The first constitutions

[Darkcrusade]

The so -called Civil war--the South was not trying to invade the North. It was not a civil war. It hardly saved America. We are all slaves now.

Abraham Lincoln destroyed the Philosophical Union and imposed a Physical Union--Force over Reason--using bayonets and a train of usurpations worse than England's George III--the reason for seceding from England in the first place--and Lincoln UNDID Jefferson's works and thereby added teeth (an understatement) to Hamilton's Proto-Fascist national banking super state agenda.

They were both Revolutionary Wars. Re: the first War: The British are coming! Re: The second War: the British and their ways are already here with their Mercantilist agendas enforced by Abraham Lincoln's War of Northern Aggression.

Lincoln's 'Second American Revolution'
by Thomas J. DiLorenzo
http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo32.html


Freedom--from tyranny and its train of usurpations--is necessary and essential but not sufficient. See Thomas DiLorenzo's "How Capitalism Saved America" (now remnant thanks to the planks of Abraham Lincoln's Unnecessary War. It was also the bloodiest war in American History and waged on civilians and later on the Indians).

http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance90.html
Other entries:
http://www.google.com/custom?sa=Sear...http%3A%2F%2Fw...

The Southern cause was "NOT [just] close to being somewhat justified." It was right and completely justified.

Lincoln's stated purpose in the war was to destroy the principle of the Declaration of Independence that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. Southerners no longer consented to being governed by Washington, DC, so Lincoln waged total war against them for four long years. Of course, he didn't put it this way but instead sugarcoated his objective with language about "saving the Union." At the time many Americans — including dozens of Northern newspaper editors — considered the act of compelling a state to remain in the Union at gunpoint to be destructive of the voluntary union of the states. And they were right.

The Unknown Lincoln
by Thomas J. DiLorenzo
http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo26.html
Understanding the large body of knowledge that intellectuals Ayn Rand and Ludwig Von Mises and their students-- including the ground breaking work of Thomas Dilorenzo's, "The Real Lincoln", and Stephan Kinsella's illuminating work on CopyRight copywrongs and its co-destruction of a Division of Labor society--are essential to UN-Blinding what IS UnSeen and impossible to glean by just reading what one's masters write, teach and spread around.

Lysander Spooner, the author of the 1845 book, The Unconstitutionality of Slavery and a celebrated abolitionist, wrote in his 1870 essay, "No Treason," that "all these cries of having ‘abolished slavery,' of having ‘preserved the union,' of establishing a ‘government by consent,' and of ‘maintaining the national honor' are all gross, shameless, transparent cheats — so transparent that they ought to deceive no one." Thanks to 140 years of propaganda in the government schools, these "cheats" now appear to deceive nearly everyone.

Notes: Lysander Spooner who authored The Unconstitutionality of Slavery in 1845, ...
http://www.google.com/custom?hl=en&c...kwell.com/lewr...

War is hell for those who wish to secede from exploitative empires.

As soon as Gandhi began influencing millions of Indians, he and some 60,000 of his followers were imprisoned in 1930. This led Winston Churchill to declare that "Gandhi-ism and all it stands for [peaceful resistance to tyranny] will, sooner or later, have to be . . . crushed." "Gandhi had replaced Lenin as Churchill's arch nemesis," writes Baker.

A New Look at How Wold War II Happened
by Thomas J. DiLorenzo
http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo142.html
Sherman was every bit as much a racist and white supremacist as Lincoln. He was also an anti-Semite, and of course hated red-skinned people almost as much as he hated South Carolinians — and would later kill them in even greater numbers.

Slaves were raped, pillaged, and murdered indiscriminately along with the white population of the South, and Sherman did nothing to stop it. *This is documented*.

It has been claimed in print that Sherman was some kind of egalitarian who was motivated by indignation over the degree of racial inequality in the South. (Cisco proves what delusional liars such Lincoln (and Sherman) cultists as Victor Davis Hanson are in "Abuse of African-Americans" by Sherman's army in Cisco's final, stomach-turning chapter.

...The union of the founders was destroyed in 1865. War Crimes Against Southern Civilians explains in great detail how, in addition to killing some 300,000 dissenters to rule by Washington, D.C. on the battlefield, the U.S. Army, under the micromanagement of Abe Lincoln, also murdered tens of thousands of Southern civilians, including thousands of slaves and free blacks, while stealing tens of millions of dollars of their private possessions as well. None of it was necessary, of course, for the purpose of ending slavery; all other countries on earth ended slavery peacefully during the nineteenth century. This included the British, Spanish, French, Dutch, and Danish colonies, where 96 percent of all the slaves in the Western Hemisphere once existed. The purpose of the war was to finally realize the Hamiltonian dream of a consolidated, monopolistic government that would pursue what Hamilton himself called "national greatness" and "imperial glory." The purpose of the war, in other words, was a New Birth of Empire, one that would hopefully rival the Europeans in the exploitation of their own citizens in the name of the glory of the state.

Malice Toward All, Charity Toward None: The Foundations of the American State
by Thomas J. DiLorenzo
http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo123.html


This country cannot be fixed by "going back to the constitution" because:

1. Those in conflict cannot agree to which of the "constitutions" by date and amendment to "go back to."

2. The "constitution" itself was a counter revolution to the agreed government set up at the revolution. It thoroughly repudiates the 5 truths articulated in the Declaration of Independence as the causes and premises for the Declaration by declaring itself to be the "supreme" law/sacred text of the land. Thus creating itself as a "sovereign" with divine right to rule because its subjects have elected representatives to plead and petition the sovereign. The eventual corruption was systemic from the initiation as articulated by the "Anti-Federalists." They were right and the Federalists were wrong.

All that is going on today "politically" is a verbal religious war by different denominations who will eventually resort to coercive lethal force to make their interpretation of their version of made up law/sacred text paramount to all the others.

Is it time to change your religion?

http://www.lib.unc.edu/blogs/civilwa...d-progression/