The South and the West–Targets for cultural destruction

by Al Benson Jr.

Frequently in recent years I have commented on the fact that the cultural American South and the cultural American West have the very same Federal adversaries. Therefore it seems reasonable to me that Southern and Western Americans that wish to preserve their unique cultures should sit down and talk with one another and seek ways to help one another prevent the planned destruction of both of our cultures.

There has been a lot in the past couple years in the news media (if such it can be called) about problems in the West with the Feds basically, if the truth were known, trying to run ranchers off their land because they seem to have a “more compelling” use for that land than the folks who have ranched and farmed it for the past 150 years, and please let’s don’t kid ourselves–the Feds are out to destroy the ranching culture in the Far West. It is one small residue of authentic American culture that they absolutely loathe because it breeds an independent spirit and the Feds hate independence, especially for ordinary folks, when we should all be getting programmed for the United Nations Agenda 21 scenario where no one has any independence. Anyone that has followed even the crooked news media has to realize that, in the West, the Feds are laboring mightily to crush any local independence.

While this problem might not be quite as openly apparent in the South it is still there, and beginning to manifest itself more and more, both with the ethnic cleansing campaign in regard to anything Confederate, and also with what people can and can’t do with their own land (which the Feds really consider to be theirs).

I recently got an article off the Kennedy Twins web site written by my good friend and co-author Donnie Kennedy entitled Crows, Slimy Frogs and Federal Tyranny. Donnie’s article points up several areas in which the problems of the Southerner and Westerner are just about identical.

Donnie observes: “From Point (Louisiana) we turn to the other end of the once sovereign State of Louisiana, where a land owner in St. Tammany Parish has run afoul of the Federal Registry, the EPA, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. It seems that fifty years ago his land was the habitat of the Mississippi Gopher Frog. The Federal Government in its ‘wisdom’ had determined to reintroduce this frog onto its ancient habitat–landowner be damned, the frogs and the Feds come first! Of course the Federal Government is assuring everyone  that it has no desire to disabuse the landowner of his property and everything will be done to make sure they can co-exist peacefully. Just stop and think. How much value has this man lost because his land is now under the ‘oversight’ of the Federal Government?  Before any change can be made on his property, it must pass Federal scrutiny. The value of his property has been greatly reduced and he must stand and obey the edicts of the supreme Federal Government.” Sound familiar to any of you folks in the West?  Can anyone say “desert tortoise”?

Years ago a man in the John Birch Society gave a speech I never forgot. He talked for over two hours with no notes. He had it all in his head. I heard him give the same speech on two different occasions. One thing he said always stuck with me. He said “It’s not really who owns the property that’s important. It’s who controls it.” The one who controls what can or can’t be done with the property, in essence, “owns” it no matter whose name is on the deed.

Same situation with property taxes. You may own property and have your name on the deed, but if you fail to pay your yearly rent for the use of that property then some governing body will come along and take “your” property and you can light your cigar with your deed because all it will be worth is the price of a good match.

We really need to begin rethinking our concepts of property, of taxes, of Federal regulations and a whole lot more because implicit in all government taxes, both West and South, is the concept that government really owns it all and we are only there by their sufferance. You may not like that thought. I may not like it but we really need to start thinking about it because, in Federal eyes, that’s the way it really is.

Advertisements

Ole Miss Continues Its March Toward “Relevancy”

by Al Benson Jr.

It seems that many of these colleges and universities in the South today don’t really feel “relevant” anymore, or maybe the proper term might be “politically correct” or more properly yet “culturally Marxist.” Somehow, it seems, their leadership and faculties must labor to convince  the cultural Marxists out there that they really, sincerely, want to play their game, but they have to do it in such a way that it will not alert those who still cherish Southern culture as to their true intent.

Therefore, they take the classical Fabian socialist approach that they might attain their intended destruction of Southern culture incrementally, all the while assuring those that might send their kids to be “educated” in their Ivory Towers that they really do treasure Southern culture and heritage, but, for the sake of being relevant in today’s changing world, they must work at soft-peddling that heritage just a bit, lest some Black Panther or Muslim terrorist become “offended.” For them the “sin” of offending someone is more heinous than the sin of adultery, which they really don’t consider all that bad anymore.

Ole Miss has gone in this direction. In its infinite wisdom, their leadership has decided to completely trash its Southern heritage and cultural background (incrementally of course) while assuring potential enrollees that this is the last thing they want to do. It may be the last thing they want to get caught doing, but hardly the last thing they really want to do.

I’ve worked at two different colleges over the years, one in the East and the other in the Midwest and from what I could see from either one, they seemed to think their mission was to “fundamentally transform”  the students sent to them so that their parents would hardly recognize them when they returned home. I had one lady even tell me once, “Since our daughter came here I don’t even know her anymore.” And she wasn’t happy with that. I told her “I could get fired for saying this to you but if you want your daughter back, taker her out of this school.” I don’t know if she ever did, but I felt it was sound advice. The “fundamental transformation” I have seen with many of these college kids is, in many cases, far from positive.

And at Ole Miss, this seems to be the plan also. They started out banning Confederate battle flags at ball games. That took awhile because, at first, the kids kept showing up with them at games anyway, but the school leadership persisted, and the kids, not realizing their heritage was under subtle attack, eventually started leaving the flags back at the dorm. Then they changed the school mascot. Col. Reb just had to go! He “offended” too many people, and who knows where all those people came from. Some may not have been Southerners who should have realized that, in the South, they don’t do things quite the same as they do in Trenton, New Jersey. Some may have been brainwashed Southern kids, because, as we know if we’ve done the homework, the brainwashing in public schools literally starts on the first day in Kindergarten.

Now it turns out the school band will be prevented from playing Dixie, while the school still talks of how it preserves Southern traditions–which it seems they are seeking to stab in the back culturally, one by one. What they want is a school that is totally identified with what they call the “New South.” And, as one man said years ago in a speech I heard “The New South is NO South.” He was right.

I wonder–how many of those that send their kids to Ole Miss that are from the South realize what is going on–and if they realized it would they be in agreement with it? And if they couldn’t agree with the hatchet job being done on their culture, would they consider putting their kids in some other school–if they could find another one that wasn’t doing the same thing? Years ago author William Lind wrote an article in which he called America’s colleges “little ivy-covered North Korea’s” He was right too.

The problem becomes more and more difficult for parents who want their youngsters to get a college education without being totally brainwashed. They really have to search to find places this can be accomplished and the number of such places seems to be diminishing.

There are some Christian colleges where this is possible, but you have to be careful there too, because some Christian colleges have also drunk the leftist Kool Aid, and may or may not even realize it. Parents in the South who want their Southern traditions and culture preserved for their children and grandchildren have got to be really discerning as to where they send them to college and I don’t envy them the homework they will have to do in making that decision in our culturally Marxist society today.

One Way To Fight Back–Sue The SOB’s

by Al Benson Jr.

Just yesterday (August 16th) someone sent me an article from the Courthouse News Service http://www.courthousenews.com written by Elizabeth Warmerdam about an artist in California suing the state for barring Confederate flags. The article notes: “California’s ban on state agencies selling or displaying items showing the Confederate flag is unconstitutional, says an artist who was not allowed to show his Civil War painting at the Fresno County Fair…Timothy Desmond sued the state on Monday, claiming the law prevents him from displaying his artwork at the Big Fresno Fair, operated by the 21st District Agricultural  Association on land owned by Fresno County. Artists display their work at the Fresno Fair every October. Desmond says the law violates the First Amendment.” One thing you have to understand here, the First Amendment only applies if we are not talking about Confederate flags or symbols.  In their case it does not apply–the law of government censorship in regard to anything Confederate then becomes the state and national standard.

Desmond does not agree. The painting he wants to display shows a scene from the 1864 siege of Atlanta and, guess what, there are Confederate flags in the picture, making it automatically verboten. Desmond is asking the Federal Court to declare California’s law as “unconstitutionally overbroad.” The bill was introduced in February of 2014, (even before the insanity in Charleston) by Assemblyman Isadore Hall, after his mother saw a replica of some Confederate money with the flag on it for sale in the Capitol gift ship in Sacramento. Governor Jerry Brown, that staunch advocate of First Amendment rights (for those that agree with him) couldn’t wait to sign this bill into law.So now an artist that dares to depict a Confederate flag in any sketch or painting might just as well forget his work being shown anywhere where the state has any say over what is displayed. That this smacks more than a little of state censorship is totally immaterial. After all, we are talking about Confederate flags here and everyone knows they should not be allowed to be displayed anywhere. Just ask any Communist and he will tell you! These are the folks that support Hillary in the upcoming “election” scam and they know what the game is even if most public-school educated Americans don’t have a clue.

So Timothy Desmond is suing the state of Commiefornia, oops, I meant California. Sorry about that. I wish Mr. Desmond well in his lawsuit. I don’t know if he will be victorious or not but at least he is making the state fight to enforce their censorship and ethnic cleansing.

In the same vein, the Sons of Confederate Veterans is suing the city of Natchitoches, Louisiana for them not being able to carry their battle flags in the annual parade there that they have marched in for years. The mayor in that fair city told them, basically, you are welcome to come but leave your flags in your vehicles, preferably out of sight. The SCV didn’t march. They picketed the parade–at both ends. Now they are suing the city.

The SCV groups in New Orleans also have a lawsuit against that city to prevent them from removing Confederate monuments. A court has stopped the city from trying to remove the monuments until all the litigation is out of the way.Of course New Orleans has been having some difficulty finding someone willing to take the monuments down.

And, according to an article in The Times-Picayune back in April of this year “Almost three out of four Louisiana residents oppose removing Confederate monuments and symbols from public space, according to a poll taken by LSU in February. Only 20 percent of people surveyed favored Confederate monument removal.” Of course we all know that to be politically correct (and culturally Marxist, which is their agenda for American society) the wishes of the 20 percent should be parroted and the wishes of the 80 percent should be ignored.  After all, the 80 percent are the ones that pay the bills. What do they know?

As much as we don’t like the concept of a litigious society yet more and more we are coming to the point where, to get any relief from what overbearing governments are doing to us we are having to learn to “sue the SOB’s” because nothing else seems to check their grasp for power. And although the courts most surely don’t always solve the problem, once in awhile they do rule in favor or ordinary folks and once in awhile the lawsuits make it just that much more difficult for over-grasping governmental bodies to force their will on us. At least, in some cases, it slows them down and makes then sweat to earn their tyranny.

“Young America”

by Al Benson Jr.

Back in the mid-19th century there was a movement in this country called the Young America movement. Your history books probably seldom mentioned it, if at all. Prior to writing this I looked through several books on my shelves, checking out the indexes of many and could find no mention of it in anything I was able to check. I checked on the Internet and found only a handful of references to it that all pretty much said the same thing.

The one I will quote here is Wikipedia because it’s not all that much different than the mere handful of others I could find.

The Wikipedia article says: “The Young America Movement was an American political and cultural attitude in the mid-19th century. Inspired by European reform movements of the 1830s (such as…Young Italy and Young Hegelians), the American group was formed as a political organization in 1845 by Edward de Leon and George Henry Evans. It advocated free trade, social reform,…and support for republican, and anti-aristocratic movements abroad. It became a faction of the Democratic Party in the 1850s.” It was promoted by Senator Stephen A. Douglas and other notables of the day. It all sounds relatively harmless unless you know how to read some of this stuff and to do a little homework.

For instance, one of the “movements” that inspired it was Young Italy. Now Young Italy was a political movement founded in 1831 by Giuseppe Mazzini.  Supposedly its goal was to create a “united Italian republic through promoting a general insurrection  in the Italian reactionary states and in the lands occupied by the Austrian Empire.” According to http://www.moneyteachers.org  “Mazzini was born in France and his father was a ‘Jacobin’ (Freemason-Illuminati group that caused the French Revolution)…Even more interesting is Mazzini’s desire to create a ‘United States of Europe’ a century before the European Union came into existence. Globalism is Illuminism and Mazzini was loyal to both…” So this was one inspiration for Young America.Another was the group called Young Hegelians.  Rummaging around for into on this group I found that Karl Marx had once been involved with them http://www.cardiff.ac.uk  Enough said.

With “inspiration”  like these groups do you begin to get a bit of a vision as to where Young America might have been headed? They supposedly supported “social reform.” What exactly does that mean? Is that politically correct terminology for violent revolution?  They supported “republican and anti-aristocratic movements.” Does that mean they supported the overthrow of legitimate government that might have been ruled by kings?  And was their “republican” sentiment a cover for collectivization  and centralization? That’s a big part of what the 1848 socialist revolts in Europe were all about in countries like Germany, which was pretty decentralized. The 1848 socialist revolt there was to centralize the government so one group could control it. Three guesses as to which group that was supposed to be.

Arthur R. Thompson in his book To The Victor Go The Myths And Monuments has quite a bit to say about Young America, more than I have seen just about anywhere else. He said enough that I felt it was worth taking a brief article and dealing with it because even though it “officially” faded out sometime after the War of Northern Aggression, the mindset and worldview that promoted it is still very much with us today, just under different names.

Mr. Thompson notes on page 215 that “The Carbonari’s Young America (YA) reached its ascendancy in the late 1850s and played a key role in laying the groundwork for a future civil war. After the Civil War they faded as a visible organization, even though their ideas have never faded from the American scene, as witnessed by the Spanish-American War and the modern neoconservative movement. YA aims since the Civil War have been generally carried out by the establishment of the major political parties. In other words, the goals of YA became the established American foreign policy without being a visible movement from the Civil War  until 1921, with the formation of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), when their tactics again became obvious, even as a more visible organization than before the Civil War. By the mid-20th century there were several elite organizations promoting the YA goals, all with interlocking directorates and membership.” That sort of brings us up to where we are today. Which brings up again the question I asked in a recent article–who controls many of these groups from behind the scenes?

A few years ago I had a friend up in Arkansas (now deceased) who knew a man that used to work at flying some of these big government and establishment people around from place to place. He told my friend once that the people that really run this country are way behind the scenes and the ones you think run it are nothing more than their mouthpieces, paid political shills, as it were.

But all this proves one thing. Ideas do have consequences and the ideas from over 150 years ago have lived on to affect our lives today and the conspiracies that were around 150 plus years ago have lived on to affect how we think and act–as they were intended to. If the evil these people promoted (and it was evil)  over 150 years ago affects our lives today then it is much more than just “ancient history.” It has become part of our everyday lives and we ignore it to our peril and to the detriment of our children and grandchildren.

Contrary to what many shrinking Christians think, I don’t believe all conspiracies are “unbeatable.” With the Lord’s help and guidance and an electorate that is willing to do the homework, and having done the homework, to fight back, there are a lot of things that could have been and still can be done. Maybe we had best pray and ask the Lord what He would have us to do rather than sitting back and thinking evil conspirators are invincible–because they are not–they are sinful human creatures like the rest of us and with the proper guidance  and effort much of their agenda can be thwarted.  The Lord told us in the Scriptures to “hate evil” and to “resist the devil.” Maybe we need to be about doing just that and a good place to begin is with serious Christian worship–and then informed action!

How About a Little Damage Control?

by Al Benson Jr.

Last week the Democratic Party  was supposedly in a shambles. The web site http://thehornnews.com had an article posted for August 2nd that said, in part, “The Democratic Party is in the middle of a leadership purge that could affect the landscape of the 2016 election. Three more top Democratic Party officials have resigned today in the wake of an embarrassing email hack.”

Ahh, but that was then and this is now.

The Democrats looked pathetically bad, with party officials being thrown under the bus with amazing regularity.

On the same say all this was happening there was also an article on http://www.1776coalition.com by Gabrielle Levy which had Trump saying “I’m afraid the election’s going to be rigged, I have to be honest,…” In light of the Clintons’ reputation I didn’t think that was an outlandish statement, but apparently the Republican Establishment did because on the Horn News for August 3rd appeared an article which was headlined “Traitors! RNC pushing Trump to quit.” This article said, again in part, “The report, from an anonymous GOP source, stated that senior party insiders are so upset and baffled by Trump’s erratic behavior that they are preparing a back-up plan for replacing him on the ballot before the November general election.” Almost sounds like something they’ve had in play for awhile.

So, in two days, we have gone from a Democratic Party in shambles over all of Hillary’s leaded emails to the Republican Establishment planning to replace Trump because of “erratic” behavior. At least this is what the “news” media is telling up. Of course how much actual truth you ever get from them is always up for grabs, but looking at this entire scenario and taking it from Democratic ruin on Monday to Trump’s possible mental condition on Wednesday, it begins to smell to me like good old fashioned damage control for Hillary. They needed something to take the spotlight off of her and to focus it somewhere else so people would, in a few days, forget all about her email indiscretions and have something else to chatter about. And in typical Marxist fashion, if they can pull this off, they will kill two birds with one stone–bury Hillary’s email problems and cut Trump’s political throat all in one fell swoop! And the prostitute press are more than willing accomplices.

Unfortunately, so is the Republican National Committee–but then, if the truth be known, they always have been. Trump was not supposed to win the nomination. One of the other 16 political shills running against him was, and the Republicans weren’t too fussy which one, although they’d rather have had a Bush or a Romney than a Rand Paul, but they’d have lived with a Rand Paul if necessary. No way can they co-exist with Trump and they have been looking for some way, any way, to deep six him since long before the Republican convention. All you have to do to realize this is to have followed their actions and comments and you could have told that the real agenda has always been “anyone but Trump.”

Just because he won the nomination didn’t change their Marxist mindsets–and please, don’t try to tell me all the Republicans are conservatives. Some are, but not many. When you talk like a conservative but vote like a Marxist, then you’re a Marxist, possibly different from the Democratic Marxists only in degree and false rhetoric.

It’s like I have said so many times before–the same leftist Council on Foreign Relations/Trilateral Commission clique in Washington and New York controls both parties at the leadership levels.  The only question we might ask, in light of recent articles  I’ve done, is who controls the CFR and the Trilateralists?  As high up as they are, they ain’t at the top of the totem pole.

So watch what goes on in the next few days. Hillary’s email problems will probably be ancient history and the Republican Establishment will attempt to find a way to replace Trump with yet another political stooge who will make sure it’s business as usual–and that Hillary wins. That’s the real name of the game.

So what will all the folks that voted for and supported Trump end up doing when they find they have no real voice at all as all this goes down?  Probably not as much as we could hope for.