The history of the United States of America has it share of unsightly stains. I categorize a "stain" on our history as things which run counter to the ideals and principles espoused in The Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States of America, and the Bill of Rights.
The most enduring and noteworthy stains have been slavery, racism, and elitism, which both run directly counter to the foundational principle that "all men are created equal." An emerging stain is the intolerant, and anti-democratic movements of 'social justice', critical race theory (CRT), and 'wokeness.'
In spite of very real stains, the United States of America is unequaled in the history of the world for enabling the political liberty and economic prosperity of people all over the world.
Part 1 - Slavery
In fairness to the Founding Fathers, many of them recognized the hypocrisy of their egalitarian principles and the institution of slavery. They made some concessions in their principles to keep the states united as one nation. At the same time, they took steps to minimize the political leverage that might accrue to slave owners by discounting the value of their human chattel with regards to apportioning legislative seats.
I believe the Founding Fathers also trusted that, over time, the principle of 'forming a more perfect union' would continue to erode slavery until it could be abolished entirely. Which is exactly what happened.
The Three-Fifths Compromise
The so-called three-fifths compromise, alluded to above, is actually a racist statement, but it may surprise some to realize that it isn't racist towards blacks. It is racist toward Native Americans (Indians):
Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three-fifths of all other Persons
Note that the words 'slave' and 'black' are not used anywhere is the Constitution. Rather the terms used are "free Persons," persons "bound to service for a term of years" (i.e., indentured servants), and "all other Persons." Only the "Indians" (all Native Americans) who were undeniably free persons, were called out and excluded by race from either category.
As a matter of Constitutional law, slavery was not a racial matter. Slavery was a legal status.
US Civil War Ended Slavery
The US Civil War was the slave owners' last ditch effort to preserve the institution of slavery which was, then, cornerstone to their economic livelihood. They had no way to know that less than thirty years after the Civil War (about 1894), Eli Whitney would invent the cotton gin, which would effectively eliminate a significant reliance on manual labor for the production of cotton.
Regardless of arguments over states' rights versus slavery as the proximate cause of the Civil War, it is incontrovertible that the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution is directly linked to the Civil War. It was passed in January of 1865 and ratified in December of that same year. The amendment ensured that the debate over the legality of slavery would be ended when the Union prevailed over the Confederate States of America. The amendment converted the Emancipation Proclamation, a potentially temporary executive order using the wartime powers of President Abraham Lincoln, into the overarching law for all states in the United States of America.
Separating Racism and Slavery
The 13th Amendment does not address racism, at all. It further perfects the Union by eliminating slavery. It also eliminates the portion of the US Constitution which discounted the voting power of slaves, because it eliminated the legal status of slavery.
AMENDMENT XIIISection 1.Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.Section 2.Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Source: National Archives
Slavery is a legal status, not a racial one.
There is ample evidence in the historical record to support this assertion. If we accept the terms 'black' and 'white' as racial identifiers, then the fact that blacks in America owned slaves substantially destroys the argument that slavery is a racial issue. Further, the historical evidence supporting the involuntary servitude (i.e., slavery) of Irish prisoners brought to the American colonies by the English destroys the remaining foundation of any argument that slavery in the Americas was purely a racist institution.
Part 2 Racism
Racism Defined
Racism has existed from time-immemorial. It is based on prejudice.
The Merriam Webster dictionary defines racism as:
- Belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
- Behavior or attitudes that reflect and foster this belief : racial discrimination or prejudice
- Systemic oppression of a racial group to the social, economic, and political advantage of another
- A political or social system founded on racism and designed to execute its principles
Prejudice
Webster defines prejudice as:
- injury or damage resulting from some judgment or action of another in disregard of one's rights
- preconceived judgment or opinion
- an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge
- an instance of such judgment or opinion
- an irrational attitude of hostility directed against an individual, a group, a race, or their supposed characteristics
Notice that prejudice is characterized by being based on lack of knowledge and irrationality.
Prejudice and racism are nothing new. Throughout history, nearly every distinct tribe, people, and nation have fostered prejudice against others.
Among the Native American tribes of the USA most nations referred to themselves as some variant of "the human beings." This implied that other nations were less than human.
The peoples of the USA believed they had a "manifest destiny" to conquer and control all of North America (and at times beyond those limits).
Romans considered themselves superior to the barbarian nations on their borders.
Germans are better than the French. The French are better than the Germans.
Before World War II, the racial prejudice of the Japanese led them declare themselves the "master race" and justify their conquest of Korea, China, and everywhere else as a logical outcome of their racial superiority and natural right to rule.
Nearly everyone is aware of the Aryan master race theory promoted by Adolf Hitler as the rationalization for the subjugation of all "inferior" races and even the extermination of specific races. His delusion led to the death of more than six million Jews as well as contributing to the deaths of 75 to 80 million soldiers and civilians in World War II.
Racial Slavery Justified
Regardless of the legal nicety distinguishing the issues of slavery and racism, it is irrefutable that, in the years leading up to the Civil War, most slaves in the United States of America were of African descent. The ethnic characteristics of the Africans were often very different than the European ethnic characteristics of those in power. This facilitated the mental gymnastics of Bible-toting slave owners to justify their enslavement, even in the face of Christian mores condemning slavery.
They reasoned that the ethnic differences between Africans and Europeans were outward manifestations of fundamental differences in the intellectual and spiritual capacities of Africans and Europeans.
This ethnicity-driven attitude toward slavery contrasts sharply with the historical justification of slavery as the merciful fate of the weak at the hands of the strong. Throughout human history, those who survived the violent conquest of their people were enslaved.
The Root of Raced-Based Slavery
Slave owners in the USA did not have the pretext of conquest to provide any moral justification for slavery, so they had to invent a moral pretext. If Africans were inherently inferior to Europeans, then enslaving Africans was an act of service, lifting them above their brute existence and into the lowest rungs of civilization.
At best, this was a specious argument. At worst it was simply a lie and blatant rationalization to quell a guilty conscience. The suppression of teaching slaves to read and write was a necessary measure to prevent the refutation of this ethnic rationalization of slavery. Blacks who could read, write, and reason as well as any European would put the lie to the argument that they were inherently inhuman brutes, barely better than savage beasts, or other domesticated livestock.
To support slavery in the USA, the ethnic differences of Africans and Europeans had to be portrayed as more than ethnic variations. Instead the Africans had to be transformed into a species that was similar to humans, but something slightly less. They had to be portrayed as a separate race of humans-like creatures with capabilities and potentials distinctly different, and less than European humans.
Part 3 - Modern Stains
Critical Race Theory (CRT)
CRT is nothing more or less than racism. Its foundational concept is that individual and collective behavior is predestined based on skin color. But, CRT is not color-blind. It is specifically and particularly anti-white.
Under the notions of CRT, white people are evil oppressors and black people are oppressed victims.
A key premise is that any institution (such as the government of the United States of America) which has been created and supported by white people is inherently designed to promote white-supremacy. Further, such institutions are irredeemably corrupted by this racist purpose and cannot be corrected. Instead, they must be dismantled and replaced by institutions built by black people. The assumption inherent in the is either that black people will inherently create untainted institutions, or that building institutions which are anti-white is definitively "good" because white people are defined as "evil."
It doesn't take a revelation from God to see that such vituperative views will inevitably lead to genocidal violence. Violent, genocide is the logical end of advocacy of any philosophy based on irrational hatred of others because of their inherent traits.
Racial violence deriving from CRT will come from any or all of three sources:
- As a natural extension of CRT as its advocates embrace their own version of Hitler's "Final Solution" and seek to exterminate whites.
- White supremacists winning adherents and supporters to aggressively "protect" whites from increasingly threatening and militant CRT supporters.
- Ordinary people who reject racism, embrace Constitutional principles, and band together to defend themselves against militant CRT black supremacists and militant white supremacists.
When that happens, it will be another stain on the history of the USA.
Wokeness
While the dictionary definition of wokeness sounds like a good thing, its practice is pretty vile. The Cambridge English Dictionary defines wokeness as:
Aa state of being aware, especially of social problems such as racism and inequality
Being aware of social problems such as racism and inequality is a good thing. If we are unaware of problems, we are nearly incapable of resolving them. Unfortunately, in practice, wokeness is particularly centered in the notion of intersectionality.
The way in which different types of discrimination (= unfair treatment because of a person's sex, race, etc.) are connected to and affect each other
Intersectionality, in practice, is a game of one-upmanship where each person tries to show how much more (potentially) they are oppressed than others because of their unique behaviors or characteristics. The underlying motive is to secure preferential treatment for some intersections more than for others. The reasoning is that the greater preference is required to offset the greater degree of oppression or discrimination. The reality is that practitioners of intersectionality want to derive financial benefits based wholly on their characteristics (inherent or otherwise) without any effort or value-add to society. The narcissistic foundation of intersectionality is that society should pay for the enrichment is supposedly receives from the presence of such intersections.
The Irony of Wokeness
The consummate irony of intersectionality is that when you carry it to its logical end point, you inevitably arrive at a doctrine which determines that the individual, is the ultimate expression of intersectionality and thus merits the greatest degree of societal protection and support.
Individual worth and protection, regardless of other characteristics, is the cornerstone of the principles of Constitutional law and liberty. That is why the Constitution begins with the words, "We the People..."
Social Justice
The Cambridge Dictionary defines social justice as:
"The idea that all people should have the same rights and opportunities and that a country's wealth and resources should benefit everyone in that country"
Like wokeness, this is another movement that sounds right in its definition, but is totally wrong in its execution.
Let's unpack this definition to find out where it goes wrong.
"all people should have the same rights"
That statement is totally in agreement with the founding principles of the USA.
"all people should have the same ... opportunities"
Life Isn't Fair
Here, we begin to skate on thin ice. Opportunities are often closely linked with circumstances and personal characteristics. Suggesting that everyone should be given the same opportunities is based on the false assumption that life is fair and evenhanded in the distribution of our circumstances and characteristics.
Some of us have greater intellectual capacity than others. The person with an IQ of 60 is unlikely to have the opportunity to attend MIT because that low IQ indicates the inability of that person to succeed at the level of intellectual endeavors needed to matriculate and succeed in studies at MIT.
Although there is not equivalent of and IQ for artistic talent, someone with my mediocre level of artistic skill is not going to benefit from, and hence not receive, an opportunity to attend Julliard. My abilities simply aren't sufficient to qualify me for attendance.
Legislating such "fairness" of opportunities without regard to abilities will have the end result of destroying excellence, and all the benefits that come from excellence. Excellent inventions such as smart phones, excellent art such as a Warhol (even mediocre art such as a Bob Rossi), and many other marvelous and beautiful enhancements to our lives will cease to occur.
Outcomes
"a country's wealth and resources should benefit everyone in that country"
This component of social justice is focused on individual outcomes. Everyone, means every individual. The premise here is that we should all get the same outcomes. The assumption is that these outcomes are universally good, hence the word "benefit."
The bitter reality is that the only way you can ensure that everyone gets the same benefit is by denying all but the most rudimentary benefits to everyone. Worse, such enforced egalitarian poverty is at odds with basic human nature and thus is doomed to failure. Enforced poverty will inevitably lead to corruption as people seeks ways to manipulate the system to provide themselves with what levels of comfort they want (regardless of what they may, or may not, deserve).
Capitalism
Worst of all, this phrase is totally anti-capitalist.
The beating heart of capitalism is sustained by two things:
- the free and uncoerced exchange of goods and services
- the natural principle of supply and demand
While governments and individuals may strive, or succeed, to exert coercion in exchanges, the natural principles of supply and demand cannot be subverted. They are inexorable.
Scarcity and utility are the natural drivers of value. People are willing to exchange more goods and services for those goods and services which are more scarce or of greater utility. They unwilling to exchange goods and services which are scarce or very useful and will do so only if the exchange is of equal or greater value to them.
Because of this natural principle, those who provide the most scarce or most useful goods and services will inevitably accrue a greater abundance of other goods and services than others.
Socialism
This is true even (or especially) in the halls of socialist governments, where valuable information or access is clandestinely and routinely traded for such goods and services as the holder of information or access desires. Political and economic power are commodities which are scarce and very useful. Thus, such egalitarian utopias almost immediately upon inception descend into corruption as illegal exchanges become the only means whereby anyone can rise above the enforced poverty dictated by the state.
Even if equality of outcomes were possible, it would be undesirable. The behavior of slaves is especially instructive in this point.
Social Justice is Economic Slavery
All slaves enjoy an equality of outcome from their labors. From their masters they get food, clothing, and shelter. The rewards do not increase in proportion to the success of the master's enterprise. As a result, when the master is not overseeing their work, slaves do only the minimal amount of work they are not forced to do.
No one will exert themselves to excellent inventions, art, innovations, or anything else, unless it will directly increase the rewards they receive for their efforts. You may argue that this should not be how people behave. However, you can just as effectively argue that the sun should rise in the West as many days as it rises in the East, and have just as much success at changing things.
Equality of Outcomes Equals Destitution
Equality of outcomes is both unattainable and undesirable. Equality of outcomes destroys initiative, innovation, excellence, and abundance. It leads only to universal poverty and destitution.
Part 4 - The Greatness of America
As I mentioned at the start of this essay, the United States of America is unequaled in the history of the world for enabling the political liberty and economic prosperity of people all over the world.
The USA is the first nation in the history of the world which was founded on the principles of individual liberty. The US Constitution and Bill of Rights is the first government expressly designed to protect the rights of the people and preserve them from oppression by the state.
The success of the American Revolution, and its founding principles, led directly to democratic revolutions all over the world, beginning first with France. It is arguable that if the American Revolution had failed, most of what we currently know as "the free world" would still be governed by powerful monarchies. Instead, they are republics, governed by leaders who are elected by the people to serve for a time while representing the best interests of the people.
The USA has fought and won two world wars to defend the political liberty of people in other countries. Unlike conquering powers throughout history, the USA did not require political or economic subservience or servitude of its defeated foes. Rather, it expended its treasure to rebuild its former foes and encouraged their self-determination.
In the wake of the successful imperial efforts of the USA (a stain in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries) instead of colonizing and retaining the servitude of countries such as the Philippines, Cuba, Mexico, and most of the Pacific Islands, in the twentieth century the USA relinquished control of these countries to self-governance.
Through most of the twentieth century and now in the twenty-first century, the USA consistently eschews colonialism and imperialism. Preferring instead to encourage self-governance, the rule of law, and universal recognition and protection of the inalienable rights of humanity.
The Decline of America
Nation Building
Sadly, our national good intentions have been abused as politicians have been seduced into "nation building." We try to impose our economic and political values and structures of governance on other nations which have not reached a point of maturity where they have a majority of people who desire these.
Most recently we see this failure in Afghanistan. Instead of using our military might to teach the Taliban that it is not in their best interests to support those who attack the people of the USA, we took over their country for a time. While there, we tried to encourage democratic government. We failed because democracy is never something that can be imposed upon a people. They must win it for themselves. True, they may need outside help, but it is worth noting that no French armies took the field with American revolutionaries against the British. The greatest share of bleeding for freedom was done by Americans.
Previously, we saw this same lesson explained to us in Vietnam. Before that, it was taught to us in the jungles of Central America during the so-called wars of the Banana republics. In all those cases, after we removed our military, the governments of those countries collapsed and re-emerged in forms that the people of that country were willing to support.
Moral Decadence
At the same time as we are seeking to build other nations, our national public persona has come to be widely portrayed by media and popular culture as dissolute, licentious, and pleasure seeking. Our movies, societal trends, and many of our laws seem to disregard the importance of the nuclear family, religion, and the sanctity of life.
All these destructive societal trends were manifested preceding the destruction of the Roman Republic and the Roman Empire. They are clearly critical performance indicators for the survival of any nation. Many of our current trends, are repugnant to wholesome people of all nations. It isn't hard to understand how Muslim extremists can gain credibility with more mainstream people by calling the USA "the Great Satan." Our society is becoming increasingly devilish and degenerate.
Conclusions
We have many old, and some new, stains on our history. Slavery, racism, CRT, wokeness, social justice, and even some imperialism are all stains on our history. Many of our old stains have been removed. Some persist and are made worse by new stains. Although the old stains of slavery and imperialism have been vanquished, racism persists and is being exacerbated by things like CRT and wokeness. Before the rise of CRT, racism in the USA was on the wane and nearly extinct.
Despite these stains on its robes, the USA is still the best place on earth to live. We enjoy a level of economic abundance, mobility, and liberty which is the envy of the world. Our political freedom (though rapidly eroding) is still substantially greater than anywhere else. The USA is still a shining city on a hill and a beacon of freedom. Those who say otherwise are either ignorant of the facts, or jealous and conniving for our downfall.
We will solve our social ills by ensuring that the law applies equally to everyone, without any regard to their immutable characteristics, or their choice of religion.
Follow Tom on Twitter: @ThomasKSheppard
Tom Sheppard is a business consultant and coach to small business owners and individuals. He is a recognized author with dozens of titles in business and fiction to his credit. One of his endeavors is to help those who want to see their own book in print. He does this through his trademarked Book Whispering Process (TM).
The author is not an official spokesperson for any organization or person mentioned herein.
(c) Copyright 2023 A+ Results LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Your comments are welcome... Please observe some ground rules. No profanity, vulgarity, or personal attacks. Profanity, vulgarity and personal attacks not only betray a lack of vocabulary and imagination, they also are the hallmarks of bigotry, and bigotry is the hallmark of someone who is fundamentally insecure in their views. Facts are always welcome.
If you believe Government is NOT the answer to all our problems, you will want to read
Godvernment: Government as God
Godvernment: Government as God
