DIXIE HERITAGE NEWS – 11/1/2019
PROBABLY NEVER COMING BACK
Now that the Tennessee Supreme Court has avoided its Constitutional duty, the nonprofit that “owns” the Confederate monuments removed from Memphis’ parks, Memphis Greenspace, will be able to act with impunity.
While they’re not sure, we suspect they are trying to sell the statues as I type. Whoever they sell to, will no doubt have to promise that they will never be returned to Shelby County.
“Whomever takes the monuments, our restriction would be that the monuments can never cross Shelby County lines ever again and come back into this community, and this restriction would have to travel with the monuments,” Van Turner with Memphis Greenspace said.
Memphis Greenspace still has to finalize a lawsuit in local court with the surviving family of Forest, whose remains are still at Health Sciences Park. “We will respect the wishes of the current family members,” Turner said. “All of that will have to be worked out in the local lawsuit pending in chancery court, and I think we’re up for it.”
KENTUCKY CHURCH TO REMOVE MONUMENT
The Presbyterian Church of Danville has decided to remove a statue of a Confederate soldier, “Captain Logan,” off their property.
The statue was placed on the property in 1910 by the United Daughters of the Confederacy and the Sons of Confederate Veterans. Back then the land was owned by the city of Danville, but now it’s private property owned by the church.
The church says the decision was made because they want to be more “welcoming towards everyone.”
The church says they are raising the money to have the monument removed solely through donations.
A date has not been set when it will be removed.
MORE HUBABALOO IN FLORIDA
A small group of “protestors” were bussed in Thursday evening to protest the Confederate statue that’s coming to Tavares (Lake County).
Those who oppose the statue have promised to keep staging these “protests” until the statue’s planned arrival in 2020.
PITTSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA DRAMA CONTINUES
The Winnie Davis Chapter of the United Daughters of the Confederacy along with Chatham County residents Barbara Pugh, Gene Brooks and Thomas Clegg have filed another suit to halt Chatham County’s plans to remove a Confederate monument outside the county courthouse.
Surprisingly, Judge Charles M. “Casey” Viseron ordered the County to temporarily halt its plan to remove the Confederate statue from the grounds of the historic courthouse in Pittsboro.
The Judge also ordered the UDC to post a $6,000 bond by noon today to cover the 10-day restraining order .
BELLINGHAM, WASHINGTON TO REMOVE LANDMARK MONUMENT
The Pickett Bridge may soon no longer bear the name of the Confederate General who built it thanks to a recommendation from the Bellingham Historic Preservation Commission.
The City Council is expected to take up the Commission’s recommendations later this year to remove General Pickett’s name and the 1920s bronze plaque honoring him that’s on the bridge.
However, a new name for the bridge isn’t going before the City Council.
Long before the War Between the States, Capt. George E. Pickett was a U.S. Army officer who built Fort Bellingham in the 1850s and supervised the construction of the bridge across Whatcom Creek. He was also instrumental in securing the San Juan Islands for the U.S.
Pickett left the Bellingham, Washington area in 1861 to fight for his home state of Virginia where he gained fame for the failed Pickett’s Charge at the Battle of Gettysburg.
NON-HERITAGE NEWS AFFECTING THE SOUTHLAND:
What do Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Bill Clinton, and Al Gore all have in common? They are all professing Christians whose children have married Jewish persons and converted to Judaism.
SPEAKING OF TRUMP
During game 5 of the World Series President Trump was booed loudly by the fans at Nats Park when he was shown on the Jumbotron. Then came a loud chant: “Lock him up.”
ALSO IN D.C.
Eric Trump told the Wall Street Journal that the President’s family business is exploring the sale of its Washington, D.C. hotel over ongoing ethics complaints.
THE WRONG DEMOCRATS ARE TRENDING
So the Democratic National Committee has raised the polling and fundraising thresholds for the sixth presidential primary debate to be hosted by PBS and Politico at UCLA on December 19. To qualify, candidates will need a minimum of 200,000 unique campaign donors, and meet one of two polling thresholds. This is basically the Party bosses doing what they can to manipulate the primary and force out candidates, like Tulsi Gabbard, who they do not want to win.
BERNIE ANNOUNCES BIG PLAN
Under the 2020 candidate’s policy, marijuana would be decriminalized, past convictions will be expunged, Big Tobacco would be shut out of the industry, and more.
AND ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST
Tim Ryan drops out of 2020 presidential race. “After seven long months of hard work, I will be returning home to my family and friends and community in Ohio to run for reelection for my congressional seat,” Ryan said.
DEMOCRAT KATIE HILL RESIGNS FROM CONGRESS
California’s first openly “bi-sexual” Congresswoman resigns her seat amid allegations of improper relationships with staffers. On Sunday, Hill announced that she would resign from Congress amid an ethics investigation.
OH RUDY SAY ITS JUST MORE FAKE NEWS
Rudy Giuliani is reported to have butt-dialed NBC News reporter Rich Shapiro not once but TWICE? He is reported to leave long voicemail messages in which he’s heard discussing Joe Biden, business in Bahrain and his need for cash.
ONE MORE REASON NOT TO FLY SOUTHWEST
BBC is reporting that Southwest Airlines pilots “livestreamed the plane toilet on hidden camera.” The airline replied saying the incident was “an inappropriate attempt at humor.”
THE “SOCIAL JUSTICE” MOVEMENT IN THIS COUNTRY IS MADE IN RED CHINA
Al Benson, Jr. , is the Editor-in-Chief of The Copperhead Chronicle .
He is also a regular feature writer for The Southern Patriot , The Dixie Heritage Letter , and other pro-Southern publications.
He is a proud member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, the Confederate Society of America, and the League of the South.
Awhile back New American magazine’s Alex Newman, did an exclusive interview with Professor Michael Rectenwald of New York University. Professor Rectenwald has been an informed critic of what is called today the “social justice movement” in this country. He has written books about it, apparently to the disgust of some of his colleagues–to the point where Professor Rectenwald has filed a defamation lawsuit not only against NYU but also against four of its professors. Rectenwald is known for his criticism of “social justice” and political correctness–not traits that exactly endear him to the socialist milieu present on most college campuses in our day.
A brief article about Alex Newman’s interview was on the LRC Blog for October 12, 2019 under the title Cultural Maoism. The article, by Charles Burris, noted that “Professor Rectenwald highlights the enormous danger that the so-called ‘social justice’ movement poses to freedom and civilization. This ideology of tyranny is now being taught to American students at schools and universities, threatening everything good. Rectenwald also discusses the hidden history of this dangerous movement.”
Continuing, he noted: “Here is an excellent article on the Chinese Cultural Revolution from the mid 1960s to the mid 1970s. I have ironically been thinking about this subject over the past couple days in regards to the continuing escalating violence and dangerous inflammatory rhetoric directed at President Trump by the left, both within the institutional mainstream regime media and entertainment industries, as well as on and off university campuses in the militant street brigades of Antifa or Black Lives Matter. I think that the term ‘cultural Marxism’ has become obsolete and should consciously and repeatedly be replaced with ‘cultural Maoism,’ stressing the repressive puritanical nature of these ideological thugs. Cultural Maoists are the savage equivalent of ISIS in seeking their apocalyptic death wish of destruction of the past (think about the widespread nation-wide campaigns against anything relating to the Southern Confederacy or what they describe as ‘white privilege’)”
Rectenwald may well have a point. Cultural Maoism way well be descriptive of what goes on in this country today with these “social justice” groups. Certainly much of what is currently taking place here does hark back to what happened in Red China during the Cultural Revolution.
Philip Jenkins did an article in The American Conservative on June 28, 2017 called So You Want a Cultural Revolution? Jenkins observed: “Horrified byo images of American students shouting down and visibly attacking speakers on their campuses, some commentators have reasonably invoked memories of the Chinese Cultural Revolution.
The problem with that analogy is that it is simply lost on most readers, including more younger than middle age.” In other words, if you are younger than middle age you have never been taught about any of this. Your “educational institutions” have just dispensed with all of this, most especially if it made any communist country, like China, look bad.
Jenkins continued: “So what exactly was this ‘Cultural Revolution’ thing anyway? The U.S. media does a wonderful job of recalling atrocities that they can associate with the Right, while far worse horrors stemming from the Left vanish into oblivion. In reality, not only does the Cultural Revolution demand to be remembered and commemorated, it also offers precious lessons about the nature of violence, and the perils of mob rule. In 2019, Communist China will celebrate its seventieth anniversary, and in that short time it has been responsible for no fewer than three of the worse acts of mass carnage in human history…” But, as these occurred in a communist country, the “news” media does not deem them worth the mention. If you could even say that our news media in this country, as least most of it, was up to the level of being utterly corrupt, up to the level of even being bought and paid for journalistic prostitutes, you would be paying them a complement! They don’t even begin to measure up to that “lofty” standard!
Jenkins starts to close his article with this: “Presently, our own neo-Cultural Revolutionaries are limited in what they can achieve, because even the most inept campus police forces enforce some restraints. If you want to see what those radicals could do, were those limitations ever removed, then you need only look at China half a century ago. And if anyone ever tells you what a wonderful system Communism could be were it not for the bureaucracies that smothered the effervescent will of an insurgent people, then just point them to that same awful era of Chinese history.”
Even Wikipedia had a brief article on this, relating to the Red Guards. It stated: “Red Guards were a mass student-led paramilitary social movement mobilized and guided by Chairman Mao Zedong in 1966 and 1967, during the first phase of the Chinese Cultural Revolution, which he had instituted.” So dear old, lovable Mao, that grand old man of agrarian reformers, turned his bloody carnage loose on his own people!
Now those in our own country who deify the likes of Chairman Mao are trying to do exactly the same thing to us. It would seem that our “social justice” warriors are little more than the spiritual descendants of Mao’s Red Guard–and if some of them were honest enough about their agenda for us, they would be glad to admit as much, but they can’t, not quite yet, lest they give the game away too soon.
WHY ARE SO MANY BIG-CITY COPS MURDERING AMERICAN CITIZENS?
Dr. Chuck Baldwin is a pastor in Montana. Additionally, he is a syndicated columnist and the radio host of the daily show Chuck Baldwin Live.
In 2004 he ran for Vice-President of the United States. In 2008 and 2012 he ran for President. All three times he was nominated by the Constitution Party. In the late 1970’s – 1980’s he was a leader in the Moral Majority.
Well, it happened again. No sooner had one Texas police officer been convicted of murdering an innocent citizen in his own home than it happened again. The police officer just convicted was a Dallas policewoman; this latest police officer, who is now charged with murdering an innocent citizen—once again, in her own home—was a Fort Worth policeman. Why are so many big-city cops murdering American citizens?
Before we go on, the Dallas policewoman who murdered an innocent man in his own home was sentenced to ten years in prison. TEN YEARS FOR MURDER! There are thousands of people in prison who have been sentenced to that length of prison time for tax evasion. Ask yourself: If you walked into another person’s home and shot and killed the resident, how many years do you think you would be serving? Most of us would be serving 25 years to life for the very same crime that this policewoman committed. But, because she was a policewoman, she received a sentence of only ten years. Talk about a miscarriage of justice!
Continuing, I think that it’s important to distinguish big-city police officers from those in small and mid-size communities, which are the vast majority of peace officers in the country. It is rare to hear of small-town cops being involved in suspicious—or outright murderous—shootings. I don’t think that’s a coincidence.
In rural or small-town America, police officers tend to be more connected to the people, more supportive of the Constitution and Bill of Rights and less inclined to be trigger-happy. That’s why when we look at national averages we rightly observe that most police officers are good-hearted, liberty-loving and peaceful. However, when we add big-city cops to the equation, we get a much different picture.
It would be easy at this point to excuse the increasing trigger-happy tendencies of big-city cops by saying they deal with more violent criminals than officers in small towns. But how does that change the Constitution? How does that change the sworn duty of police officers to uphold the rule of law? How does that change the Natural Law given to every human being that instinctively respects the life and liberties of our fellow man? Plus, the size of the various police agencies is directly commensurate to the size of the general population. In fact, in many cases, small-town police officers will be assigned to cover a much larger geographical area (thus dealing with potential violent situations all by themselves much more frequently than big-city cops, who are rarely alone) and overall population than their big-city counterparts.
Furthermore, the amount of crime per population is generally consistent nationwide—with the glaring exception that communities with strict gun control tend to have much higher amounts of violent crime. So, why are so many big-city cops murdering American citizens?
The story in Fort Worth is the case of police officers being called by a concerned neighbor regarding the welfare of a lady who the neighbor observed had an outside door ajar (but the storm door was closed) late at night. The neighbor simply asked the police department to check on her to make sure she was alright. Sounds simple and reasonable, right? Not these days.
Instead of knocking on the door to see if the homeowner was okay, a Fort Worth police officer who responded to the call started circling the house with a flashlight and looking in the windows. Hearing and seeing someone prowling around the backyard in the middle of the night, the homeowner—a 28-year-old black lady who was playing video games with her 8-year-old nephew—went to the window to see what was going on. When she did, the police officer screamed out, “Put your hands up! Show me your hands!” At the same moment, he shot the woman through the window and killed her in front of the 8-year-old. He never once identified himself as a police officer. Yep! The officer was white. Egad! Again!
The neighbor lamented, “If I had never dialed the police department, she’d still be alive.”
Immediately following the killing, the Fort Worth Police Department released a photo of a firearm in the bedroom where the woman was killed. Many people saw this as an attempt to justify the shooting. (Remember, Texas is known to be a “gun-friendly” State. Obviously, the woman had every right to have a gun in her home and to have that gun on her person when she realized there was a prowler outside her window in the middle of the night. But, once again, this is a big-city police department we are talking about.) However, the details of the shooting clearly showed that NOTHING justified the shooting, and the officer was rightly charged with murder.
How could this happen? The bigger question is: How can things like this CONTINUE to happen?
Almost 1,000 people are shot and killed by police officers each year. Over 4,600 people have been killed by policemen since January 1, 2015. So far this year (as of October 14), 709 people have been killed by law enforcement officers. To be sure, most of these shootings are no doubt justified. But the stark reality (a reality that most Americans are unwilling to accept) is that a sizeable percentage—and a growing percentage—of these shootings are extremely suspicious, and in some cases, trigger-happy police officers literally got by with murder.
While police shootings have escalated exponentially over the past few decades, violent crime itself is at its lowest point in decades. This disparity should not exist. Something is wrong!
Police departments and district attorneys are often extremely hesitant to charge police officers with crimes and, in fact, often allow dishonest officers to stay on the job. And juries are extremely hesitant to convict police officers. Sadly, too, the police officers themselves are oftentimes unwilling to reveal the crimes of their partners and fellow officers, and sometimes they even help guilty officers cover up those crimes. It is not uncommon for big-city policemen to carry “throw down” guns to plant on victims in the event that they wrongfully shoot an innocent unarmed person.
Again, this seems to almost exclusively happen in big-city police departments. Why?
First of all, rural areas and small-town communities rely more heavily on sheriff’s offices rather than police departments. And while there are anti-gun, anti-Constitution, pro-police-state sheriffs around the country, the vast majority of sheriffs tend to be liberty-loving, law-abiding men and women who value the Constitution and hold their deputies to a standard upholding those values.
Chiefs of police, however, are a different story. Of course, there are pro-Second Amendment, pro-liberty chiefs of police, but a sizeable percentage of police chiefs (especially in larger cities) are anti-Second Amendment and pro-police state. The obvious difference is that sheriffs are elected directly by the people, whereas police chiefs are appointed by city councils—many of whom carry anti-Second Amendment propensities.
As an aside, I actually subscribe to the point of view that police departments (NOT sheriff’s offices) are mostly unconstitutional. But it is useless to belabor that point. (I strongly urge readers to obtain my friend Dr. Edwin Vieira Jr.’s masterful and exhaustive CD-ROM study The Sword And The Sovereignty.)
Secondly, the training that big-city police officers often receive is more and more applied with a military/police state mentality. Officers are often trained to fear and even loathe armed citizens. Firearms by themselves are deemed to be “criminal” as is any citizen who possesses them. Officers often develop attitudes of resentment against constitutional liberties such as the 2nd and 4th Amendments.
Over the years, I have received scores of responses to my columns from law enforcement personnel in large cities. And I can honestly tell you that the vast majority of those responses are hateful and vindictive toward the Constitution and Bill of Rights. They have expressed intense opinions that the 2nd and 4th Amendments need to be expunged. I realize it’s difficult for people—including police officers—in small-town America to believe what I just said, but it is absolutely true.
Consider this fact: Every policeman who is willing to obey orders to confiscate the arms of citizens in the 17 states that have enacted “red flag” gun confiscation laws has violated his or her oath to the Constitution. In the State of Florida alone, almost 2,500 “red flag” orders have been issued (including against children and the elderly) since the law was enacted in March of 2018 (that comes to almost 5 “red flag” gun confiscation orders every day). That means 2,500 police officers (assuming each order was issued in a different district) violated their oath to the Constitution. You can be sure that the vast majority of these gun confiscation orders were issued in major metropolitan areas. See what I mean?
Thirdly, big-city police officers are often taught that anything they do is lawful because “they are the law,” and it’s up to the judges to worry about the Constitution. You’d be surprised if you knew how many big-city cops have never even read the Constitution and Bill of Rights, because they have never been taught that the Constitution is important. If anything, the Constitution is often downplayed and disparaged by law enforcement instructors.
Fourthly, big-city police officers are often taught to believe that their lives are more valuable than the lives of ordinary citizens. They might not say it in exactly those terms, but that is the essence of the instruction. They are taught that in order to “protect” the citizenry, they must stay alive—and are, therefore, not obligated to engage active shooters, for example, if they believe they have a chance of not surviving the encounter.
On this point, the American people are being hoodwinked beyond belief by anti-gun media and law enforcement. On the one hand, we citizens are told that we should not be allowed to defend ourselves with our own arms, that we must depend on law enforcement to protect us, while law enforcement officers are being instructed that it is not their job to trade their life for the citizen’s.
Indeed, the courts have consistently ruled that it is NOT the responsibility of a police officer to protect the life of a citizen and that it is the responsibility of the citizen to protect himself or herself—hence the 2nd Amendment. Read the report in that link above and note what fired Broward County Sheriff’s Deputy Scot Peterson said about his failure to confront the Parkland shooter. He said that it was not cowardice that made him act the way he did but his TRAINING. I’m confident he was truthful about that.
But the American people are being led to believe that they must not defend themselves but let law enforcement protect them. The result of this propaganda is an unarmed, unprotected citizenry (especially in big cities) that is left to the mercy of merciless killers. It’s insane!
We hear police spokesmen talk a lot about the necessity of the officers coming home at the end of the shift. No one argues that point. But what about the necessity of the citizen to come home at the end of his or her day? One life is as valuable as the other. And as we have seen by the cop shootings in Dallas and Fort Worth, the fact that one is safely and peacefully in his or her home is no guarantee that the long arm of murderous cops will not reach them. And if you think it’s bad now, just wait until “red flag” laws are instituted nationwide.
Fifthly, a growing number of big-city police agencies are subjecting their officers to the training and instruction of a foreign government: the Israeli military. And in this column, Paul Craig Roberts does a terrific job of explaining the connection between Israeli police procedures and the rise of police killings in America. He also connects the dots in showing how police are often institutionalized (and, again, I believe this to be the case in big cities) into an underlying racism in which American blacks are seen in the same light as Israelis see Palestinians.
Remember, Israel is a military police/apartheid state. It has no Constitution or Bill of Rights. The Israeli military performs law enforcement duties in Israel under rules of engagement that relate to WAR. For U.S. police personnel to be subjected to such training is antithetical to everything that America is built upon. Such training has absolutely no place in U.S. law enforcement. The American people are not “enemy combatants.” But the Israeli training of U.S. law enforcement is taking place more and more frequently.
Most conservatives will dismiss my concerns by accusing me of focusing on a few “bad apples” that don’t represent the majority. While the “bad apple” argument is certainly legitimate to some degree, these conservatives are missing the obvious fact that America has an institutional law enforcement problem. As this report asks, Why Are So Many “Bad Apple” Police Officers Bad In The Same Way?
I keep track of much of the ongoing emergence of an American police state here. Read it for yourself.
If you take this column to mean that I am “anti-cop,” you could not be more wrong. I deeply respect the office of policeman, highway patrolman and sheriff’s deputy. I have never been disrespectful to a peace officer. I have made scores of friendships with peace officers. I have relatives who are peace officers. Two sheriff’s deputies live in my neighborhood. When I lived in Escambia County, Florida, Sheriff Ron McNesby made me an honorary deputy sheriff in appreciation for my friendship with his office and for being a leader in our community for law and order and constitutional government.
Years ago, I won a city police lieutenant to Christ, and we became good friends. I rode with him and several of his officers as they patrolled the city. On one occasion, an officer called in an attempted suicide in progress. When the lieutenant and I arrived at the scene, he asked if I would go talk to the distressed man. I’m happy to say I was able to convince the man to not kill himself. I could tell many other stories of my time with policemen and sheriff’s deputies. I’m anything but “anti-cop.”
But there is a HUGE difference between constitutional law enforcement that upholds the Bill of Rights and a burgeoning Police State that destroys it. And, tragically for freedom, the latter is what many big-city police agencies are currently becoming.
Our Founding Fathers feared criminal government far more than criminal citizens. So should we.
Plus, true freedom-loving police officers who value the Constitution and Bill of Rights will absolutely agree with the point of this column—even if they believe that I’m off on a specific detail or two. (They would doubtless draw conclusions based on their personal experiences, while I draw conclusions based on reports and studies nationwide.) The ones who would take umbrage with this column are demonstrating that they are indeed the ones I’m talking about.
SUBMITTED BY ONE OF OUR READERS
Dear Fellow Americans:
America has always prided itself on individual rights and freedom, not demanding government-enforced ironclad uniformity of socio-political behavior by everyone. The American people should grant no less to foreign immigrants. Yet, it is also true that any society needs common guidelines of legal and moral behavior, in order to survive and thrive.
Foreign immigrants to America should be free to retain their Old World cultural practices, so long as exercise of the same is within context and constraint of the U.S. Constitution. They also should learn other Bible-based American concepts, i.e. the Ten Commandments and the Golden Rule. They should also learn the principle of loving neighbors as ones’ self. These are basics to general American culture, due to America’s Christian historic heritage.
English should be made America’s national language, and all foreign immigrants not already familiar with it should be required to learn it. It is the only language able to linguistically link all the rest of the world. The sun has long ago set on the British Empire, but the sun still never sets on the English language. Under protection of the Constitution First Amendment free speech rights, foreign immigrants may also retain use of their Old World languages as well.
Foreign immigrants to America should be financially independent, not needing the public treasury for their financial survival. Nothing in the U.S. Constitution text authorizes the federal government to perform this function anyway. America owes nothing to the rest of the world anyway, i.e. in America, everyone is free to pursue happiness on their own. But happiness is not guaranteed to anyone as a derivative benefit of American citizenship. Nowhere in either heaven or hell is that notion written.
QUESTION: Are moral behavior standards culturally determined, or is there a universal morality binding upon all humanity? The Holy Bible teaches the latter idea. Matthew 28:18-20. For Bible believers in Jesus Christ, therefore, there is no cultural assimilation issue. Jesus Christ has chosen His people out of the world. John 15:16.
Lawrence K. Marsh
A BIBLICAL PERSPECTIVE OF SLAVERY – PART 4 OF 10
Mike Scruggs is the author of The Un-Civil War: Shattering the Historical Myths , and Lessons from the Vietnam War: Truths the Media Never Told You.
As a nationally syndicated newspaper columnist he has written and published over 600 articles on military history, national security, immigration, current political affairs, Islam, and the Middle East.
Chapter 25 of Leviticus established Biblical regulation of slavery. Slavery is allowed contingent upon slaves being treated fairly and humanely, but it is not promoted.
Slave owners and overseers are not counted as villains or moral lawbreakers unless they significantly mistreat or abuse their slaves. It is also important to understand that in God’s eyes, earthly status of slave or free makes no difference.
Colossians 3: 9-13 Your new status: Chosen by God, so have a humble and forgiving heart.
1 Corinthians 7:19-24 The only status that counts is that you are a bondservant of Christ.
Philippians 2: 4-8 Christ’s humility should be your example.
Protections for Slaves
A number of passages in Exodus and Deuteronomy protect slaves from mistreatment or exploitation.
Exodus 21: 16 Man-stealing/kidnapping
Exodus 21 20-21
Exodus 21: 26-27
Deuteronomy 16:14. The Sabbath is also for bondservants.
Deuteronomy 23:15-16 Escaped slaves
In practice, the Jews first investigated whether, the escaped slave had legitimate cause to flee from his master before awarding them sanctuary. The issue of escaped slaves increased tensions between North and South before the U.S. Civil War, primarily because of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850.
In 1860, 803 Southern slaves of a total of 4.0 million left their masters without permission for a variety of reasons. During that same year Southern masters voluntarily emancipated over 3,000 slaves. Although Northern abolitionists aggressively agitated these tensions, the Fugitive Slave Act was far too costly and politically and morally complicated to merit anything but abandonment. Any system of labor that relies primarily on force to motivate and retain workers will have low productivity and costly retention problems.
Failure to positively motivate workers is a business loss that should not be passed on to taxpayers by funding futile law enforcement activities. A more peaceful and less costly system (even to the South) would have left the decision to the receiving Northern state. Many Northern states, however, did not want to be sanctuaries for escaped slaves. Thus the “underground railroad” went mainly to Canada. Smart Southern slave owners treated their slaves humanely, honestly, and fairly and provided motivational incentives for them.
Deuteronomy 24: 7 Man-stealing.
Religious arguments over slavery
In the religious argument over slavery, the Southern defense was based on the Authority of Scripture, while the Northern attack was based on the perceived degree of slaveholder abuses or problems such as fugitive slaves, the possibility of breaking up slave families, and incidences of unreasonably severe discipline.
However, it was the abolitionist claim that there was a higher moral law than was revealed in Scripture that was the huge red flag to those who believed in the truth, authority, and moral infallibility of Scripture. The radical abolitionists simply replaced the wisdom of God and the authority of Scripture with the vain and corruptible imagination of men. They were rightly disturbed by the preaching of such leading abolitionists as Unitarian minister Theodore Parker who said: “It may be a natural duty of the slave to develop a natural right in a practical manner, and actually kill all those who seek to prevent his enjoyment of liberty” and “It may be the natural duty for the freeman to help the slaves to the enjoyment of their liberty, and as means to that end, to aid them in killing all such as oppose their natural freedom.”
In his autobiography, Parker said that he had studied theology and found the Bible was no more than the work of men and the Church no more divine than a Dutchman’s shop. An airbrushed misconception of Parker as a great moral philosopher still haunts the establishment internet, although he was a member of the “Secret Six” major financial supporters of the murderous abolitionist John Brown, who slaughtered five Southern settlers in Kansas in 1856 and attempted to start a bloody slave revolt by taking over a U.S. armory in Harpers Ferry, Virginia (now West Virginia) in 1859. Southerners viewed all this remembering the murderous career of abolitionist John Brown from 1856 to 1859, women and children killed in the bloody slave revolt of Nat Turner in 1831, and the horrid massacre of thousands of French colonists in Haiti in 1804.
“By setting forth the truth plainly we commend ourselves to every man’s conscience.”
— 2 Corinthians 4:2
FROM THE EDITOR’S DESK
Dr. Ed is a pastor, college president, historian, the author of over 30 books, an in-demand public speaker, and the host of two radio shows.
He is an active lobbyist, tirelessly petitioning city, county, state, and federal officials on behalf of our Southern monuments and heritage.
He started Dixie Heritage in March of 2015.
Anything worth doing at all is worth doing FIRST CLASS. Pardon the “French” but we never “half-ass” it here at Dixie Heritage. We are always striving to improve.
2020 will be our 6th year publishing The Dixie Heritage Letter. In that time we have never missed an issue. Lord willing, we never will. So if you have thought about advertising in Dixie Heritage but wondered if we are in it for the “long haul” – Yeah, we are!
As part of our ongoing improvement maybe you noticed that this week’s issue has a new look? We’ve worked hard on updating the template, making it more mobile friendly and all-in-all giving our eZine a sharper look. Hopefully you like the new format.
If we missed anything its probably because I’m wrapping up production of this week’s issue a day early so that I can catch a red-eye to upper New England. I’ll tell you more about the trip after I return.
I have also just confirmed with TBR Radio that we will be doing TWO shows in 2020. This means that The Dixie Heritage Hour will be retitled: TBR Radio Presents: The Dixie Heritage Show and will be a half-hour show totally and completely dedicated to Southern history and culture beginning in January 2020. I’ll have more to say about the second show in a few weeks but its working title, which is likely to change, is TBR Radio Presents: Politically Incorrect History with Dr. Ed DeVries. If you would like to take out a year’s worth of advertising in either show I want to talk to you ASAP. If you want to advertise in BOTH shows, I have a deal for you! I am also launching an unrelated podcast on the subject of Horology which will have 12 episodes in 2020. I’m looking for just a couple of select advertisers for that project as well.
And finally, I am looking for Christians who are interested in seeing the planting of churches throughout the South. These will be churches where “southerners” and “Confederates” will be welcomed and not shunned or shamed. If you are tired of being shamed in church, please eMail me! If you are in central Florida perhaps we can work closely together on such a project? In any event, we are looking to put together southern preachers with southern Christians to plant churches that will promote and continue the faith and legacy of our Southern Fathers.
Until Next Week,
P.O. Box 618
Lowell, FL 32663