The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersSBPDL Blog
In 2017 Connecticut, Blacks Represent 10% of the Population of the State and 58 Percent of Known Homicide Suspects
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

PK NOTE: To be brief, SBPDL needs your help. This is the first fundraiser of the year and it’s been a great one since moving to Unz.com!

You can make a tax deductible contribution via VDARE to “Paul Kersey” by clicking here (be sure to earmark it for Paul Kersey). 

If you enjoy SBPDL, we encourage you to make a donation to help sustain the site’s growth (contact [email protected] if you would like to donate via PayPal, Bitcoin or Google Wallet).You can get signed copies of all PK books for a donation of $450 and individual books signed are $30, including the latest, Their Lives Matter Too. 

Or do something as simple as purchase a “Because We Live Here” shirt or coffee mug! Also, it comes in the Mel Gibson/The Patriot “Because We Live Here” version!

You can also send cash, check, or money order to:

Paul Kersey

P.O. Box 527

Oakton, VA 22124

Your generous donations help SBPDL grow. Thanks so much, and we hope you’ve enjoyed the move to the new home at Unz.com!

Inquire at BecauseWeLiveHere (at) protonmail (dot) com with any questions!

The statistics are right there, if you just know where to look. Connecticut is a 71 percent white state. Its population is 10 percent black

The 2017 Connecticut Uniform Crime Reporting provides an interesting look at violent crime in the 71 percent white state:

  • There were 105 homicides in the state in 2017. In investigations where a suspect was known, whites were suspects in 28 of them, blacks were suspects in 40 of them, and one Asian was suspected in murder.
  • Though they represent 10 percent of the states population, in 2017 Connecticut, blacks were 58 percent of known homicide suspects…

Per capita…

Despite being…

 

 

 
Hide 59 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. It is because of:

    -inequality in
    —education
    —housing
    —income

    -racism in
    —policing
    —banking
    —Schools
    —Universities

    To solve the problem we need more
    —money
    —control of government
    —opportunities in majority white areas
    —probation for youthful offenders

    Does that about some it up?

    Heaven forbid we hold people accountable for their actions, regardless of skin color or scoop economic status. By all means never attempt to clean up the ghetto, as it is as much a part of black cultural heritage as the cotton field.

    We’ve been spinning this 6 ways since Sunday and no matter how one looks at it, the facts are clear: more blacks, more crime.

    • Agree: Gunga Din
    • LOL: Augustus
  2. You should put the word “whites” in quote marks. Thev”whites” who commit murders may belong to “diverse” groups.

    • Replies: @The Village
  3. In Connecticut, you will find upper caste liberal Whites who live in huge estates in Golden Triangle and on the other hand you will find middle class white families whose daughters burn coal with blacks. Connecticut blacks are among the worst, they treat mudsharks like shit, keep a negress at home raising picknannies on the dole. Connecticut probably has the highest black white relationship rates.
    White men here, like most of the places are pathetic cucks who would rather invite negros to screw their women.
    Connecticut has a beautiful scenery nonetheless. But, it is absolutely pathetic place to live unless you earn atleast 5 million dollar a month.

  4. 435 pages of reading and stats….but page 183 told me all i needed to know. From big city to big city….it NEVER changes.

  5. Anonymous[474] • Disclaimer says:

    When discussing Connecticut, “white” murder suspects = Puerto Ricans.

  6. @ShermanFan

    I do just as MLK instructed us to do. I judge them by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin.

    However, one does not gain them any more traction than the other.

    He really should have thought that one through a little more and had us judge them by something else other than skin color or character.

    I’m having trouble thinking of another yardstick he could’ve used that applies to them.

    • Replies: @Wildkyle
  7. Wildkyle says:
    @Jim in Jersey

    Sports. Based on what I’ve seen White People Love black creatures cause they play sports. It’s a game. I never thought of it differently .I played games as a child. Now the game is life. I rebuilt the projects more than once. Just so they can live better than me. FUCK THEM ALL

  8. @American 101

    Connecticut has a beautiful scenery nonetheless. But, it is absolutely pathetic place to live unless you earn atleast 5 million dollar a month.

    There are really four Connecticuts:
    –The cities and parts of the older inner suburbs–almost totally minority, extremely dangerous, among the worst in the US. This is where almost all of the major crime in the state happens (95%+?)
    –Suburban and rural Fairfield County–almost all white and yeah, you need to be rich to live there
    –Suburban rest of CT–almost all white, and upper middle class
    –Rural CT (rest of state)–amazing scenery, almost all white, and much more affordable

    Statistics will tell you nothing about the state–the “average” of apples and oranges is “This does not compute!”

    • Replies: @Sick 'n Tired
  9. Anonymous[355] • Disclaimer says:

    Re: “There aren’t any black robots because racism!” story

    Who builds humanoid robots? Hint, it’s not a bunch of Liberian neuroscientists. From the time we are children, humans draw people who look like themselves. Is it racist if a white or Asian child doesn’t draw crayon pictures of black people? So why is it racist if white or Asian roboticists build humanoid robots that resemble white or Asian people? Again, if Wakanda existed and there were a bunch of black roboticists out there, no one would fault them for building black humanoid robots.

    We are heading to the point where whites are going to be compelled to create from scratch a cutting edge high technology country in sub-Saharan Africa, call it Wakanda, and plop an all-black population inside it like some sort of real-life dollhouse, all because a first-world all-black country doesn’t exist (because of racism).

  10. Loren says:

    White People Love black –see the trailer for new film, ‘Luce’.

    • Replies: @Love Street
    , @ShermanFan
  11. @Anonymous

    plop an all-black population inside it like some sort of real-life dollhouse

    (raises hand in class):

    “I nominate Mars!”

    • Replies: @SaneClownPosse
  12. @Loren

    Awww do I have to??
    Ok☹️

    • Replies: @Loren
  13. @DINDUNUFFINS,esquire

    Hartford has a long and ugly history of black violence.

    The mugging of the city’s white former power broker (who _never_ learned from his beating) is one example:
    https://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/27/nyregion/nyregionspecial2/27colct.html

    The message he was supposed to get: “Stay out of our city, whitey.”

    • Replies: @getaclue
  14. @Father O'Hara

    Father O’Hare,I read your comment on a previous post that said you grew up just north of Englewood I also grew up a few blocks north of Englewood

  15. 95Theses says:
    @American 101

    Slightly OT, but it may interest you to know that a condo unit at the former Buckley estate (1 Great Elm Rd, Sharon Connecticut) was up for sale back in 2017.

    I believe there is even a picture of the grand old man’s study in the photo gallery. It’s one of the few places of which I could say that I’d have been happy just living in their garage as it is so massive and stately!

    https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1-Great-Elm-Rd-3-Sharon-CT-06069/61308943_zpid/

    It was there in Buckley’s home that the The Sharon Statement was originally announced by leaders of the Young Americans for Freedom Foundation.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharon_Statement

  16. We are heading to the point where whites are going to be compelled to create from scratch a cutting edge high technology country in sub-Saharan Africa, call it Wakanda, and plop an all-black population inside it like some sort of real-life dollhouse, all because a first-world all-black country doesn’t exist (because of racism)

    South Africa?….

  17. Funny now BLM led to Black Lives Splatter. It illustrates the dangers of false diagnosis. Blacks kill blacks, and heavy police presence mitigates that somewhat, but BLM blamed the cops. Cops retreated, and so blacks ended up killing more blacks. It’s like blaming exercise for obesity and therefore exercising less… and then wondering why one got even fatter.

    The mis-diagnosis of BLM owed to the cult of black holiness. The Narrative says we must see all black youths as new ‘Emitt Tills’ nibbling on Skittles. Blacks can be tragic victims but not murderous perpetrators, and therefore, we must pretend dead blacks must be victims of non-blacks, namely White ‘racist’ cops.

    Since cops were diagnosed as the reason for black deaths, they were told to retreat and draw down. Without them, blacks piled up more dead bodies.

    Personally, I say pull out ALL cops. Who cares what those people do?

    • Replies: @ShermanFan
  18. Wildkyle says:
    @Anonymous

    Your absolutely right. I’m an old marine, and I’m homeless I fear for my life every day. I’m 61 years old. I am alone niggers are near me, will I live through the night?

    • Replies: @Love Street
  19. @Loren

    White parents, black adoptee from a “war torn country”. He is a star athlete and debater, thus suggesting his double threat as athletically and intellectually advanced. The fantasy goes from there…

    What’s the point?
    Another movie that showcases the improbable negro, excelling in white man’s world?

    I wouldn’t give $0.02 to watch a bunch of liberal twits fellate the BLM cause.

    • Agree: Love Street
  20. @Priss Factor

    Personally, I say pull out ALL cops. Who cares what those people do?

    I would generally agree, but they are akin to locusts and will travel a great distance in search of food, supplies, an opportunity to muh-dik, skittles, and booze.

    Best to ensure they cannot swarm your neighborhood.

    • Replies: @Love Street
  21. OT

    A great article and video at the “natural news” web site about the California beaches being filled with shit. The rain washes the shit filled California streets into the ocean. The Texas beaches are also filled with shit coming from the Houston Airport. The shit from incoming airplanes gets dumped into storm drains which wash into the gulf. America really is turning into third world country.

    London is also filled with shit because the sewers can no longer handle nine million people.

    • Replies: @Love Street
  22. getaclue says:
    @Justvisiting

    Amazing, all should read what the guy who almost got beat to death had to say–his “forgiveness” not a Christian one some kind of Leftist credo of white guilt, wow….–he can’t blame the “youths” that broke his face– because economic deprivation and all that–should have just said they were black and he had it coming?–do you have to be retarded to be Liberal/Progressive or just sound that way? We are in deep trouble with these people and their attitudes, maybe he’s good with getting his face smashed in by 3 hoods but probably not the next guy who may not be so flush with cash as he is….

    • Replies: @Justvisiting
  23. @Wildkyle

    You will be ok.
    But remember..Never relax around blaxx

  24. anon19 says:
    @Anonymous

    If only Wakanda DID exist. Then blacks could go there instead of to white countries.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
  25. Blacks are like cows in India.

    To any rational mind, it’s obvious that letting cows run loose is bad for traffic, costly to society, and endangers many lives. But but but, cows are sacred, and there isn’t much that can be done about them. Spiritual-thinking comes naturally to humans, but it can override reason and honest assessment of reality.

    Because cows are sacred, too many of them have been allowed to roam freely in India.
    Because blacks are sacred, too many are allowed to run around as thugs, and if they get out of hand, we can’t blame ‘blacks’ because blackness is sacred. We must focus on some other aspect of them such as their status as ‘youth’ or ‘teen’.

    https://markosun.wordpress.com/2015/09/20/traffic-and-the-sacred-cow-in-india/

    • Replies: @De'Tastrophe
  26. @Justvisiting

    They’ll turn Wakanda into another shithole.
    Same as they have done with former great American cities.

  27. @Anonymous

    People who build robots don’t make them black for one simple reason:

    They want them to actually work. 😉

    • LOL: bruce county
  28. @Justvisiting

    I’ve lived in Wethersfield (just outside of Hartford) and Danbury. Pretty much all of the crime happens in Bridgeport, New Haven, Hartford, or Waterbury, where most of the orcs are concentrated, Torrington is shifting towards that way as well, and there are a ton of mudsharks, but they all seem to stay in those areas. I haven’t encountered to many groids who like going leaf peeping or browsing antique stores in Kent or New Preston.

  29. OT: But I believe Portland was on here not to long ago. This is just the beginning for Portland. You get what you ask for in Democratic state. Looks like South Africa is expanding its reach to Portland.

    “He truly represented our Viking values and his hometown of Portland. I will never forget his smile.”

    Obviously his own character and lack of morals took him back into the tribal rituals that cost him his life. You can take Negro out of Africa but you can’t take Africa out of the Negro.

    https://www.msn.com/en-ca/sports/more-sports/portland-state-shooting-victim-was-basketball-player/ar-AAFhv6U?li=AAggFp5

  30. @Priss Factor

    A poster from times past gave this concept a name… Strangely enough you bring this up in relation to India. This kowtowing to blacks is the religion of Dinduism.

  31. @getaclue

    The term for it is “cognitive dissonance”: https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-cognitive-dissonance-2795012

    He had an ideology (belief system) and _nothing_ was going to change it.

    Another Hartford story–I worked downtown before I retired. A young white attorney (fresh out of law school) joined our office from out of state and moved into one of the downtown high-rises.

    I sat him down and said–“You need to move–now. This is one of the most dangerous cities in the country.” He smiled and talked about how he liked walking to work and had no concerns.

    It was almost a year later when he stepped out of his apartment and was viciously attacked by black thugs.

    At least _he_ had the sense to move out of town at that point.

  32. Loren says:
    @Love Street

    See Shermans review.

    • Replies: @Love Street
  33. @Anonymous

    We are heading to the point where whites are going to be compelled to create from scratch a cutting edge high technology country in sub-Saharan Africa, call it Wakanda, and plop an all-black population inside it like some sort of real-life dollhouse, all because a first-world all-black country doesn’t exist (because of racism).

    More than just a Potemkin village, an entire Potemkin country?

    We’d be smarter to use Deep Fake to draw them all off for a Marching Morons solution.

  34. @Anonymous

    From what happened when blacks in America were handed Chicago, Detroit, etc. that even were such a wakanda handed over fully formed, it would last no longer than a week..

    But let’s not let on that we know…and pretend it will be their chance to finally ride into the sunset as Kangz…

    It would be well worth building and promoting this fantasy wakanda as “their rightful Kangdom forever” if it will get them to believe and leave! Anything to get them all over to Africa and away from here.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
  35. @ShermanFan

    More cops patrolling our neighborhoods would work .
    And make our hoods orc no go zones. We can only dream..

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
  36. @Loren

    Sherman’s Hilarious.
    Check out prez candidate ((Williamson))leading a prayer asking blaggs to forgive us . Barf 🤮

  37. I truly don’t see why we didn’t take the ‘reservation’ approach to the negro at the end of the civil war.

    Was it just a learning curve? Or were they seen as more ‘useful idiots’ than the Indians would ever be.

    We bothered to hunt down and round up the Indians, forcing ‘peace’ upon them before giving them tracks of land where they could live separate-but-equal lives.

    Yet the blacks were just dispersed throughout the country, unsupervised and uneducated, causing havoc and mayhem wherever they landed.

    Had they been kept separate, they could have been offered repatriation to their homes while the remaining numbers would have stayed smaller and manageable.

    And my dog flies airplanes and I know a horse that plays the violin. Just reading back through my own writing and it comes of like science fiction/fantasy!

    • Replies: @Justvisiting
    , @Corvinus
  38. @Jim in Jersey

    This:
    https://www.history.com/topics/american-civil-war/black-civil-war-soldiers

    was the reason.

    However, the leaders of the north could have used the Heinlein (Starship Troopers) approach and only granted citizenship to black veterans and required future military service as a citizenship requirement.

  39. @Love Street

    More cops patrolling our neighborhoods would work .

    Costly and un-necessary if you can…

    make our hoods orc no go zones.

    THIS is key.  Not just hoods, but entire cities and counties.  Maybe let them pass through on Interstates, but no travel beyond the service oases or stays for more than food and fuel.

    If they were subject to arrest for even being in your county, they wouldn’t be very likely to stick around long enough to get any crime done.  Better yet, subject to arrest even on the Interstate for going where there isn’t any overnight stopping place within 8 hours in the direction they’re travelling.  Huge swaths of the country would be off-limits, and thus peaceful.

    We can only dream..

    We need a Civil Rights Act of 2021, which throws out all the previous ones and establishes civil rights for Whites beginning with freedom of dis-association.

    • Agree: Love Street
    • Replies: @Jim in Jersey
  40. @Mr. Rational

    We need a Civil Rights Act of 2021, which throws out all the previous ones and establishes civil rights for Whites beginning with freedom of dis-association.

    Yup, that is the dream.

    I can’t see it happening in the current world we live in but it certainly is the dream!

  41. @Patrialiberty

    even were such a wakanda handed over fully formed, it would last no longer than a week.

    True.

    It would be well worth building and promoting this fantasy wakanda as “their rightful Kangdom forever” if it will get them to believe and leave! Anything to get them all over to Africa and away from here.

    “Back” is optional, “gone” is mandatory.

    Wakanda doesn’t have to exist, they just have to believe it exists and wants them.  A police state with the surveillance and “Deep Fake” technology now on hand could fake a Wakanda and prevent contrary news from getting to the low-information types we need to be rid of.  Deep Fake will shortly be good enough to create cell-phone quality imagery in real time, allowing simulacra of the “new Wakandans” (programmed from recorded conversations of the subjects) to tell those not yet on the boats that everything is wonderful, come on over.

    Whether those who get on the boats disembark in Africa, or anywhere, becomes irrelevant.  The cheapest option is going to be the favorite, of course.

    • Replies: @Oil 'n Water
  42. @ShermanFan

    We’ve been spinning this 6 ways since Sunday and no matter how one looks at it, the facts are clear: more blacks, more crime.

    This is because there is a poorly educated, or ineducable, black lower class where nearly all the boys are literally bastards, and grow up feral, and join criminal gangs who kill each other, and sometimes other people in the vicinity.

    If anything is ever to be done about it, this basic fact needs to be identified and something done. For example black boys at risk of criminal behavior, or showing early signs of behavioral problems or coming to the attention of juvenile legals systems, should be isolated, heavily supervised at all times, curfewed, and so on.

    Abortion should be encouraged with cash incentives. Where necessary unmanageable children should be taken away from parents and adopted–preferably overseas in places where they will not meet other black children.

    This sounds drastic, cruel, and overdramatic, but nothing will improve by continuing with anything that has been tried so far.

    It is no good throwing hands in the air and blaming people like Wynton Marsalis for not doing enough to stop socially deprived blacks from going feral, because the majority of black Americans are actually decent and hard working and wish that someone could do something about the problem of feral youth that blights their communities.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
  43. @Jonathan Mason

    Unworkable because practically every black, Wynton Marsalis included, is going to denounce your crackdown on criminality as “racist”.

    The only way to get rid of the problem is to see to it that hood rats have NO babies here.  That means having no babies at all, or having them somewhere far away (e.g. Liberia or Ghana; Haiti and Honduras won’t do because they can still get back on foot or by boat).  I’ve suggested paying them to be sterilized, which is going to be far more effective than promoting abortions that they can refuse.  Endometrial ablation might sell well; “no more periods” is going to be very attractive.

    Paying parents of girls to put them on Depo Provera or other long-term contraception until age 18 will also sell well; at age 18 you give the girls a nice fat lump sum to get themselves fixed and a stipend for a few years.  This will pay for itself in advance due to the savings in the obstetric ward.  It’s all about the Benjamins and they don’t think about the future.

    If they denounce this as “racist” and “genocide” (and they will) you just offer them the same deal to give up their citizenship and go to the African country of their choice.

  44. @Mr. Rational

    …to tell those not yet on the boats that everything is wonderful, come on over.

    It’s a cookbook!

    • LOL: Mr. Rational
  45. Corvinus says:
    @Jim in Jersey

    “Yet the blacks were just dispersed throughout the country, unsupervised and uneducated, causing havoc and mayhem wherever they landed.”

    You can thank greedy Southrons, first because they desired to have their cash crops planted and harvested by outside cheap labor and second because they simply could not ensure “separate but equal”, as mandated by the Plessy case.

    • Replies: @Jim in Jersey
    , @By-tor
  46. @Corvinus

    Not defending it but slavery was the rule of the day. All the larger plantations made use of them because there was no other way to get the cotton picked. I don’t know who else there was to ‘hire’ to bring in the crops.

    Had the fedGov simply paid the slaveowners for their property rather than just mandating they be freed, the entire civil war might have been avoided.

  47. By-tor says:
    @Corvinus

    No, you can thank New England’s ideological Puritans and the Quakers who formed up the abolitionist wing of the GOP.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
  48. @Jim in Jersey

    Had the fedGov simply paid the slaveowners for their property rather than just mandating they be freed, the entire civil war might have been avoided.

    Wrong.  Lincoln had explicitly said that if he could preserve the Union by endorsing slavery, he would do it.

    Lincoln did NOT say that if he could renounce devastating tariffs which mostly affected the South and thus preserve the Union, he would do it… and he didn’t.  The war was mostly over tariffs which reduced the South to penury and benefitted the industrial North, which produced goods inferior to the ones the South wanted and needed.  It was all Who? Whom?

  49. AnalogMan says:
    @Jim in Jersey

    The real failure was not the slavery per se, nor the abolition, with or without compensation (for the property owners). The failure was allowing the slaves to breed.

    As a tourist in the USA, a few years ago I visited the Museum of the Confederacy, and had an interesting discussion with a gentleman who was displaying Civil War weapons. I told him that I had great respect for the people of the South, who fought bravely and honourably against overwhelming odds. He pointed out that, more important than the numerical odds was the imbalance of industrial capacity. The North could manufacture its own arms, while the South had to buy arms, principally from Britain. He said, IIRC, that at the start of the war, the South had only about a million dollars worth of industrial capital, as against about $240 million in slaves.

    I said that would explain why they allowed the slaves to breed, in contrast with the Arabs, who also took slaves from Africa, but castrated all their slaves. History shows which was the wiser policy.

    I saw a number of invoices for the sale of slaves. The going price seemed to be in the mid-$3000’s. Now, as an assiduous student of American history (I watched a lot of western movies in my youth), I know that a typical wage in those days was a dollar a day , so say ten years’ wages, up front, for a perishable product, so yeah, I can see why they did it. But it was short-sighted and ultimately disastrous.

  50. Piglet says:
    @Jim in Jersey

    I don’t know who else there was to ‘hire’ to bring in the crops.

    The Brits tried the Irish for almost two centuries but they just didn’t work out. People coming from a country where it’s cold, overcast and rainy died in droves, being worked to death in a matter of months in the hot, steamy southern states, if disease didn’t kill them first. Africans turned out to be much better suited to the task. (Note: Before anyone gets his knickers in a knot, this isn’t a defense of slavery.) You can read about it in the book Proclamation 1625 available here:

    As for going to war to free the slaves, recall Lincoln’s inaugural address:

    Abraham Lincoln’s first inaugural address was arguably the strongest defense of Southern slavery ever made by an American politician. He began by saying that in “nearly all the published speeches” he had made he declared that “I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists.” I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.” He next quoted the Republican Party Platform of 1860, which he fully endorsed, that proclaimed that “the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and especially the right of each State to order and control its own domestic institutions . . . is essential to that balance of power on which the perfection and endurance of four political fabric depend . . .” (emphasis added). “Domestic institutions” meant slavery.

    Lincoln then pledged to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act, which he in fact did during his administration, returning dozens of runaway slaves to their “owners.” Most importantly, seven paragraphs from the end of his speech he endorsed the Corwin Amendment to the Constitution, which had already passed the House and Senate and was ratified by several states. This “first thirteenth amendment” would prohibit the federal government from ever interfering with Southern slavery. It would have enshrined slavery explicitly in the text of the Constitution. Lincoln stated in the same paragraph that he believed slavery was already constitutional, but that he had “no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.”

    Of course, as kids in elementary school we were taught something entirely different, as if Lincoln had angrily said, “Free the slaves or it’s war!” and the wicked southerners said, “Nothin’ doin’, we’re keepin’ ’em chained up!”

    So what did kick it off? Read on:

    The U.S. Senate’s War Aims Resolution later echoed Lincoln’s words that the war was NOT about slavery but about “saving the union,” a contention that Lincoln repeated many times, including in his famous letter to New York Tribune editor Horace Greeley in which he said publicly once again that this purpose was to “save the union” and not to do anything about slavery. In reality Lincoln’s regime utterly destroyed the voluntary union of the founding fathers. By “saving the union” they meant forcing the South to submit to protectionist plunder, not preserving the highly decentralized, voluntary union of the founding generation based on such principles as federalism and subsidiarity.

    In dramatic contrast, on the issue of tariff collection Abraham Lincoln was violently uncompromising. “Nothing” is more important than passing the Morrill Tariff, he had announced to a Pennsylvania audience a few weeks earlier. Nothing. In his first inaugural address he stated in the eighteenth paragraph that “[T]here needs to be no bloodshed or violence, and there shall be none unless it be forced upon the national authority.” What could he have been talking about? What would cause “the national authority” to commit acts of “bloodshed” and “violence” against its own American citizens? Doesn’t the president take an oath in which he promises to defend the constitutional liberties of American citizens? How would ordering acts of “bloodshed” and “violence” against them be consistent with the presidential oath of office which he had just taken, with his atheistic hand on a Bible, just moments earlier?

    Lincoln explained in the next sentence: “The power confided in me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government, and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using force against or among the people anywhere” (emphasis added). The “duties and imposts” he referred to were the tariffs to be collected under the new Morrill Tariff law. If there was to be a war, he said, the cause of the war would in effect be the refusal of the Southern states to submit to being plundered by the newly-doubled federal tariff tax, a policy that the South had been periodically threatening nullification and secession over for the previous thirty-three years.

    In essence, Abraham Lincoln was announcing to the world that he would not back down to Southern secessionists as President Andrew Jackson had done by acquiescing in a negotiated reduction of the Tariff of Abominations (negotiated by Lincoln’s lifelong political idol and inspiration, Henry Clay, the author of the Tariff of Abominations in the first place!). He promised “violence,” “bloodshed,” and war over tariff collection, and he kept his promise.

    Imagine if people got this worked up over tax policy today. When the gubbermint slaps us with yet another tax or jacks up an existing one, we serfs just shrug our shoulders and keep plodding along.

    Full article:
    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/11/thomas-dilorenzo/the-causes-of-the-civil-war-in-the-words-of-abraham-lincoln-and-jefferson-davis/

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @Corvinus
  51. Corvinus says:
    @Jim in Jersey

    “All the larger plantations made use of them because there was no other way to get the cotton picked.”

    There was another solution–hire more workers at a higher wage. Those workers would have come from Europe.

    “Had the fedGov simply paid the slaveowners for their property rather than just mandating they be freed, the entire civil war might have been avoided.”

    Except slaves are not “property”, there were a free people who were ripped from their homeland. The federal government correctly refused to offer compensation.

    • Replies: @Jim in Jersey
  52. Corvinus says:
    @Piglet

    You are ignoring key parts in your analysis here. Lincoln drew a line in the sand when it came to no expansion of slavery in the territories. Lincoln maintained the principle here should be no extension of slavery into the areas where it did not then exist. But his votes in the House demonstrate he had no clear conception how this was to be accomplished. Regardless, slavery to him was a moral issue, one that his experience in Congress afforded him the opportunity to witness up close and personal.

    Now, the lawyer in him clearly understood that slavery in the Union, from a legal standpoint, had to be eradicated by legislation. In other words, he comprehended the constitutional limitations of removing this practice from the Southern society. Hence, when he became president, he offered an olive branch to the South by insisting he would not directly interfere with slavery in the South. But as far as the territories were concerned, the “peculiar institution” would be off limits, which was under the authority of the federal government, a move that was completely unacceptable to the South.

    Lincoln scholar Harry V. Jaffa writes, “For Lincoln…the entire antebellum debate came down to the question of whether the Negro was or was not a human being. If he was a human being, then he was included in the proposition that all men are created equal. If he was included in that proposition then it was a law of nature antecedent to the Constitution that he ought to be free and that civil society has as its originating purpose the security of his freedom and of the fruits of his labor under law”.

    Historian Allen C. Guelzo opines, “Slavery, in fact grated personally on Lincoln’s self-made passion for work and social mobility, since it condemned one category of men to a lifetime of labor without the hope of improvement while turning another into a shiftless aristocracy that scored honest labor as ‘slave work”.

    There was no purposeful course of action by Lincoln to commit acts of “bloodshed” and “violence” against its own American citizens in regards to the imposition of the tariff. That decision was in large part made the upper crust of southern society who were the kingmakers of their state governments. Remember, there was considerable opposition in the South to secede. In this vein, Lincoln was defending the the constitutional liberties of American citizens.

    https://cwnc.omeka.chass.ncsu.edu/exhibits/show/compromise/opposition-to-secession

    https://www.americanheritage.com/souths-inner-civil-war-0

    The reality is that the Civil War, contrary to Mr. Rational’s simplistic notion, was caused by a myriad of factors, with the springboard being the Mexican-American War and subsequent land grab.

  53. @Corvinus

    Your “Help Wanted” sign on the plantation lawn sounds rather silly. They brought in slaves because there was no one to hire.

    Let’s not get into who actually “ripped” the slaves from their homeland and who did the selling. They were bought because they were for sale and it was likely cheaper than hiring and shipping Europeans.

    And slaves were indeed ‘property’ whether you approve of the word or not. Just like their cattle or horses.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  54. Corvinus says:
    @Jim in Jersey

    “Your “Help Wanted” sign on the plantation lawn sounds rather silly. They brought in slaves because there was no one to hire.”

    There were Europeans for hire. The plantation owners are acting like our current globalist-capitalist masters inthat they import low class people to cut our grass and serve our food and clean our toilets in hotels. They CHOOSE not to make a concerted effort to locate workers and pay them because they were driven by profits.

    “Let’s not get into who actually “ripped” the slaves from their homeland and who did the selling. They were bought because they were for sale and it was likely cheaper than hiring and shipping Europeans.”

    Actually, it does matter here. African slavery and American slavery are noticeable different. Indeed, Africans sold their own kind to Europeans…because they were a tribal enemy. Indeed, black slaves were cheaper…because there was a money motive here. In the end, blacks were ripped from their homelands.

    “And slaves were indeed ‘property’ whether you approve of the word or not.”

    They were deemed property because Southerners engaged in a power play. Technically speaking, we–meaning people–are not the “property” of anyone.

    • Replies: @AnalogMan
  55. AnalogMan says:
    @Corvinus

    The slaves were the spoils of tribal wars. Africans owned nothing else worth fighting for. So they took slaves. But they had no use for slave labour. They neither planted nor reaped. The only things they could use slaves for were to eat, and to torture for entertainment. And that’s what they did.

    That was until the (((merchants))) arrived and offered them shiny goods in exchange for their slaves. It was a win for everybody, not least for the slaves, who got steady employment, stable homes, regular meals; they never had it so good back in the motherland. It certainly beat their immediate prospects as slaves of their countrymen.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Paul Kersey Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?