Since the beginning of slavery in America, it has been justified as being "according to the "Word of God." Indeed, in May 1861 a group of Southern clergymen seceded their churches from the Union. In December they met in Georgia to adopt an official statement to justify secession from the Union as well as justify slavery on the basis of "biblical justification." That attitude still lives.

::::::::

On 12/4/2014 Glen Ford published an article titled The New Movement: Are We There Yet, which provided his analysis of the state of race relations in America. And he suggested that a new movement for equal rights and equal opportunities for people of color "has no choice but to challenge the very legitimacy of the State and its armed organs of coercion."

I commented in basic agreement with Glen, and I appreciated his recognition that the successes of the Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s resulted in many terrible right-wing reactions that produced the ongoing era of Neo-Racism, Neo-Jim Crow attitudes, and increasing Neo-Apartheid.

I wrote two fairly long comments about his article, and I decided to expand on it here in this article because this subject is far more important than most people think it is -- and I'm gonna tell you why.

I think this era got underway in a big way in 1969 when President Richard Nixon targeted serious Black civil rights activist groups like the Black Panthers, launching the first SWAT Team attack on their headquarters. But along with that, there were many other racist activities and events that most Americans didn't even notice -- or have forgotten.

For example, the Southern rock song, Sweet Home Alabama, was a blatantly defiant response to conscientious critics of Southern racism and apartheid, and it specifically targeted Neil Young and his great hit song Southern Man, sung by Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young.

In reaction to that, the defiant rebel song Sweet Home Alabama dismissed and snubbed Neil personally and praised racist Alabama Governor George Wallace. And, during the 1970s and 1980s the song Sweet Home Alabama was sung on many stages where the Confederate flag was proudly and defiantly displayed before huge Southern crowds.

Then in 1980 the new Southern Pride Movement found a champion in Ronald Reagan, who opposed civil rights legislation and even said: "If an individual wants to discriminate against Negroes or others in selling or renting his house, it is his right to do so."

On camera, of course, Reagan chose his words carefully concerning race, but in his attitudes and policies he clearly demonstrated his position. That's why Civil Rights leader Julian Bond later said Reagan "was a polarizing figure in black America. He was hostile to the generally accepted remedies for discrimination. His appointments were of people as equally hostile. I can't think of any Reagan policy that African Americans would embrace."

One of the things Ronald Reagan did that was extremely harmful to people of color was his 1984 Comprehensive Crime Control Act, which added to the problem of racial discrimination in many ways. For example, it not only ushered in both procedural and substantive laws that are terribly unfair and continue to haunt the administration of federal criminal justice. It severely restricts the discretion of judges and results in terribly unfair prescribed minimum sentences, and it is the main reason why America's prison population is now mostly black and Hispanic males.

Since Reagan's "get tough" "anti-crime" measures and laws were put in place, many others have followed that are similarly tinged with subtle racism, which when put in practice is blatant to people of color.

Distinguishing Between Black Criminals and Black Victims of Racism

To be fair I think it should be said that bad guys are bad guys whatever their color. I mention this because I think that even though we need to point out racism wherever and whenever it is readily apparent, we also need to face the fact that there are many black thugs and gangsters who deserve to be arrested and put in prison. And I believe that in order to be taken seriously and to provide effective advocacy, civil rights advocates must choose their causes carefully and make sure to plead the cases of black and Hispanic people who are very apparently victims of racial profiling, racial discrimination, and police misconduct.

My point in bringing this up is merely to be fair and reasonable, but it is in no way meant to excuse police who abuse their power and discriminate against certain people because of their race. And it is in no way meant to excuse the Neo-Racism of the Neo Confederacy.

The Neo-Confederacy

According to the progressive Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC): "The term Neo-Confederacy is used to describe twentieth and twenty-first century revivals of pro-Confederate sentiment in the United States. Strongly nativist and advocating measures to end immigration, Neo-Confederacy claims to pursue Christianity and heritage and other supposedly fundamental values that modern Americans are seen to have abandoned."

The SPLC also notes that Neo-Confederacy "is hostile towards democracy, strongly opposes homosexuality, and exhibits an understanding of race that favors segregation and suggests white supremacy. In many cases, Neo-Confederates are openly secessionist."

Further, the SPLC notes that "Neo-Confederacy is used by both proponents and critics to describe a belief system that has emerged since the early-1980s in publications like Southern Partisan, Chronicles, and Southern Mercury, and in organizations including the League of the South, the Council of Conservative Citizens and the Sons of Confederate Veterans. Overall, it is a reactionary conservative ideology that has made inroads into the Republican Party from the political right, and overlaps with the views of white nationalists and other more radical extremist groups."

That, it seems to me, is an accurate assessment, because the ideology of the Neo-Confederacy is much like many Tea Party members, many Libertarian groups, many "Christian" Dominionist groups and many extreme right-wing Republicans. And many Reaganites fit right in with their ideology.

In fact, under Reaganism, the "Southern Pride Movement" and the Neo-Confederacy has gained immense momentum. In concert with the so-called "Moral Majority" and then the "Christian Coalition" started by Southern televangelists Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, they were joined by a whole host of other extreme right-wing groups with patriotic and religious sounding names, like James Dobson's "Focus On the Family" and numerous others.

Other groups that are part of the movement are even more blatantly political, such as the Koch brothers' founded Cato Institute and the Heritage Foundation, and they are joined on the "legal" front by The Federalist Society which has been striving to take over America's judicial system since it was founded early during Reagan's first term. That is why during the last 30 years due to the concerted efforts of all the Reaganites and all the other groups that strive to fulfill the same basic right-wing agenda, we have increasingly witnessed exactly Why the Civil War Is Related to the Current Partisan Political Conflict In America.

That title and link is to an article that discusses the history of slavery in America from 1619 in Jamestown to its being made illegal when the Thirteenth Amendment was ratified in December 1965, and it discusses the ongoing struggle by black people for equal rights and equal opportunities ever since. From the Jim Crow era to the Civil Rights movement to the Neo-Racism of the Neo-Confederacy, it points out the realities that Americans need to face.

Obvious Signs Ignored or Dismissed By the Mainstream Commercial Media

The successes of very talented, very beautiful or very athletic black Americans has produced a false sense that black Americans have "made it," and that racism is not really a problem any more -- at least not in the minds of many white people and many black people who have gained fame and fortune.

Moreover, most public figures, TV personalities, politicians and others realize that it is politically correct to not sound racist. Even right-wing extremists who prefer the old Articles of Confederation over the Constitution and are even in favor of seceding from the Union do not publicly state or reveal that they are racist.

However, the fact is that it has become increasingly acceptable to express racist thoughts and ideas in certain circles, and that has become evident in several instances. It has even been demonstrated in a growing number of ways, including the racist statements of Paula Deen, the national TV personality who demonstrates her Southern cooking skills. She was highly criticized for her use of the word "n-word," and for her defiant and shameless statement that she shouldn't have to apologize because "this is who I am." (But of course to save her career she finally issued a tearful apology, and it wasn't long before the networks forgave her and brought her back into the fold of television "celebrities.")

Similarly, Phil Robertson, the patriarch of the "Duck Dynasty," was criticized for his shameless and obviously naive, ignorant, racist statement that "before Civil Rights black people were happy." Robertson, who describes himself as a "Bible-Thumper," blamed Martin Luther King, Jr. and the Civil Rights movement for making black people "uppity" and "dependent," and he essentially claimed that it would have been better if things would have stayed as they were before that black woman Rosa Parks dared to sit in the front of the bus and be a "trouble maker."

Now of course Deen and Robertson should be forgiven if and when they are truly remorseful, contrite and repentant. But they are not. And I mention these things because Deen's and Robertson's attitudes and beliefs are more widespread than most people would think.

In fact, the effort to make the Confederate flag a symbol of pride and patriotism has only grown since 1974 when the Southern rock band Lynyrd Skynyrd made it the symbol of the new Southern Rebel and Southern Pride Movement. And it has gotten to the point where in recent years Tea Party zealots in the South have proudly and defiantly displayed the Confederate flag in demonstrations.

The Effort to Justify Racism as "Biblical"

When Phil Robertson makes racist comments while claiming that he is a "Bible-Believing Christian" he follows a very old Southern tradition that pervaded the culture of the Antebellum South, and that culture was expressed very vehemently by "Christian" preachers in the South prior to the Civil War, and especially leading up to it.

As is pointed out in the Civil War article mentioned above, in May 1861 a group of Southern clergymen seceded their churches from the Union. In December they met in Georgia to adopt an official statement to justify secession from the Union as well as justify slavery. And the most influential clergyman who had drafted the statement then became a champion of the Confederacy and one of the strongest advocates of slavery in the South on the basis of "biblical justification."

Their statement declared that: "the only rule of judgment is the written word of God." And they further declared that: "Slavery has existed under every dispensation of the covenant of grace, in the Church of God." "God sanctions it ... and Moses treats it as an institution to be regulated, not abolished; legitimated and not condemned."

To get around the Golden Rule, they declared that: "no principle is clearer than that a case positively excepted cannot be included under a general rule." And they even claimed that they were "acting as Christ and His apostles have acted before us."

After they lost the Civil War they then fought hard against the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which outlaws slavery and involuntary servitude, and they based their arguments on the same, antiquated "biblical" justification that actually violates the very core tenants in the compassionate, conscientious teachings of Jesus of Nazareth.

These are important historical issues that must be understood in order to understand the Neo-Confederacy and the Southern Pride Movement, because while they insist and probably actually believe that they are and always have been fighting for "states rights," they are actually fighting against a Democratic Republic.

A Democratic Republic, such as Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and most other Founders envisioned, regulates interstate commerce, promotes and provides for the general welfare of the states, and ensures domestic tranquility by establishing equal rights and equal opportunities and justice for all the people.

In opposition to that, Reaganism and the Neo-Confederacy have consistently taken actions to prevent that and instead establish a "Christian Meritocracy" and a Plutocracy. And they have accomplished that. We are indeed now ruled by Oligarchy and Plutocracy, and some of its leading proponents and creators proudly make as show of being "Bible-Believing Christians" -- (just as all the monarchs of all the European religious military industrial empires did).

The consequence is that America is divided more than ever before, the rich are richer than ever before, the once great middle class is rapidly shrinking as the working poor population grows, more and more Americans are suffering from poverty, hunger and homelessness, and 23.1 percent of American children live in poverty, giving the U.S, the second highest rate of child poverty out of 35 developed countries.

So, What Do We Do About It?

The temptation now for most progressives is to do what progressives did in the 1960s. Some fought for Free Speech. Some fought against the Vietnam War machine. Some fought for Civil Rights. Some fought for Women's Liberation. Some fought for Civil Liberties and Social Justice. And now the same thing is happening, only there are more things to fight against -- government spying, government secrecy, government hegemony, American "exceptionalism" and so on.

Consequently, progressives are divided, and some are even at odds. But as I have been saying for some time, progressives need to unite in common cause for the common good.

The movement to achieve civil rights and equal rights for people of color should now be part of an overall movement and a mass United Coalition for Peace, Freedom and Justice, because the vast majority of Americans are victims of the forces of greed and self-interest and the Plutocracy by which they rule over us. So we must now stand united in solidarity, and take part in a new movement, together.

That link about a proposed Coalition is a companion article to one about an Article 5 movement to reform and alter our government. And each article on that site provides links to many other articles that speak to the major issues of our times regarding government and religion. But I welcome any other suggestions as to how we might bring about a legal, peaceful Reformation of Government.

(Article changed on December 6, 2014 at 15:19)

Authors Bio:

E.J. is a progressive activist serving to help promote an initiative based on Jeffersonian principles regarding government and religion -- principles which Abraham Lincoln said are "the axioms of a free society."

E.J. has closely examined how and why America has changed, especially since 1984 when he saw the ominous signs of the terrible things to come. Now he understands why evil has triumphed over good and enabled the greediest of the richest few to now own 95 percent of the nation's wealth.

He understands that it was because Reaganism was sold as being "patriotic and religious" even though it was and is neither. In fact, Reaganism created a Plutocratic anideology that serves "Mammon," not God. But the American people didn't realize how or why the wool was being pulled over their eyes.

That is why he promotes an Interfaith initiative reflecting universal truths common to all religions. He understand that what we need is religious pluralism, religious tolerance, and real religious freedom, with freedom from theocratic imposition into the operations of government. As Jefferson said, we must have a "wall of separation between church and state."

E.J. promotes the message here on OEN (even though he vehemently disagrees with some of the articles published here) because too many Americans are divided, polarized and in conflict because they have been cunningly misled and misguided regarding the intent of America's Founders and the spirit of the U.S. Constitution.

And yet, ironically, the worst, most proud and aggressively militant leaders proudly an persistently claim they are "patriotic and religious." They cling to and try to perpetuate Reaganism, which means they do not believe that politics and government should promote the general welfare and use the common wealth for the common good.

Even worse, they do not understand that religion should be a unifying influence that creates a feeling of kinship. Instead they believe it justifies them in feeling "holier than thou" and believing that they are entitled to rule the world, which of course creates more conflict and division -- and that has impacted the nation and world in very negative and even disastrous ways.

Everyone needs to learn that we are one family of nations, religions, races and cultures, and only when we act like it, celebrate our diversity, and use the common wealth for the common good, will we have lasting peace. -- see messenger.cjcmp.org