Charles I, Duke of Buckingham, Earl of Strafford, Ulster, William Laud, Grand Remonstrance, English Civil War, Oliver Cromwell & Charles II

Posted by PITHOCRATES - February 2nd, 2012

Politics 101

Like Father Like Son, Charles I Dissolves Parliament after not Getting the Money he wanted for his Misadventures

At the start of the 17th century England was a lot like other monarchies in Europe.  Powerful.  And used to getting their way.  Sure, sometimes they had to give a little to Parliament.  That body of the people.  But that was more of an irritant than a force to be reckoned with.  By the end of the century that irritant would become the most powerful restraint on a monarch’s power the word had ever seen.

When the Scottish King James VI became King James I of England the Scottish king changed his Scottish name from ‘Stewart’ to the English ‘Stuart’.  Being the king of Scotland was all well and nice but the money and the power was in England.  And for the first time an English king ruled over Scotland (being Scottish to begin with, of course, helped).  And Wales.  And Ireland.  These were heady times to be king.  But, alas, his subjects didn’t much care for him.  Especially that body of the people.  Parliament.  Which refused to fund his errant ways.  Which took all the fun out of being king. 

Eventually James I did what all kings do.  Died.  And the crown went to Charles I.  Who annoyed his subjects even more than his dad did.  Because, like Dad, he believed in the Divine Right of Kings.  And he dissolved Parliament, too.  Just like Dad.  After Parliament was complaining about his spending habits.  And all those military misadventures.  Headed by a guy Parliament hated.  George Villiers.  The Duke of Buckingham.  Who tried to liberate Protestant Netherlands from Catholic Spain.  And failed.  Who tried to capture the Spanish treasure fleet ala Sir Francis Drake.  And failed.  Who tried to liberate Huguenot (Protestant) France.  And failed.  Buckingham was so hated that someone eventually assassinated him.

The Scottish Commit Treason to Save the Kirk from Catholicism, Charles calls Parliament to Raise an Army

Charles and the Duke were burning through a lot of Parliament’s money.  And had nothing to show for it.  In the process the king was walking all over English Common Law.  Worse, he was meddling with the Church of England.  Making the Protestant church look more and more Catholic.  It was all too much.  To borrow a lyric from the late George Harrison.  So Parliament hit the king where it hurt.  Sir John Eliot led Parliament in restricting customs duties to pay for Charles’ errant ways.  Infuriated, Charles sent his messenger, Black Rod, to dissolve Parliament.  He did.  But not before they passed Three Resolutions.  Calling Charles’ actions treason.  A bit strong for some in Parliament.  Including one ‘Black Tom’ Wentworth.  Who switched sides.  Charles made him the Earl of Strafford.  His muscle.  And sent him to Ireland.

The English may have conquered Ireland but Ireland never fully accepted being conquered.  There were many uprisings against English rule.  The problem was that Ireland was Catholic.  So not only were the English subjugating them they were attacking their religion.  Elizabeth I tried to solve this.  By having Protestant Scots settle in Ireland.  In Ulster.  In Northern Ireland.  James I followed suit.  And then annexed this land.  So there wasn’t a whole lotta love between the Irish and the English.  To borrow a lyric from Robert Plant.  And the Earl of Strafford did nothing to improve that.  He went there for money.  And got it.  More taxes.  And protection money.  Which made the Irish hate the English even more.  As if that was even possible.

Meanwhile, in Scotland, there was more trouble.  The guy making the English Church Catholic, William Laud, was doing the same thing to the Kirk.  The Scottish church.  Which was Presbyterian.  Very Protestant.  And very un-Catholic.  The Presbyterians were already not happy that their Parliament made Charles’ dad head of their church.  For kings weren’t supposed to head Presbyterian churches.  And now this.  This foul wind of Catholicism.  Well, they didn’t just sit there and take it.  They drew up a National Covenant telling Charles to stop.  Or else.  This was, of course, treason.  You just didn’t tell kings what to do.  Especially if said king believed in the Divine Right of Kings.  So Charles wanted to thump them good.  These Covenanters.  But Charles had a bit of a problem.  To raise an army for a good thumping you needed money.  Which wasn’t easy to come by when you’ve dissolved Parliament.  But he sent up a small army anyway in what we call the first Bishops’ War.  Too small to do anything they turned around and went home without fighting a battle.  Charles called for his Muscle.  Strafford.  Who told him to call Parliament.  He did.  A decade or so had passed since he dissolved the previous one.  So there shouldn’t be any harsh feelings, right?

Oliver Cromwell’s New Model Army ultimately defeated Charles I in the English Civil War 

But there were.  John Pym was the new head of the royal opposition.  And the people weren’t happy.  In England, Scotland or Ireland.  They hated Laud.  Strafford.  Paying ship money (taxes raised from coastal cities to build navies to protect coastal towns which somehow ended up helping Catholics fight Protestants in the Netherlands).  And they especially hated the court set up to encourage those reluctant to pay forced loans and extralegal taxes loan their money and pay their taxes.  So Charles was not greeted warmly.  Didn’t get the money he wanted.  So he dissolved Parliament after three weeks of this nonsense (thereafter known as the Short Parliament) and told Strafford to raise an army and teach the Scottish who their king was.  He did.  With a small army.  And fought the second Bishops’ War.  Which ended worse for Charles than the first Bishops’ War.  He lost a chunk of northern England this time.  He needed an army.  And to get an army he needed money.  Which left him no choice.  He had to call Parliament again.

This Parliament, the Long Parliament, wasn’t any more helpful.  Instead of giving Charles money they gave him a list of demands.  Arrest Laud and Strafford.  And abolish ship money and those courts.  He signed the order to execute Strafford.  “Put not your trust in Princes,” indeed.  And sent Laud to the Tower of London.  To die of age.  Meanwhile, over in Ireland, the Catholics were rising up in Ulster.  Killing Protestants wherever they found them.  Charles needed money to raise an army and fast.  But Parliament was still reluctant.  As they feared he could turn that army on Parliament.  Pym and another Member of Parliament, Hampden, passed a bill transferring power from king to Parliament.  The Grand Remonstrance.  Which led to civil war.  War between Parliament and the king.

Civil wars are the cruelest of wars.  There were no standing armies then.  So both sides assembled volunteers from their communities.  So those killing each other often knew each other.  Old friends.  Neighbors.  And family.  They tore families and communities apart.  When one of your own kills your friends and family it tends to draw some violent and cruel acts of revenge.  This was the English Civil War.  Bloody.  And cruel.  Parliament lost some early battles.  Thanks to Charles’ cousin.  A professional cavalry officer.  Who knew a thing or two about winning battles.  He so impressed Oliver Cromwell that he raised a professional cavalry force like his to fight for Parliament.  He, too, was very successful.  Soon Parliament organized their whole army along the same lines.  It was the birth of a professional, standing army.  The New Model Army.  Under Cromwell.  And Sir Thomas Fairfax.  It was the New Model Army that ultimately defeated Charles. 

Their British Descendants built the New World with a Full Knowledge of their Past

Parliament won.  Thanks to the army.  But there was little unity in Parliament.  Or the army.  They had Charles.  But they couldn’t agree on what to do with him.  Charles wrote to the Scots and asked them to save their king.  The Scots came down and started fighting.  Leading to a second civil war.  That Cromwell won in short order.  And decided that they had to try Charles for treason.  They found him guilty.  Executed him.  Made England a republic.  And ended hereditary rule.  The Scots, meanwhile, where none too pleased that they executed their king.  So they crowned Charles’ son king.  So Cromwell came north and thumped the Scottish.  Parliament made Cromwell Lord Protector.  He wasn’t a king.  But he sure looked like he was.  Then he went to Ireland and thumped them for their past sins in Ulster. 

Cromwell would die in office.  In 1658.  And much like a monarchy, which England wasn’t, Cromwell’s son inherited his office of Lord Protector.  For a while, at least.  He wasn’t like the old man.  He was weak.  And couldn’t control the army.  Charles II, in exile in the Netherlands, offered the English a deal.  Let him be king and he would give them pardons and promises galore.  Even said he would pay the army.  Long story short, England got a king again.  One that would work with Parliament.  He never trusted them.  For they did kill his dad.  But he tolerated them.  And made a deal with French King Louis XIV.  The Sun King.  Who also believed in the Divine Right of Kings.  Charles II married a Catholic.  And his brother was Catholic.  So he had some mutual interests with the French king.  A reason not to attack Catholics.  Which the French were.  Helping to maintain the peace between the two super powers.  And brought some French funds into the Crown.  Which was a lot easier than begging Parliament for it.

Charles granted complete religious freedom for everyone.  Even Catholics.  In the Declaration of Indulgence.  But Parliament was still Protestant.  So if you wanted to serve in the army, serve in Parliament or go to college you had to be a member of the Protestant Church of England.  So the century ended as it started.  With a king.  Only a king with limited powers.  But it had something new.  Religious freedom.  At least, some religious freedom.  Within a century these things would take on even greater meaning on the other side of the Atlantic.  In the New World.  Where their British descendants would build the new with full knowledge of their past.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

LESSONS LEARNED #61: “The political elite has always exploited blacks.” -Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 14th, 2011

The New World leaves old Prejudices in the Old World

Americans hated Catholics.  And why not?  Most Americans were British.  In the 18th century.  When Protestant Great Britain was forever at war with Catholic France.  Since the Reformation, it’s what Protestants and Catholics did.  Hated each other.  You just did it.  Eventually you would learn why.  But by then you were already hating.

Also, in the 18th century, slavery was part of normal life.  As it had been for centuries.  Slavery was often the misfortune of a conquered people.  Part of the social strata.  Or simply an economic tool.  Such as used in Mercantilism.  As European powers established colonies, they needed bodies to exploit the raw material and send it back to the mother country.  And the ‘godless’ people they were able to buy from African slave traders were perfect.  These ‘savages’ were little more than animals.  Struggling to live in a hostile environment.  They were better off in slavery.  In the New World they would have food and shelter.  And their masters would protect them from their hostile environment.  The way they saw it, they were doing them a favor.  Or so went the prevailing thought of the day.

During the Revolutionary War, George Washington commanded an army made up from all the colonies.  They were mostly Protestant.  But it also included Catholics.  So he had to tone down the anti-Catholic sentiment that was pretty pervasive among many of these British Americans.  And then there was a march into Canada by General Benedict Arnold.  To get the Catholic Canadians (once a French colony) to join the American cause.  (They passed on the offer.)  And so it was in the Army that the American cause transcended religion.  For it was in the army where the Protestant fought side by side with the Catholic.  As well as the free black.  Who yearned for that liberty, too, that the Americans were fighting for.  Giving Washington pause for thought.  Protestant.  Catholic.  Black.  White.  They were all people.  Americans.  This thing they were fighting for was greater than the individual colonies.  The New World would in fact be a new world.  The prejudices of the past would be left in the Old World.  And he learned that in the Army.  Where America was truly born. 

The Three Fifths Compromise Empowers the Planter Elite

It was many of these Army veterans that championed religious freedom.  And the abolitionist movements.  But the pull of the Deep South was strong.  Their planter elite, though a minority of the population, dominated political power.  Much like the landed aristocracy of feudal Europe.  They had money, power and influence.  Their view of the Revolutionary War was different than George Washington’s.  They weren’t looking to build anything greater.  No.  They just wanted to get rid of the British.  And go back to the way things were.

With the war won, that’s exactly what a lot of people did.  Go back to the way things were.  There were problems, though.  War debt, for one.  And a lack of unanimous consent.  The Confederation Congress required a unanimous vote to do anything.  Which was a rare thing.  The sectional interests were just too strong.  So in 1787, they gathered in Philadelphia to write a new constitution.  And create a new nation.  It wasn’t easy.  During the ratification process, some holdouts agreed to ratify if they added a Bill of RightsJames Madison agreed to this and worked tirelessly in the first Congress to deliver on this promise.  The issue of slavery?  That was a different story.

The Deep South would join only if the subject of slavery was off the table.  They agreed.  Tabled it for 20 years.  Give the South time to figure out how to end slavery.  Then they settled on issues of taxation and representation.  The majority of the southern population were slaves.  If they couldn’t count them to determine representation in the new government, the Deep South would have no say in the new federal government.  So they agreed on the Three Fifths Compromise.  They would count slaves as 3/5 a person.  It was a high price to pay for compromise.  For it gave the planter elite of the Deep South a disproportionate vote in Congress.  And in the Electoral College.  Which meant that this minority in the Deep South determined much of American policy until the Civil War.  Thanks to a large black population that couldn’t vote.

Liberal San Francisco:  White, Right and Out of Sight

San Francisco is an interesting town.  They don’t come much more liberal.  Or whiter.  Liberals are lucky if they’re 20% of the national population.  But a good chunk of that 20% apparently lives in San Francisco.  Nancy Pelosi coasted to reelection in 2010 with 80% of the vote even though her national approval numbers were horrible.  Her favorable ratings barely broke 10%.  In other words, the American people were sick of her and her far left liberal agenda.  They voted a bunch of her cronies out of the House of Representatives, and her from the Speakership, transferring control from the Democrats to the Republicans for the first time in a long time.  Her views are definitely not America’s views.  But they’re clearly San Francisco’s views.

Of course, many of the good people of San Francisco think that the other 80% of Americans are just too dumb to know better.  We exasperate them.  For they are the enlightened people.  The intelligentsia.  The caring.  And they were the first to drive hybrids.  Even South Park ridiculed them for that.  Calling San Francisco the smuggest place in America.  Where they like the smell of their own farts.  And they may very well like to smell their own farts.  But you know what they don’t like?  Black people (see Blacks and Republicans by Thomas Sowell posted 3/15/2011 on National Review).

The black population of San Francisco is less than half of what it was in 1970, and it fell another 19 percent in the past decade…

Blacks are being forced out of San Francisco — and out of other communities on the San Francisco peninsula — by high housing prices…

The black population in three adjacent counties on the San Francisco peninsula is just under 3 percent of the total population in the 39 communities in those counties.

It so happens that these are counties where voters and the officials they elect are virtually all liberal Democrats. You might be hard pressed to find similarly one-sided conservative Republican communities where blacks are such small percentages of the population.

So, in other words, rich liberals love to have black people vote for them.  But they don’t want to live anywhere near them.

AFDC and Abortion and the Black Family

America changed in the 1970s.  The sexual revolution was in full force.  Women’s liberation.  Abortion and birth control.  And all the feel-good programs of LBJ’s Great Society to end poverty and racial injustice.  The liberals were changing America.  The black community.  And the neighborhoods of San Francisco.

Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) caused an epidemic in children being born out of wedlock.  Because the government was paying single women per baby they had.  So they kept having babies.  Because an inexperienced young man couldn’t get a job that would match the generosity of the government.  And it was a lot easier than being a working single-mom.  So kids grew up without a father.  Spent a lot of time on the streets.  Getting into trouble.  This destroyed families in poor neighborhoods.  Which also tended to be black neighborhoods.  It was the worst of unintended consequences.  But it sure did make the recipient of these benefits life-long Democrats.  Because if you have no skills and a large family to raise, what else are you going to do but depend on those government benefits?

Of course, liberal policies weren’t all about having babies.  They were also helping to provide a lot of abortions, too.  To empower women.  To fully liberate women and make them equals in the workplace.  Because they could now do anything a man could do.  Except pee while standing up.  But they could fool around like a man.  And not have to worry about the consequences.  Just like a man.  So with abortion, birth control and a sexual revolution going on, you can guess what a lot of people were doing.  Having consequence-free fun.  If you know what I mean.  But much like AFDC, this liberation appears to have hit the black population especially hard.  A black woman is three-times as likely as a white woman to get an abortion.  And it is the only demographic where abortions exceed live births. 

Abortion is a very controversial subject with data that is often politicized.  Also, there may be other extenuating circumstances that result in these numbers.  But it shows a trend.  Liberal policies have unintended consequences.  And blacks have suffered a disproportional share of these consequences. 

The Democrat Party is the Party of Slavery and Institutionalized Discrimination

So what does this tell us about rich liberals?  First of all, they’re mostly white.  They claim that they are not the racists yet their actions indicate otherwise (San Francisco is mostly liberal and mostly white).  Their views are a minority view.  The 2010 midterm elections clearly showed that.  Yet they wield some of the greatest political power.  How do they do that?  By pandering.  To the labor unions.  The public sector unions.  The teachers.  That usual bunch that benefits by liberal policies and liberal spending.  And, of course, blacks.

When you look at the history, the Democrats haven’t been all that kind to black America.  It was the Southern Democrats who did their best to perpetuate the institution of slavery.  It was the Southern Democrats that institutionalized discrimination in the South following the Civil War.  Yes, the Civil Rights Act was passed by the Johnson administration but it was the Republicans in the House and Senate that made that possible.  The Democrats had majorities in both houses but about a third of their members were against it.  Whereas only a fifth of the Republicans were against it.  In the final House vote, all the Southern Democrats needed was to get 37% of the Republicans to vote against it to stop its passage.  Instead, 80% of Republicans voted in favor of it.  And then, of course, there’s AFDC.  Thomas Sowell blames this (and the liberal welfare state) for destroying the black family.  And the black abortion stats would probably be called genocide in another country.  Some even call it that here.

Which brings us back to the teachers.  Because when you look at these numbers, it is clear that liberal policies have not been good to black families.  But the teachers are in tight with the liberals.  I mean, with their generous pay and benefit packages they get without the taxpayer having a say in their contract negotiations, why wouldn’t they?  The government takes care of them and they take care of government.  They emphasize multiculturalism, fairness and progressive thought.  And downplay history.  The Founding Fathers play minor roles in today’s textbooks.  But students today can all tell us that the Founding Fathers owned slaves.  But they seem to forget the part about Abraham Lincoln, the Great Emancipator, being a Republican.  And that the freed blacks voted for Republicans to protect themselves from racist Southern Democrats.  

Meet the New World.  Same as the Old World.

And then along comes Barack Obama.  The ideal liberal candidate.  And first black presidential candidate.  Because of our public education there is a lot of white guilt over slavery.  So a lot of white America would probably vote for Obama to assuage that guilt.  Which included a large part of those crucial independent voters.  Things were looking up.  But could he deliver the black vote?  He graduated from Harvard Law School.  Columbia University.  He’s an Ivy League guy.  Very professorial.  He could lecture the people.  So well that it offended some.  The Reverend Jesse Jackson said then candidate Obama talked down to black people.  He didn’t like that in the least.  Even said that he wanted to “cut his nuts off.”  So it wasn’t a sure thing.  The black vote.

Of course, Obama won that election.  He took 53% of the vote to McCain‘s 46%.  And the black vote?  All but 4% voted for Obama.  No one gets 96% of the vote.  Unless you’re a dictator in a third world country.  With blacks making up approximately 12% of the U.S. population, it is clear that the black vote determined the election.  For if the black vote followed the same percentage break down of the general vote, McCain would have won the election.

So here we are, some 150 years after the Civil War and the black population is still being exploited by the political elite.  The planter elite maintained power for half a century thanks to the Three Fifth Compromise.  And liberal Democrats today use the liberal welfare state to make as many blacks as possible dependent on government.  Use their control over the public school system to hide the failure of their policies.  Their destruction of the black family.  And their racist past.  To maintain their political power.  And minority rule.  Some things never change.

Meet the New World.  Same as the Old World.  Sadly.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Ground Zero Mosque – Right but Wrong

Posted by PITHOCRATES - September 15th, 2010

All this talk about them, the Muslim community, having the right to build a mosque near Ground Zero reminds me of a scene from the movie Monty Python’s Life of Brian.  One of the men wants to be a woman.  So he can have babies.  Of course, a man can’t have babies.  But a man can have the RIGHT to have babies.  The dialogue went something like this:

Rogers: Why are you always on about women, Stan?

Stan: I want to be one.

Reg: What?

Stan: I want to be a woman. From now on, I want you all to call me Loretta.

Reg: What?

Loretta: It’s my right as a man.

Judith: Well, why do you want to be Loretta, Stan?

Loretta: I want to have babies.

Reg: You want to have babies?!

Loretta: It’s every man’s right to have babies if he wants them.

Reg: But…you can’t have babies!

Loretta: Don’t you oppress me!

Reg: I’m not oppressing you, Stan. You haven’t got a womb.  Where is the fetus going to gestate? You’re going to keep it in a box?

Loretta: Sniff.

Judith: Here, I’ve got an idea. Suppose you agree that he can’t actually have babies, not having a womb, which is nobody’s fault, not even the Romans’, but that he can have the right to have babies.

Rogers: Good idea, Judith. We shall fight the oppressors for your right to have babies, brother. Sister! Sorry.

Reg: What’s the point?

Rogers: What?

Reg: What’s the point of fighting for his right to have babies, when he can’t have babies?

Rogers: It is symbolic of our struggle against oppression.

Reg: Symbolic of his struggle against reality.

The people who are still debating the Ground Zero mosque are having their own struggle against reality.

Yes, Islam is a religion of peace.  America holds dear our right to religious freedom.  And Muslim Americans are Americans first.  But you can’t build a mosque near Ground Zero, whatever you call it.  Yeah, you can call it outreach to the Muslim community.  But the Muslim community it reaches out to are those few who pervert this great religion of peace.  The jihad bunch.  Who come, conquer and build mosques.  To enshrine their victories over the infidel. 

If you build a mosque near Ground Zero, some may see it as outreach.  But our enemies, those few who pervert, will see it as the ultimate American humiliation.  It will give them strength.  And it will recruit more to the cause.  How could it not?  The greatest ‘battlefield’ success against the world’s most powerful nation?  You know they relish and savor that victory.  And they do.  They want that mosque there.  They need that mosque there.  For the glory of Islam.  To mark the day that they (the few who pervert) brought America to her knees.  Spread fear throughout the country.  Emptied American airspace.  And made people afraid to open their mail or drink their tap water. 

I, as well as most of rational thinking people, would rather fight for Stan/Loretta’s right to have babies.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

FUNDAMENTAL TRUTH #31: “Islam and guns are a lot alike. And yet when something bad happens, we try to ban one and forgive the other.” -Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - September 14th, 2010

INSTRUMENTS OF PEACE

Yes, people with guns do kill people.  And, yes, extreme Islamic fundamentalist fanatics do kill people.  But guns keep the peace.  As does less fanatical Islam.

Societies have formed militias (armed with guns) to protect themselves from aggressors who did not wish to cohabitate in peace.   Thomas Jefferson used guns to stop the piracy along the Barbary Coast.  The Allies used guns to stop Adolf Hitler.  The NATO nations used guns to balance the Soviet threat in Eastern Europe.  An American led coalition used guns to first prevent Saddam Hussein from invading Saudi Arabia.  They then used guns to force him out of Kuwait.

Islam, and religion in general, provides a code of morality.  Religion can unite an otherwise diverse people.  It is this common faith that lets a diverse people to live together in peace and harmony.

GUNS DON’T KILL; PEOPLE DO

Guns don’t kill people.  And it’s not the bullets, either.  You can place a loaded handgun on a table with the safety off and it won’t do anything.  You can call it a name, sleep with its wife or impregnate its daughter (figuratively, of course) and it will just lay there.  For that gun to do something, a person has to pick it up.  Place their finger on the trigger.  Aim.  And shoot.  Until a person does, a gun will never harm a soul.

ISLAM DOESN’T KILL; PEOPLE DO

You can read about Islam in a book.  You can put that book on a table and it won’t do anything.  You can insult it, profane it and denounce it and it will just lay there.  For this religion to do something, someone has to read the book.  If they cannot read, a person who has read the book has to explain it to the illiterate one.  And then act.  Only when a person makes a conscious choice to commit some action can a religion harm anyone.  And if these people choose peace there will be peace.  If they choose violence there will be violence. 

ZYKLON B DOESN’T KILL; PEOPLE DO

The Nazis used to shoot undesirables (Jews, gypsies, Slavs, etc.).  They’d make a mother hold a child so one bullet could kill two.  But as the killing increased, bullets just proved to be inefficient.  And costly.  So they developed the extermination camps.  The death chamber.  And Zyklon B.  This poison could be stored and handled safely.  When it was time, a person would open a canister and pour the chemical into the gas chamber.  If left undisturbed in the canisters, Zyklon B never would have harmed a soul.  It only killed when a person placed it in into an environment where it could.

WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION DON’T KILL; PEOPLE DO

The Kurds are a lot like the Palestinians, only without Jewish neighbors.  After the breakup of the Ottoman Empire, everyone in Mesopotamia got a nation-state except the Kurds.  With the new national borders, the nomadic Kurds could no longer move freely through the lands they once did.   And, well, this caused problems.  Conflicts.  And bitter feelings.  The Kurds supported the Iranians in the Iran-Iraq war.  Saddam Hussein was not amused.  The Iraqis had stockpiles of chemical weapons.  Hussein decided to use them.  On the Kurdish town of Halabja.  He killed some 5,000 Kurds.  Injured about 10,000 more.  Mostly civilians.  If these weapons were not loaded on aircraft, then flown over and dropped on Halabja, they would not have harmed a soul.  But when orders were given, and carried out, by people, they did.

PEOPLE DON’T KILL; IDEOLOGY DOES

Yeah, so it’s pretty clear that guns, religion and chemicals are pretty benign when left alone.  Unless a person gets involved, these things just won’t hurt anyone.  It’s the people.  They’re the problem.

There are a lot of gun owners in the United States.  Few use their guns to hurt others, though.  And Muslims tell us their religion is a religion of peace.  Only a small minority perverts it to harm others.  And there’re many national leaders.  Few have committed chemical genocide.  So it’s not all people.  Just some.  That are the problem.

So what, then, makes some people do these things while others do not?  Ideology.  Some people are passionate about their ideology.  And some are so passionate that they do not permit an alternative ideology.  This is when things get dangerous.  Because they kill for their ideology.

WE KEEP GUNS OFF OF AIRPLANES AND LOOK WHAT HAPPENED

The Left wants to take away our guns.  They point to gun violence and say, “See?”  But law-abiding gun owners don’t commit these crimes.  Criminals commit these crimes.  Using guns obtained on the black market.  And denying law-abiding citizens from owning guns won’t shut down the black market.  Just as illegalizing drugs hasn’t made drugs unavailable.  Make something illegal and a thriving black market will develop.  Which will be lucrative for criminals.  So much so that they will use extreme violence to maintain their market share.

Let’s imagine a fictional world where we ban all guns.  Would it be a better, more peaceful world?

On September 11, 2001, Islamic fundamentalists armed with box cutters hijacked 4 commercial jetliners.  Two of these planes crashed into the Twin Towers.  One crashed into the Pentagon.  The passengers on one plane fought back with what weapons they could find.  The plane crashed.  They died.  But they prevented the terrorists from successfully completing their mission.

Since 9/11, some people carry guns on airplanes.  You know why?  Because a gun can stop a passionate ideologue with a box cutter.

DON’T IMPOSE YOUR VALUES ON ME

Ideology is far more dangerous than guns.  And yet, when something bad happens with a gun the Left wants to enact another level of gun control.  But when a militant Islamic fundamentalist kills Americans, the Left cautions us not to rush to judgment.  Because we may anger the Muslim world.  Who appear only to get angrier however we may try to appease them.  And yet we continue to try.  Even if it compromises our national security.  There comes a point where you have to ask yourself, why?  Why do we adhere to a lose-lose policy?

They don’t like us.  They never will like us.  Trying to make them like us only portrays us as weak.  Which makes them feel more contempt for us.  And emboldens them.  For they respect strength.  And only strength.  Which is something the Left does not understand.  Nor will they ever.  For they think that if you just apologize enough people will like you.

Of course, the Left has no compunction about attacking Christianity.  They have no problem with pornographic films with priests and nuns.  A movie where Jesus Christ has an affair with Mary Magdalene.  Or placing a crucifix in a jar of urine and calling it art.  But they would never, ever, show such disrespect to Islam.  Why?

The Left does not like the Christian Right imposing their values on them.  So they attack Christianity.  And support Islam.  In the name of religious freedom.  Christianity must accommodate Islam.  And we must forgive every transgression of Islam.  Anyone who disagrees is a right-wing extremist.  Intolerant.  And un-American.  The Left couldn’t ask for a better group of people to exploit.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,