Part 1
Part 2
John Locke theorized the natural rights to life, liberty, and property in 1689. George Mason’s Virginia Declaration of Rights, adopted on June 29, 1776, days before the Declaration of Independence was adopted, secured the same. Both documents rejected privileged political classes and hereditary offices. But rather than asserting universal equality, Mason’s Declaration was specifically written for the citizens of Virginia, who “enter[ed] into a state of society,” and their posterity; not every man, everywhere, and certainly not slaves.
The Republican Party was founded in 1854 by Whigs who were determined to prevent Southerners from occupying the Western frontier with their slaves. The sectional party’s second candidate, Abraham Lincoln, was elected in November of 1860. One year earlier, on April 6, 1859, Lincoln had written a letter to Henry Pierce expressing a radically different view of Jefferson’s words in the Declaration, which are commonly accepted by liberals and loose constructionists today as the originally intended though unfulfilled meaning. Lincoln wrote that Jefferson “introduce[d] into a merely revolutionary document, an abstract truth, applicable to all men and all times…” The “abstract truth” was that all men are created equal.
But no founding father believed that our principles of government could be accepted or applied by all men. The Naturalization Acts of 1790 and 1795 restricted immigration to free white people. In 1798, John Adams added, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” Our fathers recognized that our primary duty is to our own people, and that some are slaves by nature, and this cannot be wished or legislated away.
Richard Weaver, in his book Ideas Have Consequences, observed that “no man was ever created free and no two men [were] ever created equal.”
The comity of peoples in groups large or small rests not upon this chimerical notion of equality but upon fraternity, a concept which long antedates it in history because it goes immeasurably deeper in human sentiment. The ancient feeling of brotherhood carries obligations of which equality knows nothing. It calls for respect and protection, for brotherhood is status in family, and family is by nature hierarchical.
Jewish “neoconservatives” brilliantly hijacked the conservative movement that formed in the wake of Russell Kirk’s 1953 book, The Conservative Mind, resulting in an anti-male, anti-white, anti-Christian anti-conservatism. How this unfolded should be learned and never forgotten.
Leo Strauss escaped Hitler along with fellow Jewish revolutionaries like Herbert Marcuse and Magnus Hirschfeld. Strauss was a Nietzschean, atheist, Zionist, liberal democrat, and the father of neoconservatism, which has appealed to right-wing boomers for its anti-Communism, but at its root seeks to remake the West in Israel’s image.
Jew Harry Jaffa, a disciple of Strauss, taught that Lincoln refounded America on the allegedly universal proposition of equality in the Declaration of Independence. It mattered not at all to these people that the Declaration was a secessionist document, not a governing document. All that mattered was the Jewish agenda. Jaffa claimed that the Constitution must be read through the lens of universal equality that is given to us in the Declaration, and American history must be understood as a promise deferred until such time that, guided by Lincoln and MLK and Bruce Jenner, Americans really lived up to their propositions.
In 1976, the great Mel Bradford essentially stood athwart Judaism and yelled “Stop!” when he published an essay called The Heresy of Equality, which grew out of his debates with Jaffa. Bradford unraveled the Jewish neocon lie that our republic was founded not on blood, soil, and faith, but on the universal ideas of equality and democracy. Bradford explained that Jewish neocons were pushing these subversive ideas, marinated in Marxism, with the intention of benefitting their own people.
Bradford writes[1. M.E. Bradford, “Not So Democratic: The Caution of the Framers,” in Remembering Who We Are: Observations of a Southern Conservative (Athens: The University of Georgia Press, 1985), p. 37], “[S]ince our country crossed the Great Divide of the War Between the States, it has been more and more the habit of our historians, jurists, and political scientists to read the Continental Enlightenment, and the Age of Revolution that was its political consequence, back into the record of our national beginnings by way of an anachronistic gloss upon the Declaration of Independence.”
Jews, with their deep pockets, won control over weak, effeminate men like William F. Buckley, Jr. Jaffa persuaded Buckley that equality is a conservative value, and Buckley began to purge real conservatives from his National Review magazine and replace them with neoconservatives.
By the 1980s, Southerners, who continued to defend the confederated republican government we inherited from the founders, had been exiled from the ranks of “respectable” conservatism. By the 1990s, it was no longer acceptable for those who called themselves conservatives even to regard these once-sovereign states as being the property of Americans. Now, those who are commonly identified as “conservatives” are on the front lines to impose equality and democracy on the rest of the world, using the American war machine, primarily for the benefit of Israel, just as the neocons desired from the beginning.
Conservatives failed to hold their ground against usurpation by anti-Christs because it was far more important for them not to be viewed as “racists” or “Nazis” or “anti-Semites,” or any other terms of propaganda. They craved respect. The hard lesson learned was that a conservatism that refuses to protect blood, soil, and faith is destined to fail. And by “fail,” I mean succumb to the rape and murder of our precious children and grandchildren.
Today, “conservatism” is a pseudo-Masonic cult in which God exists alternately in the imaginations of men and the copybook headings, and this great Life Coach in the sky helps them to achieve their full potential, like an ethereal Tony Robbins, and never to cause offense to the state of Israel. “Conservatism” is marked by perpetual war for bankers, pledges to a meaningless flag, sorcery-speculation of a rigged market, the syphilitic sex-swamp called “civil rights,” and a screeching carrion bird perched on a cross.
This was predicted long ago by Bradford, who argued that an impossibly equal society is driven by envy, and envy forces the demand for equality of condition, which will always be used to secure totalitarian control.
When Reagan was elected president, he wanted to appoint Bradford to be chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities. The neocons savaged Bradford’s reputation, saying that his view of Lincoln would mean fighting the Civil War all over again in his Senate confirmation hearing. They even pointed to his past support for George Wallace, the segregationist governor of Alabama. They successfully scuttled the nomination, and Reagan appointed their choice instead – Bill Bennett.
One of the dire consequences of Lincoln’s War was the illegally ratified Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution in 1868, and it is upon that amendment, and specifically its equal protection clause, which is the manifestation of Lincoln’s revision of Jefferson’s fateful equality doctrine, that the Supreme Court has authorized the destruction of the right to free association which is guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Thus, the Supreme Court reversed in 1954 the separate-but-equal system of segregation that it had authorized in 1896. In 1967, it used the 14th to force all states to legalize miscegenation. In 1978, it allowed race to be used as a factor in college admissions, and ever since, the majority of the population has suffered from the tyranny. This has spilled over into enforced hiring quotas for government contractors and in private industry. A business owner can no longer legally choose his clientele. Clubs beyond a certain size can no longer choose their own members. In 2015, the Supreme Court authorized sodomarriage, which has spilled over to sodomite adoption and the erasure of perversion laws across the board. And in 2018, leftist technopolies are censoring free speech online, effectively blacklisting anyone to the right of Trump, choking off the ability of men to earn a living unless their opinions are approved by the gatekeepers of the media and the Folsom Street sponsors at Facebook-Apple-Google-Spotify. It remains to be seen how courts will rule on this censorship conspiracy, if at all.
Only true conservatives – who conserve our religious and racial heritage – have impeded this Marxist juggernaut which began for us Americans with a small group of busybody feminists in Boston who hated their husbands and wanted to rule in their stead. Their ugly daughters have even achieved the stated goal of occupying pulpits. When Samuel Johnson heard a woman preach at a Quaker church in the 18th century, he said it was like seeing a dog walk on its hind legs. “It is not done well; but you are surprised to find it done at all.”
“As in all the churches of the saints, the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.” (1 Cor. 14:34-35)
Woman is excluded from this masculine task of public preaching by Paul, not because she is inferior to man, but simply because her Maker has ordained for her another work which is incompatible with this. So he might have pronounced, as nature does, that she shall not sing bass, not because he thought the bass chords the more beautiful—perhaps he thought the pure alto of the feminine throat far the sweeter—but because her very constitution fits her for the latter part in the concert of human existence, and therefore unfits her for the other, the coarser and less melodious part.
The next article in the series begins with perhaps the most famous of all quotes about conservatism, but the context might surprise you.
Read Part 4
| Tweet |
|
|
|
