Posts Tagged ‘slavery’

Lincoln and Douglas at Freeport, Illinois

By John Ruberry

While we’re not–yet–at the French Revolution level of destroying then recreating society, the Angry Left is focused on defacing and toppling statues of men deemed racist. Or by having sympathetic politicians remove them, such as what happened last week with Jefferson Davis’ statue at the Kentucky state capitol. So far women in bronze and marble, to my knowledge, have been spared, but one of Illinois’ representatives at National Statuary Hall at the US Capitol just might be inflicted with induced restless legs syndrome. I’ll get to her later.

Monuments of Confederate generals and of course Jefferson Davis have been the hit the hardest by the vandals. But the rage is now world wide. Winston Churchill’s statue at Parliament Square in London had “was a racist” spray painted on its pedestal. There’s an Abraham Lincoln statue there too, Black Lives Matter activists defaced that one. Up in Scotland, a statue of medieval monarch Robert the Bruce, whose views on black people are unknown, had “BLM” and “was a racist king” spray painted on it.

Because I’m from Illinois, I’d like to zoom in on my state. Let’s return to Lincoln. While Honest Abe was always anti-slavery, his views on black people prior to the Civil War would be classified as racist today. Lincoln’s stance on slavery in the 1860 election was to confine it to states where it already existed. By 1863 he was an abolitionist, at least in areas held by Confederate forces. Two years later the Great Emancipator enthusiastically backed the 13th Amendment that finally ended slavery in America. Oh, Lincoln saved the union too. That’s why he is considered the United States’ greatest president by most historians.

Lincoln gained national prominence in 1858 during his campaign for the US Senate against Stephen A. Douglas. Other than his connection to Lincoln, Douglas, “the Little Giant,” is largely forgotten now. His Kansas-Nebraska Act, which eliminated the Missouri Compromise in determining which states would be slave or free, ignited Bleeding Kansas, a brutal warmup to the Civil War. But Douglas was a political dynamo in the 1850s and he was the nominee for president for the northern Democrats in 1860.

Douglas and Lincoln agreed to a series of seven debates throughout Illinois during the 1858 campaign, the famous, or make that formerly famous, Lincoln-Douglas Debates. Late in the 20th century bronze statues of both men were placed at each of those sites.

Hmmm.

Douglas’ views on slavery were purposely murky, he believed in “popular sovereignty,” that is the voters, who comprised only of white males in the 19th century, should decide where slavery should exist. The Little Giant owned a plantation in Mississippi with slaves. Well, not exactly, but it was in his wife’s name.

How long will it be before those Douglas statues in Illinois will be vandalized? When will the call for their removal begin? And those seven plazas with Lincoln and Douglas will look unbalanced with just one man. Will Lincoln, who at one time of course was a racist, albeit most whites were bigots in the 1800s, get yanked too from those spots too?

Nancy Pelosi is calling for the removal of eleven statues honoring Confederates at Statuary Hall. Each state gets two statues, some of these honorees are well-known, Andrew Jackson represents Tennessee, George Washington is one of Virginia’s statues. Both men of course owned slaves. Some of the honorees are virtually unknown. Frances Willard, the longtime president of the Women’s Christian Temperance Union, a group that assisted in establishing Prohibition in America, represents Illinois in the hall. Like Douglas, she was a big deal in her day. But Willard held racist views and she feuded with African American civil rights leader Ida B. Wells.

When you remove the Confederates, the slave holders, and the racists, how many statues will be left in Statuary Hall?

How many statues in front of libraries, village squares, or county courthouses will be removed?

Where does is it all end?

And if all of the statues are gone, then what?

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

Like always.

Title of the Project is wrong, not to mention the Premise 

by baldilocks

From Lyman Stone at the Federalist on New York Times 1619 Project.

1619 is commonly cited as the date slavery first arrived in “America.” No matter that historians mostly consider the 1619 date a red herring. Enslaved people were working in English Bermuda in 1616. Spanish colonies and forts in today’s Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina had enslaved Africans throughout the mid-to-late 1500s: in fact, a slave rebellion in 1526 helped end the Spanish attempt at settling South Carolina.

The presence of Spanish power continued to inhibit English settlement of the deep south basically until the Revolutionary War. In some sense, the 1526 San Miguel de Guadeloupe rebellion cleared the way for English settlement of South Carolina.

(…)

But before 1526, slavery was already ongoing in the eventual United States. The earliest slave society in our present country, and our most recent slavery society, was in Puerto Rico. The island’s Spanish overlords were enslaving the Taino natives by 1500. By 1513, the Taino population had shrunk dramatically due to brutal violence and disease. Thus, Spain brought the first African slaves to Puerto Rico.

Chattel slavery in Puerto Rico continued, despite many “Royal Graces” easing life for free blacks and sometimes promising eventual emancipation, until 1873. Even then, slaves had to buy their own liberty. It’s not clear when the last slave was free in Puerto Rico, but it would still have been a fresh memory in 1898 when the United States gained control from Spain.

Slavery in America did not begin in 1619. It began in 1513. Any argument for a 1619 date implicitly suggests that the American project is an inherently Anglo project: that other regions, like Texas, California, Louisiana, and Puerto Rico, have subordinate histories that aren’t really, truly, equal as American origin stories.

But even if the title were correct, what’s the true propose of this project? Stone gives the answer earlier in the piece.

It isn’t mostly about helping Americans understand the role played by plantation agriculture in American history. It’s mostly about convincing Americans that “America” and “slavery” are essentially synonyms.

Previously, I’ve discussed the Civil War and whether (or not) present-day black Americans should be grateful to our country and to those who fought on the Union side. A lot of people didn’t like my conclusion.

True freedom fighters have the clean conscious of God. May that be enough for them.

And at the same time, however, this country has no need to pay for its past sins. This very same Civil War was America’s trial by fire, its conviction, and its sentence — something that American leaders chose.

But, it seems as if all too many are intent on keeping everyone angry about hardships none of them had to bear. All the New York Times want to do is make itself the drum major of the anger and vengeance parade.

And what if America and slavery are synonymous? What then? Oh, yes, reparations.

Reparations, just like every other government program, will become just another cistern for politicians to wet their beaks. How do you think they all get rich?

Because that’s the true purpose of all this — to create another means for our money to become theirs.

By the way, what about those Spaniards?

UPDATE: For some strange reason, people seem to think I’m unaware of the world history of slavery. I am not.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng has been blogging since 2003 as baldilocks. Her older blog is here.  She published her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game in 2012.

Follow Juliette on FacebookTwitterMeWePatreon and Social Quodverum.

Hit Da Tech Guy Blog’s Tip Jar !

Or hit Juliette’s!

Update (DTG) Instalanche, thanks Glenn the move to the new host is progressing slowly thanks to database issues so we are posting both here at the backup site and at the current site. So keep and eye both here and at DaTechguyblog.com until the move is finished. Check out our video and written review of the new Monopoly Socialism game here. and if you want to help pay the writers like Juliette you can hit Datipjar

Abortion is the third pillar of the three great American evils that the democratic party has supported. The first was Slavery, the second was Jim Crow and the third is Abortion (Ironically all three target blacks and/or minorities). The day will come when people shake their heads wondering what folks were thinking for abortion in the same way they do on the others.

DaTechGuy We’re Fighting the Bloody Lot 1/20/2011

On this day of the annual Right to life march I hit a nerve with one of my liberal friends on twitter.

I was hitting Wendy Davis on her false narrative and pointed out that her claim to fame is supporting late-term abortion.  Once I tweeted that the entire thread became about abortion where I was fighting a lone pro-life battle (perhaps all my friends are in DC marching).

During the debate a woman scoffed at my dismissal of “choice” saying I would never have to make that “choice” when I answered

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsThat struck a nerve and brought an instant reaction from a regular liberal member of my Magnificent Panel Maxine Baptise:

Maxine’s offense not withstanding I’ve been equating Abortion & Slavery for a long time. So for the sake of those who do not understand the argument let me make it as plain as possible. In order to morally justify slavery it is necessary to do one or more of the following:

1. Deny the Humanity of the slave:

Marshal: They’re mutants! Mutts! They’re diseased! To be wiped off the face of the planet!

Doctor Who The Mutants 1972

If a Slave is not human then you are not enslaving a human being so it doesn’t matter if you own a slave or how you treat one.

1a. Admit the humanity of the slave but maintain it is inferior.

Col Montgomery:  Look around. You really think anybody’s gonna put these boys into real combat? Do you? They’re little children, for God’s sake. They’re little monkey children.

Glory 1989

If you can’t deny the actual humanity of a slave you can instead insist that the slave is a lower form of life, Alexander Stephens (D-GA) famously made that case in the what has been called the cornerstone speech:

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition.

Hey slavery is OK these people are an inferior race.

2. Emphasize the slave as property not as a person.

Calvin Candie:Seeing as you won’t pay a penny for this pickaninny here, you won’t mind me handling this nigger here any way I see fit? Django:He’s your nigger.

Django unchained 2012

If you can’t manage to deny the humanity of the slave the next step is to emphasize the slave as property. After all the slave is owned by someone else and you have no business telling someone what to do with their own property.

3.  Insist that the alternative is worse:

Captain Kirk: If we win, the Enterprise and its crew leaves here in safety. Further more, all the thralls on the planet must be freed.
Provider Two: Anarchy. They would starve.

Star Trek The Gamesters of Triskelion 1968

Haggis: I hear they’re deserting ten at a time.
Col Shaw:
Oh, you’re misinformed. We haven’t had a single incident.
Kendrick: I figure the nigs never had it so good. Three square a day, a root over their heads.

Glory 1989

If you can’t make the humanity or the property argument then you can make the “they’re better off” under slavery after all how do you expect these people to feed themselves or clothe themselves, in fact you’re doing a public service by providing for those poor innocent soles.  Much better to leave them where they were. And if all else fails and you can’t find a moral justification for slavery you can find one to ignore it…

4.  Maintain it’s none of our business:

Cetshayo:  Do I go to the country of the white man and tell him to change his laws and customs?

Zulu Dawn 1979

I remember (although I can’t for the life of me find the quote) reading of a contemporary Englishman during the time of the civil war not understanding why Americans would bother to fight a war because one side wants to hire their servants by the other while the other chooses to hire them for life.  What business is it if the Barbary Pirates, or the Romans, or the British or the Spanish or the Americans or anyone else choose to hold slaves?  Live and let live you mind your business and I’ll mind mine if we do that we’ll all get along better.  It’s not out business.

5.  Insist It’s settled law

The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person. US Constitution Article 1 Section 9 No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.

US Constitution Article 4 Section 2 (cancelled by 13 Amendment)

The US constitution specifically allowed slavery and the importation of slaves until 1808. State Constitutions allowed it and it’s been the law of the land since those states were colonies. It’s one thing to forbid slavery in areas where it didn’t exist before but this is settled law and we’ve better off letting it be.

6.  And finally maintain we can’t really do anything about it anyways

Stephen: You can’t destroy Candieland! we’ve been here. There’s always going to be a Candieland!

Django Unchained 2012

Even if you don’t like slavery w hat do you expect us to do?   Raise millions of troops and fight a war costing hundreds of thousands of lives and hundreds of millions of dollars of property to end it? Even people who had no interest in slavery would fight against us?

Early in the conflict, he used to say, a squad of Union soldiers closed in on a ragged Johnny Reb. Figuring that he did not own slaves, nor had much interest in the constitutional question of secession, they asked him: “What are you fighting for, anyhow?” The Confederate replied: “I’m fighting because you’re down here.”

The Guardian June 5th 2005 Obit for Shelby Foote

Fight a way to end slavery, that’s just crazy religious extremist talk!

*********************************************************************************

If those arguments seems familiar that’s because you have been hearing then for 40+ years on the subject of Abortion.

1.  Abortion doesn’t kill a person

The fetus is biologically human only in the sense that any part of a human body is human: every cell carries the full genetic code. A severed hand is genetically human as well but we don’t call it a person.” Virginia Ramey Mollenkott

1a. The Unborn are humans but not “people”

  2.  My Body my choice

  3.  Do you want more poor children in the world?

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js4.  Don’t want an abortion?  Don’t have one.


5 & 6  Roe v wade is settled law and it’s a waste of time and resources to fight abortion.

**********************************

I want to close with one more tweet from today…

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

I suspect this tweet from the Pope will not get a whole lot of play today from the media that has lionized him.

…and a thought from 2009

 slavery was accepted as a fact of life for ten thousand years until a British Christian Named William Wilberforce pushed a government tirelessly. And this was in a society that harbored contempt and ridicule and stigmatization for religious enthusiasm. The elites or “polite society” considered it a transgression to believe and practice

Slavery has existed as long as human history.  I suspect no person alive today can fail to find a slave in their ancestry if they go back far enough.  It took the might of the Royal Navy to end the slave trade in the 1800’s and while slavery still exists in the world, particularly and ironically in Africa the reason why it is a hidden trade rather than an open one was due to the efforts of Christians like Wilberforce who withstood the same barbs that Christians who oppose abortion do today.

Update: Just heard on EWTN Everyone who was for Slavery was free, everyone who is for abortion is alive.

Heather Robinson of Big Peace has a new interview with former slave and foe of Jihad Simon Deng:

Deng, now a human rights activist whose historic 300-mile “Freedom Walk” in the spring of 2006 gained him an audience with former President George W. Bush, discusses his escape from slavery; and efforts he and other South Sudanese Christians made during the 1990’s to raise awareness about the threat of terrorism emanating from Sudan. In a segment to appear tomorrow, Deng will discuss the plight of Christian and animist South Sudanese today; the condition of South Sudanese Christians in Israel; and his high hopes for South Sudanese independence.

I met Simon Deng during CPAC last year. and he is an inspiration, here is my interview with him along with Barbara Espinosa (who will be my guest on DaTechGuy on DaRadio this weekend at 9 p.m. EST)

Deng is an international treasure, don’t miss this interview.