Special to the Mirror By Susan M. Bauer
I came to Cape Charles over a decade ago, and bought a historic Craftsman bungalow on Jefferson Avenue, that was originally a Sears kit house. It was the conclusion of my search for a small vacation cottage near the Chesapeake Bay. I was unaware of the rich history of the town and Jefferson Avenue, in particular. I live in the historically African-American section of Cape Charles. Jefferson and Washington Avenues, comprising the northernmost portion of the town, were segregated from the rest of the historic district. The black families who lived here were represented by the best and the brightest. The house on the corner of my block was owned by the first black physician on the Shore. Across the street, in a house currently under renovation, resided a prominent black minister, and his family. The minister’s daughter grew up to become the first black woman mayor of the Town of Cape Charles. Directly across the street from me is the second oldest, continuously African-American owned and operated funeral home in the country. While being privileged to serve on the Board of the Rosenwald School Committee, I heard stories from people who still reside in this town about how, as children, they walked over the “railroad hump,” away from the white school, to attend what was then known as the “Cape Charles Colored School.” That daily trek was just one of the many shameful and inexcusable indignities the black members of our town suffered during the Jim Crow era.
The Jim Crow era is over – at least according to the history books. Whereas, laws have evolved to protect people from the most insidious types of race-based discrimination, laws can never change the bias people hold in their hearts against others, simply because of the color of their skin. Last year, in Charlottesville, Virginia, racial hatred was on full display in all of its tiki-torch carrying glory. Decent people were appalled. But that’s Charlottesville, and our bucolic little Seaside/Bayside town is nothing like that, or so I mostly believed.
I do not spend much time reading The Mirror, and less time commenting on it. I have noticed in the past that threads of comments often stray from the actual article. That’s bound to happen with the short attention spans most of us have these days. That was certainly the case, following a recent article about town employees efforts to obtain a membership to a fitness club. There were strong opinions expressed about various things, not related to a fitness club membership, but two comments stood out to me. They were shocking, not just because of their blatantly racist content, but because not one single reader opposed them. In fact, one of the comments received a positive response.
A person, posting under the pseudonym, Slide Easy, felt compelled to remark “Will never understand why white folks emulate blacks, but it sure looks and sounds ignorant. I thought [blacks] were supposed to assimilate into OUR (emphasis in original) society after they were allowed to integrate…they sure have failed.” Well, Mr. Easy, there is a lot to unpack here. I’ll start with the low hanging fruit. What does this have to do with membership to a fitness club?? Or do all paths lead to you attacking black people? More to the point, though, black citizens were not “allowed” to integrate into society. They protested, they initiated legal actions, they fought and some even died to force integration. The Civil Rights Act of 1968 was signed almost 4 months after Dr. Martin Luther King was murdered for his activism demanding equal rights for African-Americans. Most black Americans can trace their introduction to “OUR” society from their ancestors being abducted and forcibly brought to this country as slaves. Contrary what Kanye “Kardashian” West claims, slavery was not a choice for these Americans. Our society is now their society. They own it, as much as you do, and they are entitled to shape it the way they want to. In that regard, they have not failed.
Friends, it does not stop there. A reader, posting as “Tim Harris,” thinks we women and apparently all black people are a whiny bunch when it comes to demanding equality. Mr. Harris writes “[w]hy do you think you [women] are so special that you can not be demeaned, disrespected and abused? Men face the same things every day. You all really need to get a grip on yourselves. You are starting to sound like Black Folks…and that is not a good look.” Once again, how did the entire black race get called out in this discussion?
Spend some time reading comments from various articles, and it will not take long to uncover other subtle and blatantly racist remarks. No one would accuse readers of The Mirror of pulling punches. Townspeople spend apparently large chunks of time on this site, tearing each other down, and accusing each other of all sorts of malfeasance. The name calling and accusations abound, and some are quite hilarious. However, these racist comments, they are a whole different kettle of fish. They are hate speech – plain and simple. They reveal a darkness in the hearts of the people who post them, a failure of moral character. They are pure evil and they are vile. We cannot allow them to be unopposed.
I have never written to The Mirror, and believe me, I do not relish the attack that will certainly come from the views I am expressing here. Let me steal some of your thunder. I am a liberal, a snowflake, a person who has the audacity to eat avocado on my bagel, when all good women eat butter on toast. I am sure I will be accused of being exactly what is certainly going to lead to the end our civilization as we know it. Doesn’t matter. Still worth it. As Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel warned “[w]e must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, not the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.”
Ray Otton says
I am your polar opposite, politically speaking.
You are 100% correct about the shocking comments made here recently.
So much for the third happiest seaside town in America.
Slide Easy says
Blacks vs. Whites in a nutshell.
Whites are only 10% of the world’s population, yet are the most industrious, ingenious, and innovative race the world has known. Whites have formed nations, built civilizations, assumed and administrated power, created the Renaissance, the Age of Discovery, the Industrial Revolution, automation, technology, the space program which landed men on the moon and launched probes exploring beyond the solar system, discovered electricity, created wonder drugs and architecture and have harnessed nuclear power, have unlocked the secrets of DNA and relativity, created computer science and the internet age.
No pre-contact sub-Saharan African society ever created a written language or weaved cloth, or forged steel invented the wheel or the plow, or devised a calendar, or code of laws, or any social organization, or formal religion. or system of measurement, or math, or built a multi-story structure or bridge or sewer, or infrastructure of any kind, and they never harnessed a river, or even drilled well or irrigated, or built a road or railway or sea-worthy vessel, they never domesticated animals, or exploited underground natural resources, or produced anything that could be considered a mechanical device.
Blacks lived alone in sub-Saharan Africa, a vast continent with temperate climates and abundant resources for 60,000 years; so they cannot blame racism, poverty, imperialism or anything else for their failures. How could they live with all that shoreline and never contemplate putting a sail on a ship like every other culture did?
Blacks are the oldest race, they had a huge head-start so they should be the most advanced race, but they are the least advanced race. And in fact, they never did develop until they were domesticated by Whites.
19 of the 20 poorest countries are sub-Saharan African (Haiti).
Slide Easy says
There has never been a successful Black country. No modern creations or civilization exists in sub-Saharan Africa that was not brought there by Whites.
There are no White Third-World nations, but all Black ones are.
Put Whites on an island and you get England; put Asians on an island and you get Japan; put Blacks on an island and you get Haiti.
Nowhere Blacks live are they considered achievers. In fact they are universally viewed as unproductive and disruptive to society.
Simply, life is an IQ test.
Nefertiti says
You are a sick and disgusting person.
Slide Easy says
You obviously have not studied His-Story (history). I could care less what you think of me.
Servenet says
I applaud your fact-based, reasonable and remarkably intelligent reply. Haven´t seen such thoughtfulness displayed in a long time.
Cookie says
Slide Easy, you copy paste well. Your remaining cognitive skills and empathy place you in the sorry schmuck category. So sorry you lost your boyfriend to a sexy black man. You must be sad that you’ll never measure up.
Don Green says
It’s interesting that both Cookie’s and Nefertiti’s comments are ad hominem attacks. They do not refute comments such as that of Slide Easy–they simply attack the commentator. Why? Because they can’t alter the truth contained in his statements or those in the primary article. Federal crime statistics demonstrate that more than half of felonies each year are committed by about 6.5% of the population–black men. This statistic largely accounts for the phenomenon of “racism”. The root of “racism”: black crime. Stop the crime, and “racism” will gradually disappear. Congratulations to the editor for his willingness to discuss this difficult matter honestly.
Virginia Whitechick says
OK, Don Green, I’ll respond to your endorsement of Slide Easy’s racist statements.
Sub-Saharan Africa has been plundered by colonial powers until the 1960s, and, subsequently, by neocolonialists. After recently relinquishing shackles and abolishing neo-colonial dominance in many of its forms, Africans have rapidly acquired financial sustainability, the subcontinent becoming the new frontier for multinational investment. Forbes touts Africa as the “next emerging market.” For successful “black countries,” the Republic of South Africa, Botswana, Namibia, Gabon, and Mauritius, among others, fit the bill as upper-middle-income countries. Since your horizon is limited to islands, the Seychelles are high-income, like the U.S. and Western Europe. African countries are far ahead of where we are in mobile payments and mobile banking. Many sub-Saharan African countries are entrepreneurship incubators and emerging technology leaders, with Kenyan multinational M-pesa leading the way.
What do you know about Africa, beyond what your chauvinist sources tell you? Ignorant racist whites detract from, rather than contribute to civilization. Interesting that Haiti is offered as the example, a country that has been devastated by earthquakes, hurricanes, and catastrophic floods. The above-reproduced racist statements reflect knowledge gaps, likely symptomatic of the minuscule IQ you invoke; is this, perhaps, a deflection, burdening the industrious black race with ignorant white readers’/writers’ lacunae?
Paul Plante says
This same discussion on “race” has now been going on for what, years, isn’t it?
And it still is going exactly nowhere.
I bet tomorrow it still will be going on and still will be going nowhere.
Because where can it possibly go that it has not already been hundreds and hundreds of times before.
And Susan made it about race by differentiating between “white” neighborhoods and “black” neighborhoods as if Cape Charles were still segregated.
Is it?
If not, then what was the need to bring race into the picture?
If schoolchildren to the north of you have no problem with Americans being of all colors, then what the heck is wrong with you people in Virginia?
Slide Easy says
Asian countries for Asians.
Black countries for Blacks.
but White countries for everybody?
That’s genocide.
Anti-racist is a codeword for Anti-White
Cookie says
Slide Easy, yeah, white countries for everybody. Whites will be a minority even in the U.S. in about 25 years. You should hit the booze so you can check out earlier while you can still claim dominance.
Servenet says
Total fail of a piece of snark, Cookie sweetie. Yea, I would give up on that effort dear. But open anti-white…hate – is right up your alley.
Slide Easy says
Has the truth seeped into your small mind yet? You have had almost a year for it to do so.
Slide Easy says
Has the truth seeped into your small mind yet? You have had almost 2 years for it to do so.
Slide Easy says
Has the truth seeped into your small mind yet?
You have had almost 4 years for it to do so.
Frank says
You literally are the worst person. To ever comment on the internet it’s really hard to get there congrats. I’m literally shaking my head and have to be apathetic because I’d be filled with rage. You actually have no right to that opinion if you want to go build concentration camps or something fine but you deserve to every horrible thing that could ever happen to you.
Slide Easy says
Please explain what is false about the diatribe that plucked the raw nerve you had hanging out…Please, feel free. Debate the facts, not your feelings.
I could care less what you think of me.
Servenet says
Big yawn, Frankie. Comment is just another drop in the shitlib ocean of neurotic tears
Slide Easy says
I do not get my ‘rights’ from a Frank. I can assure you of that. Tell us Frank, when were you put in charge of deciding who has a ‘Right’ or Not?
My ‘rights’ came along with me at birth. I do not look for justification from you or anyone else. Do you understand?
Slide Easy says
please explain frank, we are waiting…
Slide Easy says
I axed you to explain.
Servenet says
Whoa, friend…THAT´S A LITTLE TOO MUCH *TRUTH* TELLING…for one post. Makes the haters hate overtime. Truth, you see, is the thing they hate the most. Just a word of advice. And stay undercover, the Ministry of ¨Truth¨ is ever vigilant against…er, um…THE TRUTH.
Delia says
Pillaging and raping isn’t doesn’t = most ingenious lol. It = most barbaric.
Slide-Easy says
Is that sentence Ebonics, bless your heart?
Servenet says
Very good Delia! We need ten million more like you. And I’ll take even more.
Delia says
Thanks, please explain, I don’t understand your comment.
Paul Plante says
If I understand the dude and perceive his or her underlying meaning, I believe that he or she like you decries the continued use of rape as a weapon of war in Africa, right now today, as we here in the United States where thank God women are not subject to the same kind of barbarity women in Africa are subjected to, have this very conversation, and he or she wishes there were far more of you on the planet than there are the rapers in Africa.
That is my read of the situation, anyway.
And who can blame the dude for praising you for speaking out about women in Africa being raped!
And who can blame the dude for being upset when we American people are confronted with headlines such as Reuters on April 15, 2021, with “Africa -Sexual violence being used as weapon of war in Ethiopia’s Tigray, U.N. says”
by Michelle Nichols, or how about The Guardian article “Ethiopian nun speaks of widespread horror she and colleagues are seeing on a daily basis inside the heavily isolated region of Tigray – ‘Bodies are left to be eaten by hyenas; girls as young as eight are being raped,’ Rape is being used as weapon of war in Ethiopia, say witnesses; Ethiopian nun speaks of widespread horror she and colleagues are seeing on a daily basis inside the heavily isolated region of Tigray” by Tracy McVeigh on 14 May 2021.
Some pretty sick ****, isn’t it?
And can anyone mistake those animals for humans, do you think?
There is the philosophical existential question I see you being presented with by Servenet, who like you is a compassionate Christian humanist who is being driven literally berserk by reading on the Human Rights Watch website the heart-rending story from October 5, 2017 entitled “Central African Republic: Sexual Violence as Weapon of War – Widespread Rape, Sexual Slavery by Armed Groups,” where the candid world was confronted with the following which forms the basis of why it is that Servenet is praising you for speaking out about what is happening in Africa with regard to raping and pillaging:
(New York) – Armed groups in the Central African Republic have used rape and sexual slavery as a tactic of war across the country during nearly five years of conflict, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today.
Commanders have tolerated widespread sexual violence by their forces and, in some cases, appear to have ordered it or committed it themselves.
The 176-page report, “‘They Said We Are Their Slaves,’ Sexual Violence by Armed Groups in the Central African Republic,” documents 305 cases of rape and sexual slavery carried out against 296 women and girls by members of armed groups between early 2013 and mid-2017.
The predominantly Muslim Seleka and the largely Christian and animist militia known as “anti-balaka,” two main parties to the conflict, have used sexual violence as revenge for perceived support of those on the other side of the sectarian divide.
“Armed groups are using rape in a brutal, calculated way to punish and terrorize women and girls,” said Hillary Margolis, women’s rights researcher at Human Rights Watch.
“Every day, survivors live with the devastating aftermath of rape, and the knowledge that their attackers are walking free, perhaps holding positions of power, and to date facing no consequences whatsoever.”
Slide-Easy says
Lack of Assimilation does not make for good Integration.
Servenet says
Your reply to Delia is much too tame. If she is black it follows as night follows day that she is virulently anti-White – a given. If she is White she is among the worst creatures that breathe – as Edward Dutton would identify them, a mere “spiteful mutant.”
Adeline says
Most industrious? You pillage and rxpe and force everyone else to do the hard work. I’d hardly call that industrious lol
Servenet says
Hey Adeline…what are you doing in that WHITE country that you vomit your hate all over? What are you doing in that country THAT YOUR ENEMY…WHITE PEOPLE…BUILT? You´re not only a psychotic hater, addie, you´re one monster of a hypocrite. GET OUT of that WHITE country that you are infecting. Go away from those people you hate so much from that black soul of yours. They don´t want you and certainly don´t need you. Like they don´t need cancer. Feel me, addie, kid?
Stuart Bell says
No, you are right. It is not, ‘industrious’. It was pure ‘Genius”.
As your name means Nobel or Nobility, Both of which would have certainly have forced everyone else to do hard work. You sound like a Liberal Dixie-Rat. Remember who was the party of Slavery….Democrat.
MLK was a Republican.
Mary says
My husband and I have been researching seaside towns on the Eastern Shore for a place to retire. I always look at the local paper and comment sections to get a sense of the population. Wow …. moving on.
Paul Plante says
You should also pay heed, perhaps more heed, actually, to the local governments that are in place.
Slide Easy says
Thank You!!!!
Laurie Wolpert says
The Eastern Shore is a beautiful and quiet place to live. It has problems with economic development, but there is more of a community feel, this online newspaper notwithstanding. For example, when you go to the grocery store, people will start to say hello. There’s only so many people in the area, so you are bound to get to know them (which can be both positive and negative, I suppose). It’s also simply lovely to walk along the coastline and look at the ships in the distance, eat oysters by the water, and generally get away from the rat race that pervades areas such as Virginia Beach.
There’s probably 5 jerks in every town, and it’s easier to be a jerk online (most of the jerks online don’t even use their real names). Stay at a nice bed and breakfast for a week and see what you think.
Jeff Parks says
There was a time when Virginia Beach was…
‘a beautiful and quiet place to live’.
Paul Plante says
At least five, Laurie.
Servenet says
Yea, Mary, human beings may be a little too tawdry for your numinous tastes. Perhaps moving UP…instead of ¨on¨ would be a better plan for you.
Hope Murphy says
I can assure you that this is a narrow and unpopular view.
Paul Plante says
Whew!
Sounds like Cape Charles dodged a bullet there as that old saying goes.
Frank Edwards says
You sound like an agent trying to make a quota.
Harry Savannah says
Dumb comment, guy. But don´t try again…please.
Paul Plante says
It actually sounded an awful lot like he was coming to an evidence-based conclusion based on the specific facts of the matter.
But as this is America, where everything goes, someone is certainly free to challenge his assumptions and conclusions, especially here in the Cape Charles Mirror, which I believe based on my own experience takes it citizenship duties as a centinel of our collective liberty quite seriously, as witnessed by the printing of your rather curious comment above about not trying to make that post again, as though everyday he would keep repeating it just to annoy you, as it so obviously did this time around.
Are you perhaps in the real estate game, as well?
Harry Savannah says
It´s called sardonicism/sarcasm. Requires a little thinking…or…a little notion of the wry sense of humour. Or you can just accept that it is my opinion…that his comment is dumb.
Paul Plante says
And a very good day to yourself, Harry Savannah, and I hope it is a glorious one for you, as well!
And speaking of sardonicism, a term I doubt that you will ever come across on mindless TWITTER, precisely because it does require a little thinking, plus it uses up a lot of your limited character allotment per TWEET, have you ever paused to reflect on how powerful an educational tool the Cape Charles Mirror has become in our times, precisely because of scholars like yourself who take of our valuable time to come into here to teach us that such powerful concepts as sardonicism even exist, let alone can be used in a sentence or paragraph to convey some sort of rational meaning, for which I am truly thankful to yourself for introducing me to the concept, which apparently has been laying hidden from my ken (one’s range of knowledge or sight) as it were for over seventy years now, if you can imagine that.
And digging further into the subject, which is a habit of mine when I find myself being “woke” by someone more erudite such as yourself who has a notion of the wry sense of humour, I find “sardonicism” itself has a long and interesting history, as Wikipedia tells us, to wit:
Sardonicism is “the quality or state of being sardonic; an instance of this; a sardonic remark”.
A sardonic action is one that is “disdainfully or skeptically humorous” or “derisively mocking”.
A sardonic remark may be an imitation or intimation, to express conceitedness and boldness at events of adversity and to dissuade from follies.
Also, when referring to laughter or a smile, it is “bitter, scornful, mocking”.
Hence, when referring to a person or a personal attribute, it is “characterized by or exhibiting bitterness, scorn or mockery”.
end quotes
WHEW, you know what I am saying?
That is indeed some heavy stuff to have to wade through, which is why you won’t find this conversation happening on TWITTER or FACEBOOK or in the Washington Post, for that matter.
Now, get this, according to Wikipedia, and this is stuff you probably already know, even if the rest of us in here don’t, both the origin of the concept and the etymology of the word sardonicism is uncertain, but it appears to stem from the name for the Mediterranean island of Sardinia.
The 10th-century Byzantine Greek encyclopedia Suda traces the word’s earliest roots to the notion of grinning (Ancient Greek: σαίρω, translit. sairō) in the face of danger, or curling one’s lips back at evil.
One explanation for the later alteration to its more familiar form and connection to laughter (supported by the Oxford English Dictionary) appears to stem from an ancient belief that ingesting the sardonion (σαρδόνιον) plant from Sardinia (Σαρδώ) would result in convulsions resembling laughter and, ultimately, death.
In Theory and History of Folklore, Vladimir Propp discusses alleged examples of ritual laughter accompanying death and killing, all involving groups.
These he characterized as sardonic laughter: “Among the very ancient people of Sardinia, who were called Sardi or Sardoni, it was customary to kill old people.”
“While killing their old people, the Sardi laughed loudly.”
end quotes
WOW, again, speaking an an older person in here!
Good thing I am here in America instead of Sardinia, ain’t it?
Servenet says
Good thing I am here in America instead of Sardinia, ain’t it?
Indeed…at least in the current year. And thanks for your too generous encomiums vis a vis my ¨erudition.¨ (a little honey for your tea, there). As well as expressions of your cheerful goodwill.
HS
Servenet says
Oh yes, and also for the scintillating discursive as regards the etymology of the word(s) ¨sardonic/sardonicism.¨
Marlene Cree says
Thank you, Ms. Bauer, for your timely Op-Ed. You made many excellent observations and your Elie Wiesel quote is spot on. ( And no question, avocado on bagels is delicious!) So, while I am not a fan of censorship, it does seem to me that the Editor of The Mirror is not sufficiently exercising his authority to see that the comments “printed” are really relevant to the issue purportedly being addressed. The fact that a number of commentators apparently are interested in participating in the digital equivalent of a barroom brawl doesn’t mean that this is beneficial to anyone. Cape Charles does seem ready to move to a whole new level and it would be great to think that The Mirror’s comment policy might move to a new level as well. Maybe posting specific guidelines for comments would be appropriate and helpful. I’m not sure where guidelines end and censorship begins but, in my opinion, comments should be pertinent to a specific article and those containing abusive language and name calling would not be “printed” because they detract rather than contribute to the conversation. Obviously under such guidelines, anyone would still be able to write any comment they please to the Editor but the Editor would use discretion in deciding which to publicly “print”. The end result should be that all comments are received but only those on-point and non-abusive come into public view on The Mirror platform. And while this would not address all the important issues raised by Ms. Bauer’s Op-Ed, it would go a long way towards a more civil discourse which I think would be a net positive for all.
Note: Only about 2/3 of all comments are approved. That should tell you something. Also, while sometimes annoying, sometimes disturbing, the comments section is a reflection of the community in which we live, like it or not. The Mirror comments section is American, more 4chan than Pravda.
Paul Plante says
What is it about democracy that you do not like, for this is what democracy looks like in real life, all those comments that in YOUR judgment should be banned?
As an adult in a supposed democratical society, why are you people so unable or incapable of simply ignoring those comments you don’t like?
If you think a comment detracts from some topic, and what really is the topic here outside of the fact that Susan M. Bauer came to Cape Charles over a decade ago, and bought a historic Craftsman bungalow on Jefferson Avenue, that was originally a Sears kit house, a subject I personally find quite interesting, given my interest in and affinity for Craftsman bungalows, it would seem to me as an advocate of democracy that it would be incumbent upon you, the one
complaining, to publicly demonstrate how that it.
Are you going to tell us, for example, that if someone finds legitimate fault in here with structural aspects of a Craftsman home, that that is somehow detracting from the topic, because it might make partisans of Susan M. Bauer feel bad about themselves?
Is that how picayune and stifling you would have it be in here?
As to guidelines, seems to me they have been printed before by Wayne Creed, so how many times do they have to be repeated?
As to the purpose for the existence of the Mirror, this is what I personally recall from the story “GOODBYE WAVE, WAVE GOODBYE” in the last edition of the Cape Charles Wave, to wit:
We considered shutting down the Wave following the May 2014 elections, when all three of the candidates we supported were soundly defeated.
But our supporters somehow convinced us to keep it going.
This second drowning death was the catalyst that caused us to finally give up completely.
Shining a spotlight on poor town leadership has accomplished nothing but to antagonize those who prefer to be ignorant, so we quit.
But our detractors should be careful what they wish for.
Before they drink too much celebratory champagne they should be aware of the sobering fact that our erstwhile reporter Wayne Creed, the Jon Stewart of the Eastern Shore, is not quitting.
As the Wave sinks into the sand, the Cape Charles Mirror has been born, and with Creed at the helm may prove to be a Wave on steroids.
end quotes
Is that what has all you people looking to impose strict censorship on the Cape Charles Mirror feeling so threatened?
Who is getting subdued here besides Wayne Creed?
And why?
In that final copy of the Wave, it concluded with this statement, to wit: A prominent local investor complained to Town Council, “it’s really hard to wake up on a Monday morning, wondering what’s going to [be in the Wave].”
Now that investor can wake up and look in the Mirror.
end quotes
Is that why there is now all this pushback by these champions of strict censorship in here – because that investor does not like what he or she is seeing here in the Mirror?
The candid world would like to know.
Servenet says
@Marlene Cree
Nobody is interested in your wind-bag virtue signalling. So, a little advice – get a license from a diploma mill (religious) and preach somewhere where it will be ah…appreciated.
Paul Plante says
Thanks from a fellow American for taking the time to express your views on life, Susan.
George Southern says
Thank you Marlene for your spot-on comment. My own opinion as a newspaper editor with some years of experience is that just because someone writes something doesn’t mean it should be printed. The Cape Charles Wave edited and selectively printed comments just as a newspaper edits and selectively prints letters to the editor. The reaction to the original news story mentioned above unfortunately was diluted by dozens and dozens of off-topic comments. And by the way, that news story was not specifically about “town employees’ efforts to obtain membership in a fitness club.” It was about the forced resignation of Bob Panek from his town job.
Tim Harris says
“Sick of liberals trying to make you feel guilty about slavery? All you need to do is remind them of a few historical points:
All races kept slaves all throughout history.
Most of the American slaveships and American slave-markets were run by Jews. But no one blames modern Jews. Because if anyone today says anything was “run by Jews”, they’re immediately dismissed as a crazy anti-Semite, regardless of whether or not it’s true.
When the Trans-Atlantic slaveships docked at African slave-markets to buy slaves, they bought slaves who were already slaves. It was Arab Muslims and Black Africans themselves who captured members of rival tribes and took them to the coastal slave-markets to sell to the Whites and Jews. White people didn’t go into Africa and kidnap free black people. They barely needed to get off their ships to buy slaves, it was like buying McDonalds at a drive-through. The slaves were already at the slave-market in chains, ready to go.
In the 16th – 18th century, Africans enslaved 1.5 million White Europeans in the Barbary Slave Trade. African Muslims raided up the coastlines of Europe, particularly the British Isles but even as far as Iceland, kidnapping and enslaving White European Christians. The men were galley slaves, and the women were sex slaves. This was more brutal than working on a plantation or as a domestic servant.
Native Americans and Jews owned Black slaves too, but no one seems to assign a collective guilt to modern Native Americans and Jews for their slavery. In fact, Jews were the biggest slave-owners in America per capita.
Whites were the first people to stop slavery in modern times, whereas slavery still continues in Africa to this day. In Mauritania slavery was only made a punishable offense in 2007!
Less than 2% of Whites in America ever owned slaves
Only 5% of the black slaves transported across the Atlantic actually went to the modern U.S. Most in fact went to Latin America to serve Hispanic slave-owners. But we don’t look at modern Hispanics as evil slave-owners.”
Liberals have one color.
Tim Harris says
Speaking of Blacks, Africans were the first to sell their kin into slavery while 28% of free Blacks in the US owned slaves, in much higher proportion than free whites.
10-15 million African slaves were shipped to the New World, but only 6% (400,000) to North America. The vast majority went to South America, yet countries like Brazil don’t get hit with slavery guilt.
1.5 million Whites also fell victim to white slavery in the 19th century, trafficked into prostitution. Jewish traders were instrumental in this, being the dominant slave traders for centuries as per H. D. Brackman and others. This is why slave auctions weren’t held on a Sabbath.
Jews were also the main slave traders bringing Blacks to the US. Aaron Lopez is notable: in Newport, the biggest slave trading hub, “for over 50 years over 50% of bills of lading, concessions, receipts, port clearances carried his signature.”
In all, Jews of Newport owned 300 slave ships. Of 128 slave ships docked one year in Charleston, over 120 were undersigned by Jews of Newport & Charleston. Jews were also over twice as likely to own slaves than non-Jews.
Nonetheless, slavery is projected onto and laid entirely at the feet of White men by a Jewish-dominated MSM & Hollywood. There’s also much (buried) evidence to suggest Whites were in America before Amerindians. Look up the Lovelock Cave skulls, the Solutrean hypothesis etc.
Renegade Tribune: Destroying the Anti-White Arguments
IHR: Tony Martin
Doris Birch says
‘The name calling and accusations abound, and some are quite hilarious. However, these racist comments, they are a whole different kettle of fish. They are hate speech – plain and simple. They reveal a darkness in the hearts of the people who post them, a failure of moral character. They are pure evil and they are vile. We cannot allow them to be unopposed.’
‘Hate Speech’???
You cannot and will not tell people what to Like or Hate.
Who do you think you are to try?
‘We cannot allow them to be opposed’
What do you think you can do about it?
Servenet says
Right on, Doris.
Kearn says
Interesting op-ed. I have been in Cape Charles now for 9 years, in Virginia for over 20. Race relations in VA and CC are fantastic, everyone is friendly and polite to each other. Coming from Essex County, New Jersey (Newark, NJ) this has been a refreshing change, in NJ racial tension is intense and not far from the surface.
America has a long, troubled history in racial matters. I think we should be stressing the relatively good relations the races have in CC compared to much of the rest of the country, not stressing the problems that may still exist. If, 150 years after the Civil War, we can’t see the positive in each other and try to live together, that might point to a history that is so long and bitter that it cannot be overcome, that almost seems to be what the op-ed is saying.
Paul Plante says
Up here where I am, the elementary school in 1976 had the children in the school put into words what they thought an American was, and these are a few of the descriptors in the words of some 1st graders, to wit:
An American is: is good; works hard; loves his country; goes to church; helps people.
Then we come to the 2d graders:
An American is: someone who cares!
And this is how one 3rd grader had it:
An American is someone who helps his nation.
An American is a person who stands by his flag.
An American is a person who goes to school, and says the Pledge of Allegiance.
An American is someone who obeys all the laws.
It doesn’t matter what color an American is.
End quotes
Those American values being expressed by those school children in 1976 were the same values I learned in that same school back in 1951, that it did not matter what color an American is.
Why all these years later are you people still having such a hard time with it?
The portion of the candid world that was taught as I was, and as those children were, would truly like to know.
B. Taylor says
Come here’s don’t know that the KKK writer Thomas Dixon lived in Cape Charles? The Clansman, Birth of a Nation. And now the tradition continues with the Cape Charles Mirror.
Note: Thank you for keeping us abreast of what the folks who aren’t thinking are thinking. It is much appreciated.
Tim Harris says
Since you are thinking, what part of the words above are not true?
Paul Plante says
All good women eat butter on toast?
HUH?
Where on earth did you get that silly idea from, Susan?
What third-world ****hole does that happen in?
Or more properly, what kind of people have you been hanging with that have indoctrinated you into thinking that way?
I am sure that if you did a survey, you would find many women out there eating toast with butter on it, for the reason that that is how many people, including myself, eat toast, if and when we decide to have some toast to eat.
But it is not at all mandatory that women eat toast with butter on it.
It is a matter of choice.
It is America, afterall, and women in America have been emancipated for some long time now.
Surely you cannot have forgotten Tabitha Gilman Tenney, a woman who was a notable author in early American literature who in 1801 wrote and published her most recognized work, “Female Quixotism: Exhibited in the Romantic Opinions and Extravagant Adventure of Dorcasina Sheldon.”
That work is part of The Early American Women Writers series, which offers rare works of fiction by eighteenth- and nineteenth-century women ranging from serious cautionary tales about moral corruption, much as one finds here in the Cape Charles Mirror, to amusing and trenchant social satire, which again one finds in copious amounts here in the CCM, with those books providing today’s reader with a unique window into the earliest American popular fiction and way of life.
According to its review by Oxford University Press, first published in 1801, “Female Quixotism” is a boisterous, rollicking anti-romance and literary satire taking place in the fictional village of L—, Pennsylvania, where its central character Dorcas Sheldon–who styles herself the romantic “Dorcasina”–sets out on a quixotic quest for the kind of romantic love portrayed in her favorite English novels.
Having rejected the prosaic yet honorable advances of her first suitor, “Lysander,” Dorcasina narrowly escapes marriage to a series of unscrupulous rogues interested mostly in her considerable fortune.
Moving from one misadventure to another, the heroine’s journey ends in a lonely old age bereft of romantic illusion.
end quotes
Now, does that sound like a book about a woman who eats toast with butter on it, instead of a bagel with avocado, which really is very common and actually quite pedestrian today in modern society, where the avocado is now easy to obtain, even in the hinterlands?
Paul Plante says
Susan says: I have never written to The Mirror, and believe me, I do not relish the attack that will certainly come from the views I am expressing here.
I am a liberal, a snowflake, a person who has the audacity to eat avocado on my bagel, when all good women eat butter on toast.
end quotes
Have you ever stopped to consider, Susan, that many women in America eat toast with butter as opposed to bagels topped with avocado because the chances of finding butter that is not off are a lot better than finding avocados that are not already over-ripe?
Just because you are privileged enough to be able to have avocados that are not over-ripe on your demand does not mean that all women in America are similarly privileged.
It has nothing to do with them not being emancipated.
It has everything to do with them not wanting to buy over-ripe avocados.
Hence the toast with butter as a logical fall-back position.
And boy, what a drama queen you are in here, thinking anyone really is going to care about your gustatory habits and attack you for not eating toast with butter like so many other Americans do.
Eat your bagels and be at peace with yourself, Susan.
Your digestive system will certainly appreciate you for it.
Susan says
By word count, Paul, you have tried to dominate this discussion, but you have failed to heed the advice of Elie Wiesel, to take a stand. Instead of unequivocally denouncing Easy for saying black people did not “develop until they were domesticated by whites,” you chose to be cheeky about avocados and butter. You declined to regale us with your knowledge of history by rebutting Easy’s declaration that no Sub-Saharan nation developed a written language, until they made contact with non-indigenous people, by explaining to Easy that Nigerians developed a system of writing, called Nsibidi, which some archeologists date back to 5000BC. You could have said that, by comparison, General Sully of the Roman Republic, when sent to spy on Germanic (white) tribes invading Italy, reported they possessed no written form of communication in approximately 100BC. You could have contradicted the ridiculous assertions of Tim Harris about the prevalence of white slaves in modern history, by explaining that most whites were indentured servants and not chattel, like blacks. You could have declared that your flag has 50 stars, and not 13. Like a good and patriotic American, you could have denounced the evils of racism and white supremacy. But…avocados and butter. Because you have not chosen a side, are we left inferring from your silence, and evasion, which side you are on?
Paul Plante says
I don’t play that little kindergarten game, Susan of “if you are not on my side, you have to be on the other side,” as if there can only be two sides – the one you are on, which of course is the good and righteous one, because you are on it, and the evil one which includes everybody who doesn’t kowtow to you or abase themselves before your or kiss your feet or agree with you.
I am responsible for ONE person in this lifetime, and it is NOT slide easy.
Where exactly do you get off, Susan, telling people what they have to think in this country?
Where the hell do you get off denouncing people who don’t think like you want them to?
And who the hell is Elie Wiesel?
What is he to anyone in America, or she, if that be the case?
In either case, he or she is not a function of my reality as an American citizen who is a veteran of this country who fought to defend the FIRST AMENDMENT of OUR Constitution, not the Constitution of Israel, if they even have one over there.
That Constitution I fought to defend gives you the right to run your mouth in here any way you please, and it gives slide easy the same right.
If you don’t like what he is saying, then tell him so.
It is not my function in here to do so.
Susan says
Despite your attempted obfuscation, your stance on this issue could not be clearer. You have revealed your true heart, and as Easy says “it’s not a good look.”
Todd Holden says
Don’t mess with Vets……
Paul Plante says
Susan, in all sincerity, you need a real serious bowel flush.
Chas Cornweller says
This article, for all intents and purposes, hits the nail squarely on the head. Several things arise when reading a letter such as this. Peoples’ emotions undoubtable will come to the fore. The facts will become loose and not so factual as the comments pour in to lessen the information the author has given. For example, Slide Easy states that only 10 percent of the world’s population is white or Caucasian. Well, that’s not exactly true. It is more like 14 percent. But, the interesting fact is that here in America, the percentage of Caucasian is more like 77 percent. And after all, the author is speaking of an American town, not the world in general. In fact, the world in general has a better track record on racial disparity than the United States. Of course, we can pick pockets around the world that have real racial divides. But, we are talking about Cape Charles, the lower Eastern Shore. The few commenters on here that have a definite and unapologetic bent on singular racial divide.
A very good article and classily written. Thank you, Susan M. Bauer…for being “Woke” and taking the time to point out to others, just how important that state of mind is, if we truly want to live the fulfillment of Romans 13: 1-10. You know the one Jeff Sessions used to justify the taking of children from their mothers after crossing the border seeking asylum. He just failed to read it to the very end. Slide Easy, Tim Harris and all you others, with fear and loathing…you would do well to read this. Slavery is a blemish on the face of American democracy. It is now a long dead letter of the law. But, the stigma and economic destruction it put upon a people and a citizenry of this nation still remains. It is time for ALL of us, as Americans, to recognize this fact and deal with it. All people are brothers and sisters. This is the mantra of Christ. Fact. And Tim, no one makes you “FEEL” anything. You do that. You know, the guilt thing. I do not feel guilty about slavery. I had nothing to do with it. But, I do feel shame. And I feel disheartened that my government did nothing to abolish it when it had the chance. (Articles of Confederation-Constitution-the ten original Bill of Rights). After all, the British promised slaves their freedom if they were to fight for the King. And STILL some African Colonist/Slaves fought for the new nation. Just ask Crispus Attucks. My personal shame is that of one who should do more to ensure that the vision of this document (Constitution) along with its numerous amendments (Bill of Rights – twenty-seven and counting) is not only secured, but implemented.
Racism is a divide. To divide is to conquer. To be conquered is to be that one lying on the ground with the sandal on the chest. Something to think about, fellow Virginians. Now is NOT the time for national divide. NOW is the time to stand up to the rhetoric and the tyranny. As in the writings of this nation’s poet laureate…Bobby Zimmerman:
The line it is drawn
The curse it is cast
The slow one now
Will later be fast
As the present now
Will later be past
The order is rapidly fadin’
And the first one now will later be last
For the times they are a-changin’
Susan says
Some may wonder why it is important to expose and confront the white supremacists. Why even give them any kind of forum to spew their hateful rhetoric? The real world problem is that they just don’t exist in isolation. They live and work in our community. Many occupy positions as employers, educators, mortgage brokers, health care providers, and important roles in government. Their racial animus allows them to deny, or create obstacles for, deserving people of color to have access to fair and affordable opportunities for employment, academic advancement, financial planning, health care, etc. Slide Easy and Tim Harris are surely acting on their racial hatred in ways that are unlawful, but difficult to prove. If Slide Easy were to reveal his identity and where he works, he would not be employed for long.
Slide Easy says
My boss and I laugh at you and the rest of the liberal loons together…run along now and play.
Mike Kuzma, Jr. says
I guess “I may not agree with what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it” is just another casualty in the progressive’s remaking of America.
How nice that Susan feels no qualms about using the awesome power of the State to deprive someone of their livelihood.
How nice.
America, 1776-2008. We had a good run.
Kevin Parks says
What power?
What State?
She can not deny anyone anything.
Who died and left her in charge?
Publius Americanus says
Hmmm, a few years later, and with “Cancel Culture(see Susan’s last line…’he would not be employed form long) rampant, can you not see how Susan was able to harness the power of the State to abuse those whom exercise free speech?
Chas Cornweller says
“Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented”. As Elie Wiesel states, has never been truer today. And I am reminded of that infamous quote where one may have a difficult time tracking down its original author…“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men should do nothing.” That quote should be attributed to Edmund Burke.
If racism isn’t evil, then I am not sure what is…The basis of ALL genocide has been attributed to a form of racism (exclusion by death of all perceived inferior beings or a particular tribe, race, religion or nation). Racism is subtle, as well. YOU may think you are not racists, but that thought may cross your mind, to belittle another inwardly because you think they’re not a good mother, or their car is ten years too old and smoky. OR you think because they have personal issues that don’t jibe with yours. Such as pointing out the race disparities and the harm that has come to a certain group of people by kneeling during the national anthem. Maybe their English isn’t up to snuff. Or that hair…the eyes, the nose. Perhaps they control your money better than you. All classic racism.
Differences of opinion are a different matter. And I have them all the time. With my brown friends, with my white friends, even friends I can hardly understand. But…and this is important. We talk. We disagree. We talk some more. We agree to disagree. But, I come away, knowing something a bit more. And I hope I leave an impression that, though I may be hard-headed…I am a fairly good chap. Listening…talking…eye contact. These are the things racist avoid.
I agree here with Susan. It IS important to expose this sickness. And trust me, it is a sickness. As gloomy and rotted as cancer. Susan is correct in saying that racist can affect other’s lives negatively. They’ve been doing that for hundreds of years. Worldwide…eons. They even have a name for it here in the south. Jim Crow. A series of laws, implemented to keep a segment of society down, poverty stricken and powerless. So, don’t come back and tell me it’s not a sickness. And don’t try and tell me this country is not coming down with it. When you can stand to watch young children being wrenched from their parent’s grasp and deep down agree with that policy because of some deep-rooted xenophobia and not shed one tear…then there you are. You think this country is headed for greatness? Ask yourself how it feels to bow down every Sunday, knowing your silence is shouting to the heavens, while your god watches and listens and reads your heart…every day.
Sarah Peters says
Don’t forget that they have the same right to their core belief system as you do to yours. Understand that your liberal mantra is just as offensive to them as their opinion is to you. It is not a one way street. It runs in both directions. Liberals never appear to understand this.
Susan says
Sarah, there are liberals who are racist, and there are conservatives who believe racial prejudice is wrong, and antithetical to our system of American values. It is not a liberal agenda to support racial equality. I believe it is not a conservative agenda to deny black citizens equal and fair treatment under the law. The first comment to this article was written by a man I assume is conservative, but was as equally shocked as I was to read the comments discussed in my article. It seems to me that this is one area where both principled liberals and conservatives can agree.
Sarah Peters says
I have read all your comments and theirs. To me, you do not sound like a stable person. I wish you the best of luck getting better.
Paul Plante says
Susan, you make the Ayatollah Khomeini, the Puritans and the Taliban look like a liberal open-minded people in comparison to you.
Thank God you are not in charge of this country
What a stifling place it would be.
If you had the power, it sounds very much like you would have people like slide easy heading to your gas chamber after you had him gelded.
No wonder people find you so hard to take with your self-righteous, holier-than-thou attitude.
And what is with this infantile horse**** of “By word count, Paul, you have tried to dominate this discussion?”
Do you actually go around counting words people use to express themselves like that character on Sesame Street who had an obsession with counting things?
And “tried to dominate this discussion?”
Not hardly, Susan, mostly I have been ignoring it, because it is STUPID by and large.
And I have failed to heed the advice of Elie Wiesel to take a stand?
Oh really, Susan, do tell!
That ridiculous statement is just an indication of how blind and ignorant you really are, Susan, because @ June 17, 2018 at 7:49 pm above here, I clearly took a stand, as follows, although it might not have been the one you wanted me to take:
“Up here where I am, the elementary school in 1976 had the children in the school put into words what they thought an American was, and these are a few of the descriptors in the words of some 1st graders, to wit:”
“An American is: is good; works hard; loves his country; goes to church; helps people.”
“Then we come to the 2d graders:”
“An American is: someone who cares!”
“And this is how one 3rd grader had it:”
“An American is someone who helps his nation.”
“An American is a person who stands by his flag.”
“An American is a person who goes to school, and says the Pledge of Allegiance.”
“An American is someone who obeys all the laws.”
“It doesn’t matter what color an American is.”
“End quotes”
“Those American values being expressed by those school children in 1976 were the same values I learned in that same school back in 1951, that it did not matter what color an American is.”
“Why all these years later are you people still having such a hard time with it?”
“The portion of the candid world that was taught as I was, and as those children were, would truly like to know.”
end quotes
Are you totally incapable or reading that and comprehending it, Susan?
We don’t have race problems in my HOME.
Why do you have them in yours?
Why are you living back a few centuries?
Why do you think black people are still slaves?
Because in your heart, you can’t see them as being as free and equal as you are?
Although in truth, I doubt anyone could be as equal as you, in all your perfection, regardless of what color skin they had.
And then there is this horsecrap: “Instead of unequivocally denouncing Easy for saying black people did not ‘develop until they were domesticated by whites,’ you chose to be cheeky about avocados and butter.
Who was it, Susan, who made this a thread about eating avocados on bagels, as if that somehow made you better than anyone else?
The answer is YOU, Susan.
You chose to make it about avocados and bagels, and I chose to respond.
A simple concept, really, and I think I already said that given that this is not yet the totalitarian country you and Hillary Clinton would have it be, I am under no obligation whatsoever to “unequivocally denounce Easy for saying black people did not ‘develop until they were domesticated by whites.'”
If you don’t like the statement, REFUTE IT WITH FACTS, if you can, starting with a critical analysis on your part of this following history from WIKIPEDIA, under the heading “African participation in the slave trade,” as follows:
African states played a key role in the slave trade.
Slavery was a common practice among Africans.
Chieftains would barter their slaves to European buyers for rum, spices, cloth or other goods.
Selling captives or prisoners was common practice among Africans and Arabs during that era.
In the 1840s, King Gezo of Dahomey said:
The slave trade is the ruling principle of my people.
It is the source and the glory of their wealth…the mother lulls the child to sleep with notes of triumph over an enemy reduced to slavery…
end quotes.
Which takes us to this: “You declined to regale us with your knowledge of history by rebutting Easy’s declaration that no Sub-Saharan nation developed a written language, until they made contact with non-indigenous people, by explaining to Easy that Nigerians developed a system of writing, called Nsibidi, which some archeologists date back to 5000BC.”
Since you already know that, why didn’t you cut out the middle-man and rebut him yourself?
And moving right along, we come to this gem: “You could have said that, by comparison, General Sully of the Roman Republic, when sent to spy on Germanic (white) tribes invading Italy, reported they possessed no written form of communication in approximately 100BC.”
Where on earth did you dig that crap up from?
Who is General Sully of the Roman Republic?
Do you mean Alfred Sully (May 22, 1820 – April 27, 1879), who was a military officer during the American Civil War and during the Indian Wars on the frontier?
And how did he know they possessed no written form of communication in approximately 100BC?
For that matter, how do you know it is so?
And really, Susan, who gives damn?
Did they have a language they communicated in?
Yes, or no, Susan.
And then we come to another of your ridiculous assertions of what it is I am supposed to be doing in here as your lackey, to wit: “You could have contradicted the ridiculous assertions of Tim Harris about the prevalence of white slaves in modern history, by explaining that most whites were indentured servants and not chattel, like blacks.”
Actually, Susan, NO, I could not have contradicted him, if I so chose, because I think he is more historically accurate than you are on that matter.
You want to believe what you want to believe, and facts and history be damned if they don’t say what you think they should.
As to indentured people in this country, Susan, you better believe they were chattel, as this history from the north of you clearly shows:
The patroonships were precisely feudal: no colonists of a patroonship could leave the colony during their term of service without the written consent of the patroon, and the West India Company pledged itself to do everything in its power to apprehend and deliver up all fugitives from the patroon’s service.
end quotes
Sounds an awful lot like chattel to me, Susan.
And public television on station WMHT had a series on indentured servants which stated as follows:
Indentured servants first arrived in America in the decade following the settlement of Jamestown by the Virginia Company in 1607.
The idea of indentured servitude was born of a need for cheap labor.
An indentured servant’s contract could be extended as punishment for breaking a law, such as running away, or in the case of female servants, becoming pregnant.
end quotes
Servitude, in case you don’t know the meaning of the word means “the state of being a slave or completely subject to someone more powerful.”
Again, sounds an awful lot like chattel to me, but lacking your level of supreme intelligence, how could I possibly know?
And then we come to your grand conclusion: “You (myself) could have declared that your flag has 50 stars, and not 13.”
Why, Susan, would I bother to take the time to make such a statement?
It seems absurd to me to do so, since it would be stating the obvious.
And then this: “Like a good and patriotic American, you could have denounced the evils of racism and white supremacy.”
YAWN!
You know what I am saying, Susan?
No, you probably don’t.
Paul Plante says
From this summary of what has taken place in other countries, whose situations have borne the nearest resemblance to our own, what reason can we have to confide in those reveries which would seduce us into an expectation of peace and cordiality between the members of the present confederacy, in a state of separation?
Have we not already seen enough of the fallacy and extravagance of those idle theories which have amused us with promises of an exemption from the imperfections, weaknesses and evils incident to society in every shape?
Is it not time to awake from the deceitful dream of a golden age, and to adopt as a practical maxim for the direction of our political conduct that we, as well as the other inhabitants of the globe, are yet remote from the happy empire of perfect wisdom and perfect virtue?
– FEDERALIST No. 6, Concerning Dangers from Dissensions Between the States, for the Independent Journal to the People of the State of New York by Alexander Hamilton writing as Publius, circa, 1788
Chas Cornweller says
I will never understand evil. Yes, everyone has the right to think, act and do as they do. Still doesn’t make racism right. It only makes being a bigot a right. It is not a privilege to live without fear. It is not a privilege to live with hope. It is not a privilege to live happy and unthreatened. It is an unalienable right as a human being. Some folks (uber-liberals, alt-cons, fascist, communist, klansmen, or red hatted church ladies, for all I care) feel they are entitled to their small-minded group-think. STILL does not make it right.
Sarah, I truly do understand that my speaking out rankles some. I do not care. What I fail to understand, time and time again (and call me a pinko communist sympathizer if you want to – I do not care) is how some folks, who are intelligent enough to get so far in life and acquire the things they have, want to deny others the same choice. It’s not taking that’s being done by the poor and the disenfranchised…it is just surviving. But some are so blinded by the “mantra” they hear, they just don’t give a ____ about any of them. And believe me, the older, more honest liberals understand a lot more than you give them credit for. This nation is chock full of nuts, fearmongers, haters, trolls, gun enthusiasts with more bullets than brains, greedy/corrupt politicians and liars…and more than I care to account for. Liberals are the least of your problems. Get away from the social media and the radio and the television set for a while and read some good, older books. You might surprise yourself.
Paul Plante says
Actually, my dear friend and fellow American patriot Chas Cornweller, and here I am speaking from personal experience, in the America of today, it is most definitely a privilege to live without fear, and you need both money and political connections to make that possible, and I DO NOT enjoy that privilege because I lack both.
And it is hardly an unalienable right as a human being to live with hope and to live happy and unthreatened.
If those were in fact “unalienable rights,” my dear friend Chas, where unalienable is defined as “unable to be taken away from or given away by the possessor,” with such synonyms as inviolable, absolute, sacrosanct, unchallengeable, unassailable, then clearly there would not be people in America like myself who are without such rights, precisely because there is no place those rights can be vindicated as having an actual existence, and thus, they cannot be enforced, which means they are not unalienable, at all.
Paul Plante says
slide easy, dude, look, do Susan a favor and before you say anything, could you please run it by Susan beforehand to make sure it is politically correct?
Thanks for seeing it her way, dude.
If you only say what Susan wants said, just think how much better and more perfect in every way the world will be as a result.
Deborah Bender says
Ah Susan,
Let’s step back in time for a few minutes. Let’s go back to the town meeting regarding the sale of the Historic Cape Charles School. Correct me if I am wrong but I believe you were against a community center. You and several of your little friends practically ran to the podium to fight having a community center. You and several of your little friends didn’t want a basketball court either. I ON THE OTHER HAND fought FOR a community center. A place for the children of our town to play basketball. A place where the children of our town could go in the winter and use the gymnasium. FOR ALL CHILDREN,,, BLACK, WHITE,OR PURPLE!!!! YOU FOUGHT THE COMMUNITY CENTER!! Where were you SUSAN when little Ace drowned? You sure weren’t at the town meeting when I argued for a safer beach. Fast forward to the next year when the Mexican boy drowned on FATHER’S DAY! Where were you when I argued for a safer beach? When the town council wouldn’t let anyone speak out it was ME SUSAN that brought channel 3 news to Cape Charles. It was that day that your pathetic excuse of a mayor George Proto admitted on live T.V. that the town could have done more toward beach safety.
So now the town of Cape Charles has NO COMMUNITY CENTER, A DANGEROUS BEACH, NO BASKETBALL COURT. NOTHING FOR THE CHILDREN OF THE TOWN TO DO.
Ok folks, who’s the RACIST now??
I will say one more thing Susan, I have to go along with the girl in the comment above, you need therapy. MANY, MANY YEARS OF THERAPY! 10-4 ?
tkenny says
Deborah, can you explain to us how not wanting those things is racist? Does beach safety have a color to it? I noticed that you argued for a safer beach after the drowning not before? Why was that?
Are you implying that only blacks play basketball? Isn’t that stereotypical. Why does the town have to supply something for the kids to do? Can’t a church sponsor a baseball, soccer league or some summer camp organizations come in run something on the beach or somewhere. Why does it have to be the town?
Maybe I can come over to your house in Cape Charles for some coffee and we can talk things over? ….oh, that’s right, you don’t live there anymore!
Deborah Bender says
tkenny, I have no idea who you are or where you live. Apparently you weren’t here during the old school debacle. No matter really. First of all the town didn’t want a community center or a basketball court. They didn’t want BLACK people to come into town to use either. NOW you can argue with me until the cows come home but that’s the way it was. As to beach safety, I personally only use the beach for maybe 2 years with my grandchild. Once it dawned on me that every person lying on the beach to get a tan and then walked down to the water and now in the water we’re peeing. DISGUSTING! We put up a pool to teach our grandchildren to swim. It was only after Ace drowned that I realized there are a lot of drop offs if you walk out too far. I argued for a safer Beach nothing was done. Only after the Mexican boy drowned did the town and all their wisdom put up that tiny little rope line with the tiny little buoys. No signs about safety. So you say that the town shouldn’t have to do anything in regards to children. Okay yes they do not have to do anything but wouldn’t it be nice if they would at least return the basketball court that they promised? The fact of the matter is that all the town is worried about is tourism. Oh and let’s don’t forget taxes. They worried about ways to get every last nickel out of the homeowners. My husband whose family has been on the shore since the 1800s fully intended on retiring and living happily ever after. It was when we realized that the people that actually live in Cape Charles and pay taxes and ridiculously high water bills really have no say in what goes on. And as far as coming to my house and having a cup of coffee I don’t want to meet you. You have already made up your mind about me so why would I want to meet you? Yes we we were very fortunate to sell our home. We now are surrounded on 5 Acres of our own property. We have wonderful drinking water which you don’t. We have no ignorant tourist riding by on golf carts dropping their trash in the street. Yep life is good! No double taxes either! I sincerely hope that if you think the town of Cape Charles is so fabulous that you live there forever.
Publius Americanus says
I think what she is saying is, that when it was time to fish or cut bait for ALL the kids of CC-black and white- she was conspicuous in her absence.
Ergo, liberals are quick to talk the talk, but NEVER walk the walk.
Paul Plante says
Susan, let me try to explain something to you from the perspective of someone who self-identifies as a human being who is an American citizen and a disabled combat veteran.
Among the many AMERICAN rights I fought to defend was a right known as the right of association, which has as a concomitant (naturally accompanying or associated) the right on non-association, which is a hallmark of our “democracy,” regardless of what your Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel, might think about it.
What that American right of non-association means in real life is that people do not have to “like” other people, or “respect” other people (respect is EARNED), or associate with other people.
Until we are taken over by some other more totalitarian nation, or people, what that means to you and I is that neither of us has the right to silence those whose voices we don’t want to hear, or be heard.
We must always take sides, Susan, and I took mine when I took an OATH to support and defend the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.
As to the statement of your Elie Wiesel that neutrality helps the oppressor, not the victim, and silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented, I would remind you of all those Americans who died to defend those Jews in Europe, who weren’t lifting a finger to defend themselves, as we see from p.170 of “World Wars And Revolutions” by Walter Phelps Hall, PhD, of Princeton, copyrighted 1943, as follows:
The very liberalism of the Weimar Republic was telling now against it.
For years the Nationalists and the Nazis had been organizing and drilling informal private armies of their own, the former the Steel Helmets, the latter the Sturmabteilung (Brown Shirts).
Even the peaceful Social Democrats had done likewise with the Reichsbanner corps.
Germany was seething with violent disorder.
Armed bands were attacking Jews and Communists, the former not retaliating, the latter fighting back.
end quotes
Before you go maliciously BRANDING people like myself as “racists,” Susan, I would strongly suggest that before you ran your mouth, you would first have some clear idea about what you are about to say.
I think your over-emotional state has gotten the better of you in here.
Obviously, living in a DEMOCRACY is over-taxing your emotional capacity to handle it.
Try North Korea if you are looking for uniformity of thought, because you sure won’t find it here in the United States of America
tkenny says
Um, Paul, maybe you should reread your history about the time around WWII. The United States knew clearly what was going on with the Jews in Germany and did nothing to stop it. The United States had a clear policy up to 1941 of neutrality if fact it wasn’t until September of 41 that we repeal the neutrality act, declaring war on Japan on Dec 7th, entering the European theater on Dec 11.
So, I’m sorry but by being neutral during the 3o’s and knowing what was going on in Germany, Poland, France etc. We weren’t helping anyone now were we? So point to Elie Wiesel and Susan.
By the way, something written in 1943 when WWII doesn’t end until 1945 doesn’t really seem like it would have much prospective on actual events. Try to find something from 1950 up that states anything close to that.
Paul Plante says
tkenny, dude, PU-LESE!
Don’t prattle on as you are doing above here with inanities and mere speculations.
Cite for us some actual history that would clearly demonstrate that the United States knew clearly what was going on with the Jews in Germany and did nothing to stop it, and make it more than a reference to a policy of neutrality.
Develop the subject with facts, tkenny.
If you are going to refer to a policy, then explain the policy.
As to the policy of neutrality, tkenny, the Proclamation of Neutrality was a formal announcement issued by U.S. President George Washington on April 22, 1793 that declared the nation neutral in the conflict between France and Great Britain, and it threatened legal proceedings against any American providing assistance to any country at war.
Personally, that is a policy I am for.
Why are you against it, you who I believe has never worn a uniform, or bothered to stand on the line to defend this country against foreign aggression?
You want to defend people in other countries, tkenny, then YOU go do it.
Don’t give us this crap of other Americans have to die to defend your policies.
Get your *** up on the front line and you do it, tkenny.
And then, riddle us this: what exactly is it that the United States should have done to stop whatever was going on with the Jews in Germany, and then tell us why it was the responsibility of the United States to do something for the Jews.
And here you again twist yourself up into some incredibly intricate knots when you say that the United States clearly knew what was going on in Germany during that time, but then you turn around and question a contemporary account.
If in fact, as you say, everybody in this country knew what was going, then clearly, the author of the contemporary account would also have known, which renders the contemporary account quite accurate, especially given the fact that the events he was talking about in 1943 had happened in the 1930s.
As to what people in the United States knew, it is this – there have been political intrigues in Europe involving the Jews going back and back in time, and the Jews are hardly the helpless “victims” you would have us believe they are.
Read some history, tkenny, and then tell us that they are not responsible for the predicaments they find themselves in, or that they do not bear responsibility for their own actions.
And let me ask you again – why should Americans have had to die to save the Jews in Europe?
Why didn’t they have any responsibility for themselves?
Take you time formulating your responses.
I am patient, I will wait.
tkenny says
Paul, answer this – if we intervened earlier would so many have had to die?
Did America know what was going on in Germany, yuppers!
(https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/new-project-uncovers-what-americans-knew-about-holocaust-180958712/)
1935 Times-Picayune article tells the tale of Herman Neugass, a Tulane University sprinter who refused to participate in the 1936 “Nazi” Olympics in Berlin because of Hitler’s political stance toward Jews.
Washington Post in September 1935. Hitler’s infamous Nuremberg Laws, which essentially forbade German Jews from participating in public life, had just been passed. The editorial called the laws evidence of “the menace to civilization implicit in dictatorships…Der Fuehrer ordered the approval of edicts depriving Jews of German citizenship and otherwise restoring the practices of medieval Europe.”
Political cartoonist John Knott had little sympathy for the U.S. Congress’ indecision when it came to the Wagner-Rogers Child Refugee Bill, a piece of 1939 legislation that would have opened slots for 20,000 German refugee children to enter the United States. The bill was opposed by anti-immigrant organizations and never became a law. Tens of thousands of German Jewish children went on to die in concentration camps.
1944 Anne O’Hare, in a New York Times who warned of a “twilight of the Nazi gods.” In the editorial, which a contributor added to the USHMM project, McCormick insisted that “hopeless or not…the world has to cry out against the awful fate that threatens the Jews in Hungary…these people are exposed to the same ruthless policy of deportation and extermination that was carried out in Poland.”
If you want I can supply more but the above is not policy, its reporting. It nice that you are for a policy of neutrality but for a nation built on christian values, I don’t think you will find anywhere in the bible where you shouldn’t help others if you are in a position to.
As to the author, there were many German sympathizers during the period, the Lindberghs for example, could this author also be one? And no Paul, the closer you are to the event the more muddled it is. The book was written before the conclusion of the Nuremberg trials.
Your understanding of World War II seems inaccurate to say the least. The Americans did not enter WWII to save the Jews. They entered WWII by first declaring war on Japan after Pearl Harbor. When we did that Germany and Italy declared war on the US, who in turn declared war on them. It wasn’t about saving Jews unfortunately, maybe if we acted in the early 30s the out come would have been different.
Finally, “Why didn’t they have any responsibility for themselves?” what an asinine question and shows that you have no idea what the climate was like in Germany during that period and what happened to the Jewish people, along with homosexuals , communist, and other “non German’s”. By the way “In 1933, Jews in Germany numbered around 525,000, or only 1 percent of the population,(https://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/the-holocaust) they were kinda like spit in the ocean, weren’t they in Germany
Todd Holden says
Funny how the jew and the negro made little attempt to fight back against those that wished to enslave them… Can you imagine if they tried that with ancient greeks, romans, the krauts, the Mongols Scottish highlanders…ect. Most would have fought to their death.
Paul Plante says
There is something I am incapable of wrapping my mind around – that people actually were active participants in their own enslavement, for which thought I now likely will be subject to a torrent of abuse from the modern liberals who value “victimhood” above all else, courage and bravery and such things being vestigial among the lower orders of humans in this country, for being insensitive and unfeeling!
Such it is.
In 1968, I enlisted in the United States Army to go help “intervene” (come between so as to prevent or alter a result or course of events) in a little scuffle or tussle over in Southeast Asia called VEET NAM by Democrat Lyndon Baines Johnson, who had us intervening over there to make tkenny feel good about himself, that we were actually doing something that time, instead of the nothing we did before on Democrat Frank Roosevelt’s watch, when the Democrats in charge of America at that time let all the Jews and homosexuals in Europe get slaughtered by the Germans.
When I enlisted, I was issued a “Soldier’s Handbook” which I still have in my possession.
The very first paragraph of the Code of Conduct For Members Of The United States Armed Forces stated thusly at that time:
I am an American fighting man.
I serve in the forces which guard my country and our way of life.
I am prepared to give my life in their defense.
end quotes
Now, one either believes that and accepts that, or one doesn’t.
There is no grey area that I can see.
And having enlisted and sworn an oath, I was one of those who accepted that, unequivocally.
Coming back to this country, to be spit on by liberals and denounced as a kind of Cro-Magnon or Neanderthal because of that belief, I came to learn that right here in America, jokingly called the “land of the brave and home of the free,” with it being a democracy where everything goes, there are people, our neighbors, in fact, who would choose and do choose dishonor before death.
For them, tis far better to learn to crawl and eat crumbs than to stand and die like a man, and you know what, Todd Holden!
In America, with it being a democracy, they have the freedom to feel that way, and be that way.
God bless them for it, is my thought.
But the one thing they do not have the right to do is to impose that condition on others, as is the case right here, where to be tkenny’s good friend, I have to feel sorry or compassionate for people who assisted their oppressors by obeying them, which takes in to the second paragraph of the Code of Conduct for Americans:
I will never surrender of my own free will.
Paul Plante says
tkenny, dude!
Do you know why I come here to the Cape Charles Mirror instead of wasting time on such insipid, inbred rags like the New York Times or the Washington Post?
It is because you are here, tkenny, and not at either of those other two places, so it is to here that I come, in the hopes of being able to engage with you, and that because of your sense of history, which so many in America are lacking in these days, thinking the world was created just for them the moment they were born, which perhaps for them, it actually was.
But you are not so limited, tkenny!
You have a sense that before today, there was a yesterday, and you also realize that that “yesterday” extends back in time for thousands of years, which is why I so much enjoy engaging in debate in here with you on pertinent questions such as this, to wit:
“Paul, answer this – if we intervened earlier would so many have had to die?”
end quotes
Ah, yes, intervention, tkenny – it is an interesting word, is it not, precisely because it is an interesting concept, especially in light of this discussion about us intervening somehow in German affairs during the 1930s and 1940s on behalf of the Jews and homosexuals in Germany.
Now, tkenny, following the formal rules of debate established by the Romans back when Cicero was but a pup, before I launch into a response to your question, “if we intervened earlier would so many have had to die,” I have to tell you that my understanding of the word “intervene” is that it is a verb which means “come between so as to prevent or alter a result or course of events.”
The synonyms include the words intercede, involve oneself, get involved, interpose oneself, step in, mediate, referee, interfere, intrude, meddle, and interrupt.
So when you ask me, tkenny, “if we intervened earlier would so many have had to die,” which of those meanings are you attaching to the action?
Are you asking me this question: “if we came between the Germans and the Jews and homosexuals in Germany so as to prevent or alter a result or course of events earlier, would so many have had to die?”
Or are you using one of the other meanings, like “if we had meddled in the affairs of Germany earlier, would so many have had to die?”
Either way, tkenny, you are intellectually sophisticated enough to know that without further relevant information, starting with who the “we” doing the actual intervening actually were, like maybe a church group, or the Jaycees, or the Kiwanians, and how they were doing the intervening, like with iron pipes like the Democrat paramilitaries, or assault rifles, or ordinary pitchforks, the question simply cannot be answered with any accuracy at all, but the answer is most likely YES – if we had intervened earlier, a lot more Americans would have died.
And talk about a sense of history, tkenny, dude, you are laying it out here right before our eyes as if it just happened yesterday.
Did America know what was going on in Germany?
How could they not have, tkenny, is my response!
They weren’t ignorant, afterall, and since Americans were heavily invested in Germany, and many German firms were located here and doing business, and because so many Americans were of German extraction going to back before the American Revolution, with relatives in Germany, it was impossible to not know what was going on in Germany, and kudos to you, tkenny, dude, for actually being aware of all of that so many years later.
That is a character trait of yours that makes you so unique in America today, where most people have trouble understanding that there is far more to history than the latest mindless TWEET on TWITTER, or a FACEBOOK post they saw this morning.
Paul Plante says
My understanding of World War II seems inaccurate to say the least, tkenny?
How so?
And while I am waiting to hear that answer, let us jump to this gem of yours, to wit: maybe if we acted in the early 30s the out come would have been different.
Here, I have to say that your understanding of history seems to be woefully deficient.
You prattle on about us “acting?”
How?
Do you know that in the 1930s, tkenny, militarily, Germany was out ahead of us, which means militarily, we were behind them?
Your understanding of World War II seems inaccurate to say the least.
Did you know, tkenny, or did you ever bother to consider that 17 months after Adolf Hitler announced publicly his rearmament program, the German Army reached its projected goal of 36 divisions, and during the autumn of 1937, two more corps were formed, and in 1938, four additional corps were formed with the inclusion of the five divisions of the Austrian Army after the Anschluss in March.
While at the time the U.S. entered the contest, we had only a handful of active divisions: five infantry and one cavalry.
Were you aware of any of that, tkenny?
Or don’t you think it makes a difference?
Did you know, tkenny, that while we were essentially demobilized, during the period of its expansion by Adolf Hitler, the German Army continued to develop concepts pioneered during World War I, combining ground (Heer) and air (Luftwaffe) assets into combined arms teams.
Coupled with operational and tactical methods such as encirclements and the “battle of annihilation”, the German military managed quick victories in the two initial years of World War II, prompting the use of the word Blitzkrieg (literally lightning war, meaning lightning-fast war) for the techniques used.
Were you aware, tkenny, that while we had no airborne troops before 1941 at the earliest, the Germans conducted an airborne assault on the Fort Eben-Emael in Belgium in May 1940, in which well-equipped German paratroopers dropped from the sky at night and captured the fort?
So tell me, tkenny, how do you seeing us taking action against the Germans back in the 1930s?
I am curious to know.
Paul Plante says
Now, having read not one but many books about WWII, and having grown up around combat veterans of WWII, and having been in combat myself, what I am looking for from you, tkenny, and you can team with Susan here to combine your brain power, is the WHAT and HOW of what it is we should have done back then for the Jews in Germany.
I don’t want to hear the typical crap of “well, if you don’t think we should have done something for the Jews, you have to be an anti-Semitic.”
I want solutions, just as I want to hear the solutions as to how you and Susan are going to put an end to white supremacy.
What do you think we should have done?
Write nasty letters to Hitler telling him he was a bad man?
How about sanctions?
Should we have put sanctions on him, do you think, like we did to Putin?
Would that have stopped him?
How about gun-boat diplomacy?
Should we have run a couple of battleships up the Danube and Rhine, raking the shore with shot and shell and fire and fury?
Or cruise missiles?
Should we have rained some cruise missiles down on Berlin, do you think, to punish Hitler the way we punished Bashar Assad in Syria and Gaddafi in Libya?
How about an airborne landing?
Should we have carpeted Germany with wave after wave of airborne troops to protect the Jews?
Answers, tkenny, give us some real answers.
Your hero Elie Wiesel, who spent WWII in the Auschwitz concentration camp, can write all the books he wants about “And the World Would Remain Silent,” but what solutions does he offer?
He was born Eliezer Wiesel on September 30th, 1928 in Sighet, Transylvania in the Carpathian Mountains, and in 1944, a year before the war was over, he and his family were sent to a ghetto in Sighet and later that same year they were sent to camps in Auschwitz.
Why did they go. tkenny?
Why, when the Jews in Europe were told to report with all their money and possessions to the train station to be sent off to the concentration camps, did they simply obey and go?
As to “World Wars And Revolutions” by Walter Phelps Hall, PhD, of Princeton, copyrighted 1943, that obviously was not intended to be a definitive book about WWII.
Rather, it was a book about the madness leading up to WWII, madness which you and Susan seem to think you have a solution for, although you never share it with anyone but yourselves.
So you can better understand how that book fits into the picture, here is what the Preface tells us:
Since the events herein have taken place within the memory of living men, this book may be regarded as contemporary history.
To some historians such a description in itself is sufficient read no further; others, sensitive to the momentous character of these years of turmoil, believe it not only permissable but desirable to chronicle the present, and even to dub what they have written, “history.”
The writer, it is evident, is sympathetic to their point of view.
He is, of course, aware that much of what he has written is not definitive.
On the other hand the revolutionary tempo of this present hour and the bitter death of young men everywhere in this global maelstrom are facts which need recording by one who breathes the atmosphere of 1943.
– World Wars And Revolutions by Walter Phelps Hall, PhD, of Princeton, copyrighted 1943
Mike Kuzma, Jr. says
“Lend-Lease”
So much for “neutrality”.
Chas Cornweller says
Fact: during the 1930’s, the ambassador to Germany was one William Dodd. He succinctly and determinately gave the State Department (yes under FDR – I am sure you will comment about that) information and proof of German policy against the Jews. The State Department, for many reasons, including personal, choose to ignore the signs. Also, he reported multiple instances of American tourist being beaten by Brown Shirts for not showing “proper” respect for the parades that would spring up around Berlin. So, did the American government know of the Jewish “situation” prior to the war. Of course, they did. Any minor student of history would know this fact, Paul.
Secondly, the policies of the German Nationalist party of the 1930’s appealed to some. They were an anathema to others. (Sound familiar?) The ruling of the Final Solution wasn’t formalized until 1942. Up until then, it was a slow rolling death march throughout Germany and then throughout the countries Germany conquered. By the time it was evident to most, the war was in full bloom and the camps had already been set up and in use for ten years! And you ask just how could have the United States prevented this atrocity. It’s an easy question with easy answers with hindsight. I could just as easily ask, what could have George W’s administration done to prevent 9/11? Everything has an easy answer with hindsight. The trouble with history, and you know this Paul, is that while you are experiencing it, it is living or dying in present time. Only with the backward lens of time and perspective does it become a momentous moment in time. I am certain, most German citizens did not have an inkling as to the depth their appointed madman would take them and their country at the time. They only knew that they had to go along or they too, would be sent to a camp for “re-education”. The Jewish population was no different. The second-class citizenry label had always been there. (just ask any Black person now living in the south what that is like!) The rules imposed were slow in coming and insidious in their nature. By the time they were being moved into ghettoes and loaded onto trains, they had lost their wages, their property, their security. They were a people without a country. Did a few fight back? You better believe it. But the majority had long resigned themselves to a fate they had no clue as to what was in store. Unfortunately, many believed the lie that the camps were for re-education and relocation. They even believed the lie up to the showers where they were to be de-loused. So, feel better about what a hero you might have been had you been a German Jew living in those times? Especially if you had been fifteen at the time, as Elie Wiesel was.
You ask for solutions. The solutions I can offer you (and to the rest of anyone else reading this) is to educate yourselves completely to the government you currently live under. Educate yourself as to the teachings they teach about other countries and how they handle differing cultures. Educate yourself to classic history and classic philosophy. Read the Bible all the way through. Then read the Koran all the way through. Then read the Torah all the way through. Read scholars who have commented on the Bible, the Koran and the Torah to get a different vision of what others see. Educate yourselves to educate your children. Teach tolerance. Teach understanding. Teach compassion. See beyond yourself and reach out to others. Live in the moment and not in the past. Understand the past to understand the present. Prepare for the future with hope and an open mind. Stand against oppression and bigotry. Be true to self above all others. Find God within yourself. Find the kingdom of heaven within yourself. Then go find God in others and all around you. Heaven and Hell reside on Earth! It is what you make it. There! I gave you solutions. Remember Paul, a good friend of mine once said, ”There are not problems, only solutions. My worldview is it’s all Heaven. It’s others that make it a hell for me.
Southern George says
The most elegant and erudite comment I have ever read! Thank you!
Paul Plante says
And dear friend and fellow American patriot Chas Cornweller!
What a pleasure it is to get to engage with you in here on this fascinating subject of us intervening in the affairs of Germany during the 1930s to protect the Jews and the homosexuals.
The only thing better than a day with tkenny discussing world history, of which he has a very keen sense, unlike most people in America today, is a day with both you and tkenny!
Your sense of history, Chas Cornweller, is simply superb (impressively splendid).
Yes, Chas Cornweller, it is a fact that some 88 years ago now, before you were born, in fact, although I am not sure about tkenny, who well could have been alive back then, during the 1930’s, the ambassador to Germany was one William Edward Dodd (October 21, 1869 near Clayton, North Carolina – February 9, 1940 near Round Hill, Virginia), an American historian, author, diplomat. and liberal Democrat who served as the United States Ambassador to Germany from 1933 to 1937 during the Nazi era.
Initially a holder of the slightly Antisemitic notions of his times, he went to Germany with instructions from President Franklin D. Roosevelt, a notorious Democrat, to do what he could to protest Nazi treatment of Jews in Germany “unofficially,” while also attempting to follow official State Department instructions to maintain cordial official diplomatic relations.
That was because there was a lot of American money invested in Germany, Chas Cornweller, and a lot of German money was invested in America, and it is about money in America, afterall.
Getting back Mr. Dodd, he became convinced from first hand observation that the Nazis were an increasing threat, so he resigned over his inability to mobilize the Roosevelt administration, particularly the State Department, to counter the Nazis prior to the start of World War II.
So you nailed that one right on the head, Chas Cornweller!
Well done!
It is good to know that there are a couple of people left in America with a memory more than five minutes long!
Chas Cornweller says
And Paul, just one quick note. I noticed you used the term “to protect the Jews and the homosexuals”. And another comment to tkenny that you left mentioned both Jews and Homosexuals. I should note (and I am sure you are well aware of this fact) for clarity sake, that not only were Jews and Homosexuals sent to concentration camps but other groups as well. Let’s list them, for clarity sake.
1. Jews
2. Communists
3. Leftists (a different group than Communists)
4. Slavs
5. Poles
6. Ukrainians
7. Romanians
8. Gypsies
9. Spanish Republicans
10. Infirmed or people with disabilities
11. Africans
12. Gay Men
13. Lesbians
14. Political Prisoners (inclusive of Leftists and enemy nationals)
15. Roman Catholic Priests
16. Jehovah’s Witnesses
17. Bahai Faith members
18. Freemasons
19. Esperantists
20. Resistors to Nazism (most were hanged or shot outright and never made it to camp)
So, as you can clearly see, the group is much, much larger and encapsulates a broader group than just (in Hitler’s view) deviants and Jews. The end result of the rise of a Nazi Germany is what happens when a population loses its freedoms of choice, voice and vitality and becomes subjugated to a ruling class of thugs and militaristic overlords.
And thanks for the kind words. From both you and Southern George. I am not sure how to handle the complements, other than saying thank you. I am only writing what lies on my heart and my mind, today. I am fearful that, being a student of history, I may know too much already.
Paul Plante says
Being a touch older than you, Chas Cornweller, I ended up being born right at the close of WWII, when it was still on everyone’s minds, and fresh in everyone’s memories, including my teachers, the people in my community, and the members of my family who had fought the Germans in WWII.
In kindergarten, we learned about the “GOOD GERMANS,” Chas Cornweller.
Were you taught about the “GOOD GERMANS” when you were young, Chas Cornweller, with an admonishment to not be like them in this country, blindly following a cult-like figure as your leader?
Or had they moved to having you afraid of the Commies and Russians, instead?
The term “Good German” was not a term of endearment, it was a term of contempt, and for me as a young American, it served to form the basis of my citizenship, which is to always question authority, known as Republicanism in this country.
Even Wikipedia has a section on the “GOOD GERMAN,” to wit:
Good Germans is a euphemism for German citizens during and after WWII who claimed not to have supported the Nazi regime, but remained silent and did not resist in a meaningful way.
end quotes
According to the Holocaust Encyclopedia, Chas Cornweller, according to the census of June 16, 1933, the Jewish population of Germany, including the Saar region (which at that time was still under the administration of the League of Nations), was approximately 505,000 people out of a total population of 67 million, or somewhat less than 0.75 percent.
That number represented a reduction from the estimated 523,000 Jews living in Germany in January 1933; the decrease was due in part to emigration following the Nazi takeover in January.
(An estimated 37,000 Jews emigrated from Germany during 1933.)
end quotes
One can wonder how 6 million Jews were killed by the Germans when there were only 523,000 Jews in Germany in 1933, but I will leave that for someone else, tkenny, maybe, to do the math.
The point I am making is that Germany is that that many Germans could hardly have been “subjugated to a ruling class of thugs and militaristic overlords” against their wills.
Consider this, Chas Cornweller: in his book “The Nazi Party 1919-1945: A complete history,” author Dietrich Orlow wrote that early in the war, membership in the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (the full name of the Nazi party) surged to about 6.5 million.
So, tell me, Chas Cornweller, how do 6.5 million Nazis subjugate roughly 60 million Germans against their wills?
That is a question put to me when I was five years old, learning about the “GOOD GERMANS” during WWII.
And then we have Georg Fertig, a professor of economic history and specialist in historical demography at Halle University in Germany.
According to Fertig, the 6.5 million figure is based on sound sources.
Fertig and a large team of economic and social historians recently collected historical data on Germany going back to 1834.
It shows that in 1940, there were about 69.8 million Germans.
That would mean party members represented about 9 percent of the total.
So again, Chas Cornweller, how did 9 percent of the population of Germany “subjugate” the other 91 percent?
But let’s get more specific here, because we can.
Let us consider that Nazi party membership was for adults, not children.
In 1939, Germany had about 52 million people over 15.
In that light, formal Nazi party members represented about 12 percent of the relevant population.
So, Chas Cornweller, now we have 12 percent of the German population “subjugating” the other 88 percent.
Again, without acquiescence, how could that possibly happen?
And more to the point of our discussion, could the same thing happen here, do you think – a minority “subjugating” the majority?
Getting back to Nazi Germany, in the last totally free elections in Germany in 1932, the Nazi party beat out every other party, winning about 33 percent of the vote and taking control of the parliament, or Reichstag.
That election put Hitler on his path to running the country.
What message are you getting there, Chas cornweller?
Was Germany really a case of what happens when a population loses its freedoms of choice, voice and vitality?
Or was it a case of the “GOOD GERMANS” making a DEMOCRATIC choice to willingly surrender to a ruling class of thugs and militaristic overlords?
It would be far from the first time for that happening, Chas Cornweller, nor was that the last time it happened.
So let’s say based on the vote count that 35 percent of the Germans supported the Nazis, we still have the question before us of how 35 percent of the population was able to “subjugate” the other 65 percent, without acquiescence, which takes us back to Wikipedia and the “GOOD GERMANS,” as follows:
The term further denotes those who claimed ignorance of the Holocaust and German war crimes.
Despite these claims, post-war research has suggested that a large number of ordinary Germans were aware of the Holocaust at least in vague terms: captive slave laborers were a common sight, the public knew Jews were being deported to Poland, and the basics of the concentration camp system, if not the extermination camps, were widely known.
While there is some controversy as to its exact meaning, the term “Good Germans” is therefore usually used to signify passivity by ordinary Germans in the face of widespread crimes against humanity.
end quotes
That is what I was taught when I was five years old, Chas Cornweller.
That is what shaped my citizenship as an AMERICAN.
Getting back to the “GOOD GERMANS,” Chas Cornweller, hundreds of thousands of Germans were involved to some extent in the genocide: participating in the killings directly; guarding and administering the camps where Jews and others were systematically murdered and worked to death; and providing support from both the civil and military authorities which facilitated the machinery of genocide.
If they were “subjugated,” Chas Cornweller, they did it to themselves.
tkenny says
Hot damn Paul, you are showing your ignorance of history again!
“One can wonder how 6 million Jews were killed by the Germans when there were only 523,000 Jews in Germany in 1933, but I will leave that for someone else, tkenny, maybe, to do the math.”
(http://www.annefrankguide.net/en-US/bronnenbank.asp?oid=20747)
Country Approximate number of Jews Killed Percentage of Country’s
Jews Killed
Albania — —
Austria 50,000 36
Belgium 25,000 60
Belorussia 245,000 65
Bohemia/Moravia 80,000 89
Bulgaria 11,400 14
Denmark 60 1.3
Estonia 1500 35
Finland 7 2.8
France 90,000 26
Germany 130,000 55
Great Britain 130 —
Greece 65,000 80
Hungary 450,000 70
Italy 7500 20
Latvia 70,000 77
Lithuania 220,000 94
Luxembourg 1950 50
The Netherlands 106,000 76
Norway 870 55
Poland 2,900,000 88
Russia 107,000 11
Romania 270,000 33
Slovakia 71,000 80
Spain — —
Sweden — —
Switzerland — —
Ukraine 900,000 60
Yugoslavia 60,000 80
Paul Plante says
Do you know why I come here to the Cape Charles Mirror, tkenny, dude, instead of to Forbes, or the New York Times, or the Washington Post?
It is because you are not at any of those other insipid rags, likely because they are insipid, as opposed to very lively like the Cape Charles Mirror.
So if I want to really learn anything about everything to cure my obvious ignorance about world history, here is where I have to come, with you as my professor.
So how is that for a way to start out your Saturday morning, tkenny, with that kind of praise being heaped on you?
Interestingly, I notice you have the Nazis exterminating Jews in Great Britain, which is something I never knew before, being ignorant of the fact that the Nazis had concentration camps in Great Britain, as well.
That really serves to put some sharpened teeth into that old saw, live and learn, or that other old saw, you can learn something new every day so long as you keep your head out of your *** and watch where you are putting your feet before you take as a step, based on the Taoist precept that it is better to be a foot behind than an inch too far ahead, especially when walking a mountain trail or through a cow pasture.
And then, there is France.
You are a master student of history yourself, tkenny, so surely you of all people in here must recall from seventh or maybe it was eighth grade history about the Religious Wars in France.
You remember those, do you not, for how could anyone who claims to be even partially educated and in possession of a high school diploma for get them?
To refresh your memory, assuming it even needs refreshing, the French Wars of Religion refers to a prolonged period of war and popular unrest between Roman Catholics and Huguenots (Reformed/Calvinist Protestants) in the Kingdom of France between 1562 and 1598.
It is estimated that three million people perished in this period from violence, famine, or disease in what is considered the second deadliest religious war in European history, surpassed only by the Thirty Years’ War, which took eight million lives.
And there you have them only killing some 90,000 Jews during WWII.
Not to make the Jews feel bad about themselves here, but 90,000 is kind of small potatoes, isn’t it, tkenny, compared to all the Protestants killed there?
And why do you shed no tears and make no lamentations about all those dead Protestants in France?
Are you prejudiced against them, or is it that you just don’t care, because you can’t get any political mileage out of them in here?
As you will recall, tkenny, the Huguenot community reached as much as 10% of the French population on the eve of the St. Bartholomew’s Day massacre in 1572, declining to 7–8% by around 1600, and even further after heavy persecution began once again with the Edict of Fontainebleau by Louis XIV of France in 1685.
Huguenot numbers in France peaked near an estimated two million by 1562.
Do you recall from your high school history, tkenny, the famous “dragonnades” in France under Louis XIV, which were a French government policy instituted by King Louis XIV in 1681 to intimidate Huguenot families into either leaving France or converting to Catholicism?
How, tkenny, is that different from what the copy-cat Nazis were doing in Germany and Europe during the 1930s?
Wasn’t that in fact their model, as was the St. Bartholomew’s Day massacre?
Surely you recall the St. Bartholomew’s Day massacre of French Protestants in 1572, ykenny, which was the climax of the French Wars of Religion?
For those without dear friend tkenny’s voluminous knowledge of world history, in what became known as the St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre of 24 August – 3 October 1572, Catholics killed thousands of Huguenots in Paris and similar massacres took place in other towns in the following weeks.
Although the exact number of fatalities throughout the country is not known, on 23–24 August, between 2,000 and 3,000 Protestants were killed in Paris alone and a further 3,000 to 7,000 more in the French provinces.
By 17 September, almost 25,000 Protestants had been massacred in Paris alone.
Beyond Paris, the killings continued until 3 October.
An amnesty granted in 1573 pardoned the perpetrators.
So riddle us this, tkenny: first, why didn’t we take any action?
Why did we just sit on our hands and do nothing?
And why don’t you care about Catho9lics killing protestants?
If you want to talk about injustice, tkenny, then why do you cherry-pick?
Beerman says
You all need need to chill…got get a finely crafted beer at the Cape Charles brewery!
Paul Plante says
I don’t drink the stuff, but thank you very much for the invite!
Paul Plante says
We’re in the midst of an intervention, Beerman.
tkenny is in the process of being “woke,” another way of saying he is being de-programmed of all the ideology that got jammed into his head during his formative years, and while it would be so nice to go to the Cape Charles brewery to have you stand us a couple of rounds of finely crafted beer, this process is not something we can lightly walk away before we have seen it through, and sadly, that could take years.
Deborah Bender says
Susan B. I am so sorry that you got your knickers all in a knot because I mentioned that you lived on Jefferson. Having only lived in Cape Charles for 10 years or so I didn’t even know that Jefferson was a black neighborhood in the past. I would have said the same thing if you lived on Monroe,Randolph whatever street. In the article about Bob Panek you called me a racist. Nothing could be further from the truth as far as me being a racist. Many, many people that truly know me know that my grandfather was from the British West Indies. 1/2 Jamaican and 1/2 Spanish. I also have Jewish Family in my DNA. I truly believe that the only reason you wrote this article was because of me. You need to get over yourself Susan and realize that everyone in Cape Charles is not like you. Seems to me like you are always running around trying to stir up crap. I really don’t care what happens in Cape Charles anymore. You Susan have certainly stirred up a big pot and now you have gained so many more friends. Have a great day Susan!
Mr. I love Cape Charles says
“I really don’t care what happens in Cape Charles anymore.” Then why do always comment on the Cape Charles mirror?
Paul Plante says
There was a real interesting column by Wayne Creed in the March 12, 2016 edition of the Cape Charles Mirror entitled “Cape Charles, Virginia: built on a foundation of lies, fraud and corruption,” which mentioned Deborah Bender by name.
Do you remember that article, Mr. I love Cape Charles?
Should she have been allowed to respond, do you think, based on her zip code?
I obviously do, since I am remarking upon it in here, and I don’t live anywhere near Cape Charles, something I am more and more happy about as I read this piece above here by Susan, who I would not want to live anywhere near, so I wouldn’t have to remember to take the knee and tug my forelock and say, “yes, m’lady” every time she went passing by.
Much, much too stifling for me, if you get my point, Mr. I love Cape Charles!
And that is the beauty of being an American citizen, don’t you think?
That freedom we have as a people to not have to associate with obvious bigots (a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions) like Susan, if that is the right word for it in her case.
And normally, being very meek and mild-mannered and actually quite retiring as a person, I would not trouble myself to comment on the rantings of a small-town bigot like Susan, because small-town bigots are a dime a dozen in every small town in America, which is part of what makes them “small,” so why single out Susan as if she were the only one.
The reason I joined this conversation in the first place had nothing whatsoever to do with Cape Charles itself; to the contrary, if you go back and look, you will see @ June 18, 2018 at 10:41 am myself saying to Susan as follows:
All good women eat butter on toast?
HUH?
Where on earth did you get that silly idea from, Susan?
What third-world ****hole does that happen in?
Or more properly, what kind of people have you been hanging with that have indoctrinated you into thinking that way?
end quotes
Now, while Susan may have been sitting right here in Cape Charles when she said “All good women eat butter on toast,” maybe sitting right there in Kelly’s enjoying a fantabulous (have you ever had one?) veggie burger, pecking away at her mobile device while she savored the very essence of the beans in that veggie burger, or maybe at the Cape Charles brewery, sucking down a couple of brewskies with our dear friend and fellow commentator in here, Cape Charles’ own tkenny, the fact of the matter is that the Cape Charles Mirror is not local, it is at least global in scope, if not intergalactic by now, what with the spread of the internet to literally everywhere these days, so that when Susan said that, she was not speaking to just the citizens of Cape Charles; she was speaking to the world, and since the world is very much interested in what transpires in the pages of the Cape Charles Mirror, for a host of different reasons, as could be expected, the world has a right to respond to that red meat tossed out by Susan as a sort of challenge when she said “All good women eat butter on toast,” as if that were all that there was to the matter, which is not true, as my response made clear, as follows:
I am sure that if you did a survey, you would find many women out there eating toast with butter on it, for the reason that that is how many people, including myself, eat toast, if and when we decide to have some toast to eat.
But it is not at all mandatory that women eat toast with butter on it.
It is a matter of choice.
It is America, afterall, and women in America have been emancipated for some long time now.
Surely you cannot have forgotten Tabitha Gilman Tenney, a woman who was a notable author in early American literature who in 1801 wrote and published her most recognized work, “Female Quixotism: Exhibited in the Romantic Opinions and Extravagant Adventure of Dorcasina Sheldon.”
That work is part of The Early American Women Writers series, which offers rare works of fiction by eighteenth- and nineteenth-century women ranging from serious cautionary tales about moral corruption, much as one finds here in the Cape Charles Mirror, to amusing and trenchant social satire, which again one finds in copious amounts here in the CCM, with those books providing today’s reader with a unique window into the earliest American popular fiction and way of life.
According to its review by Oxford University Press, first published in 1801, “Female Quixotism” is a boisterous, rollicking anti-romance and literary satire taking place in the fictional village of L—, Pennsylvania, where its central character Dorcas Sheldon–who styles herself the romantic “Dorcasina”–sets out on a quixotic quest for the kind of romantic love portrayed in her favorite English novels.
Having rejected the prosaic yet honorable advances of her first suitor, “Lysander,” Dorcasina narrowly escapes marriage to a series of unscrupulous rogues interested mostly in her considerable fortune.
Moving from one misadventure to another, the heroine’s journey ends in a lonely old age bereft of romantic illusion.
end quotes
Now, does that sound like a book about a woman who eats toast with butter on it, instead of a bagel with avocado, which really is very common and actually quite pedestrian today in modern society, where the avocado is now easy to obtain, even in the hinterlands?
What do you think, Mr. I love Cape Charles?
Do you have two cents to throw in here on that subject?
If so, you have a whole world out waiting with bated breath to hear it, and consider me one of them.
Oh, and enjoy the beach, but don’t go out too far or you might fall off the drop-off and drown like those couple of children did!
And mind the drinking water.
Maybe something bottled would be more palatable.
Just saying.
Madam X says
I do not know who Susan is, but I have an idea of who debbie bender is. She the one married to don bender who has ES roots to the 1800s. Woo woo! Thankfully, “everyone in Cape Charles is not like” her! You, debbie-whoever-you-are, need to “get over YOURSELF”. I believe you left CC happily, can’t you just live in your new location and enjoy it? I wish that for you.
Deborah Bender says
For Mr. I love Cape Charles & Madame X…. I am truly sorry that what I write bothers you…and by that I mean…A tiger doesn’t lose sleep over the opinions of SHEEP!
AT LEAST I AM NOT AFRAID TO POST USING MY REAL NAME!
LMAO!
Mr. I love Cape Charles says
” I really don’t’ care what happens in Cape Charles anymore.”
Why post in the comments? I did not mean to get so upset. Sorry.
Paul Chandler says
There was a time when I used to occasionally glance at the Cape Charles Wave and laugh quietly to myself at the small-mindedness and pathetic back and forth in the comments section, mostly prompted by the ramblings of Mr. Wayne “I can’t wait to leave” Creed. Today I accidentally found myself here, at Wave 2.0. To my total lack of surprise nothing has changed. I vow never to return again. Enjoy your petty squabbles while the rest of us enjoy our resurgent town.
Note: Actually, Mr. Creed has raised two kids in this town. And as they say on Monroe Ave., goodbye, good riddance, and don’t let the door hit you a** on the way out. Cheers mate! Pasty England is a joke! Go Mexico!
Paul Plante says
That was quite a post, Paul Chandler!
A lot of real red meat in there to chew over and try to digest, which has the candid world, which follows the Cape Charles Mirror on-line (it is global, you know), wondering about a couple of the more important points that you raise in there, starting with this:
How on earth did it come about that somehow, through some kind of accident as you term it, that you found yourself inside the internet where the Cape Charles Mirror is located?
That statement, I must tell you, now has a lot of people concerned, lest the same phenomenon overtake them somehow.
Do you have any kind of recollection as to what you were doing the moment before?
Was it where you were standing, perhaps?
Could you feel any kind of sensation as it was happening, you being sucked up in some kind of vortex that transported or maybe teleported you into CYBERSPACE, so you ended up inside the Cape Charles Mirror?
And have you ever stopped to consider, Paul Chandler, that as you laugh quietly to yourself at the small-mindedness you say you find here, that you are laughing at your neighbors in Cape Charles, including maybe those who run the place?
And aren’t you thankful that Wayne Creed is a big enough person to actually print your condemnation of him, the Cape Charles Mirror, and your neighbors?
And as to the vow to never return again, was that a solemn vow?
How soon will we see you back?
People like your wittiness, afterall, and your sense of irony, and they would certainly miss your erudition if you don’t come back, and why would you deny the world that pleasure?
signed,
A Fan
Paul Plante says
And while we have you on the line here, Paul Chandler, have you ever given any thought as to how and why it is that the Cape Charles school system turns out so many small-minded people in Cape Charles?
Is it safer politically than turning out people who are able to think for themselves and engage in critical thinking, do you think?
And while we are on that subject, your seeming blanket condemnation of all the posters in here as being small-minded would seem to include your fellow Cape Charles resident tkenny, who has a considerable following here to the north of you.
They would like to know if you are saying that tkenny is small-minded as well.
Are you?
R. I. Bruce says
Thank you Ms. Bauer for your insightful article. My mother’s family is from the Eastern Shore and I remember visiting my maternal grandmother in Cherit0n, VA. While waiting for the Greyhound bus in the 1960’s I can remember my mother going into the only drug store in Cape Charles and she telling my sister and I to, “wait outside.” while she go snacks for us on the long bus ride home back to Philly. It didn’t dawn on me then that not too many “colored” folks could enter the drug store at one time.
I remember my mother telling me of walking miles to the one-room school house where she attended until she graduated from high school. After graduation my mother made a be line to Philly and only returned to Cherit0n to take care of her ill father and take me and my sister to visit family.
I also remembered being told by an older cousin that I couldn’t walk on the beach in Cape Charles. I didn’t ask why at the time, but it dawned on me again how this small community has not come to the 20th let alone the 21st century.
In 2016 I traveled to Cheriton with my mother to look at the house and farm land where she was raised and that the family still owns. The reason for the trip was more for my mother who died 3 months after our trip. I still had the feeling of being out of place even as a grown woman as I did as that child waiting for her mother to exit the local drug store with our snacks.
You may not know that there still exists a “colored” cemetery where both of my grandparents, aunts and uncles are buried. I hope to visit soon and I hope I’m able to find my family members. If that isn’t racism I don’t know what is.
Bravo for writing such a wonderful op-ed. The more I would like things to change in the area things have only gotten worse especially for us Black Folk.
Paul Plante says
There actually is a world out there that you are apparently unaware of where people of all shades of color get along quite well and interact with each other as human beings for a couple of pertinent reasons, one being that they are not mired in the past as you so obviously are, continually looking for perceived injustices that happened long before you were born, or even yesterday.
What you call “racism,” which exists in YOUR mind, perhaps because of your implicit bias, will continue to exist forever in your heart and mind so long as you choose to look in a mirror and define yourself as “black,” as opposed to “human being.”
Grow up, R. I. Bruce – the world has changed since you were little.
You’ll be a “victim” so long as you keep seeing yourself as a victim.
tkenny says
Well look at that, Paul actually thinks implicit bias is real. See, you can teach old dogs.
However Paul, if you think Ms Bruce believes that racism exist in her mind, due to implicit bias you, must also believe that racism DOES exist because of other peoples implicit bias.
Nice going there genius. You finally saw the light – there is racism in the world.
Paul Plante says
There is racism in the world, my dear friend tkenny, because people like you and Ms. Bruce harbor “racism” in your hearts and minds, and there will continue to be racism until you and she can cleanse your hearts and minds of it.
When you and she are finally able to see people as human beings regardless of skin color, racism will come to an end.
What a simple concept.
tkenny says
No, Paul. There is racism in the world today because there is racism in the world today. Your ignorance is showing bright and clear.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/29/us/army-racial-discrimination-african-american-soldier.html
Hey Paul, you like to supply definitions of words here’s one for ya – empathy
Paul Plante says
Ah, yes, tkenny, empathy – the ability to understand and share the feelings of another.
What of it?
Is it empathy that enables you to understand and share the feelings of those in the world, like the paternal grandfather of Hussein Obama, who are racists?
WIKIPEDIA
Madelyn Dunham
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Madelyn Lee Payne Dunham (October 26, 1922 – November 2, 2008) was the American maternal grandmother of Barack Obama, the 44th and current President of the United States of America.
Stanley and Madelyn were unhappy about Ann’s marriage to Obama, Sr., particularly after receiving a long, angry letter from his father who “didn’t want the Obama blood sullied by a white woman.”
end quotes
Implicit bias, tkenny?
Or is it a case of where the old gent just didn’t like white people?
Paul Plante says
Speaking of racism in the world, of which there seems to be plenty, based on what I can glean from the writings of yourself and Ms. Bruce and Cape Charles’ own Susan M. Bauer, plus the paternal grandfather of American president Barack H. Obama, who “didn’t want the Obama blood sullied by a white woman,” if you can imagine that, I had as a good friend a “wise” woman whose skin was noticeably darker than my own, if one bothered to notice such things.
She talked of growing up as a woman among the black folk like Ms. Bruce, who are mired in the past and will never escape it.
For her to realize herself as a woman and human being in a multi-ethnic world, she had to get as far away from black people hung up on the fact that they are black as she could.
She did not want their racism to become her prison, as it was for them.
And yes, I did empathize with her, quite well, as I don’t like being among racists, myself.
Paul Plante says
As to empathy itself, dear friend tkenny, and if you weren’t a dear friend, I would not bother to share this with you, it can be quite destructive.
Consider, for example, the article “When empathy backfires” by Chelsea Larsson, to wit:
Touted as the cure-all for a wide range of social challenges, empathy is having its moment in the sun.
Empathy comes in a few flavors.
According to researcher Dr. Paul Ekman, there are three of note: cognitive empathy, emotional empathy, and empathetic concern.
Cognitive empathy, also known as perspective taking, happens when you try to understand what the other person is thinking.
Emotional empathy, is the intrinsic drive to respond to another human’s emotional state.
The final type of empathy is empathic concern.
This is where someone recognizes the distress of another person, and is moved to help the other person.
For instance, you see that your grandmother is struggling with her iPhone so you offer to give her a few tutorials.
But, even with all its benefits, sometimes empathy can backfire.
Although empathy can often lead to noble, altruistic acts of kindness for strangers, being unfiltered in empathy can be dangerous, especially when helping someone you don’t know.
It’s important to establish safety first.
“It is likely that empathically-motivated and emotionally naïve ‘rescuing’ has prematurely shortened many lives in human history,” write Sara Konrath and Delphine Grynberg in their study, “The Positive (and Negative) Psychology of Empathy.”
Research from the University of Manitoba found that when people empathize with a disadvantaged community over a period of time, it can lead to a confirmation of negative stereotypes for the empathizer.
end quotes
Here is what people who care about you are worried about, dear friend, tkenny, they fear, and I think rightly so, that your excessive empathizing with what you consider to be a “disadvantaged community” has led you to believe all people of color are some kind of disadvantaged losers, when the evidence you fail to see tells an entirely different story.
And then there is the Psychology Today article by Marcia Reynolds Psy.D. entitled “Can You Have Too Much Empathy?” posted April 15, 2017, as follows:
Empathetic Reactivity – When too much empathy is bad
With empathy, you will feel their stress, anxiety, and anger in your body.
You might feel their pain emotionally and physically.
If you let these emotions sit in your body, your body and mind can be emotionally hijacked.
end quotes
You have to believe, tkenny, that people love you for yourself, and they are very concerned that your mind and body are becoming emotionally hijacked here, which is quite serious, as the article demonstrates as follows:
Unbridled empathy can lead to concentrations of the stress hormone cortisol, making it difficult to release the emotions.
Taking on other people’s feelings so that you live their experience can make you susceptible to feelings of depression or hopelessness.
Not only will this lead to burnout, you can break the bond of trust you were hoping to strengthen.
When you embody other people’s emotions, you may feel responsible for relieving their pain.
You feel the need to fix their problems and make them feel better.
Unless people want your help, your intrusive reaction will push them away no matter the value of your intention.
They might feel less understood.
They feel disrespected, undermined, or enfeebled when you interrupt to render aid.
The response you believe is “being supportive” could damage their sense of safety and trust.
They no longer feel they can fully express themselves with you.
end quotes
See what I am saying, tkenny?
You’ve got to watch yourself, dude, before your cortisol levels skyrocket and start burning out stuff up there in your brainpan.
Stuart Bell says
Don’t forget how much you Black Folk have changed since the sixties. Take a long look at your people and the culture they have embraced.
Mike Kuzma, Jr. says
My condolences on your loss. It was a very nice thing of you to do to take your mom on that trip, she raised a good son.
Be well, my regards to your family.
MK
tkenny says
Paul, just throwing up some shit, hoping it sticks, eh? What a silly assed weak response. Gosh, Paul what was going in the 30s – 60s in Kenya? Any idea? Check it out, might shed a little light on that statement.
Paul, tell me your parents, your grand-parents or your grand-parents, parents didn’t disparage a black person, or a foreigner. LOL. You can’t even help solve the problem when you or Stuart Bell can’t even identify what the problem is.
Was he racism? It was a different place, different time, I’ll give him a pass. Why can I do that? Empathy, Paul. Something which you lack.
Paul Plante says
tkenny, my parents and my grand-parents and my grand-parents’ parents didn’t disparage black persons, or foreigners.
And I wasn’t taught to or trained to, either.
Mike Kuzma, Jr. says
Paul and I believe that each man and woman is capable of either succeeding or failing on their own.
YOU KNOW that minorities cannot CANNOT do a thing without the guiding and helping hand of the majority.
Who’re the racists? To get the answer, simply look into your mirror.
Paul Plante says
I’m with Mike.
Don Green says
I’m with Mike and Paul. Just breathe deeply, maybe have a few drinks, and relax, Cookie.
Cookie says
Kuzma, STFU, you silly little Russian troll.
Ken Foster says
You got a problem?
Art Sullivan says
For almost 150 years the United States has been conducting an interesting experiment. The subjects of the experiment: black people and working-class whites.
The hypothesis to be tested: Can a people taken from the jungles of Africa and forced into slavery be fully integrated as citizens in a majority white population?
The whites were descendants of Europeans who had created a majestic civilization. The former slaves had been tribal peoples with no written language and virtually no intellectual achievements. Acting on a policy that was not fair to either group, the government released newly freed black people into a white society that saw them as inferiors. America has struggled with racial discord ever since.
Decade after decade the problems persisted but the experimenters never gave up. They insisted that if they could find the right formula the experiment would work, and concocted program after program to get the result they wanted. They created the Freedman’s Bureau, passed civil rights laws, tried to build the Great Society, declared War on Poverty, ordered race preferences, built housing projects, and tried midnight basketball.
Their new laws intruded into people’s lives in ways that would have been otherwise unthinkable. They called in National Guard troops to enforce school integration. They outlawed freedom of association. Over the protests of parents, they put white children on buses and sent them to black schools and vice versa. They tried with money, special programs, relaxed standards, and endless handwringing to close the “achievement gap.” To keep white backlash in check they began punishing public and even private statements on race. They hung up Orwellian public banners that commanded whites to “Celebrate Diversity!” and “Say No to Racism.” Nothing was off limits if it might salvage the experiment.
Some thought that what W.E.B. Du Bois called the Talented Tenth would lead the way for black people. A group of elite, educated blacks would knock down doors of opportunity and show the world what blacks were capable of. There is a Talented Tenth. They are the black Americans who have become entrepreneurs, lawyers, doctors and scientists. But ten percent is not enough. For the experiment to work, the ten percent has to be followed by a critical mass of people who can hold middle-class jobs and promote social stability. That is what is missing.
Through the years, too many black people continue to show an inability to function and prosper in a culture unsuited to them. Detroit is bankrupt, the south side of Chicago is a war zone, and the vast majority of black cities all over America are beset by degeneracy and violence. And blacks never take responsibility for their failures. Instead, they lash out in anger and resentment.
Across the generations and across the country, as we have seen in Detroit, Watts, Newark, Los Angeles, Cincinnati, and now Ferguson, rioting and looting are just one racial incident away. The white elite would tell us that this doesn’t mean the experiment has failed. We just have to try harder. We need more money, more time, more understanding, more programs, and more opportunities.
But nothing changes no matter how much money is spent, no matter how many laws are passed, no matter how many black geniuses are portrayed on TV, and no matter who is president. Some argue it’s a problem of “culture,” as if culture creates people’s behavior instead of the other way around. Others blame “white privilege.”
But since 1965, when the elites opened America’s doors to the Third World, immigrants from Asia and India–people who are not white, not rich, and not “connected”–have quietly succeeded. While the children of these people are winning spelling bees and getting top scores on the SAT, black “youths” are committing half the country’s violent crime–crime, which includes viciously punching random white people on the street for the thrill of it that has nothing to do with poverty.
The experiment has failed. Not because of culture, or white privilege, or racism. The fundamental problem is that white people and black people are different. They differ intellectually and temperamentally. These differences result in permanent social incompatibility.
Our rulers don’t seem to understand just how tired their white subjects are with this experiment. They don’t understand that white people aren’t out to get black people; they are just exhausted with them. They are exhausted by the social pathologies, the violence, the endless complaints, and the blind racial solidarity, the bottomless pit of grievances, the excuses, and the reflexive animosity.
The elites explain everything with “racism,” and refuse to believe that white frustration could soon reach the boiling point.
-Source Unknown
Paul Plante says
Cookie, dude, sssssssss’up?
Listen, I think you’ve been fed some real bad poop here with respect to Mike somehow being with the Russians.
You’ve been set up, dude!
You’ve been had, and big time!
Somebody is playing you like a fiddle here, getting you to talk that kind of smack about Mike, when he is about as loyal an American citizen as you are ever going to find anywhere in this country, no matter where you might look.
And let me tell you, Cookie, dude, the thought that somebody would play those kinds of games with your head like that and get away with it is tearing the hearts right out of a multitude at least, all across America and the world, as well, since the Cape Charles Mirror is global, and you with it.
Just think, Cookie, anywhere some dude or dudette has a laptop or I-pad or smart phone, even out in the middle of the Sahara desert, or in Timbuctoo, or up on the Great Wall of China or out in the Gobi desert, they are reading your words, Cookie, and they hate to see you being done wrong here, accusing Mike, who everybody knows isn’t with the Russians, that is just some trash talk attributed to the Clinton campaign, which was famous for putting out that kind of crap about anyone who wouldn’t drink the Hillary Kool-Aid like Mike, of being with the Russians, when he so obviously is not.
And hey, Cookie, while I got you on the line here, Happy Independence from British Tyranny Day!
Stuart Bell says
H E A R ! ! ! ! ! !
H E A R ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
Paul Plante says
Looking at this scientifically, tkenny, dude, as we really should be doing in here as adults, instead of emotionally, such as you are doing above here, where you admit that you are “just throwing up some s***, hoping it sticks,” we can readily see that contrary to what you are saying, I am indeed possessed of empathy, an empathy that allows me to see each person as a human being regardless of circumstances or such trifles that you are so hung up on as skin color.
Mine is an enabling and ennobling type of empathy that affords the individual dignity, whereas your syrupy version is an enslaving type of empathy, because your empathy always requires someone to be a “victim” of something, which I think is degrading.
So no wonder you think I lack empathy, when it is a case of I am possessed of an empathy you are unable to perceive or recognize.
My empathy allows me to believe that each man and woman is capable of either succeeding or failing on their own, and then allow them the space in which to do so.
Your empathy is brought forth in a story of a boy who was watching a butterfly struggling to get out of its cocoon, and feeling sorry for the butterfly, that it had to struggle so, the boy carefully slit the cocoon to free the butterfly, which he did, but the butterfly he freed could never fly because for its wings to properly develop, it has to squeeze itself out of the cocoon.
Knowing that the butterfly knows a lot more about being a butterfly than I do, I would have left it alone, without getting all gooey emotional “BOO HOO HOO HOO HOO, oh it has to struggle, and that is terrible” about it, and thus, depriving it of its wings.
And my goodness, tkenny, what is the need for the potty mouth all of a sudden?
Isn’t that acting a little bit adolescent in here, where we are trying to have an adult conversation about matters of importance to every American, man, woman or child?
As to what was going on in Kenya, tkenny, it was the same thing that was or had been going on in Ireland, and India, and the United States of America and especially Palestine when the British were in charge.
And here is where we see the selective nature of your empathy, versus the universality of mine.
How can you turn your back on how the British treated the Irish, tkenny?
And what about the Palestineans?
And the Indians. tkenny?
And what about the French in Canada?
Where is your empathy for Evangelene?
How come you only have empathy for Obama’s grandfather Hussein Onyango, who was described by Obama’s step-grandmother Granny Sarah (Sarah Onyango Obama), as follows: “Even from the time that he was a boy, your grandfather Onyango was strange.”
“It is said of him that he had ants up his anus, because he could not sit still.”
end quotes
And since it is almost the 4th of July, tkenny, and we are talking about how many peoples of the world the British have abused over the years, beyond just Obama’s grandfather, who you are giving a free pass to, let me repeat for you these words from our Declaration of Independence from British Tyranny, to wit:
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury.
A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren.
We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us.
We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here.
We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence.
They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity.
We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
end quotes
Have you forgotten those words, tkenny, or is it a case of where you never remembered them in the first place?
That tyranny they held over us was the same tyranny they held over Kenya, and since that is 6th grade world history, tkenny, of course I knew what was going on in Kenya in the 30s – 60s.
How could I not?
Madam X says
Paul Chandler, you have it right.
Can’t you folks love the life you have? It can’t get any better than what we have in CC. My God, get over yourselves! Give thanks for your many blessings. It’s not that hard to be happy.
Paul Plante says
An excellent read, Madam X, succinct and to the point.
One small point, however: with respect to your questions of “Can’t you folks love the life you have,” and “It can’t get any better than what we have in CC,” and “Give thanks for your many blessings,” did you happen to notice the article above here entitled “Corruption is the cause of Cape Charles’ High Water Rates?”
Madam X says
To Paul Plante–My response was to Paul Chandler’s earlier post on this topic on June 25, 2018, 10:35 pm.
I think you and many others have wandered from the topic of CC water rates. All of you need to get more “succinct and to the point.”
Paul Plante says
I thought I was quite succinct and to the point above here, Madam X, when I congratulated you on “an excellent read, Madam X, succinct and to the point!”
How much more succinct and to the point could I have been?
Seems I covered all the necessary bases, but if I didn’t, I am certainly open to being educated further in the matter.
Cookie says
Art Sullivan, speaking of poop on this blog, there you have it, and you’re eating it up, served to you from some toilet in Nizhny Novgorod a few years ago – it is vintage (2014) and very special. VVSOPoop (I get it that you thought it was cognac, you’re not smart: like Stuart, you just copy paste poop). The Russians are feeding you hatred (poop) and you indiscriminate suckers are eating it up and serving it further.
Paul, there is always some Russian nearby fanning the poop… any poop that divides, like racist rants, anything likely to bring about a civil war or fascism, to end our magnificent democracy – even though you poop troopers seem to be hard at work to end it, happy Independence Day!
Paul Plante says
Study history, Cookie – democracy always destroys itself.
It don’t need any Russians to do it for it.
The chief failing of democracy is that it turns control of “government” over to the most ignorant and unknowing among us, and then everything goes south in a hurry, and Cookie, consider the fact that Russia is a democracy.
Yes, it is, dude, while we are supposed to be a Republic, which is a vastly different thing.
So why would the Russians, who have their own democracy, want to destroy ours?
Makes no sense, does it?
And consider this irony, Cookie – the pro-democracy crowd in this country wants to extend the franchise to the insane and felons and every other lunatic under the sun out there, and give them the right to vote, while at the same time trying to deprive them of the first amendment right to post stupid things on the internet.
How is that not destroying our democracy?
Boot Lamb says
You are as crazy as a ‘Sh@t House Rat”….
Art Sullivan says
It is apparent from several post you have ‘Coprophilia’. Please seek help.
Paul Plante says
Cookie, dude, first off, you are surrounded by people who care about you, and who want to do an on-line intervention for you in here to cure you of your innate fear of Russians, so help us out by calming yourself down and taking a real good breath – that’s it, feel the air come in through your nose and down into your lungs, all the way to the bottom, and then back up and out through the same nostrils it came in, and then repeat the cycle a couple of times until you feel some sort of rationality starting to return, and when that happens, take a look at what you posted above here in your obvious delirium, to wit:
The Russians are feeding you hatred (poop) and you indiscriminate suckers are eating it up and serving it further.
Paul, there is always some Russian nearby fanning the poop… any poop that divides, like racist rants, anything likely to bring about a civil war or fascism, to end our magnificent democracy.
end quotes
What on earth is with this obsession of yours with Russians, Cookie?
Who is filling your head with these crazy ideas that “there is always some Russian nearby?”
Let me tell you, that thought scared the hell out of me, the thought that it could be true, so this morning I carefully scoured every inch of the woods behind my house, and I did not see a single Russian, nor did I find any spoor, so I think you are over-reacting, dude, if you know what I am saying.
(Hint, hint, paranoid delusions!)
You remind me of this American dude who was on the same plane I was on when we landed at Shannon Airport in Ireland some years ago, where the Russians had been coming to for years.
When the American dude saw the Aeroflot planes parked right next to where our flight from America was parking, he went berserk and I thought he would start foaming at the mouth, going on as he was about how the Irish could be so disrespectful of Americans as to let “OUR ENEMIES” into the country at the same time Americans were there.
This was back in the time when Raygun was calling them the “EVIL EMPIRE,” and apparently, this chucklehead from America who was making a huge scene about this in the lobby of Shann on Airport, being apoplectic as he waved his arms and tried to get the other passengers as upset as he was, when all they wanted to do, as did I, was to get as clear from this nut job as possible.
There was an Irish dude there to pick me up and he too witnessed the whole show, in as state of pure disbelief, I would say, as I talked to him about it afterwards, to hear his thoughts on the matter, and he started by comparing tiny, weak Ireland that had no trouble with the Russians to the mighty United States, which apparently could not get along with anybody, except maybe the Brits, and you know how they treated the Irish, which was a whole lot worse than the Russians, the Irish dude told me, so what the hell is wrong with you Americans, he wanted to know – how come if the Irish aren’t afraid of the Russians, the mighty Americans are so terrified of them and I said I’m not, they’re just people to me, but as to what was wrong with people like you, Cookie,. who are terrified of them, I had no answer.
And here you come along, Cookie, all these years later, with the same paranoid delusions, where you probably check behind your toilet and under the seat for any Russians that might be lurking there before you do your business.
Poor Cookie!
Poor, poor Cookie!
You’ve been brainwashed big time, dude, with water which was too hot so tha, it shrunk your brain, which is made of cotton fabric which was never pre-shrunk, down to the size of a small DelMonte pea.
There are no Russians here to bother you, Cookie, because they are scared ******** of people like Mike Kuzma and Stuart Bell and all the other veterans in here who stand on the line to keep your precious “magnificent democracy,” the same “magnificent democracy” that put Donald trump in the White House for you, safe from harm.
By the way, Cookie, if you check history, that is the same “magnificent democracy” that gave us slavery, which was a compromise, Cookie, with compromises being the hallmark of “magnificent democracies” such as the one you would have us all embrace.
WHY?
As to racism in this country, lay that at the feet of the Democrat party in this country, not the Russians.
They were the pro-slavery crowd in this country, afterall.
You know, Cookie, credit where credit is due, because it is the right thing to do, so why do otherwise?
Publius Americanus says
Are de ROOSHIANS in head now, lady Cookee?
Me not bot, me not on terlet.
Cookie says
Guys, let me sanitize it for you (sorry you disliked the poop analogy): the abnormality is your dumbass reproduction and endorsement of rants against minority races. Does it diminish you in any way that African Americans are an integral fabric of our society, that they are successful and have a vibrant culture the world has embraced? Time to accept the reality that whites’ supremacy is now mostly in their heads.
Paul Plante says
Cookie, dude, I am over 70 and in that time, I have been around people of ALL skin colors, which is a triviality, and I have not been diminished by any of that.
And never in that time have I heard someone with lighter skin, i.e. “white,” crowing about “white superiority.”
That actually goes back to the now-discredited theory of Social Darwinism, and Social Darwinism wasn’t about “white” superiority, it was about Anglo-Saxon superiority, a belief that white, wealthy, Anglo-Saxon Americans were biologically superior to other groups, which included non-Anglo-Saxons who also had “white skin.”
Rob White says
At 56 I never heard of it either, but since we are accused of it, I intend to take full advantage of it, every chance I get.
Paul Plante says
Hillary Clinton is the one with the white privilege because she has the money to buy it with.
Like just about everything in America, white privilege has to be purchased, for it sure don’t come free.
Paul Plante says
And you don’t have to be white to have white privilege in America, either.
Look to Shahid Khan, also known as Shad Khan, the Pakistani-American billionaire and business tycoon who is the owner of the Jacksonville Jaguars of the National Football League (NFL), the English Premier League team Fulham F.C., and automobile parts manufacturer Flex-N-Gate in Urbana, Illinois, who was featured on the front cover of Forbes magazine in 2012, associating him as the face of the American Dream, for proof of that.
As of June 2018, Khan’s net worth was over $7.4 billion and he is ranked 70th in the Forbes 400 list of richest Americans, and is overall the 216th wealthiest person in the world, and also the richest person of Pakistani origin.
There’s a dude who isn’t white with the same white privilege Hillary Clinton has, because like Hillary, he has the money to buy it with, and in America, money doesn’t care about skin color.
Rob White says
African???
You people are so American that 75% of you could not point to the place in Africa that your people came from if given $15,00.00 and 15 minutes to try.
Paul Plante says
Cookie, dude, you’re obviously intelligent, and educated, I would say, and well spoken, if not terribly misguided and totally deluded about the degree of control the Russians might have over the American people, which is absolutely none over me, having grown up with that “Russians are coming” crap back in the fifties.
You know why they didn’t come then, Cookie?
Because Americans have guns.
That’s why they never tried to invade us, and that is why I was never scared of them, and certainly not susceptible to their propaganda, which to a poor country kid like me in America who didn’t grow up with soft hands was pure horse****.
So what I am trying to say here, Cookie, is that it would have been a whole lot more productive to your cause for true equality to have, instead of saying “Art Sullivan, speaking of poop on this blog, there you have it, and you’re eating it up, served to you from some toilet in Nizhny Novgorod a few years ago – it is vintage (2014) and very special. VVSOPoop (I get it that you thought it was cognac, you’re not smart: like Stuart, you just copy paste poop). The Russians are feeding you hatred (poop) and you indiscriminate suckers are eating it up and serving it further,” taken what Art Sullivan pasted, which I read word for word, instead of slamming back at Art Sullivan in a fit of emotional frenzy for daring to post it, and rationally critiqued it to demonstrate how that is Russian hatred.
Here is where you should have started, Cookie, attacking the message itself, and not Art Sullivan:
For almost 150 years the United States has been conducting an interesting experiment.
The subjects of the experiment: black people and working-class whites.
The hypothesis to be tested: Can a people taken from the jungles of Africa and forced into slavery be fully integrated as citizens in a majority white population?
end quotes
Is that true?
Or not true?
Obviously, the hypothesis itself is seriously flawed, which is something that would possibly indicate Russian involvement because everybody knows how ignorant and backwards about America the Russians really are, and the hypothesis is fatally flawed because nobody is taking people from the jungles of Africa and forcing them into slavery in the first place, and were it to hypothetically happen, it is quite possible and entirely feasible based on our own history, which you seem to be ignorant of, Cookie, that yes, indeed, they could rise from that and become fully integrated as citizens in a majority white population, since many in fact did, only to be called “Uncle Toms” and “Oreo Cookies” by those blacks that didn’t want to become integrated.
But that is a different story for a different day.
Getting back to the Russians, then we come to this, which can never be anything but a matter of opinion, to wit:
The whites were descendants of Europeans who had created a majestic civilization.
end quotes
The whites were actually rich Anglo-Saxons like Andrew Carnegie, who crushed the workers at the Homestead Steel Mill in Pennsylvania, and Jay Gould, the Robber Baron, and Jay Cooke, the banker, and Commodore Vanderbilt who had created sumptuous living for themselves at the expense of the masses of people who got to starve and owe their souls to the company store.
As to a “majestic civilization” in Europe, that is horse****.
All they did was waste the place in endless warfare that again crushed the small folks, which is why you find Palatine Germans in America along with Hugenots.
How common people were looked at by the Anglo-Saxon elite in America back then can readily be seen at p.150 of “The United States Supreme Court: The Pursuit of Justice” by Christopher Tomlins, as follows:
Justice Joseph P. Bradley, who ended his long career on the Court in 1892, once explained that political equality was what the founding fathers were referring to in the Declaration of Independence.
Economic equality was bad for two reasons.
First, because God-given human faculties varied naturally, “there are many species of luxury” – such as art, literature and music – “which the great mass of mankind are incapable of enjoying.”
Second, the redistribution of wealth was counterproductive, for it “would smother enterprise, produce listlessness,” and make one man dependent on others.
end quotes
It’s like the knowledgeable black folks up here say, Cookie, dude: “NAACP means n-words aren’t always colored people!”
It’s a societal thing, Cookie, which has nothing to do with skin color.
And it sure has nothing to do with the Russians, either, Cookie.
There is an example of how you could have dealt with what Art Sullivan posted, Cookie, instead of going off on Art Sullivan and Mike Kuzma, one of the most loyal and truly empathetic Americans you will ever come across, as being Russian dupes.
Cookie says
The Russians literally have us by the balls, Paul. They don’t just interfere in elections, wave incriminating tapes, or dangle cash, they actively promote instability by inciting hatred and division, and it’s working. They don’t want a powerful U.S. or Europe, nor the U.S. led policing alliance that prevents them, with sanctions and measures of deterrence, from taking back their former Soviet states. Open rampant racism, flowing in the Mirror, is just playing into their hands. How TF don’t you see that? You need to be more informed, dude, everyone does.
More importantly, racist vomit isn’t free speech, it’s hate speech, and you should be kicked hard in the nuts every single time you spew racist garbage.
Paul Plante says
Since I don’t spew “racist garbage,” I think my package is quite safe from being kicked.
But that notwithstanding, Cookie, I always read your posts word for word, because I find them very enlightening as to how other people here in America, and I assume, although I know the dangers of using that word, that you too are here in America and are an American citizen, although truthfully, a far different variety than I am, with this obsession, and yes, Cookie, it is an obsession, about the Russians.
I am one of those Americans who thinks all this horse**** getting spewed by Hillary Clinton and the Democrats about the Russians having all this power in this country is just that, horse****, because I actually don’t think any real American is so weak in their wits as to be fooled or cajoled by anything a Russian could do or say; but you are proving me wrong here, Cookie, because you are so obviously terrified of them, and that has me curious as to how on earth that could be.
And I’m serious about that, dude.
You say “Open rampant racism, flowing in the Mirror, is just playing into their hands,” and again, I find that to be an amazing statement.
You notice, or perhaps you don’t, because your fear of the Russians blinds you to anything that does not fit your preconceptions about how powerful you think the Russians are, that I never bother to engage when any of what you are calling “open rampant racism” is posted here in the Mirror, because why would I bother?
Tell me that, Cookie – if someone says “The former slaves had been tribal peoples with no written language and virtually no intellectual achievements,” is that “open rampant racism?”
Or is that historical fact?
And why should I care, either way, since it is talking about something that happened long before I was born?
And if that is incorrect, what a real American with some courage and common sense would do would be to calmly and rationally rebut it with a reasoned analysis as to how and why it was wrong, instead of acting like Chicken Little and running around with your head cut off, yelling about the Russians literally have us by the balls.
If that is correct, Cookie, and let us presume it is, that is a sign of just how weak and rotten at its core America has become.
The Russians aren’t doodly-squat, Cookie, and yet, like a tiny weasel in a hen house, where the chickens could peck the weasel to bits if they weren’t so cowardly, the Russians have every Democrat in this country crapping in his or her pants.
And what a statement about America that is.
And that takes me back to the Russians and the Africans, Cookie, for a moment.
If you knew anything about world history, dude, you would know that the Russians have been the best of friends to the Africans, especially in Barack Obama’s home state of Kenya, so why then would the Russians betray their black African friends by spreading lies about them in the Cape Charles Mirror, of all places?
Chcck out Wikipedia, for example, under the heading of “Kenya–Russia relations,” and you will learn, although in truth you should not have been able to get out of 7th grade without knowing this, that they are bilateral relations between Kenya and Russia, where Russia had established diplomatic relations with Kenya on December 14, 1963, and has since maintained good relations with the African Great Lakes country.
I was in high school in 1963, Cookie, and that was a current events question we had to know back then.
During the Cold war, Cookie, which I lived through, with all of its petty attendant bull****, Kenya was part of the Non-aligned movement and thus maintained good relations with the Soviet Union.
The Soviet Union even offered Kenyans scholarships to study in the country.
So why today, Cookie, would the Russians be betraying the Kenyans by falsely claiming that “The former slaves had been tribal peoples with no written language and virtually no intellectual achievements?”
If the Russians are actually saying that, then isn’t it likely to be true?
In May 1997, in Moscow, Cookie, the foreign ministers of Russia and Kenya signed a Memorandum of ministerial consultations (last round was held in Nairobi in November 2009) and then in July 2008, Kenyan Foreign Minister Moses Wetangula made a visit to Russia.
In July 2002, Moscow was visited by Kenyan MPs from the Committee on Defence and Foreign Affairs Committee of the National Assembly.
In May 2005 in Moscow, the Russian Ministry of Natural Resources and the Ministry of Environment Protection and Natural Resources of Kenya signed an interdepartmental document on the main areas of cooperation, and in May 2006 a memorandum of understanding.
In June 2009, in Moscow, Minister of Tourism of the Republic of Kenya Najib Balala met with the Head of the Federal Tourism Agency A.I.Yarochkinym.
In September 2009, Deputy Minister of Tourism, Mrs. S.Mbarire held talks with Chairman of the Tourism Committee of Moscow G.V.Antyufeevym, representatives of the Russian Chamber of Commerce.
A delegation of the National Assembly of the Republic of Kenya, took part in the International Parliamentary Conference “Russia – Africa: Horizons of Cooperation”, which was held June 15–16, 2010 in Moscow.
In November 2010, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov visited Nairobi.
He had a conversation with the President of Kenya Mwai Kibaki and talks with Acting Foreign Minister George Saitoti.
In January 2011, Deputy Chairman of the Federation Council Svetlana Orlova took part in the Russian-Kenyan business forum in Nairobi.
In March 2011, on a short working visit to Moscow, the Acting Foreign Minister George Saitoti held talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.
end quotes
And then there is the Daily Nation article “Russia scrambles to be the next major economic player in Africa” on April 18, 2018 by Kevin J. Kelley, which is quite informative on the subject, as follows:
While much attention is being given to the US-China competition in Africa, Russia has been striving, with little notice, to become another major player on the continent.
Moscow’s economic and diplomatic efforts are so far focused on those African countries that the Soviet Union supported in liberation struggles.
end quotes
Did you catch that part about” those African countries that the Soviet Union supported in liberation struggles,” Cookie?
That is more high school history that I lived through, and let me tell you something, the Russians would not be in here talking smack about the black folks as you allege, nor would they be encouraging white Americans to do so; to the contrary if they were here, they would be standing up to the white Americans on behalf of the black folks, which takes us back to that article, as follows:
Today’s Russia seeks to build on historical friendships with Angola, Mozambique, Namibia and Zimbabwe, as well as with post-apartheid South Africa.
Russia has also begun prospecting for markets and political influence in East Africa.
The sub-region’s natural gas deposits are “of particular interest” to Russian energy companies, notes Alex Vines, head of the Africa programme at the London-based Chatham House think-tank.
Kenya’s and Uganda’s nuclear-power ambitions have also been identified by Russia’s state-owned Rosatom Corporation as offering opportunities for major investments.
end quotes
Are you seeing what I am saying here, Cookie, or rather, are you seeing what actual history, as opposed to some ridiculous drivel from Hillary Clinton and the cowardly Democrats, the real party of slavery in America, is saying, or clearly telling you?
Getting back to that article about Russian-Kenyan relations, we have as follows:
Rosatom is bidding to design and build Kenya’s first nuclear plant, while the company last year signed a memorandum of understanding with Uganda to help launch a nuclear industry in that country.
Uganda has also become a leading customer of Russian arms merchants in recent years.
Russia has accounted for nearly three-quarters of Uganda’s weapons imports during the past eight years, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (Sipri).
end quotes
Ah, Cookie, poor, poor Cookie, the Democrats and Hillary Clinton have been playing games with your head, brainwashing and indoctrinating you until you have no idea what is up anymore.
The truth is right before your eyes, but you have been so blinded by Hillary and the Democrats that your eyes can no longer see beyond the film they have laid over your eyes.
As to Russia’s relations with black Africa, that Daily Nation article continued as follows:
Moscow’s weapons business is booming elsewhere on the continent.
It is the source of about 40 per cent of total African arms imports, Sipri says.
Last year, for example, a UN sanctions committee approved a sizable transfer of Russian arms to the embattled government of the Central African Republic.
Also in 2017, Russia signed a $1 billion defence-cooperation agreement with Angola as well as a military-technical pact with Nigeria.
Russian weaponry is seen as attractive in parts of Africa because it is comparatively inexpensive and relatively easy to maintain and operate, notes Paul Stronski, a Russia expert at the Washington-based Carnegie Endowment for Intentional Peace.
end quotes
Do you actually think the Russians are going to jeopardize any of that by coming over here to the Cape Charles Mirror to openly promote racial hatred again their black friends in Africa?
Stuart Bell says
Kick someone in the nuts?
Really? LMAO!
You sound like you are in 3rd grade. You would do well to look over that log before you leap.
You never know what awaits you…..on the other side.
Publius Americanus says
Biden could not be more accommodating to the Russians and Chinese. What’s yours take now, comrade?
YOU elected a traitor, and baby you wear that coat too.
Paul Plante says
To put a post-script onto this subject, which has been pretty much already beaten to death, I would like to take a moment to quote from p.132 of “The United States Supreme Court: The Pursuit of Justice” by Christopher Tomlins, as follows:
From the beginning, the Waite Court (U.S. Supreme Court, 1874-1888) had embraced a limited view of the power of the federal government to promote civil rights under the Civil War amendments (13th and 14th Amendments).
In many respects, then, the Court’s infamous decision in the Civil Rights Cases (1883) merely represented a predictable culmination rather than an unexpected or dramatic departure.
Still, the outcome carried with it the weight of history.
In an opinion written by Justice Bradley, the Court declared unconstitutional the Civil Rights Act of 1875.
The reasoning was entirely predictable, based on the results in Reese and Cruickshank: In the view of the majority, the Fourteenth Amendment was not designed to weed out discrimination by private individuals or businesses.
Bradley added a lecture on how the time had come for the country to realize that there was no longer a need to legislate for the special protection of blacks: “When a man has emerged from slavery, and by the aid of beneficent legislation has shaken off the inseparable concomitants of that State, there must be some stage in the progress of his elevation when he takes the rank of a mere citizen, and ceases to be the special favorite of the laws, and when his rights as a citizen, or a man, are to be protected in the ordinary modes by which other men’s rights are protected.”
end quotes
One hundred thirty-five (135) years later, here we all are, sill having that same debate – will there ever come a time in America when the black folks take the rank of a mere citizen, which is what all us “white boys” in this discussion are, with our supposed “white privilege,” which ain’t worth doodly-squat if you don’t have the money, like Hillary Clinton does, to buy that “white privilege” with, and cease to be the special favorite of the laws, and when their rights as a citizen, or a man, are to be protected in the ordinary modes by which other men’s rights are protected?
Servenet says
Let´s let Joe Sobran sum up the reason for the resentment and envy this black woman expresses loud and clear in her um, ah…racist ¨article.¨ —
“The concept of envy – the hatred of the superior – has dropped out of our moral vocabulary… The idea that white Christian civilization is hated more for its virtues than its sins doesn’t occur to us, because it’s not a nice idea… Western man towers over the rest of the world in ways so large as to be almost inexpressible. It’s Western exploration, science, and conquest that have revealed the world to itself. Other races feel like subjects of Western power long after colonialism, imperialism, and slavery have disappeared. The charge of racism puzzles whites who feel not hostility, but only baffled good will, because they don’t grasp what it really means: humiliation. The white man presents an image of superiority even when he isn’t conscious of it. And, superiority excites envy. Destroying white civilization is the inmost desire of the league of designated victims we call minorities.
Paul Plante says
Servenet, dude, let me tell you, that is quite a speech you just made above here.
But really, is any of it factually true?
It really is quite subjective, you know.
If you had to substantiate any of it with historical fact, would you be able to do so?
You say, for example, that “Destroying white civilization is the inmost desire of the league of designated victims we call minorities.”
Where on earth did you get that bit of news from, pray tell?
More to the point, what on earth is this thing you call “white civilization?”
Where does that exist?
And when?
For example, Servenet, what about the Moors from northern Africa, who in 711 led the Umayyad conquest of Hispania, causing the Iberian peninsula to become known in classical Arabic as Al-Andalus, which at its peak included most of Septimania and modern-day Spain and Portugal?
According to recorded history (Quoted in Edward Scobie, The Moors and Portugal’s Global Expansion, in Golden Age of the Moor, ed Ivan Van Sertima, US, Transaction Publishers, 1992, p.336), a European scholar sympathetic to the Spaniards remembered the conquest in this way:
“[T]he reins of their (Moors) horses were as fire, their faces black as pitch, their eyes shone like burning candles, their horses were swift as leopards and the riders fiercer than a wolf in a sheepfold at night . . .”
“The noble Goths [the German rulers of Spain to whom Roderick belonged] were broken in an hour, quicker than tongue can tell.”
“Oh luckless Spain!”
end quotes
How do you factor that bit of history into your model?
When you speak of this “white civilization,” are you aware that the Moors, who ruled Spain for 800 years, introduced new scientific techniques to Europe, such as an astrolabe, a device for measuring the position of the stars and planets, while scientific progress in Astronomy, Chemistry, Physics, Mathematics, Geography and Philosophy flourished in Moorish Spain?
And while we are on that subject of “white civilization,” are you also aware that Basil Davidson, one of the most noted historians, recognized and declared that there were no lands at that time (the eighth century) “more admired by its neighbours, or more comfortable to live in, than a rich African civilization which took shape in Spain?”
And Servenet, at its height, Córdova, the heart of Moorish territory in Spain, was the most modern city in Europe.
The streets were well-paved, with raised sidewalks for pedestrians and during the night, ten miles of streets were well illuminated by lamps, that being hundreds of years before there was a paved street in Paris or a street lamp in London.
And Cordova had 900 public baths!
As to architecture and engineering, which are signs of civilization along with sanitary facilities, the Great Mosque of Córdoba (La Mezquita) is still one of the architectural wonders of the world in spite of later Spanish disfigurements.
Its low scarlet and gold roof, supported by 1,000 columns of marble, jasper and porphyry, was lit by thousands of brass and silver lamps which burned perfumed oil.
And how about this for civilization, Servenet – education was universal in Moorish Spain, available to all, while in Christian Europe ninety-nine percent of the population were illiterate, and even kings could neither read nor write.
At that time, Europe had only two universities, while the Moors had seventeen great universities located in Almeria, Cordova, Granada, Juen, Malaga, Seville, and Toledo.
In the tenth and eleventh centuries, public libraries in Europe were non-existent, while Moorish Spain could boast of more than seventy, of which the one in Cordova housed six hundred thousand manuscripts.
It was the Moors who introduced paper to Europe and Arabic numerals, which replaced the clumsy Roman system, and the Moors also introduced many new crops including the orange, lemon, peach, apricot, fig, sugar cane, dates, ginger and pomegranate as well as saffron, sugar cane, cotton, silk and rice which remain some of Spain’s main products today.
The Moorish rulers lived in sumptuous palaces, while the monarchs of Germany, France, and England dwelt in big barns, with no windows and no chimneys, and with only a hole in the roof for the exit of smoke.
One such Moorish palace ‘Alhambra’ (literally “the red one”) in Granada is one of Spain’s architectural masterpieces.
Is any of that factored into your model?
Or has it been discarded so the model can stand?
The candid world, which absorbs these discussions in detail, curious as it is about how those who call themselves “Americans,” think about these things, would like to know, and truthfully, so would I and yes, Servenet, I am as white as you.
Servenet says
Pay attention now – the quote was by the well-known writer (columnist) Joe Sobran in 1997. It is his view of the world, as well as that of many including mine, which goes without saying. I have to laugh at your long and tedious history lesson about Moors and paved streets, etc. Of course, such accounts are cherry picked and contradicted by the next history teacher according to their own particular list. In the current year I am but interested in one thing…how can White people have their own place(s) and nation(s). The POC can screech and fulminate from now until they are ejected from such places and nations. Naturally this may never transpire. Though it would if a critical number of Whites precisely like myself comes to develop. It looks like it may not. It is merely my desire and hope. And it is that simple my friend.
Paul Plante says
You can just buy up a bunch of land and proclaim it your country where only white-skinned people can be citizens, Servenet.
Should be as easy as that.
Servenet says
Sure, whatever you say, slick.
Paul Plante says
Yes, Servenet, I know a lot of people who have said that to me – “Gee, Paul, who are you to keep your own counsel?”
“Where do you get off thinking you know more than we do?”
“It’s not wise to think you know better than we do!”
At that point, they generally act like they are going to get violent with me, because that is all they have to offer.
If you want to get any older than you are now, Servenet, you ought to consider the unwisdom of taking all your direction from people who may well be fools.
Just saying.
As for me, Servenet, I am over seventy.
Where are all the fools who told me I would never get here by keeping my own counsel, do you think?
Servenet says
Your reply doesn´t really go to the obvious point of my last comment to you, and I think you know this. However, you seem like a chap of general goodwill. So let me just express my wish for your having a pleasant and prosperous good day.
Paul Plante says
Thanks!
And you, as well!
And which comment of yours did I miss the point of?
Servenet says
Plans fail when there is no counsel, but with abundant advisers they are established.
Proverbs 15:22
Paul Plante says
That is a catchy soundbite, Servenet, that some would attribute to Confucious.
But when you dig into the meat of it, you find it without real substance.
You know, too many cooks spoil the soup.
Servenet says
…without real substance.
It takes quite the spirit of arrogance to elevate a mere sinner´s cerebrations above God´s Revelation. The illusion of freedom to act according to one´s own ¨counsel¨ is just that, ephemeral and utterly temporary. But you have it Paul, my friend, your temporary ¨freedom.¨ But……how wilt thou do in the swelling of Jordan?
Servenet says
Further, let me offer…TO YOU…once such example of contradiction that you really, REALLY should ¨factor into YOUR…model.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Bc5f9_YoFk
It is a mere demonstration of the alienation of White people in this present era and its result that you should off-handedly identify yourself as White. No natural mentality of kinship and an ally for you, but rather a kind of oblique contempt in your offering. The POC have no such self-denying of what they perceive accords with their interests. And this is exactly the existential hurdle Whites face today—whether enough of them will take their own side in the contest…or, to their doom, place themselves over on the side of self-immolation…your side.
Paul Plante says
Indeed you have that right, at least in part, Servenet – I am indeed on my own side in this drama, not anybody else’s.
I take no one’s counsel but my own.
And there are a lot of people with white skin who are not on your side, Servenet.
That don’t make you wrong – just not somebody people would want to follow.
Servenet says
¨I take no one´s counsel but my own.¨
And you regard this as a wise cast of mind? Think about it ,Paul, my friend. It is a patently unwise mentality. And, with this, few would disagree.
Chas Cornweller says
The mental aptitude of people like Servenet never cease to amaze me. Paul, I wouldn’t waste any further time or words with this racist. Whatever counsel he has taken is beyond the pale. Disingenuous people like Servenet (one who hides behind a computer name, ironically) fail to see the true purpose of this existence. To them, it is all about the power behind skin color. Another facet of irony is this fact, and you would also know of this Paul…that, while Europe was living in complete blindness of any scientific fact or reason and being led by the nose by very corrupt and demented religious leaders, the far East and the middle East were creating and (re) discovering a multitude of sciences and maths we take for granted today. It is a known fact that the travels of Marco Polo (and others), that their deliverance of the East to the West did much to drag “White” Europe out of the darkness and from being eternal dregs of society flushed down the toilet by insanity. Barbarity has many colors, as well as genius and light. Poor demented souls like Servenet’s cannot even fathom such diversity in the human structure. Therefore, they are doomed to a life and existence of angst and loathing. A rather sad place to be, mentally; a kind of “self-immolation” of spirit? Just sayin’. Thanks for your engagement, a well-chosen voice of reason is welcome, any day.
Servenet says
¨…racist….¨
Doesn´t even a crashing bore like yourself get a little tired of screeching ¨R A A A A A C C C I I I I S S S T !!!¨ – at every disturbance of the atmosphere? It´s a rhetorical question, of course, because it´s apparent you´re a pathological leftist globo-drone and your compulsion is just that – a compulsive disorder. And your comment is just another pathetic example of the leftist autiste. IOW, you sound like one more cookie cut-out anti-White, leftist retard. Hope you find my criticism coming from a place of cheerful goodwill…Chas, old boy.
Stacy says
Funny how racists freak out when you call them racists.
rac·ist
ˈrāsəst
noun
1.
a person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or who believes that a particular race is superior to another.
Paul Plante says
It’s not exactly clear, however, that Servenet is a racist according to that definition.
It is not clear whether Servenet feels him or herself to be of a particular race that is superior to another, or whether Servenet is a white exclusionist for whatever reasons who only wants to see people with faces like his or hers.
Mrs C.L. Grant says
There has never been a ‘freak out’ quite like the one President Donald Trump has caused you and those like you. After eight years of obama, I can assure you it is as pleasant as a cool breeze on a hot day. I look forward to the many ‘freak outs’ yet to come. I can not thank you people enough.
Paul Plante says
Interesting commentary, Mrs. C.L. Grant.
Very interesting, especially the part about the “freak-outs” yet to come from Trump.
Yes, I think you are quite correct – there will be many of them.
Do you think you will be able to handle them?
Just curious is all.
Servenet says
Funny how racists freak out when you call them racists.
Two things, Stacy, sweetie –
¨…freak out…¨ lol, you´ve got a serious case of cognitive dissonance
and
¨Funny…¨”your sense of humor…ah, I suspect you don´t have one.
Paul Plante says
Yo, Servenet, what it is, dude!
Say, you seem like a dude with your head screwed on straight here, at least in your own estimation, which, as an ethologist, I am totally cool with, even if no one else is.
People today want us to be so cookie-cutter, don’t they?
But you know what, Servenet, and I would bet you do – if there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation here in America, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what will be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by words or act their faith therein.
Thus, in America, both you and Mary above here have the right to be white supremacists, if that is what you are, or white exclusionists, who don’t want people of any color but lily white around you.
The Constitution and the Supreme Court both say that.
In fact, no less a renowned jurist than Oliver Wendell Holmes said, “If there is any principle of the Constitution that more imperatively calls for attachment than any other it is the principle of free thought – not free thought for those who agree with us but freedom for the thought we hate.”
Oliver Wendell Holmes was an actual United States Supreme Court Judge, and Servenet, the dude had both you and Mary in mind when he said those words.
And remember Louis Dembitz Brandeis, the American lawyer and associate justice on the Supreme Court of the United States from 1916 to 1939?
He had you in mind, and Mary, as well, when he said suppression of ideas worked a great hardship on society.
And Holmes put forth the proposition, which is very hard to argue with, that because we cannot know immediately which ideas are food and true and useful, and which are not, we must let them vie against one another in the faith that after full disclosure and discussion, which is a public service to all of us the Cape Charles Mirror provides, giving as much voice to the ideas of Chas Cornweller, as is given to you, and the truth will win out.
Brandeis saw free speech as an essential aspect of citizenship, Servenet.
Men and women have the duty in a democracy, although today, so many ignore it in pursuit of pleasure, to be good citizens, which means being informed on the issues confronting them, such as this white-skin-people-only state you want to create, and by the way, Sevenet, the United States Constitution gives you the authority to do just that, create a territory and come up with a constitution and a territorial government and then petition for statehood.
Afterall, Servenet, and this is the service you are providing us with in here, how can individuals make intelligent decisions about those issues without having basic information about them, such as why you don’t like people whose skin is not white, and you don’t want them around you.
That frankly confounds the bejaysus out of people who have no trouble getting along with people who don’t look like them, but to each his or her own.
How can citizens judge which side has the better argument unless they can hear both sides and then join in the debate?
To Brandeis, the fact that some viewpoints like yours run against the grain or disturb popular sensibilities made no difference.
Brandeis thus provided a positive justification for protection of speech – the necessity for the citizenry to be fully informed about issues and to be aware of all viewpoints, a sentiment the Cape Charles Mirror adheres to, despite it upsetting those who are for censorship in this country, and they are many.
Brandeis valued speech as a cultural, social, and educational, as well as a political, value in a free society, so jump on that train and educate us, Servenet – what’s up with your issues concerning people who aren’t white like you?
The candid world would truly like to know.
A friend says
Paul,
I am curious about your penchant for using the word “Dude” when responding to certain individuals. Are you using it with the current popular definition, or one of the earliest definitions: an infected elephant butt hair or a pimple on a donkey’s/horse’s butt?
Paul Plante says
Good day, A friend,
And you know, when pressed, as you have just done here, as to the why, I would have to say, after giving it a lot of the serious thought that your inquiry demanded, that it is a gestalt – a thing of the moment that is actually, or probably, anyway, purely subliminal, which is to say, the conversation draws forth from the void, as it were, the primal source, the words the conversation demands be used.
Hence “dude,” or sometimes, when proper, “dudette.”
When I think about it, it seems sort of an automatic process.
As to meanings, I probably would be labeled a classicist by the more modern folks who have twisted the meaning of dude up into an unrecognizable knot so that today, first, very few even are aware of the word anymore, especially on TWITTER, and two, nobody knows what anyone means when they use the word, or in my case, when the word happens.
Chas Cornweller says
Wow! Just like Roy Rogers used to say to his horse; “Trigger much?” Ha. Ha. You use this in a statement and I repeat for the home audience; “it´s apparent you´re a pathological leftist globo-drone and your compulsion is just that – a compulsive disorder.” And you have the audacity to call what I have, a compulsive disorder? Who even uses that term, “Pathological leftist globo-drone?” What the hell is that, anyway? Glib-speak? Non-such? Newspeak? Globo-drone! That’s rich, Net Fault. I’ll be sure to use that at our next Lenin/Marx/Maypole/Bring on the Revolution dance social.
You know, your type (yessssss….racist), your type really have flown your freak flags high ever since your sunshine boy has taken the podium. But, instead of showing me your true colors, you’re just showing (watch it now – family blog here) umm…your backside. Feeling pretty confident now that tiki torches are all the rage? Tell me, do you put citronella in those torches or just use kerosene and let the mosquitoes pump your head full of encephalitis? Inquiring minds want to know.
As far as my liberalism, I thank God for all those liberals that came before me. Peter J. McGuire and Matthew Maguire for two. I have that three-day weekend to look forward to in September, thanks to them. Or perhaps John Locke, who influenced the founding of this country and the freedoms we enjoy today. Or take Voltaire, a writer of reason and free thought (might want to take a look at his writings for some “enlightenment.” How about, a little closer to home, FDR…got our assets through the Second World War pretty much intact. Pulled us through and out of a Great Depression with “gasps!” workable social programs that kept nearly a third of this nation’s families fed. Those damned socialist! Ever driven on an interstate? Yup. Socialist. Progressives brought you that ribbon of a highway. Ever sung “This Land is Your Land” by Woodie Guthrie? Yeah, I figured…well ole Woodie, what a character! He was not only a liberal, he was a socialist! Easy there, big fella…hope I’m not boring you too much…Then there is the Big guy his self…puts the J. E. S. U. S. in Christ and heads the whole program, if you know what I mean. Said stuff like, “Blessed are the peacemakers” and “Blessed are the persecuted”, you know…crazy things like that. Sounds pretty progressive to me. In other words, he looks out for the little guy. You remember, the minorities, the poor, the refugees, the disenfranchised, Samaritans, those guys. Folks that USED to be on most American’s radar. That same common man that is currently getting shat on by the bigger guys today. Guess your radar must be broke.
So, don’t get off calling me a leftist (can’t believe you said that second (perceived slight) word. What are you? An eight-year-old or eighty-year-old? Let’s agree to just say “Leftist Person of Diminished Intellectual Capacity.” Doesn’t that sound better? Why disparage those that have been given to us by God, enabling us to better ourselves, huh? But, I guess in your day, you would have had them sterilized. Where was I? Oh yeah! Don’t get off calling me a Leftist Person of Diminished Intellectual Capacity, for one…I’ll take it as a badge of honor. Two, if I truly was, would I have been able to “Trigger” (see what I did there?) you so and be able to respond to your non-sense in such an intellectual way that all you can do is respond back to me with is slobbery, disjointed blather. I can promise you, cheerful goodwill, that’s ALL you got. Net Fault, old boy.
Paul Plante says
And Servenet, dude, getting back to you here, what’s up with this attack of yours on Chas Cornweller where you called him a “pathological leftist globo-drone,” a political term I have not heard since the Gore/Bush throwdown back when.
If I recall right, the Bush-ites were calling the Gore followers pathological leftist globo-drones, because it had a good ring to it and it made for a good soundbite, as we can see from the results – Bush became president and Gore didn’t, so there is some kind of power to words, alright.
But “pathological leftist globo-drone” is so dated today, don’t you think?
Or could it be you don’t know?
People hearing you use such a dated term to attack Chas Cornweller with are now actually wondering whether you are one of those Russians over there in a sub-basement in Lubyanka Square, renamed Dzerzhinsky Square for many years (1926–1990) in honor of the founder of the Soviet security service, Felix Dzerzhinsky, nicknamed “Iron Felix,” that FBI Director Christopher Wray told us about on 19 July 2018 when he told us that Russia continues to use fake news, propaganda and covert operations to “spin up” Americans on both sides of hot-button issues to sow discord in the United States.
“Russia continues to engage in malign influence operations to this day,” Wray said.
He also said that Russia is aggressively engaged in influence operations to sow discord and divisiveness in America.
“To me, it’s a threat that we need to take very serious and respond to with fierce determination,” Wray said.
He said the Russians identify divisive issues, and through covert and overt operations, fake news and propaganda, they “spin people up on both sides of an issue and then kind of watch us go after each other.”
end quotes
Is that what you are trying to do in here, Servenet, for Mother Russia, spin people up on both sides of an issue and then kind of watch us go after each other?
Is that why you jumped all over Chas Cornweller, calling him a “pathological leftist globo-drone,” instead of simply responding to his post by showing him where this “white-only” civilization of yours ever existed, and by the way, not to crush your ego or anything, but right now, my straw poll has Chas Cornweller out ahead of you with a healthy lead based on all the style points he picked up from a vote by the at-home audience on that last post of his.
And if that was not enough to cause people to wonder, and believe me, they did, then we come to this of yours to me, to wit: Pay attention now – the quote was by the well-known writer (columnist) Joe Sobran in 1997.
end quotes
I have to say that while the Sobran dude might have been well-known and well-regarded in Moscow, and by the way, it is something, isn’t it, history first records the name Lubyanskaya Square, or simply Lubyanka in Moscow, in 1480, when Grand Prince Ivan III of Moscow, who had conquered Novgorod in 1471, settled many Novgorodians in the area, I had never heard of the dude before this, because let’s face it, Servenet, while the dude might have been considered hot stuff in the Kremlin, over here, he was considered second-rate, a hack.
He did get the boot, afterall, at National Review, getting removed from the publication amidst controversial charges of anti-semitism.
And not to tell you your own history as if I know it better, but Veliky Novgorod, which is located in Novgorod Oblast, was already a major Baltics to Byzantium station on the trade route from the Varangians to the Greeks in 862, and Novgorod is traditionally considered to be the cradle of Russian statehood, so no wonder it means so much to you people over there.
But enough about the Motherland, let’s get back to Joe Sobran, who Pat Buchanan called “perhaps the finest columnist of our generation,” which makes your reference to him all that much more interesting given that Patrick Joseph Buchanan, born November 2, 1938, is an American paleoconservative political commentator, author, syndicated columnist, politician, and broadcaster who was a senior advisor to U.S. Presidents Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, and Ronald Reagan, aa well as an original host on CNN’s Crossfire, who sought the Republican presidential nomination in 1992 and 1996 and ran on the Reform Party ticket in the 2000 presidential election, which itself is interesting because the Reform Party has nominated several notable candidates over the years, such as Perot himself, and Ralph Nader, and also counted among its members such figures as future Republican president Donald Trump, who now has TV economist “Lefty Larry” Kudlow as his top economic advisor.
Pat Buchanan co-founded The American Conservative magazine and launched a foundation named The American Cause and he has been published in Human Events, National Review, The Nation, and Rolling Stone, as well as being a political commentator on the MSNBC cable network, including the show Morning Joe until February 2012, and he now appears on Fox News.
Buchanan has also been a regular on The McLaughlin Group since the 1980s.
His political positions can generally be described as paleoconservative, and many of his views, particularly his opposition to American imperialism and the managerial state, echo those of the Old Right Republicans of the first half of the 20th century.
As to paleoconservatism, sometimes shortened to paleocon, it is a conservative political philosophy stressing tradition, limited government and civil society, along with religious, regional, national and Western identity.
Is that what draws you to it, Servenet?
According to the international relations scholar Michael Foley, “paleoconservatives press for restrictions on immigration, a rollback of multicultural programmes, the decentralization of federal policy, the restoration of controls upon free trade, a greater emphasis upon economic nationalism and non-interventionism in the conduct of American foreign policy, and a generally revanchist outlook upon a social order in need of recovering old lines of distinction and in particular the assignment of roles in accordance with traditional categories of gender, ethnicity, and race.”
Practitioners of this philosophy identify themselves as the legitimate heirs to the American conservative tradition.
end quotes
No wonder you are so attracted to it, Servenet.
As to the nativist politician Pat Buchanan, he was strongly influenced by the Rockford Institute’s Chronicles and helped create another paleoconservative publication, The American Conservative.
Paleoconservativism’s concerns overlap those of the Old Right that opposed the New Deal in the 1930s and 1940s as well as American social conservatism of the late 20th century expressed, for example, in the book Single Issues by Joseph Sobran.
And BINGO, there we are, back at the beginning with your Joe Sobran, and by the way, it was the political theorist Paul Gottfried who is credited with coining the term Paleoconservativism in the 1980s, saying the term originally referred to various Americans, such as conservative and traditionalist Catholics and agrarian Southerners, who turned to anti-communism during the Cold War.
So when you tell us above that Joe Sobran’s view of the world is that of many including yourself, which you say goes without saying, at least now we have some sort of feel for who you are based on who your heroes are.
Servenet says
Paul, seriously my friend, your long-windedness is NOT A POSITIVE TRAIT. Yea, at long last, in the current year…TAKE SOME ADVICE. It´s really not such a mortifying thing to do.
Paul Plante says
As I say, Servenet, it is a gestalt – a thing of the moment.
The number of words used is a function of the need for exact words in the specific situation.
Sometimes, I might simply say, “well said.”
But in your case, where you bring a decidedly higher intellectual level to the conversation, more words than that are required to adequately address the various issues you have raised in here.
Paul Plante says
And Servenet, dude, I hope you are having a glorious day as well, and do you recall from grade school American history that the famous “American System” speech of Henry Clay in 1824 took three days and covered 40 pages of the federal records?
In comparison, I am quite laconic (brief, concise, terse, succinct, short, economical, crisp, to the point, incisive, short and sweet), indeed!
Servenet says
lol – flattery…will get you…quite a bit, from me. Unless you are being…ironic. In any case, I am simply admitting…ummm…shall we say, my humanity. Again, good day to you.
Paul Plante says
I read all the words you print, Servenet, and take them quite seriously.
While I may agree with none of what you say, and to be truthful, some of it is quite esoteric sounding, so I am still trying to figure it out, I do have to stand up for your right to express yourself in here, and yes, I do think you make an effort to be articulate.
It sure does beat the shouting that so often accompanies this quite sensitive subject.
I have absolutely no problem with co-existing with people who don’t look like me, which does not mean that I have to like them, or respect them, or celebrate them or approve of their way of life.
I practice that philosophy of don’t do unto others what you don’t want them doing unto you, and it works for me, anyway.
So I am intellectually curious when I am confronted by someone like yourself who seems to have issues with people who don’t have skin that is lily-white.
By treating you as a fellow human being, despite your beliefs, encourages you to do the same with me, and thus, some sort of peace can reign in the land.
Mary Knight says
Ms. Bauer, thank you for this thoughtful and obviously much needed piece. I never cease to be astonished by the great lengths people will pursue to justify their bigotry. I hope that the comments here are representative of a vile few and not indicative of something festering in the underbelly of what I still hope is a charming, hospitable community.
Paul Plante says
Mary, how are you doing today?
Fine I would hope.
And Mary, while we are on the subject of being astonished by the great lengths people will pursue to justify their bigotry, have you read much about the U.S. Supreme Court, which has been very racist throughout its history?
Consider this from p.171 of “The United States Supreme Court: The Pursuit of Justice” by Christopher Tomlins:
(Supreme Court Justice Henry Billings) Brown reassured the minority (Downes v. Bidwell) that no one need fear for the rights of inhabitants of “unincorporated territories” because “There are certain principles of natural justice inherent in the Anglo-Saxon character.”
end quotes
Talk about racism, Mary, there you have it staring you right in the face.
And what about all the Supreme Court cases where the Democrat party was involved in keeping the black folks from being able to vote?
When Supreme Court justices and one of the major political parties in this country are openly racist, can you actually be surprised to find racism still alive and quite well in Virginia?
Mary Knight says
Yes, our nation’s history is a history of white supremacy. Still, many of us are working to evolve beyond that and to resist the easy comfort it offers. I’m not surprised that there are racists here; I’m dismayed by how emboldened they are.
Paul Plante says
It is not white supremacy; it is a mistaken belief in Anglo-Saxon superiority .
At the beginning of WWII, in a conference with Frank Roosevelt concerning the future of the war after the success in North Africa, Winston Churchill was quoted as saying “Anglo-Saxons must rule the world.”
Servenet says
Mary, you receive a big smiley face and a thumbs up and a gold star for your solid virtue signalling and moral preening. How would someone like you get through the day…otherwise?
Paul Plante says
And that comment brings us back to basic high school American history, which we were ALL supposed to learn, regardless of skin color, which is a very shallow and superficial thing to get upset about, and this following from the famous Speech of Mr. Hayne of South Carolina on January 25, 1830 in response to Daniel Webster on the very question of slavery in America as it existed at that time, 54 years after the 1776 Declaration of Independence from the British who established slavery in this nation when it was nothing more than a collection of second-class English colonies, to wit:
Sir, when arraigned before the bar of public opinion, on this charge of slavery, we can stand up with conscious rectitude, plead not guilty, and put ourselves upon God and our country.
Sir, we will not stop to inquire whether the black man, as some philosophers have contended, is of an inferior race, nor whether his color and condition are the effects of a curse inflicted for the offences of his ancestors.
We deal in no abstractions.
We will not look back to inquire whether our fathers were guiltless in introducing slaves into this country.
If an inquiry should ever be instituted in these matters, however, it will be found that the profits of the slave trade were not confined to the South.
Southern ships and Southern sailors were not the instruments of bringing slaves to the shores of America, nor did our merchants reap the profits of that “accursed traffic.”
But, sir, we will pass over all this.
If slavery, as it now exists in this country, be an evil, we of the present day found it ready made to our hands.
end quotes
Just as when I was born, all the **** that then existed we of my generation found it ready made to our hands.
Moving right along, although everyone in here with a basic high school education should already know this stuff cold, especially those who make the claim to be “woke,” we have:
Finding our lot cast among a people, whom God had manifestly committed to our care, we did not sit down to speculate on abstract questions of theoretical liberty.
We met it as a practical question of obligation and duty.
We resolved to make the best of the situation in which Providence had placed us, and to fulfil the high trust which had developed upon us as the owners of slaves, in the only way in which such a trust could be fulfilled, without spreading misery and ruin throughout the land.
We found that we had to deal with a people whose physical, moral, and intellectual habits and character, totally disqualified them from the enjoyment of the blessings of freedom.
We could not send them back to the shores from whence their fathers had been taken; their numbers forbade the thought, even if we did not know that their condition here is infinitely preferable to what it possibly could be among the barren sands and savage tribes of Africa; and it was wholly irreconcileable with all our notions of humanity to tear asunder the tender ties which they had formed among us, to gratify the feelings of a false philanthropy.
end quotes
Now, I would like to hear all the SNIFF-SNIFFS and HOLIER-THAN-THOUS in here who are lightning quick on the trigger in here to HURL the charge of “RACIST” in here who think slavery was just horrible come back with some reasonable commentary as to how the Americans who inherited a system that is older than the Bible were supposed to simply wave a wand or have Froggie pluck his magic twanger and have that all go away overnight.
Getting back to it:
What a commentary on the wisdom, justice, and humanity, of the Southern slave owner is presented by the example of certain benevolent associations and charitable individuals elsewhere.
Shedding weak tears over sufferings which had existence only in their own sickly imaginations, these “friends of humanity” set themselves systematically to work to seduce the slaves of the South from their masters.
By means of missionaries and political tracts, the scheme was in a great measure successful.
Thousands of these deluded victims of fanaticism were seduced into the enjoyment of freedom in our Northern cities.
And what has been the consequence?
Go to these cities now, and ask the question.
Visit the dark and narrow lanes, and obscure recesses, which have been assigned by common consent as the abodes of those outcasts of the world — the free people of color.
Sir, there does not exist, on the face of the whole earth, a population so poor, so wretched, so vile, so loathsome, so utterly destitute of all the comforts, conveniences, and decencies of life, as the unfortunate blacks of Philadelphia, and New York, and Boston.
Liberty has been to them the greatest of calamities, the heaviest of curses.
Sir, I have had some opportunities of making comparisons between the condition of the free negroes of the North and the slaves of the South, and the comparison has left not only an indelible impression of the superior advantages of the latter, but has gone far to reconcile me to slavery itself.
Never have I felt so forcibly that touching description, “the foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests, but the son of man hath not where to lay his head,” as when I have seen this unhappy race, naked and houseless, almost starving in the streets, and abandoned by all the world.
Sir, I have seen in the neighborhood of one of the most moral, religious, and refined cities of the North, a family of free blacks, driven to the caves of the rock, and there obtaining a precarious subsistence from charity and plunder.
end quotes
Now, given that Mr. Hayne of South Carolina was actually alive back then, to be confronted with the problem, for problem to the nation as it existed back then it most certainly was, and he had no solution for it, what I would like all these people who keep saying we need to have a conversation on racism in this country start right there, because there is the basis of the conversation which must needs to be had.
Put yourself in the shoes of those people alive back then, not the morally superior shoes you all wear now, and tell us how you would have responded to Mr. Hayne of South Carolina – would you just have been screeching at him that he was a RACIST, or would you have had something actually intelligent to say on the subject?
The candid world waits with bated breath for whatever that answer is going to be, and believe me, so do I, who am so sick and tired of hearing immature mental midgets like Beto O’Rourke bleating about racists in America, as if his Democrat **** had nothing but the aroma of heavenly scents emanating from it, because but for the Democrats, who were the defenders of slavery and JIM CROW as well as the philosophers who contended the African to be of an inferior race, with his color and condition being the effects of a curse inflicted for the offences of his ancestors, the problem of slavery would have disappeared long ago.
And with respect to what is considered JIM CROW today, in 1924, the state of Oregon required electors to read the Constitution in English and write their name.
Which perhaps is something to think about today when we look at the pack of mental midgets, intellectual dwarfs, morons, idiots and just plain fools who inhabit the CONGRESS OF CLOWNS now in session to our detriment in the TEN MILES SQUARE of Washington, D.C.
Servenet says
Mary Knight, the beKighted NPC and societal rot inducer. But you haven´t got long Mary. Which is at least one…good thing on the horizon.
Slide Easy says
Racism is an attitude that takes place in ones mind.
Discrimination is an overt act that takes place in the real world.
The vast majority of people called Racist have no earthly way to discriminate against anyone.
Do you know how stupid You People look calling others Racist?
Visitor on the way says
My husband, 2 granddaughters and I are barreling down the highway in our RV as I write this post. We are on our way to spend a week on the eastern shore. I grew up across the bay on the shores of St. Mary’s county. We all had boats and spent our summers boating, fishing, crabbing and enjoying the beauty of a different pace of life. We want our granddaughters to experience a taste of this.
We currently live in the Memphis area. We know about racism. Memphis proper is 85% black. This is not a negative. Admittedly, because of generations of poverty, there are challenges, but challenges are opportunities to contribute, to improve, and to rise to the top. My husband and I have been blessed to have had the opportunity to help those of all races and backgrounds who struggle to overcome hurdles that are not of their own making. My husband helps veterans with ptsd and I help women and children born into poverty to gain socio-economic success. Additionally, we train our efforts, as our ability allows, to make sure we help people who are in need of clothing, food, etc, whether it’s through church or other non-profits.
We want our granddaughters to learn about this as well. To learn that we are all of one race-a beautiful bouquet of colors created by God. There will always be the poor; there will always be those who are the victims of racism. Hopefully, there will also always be the kindness of strangers, the charity of the generous, the compassion of the strong, the faithfulness of good churches filled with the kind of love that sacrifices for the good of others, and the willingness of brave hearted people who will fight for those who cannot fight for themselves.
I’ve read a lot of angry comments in this thread, but I’ve seen a lot of good, too. From the veteran who was willing to sacrifice his life fighting for freedom, to the gentleman who seeks to establish that we see both sides of the truth, to the self professed snowflake who passionately cries out against racism. I’m encouraged also by the comments of some who stand up for your picturesque small town, and proclaim that it is really a good place to be.
I pray that our 11 and 7 year old granddaughters will see the good stuff this weekend. And I pray that the sweet town of Cape Charles would heal from any racial rifts that may exist.
Thank you for allowing this mere tourist to comment. And, I ask you please, not to attack me for my faith in God. See you soon!
Paul Plante says
What a very nice post.
Servenet says
Indeed, you seem a nice person, but naive, and, no doubt, willfully so. The nation is in steep decline and that for many reasons, the overwhelming decline of the White population with an attendant and vicious assault from all quarters against the historic, founding peoples being a salient one. And this article reflects this hostile disposition. Pleasant and mere placid remarks do not address or realistically respond to the reality that is rotting the foundations of this present ¨husk¨ of a ¨country.¨ My response to your comment will be resented (to put it mildly). For the Truth hurts, and few will abide it.
Paul Plante says
Servenet is a Russian Bot.
Servenet says
Correct.
Paul Plante says
And I think that it is a testimonial on just how strong our Republic is in this country, or perhaps it should be a testimonial to how strong those of us who still believe in our Republic are, as opposed to the spineless Democrats who run scared and confused by Russian Bots, that we can have you in here among us, Servenet, without it making us quake or tremble or be misled or confused by obvious Russian disinformation that is intended to destroy our Republic so that the Democrats can then come into power to usher in socialism as the next step in making the United States of America part of the global Communist collective.
Servenet says
You are naive, my friend, and badly misled. America is marked for death, for many reasons which I could easily enumerate and perhaps one in particular that strongly occurs to me. It is a wicked land and increasing in the same daily. Too much comfort remains to the majority however, but in a short time such will fly away. Not a prophet, and fallible, but one doesn´t need to divine to see the patently obvious.
Paul Plante says
I’m a combat veteran of the VEET NAM war, Servenet, the “Great Shining Lie,” as it was known, so I am hardly naive, and since I don’t follow anyone, I am not misled and what you are saying is something I have been aware of for fifty years now, perhaps longer than you have been born.
As the rebel Jesus once said: “When evening comes, you say, ‘The weather will be fair, for the sky is red,’ and in the morning, ‘Today it will be stormy, for the sky is red and overcast.’”
“You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but not the signs of the times!”
“A wicked and adulterous generation demands a sign, but none will be given it except the sign of Jonah.”
Then He left them and went away.
And anyway, Servenet, never fear, because the Commies are waiting in the wings over here to usher in socialism as they transform us into a Russian satellite as part of global or universal Communism, and then, everything will finally be right with the world, and we’ll be calling each other comrade, or people like yourself Gospodin, and peace and love will reign through the land because the KGB will have it no other way.
Mary Knight says
Paul Plante and Servenet are the same cellar-dwelling troll with multiple fake accounts.
Paul Plante says
You seem like a very nice person, Mary Knight, even if you have no idea whatsoever as to what you are talking about.
And I hope you have yourself a real glorious day because you do seem like such a nice person.
Servenet says
¨Commie/comrade, etc.¨
Hilarious…I´m Alt Right and an evangelical. Probably doesn´t translate into, uh…¨commie.¨
Paul Plante says
You’re presenting us with a contradiction in terms there, Servenet, and for the record, whoever Servenet might be, Servenet clearly is not me, because an evangelical cannot really be alt-right, what ever that silly-sounding term might mean, and while you are here with us, perhaps you would deign to edify us as to what the term means when applied to you, which would be a public service either way, given that so many people in America are totally convinced the term alt-right means lacking brains in the head, which is something you could clear up for us in here, if you would be so kind as to do so.
As an aside, I find it interesting that a Russian Bot would claim to be an Evangelical, I thought they were all atheists over there with Communism as their religion, like it is with some people over here but I digress.
Getting back on the topic of Gospodin Servenet being both Alt-Right, whatever that silly term means, and an Evangelical, another amorphous word, there is an interesting article on the topic from the Berkley Center at Georgetown University here in America entitled “How Does Conservative Evangelicalism Engage Alt-Right Views?” by Melani McAlister on November 5, 2018, where we have as follows, to wit:
The official representatives of American evangelicalism have been almost uniformly opposed to the Alt-Right—issuing statements, condemnations, and disavowals.
Since the alt-right protest in Charlottesville in 2017, in which one counter-protester was killed, Christianity Today, for example, has had a drumbeat of denunciations of the alt-right, with interviews and opinion from Christian commentators, both people of color and white, who have expressed themselves as appalled in every way.
The Gospel Coalition has also repeatedly condemned the alt-right, with long articles explaining what is wrong with its theology, its politics, and its reasoning.
Indeed, months before Charlottesville, in June 2017, the Southern Baptist Convention passed a resolution condemning the alt-right — although this only happened after the resolution had initially died in committee.
end quotes
You see what I am presenting there, Gospodin Servenet?
If you are really Alt-Right, to the Evangelicals, you are radioactive.
But hey, Gospodin Servenet, you sound like you are an intellectual, so let’s explore the topic further, shall we, by going back to see where that essay from Georgetown University might take us, to wit:
But the issue is more complicated, and understanding it requires more than attending to the statements of evangelical leaders.
To unpack how the alt-right’s virulently racist politics might seem plausible to white evangelical Christians whose leadership is busily denouncing those very views, we need to understand the development of anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim stances that are common today among white evangelicals.
(Of course, not all evangelicals are white, and the percentage of evangelicals of color is going up, but I focus on white evangelicals here.)
If we want to unpack the racial politics of conservative white evangelicals, we need to understand more about what Paul Harvey has described as the “folk theology” of race and identity.
Harvey was referring to the theological arguments that undergirded support for segregation among white American Christians in the mid-century twentieth century, such as the specious notion of the “curse of Ham,” but his approach to the ordinary theologies of race is useful for understanding the appeal of the alt-right today.
end quotes
So where is it, Gospodin Servenet, that you are coming down in that debate?
How does your Evangelical side, say your right brain, reconcile itself with the virulently racist politics of your Alt-Right side, say your left brain?
Servenet says
While you are a civil man, you are also but another example of a Westerner (read that white man) who has been profoundly intellectually/psychologically controlled by the Hive – essentially all those institutions who possess vast propagandistic capacity – the legacy media, the ¨Church,¨ the academy, government on all levels, etc. The Lie has great potential to capture and swallow whole nations while the Truth is generally abhorred for it is synonymous with Light and … all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light. [And] …men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. To abbreviate what could readily become a long discursive in response to your query, I will only say that your have believed the ¨orthodox,¨ the ¨official,” the ¨approved¨ narrative which dupes and controls the masses. All the sources, those institutions and their narratives of anti-Alt Right hasbara, that you cite are profoundly mendacious, Satanically so, including those wretched ¨Christian¨ institutions to which you allude. And let me just add that what they broadcast is utterly without foundation and contradicts settled historical fact. As to what I mean by identifying as Alt Right I could just as well have said I was a White Nationalist. As were the founding European peoples of America who were also CHRISTIAN to the degree of 100% (99% Protestant, 1% RC):
Naturalization Act of 1790 –
“An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (March 26, 1790).
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free WHITE PERSON, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the States wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least, and making proof to the satisfaction of such Court that he is a person of good character, and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law to support the Constitution of the United States….
Paul Plante says
Servenet, dude, that was over 200 years ago now that any of that happened.
This is over 200 years later, and the times are no longer the same as they were then.
And those white men back then were largely Anglo-Saxons who did not have a lot of tolerance for other nationalities.
Who wants to go backwards to that time.
Not me, anyway, and what are you going to do with all these non-white people who live in this country today who were born here and thus, according to that same Constitution, are as much a citizen as are you?
Just curious is all.
You can be all the white nationalist you want to be, it is a free country, but I think you are just spitting in the wind with your desire to have this be a whites-only nation.
Servenet says
Actually there were more ethnic Germans here than Englishman at that time. So your first ¨objection¨ is just silly. More significantly you ignored the brutal FACT…that those ¨Americans¨ were STRICTLY WHITE…legally, constitutionally. Your current notions of the ethical are just that – current. And they are groundless, nay, they are death-dealing. America is dying before your very eyes, but you have been gas-lit by the controllers and thus (apparently) beyond the ability to ¨see.¨ And, certainly, you are not alone. For if a critical mass of Whites were as psychologically determined as am I…you may know of a certainty that whatever it takes to secure a nation of, by, and for a European people (WHITE people)…it would be done. God alone disallowing it, if He so purposed.
Paul Plante says
Servenet, dude, what you are calling “Englishmen” were in fact Anglo-Saxons, and the Anglo-Saxons were in fact Germans.
The English kings George I, George II and George III were Germans, which is why there were Germans over here back when.
And if you recall from the Declaration of Independence where it says “He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation,” those foreign mercenaries were Germans from Hesse and Brunswick who were cousins to the English, effectively one people living on two different land masses.
As to the relative numbers of Germans here at the time of the American Revolution, we have this from a review of American history, to wit:
1790 – By this date as many as 100,000 Germans may have immigrated to America; they and their descendants made up an estimated 8.6 percent of the population of the United States; in Pennsylvania they accounted for 33 percent of the population; in Maryland for 12 percent.
end quotes
That would seem to poke a hole in your theory, would it not?
Servenet says
LARGEST ANCESTRY GROUPS IN US (US Census)
*GERMAN*
Black/African American
Irish
Mexican
English
But it is irrelevant and you continue to ignore THOSE THINGS THAT ARE VITAL AND EVEN EXISTENTIAL Which is a very sad Boomer trait. I really have nothing more to add in this exchange and you are impervious to any reasonable argument. But I wish you good luck even so.
Paul Plante says
Servenet, dude, I am what is known as a “Seventy-Sixer,” as in “Spirit of ’76,” where ’76 refers to the year 1776, the year the United States of America came into being, so my current notions of the ethical are hardly current, and are in fact quite old.
What characterizes a “Seventy-Sixer” like myself is an adherence to these words from the founding document of the United States of America, to wit:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
end quotes
That, my friend, is what makes me an American – that belief.
And the phrase “all men” does not mean just white men as you would have it be with your more modern interpretation of that phrase.
Paul Plante says
You say, Servenet, that if a critical mass of Whites were as psychologically determined as you are, that I would know of a certainty that whatever it takes to secure a nation of, by, and for a European people (WHITE people)…it would be done, God alone disallowing it, if He so purposed.
All well and good, but the reality is that white people are not as psychologically determined as you are to secure a nation of, by, and for a European people (WHITE people), so that you represent a very small minority of people in this country who share your views, which has many thinking that it is indeed God alone disallowing it.
And your main problem is that while you freely assert that America is only for white people, no where can you find anything that supports that premise, while I can point to many of the founding fathers who say different, and here I will point to Virginia’s own James Madison in FEDERALIST No. 42, The Powers Conferred by the Constitution Further Considered, from the New York Packet to the People of the State of New York on Tuesday, January 22, 1788, to wit:
It were doubtless to be wished, that the power of prohibiting the importation of slaves had not been postponed until the year 1808, or rather that it had been suffered to have immediate operation.
But it is not difficult to account, either for this restriction on the general government, or for the manner in which the whole clause is expressed.
It ought to be considered as a great point gained in favor of humanity, that a period of twenty years may terminate forever, within these States, a traffic which has so long and so loudly upbraided the barbarism of modern policy; that within that period, it will receive a considerable discouragement from the federal government, and may be totally abolished, by a concurrence of the few States which continue the unnatural traffic, in the prohibitory example which has been given by so great a majority of the Union.
Happy would it be for the unfortunate Africans, if an equal prospect lay before them of being redeemed from the oppressions of their European brethren!
Attempts have been made to pervert this clause into an objection against the Constitution, by representing it on one side as a criminal toleration of an illicit practice, and on another as calculated to prevent voluntary and beneficial emigrations from Europe to America.
I mention these misconstructions, not with a view to give them an answer, for they deserve none, but as specimens of the manner and spirit in which some have thought fit to conduct their opposition to the proposed government.
end quotes
There is where the wheels come off your train, Servenet, and that is why your movement is such a small movement, and will remain so, because too many people, Servenet, realize that that is where you want to take us back to, and they don’t want to make the trip!
I’m one of them.
Servenet says
You are transparent in your desperation to deny the historical reality that America was founded by and for White people. Quoting Madison´s approval of the eventual termination of the slave trade within the incipient nation has nothing to do with the racial nature of the nation´s founding and the Founders´ intention that it be a nation of WHITE CITIZENRY. Whose political, social, and cultural ethos were to be under the hegemonic control of that White citizenry. To disapprove of slavery does not translate into a perverse and irrational desire for a raceless, nationless polyglot boarding house (as per an FDR expression). I would certainly myself have earnestly desired its cessation as the very fact of importing non-Whites into the nation would existentially endanger it as only the purblind would not see. And now we do see the utterly ruinous result. The nation (which is a contradiction in terms) is a mad-house in fatal decline. I cited the most fundamental statement for A RACIALLY BASED AMERICA that one could possibly allude to – the Naturalization Act of 1790. But that is not good enough for you because NOTHING ever could satisfy an ideologue. Of course, the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1924 also explicitly addressed the intention of maintaining the racial makeup of the nation as an essentially European people. It was certainly expected by then that the 10% black population would remain, as the earlier desire of many after the Civil War, including Abraham Lincoln, to send them back to the African continent, languished. Beyond what I have said thus far, there will be nothing more.
Paul Plante says
Memo to Servenet: I am hardly “desperate” to deny the historical reality that America was founded by WHITE PEOPLE, precisely because the people in the original 13 British colonies, which hugged the Eastern seaboard of the continent, and which became the original 13 sovereign states that formed the “United States” of America, were English, which is to say, people deemed to have skin that is not black, yellow, brown or red.
If that makes them “WHITE MEN,” so be it.
That they were British is made incandescently clear from this language from the Declaration of Independence, to wit:
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren.
We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us.
We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here.
We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence.
They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity.
We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
end quotes
So, yes, Servenet, the Englishmen who rebelled against the English king in 1776 had white skin.
Nobody in their right mind would try to deny that, since it is a historical fact.
What is not a historical fact is that “America was founded for White people.”
What became America was founded as a bunch of separate colonies for the purpose of enriching the Mother country, while at the same time giving England a place to have penal colonies, to get the criminals out of England.
The original colonists in many cases were little better than slaves themselves, white skin notwithstanding.
Penal colonies are settlements used to exile prisoners and separate them from the general population by placing them in a remote location, often a distant colonial territory like America was back then.
According to our own history, which used to be common knowledge among grade school children up here where I am, the British used colonial North America as a penal colony through a system of indentured servitude.
Merchants would transport the convicts and auction them off (for example) to plantation owners upon arrival in the colonies.
It is estimated that some 50,000 British convicts were sent to colonial America and the majority landed in the Chesapeake Colonies of Maryland and Virginia.
Transported convicts represented perhaps one-quarter of all British emigrants during the 18th century.
The colony of Georgia, for example, was first founded by James Edward Oglethorpe who originally intended to use prisoners taken largely from debtors’ prison, creating a “Debtor’s Colony,” where the prisoners could learn trades and work off their debts.
The British and earlier English would often ship rebellious Irish and Welsh to the Americas, or Scottish prisoners of war during the ensuing Wars of the Three Kingdoms and Third English Civil War but these were sent mostly to Maryland and Virginia, not Georgia.
When that avenue closed in the 1780s after the American Revolution, Britain began using parts of what is now known as Australia as penal settlements.
end quotes
So there is what “America” was founded for, Servenet, which runs counter to your argument, does it not?
As an aside, this isn’t some kind of weird FBI sting, is it – the FBI trolling the Cape Charles Mirror looking to snag themselves some white supremacists lurking around Cape Charles with a plot to take over America and expel everybody who is not certified white?
Paul Plante says
As to America being founded for white Europeans, I would counter with this excerpt from “A Foreign Spectator XXVIII” by Nicholas Collin in the Independent Gazetteer on September 28, 1787, as follows:
The many needy adventurers, bad characters, and low bred wretches, that flock hither from European countries, cannot but give unfavorable ideas; but it is wrong to judge from these; and happier would America be without this scum of the earth.
end quote
In his Notes on Virginia, written in the early 1780s, Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, stated thusly as to why people were being brought here, and there he is talking specifically about Virginia, as follows:
Population
The following table shews the number of persons imported for the establishment of our colony in its infant state, and the census of inhabitants at different periods, extracted from our historians and public records, as particularly as I have had opportunities and leisure to examine them.
Successive lines in the same year shew successive periods of time in that year.
end quotes
Focus on the words “persons imported for the establishment of our colony.”
Those people were hardly free, being subjects of a king as opposed to citizens of a Republic, and many of those people had no concept whatsoever of what Republicanism or democracy meant, as they had neither, themselves, being subjects of an English king who could do with them what he will.
So “America” was not founded for white Europeans as some kind of paradise where only white skinned people could live.
Getting back to Thomas Jefferson, who probably had as good an idea as anybody back then as to what was actually going on, as opposed to what “Baxter’s Brief History of America in One-and-a-Half Pages” that people used to find in a little cellophane wrapper in a CrackerJax box says what was going on, we have:
Here I will beg leave to propose a doubt.
The present desire of America is to produce rapid population by as great importations of foreigners as possible.
end quotes
I for one take Thomas Jefferson at this word in that sentence about the desire of America in 1780, ten years before the United States Congress passed “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” on March 26, 1790, was to produce rapid population by as great importations of foreigners as possible.
Those people weren’t being invited over to some Nirvana for white-skinned Europeans – they were being brought over here to work, and work hard, because in 1780, America was largely a wilderness.
Getting back to Thomas Jefferson:
But is this founded in good policy?
The advantage proposed is the multiplication of numbers.
But are there no inconveniences to be thrown into the scale against the advantage expected from a multiplication of numbers by the importation of foreigners?
It is for the happiness of those united in society to harmonize as much as possible in matters which they must of necessity transact together.
Civil government being the sole object of forming societies, its administration must be conducted by common consent.
Every species of government has its specific principles.
Ours perhaps are more peculiar than those of any other in the universe.
end quotes
BINGO, Tom, except you know what, Tom, today, nobody save a handful are aware of those principles which made us unique in your day, and because you owned slaves, Tom, today, you are persona non grata and nobody cares a fig for what you said back then, because that America is long since dead along with yourself.
Getting back to Tom and what he thought the specific principles of our government were when it was founded:
It is a composition of the freest principles of the English constitution, with others derived from natural right and natural reason.
To these nothing can be more opposed than the maxims of absolute monarchies.
Yet, from such, we are to expect the greatest number of emigrants.
They will bring with them the principles of the governments they leave, imbibed in their early youth; or, if able to throw them off, it will be in exchange for an unbounded licentiousness, passing, as is usual, from one extreme to another.
It would be a miracle were they to stop precisely at the point of temperate liberty.
These principles, with their language, they will transmit to their children.
In proportion to their numbers, they will share with us the legislation.
They will infuse into it their spirit, warp and bias its direction, and render it a heterogeneous, incoherent, distracted mass.
end quotes
He is talking about WHITE Europeans there, and with good and sound reason, because in 1780, “America” was a small and weak nation that was ridiculed by the Europeans, who did not want Republican government to survive, precisely because it was a threat to monarchy, which is all those people being imported from Europe knew.
So America was facing a quandary, as Tom tells us as follows:
I may appeal to experience, during the present contest, for a verification of these conjectures.
But, if they be not certain in event, are they not possible, are they not probable?
Is it not safer to wait with patience 27 years and three months longer, for the attainment of any degree of population desired, or expected?
May not our government be more homogeneous, more peaceable, more durable?
Suppose 20 millions of republican Americans thrown all of a sudden into France, what would be the condition of that kingdom?
If it would be more turbulent, less happy, less strong, we may believe that the addition of half a million of foreigners to our present numbers would produce a similar effect here.
If they come of themselves, they are entitled to all the rights of citizenship: but I doubt the expediency of inviting them by extraordinary encouragements.
I mean not that these doubts should be extended to the importation of useful artificers.
The policy of that measure depends on very different considerations.
Spare no expence in obtaining them.
They will after a while go to the plough and the hoe; but, in the mean time, they will teach us something we do not know.
It is not so in agriculture.
The indifferent state of that among us does not proceed from a want of knowledge merely; it is from our having such quantities of land to waste as we please.
In Europe the object is to make the most of their land, labour being abundant: here it is to make the most of our labour, land being abundant.
end quotes
Now, here it is very important to understand that the federal government of the United States of America pursuant to our Constitution did not come into existence until 1789, nine years after Tom Jefferson wrote these words about importing Europeans to America to build up our labor force, and at that time, pursuant to these words from the Declaration of Independence in 1776, Virginia was a Free and Independent State with full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do, including having control over who passed its borders, and who became its citizens, just as was the case with the Republic of Rome some 2,000 years, before.
As to slavery in 1780, from his own words, despite him owning slaves that he inherited, Tom was very much against the institution, as follows:
Under the mild treatment our slaves experience, and their wholesome, though coarse, food, this blot in our country increases as fast, or faster, than the whites.
During the regal government, we had at one time obtained a law, which imposed such a duty on the importation of slaves, as amounted nearly to a prohibition, when one inconsiderate assembly, placed under a peculiarity of circumstance, repealed the law.
This repeal met a joyful sanction from the then sovereign, and no devices, no expedients, which could ever after be attempted by subsequent assemblies, and they seldom met without attempting them, could succeed in getting the royal assent to a renewal of the duty.
end quotes
There he is talking about colonial government in British-held America when the King in England was the law of the land.
Tom then continued as follows, to wit:
In the very first session held under the republican government, the assembly passed a law for the perpetual prohibition of the importation of slaves.
This will in some measure stop the increase of this great political and moral evil, while the minds of our citizens may be ripening for a complete emancipation of human nature.
end quotes
Except as we can clearly see here 239 years later, that ripening of the minds of our citizens for a complete emancipation of human nature never happened because people in America are incapable of thinking that all are created equal.
Paul Plante says
Servenet, dude, you must be young is all I can say when you tell me that I, a VEET NAM veteran, are but another example of a Westerner (read that white man) who has been profoundly intellectually/psychologically controlled by the Hive – essentially all those institutions who possess vast propagandistic capacity – the legacy media, the ¨Church,¨ the academy, government on all levels, etc, which serves to prove you don’t know much about VEET NAM veterans, at all.
If that was ever true, and I don’t believe it ever was, it certainly was no longer once I got to VEET NAM and came face to face with the fact that the GREAT SHINING LIE has great potential to capture and swallow whole nations while the Truth is generally abhorred for it is synonymous with Light.
And you are way off base when you say I have believed the ¨orthodox,¨ the ¨official,” the ¨approved¨ narrative which dupes and controls the masses.
My days of being “duped,” Servenet, are long since passed!
Yes, back in 1967, some fifty-two years ago now, I, like many Americans was duped, that I must admit!
But as the song once said, Servenet, “won’t get fooled again!”
And look at yourself, Servenet, quoting from an act of Congress on March 26, 1790 enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, as if that meant anything at all 229 years later in 2019.
Acts of Congress are merely that, Servenet, and what one Congress does, another can undo, because acts of Congress are merely laws, and they may not even be constitutional, because the fact that Congress makes a law does not in turn make the law constitutional.
If you are basing your white nationalism on that, Servenet, it is indeed a very weak straw to make a bridge out of.
just saying.
Boot Lamb says
You can not decide for others what groups of people that other groups of people love or hate.
Only a fool would try.
Paul Plante says
And as to “securing a nation of, by, and for a European people (WHITE people),” Servenet, there already is one in Europe, and it is called the European Union.
As for a nation of, by and for a European people over here, get real, dude!
My forebears left the nation of Europeans over in Europe where they belong and went to the stone city of Quebec, Canada in 1648 to get the hell away from those European people and their endless wars and conquests that brought misery to the common folks like my forebears who left there to come over here to live among the Indians for some peace and quiet, and they were not alone.
They came here to get away from a nation of European people, so who in their right mind wants to re-create a nation of European people over here?
That don’t make sense at all.
Paul Plante says
As to it being WHITE Europeans who have no concept of what Republican government really means in practice who have caused the large part of the problems in our society Servenet is bemoaning today, long after it is too late, I refer back in time to 1866 and CHAPTER XIV of The American Republic by Orestes Brownson, entitled POLITICAL TENDENCIES, where we have as follows, to wit:
The migration of foreigners hither has added largely to the national population, and to the national wealth and resources, but less, perhaps, to the development of patriotism, the purity of elections, or the wisdom and integrity of the government.
It is impossible that there should be perfect harmony between the national territorial democracy and individuals born, brought up, and formed under a political order in many respects widely different from it; and there is no doubt that the democracy, in its objectionable sense, has been greatly strengthened by the large infusion of naturalized citizens.
end quotes
And it is that “democracy in its objectionable sense” caused by the importation of WHITE Europeans to this country that has caused the problems today that Servenet now laments.
Servenet says
Lol, you reveal yourself…finally. That you are merely an anti-White and ridiculous bloviator. And your quoting obscure and impertinent personages is truly pathetic. Age has added nothing to you but mere years.
Paul Plante says
Hey, Servenet, good to see you, dude!
Let me tell you, this is one of the most fascinating conversations I have been in, in here, and I am sincere in that, because certainly, your side deserves a good public hearing, which you are giving it.
And while I got you on the line, and by the way, I am not anti-white, because I happen to be white myself, @ July 3, 2019 at 9:45 am, you posted as follows:
LARGEST ANCESTRY GROUPS IN US (US Census)
*GERMAN*
Black/African American
Irish
Mexican
English
end quotes
Are you saying that the United States were really founded by Germans?
Certainly there were Germans over here at the time of the Revolution, but those Germans were not in charge of anything.
So the point you were trying to make there eludes me.
Paul Plante says
And Servenet, dude, getting back to yours of July 3, 2019 at 9:45 am where you told me in no uncertain terms (that’s alright, because I am for straight talk, as opposed to the elliptical the practiced flannel-mouthed bloviators use) that in your opinion as an Alt-Right, or white nationalist, I continue to ignore THOSE THINGS THAT ARE VITAL AND EVEN EXISTENTIAL Which is a very sad Boomer trait, which is totally untrue, Servenet, precisely because if something is truly existential (if something is existential, it has to do with human existence), I don’t think it is humanly possible to ignore it without being brain-dead, you know what I am saying?
Look at the logic of it, dude, and you’ll see where it is that I am coming from.
And dude, I am truly hurt that you think I am impervious to any reasonable argument, when that is far from the case.
And I haven’t “revealed” myself, dude, because I was never hidden in the first place.
And Servenet, really, dude, “bloviate” these days is such an overworked word that has become meaningless thanks to incorrect overuse by the mindless motor mouth Rush Limbo and all the Rush Limbo wannabees that have cropped up out there on “conservative radio.” like a bunch of parrots all singing the same mindless song, over and over and over again.
To help you out here, because you are polite, which I like in a debating partner, according to Wikipedia, and this is something you can always research and verify independently for yourself, bloviation is a style of empty, pompous political speech popularized by United States President Warren G. Harding, who, himself a master of the technique, described it as “the art of speaking for as long as the occasion warrants, and saying nothing”.
That, Servenet, is the proper usage of the term “bloviate,” a form of empty, pompous political speech which employs the art of speaking for as long as the occasion warrants, and saying nothing, which is exactly what Rush Limbo does on his radio shows.
And what was up with the suitcase full of Viagra that time?
Getting back to the subject of bloviation in this on-line tutorial I have prepared for you to help ypu out on this ubject, which is a bit complicated go understand, what with all those syllables in there, the verb “to bloviate” is the act of creating bloviation.
In terms of its etymology, according to one source, the word is a “compound of blow, in its sense of ‘to boast’ (also in another typical Americanism, blowhard), with a mock-Latin ending to give it the self-important stature implicit in its meaning.”
As to its origin, “bloviation” in Ohio originally meant idle chatter and when used to refer to a form of political speech, it appears in the Debates and Proceedings of the Convention for the Revision of the Constitution of the State of Ohio in the mid 19th century.
Given all of that, Servenet, it is both incandescently and patently clear that I being a blunt straight-talker myself, I am not a bloviator, and I am happy to have had the opportunity to educate yourself on the subject and thereby make the world a little bit better place for both of us.
Servenet says
Good luck to you, friend.
Paul Plante says
As to “democracy in its objectionable sense,” which is what we are having inflicted upon us in this country today, it is best described in what is now known as the First Speech of June 21 of Alexander Hamilton to the New York Ratifying Convention in Poughkeepsie, New York on June 21, 1788, as follows:
It has been observed by an honorable gentleman, that a pure democracy, if it were practicable, would be the most perfect government.
Experience has proved, that no position in politics is more false than this.
The ancient democracies, in which the people themselves deliberated, never possessed one feature of good government.
Their very character was tryanny; their figure deformity: When they assembled, the field of debate presented an ungovernable mob, not only incapable of deliberation, but prepared for every enormity.
In these assemblies, the enemies of the people brought forward their plans of ambition systematically.
They were opposed by their enemies of another party; and it became a matter of contingency, whether the people subjected themselves to be led blindly by one tyrant or by another.
end quotes
And there is exactly where we are today min this country, and history has shown that from that point on, once reached, democracy, an unstable form of government, dies, to be replaced by chaos and anarchy.
So strap your seatbelts tight, for the ride ahead might be a rough one.
Paul Plante says
And here I hate to pass up on an opportunity that Servenet presented us above here with respect to the Federal naturalization law of 1790, entitled “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (March 26, 1790), which law was repealed just five years later, and which act read as follows:
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in
Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the
limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted tobecome a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the
States wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least, and making proof to the
satisfaction of such Court that he is a person of good character, and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law to support the Constitution of the United States, which Oath or Affirmation suchCourt shall administer, and the Clerk of such Court shall record such Application, and the
proceedings thereon; and thereupon such person shall be considered as a Citizen of the United
States.
And the children of such person so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under the
age of twenty one years at the time of such naturalization, shall also be considered as citizens of
the United States.
And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens: Provided, that the right of
citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United
States: Provided also, that no person heretofore proscribed by any States, shall be admitted a
citizen as aforesaid, except by an Act of the Legislature of the State in which such person was
proscribed.
end quotes
Now, Servenet would have us believe, based on that wording, that the United States of America was intended to be only for white Europeans, which position I dispute based on my own studies of American history, and here, I must say that when young, I was taught, or had instilled in me, the belief that simply looking at some words like those above is not enough; rather one must go beyond the words to the times in which the words were written to discern the purpose for which the words were written, and in this case of the Immigration Law of 1790, that is quite easily done, thanks to Al Gore’s gift to the American people of the internet and Densho Encyclopedia, to wit:
Naturalization Act of 1790
Upon declaring independence from Great Britain, the leaders of the new republic aspired to create a distinct American nationality and minimize the risk of another monarchy.
end quotes
Purpose, people, is everything!
The Naturalization Act of 1790 was not to make the United States of America into a “white nation.”
To the contrary, it was a bid by the founding fathers to protect something that was then unique on the face of the earth, and that was REPUBLICAN government, a form of government that monarchs in Europe were very much against, and the subjects of those monarchs in Europe had no real understanding of Republican government.
Why weren’t the Native Americans made citizens of the United States?
Simple because they already had their own nations on the soil of this country.
Why weren’t the slaves made citizens?
Because they were slaves is that answer, and slaves historically, whether in our time we like it or not, were never citizens.
Getting back to the 1790 Naturalization Act, we have:
The Naturalization Act of 1790 set the criteria for naturalization to two years of residency, proof of good moral character, and an oath to support the Constitution.
It also mandated that one must “absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to every foreign Prince, Potentate, State or Sovereignty.”
end quotes
In other words, or in plain and simple words, if one wanted to be an American back then, they had to swear to stop being a European, which pretty much shoots the argument that the United States was formed for white Europeans right in the head.
Servenet says
Nothing more ¨human¨ or common than a person´s violating the most fundamental law of logic – the law of non-contradiction – because he can´t bear the truth. You´re making a fool of yourself Paul, old boy. Much better you just admit you disagree with/dislike the Founder´s view on race and and disapprove that they CIRCUMSCRIBED AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP TO BE THAT OF **¨FREE WHITE PERSON[S]…OF GOOD CHARACTER.¨** – BECAUSE THOSE WERE THE ONLY ONES WHO ***WERE*** CITIZENS OF THE NEW NATION – until after the debacle of 1861 – 65. It is a demonstration of weak character itself to despise the truth and worse…to lie to oneself about it and worse still…to embarrass oneself in attempting to lie to others as well. You only show yourself to be a fool in the eyes of others who may be merely honest themselves.
Stuart Bell says
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when liberal men are afraid of the light.
Paul Plante says
I don’t think there are any liberal men in this part of the conversation, however, unless you are referring to Servenet, and on that note, the founding fathers, those who actually stepped up to the plate and fought the Brits and beat them were liberals, and they were not afraid of the light, at all.
The conservatives back then were the Tories who were for the King.
Just think what would have happened, Stuart Bell, if the conservatives back then has won and the liberals lost the struggle – we’d still be tugging the forelock and bending the knee to a foreign despot and tyrant and your U.S. Marines would be the Royal Marines, instead.
Paul Plante says
You know what is most interesting here, Stuart Bell – the posts that Servenet makes on this subject, and especially the obloquy, and virtually identical to and indistinguishable from the posts that hard-core, self-professed LIBERALS make on the same subject, especially when they get all freaked out when presented with the actual facts of the matter, which they are both in denial of, in order to maintain their “cause” long after their “cause” has been proven to be pure bull****.
The LIBERALS use the exact same arguments Servenet uses, including this 1790 NATURALIZATION LAW Servent has hung his hat on, as if that law were worth the paper it was written on, to make their case about the need for reparations for the black folks on the grounds that before the Civil War, every single black person in this country was a slave with no rights whatsoever, YADA YADA YADA, same as Servenet, and it is impossible, just as it is with Servenet, to tell them any different.
Interesting, isn’t it?
Paul Plante says
Servenet, dude, let me first say that it is a pleasure on my part to have someone like yourself to debate with who remains polite and in control of their emotions, especially when the facts are going against them, as they are in here, which so many people in this country today are totally incapable of doing.
And with that said, let us drop back to 1790, and look again at the actual and specific language of the Naturalization Act of 1790, to wit:
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in
Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the
limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted tobecome a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the
States wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least, and making proof to the
satisfaction of such Court that he is a person of good character, and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law to support the Constitution of the United States, which Oath or Affirmation suchCourt shall administer, and the Clerk of such Court shall record such Application, and the
proceedings thereon; and thereupon such person shall be considered as a Citizen of the United
States.
end quotes
Now, several things pop out at us here, Servenet, and by the way, my views on naturalization in 1790 are entirely consistent with the views of the founders on that subject back when – if an “alien,” i.s. someone who is not a citizen, which is what “naturalization” is all about, wants to become a citizen (legally recognized subject or national of a state or commonwealth, either native or naturalized) of our Republic, then yes, Servenet, they should have to make proof that he is a person of good character, and you know what, Servenet, there is where it all went to hell in a handbasket as that old saying goes, precisely because the people already here were in many cases not of good character themselves, and they thought it very undemocratic to have a Republic that was only for people of good moral character when they themselves weren’t and did not want to be, and so we ended up with a democracy, instead, where criminals and murderers and rapists are as equal as everybody else, and should have the same rights as people who aren’t criminals.
For those unfamiliar with what may be a subtle difference, naturalization is the process by which U.S. citizenship is granted to a foreign citizen or national after he or she fulfills the requirements established by Congress, and that is what we are talking about here – the NATURALIZATION of aliens after the adoption of Constitutional government in this country in 1789
And that act was hardly intended to make this a nation for white Europeans, as Servenet would argue.
That it was intended to be exclusionary can readily be see by referring to “An act to establish an uniform rule of Naturalization; and to repeal the act heretofore passed
on that subject” (January 29, 1795), as follows:
Provided also, That no person heretofore proscribed by any state, or who has been legally convicted of having joined the army of Great Britain during the
late war, shall be admitted a citizen as foresaid, without the consent of the legislature of the state,
in which such person was proscribed.
end quotes
So, if you were as white as white can possibly be, and you were born here before the Declaration of Independence, and you were for King and Country, i.e. a “loyalist,” or Tory, as many were back then, and you joined the Brits to help put down the Revolution, as so many did, despite the fact of you being born here and as white as white can be, because you fought for the wrong side, you could not claim American citizenship after the War of Revolution was over, and you really were n0t welcome here, either.
So much for America being for the white dudes.
What a fallacy.
And before 1789, you were not a United States citizen simply because you were born here with white skin.
In fact, and this is grade school American history, you were a citizen of the state you resided in, because there was no such thing as the United States of America before 1789 that you could be a citizen of.
If you were in Virginia, then you took an oath of allegiance to Virginia.
If you were in New York, your oath of allegiance was to that state, and so on.
Consider “A Republican I: To James Wilson, Esquire” on October 25, 1787, for example:
In forming our present confederation, it was declared, “that each state shall retain its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by that confederation expressly delegated to the United States in Congress assembled.”
end quotes
In 1787, there was not yet a “United States of America” as exists today, so it was a collection of 13 separate nations who agreed to belong to a confederation, which was a concept going back to the time of ancient Greece some 2500 years earlier.
And then consider “A Federalist Essay” from the Independent Gazetteer, Philadelphia, an early version of the Cape Charles Mirror, on October 25, 1787, to wit:
An idea of thirteen neighboring States being able to exist independent of each other, without a general government, to control, connect and unite the whole, is no less absurd than was the conduct of the limbs, in the fable, which refused to contribute to the support of the belly, and by working its downfall, accelerated their own ruin.
end quotes
In 1790, the “united” states of America were virtually at the point of collapse, as we clearly see from any of those essays written prior to the adoption of the Constitution, which is why they were looking to only naturalize (make new citizens) people of good moral character.
Being white and having fifty cents in your pocket back then bought you coffee, but it DID NOT make you into an American citizen.
To the contrary, you had to swear to support the constitution of the United States, something people born here today with skin as white as the driven snow DO NOT have to do, and many don’t; and then you had to absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign
prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty whatever, which all these hyphenated Americans of today DO NOT have to do, and then for a term of two years, you actually had to behave as a man of
good moral character, attached to the constitution of the United States, and well disposed to the
good order and happiness of the same.
So yes, that served to EXCLUDE a lot of white-skinned Europeans from citizenship in this country.
Paul Plante says
Servenet, dude, you and I obviously live in different centuries, which is something I am totally cool with, given that I was never given any type of control over the universe and the various directions it has developed in, and frankly, I am unable to fathom what points you are trying to make in here, if any.
Obviously, you are disappointed and upset with the direction this nation took after 1790, and that is your right to be upset, if that is what you wish to be.
As for me, where I am right now, it is the year 2019, not 1790, or 1861, and whatever direction things went in since then is IRREVERSIBLE, so as an older person who has been to war, and has experienced armed combat, and frankly is sick of that stupid ****, I don’t trouble myself with what happened before yesterday.
You want to live in a country that only has white people in it, to which I say good luck, keep looking and perhaps you will find it.
But here in the United States of America in 2019, the year I am presently living in, there are a lot of people lacking white skin who are on the land as landowners according to OUR laws in this nation, and I suspect that more than a few of those people will stand fast if you and your white nationalist horde come and try to push them out of this country the way the Irish tossed the Danes into the ocean off Dublin, a Viking town, back when.
You say, and it is again your right to think any which way you wish to think, that nothing more ¨human¨ or common than a person’s violating the most fundamental law of logic – the law of non-contradiction – because he can’t bear the truth.
But what truth, Servenet?
Is what you believe the “truth” because you heard some white nationalist spewing garbage about what the founders wanted or intended, as if the white nationalists you listen to knew what was in their heads so long ago?
Which founders is he listening to, then?
The ones he wants to hear, because at the time of this nation’s founding, there was NO SUCH THING as a common opinion, so for every founder you can quote, I can quote someone with an opposite opinion, and yet you will tell me that the ones I quote are really false Americans, while those you quote are the true Americans, and thus, that puts you in possession of the truth?
You say, “You’re making a fool of yourself Paul, old boy,” to which I reply, “oh, well!”
And what was the debacle of 1861 – 65, Servenet?
It was a war between two belief systems, was it not – state’s rights on the one side, versus unionists on the other?
The state’s rights crowd, southern Democrats, were for the theory of the right of a state to nullify acts of Congress, such as the naturalization act of 1790, as was made incandescently clear in the Webster-Hayne debate of 1830.
As to who has the right of things in here, this following is commentary concerning the Webster-Hayne debates as follows:
As seen in the Webster-Hayne debate, partisans of rival sections and philosophies of government confronted each other convinced of the legitimacy of their respective interests, the justness of their respective causes, and the correctness of their constitutional arguments.
end quotes
And there go you and I, Servenet, so tell me, on whose side does the truth really lie?
You then say, “It is a demonstration of weak character itself to despise the truth and worse…to lie to oneself about it and worse still…to embarrass oneself in attempting to lie to others as well.”
“You only show yourself to be a fool in the eyes of others who may be merely honest themselves.”
end quotes
Which reminds me of something Caesar said in his Letter II in the Daily Advertiser, New York, another early version of the Cape Charles Mirror, on October 17, 1787, as follows:
There are always men in society of some talents, but more ambition, in quest of that which it would be impossible for them to obtain in any other way than by working on the passions and prejudices of the less discerning classes of citizens and yeomanry.
It is the plan of men of this stamp to frighten the people with ideal bugbears, in order to mould them to their own purposes.
The unceasing cry of these designing croakers is, My friends, your liberty is invaded!
The misguided people never reflect during this frenzy, that the moment they become riotous, they renounce, from that moment, their independence, and commence vassals to their ambitious leaders, who instantly, and with a high hand, rob them of their consequence, and apply it to their own present or future aggrandizement; nor will these tyrants over the people stick at sacrificing their good, if an advantageous compromise can be effected for themselves.
end quotes
Is it the designing croakers that have your ear, Servenet?
Servenet says
It is as I said – a complete inability to defer to bona fide facts. And it´s VERY…common. Also –
…when the facts are going against them….
lol – cognitive dissonance on FULL DISPLAY.
Paul Plante says
Servenet, dude, you are persistent in your beliefs, as misguided as they may be, while I am very secure in mine, and the facts are these – before 1787, there were NO citizens of the United States of America, plain and simple, and you cannot have it be otherwise, unless you want to totally warp and twist American history into some incomprehensible and unrecognizable shape.
Then, in 1787, the Constitution defined citizenship as open to “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”
Now, you will notice that the Constitution, the law of the land that I live in, which is the United States of America, says NOTHING about having to be white to be a citizen of the United States, and the fact that the NATURALIZATION law of 1790 uses the phrase “white” really means nothing at all as to who could be a citizen of this country.
It only speaks to who could be NATURALIZED, or made into a citizen, after the fact.
And that law was repealed in 1795.
So you are the one with cognizant dissidence and no nail on which to hang your hat, but at least you are polite and courteous about it, which is a credit to your upbringing.
Now, getting back to actual American history, as opposed to contrived American history, yes, Servenet, it is true that a question much mooted before the Civil War was whether the term “citizen” could be held to include free Negroes, and in the Dred Scott case, which I am very surprised you did not quote, the Taney Court answered it in the negative.
”Citizens of each State,” Chief Justice Taney argued, meant citizens of the United States as understood at the time the Constitution was adopted, and Negroes were not then regarded as capable of citizenship, which is sort of the point that you seem to be trying to make in here in some 152 years later in 2019.
However, Servenet, in dissent, Justice Curtis, who was every bit as much as Supreme Court Justice as was Taney, who incidentally is one of the most reviled persons in this nation, not only denied the Chief Justice’s assertion that there were no Negro citizens of States in 1789 but further argued that while Congress alone could determine what classes of aliens should be naturalized, the several States retained the right to extend citizenship to classes of persons born within their borders who had not previously enjoyed citizenship and that one upon whom state citizenship was thus conferred became a citizen of the State in the full sense of the Constitution.
And in 1864, which is 155 years ago now, United States Attorney General Edward Bates tackled the issue of citizenship in connection with African-American members of the Union Army, finding that “free men of color” born on American soil were American.
Now, Servenet, perhaps you can come up with a legal argument of your own that shows how United States Attorney General Edward Bates was dead wrong with his opinion as United States Attorney General 155 years ago in 1864 that “free men of color” born on American soil were American, but to date, no such formal legal opinion from yourself has been forthcoming, so pardon me if for the moment, I stick with the opinion of United States Attorney General Edward Bates finding that “free men of color” born on American soil were American.
So the ball is now firmly back in your court, Servenet.
And the candid world that watches and waits is curious as to whether you will display a complete inability to defer to bona fide facts, and put your cognitive dissonance on full display, or will you finally make it into the 21st century with the rest of us who are already there?
Servenet says
…the fact that the NATURALIZATION law of 1790 uses the phrase “white” really means nothing at all as to who could be a citizen of this country.
Sorry. Paul old friend, but I have to dispense with the ¨Mr. Nice Guy¨ persona. That is to say – you really are an idiot. The above statement is so puerile, so utterly self-contradictory that even the leftists who have contributed to these comments simply could not deny (at least not in their own minds) that you´re just a doddering old fool of a Boomer – and so many of you…oy vey.
…Naturalization Act of 1790. The original United States Naturalization Law of March 26, 1790 (1 Stat. 103) provided the FIRST RULES to be followed by the UNITED STATES [Note to Paul – the ¨United States¨ is THIS…country. The one you are contributing to the comments section…in. Can´t be too helpful to Paul, here] in the *GRANTING OF NATIONAL CITIZENSHIP*. This law limited naturalization to immigrants who were free WHITE PERSONS of good character. – Wikipedia
Do you get that Paul, old boy? Of course you don´t, but the leftists at Wikipedia do. And so does any other person of average intelligence, both left and right. They don´t like it. But it is impossible for anyone but a fraud and/or a fool to deny the ABSOLUTELY PLAIN AND UNEQUIVOCAL LANGUAGE contained in the founding documents of this nation. If you were honest, and you are anything BUT, you would simply admit what the founding peoples and documents created and charge the Founders as being evil white racists…as leftists have little problem doing. But not old Paul, here. He wants to have his shitty cake and eat it too. The instauration of the Constitution of the US and the passage of the Naturalization Act of 1790 were a mere ONE YEAR AND NINE MONTHS separated. That is all Paul, my dishonest and dull friend. The fact that the Constitution did not so specify what the 1790 law DID…was deemed insufficient in its specificity – thus the near immediately effected 1790 law of the land. It wasn´t merely and only about immigrants/¨naturalization¨ – it was more fundamentally about WHO WAS AND COULD BECOME…A ***CITIZEN*** And remember now Paul, that the Nation DID NOT BY WAY OF CODE EVEN EXIST BEFORE THIS TIME. Otherwise the Constitution has little indeed to say about citizenship but, ¨The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.¨And as to who may be eligible to be President. Thus the need for a further and concrete legislative framing of the matter. So, of course, any notions of ¨citizenship”…before… is something of a non sequitur. This, of course, is so far from difficult to grasp that it is an utter absurdity to have to even engage this pitiful badinage. But that is enough of this pure nonsense. I really must TRY to ignore you at this juncture. Have a pleasant day.
Paul Plante says
Servenet, you are the DUDE of the moment, and that is a natural fact, and Servenet, I never hold someone’s lack of education against them, and that is something I wanted you to know.
And I know you are confused, and I feel your pain, which is why I am going out of my way to help give you the basic education as an American citizen that your school system sadly failed to give you when you were young.
With respect to that NATURALIZATION LAW of 1790 you keep citing, you are flogging the bejeesus out of a dead horse, because it says what it says, and nobody argues that it says anything different about who could be NATURALIZED in 1790.
And that is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT, which is something you are unable to fathom, because you don’t know and can not understand that there is a huge difference between someone born as a citizen versus someone naturalized as a citizen.
You seem to think that in 1790, everybody here had to be naturalized, which is ignorant horse****, and whoever taught you that hog crap should have their head examined, which takes us to the dissent of Supreme Court Justice Benjamin Robbins Curtis (November 4, 1809 – September 15, 1874), notable as one of the two dissenters in the Dred Scott decision, as follows:
The first section of the second article of the Constitution uses the language, ‘a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution.’
One mode of approaching this question is to inquire who were citizens of the United States at the
time of the adoption of the Constitution.
Citizens of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution can have been no otherthan citizens of the United States under the Confederation.
By the Articles of Confederation, a Government was organized, the style whereof was, ‘The United States of America.’
This Government was in existence when the Constitution was framed and proposed for adoption, and was to be superseded by the new Government of the United States of America, organized
under the Constitution.
When, therefore, the Constitution speaks of citizenship of the United States, existing at the time ofthe adoption of the Constitution, it must necessarily refer to citizenship under the Government
which existed prior to and at the time of such adoption.
Without going into any question concerning the powers of the Confederation to govern the
territory of the United States out of the limits of the States, and consequently to sustain the
relation of Government and citizen in respect to the inhabitants of such territory, it may safely be
said that the citizens of the several States were citizens of the United States under the
Confederation.
That Government was simply a confederacy of the several States, possessing a few defined powers over subjects of general concern, each State retaining every power, jurisdiction, and right, not
expressly delegated to the United States in Congress assembled.
And no power was thus delegated to the Government of the Confederation, to act on any question of citizenship, or to make any rules in respect thereto.
The whole matter was left to stand upon the action of the several States, and to the natural
consequence of such action, that the citizens of each State should be citizens of that Confederacy
into which that State had entered, the style whereof was, ‘The United States of America.’
To determine whether any free persons, descended from Africans held in slavery, were citizens of
the United States under the Confederation, and consequently at the time of the adoption of the
Constitution of the United States, it is only necessary to know whether any such persons were
citizens of either of the States under the Confederation, at the time of the adoption of the
Constitution.
Of this there can be no doubt.
At the time of the ratification of the Articles of Confederation, all free native-born inhabitants of the States of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, and North Carolina, though descended from African slaves, were not only
citizens of those States, but such of them as had the other necessary qualifications possessed the
franchise of electors, on equal terms with other citizens.
The Supreme Court of North Carolina, in the case of the State v. Manuel, (4 Dev. and Bat., 20,) hasdeclared the law of that State on this subject, in terms which I believe to be as sound law in the
other States I have enumerated, as it was in North Carolina.
‘According to the laws of this State,’ says Judge Gaston, in delivering the opinion of the court, ‘all human beings within it, who are not slaves, fall within one of two classes.’
‘Whatever distinctions may have existed in the Roman laws between citizens and free inhabitants, they are unknown to our institutions.’
‘Before our Revolution, all free persons born within the dominions of the King of Great Britain,
whatever their color or complexion, were native-born British subjects – those born out of his allegiance were aliens.’
Slavery did not exist in England, but it did in the British colonies.
Slaves were not in legal parlance persons, but property.
The moment the incapacity, the disqualification of slavery, was removed, they became persons,
and were then either British subjects, or not British subjects, according as they were or were not
born within the allegiance of the British King.
Upon the Revolution, no other change took place in the laws of North Carolina than was
consequent on the transition from a colony dependent on a European King, to a free and sovereignState.
Slaves remained slaves.
British subjects in North Carolina became North Carolina freemen.
Foreigners, until made members of the State, remained aliens.
Slaves, manumitted here, became freemen, and therefore, if born within North Carolina, are
citizens of North Carolina, and all free persons born within the State are born citizens of the State.
The Constitution extended the elective franchise to every freeman who had arrived at the age of twenty-one and paid a public tax; and it is a matter of universal notoriety, that, under it, free persons, without regard to color, claimed and exercised the franchise, until it was taken from free men of color a few years since by our amended Constitution.
In the State v. Newcomb, (5 Iredell’s R., 253,) decided in 1844, the same court referred to this case of the State v. Manuel, and said:
That case underwent a very laborious investigation, both by the bar and the bench.
The case was brought here by appeal, and was felt to be one of great importance in principle.
It was considered with an anxiety and care worthy of the principle involved, and which give it a
controlling influence and authority on all questions of a similar character.
An argument from speculative premises, however well chosen, that the then state of opinion in theCommonwealth of Massachusetts was not consistent with the natural rights of people of color whowere born on that soil, and that they were not, by the Constitution of 1780 of that State, admitted
to the condition of citizens, would be received with surprise by the people of that State, who know their own political history.
It is true, beyond all controversy, that persons of color, descended from African slaves, were by
that Constitution made citizens of the State; and such of them as have had the necessary
qualifications, have held and exercised the elective franchise, as citizens, from that time to the
present. (See Com. v. Aves, 18 Pick. R., 210.)
The Constitution of New Hampshire conferred the elective franchise upon ‘every inhabitant of the State having the necessary qualifications,’ of which color or descent was not one.
The Constitution of New York gave the right to vote to ‘every male inhabitant, who shall have
resided,’ &c.; making no discrimination between free colored persons and others. (See Con. of N. Y., Art. 2, Rev. Stats. of N. Y., vol. 1, p. 126.)
That of New Jersey, to ‘all inhabitants of this colony, of full age, who are worth 50 proclamation money, clear estate.’
New York, by its Constitution of 1820, required colored persons to have some qualifications as
prerequisites for voting, which white persons need not possess.
And New Jersey, by its present Constitution, restricts the right to vote to white male citizens.
But these changes can have no other effect upon the present inquiry, except to show, that before
they were made, no such restrictions existed; and colored in common with white persons, were notonly citizens of those States, but entitled to the elective franchise on the same qualifications as
white persons, as they now are in New Hampshire and Massachusetts.
I shall not enter into an examination of the existing opinions of that period respecting the African race, nor into any discussion concerning the meaning of those who asserted, in the Declaration of
Independence, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
My own opinion is, that a calm comparison of these assertions of universal abstract truths, and of
their own individual opinions and acts, would not leave these men under any reproach of
inconsistency; that the great truths they asserted on that solemn occasion, they were ready and
anxious to make effectual, wherever a necessary regard to circumstances, which no statesman can disregard without producing more evil than good, would allow; and that it would not be just to
them, nor true in itself, to allege that they intended to say that the Creator of all men had endowedthe white race, exclusively, with the great natural rights which the Declaration of Independence
asserts.
But this is not the place of vindicate their memory.
As I conceive, we should deal here, not with such disputes, if there can be a dispute concerning
this subject, but with those substantial facts evinced by the written Constitutions of States, and by the notorious practice under them.
And they show, in a manner which no argument can obscure, that in some of the original thirteen States, free colored persons, before and at the time of the formation of the Constitution, were
citizens of those States.
The fourth of the fundamental articles of the Confederation was as follows:
The free inhabitants of each of these States, paupers, vagabonds, and fugitives from justice,
excepted, shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of free citizens in the several States.
The fact that free persons of color were citizens of some of the several States, and the consequence,that this fourth article of the Confederation would have the effect to confer on such persons the
privileges and immunities of general citizenship, were not only known to those who framed and
adopted those articles, but the evidence is decisive, that the fourth article was intended to have
that effect, and that more restricted language, which would have excluded such persons, was
deliberately and purposely rejected.
On the 25th of June, 1778, the Articles of Confederation being under consideration by the
Congress, the delegates from South Carolina moved to amend this fourth article, by inserting after the word ‘free,’ and before the word ‘inhabitants,’ the word ‘white,’ so that the privileges and
immunities of general citizenship would be secured only to white persons.
Two States voted for the amendment, eight States against it, and the vote of one State was divided.
The language of the article stood unchanged, and both by its terms of inclusion, ‘free inhabitants,’ and the strong implication from its terms of exclusion, ‘paupers, vagabonds, and fugitives from
justice,’ who alone were excepted, it is clear, that under the Confederation, and at the time of the
adoption of the Constitution, free colored persons of African descent might be, and, by reason of
their citizenship in certain States, were entitled to the privileges and immunities of general
citizenship of the United States.
Did the Constitution of the United States deprive them or their descendants of citizenship?
That Constitution was ordained and established by the people of the United States, through the
action, in each State, or those persons who were qualified by its laws to act thereon, in behalf of
themselves and all other citizens of that State.
In some of the States, as we have seen, colored persons were among those qualified by law to act
on this subject.
These colored persons were not only included in the body of ‘the people of the United States,’ by whom the Constitution was ordained and established, but in at least five of the States they had the power to act, and doubtless did act, by their suffrages, upon the question of its adoption.
It would be strange, if we were to find in that instrument anything which deprived
of their citizenship any part of the people of the United States who were among
those by whom it was established.
I can find nothing in the Constitution which, proprio vigore, deprives of their citizenship any class of persons who were citizens of the United States at the time of its adoption, or who should be native-born citizens of any State after its adoption; nor any power enabling Congress to disfranchise persons born on the soil of any State, and entitled to citizenship of such State by its Constitution and laws.
And my opinion is, that, under the Constitution of the United States, every free
person born on the soil of a State, who is a citizen of that State by force of its
Constitution or laws, is also a citizen of the United States.
Servenet says
I never hold someone’s lack of education against them, and that is something I wanted you to know.
Right here. This is but ONE example of what a DISHONEST cretin you are. You know nothing about my education and my prose exhibits to any rational mind that there is absolutely NO GROUND to make the above statement. It´s merely the remark one could expect from a mendacious Boomer moron – as I have and as anyone in this thread must after seeing, not reading, your wind-bag, tedious low-brow meanderings. And I must say, Paul, old boy, I haven´t witnessed the degree of self-serving, pitifully self-unaware, old fool as seen in your type in quite some time. Take a bow, my buffoonish Boomer of an online acquaintance.
Paul Plante says
Servenet, let me say right here and now that your superb command of the English language and local idiom is simply awesome and it blows me right away.
Rhetoric flows forth from you as if you were an exceedingly vociferous modern-day version of the highly-esteemed Clarence Darrow, and you quote the law with a silver tongue as if you were the living reincarnation of Quintus Hortensius Hortalus his own self, so how on earth could I ever have thought to prevail against you in a debate over who were the original CITIZENS of the United States of America?
What on earth could I have been thinking, you know what I am saying?
And by the way, in one of those many cosmic confluences of events associated with the Cape Charles due to its proximity to the alien gravitational field of that bolus from deep in outer space that having completed its intersteller journey crashed to earth of top of where Cape Charles now sits, if you can imagine something like that happening, I mean, what are the chances, and now lies deep underneath Cape Charles, and gives it so much of its gracious Southern character and charm that draws the tourists in like flies, and why not, how many other beach towns sit on top of a bolus from outer space, just the other day, a highly trusted newspaper in America noted repeatedly for its quest for the real truth underlying the false truth the competitors are peddling to make the almighty buck, that being none other than Washington’s own Washington Post, had an article entitled “House Democrats’ racially charged infighting escalates” by Colby Itkowitz, David Weigel, and Mike DeBonis on 14 July 2019, wherein was stated as follows, to wit:
In the past, liberal activists have disrupted speakers with whom they have disagreed.
end quotes
When I read that, I honestly said to myself that if Servenet had not have previously self-identified himself as a Russian bot posing as white nationalist Evangelical Christian, with his vituperation and obloquy in here, upon reading that, I would have mistaken Servenet as being a progressive liberal activist signing in to the discussion from the Netroot Nation conference.
As I say, just another of those many funny cosmic confluences of events so closely associated with the Cape Charles Mirror, which exists inside its own unique gravitational system that vibrates at its own unique frequency, so it is nothing to get excited about.
It simply is what it is, and with that, its time for a word from our sponsors and we will be right back if the dam don’t break and the water don’t rise for some scintillating dialogue from the esteemed master of rhetoric Servenet, so don’t change that radio dial!
Servenet says
Hinc ille quidem militum laudibus ad venerandam aulam.
Paul Plante says
Because of this, indeed, of the soldiers, they praise to the honor of the court of heaven.
Let me praise you on the excellence of your Latin, Servenet, you speak it better than Julius Caesar, and that is high praise indeed!
Servenet says
Oh, and btw, there´s this – And that law was repealed in 1795.
And this is just ONE…of many examples of what a dishonest empty set of clothes you are. You are either THAT STUPID or just a sneaky bastard trying to put one over on others. I have no doubt you are BOTH.
The United States Naturalization Act of January 29, **1795** (1 Stat. 414) repealed and replaced the Naturalization Act of 1790. The 1795 Act DIFFERED from the 1790 Act by INCREASING THE PERIOD OF REQUIRED RESIDENCY FROM TWO TO FIVE YEARS in the United States, by introducing the Declaration of Intention requirement, or “first papers”, which created a two-step naturalization process, and by omitting the term “natural born.” The Act specified that naturalized citizenship was reserved ONLY for “FREE WHITE PERSON[S].” It also changed the requirement in the 1790 Act of “good character” to read “good moral character.”
Paul Plante says
Servenet, you are a hoot!
And I think it is a natural talent you have, not something you had to pay a couple of grand to some theater or drama coach to develop.
You can tell a natural by the pattern of their patter, versus the one taught by some drama coach, and that is how I identify you as a natural.
And since you have chosen to step up to the front of the class as the professor, I’m going to raise my hand to see if I have the lesson down pat, as follows, and this comes out of my 7th grade CIVICS book, which is how basic this lesson really is:
Quoting like a parrot here, the original United States Naturalization Law of March 26, 1790 (1 Stat. 103) provided the first rules to be followed by the United States in the granting of national citizenship.
As Professor Servenet has steadily argued, this law limited naturalization to immigrants who were “free White persons of good character”.
So that law applied to persons not born here, who wanted to become citizens here, given that the word “immigrant” means a “person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country.”
At that same time, free blacks born here were allowed citizenship at the state level in certain states.
Getting back to the Naturalization Law of 1790, in order to address one’s good character, the law required two years of residence in the United States and one year in the state of residence, prior to applying for citizenship.
So you couldn’t just come waltzing in and make a demand to be an AMERICAN, and until you were naturalized, you were not an American citizen, regardless of how lily white your skin happened to be.
You had to PROVE to the people of America who were citizens that you were of good character, and truthfully, the candid world which watches and waits wonders if Servenet was around back then, would he or she have been allowed in, or left out in the cold as a result of his bad attitude towards his fellow mankind who he rejects as being human like he or she is.
Getting back to the 1790 law, when those requirements were met, an immigrant could file a Petition for Naturalization with “any common law court of record” having jurisdiction over his residence, and once convinced, and only after being convinced, of the applicant’s good moral character, the court would administer an oath of allegiance to support the Constitution of the United States and the clerk of the court was to make a record of these proceedings, and “thereupon such person shall be considered as a citizen of the United States.”
And that had absolutely no bearing on those who were born here – its purpose was to keep out
undesirables.
But that law was only around for a short time and it was was repealed by the Naturalization Act of 1795, which extended the residence requirement to five years, and by the Naturalization Act of 1798, which extended it to 14 years.
And then the 1798 act was repealed by the Naturalization Law of 1802.
So none of that is cast in concrete, nor does it mean doodley-squat today, 217 years later, although
some, like Servenet and some obscure dude named B.L. Wilson, who I have never heard of before this, argue from The Act of 1790 that even today only White people and their progeny would be eligible to become U.S. citizens, and although that is clearly a minority view rejected by other scholars in light of later legislation passed on immigration, nonetheless, that is the rock our Servenet clings to in here, and like a mussel on a pier piling in Cape Charles harbor, he is not going to be dislodged, and there is no rational argument that can or will make him change his mind, but that is alright, and truly we owe a debt of gratitude to Servenet for giving us a chance to go back and review some very basic American history as we have done in here, for whatever it might be worth, since so many people in America today reject the past, and treat American history as not existing before they were born, because they were not here to make it.
GG says
5 Letters: RH Neg.
Harry W Savannah says
Just tracking back to see what exactly you were replying to. Oops, took you completely wrong. So…turn my would be approval of your comment to 180 degrees in the opposite direction. Thanks.