The lesson of Appomattox: Learn it or die

Published 12 years ago -  - 12y ago 54


Recently, I walked across the battlefield at Manassas, where the Yankees expected to win. They came out from Washington, some 25 miles, with picnic baskets and their women, expecting a day’s entertainment. They would defeat the troublesome, uppity, amateurish rednecks and go home, the preposterous idea of secession dismissed. It was July 21st, 1861.

It didn’t work out that way, but it could have. The Confederate forces were seriously outnumbered. General Bernard Bee’s Alabama forces were retreating. They stopped when Bee, who died there, shouted, “Form, form, follow the Virginians. Look. There stands Jackson like a stone wall.” Thomas J. “Stonewall” Jackson did stand like a stone wall. He still stands there, in the saddle, his statue looking out across the battlefield.

Once in a while, often in battle, a man shows courage so sublime it becomes something more than courage, an uncanny glimpse of the divine. So it was here, with the impossible serenity under fire that put Stonewall Jackson with the Immortals. The Confederates held and the battle turned into a rout, ruining the Yankee picnic. The federals retreated in wild disorder toward Washington, in what historians call “The Great Skedaddle.”

Then the Confederates made a fatal but forgivable mistake. With the advantage of hindsight, we now know that, however tired and disorganized they were, they should have followed the federal forces all the way home and seized Washington itself. Nothing could have stopped them. Had they done so, they would have stopped the totalitarian machinations of corporate front man Abraham Lincoln, our first Communist President, who would have been arrested. The Confederates would have saved the Union.

What? The Confederates would have saved the Union? But wasn’t Lincoln making war to preserve the Union? Wasn’t that the motive for everything he did? Wasn’t the South fighting to dismantlethe Union? No, Pilgrim. As usual, the truth is exactly the opposite of what we all were told in the nation’s Communist government schools. Remember that the winner writes the history.

What is a political union? What was the political union created by the U.S. Constitution? It was a combination of independent, political entities – states – which agreed to enter it to advance their individual purposes. After the states created the Union, they still existed, each one unique.

They were still the sovereign nations they had been, with each of which the English king had made a separate peace; the Union they had made consisted merely of their agreement to cooperate in certain areas, to do which they surrendered a small part of their independence. The states ratified the new Constitution and created the new federal government. (Lincoln, typically audacious and insane, believed that the federal government created the states.)

The alternative would have been to leave the Articles of Confederation in place – in which the states still would have been sovereign nations that had surrendered even less authority – or instead to abolish the states completely, to junk the idea and form of union, and amalgamate the nation into a single, centralized government like one of the authoritarian, often dictatorial European countries. Again, the supremely decisive point is that this latter arrangement would not be a union; indeed, it would be the exact opposite of a union.

A man is presumed to intend the natural consequence of his acts. That is one of the basic principles of our system of jurisprudence. If I hit you in the head with a shovel, the cops won’t buy my explanation that I didn’t know blood and brain matter would spatter all over your wife’s upholstery. As they put on the cuffs, the cops would say they expected me to know that.

What has been the natural consequence of Lincoln’s war? Hasn’t it been the very consolidation of power that is the very opposite of union? Isn’t the federal government now so big that the states in effect have become anomalies, almost useless appendages, like the coccyx or appendix?

Yes, they still exist on paper, in the Constitution, on which federal leaders spit – yes, at any time they could exercise their powers – but as I write they are mere divisions of the federal government, mere lines on a map. As in “The Invasion of the Body Snatchers,” the form remains, but the substance has been drained, leaving empty husks.

And since a man is presumed to intend the natural consequences of his act, the present consequence must be what our first Communist President and his successors wanted, a consequence that now has further metastasized; now many commentators are talking about “American Empire,” a symptom of which of course is the horror in Iraq and the upcoming attack on Iran.

Which brings us to the weighty matter of what the war is called. Because the victors do write the history books, our Communist government schools call it the “Civil War.” But in a true civil war, the contenders are trying to seize the government. The war between the Reds and the Whites in 1918-1921 Russia was a civil war. So was the Spanish Civil War of 1936-1939.

But to call the American horror a “civil war” is another lying Lincoln canard, the proof of which is the fact that Jackson and the others did not seize the federal government when they probably could have after first Manassas, had they wanted it. They didn’t because they didn’t. Again, the mistake they made was that they failed to treat it as a true civil war. What did they want? They wanted to be left alone; they wanted to depart, which they had the legal right to do.

Terminology kills. It is important to call things what they are. There have been many righteous attempts to rename the “Civil War,” from the “War of Northern Aggression” to the “War for Southern Independence.” In a remarkable coincidence, my favorite appellation is the one I have coined, which I believe perfectly describes it: Lincoln’s Communist War to Destroy the Union. Remember that the Confederate States of America, which he destroyed, was a true union.

I said above that the Confederate mistake was forgivable. Why? Because at First Manassas – before Lincoln’s Communist closure of hundreds of (Yankee) newspapers, before his arrest and deportation of Ohio Congressman Clement Vallandigham, before the knowledge that many of his top officers were Communist terrorists who had fled Europe after the abortive Revolution of 1848, before the rape and robbery of Southern women in satanic monster Sherman’s scorched earth march to the sea, and on and on and on – before all that, it was still possible for Lee and Jackson to believe that the Yankee leaders (notice that I don’t call them Union leaders), some of whom they had been graduated with from West Point and served with in the Mexican War, were as honorable and as Christian as the Confederate leaders themselves.

Remember that when the true nature of the Yankee Communist horror began to ooze out, Confederate military leaders asked President Jefferson Davis for permission to retaliate in kind. The President refused. And Lee did invade the North (Pennsylvania), but of course for Robert E. Lee or Stonewall Jackson to do what Sherman did to civilians would have been unthinkable.

Eventually, Marse Bob did realize what the Yankee juggernaut was. He is quoted as saying that had he known before the Appomattox surrender what he knew after it, he would have fought to the last man. But of course, his understanding came too late. Lincoln’s victory in his Communist war to destroy the Union did exactly that. Because of it, the federal government regulates almost everything you do. The pottery now gives orders to the potter.

The question for us is: What’s our excuse? We know everything Lee did not learn in time. And I fear that fearful times are coming. We are presently in the middle of the Revolution to impose world government; soon the climax will arrive. Remember why King Saul lost favor with the Lord. God sent Saul to destroy Amalek and told him to kill everyone, men, women and children and all the animals. But Saul knew better; he did not kill king Agag and let the people take the best animals. Samuel cut Agag into pieces and the Lord transferred his favor to David.

Most of mankind’s problems (I am tempted to say, “all” of them) originate in attempts to “improve” what God says. But God does things for His own pleasure, not ours. Today, we face the same enemy who conducted the “march to the sea.” It would be comforting were there some “middle ground” between us and that Satanic Monster. Sadly, there is not. We face people whose nature it is to kill, in the same sense that it is the nature of the hyena to rend, to tear apart. Yes, we are talking about monsters like Lincoln and Sherman.

The Confederates should have treated the conflict as a civil war, taken the nation’s capital and jailed the Communist monsters they caught; should have exterminated the enemy as totally as God told Saul to do to Amalek. They didn’t know that until it was too late, but we do not have the same excuse. Unfortunately, if you face an enemy with which you cannot negotiate or compromise, an enemy that will not stop until it kills you – that lives to kill you – then you can do only two things.

You can lie down and die, offer the enemy your throat. Or you can stand and exterminate him. I wish I didn’t believe this and hope I am wrong, but I think it will soon become ever clearer in our country that it does no good to placate a hyena, a Lincoln or a Sherman. You have to kill a hyena.

Published originally at : republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact.”

54 recommended
comments icon 0 comments
0 notes
bookmark icon

Write a comment...

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *