Saturday, June 30, 2018

The Real Lincoln By Thomas DiLorenzo

I read this book way back in 2011 It was actually my first review in this blog.  I read it again this week.  In this book, DiLorenzo dives into Lincoln's unconstitutionality with regards to the secession of the south as well as the tyrannical ways of Lincoln.  Throughout my life, like most people my age, we grew up thinking Abraham Lincoln was "the best President of the United States".  We were led to believe that Lincoln was a staunch pro-black, anti slave abolitionist, but a cursory review of the facts tells you otherwise.  The fallacy of his reasons to go to war to "free slaves" is not only false but ridiculous to repeat.  For years I listened to people refer to the "Civil War" as the "War of Northern Aggression" and I had never REALLY understood, in detail what they meant by it.  This book will shed light on that phrase and details the ways of "Honest Abe".  He was in FACT a white supremacist, anti-black, and at best, indifferent on slavery. 

Lincoln was a Whig; first and foremost.  He was all about centralizing the power in Federal government as well as centralized banking and the "American System" advocated by Henry Clay in the early 1800s.

American System: "the policy of promoting industry in the U.S. by adoption of a high protective tariff and of developing internal improvements by the federal government" Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Here are a few key points covered in this book

  • Conscription - Conscription is essentially slavery.  You are forced to fight for someone regardless of your support for the cause and against your will.  So I guess the adage of "Fight fire with fire" or in this case, Fight slavery with slavery held true.

  • People in the North revolted against Lincoln and the war because they did not want to fight for blacks.  Its funny how history shows that EVERYONE in the south was pro-slavery and EVERYONE in the north were abolitionists, when in fact the opposite is true.  Many in the north sold "freed slaves" back into bondage in the South.  

  • Slave States in the North - Even with the "Emancipation Proclamation" by Lincoln which technically did absolutely nothing for the slaves, today's historians credit Lincoln with this genius writing, however the FACT is that when Lincoln and all the way until the end of the war, there were still 4 states in the North where Lincoln ACTUALLY governed that were allowed to keep slaves  (Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, Delaware and "West Virginia").  This FACT proves that Lincoln was at the very least indifferent about slavery.  Even in his inauguration speech where he famously stated "I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so."

  • Colonization - Lincoln was a firm believer in Colonization.  Essentially saying, "You can be free, just not in my neighborhood".  I remember Ted Kennedy, Senator from Massachusetts droning on  and on about how, we the people needed to adopt wind turbines because it was good for the environment, up until the point when they wanted to install them in Nantucket Sound where he lived. He became unhinged.  So do as I say, not as I do was the norm.  Again a quote from the Lincoln Douglas debates   “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 … 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 from living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be a 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.”  Ask yourself this, if you made as statement like that, what would become of you?

  • Compensated Emancipation - Looking back at other countries' actions regarding slavery in their respective countries, many did "compensated emancipation".  It would have been much less loss in blood and treasure than that of the "Civil War".  Many countries ended Slavery (in case you did not know it, slavery was not just a United States issue both rather a world wide phenomena) by purchasing the freedom of the slaves.  Slavery is a horrid practice that has no place an any society, But to assume that every southerner owned slaves and fought for slavery is as irresponsible as believing that every northerner was an abolitionist and was fighting for the freedom of slaves.

  • Fugitive Slave Act - Lincoln supported the fugitive slave act of 1850.  Going back to the the 'Slave States in the North' comment, since Slavery flourished in the north on the "border states" Lincoln needed to protect that institution by ensuring that "property" was returned to its rightful owners.  And he did support and enforce the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850.  Again this is cursory research that revisionist try to use terms like "well that is difficult" as trying to White Wash (pun intended) history.  

  • Total War - Total War is defined as "involving a complete and unified effort especially to achieve a desired effect total war total theater" Marriam-Webster.  Lincoln waged total war on the south.  This included women, children and non-military personnel.  Lincoln lauded Sherman and Sheridan for the udder destruction of the south.  Women and Children that had nothing to do with the war were rapped & slaughtered by Northern soldiers.  These soldiers would burn down civilian's homes, loot their belongings and kill all animals to ensure that even those that survived the soldiers, would be unable to survive in the long run.  Ironically, at the time, the Geneva Convention was already in effect (first rev of it).  Today, you would be charged with war crimes.  Hell, if you look at Abu Graib where soldiers were prosecuted for far less than what the north did to innocent women and children in the south.

  • Secession was nothing new - In the past leading up to the Civil War and Lincoln's notion that succession was not allowed in the Constitution, there had been plenty of debates regarding other issues that states threatened to leave the union, and never was this challenged by anyone as not being Constitutional (NY being that most vocal).  Actually if you look at the Declaration of Independence "That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; ".  Actually, Lincoln succeeded West Virginia from  Virginia.  He needed the votes.
I can go on and on, but I definitely recommend this book to any one looking to see thing outside of the revisionists view.  The fact is that anyone with 30 minutes and an open mind will see that the Civil War was NOT for the plight of slaves but rather a power grab, that to this day corrodes our states rights, a financial issue, and a Tyrant.   Lincoln controlled the media at the time.  He imprisoned news papers that did not support him 100% or wrote against him, any law maker that did not do the same was also imprisoned and in some cases deported.  He was the poster-child for tyranny.

The irony though is that both of today's political parties want to claim Lincoln as their own.  Democrats will throw the "Dixiecrats" where somehow the "good" republicans and all their good things changed sides while the "bad" republicans and their ilk stayed behind.  The reality is that most of the dictators of this world that have committed atrocities against their people have quotes Lincoln and followed his lead including Adolf Hitler.  Both parties should distance themselves from Lincoln.

I am not a "Greatest President Ever" kool-aid drinker.  I do not view him in only a negative light either although there is more than enough reasons to detest him for what he did, but conversely thinking that somehow this guy was some kind of angel from God sent here to free the slaves and be the "honest" president is cultish and sadly ignorant.  

I highly recommend this book. 

ISBN-13: 9780761526469
Publisher: The Crown Publishing Group
Publication date: 12/02/2003
Edition description: Reprint
Pages: 384
Sales rank: 252,117

Monday, June 25, 2018

The Great Revolt: Inside the Populist Coalition Reshaping American Politics By: Salena Zito and Bradd Todd

This was an interesting read to say the least.  Not your standard political book.  This book contains interview like vignettes of voters explaining their mindset and subsequent decision and vote for President Donald Trump.  This book covers the states, counties and cities that have historically been hard-core Democratic strongholds. The very same that rocketed President Barak Obama into office during his tenure.  Ironically, many of the voters were still looking for that change promised by President Obama.

The authors describe in statistical detail the numbers involved and the margins when compared to Senator Hillary Clinton that got Trump elected.  The irony is not lost when the very same voters that elected Obama into office, somehow became sexists and racists to deny the Presidency to Clinton.  I recommend reading this book to understand from a person's perspective outside of your "circle of trust" and the folks that tend to agree with you.

Strangely enough, the Republicans were attacked during Obama's administration for being violent, insensitive, hurtful, and other pejoratives; fast forward to the Trump Administration where members of his cabinet are being thrown out of restaurants with their families, and shouted out of other restaurants for simply existing.  The physical attacks against Republicans was never seen by the Tea Party.  The level of disrespect towards this President is insane.  Is he a lovable guy, probably not (for the record, I do not know him personally) but Obama was equally offensive to many of the people he spoke about and then things he said, he was much more suave and debonaire at saying it.  However anyone speaking ill of Obama was immediately and ceremoniously labeled a racist.  Similar to the "woman's groups" that allowed Sara Palan to be repeatedly annihilation by other women and men and NEVER stood up for her.  Even in the face of leftists women (and men BTW) wearing "Sara Palin is a cunt" T-Shirts.

The books shows you that many people see right through the rhetoric and see how unhinged the left has become.  For the record, I am not a Republican.  I do not watch Fox News and I am not a Tea Party member, a racists, sexist, homophobe, a Nazi or anything of the sort.  I am however not blind to the double standards being used by the left.  I welcome others opinions even when they do not match mine.  I promised that I would keep an open mind about Trump as I did about Obama and Bush.  Both Bush and Obama let me down in a big way.  Not so much on how they spoke, or  carried themselves but what their policies did.  Will Trump let me down?  Probably.  My standards for POTUS are more in line with Anarchists.  I believe the Constitution limits the Federal Government and it is specified EXACTLY what the branches of the Federal Government can and cannot do.

Sadly, if we continue down this route where political correctness is demanded but only when talking about the things that are important to you, but when anyone disagreeing with you, you can go at them with everything you have, we are doomed.  Today I was listening to a show about Sarah Sanders and how the owner of the restaurant "that is a majority of LGBTQ workers" said "We do not want to serve her".  This is insane.  The ACLU said it was OK.  This is from the people that went after a baker for not baking a cake for a same-sex wedding?  These are the ones that espoused their moral indignation against anyone that was discriminating against anyone.

Here is the rub.  I do not believe in "gay", "women", or "X", "Y" "Z" rights.  I believe in Human Rights.  There is no need to differentiate yourself because of your sex, orientation, color or anything else.  WE ARE ALL EQUAL.  The issue with that is that now, "Gay" people are of more value than a straight person.  I cannot refuse to make a cake for a gay couple, but I can kick you out of a restaurant because I disagree with you, your political party etc.  In this example, the "gay" person is of MORE value to society than anyone else.  It is identity politics 101.

I hope that this country turns their crap around real soon.  There is nothing good on the horizon if we continue like this.  The level of vitriol coming from the Democratic Party needs to be shut down.  We need to love one another and tolerate other views and opinions.  One last note, if you have any integrity, you would admit that Hillary was a bad pick.  She has broken laws.  That is a FACT.  I had to face it when Garry Johnson (aka Mr. Aleppo) and John McAfee (oh geez) ran on the Libertarian ticket.  I was mortified to associate myself with them.  Dems should do the same with her.  It only hurts your narrative when you would allow Clinton to walk and then go after Trump for what equates to the "Birther Movement" of today.

I will get off my soap box now.  "Mic drop"

Hardcover: 320 pages
Publisher: Crown Forum (May 8, 2018)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 1524763683
ISBN-13: 978-1524763688