The ever-escalating postmodern political climate of 21st century America has many political analysts and philosophers prophetically declaring the increasing prominent potentiality of a second civil war in U.S. history. While some moderates are alarmed by the practically nonchalant introduction of this newly revived, radical element into political discourse, others on the right wing, including nationalists, confederate loyalists, non-interventionists, paleo-conservatives, and even libertarians, are beginning to express ideological sympathies with the revolutionary idea.
Assuredly, the most efficient method in predicting and preparing for the future resides in acknowledging and studying the past, in meticulous detail; doing so illustrates an eerily accurate account of the similarities between the political tactics that were used during the Civil War era, and the ones being utilized today, 150 years later. During the 19th century, the political left discovered an enormously effective tactic that would not only serve as a catalyst for the destruction of states’ autonomy, individual liberty, and government restriction, but would do so in the name of benevolent societal progression: racial social justice. The totalitarian ideals of the left remain shrouded in a facade of false societal ideals of equality and egalitarianism, but are actually intended to instigate racial tensions that will further destabilize the country’s dwindling European population and integrate minorities as the predominant representation of American culture.
No longer do whites have rights; how enormously ironic it is for the white man to be deprived of his own liberties, in his own country, by his own invention!
The stereotypical arguments that are made pertaining to the civil war by the postmodern left are enormously incoherent when considered in terms of historical context; contrarily, they demonstrate that the South demonstrated far greater moral consistency than their northern opponents. General Lee, one of the most villified representations of Southern culture, never owned or inherited slaves, and the Confederate Congress permitted African American soldiers to fight for the South on March 13, 1865; this illustrates a sharp contrast to the ethical hypocrisy of the Union, particularly Ulysses S. Grant, who owned slaves; William Sherman, who opposed their liberation; and Benjamin Butler, who captured them as war contraband. This incoherence is likewise demonstrated in Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation, which only explicitly prohibited slavery in the South, while neglecting to mention the topic in the North; additionally, the last state to criminalize slavery was not a Confederate state, but was, in fact, the northern Delaware, which explicitly rejected the 13th amendment until 1901- 36 years after the end of the war. This should not be considered a shocking revelation, given Lincoln’s hesitancy towards abolitionism, as well as his blatant declaration that he rejected the notion of racial equality; he even went so far as to suggest voluntary colonization through the return of African slaves to Liberia, an African country established by the American Colonization Society in 1821.
Liberal pseudo-academics that reside within their intellectually feeble ivory towers attempt to argue that the civil war was primarily motivated by slavery and racial inequality, when it was, in actuality, fought to establish governmental centralization and federal authority over States’ independent autonomy and economic freedom; the racial component was a mere catalyst devised to 1) forge a false conception of moral superiority for the Union, and 2) effectively dismantle southern autonomy by arguing for totalitarian federal authority over independent state liberty. Thus, to refer to the bloody conflict as the “War of Northern Aggression”, is to indeed allude to it accurately.
Any validity that the argument of the moral atrocity of slavery during the 19th century would possess is instantaneously invalidated when those who crusade against the practice do so upon a selective, subjective basis; other instances of slavery that demonstrate the capacity for other races to use slavery as a tool of oppression, like the Barbary, Arab, and even modern day African slave trades, are ignored entirely. A lack of consistency in the moral perception of slavery illustrates that the goal of “racial equality” was never about equality at all, but is instead a subversive attempt to tip racial prominence and influence into the favor of minorities- which are, globally, the majority.
The same tactics of racial conflict that were utilized in the Civil War were likewise extended into the civil rights movement that rose to prominence in the 1960’s- particularly through legislation that forcefully established racial multiculturalism through mass immigration, notably the Hart-Cellar Act. Lyndon Johnson’s tremendously naive statement that “It[the bill] does not affect the lives of millions… it will not reshape the structure of our daily lives…” was a terribly inaccurate insistence that the romanticized ideal of multiculturalism, when written into law, would not possess any detrimental consequence, and we consider such a statement a hilariously absurd fantasy some 54 years later, as the white population continues to rapidly decline nationwide. It is, then, no astounding revelation to likewise witness the expansion of governmental authoritarianism and communist ideologies; while predominantly European countries illustrate the political principles of liberty, personal autonomy, Constitutionality, and libertarianism, these societal ideals are not present within foreign countries. Asian, African, and Middle Eastern countries are predominantly totalitarian in nature; China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea, Vietnam, Nepal, Guyana, and Moldova all demonstrate either explicitly communist states, or largely sympathize with the ideology, while Portugal, Sri Lanka, India, Guinea-Bissau, and Tanzania all implement socialist policies; Saudi Arabia, Iran, Libya, Bangladesh, Pakistan and Gaza have developed their own theocratic totalitarianism through Sharia law.
The European values of liberty, autonomy, personal responsibility and constitutionality are incompatible with multiculturalism.
(( See: The Reality of Race by Avialae Horton ))
European countries have increasingly adopted totalitarian policies when confronted with the dystopian lie of mass immigration, to compensate for their inability to make it a reality; Great Britain is a notable example of this, given the plethora of arrests of British civilians for hate speech against foreigners, particularly muslims- even to the extent of arresting a citizen for quoting their very own historical politician, Winston Churchill. Other European countries that have integrated multiculturalism, such as France and London, and the capital of Hungary, have consequently created phone applications designed to warn the citizenry about “no-go zones”, or, areas that are particularly susceptible to violence and crime due to foreign presence. Now, with the recent attack on the Notre Dame and Saint Sulpice, the two largest cathedrals in France, and signs indicating that these events were, demonstrably, acts of orchestrated terrorism.
Those who demonstrate skepticism towards the notion that white identity in America is under siege by multiculturalists might again consider several recent instances that validate such a claim; conservative college students are now subject to physical assault on college campuses and in public environments, elitist actors and other minorities are defended despite fabricating false hate crimes, and some producers and political organizers are explicitly prohibiting the inclusion of white Americans at events and in films.
When retaining ethnic homogeneity, however, European countries likewise retain political principles that emphasize liberty and personal autonomy, rather than advocating for globalist, universalist interests; this illustrates why independent countries like Poland and the Czech republic have suffered sanctions from the European Union, due to their refusal to accept the mass immigration of refugees. Now, with the introduction of the United Nations’ proposal to introduce “Replacement Migration”, or, the systematic replacement of a country’s native population with a foreign demographic to compensate for a declining and unsustainable birth rate, there is a demonstrably global initiative to effectively dismantle the autonomy of European countries through forced alien immigration. It is, upon this account, evident that the inevitable social tensions arising from multiculturalism within the United States are a mere microcosm of a global phenomenon.
One observes the modern era with a feeling of reminiscence; we have assuredly been here before. The same deceptive political-cultural mechanics that were utilized to manipulate the notion of ethnic identity during the Civil war era persisted throughout the post-Antebellum era, and we find ourselves amidst the same ideological struggle in the present. After having shed the tradition of ethnic identity, the European population has been successfully demonized in the name of engineered social justice, despite sincere efforts to establish egalitarianism. It has arrived, through extensive interaction with opposing demographics, at a harsh truth: Egalitarianism was never the goal- but the displacement of the European population certainly was.
It is only through the acknowledgement of these facts, irrespective of how cynical and utterly dire they appear to be, that any collective European identity might be reforged in the name of cultural coherence, to combat the systematic erasure of the history, heritage and honor of the European tradition. A world in which the statement “It’s okay to be White” does not invoke provocations of physical violence, systematic terrorism, social intimidation, and oppression, need not be a distant vision.
“That while employed in the service the said[negro] troops shall receive the same rations, clothing, and compensation as are allowed to other troops in the same branch of the service.” — Section III, Part I of General Order 14 of the Confederate Congress
 “And by virtue of the power, and for the purpose aforesaid, I do order and declare that all persons held as slaves within said designated States[Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia] and parts of States, are, and henceforward shall be free…the people whereof may not then be in rebellion against the United States and which States may then have voluntarily adopted, or thereafter may voluntarily adopt, immediate or gradual abolishment of slavery within their respective limits; and that the effort to colonize persons of African descent, with their consent, upon this continent, or elsewhere, with the previously obtained consent of the Governments existing there, will be continued.” — Preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, September 22, 1862
“So far as I know, the Judge never asked me the question before. He shall have no occasion to ever ask it again, for I tell him very frankly that I am not in favor of negro citizenship…Now my opinion is that the different States have the power to make a negro a citizen under the Constitution of the United States if they choose. The Dred Scott decision decides that they have not that power. If the State of Illinois had that power I should be opposed to the exercise of it….I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races…” — Lincoln-Douglas debate of
“My first impulse would be to free all the slaves and send them to Liberia.”– Lincoln’s speech in Ottawa, August 21, 1858
Modern day slavery continues in Libya, North Korea, Uzbekistan, China, the Congo, Pakistan, the Dominican Republic, Iraq, and Yemen.
The Liberty Great Britain party candidate Paul Weston was arrested in 2013 by British police for alleged “religious/racial harassment” for quoting a passage from Churchill’s book, the River War, about the anti-humanitarian nature of Islam and its advocation of sexual slavery.
In addition to the 875 cathedrals and churches that were vandalized or attacked in 2018, several more have been attacked leading up to the coincidental fire of the Saint Sulpice on March 17th, and the destruction of much of the Notre Dame on April 15th. 3 days before the latter incident, jihadist Inez Madani was sentenced to prison for orchestrating to burn down the Notre Dame, and encouraging Muslims to commit acts of terrorism against France. College student Hayden Williams commanded global attention when he appeared at the CPAC conference after being viciously assaulted at UC Berkeley.
College student Hayden Williams commanded global attention when he appeared at the CPAC conference after being viciously assaulted at UC Berkeley.
The most notable example of this is Jussie Smollet’s fabrication of a racially motivated hate crime in Chicago, in which he paid two Nigerians to pose as Conservatives and attack him.
A recent mayoral event in Savannah, Georgia, prohibited white reporters from entering the facility. Separately, Jordan Peele has stated that he will not include white actors in his films.
“ For Italy, Japan, the Republic of Korea and Europe, a level of immigration much higher than that experienced in the recent past would be needed to offset population decline. As a result of this higher level of immigration for Italy, Japan and Europe, 18 to 29 per cent of the 2050 population would be post-1995 immigrants and their descendants…” — Chapter 5 of the United Nations Population Division Executive summary of Replacement Migration
The views and opinions expressed on Qabick Cents are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Qabick Cents Productions. Any content provided by our authors and content producers are of their opinion, and are not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, or individual.