When the State, or Empire, and Religion Kills an Innocent Man – Who Can You Trust?

The occasion of the state (government) taking the life of innocent people is nothing new. History shows that government really cares very little about life and liberty. Government has its own agenda of self preservation and rewarding those who fall in line to protect it from the common person, insurrections and revolutions.

So the occurrence of an extremely innocent man with brown skin in the Middle East under occupation of an empire being put to death by the state seems to have little impact on the majority of people’s trust of the state itself. It seems whenever the people want things “fair”, the state is considered a neutral party that can facilitate that. How wrong they really are.

Consider this situation in the Middle East where the state/empire is brought a man who the religious leaders say is an insurrectionist, a revolutionary. Well the empire (in this specific case, the Roman Empire about 2000 years ago) definitely wants to minimize those people who stir up the masses and cause concern for the occupation army to be able to maintain control of this region of the empire. To defuse the public’s passion, a common move by the state is to allow the people to vote, and in this case, with their voice.

The people are offered to free one of two insurrectionists as a goodwill gesture of the occupation power in the season of Passover, the regions annual religious festival. The Roman governor, Pilate, had already indicated that Jesus’ “crime” was not worthy of death, however, the most vocal drown out the calls for justice and indicate that Barrabas (whose first name was Jesus, and his common name Barrabas means son (bar) of the father (abba)) be released and that Jesus be crucified.

What is clear is that the state did not and does not prioritize justice be served. One can never count on the state, especially an empire, to be moral or a proper arbitrator of true justice. What is worse is that in this situation, religion partnered with the state to accomplish this atrocity. What is clear is that the state and religion usually operate in very similar ways, as I said earlier:

Government has its own agenda of self preservation and rewarding those who fall in line to protect it from the common person, insurrections and revolutions.

Religion has similar DNA to the state and even empires. Do not look for justice in religion either!

So who can you trust?

I used to think that religion had the answer. The search led me through a rather complex path of mental gymnastics that focused more on a set of principles and a matrix of theological beliefs that actually distracted me from a relationship with the One who, as I found out, was especially fond of me (and you). Understanding how much one is loved releases one to explore why without a sense of urgency, without having to get everything lined up in one’s brain first, without having to know the complete truth.

One of the barriers I think that religion has had over the centuries towards unpacking who God and Jesus are is the dual mission and agenda that many organizations have in place. There are usually, at a minimum, a local building and staff that competes for the mission to make Jesus known to people. At the end of the day the local group or club, usually called a church, is very much into their own preservation, and the fact that money has been spent to establish and maintain this club has its members be protective of it and the ROI (return on investment) of the money (tithes and offerings) spent/invested to date. Many times, beyond the local is the regional or denominational aspect of the franchise network that requires more money and offers further distractions to the mission of making Jesus known.

Another aspect that usually accompanies this hierarchical organization is the propensity of titles. No matter how small there is usually always a pastor or elder or deacon or priest. The smallest clubs seem to need a holy place (house of God) and a holy man/guru.

When I was 6 or 7 and I read the New Testament books for the first time (while being bored to tears in a church service that focused on all the sins one may have committed in the past week), I was shocked to read that Jesus never established a club that had a holy place or had a holy man/guru. Those that followed him might have called him Rabbi or teacher, but at the end of the day he was essentially their friend, and in the night before Jesus’ death He confirmed that very thing (The Bible, John 15:15):

No longer do I call you slaves, for the slave does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all things that I have heard from My Father I have made known to you.

Beyond this, Jesus unpacked the real relationship matrix that would support them after He would leave them, a Dad (Abba Father or Papa) who Jesus had made known to them, having the same heart as Jesus PLUS Jesus Himself as a brother and then a Helper called the Holy Spirit who would be with them day-in and day-out. Wayne Jacobson in his book ‘Beyond Sundays‘ shares the simple reality quotes in his blog post:

Any title you wear be it pastor, best-selling author, or Done [a label that indicates one is “done” with organized religion but NOT done with God] will do more to separate you from others than it will help you recognize the incredible family that Jesus is building.

Claiming a label works against his prayer that his Father would make us one. The community of the new creation levels our humanity—from hierarchy and from our narcissistic notions of being in a better group than others. We are all sons and daughters of a gracious Father and that’s all the identity we need. (Matt. 23:5-12)

But once again, we risk being divided into “innies” and “outies” and falling into the false dichotomy our flesh so craves. Whether you go to “a church” or whether you don’t is a distinction without a difference .. the church is bigger than most of us would dare to believe and that his church takes expression wherever people engage each other with his love and purpose.

For those who claim that attendance at a local congregation is mandatory to be part of his church I hope they reconsider that false idea. Being part of his family is about following him not belonging to an institution.

Exactly. As I mentioned in one of my first posts last June, the hope that Jesus and His Father together worked to accomplish between Jesus’ humble birth, his life in a normal family and three short years with fishermen and tax collectors that ended with a state execution and Jesus’ life after death was to provide hope:

.. common people were given hope not just for what happens after life ends, but how one could live their life day to day in peace and with true rest knowing they were loved exponentially by an awesome father, well beyond how the best dads on earth can possibly love their kids.

This hope can be reignited when everyday people reach out across religious, socio-economic and racial barriers .. as well as across “in-church” and “outside-of-church” barriers as noted below in Wayne Jacobson’s blog post:

Anyone who finds more identity in their institutional affiliation or lack of it, their doctrine or lack of it, their ritual or lack of it, proves by doing so that they have yet to find their identity and validation in Jesus and their relationship with him. Can you imagine what we would demonstrate to the world if we were lovers of Jesus and each other, first and only? Isn’t that what he asked of us in John 13:34-35? By that, he said, the whole world would come to know we are his followers.

I contend that between those that really have a real relationship with the Father (Papa), Brother and Helper, and those who could be on a search for that relationship could help common people across the globe have hope and peace in the midst of the storms in this world, thanks to the thirst for war the current empire has here in 2019.

When one reads of Jesus’ and His followers talk about the new kingdom, it has to be done in a context that parallel’s Jesus own time of sharing of His Father’s love. Kingdom in Jesus’ paradigm does not focus on “church”, “royalty”, “slave”, “servant” at all but that of family … with Father, Brother, Sister and Helper .. and whenever these are together, THAT is the church, anywhere.

How can one explore this new kingdom? Wayne Jacobson has another post that has some clues:

When he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. (John 16:8)

Some things in life are better explored than explained such as an alpine trail lined with wildflowers, the Basilica Sagrada Familia in Barcelona, the shoreline of Galilee, or even chocolate ice cream. Explanations just can’t do them justice.

Agreed? I think Wayne is one to something. All the sermons, podcasts, articles in the world is no substitute for just “getting out there” ..

The same is true of a relationship to God. It can be explained to death, literally. We quote Scriptures, memorize cute aphorisms, and read books trying to understand it. We have sought to understand him with our heads and missed the joy of discovering how God makes himself known, and how his purpose in the world is revealed each day. Many who can talk about God in eloquent terms have no idea how to live in him with grace and affection through the difficult challenges of living in a broken world. They have never explored it.

It is like perpetual ground school for a pilot. Until they fly, until they have that experience, everything is theory only and the uptake of His relationship is relegated to basically book reading and hear-say.

Perhaps the most significant proof of this, other than what I’ve observed with people, is drawn from the way Jesus lived. He walked this out very differently than we try to. For instance, he wasn’t preoccupied with a Sunday meeting or building an institution he called church. He was more interested in letting the reality of the kingdom flow through him in the encounters he had each day. It’s why he could spend an afternoon with a woman at a well, or on the hillsides above Galilee with a large crowd.

Jesus moved with spontaneity, guided by His Father’s heart in every situation. There were times He retreated to secluded places .. other times with large crowds and parties .. other times at the bar or in family homes and then times with just His close friends. He lived life each day and never said “I will teach you about this Sunday at church”.

We act as if Jesus went to church every week to sing songs and listen to a lecture. He did no such thing, and, no, that’s not what going to the synagogue was like. He didn’t tell his disciples that’s what he wanted them to do every week. As far as we know, he never organized a single meeting, except for serving the Passover in the upper room, and even that didn’t take him long.

He seemed to wake up every day and navigate the circumstances and choices of his life with an eye to his Father’s unfolding purpose in the world…

No wonder the religious elite of the day suspected Him of perverting “religion”, and when people followed Him, they themselves were very worried and partnered with the state to plot an end game.

He didn’t offer them outlines of God’s characteristics or teach them a process for letting God’s power work through them. He didn’t offer them a curriculum, he let them watch it in his own life and explore that new reality in their own. He was offering them a different way to live—in a Father’s love, in power greater than their own efforts, in the growing simplicity of learning to trust his love.

He knew you couldn’t learn those things in a classroom or from a book. Real life has to be explored, and he encouraged them to do so—to ask questions, to struggle with their own fleshly ambitions ..

Real life. That is what Jesus did with others, a life shared. A key insight into the tight bond that developed between them is summed up in an encounter with Jesus after the cross (The Bible, Like 24:13+, The Message):

That same day two of them were walking to the village Emmaus, about seven miles out of Jerusalem. They were deep in conversation, going over all these things that had happened. In the middle of their talk and questions, Jesus came up and walked along with them. But they were not able to recognize who he was. .. They came to the edge of the village where they were headed. He acted as if he were going on but they pressed him: “Stay and have supper with us. It’s nearly evening; the day is done.” So he went in with them. And here is what happened: He sat down at the table with them. Taking the bread, he blessed and broke and gave it to them. At that moment, open-eyed, wide-eyed, they recognized him. And then he disappeared.

Back and forth they talked. “Didn’t we feel on fire as he conversed with us on the road, as he opened up the Scriptures for us?”

These friends of Jesus felt in their hearts the same fire that they had experienced over the previous three years when they had given up fishing and followed Love.

In summary, what are the paths forward? I still say a clue is to go back to uncover the Jesus style:

It is evident to me now that he [Jesus] wanted them to explore the kingdom, not analyze it. He knew they could only understand it by experiencing it, not by reducing it to a set of facts or propositions. The people I know who live most freely in the kingdom are those who are discovering it, not in seminars and classes, but in the circumstances of their own lives—a woman betrayed by her husband, a man who’s lost his job because of lies told about him, a mother whose son was convicted of murder, or a child tempted to betray his conscience for the approval of his friends. I am often asked if I have a discipleship curriculum I can recommend to others, or at least a resource to help them know the Lord better.

The curriculum for your journey is not in the Bible or some workbook based on the Bible. I know this gets me labeled as a heretic by some, but the curriculum for God’s work in you is in the Spirit himself. That’s why Jesus said that he would send the Comforter and he would guide us into all truth. He didn’t say he’d send us a book to follow, because you cannot follow a book. He didn’t entrust it to religious leaders. His Spirit alone can show us how to engage God in the reality you live every day.

Following a book is not following Jesus. Wayne explains:

Don’t get me wrong here. I’m a Bible guy. All the wisdom we need is in God’s revelation of himself, but it is the Spirit that helps us make sense of his words as they fit into our experience.

I know people well-learned in the Scriptures, who can argue theology with precision, but who have no life flowing in them. And, I know people who live by their feelings, thinking their every whim is the Spirit’s direction. They both flounder because in the end, we are still interpreting our own journey, instead of learning to listen and to rely on his indwelling Spirit.

This mirrors my own experience. So much of my more religious life took each Sunday’s sermon in application on their own tangents and never or rarely brought me closer to the One who loves me.

Jesus’ own style was a “one day at a time” adventure, seeking out those around us as the Father places them on our hearts. I contend it was intended to be that simple.

Living loved means understanding how much we are loved by Him, listening to His subtle whispers and at His prompting, love others as well, sharing our experiences as we “fly” through life’s journey.


PS For an honest insight into the nature of Jesus is Gayle Irwin’s teaching, who admits that Christian’s over the centuries has distorted things about God and Jesus. This is entertaining and maybe corny but I love how this guy passionately unpacks these truths:

2019: A Year of Distractions – Why Keeping Us Busy with Fake News Works

Even yesterday I claimed in a previous post:

I plan to read this 120 page book by Hans this weekend and will get back to you.

Yeah right! I did not get far. Why? Distractions, and not just the ones that come with everyday life, work, marriage, family, travel, groceries, cleaning, etc. These distractions include Facebook, Twitter, Gab, MeWe, e-mails that bombard us with news. Just sorting out the real news from fake news can be exhausting (however, if one just refuses to turn on the TV, refuses to get their news-feed from FB, Google, Yahoo, Fox, MSNBC, CNN, etc .. you can cut down on the effort).

CSI is hard work, and the elites know that. Their hope is that you just accept what they are spoon-feeding you through main stream and main social media OR that you just give up and ignore the fact that Rome is indeed burning. Both options have pretty serious consequences.

How far did I get in Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s book? Only 25% in Kindle language. But far enough to see how this particular line of thought on “niceness” weaves in with what others are seeing.

I have been following The Burning Platform as one of the places that highlights articles that MSM will not touch. Sometimes is is easier than searching on my own with my other news sources line Lew Rockwell, Bionic Mosquito, Moon of Alabama, RT, Mint Press, Fort-Russ, Woodpile Report, Armstrong Economics and more. Just know that no one site mirrors my own life-views as I believe we are all unique, not just by the individual, but also based on where we are at on our life’s journey. The 1980 me would look at some of the sites and say “what?!?!?!”.

So in my reading of Hans’ book “Getting Libertarianism Right”, I found this gem that just might cause you to say “what?!?!?!”. First off, Hans paints the reality of the world we live in in 2019:

“Everyone and every conceivable group is a ‘victim,’ except that small part of mankind composed of white (including northern Asian) heterosexual males, living traditional, bourgeois family lives. They, and especially the most creative and successful ones among them (excluding interestingly only rich sports or entertainment celebrities), are the ‘victimizers’ of everyone else.”

Fact. You can’t escape knowing this in these days. It has come to that.

Next, Hans shows the difficulty the “left-libertarians” have in achieving their other goals of leveling the playing field:

“Both groups only differ on the cause of this similarly identified, described and deplored ‘structural state of victimization.’ For the cultural Marxists, the cause for this state of affairs is private property and unbridled capitalism based on private property rights. For them, the answer how to repair the damage done is clear and easy. All necessary restitution, compensation and redistribution are to be done by the State, which they presumably control.

For the left-libertarians this answer does not work. They are supposed to be in favour of private property and the privatization of State-property. They cannot have the State do the restitution, because as libertarians they are supposed to dismantle and ultimately abolish the State. Yet they want more restitution than only that resulting from the privatization of all so-called public property. Abolishing the State is not enough for them to create a just society. More is needed to compensate the just mentioned huge majority of victims.”

More is needed? Obviously, if one has proof of victim-hood like being the target of a theft, one has their own country’s judicial system to work that out as long as there is evidence. (NOTE: The US justice system is very unjust as we are approaching a time when what one posts on social media can alter some state score that therefore determines what if any justice they might grant you.)

The left-libertarians actually give an evasive answer that Hans sums up this way:

“From all I can gather, it amounts to little more than an exhortation. As a keen observer of the intellectual scene has summarized it: “Be nice!” More precisely: You, you small group of ‘victimizers,’ must always be especially ‘nice,’ forgiving, and inclusive vis-à-vis all members of the vast majority of ‘victims,’ i.e., the long and familiar list of everyone except white, heterosexual males! And as for enforcement: All ‘victimizers’ not demonstrating proper respect to some victim-class member, i.e., victimizers who are ‘nasty,’ unforgiving, or exclusive, or who say ‘nasty’ or disrespectful things about them, must be publicly shunned, humiliated, and shamed into obedience!”

This is reality in 2019. This is the reason for Diversity and Inclusion efforts across this land. It is no longer “fair” to let merit determine advancement or even retention at a corporation or government position, there has to be a victim rating/quota applied.

Hans has strong words for this:

“Why should anyone be particularly nice to anyone else—apart from respecting ones’ respective private property rights in certain specified physical means (goods)? To be nice is a deliberate action and takes an effort, like all actions do. There are opportunity costs. The same effort could also be put to other effects. Indeed, many if not most of our activities are conducted alone and in silence, without any direct interaction with others, as when we prepare our meal, drive our car, or read and write. Time devoted to ‘niceness to others’ is time lost to do other, possibly more worthwhile things.

This is a fact. Being nice takes energy, and to be authentic, it takes a heart action towards prioritizing the other at this point in time. What comes next had me “take a step back”:

Moreover, niceness must be warranted. Why should I be nice to people who are nasty to me? Niceness must be deserved.

My recoil has to do with my life-view that we are all made in the image of our Creator and are all loved by Him regardless of our performance. At the same time, being the perfect Father, He does not let our bad decisions from having their consequences in this broken world. In fact, many times it is just the fact that it is a broken world that has bad things happen to people who don’t deserve it, and in these situations, although He could intervene, He might opt out as any father of adult children might do as well. We love our adult kids, and we don’t want them hurting, but sometimes these things can down the road make you stronger and a better person, able to help others that have the same experiences. A perfect, all-powerful Father, not acting to prevent something is a stumbling block for many atheists and believers. However, as a Father, knowing what I know, I trust His judgement just as I would the Prodigal Father (The Bible, Luke 15:11-32), who let both his sons come to the end of their ropes because in the end he just wanted a relationship with him.

But I digress, basically, being “nice” is not always required. Yes, you have heard of “turn the other cheek” (not holding a grudge) and “pray for your enemies”, but this same perfect Man did turn tables on the religious temple police and speak truth (in love) to the religious elite of His day. His anger, his words (calling the religious elite blind guides) and His actions say that there is a time for not being “nice”. Even to one of His closest earthly friends He said: “Get behind me Satan” (The Bible Matt 16:23) as well as “Let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.” (for self-protection in a broken world).

Hans goes on to share what happens in the long run:

Indiscriminating niceness diminishes and ultimately extinguishes the distinction between meritorious and faulty conduct. Too much niceness will be given to undeserving people and too little to deserving ones and the overall level of nastiness will consequently rise and public life become increasingly unpleasant.

Moreover, there are also genuinely evil people doing real evil things to real private property owners, most importantly the ruling elites in charge of the State-apparatus, as every libertarian would have to admit. One surely has no obligation to be nice to them! And yet, in rewarding the vast majority of ‘victims’ with extra love, care, and attention, one accomplishes precisely this: less time and effort is devoted to exhibiting nasty behaviour toward those actually most deserving of it. The power of the State will not be weakened by universal ‘niceness,’ then, but strengthened.”

We have seen this. As the Zman on The Burning Platform shares:

.. the principled conservatives, who are always ready to create a new set of conservative principles to excuse the excesses of the Left .. It’s not hard to see why normal middle-class white people find this appealing. They live ordered lives and just want to be left to live those ordered lives in peace. What they don’t want to see is violence in the streets and they certainly don’t want to be asked to confront those violent crazies on their streets. ..

This cycle where the Left commits outrages against civility and the white middle-class accommodates it, has led to where we are now. The people calling themselves the defenders of democracy tried to subvert the last Presidential election. The so-called social justice warriors celebrate a black movie star walking free after perpetrating a blood libel against white people. The defenders of open debate on the college campus, rush to suppress any opinion not on the increasingly narrow list of approved opinions.

The link from CBS that set Zman off was this one .. know that this message is being propagated far and wide:

Zman concludes:

The blood lust of the ruling class for whites not obediently walking into the void, is now undeniable. Their response to the 2016 election was to declare war on white America. In their minds, it is a defensive war and they are fully justified to use any means necessary to win. There will be no point where they pull back, fearing they have gone too far. Instead they will always seek to go further.

Again, America is a land where books are banned, people are given long prison terms for holding unpopular opinions and the livelihoods of contrarians are destroyed. This is a land where gangs of roving mobs, financed by billionaires, commit violence against citizens without consequence. Now we have a major television network calling for violence against whites and celebrating violent acts against a specific person. All of this was thought to be impossible ten years ago. What impossible thing will tomorrow bring?

That is a downer. All one has to do is look at South Africa as a place that is only a few years ahead of the US as far as victims demanding property.

But Hans’ summary (long but very worth the read) hits the nail on the head and places things in their proper perspective and not in the fantasy land that the global elites / Marxists would like everyone to believe for their own agenda:

“And why is it in particular the small minority of white, heterosexual males, and especially its most successful members that owes some extra-kindness to the vast majority of all other people? Why not the other way around?

After all, most if not all technical inventions, machines, tools, and gadgets in current use everywhere and anywhere, on which our current living standards and comforts largely and decisively depend, originated with them. All other people, by and large, only imitated what they had invented and constructed first. All others inherited the knowledge embodied in the inventors’ products for free. And isn’t it the typical white hierarchical family household of father, mother, their common children and prospective heirs, and their ‘bourgeois’ conduct and lifestyle—i.e., everything the Left disparages and maligns—that is the economically most successful model of social organization the world has ever seen, with the greatest accumulation of capital goods (wealth) and the highest average standards of living?

Great question. Although the family has been under the attack of government types for generations (because without a daddy in the family, government can fill that role and have the mom and kids become dependent on him), there is a hint of jealousy and envy ramping up across various sub-cultures not only in the USA but in Europe and elsewhere as well.

And isn’t it only on account of the great economic achievements of this minority of ‘victimizers’ that a steadily increasing number of ‘victims’ could be integrated and partake in the advantages of a worldwide network of the division of labour? And isn’t it only on account of the success of the traditional white, bourgeois family model also that so-called ‘alternative lifestyles’ could at all emerge and be sustained over time? Do not most of today’s ‘victims,’ then, literally owe their lives and their current living to the achievements of their alleged ‘victimizers?’ Why not the ‘victims’ giving special respect to their ‘victimizers’? Why not bestow special honor to economic achievement and success instead of failure, and why not give special praise to traditional, ‘normal’ lifestyles and conduct rather than any abnormal alternative that requires, as a necessary condition of its own continued existence, a pre-existing dominant surrounding society of ‘normal’ people with ‘normal’ lifestyles?”

Ouch, truth hurts. The fact that government itself loves the idea of segregating society into victims and victimizers is that it can profit from being the arbitrator, the judge and in some people’s mind, a god.

Ok, enough distractions for the day, back to my book ..

In summary, it is important to know where people are coming from. The illusions they carry keep them from any foundational truths that might help them escape being used by the system to enrich the evil entrenched in the swamp in Washington DC as well as in many governments across the globe. Empathy is great, being nice is over-rated and comes will undesirable long term effects.


Religion killed Christ. Or I might add religion partnered with politics. History shows that when religious and political establishments come together for a cause, it often involves violence, war, and death.” – Bruxy Cavey in The End of Religion

wise as serpents and harmless as doves


“Let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.”

You can do this.

Over and out.


14APR-22APR1781: Tough Times Can Produce Innovations that Matter

In my last American Revolutionary War post, I suggested that after some darkness, that change was in the air, and that a new course might be upon the efforts in South Carolina to exit the British Empire. Time to hoist the sails, capture that wind and move forward:

Francis Marion believes it is time to slip away into North Carolina to preserve their numbers in light of the nearby British force bent on Marion’s destruction. On this night, a detachment from Lt. Col. Henry “Light Horse Harry” Lee, part of the Continental Army, arrives and all talk of slipping away is put aside. The rest of Lee’s Legion is on their way. Not only that, news was delivered that Gen Greene had stopped Corwallis at Guilford Courthouse in North Carolina.

Marion and Lee wasted no time in embarking on some new tactics toward controlling most of South Carolina and Georgia for the cause. It is interesting that the great military minds that do adapt to new strategies sometimes, when they have a second chance, they can then secure a region militarily. In this case, General Greene of the Continental Army was about to adopt the “war of posts” strategy that he had dissed before.

What had allowed the freedom to operate was that Cornwallis was so impacted by the Guilford Court House battle in North Carolina that he decided to move his troops to Wilmington NC on the coast to recover. After this his plan was to then invade Virginia never again to enter South Carolina. Greene used this opportunity to secure South Carolina and Georgia land so that if a peace treaty were to be achieved, the colonies would have these territories.

With Cornwallis’ exit from the deep south colonies, the various Tory elements in South Carolina started to melt away into the countryside as news spread of Cornwallis’ departure from the region. The British left only significant forces at Camden, Georgetown and Charleston along with other troops at various posts across the colony numbering 8,000 in total. These posts were along the supply line that kept forces 800 strong supplied in Camden which is over one hundred miles away from the coast and ports.

Greene’s army numbered only 1,400 but was on the move now deep into South Carolina. In this scenario, Watson gave up chasing Marion and dumped his artillery and heavy baggage into a creek and sped toward Camden to join forces with British officer Rawdon and then circled back steering clear of the rebel forces going back to the coast at Georgetown.

“Lighthorse” Harry Lee arrived at Marion’s camp on April 14th, 1781 and filled in Marion on the details of Guilford CH, a bloody battle that the British technically won but having outrun their own supply line, Cornwallis’ troops were a mess. British cavalry officer Tarleton himself had several finger amputated from wounds he suffered in the conflict.

Lee articulated how his troops would now focus on the larger garrisons at Camden and Ninety-Six while the militia (Pickens, Sumter and Marion) work away on the smaller posts in SC. However, it was another target that Lee had in mind that Marion did not see “eye-to-eye” on. Lee wanted to lay siege to Fort Watson WITH Marion, while Marion wanted to continue his chase of British office Watson. Marion had seen first hand both the disastrous Savannah siege in 1779 and also Thomas Sumter’s attempted siege in which he got impatient and lost a lot of his men.

While the 49 year old Marion was technically in charge and 25 year old Lee was second in command, the fact that Lee had 300 troops to Marion’s 80 at this time probably led to Marion acquiescing.

Fort Watson was surrounded on April 15th, however, all the trees around the fort were gone so there was no way sharpshooters could be utilized. The British had learned much from previous militia encounters. Cutting off the water supply was also attempted but the the well right outside the fort could be used at night through a covered passage had been built. After the siege had started, the 120 defenders started digging a well inside the fort and struck water on the fourth day of the siege.

The rebels had requested a six-pounder from Greene which would have made quick work of this fort since it had no cannon of its own, but the men bringing the cannon got lost and returned to Greene’s location outside Camden.

The bottom line was that Marion’s men were not prepared for a siege and were not experienced at it. This was not their strong suite. Morale was sinking and Marion was corresponding with various militia’s around the state about some significant issues that distracted Marion from a situation he was not comfortable in:

  1. Militia Capt. Snipes was free-lancing/looting around the state and bad-mouthing Marion suggesting that people should not send supplies to him
  2. “Sumter’s Law”, which paid ten months of service to men with plunder from local Tories (horses, clothing and slaves), was causing many potential militia members to join Sumter instead of Marion’s militia. Marion did not agree with the plunder reward, but was in the minority opinion on this one.
  3. Rumor was out that Marion’s men killed three prisoners in their care according to the Brit commander in Charleston and Marion’s mentor suggested in a letter that he half-believed it.

The siege was taking its toll on the ones facilitating the siege until an innovative spirit emerged in militia leader Lt. Col. Hezekiah Maham. A tower would be built out of range from the Brits in the fort, but tall enough for sharpshooters to do their work. The fort walls were 7 foot on top of a 23 foot mound so the tower would have to be very, very high. Geometry as well as ballistics played a part in this experiment.

By April 22nd it was ready with a perch at the top with openings for the long rifles. The rebels sharpshooters rained down fire into the fort and simultaneously a patriot unit was taking down the stockade section of the fort itself. A surrender request was made and the commander McKay put up the white flag. In his journal it seemed the British inside the fort refused to fight any longer. Generous terms were offered and the British troops made their way to Charleston.

Lee and Marion reaped a bounty of ammunition and public praise was awarded to Maham and his innovation. Lee, whose ego usually precedes himself, actually came to praise Marion publicly and asked to be formally placed under Marion’s leadership “in some degree”. Greene wrote Marion and said praise would travel to General Washington and the world.

With Fort Watson out of the picture, it would be the first of many dominoes to fall for the British in South Carolina as the summer heat started returning to the region.


How Understanding History Helps Understanding the Present and the Future

Lew Rockwell today shared his reflections of a recent book released by Hans-Hermann Hoppe called ‘Getting Libertarianism Right“. In it, Hans shares an insight he himself learned from Murray Rothbard, which is …:

never to trust official history, invariably written by the victors, but to conduct all historical research instead like a detective investigating a crime. Always, first and foremost and as a first approximation, follow the money in search of a motive

It is only by knowing the true history can one form the proper frame of mind to understand current issues as well as the future state for our kids and grand-kids.

I have to be honest, when I read how this was not talking just about a libertarian approach to life as being fundamentally and logically correct, but that the word “right” also meant as opposed to left, I hesitated. But in true Hoppe form, Hans can take the logical route and prove that in the long-term, the left as it is defined today is a destructive course. Not because the right, as it exists today, has a great record, it doesn’t, but there is a fundamental aspect of the right that is essential in understanding life.

“Knowing libertarian theory — the rules of peaceful interactions — is like knowing the rules of logic — the rules of correct thinking and reasoning. . . just as every logician who wants to make good use of his knowledge must turn his attention to real thought and reasoning, so a libertarian theorist must turn his attention to the actions of real people. Instead of being a mere theorist, he must also become a sociologist and psychologist and take account of ’empirical’ social reality, i.e., the world as it really is” says Hans

OK, but what about right verses left thinking? Lew summarizes Hans’ thoughts:

The Right accepts the reality of human differences but the Left does not. Because Leftists try to make everyone equal, they favor massive interventions by the State to abolish human differences.

So true. Anyone alive today has to eventually see through the left’s agenda. True equality is not what they want, because they would be out of a job. Their effort is the “process”, which can never be successful, of making everyone equal. This is so very similar to the progressive path that came out of the 19th century and flourished toward building some utopia, that of course had government as a key initiator and sustainer in.  You know, like a god!

Hans points out that even the most ardent leaders of the left’s agenda deep down knows the truth. I mean, even the common man on the street knows the honest truth. Hans does not mince words .. he too knows that this agenda benefits some and not others:

“The egalitarian worldview of the Left is not only incompatible with libertarianism, however. It is so out of touch with reality that one must be wondering how anyone can take it seriously. The man-on-the-street certainly does not believe in the equality of all men. Plain common sense and sound prejudice stand in the way of that. And I am even more confident that no one of the actual proponents of the egalitarian doctrine really, deep down, believes what he proclaims. Yet how, then, could the Leftist worldview have become the dominant ideology of our age? At least for a libertarian, the answer should be obvious: the egalitarian doctrine achieved this status not because it is true, but because it provides the perfect intellectual cover for the drive toward totalitarian social control by a ruling elite”

So in the present state (no pun intended), many people are caught up in this dream world for the future that they will never see. By the time they realize this, it will be too late for them to enjoy the freedom of every person, being uniquely created and uniquely gifted to accomplish their unique work in this world that can make societies and communities a better place.

So what does Hans attribute this drift and now free-fall away from libertarian principles? The keystone seems to be a supreme judicial authority that quickly became politically aligned. I suggest, and Thomas Jefferson agreed, that America from the get-go was an experiment. The tweak in this experiment from the Articles of Confederation in 1781 to the Constitution in 1787 broke it even more. By the 1790s, Americans were paying more in taxes than they were in 1775!

Hans shares his insight:

“Predictably, the monopolist will use his position as ultimate decision-maker not only to resolve conflict between contending property owners, but increasingly also to initiate or provoke conflicts with private property owners, in order to then decide such conflicts in his own favor, i.e., to expropriate the just property of others to his own advantage on the basis of his own made-up laws. And on the other hand, the price to be paid for justice will rise. In fact, the price of justice will not simply be a ‘higher price’ that justice seekers may or may not be willing to pay (as would be the case for any other monopoly), but a tax that justice seekers must pay whether they agree to it or not.”

With this capstone, the effort that most people assume is that the drive is to control the state apparatus as history shows political struggles becoming at times physical wars (War of 1812, War Against Southern Independence, Spanish-American War, WWI, WWII, etc. * I got tired of typing all the wars the US has fueled). However, Hans turns this thought on its head as well:

“Only with democracy, however, i.e., the free and unrestricted entry into the State, are all moral restraints and inhibitions against the taking of others’ lawful property removed. Everyone is free to indulge in such temptations and propose and promote every conceivable measure of legislation and taxation to gain advantages at other people’s expense. That is, whereas in a natural order everyone is expected to spend his time exclusively on production or consumption, under democratic conditions, increasingly more time is spent instead on politics, i.e., on the advocacy and promotion of activities that are neither productive nor consumptive, but exploitative and parasitic of and on the property of others.”

More time spend on politics, that are not productive, but exploitative and at its root, parasitic towards the property of others! Ain’t that the truth. Everyone these days wants government money (the government has no money of its own, just the power, the sword, the gun to extort money from you). This is not sustainable, but the average politician is in this only for short-term gains. They have zero concerns about our kids and grand-kids. ZERO! Speaking of politicians, Hans has a few things to say:

“If measured by the standards of natural law and justice, all politicians, of all parties and virtually without any exception, are guilty, whether directly or indirectly, of murder, homicide, trespass, invasion, expropriation, theft , fraud, and the fencing of stolen goods on a massive and ongoing scale. And every new generation of politicians and parties appears to be worse, and piles even more atrocities and perversions on top of the already existing mountain, so that one feels almost nostalgic about the past. They all should be hung, or put in jail to rot, or set to making compensation.”

The very people who lied us into the Iraq War (and other wars) walk free today and yet the very people who broke the truth about these and other wars are now behind bars and are not free (Assange, Manning, others). Justice has been turned upside-down. We are not free. The lie has been for sometime that our troops have been fighting for our freedom. This is only a convenient cover for a parasite (global elites, US Empire, Washington DC, Deep State all the way down to the local police state) sucking all it can out of its people as well as those around the world that they sanction, drone and harass for “freedom”.

I plan to read this 120 page book by Hans this weekend and will get back to you. It has come to that. We need to be very aware of the past so we can understand the red flags around us (the ‘red flag laws’ popped in my mind, that is another post), and then prepare ourselves, our family and friends for the future. Not just physically, but psychologically as well!

At the end of the day I trust that the Judge will make all things right and all things new, but even His Son who lived in this broken world knew that critical thinking would be needed to navigate life under an empire, in His case, the Roman Empire. His example was to sell a coat for a sword, but also to have hope that there is a better day coming, as the Father would present us something fantastic, not only peace in the middle of the storm of this very broken world, but a future home where there would be no tears.

Signing off



01-13APR1781 – Marion’s Militia Targets British Regulars and Loyalist Militias

In my previous post, it was said that Francis Marion might have responded to the British destruction of his winter quarters:

“It ain’t winter anymore”

For the British it was again about “too little, too late”. The arrogance (“British Exceptionalism” maybe?) …

… as this attitude would dog them as underestimating a guerrilla leader operating in decentralized command structure is never a good idea, ask the US political and military leaders about Vietnam.

On 03APR1781, Marion’s 100 militia catch up with the British force of 300 after Brig. Gen. Francis Marion ordered Lt. Col. Hugh Horry to take his mounted infantry and find Lt. Col. Welbore Ellis Doyle.

At Witherspoon’s Plantation, Lt. Col. Doyle has some foragers there collecting food for his troops. When Lt. Col. Horry arrives at the plantation, they engage the Provincials, killing nine men and capturing sixteen. The Patriots pursue the fleeing enemy to Witherspoon’s Ferry and catch the British rear guard scuttling a ferryboat. The Patriots fire.

Lt. Col. Doyle quickly forms his men along the bank of Lynches Creek and delivers a volley of musket fire in return. After this, the British gather up their belongings and head towards the Pee Dee River no longer being able to forage for food. This daily task, still tough because it is springtime, will have to wait for another opportunity. Marion’s edge is the psychological warfare he uses that make the enemy always assume that behind ever tree, in every swamp, is Marion and his men.

By 08APR1781, Marion and his growing army crosses the Pee Dee River at
Mars Bluff and camps on the other side at Wahee Neck. He now has
nearly 500 men but their ammunition is very low, down to only two rounds per man. 500 men is impressive, however about the same time Lt. Col. John Watson Tadwell-Watson nears Marion’s location and he encamps along Catfish Creek with over 900 men.

Marion hears about the amassed troops and he calls a “Council of War” with his key officers, Lt. Col. John Baxter, Lt. Col. Alexander Swinton, Lt. Col. Hugh Horry, Lt. Col. Peter Horry, Lt. Col. John Ervin, Lt. Col. James
Postell, and Maj. John James. Francis Marion believes it is time to slip away into North Carolina to preserve their numbers in light of the nearby British force bent on Marion’s destruction. On this night, a detachment from Lt. Col. Henry “Light Horse Harry” Lee, part of the Continental Army, arrives and all talk of slipping away is put aside. The rest of Lee’s Legion is on their way. Not only that, news was delivered that Gen Greene had stopped Corwallis at Guilford Courthouse in North Carolina.

The cat (British/Loyalist Militia) and mouse (Militia) quickly becomes the cat (Continentals/Militia) and mouse (British/Loyalist Militia).

With the news that Continentals have joined with Marion’s militia at Wahee Neck, the nearby enemy is soon panicked. Maj. Micajah Gainey
slips away quietly. Lt. Col. John Watson Tadwell-Watson realizing
that his position is now tenuous at best, burns his baggage and dumps
two small field pieces into Catfish Creek and marches double-time
back to the safety of Georgetown on the coast.

Another aspect of this phase of the American colonial war against the British Empire was the fact that in March 1781, the Articles of Confederation was signed by all the colonies and it did not give the Continentals, or the politicians in Philadelphia, clear power and control over these militia units. When Lee’s Continentals arrived in South Carolina, they in fact partnered with Marion’s militia who was under the guidance of the South Carolina governor, in exile in North Carolina, John Rutledge. Further confusing the chain of command was that Francis Marion still held his Continental commission as an officer. But with the tide changing, these leaders were about to target British outposts in South Carolina toward restoring trust in the cause of freedom and liberty in the southern colonies.