Appeasement as a Strategy

Appeasement – 1. the political strategy of pacifying a potential enemy in the hope of avoiding conflict—often by granting concessions. 2. an attempt to stop complaints or reduce difficulties by making concessions.

Concession – 1. an act or an example of conceding, yielding, or compromising in some way, often grudgingly or unwillingly.

Compromise – (n) 1. a settlement of a dispute in which two or more sides agree to accept less than they originally wanted. 2. something that somebody accepts because what was wanted is unattainable. (v) 1. to settle a dispute by agreeing to accept less than what was originally wanted.

Ronald Reagan used to tell the story of the man trying to drain a swamp who finds himself surrounded by hungry alligators. In panic, he starts throwing his fellow workers to the monsters to protect himself. Of course, the end result is still the same: he will be eaten! Reagan was illustrating the futility of appeasement which gains nothing for the user but a little time before the end.

Actually, many people confuse appeasement with compromise. This is not difficult to do, especially if one is inherently honest. However, the difference between the two concepts is that in a compromise, both sides accept what is agreed upon. On the other hand, when one side considers the agreement a step towards the desired result while the other believes it is the solution to the problem, “compromise” is in fact, an act of “appeasement” by the second side. For far too long, our side has believed that each “compromise” we have accepted regarding Southern symbols and heritage is the final answer to that particular heritage problem—only to find out that in a day, or a week, or a year, the other side is back demanding more and greater “compromise” on an issue that we, at least, had considered settled.

Now, the first time this sort of thing happens, no blame obtains to us. We were honest in our negotiations but our adversaries were not. However, the second—not to mention every time thereafter–that the same thing happens, we lose all right to call ourselves ill-used. We cannot blame “the other side” when we knew—or should have known—that the concept of “compromise” existed on our part alone while our adversaries were determined to continue to work towards total victory. Indeed, I am willing to state unequivocally, that some fifty years after the end of The Grand Bargain and the commencement of the second war on Southern heritage and culture, most defenders of the South have to be aware that “compromise” with our enemies is actually appeasement and that to continue down that particular road will end in our extermination. As this is the case, Southern apologists and leaders have no business engaging in such ill-considered “compromises.” Whatever they choose to call these arrangements, they represent concessions by us and thus they must be recognized as appeasement. To paraphrase Ronald Reagan yet again, if it looks like a duck, and it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, it’s a duck—even if you call it a pig.

Given this situation, how should we deal with our adversaries? Is there any hope in attempting valid compromise or are we dealing with an unrelenting, uncompromising, intractable mindset that will settle for nothing less than Southern cultural genocide? Sadly, the answer to the above questions is, “no,” there is no hope and “yes” we are dealing with a mindset that will accept nothing less than the total extermination of the culture, history and heritage of the South. Furthermore, no amount of manifest good will and conciliatory gestures on our part will change a damned thing. With that in mind, we must determine how to proceed. First and foremost I would say that all of the efforts to foster good will by many Southern “leaders” is seen not only by our own side but by our adversaries as—to use a vulgar phrase—“kissing butt.” However sincere Southern leaders may be in attempting to re-establish the previous attitude towards the South that existed under The Grand Bargain, the sad fact is that the nation has passed beyond actual compromise and adopted a Marxist revisionist version of “history” that requires nothing less than a complete condemnation of all things Southern and that the manifestations of a unique People must be consigned to oblivion or, in the alternative, remembered only with contempt and disgust. If we do not recognize this existing state of affairs, we are not only woefully naïve, but we continue to labor towards our own extermination.

Having accepted the matter as it stands, what then is left for us to do? First, we must not “concede” or “compromise” without understanding that such “solutions” are nothing but appeasement by our side, the only benefit of which—at least to us—is that it creates a momentary lull in the struggle. Secondly, we must make much better use of that lull to forestall total defeat even if we cannot achieve total victory. We must also understand that all such “agreements” are incremental victories for our adversaries. Most important, we must be prepared to use the time to regroup and go on the offensive rather than congratulating ourselves that we have at least forestalled total defeat—for a little while anyway. At the very least we must understand that the other side will never compromise on its stated goal of cultural genocide while there is any hope of victory. Therefore we must develop strategies to use when the enemy’s assault is momentarily halted by these bogus “compromises” because we know from experience that they are formulating their next plan of attack—and the whole thing starts again with each cycle leaving us a little more isolated and impotent.

The Southern heritage movement cannot continue to be caught flat-footed by these constant assaults. We have to push back. Only in that way is there any hope of having at least some control over the outcome of the struggle. Right now, we do nothing but react. We must become far more proactive and we will never do that while many of our leaders work so tirelessly to “get along” with our adversaries. Remember, it is easy to “get along” with the enemies of the South. All we have to do is surrender—and die.

Decent rebuttal can be sent
HERE
for posting below this blog post.