The South lost because:

1. The strategic incompetence of Jefferson Davis and his inability to manage effectively the war and his administration.

2. The South fought an offensive war when a defensive war might have succeeded. The Southern mentality could never allow this, and so it decided unknowingly at the onset of the war to commit suicide.

3. The narrow-mindedness and strategic blindness of Robert E. Lee. He never understood the absolute importance of the West and so allowed Grant to sweep all before him and cut the Confederacy in two by 1863.

4. The low-quality generals appointed by Davis to defend the West. Losers every one.

5. The necessity of the South to achieve diplomatic recognition by either France or England.

6. The South’s reliance on a one-crop economy to fight a modern war.

7. Lee’s decision to invade the North (1862 and 1863) led to defeat and the near-destruction of his armies.

8. The South lacked generals who could operate on a strategic level. The North had Sherman, Grant, Sheridan and Thomas.

9. Sherman’s invasion of the South (1864 – 1865) absolutely destroyed its ability to defend itself and feed itself, and cut the South into 3 parts.

10. The brilliance and strategic understanding of Lincoln.

11. The Emancipation Proclamation (1863).

12. Lee’s insistence in the primacy of the Virginia theater of operations over the rest of the Confederacy. This forced him into a sanguinary war of attrition that the the South could not win.

Northern resources compared with Southern resources actually mattered very little. History is full of examples of smaller nations defeating vaster larger ones. The Northern blockade hardly made a difference until late 1863 when the South had already suffered tremendous defeats at Vicksburg and Gettysburg (1863). The South was extremely effective at “blockade running” and commerce raiding. The CSS Alabama was a special annoyance until its sinking in 1864. The war at sea really was just a side-show and had very little strategic importance.

After July 1863 it was obvious to all that the war was unwinnable by the South. But it still fought on until its extinction. Heroic, yes—but astoundingly stupid and suicidal.

A rational and public discussion of what is known as the “JQ”—the Jewish Question—is no longer possible in the US and has not been for half a century or more. It is said that to know who controls a nation you must know whom you cannot criticize. No public man can criticize sodomites, for example. Such a man will be subject to the “two minutes of hate” routine and cast into the void. As well, no public man can criticize the following:

1. Israel. All public men must solemnly swear to support Israel. DeSantis made his public obeisance a few weeks ago, and Trump spent his entire time in the White House doing so. The usual canards are trotted out, the most common being “Israel is our ally.” That statement would be surprising to those on board the USS Liberty.

2. The Holocaust. To merely bring up the issue is to ruin your reputation, your employment, to be called “a Holocaust denier” and be cast into the void. The subject is off-limits. So is any criticism of the Anti-Defamation League.

3. Jews. One must not for any reason mention the race of anyone who is Jewish. One must never mention the race of, for example: Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, the Sulzbergers, the Kagan Clan, Anthony Blinken, Victoria Nuland, Harvey Weinstein, Jeffrey Epstein, Bernie Madoff, the Lehman Brothers, Henry Kissinger, Chuck Schumer, Volodymyr Zelenskyy—and so on. To do so is to be labelled an “antisemite” and to be cast into the void.

Even to ask the question of why such things cannot and must not be criticized is to open yourself to slander, opprobrium and financial ruin. And I know perfectly well that merely by asking these questions I will be labeled an “antisemite”. And speaking of which…

 The Anti-Defamation League claims that “antisemitism is the oldest known virus to infest the human soul.” Wrong again. Pride is. Ask Nimrod.

4. To be an antisemite has come to mean “someone who dislikes Jews or dislikes Israel”. To even prefer the US over Israel is treated as almost treasonous. It is as I write morphing into “someone who is against the war in Ukraine”. This is because the president of Ukraine is Jewish, and the movers and shakers behind the war there are Jewish neo-cons: the Kagans, Bill Kristol and Victoria Nuland. These same neo-cons also supported America’s war in Iraq. Who benefitted by this war? Not the Americans. Not the Iraqis. Then who?

5. What we call “the Jews”—actually the Hebrews—only appeared after 2000 years of History had passed. Sumer (4000 – 2000 BC) had no knowledge of Jews, as they did not yet exist. Assyria (2025 – 609 BC) dealt harshly with the Jews, but the Assyrians dealt harshly with everyone. The Neo-Babylonians (626 – 539 BC) under Nebuchadnezzar II—he of Hanging Gardens fame—destroyed the last Jewish political entity of the Jews, Judah (587 BC), leaving only a remnant to survive in their homeland and carrying the rest to Babylon. Daniel was among them. Cyrus the Great of Persia (600 – 530 BC)—called an “Annointed One”, that is, a “Christ”, in the Old Testament—freed the Jews from this “Babylonian Captivity” and allowed them back into their homeland.

6. It was the Romans under Titus (r. 79 – 81) and Hadrian (r. 117 – 138) who so completely destroyed the Jewish presence in the Middle East that they had no political structure there until 1947 when Israel was re-founded. The Romans were never “antisemitic”. What they did to the Jews is what they did to countless other peoples. How did the Carthaginians fare? The Greeks? The Gauls? In fact, after Caesar’s assassination (44 BC) the Jews of Rome lamented his death, remained three days at the place of his funeral, and “intoned their ancient funeral chants”. If the Romans were “antisemitic”, that would have been news to the Roman Emperor Titus, whose lover, Berenice, was a Jewess.

7. When one speaks of “the Jews” it must be asked: “Which Jews?” Jesus referred to the ruling Jewish elite of his day—the Pharisees, equivalent to the “cosmopolitan Jews” of our time—as “whitewashed tombs”, “hypocrites”, “broods of scorpions” and “sons of the Devil”. See what happens if you speak of Jews today as Jesus spoke of their elite in His day. Good luck.

8. No historian I know of has really dealt with this question: “Why were the Jews after their two Diasporas during the Roman Empire expelled from every country in which they had settled?” Why indeed. The usual reason is that the Jews dressed funny and spoke a funny language. Yet such a fate has never come down upon any other people. Was there something in their character that caused other peoples to hate them? If so, what was it? If not, then please explain the causes.

9. Spain expelled her Jews in 1492. All historians I have ever read lamented this fact and claimed that it led to an almost suicidal economic and cultural crisis for Spain. But in the next breath these same historians praise Spain’s “Siglo de Oro”, her “Golden Century” (1492 – 1650), when Spain’s political, cultural and military power reached their zenith, creating the largest empire in History. This was the age of the Escorial, of El Greco, of Cervantes, of Lope de Vega, of Velázquez. Did the expulsion of the Jews allow for the Siglo de Oro? Did Ferdinand and Isabella know something about the Jews that we do not? Why in fact were they expelled? Am I “antisemitic” because I ask these questions?

10. Why is it “antisemitic” to boycott Israel, but not “anti-Cuban” to boycott Cuba?

11. It is uncontestable that Jews have become members of the financial, intellectual, governmental and artistic elite of America. Their numbers among our ruling class represent a percentage far surpassing the percentage of Jews in the nation. The Jewish elite in fact boasts about this. Does this mean that “Jews control the US”? If so, then is this a good thing or a bad thing? Or does it not matter at all?

13. “Antisemitic” has become, like “racist”, little more than slander against one’s opponent. To call a man “antisemitic” can mean you just don’t like him, though it can take on a more sinister meaning of “anti-American”, as if support for Israel is the sine qua non of being a true and loyal American. (This idea has spread to the Evangelical community, many members of which have adopted support for Israel and the Jews as part and parcel of true Christianity.) But the term is only used against public men, as it has no power in normal society—unlike “racist”, which does. Both terms are meant to shut people up. Both terms work as they are meant to.

14. Speaking of the Evangelicals: Most of them refer to their religion as “Judeo-Christianity”. There is of course no such religion except in their own minds and in the mind of Ben Shapiro. Judaism is a dead religion, as dead as Dillinger, and has been for 2400 years. If Judaism is right, then Christianity is wrong. Calling Christianity by the invented term “Judeo-Christianity” is like sewing a corpse onto a living man.

Oy vey!