Slavery

Yep. But not a dollar to some two-bit punk in D.C. just because of the color of his skin.

Another reason why I love Jason Whitlock. 


Africans enslaved Africans

A fair look at so-called colonialism is far past time. As Americans, we are the beneficiaries of colonialism.

But there are two aspects. And, no, it's not the good parts of colonialism and the bad parts. The two things are: 1) What really happened; 2) What must be said to have happened to fit a religious-like political ideology (Cultural Marxism).

What really happened? Good things, bad things. Why do I call it "so-called" colonialism? Because as much as we might wish to believe that "colonialism" is something 100% imposed by one culture upon another, it's not that simple. The Europeans, for one, had things that were very attractive to the undeveloped (often savage) natives. How else could Britain control most of India with just a relatively few people?

That story is rich, complex, full of tragedy and exploitation, but also the story of how many of these shit-hole countries around the world stopped burning dung for fuel and got on the internet.

But the point of demonizing colonialism today is to try to explain why many third-worlders (or blacks in the first-world) are often full of social pathology. It's to explain why they are often backward compare to whites or the Western world. And the ready explanation, of course, is "racism."

That is the answer that has already been determined by the Stalinesque kangaroo court. They just need to make the rest fit under that explanation. And I can guarantee you that had, for instance, Europeans never set foot on Africa, they would be weaving the same stories of exploitation and racism. "Why did Europeans isolate Africa? Why did they not involve them in trade so that Africans could better themselves?" And the answer would be, of course, racism.

It's the same as the theory of "global warming". If the weather is particularly warm, it's the result of "global warming." If it's particularly cold, it's also said to be due to "global warming."

And although there's certainly nothing wrong with being "inclusive" (in the sense of non-prejudice) and kind to others, whatever their race, I think the real (and ironic) story of this modern critique of colonialism is that it is simply another kind of colonialism. At its heart of the ideology are white liberals with a feeling of moral superiority who have taken it upon themselves to "fix" the downtrodden "people of color." And they do so via their one-size-fits-all political theories, completely oblivious and uncaring as to whether their theories are true or not, or whether their help is actually helping or not.

One could say the British certainly thought themselves superior to the people who they would see involved in all kinds of primitive and barbaric practices. And perhaps they had some good reasons for this view. But this political colonialism of the Cultural Marxist is no less tinged with a sense of white superiority.