(Editor’s Note: Although this critical review of the “Sons of Confederate Veterans” is written in a leftist/liberal slant, it covers a few points of interest, that we believe, contains some elements of truth. Recommended by Kathleen Moore.)
The Southern Mercury is a publication of the Educational PAC of the Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV). It was published from 2003 to 2008 with volumes 1 to 6 with a total of 23 issues.
This article reviews some of the issues of the Southern Mercury relative to the SCV’s claims that it is “heritage not hate” and to give some idea of the general character of this publication and to inform the reader who is writing for the SCV. It should be noted that the Southern Mercury is produced by the SCV’s educational PAC; that is, the contents are meant to educate the reader. I am not going to initially review all the issues but just some of the more notable issues. As time permits I will add some more commentary on more articles.
Vol. 1 No. 2 (Sept./Oct. 2003) — The cover theme is “Who’s Next: Southern Politicians Ousted,” which is for an article where Robert Slimp, activist in the Council of Conservative Citizens www.cofcc.org recounts the defeat of politicians who opposed the Confederate flag. (pp. 16-21). Slimp is an ordained minister in the Presbyterian Church of America and a retired US Army Chaplain.
The article of interest in this issue is “Where We Stand Now: And How We Got Here,” (pp. 10-14) by Frank Conner, who is the author “The South Under Siege 1830-2000: A History of the Relations Between the North and South.” He has a web page for the book at http://collards.phantacom.net. This article claims that liberals “infiltrated” southern institutions and launched an attack to destroy the south by using civil rights legislation.
In a section titled, “The Liberals Create a False Public Image of the Blacks,” Conner writes the following:
“After the turn of the 20th century, the white Southerners had disenfranchised and segregated the blacks, in perhaps the mildest reaction possible at that time to the blacks’ transgressions. The blacks — then a childlike people — had been selling their votes …”
Later in the same section:
Early in the 20th century, the liberals took control of the humanities department in the colleges and universities of America. Previously, anthropologists routinely recorded the notable differences in IQ among the races; but at Columbia, a liberal cultural anthropologist named Franz Boas now changed all that. He decreed that there were no differences between the races, the only biological differences between the blacks and whites were of superficial nature.
The following section in the article is titled “The Liberals Destroy the Old South in the Name of Black Civil Rights.” Conner writes that “Northern liberal writers launched a hate campaign” in 1947 against the South which he explains consists of desegregating the armed forces, passing a civil rights bill which he calls radical, and the Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka Supreme Court decision which he calls unconstitutional..
Later Conner in this section claims that a campaign of “vilification” resulted in Civil Rights legislation stating:
As the result, the US Congress enacted the patently-unconstitutional Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965, both of which targeted only the South.
Conner in subsequent sections explains how liberals are now continuing attacks on the white south through attacks on Confederate heritage. Conner proposes to change the SCV to preserve “our heritage” stating:
To do that, we must urgently reform the SCV, and convert it into a (lawful) effective fighting organization; and we must use it to fight back to restore our heritage.
What this “heritage” includes, as clearly stated earlier by the Conner’s article would include the repeal of all Civil Rights legislation. For as Conner explains about civil rights which he calls “Reconstruction II”:
The Old South was destroyed, and its belief systems and way of life were discredited outside the South.
The contents of this article come from his book mentioned above, without the books many references to Jews as the persons leading the attack on the South in the Civil Rights campaign.
In the same issue Ann Rives Zappa reviews “The South Under Siege: 1830-2000). She praises it stating “The South Under Siege is a masterful work painstakingly researched by author Frank Conner.”
Ann Rives Zappa is explains in her review:
However, when Southerners prospered in small measure from World War II, the Federal Government responded by initiating Reconstruction II.
Later, in the review:
He covers policies and events created by liberals through the Supreme Court and Congress during the Fifties and Sixties to keep the South in subjugation.
Zappa explains that Conner has a plan to fight the liberals but that it is “not for the fainthearted” and that:
Nor will these last-ditch efforts to save our South be palatable to those who have swallowed the liberals’ lies or prefer to avoid today’s issues and cover before blacks and the media.
In the biographical notes it states that she has a website www.annzappa.com.
What Zappa doesn’t discuss is Conner writings about Jews. Conner in his book sees Jews attacking the South. The following are some sub-headings to chapter 20 in the book.
Following World War II, Northern Jewish Intellectuals Take Over the Ideological War Against the South from Northern WASPs,
Who and What Are the Jews in America?
The Eastern European Jewish Immigrants Trigger Anti-Semitism in the North Shortly after the Turn of the Century.
Jews Control Almost all of the Important Radical Movements in the U.S. During the 20th Century.
During the First Half of the 20th Century, the Northern Jews Lay the Groundwork for a Black-Civil-Rights Campaign.
To Gain Civil Rights Protection Quietly for themselves, Northern Jewish Intellectuals Sponsor and Guide a Southern Black-Civil-Rights Movement During the Last Half of the 20th Century.
Reading the last two sections is interesting. Whereas in the Southern Mercury, Conner discusses Boas and his views in IQs without mentioning Jews, in the book it is all about Jews with Conner explaining that “Jews dominated the field of cultural anthropology.” (Page 393)
Conner in another section explains:
Second, most Northern (and big-city Southern) Jewish intellectuals — as today’s main proponent of secular humanism — remain the deadly foes of white Southern Christianity.(Page 403)
Look well at the Northern Jewish intellectuals/activists, O South, for they — who by rights should have been your closest friends — are by their own choice our dedicated and deadliest enemy. (Page 406)
Vol. 4 No. 4 (July/August 2006) — This issue contains a lengthy article titled “The Tolerance Scam” by Michael W. Masters. It primarily concerns itself with attacking the Southern Poverty Law Center. However, it also explains that the very concept of anti-racism is an attack on the West and Christianity and civil rights legislation is also an attack on society. The following are a couple extracts.
… and peddling tolerance as a means of defusing resistance to unending attacks on Western culture and Christianity.
Using the wedge of anti-racism, cultural Marxists orchestrated judicial and legislative changes to society over the course of decades — e.g. Brown vs. Board of Education in 1955, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Immigration Reform Act of 1965. … The cultural Marxists relentlessly hammered away at Western cultural norms using the sledge hammer of anti-racism as a battering ram to bring down the walls of traditional Western culture.
Masters sees immigration as “the cultural Marxists’ ultimate weapon in breaking the hegemony of Western culture.” In expressing his fears of a multiracial society he asks the reader:
Would America’s current majority feel secure living in a country ruled by the likes of Idi Amin?
Vol. 6 No. 2 — (March/April 2008) In this issue Alan Stang has an article “Republican Party: Red From the Start.” Stang has a website www.alanstang.com. This article sees a communist conspiracy in the Republican party of the mid-19th century. He alleges that the 1848 revolutionaries in Europe were all communists and that some of these revolutionaries came to America after the failed 1848 revolution to perpetrate some type of communist agenda in the United States. Stang states:
… Lee and Jackson did not fully comprehend what they were fighting. Had this really been a “Civil” War, rather than a secession, they would and could have easily seized Washington after Manassas and hanged our first Communist President and the other war criminals.”
Another quote is:
So, again, the Republican Party did not “go wrong.” It was rotten from the start. It has never been anything but red. The characterization of Republican states as “red states” is quite appropriate.
Vol. 6 No. 3 — (May/June 2008) Robert Slimp has an article “Americans Face the Worst Presidential Candidates in History.” Slimp doesn’t like Hilary Clinton, John McCain or Barack Obama. Interestingly enough he considers Clinton the lesser evil than McCain who he says doesn’t adequately oppose illegal immigration and supports NAFTA Superhighway. However his discussion of Obama is perhaps the most hysterical in the article.
It is very clear to me that if Barack Obama should be elected President, he would be extremely anti-white and demand reparations for slavery and press hard for affirmative action to the degree that it would hurt young whites who were seeking jobs or admission to College and Graduate schools. … However, I believe that his rhetoric and anti-white legislative proposals would stir up racial riots. If he were running for re-election, these riots would turn into an exceedingly violent nature that would seriously damage race relations in America, and leave entire sections of some of our cities in ruins. Source: www.templeofdemocracy.com/southernmercury.htm