Main Page - Latest News

Interview with the “CPAC Segregationist”


The staff at CofCC.org interviewed Scott Terry, who is being called the “CPAC Segregationist” in the media. Visit Scott Terry’s website Shotgun Barrel Straight.

~~How should conservative white people respond to accusations of “racism” ?~~

There’s no one way to respond that will cover all situations, but for my part, I usually ask “so what?”

The best thing whites can do is stop being afraid of the word.

Own it, folks.

~~Do you feel that some white conservatives engage in self-flagellation in an attempt to appease the left? Will this ever work?~~

Absolutely they do. That was a major theme of the Conservative Political Action Conference this year, and the “Trumping the Race Card” session in particular. According to the GOP establishment, the best way to avoid accusations of “racism” is to go out of our way to prove we’re not “racist” in order to attract minorities.

This could mean anything from amnesty, to placing Frederick Douglass on a pedestal. In all cases, it means handing over the institutional reigns of power to minorities.

Will it ever work? Of course. If we slowly transform ourselves into liberal democrats, hell-bent on giving away the wealth of working class whites to minorities, then I’m certain they’ll respond.

~~The media keeps telling Republicans they need to move to the left to win elections. Bill Ayers, the unrepentant terrorist closely tied to Obama, said the Republicans of today are like the Democrats of 1988. Do you feel Republicans have already gone too far to the left?~~

It’s hard for a traditionalist-minded Southerner like myself to utilize the “left” / “right” scale. We’re so far outside the mainstream “box” of political discourse, it’s no longer useful. Both the democrats and the republicans are so similar in matters of economic, foreign, and domestic policy, that the few issues they end up bickering about seem superficial, or at the very least: artificially narrow.

Neither party has the best interest of my people or our God at heart, so, whatever direction they move, be it left, or right, they’re both on the wide path to destruction.

~~Why do you think Booker T Washington is a better black role model than Frederick Douglass?~~

I don’t think either are good role models for white Southerners, nor conservatives in general.

However, during the CPAC fiasco, when I suggested we call ourselves “Booker T. Washington Republicans” instead of “Frederick Douglass Republicans”, I had Washington’s famous quote in mind. Let’s have whites and blacks be united like the hand, but separate as the fingers! Meaning: whites and blacks united in one nation, but respecting our unique ethnic communities.

Give me a Republican movement with that in mind, and whatever it’s called, I’ll lend my support!

This is the only way to end racial strife in America. We need to respect diversity and work with it – not pretend it doesn’t exist, or that the different ethnic communities do not have unique and special interests.

If the GOP establishment began self-consciously recognizing the interests of the various ethnic groups in America, including whites, they would be unstoppable in the voting booths.

~~Several liberals are complaining on twitter that the media hasn’t reported on your comments enough. What do you think about this?~~

Ha! I heard it was all the left-wing ladies, wanting to see more of me. Tell ’em to grab a Confederate flag and show up at the next CPAC; I’ll talk to them all they’d like.

~~You mentioned that theBlaze.com attacked you, but then edited their article later and now it is more balanced. Why do you think they edited it?~~

Anyone familiar with Glenn Beck knows that he constantly praises that Marxist, the so-called “Dr.” Martin Luther King Jr. Further, Beck constantly preaches the worst possible message concerning race: that we’re all Americans, and that our racial differences are not only unimportant, they’re taboo to even discuss.

So, the Blaze didn’t like my questions at CPAC much, since they presuppose race realism.

As the weekend progressed, though, I suppose they realized a lot of the more sensationalized rhetoric attributed to me, was either complete fabrication, or decontextualized exaggeration on the part of a few nut-job “reporters”, so they began re-editing their article. Of course, I don’t know that for sure.

All I know is, I like the current version a lot more than the first.

~~According to at least one media report, K. Smith said he had a friendly conversation with you after the forum and you left as friends. Can you elaborate on this?~~

Despite common notions, my questions and comments didn’t really upset the session at all. Mr. Smith was calmly and humorously interacting with what I had to say. I, in turn, was calmly and civilly asking my questions. Well and good. That’s the stuff fruitful discourse is made of.

It was only when the rambunctious leftist reporter began chiming in and acting belligerent, that the session fell apart.

So, afterwards, when I was able to escape the circle of reporters surrounding me, I approached him, and continued our discussion. He implied that Frederick Douglass Republicans would, as a matter of fact, be taking something like the race-realist / racial-harmony position I had in mind when I cited Booker T. Washington.

It’s a very sensible position to hold, and we both recognized the power it would have for reaching, not only the minority communities, but white communities as well.

That said, I’m still not sure we’re entirely on the same page, especially after looking through his book. But our disagreements aside, it’s true that we left on very congenial, and friendly terms. Far as I know, there was no animosity on either side.