Why I Joined the League of the South

Our Southern Culture Lives On
The people of Dixie have survived!
We want to be free!

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Recently, The Catholic Knight joined the 'League of the South' (see website here), a movement seeking 'to advance the cultural, social, economic, and political well-being and independence of the Southern people by all honourable means.' This is a Dixieland Independence movement, seeking the independence of Dixie from the United States, on par with similar movements, such as the one in Scotland that seeks independence from the United Kingdom, as well as the one in Quebec, which seeks independence from Canada. I joined this movement as a practising Catholic in good standing with the Church. There are many more Catholics involved in this movement, with a good number of them in leadership positions. I myself do not aspire to a leadership position within the movement, but I do give this movement my full support and endorsement as a practising traditional Catholic. I recently granted an audio interview with the Southern Nationalist Network (SNN) detailing my thoughts behind this decision (click here to listen).

There are multiple reasons why I have decided to become a full-fledged Dixie Nationalist.  I do confess to having a strong biological connection to Southern culture through my mother, both in Southern English, Irish and Scottish descent, as well as a strong Cherokee ancestry which is deeply connected to Southern history.  My ancestors on my mother's side fought for Dixie in the War for Southern Independence (American Civil War).  None of them were slave owners.  (Contrary to what is taught in America's public schools, the overwhelming vast majority of Confederates did not own slaves.)  Suffice it to say however, I had been holding back in my decision to join this secession/independence movement for nearly a decade in the hope that things might possibly turn around for the better in the United States. Those hopes have been dashed, as the U.S. Catholic Church now has a taste of things to come with the Obama administration's recent HHS mandate to force Catholic institutions to provide contraception, sterilisation and abortion-inducing drugs in their healthcare plans. It has become painfully clear that things WILL NOT get better in the years ahead, but that regardless of the election outcome in November, religious freedom in the United States is on a downward spiral.

Families that cling to their Dixie identity are frequently
discriminated against by anti-Southern propaganda.

Many Americans are angry at the Obama administration, and rightfully so. Their anger is justified. It is also justified to want to defeat Obama in the November election, and indeed the opposition will get its chance soon enough. However, I would like to propose to my readers that Barack Obama is not the problem. He is just a symptom of a much bigger problem. We can get rid of Obama in November if we are able, but that does not mean the problem will go away. The problem is not a man, it is a system, and that system is Washington DC. You see, ever since the Civil War, Americans have been content to consolidate more power and influence into the federal government. Power has consistently been directed away from the states, and toward the fed. As a result, with each passing decade, our government has become more and more centralised. This trend is a violation of the Catholic social teaching called SUBSIDIARITY, and it is the core source of our problem. By centralising the government, the American people have allowed Washington DC to become so big and so powerful, that a federal bureaucrat can hardly sneeze up there without causing turmoil all over the United States. Every little decision Washington DC makes effects us in large dramatic ways. It has now reached a point when a single election can install a man to the presidency, who happens to be insensitive to the conscience issues of Catholics, and that has in turn caused all religious freedom in the United States to come into question. How can this be? This is not what America's founding fathers intended. They never intended the president of the United States to have that much power. Never in their wildest dreams could they have imagined the government they created would turn into a tyranny worse than King George III.

My regular readers know that I am a Catholic monarchist at heart, but they should also know that a truly godly monarchy is something that is given, not something that is made. By that I call into contrast the Biblical examples of David and Saul. King Saul was the first king of Israel. He was effectively 'elected' to be king by the people. In other words, they created a monarchy for themselves. The result of that was disastrous. King Saul went insane and led his kingdom into economic and military ruin. God then replaced him with a king of his own election. King David was elected by God, not the people, and he was given to the people by God. He was a king that was given and not made. So until God gives us a king of his own election, we are forced to deal with the republican system that currently exists in our present world. The Catholic Hungarians have chosen to tackle this problem head on. They have taken over their republic and are now in the process of trying to correct its course. Likewise, the people of Scotland are soon going to hold a secession referendum, in which the public will vote on whether or not to stay within the United Kingdom. We do not know what the outcome of this secession referendum will be, or even if successful, will it produce a country more conservative and traditional? Who knows! We can't fault the Scottish people for trying however. They know the problems are too big for the normal political processes (campaigns and elections) to fix. At least they are thinking outside the box. At least they are trying something different. The whole thing may go down in flames, but at least they are trying. That's more than I can say for most Americans. Until we start getting a little radical in dealing with radical Secularism, these radical Secularists are going to walk all over us. It's a fact. It's happening. Look around! 

It has become clear to me that the principle of Subsidiarity will NEVER return to the United States federal government through the normal political methods. Once a government attains that much power, it never gives it up voluntarily. The only solution is for the people to unite and demand that their state governments TAKE IT BACK by asserting their tenth amendment rights, and if necessary, secede to become independent nation(s). Only a robust and credible secession/independence movement in the United States will create the necessary catalyst to restore power to the states and bring Washington DC back into a level of Subsidiarity more in line with what the founding fathers intended.

Now there are many peaceful secession movements across the United States; the Alaska Independence Party, Republic of Cascadia and the Second Vermont Republic just to name a few. None of these has the history and culture of Christendom though, except for the Old South of Dixieland. The people of the American Southeast, Dixie or Dixieland, are a separate and distinct culture from the rest of the United States. Nobody can deny that. One-hundred and fifty years ago these people seceded from the United States and sought independence. They were met with the most fiendish hostility from the federal government in Washington DC which acted illegally by making war on the very states it was designed to serve. The 'South' as it came to be called, was defeated by this federal government, and since then the people of Dixie have been forced to live under a regime that has never had their best interests in mind.  These Southerners were then vilified by that same regime in every way imaginable, while the regime itself went on to commit all sorts of unspeakable crimes both at home and abroad. The latest HHS mandate by the Obama administration demonstrates this with painful clarity. The United States federal government has exhibited a steady and consistent trend toward curbing American freedoms and forcing its industrial-military hegemony around the world. The United States of America has become an 'empire' in almost every sense of the word.

Part of the federal government's strategy to keep Dixieland suppressed is to vilify its past by rewriting history and teaching it to Southern children in their public schools. All across the Southland, Dixie's youth are consistently taught to hate their ancestry and most especially the cause their Southern ancestors fought to defend. The official line from the United States federal government, in spite of historical evidence to the contrary, is that the South fought solely to defend the institution of slavery and for no other reason whatsoever. While the 'good and virtuous' federal government, headed by that great 'hero and martyr,' Abraham Lincoln (a.k.a. 'Honest Abe') was merely trying to free the poor black slaves from those wicked white crackers down South. At least, that's how the United States federal government tells the story. Of course, the victor of any conflict gets to write the history, and Washington DC has spared no expense to write the children's history textbooks and erect the monuments that honour this version of events. In Washington DC, the two largest monuments erected in the memory of a man are the Washington Monument and the Lincoln Memorial. The first was the founding father of the nation. The second was a - well - another founding father of course! Even though his term in office came eighty years after the nation was founded. So powerful are the propaganda myths surrounding Lincoln that to question the man's motives or integrity is to commit 'unpatriotic blasphemy.' These things can be questioned of the original founding fathers -- in fact they can be slandered in character with virtual impunity -- but not so with Lincoln. The man, the myth, the legend; Abraham Lincoln is revered more as a god than a politician.

Pope Pius IX

No matter how good the propaganda, and no matter how forcefully it is pushed, the truth has a way of coming out eventually. With the advent of the Internet, a different view of history is starting to come to the forefront, backed by original-source documentation from the time period, including letters written by Vatican officials to the Confederacy, both acknowledging the fact that Dixie was a separate country from the United States, and acknowledging the governing titles of officers within the Confederate States of America (C.S.A.).  This should not be confused with an endorsement of the CSA, or taking sides in the Civil War, but rather a papal recognition that the South had indeed seceded, established its own government, and had become a separate nation.  Naturally, this caused an uproar in Washington City, and some sources indicate President Lincoln was furious over it, prompting some explanation from the Vatican nuncio to the United States federal government that the pope had not taken sides in the Civil War.  Confederate President Jefferson Davis and Confederate General Robert E. Lee (both Episcopalian-Anglicans) greatly admired the reigning pontiff of that time -- Pope Pius IX -- and it was this same pontiff who sent an autographed picture of himself to President Jefferson Davis while he was in prison after the war.  (You can read more about this HERE.)  I could go into a long apologetic for the South here, but I will spare you of that. Instead I will only say that the American Civil War was not fought over slavery or state's rights, but over money! Yes, after all is said and done it all came down to cold hard cash. The South was treated unfairly by the North financially. So to save money, the South seceded and formed a new independent nation. When the Northern banks realised how much money they stood to lose from this, they pressured Lincoln to take the South back by force. So that is exactly what he did. Yes, other factors played into this as well, westward expansion playing a huge role, but after all was said and done, it was a clash of civilisations that was a long time in the making.  Money played a very big part in it, and no, according to the testimony of leaders from both sides, it wasn't about freeing the slaves.  Any serious investigation into the attitudes that prevailed among the leaders of both sides during the time will reveal latent racism, greed and blinding self-righteousness. This was common in the middle nineteenth century, but it was especially true of Abraham Lincoln and his successors. Of the two sides, clearly the South had the most to lose and the least to gain financially from the conflict, but they fought for principle's sake and that was their undoing. If you want to learn the real history of the Civil War, and the real story behind the culture of the Old South, it should be told from the perspective of a man descended from Southern black slaves -- a man who knows his history and isn't afraid to tell it like it was. His name is H.K. Edgerton and his website is SOUTHERN HERITAGE 411.

H.K. Edgerton

This of course leads me to the second tool used against Dixie Nationalists by the U.S. federal government and its supporters in the 'politically correct' liberal modernist establishment.  It is the myth that anyone who sports a Dixie flag (or one of the flags of the Confederacy) is automatically a racist white supremacist on par with a Klansman or Neo-Nazi. Of course this is poppycock!  But it is typical of the liberal modernist establishment to propagate symbolism over substance.  Liberal modernists often express their support or opposition to things in very cursory ways, such as sporting various coloured ribbons, bumper-stickers of different sorts, lapel buttons, rainbow flags and such.  This is how they 'identify' who and what they are, and it is also how they 'label' others.  Naturally of course, they think they have the authority to label all symbols based on their very narrow world view.  Having been educated by America's public school systems, they immediately assume the Dixie flags stand for slavery, since after all, that's all the South fought for (according to the federal government anyway).  Therefore Dixie flags MUST represent a glorification of slavery and are therefore a sign of racist white supremacy.  Never mind the fact that Dixie flags are sported by men and women of colour all throughout the deep South.  Not only are such banners flown by black men in various places, but it has become fashionable for many women in the deep South (including young black women) to wear bikini swimsuits patterned after the Dixie flag!  Common sense would tell the average observer that this symbol obviously has some meaning other than racist white supremacy, but liberal modernists seem incapable, or else unwilling, to make this logical leap.  The truth is, the racist shtick works well for them.  Liberal modernists in the United States (and elsewhere) are notorious for labelling anyone who disagrees with their multicultural moral relativism as a 'racist.'  It allows them to shut down the conversation, claim the moral high ground for themselves, and demonise their political opposition, regardless if there is any truth to the charge.

The Dixie Flag is a Symbol that
Crosses all Racial Lines.  It is a Symbol
of CULTURE not Racism!

To clarify, there is a history of known racists using the Dixie flag as a symbol of their hate, but also in fact, those same racists use the American flag as a symbol of their hate.  So which is the symbol of their hate?  Is it the Dixie flag, or the American flag, or is it both?  If it is both, than what are we to say?  Could it be that these idiots will use any symbol to express their hatred?  Since when do they get to define our symbols for us?  If the liberal modernists use the actions of fringe idiots as an example of the Dixie flag representing racism, than intellectual honesty demands that they say the same of the American flag.  Anything less is hypocrisy.  Nevertheless, this is another way the liberal modernist establishment oppresses and demonises the people of the South.

So what would a free and independent Dixie look like today?  Well, for starters, the circumstances behind secession today would be considerably different than those of 1860-61.  Slavery is a thing of the past (thank God!) and the scourge of institutionalised segregation is behind us as well.  The reasons for secession today however, would take on some similarities to those of 1860-61, centring around economics and culture -- specifically in this case focusing on freedom of religion (conscience) and our national identity as a Christian people.  A free and independent South would have to manifest itself by individual state secessions, followed by a call for a constitutional convention, in which some form of constitution or 'articles of confederation' would have to be drawn up.  The original Confederate constitution could be used as a template, if that is what the state delegates want.  Whatever form a new Dixie Republic will take, its constitution will have to make recognition of the role of Christianity in the formation of our people and our culture.  It will have to base its laws on Christian virtues, which of course would include the protection of human life from conception to natural death.  Marriage would have to be based on the traditional Christian understanding of one man and one woman.  Citizenship would need to be defined by the states, and the national borders would need to be enforced.  Immigration would have to be stopped for the short-term to lower the unemployment rate across the Southland, and when immigration is opened back up, it will need to be tightly regulated to allow for full assimilation of those entering the country.  Limits would need to be placed on corporations, so as to prevent massive international business from taking over local economies and controlling the government, as they do in the United States.  Beyond that, states must be allowed to run their own business, following the principle of Subsidiarity, as the new Dixie Republic stands aside and lets state and local jurisdictions do what comes natural.  For the most part, states would handle their own business, while the Dixie Republic would focus on national defence and interstate commerce, while assuming a very limited role in internal state affairs.  This principle of Subsidiarity would have to be enshrined into the new constitution somehow.  Culturally, Dixians (as we would likely come to be called) would need to focus on renewing their local religious establishments and rebuilding the Anglo-Celtic culture that still exists but has been nearly decimated by 150 years of Yankee oppression.  A revival in the arts would be necessary, especially as they relate to our Irish and Scottish cultural roots.  To clarify, this is a CULTURAL thing, not a racial thing.  Black Southerners are very acquainted with the Anglo-Celtic culture of the South, and have indeed made a sizable contribution to it, especially in the arts.  That contribution is already recognised, and we will need more of their help.  A new Dixie Republic MUST and WILL be defined by cooperative partnership between all people of colour and ethnicity.  We will NEED each other for Dixie to flourish and thrive.

Believe it or not, whites and blacks worked together under
this flag, fighting big-government oppression during the
Civil War, and we still do today!

Of course the question always arises; wouldn't secession/independence start another Civil War?  To which I must say this is not 1861.  There is little chance that a sitting president today could get away with what Abraham Lincoln did one-hundred and fifty years ago.  The whole world is watching America now, in real time, via news channels and the Internet.  Yes, there will likely be politicians in Washington DC who will WANT to go to war over this, but they would be few in comparison, and they would be restrained by the tide of international public opinion.  You see, the United States federal government has been sponsoring and championing secession movements around the world for the last sixty years or so.  Washington DC trying to explain why the federal government won't allow a similar movement in its own country would be awkward to say the least.  The use of military force on its own people would be broadcast around the world, and Washington DC would lose all credibility among its international partners.  No, this is not 1861.  Things are a bit different now.

The League of the South is not a product of the past, but rather a completely new creation. It stands firmly against institutionalised racism and bigotry, calling upon all of its members to act in Christian charity toward their fellow man (see official statement here). The League has stood squarely with the Catholic Church in her struggle against the recent HHS mandate (see official statement here). As I said, many of the leaders within the League of the South are Catholics. Most importantly however, the League of the South stands for Subsidiarity, the very thing that would have prevented all these problems had Americans abided by it to begin with. The League also stands for promoting the religious virtues of Christendom and the cultural heritage of the Dixie people, which is Anglo-Celtic in nature -- a hybrid of English, Scottish and Irish culture.

I am convinced that a free and independent Southland of Dixie will inevitably result in more freedom and independence for those states in the North and West that choose to stay within the Federal Union of the United States of America. This is because Washington DC will likely loosen its grip on the states in order to prevent another secession/independence movement from arising elsewhere in the nation. That is assuming the United States actually survives much longer as a nation.

Dixie Nationalists Frequently
Turn Out To Protest Government Suppression
These Events Have Come To Be Called
'Flag Rallies' or just 'Flagging.'
They irritate liberal modernists to no end.

There are many signs that indicate the United States will not last much longer anyway. The rising federal debt, along with a stagnating economy and social discord seem to be pointing in the direction of a rapid decline. It is quite possible the United States may break up into multiple smaller nation-states anyway, regardless of what happens in Dixieland. That being the case, we Americans should all be thinking about where our loyalties reside, and what culture we most closely identify with. Because in the not-too-distant future, we may need to act in accordance with that just to survive.

If you would like to join the League of the South as well, you can do so BY CLICKING HERE. You do not need to be a Southerner to join the League or support its charitable causes. Simple donations to various charitable causes can be made HERE. Donations can also be made to 'Southern Heritage 411' HERE.  Or if you prefer, Southern heritage merchandise can be purchased HERE, with the proceeds going to 'Southern Heritage 411.'  I don't believe one is even required to be an American to make donations. If you agree with Dixie independence and the promotion of Southern culture along with the virtues of Christendom, than supporting the 'League of the South' or 'Southern Heritage 411' are ways you can help make it happen.

The St. Andrew's Banner of Dixie Papists

PLEASE SHARE THIS ARTICLE WITH OTHERS USING THE 'SHARE' ICONS BELOW.