Tag Archives: Lincoln

Happy Tax Enslavement Day

Failed, Failed and then...successful at being a stealing, murdering, despot!

Thomas DiLorenzo LewRockwell.com April 17, 2012

Today is “tax day,” the first of which in American history was the work of — you guessed it — Dishonest Abe in 1862. It was The Great Railroad Lobbyist/Protectionist/Inflationist/Corporate Welfare Statist/Warmonger president who gave us the first “progressive” income tax.

Lincoln’s chief tax collector, David A. Wells (head of the U.S. Revenue Commission) expressed the basic theme of governmental plunder through income taxation (which was not permitted by the Constitution at the time) when he said: “Wherever you find an article, a product, a trade, a profession, or a source of income, tax it!”

 

Advertisements

Lincolnites and Black Confederates

Kevin Levin a "historian" who is embraced by the mainstream for his denigration of Black Confederates.

Historian Kevin Levin has made into the very distinguished ‘The Atlantic’ magazine. The subject? Black Confederates of course. Or should I say the denigration of African-Americans contributions to the Confederacy?

The mere title is condescending. Levin writes: “More representative of the experience of “Confederate slaves” were those impressed by individual states and the Confederate government for various war-related projects such as the building of fortifications and roads.  In fact, as the number of body servants dropped, the number of impressed slaves continued to rise as a result of legislation on the state and federal levels.  Yet, the SCV/UDC have little to say about these men.Of course, it is not difficult to surmise as to why.  The first problem is that most people are not even aware that tens of thousands of slaves were impressed during the war.  It’s a measure of where we are in terms of our popular understanding of how African-Americans experienced the war. What is important to keep in mind, however, is that there is no difference between the legal statusof body servants and those who were impressed.  They were all legally owned.”

The real reason “Lincolnites” like Levin must belittle the contribution of African-Americans in the Confederacy is because in order to maintain the “myth” of Honest Abe the Emancipator the war has to be about slavery.  African-American Confederate Veterans can not be given the respect they deserve because if they are, people will question the real reasons for the war. Taxation, states rights, constitutionalists versus those who favored giving more power to a central government these were the reasons for the war then and they are reasons for the ongoing political fight in this country now.

Yes, African-Americans were impressed for service into the Confederacy just as they were “liberated” and given the opportunity to “fight for their freedom” by the Federal Government of the North. Just as both White and Black men were “drafted” into the service up to and through the Vietnam Conflict. Does this mean that any soldier impressed into service should not be honored for their service? Of course not.

Lincolnites like Kevin Levin deliberately , conveniently do not mention men like John Noland, Henry Wilson and John Lobb. All three of these men were from Missouri, fought with William Quantrill and were black.

In the book “Quantrill at Lawrence” author Paul R. Petersen gives a detailed account of the contribution of these Black Confederates.

Of Noland, Petersen writes that John T. Noland was entrusted by Quantrill to scout the town of Lawrence , Kansas before his August, 1863 raid on the town and that “John T. Noland was born in 1844. He was one of several black men who served under Quantrill . Noland showed himself a brave soldier by his conspicuous actions during the first battle of Independence and the battle of Lamar. At Noland’s  funeral all of his pallbearers were white. He was described as “a man among men”. His gravestone in Woodlawn Cemetery in Independence {Missouri} denotes his service with Quantrill as a scout”

Noland  later recounted that: ” I being a colored man I had the advantage of any white man as a spy… t was then the Col. {Quantrill} sent for me to meet him on the Little Blue River, and it was there that I received my final instruction, which was to find out the number of soldiers quartered in Lawrence, and if there were any in the vicinity”

Petersen’s book also gives great information for anyone wishing to set the record straight as to the practice of being “impressed” into service writing of Henry Wilson , Petersen notes that: “Wilson was kidnapped by Jayhawkers early in the war and was on his way to Kansas when he escaped. Wilson who lived near Independence chose to remain in Quantrill”s band rather than accept his freedom. He told those around him, ‘ I observed with my own eyes , the stealing, plundering and burning of homes of the people of this country by bands of ‘Red Legs’ even to the enticing of slaves into Kansas. I joined Quantrill when Master Wilson moved to Texas to run the blockade at Independence, carrying supplies to Quantrill and his men”.

Of Lobb, Petersen writes that: “John Lobb was also sent into Lawrence, but William Gregg remembered, “Lobb did not get back before we had started. He met us on the way and told us that Lane had left town”.

There you have it. Three men. Three Black men who fought for the Confederacy under Quantrill. All three entrusted to scout the town of Lawrence, Kansas prior to the great raid at great personal risk to themselves.  All three men, who voluntarily fought for the Missouri guerrilla fighter.

It is quite the story. A story that Lincolnites like Kevin Levin do not want others to hear because it raises questions as to the real reasons of the war  and exposes the myth of Lincoln being the “Great Emancipator”.

– Clint E. Lacy

Serves as the Press Officer for the Colonel John T. Coffee Camp #1934, Missouri Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans.

Why Lincoln has the blood of 630,000 on HIS hands

A VERY good and informative article by Frank Conner about Lincoln the megalomaniac- webmaster

This article was originally published by the Descendants of Point Look Out blog:

To justify their claims that our Confederate ancestors were like Nazi concentration-camp guards–and therefore that all Confederate symbols must now be obliterated, the civil-rights activists argue as follows: the Southern states rebelled against the Union, and started and fought the “Civil War” to protect the unspeakably-evil institution of slavery.

Those are blatant lies, and it is very important for all Southerners to know that. But because the North won the war, you have to look very hard to find the books which tell the truth.

*** John S. Tilley’s “Lincoln Takes Command” and Ludwell Johnson’s “North Against South” are two such books.

I took most of the material below from those books several days ago, to refute a claim in the SCV list server that Lincoln couldn’t have been THAT bad a person. Well, he was.

The North’s Republican party came out of nowhere in 1854, formed from the wreckage of the Whig party (the Northern Conscience-Whigs), and from the Free-Soilers and the Know-Nothings. It opposed slavery, and it demanded a powerful national-government which would subsidize Northern industrialization. The new Republican party grew very rapidly. Not surprisingly, its key bankrollers were Northern capitalists–financiers, shippers, industrialists, etc. Two of its founders and strongest political-leaders were Salmon P. Chase (first a senator and then a governor); and William H. Seward (also a governor and a senator).

There were two factors about the election of 1860 which disturbed the Southerners so badly that Southern states subsequently seceded. First was the Republican-party platform for 1860. Basically, the Northern capitalists wanted the U.S. government to tax (only) the South deeply, to finance the industrialization of the North, and the necessary transportation-net to support that. In those days, there was no income tax. The federal government received most of its revenue from tariffs (taxes) on imported goods. The Southern states imported from England most of the manufactured goods they used, thus paid most of the taxes to support the federal government. (The Northerners imported very little.) In 1860, for example, just four Southern-states paid in 50% of the total tariffs.

In 1860, the averaged tariff-rate was 18.84%; the Republicans spread the word that they were shooting for 40%–which could bankrupt many Southerners and would make life much harder for most of them. The Republican platform included a transcontinental railroad (following a Northern route); extensive internal-improvements to extend the transportation net for the Northern manufacturers; a homestead act which would eliminate the only other important source of federal funding, etc.

Second, if the Republicans somehow managed to gain control of Congress AND the White House, they would then be able to use the federal government to enact and enforce their party platform–and thus convert the prosperous Southern-states into the dirt-poor agricultural colonies of the Northern capitalists. And given the trends in demographics, the Southern states would never be able to reverse that process. The intent of the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution would then have been subverted completely: the Southern states would no longer be governed with the consent of the governed–but instead bullied mercilessly by the Northern majority. Why, then, remain in the Union?

Came the election.

At the 1860 Republican convention in Chicago, Chase and Seward were the favored candidates. Lincoln was a dark horse. In national politics, he had served only in the House, and only for one two-year term–1847-49: he had left Congress 11 years earlier! Lincoln had only three things going for him: he was considered a political lightweight, who could easily be manipulated by the power brokers; he himself was from Illinois, so the convention hall was located on his own stomping-grounds; and both he and his campaign manager–David E. Davis–were extraordinarily-adroit politicians.

In 1860 the vast majority of the Republicans did not want war. But the relatively-mild Seward had earlier coined several phrases which led many to believe mistakenly that he was a warmonger. And if Seward might possibly lead the country into war, the hot-head Chase would probably do so. Lincoln the unknown murmured soothing words of peace–which went down well. Meanwhile, he and Davis manipulated that convention behind the scenes in ways that would make today’s dirty-tricks advocates turn green with envy. Consequently, Lincoln won the Republican nomination.

Meanwhile, the numerically-far-stronger national Democratic-party was busy self-destructing over the issue of slavery.

So when the 1860 election-returns came in, it turned out that the Republicans had won the White House, and substantial majorities in the House and the Senate. When that message sank in, Southern states began seceding from the Union–beginning with South Carolina on 20 December 1860.

Several of them said that the main issue was the protection of slavery, but that was strictly for local consumption by people who did their thinking solely in terms of simple slogans. The Southern legislators could do their math; thus they knew full well that the only truly-safe way to protect the institution of slavery would be for the Southern states to remain in the Union and simply refuse to ratify any proposed constitutional-amendment to emancipate the slaves. For slavery was specifically protected by the Constitution, and that protection could be removed only by an amendment ratified by three-quarters of the states. In 1860 there were 15 slave states and 18 free states. Had the number of slave states remained constant, 27 more free states would have had to be admitted into the Union–for a total of 60 states–before an abolition amendment could be ratified. That was not likely to occur anytime soon. But with the Southern states seceding, the issue of slavery could then be settled by force of arms at any time.

After the Republicans gained control of the presidency and the Congress, eleven Southern states eventually seceded from the Union–specifically to avoid becoming the helpless agricultural-colonies of the Northern capitalists.

This move took the Northern capitalists completely by surprise. The South was like the little boy who was forever crying “wolf.” Southern states had been threatening to secede ever since the Tariff of Abominations and the days of Calhoun; the North no longer took those threats seriously. But with the South now gone, there would be no federal funding to industrialize the North–for the Northern citizenry would certainly never agree to be taxed to pay for it. And far worse than that, the many, many Northern-capitalists who had been earning fortunes factoring the Southern cotton-crop, transporting the cotton, and buying the cotton for New England textile-mills now faced financial ruin. The South normally bought its manufactured goods from Britain, anyway. Now, as a sovereign nation, the South could easily cut far better deals with the British financiers, ship owners, and textile mills to supply the South with all of the necessary support-services–leaving the Northern capitalists out in the cold.

This was all Lincoln’s fault! If he hadn’t been elected, the South wouldn’t have seceded; and the Northern capitalists would not now be in this mess.

So as President-elect Lincoln prepared to take office, he was in a world of hurt. He had the trappings of office–but not the power base to support him safely in office against the slings and arrows of his outrageous political-enemies. Both Seward and Chase had well-established power bases (financial backers, newspapers, magazines, personal political-organizations, etc.); both of them wanted Lincoln’s job; both of them merely awaited the first opportunity to spring a political trap on him, subject him to deadly ridicule, and thereafter cut him off at the knees.

Given time, Lincoln–who, after all, did occupy the presidency–could weld together a formidable power base of his own; but right at the beginning of his term he was perilously vulnerable. He MUST now have the support of the Northern capitalists.

Lincoln was a Whig masquerading as a Republican, because that was now the only game in town. He didn’t care anything about the slavery issue; he preferred to temporize with the abolitionists. But he couldn’t temporize with the Northern capitalists. He would have to drag the South back into the Union immediately, or he’d (figuratively) be shot out of the saddle and discredited very quickly; then Seward or Chase would really be running the country; and Lincoln could forget all about being reelected in 1864. That was unthinkable. But there was no way Lincoln or anyone else from the Republican party could possibly talk the Southern states back into the Union at this stage of the game; so he would have to conquer them in war. (He assumed it would be a 90-day war, which the Union Army would win in one battle.)

If you read Lincoln’s first inaugural-address with any care at all, you’ll see that it was simply a declaration of war against the South. It was also filled with lies and specious reasoning. In 1860, the official government-charter for the U.S. was the U.S. Constitution. In writing it, the delegates to the Constitutional Convention of 1787 (some of the most-canny politicians in the country) had pointedly omitted from it the “perpetual union” clause which had been a main feature of the unworkable Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union, the U.S.-government charter adopted only six years earlier in 1781. Under the Articles, no state could secede lawfully unless all states seceded simultaneously. But the Constitution–which Lincoln had just taken an oath to uphold–did not contain that clause (or any other like it); so any state could secede lawfully at any time. The South did secede lawfully. Honest Abe flat-out lied when he said that was not so; and he subsequently used his blatant lie to slaughter 623,000 Americans and Confederates eventually–in order to perpetuate himself in political office.

Lincoln needed an excuse to start his war of aggression, because Congress did not want war and would not declare war of its own volition. The most-likely hot-spot in which Lincoln could start his war was Charleston Harbor, where shots had already been fired in anger under the Buchanan administration. But the newly-elected governor of South Carolina, Francis Pickens, saw the danger–that Lincoln might, as an excuse, send a force of U.S. Navy warships to Charleston Harbor supposedly to resupply Maj Anderson’s Union force holed up in Fort Sumter. So Gov Pickens opened negotiations with Maj Anderson, and concluded a deal permitting Anderson to send boats safely to the market in Charleston once a week, where Anderson’s men would be allowed to buy whatever victuals they wished. (This arrangement remained in effect until a day or so before the U.S. Navy warships arrived at Charleston). Maj Anderson wrote privately to friends, saying that he hoped Lincoln would not use Fort Sumter as the excuse to start a war, by sending the U.S. Navy to resupply it.

Before his inauguration, Lincoln sent a secret message to Gen Winfield Scott, the U.S. general-in-chief, asking him to make preparations to relieve the Union forts in the South soon after Lincoln took office. Lincoln knew all along what he was going to do.

President Jefferson Davis sent peace commissioners to Washington to negotiate a treaty with the Lincoln administration. Lincoln refused to meet with them; and he refused to permit Secretary of State Seward to meet with them.

After Lincoln assumed the presidency, his principal generals recommended the immediate evacuation of Maj Anderson’s men from Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor–which was now located on foreign soil. To resupply it by force at this point would be a deliberate act-of-war against the C.S.A.

It turned out that Lincoln’s postmaster general, Montgomery Blair, had a brother-in law, Gustavus V. Fox, who was a retired Navy-captain, and wanted to get back into action. Fox had come up with a plan for resupplying Fort Sumter which would force the Confederates to fire the first shots–under circumstances which would force them to take the blame for the war. Lincoln sent Fox down to talk with Maj Anderson about the plan, but Anderson wanted no part of it. Lincoln had Fox pitch the plan to his Cabinet twice. The first time, the majority said that move would start a war. But the second time, the Cabinet members got Lincoln’s pointed message, and capitulated.

Meanwhile, Congress got wind of the plan. Horrified, they called Gen Scott and others to testify about it; Scott and the other witnesses said they wanted no part of the move against the Confederacy in Charleston (and nor did Congress). Congress demanded from Lincoln–as was Congress’s right–Fox’s report on Maj Anderson’s reaction to the plan. Lincoln flatly refused to hand it over to them.

Lincoln sent to Secretary Cameron (for transmittal to Secretary Welles) orders in his own handwriting (!) to make the warships Pocahontas and Pawnee and the armed-cutter Harriet Lane ready for sailing, along with the passenger ship Baltic–which would be used as a troop ship, and two ocean-going tugboats to aid the ships in traversing the tricky shallow harbor-entrance at Charleston. Fox’s plan was to send 500 extra Union-soldiers to reinforce Maj Anderson’s approximately-86-man force at Fort Sumter–along with huge quantities of munitions, food, and other supplies. The Confederacy would, of course, resist this invasion–in the process firing upon the U.S. flag. The unarmed tugs would, of necessity, enter the harbor first, whereupon they would likely be fired upon by the C.S.A., giving Lincoln the best-possible propaganda to feed to the Northern newspapers, which would then rally the North to his “cause.”

Lincoln sent orders for the Union naval-force to begin its journey so as to enter Charleston Harbor on 11 or 12 April. Next, Lincoln sent a courier to deliver an ultimatum to Gov Pickens on 8 April, saying that Lincoln intended to resupply Fort Sumter peaceably or by force. There was no mistaking the intent of that message.

Lincoln had set the perfect trap. He had given President Davis just enough time to amass his forces and fire upon the U.S. Navy. But if Davis acquiesced instead, Lincoln need merely begin sending expeditionary forces to recapture all of the former Union-forts in the South now occupied by Confederate forces; sooner or later Davis would have to fight; and the more forts he allowed Lincoln to recapture in the interim, the weaker would be the military position of the C.S.A. As a practical matter, Davis was left with no choice.

Accordingly, the C.S.A., informed that the U.S. Navy was en route, demanded that Maj Anderson surrender the fort forthwith. Anderson refused; Beauregard’s artillery bombarded Fort Sumter into junk (miraculously without loss of life inside); and Anderson then surrendered with honor intact. The U.S. Navy arrived during the bombardment–but because elements of the force had been delayed for various reasons, did not join in the fight. The Navy was allowed to transport Anderson’s men back to the U.S.

Thereafter Lincoln wrote to Fox, pronouncing the mission a great success. Lincoln ended his letter by saying, “You and I both anticipated that the cause of the country would be advanced by making the attempt to provision Fort Sumter, even if it should fail; and it is no small consolation now to feel that our anticipation is justified by the result.”

Folks, that ought to be plain enough for anybody to understand.

Now Lincoln had his excuse for a war (assuming that he continued to lie his head off about it–which he did); but there was no reason for him to believe that Congress would declare war against the South on his say-so. In fact, there was every indication that they would not. So instead of calling Congress into emergency session and asking them to declare war (which was their prerogative, and not Lincoln’s), Lincoln simply declared war himself–by calling the C.S.A.’s defense of its sovereignty in Charleston Harbor an “insurrection” against the U.S. government. Lincoln did not call Congress into session until several months later–when his war had progressed so far that Congress could not then call it off, but as a practical matter would have to rubber stamp it.

So Lincoln started the war virtually single-handed.

Without vulnerable dark-horse Abraham Lincoln assuming the presidency in 1861, I do not believe we would have had a war. Nobody wanted one except Lincoln and a few rabid-abolitionists and some Northern-capitalists whose fortunes were threatened. I consider Lincoln a megalomaniacal sociopath whose like we have not yet seen–and I pray we never will see.

What we are facing…

A special message from the webmaster:

Tomorrow is Thanksgiving, it is a time for reflecting on what we are thankful for. For me it is special because after having the worst year of my life, I have survived against all odds.  I am thankful for my family and my friends and my “Southern Family” within the ranks of the SCV who checked in on me from time to time and offered hope and words of encouragement. I am also thankful that I can still honor my Confederate ancestors and thankful that I live in a country where I am free to do so. America ain’t what she used to be, but she’s still the best place to be.

Unfortunately, this Thanksgiving, is a reminder of what we face in the coming year. 2011 is going to be the kick off of the Civil War Sesquicentennial.  There have been many state commissions and organizations created to honor this historic event. Unfortunately they have been stacked with men like Kevin Levin, who has taken many an opportunity to discredit, insult, mock and insult the Sons of Confederate Veterans, and the cause for which our ancestors fought.

A friend recently informed me that Levin : “this man has influence on the VA Civil War Sesquicentennial, The Virginia Historical Society, and receives grant money to educate our teachers on how to teach about the Civil War ( and that’s just naming a few of his influences). If we don’t get the word out, how will we be able to stop him?

I would like to see his face the next time we show up at a roundtable (like the Old Brunswick SCV did recently) if these types of posts are brought up. I also want to encourage our members (especially those in VA) to write all of these groups and let them know how we feel about a man who holds this much animosity towards the SCV having so much sway…”

Levin is also the author of the Civil War Memory Blog and his latest efforts were dedicated to mocking the SCV for educating the public on the true history of Thanksgiving as well as insulting the SCV for donating $35,000 for medical research. Normally I don’t link to men like Levin, but in this case maybe you should see his hatred and animosity for yourselves by clicking on the following links:

http://cwmemory.com/2010/11/23/happy-thanksgiving-from-the-scv/#more-10741

http://cwmemory.com/2010/11/23/scv-fund-medical-research-or-wtf/

I also wonder why Mr. Levin, who is unquestionably biased toward preserving and promoting agenda of Abraham Lincoln, as well as the myth which surrounds this U.S. president, why is HE qualified to advise teachers on Civil War heritage, but texbooks that used Sons of Confederate Veterans research about black Confederate Veterans censored?

Maybe the answer lies in the fact that in order to “preserve” Lincoln’s “legacy” men like Levin and Virginia Governor McConnell resort to racism to preserve the memory of “the great emancipator”?

-Webmaster

Is Abraham Lincoln responsible for the downfall of America?

Lincoln , advocate for a central bank and government

Did Abraham Lincoln’s creation of a strong centralized government and government banking responsible for today’s economic collapse of America? Switzerland’s “The Daily Bell”  reports:

“We are well aware of the corruption that inevitably arises when regulatory democracies persist and like tumors begin to swell. The United States is perhaps the world’s most powerful regulatory democracy, and likely its most icily corrupt. Nevertheless, it is absolutely startling to find a senior judge (see article excerpt above) at one of America’s most important financial regulatory agencies – the Commodities Futures Trading Commission – bluntly accusing a former CFTC Chairwoman (Wendy Gramm, wife of former Senator Phil Gramm) and a fellow judge of deliberate malfeasance, apparently over decades. Sub dominant social theme: “This kind of thing doesn’t happen in the US!”

OK, rewind. It has been kind of ironic to watch the US mainstream media wring its collective hands over the “corruption” in Afghanistan as if the US itself, and its deliberately corrupt system of regulatory democracy, were not worse by orders of magnitude than anything Afghanistan could summon. The three most corrupt places in the world are probably Beijing, Brussels and Washington DC in no particular order. We’ll throw in London as a fourth. And Moscow as fifth. And, wait, there’s India, too. We probably could go on and on. Is there a pattern here, dear reader?

The corruption of the West’s regulatory democracies began after the American Civil War and grew far worse in the early 21st century once the Federal Reserve was founded. The corruption was driven by a familial elite of Western power players, mostly banking families that wanted to install one-world government. They intended to do so incrementally using regulatory democracy as a Trojan Horse. Thus the West’s institutions were imperceptibly corrupted over time and almost every aspect of Western culture and commerce was tainted as well.”

L. Neil Smith, in his essay “The American Lenin” stated that:

“History tells us that Lincoln was a politically ambitious lawyer who eagerly prostituted himself to northern industrialists who were unwilling to pay world prices for their raw materials and who, rather than practice real capitalism, enlisted brute government force — “sell to us at our price or pay a fine that’ll put you out of business” — for dealing with uncooperative southern suppliers.”

An article written by John Walker entitled, “None dare call it treason” states that:

“the Civil War and the policies advocated by Lincoln and implemented in his administration and its Republican successors, fundamentally changed the relationship between the Federal government and the states. While before the Federal government was the creation of the states, to which they voluntarily delegated limited and enumerated powers, which they retained the right to reclaim by leaving the union, afterward Washington became not a federal government but a national government in the 19th century European sense”

Lincoln’s own monetary policy states that:

“Money is the creature of law and the creation of the original issue of money should be maintained as an exclusive monopoly of National Government.

Money possesses no value to the State other than given to it by circulation. Capital has its proper place and is entitled to every protection. The wages of men should be recognized in the structure of government and in the social order as more important than the wages of money. 1

No duty is more imperative on the Government than the duty it owes the people to furnish them with a sound and uniform currency, and of regulating the circulation of the medium of exchange so that labor will be protected from a vicious currency, and commerce will be facilitated by cheap and safe exchanges.

The available supply of gold and silver being wholly inadequate to permit the issuance of coins of intrinsic value or paper currency convertible into coin in the volume required to serve the needs of the people, some other basis for the issue of currency must be developed, and some means other than that of convertibility into coin must be developed to prevent undue fluctuations in the value of paper currency or any other substitute for money of intrinsic value that may come into use. The monetary needs of increasing numbers of people advancing toward higher standards of living can and should be met by the Government. Such needs can be served by the issue of national currency and credit through the operation of a national banking system. The circulation of a medium of exchange issued and backed by the Government can be properly regulated and redundancy of issue avoided by withdrawing from circulation such amounts as may be necessary by taxation, redeposit, and otherwise.1 Government has the power to regulate the currency and credit of the nation.

Government should stand behind its currency and credit and the bank deposits of the Nation. No individual should suffer a loss of money through depreciated or inflated currency or bank bankruptcy.

Government possessing the power to create and issue currency and credit as money and enjoying the right to withdraw both currency and credit from circulation by taxation and otherwise, need not and should not 2 borrow capital at interest as the means of financing governmental work and public enterprise.

The Government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending power of the Government and the buying power of consumers.

The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of Government, but it is the Government’s greatest creative opportunity.

By adoption of these principles, the long-felt want for a uniform medium will be satisfied.

The taxpayers will be saved immense sums in interest, discounts, and exchanges.

The financing of all public enterprise, the maintenance of stable government and ordered process, and the conduct of the Treasury will become matters of practical administration. The people can and will be furnished with a currency as safe as their own Government.”

In his own monetary policy , Lincoln advocates total government control over the economy and for paper currency. It is this policy, Lincolns dread, that he was willing to implement by force. It is for Lincoln’s dream of total government control over the economy , that war was waged on the South, resulting in the killing of over 600,000 Americans, and the economic collapse that is occurring in America today.