[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
History See other History Articles Title: Lincoln's Marxists Red Republicans and Lincoln’s Marxists: Marxism in the Civil War, Walter D. Kennedy and Al Benson, Jr., iUniverse Press, Lincoln, Nebraska, 2007. Beginning in the mid-1990’s I gave a number of talks about Southern history. Part of my monologue was devoted to the role of the 48ers: those veterans of the 1848 Marxist uprisings in Europe, and how they effected the politics of Missouri during the War Between the States (WBTS). I spoke about Karl Marx, Joseph Weydemeyer, Franz Sigel, and Carl Schurz, among others, who supported the Lincoln Administration. The discussion of domestic Marxism associated with the iconic Abraham Lincoln made people uneasy. Immigrant socialist revolutionaries in St. Louis formed the core of Union support and were dedicated voters casting their ballots for Lincoln in the two Missouri counties that he won. The story about Missouri Governor Claiborne Jackson’s victory at the Battle of Carthage defeating a Marxist cadre (Franz Sigel’s command) was unknown to most folks. Reminding my audience that Carl Schurz, the Reconstruction Senator from Missouri, was the only admitted Marxist to serve in the Senate was a shock to many. Any discussion about the role of revolutionary socialism and the WBTS made people very uneasy. Now 10 years later, through the Grace of God and the dedicated work of veteran writers Walter (Donnie) Kennedy and Al Benson, Jr., the story of how Marx, his acolytes, and the Lincoln administration conspired to destroy the Constitution of the Founders and skew America toward atheism, socialism, and worse, is available to anyone who will read this important book. Today the information in this work will no longer make people uneasy; it will make them angry. Amazon.com says this about the book: Was Abraham Lincoln influenced by communism when the Union condemned the rights of Southern states to express their independence? It’s shocking to think so. But that’s precisely what Walter D. Kennedy and Al Benson Jr. assert in Red Republicans and Lincoln’s Marxists. The pair completely reassess this tumultuous time in American history, exposing the “politically correct” view of the War for Southern Independence as nothing less than the same observation announced by Marx himself. During the American Civil War, Marx wrote about his support of the Union Army, the Republican Party, and Lincoln himself. In fact, he named the president as “the single-minded son of the working class.” In addition to shedding light on this little-known part of our history, Kennedy and Benson also ask pertinent questions about the validity of today’s federal government and why its role seems so much larger than the liberty found in the states it represents. Red Republicans and Lincoln’s Marxists is a bold undertaking, but it’s one that needs our immediate and absolute attention. Within its fifteen chapters and six appendices the authors give us a wealth of information that has been hidden in scholarly journals and insider left-wing history books and exposes this occult record of socialism in America to the light of day. Although much of what the authors reveal has been known for decades, the Establishment has chosen to keep these facts about the Left under wraps. Cloaking information in misdirections such as calling Marxists German democrats, liberals, progressives, freedom-fighters, and other obfuscations. Historians and similar surrogates for the dominant culture have sought to hide the role of socialism from the public. The authors take on a number of misconceptions and sacred cows of the Left and courageously reassess the record. We are treated to a concise but adequate discussion of the chronology of anti-Constitutional thinking leaking into the American venue by a variety of European socialists. Prior to the major push of socialist and materialist thought which started in the 1850s, we find that the ground had already been plowed by several groups which were interested in reversing Christian thought from which the concept in free will had arisen. We see new light shed on Leftists icons like The Shakers, the Oneida Community, Owenites, Fourierist, and other proto-Marxist influences. These vanguard groups tested the waters of the new American nation with utopian experiments which would provide fertile ground for later revolutionary materialists to plant the seeds of Marxism and other aggressive forms of socialism that would flourish in the twentieth century. The term Red Republican is something the contemporary Republican Party wants people to forget. They would like people to believe that they are for small government, not mentioning that through Abe Lincoln a whole gaggle of socialists populated the original Republican ranks. The socialist takeover of the Democrat party is well known so they are completely onboard with the Red Republican legacy. That combination makes for an atmosphere of total silence on this subject among the political elites. However Lincoln is the father of both modern parties. Through the transformative miracle of big government, our political parties are both the bastard children of Lincoln and his consort Karl Marx. It is in their universal faith in the goodness of big government that we find common ground between these two lovers and the bacillus of big government centralism is the result of this marriage. The infection is with us to this day. The authors introduce us to the main players of the Red Republicans who inferred themselves into the American political system as a power-drunk Abraham Lincoln allowed one after another member of the Marxist Revolution of 1848 to enter the Union Army, to gain access to the levers of power, and to penetrate the President’s administration to the heart. Beginning on page 109 we find that General Franz Sigel and General Joseph Weydemeyer were trusted allies and active military men who commanded Union troops in the field. General Carl Schurz was not only a field commander but an advisor to King Abraham himself. Schurz would become a political leader, founding the Red Republicans, and was the Secretary of the Interior. He was the unelected Reconstruction Senator from Missouri until the Southerners got back the right to vote and ran him out of office legitimately electing distinguished Confederate General Francis Cockrell to the Senate for five terms; purging for a time the stench lingering behind. Although not alone, Sigel, Weydemeyer, and Schurz were all friends and correspondents of the notorious Karl Marx, who actively inveigled and schemed for a Union victory, seeing the North as the inevitable evolutionary progression towards the Worker’s Utopia of perpetual socialism. Destroying the Confederacy was the fulfillment of his prophecy that the Old Order would collapse of its own volition. Never mind that Marx would send money and military aid to his operatives in the North to aid evolution. On page 130 we find out that Lincoln operative Charles Dana, and publisher Horace Greeley, hired Marx, and from his position as a paid reporter for the New York press establishment he would influence the course of the War any way he could. Marx would be the writer who began the mythology that the WBTS was a war against slavery. Parroted by W. E. B. Dubois and others, the spin doctoring of Karl Marx, who claimed the “war was to end the slaveocracy” of the South, is now thought to be metaphysical truth. It has become the historical excuse to destroy a people and their culture and is now a complete catechism to the Left today, who cannot retell history without this building block. Even though slavery is endemic to every Communist regime, Leftists love to spew Marxian platitudes about freeing slaves from the plush safety of their Ivory Towers. Using the terms worker’s brigades, re-education camps, and volunteer-labor projects, Marxists have used slavery for every conceivable purpose. Stalin, Mao, and Castro preferred to create a class of political criminals, jail them, enslave them in camps, and work them to death. Despite their high-minded sophistry, such is the Left’s legacy regarding slavery. The book follows a parade of Marxists and other socialists. From the WBTS to the present both the prominent and the hidden Leftists are plucked from American history and clinically examined by the authors of Red Republicans. With the hot light of truth turned on them, these socialist pests skitter through our past laying eggs that hatch in our present. From the so-called “feminist movement,” past the invasion of labor organizations, into the Bellamys’ “Christian Socialism,” and the writing of the Pledge of Allegiance by a Marxist who inserted the word “indivisible” as a slap to the South, Kennedy and Benson treat us to a banquet of crucial facts. Although the book is very good, it is not without minor problems. Perhaps a fuller elucidation of European socialism in the nineteenth century might have been helpful. In the discussion of anarchist Michael Bakunin, the impression is left that Bakunin was an ally of Marx. The two were rivals, and noting that socialists, communists, and anarchists fought each other in Europe over doctrine might prove helpful to understanding the present. Noting that Bakunin at one time admired the anti-statism of the South but was brought to heel by Marx, who forced Bakunin to accept that slavery was the raison d’être for the War, is a point that the authors might have explored. Unfortunately for Bakunin, showing himself to be a vassal to European socialist opinion and not a leader helped to undo him. Tying Hitler closer to the socialist movement would also have been useful. Although Hitler was not a doctrinaire Marxist, he was nevertheless a socialist as his movement the National Socialist Party (Nazi) suggests. Although German Marxists initially supported the Fuehrer, Hitler came out of other European socialist traditions: the so-called “soft socialism” of the economist Von Schmoller for instance. But he did admire Marx and his fascination with strong central government: an obsession that Hitler, Marx, and Lincoln shared. That central fact is not missed by the authors. Perhaps an investigation into what effect the 48ers had on the United States military would have been illuminating as well. At its center the major players of Marxism in the WBTS were military men. It is interesting to note that the United States officer corps split about evenly over the War. Understandably confused, some chose the new statism of Lincoln and some chose the Constitution, siding with the South. In the next major crisis, the military will have to choose among the State, the Constitution, and the Empire. Remembering that Marxists believe in the inevitable victory of an international Communist society, it is not so far fetched to opine that the legacy of Carl Schurz and company is the triumph of a global socialist empire. One can only wonder what the officers and enlisted personnel of the U. S. military will do next time. These and a few other omissions are a trifle compared to the importance of Red Republicans. It is a well written reference book which is very readable. Its vocabulary is friendly to anyone. Furthermore, those independent scholars of sententia meridiana or students of liberty will cherish this volume. Readers can place this book next to the Southern Agrarian masterpiece I’ll Take My Stand, Thomas DiLorenzo’s The Real Lincoln, and Donald Gilmore’s The Civil War on the Missouri/Kansas Border, in recognizing the importance of this work. Red Republicans is also an operational tool that will smash the illusions woven by the omnipresent Left, and it will incite the public to reclaim the truth of their past.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 3.
#1. To: X-15 (#0)
Sounds interesting. I'll get it.
If you note, it was not by coincidence that Lincoln in 1848 on the floor of the House made his speech saying that people had the right to rebel anytime they felt like it... Of course when he became president that "right" became illegal and Americans died by the thousands, plus Abe imprisoned thousands for nothing.
#4. To: Cynicom (#3)
I've read much about Lincoln and think he was the most damaging figure to this country, and to the South. He's kind of like Hitler, historically speaking. There seems to be a dual personality.
Most people don't know it, but Lincoln was kicked in the face by a horse when he was about 11, and unconscious for a long time. They thought he was going to die. His face was deformed for the rest of his life, and after that accident he suffered debilitating depression off and on for the rest of his life. I'm sure the brain damage he suffered affected his judgment as President. He was also a faggot.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||