By Walt Garlington for The Saker Blog
Mr Robert Bridge is mostly right when he says the American impulse to dominate other countries is quite old. Mostly right, for he fails to mention that ‘America’ is not a monolithic entity that speaks with a single voice. There are, in fact, several regional cultures and subcultures with their own folkways that often clash with one another. Relationships with foreign countries is just one of many flash points that have risen between them over the years.
American exceptionalism, as he rightly sees, has its origins with the settlers of New England, who believed they were sent by God to build New Jerusalem in North America. But the Pilgrims were not the only cultural group that settled in the land area that now belongs to the United States. The Southern people, whose history begins at Jamestown, Virginia, in 1607, had quite a different temperament and beliefs than the Yankees of New England. Their views of foreign policy were, accordingly, also quite different.
The well-known Farewell Address (1796) of President George Washington (a Southerner from Virginia), is a good place to begin. In it he recommends the following to those in the States:
‘Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct; and can it be, that good policy does not equally enjoin it? . . . The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible.’
Pres Thomas Jefferson, also of Virginia, echoes these sentiments:
‘Commerce with all nations, alliance with none, should be our motto’ (letter of 1799).
‘The presumption of dictating to an independent nation the form of its government is so arrogant, so atrocious, that indignation as well as moral sentiment enlists all our partialities and prayers in favor of one [independent nations] and our equal execrations against the other [dictating to other nations]’ (letter of 1823).1
Another important Southern voice is John Randolph of Roanoke: ‘His political creed was that of a latter-day Antifederalist. “Love of peace, hatred of offensive war, jealousy of the state governments toward the general government; a dread of standing armies; a loathing of public debt, taxes, and excises; tenderness for the liberty of the citizen; jealousy, Argus-eyed jealousy, of the patronage of the President.”’
The critical moment for the United States was the so-called Civil War of 1861-1865 (more properly called the War of Northern Aggression or the War to Prevent Southern Independence, for the South was not fighting to take over Washington, D. C.; she wanted to peacefully separate form it and the Northern States and chart her own course). Here Confederate President Jefferson Davis’s statement is key: ‘The lust of empire impelled them [Yankees] to wage against their weaker neighbors [the South] a war of subjugation.’2
The dramatic change that was wrought in the Union through this horrible War – from a voluntary confederation of States to an involuntarily unified nation dominated by the Yankee ruling elite in Washington City – was admitted even by Yankees themselves. A professor at Harvard, George Ticknor, after the War was over, said, ‘It does not seem to me as if I were living in the country in which I was born.’3
From that point onward, the restraint in foreign policy advocated by many Southerners was rejected by and large for the imperial expansion desired by Northerners from Alexander Hamilton to Pres Lincoln. The prediction of General Robert E. Lee in 1866, that the US government would become ‘aggressive abroad and despotic at home’, after the old principles of decentralization and a voluntary compact of independent States were destroyed by Lincoln’s War,4 has come true.
However, with more and more voices predicting a breakup of the current American Union, due to various cultural divisions, failures abroad, and so on, it is possible that the South and the other cultural regions (Great Plains, Old Midwest, etc.) will be able to free themselves after decades of Yankee domination. Smaller confederations conducting foreign policy along the lines laid down by the Old Southern statesmen would spare the countries of the world any further violence from the current Yankee Empire.
Professor William Riker once speculated about how the 20th century would have looked if the unitary American Empire had not arisen; if, instead, North America looked more like South America, with several smaller ‘disconnected republics’ populating it:
‘“I know for certain,” writes Riker, “that the relatively smaller and weaker American nations would not have been able to participate in European wars.” An America-less First World War—or Great War, as we’d be calling it—would have ended in a German triumph, according to Riker. “There would, of course, have been no occasion for Hitler and the Second World War,” and in carving up European Russia the Germans would have unwittingly prevented the rise of Soviet communism.
‘No Constitution means no Hitler, no Stalin . . . and no American Civil War, for that matter.’5
What would the 21st century look like if the American Empire were broken up into its more natural cultural-ethnic components? What terrors could be avoided – war with China, Iran, and Russia? What good could be fostered – more restrictions on the power of Big Tech?
New England does not make up the totality of culture in the United States. There are other cultures, other voices; but they have unfortunately been silenced by the Yankees for the time being. The future of geopolitics hinges in part on whether the peoples of the South, the Midwest, the Spanish Southwest, etc., rediscover and strengthen their cultural identities, withdraw from the arrogant, heretical Yankee American Empire, and pursue a modest and peaceful foreign policy that is in keeping with their unique historical, ethnic qualities.
1 James and Walter Kennedy, Yankee Empire: Aggressive Abroad and Despotic at Home, Shotwell Publishing, Columbia, SC, 2018, p. 140.
2 Ibid., p. 342.
3 Ibid., p. 142.
4 Ibid., p. ix.
5 Bill Kauffman, Forgotten Founder, Drunken Prophet: The Life of Luther Martin, ISI Books, Wilmington, Del., 2008, p. 34.
There are some countries that could emerge, the Confederacy, an independent Texas, independent California, New England, Kingdom of Hawaii could be restored etc. perhaps more autonomy for indegenous peoples too?
As much as I dislike them, we have bigger fish to fry than “yankees”.
“Yankee” is a term applied to the apostate Puritans of New England who by the 18th century had abandoned Christ as one of three Persons in the Trinity but had kept the messianic zeal of forcing their “view,” an ideology, on all Americans. Washington Irving picks this up in his Legend of Sleepy Hollow into which the pedantic Yankee from Connecticut comes to remake the local folk into his image through his vocation as a teacher. While the southern portions of the Old Midwest – Ohio, Indiana, Illinois and Michigan – had been settled by Southerners, the upper two-thirds of these states were overwhelmed by Yankee immigrants from New England. The folks who wrote the script for the movie Ride With the Devil picked up on this, reflecting the reality in Kansas and Missouri in the crucible of the War – 1861-1865. The woman you see in the clip is the wife of a young Evans man who has been killed. The important part of the clip, however, begins at 3:47 as the deceased young man’s father, Mr. Evans, reports on how the Yankees who have come into Kansas demand that everyone live and think like they do; whereas “we” do not. Yankees, globalists, whatever you want to call them want to play god and make us all over in their image. That is why they hate Russia as it is today because Russia refuses to be made over in their image.
With a private monetary system, the U$A is a suzerainty of the Global Financial Syndicate (Financial Empire). U$A’s key drivers:
– Private Monetary System
– Ponzi Finance & Schemes
Majority (97+%) of money is created by private banks, private money. Values of most are defined by their valuations. U$ury $lavery Armament$ (U$A) is a private plantation.
What does the Constitution say about who creates money? Congress. What happened to the Constitution? The U$A Congress has thrice sold Americans to the money oligarchy, starting with the First Bank of the United States in 1791, and then the Second Bank of the United States In 1812. Finally, in 1914 with the Fed.
Why do many not question the fact, that the nation’s money supply being in the hands of private coterie is effectively prima facie evidence that the administration is already under the thumb of the private Money Power?
Correction. Has always been under the thumb of the private bankers. America has never had a true democracy or freedom.
America’s wars of terror, destruction and depopulation does not stem from some genetic defect of “New England Yankees”. It was caused by the Neo-cons’ takeover of America since the Reagan presidency. Their purpose was to restore the British Empire. As present CIA director William Burns rightly said in his book, The Back Channel: American Diplomacy in a Disordered World, “In Afghanistan diplomats found themselves slipping into replicating the 19th century British Colonial Service, not playing the distinctive role of the American Foreign Service.”
What a great article and marvelous food for thought. I think Russia sided with the wrong side when she helped the north in the Civil War. I think the dead Russian in Arlington Cemetery, for his heroic acts, may be spinning in his grave like a Pennsylvania weather cock just like all those veterans of the Atlantic theatre in WW2 who, if they knew what they knew now, would have fought for the other side. Had they, we may have had a say in our brand of new Nazism. A friendlier, fuzzier fascism.
Everything occurring in the U$ right now completely fits the Nazi playbook that I’m reading about in Hitler: His First 100 Days. Granted, the optics of Biden as Fuhrer are nauseating. He is creating a new ‘jewish’ class, a subclass, who will soon be subject to the beatings, the camps, the poisonings of his progenitors. I bring this up as I live in a very fractious area with pissed off people who are heavily armed, trained and organized. People who are emboldened by both the Empire’s loss in Af-stan and the ME. Heartened by the lack of fighting spirit, unit cohesion, and sense of purpose in the Yankee fighting force. I’ve always thought of this place as New Appalachia as that’s where most of the folk are from but it’s the strangest place in the world for these folk to have gathered. There are militias of every stripe here. Even Maoists. People who you would think would be at loggerheads come together to help community quite often. They want sort out the Yankee problem before cutting their cohesiveness asunder. I am alluding to the use of Yankee in the above article as there is no Confederate leanings or south is going to do it again sentiment here. James Howard Kunstler said it best this morning: “That pin on the national grenade I’ve been alluding to…? I think Ol’ White Joe pulled it yesterday. Something big is going to blow now. I’m thinking: what remains of the American economy. The pin has been pulled. Watch the USA descend into its season of darkness and chaos. Then what…? Redemption is a possibility.”
I haven’t belong to any of the militias although I am friendly enough with many of them. My affiliation is likely to change but my friendship won’t. Semper Fi mofos.
Russia in the civil war:
Clusterf ck Nation, James Howard Kunstler:
On a humorous note, I’ve heard Germany is outsourcing to the Taliban, the removal of a 75 year occupying force from their country.
This is a great lesson in “traditional” textbook history until one factors in exactly how many people in the room were “Masons”… which implies deception from day one… this needs to be squared with the history lesson “paper” before I can accept any of it’s implied conclusions (even though it is written well).
I am not trying to detract from all your implied points they are logical, rhyme nicely, even put a smile on my face, it just that we live on Ponzi Planet, in the age of a well designed construct of deception, which means even though I love reading your paper, it will never square with the deception (even after sugar coating it).
Meaning your paper gets an A in the University or public school ( but that is not applicable to reality(a pure deception) )which “we” all need to admit before The Day of Judgement or there might be Hell to pay (sorry for that pun.)
The antithesis of an ideology such as that of the Masons often carries the DNA of the thesis, which means that it is prone to the same hubris as its alleged adversary; and hubris closes off truth which peeps through the cracks in a fallen world!
The American wars of terror, destruction and depopulation was not the result of the genetic defects of “New England Yankees. It was caused by the Neo-cons who took over the American government since Reagan. Their purpose was to create a colonial empire on the the model of the British Empire. As current CIA direct or William Burns said in his book, “The Back Channel; Diplomacy in a Disordered World, “In Afghanistan, diplomats found themselves slipping into replicating the 19th-century British Colonial Service, not playing the distinctive role of the American Foreign Service”.
As President Biden said in his August 30th speech, pulling out of Afghanistan “is not just about Afghanistan. It’s about ending an era of major military operations to remake other countries.”
This would be a sea-change in American Foreign policy. We pray that the Biden administration has the courage to stay the course.
I lived for over a decade in New England.
Walt Garlington speaks facts.
There remain pockets with deep messianism and exceptionalism, and they (or its ethos) have been the captains of the American ship for much of its history.
Good 19th century reading of that ethos: Edgar Allen Poe and Moby Dick.
Meyssan talked of this historical conflict between New England’s Pilgrims/Puritans and the Southern Jacksonians:
Biden’s tongue is the gift that keeps on giving.
He promised to “put together one of the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organizations in the history of American politics,” and we got it.
He promised a “dark winter” during the presidential debates and a few weeks later, Texas got it .
And now he promises to end “an era of major military operations to remake other countries.”
Does he mean to initiate major operations to remake his own country?
The Joe Biden Regime is not changing course because America was never about nation building or “remaking other countries.”
That is utter American propaganda.
America is about nation destroying, particularly by fomenting terrorism (and chaos) against other nations.
Biden is “withdrawing” from Afghanistan only to focus American terrorism against Russia and China, as part of the new Cold War.
Biden Is Turning Pages on Foreign Policy
U.S. Plan B for Afghanistan? Screw Up China
More on American imperial-business-as usual under the war criminal Joe Biden:
Imperial Business-As-Usual… Biden-Zelenksy Meeting Shows U.S. Learned Nothing From Afghanistan
All of the above mentioned “characters” quoted in the above article were slaveholders and promoters of genocide for indigenous people.
How can any of their views be given any historical merit? They were historically responsible for the deaths and suffering of countless human beings.
Perhaps soon they will all utter Custer’s last words.
It is in fact the hubris of the Puritan Yankee, i.e. modern-day globalist, to believe that in matters of morals he is “exceptional” and indeed “indispensable,” and therefore has the authority, from whom one does not know, to condescend to relegate even the worthy thoughts and actions of the lowly sinners, such as “slave owners, et al to the ash heap of “history” which seems to manifest itself in some of the posts on this fora. If ,in fact, the standard for having a worthy thought and even action which ensues from that thought is that one not be a sinner, then I would respectfully submit that none of us, absolutely none of us, should be posting our profound profundities on these fora.
A very plausible and persuasively argued essay.There are certainly many Southerons writing today who urge similar conclusions – Paul Craig Roberts and Fred Reed, to cite two very different gentlemen.
I am concerned, however, about the accuracy of this statement:
“From that point onward, the restraint in foreign policy advocated by many Southerners was rejected by and large for the imperial expansion desired by Northerners from Alexander Hamilton to Pres Lincoln”.
It wasn’t mainly Northerners who rushed into the Mexican state of Texas and deliberately practiced slavery, although that was against Mexican law. The men who fought at the Alamo and the Battle of San Jacinto were not Northerners, either, as far as I know. President James Polk, under whose administration the USA invaded and dismembered Mexico, was a Southerner.
It seems to me that any large community will contain its share of would-be Napoleons and Alexanders. The only question is what restrains them. The US government and armed forces have always provided ample justifications for foreign aggression, and huge resources to make them successful. Today this is truer than ever; but a new factor has appeared: namely, Russia and China, separately or together, could utterly annihilate the USA. That enforces a degree of restraint… I hope.
They (i.e. Black Lives Matter movement, et. al., and the usual suspects) recently took down Robert E. Lee’s statue that was standing in Richmond under the guise of saying it was a memorial to “slavery”. I think though the reasons for taking down his statue along with other statues of the “Old South” was really for other reasons….
You cite George Washington, but he interfered in the sovereignty of Haiti, the first state founded by slaves. He was mainly afraid of a poor example for the slaves back home. There are many other examples of imperial reach before the Civil War, even before independence itself. Perhaps the Civil War cemented a certain current of thought, but it was certainly not a turning point.
Current culture in New England is probably less belligerent than some other regions, regardless the history.
I believe your observation is most accurate. American imperial reach started way before the U.S. Civil war. Colonial America was all about imperial reach, and the reason for the founding of the United States was because the colonial settlers of the time wanted to do their own imperiall reach without constraint from the English crown. A good read is Roger G. Kennedy’s book “Mr. Jefferson’s Lost Cause:” Therein Mr. Kennedy describes the affairs of the time. They were no less wicked and twisted then what is going on now, and involved the entire world. I’d even say the current U.S. machinations are rather tame compared to the going-ons during American Colonial times. As to the Old South which I mentioned in a post above, it was no more benovolent than the Yankee North. They were just another player in the “game”. (I may add good riddance they are gone, but that still does not make the Yankees good guys.) As noted in the article here, as said by Robert Bridge the U.S. is not a monolith, but rather a cocktail of some really bad players playing some really nasty games. (I believe many folks outside the U.S. fail to realize this; that the U.S. is not a single entity, but rather a lot of competing players.) Unfortunately for all of us, the blowout from U.S. politics goes around the world.
The South has gone nowhere. We are yet and still here. Mr. Garlington and I know our patrimony which is full of sinners and reprobates; but it also has, despite its sins and flaws, worthy virtues, among them in the generations of my great-grandfathers, grandfathers and father a love of God, of home and hearth, of kith and kin and a loathing dislike for those who would threaten such. We hated the empire before it was fashionable. Regrettably, we Southerns have been the willing Janissary of the empire which has used our martial spirit and loyalty in its imperial wars since the Spanish/American War. Since WWII, more and more of us have come to understand this fact. We would make excellent allies in the fight against the empire if unwarranted moral hubris does not eliminate that option. If we must, we will continue to resist the empire on our own. We would, however, resist with such like-minded as would have us. As William Faulkner stated in his Nobel Prize Speech, we will endure.
I enjoyed reading your article, and it so much reminded me of the ‘history of Scotland’ series I saw of the Idiot Box, that I thought I might add another couple of historical facts that alter the entirety of your article. May I start by going backwards?
Let us start with the 2nd WW. Now America had decided that this was a European war and wanted nothing to do with it, and why some Americans, remembering their history had even sided with the Germans. That was until FDR with just a tad of help from Churchill, set up the Japs and Pearl Harbour.
If we look at the Atomic bomb, well that was initiated by a select few from New York. Mind you, Hitler was also offered the technology but refused it as he believed it was too horrendous.
So now let’s look at WW1, and again, believe it or not the Americans didn’t want a bar of it. Even the MSM was on the side of the Germans, until that is England was almost totally bankrupt and Zimmermann offered an end to the war in 1916. This instigated the ‘Zimmermann Telegram’ which gave Wilson the means to join in the war on the side of the Zionists, oops, sorry, the English. The most famous document during this time was “The Balfour Declaration” which was supposedly a private letter from Lord Balfour, the former PM of Britain, to Lord Rothschild, but was announced to the world by the then leader of Zionism, Chaim Weizmann on the 9th of November 1917. Of course there was no disclosure of the input from the American Zionist Jews such as Jacob De Haas or Louis D Brandeis to the Balfour Declaration.
So now let us consider the American Civil War, and there are a couple of minor incidents that should be worthy of consideration. Firstly the Southern states issued a ‘script’ or in other words their own currency. Then Lincoln ignored the major banks and instead issued his own script called ‘the Greenback’. What this did was to erradicate any possibility of the banks profiting from this war, and there is that rumour floating around the John Wilkes Booth was an agent of the Banks.
And of course there were a couple of other points in history just prior to the Civil war; the first one being gold was discovered in California in when was it? 1849. Now you can imagine what the Bank of England thought of that, can’t you?
And then there was that other little incident, when Karl Marx published his ‘Communist Manifesto’ in 1848, which created an uprising in Europe, which was savagely put down, and most of the ‘rebels’ fled to New York, via England, except for Mark and Engels, who stayed in England under the patronage of Marx’s relative, Lord Rothschild. What do you mean, that is a ludicrous statement? It is far less ludicrous than it was Engels’ family, being German Jews who owned a part share in some Manchester Mill. The English Jews were always very careful in regard to who benefitted from their enterprises.
And so finally, may we go back to the ‘Founding Fathers’ and remember another voice in the wilderness, that of Benjamin Franklin, who noticed a connection between the Bank Of England and poverty in the United States, and warned of the dangers of the Jews from New York.
No! Hang on; there’s one more bit. Back in the days of Theodore Herzl, the Zionist movement was a small Jewish sect. However late last century, which wasn’t that long ago, the Zionists decreed that they would be ‘The only voice’ of Judaism’. Rather impertinent of them, wouldn’t you say?
This is a quote from the article linked infra. It is a bit more “nuanced” than your take on the Greenback and Mr. Lincoln.
“They also attacked the National Banking Acts as a means to enrich Republicans and yoke Main Street to Washington and Wall Street. In a pamphlet published in 1864, Alexander Del Mar warned his readers that “fanned by unscrupulous politicians” they were inside a “great paper bubble” that would “inflict upon the country all the long agonies of financial distress.” Delmar was not alone. Among Republican critics there was a quiet hope that victory over the Confederacy would bring about a quick return to the gold standard and the financial status quo antebellum.”
So in fact things haven’t changed that much in the last 160 years, though I would suggest in over 2000 years
Exceptional accounting of history. People do not know that Christians have an eschatology of what the Bible says will happen but so do Muslims and Jews. The dominant eschatology of Jews is Talmudic. These folks do not worship the God of the Old Testament, they worship themselves as God. Unfortunately for the rest of humanity they also control money, media, military, and apparently now to the pharmaceutical industry.
Of great significance is the consideration that for the first 1850 years since the time of Christ there was a general understanding of the biblical narrative. In the last 170 years that narrative has been turned on its head by a Dispensationalist view that is Jewish centric. The Talmudists financed CI Scholfield and his fraudulent Bible which both made Christians in America co Zionists, and robbed the church of its spiritual power to resist evil and depravity that we experience today (transgender is, LGTBQ agenda, political corruption, war).
In the not to distant future, Americans will die fighting a war with Iran not because Iran is a threat to you and me, but because Israel wants them gone in order to implement their version of eschatology, greater Israel project. That will of course drive China, Russia, and Europe into the conflict. I recall Albert Pike grand pubba of the Masons who predicted 3 global wars. He also said the sages and the adepts the 32nd and 33rd degrees worship Lucifer.
“and most of the ‘rebels’ fled to New York, via England”
Many of those Germans ended up in the Midwest. Perhaps the majoritiy. There they founded flourishing German American communities in Cincinnati, St. Louis, and other cities with strong cultural connections to Germany. Irma Rombauer, the author of The Joy of Cooking, came from this milieu. EVeryone spoke German, treasured German music, literature, etc. Her father, a doctor, was the American consul in I think Kiel or possibly Bremen for five years. The bio of Rombauer and the Joy, Stand Facing the Stove, by Ann Mendelson, contains a very interesting account of this German subculture in the USA and its political roots in Germany, specifically the 1848 revolution.
It was basically destroyed by the inflammatory hysterical anti-German propaganda leading up to, during, and after the Great War.
Valuable text from Mr. Garlington. Helps me to better understand sources and causes of US projection of influences (political, economic, military, cultural) all over the world, including my country and myself. Otherwise, who would care (except curious people) about some country, over there, behind a vast ocean(s).
Valuable are, as well, some comments, from people who arew really in the matter.
Allow me to put in some number, which speak for themselves, and some parallels.
Obviously, such a vast territory of 9,833,520 sq km gives quite a room for heterogenity of various kinds (topography, climate, process of colonization/immigration, just see just see the number of states etc).
Were those millions of sq km enough for US population enought to prevent them (their elites) from conquering the whole world.
The first question is the quality and usability of land.
Compare to Russia, with her 22 million sq km. Most of that land is in subarctic climate, locked by ice from the north, making the “land” from the sea for a considerable part of the year. Something like Canada. This is a very complex issue and I will not elaborate it further, I think you get my idea.
Let us look at China, and her 9,596,961 sq km. The same as the US.
Moreover, her 1.41 billion live mostly on less than a half of these 9.6 million sq km (famous Tengchong-Heihe split line, dividing the whole population in 6% and 94% – Tibet, deserts and steppes are almost inhabited).
The other day there was a discussion about Ming admiral Zheng He (see eg 云林 Yun Lin comment in https://thesaker.is/nuances-of-a-silent-expansive-explosion/)
What can we notice? The US lives outside, China (and Russia) lives inside. What is the cause of difference? This article and some comments partly shed light on the issue.
I posted this once before but with an essay like this it is worth reading again. comes from a book Dr. Cantelon The Day The Dollar Dies. I wonder what President George Washington and Pres Thomas Jefferson would think and say or just suffer a major coronary?
On June 5, 1947, George Marshall, Secretary of State, spoke at Harvard University, outlining a plan to rebuild
Europe. Congress accepted the plan and authorized $12 billion for Europe, but this was only the beginning. Eleven billion had already been given to Russia under “lend-lease.”
Soon it seemed that almost every nation on earth was standing on the doorstep of Washington. None seemed to apologize for their appeals for loans or outright gifts. Friend and foe alike went away with his requests granted, whether he was worthy or unworthy.
For my own interest I had recorded the roll call of countries who came knocking on America’s door asking for aid and receiving it:
Austria $ 1,170,100,000
United Kingdom 8,668,300,000
Republic of China 3,894,500,000
Saudi Arabia 46,600,000
United Arab RePublic 295,000,000
Costa Rica 68,700,000
Dominican RePublic 8,8oo,ooo
El Salvador 10,000,000
West Indies 11,500,000
Somali Republic 9,100,000
Too Many Creditors
By 1962, America had given away over $80 billion. But the giving did not end. Soon it was 100 billion, and then 200 billion. Deeper and deeper America sank into debt. Prior to World War I, we prospered like no other nation on earth. Our national debt was only $2 million. Now it was so great that it would take a path of dollar bills reaching to the moon 70 times to pay it. The interest alone on the national debt was costing the American public $500 per second. Cries of “Unfair” were increasing in volume and number from those who understood the unbelievable truth of America’s bankruptcy.
By signing seven treaties, America was pledged to assist 43 countries of the world whose populations represented almost 1/3 of the world’s total population.
In less than a quarter of a century following World War ll, America had scattered over the world enough wealth to equal the total worth of 50 of the nation’s leading cities.
stop first quote
and further is this juicy morsel about the United Nations:
The Justice of the United Nations
Foundations of the United Nations were laid by the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Soviet Union, from August 21 to September 28,1944, in the Dumbarton Oaks Conference in Washington. Immediately afterward, the Republic of China became one of the five founding nations, and was given lifetime membership in the Security Council. Her population was larger than 3/4 of the nations who held membership in the UN. Even in Taiwan, she maintained diplomatic relationship with 60 countries of the world. In the field of commerce, she exported over a billion dollars’ worth of merchandise annually, and yet when Albania, with a population half the size of Philadelphia, made a motion that the Republic of China be expelled, the smaller nations rallied to the suggestion in a demonstration of emotionalism and bias that left a permanent blemish on the record of the UN. Ambassador Bush said on October 25, 1971, “Never have I seen such hate.” The late David Lawrence, respected news journalist and editor of the U.S. News & World Report, said,
“Can any nation be safe in an atmosphere of such irresponsible and emotional action?”
The Chinese leaders returned to Taiwan in tears. They carried with them a record free from blot or blemish. Their dues had been paid. Their position had been held with honor. But without a single grievance against them, they were expelled and not even granted the courtesy of being permitted to speak for themselves. Someone dared to sug-gest before their departure that perhaps Communist China and Nationalist China could each have a seat’ The pro-Cornmunist block pounded their desks and shouted down the proposal. A few days later’ they.were willing to talk about 2 seats being given to West Germany and Communist West Germany to sit side by side.
The UN and Peace
When asked if the UN hoped to end all wars’ international lawyer Ambassador J’ Reuben Clark’ Jr” said’
There seems no reason to doubt that such real approval as the Charter has among the people is based on the belief that if the Charter is put into effect’ wars will end. . ‘ ‘ The Charter will not certainly end war. The Charter provides for force to bring peace’ but such use of force is itself war. The Charter does take from us the power to declare war and to choose the side on which one must fight’
If men hoped the United Nations would bring peace to the world, their hopes proved groundless’ The list of wars fought since 1945 seemed almost endless:
Philippines, 1948’19 52
etc etc etc hundreds more yes?
On August 10, 1962 Herbert Hoover said:
I urged the ratification of the United Nations by the Senate, but now we just realize the United Nations has failed to give us even a remote chance of lasting peace. Instead it adds to the dangers of wars which surround us.
Peace to all hopefully anyway?
It is easy to give away money when one is printing it.
@ Robert Shule
and you may want to read whats here sir!
A One World Government needs the re-distribution of wealth across the globe and I do believe we haven’t seen anything yet.
Unfortunately, the people printing it charge interest and like brain dead lemming Americans keep paying it. Someday maybe there will be one generation of Americans with a set of stones that will intentionally default on the debt. Then we will see the evil jumping out of buildings because their god lucre will be dead.
It is a huge money, anyway, but I can hardly believe that it is given for the sake of altruism, at the price of sinking into debts.
It is rather a bare interest, invested in spread or imposition of influence onto other and, at that moment weak and dependent countries.
Someone gives some money, at right moment, to get in return much more money (and for a long time)
One cannot trust capitalist.
Even the famous land lease to the Soviet Union during the WWII, proclaimed and praised as priceless help, although amounting some 10-15% of all SU war efforts, was mainly intended to mutual exhaustion of Red Army and Wermacht (Soviets ang Germans), as it had been expliciely told in Senate during debate of the issue.
In addition, the EU can be considered as the US after war project. We do not need to dig any deep to see that even today.
So what? Commercial deficit and monetary “help” are just the typical ways an Empire conducts its interests and binds the rest to its monetary system. Nihil novi sub sole.
Robert Bridge is indeed correct when he states that American military aggression and the impulse to dominate others is old.
However, it is a lot older then the USA. Europe is quite familiar with this aggressive impulse.
It is as old as the Bible. Older yet than the Christian part of the Bible, i e the Gospels. Indeed it is as old as the Jewish part of the Bible, i e the Torah.
A conversation between Jesus and His Father.
Father what a horror show. Yes, my Son going all the way back to when Adan and Eve’s first offspring Cain killed his brother Abel!
It is these words though that are surely the most significant:
A large number of people followed him, including women who mourned and wailed for him. Jesus turned and said to them, “Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me; weep for yourselves and for your children. For the time will come when you will say, ‘Blessed are the childless women, the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed!’ Then
“‘they will say to the mountains, “Fall on us!”
and to the hills, “Cover us!”’
For if people do these things when the tree is green, what will happen when it is dry?” Luke 23:27-31
There was a quote to by a Dr. C. M. Ward who said something to the effect of America has 1/3 of the worlds population and yet uses up something like 87% of the worlds resources. I’m not sure of that exact number of 87 but it was in that ballpark. Add to this the work and words of Smedley Butler and if one shouldn’t be asking questions about what exactly goes on behind closed doors? My own thoughts is kind of like no wonder communism raises its ugly head when one part of the world suffers for want and desperately so while the other part of the world is living in luxury and the kind of luxury that it would make a sultan blush with embarrassment well no wonder the history of the 20th Century yes?
And I sit and watch a friend just sell his house for 1.7 millions dollars? No oceans views, no mountain, no river valley just the windows of the neighbors next door?
Wow wasn’t or aren’t the words of Paul Warburg so true:
“The world lives in a fools paradise, based upon fictitious wealth , rash promises and mad illusions. We must beware of booms based upon false prosperity which has it roots in inflated credits and prices.”
He said this during the roaring twenties and saw what was coming and his abject contempt for the political class to allow this to happen was such that he had no respect for any of them.
Is it any wonder he soon became the scion of Central Banking? O what did he really know and others like him?
Washington, Jefferson, Putin, Merkel, Scwuab and all the rest of them no one has the skills of true leadership.
Money Talks little else!
We think that we see some sort of a red/blue state close-balance on a map of a US election, but really what we are missing is the city and county level.
(I took a screen shot of a map dramatically showing it, but I can’t remember were I found it, nor do I have a link.)
It is all red, except for a few tracks of blue. Red means conservative with rural needs, not necessarily Trump supporters. Rural farming areas and downstaters are screwed when there is a big city in their state. Their vote is continuously cancelled by the urban force, and it does not count toward the results that they want. States are like a giant gerrymandering. I have often thought that states should have a series of county referendums or whatever legal path they could find and redraw their boundaries. For instance here is Greater Idaho, which they are currently working on:
(Please look at the map, to understand the possibilities.)
States as we know them are not able to secede because they are not complete. For instance California has no water. So regions of states, or newly redrawn states have to organize to fight for their interests.
Then groups of these newly defined states could make coalitions in Congress.
Create cooperative zones for building their economies.
Cooperate on state banking and mutual credits for home and industry.
Support common problems of pollution or agriculture development.
Have an Environmental protection that does not stop at state borders.
Combine their national guard forces. (This one is important.)
Maybe make tax free zones and trade concessions.
Well, they should do everything possible to grab more power from the Feds. Even change the US tax structure.
I believe that in the US – States Rights are a better way to legally consolidate interests into bigger factions, and wrest governance away from the present power structures. This could be a way, without disruptive protests or threat of armed rebellion.
On Election Night last November, AP had a very revealing map up online that showed voting patterns on the county level.
Virtually all states showed the rural or at least not urban vs. urban pattern very clearly: areas of blue (cities and towns) surrounded by red. Even in Mass this pattern held, although it was less stark than in other supposedly blue states, such as New York (more purple).
This is not the exact same one but it is similar:
I’ve a few book by the Kennedy brothers. One of them signed! Great guys and very knowledgeable. The war against Northern agression or the 2nd revolutionary war is greatly misunderstood in most cases. As far as the cultural divide I recommend “Cracker Culture: Celtic Ways in the Old South” by Grady McWhiney.
“New England does not make up the totality of culture in the United States. “‘
I believe the author somewhat overestimates the influence of the Yankees and their ‘exceptionalist” theological views.
I think one must factor in the rapacious commercialism of New York City. Well described by Colin Woodard, in American Nations.
The fundamental idea that is the subjet of Walt Garlington’s essay stems from David Hacket Fischer, Albion’s Seed. Highly recommended.
“American Nations” by Colin Woodard is an excellent read! It has been years since I read it but it is worth another read now that cracks are appearing in the country which has been held together by the Civil War and the commerce clause.
There were among Southerners in the antebellum period a number of leading Whig imperialists. Among them were John C. Calhoun, until he repented of his nationalist Whig tendencies, and Henry Clay who never repented and remained an imperialist Whig for the rest of his life. The other Southern Whig, who saw Clay as his mentor, was none other than Abraham Lincoln who championed all of the things Whigs championed: a national bank, cheap money, internal improvements funded by fiat money and high tariffs. Lincoln personally loathed the ideological Abolitionists with whom he was compelled to ally himself as his war of plunder and robbery hemorrhaged recruits by 1863. So, there were indeed imperialists among antebellum Southerners, mercantilists and speculators. There were, however, no ideological imperialists who wanted to make their neighbors over into their image, forcing on them their abstract agendas at the point of the bayonet and the gun. While the ideologues are the long-range artillery of the globalist to soften up their enemies with LGBT and “democratic” demagoguery, the Antriebsideologie remains the lust for money and the lust for power. Among my Southern friends and acquaintances, there are no Whigs and no ideologues left. We abhor them both.
This article is ridiculous. It totally omits the Southern desire extend their slave empire into Mexico and Cuba. There was even talk of taking Brazil. The Constitution of the Confederacy explicitly recognized the right to expand (presumably that would not have been by peaceful means).
According to The Economist, in 1848, just after the acquisition of California and New Mexico, President James Polk was “decidedly in favor of purchasing Cuba and making it one of the States of the Union.” Cheering him on was Jefferson Davis, then a senator from Mississippi. “Cuba must be ours,” he said, to “increase the number of slave holding constituencies.” Once the plan to buy Cuba failed, Mississippi’s other senator, Albert Gallatin Brown, started drooling over Mexico. “I want Tamaulipas, Potosi, and one or two other Mexican states; and I want them all for the same reason—for the planting and spreading of slavery.” So Davis and Brown may have wanted the federal government to leave them alone, but don’t mistake that plea for principle: Cubans and Mexicans deserved no such shield from federal interference.
Or look at the Cornerstone speech delivered by Confederate Vice President Alexander H. Stephens
“Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. ”
The Confederacy romantics simply cannot abide that the South was not the innocent peace loving Christians that they proclaimed themselves to be. A fair reading of history implies that the attacks on Mexico, Cuba and the other emerging States of the Western hemisphere, would have been in grave danger had the South won the war. You may decry what America has become, but an honest assessment of the potentialities of a Southern victory, are no better, and potentially worse, than what has already come to pass.
I very much appreciate your comment! Shocking.
Got to wonder if this reading had anything to do with Confederate Vice President Alexander H. Stephens philosophy and views?
Look not upon me, because I am black,
because the sun hath looked upon me:
my mother’s children were angry with me;
they made me the keeper of the vineyards;
but mine own vineyard have I not kept. Song of Solomon 1:6
The South had played out the soil and were net getting as much product to sell. They still had the slaves to house, feed etc. They wanted to extend slavery so they could sell the unneeded slaves. Slaves would have been freed in any case because the owners cold not continue to feed them.
“…with the division of European Russia, the Germans would have…”
This alone proves that Americans are apparently incapable of thinking in terms of historical civilizations, geopolitical, ideological spaces.
The division of the European part of Russia was program of the Catholic “West” since the Eastern expansion, is based on the age-old contradiction between Rome and Byzantium, the church schism around 1054, i.e. the fact that after the fall of Byzantium the center of Orthodoxy shifted to Russia, Moscow, and from there shaped the “Russian” civilization, also in conflict with the Asian peoples invading from the East. In this respect, there was a consensus of interests with the Catholic West.
This has “hardened” the Orthodox civilization, so that “partition efforts”, as e.g. by Poland-Lithuania, have always failed in the end…
Pilgrim fathers are the clear demonstration of how fanatical monotheism has spread like a plague. Monotheism of middle-eastern origins is a cancer of the entire world.