AGITATION ISN'T 'SOCIAL JUSTICE' OR 'RAISING AWARENESS'

 -- IT'S RACE-BAITING BY AND FOR RACISTS --

If slavery is offensive & hurtful (feelings vary by skin color) and cotton is racist, why aren't alcohol, sugar & tobacco
just as offensive, hurtful & racist?  <Triangle Trade of slavery-goods-raw materials image> <cotton image>

     I've been viewing some excellent episodes on our 1st 41 presidents on YouTube entitled "Life Portrait" from C-SPAN.  There's much good history shared in these programs from the 1990s.  Unfortunately, from time to time, some callers (particularly) bring up revisionist commentary regarding slavery (antebellum decades) and "the Klan" (post-bellum).  I wouldn't have minded so much had there been intelligent discussion of the issue, either from an historical survey standpoint or opinion. 
     But I frankly don't credit anyone who tells me what I must think and feel based upon my skin color, nor tells me what I must think others think and feel, based upon their skin color.  Skin color BY ITSELF MEANS NOTHING.  I was completely amused when a lady who self-identified as having mixed-race individuals as parents called in and spoke about how discussions of historic slavery (of SOME of her ancestors, not identifying which ones) INSPIRED her with the endurance and progress of (some of) her people.  More people than her, I would assume, wonder why instead of inspiring others such as is done in the writings of Booker T. Washington, who speaks of the virtues and qualities of his people, their achivements and their character, seek reparations, excuses, affirmative action for the (as we are now told by Left-wing activists) PERMANENTLY disabled.
     The callers are - with the hindsight of two decades' distance now, as well as the convenience of watching all the episodes successively - rather obviously working from rhetorical talking points and strategems to replace discussion of the men and the times with agitation of social justice views depending upon one's skin color.   If we continue to stand by for their division of history and society by skin color, America becomes permanently accursed - because the facts of history cannot be changed.  It's a sad fact about these agitators who claim to be for the "advancement" of their people and against "hate" - to be advocating a philosophy that can only lead to an inevitably permanent second or third-class status.  Their choices either proclaim more loudly than any of their programs that they themselves are racists OR they have nothing better to offer, and ought not be patronized in any way.  This "virtue signalling" is ultimately offensive and hurtful to all future generations, and kicks the can of any discrimination more down the road - thus excusing America's Founders of kicking the emancipation can down the road as they did.
     The result of such "discussions" can only be to set racial divides into stone.  Such people aren't seeking a color-blind society measured by merit and character, the traditional aims of civil rights groups.  Their goals are advancing mediocrity with nothing more substantive to offer than slogans (and one-upmanship depending upon the skin color(s) of the combatants - which one-upmanship is never an issue depending upon other factors).   Political correctness increasingly requires us to view certain words - like "lynching" and "cotton" - as always racially-connected.  Class division has never - thus far - been able to take hold in America, thwarting the methodology of class division which is still current in Europe and most successful in Bolshevik-era Russia. 
     This goal is made more apparent when such callers start discussing reparations or other current topics without any knowledge of the people and issues of the times.  This is a strategy to agitate not only the War of Northern Aggression but the issues and personalities of those times - of course, without any real grasp of issues and the then-current personalities which our ancestors of over 150 years ago would have been familiar with.  We see in the here and now with #FakeNews how political operatives attempt and intend to deceive with lies of commission and omission.  How much easier is it for such people to deceive and manipulate over the events of 150+ years ago (particularly when neglecting the events of all the interim years).
     We are pretty far along the Road to Perdition with regard to revisionist historical narratives misused for political purposes.  What is important for the reader/consumer of such to note is, which side is the one promoting such lies?  Once you determine who has chosen the pathway of lies and self-serving manipulation of history, run away from such people and their pet projects.  You are headed down the path to ruin and waste, with people who care for nothing but to use you.  We already have the example of the Bolsheviks and Stalin, who starved and shot people once they were done using them.  The very same thing happened in the South - where freedmen who didn't toe the Union League/Freedmen Bureau line post-Appomattox found themselves even less valued than the disenfranchised former Confederates, no matter how dark their skin color was.  But these decades following Appomattox - that never get the attention that the four years of the war do, and are negated - shall have to await a further post.  And this is why certain decades must be negated - because our ancestors (of ALL skin colors, who are being dishonored by these manipulations and lies) already went through all this once before.  It is most unfortunate that the achievements of free people AND freedmen are being dishonored so that (largely) criminals, liars and con-men can "wave the bloody shirt" to the ignorant.  But such is what is really going on.
     Many lament the fact of these social changes, and the vast ignorance of the decades and our culture that - forgotten - permit some people to become gullible and stupid with regard to seeing lies and liars for whom and what they are.  As for me, I see something very different - that such are building their house upon sand.  When that sand begins to shift, the houses of lies builded thereon shall crash like mansions on California cliffsides after heavy rains.  And I and others shall be there to write the narratives. 
     In the interim... When you hear about cotton, ask about sugar and tobacco.  Ask those who complain about slavery why it is they complain about legal slavery when the agitation about alcohol began alongside it, as part of the trade as well as a part of the mindset of the abolitionist (Lincoln was a temperance man, for one example - and if you did not know that, WHY NOT?).  The 20th Century revisionist ("2nd era" or "Simmons-Evans) Klan - for one example - was more about temperance/Prohibition than anything else - and in large part it was their allegiance to this issue that is the reason for their rise and fall in the early 1920s than any other reason (also another clear reason why they had nothing to do with the Reconstruction-era legitimate KuKlux).  Prohibition followed abolitionism, both causes leading to Constitutional Amendments.  What happened to all that motivation and political involvement?  And finally... why is race agitated today, but for reasons of "social justice" - and not the past "reasons" of class struggle or the "science" of eugenics?
     I submit that slavery and slaveholders of the antebellum South cannot be indicted or accused without indicting or accusing all those (largely Northerners, since the South was shut out and rebuilding for 50 years).  Y'all can blame Jim Crow all you like - but y'all know where THAT thread leads, doncha?  Yep, Yankee liberals and Lefties have built completely on sand...
#DeoVindice