Boaz has pointed out the futility of looking towards the past. How
far do we look? As a transplanted Westerner (Nevada) living happily
in the South I think we may have an answer. As a Libertarian living
under Washingtonian tyranny I would find it pleasurable to look
back to a time when Washington's brutal fist wasn't in a locked
grip around the throat of free men. When was this Mr. Boaz? When
the French controlled Mississippi? No, instead it was the grip of
just as brutal and parasitic Frenchmen rather than a fellow American,
strangling the spirit and souls of free men. To look back and find
a time where the grip of a centralized tyranny was challenged, though
unsuccessfully, we must look back to the period of time embodied
by the Stars and Bars and the Confederate battle flag.
The blood of tyrants and patriots must be shed in the name of liberty.
Unfortunately too little of the former and too much of the latter
was shed during the War of Northern Aggression ( or the Civil War
as I'm sure that Mr. Boaz would like to call it, as a sure sign
of submission to Washington and its PC enforcers). As Mr. Boaz should
know the "War" had little to do with freedom and everything
to do with slavery. No man was freed as a result of Northern victory,
only the Yoke of slavery was extended around the necks of those
who could have claimed to be free prior to the "War".
Tax slavery was extended, the concept of total war was realized
and the strength of D.C. was increased. That one could say that
the cause of liberty was advanced after the war is to claim that
the income tax, and the welfare/warfare state are improvements over
conditions prior to the war. Is Mr. Boaz prepared to make this statement?
Maybe he is. There are those that believe the state can only be
defeated by actually fighting against it and those who believe that
at least their own circumstances can be improved by making compromises
with it. Mr. Boaz and his Cato and Reason allies belong to the latter.
Why not sacrifice the glory of the south and the battle flag of
the confederacy, if it will gain one legitimacy within the establishment?
Why not? I think the answer comes from the essence of what one must
do to gain this legitimacy, agree with the state. A writer can hang
in the wings and wait to gain the attention of his rulers and the
boorish press that glorifies a group of sub rate men graced with
the power of democracy. The great men in today's world are not rulers,
but rather entrepreneurs who change our world for the better through
their innovations and improvements. They are not the vote whoring
morons catering to the fickal musings of disinterested voters and
the media propagandists who commentate on politics having studied
journalism. Boaz and his ilk would rather influence and gain the
acceptance of these types than belong to the group of people who
actually change and improve our world. I charge Boaz with second
handism. In his search for acceptance, he has become a member of
the class he desires the attention of.
I cannot claim a Southern heritage, but I can admire that group
of men who fought the tyrants of D.C. While they may not have freed
the black man, they did not enslave those in possession of their
freedom in the brutal and barbaric fashion that Lincoln and his
successors have. God save Dixie may not be a cry for perfection,
only one for improvement. When the Stars and Stripes, a sign of
Washingtonian dominance to both Nevadan's and Southerners, can escape
Mr. Boaz's criticism, while he rails against the rebellious battle
flag of the confederacy, there appears to be a contradiction in
his thought. Why cry out against the flag of a nation that never
freed the black man, without criticizing the flag of a nation that
Dale Yohe [send him mail]
teaches economics in Florida.