Spiritualists, Abolitionists, and Socialists—An unholy trinity

By Al Benson Jr.

Contrary to the politically correct of our era, there are some things the Lord sees as an abomination besides the supposed sin of “white racism.” Deuteronomy 18:10-12 gives us a small sampling. Scripture says: “There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter or a witch, Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer. For all that do these things are an abomination unto the Lord: and because of these abominations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee.”

An Encyclopedia of Religion published by the Philosophical Library in New York in 1945 says of Spiritualism that it is: “A religious-philosophical cult which is given to the study of psychic phenomena and which holds that these are to be explained in terms of discarnate spirits who have a lively interest in the living. Spiritualism was formerly inaugurated (at least in this country) in 1848,…” In 1848, gee, what a surprise! It seems that 1848 was a banner year for all sorts of apostate goings on, from the socialist revolts in Europe that gave us “Lincoln’s Marxists” to the advent of Spiritualism here. Don’t supposed there are any connections do you? Naw, all sheer coincidence—nothing to see here folks, just move along.

I recently came across an interesting site on the Internet (another reason it has to be “regulated” for our own safety and good) called http://www.alternatehistory.com that gives a brief overview of Spiritualism for many of the years in the 19th century. For 1848 it states: “Failed revolutions in Germany and other parts of Europe. The 48’ers, as they are called, are settlers from Germany across the Mid-west. Mostly leftist in their views, some out right Communist, they are open to conversion to the Spiritualist movement, except for the extreme Communists who view all religious ideas as evil. In 1860, they will vote for Lincoln and, some say, turn Iowa, Illinois and Indiana from Douglas to Lincoln, winning the election for him.” Then they go on to 1858: “The Spiritualists support Lincoln in the state election, although he still loses. It is greatly rumored, correctly, that Lincoln is a member of the Spiritualists. Most Abolitionists are Spiritualists, or share some views with them. Mainstream Churches have begun to be influenced by the Spiritualists, mostly in ideas of Mediumship…1859—Spiritualist John Brown leads a revolt of slaves at Harper’s Ferry. It fails.” Brown was an abolitionist/terrorist, but I’ve never heard of him being a Spiritualist up to this point. But the article continues: “1860—American Civil War. Volunteers from the Midwest introduce ideas of Spiritualism to other groups of people. 1 out of 4 Union soldiers are foreign born, a majority of which are German Spiritualists. One such German Spiritualist is Charles Schurz.” I think, here, the author must be referring to Carl Schurz because I couldn’t find a Charles Schurz anywhere having to do with that time period. Although I did find one reference which mentioned that he had a sister in Chicago that was into Spiritualism. And in researching for this article I came across a book, The Psychic Life of Abraham Lincoln written by a Susan B. Martinez, and it listed some of Lincoln’s friends who were Spiritualists—and on the list were Robert Dale Owen, Harriet Beecher Stowe, Frederick Douglas, and Carl Schurz. This is the first I ever heard of Schurz being a Spiritualist—if this is accurate. When Donnie Kennedy and I did our research for Lincoln’s Marxists we came across a ton of information on Carl Schurz. We still have it, filed along with documentation on all the 48’ers we wrote about in our book, and I don’t recall seeing anything about Schurz having a connection with Spiritualism. Author Ann Braude in her book Radical Spirits doesn’t mention Carl Schurz either, and she pretty well covered the Spiritualist Movement in this country during the 19th century—from a positive viewpoint.

Braude noted that: “Radical abolitionists, in turn, found in Spiritualism a religion in harmony with their individualist principles. Abolitionist’s interest in both woman’s rights and Spiritualism derived from their fierce loyalty to the principle of individualism.” This goes along with what I stated about the Abolitionists in an earlier article, that they had an agenda that encompassed far more than the slavery issue. They were, in fact, the change agents of the 19th century. And Braude observed, on page 27 of her book: “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 Angelina, talked to spirits…Mary Todd Lincoln spoke with her dead son, Willie, and brought mediums into the White House, where they conducted séances for senators and cabinet members.” And Lydia Maria Child wrote in 1862 that “Spiritualism is undermining the authority of the Bible in the minds of what are called the common people faster than all other causes put together.” That also from Braude’s book on page 28. Take a look at what Child was saying. The aim of Spiritualism was to undermine the authority of Scripture. The Abolitionists often did the same thing and the Socialists had this as a main part of their agenda. If you don’t think so, then read The Communist Manifesto.

If you look at all of this together, it would seem that the Confederacy was combating much more than just the Union armies, as bad as they were. There were spiritual issues involved in the War of Northern Aggression that are never brought up in the “history” books. All they ever prattle about is the slavery issue and the Abolitionist’s own leaders admit that, over and above that, they had other agendas in mind, some closely paralleling those of the Marxists.

The “late unpleasantness” was, at its core, a war of theologies every bit as much as one of economic issues. And because it was a theological war it was also a culture war—and this is why it has never really ended for the Yankee/Marxist mindset—they only told us it did, and unfortunately, we took their word for it.

We have got to get it through our heads that “those people” are still at war with us and they will be until they manage to destroy our culture, with its Christian roots, and our heritage. Folks, we have got to learn to start fighting back and not be content to just lay prostrate with the dictator’s boot on our necks. There are some ways you can fight back.

Take your kids out of their propaganda mills and if you can’t afford a good Christian school then teach them at home. It’s not as hard as most of you have been led to believe it is. Start educating yourselves while you still have the Internet so you realize what’s going on in the country. That takes a little bit of work but it can be done, and when you do start to learn some truth, put it in letters to the editor of your local paper. They haven’t been totally censored yet. I know lots of folks that write letters to the editor and get them printed. And start seceding from the Sodom on the Potomac culture around you. I realize this all flies in the face of the Reality Show mentality you are bombarded with, but be willing to forego that rather dubious pleasure for the sake of your children and grandchildren because, in the final analysis, you are doing this for them, not yourself. And if you are a Christian, then you should be doing all this to further the Kingdom of God, because, in the end, that is the Kingdom that will triumph and it would be nice to be able to say that, by God’s grace, you had even a small part in that victory.

“Socialist Feminism”

by Al Benson Jr.

At present, I am working my way through an excellent book written by Stanley Kurtz back in 2010 and entitled Radical-In-Chief. It is a history of the deep socialist background of the present occupier of the White House and it is available on Amazon.com

I will have more to say about Mr. Kurtz’s book in future articles because he brings out an amazing amount of documentation about the “stealth socialist” movement in this country, in which our president has been and is a major player.

On page 140 of his book, Kurtz deals with something called “Socialist Feminism” and he goes on to show that socialism has been a major part of the Feminist Movement in the 1970s. He notes: “Yet Heather Booth’s chief efforts in 1971 were devoted to organizing for socialist feminism. Booth and her early collaborator at the Midwest Academy, Day Creamer, were involved in both the Chicago Women’s Liberation Union (CWLU) and the Action Committee for Decent Childcare. The juxtaposition of the explicitly socialist CWLU and the less ideological daycare project–open to all women, not just committed socialists– exemplifies the strategy Booth and her collaborators had laid out in 1969’s Socialism and the Coming Decade, in which small, consciously socialist groups quietly build and guide less openly ideological mass movements. Booth’s developing ideological and strategic perspective is presented in her 1971 pamphlet, written with Day Creamer and a small group of others, Socialist Feminism: A Strategy for the Women’s Movement. This pamphlet was reprinted by the Midwest Academy ‘for historical purposes,’ and was sometimes used in the Academy’s training sessions.” So you can see here, in recent times, the socialist involvement in the Feminist Movement. Sadly, this is not a new development.

In our book Lincoln’s Marxists Walter Kennedy and I deal with the Feminist Movement in this country, and in Europe, in Addendum 3, on page 307, in a section called Feminists and Forty Eighters, which was originally published in my quarterly newsletter The Copperhead Chronicle back in the fourth quarter of 2006. We observed: “Modern historians with what appears to be a selective historical bias seldom examine or mention the close connections between individuals with strong communist connections and other left of center personalities. For example the outright influence of communists in the Roosevelt administration was seldom brought to light until well after his death. Likewise, the connection between socialists and outright communists and the founding of the Republican Party, or the connection between the radical feminists and the Forty Eighters in Europe is seldom if ever reported. Radical Feminism was not something new in France and Germany during the turbulent years of the 1848 socialist revolts in Europe. When the socialist (it should be noted that the terms socialist and communist were equivalent at that time) revolutions erupted in Europe in 1848, the majority of the feminists supported and otherwise aided those revolutions. Many of these women were supporters of St. Simon and Charles Fourier, both of whom were well known for their socialist philosophies.” The article then goes on to name names. Some of them you may have heard of, such as Margaretta Meyer Schurz, the wife of the well known Forty Eighter Carl Schurz who became the Secretary of the Interior during the Hayes administration. Mrs. Schurz established the first kindergarten in this country at Watertown, Wisconsin in 1856. Interestingly enough, the government in Prussia, only two years after the socialist revolts in that country had ended, outlawed kindergartens. The Prussian government was on record as viewing these schools as places of radical indoctrination for children. Given what goes on in public schools nowadays, can one really say they were wrong? Or were they remarkably prescient?

In her book Freethinkers–A History of American Secularism Susan Jacoby notes another well known feminist, “Red Emma” Goldman. She says: “At the same time there was a politically radical agnostic minority supported by European Marxist, socialist and anarchist thought and quite willing to challenge American institutions. ‘Red Emma’ Goldman was the most fiery, persuasive, and visible representative of that minority, an outspoken atheist and feminist as well as an anarchist’…Another early “Women’s Libber” over on the left! Goldman had a strong influence on Margaret Sanger, although it’s not known if Sanger ever openly acknowledged her leftist indoctrination from “Red Emma.” Sanger is reported to have been the one that invented the term “birth control.”

Back in 2003, Henry Makow, Ph.D. wrote an article that appeared on http://www.savethemales.ca called Betty Friedan: Mommy was a Commie. In part, Dr. Makow stated: “Betty Friedan, the ‘founder of modern feminism’ pretended to be a typical 1950s American mother who had a ‘revelation’ that women like her were exploited and should seek independence and self-fulfillment in career. What Friedan (nee: Betty Naomi Goldstein) didn’t say is that she had been a Communist propagandist since her student days at Smith College (1938-1942) and that the destruction of the family has always been central to the Communist plan for world government…Friedan dropped out of grad school to become a reporter for a Communist news service. From 1946-1952 she worked for the newspaper of the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, (UE) ‘the largest Communist-led institution of any kind in the United States.’ In 1947, Congress targeted the UE as a Communist front and its membership began a steady decline.” This is hardly the background for most ordinary 1950s mothers. Friedan obviously did not want lots of folks to be aware of her radical leftist past. If they had been, her book The Feminist Mystique might not have sold over five million copies. One has to wonder, seeing that the Communists are opposed to filthy rich “capitalists” making all manner of filthy lucre, who got the royalties from five million copies of Friedan’s book? Did she donate it all to the Communist Party USA? Actually, the Communists don’t really have a big problem with profit–as long as it’s their people making it and not the rest of us.

It’s important that we realize that the Feminist Movement, the Women’s Liberation Movement, or whatever brand of feminism you happen to run across swimming in your soup, is all steeped in socialism, communism, or some other brand of aberrant leftism. They are not, nor have they ever been, really concerned about helping women–they are concerned about helping their women into positions of power and influence here and around the world, so they can help to shape the socialist agenda in various countries, and tell the rest of us how we should live. They are interested, and have a vested interest in tearing down every Biblical truth regarding women and replacing it with their socialist dogma and rules. That’s something Christians need to become aware of because, today, not nearly enough are.

The Yankee/Marxist Mindset—alive and well among Lincoln’s military

By Al Benson Jr.
How many have followed the news in recent months, noting the contemptuous comments by those in the Obama Regime regarding the average American? Those people look down their long, Marxist noses at us with utter contempt. They have no use whatever for us except to use us as the cash cow to fund their efforts to destroy our faith and culture. They use us to pay for our own destruction. And we are supposed to be too stupid to know what’s going on. Unfortunately, thanks to what has passed for education in this country in the last 100 years, they are often right. However, after the last six “transparent” years of thinly-disguised fascism/Marxism some people are finally beginning to wake up, much to the chagrin of our current ruling elite. After all, you can only spit in people’s faces for so long while telling them it is dew, before some of them wise up.

The recent run-off election here in Louisiana showed that some folks have wised up. Liberal (socialist) Landrieu was finally sent packing after six years as an Obama clone that should have shamed anyone but an outright Marxist. Now we have to watch the man that unseated her to make sure he does what he claims he will do, and let him know we will be watching him if he doesn’t.

Unfortunately, this political (and military) contempt at the national level for ordinary people is not something that is new. It has not only been around since FDR, which many naïve (and some otherwise) people tell us is when our national problems really started. Anyone who has read any of my recent articles pertaining to the Constitution and the weakness of the checks and balances system realizes that our problems began long before FDR—not that he didn’t mightily contribute to those problems—but he was not the originator.

This elitist attitude toward the ordinary man was especially prevalent during and after the War of Northern Aggression. In an article by Thomas DiLorenzo that appeared on LewRockwell.com for December 4th Professor DiLorenzo noted the attitude of General William Tecumseh Sherman toward the civilian population of the South, and toward South Carolinians in particular.

Dr. DiLorenzo observed: “In a January 31, 1864 letter to Major R. M. Sawyer, Sherman explained the reason why he hated the South in general, and South Carolina in particular, so much. The war, he said, ‘was the result of a false political doctrine that any and every people have a right to self-government’.” Why how dare these insignificant South Carolinians think they had a right to self-government! Didn’t they realize that all they existed for was to serve the mighty federal Leviathan that reigned in Washington under “King Lincoln”? Why else would they even want to exist?

One of Sherman’s subordinate officers, a sterling individual named George W. Nichols, got a book published about his outstanding exploits in the War. He described South Carolinians as “the scum, the lower dregs of civilization” who are “not Americans; they are merely South Carolinians.” And General Carl Schurz noted that the average Yankee soldier looked at South Carolina as “deserving of special punishment.” Interpreted into real English that meant that the Yankee/Marxist military leadership from Sherman on down were willing to let their soldiers burn, rape, plunder and pillage in South Carolina while doing little to restrain them. After all, these South Carolina folks had to be taught a lesson—you don’t defy Yankee/Marxist authority and get away with it. With generals like Schurz on board you can bet that major appropriation of Southern property was near the top of the agenda. Comrade Schurz was one of the socialist generals Donnie Kennedy and I dealt with in our book Lincoln’s Marxists. . If you want to read more about Comrade Schurz that the history books will not inform you about, get our book. Schurz is dealt with in some detail and you will learn things about him the authors of the “history” books have seen fit to drop down the “memory hole.”

Sherman had no more use for the concept of self-government than those socialists and Marxists from Europe that were so much a part of Lincoln’s armies. In his book Citizen Sherman, Michael Fellman said of Sherman that: “His rejection of democracy and his semisecret reactionary faith in a military seizure of power deepened through the secession crisis and into the opening stages of his involvement in the Civil War.” In other words, this was Sherman’s attitude before the War even really started. Where do you suppose he got that from? Sherman’s thinking in this direction deepened as the War went on. After Vicksburg, he wrote to his brother, John that “A government resting immediately on the caprice of a people is too unstable to last… (A)ll must obey. Government, that is, the executive, having no discretion but to execute the law must be to that extent despotic.” The wishes or desires of the ordinary people made no difference. All must obey. Period! One wonders where the vaunted Constitution was during all this—in Lincoln’s bottom desk drawer maybe?

This was Sherman’s attitude toward ordinary folks—sheep to be shorn—as they bow the knee to an all-powerful secular messiah in Washington—be his name Lincoln or Obama. Unfortunately, too many Christians are willing to accept that, forgetting that there is only one King, King Jesus, and we are to bow the knee to Him, not to some tinpot dictator that wants to usurp Him and take His place.

As the new Congress files in to take its place in January, start keeping an eye on it and what it does, and if your Congressperson starts leaning to the left, let him/her know in no uncertain terms that you don’t like it—even if he/she does look down his/her nose at you for reminding them who they are supposed to be there to serve. Reminding them we already know what official Washington thinks of us would not be out of line.