Dred Scott's Revenge: A Legal History of Race and Freedom in America
Andrew P. Napolitano, 2009
Racial hatred is one of the ugliest of human emotions. And the United States not only once condoned it, it also mandated it?wove it right into the fabric of American jurisprudence. Federal and state governments legally suspended the free will of blacks for 150 years and then denied blacks equal protection of the law for another 150.
How did such crimes happen in America? How were the laws of the land, even the Constitution itself, twisted into repressive and oppressive legislation that denied people their inalienable rights?
Taking the Dred Scott case of 1957 as his shocking center, Judge Andrew P. Napolitano tells the story of how it happened and, through it, builds a damning case against American statesmen from Lincoln to Wilson, from FDR to JFK.
Born a slave in Virginia, Dred Scott sued for freedom based on the fact that he had lived in states and territories where slavery was illegal. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled against Scott, denied citizenship to blacks, and spawned more than a century of government-sponsored maltreatment that destroyed lives, suppressed freedom, and scarred our culture.
Dred Scott's Revenge is the story of America's long struggle to provide a new context?one in which "All men are created equal," and government really treats them so.
Born a slave in Virginia, Dred Scott sued for freedom based on the fact that he had lived in states and territories where slavery was illegal. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled against Scott, denied citizenship to blacks, and spawned more than a century of government-sponsored maltreatment that destroyed lives, suppressed freedom, and scarred our culture. And then white liberals, as proxy servants of Satan, enslaved the black culture fostering the demonic envious victim-entitlement mentality. Which sees as oppressors those who subscribe to and operate under the premise that benefits are to be earned, and that such have a right to higher standard of living than those who do not merit this.
And that such are to show mercy to the truly oppressed, and can bestow grace on the unworthy, not as such being their right but as a gift, with the expectation that the recipients of such will use such to become productive members of society, as able, and so help others themselves
Like the envious devil, who selfishly presumed he was worthy to sit on God's throne, (Is. 14:14) and worked to seduce Eve into seeing herself as a victim of a malevolent God who was selfishly keeping back her ability to be as a god - thus God was needed to share the wealth - the liberal elite appeals to those who have less than others as being their saviors from the oppression of the wage earners.
While in fact there sometimes is injustice and oppression, rather then encouraging overcoming such in the long term by hard work and diligence, as Booker T. Washington exhorted , what the liberal elite fostered was bitterness and resentment, as victims who were entitled to the same benefits as those they envied, even without meriting such, or as charity.
Instead, the idea that it was their right was sold to them, which the liberal saviors would procure at no cost except in response to their votes, thus fostering indolence and a welfare society which made the former dependent on the liberal saviors, which actually kept them in poverty.
And as these two classes grow and those who are required to share their wealth decrease, then more and more become dependent on the deified democrats, who will increasingly require homage in their alternative society, which increasingly reflects the will of the devil, and in which he receives obeisance thru his proxy servants.
Thus God's being done on earth as it is in Heaven is anathema to such liberal elites.