Southerners and Wars of Yankee Imperialism
http://www.flyoverpress.com/southernersandwarsofyankeeimperialism.htm
by
Dr Jimmy T (Gunny) LaBaume
On the 27th of November, 2006 FlyoverPress.com carried the essay “Death by
Government: The Missing Chapter” by Thomas J. DiLorenzo
(http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo114.html ).
In the essay DiLorenzo points out that history records the extent to which
governments have committed mass murder of their own citizens during the
twentieth century—U.S.S.R.: 20 million; China: 65 million; Vietnam: 1
million; North Korea: 2 million; Cambodia: 2 million; Eastern Europe: 1
million; Latin America: 150,000; Africa: 1.7 million; Afghanistan: 1.5
million; Nazi Germany’s 21 million civilian murders and many others. After
reviewing the literature covering these mass murders, he notes that:
“The glaring omission is the 300,000 (Southern) Americans who were killed
by the Lincoln regime from 1861–1865. According to some conservative
estimates, some 50,000 Southern civilians were also killed…For (attempting
to leave the union) they had to be invaded, killed by the hundreds of
thousands, conquered, occupied, and re-educated over and over again.”
My editorial comment was something to the effect that one can not deny the
effectiveness of that "re-education." How else do you explain the fact
that young, peach faced, Southern kids have died in gross disproportion to
their numbers in the over all population in all of the Yankee occupation
government's imperialistic wars since then?
Smokey offered an answer:
“It is the urge to eat at the same table.
“It is something I have wondered about for most of my life. Nearly every
relative I have still has strong emotional ties to the Confederacy. And
yet, they (we) enlist at the first opportunity. I would posit that human
nature is more likely the root of such contradictive behavior than
re-education, or at least part and parcel to the phenomenon.
“The South was, and to an extent is, a warrior culture. Young men raised
on the values of warriors look for an outlet. They will look for the good
to justify the cause, and ignore the contradictions. And once your
grandfather or father or uncle or cousin does it..... it's that much
easier. The urge to follow in the footsteps of heroes is strong, even when
your heroes later say, "don't do it, it's a fool's choice."
“When you grow up in a family full of veterans, dead and living, there is
a hell of an urge to be able to eat at the same table and talk as an equal
among men/warriors.
“Until those values that make Southern culture worthwhile are dead and
dispersed, Southern men will answer the call, and ignore the
contradictions at the heart of the matter—or, until the call is sounded
again, by their own nation, for true freedom.”
This seems to be a case of old Smokey just not being quite ready yet to
admit that the whole damned clan has been duped.
In all seriousness (although chiding Smokey is great fun) this raises
questions that are much to important to be so flightily brushed aside.
Besides, I too feel honored to sit at that table. In fact, the only men I
care to associate with are from that mold. Smokey’s take is not
necessarily incompatible with mine—it just does not get to answers for the
ultimate question. Where did the clan get the idea in the first place?
What was ultimately responsible?
Before attempting to get to the bottom of those questions, I need to
clarify some of the terms. “Culture” and “values” are NOT a part of “human
nature?” Race and culture are commonly confused and, as a result, are
improperly used as synonyms. Race is genetically determined. Genes
determine the morphology and physiology of the organs of the body. That,
of course, includes the brain which influences certain fundamental
behaviors (basic intelligence and the propensity for crime, for example).
In much the same way, “human nature” (or call it nature’s law or the
nature of man, if you will) is universal. It applies to all men at all
places and in all times. Murder and mayhem are violations of “nature’s
law.”
On the other hand, “culture” and “values” are learned behaviors. Culture
is the sum total of everything (art, music, language, literature, etc)
that characterizes a group of people. As such, it is learned. Again,
history supports this hypothesis with regard to “Southern culture” and
military service to the Yankee occupier. Serving in the Yankee occupier’s
military was NOT a part of Southern culture in 1865. (How many Southern
males were willing to voluntarily join the genocide of the Plains Indian
using the same tactics that had been suffered upon them and their
families?) Apparently that “value” (or “cultural trait”) has changed as is
evidenced by the fact that Southerners have died in much greater
proportion than their representation in the general population in all of
the Yankee occupier’s modern imperialistic wars.
So, if the “warrior culture” is not genetic but learned behavior, and if
it is passed down through generations, then at some point in time, a
(some) member(s) of the clan had to be persuaded-taught that somehow
sacrificing himself in the name of Yankee Imperialism was a good and noble
deed. How did that happen?
The key has to lie somewhere within the apparatus and nature of the State
itself. Every State to have ever come into existence did so through
conquest, expropriation and exploitation—history records no exception.
Coercive exploitation creates victims (malcontents). Yet on the other
hand, the existence of the State ultimately depends on public opinion. It
is impossible to quell resistance with force alone, especially in the
normal cases where small minorities expropriate and exploit much larger
groups of people than themselves. Obviously, such an operation (as State
sponsored robbery and murder) must have public support in addition to a
coercive force capability.
Most of the population must believe that the State is legitimate. Public
opinion in support of the State acts as a counterbalance to the resistance
of victimized property owners and leaves the appearance that resistance is
futile. So, the State’s goal is to maximize wealth and income acquired by
exploitation. And to do this it must create favorable public opinion as to
its own legitimacy.
There are two primary methods that the state uses to accomplish this goal.
The first is ideological propaganda. The State spends a great deal of time
and stolen resources on persuading the public that things are not really
what they appear to be—e.g. It must exploit its subjects in order to make
(or keep) them “free;” Taxes are really just “paying our fair share;” The
“social contract” is a real one—even though nobody will put it into
writing; “We” are the government and, therefore, rule ourselves; There
would be no law and order or security in the homeland if it were not for
the State; Without the State the poor would all starve and minorities
would never be able to find a job; etc etc etc ad nauseum
Another technique the State uses to create favorable public opinion is
redistribution. Instead of being strictly a parasite, the State
redistributes a portion of its extorted property to people outside its own
apparatus. Of course, doing something nice for people is NOT the idea. The
idea is to corrupt them into being supportive. This is done for the
purpose of securing the existence and expansion of exploitation and
expropriation. These redistributive measures are applied to the production
of security (police, military, and the judicial system), transportation,
communication, affirmative action, health and welfare, and so fourth.
But most important to this thesis is education. As above, the State
depends, for its very survival, on public opinion with regard to its
legitimacy. Therefore, it absolutely must eliminate any unfavorable
ideological competition and insure that statist ideologies are propagated.
Thus, the loop is closed as this is accomplished by the State’s
redistributive provision of educational services.
So where, exactly, did the clan get the idea that “service” to the
occupier is noble and good? The process began somewhere along about the
loyalty oath that was forced upon a tired and defeated people during
reconstruction. But the Yankee propagandists soon discovered that less
coercive means were more effective. Thus, the forming of State-favorable
public opinion is the sole purpose for the existence of the government’s
schools—turning out little lock-step payers of “their fair share.” It is
the only reason those schools have elaborate playing fields and athletic
facilities—to produce strong male children willing to charge headlong into
machine gun fire on behalf of the lenders of blood money and their
benefactors. It is the only reason kids say the “pledge of allegiance.” It
is why war is glorified in all manner of media. It is why history books
are, at best, a collection of half-truths and often outright lies—all of
which aggrandize the State.
If we are ever to stop the robbery and murder, we must withdraw our
“public support.” In other words, we of the clan must UN-reconstruct
ourselves.
--
Think secession!
Support our sponsors:
Options for Homeland Defense, Inc.
Quality Firearms Training
www.optionsforhomelanddefense.com
The Warrior’s Press, Inc.
Military Manuals & Correspondence Courses
Outrageous and Banned Books
www.warriorspress.com
American Lapel Pins & Emblems, Inc.
Lapel & Hat Pins, Badges, Patches
www.pinsandemblems.com
http://www.flyoverpress.com
by
Dr Jimmy T (Gunny) LaBaume
On the 27th of November, 2006 FlyoverPress.com carried the essay “Death by
Government: The Missing Chapter” by Thomas J. DiLorenzo
(http://www.lewrockwell.com
In the essay DiLorenzo points out that history records the extent to which
governments have committed mass murder of their own citizens during the
twentieth century—U.S.S.R.: 20 million; China: 65 million; Vietnam: 1
million; North Korea: 2 million; Cambodia: 2 million; Eastern Europe: 1
million; Latin America: 150,000; Africa: 1.7 million; Afghanistan: 1.5
million; Nazi Germany’s 21 million civilian murders and many others. After
reviewing the literature covering these mass murders, he notes that:
“The glaring omission is the 300,000 (Southern) Americans who were killed
by the Lincoln regime from 1861–1865. According to some conservative
estimates, some 50,000 Southern civilians were also killed…For (attempting
to leave the union) they had to be invaded, killed by the hundreds of
thousands, conquered, occupied, and re-educated over and over again.”
My editorial comment was something to the effect that one can not deny the
effectiveness of that "re-education." How else do you explain the fact
that young, peach faced, Southern kids have died in gross disproportion to
their numbers in the over all population in all of the Yankee occupation
government's imperialistic wars since then?
Smokey offered an answer:
“It is the urge to eat at the same table.
“It is something I have wondered about for most of my life. Nearly every
relative I have still has strong emotional ties to the Confederacy. And
yet, they (we) enlist at the first opportunity. I would posit that human
nature is more likely the root of such contradictive behavior than
re-education, or at least part and parcel to the phenomenon.
“The South was, and to an extent is, a warrior culture. Young men raised
on the values of warriors look for an outlet. They will look for the good
to justify the cause, and ignore the contradictions. And once your
grandfather or father or uncle or cousin does it..... it's that much
easier. The urge to follow in the footsteps of heroes is strong, even when
your heroes later say, "don't do it, it's a fool's choice."
“When you grow up in a family full of veterans, dead and living, there is
a hell of an urge to be able to eat at the same table and talk as an equal
among men/warriors.
“Until those values that make Southern culture worthwhile are dead and
dispersed, Southern men will answer the call, and ignore the
contradictions at the heart of the matter—or, until the call is sounded
again, by their own nation, for true freedom.”
This seems to be a case of old Smokey just not being quite ready yet to
admit that the whole damned clan has been duped.
In all seriousness (although chiding Smokey is great fun) this raises
questions that are much to important to be so flightily brushed aside.
Besides, I too feel honored to sit at that table. In fact, the only men I
care to associate with are from that mold. Smokey’s take is not
necessarily incompatible with mine—it just does not get to answers for the
ultimate question. Where did the clan get the idea in the first place?
What was ultimately responsible?
Before attempting to get to the bottom of those questions, I need to
clarify some of the terms. “Culture” and “values” are NOT a part of “human
nature?” Race and culture are commonly confused and, as a result, are
improperly used as synonyms. Race is genetically determined. Genes
determine the morphology and physiology of the organs of the body. That,
of course, includes the brain which influences certain fundamental
behaviors (basic intelligence and the propensity for crime, for example).
In much the same way, “human nature” (or call it nature’s law or the
nature of man, if you will) is universal. It applies to all men at all
places and in all times. Murder and mayhem are violations of “nature’s
law.”
On the other hand, “culture” and “values” are learned behaviors. Culture
is the sum total of everything (art, music, language, literature, etc)
that characterizes a group of people. As such, it is learned. Again,
history supports this hypothesis with regard to “Southern culture” and
military service to the Yankee occupier. Serving in the Yankee occupier’s
military was NOT a part of Southern culture in 1865. (How many Southern
males were willing to voluntarily join the genocide of the Plains Indian
using the same tactics that had been suffered upon them and their
families?) Apparently that “value” (or “cultural trait”) has changed as is
evidenced by the fact that Southerners have died in much greater
proportion than their representation in the general population in all of
the Yankee occupier’s modern imperialistic wars.
So, if the “warrior culture” is not genetic but learned behavior, and if
it is passed down through generations, then at some point in time, a
(some) member(s) of the clan had to be persuaded-taught that somehow
sacrificing himself in the name of Yankee Imperialism was a good and noble
deed. How did that happen?
The key has to lie somewhere within the apparatus and nature of the State
itself. Every State to have ever come into existence did so through
conquest, expropriation and exploitation—history records no exception.
Coercive exploitation creates victims (malcontents). Yet on the other
hand, the existence of the State ultimately depends on public opinion. It
is impossible to quell resistance with force alone, especially in the
normal cases where small minorities expropriate and exploit much larger
groups of people than themselves. Obviously, such an operation (as State
sponsored robbery and murder) must have public support in addition to a
coercive force capability.
Most of the population must believe that the State is legitimate. Public
opinion in support of the State acts as a counterbalance to the resistance
of victimized property owners and leaves the appearance that resistance is
futile. So, the State’s goal is to maximize wealth and income acquired by
exploitation. And to do this it must create favorable public opinion as to
its own legitimacy.
There are two primary methods that the state uses to accomplish this goal.
The first is ideological propaganda. The State spends a great deal of time
and stolen resources on persuading the public that things are not really
what they appear to be—e.g. It must exploit its subjects in order to make
(or keep) them “free;” Taxes are really just “paying our fair share;” The
“social contract” is a real one—even though nobody will put it into
writing; “We” are the government and, therefore, rule ourselves; There
would be no law and order or security in the homeland if it were not for
the State; Without the State the poor would all starve and minorities
would never be able to find a job; etc etc etc ad nauseum
Another technique the State uses to create favorable public opinion is
redistribution. Instead of being strictly a parasite, the State
redistributes a portion of its extorted property to people outside its own
apparatus. Of course, doing something nice for people is NOT the idea. The
idea is to corrupt them into being supportive. This is done for the
purpose of securing the existence and expansion of exploitation and
expropriation. These redistributive measures are applied to the production
of security (police, military, and the judicial system), transportation,
communication, affirmative action, health and welfare, and so fourth.
But most important to this thesis is education. As above, the State
depends, for its very survival, on public opinion with regard to its
legitimacy. Therefore, it absolutely must eliminate any unfavorable
ideological competition and insure that statist ideologies are propagated.
Thus, the loop is closed as this is accomplished by the State’s
redistributive provision of educational services.
So where, exactly, did the clan get the idea that “service” to the
occupier is noble and good? The process began somewhere along about the
loyalty oath that was forced upon a tired and defeated people during
reconstruction. But the Yankee propagandists soon discovered that less
coercive means were more effective. Thus, the forming of State-favorable
public opinion is the sole purpose for the existence of the government’s
schools—turning out little lock-step payers of “their fair share.” It is
the only reason those schools have elaborate playing fields and athletic
facilities—to produce strong male children willing to charge headlong into
machine gun fire on behalf of the lenders of blood money and their
benefactors. It is the only reason kids say the “pledge of allegiance.” It
is why war is glorified in all manner of media. It is why history books
are, at best, a collection of half-truths and often outright lies—all of
which aggrandize the State.
If we are ever to stop the robbery and murder, we must withdraw our
“public support.” In other words, we of the clan must UN-reconstruct
ourselves.
--
Think secession!
Support our sponsors:
Options for Homeland Defense, Inc.
Quality Firearms Training
www.optionsforhomelanddefense
The Warrior’s Press, Inc.
Military Manuals & Correspondence Courses
Outrageous and Banned Books
www.warriorspress.com
American Lapel Pins & Emblems, Inc.
Lapel & Hat Pins, Badges, Patches
www.pinsandemblems.com
~~~~~~~~~~
This is...
Gunny G's...
GLOBE and ANCHOR
Marines Sites & Forums
By R.W. "Dick" Gaines
Gny Sgt USMC (Ret.)
1952-'72
Semper Fidelis
~~~~~~~~~~
Note:
GyG's G&A Sites & Forums is an informational site and not for profit. Copyrighted material provided soley for education, study, research, and discussion, etc. Full credit to source shown when available.
~~~~~
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note:
The 'Reader Responses; shown on many posts/articles are almost always worthwhile reading.
Often, the comments by readers enhance the posted article greatly, and are informative and interesting.
Hopefully, all will remember to read the reader comments, and post their own as well.
Thanx
*****