While the primary Confederate Colonel interest in this video is the shift from agrarian to industrial society, he brings an important message about why Common Core must be opposed and stopped. For our part, we choose to home school and completely bypass the government indoctrination system.

In addition, this is a good time to point out another project that I am working on – The New Southern Agrarians. From the home page of The New Southern Agrarians:

What is Southern Agrarianism? Who were the Southern Agrarians and what did they believe? Does Southern Agrarianism have a place in today’s society? More importantly, does Southern Agrarianism show us a better way – a new path to take as we walk away from the rubble of a collapsed civilization built upon that which the Southern Agrarians warned us about? Those questions, and more, are what this web site hopes to answer.

The New Southern Agrarians is little more than what is quoted above at this time. It is, however, something I consider to be an important project and one that I will be working on.

 

“Where men are forbidden to honour a king, they honor millionaires, athletes, or film stars instead; even famous prostitutes or gangsters. For spiritual nature, like bodily nature, will be served; deny it food and it will gobble poison.”
C. S. Lewis

The reasons behind the election of the man who currently resides in the White House can be found in this same question. Was he elected because he clearly articulated a vision of a morally upright, honorable America where all men would have the opportunity to excel and then reap the rewards of their success? or was he elected because he seemed “cool” and “hip” and represented “the latest ‘in’ thing”? To paraphrase someone he is fond of quoting, was he elected based on the content of his character – or on the color of his skin? I have no doubt that it was for the latter.

I have made no secret of my admiration for constitutional monarchy as a form of government, and Mr. Lewis has presented the chief argument in favor of that – the moral and spiritual reason. Many people will, of course, feed their “spiritual nature” with poison rather than food simply because the nature of man tends toward the wicked rather than the good. Those type of people will always be with us. The benefits of having a leader who represents honor and righteousness and justice and freedom go not to what I refer to as “Walmart people,” but to those who yearn for a leader who brings out the best in men rather than pandering to our baser instincts.

Photo from NBC News site with the clear intention of distorting the facts of the two men involved. The story was about the distortive effects of those photos.

Justice has been done. Anyone who actually listened to the trial rather than listening to the media (i.e., the propaganda branch of the government), knows perfectly well that a verdict of “Not Guilty” was the only just outcome. Given the powerful influences involved, I was highly doubtful that justice would really be served in this trial. I quite literally thank God that it was.

Those calling for “Justice for Trayvon” are really calling for vengeance. One cannot have justice for one party without having justice against the other party. You either have justice or you have injustice. Period.

Justice does not “make things right”. One person is still dead and one person will never again lead a normal life, and given the number of death threats made against George Zimmerman, there is a real possibility that one of those will make good on the threat. It’s a bad situation all around and there is just no getting around that. Justice, however, has been done in that the case was tried according to the rule of law and decided on the facts and the evidence – not on emotions.

What happens next is really more important to the nation than the trial. The wide-spread concern about rioting by Blacks would never be an issue if the roles were reversed. Rioting by Whites just doesn’t happen in cases like this. The Black community has a real opportunity to prove that they have grown and matured, and that they can act in a civilized manner in a civilized country. They have the opportunity to prove the critics wrong. Obama and other Black leaders have the opportunity to show real leadership by admitting that their initial remarks did not serve to defuse the situation, but it must be defused now. The media has the opportunity to back off the rhetoric and the distortions.

Will they? The optimist in me certainly hopes so. The realist in me has serious doubts.

As early as the Revolutionary War, the South primarily produced cotton, rice, sugar, indigo and tobacco. The North purchased these raw materials and turned them into manufactured goods. By 1828, foreign manufactured goods faced high import taxes. Foreign raw materials, however, were free of tariffs.

Thus the domestic manufacturing industries of the North benefited twice, once as the producers enjoying the protection of high manufacturing tariffs and once as consumers with a free raw materials market. The raw materials industries of the South were left to struggle against foreign competition.

Because manufactured goods were not produced in the South, they had to either be imported or shipped down from the North. Either way, a large expense, be it shipping fees or the federal tariff, was added to the price of manufactured goods only for Southerners. Because importation was often cheaper than shipping from the North, the South paid most of the federal tariffs.

Much of the tariff revenue collected from Southern consumers was used to build railroads and canals in the North. Between 1830 and 1850, 30,000 miles of track was laid. At its best, these tracks benefited the North. Much of it had no economic effect at all. Many of the schemes to lay track were simply a way to get government subsidies. Fraud and corruption were rampant.

With most of the tariff revenue collected in the South and then spent in the North, the South rightly felt exploited. At the time, 90% of the federal government’s annual revenue came from these taxes on imports.

Historians Paul Collier and Anke Hoeffer found that a few common factors increase the likelihood of secession in a region: lower wages, an economy based on raw materials and external exploitation. Although popular movies emphasize slavery as a cause of the Civil War, the war best fits a psycho-historical model of the South rebelling against Northern exploitation.

Many Americans do not understand this fact. A non-slave-owning Southern merchant angered over yet another proposed tariff act does not make a compelling scene in a movie. However, that would be closer to the original cause of the Civil War than any scene of slaves picking cotton.
(source)

In Great Britain, the Queen is known for being exceptionally frugal, using the same car until it practically falls apart. In fact, in a recent year, the travel expenses for the entire British Royal Family was considerably less than the travel expenses for President Obama and his small crew.
•••
(W)hen people think of Marie Antoinette, they think lavishness and frivolity, they do not think of a woman who gave large amounts to charity, who broke down social barriers at court and who invited poor children to eat with her own royal offspring at Versailles. When it comes to royal children for that matter, it may surprise some to know how much more luxuriously the children of a President of the United States live compared to royal or even imperial offspring.
•••
The Romanov Archduchesses Olga, Tatiana, Maria and Anastasia, for example, had to sleep on camp beds and take cold baths. Their educational schedule was positively Spartan with dawn till dark studies and exercises. The White House may not be the Winter Palace but you can be sure the Obama daughters are taking hot baths at night. Similarly, when one thinks of an Emperor one doesn’t usually think of someone like Emperor Francis Joseph who slept on an army cot and wore clothes until they were worn out -and then patched them and wore them some more!
•••
In Russia, Emperor Alexander III preferred the simple meals of his servants to the delicacies of the banquets thrown by the upper class and his idea of recreation was a simple walk in the Russian wilderness with some sausage and a piece of bread for his lunch. These imperial leaders were hardly men of lavish, wasteful luxury and indulgence.

So… what is the point of this, you may ask? Why are we reading about monarchies on the Confederate Colonel blog? Aside from the fact that monarchies are a time-proven form of government that is grossly misunderstood by those who depend on American public schools for their education, it would behoove us give some serious thought as to what will replace the republican form of government here in America once it fully self-destructs. If you don’t see that coming, then you’re not paying attention. Am I advocating that America become a monarchy? The fact that I cannot see any realistic path from “here” to “there” precludes that. Still, it is a form of government that has stood the test of time for far longer than any form of self-government has. It’s a sad commentary on our ability to govern ourselves.

There are, of course, many forms of monarchy. What comes to mind for most people today is an absolute monarchy where the king lives as some sort of cartoonish, villainous character as often portrayed in movies. I suppose there is an example of that somewhere in history, but that’s not what we’re talking about here. No, we’re talking about men and women who have been raised from birth with the objective of leading a nation; who understand the realities and the give-and-take of any leadership position; who are motivated not by what they must do to get elected and re-elected, but by a sense of duty and responsibility.

Do phrases such as “constitutional monarchy” or “libertarian monarchy” sound contradictory? If so, open your mind a bit and consider what America has become – and what might have been a better choice. Consider it an intellectual challenge rather than a political proposal.

The Mad Monarchist is a blog that I read regularly. Today’s post is titled Rebutting Republican Myths and is a good starting point for an open-minded look at how government works. The author addresses the following objections raised against monarchy as a form of government, and then rebuts them:

• Monarchies are un-democratic!
• Monarchies are too expensive!
• Hereditary monarchy just isn’t fair!
• Monarchies are dangerous! What if the monarch is incompetent?
• Monarchy is an archaic throwback! It’s simply out of date!
• What about cruel monarchs like Nero or Attila the Hun? Surely no benefits could be worth risking leaders like that!
• Royals are too out of touch. They have no idea how regular people live.
• At best, monarchs are unnecessary. A president could do just as good a job.
• Monarchies must be bad or else there would be more of them!
• Monarchs are so set apart, they cannot represent ordinary people.
• Republics bring progress, monarchies only oppress.

Be sure to read the full Rebutting Republican Myths post.

More posts on secession.

Molotov Mitchell is president of the award-winning Illuminati Pictures. His specialty is entertainment communications, particularly reaching the “under 40″ demographic. He is available for speaking engagements through CMG.

Don’t Blame Romney, And Don’t Blame The Campaign is the title of an excellent post at The Hay Ride blog. I started to pull out some key quotes, but I ended up quoting nearly the entire article before deciding to limit it to only three paragraphs. Please take a moment to read the original article.

The current iteration of the Democrat Party is socialist to the core. It isn’t amoral, it’s deliberately immoral. It believes in government-sponsored infanticide, government-sponsored theft, unpatrolled borders, the destruction of the 2nd Amendment, the deliberate destruction of Pax Americana in favor of what can only be envisioned as the rise of a Muslim caliphate and the deliberate destruction of the nuclear family. It believes in the redistribution of wealth rather than its creation, which is perhaps the most offensive concept to the American economic ideal imaginable.
•••
In four years we will not recognize our country. In four years we will be without any illusions about the fact that we are in an economic depression. And in four years we will have a war – because war typically follows depression.
•••
Half the country voted against this future. But the other half didn’t. And because, given that choice, they opted for decline and the loss of individual responsibility and freedom.

H/T to Richard G. Williams of the Old Virginia blog.

Early in our history, or perhaps it was an illusion all along, we voted for candidates based on their stated position, their background, and other criteria. While those are still the terms in which we discuss elections, it is only a mask for what is really happening.

America has divided into two very distinct groups. Two diametrically opposed groups with ideas that are completely incompatible, with no room for true compromise. One will be in power and the other will actively oppose anything done by the group in power. The candidate names and the party names are just convenient labels. The two major parties have completely switched roles over the last 150 years, so the only constant is the struggle between the guiding principles of these two groups.

• One group believes that the individual is responsible for his own material destiny, and that government exists to protect individuals from force or fraud and to provide a basic framework for a civilized society. The same applies on the family level but no further. This group is identified by the labels: conservative, The Right, Republican, libertarian, etc.

• The other group believes that government exists to ensure fairness and equality. It is an egalitarian system that believes all people have equal talent and ability and drive, and that if results are unequal then it must be because the system is unfair and it is government’s role to make it “fair”. This group believes it is the role of government to redistribute wealth to ensure equal results. This group is identified by the labels: liberal, The Left, Democrat, socialist, etc.

Since the objective of these two groups is to win a majority of the votes, there is a self-leveling mechanism involved in the party platforms. The Left will move just far enough to the right to try to win a majority, while the Right will move just far enough to the left to try to do the same. If one side won’t move toward the center, then the other side captures those votes and gains power. While the line between the two sides is constantly shifting, it is still a line drawn down the middle resulting in a close election. Landslides are the result of one side failing to read the mood of the country and not adjusting their position accordingly.

To really understand the difference between these two groups, I look as closely at the people who support them as I do the actual candidates. The liberal side is coarse, crude, vulgar, immoral, and aggressively attacks my most basic beliefs taught by The Bible. They are sometimes referred to as the “Free Stuff Army” and the “Gimme-Dats”. As I imagine my grandchildren living in a world controlled by the liberals, it chills me to the bone. I have a duty to do what I can to keep that from happening. Protecting future generations is one of the most basic obligations of the Southern gentleman.

The two basic rules of power in America are:
1) There are only two sides, and they are defined by whether the individual or the government is responsible the individual’s success or failure.
2) We pick the side that we believe is right and vote for that side. The name of the party or the candidate is just a way to identify which side we believe in.

So, what is the RIGHT thing to do once one recognizes how this works? My conclusion is that we pick the side we believe is right and vote for that side. That leaves me with only one option – to cast my vote for the conservative side, which in this election is Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan. It is far from a perfect choice, but what in life isn’t?

That statement has lead to several rather passionate discussions from friends and relatives who are well-informed and truly want to do the right thing, and I respect and appreciate their efforts. That, however, changes nothing.

Every four years, America goes through The Most Important Election In History. I should have noticed this earlier, but it has taken me just a few months short of sixty years to realize that it is ALWAYS “The Most Important Election In History”.

At some point, we need to come to the realization that life is not segmented into four year terms. People fail to take the long term view because they have no tolerance short term sacrifice. When you take the long view, sometimes that means that bad men get into office; it is also true that they might well do some serious and irreversible damage. Doing what is right is seldom a painless endeavor.

Let me note here that I have been a bit more than just a passive observer of the political process, although there is no need to repeat the details in this post. I am not some dreamy kid with an idealized “vision” that is out of touch with reality. I understand that politics involves compromise – but I also understand that voting does not, or at least it should not.

• Florida is shaping up to be a key battleground state for this upcoming presidential election. Obama and Romney are dead even in the polls.
• In a race this close, every vote is important.
• Obama is not only doing an extremely bad job as President, he is working directly counter to everything that has made America such a remarkable nation in history. He is working to destroy America.

With all that said, I will not be voting for Romney – even if I could somehow know that my one vote would make the difference in this election. I will be voting for a candidate who has no realistic chance to win. I will be voting for the Constitution Party candidate, Virgil Goode. Now, for the purpose of this discussion, his platform is not important; the same arguments would apply to any number of other minor party candidates.

Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
— John Adams

What drives your choice in an election? Our entire system of government was designed around the idea that people would vote for the person who best represented what they honestly wanted in their leadership. It was assumed that a morally upright and honorable people would make such choices.

There were no political parties when the Constitution was written. The two party system developed because it is very effective at what it does: it allows a powerful elite to select our political leadership. From the voters’ perspective it is like going to a car lot filled with every make and model imaginable, yet being told you must choose between the blue car and the red car – of the same model. And from that experience, people cast their vote and then walk away believing that they have chosen their leaders. Amazing.

Here are three short videos that may help shed some light on why I am voting for a minor-party candidate who cannot possibly win, yet one who represents what I am looking for in leadership for this country. They are also about why I will not be voting for Romney – and those are two different issues.

For more on the moral requirement that we vote for the candidate we truly believe would be the best leader (no matter which party they represent), please see the Lost Causes post.

For a more practical-oriented discussion, see “Voting Strategy 2004 – When The Lesser of Two Evils Is No Longer An Option” – a document I wrote in 2004. This covers some of the practical (i.e., expedient) reasons for voting for a minor party candidate – if that is who you believe is the best choice. You may want to take a few minutes to read it.

As a closing note, Alan Keyes (featured in the first two videos) served as an ambassador under Ronald Reagan and was a presidential candidate in 1996, 2000, and 2008. I had the pleasure of hearing him speak when I was a delegate to the Republican state convention in Florida. Ambassador Keyes is truly a remarkable man who loves his country. He was the only candidate at that convention who received a standing ovation. He was wildly popular among many of the delegates, yet the media shamefully treated him as though he were just the janitor sweeping the floors. Why? Because he was not the chosen one. He was not the man who the party leadership had decided would be the nominee. He was ignored by the media, just as Ron Paul was ignored in this election.

10/18/2012 – Edited to add: I didn’t write this post because I think I have all the answers (though at times I wrongly think I do), so I’m still making an honest effort to sort this out and do what is right. Please be sure to read the replies before leaving a reply. Constructive criticism and comments are deeply appreciated. Most folks follow the crowds like robotic drones; there are very few of us who truly agonize over the question of what is the right thing to do. Thank you.