new

[From "American History Series: Review: Sociology for the South, or, The Failure of Free Society"]

The 1840s and 1850s were a time much like our own.

In the wake of the Second Great Awakening, an endless tidal wave of moral condemnation of the South poured forth from the Eastern press and Eastern politicians. Inspired by George Bancroft’s vision which was articulated in the volumes of his A History of the United States, 19th century liberalism was gaining traction and putting down roots among Eastern industrial and commercial elites. American society came to be perceived as wicked and in need of immediate and sweeping reform on many fronts. Secular reform and utopian religious movements sprung up all over the deeply unsettled region.

Southern slavery was over two centuries old at this point, but the evangelical religious revival that swept across the East created a new sense of urgency that it needed to be immediately abolished by righteous Yankees in order to stamp out sin, usher in the millennium and create a New Jerusalem on earth. This moment was the dawn of the American Left in a parade of social causes and religious cults: the Millerite movement, the Shakers, the Mormons, and Seventh Day Adventists, Charles Grandison Finney and the doctrine of perfectionism, temperance which culminated in Prohibition, women’s suffrage which culminated in the 19th amendment, opposition to Indian Removal, Transcendentalism, pacifism and opposition to the Mexican War. The various evil seen in need of reform at times was also tobacco, Freemasonry, Catholicism and even marriage which was an obstacle to free love. It was in this social context that abolitionism and racial equality also came to be seen as worthwhile causes.

As the South came under withering attack from these utopian dreamers, Southern conservatives became increasingly defensive and began to explicitly defend slavery as a positive good. Sen. John C. Calhoun led this defense of the South in the Senate for nearly twenty years in the Antebellum era from the Nullification Crisis to his death in 1850. Calhoun’s treatise A Disquisition on Government marked a conservative shift in Southern thought toward order, authority, security and the limits of liberty.

Thomas Jefferson was an ardent republican who represented the first generation of Southerners who abhorred slavery and believed that free blacks could enjoy equal rights in Africa. Liberia was established by his successors as an outlet for this philanthropic purpose. John C. Calhoun represented the second generation of Southerners who came to defend slavery as a positive good and broke with equal rights while remaining largely within the framework of Old Republican thought. Calhoun laid the groundwork for nullification and secession. Finally, George Fitzhugh was the sharpest thinker of the third generation of Southerners who were even more conservative than Calhoun’s generation.

This was the context in which George Fitzhugh wrote Sociology for the South, or, The Failure of Free Society which was published in 1854. The book builds on his earlier pamphlets Slavery Justified and What Shall Be Done With The Free Negroes? which are attached as an appendix.

Sociology for the South is significant because it was a truly radical conservative reimagining of the American Founding as well as a groundbreaking prescription for how to reset the American future. As Louis Hartz described it, the Southern Reactionary Enlightenment was “the great imaginative moment in American political thought, the moment when America almost got out of itself, and looked with some objectivity on the liberal form it has known since birth.” To put it mildly, it is a deeply illiberal book.

George Fitzhugh wasn’t just content to defend slavery like most of his contemporaries. He thought deeply about why slavery was being attacked and the motivations of its assailants. He deeply thought about his own society and its past, present and future. He thought about why the Southern model was good and how best to defend it from its critics. He thought about what was wrong about the Northern model and why it was a failure. In doing so, he laid the foundation for a new Southern conservatism.

In Sociology for the South, Fitzhugh marshaled the Bible, Aristotle, Sir Robert Filmer, Thomas Carlyle and Tory conservatism, the French sociologists and even the critiques of the socialists to launch a blistering counter attack on John Locke, Adam Smith and the political economists and the very roots of liberalism or what he labeled the system of “Free Society.” Fitzhugh was unfamiliar with his contemporary Karl Marx but echoed many of his most scathing criticisms of free-market capitalism.

[...]

George Fitzhugh explicitly saw the Revolution of ’61 as a Tory counterrevolution to the Patriot Revolution of ’76:

[...]

Everything would have worked out fine too were it not for the “pompous inanties of the Declaration of Independence.” The republican structure of the government was sound. The English tradition of constitutional liberty was sound. White identity and the English language, Protestant Christianity and the common law and virtually everything that America started out with that was promising and defined its new national identity was derived from its English parent. America’s vibrant culture of liberty was part of a tradition which was the “accretion” of countless generations of Englishmen – 170 years of the colonial era and further back than that into the time of King Alfred and the Anglo-Saxons in the Middle Ages – and had not sprung into the world from abstract doctrines of Enlightenment philosophers. It was the axioms contained within the Declaration of Independence which 19th century liberalism latched onto to legitimize itself that had wrecked the country and brought about the dissolution of the Union.

Alexander Stephens used Fitzhugh’s Tory theory and language in his Cornerstone Speech. The Confederates preserved the structure of the American Republic while pruning its liberal axioms. Jefferson Davis and Alexander Stephens both wrote volumes on constitutional liberty.

[...]

In “The Conservative Principle; or, Social Evils and Their Remedies,” Fitzhugh made clear that the slavery principle is synonymous with the conservative principle of order, subordination and government. He was unique in being able to step out of his time and anticipate that the diabolical nature of the liberal system would eventually demolish the social order entirely as it descended into anarchy.

[...]

Liberalism must be rejected.

Frankenstein’s monster has turned on his master and is now rampaging through our streets. The post-World War II attempt by the liberal establishment to base America on nothing more than anti-racism and the axioms of liberty and equality has led us to this dystopia.

But, are negroes human?

According to Rushton's "Race, Evolution, and Behavior", fully modern homo sapiens emerged in Africa 200,000 years ago. 100,000 years ago, a small group of Africans had a sudden urge to head north. This small group inhabited the rest of the world, with minimal contact with the rest of the Africans who stayed in Africa. 40,000 years ago, the Caucasoid race broke off from the Mongoloid race.

This means the entire world outside of Africa is largely related, descended from one small tribe of perhaps a few hundred or a thousand. This tribe was obviously already unique, in that it alone had the intrepidity and determination to head north and conquer the world. We, the descendants of this unique tribe, have afterwards been evolving under extremely different, more challenging environments for the last 100,000 years apart from the African race we left behind. 100,000 years under dramatically different environments from a dramatically different founding stock is a long time. Compare it to dogs:

Dog Domestication and History

"Dog history has been studied recently using mitochondrial DNA, which suggests that wolves and dogs split into different species around 100,000 years ago;

Another recent study suggests that the entire population of dogs today is descended from three females near China about 15,000 years ago

So, I'm going to stick my neck out and use the 13,000 year BC date as the probable date of domestication."

This is a convenient parallel. Dogs also come from a bottleneck, they've also been genetically separate from wolves for 100,000 years, and they've also undergone different environmental pressures than their wolf counterparts. Just as the northern latitudes presented a unique environment for non-blacks to grow up in, dogs were domesticated and evolved towards suiting human needs instead of wolf needs. No one on Earth says dogs and wolves are the same species, even though it is possible for dogs to mate with wolves and have fertile offspring. The genetic differences are vast enough, the phenotypic differences in looks, behavior, and personality are great enough, that everyone instinctively recognizes dogs and wolves are different species now.

Why then are blacks considered human? Why are blacks and non-blacks considered part of the same species? We could not look more different, act more differently, or have more different personalities than them. There is a vast genetic divergence between blacks and non-blacks dating back 100,000 years. And even though blacks and non-blacks can have fertile offspring, biologically that has never been used as the exclusive standard for whether you belong to the same species or not.

Phenotypic Variations between Blacks and Non-blacks:

Blacks have wide noses, kinky hair, black skin, high waist-to-hip ratios, prognathic jaws, long arms, and soulless, vacant eyes. Everything about them is ugly.

Blacks have the lowest IQ in the world. (ignoring the equally disgusting and black-skinned Australian aborigines for convenience's sake.) The bushmen clock in at around 50 IQ, the average Bantu achieves the mentally retarded level of 70 IQ, and the highly cultivated, well-fed, well cared for, partially white African-Americans reach 85 IQ. IQ has an enormous impact on lifestyle, achievement, and behavior. IQ correlates to poverty, crime, mortality, and broken homes on one side — and education, wealth, human accomplishment, long life and stable homes on the other. According to "IQ and the Wealth of Nations," a country must have a minimum average IQ of 90 to run a technological civilization. It is not a far cry to say it is IQ that makes humans better than the animals, and it is IQ that makes some humans better than other humans.

That's not all though. Blacks are unique in that when we arrived, they had no written language, no wheel, no architectural works, nothing at all that would indicate they live a human existence. Whereas literature and palaces and cities existed in almost every corner of the Earth, from the Incas to the Indians to the Persians to the Chinese to Stonehenge to Ankar Wat in Cambodia — nothing existed in Africa. For the past 100,000 years, non-blacks have been spreading across the globe, building pyramids and cities, developing new technology, domesticating animals and crops, covering themselves in finely decorated clothing, and living essentially human lives. Blacks, meanwhile, stayed nearly naked, self-mutilating, technology-less, with no domesticated animals, no written language, no wheel, no stone buildings, no metalworking, nothing.

Virtually every other non-black group came up with an admirable or at least interesting religion or philosophy which was recorded and taught to a priesthood. Indians had the Vedas and the Upanishads, and the Chinese had Confucianism, Daoism, and various sects of Buddhism. Europeans had Virgil, Horace, and Homer to write down their pagan religion, with Plato, Aristotle, and numberless other greats to record their philosophy. Even the Aztecs had a corpus of literature, which was, unfortunately, burnt and destroyed by the Spanish invaders. Shintoism was developed in Japan, the epic of Gilgamesh was recorded in ancient Babylonian times, and Egypt authored the Book of the Dead. Only black Africa (and assorted primitives in Australasia) hadn't recorded or created any official religion or philosophy. Blacks still rely on voodoo, witchcraft, black magic, and animism with no particular pantheon of Gods, no priesthood, no anything that could develop them past superstition and barbarism.

Today it is questionable what Blacks could achieve on their own, without the intervention of others giving to them all the things they could never produce or maintain themselves. Though we see blacks walking around in business suits, speaking English, shooting guns, and making use of all sorts of non-black generated goods and services and inventions and ideas and discoveries — none of them originate from the black man. Without the continuous intervention of charity into Black Africa, it's unknown whether they could even maintain what they have, or if they would simply regress back to mud huts the moment we left. All current black civilization is in fact transplanted non-black civilization. There is not as yet a single black civilization on Earth that has independently developed and maintained its own technological and philosophical way of life. No blacks have won any Nobel prizes in the hard sciences, fields medals, or gotten any spot on a list of Human Accomplishment that would represent some major scientific or technological advancement for the world.

Geography can be no excuse because blacks today live all across the world. Blacks in France, the UK, and the USA are given preferential treatment and access to college educations, and yet they still produce nothing. At the same time, whites who lived in South Africa and Zimbabwe made them into decent, first world nations without a problem. There is nothing about the African continent inimical to modern life, it is simply the fact that it is populated by blacks.

Nor can some strange combination of bad luck and being separate from other civilizations explain black underperformance. After all, blacks have been connected to the outside world since the 1400's. They have had centuries to modernize and improve themselves in Africa with full access to modern knowledge and technology. In contrast, it took Japan about twenty years to modernize from a feudal samurai culture to a fully modern industrial state which then took on and defeated Russia in 1900. Blacks have had centuries in the USA to do all sorts of human activities, immersed in white culture, knowledge, and technology. Instead, all they do is riot, rape, steal, sell drugs, and demand more handouts from the government. Germany recovered from WWII in just ten years, becoming yet again a prosperous, powerful, and leading-edge modern civilization. Africans meanwhile cannot recover from 'colonization,'' slavery,' or 'discrimination' after centuries. Haiti has been an all-black, independent, free state since the Napoleonic wars, 200 years ago. Even so, its lifestyle and standard of living perfectly match that of darkest Africa. In those 200 years, it hasn't progressed an inch. In fact, it has probably regressed since that time. Their neighbors in the Dominican republic have immensely better statistics than them in all fields. Instead of a failed state, the Dominican Republic takes care of its people, has a working government, and doesn't need charity. The difference? Their population is non-black. All of the old, tired excuses are refuted by geography and history.

The black murder rate is 9 times that of the white/Hispanic (combined!) murder rate. It is 36 times as high as the Asian murder rate. Blacks are the majority of AIDS cases and all other STDs, their STD rates are completely out of proportion to all other groups. Even homosexuals have a hard time keeping up with the black STD rates. No ordinary healthy human has the sexual habits of the black race. Whereas every other people on Earth developed a family structure, blacks still roam around aimlessly screwing everyone they meet and never staying to raise the child. 70% of black children in the USA are illegitimate. In Africa, women largely do all the work and raise the kids while the men commit crimes or sit around chewing leaves or smoking something. Domestic violence among blacks is atrocious. Rape is endemic. The human race does not act like this, their morals and habits are completely different.

Good things can be said of virtually every group or civilization on Earth. This is unsurprising, given the fact that everyone on Earth is descended from the same small tribe that left Africa 100,000 years ago. East Asians are such decent, advanced people they are comparable to whites. Unsurprisingly, they only diverged from the White race 40,000 years ago. There is only one group nothing good can be said about, there is only one group completely unrelated to the rest of the human race, and that is the black African. There is enough genetic variation between blacks and non-blacks that any objective scientist, classifying us like they would classify various animal species, would label us different species. On one side humans, on the other blacks. There is enough phenotypic, common sense variation, that again it is an insult to categorize blacks among the human race. They are nothing like us and they never will be, they are worse in every way. Call them orcs, or trolls, devils, or whatever you like–they are not human.