End the Scourge of White Supremacy

Your abject FAILURE to support your ERRONEOUS version of "history" is duly NOTED for the record and your unwillingness to continue is the equivalent of throwing in the towel and conceding that your position is wrong.

Have a nice day!

 

Yet another towel thrown into the ring because of the inability to defend the indefensible.

 

Kindly REFRAIN from PROJECTING your own issues onto others.

 

They're definitely your issues. Yelling "PROJECTING" doesn't change that fact.

 

Is your RACIST Traitor-in-Chief YELLING when he does the EXACT same thing in his TWEETS?

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1282675421541289985?cxt=HHwWhMC9sb6l_cwjAAAA

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1281206354334625793?cxt=HHwWgICwpcfC48cjAAAA

 

@Derideo_Te your lame attempt to distract from your misinformation is disappointing. Here is what you claimed:

And here is reality:

 

Yet another CHERRY PICKED image.

Sad!

 

It's not "yet another" and it's not "CHERRY PICKED", but it does disprove your claim. Notice you used the word "ALL". Do you understand what that word means?

 

It is CHERRY PICKED because you (a) FAILED to provide the SOURCE, and (b) failed to provide the LOCATION, and (c) failed to provide the DATE.

A single RANDOM image that could have been PHOTOSHOPPED is utterly WORTHLESS.

But that is ALL you have!

Sad!

 

In 1894, legendary Confederate partisan leader, Col. John S. Mosby expressed surprise at a recent speech in which the orator dismissed “the charge that the South went to war for slavery” as a “‘slanderous accusation.’”

“I always understood that we went to War on account of the thing we quarreled with the North about,” Mosby observed. “I never heard of any other cause of quarrel than slavery.”

https://acwm.org/blog/myths-misunderstandings-what-caused-civil-war/

 

Only if you play word games.

The Civil War was about secession, but there is no doubt among historians that secession was primarily about slavery. The seceding states left for the primary purpose of preserving slavery and they formed a new country primarily to preserve slavery. To disagree with this is to disagree about the South had to say for itself during secession.

 

Then you need to learn history from more credible sources. The complications of a differing vision of American founding philosophy is under appreciated. Are you aware that slavery continued to exist in Delaware and Kentucky up through and even for a time after the Civil War?
Are you familiar with this letter from Lincoln to Horace Greeley:

“As to the policy I “seem to be pursuing” as you say, I have not meant to leave any one in doubt.

I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be “the Union as it was.” If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.”

Letter to Horace Greeley
Abraham Lincoln

 

I rely solely on primary sources -- sources from the time period. What can be more credible?

As for Delaware and Kentucky, those were southern border states -- slaves states that stayed in the Union. I've written about them before. This does not contradict what I've already said about the seceding states seceding over slavery . . . why didn't you address that?

As for the Greeley letter, yes, I've read it. Were you aware that Lincoln already had a copy of the Emancipation Proclamation drafted whenever he published this letter and was just waiting for the right time to issue it? Did you also read until the end, when Lincoln said, "I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men every where could be free"?

Besides, the post you quoted from me was in regards to the motivations for secession . . . which you haven't touched on . . . at all. You are trying to change the subject to LINCOLN's motivations and ignoring, at all costs, the motivations of the South.

I promise you I've done more homework on this than you have. I promise you I've consulted more primary sources. If you want to have this discussion, we can, but be prepared for . . . what did you call it before? . . . ah, yes, some "tutoring".

 

I suggest you read the Virginia and Kentucky resolutions to more fully understand the southern philosophy of the Union and even the Declaration of Independence. You might also try to understand that the Emancipation Proclamation’s purpose was to discourage European recognition of the Confederacy. It was a psychological document. Slavery was not outlawed in Delaware and Kentucky until after the ratification of the 13th amendment.

 

I've read both. But we were talking about the motivations of the Confederacy for seceding . . . which you are still evading. Might want to read what they had to say about the philosophy of the Declaration of Independence . . . (ppsssst . . . they hated it because they thought it implied equality of races)

You might want to read what the Confederates had to say about their own motivations. You won't. But you should. You should also read all of Lincoln's writings, not just the ones that you think agree with you. South Carolina even cited his anti-slavery house divided speech as a reason for seceding.

Yes. We've covered this. Why do you keep running away from the motivations of the seceding states? You have yet to say one word addressing this. When can I expect an actual response?

 

The Declaration of Independence clearly states that when governments become dangerous to the ends of liberty it is the people’s right to abolish that government. The resolutions I mentioned reiterate this. These are the principles upon which the south saw the movement away from traditional American values. The north had no plans to abolish slavery in the south in 1861 so why would the south go to war over this? You do realize that you are arguing on a little known forum with a complete stranger right? Maybe you have time for this but I don’t. Good luck to you!

 

Read the declarations of causes of secession some time. Or the cornerstone speech. Or check out the Confederate Constitution. Or read the writings of the secession commissioners. Or check out the Crittenden Compromise. Every primary source available shows that the seceding states primarily seceded over slavery. Every. Single. One.

But, since you refuse to discuss this further and since you steadfastly refused this entire time to talk about the motivations of the seceding states, white flag accepted (Civil War history buffs will spot an extra joke there). If you ever are able and willing to debate this, I'm here. Until then, good luck.

 

Also, if you really are curious about the answer to this, read the declarations of causes of secession. They clearly state that the seceding states feared that the North WAS out to abolish slavery; they even quoted Lincoln to make that point. Maybe the North wasn't, but the South BELIEVED they were, and said so, and said that this was the reason they were seceding.

 

Your FAILURE to substantiate your cherry picked image NEGATES your position.

BLM marches have been occurring long BEFORE the Pandemic started so your image could have been from any of those other marches.

Sad!

Have a nice day!

 

End the Scourge of White Supremacy

And replace it with a different colored scourge? To what end?

 

Sometime you ought to read a summary, I believe Wiki has one, of who the hero that Uncle Tom was, the fictional character as well as the real person he was based on. He was a Free Black, who somehow was kidnapped, taken to a slave state and again put under the yoke of slavery. During his time on the plantation two black women who were being horribly abused, escaped and he had the knowledge necessary for their masters to find them and return them to slavery. They tortured him, offering again and again to stop if he revealed what he knew. He did not. He very painfully laid down his life for justice.

They way the term today is used as a slur, is clearly by folks who are completely ignorant of the character they pretend to reference.

​

 

I thought the Scourge of White Supremacy died out years ago in the US Pacific Northwest. Why are the riots happening in Portland and Seattle then?

 

Because Portland "protests" are a bunch of pasty white Marxist anarchists, and the city is saying they won't prosecute them as long as they claim to be "peaceful protesters" accidentally caught up in the riots.

Portland Demographics
Portland, the whitest major city in the country, has become whiter at its core even as surrounding areas have grown more diverse according to figures from the 2010 census. The Oregonian did an analysis of the shifts in Portland’s population on May 1, 2011, in an article entitled, “In Portland’s heart, 2010 Census shows diversity dwindling.” Below are some of the findings.

Of 354 census tracts in Multnomah, Washington, and Clackamas counties, 40 became whiter from 2000 to 2010, according to The Oregonian‘s analysis of the 2010 Census. Of those, two lie in rural Clackamas County. The 38 others are in Portland.

The city core didn’t become whiter just because white residents moved in, the data show. Nearly 10,000 people of color, mostly African Americans, also moved out.


Seattle is majority White, then Asian:

Race and Hispanic origin
For people reporting one race alone, 68.0 percent were White; 7.0 percent were Black or African American; 0.6 percent were American Indian and Alaska Native; 15.1 percent were Asian; 0.3 percent were Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander, and 2.3 percent were some other race. An estimated 6.8 percent reported two or more races. An estimated 6.6 percent of the people in Seattle city, Washington were Hispanic. An estimated 64.5 percent of the people in Seattle city, Washington were White non-Hispanic. People of Hispanic origin may be of any race.