Blogs
Greed & Arrogance—Origin & Evolution of the Globalist Yankee Empire
Next Post

Press {{ keys }} + D to make this page bookmarked.

Close
Photo: USA Rwally

Greed & Arrogance—Origin & Evolution of the Globalist Yankee Empire

970

USA Really presents the essay applied for The Global Democracy Award (The John Reed nominee).

The United States has an enormous global military footprint. It has a vast array of military assets available to “project power” worldwide. This military power has allowed the U.S. to position itself as the leading global power.  The U.S. Navy currently has 11 aircraft carries with one more under construction,[1] while China has two aircraft carriers with another reportedly under construction,[2] and Russia has only one aircraft carrier.[3] While neo-conservatives celebrate the use of America’s worldwide military power many liberals and traditional conservatives have called into question this “Imperial overreach.”[4] Yet, the ruling elite of both political parties, their donor class and supporters in the mainline media are hostile to even a slight withdrawal of American military for places such as Syria.[5] How did the original, constitutionally limited, Republic of Sovereign States created in 1787-8[6] morph into a global American Empire? As Southerners, we view it as a Yankee not American Empire.[7]

By the end of the War for Southern Independence (1865), Lincoln, the Republican Party, and their crony capitalist allies had successfully transformed America’s original Republic of Sovereign States into a consolidated, supreme, Federal Government. The democratically elected, peaceful, sovereign nation, the Confederate States of America, was the United States’ first imperial conquest—it would not be its last.[8]  Most liberal scholars and writers date the beginning of the American Empire to the Spanish-American War (1898). Chalmers Johnson defines the American Empire without mentioning the invasion, conquest, occupation and exploitation of the Confederate States of America.[9] Stephen Kinzer mentions the “Civil War” but never makes a connection between the United States’ invasion, occupation and post-War exploitation of the South as being in any way connected to the emergence of the American Empire.[10] The post-War Gilded Age associated with Robber Barons of industry and finance followed in the wake of the exploitation of the conquered and occupied Southern Confederacy. While the victors enjoyed the benefits of their new Empire—which is in fact the Yankee Empire—the intentionally impoverished South became the Yankee Empire’s first political and economic colony.[11] The South became and remains a captive nation.

Southerners are unique in America because they represent the only people who have had their country invaded, destroyed and occupied. Southerners are the only people in the United States who can understand that massed, bloody, bayonets are a poor substitute for self-government. Southerners are the only Americans who can truthfully—by way of actual experience—declare, “Invaded countries never forget.” This small bit of Southern piety is something America’s neo-cons and globalists do not factor into their worldwide “projection of power.” Regardless of the newly drilled water wells or schools built in foreign lands by America’s military or its civilian contractors, the invaded people will never completely forget the death of innocent men, women and children at the hands of United States’ military—such deaths are sanitized and euphemistically referred to by the Pentagon as “collateral damage?”

The United States always claims its interventions into other nations are motivated by acts of compassion.[12] President Bush II went to war to remove the criminal and oppressive government of Afghanistan that was harboring the 9-11 terrorists, President Bush I went to war in Iraq to punish aggression and protect the right of self-government in Kuwait, President Taft deposed the government of Nicaragua to establish republican institutions friendly to American interests, President McKinley declared war on Spain to free Cuba and the Philippines and President Lincoln ordered the invasion of the Confederate States of America to save the Union and free the slaves. These were the reasons offered to a gullible American public. These were the official excuses for aggressive war but in all cases the stated reasons were never fully, if at all, realized but America’s commercial and financial interests were well served by these interventions. The most audacious reason for war was Lincoln’s claim of saving the Union and freeing the slaves. Instead of saving the Constitutional Union, Lincoln destroyed it and replaced it with a supreme Federal Empire, while chattel slavery morphed into sharecropping—a new form of slavery that bound 8.5 million black and white Southerners for almost a century after the end of the War for Southern Independence.[13] Charles Bancroft, a Massachusetts historian, admitted ten years after the Yankee’s successful war to prevent Southern Independence, “While so gigantic a war was an immense evil; to allow the right of peaceable secession would have been ruin to the enterprise and thrift of the industrious laborer, and keen-eyed businessman of the North. It would have been the greatest calamity of the age. War was less to be feared.”[14] Follow the money and you will find out why empires go to war.

Confederate General Robert E. Lee, in a letter to Lord Acton a year after the end of the War predicted that, if the victors (Yankees) used their victory to consolidate political power in Washington, DC, then the United States would become as other empires—“aggressive abroad and despotic at home.”[15] Unfortunately, General Lee’s prediction has become our reality. Arrogance and greed are the two main characteristics that encouraged the Northern majority to engage in their first act of Imperialistic aggression and continue today to be the primary motivating factors that justify American worldwide power projection.

History of Yankee Arrogance

The great divide between the North and the South was not, as politically correct historians claim, a divide between non-slave and slave states. In 1776 slavery was legal in all thirteen American colonies—the New England States were then and many years afterwards actively engaged in the nefarious international slave trade. The divide was between states whose economy and culture were based on commerce and states whose economy and culture were based on agriculture. It was a divide of culture vs. culture.[16]

Puritan New Englanders viewed themselves as having the “mandate of Heaven” which commissioned them to remake the world in their image. They considered the struggle between the North and South as a struggle between “God’s elect” and the damned.[17] They viewed their fellow countrymen to the South as being “doomed as long as [they] resisted the popular New England ideologies of the day.”[18] New England and its self-proclaimed intellectual elites were the locus of all the trendy “isms” of the day. From feminist to radical abolitionist all sallied forth from that “City on a Hill” to do battle with other people’s sins.[19] Here were people who saw little value in or even detested tradition, the permanent things, and faith in transcendent values handed down by the pious through the generations. After 1865 their arrogance became one of the driving forces in the United States’ foreign policy. This aggressive and arrogant spirit was described as, “The pattern American, this dry, moral, utilitarian little democrat, has done more to ruin the old Europe that any Russian nihilist. He has done it by slow attrition, like any son who stayed home and obeyed his parents, all the while silently hating their authority, and silently, in his soul, destroying not only their authority but their whole existence.”[20]

The American—actually Yankee—aggressive and arrogant technique of destruction was first demonstrated by the manner in which Lincoln’s military conducted total warfare against their former countrymen of the South. They then turned their attention on the world at large. Southern historian Forrest McDonald described it:

Yankees formed the backbone of the Republican Party of Abraham Lincoln, and it is unnecessary to rehearse here what that meant.  …Yankees perceived slavery as an evil  and stamped it out without giving any serious thought to the consequences. It hardly occurred to them that the former slaves needed preparation if they were to bear the awesome burdens and responsibilities of freedom. Consequently, the blacks were the principal victims of the Civil War, though the white South, too, lay devastated.

During the last quarter of the nineteenth century, the Yankees abandoned their work of  Reconstructing the South and turned outwards, with a view toward uplifting the remainder of mankind. The Reverend Josiah Strong, a Congregationalist minister,  expressed their mood: “This race of unequalled energy, with all the majesty of numbers and the might of wealth behind it—the representative, let us hope, of the largest liberty, the purest Christianity, the highest civilization—having developed peculiarly aggressive  traits calculated to impress its institutions upon mankind, will spread itself over the  earth.” [21]

McDonald’s 2015 assessment of the Yankee spirit is consistent with the 1866 assessment made by Admiral Raphael Semmes, CSN:

[The Yankee] is ambitious, restless, scheming, energetic, and has no inconvenient moral nature to restrain him from the pursuit of his interests, be the path to these never so crooked. In the development of material wealth, he is unsurpassed…[22]

The marriage of arrogance and commercial greed produced a people who could always find justification for the projection of power if said power projection produces opportunities for uninhibited profits. In 1861 the Yankee went to war to maintain his ability to extract protective tariffs from the South.[23] Their publicly proclaimed excuse was one thing, while the profitable results were all together another.

History of Yankee Greed

In 1787 Patrick Henry warned the South about the dangers of joining the Union in which the North would dominate. In 1828, Missouri Senator Thomas Benton lamented that the South was being forced to pay 75% of the Federal Government’s revenue.[24] Peaceful secession would negate the North’s ability to use the Federal Government to extract tribute from the South. In 1861 when Lincoln was asked why not let the South go—he responded, “Where then shall we get our revenue?”[25] As Massachusetts historian Charles Bancroft admitted after the war, the “keen-eyed” Yankee businessmen could not survive without tribute forcefully extracted from the South.[26] Post-War the South became the Yankee Empire’s political and economic colony—exploited for the benefit of the Empire’s ruling elite and their cronies.

Governor Jones of Louisiana noted that in 1937 “Southern farmers paid a tribute of $800,000,000 to Northern manufacturers.”[27] Senator James Eastland of Mississippi in the 1940s decried Northern exploitation of impoverished Southern farmers noting that, “This is not only economic slavery but human slavery, just as bad, just as dark and just as unjust as ever existed.”[28]

Yankee greed and arrogance knows no bounds. The Yankee Empire extracted tribute from its first economic colony, the Confederate States of America, and then began the process of extracting economic “favors” from other nations that have enjoyed the presence of bloody Yankee bayonets or the threat of such bayonets. In modern times the Yankee Empire has extracted commercial/financial “favors” from targeted nations by the “gentle” persuasion of Economic Hit Men; or failing that the CIA orchestrated a coup such as it did in Iran to remove Mossadegh and install the Shah or, as last resort, it sends in the U.S. military as it did to remove Gadhafi in Libya.[29] The Yankee Empire’s “aggressive abroad” foreign policy is always implemented behind the façade of good intentions, removing some form of evil, and of course providing democracy for the world. The world is not typically improved by this “aggressive abroad” foreign policy but the portfolios of those connected to what President Eisenhower called the Military-Industrial Complex is always greatly enhanced.


[6] By ratifying the U.S. Constitution, the Sovereign States created the Federal Government to be their agent.

[7] The pejorative “Yankee” was first used by New Yorkers to describe their disagreeable New England neighbors. I do not mean all Northerners, but only the ideological, politically correct, descendants of 17th century New Englanders.

[8] Kennedy & Kennedy, Yankee Empire: Aggressive Abroad and Despotic at Home, (Shotwell Publishing Co., Columbia, SC: 2018), 75-128.

[9] Johnson, Chalmers, The Sorrows of Empire-Militarism, Secrecy, and the End of the Republic (Henry Holt & Co., New York: 2004), 2.

[10] Kinzer, Stephen, Overthrow: America’s Century of Regime Change From Hawaii to Iraq, (Times Books, Henry Holt & Co., New York: 2006), 24, 38-9, 54, 106.

[11] Kennedy & Kennedy, Punished With Poverty-the Suffering South, (Shotwell Publishing Co., Columbia, SC: 2017), 95-104.

[12] Kinzer, 83-4.

[13] Kennedy & Kennedy, Punished With Poverty-the Suffering South, 105-19.

[14] Bancroft as cited in, Livingston, Donald “Confederate Emancipation Without War,” To Live and Die in Dixie, Powell, Frank, ed. (Sons of Confederate Veterans, Columbia, TN: 2014), 485.

[15] General Lee as cited in, Kennedy & Kennedy, Yankee Empire: Aggressive Abroad and Despotic at Home, ix.

[16] McWhiney, Grady, Cracker Culture: Celtic Ways in the Old South, (The University of Alabama Press: 1988), xiv.

[17] Floan, Howard R., The South in Northern Eyes 1831 to 1861, (University of Texas Press: 1958), 8-9.

[18] Floan, 40.

[19] Bradford, M.E., A Better Guide Than Reason (1979, Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, NJ: 1994), 195.

[20] D.H. Lawrence as cited in, Bradford, 141.

[22] Semmes, Raphael, Memoirs of Service Afloat (1866, The Blue & Grey Press, Secaucus, NJ: 1987), 482.

[23] The Cost of Southern Cultural Genocide, http://www.kennedytwins.com/The%20Cost%20of%20Southern%20Cultural%20Genocide.pdf  accessed 12/26/2018.

[24] Senator Benton as cited in, Kennedy & Kennedy, Yankee Empire: Aggressive Abroad and Despotic at Home, 158.

[25] Kennedy & Kennedy, Punished With Poverty-the Suffering South, 40.

[26] Op cit.

[27] Kennedy & Kennedy, Yankee Empire: Aggressive Abroad and Despotic at Home, 7.

[28] Ibid, 8.

[29] See, Perkins, John, The New Confessions of an Economic Hit Man (Berrett-Koehier Publishers, Inc., Oakland, CA: 2016).

Author: James Ronald Kennedy