Writing History Books Without History

[Draggingtree]

Writing History Books Without History

By Paul H. YarbroughSeptember 17, 2021

The numerous declarations among “right-wing” websites, blogs, and print publications usually present a conundrum of any given thoughts among them. It is like a string of firecrackers exploding. They are necessarily lighted in sequence but seem to sound in explosive randomness.

Afghanistan a catastrophe? Of, course. What do you expect? That is if you are a conservative, what do you expect? That is if you are a Jeffersonian republican, which is what a conservative is. It is not Fox News or Prager U. or Mark Levin screaming “You stupid idiot!.” Nor is it any of those pseudo-enlightened anti-Southern beeswax babblers of childish historical elaborations that are publicized as “on the right.”

But being “right-wing” doesn’t necessarily mean being right. It just means being not “left.”

Jefferson advised the United States to seek the friendship of all nations but enter into “entangling alliances” with none.

Even before Jefferson, in his farewell address, George Washington had admonished the republic to beware of “entangling alliances.”

The “anti-Southern” line above is obligatory herein simply because the South always tried to maintain the republic and the North wanted to mutate Jeffersonianism into the Hamiltonian-Lincolnian (Fox News) national state painted as a (ghastly) democracy. The “Southern line” line itself divides true conservatives from the rest of the political pact—left, right or other. This Hamiltonian-Lincolnian mystique is (and always has been) the Republican party; NOT Jeffersonianism.

Historically it certainly isn’t the histrionic grift of the likes of Victor Davis Hanson or Newt Gingrich. Often the two sound as if their primary source is Brian Kilmeade or Sean Hannity (more comedic less grift). Listening to Davis and Gingrich, petty pirates of history is like having poison Ivy on the brain.