INTERNAL AD
April 22, 2024
Slimes Caption:
In the 1850s, critics of American slavery in the United States were influenced by German thinkers like Karl Marx
NY Times: How German Atheists Made America Great Again
Taken together, two new books tell the century-long story of the revolutionary ideals that transformed the United States
By S C Gwynne
Rebuttal By
Well, ya learn something new every day from our esteemed Marxist pointyheads of Quackademia. How many of "youse guys" knew that "German Atheists" inspired the abolition of slavery in America? "Historian" S C Gwynne (of Princeton & Johns Hopkins), in this dual book review for the Slimes, says so:
.
"In the 1850s, critics of American slavery in the United States were influenced by German thinkers like Karl Marx and Ludwig Feuerbach."
.
This mendacity is as astonishing as it is nauseating! Never mind the fact that just about all of the nation's esteemed founders (both slave-owning and non-slave-owning alike) wished for the institution to eventually die a slow peaceful death. Never mind that abolitionist sentiment and subsequent movements also date back to the very founding of the republic. No. It was the "German" (cough cough) Karl Marx -- pooped out by his bitch of a mother decades after Messrs. Washington, Adams, Franklin, Jefferson, Madison et al had all stated that they wanted slavery to end -- who should get the credit for the oh-so-original idea of freeing the slaves.
.
Hazmat suits and hip waders on, boys and girls. Into the Oy Vey League cesspool we go for a rebutting review of Gwynne's reviews for AN EMANCIPATION OF THE MIND, by Matthew Stewart (Princeton grad), and THE RISE AND FALL OF THE SECOND AMERICAN REPUBLIC, by Manisha Sinha (Columbia grad, born in India).
Mad quackademics Gwynne, Matthews and Sinha credit the emanicipation of the slaves -- and the protection given to them after the Civil War -- to their atheistic "German" guru, Karl Marx!
On the Matthews Book
.
S C Gwynne: What was the Civil War about? In a word, slavery.
Rebuttal: Wrong! Right out the gate, this ass-clown exposes himself as a totally indoctrinated ignoramus. Slavery-- its expansion, to be more precise -- was indeed an important contributing factor, but not the underlying cause of the war. The war was fought in order to thwart Rothschild's scheme to split the United States in two and impose a central bank upon each half. In a three-word phrase: it was about: saving the. Union.
.
S C Gwynne: What actually caused the war, however, is a vastly more difficult idea. Try this explanation on for size: The driving force in American politics in the decades after the American Revolution was the rise of an arrogant, ruthless, parasitic oligarchy in the South.
Rebuttal: This is actually a true statement, though it leaves out the connection between that "parasitic oligarchy" and certain forces in Europe, (Britain, France & the House of Rothschild).
.
S C Gwynne: ....built on a foundation of Christian religion and a vision of permanent, God-ordained economic inequality.
Rebuttal: Gwynne (and Matthews) reveal their God-hating Atheism. The Plantation Oligarchy may have thought of slavery as God-ordained and consistent with the principles of Christianity, but nowhere in this article does he mention the religious fervor of the Christian abolitionists. Why the omission?
.
S C Gwynne: To fight this notion and crush what amounted to an existential threat to democracy, the antislavery movement needed ideas as much as, ultimately, guns.
Rebuttal: "The antislavery movement needed ideas?" Where is this ass-wipe going with this?
.
S C Gwynne: From 1770 to 1860 .... the number of churches exploded, North and South. Soon, most of these churches, using clear and manifold endorsements of slavery from the Bible (“Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ”), were promoting and actively defending the slave republic. As the antislavery crowd soon learned, it was impossible to spin “slavery is sin” arguments against biblical literalism.
Rebuttal: Abolitionism was being hindered by the spread of Christianity, both in the North and South? Really? Then why had all of the northern states abolished slavery many decades before the Civil War?
.
S C Gwynne: Two decades before the outbreak of war, abolitionism was still a skulking pariah, a despised minority in the North as well as the South.
Rebuttal: This is partially true, because few in the North wanted the nation to be ruptured over slavery. Enlightened opinion in the North, as promoted by the newly established Republican Party, was to stop slavery from spreading to the new territories joining the Union.
.
S C Gwynne: The abolitionists clearly needed help. Enter the Germans, specifically the freethinking Germans.
Rebuttal: Here we go.
.
S C Gwynne: A large group of German intellectuals, fresh from the battles of 1848, arrived on American shores, joined the abolitionist movement and radicalized it.
Rebuttal: This may be true, but it is totally irrelevant to the question at hand because the abolitionists never had Lincoln's ear, at least not during the build-up to the war. In fact, after southern states had begun seceding from the Union, but before he was even inaugurated, President Elect Lincoln actually supported a Constitutional Amendment which would have guaranteed no Federal interference with slavery in the states in which it already existed. During his inaugural address of 1861, he even made that support public!
.
S C Gwynne: Between 1852 and 1862, Marx and Friedrich Engels wrote 487 articles for The New York Daily Tribune; Lincoln likely read them.
Rebuttal: How the heck does this butt-plug know that Lincoln "likely" read these articles? And how exactly would Lincoln have "likely" read these New York pieces when he lived in Illinois at the time? On the Internet? And even if he had somehow read them, why do these Atheists assume that the idea to end slavery originated with Marx and various other "German intellectuals," when all of the founders had long advocated for such?
.
.
* Editor's Note: Marx's true interest in slave liberation was to eventually lure the freed Blacks into the ranks of the dissatisfied Red proletariat. His unsolicited letter to Lincoln should therefore be viewed in its proper context.
1-3: Washington (Father of the country), Jefferson (father of the Declaration of Independence) and Madison (father of the Constitution), though all Virginian slave-owners themselves, wished for the institution to gradually fade away peacefully. // 4: Abe Lincoln's long-held position on the issue was identical to that of the founders, and he often cited them in his arguments against expanding slavery. He did not need "German Atheists" like Karl Marx to instruct him!
On the Sinha Book
.
S C Gwynne: Her Reconstruction embraces the Progressive Era, women’s suffrage, the final wars against Native Americans, immigration and even U.S. imperialism in the latter 19th and early 20th centuries.
Rebuttal: Now they are going to creatively spin the post-Civil War Reconstruction into another Marxist achievment.
.
S C Gwynne: In Sinha’s telling, the acheivement of Reconstruction (latter 1860s and early 1870s) is truly amazing. The federal decision to use the Army against recalcitrant ex-Confederates to secure rights for Black people resulted, she writes, in “a brief, shining historical moment which meant the inauguration of a progressive, interracial democracy.”
Rebuttal: The code word, "progressive" means liberalism / Marxism. That is NOT what Reconstruction (in the political sense) represented. The dominant Republican Party (which the overwhelming majority of grateful Blacks would vote for the next 65 years) was pro-business, pro-religion, pro-private property, pro-Gold Standard and pro-peace. That era's Republicans were pure "MAGA"-types who were HATED by "progressives" -- which is why Presidents Garfield and McKinley were also assassinated by radicals.
.
S C Gwynne: Sinha convincingly advances her vision of Reconstruction all the way forward to 1920, when the 19th Amendment granted women’s suffrage. That landmark event was inspired by the marquee equal rights amendments of the Reconstruction era, which, Sinha writes, “bequeathed a legacy of political activism and progressive constitutionalism” on the movement, a breath of air that gave America new life.
Rebuttal: This is so mistaken. The "Progressive Era" under RINO President Teddy Roosevelt, and Demonrat Presidents Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt, has zero historical connection to either the Civil War or the ensuing Reconstruction Era policies. By spinning history like this, the Left is stealing the credit for ending slavery, as well as protecting and helping the freed slaves to adapt after the war. In reality, credit belongs exclusively to the right-wing Republican Party of the late 1800s. If "progressives" should be given credit for anything, it is for deliberately destroying and reversing much of the economic and cultural progress which Blacks had been making under Republican governance.
*
.
Unfortunately, this type of reality-inverting Marxist spin on history gives southern revisionists of the School of "Lost Cause Ideology" an opening for making a ridiculous linkage between Lincoln and Marx. For the straight scoop on the US Civil War, be sure to read and review my latest book: DIXELAND DECEIVED.
The murders of Presidents Lincoln (1865), Garfield (1881) and McKinley (1901) . They were all right-wing Republicans, supported by Black voters, killed by 'Propaganda of the Deed" assassins working for the same Rothschild Demonrat Mafia which then gave us "progressivism."
Boobus Americanus 1: I read in the New York Times today that the writings of Karl Marx may have influenced Lincoln to free the slaves.
Boobus Americanus 2: Fascinating.
*
St Sugar: You credulous cretins will frickin' believe ANYTHING if it comes from the lying mouth of a commie quackademic!
Editor: Meanwhile, yours truly toils away in obscurity for stating the truth.
Please share this article -- copy & paste the heading and link below to your social media pages and emails.
Comments(All comments are read, but not always responded to)