Leftist and the League

This is an Editorial that will result in much criticism toward me  and no doubt, a lot of hate mail too but it is something that has been weighing heavily on my mind as of late and it’s something that I feel MUST be said.

I was once a proud member of the League of the South.  The primary reason for my joining the League  in 2004 was  Missouri Governor Bob Holden’s, order to remove the removal of the Confederate flag from Pilot Knob, Missouri State Historic Site as well as at the Confederate Cemetery in Higginsville, Missouri.

I watched as the Sons of Confederate Veterans, protested but soon learned, there was not a whole lot they could do about it since they were a non for profit organization and hence, could not be political.

The League of the South was not a “non for profit” organization and because of this, they were able to be as political as they wanted and since it was politics that took down the flags, it had to be politics that fought the removal of them.

At the time I was in the League there were plenty of accusations and finger-pointing  that we were a “hate-group” mainly by the Southern Poverty Law Center ( who in my opinion is a hate group unto themselves).  There was no evidence to support this claim, in fact we spent much time educating the public here in Missouri about the real reasons for the War Between the States and the stories of the men who fought against the Federals here ( some like Quantrill scout John Noland were black).  It was never about race it was about freedom and states rights.

My membership in the League ended when I was trying to get a Missouri Battle Flag erected at the grave of Colonel William Jeffers in Jackson, Missouri. The Southern Poverty Law Center pulled every dirty trick in the book, the League’s national leadership abandoned us and the flag never went up.

My membership ended because of lack of support from the National leadership of the League of the South, not racism or hate on their or any of our parts.

Today I can’t help but feel that leaving the League of the South was a wise decision.  It’s a different League now. It’s focus has shifted from scholarly arguments and the defense and preservation of our culture to a very radical, in your face approach and the focus is very racial, their following cult-like.

If one find’s themselves in a debate with a “Leaguer”  about the existence of African-Americans (or other minorities) in Confederate ranks the most likely response (or should I say accusation) is automatic “You’re a Rainbow Confederate!”.  They all repeat the  catch phrase.

The term Rainbow Confederate can be traced to Southern nationalist Michael Cushman in South Carolina, who has denied the existence of such men in Confederate ranks for quite sometime.  He was joined by former  friend turned Nazi, Mathew Heimbach, who also embraced the “Rainbow” argument and once stated on his website “If outreach to Black nationalists was good enough for Commander Rockwell, it is good enough for me.” In a previous article entitled “Death before dishonor: On the Rainbow Confederate” Heimbach stated:

For a long time, I fell into the trap of the Rainbow Confederates; it seems so easy to do. As Southerners, we love our symbols, we venerate our heroes, and we honor our fallen Confederate dead, but we seek to avoid conflict. To attempt to placate the ravenous anti-Tradition media, a group of Southerners has decided to swallow the multicultural agenda hook line and sinker. In a bizarre form of Orwellian doublethink, Rainbow Confederates believe that Southerners were racial egalitarians, generations ahead of those hate filled Yankees, and our nation was secretly going to be formed based upon a multicultural roadmap to equality and unicorns.

Similarly, Michael Cushman, publisher of the Southern Nationalist Network writes:

Even if a would-be Southern leader rejected the values and basis of the traditional South and wished to impose Modernist values upon the South movement today, one would think that such a leader would at least be aware of the Southern tradition – if for no other reason than to be able to effectively counter it in debate. However, without fail, when confronted with the Southern tradition, these Rainbows who claim to represent the South resort to precisely the same sort of name-calling and behaviour as the likes of openly anti-Southern and anti-White leaders such as Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Tim Wise.

Essentially Mr. Cushman and his followers have declared that no one else is worthy to honor Southern Heritage. No one else is worthy because the League of the South and their propaganda outlet (Michal Cushman and his SNN) have made it mandatory that one subscribes to their racial purity view of the South and its history.

I for one am of the opinion that any veteran that served in the defense of the South should be honored as such, whether they were free, slave teamster or cook.

League members such as Cushman, consider themselves the elite. They know better than you.  They are SO elite that they have set aside the Confederate flag, and exclusively fly their own Southern Nationalist flag.

Southern Nationalist Flag

Southern Nationalist Flag

This decision is fine with me. Perfectly fine because I don’t want them associated with the Confederate Battle Flag and the history of the South.

In case you were wondering if the labeling of everyday Southern people as “Rainbow Confederates” was just the work by  the likes of Mathew Heimbach and Michael Cushman, think again.

Michael Hill, President of the League of the South stated in an interview with Michael Cushman  that:

We need to get rid of the Rainbow, PC {politically correct] cancer that’s permeated the Southern movement-Michael Hill, President, League of the South

There are similarities that I can’t help but notice between the League of the South and the Leftist media, two of them specifically.

First; both the Leftist and the Leaguers hold the same belief that minorities did not serve the Confederacy.

Second;  Both the leftist and the League have little regard for historical fact on this subject.

Do you know what you get when you combine Socialists (represented by the Leftist) and Nationalists (represented by the League)?  The answer is you get Fascists. With this in mind, perhaps the League should join forces with the Left. Of course, that might mean they would have to slightly modify their Southern Nationalist banner…

swa

About aldermanlacy

I am just an average blue collar American who works hard and tries to be a good dad. I have a passion for history, music and freedom.

18 Responses to “Leftist and the League”

  1. And all of this is bull crap. The League of the south is a Southern nationalist organization, not a preservation organization. No doubt the League supports preservation but it is not our main goal, seeing how preservation efforts have done little to none to help our cause.

    • Coleman,

      Weird same last name…lol. You are right. The League is a Southern Nationalist organization and most of the members are very good people that being said, the League is attacking preservationist with their “Rainbow” allegations. I believe the South would be better off as our own nation but I just don’t see how to accomplish it, realistically. One thing that works against that concept is alienating would be supporters. I think the very least I can do is defend our heritage, with no heritage, there is no future. I want to also state that it is my opinion that many of the state chapters do not agree with attacking people and labeling them “rainbow”. The League is drifting in the wrong direction, a direction that will ultimately lead to its own demise.

      I would like to Thank You for taking time to read and respond to this article.

      Deo Vindice

      • Clint,
        The reason the League has moved away from the preservationist movement is because that it has not helped our cause. The media has kept (intensified in many cases) its anti-southern stereotypes. Schools continue to push anti-Southern history upon students (I can testify to this first hand). I do not see how preservation groups can save our ancestor’s cause while we are being controlled by a hostile nation. The League is fighting for a new Southern nation where no one would be able to remove our monuments, flags, etc. Call it a long term preservation goal, I suppose. However, with the League’s increasing activity, I am sure we will be able to organize counter-protests to the removal of flags, monuments, etc. in the future.
        As side note about secession- keep in mind most of the South did not want to secede in 1861 either. It was the radicals (fire-eaters) like Robert Barnwell Rhett who had been pushing for it for many years… it can happen again. It will just take some time. The best plan is right now is to bring exposure to the secession movement.
        Thanks for your reply.

      • Coleman, secession seems to be taking place, not in the way we have envisioned though. Colorado and Maryland both have movements to secede and become their own states. I believe several counties in Colorado actually voted to start the process last week. Whether the cause be secession or preservation, the League or some other organization, one can not win support by insulting potential members. You are right the media is against Southerners, facts mean nothing to them, including the heritage not hate philosophy and they too deny the existence of minorities in Confederate ranks. When the League agrees with the media on this subject, they fall right into their trap,which is not healthy either. The truth, above all must prevail.

        Thanks again Coleman.

  2. Actually, the League and the CofCC are protesting the removal of the Thomas Watson statue at the Georgia State Capitol in Atlanta on Nov. 23:

    http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2013/11/12/update-tom-watson-protest-signs/
    https://www.facebook.com/events/560360294035338/?notif_t=plan_user_joined

    Where is the Georgia Sons of Confederate Veterans? Where is the “heritage” crowd on this? I haven’t seen them.

    • Fair enough, but maybe you would have more support if you weren’t busy attacking potential allies?

    • I don’t understand. Are you saying that Thomas E. Watson was a contributing member of the confederacy? He most certainly was not! Why would any heraitage group want to do anything for the statue of Thomas Watson? Unless you consider the KKK a heritage group then I could understand. It just doesn’t make sense to ask why the SCV isn’t protecting something that hand nothing to do with the confederacy.

  3. It looks to me like you wrote an article attacking us.

    • Yes but who started the whole “Rainbow Confederate” label? We get this derogatory label used against us, simply because we believe some minorities served in Confederate ranks?

  4. Either you come to the League of the South under their long time, 20 years plus, auspices; or you remain out of it.

    I read your polemic completely, it’s unfocused, weak, and generally unfactual. Come back when you can put facts to paper.

    • Fact: Minorities did fight for the Confederacy ( not in large numbers compared to whites obviously).

      Fact: Calling people Rainbow Confederates has become a standard talking point and go to argument tag line by League members against people who agree with the above statement.

      I left the League a long time ago. I’m not coming back.

  5. Divide and conquer. Seems the carpetbagging Yankees have done a good job of dividing Southern Patriots.

  6. Aldermanlacy,

    Thanks for your honesty and for telling it like it is. The League has unfortunately radically changed dramatically from what it started as and as such has become something that most of our ancestors would not be proud of. As a result of their actions attacking other Confederates and labeling them as “Rainbow” Confederates, the League has allowed the enemy to divide and conquer the Southern movement in a way no other group has allowed. In my opinion, it’s gotten to a point where the League does more harm than good for the cause of Dixie.

    Thanks again for your honesty.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Southern Nationalist Responds to Recent Criticism | MARBLE HILL CONSTITUTION- NEWS - November 14, 2013

    […] the Constitution-News published an article about the peculiar similar views between Southern Nationalist and Leftist in regards to whether or […]

  2. Black “History Museum” to close in the Ozarks | MARBLE HILL CONSTITUTION- NEWS - November 17, 2013

    […] I wrote an article in which I criticized the League of the South and Southern Nationalist News publisher Michael […]

  3. President Davis : “We are not fighting for slavery” | MARBLE HILL CONSTITUTION- NEWS - November 21, 2013

    […] Leftist and the League […]

  4. Lying Leftists | MARBLE HILL CONSTITUTION- NEWS - November 22, 2013

    […] Simpson used it to put his own spin on an article I had written for my news site entitled “Leftist and the League” […]

  5. Hunter Wallace’s “Rainbow Confederate” Moment | MARBLE HILL CONSTITUTION- NEWS - December 14, 2013

    […] seemed to have shifted it’s focus from Southern Independence to Racial Superiority. As I have noted in the past anyone who expresses a belief that African-Americans (both free and slave) fought for the […]

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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

%d bloggers like this: