The Most Consequential Elections in History: Abraham Lincoln's Victory in 1864 Led to the End of the Civil War

Racial healing

To Maureen Nolan: I am not interested in engaging in a contest with you. My wish is to find common ground with you and Liz to heal and better our nation. Liz wrote in anger and you responded in anger. When I tried to get us all to transcend that anger, you responded with more anger. What do you expect in response? You will not win no matter what the response. There is no winning here. Our country loses.

CONFEDERATE PRINCIPLES CRUCIAL TO AMERICAN LIBERTY

Constitution or Union? Why the Idea of the Confederacy is Crucial to American Liberty

No symbol in so-called "polite, mainstream" America is more publicly reviled than that of the confederate battle cross. No public figure in any walk of American life could display confederate symbols without being savaged in the press and suffering significant career damage. In some circles, confederate symbolism probably ranks slightly above bestiality in terms of acceptability, although I am sure than in San Francisco, this order would be reversed. In the 2004 presidential campaign. Al Sharpton called the confederate flag "The American Swastika". This statement is remarkable. Remarkable because the Confederacy; a decentralized constitutional republic fighting a strictly defensive struggle against invasion, was the polar opposite of Nazi Germany, a completely centralized absolute dictatorship bent on military conquest. But even more remarkable is that not a single account in the mainstream press highlighted this inaccuracy. And even more remarkable, it is almost certain, had a major public figure or publication done so, they would have been severely attacked for it.

Campaigns all across America have resulted in removing the battle flag from the state capitol in Columbia, a city burned to the ground by Sherman, removing the battle cross emblem from the Georgia state flag, and countless less publicized suppressions of confederate symbolism, such as the removal of the confederate flag from confederate soldiers' graves in Charlotte's Elmwood cemetery. The Confederacy, has in fact, been the victim of one of history's most successful smear campaigns. Certainly, part is due to the old truism "the victors write the history" and much is due to heightened racial sensitivities in our current era, in which the Confederacy, which lasted 4 years, is seen as the principal villain in North American slavery, an institution which lasted more than 200 years in both north and south. But I believe there are more profound reasons for the extreme contempt heaped on the Confederacy. And these reasons strike at the very core of the reality behind the present day regime in the United States.

Large corporations sometimes clean up their balance sheets by spinning off a subsidiary to which they assign unwanted operations or debts. In a real sense., the dominant interpreters of American history have used the Confederacy as their undesirable historical subsidiary, to which they have assigned antiquated concepts such as slavery, disunion, and states rights. By "spinning off" the Confederacy, they are able to purify and transform the United States into a modern and progressive social democracy. It is very useful in this interpretation to package the evil of slavery with the other concepts. This helps to taint these ideas and prevent close examination of their worth. But their efforts are only successful if one accepts the superficial view of history taught in public school "social studies" classes or presented by the all pervasive supporters of the current American regime. In these presentations, much of the great intellectual foundation of the early republic, such as the Federalist papers and their anti-federalist counterparts, the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions, and the writings of John C. Calhoun, such as his Disquisition on Government, Discourse on the Constitution and Government of the United States, and the Fort Hill address, are ignored in a flagrant sin of omission. Of course. most people do accept this superficial treatment, and so the campaign is very effective.

So why does it matter? Why spend intellectual capital on arguing the rectitude of the Confederate cause 140 years after Appomattox? Many would argue with justification that if you are arguing for liberty, you encounter much opposition by supporting the confederate cause, and it would be more expedient to ignore it. But I can make a stronger case that the constitutional issues surrounding the secession of the southern states, Lincoln's destructive and brutal suppression of secession, and reconstruction policies and constitutional amendments, are so fundamental to understanding the erosion of liberty and expansion of federal power, that they cannot be ignored.

The other facet of this argument is the Lincoln myth. The metamorphosis of a shrewd partisan operative into a national demigod sanctified violation of the constitution as an acceptable expedient. The Union is more important than the Constitution. If the great and good Abe Lincoln did it, it must be right. For example, I saw former New York governor Mario Cuomo defending a present day action of questionable constitutionality by referring to Lincoln's expedient violations of the same. If Lincoln's "saving the union" and "freeing the slaves" can justify the violations of the constitution, that gives a pass to later Presidents, congresses, and federal courts to do the same. If Lincoln and the Union cause in the War for Southern Independence are axiomatically right, then all arguments for limited federal government and strict adherence to the constitution will eventually fail. Those of us who believe that the constitutional compact of limited government is the essential characteristic of American liberty realize that freedom is not guaranteed by a taxing, regulating, and warring government. It is guaranteed by the ability to "just say no" to such a government though nullification or secession. And a vigorous defense of the Confederate cause as among the purest expressions of true American liberty and patriotism is essential. This will not be easy and will engender ferocious opposition. We live in an America where even so-called conservatives promote the Pledge of Allegiance, a loyalty oath written by a 19th century socialist, swearing an oath to "one nation, indivisible" as the guarantor of "liberty and justice for all". This "my country, right or wrong" mentality would have been alien to the founding fathers who saw the constitution as a contract between the states, not a sacred blood oath binding one to obedience to a national regime. Modern day liberals and conservatives both promote the use of federal force and confiscation to achieve their goals, they merely disagree on the details. In the final analysis, it is a question of the primacy of Constitution or Union. Do constitutional limits on government trump a desire to preserve "Union" at all costs? Or does the need to preserve the "Union", i.e., the central government, trump constitutional guarantees of liberty?

There is little question as to where the first American patriots would stand.

THE CIVIL WAR IS NOT OVER

Anyone that thinks the Civil War is over has no comprehension of what is happening in America. The war began about 1830 as a cold war when Northern Industrialists began to slander the South. They wanted a war to gain economic control over the South. The famous English writer Charles Dickens stated "The Northern onslaught against Southern slavery is a specious piece of humbug designed to mask their desire for the economic control of the Southern States". The war became a Hot war from 1861-1865. It has been a cold war from 1865 to the present. So called "reconstruction" was the plunder, pillage, and rape of the Southern states. Even devout Northern abolitionists saw what was happening and took action to stop the corruption of carpetbaggers. But reconstruction did not end in 1877. The Northern industrialists had unfair sectional freight rates so high that no industry could come to the South and compete. Governor Ellis Arnall of Georgia finally shamed the Franklin Roosevelt administration into more or less equalizing the rates about the end of World War II. At this time the Northern Industrialists discontinued their suppression and war against the South. At this time a new group took up the cold war against the South. Since WW II the war against the South has been conducted by Northern Liberal Socialists-the same ones that control the mass news media-Hollywood, Newspapers, and TV. The first phase of Reconstruction II was the civil rights movement. There was a Northern Liberal Socialist in every back office planning and orchestrating every march and burning of the cities. Now the South is being force fed Reconstruction II Phase II-Multiculturalism and Political Correctness. Author Frank Conner wrote a 752 page book "THE SOUTH UNDER SIEGE 1830-2000" which fully documents this continuing cold war against the South. Why is the South under attack? Because the South is the most Christian and Conservative section of America. The Northern Liberal Socialists have two goals for America 1. Convert America to Total Socialism and 2. Destroy Christianity and convert America to Secular Humanism. Once the Christian South is broken the rest of America will fall in line like sheep behind Socialism and Secular Humanism. But the South is "tough to break" so the Civil War continues as a cold war. The book is available from Amazon.com. NO THE CIVIL WAR IS NOT OVER. THE SOUTH IS UNDER FULL FLEDGED ATTACK TODAY JUST AS SURELY AS IT WAS DURING 1861-1865.

Socialist Karl Marx stated " A people separated from their heritage are easily persuaded". The infamous Communist Vladmir Lenin coined the term "Useful Idiots". Those who are participating in the suppression and ban of Confederate principles and values fit Lenin's category. Many white liberals and black Americans have been indoctrinated by the Socialists and told that the Confederate flag represents racism, bigotry, and a painful reminder of slavery. What it really represents is the principles of America's founding fathers: Limited Constitutional Federal Government, States Rights, Resistance to Government Tyranny, and Christian Values and Principles. These are the same principles that the original U.S. Betsy Ross flag represents.

Socialist Karl Marx Admired Lincoln

Bob Hurst of Tallahassee, FL wrote this column for the Wakulla Journal. He graciously gave me permission to post it.

LINCOLN, HITLER, MARX, LENIN AND THE FOURTH OF JULY

The day after Independence Day and all the celebrations that were held in Tallahassee and environs on the Fourth of July, I was sitting in a local restaurant thinking about what I might write this column about while also considering the extravaganzas of the previous day and what it all means.

I have enjoyed the study of history since a very young age and most of my heroes from that earlier time were (and still are) many of the Founding Fathers of this country (plus a Confederate or two as you might have guessed if you have read this column before). I have deep and profound respect for George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, George Mason and other great and noble men of that time who gave us the basic tools for the formation of this country. In fact, of the three busts that I have in my library, two are of Washington and Jefferson - men that I look upon as being almost God-like.

Our Founding Fathers were brilliant men who knew intimately of the follies implicit in strong, centralized governments as existed in Europe at that time. That is why they developed a constitution for this young country that would discourage the development of a centralized government but, rather, would be based on a model of federalism and state sovereignty. They gave us a Bill of Rights as a codification of the restraints placed on the central government and, of course, gave us the Tenth Amendment for the maintenance of states' rights.(Just as a sidebar, Thomas Jefferson had a grandson who was a Confederate general, George Mason had a grandson who was a Confederate diplomat and Robert E. Lee married the adopted granddaughter of George Washington.)

It is because I am aware of this that I have ambivalent feelings about the Fourth of July - Independence Day. You see, for many of us who have grown up in the South, who have studied the history of our region and people, and have admiration for the stand taken by our Confederate ancestors, the celebration of "Independence Day" rings a bit hollow. We know that our Confederate ancestors fought for the independence of this region. This quest for Southern independence was, as you know, vehemently opposed by Abraham Lincoln and his political minions. By force, Lincoln and company squashed the bid for independence and according to many modern-day politically-correct historians, that settles the question. After all, "might makes right".

But there is a wonderful truism that says "a man convinced against his will, remains of the same opinion still". This holds especially true for the many Southerners who are familiar with the Declaration of Independence. That venerable document says: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it and to institute new government...".

There you have it, the South realized that the central government in Washington was created from among its parts (states) with the consent of the governed to help secure rights but could, and should, be altered or abolished if the need arose. For the South, the need arose in the mid-nineteenth century and culminated with the election of Abraham Lincoln in 1860 as president.

Lincoln's election was an unpopular event in much of the then United States. Lincoln received only 40% of the popular vote meaning that 60% of the voters preferred another candidate for the office. He was also a sectional candidate since he received not one electoral vote from any of the Southern states or border states (Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky, Missouri).

After his election he micromanaged a war to prevent independence for the South - a war that featured not only the usual military tactics and combatants but also the decimation of civil liberties and the waging of war against civilian populations. Yet today he is revered by a certain faction in this country and our children are taught in schools that he was "one of our greatest presidents".

All of this was going through my head as I sat in that restaurant and prepared to read several newspapers and magazines that I had taken with me. Some of my best reading is done in restaurants. I suppose it was just serendipity that one of those magazines happened to be the latest issue of my favorite magazine, SOUTHERN PARTISAN, for as I turned to the contents page the first thing I noticed was that the feature article for this issue was written by the marvelous Thomas DiLorenzo and was entitled "The Dictators' Favorite President".

If you're not familiar with Dr. DiLorenzo, he is a professor of economics, specializing in economic history, at Loyola College in Maryland. He is also a senior fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute. Among the eleven books that he has thus far authored are two fine exposes of Lincoln that I highly recommend. The first, released in 2002, is entitled THE REAL LINCOLN and the more recent book, released in 2006, is entitled LINCOLN UNMASKED. Both are superb and present aspects of Lincoln that you will never get from the politically correct authors who comprise the gaggle of Lincoln myth-protectors.

In the SOUTHERN PARTISAN article, Dr. DiLorenzo writes of the admiration that three ruthless suppressors of freedom and independence held for Lincoln. He mentions how Karl Marx, a contemporary of Lincoln's and the father of totalitarian communism, wrote to Lincoln congratulating him on his election victory and assuring him that the European communist movement supported him. Marx remained an admirer of Lincoln and continued to write of his agreement with Lincoln's actions for suppressing the bid for independence by the American South. (You can read many of these writings at www.marxists.org.) DiLorenzo documents other Marx writings inspired by Lincoln actions and writings.

DiLorenzo also quotes the fine author and literary critic Edmund Wilson from his 1962 book PATRIOTIC GORE: "[I]f we would grasp the significance of the American Civil War in relation to the history of our time, we should consider Abraham Lincoln in connection with the other leaders who have been engaged in similar tasks. The chief of these leaders have been Bismarck and Lenin...Each established a strong central government over hitherto loosely coordinated peoples." Wilson then goes on to explain how each of these men (Lincoln, Lenin, Bismarck) was an "uncompromising dictator" whose rule eventually led to powerful government bureaucracies that resulted in the bad potentialities of their policies leading to undesirable outcomes.

Lincoln has long been the darling of totalitarians. The Communist Party USA long held an annual "Lincoln-Lenin Day" parade in New York City and when many members of the Communist Party USA went to Spain to fight for the communists in the Spanish Civil War, they called themselves the "Abraham Lincoln Brigade". For more on this read Pulitzer Prize winner David Donald's book LINCOLN RECONSIDERED.

Perhaps the most interesting and surprising discovery in the DiLorenzo article was the revelation that Adolph Hitler based an entire chapter of his book, MEIN KAMPF, on Lincoln's model of suppression of state sovereignty and even plagiarized entire pages from Lincoln's inaugural addresses. Hitler, as all of the other worst tyrants of modern times, was a sworn enemy of states' rights and divide sovereignty. He deemed the complete abolition of states' rights as necessary and essential for the establishment of "a powerful national Reich".

This is one of the reasons that it both amuses and angers me when some self-proclaimed "educated" person tries to link the Confederate Battle Flag with the swastika. These people need to be reminded that the official name of the Nazi movement was the National Socialist German Workers' Party. Folks, the Nazis and the Confederates were a full 180 degrees apart. No wonder Lincoln was so obsessed with destroying the Confederacy.

Well, anyway, all this just means that the celebration of Independence Day to me encompasses far more than hot dogs, fireworks, beaches and History Channel programs which dwell only on the accomplishments of our magnificent Founding Fathers. Abraham Lincoln changed all that. I hope you will consider this as you celebrate Independence Day in the future. There is always far more to history than the great majority of us are ever aware of.

By the way, I appreciate all the phone calls and emails that I receive about my articles. I am always happy to recommend suggested readings to those of you who are interested in delving deeper into these topics. I also want to express my gratitude to the young man who crossed the street to shake my hand and tell me how much he enjoys the articles after the Fourth of July parade in Sopchoppy. The day was hot and my eight-pound, wool Confederate uniform was heavy, but your kind words made all the discomfort go away.

DEO VINDICE

Bob Hurst is Commander of Col. David Lang Camp, Sons of Confederate Veterans, in Tallahassee and is also 2nd Lt. Commander, Florida Division, SCV.

Lincoln did not start the war

R. Semmes is misinformed Lincoln did not send a large fleet to Ft Sumter. He sent the Star of the West supply ship after notifying the governor of South Carolina that there were only food and supplies for the fort's inhabitants and no new soldiers or ammunition would be sent. So Semmes' statement that Lincoln's

"ham handed attempt to intervene with a large war fleet" is ridiculous and wrong.

Also Mr. Waddell's statement that Lincoln could have offered compensation for the slaves to avoid the war is similarly misinformed; Lincoln DID offer compensation several times to the South but they refused each time.

To compare him to Bush is laughable. Lincoln's words will live forever and no one even now can remember anything notable that Bush has said except for maybe "bring it on" as his taunt to the terrorists.

Lincoln

Sherman's March was much more than an attack on military targets. They destroyed courthouses to ensure deed records could not be reconstructed, there were thousands of rapes most not reported because of the humiliation, and the people were left to collect corn remains from the stools of cows to make bread. The winners sanitize history.

That Lincoln was responsible for the equivalent deaths in today population terms of almost 19 million Americans is a travesty that gets little note.

Lincoln started the war?

R. Semmes of AL: So I take it Lincoln secretively put the idea of Seccession into the minds of the Charleston assembly, right?

Right...

Delusions

James W. King of GA: To assert that Lincoln was a Marxist is not only delusional, it's insane. Because someone wrote a book about it, does not make it true. You are in GA, hence you have bitterness when discussing Lincoln, and an outright hatred of Sherman. That's understandable if anyone knows anything about the southern postwar experience. However, you are sadly mistaken. While it's true Republican zealotry post-Lincoln was the driving force behind the horrible "reconstruction" period, Lincoln himself would've made things much more comfortable and efficient, had he lived.

JW Booth was the South's worst enemy, not Lincoln, Sherman or Grant. Booth murdered the man who was going to put the seccessionists back on their feet with grace and dignity. Booth's act unleashed the Republicans who spearheaded a campaign of revenge against the South; a campaign that Lincoln would have stifled had he not been killed.

One last thing. Sherman's March wasn't anywhere near the level of savagery as most Southerners believe. Sherman burned military targets, and with the exception of Charleston, carried on his campaign ruthlessesly and harshly - but with restraint, and with an eye on military success, not oppression.

Free E-Mail Article-"The 10 Causes Of The Civil War"

FOR A FREE E-MAIL COPY OF MY ARTICLE "THE 10 CAUSES OF THE CIVIL WAR" CONTACT ME AT jkingantiquearms@bellsouth.net

My article gives the Southern perspective which has never been taught in American schools. American history as taught in America's classrooms is actually a highly biased New England perspective of the civil war ( War Between The States ).

The words of Irish-born Confederate Major General Patrick Cleburne from his January, 1864, letter:

"Every man should endeavor to understand the meaning of subjugation before it is too late...It means the history of this heroic struggle will be written by the enemy; that our youth will be trained by Northern schoolteachers; will learn from Northern school books their version of the war; will be impressed by the influences of history and education to regard our gallant dead as traitors, and our maimed veterans as fit objects for derision...The conqueror's policy is to divide the conquered into factions and stir up animosity among them...

James W. King

Past Commander

Sons of Confederate Veterans Camp 141

Lt. Col. Thomas M. Nelson

Albany Georgia

jkingantiquearms@bellsouth.net

Confederacy Deserves Honor And Respect

The Confederate States of America and the Old South was a classical civilization with colleges and universities, art and literature, world class architecture, politics with superior statesmen, and a fine military. It was driven by slave labor just as the classical civilizations of Egypt, Greece, and Rome were. Regardless, slavery was a dying institution and virtually all educated Southerners knew this. It had ended peacefully in the rest of the Western Hemisphere but in America the Northern radicals, fanatics, zealots, and industrialists used it as a scapegoat to attack and subjugate the Southern states for the cause of empire and to exploit the South's resources. The famous English writer Charles Dickens stated " The Northern onslaught upon Southern slavery is a specious piece of humbug designed to mask their desire for the economic control of the Southern States". The Confederacy deserves to be honored, remembered and respected.

The Confederate Flag and the United States Flag are judged by different standards and criteria, and are not held to the same levels of accountability. In analytical science and weights and measures, comparisons are made against known standards. However, in politics comparisons are never made in a fair and impartial manner.

Political Correctness has been used to attempt bans of The Confederate Flag from schools, parades, public and private property, and even historical monuments and sites.

The Confederate flag represents Constitutional Limited Federal Government, States Rights, Resistance to Government Tyranny, and Christian Values and Principles. To say that it represents racism and bigotry is a negative and shallow interpretation comparable to saying the U.S. flag represents the genocide of the American Indians and abortion.

Hypocrisy, ignorance, and bias have been directed against the Confederate Flag. Compare the U.S. Flag (Stars and Stripes). The genocide and racial cleansing of the American Indians took place under the U.S. Flag. Their land was taken without fair and just compensation. Indians died by the thousands as they were forced on to reservations and subjected to starvation and deadly diseases. In the American West, cavalry troopers murdered entire villages including babies in their mother's arms.

Slaves were imported from Africa to America primarily by five Northern States: New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island. New York City had the second highest slave population in America. The Confederate Flag was not involved in the importation of slaves. Finally, the U.S. Flag flies over a nation that has murdered an estimated 50 million babies by abortion.

Yes, the CSA had the institution of slavery but most were treated well and it was a dying institution prior to the war. White factory workers in the North were not treated as well as most Southern slaves. For proof of this view the movie "Gangs Of New York". Yes, various hate groups have misused and abused the Confederate flag but they have done the same to the U.S. flag. The Confederate flag is 180 degrees diametrically opposed to Globalism, Socialism and Secular humanism. That is the real reason globalists, socialists, and atheists want to ban it. The infamous Communist Vladmir Lenin coined the term "Useful Idiots". The Socialist Karl Marx stated "People separated from their heritage are easily persuaded". Many Black Americans and White Liberals who are opposed to the Confederate flag have been indoctrinated by those who would convert America to Total Socialism and Secular Humanism. They have been told that the Confederate flag represents a painful reminder of slavery and racism and bigotry and that they should be offended by it. They are being used as "useful idiots" as defined by Lenin.