The Atlantic: The Glaring Contradiction of Republicans Rhetoric of Freedom

In other words, republicanism isn’t liberalism.

The Atlantic:

“For decades Republicans have marketed themselves as the party of freedom. During the 1990s and early 2000s, conservative activists took up the description of the GOP coined by the anti-tax activist Grover Norquist as the “leave us alone” coalition, so named because it consisted of voters whose stated aspiration was to live without government interference. At the height of the coronavirus pandemic, Republican governors led by Ron DeSantis in Florida gravitated toward unbending opposition to business and school shutdowns, as well as to mask or vaccine requirements, often overriding Democratic-run local governments that tried to impose them. …

Supposedly representing the party of smaller government, Republicans across red states have in recent months approved a wave of intrusive actions as they work to unravel the “rights revolution” of the past 60 years. These measures include authorizing vigilante lawsuits by private citizens against anyone involved in providing an abortion and state investigations of parents who approved medical transition treatment for their transgender children (both in Texas), as well as restrictions on how both teachers and private companies alike can talk about race and gender and how K–12 teachers can discuss sexual orientation (the “Don’t Say Gay” law, in Florida). DeSantis has penalized in various ways the Walt Disney Company, the Tampa Bay Rays baseball team, and the Special Olympics for objecting to his policies. …”

What is liberty?

Is liberty the republican ideal of self-government, OR, the liberal ideal of freedom from government? Abortion highlights the clash between these rival definitions of freedom. The pendulum in the Supreme Court is swinging away from liberalism and back toward the republican understanding of freedom.

The Founding Fathers created a federal republic with a set of liberal rights at the federal level. It was left up to each state to define who was a citizen. The Bill of Rights restricted the power of the federal government and reserved all the powers which were not delegated to it to the states. The natural rights of life, liberty and property of citizens were respected with some states determining that blacks were property and others determining that they were citizens. Some states even had established state churches. Sharp distinctions were drawn between civil equality, political equality and social equality.

The republican ideal of freedom is that communities are left alone to govern themselves. The states are sovereign, not individuals. The states have the authority to define their own members, police their citizens and regulate education and sexuality. Decisions are made collectively. Insofar as liberal rights are protected like the right to bear arms, they are protected by state constitutions.

29 Comments

  1. The Atlantic is a Neo-Con rag run by Zionist Jews who spew propaganda for every war. They are sick criminals who should be tried for war crimes. No one cares what they think and their already small audience shrinks by the hour. They are just another Democrat blog, like Reddit except they use WordPress.

    • It is the house magazine of the liberal establishment. I read it every day to keep up with what these people are thinking

      • Thank you for your service Brad

        you are a trooper for reading that tripe! can´t be easy for the eyes or the brain if you are a decent man

      • I’m thankful HW reads the libtard press and keeps us informed,
        I don’t have the stomach to do it.

        HW keeps a wide scope to his vision, it’s necessary, otherwise our perceptions become too cloistered.

        • “ Republicans across red states have in recent months approved a wave of intrusive actions as they work to unravel the “rights revolution” of the past 60 years.”

          These filthy sons of bitches actually think that the immoral, illegal, and abomination-tier CAPITULATION TO FREAKAZOID demands, is a ‘rights revolution’?????

          THE GOD-DAMNED JEWS MUST RETURN TO THE SHTETL, AND NEVER AGAIN BE ALLOWED OUT. Hitler was right. They are the source of the White Man’s problems.

          And the Church’s denomination of them as DEICIDES is NEVER TO BE ABROGATED.

          • GOD-DAMNED JEWS MUST RETURN TO THE SHTETL, AND NEVER AGAIN BE ALLOWED OUT.

            Uh, that’s been tried, several times, it always fails.
            You’ll have to find another solution.

    • >“McConnell,” … “wants to win the suburbs by defusing cultural hot buttons.”

      Most of the suburbs that matter, in terms of population, are located in deep blue states, and are not affected by crime the way urban centers are — I’m not sure how much appeal rhetoric about ‘cultural hot buttons’ from someone like McConnell will have for those people.

      McConnell is a career politician, an 80 y/o man who looks like death warmed over — more than anyone else in the GOP, he’s the face of the decrepit Wash DC gerontocracy, and many people will not be able to look past that.

  2. The Democrats had the Solid South aka the South for all those Years and reject all of us in place of Abortion, race mixing, integration, Gays, Gun Control, Atheism, and the list goes on and on. This country was better off during the time Democrats was for us. The Republican Party has never represented the Southern People and they never will. Why the South became “Republican” around 1970 I’ll never know. The Republican Party doesn’t have anything in common with Southerners who value Family Farming, the Confederate Flag, and all good stuff. I have no use for a Republican and I’ll politically fight them every step of the way. The Democrats reject us…the Republicans reject us. I don’t look at life from a generic individual freedom or libertariantard point of view. I look at things from the collective…..White Nationalism which a a deep love for the South and our Heritage & Culture. White Skin and White Unity. Deo Vindice !

    • That’s the problem….Americans don’t look at the quality of life as the consequences from collective effect. It’s mainly about what they can get their individual greedy little paws on.

    • Today’s headline:
      Reckless spending, hubris and mismanagement have led Sri Lanka into an economic collapse.

      Future headline:
      Reckless spending, hubris and mismanagement have led America into an economic collapse.

  3. Reading Jewish propaganda does not tell you what they are thinking. It only tells you what they want you to think.

  4. As to abortion I completely agree with the supreme court that it is not a constitutional right to have one and therefore should be up to the states to regulate it.

    I wish this website would take a more moderate stance on the issue of abortion. Obviously aborting a baby at 6 months is basically murder as it is heavily developed but the idea of banning abortion from inception or after 6 weeks is backwards and I’ll tell you why. A lot of women (and men) don’t want a child with a severe disability like down syndrome, a spinal condition, etc. Banning abortion outright forces a woman to have a child with some form of intellectual disability.

    I’m not one of those that thinks life starts at inception, it takes about 3 months for a doctor to be able to tell if the fetus has any severe defects, banning abortion at 4 months seems reasonable, the fetus isn’t developed enough to be self aware and sentient.

  5. The South went Republican solidly in 1972 after more than 5 years (Nov. 1963 – Jan. 1969) of LBJ’s Great Society, Vietnam War, so-called “Civil Rights” revolution and the rapid destruction of the country in the 1960’s. There was nothing to recommend the Republicans except that they weren’t the Democrats. That has always been the cheap sales pitch of the Republicans; “The other guy is worse!”

    The best outcome would have been for George Wallace to have won the1968 election. He was the only candidate who could have stopped then reversed the rot. He was the mortal enemy of both parties especially because his political appeal wasn’t confined to the South, he had support in the North also. After being crippled in May, 1972 by an assassination attempt Wallace’s national political career was over.

  6. Freedom?

    “Saintly” King Lincoln, Mr Republican himself, “loved” freedom. And if you don’t believe it then you can just spend time in prison along with all the rest of his past political enemies…

    Perhaps the biggest falsehood ever pedaled about Abraham Lincoln is that he was devoted to the principles of the Declaration of Independence. Exactly the opposite is true; he repudiated every one of the main principles of the Declaration with his words and, more importantly, his actions. In our time the odd and ahistorical writings of Harry Jaffa and his “Straussian” cult followers have been the primary means of spreading this enormous falsehood. (Jaffa was neither a historian nor a philosopher but a supposed expert in “rhetoric” who spent his career writing books instructing Americans about the allegedly “real meaning” of historical documents in writings that were often either void of historical facts or flatly contradicted by them).

    Contrary to what every American is taught beginning with elementary school (or sooner), Lincoln did not believe that all men are created equal. He repeatedly denied this for his entire adult life, even announcing during one of the Lincoln/Douglas debates that “I as much as any man want the superior position” to belong to the white race. He was proud to be a white supremacist’s white supremacist. “Before, after, and during the Lincoln-Douglas debates, in public and in private, Lincoln used the N-word,” wrote Lerone Bennett, Jr. in Lincoln’s White Dream.

    While in the Illinois legislature Lincoln supported the Illinois black codes which deprived free blacks of citizenship. He supported the 1848 amendment to the Illinois constitution that forbade blacks from emigrating into the state. He was the “manager” of the Illinois Colonization Society that used tax dollars to deport the small number of free blacks that lived in the state. Until his dying day he plotted to deport all the black people out of America (See Colonization after Emancipation by Philip Magness and Sebastian Page).

    Lincoln invented a bizarre new theory of the American founding to “justify” his destruction of the voluntary union of the founding fathers that was initiated by the Declaration of Independence – their declaration of secession from the British empire. As summarized by legal/constitutional scholar James Ostrowski, Lincoln’s absurd theory was that:

    – No state may ever secede from the union for any reason.

    – If any state secedes, the federal government shall invade such state with sufficient military force to suppress the secession.

    – The federal government may require all states to raise militias to suppress the secession of their sister states.

    – After suppressing secession the federal government may rule by martial law until such time as the state(s) accepts federal supremacy.

    – The federal government may force the states to adopt new state constitutions imposed on them at gunpoint by military authorities.

    – The president may, on his own authority and without consulting any other branch of government, suspend the Bill of Rights and the writ of habeas corpus.

    No state would ever have ratified the Constitution if this – Lincoln’s ridiculous and tyrannical new theory – is what the citizens of the states thought the Constitution said.

    After seceding from the British empire the early Americans then seceded from the “perpetual” union of the Articles of Confederation and dropped the word “perpetual” from their new constitution. Everyone understood that the citizens of the free and independent states, as they are called in the Declaration, were sovereign, not the government in the national capital. As James Madison, the “father of the Constitution,” wrote in Federalist #39, the constitution was ratified by the American people “not as individuals comprising one entire nation, but as composing the distinct and independent States to which they respectively belong.” And as Jefferson wrote in the Declaration, American government was to derive its “just powers” from “the consent of the governed,” organized as state and local political communities, not from the barrels of guns in the hands of federal soldiers. That would be more like the Soviet Union or the Roman empire than the American Union.

    Each state was considered by the founders to be a separate country in the same sense that Great Britain and France were separate countries. As stated in the latter part of the Declaration, after defining the “United Colonies” as “FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES” that are “absolved from all allegiance to the British crown,” the document says that “as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and do all other things which independent states may of right do.” Free and independent states, not something called “the United States government in Washington, D.C.” The phrase “United States” is always in the plural in all the founding documents, signifying that the free and independent states are united in participating in a voluntary compact of states. It unequivocally does not refer to the United States government in Washington, D.C. or anywhere else.

    In the Declaration of Independence Jefferson composed a “train of abuses” by the British crown that he said justified the colonists’ secession from the British empire. Lincoln was as guilty as King George III of every single one of these abuses. King George III had:

    – “Dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly . . .” Lincoln imposed military rule on the occupied South during the war.

    – “Made Judges dependent on his Will alone . . . . He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.” Lincoln illegally suspended habeas corpus and ordered the mass arrest of tens of thousands of suspected Northern political dissenters. Under King Lincoln soldiers threatened and even kidnapped judges to prevent them from issuing the writ.

    – “He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass out people, and eat out their substance.” Myriad new bureaucracies were created by the Lincoln regime to “occupy” the South and federal soldiers pillaged, plundered, and raped their way through the South from the very beginning of the war.

    – “He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the consent of our legislatures.” This occurred in parts of the South during the war and of course all during “Reconstruction.”

    – “He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws, giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended legislation.” Lincoln essentially abolished civil liberties in the North and the occupied South, blockaded Southern ports, started a war without consent of Congress, and myriad other things that historian Clinton Rossiter said “were considered by nobody as legal.”

    – “For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world.” Lincoln imposed a naval blockade on the South, and plundered the North as well with extortionate tariffs on imports.

    – “For imposing Taxes on us without our consent.” Southerners did not consent to the 1861 Morrill Tariff, a main cause of the war in the first place.

    – “For depriving us in many cases, of the right of Trial by jury.” Tens of thousands of Northern citizens were imprisoned without due process during the war.

    – “For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.” A perfect description of what occurred in Southern and border territories “governed” by Republican party hacks during the war and Reconstruction.

    – “He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us. He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coast, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people. He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny.” A perfect description of the Lincoln regime, including the importation of thousands of European mercenaries lured by promises of free land under the Homestead Act to mass murder Southerners and plunder and burn their towns to the ground.

    The author of the Declaration of Independence said in his first inaugural address as president that “If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left to combat it,” at once a defense of the idea of the voluntary union, peaceful secession, and free speech. In an August 12, 1803 letter to John C. Breckinridge, who had inquired about the burgeoning New England Federalist secession movement, Jefferson wrote that if there is to be a secession of the New England states “God bless them both [the different confederacies, that is], & keep them in the union if it be for their good, but separate them, if it be better.” In a January 29, 1804 letter to Dr. Joseph Priestly who had asked about talk of secession leading to eastern (“Atlantic”) and western (“Mississippi”) confederacies, Jefferson said that “I should feel the duty & the desire to promote the western interests as zealously as the eastern, doing all the good for both portions of our future family which should fall within my power.”

    In sharp contrast to Jefferson, Lincoln’s words on the subject are heavy handed, violent, threatening, and tyrannical. “[N]o state . . . can lawfully get out of the union,” he warned in his first inaugural address,” and “acts against the authority of the United States [meaning the government in Washington, D.C., aka, himself] are insurrectionary or revolutionary . . .” He then used the words “invasion” and “bloodshed” to describe what would occur in any state whose citizens agreed with Jefferson and the other founding fathers that the union was voluntary; that the constitution had been ratified by the citizens of the free and independent states; and that any state therefore had every right to remain or not remain in the union on its own and without permission from anyone…
    — Abbeville Institute: “Lincoln’s Repudiation of the Declaration of Independence” by Thomas DiLorenzo, July 5, 2022

    https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/lincolns-repudiation-of-the-declaration-of-independence/

    • 1 — “[N]o state . . . can lawfully get out of the union,” [Lincoln] warned in his first inaugural address,” and “acts against the authority of the United States [meaning the government in Washington, D.C., aka, himself] are insurrectionary or revolutionary . . .”

      False. Lincoln’s words were the following: “[N]o State UPON ITS OWN MERE MOTION can lawfully get out of the Union; … resolves and ordinances to that effect are legally void, and … acts OF VIOLENCE within any State or States against the authority of the United States are insurrectionary or revolutionary, according to circumstances.” (Emphases mine.)

      2 — “[Lincoln] then used the words ‘invasion’ and ‘bloodshed’ to describe what would occur in any state whose citizens agreed with Jefferson and the other founding fathers that the union was voluntary; that the constitution had been ratified by the citizens of the free and independent states; and that any state therefore had every right to remain or not remain in the union on its own and without permission from anyone…”

      Oh: “Used the words.” He used them as follows: “[T]here needs to be NO BLOODSHED or violence, and there shall be none unless it be forced upon the national authority. The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be NO INVASION, no using of force against or among the people anywhere.” (Emphases mine.)

      3 — “Lincoln’s words on the subject are heavy handed, violent, threatening, and tyrannical.”

      In addition to what I presented immediately above, Lincoln’s words included the following:

      “Where hostility to the United States in any interior locality shall be so great and universal as to prevent competent resident citizens from holding the Federal offices, there will be NO ATTEMPT TO FORCE obnoxious strangers among the people for that object. While the strict legal right may exist in the Government to enforce the exercise of these offices, the attempt to do so would be so irritating and so nearly impracticable withal that I DEEM IT BETTER TO FOREGO FOR THE TIME THE USES OF SUCH OFFICES.

      “The mails, unless repelled, will continue to be furnished in all parts of the Union. So far as possible the people everywhere shall have that sense of perfect security which is most favorable to calm thought and reflection. The course here indicated will be followed unless current events and experience shall show a modification or change to be proper, and in every case and exigency MY BEST DISCRETION WILL BE EXERCISED, according to circumstances actually existing and WITH A VIEW AND A HOPE OF A PEACEFUL SOLUTION of the national troubles AND THE RESTORATION OF FRATERNAL SYMPATHIES AND AFFECTIONS.” (Emphases mine.)

      The Abbeville Institute. Spare me.

      https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/lincoln1.asp

      • JBP: False. Lincoln’s words were the following: “[N]o State UPON ITS OWN MERE MOTION can lawfully get out of the Union; … resolves and ordinances to that effect are legally void, and … acts OF VIOLENCE within any State or States against the authority of the United States are insurrectionary or revolutionary, according to circumstances.” (Emphases mine.)

        Reality:
        “…any state whose citizens agreed with Jefferson and the other founding fathers that the union was voluntary; that the constitution had been ratified by the citizens of the free and independent states; and that any state therefore had every right to remain or not remain in the union on its own and without permission from anyone…”

        ——————-

        JBP: Oh: “Used the words.” He used them as follows: “[T]here needs to be NO BLOODSHED or violence, and there shall be none unless it be forced upon the national authority. The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be NO INVASION, no using of force against or among the people anywhere.” (Emphases mine.)

        Reality:

        Dr. John Bachman (1790-1874) was a naturalist of international reputation and a beloved Lutheran clergyman. He was a native of the state of New York and was called to the pulpit of St. John’s Lutheran Church in Charleston in 1815. A friend of the renowned naturalist John James Audubon, Bachman collaborated with him to produce The Viviparous Quadrupeds of North America (published in three volumes, 1845-49), providing much of the scientific data that informed Audubon’s beautiful paintings. Bachman authored numerous books on science and religion, served as the professor of Natural History at the College of Charleston from 1848 to 1853 and helped to found Newberry College, as well as the Lutheran Theological Southern Seminary in Columbia. In December 1860, he was one of the ministers chosen to offer the opening prayer at South Carolina’s Secession Convention. He regretted the dissolution of the Union but thought that it was better for the two sections of the country to separate, like Abraham and Lot, when they could no longer live together in peace.

        When General Sherman’s army invaded Cheraw, South Carolina, Dr. Bachman was in the area, staying at a place called Cash’s Depot, and about six months later, he wrote a lengthy letter about all that he saw and experienced there. The following is an excerpt from his letter dated September 14,1865:

        I witnessed the barbarities inflicted on the aged, the widow, and young and delicate females. Officers, high in command, were engaged tearing from the ladies their watches, their ear and wedding rings, the daguerreotypes of those they loved and cherished. A lady of delicacy and refinement, a personal friend, was compelled to strip before them, as they might find concealed watches and other valuables under her dress. A system of torture was practiced toward the weak, unarmed, and defenseless, which, as far as I know and believe, was universal throughout the whole course of that invading army. Before they arrived at a plantation, they inquired the names of the most faithful and trusted servants; they were immediately seized, pistols were presented at their heads; with the most terrific curses, they were threatened to be shot if they did not assist them in finding buried treasures. If this did not succeed, they were tied up and cruelly beaten. Several poor creatures died under the infliction. The last resort was that of hanging… They were strung up until life was nearly extinct, when they were let down, suffered to rest awhile, then threatened and hung up again. It is not surprising that some should have been left hanging so long that they were taken down dead. But it was not alone the poor blacks (to whom they professed to come as liberators) that were thus subjected to torture and death. Gentlemen of high character… gray-headed, unconnected with the military, were dragged from their fields or their beds, and subjected to this process of threats, beating, and hanging. Along the whole track of Sherman’s army, traces remain of the cruelty and inhumanity practiced on the aged and defenseless. Some of those who were hung up died under the rope, while their cruel murderers have not only been left unreproached and unhung, but have been hailed as heroes and patriots.

        Dr. Bachman went on to describe how the slaves, male and female, were treated by the soldiers:

        On Sunday, the negroes were dressed in their best suits. They were kicked, and knocked down and robbed of all their clothing, and they came to us in their shirt-sleeves, having lost their hats, clothes, and shoes. Most of our own clothes had been hid in the woods. The negroes who had assisted in removing them were beaten and threatened with death, and compelled to show them where they were concealed. They cut open the trunks, threw my manuscripts and devotional books into a mud-hole, stole the ladies’ jewelry, hair ornaments, etc., tore many garments into tatters, or gave the rest to the negro women to bribe them into criminal intercourse. These women afterward returned to us those articles that, after the mutilations, were scarcely worth preserving. The plantation, of one hundred and sixty negroes, was some distance from the house, and to this place successive parties of fifty [soldiers] at a time resorted for three long days and nights, the husbands and fathers being fired at and compelled to fly into the woods.

        Dr. Bachman, who was about seventy-five years of age, was robbed of his watch by Federal soldiers. They repeatedly questioned him about the location of other valuables, and when he did not answer to their satisfaction, one of them beat him so severely that one of his arms was paralyzed for the rest of his life…
        — Stokes, Karen, South Carolina Civilians in Sherman’s Path — Stories of Courage Amid Civil War Destruction

        An editorial printed in the Philadelphia Inquirer cheered on Sherman’s plan to wage war against defenseless noncombatants, rejoicing at “the fate of that accursed hotbed of treason.” General Sherman himself regarded secessionists as traitors and wrote that the state “deserves all that seems in store for her.”

        In a letter to Major R.M. Sawyer dated January 31,1864, the general declared his belief that the war was the result of a “false political doctrine,” namely, “that any and every people have a right to self-government.” In the same letter (published in The Rebellion Record in 1865), Sherman contended that the Federal government could rightfully take the property, and even the life, of anyone who did not submit to its authority, and he complained that it was the “political nonsense of slave rights, State rights, freedom of conscience, freedom of press, and other such trash” that had “deluded the Southern people into war.”

        In January 1865, Sherman’s forces gathered at Beaufort, South Carolina, and during that month a few of his brigades moved a little farther inland. By the first of February, the main advance was underway. Divided into two wings, one under the command of General Oliver 0. Howard, the army began to cut a wide path of destruction across South Carolina from the coast to the North Carolina border, burning farms, plantations and towns (including the capital city of Columbia); demolishing railroad lines; destroying or confiscating crops and livestock; and plundering and abusing civilians, reducing them to hopelessness and destitution. One of Shermans aides, Captain George W. Pepper, recorded his memories of the march through South Carolina in his memoir, published in 1866:

        [H]ouses were burned as they were found. Whenever a view could be had from high ground, black columns of smoke were seen rising here and there within a circuit of twenty or thirty miles.
        Solid built chimneys were the only relics of plantation houses after the fearful blast had swept by. The destruction of houses, barns, mills, &c., was almost universal. Families who remained at home, occasionally kept the roof over their heads.

        Sherman’s armies met with little in the way of military opposition from the relatively small number of Confederate forces in the state, who were compelled to withdraw and burn bridges behind them as a force of more than sixty thousand Union troops relentlessly moved inland.

        In 1865, Major George W. Nichols, an aide-de-camp to General Sherman, published a book about the campaign in Georgia and South Carolina, revealing his contempt for the people of South Carolina, whom he dehumanized as “the scum, the lower dregs of civilization. They are not Americans; they are merely South Carolinians.” Nichols thought that the thievery committed against civilians (usually women and old men) by his soldiers was amusing. After describing how the soldiers would search out valuables that had been hidden away by civilians, he added, “These searches made one of the pleasant excitements of our march.”

        The soldiers sent out as foragers, usually in advance of the main army, were some of the worst offenders in terms of pillaging and other wrongdoing. These men were called “bummers.” In his book Merchant of Terror; author John B. Walters described them as “brigands and desperadoes” who operated virtually free of any military discipline or restraint.

        Of Sherman’s accomplishments in South Carolina, Major Nichols went on proudly:

        History will in vain be searched for a parallel to the scathing and destructive effect of the invasion of the Carolinas. Aside from the destruction of military things, there were destructions overwhelming, overleaping the present generation… agriculture, commerce, cannot be revived in our day. Day by day our legions of armed men surged over the land, over a region forty miles wide, burning everything we could not take away. On every side, the head, center and rear of our columns might be traced by columns of smoke by day and the glare of flames by night. The burning hand of war pressed on these people, blasting, withering.

        Another Federal officer, Major James A. Connolly, wrote home to his wife that halfway through the march in South Carolina, he was “perfectly sickened by the frightful devastation our army was spreading on every hand.” He described the army’s actions as “absolutely terrible” and reported how most houses were first plundered and then burned, and women, children and old men were turned out into the “mud and rain.” He told his wife that he knew the campaign against South Carolina would be a terrible one before it began, but he had no idea “how frightful the reality would be.”

        John J. Hight, a chaplain of the Fifty-eighth Indiana Infantry Regiment, wrote in his diary, “Sometimes the world seemed on fire. We were almost stifled by smoke and flames.” On March 7,1865, Sherman’s second in command, General O.O. Howard, wrote to another officer that “General Blair reports that every house on his line of march today was pillaged, trunks broken open, jewelry, silver &c, taken.”

        Historian Joseph T. Glatthaar, author of an award-winning book on Sherman’s campaign in Georgia and the Carolinas, stated that the Federal army burned the capital city of Columbia (just as it had also torched a number of towns on its way to it) and that most of Sherman’s soldiers admitted that they would do it. The Columbia correspondent for the New York Herald newspaper reported in an article submitted on June 21, 1865, “There can be but little doubt that the destruction of Columbia was the work of our army.”

        In his travels with Sherman’s army, reporter David P Conyngham had seen much destruction in Georgia, but when he gave his general impression of the operations in South Carolina, he stressed how much worse was than Georgia:

        We marched, on the whole, four hundred and fifty miles, our wings extending some thirty-five or forty miles. This would give an area of over fifteen thousand square miles which we operated over, all the time supporting men and animals on the country. Indeed, the loss we inflicted on the enemy is incalculable, and all at a trifling sacrifice of life…

        As for the wholesale burning, pillage, devastation, committed in South Carolina, magnify all I have said of Georgia fifty fold, and then throw in an occasional murder, “just to bring an old, hard-fisted cuss to his senses,” and you have a pretty good idea of the whole thing.

        — Stokes, Karen. South Carolina Civilians in Sherman’s Path, Introduction, pp 9-14,17.

        ————————————-

        JBP: In addition to what I presented immediately above, Lincoln’s words included the following:

        “Where hostility to the United States in any interior locality shall be so great and universal as to prevent competent resident citizens from holding the Federal offices, there will be NO ATTEMPT TO FORCE obnoxious strangers among the people for that object. While the strict legal right may exist in the Government to enforce the exercise of these offices, the attempt to do so would be so irritating and so nearly impracticable withal that I DEEM IT BETTER TO FOREGO FOR THE TIME THE USES OF SUCH OFFICES.

        “The mails, unless repelled, will continue to be furnished in all parts of the Union. So far as possible the people everywhere shall have that sense of perfect security which is most favorable to calm thought and reflection. The course here indicated will be followed unless current events and experience shall show a modification or change to be proper, and in every case and exigency MY BEST DISCRETION WILL BE EXERCISED, according to circumstances actually existing and WITH A VIEW AND A HOPE OF A PEACEFUL SOLUTION of the national troubles AND THE RESTORATION OF FRATERNAL SYMPATHIES AND AFFECTIONS.” (Emphases mine.)

        Reality:

        I think you’ve “gone postal”, JBP.

        Mighty “white” of you Yankees to burn down a city/town and then provide postal service to people who no longer had a roof over their heads. Have a nice day…

        How did that Yankee postal service work out for:

        PARTIAL list of CIVILIAN OCCUPIED towns burned by the Yankee army, culled from the Official Records.

        Osceola, Missouri, burned to the ground, September 24, 1861
        Dayton, Missouri, burned, January 1 to 3, 1862
        Columbus, Missouri, burned, reported on January 13, 1862
        Bentonville, Arkansas, partly burned, February 23, 1862
        Winton, North Carolina, burned, reported on February 21, 1862
        Bluffton, South Carolina, burned, reported June 6, 1863
        Bledsoe’s Landing, Arkansas, burned, October 21, 1862
        Hamblin’s, Arkansas, burned, October 21, 1862
        Donaldsonville, Louisiana, partly burned, August 10, 1862

        And then there was the sack and pillage of Athens, Alabama, on June 30, 1862, by Colonel Turchin’s men, who committed rapes and other atrocities on the inhabitants. Turchin was subsequently court-martialed and put out of the military. What happened next? Turchin was rewarded by lincoln, was promoted to Brigadier General and put back in the military.

        Athens, Alabama, partly burned, August 30, 1862
        Randolph, Tennessee, burned, September 26, 1862
        Elm Grove and Hopefield, Arkansas, burned, October 18, 1862
        Napoleon, Arkansas, partly burned, January 17, 1863
        Mound City, Arkansas, partly burned, January 13, 1863
        Hopefield, Arkansas, burned, February 21, 1863
        Eunice, Arkansas, burned, June 14, 1863
        Gaines Landing, Arkansas, burned, June 15, 1863
        Sibley, Missouri, burned June 28, 1863
        Hernando, Mississippi, partly burned, April 21, 1863
        Austin, Mississippi, burned, May 23, 1863
        Columbus, Tennessee, burned, reported February 10, 1864

        Meridian, Mississippi, destroyed, February 3 to March 6, 1864

        “For 5 days 10,000 men worked hard and with a will…with axes, crowbars, sledges, clawbars, and with fire, and I have no hesitation in pronouncing the work as well done. Meridian, with its depots, store-houses, arsenal, hospitals, offices, hotels, and cantonments no longer exists.” — w.t.sherman

        Washington, North Carolina, sacked and burned, April 20, 1864
        Hallowell’s Landing, Alabama, burned, reported May 14, 1864
        Newtown, Virginia, ordered to be burned, ordered May 30, 1864
        Virginia Military Institute, Lexington, Virginia, burned, June 12, 1864
        Camden Point, Missouri, burned, July 14, 1864
        Kendal’s Grist-Mill, Arkansas, burned, September 3, 1864
        Shenandoah Valley, devastated, reported October 1, 1864 by sheridan
        Rome, Georgia, partly burned, November 11, 1864
        Atlanta, Georgia, burned, November 15, 1864
        Griswoldville, Georgia, burned, November 21, 1864
        Somerville, Alabama, burned, January 17, 1865
        McPhersonville, South Carolina, burned, January 30, 1865
        Barnwell, South Carolina, burned, reported February 9, 1865
        Columbia, South Carolina, burned, reported February 17, 1865
        Winnsborough, South Carolina, pillaged and partly burned, February 21, 1865
        Tuscaloosa, Alabama, burned, April 4, 1865

        ————————————-

        Secede now!

        May God Save the South!

        • “They are not Americans; they are merely South Carolinians.”

          Not being “American” should actually be considered a badge of honor one that should be worn proudly

          Europe is my Race and Tennessee is my Home

          Deo Vindice Sir

    • Lincoln wanted to be free — free from Blacks. He and other Yankees didn’t want slavery in the territories because it meant bringing Blacks into the territories. He was involved with the Illinois Colonization Society and in his last days “he plotted to deport all the black people out of America”. But he became a Yankee “saint” and can get away with it.

      Contrast Julian Carr and Abraham Lincoln

      Julian Carr gave a speech where he spoke of defending the Anglo-Saxon race and of him whipping a black girl for insulting a white woman who then ran over to where the federal troops were stationed in Chapel Hill to get away with her deed (keep in mind that this was less than 90 days after Carr who was a Confederate soldier had surrendered at Appomattox and he was only 19 years old at the time).


      …It is true that the snows of winter which
      never melt, crown our temples, and we realize that
      we are living in the twilight zone; that it requires
      no unusual strain to hear the sounds of the tides
      as they roll and break upon the other shore, “The
      watch-dog’s bark his deep bay mouth welcome as
      we draw near home”, breaks upon our ears — makes
      it doubly sweet to know that we have been remem-
      bered in the erection of this beautiful memorial.
      The present generation, I am persuaded, scarcely
      takes note of what the Confederate soldier meant
      to the welfare of the Anglo Saxon race during the
      four years immediately succeeding the war, when
      the facts are, that their courage and steadfastness
      saved the very life of the Anglo Saxon race in the
      South–When “the bottom rail was on top” all over
      the Southern states, and to-day as a consequence,
      the purest strain of the Anglo Saxon is to be found
      in the 13 Southern States — Praise God.

      I trust I may be pardoned for one allusion,
      howbeit it is rather personal. One hundred yards
      from where we stand, less than ninety days perhaps
      after my return from Appomattox, I horse-whipped a
      Negro wench until her skirts hung in shreds, because
      upon the streets of this quiet village she had
      publicly insulted and maligned a Southern lady, and
      then rushed for protection to these University
      buildings where was stationed a garrison of 100
      Federal soldiers. I performed the pleasing duty
      in the immediate presence of the entire garrison,
      and for thirty nights afterwards slept with a
      double-barrel shot gun under my head…

      — Julian Carr, quote from speech made at the dedication of Silent Sam, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, 6/2/1913.

      Lincoln’s classic quote:

      “…I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races,[applause]-that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality.And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I AS MUCH AS ANY OTHER MAN AM IN FAVOR OF HAVING THE SUPERIOR POSITION ASSIGNED TO THE WHITE RACE…”
      –Abraham Lincoln, quote from 4th Lincoln-Douglas debate, Charleston, Illinois, 9/18/1858.

      Legacy and public reaction to Julian Carr:

      Legacy

      – The city of Carrboro, North Carolina.

      – Carr Hall, at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Carr paid the entire cost of this building, erected in 1900 as a dormitory. When new it was described as “one of the stateliest buildings on its [UNC-CH] beautiful campus”,:?56? but in 2017 it was “a decrepit administrative office building”. The building was renamed in 2020.

      – “Duke University’s Carr Building is a different story. Its original name, in 1927, was “Classroom Building”. It was renamed “Carr Building” in 1930. In 2018 the original name of Classroom Building was restored (see below).

      – A building at the Durham School of the Arts, originally Central Junior High School, was named for Carr. On August 24, 2017, in addition to prohibiting the Confederate flag, the Board of the Durham Public Schools voted unanimously to remove Carr’s name from the building.

      – The Durham chapter of the United Daughters of the Confederacy is named the Julian S. Carr Chapter.

      – In 1945, the 100th anniversary of his birth, Governor R. Gregg Cherry proclaimed October 12, 1945, as Julian S. Carr Day in North Carolina. On that day, an editorial in the Durham Sun said that “Named for him are a great many things, churches, a factory, a library, a Sunday School class, a host of children whose parents admired the man, and, now, Durham’s Central Junior High School.”

      – A portrait of him hangs in the house of the UNC System President

      Removal of Carr’s name

      “‘Carr-washing’ has become a popular trend in Durham and Chapel Hill, as Julian Carr’s name is taken off buildings, such as the Durham Performing Arts Center. His self-presentation, at the dedication of the Confederate Monument (Silent Sam) as proud to use violence to maintain white supremacy, has sparked a movement. The speech has been quoted at Black Lives Matter Movements, and secondhand sources say it was referenced at the University of Virginia march. Carr’s slave count is undocumented other than those who labored for his companies, but his White Supremacist ties are undeniable.”

      – The Durham Board of Education voted to remove Julian Carr’s name from a building (the former Central Junior High School, mentioned above) at the Durham School of the Arts and to adopt a new dress code specifically prohibiting items that “intimidate other students on the basis of race.” Mentioned were the Confederate flag, the Nazi swastika, and Ku Klux Klan symbols.

      – The Duke University History Department, after the toppling of Silent Sam and the attention it gave to Carr’s words, asked that Carr Hall, which houses the department, be renamed. Duke President Vincent Price called for a formation of a committee of students and faculty to examine options for a new understanding of Carr, his white supremacy, and his early support for Duke University. The committee held three meetings and sought comments from the Duke community, the “vast majority” of which favored renaming. On December 1, 2018, on the recommendation of the committee, the Board of Trustees voted to remove Carr’s name from the building and temporarily returned the Hall to its original name, “Classroom Building”, until a new name is decided upon.

      – A petition has circulated calling for the town name of Carrboro to be changed. According to Alderwoman Jacquie Gist, “Changing Carrboro’s name is not a realistic option”, but the town of Carrboro is planning to erect a plaque “acknowledging namesake Julian Carr’s racist remarks”.

      – In July 2020, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill’s Carr Hall was renamed the “Student Affairs Building.”
      — Wikipedia: “Julian Carr (industrialist)”

      Public reaction to Abraham Lincoln:

      Basically — “just crickets”…

      https://youtu.be/vujJgFHQegg

      Historical reputation

      In his company, I was never reminded of my humble origin, or of my unpopular color.
      —?Frederick Douglass

      By the 1970s, Lincoln had become a hero to political conservatives—apart from neo-Confederates such as Mel Bradford, who denounced his treatment of the white South—for his intense nationalism, his support for business, his insistence on stopping the spread of slavery, his acting on Lockean and Burkean principles on behalf of both liberty and tradition, and his devotion to the principles of the Founding Fathers. Lincoln became a favorite of liberal intellectuals across the world.

      Barry Schwartz wrote in 2009 that Lincoln’s image suffered “erosion, fading prestige, benign ridicule” in the late 20th century. On the other hand, Donald opined in his 1996 biography that Lincoln was distinctly endowed with the personality trait of negative capability, defined by the poet John Keats and attributed to extraordinary leaders who were “content in the midst of uncertainties and doubts, and not compelled toward fact or reason”.

      In the 21st century, President Barack Obama named Lincoln his favorite president and insisted on using the Lincoln Bible for his inaugural ceremonies. Lincoln has often been portrayed by Hollywood, almost always in a flattering light…
      — Wikipedia: “Abraham Lincoln”

      PS:
      And by the way, Lincoln came up with a “wild story” that supposedly occurred when he was just nineteen (as 19 y.o. Julian Carr’s whipping a black girl story) and it also involved Blacks.

      …When he [Lincoln] was nineteen, still residing in Indiana, he made his first trip upon a flatboat to New Orleans. He was a hired hand merely, and he and a son of the owner, without other assistance, made the trip. The nature of part of the “cargo-load,” as it was called, made it necessary for them to linger and trade along the sugar-coast; and one night they were attacked by seven negroes with intent to kill and rob them. They were hurt some in the mêlée, but succeeded in driving the negroes from the boat, and then “cut cable,” “weighed anchor,” and left.
      –“Short Autobiography Written at the Request of a Friend to Use in Preparing a Popular Campaign Biography in the Election of 1860.” in book “Abraham Lincoln; Complete Works, Comprising His Speeches, State Papers, and Miscellaneous Writings, Volume 1” edited by John G. Nicolay and John Hay, p 640.

      Secede now!

      May God Save the South!

  7. Everything is gravitating towards contrary and opposing religions, the religion of the Jew equity, equality inclusion versus the religion of Christ, no harm must come to the innocent, and the question has been asked and answer over and over throughout time. Christ and Christian morality is the highest morality, and is closes to Gods wants and the Jews like Ron Brownstein never ever seem to get it. The kyke Brownstein is blind to God, blind as a bat.

  8. The Atlantic Magazine (the hard copy magazine) was excellent back in the early 1990s. Every issue had intelligent, well written articles about serious issues including mass immigration.

    There was even a great cover story on Jean Respail’s “Camp of the Saints” you can still reference this outstanding article on line “Must it be the rest against the West”.

    Occasionally there were some good, honest articles in later years from a Tulsi Gabard type fair, secular honest liberal perspective.

    The best is G Wood “What ISIS really wants”.

    But yes the commentator is correct, Zionist Neo Conservative Jews and just hate White people Leftist Demorat establishment, hate Trump people (the top guy is named Goldberg – served as an Israeli prison guard during the Intafata, he made friends with Arab Palestinian POWs and used his Lib American connections to get them in to the USA, universities, join the coalition of the fringes against us Whites.

    As strange as the J financier alliance with the worst Bolshevik Communists (Jews helping other Jews) the alliance of international Jews with Muslims as long as they mostly want to invade White Western Countires, vote for Obama, ethnically cleanse White cockneys from the East End of London – Lib Leftist Zionists Jews are all good with that.

    Why do they do this?

    They hate us, want us replaced.

    J Ryan

    • >The Atlantic Magazine (the hard copy magazine) was excellent back in the early 1990s.

      As I think I noted before, in 1994 they published Roy Beck’s article The Ordeal of Immigration in Wausau about Hmong in Wisconsin, which is, interestingly, still available on their website (see the link) — I don’t think a similar article would be published in The Atlantic today.

  9. I sometimes think it would have been a better world if the Anti-Federalists (who were the majority) had just reformed the Articles of Confederation. That is what they were supposed to do at the constitutional convention. Instead, they swore everybody to secrecy, banned the public and media, and threw out the AOC and replaced it with the Constitution. American history teaches the AOC was unworkable. But in reality, many delegates had proposals that would have reformed the AOC and made it better and superior to the Constitution we were saddled with. You have to read the anti-federalist papers to ascertain what these proposals would have been. Regardless the Anti-federalists warned that the Constitution did not have enough limits on taxing power, that the Supreme Court would eventually rule over all and Federalism would degenerate to rule of judges, and that the Constitution did not do enough to protect state sovereignty, which, as we all known, eventually lead to the Civil War. The AF were right on all counts! What we must do now is have all the read states call a constitutional convention. (AF were farmers and middle class, Federalists were merchants and the elite)

  10. Speaking of freedom:

    linkThis is the recorded call (with consent) between me and the sheriffs department. Here Forrest McLean of Tulare tells me that because of my “extremely right wing involvement” I must turn in my ccw. … He says that they are not trying to determine whether allegations made against me are true or not, they have it in their right to demand the revocation of my ccw and I cannot question or appeal to anyone. … This is where it begins. They don’t need to disarm everyone, they just need to disarm the people who won’t go along with the program. … Please share this video with your mainstream conservative friends still waving thin blue line flags

    He provides a link to a YouTube video containing audio of the phone call.

    Tulare County is in California.

    Caveats: I do not know this person/his background, have not listened to the phone call, and am not familiar with the relevant/related CA law(s).

    But I doubt the current SCOTUS would uphold legislation that makes this possible, but until there is a case before it, or before a sympathetic lower court judge who would issue an injunction, not much can be done.

  11. Both parties want control over the people. The Democrats are just more honest about their motives.

  12. No one who sincerely believes in limited government and the rights of the individual could be for starting one elected war after another and keeping occupations going endlessly. The U.S. government has no legal or moral authority to tell other societies what they can and can’t do. The American military is there to defend the United States of America, it isn’t some international peace keeping force. It isn’t there to fight for freedom and liberty, it’s there to defend us.

    Usually I blame wealthy elites for the way things are, they are usually responsible, however living in fly over country as I do, I run into Mr. and Mrs. J Evil Superpatriot quite often, wanting to cheer lead for the American military like it was the local football team. Wars never go on long enough for these people, we’d still be in Vietnam if it was left up to these fuckers. The good ole US of A has to go in the big win. Every war has to end like World War 2. It doesn’t help either that every now and then one of these jerks will drag out some 102 year old fart and give him his 16, 666th pat on the back for stopping those awful Nazi’s all by himself.

    • >The American military is there to defend the United States of America, …

      In addition to everything you mention, historically the US did not maintain a standing army of any significant size — I think there were two main reasons for this: 1) federalism was weaker earlier in US history, and people in the separate states simply did not want to fund a large federal military; and 2) they didn’t necessarily trust the federal government.

      Only after WWII, in particular the signing of the National Security Act of 1947, was the national security state created, which enabled the rise of the military industrial complex and the creation of a permanent wartime economy.

Comments are closed.