Co-authored by the good friend of qigong master Jim Nance. "Cutting One's Teeth"
“to have teeth first emerge through a baby's gums,” a usage dating from the late 1600s.
The Color of Wealth': A Racial Money Divide My former advisor of self-directed nonwestern meditation - Rose Brewer
her new presentation - uploaded today
There is a false paradigm of debate - a false dichotomy - between fascist racists incorrectly claiming "White Slavery" in the colonies - and the opposite extreme claiming that Forced Labor as "chattle bond" servants was NOT slavery. Citing Theodore W. Allen
So Theodor W. Allen researched the specific creation of the White Race in the colonies - from Virginia Jamestown. So in 1623 - after the indigenous Indians successfully attacked Jamestown - then a more restrictive move towards slavery began
So you work and keep half of what you produce - most of the people in Jamestown had that status. But then the tenants were reduced to "bond servants" or "chattel bond servants" that could be bought and sold.
So if we check his claim - that in 1622 - there were 100 "dissolutes" or convicts brought over as forced labor - ... the thousands of "tenants" from Europe were turned back into "servants."
http://ouleft.org/wp-content/uploads/Invention-White-Race-Vol2-Allen.pdf
So Allen is claiming 10% of the Europeans during colony times as "life-long" bond servants. Unpaid labor. This was after the Indian attack that killed off a third of the population in 1622 and another third of the population died off from starvation and disease.
So by "life-long" Allen is emphasizing that British and Africans would try to escape together...and so the British chattel bond punishment would be perpetual servitude for life - with no pay....
citing
https://archive.org/details/colonistsinbonda0000smit/page/n7/mode/2up?q=life
servants were sent to Virginia and transferred to the use of the planters resident there, who reimbursed the company for the expense of transportation. This innovation, which was not deeply meditated nor seriously considered at the time, nevertheless accustomed people to the later practice of “selling” servants. Such a transaction smacked enough of the eastern slave markets to give occasional scandal to delicate-minded observers, but it was the one characteristic of the servant trade which was both indispensable and novel. Hence its development, as well as the other trials and errors of the Virginia Company with their emigrants under bond, must be traced in some detail.
I'm not seeing any "life-long" bondage of white chattel servitude labor.
Yea I was reading the Virginia Company historical notes yesterday. The US colonies were created by Royal Corporate Charters as profit-making ventures. Indentured Servants started out in 1622 from 100 convicts sent over. So theoretically they have a "contract" to earn their freedom but part of the contract is that they can not fornicate nor try to escape, etc.
And any breaking of the "contract" means the time as debt wage is then extended and the work is so hard then they die soon after - even if they do gain "freedom." Technically it was not slavery but then in 1622 the Native Indians killed off most of the colonizers - along with disease, etc. And then there was Bacon's Rebellion which was both blacks and "whites" - Europeans - rising up together against horrendous labor conditions. So then the elite enforced race "white" laws and promoted black slavery. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Gq77rOuZck&ab_channel=JeffreyB.Perry
So this goes back to Platonic philosophy. For example when the Benedictine Monks in the 9th Century adopted Islamic Platonic science via John Scotus Erigena - this meant that antisemitism surged because a Jewish person could not "convert" to Christianity - due to Platonic eugenics racism. It's built into the mathematics of logarithms and exponential math because Plato defined each person as a natural number that had to be "compromised" for the good of the State as imperialism.
So this is why Democracy is a scam also because the "natural number" counting system is already predicated on a logarithmic and inverse exponential distribution of wealth (by then externalizing the costs of production via destruction of ecology and killing off of slaves, etc.). Technically "bonded" workers were "chattel" in the sense that their work contracts could be sold off and were "bought" when arrived into the New World - and there was corporeal punishment. But obviously it was not nearly as bad as the chattel slavery of Africans. The goal by the elite was to get the poor whites to no longer be in solidarity with the African slaves.
And it still works to this day!! Why? Because technology as progress is based on automation of jobs - and so unions were racist because the better paying "technical" jobs are of course much more limited in number - and this just keeps getting worse. So now robots are farming and automation is the number one cause of job loss even in China! A good book on this is "The Religion of Technology" by Professor David F. Noble - and his follow up "Myth of the Promised Land."
The global and historical dimensions of slavery that Kersten sketches are essentially correct — testimony to the ubiquity of class oppression. Unique to the United States, however, was racial slavery. In English-speaking colonial America, it grew out of another class institution, indentured servitude, whose subjects came in all skin colors.
It wasn’t preordained, as the Times suggests, that the permanent indenture of people of African origin was heralded with the arrival of the African captives to Virginia in 1619. To the contrary, some indentured Africans gained their freedom and became masters with their own servants, some of whom were white.
But the first “civil war” in what would be America changed all of that. A multiracial uprising of servants in 1676 in Virginia, Bacon’s Rebellion, so frightened those in the ruling class that they took steps to ensure it would never happen again. As rulers have often done when faced with rebellion, Virginia’s elite divided the producing classes to secure their rule. Drawing hard, skin-color lines between groups of the indentured increasingly became the norm — the origins of racial slavery.
Kersten rightly applauds the Declaration of Independence and what it represents for the age-old democratic quest. The enslaved black poet Phillis Wheatley certainly recognized its significance. So did the emerging middle classes in Europe.
That the stormers of the Bastille, whose act commenced the French Revolution in 1789, sent the prison’s key to George Washington as a gift, spoke volumes about the global significance of the American Revolution in the minds of the oppressed.
The U.S. Constitution is another matter, and Kersten is at pains to make a convincing case for it. Most telling about the document is that the word “democracy” never appears in it. Not surprising for a document that promised slave owners their runaway property would have to be returned — Article Four — or that their slaves would be counted three-fifths a person to guarantee their rule. All that the framers promised was a republic — that is, representative government. Who gets to be represented has been the essence of politics ever since.
The most progressive features of the document, the Bill of Rights, would only become a living reality in the 20th century owing to the struggles of the working class and its allies.
A “new birth of freedom,” as Lincoln described it at Gettysburg in 1863, was required to realize the promise of 1776. More trenchant than the lines that Kersten quotes from his Second Inaugural Address was his promise to continue the Civil War if necessary “until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword.”
Lincoln reluctantly realized that there was no constitutional solution to the problem of slavery. Only workers and farmers in uniform on the battlefield, especially former slaves, could settle the matter. The slavocracy’s demise reverberated internationally — democracy’s greatest advance in the 19th century.
The bloodletting, unprecedented before or since, made possible a second revolution. African-American men became citizens for the first time. But America’s first experiment in racial democracy was cut short. The most Kersten has to say is, “In the South, ‘Jim Crow’ legal discrimination grew in power.”
No, it wasn’t just “legal discrimination.” Reconstruction came to a bloody end. The most informed report estimates that close to 55,000 African-Americans and their supporters were murdered between the end of the war in 1865 and about 1887.
Just as ruling elites in Virginia had feared a growing class alliance among indentured servants of all colors, their latter-day counterparts 200 years later feared something similar was underway after the end of chattel slavery in 1865. Most alarming was the first general strike in 1877 that brought together black and white workers. Jim Crow laws became the new divide-and-rule strategy.
It was accompanied by terror, not confined to the South. Red Summer, the label for the slaughter of hundreds of blacks a century ago, spread into Minnesota the following year, with the lynching of three men in Duluth in 1920.
Thus the need for a second Reconstruction, what the civil-rights movement achieved. But if Kersten is to be believed, those gains were all engineered at the top, the Supreme Court and the White House.
The first time I tried to vote, in 1964, I was denied the opportunity owing to my skin color. Four years later, I could cast a ballot. Why? Because people who looked like me had been, along with our allies, in the streets, to make real the rights that were guaranteed on paper.
Kersten is right to criticize the Times’ 1619 Project for ignoring the democratic gains that have taken place in the U.S. But she misrepresents how that happened. Ruling elites, including leaders like Presidents John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, contrary to Kersten, weren’t motivated to do the right thing because they lived in the enlightened West. They saw the light because they felt the heat of the proletarian masses in the streets.
The democratic quest advances when the working classes begin to sense their self-worth, just as they did on Civil War battlefields.
And when that class takes power for the first time in the U.S., in all its skin colors and other identities, it won’t, unlike the framers of the Constitution, be squeamish about putting “democracy” into a new Constitution for the first time.
August H. Nimtz Jr. is professor of political science and African-American and African studies at the University of Minnesota.
the problem is that Marx's claim of the "edenic respites" of technology is a lie due to automation - as Professor David F. Noble exposes in his book "The Religion of Technology." Racism in the West is from Platonic philosophy as the book "The Racial Contract" exposes - and so it's a deeper problem than Marxism can address. The logarithmic and inverse exponential math is inherently racist!! Not that you have passed on excellent research. https://www.startribune.com/counterpoint-the-point-katherine-kersten-new-york-times-1619-project-both-miss/566192371/ thanks
Fascinating - so LAND is the original "technological monopoly" - as Michael E. Hudson emphasizes as well.
So then in 1662 Virginia then established:
Partus Sequitur Ventrem
in direct contrast to English common law of hereditary ownership through male descent.
This means all those women, those chattel bond servant women who are taken advantage of by men, their children will be chattel bond servants. This is what the system needs but that was not the way it was at first. ..This is so significant because it's a qualitative change.
So by 1679 there were 2000 African bond-servants and 6000 European bond-servants or 8000 bond-servants out of a total of 40,000 "immigrants" in Virginia.
Then in the 1670s the African slave trade escalates.
1676 Bacon's Rebellion had 10 smaller rebellions before that.
So 400 Europeans and Africans had guns and burned down Jamestown and took over the land.
So then in 1705 Virginia Code - the White "race" was created as a "buffer" to prevent revolution.
Not until 1723 was it outlawed for "free negroes" to not be able to vote!
So then African-Americans were not allowed to defend themselves and then the raped African women would produce more slaves.
The White slave patrols were made up of the white lower class - as brown No$ers for divide and conquer...
No comments:
Post a Comment