Happy Slavery Day!

[COINTELPRO]

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/xPyG8i2YxtQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.democracynow.org/embed/story/2014/6/27/counter_revolution_of_1776_was_us" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="true"></iframe>
Time for you to take a break from Corporate media propaganda:

This carefully documented, chilling history presents a radically different view of the profound role that slavery played in the founding of the republic, from the Declaration of Independence and the American Revolution through the creation of the Constitution. The book begins with a novel explanation about the impact slavery had on the founding of the republic. In 1772, a judge sitting in the High Court in London declared slavery "so odious" that it could not exist as common law and set the conditions which would consequently result in the freedom of the 15,000 slaves living in England at that time.

This decision eventually reached America and terrified the predominantly southern slaveholders because America was then a collection of British colonies and as such were subject to British law, and they feared that this decision would cause the emancipation of the slaves here. Thus, to ensure the preservation of slavery, the southern states joined the northern colonies in their fight for "freedom" and their rebellion against England.

This decision was codified in the First Continental Congress in 1774 when John Adams promised southern leaders the support of their right to maintain slavery and drafted a Declaration of Colonial Independence from Parliament. What follows is a fascinating account of the role slavery played in the drawing of the United States Constitution. It was only in the end, when the northern states threatened to walk out over the issue of slavery, that the southern states agreed to the prohibition of slavery north of the Ohio River, embodied in the Northwest Ordinance which created the largest slave-free area in the world. This would eventually give birth to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which codified Benjamin Franklin's affirmative action plan.

Features an introduction by Congresswoman Elanor Holmes Norton, and an in requiem poem by Barbara Chase-Riboud.
Slave Nation
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1402204000/?tag=vp314-20

Though the Heavens May Fall
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0738206954/?tag=vp314-20

I don't exalt my ancestors being put into slavery for hundreds of years as a result of July 4th. It wasn't a fight for freedom, but a fight to continue slavery forever. All you have to do is look North to Canada to see that British rule wasn't that bad if aren't into slavery...

 

[COINTELPRO]

Here are some excerpts:

With more than two centuries of propaganda, brainwashing and masturbatory invention on the subject of the American Revolution, it is all but impossible to find reference in the United States, outside scholarly works, to the fact that throughout the 1760s and 1770s, there was a growing movement to abolish slavery throughout the British Empire, including the Thirteen Colonies. The abolition campaign reached a climactic point on June 22, 1772 when Lord Mansfield, Lord Chief Justice of Britain, handed down an epoch-making decision in the case of the "Negro slave known as James Somerset", against the man who purported to own him, Charles Steuart of Virginia.

In his decision, Lord Mansfield declared that “slavery is not allowed nor approved by the law of England” and that Somerset must therefore be set free. Upon hearing the decision, blacks in the audience stood up and bowed to the Court. The Court also recognized that the legal principle of habeas corpus was applicable to black people, a terrifying prospect for slaveowners. The Somerset decision, and another similar one from the Scottish justices shortly thereafter, were stunning victories for the abolitionists and catastrophic defeats for slaveowners throughout the British Empire. These pivotal legal decisions would ultimately lead to the abolition of slavery in all British colonies and possessions throughout the world.

The Somerset case was followed avidly in the Thirteen Colonies with extensive press coverage. It was only too clear to the ruling class in the Thirteen Colonies that, under British rule, freedom for the slaves they owned was inevitable and that the basis of their wealth and power, slavery, would end if the Colonies remained under British rule.

The only way to retain their wealth and power was to retain slavery and the only way to retain slavery was to break away from Britain. Contrary to popular belief, every one of the Thirteen Colonies including New York, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Maryland and Delaware practiced slavery. Shortly after word of the Somerset decision reached Virginia, slaveowner Thomas Jefferson and four other Virginia politicians began to meet in private. They proposed the formation of a "committee of correspondence" of the colonies which was a first step to breaking away from Great Britain. They persuaded their cronies in the Virginia House of Burgesses to present a resolution for the formation of the committees of correspondence. The resolution included a list of committee members, Peyton Randolph, Richard Henry Lee, Patrick Henry, Thomas Jefferson and several others. Every single one a slaveowner.

 

[Cruise]

This is why I come to BGOL.

 

[Lattimore]

This is why I come to BGOL.

Great find. I've been trying to get information on this issue.

 

[COINTELPRO]

In contrast, Britain, the evil colonial power, not only ultimately abolished slavery in its own possessions but fought slavery worldwide, maintaining costly naval blockades of the African coast year-round and pursuing slave ships on the high seas, freeing captured Africans. In the new “free” United States, slavery continued to exist for a century after the Revolution. Those slaves who could escaped to freedom in British territory in Canada via the Underground Railroad.

http://mtwsfh.blogspot.com/2007/12/lie-number-two-american-revolution.html

http://studythepast.com/civilrights...avery _ the myth goes on _ paul finkelman.pdf

He who controls the present,
controls the past.
He who controls the past,
controls the future.

George Orwell

The essence of propaganda
consists of winning people
over to an idea
so sincerely, so vitally,
that in the end
they succumb to it utterly
and can never escape from it.

Joseph Goebbels

None are more
hopelessly enslaved
than those
who falsely believe
that they are free.

Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

 

[Fuckallyall]

Thanks for this. However, Jefferson was staunchly against slavery during the drafting of the Constitution, and Britan was far from eending colonialism with manumission. I think they kept the blockades up for the same reason AMerica and Israel keep fucking with the Iranian nuke program - to keep a competitor under developed.

 

[COINTELPRO]

Thanks for this. However, Jefferson was staunchly against slavery during the drafting of the Constitution, and Britan was far from eending colonialism with manumission. I think they kept the blockades up for the same reason AMerica and Israel keep fucking with the Iranian nuke program - to keep a competitor under developed.

http://studythepast.com/civilrights...avery _ the myth goes on _ paul finkelman.pdf

Jefferson was garbage based on this document from wikipedia, he acutally supported slavery. However, an image has been crafted for him.

I think the Haitian Revolution, 1791–1804 encouraged a few of their signers to free their slaves after they died.

 

[thoughtone]

Thanks for this. However, Jefferson was staunchly against slavery during the drafting of the Constitution

http://studythepast.com/civilrights...avery _ the myth goes on _ paul finkelman.pdf

Jefferson was garbage based on this document from wikipedia...

I think the Haitian Revolution, 1791–1804 encouraged a few of their signers to free their slaves after they died.

Fuckallyal defending a slave holder. And he is the first to call a Black person a slave.

All those so called founding assholes were garbage. Jefferson tried to blame the British for forcing the so called colonists to maintain slavery. From what I read Jefferson owned over 500 slaves and didn't grant any of them freedom upon his death. The British offered the ex slaves that fought for the British during the revolutionary war their freedom even though they lost. George Washington really didn't want Black folk to fight, mainly because he and the southerns crackers were deathly afraid of any Black person possessing a gun, but as usual, when whites get backed up against the wall, who bailed them out.


source: The Revolutionary War

While the Patriots were ultimately victorious in the American Revolution, choosing sides and deciding whether to fight in the war was far from an easy choice for American colonists. The great majority were neutral or Loyalist. For black people, what mattered most was freedom. As the Revolutionary War spread through every region, those in bondage sided with whichever army promised them personal liberty. The British actively recruited slaves belonging to Patriot masters and, consequently, more blacks fought for the Crown. An estimated 100,000 African Americans escaped, died or were killed during the American Revolution.

In November 1782, Britain and America signed a provisional treaty granting the former colonies their independence. As the British prepared for their final evacuation, the Americans demanded the return of American property, including runaway slaves, under the terms of the peace treaty. Sir Guy Carleton, the acting commander of British forces, refused to abandon black Loyalists to their fate as slaves. With thousands of apprehensive blacks seeking to document their service to the Crown, Brigadier General Samuel Birch, British commandant of the city of New York, created a list of claimants known as The Book of Negroes. Boston King and his wife, Violet, were among 3,000 to 4,000 African Americans Loyalists who boarded ships in New York bound for Nova Scotia, Jamaica, and Britain.

 

[COINTELPRO]

There is this image that has been created by the corporations to combat socialism and communism that the British government repressed the American colonists. In order to avoid that type of repression from reappearing, you should seek limited government involvement in all aspects of your lives.

In actuality, the colonist that sought 'freedom' wanted to continue slavery by splitting from Britain and establishing a government based on landowners. The rest of the people that weren't involved in slavery were sold the false belief that they were fighting for freedom, similar to what we hear today "they attacked us because of our freedoms".

Canadians never fought the British to avoid this alleged repression and are comfortable with giving government a strong role in their lives. You will never hear this coming out of corporate media, that wants to ensure that as many aspect of our lives are privatized.

There was no oppression.

 

[COINTELPRO]

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/xPyG8i2YxtQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.democracynow.org/embed/story/2014/6/27/counter_revolution_of_1776_was_us" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="true"></iframe>


Why does it matter what happen in 1776?, 1776 set the stage for our Constitution and weak decentralized government designed to prevent laws that would ban slavery. This is why our minimum wage laws is still stuck at $7.25. Slavery had to be ended through the War Power of the president! Lincoln could not end slavery and did not even attempt it until the South ceded.

I am sitting out again on July 4th.

 

[COINTELPRO]

http://www.amazon.com/dp/1479893404/?tag=vp314-20

http://monthlyreview.org/press/books/pb4451/

 

[kesq]

This is why I come to BGOL.

This why I need to come to this board more. Wow. Thx.

 

[trstar]

bookmarking

 

[COINTELPRO]

http://www.amazon.com/dp/1583674454/?tag=vp314-20


His book came out, time for me to check it out.

 

[COINTELPRO]

One was a rebellion to prevent the abolition of slavery by a Northern Republican President/Congress seeking to 'recolonize' freed slaves.

One was a rebellion against England to prevent the abolition of slavery in the 13 colonies.

If you have the choice of evil versus evil you should leave both flags up, they are both symbols of tyranny and oppression.

 

[COINTELPRO]

The language of an 1854 newspaper article from Pennsylvania is less elevated, but more typical of Northern rhetoric:

We think we have a proper estimate of the character of the negro, and our feelings towards the race are of the most kindly character. We would elevate them, but not at the expense of the white man. We have no idea of sinking our own race, in order to raise up the inferior African. This country belongs to the white man, and not to the negro, and that, in our estimation, is the purest philanthropy, which seeks to place upon the shores of Africa again, those whom cupidity has stolen from their native soil.

Between the rhetoric of the Northern colonizationist and that of the Southern slavery-apologist, there often is little to choose. They saw the same scene, and differed only in the proposed solution: long-term enslavement and paternalism, or short-term riddance back to Africa. The Colonization societies often were most strident where blacks were fewest. Vermont, with only a handful of blacks, had one of the most active in New England. John Hough, professor of languages at Middlebury College, preached this in a sermon to colonizationsts in Montpelier on Oct. 18, 1826:

The state of the free colored population of the United States, is one of extreme and remediless degredation, of gross irreligion, of revolting profligacy, and, of course, deplorable wretchedness. Who can doubt ... the blacks among us are peculiarly addicted to habits of low vice and shameless profligacy? They are found in vast numbers in the haunts of riot and dissipation and intemperance where they squander in sin the scanty earnings of their toil, contract habits of grosser iniquity and are prepared for acts of daring outrage and of enormous guilt. ... Squalid poverty, loathesome and painful disease, fell and torturing passions, and diversified and pitiable forms of misery are to be found (there).

Some of the Northern states tied the movement to their increasingly restrictive black codes. Indiana's 1850 constitution agreed to contribute fines collected under the new anti-immigration law to colonization. The state legislature later set aside $5,000 toward the cause.

This time around, Africa was not the main focus. Instead, supporters sought to found a black colony in some convenient place in the Caribbean basin. The Ohio state House petitioned Congress in 1850 to set aside some of the land lately won from Mexico to be a home for American blacks. But that idea aroused horror in many Americans who saw such a settlement eventually becoming a territory, then a state, and ultimately sending blacks to Congress. Instead, in January 1858, Missouri Republican Rep. Francis P. Blair Jr. proposed to the U.S. House that a committee be created to seek land in Central or South America for a black colony. Sen. James R. Doolittle of Wisconsin introduced a similar proposal in the upper chamber.

Abraham Lincoln was an avid colonizationist. He quoted with approval Henry Clay's words on the topic. He touted colonization in his annual messages to Congress in 1861 and '62, in his appeal to border-state representatives for compensated emancipation (July 12, 1862), and in the Preliminary Emancipation Proclamation (Sept. 22, 1862). In 1861, addressing Congress, he mentioned contraband slaves who had fallen into the hands of Northern troops, as well as the possibility of border states emancipating their slaves. He advocated that �steps be taken for colonizing both classes, (or the one first mentioned, if the other shall not be brought into existence), at some place, or places, in a climate congenial to them. It might be well to consider, too, -- whether the free colored people already in the United States could not, so far as individuals may desire, be included in such colonization.� A year later, he told Congress, �I cannot make it better known than it already is, that I strongly favor colonization.�

In his �Speech on the Dred Scott decision� (June 26, 1857), he had scolded both parties for not taking up the cause:

I have said that the separation of the races is the only perfect preventative of amalgamation. I have no right to say all the members of the Republican party are in favor of this, nor to say that as a party they are in favor of it. There is nothing in their platform directly on the subject. But I can say a very large proportion of its members are for it, and that the chief plank in their platform -- opposition to the spread of slavery -- is most favorable to that separation.

Such separation, if ever effected at all, must be effected by colonization; and no political party, as such, is now doing anything directly for colonization. Party operations at present only favor or retard colonization incidentally. The enterprise is a difficult one, but 'when there is a will there is a way;' and what colonization needs most is a hearty will. Will springs from the two elements of moral sense and self-interest. Let us be brought to believe it is morally right, and, at the same time, favorable to, or, at least, not against, our interest, to transfer the African to his native clime, and we shall find a way to do it, however great the task may be. The children of Israel, to such numbers as to include four hundred thousand fighting men, went out of Egyptian bondage in a body.

 

[kesq]

Bump

 

[QueEx]

It has been said that Black Americans are un-patriotic;
and to consider the words of one patriotic White American:​

“I do not believe, and I know this is a horrible thing to say, but
I do not believe that the president loves America . . . He doesn’t
love you. And he doesn’t love me. He wasn’t brought up the way you
were brought up and I was brought up through love of this country.”​

Rudy Giuliani on Barack Obama,
during dinner at the 21 Club, a former
Prohibition-era speakeasy in midtown Manhattan.​

I wonder why.