I saw a recent commentary over the 4th that is not in history books. Jefferson was in a financial bind and because of Virginia law could not free his slaves. History has a filter and does not provide the rest of the story.
It is correct that Virginia law at that time did not permit the freeing of enslaved people. In addition, when the Declaration was written and proclaimed, we were still very much at war. In Virginia, many plantation owners had their homes burned down by British soldiers, particularly under Banastre Tarleton. Men who were active in the American government (2nd Continental Congress at the time of the Declaration) or in state level government) at times had to relocate or flee to avoid capture by the British. Soldiers might have been taken prisoner, but those in the government were in danger of execution for treason if captured. The war itself took up all their energy, and there was no time to consider plans for educating and providing paying jobs if slaves would have been freed. In those times, there was a lot of chaos, poverty, and hunger. The British would raid farms and steal cattle and every kind of food to feed their troops who were far from home. Washington's men also needed to eat, and would have to rely on local farmers also though Washington said they must pay for what they took in fairness to fellow Americans and to maintain their loyalty - but Congress had no power to tax and funds were limited - and colonial money was mostly worthless. So even the farmers were hungry. So, during these chaotic times most people suffered in some way, and there were not "paying jobs" such as we know today at that time - money worthless, farmers away at war. In some cases, enslaved men were offered freedom if they served in the military, offered by British and by Americans, but there was no real ability to formulate a humanitarian plan for the orderly freeing of all enslaved people at that time. The war needed to be won, or most leaders would have been executed, and the people as a whole would have been little more than slaves. In Boston, prior to the outbreak of the war, people were forced to have British army officers housed in their own homes, and women were forced to cook and clean for military men, forced by law, by the Quartering Act. So, actually white people were slaves prior to the outbreak of the war, not only African Americans. A different kind of slavery to be sure, since white people in Boston technically owned their own homes and could carry on their own business, but if you were forced to give up your bedrooms to British military, forced to cook for them and do their laundry, while you slept on the kitchen floor like CInderella, surely that was a form of slavery. Most people today don't know enough history to have any idea what things were like at that time - we can imagine what we want and believe things should have been different without having any idea of the realities. The enslavement of Africans and African Americans was evil, it was an evil system, starting with Africans who sold members of other tribes to white men for transport to North American and the Caribbean, and continuing up until the Civil War. But I can't blame the "founding fathers" for a mess they inherited. George Washington is vilified by some as a slave owner, but he did give orders that families should not be broken up and sold apart, and he kept and provided for those too unwell or too old to continue working, with provisions made for their care to continue after his own death. While slaves could not have been freed under Virginia law at one time, it became possible later, and Washington did free his slaves and provide options and a transition plan to go into effect after his death. The realities of making a fair and workable plan involved more than we might imagine today, there is more to consider than I would try to enter into this textbox. People need to read beyond the high school textbooks or even college level textbooks and dig deeper, but too few have an interest to try to learn and understand history. Or they believe completely false things, like, university students who demanded that a statue of Lincoln be removed because he had been a slave owner (untrue and I hope many of us know).
There are many more slaves today here in the US and all over the world, today compared to the start of the Civil War. There are millions who are enslaved by human traffickers, and that does include very young children also. There are women, men and children enslaved for sex work and also for general labor. They are definitely slaves. Those forced to do sex work are forced to service many customers on a daily basis, and they have no say. In a research study on trafficking, through interviews with women who were trafficking survivors, it was learned that the majority had multiple forced abortions. In the study (by Lederer and Wetzel) one woman reported having had 17 abortions. To learn more about the trafficking of children, the movie "The Sound of Freedom" is out this week on limited release - it is not going to be shown at all theaters, and is probably going to have a limited number of days in theaters - though it has had huge success since opening on July 3, that perhaps it will stay around longer than originally planned - I understand it has been #1 this week. The movie is not depressing because it is based on a true story of children being rescued from traffickers in a sting operation, with two children who are especially featured in the movie ending up back home with their parents. So it is very hopeful and leaves with hope, though we have to be the hope for the modern day slaves. But today - it is much worse in so many ways than in earlier centuries. Greater numbers of slaves for sure, and all races and nationalities. With slavery in the US historically, there were many situations in which enslaved people were treated with extreme cruelty, and at the same time, other situations in which enslaved people apparently were fed and clothed adequately and treated reasonably well - though not to minimize the injustice of the lack of freedom, lack of opportunities, and sources of distress that historians would not always know. So, not intending to minimize that, and yet, it appears that most people who live in the situation of human trafficking today live in horrific circumstances, and their lifespan is shortened tremendously. Lederer & Wetzel (2014) examined this from a public health perspective and those who escaped trafficking had headaches and neurological conditions from the horrific abuse, but not only that - long, long lists of symptoms and health conditions that were directly caused by their horrifically abusive treatment during trafficking. Slavery, whether old or new, is a terrible evil, and it did not end with the Civil War. It's still with us in a different form. You can help to end the trafficking of children at our borders by signing a petition to support legislation proposed by Senator Marsha Blackburn - read about it here and sign if you wish: https://lifepetitions.com/petition/human-trafficking?utm_source=email_070523 and see the trailer for "The Sound of Freedom" and consider buying a ticket and seeing the movie this weekend while it is still around: https://www.angel.com/pay-it-forward/sound-of-freedom?utm_medium=direct&utm_source=angel-freedom&utm_campaign=sound-of-freedom-theatrical
Those who voted for Joe Biden and Democrats also support the criminals involved in human trafficking. Because the Congressional investigation reveals Biden family invests money in human trafficking, yet I don’t see any Biden’s supporters condemn his crimes at all.
Illiberals today have shamelessly turned themselves into cohorts of criminals of the worst kind. They even boast about what they have done.
In my comment, the legislation proposed by Senator Marsha Blackburn would require that all children who are being brought into the US illegally must be DNA tested. That is because if the children are being brought in by parents, there would be a DNA match, and if brought in by traffickers, unlikely to have a DNA match. Of note, the DNA testing was being done previously but under the BIden administration this was stopped because it was deemed unnecessary. Possibly it was not necessary because the Biden was making so much money off the traffickers? Wide open border, and all these unaccompanied minors, or rather, accompanied by cartel guys who bring them across and sell them. Blackburn's bill, by requiring the DNA tests on all children who enter illegally - not all children, but those entering illegally - would put a stop to most of the trafficking. It has been reported that about 30% of the children entering illegally are being trafficked. Remember all the criticism about children being separated from their "parents"? They were often being separated from their traffickers and kept safe until things could be sorted out. Anyway, yes, I recently became aware of Biden's involvement in trafficking. The US is one of the biggest trafficking destinations, and Mexico is reportedly the largest supplier at least to the US, and among the top suppliers globally. More can and should be done, but resuming DNA testing would be a good start.
I did see Sound of Freedom on July 3rd. It is now the top selling movie. Trafficking is now gaining more recognition while at the same time growing bigger. There will always be pedophiles, the evil. We need to make sure to severely limit or totally remove their supply.
There is no benefit whatsoever to comparing whether one form of slavery is worse than another. Each instance of it, in the past and today, is an affront to humanity. We need to get clear on that, and work to abolish and make amends for all forms of it. There is great reward in righting wrongs.
And, is growing...Thanks to the Central Bankers with the International Mafia enabling uncontrolled INVASION OF THE WEST to provide for the putrid and abominable sins of Human Trafficking/Sexual Slavery of children, babies and all kinds of human beings...FOR TRULY EVIL AND HORRIBLE PURPOSES OF ALIEN BEINGS DIRECTLY FROM HELL wearing human being suits on Earth.
I have read several biographies of the founding fathers over the years, that concur with what you have said. It was not all as neat or cut and dried as I learned in school. It's been a while since I read it, but pretty sure it was Ron Chernow's Alexander Hamilton who noted that the slave question almost derailed the entire revolution/declaration of independence. There would have been no unity had the slave issue been addressed at the time, many of the founding fathers did not get along, and it was a fine line to walk to hold the coalition together during the years of the war and the writing of the constitution.
Yes, it was very difficult to get all 13 colonies to agree on whether to go to war and how to conduct the war. If they had also had to agree on slavery and solve that first, we would not have ended up as the United States. In a way, like today, think about the difference between California and, say, Florida. People in the various colonies differed from each other greatly, not so different than today - and it was a tough job to bring everyone to more or less consensus about the Revolution. And then the Constitution as well - Patrick Henry was a delegate to the convention that wrote the Constitution but he thought he "smelt a rat" and did not attend at all, and it was a hard job to get each state on board.
Especially since that convention was ostensibly being held to amend the Articles of Confederation, NOT make a whole new government! About 30% of the delegates, headed by Alexander Hamilton himself, were the culprits of this hijack of intention. They just had to have their central bank and powerful fed gov't.
Yes, it is amazing how much I did not learn about how all this really went down. Granted, I did not take any history classes outside of what was required in all my years of formal education. I credit my daughter, who loved history even as a child, to prompt me to start digging deeper. And the more I dig, the more I appreciate the miracle that was the birth of this nation and its Constitution.
Not sure if that link is working as intended, I got an error message and then redirected - but am aware that ranchers and farmers have started using mRNA vaccines with cattle and pigs. I'm thinking going forward, most people would do well to grow their own gardens from heirloom seeds (while you can still get them) and try to get meat from any local farmer who doesn't give the new vaccines to his herd. Who may be "organic" or perhaps beyond organic. Though I am hoping that the mRNA or vaccine bits would be destroyed by cooking, at least regarding the meat. I know, some people want to make it challenging for us to get any food, much less food that is clean and safe.
I think if real history were taught in schools like we had in the 50s and early 60s, people might have a better understanding of our past! Instead they get crt, woke junk, pronouns and sexual deviancy! They are the most confused generation of elementary, Jr. High and hi school students we’ve ever had. They’ll grow to be confused adults.
Thank you for your brief history lesson! Well done.
Nancy, a while ago this evening, I wrote another post with suggestions for some good history books for kids and adults, including a series by Peter Marshall and David Manuel in adult and children's editions, also the series of 5 books by Rush Limbaugh with his wife Katherine on American history. IF you scroll through the comments you may found the info about those books. But I'll mention some other good books for children and teens. Anything you can find by Jean Fritz is going to be really entertaining and at the same time, really authentic history. For children in the primary grades, there are books with illustrations on every page, and titles like "Where was Patrick Henry on the 29th of May?" and "Why Don't you get a Horse, Sam Adams?" and "And then what happened, Paul Revere?" They really are historically accurate, but written in a memorable way that younger children enjoy - well, Amazon suggests ages 7 through 9, but I think you can go younger or older with some of these. But then Fritz also does books that are more middle school to high school level, like, "Early Thunder," which is about a 14 year old boy whose father is Tory (loyal to the King) while the boy has friends on both sides, but gradually finds himself siding with the patriots. Amazon says that one is for ages 8 -12, but the 14-year-old hero should be a clue that it's really for somewhat older readers, plus, it's 256 pages which is way too long for an 8 year old. Thus, in the reviews by parents, some say they and their kids didn't like it - they may have been too young for it - but still 70% gave it 5 stars. While most of Fritz's books are biography and teach a lot of history through telling the stories, Early Thunder is historical fiction, with fictional characters like this boy and his father and his friend - but at the end of the book she tells you who was real who was not, and the story centers around a true historical incident that could have been the start of the Revolution though the situation was cleverly de-escalated. Fritz started writing and publishing in the late 1950's, and apparently wrote for 4 decades. So the books are more similar to what you recall from the 50's and 60's and not like the revisionist things one reads today from people who hate America. Fritz loved America, and writes really sparkling, brilliant stories that bring real heroes to life. The "big kid" biographies are marked on Amazon as being for ages 8 to 12, and I'm not sure that is correct in all cases, but if you buy one for a grandchild or nephew and it turns out to be too advanced, books can be saved till a child is ready. Some of her biographies for older kids would be "Bully for you, Teddy Roosevelt," and "The Great Little Madison," but she wrote about 100 books in all. I noticed in one of the reviews by parents, a mom wrote that she thought reading stories more than history books gave her son a love for history and I think the stories are important. Besides the Jean Fritz books, and the other two series from my other comment - there is a series from the 1950's - 1960's that I read when I was young, "We Were There..." like, "We were There at the Boston Tea Party." (by Robert Webb. I read that when was 7 years old, though a website says it is for ages 8 -14. This one was 1st published in 1956, but reprinted in 2013 and is still available in that paperback edition. If you have young people in your extended family, it is a good one to teach history and inspire a love for the US. This same "We Were There series" with originals from 50's & 60's can still be found in used hardbacks or in some cases, reprinted paperback if you search.
Very interesting! I have heard about the Rush books he spoke about when I was in the car. I will look into Jean Fritz , as she appears to be a wealth of info. Thank you.
It was the Royal Diaries series that piqued my daughter's interest in history. A series of historical fiction books that are written from the perspective of what a 13-15 year old historical figure would have written in her diary about the events of her time. I read them too and learned as much as she did.
I’m in agreement on how terrible the current woke social studies curriculum is, but I also think that what I learned back in the 60s was a complete whitewash of what actually happened. One key point that was never covered was how much wealth was shipped back to Spain and the Vatican for many years after Columbus landed in the “new world”. Just on ship in one of the many many armadas, which happened to sink in a storm, and wasn’t recovered until the mid-20th century, is now a museum in Key West. It was carrying silver bars that amounted to $600M in 2015 dollars. I found that shocking, by itself it reveals the real motive for Columbus’ journey, and the real picture of what his group did after they landed. As far as I’m concerned, the Vatican needs to give those stolen goods back. It’s not ok to sit on wealth that was stolen at gunpoint. Ditto with the taxpayer funds that are now in the pockets of the Big Pharam CEOs. They should be required to return every penny.
Wonderful comment. There's also a slanderous rumor that Robert E. Lee, cousin to Richard Henry Lee, Founding Father, owned slaves.
This is a lie. He abhorred slavery, but was executor of his wife's father's estate (she was Washington's granddaughter), and her father died with slaves, high debts, and a provision in his will that his slaves by freed within 5 years of his death.
The slaves needed to work to make the money to pay the debts, they were paid, and the slaves freed. This was 10 years before the War Between the States.
Concise, accurate and thoughtful...Finally, finding intelligent people worth the time to read and GAVE TO MY GRANDCHILDREN TO READ, as well. Poor things...Grammy keeps them perpetually learning even in the summer when taking breaks from other activities. Ha..😎....Actually, the poor horses NEEDED A BREAK before getting a bath and curried. They sure have lost all their winter weight quickly this year.
Funny, because that's just what the Progressives like to complain about and that's why they created 1619 Project. A similar complaint that ended with a shoddy solution. The nuances of history are lost on most everyone.
Their motivation was not to improve our history. Their intent was to establish a false narrative to destroy America and demand undeserved "reparations" on top of decades of welfare handouts, affirmative action, quotas, and preferential treatment.
I read something about that, too. It seems that he was in debt, and if he tried to change the status of his slaves, they would have been liable to seizure and resale on the slave market to repay any debt that he had, so instead of officially freeing them, he told them that if they "escaped", he would not pursue them, thus in effect, freeing his slaves and permitting them to retain their family group.
There are articles describing Jefferson's severe debt burden at various sites around the net, as well as information about his slaves. Wikipedia has an article entitled ''Thomas Jefferson and slavery'' that gives details. Many of his slaves were sold off after his death to help pay off the debt.
Think of today's politicians, like Biden, Pelosi, Obama, the Clintons etc. etc., who have ''somehow'' become quite rich through holding important office as ''public servants''---how things have changed...
And some additional info about Jefferson the others who were involved in writing and editing the Declaration is at this link - Jefferson actually 1) 3 yrs after writing the Declaration, introduced legislation in the Virginia legislature that would have abolished importation of slaves and created an orderly process for freeing slaves - which all failed to pass the vote in the legislature; 2) as President he signed a bill passed by Congress to ban the importation of slaves, and he had supported this bill 3) He wrote strongly against slavery on several occasions. There is a lot more there, info on Ben Franklin (who once owned slaves but freed them in his lifetime and became President of an abolitionist organization) and also John Adams and Roger Sherman, on the committee to write the Declaration, who never ever owned any slaves. Good article. https://www.westernjournal.com/dem-rep-displays-stunning-lack-knowledge-declaration-independence-slavery/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=conservative-brief-WJ&utm_campaign=dailypm&utm_content=western-journal
ok, so you either don’t comply with such a law or you move your slaves to a state where you can free them. It’s ridiculous to claim that Jefferson, with all of his wealth, couldn’t possibly find a way to free his slaves.
Thomas Jefferson in his original draft also had a long paragraph decrying slavery. Furthermore, his draft of a law in Virginia became the basis for the NW Ordinance, which prohibited slavery in the new territories. This prohibition came from Jefferson’s prior draft.
Furthermore, how does one suddenly free thousands of slaves and make them free, self-governing citizens. They formed greater than half the population of some states. Our Founders were adults who recognized that overnight emancipation, though morally laudatory, would be a practical disaster that would carry its own suffering.
No Founder spoke positively of slavery. It wasn’t until 30 years or so later when John C Calhoun imported German Enlightenment philosophy that the notion of slavery as a positive good was born.
Wow. We live in fascinating times when the truth about all things past and present is being revealed. It's extremely costly remaining in ignorance, but extremely painful waking up to the truth. This explains why we never learn about real history. I'm 64 and my awareness of my ignorance grows every day even as the layers of lies are peeled away.
Im in the UK; the Wokerati have infiltrated the education system such that some School teachers are allowing minor children to "identify" as cats .... and other inanimate objects; I will let that sink in....what the Governors are doing in these Schools is beyond me.
Meanwhile the Marxist apparatchiks in the Arts have this week had a performance of a play deemed only for non white audiences for one day - a sample of the reports of this here:
The re-writing of books, novels and history is now "acceptable" to some, never me- can you imagine "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee" re-written to be somehow more orientated against non idigenous Americans..or "The Gulag.." volumes in some egregious way? I am part way through Shelby Foote's 3 volume Narrative...... is that what might be called history in action?
Not at all possible. History taught in schools by necessity must be snippets of importance. Details must be left to the students and their questions. A seminar on the civil war could be a day or a year. As one posters notes it might take several class hours to explore the Virginia laws dealing with slaves and property rights.
I would have given a lot to have class hours like that when I was in high school. And this was back in the late 1960's, when standards were supposedly higher than now....
At the Constitutional Convention of 1787, there was a Committee of Eleven attempting to shut down the Slave Trade by 1800. This sunset clause of the slave trade, after being pushed back 8 years, was built into the US Constitution, pro-actively making the import of slaves illegal after 1808.
On almost every historic front, starting with Pennsylvania Quakers in 1688, it was the Americans who led in the various anti-slavery initiatives which transformed our world to one more free.
I'll just add that Jefferson's drafts never were codified because there wasn't support for them in the legislature.
"It wasn’t until 30 years or so later when John C Calhoun imported German Enlightenment philosophy that the notion of slavery as a positive good was born."
I'd debate this as the case. It's not that simple. There was a very complicated dynamic between the industrialized north and the antebellum south that required compromise on many levels just to get agreement on a confederation, let alone ratifying The Constitution. The south was concerned about the more populous north controlling the legislature if we just used free-persons as a measure of representatives in the house. Then it gets codified in the Articles, then The Constitution, and slavery becomes a power struggle and a point of contention for tariffs and pretty much takes on a life of its own.
It's very easy for us looking back at the default state of affairs 300 years ago and project the injustices of our current time on to our forefathers. Slavery was a normally accepted practice all over the world for MILLENNIA until the Queen of the British Empire declared it unjust. Slave holders could be of any race or nationality. So could their slaves. It just depended on what place and time we're talking about.
I highly recommend Thomas Sowell's "Black Rednecks and White Liberals."
“It takes no more research than a trip to almost any public library or college to show the incredibly lopsided coverage of slavery in the United States or in the Western Hemisphere, as compared to the meager writings on even larger number of Africans enslaved in the Islamic countries of the Middle East and North Africa, not to mention the vast numbers of Europeans also enslaved in centuries past in the Islamic world and within Europe itself. At least a million Europeans were enslaved by North African pirates alone from 1500 to 1800, and some Europeans slaves were still being sold on the auction blocks in the Egypt, years after the Emancipation Proclamation freed blacks in the United States.” ― Thomas Sowell, Black Rednecks and White Liberals
Also, Gordon Wood's "Empire of Liberty" does a good job of showing the change in attitudes on slavery from 1789 to 1812, but it's a more generalized look at the country and it doesn't dedicate as much to it as Sowell's book. It is an excellent book in its own right giving you a good flavor of the dynamics of the politics happening in the country during the period. https://amzn.to/3pE0LVo
There are some very good books on Jefferson himself, to which his attitudes on slavery are covered along with his attempts to abolish them:
Basani's "Liberty, State, and Union: The Political Theory of Thomas Jefferson" is excellent. https://amzn.to/3PG7tot
Gutzman's "Thomas Jefferson - Revolutionary: A Radical's Struggle to Remake America" covers the slavery dichotomy as well. https://amzn.to/44R8RZV
Gore Vidal's "Burr" is a very untraditional look at the United States through Jefferson's Vice President's eyes. I think it is a very compelling story that shows a very different perspective of Jefferson worth exploring. https://amzn.to/44xiQ6f
Lastly, Patrick Newman's "Cronyism: Liberty versus Power in Early America, 1607–1849" really takes a hammer to the founding fathers, shedding light on backroom deals and skeletons in the closet. Nobody is spared and you'll see that politics hasn't really changed in 300 years. https://amzn.to/3PLFgMR
Excellent, thanks - also best books on Mexican American war and relations with Mexico before and since. Also the history and growth of the US defense industry. Thanks again
Truth. Standing in judgement of historical figures is a conceit of the envious and lazy minds.
And if anybody living today ever wonders what they'd have done living in 1930's-1940's Germany they need only look in the mirror at their actions since 2020 and they have their answer. Did they obey? Did they "mask up?" Did they roll up their sleeves for a needle? Did they exclude others, discriminate against those who didn't obey? Did they stand up for others who didn't obey even if they thought it was the right thing for them to do? Did they stand up for the kid in the classroom who was being picked on by the bully? Or did they sit quietly, wince a little for the kid but say nothing, even giggle when the bully said something funny (Seriously, it's horse paste! hahahahah!)? Every single one of us did EXACTLY what we'd have done in Germany. Exactly. No exceptions. Humans are the same. In 2023, 1943, 1933, 1863, 1773. Same.
The simplest way to demonstrate the futility of judging the past actions of history is to read the Bible. The meaning of words requires context of the language and the times. Without the full context and accurate definitions of the vocabulary of the time, fully understanding is impossible. And even with full understanding, judgement is dicey at best.
To paraphrase an old saying, you can't judge a man without walking a mile in his shoes. This means you have to have lived a person's experience in their context before you can understand how they thought and felt. And even then, you're estimating.
Having the full context and definitions helps understanding, but it does not ensure you interpret it as the other persons did. History is a tricky beast.
Accurate definitions of words is essential. A great dictionary, American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster 1828, is a treasure trove. For those who love to do word studies and apply to bible studies, it is highly recommended.
Does anyone reading this believe the human brain and temperament, character, morals have genetically evolved over the past 500 years? Does anyone reading this believe they are cut from a finer cloth of man, their genes superior with imbued ethics, morals, humanity, their blood makes them impervious to practices like these? Does anyone reading this believe the Aztec were inherently, intrinsically, preternaturally more savage than we are today? Because, evolution?
The mind. The human mind is very adaptable to changing conditions. And can be conditioned. Our nature doesn't produce horrors like ritual sacrifice. Our minds do. And our hearts. And our connectivity to our fellow man.
Which is why the powers that be today, the Malthusians, those who believe they are cut from a better cloth of man, are more sophisticated, are elite and genetically superior to all others work so hard with propaganda and censorship programs, apply psychological manipulations, Mind Managers, behavioral "scientists" skilled in deception and coercion to mold our minds, our thoughts into what they want us to be. They possess cold hearts, fear our connection with our fellow man, they put their faith in the cool, rational, academic approach of "science" of govern-ment. Govern=Control, Ment=Mind.
We are the same human. Only our irrational love, our hearts and souls, our faith in God protects and preserves our humanity. The Aztecs followed their "science." All of the evil, murderous regimes of the 20th century follwed their "science." We must not follow their "science" today. If we, the same humans, are truly capable of learning from the history of man. Men just like us.
Yes, and the indigenous tribes of Mexico begged Cortez to topple the Aztecs because of their cruelty.
However, REAL science, as defined by the Scientific Method, is a safeguard. Scientists are skeptics, and it's largely inductive logic, which is a learned discipline, not natural to most people. A good scientist knows his work must be replicated and stand up to the scrutiny of his fellows. That in itself is a guard.
Our public health started to rot when research was funded by govt grants. Like everything in gov't, it eventually becomes a huge racket.
Anyone that paid attention to the Gallo theft of Luc Montanier's discovery of HIV should have seen what was happening.
Yes. REAL science. Not pseudoscience. Like psychological manipulative 'science', like social and behavioral science. Which are narrative sciences. Tiny little bit of natural science onto which an entire narrative is constructed for purposes of social and behavioral control and societal shifts in understanding.
I found this link to a description of The Science Wars very useful to understanding how the social sciences, narrative science, pseudoscience have displaced natural sciences and the scientific method. It is written from the perspective of a Marxist, so I take that into account as I read it. But it is very well-sourced, lots of references and citations of credible sources and I can follow them far back in. While this piece leans strongly into the science wars of the 1990's the writer brings it forward to the late 2010's and I think it is about as good a primer as I've found in one source. Again, I read through the writer's bias to gain a clearer understanding of it that fits with other data points I bring with me to the information the writer presents:
Mind you, this is the science that is being taught to our "best and brightest" today. Doctors, engineers, physicists, chemists, etc. All scientific learning and understanding is being conveyed through narrative prisms that distort the REAL natural sciences.
The standards are being dumbed down. Even for physicians. Less expertise is expected of them. They are becoming trained monkeys who plug in symptoms in expensive WebMD programs to dispense assembly line diagnosis and prescriptions. The art of medicine, critical thinking, innovation is being replaced with obedience to standardized protocols. The pandemic medical response wasn't a mistake. It was the plan. One-size fits all, no variations, whatever the program says, goes. Punishing medical professionals who think for themselves. The natural evolution of The Science Wars that elevated narrative social and behavioral science atop natural science.
This just came out in the American College of Physicians, Annals of Internal Medicine, June 20, 2023
"with Step 1 transitioning to pass/fail scoring and the elimination of Step 2 Clinical Skills. These changes bring us to a unique time of reflection on the purpose and structure of Step 3. Considering its history and aims within the current landscape of medical practice and licensure, we believe that the present structure of Step 3 is impractical and burdensome."
Make you more confidant in the skill level of your physician? But they're educated enough to tell you that boys can be girls if they click the heals of their red slippers together, inject 72 poisons, including for STD's into your infants "for their health" and declare a pandemic over to honor the deification of a career criminal, then restart it when the arson, looting and mayhem stops. Because, science (narrative).
Your welcome. I meant to say a little more clearly that the Science Wars piece is a good basic summary, minus the bias. But the links it contains, that's where I got the best, most informative understanding of the subject, including historical context. The links that it references, that's what makes it a great repository.
I know that my ancestors owned slaves (in Baltimore and the Chesapeake Bay area) during the first half of the 19th century. One of those slaves escaped and became known to the world as Frederick Douglass. In his autobiography he recounted how he was treated while a slave. It makes fascinating reading--in some ways my ancestors behaved admirably, and in other instances they revealed all too human failings, within the customs of the time.
As a man of today, of course I would not tolerate owning slaves. But if I were born into the early 19th century in Baltimore, I would not have the advantage of hindsight that we have now. While I would like to believe that I would behave decently under the circumstances, there is no guarantee of that. Frederick Douglass was adamant that the main problem with slavery was the slave system itself and how it corrupted otherwise decent people into committing injustice against their fellow humans. His autobiography offers up ample evidence for his argument.
This was a fantastic autobiography and an extremely important first person view of slavery that everyone needs to read. https://amzn.to/3eUC7Hs
I think we ALL owe it to ourselves to reflect on what slavery actually was, along with someone tenacious enough to not let such an institution diminish the fortitude of who he was. The story is an amazing one.
I have only one regret with this autobiography, and that is with his treatment of Abraham Lincoln. He lionizes Lincoln for abolishing slavery even after he eventually admits Lincoln wanted to preserve the union at any costs -- even if it meant preserving slavery, or removing slaves from the country.
"He was ready to execute all the supposed constitutional guarantees of the United States Constitution in favor of the slave system anywhere inside the slave States. He was willing to pursue, recapture, and send back the fugitive slave to his master, and to suppress a slave rising for liberty, though the guilty master were already in arms against the Government. The race to which we belong were not the special objects of his consideration."
"...though the Union was more to him than our freedom or our future..." Douglass gives Lincoln a pass because of the end result.
This I cannot abide by. Yes, the Confederacy had extreme issues, just as a marriage with irreconcilable differences ends in divorce. Except in the case of President Lincoln, one was forced to remain against its will with the wholesale slaughter of a decent amount of its next of kin as submission.
There was another way to end slavery -- if that were actually the stated end, but Lincoln took the road of tyranny and subjugated free and independent states to preserve the union at any cost. His legacy has disenfranchised and enslaved us ALL.
Regardless of this, the whole of the autobiography is completely and utterly worthwhile. It is, after all, a perspective of one man's view of the most important events throughout his life. It is a view that all of us must endeavor to comprehend or we shall surely repeat the mistakes of the past, except this time, it will be all of humanity that suffers.
“Thus far all human governments have been failures, for none have secured, except in a partial degree, the ends for which governments are instituted. War, slavery, injustice and oppression, and the idea that might makes right have been uppermost in all such governments, and the weak, for whose protection governments are ostensibly created, have had practically no rights which the strong have felt bound to respect.
The slayers of thousands have been exalted into heroes, and the worship of mere physical force has been considered glorious.”
It is terribly easy for any high browned left wing do gooder liberal living in the ease of 21st century America with their 9-5 work from home sipping a soy latte Seattle’s Best coffee to say, “If I was born back then I would have done this or done that!!!”
Bullshit!!!
You give any of them an inheritance in 1800 America of 1000 prime fertile acres of Georgia knee high ready to pick cotton and 30 slaves owned by them to pick it that would net them $10,000 confederate dollars 💵 in their local bank account and watch how fast they get out there and crack that whip on them slaves to harvest that crop before the boweevils or a summer hail storm decimates it and scatters their $10,000 profit to the wind!!! You really think they are gonna let their high Southern Society Debutante wife and six French language tutored and pompously dressed kids do without or go hungry over the cold Georgia winter and be mocked for missing the fall formal at any of their society functions!!!
Your comparison to what they would do from what they all did during Covid is spot on my friend!!! If they had slaves they would have thought it as normal in the 1800 American South as they would think using a cell phone is today! It is easy to say you would feel a certain way back then based on what you know today but when placed back in history in that social context your social and societal norms and upbringing would have most everyone going right along with whatever social construct you found yourself in! And thats a fact, Jack!!!
As folks typed their responses to you on their I-whatevers or any battery containing devices did they then bash their devices on their desks to protest modern day slavery? Let alone what China does, how about the cobalt mining child slavery in the Congo? So where exactly does hypocrisy lie? 200+ years in the past or right faucing now?
There are at least 45 MILLION slaves in the world right now! More than when slavery was "legal"! When Barry allowed more than 800,000 " unaccompanied minors" in this country where did they disappear? The children found working in meat packing plants are the lucky ones! How many are sex slaves? With Brandon allowing hundreds of thousands to be brought in EVERY DAY!
I agree fully. It is tired and disingenuous to apply today's standards to our forebears. I recently read an accounting of what became of the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence and it seems the majority of them ended up stripped of their assets, many jailed, some were put to death - all for standing up for a cause so much bigger than them. We owe nothing but gratitude to all of these men, and I say that knowing fully many were misogynists, slaveholders, polyamorists, and more.
I would like to think, had I the means, I would have freed then paid the former slaves to stay on and continue their work - but who can say? As you so rightly point out, look how meekly so many people swallowed the party line during Covid, and locked down and denounced anyone who questioned constant masking and distancing and boosters. People were afraid to question authority in a society where we have the legal right to do so - who would truly have stood up against such greater odds?
Please all - go see Sound of Freedom. Tell your friends to see it and then ask them what they are doing themselves to end slavery -of children, of young people now.
Where is the outcry and action from all of us that think ourselves more highly than our founders?
In 1911, Booker T. Washington wrote: "There is a class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs-partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs."
We have now had a black president, black vice president, several black attorneys general, several black surgeon generals, we've had two black coaches meet in the superbowl.... and we are "systematically racist?" Only the BLM organization, whose obese founder Patrice Cullors said "we are trained Marxists" could come up with that one. And then there is that $1.4mm mansion she bought in all white Topanga Canyon with all that wokester dough; kinda like Obama's mansion at 79 Turkeyland Dr., Edgartown MA (Martha's Vineyard) which is literally 3 feet above sea level (verify elevation herehttps://whatismyelevation.com/location/41.36189,-70.54573/79-Turkeyland-Cove-Rd--Edgartown--MA-02539- Verify address here https://www.forbes.com/sites/kathleenhowley/2019/09/01/obamas-buying-marthas-vineyard-estate-from-boston-celtics-owner/?sh=34fe08453007
The Obama mansions would house 10,000 illegals alone in the pantry!
In your historical hypothetical, I suspect that most of us, myself included, would accept such a Jeffersonian inheritance as “the way things are” and carry on with business as usual while attempting to treat everyone involved in what would have been considered a humane way for that period of time.
Black PBS personality and Harvard Univ. prof Henry Louis Gates says at https://www.pbs.org/wnet/african-americans-many-rivers-to-cross/history/how-many-slaves-landed-in-the-us/ that while 10.7 mm blacks were shipped out as slaves, only 388,000 – a tiny percentage – were shipped to North America (he doesn’t specify it this includes Central America or not). That’s right – just under 4% of slaves went to North America. In contrast, Dr. Robert Davis at Ohio State Univ. has calculated that between 1 and 1.25 million white Europeans were taken as slaves TO Africa along the Barbary Coast between the 16th to 18th C, https://news.osu.edu/when-europeans-were-slaves--research-suggests-white-slavery-was-much-more-common-than-previously-believed/ That means that well over 3 TIMES the number of whites were enslaved by African Muslims than blacks by North Americans. Davis’s new estimates appear in the book Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters: White Slavery in the Mediterranean, the Barbary Coast, and Italy, 1500-1800 (Palgrave Macmillan). Yes, this means up to 325 times the number of whites were taken as slaves to Africa than Africans to the America (and some of that 388,000 may have gone to Mexico or Central America).
And the U.S. lost a MASSIVE 2% of its population, 620,000 in the Civil War to stop this. In today’s population, that would mean almost 6 million people. History.com says 618,222 is often cited for the number of deaths, with 360,222 Union soldiers. Are more soldiers dying than there were slaves taken not reparation enough? More recently, the War on Poverty – a very large percentage dedicated to make up for the injustices of a century ago - started in 1964, has spent over $22 TRILLION by some estimates. How well has that done? Just go visit the tent cities of socialist SF, Portland, Seattle, LA, etc. I am happy to pay reparations… to any black person applying who lived under slavery, or was even a child or grandchild of a slave.
I have submitted my reparations request these Muslim nations on your behalf, asking for $5mm each. Will let you know when “the cheque’s in the mail.”
I would add that the applicant is currently indigent, lacking in resources and income. But of course, America has systems for providing for those who meet those standards regardless of the status of forbears.
#2 was the default and the northern industries realized that they could hire, work to death and replace their "workers" without the up front capital costs.
At the time it was becoming obvious that the ROI on slaves was not good. The system had to change and there were many reluctant owners in the 1860's. Looking at census records (1860-1880) you can see that many household slaves and owners continued on well after emancipation. We might assume the slaves were members of that family and simply stayed on.
The ROI was increased, once the slave owner purchased the new Cotton Gin. One slave could then complete the work of 50 per day. Of course the cotton gin was available in the North, too, making them less dependent on the Southern states for this staple.
Sorry that those who malign Thomas Jefferson for writing about liberty in the Declaration are ignorant of the 158-word clause the Second Continental Congress removed from Jefferson's original blaming King George for the scourge of African slavery on the continent of America. Maybe they should read more.
As a writer (and a reader that appreciates good writing), I love how you used "158-word" in your statement. The specificity adds power to your message.
Feudalism predated GR III by a few hundred years which itself was not a "thing" whilst various forms of slavery dominated Africa, the East ......for centuries. What amazes me is that those who demand "reparations", "compensation" do so whilst living in some comfort, clearly not starving and exhibiting some education; they do not seem to address how slavery was enabled by indigenous people all over the continent of Africa, that non Africans were also trafficked - not a one way street for sure. Am I "allowed" to think that....?
Oh, and did I mention black history gadfly and Obama buddy Henry Louis Gates said 388,000 blacks were shipped to N. America... but apparently the fasco-Marxist America haters are too ignorant to know that up to 1.25 million whites were, very roughly in that same era, TAKEN TO NORTH AFRICA AS SLAVES?
What's that I hear? Yet more leftist ignorant silence?
A new study suggests that a million or more European Christians were enslaved by Muslims in North Africa between 1530 and 1780 – a far greater number than had ever been estimated before.
In a new book, Robert Davis, professor of history at Ohio State University, developed a unique methodology to calculate the number of white Christians who were enslaved along Africa’s Barbary Coast, arriving at much higher slave population estimates than any previous studies had found.
Most other accounts of slavery along the Barbary coast didn’t try to estimate the number of slaves, or only looked at the number of slaves in particular cities, Davis said. Most previously estimated slave counts have thus tended to be in the thousands, or at most in the tens of thousands. Davis, by contrast, has calculated that between 1 million and 1.25 million European Christians were captured and forced to work in North Africa from the 16th to 18th centuries. They even took slaves from Iceland !
Davis’s new estimates appear in the book Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters: White Slavery in the Mediterranean, the Barbary Coast, and Italy, 1500-1800 (Palgrave Macmillan)
It is clear, our Founding Fathers were committed to creating a government like no other in the history of mankind. They brilliantly brought out truths never said or heard before, "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness ..." They first had to risk their lives fighting for Independence, and then they could push their efforts to create a More Perfect Union! A Union without slavery. It is no coincidence that President Lincoln used the words and intentions of our Founding Fathers in justifying the Civil War to end slavery. President Lincoln also used the same words to justify further fighting in order to preserve the Nation created by our Founding Fathers! The Founding Father's believed slavery was unjust, as depicted with the words above. Additionally, they took concrete steps to contain slavery, forbidding it in the Northwest Territory, while ending the slave trade in 1808, in the hopes that it would wither away. Lincoln stated in one of his debate's with Douglas, on this issue, the Founding Fathers, "stopped it's spread [slavery] in one direction and cut of its source in another." We must also never forget how unjust it is to hold generations before us to the standards we have today. Would it be just to hold the standards of an adult for a child? No, that would be unjust, just as it is for those holding our Founding Fathers to the standards of our Nation today. In fact it is their actions and sacrifices, that even allowed us to be where we are today. On Independence Day, the only just act is to revere our Founding Fathers for their courage, brilliance, and sacrifice for follow on generations to receive freedom's and life standards, they never were able to experience. May God Bless our Founding Fathers and America, and may all globalists, looking to destroy America rot in hell!
Slavery was not a major issue for Lincoln in prosecuting the War, it was minor, really. The largest issue was the tariffs, and how, because of the differences between the economies of the industrial North, and agricultural South, the tariffs became a heavy burden for Southerners. . See the Tariff of Abominations, and the straw that broke the camels back, the Morill Tariff.
Slavery only became a huge issue when Lincoln was losing the war.
Brilliantly stated! And we should also be reminded that the ideals and aspirations espoused in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution had at the time and even more so now, a UNIVERSAL hope for ALL PEOPLE of the world; the American Revolution and Civil War did not just represent national struggles but a struggle to free humankind from tyranny no matter where it existed as well as to restore the right of all to live as equals with the sovereignty granted by our Creator.
I saw a recent commentary over the 4th that is not in history books. Jefferson was in a financial bind and because of Virginia law could not free his slaves. History has a filter and does not provide the rest of the story.
It is correct that Virginia law at that time did not permit the freeing of enslaved people. In addition, when the Declaration was written and proclaimed, we were still very much at war. In Virginia, many plantation owners had their homes burned down by British soldiers, particularly under Banastre Tarleton. Men who were active in the American government (2nd Continental Congress at the time of the Declaration) or in state level government) at times had to relocate or flee to avoid capture by the British. Soldiers might have been taken prisoner, but those in the government were in danger of execution for treason if captured. The war itself took up all their energy, and there was no time to consider plans for educating and providing paying jobs if slaves would have been freed. In those times, there was a lot of chaos, poverty, and hunger. The British would raid farms and steal cattle and every kind of food to feed their troops who were far from home. Washington's men also needed to eat, and would have to rely on local farmers also though Washington said they must pay for what they took in fairness to fellow Americans and to maintain their loyalty - but Congress had no power to tax and funds were limited - and colonial money was mostly worthless. So even the farmers were hungry. So, during these chaotic times most people suffered in some way, and there were not "paying jobs" such as we know today at that time - money worthless, farmers away at war. In some cases, enslaved men were offered freedom if they served in the military, offered by British and by Americans, but there was no real ability to formulate a humanitarian plan for the orderly freeing of all enslaved people at that time. The war needed to be won, or most leaders would have been executed, and the people as a whole would have been little more than slaves. In Boston, prior to the outbreak of the war, people were forced to have British army officers housed in their own homes, and women were forced to cook and clean for military men, forced by law, by the Quartering Act. So, actually white people were slaves prior to the outbreak of the war, not only African Americans. A different kind of slavery to be sure, since white people in Boston technically owned their own homes and could carry on their own business, but if you were forced to give up your bedrooms to British military, forced to cook for them and do their laundry, while you slept on the kitchen floor like CInderella, surely that was a form of slavery. Most people today don't know enough history to have any idea what things were like at that time - we can imagine what we want and believe things should have been different without having any idea of the realities. The enslavement of Africans and African Americans was evil, it was an evil system, starting with Africans who sold members of other tribes to white men for transport to North American and the Caribbean, and continuing up until the Civil War. But I can't blame the "founding fathers" for a mess they inherited. George Washington is vilified by some as a slave owner, but he did give orders that families should not be broken up and sold apart, and he kept and provided for those too unwell or too old to continue working, with provisions made for their care to continue after his own death. While slaves could not have been freed under Virginia law at one time, it became possible later, and Washington did free his slaves and provide options and a transition plan to go into effect after his death. The realities of making a fair and workable plan involved more than we might imagine today, there is more to consider than I would try to enter into this textbox. People need to read beyond the high school textbooks or even college level textbooks and dig deeper, but too few have an interest to try to learn and understand history. Or they believe completely false things, like, university students who demanded that a statue of Lincoln be removed because he had been a slave owner (untrue and I hope many of us know).
Thanks. A great exposition of the reality of slavery at the time. We know also that slavery- in its many forms - exists today.
There are many more slaves today here in the US and all over the world, today compared to the start of the Civil War. There are millions who are enslaved by human traffickers, and that does include very young children also. There are women, men and children enslaved for sex work and also for general labor. They are definitely slaves. Those forced to do sex work are forced to service many customers on a daily basis, and they have no say. In a research study on trafficking, through interviews with women who were trafficking survivors, it was learned that the majority had multiple forced abortions. In the study (by Lederer and Wetzel) one woman reported having had 17 abortions. To learn more about the trafficking of children, the movie "The Sound of Freedom" is out this week on limited release - it is not going to be shown at all theaters, and is probably going to have a limited number of days in theaters - though it has had huge success since opening on July 3, that perhaps it will stay around longer than originally planned - I understand it has been #1 this week. The movie is not depressing because it is based on a true story of children being rescued from traffickers in a sting operation, with two children who are especially featured in the movie ending up back home with their parents. So it is very hopeful and leaves with hope, though we have to be the hope for the modern day slaves. But today - it is much worse in so many ways than in earlier centuries. Greater numbers of slaves for sure, and all races and nationalities. With slavery in the US historically, there were many situations in which enslaved people were treated with extreme cruelty, and at the same time, other situations in which enslaved people apparently were fed and clothed adequately and treated reasonably well - though not to minimize the injustice of the lack of freedom, lack of opportunities, and sources of distress that historians would not always know. So, not intending to minimize that, and yet, it appears that most people who live in the situation of human trafficking today live in horrific circumstances, and their lifespan is shortened tremendously. Lederer & Wetzel (2014) examined this from a public health perspective and those who escaped trafficking had headaches and neurological conditions from the horrific abuse, but not only that - long, long lists of symptoms and health conditions that were directly caused by their horrifically abusive treatment during trafficking. Slavery, whether old or new, is a terrible evil, and it did not end with the Civil War. It's still with us in a different form. You can help to end the trafficking of children at our borders by signing a petition to support legislation proposed by Senator Marsha Blackburn - read about it here and sign if you wish: https://lifepetitions.com/petition/human-trafficking?utm_source=email_070523 and see the trailer for "The Sound of Freedom" and consider buying a ticket and seeing the movie this weekend while it is still around: https://www.angel.com/pay-it-forward/sound-of-freedom?utm_medium=direct&utm_source=angel-freedom&utm_campaign=sound-of-freedom-theatrical
Those who voted for Joe Biden and Democrats also support the criminals involved in human trafficking. Because the Congressional investigation reveals Biden family invests money in human trafficking, yet I don’t see any Biden’s supporters condemn his crimes at all.
Illiberals today have shamelessly turned themselves into cohorts of criminals of the worst kind. They even boast about what they have done.
In my comment, the legislation proposed by Senator Marsha Blackburn would require that all children who are being brought into the US illegally must be DNA tested. That is because if the children are being brought in by parents, there would be a DNA match, and if brought in by traffickers, unlikely to have a DNA match. Of note, the DNA testing was being done previously but under the BIden administration this was stopped because it was deemed unnecessary. Possibly it was not necessary because the Biden was making so much money off the traffickers? Wide open border, and all these unaccompanied minors, or rather, accompanied by cartel guys who bring them across and sell them. Blackburn's bill, by requiring the DNA tests on all children who enter illegally - not all children, but those entering illegally - would put a stop to most of the trafficking. It has been reported that about 30% of the children entering illegally are being trafficked. Remember all the criticism about children being separated from their "parents"? They were often being separated from their traffickers and kept safe until things could be sorted out. Anyway, yes, I recently became aware of Biden's involvement in trafficking. The US is one of the biggest trafficking destinations, and Mexico is reportedly the largest supplier at least to the US, and among the top suppliers globally. More can and should be done, but resuming DNA testing would be a good start.
I did see Sound of Freedom on July 3rd. It is now the top selling movie. Trafficking is now gaining more recognition while at the same time growing bigger. There will always be pedophiles, the evil. We need to make sure to severely limit or totally remove their supply.
A greater question is ... What kind of man wants sex with children?? Why is the market here so huge? What have we become?
There is no benefit whatsoever to comparing whether one form of slavery is worse than another. Each instance of it, in the past and today, is an affront to humanity. We need to get clear on that, and work to abolish and make amends for all forms of it. There is great reward in righting wrongs.
And, is growing...Thanks to the Central Bankers with the International Mafia enabling uncontrolled INVASION OF THE WEST to provide for the putrid and abominable sins of Human Trafficking/Sexual Slavery of children, babies and all kinds of human beings...FOR TRULY EVIL AND HORRIBLE PURPOSES OF ALIEN BEINGS DIRECTLY FROM HELL wearing human being suits on Earth.
Yeah, but you don't see leftists or feminists going to Libya to free them in the slave markets, do you?
Right?! I think we'd be better off dealing with that, for sure!
I have read several biographies of the founding fathers over the years, that concur with what you have said. It was not all as neat or cut and dried as I learned in school. It's been a while since I read it, but pretty sure it was Ron Chernow's Alexander Hamilton who noted that the slave question almost derailed the entire revolution/declaration of independence. There would have been no unity had the slave issue been addressed at the time, many of the founding fathers did not get along, and it was a fine line to walk to hold the coalition together during the years of the war and the writing of the constitution.
Yes, it was very difficult to get all 13 colonies to agree on whether to go to war and how to conduct the war. If they had also had to agree on slavery and solve that first, we would not have ended up as the United States. In a way, like today, think about the difference between California and, say, Florida. People in the various colonies differed from each other greatly, not so different than today - and it was a tough job to bring everyone to more or less consensus about the Revolution. And then the Constitution as well - Patrick Henry was a delegate to the convention that wrote the Constitution but he thought he "smelt a rat" and did not attend at all, and it was a hard job to get each state on board.
Especially since that convention was ostensibly being held to amend the Articles of Confederation, NOT make a whole new government! About 30% of the delegates, headed by Alexander Hamilton himself, were the culprits of this hijack of intention. They just had to have their central bank and powerful fed gov't.
Yes, it is amazing how much I did not learn about how all this really went down. Granted, I did not take any history classes outside of what was required in all my years of formal education. I credit my daughter, who loved history even as a child, to prompt me to start digging deeper. And the more I dig, the more I appreciate the miracle that was the birth of this nation and its Constitution.
Thanks- great clarity and context. I appreciate you sharing.
Not sure if that link is working as intended, I got an error message and then redirected - but am aware that ranchers and farmers have started using mRNA vaccines with cattle and pigs. I'm thinking going forward, most people would do well to grow their own gardens from heirloom seeds (while you can still get them) and try to get meat from any local farmer who doesn't give the new vaccines to his herd. Who may be "organic" or perhaps beyond organic. Though I am hoping that the mRNA or vaccine bits would be destroyed by cooking, at least regarding the meat. I know, some people want to make it challenging for us to get any food, much less food that is clean and safe.
I think if real history were taught in schools like we had in the 50s and early 60s, people might have a better understanding of our past! Instead they get crt, woke junk, pronouns and sexual deviancy! They are the most confused generation of elementary, Jr. High and hi school students we’ve ever had. They’ll grow to be confused adults.
Thank you for your brief history lesson! Well done.
Nancy, a while ago this evening, I wrote another post with suggestions for some good history books for kids and adults, including a series by Peter Marshall and David Manuel in adult and children's editions, also the series of 5 books by Rush Limbaugh with his wife Katherine on American history. IF you scroll through the comments you may found the info about those books. But I'll mention some other good books for children and teens. Anything you can find by Jean Fritz is going to be really entertaining and at the same time, really authentic history. For children in the primary grades, there are books with illustrations on every page, and titles like "Where was Patrick Henry on the 29th of May?" and "Why Don't you get a Horse, Sam Adams?" and "And then what happened, Paul Revere?" They really are historically accurate, but written in a memorable way that younger children enjoy - well, Amazon suggests ages 7 through 9, but I think you can go younger or older with some of these. But then Fritz also does books that are more middle school to high school level, like, "Early Thunder," which is about a 14 year old boy whose father is Tory (loyal to the King) while the boy has friends on both sides, but gradually finds himself siding with the patriots. Amazon says that one is for ages 8 -12, but the 14-year-old hero should be a clue that it's really for somewhat older readers, plus, it's 256 pages which is way too long for an 8 year old. Thus, in the reviews by parents, some say they and their kids didn't like it - they may have been too young for it - but still 70% gave it 5 stars. While most of Fritz's books are biography and teach a lot of history through telling the stories, Early Thunder is historical fiction, with fictional characters like this boy and his father and his friend - but at the end of the book she tells you who was real who was not, and the story centers around a true historical incident that could have been the start of the Revolution though the situation was cleverly de-escalated. Fritz started writing and publishing in the late 1950's, and apparently wrote for 4 decades. So the books are more similar to what you recall from the 50's and 60's and not like the revisionist things one reads today from people who hate America. Fritz loved America, and writes really sparkling, brilliant stories that bring real heroes to life. The "big kid" biographies are marked on Amazon as being for ages 8 to 12, and I'm not sure that is correct in all cases, but if you buy one for a grandchild or nephew and it turns out to be too advanced, books can be saved till a child is ready. Some of her biographies for older kids would be "Bully for you, Teddy Roosevelt," and "The Great Little Madison," but she wrote about 100 books in all. I noticed in one of the reviews by parents, a mom wrote that she thought reading stories more than history books gave her son a love for history and I think the stories are important. Besides the Jean Fritz books, and the other two series from my other comment - there is a series from the 1950's - 1960's that I read when I was young, "We Were There..." like, "We were There at the Boston Tea Party." (by Robert Webb. I read that when was 7 years old, though a website says it is for ages 8 -14. This one was 1st published in 1956, but reprinted in 2013 and is still available in that paperback edition. If you have young people in your extended family, it is a good one to teach history and inspire a love for the US. This same "We Were There series" with originals from 50's & 60's can still be found in used hardbacks or in some cases, reprinted paperback if you search.
Very interesting! I have heard about the Rush books he spoke about when I was in the car. I will look into Jean Fritz , as she appears to be a wealth of info. Thank you.
It was the Royal Diaries series that piqued my daughter's interest in history. A series of historical fiction books that are written from the perspective of what a 13-15 year old historical figure would have written in her diary about the events of her time. I read them too and learned as much as she did.
I’m in agreement on how terrible the current woke social studies curriculum is, but I also think that what I learned back in the 60s was a complete whitewash of what actually happened. One key point that was never covered was how much wealth was shipped back to Spain and the Vatican for many years after Columbus landed in the “new world”. Just on ship in one of the many many armadas, which happened to sink in a storm, and wasn’t recovered until the mid-20th century, is now a museum in Key West. It was carrying silver bars that amounted to $600M in 2015 dollars. I found that shocking, by itself it reveals the real motive for Columbus’ journey, and the real picture of what his group did after they landed. As far as I’m concerned, the Vatican needs to give those stolen goods back. It’s not ok to sit on wealth that was stolen at gunpoint. Ditto with the taxpayer funds that are now in the pockets of the Big Pharam CEOs. They should be required to return every penny.
Wonderful comment. There's also a slanderous rumor that Robert E. Lee, cousin to Richard Henry Lee, Founding Father, owned slaves.
This is a lie. He abhorred slavery, but was executor of his wife's father's estate (she was Washington's granddaughter), and her father died with slaves, high debts, and a provision in his will that his slaves by freed within 5 years of his death.
The slaves needed to work to make the money to pay the debts, they were paid, and the slaves freed. This was 10 years before the War Between the States.
Concise, accurate and thoughtful...Finally, finding intelligent people worth the time to read and GAVE TO MY GRANDCHILDREN TO READ, as well. Poor things...Grammy keeps them perpetually learning even in the summer when taking breaks from other activities. Ha..😎....Actually, the poor horses NEEDED A BREAK before getting a bath and curried. They sure have lost all their winter weight quickly this year.
good reply thanks mate Brisbane Aust
Excellent and much needed history lesson!
I wish more people realized that "history" is filtered.
Unfortunately most of history is lost to the ages because not all accounts are included.
Funny, because that's just what the Progressives like to complain about and that's why they created 1619 Project. A similar complaint that ended with a shoddy solution. The nuances of history are lost on most everyone.
Their motivation was not to improve our history. Their intent was to establish a false narrative to destroy America and demand undeserved "reparations" on top of decades of welfare handouts, affirmative action, quotas, and preferential treatment.
I read something about that, too. It seems that he was in debt, and if he tried to change the status of his slaves, they would have been liable to seizure and resale on the slave market to repay any debt that he had, so instead of officially freeing them, he told them that if they "escaped", he would not pursue them, thus in effect, freeing his slaves and permitting them to retain their family group.
There are articles describing Jefferson's severe debt burden at various sites around the net, as well as information about his slaves. Wikipedia has an article entitled ''Thomas Jefferson and slavery'' that gives details. Many of his slaves were sold off after his death to help pay off the debt.
Think of today's politicians, like Biden, Pelosi, Obama, the Clintons etc. etc., who have ''somehow'' become quite rich through holding important office as ''public servants''---how things have changed...
And some additional info about Jefferson the others who were involved in writing and editing the Declaration is at this link - Jefferson actually 1) 3 yrs after writing the Declaration, introduced legislation in the Virginia legislature that would have abolished importation of slaves and created an orderly process for freeing slaves - which all failed to pass the vote in the legislature; 2) as President he signed a bill passed by Congress to ban the importation of slaves, and he had supported this bill 3) He wrote strongly against slavery on several occasions. There is a lot more there, info on Ben Franklin (who once owned slaves but freed them in his lifetime and became President of an abolitionist organization) and also John Adams and Roger Sherman, on the committee to write the Declaration, who never ever owned any slaves. Good article. https://www.westernjournal.com/dem-rep-displays-stunning-lack-knowledge-declaration-independence-slavery/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=conservative-brief-WJ&utm_campaign=dailypm&utm_content=western-journal
ok, so you either don’t comply with such a law or you move your slaves to a state where you can free them. It’s ridiculous to claim that Jefferson, with all of his wealth, couldn’t possibly find a way to free his slaves.
Thomas Jefferson in his original draft also had a long paragraph decrying slavery. Furthermore, his draft of a law in Virginia became the basis for the NW Ordinance, which prohibited slavery in the new territories. This prohibition came from Jefferson’s prior draft.
Furthermore, how does one suddenly free thousands of slaves and make them free, self-governing citizens. They formed greater than half the population of some states. Our Founders were adults who recognized that overnight emancipation, though morally laudatory, would be a practical disaster that would carry its own suffering.
No Founder spoke positively of slavery. It wasn’t until 30 years or so later when John C Calhoun imported German Enlightenment philosophy that the notion of slavery as a positive good was born.
Wow. We live in fascinating times when the truth about all things past and present is being revealed. It's extremely costly remaining in ignorance, but extremely painful waking up to the truth. This explains why we never learn about real history. I'm 64 and my awareness of my ignorance grows every day even as the layers of lies are peeled away.
This is why we need to start teaching real, full-orbed history in schools.
Im in the UK; the Wokerati have infiltrated the education system such that some School teachers are allowing minor children to "identify" as cats .... and other inanimate objects; I will let that sink in....what the Governors are doing in these Schools is beyond me.
Meanwhile the Marxist apparatchiks in the Arts have this week had a performance of a play deemed only for non white audiences for one day - a sample of the reports of this here:
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/news/london-theatre-organises-black-only-performance-with-white-audiences-banned/ar-AA1bvzGA
The re-writing of books, novels and history is now "acceptable" to some, never me- can you imagine "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee" re-written to be somehow more orientated against non idigenous Americans..or "The Gulag.." volumes in some egregious way? I am part way through Shelby Foote's 3 volume Narrative...... is that what might be called history in action?
Not at all possible. History taught in schools by necessity must be snippets of importance. Details must be left to the students and their questions. A seminar on the civil war could be a day or a year. As one posters notes it might take several class hours to explore the Virginia laws dealing with slaves and property rights.
I would have given a lot to have class hours like that when I was in high school. And this was back in the late 1960's, when standards were supposedly higher than now....
Great points, Jared.
At the Constitutional Convention of 1787, there was a Committee of Eleven attempting to shut down the Slave Trade by 1800. This sunset clause of the slave trade, after being pushed back 8 years, was built into the US Constitution, pro-actively making the import of slaves illegal after 1808.
On almost every historic front, starting with Pennsylvania Quakers in 1688, it was the Americans who led in the various anti-slavery initiatives which transformed our world to one more free.
Exactly! Well said!
I'll just add that Jefferson's drafts never were codified because there wasn't support for them in the legislature.
"It wasn’t until 30 years or so later when John C Calhoun imported German Enlightenment philosophy that the notion of slavery as a positive good was born."
I'd debate this as the case. It's not that simple. There was a very complicated dynamic between the industrialized north and the antebellum south that required compromise on many levels just to get agreement on a confederation, let alone ratifying The Constitution. The south was concerned about the more populous north controlling the legislature if we just used free-persons as a measure of representatives in the house. Then it gets codified in the Articles, then The Constitution, and slavery becomes a power struggle and a point of contention for tariffs and pretty much takes on a life of its own.
It's very easy for us looking back at the default state of affairs 300 years ago and project the injustices of our current time on to our forefathers. Slavery was a normally accepted practice all over the world for MILLENNIA until the Queen of the British Empire declared it unjust. Slave holders could be of any race or nationality. So could their slaves. It just depended on what place and time we're talking about.
I highly recommend Thomas Sowell's "Black Rednecks and White Liberals."
https://amzn.to/37IczIU
“It takes no more research than a trip to almost any public library or college to show the incredibly lopsided coverage of slavery in the United States or in the Western Hemisphere, as compared to the meager writings on even larger number of Africans enslaved in the Islamic countries of the Middle East and North Africa, not to mention the vast numbers of Europeans also enslaved in centuries past in the Islamic world and within Europe itself. At least a million Europeans were enslaved by North African pirates alone from 1500 to 1800, and some Europeans slaves were still being sold on the auction blocks in the Egypt, years after the Emancipation Proclamation freed blacks in the United States.” ― Thomas Sowell, Black Rednecks and White Liberals
Also, Gordon Wood's "Empire of Liberty" does a good job of showing the change in attitudes on slavery from 1789 to 1812, but it's a more generalized look at the country and it doesn't dedicate as much to it as Sowell's book. It is an excellent book in its own right giving you a good flavor of the dynamics of the politics happening in the country during the period. https://amzn.to/3pE0LVo
There are some very good books on Jefferson himself, to which his attitudes on slavery are covered along with his attempts to abolish them:
Basani's "Liberty, State, and Union: The Political Theory of Thomas Jefferson" is excellent. https://amzn.to/3PG7tot
Gutzman's "Thomas Jefferson - Revolutionary: A Radical's Struggle to Remake America" covers the slavery dichotomy as well. https://amzn.to/44R8RZV
Gore Vidal's "Burr" is a very untraditional look at the United States through Jefferson's Vice President's eyes. I think it is a very compelling story that shows a very different perspective of Jefferson worth exploring. https://amzn.to/44xiQ6f
Lastly, Patrick Newman's "Cronyism: Liberty versus Power in Early America, 1607–1849" really takes a hammer to the founding fathers, shedding light on backroom deals and skeletons in the closet. Nobody is spared and you'll see that politics hasn't really changed in 300 years. https://amzn.to/3PLFgMR
Excellent and invaluable information, much appreciated!
Excellent, thanks - also best books on Mexican American war and relations with Mexico before and since. Also the history and growth of the US defense industry. Thanks again
Truth. Standing in judgement of historical figures is a conceit of the envious and lazy minds.
And if anybody living today ever wonders what they'd have done living in 1930's-1940's Germany they need only look in the mirror at their actions since 2020 and they have their answer. Did they obey? Did they "mask up?" Did they roll up their sleeves for a needle? Did they exclude others, discriminate against those who didn't obey? Did they stand up for others who didn't obey even if they thought it was the right thing for them to do? Did they stand up for the kid in the classroom who was being picked on by the bully? Or did they sit quietly, wince a little for the kid but say nothing, even giggle when the bully said something funny (Seriously, it's horse paste! hahahahah!)? Every single one of us did EXACTLY what we'd have done in Germany. Exactly. No exceptions. Humans are the same. In 2023, 1943, 1933, 1863, 1773. Same.
The simplest way to demonstrate the futility of judging the past actions of history is to read the Bible. The meaning of words requires context of the language and the times. Without the full context and accurate definitions of the vocabulary of the time, fully understanding is impossible. And even with full understanding, judgement is dicey at best.
To paraphrase an old saying, you can't judge a man without walking a mile in his shoes. This means you have to have lived a person's experience in their context before you can understand how they thought and felt. And even then, you're estimating.
Having the full context and definitions helps understanding, but it does not ensure you interpret it as the other persons did. History is a tricky beast.
Accurate definitions of words is essential. A great dictionary, American Dictionary of the English Language, Noah Webster 1828, is a treasure trove. For those who love to do word studies and apply to bible studies, it is highly recommended.
Same Humans. 1523:
https://historycollection.com/brutal-aztec-human-sacrifices-believed-serve-aztec-people-unbelievable-reason/2/
Does anyone reading this believe the human brain and temperament, character, morals have genetically evolved over the past 500 years? Does anyone reading this believe they are cut from a finer cloth of man, their genes superior with imbued ethics, morals, humanity, their blood makes them impervious to practices like these? Does anyone reading this believe the Aztec were inherently, intrinsically, preternaturally more savage than we are today? Because, evolution?
The mind. The human mind is very adaptable to changing conditions. And can be conditioned. Our nature doesn't produce horrors like ritual sacrifice. Our minds do. And our hearts. And our connectivity to our fellow man.
Which is why the powers that be today, the Malthusians, those who believe they are cut from a better cloth of man, are more sophisticated, are elite and genetically superior to all others work so hard with propaganda and censorship programs, apply psychological manipulations, Mind Managers, behavioral "scientists" skilled in deception and coercion to mold our minds, our thoughts into what they want us to be. They possess cold hearts, fear our connection with our fellow man, they put their faith in the cool, rational, academic approach of "science" of govern-ment. Govern=Control, Ment=Mind.
We are the same human. Only our irrational love, our hearts and souls, our faith in God protects and preserves our humanity. The Aztecs followed their "science." All of the evil, murderous regimes of the 20th century follwed their "science." We must not follow their "science" today. If we, the same humans, are truly capable of learning from the history of man. Men just like us.
Yes, and the indigenous tribes of Mexico begged Cortez to topple the Aztecs because of their cruelty.
However, REAL science, as defined by the Scientific Method, is a safeguard. Scientists are skeptics, and it's largely inductive logic, which is a learned discipline, not natural to most people. A good scientist knows his work must be replicated and stand up to the scrutiny of his fellows. That in itself is a guard.
Our public health started to rot when research was funded by govt grants. Like everything in gov't, it eventually becomes a huge racket.
Anyone that paid attention to the Gallo theft of Luc Montanier's discovery of HIV should have seen what was happening.
Yes. REAL science. Not pseudoscience. Like psychological manipulative 'science', like social and behavioral science. Which are narrative sciences. Tiny little bit of natural science onto which an entire narrative is constructed for purposes of social and behavioral control and societal shifts in understanding.
I found this link to a description of The Science Wars very useful to understanding how the social sciences, narrative science, pseudoscience have displaced natural sciences and the scientific method. It is written from the perspective of a Marxist, so I take that into account as I read it. But it is very well-sourced, lots of references and citations of credible sources and I can follow them far back in. While this piece leans strongly into the science wars of the 1990's the writer brings it forward to the late 2010's and I think it is about as good a primer as I've found in one source. Again, I read through the writer's bias to gain a clearer understanding of it that fits with other data points I bring with me to the information the writer presents:
https://magazine.scienceforthepeople.org/vol22-1/science-wars-the-next-generation/
Mind you, this is the science that is being taught to our "best and brightest" today. Doctors, engineers, physicists, chemists, etc. All scientific learning and understanding is being conveyed through narrative prisms that distort the REAL natural sciences.
The standards are being dumbed down. Even for physicians. Less expertise is expected of them. They are becoming trained monkeys who plug in symptoms in expensive WebMD programs to dispense assembly line diagnosis and prescriptions. The art of medicine, critical thinking, innovation is being replaced with obedience to standardized protocols. The pandemic medical response wasn't a mistake. It was the plan. One-size fits all, no variations, whatever the program says, goes. Punishing medical professionals who think for themselves. The natural evolution of The Science Wars that elevated narrative social and behavioral science atop natural science.
This just came out in the American College of Physicians, Annals of Internal Medicine, June 20, 2023
https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M23-0695
"with Step 1 transitioning to pass/fail scoring and the elimination of Step 2 Clinical Skills. These changes bring us to a unique time of reflection on the purpose and structure of Step 3. Considering its history and aims within the current landscape of medical practice and licensure, we believe that the present structure of Step 3 is impractical and burdensome."
Make you more confidant in the skill level of your physician? But they're educated enough to tell you that boys can be girls if they click the heals of their red slippers together, inject 72 poisons, including for STD's into your infants "for their health" and declare a pandemic over to honor the deification of a career criminal, then restart it when the arson, looting and mayhem stops. Because, science (narrative).
Thanks for the links. So great.
Your welcome. I meant to say a little more clearly that the Science Wars piece is a good basic summary, minus the bias. But the links it contains, that's where I got the best, most informative understanding of the subject, including historical context. The links that it references, that's what makes it a great repository.
Very insightfully stated!
Well said!
Very astutely stated!
I know that my ancestors owned slaves (in Baltimore and the Chesapeake Bay area) during the first half of the 19th century. One of those slaves escaped and became known to the world as Frederick Douglass. In his autobiography he recounted how he was treated while a slave. It makes fascinating reading--in some ways my ancestors behaved admirably, and in other instances they revealed all too human failings, within the customs of the time.
As a man of today, of course I would not tolerate owning slaves. But if I were born into the early 19th century in Baltimore, I would not have the advantage of hindsight that we have now. While I would like to believe that I would behave decently under the circumstances, there is no guarantee of that. Frederick Douglass was adamant that the main problem with slavery was the slave system itself and how it corrupted otherwise decent people into committing injustice against their fellow humans. His autobiography offers up ample evidence for his argument.
This was a fantastic autobiography and an extremely important first person view of slavery that everyone needs to read. https://amzn.to/3eUC7Hs
I think we ALL owe it to ourselves to reflect on what slavery actually was, along with someone tenacious enough to not let such an institution diminish the fortitude of who he was. The story is an amazing one.
I have only one regret with this autobiography, and that is with his treatment of Abraham Lincoln. He lionizes Lincoln for abolishing slavery even after he eventually admits Lincoln wanted to preserve the union at any costs -- even if it meant preserving slavery, or removing slaves from the country.
"He was ready to execute all the supposed constitutional guarantees of the United States Constitution in favor of the slave system anywhere inside the slave States. He was willing to pursue, recapture, and send back the fugitive slave to his master, and to suppress a slave rising for liberty, though the guilty master were already in arms against the Government. The race to which we belong were not the special objects of his consideration."
"...though the Union was more to him than our freedom or our future..." Douglass gives Lincoln a pass because of the end result.
This I cannot abide by. Yes, the Confederacy had extreme issues, just as a marriage with irreconcilable differences ends in divorce. Except in the case of President Lincoln, one was forced to remain against its will with the wholesale slaughter of a decent amount of its next of kin as submission.
There was another way to end slavery -- if that were actually the stated end, but Lincoln took the road of tyranny and subjugated free and independent states to preserve the union at any cost. His legacy has disenfranchised and enslaved us ALL.
Regardless of this, the whole of the autobiography is completely and utterly worthwhile. It is, after all, a perspective of one man's view of the most important events throughout his life. It is a view that all of us must endeavor to comprehend or we shall surely repeat the mistakes of the past, except this time, it will be all of humanity that suffers.
“Thus far all human governments have been failures, for none have secured, except in a partial degree, the ends for which governments are instituted. War, slavery, injustice and oppression, and the idea that might makes right have been uppermost in all such governments, and the weak, for whose protection governments are ostensibly created, have had practically no rights which the strong have felt bound to respect.
The slayers of thousands have been exalted into heroes, and the worship of mere physical force has been considered glorious.”
It is terribly easy for any high browned left wing do gooder liberal living in the ease of 21st century America with their 9-5 work from home sipping a soy latte Seattle’s Best coffee to say, “If I was born back then I would have done this or done that!!!”
Bullshit!!!
You give any of them an inheritance in 1800 America of 1000 prime fertile acres of Georgia knee high ready to pick cotton and 30 slaves owned by them to pick it that would net them $10,000 confederate dollars 💵 in their local bank account and watch how fast they get out there and crack that whip on them slaves to harvest that crop before the boweevils or a summer hail storm decimates it and scatters their $10,000 profit to the wind!!! You really think they are gonna let their high Southern Society Debutante wife and six French language tutored and pompously dressed kids do without or go hungry over the cold Georgia winter and be mocked for missing the fall formal at any of their society functions!!!
Your comparison to what they would do from what they all did during Covid is spot on my friend!!! If they had slaves they would have thought it as normal in the 1800 American South as they would think using a cell phone is today! It is easy to say you would feel a certain way back then based on what you know today but when placed back in history in that social context your social and societal norms and upbringing would have most everyone going right along with whatever social construct you found yourself in! And thats a fact, Jack!!!
💯💥
Very accurately stated!
Not to mention the S. Carolina rice fields, which were literally hell on earth!
As folks typed their responses to you on their I-whatevers or any battery containing devices did they then bash their devices on their desks to protest modern day slavery? Let alone what China does, how about the cobalt mining child slavery in the Congo? So where exactly does hypocrisy lie? 200+ years in the past or right faucing now?
There are at least 45 MILLION slaves in the world right now! More than when slavery was "legal"! When Barry allowed more than 800,000 " unaccompanied minors" in this country where did they disappear? The children found working in meat packing plants are the lucky ones! How many are sex slaves? With Brandon allowing hundreds of thousands to be brought in EVERY DAY!
🎯
💯
Sexual slavery as well.
Well framed arguments again Sir! My hat is tipped to you in admiration. 👍🏻🇺🇸
I agree fully. It is tired and disingenuous to apply today's standards to our forebears. I recently read an accounting of what became of the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence and it seems the majority of them ended up stripped of their assets, many jailed, some were put to death - all for standing up for a cause so much bigger than them. We owe nothing but gratitude to all of these men, and I say that knowing fully many were misogynists, slaveholders, polyamorists, and more.
I would like to think, had I the means, I would have freed then paid the former slaves to stay on and continue their work - but who can say? As you so rightly point out, look how meekly so many people swallowed the party line during Covid, and locked down and denounced anyone who questioned constant masking and distancing and boosters. People were afraid to question authority in a society where we have the legal right to do so - who would truly have stood up against such greater odds?
That was after pledging their lives, their liberty, and their sacred honor for ours.
Exactly right!
Very insightfully stated!
Please all - go see Sound of Freedom. Tell your friends to see it and then ask them what they are doing themselves to end slavery -of children, of young people now.
Where is the outcry and action from all of us that think ourselves more highly than our founders?
Can it be found online? I have seen several trailers, but not the full movie.
Hi. Only theaters now as far as I can see. We have lots of theaters showing it and a lot have been almost sold out.
In 1911, Booker T. Washington wrote: "There is a class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs-partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs."
We have now had a black president, black vice president, several black attorneys general, several black surgeon generals, we've had two black coaches meet in the superbowl.... and we are "systematically racist?" Only the BLM organization, whose obese founder Patrice Cullors said "we are trained Marxists" could come up with that one. And then there is that $1.4mm mansion she bought in all white Topanga Canyon with all that wokester dough; kinda like Obama's mansion at 79 Turkeyland Dr., Edgartown MA (Martha's Vineyard) which is literally 3 feet above sea level (verify elevation herehttps://whatismyelevation.com/location/41.36189,-70.54573/79-Turkeyland-Cove-Rd--Edgartown--MA-02539- Verify address here https://www.forbes.com/sites/kathleenhowley/2019/09/01/obamas-buying-marthas-vineyard-estate-from-boston-celtics-owner/?sh=34fe08453007
The Obama mansions would house 10,000 illegals alone in the pantry!
In your historical hypothetical, I suspect that most of us, myself included, would accept such a Jeffersonian inheritance as “the way things are” and carry on with business as usual while attempting to treat everyone involved in what would have been considered a humane way for that period of time.
You would have to because of the laws of Virginia at the time disallowed liberating slaves.
Except the change makers
Just like in Lake Wobegon, where all the men are good-looking and all the children are above average.
Black PBS personality and Harvard Univ. prof Henry Louis Gates says at https://www.pbs.org/wnet/african-americans-many-rivers-to-cross/history/how-many-slaves-landed-in-the-us/ that while 10.7 mm blacks were shipped out as slaves, only 388,000 – a tiny percentage – were shipped to North America (he doesn’t specify it this includes Central America or not). That’s right – just under 4% of slaves went to North America. In contrast, Dr. Robert Davis at Ohio State Univ. has calculated that between 1 and 1.25 million white Europeans were taken as slaves TO Africa along the Barbary Coast between the 16th to 18th C, https://news.osu.edu/when-europeans-were-slaves--research-suggests-white-slavery-was-much-more-common-than-previously-believed/ That means that well over 3 TIMES the number of whites were enslaved by African Muslims than blacks by North Americans. Davis’s new estimates appear in the book Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters: White Slavery in the Mediterranean, the Barbary Coast, and Italy, 1500-1800 (Palgrave Macmillan). Yes, this means up to 325 times the number of whites were taken as slaves to Africa than Africans to the America (and some of that 388,000 may have gone to Mexico or Central America).
And the U.S. lost a MASSIVE 2% of its population, 620,000 in the Civil War to stop this. In today’s population, that would mean almost 6 million people. History.com says 618,222 is often cited for the number of deaths, with 360,222 Union soldiers. Are more soldiers dying than there were slaves taken not reparation enough? More recently, the War on Poverty – a very large percentage dedicated to make up for the injustices of a century ago - started in 1964, has spent over $22 TRILLION by some estimates. How well has that done? Just go visit the tent cities of socialist SF, Portland, Seattle, LA, etc. I am happy to pay reparations… to any black person applying who lived under slavery, or was even a child or grandchild of a slave.
I have submitted my reparations request these Muslim nations on your behalf, asking for $5mm each. Will let you know when “the cheque’s in the mail.”
Excellent and insightful comment!
I would add that the applicant is currently indigent, lacking in resources and income. But of course, America has systems for providing for those who meet those standards regardless of the status of forbears.
#2 was the default and the northern industries realized that they could hire, work to death and replace their "workers" without the up front capital costs.
At the time it was becoming obvious that the ROI on slaves was not good. The system had to change and there were many reluctant owners in the 1860's. Looking at census records (1860-1880) you can see that many household slaves and owners continued on well after emancipation. We might assume the slaves were members of that family and simply stayed on.
Family or couldn't find a better job. If they had a decent owner he would be a decent boss so why move?
And it was the law in many states that slaves could not be taught to read. The only kind of non-slave jobs there were, were slave-type labor.
And most gun control laws were originally to prevent blacks from owning firearms. Can't have people defending themselves.
The ROI was increased, once the slave owner purchased the new Cotton Gin. One slave could then complete the work of 50 per day. Of course the cotton gin was available in the North, too, making them less dependent on the Southern states for this staple.
Sorry that those who malign Thomas Jefferson for writing about liberty in the Declaration are ignorant of the 158-word clause the Second Continental Congress removed from Jefferson's original blaming King George for the scourge of African slavery on the continent of America. Maybe they should read more.
As a writer (and a reader that appreciates good writing), I love how you used "158-word" in your statement. The specificity adds power to your message.
Feudalism predated GR III by a few hundred years which itself was not a "thing" whilst various forms of slavery dominated Africa, the East ......for centuries. What amazes me is that those who demand "reparations", "compensation" do so whilst living in some comfort, clearly not starving and exhibiting some education; they do not seem to address how slavery was enabled by indigenous people all over the continent of Africa, that non Africans were also trafficked - not a one way street for sure. Am I "allowed" to think that....?
Oh, and did I mention black history gadfly and Obama buddy Henry Louis Gates said 388,000 blacks were shipped to N. America... but apparently the fasco-Marxist America haters are too ignorant to know that up to 1.25 million whites were, very roughly in that same era, TAKEN TO NORTH AFRICA AS SLAVES?
What's that I hear? Yet more leftist ignorant silence?
A new study suggests that a million or more European Christians were enslaved by Muslims in North Africa between 1530 and 1780 – a far greater number than had ever been estimated before.
In a new book, Robert Davis, professor of history at Ohio State University, developed a unique methodology to calculate the number of white Christians who were enslaved along Africa’s Barbary Coast, arriving at much higher slave population estimates than any previous studies had found.
Most other accounts of slavery along the Barbary coast didn’t try to estimate the number of slaves, or only looked at the number of slaves in particular cities, Davis said. Most previously estimated slave counts have thus tended to be in the thousands, or at most in the tens of thousands. Davis, by contrast, has calculated that between 1 million and 1.25 million European Christians were captured and forced to work in North Africa from the 16th to 18th centuries. They even took slaves from Iceland !
Davis’s new estimates appear in the book Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters: White Slavery in the Mediterranean, the Barbary Coast, and Italy, 1500-1800 (Palgrave Macmillan)
It is clear, our Founding Fathers were committed to creating a government like no other in the history of mankind. They brilliantly brought out truths never said or heard before, "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness ..." They first had to risk their lives fighting for Independence, and then they could push their efforts to create a More Perfect Union! A Union without slavery. It is no coincidence that President Lincoln used the words and intentions of our Founding Fathers in justifying the Civil War to end slavery. President Lincoln also used the same words to justify further fighting in order to preserve the Nation created by our Founding Fathers! The Founding Father's believed slavery was unjust, as depicted with the words above. Additionally, they took concrete steps to contain slavery, forbidding it in the Northwest Territory, while ending the slave trade in 1808, in the hopes that it would wither away. Lincoln stated in one of his debate's with Douglas, on this issue, the Founding Fathers, "stopped it's spread [slavery] in one direction and cut of its source in another." We must also never forget how unjust it is to hold generations before us to the standards we have today. Would it be just to hold the standards of an adult for a child? No, that would be unjust, just as it is for those holding our Founding Fathers to the standards of our Nation today. In fact it is their actions and sacrifices, that even allowed us to be where we are today. On Independence Day, the only just act is to revere our Founding Fathers for their courage, brilliance, and sacrifice for follow on generations to receive freedom's and life standards, they never were able to experience. May God Bless our Founding Fathers and America, and may all globalists, looking to destroy America rot in hell!
Slavery was not a major issue for Lincoln in prosecuting the War, it was minor, really. The largest issue was the tariffs, and how, because of the differences between the economies of the industrial North, and agricultural South, the tariffs became a heavy burden for Southerners. . See the Tariff of Abominations, and the straw that broke the camels back, the Morill Tariff.
Slavery only became a huge issue when Lincoln was losing the war.
Brilliantly stated! And we should also be reminded that the ideals and aspirations espoused in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution had at the time and even more so now, a UNIVERSAL hope for ALL PEOPLE of the world; the American Revolution and Civil War did not just represent national struggles but a struggle to free humankind from tyranny no matter where it existed as well as to restore the right of all to live as equals with the sovereignty granted by our Creator.