Posted on 03/20/2013 9:57:49 AM PDT by mnehring
Zo has strong words for neo-confederate libertarians, especially those who infiltrated the CPAC conference. He reminds viewers why some libertarians have no place in the conservative movement, and why Republicans should embrace the vision of Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass.
(Video at link)
(Excerpt) Read more at pjtv.com ...
Except for that itsy-bitsy detail that the vast majority of the white people of that time were saying that “all WHITE men are created equal.”
This point is well-established.
I hope you can see the considerable difference between the belief system of the late 1700s and that of today. For you to have a valid point, history would record that the majority of the white population of that time believed that black people were equal to white people, but simply chose to ignore it despite their beliefs. A silly notion to be sure, but that is the foundation of your argument. Bottom line is, if what you are trying argue was true, the founders — from both north and south — would have been hypocrites to the extreme.
The simple fact is, the vast majority of the people who founded this country did NOT believe that blacks were equal to whites. Period.
Well good thing then, that all the racists are liberals. :) We don’t need anymore of them messin stuff up for us.
The Founders were unrivaled in their ability to use language, yet you assume they couldn't insert the simple adjective needed to make their actual point clear.
This whole issue of what the DOI meant was NOT settled in men's minds in 1860. It was argued and fought over throughout the 1850s.
Lincoln in one of the Douglas debates expressed well my view on the issue. You and Stephens of course disagree.
"I think the authors of that notable instrument intended to include all men, but they did not mean to declare all men equal in all respects. They did not mean to say all men were equal in color, size, intellect, moral development, or social capacity. They defined with tolerable distinctness in what they did consider all men created equal — equal in "certain inalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." This they said, and this they meant. They did not mean to assert the obvious untruth that all were then actually enjoying that equality, or yet that they were about to confer it immediately upon them. In fact, they had no power to confer such a boon. They meant simply to declare the right, so that the enforcement of it might follow as fast as circumstances should permit. They meant to set up a standard maxim for free society which should be familiar to all, constantly looked to, constantly labored for, and even, though never perfectly attained, constantly approximated, and thereby constantly spreading and deepening its influence, and augmenting the happiness and value of life to all people, of all colors, everywhere.
I’m all in favor of color and ethnic blind. When it comes to those of white Christian heritage the media and many so called liberal elites oddly get away with the most vile form of racism with discriminatory hiring and admissions policy. American Conservative recently had a good article on this discrimination by liberal minorities called the Myth of the American Meritocracy.
The ethnic backbone of the GOP had better ensure that all have a level playing field before we agree with”liberal racists” that once again we are the problem.
It’s amazing the extent that Lost Cause Losers will go in order to apologize for the madness that was the confederacy.
“For your assertion to be true, we would have to assume that the Founders, while not perhaps hypocrites, were definitely either stupid or liars.”
Nonsense. We simply have to know that that was the truth of the times they lived in. You are obviously very ignorant about the beliefs of 17th and 18th century Europeans...and by extension, English colonials. You can look it up yourself, but here’s one example:
As the slave trade developed, Europeans created a racist ideology which could be used to justify the trade. Africans were thought to be sub-human, uncivilized, and inferior to Europeans in every way. And as they were ‘not one of us’, they could be bought and sold. The development of racism is linked to the slave trade. The slave trade could not have continued without this ideology to justify it. Racism cannot be ignored in any study of the slave trade.
Get it? Our founders lived in a culture that considered blacks to be subhuman. So, in their minds, saying that “all men are created equal” while sanctioning slavery in ALL 13 colonies/states, was not hypocritical. Nor were they stupid or liars. They simply did not believe blacks were “men” in the same way that white people were. If you cannot grasp this simple, well-documented truth there is no need for further discussion.
“The Founders were unrivaled in their ability to use language, yet you assume they couldn’t insert the simple adjective needed to make their actual point clear.”
I assume nothing of the sort. See above. You are simply unable to comprehend the fact that most people of that time did not consider blacks to be “men” in the same sense they considered themselves to be men. To them, adding “white” would have been both unnecessary and redundant.
“This whole issue of what the DOI meant was NOT settled in men’s minds in 1860. It was argued and fought over throughout the 1850s.”
More nonsense. There was no disputing what was in the DOI. The argument was over what was — or was not — in the Constitution.
“Lincoln in one of the Douglas debates expressed well my view on the issue. You and Stephens of course disagree.”
By this point you should understand that nothing you have said has been correct, including this statement.
Keep in mind that many of our Founding Fathers” (including George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison) were slave owners. For me to accept your points we both would have to believe that they were either hypocrites, liars, or stupid (according to you), OR they were victims of the beliefs of their time, in this case, the belief that blacks were subhuman.
My explanation — is based on facts — makes perfect sense. Your arguments, based on nonsense, do not.
Many times, the blacks will view it as a white plot and actively work against it. In situations where the poor people are white, then it is viewed in a similar fashion (the rich are looking to control the poor). Bringing in role models (who left and made something of themselves), makes people angry as they are viewed as betraying the neighborhood. Seen it in the poor whites where I grew up, Indian reservations, and the places where my wife teaches.
A lot of these uplift programs don't work because they are trying to solve the symptoms, not the cause. Once you get a group of people convinced that they are victims, they give up. Race doesn't have much to do with it, and changing that perception is very difficult.
Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass, where oh where is MLK, Mike King the great academic fraud, whore monger and commie crat?
Come to think about it, it was fought over even more after the 1850s, in a quite literal sense during the 1860s, and then somewhat more figuratively for the next century.
It was only in the 1960s and later that America finally reached a consensus on what the DOI actually meant, which was the interpretation expressed most powerfully by Lincoln.
This was one of the few good things to come out of the 60s, IMO.
Forget segregation, many just want to secede from the Federal Government controlled by the petty tyrants, the NE Trotsky Repubs and coastal/upper MW communist. We want out of the CIA operative Wm Buckley’s worthless neo-conservativism party and as soon as possible from the rapidly devolving into S. Africa US Federal Government and we know that battle is unavoidable now!
Commercial interests brought slavery to the USA for the same reason that illegal emigration has been allowed to persist.. Powerful greedy people wanted cheap (illegal?) labor then as they do now. The politicians then figured out a way to capitalize on the divide, then as they do now, and that’s where the “racism” comes into play.
What’s that WE kemmosabe? You sound like the Leftist thugs that beat up the diners in IL. The faux anti-racist, aka leftist skin heads.
“In his speech Stephens explicitly claimed that the Founders were wrong in this belief and that the CSA was superior...”
Wow! Stephens was making claims that something that did not yet exist was superior.
snicker...
Put down the shovel, son.
Ooops. My bad. Sorry, got lost in the thread and thought you had posted out of context. I’ll give you that one.
But really, you should put the shovel down.
Stephens made that quote in May 1861, the CSA was founded in February 1861.
Sigh, this is why we can’t move forward. Dare to speak the truth about an issue and on one side the Republicans accuse you of racism and the Storm Front ignoramuses try to involve you in their racial purity wet dreams.
Conservatism is devoted to the notion that we are a “melting pot”. We don’t care where you come from, what your race or religion is, as long as you blend in with society.
Liberals are devoted to the “tossed salad” notion, that people of different cultures can live amongst each other in peace and harmony....which we all here know is a whole bunch of hooey.
Hip-hop is more like beatnik poetry from the fifties than music. All meter and no music.
We don't need a plan to uplift blacks. We need a plan to wean them off of the free stuff. But no one will touch that with a 10 foot pole. IMHO this issue doesn't get fixed as long as the US has access to credit. The politician has not been born who has the stones to say "no more free stuff".
Modern slavery is better because the slave owner is the government, and while the government provides food and housing to the slaves, they don’t make the slaves toil at hard labor, they only make them show up a couple of times a year and vote.
Sometimes they ask the slaves to fill up the streets and demand things.
And the government master doesn’t use literal shackles. However, it does many things to keep the slaves from escaping. The government sets up huge plantations we call cities. It makes it impossible for people on the plantation to own their own transportation, instead offering them cheap access to “public” transportation which takes them AROUND the plantation, but not OFF the plantation.
Government implements tax policies that drive up the costs of living off the plantation.
The Government master doesn’t technically FORBID the slaves from making money and thus finding an escape. But it sets up regulatory policies that make it hard for the slaves to get any meaningful work where they are housed, it sets up handouts and other programs that encourage sloth, encourages the dissolution of families, and encourages dependency.
It runs school systems that pretend to teach the slave children, but instead leave them ill-prepared for anything more than slave labor like janitorial work, or slinging food at a McDonalds, or stocking warehouses.
It offers no meaningful entertainment or culture, instead trapping the slaves in a downward spiral of debauchery and crime. The government masters focus not on solving the scourge of gangs, or of drug dealers, or of wanton drunkenness — instead using police power to “contain” the problem, to keep it from spilling out to where the non-slaves live.
Occasionally, this task is made difficult, such as where established universities exist within the plantation; extra effort is then made to keep the slaves from wandering into the enclaves where the “normal people” are.
And the government masters ensure that the slaves cannot help themselves, cannot save themselves, cannot protect themselves. No school vouchers to get real education. No guns allowed to keep out the criminals. No real jobs to lift your economic status. No real political choice to vote in people who will make things better.
The slaves know, at least subconsciously, that they are slaves. They don’t know who to blame, and the slave-owners make sure to tell them every day that it is the rich, the corporations, big business, evil republicans, white people, asians, the successful, the well-off, suburbia, that are the problem. So the slaves riot, pillage, commit crimes against their “oppressors”, think they are getting somewhere, like how in the book 1984 there were fake wars — keep the slaves from recognizing the truth by letting them take out frustration on their enemies.
And when the non-slaves object to being targeted, we can call them racists.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.