Lincoln’s War

By: Ron Holland

America’s greatest tragedy, its economic causes and the 143 year cover-up of the real history about the war by Washington and GOP political establishments. This was an address given on March 22, 2003 by Ron Holland at the Lincoln Reconsidered Conference sponsored by

"The love of money” was at the root of Lincoln’s attempts to preserve the Union. – Charles Dickens

It is a pleasure to visit you here today in historic Richmond, Virginia the former capital of the Confederate States of America. I’m from North Carolina, which has also been in the news recently. I’m originally from Nash County where the tobacco farmer driving a tractor penetrated our “Homeland Defense” of the Washington Mall and held the Feds at bay for 4 days. Doesn’t say much for Homeland Security. North Carolina has also been in the news on Thursday as we just got back our copy of the original Bill of Rights stolen by Lincoln’s forces and lost for 138 years. Chalk up one for the FBI. Personally, the original copy is OK but wouldn’t it be great to see the federal government return to following original Bill of Rights when it comes to personal and civil liberties. Now, that NC has copy, maybe we should send it to Washington so they can take it look at it for a change. I fear the Washington politicians today have forgotten the Bill of Rights just like Lincoln did 143 years ago.

Walking around here yesterday I got the impression that the city has really gone down in the last 138 years since it was the capital of a new Confederate nation. Let us never forget that Virginians and Southerners defended this city, for almost 5 years of war, invasion and attempted subjugation and let us also never forget who we defended it from!

Now some people seem to think a statue of Abraham Lincoln would help tourism and revitalize the somewhat seedy downtown here, but I question this. I have a better suggestion, maybe we should again make it a national capital but then again looking at Washington, DC just 100 miles to the North, maybe this isn’t a good idea. Well I’ll let you in on a little secret, that Lincoln statue by "those people" as Robert E. Lee called our enemies is all about money, profits and economic power and maybe it is appropriate because that is really what Abraham Lincoln’s economic policies and his war were all about.

My home state, North Carolina, was also home to Carl Sandburg, the author of the famous or infamous Lincoln multi-volume biography written during the 1930’s and much of what the general public has come to falsely believe about Lincoln was from this questionable biography. He was appropriately enough a radical, socialist who was the secretary to the first Socialist mayor of Milwaukee from 1910 to 1912. In 1945, Mr. Sandburg ironically purchased the western North Carolina home of Christoph Memminger, the first Secretary of the Treasury of the Confederacy with the royalties from his Lincoln biography.

Jim Cullen wrote in The Civil War in Popular Culture, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington & London, 1995, on page 46 that the Sandburg series of Lincoln books were mostly propaganda with history reworked to justify FDR’s New Deal:

“This mythic hero

[Lincoln] is not a static figure carved in stone, however. He is wrought from a forge of urgency, even necessity. Positing a strong but humane Lincoln creates a useable precedent that paves the way for another leader to assume his mantle during another crisis. [Roosevelt]. The Great Depression becomes less menacing when juxtaposed with the Civil War, and the need for a strong leader become less menacing when the nation feels it survived one previously. This was the ‘cultural work’ Sandburg sought to perform in his Lincoln biography.

When I stand up here, I can’t help but think of ten year old, Stacy Wade Harris of Georgia who signed the We Say No To the Richmond Lincoln Statue Petition I posted on the web with these comments. “I am only 10 years old but I already feel like I’ve hated Abraham Lincoln for 110 years.” Stacy, sometimes I feel that way too but I’m not here to either talk about hate, revenge or to bring up the past about what happened 6 generations ago. I’m here to talk about Lincoln’s War the the economic causes for this, the greatest of American

There is still too much hate and division in the world today. Let me read to you an e-mail I received from Jon Frank, a newspaper reporter here in Virginia.

“Your time of controlling the south is long over and it would benefit all Americans if you would either cease and desist or leave for some other country more hospitable to your eccentric views. New Southerners, like myself and virtually everyone else I know, mock everything you do and are now in the majority. We no longer will tolerate your twisted thinking. Trent Lott’s fate is waiting you, so keep it up. I work at a newspaper and the kind of trash that you insist on promoting is simply laughed at by all who are even marginally reasonable in the newsroom. Lincoln already is in Richmond for all time and it is Jefferson Davis, Robert E. Lee and those other confederate fools who will slowly but surely be removed from view throughout the south..” – Jon Frank

Lincoln’s Economics, Policies, Tariffs & Commercial Interests Demanded War – This is what we are up against but the solution is education, honest history and the truth about Abraham Lincoln and his unnecessary war. I’m here to discuss the economic policies of Lincoln and his special interests and why and how this led to the tragedy of Lincoln’s terrible war.

Lincoln’s War sacrificed the lives of over 620,000 Americans, North and South, White, Black, Native American and recent immigrants. Who here has seen the Gods and Generals movie? Who could not be moved to tears watching the Irish immigrants who had already fought so long for independence and self-determination as the only colonial colony in Europe against the British Empire fighting now each other against the heights above Fredericksburg.

Let me ask you one question. How many of you in attendance here today have traveled from outside the old Confederacy? No stand up and lets give them a round of applause.

This is important because many of us here in the South wrongly consider Lincoln’s War and its aftermath as only Southern history, a Southern tragedy and part of only our heritage. Of course, we suffered more through the immediate aftermath of Reconstruction but that is minor compared to the other economic and political legacies of Lincoln we deal with daily throughout the entire United States. It is American history and an American tragedy of unparalled proportions where these United States with state sovereignty and the right of secession as a final defense against and limitation on the federal government became the United States. Where the constitutional republic with limited powers paid for with the blood of thousands of American patriots was exchanged for the beginnings of an empire, an imperial presidency and the useless federal bureaucracy we all live under today.

Over 6 generations have passed since this war but its far more than just a Southern tragedy or even an American tragedy. It was and continues to be a tragedy for world civilization. Back when the Soviet Union was breaking up Mikhail Gorbachev indicated that he would use force to stop the secession and peaceful independence of occupied republics and his excuse was none other than the actions of Abraham Lincoln.

In 1999, the Chinese Premier told President Clinton that it had the right to use force to hold China together and to go to war to conquer its break away province of Taiwan, again Lincoln’s War was the stated reason. Luckily, neither the Soviet Union, nor China have yet chosen to follow the horrendous example of Abraham Lincoln.

Back in 1931, H.L. Mencken, the most prominent newspaperman, book reviewer, and political commentator of the day wrote: “Lincoln has become one of our national deities and a realistic examination of him is no longer possible.” Mr. Mencken died in 1956 and I believe he is smiling down or (depending on your view of Mencken) up on us here today as we prove him wrong. Thanks to many brave historians and economists willing to tell the truth at some cost to their careers and social acceptance, and the courageous Lew Rockwell and his and the Mises Institute, we are here today in Richmond, Virginia to begin the work of tearing down a false God of the Washington elites and to educate the public about the real Abraham Lincoln and what he did to our Republic, the Constitution and our country.

First of all Lincoln had no personal economic policy or agenda, as after all he was a politician much like our politicians today. Politicians and elected officials represent vested interests, certain industries, etc. which provide the majority of campaign contributions. Do you really think presidential candidates like John Edwards from NC, Bill Clinton, George Bush, Al Gore have personal economic policies, no. But their campaign supporters and special interests contributors do and this out of necessity and election needs becomes their policy.

Lincoln’s economics and politics are very much intertwined just like today’s political environment. When running as a Whig candidate for the Illinois legislature in 1832 . Lincoln stated, “I presume you all know who I am. I am humble Abraham Lincoln. I have been solicited by many friends to become a candidate for the legislature. My politics are short and sweet, like an old woman’s dance. I am in favor of a national bank…In favor of the internal improvements system and a high protective tariff.”

He never changed positions over the 28-year period from then until he was elected President of the United States and he sure didn’t change then. Lincoln’s War is the result of his dedication to the special interests that supported him throughout his long career. His statement above was the Whig Party’s platform and agenda – protectionism through tariffs, government control of the money supply by a nationalized banking system and government subsidies for commercial interests including the railroad, shipping and canal building, what they called “internal improvements”. In 1859, as a Republican. Lincoln indicated he was “always a Whig in politics”. This was in effect, Henry Clay’s American System also called mercantilism.

The famous Lincoln/Douglas debates clearly showed the difference between the mercantilism of a consolidated government and the confederacy of sovereign and equal states as expressed by Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson. Douglas said it best, “Lincoln goes for consolidation and uniformity in our government while I go for maintaining the confederation of the sovereign states.” A confederation of sovereign states was the national government instituted by America’s founding fathers and this was destroyed by Lincoln’s War. .

My favorite description of Lincoln and his views is by Murray Rothbard, the noted libertarian author, economist and freedom philosopher whose books on Austrian economics and liberty most impacted me when I was in college back in the early 1970’s. If you can only read one book on the American Revolution, read his 4 volume "Conceived in Liberty" series and you’ll be glad you did. Quoting Murray, “Lincoln was a master politician, which means that he was a consummate conniver, manipulator and liar.” This is from his “America’s Two Just Wars: 1776 and 1861.” Need I say more. This aside guess where this giant of freedom, but short of statue Jewish New Yorker is buried, here in Virginia. And guess which flag of freedom flies daily over the graves of he and his sweet wife, Jo Ann, The Third National Flag of the Confederacy. For more information in addition to the photo at the right, Click To: A Tribute to Murray Rothbard,

Rothbard defined mercantilism as a “a system of statism which employed economic fallacy to build up a structure of imperial state power, as well as special subsidy and monopolistic privilege to individuals or groups favored by the state.“

Tom Dilorenzo writes, in the Real Lincoln: “More specifically, protectionism (legal protection from international competition through trade tariffs and quotas) was a means by which a government could dispense favors to well-connected (and well-financed) special interest groups, which in turn provided financial and other support for politicians dispensing the favors. It benefits both those industries that are protected from competition and the politicians, but it harms everyone else.”

Now for those of us who aren’t economists what does this really mean? Its corporate welfare and the buying votes of special interests which use the voting booth as a way to steal wealth rather than working or producing it. This is why the multitudes of lobbyists and lawyers inhabit the regions around Washington, DC today like so many scavengers. This is the United States congress and special interests today in the 21st century.

What was nationalized banking that Lincoln favored? It was really little more than a belief that the government should print paper money in order to help finance the politician’s subsidies and special-interests. It’s a way to hide payoffs instead of raising taxes. How much gold backs the Washington dollar today? Does anybody know. None! We are purely on a paper money standard controlled by the Federal Reserve system.

Now we go to the third of Lincoln’s economic programs, protectionism through high protective tariffs. The transfer of tariff revenues predominately paid for by Southern imports to special interests like Lincoln’s railroad interests supporters and other Northern “internal improvements” and of course the prohibitive tariffs meant that Southerners would buy Northern products rather than imports when possible at the highest possible price.

So here we have Lincoln’s economic and political agenda. A national bank, (paper money), an internal improvements system, (corporate welfare) and a high protective tariff, (meaning the South would purchase Northern goods and pay most of the taxes for the federal government). Remember in 1860, over 80% of total federal government revenue was paid by the people of the South.

A Tragic War To Guarantee Northern Corporate Profits, Tariffs, Taxes & Corporate Welfare Paid By the South – So how did we get from here to a war that costs the lives of 620,000 Americans? Its really quite interesting and not particularly complicated.

First let’s set the stage by looking the regional differences. These United States evolved quite differently from independence back in 1787. Over the period, the North developed a large and very extensive manufacturing economy and to promote profits and defend its industry from competition they favored a protective tariff and the higher the better. This was in direct opposition to a primarily agricultural and agrarian South. Since we didn’t have much manufacturing capacity we consumed large quantities of imports.

Charles Adams states the case better in his book “When in the Course of Human Events” on page 90: “When the new nation began, there had been few manufacturers. Import duties fell evenly among the states. But manufacturing got started after the War of 1812, and a modest protective tariff seemed to be in everyone’s interest for the infant industries. But by 1828 the protective tariff had become a prohibitive tariff, and it provided fat profits to manufacturing interests in the North that really didn’t need to be protected anymore. The tariffs turned into “a system that compelled it [the South] to pay a heavy fine into the pockets of Northern manufacturers. Southern ships that carried cotton and tobacco to Europe were paid by an ‘exchange of commodities,’ that is, European manufactured goods that now had a high tariff charge, thus draining money from the pockets of the people in the South into the federal Treasury, which the people of the North were not paying – a tax lacking in uniformity or equality in the nation, an unconstitutional tax for certain.”

Southerners had been protesting the protectionist tariffs since 1824, as we paid the majority of the tariff taxes because we had to import goods. There was no income tax and more than 80% of all government revenue came from tariffs and most of this went to improvements and special interests in the North. Also remember that in 1860, almost 75% of total exports from the United States, came from the South. So you see the horrible bind the South was in at the hands of the North, the federal government and Lincoln’s Republican Party.

In 1861, English author Charles Dickens of “A Christmas Carol” and Ebenezer Scrooge” fame, a man often considered the leading man of English letters for the past two centuries, wrote the following about the war: “The conflict is between semi-independent communities,” he said, in which “every feeling and interest on the one side [the South] calls for political partition, and every pocket interest [the North] calls on the other side for union.” “So the case stands, and under all the passion of the parties and the cries of battle lie the two chief moving causes of the struggle. Union means so many millions a year lost to the South; secession means the loss of the same millions to the North. The love of money is the root of this as of many other evils.” He ended with the follow phrase: “the quarrel between North and South is, as it stands, solely a fiscal quarrel.”

The well known Dickens biographer, Peter Ackroyd: “The Northern onslaught upon slavery was no more than a piece of specious humbug designed to conceal its desire for economic control of the Southern states.” I somewhat disagree because the North already had effect economic control over the South, the war was fought to maintain that economic control, Northern manufacturing profits and tariff revenues.

Now the looting expedition of Dixie would have continued by tariffs and democratic means without Lincoln’s war to prevent Southern independence because by 1860, the North had the electoral power to pass legislation without the need of any Southern support. The South abused by the tariffs now lay politically defenseless and prostrate without any means to defend itself in Congress. Under Lincoln the Northern majority control tariffs changed from being primarily a legitimate source of revenue to fund government into where powerful vested interests use government tax policy in order to loot less connected sectors of the economy – just like today. The Northern commercial interests prepared to loot a region where as today powerful special interest groups use the vote to loot other more productive but less numerous special interest groups through income tax, regulations and deductions.

This is clearly shown by the confiscatory, Morrill Tariff, passed in the House of Representatives during the 1859-60 secession. When Lincoln’s Republican Party gained control of the Senate the following year, it passed. So the South began its only real course of action left open, to secede peacefully as most in the South and many in the North felt was their right and obligation. Just as the states had originally gone into the voluntary union through State conventions, the states pulled out, one by one.

At first there was wide spread support even in the North for peaceful, democratic secession.

Quoting from Tom Dilorenzo’s, The Real Lincoln, on page 107, here are just a few of the newspaper editorials supporting the South:

Albany, NY – “We sympathize with and justify the South because their rights have been invaded to the extreme. If they wish to secede, we would wish them God-Speed.”

Davenport Iowa Paper – “The leading and most influential papers of the union believe that any State of the Union has a right to secede.”

Providence RI paper – “Sovereignty’ necessarily includes what we call the ‘right of secession.’ This right must be maintained lest we establish a ‘colossal despotism’ against which the founding fathers ‘ uttered their solemn warnings.”

Cincinnati Daily Press – “We believe the right of any member of this Confederacy to dissolve its political relations with the others and assume an independent position is absolute.”

New York Tribune – “If tyranny and despotism justified the Revolution of 1776, then we do not see why it would not justify the secession of Five Millions of Southrons from the Federal Union in 1861.

New York Journal of Commerce – “Opposing secession changes the nature of government’ from a voluntary one, in which the people are sovereigns, to a despotism where one part of the people are slaves.”

One of the earliest newspapers to realize what Southern free ports would do to Northern commerce was the Chicago Daily Times. Quoting from a December 10, 1860 edition:

“In one single blow our foreign commerce must be reduced to less than one-half what it is now. Our coastwise trade would pass into other hands. One-half of our shipping would lie idle at our wharves. We should lose our trade with the South, with all of its immense profits. Our manufacturers would be in utter ruins. Let the South adopt the free-trade system, or that of a tariff for revenue, and these results would likely follow.” From Adams page 23

Understand this December editorial took place three months before Lincoln’s Morrill Tariff – not a revenue tariff but a prohibition tariff designed to keep a wide range of foreign good out of the United States. This was prior to any secession, the Confederacy, and of course no independent South was a free trade or low tariff zone.

Lincoln’s Bottom Line: War At Any Price! – Now lets move forward to March 2, 1861. The New York Evening Post editorial entitled “What Shall Be Done For A Revenue”: That either the revenue from duties must be collected in the ports of the rebel states, or the port must be closed to importations from abroad, is generally admitted. If neither of these things be done, our revenue laws are substantially repealed; the sources which supply our treasury will be dried up; we shall have no money to carry on the government; the nation will become bankrupt before the next crop of corn is ripe. There will be nothing to furnish means of subsistence to the army; nothing to keep our navy afloat; nothing to pay the salaries of public officers; the present order of things must come to a dead stop.”

In other words, if they couldn’t continue to unconstitutionally tax and plunder the citizens of the South, then what would they do? The Northern commercial profits, corporate welfare through internal improvements and the federal government revenue had been based upon the rape of the Southern people through tariffs since 1824. There was no apparent thought to lower tariffs to compete with a low tariff Confederacy, or maybe to lower profits in order to interest Southerners in buying manufactured goods from up North. Their fear was lower taxes and tariffs and that the South would actually decide to buy goods which were fairly priced from Europe rather than the overpriced monopoly of the past Northern goods.

No, the answer was to provoke an incident and the South obliged them at Fort Sumter. This was nothing more than an early variation of the faked Gulf of Tonkin attack, which brought the US into the Vietnam War. Or like Hitler, when he invaded Poland in 1939, using Nazi prisoners dressed as Polish soldiers and claimed they started the war by attacking a German radio station on the border.

Many will say, this might well have happened 140 years but not today. These things don’t happen anymore with our government. Since we are now going to war against Iraq, let’s compare the similarities in the reasons for Lincoln’s War and our first war against Iraq written by Charles Adams in When In the Course of Human Events.

Throughout history most wars have included economic factors as well as armies and navies. Imperialism usually ends with colonies being exploited by the conquerors. There is an analogy between the Gulf War of 1991- 1992 and the American Civil War with respect to the motive for invasion. Saddam Hussein had seized Kuwait under some claim of legitimacy, but this gave him control over much of the Middle Eastern oil, and his armies could easily keep going and take over the other oil-producing nations in the Arabian Peninsula. This, so the leaders of the West believed, could strangle the business and commerce of all Western oil-consuming nations. The horror story that the North used to justify its war against the South was also used to justify the Gulf War. Economic catastrophe was in the making. War was the solution in both instances, and war put an end to the threat, whether real or imaginary.”

Although the only causality at Ft Sumter was a horse, the Northern newspapers which so favored peaceful co-existence with an independent South and the right of secession just a few months before turned on a dime in calling for war, invasion and the collection of tariffs regardless of the price or war. Northern industry and the special interests behind Lincoln were not willing to shoulder their fair share of tax revenues or limit corporate profits in order to compete peacefully in a free-market, free-trade environment with the Confederate States of America. It was war at any price in order to safeguard Northern profits, monopolies, and tariff revenues. Not a pretty picture really and no wonder it has been covered up.

Now this was over 140 years ago so let me use a modern day example or analogy to further clarify the situation at the time. Today tariffs aren’t a major source of government revenue, as we all know too well its personal and corporate income tax receipts. Now imagine the situation if state after state here in the South suddenly passed legislation limiting the payment of individual federal income tax to 5% as well as our corporate taxes to maybe 5%. Second, let’s say because of this, the entrepreneurs in the automobile industry, and other major industries as well as the financial, banking and Wall Street all decided to reincorporate or start businesses here in the South. This could bankrupt many of the industries and the federal government.

There would only be two choices open to the federal government politicians who except for the brief period of 1861to 1865 have always maintained a permanent monopoly on tax revenues. Either they meet our low tax rates and compete in a peaceful free-market which would mean a drastic cut in government revenue, power and special interest benefits. Or suffer financial losses, corporate and national bankruptcy Not a likely scenario. Or trump up some fake reasons to go to war and attempt to destroy the competitor. This is what happened in a nutshell. This is the economic backdrop of Lincoln’s War.

This was when taxes degenerated from being primarily government revenue sources to strictly plunder used by the politicians in power to benefit and support their loyal special interests. While the war and tariff were first clumsily directed against an entire region, today our politicians have learned there are easier ways to plunder than geographical and this has been to plunder and steal from individual groups through tax incentives, deductions and the graduated income tax. Thus by attacking classes and groups one at a time all across the nation with this regulation, tax or incentive, the other, the citizens might whine and complain but they don’t organize geographically and attempt to leave the Union. Still the process is the same, revenue increases and opposition is muffled.

The 138 Year Cover-up of the Terrible, Criminal Truth & Economic Reasons For Lincoln’s War – So many ask, “why the continual lies about Lincoln, the cover-up about his war, the economic & commercial interests, manufacturing, and the entire Northeastern business and newspaper establishment that has continued for 138 long years? The reason is simple but troubling. The truth and an honest history of Lincoln’s War is so terrible, despicable and criminal that it has been hidden for 138 years.

The losses from Lincoln’s War in terms of causalities and property were so great and so destructive, not to mention the change in federal government structure and by ending the former secession and state sovereignty limitations on its growth and power, that the horrible truth had to be hidden from view then and still continues to this day.

This cover-up started not to hide the reasons for the war from Southerners who were after all a defeated people and nation suffering under the military rule of Reconstruction. But to hide the truth about Lincoln, the Republican Party in power at the time and his war from the brave soldiers and widows and families of the Union Army.

The irony is Southerners knew what they were fighting for. In the final analysis, Southerners of all races fought like every people invaded by a hostile foreign power to defend themselves, their families, their homes and private property. Yes, the usual grand arguments of defending the Constitution, state sovereignty, Southern independence, rang true to an extent. But as the story goes, when a Northern soldier asked the Confederate, “why are you fighting me, the Confederate answered because you are down here on my land”.

What would the Republican Party politicians say to Union soldiers and families who lost over 320,000 causalities about the truth of the war. Could they say that they had fought, became crippled or died for tariffs and taxes? That they sacrificed their lives and those of their loved ones for continued profits of commercial interests, the railroads, the politicians and the news papers at the national and state level. That rather than freely compete with a free trade or low tariff South and suffer financial loss, that the captains of industry decided not to fight themselves or compete but rather to send hundreds of thousands of brave Union soldiers to their deaths over tax revenue, commercial profits, increased government power, control and tyranny.

Quoting from the governor of Illinois, Lincoln’s home state just before the wars end on January 2, 1865. Governor Richard Yates said: “The war…has tended, more than any other event in the history of the country to militate against the Jeffersonian idea, that ‘the best government is that which governs least’.

Now in defense of the Northern interests and even Lincoln himself, the price was unexpectedly high and no one in big business, or Lincoln ever dreamed the Union victory and the tariff profits and protection would come at such high a price. No people, no nation, no citizenry with the right of voting and arms would ever suffer such an affront all for taxes and commercial interests.

From the victors point of view and their commercial interests and politicians, the truth had to be hidden away with cover-up and propaganda by sell-out historians on the government dole or special interests payroll whose job like Carl Sandberg’s was to whitewash and rewrite history. These lies and propaganda still continues to this day. In my opinion, this is why we are all here today, for closure, for an honest history and to learn how this happened and to assure that in the United States, this kind of presidential and special interest tyranny never happens again. Our Jewish friends often say never again when it comes to the horrible Nazi holocaust and of course they are right. I think it is time for us here in the United States, to tell the truth about our history so we too can say for all the world to hear, never again.

How To Liberate the South & All of the USA From the Lies About Lincoln and His War – In conclusion, I hope this will cause each of you to take the time to explore more details about the economic factors and Lincoln’s policies which led up to Lincoln’s War. Although there have been between 50,000 and 70,000 books and articles written on the war, your best sources for truth rather than propaganda can be found in four books. I suggest The Real Lincoln: A New Look At Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War by Tom Dilorenzo, When In the Course of Human Events by Charles Adams, Emancipating Slaves, Enslaving Free Men by Jeffrey Rogers Hummel and Secession, State & Liberty edited by David Gordon of the Mises Institute. I believe all the books are on sale here at the Mises table and the Ludwig von Mises Institute Online Store.

On a personal note, I believe most of the attendees here today and all of the speakers probably share my support and solidarity with people of Virginia in opposition to the proposed Lincoln Statue. Maybe the statue will go up for a while but my prayer is that this conference will mark the beginning of a new understanding and educational outreach program about Lincoln and the war, where America went wrong and how we exchanged our Republic with state sovereignty and limited powers for a powerful unchecked federal government at home and an empire abroad.

Many will say, as H L Mencken did back in 1931 that it’s too late to get the truth out but your attendance at this conference today proves Mencken wrong. And speaking of solidarity, who can forget back in 1980 Lech Walesa took on the communist leaders of Poland and their efforts led to by 1989, independence for Poland and eventual freedom for the entire Soviet Block nations and the end of communism in the former Soviet Union.

Yes, we are taking on a powerful, flawed American icon, 143 years of lies and propaganda about the greatest American tragedy and holocaust. But I’ll close with a quote by Robert E. Lee, “A nation which does not remember what it was yesterday does not know where it is today.” Our nation needs to learn where we are today, how we got here and how to get back to the Republic with limited government we had before Lincoln’s War. Today we take the first step in learning how we got here. My final quote is by a contemporary of Walesa, Vaclav Havel, Czech playwright and former president of the Czech Republic.

"He who fears his own past must necessarily fear what lies before him. Lying can never save us from the lie. Falsifiers of history do not safeguard freedom but imperil it. Truth liberates man from fear."

Let us begin today to liberate the South and all of America from the lies about Lincoln and his war.

Thank you.
Ron Holland, Editor
Dixie Daily News

Ron Holland is a freedom oriented investment and political writer and speaker. He is the author of 2 books and over 60 special reports and articles. He characterizes himself as free-market, anti-Washington and pro South as well as an advocate for maximum liberty and minimum government. He is the Editor of Dixie Daily News and Ron is now constructing a new online journal of articles and research called The Secession Journal. This is an internet publication and website dedicated to the resurrection of the educational, philosophical, economic and political use of secession at the national, state and local levels, state sovereignty and a return to the original American Republic. His e-mail is

Originally Published at: