Did the Declaration Create the Anti-Slavery Movement?

Jon Meacham is one of the worst Lincoln worshipers in America.

His latest book on Lincoln is pure garbage.

But every establishment dope wants his approval.

Take for example Professor Manisha Sinha. She has been featured on major cable television shows and has won awards for her work on slavery. She is the establishment’s establishment.

Yet, she thinks she is underappreciated, that is until Jon Meacham mentioned her in a recent book review for the New York Times.

This is how these people operate. They sit around waiting for someone with a name to point out their “brilliance.” Why? Because they are insecure, thin skinned activists playing historian.

The funniest part? These people don’t realize they are all on the same team, even the “conservatives” among them.

Meacham spent the entire book review taking apart Ron DeSantis for claiming that the Declaration of Independence created the anti-slavery movement in America.

This coming from a man who thinks Lincoln walked on water because he made the case that the Declaration of Independence created the anti-slavery movement in America.

He has to differentiate himself from those evil conservatives, the same conservatives who believe in the same righteous cause Lincoln myth.

Meacham pointed to earlier anti-slavery movements in America while leaving out some really important details, most importantly that even after 1776 most Americans tolerated slavery and nearly all were what we would call racists today.

That was the case long before the Declaration as well, even among our glorious New England saints who spoke about the evils of slavery while making large amounts of money on the slave trade and Caribbean slave plantations.

As I’ve said for a long time now, action speaks louder than words, and Americans may have made lofty statements about “equality” but no one really believed it.

Nor did they define it the way we do today.

That is another story.

I love these kinds of stupid essays because they provide great Podcast fodder. I discuss Meacham’s essay on Episode 770 of The Brion McClanahan Show.

America in Decline?

World War III seems to be on the horizon, and every establishment politico is rushing headlong into the abyss.

This is the message from the stammering, boot-licking hacks during the Davos summit a couple of weeks ago.

Except they don’t seem to mind. Climate change, ya know?

A little nuclear war could be good for the environment. Anything to stop global warming.

This is like a new Keynesianism. Instead of digging holes, filling it with money, and digging it out in the name of “prosperity,” we’ll launch a few tactical nukes and wipe out a few cities in the name of stopping “climate change.”

Of course, the extra benefit would be that we would have to rebuild these cities. Cha ching! Keynes is smiling on from hell.

Who is driving all of this new war drum lunacy? The Biden administration, of course.

At least, “the world” now thinks the United States is muscling up again after years of “managed decline.”

They never liked Trump even though he was really one of them. He was just honest about being a crook.

They want to hide the fact.

The Ukraine wants tanks? Sure, how about 31. The Ukraine wants F-16s? On the docket.

How long before the Ukraine wants nukes? That’s coming.

American foreign policy used to be driven by sober realism. Even Biden understands we have natural advantages, i.e. two oceans separating us from the world, and so the United States pursued a real “peace through strength” foreign policy–meaning economic strength–for much of its early history. That was “America First.”

Non-intervention in foreign affairs kept Americans out of foolish European wars. How many more white crosses do we need in Europe?

On second thought, they probably wouldn’t hand out white crosses any more. Too Christian. It would have to be a rainbow flag adorning every grave.

“America First” was always a bad word to the Davos lizards. It meant they had to go at it on their own without American money and blood.

That’s why Biden fits right in and why the establishment is so dangerous.

Corrupt, too. Just wait until more information hits about the Hunter Biden laptop. It’s going to get worse for Joe, at least to the public eye. The establishment clearly wants him out or they wouldn’t have allowed for this information to become public.

It the “world is bullish” on America again, it’s time to stock up on anti-radiation meds.

That can only mean bad things for Americans.

Higher inflation, shortages, and war.

And in contrast to the Bush wars of the 1990s and 2000s, Biden has poked a fight with a bigger and more corrupt bear.

His “mission accomplished” speech may never happen.

I talk about “American Decline” on Episode 768 of The Brion McClanahan Show.

The Lessons of War

The generals are gathering in their masses.

And the United States and NATO are sending tanks to Ukraine to fight the Russians.

31 from the United States to be exact. This stupid idea is the result of the stupid establishment.

It seems the establishment never learns the lessons of war.

Or maybe they know full well that we war helps them expand their power, and if you defend the 51st State, the Ukraine, then you have helped support the latest thing.

I can’t wait for the yard signs. The Ukrainian flag won’t be enough.

You’ll soon have to show your allegiance by buying more war bonds.

I chalk this up to World War II. You see, no one stopped Hitler, and because Putin in the new Hitler, we must do everything in our power to stop Adolph Putin.

Or maybe it’s the Vietnam syndrome. The United States has to win at all costs and never surrender.

I wonder how long it will take for Biden to show up on an aircraft carrier with “Mission Accomplished.”

He won’t be landing in a fighter plane, so it might have to be on dry land.

If we really heeded the lessons of war, the United States would steer clear of the Ukraine and would stop funding the conflict.

It would also heed the lessons of the founding generation and adopt a real “peace through strength” policy that centers on “American First” and non-intervention.

I would also add the Congress could slash the military budget and it wouldn’t matter much. Some Republicans showed a willingness to do this and were rebuffed by the neocon war hawks in the House.

You can’t fix their kind of stupid.

I discuss the real lessons of war on Episode 766 of The Brion McClanahan Show.

Is Secession the Right Thing to Do?

National Review of all places recently published an interesting piece on secession, penned by Hillsdale College Professor Miles Smith.

I like Professor Smith. He has interesting things to say about the South on social media, and he is genuinely interested in the Southern tradition, not as a specimen to be studied under a microscope, but as a real place with real people and a vibrant culture.

His piece on secession isn’t bad–and I agree with his overall conclusion–but it shows that NR isn’t ready to adopt any position that might remotely favor federalism.

Smith doesn’t think secession is a good idea, but he also doesn’t think it should be considered “insurrectionist.” Even some leftists agree with him.

Smith is correct that the time is not right for secession. Americans aren’t ready for it, even if poll numbers indicate that more people at least want to discuss the possibility of independence, and then there’s the thorny issue of the deep state and the intricate web of money and power that would surely work to prevent Texas or California from bolting the Union.

Bill Bennett said he would advise sending in the tanks if one person in a State wanted to remain “loyal.”

The neocons can always be counted on to say stupid things.

The time for secession might have already passed, at least until things get much worse.

But his discussion of the “legality” of secession suffers from the same problems that any third rate journalist would experience when penning a piece on the issue.

Texas v. White solved nothing. Smith suggests you can argue that it was a rigged decision. True. The Republican dominated Supreme Court would never issue a ruling declaring secession to be legal in 1869. That would have invalidated Lincoln’s war and the entire premise of Reconstruction.

But Texas v. White also provided a legal opening. Secession is legal, according to the decision, if the Congress boots a State out of the Union. This gave the Republican reptiles in Congress cover for military reconstruction.

Smith argues that Congress should pay attention to secession sentiment because it springs from discontentment over abusive federal power.

This has always been the case. The answer is thinking locally and acting locally. That would create strong independent communities capable of stronger peaceful political action if necessary.

Either way, his piece was great Podcast fodder, so I cover it on Episode 765 of The Brion McClanahan Show.

Is the Decline in “Professional” History Dangerous?

Leftist historian Daniel Bessner dreads the “dangerous” decline in “professional” history.

This shouldn’t be happening in our society, but, as you might expect, Bessner chalks it up to ignorant conservative hayseeds who don’t seem to appreciate the nuances and rigorous academic standards of professional history.

Or maybe they are just racist. He can’t decide.

Either way, professional history, he argues, is vital to our success as a “nation.”

I think Americans are generally just tired of “historians” like Bessner and other leftist nobs hectoring to them while politicizing every issue in the name of “history.”

Take for example this Tweet from “twitterhistorian” Manisha Sinha, the Indian born “leading historian” on American abolitionism. This is like calling Nikki Hailey the leading American political figure on Confederate symbols.

Sinha’s entire social media presence is dedicated to leftist activism, except she calls it history.

Never mind that Sinha doesn’t seem to grasp that a lawsuit over a State law in a State court has nothing to do with the relationship between the general government and the States, or that Calhoun’s “theory of state sovereignty” was in fact anti-secession. Those tedious little facts don’t matter. All that matters is RACISM and SLAVERY if we invoke Calhoun and the “G Coup P.”

We know many “history” courses are in fact a cover for leftist propaganda. Ron DeSantis had a wonderful response to a Florida decision to reject an “African-American History” course count as an AP credit. Why? Because they weren’t really teaching “African-American History.” The curriculum contained sections on gender identity and defunding the police.

Courses like this have led to the movement to remove or “contextualize” not only Confederate monuments–the low hanging fruit–but also historic sites and those dedicated to the founding generation.

They are all racist, too, you know?

I’ve said it before on my show that the proper response to this should have been, “No. Shut Up.” They don’t really care about argument. They don’t really care about discussion. They only care about their own power and their ability to cram their silly little progressive notions into as many minds of mush as possible.

History is a weapon, not a serious scholarly effort to understand the past on its own terms.

That is why people recoil at the 1619 Project. It’s aim is entirely political. So was the 1776 Commission Report, by the way.

Without question, history often leads to political discussions. At its best, history inspires conversation and inquiry. But for people like Sinha, Bessner, and 1619 Project creator Nikole Hannah-Jones, history serves as a means to gain a moral advantage over their political opponents.

Force them to genuflect to their morally superior leftist masters.

Did I mention that Sinha’s favorite political figure is Charles Sumner?

That more than anything else speaks volumes.

I discuss the “dangerous” trend to eliminate “professional history” on Episode 764 of The Brion McClanahan Show.

Have Progressives Found Federalism?

Has a mainstream progressive found federalism?

In our age of government worship, this might be like a lost soul finding Jesus.

Not really, but small steps.

Jamelle Bouie at the The New York Times has recently pecked out a couple of pieces that make it seem like he has indeed discovered the beauty of federalism.

He seems to support trimming the power of the federal courts, and now he opines that federalism is the only way to save America.

I have been critical of Bouie in the past, and I still will be most of the time. He and I don’t agree on much of anything politically, but that is why federalism is so important.

I would be fine with Bouie living in his own little socialist Utopia somewhere in America. Just not in my State.

And he can leave my State alone, too.

I think he is starting to get it. I am cautious, as the core of any progressive is the dream of controlling others. It doesn’t matter if they are on the left or right, they want power.

It’s the Yankee in them.

Federalism is the only reason the Constitution was ratified in 1788. The “anti-Federalists” may have been right about the future of America, but the “friends of the Constitution” persuaded enough people that their opponents were wrong to get it through the ratification conventions.

It must be emphasized that while the “anti-Federalists” may have been perceptive about the way the general government would abuse power once the Constitution was ratified, the “Federalists” consistently argued they were wrong. That is why we should listen to the Federalists, not the anti-Federalists, when finding original intent.

Otherwise, we concede the field to the other side. The “antis” really wanted federalism and the “Federalists” promised we would get it.

Nationalism wasn’t on the table.

Both sides seemed to agree that centralization was the Shirt of Nessus and should be avoided in such a diverse federal republic.

The Federalists may have been lying–Hamilton certainly was–but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t hold the federal government accountable to original intent.

That is why the 10th and 9th Amendments exist. They were the check on the entire system. And what became the 10th Amendment was often the first on the list of proposed Amendments coming from the States.

If Americans could get this one civics lesson, the entire course of American government could change, and frankly, as Bouie argues in his essay, we could have lasting civic peace.

I discuss Bouie and federalism on Episode 760 of The Brion McClanahan Show.

The Tyranny of the Majority

Does the “tyranny of the majority” exist?

Short answer, yes.

Every astute political thinker has realized this inherent problem with democracy. It’s why the founding generation warned against excessive democracy in government.

The Constitution was designed to be primarily anti-democratic.

The rule of the 50+1 percent allows a very slim majority to plunder the other half of the population, or worse.

Of course, those who preen about “moral righteousness” always seem to have the high ground. “Are you opposed to helping poor people? Are you racist? Do you want to put people back in chains?”

This kind of stupidity is commonplace on the American campaign trail, and it grabs headlines in the mainstream press who believe that tax payers–the minority of the population–want to enslave the majority or throw grandma off a cliff.

John C. Calhoun understood that a simple numerical majority would constantly plunder the minority and destroy any written Constitution.

It’s why he advocated for a “concurrent majority”, meaning that the minority could always have a veto. This would require real, super-majorities, for any legislation to pass.

Not a bad idea.

Judge Andrew Napolitano recently wrote about the Tyranny of the Majority, and his piece provided a great starting point for a discussion of the problem.

It resulted in Episode 758 of The Brion McClanahan Show.

A Return to “Midwestern Values”?

George Will thinks Americans need to return to “Midwestern values.”

What does this mean? I have many listeners from the Midwest, and they are all great people, but I don’t think any of them would identify with how Will defines “Midwestern values.”

To Will, like all Straussians and neoconservatives, “Midwestern values” rely on the Lincoln myth of America.

Will makes this clear in this Washington Post opinion piece.

You see, Midwesterners avoided the lash of slavery and righteously fought for the Union. They also grew a lot of corn to feed crusading Union soldiers singing His Truth is Marching On.

This is a clear distortion of the real underpinnings of Midwestern culture, namely the South and Jeffersonian America.

We have to remember that Southerners obtained the Midwest for the United States–George Rogers Clark–and Southerners, at least initially, settled the region. The Northwest Territory was at one time called Augusta Co., Virginia.

It wasn’t until later that Yankees started showing up, and coupled with outcast German revolutionaries, changed the dominant political makeup of the region. But I would argue not the character.

Midwesterners have been primarily rural people, Jeffersonian to the core. The “Midwestern values” that Will trumpets are in fact, Southern.

Slavery had nothing to do with the cultural norms of Southerners. As David Hackett Fischer has shown in Albion’s Seed, slavery did not create Southern culture. Nor did “racism,” which was a feature of American life North and South for generations.

Southerners defined America for much of the antebellum period. New Englanders like Charles Sumner knew it, which is why they tried desperately to foist their version of America on the rest of the United States.

Will is really suggesting that America needs to be saved by “Yankee New England” values, something we already have. Just look around.

The United States is governed by California and New York, and not the good parts of either State.

But as usual, a bad George Will column makes for great Podcast fodder, so I hammer his faux “Midwestern values” on Episode 757 of The Brion McClanahan Show.

Secession in the 21st Century

While many dopes in American still hold this view–see the “Naming Commission” and Ty Seidule–the term has found new life in the 21st century.

There are multiple secession movements across the United States and people around the world are looking to decentralization as a remedy for the out of control State.

The desirability and efficacy of secession can be debated, but no one in the United States should think secession is treason or illegal.

The compact fact of the Constitution and the reserved powers of the States to secede is easily discernible.

Many libertarians have jumped on the secession train, including Ryan McMaken at the Mises Institute.

He has a new book out on the subject, and gave a nice talk about secession at the Mises 40th Anniversary event last year.

My most substantial critique concerns his avoidance of John C. Calhoun as a real American political thinker concerned with the “tyranny of the majority.” McMaken correctly identifies the root problem of American government, namely numerical majorities, but does not mention the one man who provided a real proposal to give the 10th Amendment teeth.

Why? Slavery and racism, of course. It’s better to cite Ludwig von Mises and Murray Rothbard than John C. Calhoun, even though left libertarians like to claim Mises was a Nazi and Rothbard a Klan member.

Go figure. You should never try to appease those people.

Secession should be discussed, but Americans, in my estimation, are not ready for it, particularly when you have large segments of the population who can’t get out of their own way without hoisting a Ukrainian flag while wearing a mask.

These sheep love the State, and if the State says secession is treason and racist, it is.

Yet, McMaken’s talk was great Podcast fodder, so I discuss it on Episode 756 of The Brion McClanahan Show.

“The Squad” and “MAGA Republicans”

We can dream. While the House debates who should be the next Speaker, they can’t do any business. Which means they can’t make anything worse.

I wrote a book titled 9 Presidents Who Screwed Up America, but as John C. Calhoun pointed out in the 19th century, it was really Congress that kept screwing up America.

Writing a book on that topic would be a multi-volume endeavor.

We are seeing something beautiful develop at this point: principled representatives who won’t cave to the establishment. That doesn’t make any of them worthwhile. I don’t trust a Republican to do anything right, but it does mean that perhaps there could be some changes in Congress.

I recorded episode 755 of The Brion McClanahan Show last week, before the current dust up over the Speaker position, but I did allude to it on the show and opined that it was going to make for great political theater. I also suggested that someone should vote for Donald Trump. Matt Gaetz did just that. Twice. Hilarious.

The people blocking “Conservative, Inc.” from holding on to power in Congress are doing yeoman’s work. They also have all the power in a evenly divided legislative body. If the establishment wants to get work, they have to compromise with these people.

The progressive “Squad” has followed this plan for the last several years, and the House lurched left as a result. They’ve also added more members.

This sets up an interesting 118th Congress. “MAGA Republicans” and “The Squad” could make things interesting for years, that is if they both keep playing hardball.

I love it. The less Congress does, the better we are.

Check out Episode 755 of The Brion McClanahan Show.