Thus Spake Zorg

6 Replies

Under an excellent article by Catholic World Report, a post by “Zorg” was penned on the WBTS.:

Very good article, except I have to quibble over the word “cause.”

“To insist that the only cause of the war was slavery—and it was a
cause of the war—obscures a number of things.” I understand that you mean it was an historical factor, but a *cause* of the *war* it was not. Yes, we habitually speak this way, but it’s not helpful. It’s too much of a propaganda term as it implies inevitability and some sort of quasi-physical “historical process” or whatever. Human beings are exceedingly prone to rationalize war rather easily, so the words used are very important.

War-making is not a matter of physics, but of choice. Human beings with free will directly cause war as it is organized violence. It was Lincoln who decided to make war on the states after they seceded, and because they seceded. His stated goal for making war was to preserve the Union (even at the expense of the slaves if necessary). If Lincoln did not make war against them for seceding, then there would have been no war.

Secession is not war. This is a distinction which cannot be missed. War is a planned aggression, willed and carried out consciously by men. And those who do so are directly responsible for the consequences which follow.

Incredibly monstrous consequences followed Lincoln’s war on the states and the people of the South. We are still feeling the effects after 150 years. Lincoln’s Orwellian “Union” was not the voluntary Union of the Founders or of the Constitution, but more like the Soviet Union – join or die. And now the rotten fruit of this idolatrous doctrine of the central state as an irresistible mystical “Union” is becoming fully manifest.

This current move to cleanse the culture of our historical and cultural symbols is truly un-American. The cultural Marxist narrative that this historical American battle flag is somehow “racist” in itself, and that anyone who displays it must be publicly shamed and vilified, is insane, but it’s par for the course. It’s what these people do. They are hellbent on vilification and thought control. You either toe the line and parrot back to them their social-engineering propaganda or you are a “bigot,” or a “racist,” or a “homophobe,” or “anti-choice,” or “hateful,” or “ignorant,” etc. We must all be “one,” and stop being “divisive.”

I’m guessing that they finally figured out that that X was a St. Andrew’s cross, and they had the usual reaction of vampires.

The quality of argument is really improving!

6 thoughts on “Thus Spake Zorg”

  1. weavercht Post author

    I posted many comments. I dunno how many will be approved.

    One specifically I doubt will be approved, I’ll repost here:

    The South’s greatest trait is chivalry, not just hospitality. While the North used total war and foreign troops, the South attempted to fight like Christians. It was really only the guerrilla tactics of Reconstruction that freed us from that Hell.

    It’s interesting how Clarence Thomas defends his segregated school and calls it racist the assumption that a black school must be inferior to a white school. He said his school was just fine.

    And today we see what progressives have done to black culture. Black children rarely have a father today, and crime is high. That is partly due to the progressive culture.

    Dissolving identities to create a mass proletariat is largely your goal, no? You want a global state where there are no divides of ethnicity, no ties of history, easily malleable human resources. Put another way: world slavery.

    I believe it’s easy for Southerners to understand this, because we come from a post-slavery society.

    We see in the Middle East communities living together but separately. We see similar situations throughout the world. It’s not inherently evil. It’s perhaps inherently human though, man being a social creature. And communities of people can make for inefficient human resources, which is to say they get in the way of profit.

    Like

    Reply ↓
  2. redphillips

    I have repeatedly made the same argument Zorg is making here. The cause of the War was Lincoln’s invasion. Slavery was a cause of secession. I wonder if Zorg has been reading me.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply ↓
    1. weavercht Post author

      Be sure to put it all into your book. No one will remember what you forgot to include.

      Only if it’s successful will an editor print a second edition that you can edit. Though I suppose you’ll do an e-book maybe.

      I actually have a first version of Sam Francis’s book on Burnham somewhere, assuming it wasn’t thrown out. I haven’t seen it in years. It was tattered, but I prized it. Anyway, the first version is much rougher than the next. And one of Buchanan’s early books is especially rough.

      Like

      Reply ↓
  4. weavercht Post author

    New reply by me (doubt anyone will read in either location 😛 ) :

    My intention was to make a point, not to insult you personally. Sorry if I offended you, but I believed my comment a good means of expressing the point.

    The South is being ethnically cleansed, to put it plainly, and we see a wider trend of globalisation, not necessarily due to a conspiracy. Transportation and communication have never been so easy, and the drive for profit pushes expansion.

    I’m very attached to the South; It’s home. And I’d like for it to endure. Also, Southern ideas are a leading opponent to consumerism and globalism, so what’s left of us is potentially beneficial to man. If European colonialism dominated the world previously, today we have a new form of globalism which the South stands against.

    The wider trend is away from GK Chesterton’s vision of a “chorus of superlatives”, a world of smaller, distinct nations, each with its dignity and place of belonging. Small societies are especially wonderful for their elites being nearer to those they rule. (Every society is run by an elite, in some form.) The trend is towards Belloc’s Servile State, towards socialism/collectivism away from distributism. It’s really another Catholic, James Burnham, who coined an especially fitting term, the “managerial state” (government and big business run by managers of others’ property). Belloc seems proven true that capitalism then is merely a transition phase.

    –

    To explain the South: I’m not someone who obsesses over eugenics and IQ, I don’t like Nietzsche, don’t revere Social Darwinism. My point: I don’t fit that stereotype we see frequently by some who obsess over racial differences.

    But the racial differences do exist. And that essential premise is part of the misunderstanding of the South.

    And racial tensions have been fanned externally, from the outside, in the South. Your perception of the South, keep in mind, was influenced by the radio and television, “The Great Stereopticon”, as Richard Weaver called it. It’s only with the Internet that we hear more perspectives, which isn’t to say the Internet is without its own dangers.

    –

    Chesterton’s book on Jews leads me to believe he wouldn’t have demanded integration in the South, to the extent he understood the US South. Chesterton made a comment on the US as a “nation of immigrants” which wasn’t entirely correct, so I’m highlighting that he didn’t necessarily understand the US, since he was of course from England.

    And Richard Weaver, the great Southern intellectual (quoted at the top) who is beloved by some traditional Catholics, despite his being Protestant, did not support integration.

    –

    Many Southern activists today have been looking to how the Chinese survived discrimination here and how the Afrikaners have endured… less well in South Africa. We expect that is our future: to be increasingly discriminated against and hated, ideal targets for society’s hate.

    –

    You say Germany’s behaviour is admirable. It is not. The Germans could use a bit of pride. They sinned, because they’re human. Everyone with power sins. It’s quite easy for the powerless to accuse them. But everyone sins. Germany should stand tall and work towards the future. Its primary enemy in that war was the atheist Soviet Union (which only used religion, didn’t serve it). Pat Buchanan has noted that had Britain not stepped in, Germany would have likely fought the Soviets with Poland a German satellite.

    And of course, Wall Street funded the Bolsheviks (and the Germans too, see Anthony Sutton’s books). So, the evil involved is more international.

    –

    The South is needed in the world today partly because we’re among the few strong enough to take stands for what’s truly right. We still have elements of an agrarian, religious, and chivalrous heritage. Most others fall in line to serve consumerist globalism, bringing about large servile states. I don’t claim Southerners are perfect, there’s far too much support among average Southerners for war; but the two groups I see leading the charge are Catholic Trads and Southerners. You can believe we’re an enemy, but we’re going to be out making arguments against the very same consumerist globalism you oppose, if indeed you do oppose it.

    Pretty much every outsider who admires the South falters on race. The conclusion I make is others believe significant racial differences could not possibly exist, as a matter of ideology.

    I can’t really argue against a man’s ideology.

    My experiences in the South are that no one outside of white Southerners cares anything for blacks. There’s a desire to feel good, to believe good is done; but no one but Southern whites will truly help blacks.

    Case in point: Obama grants amnesty to unskilled workers who will drive down market wages most for black Americans. And Obama works towards America-last trade deals that will not serve blacks. And Obama’s QE has expanded the wealth gap, most notably for blacks.

    So, everyone talks of helping blacks. But truly blacks are just used and manipulated by distant elites who care nothing for them.

    Charity work is huge in the South. And a large part of that is whites helping blacks. There’s a growing trend of black-on-white violence and hate, fueled by the media. But of course, it’s we who actually live here who must endure it. Outside the South, those living out delusions of ideologies don’t suffer from attacks in their enclaves. And yes, I’ve been robbed myself. Everyone gets robbed or attacked nowadays. Nearly always by blacks. And it’s external influences, by people with values like yours, fueling this evil, encouraging the crime.

    If you want to say (I expect you would argue thusly) that whites of the past were concerned about the demographic situation or otherwise the power-balance: Yes. This doesn’t make us evil. You demand unrealistic ideals. Power concerns are the rightful topic of politics.

    Americans “helping” in Iraq has ruined Iraq, and Americans “helping” in the South has similarly damaged the South. I don’t mean “damage” as in harming only whites but in harming everyone here. Outsiders don’t understand the South, seemingly because they don’t believe racial differences could exist. That misunderstanding of what they’re dealing with leads outside involvement to cause harm to everyone. Meddlesome outsiders should focus on improving what they understand and have a duty to.

    Like

    Reply ↓

Leave a comment