"Here’s the real question, however: aren’t the differences between Brad, Michael Givens, Matthew Heimbach, Connie Chastain, and the Virginia Flaggers simply tactical? Do we really think they entertain substantial differences when it comes to core beliefs, including racial attitudes? In fact, Brad’s the only one who has publicly placed some distance between Heimbach and himself, although I hear that Givens claims he does not know who Heimbach is … although we have a photograph to suggest otherwise."For Simpson (as already noted elsewhere), "...publicly placed some distance between Heimbach and himself..." means doing so in a comment on his blog. In his view, reminiscent of a three-year-old's, if it hasn't been done there, it hasn't been done. However, to be a truthful and honest statement, he would have to know that no "distancing" has happened on any public venue, not just his blog, and I don't think he knows that. I don't think he even cares about it. He just focuses on "links and ties" -- even if fabricated -- in order to demonize innocent people as evil white supremacists.
And does this professor at a major state university really not understand that public figures like Givens frequently have their photo made with people they don't know, and the snap of the shutter doesn't automatically and magically bestow upon them total knowledge of the person posing with them? (This is yet another example of the bewildering willingness floggers sometime exhibit to shrink their own intelligence for the opportunity to wield the put-down of people they don't like.)
Obviously, when people are willing to lie, and to dumb themselves down to do it, what they "really think" is of no consequence.
So then we have the misnomer'd LibertyLamp, Conspiracy Theorist Extraordinaire, weighing in. He sez, "The Confederate fetish movement is very much like the dress up neo-Nazi movement. Both groups have made up fantasies about that certain time period where there was racial inequality and domination."
Um... has there ever been a time when there WASN'T racial inequality and domination? Besides, there is no such thing as a "Confederate fetish" movement.
"They both work very hard at creating denial stories about the atrocities that were committed during those time periods."
I wouldn't know about neo-Nazis, who LibertyLamp is apparently quite cozy with, but I've been an observer of, and participant in, proSouthernism (both heritage and independence branches) since about 1999 (and was a proud Southerners long before that) and I have encountered no "denial stories about atrocities." As it should be, there is resistance to the attempts by Simpson, Lamp and other flogger-types to totally define white Southerners, the South, and the Confederacy by atrocities, or negatives (while, significantly, glossing over, perfuming or otherwise ignoring atrocities and negatives of the north and the USA). But that's not the same thing as denying atrocities. And if, perchance, some do that, all do not. The wish to portray them all by the traits of a few is a marvelous illustration of the clone-like leftist mentality itself.
They both like to dress up and cos play with their childish fantasies about being in those time periods and having that upper racial hand.
Have no idea what he's talking about. Re-enacting? It's a hobby. Not everyone who does that is a Confederate activist. Sometimes people wear period attire as part of living history events, or celebrations and commemorations, but that's hardly "fantasizing." So what you have here is yet another example of fudging the truth in order to demonize.
On Connie’s website is an ad to “help save white genocide in South Africa”. That campaign was started and is based with Aryan Nations, who BTW fly confederate flags during their rallies.
SAVE white genocide? My graphic advocates STOPPING it. And it's not an "ad." It's simply a statement, a graphic that *I* made and did not acquire from the 'net. I have seen no evidence that it is a campaign that started and is based with Aryan Nations, although I admit, since I know next-to-nothing about Aryan Nations, and LibertyLamp is apparently quite cozy with them, I don't know whether it started with them or not.
However, that's not where I learned about it. I developed a mild interest in South Africa because two of the models I chose for my book covers are South Africans. I read a little about it, and was horrified to discover the horrific murder rate of white farmers in SA. I read more about it at WorldNetDaily, Front Page Magazine, the UK Telegraph and other news sources. And, if memory serves, in some articles by Ilana Mercer. I've never encountered the idea that the campaign to call attention to the murders of white farmers in South Africa is the work of Aryan Nations -- until I read LibertyLamp's comment. I have to take it with lotsa grains of salt since LibertyLamp is a leftist in the business of demonizing ordinary, decent folks.
What is so horrific about the attacks and murders of white farmers and their families is not just the racial aspects -- though the murderers are black and the victims are white -- but the incomprehensible brutality involved. I'm no expert on apartheid, far from it, but I've read some about it, and while there's no mistake that there was stark inequality based on race, and government forced (something I rarely if ever approve of) -- I found nothing about it that justifies these murders and particularly the brutality of them.
Lamp notes that the Aryan Nations "...BTW fly confederate flags during their rallies." Yet another transparent and phony "links and ties" attempt, apparently to convince people that anyone who flies the flag is a secret, or at least wannabe, Aryan. This is what happens when you put demonization of people you don't like above maintaining your own integrity.
Other of these so called “flagger/Confederate patriots” support plugs for the Political Cesspool radio show, which is white supremacist. Again, I wouldn't know, since I don't listen to the Political Cesspool, or read books by its spokesman. However, if LibertyLamp says it's white supremacist, I'll have to take that with many more grains of salt, since he is in the business of seeing white supremacy here, there and everywhere -- even where it doesn't exist -- or calling things white supremacy that aren't.
I do honestly believe that while these “flagger/Confederate patriots” work so hard at their “the war was not about slavery” montra, that slavery is one of the primary attractions for their being in that movement because they want an upper hand in society based on their white skin color.
Would love to see where he has found flaggers saying "the war was not about slavery." The people I've encountered who huff and puff, "The war was NOT about slavery!!!!" are usually anonymous posters on comment threads following negatively biased news reports about the Confederate flag and such. Not a lot of in-depth discussion in that venue.
However, I do honestly think it is a dishonest characterization of people such as myself, who make a distinction between the causes of secession (slavery was the primary, but not the only, one) and the causes of the war, of the fighting (defense against an army that had come South to kill Southerners).
And the claims about "skin color" are some of the lamest in the leftist arsenal -- as if the amount of melanin in skin cells is the only thing that differentiates people, or is the only basis for classifying them into groups. I know this is a made-up argument, because even leftists who have voluntarily and deliberately dumbed themselves down are not THAT dumb.
(A note to B. Parks, who is so turned on by calling into question people's intelligence and mental states... Honey, if you want to see some evidence of deranged thinking, look at these death-obsession images I got off LibertyLamp's Twitter feed: http://mybacksass.blogspot.com/2013/09/more-tiptoein-and-pogo-stickin.html. Remember, he's on your side -- a self-trumpeted "anti-racist.")
UPDATE ~ UPDATE ~ UPDATE ~ UPDATE ~
Have y'all read the white nationalist convention going on at Crossroads? What a scream!
It's in the comment thread following the Clint Lacy post...
It's in the comment thread following the Clint Lacy post...
Lamp and Brad Griffin (ostensibly a proSoutherners who insults Southerners with names like Rainbow Confederate and Confederate Cryptkeeper) are chattering about some white nationalist who got "outed" on TV as having some race-mixing in his ancestry. Apparently, they find that fascinating.
I can't imagine why. I'm fascinated by, and proud of, my Cherokee ancestry, although by my calculations, I'm only 1/64th Cherokee, going by those in my lineage that we know were Cherokee, or part-Cherokee. It's possible there were other Cherokees in my direct lineage, and if so, that would change the number some... although I look, you know, plain vanilla, Elizabeth-Warren white.
There's also been speculation that one of our family mystery men may have been a Melungeon. i.e., an Appalachian "tri-racial isolate" group -- the three races being European, sub-Saharan African and Native American. I guess, to fit the stereotype, I should pretzel up and agonize over my possible non-lily-white origins, but frankly, I really don't care. Whether I am, or whether I ain't makes absolutely no difference in my life ... and I know no one in my family that it would matter to.
But I want to point out one thing... Lamp sez, "Brook asked how well connected these common flaggers are with the more heavy hitting white nationalists. It’s obvious there is some behind the scenes footsie being played under the table."
It's obvious? How can something happening behind the scenes and under the table be obvious? LOL!
When leftist anti-wacist floggerettes are in slander mode, do they even pay attention to what they're saying?