Attempts to Reform a Pirate Nation Created a Modern America

 Examples of America as a “Pirate Nation” and the attempts of Britain to suppress the Stuart conservative scourge across the ocean are actually quite abundant and easy to find! One such example was inveterate English reformer Francis Nicholson. From 1688-1689, just after the accession of the Dutch Protestant reformer King William of Orange, Francis Nicholson was sent as lieutenant governor to the Dominion of New England. He quickly gained a reputation as a progressive and immediately alienated his less than enthusiastic conservative constituents in Stuart-favoring America. The Crown, though, appreciated his efforts at liberal reform there, and upon his advisable departure from New England, he proceeded to Virginia to be their governor from 1690-1692. The liberalizing British Crown was impressed with his reform efforts and appointed him next to serve as Maryland’s governor from 1694-1698, and again as governor of Virginia from 1698-1705.

Americans, however, did not take a shine to the reformer Francis Nicholson – in fact, they took great offense! Of his second term in this colony, biographer Natalie Zacek writes that “Virginians recoiled at Nicholson's military gruffness and his uncouth public courtship of Lucy Burwell,” both reasons bordering on juvenile.^[1] More to the point, his “attempts at reform threatened the power of such men as William Byrd I, so that several members of the governor's Council—including Nicholson's former ally, [James] Blair—convinced the Crown to remove him.”^[2] Americans fought back fiercely at liberal reform! British reformers could seldom grow amenable roots “beyond the lines of amity” in America. It was especially hard while at war. Note that, for America today, war is frequent overseas – if not brutally constant – with hired mercenaries to do the dirty work and bring back the oil and drugs – the “golden” treasures of modern times. 

Immediately following Nicholson’s administrations in faraway America, the Crown put aside their colonial reform efforts for Queen Anne’s War, in which the future “Blackbeard,” or Jamaican gentleman Edward Thache participated. Nicholson returned to London and petitioned the last Stuart queen to make an expedition to take French territories in Canada. Nicholson then captured the French Port Royal in that territory on October 2, 1710, but couldn’t hold it. Still, this battle began the conquest of Acadia and permanent British control over Nova Scotia. In that effort, Nicholson combined forces with Sir Hovendon Walker, then commander of HMS Windsor – at one time, the ship on which Thache served – at the head of his fleet, perhaps with Thache still aboard (as the date that he received discharge from Windsor is still as yet unknown). Much to Nicholson’s ire, however, many ships in Walker’s fleet foundered on rocks near the mouth of the Saint Lawrence River. The Royal Navy forced a cancellation of the expedition, which greatly angered Nicholson, who had led the land forces, but then had to retreat. Overall, however, the British were eventually successful.^[3]

Francis Nicholson spent some time afterward as Nova Scotia’s governor, residing far to the south in Boston. There, he re-attempted his reform efforts once again, angering colonials, by removing “notorious” American malcontents from office. Still, colonials joined together and claimed Nicholson to be mad and had him declared incompetent. “Malcontents” regained their positions and cast the incorrigible reformer Nicholson from New England. This sordid ad hominem political tactic – with the rhetorical use of the term “treason” – enabled colonial conservatives to maintain their power in America against the efforts of British Whig reformers. Understand that these tactics often work with uneducated voters. Is it any surprise that the tactic still works well for today’s American conservatives whose base is primarily poor Southern and rural voters?[4]

Undeterred by his defeats in New England – with reform still the fervent wish of the growing Whig ministry under George I – Francis Nicholson then found appointment as the first royal governor of South Carolina during the more turbulent second phase of the Golden Age of Piracy from 1721 to 1725. By this time, during the latter part of the Golden Age, British reform at first appeared to make some headway in a stubbornly corrupt America. Nicholson’s instructions from the Crown cite the usual dealings with Indians, trade, and such, but a preamble to these instructions involved the legal issues surrounding piracy. His superiors realized that their initial efforts at reform could not be trusted purely in corrupt colonial hands. Once the Crown gained control from the Lords Proprietors – Carolina’s former private owners, interested only in what profit they might gain – they would still attempt to utilize their captured Bahamian base in America to ensure further reform. But, as all best laid plans….

Apparently, American resistance to reform was not because of the Lords Proprietors’ abusive influence. Americans – even free of private or proprietary rule – still did not want liberal reform and had proven quite obstinate and stubborn. American gentlemen resented being told what to do and fervently proved themselves as the quintessential “Commonwealth of Pyrates”! To protect their heroes, Americans abused the procedures for piracy trials under the outline laid out by Sir Charles Hedges in the late seventeenth century. Edward Randolph’s earlier assertion that pirates in America “could not try pirates” – meaning themselves – was reflected in the Crown’s instructions to their colonial administrators.

The preamble to Nicholson’s instructions from the Board of Trade called for no less than seven men, the governor or his representative being required as one, to form an admiralty court. Also, the other six being “no person but Such as were known Merchantts, factors, or Planters or Such as Captains, Lieutenants or Warrant Officers in any of his said Late Majesties Ships of Warr or Captains, Masters, or Mates of some English shoar Should be Capable of being So Called and Sitting and Voting in the said Court.”^[5] The use of the word “English” is ambiguous here – not “British,” although the distinction is barely noticed today when these distinctions do not carry quite the same connotation. Why write this detail or make this distinction? Americans had not been prone to put French or Spanish citizens on their admiralty courts – nationality could not have been the problem. Could it be that “English shoar” in his instructions referred to the actual shores of England herself – not an English possession or colony? As influenced by Edward Randolph’s words, the apparent meaning may be subtle, but the Crown had not trusted natural-born Americans – as well as foreigners – judging pirate trials or administering justice to their own. As with any colony of Britain, many English vessels visited the colonies on a regular basis. South Carolina records show a regular pattern of trans-Atlantic commerce from Bristol, Liverpool, London, as well as West Indian traffic. These “Captains, Masters, and Mates” of “English shoars” – not colonial or provincial – would be readily available to serve on such courts in America.

Francis Nicholson’s superiors were quite serious – their subtly anti-pirate preamble went on for almost five full pages before Nicholson’s actual instructions began. They listed three anti-piracy acts: 11^th William III, 1^st George I (not only to prevent piracy, but specifically piracies on the king’s ships), 10^th Anne I (on building county jails), and 12^th William III (reiterating 13^th Charles II for support of the navy overseas). One certainly got the impression that the Crown did not trust those remote provincials in the American wilderness. They seem to have had good reason!

The instructions themselves contain the usual references, with specific exception. No. 56 was undoubtedly generated by the government’s extreme difficulties with the Richard Tookerman-Henry Wills piracy case of that same year in London Courts. This instruction read that “no persons for the future be Sent as Prisoners to this Kingdom from the said Province of South Carolina, without Sufficient Proof of their Crimes, and that proof transmitted along with the Said Prisoners.”^[6] Capt. Edward Vernon probably nodded his approval for the Crown’s caution – still smarting financially from that affair. He paid £1,200 in fines from the resulting judgment of false arrest, a travesty of justice expertly manipulated by veteran American pirates Tookerman and Wills.

It’s helpful to compare this corruption with Republican President Donald J. Trump, his personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Vice-President Mike Pence, and Attorney General William Barr in obstructing the wheels of justice in Trump’s first term (2017-2020): betraying American citizens to dictators, colluding with foreign states, and extorting others to illegally upset elections! George Washington clearly saw this “foreign influence” in our affairs as disgraceful. For an American Administration to collude with foreigners is a betrayal of the nation. Let’s be clear, though – this is still not “treason” – this betrayal of Trump’s office – or “treason” as President Trump often accused of his many detractors, including the famed “whistleblower” exposing Trump’s extortion of Ukraine’s president – oh, no – it’s not treason. You see, according to the U.S. Constitution, no war had been declared by America – the “Commonwealth of Pyrates!” So, neither Trump nor his opponents can be accused of actual “treason” in the course of their betrayal of the United States of America! Trump et al basically pirated or robbed our “democracy” to fill their coffers of treasure and stay in power – ostensibly indefinitely! These political brigands cared not with whom they colluded to obtain their goals – even America’s longest-term enemy, Russia!

As recognized by Sebastian Prange, recognizing the Golden Age historical connection requires that we precisely understand the terms and their usage through time. As Prange saw it “pirates are more likely to be portrayed as pests than as political actors,” erroneously thrust “into a realm of illegitimacy and subversion,“ yet capable of true agency even in government.^[7] “Piracy” wrongly conjures base anti-heroic thoughts of “plunder,” “notoriety,” and “illicit romance” rather than simply “theft” – like hold-ups and robberies are generally seen as blue-collar crimes in the minds of Americans today. Thanks to historians like Marcus Rediker, we now think of pirates in that same Marxist sense - as desperate poor people who fought against wealthy oppressors in a democratic revolt – but this is simply not true for the wealthy and educated pirate captains – those capable of the intricate math necessary for navigation – those captains of the most technologically-advanced machines of their day – or sailing vessels. It shifts our thinking away from crimes committed by their government contractors – or similar wealthy Americans today – essentially the same theft, bribery, extortion, and other white-collar crimes committed also by their counterparts in the eighteenth century. Using the term “piracy” – essentially for crimes at sea, instead of the actual word “crimes,” warps our impression anachronistically away from recognition of the criminal element today – also even government agents. Calling them “pirates” invokes scenes of Errol Flynn swinging through the air with a bandana on his head and a knife in his teeth. In reality, pirates were criminals who stole another person’s property. The criminal methods are the same – their tools have simply changed – they now wear business suits instead of periwigs or tri-corn hats. Wealthy American conservatives through the Civil War up to the present day have relied on this chronological confusion to mislead the general populace and distract them from their own crimes of greed, including in earlier times, slavery. This pattern has not changed because humans have not changed – we did not evolve that much in only a few centuries! Yes, there are still “pirates”or “criminals” – men of greed – in America’s patrician population despite the efforts of men like Edward Randolph and Francis Nicholson in the eighteenth century – or Progressives today!

Instructions 67-70 to Francis Nicholson may have been of particular interest to the wealthy well-educated war veteran and later “pirate” Edward Thache. These instructions concerned “Merchants and Planters of the West Indies” in corresponding and trading with the French Islands in those parts. The 5^th and 6^th articles of their mutual 1686 treaty prohibited “to Trade and Fish in all Places possessed or which shall be possessed by the other in America.”[8] The Crown worried that intelligence or military secrets would leak to their Catholic enemy by continuous contact with these English traders – indeed as privateers and pirates gained intelligence from them. For example, while at the Virginia Capes with Benjamin Hornigold, pirate Edward Thache may have been quite pleased to learn from Capt. Pritchard about the future visit of a large, lightly-manned and gunned slave ship (La Concorde) near Martinique. Pritchard had come upon the pirates as he sailed northward from his most recent port of St. Lucia, in the French Windwards. Still, once Thache arrived there, and soon after taking La Concorde, Thache might also have been quite annoyed with such English merchants like Christopher Taylor trading to Bequia – with the French. Taylor was the only man in any record who claimed violence was done to him directly by Thache, although greed – the money – may also have influenced Thache to do so. Furthermore, Thache never hanged Taylor from the yardarm, as he threatened; so, it may yet have been a bluff.[9]

Stuart Tories, Jacobites, and many elite Americans of conservative persuasion saw King William’s progressive policies and those of his successors and their many reforming administrative “Dutch dogs” as weakness. War had been natural for these conservatives – as, indeed, war fuels the pecuniary desires of mercenary corporations like Blackwater or Xi today – essentially, corporate “piracy.” One may have heard in their youth that “Might made right; strength over weakness made a resilient nation – it commanded trade and ensured profit,” or “Only the truly strong could be truly free.” Perhaps you’ve heard “Sorry. Nothing personal – it was just business!” We still think like the pirates of yesterday and care little about what happens to the failed companies we leave in our brutal capitalistic wake. We could be tempted to say it’s “human nature” because we have behaved this way for generations!

“Piracy had become so interwoven into the social infrastructure of the Atlantic colonies,” writes Douglas R. Burgess, “that it helped shape the policies of many colonial governments,” and gave rise to more lenient policies on crime.[10] Piracy built a complacent and corrupt America where “human nature” was considered absolutely “greedy,” “corrupt,” “immoral,” and just awful! But, it’s simply not true – humanity is not evil.

Piracy of select humans was essentially corrupt – it completed Queen Elizabeth’s task begun in 1588 after the defeat of the Spanish Armada – to steal Spain’s wealth and colonies. These select humans founded America and raised children of similar thought. Americans grew to love their pirate heroes. Piracy provided “many goods and luxuries that colonists from Boston to Charleston later took for granted.”[11] The political differentiation began with King William’s War (1688-1697) or Nine Year’s War. America began accepted criminality while Britain moved away from that practice. Differentiation from England had occurred for at least the past five generations, 3,000 miles away, “beyond the lines” of amity, with West Indians consistently winning Spain’s former empire and riches. It appeared that criminality worked, so America so no reason to stop its crimes!

A significant ideological band snapped that tore mother from child. The strong and martial Stuart ideologues in America saw no reason to change their methods with all the winning – with their coffers overflowing with treasure! There existed little incentive to change – the profit made in America was far beyond British experience at home. By far, Anglo-Americans won the lion’s share of the gold, silver, sugar, indigo, rum, and molasses – treasures that once belonged to Spain! They began to purchase the majority of slaves in America and grow the most sugar, or “white gold.” Pirates were capitalists because semi-legalized theft was more profitable than open legality. Of course, they should keep the profits for themselves, not share it with the British who they saw as ignoring their legislative needs and who pressured them to change! Americans today don’t recognize this so easily because “legal” and “illegal” are wholly ambiguous and relative terms, just like “treason,” “sovereign,” “freedom,” or the essentially criminal “pirate.” Pirates and capitalist criminals hide in modern linguistic ambiguity – always in political rhetoric.

Conservatives or Tories of the eighteenth century both in England and America saw their world and their profit coming to an end when a German king took the throne of Britain. It did not really matter that he was Protestant and not Catholic, although much has been made about that distinction and the religious differences had played their part. The main points, however, had more to do with the money, but were financial, political, and, to an increasing extent, cultural – the new king was a threat to martial Stuart policies in America that aided them to take whatever they wanted. George I – more specifically, his ministers – were viewed as the most liberal and alien administration yet foisted upon them from 3,000 miles away – not English, Scottish, Irish, or even Welsh! George I was an immigrant king in his own country! One could imagine today’s autocratic Trump administration would have rejected it outright!

Jacobites, followers of the Stuart line of James III, or the ousted “Pretender,” responded with an attack on England to restore his rightful place on the throne in 1715. Pirates of the Golden Age in the West Indies may have believed that their actions aided the same agenda – but more importantly, their profits. These conservatives lashed out at a purportedly unfair system that threatened their more violent imperial traditions. Still, they were not yet prepared to mount a full-throated revolution and probably would have backed down even during the Jacobite Revolution of 1715 had it not been for the glittery treasure, a source of great profit, spilled on the Florida shores in July of that same year! The timing created a perfect storm across the Atlantic that created the Golden Age of Piracy, the Commonwealth of Pyrates, or modern America.

During the Golden Age of Piracy, Douglas Burgess asserts, “Loyalty [or at least casual deference] to the English flag, which had been a hallmark of the profession [piracy] since the sixteenth century, gradually succumbed to a quite different sentiment: ‘war against all the world.’”[12] War against everyone else – the foreign; differences of religion, politics, and especially other cultures became anathema to an increasing isolationist America – then including the West Indies. This shift in basic intent denoted a change in far more than just politics: it was also territorial, cultural, racial, and financial – feudally Stuart in aggressive style. Burgess said that this shift caused some, like Marcus Rediker, to “posit a protodemocracy of pirates that stood apart from and in conflict with the Crown and its colonies.”[13] Burgess’ desire to explain piracy as a phenomenon separate from emerging American politics, however, handicaps his reliance on the already handicapped theories of Rediker. Americans all across the continent and in the West Indies enjoyed and benefitted from the same “pirate,” imperial, or one-sided autocracy. Rediker was partly correct except that his “conflict with the Crown and colonies” was more directly a conflict of the colonies, but with a rejected Crown. America tested its hegemony on the water, revolting against England in the Golden Age and simply failed the first time around – the second, however, would succeed. The argument is inescapable – we diverged from Britain in that they moved away from piracy/criminality while we firmly embraced it and created our culture from it. The umbilical cord had snapped. America began to truly see itself as an independent “Commonwealth of Pyrates.” No amount of redeemer or conservative rhetoric would change that.

 

---

[1] Natalie Zacek, “Francis Nicholson (1655–1728),” Encyclopedia Virginia (Richmond: Virginia Foundation for the Humanities, 2016), http://www.encyclopedaniavirginia.org/ (accessed 30 Jul 2016).

[2] Ibid.

[3] Nicholson reportedly tore off his powdered wig and threw it to the ground when he heard the news of the fleet disaster.

[4] A study of U. S. Census records since 1850 for northern versus southern states and their respective abilities to read and write (possessing of a basic education) is highly instructive on this point. Ancestry.com it!

[5] "South Carolina Probate Records, Bound Volumes, 1671-1977," images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-19424-37315-19?cc=1919417 : 21 May 2014), Charleston > Miscellaneous record, 1696-1729 > image 128 of 301; citing Department of Archives and History, Columbia.

[6] Ibid., image 138 of 301.

[7] Prange, “A Trade of No Dishonor,” 1270.

[8] Ibid., image 139 of 301.

[9] Still, Thache expressed a particular annoyance with the French, who consistently threatened his home of Jamaica and with whom he fought consistently in the former war. His actions after capturing his Queen Anne’s Revenge demonstrate a steady determination to hurt the French in the French Windward Islands and later at Petit Goâve in French Hispaniola.

[10] Douglas R. Burgess, Jr., The Pirate’s Pact: The Secret Alliances Between History’s Most Notorious Buccaneers and Colonial America (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2009), 169.

[11]Ibid.

[12] Burgess, Politics of Piracy, 200.

[13]Ibid.

RED ALERT! Christian-GOP Dominionism and Donald Trump

This is a thread from "Mr. Spock" on twitter about one of the greatest threats our democracy has ever faced! These are America's Dark Ages!

You will note several similarities in the following thread that may sound familiar if you are used to studying history - particularly the Civil War. This is the racist "white man's" theology of the South's "god of the slavemaster".. now the dominant domain of Republican political ideology!

1898 caption from the Raleigh News & Observer - annotated by the author

The continuous criminality of the South and the GOP: Over 100 Years of GOP Crime & Fascism: https://youtu.be/qBU3lBlecaI

------

In Star Trek, one of the core story lines was the Dominion war. But it was mostly in Deep Space Nine. It was originally aired in the 1990s. But it was really speaking to America. Because America is truly at war with the Dominion, here and now. Dominion theology is Christian [in origin].

Political ideologies that seek to institute a nation governed by Christians based only on their personal understanding of Biblical law. Dominionism is a label that only applies to certain groups of Christians within the United States, nowhere else on Earth does this apply. [One particularly anti-American - and Southern neo-Confederate - one is "Church of God Evangelistic Association" operated by David J. Smith]

Dominionism is a radical movement, it cloaks itself in the mantle of Christian faith and American Patriotism, when what it is actually trying to do is dismantle democracy. These people put themselves on a pedestal and dictate the morals of a country based on their limited subjective views that they cherry pick from the Bible and ignore the parts that would effect them. So for example, they will press for oppression of LGBTQ, but not divorce or adultery. They are raping the faith of millions and calling themselves moral whilst acting amorally.

Dominionism has a belief in magic along with adoration of a leader - sound familiar? They believe in the supremacy of a master race, this master race is the bastardised version of American Christianity where Jesus is white and protects only America 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄

But most importantly, the give away is not on what they say, but on how they act. The Dominion movement is a totalitarian movement, exploiting those of faith, but of people that don’t truly understand their faith. They will use religious and patriotic language, usually combined. For example, one cannot be truly a patriot American unless you are a Christian, but not true Christianity, it has to be the White bastardised version of Christianity. Everyone else is the enemy. Everyone else is evil and must be eradicated. One must do as they say..

It is the only way to be a Christian and American [according to Dominionism]. Adhere to all of their rhetoric. Find a leader to adore, no matter how unethical he is [GOP's Donald Trump in this case].

So what is their ultimate goal? A legal system based on “Christian Values.” Labor unions & Civil rights movements will be abolished. It will form the basis of the educational system. Women will be removed from the workforce to stay at home [if this reminds you of the "Handmaid's Tale" series on Hulu, you're not wrong!].

Seen these women protestors dressed in red robes? That's from "Handmaid's Tale"

The most important book for the Dominionist is the “Institute of Biblical Law,” which calls for a Christian society that is harsh, unforgiving and violent.

It calls for the death penalty of LGBTQ, blasphemy, astrology and incorrigible juvenile delinquency and women only to be chaste before marriage. The book calls for the Christian United States. There are 2000 radio stations feeding this in America and 6 TV channels. Right now!

So who are the poster boys of Dominionism? Well Pat Robertson for one and I’m sure that surprises no one.

Here’s an article from 2006 which speaks of the rise of Dominionism.

This is why WE HAVE TO STICK TOGETHER. We cannot ever allow this Draconian society to occur. This is why we must call out this fake version of Christianity which is all about white straight men having all of the power. We must say no. Never surrender.

The enemies of morality will not stop and will not back off. The Left cannot and will not change.

"If the Democrats in the Senate try again to usurp the President's constitutional authority by filibustering, there will be a battle of enormous proportions from sea to shining sea." —James Dobson

[more Civil War news & rhetoric by Robert Reich, Franklin Graham,

Politics is religion, and the right is getting ready for the end times

Pete Buttigieg: "Hypocrisy" of Evangelical Christians Supporting Trump

The Evangelical Civil War: An Interview With Russell Moore - Bloomberg ]

Can you understand why tRump is so important to them and their movement?

So the religious right now have 30 million active voters. They go out and vote no matter what. This is why we must ALWAYS VOTE.

None of my tweets I must add are attacking Christians. Real Christians. Not at all. Christians are needed to push back, to speak the truth, to say no to the cheapening of their daily spirituality. I think America needs true Christians now more than ever, to speak out more.

Why Christian nationalists love Trump

------------------

My thanks to Mr. Spock for his ever logical and fascinating analysis!

I have written a quite a few blog entries myself on Southern conservatism combined with theology and originating from early American piracy and crime:

North Carolina: The Subtle Politics of Slavery Before and After the Civil War 

Progressive Liberal Minister Born in the Confederacy!  

"Quest for Blackbeard" and the "Counterfactual" Politics of the South 

Why do Poor White Voters Vote Against Themselves?

North Carolina's Political Pirate Nest

Really! Pirates and Tea Party Conservatism 

Carolana to Carolina: Imperialism, Science, and Early Huguenot Interest in Bath County

Pirates and Capitalists: Two Sides of the Same Coin 

The National Rifle Association in a Culture of Terrorism

A Proud North Carolina Tradition!

North Carolina: The Subtle Politics of Slavery Before and After the Civil War

Republicans were Liberal Before the Confederacy Took Them Over!

North Carolina's Most Amusing Governor and Wilmington Founder 

Political Agenda of "Redeemer Historians" in North Carolina

Responsibility in Business: Imperialism, Africans, and Rice in the South Carolina Trade

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Am I Just Picking on the Confederacy?

Originally published in 2011 - in the Obama Era.

You tell me.. was I wrong?

Equal Rights

From  http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/breaking.htm :

The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) launched roughly fifty years later after the 19^th amendment was no so fortunate and was never ratified. Phyllis Schafly, leader of the opposition had a celebration of its defeat June 30, 1982 and Norma Russell for the Southern Partisan interviewed her the morning after. A question about the concentration of her support in the South is revealing, implicitly bringing up the issue of States’ Rights. Three reasons were given, one was that some of the southern state legislatures were not in session the year the ratification process started, giving her time to build up opposition in those states, and another reason was that southern states’ laws were held to privilege women, and the third states’ rights. 

PARTISAN: How do you account for the concentration of opposition to the ERA in the South?

SCHAFLY: There are several reasons for opposition to the Equal Rights Amendment in the South. …

The second reason for the opposition to ERA in the South is that Southerners recognized early the tremendous shift of power to the Federal Government that was involved in Section 11 of ERA. They did not want to give the Federal Government any more power. Now I think the rest of the states in the country feel that way too, but the Southern states recognized the danger sooner.

Well might Schafly appreciate the South, otherwise the ERA would have passed easily. Of the former states of the Confederacy and Oklahoma, 10 states rejected the ERA, a nearly Solid South of 84% opposition. Of the other 38 states, 33 ratified the ERA, a percentage of 87% in favor. However, for ratification ERA would need a total of 38 states. This meant that outside the South 36 states would be needed, a percentage of 94.7%. Unlike the 19^th amendment, the ERA didn’t get nearly 100% support outside the South, so it died.

 The 19^th amendment and women’s rights are just one example elaborated here. You could look at a map of states with Sodomy laws or right to work laws and see confederacies. 

 Does this map look similar to any other?

States in Blue ratified the ERA amendment... States in Red did not.

Unconstitutional Religious Tests for Office

 Rachel Maddow shows map about 2 minutes into this video about Cecil Bothwell in Asheville, NC

Article Six of the United States Constitution states "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."  Seven southern states still ignore this...

Does this map look familiar too?

How about this one?

Red is the Southern Baptist Convention...  Most fundamentalist wackos branch off the Baptist denomination... including Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, KS with Pastor Fred Waldron Phelps, Sr.

 
Sexual Orientation Rights

No Protection in the South... surprising, huh? Not really...

Westboro Scrapbook:

Pastor Phelps leading his gay-bashers at the pulpit.  He has been so inspiring to many conservative leaders!  What's weird is, that his state of Kansas supposedly affords some rights to gays and lesbians.

Uh...

Another Uh...

There is no wondering why Markos Moulitsas Zúniga calls these guys (today's right-wingers) the American Taliban... Westboro Baptist Church says it themselves... "God is" THEIR "terrorist!"  

Death Penalty

Bible Belt Death

Source: http://www.sullivan-county.com/nf0/dispatch/death.htm 

Like almost everything else in Appalachian culture, the Bible plays a part in how many people think. Most people may not know it, but the Protestant version of the Christian religion is split over more things than just how to read the Bible. They can be split into two broad groups: 


(1) The death of Jesus on the Cross is a symbol of love by God who was willing to sacrifice His Son to show that love. His sacrifice was a symbol of love and forgiveness, and those were also the words of Jesus and what he stood for. These folks may/may not agree on issues such as abortion or homosexuality but are more "liberal" (I don't mean socialist) on many issues. Many of the best parts of our society , including civil rights, comes from this Christian tradition. These folks usually have a positive outlook on life. 


OR 


(2) Humans are by nature evil, wicked, born into sin and must be controlled at all times. They see God as an angry judge, ready to hand down swift punishment for the smallest infraction of His Laws. This is best symbolized by the Flood in Genesis or Sodom and Gomorra. Some of these folks may go as far as advocate the death penalty for abortion and homosexuality. Their version of God is utterly devoid of reason, love, or compassion in many cases. They simply follow "faith only" and ignore anything Jesus said as they prefer the Apostle Paul (Romans), Revelations, and the harshest sections of the Old Testament (BCBNOTE: you know... like the Taliban with the Quran). There is often an element of racism, social, and religious intolerance. Most view life as a struggle and have a negative outlook. 


... what disturbs me is most death row inmates are poor, non-white, or both. 

--------------------------------------------

Still ethnic cleansing are we?  Like we did in 1898 Wilmington?  It seems to be going well for the "Good ol' Boys" ...

Am I just being unfair?  

Actually, 35% of New Jersey conservatives believe that Barack Obama MIGHT be the... and get this... the ANTI-CHRIST!!

So, maybe it's more than just the former Confederate States today.  I'll bet they had some contribution, though!  Frank Schaffer (in the video above) calls them insane...he asks...
"How do we save Christianity from Christians?"

It seems like I'm not really being unfair to suppose that the harshest laws in our country come out of the Baptist-denominated South.  Looking just in the yellow pages of a rural town in Florida, I found 1 Catholic Church, 1 Episcopalian church, 2 Methodist, various others at 1 church each, and... 69 Baptist churches!  The South is overwhelmingly Baptist.  I was raised Baptist myself, so it's not like I'm swinging a bat at the guy next door.  Some of these churches, like my own growing up, I'd like to think, were relatively comfortable with everyone else.  Many of them, however, are extremists.  Sub-denominations like Pentecostal, Apostolic, and the like represent groups that more or less do not wish to grow into the future... in fact, they stay in the past and chant gibberish and fall on the floor when their preacher touches them.  Whereas, northern religious groups like the Amish clearly desire to stay in the past, they simply plow their fields, ride their buggies in town, and also keep to themselves.  Southern fundamentalists, on the other hand, believe not only that they should ignore reason and civilization, but also that they should proselytize and force everyone to believe the way they do.  In other words, they're intolerant and belligerent with "God's love" (Reference Westboro: how's that done again?).  And, they actively try to make this happen... to "win over souls."

Agreed, most of us regard the extreme ones as "wackos" and ignore them, but many of these groups (politically-minded bunch) opted for moderation to be more accepted by the general public and, for the most part, since the Civil War, they have.  The "Good ol' Boy" code developed out of this socio-political atmosphere.  The Ku Klux Klan, too.  The moderate, acceptable types went to Washington as our Congressmen.  They carried their ideology with them and infected the rest of the country.  Since the development of television, they have hit the air waves.  They "snuck" into the mainstream and, today, they are powerful enough that they don't need to be low-key anymore.  Their political affiliations grew to the point that they now influence presidents and Congress directly.  Ask George W. Bush about that "faith-based" thing...  Then there's the secretive, modern-day "Family" which puts on the National Prayer Breakfast, attended by American presidents since Eisenhour, and highly influential!  Did I mention that they allegedly helped promote Ugandan "kill-the-gays" legislation and maintain the infamous "C-street" residence in Washington where three members were recently caught in compromising sexual encounters (different cases... in a single year)?  George Rekers was one of the most recent anti-gay preachers who went on a trip with a personal masseuse that he hired from "rentboy.com"... to give him erotic massages!


This is not traditional Christian behavior.  It is "Christians on Cocaine" behavior... Kentucky-fried Trinity with a side-dish of $$$ and power... and a huge amount of hypocrisy!  This is why Jefferson said to keep a "wall of separation" between religion and government... because religion go in any political direction imaginable in any of a number of "visions" and can easily turn fundamentalist (like the Taliban or Falwell or the Family) and become dangerous... like they are today, as a matter of fact!  You've been paying attention, right?

A friend of mine proposed that the Union may have been better off without the South and should have avoided the Civil War and let them secede.  He says that the North would probably have suffered the loss of the lucrative exports from the South, but he also reminded me that the South depended on really just one product... cotton.  He suggests that this made the South's economy unstable anyhow.  Projecting the future, he believed that the South would have suffered numerous slave revolts, who decided to free themselves, and the South would have been slowly taken over by other nations, third-world countries, etc.  It might end up as a collection of petty dictatorships.  

That would suck, huh?  But, how would the North get along?  Might they have been better off?  They may actually have been higher in world literacy ratings, education, civil rights, fewer blacks and non-whites in jail or facing the death penalty (racism existed north of the Mason-Dixon, too, but not quite as fervently as in the south).  The Civil War hardened southerners who turned their religion into a political weapon and they continued the war... Reconstruction was a joke, ended by a back-room political compromise (probably the first Falwell-type deal), and racist Congressmen, like Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III of Alabama, would make policy for us all.  Consequently, only 40% of Americans today believe in evolution, a proven biological phenomenon (yes, proven!), 35% of New Jersey residents believe that Barack Obama "might" be the Anti-Christ, the United States is 34th on a list of 35 countries that judged science vs superstition (we overwhelmingly opted for superstition).  Turkey is 35.

When does the Fundamentalist government of the new America decide to kill gay Americans like Uganda?  Or re-institute slavery to give those "poor, out of work African Americans jobs"?  Sound insane?  I assure you that I've heard this talk before. 

This is crazy.  But, this is what many of us believe.  So, am I being unfair to the Confederacy?  The Union took them back, allowed them back into Congress to affect national policy... not unlike a virus!  Fundamentalists use an EXCLUSION PRINCIPLE that goes against all truly American ideals... and it gets political.

Take Jerry Falwell, for example.  A Huffington Post article by Mike Papatonio tells how Falwell's corrupt fundamentalist legacy still affects politics at Liberty University.  The 2009 article starts off:

Two weeks ago, leadership at Liberty University in Virginia told young Democrats that they were no longer entitled to recognition as a sanctioned organization on campus. Only young Republicans are welcome there.

You can see in the picture at left who Jerry really worshiped.  Multiply Falwell by the number of crazy fundamentalist leaders out there and think about what effect this may have had on the politics of our nation.  When you read the article, Falwell seems highly corrupt and downright sleazy.   Ever wonder how pseudo-news shows like FOX got started or where they get their validation from?  

Evangelicals and the GOP is absolutely right!  They are one and the same.

Does anybody else see the patterns here?  Am I still being unfair to my ancestors?  It doesn't take long to find all of these clues.  But, most of us don't want to know.  Well, I do.  I don't want to carry on a tradition of idiocy and violence in the benevolent cloak of ministry.  

Keith Olberman, Jeff Sharlet, Chris Rodda, John Amato, etc have all written books about the fundamentalist influence on America.  One evangelical-turned-sane, Frank Schaeffer, explosively opposes these guys now, in his book, Crazy For God, seen in this photo: 

Please think about it!  I'd like to see the United States get better ranking in world literacy or in our ability to use and accept reason.  The only way that will happen is to de-influence evangelicals.  Let's finish the Civil War once and for all... it's over, guys!  Seriously, it's done!  Get on with life, now... open your eyes.  Christians like Frank Schaeffer want you to know this, too.  Let's change the maps of our nation to read as ONE America, with the wonderful diversity that a true "melting pot" of cultures can bring to it.  Don't watch crap like FOX (or FAUX-NEWS, lol).  Use sense and reason and don't give into superficiality.  American laziness is adored by the GOP and guys like Falwell and mouthpieces like FOX.  

Communism or the Taliban or Al Qaeda was never the real threat.  Read history, folks!  The real threat has always been here...  here, where fundamentalists spout off biblical scripture that suggest the assassination of our own president and offered up on Cafepress.com!  Zazzle.com recognized the free-speech rights, but said, responsibly, that this message was not acceptable and removed the products from their website.  Communism was actually pretty cool by comparison!  Keep the Taliban away, though... there's enough of them here already!  The rest of the world is frightened by our religious fundamentalism, like we are of Al Qaeda... only we have more money and nukes!  Think about it... nuclear weapons in the hands of illiterate nutjobs... I said, NUCLEAR WEAPONS... think Iran's a problem?  When will we decide that God needs us to use them?   

One more point... thanks to the bad press given lately to fundamental Baptists, the whole idea of denomination is disappearing from the religious right.  Make no mistake, though.  Fundamentalists are no less fundamental just because they say they are non-denominational.  It just makes it harder to tell who the nutjobs are.  You can recognize these churches by the military-compound look to their gigantic, multi-million-dollar grounds, some with guard gates!  You have to consider where the money came from to build these places... what corporations do they owe their souls to?  The nicest and friendliest church that I've ever been to was a simple, one-room church in a small town with unassuming patient people (like they were before 1860... minus slavery).  They are out there... you have to look.  Even in the old Confederacy!  Otherwise, ask Frank Schaeffer...

I'm not really being unfair...