Alleged historian, Michael Beschloss, or more specifically as he is referred to (by the media, who else?) as a “presidential” historian. recently excitedly challenged those viewing the news that the November 8 election might destroy democracy resulting in the killing of our children. It wasn’t clear how or where this so-called “historian” plucked such goofy, garbled, evidence of destroying democracy, and the slaughtering of our children but then he is a Harvard man—that’s where, while he grappled and collected his M.B.A., he learned so much history. But Harvard is the place of plenteous piety of scholarship, i.e. you can be whatever you want regardless of learning or grades. By God, you are Ivy League (Heaven) and Harvard is God, Yale is the Son and the Holy Ghost is unclear, though Princeton is “following the science.”
It doesn’t particularly matter that Beschloss said what he said. I’d be surprised if anyone took him seriously anyway, coming from the cardboard cut-out of a “news” source, NBC, that he comes through and to “we the people.”
Anyone taking in such blended and opinionated historical concoctions from such a kindred fellow will believe such fibbers or plagiarists such as Brian Williams or Doris Kerns Goodwin perhaps. These are the sort of hearing ears that will bend toward newsy gals like Joy Behar of The View with her own research being “I looked IT up.”
Of course, where or when “it” was looked up is never mentioned by Joyless Joy. This is how history is built on the left. Not a lot of difference on the so-called “conservative” side, however. They have more than their share of historical dolts. In a bit, more about these dolts.
There are a number of others who slice into history with their verbal scalpels of historical castration—seeds of truth are gelded– thus we do not learn that Madison did NOT write the Constitution, although he was quite able in leading the several independent colonies towards convening for altering the Articles of Confederation; hoping for possibly a republic of republics, which is what the Constitution claims through guarantee to be (Article 4).
But the pretenders are everywhere. It was Madison’s organizing efforts for which he received the title “Father of the Constitution,” not that he wrote the dang thing.
But each media historian will consume whatever is available. Not a surprise. A fool as the proverb says will return like a dog to eat its own vomit of foolishness (see Proverbs 26:11).
"*" indicates required fields
And, of course, the idiot’s word—and Plato’s bane– of “democracy” is nowhere in to be found in the Constitution. But we are told that something called democracy is going to be destroyed? I see.
Neither included is a nonsensical (definitely not from God) claim of anyone’s and everyone’s (black, white, Indian, man, woman, trans-degenerate, et al), RIGHT TO VOTE! That of course would be of the grandest pile of vomit a fool or dog would return to. That so-called “right” neither is in the Constitution by deliberate intention. The mission was for a republic, not a mob. But to hell with historical fact and intuitive logic.
Where are the collaborative historians to shine a light forward to protect the past? Harvard? Yale? The dogs hear the dinner bell!
But the pretenders, the swindlers, the imposters are not nearly as dangerous as that of the “fifth columnist” within the real conservative soldiers’ columns.
Beschloss et al are like bad weather: they will always be with us.
But conservatives (and historians) are rare, and fellows like Russel Kirk, Richard Weaver, M.E. Bradford or Clyde Wilson, and many more of their kin are the truth of conservative measure and understanding of history. Also, they have quite well read and written about it. These are conservatives who understand conservation.
But, sadly, outside of MSNBC, CNN, and ad-fake media nausea, a large segment of the news is available only through Fox News and some lesser sorts (News Max, etc.).
And being the largest, Fox gets the lion’s share of conservative viewership. But being called “right-wing” doesn’t necessarily mean being right. It just means being not “left.” Fox is mostly just not left. It suffers from presentism (as wildly as any) as well as mediocre mush in the history department.
Unfortunately, it has such shallow and unlettered students of history as Jesse Waters, Mark Levin, Brian Kilmeade, Dinesh DeSousa, Victor Davis Hanson, and even Tucker Carlson, who might be a good student if he would stop to ask a question once in a while. I will say that there is one who seems to ask questions without the pompous bloviating once in a while, who is Laura Ingraham.
However, fellows like Mark Levin, Jesse Waters, Brian Kilmeade, and Victor Davis Hanson have blindly looked straight into the camera and spewed stupid, reckless, nonsensical babble such as “The Democrat party started slavery and wanted to keep it going.” Not only that, they strongly suggest that the Republican party sought to end slavery. Then they throw in the timeless canard that “we fought a civil war to end slavery.”
They might as well say World War II was fought to end antisemitism.
No, a war (an illegal one) was fought to nationalize the union and as a result, the slaves were scattered in a mass injurious Southern diaspora and declared free. Many unnecessarily died as a result of brutal corrupt Yankee Republican Reconstructionists. Negrophobia in the North ran rampant.
Only a child with a mind of less than a child would think that ANY political party started slavery, even in America, since African slavery began long before (16th century in the Americas).
Political parties? The initial political philosophies of Federalists and Anti-Federalists (Hamilton vs Jefferson) began, in the late 18th century These bled into the Democrat-Republicans, (later the Democrats) the Whigs, the Republicans, and the Constitutional party of 1860.
And for their historical limitations, they might note that not only did the Republicans want to exclude blacks from the “free” states but also exclude them from the new territories. They wanted them OUT, preferably out of the western Hemisphere—back to Africa. And Lincoln was a hard charger for this Republican focus, as long as he got elected (he finally was elected with 43% of the popular vote). He was happy to keep the slaves penned up in the South or sent to Africa as long as he got “his tariffs.” Free them, don’t free them, he cared not.
Minor mental mind Marl Levine (and Waters mostly confirms) even screams (literally) that the Democrat party brought about slavery, segregation, the Civil War (sic), the KKK, lynching, and a host of other sins of man. Now, anyone with eyes to see or morals to wrestle with can see that the Democrat Party of at least the last 30 years has degenerated into a sewer of filthy perverts and lazy money-for-free politicians buying any vote in sight with lies and futuristic nonsense.
But they did not start slavery. And no government, U.S.A. or C.S.A. fought a war where over half a million men died to free the slaves or to “keep” them.
People like Michael Beschloss are, as stated above, like bad weather, like the Democrats’ own media. They both probably will always be around.
But to the 21st-century Republicans, the mighty steerers of the great red storm, you better remember that Southerners are Republicans because they are conservatives. Not the other way around.
He who hath an ear:
If after the storm, and the great wave has subsided, this may your last chance to know the South and not those bloviating pseudo-historians above. True conservatism, the South is.
We love our honorable ancestors. We salute, as grand Christian soldiers, Robert E. Lee, Jefferson Davis, and Stonewall Jackson.
We stand for Dixie. And we stand for the Star Spangle Banner NOT a National Anthem.