Doves Dropping Bombs (No Redneck Ever Called me a Vatnik)

An article by RWA Samizdat contributor M Book

It was once common to refer to America as a melting pot. The idea was that multiple ingredients, immigrants of different cultures, would slowly melt away to form a single, American identity. This idea is still popular in certain spheres, but soon the metaphor changed to a diversity stew, where each culture would retain certain, acceptable characteristics but contribute to the overall flavor of America! This was popular amongst liberals who wanted to consider immigrants from Central and South America equal to the WASP, Ulster Scots, Germans and other Northern Europeans that formed what was once considered the core of American identity. It might be simpler for Europeans to consider the United States as various factions, dimly aware of each other, vying for local and federal power. Ulster Scots comprise most of the lower-class whites in the South and Appalachia, referred to as rednecks, hillbillies, white trash or whatever the current term of today. They make up a significant portion of the military class and are generally despised by everyone. Born Fighting by James Webb discusses this oft forgotten ethnicity. Steve Sailer, occasionally mentions them, albeit in a normally negative light.

One of the many interesting aspects of this ethnicity is their association with qualities that are frowned upon by the contemporary political establishment. They are the nascar racing, alcoholic whites of the Merle Haggard variety, formerly of the “If you don’t love it, leave it” attitude towards patriotism. Often seen as Waylon Jennings, also an Ulster Scott, writes of himself, “too ugly for LA and too stupid for New York.” These Southerners often excel in the military during a formal war, with such examples as Andrew Jackson and Davy Crocket. They’re the type who wanted to use a nuclear weapon against Iraq and thought Trump was a political messiah. My absolute favorite example, to explain to Europeans how Southerners feel towards the rest of America, is Operation Jade Helm. In 2015, Alex Jones convinced Texas that the federal government intended to invade, itself. A training exercise was seen as a federal act of aggression, in the vein of the butcher General Sherman, and even normies stocked up on weapons, ammunition and food. The Governor sent the State Guard to keep an eye on them. They’re an ornery people. These are the people that Universities condemn as racists and backwards people. Fire and brimstone Baptists and police standoff lone gunmen. What they are not, amusingly, are Ukraine supporters.

This statement should be qualified. If we can assume most Southerners are influenced by the Ulster Scot ideas of self-reliance, aggression and social conservatism, we can see from pew research they’re statistically more likely to be against support for Ukraine compared to democrats. I don’t consider this to be an inconsistency, most Southerners adhere to Charlie Daniel’s Band’s Long Hair Country Boy style of ethics,

“But I ain't asking nobody for nothin'

If I can't get it on my own

If you don't like the way I'm livin'

You just leave this long-haired country boy alone"

The goal of almost every one of these people is to become so self sufficient that they can truly exit society. They dream of the yeoman farmer, though many are unable to articulate it.

This might not be seen as significant but compare that to the feelings toward the Iraq war, an engagement that saw actual American soldiers dying. This support could be skewed in favour of Republicans supporting war for two reasons. Firstly, because retribution is a Southern value. When 9/11 happened, they felt they themselves had been attacked. I do find it amusing to consider the different reactions to 9/11 if had happened today, but in 2001, the idea of a “United” States felt more coherent. Secondly, because they are the families that send their kids to the military. Presumably you’d be more likely to support a war if you lost a loved one to it, rather than think their sacrifice was in vain. Effectively, by ending the draft, we’ve created a military class where the children of veterans typically enlist themselves. No doubt a predictable outcome of the volunteer force, but one that stratifies military families into the most consistent source of new recruits. As these families become more alienated from a polarizing federal policy, more recruiters will struggle with that formally solid base. If Trump was in office, I suspect these numbers would be wildly different, but with a Biden government, recruiters will continue to struggle to court these children of Veteran families to die on foreign soil.

The differences in opinion are well known but are surprising. If our Southern, Ulster Scot cannon fodder isn’t supporting the war, that traditional group associated with killing and dying in foreign entanglements, who is? Shockingly, it's that very NPR/NYT group of democrats that prided themselves on opposing the Iraq war (after it had become fashionable to do so). They laughed at the idiot Republicans for shedding tears at Toby Keith songs, and now howl in delight at stories like “Ghost of Kiev.” In the UK, many Ukrainian flags have found themselves next to quasi state representations. For example, the NHS rainbow logo doesn’t necessarily represent the state, but as Great Britain is increasingly thought of as imperialistic and evil, it becomes a stand-in for people to be proud of. A similar transfer of patriotism has happened in the US with the Pride flag. Displaying or being proud of your nation’s flag might be thought of as nationalistic or low class, where the adoption of these new symbols has a similar “I’m in the group” message, with none of the potential “out group” connections. In Ireland, a country that is, for the moment, allowed to be patriotic because it means antagonism to their closest neighbour, they fly a Palestine flag as an expression of patriotism. Next to the border of Northern Ireland, you’ll sometimes see the Palestinian flag fly next to their tricolour, which is a message of solidarity with a country they see as similarly oppressed to them. In all cases I have seen a Ukrainian flag flying right alongside.

The colour of the flag could be something out of a marketing company. In fact, I think it is, when you consider all of the pleasant blue and yellow covid signs.

And this flag, now charged with political sentiment, becomes a symbol of pride for a new Western culture that transcends national borders. This globalist force that democrats and liberals are more likely to support. It’s the closest to a sort of Fabian, HG Wells Modern utopia I think has ever existed. I do think Ukraine support was more prevalent in both the US and the UK because they have had the most dedicated propaganda efforts; although evidently not quite enough. They’re also epicentres for every Western force that radiates out, changing culture to match their own. “You will have pride parades in Japan.” Still, this is an important distinction. Instead of national symbols, the Ukraine flag has joined the pride flag that represents Western cultural power, but not Western equality. It’s a sort of Liberal image that is designed to strike against the socially conservative Russia or China. You can identify with this image, regardless of your physical proximation, if you adhere to the correct ideology. The fact their flag has become something that would be so foreign to the fighters wearing it would be comedic if it was all so incredibly embarrassing. Some readers might scoff at Azov battalion or NAFO trolls being representatives of US style progressive politics, but this will be the subject of future writing.

None of what I’m saying is new territory. Various post left journals have been decrying what they see as a betrayal by progressives, such as Glen Greenwald or Jimmy Dore. It’s a common criticism to compare democrats own fear of domestic extremism with the fact they’re giving billions in military gear to avowed nazis in the Ukraine. Many people might be baffled by this, or even dismiss it as cynical attempts to profit from the conflict by means of lobby groups in the military industrial complex, but that ignores the millions of genuine Ukraine supporters. These are, somewhat normal people, who pride themselves on being politically informed by “proper sources” like legacy media. They faithfully vote democrat and might even define all their political beliefs as being “a decent freaking human being.” In the UK they are concerned with Labour’s Corbyn extremism and pray to see the day they’ll be members of the EU again. “Mate, mate, do we just wait for Putin to start a bloody world war?”

After the legacy of the Iraq war, promoted primarily by George Bush and Dick Cheney’s regime, it’s easy to see how war would mostly be associated with Republicans. There is an image of conservative warhawks, frustrated that they never got their third world war with communists, search the world for the flimsiest excuse to invade a country for its riches. It’s a concept that is reverberated by Hollywood’s reimagining’s of history, where all war is fought by greedy old men for the explicit purpose of somehow benefiting from the bloodshed. Still, this idea is predicated on the belief that our current society is enlightened, incapable of mistakes, while the past is barbaric and cruel. Might sound silly to some, but many implicitly believe this. In reality, no one has ever fought a war for “evil intentions.” Yes, even the Nazis, the go to for all historic villains, was a military force composed of normal German citizens that believed they were morally blameless, despite what the “Are we the Baddies” UK sketch will have you believe.

Operations in Iraq against Saddam weren’t justified because of an oil dispute, but rather because the Ba’athist leader was accused of gassing the Kurds. NATO bombed Yugoslavia to save those unfortunate souls in Kosovo. The Vietnam war was supposed to save the South Vietnamese government, before the Gulf of Tonkin incident occurred, officially. (Interestingly, Jim Morrison’s dad commanded the fleet in Vietnam during the controversial and conspiracy ripe Tonkin incident)

World War II had it’s protestors who argued that the war simply shouldn’t involve them. Robison Jeffers, poet and war critic penned ‘The Soul's Desert’:

“They are warming up the old horrors;
And all they say is echoes of echoes.
Beware of taking sides; only watch.”

US citizens cried as they do today, “What does this have to do with us?” FDR couldn’t just ask America to commit to a massive war in Europe that would restructure geopolitical power dynamics in America’s favor for decades to come. He couldn’t explain that, despite the USSR taking the bulk of the casualties against Nazi Germany, America could use this as a chance to install foreign bases and end colonial agreements in Great Britain and France. Instead, he would have to wait for the incredibly fortuitous bombing by the Japanese at Pearl Harbor to further his demands.

Finally, Woodrow Wilson, who campaigned on preventing the war in Europe from entangling the United States, used the attacking of the Lusitania and suspicious Zimmerman telegram as justification, claiming.

“We have no selfish ends to serve. We desire no conquest, no dominion... no material compensation for the sacrifices we shall freely make. We are but one of the champions of the rights of mankind. We shall be satisfied when those rights have been made as secure as the faith and freedom of the nations can make them.”

Wilson, FDR, and Johnson were all dyed in the wool liberals, not frothing war hawks. Domestically they would advocate for policies targeting racial and economic disparity. Ideologically you can draw a straight line from Wilson’s policy, reflecting the liberalism of his era, to Johnson. Wilson may have been opposed to blacks entering Princeton but made sure a Roman catholic and Jew were able to get on the board, progressive for the era. FDR continued this tradition with New Deal policies and had his own “Black Cabinet” of African American advisors. Johnson won modern liberalism’s greatest victory, the Civil Rights law.

The quote from Wilson is so perfect, because it sums up the desires of these war supporters, “We are but one of the champions of the rights of mankind.” This is the attitude that Americans go to war with. The Cheney war hawk invading and eagerly showing off his debauchery by openly carving up Iraqi oil fields is an aberration, liberal attempts to wage war for “mankind” is the rule. Consider now, who is pushing for war with Russia. Progressive democrats that could be considered the grandchildren of Lyndon B. Johnson’s policies, Democrats of the Biden style from yesteryear and Republicans that hope they can associate the aid in Ukraine to freedom and Pax Americana. These Lyndsey Graham republicans don’t exist anymore, as the earlier pew research charts can attest to. The Southern white, after the Opioid Crisis, Afghanistan and Covid, cannot see himself battling for control of the world anymore. They live in communities where the only industry is fast food and gas stations. They understand towns across the deep South and Southwest will inevitably die and they’ll need to move into cities for any chance of upward mobility. Even the pockets of wealth that still exist reject, for the most part, the attempt to inspire the public against Russia, purely from a rebellious streak against a government they don’t like.

This isn’t to say these people are pro-Putin, or that cattle ranchers in Texas are discussing the overall consequences of the Maidan coup. I would be pleasantly surprised if plumbers in New Orleans, digging in sewer water, were discussing the failures of Putin not acting quickly enough to rescue Slavyansk. I’m sure if you polled Americans about their general sentiment towards Putin, they’d all view him unfavourably. However, these opinions of Putin aren’t strong enough to compel people to enlist, nor does the current Biden regime have the political strength to convince people war is necessary.

The use of sanctions and aid is a uniquely liberal idea that is still wreaking havoc in the Ukraine, as phenomenal number of tax dollars are wasted by Russian soldiers destroying foreign tech. It’s causing prolonged suffering that will be felt for years, as we can see with the delivery of cluster bombs to an increasingly desperate military. The dedication to the cause doesn’t require enlistment because there are no official boots on the ground to begin with. You fly a flag, you buy a sticker, you tell the girl you work with about NAFO and she nods absentmindedly.

It’s important to realize, if the United States formally declares war on Russia over the Ukraine, it will be gilded by moral responsibility. I think it's naive to think that any country, separated by an ocean, can be forced into war. You won’t see John Bolton types salivating over the potential conflict, you’ll see weepy eyed politicians informing you of some imagined atrocity that demands we send millions of people to Eastern Europe. The dumb, racist rednecks will not be the ones to initiate war, content to be left well enough alone, but they’ll be the ones who die. The virtuous Liberal, desperate to convert more countries to the End of History in order to save them, will be the ones who drops the bombs. Liberals instinctively support this war, because it is a war for the continuation of liberalism, whether they realize it or not. There are no hypocrites, just winners and losers.

If you want to submit your article to RWA Samizdat, hit us up on: rwasamizdat@proton.me