posted on Nov, 19 2017 @ 10:57 PM
“His zeal in the cause of freedom was infinitely superior to mine. Mine was as the taper light, his was as the burning sun. Mine was bounded by
time. His stretched away to the silent shores of eternity. I could speak for the slave. John Brown could fight for the slave. I could live for the
slave. John Brown could die for the slave.
* Frederick Douglass, as quoted in A Lecture On John Brown.”
John Brown being a white, extremist abolitionists who led a failed raid to free all the slaves and build a free black state in the Appalachian
mountains and Frederick Douglass was hands down the most influential black abolitionist of the 1800’s.. maybe the most influential african American
In Civil rights history..
(imho it’s either him or Tubman and they did it during slavery, when it was considered a scientific fact that the races were unequal and those of
European decent deserved to rule..
What does MLK or Malcolm X really have on that ???)
In that passage, that is arguably the most prominent African American figure in the realm of equality in American history, freely admitting that,
“See that white guy over there.. He wanted it just ridiculously more than I did.. “
Douglass was born a slave. He then escaped to the north to become one of the most eloquent speakers of his day. He was so influential he became a
somewhat advisor to President Abraham Lincoln Himself..
So hypothetically, he is as good a case as your gonna make for a , best/worse case scenario person who is gonna hate slavery... Yet in his own
“His zeal in the cause of freedom was infinitely superior to mine.”
And don’t get this messed up. Douglass personally new John Brown.. this isn’t him propagandizing some guy he didn’t know, based on the celebrity
status Brown received in the wake of Harper’s Ferry....
Brown begged Douglass to accompany him on his raid at harpers ferry, but Douglass refused due to the odds against its success. He didn’t think it
was a well thought out enough plan... and it wasn’t .. lol
So if that is the case, then why can’t a white man ever understand the plight of the African American people???
Why would Malcom X when asked if he would ever allow a white man to join his organization, later reply ,
“If He we’re still alive, we MIGHT let John Brown in.”
The guy who FREDERICK DOUGLASS says ,
“His zeal in the pursuit of freedom was infinitely superior to mine” ?!?!
Is Malcolm X retarded?!?!
If your claiming to run “the most extreme black power group in America” and John Brown shows up. You hand him the F’n keys and ask him where he
wants you to stand.....
The only reason you wouldn’t instantly hand over leadership would be because he is just too extreme and you decide you have to keep him on a leash..
.. but regardless he just became your figure head... and Malcolm X says “MIGHT”?!?!
I’m not only pointing this toward any specific race... you can find people of ANY racial make up on ANY side of ANY argument..as I’m sure there
would have been a few black house slaves and overseers who had relatively great lives and were all about slavery.. this is a humanity issue that I
think can be applied to just about every issue..maybe in history.
For some reason we have decided that only someone from whatever social group, can truly understand and speak for that group..
Well is that always true, or always the most effective course of action??
With just about everything , distance breeds impartiality and a perception of credibility in that impartiality..
If someone knowledgeable , but unaffected by an event/issue gives you their opinion on it. You will more readily believe it over someone who is
emotionally/financially invested in a certain outcome..
So some arguments are just better coming from “the side of the chessboard”..
Maybe all are.. at least all where an outside party has the ability to be sufficiently knowledgeable of whatever event.
So then why is it scoffed on for a white guy to run the NAACP??? Why did that woman who was running an NAACP while pretending to be black, get
roasted so badly???
Is there likely ANYONE who wanted it more than she did???
I doubt it..
And I think that applies to everything..
Why couldn’t a black guy run CMT??
Why couldn’t a man run whatever coalition of feminists??
Why couldn’t a black woman run the KKK” , I know that’s kinda fundamentally the opposite of what they are after.. but who knows?? that might be
the most effective figure head they could ever find... Some black woman who is an extremely eloquent speaker , but has a deep hatred for her “own
people”. Who is just brilliant at thinking up propaganda to demonize black people and push the KKK’s agenda.
And out of 350 million Americans, it is a safe bet she is out there somewhere lol...
The narrative is wrong, and I think maybe that is because it was cemented in a time when ”separate but equal was the goal for most on both
There never should have been a SEPARATE and because of that there should have never been a black panthers.. or a black entertainment network. Just
like there never should of been a kkk or whatever white supremacists group.
It is just more efficient to use all the tools you have available to you, rather than limit yourself only those assets that fit some obscure and
Because the fight has never been between black and white.
It has been between slavers and abolitionist , segregationists and integrationists, racists and those who wanted equality, Freedom and oppression..
and make no mistake you can find hero’s and villains of freedom and equality in every ethnic group we have arbitrarily shoehorned together..
Historically, there are ONLY 2 ways that a oppressed people throw off the shackles of oppression.
1. murder everyone of the oppressing class..as happened in Haiti. As it is the only modern state to be formed by an enslaved people rebelling. Maybe
the only one in history..
2. Build a coalition of people from both the oppressed people and the establishment and change the system..which happens all the time.
If the oppressors are united against the oppressed, the only way to win is in battle.... and good luck against a united front of oppressors...
There is a reason it only worked once and that is because in Haiti they let the population reach a 10/1, slaves/slaveholder ratio.
I think Civil Rights leaders of the past made a grave error, that has been swiftly adopted by the opponents of civil rights and turned against
I think the white civil rights leaders made a concerted effort to highlight black leaders and downplay the white ones to aid in the empowerment of the
disenfranchised black population.
However, I think this was short sighted and allowed for their opponents to craft the narrative as if the battle for civil rights was “black people
against whites”, Rather than good vs evil.
I think any short term gain that was achieved in motivating the black population behind exclusivity black leaders, was lost in the aftermath of a
narrative that inherently screws black people, because they are only 13% of the population... So if it’s black vs white.. 13% ALWAYS loses to the
other 87%... that’s math.
But if the split is set up purely along ideological lines....that’s where you can get above the 50% required to change things..