Wednesday, April 14, 2010

The People You’re Allowed to Hate

The American Conservative » The People You’re Allowed to Hate

Once again I find myself in a position that, I must admit, feels a bit awkward to me... That of agreeing with Pat Buchanan.

Alas, if real history were taught, then people would understand what the first Civil War was about. It was a power struggle between the states and the federal government. The United States of America. States came together voluntarily, and the war was about whether or not those states had the right to withdraw from this voluntarily entered union.

The war was not about slavery. The Emancipation Proclamation only 'freed' slaves in the south, not in the north. Lincoln himself didn't believe in the equality of blacks. His ideal soultion was to ship them back to where they came from. Furthermore, the other major nations didn't have to resort to war to end slavery in their countries and neither did the United States. The Abolition Movement was working, and the abomination of slavery would have ended without the war because right is right and wrong is wrong.

The supremacy of the federal government ushered in by Lincoln was a betrayal. The real issues of War of Northern Aggression, the war to prevent states from voluntarily withdrawing from a union they voluntarily joined, are rarely discussed. Everyone grows up with the propaganda and outright lies that describe the war as one to free the slaves and portray Lincoln as a saint that made huge sacrifices to free the slaves, and the south and those that fought against that unjust federal power grab continue to be villified.

Watching the federal government, bloated and fat on our tax dollars, continue to take as much power (and money) from the states and the people as possible, it certainly doesn't surprise me that they hope to keep the hatred of those that would deny their right to power burning hot. With the number of states taking steps to assert their states' rights and the number that are flirting more seriously with the notion of escaping the union and the federal government's ever more onerous demands, it doesn't surprise me at all.


Anonymous said...

I've always liked Pat. He's a cat lover, patriot, intellectual, and all-around good guy who speaks his mind, and does so in an often convincing and persuasive manner, regardless. Sure, some of his comments leave a bad taste in my mouth, yet he certainly is better than the alternatives that seem to be in vogue nowadays. At least Pat has always put his ideas into written form, I believe moreso than the common pundit. Good for him.

Be that as it may, I'm convinced our culture has a fatal mind-numbing dependency on the pundits and sophists parading in front of us each night via the wizardry of modern communications. It's a dangerous kind of fix, because if fosters a mindset that encourages prima facia certitude, without thinking things through with one's own thoughts and cerebral capacities. I can't remember the last time I tuned into MSNBC or Fox. These people are so tedious, elitist, boring, and certain of themselves. It's nauseating. I always think of Camus when these folk pop into my head---All of their certainties don't amount to a hair off of a woman's head....

Sharon Secor said...

Thanks for stopping by and your comments are always appreciated. I absolutely agree with you on the dependency on pundits. I don't own a televsion myself, but I hear people talking about these people and parroting ideas with no real thought. When challenged, they can't defend or debate the ideas because they've never really thought about the issues. Camus -- a nice touch and a lovely concluding line. Thanks for making me smile in appreciation, it is a joy to encounter thoughtful people.