Quote from: alaric

Quote from: Marcelino

Tribalism seems to be a universal trait.  

Right but it seems when people of "color" engage in it, it's known as "pride" but when any ethnic whitey does the same it's labeled "racism".

Of course when it involves the Jews or Israel why it's known as their "right to exist".

Everyone else on the planet needs to assimilate or diversify.

I have never heard anyone of any race accuse people who are proud of their specific ethnic heritage of racism simply for that fact.  I am proud of my Irish heritage, If I were to say I was proud of something bigger than that, I might say European.  I think this is true, at least to some extent, because often white people in America know what their ethic heritage is with more precision than just European.  Most American blacks don't.  If they did, I think the dynamics here might be different.  

had my Kilt one time at shop to get taken in, little black girl asked me about it, was verysweet, as was mother...no one accused me of bigotry......and yes, for some here this may be  :shocked:, I spoke to them......

These people seem quite proud too and tribalistic.  

do you stay up all night looking at these groups, in fear of them? too bad you dont spend more time promoting a CATHOLIC CULTURE and prayer, less worry about "them"....imagine then, that would require effort and energy, easier to sit at the internet and look up "them against us", people lurking outside of the window........oddly, many that are in constant  :shocked: :furtive: live in WhiteBread middle America......surrounded by fat assed whites from the Church of the Local Good Book.......who said Catholics seem to id more with as they are white.....Protestantism then is unimportant to them suddenly, as some dark fellow might somewhere be lurking.......

It is my understanding that, The Ku Klux Klan was formed after the cινιℓ ωαr, in response to the policies of Radical Republicans, imposed on The South, during the era of post-war "reconstruction."  Those policies were based on the idea, which at the time was quite radical, that blacks were completely equal with whites and that southern whites had committed great crimes against humanity, by their enslavement of blacks.  Hence, southern whites owed a great debt to blacks, which should immediately be repaid with land, money, weapons, political control and a willingness on the part of southern whites to have their property seized, body beaten or raped and their life taken, if wanted, all in the cause of atoning for their sins against the blacks.  I do not think I am exaggerating here.  

President Lincoln, while a republican, was a moderate.  Hence, he did not wish to punish the south, any further than he felt had been required to bring it into submission to The Union, which the cινιℓ ωαr had accomplished and General Lee had agreed to, when he surrendered.  However, their were forces within Lincoln's party that did in fact want to punish the south.  They were called the radical republicans and, unfortunately, they dominated reconstruction policies in the south.  

In response to the terribly anti-southern-white policies of the radical republicans, during reconstruction, southern whites formed a secret political and military organization to protect whites during reconstruction.  After the federal government quit pursuing radical policies in the south, it was, for the most part, disbanded.  

the southerner, wanted freedom and a seperate country. he was brutalized, invaded,occupied and then slighted in favor of balcks that were no more then puppets to destroy his cultre, sued like many and then put in charge, often they were illiterate. THe KKK in the beginning were more of a local militia to defend themselves and their families. Sadly, they quickly devolved into terrorizing normal whites and blacks.......often those with little role to play......the KKK around WWI and after took on more anti-Catholic and anti-immigrant stances, often against immigrants from Catholic areas.....they sure did not like my great gransfather moving into "their" neighborhood, though he was 2nd or 3rd generation Bavarian Catholic and was largely, americanist.......they formed on his lawn with the burning cross.....after ingoring and shunning them and slighting them....no cross got burned, G-grandpa had a 12 gauge......racke 'um, watch them scatter.
By 1918 and after, the bigest KKK was in PA and souther NY state, Indiana, Ohio,etc.......same latter w/Aryan movements.....the south still gets blamed, but much more subtle and not so subtle bigotry up north and esp, in Mid-West....which seems to bleed over into Catholics in those areas trying to be good americans and fit in with the Prots there......

Todays "Minute Men" are in essence, yesteryear's Ku Klux Klan.  

Not necessariyl, some MM are Hispanic, black, etc......met and had dinner some yrs ago w/Gilchrist, nice guy, did not see or hear any overt racism..but yes, some likely have that element. Lawful immigration policies are one thing......some of it is bigotry as they Hispanics come from a Catholic background and we cant have that in whitebred Protestant/Masonic USA....though in truth, most Hispanics are very thin deep Catholics, give them some freebies and next week, they are Methodists,etc......

Quote from: Marcelino

Germans have the coolest flag and colors of any nation hands down IMO.

 :applause:

Quote from: alaric

Quote from: Marcelino

In America, around 1900, Catholic and Jєωιѕн immigrants, from Southern and Eastern Europe began flooding into a country, which had been almost exclusively the domain of Protestants from Northern Europe and a minority of protestantized blacks, from Africa.  

Not surprisingly, Americans were alarmed by this "Immigrant Invasion."  In response, they re-formed The Ku Klux Klan to protest the invasion of their country by foreigners.  These protests were largely directed against their own government, which had in fact betrayed them.  

My paternal ancestors are catholic immigrants.  They often said of this, that had a bunch of Protestants from Northern Europe invaded one of their Catholic countries, the resonse would have been largely the same!  So, they didn't take it as a personal insult.  

Of course you know, the immigrants from these regions you speak of were seen largely as "Papists" and an eminent threat to the South as well.

Ironically in a strange twist in history I believe the Vatican actually backed the Confederacy's right to secede.

Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if The Vatican saw a threat in a completely unified America, dominated by a New England elite (not exactly, queen isabella, if you know what i mean)!  

Of course, no one who was sane   thought war was necessary to free black slaves or even that blacks were being terribly mistreated.  It was the radical wing of the republican party that thought like that and it was those same kind of ideas that I think started the french revolution and its fallout, which of course, was extremely anti-papist!

And, there was all the folks who would suffer from a cινιℓ ωαr.  It was the bloodiest war this country ever fought.  In fact, the casualties of that war still exceed the american casualties in every other war America has ever fought.  

Of course, everybody knew  that industrialization was putting an end to state sponsored slavery.  So, nobody needed to die in a cινιℓ ωαr, to put an end to slavery.   It was already dying.  

It's all about rank.  They destroy the rank of the priesthood, the monarchy, then whites, natives, men, babies and of course, women.  In the end, the only thing that gets any potent rank, in the modern era, is power.  Hence the phrase, might makes right or as an ancient roman might have put it, caesar is truth.  

tell that to my mother, she buys into the fantasy of war=needed for freeing slaves, though she has no real love of them. SHe is deaf to the real reasons. tom diLorenzo, though a libertarain, has some good work on Lincoln and the war. A lot of nations, esp Catholic ones, freed slaves peacefully and gradually, with education............hence, more succesful today then the american black....

Quote from: Traditional Guy 20

Quote from: Marcelino

Northern Protestants alllied with Jews to defeat their common enemies:  Catholics and The South.  

Catholics and The South have common enemies and tend to be more conservatite/traditional, than northern protestants and jews.

Southern Protestants support Israel and Jews.

So what if the South is more 'traditional' when it comes to values? If one ignores the immorality that Israel does against the Palestinians one has to question whether that is a person with morals.

If you take a drive through the South you'll see plenty of **** *****, the same as in the North.

No, but you made the comment in regards to The South, not The North and it is bologna.  

As far as economics goes, that disgusting term is definitely a slander towards  lower income whites, but especially Southern ones.  

Your use of that term disgusts me;  it is a term for our enemies to use, not our patriots.  

Trad guy 20 is judging the south as it is NOW, not then.......zionism, Palestinians,etc were NOT an issue, at all, then.....though Jєωιѕн money was a factor......that is why Trad20 is for me on hide, he does not think things through...the south has changed a lot in 100+ yrs. The rise in fundamentalism and teh losing groudn for Anglicans, etc is not what you would have seen in 1860. The southerner now is a Neocon aider and zionist  :rahrah:, the war and plan worked well, now, didnt it. The wars and aggresive foreign policy of the USA state now would have been foreign to most southerners in 1860......Today's USA is Lincolnism on steroids........he would be proud.....

Quote from: Sigismund

Quote from: alaric

Quote from: Marcelino

Tribalism seems to be a universal trait.  

Right but it seems when people of "color" engage in it, it's known as "pride" but when any ethnic whitey does the same it's labeled "racism".

Of course when it involves the Jews or Israel why it's known as their "right to exist".

Everyone else on the planet needs to assimilate or diversify.

I have never heard anyone of any race accuse people who are proud of their specific ethnic heritage of racism simply for that fact.  I am proud of my Irish heritage, If I were to say I was proud of something bigger than that, I might say European.  I think this is true, at least to some extent, because often white people in America know what their ethic heritage is with more precision than just European.  Most American blacks don't.  If they did, I think the dynamics here might be different.  

had my Kilt one time at shop to get taken in, little black girl asked me about it, was verysweet, as was mother...no one accused me of bigotry......and yes, for some here this may be  :shocked:, I spoke to them......

Well, aren't you sooooooo much smarter than the rest of us!   :sign-surrender: