There was a time when America might have been mostly reunited. That time is gone. You will never come close to reuniting this country again. We have let in too many foreigners who refuse to assimilate and who want to remake America into their own image and will not be satisfied with anything less. And we’ve done that on purpose. No matter how much Trump or others try to make us all one people again it will not happen.


Look at the two visions of this country displayed at the two political conventions this year. They couldn’t be further apart if they tried. One the one side you have mostly conservative, including many middle of the road folks, who just want to live their lives and be left alone.


On the other side you have a ton of screaming meme’s whose fondest wish is for a communist Ameriika and they refuse to be satisfied with anything less! And they are fully willing to force their leftist agenda on the rest of us. So how do you reconcile these two? You don’t. Eventually They will have to fight. If the rightists have any guts at all they must resist the howling leftist hordes.


If this sounds like civil war you may be right. I’m afraid it has come down to this, as much as I hate the thought of it. The two visions of America can never be reconciled–one free and the other communist. There has to be a separation and I am afraid it will be a bloody one–as it was in 1861–except that was not a civil war. This one will be, a civil war of communist aggression, which we will be foolish if we do not resist. Not resisting will be the death of America and the birth of Amerika.


We had better realize those on the left have a agenda they plan to carry out no matter what. Being “nice” to them will only encourage them and hasten our demise The left is evil and must be resisted–resisted and exposed for the anti-Christs they are. Nothing else will suffice. This is a little something for us to think about.

Over the years, in many articles, I have documented the support Karl Marx and his friend, Engels, had for Lincoln’s “glorious Union” during the War of Northern Aggression. By now it should be no secret to anyone except those who depend on government school textbooks for their historical information. Leftist European revolutionaries strongly supported the Northern cause. Even court historian James McPherson has to admit that much, though he does it with pride, which shows you where McPherson is really coming from.


It was mentioned in the book Karl Marx by Franz Mehring that the English branch of the Communist International, when Lincoln was re-elected in 1864, sent him a message of greetings and congratulations.


Marx was the one that drew this message up, addressing it to the “son of the working class” that had been given the job of “leading his country in a noble struggle to emancipate an enchained race.” That had to have been the biggest pile of 19th century horse manure on record, because both Lincoln and Marx knew better. Neither of them gave a tinker’s damn for the “enchained race” except as an excuse to beat down the South.


According to Mehring, Marx put maximum effort into the message to Lincoln, something unusual considering how lazy Marx was. Lincoln did not fail to notice this. Much to the surprise of a London newspaper…” he (Lincoln) answered the address in a warm and friendly tone.” It’s what I have previously stated—a mutual admiration society consisting of Karl Marx and Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln, needless to say, was far from being the country bumpkin, hayseed lawyer that our “history” books have portrayed him as.


And Marx and Engels were far from being alone. Other European radicals and socialists also strongly supported the Union cause. The well-known Russian revolutionary Michael Bakunin, with whom Marx had some notable differences, was also a partisan of the Union cause. According to the book Russian Radicals Look To America by David Hecht, Bakunin was a keen observer of social conditions in the United States.


According to Hecht: “As has already been recorded, Bakunin was a firm opponent of American slavery and unwaveringly supported the North during the Civil War. This attitude was shared by Herzen (also by Belinski, Chernyshevski, and Lavros) and was to be expected…in view of his specifically Russian experience of opposition to serfdom.” So not only Bakunin, but all these other revolutionaries of various stripes supported the Northern cause. I have to wonder at this point how many of these erstwhile socialists in Europe realized that four slave states still remained in the Union and the Union showed no interest whatever in emancipating the slaves in those four Union slave states. But I guess we are not supposed to ask that question. After all, none of our “historians” bother to.


While in America, Bakunin wrote to Herzen and Ogarev that “In the struggle between the Northern and Southern United States…the North…has all my sympathies. So Bakunin visited the United States. You have to wonder where these supposedly penniless leftist agitators got the money to travel around the world. Passage to America wasn’t cheap. So where did Bakunin come up with the bread to come here?


Like Marx, Bakunin berated the North for their slow start in the War. After the shooting part of the war was over, Bakunin was strongly in favor of the racical “reconstruction” policies of Thaddeus Stevens and Charles Sumner and Edwin Stanton and that crowd. He must have talked to the “right” people while he was here. Bakunin wanted the North to impose revolutionary measures on the South. He got his wish.


Bakunin said that for “popular self-government (really communism) to become a true reality, that ‘another revolution…far more profound…’ would be a necessity.” Stop and analyze what Bakunin said for a moment. He recognized that the War of Northern Aggression was a revolution. By his use of the term “another revolution” he referred to a revolution beyond the war, which could only be the emergence of “reconstruction” and the civil rights movement that was demonstrated by the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments. Think about that for awhile.


So, from Marx and Engels to Bakunin and Herzen, the communist/socialist sentiment in Europe was overwhelmingly in favor of a Northern victory, contrary to the desires of ordinary working folks in Europe who favored the South, as we noted in the last article. The communists saw something in the Union cause they loved (apostasy and anti-Christianity) and they saw something in the Southern cause they hated (orthodox, Reformed Christianity)! While this may seem over-simplified to some, it is the root from which the theology of socialism grows.


Considering the wide influence held in the North by abolitionists, Unitarians, and European communists, I think we may have to strongly reassess what our “Civil War” was really all about. The communist/socialist influence in the North has only grown stronger as research has continued. “Those people” sought a revolution against a basically Christian South, and to put it in the proper light, they dredged up slavery as their noble pretext for anti-Christian revolution. Had the slavery issue not been handy some other reason would have been used to justify their revolutionary intent.


Hopefully with some of the recent articles on this page you will have grasped the fact that our “Civil War” was little more than a pretext for socialist revolution in America. That war was our French Revolution, and as France has not, to this day, recovered from her revolution, so have we never fully recovered from ours, the real one—the “Civil War.” We live with the results of that war still today. No one born after 1865 has ever lived under the system bequeathed to us by the Founders. Since the supposed end of the War of Northern Aggression we have all been living in Post-America.

Often civil war comes in many forms—two opposing factions vying for control of a government; one group striving for control of a government while their opposition (usually ordinary folks) don’t even realize what is going on. So you have one revolutionary group (usually working behind the scenes, often part of the present government) financing and guiding radicals in the streets and enabling them to commit all sorts of mayhem against the general population, to scare them in order to keep them from exercising their mandate to vote and take part in the political life of the country. Sound familiar?

A major part of this form of civil war is censorship, either by hiding information the public needs to be aware of or by trying to censor out of existence those that try to inform the public about what is really going on. Usually both the concealing of facts and the censoring of those who seek to reveal those facts go on simultaneously. You see, all the facts can’t always be totally hidden. And there are those who follow the political scene who are able to dig out at least some of the facts—hence they must be silenced, lest they reach enough people with what they have found that those who operate behind the scenes should be politically embarrassed. A good example of this was the ongoing effort to cover up politically incorrect info about the COVID scam that Fauci and friends sought to foist on the public.

None of this is new. It has gone on at least since the French Revolution, and it reared its ugly head in this country awhile before the War of Northern Aggression, in the form of both censorship and propaganda.

As the War of Northern Aggression gained steam, the beneficent Mr. Lincoln made sure no voices of dissent against his agenda would be heard in the North. To that end, many opposition newspapers were shut down and individuals who dared to disagree with Lincoln’s agenda were routinely silenced. Some were treated to the motel-like conditions of Old Capitol Prison for extended “vacations.” These included newspaper editors, politicians, and even clergymen. The clergy in the North had to learn that it was “not nice to disagree with Father Abraham.”

Depending on what sources you referred to, anywhere from 13,000 to 38,000 Northern folks were treated to the “country club” conditions of Yankee prisons during the War. And these people were not raving Southern partisans either. All you had to do to be treated to the joyful experience of a Yankee prison was to disagree with Mr. Lincoln about most anything from the conduct of the war to the high price of groceries, and if someone chanced to hear you and reported you, you were hauled off to the slammer. Evidence of your “crime?” Heck, no! No evidence needed, just someone’s word that you said what he claimed you did. In light of recent events in Washington and New York, does this have a familiar ring?

And in Lincoln’s administration you almost, in a sense, had a government within a government—because of the agendas of Edwin Stanton, Thaddeus Stevens and others in Congress were most definitely not the program of Lincoln. Of course most of this has been censored out of our “history” books lest too many ask the wrong questions. With Lincoln you hardly ever knew what he really thought, and he couched his comments in a way he wanted you to take them instead of the way he really meant them. A good example of that was the way he parsed words regarding the Fort Sumter situation that he used to start the war. I realize my saying that will cause many leftist types to hyperventilate and they will shout the South really started the war. No they didn’t! Lincoln pushed them into a situation where they technically fired the first shot. It was a testimony to Lincoln’s devious nature that he was able to accomplish this and shift the blame. Again, all this stuff is censored out of the “history” books because you don’t need to know the truth. Those who know the truth often fight back. In the sense that the censors seek to keep you from knowing the truth, they have declared war on you, and on your children!

Lincoln was far from the only devious person in his administration. In fact his administration was loaded with them. Years ago I read an article on Wade Burleson about the Lincoln assassination and John Wilkes Booth. That was back around 2018 or so, but you may still be able to find it, The site is still up. The article said, in part, “The historical account of the actual assassination of our sixteenth President of the United States is without factual dispute. What has been open to debate is the number of men (and women) involved in the conspiracy to either kill or kidnap President Lincoln.” Now lets stipulate something here. These were two separate crimes. There were some who were guilty of taking part in a kidnap plot who were not guilty of the assassination plot.

The Burleson article continued: “The Lincoln Conspiracy, a 1977 book by David W. Balsiger and Charles E. Sellier seeks to prove that in 1865 Edwin M. Stanton Lincoln’s Secretary of War and other Radical Republican allies sought to kidnap Lincoln. They intended to hide Lincoln for a time while bogus articles of impeachment were drafted to remove him as president. The primary motivations for this plot were strong opposition to Lincoln’s liberal Reconstruction plans…” While there were some things in this article I don’t completely agree with, this part rings mostly true—except that Lincoln’s “liberal” Reconstruction plans were mostly formed to benefit Lincoln rather than the South. He wanted the political patronage he’d get from controlling Reconstruction. Any president who could have allowed what Sherman did to Georgia was no friend of the South. His Reconstruction agenda would have benefitted him in his second term.

Quite awhile ago now, I watched a video on You Tube called “Missing pages of J. W. Booth’s Diary” done by a man named Don Thomas. I don’t even know if it’s still out there, but you can see if you can find it. He made it on July 9, 2016. Mr. Thomas has also written a book The Reason Lincoln Had To Die. I think you can still find it on Amazon. He self-published it in 2013 because he couldn’t find a publisher that would touch it with a ten foot pole. Whenever publishers shy away from this kind of thing, I like to check it out. I got the impression, watching Mr. Thomas’ YouTube presentation, that he had really done some homework and he came up with many of the conclusions the authors of The Lincoln Conspiracy did. Although I’ve not been able to get it, I think Thomas’ book would be worth the read and his You Tube video worth watching, provided some politically correct censor doesn’t come across it and decide we don’t need to see it.

I guess, looking at our current national situation, with the Biden/Obama regime in control, I am forced to reiterate something I said years ago—we are engaged in a cultural civil war. The regime in power has declared war on us ordinary folks by hiding the truth from us as much as possible and when some folks try to get that truth out there they are censored because the Swamp, Deep State, or whatever you want to call these sleazebuckets, feel that they have the right to dictate to us how we should live and what we should be allowed to believe. They cannot allow us to grasp the real truth in—in history, theology, politics, or any important issue that affects our lives. If people learn the truth, they may fight back, and it might get messy, so the oligarchs want to avoid that if possible. Those that oppose ordinary people and their God-given liberties cannot stand the light of truth being shined upon their evil deeds. That fact, alone, should reveal to us their true origins (John 8:44).

The so-called “Reconstruction” period in the South, after the shooting phase of the War of Northern Aggression ceased set in motion an insidious trend that has yet to be reversed in this country. That avoidable war brought monstrous federal intrusion into the private lives of individuals on a heretofore undreamed-of level. “Reconstruction” in the South set up virtual military dictatorships in all the former Confederate States. The banner of what today is referred to as reverse racism was raised atop the federal flagpole and flown on high. It has yet to be taken down. In fact, with the Biden/Obama regime now in power, they are busy building a higher flagpole for it.

This trend toward centralized federal pre-eminence has never been reversed, nor will it be until this country wakes up or folds up. And if it folds up as the Biden/Obama regime plans for it to, it won’t make any difference.

​Several years ago my family and I took a trip - one of many over the years. On the way home we stopped at the National Historical Park at Harpers Ferry, (West) Virginia. At that site the town has been in the process of being reconstructed that that it will eventually appear just as it did when abolitionist/terrorist John Brown conducted his raid there in 1859. Maybe by now they’ve finished with the reconstruction, I don’t know. (They filmed part of the movie Gods and Generals there. If you all have not seen that movie, you should.) Many have claimed that Harpers Ferry has been turned into a secular shrine to glorify John Brown. It would seem that those who have labored hard to do that must approve of Brown’s violent terrorist tactics.

Anyway, while on our visit there, we chanced to visit the building that had housed the Provost Marshall’s office. A lady there, dressed in period attire, explained to the tourists that during the War of Northern Aggression (she didn’t call it that) Harpers Ferry was under federal jurisdiction, and was therefore, under the control of the Provost Marshall. When the lady explained what powers this man had I could not help thinking that the Provost Marshall was, for all intents and purposes, a federal dictator. As I pondered how that war had paved for future federal dictatorships, a picture of the Supreme Court suddenly flashed through my mind.

Court watchers have noted, with appropriate apprehension over the years, some of the “interesting” decisions of the court. The decisions that Comrade Obama’s forcing everyone to buy his “health” insurance or be fined was little more than judicial quackery. But the court seemed to have no problem with it. There was a decision (back in 2005, I think it was) in the state of Connecticut that allowed a city to use eminent domain, (something I’ve always hated) to attempt to seize the property of several homeowners. Apparently some cities in Connecticut felt they could make better use of some people’s property than the property owners could and so property was taken under the eminent domain clause. This is something I have never agreed with. It’s one of those weak spots the Constitution is famous for.

George Will was never one of my favorite columnists, but on occasion he came up with an article that showed some insight. Several years ago now he did a column dealing with a decision of the Supreme Court. He noted, “The Court bestowed, prospectively, its constitutional imprimatur on virtually any racial spoils system Congress enacts. The Court selectively overturned a series of precedents that had at least limited the proliferation of what are euphemistically called ‘race-conscious policies’.”

In this particular instance Will observed that the Court, by a 5-4 majority ruled that Congress may assign special benefits to particular government-preferred minorities (to the detriment of all who do not make the preferred list) and Congress may do so without regard to any injury resulting from discrimination. Reverse discrimination is now cut loose from the pretense that it is merely a remedial measure.” Take a good look at Will’s comment and let it sink in. Doesn’t it make you feel good if you happen to belong to some group that hasn’t made the government’s “preferred” list—like white Christian Southerners for example?

Some have taken exception to court rulings of this nature, claiming they violate the constitutional guarantee of equal protection under the law. Sorry folks, but that one was thrown under the bus a long time ago according to Will. “Equal protection is not violated if the injury done by reverse discrimination serves an important government objective.” Did you all get that? Equal protection is not violated by unequal treatment as long as “important government objectives” are being served. Question—where is this situation any different than what occurred during the first phase of “reconstruction” after the Marxist/Lincolnist Revolution of 1861, aka the Civil War?

Theologian C. Gregg Singer aptly pointed out in his book A Theological Interpretation of American History that the real aim of Thaddeus Stevens and his fellow Northern revolutionaries was a program of “reconstruction” that would start in the South and would be handled in such a way as to eventually include the entire country. The entire fabric of American life, North and South, was to be “reconstructed” according to their revolutionary aims. And guess what, folks, due to the advent of the public school system, first in the North, then in the “reconstructed” South, it has mostly worked!
​
So let’s summarize. The “reconstruction” (Marx’s term) in the South set forth a policy of reverse discrimination where there was no protection under the law for Southern whites because it had been determined that reverse discrimination in regard to freed slaves served “an important government objective” of working to “ensure the perpetual ascendancy of the party of the Union” (the Republican Party).

Both North and South lived through the first phase of “reconstruction” until both became “reconstructed” enough so that most memories of a truly Christian America were obliterated.

That having been accomplished, it is now time for us to begin to realize that we are, at present, and for the discernable future, in the midst of the second phase of “reconstruction”. The perpetually ascending federal government, (the secular deity) via its court system, is busily enacting quotas and racial preference agendas and telling local school districts they have the power to raise taxes on their own, even if voters have voted down the proposed tax increase. When President Trump was in office he tried to give us a more conservative Supreme Court. But he was only one man and he got precious little support or good advice from the Deep State moles in his own administration.

It would seem that the chickens of American apostasy, turned loose in the 1820s, have now come home to roost. Many years ago, Rev R. L. Dabney in his book Defense of Virginia and the South wrote: “A righteous God, for our sins toward Him, has permitted us to be overthrown by our enemies and His.” Although he was speaking at that time to Southerners, his commentary is now appropriate for the entire country. One of the main fruits of apostasy is more and ever repressive government. Until apostasy is repudiated and a Christian culture is sought after and worked for, things will only get worse and we will continue to have rulers like Barack Obama and China Joe Biden, who are truly the fruit of and result of apostasy.

Many Lincoln aficionados each year eagerly await the month of February so they can bombard us with pseudohistory about Abraham Lincoln the supposed “great emancipator.” Our students in those indoctrination centers we are still foolish enough to think of as public schools will be treated to all manner of historical fables about how Lincoln “freed” the slaves (he actually freed no one). This is the man, so they inform us, who had a fond spot in his heart for black folks. Actually he was a flaming racist, yet black people continue to revere him as though he were Moses parting the Red Sea for them so they could walk across to the promised land of freedom. Actually Lincoln did lead them, and the rest of us as well, into the “Red” sea. Most have not figured that out yet. Give us another hundred years, if we still have a country, and maybe we’ll figure it out!


With the War of Northern Aggression, Lincoln’s primary goal was to preserve the Union with bayonets - a union that, in his mind, had existed before the different states had - in fact, had always existed, states or no states. And it was a union in which the individual states had no say in what they did, except as allowed by a central government in Washington. In other words, in Lincoln’s “Union” the states were totally “free” to do whatever Washington required them to do.


​Mr. Lincoln didn’t really give a flip one way or the other whether slavery flourished or not. As proof of this, witness his support for the Corwin Amendment. What’s was the Corwin Amendment, you might ask? You mean you never read about that in your public school “history” book? I guess that’s one of those little facts the public educators and their collaborators in the government and the publishing industry felt you’d be better off not being aware of. After all, if you don’t know, then you can’t ask any embarrassing questions they don’t have answers for, can you?


The Corwin Amendment was introduced into Congress in March of 1861. Its sponsor was Ohio Representative Thomas Corwin. That’s right folks, this man came from Ohio, not Georgia or Alabama. Some reports have stated that Corwin introduced this amendment to prevent the “Civil War.” It was presented to the Congress in the form of House (Joint) Resolution No. 80. The entire idea of the Corwin Amendment was to prohibit Congress from trying to ban slavery in whatever states there were that still permitted it. The Corwin Amendment would have stopped Congress from “abolishing or interfering with the ‘domestic institutions’ including persons held to labor or service (a reference to slavery)” Interestingly enough, a parallel resolution to the one in the House was introduced into the Senate by William H. Seward of New York, not Georgia or Louisiana, but New York. So both of these resolutions were originated with Northern, not Southern congressmen.

Even Wikipedia picked up on this, surprisingly, and they said: “However, the newly formed Confederate States of America was totally committed to independence, and so it ignored the Corwin Amendment.” Interesting. Our so-called “historians” have continued to inform us over the decades that the Southern states fled the Union solely so they could keep their slaves. no other reasons for their departure need apply.​

If that had truly been the case, here was a golden opportunity for them to keep their slaves and to get back into the Union so they could vote to do so. Yet they passed it up! You don’t just suppose they might have had other more compelling reasons for secession than the slavery question, do you? Like the problem with tariffs, for instance. Our court “historians” would never admit to that no matter what! We have to be conditioned to the “fact” that slavery was the only issue involved so we won’t ever ask any questions about any other issues they don’t want to answer. In that regard, I would point people to Gene Kizer’s book Slavery Was Not The Cause Of The War Between The States. 

In February of 1861 the House approved the resolution by a vote of 133-65 and in early March the Senate approved it by a vote of 24-12. The seven Southern states that had already seceded from the Union at that point didn’t bother to try to vote on the issue, leading to the inescapable conclusion that, for them, slavery was not the only sole and real issue. Had it been the only issue, no doubt they could have petitioned Washington and gotten back into the Union so they could have voted to keep their slaves.


Also worth noting here is the fact that the “great emancipator” did not oppose the Corwin Amendment. He said, in his first inaugural address: “(H)olding such a provision to now be implied Constitutional law I have no objection to it’s being made express and irrevocable.” In other words, a Constitutional amendment that made slavery for life the rule of law didn’t bother Mr. Lincoln one iota!


According to Indopedia, “A young Henry Adams observed that the measure narrowly passed through both houses due to the lobbying efforts of Abraham Lincoln, the President-Elect.”


So it seems that the “great emancipator” lobbied to get this pro-slavery amendment passed through both houses of Congress. Something else the “history” books didn’t bother to tell you about. After all, that would not have fit the image of the Great Emancipator Lincoln that people in government and public schools were trying to peddle to the “great unwashed” (and under-educated) masses, so they just left that little fact out. So the slaves were not freed until the second 13th Amendment was enacted in late 1865, months after Lincoln had gone to his eternal “reward.”


Maybe it behooves people to start asking questions about those public school “history” books we were all brought up with—you know—really embarrassing questions, the kind they don’t ever want asked and that they will try to sluff off as “conspiracy theories.” Somebody needs to do it—so why not now???

Way back in 1988 (ancient history now) I had an article published in The National Educator, which I doubt is even in business anymore, that dealt with the extreme efforts of the NAACP to have Confederate flags removed from the capitol buildings in several Southern states. I mention this to remind folks that attacks on Southern culture and heritage have been going on for much longer than the advent of the Biden/Obama administration.

Needless to say, this sort of Orwellian activity on the part of the NAACP and other anti-South organizations has continued and steadily increased, presently with the aid of the federal government, for over three decades now, to the point where recently it has become a prolonged feeding frenzy for the left when it comes to anything Confederate no matter how small or insignificant it might be.

The NAACP’s checkered history has been a wonderment to behold over the decades. They’ve had problems with some of their people over the years who’ve been in high positions and during the early 1990s they seemed about to sink into oblivion until some little leftwing bird chirped in their ear about how attacking all things Confederate just might revive their sagging membership roles if such propaganda were presented in the right format. They were quick to pick up on this and have since ridden it to death! So I guess it must have put some long green in their coffers. Here was a group, supposedly formed to help black folks, yet it had all white presidents at least until sometime in the 1960s.

An excellent expose of the NAACP could be found in the book Biographical Dictionary of the Left, Volume One by Francis X. Gannon. It was published by Western Islands back in 1969. I’m not sure if you can even find it anymore. If it has been reprinted I’m not aware of it—but it should be.

Since the early 1990s I have read scores of articles dealing with the ongoing leftist agenda of removing Confederate flags, monuments, and other symbols from government schools public buildings, parks and other places. And since 2015, when that idiot Dylan Roof shot those black folks in South Carolina, the effort has really reached a fever pitch. Since the advent of Biden/Obama the federal government has officially joined the attack with continuous references to what traitors our Confederate ancestors were for even thinking of resisting old Honest Abe’s version of the “glorious union.”

It’s almost like the world will end for leftists unless they get to remove every remembrance of the old Confederacy before Trump’s attempt at a second term—something else that seems to give them the Heeby Jeeby’s. I’ve been watching this whole process for longer than I like to admit and, believe me, it’s enough to gag a maggot!

And actually, if the truth be known, the federal government has been involved with the anti-Southern racket since at least the early 1860s. According to an article in Chronicles magazine by author John Chodes several years ago now, it was in the early years of the War that Congress passed the Morrill Act (early 1860s). This act just about amounted to direct federal aid to education. The stated objective for the act was to “fund colleges that teach agriculture and the mechanic arts via money raised through federal land grant sales.” However, according to Mr. Chodes, “The true objective (of the act) was to bring the Northern perspective to the reconquered areas of the South, to teach the rebels’ children respect for national authority—to break their rebellious spirit forever. The three R’s had absolutely nothing to do with this landmark bill.” Knowing that he who pays the piper calls the tune, is anyone really surprised?

Senator J. P. Wickersham said in 1865 that the majority of non-slave-holding whites in the South were “deplorably ignorant” and it was this ignorance that helped rebel leaders to enlist so many of them in Confederate armies. Wickersham felt that as long as they remained “ignorant’ they would remain the pawns of political demagogues.” In other words, unless the Southern “poor white trash” were properly “educated” with the proper Northern perspective they would continue to be swayed by such banal considerations as Christianity, states rights, constitutional government, and a whole host of similar “unenlightened doctrines.” So if only you could give them the “proper Northern education” they would then become the pawns of enlightened Northern demagogues.

Wickersham then went on to state that “A Republican form of government cannot long last without providing a system of free schools.” Read that one again as you choke on it! Anyone gullible enough to swallow such a pile of bovine fertilizer as that deserves the stomach upset he gets from it! The last thing any true Republic needs is “free (government) schools” or “free education for all children in government schools” as that vaunted champion of humanity, Karl Marx, promoted in The Communist Manifesto. I hate to differ with such educational giants as Wickersham and Marx but I don’t think the average Southerner was nearly as ignorant as these men try to paint him.

Senator Morrill, in seeking to justify his authorship of the Morrill Act said: “The role of the national government is to mold the character of the American people.” Sorry Mr. Morrill, but you are dead wrong here! The “role” of the national government, or of government at any level, is defined in Romans, chapter 13. If these politicians in the 1860s had such a statist mindset, do you wonder why we have so many problems today? And some people today still think we didn’t have a problem with socialism in this country until it reared its head when FDR was in office in the 1930s. Wake up folks! You are at least 100 years off in your thinking!

Government schools will continue to pass off abolitionist rhetoric as “history” to the unsuspecting. They dare not inform you of the Christian revivals that took place in the Confederate armies during the war. And they will never inform you of the Christian conviction and dedication of men like Lee, Jackson, Stuart, and many, many others who wore the gray. All you will ever get from today’s “historians” and believe me, I use that term loosely, is tales about how these men were all slaveowners, and therefore, white supremacists. That’s the end of the discussion for them. You don’t need to know anything else and they hope you won’t take the trouble to learn!
​
If you don’t grasp that the leftists have been on a mission to trash and destroy Southern heritage and history then you have not kept track of the perambulations of outfits like Antifa or Black Lives Matter. Now, while we know that the leftists are the “up front” guys in the cultural genocide against the South, we also know that there are people in back of them that promote and finance what they do, people that want us and our Southern heritage and culture destroyed every bit as much as the leftists they employ do. Lots of those people reside in Washington and are denizens of the Deep State. Their vision of a “new world order” has no place or room in it for the preservation of Southern history, heritage or culture, particularly as any of that relates to the Christian faith. Shorn of all their sophistry, that’s where their attack on us and our heritage and history is really headed. In the final analysis, that’s what it’s really all about.

​Tucker Carlson, in a recent video, noted that “Donald Trump’s triumph in Iowa wasn’t just decisive, it was historic. His thirty point margin of victory was more than double the previous record. Despite this, Democrats and the media are still holding out hope that Trump’s support will somehow evaporate… and they have a plan if it does: replace Trump with Nikki Haley.”

Considering that a lot of Haley’s financial support has been coming from Democrats with big bucks, this should not be surprising. We have in this country what amounts to a Uni-Party, made up of some Republicans, many Democrats, various socialists and communists, all with a One World Government worldview. These people recognize Nikki Haley as one of their own.

So, if for some reason China Joe Biden can’t pull off another election steal, they’ll be satisfied with Nikki Haley because they realize they will get the same results, just with different names. It wouldn’t be the first time the Uni-Parth controlled both candidates. When that happens, they win either way, and the public loses either way. That’s what they’d love to engineer with the 2024 election. They already know Trump won’t play that game, but Nikki Haley is politically ambitious, so she will.

Her removal of the Confederate flag in South Carolina in 2015 demonstrated that. She had no interest in protecting or preserving the heritage of many in her state if selling out their heritage would advance her political career. After all, her heritage wasn’t their heritage. I’ve heard where lately, she’s tried to backpedal on that somewhat. Don’t buy it! She’s looking for the votes.

Being one of Klaus Schwab’s “disciples” (something she obviously doesn’t talk about) I would assume she has the same One World Government viewpoint that Schwab has. Obviously that wouldn’t sell well on the campaign trail so it gets ignored.

Tucker Carlson also observed that “A Nikki Haley presidency is a lot like a war with Iran. It’s a terrible idea. No normal person wants it. But because a small well-funded group of extremely enthusiastic activists are determined to have it anyway, we are perpetually on the verge of getting it anyway.”

So, potential voters ought to ask, where does her money come from? Who is working to promote her as THE alternative to China Joe Biden? What connections does she still have to Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum? One potential voter in New Hampshire, when interviewed said that he couldn’t support her because “she is really liberal in 4 or 5 areas.” He didn’t list those areas, but from his brief comments you could tell he had done some research on her.

​If the One World Government cabal can succeed in replacing Trump with her, then they will have sewn up America’s future for good/ And their plans for our future are not what most of us would agree with.

Nikki Haley, like so many other RINO’s, continues to mangle the truth about what the War of Northern Aggression was really all about. These people have swallowed so many abolitionist fantasies’ they will never be able to get beyond them to anything approaching the truth. So they just continue to regurgitate the myth that it was all over the slavery issue. That way they never have to do any homework to discover the truth. Just repeat the lie enough times and it becomes their “truth.”

​Klaus Schwab, head of the World Economic Forum, the outfit that wants us to learn to eat cockroaches instead of grass-fed beef, must have a favorite Republican candidate running for president. And if he does, then it is Nikki Haley, who has been one of his “disciples” over the years. Of course Nikki fails to mention that in her appearances around the country. Do you wonder why?

in an article in the “New York Times” recently it was stated: “Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor and Republican presidential hopeful, on Thursday walked back her stumbling answer about the cause of the Civil War, telling a New Hampshire interviewer ‘of course the Civil War was about slavery’.” Well, Nikki, you got it wrong again (yet). You haven’t learned a thing since 2015 when you rushed to take the Confederate flag down in Columbia because you thought the Republican establishment would laud you for it. Their opinion was more important to you than that of the voters who elected you. It still is–which is one major reason you should NOT have the Republican nomination.

If the war was all about freeing the slaves, and I have asked this question more times than I can remember, why did not the North free those slaves in states that remained in the Union first? That would have been a logical first step in the emancipation of all the slaves in the Confederacy. The North could have led the abolitionist cause by shining example. But the North didn’t choose to do that. Rather they elected to keep slaves in bondage in slave states that, for one reason or another, remained in the Union–and when West Virginia seceded from the Confederacy, it came into the Union as a slave state–thus making five Union states slave states.

In fact, Lincoln’s famous (and totally useless) “Emancipation Proclamation” explicitly listed areas that slaves were NOT to be freed in–those areas being the Northern slave states and areas in the Confederacy that the Union had recaptured. The message here was clear–slavery is okay if your state is in the Union, but it’s not okay if your state is in the Confederacy. Ms. Haley should know all this, but it seems she doesn’t! It would seem that knowing accurate history is not a big part of her election agenda. In fact, most politicians in both parties are probably historical ignoramuses. They don’t really have to be historical whiz kids–all they have to do is make us think they are. With the abysmal state of education today in our public schools, that’s not always too hard.

By some fluke, should Donald Trump manage to win the presidential nomination without having it stolen from him, I sincerely hope and pray he will have the good, common sense NOT to pick Nikki Haley as a running mate! As I’ve said before, she is a One World sheep in conservative clothing. Anyone who has been a disciple of Klaus Schwab is far from being genuinely conservative–and equally as far from telling the voting public about the real truth of the War of Northern Aggression!
​
Someday, in God’s providence, the real truth will manage to get out there. Until such time, those who do realize it need to keep pounding the pavement to get the truth out there to those who are hungry for it. There are some who are–and if we can get it to them–who knows what they and their children can do with it.

Just recently I came across an article, posted December 4th, about Nikki Haley which I would urge readers to check out.  It very much echoes my sentiments on Ms. Haley, who I wrote an article about on my blog last February.

Comrade Nimarata is running for president and is trying to pass herself off as a conservative Republican when, actually, nothing could be further from the truth. She’s a disciple of Klaus Schwab and his World Economic Forum. Schwab is, you know, the guy that recommends we all start learning to eat cockroaches and other creeping wildlife instead of real meat produced by our own farmers and ranchers. Supposedly doing this will combat the farce we call “climate change.”

I guess I’m just a bit old fashioned, but I will wait to do that when I can stand behind Comrade Schwab at the local roachburger stand and let him order first. You can bet the farm he ain’t going to be eating what he expects the rest of us to eat if we are dumb enough to take his advice. And I don’t expect Ms. Haley to step up and order a cricketburger or a roachburger either. Folks here in the South should remember she was first in line to take down Confederate flags after that shooting in South Carolina back in 2015 that started the latest craze to get rid of Southern flags and monuments. No self-respecting Southerner should vote for this woman. She’s a One World government witch wearing a conservative Republican sheepskin. Avoid her like the plague!

​Recently, I read a speech by a gentleman who had given that speech at a Confederate cemetery in Fayetteville, Arkansas. It struck me because I had once, back in 2005 I think it was, also given a speech at a Confederate cemetery in Fayetteville and I wondered if it was the same cemetery. Then I thought it must have been, for I doubt there are two Confederate cemeteries in Fayetteville. It was a beautiful cemetery and I only hope it is still there, with its Confederate flags flying as it was then. So many things Confederate have been destroyed in the South, you have to wonder if the modern day “reconstruction” crowd has stooped to desecrating Confederate graves to erase any and all memory of anything even remotely Confederate or Southern. It wouldn’t surprise me.

At any rate, this man gave a speech on the effects of “reconstruction” in Arkansas and you could tell from his remarks that he had done the homework. He noted: “We can name three Reconstructions, all with the same aim: the annihilation of the true America. the First Reconstruction, the states of the former Confederacy were reduced to total bondage. The Second Reconstruction occurred through the 1950s and 60s as the Federal government used the ‘Civil Rights movement’ to eradicate the last vestiges of identity which the South had still clung to. The Third Reconstruction is what we are now experiencing. When they drove Old Dixie down, they also dug Old Glory’s grave..”

Of the First Reconstruction he commented: “Writing from Fort Smith in 1865, a Union commander wrote that several thousand families in the area ‘have nearly all been robbed of everything they had by the troops of this command, and are now left destitute and compelled to leave their homes to avoid starvation.” All this was only the beginning of sorrows for the South, but it amply shows the mindset of the Yankee “liberators.”

“Reconstruction” in the South was the total uprooting, French Revolution style, of all they had known and believed. I can recall my Dad telling me that, when he was young, he had talked with a man who was an ex-slave. The ex-slave told him about when the Yankee soldiers came and told the slaves they were “free” and that they could go from where they were, which was probably their former owner’s property. The old ex-slave talked about how their owners had cared for them and they did not want to leave. One of the slaves, with some perception, said “If we are free, why can’t we stay here if we want to?” He never forgot the soldier’s reply: “You’re free to go but not to stay.” And the soldiers didn’t let them stay. They had to pack everything they could carry on their backs and get out on the road with all the other displaced slaves who also had no place to go! A prime example of tearing down the old South for both blacks and whites, who, if left alone, could have helped one another through “Reconstruction.” But that wasn’t the game plan. The game plan was to pit them against one another–and they’re still doing that today! This was a prime example of “the reconstruction of a social world” in Karl Marx’s own words–in case you wonder where the term “reconstruction” ever came from.


Some of the other things he talked about in his speech pertaining to “Reconstruction” would make you weep–how the carpetbaggers taxed the property, wanting to collect all the back taxes going back to 1861, which most Southerners simply, after four years of war could not pay. And so their property was confiscated and the carpetbaggers taxed them off their land and sold it to their slimy pals for pennies on the dollar. Their is simply too much misery to go into it all–suffice it to say, the plan was the deconstruction of the South. The term “reconstruction” was a cruel joke on the South!

It’s enough to realize that the Republic this country was founded as was destroyed through the Lincoln administration and those that followed it–never to be restored to what it had been–but that was the conspiratorial plan all along. Our “Civil War” aka as the War of Northern Aggression, was this country’s French Revolution–and we have never recovered from it as France never did. All we are going through today, with the tearing down of our flags and monuments, is the third phase of “Reconstruction” which is meant to bury what’s left of this country and any vestige of its true history forever. This may give you some idea of why I say “Reconstruction is ongoing.”