The United States Was Founded as a White People’s Republic

by James Harting

I HOLD THIS TRUTH to be self-evident: that the United States of America was at its inception founded as a country of, by and for White people, regardless of what it has become or degenerated into today.

The elites ruling America today, and the Jews prime among them, have replaced the traditional definition of America as a White people’s country with the peculiar notion that it is a “propositional nation.” This pipe-dream holds that that anyone, from anywhere in the world and of whatever race or ethnicity, can become an American if they agree with certain sugary platitudes about racial equality, equal opportunity, democracy, and so forth, and if they embrace some version of the capitalist fantasy in which everyone can theoretically become a millionaire if they just work hard enough.

But the indisputable historical reality is that America was not founded as a “propositional nation” open to everyone in the world, but as a White people’s republic.

The Founding of America

The noted National Socialist thinker Matt Koehl commented on the racial origins of the United States in his 1973 essay, “American: A Racial Mission.” He wrote:

“Before the coming of the first Europeans, the concept of ‘America’ didn’t exist — either as a nation or as a geographical term.

“American history did not begin until the first White men set foot on these shores. Our history began as an extension of European — i.e., White, Western, or Aryan — history.

“The pre-Columbian aborigines scattered across the North American continent and periodically engaging in inter-tribal warfare certainly did not regard themselves as ‘Americans,’ or for that matter, as members of one, single community.”

Even before it was an independent country, America was already a racial-political expression of the White Man.

The racial character of society in pre-Revolutionary American is revealed by an act passed by the Virignia assembly in 1670, which prohibted free Blacks from owning White slaves.

That the US was conceived of as a White people’s republic is manifest in its very foundational documents, such as the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States of America.

The Declaration of Independence

Proponents of the dishonest notion of racial equality love to quote the following passage of the Declaration of Independence:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, and that they are endowed by the Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these rights are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

Stirring stuff, and when ripped from its historical context and cited in isolation, it does apparently support the bizarre concept of racial equality.

The reality, however, is that Jefferson was speaking metaphorically, not literally, and within a very circumscribed definition of “all men.” He himself owned dozens (perhaps hundreds) of primitive Negro slaves, none of whom he considered as the equal of any free White man.

In penning this passage, Jefferson was paraphrasing the Virginia Declaration of Rights, authored by George Mason. That document holds that “all men are equally free and independent” before the law. This sentiment would be understood in the context of the times to contrast with the British legal notion, that all men were not equal before the law, that is, that the royalty and nobility had legal rights that ordinary free citizens (“commoners”) did not have. It was further understood that by “men,” Mason and Jefferson meant White, male, adults — and no one else. (Mason, it should be noted, was another slave-holder, along with George Washington and other of the Founding Fathers.)

In his book Notes on the State of Virginia (written 1781, published 1784) Jefferson comments at length on the superiority of White people to Negroes, including the following passages:

“In general, their existence appears to participate more of sensation than reflection…

“Comparing them by their faculties of memory, reason, and imagination, it appears to me, that in memory they are equal to the whites; in reason much inferior, as I think one [Black] could scarcely be found capable of tracing and comprehending the investigations of Euclid; and that in imagination they are dull, tasteless, and anomalous…

“…[B]lacks, whether originally a distinct race, or made distinct by time and circumstances, are inferior to the whites in the endowments both of body and mind. It is not against experience to suppose, that different species of the same genus, or varieties of the same species, may possess different qualifications.”

Elsewhere in the Declaration, Jefferson revealed his attitude (and those of the other Founding Fathers who signed the document) towards the race gently referred to today as “Native Americans,”

“[King George III] has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.”

“Merciless Indian savages!” That is certainly not a ringing endorsement of racial equality and tolerance!

The Declaration was written in 1776. Some eleven years later, the US Constitution was drafted. It is much more racialist, both implicitly and explicitly.

The Constitution of the United States of America

Although it unfortunately does not always use racially explicit language, the Constitution is essentially a White racialist document. It divides the population of the US into three categories: (1) Negro slaves, called here “Other Persons; (2) Indians; and (3) “We the People,” meaning, obviously, White people, if we subtract Negroes and Indians from the total population.

The Preamble reads:

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and to our Posterity, do hereby ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

The key word here is “Posterity,” which the dictionary defines as “the offspring of one progenitor to the furthest generations,” that is to say, direct descendants. The direct descendants of “we the people” of 1787 are Whites of European heritage, not Eastern European Jews, Syrian refugees, mestizos from south of the Rio Grande or any other non-Whites.

The low estimation in which the Founding Fathers held Blacks is reflected in the so-called “Three-Fifths Compromise,” found in Article I, Section Two, paragraph three. It reads:

“Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.”

The meaning here is that for purposes of apportioning representatives to Congress, which is determined by the population of each state, Blacks counted for only three-fifths of a White person. That Negroes are referred to here as “Other Persons” is especially telling: the Constitution specifically sets them apart from “We the (White) People.”

Also mentioned in that paragraph are Indians, who are put in the same category as Blacks for purposes of taxation. Further in the Constitution, Congress is granted the specific power of dealing with Indians, who are not defined or considered as citizens:

“Congress shall have the Power … To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes…[Art. I, Sect. 8, para. 3]”

The Constitution was ratified in 1788; it was not until 1924 that Congress granted citizenship to all Indians in the US who were not explicitly granted citizenship by a previous treaty.

So we see that although it did not always define the racial character of the new American republic clearly, the Founding Fathers were thinking and acting along racial lines.

The Naturalization Act of 1790

Perhaps the Framers came to some belated realization that they needed to speak more clearly concerning race and the law. The Naturalization Act of 1790, setting out who may become a citizen of the new American nation, states explicitly,

“That any alien, being a free White person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States, for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof…”

You cannot get any clearer than that.

The racial requirement for citizenship was upheld when the act was renewed in 1798 and again in 1802. It was not until 1870, in the wake of the Civil War, that full citizenship was extended to Blacks, described specifically as “aliens of African nativity and to persons of African descent.” Even then, Negro citizenship was recognized as a special exception to the otherwise White character of the US.

This can be seen by the “Chinese Exclusion Act” of 1882. This was a Federal law that prohibited Chinese from entering the United States. It remained in effect until 1943, when it was repealed because China was an American ally in the Second World War.

And, as noted earlier, although individual exceptions were made now and then, American Indians were not granted citizenship as a race until 1924.

The United States of America was founded as a country of White people, by White people and for future generations of White children.

Anyone who says otherwise is either ignorant or a liar.

Into the Darkness

Today, in 2018, the majority of elementary school children in the US are non-White, and the percentage of non-Whites grows each day as the percentage of White children declines: that is the future that the ruling elites have in mind for us.

The US is, supposedly, a democracy. Yet the government has never asked the White population if they agreed to allow themselves to become extinct. There has been no public national debate. Instead, White genocide is being foisted on us without consultation or permission.

Those White people who are racially aware need to decide whether they are going to meekly acquiesce to their extermination — or if they are going to rise up and fight back.

A wise man once wrote:

“If, through the instrument of governmental authority, a people is being led to its destruction, then rebellion is not only the right of every member of that people, it is his duty.”


“Those who want to live, let them fight; and those who do not want to fight in this world of eternal struggle do not deserve to live.”

* * *

Source: Do Right and Fear No One

Previous post

If Jews Didn’t Exist... Who'd Want to Invent Them?

Next post

Hawaii: Leader of Pro-White Pagan Group Odinia in Path of Volcano


  1. JM/Iowa
    15 July, 2018 at 12:58 am — Reply

    Whatever the “founding fathers” intended or said makes not a whit of difference, they failed at establishing the institutions by which this republic would remain White and failed at keeping ALL non-Whites and Jews out.

    This failure can only be rectified by their posterity, meaning each and every White living today in the U.S. and elsewhere, by establishing and upwardly evolving the institutions necessary for White survival and a progressive future. Only the National Alliance offers the framework and the people willing to do that. Whites who choose to sit on their thumbs will find that their failure to take responsibility (for whatever reasons) will yield this land to non-Whites and forfeit the living space we need for the aforementioned survival and future. It will be they who are blamed by our posterity for failing them.

    For my part, I intend not only to be blameless before my descendants, but to live a honorable and creditable life in service to our people.

    • 15 July, 2018 at 5:31 pm — Reply

      If the origins of the United States as a White people’s republic were so unimportant, then why have the Jews spent so much time and effort covering this up and falsifying the historical record?

      Awhile back I was leafing though a middle school textbook on American history. In the chapter on the Civil War there were no photographs of Confederate generals or leaders, but there were two photos of Negro troops, who, it said, heroically fought to free their race from White oppression.

      As George Orwell noted, “He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.”

      Nothing grows into the future that is not organically rooted in the past.

      • JM/Iowa
        15 July, 2018 at 11:56 pm — Reply

        The historical record indicates that the United States republic was Aryan in origin, that is without dispute. The record also indicates that our Aryan forebears built poorly, allowing our racial competitors (and self-chosen enemies) to live amongst us to eat away at our substance. This is what I would call a “failure.”

        My point is that we learn from this mistake, prepare ourselves for the day when the failure is swept away and replaced by Aryans who have our Cosmotheist values engraved in their hearts and minds and have learned to not repeat the failures of the past.

  2. Guess
    15 July, 2018 at 5:31 am — Reply

    The Founding Fathers were geniuses but they had no money. They established plantations and imported slaves. Their descendants most are citizens and should be compensated. Nobody else. Newcomers like Obama want to jump the gravy train.

  3. cc
    15 July, 2018 at 12:55 pm — Reply

    The so-called Founders talked a lot about liberty and freedom while simultaneously designing a monstrosity central government. Politicians will be politicians.

    In 1787 anti-federalist Patrick Henry called the Constitution a crazy magazine. He dismissed the Philadelphia Convention as the Federal Convention.

    1. “. . . that a wrong step made now will plunge us into misery, and our Republic will be lost.”

    2. “Who authorized them to speak the language of We the People. The people gave them no power to use their name. That they exceeded their power is perfectly clear.”

    3. Periodical military magazine: “[The Constitution] replaced the loose confederation of states with a strong federal government whose power the patriots fought to overthrow.”

    John Hanson, the first President, was also anti-federalist.

  4. cc
    15 July, 2018 at 6:48 pm — Reply

    The Jews out in Hollywood released a movie called Glory.

    The following excerpt is lifted from the Confederate Battle Report on Fort Wagner.

    Charleston Harbor

    Assault On Fort Wagner. July 22, 1863. Brigadier General R.S. Ripley, Commanding

    “The carnage of the enemy in the confined space in front of Battery Wagner was extreme. The ditch and glacis were encumbered with the slain of all ranks and colors, for the enemy had put the poor negroes, whom they had forced into an unnatural service, in front, to be, as they were, slaughtered indiscriminately. The White colonel who commanded them fell with many officers of the regiment (the Fifty-fourth Massachusetts), and the colors under which they were sent to butchery by hypocrisy and inhumanity, fell, draggled in blood and sand in the ditch, a mournful memorial of the waste of industry.”

    Confederate General Johnson Hagood said of Robert Gould Shaw:

    “Had he been in command of white troops, I should have given him an honorable burial; as it is, I shall bury him in the common trench with the niggers that fell with him.”

  5. neetblog
    16 July, 2018 at 4:30 am — Reply

    The United States belongs to the Native Americans, they have a blood and soil connection as I do not. That’s why at some point in my life I will move back to Central Europe and hope the hate from all of you will dissipate and realize where your true home is.

    • 16 July, 2018 at 2:15 pm — Reply

      Seriously? So you think the Mongoloid peoples who hailed from the Asian continent are “native” to North America? Wow. Stop drinking the Kool-Aid. You’ve not heard of Kennewick Man, the Spirit Cave mummy, Windover bog site and about 20 others that revealed European skeletal remains on American soil that pre-date even the oldest Amerindian remains by 9,000 years?

      It’s precisely because of these findings and specifically after the Kennewick Man discovery that the Amerindian tribes, along with their jewish lawyers, pressured Congress to rush through the Native American Graves and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) in the 1990’s. NAGPRA basically states that any skeletal remains found on U.S. soil that are older than 500 years MUST be turned over immediately to the regional Amerindian tribe to be reburied on their reservation as one of their own brothers, regardless of whether that’s true or not. Any further scientific investigation on such remains in a federal crime. Yes, science is now a crime. Truth does not fear investigation.

      The phonies that call themselves “native” Americans aren’t native at all, and they know that. To lose their coveted title would mean to lose their millions of acres of reservation land on which they pay ZERO taxes, hundreds of casinos on those lands that rake in up to $20 million per month on which they also pay ZERO taxes, complete autonomy from the heavy hand of the U.S. government and the right to sovereignty and self-rule…and of course, their use of the sympathy card as an oppressed minority. Yes, there is a LOT to lose for the fakers who call themselves native Americans. I also read an article by a Hopi woman years ago who said for generations her people have handed down the story of how when their ancestors “came to” North America, they encountered a white-skinned, red-haired people who they proceeded to conquer and kill. They hold the story as a great act of heroism in their history, but she said they’d never share that openly outside the tribe. I wonder why!

      The science and archeological record prove without a doubt that Whites were in North America long before the Mongoloids crossed the bearing straight and became Amerindians. Even putting that evidence aside, this is the reality: No one is “native” to anywhere. No one just sprang up from the ground like green grass and claimed any land as their own. ALL people are migratory, nomadic, wanderers and explorers to one degree or another. As such, the ONLY thing that entitles any group of people to any land is 1.) their ability to acquire it either through exploration or conquest and 2.) how long they can keep it. That’s it. So, I say enough with the “we were here first” nonsense. That’s only a distraction of the anti-White establishment. No one was anywhere “first”. Bring on the battle and let it be done.

  6. 16 July, 2018 at 3:44 pm — Reply

    Read your Old Testament; what did The God of Israel tell Abraham to do–go to the land of Canaan and I will give you that land.. As the Children of Israel came to the River Jordan, ready to cross over into Canaan, what did God tell Israel under Joshua to do — wipe out all of the people of the region including Canaans’ people! Who were the people of Canaan–from the book of Moses Chapter 7–v.8 {actually Enoch speaking} The Lord shall curse The Land of Canaan, blackness on all the children of Canaan and they were despised among all people..
    By the way, did Gods Chosen People while they were in Egypt inter marry–no they did not–read your Old Testament–it applies to day..

    • JM/Iowa
      17 July, 2018 at 2:04 am — Reply

      I’ve read enough of the “Old Testament” to conclude it’s full of feces. Parting the Red Sea? Anthropomorphic “deity” who is jealous of other gods? Burning bushes that talk?

      The Romans had a legal maxim, Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus. If the “Holy Bible’s” testimony is to be believed, one must put away one’s good sense first. And that I will not do.

  7. Omni George
    4 August, 2018 at 2:14 am — Reply

    As President of the United States, Thomas Jefferson strongly encouraged race-mixing and intermarriage between White Americans and the American Indians:

    “…[W]hen once you have property you will want laws and Magistrates to protect your property and persons, and to punish those among you who commit crimes. You will find that our laws are good for this purpose; you will wish to live under them, YOU WILL UNITE YOURSELVES WITH US, JOIN IN OUR GREAT COUNCILS AND FORM ONE PEOPLE WITH US AND WE SHALL ALL BE AMERICANS, YOU WILL MIX WITH US BY MARRIAGE, YOUR BLOOD WILL RUN IN OUR VEINS, AND WILL SPREAD WITH US OVER THIS GREAT ISLAND.”

    — President Thomas Jefferson to Hendrick Aupaumut, 21 December 1808 (emphasis added)

    • Andrew Hamilton
      4 August, 2018 at 1:33 pm — Reply

      This 1808 letter by President Thomas Jefferson to a Mohican diplomat is a good illustration of why it is wise to read the historical writings of Whites directly whenever possible rather relying upon secondary sources to ascertain what went on in their heads in pre-Jewish, pre-communist society.

      Judging from the four corners of the letter, and assuming he was not dissembling, it was Jefferson’s belief that American Indians should—with White assistance—greatly increase their population size by adopting American laws and an agricultural rather than hunter-gatherer mode of existence. Looking further into the future he foresaw White miscegenation with a necessarily much larger Indian population.

      One would want to know his views about White-Indian relations across the arc of his life, before and after the letter was written. They may have changed over time.

      To me the letter suggests racial shortsightedness as well as a tendency among Whites to think in purely Negro-White terms while remaining fuzzy on racial groups and White hybridization outside that simple dichotomy. Jews have exploited this probably innate tendency.

      Jefferson assumed that Indians were racially so similar to Whites that they 1) could readily adapt to White laws, land ownership, and agriculture and 2) should be biologically assimilated through racial admixture.

      He makes an interesting observation about White demographic expansion at the time:

      “the whites on the other hand are in the habit of cultivating the earth, of raising stocks of Cattle, hogs and other domestic Animals in much greater numbers than they could kill of Deer & Buffalo. having always a plenty of food and clothing they raise abundance of children, they double their numbers every twenty years, the new swarms are continually advancing upon the country like flocks of Pigeons, & so they will continue to do,” adding, “you see how from a small family you may become a great nation by adopting the course which from the small beginning you describe had made us a great Nation.”

      By inference one can sympathize with the concerns about the Indians’ fate that the Indian diplomat must have expressed to the President.

    • 4 August, 2018 at 1:51 pm — Reply

      TJ quote duel with Omni George:

      “If ever we are constrained to lift the hatchet against any tribe, we will never lay it down till that tribe is exterminated, or driven beyond the Mississippi… in war, they will kill some of us; we shall destroy them all.” -Thomas Jefferson

  8. Omni George
    4 August, 2018 at 3:08 pm — Reply

    LOL, you dumb fools.

    As President, Thomas Jefferson sought full U.S. citizenship for those Indian nations which desired it, including the Cherokee. In his Eighth Annual Message to Congress on November 8, 1808, Jefferson presented to the nation a vision of White and Indian unity:

    “With our Indian neighbors the public peace has been steadily maintained…. And, generally, from a conviction that WE CONSIDER THEM AS PART OF OURSELVES, AND CHERISH WITH SINCERITY THEIR RIGHTS AND INTERESTS, the attachment of the Indian tribes is gaining strength daily… and will amply requite us for the justice and friendship practiced towards them…. [O]NE OF THE TWO GREAT DIVISIONS OF THE CHEROKEE NATION HAVE NOW UNDER CONSIDERATION TO SOLICIT THE CITIZENSHIP OF THE UNITED STATES, AND TO BE IDENTIFIED WITH US IN LAWS AND GOVERNMENT, in such progressive manner as we shall think best.”

    (emphasis added)

    Thomas Jefferson’s letter to Benjamin Banneker:

    Philadelphia Aug. 30. 1791.


    I thank you sincerely for your letter of the 19th. instant and for the Almanac it contained. no body wishes more than I do to see such proofs as you exhibit, THAT NATURE HAS GIVEN TO OUR BLACK BRETHREN, TALENTS EQUAL TO THOSE OF THE OTHER COLOURS OF MEN, & THAT THE APPEARANCE OF A WANT OF THEM IS OWING MERELY TO THE DEGRADED CONDITION OF THEIR EXISTENCE BOTH IN AFRICA & AMERICA. I can add with truth that no body wishes more ardently to see a good system commenced for raising the condition both of their body & mind to what it ought to be, as fast as the imbecillity of their present existence, and other circumstance which cannot be neglected, will admit. I have taken the liberty of sending your almanac to Monsieur de Condorcet, Secretary of the Academy of sciences at Paris, and member of the Philanthropic society because I considered it as a document to which your whole colour had a right for their justification against the doubts which have been entertained of them.

    I am with great esteem, Sir, Your most obedient humble servant.

    Thomas Jefferson

    (emphasis added)

    Benjamin Franklin on the centrality of Black equality:

    “Slavery is such an atrocious debasement of human nature, that its very extirpation, if not performed with solicitous care, may sometimes open a source of serious evils…. Attention to emancipate black people, it is therefore to be hoped will become a branch of our national police… To instruct, to advise, to qualify those who have been restored to freedom, for the exercised and enjoyment of civil liberty… and to procure their children an education calculated for their future situation in life, these are the great outlines… which we conceive will essentially promote the public good, and the happiness of these our hitherto too much neglected fellow creatures.”

    — Benjamin Franklin, President of the Pennsylvania Abolition Society, 1789 ( )

    “The bosom of America is open to receive not only the Opulent and respectable Stranger, but the oppressed and persecuted of ALL NATIONS AND RELIGIONS; whom we shall wellcome [sic] to a participation of all our rights and privileges, if by decency and propriety of conduct they appear to merit the enjoyment.”

    — George Washington, addressing Irish immigrants in New York City, December 2, 1783 ( )

    When America was founded, free Blacks were VOTING CITIZENS in at least 5 states, namely New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, and North Carolina.

    The four naturalization acts passed between 1790 and 1802 made it increasingly HARDER – not easier – for Europeans (who were termed “White aliens”) to immigrate to the US. Among other things, these laws raised the residency requirement from 2 years, to 5 years, and finally to 14 years.

    John Quincy Adams, as Secretary of State under President James Monroe, advised would-be immigrants from Europe that unless they stop being European and discard their European thinking, they will fail in America:


    “To one thing they [Europeans] must make up their minds, or, they will be disappointed in every expectation of happiness as Americans. THEY MUST CAST OFF THE EUROPEAN SKIN, NEVER TO RESUME IT. THEY MUST LOOK FORWARD TO THEIR POSTERITY, RATHER THAN BACKWARD TO THEIR ANCESTORS; they must be sure that whatever their own feelings may be, those of their children will cling to the prejudices of this country, and will partake of that proud spirit, not unmingled with disdain….”

    (emphasis added)

    — Secretary of State John Quincy Adams to prospective German immigrant Moritz von Furstenwarther, 1819 ( )

    The Founding Fathers knew firsthand the valor and skill that Blacks were capable of, such as those Blacks who fought for America’s freedom including the famous spy James Armistead.

    Black Americans enlisted in the Continental Army and served honorably in the cause of America’s freedom.

    Native American Indians fought for America’s independence and served in all of America’s wars since then.

    In 1776, the US signed the Treaty of Watertown with Indian nations from the Wabanaki Confederacy to help them enlist as paid fighters for the American Revolution. This was the very first foreign treaty that the independent US government signed.

    In India itself, Hindus and Muslims together sided with the French and fought to secure America’s freedom against the British. The American revolutionaries greatly admired them:

    “The bill for establishing religious freedom… I had drawn in all the latitude of reason and right. It still met with opposition; but… it was finally passed; and a singular proposition proved, that its protection of opinion was meant to be universal. Where the preamble declares that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the words ‘Jesus Christ,’… the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the JEW AND THE GENTILE, THE CHRISTIAN AND MAHOMETAN, THE HINDOO, AND INFIDEL OF EVERY DENOMINATION.”

    — Thomas Jefferson, from his collected writings, 1821 ( )

    “I fully agree with the presbyterians [sic], that true freedom embraces the MAHOMITAN AND THE GENTOO [HINDU] AS WELL AS THE XN [CHRISTIAN] RELIGION. And upon this liberal ground I hope our Assembly will conduct themselves.”

    — Richard Henry Lee, signer of the Declaration of Independence for Virginia and former President of the Continental Congress, in a letter to James Madison, November 26, 1784 ( )

    • Andrew Hamilton
      4 August, 2018 at 3:45 pm — Reply

      Your response is asinine. You cannot have it both ways:

      “America is an antiracist proposition nation”–which you are asserting but do not believe.

      And, simultaneously:

      “Whites are evil racists, and always were; America and European nations were monolithic racist states.”

      Peddle that sh-t in the comments at mainstream news sites, where ignorant, misinformed, and racist readers will buy it.

    • 5 August, 2018 at 12:01 pm — Reply

      The general policy toward Redskins, from Thomas Jefferson through his proteges Madison and Monroe, down to Andrew Jackson, was that the Indian territories should gradually cease to exist as the Indians learned to rely primarily on agriculture instead of hunting, and assimilated to the White population.

      Jefferson thought that this would happen gradually of its own accord, because the Indians were not good at managing their own affairs, and would run up debts, and would lose territory in settling the debts, and also would not need so much land for farming as for hunting.

      The plan went afoul because Scottish merchants married into the Cherokee tribe and took charge of their affairs, and made the process much more difficult. The fabulously wealthy “Chief” John Ross was only one-eighth Cherokee.

      The Redskins were welcome to become citizens of their particular state if they chose to take up a normal White person’s life as farmers, but if they wanted to continue as hunter-gatherers, there really was no alternative to relocating beyond the Mississippi, because the game east of the Mississippi was becoming scarce.

      • 8 August, 2018 at 8:09 am — Reply

        I may have overgeneralized.

        This whole question of assimilation of Indians and granting of citizenship to Indians is a bit murky.

        There were some treaties where Indians were offered the opportunity to acquire private farms and become citizens. Here’s one discussed by a blogger who seems to be Cherokee. First he quotes a paragraph from the Treaty of the Cherokee Agency (1817):

        “’And to each and every head of any Indian family residing on the east side of the Mississippi river, on the lands that are now or may hereafter be surrendered to the United States, who may wish to become citizens of the United States, the United States do agree to give a reservation of six hundred and forty acres of land in a square to include their improvements which are to be as near the centre thereof as practicable, in which they will have a life estate with a reversion in fee simple to their children reserving to the widow her dower, the register of whose names is to be filed in the office of the Cherokee agent, which shall be kept open until the census is taken as stipulated in the third article of this treaty [June 1818]. Provided, That if any of the heads of families, for whom reservations may be made, should remove therefrom, then, in that case the right to revert to the United States. And provided further, That the land which may be reserved under this article, be deducted from the amount which has been ceded under the first and second articles of this treaty.’”

        “The treaty promised a square mile of land to every Indian family east of the Mississippi River living on the lands that were ceded to the government if they would become citizens of the United States and give up their status as Cherokee [or other] Indians. Six hundred forty acres for their very own, with their present home as nearly as possible to the center of that acreage–that was the promise. All they had to do was file a request with the Indian Agent within almost a year. Very few of the people had ever owned any land, and the concept was somewhat foreign to them. Perhaps the main attraction for becoming “citizen Indians” may have been staying in the East, on familiar lands. Only about 311 Cherokee people applied for the land. A few of those actually got some land, usually less than the promised amount, and almost all of them lost what they did get. Still, for a time, some of them remained among the white settlers.”

        So, some Cherokee, at least, were granted private plots from the former tribal land. The blogger doesn’t say whether the promise of citizenship was fulfilled.

        On the other hand, there is this, from the Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, for the year 1892:

        “Status of Indian women married to citizens of the United States. – Under date of February 10, 1855, an act of Congress was approved (10 Stats., 604) which provides that “any woman who is now or may hereafter be married to a citizen of the United States, and who might herself be lawfully naturalized, shall be deemed herself a citizen.” As the courts have declared that an Indian can not be natturalized under our general naturalization law (6th Federal Reporter, 256), an Indian woman under the statute just quoted could not by marriage with a citizen of the United States become a citizen herself. By the act of August 9, 1888, (25 Stats., 392), Congress declared that any Indian woman (except a member of the Five Civilized Tribes) who should thereafter marry a citizen of the United States should be deemed a citizen herself by virtue of such marriage, but that in thus becoming a citizen she should in no way foreit any of her rights to an interest in the property of her tribe.

        “According to this an Indian woman married to a citizen of the United States prior to August 9, 1888 not only did not become a citizen herself by reason of such marriage, but she did not lose her connection with her tribe nor cease to be an Indian; so that the law of descent among the Indians, which is often through the mother, would seem to have included her offspring as members of her tribe.

        “Since the passage of that act, however, the effect of the marriage of an Indian woman to a citizen of the United States upon the status and rights in her tribe of her offspring by such marriage is totally different. Now, and hereafter, by her marriage to a citizen, she separates herself fropm her tirbe and becomes identified with the people of the United States asdistiniguished from the people of her tribe. Her children will be citizens of the United States in all respects, and in no respect can they be deemed to be members of her tribe. They are Americans, not Indians.”

        The most obvious fact about the matter is that assimilation of Redskins was not regarded with the same horror as assimilation of Negroes. One reason for that may be that there were few of them. The whole eastern Cherokee population relocated under the Treaty of New Echota (inhabiting an area one-third the size of Tennessee) was only about 13,000.

        • Omni George
          8 August, 2018 at 11:35 am — Reply

          Dumb White supremacists couldn’t care less what the Founding Fathers thought.

          A PERPETUAL ALLIANCE: “Article XI. A perpetual Alliance offensive and defensive, is to be entered into as soon as may be with the Six Nations; their Limits to be ascertained and secured to them; their Land not to be encroached on, nor any private or Colony Purchases made of them hereafter to be held good; nor any Contract for Lands to be made but between the Great Council of the Indians at Onondaga and the General Congress. The Boundaries and Lands of all the other Indians shall also be ascertained and secured to them in the same manner; and Persons appointed to reside among them in proper Districts, who shall take care to prevent Injustice in the Trade with them, and be enabled at our general Expense by occasional small Supplies, to relieve their personal Wants and Distresses. And all Purchases from them shall be by the Congress for the General Advantage and Benefit of the United Colonies.”

          — Benjamin Franklin, “Proposed Articles of Confederation”, presented to the Continental Congress on May 10, 1775 ( )

          THEIR PROPERTY, RIGHTS, AND LIBERTY: “Article 3. Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged. The utmost good faith shall always be observed towards the Indians; their lands and property shall never be taken from them without their consent; and, in their property, rights, and liberty, they shall never be invaded or disturbed, unless in just and lawful wars authorized by Congress; but laws founded in justice and humanity, shall from time to time be made for preventing wrongs being done to them, and for preserving peace and friendship with them.”

          — The Northwest Ordinance, passed by Congress, July 13, 1787 ( )

          PEACE AND GOOD NEIGHBOURHOOD: “I cannot dismiss the subject of Indian affairs without again recommending to your consideration the expediency of more adequate provision for giving energy to the laws throughout our interior frontier, and for restraining the commission of outrages upon the Indians; without which all pacific plans must prove nugatory. To enable, by competent rewards, the employment of qualified and trusty persons to reside among them, as agents, would also contribute to the preservation of peace and good neighbourhood. If, in addition to these expedients, an eligible plan could be devised for promoting civilization among the friendly tribes, and for carrying on trade with them, upon a scale equal to their wants, and under regulations calculated to protect them from imposition and extortion, its influence in cementing their interests with our’s [sic] could not but be considerable.”

          — Pres. George Washington, Fourth Annual Message to Congress, November 6, 1792 ( )

          OUR BRETHREN OF THE SAME LAND: “Go on then, brother, in the great reformation you have undertaken…. In all your enterprises for the good of your people, you may count with confidence on the aid and protection of the United States, and on the sincerity and zeal with which I am myself animated in the furthering of this humane work. You are our brethren of the same land; we wish your prosperity as brethren should do. Farewell.”

          — Pres. Thomas Jefferson, to the Seneca leader Handsome Lake, November 3, 1802 ( )

          WE THANK THE GREAT SPIRIT: “I am glad, brothers, you are willing to go and visit some other parts of our country…. we thank the Great Spirit who took care of you on the ocean, and brought you safe and in good health to the seat of our great Council; and we hope His care will accompany and protect you, on your journey and return home; and that He will preserve and prosper your nation in all its just pursuits.”

          — Pres. Thomas Jefferson, to the Choctaw nation, December 17, 1803 ( )

          • 9 August, 2018 at 11:58 am

            George Washington: “If, in addition to these expedients, an eligible plan could be devised for promoting civilization among the friendly tribes….”

            This means making the Injuns into farmers so that they would require much less land.

            In the late 1700s it was still believed that the Injuns were potentially equal to Whites, but by the 1830s, according to Lewis Cass, it had become apparent that something in the Injun nature was insusceptible to change. The Redskin recklessness and lust for firewater are still notorious.

          • Aldo
            11 August, 2018 at 10:31 am

            Ley off the cuck porn and Hollywood, Leftie.

  9. cc
    4 August, 2018 at 10:00 pm — Reply

    1865 to present. The Gay Union. If it’s a forced alliance, what else could it be? The federals on the Potomac demand a single democracy. Statehood is for those who pretend.

    Northern Republicans / Black Republicans passed forceful civil rights acts of 1866, 1870, 1871, 1875. Unleash Negroes unrestrained on the people of the states.

  10. cc
    5 August, 2018 at 3:11 pm — Reply

    A Republic is the forerunner of central despotism.

  11. Travon Martinberg
    7 August, 2018 at 2:07 am — Reply

    A lot of discussion about what happened 150 years ago is useless now unless it provides a lesson. The lesson is that going forward, whites must never let non-whites into their living-space communities, eventually even as visitors, regardless of how convenient or profitable such presence may seem at the time, even if it means relinquishing territory lost to multiculturalism, such as NYC, at least temporarily. Asians, Amerinds and the rest can live freely and independently in N. American multicult region(s) such as NYC. To reestablish the authority to return to this point – that existed just a few decades ago – venues of jewish over-influence (press, academia, law, and finance) must simply be exposed publicly and firmly as RACIST toward “gentile” whites (some of these jews claim they’re white when politically convenient), because they are, borrowing a tactic the mud folks with the parasite’s aid have used to make whites cower and flee the systems they built and maintained for many decades.

  12. BW
    18 September, 2018 at 6:39 pm — Reply

    Can’t verify what’s printed in those links easily,but it’s clear,given today’s political climate,that America’s founding fathers are very often misrepresented and misquoted by the left,with regards to what they believed in terms of race or race policy.Most of the sources I have examined are anything but unbiased.Even if it were all true,would it justify our current policies and demographic trends? The salient fact is that America was founded as a white nation and its quickly turning into something else..something unsustainable..something in which excellence,trust,civility,cooperation and peace will be impossible.The left loves to make us believe that our white founders loved non-whites and wanted us to integrate with them and give them the same rights and citizenship status that whites had or that they had the same level of participation in our institutions or wars that whites did,but this is clearly not true,at least,not entirely.And again,even if true,it doesn’t justify our present demographic trajectory of making whites a minority and turning a once homogeneous and cohesive nation into a chaotic,overcrowded and conflict-ridden shithole.These leftist and sjw idiots can call it “white supremacy” all they want,but the truth is that America was and is a white nation and its greatness and historical identity came from this fact and that the replacement of its founding stock with non-whites will have profoundly negative consequences for all of us.My neighbor recently took his daughter out of school because the local demographics were such that she had become the only white student in her class and was frequently harassed by blacks and Mexicans.This is the sort of reality that cannot be justified by all those red links above and the sjws who cite them.

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Slander, crude language, incivility, off-topic drift, or remarks that might harm National Vanguard or its users may be edited or deleted, even if unintentional. Comments may be edited for clarity or usage.