Culture Destroyers, Leftist Ignoramuses, Useful Idiots-all in high gear

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

Some one sent me a copy  of an article from The Gateway Pundit website yesterday, August 17th, which I thought was poetic justice.  The article began by saying this: “Make no doubt about it–This is Marxist revolution in America today. Fed by media lies, radical community organizers and millions of dumb leftists.”

It turns out that a group of ignoramus Leftists in Chicago have torched a statue of Abraham Lincoln, even though he supposedly “freed the slaves” which he really didn’t. Now either these Leftists are totally ignorant–or, on the other hand, maybe a handful of them have read Donnie Kennedy’s and my book Lincoln’s Marxists which gives the lowdown on where Lincoln really was racially (if they can even read)–and if they graduated from Chicago public schools that’s a big “if.”

As I said, I found this an instance of poetic justice. Lincoln, the Marxist lover, has his statue torched by Chicago Marxists! That has got to be a hoot for people who know what the political game really is. Do I endorse their doing that to his statue? No. I am no Lincoln lover by any stretch of the imagination, but I don’t endorse vandalizing monuments and statues, even of people I don’t like. If we start doing that we are no better than our adversaries on the Left.

So the Social Justice Warriors (more Leftists) are definitely on a “remove the statues” kick. They sense cultural victory within their grasp this year and so they are going for broke. But I also noticed an article from Seattle yesterday about a really ugly statue of Lenin there (and I mean this this IS ugly)! However, for some reason the Social Justice Warrior crowd does not have this Lenin statue on their list of monuments that need to come down. They want Washington and Jefferson monuments to come down but they are okay with leaving Lenin up. Could it just possibly be that they agree with what Lenin did to Russia and they want the same thing for us here–Lenin being a beacon of light for them?

And then, back to New Orleans!  You all remember the big fuss there earlier this year over the Confederate statues that had to come down because a handful of Leftists, including the mayor’s black girlfriend, didn’t like them and the mayor decided to use that as a platform to advance his political career. Well, guess what? They are now back for round two and they have a whole bunch of other things they don’t like that now have to either come down or be changed. This is what you get when you try to appease the cultural Marxists–they never quit until your whole history and culture are gone and they own you.

According to an article by Kevin Litten: “Take Em Down NOLA has long said city leaders did not go far enough. They want the statue of Andrew Jackson in Jackson Square taken down, as well as the renaming of streets such as Jefferson Davis Parkway and Robert E. Lee Boulevard. Historian Kelly Porter, who said she was helping Take Em Down with research, said at the press conference that she had identified 13 additional statues and a number of schools, street names, and historical plaques linked to the Confederacy.  All told, more than 100 items could be targeted for removal or renaming, she said.” Did you all get that number–over 100 items changed or removed that are part of your history. Sounds like a thorough cultural purge will be underway in the Big Easy. Does that give you the warm fuzzies??? And do you think they will quit after New Orleans? If you do then you are naive beyond belief and live in la-la land!

I have a generational question for all these Social Justice types. What will they do when, somewhere down the road, others come along that don’t like what they have put up and go to changing it all over again with a whole new set of “heroes” and names?  It wouldn’t be the first time in history that happened. This sort of thing went on back in Egypt during the days of the Pharaohs. It went on during the French Revolution when the Illuminati types tried to remove any reference to God. Guess what? That didn’t work. God is still here–the revolutionaries are not–many of them having kept their appointments with the guillotine.

However, in this country, it is all an ongoing part of the “reconstruction” that started after the War of Northern Aggression. The reconstruction crowd has been trying to remove God and historic white Christian culture from this country, especially in the South, for 150 years now, and they show no sign of letting up. If anything, in recent years, they are ratcheting up their efforts, feeling their opposition is wearing down. Is it?  In 2015 I saw push-back to their efforts to get all Confederate flags taken down. This year I have not seen very much. It’s like most folks down here are just sitting it out, watching the Leftists do their thing–and when they’ve completely dismantled our history and heritage, we’ll sit back and wonder what happened.

Now I don’t endorse anything like this debacle in Charlottesville. That almost seems like a set-up the more you read about it. But it seems to me that we have to find some legitimate way to defend our history and culture while we still have it. Otherwise, we will simply be deprive of it by our doing nothing. Any suggestions?

Is Black Privilege At Colleges On The Way Out?

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

How many of you have been treated to stories and “news” commentaries about “white privilege” until it is literally coming out the kazoo? I have heard and read about it until I am thoroughly sick and tired of it–and most of the black people that try to chastise me with their pontifications about my “white privilege” seem to drive newer cars than we do and many have college educations, which I could not afford. I have often asked the question–just who ended up with all the “privilege?” But, of course, that is the forbidden question and you are automatically “racist” for even thinking it. It is, after all, “thoughtcrime.”  Says who???

It reminds me of the German socialist Donnie Kennedy and I wrote about in Lincoln’s Marxists, who, after the War of Northern Aggression was over, lectured Confederate General Richard Taylor about how to be a “real American.” Naturally his definition of a “real American” (socialist) was somewhat different than ours was.

And so it is with this “white privilege” charade. Many of the black “liberals” (socialists) that I have run across seem to have accrued lots more “privilege” than most white folks I know. It reminded me of when we first came to North Louisiana. I had a hard time finding work at first and one day my wife went to the nearest city and inquired about how you went about getting food stamps on a temporary basis if you were out of work. The lady she talked to was black, but not unfriendly, and she explained to my wife that, in this particular area, if you were not black, you could just about forget about any help. The help was for the black folks, not for the rest of us. So I concluded from that episode, which happened several years ago now, that part of our “white privilege” here was the privilege of being refused help that folks with darker skins got automatically. So please, don’t talk to me about “white privilege” because it’s all a pile of bovine fertilizer and most folks know it even if they don’t dare say it!

Along those lines, I read a New York Times article by a Charlie Savage for August 1, 2017 about the Trump administration preparing to “…redirect sources of the Justice Department’s civil rights division toward investigating and suing universities over affirmative action admissions policies deemed to discriminate against white applicants…The document, an internal announcement of the civil rights division, seeks current lawyers interested in working for a new project on ‘investigations and possible litigation related to intentional race-based discrimination in college and university admissions’.”  Question: if this document was an internal memo, where did the New York Times get a copy of it? Another “leak?”

It seems that this investigation may be run from the division’s front office, rather than the Justice Department’s Educational Opportunities Section. That fact may indicate a serious investigation. Time will tell, so stay tuned.

The Times article noted that Roger Clegg,  who was a former official in the civil rights division under Reagan, and then under Bush, and who is now president of the Center for Equal Opportunity, has said that this new project is a “welcome” and “long overdue” development. Clegg said: “The civil rights laws were deliberately written to protect everyone from discrimination, and it is frequently the case that not only are whites discriminated against now, but frequently Asian-Americans as well.” It’s a good statement, but I’d disagree with him on one point. The civil rights laws were not written to protect everyone–they were written, originally, to encourage exactly what they do now–promote blacks over whites in a typical class struggle scenario–just like “reconstruction” after the War.

Lets be realistic–whites are discriminated  against, in spite of all the Leftist howling we hear from the Swamp to the contrary. I know of one company, right here in Louisiana that had a job opening a few years back. Folks from all races signed up to take the testing program for this job. I was told that the whites who took the test got higher scores than did most of the others–and when that fact became obvious to the test administrators, what they did was simply to pitch all the test results and start over with an entire new group of possible candidates, one that was more “racially inclusive” (meaning a black majority) and they went from there. So, in that particular case, having “white privilege” meant you got to be excluded from trying out for this job if you scored too high on the test. That seems to be how most of these programs work out.

So, if the Justice Department actually gets to where they can do something about this situation at the university level, then I am all for it. Naturally, the Leftists among us (and there are too many) will scream and moan because one of their pet entitlements may end up being removed (the ability to get in whether you qualify or not).  But that one has been around way too long anyway. I have seen it in operation since the 1960s, before I even had a clue as to what it was all about. I’d like to see someone finally begin to deal with it, despite all the ranting about “racism” from those on the Left, who, if the truth be known, are the real racists.

“Cump” Sherman–A Yankee/Marxist Prototype of the cultural Marxist

by Al Benson Jr.

Anyone who has read any amount of the material I have written, either in my newsletter The Copperhead Chronicle or in articles on the Internet,  knows that I have employed the term Yankee/Marxist on more than one occasion. One of my readers, one time, asked me if using the term Yankee/Marxist wasn’t redundant. He had a point. However, my use of the term, redundant though it may be, is to amplify in people’s minds the truth that the Yankee, for the most part, has a Marxist worldview. He mostly has no use for the God of the Bible, whose Son and Holy Spirit he would vociferously deny, and he has no use for the concept of private property (except his own) and his agenda during the War of Northern Aggression was always “steal all you can carry off and destroy the rest. I suppose it needs to be stated here that by the term “Yankee” I am not referring to all Northerners, of which, though I have a Confederate ancestor, I am one.

The Yankee/Marxist’s was to “free the slaves” was a noble-sounding rationale and cover for his rape and pillage of the South, on several different levels, and his main effort was to make sure that his “god” in Washington (the federal government)  was forever worshiped and bowed down to. His cultural Marxist progeny today will even admit this if you pay strict attention to what they say.  One of the more well-known among them, Newt Gingrich, recently made a statement on television in which he said: “We fought a civil war to establish one sovereignty, the U.S. government.” Well, so much for “freeing the slaves” right? That was a good cover story, but Mr. Gingrich slipped up when he told the truth here–and tell the truth he did!

The Yankee/Marxist simply could not abide freedom and liberty for anyone. Everyone needed to be totally regulated and constantly supervised–for his own good naturally. He had an overriding compulsion to control people’s lives and make them do what he felt was the right thing–even if they did not feel like doing what he thought was right and proper, why then, he’d work to pass a law that made people do what he wanted. After all, he knew best. His cultural Marxist children still do the same thing today. Obama Care is a prime example and firearms registration (and eventual confiscation) is yet another.

That William Tecumseh Sherman shared this worldview can be seen from many of his comments over the years. In his book Citizen Sherman Michael Fellman has duly noted Sherman’s propensity toward military dictatorship on pages 80, 87, 131, 147, and 184.

Presently, I am in the midst of reading an interesting book by Winston Groom called Vicksburg 1863 in which Mr. Groom details all that went on in the Yankee attempt(s) to capture Vicksburg during the War. It was quite an extensive operation that lasted over a year  and went into several attempts by various methods, to take the city (all of which failed) until the final siege of the city ended it all. Sherman figured prominently in some of these efforts.

In discussing Southerners and their resistance to Northern “benevolence” Sherman said: “This is a larger class than most men supposed and they are the most dangerous set of men this war has turned loose upon the world. They are splendid riders, first-rate shots, and utterly reckless. These men must all be killed or (imprisoned) by use before we can hope for peace.” A quote from page 34. You will note that Sherman’s “final solution” to dealing with anyone that did not conform to his will was extermination. He took the same tack with the Indians in the West after the War was over (if they don’t do what we want then kill ’em all). Ol’ Cump Sherman was a real humanitarian–in the same mode as Joseph Stalin–who may have learned some lessons from Sherman.

It bothered Sherman that, when the Yankees took Memphis, most folks there were not real happy at his arrival in their fair city. If they expressed that in any tangible way, he retaliated,  gentle soul that he was. Mr. Groom noted: “First he threatened to close any church–and this included virtually all of them–whose minister or priest refused to offer a Sunday prayer to the president of the United States, whom they reviled. Next he began expelling from their homes the wives and families of rebel soldiers and sympathizers in reprisal for Confederates shooting at Union gunboats operating on the Mississippi…On September 24th he ordered the town of Randolph, Tennessee burned to the ground in retaliation for people firing on U.S. vessels and also, for the same reason, commanded the immolation of all homes, farms and outbuildings for fifteen miles down the Arkansas side of the river opposite Memphis.” And Mr. Groom noted, in this context, “These seem to be the earliest of Sherman’s pyromaniacal  urges in connection with Southern civilians and their property, but by a long shot they were not his last.” This quote from page 182. It almost seems like an understatement!

After reading some of the other things Sherman did during the War, I seriously wonder if he wasn’t a closet pyromaniac and the War gave him an opportunity to flaunt his aberrant behavior that he had not had previously–and after all, it was only Southern private property, along with war material, that he destroyed, and only Southerners that he turned out to starve and freeze when his bummers burned everything they couldn’t carry away. No problem there, right?  Naturally the authors of what passes for our “history” books don’t feel anyone really needs to know all this, so they just leave most of it out, except for a vague reference here or there, the same way they leave out all the information about all the Marxists in Lincoln’s armies, and in the Republican Party. Nothing to see here folks, just move along, and don’t look too close!

So Sherman may not have been, technically speaking, a cultural Marxist.Most of those we refer to as cultural Marxists did not enter the picture until the early 1900s with the advent of the Frankfurt School, as we have noted in other articles, but Sherman was most definitely a Yankee/Marxist and they can rationally be considered as the 19th century prototype for the cultural Marxists that were to follow them.

The aim of the cultural Marxists is to water down and ultimately destroy Christianity and to rid the world of that horrible curse known as Western Civilization, which has its base in Christianity. This is one reason the cultural Marxists never quit. Their agenda calls for the destruction of the Christian faith and its Triune God and replacing the Trinity with their own “god,” a collectivist, centralized tyranny that they call the “revolution of the proletariat.”  And lest you think this is a new struggle within the past 100 years or so, or even back as far as the French Revolution, this struggle goes all the way back to Genesis 3 in the Holy Bible.

Reprinted from The Copperhead Chronicle,  fourth quarter, 2016

Please Pass the Planned Poverty

by Al Benson Jr.

How many folks chanced to drive through parts of the South in the 1950s, 60s and even in the early 70s and noted how poor the country seemed to be compared with other areas of the United States? Many probably wondered why the South couldn’t seem t do better that it was doing. To say that the South, in our lifetime, was and is the poorest part of the country, with the possible exception of Indian reservations, is no exaggeration. And yet, knowing some of the reasons for that and the history behind it, my wife and I, now living in Louisiana, would not willingly go back north to live. The South is home, and we have been more content here than just about any other place we’ve lived, for several reasons.

There are reasons for the poverty in much of the South and for the poor whites and blacks that live in it, and in many cases the poverty is not their fault. It was intended for them to live that way by those that sought to conquer them during and after the War of Northern Aggression and by the descendants of those conquerors who, even today, enjoy rubbing their faces in the planned poverty that is supposed to be their due because their ancestors had the temerity to stand up and “dare defend their rights.” Such is not to be tolerated in the cultural Marxist milieu.

To explain some of this, Ron and Donnie Kennedy have a new book out called Punished With Poverty published by Shotwell Publishing in Columbia, South Carolina http://www.ShotwellPublishing.com  which I would recommend to any and all who wonder why the South has been in the particular situation we have found her in today. About the best way I can say it (excuse my bluntness) is that those collectivist types that overran the South during and after the War planned it that way. If Southern people were too poor and beaten down to fight back again, why there would be no future resistance to what would eventually morph into what we call the New World Order.

To quote the Kennedy Brothers: “Several years ago and elderly friend of the Kennedy Twins told a story about how his grandmother  often stated that ‘those people tried to starve all of us to death after the War.’ Two things struck me about this man’s story: First, his grandmother lived in North Central Louisiana, a section of the South that was not even physically touched by the War; second, his grandmother was not talking about starvation as a result of military action in and around her home but the actions of ‘those people,’ that is, Yankees, well after the War. The war was over, what happened to the idea of ‘with malice toward none,’…” If you’ve read the history you know what happened to it. It was nice Lincolnian  political rhetoric and that’s all it was.

And the Kennedys noted also: “(A) leading Northern newspaper called for a terrible retribution against Southerners: ‘We mean to conquer them,  Subjugate them…’ Never would traitors be permitted to ‘return to peaceful and contented homes’; instead they ‘must find poverty at their firesides and see privation in the anxious eyes of mothers and the rags of children.” Now isn’t this just an ennobling Northern sentiment? Somehow this isn’t quite the picture of the noble, generous and forgiving Yankees that i was taught about in my public indoctrination center’s “history” books.  The Kennedys ask the question: “Did the nation that spawned the articles quoted above, calling for Northerners  to ‘conquer and subjugate’ the South and leave the future generations of Southerners to ‘find poverty at their firesides and see privation in the anxious eyes of mothers and the rags of children,’ institute a Reconstruction policy that fulfilled these hideous propositions? One final question that must be asked: Is the policy of impoverishment and subjugation of Southerners an ongoing political policy of modern America?” How can you answer that question any other way but “Hell, Yes.”

The Kennedys also observed that: “For Northerners who view themselves via standard establishment propaganda as grand defenders of the downtrodden and promoters of freedom, reading about how the war against the South was instituted in order to secure profits and power for the North’s ruling elite, will not be gleefully embraced.” While that is understandable, in view of what we were all taught in public indoctrination centers, if some of the Northern folks want to really grasp what the War was all about then they are going to have to start embracing what the Kennedys talk about here–gleefully or otherwise.

There is so much in this book that I can’t do more than scratch the surface here, but in the words of the late Alan Stang,  when he reviewed Donnie’s and my book, Lincoln’s Marxists, in regard to Punished With Poverty, “You need to read this book!” I will be passing more information out of Punished With Poverty along as the Lord enables.

Louisiana Had (and Has) Precious Little to Thank Washington For

by Al Benson Jr.

Have just finished reading Richard Taylor and the Red River Campaign of 1864 by Samuel W. Mitcham Jr. It was a very informative book on the infamous Red River Campaign (and Union cotton-stealing expedition) in Louisiana in the Spring of 1864.

Union General (and presidential aspirant) Nathaniel (Commissary) Banks led a Union army of over 30,000 men, which included several U S Navy boats and Commodore David Dixon Porter in a campaign to capture Shreveport, Louisiana for the glorious Union. The Navy folks and their vessels were supposedly along to aid General Banks in this effort, but most of them were much more interested in “appropriating” as much Louisiana cotton as they could get their hands on. Made no difference whether it was cotton owned by the Confederate government or privately-owned cotton, as the Navy got a cut out of whatever they managed to “confiscate.”

Opposing this Northern redistribution of Southern wealth by Lincoln’s “indestructible” Union was General Richard Taylor and a little over 5,000 men, mostly from Louisiana, Texas and Arizona. Believe it or not, with over 30,000 men and the help of the U S Navy, Banks couldn’t get it done, and Dick Taylor, as they say here in Louisiana, “whupped his ass.”

After he got as far as Mansfield and got solidly beaten there, Banks started his retreat back south. But at first he refused to call it a retreat, rather he labeled it a “retrograde” movement. That’s Yankee/Marxist language for a retreat without coming out and admitting it. However, the Yankee/Marxist soldiers who had been legitimately defeated at Mansfield were going to make sure they got back at the folks in Louisiana because they tried to defend their homes and property. Louisiana folks hadn’t learned that when the Yankee/Marxists come calling then defending your home and property is a no-no. Yankee/Marxists have no use whatever for private property–unless they can steal it, and naturally they always steal it for “the people.”

According to Mr. Mitcham, Confederate Lt. Col. Francis Richard Lubbock wrote: “The demoralized enemy in their retreat left no houses or fences, stock or supplies, behind them.  Everything of any possible value was taken or destroyed.” And Elias P. Pellet of the 114th New York Volunteers was honest enough to agree with Lubbock in his history of the 114th Regiment when he wrote: “Destruction and desolation followed on the trail of the retreating column. At night, the burning buildings mark our pathway. As far as the eye can reach, we see in front new fires breaking out, and in the rear the dying embers tell the tale of war. Hardly a building is left unharmed…The wanton and useless destruction of property has well earned (A. J. Smith’s) command a lasting disgrace…” A. J. (Whiskey) Smith was one of the Yankee/Marxist commanders under Banks and he had that nickname because he was rather too fond of the bottle.

Mr Mitcham also write: “To deprive both Rebels and civilians of food and water, wells were fouled and animals were shot, including cows, calves, hogs, horses, chickens, and mules. Houses, barns, corncribs, smokehouses, chicken coops, and Negro cabins were all burned.” It seems that “Firebug” Sherman in Georgia was not the only Yankee/Marxist arsonist during the War. It was probably a toss-up between Whiskey Smith and Phil Sheridan in Virginia as to who would get second place to Sherman. This commentary regarding Yankee arsonism is on page 250 of Mr. Mitcham’s book. He continues with more of the same on pages 259-60. Not fun reading unless you are a Yankee arsonist. They literally destroyed everything in their path even when it had no military value. You have to understand, they were making war on civilians as well as soldiers, and what’s more, they seemed to enjoy doing it.

On page 306 Mr. Mitcham made a very telling observation, which most folks today would probably not even think about. He wrote: “It took Louisiana almost a century to recover from the war,  and it has yet to recover its previous position. In 1860, it was ranked second in the Union in per capita income, and half of all American millionaires lived along the Natchez-New Orleans axis. Today it ranks forty-first in per capita income…”

The thought occurred to me, as I read this, that, starting with the major cotton theft here in Louisiana and in other places in the South as well, the War of Northern Aggression was one gigantic redistribution of the wealth scheme, not only to destroy our culture but to bleed us dry financially also. Didn’t von Clauswitz say that “war was the pursuit of political goals by ‘other means.'” If the “political goal” is to destroy the South, then for the Yankee/Marxist, war is a legitimate option.

You might say that this was the “Neanderthal version” of cultural Marxism, along with “reconstruction” later that was to deliver the coup d’ etat to the culture, faith, and financial stability of the South.  They weren’t able to take it quite as far as they would have liked to, but give the Yankee/Marxists credit–they did their absolute best to contribute to our destruction and demise as a distinct people–and they are still working on that as I write this.

Our problem is that the majority of our folks don’t realize that “those people” are still fighting their war against us. We quit fighting. They didn’t! All they did was to change their tactics. We are seeing the latest development of their new tactics in our day.

To their way of thinking the War will not be over until they have completely destroyed us, our faith and culture. They want our grandchildrens’ souls in their hip pocket. That’s a truth we have to begin to realize and so far, I don’t think we’ve grasped it yet.

The South and the West–Targets for cultural destruction

by Al Benson Jr.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Illuminists, Apostates, Spiritualists–the usual suspects–All Interlocking

by Al Benson Jr.

The title of this article should give you some idea of where we are headed. As we look at the Illuminati and its continuing influence, even down to today,  we have to note that much of their effort was (and is) directed at reaching the next generation or two and, through them, continuing to reach into the future. As evil as they were, they had a multi-generational approach to keeping their worldview, their religious faith as it were, alive and well. More Christians should take a multi-generational approach to making sure their children and grandchildren learn the truth. However, the Illuminist conspirators have taken great pains to make sure this does not happen by the way their minions have worked at neutralizing most churches with erroneous information and just plain bad doctrine. So the church ends up being neutered and what should be opposition to Illuminist efforts withers on the vine.

In his book A Theological Interpretation of American History C. Gregg Singer, once on the faculty of Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, where he served as Professor of Church History and Historical Theology, has noted: “After 1830 there was a growing philosophical and theological cleavage between the North and the South.  While the North was becoming increasingly subject to radical influences, the South was becoming increasingly conservative in its outlook.” He observed that Old School Presbyterianism had begun to take a strong stand against the abolitionist position, “…not because it was opposed to slavery per se, but because of the philosophy and theology which it represented, and because they clearly saw that if this radicalism were to gain the supremacy in the national government, then there must certainly come in its wake a radical political and social program which would threaten the established order and constitutional government for the nation as a whole.” He took note of Rev. John Henley Thornwell’s commentary on this where Thornwell said: “The parties in this conflict are not merely abolitionists and slave-holders–they are atheists, socialists, communists,  red republicans, Jacobins on the one side and the friends of order and regulated freedom on the other.In one word, the world is the battleground–Christianity and atheism the combatants, and the progress of humanity is at stake.” Thornwell wrote this in 1850. The War of Northern Aggression was a decade away yet, but with amazing prescience, he saw what was coming and he recognized many of the adversaries. Rev. Benjamin Morgan Palmer called the abolitionist mindset “undeniably atheistic”  and he connected it with the French Revolution. These godly men saw the problem and recognized some of those involved, but did they grasp the fact that there was a guiding hand in back of the Jacobins, socialists, atheists and the rest that moved them all to do what they were doing in concert? Whether they did or not, it’s a question we ought to consider, for it is still applicable in our day when we look at some of the groups and individuals that perform radical acts on the contemporary scene.

We can all look at the Black Panthers, Black Lives Matter, the Southern Poverty Law Center and even the Ku Klux Klan in our day and ask the question–where does the money and direction come from for these groups to do what they do, and who behind the scenes that we never hear about gives them their marching orders? Because no matter how you try to cut the mustard, what most of these groups do is not spontaneous.  I watched so-called “anti-war” groups in action on two college campuses right after the Kent State shootings back in the early 1970s, when you had some of the most well-organized “spontaneous” demonstrations you ever saw, complete with propaganda printed in North Viet Nam for protesting American students to carry and hand out. And this stuff came to at least one of these schools by the box load because I brought a box full of it home at the time and went through it. So please don’t talk to me about “spontaneous.” I’ve been there–and “spontaneous” it ain’t!

It was no different after the War of Northern Aggression. Arthur Thompson has noted in his authoritative book To The Victor Go The Myths And Monuments that: “The practice of sending the worst sort of political radicals and members of secret societies as our representatives continued after the Civil War. These men represented the U.S. government, but not necessarily the American people.The Marxist Louis Blenker was appointed our man in Nantes, France. Alexander Asboth, who had served with Kossuth in 1848, was our man in Argentina and Uruguay…After serving as secretary of war and then attorney general under Grant, co-founder of the Order (of Skull and Bones)  Alphonso Taft was appointed U.S. minister to Austria and then Russia…(Carl) Schurz, after supporting a movement to annex Canada to the United States, became active in the anti-imperialism movement.” Makes you wonder if Schurz  was an early advocate of the present-day North American Union movement. Three of the four men mentioned here were Forty-eighters that Donnie Kennedy and I dealt with in our book Lincoln’s Marxists.  Only Alphonso Taft wasn’t–and he was co-founder of the Skull and Bones society which is still alive and flourishing today. Look up Skull and Bones on the Internet. You should find some interesting reading.

If you are able to get Mr. Thompson’s book, and I hope that many will, you will find an amazing list of people belonging to abolitionist, Spiritualist, socialist and Feminist groups mentioned and there are interlocking memberships and directorates in all these groups so that when you learn what to look for you can begin to see a pattern here of a small but influential clique of people belonging to different groups, which often seem at odds with each other, but are really not. You start to see the same names over and over again in the different groups and you cannot help but come away with the distinct impression that you really have one fairly small clique exerting tremendous influence  over many groups, and therefore many people. Such cannot be accidental or coincidental.

And this continued on into the twentieth century (and beyond).  Mr. Thompson mentioned prohibition and the  Prohibition Party, one of the founders of which was Alvan Bovay, one of the founders of the radical Republican Party.  He also noted, in passing, the Women’s Christian Temperance Union, “which was run by the lesbian Frances Willard.” Folks, I swear, you can’t make this stuff up!  In closing out this particular chapter, which majored on Leftist infiltration, Thompson noted: “A unit organized under the American Red Cross later served as a cover for American involvement  in helping to solidify Lenin’s Bolshevik  government in Russia.” I bet your history books forgot to include that one.

Those that wish to get information about Mr. Thompson’s book can contact: American Opinion Publishing, 750 N. Hickory Farm Lane, Appleton, Wisconsin 54914. Don’t think that the Illuminati is dead just because you don’t see the name floating around anymore. Rather, look at the myriad of other organizations out there today, no matter what their names, that promote anti-Christianity, One World Government, socialism, and all those agendas dear to the heart of any Illuminist.