An open letter to White people who tire of hearing about slavery when they visit slave plantations: especially Suzanne Sherman.

Dear Ms. Sherman,

When I read your reflection in The American Conservative I was so sorry to hear that you had mistaken the museum at Thomas Jefferson’s Monticello for a monument to the Declaration of Independence. This mistake clearly caused much despair to you, and I suspect, to your unwitting children, who later found themselves flung headfirst into the depths of their mother’s folly before a crowd of annoyed weekenders. And so, though it was due to your own mistake, I offer you my sympathy and am glad to hear, for the sake of your emotional well-being, that out of the glare of national attention, on a lesser known property, Jefferson’s Poplar Forest estate, you were able to receive the version of history which you most preferred. For the sake of people like you, if it would not be such a terribly expensive endeavor, mental health professionals might find it useful to maintain lovingly bowdlerized versions of historical exhibitions, lest your delicate intellectual constitutions be damaged by being forced to experience history in its full and living palette.

Slavery 1
With apologies to those who had hoped to learn about 19th century fashion.

I am only taking, (should I say seizing?) the liberty of writing to you now, because the accounts which you offer of your continuing misadventures in slavery’s land, lead me to believe that you may be putting yourself in a hopeless position if you continue your historical travels, and I want to take it upon myself to offer you a way out of this place of suffering. After finding yourself jilted at Monticello, you went to Madison’s Montpelier, then to John C. Calhoun’s home in Clemson, South Carolina and then to Peyton Randolph’s home in WIlliamsburg, apparently, still in search of a museum in which to discuss 18th century political theory, all in vain. Your fruitless sojourns lead me to reach out in compassion to explain something which may put an end to them: The preservation of historical homes is done, not to propagate the abstract notions which their owners may have harbored within those walls, but, to preserve for posterity a glimpse into the daily life and domestic situations within which history occurred. Monticello is not a monument to the Declaration of Independence, because there is nothing which one can learn about that document from peering into Jefferson’s kitchen which cannot be better learned from a book. Montpelier does not memorialize The Federalist papers and the Constitution, it relies on the words to memorialize themselves and on careful study, which gives a broader historical and intellectual context, to make their theory live again.

Patrick HenryLiberty or death! Patrick Henry, slaveholder, speaking atop the soapbox of unwitting irony.

It was not America’s founding documents which gave these places daily life, nor the theories of Locke, Montesquieu, and Rousseau which created their domestic situation, Thomas Paine’s pamphleteering did not do the labor and make the profits which made such luxury possible, all this was the work of slavery, or, more precisely, the hundreds of enslaved West African men, women and children which your founding fathers forcibly held in bondage.

MontpelierA Virginia slave labor camp.

I am the descendant of those people. My mother’s people slaved in South Carolina, my father’s in Georgia. As of now, I know nothing else concrete about them. I do know, that if you had visited any of these stately homes in their heyday, you would have seen far more slaves than free people. A uniformed Black man would have taken your coat and cordially led you deeper into the recesses of the place. You would have seen men and women of all ages, impeccably uniformed, hurrying to and fro, forced by the existential threat of violence, to attend to your comfort. If you had just stood still, you might have gone minutes, even hours, without seeing another White face. Madison had a wife and one son, which means that when the Madison family was home “alone,” if you exclude the one White overseer he employed and the overseer’s family who also lived on the estate, as many as 98% of the people living at Montpelier at any time were enslaved Africans. Which means, that while the story of Madison’s presidency and his intellectual contributions to the nation’s founding are his; the story of Montpelier is the story of its slaves.
I imagine that story may not mean much to you. You seem to want to treat it as being no more worthy of discussion than the wallpaper in Calhoun’s bedroom. But, as their descendant, I have no choice but to know that they were human beings, as I am a human being, with births and deaths as miraculous and tragic as any that ever were, with lives as filled with laughter and tears, loves and hates, aspirations and fears as any human lives. The inner mysteries of these enslaved souls were as great as the chasm between this world and the one beyond. The stealing of a single one of their lives, much less hundreds, is a crime of striking magnitude, which therefore makes up the most important story these buildings can tell. But on this, we disagree. I imagine you would be very disappointed by a visit to Auschwitz-Birkenau, where the 1.5 million Jews and Gentiles killed there are distracting from the all-important discussion of Mein Kampf and Hitler’s lackluster painting career. You probably think the Gallic war is the story of Julius Caesar’s trip to France, not thousands of Romans subjugating thousands of Gauls. You probably think the history of America’s Gilded Age is the story of how Rockefeller, Carnegie, Vanderbilt and Morgan made and spent their wealth, and not the story of men, women and children who had lived their lives in fiery iron dungeons, sweating to make the gilding. You would probably call the stories I suggest: revisionist history, no, it is history given vision, history which shows us the world as it really was, so we can see it as it really is.

Old MadisonJames Madison, the purveyor of the above slave labor camp, his face withered by years of brutality.

You argue that had Madison freed his slaves, they likely would have starved, which I find to be an odd way of looking at things. Let us imagine the more quotidian aspects of James’s life, the life of a typical Virginia slaveholder. When he was born, he was likely to have been delivered by an enslaved midwife, after hers and his mother’s, the next arms to cradle the small, sickly, pale child would have been those of an enslaved Black wet nurse. From her body, he would have drawn the elixir of life, via the same mother’s milk which founded the strength of her own children, who would serve him all his days. Every stitch of clothing which would ever touch his body for the majority of his life, would be made by enslaved seamstresses and, after the boy was weaned, every bite of food he would ever eat at home would have been prepared by an enslaved cook, from food which was either raised or paid for by the slaves who did everything else for him, in his father’s house, which slaves built and then in the White House, which slaves also built. James’s first playmates would have been children too young to work, but still slaves, as he would learn when told of the immutable line which divided him from the people whose suffering and toil made up the very substance of his body. As James grew older, he might have, if it pleased him, seen fit to seize his first bit of carnal knowledge from the body of one of his wet nurse’s daughters. When he went away for the schooling which his family paid for with the wages of theft, a slave boy about his age went with him, to keep him from any acquaintance with the slightest labor. And it was with this education that his slaves paid for, that James rose through the ranks of the Virginia aristocracy to sire a constitution and lead a nation. And when James’s frail body finally gave way, it would have been lowered into a grave dug by enslaved men, in a coffin made by the enslaved people who had been carrying him all his life.

slavery 2With apologies to those who wanted to learn about the role of rope in 18th century shipping.

Though Madison, like several of the nation’s most politically prominent slaveholders, agonized over the issue of what was to be done with the African slaves on which they depended, he never allowed his to go free; not because he was afraid that without him to carry around they might starve, but because he feared, quite logically, that without captives to carry the burden of his life, he, as a man accustomed to luxury and knowing no trade but politician, would starve.

You therefore have the matter exactly backwards. In death, the moral weight of this decision cannot even rely on the fictions of acolytes like yourself to support it. Though you valiantly tried when you said that manumitting slaves was illegal in Virginia, when, in fact, the Virginia legislature legalized manumission in 1782. Though for most people, it would go without saying, that whether it was illegal to free his slaves or not, this in no way bears on Madison’s guilt, as the one who actively held slaves. I am therefore as sorry that the tour guides could not correct your misinformation, as I am that they were unable to correct the several of your follies which I have striven to correct here.

WAR & CONFLICT BOOKERA: CIVIL WAR/BACKGROUND: SLAVERY & ABOLITIONISMThough parted from his rural home, these signs of his master’s benevolence he shall carry the rest of his days.

To return us to the matter of starvation: As far as I know, there is no record of any mass starvation associated with the manumission of American slaves, though four million were freed at once by an act of congress in 1865. And, I can attest, that though my family has been free 151 years, in all that time, free of vicious little men like James Madison to carry about, we may have hungered, but we have never starved! My people work. They have earned the entirety of their substance in fields and factories, in classrooms and law offices and as soldiers of the United States. An honorable, clean way of living which all your founding slavers avoided by resorting to lives of gentrified brutality.

This is the history of the American South, which you, not being from this region, might find it convenient to avoid, but which you have no right to expect the nation as a whole to avoid, so that you might miss it while staring it square in the face. Moreover, as it is the history of the material foundations of the United States of America, it is the only history you have this side of the Atlantic.

V. R. Bradley

Thanks for reading! (If you want to see more of this kind of work and help me build a new media company please become a regular patron at:

I’m also grateful for one time donations here:  Long live the people’s revolution!

270 thoughts on “An open letter to White people who tire of hearing about slavery when they visit slave plantations: especially Suzanne Sherman.

    1. Very thought provoking! My grandmother has always loved the plantation museums in Charleston, sc, presumably in admiration of the old southern architecture. All I can see when I see these homes is the atrocities committed against fellow humans in favor of greed. I love my grandmother and I don’t think she is an insensitive person but this is where we disagree. I can’t see drayton hall for anything other than a site of where the worst of our species was celebrated. Thank you for your article


  1. wonderful response. As a former docent at an historical home in Virginia, I always marveled at the complete LACK of knowledge people had about slavery and the impact it had on people’s lives., both white and black. The whites were almost completely incapable of doing anything for themselves, and never had a thought about how much they depended upon the slaves. Thank you for the post. Hope to read more.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. When you say “whites” here, you should clarify that you specifically mean the white people who lived on the plantations as the heads of those estates. It’s easy to get the wrong idea that everyone with light skin was master of a plantation, but of course it was not so, and a great many farmers and craftsmen eked out a modest living on the basis of very hard labor that they did themselves.

      Our tendency to forget one side or the other has always been a challenge in our very tenuous grasp of history, and it continues to this day: when people talk about white privilege, they frequently carry it to imagine that being white ensures some sort of success or prosperity, when in fact it’s merely the absence of an unfair burden placed upon those with darker skin by a system that makes judgements on the margin. There are a great many very poor white folk in this country, and it has always been that way. Only a handful of people were ever the masters of great estates, then or now, and they have always devoted considerable time and resources to making sure that everyone else overlooked that fact.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. I must differ with your statement. It’s more than just the absence of an unfair burden placed upon those with darker skin. Descendants of African slaves also have to deal with being murdered by legalized law enforcement agents, they have to deal with a two tier judicial system, they have to deal the threats of White Supremacy Groups, they have to deal with their children being given a secondary education just to name a few things they have to deal with. And one of the worst things that they have to deal with is constant opposition between them and ordinary Europeans. There seems to be a plot to keep black skin people and white skin people at odds with each that never allow them to be unified.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. A plot much like this article and your comment. Black men kill just as many white today. No wonder. Move on from the slavery cry and more of the world can see eye to eye.


      3. Ummm… I was replying to the comment above, “There seems to be a plot to keep black skin people and white skin people at odds with each that never allow them to be unified,” but of course you had nothing to say to that. Your entire blog does nothing but continue the black and white separation so I’m not sure who you think you’re fooling but please do your research as my statistic stands perfectly strong.

        Liked by 1 person

      4. okey dokey. I was talking about the white family that owned the historic house I worked at specifically. I understand white privilege…didn’t realize a short comment needed such a distinction. thanks

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Having read your letter, I had to take the link back to the original story and The American Conservative. Now I could get a measure of your own restraint in your thorough refutation of his point, that the tours of the two houses mentioned, was somehow imbalanced by the inclusion of the history of the enslaved workforce of these houses. What struck me was the writer’s blindness to the inherent irony in his own argument, for if, as he wished, the tours spoke more of the contribution and formulation of political ideals of the inhabitants of these houses, then these ironies would’ve become immediately apparent. This is a great read. Thank you

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Wonderful writing. May I please point out an edit needed? Second to last line, change “starting” to “staring.” This wonderful feat should not be marred by any typo.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Having visited Monticello this past year, having taken the tour “Slavery at Monticello” I am happy to say they did a wonderful job – at least my wife and I thought so – at presenting the contributions of slavery at Monticello. As good a job as they did at it though, what I came away with was only a drop in the bucket compared to what I just read. Wonderful article! Bravo and thank you!

    Liked by 3 people

  5. We should make Monticello the “white guilt mecca”. Remove all mention of Jefferson’s intellectual accomplishments, just make it a tour of the horrors of slavery (because white people don’t understand that slavery was bad and they need constant reminders). I think you could charge (reparate) admission that could go to funding camps to reeducate white people on their privilege.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. The point of this post was a response to the letter linked in the first paragraph. I think you would have saved yourself some indignation if you would have actually taken a look at the link provided. This isn’t a matter of white guilt. It’s a matter of history. A history that was not only relevant to but central to these historical homes. These houses serve no other purpose but to remind us how pivotal slaves were to the building of this nation and to the every day life of prominent figures. Shall we ignore that part of history entirely?

      The author addressed your point so eloquently I hate to even give my watered down explanation. I encourage you to read both letters for better understanding though!

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Honestly your article is very well written and it has points that “white people” need to hear. However by starting it out with “Dear white people” you immediately invite eye rolling and trolling. Some will say I’m whitesplaining to you which is nonsensical bullshit I’m telling you how to reach the people you want to hear what you have to say.


      2. “an open letter to white people” look man do what you want, I really don’t care but if you want your message spread theres better ways.


      3. As a statement of objective fact, my essay is entitled: “An open letter to White people who tire of hearing about slavery when they visit slave plantations: especially Suzanne Sherman.”


      4. It is and it’s a good article. I’m gonna write another that says “an open letter to black people who tire of hearing…..


      5. The idea behind “Whitesplaining” is that White people often assume they have something useful to teach non-White people even when they don’t, as appears to have been the case here.


  6. That picture of the scars is one of the most haunting pictures out there.

    It often reminds me of the picture of the young man dieing of AIDS surrounded by his family or the picture of the young baby in africa starving with the vulture behind him.

    It gets to something powerful and true that there are realities out there that simply are wrong. They don’t need discussion or opposing/affirming view points. They are simply wrong just as there are things like holding a door for the person behind you, helping an elderly person cross the street when it’s busy and dangerous, giving up your life so another person can live, or rescuing a child that are simply good and in creating different narrativs you dis-service humanity.

    Thanks for a wonderful post 🙂 As always a bit of controversial material in an article helps bring the discussion to it.

    Hopefully in time we can just talk about things simply without the prejudice or controversy. With people simply knowing right from wrong and being in communion with one another past the divisions that seem to separate us so badly.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. Thank you ever so kindly for the detailed and beautiful wording of the Great American History that we need to publish in its full entirety: the building of the Nation called America by enslaved West Africans. These people lived under the threat of violence, bodily harm and death on an hourly basis. It was the height of white supremacy in America as was the Holocaust in Germany. Yet, we as African Americans are constantly told to focus on the “now” and move on. However, my mind is constantly on my sisters who were raped sold impregnated by strangers made to breed and whose babies were sold off without any second thoughts to be raised as orphans. The pain they bore is a daily part of my life and the more I learn about them the more I am connected to my ancestors who lived on this soil.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. An interesting read. I haven’t been able to find a reference to Suzanne Sherman, who seems to have sparked at least part of this post. Is there a link I missed in the text?


      1. Okay, found the link. It doesn’t show up as BLUE but has a tiny underline with a faint blueish caste. That’s why I missed it. That, and I read from my cell phone at times and the tiny font just defeats my limited visual acuity.

        By the way, I admire that you can maintain a debate with someone who disagrees with your use of the word ‘race’ versus ‘racism’ above without wanting to scream and tear your hair out. (Perhaps you do it in the privacy of your own home.) I was aggravated just reading the contrary and sometimes illogical replies the writer made. How can anyone argue there is no such thing as race?

        If we lived in a vacuum and no one every saw anyone else, maybe you could argue we are a species that has no fundamental cultural identity–but we don’t live in a bubble and we interact. This leads to perceptions of ‘otherness’ based on observation and presumed bias. (Think tribal cultures where someone carries a club and whacks you without provocation–perhaps it is a defensive posture based on that person’s prior experience–or an aggressive stance learned at the school of might makes right.) It is a natural reaction in our hind brains trying to sort any person you meet (benign or otherwise) into a category of known versus unknown entities. Once you have a negative or positive interaction with anyone–regardless of who or how–you have an imprint for meeting the next person who may or may not fit that same template. It’s hardwired into animals–if they have a bad association with a species, they learn to avoid that species. And, as far as we humans come in developed, analytical reasoning, we are base animals at the core and will react and adapt on that level when we program ourselves for social interaction.

        That was a long-winded way of saying, I admire your ability to respect an aggressor who disagrees with your views without wanting to club them.


      2. Hahaha, thanks, small doses help. What irks me is when I end up spending day after day dancing around someone else’s fallacy, and I actually invited him to write an essay which I could respond to, in order to draw him out of the woods for a full frontal assault. Stay tuned. I actually argued down a guy who attempted to tell me that I was legally still a slave because the 13th amendment (which he kept getting confused with the 14th amendment) wasn’t valid because of the treaty which ratified the Louisiana purchase and some other stuff. After informing him that I didn’t care what the law said, anyone who tries to put a whip on my back is going to have severe health problems. I pointed out that the screenshot from that treaty which he showed me said at the bottom “This treaty being made pursuant to the constitution of the United States.” Which means that whatever was said about respecting the laws preexisting in those areas, the constitution supersedes. I then had to explain that when an amendment is made to the constitution, it becomes as if it had always been there and so all laws made under the constitution must change their effect in response to it. He made other arguments but this was the most stupid. He then blocked me on the social media site. I say all that to say, that once you’ve dealt with someone who thinks he has the right to own you, everything else is small potatoes, I just prefer that the debater gives up once defeated.

        Liked by 1 person

  9. I just caught your other comment- maybe there’s a non-rude, non-supremacist bone in your body after all- but yes- you DID speak as if you know me.

    You said ‘you’ on many occasions.

    This is a classic ploy of othering and projection- narcissists and bullies use that technique.

    You see -when you employ the ‘you/me’ in discourse, it is deliberately ‘othering’ language according to Rogers and other psychologists.

    And- it sets up a blaming, shaming, supremacist narrative where only you can ‘win’. Or, where ‘you’ can then be called on the carpet for it, then inevitably insulted when your own language- your othering- comes back at you.

    So yes, you did speak as if you know me. And- you seem to do it with those who don’t instantly praise you


      1. Thanks for your reply- three days later.

        Arrogance much?

        And-if you’re ever up to discussing Rogers, et al, I’ll pencil in a box in my appointment book- or give you a reference to a shrink that can handle your particular diagnoses of ‘ disingenuous smart ass’ better than me.

        As for your ‘twisted ending’ of your piece- um let me guess: rope joke? Hahahahaha. Sooooo funny in a not funny way.

        Or is da big surprize dat you didn’t write the piece? Or is the big surprise that some white guy in 1890 wrote it as a backgrounder for Plessy v Ferguson or something?


        Oh- Hahahaha some more, wutever. Twisted alright.


      2. You’re not entitled to even a single second of my time and, believe it or not, I have other things to do besides shooting down fallacies. In addition, you’re not the only trollish netizen whom I am kind enough to engage. Therefore, you should be glad that I responded at all and accept my response whenever the hell I give it. If that makes me arrogant, fine; if my arrogance offends you, step off. I will respond to your specific arguments later when I’m less busy and if it should please me to do so.


  10. I stumbled upon this article of yours completely at random. I am glad that I took the time to read it through. Very insightful and extremely interesting. Thank you

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Can we fast forward to the 21st century where all of the “white men” are tired of hearing the slavery cries of the black man and the worsening reverse racism that’s come with it? I love all colors and accept all perspectives and guess what, so do my parents, my gradparents, even my great grandparents. Why do people like you continue to try to hold today’s world back with your never ending cries of slavery. We ALL know what happened back then. It’s dreadful to most. Be part of the positive change instead of invoking shouts of “black power” while the “white man” faces as much prejudice as the black today.


    1. I don’t know which inaccuracy to attack first. The article is about history and slavery so……….I mention history and slavery. I don’t hear people like you complaining every fourth of July when the country jams its head further up Jefferson’s rectum.


  12. Reblogged this on Postcard from a Pigeon and commented:
    Having read your letter, I had to take the link back to the original story and The American Conservative. Now I could get a measure of your own restraint in your thorough refutation of his point, that the tours of the two houses mentioned, was somehow imbalanced by the inclusion of the history of the enslaved workforce of these houses. What struck me was the writer’s blindness to the inherent irony in his own argument, for if, as he wished, the tours spoke more of the contribution and formulation of political ideals of the inhabitants of these houses, then these ironies would’ve become immediately apparent. This is a great read.


  13. Nothing has been more exciting to me and what I understand about history in general, the Constitution specifically, is the opening of those hidden doors which have been closed, locked to all of us. It is far more exciting and makes those men and women we blindly revere, no longer demigods, but real people and the lives they led, real and true. In this finding we can all learn a truth that is axiomatic. That is that despite the darker aspects of life we all carry with us to some degree, each and everyone of us has the ability and the right to create greatness. We all live, not at the margins where everything is black or white, but in that huge place where all is grey, but rich with potential.


  14. The science is in.

    There is no such thing as race. Its was an invention of some pretty ignorant Europeans who felt superior.

    If you could kindly stop perpetrating that ignorance, that would be great.


    1. Just because something is a social construct does not mean it doesn’t exist or have real material effects. For instance, English, language we are speaking in, is also a social construct. It exists and its existence can be used to achieve certain effects.


      1. Right. And this particular social construct was invented to oppress. It serves no real purpose.

        No one is required to use them, either. Children do not grow up with such ideas. They have to be taught.

        It’s your choice to use them. There is no reason however to identity by race. Racism can, and will exist, so long as you perpetuate it.


      2. I use it because it is used to oppress people like me. If White supremacy didn’t exist, I’d have no need to resist it. Join me in resisting White supremacy and we could finally put the matter rest. You’re attacking me for talking about the gun pointed at me instead of trying to disarm the man holding the gun.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. But race is the invention of white supremacists. They are the ones who gave people a false racial identity.

        You cannot fight them, when you are serving them by using their weapons of division.

        Either you agree you are a human, and become one of us. Or you label yourself white, black, or yellow, and declare you are an enemy of humanity. Liberate yourself, or play into their hands.

        It’s your choice.


      4. Why is being Black and human any more of a contradiction than being a South Carolinian and human? You fail to realize that publicly expressed colorblindness benefits racists very well, 350 years of legalized racism structures our society at every level and simply not talking about race allows people to reproduce, maintain and expand these systems and structures with impunity. If people of African descent are disproportionately likely to be arrested for a crime which they commit no more often than people of European descent, how does one address this clear injustice without addressing the source of the disproportionality? Yes White supremacists did invent race and racism, but how exactly does refusing to talk about a system which has massive influence on the modern world make that system disappear? When White people stop talking about and enforcing oppressive systems based on race, we’ll be able to stop talking about race.

        Liked by 1 person

      5. Cultural identity has always been used. Culture shapes you. We shape culture.

        Race has nothing to do with culture. Culture and nature ARE colorblind.

        The only reason you heard the argument that colorblind leads to racism is to keep you controlled. The racist know racism will cease to exist if people refused to use them. There is no way to perpetrate racism if race is ridiculed and shamed, it will absolutely lose its power.

        I did not suggest refusing to talk about injustice. You don’t need race labels to talk about social issues. Those are separate issues.

        Oppression comes in many forms. By assuming its bases on a false concept, you won’t investigate actual causes of oppression. Like corruption in politics. You won’t address how legalized dishonesty and lying destroy lives. You won’t look at how the media, or consumerism, or materialism as oppressors. What about academic bias oppression? Those are real.

        Attitudes are real. Treating people differently based on absurd beliefs about race and gender are real problems. But their root is in language.

        I challenge you to read 1984 which is about controlling populations through language, the greatest oppression ever known to mankind if small groups are allowed to control it. Like the media, or ideology, or political parties.

        There is nothing immoral, unethical, or wrong about refusing to use false identities. Even more interesting is the power of self identity. We are breaking away from absolute identity. If a man can identify as a woman, then anyone can identify as any race they want. This will inevitable lead to the question of using these false identities at all. Are you defined by them? Expect more rebellion against the cult of false identities and labels used to control and confuse society into turning against each other.

        We are human. That is all that ever mattered.


      6. There is a well known maxim in the social sciences: “If men perceive things as real, they are real in their consequences.” Catholic and Protestant aren’t real categories stamped on people by nature, but, there was a time when persecution of people called Catholics by people called Protestants was real (and vice versa). Race isn’t real, race based slavery was real and so are the correlations between being of visible African descent and being disproportionately impacted by every negative society has to offer. That is a social issue, that is real. Your semantic argument does nothing to address these realities.


      7. Then I would challenge that premise as false. What is real can only be known by agreement, if you wish others to accept what is real.

        The white supremacists got you to accept their reality.

        I reject it.

        And again, you are trying to put cultural and institutional structures like religion and nations on equal footing with race. That’s not going to work.

        In essence, the white supremacists tribalizes groups of people. It’s no different than nationalism, except that you are using race to create a nationalist identity.


      8. Whether you accept a premise or not, if it is widespread enough, the material effects become real. Why isn’t race on the same level as religion and institutions. Aren’t they all social constructs?


      9. What you seem to be saying is that, if injustice exists, we cannot fight it?

        I am addressing the cause of the injustice, the material effect is the USE of false identities.

        Social constructs are organized and real entities like marriage, government, culture, corporations, tribes, which all have structure.

        Race has no structure whatsoever. It does not exist, but remains abstract. You are trying two equate abstract concepts with social constructs. So no, they are not all social constructs.


      10. No, the material effects are a shorter lifespan, less access to education, higher infant mortality, worse mental health, greater incarceration, lower quality healthcare, being killed by the police etc. My identity as a person of sub-Saharan African descent isn’t false, what’s false is the notion that being of said descent makes me stupid, lazy, criminal and subhuman. It is the latter portion which causes the material effects above, not people who share my descent identifying that said effects are the result of the notion I’ve just laid out and that being the victims of said notion and its effects, historically and in the present, are something which we have in common and can effectively organize against. Not recognizing this does nothing to change the original ideology which has been crafted around people of African descent, it just hinders our ability to fight it. The effects are there whether we recognize them or not.


      11. So your objections are political, not racial. Injustice and lack of equal opportunity effect everyone in the world.

        So the real issue then is your own personal identity. There are many, many cultures and languages of the sub-Sahara. How did you come to own that identity?

        I have no such identity. I am legally American, but that doesn’t define me at all.

        As I stated, identity is becoming fluid. How are you can to use that to organize in a world moving away from such 19th Century thinking?


      12. I don’t know what a racial objection is. When did I say people of African descent were the only ones that suffered, what’s your point? My objection is human, I’m objecting to human suffering caused by an ideology. My personal identity is not the point, I just wanted to ground the discussion in the reality of the basis upon which Black identity, as I understand it, rests?How came I to own what identity? Yeah, there are many people of sub-Saharan Africa, and I’m the descendant of a lot of them, specifically of members that were kidnapped and brought to the New World as slaves, it’s really pretty simple. Identity has always been fluid, and it is in the context of that fluidity that I hold mine, there are many identities far older than 2 centuries that continue thrive, so, once again, I fail to see your point.


      13. Then we are not speaking the same language. I have no “black” identity in which to relate. If your trying to ground the discussion in a perceived “reality” that has no real scientific basis, as you admit, then how can we agree? If I see you only as human, of human worth and human value, with human rights, where does “black” and “white” fit into the dialogue?

        I believe that identity you hold is a result of peer pressure and outside sources. You would not have owned it. I own no such equal identity. I require none. I will not play the game of white supremacy and colonialism.


      14. Listen carefully, the people from whom I actually descend, the people whose genes are in every cell of my body, are from West Africa. That is real, and it has impacted the history of my family over the past 500 years. Now, as a result of being treated poorly because of this reality, people who share that reality began to identify as Black instead of identifying with their particular ethnicities because their collective status became to be seen as more relevant. Race is no more and no less than other socially constructed identities, racism isn’t the problem, racism is. There is an objective substrate, ancestry, rituals, location, etc. upon which a collective identity is built.


      15. That makes no sense to me. My ancestors do not define or effect me in any way. My genes are a possession, not part of me. My humanity exists regardless of my race.

        You can’t have racism without race. They are absolutely one and the same.

        So how do you deal with people who use no racial identity?


      16. Racism and race are not one and the same, the belief in racism presupposes a belief in race, that doesn’t mean they are one and the same. Believing a chair exists is not the same as believing that I should beat you with it. I deal with people based on a combination of what they I identify as and how they act.


      17. And if one does not identify by race, sexual orientation, or class, how then will you deal with then?

        And it is the same thing. I see no difference. You cannot use a physical comparison of an abstract concept. The concept in question never existed in the first place.


      18. Not existing as a biological reality is not the same as not existing. America has never been a biological reality, but I still pay taxes and I still move through the world in certain ways based in being a part of said entity.


      19. Again, that is an organized entity composed people. People exist.

        That race, sexuality, or class exists are abstract things that no organization requires to function. Tribes, States, Governments, Families, do not require race, sexual orientation, or class to be members of the group.

        As I stated, this whole issue is creating new forms of radical nationalism based on new identities that make no sense.


      20. Black people organize, we’re people, we have a culture and large organizations based on the notion of us as a people with a shared history. I don’t really see your point. The fact that you like certain fictive social entities more than others doesn’t mean that ones you don’t like are less real than the ones you do like, the fact that you find it inconvenient for Black people to organize politically doesn’t make that organization more illegitimate than any others.


      21. Race was never the foundation of any kind of “sharing.” What history do you think is shared, when culture, tribes, languages, and reality are not in any way bound by race?


      22. Or not participate. I choose not to participate in any form of racism. I am not part of any race whatsoever.

        That is a biological reality.


      23. That’s fine, and has nothing to do with the way race structures the society in which you’re in, I can decide to not be part of any race, that won’t stop people from treating me a certain way based in my perceived race.


      24. If you’re only concern is how people treat you … that was never a racial issue. That’s a moral issue. And an issue that ultimately is about controlling society.


      25. Why react at all to being told you are inferior? Actions speak louder than words. Merely saying “I am not inferior” has no more weight than saying “I am honest, trust me.”

        Actions always speak louder than words. It still has nothing to do with race. Again, this is a moral issue, how people treat one another is always a moral issue.


      26. Because being seen as inferior impacts the way we are treated in the society in which we live, it is the cultural and ideological basis of said society and it has been creating horrible outcomes for 400 years.


      27. Always? White supremacy is only a recent thing from the 1800’s.

        Prior to that you had colonialism, which is not based on race, but a desire to expand or migrate. The cultures of Europe are not tied to land, unlike other cultures. Nor is it tied to race, being diverse and mixed since Roman times.

        If you want to get into the cultural origins of colonialism, then explore Tue Greeks and Phoenicians who colonized well beyond their homelands.

        Racism played no part then, or in recent times. Secular society invented a new form of rationalizing their brutality around the world by inventing races. But even then its fueled by unrestrained statism and corporate greed, the true source of colonialism and racism.


      28. Your grasp of history is unsurprisingly lax. No racism before the 1800s? Tell that to Thomas Jefferson and his “Notes on the State of Virginia.” European society wasn’t based on land? Tell that to all the feudal lords.


      29. Common misunderstandings. Feudalism is a political system. They are based on land.

        Culture is not, and is fluid and migrates often.

        And as an ideology, no, racism did not exist until the 1800’s. Forms of it began earlier.

        History is not about absolutes. The point is to address the origins of ideas. You seem to want to demonize people, rather than ideas. Us against them thinking, rather than address why people think as they do. Ideologies if unchecked, spread like a virus had make good people to bad things. Rationalization of evil is the oldest trick in the book. Racism is rationalization of evil. To understand it, seek out origin and who gained.

        Who gains from racism? The elite.


      30. Culture arises out of material conditions, the separation between politics and culture is specious. If organizing ones entire society and land and who owns it doesn’t constitute a culture based on land, what does?


      31. The separation between culture and politics is essential. The political power is subservient to society, which institutes it. Societies can, and should, change their political institutions as necessary. That’s is also called democracy.

        Society itself is not organized. It creates organizations. It institutes groups with authority, but itself is not an institution.

        There are very important things to not confuse.

        That humans own property is a non-issue. Or is that important somehow?


      32. This conversation has grown ponderous and tiring. Do you have a blog? If so, send me the link, I think it will be more efficient to respond to each other at length rather than in comments.


      33. So ideologies don’t exist until someone rights a philosophy on it? Yes, I’m sure I can find a tract arguing for the inferiority of Africans to Europeans to but even still, do ideologies not exist until someone writes a book on them?


      34. Yes. A set of ideals must exist in some written form. That is what the word ideology means, the study of ideals. What is there to study if its not subject to examination?

        What evidence would you have of an ideology otherwise?


      35. Please don’t presume to reduce what I want to do to some narrow frame of reference which you find it easy to impose on me in order to avoid dealing with the flaws in your arguments.


      36. Now you’ve just started repeating the obvious, but you fail to answer my question. Why is ignoring race as a social category a more effective means of combatting racism than co-opting the concept of race and using it to contest racism, the belief that some heritage groups are superior to others. Stripped of hierarchy, race itself becomes just another organizing concept, like tribe, nation, creed, church, class etc.


      37. Ignoring race strips it of power. I explained that already, and did answer your question. A thing that has no word has no power.

        You cannot fight fire with fire. You put it out. Ignoring race as a concept puts put the flames.

        Heritage groups are not races, and heritage is a totally separate issue. Who thinks one is superior to another? Superior is yet another subjective concept. What one person thinks is superior I might believe inferior.


      38. You say you want to be listened to. If you are ignored, then you have no power.

        I thought that was obvious.

        Why should we give power to supremacists? Why should they not be ignored? You give them power by playing their game.


      39. Heritage groups, races, nation within a nation, these are all semantic. The point is, people perceived to be of sub-Saharan African descent are oppressed, what is to be done about it?


      40. What do you mean semantic? They are entirely separate.

        Again, culture and heritage is not bound by race.

        Who is oppression an entire culture?


      41. As for actions speaking louder than words, you’re the one saying we should try to educate people, and tell them that race isn’t real. I’m the one saying we should organize and work to change material reality.


      42. It’s really the same thing.

        Beliefs vanish over time because people stop believing in them. Why should the concept of race be any different?


      43. Those have a real effect on reality. A set of beliefs.

        Race is merely a result of beliefs. So address the ideology that is the source.


      44. The source of racism is White supremacy, the source of “race” is the need to create the conditions for racism. Which doesn’t mean that organizing around a shared heritage to resist it is wrong.


      45. First sentence is true. So is second. But second sentence doesn’t follow.

        Race has no heritage or commonality, aside from biology. It has never been used in heritage or culture.


      46. Also, it’s not an either or game, seeing someone as human doesn’t preclude seeing them as having specific identities any more than seeing someone as living in Australia and not Scandinavia does. The idea that we must all be these undifferentiated humans in order to all be human is absurd.


      47. Also, above, you admitted earlier, along with the majority of social scientists , that race is a social construct, now you deny what it is? Also, there is nothing about race which makes it more abstract than any other idea that people carry around, like a nationality or a religion. You’re confusing the creation of an ideology to oppress (racism) with the recognition of said ideology and deliberately working against it, (anti-racism).


      48. Because I had to think about it. Do your views not change with time and new knowledge?

        I find often with my own research that social scientists are wrong, or their interpretation of data biases or flawed.

        Don’t you? Surely you don’t agree with every conclusion or interpretation without careful thought or your own research.

        The actual ideology of racism is rooted in materialism and German philosophy. It’s not an independent ideology.


      49. Ok, so you’ve decided that race is not a social construct, now you have to defend that notion. There is not such thing as an independent ideology, everything arises out of what came before it.


      50. I’m afraid the original invention of race never had a defense. As you admitted, white supremacists invented it. Why then would I have to defend their invention?


      51. Why are we arguing about race and not racism? Just because an axe was originally used to kill someone doesn’t mean it can’t then be used to chop down a tree, there are exigencies to survival within unspeakably hostile contexts which leave no room for caring about your dream of semantic purity.


      52. You’re right, without the concept of racism the concept if racism doesn’t make sense, neither does anti-racism. That’s why, in the face of racism already existing, we organize around anti-racism. I really don’t see what’s so complicated.


      53. Because its organizing around a false concept. Its basically reactionary and avoids addressing the real issue. Why anyone should use racial identity.


      54. That’s up to you. Educating people on how stupid it is would be the first step.

        That’s how it started. Bad education for decades from the 1800’s.


      55. People don’t care how stupid it is, because race allowed them to create racism which benefits them. Why would people who don’t even listen to us when we say racism exists listen to us when we say race isn’t a biological reality?


      56. Not all social movements have a good plan. The premise was poor from the very beginning. You are being a reactionary to their game.

        Stop reacting to their reality they have created for you. Stop listening to THEM.


      57. If you use their abstract ideas, you are listening to them. You are benefiting only the white supremacists.

        I refuse to give them anything at all. They did not define reality. You only think they did, and react accordingly.


      58. You never answered my question, when we stop using those words and nothing changes, in fact things will probably get worse because we will have no basis around which to organize, what will happen then?


      59. That is a slippery slope fallacy to avoid change.

        Of course you have a basis in which to organize. There are many to choose from. Heritage, culture, religion, ideology, etc.

        Those things are based on humanity being equal.

        Race, sexual orientation, and class is based on humanity being divided.


      60. Not if we collectively renounce it as a reality. Your method of dealing with it won’t work. Calling it out as a nonexistent concept will.

        Why should anyone use racial words at all?


      61. You can’t control how people think. You can only teach them.

        It took over a century to get to this situation. Do you think it will just go away in one or two generations?


      62. I don’t think people who benefit from a racism which, among other things, tells them they don’t have to listen to people like me, will change their thinking. That’s why I focus on organizing to change the material reality.


      63. Reality is always in flux. And in the scientific communities around the world, race isn’t taken seriously by anyone. Especially as non-Western nations realize how the West duped them with so many false identities.

        You do realize other organizations are addressing the same issue differently? You are making it political and social. Scientists do not care, as they know reality far more intimately than the average person. They define reality.

        So when science says race doesn’t exist, and society wants to insist that it does … that is a problem.


      64. Race isn’t taken seriously because race isn’t a scientific reality, just like political parties aren’t. Though, I’ve read scientific studies which look at health outcomes based on race.


      65. The change away from using racial words will be slow. Many resist. It is difficult to deprogram over a century of using racial words.


      66. Racial words aren’t the problem, racism is, I could be Black all day long if people didn’t think Black meant inferior. I think you’re just tired of hearing about racism and would prefer silent suffering.


      67. The existence of beliefs control behavior. The creation of race is at the root of the concept.

        So you would rather not uproot the problem?

        Of course people are tired of hearing about racism. Because people are becoming aware there is no race at all.


      68. I see more and more mixed race people here in North Eastern PA and that is good to blend races. More black people buying homes out in the country where I live. But we also see more and more drug dealers and gang murders here now from blacks coming in from Philly and NYC area. It’s scary to us white folks. But you know.. there’s lots f horrible murdering white folks out there too. Although not many of my own ancestors had slaves. in fact only one I knew of on the census. But up North here there were many more free blacks in the census in PA, NY and NJ. But I can say I am not to blame for what my ancestors did in the past. I’m ashamed if they had slaves, but here in the present it’s not my fault, I had nothing to do with it. I’m sorry you are so upset but even for YOU it is in the past, can’t you leave the anger there too?


      69. This article was about history. History is important. That’s why people go to the homes of historical figures. Slavery is a part of American and world history. Any more questions?




      1. I was with you until you referred to my ancestors and put the burden of racism (presumably meaning racism worldwide, since the dawn of humanity) on white people alone. Racism, xenophobia, ageism and any number of other isms along those lines reflect the unfortunate human tendency to categorize others different from us in broad simplistic groups, attach superficial, ill-informed judgement to them and regard them with suspicion, or fear, or hatred. White Europeans perpetrated black slavery in the new world along with subjugating native peoples and thereby taking racism to unfathomable extremes, but racism has been deeply ingrained in every world culture since the dawn of time.

        Some of us have no ancestors who were slave holders in America and a good many who opposed slavery. How much credit or blame each of us can take for the deeds of our ancestors or the past deeds of our entire race is not a question that can be plausibly answered.


      2. Racism is distinct from xenophobia. Yes, xenophobia has existed since the dawn of time, but, if you lived in a place for centuries, and generation after generation of your family knew the language, practiced the religion and were steeped in the culture, those descendants were no longer considered “strangers” xenophobia meaning “fear of strangers.” Racism is a unique European idea, based around the idea that people can be categorized like animals and that no matter what they do, certain people are immutably inferior.

        Liked by 1 person

  15. Love this blog entry as well I’m Super excited for everyone to check out my blog!! I’ve been working on it for a month now and it’s finally ready. I’ll be posting new things every chance I get. Having a little one makes it kinda crazy to get alone time. So please check it out!!


  16. I live on property that was once a plantation where rice grew and human property worked. As a daughter of people who were not in the USA before 1895, when the current SC Constitution was originally written, I don’t feel personally attached to the magnolia and moonlight heritage of the American South but am not unaware of its tremendous presence in the culture and politics around me. Race and racism are part of my everyday life, and the degree to which I depend on African-Americans is different only in degree from that of James Madison. It is brown-skinned people who blow the leaves off my roof and who do most of the low-paid work in my town. In some ways they are still enslaved by the poor education that was available to them for decades, long after Reconstruction and long after Brown v Board of Education. People who never owned slaves, and who claim that their forebears never did either, still begrudged the descendants of slaves a decent education and blithely founded and supported private “Christian” schools that would be safe from integration. In SC, the standard of “minimally adequate education” has governed what is available to thousands of students who cannot afford, or who might not be accepted in, private schools.

    As long as I have lived here, I’ve watched the buses roll up to resort businesses at 7 am and depart later in the day for long rides home to poorer towns. I’ve never seen a white person board a bus headed to Frogmore or Estill, and in fact the only reason the Palmetto Breeze bus system exists is to transport workers. Parallels can be drawn between these workers’ lives and their ancestors’ labors, as they are essential to an economy that depends on their work without really recognizing their importance and rewarding it.

    Times change but not always as drastically as is convenient to believe. I’m glad someone called out Suzanne Sherman for her shallow understanding of history. I felt the sting of the open letter and but in comparison to the lash or the noose, or the fear that birthed #BlackLivesMatter, it was very gentle.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. I’m glad to hear you’re so aware, yes, the basic fundamentals of the Southern economy have never changed. I grew up in Orangeburg South Carolina and the more I’ve learned about history the more I’ve seen that my sleepy little hamlet is not immune. Orangeburg Prep is the private school, I remember when I was just learning to read asking my grandmother what “preparatory” meant, she snapped back “A school for White kids.” When I got older, I figured she was being sarcastic and making an economic critique, when I got even older I realized that “Prep” was a segregation academy. I realized that the railroad tracks which divided the town in two once divided the White side of town from the Black, with the city’s two HBCUs and all the homes of family members who lived in homes their parents had owned on one side and the nicer homes (which isn’t to say there were no nice homes on “our” side) and White churches were on the other. I’ve only just begun to tease out the racial geography and history which I walk through whenever I go home. Plantation houses that fly confederate flags, cotton and tobacco fields still owned by those same houses: Every stone, every tree, ever house, every clearing, if it’s been there long enough, has a story. Finally, I’m glad to run into somebody who can tell the difference between learning that one benefits from an injustice from the pain of learning one is harmed by them.

      Liked by 1 person

  17. Reading this made me so proud. I do not know you in any way other than from what I’ve read here today but I want to say thank you for being bold enough to enlighten, inform and correct all in one post. Also, thank you for knowing what you’re talking about and wording it in such a way that it not only checked ignorance but also took us on an insightful journey through history along the way. It was a pleasure to read.

    Liked by 1 person

  18. Your work is outstanding and unparalleled! Only thing I might add is that black people still are enslaved as, indeed, are all the rest of us.

    As evidence, the following letter is written by a Superior Court Judge in Alaska. Her name is Anna Maria Riezinger:

    Anna Maria Riezinger (Anna Von Reitz) November 28, 2015 Big Lake, Alaska

    Dear Federal Agents: I am addressing this letter in this way, because it is my understanding that it will be read by members of both the FBI and the US Marshals Service. It is also my understanding that you have available for examination a wet-ink signed copy of the illustrated affidavit of probable cause entitled “You Know Something Is Wrong When…..An American Affidavit of Probable Cause” as back-up reference and evidence.

    Since the publication of the affidavit a plethora of new supporting documentation and evidence has come to light. We found, for example, that on June 30, 1864, the members of Congress acting as the Board of Directors of a private, mostly foreign-owned corporation doing business as “The United States of America, Incorporated” changed the meaning of “state,” “State” and “United States” to mean “District of Columbia Municipal Corporation.” Like the 1862 change of the meaning of the word “person” to mean “corporation” cited in our affidavit, these special coded meanings of words render a drastically different picture of the world around us.

    It turns out that your “personal bank account” is actually a “corporate bank account.” The “Colorado State Court” is actually the “Colorado District of Columbia Municipal Corporation Court.”

    If you are shocked to learn these facts, you are not alone. So are millions of other Americans. These changes were made 150 years ago and tucked away in reams of boring meeting minutes and legalistic gobbledygook meant to be applied only to the internal workings of a private governmental services corporation and its employees. There was no public announcement, just as there was no public announcement or explanation when Congress created “municipal citizenship” known as “US citizenship” in 1868. Properly, technically, even to this day, this form of “citizenship” applies only to those born in the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and other Insular States, so there was no real reason to educate the general public about the topic. As Congress was secretively using the labor and the private property assets of these “citizens” as collateral backing the corporate debts of “The United States of America, Inc.” there was plenty of reason to obscure this development. At the end of the Civil War it would have been very unpopular to reveal that they were simply changing gears from private sector slave ownership to public sector slave ownership.

    You may be surprised to learn that slavery was not abolished by the Thirteenth or any other Amendment to any constitution then or now. Instead, slavery was redefined as the punishment meted out to criminals. Look it up and read it for yourselves. It remains perfectly legal to enslave criminals, and it was left to Congress to define who the criminals were, because Congress was given plenary power over the District of Columbia and its citizenry by the original Constitution of the Republic and could do whatever it liked within the District and the Washington, DC Municipalities.

    A child picking dandelions on the sidewalk could be arbitrarily defined as a criminal and enslaved for life by the renegade Congress functioning as the government of the District of Columbia and as the Board of Directors for the District of Columbia Municipal Corporation, but for starters, Congress simply defined “US citizens” as debt slaves under the 14th Amendment of their corporation’s articles and by-laws – which they deceptively named the “Constitution of the United States of America.”

    The actual Constitution was and still is called “The Constitution for the united States of America,” but most people untrained in the Law and trusting what they believed to be their government didn’t notice the difference between “The Constitution for the united States of America” and the “Constitution of the United States of America.” Are you beginning to see a pattern of deliberate deceit and self-interest and double-speak and double-dealing? And are you also beginning to catch the drift – the motivation – behind it?

    Let’s discuss the concept of “hypothecation of debt.” This little gem was developed by the bankers who actually owned and ran the governmental services corporations doing business as “The United States of America, Inc,” and as the “United States, Incorporated.” When you hypothecate debt against someone or against some asset belonging to someone else, you simply claim that they agreed to stand as surety for your debt – similar to cosigning a car loan – and as long as you make your payments, nobody is any the wiser. Normally, it’s not possible for us to just arbitrarily claim that someone is our surety for debt without proof of consent, but that is exactly what Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the Conference of Governors did in March of 1933. They named all of us and all our property as surety standing good for the debts of their own bankrupt governmental services corporation during bankruptcy reorganization-and got away with it by claiming that they were our “representatives” and that we had delegated our authority to them to do this “for” us. The exact date and occasion when this happened and where it is recorded, is given in our affidavit.

    In order to pull this off, however, they had to allege that we were all “US citizens”, and therefore, all subject to the plenary power of Congress acting as an oligarchy ruling over the District of Columbia and the Federal Territories. They did this by abusing the public trust and creating and registering millions of foreign situs trusts named after each of us. Under their own diversity of citizenship rules, corporations are considered to be “US citizens.” So they created all these foreign situs trusts as franchises of their own bankrupt corporation, used our names styled like this: John Quincy Adams – and placed commercial liens against our names as chattel owned by their corporation and standing as surety for its debts. A group of thugs elected to political office grossly transgressed against the American people and the American states and committed the crime of personage against each and every one of us without us ever being aware of it.

    They couldn’t enslave us, but they could enslave a foreign situs trust named after us – that we conveniently didn’t know existed – and by deliberately confusing this “thing” with us via the misuse of our given names, they could bring charges against what appeared to be us and our private property in their very own corporate tribunals.

    And so the fleecing of America began in earnest. The hirelings had our credit cards, had stolen our identities, and were ready to begin a crime spree unheralded in human history. They claimed that we all knew about this arrangement and consented to it, because we “voluntarily” gave up our gold when FDR sent his henchmen around to collect it – when as millions of Americans can attest, people gave up their gold in preference to being shot or having to kill federal agents. They chose life for everyone concerned over some pieces of metal, and for that, they are to be honored; unfortunately, their decision gave the rats responsible an excuse to claim that Americans wanted to leave the gold standard and wanted the “benefits” of this New Deal in “equitable exchange” for their gold, their identities, the abuse of their good names as bankrupts and debtors, the loss of allodial title to their land and homes, and their subjection as slaves to the whims of Congress.

    According to them, that is those who benefited from this gross betrayal of the public trust, we all voluntarily left the Republic and the guarantees of the actual Constitution behind, willingly subjected ourselves to Congressional rule, donated all our assets including our labor and property to the Public Charitable Trust (set up after the Civil War as a welfare trust for displaced plantation slaves), and agreed to live as slaves owned by the District of Columbia Municipal Corporation in exchange for what?

    Welfare that we paid for ourselves. Social Security that we paid for ourselves. The criminality of the “US Congress” and the “Presidents” acting since 1933 is jaw-droppingly shocking. Their abuse of the trust of the American people is even worse. They have portrayed this circumstance as a political choice instead of an institutionalized fraud scheme, and they have “presumed” that we all went along with it and agreed to it without complaint. Thus, they have been merrily and secretively having us declared “civilly dead” as American State Citizens the day we are born, and entering a false registration claiming that we are “US Citizens” instead.

    We are told, when we wake up enough to ask, that we are free to choose our political status. We don’t have to serve as debt slaves. We can go back and reclaim our guaranteed Republican form of government and our birthright status if we want to, but that requires a secret process in front of the probate court and expatriation from the Federal United States to the Continental United States and all sorts of voodoo in backrooms that can only be pursued by the few and the knowledgeable and the blessed. Everyone else has to remain as a debt slave and chattel serving whatever corporation bought the latest version of corporate “persona” named after us.

    So let me ask you, as members of the FBI and as US Marshals, does this sound like something you want to be involved with enforcing on innocent people, or does it sound like something you want to end as expeditiously as possible?

    The frauds that took root in the wake of the Civil War and which blossomed in the 1930’s have come to their final fruition. Employees of the “District of Columbia Municipal Corporation” and its United Nations successors are being used as jack-booted thugs to throw Americans into privately owned “federal correctional facilities” when those who need correction, the members of the American Bar Association and the euphemistically named and privately owned and operated “DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE” continue to ignore the fact that Americans DO have a choice and that by the millions we are demanding our freedom from all these pathetic false commercial claims and presumptions.

    We are standing up before the whole world and telling these privately owned “governmental services corporations” to go bankrupt like any other corporation that doesn’t do its job and mind its budget. These entities deserve to go bankrupt and worse. They have spent money and credit that was never theirs to spend. They have defrauded millions if not billions of innocent people and they have prevented Americans from claiming their birthrights for far too long.

    These people, the members of Congress and the various “Presidents” of the numerous “United States” corporations, have acted as criminals. They deserve to be recognized as such.

    The members of the American Bar Association have attempted to wash their hands while profiting from the situation and obstructing justice. They stand around shrugging and saying, “Well, it’s a political choice. We don’t have anything to say about that.” Yet at the same time, they refuse to correct the probate records to reflect our chosen change of political status when we plainly identify ourselves and enunciate our Will for them. They, too, deserve to be recognized as self-interested criminals and accomplices to identity theft, credit fraud, and worse, which is why we have recently issued a $279 trillion dollar commercial obligation lien against the American Bar Association, the International Bar Association, and the DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.

    All our assets, our bodies, homes, businesses, lands, and labor, have been signed over into the “Public Charitable Trust” by con men merely claiming to represent us. Then, when we object to their lies and entrapment, they use the same fraud against us as their excuse for bringing more false claims against us and throwing us in jail. Enough is enough. The British Monarch and the Lords of the Admiralty have promoted this fraud against us at the same time they have claimed to be our trustees, allies and friends in perpetuity. It’s time to clear the way for us to politely and peaceably exit from any presumption that we are or ever were “US citizens”, willing participants in the “Public Charitable Trust,” or willing “sureties” for the debts of any private bank-run governmental services corporation merely calling itself the United States of Something or Other.

    We repudiate any presumption of private municipal citizenship or obligation to the District of Columbia Municipal Corporation or any successor thereof, and demand an immediate and permanent correction of the civil record to reflect our birthright status as American State Citizens, nunc pro tunc.

    As for you, as “Federal Agents”, you have a lot to think about. For starters, who really pays your paycheck? Is it the goons in Washington, DC? Or does it all come from the American people you are supposed to be serving? Do you believe for one moment that anyone just lined up and gave their gold to FDR voluntarily? Do you believe that anyone gave away all their property and the guarantees of the actual Constitution for the “privilege” of paying for Social Security? No?

    Wake up and smell the java and start doing your real jobs. If anyone complains, arrest him. We are reopening the American Common Law Courts expressly for the purpose of settling disputes related to living people and their property assets in excess of $20 as mandated by the Seventh Amendment.

    We, the American people, are the ones holding absolute civil authority upon the land of the Continental United States, and we give you permission to arrest the members of Congress, the President, the Secretary of the Treasury, and any other politician or appointee pretending to speak for us so as to enslave us and bring false claims against us via this institutionalized fraud scheme. We want it recognized for what it is and dismantled and repudiated tout de suite.

    Any court that is caught arresting and prosecuting Americans under the presumptions just described to you, such as bringing charges against foreign situs trusts with names styled like this: John Quincy Adams, or Cestui Que Vie trusts styled like this: JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, or Puerto Rican public transmitting utilities styled like this: JOHN Q. ADAMS, it is your responsibility to make sure that any individuals being addressed by these courts were actually born in the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, or one of the other Insular States and that they are not ignorant American State Citizens being falsely registered and railroaded.

    Do you understand? Is it now completely clear who the criminals are? Your actual employers and benefactors are being attacked and defrauded by criminals pretending to act as their elected representatives and accomplices in black robes who are serving as enforcers of this fraud for profit. This has been happening right under your noses.

    This whole circumstance has escaped broad scale public understanding because it was being pursued by private governmental services corporations owned and operated by international banking cartels who claimed that these “private arrangements” were none of the public’s business, despite the grotesque and far-ranging impact these cozy understandings have had upon the people of this and many other countries.

    Let it be perfectly clear to you that the business of these private corporations has become our business because they have operated in violation of their charters, in violation of the treaties allowing their existence, and in violation of the National Trust. The American Bar Association and the Internal Revenue Service have both been owned and operated as private foreign bill collectors and trust administrators by Northern Trust, Inc., in violent conflict of interest. They are not professional associations, non-profits, nor units of government. They are con artists and privateers whose licenses expired as of September 1, 2013.

    The United States Marshals Service is enabled to act in the capacity of constitutionally–sworn Federal Marshals and we invoke their office and service as such; failure to accept the public office means rejection of all authority related to us. The same may be said of the FBI. Either you do your jobs as constitutionally sworn public officers, or you act as private mall cops in behalf of the offending corporations and under color of law when you pretend to have any public authority or function. This is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Judge Anna Maria Riezinger Alaska State Superior Court

    As if the above is not enough, check out 1871, the year in which Congress changed this nation to a corporation, The United States, Incorporated. Don’t believe me. See for yourself. Do your own research.


    Bill Ernstberger

    Liked by 1 person

  19. Pingback: GOOD LUCK

Leave a Reply to thelivelyleftist Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s