Confederate Society
By Al Benson Jr.

The story of Camp Chemung, or Elmira POW camp in Elmira, New York is a long and checkered one. Michael Horigan has written a book entitled Elmira—Death Camp of the North which I would recommend to anyone doing research on the gruesome history of POW camps in the North during the War of Northern Aggression. Elmira is one of those scary places you never read about in the “history” books. It was so bad the Union authorities tried to shove it down the “memory hole” with the help of a compliant “news” media. Even back then the “news” media was little more than a lap dog for the establishment. Nothing new under the sun, is there?

The information on the flyleaf of Horigan’s book is quite revelatory. It states: “Elmira’s death rate was the highest of any prison camp in the North—almost 25 percent. Comparatively, the overall death rate of all prison camps in the North was just over 11 percent; in the South it was just over 15 percent. Clearly, something went wrong at Elmira.” A nice way of describing Yankee/Marxist brutality—“something went wrong.”

According to “Almost 25 percent of the 12,123 Confederate soldiers who entered the 40-acre prisoner of war camp at Elmira, New York, died. This death rate was more than double the average death rate in other Northern prison camps, and only 2 percent less than the death rate at the infamous Southern prison at Andersonville, Georgia. The deaths at Elmira were caused by diseases brought on by terrible living conditions and starvation, conditions deliberately caused by the vindictive U.S. commissary-general of prisoners, Col. William Hoffman. The conditions were inexcusable; the North had more than enough food and materials for its armies, population, and prisoners.” And that’s the difference between Elmira and Andersonville—the Union had more than enough to adequately feed and care for the POWs. The Confederacy did not. The privations and hardships at Andersonville were NOT deliberate; at Elmira and other places like it, they WERE deliberate.

This is the kind of thing that, after World War 2, they condemned Nazi war criminals for, yet you can’t do that here—Hoffman’s side won the war, so all is automatically forgotten—except at Andersonville, and that, like the slavery issue, will NEVER be forgotten. You see the politically correct thing to do nowadays is to operate a selective forgiveness—they absolve the North of its atrocities, condemn the South for its alleged atrocities—and teach it this way in most public schools so the anti-South propaganda is forwarded along to the next generation, and the next, and so on.

In 1864 a stockade had been built around an unused Northern army training camp in order to create what would become Elmira Prison in June of 1864. The prison had 35 barracks and was expected to house about 5,000 POWs. The first 400 arrived on July 6th, and by the end of July there were already more than 4,400 POWs there. At that point it was almost at full capacity. But, as the fella says, “You ain’t seen nothin’ yet.” By the end of August there were almost 10,000 POWs there, a good portion of them having to sleep in the open, in ragged clothers, what remained of their uniforms and with not blankets.

Would the Yankee/Marxist’s War Department remedy this? Not hardly! Michael Horigan notes in this book, on page 19 that: “…his (Hoffman’s) grasp of the War Department’s arcane Civil War bureaucracy was matched only by his parsimonious, budget-conscious edicts that resulted in withholding large sums of money that were earmarked for the purchase of prisoner-of-war rations, clothing, shelter, and medical supplies. Money withheld by Hoffman  for rations alone would result in the return of $1,845,126 to the government at the conclusion of the war.” Even today that’s a pretty good chunk of change. You can imagine what it was in 1865. In other words, Hoffman starved Confederate POW to the tune of $1.8 million.

Even though it was noted that Elmira had only the capacity to take care of 5,000 POWs it seems that Hoffman, somewhere along the line, came up with the idea that it could house 8-10 thousand prisoners. Horigan observed: “Significantly, that figure came from Washington—not even the post commander at Elmira. As to how Col. Hoffman arrived at this estimate  remains to this day the single most mysterious aspect of the Elmira prison camp story. Surely has was aware of the fact that Elmira’s accommodation limit was 5,000 prisoners of war.  Eastman had made it clear on May 2nd that total capacity of Barracks Nos. 1 and 3 was 6,000 and then ten days later lowered that figure to 5,000. Yet the commissary general of prisoners persisted that Elmira will quarter upwards of 10,000 prisoners of war.” And Horigan continued: “Colonel Hoffman’s arbitrary prisoner-of-war figure is a sticking point that would lead to charges more than a century later that Elmira was deliberately established as a death camp.” I can see now, some naïve person reading this and thinking “Why the virtuous Union would never establish death camps for their POWs.” Why not? We’ve already found out they had secret police, that they tortured prisoners, that they locked people up for years on the merest hint of suspicion with no proof whatever—so why not death camps? If you want to read about Edwin Stanton, his secret police, and torture tactics used by the North then read a couple of the recent articles on  Just don’t read them with your morning coffee because you won’t enjoy it.

Rations at Elmira were never enough. Lonnie R. Speer, in his book Portals to Hell—Military prisons in the Civil War frankly tells us that: “As at several other prisons, the POWs often resorted to eating dogs and cats  that strayed into the compound. One of the POWs noted that: “The ribs of a stewed dog were delicious, (but) broiled rat was superb.” You have to wonder, with the commissary general turning back to the government over $1.8 million at the end of the war just for rations he did not bother to purchase to feed POWs, what the real name of the game was. From all I have been able to read about the Yankee/Marxist mentality prevalent in Washington during and after the War I would have no doubt that the federal government, somewhere, written or unwritten, had a deliberate starvation policy in regard to Confederate POWs.

During the bitter cold New York winters, POWs families in the South sought to send them warmer clothes for the winter. But, when this happened that example of Yankee/Marxist beneficence Colonel Hoffman, would only allow clothing that was gray to be passed out.  Clothing in other colors was simply burned, while sons, brothers, and husbands of those who sent them literally froze to death. I tell you, the depths of Northern charity just knew no bounds.

It got so bad that even the Yankee/Marxist government was thinking of court-martialing some people.  The  site noted: “Before resigning to avoid court-martial for his criminal treatment of sick prisoners, the chief surgeon at Elmira was overheard boasting that he had killed more Rebels than any other Union soldier.”


By:  Mike Scruggs

     January 19 marked the 207th birthday of one of the most revered military leaders in American history.  In fact, Robert E. Lee remains one of the most studied and respected military commanders in world history, although he was ultimately on the losing side.

     The enormous importance that the mainstream media and political leaders today give to the Martin Luther King Holiday has worked to obscure the memory of Lee. Although there are many states that celebrate holidays for both King and Lee, most Southern politicians, following the politically correct fashion of the times, have shied away from honoring Lee. That is a great tragedy, for few men in American history have left such an exemplary record of Christian faith, noble character, and devotion to cause and duty. 

     Following Lee’s death at his home in Lexington, Virginia, on October 12, 1870, former Confederate President Jefferson Davis gave a moving eulogy honoring Lee at a Memorial meeting in Richmond on November 3. This was probably the largest gathering of Confederate generals and officers since the end of the war. In the course of his speech, he gave this praise of Lee:

“This good citizen, this gallant soldier, this great general, this true patriot, had yet a higher praise than this or these; he was a true Christian.”

     Robert Edward Lee was born in Westmoreland County, Virginia, in 1807. He was the youngest son of Revolutionary War hero, Henry “Light Horse Harry” Lee and Anne Hill Carter. Henry Lee had been a close military confident of fellow Virginian, George Washington. He was a Virginia delegate to the Continental Congress form 1786 to 1788 and later became the 9th Governor of Virginia from1791 to1794. However, he lost most of his fortune in the financial panic of 1795-6. Nevertheless, he was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 1799. During his one two-year term he wrote the Congressional tribute to Washington on his death in 1799: “First in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen,” Continued financial difficulties resulted in a year in debtors prison in 1809.  He spent most of the rest of his life in the West Indies trying to recover his wealth.   He died in 1818 on his way back to Virginia, when young Robert was only 11-years-old.

     In growing up, young Robert was influenced by his father’s military and political legacy including his financial humiliation and struggles. He was also strongly influenced by his mother’ s Biblical teachings and the character of his father’s friend, George Washington. It was not surprising that he decided upon a military career and attended the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. Lee graduated second of the 46 cadets in the class of 1829. He began his career as a Second Lieutenant assigned to the Engineer Corps and distinguished himself in combat reconnaissance assignments under General Winfield Scott in the Mexican War from 1846 to 1848. He was Superintendent the U.S Military Academy at West Point from 1852 to 1855.

     It was as Superintendent at West Point that Lee’s leadership style was refined and molded. As a cadet, Lee’s outstanding academic performance and strict military bearing had gained him the nickname “the Marble Man” with his classmates, but his leadership style as Superintendent was anything but stiff and overbearing. While Lee was Superintendent, the Cadet Corps was only about 200, and he took a personal interest in every cadet, especially those who struggled with the strenuous academic and strict military discipline of the school. Lee had high standards, but his style was not to push, drive, or threaten. According to his most celebrated biographer, Douglas Southall Freeman,

“He carried them [the cadets] on his heart, and spent many an anxious hour debating how he could best train them to be servants of their country by making them masters of themselves.”

     Later as Commander of the Army of Northern Virginia and General-in-Chief of the Confederate Armies, one of the reasons for Lee’s spectacular success in motivating Confederate soldiers, who were often badly outnumbered, out-gunned, and coping with inadequate supplies and clothing, was that they knew his orders were not given to gain himself promotion, praise, or personal glory. He had the highest standards of duty and honor and that included responsibilities to his troops as well as cause and country. 

     Responding to public praise for his stunning military victories, Lee said:

“I tremble for my country when I hear of confidence expressed in me.  I know too well my weakness, that our only hope is in God.”

     On discipline Lee remarked,

“A true man of honor feels humbled himself when he cannot help humbling others.”

     When told that his chaplains were praying for him daily Lee responded:

“I can only say that I am nothing but a poor sinner, trusting in Christ alone for salvation.”

     A Confederate officer recollected:

“His soldiers reverenced him and had unbounded confidence in him, for he shared all their privations.”

     A private in the Army of Northern Virginia recollected:

“It was remarkable what confidence the men reposed in General Lee; they were ready to follow him wherever he might lead, or order them to go.”

     John Brown Gordon, Confederate Lieutenant General and later Governor of Georgia and U.S. Senator, said this about Lee:

“Intellectually, he was cast in a giant mold. Naturally he was possessed of strong passions. He loved the excitement of war. He loved grandeur. But all these appetites and powers were brought under the control of his judgment and made subservient to his Christian faith. This made him habitually unselfish and ever willing to sacrifice on the altar of duty and in the service of his fellows…He is an epistle, written of God and designed by God to teach the people of this country that earthly success is not the criterion of merit, not the measure of true greatness.”

     “Thou therefore endure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus Christ.”

—2 Timothy: 2:3 


On January 19 and 21, many of us will remember the birthdays of  Generals Robert E. Lee and Thomas Jonathon "Stonewall" Jackson respectively. In honor of their memory, I'll raise atop my flagpole an infantry-sized (4ft. X 4ft.) Army of Northern Virginia Battleflag as tribute to two great sons of the South. Why remember these two men? They were the epitome of leadership by example by which many of us patterned our lives. This includes Presidents and Pastors, along with folks in various walks of life both here and abroad. Their life and career left a legacy of selfless devotion to duty, honor, and people unmatched in the history of western civilization. Their mark was not just military heroism, but also a moral heroism. Their brilliant accomplishments on the battlefield were outshone in victory and defeat by the nobility of their moral wisdom and stainless integrity. Their devotion to God, family, soldiers, and the Southern Cause became legendary.

Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson, whose military tactics have been studied worldwide, were American soldiers, educators, Christian gentlemen, husbands and fathers. And even though they are primarily thought of as Confederate Generals, they both would only want to be remembered as humble servants of God. They accepted no credit for victory or defeat, noting it was God's will and all glory given him.

At war's beginning, Lee held a 32-year commission in the United States Army. He resigned that commission after being offered command of the Union Army and chose instead to defend his beloved country of Virginia, of which this Union Army was being rallied to illegally invade the South. This is a great sacrifice made by Lee on which I will challenge upon in a later communication.

Before the War for Southern Independence, Thomas Jackson was an ex-soldier, artillery specialist, and an obscure professor at Virginia Military Institute. He also served as a board member of a local bank. Though he was considered a pillar of the community, he was threatened with prosecution for conducting a Sunday school class for slave children, which was illegal at the time. Jackson risked his place in society by remarking that all should know the teachings of Christ. No threat was ever made good. Again, I will challenge upon this in a later communication.

Jackson received the immortal nickname "Stonewall" after the first Battle of Manassas in July 1861 when he stood fast - pressing his troops forward to close a gap in the line against a Union attack. Upon observing Jackson, General Bee out of Texas reportedly called out to his men, "Rally behind the Virginians! There stands Jackson like a stonewall!" Some report that Bee didn't agree with Jackson's maneuver and actually said, " "Look at Jackson standing there like a damned stone wall!" We'll never know what Bee meant because moments shortly after his rallying cry, he was shot and died the next day. Whatever his actual words, General Bee was credited for giving rise to General Thomas J. Jackson being forever after referred to as "Stonewall Jackson."

Following this victory, "Stonewall" wrote a letter to the Pastor who was carrying on the colored Sunday school class: "In my tent last night, after a fatiguing day's service, I remembered that I failed to send a contribution for our colored Sunday school. Enclosed you will find a check for that object." 
"Stonewall" Jackson is considered by military historians as one of the most gifted tactical commanders in US history. He was General Robert E. Lee’s right hand during many battles. Unfortunately, Jackson was accidentally shot by Confederate pickets at the Battle of Chancellorsville on May 2, 1863. General Jackson survived with the loss of his left arm, but died of complications from pneumonia eight days later.

After the passing of "Stonewall", General Robert E. Lee stated, "Jackson has lost his left arm, but I have lost my right."

Sir Winston Churchill once remarked, "Lee was the noblest American who had ever lived and one of the greatest commanders known to the annals of war."

The late Franklin D. Roosevelt, America's 32nd President, spoke at the unveiling of the Robert E. Lee Memorial Statue in Dallas, Texas on June 12th, 1936 and said, "I am very happy to take part in this unveiling of the statue of General Robert E. Lee.

All over the United States we recognize him as a great leader of men, as a great general. But, also, all over the United States I believe that we recognize him as something much more important than that. We recognize Robert E. Lee as one of our greatest American Christians and one of our greatest American gentlemen."

On August 9th, 1960, former General and President Dwight D. Eisenhower, in response to an inquiry as to why he had a picture of Robert E. Lee in the Oval Office remarked:

Respecting your August 1 inquiry calling attention to my often expressed admiration for General Robert E. Lee, I would say, first, that we need to understand that at the time of the War Between the States the issue of Secession had remained unresolved for more than 70 years. Men of probity, character, public standing and unquestioned loyalty, both North and South, had disagreed over this issue as a matter of principle from the day our Constitution was adopted.

General Robert E. Lee was, in my estimation, one of the supremely gifted men produced by our Nation. He believed unswervingly in the Constitutional validity of his cause which until 1865 was still an arguable question in America; he was thoughtful yet demanding of his officers and men, forbearing with captured enemies but ingenious, unrelenting and personally courageous in battle, and never disheartened by a reverse or obstacle. Through all his many trials, he remained selfless almost to a fault and unfailing in his belief in God. Taken altogether, he was noble as a leader and as a man, and unsullied as I read the pages of our history.

From deep conviction I simply say this: a nation of men of Lee's caliber would be unconquerable in spirit and soul. Indeed, to the degree that present-day American youth will strive to emulate his rare qualities, including his devotion to this land as revealed in his painstaking efforts to help heal the nation's wounds once the bitter struggle was over, we, in our own time of danger in a divided world, will be strengthened and our love of freedom sustained.

Such are the reasons that I proudly display the picture of this great American on my office wall.

And finally on Aug. 5th, 1975, 110 years after Lee's application, President Gerald Ford signed Joint Resolution 23, restoring the long overdue full rights of citizenship to Robert E. Lee.

At that signing, President Ford said, in part: "General Lee's character has been an example to succeeding generations, making the restoration of his citizenship an event in which every American can take pride."

So I ask each of you to take time and remember these two men. When you attend church services tomorrow, ask your Pastor if the congregation can sing "How Firm a Foundation" in memory of Lee. It was his favorite hymn.

Semper Fi - Semper Southern - Semper Saviour,


By: Tim manning

The heart of U.S. Reconstruction following 1865 was to regain power in the Northern Democrat controlled States and moderate Republican States that opposed and mostly hated Abraham Lincoln and the Radical Republicans of New England. During the 1860s only people born in the New England States considered themselves as "Yankee's."

New Yorkers distrusted and largely "hated" the rude people of New England and they opposed Lincoln's war. New York State had a Democrat government and a Democrat Mayor of NYC.

New Jersey had a "moderate" Republican Governor and State government that despised Lincoln and New England.

Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin and Michigan had Democrat governments during Lincoln's war and had no use for any Yankee's or their unconstitutional views of government.

All of these States and New York called up their militias to kick the USA out of their States beginning in 1863.

The U.S. War Department record known as the Official Records of the War of the Rebellion said that "half of all U.S. military" were fighting in the northern States. This is virtually never taught in U.S. government sponsored schools.

When the war was over most Northerner's would not vote for a Republican and without the South supporting Republicans (FORCED UPON US BY THEIR CARPETBAGGERS), the Party of Lincoln would have been completely finished in the United States and the destructive consequences of the War may have been lessened and the South permitted to be independent. Most Northern Democrats favored Southern independence and  a less centralized federal government.

To maintain control of the central U.S. government after the War, it was more important to "Reconstruct" the Northern States than it was the defeated Southern States whose voting was easier to control with Southern whites now disenfranchised.

FIRST, Republicans had to control voting in all of the Democrat States and areas of the North, and SECOND, those Democrat voters had to identify with the winners of the War, the Republicans.

At the end of the War,  Northerners did not in any way identify with the Yankee New Englander's.

Southerner's understood this and referred to New Englander's as "Yankee's" and the rest of the Northern people as "Northerner's" unless they behaved liked the poorly mannered New Englander's. This dichotomy of "Northern vs Yankee" was soon lost to Northerner's as the U.S. Reconstruction of the Northern people become more and more dominant.

The success of "U.S. Reconstruction" was nearly total in the Northern Democrat States as we see today. Northerner's (not New Englander's) who fancy themselves to be "Yankee's" with a capital "Y." Southerner's STILL consider "Yankee's" with a lower case "s" as an irreligious, vulgar, profane and sexually immoral and dishonest people, and are mildly amused at the historical ignorance of Northerner's who proudly refer to themselves as "Yankee's."

Southerner's tend to have longer historical memories which is why Southerner's still resist the ongoing Reconstruction of their culture and government.

Marxism in the Civil War
By: Jonathan Harris

Before reading the book "Red Republican's and Lincoln's Marxists" I have to admit I was a bit skeptical. Despite my predisposition to be wary of any fiber of genuine Christian morality flowing within the veins of Lincoln not to mention the founders of the GOP, I did not think it likely that any of them would be sympathetic towards the precepts of communism. After all, communism is a monster of the 20th century isn't it? Wilson, FDR, Johnson, and Carter may have been affected, but Lincoln? Having given up the fantasy that "Honest Abe" "freed the slaves" and "saved the union" by maintaining the constitution and being authentic with the true intentions of Thomas Jefferson, I decided to see whether or not this association between Lincoln and the teachings of Marx was legitimate. What I found was shocking - perhaps more so to the average products of public education than I, but admittedly I was astonished. Herein I will endeavor to acquaint my readers with a couple of the more damning facts which give us reason to question the allegiance of the Republican party to free markets and limited government. While I cannot offer nearly half of the information I'd like to, I encourage you if interested to pick up a copy of the book by clicking on the icon above. These are facts historians have conveniently left out and its time Americans became introduced to them. They will explain the "state capital" tendencies of the GOP, expose the Lincoln cult, and trace the origin of the progressive disease in the US. I ask you to continue to read and in so doing unlock history's best kept secrets.

Marx and Lincoln 

When we survey the history of the "Civil War" through the eyes of the world's most notorious communist, we are acquainted with a man who hated (as can be seen in his post-war letter to President Johnson) the South out of pathetic ignorance. Karl Marx supposed that the South had in secret prepared to undermine the United States for years, that Jefferson Davis was a "dictator," that  the Confederate Constitution (which outlawed the slave trade) promoted slavery, that the Supreme Court was a tool of slaveholders, and that the South geographically encompassed three-quarters of the Union.

In the autumn of 1861 Marx, the Father of Communism, wrote the following regarding the "American Civil War."

The war of the Southern Confederacy is, therefore, not a war of defense, but a war of conquest, a war of conquest for the extension and perpetuation of slavery.

It is interesting to observe that virtually all Liberals and a majority of modern day conservatives would heartily agree with such a statement. This should raise a "red flag" in the minds of those who love liberty.Why is it that the majority of Americans, even those who advocate the free-market, agree with the way in which Karl Marx of all people framed the cause of the war? Though Marx and his partner in communism Fredrick Engels lived in Great Britain, they served "as propaganda agents for the Northern cause in Europe." The authors point out that "while most Americans think of abolition of slavery as an end in itself, communists had a completely different view of abolition." Marx stated in The Civil War in the United States, "Labor cannot emancipate itself in the white skin where in the black it is branded." After the war was over Marx said in a speech:

And the successful close of the war against slavery has indeed inaugurated a new era in the annals of the working class. . . Still the Civil War offered a compensation in the liberation of the slaves and the impulse which it thereby gave to your own class movement. 

As one can see, the freeing of the slaves was not an end in itself to the Father of Communism, but rather a means to an end- that end being the revolution of the working class against the proletariat. I should note that the authors do dismantle Marx's notion that the South was aggressively fighting to "perpetuate" slavery. On the contrary, the War Between the States was a war of centralism vs. federation, of humanism vs. Christianity, of socialism vs. capitalism, and of imperialism vs. popular sovereignty. We do not have time to address Marx's popular lie in this review, but would encourage those curious regarding this issue to pick up a copy of Myths of American Slavery

After Lincoln's second inaugural victory, Marx delivered a congratulatory letter to the 16th president on behalf of the International Workingmen's Association which stated in no uncertain terms where the allegiance of the communist community lay. The last paragraph of the letter is as follows:

The workingmen of Europe feel sure that, as the American War of Independence initiated a new era of ascendancy for the middle class, so the American Antislavery War will do for the working classes. They consider it an earnest of the epoch to come that it fell to the lot of Abraham Lincoln, the single-minded son of the working class, to lead his country through the matchless struggle for the rescue of an enchained race and the reconstruction of a social world. 

Though no conservative should have a problem with the rescuing of  "an enchained race" (Although it may be pointed out that Lincoln never accomplished this task, and the radical republicans enchained all men to civil slavery while in the process making the lot of the slave even worse) all of our eyebrows should raise when we hear the words "reconstruction of a social world." Was Lincoln fulfilling the next step in creating a world in Marx's image? How can this be?

The American System and Socialism 

The answer lies in an idea of strong central government promoted by Alexander Hamilton, passed on to Henry Clay, and finally making its way into the White House through the election of Abraham Lincoln. The "American System" as it was called is defined by the authors as "nothing less than an attempt to increase the power of the Federal government beyond that which the Constitution authorizes." Clay, a politician Lincoln modeled himself after, was an advocate of centralized banking, internal improvements, and protective tariffs all of which conflicted with the Constitution and promoted a centralized state. Sometimes these policies are referred to as "State Capitalism," a system in which the government favors certain businesses and regions over others in exchange for favors and vice-versa. It goes without saying that it takes a strong central government to impose a system of redistribution. The communist transformation (note: communist and socialist meant the same thing in 1860) of America gained legitimacy under the leadership of the early Republican party due to these policies. If we compare the Communist Manifesto to Lincoln's actions we can see this quite clearly. The Manifesto calls for a "heavy progressive or graduated income tax." In comparison, Lincoln signed the Legal Tender Act in 1862, and the national currency acts in 1863 and 1864. Instantly a system of nationally charted banks were created and a federally run national banking monopoly was born. One of the leading supporters for nationalizing baking, (R) John Sherman of Ohio proclaimed, "Nationalize as much as possible [and thereby] make men love their country before their states." In 1862 Lincoln signed America's first income tax into law creating the first IRS service. Another idea supported by both Lincoln and Marx was Federal involvement in education. In 1862, Lincoln signed the Morrill act, named for Senator Justin Morrill who defended it this way: "The role of the national government is to mold the character of the American people." Instantly money that was made through Federal land grant sales went to funding colleges. It goes without saying that Washington controlled the curriculum. In Carl Sandburg's six-volume account of the life of Lincoln he highlights something conservatives should find disturbing. When referring to Robert Owen's (an early American socialist) utopia it is said that "the scheme lighted up Lincoln's heart." It is for these reasons that columnist Vin Suprynowicz has called Lincoln and his most ardent supporters "American Bolsheviks."

Communists in the Ranks

The communist connections and participants in Lincoln's War emphasized by Red Republicans are to numerous to mention within the limited space here, so for times sake I will mention some of the more influential men and important connections. After the failed socialist revolutions of 1848 which encompassed most of the European continent, many German, English, Hungarian, Bavarian, etc. atheistic socialists flocked to the United States having been banned from their homelands for treason. Ironically just about all of them wound up in the North (for a number of factors including an already strong progressive movement brought on by Transcendentalists and Unitarians) as ardent supporters of the Republican party. During the first GOP convention one of the main objectives of the Forty-Eighters was to assure that "Puritans and native born Americans" would not control the party. The Germans, being the largest of the immigrant groups, contributed the greatest to Lincoln's election. Frederick Engels (Marx's brother in arms) pointed out, "had it not been for the experienced soldiers who had entered America after the European revolution -- especially from Germany -- the organization of the Union army would have taken still longer than it did." The first GOP convention included 19 German -American delegates, most of whom were forty-eighters some of whom were personal friends of Marx and Engels. In fact, the GOP platform included  protection of voting rights for foreign-born citizens and promotion of the Homestead Act under the nickname of the "Dutch" (i.e. German) planks. Lincoln valued the German vote so much that he even secretly purchased a German newspaper, the Illinois Staats Anzieger before his election. In fact, just about every, if not all, of the German communist participants highlighted in Red Republicans were at some point journalists for German newspapers in the U.S.. It was the "default" vocation for exiled socialists.

A couple of the more influential German Forty-Eighters (i.e. communist revolutionaries) in the GOP were Carl Schurz who was a GOP delegate, Lincoln supporter, minister to Spain in Lincoln's administration, General in the Union Army, Secretary of the Interior under Hays, senator from Missouri, journalist, and president of the National Civil Service Reform League (a position he used to disenfranchise Native Americans just as he had the South).  Franz Sigel served as a general in the Union Army and became the superintendent of the St. Louis Public School system. It is worthy of mentioning that the uniforms of the Third Regiment of Missouri under his command had been customized to resemble the socialist revolutionary uniforms worn in Germany in 1849. Friedrich Karl Franz Hecter who led the German revolution was a key player in obtaining the German vote for Lincoln, he also led a German regiment in the war. August Willich, a personal friend of Marx (Marx described him as a "communist at heart") recruited more than 1,500 German soldiers and became a Union General. Louis Blenker was General of the 8th New York Infantry and gained a reputation in Northern Virginia as a looter from the way in which he commanded his men to steal from the civilian population. Edward Solomon and two of his three brothers became Generals (the 4th was a Sergent) in the Union Army, he himself became governor of Wisconsin. Another Edward Solomon (unrelated, who was a bit young to be a forty-eighter, yet  was still a socialist) became a General under General Grant and was awarded the appointment of governor of the Washington territory from President Grant. Friedrich Kapp, a newspaper man after the German revolution, was an elector for the GOP and became the commissary of immigration in 1867. Fritz and Mathilde Anneka were influential German revolutionaries who were also friends with Karl Marx and supported the Union war effort through speeches and journalism. Mathilde went on to be one of the original radical feminists in the United States. Karl Heizman was also a journalist and became an advocate of terrorism against the South by attacking civilians and women and children (an idea unfortunately implemented). Joseph Weydemeyer was a close associate of Marx's the Annekes and Willich starting the first Marxist organization in the U.S., the Proletarian League of New York, and starting two socialist newspapers which favored Lincoln. Peter Joseph Osterhaus became a postwar military governor in Vicksburg after serving under General Sherman. Max Weber migrated to New York from Germany to become a General in the Union Army, an IRD agent (modern day IRS), and finally a U.S. consul to Naples.

When we turn our attention to the Non-German socialists the connection between the Republican government and socialism becomes even more clear. It is thought that Lincoln himself offered Giuseppe Garibaldi, the Italian leader of socialism against the Pope the position of commander of Union forces, a position Garibaldi declined upon Lincoln's refusal to reframe the war as being "anti-slavery." Two of the members of John Brown's gang were Forty-Eighters (from Bavaria and Vienna). Frederick Hassaurek from Vienna edited a German newspaper in Cincinnati, campaigned for John Fremont (the first Republican candidate for president), and became a diplomat to Ecuador under Lincoln. Julius Staul, a Hungarian revolutionary, became the US consul to Japan and Shanghai after serving under Fremont in the Union Army as a General. Fremont's chief of staff was Alexander Asboth, also from Hungary.  He went on to become a U.S. diplomat to Argentina. In fact, Fremont (the famous explorer, GOP presidential candidate, and general) is so connected with socialism judging from the men he surrounded himself with, most of whom are not included in this review, that it leaves little doubt that he himself was a socialist.The commander of Fort Delaware (a notorious Union prison camp in which captured Confederates were tortured and killed) was Hungarian revolutionary Albin Francisco Schoepf. Thomas Francis Meagher was an influential Irishmen who helped substantially in the raising and commanding New York's Irish Brigade.  He was also a journalist, lecturer, and not to mention a convicted criminal having been first deported to Australia (penal colony) by Great Britain. Lorez Brentano, another Forty-Eighter became a senator from Illinois and served as a U.S. ambassador to Dresden. 

Many of the early republican socialist leaders weren't foreign at all. John C. Fremont was the first Republican presidential candidate, Senator John Sherman was General William T. Sherman's brother, General Sherman himself was on a list of "approved communists", Charles A. Dana who was according to Lincoln the "eyes of the administration" was Assistant Secretary of War and a very close friend of Marx and Engels. Horace Greeley, a committed communist, hired Dana as an editor for his paperThe New York Tribune, and included Karl Marx as a columnist. If we broadened our margins to include Unitarian, Transcendentalist, and other Utopian humanists supporters of the Union we would have a very large list of influential socialists indeed. 

Hitler and Lincoln

Having recently finished Mein Kampf part I, I find it almost laughable to hear modern conservatives compared to Adolph Hitler. Hitler was nothing more than a "National Socialist" which is what the Nazi party stood for. His railings against communism were over a slight disagreement in their method of class warfare and international socialism. He chose race/cultural warfare instead of class, however still maintaining the basic principles of socialism (save perhaps destruction of the family). It is interesting to note that Hitler had much in common with Lincoln (No I'm not saying Lincoln was a Nazi). Hitler stated in Mein Kampf

The states that make up the American Union are mostly in the nature of territories. . . formed for technical administrative purposes. These states did not and could not possess sovereign rights of their own. Because it was the Union that created most of these so-called states. 

Abraham Lincoln said:

The Union is older than the States and, in fact created them as States. The Union, and not themselves separately, procured their independence and their liberty. The Union threw off their old dependence for them and made them States, such as they are. 

Aside from being completely wrong historically speaking the philosophy behind both statements is also wrong. Hitler believed in a Reich that would last 1,000 years. In other words a "perpetual" empire, insofar as human governments can be ongoing. Lincoln believed that the nation would "not perish from the earth." Since neither Lincoln nor Hitler were Christians in the orthodox sense it is doubtful that their token statements about God from a Christian perspective were legitimate. It is more likely that as master politicians they were able to fulfill the expectations of religious people while pursuing a centralized God-like state with their actions. Actions do speak louder than words.And Hitler's actions were akin to Lincoln's. The authors state: 

. . .the Federal Republic of Germany was composed of twenty-five German states. . . free, independent, and sovereign. . .One of the first things done by Hitler. . . was to deny any claim of state sovereignty by these states and to consolidate all power into one big government.

Placing a government in a position of perpetuity is to ascribe to it an attribute of God, and deny Him the right to divide a people as He did at Babel and as He'll do when He returns. It places man's faith in a "stable" system instead of a stable God.


At the very least it should be mildly disturbing to hear that Hitler and Marx were named among the fans of Lincoln, and it should call into question just how "Republican" in the conservative sense Lincoln truly was. Far from being a sole indictment against Lincoln however, we should call into question the whole origin of the GOP. Are they truly conservative if they look back to Lincoln for inspiration? They were the original party to allow socialists to gained admittance into the U.S. government, which ushered in the progressive era of Roosevelt, Wilson, and FDR. It's clear that a "renewal" is not the answer for the GOP, but rather a complete start from scratch. Either that or the creation of a third-party that will adhere to the Constitution and stop trampling on the rights of states and people like both parties have been in the habit of doing over the past 150 years. Still, it is the principles of God that will save this nation, the God that Hitler, Marx, and Lincoln rejected, not political parties. It is a battle of humanism vs. Christianity and only revival in the orthodox Christian sense has any hope of restoring the government of the United States.

The story of THE BLACK EYED PEA being considered good luck relates directly back to Sherman's Bloody March to the Sea in late 1864. It was led by Union Major General William T. Sherman. 

The 'Civil War' campaign began on 11/15/64 when Sherman 's troops marched from the captured burned-to-the-ground city of Atlanta, Georgia, and ended at the port of Savannah on 12/22/1864. When the smoke cleared, the southerners who had survived the onslaught came out of hiding. They soon realized that the Yankee invaders that had marched through the countryside had looted and stolen everything of value, and stolen or destroyed the food-stocks of the populace, including all the livestock, death and destruction were everywhere. Entire Cities were torched and the fields were salted so as to prevent future crops from growing in them for years to come. 

While in hiding, few had enough to eat and starvation was now upon the survivors. There was no international aid, no Red Cross meal trucks, no homeless shelters. The Yankee Northern army had  taken everything they could carry or haul away on the stolen wagons, and eaten everything they could eat.  But they couldn't take it all.  They burned what they didn't steal.They wanted no way for anyone to survive in the South nation.  They wanted it fully cleared for the taking. Their intentions was no less than the eradication of the Southern people, a true holocaust. 

The devastated people of the Confederacy found that, for some unknown reason, Sherman's blood-thirsty troops had left silos full of black eyed peas in tact in the wake of their carnage and destruction. You see at the time in the north the lowly black eyed pea was only used as feed stock. The Yankee northern troops saw it as the thing of least value, taking grain for their horses, livestock and other crops to feed themselves they just couldn't take everything. So they left the black eyed peas in great quantities assuming it would be of no use to the survivors because all the stock that it could feed had either been stolen, eaten or killed by the Yankees.

Southerners awoke to face a new year in this devastation; facing massive 
starvation if not for the good luck of having the black-eyed peas to eat.  From New Years Day 1866 forward, the tradition grew to eat black-eyed peas on New Year's Day for good luck and in remembrance of those brave Confederates who fought to survive with nothing, and did, in spite of all that the Lincoln Yankees did to them to kill them.

Sent to the CSA by Billy Pierce and edited by the Confederate Sentry

Editor's note: The  following excepts are provided from Bernhard Thuersam, author of
The North Carolina War Between the States Sesquicentennial. 

The website link is at 

"Hung for Defending His Country"

“Dear Children – Soon our troops began to pass through [Raleigh, April 1865], weary, dirty fellows, and hungry also, every one that could, fed them; they could not stop but in passing, we stood at the gate and handed them bread and ham; they were marching to the tune of Dixie, the war song that we vainly
thought was going to lead them to victory.

Our soldiers retreated towards Hillsboro, the Federal soldiers pursuing. One reckless Confederate soldier from Texas was in the rear guard; he fired on a Yankee soldier, so close were the pursuers to the pursued. After firing he turned and put spurs to his horse, but unfortunately his horse stumbled, and he was captured. The next morning under a guard of soldiers,
he was carried by our home, (I looked on with anguished heart) to the grove back of your Grandfather’s,
and hung to the limb of a huge tree, under which your uncles and aunts had played in childhood.” 
(A Grandmother’s Recollection of Dixie, page 29).

“They Whipped Mrs. R.”
Chester, South Carolina, [February]. 27, 1865

“My Darling Sister, I am so rejoiced to be able to once more write you though it is more than probable
this letter may never reach its destination. Every day we were in hourly expectation of a visit from Sherman’s
troops. When Columbia was evacuated they sent all the Government stores to this place….The Treasury
Department went through to Charlotte. I saw a good many of the girls….only stayed a few hours and
were very anxious for me to go to North Carolina…..

I must tell you some of the outrages the Yankees have committed around here. An old man by
the name of Brice lived in Fairfield District….The Yankees hung him because he would not tell where
had hid his money and silver. They robbed every house they passed, burnt a great many. They have
burnt Tom Boulware’s and some houses near there, burnt Mary S. DeG’s gin house, cribs, etc.,
and took two watches and some other things from here.

They stripped old Mrs. R., Kate’s mother, and whipped her, destroyed everything Mrs. N. Beckham had
to eat and the Boulware’s and Watson’s, I hear, are living off the corn left by our cavalry men in the woods.

It has been some time since I have had as comfortable a night’s rest as I had last night…
Wheeler’s men killed sixteen Yanks I hear in retaliation for whipping Mrs. R. Oh Ann, I do think the idea of
a Lady’s being stripped and whipped by those villains is outrageous, the most awful thing I have heard of.

Oh Annie, is it not awful to see the way our people are suffering and the sin that is committed…..
I just know people cannot die from fear…..” 
(When Sherman Came: Southern Women and the “Great March,” pp. 229-230).

If You Had Behaved Yourselves, This Would Not Have Happened:

“…[T]he Yankees came by the hundreds and destroyed everything that we possessed---every living thing.
After they had taken everything out of the house---our clothes, shoes, hats, and even my children’s
clothes---my husband was made to take off his boots which a yankee tried on. The shoes would
not fit, so the soldier cut them to pieces. They even destroyed the medicine we had.

In the cellar, they took six barrels of lard, honey and preserves---and what they did not want, they let
the negroes come in and take. They took 16 horses, one mule, all of the oxen, every cow, every plough,
even the hoes, and four vehicles. The soldiers filled them with meat and pulled them to camp which was
not far from our home. They would kill the hogs in the fields, cut them in halves with the hair on.

Not a turkey, duck or chicken was left.

My mother in law…was very old and frail and in bed. They went in her bedroom and cursed her.
They took all our books and threw them in the woods. I had my silver and jewelry buried
in the swamp for two months.

We went to Faison Depot and bought an old horse that we cleaned up, fed and dosed, but which
died after a week’s care. Then the boys went again and bought an ox. They made something like a plough
which they used to finish the crop with. Our knives were pieces of hoop iron sharpened, and our forks
were made of cane---but it was enough for the little we had to eat.

All of which I have written was the last year and month of the sad, sad war (March and April, 1865).
It is as fresh in my memory and all its horrors as if it were just a few weeks ago. It will never be erased
from my memory as long as life shall last.

I do not and cannot with truth say I have forgotten or that I have forgiven them. They destroyed what they
could of the new house and took every key and put them in the turpentine boxes. Such disappointment
cannot be imagined. My children would cry for bread, but there was none. A Yankee took a piece out of
his bag and bit it, and said: “If you had behaved yourselves this would not have happened.”
(Story in Sampson Independent, February 1960; The Heritage of Sampson County (NC), pp. 253-254)

Sherman’s Fiends Incarnate Liberate Women’s Clothing

“Where home used to be. April 12, 1865”
Your precious letter, my dear Janie, was received night before last, and the pleasure that it afforded me,
and indeed the whole family, I leave for you to imagine, [and I am thankful] when I hear that my friends are left
with the necessities of life, and unpolluted by the touch of Sherman’s Hell-hounds.

My experience since we parted has indeed been sad…..[S]uch an army of patriots [as ours] fighting for their
hearthstones is not to be conquered by such fiends incarnate as fill the ranks of Sherman’s army. Our political
sky does seem darkened with a fearful cloud, but when compared with the situation of our fore-fathers,
I can but take courage.

[At] about four o’clock the Yankees came charging, yelling and howling. They just knocked down all such
like mad cattle. Right into the house, breaking open bureau drawers of all kinds faster than I could unlock.
They cursed us for having hid everything and made bold threats if certain things were not brought to light,
but all to no effect. They took Pa’s hat and stuck him pretty badly with a bayonet to make him disclose
something…The Negroes are bitterly prejudiced to his minions. They were treated, if possible, worse
than the white people, all their provisions taken and their clothes destroyed and some carried off.

They left no living thing in Smithville but the people. One old hen played sick and thus saved her neck,
but lost all of her children. The Yankees would run all over the yard to catch the little things to squeeze to death.

Every nook and corner of the premises was searched and the things that they didn’t use were burned or
torn into strings. No house but the blacksmith shop was burned, but into the flames they threw every
tool, plow, etc., that was on the place. The battlefield does not compare with [the Yankees] in point of stench.
I don’t believe they have been washed since the day they were born. I was too angry to eat or sleep…

Gen. Slocum with two other hyenas of his rank, rode up with his body-guard and introduced themselves
with great pomp, but I never noticed them at all.

Sis Susan was sick in bed and they searched the very pillows that she was lying on, and keeping
up such a noise, tearing up and breaking to pieces, that the Generals couldn’t hear themselves talk,
but not a time did they try to prevent it. They got all of my stockings and some of our collars and
handkerchiefs. If I ever see a Yankee woman, I intend to whip her and take the clothes off her very back.”
(Janie Smith’s Letter (excerpts), Mrs. Thomas H. Webb Collection, NC Division of Archives & History).