What Does The Stars and Bars Represent?

Political Correctness has taken a front seat in the debate… all over what a raging lunatic did (or maybe didn’t do, depending on whether or not the entire Roof thing is a hoax). Be that as it may, it is apparent by watching/listening/reading the main stream media, we find ourselves being divided (and conquered). By now, if you are a regular reader here, you must know that in my opinion, any time you find the MSM going on a constant attack, focusing on a particular subject, there is an agenda that is meant to fuel this divide and to form the conceptions of those who take heed to their reports (which in almost every case is in direct contradiction to what they do in their homeland). You would also know that any time I see these obvious events take place, I feel confident that a completely opposite stance is probably the best viewpoint. Granted, in reality, there are many shades of gray in their black and white world. If they are pushing the meme about something, you can rest assured that they are doing the bidding of the powers that be with some nefarious intent.

That is what they do. The sooner you understand it, the better for us all. The MSM is not our friend. They are not truthful. They are pawns used to brainwash you. Period. But I want to focus on one particular subject today: the Stars and Bars.

confederate_flag_usa_by_atillawolf-d37ooh3

That emblem represents many things to many people. It is loved by some and hated by others. It is a source of pride to some and a source of humiliation to others. Everyone has their own feelings and should have the liberty to express themselves however they see fit.

The people who are embracing the media lies about this flag are the same people who kowtow to the media clowns doing the Empire’s bidding. The same people who are ignorant about WWII. The same people who fall for every conceivable lie meant to divide the races and every other erroneous and fake cause:

Censorship and bans contribute to historical amnesia, smack of the Bolshevik re-writing of history and are not the answer. Neither Jefferson Davis, Robert E. Lee or Stonewall Jackson would have had anything but utter disgust for the coward who massacred Black people at prayer. Above all, the Confederate flag stands for the human right of secession, no matter how many maniacs attempt to appropriate it for their demented 21st century causes.

The way of life back then entailed a very small number of southern white people that owned slaves, but you wouldn’t think that by listening to the leader of the Empire, his minions that regurgitate the intended mantras, or the gullible stooges that praise and succumb to their every word. Many of these people take a stance so pigheaded that they forget who their allies are (or were) and that they cannot see that they are supporting the elimination of Freedom of Speech. And no matter what a person’s reason for owning the Stars and Bars (even the most vile, racist, hating rationale), it is their freedom to use that emblem as a form of speech. Others may not like it and they can say all they want regarding it. In the link above, I did tell him to stfu about it because in Chautauqua’s view (http://augureye.blogspot.com/2015/06/flag-of-hatred.html), anyone that cares for that flag is equivalent to a Nazi: of course, his view of the NSDAP is formed by the same corrupt media and the lying official historians (but that is another subject altogether). There are truths about Slavery that he either doesn’t know or is purposefully hiding. Maybe he and others could take the time to learn more about the truth of the subject.

FullSizeRenderThese people should understand that their narrow view cannot be used against each and every person who has an affinity for that emblem, but even if they are so short-sighted and ignorant, they should not be hypocrites. If they have a thinking brain, perhaps they should re-evaluate the many varied reasons that individuals have for embracing it. According to the people like Chautauqua (and there is a country full of these sycophants railing against people like me), any thoughts of heritage or pride from people who are against Empire and a bloated Federal Government, makes us all miscreants and low-lifes. Hence, the hypocrisy. He has no problem discussing today’s Federal Government’s over reach and lies. But damn those who spoke out about the tyranny 150 years ago. Damn the people who understand that history is not what the very same tyrannical powers that took over the Union back then, rule with the same, ever-growing despotism today:

The Union was taken, by its Northern worshipers, from a contractual institution that can either be cleaved to or scrapped, and turned into a divinized entity, which must be worshipped, and which must be permanent, unquestioned, all-powerful. There is no heresy greater, nor political theory more pernicious, than sacralizing the secular. But this monstrous process is precisely what happened when Abraham Lincoln and his northern colleagues made a god out of the Union. If the British forces fought for bad King George, the Union armies pillaged and murdered on behalf of this pagan idol, this “Union,” this Moloch that demanded terrible human sacrifice to sustain its power and its glory.

From Charles Burris at Lew Rockwell

Custer's Flag from Little Big Horn

Custer’s Flag from Little Big Horn

If embracing the Stars and Bars is only about hatred, then let’s hear the peanut gallery discuss the American Flag and how it has been used to oppress and murder native Americans. Or how it was used to secede from a tyrannical king. Or how it has been used to foster hatred and pride among the gullible who serve to murder and oppress countless millions of people in the world that are NOT American (not to mention the Americans, like me, who are being oppressed with the patriotic fervor we hear from the lick-spittle masses on a daily basis).

I can’t help the brain-washed sycophants, except to share what this emblem means to me and if they still want to label me as a hater, racist, die-hard, ankle biter, coward, traitor, knuckle-dragger, cockroach, etc, (all found in Chautauqua’s post) then that is on them and I will not associate with them further. Had he known, at the time, that I had a personal respect and admiration for the symbolism of that emblem, he may not have wanted me to have anything to do with his stuff.  (With his permission, encouragement and appreciation, I once did a video from a post he did, then had to re-do it later when YT deleted my channel. I have re-assigned the video as “private” until this gets hashed out).

What does the emblem mean to me?

1348114121_6539_lynyrd_skynyrd

Lynyrd Skynyrd: “Heritage, not hate”

Historical Confederate flag picture in Harper's Weekly

Historical Confederate flag picture in Harper’s Weekly

Maybe I should start with what it does not represent to me. It has never represented hatred or an embracing of slavery. In my mind, it has nothing, whatsoever to do with hating black people or celebrating their bondage or any ideas of my superiority to anyone else, especially black people. I don’t condone racism and hatred towards others and I don’t support the KKK or any outfit that thrives off of hate and self-assigned superiority. To insist that those issues are some hidden secret that all rebel flag admirers harbor is misleading, at best, and downright lies at the worst

To this day, I don’t even own one (but I will as soon as I can find an outlet, which is impossible right now because they are all sold out: that should tell you something). I have never flown one, nor have I ever thought it a cause to fight over. Until now.

I see that emblem as a representation of freedom. It gives me pride to know that southern folks had the presence of mind to question the empire being formed and the control the Federal Government of the day over their livelihood and way of life.

To me, this emblem is a banner of battle. It is an image that represents the antithesis of what America has become. It encourages me because I now see America as the oppressor of the world, subservient to Jewish Zionist interests.

The Truth About The Stars and Bars

The first Confederate National Flag

The first Confederate National Flag

These people who are so opposed to the flag, don’t even know the history of it (during that time, it wasn’t very prevalent). It was hardly ever seen in battle, because most of the Confederate forces used their own state flags. What you see today isn’t what was used in the day.

What we know today as the “Confederate flag” is a 20th- century combination of the battle flag’s colors with the Second Navy Jack’s design. It is a symbol of cultural identity for some white southerners..

There was a progression of flag designs, many similar to the Union’s flag. The design was similar because southerners were patriotic and wanted something that looked the same. However, this caused confusion on the battlefield. The current Stars and Bars is a 20th century image.

Who Were The Real Culprits In That War?

Abe Lincoln, for starts.

As DC Dave pointed out in his essay called, “Mencken and More on Lincoln’s Speech”, H.L. Mencken wrote about the mind-numbing hypocrisy of the Gettysburg Address:

But let us not forget that it is poetry, not logic; beauty, not sense. Think of the argument in it.  Put it into the cold words of everyday. The doctrine is simply this: that the Union soldiers who died at Gettysburg sacrificed their lives to the cause of self-determination—”that government of the people, by the people, for the people,” should not perish from the earth. It is difficult to imagine anything more untrue. The Union soldiers in that battle actually fought against self-determination; it was the Confederates who fought for the right of their people to govern themselves. What was the practical effect of the battle of Gettysburg? What else than the destruction of the old sovereignty of the States, i.e., of the people of the States? The Confederates went into battle free; they came out with their freedom subject to the supervision and veto of the rest of the country—and for nearly twenty years that veto was so effective that they enjoyed scarcely more liberty, in the political sense, than so many convicts in the penitentiary.

Obama Jewish GrandmotherToday is no different. There are still masses of people who are totally captured by such inane nonsense. People who fall for every poetic word uttered by a “black” man with white ancestors. A man whose black heritage doesn’t come from American slavery, but from Kenya. A man who was raised with white people, hobnobbed with white people in school, was supported by white people, and who won the election because of white people.

I think it is clear, as well, that Dave agrees with my assessment of the hypocrisy of people because the very revolution that founded this country is the same type of “rebellion” against tyranny that the South attempted:

The quickest and easiest objection to Mencken on this assessment—that is to say, the objection of the average American who has had it drummed into him that the victory of Lincoln’s forces over the Confederacy was very nearly the best thing to happen in the history of the North American continent—is that the South could hardly be said to be fighting for freedom while it held a substantial proportion of its population in bondage as slaves.  That argument is easily dismissed.  One could argue in precisely the same way that the American colonial revolutionists couldn’t have been fighting for freedom, either, because they had lots of slaves then, too.  The thirteen colonies were fighting for their freedom from Britain—with the slavery question put off until later, and the eleven states of the Confederacy were fighting for their freedom from the Union—with the slavery question put off until later, both in the Confederacy and in the states remaining in the Union in which slavery remained legal.

One might consider another culprit: Those Damned Yankees:

William Tecumseh Sherman

William Tecumseh Sherman


Right into the war, Northerners opposed to the conquest of the South blamed the conflict on fanatical New Englanders out for power and plunder, not on the good Americans in the South who had been provoked beyond bearing.

Many people, and not only in the South, thought that Southerners, according to their nature, had been loyal to the Union, had served it, fought and sacrificed for it as long as they could. New Englanders, according to their nature, had always been grasping for themselves while proclaiming their righteousness and superiority.

lncoln-1858The Yankees succeeded so well, by the long cultural war described in these volumes, and by the North’s military victory, that there was no longer a Yankee problem. Now the Yankee was America and the South was the problem. America, the Yankee version, was all that was normal and right and good. Southerners understood who had won the war (not Northerners, though they had shed a lot of blood, but the accursed Yankees.) With some justification they began to regard all Northerners as Yankees, even the hordes of foreigners who had been hired to wear the blue.

Here is something closer to a real history of the United States:

Yankee Thaddeus Stevens

Yankee Thaddeus Stevens

American freedom was not a legacy of the “Puritan Fathers,” but of Virginians who proclaimed and spread constitutional rights. New England gets some credit for beginning the War of Independence. After the first few years, however, Yankees played little part. The war was fought and won in the South. Besides, New Englanders had good reasons for independence — they did not fit into the British Empire economically, since one of their main industries was smuggling, and the influential Puritan clergy hated the Church of England. Southerners, in fighting for independence, were actually going against their economic interests for the sake of principle.

Once Southerners had gone into the Union (which a number of wise statesmen like Patrick Henry and George Mason warned them against), the Yankees began to show how they regarded the new federal government: as an instrument to be used for their own purposes. Southerners long continued to view the Union as a vehicle for mutual cooperation, as they often naively still do.

IMG_0365

Honoring Yankee Thaddeus Stevens

He would make a desert and call it peace,
And the “rebels” would behave.
Such thoughts and more come rushing in
Beside the zealot’s grave.
~ DC Dave

Read about Thaddeus here.

Yankees, as opposed to Northerners, are not the morality leaders of this country, as they would have us believe (although they are the most hypocritical):

The word “Yankee” gained popularity in the early to mid nineteenth century to describe a particular brand of New Englander: arrogant, hypocritical, unfriendly, condescending, intolerant, extremely self-righteous, and believing that he and his were God’s chosen people.

Yankees have never shied away from using the coercive powers of the state to compel others to be remade in their image. That’s why compulsory government schooling originated in New England, as did prohibitionism. It’s also why Stalinism took hold in the North (especially in New York City) in the twentieth century, as did its offshoot, neoconservativism, in more recent times. Indeed, many of the more notorious neoconservatives openly admit that they were Stalinists in their youth and have never fully abandoned those beliefs.

At the outbreak of the War to Prevent Southern Independence there was a vigorous secession movement in what were known then as the Middle States — Maryland, Pennsylvania, Delaware, New York, New Jersey. During the war there were thousands of Northern “peace Democrats” who opposed Lincoln and his Yankee cabal. These people, who were essentially Jeffersonians, had one thing in common with the Southern Confederates: they despised the arrogant, pushy, greedy, and insufferably self-righteous Yankees. They were ruthlessly censored and imprisoned by the tens of thousands by the Lincoln government. When they rioted over military conscription, the Yankee army shot them dead in the streets by the hundreds if not thousands (See Iver Bernstein, The New York City Draft Riots).

The idea of Yankee moral superiority was carefully crafted almost from the time of the Pilgrims. By 1861, New England Yankees and their Midwestern cousins had concocted the myth of a free, white, and virtuous New England that, by virtue of its moral superiority, had a right to remake all other sections of the U.S. in its own image, creating a Heaven on Earth (i.e., the New England-ization of North America). A corollary of this myth was the notion of the morally corrupt, slave-owning South.

But the notion of a morally superior New England Yankee nation is all a myth, as is explained in great detail by Joanne Pope Melish in her book, Disowning Slavery: Gradual Emancipation and Race in New England, 1780—1860 (Cornell University Press, 1998). Professor Melish, who teaches at the University of Kentucky, documents how New England propagandists rewrote their own history, not unlike how the Soviets rewrote Russian history, to say that slavery in that part of the country was only very brief and very benevolent.

One hears the constant maxim about defense of slavery (or opposition to abolition) as being the reason for secession.

Why The Civil War Was Not About Slavery

DWL-Quote

Yes, slavery was an element of secession, but not the primary issue. Expanding Federal government powers, tariffs that were stealing from the south (enriching the north), expansion of central banking, political and presidential agitation… all are aggressive elements of control and empire. The south didn’t want to be a part of it.

The WAR BETWEEN THE STATES 1861-1865 occurred due to many complex causes and factors as enumerated above. Those who make claims that “the war was over slavery” or that if slavery had been abolished in 1776 when the Declaration of Independence was signed or in 1789 when The Constitution of the United States of America was signed, that war would not have occurred between North and South are being very simplistic in their views and opinions.

The following conversation between English ship Captain Hillyar and Capt. Raphael Semmes-Confederate Ship CSS Alabama occurred during the war on August 5th, 1861. It is a summary from a well-educated Southerner who is stating his reasons for fighting.

Captain Hillyar expressed surprised at Captain Semme’s contention that the people of the South were “defending ourselves against robbers with knives at our throats”, and asked for further clarification as to how this was so, the exchange below occurred. I especially was impressed with Semmes’ assessment of yankee motives – the creation of “Empire”!

Semmes: “Simply that the machinery of the Federal Government, under which we have lived, and which was designed for the common benefit, has been made the means of despoiling the South, to enrich the North”, and I explained to him the workings of the iniquitous tariffs, under the operation of which the South had, in effect, been reduced to a dependent colonial condition, almost as abject as that of the Roman provinces, under their proconsuls; the only difference being, that smooth-faced hypocrisy had been added to robbery, inasmuch as we had been plundered under the forms of law”
Captain Hillyar: “All this is new to me”, replied the captain. “I thought that your war had arisen out of the slavery question.”
Semmes: “That is the common mistake of foreigners. The enemy has taken pains to impress foreign nations with this false view of the case. With the exception of a few honest zealots, the canting hypocritical Yankee cares as little for our slaves as he does for our draught animals. The war which he has been making upon slavery for the last 40 years is only an interlude, or by-play, to help on the main action of the drama, which is Empire; and it is a curious coincidence that it was commenced about the time the North began to rob the South by means of its tariffs. When a burglar designs to enter a dwelling for the purpose of robbery, he provides himself with the necessary implements. The slavery question was one of the implements employed to help on the robbery of the South. It strengthened the Northern party, and enabled them to get their tariffs through Congress; and when at length, the South, driven to the wall, turned, as even the crushed worm will turn, it was cunningly perceived by the Northern men that ‘No slavery’ would be a popular war-cry, and hence, they used it.
It is true that we are defending our slave property, but we are defending it no more than any other species of our property – it is all endangered, under a general system of robbery. We are in fact, fighting for independence.”

“I don’t know about you, but I am tired of being insulted by morons.”

Thus says Cooter (Ben Jones) from The Dukes of Hazzard show. He has followed up with:

“When we say our flag stands for ‘heritage, not hate’ and ‘pride, not prejudice,’ we mean it … Cooter’s is going to continue to sell our Southern symbols as long as there is a Cooter’s. I will fight these people until hell freezes over, and then I will fight them on the ice.”

general-lee-1

The politically correct “morons” have taken this way too far. They have forced removing the emblem from the well-known and loved  car found in that TV series. What’s next? An image of Obama instead? Or maybe…

General Top with Star

Maybe this will make the sycophants happy

They want to remove the image from car tags. There is a push to remove Civil War memorials. Next, am I supposed to agree that they shut down historical landmarks such as Shiloh National Military Park or allow them to erase the Confederate portion and only allow the Union contingent? Instead of the Blue and the Gray, will it become The Blue?

Forget that!

That flag is an image of rebellion against centralized government over-reaches and a representation of individual state’s rights. In my mind, it should be used to unite people of all colors and creeds to fight against the imperial power structure that dominates this planet.

Must Reads:

Mencken and More on Lincoln’s Speech

Rothbard Has The Last Word On The Confederate “False Flag” Issue

The Yankee Problem in America

The Myth of the Morally Superior Yankee

Fanatical Yankee Utopians

The Real Lincoln in His Own Words

Taxation and Slavery: A Parallel

White Slaves

The 10 Causes of The War Between The States

Follow @BuelahMan

BuelaHuh?

Did I rub you the wrong way or stroke you just right? Let me know below in the comments section or Email me at buelahman {AT} g m a i l {DOT} com

If for some reason you actually liked this post, click the “Like” button below. If you feel like someone else needs to see this (or you just want to ruin someone’s day), click the Share Button at the bottom of the post and heap this upon some undeserving soul. And as sad as this thought may be, it may be remotely possible that us rednecks here at The Revolt please you enough (or more than likely, you are just a glutton for punishment??), that you feel an overwhelming desire to subscribe via the Email subscription and/or RSS Feed buttons found on the right hand panel of this page (may the Lord have mercy on your soul).

Comment Policy:

Please keep comments relevant to the topic. Multiple links will automatically relegate your comment to the spam section, so keep that in mind as you post. 1st time commenters must receive Admin approval, but have free reign after that.


All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the “fair use doctrine” in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of the advertiser and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BuehlahMan’s Revolt or WordPress.com

60 thoughts on “What Does The Stars and Bars Represent?

  1. When I first read C’s diatribe about burning the ‘racist’ flag I thought, whoa, aren’t we going a little bit overboard here. He should at least have linked to the full speech:

    http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/cornerstonespeech/

    Contrary to all the politically correct people the sentence in Little Aleck’s – as he was known throughout his life – ” … the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man … ” was true then and in general is true now. There, I said it. Call me a racist.

    patriotrising.com also has something to say about this false flag:

    ‘Essentially, America just got sold out by people like Marco Rubio. And it was incredibly easy to pull it off. First, America was distracted by a contrived, pre-planned mass hysteria/outrage event now known as the Confederate Flag flap. Hilariously, this literal false flag controversy doesn’t even involve the actual Confederate flag. It involves a battle flag that people mistakenly think is the Confederate flag. …’ That in light of the TPP fast track passed in congress. But, oh no, we need to burn that racist flag! For me it also represents an aspect of free speech. What does that make Chatauqua?

    Thanks, B-Man.

    Like

    • I don’t understand C’s obstinance. He is normally a decent, well-receiving fellow. His diatribe seemed very much out of character.

      I took him to task on his site, tried to explain a few points I shared here and although he admitted he could see where a person would be offended (I wasn’t as much offended by the names, as I was by his total lack of understanding, his misstep and the continued defense of his point).

      His main reference is what a VP of the Confederacy said about slaves. My retort is that the logic would mean that he agrees with everything Biden and Cheney, et al said and that they speak for him. With that one rejoinder, his point moot, for I know that he doesn’t believe that Cheney speaks for him.

      Virtually all his commenters disagree, but he is sticking to his guns, perpetuating and supporting the divide.

      Now he wants me to delete the video (which, frankly isn’t all that good anyway). I’d rather delete it than be associated with someone so pig headed and short-sighted (and one that is falling for TPTB’s directives).

      Like

      • Mind you B-Man, this is my opinion and nothing else. Usually, I try to avoid scraps like this one but I have to say the holier than thou attitude of our friend Chatauqua is something to behold. By the way, he’s got another post up about racists. Sure you know.

        You can see his kind of reasoning with people who haven’t come to terms with the truths of WWII, either because they don’t care or are too indoctrinated with no drive to investigate. Another one sweeping the truth about European history and WWII under the rug, as if it doesn’t count is the gardener and his entourage. But, they all promote enlightenment, and claim the ones who don’t get it are sooo stupid.

        Well, excuse me, do I not only need the government to tell me how to behave, now the enlightened guys are telling me how to behave too? How about I decide for myself. I hope that is not too much of a novelty.

        McCob in all his eloquence manages to contradict himself by saying there is nothing wrong with looking down at various cultures, but at the same time we are all equal. If that’s the case, why would you look down on others if you didn’t feel superior. Case closed.

        Like

        • I decided to not look back at the hypocritical liar’s blog. He refuses to add my comments now, where he is eviscerated for his logical fallacies and pretend “enlightenment”. Its one thing to have a strong belief about something, but when he cannot back it up with fact, only innuendo, and like a child, stomps his feet while purposefully disallowing interaction, I see him for the ignoramus (or shill) that he is.

          At first I thought he was just pig-headed (and said that multiple times), but now I am confident it is more. Ignorance doesn’t explain what he is doing.

          But enough of him. As far as I am concerned, he is dumped into the waste bin of B’Man history.

          McCob, on the other hand, has seemed decent, so even though I don’t agree with him, I have enjoyed reading his opinion.

          I didn’t rebuff his assertions about pygmies, because frankly, I don’t know about pygmies (their war tactics, their greed, etc). Something tells me, however, that if they are human (as he intimates) then they are also prone to human characteristics. My only thought is that they may not be as likely to do them because their actions are much more visible and subject to tribal scrutiny. I could try to read about it, but I really don’t care.

          I don’t always agree with Mr Fred, but his points cannot be completely discounted.

          I would not want to live in huts with no electricity. I would not enjoy “art” drawn into mud, compared to works of art hanging in the Louvre. I would not enjoy walking everywhere in my small area, compared to an air conditioned vehicle taking me thousands of miles. Etc. Those things are superior, in my view.

          Like

  2. what people need is an Anti-Stupid Idiot Supplement…

    Truth !

    Despite repeated provocations from the Canaanites {Jewish Terrorists}
    

    in the North, the Southern States proved remarkably tractable,
    freely making concessions to demands which were intended only to force them into war.

    The Missouri Compromise, written in 1820, was accepted even though it
    prohibited slavery in the new state.
    It did restrict voting privileges to “free white male citizens,”
    thus excluding women, slaves, and Indians from exercising the ballot.
    In 1849, the people of California adopted a constitution which prohibited slavery.

    The Compromise of 1850 provided that the prohibition of slavery should be left up
    to the individual States, thus thwarting the Canaanites in their attempts to make
    this problem an excuse for federal intervention and a cause of war between the States.

    It is a matter of historical record that the Civil War was precipitated by
    

    the action against Fort Sumter in South Carolina, across the bay from Charleston.
    This opening of hostilities can be traced directly to the power of the
    Scottish Rite in Charleston, which is known officially as
    “the Mother Lodge of the World.”

    http://snippits-and-slappits.blogspot.com/2013/05/eustace-mullins-curse-of-canaan-chapter.html

    apparently there is a Bumper Crop of Stupid Idiots {Talmud Vision Watchers}

    Seeing Archie Manning play Quarterback at Ole Miss in a sea of Stars & Bars
    is a scene that will endure in my memory for ….a long time

    to Hell with the politically correct PSYCHOPHANT = Jew Worshipping Morons

    http://www.ini-world-report.org/2015/06/23/an-education-on-lawful-money/

    see also…. St Andrews Cross & The Stone of Destiny

    cue Joe South : Children & Games People Play

    RIP : Robert E. Lee & all those who gave their last full measure of devotion…

    For Truth & Liberty

    Like

  3. “The black man not equal to the white man”? Give me a break. We all start out as a fuck and end up as so much dust blowing around. Sounds like equality to me. Besides, white people and black people are going to make babies together. Try to stop this phenomenon. Just try!

    White people aren’t superior. White people are just as stupid and weak and prone to emotional and mental problems as anyone else. There is nothing wrong with looking down at various cultures but when one thinks there own culture is superior then that is just not healthy. There is nothing one can say about one group or another, no matter how nasty, that isn’t true. Such is the human condition.

    The rebels played war with a vastly superior military force and they lost; armies win battles but navies win wars. The south never had a chance and this fact was clear to anyone who had a brain. The south was stupid and their leadership betrayed the southern citizens. The south was not righteous. None of us is righteous.

    Humanity is divided between the lucky and the unlucky and we will always have overlords to contend with until we come to a day when society develops a new cultural paradigm. War serves the bad people not the common people. It is my hope the day will come that when, if someone utters the word, ‘soldier’, no one will know what it means.

    As far as the Stars and Bars, or any other flag goes, it is just a piece of cloth to me.

    Thank you Buelaman. I always look forward to reading your stuff.

    McCob

    Like

    • Thanks, McCob.

      As I mentioned, the flag, itself, has not been all that important. I never flew one. I had a Lynyrd Skynyrd t shirt with one on it and a couple of Ole Miss shirts with the emblem.

      But it becomes much more important to me when they try to ban it. What is next? The slippery slope thing.

      That is why I insist on keeping it. Why I now embrace it more. Much like the way I use the word “redneck”, re-brand it as a rally image for everyone. Put up the finger to the government and their shills.

      You may be interested in Mr Fred’s latest address of white supremacy, addressed towards Cornel West. Maybe “supremacy” has a different meaning than the standard portrays?

      http://fredoneverything.org/are-white-men-gods-ii-getting-the-facts-straight/

      Like

      • Bman,
        you certainly are entitled to express yourself as you see fit. I am a peasant, myself. I know I am not superior to anybody. In my humble opinion we here in the rank and file of humanity are constantly subjected to a divide and conquer strategy employed by the powers that be. What troubles me is that peasants like myself are manipulated and treated like chumps and that the tactic works and has been working for thousands of years. I doubt things will change anytime soon.

        Be well, McCob

        Like

        • Bman,

          I read your link and I can’t say as I am favorably impressed with the argument. There is nothing wrong with being white except that we are human. The writer equates artistic and scientific advances with supremacy and that is just an opinion. Besides what the euros developed was built upon what Asians and Egyptians did and they weren’t white. I sense mendacious propaganda. I really don’t know who invented what and I don’t know if the history is true. Besides, it is more important to be good hearted than it is to be smart. And has scientific and artistic advancement really done anything to make people any happier in an aggregate sense? I doubt it. For all we know the primitives may have been a lot happier and healthier than todays modern day counterpart. Greed, corruption, injustice and murder are the price of civilization and one has to wonder if it is worth it.

          I once saw a movie in a sociology class about the Imbutu Pygmies of central Africa. In the movie these hunter gatherers had no religion nor politics. They didn’t work unless you call hunting and fishing and gathering from the forest work. These people seemed really happy; they were all smiling. According to anthropologists their culture had lasted over 50,000 yrs. I would say these people produced a culture much superior to that which any of us Caucasians have came up with.

          Civilization is neurotic and perverse.

          White people have no good reason to pat themselves on the back.

          McCob

          Like

          • I understand what you are saying.

            Mr Fred, in my opinion, is expressing somewhat tongue-in-cheek. I have followed Fred for quite some time and he does that frequently. His background, however, was beating the streets as a writer in DC (as I remember) and has plentiful experience with black folk. He is married to a Mexican woman, so I do not necessarily believe he is racist, but has strong opinions.

            One can see Africans, to this day, that live in huts, with no conveniences. Whenever they get the opportunity, my bte is that they would love it (I remember recent stories told about Africans getting solar panels and well pumps. I doubt they would ever go back). I know I wouldn’t want that.

            I seriously doubt that greed, corruption, etc are just found in civilized societies. The very nature of humanness would seem to disprove that. But in a smaller tribal-like setting, there is far more scrutiny on individuals, so they don’t get away with it as easily as being hidden in a large society.

            As for Pygmie culture transcending various white cultures? That is a stretch to me. As much as I enjoy hunting, fishing, and gardening, I would not enjoy being solely providing for myself in that way right now (maybe I am just getting too old). Why do so many people want to immigrate into white societies? Wonder why that is if they are so happy in a hut?

            Like

            • Bman,

              Of course you and I couldn’t be happy with being hunter gatherers due to the way we have been raised. The culture shock would kill us. I would say that the Pygmies were not greedy. For example they don’t value gold or go crazy over it the way we civilized people do. How can one be greedy when there is no swag to fight over. Hunter gatherers don’t line up great armies in battlefield array for great slaughter. They don’t kill their spouses for life insurance pay outs. My comment about them being superior is based on the assumption that they have lasted for over 50,000 yrs. And I do believe they are healthier. They have nothing to corrupt. They have nothing to be greedy about. As far as injustice goes…well, injustice requires law and they have no law to speak of. They have mother earth and each other. It might be over for them as of this time but to me they seemed to be living in a golden age.

              Only insecure people boast. Hubris is an emotional problem. And, we live in a culture that produces insecure, as well as self destructive and neurotic, people. Mr. Fred’s basic thesis seems to say that we white people should take credit for whatever Bach, Newton, Shakespeare,…, etc. came up with. I didn’t think up any of that stuff so I don’t see where I should be proud of it.

              Crazy Horse or Sitting Bull? some famous Indian has been quoted as saying, “The white man is crazy.” I can’t say they were wrong.

              I do not think you or Mr. Fred is a hateful person. You are entitled to your points of view and maybe you are right.

              Thank you for your polite and thoughtful rebuttal. Discussion like this helps me to work through things.

              McCob

              Like

    • Mr. McCob,

      You asked, “The black man not equal to the white man”?
      ANYONE that has a brain and knows how to use it, understands that there is no such thing as being ‘equal’, there are to many OBVIOUS difference’s that you have chosen to ignore just so you can make (in your mind) a point that is not substantiated by the facts!

      From what I understand, the ‘idea’ that “All men are created equal” is a misquoted, out of context lie, that is used to confuse the issue! The WHITE MAN IS NOT equal to the Black man in many ways!!!

      I have said for years, …”God created ALL of Mankind, with each race serving a purpose, and each race benefiting from each others different purpose. All men are not created equal, but rather, ALL men are equally created for GODS purpose!”… If you believe in “GOD” or not, the facts tell us that we are NOT “equal”!

      You then said,
      …”White people aren’t superior”…

      WELL there is a TRIBE that fears the White man so much that they have been trying to destroy us and OUR Nations! Why is that? I could tell you if you asked! But for now, suffice it to say, you have no argument!
      Have a look in “their own words” >>>

      …”Edoms Thorn on White Genocide: Guest Post | B’Man’s Revolt
      http://www.buelahman.wordpress.com/…/edoms-thorn-on-white-genocide-guest-pos..

      AS far as the “Flag” goes, I have refused to fly it because of the blatant IGNORance on both sides of the issue!

      Like

  4. From “The NeoCon’s Confederate Problem” by Paul Gottfried:

    None of this need surprise us. The persistent neoconservative prejudice against the South sprang from the ethnically parochial culture in which the older generation of neoconservatives grew up. In my youth, I was struck by the malice with which New York Jewish visitors to Florida described their road trips through the land of “rural bigots.” Next to the Germans, whom they assured me—the child of Austrian Jewish immigrants—were all Nazis, these Southern “anti-Semites” were the most unpalatable humans they were forced to share the planet with.

    http://www.vdare.com/articles/the-neocons-confederate-problem-and-americas?content=of%20their%20loathing

    As one who grew up just off Rt. 301, the main drag between NY City and Miami, in Eastern North Carolina, I can tell you that the loathing was reciprocated toward these boorish no-tippers. Since it was virtually the only contact that most of us had with people from the North, it did nothing to foster regional harmony. When someone said “Yankee,” that was the image that tended to come to mind, unfortunately.

    Like

  5. You are offended by my Confederate flag? JE SUIS CHARLIE HEBDO ! That is what YOU told the muslims.
    JE SUIS CHARLIE HEBDO as long as “they” approve …………… actually the Confederate flag is not about race, but about COMRADE-UNCLE-Sam –it’s a symbol against the over reaching police state of federalism. Just as is the GADSDEN flag
    ALL traces/symbols of FREEDOM are being erased. Andrew Jackson who DARED stand up to the International BANKERS is under attack on the $20
    All those CongressSCUM who voted for Obamatrade are every so quickly running around trying to get removed any statue or symbol from the era of the Civil War. Such are the last reminder to a brainwashed public that once upon a time Americans fought against what is happening everywhere nowadays.
    Mel Gibson suppressed because EVERY one of his movies preached FREEDOM
    I am appalled when I see the “STAR of DEATH” flown in public. Israel thinks GREATER ISRAEL should rule the World. “Greater Israel” is all land between the Nile and the Euphrates rivers, Syria, Jordan, most of Saudi Arabia and Iraq. You can find maps they have drawn online.Did you know what the two blue bands on their flag stand for? The Nile and the Euphrates. Yes, it’s true. “Thou shall not covet …..” Israel COVETS ALL.
    The sight of the “STAR of DEATH” sends a frightening and offensive message to ALL NON-Jews.

    Like

  6. Do you mean what “do” the stars and bars represent? Your not as special as you think. Time to go back to grammar school.

    Shannon

    Like

  7. one problem the CSA had at the time, is that while the mostly white and some black young men were getting killed in some battle somewhere, the leadership of the CSA were girly men cavorting around with each other and doing their queer thing. This is something I didn’t know. Learn something new everyday. Texe Marrs was talking about this a while back on Rense. It is astonishing that the president of the confederacy , Jefferson Davis was a queer and so was the VP, a jew named Judah Benjamin, (who by the way, was a friend of the rothschilds , isn’t that sweet?) and then this jew escapes from the united states after the war and heads to england where he becomes a famous lawyer and personal lawyer for the queen of england.
    when you have homosexuals running your government , i ask, is this a good thing?

    Like

    • Benjamin was never VP of the Confederacy. He was a Senator from LA who was appointed Sec of State (which didn’t go over very well with southerners). He was, indeed, thought to be gay (but not necessarily at the time).

      As for Jeff Davis being gay, I have never heard of such a thing and he was married twice with children.

      Like

      • texe marrs reported that davis and benjamin were seen walking around holding hands etc. i am not sure where he got this info but i wouldn’t doubt it. he also said lincoln was a flamer as well.

        as far as a man being married and still being gay , that sort of thing has gone on for a very long time. during the days of the roman empire, men got married to have children and then had their kicks with other men or boys. it was accepted behavior. paul the apostle ran into this all the time during his missionary journeys and even talked about it sometimes. maybe that is why davis kept getting divorced.

        anyway here is the show that i am talking about where texe marrs discusses this issue. hat tip to mami’s shit .

        [audio src="http://k003.kiwi6.com/hotlink/63u2zwwkcv/Rense.20150518.1of3.mp3" /]

        see what you think…….

        Like

        • I find it difficult to compare activites thousands of years ago to those less than 200 years ago.

          Sure, there were plenty of hidden gays, but if you research the two men (Davis and Benjamin) it becomes easy to see the difference between their two lives.

          Texe can say whatever he wants to say, but I have studied this subject and I don’t see the gay Davis connection. Other than Texe saying it, I can’t find any corroborating evidence.

          Lincoln? I don’t know. He was a masterful liar, though.

          Like

  8. Brilliant and beautiful. I am a Southern Lady from Virginia and will never let my heritage be taken from me. If they try, I shall remove my gloves and go out with their blood under my fingernails.

    Like

  9. Great column but you do know the battle flag was never called the stars and bars right? The battle flag is either just that or the southern cross which most don’t know.

    Like

    • Hi Steve,

      Yes, I understand that the first National Confederate flag was the stars and bars. But so many people call the battle flag the stars and bars that I wanted to use that in the title (and it is what almost everyone I know in MS calls it). It is also known as the Dixie Flag.

      Like

  10. lol …Considering the high probability that General Robert E. Lee and William Porcher Miles were functioning as covert agents for the Rothschilds’ British East India Company, I think that your substitution of the Israeli flag (another Rothschild creation) for the Southern Cross Battle Flag on the Dukes of Hazard car here is quite appropriate and quite telling.

    Like

    • Are you pretending to not understand the reason for the symbol on the car?

      It appears that there is a “high probability” that you are a Jewish shill. Imagine that.

      Like

  11. Pingback: What Does The Stars and Bars Really Represent? | thegoodmanreport
  12. Just today I had this exchange with an old academic colleague. First, I got this email from him:

    I do enjoy reading this person, “B-Man”, making a fool of himself. But I get the impression that you endorse this nonsense. Sad.

    My response:

    Indeed, I have found practically nothing that this gentleman has written that I disagree with. I was particularly pleased to see him reference my essay, “Mencken and More on Lincoln’s Speech.” I would be very interested to know why you think what he has written is nonsense and why you think my endorsement of it is sad. As Thomas Sowell says he used to write with red pencil on his students’ papers, “Specify, don’t characterize.”

    You see that he gives readers an opportunity to comment. I am placing this exchange on the comment page so all involved can defend what they have written. (end of quote)

    Since at this point all we have from the attacker is his negative characterization, the ball is in his court to provide specifics. Let’s hope he will step up to the plate and, as I used to tell my students, we can all improve the quality of our ignorance with the ensuing exchange.

    Like

  13. My history-teaching former academic colleague has responded to me privately. First, here is what he sent:

    Thanks for replying.

    I must admit that I did not read all of B-Man’s essay. It goes on and on, and I didn’t have the endurance. Here is my response to its central question.

    Let’s leave aside some important issues, such as the overwhelming consensus among professional historians about the role of slavery in causing the Civil War, what slavery meant, what “heritage” means, what our white ancestors thought they were fighting for, etc.

    Let’s simply address how we should treat fellow citizens. A large segment of them, mostly black, say they are insulted, humiliated, and in other ways hurt by the sight of the common version of the Confederate flag. Even if we don’t feel them ourselves, it is not the place of B-Man, or you, or me to deny those emotions in others. We should assume them to be genuine and acknowledge that there are aspects of the symbolism of the flag that might cause them [pain?].

    It is a matter of common courtesy and decency to stop doing things that cause our fellow citizens pain.

    On the related issue, the right of anyone to fly the flag: Governor Haley, and most other public officials I’ve heard address the issue, have explicitly affirmed the right of individuals to display the flag on their property. The problem is its display at official public buildings, supported by taxpayers, including black ones and others offended by the flag. (I supposed ultimately it could become an issue decided by courts and/or voters in some jurisdictions.)

    Just because a right exists, however, is no reason why it should be exercised.

    Now here is my response:

    May I congratulate you for the somewhat improved tone of your follow-up email. I say “somewhat” because it is still a bit lofty and dismissive concerning Buelahman’s essay, beginning as it does with what I can only take as a confession of intellectual laziness, “I must admit that I did not read all of B-Man’s essay. It goes on and on, and I didn’t have the endurance.”

    That is to say, you admit that you fired off your 23-word insult to your old academic colleague and his frequent collaborator without having bothered to read all of what he (and I?) have written on the matter. In your short email, I might remind you, you manage to say that he is is making “a fool of himself” and that he is writing “nonsense” and that it is “sad” that I should seem to go along with it.

    Your opening sally in this follow-up raises an important question. Have you still not read it? You’re retired and certainly have the time, but are you still just going, as it appears to me, on emotions and impressions? And how far did you get with your initial reading? Did you pitch it aside just as he set the stage:

    “The MSM is not our friend. They are not truthful. They are pawns used to brainwash you. Period. But I want to focus on one particular subject today: the Stars and Bars… The people who are embracing the media lies about this flag are the same people who kowtow to the media clowns doing the Empire’s bidding. The same people who are ignorant about WWII. The same people who fall for every conceivable lie meant to divide the races and every other erroneous and fake cause.”

    Where is the nonsense here? This looks like horse sense to me. Are you among those people who believe that Timothy McVeigh masterminded the Oklahoma City bombing, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed did likewise for 9/11, Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone culprit in the death of JFK, and the Tsarnaev brothers killed the people the MSM say they did in Boston, to mention just four examples of the sort of thing he is talking about? If so, I can see why your mind might close up tight at that point and you would do no further reading.

    Is it also your considered opinion that I have made a fool of myself with “Mencken and More on Lincoln’s Speech,” upon which B’Man draws heavily? How so?

    Now, with not the slightest sense of irony, on the heels of your short, insulting blast, you lecture us in the best New Englander tradition that it all comes down to a matter of civility. Civility! Many black people, you–and our wonderful news media–tell us, take the Stars and Bars as a symbol of racial superiority and a celebration of slavery and therefore, all of us, but Southerners in particular, should simply have the common courtesy never to display the damned thing.

    The worst thing about that argument is its timing. If we were still in the 60s and Southern hardliners were waving the flag in the face of people at lunch-counter sit-ins, I might say you have a point. Considering the original motivation behind the flying of the Confederate Battle Flag on the Capitol Building in South Carolina and the fact that it is supported by public funds, I agree with you that the case is strong to take it down there. But let’s take the sort of cold, clear-eyed look that Buelahman takes in his essay at this obviously orchestrated campaign to mothball the Stars and Bars forever in the wake of the event in Charleston.

    For one so putatively concerned about people’s feelings, you should see how this hullabaloo looks to many native Southerners. At a time when racial harmony in the South has never been greater, the national press is dragging their culture, their history, and the flag that to many is representative of their Southernness into the mud, all because of this truly bizarre and anomalous happening in Charleston. In a nutshell, it certainly looks like we Southerners are all being blamed for killing a group or righteous black people on account of our endemic and ineradicable racial hatred. I don’t like that. It’s easily as insulting as your first email.

    I also do not accept the assertion that within the grassroots black community there is any strong revulsion to the Stars and Bars as it has been used for the last thirty years or so. This current hysteria certainly looks ginned up to me by agents of the Empire, people like Al Sharpton. The knucklehead successors to Ronnie Van Zant in Lynyrd Skynyrd might have capitulated, but I don’t think the writers and performers of “The Ballad of Curtis Loew” need worry about how their display of the flag is taken by the black community. In my view they should continue to display their pride in their roots with the most recognizable symbol available, and I’m pretty confident that Buelahman would agree with me on that.

    Now, briefly, let’s talk about your first point. You appear not to know to whom you are writing when you invoke “the overwhelming consensus among professional historians about the role of slavery in causing the Civil War.” Just this April I began my essay, “Letter to a Court Historian about Forrestal’s Death” with these lines: “H.L. Mencken aptly called them ‘the timorous eunuchs who posture as American historians.’” In 2009 I penned “The Case for Free Inquiry”:

    You say they gassed six million Jews.
    I ask you how you know.
    You say it’s from historians;
    They agree that it is so.

    But what about the Forrestal death?
    They agree on that one, too.
    And until I checked it for myself,
    I only thought I knew.

    I don’t need “professional historians” to do the most elementary thinking for me. The war in question was, somewhat like our two ongoing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, a war of choice. Then it was the choice of Abraham Lincoln and his cohorts to wage a war of aggression against the states that had proclaimed their secession from the Union. Even Lincoln’s biggest defenders will admit that the Fort Sumter episode was designed by Lincoln to get the South to fire the first shot so that he could claim the moral high ground.

    No one could deny that the slavery was an important factor in the secession. I think that it is debatable as to whether it was the most important factor, though. The war, itself, is all on Lincoln. The professional historians that you like to invoke consistently rate this butcher of so many of his fellow Americans as perhaps our greatest president, which is another good reason not to trust them.

    I can say with some confidence that my great grandfather, John Henry Martin, who came from a piedmont county in North Carolina that had virtually no slaves, did not fight under Robert E. Lee and spend the last months of the war in the hell hole of the Point Lookout P.O.W. camp to defend the institution of slavery. He and his fellow Southerners were attacked by the minions of Lincoln’s federal government and they felt that they had no choice but to resist. What’s going on now has made me want to trek back down to Southern Maryland and plant another Confederate Battle Flag by the monument to John Henry and his fellow victims. See http://www.plpow.com and http://www.cem.va.gov/cems/lots/point_lookout.asp.

    Like

    • I think he is the epitome of a Cultural Marxist. What he is saying is that free speech doesn’t apply if its insensitive. That we must judge all speech and actions upon how others “feel”.

      I, on the other hand, cherish free speech for anyone and everyone, whether they agree with me or make me feel bad, (or not). I wrote in the post above:

      And no matter what a person’s reason for owning the Stars and Bars (even the most vile, racist, hating rationale), it is their freedom to use that emblem as a form of speech.

      Sadly, this “historian” is more worried about appeasing feelings than honoring free speech. Cultural Marxism, plain and simple.

      Should he be concerned for my feelings if the gay flag (and the lifestyle it represents) offends me or makes me feel bad? I seriously doubt that he gives a damn about that. He may even celebrate it if it were to bother me enough. Its the politically correct, leftist thing to do.

      But I would welcome his opinion, apparently more than he welcomes mine. And I would fight for his right to share it, while he would gladly see me go quiet to appease people, like him, who have no idea about the history I wrote about in the post.

      And I don’t even have a PHD

      Like

  14. Pingback: Where Are The Rebels? | Pragmatic Witness
  15. Pingback: Dixie Dynamite! Down in the Trenches with B’Man’s Revolt | Aryan Skynet

You Got Something To Say? Please keep your maw respectful and gab on topic.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s