What Does The Stars and Bars Represent?

A REDNECK’S GUIDE TO REVERSING THEIR CONTROL OF YOUR BRAIN

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.

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 humility 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, 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.

These 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

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?

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

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.

Today 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

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.

The 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: 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.

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

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 Hazard 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.”

The politically correct “morons” have taken this way to 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…

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 Empirical 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

Why The Civil War Was Not About Slavery

Filed under: B’Man’s Rants, Big Media, Crazies, Dissent, Politics, Real History, Southeast USA, Video Tagged: Abraham Lincoln, Augureye Express, Barack Obama, Ben Jones, Charles Burris, Chautauqua, Civil War, Clyde Wilson, Confederacy, Confederate flag, Cooter, DC Dave, Donald W. Livingston, Dylann Storm Roof, Federal Government, H. L. Mencken, heritage not hate, James W. King, Lew Rockwell, Michael Hoffman, rebel flag, secession, Stars and Bars, The Dukes of Hazard, The Union, Thomas DiLorenzo, Yankees