The American Slavery Script

The currently approved conceptual framework for American race relations dictates that whites – all of them, simply by dint of being white – are oppressors. Any deviation from this rigid script, no matter how deeply rooted in fact, must be immediately squashed like a blood-engorged tick.

I’ve often discussed how guilt is one of the primary political weapons – in the long run, possibly more powerful than bullets. Since the currently accepted narrative is based far more on an attempt to quarantine historical guilt among whites than it is a sober assessment of the facts, the typical response to any discussion about white slavery is emotional rather than logical.

Here are some facts that the script demands you ignore:

• Even at the peak of American slavery, only a tiny percentage of American whites – about 1.5% – owned slaves.
• Leading up to the Civil War, a vastly higher quotient of whites had worked as indentured servants and convict laborers than had ever owned slaves. Most historians, regardless of their political orientation, agree that anywhere from half to two-thirds of whites who came to the American colonies arrived in bondage. The fact that the vast majority of whites existed in a state closer to slavery than to slave ownership is something resolutely ignored in the modern retelling of history.
• Documents from the era show that so-called white indentured servants were often referred to as “slaves” rather than “servants.”
• These “servants” did not always enter into voluntary contracts. There is overwhelming evidence that many of them were kidnapped by organized criminal rings and sent to work on American plantations. It is possible that as many, if not more, whites than blacks were brought involuntarily to the colonies.
• The middle-passage death rates for these “servants” were comparable to that of blacks on slave ships from Africa to the New World.
• Indentured servants were whipped and beaten, sometimes to death. When they escaped, notices were placed for their capture.
• These “servants” lived under conditions so brutal that an estimated half of them died before their seven-year term of indenture expired.

Compiled from The Redneck Manifesto – A 1641 law provided for all disobedient servants to have their skin branded, regardless of its color. A 1652 law in Providence and Warwicke (later Rhode Island) mentions “blacke mankind or white” servants. During a 1659 Parliamentary debate on the white-servant trade to the colonies, legislators used the word “slaves” rather than “servants.” A 1683 Pennsylvania law contains the phrase “no Servant White or Black.”

A Virginia law of 1705 mentions the “care of all Christian slaves,” ‘Christian’ being a contemporary euphemism for European. A colonial observer of Virginia convict laborers said, “I never see such pasels [passels, parcels] of pore Raches [poor dogs?] in my Life... they are used no Bater [better] than so many negro Slaves.” A 1777 screed protesting the indenture racket claimed that a white servant’s body was “as absolutely subjected as the body or person of a Negro, man or woman, who is sold as a legal Slave.” In the 1820s, Karl Anton Postl commented that non-slave-owning whites “are not treated better than the slaves themselves.”

In contemporary histories, Howard Zinn stated that “white indentured servants were often treated as badly as black slaves.” Eugene Genovese wrote that “In the South and in the Caribbean, the treatment meted out to white indentured servants had rivalled and often exceeded in brutality that meted out to black slaves.”

From Michael A. Hoffman – Judaic-Americans played a pivotal role in the merchandising of black flesh prior to the 20th century. Black academics such as the late Prof. Tony Martin of Wellesley College are marginalized and their career opportunities severely curtailed if they dare to inform their students of the vast Judaic role in black enslavement in the Americas, as detailed in the magisterial history books, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, Volumes I, II, and III.