Exclusion or Extinction, You Choose

“Those who council waiting, or remaining in the Union until some overt act is committed so glaring as to warm up those whose blood courses at present so slowly through their veins, will find, when that time arrives, that through the great patronage and insidious workings of a Black Republicans administration, there will have been mustered into existence, in our own midst, a hoard of unsound men, of sufficient numbers in some localities of the south to bring on civil war and bloodshed among ourselves.  These results I would avoid, and I believe secession is the remedy.”

Francis Richard Lubbock, Letter to The Houston Telegraph (October 29, 1860)*

Francis Richard Lubbock had been Lieutenant Governor of Texas, and would shortly be Governor, when he wrote this line in answer to the question, “what should Texans do if Abraham Lincoln is elected President and a Black Republican administration takes control of the Federal Government.”   His answer, as you see, was that Texas should immediately secede from the Union because, under a Black Republican administration, a “hoard of unsound men” would be “mustered into existence” within the very confines of Texas, and because the resulting multicultural Texans would one day fall together by the ears and tear each other to pieces.

Whatever you may think of Abraham Lincoln, the Black Republicans, the Confederate States of America, and the American Civil War, you must agree that Lubbock here unfolds a general truth about cultural politics.   Every ruling party must by its “great patronage and insidious workings” give rise to a hoard of sycophantic clients, dependents and hangers-on.  These myrmidons of power must, if not positively excluded, spread like a dusting of anthrax spores into every crevice and corner of the land.  And when the ruling party at last cracks down to impose its will, belatedly warming the blood of moderate dissidents, every region and institution will find, too late, that it is riddled with these “unsound men” and is therefore, itself, unsound.

Covert infiltration therefore precedes the “overt act” by which a ruling party declares open war on a dissident minority.   It is because of this covert infiltration that the regions and institutions that should protect that dissident minority immediately “cave in,” falling to pieces in internecine squabbles.  This is why, in the cultural politics of today, no “inclusive” organization can dissent from the ruling party line, or even protect those of its members who do.


*) This letter was printed in the Houston Telegraph on November 6, 1860, the day Lincoln was elected and the United States was set on the road to become the United State.  This passage appears with slightly different wording in Francis Richard Lubbock, Six Decades in Texas, ed. C.W. Raines (Austin: B.C. Jones & Co., 1900), p. 301.

7 thoughts on “Exclusion or Extinction, You Choose

  1. My Inner Boer loves a Spoor. That being said, I think you’ll find that the Infiltrating Fun Guys (geddit? geddit?) you’re referring to would resent the implication.

  2. Your article put me in mind of a letter to the editor published in the Oct. 26, 1905 edition of the Birmingham, AL Jones Valley Times. The letter’s author, J. H. Savvage, was a colonel under general Wheeler in the 19th Alabama infantry regiment, CSA, during the WBTS, who served in many campaigns and was later the regiment’s historian of sorts. My 3rd great grandfather and his two eldest sons were soldiers in the 19th Alabama. Mr. Savvage’s history of the 19th Alabama is interesting reading in its own right, but he writes in a different though related capacity as per below:

    The President and Ex-Confederates

    “Mr. Editor: I see in your issue of Oct. 26th [1905], under the above caption and over the name of Edgar M. Glenn, an article which shows the author to be one of those broad minded, elastic and double-conservative gentlemen of the present day, characterized as an emergency man. He says he desires to enter a mild protest to my attitude in regard to Camp Hardee’s gush, in performing the monkey act for the ringmaster on the occasion of his advent into Birmingham. I have nothing to take back.

    In Mr. Glenn’s comment, he misstates the ground I assigned as a reason why Confederate organizations should not stoop so low as to boot-lick Roosevelt. I put it on the ground that Roosevelt had denounced Confederate veterans and Jefferson Davis as traitors, in his history to go down to posterity and to our sons. I repeat that Confederate Veterans who are and were true to the cause are out of place when such a defamor as Roosevelt, who by accident gets to be president, to be toadying around after such a creature. Mr. Glenn, in his article, says “we do well to consider the man’s point of view.” There is no point of view that mitigates slander and defamation. Especially from one of superior intelligence writing history.

    I deny Mr. Glenn’s assertion that at the North, Jefferson Davis was regarded as the spirit of secession and an arch traitor of rebellion and disruption, and that judgement will brand him as such. This is a poor apology for Roosevelt’s traitorous brand and poorer patriotism and Southern manhood. He is incorrect when he says that many epithets, hard and sweeping, touching Abraham Lincoln, are well fitted to match anything said of Jefferson Davis, and such apologies should be spurned by Southern patriots. He says it will be well for us, Southern patriots, rebels, to reflect that they did not hang Jefferson Davis. I suppose he means, between the lines, that he ought to have been hung.

    After a long list of apologies for Roosevelt’s slanders of the South and of Jefferson Davis, he turns to Camp Hardee and the gallant ex-confederate Captain and ex-Governor, and covers them up with glories for the part they performed on the occasion. None was better equipped than the gallant captain or under greater obligations to perform than the gallant captain. He would have been recreant and an ingrate if he had failed to perform much on the occasion, because of the fact that Roosevelt had very recently appointed the captain’s brother to a good paying office. To which fact the captain referred in the speech and reminded Camp Hardee, and he being a member of Camp Hardee, of course, had the right to demand of the Camp the performance of their part, and if they had failed to obey, the gallant captain would have probably called an extra session, and had the Southern Confederate Veterans Association abolished. So this must go, in part mitigation, of the performance of Camp Hardee. The gallant captain is subject to these spasmodic gim jams, especially when good things are in reach. You remember he had one of these fearful spells when McKinley came south.

    I wonder where this man, Edgar M. Glenn, was during the four years of the war. If he was a man then, he certainly has apostatized. But if he was not, he may claim to come in under the granddaddy clause. I felt very sad when I saw Camp Hardee toadying after the carriage in that procession, not being allowed to carry a camp flag. The whole affair and Mr. Glenn’s article called up in recollection an old song sung by the negroes of South Carolina sixty years ago. Which seems to me would have been appropriate on this occasion for Camp Hardee, the gallant Captain and Mr. Glenn to have sung. As follows:

    My old cow is a good old cow,
    Blow boys, blow.
    She gives milk and butter too,
    Blow boys, blow.”

    -J.H. Savvage

    • That is a good and spirited response. I’m afraid it is only late in life that I have come to understand the full meaning of the contested terminology of that war. For instance why it was for Southerners a War between the States and not a Civil War. As is clear in my Lubbock quote, a civil war would have Texan’s fighting Texans (or Michiganders fighting Michiganders) since Americans were citizens of their respective states. Likewise words like rebellion and disunionist. I’m afraid good and spirited responses of this sort are now exceedingly rare, and that nearly everyone nowadays sees that war from Beacon Hill in Boston, Massachusetts.

  3. We can learn from history – but only if we notice the large differences between then and now.

    What’s New about this; is that the modern infiltrators and subverters are allied to a destructive and value-inverting agenda; are unified within nations; and (since 2020) coherent worldwide – via cross-linked bureaucratic agencies and a monolithic mass media.

    They are not – *nowadays* (not really since the 1960s) – pursuing any specific real-world outcome; but by their leftist ideology are engaged in *opposing* a variety of supposed-injustices (ism’s phobias, emergencies, crises…) – All of which are both dishonestly conceptualized (up to being wholly fabricated) – and so vaguely defined and implemented as to amount to the coercive use of arbitrary power.

    The idea that a majority would (over many decades) declare war upon itself, and express delight in its own destruction, without any plausible or better aim in view, is something probably beyond the imagination of the 19th century mind.

    • You are quite right that the past is a different country, and that it is dangerous to tell ourselves that we’ve been through all this before. I yesterday read the account of Jesus’ trial before Pilate in John’s gospel, and so have been thinking about the value inversion of that judicial murder. Judicial murder really turns the world on its head, because the instruments that should protect innocence in fact punish innocence, and because the memory of an innocent victim of a judicial murder is infamous instead of pitied. It is the utter desecration of innocent blood. But I also think we can see Caiaphas and Pilate as archetypes, the one hating the good while wrapped in priestly robes, the other a weak and dithering man wrapped in the robes of authority. But I’ve wandered from the point.

      The nature of today’s agents of destruction is new, but secession remains a means to limit the reach of their power. Or maybe it is too late. We did not heed Lubbock’s warning and have allowed a hoard of unsound men to be mustered in our midst.

Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.