XBradTC

There is very little philosophical difference between the 2001 demolition by the Taliban of the ancient Buddhas in Bamiyan and the recent destruction of Confederate statues and monuments across the South.  Nor is there an appreciable difference between the desired destruction of the Giza Pyramids and the demand to do the same to the Confederate Stone Mountain memorial in Georgia.   Both represent the Orwellian imperative to remove unpopular or inconvenient history.  Both were/are perpetrated by violent, thuggish, ignorant mobs who are collectively and individually too brainwashed or stupid to understand the portent of their actions.

As the Taliban declared such monuments "ancient sites built by infidels", so now the American version is that monuments to the sons of the Confederacy were built by treasonous and hateful racists.  Of course, the Civil War, in which my great grandfather fought for the North, and died a young man of his wounds, was about much more than slavery.  The issues surrounding the war are, as any student of history knows, incredibly complex.  But, like so many other things, the Left desires a "bumper sticker" explanation that plays to emotion rather than understanding and knowledge.  

Some things don't fit on a bumper sticker.  Slave owners were exclusively Democrats.  Southern secessionists were Democrats, supported by pro-slavery "Peace Democrats" in the North.  After the war and through the last century, the Ku Klux Klan was comprised entirely of Democrats, one of whom served in the US Congress until 2010.  Despite the unquestioned cruelty of slavery, more Black Americans fought for the South than the North.  Confederate Veterans were declared US War Veterans in 1958, despite the "Institute for Southern Studies" trying to convince us otherwise.  

Perhaps the alt-left would like to forcibly collect repayment of the VA benefits of the last surviving Civil War pensioner, the disabled child of a Confederate soldier?  Or sue the descendants of Sylvester Magee, a black man who fought for Mississippi, and believed to be the last living freed slave (he died in 1971).  

Funny, the American Talibantifa seems to be rather ambivalent toward modern slavery, nearly the exclusive purview of their besties, the muhammedans.  (Though there are some black professional athletes that claim themselves to be slaves, or at least indentured servants, to the tune of being paid several hundred thousands of dollars per game, it might be worth noting.  Oh the humanity.)  

So what is the end game of this?  Ask Marcuse and Alinsky.  And Brother Barack and Sister Hillary.  Demonizing of the Founding Fathers as hateful, bigoted slaveowners who could not possibly have built a proper model for government.  Replace the Constitution, of course, with a new document full of Social Justice and Economic Justice.  Where the heterosexual white male is persona non grata, guilty of all manner of oppression and hate just for being white and male and straight.  

Ponder these:  We can be subject to lectures about how hateful anyone must be who does not condemn everything Southern and Confederate, by none other than Albert W. Gore Jr., whose father was a proud Segregationist and Dixiecrat.  

And today, in Boston, where there is a university  named after the great champion of free speech, Justice Louis Brandeis, Mayor Marty Walsh and other city officials are actively suppressing the Constitutional free expression of law-abiding Americans because they label those with contrary views "hate groups," and declare them unwelcome in their city.  

The ability to speak one's mind, to challenge the political orthodoxies of the times, to criticize the policies of the government without fear of recrimination by the state is the essential distinction between life in a free country and in a dictatorship. 

If only.   By the way, what's the latest on those Russian hacks?  And any word on the IT managers for the DNC?  URR here.