-Caveat Lector-
Via http://www.lewrockwell.com/
From
http://www.pointsouth.com/partisan/samples/sample-yankee-repents.htm
{{<Begin>}}
Note: The following is an unedited pre-publication manuscript from Southern
Partisan magazine. Errors of grammar, punctuation, and fact have not been
checked or corrected. This article is not for reproduction, but to give our web
page visitors a general idea of our content.
All rights reserved. Southern Partisan Magazine Corporation, 1999. A YANKEE
REPENTS
by James Perloff
As a conservative, I normally take an uncompromising stand on every
issue, whether abortion or gun control, defense spending or religious freedom.
So I long wondered why I felt ambivalent about the War Between the States.
On one hand, I could never condone slavery. Who could doubt the
universal intent of the founding fathers in declaring "All men are created
equal"? And hadn't the Yankees fought to preserve the USA I treasure as a
patriot? On the other hand, I admired the South's deep-rooted conservatism.
During the War Between the States, few people were uncertain about
their sympathies. So had I lived then, resolute conservative that I am, surely
I would have taken a stand. But on whose side?
Deciding to investigate, I obtained a heavy volume of Abraham Lincoln's
correspondence and speeches. Having recently read the distinguished letters of
America's patriarchs, such as Washington and Jefferson, I ex
pected something commensurate.
I was surprised and disappointed. Lincoln's early writings often sounded
rather neurotic, and presented a politician not above penning anonymous denigrations
of opponents in the local press. I saw little of the
nobility of Lincoln's Mount Rushmore neighbors.
But, age often yields character, and as Lincoln approached the Presidency,
his writings began to manifest deep-felt concern for mankind. During the war, he
appeared steeped in its gravity. One could sense a burd
en over the casualties, sincere patriotism, and reverence for God. After reading
Lincoln, I concluded he had been on right's side.
However, Proverbs 18:17 says: "The first to present his case seems right,
till another comes forward and questions him." Deciding the Confederacy deserved equal
time, I was pleased to find a dusty copy of Jeffer
son Davis's The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government.
Previously, I had not known such books existed. Being raised in the North, I
had only heard Yankee perspectives on the war. The South's viewpoint reached me
through prisms of Northern historians. I even attended
Colby College----alma mater of Benjamin Butler, whose infamous order, permitting his
troops to treat any disrespectful lady of New Orleans "as a woman about town plying
her vocation," made him one of the most hated figur
es in Dixie.
Davis's book revealed a new world. Here were not the words of a politician,
but of a statesman, like his namesake, our third President.
Rise and Fall not only contained a blow-by-blow of the entire war, but an
exhaustive, lucid exposition on secession and states' rights. Jefferson Davis
apparently did far more homework than President Lincoln. He
not only studied the Constitution, but the original minutes of the Constitutional
Convention, the ratification statements of each state, and nearly all the important
debates and correspondence related to those proceeding
s. Davis exploded the arguments of Lincoln, Webster and other 19th-century Unionists,
and demonstrated that the states originally confederated understanding that each would
retain its sovereignty.
I was astonished to learn from Mr. Davis that in 1844, Massachusetts, of
which I am a lifelong resident, passed a resolution threatening secession from the
Union over the annexation of Texas. Massachusetts polit
icians had made similar noises in 1803 and 1811 following the purchase of Louisiana
and its subsequent admission as a state. Thus, Yankee views on secession's legality
appear to have hinged more on Yankee advantage than C
onstitutional observance.
Abraham Lincoln claimed to have waged war to keep the Union together.
Recently I read some of the famed diaries of Confederate women, which opened my eyes
to the devastation Union armies visited on the South, an
d helped me realize why Southerners so long spoke the name "Yankee" with contempt. So
I am forced to ask: Was it by Mr. Lincoln's great love for the South that he wanted to
remain united with it? If so, he seems to have b
een saying, "My Southern brethren, I cherish you so much I am going to invade you,
burn your cities, plunder your homes, and starve your children."
To this, Lincoln apologists would reply, "It was not Lincoln's love of the
South, but his love of the Constitution and principles therein that motivated him to
keep the Union together." Indeed, in his 1861 inaug
ural address, he claimed to fear that the South's secession would lead to "despotism"
there. He glossed over the fact that the Confederacy's Constitution was nearly a
duplicate of the U.S. Constitution, slightly amended.
In Rise and Fall, Mr. Davis placed the two side by side, with the amended language
italicized, so that any reader could objectively compare them. The Confederate
Constitution admitted of despotism no more than that of the
U.S.
In 1788, the Massachusetts state convention ratified entry into the Union by
a vote of just 187 to 168. Let us suppose that, a couple of years later, a second vote
had rescinded the first, and Massachusetts resp
ectfully announced: "Upon further consideration, we have decided that belonging to the
Union is not in the state's best interests." I wonder if anyone can imagine George
Washington issuing the following proclamation:
"It has come to my attention that Massachusetts intends to depart the Union.
I declare Massachusetts to be in rebellion! I am requesting the governors of the other
states to muster armies which are to proceed to
Massachusetts and invade it. I am dispatching federal warships to blockade Boston
Harbor. Upon capture, the city is to be burned to the ground. Federal commanders shall
torch other Massachusetts cities and towns as they
see fit.
"I, George Washington, do further declare, that because the people of
Massachusetts have perpetrated this brazen treason, all of their rights are forthwith
revoked. Of course, if any Massachusetts resident disav
ows his state's dastardly decision, and swears an oath of loyalty to the federal
government, his rights shall be restored. Such cases excepted, federal soldiers should
feel free to loot any Massachusetts home. Crops not s
eized for army provisions should be destroyed without regard to the needs of the
rebels and their families. After all, war is hell.
"And you citizens of other states, take warning! Consorting with the
Massachusetts rebels will not be tolerated. It has come to my attention, in fact, that
certain leaders and legislators in New Hampshire and Co
nnecticut have expressed sympathy for their cause! I am ordering federal troops to
round up these "border state" turncoats. They will be jailed without hearings. I
hereby revoke the right of habeas corpus just accorded un
der the Constitution. In times as these, suspicion alone shall be suitable cause for
imprisonment..."
No one believes George Washington would have issued such a proclamation. And
if he had, he would have swung from a tree. True, Lincoln did not state things so
bluntly, but the foregoing accurately reflects Yanke
e policy. What had changed between 1789 and 1861 to warrant such a response?
Lincoln claimed to be fulfilling the will of America's founding fathers. Yet
those eminent men had not gone to war over slavery. Would they have warred over
secession? Mr. Davis supplied ample quotations from Wa
shington, Madison, Hamilton and others to establish that they would not. It was quite
difficult to coax several of the states into the Union; had they for a moment believed
withdrawal would be branded as treason punishabl
e by invasion, no state would have joined. And as Davis incisively pointed out, the
Declaration of Independence, to which Lincoln professed such homage, itself
constituted secession from Britain!
Comparison of Davis to Lincoln highlights the former's integrity, but
surprising duplicity by "Honest Abe". Regarding Fort Sumter, Davis laid out the
correspondence between Washington and the South's envoys. He
demonstrated that the Lincoln administration acted deceitfully----perhaps to ensure
that the Confederacy would fire the first shot, and thus justify, in the world's eyes,
armed conquest of the South.
Apparently, one reason the South lost the war was that it behaved honorably.
But, to the North, the ends justified nearly any means.
Abraham Lincoln frequently invoked God's name in association with his cause.
Referring to the war, he declared: "The will of God prevails. In great contests each
party claims to act in accordance with the will o
f God. Both may be, and one must be, wrong. God cannot be for and against the same
thing at the same time." Lincoln implied that Northern victory bespoke God's favor.
Perhaps so. Or did we Yankees win simply because we possessed vastly
superior numbers, weapons, and ships? Victory does not certify heaven's approval. Did
Stalin's seizure of Lithuania signify that God loved the
Red Army? When a woman struggles against two muggers, and they overwhelm her, does
their "triumph" mean providence has conferred its blessing on them?
Conduct, not victory, best measures fulfillment of God's will.
Generally, the record attests that the South fought more managed its diplomacy
more honestly. It did little to reciprocate the North's pillaging sytle of
warfare-----a style that continued with the rape of Reconstruction. To me,
these matters attest to righteousness far more than the verdict of
Appomomattox.
What were the war's results? True, the evil of slavery ended.
However, had the South won, does anyone believe the institution would still
exist there? Industrialization and modernization would have purged it, just as
they had previously in the North.
From a conservative perspective, the war's most lasting significance
was the crushing of state sovereignty. It made the states, and their people,
little more than vassals of a powerful centralized government. Without Northern
victory, Washington could not have so easily burdened us with income tax; FDR
could not have ushered in socialism with the New Deal; and no Supreme Court
could have banned school prayer or forced abortion on unwilling states. Now,
via federal law, the "politically correct" are attempting to destroy every
vestige of Christianity and morality. Mr. Davis declared: "The result
established the truthfulness of the assertion ... that the Northern people, by
their unconstitutional warfare to gain the freedom of certain Negro slaves,
would lose their own liberties." How right he was!
I believe the war had even broader implications. In my 1988 book The
Shadows of Power, I examined American foreign policy from Wilson through
Reagan. I concluded that certain U.S. diplomats in this century have labored to
place America under a world government. This goal is today shared by a number
of liberals, socialists, and Clinton foreign policy officials, and is pursued
through such stepping stones as the GATT, environmental accords, and the U.N.
Its ultimate fulfillment would ominously threaten mankind. For if the world
came under a single government, whose policies would rule it? If a global
authority turned despotic, where could one turn to escape it?
Thus the War between the States stands as a haunting forerunner of a
critical danger now on our horizon: then it was state sovereignty versus
national government; today American sovereignty versus world government.
I understand that you Southerners call the war "the Lost Cause." I do
not consider it lost. Today, if anyone fights for conservatism and the Judeo-
Christian ethic, battles against federal bureaucracy and our submersion into
world government-----I believe that person rides beside Robert E. Lee and
carries a Confederate banner with Stonewall Jackson.
In the preface to Rise and Fall, Jefferson Davis wrote that his
intent was "to furnish material for the future historian, who, when the
passions and prejudices of the day shall have given place to reason and sober
thought, may, better than a contemporary, investigate the causes, conduct, and
results of the war." Thank you, Mr. Davis. For me, that moment has arrived.
Finally, I know where I stand on the War between the States. And as for you
Southerners, I wish you had driven our Yankee hides all the way back to Boston.
It is my great sorrow to be saying this to you 135 years late.
James Perloff's The Shadows of Power, sold 90,000 copies. He has written for
numerous magazines, but is a new convert to Southern Partisan.
Southern Partisan Web Pages are web-authored by Apologia Services (Jeffrey
Todd McCormack, Webmaster) ©1996-1999 All Rights Reserved
All Graphics are ©All Points South & Apologia Services
Last Updated 28 June 1999 anno Domini
{{<End>}}
A<>E<>R
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Integrity has no need of rules. -Albert Camus (1913-1960)
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking
new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said
it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your
own reason and your common sense." --Buddha
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that
prevents us from living freely and nobly. -Bertrand Russell
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Everyone has the right...to seek, receive and impart
information and ideas through any media and regardless
of frontiers." Universal Declaration of Human Rights
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will
teach you to keep your mouth shut." Ernest Hemingway
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Forwarded as information only; no endorsement to be presumed
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
