Florida as a Site of Conflict Between Colonists & Natives

1,920 words

^[1]ORLANDO, FL — There is a long history of struggle between groups in Florida that has been largely buried by general ignorance and presentism. Americans have not seen their states, let alone their entire country, as a product of racial war and conflict in a long time, not since the days of Madison Grant and Lothrop Stoddard. It is taken for granted that hundreds of millions of people live on this continent despite originating half a world away, and little thought is given as to how this happened over the span of a dozen generations, to say nothing of how a similar transformation could happen again. The replacement of one people with another, however, is the history of Florida and the history of the United States.

The first permanent European settlement, St. Augustine, was built in 1565 by the Spanish, in a land which was populated by the indigenous American Indians, whose ancestors arrived there thousands of years before. Over the next 300 years, there would be violence and territorial competition between the Spanish, French, English (eventually the unified British), Americans, and of course, local Indians who were inferior technologically and in terms of state organization and perimeter defense to Europeans. Throughout the age of colonialism, Florida sat at the crossroads of conflict owing to its location on fault line of New Spain, New France, British North America, and Indian lands.

Only one group could win. Over the first half of the 19th century, Florida came to be peopled and ruled by its current majority occupants, Americans. White settlers crossed over from South Carolina and Georgia, illegally, into land that Spain largely controlled only on paper. At the same time, lightly-governed Florida became a safe haven for the local Seminole Indians—who conducted raids across the border into the United States—and for runaway African slaves ^[2], whose owners could not reclaim them from Spanish territory.

The violence against Americans enabled by Spanish anarchy gave the now-hated Andrew Jackson ^[3] the casus belli to lead a campaign into Florida from 1817–1818, as part of conflict known to historiography as the First Seminole War. (There would be three in total from 1816 – 1858). In 1830, the self-explanatory Indian Removal Act attempted to settle the problem permanently, though the majority of Seminoles would not be removed from Florida until the 1850s. Florida is not unique here, but salient in a pattern across American history and geography. Peace between colonists and natives was scarce while violent conflict was frequent, resulting in the elimination of the weaker in favor of the stronger. Today the population of what the 2010 US Census designated as ‘American Indians and Alaska Natives,’ numbers shy of six million (many of whom are miscegenated with the blood of their conquerors), while the Anglo-American ^[4] population (monoracial non-Hispanic Whites) numbers almost two hundred million.

We now come to the 21st century, where a reanimated Andrew Jackson would conclude that Spain is reconquering Florida, launching invasions from her ports in the Caribbean. But mestizo colonists are not the only new settlers who have arrived in Florida (and the United States). As we learned on June 12, 2016, an ethnic Afghan born in New York massacred 50 people at a gay bar and wounded 53 in the worst mass-shooting and non-9/11 Muslim terror attack on US soil in history. His parents were allowed to immigrate as a result of 1965’s (((Hart-Celler Act))), which removed immigration quotas favoring Northern Europe in lieu of open borders. A lot of obvious commentary has already circulated regarding the conflict between Islam and LGBT ideology, how one client group of the left is butchering another, about immigration being a cause of Muslim terrorism, or about how (((White Christian homophobia is the real problem here))). But I would like to make a different observation.

June may be both “LGBT pride month” and Ramadan, but I don’t believe the Orlando massacre can be reduced to pure Islamic anti-homosexuality. This wasn’t about being “trad” or about attacking degeneracy. No, what we know from the ideology of the Islamic State’s puritanical Wahhabism (trve Islam ^[5]), is not that they are just anti-homosexual or anti-degeneracy, but that they are against Western degeneracy because it is Western. To the rest of the world, especially the Middle East & North Africa, and black Sub-Saharan Africa, our homelands are beacons of foreign sexual and cultural degeneracy, atheism, and zionism. American attempts to bribe these countries with aid into repealing their anti-sodomy laws are seen as imperialism and gross violations of sovereignty.

Omar Mir Seddique Mateen wasn’t a homegrown American terrorist who decided he hated homosexuality because of living in the evil South, as the far-left might try to argue. He was an ethnic Afghan and a Muslim, expressed solidarity with the Chechen brothers who bombed the 2013 Boston Marathon, and pledged allegiance to the Islamic State, which sees itself as an international Islamic caliphate waging war against the entire Dar al-Harb, the infidel ruled “House of War.” In fact, Mateen is only a generation removed from an Islamic state (though not the Islamic State); Afghanistan is officially an “Islamic Republic” and the country’s national motto is the shahada. Being born in New York did not imbue him with progressiveness. There is no magick dirt. Oh, and he was also a wife beater, according to an interview conducted with his former spouse.

The Orlando massacre wasn’t just about gunning down what government agencies call “men who have sex with men” or what the far-Left calls “boy-bodied people.” This was about attacking what contemporary Islamists see as a symbol of the West, in the same way that the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were targeted on 9/11 as symbols of the West.

So what does any of this have to do with colonization and the Seminole Wars? Think of it as a frame of reference, as a failure to learn from the lessons of history. According to a 2015 report from Pew Research Center ^[6]:

The arrival of new immigrants and the births of their children and grandchildren account for 55% of the U.S. population increase from 193 million in 1965 to 324 million today… If no immigrants had entered the country after 1965, when the U.S. population numbered 193 million, the nation’s population still would have grown—to 252 million people by 2015, rather than 324 million. The population would have grown by less than half as much as it actually did (30% vs. 67% growth).

All those Americans crossing into Florida two hundred years ago destroyed Seminole society, violently, and now whatever remains of them can be found in the bloodlines of Oklahomans. Today we face a similar colonization problem as the Seminoles once did, as most growth is in due to foreigners, and Mateen is just one example of it. Among the unassimilable settlers arriving here in recent years to replace us are some who view Americans, LGBT or otherwise, with bloodthirsty hostility. This is especially common among Muslims; see here ^[7] for stats on their anti-Western views and behavior. The reason Obama will never name Islam as a component of conflict in these events is because he is part of the international colonization of the West as promoted by the hostile occupation government ^[8]. Why would an African man of Muslim descent target his fellow New American coalition members for blame? He needs them and they need him. Obama lost the White vote in 2012 but still won the election. Thanks again, (((Hart-Celler Act))).

Like anti-homosexuality, US gun laws and availability are not the root cause either. Mateen passed federal background checks to buy his guns even though he had been interviewed twice by the FBI over suspected terrorist affiliations. Really, what kind of government allows this stuff to happen if not an anti-national government? He shouldn’t be here, let alone be able to buy firearms. Democrats will jump to blame the Republican Congress for this—because they think no guns should be sold and blame Republicans for any gun deaths. But the problem is obviously not just that guns are available; we did not have Muslim terror attacks until we had a large enough Muslim community to produce them ^[9]. Guns, on the other hand, have been here since day one. This country was founded in ink and gunpowder.

The criminally negligent Democratic misdiagnosis, however, does not excuse Republicans from blame. What happened in Orlando is a result of both liberal immigration policies and cuckservative gun control policy. The NRA and its senators would leap at the opportunity to sell weapons to Muslim residents of the United States and promote them for multicultural propaganda purposes. The ideal situation from a nationalist perspective would be to restrict firearms ownership of non-whites and other foreigners, not the entire country. Without colored gun crime, we would have rates comparable to Europe. Congressional Republicans will never do this, preferring to have Wild West-style gun deregulation rather than diversity-aware regulation. So of course Mateen was allowed to buy guns, because 1.) any non-criminal citizen is pretty much allowed to, 2.) the laws are identity-blind, and 3.) enforcement is likely done by people who want to signal how progressive they are by not racially or religiously profiling Muslims and Middle Easterners. That latter mindset goes back to pre-9/11 George W. Bush by the way.

Both Republicans and Democrats tend to approach the idea of gun regulation at an un-tailorable federal level, so passing any sensitive ordinances for our deracinated but diverse citizenry becomes a byzantine dance around the silverback gorilla in the room. We either need to open carry muh gunz everywhere or ban every last chambered tube of metal. You might say that equality ^[10] demands it.

Let’s get back to the issue at hand. Mateen’s violent raid on a Dildolech temple wasn’t just because he doesn’t like Dildolech. It is part of a general hatred against the West, a pattern we have seen in recent memory in Brussels ^[11], San Bernardino, Paris ^[12], and Chattanooga—hell, even in Beirut, which was bombed around the same time as the 2015 Bataclan theatre shooting in Paris and is considered the most Western and libertine of the Arab capitals. Though a tragedy is a tragedy, whether we feel sympathy ideologically with the victims or not—most of whom were presumably gay and many ^[13] of them non-white—doesn’t matter. It was apparently gay Latino night at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Weimarida, but it could have just as well been Oktoberfest in Omaha, Nebraska. The enemy sees them as us and thought this to be an attack on the West, just like the attack on the offices of Leftist degenerate paper Charlie Hebdo in 2015.

The Orlando massacre should be known to posterity as one of the many battles between settlers and natives since the defeat of nationalist government in 1960s, just as the American Indian Wars began between the English and the Powhatan after the foundation Jamestown in the 1600s and continued between the Americans and the Seminoles in Florida centuries later. History has a long reach. Mateen would have never been born here if not for the (((Hart-Celler Act))). And I would have never been born here if the European colonists of North America had been defeated by indigenous arms. What kind of America will our great grandchildren live a marginalized existence in should our string of defeats get longer?

Orlando, if we allow the luegenpresse to set the frame for us, places the right in the awkward position of having to defend degenerate sexual behavior against Islam. But that is not what this is actually about. The Orlando massacre is just another example of diversity + proximity = conflict. And it must be driven from our lands before we are.

Source: https://atlanticcenturion.wordpress.com/2016/06/13/florida-as-a-site-of-conflict-between-colonists-and-natives/ ^[14]