Our Survival As A People

When God foiled the building of the Tower of Babel on the plains of Shinar he did so in order that the people might be scattered into separate nations and no longer be one people with one language (Genesis 11:1-9). In the previous chapter, we are told that the sons of Noah--Shem, Ham, and Japheth--and their descendants would occupy specified parts of the earth. For example, we read in Genesis 10: 5 regarding the sons of Japheth: "By these were the isles of the Gentiles divided into their lands, everyone after his tongue, after their families, in their nations." It is clear, then, that God intended men to live separately with their own languages, kith and kin, and nations. Therefore, nations (i.e. peoples) have a Biblical mandate to exist and thereby to protect their interests from those who would destroy them either by war or more subtle means.

Because of a resurgence of godless multiculturalism and universalism (the new Tower of Babel), white Western Christians are threatened with extinction as a separate and identifiable people because of their own weakness and lack of Biblical understanding about the God-ordained principles of nationhood. While all other "nations" (i.e. groups based on race and ethnicity and "blood and soil") are encouraged to preserve themselves and their cultures, white Christians in the West (the descendants of Japheth) are told that we must give up everything we have in order to placate those different from ourselves and who bear some alleged grievance toward us (i.e. slavery, "racism," hatred, etc.) Sadly, it is often "Christian" ministers who lead the charge toward multiculturalism, pluralism, and universalism in the name of God himself. But they are false teachers.

By the grace of God, the philosophies and institutions of Christian liberty are the creations of Western European whites. In this age of rabid "political correctness," this salient truth is buried beneath the monumental lie that all men (and hence all cultures and civilizations) are "created equal." But truth is a stubborn and resilient thing. And the truth is that for at least the past 400 years, Western Christian (i.e. European-American) civilization alone has enjoyed the fruits of ordered liberty and abundant material prosperity. Elsewhere in the world despotism has been the order of the day. However, let us not boast for the simple reason that God has ordained things thusly out of His eternal wisdom. The Western world's blessings of the Gospel, liberty, and prosperity are just that, a blessing. In Acts 16: 6-9, Paul and Silas were headed for Asia to spread the Gospel, but the Holy Spirit forbade them to go into that region. Instead, the Spirit led them, by means of Paul's dream, westward into Macedonia. Thus the Gospel was forbidden to Asia in that day. Conversely, it was God's will that it be spread into Europe. Of this we cannot boast. Rather, we can only thank God that in His providence He saw fit to bless our ancestors with His word and all that flows from obedience to it.

Our white European-American ancestors had no trouble enunciating the obvious truth that Western Christian civilization was superior to all others. Moreover, they had no hesitation about defending it, as their God-given patrimony, against those who would denigrate or destroy it. Just a century ago, our civilization was still distinguished by a robustness and self-confidence born out of a realization of the natural superiority of the West and its ways. None but the most crack-brained utopians believed in social, political, economic, and cultural equality, nor did they believe in the equality of the races in intellect and accomplishment. Unfortunately, the present century has witnessed the old order turned upon its head.

Today, the descendants of those European-American whites behave as a shamed and defeated people. Not only do they refuse to proclaim the God-ordained superiority of their own civilization and its venerable institutions; they also refuse to defend the very ethnic and racial particularities that gave form and definition to that civilization. "White" has become a dirty word, and few whites can even use the term now without wincing and casting furtive glances to and fro. But to deny one's identity in such a manner is to dishonor the God who made us what we are and who separated us from the other races for His own eternal purposes. While blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and other groups revel in their natural peculiarities, whites will not dare even admit that race is one of the primary factors that determines who we are and what we create on this earth. This is a simple and fundamental fact of God's creation. We are who we are simply because He has commanded it.

Because Christian liberty has been the product of Western civilization, should the white stock of Europe and American disappear through racial amalgamation or outright genocide, then both liberty and civilization as we have come to know them will cease to exist. As whites have lost the will to defend their inheritance, there has been a corresponding increase in the willingness of the colored races to destroy Western Christian civilization and replace it with their own vision of the "good society." That vision, or nightmare, as it were, will have no truck with the rule of law, equity, or fairness. It will be predicated on the "intimidation factor"--the employment of brute force by the strong against the weak. In short, it will be "payback time" for the alleged mistreatment that minorities-cum-majorities have suffered at the hands of the White Devils.

Why do white Americans, in particular those who can trace their lineage to the founding stock, lack the backbone to stand for the civilization given them by their forebears? A major reason is collective guilt. The white man first came into widespread contact with the darker races through the institution of slavery in the seventeenth century. Slavery (and not "man stealing") was successfully defended from a Biblical standpoint through the War for Southern Independence and beyond, but after the South's defeat and subsequent "reconstruction" the institution's legitimacy was systematically undermined in the name of "equality" and misappropriated "Christian ethics." During the first half of the twentieth century, Communists in Europe and America seized on the issues of "equality," "racism," and "white guilt" and began to use them as battering rams to knock down the gates of the old social, political, and economic order in the West. Moreover, the bogus work of leftist intellectuals such as Franz Boas and Margaret Mead told white Europeans and Americans that all cultures were basically equal (i.e. what became known as "cultural relativism").

Slavery and "racism" (the latter term was coined by the Bolsheviks), then, became instruments wielded by the left to destroy the very civilization, which allowed them the freedom and leisure to formulate and articulate their ideas in the first place. This nihilistic predilection shared by all leftists appears paradoxical at first glance; however, upon closer inspection it reveals a deep-seated hatred of God-given order and rationality, hallmarks of the white Western world. The leftist embrace of the antithesis of ordered Christian liberty manifested itself early on in a fascination with the primitiveness of non-white, non-Christian peoples and cultures. It was the "Enlightenment" philosophes in France who first became enamored with the idea of the "noble savage" who had not been corrupted by the vile civilization of the West.

The leftists' success in introducing the concept of "racism" into the American social and political lexicon has led today to increasingly shrill demands from black leaders for set-asides, affirmative action, reparations, and other sorts of race-specific preferential treatment. This is clearly a policy of economic blackmail intended to transfer yet more wealth from whites to blacks. It also is another means of eliciting from whites an admission of guilt in order than their civilization might be further discredited. But instead of whites owing blacks reparations for slavery and its alleged attendant ills, for instance, blacks in reality owe white America (especially the South) a debt that likely will be neither acknowledged nor paid. Sold into slavery by their own people (or by the Muslims whom many blacks hold in such high regard today), Africans were transported out of a heathen and idolatrous continent and set down in the most Christian section of America--the South. There they were instructed in the Christian religion of their masters, given cradle-to-grave security, and generally treated quite humanely. In short, they were given a chance to live in an advanced civilization and have prospered mightily because of it. All one has to do is contrast the lot of today black Americans with that of his brethren back in Africa to see the truthfulness of this assertion.

The South's military defeat in 1865 and the subsequent sudden emancipation of three and one-half million slaves was a disaster for whites and blacks alike. Former slaves, who found themselves on top in many areas of the Reconstruction-era South, generally proved unfit to hold positions of authority. Spurred on by the Radical Republican leaders, these black legislators and newly enlisted soldiers earned the enmity of disenfranchised whites who saw the destruction of their society at hand. Therefore, once the Union military occupation forces withdrew from the South in 1876, white Southerners immediately began to reassert their authority over a war-ravaged society. During the period from 1865-77, whites in the South had seen enough of Negro rule to understand that their [i.e. white] civilization would perish should black be given the vote and thus be permitted to control the political system.

Whereas whites and blacks in the antebellum South had lived and worked together in close proximity, once the situation changed at the end of the war (especially with the passage of the Reconstruction amendments) some new arrangement became necessary if whites were to preserve their society. Few Southerners of the late nineteenth century believed that whites and blacks could live together in a state of equality without serious social consequences for both races. Therefore, postbellum Southern blacks were disenfranchised and "Jim Crow" laws resulted in a segregated South (today "Jim Crow" has been replaced by what might be called "Jim Snow" policies that discriminate against whites). Though these measures white Southerners were able to exert some control over a still primitive black population. Nonetheless, the “black community" of the late nineteenth century began to experience problems largely absent prior to 1865: black-on-black crime, illegitimacy, abject poverty, disease, and family disintegration, among others. Despite trillions spent on welfare and other programs, these problems--and many others--still plague the "black community" in the present day. Clearly there is an ever-present problem here that emancipation and money did not solve.

Today, it is fashionable for black leaders and their white liberal allies to blame slavery and "racism" for the continuing ills that beset the "black community." These ills were not eradicated by the "Civil Rights" revolution, and now black failure must have a fresh excuse: institutional "racism." To the Jesse Jacksons and Al Sharptons of the world the only remedy is the destruction of white Western civilization in which blacks and other minority victim groups cannot compete and its replacement with a society based on the principles and mores (usually some form of Marxism) of dark-skinned peoples. This is why whites (beginning with Southerners, the easiest targets) and their way of life must be demonized and then eradicated. Blacks and other minorities claim they simply cannot get a fair shake in the white man's world.

The cold facts of history tell us that blacks have never created anything approximating a civilization in the Western sense of the term. Indeed, history gives the lie to the bogus claims of the Afro-centrists who hail Mother Africa as the cradle of a glorious civilization that the white man stole and made his own. What progress and light that did shine on the Dark Continent came only as a result of nineteenth-century European colonialism. Once those colonial regimes were dismantled after World War Two, Africa began a steady descent once again into decadence. One need only look at Zimbabwe (the former prosperous and orderly country of Rhodesia) and Nelson Mandela's South Africa to see the deleterious effects of white disestablishment and black rule. Again, it is a cold and hard fact that if white Christian European-Americans should lose control over the North American continent to non-white minorities, then it will cease to be the civilized place we have known for the past several hundred years. As blacks and other minorities (e.g. Hispanics in the American Southwest) have gained political control over towns and cities, the decline in the quality of life for whites has become precipitous. Whites have quietly deserted the very places their forefathers built rather than stay and be subjected to the crime and disorder that frequently comes with minority rule. Especially intolerable is the never-reported epidemic of black-on-white violent crime. Whites, then, do not leave because they are "racists" (whatever that means), but because they fear for their lives and property in an unfamiliar and inhospitable environment. They have become cultural outsiders.

By inflating the moral worth of non-white cultures while at the same time diminishing the stature of white Western civilization, the left has succeeded in lowering the cultural aspirations of the white man. Why listen to Mozart when you can have Rap? Today, because of the influence of the MTV-Hollywood nexus, it is the epitome of "cool" among young whites to act like blacks or other minorities. Baggy pants, backward-turned caps, Rap music, sexual license, all are manifestations of this descent to the lowest cultural common denominator. And stemming naturally from this sad state of affairs is not a sense of cultural equality but of cultural superiority--non-white over white. It is then but a short series of steps from white guilt over slavery and "racism," to equality, to multiculturalism and diversity, to hate crimes and hate speech, to the ultimate compromise of racial (i.e. national) extinction through miscegenation. At that point (which we are approaching rapidly in the early 21st century) the old European-American Christian civilization will be ready for the dustbin of history.

The appeal of non-white-dominated popular culture (especially sports and entertainment) combined with low white birth rates and massive Third World immigration threatens to engulf whites both culturally and genetically. What will happen when America is no longer a "white Christian nation?" Already we have seen that the "Civil Rights" revolution of the 1950s and 1960s (the Second Reconstruction) was more about special privileges for blacks and other minorities than about "equality." Moreover, guilt-ridden whites have acquiesced to a campaign of silence about the epidemic of black-on-white violent crime (the media's dirty little secret that never gets reported). It is an open secret today that many black and Hispanic leaders are calling on their followers to "get even" with Whitey for perceived past injustices. For proof, I give you the current “Revenge for Trayvon” campaign egged on by the President and the Justice Department.

There are, however, some blacks who see the truth and are willing to speak it. One is syndicated columnist and George Mason University economist Walter Williams, who opined that the antebellum South was absolutely right to defend its largely Anglo-Celtic civilization from the machinations of Yankee Abolitionist meddlers. Then there is the late Elizabeth Wright, whose views undoubtedly shook liberal egalitarians to their very core. Wright noted, "I am not fooled by the 'diversity' folk into believing that the institutions of this society will be preserved and honored by those who happen to share my gene pool. . . . The multicultural ideologues . . . make it clear that they view these institutions with contempt. They are working for nothing less than total control. . . ."

Wright indeed pegged the multicultural egalitarians correctly. Raw power is their one and only end, and they will use any means necessary to obtain it. And when they do, white European-Americans will be their first target. Then we will understand what "equality" really means. Wright believed that "when these people [i.e. blacks and other minorities] come to power, their major aim will be to institute their 'enlightenment' policies in all quarters of society. . . . I have heard them refer to liberties such as freedom of speech as no more than . . . 'jive ass claptrap' . . ." She continued: "I predict that, once in power, they will actually create laws to impose interracial unions, in order to finally bring about the 'raceless' dream society. . . . He . . . who insists on union with his own kind will be dubbed an intractable racist and sent off for further re-education."

It goes without saying that few whites today would have the intestinal fortitude to say what Elizabeth Wright said, and that is precisely the problem. Even in the benighted and "racist" South, most whites will no longer speak and act in their own interests. However, the situation in Dixie, as bad as it is (especially in the big cities, yuppie suburbs, and wimpy churches), is much better than elsewhere. If a spirited defense of white, Western, Christian civilization is to be mounted on these shores, it will be in the South among that remnant of proud Anglo-Celts who remember the glories of their past. As likely as not, the South will find it necessary to break away from a decrepit Union that has already succumbed to the poison of multiculturalism and then form a new polity dominated by the mores and institutions of our own civilization.

Once again, Elizabeth Wright (and don't you feel ashamed that a black woman dared do our talking for us?) seemed to understand our predicament better than most whites themselves. She saw "no deep-seated, heartfelt opposition to this trend [i.e. multiculturalism] except among white 'Southrons.' Other types of conservatives talk tough until an epithet is hurled their way. Then they fold." Undoubtedly she made reference here to the Republican Party. Wright concluded her remarkable essay with a call to arms for white Southerners: "Who is most likely to fight the hardest to maintain and conserve this extraordinary experiment in freedom. . . ? Who else but the actual descendants of those Founders, that's who. That means you, white Southrons. Once you lay down the sword, that will be the end of resistance. . . . I view the battle as one that can only be accomplished by whites. . . . I would think that most whites would want to be among the last who would destroy that which came out of the genius of their ancestors. So, if a 'white' South would guarantee the preservation of those institutions . . . then let's have a White South."

Wright's clarion call was refreshing indeed. But it is white Southerners themselves who must muster the courage to act and act soon. Demographers predict that whites will be a minority in this country by 2040 (this is already true in California and several other States). If we are not willing to fight to preserve that glorious heritage bequeathed us by men of honor, genius, and principle, then we truly deserve the disinheritance that will befall us within the next half century. We are sowing the wind because of our inaction regarding immigration and multiculturalism. We will likely reap the whirlwind.

Michael Hill
Killen, Alabama