An American Civil War: the Role of Faiths and Religion

One aspect of a new American Civil War that we’ve touched upon very lightly is what the combatants believe in. In the Civil War of 1860-1865, both North and South were predominantly Protestant Christian, with Catholics, Jews, Muslims, pagans and atheists participating. The primary crisis of conscience centered on the theology of slavery. Slavery does exist in the Christian Bible and in the Septuagint. But, is slavery acceptable to God? Similarly, in a modern civil war, the primary crisis of conscience centers on the twinned questions ‘who is God?’ and ‘what does it mean to be a god?’ Answering those two questions informs behavior, and therefore the conduct of war. The history of the Twentieth Century informs us of the effects of faith and religion on warfare today.

American warriors are familiar with the Just War doctrine of Saint Augustine. Just War is divided into two parts: right to go to war, and right conduct in war. The first part is political and rightly should be the topic of debate. The second is, for Americans, a non-negotiable. The tenets of right conduct are: 1) the Principle of Distinction, which is recognizing who is and isn’t a combatant; 2) Proportionality, which is using just the right amount of force to achieve an objective; 3) Military Necessity; 4) Fair Treatment of Prisoners of War; and, 5) Not to employ any means of combat that are evil in and of themselves (“malum in se”), such as Tamerlane-like massacres of entire cities.

What we’ve seen on the Left is the joyful acceptance of the Doctrine of By Any Means. As the doctrine’s title says, any means to end is acceptable. “It’s only a fair fight if you’re buddy’s winning” is one way to think about it. For our purposes, we are not going to examine the nazis of Germany and the communists of the USSR, China and America. Instead we will look at Mexico in the time from 1924-1929. Most Americans don’t know Mexico’s history beyond Cinco de Mayo (created in an American bar, just like Saint Patrick’s Day) and Taco Bell (created in New Jersey. New Jersey people!).

An early hero of Mexico’s freedoms was Father Hidalgo. Executed by Spanish troops in 1811, Father Hidalgo and the Catholic Church were seen as pro-people, pro-freedom of conscience. With the introduction of the French, and their alleged Enlightenment (never have thoughts grown so dark as in the Enlightened Age), a virulent anti-Christianity was given structure. Following the execution of the so-called Emperor Maximillian in 1867, the first president of Mexico, Benito Juarez, as his first official act, confiscated (stole) the property of the Catholic Church in Mexico City.

The anti-Catholicism and anti-Christianity waxed and waned up through the troubles of the Mexican civil war of the early Twentieth Century. Mexican political leaders had three characteristics in common: they were Free Masons, anti-catholic, and corrupt. These characteristics, and America’s very-hard-won freedom of religion inspired an enduring, century-long exodus from Mexico, Central and South America to the United States. These characteristics were enshrined in the Mexican constitution of 1917. The long and the short of this constitution was that Catholics were not permitted to engage in essential rituals like receiving the sacraments and attending mass, to speak, to vote, to hold property. These denials of inalienable rights were ruthlessly enforced. By any means necessary.

In 1924, General Plutarco Elias Callez (pronounced Ki as in kite, yez – Ki-yez), was elected on a Bernie-Bros platform of redistribution of wealth and greater democratic reforms (and then founded what we know today as Mexico’s dominant political party, the Institutional Revolutionary Party (Partido Revolucionario Institucional, or PRI) which is a member of the Socialist International). Part and parcel of Callez’s socialist government was a rigid anti-Christianity which took the form of an extreme form of anti-clericalism. This resulted in some 17 states in Mexico not having any priests or churches. Even to speak in protest meant 5 years in prison. How very enlightened. With no brakes on the train of governance, Mexicans become even more oppressed.

Eventually, Catholic Mexicans had enough and revolted. The Cristero War was a bitter war which, like its Russian counterpart, and foreshadowing socialist military conduct in the Spanish Civil War and World War II, saw the Mexican army abandoning right conduct in combat and instead resorting to any means necessary. Massacres, mass rapes and other tactics were the rule for the socialists.

The Cristeros were supported by Irish patrons and the Pope (at least for a while). The Mexican government was supported by the United States (war is bad for business), and especially the Ku Klux Klan (funny how the KKK and socialists are always buddy-buddy, but in public they treat each other as the crazy uncle locked in the basement). The Cristero War ended with a peace brokered between Pope Pius XI (likely his Cardinal Secretary of State) and the American ambassador to Mexico, Dwight Morrow. To celebrate the new-won peace, Callez had a little under 7,000 leaders of the Cristeros executed.

In an American Civil War, the Left is dominated by Socialists. The history of Socialist conduct in war is bleak. Socialism is anticlerical, and by that standard where-ever there is no God, there is no mercy – whether Left of Right, and that leads directly to by-any-means conduct. By any means necessary is license to commit mass murder, rape, theft and other crimes without distinction between combatants and civilians (and permits crimes against one’s own supporters in the absence of enemies). Andersonville will be seen as the threshold, a ‘hold-my-beer’ moment, in the treatment of POW. More importantly, freedom of conscience to be Christian or Jew will be a capital crime. This has been true in decade after decade of the Twentieth Century, and today’s Left is as militant in its anti-Christianity and anti-Semitism as at any time in history.

Posted in History, Insurgency & Counterinsurgency | Leave a comment

New Uniforms Will Be Expensive

In case you knuckle heads who think that Pinks and Greens will be cool, let me highlight some facts, it is going to cost you a bunch of money, let me show you.

Pinks and Greens will require the following:

Pin On Rank for Officers

DUI pin on for officers and Enlisted

Brown Shoes

Brown Boots for the Airborne

Brown Socks

Sew on Rank for Enlisted

Brown Shoulder Boards for Officer and NCOs

New Headgear (both saucer cap, brown beret (unless the SMA wants to get rid of beret), and cunt cap (if beret goes the way of the dodo bird).

Sam Browne Belts (for Officers only enlisted will wear leather belt)


Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments

The Hell of the Wonder-weapon

History is the enumeration of facts about warfare. War forms the basis of the discipline of studying history. And one salient fact of war is the Wonder-weapon. The Wonder-weapon is a technological marvel that changes tactics, and initially provides a decisive edge. Initially, until a counter-wonder-weapon is created or the weapons become too expensive to maintain, causing a collapse of the economy of the culture that created the weapon.

First there was stone weapons, then metals. To protect against stone and metal man adapted hunting techniques to create ‘stand-off range’ in order to mitigate damage from mastodon or maniple. Stand-off distance was countered by speed of maneuver using horses and camel and oxen. Before the stirrup and horse bridles and side reins (before those, horses were choked as you can see from contemporary friezes), speed was achieved through the adaptation of carts in chariots, and combined with stand-off distance weapons in slings and stones, and bows and arrows.

Then came weapons of defense: the shield and body armor. Shields were defeated by different weapons, such as hooks or simply stabbing through them or around them. To counter-defeat the attacks the shields got heavier, and once warfare progressed so that the shield became irrelevant, they become smaller and more ornate. From stone-age hunters through Romans to knights, each age saw new technology, but combat remained infantry grunts going toe-to-toe with the enemy.

In the US we saw the battles of the Monitor and the Merrimack, but it was the battle of the shovel around Richmond that finished off the Confederacy. The Germans of World War II provide the most dramatic search for wonder-weapons. The V1 and V2 missiles, jet planes and monstrous tanks that sank into the earth. For every weapon developed, an army division had to maintain horses and mules in order to transport logistics. Lacking quality, quantity, or speed of delivery of logistics, once the close battle was closed, the Germans got their butts kicked. Today in the US we are seeing the same phenomenon: for each wonder-weapon like the Zumwalt and the F-35, our military becomes less capable. For each new thing, we have to give up the core of combat: to close with and destroy the enemy.

Impossible!, you say? Our Navy lacks a projectile to support Marines and soldiers. When combined with the naval gunfire capability of the Littoral Combat Ship, our Marines are on their own. Our Navy has no plans to create such a round. Meanwhile China is mass-producing warships. Thank you Slater for this article on China’s PLAN.

But wait! There’s another wonder-weapon on the horizon that will completely change naval artillery and defeat China’s quantities! Except the weapon is reliant on the internet-of-things, also known as ‘imminently hackable’ and easily mitigated.

Warfare is changing and technology and easy money are driving those changes. Historically, whenever a country relies on a single weapon that country fails relatively soon after. That includes reliance on humans forming that weapon: the Roman legion, the Japanese samurai, the Cossacks and the Field Artillery. Example: US Navy sailors who are politically correct, and can’t sail their ships. Wonder-weapons are hell, and the US military is bathing in brimstone.

Posted in Chaos, Defending the Homeland, Elements of National Power, History, Leadership, Marine Corps, Navy | 1 Comment

Birth of a Marine Corps and Other Nuclear News

Japan is birthing a Marine Corps after 73 years. Japan, thanks to China and North Korea, is rearming finally. What will be interesting will be how Japan rebuilds its society to include warriors over the legal and cultural obstacles America imposed on the Japanese in 1945.

Popular Mechanics presents an article on yet another naval threat: the Russian Doomsday Torpedo – another nuke weapon, another threat we will forced to go hat in hand to Big Defense for their latest wunderwaffe. I wonder how much this is going to cost us? At least as much as teaching the Navy that water is wet and Port has 2, 2!, sea-faring definitions.

Since North Korea now has a credible nuclear threat, as well as having an expectation of Pakistan taking revenge by giving yet more nuclear technology to terrorists, here’s a guide to get you ready for surviving a nuclear strike. For me, the first way is not to live in some out of the way town in the Midwest. Bombing San Fran, while edifying, may cause America to get pissed off. Smalltown, Kansas, eh, so what? They’re bitter clingers and know the point count in NASCAR. Give Kim what he wants before the next Broadway premiere…

Posted in Defending the Homeland, Friends & Allies, Marine Corps, Navy, Strategy | 1 Comment

War in the Pacific

Several articles today on war in the Pacific. The first covers China’s strategic moves inside the US of A. American campuses are particularly vulnerable due to the Leftist Authoritarianism (but I repeat myself) of the college and university administrivialists; and the cultural, pseudo-intellectual Marxism of the Professariat. The problem for students starts sooner, but what has me scratching my head is the lack of intellectual curiosity. But hey, Google, which totes ain’t evil, is a thumb swipe away.

China’s strategic maneuvers focus on the economy and operational maneuvers in space. Recall what the US Navy did to the Confederacy. Everything after 1861 was just the South’s death-twitching. To have a manufacturing base, one needs raw materials, and China figured that out and is acting accordingly. It’s a race to see who’s vision controls the future, but fortunately for the Chinese, America is focused on white trucks blocking the cameras at Mar-a-lago, and whether or not the POTUS described Haiti in the most aromatic of terms.

What is a bona fide crapper is DoD’s finances. One strategic move that I expect will get tossed away in political chess is an overdue audit of DoD.

The last article discusses the tactics that North Korea could use against America and South Korea. These are not new tactics by any means. In WWI the Germans called these Stormtrooper tactics, and America saw similar in its many wars with the Indian nations. Still, the enemy has a vote. And so do those students mentioned above. Would our 17 Intelligence Agencies even know there’s a war? Education – our first strategic resource to win the Pacific.

Posted in Chaos, China, Idiocy, Korea, Strategy | Leave a comment

An American Civil War: an Economy

As we’ve reviewed the concept of an American Civil War, the perspective we’ve taken is not one of combat. We’ll cover that another time because in such a war, there will be foreign intervention, and their goal will be to grab the strategic power of the US: nuclear weapons, our Naval and bomber fleets, and control of the sea and air. That’s a given. We’ve looked away from combat because we know combat, we know strategy, operations and tactics in warring with formally trained and ad hoc organizations. Today we turn our view to the economy of an American Civil War.

Merriam-Webster defines economy as “the structure or conditions of economic life in a country, area, or period.” The structure has both directives: laws and policies and agreements of shall and shall nots; and the physical components to exchange a good or service for a desired item of value. We call this item of value ‘money.’ It can be a physical object like a metal, mineral, or even the promise to provide a metal or mineral in the future. This last is the person selling himself into debt slavery: he works to pay back for the good or service acquired through credit.

In this civil war the Left is working so hard to start, it is necessary to collapse the economy. Like the proverbial glass filled with water, if you pour out the water, you fill the empty space with air. People abhor vacuums in their lives. A modern example of the collapse of an economy and what happens after is the former Yugoslavia. As the politicians lead their people into division first, then hatred, it became necessary to collapse the economy to get the murder into motion. How the people of the former Yugoslavia handled their new economy resembled what we had in the Confederate States of America.

Christopher Memminger of South Carolina was the first Confederate Secretary of the Treasury. His job was impossible because the Southern economy, divorced from the North, was based on fantasy thinking. The premise of the rebel economy was that combat would be over within a few months and then Southerners could enjoy greater wealth freed from paying Northern merchants and federal tariffs and taxes. To that end, combat forces were raised by individuals wealthy enough to afford a company, battalion or regiment, or the citizens of communities that contributed pre-war monies to raise organizations. The premise was a bad one.

Before New Year’s Day of 1862, the individual contributions dried up. The Confederates tried taxation. This became unenforceable because collecting taxes was left to individual states, which withheld a large portion of the taxes to pay for their own priorities. The Confederacy starved itself of cash necessary for paying for military supplies and manpower. This economy forced General Lee to invade the North in search of supplies, which forced battles over shoes (Gettysburg, which proved disastrous to the South), and desertion as men slipped away to eat, stay warm, and shore up their families.

The Confederate political leaders expected to get hard cash from tariffs on international trade: cotton and slavery were major commodities which underpinned the Southern pre-war economy. The Federal Navy stopped most trade; and, the Confederate Congress made a major mistake by refusing to trade cotton with Europe. The thought was cotton was so important to Europe that the British and French would sail to the South’s rescue. Cotton is grown in Egypt, and in India, and on other continents. The British and French grew rich in the absence of competition from America. Dependent on tariffs that could not be collected without trade, money needed to service their growing debt, the South became desperate and went full “Occupy Wall Street.”

These 1860s version of the Bernie Bros seized Federal property and attempted to repudiate debts owed to Northern banks. This presented two new problems to the Southerners and their core identity as Christian, honorable people. Seizing property is theft. Repudiating debt is also theft. Very few Southerners were willing to risk Salvation for a transient perception of being debt free. Today, in a post-Christian country, and one in which Honor is drag, the Bernie Bros tactics will work in the short term – but who will loan cash to them when it comes time to rebuild after the conclusion of a civil war? If you think it won’t happen, consider what happened to the former British colonies in Africa that repudiated their debts.

The Confederacy failed in another way: monetary policy. Fiat currency is money created by law, in this case, the “Greybacks” which were the equivalent of US dollars. There were two types of greybacks: the regular ones, and then the second type was an interest-bearing greyback, so one Confederate dollar was meant to be worth more than a dollar. The Confederacy printed too many of these greybacks and inflation was insane. Finally the South turned to the gold standard – but how much gold was left after sending it to Europe to buy privateers, blockade runners and a dribble of supplies?

Should the Left succeed in getting America into a Civil War, the economy on their side will resemble their economic preferences. For the Bernie Bros, National Socialism is their preferred economic and political philosophy. For the Progressives, their preferred system is Xi-ist Marxism (billionaires at the very top, bayonets for the rest of China). After the confiscations and usual Keynsian mismanagement, the Left would have to resort to (with many heads exploding, literally and figuratively) capitalism. Considering that banks and the Federal Reserve system are based in cities, natural Leftist centers, the Left will immediately possess the infrastructure for an economy. But, these are in natural opposition to Leftist political and economic philosophies that their hired Antifa and Black Bloc mobs will enforce to the death.

“Social Safety Nets” could not be afforded. Food, water, basic staples would be imported from Europe and Asia, and the prices would be exorbitant. The too-poor, the elderly, the infirm would be sent to Rest Homes, with an initial free shower thrown in to reduce costs and consciences. Debt slavery will be transferred to a more open evil of actual slavery, which won’t respect race or faith. Much of what America covets in terms of materiel goods doesn’t maintain value – look at the Kelly Blue Book, and besides, why would a merchant accept yet another Prius in exchange for groceries? It’s cheaper and easier for Progressives to have the average Leftist citizen working in the fields growing cabbages or rebuilding buildings by hand.

Not a pretty picture. Folks who are eager for a civil war have no idea what they are in for. The former Yugoslavia as well as the former British colonies in Africa have yet to recover from making the same mistakes the Confederacy made from 1861-1865. The South didn’t recover for 120 years after the surrender at Appomattox. If the Civil War begins in 2020, that means Americans would not see recovery until 2145. As if the world would let us recover, but that’s a post for another day.

Posted in Chaos, History, Insurgency & Counterinsurgency, VMI, War and the Moral Consequences | Leave a comment

An American Civil War: the Home Front

There’s been rhetorical shots fired in the war between America and secessionist California, one in which Californians will lose. Those are the breaks though. When South Carolina’s militia, augmented by The Citadel’s Corps of Cadets, fired on Fort Sumter, there was a lot of fantasy-thinking and wish-casting, similar to Californian chakra-blasting. Confederates believed there would be no widows, no orphans, and the parents back home would worry, a little, but otherwise get the crops in and get down the fiddle in joy.

There were widows. And orphans. And unless Maw and Paw had a way to smuggle luxury crops such as cotton to Europe, there was a lot of privation. First to go was textiles. Medicines followed, followed by other processed products used by urban dwellers.

To help keep order, since in every war many if not most police and firefighters and EMT join the military and head off to the front, the Confederate states constituted another paramilitary force called the Home Guard. Usually focused on capturing deserters, the Home Guard played a role in ensuring the citizens stayed compliant.

How would this play out today, besides being ugly? Both sides start off with a very large population in need of care: de facto widows – single mothers – and orphans – legions of abandoned babies and elderly who will drain resources. There is also a very large population that is able-bodied but wholly dependent on other people working and providing for them. We’ve already witnessed riots when the Food Stamp debit cards didn’t get reloaded. The Left already has a solution for the babies and old folks, so it’s merely an academic exercise in wondering how long before its citizens are buying and selling lampshades and used clothing with questionable provenance.

There is also the brain-splodey of law enforcement – which may not enforce the laws today – having to enforce new or remembered laws. With the experienced policemen at the front, local communities will have to create new police officers and more likely create vigilante gangs. We witnessed the quality of law enforcement plummet in the first decade of this century with repeated deployments of military reservists. We have a generation of citizens who know there are laws and we expect law enforcement to not enforce them. A recent example is the beclowning of Colorado Senator Cory McPothead threatening to not staff law enforcers because LEO may enforce laws that Senator McPothead can re-write and likely get passed and signed into law. Rule of law means laws are enforced, not selectively. So what laws can secessionists expect to have followed without resorting to short ropes and tall lamp posts every time?

Like the Confederacy, textiles will become scarce. There is the loss of skills in harvesting and processing natural resources such as sheep’s wool, cotton, and others into wearable, usable clothes. Clothes wear out. Kids grow. Adults do too. And then there’s bandages, car seats and other uses. For the coastal secessionists, there won’t be processed petroleum available. This means the Chinese and Europeans will have to show up with soldiers AND food AND domestic products ready for use.

Good luck with that.

It leads back to the question concerning humanity: generalization versus specialization. Please read the comments at that link, too. Specialization leads to scarcity of knowledge and skills, and the lack eliminates security, which creates anxiety growing into panic. Infecting a group, the resulting panic will ultimately destroy every semblance of order and folks find themselves living “The Walking Dead.” For any secessionist, it won’t be the battle front that defeats them, but the Home front.

Posted in Chaos, Defending the Homeland, History, Readiness, Resistance | Leave a comment