“China Joe’s” Amerika–The New Reconstruction

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

It almost seems that we are entering a period of 21st century “reconstruction” in some ways similar to the “reconstruction that we endured after the War for Southern Independence.

After that horrific war everything remotely “Southern” was under attack and had to be done away with so the country could be introduced to something the reconstructors called the “New South.” The New South was really no South at all. It was really a deconstruction of the old South that was then labeled “new” by its leftist promoters.

We see a parallel of that situation in our day. For today’s raving leftists Donald Trump seems to represent an embodiment of the Old South mentality that must be totally destroyed and its memory removed–shoved down the memory hold if you will. To remove any vestige of Trump’s Old America it has to be replaced with “China Joe” Biden’s “new Amerika in which Communist China ends up controlling what goes on in this country–something many in our political establishment in both parties really have no big problem with–as long as they can continue to get a big slice of the political pie for themselves.

An article in the February 1st issue of The New American magazine by Alex Newman explains much of this. The article is called Communist China Infiltrating Everything and it is worth reading. Newman states, in part, “It has become popular for conservatives to exclaim , only half jokingly ,that ‘China owns Biden.’ Unfortunately, Biden is just the tip of the iceberg: At all levels, U.S. officials, businesses, and media outlets are being compromised. In fact, whether the mass-murdering regime in Beijing officially owns Biden or not, it ‘owns’ a growing array of assets among Western politicians, companies, technologies, media outlets, and more, a situation that threatens the survival of America as a free nation…The American media, which would normally be responsible for reporting all this, is being paid off and compromised by Beijing, too, a growing array of documents and evidence reveal…U.S. lawmakers ae being targeted via bribery and blackmail to do the dictatorship’s bidding” according to U.S. Director of Intelligence John Ratcliffe.

Newman noted that Kamala Harris’ husband, Doug Emhoff works for a law firm that is getting rich working for Communist Chinese outfits posing as ‘companies.’ No surprise there. When Comrade Kamala assumes the mantle of president after China Joe is put out to pasture she will, in effect, be Barack Obama’s third term in office. Both her and Obama have strikingly Marxist backgrounds.

But it ain’t only the Democrats, folks. The Republicans are in bed with the Chinese Reds also. Alex Newman tells us that: “Even Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is indirectlly tied to the CCP through his wife, Elaine Chao. Chao, a member of the gloablist China boosting group known as the Council on Foreign Relations, comes from a family that made its fortune in shipping through close ties to the CCP dating back decades, multiple news reports have revealed…The threat of Chinese Communist infiltration of America and the West today is enormous and existential.” And the media is not telling you this because the Chinese have bought and paid for them. So they will do their part to implement China Joe’s “new reconstruction.”

Remove the memory of Trump, implement the new Harris/Biden “reconstruction” for this country and then sit back and enjoy their bribe money while selling the country out to its enemies. It seems that is now the game being played. All they have to do is to keep the public here scared of the Chinese virus and hiding in fear behind their face masks forever and they will have accomplished their goal and Amerika will soon be “reconstructed.” And your nor your children will recognize it as America anymore and that’s because it won’t be.

The new “reconstruction” deems that we will become a satellite to Red China–and our present political establishment, which has no loyalties except to the Prince of Darkness, will love to have it so. This is where we are at. Learn to resist it or get used to it.

We May Lose Because We Don’t Care About Our History

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

Over the past week or so I have posted a couple articles about terrorist John Brown and some of his leftist connections (yes, he had some leftist connections).

Some of the comments I got back from various places my articles were posted were, how shall I say it, downright abusive. Everything from “who cares about all this crap?” to comments that used profanity that I won’t go into.

Some of this made me reflect a little and I came up with the possibility that, at least in our day, we may well lose the struggle for our freedom because many on our side of the political and theological fence not only do not comprehend or grasp the importance of our history, they just don’t care. They are not interested.

What they don’t seem to realize is that if we don’t have a firm grasp on what has happened throughout our history they will never be able to fully understand what is going on now and if they don’t understand it they will be ignorant of how to deal with it. Yet many, if not most, seem to be at that point. They don’t seem to understand that what has gone before affects what is happening right now and if you try to explain that to them they get mad at you.

Over the past few years I have seen writers of fiction that grasp the importance of history more than the average American. Of course the way history is taught in most public schools does not help this situation. I’ve had people tell me “history is boring.” If you understand it, it really isn’t boring. But it is taught in such a way as to turn people off because if they truly understood our history then they might have problems with where we find ourselves today. The powers that be would just as soon avoid that problem. So history is taught in such a way as to make people lose interest in it and fail to see how important it really is.

People in their “history” classes in school are taught that the War of Northern Aggression was fought only over slavery and nothing else. If you dare to bring up the issue of tariffs as a major cause of that war then you are probably going to be called a racist because the establishment version of that history has no place for the tariff issue–and so you never hear about it. You have to do your own research to find that out and if you try to explain that to people, they mostly don’t care.

Even here in the South, our kids in public schools, and some private ones as well, are taught that their ancestors fought to keep their slaves–even though only about six percent of Southern folks owned any slaves. We are supposed to believe that the other 94% fought so the 6% could keep their slaves. Is this stupid or what? Yet most of us are too lazy to find out the real truth. It’s lots easier to just get mad at those trying to inform you than it is to check out what they are telling you.

The rationale today is to “shoot the messenger and ignore what he tells you.” Eventually there will be no more messengers–and you will lose your liberty because you were too lazy to listen when you had the chance. And when that happens I suppose it will all be Trump’s fault!

John Brown & Hugh Forbes–Conspiracy & Treason

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

In my most recent article I dealt with terrorist John Brown and his dealings with a man named Hugh Forbes, who, as I now have found out, was a Forty-eighter revolutionary–and probably much more.

Forbes gets some mention in some of the books about John Brown. J. C. Furnas, in his book The Road To Harpers Ferry took note of Hugh Forbes. He commented: “To drill them (Brown’s “army) Old Brown had enlisted another odd fish,’Colonel’ Hugh Forbes, a British soldier of fortune who had quit the silk trade in Italy to turn guerilla with Garabaldi.” There were Forbes’ Forty-eiglhter bonafides right there.

Otto Scott in his book on John Brown, The Secret Six: The Fool As Martyr told us a bit more about “colonel” Forbes. He revealed that: “One man to whom such words sounded familiar and reallistic was Colonel Hugh Forbes, a former officer under Garabaldi in the Revolution of 1848. English-born, fluent in both French and Italian, Forbes was editor of a small Italian language newspaper in New York.He was also a fencing master and a translator at the New York Tribune–a paper that harbored many revolutionaries including Karl Marx–among its European correspondents. Interestingly enough Colonel Forbes had been brought to (Thomas Wentworth) Higginson’s attention by Senator Sumner, who had a wide acquaintance among European revolutionaries.” Forbes had written a two-volume book on military warfare published in Italy and he recommended his books as a manual for volunteer soldiers. He talked to John Brown about this and Brown agreed to pay him a hundred dollars a month to “summarize the lessons of Italy in English for Brown’s own projected volunteer ‘army’ …”

Writer Steve Byas did an excellent article in the New American Magazine back in February of 2017, Volume 33 No. 3 entitled John Brown’s Lethal Legacy. Mr. Byas noted how those that made up the Secret Six group that supported and financed John Brown were in favor of a violent revolution. He observed: “If Brown was going to lead a bloody revolution he would need a person with more military experience to help train his ‘army.’ The steady contributions of the Secret Six enabled Brown to hire Colonel Hugh Forbes for the job. Forbes had been an officer under Italian radical Giuseppi Garibaldi, a soldier in the Revolution of 1848. Born in England and fluent in Italian and French, and worked as a translator fror the New York Tribune. Among the European correspondents for the Tribune was Karl Marx, the author of the Communist Manifesto. The newspaper regularly provided space for the opinions of European revolutionaries. Forbes had been introduced to the Secret Six by Senator Sumner–a man who later became an actual communist and who was on a friendly basis with many of the revolutionaries in Europe. It is well establislhed from the history of communist revolutions elsewhere that Marxist revolutionaries seize upon issues such as slavery for their own purposes. If there is a ‘class struggle’ they exploit it, and if there isn’t such a conflict, they work to create one.”

Forbes had some problems with Brown’s plan for Harpers Ferry, but other abolitionists did also, Frederick Douglas among them. Forbes didn’t think Brown had enough men for such an effort. Steve Byas told us: “The disgruntled Forbes threatened the Secret Six with exposure of their role in Brown’s treasonous plans and this evidently caused a delay of the plan’s execution for several months from 1858 to 1859…Higginson was supportive of Brown, saying, ‘I am always willing to invest in treason.’ Sanborn’s sentiments were similar: ‘Treason will not be treason much longer, but patriotism’.”

So this is what you are dealing with–treasonous behavior trying to pretend it is somehow virtuous and patriotic. Sort of reminds you of what is going on now with the Harris/Biden regime.

This all fits in quite well with what Aurthur R. Thompson has told us in this revealing work To The Victor Go The Myths & Monuments. Of Forbes Mr. Thompson told us that: “Considering that all involved knew that Forbes was working for Mazzini, it is obvious that important Americans welcomed the involvement of a key Carbonari in their operations. It was not simply a plot by Brown; it involved many prominent people who had no problem involving the Carbonari–if they too were not already part of the Carbonari conspiracy, or lhigher up the ladder themselves. Here we see that conspiratorial forces worked both sides of the conflict; within the Brown initiative and the KGC. Supposedly, the two were in opposition, but in reality theiy were guided by one force linking back to the Carbonari network. Mr. Thompson also noted that Brown, in Kansas, “had veteran Forty-eighters Charles Kaiser, August Bondi, and Charles W. Lenhardt who rode with him in Kansas, and the Chartist Richard J. Hinton.”

So between Forbes and those Forty-eighters that helped him in Kansas, Brown was well supplied with leftist revolutionary assistance. Sort of makes you wonder what John Brown was really all about doesn’t it? Maybe down the road apiece we need to look at the backgrounds of some of those that supported Brown a llittle bit more.

John Brown–Conspirator

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

Over the years I have run into many who seem to venerate John Brown of Harpers Ferry “fame” as though he were some sort of savior for mankiind. Actually the opposite is probably closer to the truth. I have, recently, in an article on John Brown, referred to historian Otto Scott’s thoughtful work on Brown The Secret Six–The Fool As Martyr. It goes into Brown and those radicals that supported and financed his activities.

Another book I have often referred to and recommended is one by Arthur R. Thompson To The Victors Go The Myths And Monuments. Mr. Thompson has also done yeoman duty in exposing conspiracy in this country and those who are part of that conspiracy to take this country down, indeed to take all of Western Christian civilization down–for that is their ultimate goal.

John Brown was involved in that conspiracy, which still exists in our day. On page 291 of his book, Mr. Thompson tells us about John Brown’s involvement. He says: “The entire life of John Brown was involvement in conspiracy, including the conspiracy that had worked for years to destroy the social order of the country and replace it with Illuminist ideas. he named as one of the trustees of his will William Russell, the founder of the Order.” The Order he is talking about here is the Order of Skull & Bones, which some of you all must have heard of. Historian and Professor Antony Sutton wrote a book about the Order of Skull & Bones back in the 1980s called America’s Secret Establishment. It was a controversial book and Sutton had a hard time getting it published. I think he eventually self-published it.

Mr. Thompson observed that: “Since the growth of the Internet, the widespread reputation of Skull and Bones,the Order, has proliferated, with more and more people paying attention to such things, and some modern histories of Brown have dropped any references to Brown’s connections with William Russell. Apparently to refer to Russell in connection with Brown would raise some eyebrows…Brown was the first political terrorist of his kind. Before, terrorism was a part of government, either against their own people as a means of ruling them, or aainst another citizenry whom they wished to influence into some form of reaction, or tribe against tribe….In the case of Brown, he was backed by those who wanted a change in government for their own purposes. He was their instrument to wage terrorist activity to react the people into accepting war and the changes wrought by that war. And his arms were supplied by these men. Brown had conspirators in government at the state and federal level who helped him, even though his enterprise was not sanctiioned by the government. Indeed,if the federal government had done the job it was supposed to do, the army would have arrested Brown and the others in the Kansas Territory who were causing the mayhem on both sides.”

Thompson contined: “Brown hired Hugh Forbes, an Englishman who had fought under Garibaldi,to train his soldiers in 1857.In most volumes about Brown, little is mentioned about Forbes except tlhe foregoing. When looking into his background, it becomes very interesting that he linked up with Brown and subsequent events. The story of Forbes is that he was an emissary and operative of Mazzini in the United States. He was asked to come to America in that capacity and work with the emigres who had removed to the New World. Literally thousands of members of the European Carbonari front groups had moved to America after 1848. They needed to be pulled together into a cohesive organization to work for the goals of the Carbonari. Forbes was one of the main men tasked to do the job by Mazzini, if not the leader of the effort,to at least pull together the lower political levels of Carbonari influence. Forbes was pressed on Brown by his backers in the East.” So it was all not just a plot by Brown. He was part of something much bigger–one cog in the wheel of conspiracy to take this country down. And as for these European Carbonari that came over here after 1848–how many of them were the Forty-eighters Donnie Kenedy and I wrote about in Lincoln’s Marxists? I wouldn’t mind having a dollar for every one that was.

So John Brown was an integral part of the conspiracy that was working to destabilize the United States, using terrorism as part of their agenda. And if Brown was part of all that, what about the people that financed and promoted him? Were they all part of that also? Or as the man says “Will the sun rise in the East tomorrow?”

More on John Brown in the near future.

Celebrating America’s Pro-Marxist “Emancipator”

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

Well. this is the day that the country celebrates the birth of the Republican Party’s first pro-Marxist president. There have been others since Lincoln but he was the first one of note. Note I said he was a “pro-Marxist”. I need to clarify that before some screaming idiot somewhere claims I said Lincoln was a Communist. That he was a socialist with a socialist worldview I do not doubt for a minute. His political proclivities all point in that direction.

In going through the latest edition of Ron and Donnie Kennedy’s seminal work The South Was Right! you will find more than enough in the way of evidence to display Lincoln’s leftism as well as showing that his “emancipating the slaves” was the stuff of which legends are made and propagated.

On page 34 of their book the Kennedys noted that: “Shortly after the South seceded the Republican controlled Congress submitted, and Lincoln supported, a Thirteenth Amendment that would guarantee the security of slavery if the South would rejoin the Union. It was called the Corwin Amendment and several Union states ratified it but it soon became apparent that the South wanted independence and the amendment died.. Had it passed slavery in the United States would have continued under Lincoln’s administration and Republican Party rule. The North’s motive for invading a sovereign nation, the Confederate States of America, was not to free their oppressed black brothers and sisters. Lincoln’s and the Republican Party’s primary aim was to secure the continuing flow of Southern wealth extracted via protective tariffs.

If you can still find an original copy of the Emancipation Proclamation please take the trouble to really read it! You will find all the Northern controlled areas that had slavery in this country that were exempt from the provisions of the Emancipation Proclamation. That’s right–exempt!

As for Communist sympathy for Lincoln, even in our day, On page 270 of their book the Kennedys observed that: “Americans who oppose secession for Dixie find themselves in bed with the Communist Party of China which proclaims the right to invade its secessionist province of Taiwan. China’s Minister of Defense, Wei Fenghe, noted that ‘Abraham Lincoln is America’s greatest president. The United States is indivisible, so is China.’ The Communist leader of China pointed out that Communist China would only be doing what Lincoln did in 1861. Of special interest is the use of the word ‘indivisible’ by this communist leader. An early adocate of the United States being trasformed into an ‘indivisible’ nation was Friedrich Engels, the co-founder along with Karl Marx of modern-day communism. In a letter to a communist Union General, Joseph Weydemeyer, Engels praised the action of the North in subduing the South because it would advance the world-wide communist effort. Weydemeyer was a close friend of Karl Marx and responsible for the publication of the first copies of Marx’s Communist Manifesto in the United States.”

You can begin to see here, in case you had not noticed before, the the comunists world-wide and those among us really had and have a love affair with Mr. Lincoln. Needless to say your “history” books in this country will refuse to deal with any of this at any point. If you want real history, don’t go to the “history” books as all you will get there is the perpetuation of the Lincoln legend.

In our day we need to get past the legend and find out the real truth, even though many “conservatives” don’t really want to know it, would really like to just ignore it in favor of their wishful fables.

Years ago I was a monthly columnist for a conservative paper in California and I did a wholle series of articles for that paper on Lincoln and the War of Northern Aggression. At one point the publisher of that paper reluctantly asked me to stop writing about Lincoln because his conservative audience didn’t want to hear it and he was losing subscribers because of my exposes on Lincoln. At that point I asked myself “If the conservatives don’t want the truth, then where is this country headed?” I have to conclude that, wherever we were headed, with recent political events in this country that we have now arrived.

At any rate, if you still want some truth in the “Empire of Lies” then get the Kennedy’s book The South Was Right! from Shotwell Publishing https://www.ShotwellPublishing.com PO Box 2592 Columbia, South Carolina 29202.

Ahh, Those Yankee Slaveowners

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

I have recently been given a copy of Ron and Donnie Kennedy’s classic work The South Was Right! This is the new, updated edition for 2020, published by Shotwell Publishing in Columbia, South Carolina. I had thought to do a book review of this outstanding work. However, the new updated version, with much new information, is almost 500 pages in length and so no single book review of this will suffice. What I am going to do instead is to pick out pertinent information and topics from the book and do a series of articles on that information. If some of what I present from The South Was Right! makes you a bit uncomfortable you can consider that you have been a victim of badly presented half truths as depicted in what passes for history books in most of our schools today. The Kennedy Brothers’ book, if you will take the time to read it, will correct much of the meaningless drivel you were taught as “history” but really wasn’t.

I thought a good place to start would be with the subject of Yankee slaver owners, covered in their book from pages 153-163 as part of Chapter 5. This is history you will never, and I mean never, see in your establishment “history” books because our court “historians” like their contemporaries in the “news media” have decreed that you don’t need to know this stuff–so they will make sure you don’t!

The Kennedys observe, on page 153, that: “No other issue in American history has been abused more than the history of African servitude in the South. People who dare to speak about slavery in a light other than that demanded by the neo-Marxist left will find themselves an outcast from modern ‘P.C.’ society. Nevertheless, when we look at America, we find that many names that we associate with the development of this country have been associated with slavery. The names of the Puritan Fathers of New England loom foremost in that group of slave holders. Even men such as Josiah Franklin, stepbrother of Benjamin Franklin, was associated with slavery, being active as a slave dealer in Boston. Yet the Franklin name is never held up for scorn because of the action of the Boston Franklin family. John Hancock, the most prominent signatory of the Declaration of Independence, was both a participant in a slave trading venture and a slave holder. But have you ever heard the cry to take down any monuments to John Hancock? Hancock was not the only New England signatory of the Declaration of Independence who was a slave holder. Samuel Huntington of Connecticut and Stephen Hopkins of Rhode Island were also slave holders, and their names can also be found on the Declaration of Independence.” There are those useful idiots that claim no one in the North ever owned slaves. That’s a bald-faced lie and many of them know it. Their goal in life is to make sure you don’t know it!

The Kennedys continue: “When the previous paragraph was written in 1994, neo-Marxists had just begun their attacks upon Confederate monuments and Southern history. At that time the nation was warned by so-called ‘neo-Confederates’ that one day all Traditional American Values and heroes would come under assault–that day surely arrived in 2020. Rather than joining with the defenders of the South’s history, neo-conservatives such as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, and many others assisted the neo-Marxists in their efforts to denigrate and destroy the South’s heritage and history. Neo-conservatives did this by agreeing with the neo-Marxist’s narrative of the South fighting to preserve and promote slavery (something that came out of the mouth of Karl Marx, see Benson and Kennedy, Lincoln’s Marxists, Chapter 2) and promoting secession as treason. By not allowing the Southern narrative about these issues to be heard, censorship by exclusion, the neo-Marxists were given all the cover and encouragement needed to advance their attack upon ALL Traditional American Values. the slogan of being ‘Fair and Balanced’ seems to not apply when dealing with the people of the defeated Confederate States of America.”

As noted by the Kennedys on page 157: “If the South is an evil place because it had slaves, then so is the North. If Southerners were wrong for owning slaves, then what about the Northerners who sold them those slaves? If the South is to be castigated because a small minority of its citizens made money from slave-grown cotton, then what about the North whose textile mills made money from that same slave-grown cotton?

Back on page 108 the Kennedys noted that: “Our neo-Marxist opponents d not want to work with us–they want to exterminate us or at least our Western Christian civilization. They are full of hatred toward all traditional Western American and Christian values as well as hatred for those who believe in such values. Lists of numerous neo-Marxist attacks against conservatives is proof of their uninhibited hatred–a hatred that is shielded and under-reported by the leftist media.” It is indeed too bad that most of our people in our Southern Heritage Movement simply do not seem to grasp this. They probably watch way too much of what passes for “news” from the leftist media which inhibits their discernment.

Lord willing, we will provide more information from the latest edition of The South Was Right! as we are able.

Tariffs And Slavery

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

The professional South-haters among us, and their number, thanks to horrendous “education” is legion, insist that the War for Southern Independence aka the War of Northern Aggression, was only fought so the South could keep her slaves and for no other reason. Indeed, those folks do not even want to consider looking at any other reason for that war. Other reasons would interfere with their anti-South agenda and so no other reason than slavery for that war need ever apply because it will never be considered.

I have run into these anti-South zealots over the years. Some have even accused me of defending the South so we would be able to reinstitute slavery here should we ever desire to. What balderdash! No one in his right mind wants to reinstitute slavery–here or anywhere else–except maybe some of the political types in Washington via the programs they plan to institute by some of their legislation they hope we are all too dumb to figure out.

Awhile back Dr. Clyde Wilson did an article on https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org called Why The War Was Not About Slavery. Dr. Wilson is a historian and an expert in his field so he knows whereof he writes. His article states, in part, “Let’s consider the war and slavery. .Again and again I encounter people who say that the South Carolina secession ordinance mentions the defense of slavery and that one fact proves beyond argument that the war was caused by slavery. The first states to secede did mention a threat to slavery as a motive for secession. They also mentioned decades of economic exploitation and the seizure of the common government for the first time ever by a sectional party declaredly hostile to the Southern states. Were they to be a permanently exploited minority, they asked? this was significant to people who know their fathers and grandfathers had founded the Union for the protection and benefit of ALL the states.”

Dr. Wilson continued: “It is no surprise that they mentioned potential interference with slavery as a threat to their everyday life and their social structure. Only a few months before, John Brown and his followers had attempted just that. They murdered a number of people including a free black man who was a respected member of the Harpers Ferry community and a grand-nephew of George Washington because Brown wanted Washington’s sword as a talisman. In Brown’s baggage was a constitution making him dictator of a new black nation and a supply of pikes to be used to stab to death the slave-owner and his wife and children.” Bet your high school “history” books forgot to fill you in on some of that didn’t they?

It was noted by Dr. Wilson that slavery was not under any real threat if they just stayed in the Union. Lincoln had already told them that. He had told them that he had no intention of bothering slavery where it already existed so the idea of the Southern states seceding so they could just keep their slaves is beyond ludicrous.

Another interesting article appeared on https://www.mightytaxes.com dealt with the Corwin Amendment, which was the original version of the 13th Amendment. This article noted that “The Corwin Amendment not only protected the institution of slavery, but included language to make itself unamendable so that no future amendment to the Constitution could undo it. Essentially this first version of the 13th Amendment secured slavery as a permanent institution in America.” And who, might you ask, was this man the amendment was named after? None other than Thomas Corwin, a congressman from Ohio! That’s right, Ohio–not the heart of Dixie! That could be one reason you never see this dealt with in the “history” books. Had Mr. Corwin been from Alabama rather than Ohio you can bet this would have made it into the “history” books. But the information that a Northerner had introduced an amendment to perpetuate slavery was something the court historians long ago decided you didn’t need to be aware of. So they made sure you weren’t.

This same article quoted Charles Dickens when he said “The Northern onslaught upon slavery was no more than a piece of specious humbug designed to conceal its desire for economic control of the Southern states.” I’d say that was a pretty accurate statement.

The article also observed “As you can see, in early 1861 the institution of slavery was secure in America, and Abolitionists were still largely a far-left group of ‘crazy liberals,’ so why go to war? Well, taxes of course. Just before Lincoln took office departing President Buchanan signed a tariff even worse than the Tariff of Abomination of 1832. The new tax in 1861 was called the Morrill Tariff, and it was the highest tariff in American history, taxing imports at over 45%, with iron products taxed at 50%! Victorious Republicans cheered the heavy taxes that benefitted the Northern industrialists who backed Lincoln. In Lincoln’s inaugural address he made no mention of ending slavery, but did promise to collect high taxes in imports in the South under all circumstances and without exception…The fuse had been lit on the American Civil War. While the North was willing to live with slavery in the South, there would be no such concession on taxes. The forts in Southern ports would be used to enforce tariffs and collect taxes even if the South seceded.”

Lincoln wanted his pound of financial flesh from the South no matter what. Now, again, I realize facts like this get in the way of the South-haters’ “It was all about slavery” agenda and to perpetuate that agenda they cannot afford to be confused with the facts so they ignore them. To paraphrase the comments from a former Obama flunky–“never let a bad agenda to to waste!” And they haven’t, nor do they ever intend to.

Some Politically Correct (bad) History For Oklahoma

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

Way back before I was married I lived for part of one year in Oklahoma, in addition to having spent quite a bit of time over the years in and out of the state. Oklahoma has always been one of my favorite spots in the country. I always found the folks there warm and friendly.

The year we lived there my Dad and I went down to Oklahoma City to find out about getting work in the state park system. That didn’t work out for us and it’s probably good that it didn’t, for had it done so I would not have gone back east and ended up marrying my wife. So the Lord had a plan for us in leaving Oklahoma. That being said, I still remember Oklahoma with fondness and my wife and I have visited it on more than one occasion as I wanted her to see one of the places in the West that I had learned to love.

So it was with a certain degree of sadness that I recently read an article by Allan Wall on https://vdare.com/writers/allan-wall abolishing the Oklahoma Land Run Monument from the community college in Oklahoma City.

Mr. Wall observed: “The land runs, which were actual races for land, are part of Oklahoma history. It’s how a significant portion of the state was settled. The first land run was in 1889, settling an area of central Oklahoma called ‘the unassigned lands’ which was uninhabited and not belonging to any Indian tribe. that’s the land run in which Oklahoma City was founded, jumping the population from zero to 10,000 in one day. In this era of Heritage Haters, the Land Runs are under attack. Now a monument at the Oklahoma City college has been removed…The large concrete slab, visible outside the main building on campus, depicted those who came to Oklahoma for the Land Run of 1889 as heroes and innovators, OCCC officials said. Executive Vice President Danita Rose, whose maternal grandfather was of Cherokee descent, said that the decision to remove the monument was a top priority for the executive leadership team.” In other words, the politically correct element at the college wanted this monument gone regardless of its value to the heritage of the state.

Some noted that it was the old “I’m Cherokee” argument but Mr. Wall gives the lie to that foolishness when he notes: “The land settled in the 1889 land run was not Cherokee land, had never been Cherokee l land and was never settled by the Cherokee.” And, interestingly enough, it had been a Cherokee who, in 1879,suggested that these unassigned lands be opened up to white settlement!

Danita Rose commented that: “If our goal is to create a community that is inclusive and welcoming to everyone, a monument that depicts cruelty and oppression can’t be on display here.” Frankly, I am at a loss to see how a monument to a land rush for land that was uninhabited contributes to cruelty and oppression, but then that’s just me. I’m sure the politically correct leftists among us can point to how any monument, anywhere, that they don’t particularly like contributes to cruelty and oppression in their narrow minds. I suppose they’d like to see the Land Rush monument replaced with a statue of either Marx or Lenin, those compassionate champions of humanity whose followers killed millions. Now wouldn’t such be a major contribution to “diversity”?

Actually what it all comes down to is that, when it comes to monuments “no white folks need apply.” In this day and age the definition of diversity means everybody except white folks. We are simply beyond the pale when it comes to diversity.

The Land Run of 1889 did not create oppression and/or cruelty but that doesn’t matter. The leftists claim it did and that’s all that matters. If you dare to question their historical knowledge or perspective then you are nothing but a racist bigot–so sit down and shut up!

It would seem that the Community College of Oklahoma City has succumbed to the thrall of leftist dogma so prevalent on most campuses today. Now, even with community colleges you have to be careful where you send your kids as there are fewer and fewer places where they won’t be bombarded with socialist doctrines. I wonder, with all that is going on today, how much Communist China has to do with what is being taught in many colleges.

The Great Unanswered Question

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

Here and there I get remarks directed at some of the historical articles I write concerning the War of Northern Aggression. Most of the comments seem to deal with the slavery issue. Some individuals with great imagination almost seem to think that the South fought that war so we could still keep slaves to this very day.

To these political worthies I have often directed this question–If the North was so gung ho as to fight against the South to free the slaves, then why did not the North first free all the slaves in states that, for one reason or another, remained part of the Union? This would included Kentucky, Maryland, Delaware, Missouri, and the newly created state of West Virginia. That’s right–West Virginia. The newly created state of West Virginia entered the Union as a slave state, not as a free state. The response I have gotten to this question has been one of ear-shattering silence! No one wants to touch this question and so they just pretend it doesn’t exist or that they didn’t hear anyone ask it. It’s probably the most ignored question of the past several decades.

To these harbingers of Yankee righteousness I would direct the book by Gene Kizer Jr. which I reviewed a few years back Slavery Was Not the Cause of the War Between the States published by Charleston Athenaeum Press http://www.BonnieBluePublishing.com Check the internet and see if you can find it if you want the truth instead of Yankee fables. If you don’t really want the truth (and I suspect many don’t) then continue to ignore it, but if you do that, then please shut up about all this slavery foolishness!

Mr. Kizer noted on page xxiii of the introduction to his book that “Most people in the North (95-98% according to historians Lee Benson and Gavin Wright) were not abolitionists. They did not care about freeing the slaves who would then come North and be job competition. No Republican could be elected in the North on the platform of directly ending slavery but they could agitate on slavery in the West with good results. It was a hot political issue driven as much by rallying votes–vote Republican:…Lincoln himself stated in the Lincoln-Douglas Debates that the West was to be reserved for white people from all over the earth…Neither slaves nor free blacks were welcome in Lincoln’s West.”

Kizer observed a comment by Lincoln scholar Richard N. Current where Current stated: “Lincoln and his fellow Republicans, in insisting that Congress must prohibit slavery in the West, were dealing with political phantoms.” Kizer tells us that “In 1860, there were only two slaves in Kansas and 15 in Nebraska, and that was after being open to slavery for ten years. As stated above, Current did not believe slavery would have lasted another generation, even in the deep South.”

And Kizer reiterates “Slavery was not the cause of the War Between the States. Once you understand the true cause–the imminent economic annihilation of the North which was coming fast–all other actions taken by Lincoln and everybody else make infinitely more sense. Abraham Lincoln needed to start his was as quickly as he could. He needed his blockade of the South in place as fast as possible to keep Europeans and especially the English from forming trade and military alliances with the South…” Kizer also noted that: “Ramsdell states also that the North’s gaping self-inflicted wound, the Morrill Tariff, kicked in and greatly added to the panic and call for war in the North as the Northern shipping industry was largely rerouted, in one fell swoop, away from the high-tariff North and into the low-tariff South where protective tariffs were unconstitutional.”

Now I realize that Mr. Kizer’s research will never convince the professional South haters of their gross errors on the slavery issue, but at least they can never say no one told them.

Reconstruction Is Back–If it really ever ended to begin with

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

Back in 1868 the Russian radical, Michael Bakunin, commented on the aftermath of the War of Northern Aggression. Considering he was not an American, Bakunin had some interesting comments to make about that war. In the book Russian Radicals Look To America it was noted, on page 70 that “Bakunin hoped for the ‘triumph’ of this minority ‘of great and generous…principles,’ but at the same time was aware of the limited possibilities of the ‘revolution by consent’ (as we would cal it today), once this minority achieved power. For ‘popular self-government’ really to become a reality…another revolution…far more profound…would be necessary.”

What Bakunin was really saying here is that another revolution, over and beyond the War of Northern Aggression, would be needed to give newly freed ex-slaves the place they really deserved in this country–and that further revolution was what Karl Marx referred to as “the reconstruction of a social world”–what we call “reconstruction” in the South. Two things here. One, Bakunin recognized the War of Northern Aggression was a revolution, and it was. It was this country’s French Revolution. Two, he recognized that our version of the French Revolution was not quite enough to give the leftist radicals in Washington everything they hoped for and so, to do that, we needed yet another revolution, a revolution that lying “historians” have told us was to rebuild the vanquished South–and they had the gall to call it “reconstruction.” Former General Richard Taylor from here in Louisiana called it “deconstruction” and he was right!

If you want to find out how well “reconstruction” really worked for the South and its folk, then read Ron and Donnie Kennedy’s book Punished with Poverty Shotwell Publishing, Columbia, South Carolina and you will get an up close and personal view of how “reconstruction” worked for the South.

The late Frank Conner in his book The South Under Siege–1830-2000 noted some of what was “accomplished” during “reconstruction” in the South. Mr. Conner observed that “…voter registration boards (named by the military authorities) could arbitrarily deny the vote to anyone: in other words, Southern Democrats would have a very hard time getting registered to vote…Now the South was under martial law. The occupying army could enter and search any Southerner’s home at any time and seize whatever possessions it wished…The U.S. Army could arrest any Southerner at any time for virtually any reason and hold him as a prisoner without trial for however long it wished…Woe unto any Southerner who displayed–under any circumstances at all–a Confederate flag or any other symbol of the Confederacy, he would be arrested immediately.” Former Confederate soldiers even had to remove CSA buttons off their coats and fasten those coats with string! Does any of this sound remotely familiar given today’s political climate–particularly the part about the flags–and that part has now been expanded to include Confederate monuments–the reason given for that? They supposedly promote “racism.”

Look at some of what has gone on recently in this country. It looks to me like our current crop of leftists in both parties in Washington has been using the playbook of the Radical Republicans from the 1860s as a guide to what they want to enact in our day. One is left to wonder how long it will be before they start trying to enforce the finer points of this updated “reconstruction.” Already Trump voters are all being labeled as “domestic terrorists” who, if not all arrested should at least be forced to attend “re-education camps”. They did the same thing in the 1860s in the South–only back then the re-education camps were called public schools and they were a particularly Yankee invention foisted on the South as part of our price for losing the War. Same principle in both cases.

Back in the 1860s Southerners who would not vote Republican were routinely denied the vote. They’re not doing that today–yet–rather they are going to cancel out our votes by letting anyone who comes into the country vote, citizen or not and they are talking about even giving the vote to 16 year olds. They plan to make sure those nasty Trump voters never have enough votes again to constitute a majority and should that occur again by sheer accident a bit of creative voting in certain states will solve that thorny problem for them.

Actually, “reconstruction” in this country never really ended. It took a slight breather but now it has returned with a vengeance. One wonders if Trump voters are the new Confederates in this ongoing story of leftist occupation of the country. So, folks, welcome to the 21st century brand of “reconstruction” designed by the deep state to ensure that you never get your God-given liberties back–ever again!!!