| A remark I hear frequently is, "Well, I guess I’m not
too welcome here. I’m a yankee!" My reply is always the same, "What makes
you think you are a yankee?" Always the answer is, "Oh, I’m from…(name
a northern state)". How thoroughly have our citizens been maleducated (the prefix mal
meaning defective). My 1965 Encyclopaedia Britannica defines Yankee as "a word of
uncertain origin (perhaps from Dutch Janke, Little John), applied in the 18th
century to New Englanders, first by British soldiers as a contemptuous nickname, then as a
descriptive nickname still acceptable in New England. Britons began to use the term for
all United States citizens well into the 20th century." The 2000 edition
of the Columbia Encyclopedia says, " By 1765 it was in use as a term of contempt or
derision, but by the opening of the American Revolution, New Englanders were proud to be
called Yankees. The popularity of the marching song Yankee Doodle probably had much
to do with the term’s subsequent wide usage."
My definition of yankee is as follows; "those ever present
folk who know what is best for you. They insist that you like them either at the point of
a bayonet or threat of a lawsuit. They firmly believe that the Constitution (of the United
States of America) only applies to their minions when it is convenient and only when they
interpret it. They long for ever more power so they can demonstrate to the rest of us
clods the glories of marxist socialism."
Most of you should know by now that the "Pilgrim
Fathers" of Plymouth were about setting the seeds of socialism to sprout in the New
World. Their attitude, demeanor, and approach were from the beginning one of high-minded
elitism that always knew best. Their attempt to form an early and separate Confederation,
their strict rules of thought and opinion, and their horrible and barbaric forms of
punishment and death should have been and was a warning to our Founders. But our Founders
rarely had more than a third of the people solidly behind them at any one time so they
sought support where they may. We have carried the burden of that error with us ever
since.
Would you consider the roughly 38,000 civilians who had the
dubious distinction of being arrested and imprisoned by Mr. Lincoln’s gestapo for
anti-northern thought to be yankees? Most of those hapless individuals dwelled north of
the Mason-Dixon. In Ezra J. Warner’s excellent text, Generals in Gray, which
deals exclusively with general grade officers, he says, " Another interesting fact is
that of 239 officers of the Regular Army who resigned in 1861 to cast their lot with the
Confederacy, 26 were appointed originally from Northern states." Would you call those
26 officers, yankees? Missouri, Kentucky, and Maryland were occupied States whose
legislatures were either arrested or prevented by a Federal Military from fully exercising
their constitutional duties with regard to secession. Would you consider all the citizens
of those unfortunate states yankees? In 1863, western Virginia was un-Constitutionally
stolen from the Commonwealth by bayonet and blue clad voters, would you call the folk from
West Virginia yankees?
Eighteenth century Britons did not refer to Virginians as
"yankees". That term was used exclusively for those ever present folk who were
so steeped in selfishness, greed, self-righteousness, and piety that they presumed to
command the rest of the colonies how to live. The Pilgrim Father’s infatuation with
the French Revolution and their embrace of Unitarianism led them naturally to lust for
ever more power and wealth. Thus it is no surprise that "save the Union" and
"abolition" became fascist buzzwords employed by them and their accomplices.
Incite the masses by repeating these grand terms and thus disguise their true intent. Hard
core abolitionists vowed to "destroy the Union" while those intent on war
appealed to the rural unwashed sense of patriotism and lack of historic knowledge to
"save the Union". Yep, through clever media manipulation they had it both ways.
By media manipulation, I mean sending the Federal Army to a newspaper to shut it down and
arrest the offending editors. But how can you destroy the Union and save the Union at the
same time, you might ask?
You may not wish to recognize this but it is none-the-less true.
The Lincoln regime of 1860 ushered into our domain a fascist dictatorship: tyranny, pure
and simple. Designed from the beginning to destroy the voluntary Union of our founders and
replace it with a forced Union, indivisible. Thus the concept of the Constitution as a
living document. For if our Constitution can not be relied upon as a firm contract among
sovereign States then he who controls force controls the Constitution and its
interpretation. To offer a quote from Charles Adams’ excellent text, When in the
Course of Human Events, page 48, "To Lincoln, the Supreme Court was as much a
threat as the Maryland legislators. According to the federal marshal, Ward Hill Lamon,
‘after due consideration the administration was determined to arrest the Chief
Justice (of the United States Supreme Court).’ They had already arrested members of
the Maryland legislature who had been less than supportive of the administration and its
zeal for war on the Confederacy, so why not Justices of the Supreme Court? Lincoln issued
an arrest warrant for (Chief Justice) Taney."
Again from, When in the Course of Human Events, "Secretary
(of State) Seward was behind this era of totalitarianism in America. He was drunk with
power, bragging to the British ambassador"… "My Lord, I can touch a bell on
my right hand, and order the arrest of a citizen of Ohio; I can touch the bell again, and
order the imprisonment of a citizen of New York; and no power on earth, except that of the
President, can release them. Can the Queen of England do so much?" These words from a
public servant serving at the discretion of the President, both of whom were required to
take the Constitutional Oath of Office. Imagine, the Soviet Union could have and Marxist
Red China may yet use the actions of Abe Lincoln’s yankee government as justification
for imprisonment of its citizens.
Now, quoting from, Facts and Falsehoods, by George Edmonds,
"Hamilton and Jefferson, says Fisk in the North American Review of April 1879,
represent the two opposing ideas which prevailed at the time our government was formed,
and which, with some variations, have been the basis of our political divisions into
parties ever since… Hamilton embodied the tendency to the centralization of power in
the national government. Jefferson, on the other hand, represented the demand for a
complete diffusion of sovereignty among the people, and its exercise locally and in the
states, and confining of national functions as closely as possible to the strictest
interpretation of the Constitution… Mr. Fisk admits that Hamilton, the monarchist,
represented the party which directly opposed the sovereignty of the people…The
resemblance between Hamilton and Lincoln is so close no one can resist it. A just parallel
of Hamilton and Lincoln will show them alike in many ways and that Hamilton’s work
made Lincoln’s possible."
So, what we are left with is something akin to an Imperial
Democracy resting comfortably upon the rubble of our Democratic Republic and we can thank
the yankees of New England for it all. For it was their arrogant and open lust for more
wealth which caused them naturally to desire one all-powerful central government from
which they might extract special favor. Well-oiled lobbying has always been the favored
purview of moneyed urban bankers, merchants, and industrialists. All of which was warned
against by men like, Patrick Henry, John C. Calhoun, and George Washington, to name a few.
Is it any wonder that these great Americans are no longer studied in government schools?
Liberty is a fragile thing, and for it to flourish there must be
trust among citizens. Duty, honor, and fidelity must be aspired to by each person who
would claim the responsibility for tending liberty. I am afraid, to paraphrase John Taylor
of Caroline County Virginia, that we are living in a real tyranny with imagined liberties.
How sad.
So, if you believe that Mr. Lincoln saved anything, you must be a
yankee. It makes no difference where you’re from. If you are a parasite, always
demanding ever more government, you must be a yankee. If you refuse to take the
consequences of your own actions, you must be a yankee. You know who you are.
On the other hand, if you simply wish to be left alone to pursue
your own future and that of the welfare of your family and community, watch out –
you’ll be called a Rebel.
Back To
 |
