Why are so many Southerners so pro-militarism and anti-liberty?

Joined
Jun 17, 2007
Messages
490
This has been something that has been annoying me for several years. Southerners, at least Southern politicians, are almost completely pro- Big Government. The Democrats in the South seem to be a lot like Democrats everywhere else. But the Republicans, many former Dixiecrats and others religious folks pushed out of the Democratic Party, are just as bad. In particular, they are militarists and imperialists. Yet, their ancestors were the victims of an imperial War. I am speaking, of course, of the War Between the States. And before some of you may say it, the Civil War was not fought over slavery or at least not initially. It's ironic to hear neocon radio hosts, who must have some popularity in the South, cite Abe Lincoln's suppression of civil liberties as a precedent for today's war on terror.

Are there any Southerners in the forum who can either support or criticize what I'm saying? I do what to qualify what I've said by saying that I'm speaking generally. And I'm not implying that the rest of the country is any more libertarian than the South.
 
I think it has a lot to do with how Southern Christians are taught their faith, which is, basically, blind obedience.
 
I think a lot of it has to do with their belief that we should protect Israel because they are the "chosen ones". Their pastors preach this to them on a weekly basis. So, it's very hard for them to break free from this thinking and say... wait a minute, this doesn't make any sense. They however are closer to doing this, than I have seen in a long time. We simply MUST get the campaign literature distributed in our own communities. If they don't know about him and have time to research him, Ron Paul will lose the nomination.
 
I think a lot of it has to do with their belief that we should protect Israel because they are the "chosen ones". Their pastors preach this to them on a weekly basis. So, it's very hard for them to break free from this thinking and say... wait a minute, this doesn't make any sense. They however are closer to doing this, than I have seen in a long time. We simply MUST get the campaign literature distributed in our own communities. If they don't know about him and have time to research him, Ron Paul will lose the nomination.

I agree. I believe this is the reason.
 
I assume by what you've been saying is that Christian Conservatives have a lot of influence in the SCRP. And that many of these people feel they have some Biblical obligation to have the U.S. government support Israel. And this support is unqualified.
 
Louisiana is becoming more libertarian, i can vouch for that... our citizens are more likely to take up arms against the government, than fight to protect it.
Everyone in louisiana has gun, legal and illegal. ;)
 
I've noticed this too, and, being a born-and-raised North Carolinian, I was actually swayed by the same jingoistic politics for many years. I like to think we're evolving out of it though. In NC's 9th Congressional District, a very progressive, anti-war Democrat named Bill Glass came fairly close to unseating Sue Myrick in '06...and, once I'm old enough to run for Congress in '10, I'll finish the job! :D
 
A huge amount of military bases are in the south. Candidates know how to scare their constituents about the possibility of the base closing down and pretty much losing a city their main source of income.
 
Louisiana is becoming more libertarian, i can vouch for that... our citizens are more likely to take up arms against the government, than fight to protect it.
Everyone in louisiana has gun, legal and illegal. ;)

While Louisiana is part of the South, it is not typical of the South. Catholicism is strong. Louisiana had a Jewish Senator, Judah Benjamin. I'm not saying Benjamin was a good guy but it says a lot that there would be a Jew serving at such a high level in the 1850's.
 
There's something to the religious aspect, but I think that's really a minor part of it.

I think what is much more significant is the "Culture War" aspect of it. Like it or not, the vast majority of Americans have completely bought into the two-party system. And for most of us these days, the Democrat Party represents the destruction of traditional American culture. It represents the promotion of minority group interests at the expense of the majority, it represents political correctness run amok, it represents anti-religious fervor, it represents attacks on the traditional family structure, etc.

Of course, these things are found to some degree in the neoconservative Republican Party as well, but to a much lesser degree. Having bought into the myth that they only have two choices, these Southerners side with the one that is less overtly hostile to their way of life. It is unfortunate that it comes with imperialist baggage attached, but most people really aren't thinking that abstractly.

They just know that the Democrats stand for things that are very abhorrent to them, such as disallowing prayer in public places, removing religious iconography from state buildings, making 1st-graders read books like "Heather Has Two Mommies", affirmative action, mass immigration (even more than the Repubs), etc. Thus, they go with what they perceive as the lesser of two evils.

Coming from a predominantly Scots-Irish (ie. bellicose) background, the matter of a little war here and there isn't a deal-breaker. What matters most to them is the preservation of culture.
 
Last edited:
A huge amount of military bases are in the south. Candidates know how to scare their constituents about the possibility of the base closing down and pretty much losing a city their main source of income.

I'm glad you brought that up. This is where the welfare state and the warfare state meet. The Feds have a lot of influence over the South through the military. Unfortunately, any Southern that voices opposition to the ongoing military occupation of the South are written off or labeled as "racists". (Some of them are, but not every single one).
 
Western SC is MAJOR Bible belt. Lived there, seen it. The problem is a combo of the 'chosen people' issue, the obey 'authority' stated frequently in the Bible which has been projected onto the gov't, and letting other people do the thinking for them. Obviously, many of them support blindly what the pastors/churches tell them, and don't think independently. Well....sounds familiar, can anyone say MSM?
 
Yet, their ancestors were the victims of an imperial War. I am speaking, of course, of the War Between the States.

Which they lost, and then they had their culture and economy torn apart and "Reconstructed", and spent years under the boot. By some estimates the southern economy has never recovered.

Just looking at cultural trends, it would seem the liberty-minded got out toward the west when they could. Idaho, Montana, many rural parts of Texas, etc. are where quite a lot of the liberty-minded culture aggregates these days.
 
Western SC is MAJOR Bible belt. Lived there, seen it. The problem is a combo of the 'chosen people' issue, the obey 'authority' stated frequently in the Bible which has been projected onto the gov't, and letting other people do the thinking for them. Obviously, many of them support blindly what the pastors/churches tell them, and don't think independently. Well....sounds familiar, can anyone say MSM?

In general, is there any difference between the Black Churches and the White Churches in regards to blindly following their preachers? Are Black Southerners also gung-ho on Israel?
 
Wow lots of anti-religious fervor in this thread. "yeah its because they are blind ignorant followers of their faith" and "Their churches are prisons not sanctuaries" yeesh people, i agree that it is better to mix faith and reason than to have blind faith, but these blanket generalizations seem a bit ill-founded and crude.
 
See, I think that the North is the pro-militarization, anti-liberty half of the nation. I was raised in the south and don't really know many folks at all represented by the characature presented in this thread. I ripped some guy on this very subject not too long ago about the kids in louisiana getting the gob's justice. It seems like on npr's fresh air, the question was posed if the south was threatened by a return to Jim Crowe in light of the recent Supreme Court racial quota ruling.

To me forced integration via racial quotas is not only deliberate population control, it is also an effort to strip the individual of any sense of identity/community/self outside of that defined by the state. Racial quotas are a phenomenon of the north and the elite along the west coast, why? because that is where the racists live in their largely segregated subdivisions... white flight.

"The south" as some sort of easily defined entity within this country is a complete fraud. I live in south texas and I assure you that my part of the state is more culturally tied to central america than say new york or d.c. It has always been this way, even before the United States was even a thought and has never changed... hopefully it never will. It is my home, it is what I know, where I plan to stay and therefore feel the need to respond w/ such a long post... I just hope all the yankees out there (yankee, as defined by me is anyone north of San Antonio) have the patientce and attention span to stick it out to the end.

The problems brought up in this thread is not a problem of the people, but rather the institutions corrupted by power and outside influence. These are the same folks that will cry to you about welfare queens because they only received $200,000 for not raising X, and for raising Y... even if you can't really grow corn down here (knowing this of course, you don't really bother buying all that fertilizer or diesel fuel you'd need either, since it ain't gonna come in anyway)... These folks are typically the children, grandchildren ...on down the line... of formerly slave owning, resource grubbing Americans and are supported by the army of immigrants who moved in from the rust belt back in the late 70's/80's, and have in the last couple of years been coming in droves (really though, I'd take the mexicans and otms over more nosey, uptight yankees any day of the week).

You can always recognize these folks by:

1) The insanely large metal gate with cut out cowboy on the trail, the name "rancho blah blah blah," made to look written in rope, and the enormous Lone Star right in the middle.

2) Their vehicles' [brand name] logo replaced with a Texas Flag and/or the texas flag in the towing hitch of their truck they never use to tow anything (ok, maybe the rv sometimes, but only during the summer when it gets too hot).

3) Their nasally, rapid and often rude speech, attitude, and tone of voice.

4) The general aura that I assume is caused by the realization that you were born in some other little, wimpy state.

Most native Texans I know are extremely liberal (in a social sense) and accepting of anyone who likes to party, shoot firearms, damn the eyes of all authority, raise a fuss in jest over just about anything, talk shit and hear it in return, and respect everyone's right to just be left the hell alone if that's what they so desire... anyone and everyone regardless of color, age, sexual orientation, all those things the institions try to legislate significance into.
 
the post was longer, but apparently cut off

just so you know... I define yankee as follows:

yankee- anyone living north of San Antonio, TX
 
Back
Top