By: John Martin of Global Research.com
They came as slaves; vast human cargo transported on tall British ships bound for the Americas. They were shipped by the hundreds of thousands and included men, women, and even the youngest of children.
Whenever they rebelled or even disobeyed an order, they were punished in the harshest ways. Slave owners would hang their human property by their hands and set their hands or feet on fire as one form of punishment. They were burned alive and had their heads placed on pikes in the marketplace as a warning to other captives.
We don’t really need to go through all of the gory details, do we? We know all too well the atrocities of the African slave trade.
But, are we talking about African slavery? King James II and Charles I also led a continued effort to enslave the Irish. Britain’s famed Oliver Cromwell furthered this practice of dehumanizing one’s next door neighbor.
The Irish slave trade began when James II sold 30,000 Irish prisoners as slaves to the New World. His Proclamation of 1625 required Irish political prisoners be sent overseas and sold to English settlers in the West Indies. By the mid 1600s, the Irish were the main slaves sold to Antigua and Montserrat. At that time, 70% of the total population of Montserrat were Irish slaves.
Ireland quickly became the biggest source of human livestock for English merchants. The majority of the early slaves to the New World were actually white.
From 1641 to 1652, over 500,000 Irish were killed by the English and another 300,000 were sold as slaves. Ireland’s population fell from about 1,500,000 to 600,000 in one single decade. Families were ripped apart as the British did not allow Irish dads to take their wives and children with them across the Atlantic. This led to a helpless population of homeless women and children. Britain’s solution was to auction them off as well.
During the 1650s, over 100,000 Irish children between the ages of 10 and 14 were taken from their parents and sold as slaves in the West Indies, Virginia and New England. In this decade, 52,000 Irish (mostly women and children) were sold to Barbados and Virginia. Another 30,000 Irish men and women were also transported and sold to the highest bidder. In 1656, Cromwell ordered that 2000 Irish children be taken to Jamaica and sold as slaves to English settlers.
Many people today will avoid calling the Irish slaves what they truly were: Slaves. They’ll come up with terms like “Indentured Servants” to describe what occurred to the Irish. However, in most cases from the 17th and 18th centuries, Irish slaves were nothing more than human cattle.
As an example, the African slave trade was just beginning during this same period. It is well recorded that African slaves, not tainted with the stain of the hated Catholic theology and more expensive to purchase, were often treated far better than their Irish counterparts.
African slaves were very expensive during the late 1600s (50 Sterling). Irish slaves came cheap (no more than 5 Sterling). If a planter whipped or branded or beat an Irish slave to death, it was never a crime. A death was a monetary setback, but far cheaper than killing a more expensive African. The English masters quickly began breeding the Irish women for both their own personal pleasure and for greater profit. Children of slaves were themselves slaves, which increased the size of the master’s free workforce. Even if an Irish woman somehow obtained her freedom, her kids would remain slaves of her master. Thus, Irish moms, even with this new found emancipation, would seldom abandon their kids and would remain in servitude.
In time, the English thought of a better way to use these women (in many cases, girls as young as 12) to increase their market share: The settlers began to breed Irish women and girls with African men to produce slaves with a distinct complexion. These new “mulatto” slaves brought a higher price than Irish livestock and, likewise, enabled the settlers to save money rather than purchase new African slaves. This practice of interbreeding Irish females with African men went on for several decades and was so widespread that, in 1681, legislation was passed “forbidding the practice of mating Irish slave women to African slave men for the purpose of producing slaves for sale.” In short, it was stopped only because it interfered with the profits of a large slave transport company.
England continued to ship tens of thousands of Irish slaves for more than a century. Records state that, after the 1798 Irish Rebellion, thousands of Irish slaves were sold to both America and Australia. There were horrible abuses of both African and Irish captives. One British ship even dumped 1,302 slaves into the Atlantic Ocean so that the crew would have plenty of food to eat.
There is little question that the Irish experienced the horrors of slavery as much (if not more in the 17th Century) as the Africans did. There is, also, very little question that those brown, tanned faces you witness in your travels to the West Indies are very likely a combination of African and Irish ancestry. In 1839, Britain finally decided on it’s own to end it’s participation in Satan’s highway to hell and stopped transporting slaves. While their decision did not stop pirates from doing what they desired, the new law slowly concluded THIS chapter of nightmarish Irish misery.
But, if anyone, black or white, believes that slavery was only an African experience, then they’ve got it completely wrong.
Irish slavery is a subject worth remembering, not erasing from our memories.
But, where are our public (and PRIVATE) schools???? Where are the history books? Why is it so seldom discussed?
Do the memories of hundreds of thousands of Irish victims merit more than a mention from an unknown writer?
Or is their story to be one that their English pirates intended: To (unlike the African book) have the Irish story utterly and completely disappear as if it never happened.
None of the Irish victims ever made it back to their homeland to describe their ordeal. These are the lost slaves; the ones that time and biased history books conveniently forgot.
Editor's note: Today American's will be celebrating Memorial Day, mostly by waving their little American flags, grilling out, going to the beach or getting inebriated.
Sadly many will have no idea what it represents, or how it was created in 1868 to honor the war dead of both Union and Confederate Armies in the War for Southern Independence.
Several Presidents and Congresses have passed measures to recognize these fallen but none codifies the commitment as US CODE TITLE 38 which outlines the veterans benefits (including Confederate soldiers) with specific legal rights. Since Confederates are legally acknowledged as veterans, why are their battle flags not honored as well in parades and memorials this day? That is a question or point that could very well be defended in court if Confederates were to push back against the erosion of their "civil rights" that have been usurped in many ways since the NAACP declaration of war against all things Confederate in 1991. Too few in "the cause" have had the resources or the backbone to stand and fight for the battle flag but perhaps attitudes will soon start to change.
As General Forest often said "NEVER STAND AND TAKE A CHARGE----CHARGE THEM TOO!" But ever since the 3rd leg of the 3-legged stool was created (the LBJ "New Society") which took the most prosperous nation in history (within 50 years) into the most bankrupt, corrupt and decadent society since Sodom and Gomorrah, we only have to listen to the voices crying out from history to see where this movie ends.
In 55 BC Cicero was quoted in the Roman Senate as saying this:
"The Budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be
curtailed, lest Rome will become bankrupt. People must again learn to work
instead of living on public assistance."
A Short Confederate History Lesson:
By Ron Hammon: (reprinted from POP the Southern American.)
When the Founding Fathers created the Constitution of the United States of America, they intended the United States to be just that, a Confederation of Independent, Sovereign States.
The Federal government was meant to be similar to the European Union today, an association of fellow "States", assembled for mutual defense, unfettered commerce, and only a very limited amount of cooperation in other areas. To join, individual states had to agree to abide by a number of over reacting principles, such as freedom of speech and the right to bear arms.
Spain is still considered sovereign today, even though it is a member of the European Union. Spain is also, (as far as we know) able to resign from that union as it wishes.
In 1859, a citizen of the "State" of Virginia was assumed to be a citizen of the "COUNTRY" of Virginia, NOT a citizen of the United States, no less than a citizen of the country of Spain is NOT a "citizen" of the European Union today. This is why Robert E. Lee felt compelled to serve his beloved Virginia, his home "country", when it resigned from the corrupting Union. Lee had nothing to gain from the false, today-touted reason of maintaining slavery as THE cause of the Great War. Slavery was dying out all over the world. There was never any need for a war over it. Lee, the head of the Army of Virginia, had no slaves, nor did the vast majority of Southerners who fought for the Confederacy.
Despite the efforts of a few of the Founding Fathers, like Alexander Hamilton, to form a strong empire, rather than a Confederation of Sovereign States, the original idea of "United States" rather than a "United STATE" held true for almost a whole century. Then, a fresh movement arose.
The Northern states (those that had already given up their former practice of widespread slavery, like New York), because of greater voting population, could out-vote the South and pass special taxes and tariffs to be paid primarily by the South but spent by the North, a redistribution of wealth, fleecing the South. Less than a century earlier, this sort of "Taxation without Representation" fueled the FIRST American Revolution against British tyranny.
Today, virtually every American feels that this first attempt to split away from an oppressive, over lording government was justified and noble.
However, in the last century, the Union government has managed to blind most Americans to the noble effort of the much more free and independent Southern states to separate from that central government, a government which had changed into an empire and became far more oppressive to the South than King George had been to the colonies.
The brand new political party in 1860, the Republican party (which replaced the Whigs) was dedicated to the drastic change to a dominant, centralized Federal government, a true empire, to overlord the individual states.
This single "nation", with uniform rules that the whole "nation" MUST follow was a drastic change into a completely different frame of government. The centralized form, as opposed to smaller, distributed government, closer to the people, was spearheaded by Alexander Hamilton and resisted bitterly by Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson. Completely different ideals splintered the opposition party, the Democratic party, into different factions. Because of a severe FOUR-way split among the other candidates, the new, radical Republican party won the presidency with its first Presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln, a strong advocate of the new, bastardized idea of U.S. government envisioned by Henry Clay and Alexander Hamilton, a strong central government with subjugated states bowing to the whims of a distant overlord.
The REAL "United States", as originally conceived by Thomas Jefferson, was doomed.
Lincoln, and his handlers, had a grand plan for empire building and would let nothing stop the forging of a strong, centralized, global power, not even the U.S. Constitution! For example, the Constitution states that only states can coin money. This didn't stop the "lawyer", Ol' "Honest Abe" from outlawing the practice and delivering the production of all money over to the Federal government. The Southerner Andrew Jackson, while President, had infuriated big bankers by squashing their power of a National Bank. But, the Yankee President Lincoln and the young Republican party did the exact opposite. They made banking and money-making a Federal operation since whoever controls the money controls the people. (The European Union is pissed that Great Britain refuses to stop printing its own money. Sound familiar?) They intended to utterly shift control away from local oversight and balance, as designed by the Founding Fathers, to Washington, D.C. The day of "Big Brother", the overreaching and overbearing centralized power, was born.
We now suffer the inevitable results of Lincoln's change to a "Big Brother" centralized power. There may be no stopping the impending collapse. (to continue, go to top right) The REAL U.S. patriots in the South decided that the only reasonable course was to cut away this diseased corruption of the principles of freedom and local control designed by and promised by the Founding Fathers.
Some states forfeited their membership in the crumbling Union to form a fresh Confederation of states that would abide by the principles of the original U.S. Constitution. After South Carolina tried to clear a stronghold of stubborn, Northern military occupation, in blatant defense of it's sovereignty, the young Confederation WAS ATTACKED by a vengeful Lincoln. The North would not give up the expected tax windfall from the South without a fight. (A sad part of the story is that gold and silver mines discovered out West more than replaced all money lost from not fleecing the Southern states!)
In direct violation of the U.S. Constitution, Lincoln raised an army without consent of Congress to combat these "rebels". Contrary to popular opinion, Lincoln's cause was so unpopular in the North that one forth of all Union troops were constantly diverted to put down rebellions in the streets of northern cities, newspaper editors were imprisoned, and Lincoln even (illegally) suspended Habeas Corpus.
This "Second American Revolution" was even more popular than the original American Revolution at the time. The South was almost totally non-industrialized, so the Union expected to squash this "rebellion" in just a few months. But, they totally underestimated the hearts, minds, grit and resolve of Southerners. In a few months, the Army of Northern Virginia almost took the District of Columbia itself! An escape plan was ready in case the Confederate Army managed to rout the Northern Army and seize the Capitol. Early in the conflict, Lincoln imprisoned the Maryland legislature to prevent their even having a chance to vote to join the Confederacy thereby surrounding Washington.
The South was right, and the whole world knew it. (That is, if the first American Revolution was right, then the second American Revolution was also right.)
France, England, and most of nations of the world were on the side of the Confederacy, at least in principle. This wasn't just because they needed cotton, as has been told. It was generally realized that this was the American Revolution, Act II. But this time, the overreaching, overbearing, tyranny was Washington, not King George across the Atlantic. This time, despite our very best efforts, "right" finally lost. If the South had known how it would be victimized after rejoining the union, Lee would never have surrendered, he said so.
Southern Generals, as well as the Southern people in general, still believed in honor. This put them at a further disadvantage in the "total war" advocated by the top Northern Generals and approved by Lincoln. The Northern shelling of civilians and the destruction of civilian property to demoralize the enemy was later studied by Hitler. One of Lincoln's Commanders even went so far as to suggest that EVERY "rebel" (CSA citizen) should be killed! Fighting honorably against an enemy who employs every trick in the book (like offering citizenship to potential immigrants to come and join their army), dooms the honorable side to eventual failure without an overwhelming superiority.
Was "The War" about slavery, as we were taught by an educational system supervised by the U.S. government? No way! Even General Grant, the future President, said, during the war, that if he thought that the war was to free slaves, he would resign immediately. Old "Honest Abe" himself, the "Great Emancipator", said that if he could win the war without freeing a single slave, he would. In fact, he said that "we should be separated" and there was "a natural disgust in the minds of nearly all white people, to the idea of an indiscriminate amalgamation of the white and black races". Lincoln was NOT an advocate of black equality! Had Lincoln not been assassinated, his plan was to remove all blacks off of the continent to either the Caribbean or Liberia. The African nation of Liberia was CREATED by the U.S. for just such a plan. Lincoln never desired an integrated society.
Dixie became an occupied country after Lee's surrender. Many Yankee's even demanded that Jefferson Davis be executed for treason. (This was probably because Davis, unlike most "fair-weather" friends of the South, NEVER professed that the actions of the Confederacy were wrong.) For a generation, Federal troops were stationed all over the South, lurking, stealing, abusing, raping, all with a wink and a nod from Washington. After all, the nasty, unkempt, drunkard, former Union Army General Grant, whose slovenliness was so conspicuous compared to Lee, had become the U.S. President! This shameful period AFTER the war spawned the "damned Yankee" sentiment, not the war itself. There were Northern "carpetbaggers" crawling out from under every rock to con Southerners out of what few treasures they still had. Since the Yankee Army formed the acting police, little was done to those "punishing" the former "Rebels", and all knew it.
So, be proud, ye Southern born! Our forefathers were the keepers of truth and law, keepers of humanity, and keepers of the grand plan, the Constitution of the Founding Fathers. We did more than our best. We exhausted our meager resources and ourselves in a hopeless fight, simply because we were right. Yankee lies can't hide the truth.
Yankees can never take our pride. We can still be PROUD CONFEDERATES!
By: Joan Hough, member of The Confederate Society.
Reports are surfacing that repairs are to be made on the only Memorial for Confederates who were murdered at Camp Douglas in Chicago.
Repairs are long overdue--should have been made years back.Why have they not been made? Taxpayers (including Southerners) keep the Yankee monuments and gravestones at Vicksburg US Military Park in tip top condition. Who takes care of the Confederate’s only monument in Chicago? Although every original blade of grass is protected at Andersonville by the U.S. government, it has made sure every splinter of the horrific Camp Douglas US prison Confederates has been eliminated—that every bit of evidence of the prison’s existence has been removed. Totally erased, even in the pages of American history, is the truth that a prison existed in Chicago, which made incarceration a confinement in Hell for every one of its Confederate prisoners.
Andersonville Prison, which housed Union soldiers, was a bit of Disney World compared to Camp Douglas. Confederates were deliberately, routinely murdered and starved at Douglas—on the direct orders of the United States Congress and with malice for all and absolute approval of Abraham Lincoln and his Marxist-filled, Marxist-created Republican Party. The Confederate government, on the other hand, moved Heaven and Earth in an attempt to get the U.S. to send doctors, medicine, food to the U.S. prisoners at Andersonville.
Why are there no road signs to point the way to the Chicago monument and that Chicago Hell Hole Prison where defenseless Southerners were tortured and murdered? Signs marking the way to the prison’s site have not existed in a century or more. Even native Chicago citizens are unaware that there was once in their city a revoltingly evil US prison wherein many thousands of helpless Confederates were tortured and murdered. The historians and the US government have lied to us about US perfidy for years. The presence of street signs alone might make Chicago folks learn the truth of the US cruelty toward helpless fellow Americans– a truth all Americans should learn.
Will somebody with human kindness please move or blow up the UGLY ROCK that is now located in front of the one Confederate monument in the Chicago Prison’s swamp? The Ugly Rock is filled with words viciously insulting our Confederate dead. That rock of enormous ugliness was placed in front of the Confederate Memorial. My cousin's body disappeared from Camp Douglas. In fact, his name was omitted from all the prison rosters and is not on the memorial. He was in that prison. He died there. He was tortured before dying. This we know. His parents’ suffering was increased by the 2nd Manassas kill of his brother.
The oh so moral folks of Chicago, seeking thrills, paid money to climb high into watch towers and observe much of the torturing done at Douglas.. They watched as Southern boys were stripped and forced to sit, with naked bottoms unmoving on ice—beaten mercilessly if they wriggled! They watched as Southern boys (some as young as 14) were forced to "ride the mule" high in the air and experience while “riding” tortures inflicted on their sexual organs. Death for some resulted from their ride. Well-fed Illinois citizens watched as guards shot sick Confederates. They watched as, before their eyes, husky Southern males turned into starved, emaciated collections of bones. They watched as their own mayor, while in a fit of human decency, was arrested because he tried to slip some food to a few of the emaciated boys who were being deliberately starved to death on government order.
One year into the war, the folks in Mr. Lincoln's “Camp Douglas” state passed a state law prohibiting arrival there of any mulatto or black person. Black Confederates imprisoned at Douglas feared to be released. So much for the Yankee-Marxist lie that the war was begun to free slaves! So much for the inferior scholars called professors who continue to propagandize that lie. The monument in the swamp in Chicago is Chicago’s single Confederate monument. It lists only a few of the Confederates who were murdered at Camp Douglas. The history of the birthday of the monument is clouded with Yankee speeches falsely claiming northerners responsible for it and attributing everything wonderful to martyred Abe Lincoln.
The Yankees have long pretended that Camp Douglas never existed. However, one honest northerner, Dr. George Levy, a professor of legal studies at Roosevelt University, became interested in Camp Douglas while he was a student at the University of Chicago —across the street from the site, which had been cleared of all evidence of the Camp’s existence. Read honest Levy's truly honest report on his discoveries about the United States Hell Hole. His book To Die in Chicago: Confederate Prisoners at Camp Douglas 1862-65 should make even the most brainwashed in the U.S. cease yapping about Andersonville being so terrible. It should cause them to halt prattling their programmed inanities about the nobility of the Republican invaders. The tortures at Camp Douglas not only had the approval of Mr. Lincoln and his U.S. Congress,
but were congressionally mandated by the United States Senate. (Check the record.)
Andersonville's problems occurred despite President Davis’ many efforts to get Lincoln to either exchange prisoners or send in his doctors,medicine and even food for the prisoners. Camp Douglas’s horrors were UNION created, performed under the watchful eyes of Lincoln and his Republican Congress. After heinous tortures the Confederate dead in Chicago were frequently dumped into a hole in the swamp; their bones often arising in later built, adjacent parking lots. The Union torturers at Douglas ceased keeping rosters and all records when the deaths/murders of Southerners became enormous and US officially published numbers conflicted with those of the Chicago newspaper. Oddly, the first of the deaths was that
of a tiny, 14 year old black Confederate youngster who was shot by his “great emancipators.”
Some of the Camp Douglas dead Confederates may still lie in Chicago’s now filled-in swamp, but the whereabouts of many thousands is unknown. (Pigs ran free in the streets in New York in that time, did they do the same in Chicago?)
The Lee museum
Editors note: This article from Al Benson is worth reading with retrospect to the continuing disturbance at Washington and Lee University. A so called "committee" made up of leftist- radial students has demanded the battle flags be taken down from the Lee museum on campus. Their lack of knowledge on history is appalling as they equate the memory of the man who saved their University from extinction, after Lincoln's war, to racism in the modern era.
The only "racists" in the debate are the members of this unique committee who wish to denigrate the Confederate symbols and flags in some cheap stunt to gain public awareness of themselves in order to win points with the media and the minions of power in the social elite.
by Al Benson Jr.:
On several occasions I can remember my pastor at church saying that if you are not making someone mad then you aren’t doing anything. He has a valid point. If you are at peace with “the world” and no one has any gripe with anything you do or say, then you are a friend of the world and, biblically speaking, that is an unenviable position to be in.
Christians make people mad because they have the temerity to tell people the truth and all people do not relish truth. Some would rather live with lies and giving them the truth ticks them off. So I reckon this article will tick some folks off.
Years ago, when I was in the John Birch Society there were folks that said we had three enemies—liberalism, socialism, and communism. Or to put it more succinctly liberalism=socialism=communism. One is merely a progression to the next. The John Birch Society was anathema to the religious and political left. They detested it with un-excelled passion. They still do. Why? It’s because the JBS tells people the truth about them and they don’t want the American public as a whole to know that truth—yet they can’t dispute it, so what do they do? They smear the JBS with a lot of unfounded accusations which they hope will take people’s minds off the real truth and refocus them on the spurious accusations. This is an old Communist tactic—condemn others and elevate yourself. It often works, but not quite as much as it used to. Thanks to the Internet, lots of people have had the chance to see “other options” when it comes to news and commentary and they have picked up a certain amount of discernment regarding what I laughingly refer to as the “news” media.
About twenty years after my initial involvement with the JBS I started to become involved with the Southern Heritage and Confederate Movements. You may think the two are mutually exclusive, and I didn't make any real connection until I found that those who hated the Southern Movement were, guess who? Liberals, socialists, and communists. So why did the religious and political left hate the Southern Movement? Same reason they hated the JBS. The Southern Movement told the truth about the real reasons for the War of Northern Aggression and about Abraham Lincoln, who was and is a major icon of the left. To find out why, read Lincoln’s Marxists
which is available on Amazon.com
The truth about Lincoln and the War rattled the left’s cage. The public has, for generations now, been “educated” to believe the War was all about slavery and nothing else. This has been the establishment line for decades now (and I include the establishment as part of the liberal/socialist coterie). To state that such a line is balderdash is only repeating myself.
The liberal/socialist/communist triad absolutely loathes the South, its real history and heritage. All you have to do to prove this is to check out the website of the Southern Poverty Law Center.
This will give you a thumbnail sketch of where the left is really coming from in regard to the South and its history. The SPLC is big on hate groups—a “hate group” being anyone that disagrees with their leftist slant on anything. Their take on Southern history is strictly barf-bag material but you’d be surprised at how many “journalists” quote them as a “reliable” source on Southern bigotry or prejudice or whatever other sins the South happens to share with the rest of the country.
All these liberal/left groups use every opportunity to trash the South and its people and they absolutely detest Southern history and Confederate symbols. But if you look at where they are coming from, the reason becomes obvious. The South has been more Christian in its worldview than most of the rest of the country since well before the War of Northern Aggression and the left hates Christianity. They always have, and the reason is that they are in rebellion against God and His law, which they seek to replace with their own “god” (the state) and their “law” (Marx’s “ten commandments” as found in the Communist Manifesto
The leftists reserve some of the bitterest of their vehemence for Confederate symbols and flags. These, we are dutifully informed, are all symbols of “racism” (a Trotskyite term), prejudice, bigotry, and you name it. Southern whites, we are told, are responsible for every ill in the world from sunspots to the blind staggers. It’s all “whitey’s fault” (all the better to get reparations out of you, my dear) and Southern whites are supposed to feel guilty for, literally, all the sins of mankind, which others committed only because white folks forced them into it. And to absolve ourselves from these heinous sins we have only to cross their palms with silver—again and again and again.
So what are these horrible Confederate symbols that need to be taken down and relegated to the attic or trash heap? Well, there is the well-known Confederate battle flag, which is a Christian symbol, the Cross of St. Andrew. We have to get rid of that because the KKK has used it. If that’s the case, then lets get rid of the United States flag also, because it is a known fact, for those that have done the homework, that the KKK used the United States flag extensively in parades and assemblies. So it would seem apparent that if one is “racist” because it is used by the KKK, then shouldn’t the other be also? There are several other Confederate flags that must be “racist” simply because they are Confederate. There is Polks Battle flag for the First Corps of the Army of Tennessee. It has a St. George’s Cross on it—another Christian symbol. Then there is the battle flag for Confederate troops from Missouri, which is a blue flag, with a red border, with a white Christian Cross on it. Then the 3rd Kentucky (Confederate) Infantry flag has a Christian Cross with 13 stars in it, and Major General Dabney Maury’s Headquarters Flag is yet another one with a Christian Cross on it. There are others I could mention, not as well known, but yet still containing Christian symbols. All these flags, supposedly “racist” reflect, to some extent, the worldview of the Confederate States.
I submit that this is really what the leftists want to get rid of—any Southern flag or symbol that reflects the South’s Christian heritage. That’s what they really hate—any kind of Christian symbolism, especially Southern Christian symbolism. Anyone who has read anything about the liberal/socialist/communist cadre realizes that they regard Christianity as one of their main foes, to be either neutralized or gotten rid of any way possible. The left really has no problem with racial prejudice or bigotry. They practice it just as much as anyone else does, only they don’t want to be perceived as being guilty of it so they point the accusing finger at others who may not even be as guilty of it as they are. After all, it was Karl Marx who, condescendingly referred to Jewish people as “Jewish Niggers.” That was Marx’s term, not mine and I have seen him quoted more than once using that term. No, the leftist’s real problem isn't with racial prejudice—it’s with Jesus Christ and the Christian faith, because they realize that even a sleeping Christian church has the potential of becoming their biggest adversary should something awaken it in the future. And Southern Christians could end up being the biggest adversary of all because even with their faith having been tampered with and watered down, they are still the people in the part of the country where the Christian worldview remains the strongest.
You have to give the liberal/socialist/communist group credit. They at least recognize their Main Enemy. The question is—will the Church wake up and recognize one of hers?