Unitarian/Socialist Influence On Public Schools

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

The recent June 21st issue of The New American magazine is a special report on education in America. The people that publish The New American realize that the major problem we have with education in this country is the public school system. An informative article by Alex Newman in this issue is entitled Government Schools vs. Christianity. Among other things Alex Newman noted: Despite the myth of religious ‘neutrality’ and ‘secular’ schooling perpetrated by the government school establishment and its apologists, all education is fundamentally religious in nature. That is just as true in government schools across the United States as it is in Islamic madrassas of Pakistan. The only question is what what religion and what worldview is being taught.” This is a cogent truth that most people, Christians included, never seem to grasp.

Newman goes on to observe that “non-Christians and anti-Christians with communist leanings were primarily responsible for the government takeover of education in America beginning in the mid-1850s…The gradual replacement of Christianity in the public schools began early on in the history of government-run education. It started with Communist Utopian Robert Owen, the first serious advocate of a total government takeover of education in America. In Owen’s view, only government training of children in collectivism from a young age could produce people ready to dispense with private property and live for what he viewed as the greater good of the collective.

Owen’s collective colony in New Harmony, Indiana went belly-up after only a few years, as most of such socialist experiments did in the 1800s. And there were a lot of them here in the 1800s, from Brook Farm to Fruitlands to New Harmony to the Shaker towns in several states, although the Shakers lasted longer than some of the others.

After his dismal failure at New Harmony, Owen teamed up with Orestes Brownson to promote a “secret society modeled on the Carbonari, an early 19th century Italian secret revolutionary society to work toward that goal.” And Newman tells us that the object of this society was “…convincing the public to support a government takeover of education. The second was to get men elected to the legislatures who would help advance that mission. But there was an even more ambitious goal: setting up a national system of compulsory government schools that would exclude all religion.” Brownson said that “The great object was to get rid of Christianity.”

And Unitarian Horace Mann “wanted to get the Bible out of education under the guise of stopping ‘sectarianism’.” Mann was totally opposed to the Calvinist church schools in Massachusetts. Mann was totally opposed to Reformed theology–indeed he had apostatized from it and formed his own creedal statement of how he felt life should be lived and he wanted to foist that apostate world view on the children of Massachusetts.

All of this happened in the early to mid-1800s–not the 1900s! Our problems with public schools go way, way back to their beginnings. You are not going to reform them by going to parent-teacher meetings or running for the local school board or throwing more public money at the public schools under the fallacious guise of “quality education.”

The public school system will not be reformed because it is doing what it s founders intended it to do. Those who say public education has failed do not understand what this system was created to do. Actually, the public schools have been a howling success at what they were created to do–propagandize your children into accepting and embracing the socialist, anti-Christian worldview.

This should be apparent to anyone who engages in serious thought when you see what is being taught in public schools in our day. Our public schools are teaching concepts that Lenin and Mao would love and endorse. Why do you think that so many of our kids are so sold on communism and socialism? Because they are getting it taught to them in school, that’s why. Oh they don’t call it communism. They give it nobler-sounding names like Critical Race Theory and the 1619 Project and a host of others. But what it amounts to is socialist doctrine and propaganda. If you choose to use public schools your kids are being indoctrinated in this stuff.

The articles in this latest issue of the New American advocate that you remove your kids from public schools and work to defund them and I could not agree more. Every new bond issue for public schools that comes up should be voted down. And they would be if only parents started to grasp the agenda of these brain laundries in sufficient numbers.

This Chinese virus that kept so many kids out of school last year allowed parents to get a look at at least some of what was being taught in schools and lots of parents did not like what they saw. Enrollments in public schools are down this year in many states, even here in Louisiana. Home school enrollment is on the rise–and that is good. We need to continue this trend.

More parents need to begin to grasp what the public school system is really all about, particularly Christian parents. Their primary goal is robbing your children of their faith and turning them into good, compliant little collectivists. Despite the efforts of some good teachers, that is the objective of the public school system and those that promote it, and people need to start figuring that out.

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.

Communist and Socialist Influence In the “News Media” Since the 1840s


by Al Benson Jr.
Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

How many think the “news” media has only been a problem for the past few decades, from sometime around the 1950s until now? If this is what you believe then you have already swallowed half of their lie. In fact, the “news” media–so called–has been a propaganda organ of the Deep State from sometime in the 1840s. And always with a leftist slant!


If you are doing the homework you can begin to notice this in the late 1840s with some of the coverage given to the 1848 socialist and communist revolts in Europe by Horace Greeley’s paper the New York Tribune. Articles by Charles A. Dana for Greeley’s paper purported to cover what was going on at that time in Europe. What they didn’t tell you was that Dana was actually participating in those socialist revolts and then sending back “news” that made them look good. This is a tactic that has been used by the Left ever since then and it must work because lots of naive people seem to buy into such gobbledygook

.
This was particularly noticeable in the left-of-center coverage given to abolitionist/terrorist John Brown. The book John Brown’s War Against Slavery by Robert E. McGlone observed that: “To call the role of abolitionist correspondents in Kansas is to compile a list of John Brown’s admirers and disciples: James Redpath, Thomas Wentworth Higginson, William Addison Williams, Richard J. Hinton, Richard Realf, John Henry Kagi, and others. Just twenty in 1855 when he came to Kansas, Scottish-born James Redpath was a correspondent for three Republican papers, including Greeley’s New York Tribune.”


And he continued: “Englishman Richard J. Hinton, another reporter for Eastern newspapers, arrived in Kansas in June 1856. He soon joined Brown’s ‘army’ and later claimed he would have been at Harpers Ferry had he been properly informed on the date of the attack. Richard Realf reported for Eastern papers and rode with (James) Lane before volunteering to serve under Brown. John H. Kagi, Brown’s second in command at Harpers Ferry reported on Kansas for the Washington National Era..Kagi was the associate editor of the Topeka Tribune…”


Then there was leftist Unitarian Thomas Wentworth Higginson, the man who was “always ready to invest money in treason.” McGlone tells us that “His ‘letters from Kansas’ ran in several Eastern and Midwestern newspapers over the signature ‘Worcester’.” Do you begin to get the idea that John Brown was top-heavy with “news” correspondents? Obviously the political and theological Left had big plans for Brown and his agenda or he would not have rated this much “news” coverage.


But McGlone hasn’t told you everything. Whether that was on purpose or not I can’t say, so I will give him the benefit of the doubt. To fill in some of the missing bits of info, we need to go to Arthur Thompson’s book To The Victors Go The Myths And Monuments. Mr. Thompson can always be depended on to give some what most of the rest leave out. He notes, of Brown that: “Brown also had veteran 48ers Charles Kaiser, August Bondi, and Charles W. Lenhardt who rode with him in Kansas, and the Chartist (English socialist) Richard J. Hinton. Many short histories of Brown leave out any reference to the majority of the aforementioned men. Brown was admired by Emerson, Thoreau, Theodore Parker, Gerrit Smith, Dr. Samuel Howe, and Frederick Douglas Frederick Douglas was close enough to Brown that Brown confided in him the location of what would become the raid on Harpers Ferry. After the raid, Douglas also fled temporarily to Canada for fear that he would be prosecuted for abetting. The official story is that he was worried about guilt by association. Actually, evidence captured at the time in the possession of John Brown implicated Gerrit Smith, Joshua Giddings, and Douglas…The membership in a wide variety of conspiratorial organizations just among the men who rode with Brown indicates a broad-based influence within the Left.


So you can see that the Left had plans to use Brown and his agenda for their own purposes. Brown was the cannon fodder for part of their leftist revolution in this country. So please, you folks on the left, please don’t continue to bleat about how communism was no problem in this country until Roosevelt. You are trying to defraud us of 100 years of your active agenda in this country in the hope that we will not pick up on it. Sad to say, for you, it isn’t working anymore.

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.

Critical Race Theory and The Local Public School

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

In March of 2021 writer Christopher F. Rufo did an article for Hillsdale Colleges’ publication Imprimis in which he dealt with Critical Race Theory and its origins. I can’t deal with it all here. It is long and informative and you may be able to find it on the internet–if it hasn’t been censored off by now. For my purposes here I will give you a brief quote. Mr. Rufo noted that: “Critical race theory is an academic discipline, formulated in the 1990s, built on the intellectual framework of identity-based Marxism. Relegated for many years to universities and obscure academic journals, over the past decade it has increasingly become the default ideology in our public institutions.” One of those public institutions is the public school system and Critical Race Theory is, regardless of what some try to tell us, alive and unfortunately well in our public school systems in America.

I read an article for May 24th on https://www.thegatewaypundit.com which observed: “In Cherokee County, Georgia there was a grassroots victory at the school board level as concerned parents convinced their elected school board members, on the spot, to prohibit the implementation of Critical Race Theory and the 1619 Project based on their concerns. .According to (a) reader, interest in the topic of CRT and the 1619 project was intense and concerned citizens overfilled the building where the school board meeting was held and many had to be out in the parking lot:..The school board voted 4-1, with two abstentions to approve a resolution to prohibit implementation of critical race theory and the 1619 Project..from being taught in Cherokee schools. Groups of concerned parents , teachers, students, and other concerned citizens around the country are organizing similar resistance to the Marxist teaching style and learning aids called CRT, with lobbying efforts at their school board and local government levels, seeking similar resolutions to have it banned from public schools.”

Now, let me ask a question here–have any of you older folks ever seen a situation similar to this? To some of us who have lived in West Virginia, this is a carbon copy of the beginning of the Kanawha County Textbook Protest that took place in that county in West Virginia during the mid-to-late 1970s. The Kanawha County school board, with the exception of the one honest lady on it, Alice Moore, tried to foist off a set of really raunchy textbooks on the students in that county. The parents in Kanawha County protested, picketed the schools, marched, and contacted their political leadership at the state and local levels–and no one could, or would, help them. And there was no help forthcoming at the federal level because it is the federal level that is responsible for what your kids are spoon-fed at the local level. Anyone trying to tell you different is either naive or a liar. Everything in public schools is filtered through the grid of the federal Department of Education, except maybe the times the kids are allowed to have recess. Local control of public education is a vaunted myth that should have died out after the feds put down the textbook revolt in West Virginia , using whatever methods they needed to.

So I will say this to the good folks in Cherokee County, Georgia. You have put off the implementation of Critical Race Theory in your public schools–for now! However, if you don’t keep your eye on your local school board, and think you have won this fight for good and all, then somewhere down the road, this “educational” Marxist construct will resurface once the parents quit watching out for it. It may come back with a different name to throw parents off track but it will be back–just as sure as the turning of the earth!

In order to prevent your kids from again facing the probability of being subjected to this Marxist drivel posing as education you would be better advised to remove your kids, if at all possible, from the public school system and either find a good Christian school or teach them at home. For those willing to make the sacrifice this can be done. It means learning to accept the responsibility for your own kids’ education rather than leaving the job up to local school educrats who may or may not have your kids’ best interest at heart. This is not a blanket indictment of all who teach or have taught in public school. We have a niece who teaches in one. Rather it is a warming to be alert because there are many in the educational bureaucracy at all levels who view your kids as cannon fodder to the leftist propaganda they intend to shove down their throats as part of the destruction of your culture and history.

Christian parents especially need to hear this, but I fear not many of them will listen. A lot I know never did and they were anxious to even avoid this discussion. Being forewarned, however, is to work toward being forearmed. To all but leftist parents–understand this-the public school system ain’t your friend–it is the culture destroyer of your heritage.

Critical Race Theory and “Woke” Evangelicals

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

I can recall, back in the 1980s, which seems like ancient history now, that one of the evangelical authors that got lots of attention was Os Guinness. Evangelicals raved about his work. At that point I had not read much of what he wrote. At that point he seemed rather apolitical to me and that seemed to be what evangelicals back then liked–someone that was either apolitical or leaned slightly to the left. It was considered in some evangelical circles to be rather avant-garde to lean to the left politically. What many evangelicals did not seem to realize was that all politics is, at root, theological and that politics is only someone’s outworking of his theology. Therefore, if your politics leaned to the left, so did your theology.

Many evangelicals, even today, still have not figured this out.

I have wondered if the evangelicals who loved Os Guinness back in the 80s would still love him today, but I have doubts about that due to a column on https://www.wnd.com/2021/05/evil-critical-race.theory written by Art Moore. Mr. Moore says: “One year ago, few Americans outside of higher education had heard of Critical Race Theory, which contends the concept of race is not biological but rather a culturally invented category designed by white people to oppress people of color. Now, having leaked from its academic lab, CRT is spreading exponentially to school boards, corporate offices the military and governmental agencies…But it’s urgent that citizens of this nation realize that CRT is not merely ‘erroneous teaching’ and that the ‘leak’ was no accident, warns Os Guinness, an Oxford-educated scholar with an unusual cultural and political vantage point. Born to Christian medical missionaries in China where he was a witness of Mao’s communist revolution, Guinness contents that CRT is part of an intentional, systematic, revolutionary movement in America stretching back to the 1930s that intends to replace this unique experiment in ordered liberty with a system responsible for the deaths of more than 100 million people in the 20th century…The so-called ‘cancel culture’ and Critical Race Theory are ‘the fruit’ of what has been described as the ‘long march through the institutions’ and ‘the triumph of cultural Marxism, or neo-Marxism,’ Guinness said in an interview with Eric Metaxas.”

And Moore observed that “Guinness noted that the term ‘long march through the institutions’ was coined by communist student activist Rudi Dutschke in the 1960s. It was popularized by German-American Marxist scholar Herbert Marcuse of the so-called Frankfurt school of critical theory in his 1972 book Counterrevolution and Revolt.”

So this entire thing we have been fed is a communist construct. Moore noted that “The sexual revolution and cultural Marxism, Guinness told Metaxas, are ‘the heirs of the French Revolution.” And Guinness tells us “The tragedy is today we’re switching from the American Revolution to the heirs of the French Revolution, and that switch is disastrous.” Guinness is right on the money here.

Moore noted: “Guinness, a British citizen who has lived in the United States since 1968, said that many evangelical leaders are ‘incredibly naive’ about what is happening today because they don’t see the big picture. He recalled the many Zoom calls with evangelical pastors in which he has participated amid the cultural upheaval following the death of George Floyd. Many of these pastors speak of ‘social justice’ Guinness said, without understanding they have ‘drunk the kool aid’ of cultural Marxism.”

Guinness tells us that “The way of the cultural Marxist, the radical left, is only power, and it makes the problem worse, not better.” Those that understand Marxism know that this is intentional. not coincidental.

As I worked over this article, the thought came to me–where were the Christians when all this has been happening? Sad to say, they were probably out to lunch–a long, prolonged lunch, which is probably where they drank the kool aid of cultural Marxism!

Unless evangelical pastors start waking up to what’s going on and warning their congregations about all this the future of the church in our day is bleak indeed. I know the Lord will win the victory in the end, but I think he wants to use His people to help win that victory. If His people have been put to sleep with cultural Marxist kool aid that victory may take longer than it otherwise would have.

Sorry To Disappoint The Left-Wingers But Southern Heritage Ain’t Dead

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

I realize the scions of the political and theological left have been trying to kill Southern heritage and culture for a long time now, but I have news for them–despite some victories on their part–it ain’t working. Oh, I realize they control the media and most of the educational outlets in the country, but the truth is that people who understand this are just finding ways to get around them. and ignore their diatribes.

April is Confederate History Month and there have been lots of Confederate events around the country that what passes for a news media just ignores. We have one right here in North Louisiana that is routinely ignored by the “news” media called Flags Across the Ouachita. Members from several Sons of Confederate Veterans camps in this area gather one Friday afternoon in April at rush hour on the Lea Joyner Bridge across the Ouachita River with their Confederate flags and display them to the rush hour crowd as they pass on by. The response by the rush hour crowd is overwhelmingly positive with people honking their horns, waving and giving us a thumbs up. They appreciate this display of our (and their) heritage. If response to this event was negative you can bet the “news” media would be on hand to make people aware of that, but since the response is mostly positive they ignore it.

I recently came into possession of a new book called What The Confederate Flag Means To Me published by Sea Raven Press P O Box 1484 Spring Hill, Tennessee 37174-1484. It is an interesting compilation of the thoughts and comments of over 30 different people, not all of them from the South, on what the Confederate flag means to them personally and how they view it in the overall context of American culture.

Two overarching themes come through many of their comments. One is that many folks view the Confederate Battle Flag in a Christian context. The St. Andrews Cross on the battle flag gives it a Christian context for them and Christian meaning for them. I can’t say I disagree. I have some Scottish ancestors as well as a Confederate ancestor and so the St. Andrews Cross is a part of my heritage on both fronts. And I am not ashamed of that–I am thankful for it.

The other theme that is reflected in many of the comments is that the Confederate Flag is recognized as a symbol of resistance to tyranny and “big government.” In today’s context I don’t think that can be argued with. In the main, the people who cannot seem to grasp that are those “useful idiots” that have been spawned and influenced by the leftists in this country.

Years ago those in the patriotic movement in this country recognized their their main adversaries were liberals, socialists, and communists. These are the exact same people who are opposed to the Southern Heritage Movement. That should tell you something. The liberals and socialists are nothing more than “slow communists” who just have not made the full transition over to full-blown Marxism quite yet. But they are working on it whether they even realize it or not.

There is a whole section in the communist “prayer book” on how to combat Southern heritage and the first chapter of that section tells them how to lie about it. Whatever else they have learned they seem to have memorized that first chapter! All they do is lie about us and our heritage and culture. These lies are supposed to shut us up. Mostly they don’t. They make us more determined to promote the truth and expose leftist fables for what they are. The leftists haven’t figured that out yet, but they will someday if given enough time. Our job is to educate ordinary folks and expose leftist lies and liars.

Yankees & Marxists–Birds of a Feather

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

Years ago Dr. Clyde Wilson wrote a series of excellent articles which he titled The Yankee Problem in America. I don’t remember if he ever made this into a book or not, but if he didn’t it would be a good book. You may still be able to locate copies of some of the articles on the internet–if they haven’t been removed under the guise of being politically incorrect, which they thankfully are.

Let me say at the outset, when I refer to Yankees I am not and I repeat, not, talking about everyone born and raised in the North. There are lots of good folks in the North who would not ever qualify as Yankees, nor would most of them want to.

Yankee is not your geographical location on the map. Yankee is a mindset. Let that thought sink in a bit. Some of the most stalwart Southern patriots I have known were born and raised in the North. Those that are still there are good Copperheads. But you have Yankees in the South too. They speak with Southern accents and they eat fried chicken and okra. We refer to them as scalawags because they have sold out their heritage in order to gain some advantage from the Yankee types who control most of the federal government.

I can recall once trying to explain who was a Yankee to a lady from Illinois. When I got through, she said “You are talking about a control freak.” She was right. That’s what a Yankee is. He, or she, wants to totally control what you think, how you live, what you are allowed to believe, what you are supposed to not believe, what you can or can’t do with your own property, etc. You get the message, I hope. If not you just ain’t been paying attention.

During this Chinese-induced pandemic we have suffered through we had one governor in a Northern state that issued “mandates” (which really have no force as laws) that prevented people from going out and planting gardens in their own backyards. Not planting a garden in the backyard was, somehow, supposed to help combat the pandemic. It was never explained quite how that worked, but then the governor never had to. She did it because she felt she could, and for no other reason. I think the Supreme Court in her state eventually said her mandates were too draconian and overturned most of them. But that took awhile and lots of citizens in her state marched and protested before it happened. Had they not it probably never would have happened. The old saying “People deserve what they permit” is probably all too true.

So now you have some idea of how Yankees want to totally run your life. What about the Marxists? What do they really want, in spite of the “news” media telling us how really wonderful they are?

Well, the Marxists, (and there are lots of them in Washington and in your state capitols) have their version of what is best for you (and ultimately for them). They want to totally control what you do. They want to control what you are allowed to see and not see, what you are allowed to believe and what you should not believe, what you can and can’t do with your own property and so on. In other words they want to totally control your entire life. So the question arises–what is the difference between the Yankee and the Marxist? If you look at what they both want there really is not much difference. In fact some Yankees have ended up becoming Marxists because the transition from one to the other causes them no pain or inconvenience at all. Both want government control of your entire existence. They are, in a sense, interchangeable with one another. They want to decide how your children should be educated–what they should learn and what they are not allowed to learn. Public “education” in this country (something advocated by Karl Marx) gives them much of that ability. Private Christian schools are anathema to both the Marxist and the Yankee. They don’t think they should be allowed to exist and if they do then they need to be strongly regulated so all the kids who attend them won’t grow up to be “white supremacists” or Christian patriots. Such must be avoided at all costs if the Yankee/Marxists are to be able to retain their power to run our lives.

The Yankee/Marxist recognizes the Christian faith as his main adversary. Unfortunately, most Christians in our day fail to recognize the Yankee/Marxist as one of their main adversaries because their faith has been neutralized to the point where discernment has been replaced with “feel good” theology. Who do you suppose is responsible for that? When churches post Black Lives Matter banners outside their churches then you have to realize that the faith in that church has been severely compromised. It has become, in effect, an outpost for Marxist revolution. Christians should avoid such churches like the plague because they are a plague on the Christian faith.

Our ability to recognize our adversaries has been watered down. We had better wake up and start to reverse that trend while we still have some ability to do that, lest the day come upon us when that ability is gone.

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.”