Did Lincoln’s Theological Views Reflect His Political Actions?

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

The title of this article is a legitimate question–not only for Lincoln, but for the rest of us as well. Do our political actions reflect our theology? If you look today at some of these Democrats and RINO’s that hate Trump and will do or say anything to hurt his agenda, true or not, (and most of the time it isn’t) you have to ask if what they are doing reflects their theology–and if it does–then what does it say about the god they serve?

Similar questions were not always asked about Abraham Lincoln because back then most people didn’t equate a man’s theological perspective with what he did politically. Then, as today, they should have. There is more connection there than most people realize.

I’ve dealt with Mr. Lincoln’s religious views in the past, but not for awhile, so it might not hurt to go back and refresh our memories about them. Ward H. Lamon wrote a book, published in 1872–The Life of Abraham Lincoln: from his birth to his inauguation as president. Lamon probably knew Lincoln as well as anyone. And Mr. Lamon quoted, in his book, another man who knew Lincoln as well as anyone, his law partner for years, William H. Herndon. Herndon said of Lincoln: “As to Mr. Lincoln’s religious views, he was, in short, an infidel-atheist. He did not believe that Jesus was God, nor the Son of God–was a fatalist, denied the freedom of the will. Mr. Lincoln told me a thousand times, that he did not believe the Bible was the revelation of God, as the Christian world contends.”

With a world view like that, how do you think he would deal with his political adversaries? Does the word “treacherously” come to mind?

Lew Rockwell wrote an article back in May of 2000 called The Genesis of the Civil War in which he made some interesting observations. Mr. Rockwell took pains to note that the War of Northern Aggression in the 1860s was not really a “civil war” as a civil war is one where two opposing groups are fighting for control of the same country–and that was never the South’s objective. The North wanted total control if it all–the South just wanted to separate and go its own way. Mr. Rockwell deals with that by saying: “But why would the South want to secede? If the original American ideal of federalism and constitutionalism had survived to 1860, the South would not have needed to. But one issue loomed larger than any other in that year as in the previous three decades: the Northern tariff. It was imposed to benefit Northern industrial interests by subsidizing  their production through high prices and public works. But it had the effect of forcing the South to pay more for manufactured goods and disproportionately taxing it to support the central government. It also injured the South’s trading relations with other parts of the world.  In effect, the South was being looted to pay for the North’s early version of industrial policy. The battle over the tariff began in 1828, with the ‘tariff of abominations.’  Thirty years later, with the South paying for 87% of federal tarff revenue while having their livelihoods being threatened by protectionist legislation, it became impossible for the two regions to be governed under the same regime. The South as a region was being reduced to slave status, with the federal government as its master.”  Do you think no one in the North realized this? The average man may not have, but the Northern politicians and political thinkers did. What do you suppose their theological world view was? Three guesses!

And obviously Mr. Lincoln understood this. He was no dummy and, as a lobbyist for Northern railroads he would have known how this system worked. When someone asked him at one point why he did not just let the South go, his reply was “What then will become of my tariff?” So Lincoln realized the South was getting shafted–and that was okay with him, but if they seceded then he wouldn’t be getting their tariff money anymore and the North couldn’t continue to stiff them anymore and so Lincoln had to prevent that. In other words, legalized theft of Southern resources had to continue so Northern industrial interests could benefit. Whose theological persuasion do you suppose that benefited?

Lincoln made it clear his main intent was to get that Southern tariff money–no matter what. He said “My policy sought only to collect the Revenue (a 40 percent federal sales tax on imports to Southern states under the Morrill Tariff Act of 1861…I have no purpose, directly or indirectly to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists…” There was no proof Lincoln ever declared war to abolish slavery, it was always to “preserve the Union.” One might well ask,  For who?

Of course if Lincoln did not believe in the Bible and the truth about Jesus Christ, that means that he served another god who had an opposing theology to that found in the Scriptures. Do you think Lincoln realized all this. Commentary from his era would lead us to believe that, to some extent, he did.

Unfortunately for the North, the concept of legalized theft via the tariff, was reflected in their culture, whether they realized it or not, and some did. The rise of Unitarianism in the North and after that, the spread of socialism there, reflected a Northern theology that was justifiably repugnant to orthodox Christians in the South. Over the years, I have mentioned the theological implications of the War of Northern Aggression. Most don’t want to hear it. I have gotten reactions ranging from a stopping of the ears to outright laughter–and some of this from Christians.

But, the theological implications of that War will have to be dealt with, one way or another because, in the final analysis, the theological implications of that War will prove to be more important than the supposed slavery issue. And Lincoln’s theological world view is part and parcel of it all.

National Education–It Has Always Been About “Reconstructing” Southern Culture

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

In his book Segregation–Federal Policy or Racism? (Shotwell Publishing, Columbia, South Carolina) author John Chodes noted, on page 53 that: “In 1867, a small agency was created by Congress. It was called the Bureau of Education. It consisted of only five employees: a supervisor and four clerks, ‘to collect such statistics and facts as shall show the condition and progress of education in the several states and territories…as shall aid the people of the United States in the establishment and maintenance of efficient school systems, and otherwise promote the cause of education throughout the country.’ From this miniscule beginning, over time, the Bureau of Education became a gigantic department, nationalizing, controlling, and separating black and white primary and secondary schools by administering the Morrill colleges and absorbing the Freedmen’s Bureau schools into its own bureaucracy.” And we have all been led to believe that the federal Department of Education  didn’t happen until Jimmy Carter brought it in during his one-term presidency as payback to the National Education Association for their support of him. Actually,  it seems that all Carter did was to support the most recent manifestation of something that had really been around, in one form or another, for a very long time.

It seems that the educational messiahs in Washington at that time (ever read about them in your history books?) felt that one of the leading causes of Southern secession was that Southern folks had existed for all those years without the dubious “benefit” of a nationalized school system, and therefore, they were easy prey for “Southern demagogues” to con into helping their states secede from our “indivisible” Union.

Republican demagogue James P. Wickersham of Pennsylvania observed that: “It was this ignorance that enabled the rebel leaders to create a prejudice in the minds of this class of persons against the North and to induce them to enlist in their armies…As long as they are ignorant they will remain tools of political demagogues and therefore be incapable of self-government. They must be educated;…No state that has passed an act of secession should be allowed to take its former place in the Union without having first incorporated into its constitution a provision for the establishment of a free school system.” Do you begin to see where this has all been going?

What the honorable Mr. Wickersham is really saying here, in his own unique way, is that most Southern folks have just been paying attention to the wrong set of demagogues. They’ve been listening to Southern ones when they really should have been embracing Northern ones. It seems the Northern demagogues have the (politically) correct slant on all the current issues of the day and, therefore, any state that embraced secession should have to have some sort of Yankee/Marxist public school system firmly in place to brainwash the kiddies before it even dreams of unification with the glorious Union. In other words–“teach your kids to think the same way we’ve taught ours to think–or else!”

This Yankee/Marxist mindset portrays secession as some sort of evil, traitorous act that has to be “educated” out of Southern kids so they will never again be tempted to think along those lines. It would seem, if you look at some of today’s headlines, that the government educational system has been somewhat less than spectacularly successful  in obliterating  the idea of secession. There are some small blessings we can be thankful for!

Contrary to what the promoters of public education have told us for over 150 years now,  secession is not (was not) treason. The Declaration of Independence was a secession document, and three of the states that ratified the Constitution did so with the proviso that, if this new government ended up being detrimental to their states, they reserved the right to remove themselves. Virginia, Rhode Island, and New York all said that, in one form or another, in their ratification ordinances. So if secession had been treasonous then the ratification ordinances of those states should not have been accepted–but they were, and that fact alone, which most of your “history” books leave out, speaks volumes.

National (and it’s never really been local) education has always been about the restructuring of American society and culture and making it into something the Founders would not have recognized, something that the Washington and New York culture-benders wanted it to be. All this blather about “quality education for the kids” to put it bluntly, smells like a fresh West Texas cow chip on a hot day in August. It’s pure bovine fertilizer–and not even the high grade stuff at that!

As far as all the Confederate monuments coming down, what do you think most public schools in the South have been teaching your kids about their ancestors who seceded and fought for the Confederacy? You probably don’t really want to know. But you better start finding out, because the drivel they are pushing down your kids’ throats will affect their future, your grandchildren’s futures and the future of your Southern culture.

Just remember this–if you take nothing else away from what you’ve read here–“Reconstruction” is ongoing. It has never stopped. It may have shifted gears here and there, but it has never ceased. It is as relevant to your lives today as it was to those who surrendered at Appomattox.

Education Is “Reconstruction”–Even Today!

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

In his informative book Segregation–Federal Policy or Racism (Shotwell Publishing Co., Columbia, South Carolina) author John Chodes has some interesting information in chapter 6, which he entitles The Freedmen’s Bureau:  Segregation for Black Education. In this chapter he notes that the whole concept of segregation was promoted so that blacks could be “educated” (radicalized) separately from whites. This was a kind of master  plan to promote class hatred between the races. Look at it this way–one of the reasons for the War of Northern Aggression was not to free the slaves, but rather to transfer ownership from private hands to federal hands. From private hands to the Freedmen’s Bureau!

Chodes notes how the federal government was, even in the 1860s, messing around with federal control of and aid for education. The foolish idea of public, or government, schools being “ours” or somehow belonging to the people, is and has been the prevalent myth, propagated on the public at large so they will not realize that this leviathan institution was made and directed from Washington from day one. This is something we have got to get through our heads! These really were and are Government Schools!

Chodes observes, on page 34 that: “The Union League, for all its destructiveness for race relations,  was only a division of a larger organization–the Freedmen’s Bureau. It was an agency of the War Department. Its role in the post-war South was enormous and its educational projects that were put in place in the 1860s, became national models for the 20th century. Its political directives for the special treatment of blacks and the hunting down of racists is still expanding in the contemporary United States and continues to impact current national policy.”

The Union League separated the blacks from the whites and then the Freedman’s Bureau educated them differently, which laid the basic foundation for “eternal segregation.” And Chodes accurately observed that  “The primary function of the Freedmen’s Bureau was educating blacks to vote Republican and to forever hate Southern whites. Integration was unthinkable, except in some rare, showcase schools, where it was used to torment whites with radical principles of social equality.” They could teach the blacks how to vote Republican and not bother to teach the whites much about anything regarding voting because the vast majority of the whites had been disenfranchised due to “reconstruction” and could no longer vote.

Then came the Yankee/Marxist “school teachers.” These “missionaries” and they were missionaries, felt that they were “…the advance guard of a new army of invasion against the terrible South.” And here your “history” books have told you that “reconstruction” ended when all those Yankee troops departed. Well, not really. The South was still in the process of being invaded–only now it was with school teachers instead of soldiers–but the results, if more insidious, were still the same. It was never about “freeing the slaves” but it was always about changing the culture, particularly the Christian culture, of the Old South. After 150 years of this, we still haven’t figured that out yet. I begin to wonder if we ever will!

These invading “missionaries” of Yankee/Marxist “education” came down here to show us the error of our ways, and while they were assaying to do that they “…taught the negro the wildest of social, political, and religious doctrines…In teaching him not to be servile, they taught him to be insolent…” Anyone notice any of that going around today?

Chodes said that “In his autobiography, General O. O. Howard described his plan to permanently consolidate all Southern schools. This would be the prelude to nationalizing them.” Howard wanted all education, both private and public, to “become absorbed in a great free system.” Guess who would control that “great free system?”  Subtle hint: it wouldn’t be the parents! In retrospect, you have to wonder how much different this was than Karl Marx’s tenth point in the Communist Manifesto  “Free education for all children in public schools.” I don’t see much difference.

And in regard to educating white kids “…education would be the instrument for reforming the Southern mind to be sympathetic to the principles of union and liberty, and for training Southerners to be obedient to Republican Party rule. In a sense, the school was the common denominator,  the agency for nationalization of the sectionally minded South.” It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see where all this was going–and remember, this was 1866, not 1966!

I have, over the years, often maintained that public (government) education was an integral part of “reconstruction.” Unfortunately, most Southern folks I have talked to either totally don’t get it, or they don’t even want to think about it. To that degree, “reconstruction” in the South has been a smashing success. The “missionaries” have done what the Yankee troops couldn’t.

But, whether you want to think about it or not, government schools ARE a major part of the ongoing “reconstruction” of the South, and of the rest of the country as well. If you look at the history of government schools, you will find that kids (and parents) in the North were being “reconstructed” for about a generation before they started on us. So, whatever else you want to think, government schools as we now have them, were part and parcel of “reconstruction” in the South, and that is a problem we have yet to deal with down here.

Segregation Was Not Southern Racism–It Was Federal Policy

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

I have just received an informative little book that deals with a lot of material folks will never see in their “history” books, but need to be aware of, especially here in the South. This book was written by John Chodes of New York City and published by Shotwell Publishing  http://www.ShotwellPublishing.com in Columbia, South Carolina.

The title of the book is Segregation Federal Policy or Racism? And Mr. Chodes explains why it was federal policy instead of Southern racism. He starts out by dealing with a subject I have written about on and off for years, but which most people simply fail to grasp–that “reconstruction” did not end in the South after the Yankee/Marxist troops departed–it just continued under other names and it continues right down to our day. The current riots in Charlottesville, Virginia are a prime example of how “reconstruction” continues to work in our day.

Chodes notes on page x of his introduction that: “Northerners attempted to recast every opinion opposed to the North’s myths, to impose Northern ways upon the Southern people, to…write error across the pages of Southern history which were out of keeping with the Northern legend…” Here he quoted Frank L. Owsley, who had noted all this decades ago. And referring to this, Chodes stated: “This new history erased the fact that segregation is not the result of Southern racism. It is the result of federal policy from 1865 to 1900 to divide the white and black races and to promote discord and hatred for political advantage.” In this vein, he begins to conclude his book with this statement: “Uncle Sam has come full circle. He created segregation by fraud, force, and violence, then blamed Southerners for those deeds. Now he employs busing, gerrymandering of election districts, the police, the national guard, the courts, confiscation, and the threat of incarceration to achieve a coercive, integrated, egalitarian society through an arbitrary  ratio of blacks to whites. This is totally in keeping with the utopian dream of the Radical Republican carpetbaggers and congressmen.” And in between these two points he says an awful lot in a short 73 pages that it will take a couple of articles for me to even hit all the high points.

Mr. Chodes notes how the antebellum society of the South before the War of Northern Aggression was an integrated society, especially on the plantations, but other places as well. For Southern society to function back then there had to be a fair amount of integration because there was a mutual dependence of both races on the other. After the Confederacy was defeated (but never officially surrendered) all of this changed. “Reconstruction” changed all this “…by the bayonet, into mutual suspicion and loathing, separation and violence. A great mental and physical chasm opened up between the races.” That was not by accident. He goes into the fact that, in the Johnson administration, segregation began under “congressional reconstruction.”  He wrote that: “In many respects, the Reconstruction-era policy of divide and conquer is still maintained today but in a subtler form.” Only with some of what is going on today with the planned destruction of Southern culture, it is getting much less subtle and much more overt.

Chodes notes the integrated makeup of Southern armies. He observes: “Contrary to politically correct history, the Confederacy used blacks, slave and free, as troops long before the North did. Slaves were integrated with white troops into Southern armies,” and although Mr. Chodes didn’t mention it, they got the same pay, when they got paid, as white troops did. In the Northern armies they got less.

The 14th and 15th Amendments come in for “honorable” mention by Chodes, where he notes that “Both these amendments drove a tremendous antagonistic  wedge between the races. They were not intended to create equality between blacks and whites, they were to put the bottom rail on top and perpetuate constant discord, violence, and political submission of the rebels to the freedmen. These Constitutional amendments were acts of revenge and their effects are still felt today.”

The Freedmen’s Bureau and the Union League are dealt with in some detail and he notes how the Freedmen’s Bureau “…represented the first unconstitutional foray by the federal government into education. The Freedmen’s bureau began the process of nationalizing Southern schools…It focused on educating blacks, which included propagandizing for Republicans and hating ‘traitors’ so that any hope of reconciliation with Southern whites was eradicated.” He noted that the Morrill Act, passed in Congress, was “segregating whites for re-education” and he ties all this in with the Department of Agriculture and shows how it has worked down through the decades. Do you begin now to get some idea of where all this is going? Connecting any dots?

This is not a fun book to read, but it is a necessary book to read if you want to begin to grasp all that has been done to (not for) us since the end of the War, all in the name of “progress.”

It is easy to see that the federal government already had a class struggle (Marxist) mindset and a plan in the works before the War was ended that they were going to foist upon the South first, and then the rest of the country afterward.

Please do yourself and your children a favor and read Mr. Chodes’ book to grasp what the cultural Marxists have done to us while we slept, especially here in the South.  And if you don’t grasp what cultural Marxism is, it is nothing more than a communist war on your culture, on you, and on your children. You should be able to understand that. It’s as plain as I can make it.

Mr. Chodes’ book sells for $7.95 and would be worth it at twice the price.