a little story of s***ery
Aug 16, 2017 13:24:43 #
This ignorant association between a Confederale soldier and s***ery contradicts all known history. S***ery in the Southern states was confined to large argicultural tracts known as plantations. S***es were the agricultural workforce. This institution long predated the Confederacy and the United States itself. It was an inherited institution from the time that the New World was colonized by European economic interests. S***es were not a Southern invention. They were brought in long prior to the Declaration of Independence, because there were resources to be exploited but no work force.
The first s***es were white s***es, but they died like flies from malaria and yellow fevor. Next indigenious Americans (“Indians”) were used as s***es, but they would not work. Then it was discovered that some Africans had immunity to malaria and resistance to yellow fever, and finally a work force was located. The s***es were purchased from the African tribes that annually conducted warfare between themselves, the booty of which was s***es. Socialist historians, such as Karl Polanyi, the Jewish brother of my Jewish Oxford professor, the distinguished physical chemist and philosopher Michael Polanyi, to whom my first book is dedicated, wrote detailed and exacting histories of the African s***e trade conducted by black Africans.
Confederate soldiers did not own s***es, and as every honest historian knows, they were not fighting for s***ery. They were fighting, because their country had been invaded.
The Confederacy was not their country any more than the United States had been. Their country was their state. In those days people’s loyalty was to their state. They thought of their state as their country. To their minds, the United States was something like the EU is to the French, Italians, Dutch, British, etc. The French still think of themselves as French, not as EU.
Remember, when Robert E. Lee was offered command of the Union Army, he declined on the grounds that he could not bring war to his own country, by which he meant Virginia.
Lee’s army was the Army of Northern Virginia.
As President Lincoln said over and over, the war is not about s***ery. It is about “preserving the union,” that is, the empire. If the South were permitted to separate, it would mean that there would be two countries competing for the vast lands to the west of the Mississippi River. The budding empire in Washington did not want any such competition.
If the South were permitted to seperate, the North would lose its market for its relatively high priced manufactured goods that it hoped to sell to the South by placing a tariff against the cheaper British goods.
The South figured, correctly, that it would be doubly hit. Higher prices from the North and retaliatory tariffs from the British on its cotton exports.
This economic conflict between the North and South went on for a long time before it provoked secession. The left-wing American Historian, Charles Beard, explains the so-called “Civil War” in the economic terms that provoked it. It had nothing whatsoever to do with s***ery.
The very designation, “Civil War,” is a lie. A civil war is when two sides fight for control of the government. The South was not fighting for control of the US government. It was fighting, because the North had invaded.
Lincoln did not free the s***es. Moreover, had Lincoln not been assassinated, his plan was to send the b****s, whom he regarded as inferior to w****s, back to Africa. This is not a “conspiracy theory.” It is the documented fact. It is totally impossible to refute this documented fact.
The Emancipation Proclamation was propaganda. It had two purposes: one was to shut up the abolitionists. The other was to promote a s***e r*******n in the Southern states that would draw Confederate troops out of the front lines to protect the women and children at home. As Lincoln’s own Secretary of State, William H. Seward, said, we have freed the s***es where we have no jurisdiction and left them in s***ery where we have jusistiction. Seward’s exact words: “We show our sympathy with s***ery by emancipating s***es where we cannot reach them and holding them in bondage where we can set them free.”
The left-wing historian Richard Hofstadter ridiculed Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation for freeing only the s***es over which Lincoln had no power.
Lincoln’s purpose was not to free s***es but to provoke the s***e rape of Southern women and murder of Southern children that would pull the Southern troops his generals could not defeat off the front lines and impel them home to protect their families from Lincoln’s s***e revolt.
But the s***es did not revolt even though there was no one there to conrol them but women and children. So what kind of oppression was this?
Lincoln issued the proclamation intended to produce a s***e r*******n because he had run through countless generals, and although the Union army in its engagements with Robert E. Lee always outnumbered the Southerns by two or three to one, and sometimes more, the Army of Northern Virginia did not lose a battle for the first two years of the War. If the South had had more people, a number of Southern battle victories would have ended in the capture of Washington and the end of the war. But the South never had the number of soldiers sufficient to have a reserve to capitalize on its military victories. In contrast, the North had an endless supply of immigrants from Ireland, most of whom died for the American Empire.
Oppositon to the war in the North was high. Lincoln had to arrest and imprison 300 northern newspaper owners and editors and exile a US Congressman.
S***ery was an inherited institution, not a Southern construct. S***ery would have gradually disappeared as immigrants into the South begin forming a work force and the over-cultivated plantation lands begin losing their fertility. S***ery existed as long as it did because new immigrants, instead of becoming a local work force, moved west, occupied Indian land and became independent farmers.
Of course, the abolitionist created all the hatred of the South that they possibly could. Indeed, during my entire life, lived almost exclusively outside the South, I have observed the liberals foment racial hatred of b****s toward w****s, and I have watched feminists foment g****r hatred of women toward men. Hatred is the great cause of the liberals. It is what defines them.
The stupid liberals have sowed social enmity between races and g****rs. The destruction of America will be the result.
Perhaps we will fall apart, occupied in racial and g****r warfare, before the Russians and Chinese have to blow us off the face of the earth.
Facebook
Twitter
Google+
Share
The first s***es were white s***es, but they died like flies from malaria and yellow fevor. Next indigenious Americans (“Indians”) were used as s***es, but they would not work. Then it was discovered that some Africans had immunity to malaria and resistance to yellow fever, and finally a work force was located. The s***es were purchased from the African tribes that annually conducted warfare between themselves, the booty of which was s***es. Socialist historians, such as Karl Polanyi, the Jewish brother of my Jewish Oxford professor, the distinguished physical chemist and philosopher Michael Polanyi, to whom my first book is dedicated, wrote detailed and exacting histories of the African s***e trade conducted by black Africans.
Confederate soldiers did not own s***es, and as every honest historian knows, they were not fighting for s***ery. They were fighting, because their country had been invaded.
The Confederacy was not their country any more than the United States had been. Their country was their state. In those days people’s loyalty was to their state. They thought of their state as their country. To their minds, the United States was something like the EU is to the French, Italians, Dutch, British, etc. The French still think of themselves as French, not as EU.
Remember, when Robert E. Lee was offered command of the Union Army, he declined on the grounds that he could not bring war to his own country, by which he meant Virginia.
Lee’s army was the Army of Northern Virginia.
As President Lincoln said over and over, the war is not about s***ery. It is about “preserving the union,” that is, the empire. If the South were permitted to separate, it would mean that there would be two countries competing for the vast lands to the west of the Mississippi River. The budding empire in Washington did not want any such competition.
If the South were permitted to seperate, the North would lose its market for its relatively high priced manufactured goods that it hoped to sell to the South by placing a tariff against the cheaper British goods.
The South figured, correctly, that it would be doubly hit. Higher prices from the North and retaliatory tariffs from the British on its cotton exports.
This economic conflict between the North and South went on for a long time before it provoked secession. The left-wing American Historian, Charles Beard, explains the so-called “Civil War” in the economic terms that provoked it. It had nothing whatsoever to do with s***ery.
The very designation, “Civil War,” is a lie. A civil war is when two sides fight for control of the government. The South was not fighting for control of the US government. It was fighting, because the North had invaded.
Lincoln did not free the s***es. Moreover, had Lincoln not been assassinated, his plan was to send the b****s, whom he regarded as inferior to w****s, back to Africa. This is not a “conspiracy theory.” It is the documented fact. It is totally impossible to refute this documented fact.
The Emancipation Proclamation was propaganda. It had two purposes: one was to shut up the abolitionists. The other was to promote a s***e r*******n in the Southern states that would draw Confederate troops out of the front lines to protect the women and children at home. As Lincoln’s own Secretary of State, William H. Seward, said, we have freed the s***es where we have no jurisdiction and left them in s***ery where we have jusistiction. Seward’s exact words: “We show our sympathy with s***ery by emancipating s***es where we cannot reach them and holding them in bondage where we can set them free.”
The left-wing historian Richard Hofstadter ridiculed Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation for freeing only the s***es over which Lincoln had no power.
Lincoln’s purpose was not to free s***es but to provoke the s***e rape of Southern women and murder of Southern children that would pull the Southern troops his generals could not defeat off the front lines and impel them home to protect their families from Lincoln’s s***e revolt.
But the s***es did not revolt even though there was no one there to conrol them but women and children. So what kind of oppression was this?
Lincoln issued the proclamation intended to produce a s***e r*******n because he had run through countless generals, and although the Union army in its engagements with Robert E. Lee always outnumbered the Southerns by two or three to one, and sometimes more, the Army of Northern Virginia did not lose a battle for the first two years of the War. If the South had had more people, a number of Southern battle victories would have ended in the capture of Washington and the end of the war. But the South never had the number of soldiers sufficient to have a reserve to capitalize on its military victories. In contrast, the North had an endless supply of immigrants from Ireland, most of whom died for the American Empire.
Oppositon to the war in the North was high. Lincoln had to arrest and imprison 300 northern newspaper owners and editors and exile a US Congressman.
S***ery was an inherited institution, not a Southern construct. S***ery would have gradually disappeared as immigrants into the South begin forming a work force and the over-cultivated plantation lands begin losing their fertility. S***ery existed as long as it did because new immigrants, instead of becoming a local work force, moved west, occupied Indian land and became independent farmers.
Of course, the abolitionist created all the hatred of the South that they possibly could. Indeed, during my entire life, lived almost exclusively outside the South, I have observed the liberals foment racial hatred of b****s toward w****s, and I have watched feminists foment g****r hatred of women toward men. Hatred is the great cause of the liberals. It is what defines them.
The stupid liberals have sowed social enmity between races and g****rs. The destruction of America will be the result.
Perhaps we will fall apart, occupied in racial and g****r warfare, before the Russians and Chinese have to blow us off the face of the earth.
Google+
Share
Aug 17, 2017 14:17:48 #
That is a correct assumption of what is going on in America today. The Left wants to rule the country to their satisfaction not the peoples satisfaction, the left wants to dominate and make this country a thirds world s**thole so that they can become the ruling class, C*******m and socialism is what they want, not a government of the people by the people and for the people. If we could all just live in peace and Love our neighbor, this country would be Great Again.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.