To: maceng2 who wrote (177504 ) 9/3/2021 1:22:19 AM From: sense 1 RecommendationRecommended By maceng2
Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 219836 Lincoln perhaps a more complex character than history prefers... is not the issue, I think... that Pieczenik tries to make it. He represents the fact of Lincoln's illness as a proof of something near mental deficiency, which it decidedly was not. But, on the rest he is not wrong... that the war was a continuation of a thread that had lain dormant since the extinguishment of the Federalists in the wake of the Hartford Convention... a bit of history that was "common knowledge" back then, of events that today we would call "conspiracy theory" that became realized into fact... and that history remains today, banished from the books and historians perception. I suspect the same fate will befall the grotesque nature of Fauci's self interest and his clear conflict of interest, as well as the worst possible appearances of the unvarnished view of the events around the invention of the spike protein and its subsequent uses in application in GMO viruses and GMO people. The Civil War was not driven by slavery... save peripherally in the fact that slavery was an integral part of the southern economy... The focus of the war was, as he says, an economic conflict between the north and the south... That conflict was a direct, but opposite, replay of the SAME economic war that occurred between the north and that south, that the north lost... in the War of 1812, and in the related pre and post war conspiracies... between the ship owners and TRADERS in New England, when that was the entire basis of the northern economy... and the far wealthier plantation based agricultural economy of the south. The north had no adequate means to resist the wealthy southern states in 1812... and thus they conspired to rejoin England as once recalcitrant but now newly loyal subjects of the King... in order to escape the imposition of restrictions on trading with the enemy... which trade was their entire livelihood. The history is long suppressed... but, the air of treason that remained attached to the Federalists afterwards ensured their rapid dissolution and demise. They ceased to exist by the 1830's... failing right along with the pro-Federalist politics of Washington, and the far more monarchist bent of John Adams. That left the Jeffersonian school ascendant through the Jackson era... Only later, after Democrats and Republicans emerged from the former Democratic-Republicans... did Republicans gravitate back toward the pro-Federalist (and pro-"Atlanticist") positions of the former Federalist party... as Lincoln exemplifies in his advocacy for a more tyrannical union. The role of the British in the Civil War... had more to do with fostering the conflict, first... playing both sides, and, then, while seeking in the long term to re-establish the ascendency in control imposed by the banking cabal... sought to saddle the new country with the war debt... to which Lincoln was compelled to submit, during the war. But, the banks were intent on preventing the debt ever being retired... so when the war ended, and Lincoln quickly moved to retire the debt and restore government independent of the banks control... that is why the banks hired Wilkes-Booth to supplement the performance already airing in the theater... I think it was not until after the assassination that the need for an alternative explanation for it created the need for the myth of Lincoln as the great emancipator... from slavery... rather than from debt. Where Pieczenik falters... is in not following through fully on the impacts of the change in the economic aspects... as those shifts were being enabled... as the power of the central government grew leaps and bounds... and the power of states and the liberties of individuals were being reduced. The key being, not that the slaves were being liberated, as much as they were being re-organized into a new system of slavery that is more conveniently managed in the interest of the new substitutes for the former plantation owners... so, in the interest of the newly wealthy class emerging from the industrial revolution. The slaves were not liberated, as much as they were elevated to the class of serfdom into which others were being reduced. As the Industrial Revolution proceeded, power shifted with it... including the superior productive power and capacity to create the material of war... much as it is shifting again today, with change from "carbon" to "green", and from "old tech" to "new tech"... "analog" to "digital"... creating a whole new class of even more clueless tyrants... who now compete for control with the prior class of tyrants...