Right Of Return - Southerners Come Home

Obama is not the first Caesar to rule America, and he may not be the last either.

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: I have run all the numbers for the 2012 election, and now with a fair degree of confidence, I think I can safely say two things...

1. Mitt Romney will be the Republican nominee for President of the United States.  Rick Santorum's strategy of stealing enough delegates away from Romney to cause a brokered G.O.P. convention will not work.  His window of opportunity closed yesterday.  He's a lame duck candidate now.
2. In a head-to-head battle between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama, Mitt Romney loses hands down.  He does not energise the base of the party.  Primary voter turnout numbers are dropping by the week as it becomes more apparent that he will be the nominee.  A socially conservative Romney is viewed as a fraud by the Christian right.  It's over.  Mitt Romney will not (indeed cannot) win.  This means Barack Obama will be re-elected, and we can look forward to another four years of him in the Whitehouse.

So as we prepare for another four years of Obama, the question begs to be asked: "What now?"

The United States is about to go into a period of 'heavy executive oversight' -- i.e. dictatorship.  Fortunately, it looks like this particular dictator -- Obama -- is just a temporary one.  He will hand his seat over to another in Janurary of 2017, but that one will be a dictator too.  This dictatorship period is inevitable and predictable.  Not to worry.  People live under dictatorships all over the world, and some of them live fairly well.  Americans will too.  This however, is the final gasp of the American empire before it crumbles.  When it does crumble, it should happen rather quickly, considering how much federal debt Washington DC has accrued.  The fall of the American empire will be primarily over money, but I would expect a botched foreign war to play into this as well, sucking what little there is left out of the coffers.  We are going the way of the ancient Roman empire.

Within our lifetimes, perhaps sooner than we think, the secession movements in the United States will gain steam and become quite credible.  It is not likely they will move to secede while the American empire is still standing, but as soon as Washington DC loses its grip on things, look for these secession movements to spring into action, taking the lion's share of political attention.   So my question to you is this.  WHEN these secession movements gain steam, and it looks like the former United States is about to be broken up, where do you want to be???  What region of the continent do you think you would do well in?

There are multiple peaceful secession movements across the United States, however the one I am particularly interested in is the American South (Dixieland).  The time has come for all of the sons and daughters of the South, and their descendants, who now live in other parts of the United States, to come home.  When the American empire crumbles, you don't want to be caught in an area where the culture is not your own.  If you're a Southerner by culture, then you know who you are.  You want to be in an area that is ready and eager to rebuild according to the Christian culture and values you hold dear.  Start getting your things in order.  It's time to move back home.

If you're neither a Southerner, nor descended from the South, but you share the values of the Southern people -- Faith, Family and Christian Culture -- then you may want to consider a relocation to the South (Dixie).  Catholicism is growing at a rapid rate in the South.  In fact, it's the only part of the United States where dioceses are building parishes and schools instead of closing them down.  You will also be pleased to know that the Southern states of Dixie are still vigorously fighting gay-marriage, while many states in the North and West have given in to it.  My home state of Missouri has passed a constitutional amendment banning gay-marriage outright.  Many other Southern states have done the same.  This makes the South more hospitable to Catholic Charities while other states in the North and West are causing them to shut down.  Homeschooling is protected in the South as well, encouraging family-based traditional education.  Housing is very affordable and so is Catholic school tuition.  The only advice I would give you is this.  When you come to live here, leave your Northern and Western mentalities behind.  With a little help, you will assimilate into this region easily, and you'll be glad you did. 

St. Joseph, patron of home sellers, pray for us all!

Catholicism Is The Fastest Growing Religion In Dixie

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: More evidence is mounting that the American South (Dixieland) is becoming the fastest growing region for Catholicism in the United States (read more here, here and here).  One hallmark of 'Southern Catholicism' is its more traditional character. Southern Catholics are far more likely, than their counterparts in other regions of the United States, to believe what the Catholic Church teaches and attempt to practice it. Furthermore, Southern Catholics have a growing interest in the more traditional liturgical aspects of the faith, including Latin hymns, incense, ad orientem, and kneeling for communion. In addition, there is a growing interest in traditional headcovering among Catholic women in the South. Now with this growth we are beginning to see the building of new seminaries...

(CNA/EWTN News).- A community of cloistered nuns and a future regional seminary plan to occupy newly purchased property in Cleveland County, N.C., to serve a flourishing Catholic population.

The Poor Clares of Perpetual Adoration and the Winston-Salem, N.C.-based Te Deum Foundation will acquire 484 acres valued at $2.9 million in Mooresboro, which is about 60 miles west of Charlotte.

“Most seminaries only teach how to close parishes, cluster parishes, and how to administer to several parishes in light of dwindling numbers of Catholics,” the foundation said on their website. “Praise be to God that this is not a problem in the South!”

The planned seminary, for which 151 acres have been set aside, will be the only one in Georgia, Florida and North and South Carolina, the Catholic News Herald reported. Seminarians from the Diocese of Charlotte currently attend seminaries in Maryland, Ohio and Rome....

read full story here

It should not be surprising then that with this growth of Catholic population in the South, we are also seeing a surge of Catholics into the Southern Nationalist Movement. In fact, Catholics make up a sizeable portion of the leadership in this movement. You can read more here.

Typical Anti-Dixie Propaganda

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT:  I saw the preview trailer for this film and I was speechless.  I didn't know whether to be offended, or laugh, or what?  I was just speechless.  The whole concept is just so ridiculous.  It's almost like a joke -- right? -- it is a joke?  Isn't it???  No, they can't be serious.

Ah, but they were serious.  The whole Civil War conflict has been rewritten into a Hollywood vampire film.  Yes, seriously... vampires.

It's called 'Abraham Lincoln - Vampire Hunter' and I'm sure you can guess who the vampires are.  That's right - my ancestors - the Southerners.  I suppose of this were a low-budget 'B' film I would probably just laugh it off.  However, it looks like somebody put a lot of money into this.

Now I'm not into the vampire thing.  I honestly don't find anything that entertaining about people behaving as blood-sucking leaches, but hey, to each his own I guess.

In America it seems there are only two acceptable prejudices any more.  The first is against practising Catholics of course.  The second is against people of Southern heritage.  Folks like me just get a double dose I suppose.  Still, I wonder if the vampires in this film were black slaves how the NAACP would look at that.  If they were Jews, I wonder what the Anti-Defamation League would say.  If they were Native Americans, I would be curious to see the tribal responses.

In America today, we live in a culture where the South is so wrongfully maligned, so incredibly slandered, that turning our Southern ancestors into blood-sucking vampires is viewed as perfectly acceptable for Hollywood entertainment.  I post this strictly for my international readers, so you can see first hand just how debased, ignorant, insensitive and downright hateful (not to mention stupid) the prevailing Yankee culture has become in the United States.

Ozark Heritage: Laura Ingalls Wilder

The 'Little House' of Laura Ingalls Wilder in Mansfield Missouri
Nestled in the heart of the Ozark Mountains
Some of her 'Little House' books were penned here.

Laura Elizabeth Ingalls Wilder
(February 7, 1867 – February 10, 1957)

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Many of my readers, including my international audience, may be familiar with the Laura Ingalls Wilder books. They have been printed in many languages around the world. For those of you not familiar, Laura Ingalls Wilder was a pioneer child during the later half of the 19th century in the Midwestern to Upper Central United States. She was born in 1867 Wisconsin, just two years after the conclusion of the great Civil War that ravaged the American South. She was the second of five children born to Charles and Caroline Ingalls. The family originally moved to Kansas on the government promise of free land (The Homestead Act). They later moved to Minnesota, spent a brief time in Iowa, and finally back to Minnesota again, where Charles and Caroline lived the remainder of their lives. Laura eventually married Almanzo Wilder and moved to Mansfield Missouri down south of the Mason-Dixon line. It was here she eventually wrote her memoirs as a series of children's books commonly known as the 'Little House on the Prairie' collection.

The 'Rock House' English Cottage
Built by Rose Wilder for her Parents
Some 'little house' books were penned here.

During the time of Laura's childhood, tens of thousands of Americans migrated westward from the war-torn nation, motivated by the promise that if they could just settle a portion of land west of a certain government-drawn line, they would be granted full ownership of that land free of charge. It was the way in which America rebuilt herself after the Civil War and gave new hope to poor families who had nothing financially to lose. Thousands of American families travelled west on horse-drawn covered wagons with all their possessions inside (which usually didn't amount to much). Upon finding a suitable plot of land, the wagon was unloaded, and a small cabin was immediately built, usually using lumber harvested from nearby trees. Within a year, a small farm was usually planted, and the family would hope and pray for a successful crop. If the Lord blessed them, they would usually gain enough money to survive another year. If not, they suffered all the hardships of poverty, starvation and disease. Many of these settlers died on their homesteads. Many more returned back east for medical attention, hoping to get back to their homestead before it was torn down and re-settled by somebody else. Encounters (sometimes unfriendly) were common with Native American tribes.  Some settlers were highly successful, but most were modestly successful. The Ingalls family numbered among the modestly successful, with some setbacks and tragedies here and there. Their only son (Charles Fredrick) died in infancy. Their oldest daughter (Mary Amelia) went permanently blind after a bout with scarlet fever. Laura's husband Almanzo suffered from paralysis after they both contracted diphtheria while Laura was pregnant with her first child Rose Wilder. While all three survived the illness, Almanzo required a cane for the rest of his life and was unable to tolerate hard labour. This caused Laura and Almanzo's downward spiral into poverty and debt in Minnesota, eventually leading to their move to Southwest Missouri, a warmer area well-settled and civilised since long before the Civil War. Since this area was still considered "out west" the land was cheaper than east of the Mississippi, and the Civil War had been less devastating to Missouri than other regions down South. It made a much more tolerable climate for the couple to raise their small child, Rose, and was still close enough for the Ingalls and Wilder families to visit from time to time.

A young Rose Wilder with her mule
Spookendyke.  Laura and Almanzo gave
her the mule to ride to school, but Rose
reported that it was so stubborn she ended
up walking it to school most of the time.

Rose Wilder grew up as a Missourian, in the cradle of the Ozark Mountains, and then went on to become a world famous author and columnist. She returned to the Ozarks after many world travels with enough money to build her parents a luxury English cottage on their farm. It was here that Laura, at the prompting of Rose, began her 'Little House' childhood memoirs. Laura was herself a school teacher and a columnist. Now she was an author, and her books were designed to teach children about the life of rural Americans during the pioneer period after the Civil War. They have been published in multiple languages and are famous world wide. They are a wholesome and entertaining account of the latter 19th century. If you have not already introduced your children to her stories, I strongly recommend them.

I recently visited the Mansfield 'Little House' with some friends and captured some of the photographs featured here. While I was not permitted to take pictures of any of the interiors (houses and museum), I was free to take all the pictures I wanted outside. The interior of the houses were remarkable, as I was privileged to stand in the home and touch some of the items of this world-famous American icon. In the 1980s, film producer Michael Landon, created a movie and television series based on the memoirs of Laura Ingalls Wilder. While much of the film episodes are fiction, they are set to the historical reality of her life and times. Laura was portrayed by actress Melissa Gilbert and the episodes were narrated by her in the way Laura wrote her books. These are interesting fictional stories based on factual people and lives.

Today's local children playing
in Mansfield Missouri

The Ozark Mountains in Southern Missouri are filled with history and culture. Moving to this area was one the most rewarding decisions I've ever made. For my Catholic readers, you will be pleased to learn that Catholicism is growing in this area at a nearly exponential rate. The small rural town of Mansfield Missouri already has a thriving Catholic Church. Missouri also has some of the most generous home-schooling laws in the world, making the state extremely hospitable to traditional family life. If you are a traditionally-minded Catholic family anywhere in the United States, a move to the Ozark Mountains of Southwest Missouri or Northwest Arkansas might be a desirable placed to raise your children. It certainly worked out well for me and of course Laura Ingalls Wilder.

CATHOLICS WIN DEEP SOUTH !!!

The St. Andrew's Banner of Dixie Papists

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: History has just been made. For the first time ever, the Deep South of Dixie has just voted for two Catholic candidates for president. South Carolina and Georgia voted for Catholic convert Newt Gingrich, while Alabama and Mississippi just voted for traditional Latin Mass Catholic Rick Santorum.

Catholic Convert
Newt Gingrich

Traditional Catholic
Rick Santorum

While I suffer from no illusions about either of these two candidates -- they are both big government Republicans who have compromised their conservative principles -- I am compelled to point out to my readers that history has just been made. The Deep South of Dixie has just demonstrated a willingness to shed its anti-Catholic history and support a Catholic for the highest office of the land. (They just can't decide which one yet.)

When you couple this with the fact that Catholics are taking leadership roles within the New Southern Nationalist movement, it can safely be said that what we are witnessing in the Southland of Dixie is a profound paradigm shift crossing all religious lines. The South is coming out pro-Catholic, and as far as this strongly Evangelical part of the United States goes, they say the more traditionally-conservative Catholic the better. (Now if we can only find one that believes in Subsidiarity.)

A Southern (Dixie) Take on Monarchy

(Southern Nationalist Network) - As demonstrated by Dr Hoppe, the democratic age has brought about less liberty, weaker families, a declining birth rate and total war. It should be clear that democracy is a failure. It is a regression back into barbarism, not a progressive step forward as it is generally understood today due to non-stop propaganda in its favour. Most of our Southern ancestors wisely rejected democracy and the ‘progressive’ agenda which came from New England and the North. Instead, Southerners embraced an extremely limited, aristocratic republic which in many ways had more in common with a traditional monarchy than a modern democracy. Once liberty and property rights were the key political issues in Southern society and government interfered little in people’s lives. The Southern population was growing and highly affluent. Under democracy today the South is the poorest region of the United States, crime is rampant, millions of Third World aliens populate our States, birth rates have dramatically fallen, hundreds of thousands of laws regulate our every activity, and war (generally aggressive) is nearly always present. The more democracy has been forced upon us, the worse off we have become. Under the monarchical system the West ruled supreme in the world by any possible standard.  Civilisation was on an upwards trend. There seemed to be no height to which we couldn’t reach. Today we live in a dying civilisation. The old optimism is rightfully gone and we wonder now if we will even be able to survive the present century. Not all our problems can be blamed upon democracy, but surely this awful, failed system deserves a great deal of the blame. If we are to correct the direction of our civilisation one of the things we must do is reject the democratic system. We can not return to the past; however, by studying our past and looking back at a more healthy age and system, we can find answers which can be adapted to our present problems in the modern age. Folks like Dr Hans-Hermann Hoppe are doing invaluable work by pointing us in the right direction...

read full story here
Click here for the audio (duration: 19:15)

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT:  While most folks wouldn't normally associate Dixie Nationalism with monarchy, there is a school of thought among some Southerners that perhaps a more traditional form of government is needed that has strong ties to our European Christian heritage.  It's not hard to see traces of this element woven throughout Southern society.  For example, Southern hospitality harkens back to medieval chivalry.  Southern honour also harkens back to chivalry, when a man's word was his bond, and his integrity was not to be insulted.  Southerners have always been a traditional people, sometimes even to a fault, and this has caused us more than our share of trouble over the last century and a half.  While most Southerners would just desire things to 'go back to the way they were' in the Constitutional Republic days of the American Empire, a growing number are beginning to realise that is never going to happen.  Among those Southerners who yearn for independence again, some are open to discussion on more traditional forms of government -- monarchy in particular -- and this creates an interesting overlap with the traditional Catholic perspective.  The above citation and podcast is from a Southern (Dixie) Nationalist news blog.  I'm sure my readers will find it interesting.

Secularism Is More Dangerous Than Radical Islam

(Catholic Insight) - In a meeting with various U.S. Bishops, Pope Benedict XVI said that the consensus which once existed in America supporting “ethical principles deriving from nature and nature’s God,” has faded. “Today that consensus has eroded significantly in the face of powerful new cultural currents which are not only directly opposed to core moral teachings of the Judeo-Christian tradition, but increasingly hostile to Christianity as such,” he said.

The Pope was emphatic in insisting that the threat posed by current trends threatens not only Christianity but “humanity itself.” He said: “To the extent that some current cultural trends contain elements that would curtail the proclamation of these truths, whether constricting it within the limits of a merely scientific rationality, or suppressing it in the name of political power or majority rule, they represent a threat not just to Christian faith, but also to humanity itself and to the deepest truth about our being and ultimate vocation, our relationship to God.”

The Pope used strong language to describe the grave situation he perceives in America. “(I)t is imperative, he said, “that the entire Catholic community in the United States come to realise the grave threats to Church’s public moral witness presented by a radical secularism which finds increasing expression in the political and cultural spheres.” He continued, “The seriousness of these threats needs to be clearly appreciated at every level of ecclesial life.”

read full story here

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT:  Pope Benedict XVI has now warned Americans against the dangerous trend of militant Secularisation in the United States.  It is, in my own estimation, a trend far more dangerous to us than radical Islam, and threatens to do more harm to our Christian culture than Muslim jihadists could ever do on their best day.  Pope Benedict ought to know a thing or two about this.  He has lived his entire life in Europe, where he has watched first hand the horrors of Nazism, followed by the post-war Secularisation of European society.  Today, Europe is spiritually lost, just as Our Lady of Fatima warned the three seer children almost a century ago.  That once great Christian civilisation is no more.  The twentieth century killed it.  What was the cause of Europe's demise?  Was it Nazism?  Was it fascism?  Was it communism?  While all of these things certainly played a role in preparing Europe for her rapid apostasy, it was none of these things that finally brought it about.  No.  What caused Europeans to give up their faith was nothing more or less than Liberal Progressive Secularism!  With mind-blowing speed, Europe was returned to an era where practising Christianity occupied a percentage of the population so shockingly small, that numbers of this type haven't been seen since the days of the ancient Roman Empire.  Their embrace of the Secularist mindset brought about this immediate and dramatic decline of Christianity in Europe -- IN LESS THAN ONE GENERATION!!!  Radical Secularisation proved to be more effective at eliminating Christianity than Nazism, fascism and communism combined!!!

Now the Secularists have set their sights on North America.  They have infiltrated our schools, media, government and courts.  They occupy the highest offices in the land and sit on the United States Supreme Court.  They have been present among us for just as long as the European Secularists, if not longer, and their works are evident.  Many of them have ties to known hate-groups, such as the Ku Klux Klan and Neo-Nazis.  Yes, some are in our federal government, and even some have sat on the United States Supreme Court.  I encourage you to listen to this short audio clip from Constitutional lawyer and radio talk-show host Mark Levin.  (I'm not his fan, but I give credit where credit is due.)  He will tell you where American Secularism came from and it will shock you.  The anti-Catholic bigots are still running America, and they have been for a very long time.  Think of it for just a moment.  While I am no fan of the former President John F. Kennedy, and he was certainly no paragon of Catholic virtue by any stretch of the imagination, he could not be elected president in this country without first RENOUNCING his faith in public life.  This is why I predict that Rick Santorum WILL NOT be nominated for president by the GOP.  While the man has many flaws, not as serious as Kennedy's but flaws nonetheless, he has refused to renounce the influence of his Catholic faith on his public life.  That killed his campaign right there.  Santorum will fizzle in the weeks ahead.  Mitt Romney, on the other hand, did renounce his Mormon faith in public life back in 2008.  So having bowed to the sterile gods of Secularism, just like J.F.K., he will get his party's nomination.  Whether or not he wins the presidency is another story.  That depends on different issues.

The Secularisation of the United States and Canada have now reached an unstoppable speed.  The Obama administration's recent HHS mandate is just a symptom of this much greater problem.  Word has it that another HHS mandate compromise is in the works.  We shall see what comes of that, but it changes nothing as far as I'm concerned.  Even if the U.S. Catholic Church wins this battle hands down, the fact that they had to fight that battle in the first place clearly signals that the United States of America, I was taught to believe in as a child, does not exist and clearly has not existed for a very long time.  The flags, the anthems, the mottos, the pledge, all of it; they are an illusion.  The religious freedom these things claim to represent does not exist.  Anti-Catholics have been running this federal Union for a very long time.  This is why I have joined the League of the South, an organisation heavily influenced by Catholic thinking in regards to freedom of religion, and have become a full-fledged secessionist and Dixie Nationalist.  Their Core Beliefs Statement and Statement on Racism were formulated with the help of Catholics and present a future vision of our homeland that no good Catholic can honestly object to.  The League's Statement on Obama's attack on Christians demonstrates a clear stand with the U.S. Catholic Church against the Obama administration's recent HHS mandate.  The biggest reason why I have joined the League of the South however, is its blatant and unapologetic stand against militant Secularism.  There is no other viable political organisation in the United States that takes such a strong stand against the Secularisation of our society.  Admittedly, the League of the South is a geographical organisation, representing mainly the sixteen Southern states of Dixie, thirteen of which seceded in 1860 - 61 to form their own nation.  One doesn't need to be a Southerner to join the League, but admittedly, the League's interest concerns the South.  Catholics in other parts of America are more than welcome to support the League, but I would also encourage them to form their own geographical organisations in opposition to the militant Secularism now promoted by the District of Columbia, otherwise known as 'The Columbian Empire' or 'Washington D.C.'  I would strongly encourage Catholic involvement in the Second Vermont Republic and the Third Palmetto Republic.  Both of these growing state secession movements will need strong Catholic influence to become successful and prevent an infestation of anti-Catholicism within their ranks.  Between the Second Vermont Republic and the Third Palmetto Republic, one will immediately observe two very different ways of addressing social problems, but both can be easily guided by the wisdom of Catholic teaching on Subsidiarity, each in its own way.  Catholics should also look into forming new state organisations in other parts of the United States.  Why?  Because in order to fight back effectively, we must bring into question the authority of Washington D.C. over us.  It's the Church's job to transform the faithful, and yes, the laity do have a role in that process.  However, when it comes to the political affairs of this world, it is not the Church's job to transform our political institutions.  That is specifically the job of the laity.  So if you think the Catholic Church is ever going to transform anti-Catholic Washington D.C., you can just get that silly notion out of your head right now.  IT'S NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN!!!  Rick Santorum, for example, would transform Washington D.C. about as effectively as John F. Kennedy did -- which is nill.  The nation's capitol is un-reformable.  It's not just the District of Columbia that needs transformation, (a transformation that will never happen), but increasingly we are beginning to see anti-Catholic sentiments in many U.S. states as well.  Basically, wherever one sees a strong political push for homosexual 'marriage,' there one will also find a latent anti-Catholic bigotry just beneath the surface.  Again though, it's not homosexual 'marriage' that is the problem here, it's just another symptom.

THE PROBLEM IS MILITANT SECULARISM.  That's because Secularism and Christianity are two opposing world views, at odds in every way, having virtually nothing in common.  Indeed, Christianity and Islam have more in common than Christianity and Secularism.  If one believes that Christianity and Islam can never coexist in peace, an assumption sometimes accurate and sometimes not, than the dichotomy between Christianity and Secularism is even greater.  THE TWO SYSTEMS CANNOT COEXIST IN PEACE AT ALL.   One will always devour the other.  The only question is which one will pursue the more aggressive position.  For the last sixty-plus years, the more aggressive party has been Secularism.  It has destroyed Europe at a mind-blowing speed.  North America is next, and the Secularists are well on their way.  The momentum is gathering.  Christians in North America have this one last window of opportunity to make our last stand before the coming Chastisement of God.  We must break the hold that Secular institutions (governments) have upon us.  We must deny them their power to govern us.  We must make it crystal clear, beyond the shadow of a doubt, in no uncertain terms, that we will not submit to the sterile gods of Secularism any more.  They have no power over us.

Like it or not, America's Roman Catholics will play a central role in this struggle.  The Church has given her marching orders insofar as she is authorised to give them.  We, the Roman Catholics of the United States, have been instructed to disobey any government law or diktat that violates Catholic conscience.  Most recently, such an edict has manifested itself in Obama's HHS mandate on artificial contraception, sterilisation and abortion-inducing drugs.  What will become of this edict we cannot know right now but it does not matter.  Because even if the Catholic Church wins this battle, more will soon follow, and it won't just be against the federal government, but against state governments too.  Sadly, most of these state governments are in what is historically known as Yankee or Western territories.  So far, the Old South (Dixie) has been the only region that remains legally friendly to the Catholic Church.  Catholics must seize on this opportunity while it still lasts -- before this window closes and all is lost.

In addition to what the Catholic Church advocates, which amounts to limited civil disobedience against unjust laws, as a Catholic layman working in the political realm, I am advocating a counter punch against Secularism, which has not been seen since the advance of this evil since the middle twentieth century in Europe and North America.  Nobody thus far has called out militant Secularism for what it is -- EVIL.  Since it is evil, we must stand against it.  We are morally obligated to do so.  Thus we must also stand against those private and public institutions that promote it, and this includes not only various state governments, but the United States federal government itself.  After more than half a century, the time has finally come to fight back!  We are a Christian people, and WE WILL NOT voluntarily submit to a government that opposes our faith.  We cannot be expected to submit to militant Secular law any more than we can be expected to submit to Islamic shariah law.  Both of them oppose us and both of them are hell bent on devouring us.  Therefore, we will not voluntarily submit to them.  They must be forced upon us, and indeed they have been in various places, and we have had enough!  In the east Christians must deal with Islam, but in the west we must deal with Secularism, and in the west not only is Secularism more dangerous, but we still have a fighting chance against it.  This is why I advocate peaceful secession movements, not just in America but in Canada too, and the creation of benign Christian Republics that respect the rights of all without infringing upon our Christian faith or historic Christian culture.

My fellow Catholic readers, you cannot say that anything I've written here is untrue.  You know what is happening.  The signs are all around us.  You know the window of opportunity is closing, and if you stand idly by and do nothing, you have only yourselves to blame.  We are Christians, and we are bound by Christ's law of peaceful activism.  Let us exercise this law to its fullest extent.  Let us peacefully declare the reign of Secularism over!  Let us take back our land and our institutions where we can, and let us make our last bold stand as we wait for God to deliver us from evil.

U.S. States Begin To Prepare for Collapse Of Federal Government

Sinking of the Titanic

(Trib.com) - State representatives on Friday advanced legislation to launch a study into what Wyoming should do in the event of a complete economic or political collapse in the United States.

House Bill 85 passed on first reading by a voice vote. It would create a state-run government continuity task force, which would study and prepare Wyoming for potential catastrophes, from disruptions in food and energy supplies to a complete meltdown of the federal government. 

The task force would look at the feasibility of Wyoming issuing its own alternative currency, if needed. And House members approved an amendment Friday by state Rep. Kermit Brown, R-Laramie, to have the task force also examine conditions under which Wyoming would need to implement its own military draft, raise a standing army, and acquire strike aircraft and an aircraft carrier.

The bill’s sponsor, state Rep. David Miller, R-Riverton, has said he doesn’t anticipate any major crises hitting America anytime soon. But with the national debt exceeding $15 trillion and protest movements growing around the country, Miller said Wyoming — which has a comparatively good economy and sound state finances — needs to make sure it’s protected should any unexpected emergency hit the U.S.

Several House members spoke in favor of the legislation, saying there was no harm in preparing for the worst...

read full story here

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: This is very intelligent, and if you live in the United States, you need to forward this story to your state congressmen, urging them to support similar measures in your state. As the article says, there is no harm preparing for the worst, and I'm afraid that in all likelihood, the worst will indeed happen, with the only question being 'when?'

Yes, the United States federal government in Washington DC, what many are beginning to call 'The Columbian Empire,' will collapse eventually. With a federal debt surpassing the GDP, combined with over a trillion dollars in annual deficits, and matched by a trade deficit that is just as large, it is clear that America's eventual demise is inevitable. Combine this with political and social unrest in the Union, and these problems are just compounded all that much further.  Just as sure as I am writing this, that day will come. What we don't know is when it will come. Will it be sooner (within 20 years) or later (beyond 20 years)? That is unpredictable right now, but it WILL happen. That much is sure.  The watery grave of history demands it.

WHEN it does happen, it will be kind of like the sinking of the Titanic, and it will be hard for the world to watch. When the USA goes down, it will likely take Canada and Mexico with it. Much of North America will be thrown into economic, social and political chaos. The effect of this will reverberate outward economically, bringing great harm to America's primary trading partners. Other regions of the world will be thrown into economic upheaval as well. The European Union will not likely survive such upheaval, that is, if it still exists at all by the time this happens. China and the Pacific rim will also be negatively effected, as well as South America. However, the effects of America's sinking will vary on different regions, directly related to their economic dependency on the United States. I suspect the worldwide economic upheaval (when it finally happens) will last approximately five years, before the world settles down into a new economic-political paradigm. This upheaval will likely include war in some places. Hopefully, it won't be a world war. Of course, there is always the chance that the United States could go out with more of a whimper than a bang. The upheaval may simply be localised to North America, while the rest of the world seeks ways to manage the new world paradigm without the United States. The first order of business however, would be moving the United Nations out of New York and into some other international metropolitan. It may involve changing the charter of the UN as well. Who knows how the world will handle this. The best advice I could give to people of other nations is that if you want to reduce the effect of this catastrophe on your nation, pressure your leaders to get your nation less dependent on the United States.

As for Americans, our time has come to get ready, and the smart people of Wyoming are on the right track. With just a handful of exceptions, most U.S. states are economically solvent, or very close to it. Many states, including my own (Missouri) are energy independent when it comes to electricity. We actually sell our electricity to other states. Most states have access to coal and natural gas as well. Then of course there is crude oil. States liberated from the restricting powers of Washington DC (The Columbian Empire) will have unhindered access to their own oil reserves and the ability to sell it or build refineries as needed. Timber is abundant in many states, and then of course there are farmlands that can be used to sustain our local population. Yes, for the most part, many states do have what they need to not only survive, but even flourish and thrive, in the absence of the United States federal government. As for military defence, this will not be a problem either. The emerging independent states of America will have the finest retired military veterans to draw from, including leftover equipment from the imperial arsenal, and that will include nuclear weapons. Of course these will have to be secured somehow, and it is highly unlikely that the independent states of America will allow some foreign power to do that for them. So you see, unlike the Titanic, the sinking United States of America has plenty of lifeboats available for everyone. The sinking process will be painful to be sure, but when it's finally over, there will be a new beginning. Yes, it will be the end of an era, but not the end of the world. Personally, I believe the sinking of America actually began in September of 2008. That's when we hit the iceberg, so to speak, an iceberg of economic collapse thanks to reckless government policies, and the chambers of the ship have been flooding ever since. However, thanks to the Federal Reserve, we have good pumps that are keeping the ship afloat for now, but just barely. Those pumps WILL fail eventually. It is inevitable. Sooner or later, we are all going to have to get on the lifeboats.

Those states, like Wyoming, which are officially exploring this, are getting ready in advance. They are inspecting the lifeboats, so the speak, which is a restoration of power to state governments, and securing the supplies they need from the ship before the inevitable happens. Of course, it would be wise for such independently thinking states to start looking at alliances with neighbouring states with a similar culture. Cultural alliances (based on language, values and religion) have historically proved to be much more reliable than proposition alliances (based entirely on economics and politics) as currently exist in the United States and the European Union. Proposition alliances (such as USA and EU) have a history of falling apart sooner or later.  Sometimes they even result in civil war. Cultural alliances have a long-enduring history. Fortunately, besides what we know to be the obvious cultures in America, there have been studies of the dominant cultural make up of the North American continent. The following is a map created in 1981 by Joel Garreau and was published in a book entitled 'The Nine Nations of North America' (read more here).  It is a map of culture. This is not a prediction of political divisions. As we know politics will likely produce different results than what is seen here. However, it would be wise for the future political entities of the independent states of America to use cultural maps such as these to help them determine what will produce the most lasting and reliable long-term alliances....

As I said, this is a cultural map.  It is not intended to represent future political boundaries.  Rather, it is designed to outline the cultures that already exist as expressed in religion, values, music, art, dispositions and temperaments.  You will notice that much of this has to do with how North America was settled by European immigrants.  For example; the Germans and Swedish settled much of the green area labelled as 'Breadbasket,' while the Scots and Irish settled much of the red area labelled as 'Dixie.'  The English settled much of the light blue area labelled as 'New England,' while the Spanish originally settled much of the brown area labelled as 'Mexamerica.'  The area labelled as 'Empty Quarter' simply means there is currently no dominant culture there, and so it's open to whatever culture wants to settle it.  As you can see, Mexico is not labelled, simply because Mexico is already established as a dominant Spanish culture.  This in no way insures the survival of the political entity known as 'Mexico.'  Who is to say what will come of that?

Whatever balkanisation comes from the fall of the United States will inevitably be drawn up somehow along these cultural lines.  Of course, political boundaries will likely look a bit different than the general cultural boundaries we see here.  For example, I cannot, for the life of me, imagine the State of Texas allowing itself to be divided three ways.  Texans will fight and die to keep their borders intact.  Missouri on the other hand, is a different story.  Missourians are less particular about political boundaries, and are more inclined to 'go along with whatever works,' as the state has a long history of political compromise.  That being said, I can easily see a cultural split between the German north, and the Scottish south, turning into a political division if Missourians are so inclined to go that route, and I can guarantee, based on cultural temperaments, that such a split would not only be peaceful but agreeable as well.  With Missouri however, you never know.  Missourians may simply decide to stay together in spite of their cultural differences, as they do have a lot in common, and there has never been any significant problems between them.

In the mean time, before the sinking is complete, individuals states would do well to imitate Wyoming and simultaneously explore interstate alliances in the absence of The Columbian Empire (Washington DC).  In my own region of Dixie, the League of the South and the Southern National Congress are designed to do just that.  It would be wise for other regions of the United States to explore the creation of similar organisations.  The time has come to start thinking outside the box.  The ship is sinking and it will go down eventually.  The damage is too great to repair, and the pumps keeping us afloat will fail eventually.  Start getting the lifeboats ready.  Talk to your local state congressmen.  Tell them to imitate Wyoming.  Then start exploring interstate alliances based on cultural similarities.

The Declaration of Independence - What Does It Mean?

Signing of the Declaration of Independence

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security...

-- The Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: There is a lot of talk these days about the Constitution of the United States. Indeed some have enshrined the Constitution as if it were some sort of Holy Writ. In fact, not only does the U.S. Constitution have nothing to do with the founding of the United States, but it wasn't even our first form of government! The 'Articles of Confederation' (1777 - 1787) was the first document outlining the function of American government. That document was eventually replaced by the Constitution which has since served as our SECOND attempt at self-governance. Neither of these documents, not the Constitution nor the Articles of Confederation, were the founding documents of the United States. That designation is reserved for one document alone -- The Declaration of Independence.

Thomas Jefferson

The above words, originally penned by Thomas Jefferson, declare the basic premise and concept behind the United States of America. The founding principle of our nation was one simple concept. That concept is that when people are systematically abused by their government, they have the God-given RIGHT to secede from that government and form for themselves their own government, especially if such a local government already exists.

As in the case of the thirteen British colonies in America, each of them had their own local state government. Likewise, these state governments frequently sent representatives to a regional 'Continental Congress' which in many ways functioned as a precursor to an independent government. Yes, the principle America was founded on was the notion that people (organised in the states they reside) have the right, to pull away (secede) from one form of government, become independent, and even reorganise under another form of government of their own making. It was a revolutionary idea to say the least, and one the king of England did not agree with. After a long and bitter war with the British crown, the king signed thirteen separate agreements to end all hostilities with each of the thirteen colonies. It was called the Treaty of Paris, and it was signed on September 3rd, 1783. After all the platitudes about 'freedom' and 'liberty' as well as what that means to various people, in the end, America was founded on just one thing -- the right to secede!

Some eighty-five years later, something happened that turned all of this on its head. It was called the American Civil War. We can debate the circumstances and causes of the Civil War ad nauseum but it will not scratch the surface of this issue. To debate the causes of the Civil War is to miss the point entirely. The point is; do states have the right to secede or don't they? Thomas Jefferson and the Founding Fathers said 'YES' and they fought a war to defend it.  Almost a generation later, as the New England states were seriously considering secession from the rest of the United States over the Louisiana Purchase, Thomas Jefferson was asked what he thought of New England secession.  He responded with the words 'they will all be our children' pointing out that they had the right to leave America, and even if they did start their own country, they would do so in the spirit of the American Revolution and remain Americans by common heritage.  New England secession never happened, but the movement itself, along with Jefferson's response to it, underlines the position of America's founding.  People (organised in the states they occupy) have the right to lawfully secede.

Abraham Lincoln

Exactly thirty-five years after Thomas Jefferson's death, one of his presidential successors, Abraham Lincoln said 'NO' to the right of secession, and he fought a war to defend his position.

So which is it? Who is right? Is it Jefferson or Lincoln? It has to be one or the other, but it cannot be both.

Before addressing this issue in the comments section below, please keep in mind this is not about the alleged 'causes' or 'circumstances' leading up to the American Revolution and American Civil War. Any comments disparaging one side or another, concerning these alleged 'causes' or 'circumstances' will likely be moderated. This is solely about the principle enshrined in the document above. DO STATES HAVE A RIGHT TO SECEDE OR DON'T THEY????

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.