Some Observations on the Gun Control Debate

by Kevin Carson

Some Observations on the Gun Control Debate

As tends to happen after each such horrific occurrence, the school shooting in Connecticut was the occasion for reviving the debate over gun control in the United States.

Given the quality of this debate, I’m not really interested in engaging either the smug liberal challenges of “well, are you people finally ready to come to your senses” or the right-wing hysteria of “The Kenyan Marxist Muslim is coming to take our guns away!” I’ll just say for the record I’m an anarchist, and I don’t care much for the idea of the same state responsible for warrantless wiretapping and the NDAA regulating the public’s access to weaponry for self-defense. And I don’t want a new War on Guns carried out by the same lawless paramilitary thugs in kevlar who’re already fighting the wars on drugs and terrorism. At the same time, I can’t say I’m too crazy about the loudest anti-gun control voices on the right.

Instead, I’ll just make a few general observations. First, I doubt the level of gun violence in the United States has much to do with the kinds of gun laws that are in effect. This country would have a high rate of gun violence regardless of the laws on the books, just because of our culture. There’s a lot of truth in the liberal arguments against America’s “gun culture.” The United States has more gun violence than other Western countries for the same reason it has a culture of flag-worship and “supporting the troops” unequaled anywhere else in the West, for the same reason Christian Zionism is such a powerful political force in our country, and for the same reason a large plurality of our population actually believes the earth is 6000 years old.

Part of it stems from the unique role of what the late Joe Bageant called Borderers, Ulster Scots or Scots-Irish in shaping American culture. As a result American political culture is more predisposed than most to a kind of Type-A authoritarianism fixated on the use of violence to “show them who’s boss” or “teach them a lesson.” The worship of the military and the executive goes back to the Ulster Scots inside the Pale, with their adulation for King Billy.

And part of it probably stems from the Second Great Awakening, which is — directly or indirectly — at the root of so many of the ways in which American culture went off the rails in comparison to the rest of Western Christendom. The “Premillennial Dispensationalism” of John Darby, shared by the Southern Baptists and other fundamentalist sects and publicized by Hal Lindsey and the Left Behind series, traces back to this. So do our puritanical attitudes toward alcohol, and our weird attachment to Israel.

Second, I expect strict gun laws to be about as effective as the post-9/11 “counter-terrorism” police state, the Drug War, or the strict digital copyright regime in actually reducing the activity they’re ostensibly intended to reduce. Strict gun laws will hardly put a dent in either gun ownership or gun crime. In the places touted as examples of the benefits of gun control, like Europe and Japan, levels of gun ownership and violence were already far lower than in the United States even before such laws were passed.

But third, what strict gun laws will do is take the level of police statism, lawlessness and general social pathology up a notch in the same way Prohibition and the Drug War have done. I’d expect a War on Guns to expand the volume of organized crime, and to empower criminal gangs fighting over control over the black market, in exactly the same way Prohibition did in the 1920s and strict drug laws have done since the 1980s. I’d expect it to lead to further erosion of Fourth Amendment protections against search and seizure, further militarization of local police via SWAT teams, and further expansion of the squalid empire of civil forfeiture, perjured jailhouse snitch testimony, entrapment, planted evidence, and plea deal blackmail. In short, a War on Guns will take us even further in the direction of a society handed entirely over to violent criminal gangs, and the biggest gang of all: The criminal beasts of prey in uniform.

flattr this!

39 responses to “Some Observations on the Gun Control Debate

  1. Barack Obama is not a Kenyan (he did not even visit the place till he was an adult) and he is not a Muslim (“Liberation Theology” and “Collective Salvation” has, at base, the same contempt for Islam as it has for Christianity – and for the same reasons, the belief in an actual being called “God” and the belief in INDIVIDUAL survival after physical death).

    As for Barack Obama’s political philosophy – it is the same as that of his mother, and his maternal grandfather, and Frank Marshall Davis, and of his teachers at Occidental California, and Columbia (all those Cloward and Piven conferences in the New York) days, and those academics he allied with at Harvard Law – and the Comrades he worked for two decades with in Chicago. I find it hard to believe that Barack Obama suddenly dropped the belief system of a life time on January 20th 2009. Most likely he is still doing the same Cloward-Piven stuff he did back in his Community Organiser days (try and increase govenrment spending as much as possible in order to destroy civil society – or “capitalism” as they call it) – just on a much larger scale.

    As for the the rest of this article by Kevin Carson……

    Perhaps it is anti “gun control” (if so I welcome that – yes indeed I do), but it so full of hatred for Christians, and for “Zionists”, and general hatred for America and American culture and history generally, it is hard to tell.

    Some actual evidence that the murderer was a conservative Christian (or a “Zionist”) would be in order. I do know that Conn used to be a rather straighlaced Protestant State (Yale was formed to Harvard leaving that path – although Yale eventual went the same way), but it has not been that way for a very long time. Basically it is almost as crazy and blaming some modern killing in England on Oliver Cromwell.

    For the record, Mexico (not know for being strongly Protestant) has a much higher murder rate than the United States – and strict gun control also. Indeed in urban areas on the Texan (Texas Boo-Hiss – that is where the evil Christians and evil Zionists live) Mexican border, the murder rate is often ten times higher on the Mexican side of the border than on the American side.

    I doubt it is a bunch of rabid Protestants and “ZIonists” doing all this murdering on the Mexican side of the border (or on the other side – come to that).

    For the record, I suspect Kevin hates believeing (i.e conservative) Catholics, just as much as he hates believeing Protestants and Jews (sorry ZIonists), But, of course, I could be mistaken.

    And, of course, the primary purpose of the right to keep and bear arms is to protect people and their property from Kevins. Whether the specific Kevins are inside the Marxist – “Anarchist” alliance that is the “Occupy” movement, or outside it.

  2. By the way – the original “Fundementalists” (i.e. the people who actually wrote the essays on the “Fundementals” – in opposition the “Social Gospel” people) did not believe that the world was six thousand years old. Indeed many of them were scientists.

    “I did not say they did – I said many Americans do…”.

    Of course my dear.

    And I believe that you only hate them (the believers that the world is six thousand years old) in the same way that I believe that you are a regular viewer of EWTN – and do not hate conservative (i.e. believeing) Catholics.

  3. Obama may not be Kenyan but he certainly hates the British, and that must be bad for both of us (I have one foot in each country). One of his first acts on assuming office was to return a bust of Winston Churchill that had been presented as a gift to one of his predecessors (Reagan?). To me that small insignificant act speaks volumes.

  4. Yes Hugo – but his socialist father can not be blamed for that (he was too busy back in Kenya, getting drunk and smashing up cars, to have anything to do with his son’s upbringing). The anti “Western Imperialism” stuff comes from Barack’s mother, and his maternal grandfather, and Frank Marshall Davis, and the academics at….., and the Comrades in Chicago and…….

    Well just about everyone in Barack’s life. I doubt he knew many admirers of Winston Churchill.

    By the way – I believe that the bust was a gift to George Walker Bush (a Churchill fan, and a history major in his Yale days – when he was not getting as drunk as Barack’s father used to).

    The left are going overboard with their normal “blame the victim” stuff – lots of sneaky attacks on Nancy L. (led by the New York Times – as one would expect from Joe Stalin’s friends).

    I am reminded of the New York Times attack claiming that that the murderer in the Arizonia killings (and the wounding of the member of Congress) was “anti abortion” – he turned out to be pro abortion.

    As far as I know the NYT never apologised for their smear – but then they rarely do.

    Still I am waiting for Kevin to throw in the corporate link.

    After all the father of Adam L. works for General Electric – so “corporations” must be to blame somehow.

  5. Obama apparently alleges his grandfather (?) was tortured by the British, and hates us (Brits) as a consequence. In fact I get the sense both he and his wife are consumed with hatred for all sorts of real or imagined injustices going back God knows how far, and now it’s payback time. They are not nice people.

  6. “The Roots of Obama’s rage” argues this case Hugo.

    Personally I do not think Comrade Barack could care less about his grandfather – although he may have used his memory to gain some “street cred” with the Comrades in Chicago (after all, unlike his friends Mr and Mrs Ayers, Barack was too young to take an active part in “the struggle” in the 1960s and 1970s).

    The vast majorty of the victims of the Mau Mau (that odd mixture of Marxism and mystical practices) were, of course, black.,

    However, harsh treatment was indeed dealt out to Mau Mau types – Enoch Powell protested against it back in the 1950s.

    Of course those on the left trained to think “Enoch Powell = evil” would not understand why Mr Powell’s code of honour would lead him to protest against brutal treatment, even of enemies such as the Mau Mau.

    In a few hours expect some more fake emotion from Comrade Barack – he is good at wearing a mask (Barack would never make the stupid mistakes that Kevin makes), Bill Ayers said that Comrade Barack was the best he had ever seen

  7. I’ve always wanted to know, and my mother, being a Lebanese Christian, would never tell me:_

    Exactly what is a “Zionist”? (She used it as a swearword.)

    I’d love to know, and of course, as “efferbody no” (as British teachers all say to their pupils), wikipedia is “all wrong”…

  8. Zionism is Jewish racial supremecism, as I understand it.

    Also Paul,

    I’m a Catholic and I really don’t like Zionists myself, they manage to do more for anti-Jewish movement than the idiots could ever do themselves.

  9. Zionists may regard themselves as the ‘chosen people’, but they recognise there is room in the world for non-Jews. This is where they differ from Islamists. Well, they differ in plenty of other ways as well, but you know what I mean.

  10. JFen – survival would be a better word than “supremecism” (if there is action to prevent Christian Arabs selling pork then that would indeed be a warning sign – as long as people keep offering me pork chops then things are O.K.). Nor are Jews a “race” (as anywone who had actually been to Israel would know – there are white Jews, brown Jews, black Jews).

    By the way there have always been Druze, Christians and even Muslims in the IDF – although not many of them. Just as there have always been nonJews in the Israeli Parliament. Indeed many Israeli citizens are not Jews. I have visited towns which even conservative newspapers (such as the British Daily Telegraph) have told me had their non Jewish populations driven out in 1948 and, actualy, there are plenty of non Jews there (indeed in Jaffa non Jews appeared to be in the majority). Some Muslun villages were indeed attacked (for military reasons or, yes, for revenge) but, on the other hand, whereever the forces of Islam won the Jewish population was exterminated (no one cared if the place had been bought back in the 19th century – if the Arab Legion or other such captured the place it was all over).

    I am not interested if you “like” Jews or not (I only like individuals myself – I do not like any religious group or ideological group), As long as you do not try and exterminate Jews (for example as Adolf Hitler and his friend and ally the Grand Mufti tried to do) then Zionism has no problem with you. And there are (see above) nonJewish Zionists.

    The policy of Britain in the 1920s and 1930s (breaking the promises of the Balfour Declaration) and of the Roosevelt Administration in the 1930s (allowing in only one tenth of the Jews that even the Congressional legislation) meant that there was no practical alternative to military Zionism (i.e. the effort to hold a position by force – on the principle that even defeat, and death, in battle is better than going to extermination like a bunch of sheep). To hold land that had been privately (and voluntarily) bought. The attempted extermination of 1948 changed that rule – I think wrongly changed it (although understanably – as it is hard to respect the property rights of people who keep trying to exterminate you).

    I believe that no Muslim owned land (not one inch of it) should be settled by force. No matter how many efforts are made to exterminate the Jewish people.

    For example, it may be justified to build a fortification on a hill (which, otherwise, the Muslims would shoot down from) but no Jews should live on a hill (or anywhere else) that was not voluntarily bought. That means I get hit from both sides – people who want to hand the positions over to the forces of Islam (which is suicidal – as they will open fire from them) and people who want to build houses on them (which is unjust – unless the private owner can be found and agrees to sell).

    I also TOTALLY OPPOSE all government aid to Israel (and everywhere else, especially the United Nations and IMF).

    As for peace – peace in Islamic law means submission to the forces of Islam (a point Westerners do not tend to undertstand). From a practical point of view (on the ground) peace=death.

    I would rather have certain irritations (such as, for example, the last time I want to the cinema in Israel the person sitting next to me had an automatic rifle that hit my leg – he did apologise) rather than genocide. Although (insanely) there are “gun control” regulations in Israel – how many “criminals” are thus created is something that a sane government (if there can be such a thing) might want to consider.

    As for religion…..

    I am Anglican (“Church of England”) myself. If I was ever called a “Christian mercenary” (that has not happened yet) I suppose I could reply that the person speaking was a “Jewish slave” (Jews being conscripted), but I hope I would not reply to such an insult with another such insult (no promises – after all I can be a bit hot headed at times). As I am a fat, useless, middle aged nonenity, I doubt it will come up. After all if things are so desperate that trash like me end up manning positions then the time for insults is over (it is the time to make one’s peace with God and remember to save the last bullet, or couple of bullets, for one’s self ).

    But if you think that Kevin Carson would give believeing Catholics a pass you are mistaken. He would not give a Catholics a pass – I may be old and so far over the hill that I am in a drainage ditch, but my “nose” still works (and I smelt out Kevn six years ago).

    At bottom collectivist “anarachists” (Black Flag people) are no different from their Marxist (Red Flag) allies.

    That is why they cooperate so well in the Occupy movement, and in the teacher unions and so on.

    No friend of the Occuply movement or of the Chicago teacher unions is a friend of liberty.

  11. David.

    For thirty years the Christians and the Muslims of Lebanon try and wipe each other out – and it is the fault of the Jews.

    And in 1982 some Christians kill some Muslim civilians – and it is the fault of the Jew Sharon.

    I am a Christian myself – and find the attitude baffleing.

    By the way – some Lebanese Christians (a minority I hope)) have made an allance with the Assad regime (they used to kill lots of Lebanese Christians – but at least the Assad regime is sort of secular, so I might understand that bit) and with the allies of the Assad the Iranian backed “Party of God” among the Shia.

    That I do not understand – I really do not.

    Sure the Hiz would exterminate the Jews (O.K. if someone wants to exterminate Jews) but they would also (in the end) exterminate the Christians also. Not that most of the Sunni exactly love the Christians either – in fact their plan is to drive what is left of the Christians out of the Middle East (they may honour the name of Omar – but they think the ritual humilations of Christians under the “Pact of Omar” did not go far enough). And, of course, the true Islamists (Shia or Sunni) want to extend that to planet Earth as a whole.

    The Hiz are “hasteners” (like the Iranian leadership) so they believe it is a sacred religious duty to spread “fire and death” everywhere (London as much as Jerusalem) so that the “Hidden Iman” can return on his white horse (by the way the differences inside the Iranian leadership are over which indiviudal is to lead the white horse that the Hidden Iman will be riding – both the Supreme Leader and the President think they should be the one doing it).

    So the alliance is just senseless – really senseless.

    By the way – Zionist, in theory someone who wants to hold mount Zion.

    In practice anyone (of whatever religion – or NONE) under the blue and white battle standard.

    Can Jews, Christians and Muslims get along?

    We they seem to in Hafia.

    But that could change at any time.

    Oh, by the way, to anyone who (like Comrade Barack?) who is thinking “this religious stuff is crazy – they must be really stupid”.

    A lot of it (including those Jewish ultra othodox “students” who never do a stroke of work in their entire lives) is crazy.

    But that does not mean the people involved are unintelligent.

    For example, the Iranian leadership (the same people who obsess over who is going to lead the white horse and so on) are actually highly intelligent.

    Sadly there is no automatic connection between intelligence and sanity.

  12. Indeed. “I may be crazy, but I’m not stupid” as they say. I once heard that the Islamists needed to bring about world chaos in order to hasten the coming of the ‘twelfth Imam’. Paul you describe yourself as a Christian. I always feel that term needs defining, as it could refer to someone who just follows Christian ethics because it seems the right thing to do (which of course encompasses many non- Christians). Or alternatively it could describe someone who believes Jesus Christ is the immaculately conceived son of God etc etc and you’ve got to do what the Pope tells you because if you don’t you’ll burn in Hell for all eternity etc etc. Like my late mother, a dogmatic Catholic, for example.
    As a matter of fact, I thought you were Jewish.

  13. “Paul” should have given it away Hugo. If I was Jewish (or converted) it would be “Saul”.

    My position is an interesting one – in that the Nazis would have considered me Jewish (Jewish father), but Orthodox Jews would not consider me ethically Jewish (non Jewish mother).

    Oh well – perhaps a special gas chamber could have been built for me (and for people like me) in order to not upset either group.

    Anyway kin of my father did not have this problem – they went to the soap factory after being taken in Holland. Blond people like my aunt (well my aunt in her youth). Less “Jewish looking” than my nonJewish mother (dark).

    Theologically I doubt that the human mind can really understand God (we grope for undertanding, perhaps the closest the Classical world got was Athena, but we do not really understand – we see through a darknened glass). However, I do belive that Jesus was the incarnation.

    Although (as Glenn Beck is fond of saying) perhaps I better go to the gates with someone who does not.

    If I am right I can vouch for them, and if they are correct – they can vouch for me.

    The old “throw yourself on the mercy of the court” position.

    And in my case – I certainly need that mercy.

  14. By the way (and I do not sure JFen really understood this) I was being sarcastic (normally a mistake – it is rightly called “the lowest form of wit”) when I said Kevin was a viewer of EWTN.

    That is actually me – and I am not a Roman Catholic (I am Anglican – and rather latitudinarian at that), but I do not like their scholarly approach. I am fond of the station.

  15. Julie near Chicago

    While it’s true that historically parts of the U.S. (chiefly, I believe, Appalachia from W. Virginia down through Kentucky and Tennessee: the Southern Highlands) have known a lot of inter-clan feuding–the Hatfields and McCoys, for instance–and if I recall aright, Dr. Sowell ascribes this to a segment of Highlands Scots, or Scots-Irish, who settled in those areas, bringing their culture and mores with them. (See his book /Black Rednecks and White Liberals on this. However, note also that a part-Japanese, somewhat libertarian Argentinian gent of my online acquaintance has some problems with the book–in particular with Dr. Sowell’s analysis of the behavior of North and South American Japanese during WW II. So nothing is for sure, I guess.)

    However, unless I’m sadly mistaken the American murder rate is high because of the “street” gangs–“gang warfare” for various reasons, and also one-offs as rites of induction and so forth. And those gangs are comprised mostly of non-Europeans, in which group I include so-called “Hispanics” even though many, though not all, of these people are of partly-Spanish extraction.

    And it has virtually nothing to do with religion. Nor with being “American,” for that matter, except that America obviously has a political disease that incubates and fosters this kind of violence.

    But that’s not the fault of either the genuinely religious Christians and Jews (who don’t believe in the “social gospel,” i.e. who aren’t that interested in running other people’s lives, however much they might like them to “find God”) or the people I would class as today’s “conservatives”–people who disapprove of murder (including, usually, of unborn children) and crimes of violence and theft, but who aren’t so interested in running other people’s lives: that is, people who, without being cast-in-concrete traditionalists, nevertheless don’t believe in throwing out the baby with the bath water politically.

    (In fairness, of course there are predatory or corrupt conservatives. But that’s not because of their political, or religious, conservatism; i.e., there’s nothing in political or religious conservatism per se that fosters corruption. And today, it’s fairly evident that there are a lot more corrupt liberals (American meaning) than conservatives. In Chicago alone, and if you throw in a few other choice hot-spots–!)

  16. There do seem to have been differences between the Ulster Scots (the Scots Irish) and the “Scottish Scots” (for want of a better word).

    Perhaps because of the persecution in Ireland (it is often forgotten that dissenters were persecuted in Ireland – the history of the persecution of Catholics overshadows this story).

    There was a more distinctinve anti government streak in the Scots Irish in the United States than in the Scottish Scots.

    Less of a belief that government would be fine if it was the right sort of government – and more of a belief that government should be strictly limited (regardless of the form of government).

    Also the form of religion changed. Most fundementally (in spire of George Whitfield, the man most associated with the “Great Awakening” being an ardent Calvinist Predestination person) it moves AWAY from Predestination.

    Some have explained it in the following way…..

    The main pass through the mountains was the Cumberland Gap – but it was still a difficult trial for a wagon, so one had to lighten the load…..And one thing that had to be dumped out of the wagons was Presdestination……..

  17. Julie near Chicago

    Paul…heh…yes, I’ve seen that explanation. (Probably read it in another of your comments somewhere. Well worth keeping in mind.)

    But my real point is that it’s not American culture overall that’s so violent and so full of people ready to commit mass murder and so on…it’s not our culture, still less our Christian and Jewish population, that raises our murder statistics. It’s the gangs, and their prevalence is the result ultimately of diseased politics. The gang culture may be fostered and nurtured by terrible political beliefs and policies and actions…but it is still not just distinct but quite different from the American culture in general, and that includes the the normal American gun-owning culture.

    Of course, one never knows how far to trust such statistics. Is the murder rate (per capita) here really higher than in country X? But then, you already covered that angle above.

    • And the gang culture is primarily fuelled by prohibition, and those areas – like Chicago which are heavily disarmed have the highest crimerates.

  18. JFen – Chicago is indeed vile.

    And, yes, drug prohibition (at least in Federal law) has no more Constitutional basis than “gun control” has.

    Julie – yes.

    States like Maine, Vermont and New Hampshire used to be ultra conservative States (of course Maine and Vermont were the only States to vote against Franklin Roosevelt in 1936) – I can remember when New Hampshire was (I think it started to fall apart when they let judges demand higher government education spending – thus making a nonsense of the idea of representative government) and yet, they had no higher murder rates than they do now.

    There is still virtually no “gun control” in places like Vermont, and still plenty of Scots Irish in New Hampshire (they did not all go South). Yet the murder rate is very low.

    Still there is an “Ulsterman” tradition of answering any insult (or something that is thought to be an insult) with violence. “In Ulster they shave with a blow torch – and that is just the women”.

    Still that is better than the English way – which is basically, grumble grumble, SUBMIT, grumble grumble SUBMIT AGAIN. And so on.

  19. Julie near Chicago

    I’m betting you’re aware of this site, but the house always bets both ways:

  20. I was not aware of the website.

    One must also remember that the Scots are an IRISH tribe – the idea they arrived in Ireland in the early 1600s is bogus (although, yes, James the VI of Scotland and first of England was a total …….).

    Everyone is really related to everyone else (although you can get yourself killed saying that). For example, in almost every key battle the commander of one side would be the cousin (or closer) of the commander of the other side – but they would do their best to kill each other (leading from the front is an Irish tradition – it is also, contrary to what is often said by the P.C., an English one).

    For example, I have known Protestant Irish called “O’Neil”, and the leader of the S.F. (the IRA front) is Mr Gerry (that it is a “G” not a “J” is actually politically important) ADAMS, his forefathers come from Lincolnshire England (only a few miles from where I am typing this) although it might cost me my kneecaps to point that out in the wrong place in Ulster.

    And my own people (on my mother’s side) are Southern Irish – Waterford Powers.

    That group also has its faults – not “you have spilled my beer so now I am going to turn into the Incredible Hulk” thing of the Ulsterman, but nice either.

    As my grandfather used to say (explaining the culture – it was not something he had personally done) – if you hate someone do not show it, on the contrary smile and buy him a drink (indeed buy him more than one), and make sure you have a group of your friends waiting outside in the dark to kick the ….out of him when he comes out of the bar. Sometimes it is known as “smile and hit”. It shows control (which is good) rather than the neck-goes-bright-red-and-swells-up-as-they-shout-with-berserk-fury of the Ulsterman – but it is also TREACHERY which I do not like.

    I actually like that LESS than I like the “your shadow has [accidentally – but I am offended anyway] fallen upon me – so I am now going to turn into the Incredible Hulk and try and rip your head off ” Ulsterman thing.

    Still some things both sides agree on – for example “a man who lays his hand on a women should have that hand broken”. I remember the man who ttold me that had a large collection of axes and so on (as well as access to firearms – legal? illegal? I do not know and I do not care) and he meant it.

  21. That should read “NOT nice either”.

    Anyway Julie wanted to talk about the specifically American side of this.

    Yes a lot went to Penn (especially Western Penn). As well as places like northern New Hamphire. So hardly a just “Southern” people.

    Normally one can tell by turning on the radio – if the most popular stations are Country music then……

    Often the got the same problems – again and again.

    Try to make whiskey in Scotland? (by the way they make booze in Catholic Ireland also – hence “Tory Island – romote, cold and ruled by brigands [illegal whisky makers] like the Tory party” – the “Tory party” is actually the British Conservative Party – but the nickname is “Tory”, Irish bandit, just as the nickname of the Liberals USED to be “Whig”, meaning Scottish cattle thief….. it all goes back to the James II and …..).

    Get taxed and regulated.

    Move to Ulster.

    Get taxed nd regulated again.

    Move to the American colonies.

    Get hit by the British authorities.

    Help defeat London.

    And get hit by George Washington (with his part conscript army – a coulple of people were killed resisting conscription and they had a long memory for that in Philly, as “Light Horse Harry” found when the locals beat him to death, years later, in revenge).

    Jefferson got rid of the Federal taxes and regulations on making booze – but they came back with the Civil War

    Generally the “Scots Irish” in American had a deep hositity to unlimited government (democratic or not).

    And, like the Catholic Irish, they shared the belief that the laws of God trumpted the laws of the State.

    Proud, independent people who will fight to the death for their freedom, And, by the way, show me one who has shot up a school?

    And believe that the law of God (God as a real person – not an abstraction, and INDIVIDUAL survival after death, not “collective salvation” under the “social justice” of the “social gospel”) trump the laws of the state. That is something that both Catholic Irish and Protestant Irish have always believed (and they are right).

    Odd that an “anarchist” like Kevin Carson hates them (indeed, to judge by his name, hates his own people). Not so odd when one considers what sort of “anarchist” he really is.

    Remember the “Redneck” does not care if you richer than he is.

    If you offend him (by saying the wrong thing – or whatever) he will punch you in the face – or put a bullet in you. If you were rich or poor – would not matter.

    But he could be could be starving to death in a ditch – and you could park right next to him in a golden coach covered in rubies. And he would not even touch it . Indeed he would put a bullet in the guts of anyone who tried to steal it – even if this was the last thing the Redneck did before leaving this world of hunger or sickness.

    The Black Flag “anarchist” quite rightly senses that such people are not his friends.

    Indeed such people (with the Bible in one hand and a pistol in the other) are the worst nightmare of this sort of “anarchist”,

  22. Julie near Chicago

    Paul, this is fascinating. Thank you–and, more please!

    Interesting that by your take, Kevin C. “hates his own people”–I wondered about that myself.

    Also, I wonder how this ties in with the (alleged) Irish gangs of New York and Boston, and the apparent fact that a segment of the Irish ended up as ward bosses and then machine politicians running many of the larger U.S. cities. (“Alleged” and “apparent” because I no longer trust very much of what I’ve read or been taught, no matter by whom….)

    Actually it seems to me that we have so-called “Hispanic” gangs and “Black” gangs (not to mention Russian gangs and Oriental gangs–Vietnamese and Chinese and to some extent Korean), but before that we had Italian gangs and before that Irish gangs…with a contingent also of Jewish gangsters, I’m sorry to say, although I don’t know if there were really Jewish “gangs” in the same sense as the others.

    Next up: Another subtopic, this about Congregationalism in view of the discussion of limited-government Scots-Irish….

  23. Julie near Chicago

    O/T somewhat…please forgive.


    Back to the Scots-Irish “limited-government” types. I wonder how this ties in with Protestant Congregationalism…because I grew up in a rural, Northern-Illinois Congregational Church back in the 50’s before this horrible miscegenistic mating of the Congr. Ch. with the Evangelical and Reform Church which resulted in the United Church of Christ, ugh. (I did find Paterson’s address “Scottish Congregationalism” online earlier. Interesting…will have to read again.)

    I had always thought that my particular church was representative of the whole denomination. I was taught that theologically, Christians are defined by their belief in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (the Trinity)…as constituting the One God…but that it was up to each person to understand this for himself, as is true of all of God’s works. As in, “God gave you a brain–He expects you to use it.” That was pretty much it. Oh, sure, we believed in the Immaculate Conception, in the Resurrection, in Jesus as Redeemer (or maybe, almost as a symbol of Redemption)–but all of that to be, ultimately, a matter of individual understanding, with the minister leading in the sense of suggesting his own understanding. In other words, the attitude was greatly liberal–in the old (correct) sense, and each person’s relationship with God was individual, with no intermediaries.

    We specifically did not proselytize. (Oh, an individual might, but it was not a project nor a feature of the church.)

    In the last few years I’ve read that the C.C. in America was quite doctrinaire; also that it became less authoritarian and more liberal (Classic sense) in thought and maybe practice too as you moved across the country from New England to the mid-Midwest (my area) to the Southwest.

    (By the way–when the U.C.C. was formed in 1957, each individual Congr. Ch. voted on whether to join or not. My church did, shame on them!, and we were promptly treated to ministers whom I now recognize as Social Gospelists. They struck me as smarmy phonies at the time–I was 14 and remember it well. GAG. But here and there there are still Congregational Churches as such, though I don’t know to what extent any of them have drunk the Kool-Aid.)

    Now, this is interesting partly because in his “History of the Welfare State” Rothbard swears the Progressive idea took hold across a swathe of the country that definitely (he states over and over) included northern Illinois. But, granted I was a kid and not looking for that kind of stuff, up until the E&R merger and the smarmy preachers I didn’t pick up any sense of that. I had a sense that Christian interpersonal moral duties really amounted to something rather close to the attitudes of benevolence and charity…help out where you can, and be not too quick to blame (condemn)…or to punish.

    –There’s an incident that’s always stayed with me. When we were at Purdue (West Lafayette, Indiana–NW Indiana, but far enough south to be on the fringes of the Bible Belt) I worked with a young woman who was definitely some sort of Holy-Roller/Four-Square/Pentecostal/maybe-J’s.-Witness type. She was strongly of the “Negroes should be kept in their place” persuasion and VERY “redneck, American stereotype of.” I was talking to her and said, But as a Christian don’t you believe that all men are brothers? And her answer was a flat “No.” It shocked me. Although I no longer considered myself Christian, I did think the idea that “we are all equal in God’s sight,” as in “human life in itself is a great value,” was sort of central to the moral foundations of Christianity.

    And if anyone cares, I still think so!

    (In fact I think that Miss Rand missed this altogether…and that it’s one of the flaws in Objectivism.)

  24. Julie near Chicago

    Lastly, a question: Does anyone have a URL for some of A. L. Perry’s writings on the market, or on liberty? I did find (and download) his essay “The Scotch-Irish in New England”–thanks for the reference, Paul.

  25. Julie.

    Well the City Machines were (mostly – not all of them) Irish Catholic.

    As with the motto “vote early and vote often”.

    By the way that is why, up till recently, Democrats used the word “caucus” and Repulicans used the word “conference” (the word “caucus” has Irish Catholic associations).

    Actually I do not mean to be insulting – after all I would have supported “T Hall” (as the lesser evil) against the reformers, myself.

    Sadly Mayor Wagner (in the 10950s) united the Machine with the reformers – thus putting New York City on the road to bankruptcy.

    A similar thing happened after the first Mayor Daley died in Chicago – he was a son-of- a. (anyone who has seen his vast government housing projects knows he was a bad man)…. but he was not as bad as the Communists, his police (then mostly Irish) faught hand-to-hand with the Communists on the streets in 1968 (the media took the Communist side – no surprise there). But after he died the Machine lost its way – and eventually ended up merging with the Communists (hence Chicago became the Hellhole it now is).


    Well “Murder Incorporated” were Jewish – not a nice bunch of people. Just murderers with intellectual pretensions (a bit like Kevin Carson – if ever actually had the guts to try and murder some “capitalists”, of couse in real life Kevin is too much of a coward to actually try anything).

    At least Murder Incorporated were not Cong – sadly many Jews were (and are). The SDS – Weathermen had many Jewish members. Of course these people are “ethnically” Jewish – not actual believers. Alienated from Jews – as well as from the wider society.

    They cling to Marxism (or “anarachism” – as Bill Ayers said “I am an anarchist as much as I am a Marxist”) as a substitute religion. Normally it is more than one generation “out” before the problems really start.

    For example, it was Karl Marx’s father who gave up Judaism – Karl was brought up without it. It was the same with Bill Ayers and the rest of the “New” left – even their parents were not believers.

    On the other hand – other atheist Jews go for pro liberty ideas (as Ayn Rand did). Jews tend to love intellectual systems – good ones as well as bad ones.

    For ethinc questions generally I do not think that Thomas Sowell’s “Ethnic America” (1980) has been much improved upon – although he is unfair to the Scots-Irish “Rednecks” (he sees the bad – but not really the good).

  26. Julie I am no theological expert (to put it mildy) but I suspect that, from a sociolgical point of view, the old structure of Congregationalism might have a pro freedom effect.

    If each congregation is in charge of its own affairs (choosing the minister and so on) it is harder for the left (those masters of infiltration) to control such a church.

    Of course leftists often talk of supporting local independence – but they lie (I know saying “the left lie” is like saying “water is wet”), in reality their view of “communities” is that they need “organising” by trained leftists.

    To use the words (from a different context – but not wholly different) of a man who later went on to become President of Princeton (a century before evil took over that place) ……

    “They are very tolerant, they will tolerate anything – apart from Holy Scripture and the opinions of the common people, those things they will not tolerate at all”.

    I suspect that the more decentalised nature of religion in New Hampshire (as opposed to Mass) did have a political effect.

    And I am talking about the Congregationalists – not the “Town Church” (choose from five options) law that existed till 1819.

    Although even that is better than a single State church (which Mass had till the 1840s I believe) – with no choice for towns.

    By the way when the Democrats ended the Town Church system in New Hampshire (which I think was a good thing) they also tried to take over Dartmouth college (a very bad thing).

    Thus leading to Dartmouth College Versus New Hampshire – one of the classic cases that established freedom for private associations (corporations) in the United States.

    Sadly most universities have betrayed the cause of freedom and both accept government money (student loans and so on) and teach collectivism (under the mask of “critical theory” and other Marxist Frankfurt School stuff).

    Still a few are still loyal to the old cause.

    For example Hillsdale in Michigan.

    Founded by Free Will Babtists (now there is a case where theology has a direct political effect).

    First University (I believe) to treat women the same as men and blacks the same as whites.

    But it annoys the Feds by not obeying their “policies” (sepcial statistic gatherering and so on). and by turning down their (stolen) tax money.

    No doubt Kevin still wants to kill-kill this corporation – but Sean might give Hillsdale a pass.

    By the way……

    I can not remember whether Light Horse Harry was killed in Philly or Baltimore.

  27. I think the first sign that corporations were going to be free in America came when the Vatican (soon after the United States government became established) asked permission to appoint bishops – it was the custom that they had to ask permission in many European countries.

    The Americans replied that government (at Federal or State level) had no right to get involved in such matters.

    Of course, logically, that cuts both ways – if a church (or other corporation) is really going to be free from government, it has no right to ask for subsidies.

    So no “church tax” (still exists in Germany) and no bank bailouts and other such.

    The Lutherian church fell apart in Germany in the 1930s because of direct financial fear.

    “Of course the anti Jewish policy is wrong – but we are civil servants do we have the right to oppose government policy, and there is our pay and pensions to be considered……”. That is what led to Dietrich Bonhoeffer comming to despise his own Church (he had been a Lutherian all his life) so much.

    Of course even when he lived in the United States Bonhoeffer had preferred the “fundementalist” churches in New York (including “black” ones – the opposite of “Liberation Theology” of the Rev. J. Wright and co in our time) – despising the “modernist” Churches where if they mentioned the name “James” they meant William James not Saint James.

    Indeed Bonhoeffer’s view came to mirror that of John Witherspoon almost two centuries before.

  28. It was Baltimore – over the war of 1812 (as well as old hatreds between Federalists – Whigs and Democratic Republcians going back to the Whiskey Rebellion and so on).

    Actually (as the British had agreed, or were about to agree, to an end to conscripting men on American ships into the Royal Navy) Light Horse Harry was RIGHT about the war of 1812 (it was a terrible blunder) – but it did not do to say that in wartime.

    On racism in theology……..

    Yes Julie – it is sinkeningly unChristian.

    Either humans are created in the image of God (meaning the mental-soul image of God – not two legs, two arms and so on) or we are not.

    This “well he is black so he is not a free will being (like God)” stuff is vile.

    Southern Babtists and so on had an indefensible position.

    Although, to be fair, it was hard core Christians who were the foes of slavery (both in the north and the south) and formed the core of Civil Rights movement in the hard times – BEFORE it became fashionable.

    Every year their were petitions and other protests against lynching and so on – and this opposition was dominated by hard core Christians in the South (as well as the North). Real “Bible Thumping” types.

  29. Julie near Chicago

    Wow, Paul, there’s more here than I dared hope for! Thank you for the time and effort to pass all this on.

    City Machines mostly run by Irish Catholics. Check. That was my impression, but only an impression.

    Hizzoner M. Richard J. Daley. The Projects. Indeed yes. For awhile there, for instance, I had to drive past Robert Taylor Homes every day. Ugh. And we were there when they built them.

    Jewish gangs. Everybody knows Bugsy Siegel and Meyer Lansky, I guess, but I didn’t realize there was such a thing as the “Jewish Mafia.”

    I agree…what you’re calling “Jewish Cong” is disappointing–and disillusioning, I’m afraid. Various people have tried to explain it (as you know, I’m sure). And the SECOND vote for the Sith is inexplicable by me.

    Sowell. Your remark about his being “unfair to the Scots-Irish” in his 1980’s book points up what the half-Japanese gent from Argentina said about his analysis of the difference among communities of naturalized Japanese in the Americas. You disagree with him (to some extent) in your area of knowledge, as Kenji does based on his observations of a different ethnic group. It does cast some doubt on the validity of his thesis in general, which I had thought was persuasive in the “Black Rednecks” book. I haven’t read the earlier one.

    Independence amongst the Congregationalists…the question is, which is chicken and which is egg? In a case like that there’s usually a feedback loop of some sort. But I was really surprised to read that the original Congregationalist Christian movement was quite doctrinaire. In fact in one place I read that in America, the original Puritans were Congregationalists!

    All I know is, that’s not my experience at all–there was nothing doctrinaire in my church. And the business about not proselytizing was unique as far as I could see. The Methodists were the second most “liberal” (freedom of thought and conscience) but they did have their Methodist organization with the hierarchy of bishops and all–and they did proselytize, in a relatively low-key but rather persistent way. Next were the Baptists (don’t know if they were Southern Baptists or not–suspect not), who were rather doctrinaire–in fact made life difficult for one of the high-school English teachers who had been divorced –he was long since happily remarried with a teenage son and a younger daughter. Last the Lutherans, who if I recall correctly were like the Catholics in not allowing Lutherans to attend the services of other Churches. (I could be mis-remembering; I’ll give that one about a 77% confidence rating.) The Catholics, of course, were forbidden from even entering the buildings of other churches. –This was all just before the Ecumenical Movement took off.

    Of course, a church body–the particular congregation, deacons or whatever, board if there is one, minister–is a political unit like any other. Coming from a relatively small town (1800-2200, depending) I am very aware of the pressure small social-political groups can exert on recalcitrant members. Richard A. Epstein alluded to that somewhere in one of his interviews, I think: If you’ve exhausted local legal avenues, you’re done. If your county has a rotten Sheriff…there’s no recourse. Unless, of course, the populace gets REALLY fed up. (See the ‘Battle of Athens, Tennessee’ for a wonderful example of that.)

    (Personally, it seems to me that the higher the population density, the smaller the possible scope of libertarianism.)

    Corporations. It’s amazing how many people seem to think that a Corporation is by definition a large operation whose sole job is to “make” money. Even many so-called “libertarians” of the non-leftist variety seem to take it for granted. And all these nitwit Democrats and libs who complain about *Citizens United* don’t grasp at ALL that if “right-wingers” and Republicans were well-served by it, the Democrats should be cheering from the housetops because now THEIR business corporations AND unions AND foundations etc. etc. etc. can spend like drunken sailors–openly.

    Your information about the Catholics assuming they’d need to apply to our Government for permission to appoint bishops, and also about the disintegration of the German Lutheran church under fear of being de-funded, is news to me and also very interesting. No, obviously churches’ being tax-free is a bad, terrible idea…but I can see how it came to be, given the temper of the times. Now, of course, revoking tax-free status would be like revoking welfare programs altogether. Although–I think segments of certain denominations might get the point.

    Racism (true racism that is) in Christians…this girl (late 20’s I think; married) may have been Southern Baptist. Or not, of course. But she was so sure she was Christian…and I was so sure that, as you say, the very foundation of Christian ethics derives from the fact that we are all made in the image (right, not the PHYSICAL image) of God…and that Jesus taught that “all men are brothers” (don’t in fact know if he ever said that, but my church did teach it)…really set me back on my heels. How could you be Christian and not believe that!

    Thanks again for the response and the information, Paul. Very much appreciated.

  30. Julie near Chicago

    The Battle of Athens, Tennessee (a.k.a. “The McMinn County War)–1946…there is a made-for-TV video at several places on YouTube. Fascinating. See, for instance, the video uploaded by /The Patriot Post/ at

    In its writeup at , Wikipedia notes (with links at source):

    “The 1992 made-for-television movie An American Story (produced by the Hallmark Hall of Fame) was based upon the McMinn County War but set in a Texas town in 1945.[citation needed] It was nominated for two 1993 prime time Emmy Awards and one American Society of Cinematographers award.[citation needed].”

  31. Protestants can be intolerant to.

    A Lord Chancellor (only a few years ago) was told he could not attend the funeral of an old friend – as the man was a Roman Catholic (and it would, therefore, be a Roman Catholic funeral). He told his (ultra Protestant) Church in Scotland where they could stick their rules.

    As for Murder Incorporated (and so on).

    Not big to be a “Jewish Mafia” – more (as I said) a hanful of scumbags with intellectual pretentions.

    A criminal is a criminal – and there is an end to it.

    Jews and American “liberalism”.

    I give up trying to explain it.

    I live it to the comics (many of whom are Jewish).

    For example…….

    “Of every 100 Jews only five are Communists – but of every ten Communists those five will be half of them”.

    Too close to the truth (in the old days) to be amusing.

    As for general “Liberalism” among American Jews.

    A lot of it may be (said Paul desperatly trying to think something up) “white guilt” – but in an extreme form.

    For example, the “Civil Rights” movement is really a QUOTA movement (that has been obvious since the 1960s – they do not want free competittion they want blacks or…… to have a set percentage of the jobs and so on) Jews massively lose by quotas (as Jews are “over represented” in X, Y, Z, profitable fields) yet Jews overwheiming back the “Civil Rights” movement (even when the Black Panthers and so on make it clear they not only want to take the money of Jews – they want to send Jews to their deaths).

    “We are an ethnic minority – we must back ethnic minorities” seems to be thinking and “the more radical the better – if they want to kill us, that proives how sincere they are” Tom Wolfe tried to explain this, but I I can not.

    I thought it was changing (I really did) that Jews were no longer ashamed of being successful (as if it was some sort of crime) – but then the election returns came in.

    Two thirds of the Jewish vote for Comrade Barack was it not?

    Would the same people who flock to vote for Comrade Barack vote a CONSERVATIVE black person (say Senator Tim Scott)?

    Most likely NOT.

    Why not?

    I do not know, I just do not know.

  32. The battle of Athens Tenn.

    Yes Julie – they did the right thing.

    Hard for anyone (bar a hardcore establishmentarian – such as media person from the Economist magazine) not to agree.

    To go from the serious – to the much less serious…..

    I wonder if Robert Heinlein was inspired by this incident?

    You know – for the government by Veterans in “Starship Troopers”.

  33. Julie near Chicago

    Heinlein…I really don’t know. I think I was a very young teen when I read “S. T.” But again, maybe I didn’t read it at all.

    Oddly enough I’ve just now come across a very interesting bit of history on the connection between the Sullivan Act and Tammany Hall’s “Big Tim” Sullivan, who (per the article) pushed the Act through so as to protect the gangs in the pay of Tammany.

    See “The Strange Birth of NY’s Gun Laws” at,2_0_0_1_46137537_ANzXiGIAAJqmUNtt1wPiGTxqN5w,2_0_0_1_46136967_ANzXiGIAAHnaUNtsyQr7tDfsHAg,2_0_0_1_46132993_ANzXiGIAAF3ZUNto7goZc38g6sY,2_0_0_1_46123948_AN7XiGIAAVvQUNtcZQFxzkFpGqA,2_0_0_1_46116335_AN3XiGIAASdcUNtTyQjiMEq%2F8JU,2_0_0_1_46102394_AN%2FXiGIAAEg3UNszKgg%2F8mUz9FM,2_0_0_1_46101817_AEjXiGIAAKKfUNswswRpP2c84Yo,2_0_0_1_46101228_ANzXiGIAARymUNsvoAIcZmZ2jI4,2_0_0_1_46100411_AEjXiGIAAGI5UNsrIAyVIQbObzI,&sort=date&order=down&startMid=0&hash=5b08485fc27d6e488adad6f01e525b7c&.jsrand=7120432

    (Aside: Yes, long URL. I NEVER use shortened URL’s, since at best they add an extra step to accessing the site, and the rest of the time you don’t really know where you’re being taken.)

  34. Julie near Chicago

    PS. I see you’re going to have to copy that whole long thing, starting with http:// and ending with =7120432 and paste it into the address bar.

  35. New York is a place get afloat by the bank credit bubble – this was even true before the Federal Reserve (the New York Fed has always been the main outlet for new credit money) as corrupt New York courts as far back as the 1850s declared that insolvant banks were not insolvant (so you could not have your money), and the National Banking Acts of the 1860s made it actually illegal to “discount” the debt paper of the big New York banks.

    By the early 20th century they were even tearing down places of worship on M.island (including the biggest Jewish place of worship in the United States) in order to have more space for the glass and steel temples of financial services.

    In a sane society the entire financial services industry should be no bigger than REAL SAVINGS are.

    Sadly the United States (and the other major Western nations) have never been further from sanity in this area.

    Want to know what New York city wil be like when the bubble finanally goes?

    Go to the Upstate cities (such as a Buffalo and Rochester) and you will get a hint.

    And that is if things do not turn out too badly.

    If they do – then the gun gangs will be out of the control of any political machine.

    The (decaying) streets will really run with blood. And there really is a possibility that de facto bankruptcy will turn into real collapse.

    And that idiot Governor Mario C. thinks he is going to be “President of the United States”.

    Even if things go relatively well he will not be relected as Governor in November 2014.

    And if things really go badly – he (along with everyone else) will have more pressing concerns than politics.

  36. Julie near Chicago

    New York! We were there for a year, 9/1965-8/1966 incl. We expected so much…heck, we were only 22 and thought NY was It, the most wondrous city on the planet, the heart of the Capitalist New World. Hoo boy! By the time we left, Alan, who was a Chicago boy born & bred (from the working North Side, not the hoity-toity part and not the ward-heeling South Side) said to me, “NY is an accident waiting to happen.” –Well, our language was milder in those days. What could I say? “Yeah” about seemed to cover it. That was the year they elected a *Republican*, sort of, for mayor–John Lindsay. It didn’t help, and anyway Lindsay bolted the Party immediately his term was up, as I remember.

    The Jews…Alan’s mother and her entire family were Jewish–her parents were Orthodox in fact–and although she wasn’t terribly observant (and married, *gasp*, a Lutheran–her parents almost threw her out) she was at bottom a believer and definitely not “deracinated.” So he was reared Jewish, and bar-mitzvahed. I’ll spare you all the personal family stuff, but anyway his mother’s folks were Hungarian immigrants, and his father and his father’s sister were German immigrants. He came over in 1924, before the Nazi takeover, but he had no use for Hitler. And Alan’s family on both sides, including his aunts and cousins, are probably sort of “center-right.”

    Returning more to the question of “how come Jewish ‘liberalism'” (American style), have you read Norman Podhoretz’ book? I haven’t, but I’ve seen various reviews of it. One of them, at /*Tablet Magazine*/, is by a Seth Lipsky and entitled “The Long Goodbye.” It’s at

    An overly-hopeful (as it turns out) article by a Rabbi Dov Fischer, from last July, is “Jews and American Conservatism,” at /*The American Thinker*/. There are also 3 pages of comments arguing the points back and forth–some of it is substantive and interesting. (There is a problem of interpretation, given different understandings of “liberal” and “liberalism” by Americans and Europeans.) See

    But to my mind the most interesting of the bunch (though I’m not sure it’s all that explanatory) is Norman Berdichevsky’s longish piece “American Jews’ Paradoxical Allegiance to the Democratic Party,” at

    (There are a few embedded links at the source.)

  37. Well, of course, some of the best free market thinkers have been from a Jewish background (and some of the best free market thinkers have been black).

    Sadly when many Jews reject youthful Marxism they sort of stop half way – and become “Necons”.

    Sort of “well Marxism is no good – but the Welfare State is cool, and lets have some wars for democracy also….”

    Weird stuff.

    The neoCons think they are clever – but most of them are really dumb. For example, in 2004 Vanity Faire (spelling alert) conned them into saying critical things about Bush Administration policy.

    “We will only publish this after election”.

    Of the leading necons I think only Frank Gaffney did not fall for this particular “are you a total moron” test.

    New York City…. credit bubble central.

    Perhaps the Mayor who did it most harm was not Lindsey (useless though he was) – but rather Wagner.

    He unionised the city government – and that is always a long term ticket to bankurptcy.

    He also never met a spending scheme he did not like.

    Mrs Roosevelt despised the man – perhaps the only think in the known universe I agree with her about.

    Where did that weird accent come from?

    The lady sounded like someone pretending to be an Englsh aristocrat and getting it horribly wrong – a bit like some ham actor.

    Still I am told that a lot of upper class educated Americans had that sort of accent (although to a much milder degree).

    Of course the lady was pro Communist also – indeed she supported getting rid of the files of the old Russian Section of the State Department – so the New Dealers could pretend they did not know about the millions of murders in the Soviet Union.

    A pro Communist want-to-be aristocrat snob – not so odd as it might sound.

    Hampstead, in this country, used to be full of such people.

  38. As for the Jew hating Jews that the American Thinker article points to – sadly an old story. Karl Marx hated Jews (businessmen were “inwardly circumcised Jews” and, as Paul Johnson points out large sections of Karl Marx’s outpourings of hate against the “capitalists” are taken WORD FOR WORD from Martin Luther’s late life outpourings of hate against Jews).

    And, of course, the Spanish Inquistion was headed by someone of Jewish ancestry. Such people are always trying to “kill the Jew in themselves”.

    Hence the support of Bill Ayers and co for Hamas.