While working in a redoubt, Knox and his former artillery officer, Alexander Hamilton, who was now an infantry colonel, argued over whether it was unmanly to yell at the sight of an oncoming shell before jummping for cover behind the wooden blinds set up to shield the men from explosive shrapnel. Washington had issued orders approving warning cries to save lives. Hamilton, however, maintained that being a soldier meant braving danger without flinching. As he and Knox argued, the cry went up that a shell was headed their way. Knox moved toward the blind, and Hamilton grabbed Henry as a shield. They battled each other to reach protection just seconds before the shell exploded. Knox told Hamilton not to use him as a breastwork ever again.
Henry Knox by Mark Puls
EVERYONE STOP WHAT YOU ARE DOING RIGHT NOW AND READ THIS VERY IMPORTANT STORY FROM THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION.
I had a quick question: you mentioned in a post about the "sodomite population" in the West Indies, and I was wondering if you had more info on that, or could point me towards more info? Like were they sent there, did they exile themselves, etc.? I'd really like to know more, so thank you in advance for any info you can give!
There’s not really specific statistics I can give you about the prevalence of sodomites in the West Indies or how accepting/apathetic the region was about sodomy at any given time. You have to understand that no two places on the map or in time would be the same about the issue, and it’s all circumstantial. But, given context, I can say that the West Indies would’ve had a larger population of people convicted of sodomy after the 1640s than any other British colony.
To answer your question, all I can do is explain the history of the labor force demographics of the colonial West Indies and let you make your own speculations.
I was in my English/History class one time (same teacher, different class) and in the margins of Jefferson and Hamilton the Rivalry that Forged a Nation I had outlined a certain Jedams paragraph where he was yelling at Hamilton and said Jefferson was ten time the more qualified man for president and in large purple pen wrote “shit, that’s gay” and my teacher asked up what I was reading, picked up my book and started flipping though the pages. She made no expression but handed me back the book on that page with the Jedams and I don’t even know what she thought.
The West still doesn’t understand
the evils that haunts mankind since the emergence of modern ideologies.
Although Burke criticised the development in France during the Revolution, we never learned the
lessons he wished to teach us. Instead we replaced his wisdom with forgetfulness of
the worst atrocities ever faced by mankind.
In the early hours of 17 July, 1918, the Romanov family, three
servants and their doctor were herded down into the cellar of the Ipatiev house
in Yekaterinburg. They had been told that they were going to take cover from
artillery from the approaching White Army. They put on their clothes and
gathered some belongings and the Tsar carried his sickly thirteen-year-old son,
Alexei, down the stairs.
They waited in the cellar for a while, before a group of
armed men came in and read their sentence. Death. The Tsar was then shot
several times in the chest and he fell down dead or dying. For the rest of them
the gruesome butchery had just begun. Alexei, Anastasia, Tatiana, Olga and
Maria were not killed by the first hail of bullets. Wounded and terrified they
cried out in agony before they were executed with bullets, bayonets and the
butts of pistols and rifles. One of the murderers recalled that the floor was
slippery as ice from brains and blood as they waded in to kill the children. It
took 20 minutes before they were all quiet, but as they carried the bodies out
it was revealed that two of them were still breathing. The children were then
stabbed until dead. The bodies were plundered of valuables and the soldiers cut
off the fingers of the Tsaritsa to remove rings. All of them were cut up, put
in acid and dumped in a mine shaft and a shallow grave.
Thus ended 300 years of
Romanov dynasty. But of course, for Russia, the slaughter had just begun. At
least 20 million people were killed by the USSR, and communism as a whole is
responsible for killing at least 100 million people. It is the single deadliest
ideology in the history of mankind.
The left gets away with murder
Here’s a death toll for communism around the world, according to the Black book of communism: 65 million in the People’s Republic of China 20 million in the Soviet Union 2 million in Cambodia 2 million in North Korea 1.7 million in Ethiopia 1.5 million in Afghanistan 1 million in the Eastern Bloc 1 million in Vietnam 150,000 in Latin America 10,000 deaths “resulting from actions of the international Communist movement and Communist parties not in power.”
The left also has a long history of domestic terrorism in the West. The Red brigades, Red Army Faction, Weather Underground, Symbionese Liberation Army to mention a few.
Exempt from scrutiny Unlike followers of revolutionary ideologies on the right, it
is quite possible to call yourself a communist without any repercussions in
your personal or professional life. It can even help you in your career, especially in Academia. Many famous Swedish people in politics, media, sport, and culture are un-repenting communists. Members of a Marxist-Leninist party even. Many more are just slightly reformed and constantly apologetic, often hiding behind a thin veneer of restraint which is let go as soon as something in society upsets them, and they immediately call for totalitarian and violent measures. The online world has proven a perfect outlet for their urge to purge, as they hound political opponents, engage in mischaracterisation, threats, and calls to violence. Western society has an inexplicable tolerance for these leftist views and ideas, even when it takes violent expressions.
It’s easy to think this is just something relating to communism or anarchism, but the above examples often come from liberals too. And they also have a history of getting away with murder. Between 1793 and
1794 the Reign of Terror raged across France. Robespierre and the revolutionaries
did what so many revolutionaries would do after them, they killed anyone who
they didn’t like. Most famously Robespierre and his thugs killed the
aristocracy, but in fact 72% of those executed were peasants and workers who simply disagreed with the regime. In modern day, another example is the Western liberal support of the Arab spring which has been pivotal in crashing the
Middle East into yet another violent rampage.
Remains of 20,000 poles murdered by the Soviet Union
We just want change.
And kill anyone who opposes it
Revolutionaries kill people. The revolution is in itself
almost always responsible for worse atrocities than the regime it seeks to
overthrow. Solzjenitsyn claimed that in the 80 years prior to the Russian
revolution – a period where one Tsar was
assassinated, there were many assassination attempts (one in my own country,
Sweden, in fact), and there were widespread revolutionary movements – only
about 17 people a year were executed. The Cheka, however, executed without
trial more than a thousand people a month in the first years after 1917. He
continues to tell us that if you would average the amount of executed a month
up until the height of executions by Stalin in 1937-38, about 40,000 people
were killed every month. He rightly wonders how the west could make an alliance
with such a horrible regime. How was the Soviet Union better than Nazi Germany?
In fact, it wasn’t.
But the revolutionaries aren’t just to be rejected for their
blood lust. If we simply look at the murderous aspect they cannot be understood.
The question becomes a simple argument of “how could this happen?”. The really
important thing to understand is how mankind can develop and improve
society, without destroying itself in the process, and how we can maintain that
which serves us even when we have forgotten how it serves us. This is the point
of view that Burke argued in the Reflections on the Revolution in France. He meant
that the reason that the French Revolution would be so disastrous was that it
was founded on abstract concepts that ignored mankind’s complexity, the wisdom
which hides within tradition, and the intricacy of human society. It also
ignores the weakness of men and our inability to grasp everything, but our
willingness to think that we do. Herein lies the hubris of utopian thinking and
ideological fight for power of the societies that have grown more organically
over the centuries. The left is a living example of the Doning-Kruger effect,
if you will. Too stupid to understand that it doesn’t understand. I mentioned the liberal support of the Arab spring previously, and it is a prime example of how overthrowing functioning nation states for abstract ideas can lead to extreme problems. Remembering Burke commenting on the French Revolution, it is easy to see history repeating itself, but this time in the Arab world:
“Can I now congratulate the same nation upon its freedom? Is it because liberty in the abstract may be classed amongst the blessings of mankind, that I am seriously to felicitate a mad-man, who has escaped from the protecting restraint and wholesome darkness of his cell, on his restoration to the enjoyment of light and liberty? Am I to congratulate a highwayman and murderer, who has broke prison, upon the recovery of his natural rights? This would be to act over again the scene of the criminals condemned to the galleys, and their heroic deliverer, the metaphysic knight of the sorrowful countenance.” (Reflections on the French Revolution. The Harvard Classics)
Remember who we are. Or perish. The alternative to these modernist ideologies is a state based not around an ideology, but around fair and tested principles of law, and a people and their geographical location. In other words a nation state for each people created around the self interest of that people as a whole, and represented by themselves.
We have not yet managed to free ourselves from abstract utopian
thinking. And it is important to remember that it is not just the revolution that kills, that is just an eclipse in
the blood lust fed by the urge to kill that which does not fit the revolutionary world view. Man
has always killed, but when he kills for abstract ideals there is no limit
to the extent of the murder. The breech against the abstract idea can occur at
any time, in any generation, and in any person. No one is ever safe.
The limits of man’s wisdom should prevent us from any too
radical idea. Anything that changes society greatly in too short a time.
Today’s Western society is rife with abstract ideas that are said to improve
life for mankind. The ideas of globalism, open border, multicultural societies,
the dismantling of the family are obvious abstracts that are major changes to
our societies, that history repeatedly tells us could lead to disaster. But
beyond those things, we will be facing technological advances that are beyond
our current field of vision. We are facing these new challenges without having
understood anything from the violence of Modernity and the 20th
century. I believe that is a reason for concern and potentially the end of