Texas College Students and Marxist Critical Theory

by Al Benson Jr.

Just this morning 5/13/15 I posted an article on my other blog spot
http://revisedhistory.wordpress.com 
having to do with the student government at the University of Texas in Austin seeking to
remove the statue of Jefferson Davis from the campus there. Some potential Marxist(s) had already vandalized and defaced the statue with red paint (red--how appropriate).

It turns out that the vice-president of the student government body is one Rohit Mandalapu (hard to tell where he is from with a handle like that) and one of his areas of study and interest in Marxist Critical Theory. 

Critical Theory is one Marxist device for destroying the present culture and theology of anyplace or people the Marxists disagree with. It's another version of Cultural Genocide. It's a system that seeks to tear down any and all existing culture, particularly Christianity and Western Culture and completely obliterate them by replacing them with what they call "new thinking." The radicals in France tried this same identical approach during the French Revolution and though they had moderate success with it in France, it was never all they had hoped for. Now the Marxists are working on it here, and though they undoubtedly will have some success with it because they seem to have captured most of our college campuses, they will not ever completely succeed here either, because the main thing they are trying to remove is Jesus Christ and the Christian faith and that will not happen for them no matter how hard they labor for it. God will not be mocked and those people will end up reaping what they have sown and they won't much like it.

Of course some of what they need to get rid of is Confederate Heritage because that has a Christian foundation and so it has to go. Hence the maniacal attempt on their part to remove all Confederate flags and symbols from any location they happen to stumble across them.

And so the Lord's people need to resist this Marxist agenda. The Lord will not let the Marxists succeed ultimately, but He will use His people to oppose them and so His people had better start waking up and doing what He would have them do as part of that opposition.

Confederate flags and statues on private property where they cannot be removed might be a good start. Some SCV groups and others are starting to do this and it really ticks the Marxists off, so I would encourage Confederate Heritage groups to start doing more of it when and wherever they can.

(Confederate) Flags Across the Ouachita

by Al Benson Jr.

One Friday afternoon each year in the middle of April the Lea Joyner Bridge across the Ouachita River that separates the cities of Monroe and West Monroe, Louisiana plays host to an unusual event.

On this day, members from many of the Sons of Confederate Veterans camps in the Monroe/West Monroe area gather on the bridge and display Confederate flags, all kinds of Confederate flags, to the public driving over the bridge and they usually do this during rush hour so there is lots of traffic. Some come dressed in Confederate uniforms, some don't, but everyone on the bridge for this gathering has some sort of Confederate flag to wave at the passing crowd. This event usually lasts through rush hour, so lots of folks get the chance to see all manner of Confederate flags waving as they drive on by.

This is a visible commemoration of the Confederate heritage of the area and these folks are not bashful about waving Confederate flags at people. They are not trying to "offend" anyone but they are thankful for their area's Confederate heritage and they are not about to hide their Confederate flags under the bed or in the basement as the politically correct leftist crowd fervently wishes they would.

The Confederate flag is a living symbol of their heritage. None of them looks upon it as a "racist" symbol. It has never meant that to them, but they have grown tired of seeing everyone else's  heritage being celebrated while theirs is denigrated. They have grown tired of observing strident Cultural Marxism being practiced upon the South by socialists and Marxists from Washington, D.C. on down, and folks, let me tell you, there are lots of socialists and Marxists in Washington and, unfortunately in many of our state capitols. Many of these SCV folks in this area have read Donnie Kennedy's and my book Lincoln's Marxists and they know what the deal really is.

I have been privileged to stand with them on two different occasions for this event, waving a Confederate flag (no I am not ashamed for having done so) and it is interesting to watch the folks driving by and see the different reactions you get from them. Some folks drive by and toot their horns and wave enthusiastically. Even though they've been brainwashed in government schools there is enough of the memory of their heritage left that a Confederate flag is a positive reminder of that heritage and they react positively to it. Interestingly enough, a lot of those who respond this way are younger folks. I take that as a good sign.

There are some older folks that respond positively and there are many others that look as though they'd like to, but can't quite bring themselves, in this politically correct environment, to go through with it. There are always a handful that, naturally, don't like it, and their responses vary all the way from the proverbial "middle finger" to things more verbally intense, but they are a minority, thank the Lord. One flag-waver I talked to today said he had had half a dozen or so black folks that had waived at him and his flag. Some black people, it seems, are waking up to the fact that some of the"racist" hogwash they have been fed is just that--hogwash. This is the kind of event that the local "news" media wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole. If three people with Malcolm X flags showed up, they'd be there in droves, but Confederate flags are to be ignored as much as possible--even when they are patently visible.

I'd like to encourage other Confederate groups around the country to do something like this once or twice a year. I've noticed that there are "Confederate Flaggers" groups around, though mostly in the East, that come out to demonstrate against egregious  heritage violations, and that's good. Maybe we need more of them in other areas.

At any rate, the SCV camps in the Monroe/West Monroe, Louisiana area (and there are several) have come up with a unique way of displaying their Confederate heritage and it does get noticed, even if the "news" media can't be bothered reporting on it. You could say that these SCV camps do reach the public with their efforts--not because of the "news" media, but in spite of it!

Appomattox Wasn't Really the End (Especially for the North)!

by Al Benson Jr.

On April 6th I read an article by a thoroughly politically correct gentleman named Charles J. Dean on the website www.al.com dealing with the so-called "end" of the "Civil War." I don't know where Mr. Dean learned his history, but Lenin could not have taught him any better.

Mr. Dean noted in his article: "On April 9, 1865  General Robert E. Lee surrendered his sword and his Army of Northern Virginia to Gen. Ulysses Simpson Grant marking the end of the Civil War." Mr. Dean has swallowed the fiction most of us were programmed with in government schools--namely that Appomattox was the end of the War and that was it.

Actually, all General Lee surrendered at Appomattox was the Army of Northern Virginia and no more. He could have surrendered all the Southern armies in the field but he did not do that. And there were other Confederate armies in the field. Joe Johnston in North Carolina did not surrender until April 26th and there were others after that. And the Confederate Government never did officially surrender. Jeff Davis and his cabinet fled Richmond and continued to try to govern on the road. Some were eventually captured and some were not. But no official surrender. And I think the last battle of the War, officially, was fought at Palmito Ranch in Texas in either late May or sometime in June, I can't recall which right now.

But Mr. Dean, in his verbal assault on the South says: "But all these many years later I sometimes wonder if that bloody war for some of you has ever ended. Or if some of you have ever accepted the defeat the South was dealt." He then went on to write about how the Confederate Flag was "racist" from its inception and how the South fought to maintain slavery. You've seen and heard it all before. Most of it can best be described as the usual Cultural Genocide perpetrated by Yankee/Marxist propagandists since the end of the War--and the fact that it is still being propagated shows that, for the Yankees, the War never really ended. Oh, the shooting part ended alright, but the Cultural part has continued for 150 years now, thanks to Northern vitriol--and shows no signs of diminishing.

Thankfully, quite a number of folks contacted Mr. Dean to disabuse him of the Yankee/Marxist propaganda he was pushing and I guess, from his comments, some of them were rather less than polite. Although from reading his comments, I don't think it would have made any difference if all the replies had been the epitome of politeness and correctness. They would not have been able to confuse him with the facts.

I've told this story before, but it bears repeating. I know a preacher who is also a historian and one time he talked with someone that told him, quite bluntly "You lost the War, get over it." To which he replied that the South could accept having lost the War but what they couldn't accept was the fact that the North tried to destroy their culture (and is still trying). That's what they could not accept. In regard to the South and her culture, Cultural Genocide (Cultural Marxism) has reigned in this country almost since the War ended. "Reconstruction" and Yankee public schools were the start of it and it has gone on, to one degree or another, for decades now. It still continues. The present-day "reconstruction" crowd is bound and determined to remove any and all memories of Southern culture--flags, statues, place names, street and park names, all of it. It must all be annihilated--except for the memory of slavery (which the North also had, but that fact has been conveniently swept under the rug). The memory of slavery will, they hope, produced "white guilt" in the South and maybe from that the reparations crowd can accrue a little of the long green from the guilt-ridden. In other words, much of it is a scam.

And they have made lots of Southern folks feel guilty when the should not have. And as far as "racism" there was every bit as much of that in the North (still is) as there was in the South. It just doesn't get talked about because the real agenda is to prostrate the old, Christian South. That's what it's all about. So, in reality, the North has been fighting a culture war against the South since Appomattox--and before. Southern folks should quit buying into the guilt trip, start doing some homework and pointing out the sins of the North--and there are many to be pointed out.

I speak as someone who was born in the North, but I've lived in the South for over twelve years now, and I've watch how Northern Marxists play this Alinskyite  game against the South and most Southern folks seem too polite to resist. Folks, start resisting! Do the homework, find out where your accusers are really coming from (the hard left) and start exposing them as the Scripture commands in Ephesians 5:11.

It's All Cultural Genocide

by Al Benson Jr.

This may not seem to some folks to have much to do with Southern heritage and the Cultural Genocide agenda that is being perpetrated on the South but actually, the two situations run in tandem with one another.

A friend in the Confederate Society of America sent me this. The title of it is: "Black Student Union Wants Campus Building Renamed After Most-Wanted Cop Killer." And this happened, where else, but the University of California at Berkeley, the Marxist Mecca of the West (left) Coast. The commentary I received continues: "UC Berkeley, the pinnacle of activist colleges, allows for a Black student union--a problem in itself, (can you imagine the fuss is someone wanted a white student union). This so-called 'union' is pressing to rename a campus building after a cop-killing black female, who murdered a New Jersey State Trooper in 1973 and then fled to Cuba.  Assata Shakur, formerly known as Joanne Chesimard, is a former black panther and the first woman on the FBI's 'Most Wanted' terrorists. I'm sure she's quite worthy of such a distinction at such a liberal/progressive college as UC Berkeley."

My friend noted that, for about 25 years, similar groups across the country, most especially in the South,  have been pressing, usually with success, to rename buildings, bridges, streets, parks and all manner of other things that have anything to do with the Confederacy or Confederate Veterans. Groups have been recently involved in removing Confederate flags in Lexington, Virginia at Washington and Lee University which, if some had their way, would probably be renamed Marx and Lenin University! Lee/Jackson Day will soon be only a fond memory in Charlottesville, Virginia, thanks to the efforts of some "community organizers" in that fair city. "Community organizers!" Where have you heard that term before?

A few valiant Confederate heritage groups have protested much of this, but they are small and don't get much help or support from other patriotic groups. Years ago, I recall a flap over Confederate flags in a cemetery where Confederate soldiers were buried and the Sons of Union Veterans spoke up and supported the Confederates. Not much of that going on today. Now there is even a move to remove US flags at certain "progressive" campuses around the country and veterans groups are all up in arms over it. But they weren't too keen on supporting the Confederate groups in a similar situation. I wonder if they expect support now from the Confederate groups in the name of "patriotism."

Years ago, probably about 20 now, some of us said that when these Marxist (and they are Marxist) groups had finished mangling the Confederate flag they would proceed to go after the US flag. Nobody wanted to hear it. Well, folks, the day has arrived and most are still clueless. My friend stated: "This is because too many 'good people' are clueless as to Marxist methodology and therefore are clueless as to how to prosecute a war to stop their aggression/takeover. Eventually, they will show up at your front door."

This is all the result of a century of propaganda against the South first, and then all of America next, by "progressive" (socialist) politicians, college professors, and even some "useful idiot" preachers. This kind of thing is NOT happening by accident and these events are not "coincidental." There is an agenda behind it all and until Southern folks begin to wake up and realize that and to realize they have to help each other combat this sort of thing, it will continue--until all your parks, streets, schools, and whatever else, have undergone name changes and are now named after Marxists and socialists who have been responsible for tearing down the country, beginning with the South.

About now some good Christian folks will speak up and say--"Hey, don't worry about this, the Lord  is in control" and He is, no doubt of that. But maybe, just maybe, He might want to use YOU to exercise some of that control in these situations and you ain't having any. Think about that.

Mr. Lincoln and Emancipation--Deportation

by Al Benson Jr.

As I have noted in past articles, Abraham Lincoln continues to be portrayed by the media and accompanying Lincoln cultists as the great benefactor of the black people in this country. The fact that he was a racialist is usually shunted aside, but if it does chance to come up, Lincoln's choir will loudly chant the old familiar tune "Once a racist but now a black lover" and they will go on in great detail to explain how his views on race, as openly portrayed in The Lincoln Douglas Debates had "mellowed" or "matured" since the Debate days. After all, didn't he issue the Emancipation Proclamation that freed all the slaves? Well, no, actually he didn't.

His proclamation, in reality, freed no slaves because it only applied to the Confederate States, which was a separate country at the time. Lincoln had no authority to free the slaves in another country. However, he might have had the authority to free the slaves in Maryland, Missouri, Kentucky, and Delaware--all slave states which remained firmly in the Union--through one device or another, but his famous Proclamation did not apply to them. Nor did it apply to parts of the Confederate States that had been occupied by the Union.

In other words, Lincoln freed slaves where he had no authority to do so and he left in bondage those he might have had the authority to loose. You have to conclude that the Emancipation Proclamation was more about wartime propaganda than it was about freeing slaves.

Early on in his presidential tenure Lincoln had been in favor of freeing the slaves and then deporting them to some other country, preferably further South. However, Lincoln's hagiographers have assured us he grew out of that latent childhood notion and his views about blacks then morphed into a full-blown appreciation of their dignity and worth. And I'll bet, as they continue to write books about this, they laugh all the way to the bank.

But did it really happen in the Pollyanna way they tell it? Not quite. There was an article in the London Telegraph back on February 11, 2011, written by Jon Swaine that talks about a new (at that time) book,written by two men, Phillip Magness and Sebastian Page and called Colonisation After Emancipation. Turns out they found documents in the National Archives in both England and this country that would "significantly alter his legacy."

According to Mr. Swaine: They found an order from Lincoln in June 1863 authorising a British colonial agent, John Hodge, to recruit freed slaves to be sent to colonies in what are now the countries of Guyana and Belize. Hodge reported back to a British minister that Lincoln said it was his 'honest desire' that this immigration went ahead," said Mr. Page, who is a historian at Oxford University. And Mr. Swaine continued: "The plan came despite an earlier test shipment of about 450 freed slaves to Haiti resulting in disaster.  The former slaves were struck by smallpox and starvation, and survivors had to be rescued. Mr. Lincoln also considered sending freed slaves to what is now Panama, to construct a canal--decades before work began on the modern canal in 1904. The colonisation plan collapsed by 1864. The British were fearful the confederate states of the American south may win the civil war, reverse emancipation, and regard British agents as thieves.  Congress also voted to remove funding."

Yet, even as late as the Fall of that year the Attorney General sent Lincoln a letter which showed he was still actively exploring whether the plan could be carried through or not. The letter said: "...further to your question, yes, I think you can still pursue this policy of colonisation even though the money has been taken away." Dr. Magness said he thought the book would change people's opinion and view of Lincoln. Sorry to say, it does not seem to have made all that much of a dent in his halo.

Lincoln is still revered as the "great unifier" by many politicians, including our current president. Of course Lincoln was influenced by the Marxists in his own government and armies (see Lincoln's Marxists Pelican Publishing Co.) and our current president is a Marxist, so you can see why he harks back to Lincoln.

Despite the many books that have recently been written by authors that have really done the homework on Mr. Lincoln, his "Amen Corner" refuses to be confused with the facts.

Some Minor Disturbance Over What Stephen Dill Lee Really Said

by Al Benson Jr.

It seems that my most recent article about Stephen Dill Lee's Charge to the Sons of Confederate Veterans stirred up a minor tempest in the proverbial teapot. Within 24 hours of its being posted, replies came from several sources that said that "Remember it is your duty to see that the true history of the South is presented to future generations" was not a part of Lee's original address. Some friends of mine did some checking and it appears they may be correct on that one point, though I took the quote from an SCV web site. So if I got it wrong so did they. It seems that this particular portion of his Charge had the wording changed to this in 1906 and it reflected something other that what Lt. General Lee said, sort of a compromise in semantics, if you will, a slight toning down of the original wording.

At any rate, as I quoted from what was apparently  the 1906 version rather than the original, I stand corrected.

There seems to be, even today, a bit of a fuss over how this terminology was parsed out and what was really said. There are those who will argue for historical correctness, and that's okay. I strive for that myself, even though I don't always get it perfect. However, what we often end up with in disagreements like this is a situation where those who have gotten a particular quote, or whatever, correct will never go any further than their historical argument, and it's usually an armchair argument rather than an active one.

I've followed SCV "politics" like I have the politics of many groups over the years and I know enough to realize that there are factions within the SCV that argue about what the organization should be doing. Some want it to be merely an organization that puts flowers and flags on Confederate graves and keeps the lawns at Confederate cemeteries mowed, with little or nothing beyond that. Others want the SCV to take a much more activist role in presenting historical truth and contending for that truth. I guess, were I able to officially belong to the SCV, I would belong to the latter group rather than the former.

Over the years some have felt I was a bit too much of an activist, and often they were not hesitant to let me know that. Maybe that's why I never quit being one. Seems to me if you believe in something and feel it is worth defending or fighting for then its worth doing at actively as long as you can. My wife and I have supported and acted in behalf of several causes over the years of our married life, and always felt they were connected at the theological level even though the connection might not be apparent at other levels to most people. We can no longer do this as actively as we once did. Age and medical conditions slow one down, but on the other hand we are not ready to lie down and concede defeat either. Helping to prepare another generation to take up the fight is also important. After all, as Christians, we have a multi-generational worldview and where we have, by God's grace sown some seed, others will, also by God's grace, come along to water.

So, in a sense, arguing over Lt. General Lee's exact wording in his Charge over 100 years ago, while it is important to get it right, really begs the question. And the question still is, What should the SCV be doing? 
What was the original intent of the organization? If it was only to decorate graves, then I guess we could paraphrase Scripture and ask "Do not even the Yankee/Marxists do the same?" And some of them don't really have to do anymore, because their grandfathers wrote the "history" books didn't they? Yet they are not content to just let it lie, but rather they turn out a continuous  stream of political correct invective that relentlessly attacks all things Southern and Confederate.

If the Confederate Battle Flag was only a flag for grave tenders then why did the NAACP so vehemently attack it several years ago and stir up a firestorm over it? Of course many of us realize the NAACP membership was flagging and they needed a whipping boy to drum up support for the politically correct shock troops and to enrich the coffers, but was that the only reason? Why do the politically correct Marxists (and they are Marxists) continue to attack the flag and Southern heritage even today? It seems to me that the SCV, as well as other Southern and Confederate groups, has an adversary that is determined to stamp out everything they ever stood for. And if that's the case, then just tending your ancestors' graves isn't enough. If that is, indeed, the case, then you better learn how to rise up from tending the graves of your honored dead and learn how to fight back. If you are willing to just sit back and let the Cultural Genocide crowd run all over you while you are trying to be "nice" then you are--well, I can't say what you are--it would probably get my blog tossed off the Internet.

It seems that the SCV, like other groups, has to decide which was it's going to go. Personally, I was never in favor of letting my adversaries stomp all over me if they were Marxists. With other Christians, and other well-meaning folks you can often agree to disagree and let it go at that. You can't do that with Marxists, or with any of the leftist crowd. There is no peaceful co-existence with them except on their terms and anyone with an ounce of sense won't play that game.

All you need to is to check out the political persuasions of those who practice Cultural Genocide on the South and you will see what I mean--all the way from the political left, to the educational left, to the Evangelical left--they are all leftists, and as such, your destruction, culturally and otherwise, is their goal.

So whatever Lt. General Lee's Charge did or didn't say, the SCV has to consider the question of what they are going to do to deal with their Cultural Marxist adversaries. That is the ultimate question for all the various groups that would defend the South, Southern tradition and history, including the Confederate States, or the Southern way of life.

Start by learning who your enemies are. Learn how to expose them.  Then learn how to oppose them, because just tending the graves of your ancestors, as important as that is (and I don't discourage that) is not going to cut the mustard in the days to come and any organization that proposes to do that and nothing else, has got major problems.

A Really Big Confederate Flag In Lexington, Virginia

by Al Benson Jr.

The parochial city of Lexington, Virginia has a new Confederate Battle Flag, on private property, on Route 60, which is just outside of the city limits of Lexington. Thank Heaven for private property, because if the city of Lexington owned all the property then they would be able to drop a large part of their history and heritage right down the memory hole.

You might be curious as to why I labeled Lexington as parochial. Look at it this way. Any city that consciously obliterates part of its history and denies part of its heritage is a city that will not long endure. At some point, its provincialism will become apparent to the point that it will cease to be a place of any importance, and it will eventually be swallowed up in that great nether world of political correctness and "diversity."

This month we celebrate the birthdays of Robert E. Lee and Thomas Jonathan (Stonewall) Jackson, probably two of the finest Christian patriots this country has ever produced. However, thanks to the perpetual whining of some disaffected minorities, their memories must now be erased in Lexington and their distinguished places in that city must be denied or at least denigrated. A place that denies the great among them is destined for the ash heap of history. To deny great men is to put emphasis on the mediocre and the pedestrian--and that is what Lexington has deemed is the only way to go. No Confederate flags in that august city--they might "offend" someone who does not want to understand their true history and therefore has an agenda for their demise without any opposition  from the local folks.

Ahh, but there IS opposition, darn it,  and those local rednecks just won't shut up and go home to watch their car races or football games, or whatever else the elite has designed to keep them occupied so they don't notice what is going on. They want to see the symbols of their history and heritage flying aloft without shame--and they have a right to that, contrary to the wishes of the offended minority. These minorities are not the only ones with rights, although they doubtless wish to have it so, as so they work to get ordinances passed that will remove the rights of others so they can exercise theirs with no opposition or competition. But it ain't quite working out in Lexington. Hence that big Confederate Battle Flag out on Route 60--long may it wave!

And we should not hesitate to honor Lee and Jackson, not only in Lexington, but all across the South. Fly your Confederate flags, put new bumper stickers with flags on your pickup trucks, and let people know you are thankful for your heritage--not proud and arrogant, but thankful.

Lee and Jackson were both humble Christian men who relied on Jesus Christ for their salvation, unlike many of those who have days or times commemorating them nowadays and who were the friends of communists and other various assorted leftists.

I wonder if, someday this week, over 1,000 people marched down the main street of Lexington carrying Confederate flags, would the City Council try to have them all arrested? I wonder if such an event would be considered the use of the Cloward/Piven strategy going in reverse. Interesting thought.

Reasons To Fly the Confederate Battle Flag

by Al Benson Jr.

A friend in Southwest Virginia recently sent me an article posted by The Virginia Flaggers back in December of last year. It listed 12 reasons to fly the Confederate Battle Flag. I can't list all of them here, but there were some pretty good ones among them so I'd like to comment a bit on them.

 They started off with: It is one of the oldest Christian symbols on Earth (The St. Andrews Cross) and silently but eloquently lets the world know that a Christian family resides at the residence where it is flown. Although many don't comment on it, this is one of the major reasons the Battle Flag is so hated among the communists, socialists, and various other bottom-feeding leftists around the country. The Battle Flag is, indeed, a Christian flag and the leftists hate it because they hate Jesus Christ. To them, He is competing for the Kingdom of God with them and they'd love to dethrone Him, as Satan wanted to do in Matthew 4 but was unable to. His disciples, however, have not given up yet and they still keep trying. Sorry guys, you're not going to make it. If you couldn't keep Him in the tomb on that first Easter morning you won't be able to remove Him from God's right hand now. But you have to keep trying, I guess. After all, when you're beaten you have to do something to keep others from knowing.

Another good reason: It, (the Battle Flag) is a universal symbol of resistance to tyranny, having been sighted flying in nearly every modern day conflict where people were, or are fighting an oppressive and despotic governance. And the leftists and ultra-liberals realize that, and since they are the Fathers of all tyranny in the world today they must automatically hate any symbol that represents resistance to tyranny.

Yet another good one: It is a reminder that Liberty is a God-given right, not a commodity to be controlled by greedy politicians, left-wing liberal teachers, and power-crazed activist judges. And it's also a reminder that Liberty is worth fighting for. You can bet the theological and political Left grits its collectivist teeth when reminded that it is God that bestows liberty, not some socialist regime that tells you that you are free when they toss you a few political crumbs. "If you like your health insurance then you can keep your health insurance." Even their "freedom" is built upon lies!

And another important reason: It lets those who would oppress us, and steal our Liberty know, they have not yet succeeded, and will not have succeeded, until they have killed every last one of us, and destroyed every last Battle Flag. This has seldom happened in any oppressed country throughout history and will not happen here, unless we fail to educate our children about the real meaning of the Flag. And here, we have our work cut out for us. We not only have to educate our children about the meaning of the Battle Flag, but we have to educate them as to what the War of Northern Aggression was really all about and how a Unitarian/socialist Northern government sought to destroy the Christian culture of the South both before and after the shooting was all over. "Reconstruction" was a Marxist program--the term even came from Marx. The hard truth is, unless we start giving our children a Christian education and start doing it seriously, we will lose not only our children but the country as well.

That's a somber thought, but we'd better begin to dwell on it and get those kids out of public  schools that are under the control of our adversaries. You are only one generation away from losing your Christian culture, your heritage and your liberty. What you do with your kids will determine your (and their) future.

The Perseverance of the Battle Flag

by Al Benson Jr.

Living in Louisiana as I do,  on occasion I do get to see Confederate Battle Flags, sometimes on someone's flag pole, but more often on the front of someone's pickup truck or car, in the form of a license tag. This grievously offends many who come here from the North, and even some Southern folks who ought to know better, but who have succumbed to the propaganda spouted by what ludicrously passes for the "news" media. I also come from the North originally (though I got here as quickly as I could).  The Confederate Battle Flag does not offend me. I had one hanging on my office wall for years, even when I dwelt in the nether regions of New England, everybody's Unitarian paradise. Here in Louisiana I have a big Third National Flag on my office wall. I'd have one in front of the house but there's no flag pole on this property, and the property is not mine.

From time to time you see polls on the Internet asking something like "Do you think the Confederate Battle Flag should be taken down?"  in some particular place.  Almost always the poll shows support for leaving the Battle Flag  up running about 80-20 in favor of leaving it alone. While I realize these are not scientific polls, they are a reflection of how most people feel about this issue. If the Battle Flag is flying in a particular place they want it left alone, regardless of the frantic desire of some fuzzy-headed liberal who moved here six weeks ago from New Jersey and is all shook up over it. This ain't New Jersey!

I recently saw a poll entitled: "African-Americans, Is It Time To Surrender The Battle On The Battle Flag?" Again, the results when I saw the poll were running about 87-12 for leaving the flag alone.

You'd think the NAACP and the Southern Poverty Law Center would begin to get the message, but no, they don't seem to. Removal of the Confederate Flag continues to be a major part of their agenda, both because it is a Christian symbol and a Confederate symbol, so they will plod on with their irrational hatred of the flag no matter what.

Fly a Battle Flag in your front yard and that might just be enough to get the SPLC to designate you as a "hate group." It doesn't take much more than that with those people. And, as for the NAACP, if they were really dedicated to helping black folks to advance and better themselves you'd think they could find a better way to do it than fussing over the Battle Flag like they do. Who does that help? Why it helps the NAACP to get more support (and money) from gullible blacks who think the organization is really trying to help them instead of what it's really doing, which is to feather its own financial nest. Hopefully, some day, a lot of them will wake up to what a farce it all is.

Awhile back now, I saw comments on a news site by a James Bendy. I don't know Mr. Bendy, but his comments were so on target I felt they were worth passing along. Mr. Bendy commented: "Oh yes, indeed, it is long past time for the NAACP to give up their ridiculous 'struggle' against a mere flag. Before the NAACP leadership decided to issue their 'call to arms' against the CBF back around 1990 as a stunt to increase their dwindling membership and donations, no one minded either way about the flag. Now it is more popular than ever, and many people have learned the truth about it...The Confederate Battle Flag is undeniably the most recognized symbol of the South, not only in the South, but in the United States and across the globe.  No other region in the United States has a symbol, much less a symbol so universally recognized...When the wall fell in Berlin at the end of the Cold War, the Confederate Battle Flag was there! Why? Because across the world, the crimson flag is a symbol of opposition to an oppressive government!" I know from personal experience that his comments about the Battle Flag regarding Eastern Europe are correct. My wife and I have talked to Eastern Europeans who called the Battle Flag "the freedom flag."

In Eastern Europe they knew what the Confederate Battle Flag stood for while dumb, mis-educated Americans were, and are still talking about being "offended" by it. You have to conclude that there has been something lacking in our "education" (on purpose).

Several years ago I talked to a Christian missionary from South Africa who, when he was in this country, bought six Confederate Battle Flags to take back with him to the Sudan in Africa where he was doing missionary work. Someone sent me a photo of him awhile back, with five or six black Africans, one of whom was holding a Battle Flag in the picture. The black man in the picture holding the flag didn't seem "offended" in the least. Might just be a lesson there for some of the race-baiters in this country--not that they'll listen.

Where Do Confederate Flag Detractors In Virginia Originally Come From?

by Al Benson Jr.

On Saturday, October 11, 2014 there was an interesting article posted on
http://jerryd14.wordpress.com   dealing with the origins of some of the Confederate flag
detractors that have been so active in Virginia in recent months.

The author of the article stated: "It looks kinda suspicious, I mean, I am not a forensics expert, or
crime fighter, nor mind reader, but I can smell a Damn Yankee.  It is interesting to see in most of the recent places in Virginia where the  Morons, Liberals, Politically Correct ..., quite a lot of the players seem to also be Yankee Carpet baggers. Not all, but a lot.  Coincidence, not hardly.  Yes the old DNA is there, and the author notes that they are "stiff necked, hardheaded, loud,..." and a few other choice adjectives which I will dispense with here, not that I disagree with his observation.

And he observes further: "They come here, smile and tell us how much they so love the South, and worm their slimery selves into  employment, take over Southern institutions like rats take over a package of cheese, and begin to change it all to make it like the Hell Hole Northern cesspool they slid down from." This is something most Southern folks don't stop to think about--the origins of many that run some of their heritage institutions and groups. Now I can't say that all Northern folks are bad, I am one myself, originally, but in all my years, I have never knowingly harmed or diluted any Southern heritage organization or group. If anything, I lean in the other direction. I've had some Southern folks tell me "You're more Southern than some of the Southerners I know." My wife and I now live in Louisiana and we did not come here to dilute Southern culture, we came to partake of it, and to promote it, and we've never felt unwelcome in the South. Unless some sort of family emergency arose, we'd never consider moving back north again.

Unfortunately, though, not all Northern folks take that position, and the author of the jerry14 article notes that the Director of the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts is a man from New York state. And he notes the Danvillle, Virginia Museum of Fine Arts, as a "place for inclusiveness, if you are black, liberal, and politically correct, but no Confederate Flag is desired." Some of you all have probably been reading about the big fuss over the Confederate Flag in Danville just recently. The prominent member on the board of directors at the Danville Museum is a lady named Cara Burton, and the author says: "Where do ya think she was born, Atlanta, Nope, Richmond, unh, uh, let's try New York again."

He also noted the recent problem at Washington and Lee College and mentions the head man at that school, Mr. Kenneth P. Ruscio. However, Mr. Ruscio doesn't come from New York--he comes from Red Bank, New Jersey. When a group of black students suddenly became "offended" at a Confederate Flag in the chapel as Washington and Lee, Mr. Ruscio couldn't get the flag down fast enough. What has happened is that many places of cultural importance in the South have been taken over by Northerners who have no interest in Southern heritage or culture other than dispensing with as much of it as possible. Unfortunately, you've got some Southerners that are willing to do the same thing. Wherever they were educated they were made to feel guilty about their heritage and culture and so they have come back to the South to help eradicate as much of it as possible, like good little Yankee wannabees.

I don't know what you all can do about these folks as they work to dismantle the heritage left to you by your forefathers, but you have got to do something. I don't know if starting up competing institutions to those you have already lost is an option or not in some cases, but you have got to do something. And whatever you all do, you have got to make sure your leadership has its feet firmly planted in a positive view of Southern culture and heritage.

Politically Correct Professors

by Al Benson Jr.

On my blog spot http://revisedhistory.wordpress.com  I have been working on a series of articles about secession and all the reasons for it and why it was, and is, legal. So far the reception of these articles has been pretty good and quite a few folks have been reading them. I've done 6 or 7 in a row up to this point.

Most of the commentary I have gotten back from folks has been positive, but then, with my pro-Southern audience I sort of expected that most folks would tend to agree with me.

However, after the writing of these last 2 articles, I have come across a history professor (or rather he's come across me, I don't know which) from a community college on the West (Left) Coast and he is busily emailing me replies to my articles trying to show me how far off I am--that secession is not legal, that the Constitution was not a compact between the States, which I believe it was, but was, rather, a situation that, once a state got into it they could never get out unless all the states agreed to let them go.

To me this is the usual politically correct version of history, and also, to me, political correctness is really nothing more than Cultural Marxism, which is nothing more than Marxism taken to a new level. No doubt there are many folks who have bought into political correctness that have no idea of what it really is or where it came from, but unfortunately, they do as much damage with it as those Marxists that do realize where it came from and what its goal (the destruction of Western culture, particularly Christianity) really is.

Since secession can be practiced on many levels, I would advocate, for folks who have not bought into the political correctness permeating the culture around them, that they secede culturally from the politically correct culture around them. One way to do this would be to remove your children from the government school system, which spreads political correctness around as much, if not more, than many other government institutions. Take your kids and secede from the public school system. Find a good Christian school for them or if you are not able to afford to do that, then teach them at home. It is something that can be done, not all that expensively, and there are lots of home schooling resources out there now that didn't exist when my wife and I home schooled our kids back in the late 1980s.

Private Christian education would be a major step away from political correctness in the area of education and I would recommend it to all that are able to do it.