Abraham Lincoln Was a White Nationalist

The hidden history of the Great Emancipator offers a glimpse into the cover-up needed to perpetuate America’s aggressive multiculturalism.

Abraham Lincoln Was a White Nationalist

“Donald Trump is literally Hitler.”

These days it wouldn’t exactly require one of the residents of Israel’s newly christened “Trump Heights” settlement tweeting out a video of Jonathan Frakes Telling You You’re Wrong for 47 Seconds to gather enough evidence to mount a sufficient “well, actually” against any suggestion that Donald Trump is the second-coming of an antisemitic dictatorial racial supremacist.

That said, Abraham Lincoln was literally a white nationalist. 

On August 14, 1862, more than a year into the Civil War, Lincoln convened a meeting at the White House for officials from the Department of the Interior, including most notably James Mitchell, who had been appointed by the president to the newly created position of Commissioner of Emigration only 10 days earlier. The purpose of the meeting was to give “audience to a Committee of colored men”—in fact, the first delegation of black men ever received at, or invited to, the White House—to offer to pay them to leave the country. 

Abraham Lincoln unironically told black people to go back to Africa. 

Or Central America. Either worked for Lincoln. He made it clear that he didn’t have a preference for where his guests went, he just wanted them to leave the continental United States, as an entire race, forever. 

“Why should they leave this country?” 

Referring to all black people, and not just those in the room whom he was addressing, Lincoln posed this exact question, apparently rhetorically, as he immediately provided the answer:

“This is, perhaps, the first question for proper consideration. You and we are different races. We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss, but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both, as I think your race suffer very greatly, many of them by living among us, while ours suffer from your presence. In a word we suffer on each side. If this is admitted, it affords a reason at least why we should be separated.”

Abraham Lincoln was literally, unequivocally and unapologetically a white nationalist.

Today, simply stating “it’s okay to be white” is considered hate speechand don’t even think about noticing aloud something as self-evident as, like, basic crime statistics, or that all the people who own all the media companies and all the banks happen to share all the same things in common. 

All the while, the man taught to every American child as “the Great Emancipator” extended the first-ever White House invitation to any such “Deputation of Negroes” for the sole purpose of bestowing upon them the honor of being /pol/-tier shitposted right in the face by the president of the United States and the team he assembled to develop strategies for bringing about the deportation of all black people. 

If the man known today as the least-racist white person in American history was actually an extreme white nationalist, what does that say about what most people today know of American history? Of white nationalism? Of how Americans think about race, and why that has changed over the past 150 years?

We all know today that Lincoln was right: slavery, notably as an institution and reality of American history, was horrific. 

Also: multiculturalism doesn’t work. Or at least that it had, and would likely continue to have, a net negative impact on the people for whom the country was founded.  

Lincoln was, of course, referring to the hundreds of thousands of white countrymen who were slaughtering each other on battlefields across the nation at the time—in large part over the fate of the black race in America. He specifically said as much in his meeting:

See our present condition—the country engaged in war!—our white men cutting one another’s throats, none knowing how far it will extend; and then consider what we know to be the truth. But for your race among us there could not be war, although many men engaged on either side do not care for you one way or the other. Nevertheless, I repeat, without the institution of Slavery and the colored race as a basis, the war could not have an existence.”  

And that was over 150 years ago. Lincoln could not have imagined the extent to which the de facto tax that comes with diversity would continue a century and a half after the Civil War had ended. 

Today, large sections—in some cases, entire halves or more—of major US cities are essentially no-go zones for white Americans. Just ask Chicago. According to the FBI’s official crime statistics, despite being only 13% of the total population, black people commit more than 50% of the violent crimes in the United States. 

It takes the tax revenue of more than three white Americans to cover the cost of one black American. In 2014, white Americans generated a tax surplus (total tax revenue minus government spending) of $2,795 per person. By contrast, as a result of government spending on welfare and social programs over the same year, black Americans generated a budget deficit of $10,016 per person. 

Because of racism and oppression!” screams the woke liberal at his/her/their/xir computer screen. 

Well, not to concede that point, but black people had their chance to be free of white people. That’s the whole point of this article.

But they declined Lincoln’s offer. 

Lincoln even suggested that he could bring about a quicker end to slavery and the war if he could ensure that blacks would leave the country once freed. In this context, he described any potential refusal by already-free black men to self-deport as “extremely selfish,” lacking any consideration for both the enslaved members of their own race and the white men dying on Civil War battlefields.   

So why didn’t the Deputation take the president up on his offer? Why didn’t they jump at the opportunity to be paid to go back to the homeland of their ancestors, and end slavery and the bloodiest war in American history all in one swing? 

Because even Africans don’t want to live in Africa. Nor Central Americans in Central America. Based on every contemporary metric tracking immigration into Europe and North America, what is true today was apparently just as a true 157 years ago.

Is it a lack of natural resources in these lands that creates so much dysfunction and undesirability in the eyes of even their native people? Not if you consider the definition of “natural resources” to include infinity precious metals, diamonds, oil, livestock and arable land.

The real estate isn’t the problem. What else could it be?

What was so desirable about America that free black men wouldn’t accept payment—or help to end a war, or even free millions of members of their own race—to be separated from it? (Surely it wasn’t the American legal system that rendered them second-class citizens, regardless of their status as free men.) 

The answer is simple: white people and the societies, prosperity and safety of the civilizations that sprout up around white people wherever they are found. 

How else can you explain the preference of black people to live as second-class citizens around white people rather than be paid to live among their own race? How else can you explain millions of non-white migrants pouring into Europe and the United States today?    

And if white people are the reason that black people struggle so much in America today, then why do black people in Africa need mass-marketing outreach to be informed that raping babies doesn’t cure AIDS

Could it be that black people in Africa are poor because, as a civilization, they haven’t invented currency? That even when they forcibly take an established monetary system (and fertile farm lands), as black Zimbabweans did to white Rhodesians in the late 20th century, they end up with only hundred-trillion-dollar bills to eat?

Could it be that proximity to white people in a white society is worth more to a non-white than any amount of money or prestige in a society without white people?

Big if true. And if true, consider the benefits and opportunities afforded by the continued residence, citizenship, government expenditures and astroturfed celebration of diversity in America as more than enough reparative justice for descendants of black slaves freed over 150 years ago. 

But, if true restorative justice is the goal, maybe the real solution would be for everyone to admit that this whole thing isn’t working out. Even Abraham Lincoln knew it wouldn’t work, and the fact that this isn’t common knowledge to every American exemplifies perfectly the depths of the cover-up necessary to perpetuate today’s current levels of aggressive multiculturalism upon the United States.

Related Posts