Justplainbill's Weblog

May 29, 2026

book list update 5-29-2026

Filed under: Political Commentary — Tags: , , , , — justplainbill @ 4:31 pm

A Starter’s Reading List

as of 29-May-26

Early Histories of Western Civilization:

Most people, generally, ignore these earlier peoples and their histories. Both Commentaries and Thucydides are filled with policies, histories, and biographies that are still relevant, and have been since before they were written. Thucydides in particular is a blueprint of how to both succeed and fail in government & war. The fact that it starts with an explanation of how these wars started, a how to and how not to execute diplomacy, and ends with the destruction of Athens, and why they lost, is more instructive than Sun Tzu’s Art of War will ever be, though Art of War is also an essential read as is the works of Liddell-Hart. Commentaries is a further exploration on how to win and lose, and both are extraordinarily relevant in our nuclear age.[1]         

Cæsar, Julius: The Landmark Julius Cæsar: The Complete Works ISBN 978-0-307-45544-4

            Referred to by some as ‘Cæsar’s Commentaries,’ includes Gallic War[2] and Civil War. I prefer the Landmark series for all sorts of reasons, primarily that they are annotated and have maps placing all of the locations in place for easy reference. So much explanation by the editors in the margins that other source materials are unnecessary, not even a dictionary or glossary, unless one wants to delve into the history of the time & place, in which case the works of Victor Davis Hanson, Ph.D., are strongly recommended. Although they are large volumes, most of the extra space is margin for notes of your own, and their annotations. Worth the price, soft-backs available on Amazon, collectible copies can be gotten through www.thriftbooks.com and some are available at www.foliosociety.com .

            Thucydides: The Landmark Thucydides: A Comprehensive Guide to The Peloponnesian War ISBN 978-1-4165-9087-3

            Like Commentaries, the Landmark people have made this an easily readable and understandable piece of work. Even better, they got Dr. Victor Davis Hanson to do the introduction. Look for Landmark editions where possible. Herodotus comes in Landmark, too.

            Tacitus: The Annals of Imperial Rome ISBN 0-14-044060-7

                        Tacitus’ last work covers Rome from ~55 AD to ~117 AD, this is the period leading up to the fall. It ends with Nero’s death.

            Herodotus: The Histories ISBN 1-59308-102-2

                        Describes the rise of Greece and the creation of the city-states from an agricultural & subsistence society into the civilization, Western,[3] foundations for contract law and banking systems and to the fount of Western philosophy, including the concepts of democracy, free trade, and social equality. May be the first surviving Western history book. Some think that the pieces he wrote about Egypt were foisted on him by guides as the Egyptian locals may have thought of him as a simplistic tourist rather than a serious historian, they being so much more culturally advanced.

            Everitt, Anthony: Cicero; the life and times of Rome’s greatest politician ISBN 978-0-375-75895-9

            Exactly what it says: a well-researched biography of Cicero, one of the greatest orators, politicians, and jurists of Western Civilization.

            Of interest are the “pre-history” works that suggest several civilizations existed before The Great Flood. Various engineers vacationing in India, Egypt and Western Africa have pointed out anomalies that clearly make it apparent that machine tools were used in the construction of Ancient works in Egypt, China, Siam, and India. See: Christopher Dunn’s, Lost Technologies of Ancient Egypt, ISBN 978-159143102-2, and Brien Foerster’s Lost Ancient Technology of Egypt (two volumes) ISBN 978-1-500915568.

Early colonies & the War of 1776, “The Revolutionary War”

            Rothbard, Murray N.: Conceived in Liberty ISBN 978-1-933550-98-5

                        Five volumes in two books, tenth grade level reading skills, available in hardback and paperback at www.mises.org/store . The Mises Institute is the premiere Austrian School of Economics proponent in the U.S. It is located at the University of Alabama, Auburn. Conceived in Liberty covers from the first settlements, the 17th Century, through the new republic, 1791.

            McCullough, David: 1776 ISBN 0-7432-2671-2

                        One volume, tenth grade read.

            Middlekauff, Robert: The Glorious Cause ISBN 0-19-503575-5

                        One volume, another tenth grade read. About the revolution.

Several good intermediate level, 12th grade reads:

            DiLorenzo, Thomas J.: Hamilton’s Curse ISBN 978-0-307-38285-6

                        “How Jefferson’s Arch Enemy Betrayed the American Revolution – and What It Means for Americans Today,” quote from the dust cover.

            Maier, Pauline: Ratification; The People Debate the Constitution, 1787 – 1788 ISBN 978-0-684-86854-7

                        Prof. Maier went to the original source documents of all of the ratification conventions and states’ legislatures to figure out what happened. Of particular interest to me, Mark Levin & Pete Hegseth notwithstanding, is the number of states that insisted that the right to secede, as evidenced by the secession conventions of 1776, 1814, 1826, and 1860 be acknowledged by all member states.

            Tuchman, Barbara W.: The Shot Heard Around the World (cannot find my copy)

            Mason, Matthew: Slavery & Politics in the Early American Republic ISBN 978-0-8078-3049-9

                        Discusses how slavery impacted early American politics. Definitely not read by the 1619 Project proponents, nor anyone in the NAACP or the Democratic Party.

            Lefkowitz, Mary: Not Out of Africa ISBN 0-465-09838-X

                        Noted Egyptologist refutes all of the nonsense about African-American oral histories and their attachment to Egyptian Civilization.

Between the two secessions

Lots and lots of things occurred between 1783 and 1860. Two of the best are Calhoun’s A Disquisition on Government and Alexis de Tocqueville’s Democracy in America. Calhoun’s commentary on the mistakes made in the constitution are still relevant, as are de Tocqueville’s. Of particular interest to us today, is how de Tocqueville points out how few poor there are, and how few rich there are in America and how our democratic-republic is ours to lose, this back in the 1820’s. Commentary on losing our freedom was a familiar theme of both Ben Franklin’s and Thomas Jefferson’s.

The War of 1861, “The Civil War” or “The American Civil War” to differentiate it from the other civil wars, such as the English “War of the Roses” and the “Spanish Civil War” which usually only refers to the one in the 1930’s.

            Foote, Shelby: The Civil War: a narrative ISBN 0-394-74623-6

                        Three volumes in paperback, about 1,000 pp each, tenth grade level reading skills, available on Amazon.

Hillsdale college, www.hillsdale.edu has numerous DVDs on both subjects as well as some biblical studies. They are on-line for study at your own pace. They are free upon request, and you may be interested in their speaker series letter Imprimus, also at no charge although they would like donations.

Another DVD source, not as a good in my opinion but still having reliable source material is the Smithsonian Institution’s The Great Courses DVD series which are on just about everything including how to play the guitar, yoga, &c. TGC DVD’s generally run from $29.99 to $499.99 depending upon the material. I have found their ‘books of distinction’ series to have honest reviews and analyses of these works, for the purpose of this introductory reading list, they have an understandable set on The Federalist Papers.

For a better understanding of the constitution and what originalism is all about, you must read both The Federalist Papers and The Anti-Federalist Papers. Keeping in mind that ratification and the Bill of Rights would not exist without both of these sets of pamphlets.

In the Hillsdale series is one of particular note: The Skeptic’s Guide to American History. The Hillsdale people also have hard copy workbooks & guides to go with their DVDs, but you have to pay for them. If you are serious, getting the guides and workbooks is worth the small price requested. Otherwise, just hearing the non-woke histories is worth the time spent watching them.

Intermediate level works are too numerous to list, but include any of the works of William Freehling, Thomas DiLorenzo, Mark E. Neely, Jr., Forrest McDonald, Eric Foner, and of special note is:

            Kennedy, James R., Kennedy, Walter D.: The South Was Right ISBN 1-56554-024-7

                        Reviled and repudiated by The Left, especially the rabid racists, includes a summation of the 1860 U.S. census showing the actual ethnic breakdown of slaves in the country; the number of Native-Americans in slavery (~40%), Chinese (~3%), and Whites (~1%, mostly of Irish descent in the Union slave states of MD, DE, and MO).

Both of these time periods have many good works where the author went to the original source materials. Look especially for historians from Southern universities as they are more interested in truth than fostering the Northern perspective. A recent work on the duplicity of the Northern aggression is:

Addicott, Jeffrey F. (Lt. Col. U.S. Army; BA, JD, LLM [2], SJD): Union Terror ISBN 978-1-94766-0-823

            Pretty much details how the Union Army raped, pillaged, and burnt its way through the South for the sole purpose of looting the country-side. Sherman bragged at a post-war re-union of his army how they took North over $100,000,000.00[4] in loot and how they destroyed even more of The South. Keep in mind that the Federal budget of the early 19th Century shows that The South contributed over 75% of Federal revenue while The North received over 75% of it in the form of economic development, mostly of railroads and canals.

Of particular note to these works, is that Virginia did NOT originally secede from the Union! Virginia seceded only after Lincoln unconstitutionally declared that he would raise an army, legal province in Article I that only Congress could do so, and then take that army across Virginia to quell the “uprising” in the Carolinas. The Virginia legislature was adamantly opposed to a foreign army invading the State of Virginia for the purpose of invading the States of North and South Carolina. A biography of Jefferson Davis records how Davis was on his way to the Confederate capital in Alabama, when word of Virginia’s status changed, and then he went to Richmond.

Economics

I know of no basic/simple economics books, but readable starters are more about history than PPM (purchasing power of money) or MMT (Modern Monetary Theory – which by-the-by is simply a repackaging of 19th century Marxist Chartelism theory, so loved by AOC, Mamdani, & Bernie, keep in mind that The Warmth of Collectivism has murdered over 100,000,000[5] in just the last 200 years, i.e., from The Age of Metternich to the present), so,

            Mises, Ludwig von: Omnipotent Government; The Anti-Capitalist Mentality; Theory and History; Liberalism, the classic tradition, his magnum opus is Human Action, but do not go there before reading the shorter works.

            The Mises Institute has all sorts of pamphlets that they will send for no or little charge. They include works on money (Rothbard: What Has Government Done to Our Money; Hulsmann: How Inflation Destroys Civilization; Salerno: The Progressive Road to Socialism), government, and moral philosophy (Hoppe: Social Democracy). The Cato Institute also publishes relevant works on both economics and politics. One recent publication is A Fiscal Cliff, new perspectives on the U.S. federal debt crisis. The Cato Institute is where I get the pocket copies of the U.S. Constitution and Declaration of Independence.

            Boettke, Peter J., Coyne, Christopher J.: The Oxford Handbook of Austrian Economics ISBN 978-0-19-981176-2

                        Essays and articles on the school of Austrian Economics. Not for beginners, but an essential read for those interested in economics beyond the supply/demand curve and simple banking. Especially good for those who want to learn more about marginal utility and human action.

Exceptional historical piece on war, economics, and humanity: Ralph Raico, The World at War, ISBN 978-1-61016-778-9, as far as I know, only available at mises.org/store but may be also on Amazon. Mises.org has numerous pubs taken from Raico lectures, so far, all are good reading, excepting only Raico’s PhD dissertation, which requires familiarity with several European languages as some is in Italian, German, French, and Spanish. Also, Leonard Read’s essays have been compiled into Freedom in One Lesson, and Hunter Lewis’ Economics in Three Lessons. In my opinion, these are intermediate reads only because none of the basics are taught in K-12, much less at the university level. Also, from memory, think that Hayek has Economics in One Lesson, but I cannot find my copy to verify this. Mises also has Hayek in the 21st century.

Business histories are a good place to go as they combine some economics with what has actually happened. William D. Cohan, John Steele Gordon, and Charlie Gasperino are just a few of the many business historians. I suggest starting with Gordon’s An Empire of Wealth, ISBN 978-0-06-06-009362-5.

Current relevant works include:

            Hoppe, Hans-Herman: A Theory of Socialism & Capitalism ISBN 978-1-9335-5073-2

            Denson, John V., editor: The Costs of War, ISBN 978-0-7658-0487-7

             Merrifield, John, editor: A Fiscal Cliff, ISBN 978-1-948647-87-8

For the economic issue of slavery, first read Foote, then go to:

            Thomas, Hugh: The Slave Trade, ISBN 978-0-684-81063-8

Adams, Charles: Slavery, Secession, & Civil War ISBN 978-0-8108-5863-3

Loads more when you are ready, especially works by The Founding Fathers. Things like how they were so opposed to troops being quartered in the homes of private citizens, a common practice from before the Roman Republic, how during The Ratification conventions, three states refused in conclave to ratify the 1787 Constitution (the one that we still have) unless everyone understood that they could leave the union at any time that they wanted to leave, (Mark Levin & Pete Hegseth notwithstanding, adequate research shows that slavery was not the over-riding issue, but that a combination of wealth redistribution and the items that Jefferson put into the Declaration of Independence on self-governance were), and how there was a secession movement by the New England states in 1814, and by South Carolina in 1826, and the Deep South in the 1850’s, this latter one causing Representative Abraham Lincoln to make a speech on the floor of the House of Representatives acknowledging the right to secede, but please don’t. Said speech is in the Congressional Record.[6]

Outstanding collectibles are available for S&H included at about $38.00, through The Library of America, www.loa.org  . Look to the ‘slipcover’ copies which come with cardboard slip covers of the hardback books.

Of further interest on the causes of the American Civil War, is the 1850’s Supreme Court decision Scott vs Davis a.k.a. The Dred Scott Decision. SCOTUS declared that slaves were property, and as such, fell under the private property restrictions of the constitution and as such, slaves were not protected by the constitution. Considering that at the time, ~58% of slaves were of African descent, importation of slaves forbidden around or before 1800, 38% Indians (“Native Americans”), 3% Chinese (working on the Pacific sections of the railroad) CA being a ‘free’ state the Chinese overseers/owners not bothering to tell their slaves that they were free, and 1% White (Irish mostly, domestics “up North”), slavery wasn’t really about Race, but the economic stealing of the productivity of the individual, which still goes on today everywhere, including the stolen labor of the women and children, illegals, being trafficked here in the U.S.A., and as an approved of method of converting one to Islam.

On Investing

Lots of books on personal financing and investing. Suze Orman and Dave Ramsay have some of the best starter books on controlling your personal finances, especially on the importance of saving. FOX Business News has some adequate programming on current events impacting the marketplace, Varney & Co. being one, however, one needs to know more than what they are talking about, and the same with Bloomberg. Graham & Dodd’s Security Analysis, ISBN 978-0-07-159253-6, is the premier work and the one that Warren Buffett credits for his success. Here are three easily readable and understandable works, The Work on Banking, and a DVD. More are available through The Great Courses and from Hillsdale College.

            Payne, Charles: Unstoppable Prosperity, ISBN 978-1-7329113-3-8

            Babcock United Investment: Successful Investing, ISBN 0-671-64762-8

            Fridson, Martin S.: The Little Book of Picking Top Stocks, ISBN 978-1-394-17661-8

            Fullenkamp, Connel: (DVD from www.thegreatcourses.com ) Understanding Investments, ISBN 978-1-598-038323-X.

Banking: Moorad Choudhry: The Principles of Banking, 978-1-119-75564-7

When you look at events, trends, and movements in their historical context, it is my opinion that it is all based on wealth.[7] Consider how from the economics viewpoint, the American Civil War was so unnecessary, wasteful, and destructive. With Robert Fulton’s steam engine doing so much work for so much less effort and cost, slavery as an economically feasible use of resources was rapidly dying. There were steam threshers, steam tractors, steam locomotives, and even steam carriages by 1860.

Thomas Jefferson commented on how the steam engine would change things fifty years before The War of 1861.

 Slavery in the border states was mostly limited to personal/household slaves. Only in the Deep South were slaves still used, mostly for agriculture, which, if you look around today, picking crops is still mostly a human endeavor. Look at Hugo Chavez’ work in unionizing farm workers and what happened to him. Look at the recent results of the ICE raids on CA on the marijuana farms where illegal alien children were found to be harvesting pot plants.

An important historical point to make here is that of the secession conventions of 1860, both Missouri and Virginia voted to NOT secede. Missouri was trapped when Lincoln sent Frémont to rule Missouri. According to his daughter, General Frémont saw this as a chance to force Missouri into a Western Kingdom with himself as king; and Virginia did not secede[8] until Lincoln unconstitutionally[9] raised an army and threatened to invade Virginia to get to the trouble-maker South Carolina.

On the blog, www.justplainbill.wordpress.com there is a ten-year-old bibliography for further reading, if you are interested. That list has not been updated to include some of the works listed above. Neither list has much of what I would recommend for intermediate or advanced reading, as I simply have not gotten around to it, and I am still woefully behind on my own reading and writing.

The blog has recent posts, 12/2025 on wealth production and an open letter to Trump on suggested solutions.

An adequate source giving the European perspective on many things is: BBC History Magazine, www.historyextra.com . It is surprising to many Americans that the Europeans not only believe that they actually contributed to such events as WW II, NATO,[10] democracy, &c., but in fact contributed a lot more than the U.S.A. did in destroyed wealth and people. Objective history/reporting, what a concept.[11]

Psychohistory

Oddly enough, not enough credit is given to science-fiction or to straight fiction in the development of critical thinking. The first books, Peloponnesian Wars and Cæsar’s Commentaries, are basics on everything, however, in looking forward various works +/or series of works, open one to all sorts of possible future patterns and raise interesting intellectual questions ripe for open speculation and “dinner” conversation.

Heinlein’s big three, Starship Troopers, Stranger in a Strange Land[12], and The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, are such along with his Future Histories series. Orwell’s 1984 and Animal Farm fall into this category. Ayn Rand’s Anthem, The Fountainhead, and Atlas Shrugged, and Isaac Asimov’s seven Foundation books, which should be read in the order of its time-line and not in published order, as well.

Government

There are loads of books, including my own,[13] on government, however, the best introduction and commentary to government, are the two BBC series, Yes, Minister, and its sequel Yes, Prime Minister.

Sources for purchase: Amazon.com for most of them; if you do not mind used books in various conditions, thriftbooks.com; Raico, Read, and the economics & economic history books, are available on mises.org/store.

Bill

©justplainbill 2026

Cite as A Starter’s Reading List, www.justplainbill.wordpress.com© 2026.


[1] It is interesting to note that prior to the 1946 G.I. Bill, and still in the U.K., a ‘liberal education’ meant that you learned Greek and Latin. In order to properly learn these ancient languages, students had to read all of these, and other works, in the original tongue, so, prior to the Korean War, a liberal education meant that you actually got an excellent education in business, government, and philosophy. Something no longer available in our CRT – DEI world.

[2] You have heard the opening: Gaul is divided into four parts.

[3] A.K.A. Occidental, one of the two major ecumenes, the other is Oriental.

[4] Keeping in mind that Lincoln’s 1863 State of the Union address included how on a federal budget of $13,000,000.00 (Thirteen Million dollars) he had a surplus even though the economy was in shambles and he was financing an extensive war.

[5] Think that I am kidding? This includes the blood shed of the French Revolution, The Napoleonic Wars, The (unconstitutional) War of 1861, the Czarist Cheka pogroms, the slaughter of Germans, Jews, Gypsy’s, & dissidents by The Third Reich, Stalin’s starving of over 20M “White Russians” & Ukrainians & the Gulags, Mao’s starving of over 30M, CCP official numbers, during the Cultural Revolution and the recent One Child policy of the CCP resulting in an estimated 33M forced abortions, and of minor note, Pol Pot’s killing 6M of his own people.

[6] Important to note that speeches made on the house/senate floors are NOT what is in the CR. Before publication, boards are sent to the members for correction +/or change before printing allowing them to change anything that they want to what they want to actually be on record.

[7] Money is not wealth, money, i.e., cash/currency/moolah/pounds/dollars/&c., is a medium of exchange falsely representing wealth created by productivity. Money, especially fiat currency, is subject to arbitrary re-valuations and pricing by governments, monopolists, and various bureaucracies, as well as criminal activity such as counterfeiting. All economic wealth is created by productivity of physical labor, strokes of genius, +/or intellectual innovation & invention. And then, there’s wealth of spirit, health, and well-being. Remember, an ounce of gold in 1700 is still one ounce of gold in 2024. One pound in 1700 was almost six months wages whereas one pound today will not buy you a loaf of bread. Ten years ago, one ounce of gold was ~$700, today it is over $4,700/troz and silver just passed $92/troz. See Rothbard’s, What has Government done to our Money?

[8] Jefferson Davis was on his way to the Confederate capitol of Birmingham AL when he received word that Virginia was up in arms, thus moving the Confederate capitol to Richmond VA.

[9] Article I of the constitution states clearly that only the Congress may raise an army.

[10] Well, at least until the fall of the U.S.S.R. Recent historical emphasis on the WW I Eastern Front, Poland, Russia, Türkiye &c, has been ignored in the West. Good reporting in BBC History.

[11] Notwithstanding the recent honesty & truth scandals at the BBC itself, these articles are pretty good if you look out for the green hoax and DEI/CRT crap, which crap is self-evident.

[12] Got an X account? Grok is ‘Martian’ for drinking the water of life. Makes ya wonder what Musk was reading in high school.

[13] The Heartland Plan, © 2008 Eloquent Press ISBN 978-1-934925-59-1

The Albany Plan Re-Visited, www.bn.com/ebooks,

June 24, 2015

America: One Nation, Indivisible, by Victor Hanson [c]

America: One Nation, Indivisible
June 24, 2015 1:57 am / Leave a Comment / victorhanson
The Confederate battle flag is far from the only worrisome symbol in America today.
by Victor Davis Hanson // National Review Online

Protesting the Confederate flag in Columbia, S.C. (Mladen Antonov/AFP/Getty)
Everyone is weighing in on the horrific murders in Charleston and blaming the mindset of the mass murderer on wider social pathologies. After the airing of the racist crackpot ideas of the unhinged Dylann Roof, calls have gone out to ban the public flying of the battle flag of the Old Confederacy, which has also been incorporated in various forms in four state flags. Perhaps we should step back and eschew symbolism that separates us by race rather than unites us as fellow citizens.
Aside from the specious argument that the flag, along with media like Fox News and talk radio, fuels homicidal maniacs like Roof, there is quite another question: whether implicit state endorsement of Confederate symbolism offers sanction for the old idea of an apartheid nation, and thus sends entirely the wrong message of American separatism rather than unity. While many Southerners object that the flag simply proclaims the battlefield honor of those who were defending their homeland, the Confederacy was so entwined with the idea of preserving slavery that the flag, even today, can evoke racial polarization. For all the Southern patriots who understandably see in the Confederate battle flag the historical resonance of Pickett’s Charge or the resistance to Sherman’s March to the Sea, there are probably just as many who equally understandably consider it a nostalgic icon of white supremacy. In a racially diverse society, it makes sense to phase out state sanction for the battle flag — as South Carolina governor Nikki Haley advocated yesterday, in calling on the state legislature to vote for the removal of the battle flag that has been flying over the grounds of the state capitol.

But perhaps we should not stop there, given increasing ethnic tensions and widening racial fault lines. There are plenty of other overt racialist symbols that separate Americans. One is the prominent use of La Raza, “The Race” — seen most prominently in the National Council of La Raza, an ethnic lobbying organization that has been and is currently a recipient of federal funds. The National Council of La Raza should be free to use any title it wishes, but it should not expect the federal government to subsidize its separatist nomenclature.
The pedigree of the term La Raza is just as incendiary as that of the Confederate battle flag. The Spanish noun raza (cf. Latin radix: “root” or “race”) is akin to the now-discarded German use of Volk, which in the early 20th century came to denote a common German racial identity that transcended linguistic and cultural affinities: To be a real member of the Volk one had to “appear” German, in addition to speaking German and possessing German citizenship.
La Raza is just such a racialist term. It goes beyond a common language and country of origin, and thus transcends the more neutral puebla(“people”: Latin populus) or gente (“people”: Latin gens). Raza was deliberately reintroduced in the 1960s to promote a racially superior identity of indigenous peoples and mestizos born in the Spanish-speaking countries of the New World. That is why the National Council of La Raza once had a close affinity with MEChA (Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán), the infamous racialist U.S. student group (its ironic motto is “Unity creates strength”), some of whose various past slogans (cf. the Castroite derivative “Por La Raza todo, Fuera de La Raza nada”) finally became sources of national embarrassment.
La Raza is now a calcified separatist slogan, one full of implications that are unworthy of taxpayer support.
The use of the phrase La Raza reflects its illiberal modern origins. It came into popular currency during the 1930s in Spain, when the Fascist dictatorship of Francisco Franco wished to promote a new Iberian identity that went well beyond the commonality of Spanish citizenship and fluency in the Spanish language. Franco expropriated La Raza to promote the racist idea that the Spanish were a superior people by birth. He penned a crackpot novel, Raza, embodying Fascist and racist themes of Spanish genetic and cultural superiority. La Raza appeared on the big screen in the form of a hokey 1942 Spanish-language movie, full of racist themes, anti-Americanism, and fashionable Fascist politics.
But Franco was only channeling another, more famous contemporary Fascist, Benito Mussolini, who had his own Italian version of the term, la Razza. In 1938 Mussolini published his Manifesto della Razza (“The Racial Manifesto”), which defined Italians as a superior Aryan race and excluded Italian Jews, Africans, and other supposedly less pure groups from various positions in the Italian government.
In sum, the word “Raza” has a disturbing recent history, and that is why Spaniards and Italians today have dropped its common usage. Yet that well-known association with racial chauvinism was precisely why the founders of the National Council of La Raza, by their own admission, reawakened the word in the 1960s to focus on what they saw as a particular racial category of Spanish speakers. But La Raza is now a calcified separatist slogan, one full of implications that are unworthy of taxpayer support.

One wonders why in 2015 there is still nomenclature such as “the Congressional Black Caucus,” over half a century after the civil-rights movement sought to promote integration and the idea that Americans should be judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin.. The Caucus ostensibly seeks to ensure the end of exclusion by race from full participation in American society by creating a lobbying group focused entirely on one particular race. The postmodern rationale is either that groups that have suffered past disfranchisement and discrimination should not be subject to current anti-discriminatory protocols, or that they should at least enjoy a compensatory period of exclusion from color-blind values to offset centuries of oppression.
The premise seems to be that African-American House members seek to promote a common “black” agenda that transcends their local, county, or state interests.
Thus the group’s membership is entirely race-based. The Caucus is not open to those members of the House of Representatives who are not African-American, but who might share the Caucus’s racial or political agenda — as the Jewish-American Representative Steven Cohen learned when he was elected to Congress in 2006. The Lebanese-American Ralph Nader was once attacked at a Caucus meeting in clearly racial terms on the understanding that the group was exempt from charges of racism. How far is the racial concept transferable — “the Asian Caucus”? “the Latino Caucus?” “the White Caucus?” “the European-American Caucus”? The premise seems to be that African-American House members seek to promote a common “black” agenda that transcends their local, county, or state interests. If an Asian, white, or Latino voter’s congressional representative is a member of the “Black Caucus,” does that mean that the voter will receive less attention than a black voter — as de facto white caucuses in the Old South most certainly did ignore the interests of their non-white constituents? Is that why conservative African-American legislators who see all their constituents in terms that transcend race tend to avoid joining the Caucus? Could not the “Black Caucus” rebrand itself as the “Civil Rights Caucus” or the “Progressive Caucus”?

Reexamination of the battle flag offers us a teachable moment. Critics made a good point that any state sanction of the secessionist flag inevitably sends the wrong message to millions of Americans, who in their private lives are free to display any symbol they wish. But the current racialist reaction to past racism has become equally indefensible in an increasingly fragile multiracial state. The state should not support any racially separatist symbols, titles, or groups.
We should pause to appreciate that the American democratic experiment in ethnic and racial diversity is nearly unique. Indeed, the very idea of racial diversity and nationhood does not have much of a record of success in history. Few countries have been able to transcend their ethnic origins and sustain a racially pluralistic society. Rome was an exception and pulled it off for nearly 500 years, as the Roman Empire grew to encompass non-Italian peoples from the Euphrates to Scotland before unwinding into tribal chaos. The Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian Empires worked for long periods, though they relied on the use of autocratic force and imperial coercion to suppress minorities, in ways antithetical to modern notions of governance.
In more recent times, religious and racial diversity — in Rwanda, the former Yugoslavia, Iraq, or contemporary Nigeria — has resulted in chaos and, occasionally, genocide. True, some nations have been able to incorporate different tribes, as in the United Kingdom’s unification of the various peoples of the British Isles, but usually after hundreds of years of fighting and only when there were underlying racial and cultural affinities that could trump tribal differences.
In other words, the United States is history’s exception, not its rule. America is a great, evolving experiment of a constitutional republic in which peoples of all different races, religions, and ethnic backgrounds are equal under the law and see themselves as Americans first and members of tribes second — appearance and religion being incidental rather than essential to the American body politic.
In an America that was originally founded by mostly Northern European immigrants, a Juan Lopez from Oaxaca is freely accepted as a U.S. citizen in a way that a white Bob Jones would never fully be embraced as a citizen of Mexico, a country whose constitution still expressly sets out racially chauvinistic guidelines that govern immigration law. Someone who appears African or European would have a hard time fully integrating as a citizen in Chinese, Korean, or Japanese society, in a way not true of Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese in America. The world assumes that in America a president, attorney general, secretary of state, or Supreme Court justice can be black; but it would be as surprised to find whites as high public officials in Zimbabwe as to find a black as prime minister or foreign minister in Sweden or Germany.
In the last half-century, Americans have increasingly tended to emphasize race and tribe in promoting “diversity,” rather than seeking to strengthen the more tenuous notion of unity with their fellow citizens. We have forgotten that human nature is fond of division and must work at setting aside superficial tribal affinities to unite on the basis of core values and ideas.
Symbols, flags, organizations, and phrases that emphasize racial difference and ethnic pride are no longer just fossilized notions from the 1960s; they are growing fissures in the American mosaic that now threaten to split the country apart — fueling the suspicion of less liberal and more homogeneous nations that the great American experiment will finally unwind as expected.
That would be a great tragedy, but a catastrophe entirely predictable if citizens seek symbolic solidarity with their tribe rather than in the common idea of just being American.

[And, the NAACP, the Congressional Black Caucus, The Italian anti-Defamation League, &c.

Personally, when advertising agencies aim at one ethnic group rather than the entire market segment, in the interest of diversity, and polling companies don’t include ‘American’ as a demographic group, the racism becomes more and more ingrained in the culture to the detriment of ALL!.]

April 15, 2015

On Abraham Lincoln and the Inversion of American History, by Boyd D. Cathey, [nc]

On Abraham Lincoln and the Inversion of American History
By Boyd D. Cathey • April 15, 2015 • 1,700 Words • 15 Comments
• Reply
shutterstock_115238551

Back in 1990 in Richmond, Virginia, as part of the Museum of the Confederacy’s lecture series, the late Professor Ludwell Johnson, author and professor of history at William and Mary College, presented a fascinating lecture titled, “The Lincoln Puzzle: Searching for the Real Honest Abe.” Commenting on the assassination of Lincoln now 150 years ago, here is a portion of Dr. Johnson’s prepared remarks:

[After his death] for many, Lincoln became a symbolic Christ, for some, perhaps, more than symbolic. They could scarcely help themselves, the parallels were so striking. He was the savior of the Union, God’s chosen instrument for bringing the millenium to suffering humanity, born in a log cabin (close enough to a stable), son of a carpenter. . . . He was a railsplitter (close enough to carpentry), a humble man with the human touch, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief, called by his followers to supreme greatness, struck down by Satan’s minions on Good Friday.

Said one minister in his Black Friday sermon: ‘It is no blasphemy against the Son of God and the Savior of Men that we declare the fitness of the slaying of the second Father of our Republic on the anniversary of the day on which he was slain. Jesus Christ died for the world, Abraham Lincoln died for his country’. . . . Another spoke of his ‘mighty sacrifice . . . for the sins of his people.’ Yet another proposed that not April 15, but Good Friday be considered the anniversary of Lincoln’s death. ‘We should make it a movable fast and ever keep it beside the cross and grave of our blessed Lord, in whose service for whose gospel he became a victim and a martyr.’

For years after the war the rumor persisted that Lincoln’s tomb in Springfield was empty. Lincoln was also frequently compared to Moses, who led his people to the Promised Land that he was not allowed to enter, and, like Moses after viewing Canaan, was taken by death.

It is right and fitting, then, given the legacy now increasingly laid at Lincoln’s feet, the resultant and seemingly unstoppable growth of the “Behemoth” managerial state that has occurred since his presidency, and the anniversary of his death, to examine again his actual meaning in the context of our history.

Probably too much has been written about Abraham Lincoln. Most school age children know almost nothing about him, except that “he freed the slaves,” which, of course, is patently untrue: he freed not one slave. Yet, his looming presence as a pre-eminent national lodestar, his role as a kind of holy icon after death, and the radical task he accomplished in completely restructuring the original American nation that the Founders created, remain constantly with us. In a real and palpable sense, as the text excerpted from Professor Johnson shows, Lincoln immediately became the founder and canonized “saint” of a “new” nation, in which the ideas of “democracy” and “equality” were enshrined as bedrock principles.

As the late Professor Mel Bradford illustrates abundantly in his signal volume, Original Intentions, with Lincoln and his successors, concepts rejected outright by most of the Founders and eschewed by the Authors of the Constitution, replaced the original understanding of what this nation was supposed to be and represent. The Gettsyburg Address makes clear that Lincoln based the American founding on the Declaration of the Independence (“Four score and seven years ago….”) and on his shaky reading of that war time document.

As such, today the “high crimes and misdemeanors” that are the most heinous, the most grave, in our benighted land are “crimes” against “equality,” whether committed against racial minorities, or against “women,” or against homosexuals who want to force the rest of us to fully accept their lifestyle…and “crimes” against “full democracy,” including voter IDs, and preventing illegals from full participation in all the goodies that the Federal government can dole

This is not to say that there is an unbroken, direct line connecting the “Lincolnian Revolution” of the 1860s with the public and private defecated culture and corrupt and managerial political system that engulf us today. Indeed, the history of the USA since 1865 is filled with vicissitudes and “curves and variations.” It would be unfair perhaps to blame Lincoln directly for these present happenings. Indeed, more than likely, as a 19th century liberal, he would be offended and shocked by much of what besets us today culturally and socially. But Lincoln, like other leaders of 19th century Liberalism, opened the door to future, much more radical change. So, while it is assuredly not correct to hold him responsible for, example, same sex marriage, there is a torturous genealogy that can be traced without injury to the historical narrative.

Of those radical changes that came as a result of the Lincolnian Revolution and that directly affect us today, the cataclysmic effects of the (illegally passed) 14th Amendment must be highlighted. Indeed, one could suggest that it is under the rubric of the 14th Amendment that most all of our present decay and distress has occurred. If there had been no 14th Amendment, would most of the horrendous court decisions we’ve seen have been rendered? Yet, the 14th Amendment grows directly out of the consequences of Southern defeat in 1865, in a War begun by Abraham Lincoln.

Certainly, there are those who would argue that the “Reagan years” or even the 1920s represented respites in this ongoing revolution. Nevertheless, the general and overwhelming propulsive movement, the historical dynamic, has been in just one direction. In sum, the triumph of the Lincolnian Revolution in the American nation was, in fact, the real triumph of the 19th century “Idea of Progress” and the belief in the inevitable and continuing liberation and enhancement materially and intellectually, of human kind.

It is interesting, I think, to focus the great Iliad of the Confederacy in the context of the brutal and vicious universal war between the forces of 19th liberalism and the forces of tradition and counter-revolution. The Confederacy, the old South, played a not unimportant role in that conflict, and, even if most Southerners did not recognize that context at the time, many European traditionalists, Legitimist royalists, and Catholics most certainly did.

In my research over the years, specifically while I studied in Spain and Switzerland, and then taught in Argentina, I was struck by the fact that almost without exception, all 19 th century traditional conservatives, Legitimists, and Catholics not only favored the Confederacy in its crusade against the North, but they did so enthusiastically, to the point that thousands of European traditionalists found their way to cities like New Orleans to volunteer to fight for the Confederate cause. As many as 1,800 former soldiers of the old Bourbon Kingdom of Naples (Two Sicilies) arrived in Louisiana in early 1861 to offer their services to the South after their defeat by the arms of the liberal Kingdom of Piedmont-Savoy. Volunteers from the Carlist Catholic traditionalists in Spain came by way, mostly, of Mexico. According to Catalan historian, David Odalric de Caixal, as many as many as 4,000 Carlists enlisted in Confederate ranks, many in the Louisiana Tigers (see M. Estella, “Un historiador investiga la presencia de carlistas en la Guerra de Secesion,” El Diario de Navarra [Pamplona], December 9, 2011). French Legitimists (the “ultra-royalists” who opposed the “democracy” of the Citizen-King Louis Philippe) also volunteered, mostly notably the Prince Camille Armand de Polignac, a hero of the battle of Mansfield.

The Italian Duchy of Modena, under its duke Francesco V (called by modern writer and historian Sir Harold Acton, “the most reactionary ruler in all of Europe”), actually recognized the Confederacy. And Pope Pius IX offered de facto recognition to the Confederate cause, and his sympathies were quite open, as were the Confederate proclivities of the official publication of the Vatican, “La Civilta Catolica.” The Crown of Thorns that Pius IX wove with his own hands for President Jefferson Davis while Davis was a post-war prisoner in Fortress Monroe remains in a museum in New Orleans, a memorable relic of papal sympathy for the Confederacy.

And who can forget the favor given by and collaboration of the Habsburg emperor of Mexico, Maximilian? It was to his empire that many Confederate soldiers fled after Appomattox and Palmito Ranch. (Recall the John Wayne classic, “The Undefeated,” and other cinematic representations of that relationship?)

The traditionalist press in Europe openly believed that the Confederacy was part of a much greater conflict—a conflict, a universalized war, to halt the advance of the effects of the French Revolution, and to–if possible–reverse the worst aspects that resulted from the opening of that Pandora’s Box. And in particular, they visualized the Confederacy as a co-belligerent in the effort to stop the growth of “democratism” and “egalitarianism.”

Certainly, one can debate if this vision by European traditionalist conservatives was completely valid, or mere fancy. But the reasons supporting it, given our subsequent history, are strong in an ex post facto way.

What we are talking about is, then, the triumph in the 19 th century of a radical transformation in the way our society and our citizens look at history and change. Indeed, the result was the enthronement of the “Idea of Progress” as the norm, such that movement in history always is “progressive” or, better described, “a la Sinistra”–to the Left. And, given this template, does not the ongoing Leftward—”progressive”—movement of both Democrats AND Republicans in the US, as well as both Socialist and establishment “conservative” political groupings in Europe, make sense?

Until this narrative–this sanctified and blessed “progressivist” idealization–is overturned and reversed, we shall continue to be at the mercy of faux-conservatives who continue to lead us into more Revolution, even if by a slightly different route from the hardcore revolutionaries.

Thus, Professor Johnson’s account of the apotheosis of Lincoln and the enshrining of the “Lincoln Myth” go hand-in-hand with the mythologization of Garibaldi in Italy, or of Louis Blanc in France, as symbolic of what happened to an older, pre-Revolutionary civilization…and to the “exceptional” American nation along the way.

In the USA it really began in earnest, as Ludwell Johnson recounts, almost immediately after Lincoln’s death, and it continues full force today.

Blog at WordPress.com.