Posted on 08/04/2016 5:18:21 AM PDT by OddLane
First he exposed the History Channel’s miniseries “Roots” as root-and-brunch fiction. Now, the courageous epistolary warrior Kunta (Jack) Kerwick has turned his attention to correcting lies about slavery, promulgated in media and scholarly circles.
A point forcefully made by Kerwick is that although a vibrant, indigenous slave trade was conducted well into the nineteenth century in the interior of West Africa, slavery has become the White Man’s cross to bear.
Also omitted, in the course of the “honest” conversation about race directed by our political masters, is that credit for the demise of the slave trade in Africa belongs to Europeans. In his compact study, The Slave Trade, British historian Jeremy Black (London, 2006), highlights the “leading role Britain played in the abolition of slavery [as]… an example of an ethical foreign policy.” Britain agonized over this repugnant institution, failed to reconcile it with the Christian faith, and consequently abolished it.
(Excerpt) Read more at frontpagemag.com ...
This is one of these yes and no questions.
There is no “earthly” reason keeping this, like other historical slaveries, from receding into the past and ceasing to contaminate the present.
However a people seized with modern anomie, ennui, and boredom is an easy prey for such facile identity politics. “We are the slaves” becomes bigger than anything else they could be. They are very right to look for a reason that they should matter, though wrong to find it in Marxism.
It’s a spiritual battle. Nobody says that these Muslim captors were anything but evil. They were driven by evil spirits. These evil spirits must be bidden adios in favor of an embrace of God or else they will continue to plague us without end.
Wow! Good article....Obama and Hils are all about lies only.
Well, thank GOD judgement is not *left* up to me.
Oh yeah pun intended.....
There is something in human nature that seeks to be morally justified without being moral. Victimhood supplies that.
If you pay attention you will notice lots of people doing this; when you meet them, or before they offer an opinion on something, they have to establish their bona fides as a victim so that, in their minds, you will take them seriously.
Its just an odd quirk that especially in recent times people have fallen in to.
In any case, slavery has been used heavily for this purpose.
Most people get their moral sense from the culture. As a consequence when the culture goes toxic, they have no way of seeing it, and no way of understanding what has gone wrong in their lives. And the more that goes wrong in your life, the more victimhood you will suffer (and inflict) and so the cycle gets stronger.
The problem in most of our inner cities is a simple one; broken families, substance abuse. Not enough believing Christians per square mile.
Your first line is brilliant.
And the welfare systems encourages women not to marry the father of their children while the men turn to selling drugs as a way to make money.
I think that’s a theory worth pursuing. I think it’s more that people seek the POWER that comes from moral rectitude but are unwilling to make the sacrifices required to actually EARN that power. Martin Luther King prompted an entire nation to embrace racial equality, not through bombast and extortion but by exposing the inconsistency between prejudice and Christian principle. He had the moral high ground and used it to leverage away decades of discrimination.
Contrast that with today’s mis-named “civil rights” movement. Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and BLM are clearly NOT appealing to “the better angels of our nature.” They are trying to wield the power of the Victim without being victims, and they are encouraging the same abuse in their followers. Their ridiculous exaggerations and outright lies demonstrate the sheer paucity of their position, and their desperate need for a false moral aura.
I thought so too.
Yeah, right. About a year ago, I read "Chocolate Wars", and the British Foreign Office kept the Cadburys (still family-owned) from exposing the Portuguese Angolan slave trade on the chocolate plantations as late as the eve of WWI, iirc.
Once it came out, the holier-than-thou Cadbury Quakers took an awful lot of bad publicity, courtesy of competing chocolatiers, over Cadbury's continued dealings with said chocolate suppliers utilizing actual slave labor after Cadbury confirmed the slavery.
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.