"Wanted for War Crimes: Abraham Lincoln" Part Two -- Original Text

2 views
Skip to first unread message

RStacy2229

unread,
Aug 12, 1996, 3:00:00 AM8/12/96
to

PART TWO: LINCOLN WAR CRIMES FLIER

Still, during the darkest days of Jim Crow and even during the bitter
struggles of the civil rights movement, the majority of Southerners, black
and white, have never allowed racial hatred to enter their day-to-day
lives. If hatred had been the rule, rather than the exception, surely John
Brown's nightmare vision of a bloody race war would have long since
devastated Dixie. Lynchings were never a common event in any Southern
community, and the Ku Klux Klan -- though born in the South -- had its
largest 20th-century following in the Midwest and has long since ceased to
be anything but a tiny sect below the Mason-Dixon line.

It should not be overlooked that, more than 100 years after the end of
slavery, most African-Americans still choose to make the South their home.
In the states of the old Confederacy, black people constitute between 20
and 35 percent of the population. Nor are these people trapped in rural or
urban poverty, but many have gained political and economic prominence in
their communities. Such Southern cities as Atlanta have become meccas for
ambitious career-oriented black men and women from around the country,
even around the world. Had hatred been the dominant historic force in
Southern race relations, would any of this be true?

And as the citizens of Dixie look North, where Lincoln once ruled, and
West, where the Republican Party worked for years to keep black people
out, what do we see? Hatred, hostility and suspicion, overlaid with a
patina of humanitarian hypocrisy that most African-Americans have long
since seen through. The end of the civil rights era is often traced to the
mid-1960s when, having secured equality under the law in the South, Martin
Luther King turned northward and attempted to end de facto segregation in
Chicago -- in Lincoln's home state. Resistance was furious and, after
King's
death, with the busing riots in Detroit and Boston of the late 1960's and
'70's, it became obvious to the world what Southerners had known all
along: Yankees hate black people.

In 1996, some national leaders have attempted to revive the old stereotype
of Southern bigotry by pointing to a number of arson fires against rural
black churches. It quickly became apparent, however, that very few of
these fires were racially motivated. Most were apparently set by teen-age
vandals, one was set by a 13-year-old girl involved with devil worship and
another was set by black contractors who had been hired to renovate the
church they burned. No widespread conspiracy of hate has ever been
discovered.

And so we look at the South, and we see a region where -- even under
slavery, even during segregation -- black and white have generally lived
together in harmony. We look to the North in recent years and see black
people beaten to death by mobs in Detroit and New York. We look West and
see Rodney King, riots, and Mark Fuhrman. The South can hold her head
high.

Abraham Lincoln? He and his political allies centralized political power
in Washington, D.C., and used that power to pass high tariffs which made
possible the era of "Robber Barons." The South's opposition to such
tariffs had been one of the prime causes -- and some would say THE prime
cause -- of the war. Having created a continental empire, foreign
imperialism was the next logical step: Cuba, the Philippines, Panama and,
yes, even Vietnam were the ultimate victims of Lincolnian doctrine. And
the continued expansion of the power of the central government to
interfere in the ordinary affairs of its citizens is but the expected
consequence of Lincoln's denial of
the South's independence.

Is the South dead?

Did Lincoln and his successors achieve the liquidation of the entire
culture of the Confederate states, as was their goal? Some would say
"yes." Our big cities are almost indistinguishable from Cleveland or
Buffalo -- except for the weather, perhaps. Many of our young people ape
the perverse culture of MTV and the obscene immorality of soap operas and
daytime talk shows. Cheeseburgers, tacos and pizza have supplanted
cornbread, greens and black-eyed peas in the diets of many Southerners.
Even our distinct form of speech, some would say, is gradually being
homogenized.

But a growing number of Southern leaders say Dixie is still alive, and
they mean to keep it that way. Led by such scholars as Dr. Michael Hill,
Dr. Clyde Wilson and Dr. Thomas Fleming, joined by influential clergymen,
authors, journalists and just ordinary working men and women, this
burgeoning movement has led to the formation of The Southern League.

Dedicated to the "economic, cultural and political independence" of the
South, a goal to be achieved "by all honorable means," The Southern League
is unlike any other current movement in America. It is no crackpot
militia, nor is it any way racially oriented. Its members are involved in
defending such traditional Southern symbols as the Confederate battle flag
from attacks by advocates of political correctness; however, this is much
more than a "heritage defense" group. Its members are conservative in
their political and cultural leanings, but this is not merely another
front of the Republican phalanx: The Southern League shocked the "country
club" crowd by endorsing the "divisive" Patrick Buchanan for President.

No, the Southern League is more than all this. The organization aims to
resurrect and revitalize the moral and political doctrines to which such
men as Davis, Lee and Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson dedicated their lives,
including a free and independent South, either under the
"paleo-federalist" principles of the 10th Amendment or by the "Southern
National" act of secession. As shocking as such a notion may sound on the
cusp of the 21st century, both the friends and enemies of the Southern
League have begun to take this movement seriously. Why? Look around. Calls
for "home
rule" and "autonomy" are becoming common around the globe: From Scotland
to the West Bank, in the Baltic and in the Balkans, we see empires falling
apart or nations facing demands for independence by regional minorities.
Most recently, Quebec came within a single percentage point of voting to
secede from Canada.

If secession is all right for Bosnia and Estonia, if Taiwan can seek to
maintain its independence from mainland China, if the Quebecois can seek
their freedom, then why can't the American South do the same? After all,
we more or less invented secession, and certainly, the failing course of
the massive federal leviathan is cause enough to seek an escape from those
big-government policies which have led to a $5 trillion national debt.

Learn more about this movement. Visit the Southern League's World Wide Web
site, DixieNet, which features not only news and information about this
organization's doctrines and activities, but also can connect you to a
fascinating amount of information about Confederate history and Southern
culture. Learning history was never so much fun!

Too bad for Abraham Lincoln. The conquest was successful, but the
subjugation of the South did not last!


Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages