Dress for Success?

Replicating Lincoln’s inauguration is not what I would have chosen as a “theme” party. Nostalgia and history are two different things. The Democrats have adopted Lincoln as one of their own. First they replicated his funeral for JFK and now his inaugural. You would think they could come up with Democrats FDR or Wilson for their reenactments of history.

I guess that is because the Democrats are much like the Whig Party that Lincoln was a long time member of before it fell apart and he became a Republican. But he never stopped being a Whig. Besides usurping the other Party’s guy is so much more Machiavellian.

I really wouldn’t want our country to emulate, over the next term of office, years of civil war, the suspended writ of habeas corpus, destruction of vast amounts of property, inflation, shortages, forced impressments, church burnings, hundreds of thousands of unnecessary deaths, family turned against family, trampling on state rights, rape and pillage and thousands of imprisonments for merely being critical of the government.

Although a reenactment of Lincoln shutting down the msm for the slightest of criticism would be an interesting and ironic turn of events, I would be against it in any form.

At the time of Lincoln’s election with less than 40% of the popular vote, he was so despised there were plots against his life. He actually had to sneak into Washington for his inaugural dressed as a woman. He succeeded in getting into town, disguised as an old woman, complete with hunched over walk. Talk about dress for success.

I’m sure glad they decided to skip reenacting that part of the story.

Don’t Blame God

Land is not holy, God is holy. Temples, walls and shrines are not holy, God is holy. Cities are not holy, God is holy. War is not holy, God is holy.

Christianity, Judaism and Islam all believe in one God. Christianity and Islam are rooted in Judaism. Yet, each believes they are the true religion.

Each of these religions preach love and tolerance, none are very good at practicing it.

Christianity was formed around the teachings of one individual Jewish prophet. Islamic religion was formed as a uniting force.

We delude ourselves if we believe there will be an end to violence in the name of God. Violence committed in God’s name is really not about him at all. It is about the tribal nature of humans and how those tribes seek to impose their will on others because of their own insecurities and aggression. And we are no more enlightened or advanced in the matter of achieving religious tolerance than we were thousands of years ago, despite all the intellectual study. That is because we are foolish enough to actually believe the violence has anything to do with religion.

The same battles rage on, each claiming God is on their side, I can’t remember a war in the past several hundred years that has been fought where one or both sides failed to drag God into it. There really is no good solution. In regards to the Middle East, many politicians have tried to offer a solution, all have failed and most have just made the situation worse.

Hate is a powerful emotion and when combined with the name of God it becomes a powder keg. Justification for violence in the name of God is merely cover and a refusal to accept the real human motivations behind it. Those motivations mostly boil down to power struggles that have nothing to do with religion.

It is impossible to address the root of the fears and insecurities of man that cause him to choose violence as a solution as long as God is used for cover. A problem cannot be solved if those who have it refuse to recognize the problem for what it is and I don’t see much that has anything to do with God in the Middle East.

In the Middle East, God is simply being used to rally Muslims against Jews and Christians, the excuse is an injustice against Palestinians. But the Palestinians are merely the pawns who do most of the dying. Iran is pulling the strings. They act as though it is a Holy War being fought over a Holy Land, but it is really just another power struggle aimed at focusing hatred in a certain direction. But then, no one would get very excited about it or be so quick to die for it without the word “Holy” added into the mix.

The greater problem is the game we could call “Ultimate World Chess” that preys upon these disagreements. The motivations of these parties are purely selfish and they take the side that benefits them the most to increase the chances of survival of those in power.

That is why you are not hearing real protest from most of the Middle East. They’ve proved more than once that they really don’t care about the fate of the Palestinians and Iran is a greater threat to them than Israel, so they are probably hoping Israel eliminates the problem of Iranian backed Hamas terror. Iran is under the serious possibility of political and economic collapse and rallying support for Palestinians based on religious war in Gaza deflects attention from their internal problems.

Of course, should it benefit any of the parties involved, they will not hesitate to shift allegiances as necessary for whatever gain they seek.

That is why, for instance, The Soviet Union was able to form a non-aggression pact with Germany, but when invaded by Germany in WWII, they joined the Allies. And after the war, they became our enemy over ideology, which is the Communist’s version of religion.

Speaking of Atheists …

Atheists often make the argument that a world without God would be more peaceful. But the Soviet Union proves that Godless states use ideology and cult of personality, in place of God to achieve the same results.

As long as tribes of men are willing to be manipulated by fear and hate mongering leaders, there will be wars. As long as man holds earthly possessions and objects out to be holy and worth fighting for, there will be wars. As long as we allow our insecurities to get the better of our intellect, there will be wars.

So don’t blame God for the fighting in his name, blame the way man has interpreted and used God for his earthly purposes.

Who is Tanaghrisson?

The short answer; A Seneca Half-King of the Iroquois Confederacy, allied to the English in 1754

Why is he historically important?

On May 28, 1754 Tanaghrisson and his men led Lt. George Washington and his forty men from Virginia fighting for the English to a French camp of about 30 soldiers at a glen in the Ohio Valley (in western Pennsylvania.)

It was early in the morning, Washington and Tanaghrisson had the camp surrounded. Washington’s men fired into the camp. The French tried to retreat but were blocked by the Tanaghrisson’s men. Fourteen French were hit, three English were wounded and one killed. The French Ensign in charge, Joseph Culon de Villiers de Jumonville, was among the wounded.

Jumonville told Washington his mission was peaceful and had a letter he was to deliver telling the English to withdraw from French territory.

Washington needed to have the letter translated and while he was doing so, Tanaghrisson and his men hacked all but one of the wounded French soldiers to death. Tanaghrisson smashed open Jumonville’s head and pulled out his brains running them between his hands as if he were washing them.

Washington, seeing this slaughter and unable to stop it, ordered his men to protect the rest of the French soldiers and take them out of the glen so they would not be killed. Meanwhile, Tanaghrisson’s men then scalped and maimed the bodies of the dead Frenchmen.

This slaughter is largely considered to be the start of the Seven Years War.

I’m trying to imagine how this incident shaped the young Washington’s opinion of the Iroquois for the rest of his life and what effect it had on his decisions regarding them during the Revolutionary War.

Wani’shi Ni’tis

I am a big fan of Native American (formerly known as Indians) history. The tribe that interests me most is the Lenni Lenape. Loosely translated that means “Original People.” The Lenape were among the oldest settlers in the Americas. All that stuff you hear about Indian settlement being only a few thousand years old has been debunked. They have been here much, much longer. No one really knows how long.

The Lenape occupied the area of what is now Southern New Jersey (a major tribe being Schey-ic-ibbi) and South Eastern Pennsylvania (a major tribe being Shackamaxon) along the Delaware River (Lena’pewisi’pu.) They were among the first to sell off their tribal lands and assimilate into other tribes, mostly in Canada and Oklahoma. They also don’t call themselves Lenape anymore, but have adopted the name Delaware given to them by the settlers. The original Lenape would be very surprised to be thought of as a nation of tribes, they weren’t that organized.

Dutch, Swedes and later the Quakers were the main settlers in the area. These settlers tried to deal with the Lenape fairly, recognizing the need to purchase the lands they occupied based on the European concept of ownership. But the Lenape concept was not based on individual land ownership; it was more territorial by local village or family. They simply believed they had the right to occupy and hunt the area they had staked out for their tribe or family. As a result of this conceptual difference, at times, settlers had to purchase the same land more than once.

The area tribes routinely fought with each other but not over land. The fighting was more Hatfield-McCoy in nature based on settling a blood score and possibly to raid for food and women. The fighting was usually on a very small scale and over quickly, since these villages were far from large and survival was always the main concern.

What fascinates me is their extreme tolerance for each other. Lenape were forgiving of most all transgressions and the rules were very loose. They had no racial bias. They were also very tolerant parents. Hospitality to visitors was an important part of their beliefs. A visitor could always expect to be offered food and shelter.

The “Algonkian” (yes, that is the correct spelling) language they spoke has been just about completely lost to history. Some words and phrases still remain. Many municipal and place names in NJ and PA are taken from their language, although they have been Anglicized. Some people try to group many tribes together, encompassing very large areas by their common language base. But the Algonkian language variables among the tribes were huge, more akin to speaking different languages.

Very few people probably know that the first Indian Reservation to be established was set up for the Lenape in New Jersey called “Indian Mills.” But they couldn’t make a go of it there, so they sold off their reservation lands. The last full blooded Lenape in New Jersey was a woman named “Indian Ann.” She was well known to the settlers in the area at the time because she traded woven baskets for food and supplies with them. She was well thought of and to this day there is a trail named after her in New Jersey.

The Lenape were Democratic, maybe that’s why I admire them. Maintaining personal freedom while working for the common good of their tribe was at the root of their beliefs, almost sounds like the Constitution. Those are beliefs I could get behind!

Like all people, the Lenape weren’t perfect and it is not my aim to glorify them, but I can’t help believe we could learn a few things from their positive qualities, which is why I chose to speak of them.

If you have children interested in Native American history, there is a book called “The Indians of New Jersey” formerly titled “Dickon Among The Lenapes” by M.R. Harrington. The book combines the fiction of an English Boy being stranded among the Lenape with factual tribal information about the Lenape. It is a good starting point.

Anyway, Wani’shi Ni’tis (That’s Algonkian for “Thank You Friend”) for reading this blog!

How Conspiracy Theories Get Started

Conspiracy theories would never get much traction if all the facts were laid bare for the public to see at the time of the incident. Unfortunately, those who have something to hide from the public usually do hide it. And sometimes those who have nothing to hide simply mishandle the situation and thus fuel suspicion.

Governments tend to be mistrusted because they are usually big power wielding entities that have a history of being less than truthful with the folks. Sometimes they do it to “protect” the people and sometimes they do it to protect themselves from the people. Sometimes they do it because revealing certain information could help our enemies get the better of us. Sometimes they do it to avoid taking an action that could escalate an existing tension.

The nature of humans is to seek an answer that satisfies their curiosity about a particular incident. (That is why detective and mystery novels are so popular.) If the answer they are given sounds incredible, they will usually try to formulate an answer that seems more plausible. Worse still, if they are given no answer, others, often with little or no real knowledge, step in to explain the cause and the rumor mill really gets to grinding.

Sometimes this is to the benefit of those who prefer the facts remain unknown. Conspiracy theories help them cover up or obscure the truth. The crazier the theories that are out there, the better it becomes for them, because then all theories become suspect. So those theories that are actually based on fact and are reasonable get tossed on the pile with all the rest.

These theories provide countless hours of entertainment for millions of people and are an industry unto themselves; spawning books, websites, movies and endless hours of discussion.

It usually starts with an incident that grabs the public’s attention. Those directly involved, whether it be government or individuals, release either minimal information or none. Then the search for answers to those unanswered questions begins.

Eventually the incident fades from the memory of most people and the people who know the facts either move on or die of old age. The truth may actually be told fifty or on hundred years later, but by then, the truth is pretty much useless especially if a crime is involved, as no action can be taken against the perpetrators.

I’m sure you can think of at least four or five incidents that have conspiracy theories revolving around them.

I think I am seeing one in the making right now; Questions about the President-Elect’s birth certificate have been making the rounds of the internet, with all kinds of wild claims being made. Like all the rest, it will eventually become a legend, because some people believe they are being deceived about his citizenship and so they will come up with an explanation that satisfies their need for an answer.

And so it goes on and on.

Choose Your Heroes Wisely

If a leader were to suspend the writ of habeas corpus, be responsible for hundreds of thousands of his fellow citizens deaths, wreak total destruction on cities and wage war on woman and children, arrest and imprison thousands of people without charging them with a crime what would you call him? A tyrant?

If a leader were to send troops to interfere with elections and see to it that anyone who opposed him was denied the right to vote, what would you call him? A dictator?

If a leader authorized the arrest of anyone who refused to pray for him and burned their churches and launched a campaign of aggressive forced military service, what would you call him? A despot?

Who is this horrible oppressor? Sounds like Lenin, Stalin or Hitler doesn’t it?

Actually, it was Abraham Lincoln.

Not so honest Abe was the first pro-Nationalism President. I guess you could also say he was the first RINO, since he was really a Whig who joined the Republican Party after the Whig party ceased to exist. But he never gave up his Whig political philosophy. Whigs could be thought of today as big centralized government Socialists. Abe trampled on our Constitution with a vengeance and we haven’t been the same since.

No wonder the Liberals love him.

Oh, and by the way, he didn’t really oppose slavery either. These historical facts about Lincoln are all available to anyone who cares to know the truth.

When Lincoln ordered the assassination of Confederate President Jefferson Davis, the South decided to return the favor. If you know the history, you know why John Wilkes Booth said, “Thus always to tyrants” after he shot Lincoln. Of course he was an actor, so he said it in Latin “Sic semper tyrannis” for dramatic effect. That also happened to be the motto of Virginia.

Blind hero worship can be a dangerous thing. When choosing heroes, it pays to know the facts and choose wisely. Your freedom may depend upon it.