Anarchist and History

By now we have all witnessed the destruction of art and history in New Orleans. The Battle of Liberty Place monument, the Jefferson Davis statue, the General P.G.T. Beauregard statue and General Lee are now long gone. Well, they’re are not long gone, word is that they are sitting in a city scrapyard.  The point is , in New Orleans the War of Northern Aggression apparently never happened, and neither did Reconstruction.

Many reasons have been listed for the removal of Confederate monuments, most mention “racism” in some shape or form often with the word “terrorists” thrown at our Confederate ancestors for good measure. If the accusations and terminology appear inflammatory it’s because they are.

Inflammatory people like using inflammatory language for inflammatory causes and few groups are more inflammatory than those who call themselves “Antifa” (the name stands for anti-fascists”).

Antifa likes to accuse everyone that they disagree with of being Nazis. The fact that they are targeting monuments to Confederate history is no surprise. Most people that believe in the preservation of American history (politically-incorrect or not) are self described conservatives and tended to vote for Donald Trump for President of the United States last year.

Antifa wants to burn everything down, and disrupt the day to day lives of millions of Americans, because that is their plan and it has been all along. The February 2, 2017 issue of the New York Times reported:

” With far-right groups edging into the mainstream with the rise of President Trump, self-described anti-fascists and anarchists are vowing to confront them at every turn, and by any means necessary — including violence.”

So it’s no surprise that they turn up in New Orleans demanding the removal of Confederate monuments and attacking those who stood in their defense in the days prior to their removal.  

It is also no surprise that are continuing their attempted “purge” of everything Confederate, in fact, they have already set their sites on St. Louis, Missouri. The May 24, 2017 issue of New Orleans’ Times- Picayune reported that Tashaura Jones, Treasurer of the City of St. Louis, Missouri “caught the spirit” from New Orleans and has started a “Go Fund Me” page to raise money to do it.

This news was later reported by television station KMOV in St. Louis and naturally, people reacted. Among those who showed up were people who supported the monument, and of course, Antifa who opposed it. 

Though the stand off was heated at times no violence occurred. The May 24, 2017 St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported :

“Those who want the monument to come down say it symbolizes hatred and a hurtful past they want removed. Many called those in favor of the relic white supremacists and Nazis. Some of them had “Black Lives Matter” signs.”

KMOV television in St. Louis also covered the action. Mixed into the crowd of demonstrators were numerous Antifa protesters, face covered with bandannas and many wearing patches with the anarchy symbol on their clothing.  

KMOV also reported that during the night the protesters returned to spray paint graffiti  on the monument. According to one protester who supported the monument’s removal:

“What this is, you see a man going off to war,” said a protester describing the monument as he was debating supporters. “In reality what he was doing was fighting to keep black families in chains.”

I could give numerous examples of just how wrong that statement is but would it really do any good to those who want the monument down? Nope and here’s why; this group that calls themselves “Antifa”, these proud “anarchists” are the most organized bunch of anarchist I think I’ve ever seen.

The whole meaning behind the term anarchy is that there are no rules. Do you find it ironic that a group that continually insinuates that Confederate monuments are tributes to hood wearing Klan members, encourage anonymity among it’s members by covering their faces?

Do anarchists usually come with instruction manuals? Antifa does. Here is the section that encourages members not to have a “public” face.

“One extreme option is to function as a group but not give yourself a name, and not tell fellow activists what you are doing. Once you have a name, fascists will try to figure out “who is in the group.” Not having a public face makes your actions even more anonymous. If people are being targeted, for example after a conflict with fascists, a publicly known group will draw attention first. If there is no public presence, or no formalized organization with a name, this will complicate the process of identification and retaliation.”

There are many rumors that billionaire George Soros provides major funding to the Antifa organizations. This too is…another irony. Antifa, a group of anarchists devoted to fighting facism, that is well organized, comes with a strict set of rules, is funded by… a fascist.

George Soros came from a Jewish family and was a Nazi collaborator. According to The Daily Wire:

“Soros comes from an anti-Semitic Jewish family and was a Nazi collaborator. “My mother was quite anti-Semitic, and ashamed of being Jewish,” Soros said in an interview with The New Yorker. “Given the culture in which one lived, being Jewish was a clear-cut stigma, disadvantage, a handicap-and, therefore, there was always the desire to transcend it, to escape it.”

Soros later said in the interview that he did not feel any remorse “about confiscating property from Jews as a teenager.”

Shadow Proof . Com carries an article from an individual who was hired by George Soros. The individual stated:

“Weeks into the presidency of a buffoonish but vicious tyrant, I feel compelled to take off my black bandanna, hooded sweatshirt, and kick off my steel-toed boots to reveal myself to the people. This is especially for those who believe the United States is faced with an uprising led by professional anarchists and paid protesters.

They are right. In this communique, I will unmask myself, and thus, in doing so, there will be truth.

I can say they are correct because I was hired by New York Hedge Fund manager and elite liberal sugar daddy George Soros to personally chair an anarcho-commission of agitators. We were asked to treat our work like that of a corporation. The more franchises we could start in cities across America, the more likely we would be able to tear down Donald Trump.”

So how is all of this related to Confederate monuments?

It is only related to Confederate monuments in a sense that it is in the bigger picture to disrupt America by any means possible. 

Trump was not supposed to win the presidency. He wasn’t and isn’t a globalist ( though he is surrounded by them). The quickest way to extinguish the torch of liberty, self-government and rebellious spirit that this country was founded upon is to erase every symbol and every monument that reminds people of these ideals.

Disregard all of the rhetoric about slavery, white supremacy and divisiveness. That’s not why Missourians fought for the Confederacy.  Missourians joined her sister Southern states after they witnessed their native sons (and women and children) get gunned down in the streets of St. Louis by German immigrants on May 10th, 1861.

-Clint Lacy

Click Here to Order “Blood in the Ozarks: Union War Crimes Against Southern Sympathizers and Civilians in Occupied Missouri”



Colonel W.H. Righter

                righter_letter  Colonel W. H. Righter plays a prominent role in “Blood in the Ozarks”.  He is mentioned in the two documents Jerry Ponder sent me in 2005, which he found in the early 1990’s during a library consolidation in Doniphan, Ripley County, Missouri.

Both of these documents mention The Wilson Massacre (which occurred on December 25, 1863 in Ripley County , Missouri. Both of these documents also mention Colonel Righter, stating that he was captured with General M. Jeff Thompson in Pocahontas , Arkansas in August, 1863.

Those who claim the massacre never happened also state that Righter was not a colonel, despite the fact that Mr. Ponder was able to get the  Veterans Administration to provide him with a military headstone as well as the fact that the VA said they had no reason to doubt the information that was provided by Ponder to get the headstone.

I would like to share a few items that did not make it into the book before publication . The first is a letter written by Righter to the St. Louis Republican.

In the letter Righter states that he received the Republican until September, 1863 when he returned to St. Louis. This fits the time-frame that the documents Ponder sent to me of when Righter was captured and sent to St. Louis at which time he was given the Oath of Allegiance and gave his word he would not enter the war again. There are other archives which also lend credibility to Righter’s service to the South.

A clip from the Ripley County Democrat newspaper states that all who are going to the Confederate Veteran’s Reunion in Little Rock , Arkansas, should contact “Colonel Righter”.

Another May, 1911 newspaper story includes Righter in a list of members from the Colonel Hedgepeth Confederate Veterans Camp who were attending the reunion.

There can be no doubt given the time-frame of when Righter went to St. Louis in 1863 and it can be no coincidence that Righter did not only attend the Confederate Veterans Reunion in Little Rock, Arkansas,1911, but was also the person to contact for Ripley County for those planning to attend.



Blood_in_the_Ozarks_CoverI thought I would post the foreword to “Blood in the Ozarks” for the new book website. It was an honor to receive such kind words from Professor Goodwin!- CL


There is probably nothing in more short supply today than objective history—and the shortage grows daily. This is not only a sad, but a dangerous situation. Witness the recent furor over the battle flag of the Confederacy, now extended to monuments and even names connected to Southern history regarding the War Between the States. Lunacy and cowardice prevail, due in large part to decades of the teaching of false history. The urgent need for works of objectivity and TRUTH, in dire shortage for decades, has exploded of late.

The timing of the appearance of this book—Blood in the Ozarks—is certainly fortuitous.
My final year of teaching American history on the college level was 2002. Had Clint Lacy’s book been available at that time, I would have made his book required reading for my students. It is that valuable a source in the service of TRUTH regarding the fratricidal
conflict erroneously called the American “Civil War.”

During my years as an instructor, I often assigned articles from THE BARNES REVIEW (TBR) history magazine in Washington, D.C., to my students, and required them to write a response paper about those articles. (Note that TBR is one of the very few politically
incorrect (historically objective) magazines being published in America today.) I asked for my students’ opinions on what they had read, NOT a report on what the authors of the articles said.

And I assured them that their grade on the paper would NOT in any way be based on whether they agreed or disagreed with the TBR article. I was looking for whether or not they had understood the gist of what the author was trying to convey.

I can assure you that reading those responses was the most pleasurable part of my job as an instructor. It seems I had prompted many of them to THINK—which is the duty of any teacher worth his or her salt.

Most of the responses were favorable to the articles, and I was asked often, “Why wasn’t I taught this in high school?” But one student—a male of 35 years old, an ex-military man from Ohio, responded, “This is Rebel propaganda. The South got what it damned-well deserved!”

As unfortunate as his words were, I had to accept that he was only regurgitating what he had been taught years ago regarding that conflict—that the North was the righteous defender of the poor Black people and was fighting to end the evil institution of
slavery, and the Confederates were racists fighting to keep those Black people in chains. His response was a perfect example of the results of teaching FALSE history. His mind was not the least bit open to any contrary information, no matter how well-documented.
And those lies have been used to beat Whites, in particular, over the head for decades.

But in this book, Clint Lacy describes the assault on his and other historians’ research and conclusions by two adversaries much like the Ohio student I described. Kirby Ross and Ray Burson did their best to deny the occurrence that is the focal point of Lacy’s book—the Christmas Day 1863 massacre at Pulliam’s Farm in Ripley County, Missouri, that included the murder of women, children and the elderly. Ross and Burson insist that a “massacre”
did not occur, that Northern troops would never have perpetrated such, and that only Confederate military men were attacked and subdued. They have denigrated the research and findings of those who have taken issue with the supporters of the Union, and, in
typical fashion, accuse the South of atrocities. But we are well aware that the victors write the history, and contrary viewpoints are often ignored or buried. Our job as historians is to dig into and expose just WHY there is such animosity to those who take a challenging
view. And therein lies the ongoing battle between bias, subjectivity and objectivity in the writing of history.

As an instructor, I had to use the required text, These United States—the Questions of Our Past, by Irwin Unger. The part of that text regarding the War Between the States, and the ensuing period of “Reconstruction,” was in no way objective. I discovered that Unger was a product of New York’s educational system. And, like most people, his bias toward the Union was clearly evident. One expects that from Joe Citizen—but NOT from one whose
profession as an historian demands as much objectivity as possible. In all fairness, I have to say that if I had to author a history of that conflict, it would be a challenge to keep my own bias toward the South in check, but I like to think I would be as fair as possible. I
did challenge the text often in class, offering another perspective. Had the administration known that my Confederate battle flag often flew proudly from the porch of my apartment, I doubt I would have lasted until my popsicle melted!

At any rate, this book made me think about examples of false history and why it has revailed, as well as the hypocrisy of those who defend such lies. When Oliver Stone announced he was making a blockbuster film about the JFK assassination based on Jim
Garrison’s book in the early 1990s, my how the defenders of the Establishment myth flew into a rage, denouncing the project and declaring that it would be “teaching FALSE history to the American People!”  I didn’t know whether to laugh or barf. The teaching of false history also pervades so many other pivotal events—the Pearl Harbor attack, the Gulf of Tonkin incident that triggered U.S. involvement in Vietnam, the USS Liberty tragedy, political assassinations and, yes, the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on America. One
comes to realize that the teaching of false history is not happenstance. There is a method to the madness. Those who attack the happenstance. There is a method to the madness. Those who attack the messenger, so to speak, are leading a crusade—NOT for historical
TRUTH or accuracy, but to promote continued ignorance and, more importantly, to keep the lies in place to maintain CONTROL of the people. Part of their agenda is to keep us divided and at each other’s throat, that they might continue their nefarious agenda unmolested. The controllers MUST maintain their GUILT and control the BLAME game, so that information such as the deliberate starvation policy by Union forces against Southern civilians, and massacres such as happened Christmas Day, 1863, remain buried—along with countless other examples of savagery directed by Gen. William T. Sherman and other Union commanders against helpless civilians. After all, it would really do damage to their fairy tale of “Union troops are the good guys, Confederates are the evil ones.”

If we are ever to regain our sovereignty as individuals and as States and a Nation, straightening the historical record is a must. The War Between the States is a key area needing attention.

The author of this book has done an excellent job of exposing the fairy tales and making his own case. His “Summary” is a courtroom worthy conclusion of the validity of his thesis—that Yankee troops did indeed engage in barbaric behavior regarding the helpless.

The appendix makes for fascinating reading as well, and contains valuable illustrations.
I could not help but think of the movie The Outlaw Josey Wales while reading Blood in the Ozarks. The author has taken a stand for truth and justice in this expression of his research.

Well done! May more follow his example.
Autumn 2015

A native-born Texan, Revisionist RAY GOODWIN is a retired instructor of American history on the college level in Victoria, Texas. Ray has given multiple addresses to the Sons of Confederate Veterans organizations in San Antonio, Austin, Corpus Christi and Victoria. He has had many articles published over the years.

CLICK HERE to order your copy of “Blood in the Ozarks” online.

Order By Phone: 1-888-699-6397

Order by U.S. Mail: $17 ( plus $4 Shipping and Handling)

Poisoned Pen Publishing House, P.O. Box 2770,
Stafford, VA 22555. Cash, U.S. check or money order drawn on U.S. banks
only. Outside the U.S. add $24 per book S&H.