Abraham Lincoln The Rosicrucian???

by Al Benson Jr.

As far as what they believe, the Rosicrucians seem to be a real mixed bag. One internet sit says “Rosicrucianism contains elements of Christianity, Hermeticism, Mysticism and Kaballah.” And it is claimed they are “a spiritual and cultural movement that arose in Europe in the early 17th century after the publication of several texts purported to announce the existence of a hitherto unknown esoteric order to the world…”

I make note of this because the Rosicrucians are mentioned in Arthur R. Thompson’s authoritative work To the Victor go the Myths and Monuments. Mr. Thompson observes, on page 13, that “The Illuminati influence spread too rapidly to have been an organization that was founded in a vacuum. There had to have been other networks that helped drive the work of the Illuminati. These obviously were of the aforementioned Enlightenment, but had to have a more central source of direction. Some claim it was the Rosicrucians, yet modern Rosicrucians claim they sprang out of the Illuminati. And, it is claimed that Weishaupt was a Rosicrucian. In addition it becomes confusing because the Rosicrucians were the first secret organization to combat the Illuminati. Since the Illuminati had a superior organization, in the long run they may have infiltrated the Rosicrucians. Rosicrucian writings do refer to the illuminati in their degrees, that a Rosicrucian could attain a certain degree that is referred to as ‘Illuminati.’…Of all secret societies the Rosicrucians have been the most elusive to pin down.”

Mr. Thompson noted that: “There is much about them that is deliberately fabricated to throw people off the track. One does not know if their claim on Lincoln’s membership is true, for instance. He is claimed, as well as Jefferson, Franklin, Giuseppe Mazzini and Albert Pike,..The head of the Rosicrucians in his writings in the early 20th century claims that Lincoln was chosen by the Supreme Council as the ‘annointed one’ to carry further the work of what they called ‘freedom.’ They further claim that earlier there existed a Council of Three, composed of Benjamin Franklin, George Clymer, and Thomas Paine, then Paine was replaced by Lafayette. Franklin and Lafayette both belonged to the Humanidad Lodge, which allegedly was a Rosicrucian entity. It is rare that anyone refutes these two facts: their membership and that it was a Rosicrucian entity…According to the Rosicrucians, the Council of Three was revitalized in 1842 by George Lippard. It is said by the Rosicrucians themselves that the council consisted of Dr. Paschal Beverly Randolph, Gen. Ethan Allen Hitchcock, and Lincoln. This is a recurring ‘fact’ in most Rosicrucian published sources…In all of Randolph’s biographies it is stated that he became such a good friend of Lincoln’s that he was on board the train taking the corpse of Lincoln from Washington, D.C. to Springfield, Illinois but was asked to detrain because some of the other personages objected to a man of color being aboard. Randolph was of mixed blood….What is known is that the world headquarters of the Rosicrucians was moved to America in 1848 and they stood for a parliament of the world. They are only one of many key conspiratorial organizations that moved their headquarters to America just before or after the Civil War.”

Interesting that they moved here in 1848. That was an eventful year, what with the communist/socialist revolts in Europe going on and also, here, the beginning of the women’s lib movement occurred in Seneca Falls, New York–an event that was rife with spiritualism. 1848 was not a good year for this country. We were subjected to influences that would eventually change this country–and not for the better.

Mr. Thompson also informed us that: “Of the above list of Rosicrucians, what is known is that Hitchcock was a Swedenborgian and the author of Swedenborgian books, including Christ the Spirit in which he attempted to show that Scriptures were symbolic books written by members of a Jewish secret society. He was a warm personal friend of Lincoln as well as a military advisor. He appears to have been a Rosicrucian, since he is listed as such by every leader of that society in every book written about the Order.”

So it would seem that there were connections between the Rosicrucians and the Illuminati and you had some “interesting” personalities that were Rosicrucians and some rather odd theology came from some of them. Theology that was not good for the country. Whether Lincoln was part of it or not, is hard to say, though the Rosicrucians claim he was. Given Lincoln’s anti-Christian bias and his interest in spiritualism, this all sort of fits our view of the “Great Emancipator.” We’ve been fed 150 years worth of lies about Lincoln that were created to build for us a legendary Lincoln that never really existed except in the minds of those forging the legends. Maybe someday our “history” books will get it right–but don’t hold your breath waiting!

Advertisement

Remembering Sharpsburg

by Al Benson Jr.

Today, September 17th, marks the 160th anniversary of the Battle of Sharpsburg in Maryland during the War of Northern Aggression. General Lee had marched north with an army of 55,000 and ended up confronting General McClellan with an army of 87,000. The idea of Lee moving north was twofold. One was to give Virginia a little respite from the fighting that had gone on there since the war started and another was to try to win a decisive victory in the north that might have resulted in European recognition of the Confederate States.

Some have noted that Lee’s original destination was probably Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, which if he could have made it, would have put him in a good position to keep federal help from getting to Washington. At one point he had to send a force to Harpers Ferry to capture that so he would have a way to get supplies for his army from Virginia and he could not leave a federal force there on his flank.

Lee and McClellan finally collided near Sharpsburg on September 17th and fought a battle there that lasted all day, with around 12,000 Union casualties and 10,000 Confederate casualties. The battle ended around 5:30 in the afternoon, with Lee preparing his defensive line to receive another attack from McClellan the next day. That attack never came, and so the next night, Lee moved his army back toward Virginia.

I’ve read articles that said the Union won this battle. Wishful thinking! At best, the battle was a draw, and Lee only retreated after waiting for an attack from McClellan that never came. Just a few personal observations here. McClellan had 30,000 more men than Lee did and yet was still not able to defeat him. Not only that, McClellan had gotten a copy of Lee’s orders to his generals and so should have known how to use that intelligence to defeat Lee, yet he did not. So Lee, with 30,000 less men fought him to a draw.

Though the North won the war, it took overwhelming numbers of troops, many of whom were foreigners, to defeat the South. Had the numbers been somewhere near equal on both sides the results may have been dramatically different and the South may well have been able to resist Northern aggression. I never forgot the story I heard years ago about the Union soldier who asked the Confederate soldier “Why are you fighting this war anyway?” To which the Southern soldier replied “Because you’re here.”

Most Southerners didn’t own slaves and so that’s not what they fought over, but they had a bad attitude about being invaded. They didn’t like it. I realize there were people and groups that wanted North and South to fight because no matter who won they planned to put the entire country into political bondage. It was easier to do if the North won, and they are still working at it today. They have destroyed state sovereignty throughout the country and kept people asleep with their federal education establishment and now they feel they are about to put the finishing touches on their agenda. However, they realize people are starting to wake up and so they are in a big hurry to complete their task before enough of us wake up to give them serious resistance.

Actually Lincoln and the Northern Republican Establishment didn’t fight a war to abolish slavery. They fought a war to institutionalize it on the national level. Biden’s crew of internationalists are working on that as I write this. Whether they are successful or not will depend on how many people are willing to resist being slaves to the Establishment.

Abolitionists, Spiritualists, And Women’s Libbers–Our “history” Books Glamorize The Wrong People

by Al Benson jr.

The radical Abolitionist Movement in this country in the years from the 1830s through “reconstruction” at the end of the War of Northern Aggression caused many problems we still deal with today. And yet the people responsible for these radical movements are often the ones our “history” books choose to glamorize today.

If you look at the scribblings of Abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison you have to recognize that this man was a rank internationalist whose agenda went way beyond freeing slaves. That was supposedly part of it, but not the whole of it by any means. Although there were undoubtedly some Christians in the Abolitionist Movement, by and large, it was an experiment in rank apostasy. Many of its adherents had become enamored of the strange doctrines of spiritualism that so permeated mid-nineteenth century America. Others had become devotees of Unitarianism–yet another form of apostasy from the Christian faith. Others, like John Brown, had become terrorists.

Ann Braude, in her book Radical Spirits told us that: “Every notably progressive family of the nineteenth century had its advocate of Spiritualism, some of them more than one…The ubiquitous Beecher family contributed Charles Beecher and Isabella Beecher to its ranks, while Harriet Beecher Stowe became a serious investigator…As already noted, abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison was an early convert and remained loyal to the movement until his death. The famous Grimke sisters, Sarah and Agelina talked to spirits.” All of these people were abolitionists–and all, according to Braude, involved in Spiritualism. Undoubtedly your “history” books mention some of these worthies in glowing terms–but do they tell you anything about their Spiritualist connections? I’m willing to bet that is hardly, if ever, mentioned.

Susan B. Anthony, from a Quaker family, became a partner to Elizabeth Cady Stanton in the promotion of what has today become the Women’s Lib Movement. Anthony, at the beginning, had a hard time giving speeches in public. She lacked confidence as a public speaker and so she read most of her speeches to her audiences. Braude has written of Anthony that she wrote to her colleague, Stanton, and stated that: “You can’t think of how earnestly I have prayed to be a speaking medium for a whole week. If they would only come to me thus, I’d give them a hearty welcome.” She was referring to the spirits. Braude has stated, then, that for the sake of the Women’s Lib Movement (they didn’t call it that back then) she was willing to open herself up to being used by spirits.

Another author, Kathleen Barry, in her book Susan B. Anthony took a little different tack on Anthony’s spiritual worldview. She observed that: “In her autobiography, Elizabeth Cady Stanton described Susan’s spirituality as that of an agnostic. Susan never denied the existence of God, but her beliefs were secularized and lodged in the world around her.” So, whichever way you take it–Spiritualist or Unitarian–Anthony’s beliefs were a radical departure from orthodox Christianity–and this is the foundation for Women’s Lib!

Braude, in Radical Spirits identified spiritualism as being present at the Women’s Rights convention at Seneca Falls, New York in 1848. She noted: “From this time on, Spiritualism and women’s rights intertwined repeatedly as both became mass movements that challenged the existing norms of American life. The two movements shared many leaders and activists.” Again, your history books probably don’t touch on any of this.

It is worth observing in passing that the Spiritualist Movement began to make inroads in this country right around 1848, the same year the communist and socialist revolts began in Europe. In fact, one of the female Forty-Eighters, Mathilde Franziska Anneke, the wife of socialist agitator Fritz Anneke, once she came to America, became one of the leading lights in the Women’s Rights Movement. She worked closely with Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton and even lobbied in Washington in behalf of women’s rights. So you see there were connections between the Forty-Eighters and the Feminists.

Another family influenced by spiritualism were the Lincolns, both Abraham and Mary. I have read several books mentioning that Mary Lincoln attended seances after the death of their son. But none of these books mentioned that Lincoln attended seances without his wife on trips to New York before he was elected. Arthur R. Thompson mentioned this in his authoritative book To the Victor go the Myths and Monuments on page 201. Mr. Thompson told us that: “J. B. Conklin was a medium. Upon Lincoln’s election, he recognized Lincoln as a frequent guest at seances in New York prior to his election. Conklin stated in the Cleveland Plainview that Lincoln was a spiritualist. Lincoln was shown the article and instead of contradicting it, said, ‘The only falsehood in the statement is that the half of it has not been told. This article does not begin to tell the wonderful things I have witnessed.’ On four successive Sundays prior to the issue of the Emancipation Proclamation, Conklin was a guest at the White House and tried to take credit for the proclamation. Accurate or not, and there were many other influences, a number of spiritualists urged Lincoln to issue the Emancipation Proclamation…Mary Lincoln attended many seances with three different mediums after moving to Washington, and Lincoln accompanied her on occasion in and out of the White House.”

There is a lot more that could be told but it will have to do for another time.

Conspiracy, Assassination, And Reconstruction

by Al Benson Jr.

Karl Marx, in his commentary about Lincoln claimed that Lincoln was fighting for “the rescue of an enchained race and the reconstruction of a social world.” Anyone who has studied Lincoln knows he was a racist and really did not care about the slavery issue except as a crutch he could use to beat the South over the head with. The last part of Marx’s statement is the really critical part–“the reconstruction of a social world.” I always found it interesting that when the Union was going to govern the South after the war they called it “reconstruction.” What the Union did to the South was exactly what Marx advocated.

There was lots of conspiratorial activity in the background, going all the way back beyond the Lincoln assassination. As background, Arthur R. Thompson, in his book To the Victor Go the Myths and Monuments, deals with the Lincoln assassination. He notes: “There was a great deal of evidence that the Confederate Secret Service was involved in the plot against Lincoln, at least the original plan, which was to kidnap Lincoln and hold him for some kind of ransom to either free Confederate prisoners or to end the war under favorable terms. Apparently the original idea of the Confederacy was to kidnap the president and hold him for ransoming tens of thousands of Confederate prisoners . Booth initially attempted such a plot, but circumstances made the attempt impossible. Abduction would have helped the Confederacy and their cause. Assassination helped the Conspiracy.” The conspiracy he refers to here is the one started in Germany in the 1700s, the Illuminati, and which, under a variety of names, continued into the 1800s and still continues to this day. It should be noted here that in the 1800s the abduction of an enemy head of state was considered a legitimate tactic of war, whereas assassination was beyond the pale.

And there was evidence to believe that some in the Union were involved in Lincoln’s assassination. Mr. Thompson observed that: “The movements of Lincoln and those surrounding him were well known to Booth, demonstrating that Booth had to have had a number of people working to feed the information to him through some organization that extended inside the Union government. For instance, Booth knowing the countersign at the Anacostia Bridge over which he made his escape. Another indication Booth had inside information relative to the movement and schedule of Lincoln was that Booth seemed to know which people were invited to attend events with Lincoln…In George Atzerodt’s confession, he mentions that Booth told him that if he did not get Lincoln the ‘New York crowd’ would. Booth also stated more than once that there were between 50 and 100 people involved in the plot. This is not as implausible as it may sound. Recall that the John Brown conspiracy involved scores of people that were never brought to justice. Booth, as is the case with most assassins, also kept a diary…” But that is yet another story. In the John Brown situation some of the conspirators were a group known as “the Secret Six” who were mostly Unitarian bigwigs. None of this group paid for their part in Brown’s debacle at Harpers Ferry.

We often forget, with the apotheosis of Lincoln, that Andrew Johnson and William Seward were also scheduled to be assassinated, which of course did not work out. Mr. Thompson reminds us that “Had all of the assassinations been carried out, America would be a very different place today. Not only would those who assumed power–either legally or de facto–have been different, but the feelings against the Southern people would have been even more broad, deep and vituperative. Wiping out the top three in the federal government would have been used to justify anything the Radicals desired–not only over the South, but over the North as well. Radicals in power never allow a crisis to go unused in building power.” One of Obama’s good buddies, Rahm Emanuel, reminded people “Never let a crisis go to waste.” if you will remember.

Mr. Thompson also reiterated that: “Those who were not immediately exposed among the small, insignificant group surrounding Booth were allowed to walk free. One has to ask why, and what these people knew that the authorities did not want exposed to the public by open trial.”

I have often wondered over the years why the government was soon keen on making sure Mary Surrat was among those hanged for Lincoln’s killing. I’ve even written about it and others have written books proclaiming her innocence, yet someone in the government wanted to make sure she hung rather than just going to prison. So I have often wondered–what did Mary Surrat know and when did she know it? And then there was Assistant Secretary of War Thomas Eckert who visited conspirator Lewis Powell in prison and questioned him. Afterward Eckert said: “All I can say about this is, that you have not got the one half of them.” So what did Eckert know? Alot of conspiracy went on at this time that will never make it into the “history” books because those who control much of the Deep State conspiracy going on in this country also control what makes it into our history books and what gets left out that they think they are better off if we don’t know about most of what really happened. So much for educational objectivity.

The South As The Usual Whipping Boy

by Al Benson Jr.

A friend of mine from Alabama recently sent a letter to the editor of a “news” paper in his area. I don’t know if it got printed or will get printed but in it he made some very appropriate comments that I thought deserved some attention.

He stated, quite accurately, that: “Since 1865 the South has been made America’s whipping boy when it comes to the issue of slavery. Politicians today still use the ‘victimhood’ of slavery on their black constituents to get their votes and gain or hold power over them…I intend to point out a few of the many instances where the North shares guilt over slavery,…The Triangle Trade was about New England shipping companies buying black slaves from their black captors on the coast of the present day African country of Ghana, transporting them back to New England ports and selling them to buyers in both the north and south. The Province of Rhode Island was officially referred to as Rhode Island and Providence Plantations and for good reason, because that is exactly what it was–a plantation.” Your “history” books naturally left this out, but I know a little about it because I grew up in nearby Massachusetts, about a mile from the Rhode Island state line.

I think the state of Rhode Island changed the official name a few years back and took the “plantations” part of the state title out because it sounded too much like what the state had actually been–a big plantation–and that was not politically correct.

I read a book a few years ago written by three reporters from a Hartford, Connecticut newspaper that was about how the north actually profited from and promoted slavery. I don’t imagine that book made them too many friends among the politically correct, but it told the truth.

No one condones slavery. However, when passing around the usual liberal guilt trip for it there is more than enough guilt to go around both in the north and the south. So why don’t the “history” books mention that? You know why. The North won the War of Northern Aggression so naturally their complicity in the slavery question has been expunged from the record. Out of sight out of mind.

I’ve been asking a question for years now that has been studiously been ignored and I expect others have asked it as well. If the North fought the war to abolish slavery as many so-called “history” books inform us then why didn’t the North abolish slavery first in those slave states that remained, for one reason or another, tied to the Union? If abolition was the North’s true intent, shouldn’t they have done that? Yet they didn’t. When West Virginia seceded from Virginia to remain in the Union she entered the Union as a slave state, not a free state.

There were 429,000 slaves in states in Lincoln’s indestructible Union who were kept in bondage until the 15th Amendment freed them after Lincoln’s death. I’m still waiting for an answer as to why they were not freed first if freeing the slaves was the reason for fighting the war. Guess I shouldn’t hold my breath waiting for an answer because that is another of those questions the politically correct will ignore, right?

When a Socialist Became the Secretary of the Interior

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

I have noted in recent articles the impact that socialists and communists had in the history of this country well before the twentieth century–going all the way back to the 1840s. Lots of historians–so called–will seldom, if ever, acknowledge this. Even less will they make mention of the basic socialist foundations of the “conservative” Republican Party. This is history we are not supposed to be taught. And mostly, we aren’t. We have to find this out for ourselves by doing the homework.

One thing that does aid us is that more and more, the socialists are not bashful in admitting their impact on our earlier history. Where the historians ignore it, the socialists brag about it. Donnie Kennedy and I, when we wrote our book Lincoln’s Marxists, the first edition of which was called Red Republicans and Lincoln’s Marxists found this to be true. Incidentally, the first edition of our book is still available.

I just recently came across an article entitled https://worldhistory.us/american-history/impact-of-the-forty-eightors-on-the-amer… that was quite frank in what it admitted. It was published in August of 2018. In part it noted: “For the German-American Forty-Eighters, the best political instrument to ply their revolutionary ideals was the new Republican Party…As a result, the German Forty-Eighters became a significant voting bloc in the Republican Party.

Another German Forty-Eighter, Carl Schurz, a farmer and abolitionist from Wisconsin, helped pave the way for Lincoln’s presidential victory…Schurz mobilized a large part of the German-American vote for Lincoln in the general election…Unfortunately, the German-American reputation as fighters suffered during the course of the war. Schurz, who was awarded with a command by Lincoln, led German-speaking units at the battles of Chancellorsville and Gettysburg. His soldiers retreated pell-mell in those battles.” Germans supplied around 750,000 of the Union’s 2.5 million soldiers. That was in the neighborhood of 30%. Not all of those were Forty-Eighters, but a fair number were.

The article opines that the War of Northern Aggression would have happened whether the Forty-Eighters were there or not but it says “…the outcome might have been a bit different.

As for Carl Schurz, his propensities for socialist activities continued and he ended up becoming the Secretary of the Interior in the Hays administration. Pretty lofty position for a German socialist to occupy in the federal government. In our book Lincoln’s Marxists we provided a bit of information about Schurz and his time in the Interior Department. It was not Schurz at his best.

But even more harm was done by his wife, Margarethe Meyer Schurz. It was she who introduced the idea of kindergartens into America. She was a disciple of Friedrich Frobel, the founder of the Kindergarten movement. It is worth noting that, when the socialist revolutionaries were driven out of Germany and legitimate government was restored, kindergarten were banned in that country. When I first started this blog back in November of 2011 I did an article dealing with the socialist origins of the kindergarten movement. Like so many other socialist agendas it came into existence in the 1800s, not the 1900s in this country. And our children are not the better off for it. Yet, along with the rest of the public school movement we seem to have embraced it.

Now, with Critical Race Theory and the 1619 Project, along with the whole transgender movement some are beginning to see what the public schools have been doing to their children and lots of them don’t like it. Let us hope they realize they need to get their kids out of those indoctrination centers we call public schools.

It should, by now, have begun to dawn on people that a lot of the problems we have in this country were introduced here by European socialists of one stripe or another. And when they arrived they found home-grown American socialists who were more than willing to aid them in the destruction of our God-given liberties. That’s what socialism is really all about.

When a Communist Was the Assistant Secretary of War

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

Many may look at the title of this article and complain that “this has never happened in this country.” Sorry to disappoint you, but it has–and it wasn’t in the 20th century when we had a carefully orchestrated “Cold War.” It was in the 19th century, back when they try to tell us that communism didn’t exist here. They lied to us. It did exist here, but we are not supposed to realize that fact. It doesn’t bode well for the fake historians.

The man this article is about was not a Communist Party member. But he was a communist in this worldview and he ardently supported what they were doing.

By now, those of you that have followed history know who I am writing about–Charles Anderson Dana–the assistant secretary of war under Edwin M. Stanton in the Lincoln administration. Dana was a promoter of the communist worldview going back to the days before the socialist revolts in Europe in 1848.

An interesting article on https://djdnotice.blogspot.com for October 1, 2014 said of Dana that: “Brigadier General Joseph Weydemeyer of the Union Army was a close friend of Karl Marx and Fredrick Engels in the London Communist League (Assistant Secretary of War Charles A. Dana, close friend of Marx, published with Joseph Weydemeyer a number of Communist journals and also ‘The Communist Manifesto,’ commissioned by Karl Marx. As a member of the Communist/Socialist Fourier Society in America, Dana was well acquainted with Marx and Marx’s colleague in Communism, Fredrick Engels. Dana, also, was a friend of all Marxists in the Republican Party, offering assistance to them almost upon their arrival on the American continent.) So there were Marxists in the early Republican Party. Reading most of our current “historians” who would’ve guessed?

Dana was also an author of some note (all the better to propagandize you, my dear). He is reported to have written a book Stanton’s Reporter: Charles A. Dana in the Civil War. He also wrote Proudhon and His Bank of the People,: Being a Defence of the Great French Anarchist,… There’s more to the title but I am not going to print the rest out here. It’s long enough for a short paragraph.

Another book mentioned in the research I located was written by Carl J. Guarneri and is called Lincoln’s Informer: Charles A. Dana and the Inside Story of the Union War. I don’t know where this author is coming from but his book shows there is still interest in Dana. The book Horace Greeley And Other Pioneers of American Socialism by Charles Sotheran notes, on page 291 that “Horace Greeley selected the best managing editor the Tribune ever had, from among the Brook Farm Socialists. This was Charles Anderson Dana, the present editor of the New York Sun. For those who may not know, Brook Farm was a socialist experiment in communistic living that eventually went belly-up as most socialist experiments do. It has been described as a “Unitarian, Humanitarian, and Socialistic experiment.”

Arthur Thompson in his informative book To The Victors Go The Myths And Monuments has noted on page 198 of that book that: “Charles Dana was a vice president of the National Convention of Associations. He was a member of the Proudhonian Club, nicknames the 48ers of America, composed mainly of Americans who had participated in the revolution of 1848-49 in Europe. In 1848 he spent eight months in Europe covering the revolutions for the New York Tribune, and he shared Marx’s views. Dana wrote that the purpose of the uprisings was ‘not simply to change the form of government, but to change for form of society.’ He did more than report. Dana is but one example of reporters who participated in revolutionary activities and then posed as impartial observers…This has long been a tactic of the Left, and continues to this day.” In other words, Charles Dana was part of the 19th century’s “Fake News” media. And let us never forget that it was him who hired Karl Marx to write for Greeley’s newspaper.

So here we have Charles A. Dana, writer, socialist revolutionary, and eventually Assistant Secretary of War under Edwin Stanton. And if you think Stanton was not aware of all this then you gravely underestimate Mr. Stanton. He knew! As sharp and shrewd as Stanton was he would have known all of this and still he pegged Dana as his chief informant. That should tell you something about Stanton as well as Dana. Dana was the perfect example of communist infiltration of the US government in the 19th century. We had plenty of that in the 20th century. I begin to wonder how much the 20th century infiltrators learned from Charles A. Dana.

Communism in America? Go Back to 1850

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

I recently came across an article on https://www.historynet.com that was not new, but was interesting. It was originally published back in 2012, in June of that year, in Civil War Times. I used to read this magazine, but it had been my experience that it did not deal overly much with issues like this, as that was not politically correct at the time (and still isn’t).

Sarah Richardson wrote the article and it dealt with an interview it seems she had with Robin Blackburn, the author of the book An Unfinished Revolution: Karl Marx and Abraham Lincoln. Blackburn is a British historian and former editor of the New Left Review so no one can accuse him of being a paranoid right winger. He brought out some interesting points about Lincoln and Marx. Richardson noted of Lincoln that “Up until the age of 21 he was working without payment for his father. On some occasions his father would hire out his son’s services and even then didn’t hand over the wages.” Blackburn seemed to think this may have affected Lincoln’s views on slavery. It’s possible but it’s hard to say for sure. Although we know from some of Lincoln’s later comments on slavery it was not a major issue in his invasion of the South. He claimed to be preserving the Union (though it was going to be a preservation by force). But he said at one point that if he could preserve the Union by freeing some slaves and not others, he would do it and if he could preserve the Union by freeing none of the slaves he would do that. And his “Emancipation Proclamation in 1862 freed only slaves in Confederate territory. It freed no slaves in Union-held territory.

But the American connection to Marx goes further than Lincoln. Richardson’s article stated: “Marx himself was only 30 when he was caught up in the 1848 revolution, and he edited one of Germany’s main revolutionary newspapers. At that time, he was visited by Charles Dana, an American journalist and managing editor of the New York Daily Tribune. Dana later hired him as the Tribune’s European correspondent, A lot of his research for the Tribune ended up in his famous book Das Capital, published in 1867.”

Donnie Kennedy and I, in our book Lincoln’s Marxists, the first edition of which is still available under the title Red Republicans and Lincoln’s Marxists dealt with Mr. Dana and his communist proclivities at some length. Mr. Dana was a prime mover and shaker in the movement to promote communism in this country in the 1850s. Arthur Thompson, author of the very informative book To The Victors Go The Myths And Monuments also deals with Charles Dana on page 198,givng more info on Dana’s leftist background.

The Tribune published, over the years, something like 450 of Marx’s articles, with at least 300 published under his name, though some researchers claim his helper, Engels, wrote quite a few of these because Marx was just too lazy to write when he often needed to, so Engels stood in the breath often while Marx was daydreaming about ways to save the world (for communism).

After the revolts of 1848 ended, thousands of the leftist revolutionaries involved fled to this country. Many of those kept in contact with Marx and continued their leftist activities by writing for German-language papers in this country, which, over time, eventually influenced many Germans here toward a Marxist point of view.

Richardson noted that “There were about 200,000 German-Americans who fought for the Union, and about 40,000 were in units that had the Germain language as the medium of command.” So these people were over here, supposedly to help the North “free the slaves, and they couldn’t even speak the language. Bet your “history” books never mention any of this! And besides, the idea of leftists fighting to “free” anyone from anything is just ludicrous All you have to do in our day is look at the countries that were enslaved under communism and you begin to understand the communist concept of “freedom.” You are “free” to do what the communists tell you to do or they shoot you or put you in a “re-education” camp” until you see things their way. And if you don’t, then they shoot you!

Richardson then notes that Dana, who had been responsible for getting Marx to write for Horace Greeley’s paper became the assistant secretary of war in 1862. He remained in close contact with good buddies of Marx like Joseph Weydemeyer who later became a general in the Union Army. And also mentioned “Another member of the Communist League in Germany in the 1840 was August Willich, who became a Union general.”

And she made another interesting point from her interview with Blackburn She said “Worth noting, too, that Marx and Lincoln were both influenced by German philosophy–in Lincoln’s case, as transmitted by such writers as Theodore Parker.” Parker was a noted Unitarian. And all the stuff I have read about him never mentioned anything about any German connections–but it now seems there were some.

We have got to begin to realize that communism in America was alive and well in the early 1850s here and that we have been lied to by those faux-historians that tell us you never had a problem with communism in America until the Roosevelt years. Let’s wake up and begin to do the homework ,lest we be victimized even further in our own day.

Taking a Stand

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

April is Confederate History Month and we need to proclaim that without hesitation or apology. When leftist thugs howl about the South seceding so she could keep all her slaves we need to start asking them about those slave states that remained part of the Union all the way up until the 13th Amendment was enacted, months after “honest” Abe was dead and gone. Having never learned any real history most of them won’t know anything about that. You will need to remind them–not that it will shut them up–but it might slow them down a bit if someone has an accurate answer to their tomfoolishness.

Ray H. Shores had an informative article in the recent issue of The Southern Defender. He raised some good points both from a Christian and Southern perspective. He talked about duty calling us and wondered if we would answer. He wrote: “Now more than ever before, duty calls us to take a public stand for Liberty, which is more than just freedom. It’s freedom tied to Biblical principles, where the Founders of the United States and Confederate States took a public stand.”

And he continued: “It’s easy to say that we’ll fight when the going really gets rough–when the goons come for the guns, perhaps. But, what if the goons don’t come for the guns? What if they just make it a crime to use them without a permit–a permit that is rarely approved. We would be wise to remember that the Apostle Peter told Jesus he would stand up to the goons when the going got rough. Later, he cried tears of regret because he failed. Anybody can brag about things he or she will do tomorrow, but brave men and women are taking a stand now.” I have often heard people brag that “They will only get my gun when they pry it from my cold, dead hands.” And I have often wondered how many of those that loudly make this brag will be the first to line up and turn their guns in if push ever comes to shove. Bragging and doing ain’t necessarily the same animal.

At any rate,. Ray gave us a list of things most of us can work at doing right now that may help to forestall the enemies of Christian liberty we are all faced with today. I won’t list them all here but I will give you some of them–the ones that jumped out at me as I read them.

  1. Pray for courage and protection during these times when we confront determined anti-liberty, pro-Communist foes.
  2. In your front yard, on the tallest flagpoles you can afford, raise one or two flags of liberty…This action will embolden your children, your neighbors, and even yourself. Flags are a rallying point, and the sight of them builds courage and reminds the troops of the reason they are fighting…
  3. Only support politicians that are active open champions of the ‘Original Intent’ of the U.S. Constitution and States Rights. Stop supporting weaklings, appeasers and con-men.
  4. Study your Bible and work to repent of real sins instead of sins invented by heretics and Communists, such as the ‘sins” of owning too much property, having too much money, and associating with people of your own choosing. Claim the gender that God gave you at birth. Don’t support the ‘Woke Church’ and churches that adhere to the Communist-created ‘Critical Race Theory’.
  5. Work to purify your mind through learning, and avoid corrupting influences, such as perverted and Communist-inspired television programs…
  6. Work to purify the hearts and minds of your children. Try to avoid putting them into the clutches of Marxist-minded teachers or into schools led by conformists and people who fear the news media more than they love truth and liberty.
  7. Patronize pro-Liberty businesses and websites. Use web browsers, social media and e-mail hosts that are not joined at the hip with the Federal government. Some of the Liberty flags Ray mentioned earlier are The Betsy Ross flag, The Bonnie Blue flag, The Confederate Battle flag, the Confederate First National flag, the Gadsden flag. I did articles about three of these flags awhile back on my https://thecopperhead.blogspot.com site–a site that has been seriously shadow-banned because I refuse to be politically correct. Hopefully this brief article will encourage some of you to take note of and celebrate Confederate History Month.

Lincoln & the Forty-Eighters

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

Yesterday, March 2nd, I did an interview with Cliff Kincaid for one of his you tube presentations. It was mostly on Donnie Kennedy’s and my book Lincoln’s Marxists. Hopefully I was able to give Cliff my take on the communist influence in this country in the years both before and after 1848. I don’t do a lot of these interviews so I am always concerned that I do not do well enough on them. Cliff had read our book and so was mostly in agreement with the history of socialism in this country that we presented.

However, in doing some preliminary research for this interview, I read an article by a man who claimed that Marx’s influence on Lincoln was pretty minimal and he took to task a writer who dared to disagree with that. He claimed that Lincoln just reading Karl Marx’s articles in utopian socialist Horace Greeley’s New York Tribune would not have been enough to reinforce Lincoln’s views on socialism. While I don’t totally agree with that, I got the impression he was trying to soft-pedal Lincoln’s socialist worldview–something Lincoln-lovers dearly want to hide.

In doing more research on this I came across an article by a John Nichols published in the International Socialist Review https://isreview.org that was quite informative. The socialists do not hesitate to identify with Lincoln as he was, in a sense, one of them. Mr. Nichols noted, in part, that Greeley’s Tribune was one of the papers delivered to Lincoln’s law office in Springfield and that Lincoln was “Keenly aware of the rising tide of liberal, radical, and socialist reform movements in Europe, a tide that would peak–at least for a time–in the ‘revolutionary wave’ of 1848 and its aftermath, the young congressman joined other American Whigs in following the development of that year’s ‘Springtime of the Peoples’ which saw uprisings against monarchy and entrenched economic, social and political power in Germany, France, Hungary, Denmark and other European nations. For Lincoln, however, this was not a new interest.” That was an interesting comment there at the end. It indicated that Lincoln was familiar with the socialist upheaval going on in Europe.

Nichols continued: “Long before 1848, German radicals had begun to arrive in Illinois, where they quickly entered into the legal and political circles in which Lincoln traveled. One of them, Gustav Korner, was a student revolutionary at the University of Munich, who had been imprisoned by German authorities in the early 1830s for organizing illegal demonstrations.” Korner ended up in Illinois where “Within a decade he would pass the Illinois bar, win election to the legislature and be appointed to the state Supreme Court. Korner and Lincoln formed an alliance that would become so close that the student revolutionary from Frankfurt would eventually be one of seven personal delegates-at-large named by Lincoln to serve at the critical Republican State Convention in May 1860, which propelled the Springfield lawyer into that year’s presidential race. Through Korner, Lincoln met and befriended many of the German radicals who, after the failure of the 1848 revolution, fled to Illinois and neighboring Wisconsin. Along with Korner on Lincoln’s list of personal delegates-at-large to the 1860 convention was Friedrich Karl Franz Hecker…” He gets prominent mention in Lincoln’s Marxists.

And Nichols also noted: “The failure of the 1848 revolts, and the brutal crackdowns that followed, ;led many leading European radicals to take refuge in the United States, and Lincoln’s circle of supporters would eventually include some of Karl Max’s closest associates and intellectual sparring partners, including Joseph Weydemeyer and August Willich…Lincoln did not merely invite the 48ers to join his campaigns, he became highly engaged with their causes.”

So what do Nichols’ comments here tell you about where Lincoln was really at? It would appear that the 48er influence on Mr. Lincoln, due to his socialist proclivities, was much stronger than most writers would have us believe. When theologian James Henley Thornwell referred to “Red Republicans” back in the 1850s it would seem he knew what he was talking about. Wonder how much he knew about “Honest Abe.”