Slavery has always been a part of life in all civilizations. Aristotle declared, “From the hour of their birth, some are marked out for subjection, others for rule. In his day, there were more slaves than free males. Professor David P. Forsythe wrote in his book, The Globalist, “The fact remained that at the beginning of the nineteenth century an estimated three-quarters of all people alive were trapped in bondage against their will either in some form of slavery or serfdom.”

So, while slavery has always been with us, it has always been the result of one group taking advantage of another for the first groups’ benefit.

Slavery has been a reality since the early days of civilization for a simple reason: Men are inherently wicked. Theologians call it sin that came down to us through our parents from Adam and Eve. Although far more Whites have been enslaved than Blacks, that makes little difference except for the record.

It is also a fact that black African chiefs enslaved their own people, marched them to the west coast of Africa, and sold them to Arab, Jewish, Portuguese, English, and American traders. When the white slavers refused to pay the black slave traders’ asking price, the chiefs simply refused to sell. They knew how to get their price. It’s called waiting. The white slavers pouted in their ships just offshore as their food and water dwindled. Eventually, they capitulated and paid the asking price. The slaves were then distributed all over the world, not only in America.

I also want to make clear that no slaves are alive today in America. If there were, I would agree that they should be compensated. When I wrote AIDS: Silent Killer in 1987, I dealt with the now infamous Tuskegee Study where black men were used and abused in medical experiments for many years by the U.S. Government. On numerous talk shows, I advocated the prosecution of all responsible U. S. officials still alive and reparations for the few still living black men. Each man still living received $37,500. Not much in my opinion.

But no slaves are alive today, and it is insane, inappropriate, and impossible to expect any kind of payment after so many years.

My critics will reply that while no one alive has been held captive, the fact that generations of Blacks were kept in slavery, without education, with no ability to build a solid foundation, means their descendants would be far better off today without that past injustice. They say payday someday is today so pay up. However, that is a flawed argument.

Robert Fogel and Stanley L. Engerman did an enormous study of slavery in, Time on the Cross,  in which they estimated that about 85% of the economic output of American slave labor was consumed by the slaves themselves in the form of food, clothing, etc. Therefore, while the argument is not totally invalid, it does not have the force the proponents think. The bulk of slave production was used for their own benefit! Loss of their argument.

Frankly, according to Fogel and Engerman, those who make the argument that Blacks have made such an impressive contribution to present society significantly overstate their case. David Horowitz suggests, “Logically, it has about as much substance as the suggestion that O. J. Simpson should have been acquitted because of past racism by the criminal courts.”

There are other problems: Who funds the scam, and who profits from the scam? Since the money would come from the U.S. Treasury, then all taxpayers would be paying. That means Blacks would be paying for their own reparations! It also means that recent immigrants would be paying as well as descendants of those who arrived in America since the Civil War who had no connection to slavery.

Furthermore, Northerners would be paying reparations when their distant relatives fought and died “to free the slaves”! By what logic can that be justified? Additionally, not all Blacks living today have a heritage of slavery. Former President Obama is such a person.

There were 7 million Whites in the South, and 6.5 million of them did not own slaves, so why should their descendants pay for slavery perpetrated by others? Should American Indians pay reparations since they were allegedly here before Whites or black slaves?

But then some Indians owned black slaves and even ate them during bad times!

Then there is the task of determining who gets paid. If one could justify reparations for Blacks who are descendant from slave families, how do we know which Blacks are descendants of slaves? Many present-day Blacks are descendants of free Blacks! Some living Blacks would be receiving money for mistreatment that did not involve them or their relatives. That is dishonest.

There is another problem that is unknown by most Americans: the US Census of 1830 reveals there were 3,775 free Blacks who owned 12,740 black slaves so how do we differentiate between those who had ancestors who were slaves and those whose ancestors were not slaves but were in fact, slaveholders? By paying money (ripped from hard-working taxpayers of all races) to Blacks whose ancestors owned slaves, we would be rewarding slavery!

But it gets worse! And more complicated since 65,000 Southern free black slaves voluntarily served in the Confederate military, how do we pay their present-day ancestors reparations? Isn’t it very inconsistent to pay reparations to Blacks whose ancestors fought against “freeing the slaves”?

The biblical standard of each person is responsible for his or her own sins comes into play, so I want to know why sons and daughters should be held responsible for the sins of their fathers.

How will it set with poor white Americans who are struggling to live when they are taxed to pay reparations to wealthy Blacks such as Jesse Jackson, Spike Lee, Barack Obama, Oprah Winfrey, Michael Jordan, and a whole gaggle of rich entertainers and professional athletes? Talk about racial strife! I suggest that reparations will do more to divide the races than forced busing ever did.

Furthermore, I believe that millions of Americans will simply refuse to pay taxes if such an unfair, unreasonable, and unworkable policy is implemented. Look for a major tax revolt.

Also, American Blacks had and have incredible opportunities to be successful in our nation. It is also a fact that the poorest Black in the roughest ghetto is many times better off than those Blacks living in totalitarian nations in Africa. In fact, some Blacks are thankful that their ancestors were brought here so they could live in a free country to hear the Gospel of Christ instead of living in constant fear of false pagan gods, tribal wars, starvation, cannibals, etc. While the slave trade was horrific and all connected to it were criminals, there have been residual effects for which some Blacks are thankful.

Even Cassis Clay, better known as Muhammad Ali, who fought George Foreman in Zaire for the world heavyweight boxing title, realized his advantages because his ancestors were brought to America. Ali won the fight, and upon returning to the United States, he was asked by a reporter, “Champ, what did you think of Africa?” Ali replied, “Thank God, my granddaddy got on that boat!”

Only a fool, a fanatic, or falsifier would disagree.

(Dr. Don Boys is a former member of the Indiana House of Representatives who ran a large Christian school in Indianapolis and wrote columns for USA Today for 8 years. Boys authored 18 books, the most recent being Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning!  The eBook is available here with the printed edition (and other titles) at www.cstnews.com. Follow him on Facebook at Don  Boys, Ph.D.; and visit his blog.  Send a request to DBoysphd@aol.com for a free subscription to his  articles, and click here to support  his work with a donation.)

This on-rushing bandwagon (full of explosives) may cause more racial strife than forced busing for school integration! Radical black leaders are demanding that U.S. taxpayers pay the descendants of slaves a suggested $1,000,000 each! And yes, I am serious, but it gets worse because those black leaders are serious.

The National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America (N’COBRA) was established in 1987 and is a gaggle of organizations and individuals organized for the sole purpose of hustling reparations for black descendants in the United States. In February of 2001, hundreds of people attended the Reparations Convention in Chicago, where “Brother Howshua” proposed that blacks receive free education, free medical care, free legal advice, and free financial aid. Additionally, there would be no taxes, and if they wish to emigrate to Africa, they would each receive a million dollars!

Of reparations, The Washington Post admitted, “The subject is scalding hot, untouchable as public policy. Even the brave run from it.” Yes, it is “scalding hot,” but no, I am not running from this illegal, immoral, and incredible shakedown. And, make no mistake, it is just that: a shakedown, a scam of significant proportions.

The reparations scam has been simmering for decades, and it is scalding hot now that Democrats are running things. Many Democrats are for reparations, but then most politicians, to get votes, would promise young, tender missionaries for Sunday dinner to any cannibals in their district. And with the chaos at the southern border, we may have a few cannibals—and they will vote Democrat.

Of course, informed people are dazed and dazzled by their pandering to the lowest common denominator, but few are deceived.

At the National Reparations Convention in Detroit, it was a Muslim love fest with traditional Muslims and Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam. Their website says, “You can never be totally free, until Mother Africa is recognized and respected. Free the land!” I have no idea what that means. One Black said when he gets his reparation check, he is going back home to Africa. Well, that would be one positive use of confiscated funds.

At the Detroit meeting, I did not see one white face in the forum of maybe 300 people who want access to your checkbook. Every time N’COBRA was mentioned, the Nation of Islam was mentioned. When the offering was taken, the Muslim leader said, the money would go to the “N’COBRA national movement and the local Nation of Islam.”

Farrakhan agreed, declaring, “Our reparations must be complete and total.” In other words, open your wallets, Whitey. Or, more correctly, give me your checkbook after you sign all the checks. Farrakhan also ranted in one of the most racist diatribes I have ever heard, but no one in the media discussed it. Was it too hot?

Farrakhan was introduced as “one of the greatest leaders in history.” He calmly ranted about Blacks being the original humans until they were corrupted by Whitey. He then said Blacks were “the original man, the cream of the planet, and the absolute God of the Universe.” He declared, “Blacks are liars, thieves, homosexuals, lesbians, etc., because the white man made them that way…And reparations were not only about money.” He asked, “What will a white man’s nigger do with money and no love for himself and his own people?”

Louis used nigger three times, but I’ll be scolded for using it rightly. He said when Blacks reach a certain point of success, “there will be Whites and the system will block any further growth…We want equal justice under the law applied equally to all regardless of creed, class or color…We want a full and complete freedom….”

He did not blame Jewish people for sending the United States to “hell” as he did in another speech. Instead, he warned Jewish people, “when it’s God who puts you in the ovens, it’s forever.” He has also repeatedly described Jewish people as “satanic.”

Farrakhan has a history of making bigoted statements against white people, once declaring that “white people deserve to die, and they know, so they think it’s us coming to do it” at a Milwaukee event. He also described white people as “potential humans” who “haven’t evolved yet.” In addition, he has said that Hitler was a “great man” overlooking his whiteness.

Farrakhan lives very well off the backs of Blacks. So what’s new? Haven’t most black “leaders” (and some white leaders) done that for generations? Louis has a 77-acre country estate in addition to two posh Chicago homes. For sure, race-baiting pays big time.

The black hustler did not tell the Detroit audience if he is still followed by a monstrous spaceship wherever he goes to protect him from harm. Farrakhan did not tell them that he also saw Elvis, Amelia Earhart, and Jimmy Hoffa on the ship, but had he done so, the crowd would have believed him. After all, “God” cannot lie. Louis told the crowd that the “wheel” ship would one day destroy the white man and bring Blacks into power. He also assured the adoring crowd that 1500 smaller planes from the giant “wheel” follow him at all times.

Now you know why he is called “Screwy Louie.”

How can anyone take such a nut job seriously? Why does the media give him any credibility? It is a major scandal that any politician or any civilized person would consider him anything but a low-life exploiter of naïve, careless, and gullible Blacks. (And of naïve, irresponsible, and gullible media personalities.)

Dr. Maualana Karenga, the founder of Kwanzaa, was a leading promoter of the shakedown conference in Detroit. He said in a N’COBRA convention announcement, “400 years of terror…fear when awake and when asleep… fear being brutalized, fear of being raped.. .nonstop terror committed by this nation…the terror has not stopped…after 400 years of terror, there’s a debt to be paid.”

Karenga’s dishonest demagoguery was deplorable and dangerous, but his rap sheet is more damning.

His legal record is a good introduction to those who don’t know him. On September 17, 1971, Karenga, then known as Ron Karenga, was sentenced to one to ten years in the slammer on counts of felonious assault and false imprisonment. The charges stemmed from a May 9, 1970 incident in which Karenga and two others tortured two women. According to the Los Angeles Times, “Deborah Jones, who once was given the title of an African queen, said she and Gail Davis were whipped with an electrical cord and beaten with a karate baton after being ordered to remove their clothes. She testified that a hot soldering iron was placed in Miss Davis’ mouth.”

Please remember that this is the dude who developed the “African-American holiday” known as Kwanzaa that some Blacks have decided to celebrate instead of Christmas. However, it is not African and for sure not American.

At his trial, Ron Karenga’s sanity was in question, and a psychiatrist declared, “This man now represents a picture which can be considered both paranoid and schizophrenic with hallucinations and delusions, inappropriate affect, disorganization, and impaired contact with the environment.” The psychiatrist observed that Karenga talked to his blanket and imaginary persons and believed that he had been attacked by dive-bombers!

My three-year-old grandson also talked to his blanket, had imaginary friends, and believed he had been attacked by peg-legged, one-eyed Caribbean pirates. Still, he has not been offered a position at a major university, as was Karenga! An irresponsible judge sentenced Karenga to one to ten years in prison; he served four years. Then he went from being a prisoner to a professor at California State University at Long Beach when he became head of its Black Studies Department! I think he should still be in prison making license plates.

Black Lives Matter supports N’COBRA along with Screwy Louie Farrakhan and wacko Karenga, so that should tell you something about the group that wants your money as retribution for slavery they never experienced.

When shrimp learn to whistle Dixie in four-part harmony.

(Dr. Don Boys is a former member of the Indiana House of Representatives who ran a large Christian school in Indianapolis and wrote columns for USA Today for 8 years. Boys authored 18 books, the most recent being Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning! The eBook is available here with the printed edition (and other titles) at www.cstnews.com. Follow him on Facebook at Don Boys, Ph.D.; and visit his blog. Send a request to DBoysphd@aol.com for a free subscription to his articles, and click here to support his work with a donation.)

His ambitions were commendable, while his actions were calamitous. He was a fanatic who had one thing on his mind, and no one could change it. He was John Brown, whose photo in the dictionary should be listed under “fanatic.” He was to die hanging from a rope (bought by the Federal Government) in Charles Town, VA (now, WV) on a cold December day in 1859.

John Brown was from a good family going back to the Pilgrims, proving once again that stupidity, fanaticism, and mental problems can afflict any strata of society. Brown’s father had as an apprentice Jesse R. Grant who was the father of Ulysses S. Grant.

In 1825, the John Brown family moved to Pennsylvania, where they purchased 200 acres and built a home, then started a tannery that soon employed 15 men. From 1825 to 1835, the Browns helped 2500 fugitive slaves find freedom since their home was a major stop on the Underground Railroad. He helped establish a school and became postmaster of Randolph, Pennsylvania.

Obviously, even fanatics can accomplish some good, but it never relieves them of their nefarious activities. After all, Mussolini made Italy’s trains run on time, and Hitler is responsible for the Volkswagen automobile. Oops, it is dangerous to say anything positive (even if truthful) about tyrants. It is acceptable to praise lefties such as Stalin, Castro, Chavez, Obama, Sanders, Biden, and what’s-her-name, etc., even when they lie.

In 1836, Brown moved his family to what is now Kent, Ohio, and in 1837, he made his famous and destructive vow mentioned earlier. The vow was in response to the murder of a famous Presbyterian preacher, newspaper editor, and abolitionist Elijah P. Lovejoy, who was shot and killed by a proslavery mob. His murder shocked the whole country.

In 1846, Brown moved his family to Springfield, Massachusetts, where he joined the Sanford Street Free Church. There he heard famous antislavery speakers such as black leaders Frederick Douglass and Sojourner Truth, both former slaves. Brown greatly influenced Douglass toward more aggressively pursuing their cause. After spending a few hours with Brown, Douglass wrote in 1847, “My utterances became more and more tinged by the color of this man’s strong impressions.”

Douglass should have been more careful about his friends and associates.

Brown moved again in 1849 to North Elba, New York, a black community in the Adirondack Mountains, with plans to help blacks learn to farm. That was commendable, but fanatics take advantage of situations to further their good or bad causes.

All fanatics are dangerous, as seen recently in Washington, D.C. A half a million Trump supporters met in Washington on January 6 and resulted in an out of control mob invading the Capitol Building. Few in the media mention that only a few hundred were out of control, while hundreds of thousands made their opinions known by peaceful protests.

The mainstream media seem to think it is unthinkable that fanatics like BLM and Antifa would be involved in such a gathering as provocateurs. We know there were rabid fanatics (extremists) on both the left and right who broke laws, and all should go to the pokey for a year or so. Moreover, the violent ones who injured others should go to prison for a few years. That would cool some of their political enthusiasm.

Brown is usually called an intensely religious man, but he was a nut case, and his noble motives are no excuse for his excessive and violent behavior. He thought violence was the only way to stop slavery, and, incredibly, he was proclaimed a hero. He is considered one today by the non-thinkers. Neither Brown’s religious dedication nor his hatred of slavery justifies his zealotry. Neither do the political contradictions, confusion, and chaos give Brown any credibility.

Brown focused his concern on Kansas’s future statehood, then a territory, and made plans to move his family west. He took his fanaticism with him. Brown and the anti-slave settlers were hoping to bring Kansas into the Union as a slavery-free state.

U.S. President James Buchanan (a slave-leaning northern Democrat) determined to admit Kansas as a state as soon as possible, and he didn’t care whether it was a slave or free state. He wanted another state. Abolitionists had moved from New England to Kansas to help the cause of ending slavery. In contrast, proslavery citizens from Missouri and Georgia moved to Kansas to help make Kansas a slave state.

Proslavery people in neighboring Missouri continued to stir the pot in Kansas, helping keep alive the Free State and Slave State issue. Abolitionists in Kansas  were known as jayhawkers who took advantage of the chaos to bully the proslavers along the Kansas-Missouri border. Abolitionists were genuinely concerned with the possibility of another slave state.

A train wreck was in the making that Brown only caused to accelerate as he and his family moved to Lawrence, Kansas. Antislavery settlers from Massachusetts founded Lawrence to make Kansas (soon to be called Bleeding Kansas) a Free State, mitigating the influence of proslavery citizens. When Brown moved there, he made the political situation worse, much worse.

Lawrence was invaded by about 800 proslavery men led by the Douglas County Sheriff Samuel Jones on May 21, 1856. Jones had been shot in the back earlier and chased out of town, so he had the color of law on his side if not actual authority for the Lawrence raid. Two flags were flying at the head of the posse: an American flag and a flag with a crouching tiger. Other banners proclaimed “Southern rights” and “The Superiority of the White Race.”

The town leaders decided not to resist the posse but also refused to comply with their demands. Sheriff Jones told a town spokesman that all citizens had to surrender their weapons, but the spokesman replied that he could not command a town citizen to do anything. The town official did give him the town cannon, but the sheriff was not satisfied. Tyrants must always disarm free citizens.

After failing to destroy the Free State Hotel with cannon fire, the sheriff torched the building. He and his men then destroyed the Kansas Free State and the Herald of Freedom printing presses and threw the type and other equipment into the Kansas River. The sheriff’s posse then burned a large home, looted the town, and was dismissed by the sheriff, who went home for a cold refreshment.

The next morning, Brown and his sons, disappointed that Lawrence’s citizens had not resisted, went to the homes of proslavery settlers near Pottawatomie Creek in Kansas on May 24, 1856. The Brown family announced they were the “Northern Army” come to provide justice. They broke into proslaver James Doyle’s cabin and marched him and two of his sons down a road where Owen and Salmon Brown hacked their victims to death with broadswords. John shot Doyle in his forehead. Later that evening, the Browns visited two more cabins and brutally murdered two other proslavery settlers. None of those executed owned any slaves or had anything to do with the raid on Lawrence.

Brown lit the match that exploded the powder keg of three months of violence following the massacre, and 29 people died.

Shockingly, Brown is considered a hero, even a dedicated Christian, by many. No, not the kind revealed in the Bible where a Christian is one who has trusted Christ and experienced a changed life. Brown and his crowd did not act like Christians, and the Capitol mob did not act like Christians or Conservatives.

Of course, some of the riot leaders in Washington were far-left provocateurs.

The sacking of abolitionist Lawrence could not be justified. The fact that the proslavery county sheriff led the raid did not make it legal. The invasion of the town only antagonized the northern states and made the division more rigid. Pro Free State Republicans introduced a bill to bring Kansas into the Union as a free state while Democrats introduced a bill to bring in the new state as a proslavery state. The lines were drawn, and everyone chose sides, sometimes brother against brother.

Attempting to settle the issue, the territorial legislature (very proslavery) called for a Constitutional Convention in Lecompton in September of 1857. Free-state (antislavery) men were fearful that proslavery influencers would rig the election. They did. So, proslavery forces “won” that election as border ruffians poured over the Missouri border to stuff the ballot boxes.

When the Territory citizens voted on the issue, many fraudulent votes were cast from nonresidents from Missouri, resulting in massive violence that reinforced the area’s name of Bleeding Kansas. Some people estimated that up to 60 percent of the votes cast in Kansas were fraudulent.

With all the chaos, Kansas, as a free state, later became the 34th state to join the Union, not because of John Brown but despite him. Both sides committed atrocities, and this struggle between pro-and anti-slave forces in Kansas was a significant factor in the eruption of the Civil War.

Brown moved back east and met with two black leaders Frederick Douglas and Harriet Tubman, who greatly influenced him. With Tubman’s help, whom he called “General Tubman,” Brown led an attack on pro slavers, as well as a United States military armory, at Harpers Ferry, Virginia, in October of 1859.

(And now Biden wants to replace Jackson’s face on the twenty-dollar bill with Tubman’s.)

Brown’s motive for the raid was to get supplies, guns, and ammunition to arm slaves he expected to rebel and attract other slaves spreading rebellion throughout the South. Alas, the slaves did not rebel as expected. During the raid, a Baltimore and Ohio train left the station headed for Washington, where passengers reported the attack.

As the train pulled away from the station, a baggage handler was shot in the back and killed when he refused to obey Brown’s men. The victim was a free Black man!

Brown attacked the armory with 21 men, including his sons, but it was all over within two days. His men were killed or captured by the locals and U.S. Marines led by Robert E. Lee. Brown was tried for the murder of five men, instigating a slave rebellion, and treason against the Commonwealth of Virginia and was found guilty on all counts.

On December 2, 1859, Brown was hanged in Charles Town and buried with the noose still around his neck. One of the witnesses to his hanging was an obscure actor named John Wilkes Booth, another fanatic.

Fanatics come from all groups of people and must not be excused, esteemed, or emulated by people of principle.

(Dr. Don Boys is a former member of the Indiana House of Representatives who ran a large Christian school in Indianapolis and wrote columns for USA Today for 8 years. Boys authored 18 books, the most recent being Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning! The eBook is available here with the printed edition (and other titles) at www.cstnews.com. Follow him on Facebook at Don Boys, Ph.D.; and visit his blog. Send a request to DBoysphd@aol.com for a free subscription to his articles, and click here to support his work with a donation.)

As I move my tongue from my cheek at the very beginning of this super sensitive topic, I am aware that I can’t win no matter how sensible my arguments may be. You see, I am white, and according to nutty leftists (but then, I repeat myself), my whiteness determines my racism. I’ve always been white, and I expect to stay white. Moreover, I’m completely satisfied to be white; I never had a desire to be anything else. Using elementary logic, it would do no good to want to be anything but white. Plus, I see no advantage to being of another race, group, kind, crowd, etc.

So, I am white and proud of it. Now, that’s dangerous, and the wackos on the left, following my declaration, expect me to automatically fall to my knees in deep contrition, weeping copious tears while I flagellate myself and throw ashes over my head. That is because admitting to being satisfied and even legitimately proud of being white makes me a dangerous white supremacist.

Hogwash, balderdash, and a generous dose of poppycock!

Being satisfied, even proud of being white, is synonymous with racism—to the racists. That’s what the experts in racism say. The reason the experts are experts is that they are usually black racists or self-hating Whites. Hating Whitey makes them feel so noble, superior, and righteous while they are actually nutty, senseless, and ridiculous.

However, since I am delighted to be white (after all, it doesn’t help to want something else) does not mean I hate those who are not white. It does not mean I am superior because of my whiteness since there are many nonwhites brighter, wiser, better than I. Whoever I am, and whatever I have is all because of the sovereign grace of God. I have nothing about which to brag.

Is it possible to disagree, dislike, and disapprove of the critical race theory and not be racist? If one is critical of school bussing for racial balance, is that racism? If one is critical of affirmative action where one race is preferred over others, is that racism? Is it racism to remind folk that more than 77% of black babies born in America are illegitimate? Is it racism to mention that in almost every famous incident of a cop shooting a Black man, the Black was resisting arrest or was armed?

If my above beliefs are obvious racism, then my critic does not feel required to provide proof of my “racism.” What it proves is that my accuser is an obvious jerk; race and skin color are irrelevant.

The stats indicate if I were black, I might be more athletic, although I’ve been told, “white men can’t jump.” But who knows that maybe blacks excel at sports because they work harder at it. If I were Asian, I would be more adept in math and science, but perhaps Asians excel at math and science because of a superior educational system in their respective nations.

Minorities rant long and loud about their unequal status, but they have no desire for equality. Maybe some minorities see racism everywhere in everything because they look through racist eyes. They would be shocked to discover they are simply racists looking for a way to eat without working since racism is bankable.

Could that be? Dare I suggest that such is black privilege?

It is possible for a person to not like some minorities without being a hater and racist. It is possible that some slaveholders while owning slaves, were not racists. Usually, slavery was a matter of economics. And some slaves lived better, much better than free people did. Early American farmers found themselves in a new land with very few workers and tobacco or cotton to plant and harvest. They bought slaves, and some owners were sadists (and idiots) who enjoyed mistreating their slaves while other owners treated their slaves well, even educating them and teaching them the Bible.

Two liberal (very liberal) professors tell us in their book Time On The Cross: The Economics Of American Negro Slavery that some planters instituted a profit-sharing for their slaves. They also tell us, “The average pecuniary income actually received by a prime field hand [slave] was roughly fifteen percent greater than the income he would have received for his labor as a free agricultural worker.” Wonder why public school books and race-baiters on television never mention that?

The prospect of kind slaveholders is impossible for radicals to consider because, while true, that concept does not fit the racist agenda, and their agenda provides them money and status.

Most slaves for millennia were taken in war and were white. It was not about race. But to the racists, everything is about race. That is proof of their racism.

The Jews were slaves in Egypt, making bricks without straw, constructing buildings, repairing roads—backbreaking labor. They were hated and mistreated. The Egyptians were haters, and I wonder why Jews are not demanding reparations for hundreds of years of Jewish slavery.

It was a different story in Babylon where the Jews were slaves but free to live their lives and make a living however they chose. Since they were slaves, they had to pay tribute to the king, but Jewish slaves in Babylon could build homes, plant gardens, marry and leave an inheritance to their children.

Jeremiah said, “there will be peace to you.” The Jews in Babylon lived far better than slaves elsewhere. Is it possible the Babylonians were not racists and did not hate the Jews? It was a matter of circumstances since the Jews were taken in warfare.

God rejected Ishmael, the first-born of Abraham, because of his race; he was not born of Sarah. Was that racism? Or was it legitimate discrimination based on the fact he did not meet the criteria of God? Even though God prospered Ishmael and Abraham loved him, Ishmael was not treated equally; therefore, by today’s enlightened and progressive standards, God and Abraham were racists.

Since God loves everyone, we are commanded to do the same, even to love our enemies who despitefully use us and mistreat us. God loves the stupid white and black racists. And I’m trying.

While the Bible does not deal with racism, it does teach us to treat everyone fairly, honestly, and kindly. I am commanded to treat people the way I want to be treated, but that does not nullify my personal choices of association in social and business life.

Moreover, God displays and recommends discrimination, which is not recognized as sin. He commanded the Jews not to marry Gentiles; therefore, He discriminated against Gentiles.

It was not racism to take combatants in battle as slaves; it was kinder than killing them. Slavery was the consequence of war. This was the economics of warfare. It must be understood that one lives in a culture, not of his making. Slavery was the accepted and normal part of life throughout the world. Highly educated men did not question the slavery concept. It was accepted as normal.

Historically, slaves were prisoners of war. Wars have always been common; thus, many were killed, and many were enslaved. It is easy for us, from our enlightened culture, to judge past generations, but how would you have treated POWs? They couldn’t be sent back home since they would have to be fought again and again. They could be imprisoned, requiring them to be fed, clothed, housed, and guarded. Not too smart. So, make them work since they chose to be combatants and were conquered. The conquerors were not racists. They were rather lenient in permitting their enemy to live.

The New Birth results in having the “mind of Christ” where “there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.” However, at the present, few possess that mind, and there we find racism.

Until that time when Christ is preeminent, we are plagued with slave and free; male and female; rich and poor; resulting in great divisions in our societies such as American slavery.

Finally, the black slaves got rid of the white man in the big white plantation house, but now all of us are citizen/slaves of the government plantation run by an old white man in the big white house in Washington.

Now, that may not be racism, but it is still slavery.

(Dr. Don Boys is a former member of the Indiana House of Representatives who ran a large Christian school in Indianapolis and wrote columns for USA Today for 8 years. Boys authored 18 books, the most recent being Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning! The eBook is available here with the printed edition (and other titles) at www.cstnews.com. Follow him on Facebook at Don Boys, Ph.D.; and visit his blog. Send a request to DBoysphd@aol.com for a free subscription to his articles, and click here to support his work with a donation.)

She may be right but, of course, she is probably wrong. However, the paper—with missionary zeal—does a yeoman’s job to support her dreams, desires, and delusions even though it is a hopeless and impossible task.

Wanda is an ordained Baptist minister and college professor whose grandiose aspirations for a slave connection, if accepted as true, might promote her into historical significance. She has about the same chance of proving her famous ancestry as one of the ranting Democrats has of becoming President.

Angola is a huge nation roughly an 800 mile square along Africa’s western Atlantic Coast made up of rugged highlands, a huge plateau, farmlands, a desert, and mountains. It is rich in wild animal life such as giraffes, buffaloes, zebras, gorillas, chimpanzees, black rhinoceros, wildebeests, lions, hyenas, and leopards.

It also has a vast number of two-legged animals known as political leaders although they are thugs, thieves, and totalitarians. The nation is run by former general Joao Lourenco who was trained in Moscow; and the media, the money, and the military are controlled by him and the Marxist People’s Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA). Protestors are not treated well.

The country is rich in precious gems, metals, diamonds, gold, iron, cotton, coffee, and plenty of farmland. The nation has abundant natural resources, and it ranks among the highest of the oil-producing countries in sub-Saharan Africa. Most of the oil revenues go to the government resulting in a long simmering reaction toward the money grabbers.

The first of the lengthy series with a substantial amount of errors, exaggerations, and embellishments is loaded with feel-good revisionist history to give Blacks a feeling of importance and produce a wagonload of guilt on living Whites who have no culpability.

The article was headed, “Wanda Tucker’s spiritual journey to where the slave trade began.” No, that despicable trade started thousands of years earlier and race had nothing to do with it. Slavery was usually a result of wars and most slaves have been white.

Continuing Tucker’s search for her ancestor, Deborah Barfield Berry and Kelley Benham French, added, “Wanda’s family invokes a deep sense of pride whether it is provable or not.” How can one have pride, especially a “deep sense of pride” in an illusion or maybe delusion; for sure, not a conclusion?

The authors opined, “Her academic training never undermined her faith in her family’s history. Just because it wasn’t on paper didn’t mean it wasn’t true.” However, there is not a scintilla of proof that it was her family’s history. Moreover, it is also possibly true that one of the Socialist candidates could become president but don’t bet the farm on it.

The white Portuguese officials in Angola traded guns in return for slaves and with superior weapons, black chiefs captured and sold natives on a far larger scale providing funds to provoke intertribal warfare that produced even more slaves.

We are told “Historians had learned fairly recently that the first African-Americans had been captured here.” Note captured, but not captured by black chiefs and sold to unscrupulous Portuguese slavers. The article did not mention that Angola was the home of Anthony Johnson, a black man who became a large landowner in Jamestown and owned many slaves, including some Whites. Just an oversight.

The article managed to work in a criticism of President Trump’s comments on Baltimore’s problems and his criticism of the four “women of color.” Wanda allegedly thought of all that and “saw brown children in cages at the U.S. and Mexico border. She saw black boys being shot in the street.”

No, Wanda “saw” none of that. In her mind’s eye she saw what she wanted to see—what she was looking for.

Wow, such literary gymnastics deserve a Pulitzer Prize but since Trump is blamed for mass shootings, the border mess, bad race relations, and the coming recession, that’s reasonable to everyone gazing at their navel standing in far left field. After all, everyone knows President Trump is responsible for sunspots, dandruff, bad weather, arthritis, and hot flashes.

The USA TODAY article opined about the black “queen” “Njinga, who came to power [in the 1600s]…is the most awe-inspiring of the Angolan ancestors….Something stirred in Wanda, seeing an entire country honor a black woman for her leadership and strength.” Njinga was ambassador to the Portuguese and later assumed power over the kingdoms after the death of her brother.

The august paper did not reveal that many believe that Njinga was involved with her brother’s suicide and that was the reason Portuguese officials refused to honor her right to succeed her dead brother. Nor that she took control of her brother’s young son then allegedly had him killed for his “impudence.” Nor did the article reveal Njinga was a self-crowned “queen” and according to Jewish feminist Aurora Levins Morales, “she was also an elite woman living off the labor of others, murdered her brother and his children, fought other African people on behalf of the Portuguese, and collaborated in the slave trade.”

However, the self-made queen was “awe-inspiring” according to the paper.
The notorious Marquis de Sade’s Philosophy in the Boudoir, reveals how Njinga was a woman who “immolated her lovers.” De Sade’s reference for this comes from History of Zangua, Queen of Angola. This book claims that after Njinga became queen, she acquired an all-male harem who were forced to dress in women’s clothing—as did her male servants. According to Rejected Princesses, the men “fought to the death in order to spend the night with her and, after a single night of lovemaking, were put to death.”

USA Today identified Njinga as “awe-inspiring;” however, my takeaway from the article was that slavery was primarily perpetuated by Americans and peculiarly done by Whites and both concepts are dishonest, divisive, and destructive to Black-White relations. It seems anything black is acceptable, approvable, even to be applauded; anything white is to be considered privileged, pampered, and predictable.

But don’t honest, sane people consider that racism? No, those who discriminate against truth have no problem accepting such disingenuousness.

Such articles in the leftist media are a sham, a shame, and a scheme to make minorities feel good about their ancestral past. Even if true, that doesn’t provide cover for not accepting their personal and collective failures in the present.

No wonder America is a mess—because historians, writers, and the media fail to follow the principled maxim—never report a lie and never refuse to publish the truth. Moreover, for a newspaper to kill so many trees to promote a warped version of history to further their leftist ideology is both disgusting and hypocritical.

But the fake news groups are used to that.

I hope Wanda discovers she is a descendant from one of the original black slaves but she doesn’t really need that since she has already proved that she doesn’t need to be propped up by anyone, anything, anyhow.

(Dr. Don Boys is a former member of the Indiana House of Representatives who ran a large Christian school in Indianapolis and wrote columns for USA Today for 8 years. Boys authored 18 books, the most recent Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning! eBook is available here with the printed edition (and other titles) at www.cstnews.com. Follow him on Facebook at Don Boys, Ph.D.; and visit his blog. Send request to DBoysphd@aol.com for a free subscription to his articles, and click here to support his work with a donation.)

The charge is often made that Christians were always soft on slavery, but that is a slander. Slavery was practiced in Old Testament times; however, it was worldwide, mainly because of almost constant wars. What few know is that slavery in Israel was not severe; it fact, it was illegal to mistreat a “slave.” The slave was really an indentured servant who was to be treated like one of the family! Any mistreatment and the servant would go free. In fact, a “slave” could walk over to a neighbor’s property and leave his slavery! However, many American Christians, especially in the South, taught that slavery was permitted and sanctioned in the Bible. They were wrong and it is a blight, especially on Methodist and Baptist slaveholders of that era, because of that sin.

Moreover, as early as the first century, the Essenes (one of the three major Jewish sects of that period) prohibited slavery according to A Manual of Church History. Josephus records that Essenes existed in large numbers and thousands lived throughout Judea.

The Greek philosopher, Aristotle, thought that slavery was a natural thing and that human beings came in two types: slaves and non-slaves. Therefore, it was natural for some to rule and others to be ruled. Slaves were simply property to be used as advantageously as possible. That was in the “golden age” of Greece when pederasty, infanticide, and discerning the future by looking at the entrails of a chicken were popular! Golden age indeed!

Christianity began to change all that as it influenced a broad spectrum of the world: princes and  paupers; educated and ignorant; lords and serfs; and Christians and heathen.

Christians have often been accused of being anti-science; however, such claims are made by ignorant or bigoted men. Dr. Rodney Stark, a professor of sociology and comparative religion, states in his For the Glory of God, “The leading scientific figures in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries overwhelmingly were devout Christians who believed it was their duty to comprehend God’s handiwork.” Without the work of Bible-believing scientists such as Isaac Newton, Lord Kelvin, Joseph Lister, Johann Kepler, Robert Boyle, Gregor Mendel, Michael Faraday, Joseph Priestly, and others the world would not be nearly what it is today.

Michael Faraday was a scientist and evangelical Christian whose pioneering work changed the modern world in that he helped give us electricity and was the founder of the Greenwich Observatory.

Johann Kepler, an active Christian and creationist was best known for his laws of planetary motion. He was a mathematical genius who made contributions to the Copernican concepts and for his own additions to astronomy. His work provided a foundation for Isaac Newton’s theory of universal gravitation.

Isaac Newton was reared in a Christian home and went to the university primarily with the purpose of entering the Christian ministry. Instead, he discovered universal gravity.

Joseph Priestly was an 18th-century English theologian, natural philosopher, chemist, and author of 150 books. He was identified with the English dissenters during the religious confrontations. He has historically been credited with the discovery of oxygen.

John Locke was reared in a Puritan home, a fact reflected in his writing and political positions and Emmanuel Kant had his roots deep in the pietist foundations.

Kenneth Latourette in his classic A History of the Expansion of Christianity, reveals, “From it (the Christian church) sprang peace societies, societies for the abolition of slavery, organizations for the betterment of the condition of the laboring classes, temperance societies, hospitals, orphanages, societies for the distribution of wholesome literature, and thousands of schools.”

Christian leaders started and helped fund schools for infants and cripples, rescue homes, help for the poor, the sick, and the mentally abnormal, service for discharged prisoners and the families of prisoners, lodging houses, clubs for apprentices, and campaigns against beggary, drunkenness, and prostitution.

Pastor Theodore Fliedner in Kaiserswerth inaugurated a home for discharged women convicts and influenced Florence Nightingale who went on to create the modern nursing profession.

Anthony Ashley Cooper grew up in a moderately religious home but became a Christian because of his childhood nurse. As a member of the English Parliament, he strongly advocated better treatment of the insane, legislation that improved working conditions in mills and factories, and limiting the working day to ten hours. His work led to the barring of boys under thirteen and women from the mines, protection for chimney sweeps, and an act which brought improved housing conditions.

Missionary followers of Jesus are credited with stopping cannibalism and head hunting in many primitive societies.

The influence of Jesus on society via music, art, architecture, and literature is impossible to quantify.

Because Christ was born, we have literature by such Christian writers as Bunyan, Dante, Chaucer, Donne, Dostoevsky, Dickens, Milton, and Shakespeare. Regarding Shakespeare, William Burgess in his The Bible in Shakespeare wrote, “it is seen that Shakespeare drank so deeply from the wells of Scripture that one may say, without any straining of the evidence, without the Bible Shakespeare could not be.”

Had Jesus never been born, music would not be comparable to what we experience. Handel, Vivaldi, and Bach were professing Christians who worked to honor God with their work. Bach, for example, signed all his works with Soli Deo Gloria or “Solely to the glory of God.”

Many of the art productions would be absent without the Christian-themed artistry of da Vinci, Michelangelo, Rembrandt, and countless others.

And think of all the incredible architecture through the years. Especially noteworthy are the beautiful cathedrals in Europe. I am not an advocate of Roman Catholicism but they built the most incredible cathedrals in the world.

Christians don’t claim that the U.S. Constitution is overtly Christian, but no informed person doubts that its basis comes from biblical teaching. Our civil laws are obviously based on the Ten Commandments. Also, the incredible principle of the judicial, legislative, and executive branches is taken directly from Isaiah 33:22. Requiring at least two witnesses to a crime comes directly from the Bible. At least 50 of the 55 signers of the U.S. Constitution were orthodox Christians.

Private property rights are sourced in the commandments, “Thou shalt not steal” and “Thou shalt not covet.”

Cynics and critics can criticize Christianity that has failed at times to live what it professes, but they have no valid complaint against Christ. His life, death, and resurrection have made a greater impact on the world than any other person who ever lived. He sure has changed the world and made it infinitely better.

Has He changed you?

Boys’ book  Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning! was published by Barbwire Books; to get your copy,  click here. An eBook edition is also available.

Only one in eleven Southerners owned slaves; however, a vast majority of the leaders did: politicians, educators, doctors, even preachers. In South Carolina 40% of Baptist preachers were slaveowners! That is a shame, a scar, and a scab upon that illustrious group.

There was no justification for Christian Americans and even pastors owning slaves and they did by the thousands. Churchill in his A History of the English Speaking Peoples revealed that 660,000 slaves were held in America by ministers and members of different Protestant Churches! Five thousand Methodist ministers owned 219,000 slaves while 1,400 Episcopalians held 88,000 blacks. Alas, 6,500 Baptists owned over 125,000 slaves. Furthermore, such slavery was defended in many pulpits Sunday after Sunday. Only the Quakers, as a movement, condemned slavery during the Colonial period. They were right on slavery while wrong on pacifism.

Some Liberals who are more interested in their agenda rather than the truth only present one side, the worst side, of the slavery issue. In many churches, especially Baptist churches, Blacks had active roles as leaders–even preachers–while the Anglican (Episcopal) Church refused them such positions. Some plantations even had churches or chapels build for the slaves.

After some slave revolts in the early 1800s, especially Nat Turner’s Rebellion in 1831, Virginia law required black churches to have a white minister present for all services.

In the early days of the First Great Awakening that began in the 1730s, Baptist and Methodist preachers argued for the release of all slaves and an end to slavery but it was a losing battle and they eventually found ways to defend slavery! They used the Bible by twisting the passages and especially the “curse of Ham” to defend the indefensible.

Christian plantation owners were often leaders at the local Baptist and Methodist churches and were often overwhelmed with guilt. They knew the holding of humans was demeaning, disgraceful, and depraved but were stuck in the system. They had large plantations that required workers and slaves were the only answer. Many slave owners were aware of their greedy materialism and knew it was condemned by the Scriptures.

A wealthy Alabama slave holder warned his son: “Don’t let this world, or the honors of the world, yea I would add the Riches too, cheat you out of the love, and of course the favor of your blessed savior…I know it is not sinful to be rich, or honorable, but Mr. [John] Wesley says it is extremely dangerous, therefore we should watch and pray much in order to keep humble and devotional. . . .”

The Methodists tried to expel slave holding church members in 1784 but found it unenforceable and withdrew the demand. Baptists in Virginia denounced slavery in 1789 and the Kentucky Elkhorn Baptist Association presented a resolution against slavery in 1791 but it was so controversial it was dropped.

Presbyterian synods in New York City and Philadelphia in 1787 suggested that their members gradually end slavery and by 1792 most Presbyterians thought slavery should be ended. By 1815, Presbyterians decided that buying and selling of slaves was “inconsistent with the Gospel.”

Most Abolitionists who fought to free the slaves belonged to strong Methodist and Baptist churches; however, that does not ameliorate the fact that many ministers held slaves no matter how well they were treated.

In 1840, concerned Baptists formed the American Baptist Anti-Slavery Society and that decisive action forced the fence-straddlers to take a stand. In 1844, the Georgia Baptist Convention appointed a slave owner as missionary to the Cherokee Indians but when he came up for approval at to the General Convention he was rejected. The following year, southern Baptists withdrew to form the Southern Baptist Convention in Augusta, Georgia. The Methodists and Presbyterians also split over slavery. So there was no unanimity on the slavery issue.

In 1855, the soon-to-be famous Confederate General Stonewall Jackson broke the law every Sunday morning by teaching a Sunday school class of Blacks at the Lexington Presbyterian Church. That example of civil disobedience should have been emulated by every pastor and Christian worker. Alas, it was not.
The slavery scandal is a scab on society. Frankly, I think too many unprincipled people “use” the issue for their own selfish desires; however, it is time to admit the guilt of all participants and move on.

Nevertheless, there is a side of this issue that I have never heard discussed: the failure of local pastors to come down hard on their congregations filled with slave owners. It is one thing to discuss the evils of slavery in a denominational meeting with religious leaders and another thing to preach of its wickedness during a Sunday morning service. That was seldom done, much to the shame of Baptist, Methodist, and Presbyterian clergymen. Especially Baptists who have always made such a big issue out of standing for biblical truth. And still do.

Our theological ancestors faced influential plantation owners each Sunday morning and said nothing and many pastors today take a stand like a crippled chicken and keep silent lest they lose members, rock the boat, and maybe precipitate an IRS inspection of their church activities. Their local mayor may even demand a copy of recent sermons; and some pastors will probably turn in their sermons–like sheep, not shepherds.

While it is easy for me in the safe distance of the 21st century to criticize my fellow Baptist preachers of the past, it was still a major failure. Those of us today must learn from that failure. Preachers must major on biblical preaching; we must also give some direction to society. If anyone is against the killing of unborn babies, it should be Baptist preachers. If anyone is against the perversion of marriage, it should be Baptist preachers. If anyone is against porn, it should be Baptist preachers. If anyone is against vile, venal, visual garbage on television it should be Baptist preachers.

While pastors in the past refused to take on the “colored” thing, most modern day pastors even refuse to take on the color television set that spews out visual garbage because they know it would split their church or put them in the unemployment line.

Baptist preachers preaching against vile television would be as explosive as a pastor preaching against slavery in the 1800s as leading plantation owners gasped and headed for their buggies. It didn’t happen then and it isn’t happening now.

Sometime, even preachers don’t walk their talk.

http://bit.ly/1iMLVfY Watch these 8 minute videos of my lecture at the University of North Dakota: “A Christian Challenges New Atheists to Put Up or Shut Up!”