develop a more high definition view of what was happening with an eye toward the various ethnic groups (mainly Whites from different backgrounds). It would be nice to know if a general “worldview” and temperament survive over centuries in a people. I think the answer is yes.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albion%27s_Seed#Four_folkways

  67. @West Reanimator

    In fact, Puritans generally opposed the westward expansion of America. I don’t know how populated New England was with Red Folks but it must not have been much, and certainly they were no fierce Comanches to contend with.

    The Whites who conquered the West, Midwest, and the South were decidedly non-Puritan.
     
    In fact, the largest and bloodiest Indian War was fought in New England: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Philip's_War

    What is remarkable about King Philip’s War is how much of an overt race war it was.

    That war remains the most significant one in the recorded history of the North American continent in terms of white population loss. It is said that as much as 10% of the New England population was killed in the period of little over a year.

    The War Between the States, as bad as it was, is said to have knocked off up to 4.5% of the White population of the states that seceded (dead as a result of war, many more by virus and germ than bullet or cannon-shot, but anyway who should have lived), and 1.5%+ of the states that did not secede.

    The political consequences of ‘loss’ in King Philip’s War, the perhaps-permanent-hobbling of the New England colonies, would have also been much more significant than the loss of the war by the Confederate States of America war effort was for the Southern states. A far better Civil War-era analogue would have been if the fanatic and Charles-Manson-like John Brown had really been able to raise a Black Slave revolt in 1859 and somehow it became spread over the the entire South, with the Black insurgent army aiming for the Haiti Model, killing hundreds of thousands of whites from Maryland to north Florida to Arkansas.

    A present-day analog (attempt) to King Philip’s War: Imagine Mexico invading the four border states in 2021, targeting Whites, and killing five million of us between the SF Bay Area and Dallas and all points in between and below, by 2022. Imagine the collapse of all four border-state governments. Imagine white militias forming on a local basis and carrying out revenge attacks and counter-offensives against all Latin Americans in the area, hostile and neutral alike, with even more killed on their side and many Hispanics fleeing entirely, to safer pastures to the south, in the later stages of the conflict. That would be a rough analog to King Philip’s War in proportional terms scaled to today and applied to the Texas-to-California area.

    (The invasion by Mexico scenario is an imperfect analogy because the New England colonies in the 1670s were essentially ethnostates with a deep sense of mission, engaged in a major but shaky new-nation project; the US southwest today is more analogous in political terms to the late Roman Empire.)

    • Replies: @Corn
    In his book “Who are We?” Samuel Huntington noted that per capita, King Philip’s War was the bloodiest war in American history.

    There were ninety English settlements in New England at the time. Huntington wrote that fifty six were burned by Indians.

    The Puritans also traded with the Indians, some Puritan ministers had made efforts to translate the Bible into Indian languages..... but after King Philip’s War the whites view of the Indians had a harder edge. The westward expansion was more merciless, the colonists harder. Huntington wrote that King Philip’s War set a multicultural America back two or three hundred years, and implied that treatment of Indians would have been fairer or more equal if not for the bloodshed of that war.
  68. @Wilkey
    It's funny that none of the virtue signalers complaining about the way Americans stole Indian land ever actually propose giving any of it back to the Indians we stole it from. Why not give them back New York City, or Boston, or maybe a hundred miles or so of coastal California?

    The reason they don't suggest it, of course, is because bashing the Pilgrims and other early settlers has nothing to do with trying to solve a problem and everything to do with using the past to attack their racial, ethnic and/or religious enemies.

    Meanwhile no one is attacking Chinese immigrants for the way China treats the Uighurs and Tibetans. No one is attacking Muslim immigrants for the way gays, women and religious minorities are treated in most Muslim countries. And on and on it goes. Whites today are to be held accountable for shit that happened nearly half a millennium ago, while brown people are innocent of shit happening in their home countries this very minute.

    Whites today are to be held accountable for shit that happened nearly half a millennium ago

    Whites are the worldly Jesus — they bear the sins of the world. But the sacrificial lamb is like the cat…

    …where was I? Yea right; it always land on its feet.

  69. @Hail
    You might be referring to opposition to the expansion of new slave-holding states. A characteristic case was the Kansas–Nebraska Act debacle of 1854 which many see as triggering the Civil War seven years later (a war which, from a very-narrow ending-slavery point of view, was wholly unnecessary and unfortunate since slavery was becoming obsolete so quickly).

    Probably you're not referring to this, but New England also definitely opposed the schemes being floated to annex Cuba or elsewhere in broader Latin America, some of which later went through in other forms, including the Puerto Rican albatross still with us which has done real damage in the pasty seventy years to the US mainland.

    In practical terms, it was New Englanders who were often at the very forefront of expansion, from the time of the loss of the French by 1760 and over the next century and more. They never had the numbers to fully occupy so vast a continent-wide space, and plenty of others of kindred NW-European origin came, most notably Germans in most places, and lots Scandinavians in one region (of which my father is a descendant), and other groups here and there filling in the gaps.

    If you don't believe me, look up the history of the small or large town of your choice across the Farm Belt or Rust Belt; odds are, if the history of the town is comprehensive (and not a lazy wiki writer's "the town was founded in 18__, period, end of section), first settlement is often associated with New Englanders; Congregational churches or other related churches among the first set up.

    “If you don’t believe me, look up the history of the small or large town of your choice across the Farm Belt or Rust Belt; odds are, if the history of the town is comprehensive (and not a lazy wiki writer’s “the town was founded in 18__, period, end of section), first settlement is often associated with New Englanders; Congregational churches or other related churches among the first set up.”

    Quite true. When reading histories of the rural township in which I live, it seems Massachusetts men were quite prominent in the white settlement of my patch of Illinois.

  70. @Hail
    What is remarkable about King Philip's War is how much of an overt race war it was.

    That war remains the most significant one in the recorded history of the North American continent in terms of white population loss. It is said that as much as 10% of the New England population was killed in the period of little over a year.

    The War Between the States, as bad as it was, is said to have knocked off up to 4.5% of the White population of the states that seceded (dead as a result of war, many more by virus and germ than bullet or cannon-shot, but anyway who should have lived), and 1.5%+ of the states that did not secede.

    The political consequences of 'loss' in King Philip's War, the perhaps-permanent-hobbling of the New England colonies, would have also been much more significant than the loss of the war by the Confederate States of America war effort was for the Southern states. A far better Civil War-era analogue would have been if the fanatic and Charles-Manson-like John Brown had really been able to raise a Black Slave revolt in 1859 and somehow it became spread over the the entire South, with the Black insurgent army aiming for the Haiti Model, killing hundreds of thousands of whites from Maryland to north Florida to Arkansas.

    A present-day analog (attempt) to King Philip's War: Imagine Mexico invading the four border states in 2021, targeting Whites, and killing five million of us between the SF Bay Area and Dallas and all points in between and below, by 2022. Imagine the collapse of all four border-state governments. Imagine white militias forming on a local basis and carrying out revenge attacks and counter-offensives against all Latin Americans in the area, hostile and neutral alike, with even more killed on their side and many Hispanics fleeing entirely, to safer pastures to the south, in the later stages of the conflict. That would be a rough analog to King Philip's War in proportional terms scaled to today and applied to the Texas-to-California area.

    (The invasion by Mexico scenario is an imperfect analogy because the New England colonies in the 1670s were essentially ethnostates with a deep sense of mission, engaged in a major but shaky new-nation project; the US southwest today is more analogous in political terms to the late Roman Empire.)

    In his book “Who are We?” Samuel Huntington noted that per capita, King Philip’s War was the bloodiest war in American history.

    There were ninety English settlements in New England at the time. Huntington wrote that fifty six were burned by Indians.

    The Puritans also traded with the Indians, some Puritan ministers had made efforts to translate the Bible into Indian languages….. but after King Philip’s War the whites view of the Indians had a harder edge. The westward expansion was more merciless, the colonists harder. Huntington wrote that King Philip’s War set a multicultural America back two or three hundred years, and implied that treatment of Indians would have been fairer or more equal if not for the bloodshed of that war.

  71. @RichardTaylor

    ... if the Puritans were anything like the caricatured version Moldbug and his followers push, well, needless to say they would not have created a new nation, in the process dispossessing the Red Man of a huge amount of more-or-less good land
     
    In fact, Puritans generally opposed the westward expansion of America. I don't know how populated New England was with Red Folks but it must not have been much, and certainly they were no fierce Comanches to contend with.

    The Whites who conquered the West, Midwest, and the South were decidedly non-Puritan.

    In fact, Puritans generally opposed the westward expansion of America.

    Hmm. Apparently you haven’t seen this particular map (see Yankeedom):

    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard
    Ehhhh, as someone with extensive experience of the western part of, "Yankeedom," I can't really agree with the area under that label on the map.

    I'd argue that, "Yankeedom, " stops somewhere around Utica or Syracuse, NY.

    Furthermore, the sub-region from Syracuse to the Dakotas should be further divided by Lake Michigan/the Straits of Mackinac.
  72. @RebelWriter
    "Jamestown was the first permanent English colony in America."

    FIFY

    It's always been a curiosity for me, as a Southerner, that so many people draw a timeline to the Pilgrims and Plymouth when discussing the founding of America. References to the "Pilgrim Fathers," and such, seemed intentionally obtuse until I did some reading about the subject.

    The New Englanders, particularly the Puritans, viewed their founding as the beginning of what became the United States, born with a different vision than that financial venture going on in the Mid-Atlantic and Southern colonies. Calvinists through and through, they believed they were ordained by God, predestined to settle in North America. It didn't matter who got here first, American didn't begin until they arrived. These views pre-dated the Civil War by about 200 years, or from the very beginnings of New England.

    The New Englanders, particularly the Puritans, viewed their founding as the beginning of what became the United States, born with a different vision than that financial venture going on in the Mid-Atlantic and Southern colonies. Calvinists through and through, they believed they were ordained by God, predestined to settle in North America. It didn’t matter who got here first, America didn’t begin until they arrived. These views pre-dated the Civil War by about 200 years, or from the very beginnings of New England.

    Indeed.

    • Replies: @benjaminl
    https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/puritans-as-a-city-on-a-hill-daniel-rodgers/

    For more than 200 years the work lay in manuscript, until the Massachusetts Historical Society published it in 1838, in a collection of documents in which it was preceded by a few poems just a cut above doggerel and followed by a short history of the US Postal Service.
     

    Throughout the 19th century, the speech remained little more than an antiquarian curiosity. Even in the early 20th century, when scholars began to take note of it, no one attributed to it any claim of divine special favor. Writing in 1916, the Harvard historian Samuel Eliot Morison, who traced his New England ancestry to the 1660s, heard in it an “emphasis on collectivism rather than individualism”—as if Winthrop had been a secret socialist.

    The modern career of Winthrop’s speech got underway in the 1930s, when a graduate student at the University of Chicago, Perry Miller, went east to Harvard, in part to study with Morison. Miller, who also had New England roots (he was related to Christian Science founder Mary Baker Eddy) but cultivated the personal style of a Midwestern tough guy in the Dreiser-Hemingway mode, had dropped out of college for a while and joined the merchant marine, which took him, among other places, to the west coast of Africa. It was there, he later recalled in brash emulation of Edward Gibbon—who had been seized by the ambition to write The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire while contemplating the ruins of the Forum—that Miller discovered his destiny while unloading drums of American oil. Suddenly, he grasped his life’s mission: to expound to the world “what I took to be the innermost propulsion of the United States.” This propulsion, Miller insisted, had been ignited in colonial New England.
     

  73. @Jenner Ickham Errican

    The New Englanders, particularly the Puritans, viewed their founding as the beginning of what became the United States, born with a different vision than that financial venture going on in the Mid-Atlantic and Southern colonies. Calvinists through and through, they believed they were ordained by God, predestined to settle in North America. It didn’t matter who got here first, America didn’t begin until they arrived. These views pre-dated the Civil War by about 200 years, or from the very beginnings of New England.

     

    Indeed.

    https://live.staticflickr.com/3214/3151975794_fa7f6cb101_z.jpg

    https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/puritans-as-a-city-on-a-hill-daniel-rodgers/

    For more than 200 years the work lay in manuscript, until the Massachusetts Historical Society published it in 1838, in a collection of documents in which it was preceded by a few poems just a cut above doggerel and followed by a short history of the US Postal Service.

    [MORE]

    Throughout the 19th century, the speech remained little more than an antiquarian curiosity. Even in the early 20th century, when scholars began to take note of it, no one attributed to it any claim of divine special favor. Writing in 1916, the Harvard historian Samuel Eliot Morison, who traced his New England ancestry to the 1660s, heard in it an “emphasis on collectivism rather than individualism”—as if Winthrop had been a secret socialist.

    The modern career of Winthrop’s speech got underway in the 1930s, when a graduate student at the University of Chicago, Perry Miller, went east to Harvard, in part to study with Morison. Miller, who also had New England roots (he was related to Christian Science founder Mary Baker Eddy) but cultivated the personal style of a Midwestern tough guy in the Dreiser-Hemingway mode, had dropped out of college for a while and joined the merchant marine, which took him, among other places, to the west coast of Africa. It was there, he later recalled in brash emulation of Edward Gibbon—who had been seized by the ambition to write The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire while contemplating the ruins of the Forum—that Miller discovered his destiny while unloading drums of American oil. Suddenly, he grasped his life’s mission: to expound to the world “what I took to be the innermost propulsion of the United States.” This propulsion, Miller insisted, had been ignited in colonial New England.

  74. @Desiderius
    Wesley and Whitefield may have been too Arminian for the hoity-toity Plymouth Rock Puritans (for that matter so we’re Hooker and Williams in New England proper) but it wasn’t like they were drawing all those crowds with incense and idolatry either. The Method to their madness was more ad fontes Reform than High Church clericalism. Not many stained glass windows in the middle of a field.

    The only real non-Calvinists were the Menckens in the middle.

    It would take a nit comb to untangle the various sects of Protestants that came to these shores, as well as those that arose here. Think snake-handling Baptists Pentecostals, for instance. I’ve never had a desire to dig into it, or to dwell on it much. I can understand the reformation easily enough, but overall it was unfortunate for Northern Europeans to split into ever smaller groups over disagreement about minor points of doctrine, and what hymns were sung on Sunday mornings, and then to kill each other over these (in my mind) quibbles.

    The move to true religious freedom was historically in the Middle Colonies (Virginia’s Statute for Religious Freedom), but Rhode Island was the first colony without an established church, and opened itself up to settlers regardless of religion. Most people, when they think of New England, think of Massachusetts Bay and the Puritans, who were decidedly not in favor of general religious freedom, but the rest of New England was more open, think of that what you will.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    They weren't minor, Mr. Locke, nor was it just about doctrine. In the fullness of time it may all come to be understood as the birth-pangs of Trent, but Trent doesn't come without Luther and Calvin, just as the American Republic doesn't come without the Renaissance and the motto it shared with the Reformation: ad fontes.

    They were both about recovering one's roots.

    Oh, and here's a nit comb.

    https://frenchpress.thedispatch.com/p/satanic-pregnancies-explained

    , @Lockean Proviso
    Virginia was the first to implement disestablishment via democratic political processes, a path later taken by all the states with Massachusetts being the last to do so in the 1830s. Roger Williams provided a good example (and William Penn also emphasized religious toleration in Pennsylvania), but Virginia's statute was a joint effort between enlightened elites like Jefferson and Madison and the backwoods Baptists and Methodists- high-low politics. The recent cultural war on Jefferson is a war on concepts of freedom of conscience and genuine populism. The denial of free will is another postmodern attack on freedom of conscience- and consequently, true toleration. If no one really chooses for themselves, then our choices should be made by credentialed elites.
  75. @Jenner Ickham Errican

    In fact, Puritans generally opposed the westward expansion of America.
     
    Hmm. Apparently you haven’t seen this particular map (see Yankeedom):

    https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2013/11/11/map_custom-7636b2427382cc547b583285526a2f3f0adeed13-s800-c85.jpg

    https://jaymans.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/north-american-nations-4-3.png

    Ehhhh, as someone with extensive experience of the western part of, “Yankeedom,” I can’t really agree with the area under that label on the map.

    I’d argue that, “Yankeedom, ” stops somewhere around Utica or Syracuse, NY.

    Furthermore, the sub-region from Syracuse to the Dakotas should be further divided by Lake Michigan/the Straits of Mackinac.

    • Replies: @RebelWriter
    This map was likely derived from a map of North American dialects, as it's pretty close. You can do an internet search and find several. The dialect map is also nearly perfectly recreated in Ancestry.com's map of US ancestry.

    https://blogs.ancestry.com/cm/what-770000-tubes-of-saliva-reveal-about-america/
  76. @Hail
    I often think the people who make a hobby of bashing the Puritans have created a giant Strawman for themselves, and bash at it for their own purposes, which are sundry, very often differing from person to person. The thing about bashing the Puritans is, so few will defend them that one can score hit after hit, and look smart about it, without taking return fire.

    Anyway, if the Puritans were anything like the caricatured version Moldbug and his followers push, well, needless to say they would not have created a new nation, in the process dispossessing the Red Man of a huge amount of more-or-less good land (New England soil is not at all the best in North America, but that's a minor point); the discipline and drive of the civilization-construction program in which they were engaged is impressive.

    You don’t understand the first thing about Moldbug. You’ve conflated him with the usual tired Footloose prude-bashing.

  77. @RebelWriter
    "Jamestown was the first permanent English colony in America."

    FIFY

    It's always been a curiosity for me, as a Southerner, that so many people draw a timeline to the Pilgrims and Plymouth when discussing the founding of America. References to the "Pilgrim Fathers," and such, seemed intentionally obtuse until I did some reading about the subject.

    The New Englanders, particularly the Puritans, viewed their founding as the beginning of what became the United States, born with a different vision than that financial venture going on in the Mid-Atlantic and Southern colonies. Calvinists through and through, they believed they were ordained by God, predestined to settle in North America. It didn't matter who got here first, American didn't begin until they arrived. These views pre-dated the Civil War by about 200 years, or from the very beginnings of New England.

    “Jamestown was the first permanent English colony in America.”

    Jamestown didn’t survive into the 18th century. That’s not most people’s idea of “permanent”.

    If you mean “Virginia”, that’s different.

  78. @West Reanimator

    In fact, Puritans generally opposed the westward expansion of America. I don’t know how populated New England was with Red Folks but it must not have been much, and certainly they were no fierce Comanches to contend with.

    The Whites who conquered the West, Midwest, and the South were decidedly non-Puritan.
     
    In fact, the largest and bloodiest Indian War was fought in New England: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Philip's_War

    In fact, the largest and bloodiest Indian War was fought in New England:

    The New Englanders suffered losses commensurate with or higher than the CSA in the Civil War. And they were the winning side.

    It was never purely Indians vs whites. The allied and enemy tribes were reversed from the earlier Pequot War. And the English were wedged in between the Dutch and the French. Racial solidarity wasn’t a big thing in those days.

    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard

    Racial solidarity wasn’t a big thing in those days.
     
    Has that really changed?
  79. @RichardTaylor

    ... if the Puritans were anything like the caricatured version Moldbug and his followers push, well, needless to say they would not have created a new nation, in the process dispossessing the Red Man of a huge amount of more-or-less good land
     
    In fact, Puritans generally opposed the westward expansion of America. I don't know how populated New England was with Red Folks but it must not have been much, and certainly they were no fierce Comanches to contend with.

    The Whites who conquered the West, Midwest, and the South were decidedly non-Puritan.

    The Whites who conquered the West, Midwest, and the South were decidedly non-Puritan.

    They had to– there was no place for them in their cheap-alien-labour homeland. imported

    Yankees did indeed move west, but more slowly, state-by-state, generation-by-generation. They moved when they ran out of room to farm. They swamped the mostly single Frenchmen and Southerners who had preceded them. Then they were swamped themselves.

    My favorite Yankee settlement is Honolulu. Just the right balance of imported talent and local color.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    https://youtu.be/SRdcogfMLfA
  80. @Ripple Earthdevil
    The rotary at the foot of the Sagamore Bridge was long ago eliminated. Not sure of the one by the Bourne Bridge southwest of there, haven't driven that way in a gazillion years.

    The Bourne Bridge rotary is alive and well. I wish the same could be said for the Sagamore one. The high-speed cloverleaf jungle that replaced it ten or so years ago is insane. At least with a rotary, if you miss your turnoff, another trip around will get you back where you want to be in five or ten seconds.

  81. @The Wild Geese Howard
    Ehhhh, as someone with extensive experience of the western part of, "Yankeedom," I can't really agree with the area under that label on the map.

    I'd argue that, "Yankeedom, " stops somewhere around Utica or Syracuse, NY.

    Furthermore, the sub-region from Syracuse to the Dakotas should be further divided by Lake Michigan/the Straits of Mackinac.

    This map was likely derived from a map of North American dialects, as it’s pretty close. You can do an internet search and find several. The dialect map is also nearly perfectly recreated in Ancestry.com’s map of US ancestry.

    https://blogs.ancestry.com/cm/what-770000-tubes-of-saliva-reveal-about-america/

    • Thanks: The Wild Geese Howard
  82. Why aren’t the goodwhites protesting against immigration?

    Contemporary immigration from Asia, Africa and Central/South America is neo-colonization. The best way to show solidarity and sympathy with North American aboriginal tribes is to protest today’s re-colonization of their lands by the black, brown and yellow man.

    Of course, virtue signaling is really about bashing whites, while doing nothing constructive. It’s a hate-fest for slackers.

  83. @kihowi
    I'm shocked! I believed this for ages because the lyrics are so...Wodehousian. Cole Porter must have been a great style mimic...or they did a little deal involving the writing credits.

    I believed this for ages because the lyrics are so…Wodehousian. Cole Porter must have been a great style mimic…or they did a little deal involving the writing credits.

    Wodehouse could also have been mimicking Porter, who’d already had a decade of hits by 1934.

    More likely, since they were brought together somewhat randomly by a producer who wanted a show written for particular stars, one of whom was Ethel Merman, the similarities might just be due to their writing for the same people.

    Don’t forget, too, that Cole Albert Porter and Pelham Grenville Wodehouse had had elevated upbringings.

  84. @Reg Cæsar
    That's pretty gay. Mayor Pete should have a photo op there.

    That is a photo of the Charleston slave market, so mebbe a better photo op for Bloomberg

  85. @Reg Cæsar

    In fact, the largest and bloodiest Indian War was fought in New England:
     
    The New Englanders suffered losses commensurate with or higher than the CSA in the Civil War. And they were the winning side.

    It was never purely Indians vs whites. The allied and enemy tribes were reversed from the earlier Pequot War. And the English were wedged in between the Dutch and the French. Racial solidarity wasn't a big thing in those days.

    Racial solidarity wasn’t a big thing in those days.

    Has that really changed?

    • Agree: Desiderius
  86. @Travis
    Leftists have been critical of Europeans immigrating to America for a long time now...never do they celebrate the diversity the English brought to America.

    They also opposed celebrating 1492 , even though Columbus introduced diverse Latin culture to the Caribbean. The Spaniards brought their culture to America and the leftist favor giving special privileges to the descendants of the spanish conquistadors today, yet they attack the Spanish for coming to the America and many localities across the U.S. have decided to change Columbus Day to Indigenous Peoples Day. Why do the woke oppose celebrating the Spanish coming to America in the 15th century but applaud the same Spanish for coming to the United States today ?

    We all know the answer, but in case it needs to be made explicit:

    Because “diversity” is code for “anti-white.”

  87. @Kronos
    Any guesses on which rival campaign funded/organized this stunt?

    What stunt? Looks to me this was a typical, normal Bernie rally! 🙂

  88. @RebelWriter
    It would take a nit comb to untangle the various sects of Protestants that came to these shores, as well as those that arose here. Think snake-handling Baptists Pentecostals, for instance. I've never had a desire to dig into it, or to dwell on it much. I can understand the reformation easily enough, but overall it was unfortunate for Northern Europeans to split into ever smaller groups over disagreement about minor points of doctrine, and what hymns were sung on Sunday mornings, and then to kill each other over these (in my mind) quibbles.

    The move to true religious freedom was historically in the Middle Colonies (Virginia's Statute for Religious Freedom), but Rhode Island was the first colony without an established church, and opened itself up to settlers regardless of religion. Most people, when they think of New England, think of Massachusetts Bay and the Puritans, who were decidedly not in favor of general religious freedom, but the rest of New England was more open, think of that what you will.

    They weren’t minor, Mr. Locke, nor was it just about doctrine. In the fullness of time it may all come to be understood as the birth-pangs of Trent, but Trent doesn’t come without Luther and Calvin, just as the American Republic doesn’t come without the Renaissance and the motto it shared with the Reformation: ad fontes.

    They were both about recovering one’s roots.

    Oh, and here’s a nit comb.

    https://frenchpress.thedispatch.com/p/satanic-pregnancies-explained

  89. @Reg Cæsar

    The Whites who conquered the West, Midwest, and the South were decidedly non-Puritan.
     
    They had to-- there was no place for them in their cheap-alien-labour homeland. imported

    Yankees did indeed move west, but more slowly, state-by-state, generation-by-generation. They moved when they ran out of room to farm. They swamped the mostly single Frenchmen and Southerners who had preceded them. Then they were swamped themselves.

    My favorite Yankee settlement is Honolulu. Just the right balance of imported talent and local color.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    I think I can get that in my library's discard bin for a quarter. If I could stand Clooney, I might even watch it.
  90. @RebelWriter
    It would take a nit comb to untangle the various sects of Protestants that came to these shores, as well as those that arose here. Think snake-handling Baptists Pentecostals, for instance. I've never had a desire to dig into it, or to dwell on it much. I can understand the reformation easily enough, but overall it was unfortunate for Northern Europeans to split into ever smaller groups over disagreement about minor points of doctrine, and what hymns were sung on Sunday mornings, and then to kill each other over these (in my mind) quibbles.

    The move to true religious freedom was historically in the Middle Colonies (Virginia's Statute for Religious Freedom), but Rhode Island was the first colony without an established church, and opened itself up to settlers regardless of religion. Most people, when they think of New England, think of Massachusetts Bay and the Puritans, who were decidedly not in favor of general religious freedom, but the rest of New England was more open, think of that what you will.

    Virginia was the first to implement disestablishment via democratic political processes, a path later taken by all the states with Massachusetts being the last to do so in the 1830s. Roger Williams provided a good example (and William Penn also emphasized religious toleration in Pennsylvania), but Virginia’s statute was a joint effort between enlightened elites like Jefferson and Madison and the backwoods Baptists and Methodists- high-low politics. The recent cultural war on Jefferson is a war on concepts of freedom of conscience and genuine populism. The denial of free will is another postmodern attack on freedom of conscience- and consequently, true toleration. If no one really chooses for themselves, then our choices should be made by credentialed elites.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Roger Williams provided a good example (and William Penn also emphasized religious toleration in Pennsylvania), but Virginia’s statute was a joint effort between enlightened elites like Jefferson and Madison and the backwoods Baptists and Methodists- high-low politics
     
    Catholic Maryland was also among the first, but that was more of a cut deal, a face-saving, than high principle on either side. Neither Rome nor Canterbury had much time for freedom of conscience. That was still a Baptist and Quaker heresy.

    A few years after Providence and Portsmouth and not long before Maryland was Gravesend in New Netherland. It was apparently named for Willem Kieft's hometown of s'Gravenshage rather than the English city, with which it had no connections.

    It was founded by Lady Deborah Moody from her husband's estate. The residents were Anabaptists, and practiced freedom of conscience as a matter of principle. She let the men run it.

    The reason everyone's heard of Ann Hutchinson and no one of Deborah Moody is simple-- well-behaved women rarely make history. Certainly not feminist history.
  91. @Desiderius
    https://youtu.be/SRdcogfMLfA

    I think I can get that in my library’s discard bin for a quarter. If I could stand Clooney, I might even watch it.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    Clooney’s underrated. Comes from good people. He’s more anti-Glibertarian than woke. I’m coming around to his point of view.

    In any event great flick on the exact topic you mentioned.
  92. @Lockean Proviso
    Virginia was the first to implement disestablishment via democratic political processes, a path later taken by all the states with Massachusetts being the last to do so in the 1830s. Roger Williams provided a good example (and William Penn also emphasized religious toleration in Pennsylvania), but Virginia's statute was a joint effort between enlightened elites like Jefferson and Madison and the backwoods Baptists and Methodists- high-low politics. The recent cultural war on Jefferson is a war on concepts of freedom of conscience and genuine populism. The denial of free will is another postmodern attack on freedom of conscience- and consequently, true toleration. If no one really chooses for themselves, then our choices should be made by credentialed elites.

    Roger Williams provided a good example (and William Penn also emphasized religious toleration in Pennsylvania), but Virginia’s statute was a joint effort between enlightened elites like Jefferson and Madison and the backwoods Baptists and Methodists- high-low politics

    Catholic Maryland was also among the first, but that was more of a cut deal, a face-saving, than high principle on either side. Neither Rome nor Canterbury had much time for freedom of conscience. That was still a Baptist and Quaker heresy.

    A few years after Providence and Portsmouth and not long before Maryland was Gravesend in New Netherland. It was apparently named for Willem Kieft’s hometown of s’Gravenshage rather than the English city, with which it had no connections.

    It was founded by Lady Deborah Moody from her husband’s estate. The residents were Anabaptists, and practiced freedom of conscience as a matter of principle. She let the men run it.

    The reason everyone’s heard of Ann Hutchinson and no one of Deborah Moody is simple– well-behaved women rarely make history. Certainly not feminist history.

    • Thanks: Lockean Proviso
  93. @Reg Cæsar

    So likely a local.
     
    Or an Indian. Perhaps a fan of Liz.

    There is a thicket of casinos in the area.



    Plymouth is the hub of the "Irish Riviera":



    https://dtjew9b6f6zyn.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/lMmNRAp4RnqpoqmroWE4S-ptrln1glpeTgxopiXFTtQ-700x478.jpg

    The rotaries don’t exist anymore, just the traffic jams.

  94. @Reg Cæsar
    I think I can get that in my library's discard bin for a quarter. If I could stand Clooney, I might even watch it.

    Clooney’s underrated. Comes from good people. He’s more anti-Glibertarian than woke. I’m coming around to his point of view.

    In any event great flick on the exact topic you mentioned.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    He’s more anti-Glibertarian than woke. I’m coming around to his point of view.
     
    Kentucky lefties aren't my thing. I'd prefer a libertarian who moved there to a prog who moved out.

    Sen. Rand Paul Blasts YouTube for Censorship After Floor Speech is Removed


    The Cases are a prime example of a multigenerational Hawaiian haole family. Steve founded AOL, and cousin Ed represents southern Oahu in Congress.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Case

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_Case

    One went to Punahou, the other to Hawai'ian Preparatory Academy. Probably the two most expensive schools in the state.
  95. @Desiderius
    Clooney’s underrated. Comes from good people. He’s more anti-Glibertarian than woke. I’m coming around to his point of view.

    In any event great flick on the exact topic you mentioned.

    He’s more anti-Glibertarian than woke. I’m coming around to his point of view.

    Kentucky lefties aren’t my thing. I’d prefer a libertarian who moved there to a prog who moved out.

    Sen. Rand Paul Blasts YouTube for Censorship After Floor Speech is Removed

    The Cases are a prime example of a multigenerational Hawaiian haole family. Steve founded AOL, and cousin Ed represents southern Oahu in Congress.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Case

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_Case

    One went to Punahou, the other to Hawai’ian Preparatory Academy. Probably the two most expensive schools in the state.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    He's a Democrat, not a lefty. For most of Kentucky's history the Ds were the conservatives. In any event, Paul's great. Good to see other libertarians focusing on the right priorities.
  96. @Reg Cæsar

    He’s more anti-Glibertarian than woke. I’m coming around to his point of view.
     
    Kentucky lefties aren't my thing. I'd prefer a libertarian who moved there to a prog who moved out.

    Sen. Rand Paul Blasts YouTube for Censorship After Floor Speech is Removed


    The Cases are a prime example of a multigenerational Hawaiian haole family. Steve founded AOL, and cousin Ed represents southern Oahu in Congress.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Case

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_Case

    One went to Punahou, the other to Hawai'ian Preparatory Academy. Probably the two most expensive schools in the state.

    He’s a Democrat, not a lefty. For most of Kentucky’s history the Ds were the conservatives. In any event, Paul’s great. Good to see other libertarians focusing on the right priorities.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS