Thursday, October 20, 2016

Review of The Deep South Says “Never” -- Part 2

Review of The Deep South Says “Never”
-- Part 2
Thomas Allen

    In Chapter 3, Martin describes the reaction of the Border States to the Supreme Court’s desegregation decision. They quickly surrendered unconditionally. [Such surrender did not lessen the frequency and intensity of racial strife and riots. If anything, surrendered encouraged them. During the 1950s most of the racial strife was Whites assailing Blacks. However, defeat after defeat eventually demoralized and cowed Whites while victory after victory emboldened Blacks. After Congress formerly joined the Communist integrationist movement in 1964 with the Civil Rights Act, Blacks began pushing and rioting in earnest. Thus, from the early 1960s to today most racial strife has been Blacks assailing Whites.] He focuses on Maryland, Missouri, and Kentucky and concludes with a discussion of Tennessee.
    To comply with the desegregation decree, Baltimore decided to allow “any child [to] attend any school in the city” (p. 80). [Later, courts would object to such a solution because allowing freedom of choice did not integrate schools as fully as judges desired.]
    St. Louis’ approach to desegregation was to redraw the boundaries of the school districts (pp. 84-85). [Later, federal judges would not accept this approach unless the borders of the school district were drawn to integrate schools sufficiently to satisfy the judges’ integrationist lust.]
    Martin quotes Philip Hickey, superintendent of the St. Louis school system: “We think we’re through it. It’s working even better than we expected” (p. 85). [Could Hickey have really been this naive or ignorant? They were only beginning. The worse was yet to come. Apparently, he did not realize that the long-run goal of desegregation was to bring down the White race, even if it also destroyed the Black race, and by that, bring down the United States, Western Civilization, and Christianity.]
    Kentucky offered more resistance than Maryland or Missouri. However, it also surrendered [to federal tyranny] (pp. 85-87).
    Martin presents some of the discussions between segregationists and desegregationists in some Kentucky towns. Some people argued that the Supreme Court had made a decision and the people should obey it (87ff). [The same thing has happened with the Supreme Court’s decision to legalize homosexual “marriages” and other pervert agendas. Obeying tyrannical rulings of the Supreme Court has brought the country to the edge of destruction. One or two more such rulings will push it into the abyss of no return.] The more religious integrationists declared that desegregation, integration, was God’s will (pp. 87ff). [It may be the will of their god, but it is not the will of the God of the Bible. The God of the Bible is a Segregationist. His prophets and even His Son preached segregation from beginning to end. (V.  Integration Is Genocide, False Biblical Teachings on the Races and Interracial Marriages, People of the Flood, “Review of Segregation and Desegregation,” “A Review of The South and Christian Ethics,” “The Bible, Segregation, and Miscegenation,” and “Is Integration a Moral Law?” all by Thomas Allen.)]
    Martin cites Omar Carmichael’s, the superintendent of the Louisville school system, promotion of desegregation. Part of his promotion included “Negro and white school interchanged assembly program. At one a Negro choir sang The Battle Hymn of the Republic while a white choir simultaneously recited the Gettysburg Address” (p. 95). [Both of them are highly anti-South. The Battle Hymn of the Republic advocates stomping out the South. The Gettysburg Address is nothing but pure political hypocrisy (v. H.L. Mencken’s comments on it in “The War”)]
    Louisville’s desegregation scheme was redrawing school district boundaries without regard to race and then allowing students to transfer to schools in other districts if they so desired. Not unsurprisingly, the NAACP objected to Louisville’s approach (p. 97). [Like all other school desegregation schemes if some federal judge decided that people did not voluntarily integrate themselves to the satisfaction of the judge, he would reject the plan — and often impose his own plan.]
    [In his description of the Border States desegregating, Martin identifies no White leader who was pushing school desegregation voluntarily sending his children to Black schools. Thus, they were and still are all hypocrites. {Some Whites have been so brainwashed and are so full of self-hate and probably subconsciously hatred for Blacks that they go out of their way to send their children to predominantly Black schools.}]
    In Chapter 4, Martin discusses some school segregationists. They include:
    –    Sam Engelhardt, leader of the Citizens’ Councils of Alabama and chairman of the Citizens’ Councils of America (pp. 105ff);
    –    Asa (Ace) Carter, a Citizens’ Councils leader in Alabama and rival of Engelhardt (pp. 107ff);
    –    John Kasper, a segregation activist and Citizens’ Councils leader from Tennessee (pp. 119ff)
    –    Robert Patterson, founder of the Citizens’ Councils movement, head of the Association of Citizens’ Councils of Mississippi, executive secretary of the Citizens’ Councils of America (pp. 123ff);
    –    J.P. Coleman, Governor of Mississippi (he was a moderate [i.e., weak] segregationists) (pp. 134ff) [Coleman seemed more of a scalawag and a quisling although not as openly as Governor Folsom of Alabama];
    –    W.J. Simmons, editor of the Citizens’ Council (pp. 137-140);
    –    John U. Barr, retired rope manufacturer from Louisiana, former vice president of the Southern States Industrial Council, and organizer of the Federation of Constitutional Government (pp. 140-141);
    –    Leander Perez, corporate lawyer and district attorney (pp. 140-142);
    –    James Eastland, U.S. Senator from Mississippi (pp. 140-142);
    –    Herman Talmadge, U.S. Senator from Georgia (p. 140).
    Carter lost his job as a radio broadcaster because:
In the broadcast, made during Brotherhood Week, Carter compared the National Conference of Christians and Jews to the Communist Party and said it favored desegregation, the Genocide Treaty, “race mongrelization,” and “dictatorial federal law to enforce integration” (p. 108).
[Carter was right — at least in the sense that the National Conference of Christians and Jews (now called  the National Conference for Community and Justice) was promoting the same agenda that the Communist Party promoted. Both fostered desegregation, i.e., integration, a policy that leads to mongrelization. Both supported the Genocide Treaty, which prohibited the eradication of a race because of its race but allowed the eradication of a race for political reason.  {Ironically, integration, especially governmentally forced integration, is contrary to the Genocide Treaty (v. Integration Is Genocide by Thomas Allen)} The Supreme Court’s desegregation ruling did lead to “dictatorial federal laws to enforce integration,” of which most proponents of that ruling support.]
    Engelhardt urged Southerners in general and Alabamians in particular to “‘talk white, think white, hire white, buy white, and remain white’” (p. 110). [For the most part, Whites have failed to heed Engelhardt’s words of wisdom. As a result, they are on the verge of losing their country, culture, and civilization. Blacks have done a much better job of talking Black, thinking Black, hiring Black, etc. Unfortunately, they have failed at keeping themselves Black as they strive to breed themselves out of existence.]
    Engelhardt offered some more sage advice: “We can’t give one inch. If we let a crack in the door, that’s it” (pp. 111-112). [The South cracked the door. Now they are on the verge of losing everything: their race, homes, religion, country, culture, and civilization. They have already lost their liberty, but most do not realize this loss.]
    Martin summarizes a speech that Congressman Grant gave at a Citizens’ Council meeting:
Announcing that he had “no apology for being here” and that he was a “friend of the Negro race,” he reviewed the legal history of the Court’s school desegregation decision. He attacked the “authorities” on whose testimony the Court had based its decision as men who belonged to Communist or Communist-dominated organizations. (Senator Eastland of Mississippi made a full dress Senate speech on this subject; it has been widely distributed by Citizens’ Councils.) He praised American greatness. He accused the State Department of trying to change American social customs in order to persuade other countries to accept “billions” that America was “giving away overseas” to thwart Russia. He said the NAACP wanted to wipe out all segregation, not only in schools and buses. This brought him to miscegenation, and he quoted prominent Negroes at length as favoring it. He said even “some white people right here in the state of Alabama in the teaching profession” believe in miscegenation. A Senate filibuster was the only hope against current “vindictive” and “punitive” civil rights legislation (pp 113-114).
[Grant spoke truthfully, but most ignored him. Thus, it was “the night they drove old Dixie down.”]
    Commenting on changes taking place in the school system prior to desegregation, Carter asks, “Is the system of education preparing our children for a competitive, free America, where there are naturally frustrations, or is it preparing them for a non-competitive, integrated, communistic slave-state?” (pp. 118-119). [With 60 years of hindsight, we now know the answer. The educational system was changed to prepare children “for a non-competitive, integrated, communistic slave-state.”] He states that a school superintendent told him that the changes were being made to “remove the competitive system and prevent frustrations” (p. 118). [Apparently, people involved in setting educational policies, including people in the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, were convinced that Blacks were intellectually inferior to Whites. Therefore, the curricula had to be dumbed down to prevent Black frustration.]
    Patterson said, “If there’s no Nigras, integration’s beautiful. A fine thing. Everybody’s for integration — for the other fellow. Resistance to integration is directly proportionate to the Nigra population” (p.126). [Polls at that time supported Patterson’s claim. Whites tended to favor integration in proportion to the lack of Blacks in their area. That is, Whites in areas with few or no Blacks favored integration much more than Whites in areas with a large Negro population compared with the White population.]
    [Patterson points out the hypocrisy of Yankees.] Senators Hubert Humphrey of Minnesota and Wayne Morse of Oregon were the strongest advocates of integration. Yet their states hardly had any Negroes with whom to integrate. Minnesota had 14,000, and Oregon had 11,000. Patterson declared:
If the North really wants to be objective, let all the Northern states bring themselves up to the national average — let each state import enough Nigras to bring its Nigra population up to 10 per cent, the national average. Minnesota needs 284,000 Nigras to bring it up to the national average. We don’t want to postpone this problem. Why doesn’t Hubert Humphrey go to his people and say, “I want you to work to provide  284,000 accommodations — schools, houses and churches — for 284,000 more Nigras that I’m goin’ to  bring in  here.”  We  realize  Senator Humphrey wants to help us or he wouldn’t be making all this racket. We’re in a better position to tell him how to help us than anyone else is. And we’re not going to tell them how to handle those Nigras. We’re not going to advocate civil rights legislation. We’re just going to share the problem since they are so willing to share the solution (p. 126).
[Of coarse, the North would never entertain such a solution. Deep down, Yankees despised Blacks; they just love them in the abstract. They did not and most still do not want to be around Blacks. To them Blacks were and are an abstraction, and not a concrete reality as they were and are in the South. Thus, they enacted the civil rights laws and related laws to encourage Blacks to stay in their place, i.e., to stay in the South. The plan worked for a few years until some renegade federal judges began enforcing the civil rights laws in the North.]
    Patterson adds, “Hubert Humphrey says we should integrate because of Russia and the cold war and the opinion of the Asiatics. So I’m to destroy my children here in Sunflower County in order to impress the Asiatics” (pp. 126-127). [That’s right! Actually, Patterson was to offer his children to bring down the Southerner. Humphrey was not going to do anything to harm the Soviet Union. He always sought to appease the Soviet Union and Communists. He was about as close as one can be to being a Communist without becoming a card-carrying member of the Communist Party. Moreover, he was a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (v. “Council on Foreign Relations” by Thomas Allen) and a founder and vice president of the socialist American for Democratic Action. Humphrey promoted the New World Order with its one world government (Francis X. Gannon, Biographical Dictionary of the Left, I (1969), p. 374). {Also see, That Man from Minnesota by Joyce Press.}]
    Patterson notes that many people in the North believe in segregation. His proof is that they live in segregated neighborhoods. He adds, “It’s a pitiful thing in this nation when a man is not allowed to speak out for what he believes” (p. 127). [Such oppression has only gotten worse over the last 60 years. People have lost their jobs for speaking out.]
    Patterson remarks that changes in agriculture and the economy is making the Negro unwanted. Mechanization of agriculture and the conversion of cotton fields to pastures for cattle are driving the Negro from the land. Industrialization has not helped the Negro much. Manufacturers want skilled labor, not unskilled former farmhands. Moreover, desegregation is also making the Negro unwanted. As a result, Negroes are migrating northward. [Thus, the scheme of Yankeedom to keep the Negro in his place — in the South — has backfired.]
    About the Indians in Mississippi, Patterson says, “The Indians don’t want niggers in their schools. They’re proud their race” (p. 132).
    He remarks that the White schools that his children attend is not nearly as good as the Black school. Thus, he is a victim of prejudice (p. 132).
    Patterson thought that segregation would prevail and eventually spread to the Northern states. [Patterson was wrong. Within a few years all the schools throughout the South would be integrated. A few years after that, those in the North would be integrated. Integration did not stop with schools; it invaded every aspect of life.]
    In Chapter 5, Martin discusses how desegregation has worked in the Border States. [In short, the Border States surrendered completely and unconditionally with hardly any resistance to federal tyranny.] He discusses some problems that teachers and pupils, especially Black pupils, have had. The problems that Black pupils had were learning to behave and trying to perform at the same level as White pupils. Martin fills this chapter with praises for Black pupils and parents.
    The excuse offered by school officials and other integrationists for the lower achievement of Blacks is social and economic conditions and “inferior teaching in  the old all-Negro schools” (p. 148). [This excuse means that Black teachers are inferior to White teachers, and is, therefore, an insult to Black teachers.] For segregationists, the lack of Black achievement resulted from “inherent Negro inferiority” (p. 148). [This is the old environment verses genetics argument. The segregationists were right.  As many scientific studies show, genetics is a far more important determinant of intelligence than is environment. Genetics accounts for about 75 percent of intelligence. {V. The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life by Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray, The Inheritance of Mental Ability by Cyrll Bur, Man’s Racial Nature and Race and Politics: the Racial Controversy by H.B. Isherwood, Race Difference in Intelligence by John C. Loehlin, Major Findings from Twin Studies of Ability, Personality, and Interests by Robert C. Nichols, Racial Difference in Mental Growth and School Achievements by R. Travis Osborne. Race, Intelligence and Bias in Academe by Roger Pearson, Race, Evolution, and Behavior: A Life History Perspective by J. Philippe Rushton, A Question of Intelligence: The IQ Debate in America by Daniel Seligman, and Integration Is Genocide by Thomas Coley Allen}
    Martin writes “[E]veryone except dedicated segregationists expect that in a few years Negroes will do as well as Whites” (p. 148). [Everyone except the dedicated segregationists were wrong. After sixty years of integration and dummying down the educational system for the benefit of Blacks, Blacks on average still lag behind Whites intellectually. Rigging the system for their benefit and to the detriment of Whites has not helped Blacks. However, it has hurt Whites and the country — thus harming Blacks.]
    Martin quotes a teacher saying, “I haven’t heard one say we’d been unfair” (p. 151). [How things have changed!]
    Martin notes how integrated sports teams destroyed resistance to integration (p. 151). [That goes to show that most people place sports above the preservation of their race.]
    In Chapter 6, Martin discusses the resistance to desegregation in the Deep South. He continues his discussion of the work of the Citizens’ Councils to prevent desegregation, the future of the Citizens’ Council, and opposition to the Citizens’ Councils. He remarks that “the Councils are essentially a middle-class movement, with a sprinkling of the top of society” (p. 155). Also, he discusses the rise of the Klan and the progress made to desegregate. Then he identifies three by-products of opposing desegregation: the rise of anti-Semitism, trouble in the labor movement, and abridgement of free speech.
    Martin writes, “Some Southerners, weary of being caricatured as a bunch of Claghorns and Kluxers and haters, wish the agitation would stop” (p. 155). [These Southerners invert the motto of North Carolina, which is “To Be Rather Than To Seem,” to “To Seem Rather Than To Be.” Their self-esteem is so low that it depends on what people whom they have never met and will never meet think of them. However, they are conceited enough to believe that these strangers will think about them. Moreover, they fail to realize that there are three types of people in this world. First are those who go with the flow, which is the majority, and do not matter. Then there are those who just want to be left alone and those who are determined not to leave them alone. As long as anyone in these two groups live, peace and harmony cannot exist.]
    Martin states, “Jews, themselves a religious minority, have traditionally tended to view sympathetically the plight of any minority” (p. 159). [One minority whom Jews do not view sympathetically and whom they have sought to destroy is the Southerner. {Many Jews in the South opposed integration and did not seek to destroy the South}Furthermore, Jews controlled the NAACP and many were Communists. Thus, segregationists gave the appearance of being “anti-Semites.” So many integrationists were Jews and so many Jews were integrationists that to oppose integrationists gave the appearance of opposing Jews per se. Furthermore, Martin errors when he refers to Jews as a religious group. They are not. They are an ethnic group, a nationality. Most Jews, probably a majority, are atheists, agnostics, or nonreligious {v. Zionism: A Brief History 1800-1949 by Thomas Allen}].
    Martin writes, “A third by-product is the abridgment of free speech. Preachers who opposed segregation lost their pulpits. Books were banned, professors fired.” [Any preacher who preaches against the clear teachings of the Bible ought to lose his pulpit. Moreover, proponents of integration, miscegenation, and amalgamation of the races have been far more effective at banning books and firing professors. Most people live in such fear of them that they always have to watch what they say so as not to offend easily and highly offended integrationists, miscegenationists, and amalgamators.]
    Martin quotes Roy Wilkins of the NAACP saying, “I didn’t expect murders, nor the petty, cruel persecution of ordinary Negroes who signed school petitions. This is the Hitler pattern, the Soviet Russia pattern” (p. 168). [Wilkins has it backwards. In Hitler’s Germany and Soviet Russia, the central government imposed tyrannical, despotic decrees on the people. In the South, the people were trying to protect themselves from a tyrannical, despotic central government imposing its decrees on them. Thus, the exact opposite was occurring in the South as occurred in Hitler’s Germany and Soviet Russia. Unfortunately, they failed, and the country is being destroyed by an ever-growing tyrannical, despotic government that is becoming more and more like Nazi Germany. Furthermore, Martin fails to mention that Wilkins was affiliated with at least seven communist organizations, and therefore, pro-Soviet Russia organizations. Thus, Wilkins was a front man for Communism and the Soviet Union {v. “The Civil Rights Movement Is a Communist Movement” by Thomas Allen}.]
    Martin writes, “An expert, asked when he thought the Deep South would desegregate, replied, "Never. . . . Most Southerners agree” (p. 168). [Either Southerners then had a short time span for “never,” or they were extremely naive, or they were deliberately fooling themselves. Within a few years, all school systems would be fully interrogated. By the end of the Centennial in 1965, the South had been as thoroughly defeated as it was in 1865. Within a decade, the rest of the country would have been as abjectly defeated as the South.]
    Martin notes that Southerners were aware the possibility of the U.S. government using troops to enforce desegregation. Many expected that if it did, a civil war, or something close to it would happen. Simmons of the Citizens’ Council said, “To me it is inconceivable that the rest of the country would stand for the South to be put to the sword” (p. 170). [The U.S. government did use troops in Alabama and Arkansas. Not only did the rest of the country stand by and do nothing, parts of it cheered the tyrant on. To the detriment of the country, the South submitted and surrendered unconditionally to despotism and tyranny. Now the country is enjoying the fruits of the South’s defeat.]
    Martin asks, “How high a price is the South willing to pay to maintain its peculiar institution? And how high a price is the North willing to exact to destroy the institution?” (p. 172). [To the detriment of the country, the White race, Western Civilization, and Christendom, the North was willing to extract a higher price than the South was willing to pay. Thus, the North brought down the country, the White race, Western Civilization, and Christendom. Nearly all the problems of today can be traced back to the Supreme Court’s disregard for and destruction of the Constitution with its desegregation ruling of 1954.]


Copyright © 2016 by Thomas Coley Allen 

Part 1 

More articles on social issues

No comments:

Post a Comment