Those terrible, racist white guys who created the United States in action.
821 words
Happy Independence Day! Like any other proud American on the Fourth of July, I’ll be grilling hot dogs and burgers with my neighbors before lighting up many kinds of explosions at dusk.
What are we celebrating? America is not an idea, or a melting pot, or some generic, beige blob of people who like to grill. America is the political expression of a particular people stemming from a particular shared history and culture in order to provide for the welfare of that particular people and their posterity.
The Preamble of the Constitution of the United states reads:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, ensure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
The “ourselves and our Posterity” are ethnically European whites, and there is nothing unjust in that. American Indians were considered distinct sovereign nations, and wanted to be such. According to the Naturalization Act of 1790, citizenship was limited to “whites of good character.”
You can buy Greg Johnson’s Toward a New Nationalism here
When asked, historically Americans have said that they do not want more immigration (see Gallup polling data here). When Americans dare take action, however, for example when they passed California’s Proposition 187 in 1994 to limit state benefits to illegal immigrants, it was challenged and overturned in court as racist. Arizona’s similar Proposition 200 from 2004 still stands, but continues to be targeted by at least one pending lawsuit.
Even Thomas Jefferson, who penned “all men are created equal” — which was meant as a rebuttal to the idea of hereditary monarchy and aristocracy — proposed a plan to emancipate and then deport all of America’s black slaves to the tune of $900 million. At the time, this was unfortunately considered too costly and disruptive. As for today, Jared Taylor of American Renaissance informed us in March that 34 members of Congress had proposed to spend $73 billion every year to wage war against racism — which is another name for a war on whites, of course, since only whites are capable of racism.
Before 1964, no one thought America was a “nation of immigrants.” This phrase was only popularized by John F. Kennedy’s essay “Nation of Immigrants,” which was posthumously published in 1964 after being commissioned by the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai Brith. A year later, the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 was passed only when it was promised that it would not alter the demographic makeup of the United States. The Chairman of the Senate subcommittee hearings on the bill, Edward Kennedy, said in his opening remarks:
What the bill will not do: First, our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. Under the proposed bill, the present level of immigration remains substantially the same . . . Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset . . . Contrary to the charges in some quarters, S. 500 will not inundate America with immigrants from any one country or area, or the most populated and economically deprived nations of Africa and Asia . . . In the final analysis, the ethnic pattern of immigration under the proposed measure is not expected to change as sharply as critics seem to think. [Lawrence Auster, The Path to National Suicide: An Essay on Immigration and Multiculturalism, page 12 1990, Monterey, Virginia, The Immigration Control Foundation]
There is nothing inherently problematic in the idea of an explicitly white nation. De facto (Estonia) and de jure (Israel) ethnostates already exist. The reclamation of America as a White Nationalist country doesn’t require violence or injustice. We can start by enforcing our existing immigration laws, ending birthright citizenship, taxing remittances, repealing the 1965 Immigration Act that was passed under false pretenses, and providing incentives for repatriation of recent immigrants. (See “Restoring White Homelands” by Greg Johnson, which is Chapter 6 of The White Nationalist Manifesto, available here.)
Establishing an explicit homeland for American whites is easier than you might think — because we already have one.
More from Counter-Currents on American Nationalism:
- “What is American Nationalism?” March 20, 2018 by Greg Johnson
- “Is White Nationalism Un-American?” April 17, 2017 by Greg Johnson (more like this in Toward a New Nationalism by Greg Johnson, available here)
- “Thomas Jefferson & the Declaration of Independence” July 4, 2018 by Alex Graham
- Audio: Counter-Currents writer Thomas Steuben on The Political Cesspool, James Edwards’ award-winning radio show, July 2, 2022 Hour 2; click here to listen
- Audio: “James Allsup on American Nationalism” March 2, 2018 on Counter-Currents Radio
- “White Identity Nationalism” May 25, 2022, by Neil Kumar (Part 2 here; Part 3 here)
- “Why White Nationalism?” October 30, 2015 by Greg Johnson
- “White Identity Politics: Inevitable, Necessary, Moral” April 30, 2019, by Greg Johnson (more like this in White Identity Politics by Greg Johnson, available here)
- “White Nationalism for Dummies” June 15, 2020 by John Wilkinson
- “Our Votes Don’t Matter, But Our Ideas Do” January 23, 2020 by Greg Johnson (more like this in The Year America Died by Greg Johnson, available here)
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.
- First, donor comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Second, donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Non-donors will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “Paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days.
- Third, Paywall members have the ability to edit their comments.
- Fourth, Paywall members can “commission” a yearly article from Counter-Currents. Just send a question that you’d like to have discussed to [email protected]. (Obviously, the topics must be suitable to Counter-Currents and its broader project, as well as the interests and expertise of our writers.)
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:
Paywall Gift Subscriptions
If you are already behind the paywall and want to share the benefits, Counter-Currents also offers paywall gift subscriptions. We need just five things from you:
- your payment
- the recipient’s name
- the recipient’s email address
- your name
- your email address
To register, just fill out this form and we will walk you through the payment and registration process. There are a number of different payment options.
8 comments
Nice article but no celebrations for me today, working on things in hope of getting a better job. I do have a question on your figure of 900 million in 1790. I couldn’t find that figure in the source article. Note that a dollar back then was worth a lot and I recall that the cost of building a “pocket battleship” (like the USS Constitution) was ~ $300,000.
I think your figure was off by 1,000x. There were 1/4 million Blacks in the US in 1790.
The average price of passage for an indentured servant from Britain to Philadelphia was £8 12s in 1745 and £9 6s in 1771.
— from Quora
In the late 1700’s a £ was a gold coin the size of an US $5 gold piece. Thus, we’re looking at $50 or 3 Spanish gold doubloons ($16 ea). Now that’s passage for a passenger. For Blacks being returned to Africa, conditions won’t be as bad as the slave ships but would be a lot cheaper than 1st class passage. $4 a head would be close to 900 thousand.
Thank you, Mr. Bourbaki! The $900 million figure is based on Thomas Jefferson’s letter to Thomas Sparks, February 4, 1824 in The Writings of Thomas Jefferson vol. XVI edited by Lipscomb & Bergh pages 8-14 here and has been interpreted at about $900 million which includes both the cost of emancipating the slaves via buying them, their transportation and care, and also a year’s worth of provisions and farm equipment for their new nation (See also this evaluation “Thomas Jefferson and Slavery: An Analysis of His Racist Thinking as Revealed by His Writings and Political Behavior” by Nicholas E. Magnis in The Journal of Black Studies Vol 29. 4 here (page 12).
You may wish that this was true, but that does not make it true. Whatever the American nation was imagined or intended to be 250 years ago, the country today is and ever shall remain a beige polyglot ZOG-run multiculti monstrosity whose primary purpose is to squeeze money and guilt out of white people to feed the never-ending entitlement of double-digit IQ Third Worlders.
Thanks to mass immigration, the genie is out of the bottle and you ain’t ever gettin’ it back in. Today, in 2022, American nationalism is the diametric opposite of white nationalism – and it’s going to stay that way for the foreseeable, unless you have some magic trick that will disappear the 40% (and growing!) of the US population that isn’t white and that exists primarily to hate, undermine and destroy whites.
To be an American nationalist is to declare that you’re happy to see whites bred out of existence, so long as the people doing the breeding cheer for the Yew-Ess-Ay at the Olympics. My race is my nation. My race is my religion. It should be yours too.
When our American ancestors tried to repatriate the blacks back to Africa and set up the colony of Liberia, they provided them with the same constitution that governed the states. Liberians made one significant improvement, which I hope we will someday have the opportunity to learn from. They added an element to the document which limits citizenship to people of African descent and they have resisted attempts by the Indian merchant class to rescind it. There are very few things we could ever learn from these people, but this is one of them.
Excellent post, concise yet filled with relevant information (and very useful links). This is a model of how website articles should be written.
I disagree, however, and have at least since the early 90s, with the thought that whites can ever reclaim the USA. Sam Francis’s mid-90s essay in AR about reconquering the continent was the only time I ever disagreed with the great man, but I still recall how naive I thought at the time he sounded. The absolute best white preservationists can ever hope for (outside of collapse scenarios, after which anything could conceivably become possible – or not) is what I have long advocated: prowhite territorial ingathering, followed by WN metapolitical persuasion and a concurrent political push for secession and new ethnostatist sovereignty (once we’re sovereign, Greg Johnson’s “slow cleanse” can commence).
Of course, we must still relentlessly fight against the immigration invasion in every way and at every opportunity, as well as against all antiwhite policies. But too much American territory has been slow-conquered for us to be able to hope for more than our own future piece of the collapsing empire. What utter fools (and traitors, whether active or more usually passive ones) postwar Americans have been!
In 1789 the United States was a federation of former British colonies along the Atlantic coast. A century later, White Americans had conquered to the Pacific Ocean and established a grand new civilization.
In 1865 the Confederacy had been vanquished, the Radical Republicans were in control of the country, and Southerners were under military occupation. A mere twenty years later what has been termed the White Man’s Revolution had triumphed and the US was pretty much a White racial state.
The current sorry situation of White dispossession may be a temporary historical aberration. Things can turn around, fast. Consider how memes originating in the Dissident Right such as the Great Replacement are becoming mainstream. Or how an outsider like Donald Trump could show up out of nowhere and sweep into the White House. A revival of White consciousness is central because once that occurs, policies could be formulated for the regaining of power.
A radical reorganization of North America might be in the cards: perhaps a breakup of both the existing United States and Canada and the reintegration of their White majority regions into a new super-state. Such a reorganization is not improbable. Just look at the map of North America over the last three centuries, borders have been in a continual state of flux. What really counts is forming a self-sufficient White ethnostate.
Something to think about every Fourth of July.
What a great article, Cyan: terse, informative, full of useful references.
Apropos of your subject, this SPLC poll (which I believe has been mentioned in another C-C article) is encouraging.
Nicely said.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.