Category Archives: History

UPDATED: The Founders Reduced

Africa, Colonialism, Ethics, Founding Fathers, History, Human Accomplishment, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Nationhood, Political Correctness, Propaganda, Pseudo-history, Race, Racism

After a conference (some photos are posted below) in Baltimore, I decamped to Old Town Alexandria (still occupied federal territory) to do some sightseeing. That meant staying away from the venue from which Glenn Beck and his 9/twelvers choose to rouse the nation: DC. Incidentally, a gentle bouquet of sewerage blanketed DC when I landed at Reagan National Airport. It lingered for days.

I, of course, needed no olfactory reminders to steer clear of DC. We headed into Virginia. Fredericksburg, Charlottesville, and Orange: The landscape took my breath away. So beautiful, so steeped in history and patriotism. One could so clearly see why magnificent men once defended these places to the death.

Sadly, after touring George Washington’s Mount Vernon, James Madison’s woefully neglected Montpelier, and Thomas Jefferson’s home, Monticello, Sean and I turned into betting men. The bet? In what room, or stage of the guided tour, would our guide begin to deconstruct the founders for slavery, making sure that all present understood how compromised were these brilliant and brave individuals because of that peculiar institution.

Whites had been taught well. Many of the questions fielded touched on slavery; most of those present were eager to display their exquisite sensitivity. Achingly sensitive: Although the slave quarters were closed for renovations, one young man had draped himself over a windowsill. There he stood motionless, deep in thought, his frame racked by (very showy) pain.

An African-American family sauntered toward the estate plan, where I lingered. The father pointed his son toward one thing and one thing only: “Here, son, were the slave quarters. Here is their unmarked tomb,” said dad. They left. Thus was the boy instructed to keep those suppurating sores oozing with resentment. Not a word did dad disgorge about George Washington. Thus was Washington whittled down.

At Monticello we were joined by my good friend the economist and historian Tom DiLorenzo. Tom has blogged about another libel leveled against “The Great Man,” on Lewrockwell.com: the notion that “Jefferson fathered six children with slave Sally Hemmings,” disseminated by the “school-marmish tour guide.”

On average, by the time you arrive at the second room in any given house, you are hit with the requirement that Honky expiate over slavery. The Founders, it is intimated, are beyond repair given the contradiction they embodied. This was the gist of the message.

One pimply female gatekeeper—she was ominously standing sentinel at Washington’s tomb—wearing trendy shades and a shortish skirt, explained to a concerned middle-aged white man: “Washington freed his slaves towards the end, but kept some on because “he was addicted to the life style.” Imagine using contemporary pop-psyche vernacular in this context!

HISTORY FROM BELOW. The history of the US is what the Legislative Black Caucus, the NAACP, and so-called civil-rights activists say it is; it’s history from below; a litany of complaints and contrivances from self-styled victims’ groups on behalf of minor historical figures.

Outside “the plantation office building where Stonewall Jackson died in Guinea Station, Virginia.”

Outside the plantation office building where Stonewall Jackson died, Guinea Station, Virginia.

These little piggies, Ossabaw Island Hogs, belong to the very breed once bred by George Washington at Mount Vernon. This most innovative farmer, who used state-of-the-art technologies and thinking with respect to agriculture and conservation, was, naturally, nothing without the slaves (whom he and his ilk schooled).

With Barely A Blog Star, Myron Pauli, who was good enough to attend the Mencken Club Conference.

Peter Brimelow and myself.

UPDATE: I understand that David, in the Comment hereunder, is being cynical when he writes, “I got it, the founders were flawed, sinful men like me and you,” but the following bears saying:

No, the Founders were nothing like us. Not even close. I’m not talking as an idealist, but as a realist. Judging from their deeds and their words, the American Founding Fathers were immeasurably better than just about anyone on earth today (and that goes for that gnarled, somewhat stupid sadist, Mother Teresa. And yes, Christopher Hitchens nailed the woman).

Their actions tell us that they forsook their fortunes for a cause we no longer have the intellectual or moral capabilities to grasp: liberty.

Their writings evince an intelligence and a level of abstraction far beyond that evinced by most contemporary intellectuals. In fact, Charles Murray’s monumental work, Human Accomplishment, in which he comes up with 4,002 subjects who “dragged their fellow men out of wattle-and-daub hovels and pushed them into space rockets,” tends to support my harking to the past, not the present, for intellectual inspiration.

Slavery was debated vigorously and finally abolished by the English—not the Arab or African traders (who persist in the practice).

I cover this topic in my yet-to-be-published book, Into The Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons For The West From Post-Apartheid South Africa. It is a complicated subject. The missionaries in Africa, for example, regarded slaves as children to be de-tribalized and missionized. They were taught skills and trades; mission stations acted as havens for refugees fleeing tribal depredations in South Africa.

As you tour the homes of the founders mentioned above, you’re wont to hear about this or the other wonderful cabinet maker or marvelously gifted horseman, or farmhand, etc. Who do you think taught the slaves these skills and trades? The monarchs of Buganda or Ethiopia?

As I say, the Founders were advanced for their time in EVERY respect. Not perfect, but a great deal more perfect than most of us.

Thomas Paine: 18th Century Che Guevara

Classical Liberalism, Conservatism, Founding Fathers, History, Ilana Mercer, libertarianism, Liberty, Political Philosophy

My Friday column for October 22 will probably be titled “Thomas Paine: 18th Century Che Guevara.” The column following it, to be published on Friday October the 29th, is “The ‘Moronizing’ Of Modern Culture.”

You’ll have to read the first to appreciate the second, as they are part of a conversation with Dennis O’Keeffe, Professor of Sociology at the University of Buckingham, and Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of Economic Affairs, “the UK’s original free-market think-tank, founded in 1955.”

Under discussion is the subject of Professor O’Keeffe’s latest book, “Edmund Burke.”

One of the questions I asked Dennis was “Why is it that one rarely hears Edmund Burke mentioned in American public discourse, yet my countrymen know and love Thomas Paine, who sympathized with the Jacobins and spat venom at Burke (‘the greatest Irishman who ever lived’) for his devastating critique of the blood-drenched, illiberal, irreligious ‘Revolution in France’?”

Indeed, although neglected, Edmund Burke’s thinking is central to American—and any other—ordered liberty.

Be sure to read the two columns, which you can follow from Barely a Blog to WND.COM.

I am away at the 3rd annual meeting of the HL Mencken Club. Please join me if you are in the vicinity. The details are HERE.

The John (Eliot Spitzer) & The Mindless Schoolmarm (Kathleen Parker)

Celebrity, Economy, History, Media, The State, The Zeitgeist

We can all agree that Eliot Spitzer did his most ethical work as a John, between the sheets with the hooker with whom he was caught. Before that he was a politician who persecuted the productive class.

“Parker Spitzer,” CNN’s new current-events program, is easily the most repulsive thing on TV. More so than “Keeping Up With The Kardashians.”

I’d never have guessed, though, that I’d prefer Spitzer’s open statism to Kathleen Parker’s coy conformity. The New York Times stated that “Ms. Parker does not bring to CNN Mr. Spitzer’s propensity for controversy.” That’s an understatement.

Parker, we are told, is a Pulitzer prize winner. That tells me as much about that journalistic honor than Obama’s peace prize tells me about the Nobel Prize. Not only does this woman, Parker, not express a thought in opposition to her partner’s; she doesn’t express a thought.

Today the creepy couple entertained the king of Keynesians, economist Paul Krugman. Both offered plaudits to his predictive brilliance. Neither one challenged his warped history and economics. Yesterday it was the gorgeous model and ditz Paulina, and the French philosopher Bernard-Henri Lévy. Both called the tea partiers savages. Nobody was smart enough to point out the differences between the Revolution in France, as Edmund Burke referred to this barbaric turning point in history, and the American Revolution.

Parker is a wound-up, tight-lipped, prissy schoolmarm—which is not a bad thing at all. I like prim and proper. It’s the dumb statist that I don’t much dig.

“Parker Spitzer” is self-congratulatory, pompous Beltway banter.

It needs to fail.

The John (Eliot Spitzer) & The Mindless Schoolmarm (Kathleen Parker)

Celebrity, History, Media, The State, The Zeitgeist

We can all agree that Eliot Spitzer did his most ethical work as a John, between the sheets with the hooker with whom he was caught. Before that he was a politician who persecuted the productive class.

“Parker Spitzer,” CNN’s new current-events program, is easily the most repulsive thing on TV. More so than “Keeping Up With The Kardashians.”

I’d never have guessed, though, that I’d prefer Spitzer’s open statism to Kathleen Parker’s coy conformity. The New York Times stated that “Ms. Parker does not bring to CNN Mr. Spitzer’s propensity for controversy.” That’s an understatement.

Parker, we are told, is a Pulitzer prize winner. That tells me as much about that journalistic honor than Obama’s peace prize tells me about the Nobel Prize. Not only does this woman, Parker, not express a thought in opposition to her partner’s; she doesn’t express a thought.

Today the creepy couple entertained the king of Keynesians, economist Paul Krugman. Both offered plaudits to his predictive brilliance. Neither one challenged his warped history and economics. Yesterday it was the gorgeous model and ditz Paulina, and the French philosopher Bernard-Henri Lévy. Both called the tea partiers a savages. Nobody was smart enough to point out the differences between the Revolution in France, as Edmund Burke referred to this barbaric turning point in history, and the American Revolution.

Parker is a wound-up, tight-lipped, prissy schoolmarm—which is not a bad thing at all. I like prim and proper. It’s the dumb statist that I don’t much dig.

“Parker Spitzer” is self-congratulatory, pompous Beltway banter.

It needs to fail.