Concepts for a pro-Southern party

The following are concepts I and others have been considering as fundamental for distinguishing a Southern national party from the ruling US parties. They are presented here in no particular order for SF readers to consider along with short statements to get the ball rolling:

  • Traditionalism: We wish to uphold those positive traits which have developed in Southern culture and help to define us as a people.
  • Conservation: As stewards of the South, we wish to preserve the natural beauty and resources of our land and animal life and pass this rich blessing on to future generations of Southerners. We reject the bourgeois notion of limitless “development” and “progress.”
  • Populism: We wish to give a voice to disenfranchised Southerners who have been abused or ignored by the US political and economic system. We seek to represent their interests as members of our Southern family.
  • Christianity: Our faith is central to our values and worldview. We wish to represent those Chtistian values in all aspects of our society. We see the traditional church as the proper moral authority.
  • Nationalism: We recognize the Southern people as a unique ethno-cultural body whose homeland is the South. We assert the Southern people’s ownership of the South and seek to promote our national identity, values and well-being.
  • International cooperation: We have strong ethno-cultural ties to the native peoples of the British Isles. We seek to build on those connections while maintaining a strong and healthy respect for national sovereignty. Likewise, we have strong historic and cultural ties to the Western peoples of the former plantation societies of the Western Hemisphere. We also face many of the same challenges as they do. We seek to re-build positive, helpful relationships with those cultures and work together where possible in confronting shared challenges.



Leave a Reply

  1. Looks like the platform is in place.

    I’m trying to tone down and minimise the Yankee bashing. However, the ownership of the South by the Southern People, is a key concept that comes into direct conflict with the North. The Northern people, having an overwhelming sense of entitlement, believe, or rather, have come to expect, that all of America® is the personal and the common property of the Northern People themselves. They also seem to entertain the notion that Southrons and other non Northerners are mere tennants that exist at their sufferance. I’ve
    seen this in commentary. For example; Texans are supposed to leave Texas. But their land belongs to the Northern people. Who will, at some future date, collect “their” property. Same for the rest of Dixie. It’s important to reassert, constantly, the natural right of the Southern People to their rightful property in Southern land.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Yes, our ownership of the South is an essential point. We can make this point in the following manner:

      US Media Man: America is a nation of immigrants. We are all immigrants here.

      Southern Party Spokesman: The Southern people are not a nation of immigrants. We are a unique people and the South is ours.

      US Media Man: But the South isn’t a nation. It is part of America – which is a nation of immigrants.

      Southern Party Spokesman: The USA is a multi-national mess due to several decades of open borders and mass immigration. But the Southern people are still a distinct nation and the South is our homeland. Southerners own the South just like the Scots own Scotland and the Russians own Russia. When Republicans and Democrats try to take the South away from Southerners by flooding us with Mexicans or Muslims that is illegitimate and wrong. The South belongs to the Southern people.


  2. I’m glad to see that the time has finally come for Southern nationalists to start seriously considering the formation of a political party. I have long thought that a party would be necessary if we are ever to gain our independence from the US, and perhaps now that the GOP has finally shown what they really think about the South, our culture, and our traditions, Southerners may be receptive to our nationalist message.

    I agree with the concepts that you have briefly introduced in this post, and I look forward to seeing how you and the other party organisers flesh them out. I am curious to know how you will define the term “traditional church.” Certainly you can’t mean that all Christian denominations are “traditional,” do you? (I don’t think you would have used the term if you had thought all Christian denominations were equal.) Can there be more than one denomination that is considered to be “traditional”? And how do you plan to appeal to those whose denominations are not considered “traditional”?

    Out of curiosity, do you plan to run for office on the new Southetn party ticket?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Emma, you are sharp, as usual. I used the term “traditional church” on purpose to distinguish us from the new Left Christians who embrace homosexual marriage and transgendered priests or push to flood our land with Third World immigrants. Those are not traditional Christian values. Likewise, I use it to distinguish us from bizarre sects such as the Jehovah’s Witness, for example, a faith invented in the 1870s which holds non-traditional Christian beliefs. In general, I think this is sufficient and it is a bit dangerous to pursue this distinction much further as it will begin to alienate a large segment of Southern society.

      I can not guarantee that a Southern national party would embrace this distinction in its platform. I am merely suggesting it here as a concept worth consideration.

      I will not run for office on any ticket. It is not my calling; I can help our cause more effectively in other ways. I do wish to help build the party though.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. That said, I still think it is too broad, and will present your enemies far too much to attack.

    I am thinking here of Susan B. Anthony and her longtime lover, confidante, Elizabeth Cady Stanton. If you recall, they were revolutionaries – dedicated to a whole proposition of things, for many decades. Finally, towards the end, when the movement for women’s suffrage had gained great steam, and the prospect of congress debating it was looming – Susan told Miss Elizabeth the movement had to drop negro suffrage from it’s platform – otherwise they would lose their support from The South. Miss Elizabeth was horrified and the two fell out – never to reconcile.

    Anthony insisted, however, and the result was that women’s suffrage did pass, soon enough.

    I say this not only to you, but, particularly in light of Mr. Owen’s comment and in light of 20 years of Dr. Hill’s determined efforts to make this movement something larger.

    I believe that the LOS could have been much much more successful, sooner, had the platform been concentrated and simplified – inclusive not exclusive, and NOT so complex and scattered.

    Because Dr. Hill adopted such an all-encompassing sweeping platform, it has given his opponents endless ammunition with which to stifle the movement,; and, in spite of Dr. Hill’s great persona magnetism and courage, it has been stifled. I say that irrespective of the recent boondoggle of folks joining and or showing interest in joining the LOS. The fact of the matter is that the LOS ought be in the millions of members now,m and it is not.


    THE SOUTH FOR SOUTHERNERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    That ought be the only platform for the party. These other issues you mention will only hurt the party.

    Just think how many potential supporters you will lose just over the church issue. Many of our fellow Southerners are patriots, but, do NOT like the church – any church.

    Just think how many of them are businessmen, and will hate your environmentalism plank.

    No, Sir – you are sculpting this platform too much for your own psyche.

    THE SOUTH FOR SOUTHERNERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    That ought be the only plank – because this will allow Southern patriots, from every corner to rally to the cause.

    If you launch this party, with all these planks, you enemies will tar and feather you, and the party will NEVER be allowed to live it down – no matter how many changes y’all try to make, later on down the road.

    You will cost yourself decades of futile toil.

    After The South is mobilized to become independent, all these other issues can and will be addresst – Then NOT now…

    Sir, forgive my brusque and biting criticism. You know how much I respect you and Dr. Hill. I just don’t want to see the same mistakes made, over and over again. Time is running out.


  4. One more thing, Sir : it can be argued that ‘exclusionism’ (not fully mobilizing and calling forth our negroes, cost us our independence 150 years ago)

    Repeating that mistake will be costly.

    You can be sure that, in such a political fight, Northerners, and their government, will hold nothing back.

    If we insist on fighting with one arm tied behind our back, the result will be predictable.

    THE SOUTH FOR SOUTHERNERS must be the sole plank, and the definition of ‘Southerner’ broad – or, in your case, vague.

    Otherwise it is merely going to be the LOS in party form, and it will be stifled. Bet on it, Sir.


  5. I just want to make this crystal clear, Sir – the enemies of this movement, will immediately attack it thus…

    ‘The new Nationalist Southern Party is merely a newly cookt up and amalgamated version of the Grand Alliance, The KKK, The LOS, the CCC – all dinosaurs of the Jim Crow segregatuionist past.

    Don’t be confused : this is the modern party of hate.’

    And so it will go, Sir – and, unless y’all can show y’allselves credibly open to all Southerners, y’all will be tarred & feathered, in this way Now, y’all, of a certain mindset, might not give a damn about it – BUT, it WILL affect those as of yet millions of ungalvanized Southern voters y’all will be hoping to reach.

    In their eyes (the as of yet unnationalized Southern voter) there will be an insuperable stench about y’all, (The Yankee government will insist – bringing to bear their all powerful media to bear against y’all – if just using the SPLC does not work, sufficiently in and of itself) and that will doom the venture.


    • Your comments are worth considering, JD. I agree with you on the League, BTW. I will respond once I have had the time to think things over. Thanks!


      • Sir – thank you so kindly for you words. May I add one more thing?


        Below that, Sir, ought be this definition –


        Sir, please allow me to admonish you about this : when contemplating such a definition, those who are radical will not, at all, like this approach; because they will feel, and be sure to say – ‘but, this leaves open the way for the Negro, the Jew, the Hispanick, the half-breed, the Gays the Atheist, the Degenerate, and the Criminal to join us.’

        Your response can be : yes, that’s true, and we are going to need every Southern one of them to fight all the Yankee ones of them. The Yankees, and their subverted government, will use everything against us. No, in this fight for our survival we cannot restrain a friend, we cannot hold back a single source of Southern patriotism or a single Southern resource.

        Sir, if we are to succeed at seceding, then we must NOT frame this fledgling party for radicals, revolutionaries, but for the NORMAL Southern woman and man – so that they and their neighbours, will feel free to join us, en masse.

        You can be sure, Sir, that the Yankee government will come at us in the way I’ve described – BUT, it won’t stick! The simple platform and broad definition will allow us to show, both in words, deeds, and photos, that we are The South – not just a radical disgruntled few hoping to gain liberty just to disenfranchise other Southerners.

        The Yankees will do just that : show this party as an attempt by some Southerns to gain independence to disenfranchise other Southerners.



  6. Sir, I understand you are going into a deep think. Just a few more thoughts here…


    In the last part, Sir -‘… and consider themselves Southerners’ … that will rally some Yankee transplants to our side, and with others of them, at the very least, neutralize them forming a resistance. This being that many of them like our land so much that they will be willing to ‘consider themselves as lovers of The South – if not Southerners proper.

    Further, because of the wording of this – many white Southern libertarians & liberals, who are presently hardened enemies against our agenda (because of the racial exclusionism) will rally to us – they, being thoroughly disgruntled with the usurous and foreign subverted Yankee government – would see a chance for a moral rebirth. There are many progressives who are sick of business as usual, in Washington D.C. – and whose numbers would swell ours.

    Last, on such a internet page, where the party would regard as cyber headquarters – the members of the party (people of every colour & creed) could give testimonies about their belief in the goals of the party.

    This would, in the eyes of those normal unpolitical Southerners, whom, in their tens of millions, we wish to galvanize to their own interests, render the SPLC attempts, and, eventually, the larger Yankee government media, to paste us as haters …UNSUCCESSFUL. Not in the eyes of us or those of the The Establishment or the SPLC, mind you … but, in the eyes of those who would count most – the average decent Southerner; the practical he and she who work hard, and who distrust anything that has a taint of idealogical extremism, left or right.


  7. A pro-Southern political party is greatly needed, and such a party could accomplish great things—so long, that is, as it is defined by the principles listed above. But a Southern party that is too cowardly to define explicitly what is meant by such terms as “the South” and “Southerners” will almost certainly accomplish nothing at all. It would simply be the Southern equivalent of the GOP, with “Southerner” taking the place of “American.” A pro-Southern political party will inevitably be called any number of unpleasant names. Better to take it on the chin like a man and remain true to one’s principles, than emit vague noises about a Southerner is anyone who “considers himself Southern.”

    (By the way, the box in which I am supposed to enter my information is next to impossible to use. The line for my name is jumbled up with the line for the commentator’s website, and the line for my email is jumbled up with something else.)

    Liked by 1 person

  8. No, it is definitely not ‘better to take it on the chin’, by pursuing a futile politick.

    One issue at the time – just like building a house. First clear the lot, before laying the foundation – which comes before putting up the structure.

    Insisting on putting up the structure before laying the foundation or clearing the lot is a strategy for permanent failure.

    Get the Yankee government off the backs of the Southern people is issue #1. That is clearing the lot.

    After that, the sky is the limit, with regards to laying foundations and building structures.


  9. Timing (sequence) is the key element in building things.

    A friendship and caring should come before sex. That gives the relationship the proper basis.

    Pursuing all three things simultaneously, is not possible – not and be effective at all three.

    There is a self-destructive mentality afloat in Southern Nationalist circles – one which says : ‘we need to proclaim ourselves forthrightly and make a point of having absolutely no artifice. If we are destroyed then so be it.’

    This is pure vanity.

    To choose to line up to be destroyed to feel good about ourselves, and leave our spouses, children, and descendents to live under a complete subjugation, without freedom or self-respect, is to big a price.

    I’ll be even more straightforward about it : when you love someone or something, you sacrifice for it.

    We Southerners have spent decades, since a silent war was declared on us after WWII, pursuing ineffective politicks and keeping our heads in the sand.

    I’m in favour of it no longer.

    When, pinned down at Omaha Beach on June 6 1944, the battleships opened up on the last remaining German machine gunners – who had mowed his friends down, in their thousands, my daddy and his friends cheered.

    They did not say : ‘poor Germans, they have no battleships – so it is NOT honourable to use them – anymore than the German machine gunners said, ‘Poor americans – they have no machine gun nests and pillboxes, so we won’t use them.

    Our culture and people are at the precipice of becoming non-entities in our own lands.

    Time to organize and fight with every political strategy at our disposal.

    Time to hold back no legal punches from those who would obliviate us, and every memory of us.

    I could go on with this – but, with the sun setting, I have to go water my garden.


Leave a Reply

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

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s