Emancipation Draft of Sorts

In National Review on July 20, 2012 Allen C. Guelzo burned the midnight oil to post, at 4:00 A.M. Emancipation: The Un-Holiday
Lincoln himself thought the proclamation “the great event of the nineteenth century."

He informed us that today, 22 July 2012, is the 150th anniversary of the reveal to Lincoln's cabinet of the proclamation, and then he layers on the usual fiction that Lincoln was just trying to be properly legal by freeing only the slaves in the parts of the world that were no longer party of the Union.  I have always found it curious that Lincoln never bothered with staying legal in other areas that were inconvenient for his quelling of a widespread rebellion, like suspending habeas corpus without so much as asking the Congress.

He asked for, and got, a progressive income tax from the Congress, that was properly thrown out as soon as the US Supreme Court got to hear the case.  You see, the Congress passed and Lincoln signed that piece of work knowing full well that it was illegal under the Constitution to directly tax income of individuals.  Yet, Honest Abe could not see it in his fiber to waive his top hat and free all of the slaves.

You were aware that Lincoln did not free any slaves in Union loyal areas, like New Orleans, Louisiana and Kentucky, right?  If not just set your favorite search engine to find the Emancipation Proclamation and read the whole thing.  The world of racial bigotry history, at least the version taught to people who pay good money expecting to learn, is full of the fiction we all heard that flies in the face of the two paragraphs preceding this one.

Here is another one, from over one hundred years after the American Civil War: Communists eliminated racism in Cuba.  Due to the fiction spread from their own fellow travelers, Eldridge Cleaver and Earl Andrew Ferrell, jumped parole and fled to Cuba.  Much to their surprise, they discovered White Communists ran everything in in Cuba!  After being released from Cuban prison, they hung around a few months and "moved" to Algiers.  Cleaver returned to the USA in 1975.

See the article in the Google archive

When Cleaver returned to the USA in 1975, CBS covered the news thusly:

Do You Know Of The Racism Of Progressive Hero Jack London?

Reason magazine, April 1997: Call of the Whites

The Yukon city of Whitehorse announced plans last year to rename one of its main streets Jack London Road. London was in the Yukon during its 1890s gold rush, leaving with only scurvy and his literary inspiration. Before Whitehorse could put up its new street signs, however, a local Indian tribe called the Kwanlin Dun objected. Some of London's personal letters, they charged, contained racist views. According to an account in The Washington Post, these "appeared to advocate white superiority." His defenders tried to save the day, arguing, in the Post's words, that London "was relatively progressive for his era." But an embarrassed Whitehorse decided to drop London.

Actually, both of these characterizations -- that London "appeared to advocate" racism, and that he was "relatively progressive" -- are not only true, they are real understatements.

Read the rest here.

The article cites many of London's writings, including The Unparalleled Invasion, a story about a Western invasion of China and exterminating Asians with germ warfare.  That one story on its own is no evidence of racism.  In my fiction, I write of all sorts of horribles that happen to the main characters, bigotry, torture, involuntary sexual servitude, etc. that I do not want happening to anybody in reality.  Hopefully that is obvious by my non-fiction, serious positions on these issues.  Jack London obviously wanted his non-fiction bigotry to flow through his fiction and Unparalleled Invasion was his bigoted, genocidal dream.  Perhaps it is this habit of so many fiction writers, to fictionalize their true desires, that causes people to assume none of us can just make things up in the quest for an interesting story.

The denial that the American Left grew from the same branch of Socialism that the German National Socialists grew from borders on criminal.  The antics of the American Left truly are criminal.

One reason that the American Left exists at all is an accident in good fortune.  The same sort of accident that benefited Mahatmas Gandhi in India benefits the Left in America: an enemy with a soft heart.  I am still searching for a laissez-faire, free market, "Right Wing" regime in the history of the world that brutally suppressed Socialists.

The closest that I have found is the Pinochet government of Chile.  The only problem there is, that regime began with a Socialistic command economic frame and left power after moving the economy toward the free market.  Even while they were operating as a Socialistic military dictatorship, they were not particularly brutal.  In comparison, the number of people Che Guevara murdered in Cuba is about the same number of opponents that Pinochet had merely jailed in Chile.  Pinochet's victims were freed, Guevara's are lost forever.

If anybody has a candidate for a laissez-faire, free market, "Right Wing" regime, please let me know for inclusion, with attribution, in How Many Borders Would You Like With That Socialism?