Tag: civil war

Simple Truths: Sometimes Just One Quote Can Launch One on a Research Expedition

Sometimes only a nugget of truth can cause one’s mind and heart to seek out the deeper meanings of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

From Clyde Wilson comes this gem:

“there has not been a real opposition party in U.S. politics since Mr. Jefferson sent Colonel Hamilton and His Excellency John Adams heading back north.”

Source: “Annals of the Stupid Party: Republicans Before Trump” by Clyde Wilson

Think about it for a minute. I am sure going back ten or fifteen years almost everyone will lament (maybe only privately) that no matter what party or what president is elected after promising the moon, one always seems to get the same “nothing-burger”.

Well, let’s just say the further you go back in the history of the United States of America, the more you see the two or three parties bringing more of the same to this country, sometime the red team is more “progressive”, sometimes the blue team is, but at the end of the day, the politicians will just politic this nation to its eventual death. There is no major difference in the political parties of 2019, same has been the case since the early 1800s. The two parties are the wings of the same bird!

Another quote I came across that had me thinking:

“A civil war, by denotative or connotative definition, occurs when a faction wishes to overthrow or control an existing government in order to impose its own ideology upon the governed. The Southern states that seceded from the Union had neither the desire nor the plans to take command of the country. They simply wanted to withdraw from it, and arguably, according to even some modern constitutionalists and historians, had a right to do so, based upon the nation’s origins. Virginia, New York and Rhode Island demanded that the right of secession be reserved before they would even agree to the Constitution, thereby implying that secession was indeed a right reserved by individual states.”

Source: “Slavery and The Civil War: What Your History Teacher Didn’t Tell You” by Garry Bowers

It is true, and yet 99% of all Americans think, really do think, that the 1861-1865 conflict was a “civil” war. It is a myth, plain and simple.

So what was it? Well, to be honest, if someone files for divorce, is that ever a reason to be an aggressor on individual as in doing personal harm to him or her? Only psychos will “take out” the other person so “no one else can have him/her”.

To break it down properly, you have to know that EACH state acted independently to weigh the pros and cons of secession. Some state representatives said that exiting the federation was too early, others said it was past time. In the end, from December 1860 until early February 1861, seven sovereign states left the federation and others like North Carolina and Virginia decided to stay in the federation of states.

The very act of leaving verses trying to force seven state’s priorities, beliefs and convictions on the remaining 20+ states, means that they were ready to live and let live. There was zero aggression on the part of the exiting states. Even when these states came together in Montgomery, AL in February 1861, there was never the thought of pushing their agenda on the more northern states or the “union” as a whole.

This was not a civil war. People need to know that. It will become important someday, soon I hope.

Another quote from the same source as above might help convince you of a truth, as you consider whether or not to accept it as such:

“In U.S. official government records, it is known as “The War of the Rebellion.” This title, too, is incorrect. In 1867, none other than U.S. Supreme Court Justice Salmon P. Chase noted, in his declaration that Jefferson Davis (or any other Confederate) could not be tried for treason, that “Secession is not rebellion.”

There you have it. The action in 1860/1861 was the same thing as in 1775, when a year later, in 1776 it was stated:

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America, When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

Please notice that the word “united” is not capitalized. Words and capitalization matters. These were thirteen sovereign states that decided to separate and divorce the British Empire.

Please notice too that the dissolution of the political bands is something that happens in this broken world, and that separate and equal can be better than together and miserable and abused!

This discussion is needed today, in the USA!

If the USSR can do it (break apart into smaller republics), one would think the US, which was born of secession, could do the same. Right?

Just think about it. Research it. Consider it. You don’t have to accept it as truth you know.

-SF1

28SEP1780: South Carolina’s Internal Civil War Means It’s About Family

The wars this nation (originally known as the united States of America, emphasis on States OVER “united” or ‘union’) has been involved in since the so-called “Civil War” from 1861-1865 have rarely pitted family members against each other. Sure there are many of those whose family have come over from a land where true civil war was fought. However, a war that splits families and generations only has occurred in 1775-1783 and 1861-1865 in the USA.

NOTE: The definition of civil war implies that the contestants or factions desire control of the entire country. This was NOT the case when the southern States started seceding in late 1860 and by spring 1861 had formed a federation fashioned after the original 13 States, whose goal was independence of 7 states NOT control of > 30 states! But I digress.

By 1780 in South Carolina, there were those who have switched sides (Tory to Whig or visa versa) especially after the British secured Charleston harbor. Many former militiamen were now Tory/Loyalists and backing the crown, King George, and the Redcoats.

Francis Marion’s family was no exception to the rule. One can read history and easily gloss over the names and not be aware that these people were in the same circles, were at each other’s weddings and funerals before the war.

It is essential to get some background at this point of Marion’s story as he re-enters South Carolina in late September. From the book, The Swamp Fox: How Francis Marion Saved the American Revolution, the author John Oller states pretty clearly the relationships and relational lines that connected many of these men that were shooting at each other:

… Marion knew these Tories. They were from St. James and St. Stephens Parishes, the French Santee and English Santee of Marion’s family. John Coming Ball, a local rice planter, was a half-brother of Elias Ball, the Tory whose tip had helped Banastre Tarleton defeat the rebels at Lenud’s Ferry in May. A Whig militiaman who switched sides after Charleston fell, Elias Ball was married to a Gaillard, whose sister married Marion’s brother Job (his second marriage), with Marion serving as best man…

… Peter Gaillard, another member of that prominent Huguenot family, was John Coming Ball’s second in command. Although only a lukewarm Tory, Gaillard was under the influence of his rabidly loyalist father and had served on one of the early expeditions designed to hunt down Marion. John Peyre, whose family was related by marriage to the Gaillards, Balls, and Marions, had been neutral until the fall of Charleston, after which he took British protection and became a strong Tory.

Needless to say, not only was there societal connections, there were also plenty of reasons to opt for revenge. Once again Francis Marion rises above the others and with his leadership offers a long-term view:

Although these neighbors and relatives were out to kill him, Marion took none of it personally. He would later describe the Tory militia at Black Mingo Creek as “men of family and fortune” who had shown themselves to be “good men” before the outbreak of civil war. He even hoped to convert some of them to his cause.

What a refreshing attitude to have in the middle of this life and death struggle among families. How many men (and women) today would consider the high road when faced with desperate times such as these?

Before twilight on 28SEP1780, Marion and his men had crossed the Great Pee Dee River on flatboats and camped at Witherspoon’s Ferry. Here, Marion met up with Capt. John James Jr. and Capt. Henry Mouzon (the author of the 1775 map I use in this series). Good Intel about a Tory presence was shared and again Marion chose to keep it secret and to rest his troops for a few hours before waking them up to ride south towards Dollard’s Tavern on Black Mingo Creek 15 miles away.

In a future post I will cover what happened at that tavern one of the few times Marion outnumbered his opponents. It involves a man, John Coming Ball, and his horse, and a whole lot more.

Stay tuned.

-SF1

State’s Rights, Slavery or Freedom?

While there is an effort to erase all history in this country by the government schooled ignorant masses, those that can think critically will need to research harder to find source material necessary to learn from.

Why do we need to learn? Because whenever you have culture wars, collective societies and empires in the mix you will need to know your enemy so you can effectively resist the wave, retain your freedoms and maybe even your life. Beyond this, there are others in your family or circle of friends that need to be sparked to research on their own over time. The struggle is real as one by one we give people truth in love and give them the freedom that is in our DNA from out Creator.

An article from Abbeville Institute sparked this thought in me this morning .. here is a clip:

“The Civil War was fought over slavery.” If you want verification of this “known” fact, this politically correct “given” all you have to do is ask a typical Southern politician, educator, media personality, minister or just about anyone you meet on the street.

True that you can ask this question all over the United States and get this as the 90% majority opinion. You might be surprised that those in foreign lands tend to see things a little clearer as I predict only 80% of the world that is knowledgeable of the American “Civil*” War.

* By definition, that war was NOT a “civil” war where BOTH sides want the WHOLE nation

Southerners who know the truth about the War for Southern Independence will try to correct the error of Yankee propaganda by announcing that the War was fought over states’ rights not over slavery.

So there is probably another 10% of Americans that would agree with this paragraph .. that it was all about “state’s rights”, that their state had a right to opt out of an abusive marriage when and if necessary years after it agreed to the marriage (whether it was the 1st marriage during the late 1770s with the Continental Congress or the 2nd marriage during the late 1780s with the US Constitution). While this is honorable and follows the founder’s thought processes, there is something more at the core of most of those who fought.

The author goes on to point out that your typical southern dirt farmer in 1861 was not all that political and really saw the imminent invasion as a threat to his way of life, and that of his family and his land! In fact, he offers a short story to segway to a way to look on the reality of 1861:

Suppose one is walking along a city street and you come upon an individual viciously beating someone. Out of a sense of honor and Christian charity you demand that the man cease beating his victim but the man looks at you and tells you to mind your own business because he has “a constitutional right to beat the victim.” Now don’t think outside of the scenario—with just the facts as given—how would you feel even if the person doing the beating did in fact have a constitutional right to beat the victim? Legal technicalities do not stand up well against an emotional appeal.

So the author suggests that the south missed the boat in the post war period by not getting to the core of the grounds for divorce in the first place. In addition to this, I contend that this political “evidence” pales in comparison to the life both southerners, northerners and westerners (Midwest today) had before that horrible war. The author goes on to lay blame at the southern politicians:

Instead of maintaining the struggle for the principle of Southern freedom; the right to be the masters in our own homes; the right of self-determination; and the right to live under a government ordered upon the free and unfettered consent of the governed—all of which was boldly proclaimed in 1776—Southern spokesmen meekly declared that the men in gray were fighting for states’ rights. Instead of challenging each successive generation of Southerners to break the chains of political and economic bondage fastened upon the people of the South by the ruling elite of the Federal Empire, our “leaders” sought to assure the Northern majority that “we the people” of the invaded, conquered and occupied Confederate States of America were once again 100% loyal Americans—meaning that we were obedient subjects of the newly created Federal Empire.

So in the North (Union) waging a war against southern culture is a particularly wicked way through wholesale burning of homes and cities, raping of women and taking anything of value from the innocent people left behind by their husbands who were fighting hundreds of miles away (i.e. total war), the north actually “kept the Union” (i.e. marriage) intact while a by-product was freeing the black slaves only to exit this war by making everyone a slave on the government plantation by force.

Now here comes the punch line …

Why did those men in gray, the majority of whom were not part of the plantation system, why did they fight for four long years against overwhelming odds with not a single friend in the community of nations to offer encouragement? Why were they willing to expend so much blood and treasure? The answer is as simple as it is eye-opening; they were fighting to be free; to prevent an aggressive and culturally dissimilar Yankee majority from making political and economic slaves of the Southern minority. They were fighting to prevent Yankees from turning Southerners, both black and white, into political and economic vassals of their newly created Federal Empire! They were fighting to drive back an aggressive and evil invader (the United States of America) and to preserve the independence and freedom of their country …

.. their land, their way of life.

Look around today in 2018 and be honest. Can you see why many people in this forced Union are now worried about a second “civil” war? Can you see why the south and its former independent spirit was targeted in the last decade to rid itself of the desire to once again desire to shake off the tyranny that runs loose in this land? Is there no refuge for those that just want to be left alone .. opting out of any government assistance and be self-reliant where they can raise their families THEIR way .. in FREEDOM?

It is critical that those who love their God-given life, family, healthy communities and land come to terms with the encroaching empire and its cultural rot and filth. One example of how a people can be free in spirit while being a serf in an empire is in the book of Acts in the Bible. These people were able to both rest in His love and hope while being proactive defenders of the ones they love on this earth. A future post will cover my own thoughts on this.

Until then, dream about freedom, research to know your enemy and be prepared for the times ahead .. teach that next generation well!

SF1

Storm Clouds – Can You Sense It?

The storm clouds have breasted the horizon and they’re moving our way fast. – Francis Porretto

From Liberty’s Torch

We’ve been here before, the reign of terror in the 1970s with thousands of bombings, targeted criminal assaults, serial urban arson on a large scale and many unpunished murders.

How serious is the threat? About twenty per cent of the population identifies as Progressive. Not more than twenty per cent of those are committed radicals. Quick arithmetic says about a million strong. Of these, only some will actually participate in violent acts. If history rhymes, they’ll go down to the plantation, spin up the idle hands and set them on the townsfolk.

Trust fund activists are the darlings of the media so, as in the ’70s, they’ll be portrayed as leading a huge populist movement. As always, behind the smoke and mirrors will be more smoke and mirrors. It’s a mistake to underestimate them however.

Arm yourself, they will. This advice comes from a reliable source:

Luke 22:36 – But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it and likewise his pack; and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one.

If you’re in a city it’s useful to know street mobs are deeply impressed by actual opposition. Said differently, they’re cowards. During the 1992 Rodney King riot in Los Angeles, determined Korean-Americans successfully defended their businesses with not much gunfire.

The goal isn’t “knock ’em down dead at eight hundred yards” like in the movies, the goal is to convince the mob they’re making a mistake. Putting one on the ground, writhing in pain with a blown kneecap, say, is the kind of publicity you just can’t buy.

A centerfire battle rifle is best, but a typical city block only runs a hundred and some yards, give or take a Starbucks. If all you have is a bunny gun nearly everything is in range. Even a shotgun with serious meat-getter loads covers a lot of it. In most cities the Left is in a position to shut down vendors of ammunition, get as much as you can when you can. And forget “grocery shopping”, lay in supplies, there’s no good reason to get flash-mobbed on a milk run.

Decide what you will absolutely-for-sure defend. Ally with capable, trustworthy and like-minded neighbors for mutual defense and let it go at that. But don’t go looking for trouble. Again, if you’re in a city, stay away from crowds, they’re trouble by intent. What happens to the crowd happens to you. It’s not as if you’ll be consulted before it all goes bad. There’s never a good reason to forfeit your own good judgment.

The Left is always preparing for their long-standing fantasy of murderous insurrection. What would we see if they decided the time is right to go for it? We’d see what we are seeing. Be alert. If the game is on, cities will get untenable. You may have to leave. This is something other than “unrest” with its roving mobs of opportunists, it’s a catastrophic collapse of civil order by design.

From: Woodpile Report

Not to scare anyone, but the time for planning is now. There are forces behind the scenes that keep escalating this division for their benefit, they will not enter the fray but will benefit from it. Remember how Lincoln acted to the “insurrection” in 1861? That was based on a law created after George Washington used the military to crush the Whiskey Rebellion in PA (those rebelling just retreated back into the woods). That law is still on the books and those that salivate with the ramp up in the police state would love a full on inclusion of US military forces and hardware that our government has at their disposal to tighten the grip on this land.

It’s your call, no one will ring a bell and make an announcement. If you’re told anything you’ll be told to “remain calm and carry on, order is being restored”. People want to believe it so they will believe it, and there’s your opportunity. First out is best out.

Cities are supported entirely from the outside: food, fuel, electricity, water—everything. All will stutter maddeningly, then wink out to nothing. Officialdom wants to keep you from the only reasonable reaction: panic, so events will always be a step or two ahead of your awareness.

Have a “stop loss” decision point and don’t second guess it, the window will close fast. The surest way to survive a catastrophe is to be elsewhere. This is why you, and the one percenters, have a Beta Plan, meaning a remote, defendable, four-season bugout destination with supplies stacked high and deep.

Four-season bugout location .. that will indeed be interesting .. especially as things unravel, competing groups and families will be vying for similar locations. Many people not used to the outdoors will find themselves out of their element pretty fast.

I prefer the ‘1776 Option’ which is outright secession. Various areas of this country have various “personalities” and it would be great to segregate towards peace than diversify towards an uncivil war. I have kids and grand-kids, I prefer peace ..

When you are fed, there are many problems. When you are hungry, there is one problem.
-NoPension at Zero Hedge

Uncertain times require a back to basics adjustment. Slow adopters will suffer the most.

Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better.

When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity.

To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control.

I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.
– Theodore Dalrymple

Used to being controlled, critical thinking skills if any will be rusty.

Find your lifeline here

What Does a Man Do When His Life, Property and Neighbors are Threatened?

Weapons are the tools of fear. A decent man will avoid them except in the direst necessity and, if compelled, will use them only with the greatest restraint. Peace is his highest value. If peace has been shattered, how can he be content? His enemies are not demons, but human beings like himself. He doesn’t wish them personal harm. Nor does he rejoice in victory. How could he rejoice in victory and delight in the slaughter of men? He enters a battle gravely, With sorrow and with great compassion, As if were attending a funeral.

Lao Tzu – ‘The Tao Te Ching’

In Francis Marion’s colony of South Carolina, there was little action in the rebellion against the British Empire until 1780. As noted in John Oller’s book ‘The Swamp Fox – How Francis Marion Saved the American Revolution‘:

Ever since the shots were fired at Lexington and Concord in 1775, the South had been mostly untouched by the conflict, which was famously fought at places such as Bunker Hill, Fort Ticonderoga, Trenton, and Brandywine. But by 1779 the war in the North had reached a stalemate, with the British firmly in control of New York City under Sir Henry Clinton, and the Americans, led by George Washington, camped thirty miles away in Morristown, New Jersey, desperately hoping for help from a French navy anchored in the West Indies. The last significant engagement in the North had been in June 1778 at Monmouth Courthouse, where Washington and his most dependable officer, Nathanael Greene, battled Clinton and his lieutenant general, Charles Cornwallis, to a draw. But while the Americans remained hard-pressed, Britain had grown increasingly weary of war. Its coffers nearly bankrupt and its military stretched thin by an expanded conflict with France and Spain, Parliament agreed to finance one final effort to end the American rebellion.

George Washington had remained convinced that victory could only be had if the Continental forces could displace the British from New York harbor. This is something he remained fixated on for several years until the French did send their navy, not to New York harbor but to Yorktown, Virginia in the fall of 1782.

With the stalemate in the northern colonies, the focus shifted to the southern American colonies. The British Empire’s “Southern Strategy” was agreed on by King George, Lord Germain and by General Sir Henry Clinton who was initially in New York harbor. The strategy had both logic and economy in mind to address the concerns for a lingering war in this part of the empire when there were plenty of other areas around the world that the British were spending resources on. The British were convinced that there were a majority of Loyalists in the southern colonies that would aid them at the very least at occupying and retaining them in their empire.

The British would begin by occupying the colony of Georgia where revolutionary sentiment was weakest and aim to establish a foothold there. From that most southern location the thought was to gain more and more American loyalists to be in the fight (British reasoning was that it was cheaper and spared British lives to “Americanize” the war) as they rolled up South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia and beyond .. or so they thought.

However, blowback is real.

While the British had an easy time with Savannah, Georgia in December 1778 and eventually made Charleston capitulate in May 12th 1780, there were actions and words from the British that eventually had unintended consequences.

Initially the British believed their plan was working as there was a wave of brown-nosers that gave Clinton and the British Admiral a congratulatory address thanking them in restoring the South Carolina politically to Great Britain. So confident was Clinton by June 4, 1780 that he proclaimed that the South Carolina people are “either prisoners or in-arms with us” .. so Clinton made plans to return to New York harbor while giving Cornwallis cleanup duty. Clinton had previously stipulated that so long as any civilian Whigs agreed to a parole, the British would grant them a full pardon and leave them in peace in their homes and property for the duration of the war. However, before Sir Henry Clinton left he announced on June 3, 1780 that prior paroles were null and void and those previously on parole would have their rights restored AND were expected to actively assist the British government. Basically, anyone not signing an oath of allegiance to the British Empire by June 20th 1780 would be considered enemies of the king.

Neutrality was no longer an option, basically you are either with us or against us. With British raiders already burning houses, pillaging property, etc., the countryside was awakened and a hornet’s nest of rebel sentiment was born.

Blowback caused a very nasty civil war in the independent colony of South Carolina where the vocal leaders of the rebellion were arrested and shipped to St. Augustine, Florida. Governor John Rutledge’s had left for exile in North Carolina so basically the civil government in South Carolina ceased to exist.  So between the colony’s Whigs, Tories (Loyalists) and even Indians, the Carolina back-country grudge scars were reopened. Religious affiliations were also splitting communities with Presbyterian and Baptist dividing with Anglican (which was a tax-supported entity). However, these allegiances were not fixed affiliations for if a Whig steals your horse, you might consider becoming a Tory. There was a cycle of retribution and revenge that would take its toll for the whole war from 1775 to 1782.

It is in this moment in time that Francis Marion, healing from that ankle injury that happened in Charleston months before, would emerge as a grass-roots leader, not as a Continental officer, but as a freedom fighter. The Swamp Fox was in principle a visionary who knew the long-term effects of blowback well. The tenor of Francis Marion’s rules of engagement had in mind a future more united society in South Carolina if the war against the empire could be won.

Before we proceed to see when Francis Marion arrives on the scene in the summer of 1780, I will instead set the stage yet again for how divided the colony of South Carolina was by then. This was not something that happened suddenly in 1775 but was set in the decades that proceeded the American Revolution that involved the lawless Carolina back-country and groups known as the Regulators and the Moderators, the ‘Blue’ and ‘Red’ sides of the day.

QUESTION(s):

What would happen in today’s regions in the United States as rival factions are pitted against each other? Who might emerge that would fight for liberty, freedom and rights of ALL involved? How could grass-roots efforts effectively turn the tide from an occupation force of an empire?

Finally, do we have hidden in our country the type of man like Francis Marion who would selflessly emerge onto the scene and fight for self, family and friends even when these family members and friends be on either side of this internal, societal conflict?