The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
If Thomas Jefferson Is Canceled, Will Anybody Remember Sally Hemings?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From NBC News in 2017:

Statues of Washington, Jefferson Aren’t ‘Next,’ But It’s Complicated, Historians Say

Trump has posited that the statues of Founding Fathers could come down following the removal of Confederate symbols across the country. Historians say he’s wrong.

Aug. 18, 2017, 2:44 PM PDT / Updated Aug. 18, 2017, 2:55 PM PDT
By Dartunorro Clark

After all, historians are experts on the future. Follow the Science of Psychohistory!

From the New York Times news section today:

Jefferson Statue Will Be Removed From N.Y.C. Council Chambers

By Jeffery C. Mays and Zachary Small
Oct. 18, 2021

For more than 100 years, a 7-foot-tall statue of Thomas Jefferson has towered over members of the New York City Council in their chamber at City Hall, a testament to his role as one of the nation’s founding fathers and the primary author of the Declaration of Independence.

But for the last two decades, some Black and Latino Council members, citing Jefferson’s history as a slaveholder, called for the statue to be banished — a push that gained significant momentum in the last year, as the nation has broadly reconsidered public monuments that can be viewed as symbols of systemic racism.

On Monday, city officials voted unanimously to remove the statue from Council chambers, but delayed a decision on where to put it.

… There have been various attempts to remove the statue; two decades ago, a call to banish the statue gained attention, but went nowhere.

… “Jefferson embodies some of the most shameful parts of our country’s history,” Adrienne Adams, a councilwoman from Queens and co-chair of the caucus, said at the hearing.

… The debate over the Jefferson statue is part of a broad, nationwide reckoning over racial inequality highlighted by the murder of George Floyd, the racial disparities further revealed by the coronavirus pandemic, and the sometimes violent debate over whether Confederate monuments should be toppled and discarded.

… Some public speakers argued that the statue should remain in the Council chambers, suggesting that its placement there could facilitate the debate over his legacy.

Assemblyman Charles Barron, the former councilman who tried to get the statue removed in 2001, vehemently disagreed.

“I don’t think it should go anywhere. I don’t think it should exist,” Mr. Barron said at the hearing. “I think it should be put in storage or destroyed or whatever.”

The imposing statue, which sits on an almost 5-foot-tall pedestal, is a plaster model of the bronze statue of Jefferson that is on display in the United States Capitol Rotunda in Washington. It was commissioned in 1833 by Uriah P. Levy, the first Jewish commodore in the United States Navy, to commemorate Jefferson’s advocacy of religious freedom in the armed forces.

Commodore Levy also bought Monticello (the Jefferson-designed house with a spectacular but leaky octagonal skylight was a notorious money pit) and began the process of converting it into a historical monument to Jefferson’s memory.

… The Public Design Commission voted to remove the Theodore Roosevelt statue at the entrance of the American Museum of Natural History earlier this year and approved a long-term loan to an unnamed cultural institution, but no further plans have been announced.

Also from the New York Times:

To top that off, Netflix plans to turn the book’s title novella into a film. In the novella, which is set in the near future, a young woman who is descended from Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings, and a band of largely Black and brown survivors take refuge from marauding white supremacists in Monticello, Jefferson’s homestead.

It sounds like The Establishment’s version of The Turner Diaries.

One of the unspoken things that excite black women about Jefferson is that he couldn’t resist Sally Hemmings. Sure, they complain about him endlessly and how it was so awful of him, but they love Jefferson’s validation of Black Girl Magic that America’s most eligible widower never married again because he was satisfied with Sally.

Jefferson probably touched her hair.

 
Hide 204 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Remember Science? Science says that we have absolute no proof of the Hemings alliance, except that it was likely someone in the family. We hate science, don’t we?

    PS. George Washington is next. Who, after that?

    • Replies: @Anon
    @Polistra

    There is pretty good historical evidence that Thomas Jefferson had an affair with Hemmings that produced offspring. Combined with the Y-STR evidence that a man of Jeffersonian lineage fathered these people, I see little reason to cast doubt on Thomas Jefferson as the best candidate for baby daddy...


    Unless of course you are both a fan of Thomas Jefferson's ideas and an anti-race mixer. Which would be a pretty awkward inclination to have if Thomas Jefferson did in fact mix with an off-white person.

    Perhaps you want to drag this through the mud until someone's skeleton gets exhumed and genetically sequenced, and proves, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that it was Tommy Jefferson. But then what would you do? Would you re-think your fondness of Jefferson?

    Replies: @Getaclue, @Dutch Boy, @Paperback Writer, @Anon

    , @Jack D
    @Polistra


    Science says that we have absolute no proof of the Hemings alliance, except that it was likely someone in the family.
     
    TBH, this is very weak sauce. The old line was that there was absolutely no proof, now the new line is that there is absolutely no proof except for the DNA. Maybe it was some other Jefferson and not old Tom himself, but waving the banner of science in this case is not a good idea - the science may not be 100% dispositive but the scientific evidence sure don't help your case. If this was a courtroom, this is not evidence that you would want to introduce for the defense.

    If I were you, I would change the subject. People's personal lives are complicated. Strom Thurmond had a black(ish) daughter. Believing that some of the Hemings children might have been fathered by Thomas does not cause me to think less of the man and his incredible accomplishments. It does not negate them in any way.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @Polistra

    , @Getaclue
    @Polistra

    Seems Jefferson's moron relative probably had sex with the slaves -- he used to go to their quarters to play music with them it seems -- nothing Thomas Jefferson did...this lays it all out pretty well as to DNA testing etc.:

    https://www.tjheritage.org/jefferson-hemings-controversy

    , @Alden
    @Polistra

    4 generations of White men; great great grand father, great grand father, grandfather and father made Sally a pass for White 7/8 White 1/8 black octoroon. And whoever fathered her 15/16 White 1/16 black children was a White man.

    Sally’s father was also the father of Jefferson’s wife, Sally’s half sister.

    Men of UNZ, Men of UNZ and your southern ancestors.

    , @SunBakedSuburb
    @Polistra

    "We hate science, don't we?"

    I hate Science but wuv science.

    , @Buzz Mohawk
    @Polistra


    George Washington is next. Who, after that?
     
    You and me.
    , @carroll price
    @Polistra


    George Washington is next. Who, after that?
     
    You and me - think I'm joking?
  2. They should make the Tracy Morgan ‘Jefferson’ film from 30 Rock for real. (And given how fast Netflix has been slashing budgets, it might look about the same production-wise)

    And the best picture from NYC City Hall, it’s like a renaissance painting.

  3. “I don’t think it should go anywhere. I don’t think it should exist,” Mr. Barron said at the hearing. “I think it should be put in storage or destroyed or whatever.”

    Meet your new founding father. Translation to follow.

    • Replies: @Thomas
    @Neil Templeton


    Meet your new founding father. Translation to follow.
     
    Mup da doo didda po mo gub dat tum muhfugen bix nood cof bin dub ho muhfugga.
  4. As was reported here at UR in at least a couple different articles, a black bully recently declared on social media: “If your bf white you single to me. Fuck timmy gon do?” He got his answer when one Timmy responded to his violent predatory racism by shooting him dead. I took a look around the internet to see what the different reactions were, and I was surprised by the number of coldly unsympathetic responses from black women. Mostly variations on “He died pursuing what he loved best. I’ll just leave it at that.”

    • Replies: @fish
    @JimDandy


    “If your bf white you single to me. Fuck timmy gon do?”
     
    You really have to appreciate the efficiency of the language.....
    , @AndrewR
    @JimDandy

    Timmy gon break that buck. Then the Jews will arrest and lynch Timmy.

    Replies: @Jack D

  5. One of the unspoken things that excite black women about Jefferson is that he couldn’t resist Sally Hemmings. Sure, they complain about him endlessly and how it was so awful of him, but they love Jefferson’s validation of Black Girl Magic that America’s most eligible widower never married again because he was satisfied with Sally.

    Nothing encapsulates 21st century America better than the author of the Declaration of Independence being demoted in significance to something like this. Forget COVID. The real unstoppable pandemic of the era is afrocentric solipsism.

  6. Is it possible, likely even if not certain, that the Sally Hemings story is America’s original race hoax?

    https://www.takimag.com/article/putting-out-the-fire-with-lighter-fluid/

    • Replies: @Alden
    @Polistra

    I wonder who the sperm donors of all those mulattos, quadroons, octoroons and 15/16tharoons black women popped out for centuries were.

    Maybe there was a God like Zeus who impregnated black women with part White babies. Zeus disguised himself. The Jewish Christian sky God did it by magic . Maybe that was how America’s been plagued with mulattos since 9 months after the Black Plague ship arrived in 1619 Virginia. Couldn’t have anything to do with White men.

    Replies: @Whiskey

  7. @Neil Templeton

    “I don’t think it should go anywhere. I don’t think it should exist,” Mr. Barron said at the hearing. “I think it should be put in storage or destroyed or whatever.”
     
    Meet your new founding father. Translation to follow.

    Replies: @Thomas

    Meet your new founding father. Translation to follow.

    Mup da doo didda po mo gub dat tum muhfugen bix nood cof bin dub ho muhfugga.

  8. I wonder if it was weird for Jefferson to keep a slave that was 3/4 white as a concubine? And it was weirder even to have 7/8 white kids as slaves.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    @anonymous

    Yes, it was weird, but those were the weird laws of the time.

    But out at Monticello after sunset the Jefferson family was relatively free from outside interference.

    These kind of relationships and family structures must have been common at the time.

    Remember that Sally Hemings was the half sister of Jefferson's wife and that she voluntarily returned from Paris to the United States with Tommy boy, when she could have walked away from slavery and stayed in France.

    Replies: @NOTA, @Paperback Writer, @Buzz Mohawk

    , @Jack D
    @anonymous

    To outsiders it was strange*, but for people who lived in this culture, black and white, it was just their reality. To people who are born into a culture, the order of things, however strange they may appear from the outside, appears normal and natural and all that they know.

    *In Jefferson's time in Virginia, it was customary in a wealthy home to have a servant (slave) stand behind each diner at the dinner table and wait on him or her (this is why it is called waiting - most of the time you are just standing there). Many of the house servants at Monticello were members of the Hemings family, who were never assigned to field work. One guest from outside noticed that the guy standing behind Jefferson looked like a slightly darker spitting image of the ex-President and found the whole scene to be very strange, especially since it would have been extremely rude to actually mention this - it was like an elephant in the room that you had to pretend wasn't there.

    Replies: @AnotherDad

    , @Alden
    @anonymous

    Sally was 7/8 White and a wedding present from Sally’s father. Who was also the father of jefferson’s Wife. An old southern tradition. Breeding Whiter and Whiter human livestock.

    Black from Africa births a brown mulatto. Brown mulatto births a Carmel quadroon.
    Carmel quadroom births a butterscotch or cream colored octoroon.

    50 years ago labradors were mostly black and dark brown a few dark caramel. Breeders noticed more and more buyers preferred the dark caramel dogs. So started breeding golden tan labs. Then buyers preferred lighter tan labs. Now there’s blond and cream almost white labs.

    Pomeranians used to be solid white a very few solid black. Breeders decided those colors aren’t interesting, so now Pomeranians come in many shades of gold brown gray something the breeders call gray blue and gray lavender and most are not solid colored. The breeders are turning out patchy Pomeranians. 3 or 4 colors in blobs and patches on those tiny 5 inch tall 4 pound bodies. There are even brindle Pomeranians the ugliest color and pattern ever.

    It’s called breeding. Just as Labrador breeders could get more money for a caramel or golden Labrador so the human livestock breeders could get more money for a caramel or golden than a black or dark brown human. And have fun doing the breeding themselves.

    Replies: @SunBakedSuburb

  9. Trump: There is blame on both sides

    Remember that Trump guy? He tried to equate the good guys with the bad guys! I mean, how confused can one person be? As if he were literally something or other.

  10. I take it this means we are ditching that whole “All men are created equal” nonsense as well.

    • Replies: @Rob
    @The Germ Theory of Disease

    Yeah. I don’t think what would happen should normies and the right lose Enlightenment values. Those values are hideously white though.

    I think a flaw in modern interpretation of Our Former Constitution was acknowledement of HBD. All men may be createc equal, but we are not all the same. The enlightenment only illuminated Western Europe. It may be that there is no one best political or social system thst is the best for everyone. Democracy in the Arab world would not work very well. Ditto Africans. Pretty much any people that is not capable of creating seventeenth century Western European tech is not cut oyr for the Enlightenment. I’m using tech broadly here, sort of in the sense of physical products, but also in knowledge of how to do things. Peoples that never came up with rule of law or written language probably do not have the mental firepower to understsnd why free speech, just to pick one, is so valuable for a people who can handle it. Big Men and free speech do not really mix.
    In Arab countries, democracy would mean civil wars and genocide, followed eventually by Israel turning their enemies’ capitals into glass. Historically, they’ve either been ruled by aliens, like the Ottomsn Turks or potentates - men who control the big city and the desert folk are left to their customary ways.

    African countries simpky have too many ethnic groups intermingled to make democracy viable. Hell, democracy is probably no longer an appropriate system for America because we have become so diverse. When the people are not smart enough to have political philosophies beyond “i want to be in charge because that way the taxes go into my bank account in Switzerland” yhere is no place for democracy, because laws are not made with any sense of justice or attempt to optimize some type of utility for people.

    That’s why US allies in the cold war were such a joke. There were no Western coubtries in Adrica. There were just strongmen who thought America had better military bling. Along the lines of what the warlord in Lord of War said when he came to America, “can you get me a gold plated gun of Rambo?” or somesuch. How can a country have democracy when they are not a people? It’s merely two lions and sheep votimg on what to have for dinner.

    I could be wrong, though. But if a third world country is going to live by enlightenment values, it has to come from within. As the two peaces we recently lost, we cannot bomb people into liberalism. I have heard that, while Muslims and progs hate Richatd Dawkins for his criticisms of Islam, Arab atheists really like him.

    When people are murdered for atheism in Pakistan, for example, it makes them look like barbarians, but also reminds me of Bush I saying atheists should not be considered patriots or citizens. On the one hand, a culture cannot survive or thrive without some sort of civic religion for lack of a better term. Morality seems to be tied up with religion for mowt people, but Western atheists have not been monsters, communists excepted of course.

    I guess that’s the problem with being a nation of ideals rather than a nation united by blood and common descent. When people disagree abou ideals, then it is very easy to mentally exile them. From there, it is only readonable to cancel people.

    Too long a comment, and rambling to boot. I am sorry.

    Replies: @Rob McX

  11. Once Thomas Jefferson is cancelled, you can be damned sure that the United States of America is finished in all but name.

  12. It’s quite true Jefferson is a symbol of the most shameful things about our past; first, the importation of people who find Jefferson embarrassing.

    • Agree: Rob McX
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Redneck farmer


    It’s quite true Jefferson is a symbol of the most shameful things about our past; first, the importation of people who find Jefferson embarrassing.
     
    He even put the worthless mendicants up on his estate. Talk about a bleeding heart!



    At least we didn't adopt his wacky system of measurements. The French did, and look what happened to them.



    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/62/La_derni%C3%A8re_charrette_de_Thermidor.jpg/320px-La_derni%C3%A8re_charrette_de_Thermidor.jpg

    Replies: @El Dato

  13. This story next to the Taliban one is an interesting reminder about how outraged many on the Left were that the Taliban were destroying Buddhist monuments and yet they’re even more fanatical about destroying statues of White men.

    The sad thing is that there are so many conservatives who wave the American flag and think there is something to save. That energy should be focused on constructive ways of breaking the Empire apart and creating something better for their children.

    • Agree: Thea
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Morris Applebaum IV


    That energy should be focused on constructive ways of breaking the Empire apart and creating something better for their children.
     
    And creating those children.

    Replies: @Alden

    , @Dmon
    @Morris Applebaum IV

    Yup. Reminds me of one of the tweets Steve was featuring over in the righthand column the week of the US pullout from Afghanistan.
    "Afghanistan has been liberated from people who destroy statues, mandate face coverings and endorse genital mutilation of children".

  14. Adrienne Adams, a councilwoman from Queens

    Queens!

    New York!!

    Nothing encapsulates de Blasio/Cuomo-era NYC like this statue, though:

    • Replies: @Shel100
    @Reg Cæsar

    Is that a statue of George Floyd?

  15. @Redneck farmer
    It's quite true Jefferson is a symbol of the most shameful things about our past; first, the importation of people who find Jefferson embarrassing.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    It’s quite true Jefferson is a symbol of the most shameful things about our past; first, the importation of people who find Jefferson embarrassing.

    He even put the worthless mendicants up on his estate. Talk about a bleeding heart!

    At least we didn’t adopt his wacky system of measurements. The French did, and look what happened to them.

    • Replies: @El Dato
    @Reg Cæsar

    Give it up Reg. Metric is superior -- same as the absence of misspellings and grammatical problems you are pursuing.

    End of story.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  16. @Morris Applebaum IV
    This story next to the Taliban one is an interesting reminder about how outraged many on the Left were that the Taliban were destroying Buddhist monuments and yet they're even more fanatical about destroying statues of White men.

    The sad thing is that there are so many conservatives who wave the American flag and think there is something to save. That energy should be focused on constructive ways of breaking the Empire apart and creating something better for their children.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Dmon

    That energy should be focused on constructive ways of breaking the Empire apart and creating something better for their children.

    And creating those children.

    • Agree: Catdog
    • Replies: @Alden
    @Reg Cæsar

    This is the wrong site to advocate having more children . The Men Of UNZ are fathers of 0-2 children mostly 0.
    The Men of UNZ remind me of those 19th and early 20th century childless catholic priests urging married Catholics to have as many children as possible and don’t worry about feeding and housing them because God will provide.

    Practice what you preach father of 2.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  17. Thomas Jefferson probably didn’t touch her hair and definitely didn’t father any children with her.

    If you’re going to bring this up please note some of us don’t believe this crap and the mainstream treatment of it is an outright lie–the science certainly didn’t prove it. And they know that.

    • Agree: Bill Jones
    • Replies: @Kylie
    @Whereismyhandle

    "Thomas Jefferson probably didn’t touch her hair and definitely didn’t father any children with her.

    If you’re going to bring this up please note some of us don’t believe this crap and the mainstream treatment of it is an outright lie–the science certainly didn’t prove it. And they know that."

    Since we're now in an era of feels not facts, the science doesn't have to prove it. The left just has to get people to believe the lie. And it's done that very successfully. So now Thomas Jefferson has had sex with Sally Hemmings because that's how the left and its useful idiots feel the narrative should go. It feeds their sense of righteous indignation, racial grievance and anti-white male hostility. It may not be the truth but it's their truth. And that's what matters these days.

    , @Barnard
    @Whereismyhandle

    Jared Taylor has a good video of the Jefferson-Hemings hoax at Amren. I would also recommend the book, Framing a Legend by Andrew Holowchak. It thoroughly debunks Jefferson as the father of Hemings children. It is not certain all of Sally Hemings children had the same father as there is only a DNA match to Eston, who would have been conceived when Thomas Jefferson was 62. The most likely candidate is his brother Randolph who was the Billy Carter of his day.

    https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/framing-a-legend-m-andrew-holowchak/1113760393

  18. @The Germ Theory of Disease
    I take it this means we are ditching that whole "All men are created equal" nonsense as well.

    Replies: @Rob

    Yeah. I don’t think what would happen should normies and the right lose Enlightenment values. Those values are hideously white though.

    I think a flaw in modern interpretation of Our Former Constitution was acknowledement of HBD. All men may be createc equal, but we are not all the same. The enlightenment only illuminated Western Europe. It may be that there is no one best political or social system thst is the best for everyone. Democracy in the Arab world would not work very well. Ditto Africans. Pretty much any people that is not capable of creating seventeenth century Western European tech is not cut oyr for the Enlightenment. I’m using tech broadly here, sort of in the sense of physical products, but also in knowledge of how to do things. Peoples that never came up with rule of law or written language probably do not have the mental firepower to understsnd why free speech, just to pick one, is so valuable for a people who can handle it. Big Men and free speech do not really mix.

    [MORE]

    In Arab countries, democracy would mean civil wars and genocide, followed eventually by Israel turning their enemies’ capitals into glass. Historically, they’ve either been ruled by aliens, like the Ottomsn Turks or potentates – men who control the big city and the desert folk are left to their customary ways.

    African countries simpky have too many ethnic groups intermingled to make democracy viable. Hell, democracy is probably no longer an appropriate system for America because we have become so diverse. When the people are not smart enough to have political philosophies beyond “i want to be in charge because that way the taxes go into my bank account in Switzerland” yhere is no place for democracy, because laws are not made with any sense of justice or attempt to optimize some type of utility for people.

    That’s why US allies in the cold war were such a joke. There were no Western coubtries in Adrica. There were just strongmen who thought America had better military bling. Along the lines of what the warlord in Lord of War said when he came to America, “can you get me a gold plated gun of Rambo?” or somesuch. How can a country have democracy when they are not a people? It’s merely two lions and sheep votimg on what to have for dinner.

    I could be wrong, though. But if a third world country is going to live by enlightenment values, it has to come from within. As the two peaces we recently lost, we cannot bomb people into liberalism. I have heard that, while Muslims and progs hate Richatd Dawkins for his criticisms of Islam, Arab atheists really like him.

    When people are murdered for atheism in Pakistan, for example, it makes them look like barbarians, but also reminds me of Bush I saying atheists should not be considered patriots or citizens. On the one hand, a culture cannot survive or thrive without some sort of civic religion for lack of a better term. Morality seems to be tied up with religion for mowt people, but Western atheists have not been monsters, communists excepted of course.

    I guess that’s the problem with being a nation of ideals rather than a nation united by blood and common descent. When people disagree abou ideals, then it is very easy to mentally exile them. From there, it is only readonable to cancel people.

    Too long a comment, and rambling to boot. I am sorry.

    • Thanks: El Dato, ic1000, Harry Baldwin
    • Replies: @Rob McX
    @Rob

    Great comment.

  19. In any case, if the story of Sally Hemings is true, then Jefferson, regardless of his achievements, does not seem to have been a person with really great moral judgements. Yes, I guess having bastards wth “the help” was normal even in slave-less England, but still, not morally commendable.

    Perhaps Jefferson should be cancelled from the right, for being an adulterer and a race-mixer? LOL.

    Further, considering that Jefferson’s wife was actually Sally Hemings’ half-sister, this sound like one of those “cousin marriage” stories one hears from Islamic countries…

    • Replies: @carroll price
    @Dumbo


    Jefferson, regardless of his achievements, does not seem to have been a person with really great moral judgements.
     
    Moral judgements are confined to the head. They have never been know to extend below the neck line.
    .
  20. Oh yeah, Sally Hemmings and TJ. Are any of their descendants visible minorities, as they say in Canada? I think I saw a picture of a bunch of them. IIRC, they were white blacks.

    I wonder if we bred the Descendents of Jefferson with each other, we could reconstruct TJ’s genome. Would be an interesting project for more advanced genomic engineering than we have now. Check out all his descendants’ genomes, where a bunch of them are identical by descent, it suggests that region of the chromosome is Tom’s. Assuming the descendants don’t have any other common ancestors recently.

    This would be like trying to reconstruct Neanderthal or Denisovan from modern man. I think I heard that we have about 70% of the Neanderthal genome scattered about. Likely no X or Y chromosomes, nor mitochondrial DNA.

    The difference between the projects is that Jefferson II would be a valuable addition to society. Neanderthal II would have to be given some sort of reservation homeland, perhaps in a national park. Otherwise, he competes with other populations for pity admission to college.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Rob


    I wonder if we bred the Descendents of Jefferson with each other, we could reconstruct TJ’s genome.
     
    Closest we could get is Randolph Jefferson's genome.

    https://nicholasstixuncensored.blogspot.com/2009/04/giving-thomas-jefferson-business-sally.html

    https://vdare.com/articles/abolishing-america-contd-the-jefferson-antimyth-debunked

    https://vdare.com/articles/ann-coulter-jefferson-hemings-myth-was-thomas-jefferson-on-the-duke-lacrosse-team

    https://www.amren.com/news/2009/06/rescuing_jeffer/

    If you only have time to read one debunking, read Ann Coulter's. Hers is, characteristically, the most concise and entertaining. The Nicholas Stix one, though, really exposes the outright fraud and the fraudsters who perpetrate it.

    Replies: @AnotherDad

    , @Lloyd1927
    @Rob

    The only Jefferson/Hemings descendants who passed the DNA test were "white whites" not "white blacks." They were all descended from Eston Hemings Jefferson.

  21. @Reg Cæsar
    @Redneck farmer


    It’s quite true Jefferson is a symbol of the most shameful things about our past; first, the importation of people who find Jefferson embarrassing.
     
    He even put the worthless mendicants up on his estate. Talk about a bleeding heart!



    At least we didn't adopt his wacky system of measurements. The French did, and look what happened to them.



    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/62/La_derni%C3%A8re_charrette_de_Thermidor.jpg/320px-La_derni%C3%A8re_charrette_de_Thermidor.jpg

    Replies: @El Dato

    Give it up Reg. Metric is superior — same as the absence of misspellings and grammatical problems you are pursuing.

    End of story.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @El Dato


    Give it up Reg. Metric is superior
     
    Then why isn't it used by computers? A gigabyte is 1,073,741,824 bytes, or 8,589,934,592 bits. A terabyte consists of 8,796,093,022,208 bits. Pretty messy, eh?

    A petabyte is 9,007,199,254,740,992 bits. That's almost a power of 10!

    Congress instituted the metric system in 1866. (Reconstruction!) It's still not in use because of the V-word.

    Kasson Act


    Enjoy your kilogram cake of tapioca flour, soy milk, margarine, and aspartame. That is, if you can read the recipe in Esperanto. We'll stick with the Axis of English.



    https://youtu.be/qbdx2nOQKKo

    https://youtu.be/s95cxZkC_es

    Replies: @nokangaroos, @Kratoklastes, @Veteran Aryan

  22. OTOH, does anyone really remember dynastic Chinese upheavals from around A.D. 300 resulting historically excessive death counts in the multiple millions?

    Death Camps Aren’t ‘Next,’ But It’s Complicated, Historians Say

    Also,

    …a band of largely Black and brown survivors take refuge from marauding white supremacists in Monticello, Jefferson’s homestead.

    It sounds like The Establishment’s version of The Turner Diaries.

    “BIPOCs vs. Aliens”

    Aliens win hands down.

    And why is Miss Johnson apparently suffering in the sunflower plantation?

  23. You need to fully understand that your nation has been a cancer to civilisation.
    What you do to yourselves now, you did to others for generations.
    In the end, cancer kills itself.

    Sadly it also kills the host. European, not “Western” civilisation.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @byrresheim


    You need to fully understand that your nation has been a cancer to civilisation.
    What you do to yourselves now, you did to others for generations.
    In the end, cancer kills itself.

    Sadly it also kills the host. European, not “Western” civilisation.
     
    What are you referring to?
  24. Anon[287] • Disclaimer says:
    @Polistra
    Remember Science? Science says that we have absolute no proof of the Hemings alliance, except that it was likely someone in the family. We hate science, don't we?

    PS. George Washington is next. Who, after that?

    Replies: @Anon, @Jack D, @Getaclue, @Alden, @SunBakedSuburb, @Buzz Mohawk, @carroll price

    There is pretty good historical evidence that Thomas Jefferson had an affair with Hemmings that produced offspring. Combined with the Y-STR evidence that a man of Jeffersonian lineage fathered these people, I see little reason to cast doubt on Thomas Jefferson as the best candidate for baby daddy…

    Unless of course you are both a fan of Thomas Jefferson’s ideas and an anti-race mixer. Which would be a pretty awkward inclination to have if Thomas Jefferson did in fact mix with an off-white person.

    Perhaps you want to drag this through the mud until someone’s skeleton gets exhumed and genetically sequenced, and proves, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that it was Tommy Jefferson. But then what would you do? Would you re-think your fondness of Jefferson?

    • Replies: @Getaclue
    @Anon

    Actual the evidence is that Jefferson had a mentally deficient relative who liked to hang with the Slaves in their quarters and play music -- seems he is the one who impregnated whoever -- Thomas Jefferson didn't do that sort of thing....-- there is much DNA testing etc. -- extremely doubtful Thomas Jefferson impregnated any slave but it makes for good slandering so....-- this lays out most all to date on this:

    https://www.tjheritage.org/jefferson-hemings-controversy

    , @Dutch Boy
    @Anon

    Master and slave sexual relations have been routine at least since Abraham got Ishmael via Hagar and the American South was no exception. Slavery is, after all, a form of exploitation of varying degrees of severity and sexual exploitation comes naturally when the exploited are property.

    Replies: @Captain Tripps

    , @Paperback Writer
    @Anon


    There is pretty good historical evidence that Thomas Jefferson had an affair with Hemmings that produced offspring.
     
    No there isn't.
    , @Anon
    @Anon


    There is pretty good historical evidence that Thomas Jefferson had an affair with Hemmings that produced offspring.
     
    That's what I thought too, but looking at the specifics of the genetic test, it only narrows it down. It doesn't point to Jefferson specifically. It was a 1980s pre-Human Genome Project Y-chromosome test, not a full genetic scan, and there was no testing of Jefferson's DNA itself. The only other evidence was an attempt to correlate the locations of everyone involved from incomplete diary entries and the like, which from a distance of over two centuries is not that convincing.

    As someone mentioned, there were as many as eight other male relatives who who hanging around, of various degrees of probability, with Randolph Jefferson being at the top of the list.

    It would not be that hard to do a more solid genetic test of biological Jefferson material using current technology, but there is a Hemings Industrial Complex now that resists such efforts as racist denialism, so there is not much inclination to pursue it for fear of being cancelled.

    The Wikipedia article has a good summary and links to primary source material.

    Replies: @Jack D

  25. @Whereismyhandle
    Thomas Jefferson probably didn't touch her hair and definitely didn't father any children with her.

    If you're going to bring this up please note some of us don't believe this crap and the mainstream treatment of it is an outright lie--the science certainly didn't prove it. And they know that.

    Replies: @Kylie, @Barnard

    “Thomas Jefferson probably didn’t touch her hair and definitely didn’t father any children with her.

    If you’re going to bring this up please note some of us don’t believe this crap and the mainstream treatment of it is an outright lie–the science certainly didn’t prove it. And they know that.”

    Since we’re now in an era of feels not facts, the science doesn’t have to prove it. The left just has to get people to believe the lie. And it’s done that very successfully. So now Thomas Jefferson has had sex with Sally Hemmings because that’s how the left and its useful idiots feel the narrative should go. It feeds their sense of righteous indignation, racial grievance and anti-white male hostility. It may not be the truth but it’s their truth. And that’s what matters these days.

  26. Steve Sailer,

    What would be the Mendoza line for journalists these days? It seems a person could put together a list of basic “news” articles (opinions and junk) that are provably wrong in a number of ways. Or that make predictions that are provably wrong.

    What percentage does the NYT need to bat? The reason I thought of the Mendoza line, it seems like legacy left media/dying media is batting well below .200.

  27. @Whereismyhandle
    Thomas Jefferson probably didn't touch her hair and definitely didn't father any children with her.

    If you're going to bring this up please note some of us don't believe this crap and the mainstream treatment of it is an outright lie--the science certainly didn't prove it. And they know that.

    Replies: @Kylie, @Barnard

    Jared Taylor has a good video of the Jefferson-Hemings hoax at Amren. I would also recommend the book, Framing a Legend by Andrew Holowchak. It thoroughly debunks Jefferson as the father of Hemings children. It is not certain all of Sally Hemings children had the same father as there is only a DNA match to Eston, who would have been conceived when Thomas Jefferson was 62. The most likely candidate is his brother Randolph who was the Billy Carter of his day.

    https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/framing-a-legend-m-andrew-holowchak/1113760393

  28. They should only allow statues of leaders who’ve paved the way without racism, oppression, lying, cheating, stealing, backstabbing, violence, greed, all the awful primal behaviors man has carried throughout history. Get rid of that ugliness and forge ahead. It’s long overdue.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Ebony Obelisk

    Once you get rid of all the statues of leaders who are guilty of racism, oppression, lying, cheating, stealing, backstabbing, violence, greed and all the awful primal behaviors man has carried throughout history, this is what is left:

    https://jmoreliving.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Pedestal_socialjustice-768x512.jpg

    There is no human who is free from sin and if there was, I wouldn't want that guy running things anyway.

  29. All these statues for that cracker Thomas Jefferson, but not one for righteous brutha George Jefferson.

    • Thanks: carroll price
    • Replies: @Dr. Charles Fhandrich
    @The Alarmist

    Don't forget his sycophantic white neighbor. He just about reached the limit when it came to subservient asshole. Pardon my French.

  30. @Rob
    Oh yeah, Sally Hemmings and TJ. Are any of their descendants visible minorities, as they say in Canada? I think I saw a picture of a bunch of them. IIRC, they were white blacks.

    I wonder if we bred the Descendents of Jefferson with each other, we could reconstruct TJ’s genome. Would be an interesting project for more advanced genomic engineering than we have now. Check out all his descendants' genomes, where a bunch of them are identical by descent, it suggests that region of the chromosome is Tom’s. Assuming the descendants don’t have any other common ancestors recently.

    This would be like trying to reconstruct Neanderthal or Denisovan from modern man. I think I heard that we have about 70% of the Neanderthal genome scattered about. Likely no X or Y chromosomes, nor mitochondrial DNA.

    The difference between the projects is that Jefferson II would be a valuable addition to society. Neanderthal II would have to be given some sort of reservation homeland, perhaps in a national park. Otherwise, he competes with other populations for pity admission to college.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @Lloyd1927

    I wonder if we bred the Descendents of Jefferson with each other, we could reconstruct TJ’s genome.

    Closest we could get is Randolph Jefferson’s genome.

    https://nicholasstixuncensored.blogspot.com/2009/04/giving-thomas-jefferson-business-sally.html

    https://vdare.com/articles/abolishing-america-contd-the-jefferson-antimyth-debunked

    https://vdare.com/articles/ann-coulter-jefferson-hemings-myth-was-thomas-jefferson-on-the-duke-lacrosse-team

    https://www.amren.com/news/2009/06/rescuing_jeffer/

    If you only have time to read one debunking, read Ann Coulter’s. Hers is, characteristically, the most concise and entertaining. The Nicholas Stix one, though, really exposes the outright fraud and the fraudsters who perpetrate it.

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    @Almost Missouri


    One of the unspoken things that excite black women about Jefferson is that he couldn’t resist Sally Hemmings. Sure, they complain about him endlessly and how it was so awful of him, but they love Jefferson’s validation of Black Girl Magic that America’s most eligible widower never married again because he was satisfied with Sally.

    Jefferson probably touched her hair.
     
    Almost--i saw this and thought "uh oh" Nick Stix alert!

    Fortunately you've got it covered. I think the balance of evidence points and Randy Randolph.

    (But i confess, i don't find it the least bit embarassing if widower Jefferson and his wife's half-sister did enjoy each other's company.)
  31. @anonymous
    I wonder if it was weird for Jefferson to keep a slave that was 3/4 white as a concubine? And it was weirder even to have 7/8 white kids as slaves.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Jack D, @Alden

    Yes, it was weird, but those were the weird laws of the time.

    But out at Monticello after sunset the Jefferson family was relatively free from outside interference.

    These kind of relationships and family structures must have been common at the time.

    Remember that Sally Hemings was the half sister of Jefferson’s wife and that she voluntarily returned from Paris to the United States with Tommy boy, when she could have walked away from slavery and stayed in France.

    • Agree: Jack D
    • Replies: @NOTA
    @Jonathan Mason

    ISTR that he freed his kids, just not the rest of his slaves.

    , @Paperback Writer
    @Jonathan Mason

    She was 14 at the time - what would she have done in France? Her older brother, a barber or a butler, could have done that, though. I forget his name.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Ed, @carroll price

    , @Buzz Mohawk
    @Jonathan Mason

    Fifty Shades of Jefferson

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason

  32. On Monday, city officials voted unanimously to remove the statue from Council chambers

    Maybe they can replace it with a statue of O.J. Simpson…

    • Replies: @Rob McX
    @Dr. X

    Unlike Jefferson, OJ is definitely a race mixer. Like Jefferson, he's also a widower.

  33. @anonymous
    I wonder if it was weird for Jefferson to keep a slave that was 3/4 white as a concubine? And it was weirder even to have 7/8 white kids as slaves.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Jack D, @Alden

    To outsiders it was strange*, but for people who lived in this culture, black and white, it was just their reality. To people who are born into a culture, the order of things, however strange they may appear from the outside, appears normal and natural and all that they know.

    *In Jefferson’s time in Virginia, it was customary in a wealthy home to have a servant (slave) stand behind each diner at the dinner table and wait on him or her (this is why it is called waiting – most of the time you are just standing there). Many of the house servants at Monticello were members of the Hemings family, who were never assigned to field work. One guest from outside noticed that the guy standing behind Jefferson looked like a slightly darker spitting image of the ex-President and found the whole scene to be very strange, especially since it would have been extremely rude to actually mention this – it was like an elephant in the room that you had to pretend wasn’t there.

    • Agree: AnotherDad
    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    @Jack D


    To people who are born into a culture, the order of things, however strange they may appear from the outside, appears normal and natural and all that they know.
     
    Excellent one sentence statement of the issue--and of the nature of "culture" in general.
  34. @Rob
    @The Germ Theory of Disease

    Yeah. I don’t think what would happen should normies and the right lose Enlightenment values. Those values are hideously white though.

    I think a flaw in modern interpretation of Our Former Constitution was acknowledement of HBD. All men may be createc equal, but we are not all the same. The enlightenment only illuminated Western Europe. It may be that there is no one best political or social system thst is the best for everyone. Democracy in the Arab world would not work very well. Ditto Africans. Pretty much any people that is not capable of creating seventeenth century Western European tech is not cut oyr for the Enlightenment. I’m using tech broadly here, sort of in the sense of physical products, but also in knowledge of how to do things. Peoples that never came up with rule of law or written language probably do not have the mental firepower to understsnd why free speech, just to pick one, is so valuable for a people who can handle it. Big Men and free speech do not really mix.
    In Arab countries, democracy would mean civil wars and genocide, followed eventually by Israel turning their enemies’ capitals into glass. Historically, they’ve either been ruled by aliens, like the Ottomsn Turks or potentates - men who control the big city and the desert folk are left to their customary ways.

    African countries simpky have too many ethnic groups intermingled to make democracy viable. Hell, democracy is probably no longer an appropriate system for America because we have become so diverse. When the people are not smart enough to have political philosophies beyond “i want to be in charge because that way the taxes go into my bank account in Switzerland” yhere is no place for democracy, because laws are not made with any sense of justice or attempt to optimize some type of utility for people.

    That’s why US allies in the cold war were such a joke. There were no Western coubtries in Adrica. There were just strongmen who thought America had better military bling. Along the lines of what the warlord in Lord of War said when he came to America, “can you get me a gold plated gun of Rambo?” or somesuch. How can a country have democracy when they are not a people? It’s merely two lions and sheep votimg on what to have for dinner.

    I could be wrong, though. But if a third world country is going to live by enlightenment values, it has to come from within. As the two peaces we recently lost, we cannot bomb people into liberalism. I have heard that, while Muslims and progs hate Richatd Dawkins for his criticisms of Islam, Arab atheists really like him.

    When people are murdered for atheism in Pakistan, for example, it makes them look like barbarians, but also reminds me of Bush I saying atheists should not be considered patriots or citizens. On the one hand, a culture cannot survive or thrive without some sort of civic religion for lack of a better term. Morality seems to be tied up with religion for mowt people, but Western atheists have not been monsters, communists excepted of course.

    I guess that’s the problem with being a nation of ideals rather than a nation united by blood and common descent. When people disagree abou ideals, then it is very easy to mentally exile them. From there, it is only readonable to cancel people.

    Too long a comment, and rambling to boot. I am sorry.

    Replies: @Rob McX

    Great comment.

  35. @Dr. X

    On Monday, city officials voted unanimously to remove the statue from Council chambers
     
    Maybe they can replace it with a statue of O.J. Simpson...

    Replies: @Rob McX

    Unlike Jefferson, OJ is definitely a race mixer. Like Jefferson, he’s also a widower.

  36. @byrresheim
    You need to fully understand that your nation has been a cancer to civilisation.
    What you do to yourselves now, you did to others for generations.
    In the end, cancer kills itself.

    Sadly it also kills the host. European, not "Western" civilisation.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    You need to fully understand that your nation has been a cancer to civilisation.
    What you do to yourselves now, you did to others for generations.
    In the end, cancer kills itself.

    Sadly it also kills the host. European, not “Western” civilisation.

    What are you referring to?

  37. they love Jefferson’s validation of Black Girl Magic that America’s most eligible widower never married again because he was satisfied with Sally.

    Well not exactly Black Girl Magic. More like Quadroon Magic. Sally was 3/4 white and probably the half sister of his late wife. He probably wasn’t even tempted to touch her hair .

  38. @Polistra
    Remember Science? Science says that we have absolute no proof of the Hemings alliance, except that it was likely someone in the family. We hate science, don't we?

    PS. George Washington is next. Who, after that?

    Replies: @Anon, @Jack D, @Getaclue, @Alden, @SunBakedSuburb, @Buzz Mohawk, @carroll price

    Science says that we have absolute no proof of the Hemings alliance, except that it was likely someone in the family.

    TBH, this is very weak sauce. The old line was that there was absolutely no proof, now the new line is that there is absolutely no proof except for the DNA. Maybe it was some other Jefferson and not old Tom himself, but waving the banner of science in this case is not a good idea – the science may not be 100% dispositive but the scientific evidence sure don’t help your case. If this was a courtroom, this is not evidence that you would want to introduce for the defense.

    If I were you, I would change the subject. People’s personal lives are complicated. Strom Thurmond had a black(ish) daughter. Believing that some of the Hemings children might have been fathered by Thomas does not cause me to think less of the man and his incredible accomplishments. It does not negate them in any way.

    • Agree: Alden
    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @Jack D

    Gotta disagree.

    The DNA proves that one child was fathered by a Jefferson. Not *the* Jefferson.

    Ann Coulter does a pretty good job of casting doubt on whether the daddy was Thomas.

    https://dailycaller.com/2019/07/03/coulter-thomas-jefferson-lacrosse/


    For Eston to be Jefferson’s son, we have to believe that five years after being falsely accused of fathering a child with Hemings, Jefferson decided, What the heck? I may be president of the United States, but I should prove Callender’s slander true by fathering a child with my slave! No one will notice.
     
    This isn't weak sauce and it isn't a minor blip. It's really a hill to die on. The Barbara Chase-Riboud book is really a piece of shit. She claims that Jefferson got his hands on Sally when she was 14, in Paris. There's zero evidence he even saw her there. It's all downhill from there, pun intended.

    Replies: @res, @Jack D

    , @Polistra
    @Jack D


    Strom Thurmond had a black(ish) daughter.
     
    LOL! A lawyer, you are not. So?

    Also no judge of science, apparently.


    If I were you, I would change the subject.
     
    LOL! Who, me or Steve?

    "We are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor to tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it."
     
    Dang, can't remember just who said that.
  39. @Morris Applebaum IV
    This story next to the Taliban one is an interesting reminder about how outraged many on the Left were that the Taliban were destroying Buddhist monuments and yet they're even more fanatical about destroying statues of White men.

    The sad thing is that there are so many conservatives who wave the American flag and think there is something to save. That energy should be focused on constructive ways of breaking the Empire apart and creating something better for their children.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Dmon

    Yup. Reminds me of one of the tweets Steve was featuring over in the righthand column the week of the US pullout from Afghanistan.
    “Afghanistan has been liberated from people who destroy statues, mandate face coverings and endorse genital mutilation of children”.

  40. @Ebony Obelisk
    They should only allow statues of leaders who've paved the way without racism, oppression, lying, cheating, stealing, backstabbing, violence, greed, all the awful primal behaviors man has carried throughout history. Get rid of that ugliness and forge ahead. It's long overdue.

    Replies: @Jack D

    Once you get rid of all the statues of leaders who are guilty of racism, oppression, lying, cheating, stealing, backstabbing, violence, greed and all the awful primal behaviors man has carried throughout history, this is what is left:

    There is no human who is free from sin and if there was, I wouldn’t want that guy running things anyway.

  41. Sally Hemings and her children would have been white slaves – not black ones.

    https://multiracial.com/index.php/2001/10/01/white-slaves/

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Lloyd1927

    It's true that some of Sally's children were so white that, when Jefferson allowed them to "escape" to the North (legally their ownership was tied up in an estate and he did not have the right to free them) then most of them lived as white people. Some were visibly mulatto and continued to live in the black community, such that nowadays there are both "white" and "black" Hemings descendants. The black ones are fair skinned but identifiably black. Sally herself (of whom no image exists) was 3/4 black rather than 7/8 like her children and was probably visibly (part) black like the Hemings ladies in the photo below.

    https://i.pinimg.com/564x/fb/13/b2/fb13b2629a4dc2cfffb39ec462804ab2.jpg

    Replies: @Lloyd1927

    , @Paperback Writer
    @Lloyd1927

    Doesn't matter.

    Someone here expressed surprise that the near-white Hemings family was enslaved - slavery came from the mother's status.

    Look up Partis sequitur ventrum.

    Mark Twain wrote a funny/sad book about this, Pudd'nhead Wilson, which was about a slave woman, Roxy, who was 15/16ths white. She switches her son w/the master's son in the cradle (they're born on the same day). The ruse is discovered when the boys are grown & the "master's" son is promptly sold down the river.

    Newton Knight had descendants who were virtually white & had problems establishing their status. There were others.

    As a quadroon, Sally was as black looking as Ruby Tandoh, who sometimes looks a bit blackish and sometimes doesn't.

    Replies: @carroll price

    , @carroll price
    @Lloyd1927

    The universal rule applying to children born of female slaves was: "all offspring follow the condition of the mother". Meaning that children born to slave women were born slaves, regardless of who the father happened to be.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

  42. Sally Hemings’ mother Betty was a bright mulatto woman, and Sally mighty near white….Sally was very handsome, long straight hair down her back,
    – Isaac Jefferson, former Monticello slave

    https://historum.com/threads/thomas-jefferson-monticello-and-sally-hemings.188168/

    So even if she was his concubine, Thomas Jefferson never mated with a mere black woman. Sally had the beauty of a white woman. Think of that the next time you see some dark mulatto actress like Thandie Newton or Carmen Elego pretending to play Sally Hemings. Hemings is promoted as a “black” icon so every Negro woman can imagine herself resting her kinky head on the breast of the great TJ.

    https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0206951/?ref_=nm_flmg_act_36

    https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0113463/?ref_=nm_flmg_act_42

  43. Of course nobody would remember Sally Hemings. There’s nothing memorable or significant about her. In fact, the first black person worth mentioning by name in American history is Chuck Berry (Maybellene – 1955). As a point of comparison the first European worth mentioning by name is Christopher Columbus (1492), followed by John Cabot (1497), Ponce de Leon (1508) and Hernan Cortes (1521).

  44. @JimDandy
    As was reported here at UR in at least a couple different articles, a black bully recently declared on social media: "If your bf white you single to me. Fuck timmy gon do?" He got his answer when one Timmy responded to his violent predatory racism by shooting him dead. I took a look around the internet to see what the different reactions were, and I was surprised by the number of coldly unsympathetic responses from black women. Mostly variations on "He died pursuing what he loved best. I'll just leave it at that."

    Replies: @fish, @AndrewR

    “If your bf white you single to me. Fuck timmy gon do?”

    You really have to appreciate the efficiency of the language…..

  45. I was sitting having coffee in City Hall Park yesterday morning when a channel 7 reporter and cameraman asked my opinion of taking down the Jefferson statue. I didn’t know which one they were talking about. But I said I’m against taking it down, since he was the president after all. Maybe have some plaques nearby for context for those that want it. Admittedly that last bit is some weak sauce but I didn’t even know what was at issue.

    I probably foolishly gave my name.

  46. I homeschool my children, and one of the annual rite of passage educational activities that my children do, typically at grade five, is to visit and write an essay about our local county courthouse (which was the first public building built in the county). All my older teenage children have done it.

    I recently took one of my little ones for her turn at the field trip and discovered that the statue that graced the front lawn of the courthouse was gone. It was a statue of the first soldier in the county who was killed during the Civil War. And he was killed around the courthouse. He wasn’t a slave owner or someone who had power or political decision-making ability – just the first ordinary soldier – from either side of the Civil War – to be killed in battle at the courthouse. He just happened to be a Confederate.

    I found out thereafter that the cowardly county leaders voted to remove it during the George Floyd hysteria and had it done in the dead of night like a burglar, so as not to arouse any “controversy.” Even my Chinese immigrant neighbor – when I discussed it with him – said it was terrible that people in power in this country were erasing history they didn’t like. And, yes, he told me it reminded him of the Cultural Revolution in China.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Twinkie

    You could say the same thing about German soldiers during WWII but you don't see a lot of statues of Waffen SS troops.

    I think it was a mistake to honor the Confederate cause. It is possibly to fight bravely and honorably but if you are fighting for an unjust cause, your bravery and honor is nevertheless negated. I understand why the defeated people of the South erected these statues in order to regain their dignity and why the North allowed it to be done in the interest of national reconciliation, but it was a mistake. The Lost Cause was not a noble cause. They fought for the right of humans to own other humans as property. You can varnish it to be about "States Rights" or whatever, but at bottom that is why they seceded. Such a cause does not deserve to be honored. America would have been a better country if the people of the South had, of their own initiative and not having it forced down their throats, come to understand that they had been mislead by their rulers and that many innocents gave their lives for an ignoble cause.

    That being said, the glorification of the Lost Cause, like the Civil War itself, is now a matter of history and should not be erased. (It should be understood that the cult of the Lost Cause was a separate chapter in American history and most of those statues stem from that chapter and not from the war itself). But perhaps as is seen in certain places in E. Europe where they have gathered up all of the statues of Lenin and put them together in one park where they can all point toward each other rather than toward the Future, these statutes should be put into their context and not allowed to be honored in a way that they do not deserve.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Reg Cæsar, @J1234, @SunBakedSuburb, @Neil Templeton

    , @kaganovitch
    @Twinkie

    I found out thereafter that the cowardly county leaders voted to remove it during the George Floyd hysteria and had it done in the dead of night like a burglar, so as not to arouse any “controversy.”

    As Charles Peguy wrote “It will never be known what acts of cowardice have been committed for fear of not looking sufficiently progressive.” The "bluepilling" of Western Civilization has been going on for quite a while as this was written before WW1.

    Replies: @Gabe Ruth

    , @Matttt
    @Twinkie

    Many of these statues were sponsored by groups like United Daughters of the Confederacy: wives, mothers, daughters, and sisters of Confederate soldiers who wanted to remember their dead men. Of course, mourning white women are entitled to no consideration at all. On the other hand, we reorganized our whole society - ruined our schools, exposed our children to danger, dumbed down then eliminated our culture - because we thought blacks felt inferior (they didn't).

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

  47. @Polistra
    Remember Science? Science says that we have absolute no proof of the Hemings alliance, except that it was likely someone in the family. We hate science, don't we?

    PS. George Washington is next. Who, after that?

    Replies: @Anon, @Jack D, @Getaclue, @Alden, @SunBakedSuburb, @Buzz Mohawk, @carroll price

    Seems Jefferson’s moron relative probably had sex with the slaves — he used to go to their quarters to play music with them it seems — nothing Thomas Jefferson did…this lays it all out pretty well as to DNA testing etc.:

    https://www.tjheritage.org/jefferson-hemings-controversy

  48. @Anon
    @Polistra

    There is pretty good historical evidence that Thomas Jefferson had an affair with Hemmings that produced offspring. Combined with the Y-STR evidence that a man of Jeffersonian lineage fathered these people, I see little reason to cast doubt on Thomas Jefferson as the best candidate for baby daddy...


    Unless of course you are both a fan of Thomas Jefferson's ideas and an anti-race mixer. Which would be a pretty awkward inclination to have if Thomas Jefferson did in fact mix with an off-white person.

    Perhaps you want to drag this through the mud until someone's skeleton gets exhumed and genetically sequenced, and proves, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that it was Tommy Jefferson. But then what would you do? Would you re-think your fondness of Jefferson?

    Replies: @Getaclue, @Dutch Boy, @Paperback Writer, @Anon

    Actual the evidence is that Jefferson had a mentally deficient relative who liked to hang with the Slaves in their quarters and play music — seems he is the one who impregnated whoever — Thomas Jefferson didn’t do that sort of thing….– there is much DNA testing etc. — extremely doubtful Thomas Jefferson impregnated any slave but it makes for good slandering so….– this lays out most all to date on this:

    https://www.tjheritage.org/jefferson-hemings-controversy

  49. Rather than go through all this bother, just remake the statues into orcs like the ‘twist’ ending of the terrible Planet of the Apes remake.

    Everyone will love Thomas Chimperson and Abanana Lincoln.

  50. @Lloyd1927
    Sally Hemings and her children would have been white slaves - not black ones.

    https://multiracial.com/index.php/2001/10/01/white-slaves/

    Replies: @Jack D, @Paperback Writer, @carroll price

    It’s true that some of Sally’s children were so white that, when Jefferson allowed them to “escape” to the North (legally their ownership was tied up in an estate and he did not have the right to free them) then most of them lived as white people. Some were visibly mulatto and continued to live in the black community, such that nowadays there are both “white” and “black” Hemings descendants. The black ones are fair skinned but identifiably black. Sally herself (of whom no image exists) was 3/4 black rather than 7/8 like her children and was probably visibly (part) black like the Hemings ladies in the photo below.

    • Replies: @Lloyd1927
    @Jack D

    No. Sally Hemings was a quadroon. Her father was Jefferson's father-in-law, John Wayles. Her mother was Betty Hemings, the daughter of an English sea captain named Hemings. None of Sally's offspring were "black." None married blacks. In the above photo, the two white women are some of Eston Heming Jefferson's white descendants. The ones showing black ancestry are descended from Madison Hemings. Madison was not black and few people in his "free colored" community were black. However, his descendants married "down" over the years.

  51. Here in Ecuador they have museums dedicated to Inca culture.

    The Incas well well known for practicing human sacrifice, before the Spaniards showed up and informed them that Jesus was the last human sacrifice and that the practice was long since obsolete.

    It is almost as if they are somehow proud of the Incas, or something. Have they no shame?

  52. @Anon
    @Polistra

    There is pretty good historical evidence that Thomas Jefferson had an affair with Hemmings that produced offspring. Combined with the Y-STR evidence that a man of Jeffersonian lineage fathered these people, I see little reason to cast doubt on Thomas Jefferson as the best candidate for baby daddy...


    Unless of course you are both a fan of Thomas Jefferson's ideas and an anti-race mixer. Which would be a pretty awkward inclination to have if Thomas Jefferson did in fact mix with an off-white person.

    Perhaps you want to drag this through the mud until someone's skeleton gets exhumed and genetically sequenced, and proves, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that it was Tommy Jefferson. But then what would you do? Would you re-think your fondness of Jefferson?

    Replies: @Getaclue, @Dutch Boy, @Paperback Writer, @Anon

    Master and slave sexual relations have been routine at least since Abraham got Ishmael via Hagar and the American South was no exception. Slavery is, after all, a form of exploitation of varying degrees of severity and sexual exploitation comes naturally when the exploited are property.

    • Replies: @Captain Tripps
    @Dutch Boy

    Indeed, as the saying goes, "we are all descended from slaves and slavemasters". It was common through all of Western history up through the widespread adoption of Christianity in the Middle Ages. Even then, during the period of Kings, Princes and Lords, though the serfs weren't "legally" owned property, the aristocracy still took their "privileges" when the need suited them.

  53. @Twinkie
    I homeschool my children, and one of the annual rite of passage educational activities that my children do, typically at grade five, is to visit and write an essay about our local county courthouse (which was the first public building built in the county). All my older teenage children have done it.

    I recently took one of my little ones for her turn at the field trip and discovered that the statue that graced the front lawn of the courthouse was gone. It was a statue of the first soldier in the county who was killed during the Civil War. And he was killed around the courthouse. He wasn't a slave owner or someone who had power or political decision-making ability - just the first ordinary soldier - from either side of the Civil War - to be killed in battle at the courthouse. He just happened to be a Confederate.

    I found out thereafter that the cowardly county leaders voted to remove it during the George Floyd hysteria and had it done in the dead of night like a burglar, so as not to arouse any "controversy." Even my Chinese immigrant neighbor - when I discussed it with him - said it was terrible that people in power in this country were erasing history they didn't like. And, yes, he told me it reminded him of the Cultural Revolution in China.

    Replies: @Jack D, @kaganovitch, @Matttt

    You could say the same thing about German soldiers during WWII but you don’t see a lot of statues of Waffen SS troops.

    I think it was a mistake to honor the Confederate cause. It is possibly to fight bravely and honorably but if you are fighting for an unjust cause, your bravery and honor is nevertheless negated. I understand why the defeated people of the South erected these statues in order to regain their dignity and why the North allowed it to be done in the interest of national reconciliation, but it was a mistake. The Lost Cause was not a noble cause. They fought for the right of humans to own other humans as property. You can varnish it to be about “States Rights” or whatever, but at bottom that is why they seceded. Such a cause does not deserve to be honored. America would have been a better country if the people of the South had, of their own initiative and not having it forced down their throats, come to understand that they had been mislead by their rulers and that many innocents gave their lives for an ignoble cause.

    That being said, the glorification of the Lost Cause, like the Civil War itself, is now a matter of history and should not be erased. (It should be understood that the cult of the Lost Cause was a separate chapter in American history and most of those statues stem from that chapter and not from the war itself). But perhaps as is seen in certain places in E. Europe where they have gathered up all of the statues of Lenin and put them together in one park where they can all point toward each other rather than toward the Future, these statutes should be put into their context and not allowed to be honored in a way that they do not deserve.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Jack D


    You could say the same thing about German soldiers during WWII but you don’t see a lot of statues of Waffen SS troops.
     
    We aren’t Germans.* And the Civil War was not a expeditionary war of aggression aimed at conquering non-Americans.

    This was a statue of a man from my county whose likeness was erected to commemorate an event of massive historical magnitude in my country and, yes, the county. There was nothing about the Lost Cause or any such thing associated with the statue. All the markings were rather matter-of-fact (I noted, however, they left the markings about slaves being traded at the courthouse intact - I guess some history is more equal than others).

    Not everything is a morality play about the Holocaust and the Nazis.

    *If the Germans wanted to erect a statue of a common Wehrmacht soldier to commemorate the heroism of their soldiery during World War II, I wound object to it though my opinion as a non-German doesn’t matter.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Paperback Writer

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @Jack D


    They fought for the right of humans to own other humans as property. You can varnish it to be about “States Rights” or whatever...
     
    I prefer to varnish it to be about Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. Those states were demographically diverse, the diverse were included in apportionment, and the citizens held equity in the diverse.
    , @J1234
    @Jack D


    You could say the same thing about German soldiers during WWII but you don’t see a lot of statues of Waffen SS troops.
     
    A very false equivalency. There was a general policy following WW2 (at least by about 1949 on) that all vestiges of the Third Reich in Germany be removed. There was no such policy in the South (post Reconstruction, i.e. from the late 1870's on. Reconstruction - having it's origins primarily in Republican party radicalism - lacked the insight and reason to be an effective policy in the long term.)

    With statues of the Confederacy, the issue today is that radicalized people want the statues removed 100+ years after the fact for ideological reasons. Where were these people 15 to 25 years ago? Or at least, where was their political presence? Why didn't Ken Burns promote the removal of Confederate statues back when he had a national audience interested in his civil war documentary in the late 1980's? The answer is because it wasn't morally enhancing for his public image to do so back then. It is now, so he does. (Or maybe it never even occurred to him back then. )

    After 100+ years of existence, historical statues themselves become part of history and an influence upon culture. As with all cultural decisions that take place within the realm of politics, it's of profound importance to not make culture and politics enemies of each other (though many would say we're way beyond that point by now.) If ever a referendum had a useful purpose, this would be it - deciding on the appropriateness of symbolic public cultural imagery is one of the few things that the public at large is qualified to do. That could be the approach in each of the localities where the statues were constructed. Instead, the "democracy loving" left falls back on what it truly believes in: sacralism and government (as the enforcing church of that sacralism.)

    Replies: @Jack D

    , @SunBakedSuburb
    @Jack D

    "you don't see a lot of statues of Waffen SS troops"

    There should be a statue of Waffen SS LT Colonel Otto Skorzeny erected in Madrid for his work in making that city a hub of post war intrigue.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    , @Neil Templeton
    @Jack D

    Shame on you for implying that children should be taught to disrespect their ancestors.

  54. @JimDandy
    As was reported here at UR in at least a couple different articles, a black bully recently declared on social media: "If your bf white you single to me. Fuck timmy gon do?" He got his answer when one Timmy responded to his violent predatory racism by shooting him dead. I took a look around the internet to see what the different reactions were, and I was surprised by the number of coldly unsympathetic responses from black women. Mostly variations on "He died pursuing what he loved best. I'll just leave it at that."

    Replies: @fish, @AndrewR

    Timmy gon break that buck. Then the Jews will arrest and lynch Timmy.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @AndrewR

    Right, the Jews are famous for doing lynchings of white men. White men cower in fear whenever they see a group of bearded men in black suits. The fringed garments strike terror into their hearts.

    Replies: @fish

  55. @Polistra
    Remember Science? Science says that we have absolute no proof of the Hemings alliance, except that it was likely someone in the family. We hate science, don't we?

    PS. George Washington is next. Who, after that?

    Replies: @Anon, @Jack D, @Getaclue, @Alden, @SunBakedSuburb, @Buzz Mohawk, @carroll price

    4 generations of White men; great great grand father, great grand father, grandfather and father made Sally a pass for White 7/8 White 1/8 black octoroon. And whoever fathered her 15/16 White 1/16 black children was a White man.

    Sally’s father was also the father of Jefferson’s wife, Sally’s half sister.

    Men of UNZ, Men of UNZ and your southern ancestors.

  56. As far as I understand, he took Sally Hemmings because she was the half-sister of his first wife. That is not an uncommon pattern. No black girl magic needed to explain it.

  57. If Thomas Jefferson Is Canceled, Will Anybody Remember Sally Hemings?

    Yes, they will. You’re usually good at finding the weakness in the woke brigades crappy reasoning but this isn’t among your best.

    Who remembers who killed all those Christian martyrs?

  58. @Polistra
    Is it possible, likely even if not certain, that the Sally Hemings story is America's original race hoax?

    https://www.takimag.com/article/putting-out-the-fire-with-lighter-fluid/

    Replies: @Alden

    I wonder who the sperm donors of all those mulattos, quadroons, octoroons and 15/16tharoons black women popped out for centuries were.

    Maybe there was a God like Zeus who impregnated black women with part White babies. Zeus disguised himself. The Jewish Christian sky God did it by magic . Maybe that was how America’s been plagued with mulattos since 9 months after the Black Plague ship arrived in 1619 Virginia. Couldn’t have anything to do with White men.

    • Replies: @Whiskey
    @Alden

    Most mixed race people are the result of Black father, White mother. White women (and all women) rate black men the most attractive. Low IQ, impulsive violence, extraversion, etc. That's a recipe for male sexiness. Meanwhile black women are noted for their masculine attributes and general ugliness. No man with a choice even or especially black men will choose them over others.

    This is just reality.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Twinkie, @Inselaffen, @very old statistician

  59. @Jack D
    @Twinkie

    You could say the same thing about German soldiers during WWII but you don't see a lot of statues of Waffen SS troops.

    I think it was a mistake to honor the Confederate cause. It is possibly to fight bravely and honorably but if you are fighting for an unjust cause, your bravery and honor is nevertheless negated. I understand why the defeated people of the South erected these statues in order to regain their dignity and why the North allowed it to be done in the interest of national reconciliation, but it was a mistake. The Lost Cause was not a noble cause. They fought for the right of humans to own other humans as property. You can varnish it to be about "States Rights" or whatever, but at bottom that is why they seceded. Such a cause does not deserve to be honored. America would have been a better country if the people of the South had, of their own initiative and not having it forced down their throats, come to understand that they had been mislead by their rulers and that many innocents gave their lives for an ignoble cause.

    That being said, the glorification of the Lost Cause, like the Civil War itself, is now a matter of history and should not be erased. (It should be understood that the cult of the Lost Cause was a separate chapter in American history and most of those statues stem from that chapter and not from the war itself). But perhaps as is seen in certain places in E. Europe where they have gathered up all of the statues of Lenin and put them together in one park where they can all point toward each other rather than toward the Future, these statutes should be put into their context and not allowed to be honored in a way that they do not deserve.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Reg Cæsar, @J1234, @SunBakedSuburb, @Neil Templeton

    You could say the same thing about German soldiers during WWII but you don’t see a lot of statues of Waffen SS troops.

    We aren’t Germans.* And the Civil War was not a expeditionary war of aggression aimed at conquering non-Americans.

    This was a statue of a man from my county whose likeness was erected to commemorate an event of massive historical magnitude in my country and, yes, the county. There was nothing about the Lost Cause or any such thing associated with the statue. All the markings were rather matter-of-fact (I noted, however, they left the markings about slaves being traded at the courthouse intact – I guess some history is more equal than others).

    Not everything is a morality play about the Holocaust and the Nazis.

    *If the Germans wanted to erect a statue of a common Wehrmacht soldier to commemorate the heroism of their soldiery during World War II, I wound object to it though my opinion as a non-German doesn’t matter.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Twinkie


    There was nothing about the Lost Cause or any such thing associated with the statue. All the markings were rather matter-of-fact
     
    What year was the statue put up? The biggest spike was between 1900 and 1920 (although a few were put up as late as the 1950s - the Georgia state flag did not include the Confederate Battle Flag until 1956) and indeed these were tied to the Lost Cause myth and to the related cause of Jim Crow. Very few were put up immediately after the war unless they were memorials to a particular person. Even if the statue doesn't specifically allude to the Lost Cause, the motivation behind it probably did.

    https://www.history.com/news/how-the-u-s-got-so-many-confederate-monuments

    These statues were not erected as some spontaneous outpouring of grief by the families of the veterans - they were erected for political reasons and they will come down for political reasons. In fact they both send the same message - "Our Side Really Won". Saying that we should not allow politics to interfere with history is nonsense in this case because the statues that are now dying in politics were born in politics.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Whiskey, @Anonymous, @rebel yell

    , @Paperback Writer
    @Twinkie

    When Jack is out of arguments, he swings wildly and misses:


    You could say the same thing about German soldiers during WWII but you don’t see a lot of statues of Waffen SS troops.
     
    Of course there's zero comparison between the two, not that I support the Confederates. They were mostly simple guys led by madmen drunk on power. The madmen had a bad cause, and the simple guys died for it.

    I seem to be referring to Ann Coulter a lot now, which is weird because I really don't like her, but she made a good point somewhere when she said that honoring the Confederate dead helped to end the Civil War. In many countries these things simmer on indefinitely. Well, we ended it, or thought we did. Southern officers were prominent in WW1 and WW2. A descendant of NB Forrest was killed in WW2. And so on.

    Jack makes all these ancillary points about how putting up those statues was political then, and it's political now, as if this didn't occur to any of us, and it's irrelevant to the point: THIS IS A POWER STRUGGLE. One side is winning, and it's the side that's gonna crush him into the ground, and that's OK. Just give in to them a little and they'll stop twisting your arm behind your back.

    It doesn't work that way.

  60. @Jack D
    @Polistra


    Science says that we have absolute no proof of the Hemings alliance, except that it was likely someone in the family.
     
    TBH, this is very weak sauce. The old line was that there was absolutely no proof, now the new line is that there is absolutely no proof except for the DNA. Maybe it was some other Jefferson and not old Tom himself, but waving the banner of science in this case is not a good idea - the science may not be 100% dispositive but the scientific evidence sure don't help your case. If this was a courtroom, this is not evidence that you would want to introduce for the defense.

    If I were you, I would change the subject. People's personal lives are complicated. Strom Thurmond had a black(ish) daughter. Believing that some of the Hemings children might have been fathered by Thomas does not cause me to think less of the man and his incredible accomplishments. It does not negate them in any way.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @Polistra

    Gotta disagree.

    The DNA proves that one child was fathered by a Jefferson. Not *the* Jefferson.

    Ann Coulter does a pretty good job of casting doubt on whether the daddy was Thomas.

    https://dailycaller.com/2019/07/03/coulter-thomas-jefferson-lacrosse/

    For Eston to be Jefferson’s son, we have to believe that five years after being falsely accused of fathering a child with Hemings, Jefferson decided, What the heck? I may be president of the United States, but I should prove Callender’s slander true by fathering a child with my slave! No one will notice.

    This isn’t weak sauce and it isn’t a minor blip. It’s really a hill to die on. The Barbara Chase-Riboud book is really a piece of shit. She claims that Jefferson got his hands on Sally when she was 14, in Paris. There’s zero evidence he even saw her there. It’s all downhill from there, pun intended.

    • Thanks: Polistra
    • Replies: @res
    @Paperback Writer

    That is an excellent point. How have I missed seeing it before?!

    Much discussion of Hemings DNA at https://www.unz.com/isteve/global-ancestry-and-cognitive-ability/#comment-3436598

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    , @Jack D
    @Paperback Writer


    I may be president of the United States, but I should prove Callender’s slander true by fathering a child with my slave! No one will notice.
     
    I may be president of the United States and there have been a lot of rumors about me being a philanderer, but I should prove their slander true by getting blow jobs in the Oval Office! No one will notice.

    Stranger things have happened. It would not be the first time that a man let some other organ control his brain.

    I simply don't buy the "Jefferson would never have done that" type arguments. Humans, even the greatest humans, are capably of ANYTHING behind the closed doors of the boudoir and just because you know the public man doesn't mean that you know the man in full.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

  61. Those stupid GOPs keep giving the evil DEMs irritating, cost-free, symbolic political victories. They should demand a quid pro quo:

    • Thomas Jefferson for Franklin Roosevelt.

    • Sheriff Joe for Governor Black Face.

    • Robert E. Lee for Earl Warren. (There’s a public school in Kern County, not far from Manzanar, named after that progressive icon; EW was a big supporter of the camps. Talk about rubbing Japanese-American noses into the desert ground.)

    I’m all FOR acts like:

    • razing the DC (renamed “District of Crooks”) monuments,

    • painting rainbows on the WH,

    • sanding off, or putting masks over, the faces on Rushmore.

    NYC has > 1,700 public schools. Many are referred to by numbers, e.g. “P.S. 100”. That’s a Base 10 bias, and insensitive to kids with syndactyly. Schools should be numbered either in binary or powers of e (rounded to 10 decimal places).

  62. @Anon
    @Polistra

    There is pretty good historical evidence that Thomas Jefferson had an affair with Hemmings that produced offspring. Combined with the Y-STR evidence that a man of Jeffersonian lineage fathered these people, I see little reason to cast doubt on Thomas Jefferson as the best candidate for baby daddy...


    Unless of course you are both a fan of Thomas Jefferson's ideas and an anti-race mixer. Which would be a pretty awkward inclination to have if Thomas Jefferson did in fact mix with an off-white person.

    Perhaps you want to drag this through the mud until someone's skeleton gets exhumed and genetically sequenced, and proves, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that it was Tommy Jefferson. But then what would you do? Would you re-think your fondness of Jefferson?

    Replies: @Getaclue, @Dutch Boy, @Paperback Writer, @Anon

    There is pretty good historical evidence that Thomas Jefferson had an affair with Hemmings that produced offspring.

    No there isn’t.

  63. @Twinkie
    I homeschool my children, and one of the annual rite of passage educational activities that my children do, typically at grade five, is to visit and write an essay about our local county courthouse (which was the first public building built in the county). All my older teenage children have done it.

    I recently took one of my little ones for her turn at the field trip and discovered that the statue that graced the front lawn of the courthouse was gone. It was a statue of the first soldier in the county who was killed during the Civil War. And he was killed around the courthouse. He wasn't a slave owner or someone who had power or political decision-making ability - just the first ordinary soldier - from either side of the Civil War - to be killed in battle at the courthouse. He just happened to be a Confederate.

    I found out thereafter that the cowardly county leaders voted to remove it during the George Floyd hysteria and had it done in the dead of night like a burglar, so as not to arouse any "controversy." Even my Chinese immigrant neighbor - when I discussed it with him - said it was terrible that people in power in this country were erasing history they didn't like. And, yes, he told me it reminded him of the Cultural Revolution in China.

    Replies: @Jack D, @kaganovitch, @Matttt

    I found out thereafter that the cowardly county leaders voted to remove it during the George Floyd hysteria and had it done in the dead of night like a burglar, so as not to arouse any “controversy.”

    As Charles Peguy wrote “It will never be known what acts of cowardice have been committed for fear of not looking sufficiently progressive.” The “bluepilling” of Western Civilization has been going on for quite a while as this was written before WW1.

    • Agree: Twinkie
    • Replies: @Gabe Ruth
    @kaganovitch

    Thanks for the quote, new to me. Peguy was one of the first men killed in WW1.

  64. @Twinkie
    I homeschool my children, and one of the annual rite of passage educational activities that my children do, typically at grade five, is to visit and write an essay about our local county courthouse (which was the first public building built in the county). All my older teenage children have done it.

    I recently took one of my little ones for her turn at the field trip and discovered that the statue that graced the front lawn of the courthouse was gone. It was a statue of the first soldier in the county who was killed during the Civil War. And he was killed around the courthouse. He wasn't a slave owner or someone who had power or political decision-making ability - just the first ordinary soldier - from either side of the Civil War - to be killed in battle at the courthouse. He just happened to be a Confederate.

    I found out thereafter that the cowardly county leaders voted to remove it during the George Floyd hysteria and had it done in the dead of night like a burglar, so as not to arouse any "controversy." Even my Chinese immigrant neighbor - when I discussed it with him - said it was terrible that people in power in this country were erasing history they didn't like. And, yes, he told me it reminded him of the Cultural Revolution in China.

    Replies: @Jack D, @kaganovitch, @Matttt

    Many of these statues were sponsored by groups like United Daughters of the Confederacy: wives, mothers, daughters, and sisters of Confederate soldiers who wanted to remember their dead men. Of course, mourning white women are entitled to no consideration at all. On the other hand, we reorganized our whole society – ruined our schools, exposed our children to danger, dumbed down then eliminated our culture – because we thought blacks felt inferior (they didn’t).

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @Matttt

    I think most of them were. This is a little remarked upon part of the whole uproar. The people who wanted to commemorate the dead were mostly women.

  65. @anonymous
    I wonder if it was weird for Jefferson to keep a slave that was 3/4 white as a concubine? And it was weirder even to have 7/8 white kids as slaves.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Jack D, @Alden

    Sally was 7/8 White and a wedding present from Sally’s father. Who was also the father of jefferson’s Wife. An old southern tradition. Breeding Whiter and Whiter human livestock.

    Black from Africa births a brown mulatto. Brown mulatto births a Carmel quadroon.
    Carmel quadroom births a butterscotch or cream colored octoroon.

    50 years ago labradors were mostly black and dark brown a few dark caramel. Breeders noticed more and more buyers preferred the dark caramel dogs. So started breeding golden tan labs. Then buyers preferred lighter tan labs. Now there’s blond and cream almost white labs.

    Pomeranians used to be solid white a very few solid black. Breeders decided those colors aren’t interesting, so now Pomeranians come in many shades of gold brown gray something the breeders call gray blue and gray lavender and most are not solid colored. The breeders are turning out patchy Pomeranians. 3 or 4 colors in blobs and patches on those tiny 5 inch tall 4 pound bodies. There are even brindle Pomeranians the ugliest color and pattern ever.

    It’s called breeding. Just as Labrador breeders could get more money for a caramel or golden Labrador so the human livestock breeders could get more money for a caramel or golden than a black or dark brown human. And have fun doing the breeding themselves.

    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
    @Alden

    "It's called breeding."

    You seem to have an unwholesome interest in dog breeding. Today's young white women have emotionally unhealthy relationships with their child surrogate dogs. Too bad your pecker doesn't work because you could score big time.

  66. It’s nice to see that the NYC council has solved its crime issues, shuttered businesses, high taxes, defunding the police, conjested streets, revolving door court system, open air drug use, and rampant homeless problems. That they now have time to focus on removing a statue that was there long before they were installed in office, and should be there long after these clowns are done running the city into the ground.

    • Replies: @J1234
    @Sick 'n Tired


    It’s nice to see that the NYC council has solved its...issues...they now have time to focus on removing a statue that was there long before they were installed in office
     
    But not enough time to remove several 18 oz. street signs that honor Samuel Dickstein, a spy for the Soviet Union while serving in the United States Congress.

    Replies: @Jack D

  67. @El Dato
    @Reg Cæsar

    Give it up Reg. Metric is superior -- same as the absence of misspellings and grammatical problems you are pursuing.

    End of story.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Give it up Reg. Metric is superior

    Then why isn’t it used by computers? A gigabyte is 1,073,741,824 bytes, or 8,589,934,592 bits. A terabyte consists of 8,796,093,022,208 bits. Pretty messy, eh?

    A petabyte is 9,007,199,254,740,992 bits. That’s almost a power of 10!

    Congress instituted the metric system in 1866. (Reconstruction!) It’s still not in use because of the V-word.

    Kasson Act

    Enjoy your kilogram cake of tapioca flour, soy milk, margarine, and aspartame. That is, if you can read the recipe in Esperanto. We’ll stick with the Axis of English.

    [MORE]

    • Replies: @nokangaroos
    @Reg Cæsar

    I´m sure some satisfaction is to be gleaned from leading the
    Coalition of the Unwilling/Axis of Benightenment ...
    but you will keep losing aircraft if you cannot even force your gallons
    upon the Canadians :P

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    , @Kratoklastes
    @Reg Cæsar


    A gigabyte is 1,073,741,824 bytes, or 8,589,934,592 bits. A terabyte consists of 8,796,093,022,208 bits. Pretty messy, eh?
     
    Not if you're a customer of a hard drive manufacturer. 1MB = 1000KB; 1GB = 1000MB; 1 TB = 1000GB.

    So as far as Western Digital is concerned: 1GB is 1,000,000,000 bytes - those who think this is a 7.37% ripoff can go pound sand.

    It's of a piece with 'up to 50% off*' and 'free*', and 'studies say' and 'linked to', and download speeds listed in Mbps.

    Everything has an embedded asterisk nowadays. It's the range of little Jew-y 'nickel & dime' things that everyone knows about.

    There is now a profound and obvious requirement for behavioural correctives - which at this stage should be primarily machete-based if they are to achieve anything: the effects really need to be salutary so as to generate a little more circumspection in the types of shitbags who have hitherto gotten away with it.

    Frankly, it strikes me that it would be an almost-unalloyed mitzvah if the violent impulsivity of US urban blacks could be harnessed and unleashed on the C-suites of the US corporate and government sector.

    If wishes were horses...

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Reg Cæsar

    , @Veteran Aryan
    @Reg Cæsar


    Then why isn’t it used by computers?
     
    There are only 10 kinds of people - those who understand binary and those who do not.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  68. Jefferson should be cancelled for the “all men are created equal” nonsense.

  69. @Paperback Writer
    @Jack D

    Gotta disagree.

    The DNA proves that one child was fathered by a Jefferson. Not *the* Jefferson.

    Ann Coulter does a pretty good job of casting doubt on whether the daddy was Thomas.

    https://dailycaller.com/2019/07/03/coulter-thomas-jefferson-lacrosse/


    For Eston to be Jefferson’s son, we have to believe that five years after being falsely accused of fathering a child with Hemings, Jefferson decided, What the heck? I may be president of the United States, but I should prove Callender’s slander true by fathering a child with my slave! No one will notice.
     
    This isn't weak sauce and it isn't a minor blip. It's really a hill to die on. The Barbara Chase-Riboud book is really a piece of shit. She claims that Jefferson got his hands on Sally when she was 14, in Paris. There's zero evidence he even saw her there. It's all downhill from there, pun intended.

    Replies: @res, @Jack D

    That is an excellent point. How have I missed seeing it before?!

    Much discussion of Hemings DNA at https://www.unz.com/isteve/global-ancestry-and-cognitive-ability/#comment-3436598

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @res

    You mean the point Coulter made?

  70. @Jack D
    @Twinkie

    You could say the same thing about German soldiers during WWII but you don't see a lot of statues of Waffen SS troops.

    I think it was a mistake to honor the Confederate cause. It is possibly to fight bravely and honorably but if you are fighting for an unjust cause, your bravery and honor is nevertheless negated. I understand why the defeated people of the South erected these statues in order to regain their dignity and why the North allowed it to be done in the interest of national reconciliation, but it was a mistake. The Lost Cause was not a noble cause. They fought for the right of humans to own other humans as property. You can varnish it to be about "States Rights" or whatever, but at bottom that is why they seceded. Such a cause does not deserve to be honored. America would have been a better country if the people of the South had, of their own initiative and not having it forced down their throats, come to understand that they had been mislead by their rulers and that many innocents gave their lives for an ignoble cause.

    That being said, the glorification of the Lost Cause, like the Civil War itself, is now a matter of history and should not be erased. (It should be understood that the cult of the Lost Cause was a separate chapter in American history and most of those statues stem from that chapter and not from the war itself). But perhaps as is seen in certain places in E. Europe where they have gathered up all of the statues of Lenin and put them together in one park where they can all point toward each other rather than toward the Future, these statutes should be put into their context and not allowed to be honored in a way that they do not deserve.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Reg Cæsar, @J1234, @SunBakedSuburb, @Neil Templeton

    They fought for the right of humans to own other humans as property. You can varnish it to be about “States Rights” or whatever…

    I prefer to varnish it to be about Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. Those states were demographically diverse, the diverse were included in apportionment, and the citizens held equity in the diverse.

  71. I imagine he touched quite a bit more than her hair….

  72. @Paperback Writer
    @Jack D

    Gotta disagree.

    The DNA proves that one child was fathered by a Jefferson. Not *the* Jefferson.

    Ann Coulter does a pretty good job of casting doubt on whether the daddy was Thomas.

    https://dailycaller.com/2019/07/03/coulter-thomas-jefferson-lacrosse/


    For Eston to be Jefferson’s son, we have to believe that five years after being falsely accused of fathering a child with Hemings, Jefferson decided, What the heck? I may be president of the United States, but I should prove Callender’s slander true by fathering a child with my slave! No one will notice.
     
    This isn't weak sauce and it isn't a minor blip. It's really a hill to die on. The Barbara Chase-Riboud book is really a piece of shit. She claims that Jefferson got his hands on Sally when she was 14, in Paris. There's zero evidence he even saw her there. It's all downhill from there, pun intended.

    Replies: @res, @Jack D

    I may be president of the United States, but I should prove Callender’s slander true by fathering a child with my slave! No one will notice.

    I may be president of the United States and there have been a lot of rumors about me being a philanderer, but I should prove their slander true by getting blow jobs in the Oval Office! No one will notice.

    Stranger things have happened. It would not be the first time that a man let some other organ control his brain.

    I simply don’t buy the “Jefferson would never have done that” type arguments. Humans, even the greatest humans, are capably of ANYTHING behind the closed doors of the boudoir and just because you know the public man doesn’t mean that you know the man in full.

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @Jack D

    You're not dealing with the facts, Jack.

    First you bring up Strom Thurmond, as if this proves Jefferson did the same thing. It proves nothing, it's just guilt by association.

    Now Clinton, a known philanderer. Not a rumored philanderer. Pretty much an admitted one. No one was shocked or surprised by any of the accusations against Clinton - they just defended him procedurally. And Clinton flipping the bird at the world was in total character.

    Please deal with the facts. I'd love to see you take on the facts that Coulter brought up.


    "Humans, even the greatest humans, are capably of ANYTHING behind the closed doors"

     

    That's such a blanket, general statement it's meaningless. Applying it to real people, I don't believe that Ike beat Mamie, that Harry, Bess, and J. Edgar Hoover had threesomes, or that Lincoln was gay. (I do believe his predecessor was.)

    The Jefferson descendants shot themselves in the foot by denying that any Jefferson could possibly ever have fathered any of Sally's offspring. So now they're paying, but that doesn't excuse us from looking at ALL of the facts.

    Jefferson had an affair with Maria Cosway, a sophisticated European, after Polly died. She, not little Sally, was his France affair. He was constantly watched in France, and if he'd been screwing his 14 year old slave girl, the French would have gossiped about it. He yearned for Maria his whole life. I find it weird to think that a man who fell head over heels for Maria Cosway would have fallen for an illiterate slave woman - after age 60.

    You're in some great company, Jack.

    https://web.archive.org/web/20190215162728/https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/02/15/thomas-jefferson-is-r-kelly-american-enlightenment/?utm_term=.bc700b462909

    Replies: @Jack D

  73. @Jonathan Mason
    @anonymous

    Yes, it was weird, but those were the weird laws of the time.

    But out at Monticello after sunset the Jefferson family was relatively free from outside interference.

    These kind of relationships and family structures must have been common at the time.

    Remember that Sally Hemings was the half sister of Jefferson's wife and that she voluntarily returned from Paris to the United States with Tommy boy, when she could have walked away from slavery and stayed in France.

    Replies: @NOTA, @Paperback Writer, @Buzz Mohawk

    ISTR that he freed his kids, just not the rest of his slaves.

  74. @Twinkie
    @Jack D


    You could say the same thing about German soldiers during WWII but you don’t see a lot of statues of Waffen SS troops.
     
    We aren’t Germans.* And the Civil War was not a expeditionary war of aggression aimed at conquering non-Americans.

    This was a statue of a man from my county whose likeness was erected to commemorate an event of massive historical magnitude in my country and, yes, the county. There was nothing about the Lost Cause or any such thing associated with the statue. All the markings were rather matter-of-fact (I noted, however, they left the markings about slaves being traded at the courthouse intact - I guess some history is more equal than others).

    Not everything is a morality play about the Holocaust and the Nazis.

    *If the Germans wanted to erect a statue of a common Wehrmacht soldier to commemorate the heroism of their soldiery during World War II, I wound object to it though my opinion as a non-German doesn’t matter.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Paperback Writer

    There was nothing about the Lost Cause or any such thing associated with the statue. All the markings were rather matter-of-fact

    What year was the statue put up? The biggest spike was between 1900 and 1920 (although a few were put up as late as the 1950s – the Georgia state flag did not include the Confederate Battle Flag until 1956) and indeed these were tied to the Lost Cause myth and to the related cause of Jim Crow. Very few were put up immediately after the war unless they were memorials to a particular person. Even if the statue doesn’t specifically allude to the Lost Cause, the motivation behind it probably did.

    https://www.history.com/news/how-the-u-s-got-so-many-confederate-monuments

    These statues were not erected as some spontaneous outpouring of grief by the families of the veterans – they were erected for political reasons and they will come down for political reasons. In fact they both send the same message – “Our Side Really Won”. Saying that we should not allow politics to interfere with history is nonsense in this case because the statues that are now dying in politics were born in politics.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Jack D


    the Lost Cause myth and to the related cause of Jim Crow.
     
    It wasn’t just the Lost Cause myth. During the late 19th and early 20th centuries, there was much renewed interest in the Civil War in general and in commemorating it in particular (which had been suppressed or discouraged in the initial decades after the conclusion of the war), as the South recovered economically and psychically from the trauma of not just defeat, but physical devastation.

    But you know whose motive is crystal clear? The erasers of history - they bleated about “our values” as they voted.

    These statues were not erected as some spontaneous outpouring of grief by the families of the veterans
     
    Straw man.

    It is possibly to fight bravely and honorably but if you are fighting for an unjust cause, your bravery and honor is nevertheless negated.
     
    Courage is an innate quality that manifests externally via action. It is never negated by that which exists outside the man.

    Very few wars have ever been fought for a “just cause” in the context of the post-World War II moralism (for goodness sakes, the ancients fought wars of conquest to win glory and honor). To follow your reasoning would negate valor and its celebration in 99.99999% of wars in human history. As I wrote before, not everything is a morality play about the Holocaust and the Nazis.

    Americans in the 1800’s took state sovereignty very seriously and the state was often the primary source of sovereign loyalty. Were I a man of my county at the time, I’d have voted against secession and opposed slavery for that matter, but would have answered the call to arms by my state and fought in its defense.

    Replies: @nebulafox

    , @Whiskey
    @Jack D

    Wrong. The erasure of ALL White men (including Jews) is because of ... Brandon Tartikoff.

    Prior to that Head of NBC Programming, TV and mass culture aimed at well, mass audiences. Being broadly appealing. There had been moves before, the Rural Massacre when CBS canceled high-rated Beverly Hillbillies, Gomer Pyle, Petticoat Junction, and Green Acres because of high ratings but mostly rural viewers. But Tartikoff in the 1980s with Hill Street Blues, Cheers, and Seinfeld (before the latter two became hits) went for favorable demographics: DINKs (dual income, no kids) and wealthy urbanites 18-34 to get more money out of advertisers than say, Happy Days or Laverne and Shirley. Even with a fraction of the audience.

    That's the recipe for Netflix now -- they make their money out of stupid hedge fund investors throwing money at them and selling user data. Advertisers don't care or want to know about White men, only young White women and blacks. The only two groups that matter.

    As ours is a profoundly commercial culture where individuals find meaning (pathetically) by aligning themselves with corporations that "bear" their values: Apple, Nike, the NFL, etc. this means ultimately that ALL White men need to go in the desire to eliminate everyone but young White women and blacks. That is how commercial culture appealing to ever more fanatical but smaller groups goes.

    And this is a disaster for the nation and the world. The world is underpinned since 1945 by American military dominance. Which in turn requires massive investment and promotion of flyover White men to both maintain a technological advantage and keep ever more complex systems operating. Black people have nothing to offer but home invasions, purple drank, and twerking. The Chinese are not impressed. Young White women can rage on Twitter. The Chinese are not impressed. China launched a glide path hypersonic vehicle that the US cannot match and does not understand how it works. This makes our missile defense basically useless as these vehicles can manuever out of the way and come in from the South Pole.

    Take down Jefferson. OK, then what, put up a statue of George Floyd or OJ? This pretty much makes White men the eternal enemy of blacks and White women, but also vice versa. The happy fat days of American dominance are over and the ability to trash White men comes at a real cost even if you can't see it out your window. Look at Chicago. Lesbian black mayor Groot is acting out her HATE HATE HATE of White male cops, how well do you think is going work out for the people of Chicago.

    As White men we understand this very well: White women, blacks, liberal Urban Jews, Subcontinentals, and Asians mostly HATE USE and WANT USE DEAD. We understand that quite well as its been shouted through the megaphone since the 1980s. Message received!

    , @Anonymous
    @Jack D

    In the early 1900s the veterans of the war were dying so it makes sense they were erecting monuments at that time. You don't need monuments when granddad is around to tell his stories.

    , @rebel yell
    @Jack D


    These statues were not erected as some spontaneous outpouring of grief by the families of the veterans – they were erected for political reasons and they will come down for political reasons.
     
    You can say the same thing about holocaust memorials. When were they built - 20 years, 50 years after the war? Times up! It's political, not spontaneous.
    And god knows the holocaust has been politicized.
    As for lost cause, slavery, states rights and the rest - you go your way and we'll go ours. Mexicans can admire Montezuma the cannibal, jews can admire Joshua the slaughterer of multitudes, yankees can admire John Brown be-header of teen boys, and southerners can admire Jackson and Lee.

    Replies: @Jack D

  75. @AndrewR
    @JimDandy

    Timmy gon break that buck. Then the Jews will arrest and lynch Timmy.

    Replies: @Jack D

    Right, the Jews are famous for doing lynchings of white men. White men cower in fear whenever they see a group of bearded men in black suits. The fringed garments strike terror into their hearts.

    • Replies: @fish
    @Jack D

    Lots of ways to "lynch" a man Jack.

    Replies: @JimDandy

  76. @Reg Cæsar
    @Morris Applebaum IV


    That energy should be focused on constructive ways of breaking the Empire apart and creating something better for their children.
     
    And creating those children.

    Replies: @Alden

    This is the wrong site to advocate having more children . The Men Of UNZ are fathers of 0-2 children mostly 0.
    The Men of UNZ remind me of those 19th and early 20th century childless catholic priests urging married Catholics to have as many children as possible and don’t worry about feeding and housing them because God will provide.

    Practice what you preach father of 2.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Alden


    Practice what you preach father of 2.
     
    Three, but the (Ovaryton) window is closing. My point is that here some argue that men want children but women don't, while others counter that women want children and men don't. I think both natalists and antinatalists should do us all a favor and seek out those who share their respective views and act accordingly.

    Natalist appeals and incentives are more efficiently directed to those already amenable to embracing children. And, in general, it is irresponsible for irresponsible people to have children and irresponsible for responsible people not to.

    And leave priests out of this.
  77. In the novella, which is set in the near future, a young woman who is descended from Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings, and a band of largely Black and brown survivors take refuge from marauding white supremacists in Monticello, Jefferson’s homestead.

    Does that young woman fall in love with one of them white supremacists and uses her black girl magic to bring him to the light dark side? Does he ever get to touch her hair?

    And what kind of a near-future apocalyptic disaster brought about this whole situation in the first place?

    Inquiring minds want to know.

  78. @Jack D
    @AndrewR

    Right, the Jews are famous for doing lynchings of white men. White men cower in fear whenever they see a group of bearded men in black suits. The fringed garments strike terror into their hearts.

    Replies: @fish

    Lots of ways to “lynch” a man Jack.

    • Replies: @JimDandy
    @fish

    Well, I mean, they just straight up lynch-lynched a lot of Kulaks.

  79. @Jack D
    @Twinkie

    You could say the same thing about German soldiers during WWII but you don't see a lot of statues of Waffen SS troops.

    I think it was a mistake to honor the Confederate cause. It is possibly to fight bravely and honorably but if you are fighting for an unjust cause, your bravery and honor is nevertheless negated. I understand why the defeated people of the South erected these statues in order to regain their dignity and why the North allowed it to be done in the interest of national reconciliation, but it was a mistake. The Lost Cause was not a noble cause. They fought for the right of humans to own other humans as property. You can varnish it to be about "States Rights" or whatever, but at bottom that is why they seceded. Such a cause does not deserve to be honored. America would have been a better country if the people of the South had, of their own initiative and not having it forced down their throats, come to understand that they had been mislead by their rulers and that many innocents gave their lives for an ignoble cause.

    That being said, the glorification of the Lost Cause, like the Civil War itself, is now a matter of history and should not be erased. (It should be understood that the cult of the Lost Cause was a separate chapter in American history and most of those statues stem from that chapter and not from the war itself). But perhaps as is seen in certain places in E. Europe where they have gathered up all of the statues of Lenin and put them together in one park where they can all point toward each other rather than toward the Future, these statutes should be put into their context and not allowed to be honored in a way that they do not deserve.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Reg Cæsar, @J1234, @SunBakedSuburb, @Neil Templeton

    You could say the same thing about German soldiers during WWII but you don’t see a lot of statues of Waffen SS troops.

    A very false equivalency. There was a general policy following WW2 (at least by about 1949 on) that all vestiges of the Third Reich in Germany be removed. There was no such policy in the South (post Reconstruction, i.e. from the late 1870’s on. Reconstruction – having it’s origins primarily in Republican party radicalism – lacked the insight and reason to be an effective policy in the long term.)

    With statues of the Confederacy, the issue today is that radicalized people want the statues removed 100+ years after the fact for ideological reasons. Where were these people 15 to 25 years ago? Or at least, where was their political presence? Why didn’t Ken Burns promote the removal of Confederate statues back when he had a national audience interested in his civil war documentary in the late 1980’s? The answer is because it wasn’t morally enhancing for his public image to do so back then. It is now, so he does. (Or maybe it never even occurred to him back then. )

    After 100+ years of existence, historical statues themselves become part of history and an influence upon culture. As with all cultural decisions that take place within the realm of politics, it’s of profound importance to not make culture and politics enemies of each other (though many would say we’re way beyond that point by now.) If ever a referendum had a useful purpose, this would be it – deciding on the appropriateness of symbolic public cultural imagery is one of the few things that the public at large is qualified to do. That could be the approach in each of the localities where the statues were constructed. Instead, the “democracy loving” left falls back on what it truly believes in: sacralism and government (as the enforcing church of that sacralism.)

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @J1234


    If ever a referendum had a useful purpose, this would be it – deciding on the appropriateness of symbolic public cultural imagery is one of the few things that the public at large is qualified to do.
     
    Absolutely. The RRS Boaty McBoatface heartily agree with you.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/22/world/europe/boaty-mcboatface-what-you-get-when-you-let-the-internet-decide.html

    Seriously, democracy is flawed. How does it make sense that if 51% regard Stalin regard him as a murderous madman and 49% like him a lot, the statue should go but if public opinion shifts 2% then he should come back. What if it shifts back again 2% in the other direction? Do we bring the Stalin statues in and out according to an annual referendum?

    After 70 years, were the statues of Lenin in E. Europe "part of history"? Sure they were, but when the regime changed, they were torn down or taken to outlying parks where they served as object of kitsch and not as public monuments to a man who lead an unjust regime:

    https://www.changesinlongitude.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Budapest-Memento-Park-Random-Lenin-statue.jpg

    Replies: @Twinkie, @J1234

  80. @Jack D
    @Twinkie


    There was nothing about the Lost Cause or any such thing associated with the statue. All the markings were rather matter-of-fact
     
    What year was the statue put up? The biggest spike was between 1900 and 1920 (although a few were put up as late as the 1950s - the Georgia state flag did not include the Confederate Battle Flag until 1956) and indeed these were tied to the Lost Cause myth and to the related cause of Jim Crow. Very few were put up immediately after the war unless they were memorials to a particular person. Even if the statue doesn't specifically allude to the Lost Cause, the motivation behind it probably did.

    https://www.history.com/news/how-the-u-s-got-so-many-confederate-monuments

    These statues were not erected as some spontaneous outpouring of grief by the families of the veterans - they were erected for political reasons and they will come down for political reasons. In fact they both send the same message - "Our Side Really Won". Saying that we should not allow politics to interfere with history is nonsense in this case because the statues that are now dying in politics were born in politics.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Whiskey, @Anonymous, @rebel yell

    the Lost Cause myth and to the related cause of Jim Crow.

    It wasn’t just the Lost Cause myth. During the late 19th and early 20th centuries, there was much renewed interest in the Civil War in general and in commemorating it in particular (which had been suppressed or discouraged in the initial decades after the conclusion of the war), as the South recovered economically and psychically from the trauma of not just defeat, but physical devastation.

    But you know whose motive is crystal clear? The erasers of history – they bleated about “our values” as they voted.

    These statues were not erected as some spontaneous outpouring of grief by the families of the veterans

    Straw man.

    It is possibly to fight bravely and honorably but if you are fighting for an unjust cause, your bravery and honor is nevertheless negated.

    Courage is an innate quality that manifests externally via action. It is never negated by that which exists outside the man.

    Very few wars have ever been fought for a “just cause” in the context of the post-World War II moralism (for goodness sakes, the ancients fought wars of conquest to win glory and honor). To follow your reasoning would negate valor and its celebration in 99.99999% of wars in human history. As I wrote before, not everything is a morality play about the Holocaust and the Nazis.

    Americans in the 1800’s took state sovereignty very seriously and the state was often the primary source of sovereign loyalty. Were I a man of my county at the time, I’d have voted against secession and opposed slavery for that matter, but would have answered the call to arms by my state and fought in its defense.

    • Agree: Polistra, Jim Don Bob
    • Replies: @nebulafox
    @Twinkie

    I find it particularly revealing that the people who want to remove the history (and in the rural Deep South, they are largely outsiders) have no realistic, constructive thing to replace the history with. This indicates they aren't so much interested in history as much as power, and perhaps their own complexes in some cases.

    The truth is people have to make sense of their own history, just as they need to make political arrangements that suit their own circumstances. It really is the only way a healthy relationship with that history can develop. Outside imposition, even if successful, rarely develops into something healthy. The fact that the NYT wants BadAmerica, and in particular the South, to be more like contemporary Germany, speaks volumes: never mind that Germany's post-1968 historical relationship is anything but healthy.

    Besides, the CW narrative that dominated American education until the last 50 years served a purpose beyond psychological healing. That was to ensure secession was dead as a dodo and the South could be properly reintegrated after a conflict that left 1 in 4 military age men dead. It succeeded beyond anybody's wildest dreams. The South would view itself as more American than any other part of the nation rather than something potentially different. This was huge, and not something that was inevitable in 1865.

    Of course, the price for this national healing was the tacit willingness to throw the blacks of the South to the wolves for another near century, which I'm obviously not going to defend. But it wasn't done casually on a whim, and in any case, it has been over half a century since America began to address that particular sin. Hell, we talk about it every day in the papers. If the people complaining about the statues were simply interested in justice rather than cleansing, why didn't they complain then?


    "Courage is an innate quality that manifests externally via action. It is never negated by that which exists outside the man."

    G-O-L-D.

    I think the reason WWII stands out in memory is precisely because it is the exception and not the rule in human history. For most of human history, abstract notions of good and bad didn't matter: it was your side and that was that. It's only been relatively recently that this changed.

    The governments of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were so indisputably, totally evil that it could become a straightforward good/bad fight in the public consciousness. Whether that was genuinely because of direct contrast to one's own state, or in the case of the Soviets and Chinese, because it was clear what Axis victory meant for you and your people, however immoral your own government was. It was also fought almost to completion, unlike the preceding world war, or the successor Cold War conflicts.

    Replies: @nebulafox, @Prester John, @Twinkie, @Paperback Writer

  81. @Sick 'n Tired
    It's nice to see that the NYC council has solved its crime issues, shuttered businesses, high taxes, defunding the police, conjested streets, revolving door court system, open air drug use, and rampant homeless problems. That they now have time to focus on removing a statue that was there long before they were installed in office, and should be there long after these clowns are done running the city into the ground.

    Replies: @J1234

    It’s nice to see that the NYC council has solved its…issues…they now have time to focus on removing a statue that was there long before they were installed in office

    But not enough time to remove several 18 oz. street signs that honor Samuel Dickstein, a spy for the Soviet Union while serving in the United States Congress.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @J1234

    Dickstein was more of a Crook (not coincidentally, his NKVD code name) than a spy. For $3,000 (in the 1930s a lot more $ than it is in todays microdollars) he would get anyone a visa. He didn't care whether you were Red, just that your money was green.

    Urban American Jewish politicians in those days resemble urban African American politicians today - almost all are Democrats but some are hard Leftists and some are corrupt Leftists. Dickstein was more in with the corrupt guys than with the True Believers.

    Replies: @J1234

  82. @Alden
    @Polistra

    I wonder who the sperm donors of all those mulattos, quadroons, octoroons and 15/16tharoons black women popped out for centuries were.

    Maybe there was a God like Zeus who impregnated black women with part White babies. Zeus disguised himself. The Jewish Christian sky God did it by magic . Maybe that was how America’s been plagued with mulattos since 9 months after the Black Plague ship arrived in 1619 Virginia. Couldn’t have anything to do with White men.

    Replies: @Whiskey

    Most mixed race people are the result of Black father, White mother. White women (and all women) rate black men the most attractive. Low IQ, impulsive violence, extraversion, etc. That’s a recipe for male sexiness. Meanwhile black women are noted for their masculine attributes and general ugliness. No man with a choice even or especially black men will choose them over others.

    This is just reality.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Whiskey

    Maybe nowadays but in slave times (when most of the admixture occurred) it was almost always a black woman and a white man. For a white woman in America to bear a black child was a matter of great shame as recently as the 1950s.

    Meanwhile, black women never (and to this day) were overly concerned with the paternity of their children because they did not expect the fathers (of any race) to stick around for the child rearing. If anything, white men were more likely to take responsibility. Strom Thurmond paid for his black daughter's education. If her momma had kids from a black father too, I doubt he paid for their college. Jefferson also treated Sally Hemings's children very kindly - they only had to do light work around the house and were given the opportunity to "escape" as soon as they reached adulthood.

    , @Twinkie
    @Whiskey


    Most mixed race people are the result of Black father, White mother.
     
    No. Per the 2010 Census data, there were about 8.4 million people who were of two or more racial ancestry. Of those, only 2 million or so were black-white mixes.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_racial_and_ethnic_demographics_of_the_United_States#Population_by_race_(estimates)%5B23%5D


    White women (and all women) rate black men the most attractive.
     
    No. Black male-white female pairings fare very poorly in income, indicating low socioeconomic status. To the extent there are white women who marry black men, they are very downscale.

    https://i.insider.com/4f3d4337eab8eaef54000042?width=600&format=jpeg

    Replies: @Jack D, @WIlkey, @Nachum

    , @Inselaffen
    @Whiskey

    African-Americans are a mixed race population mostly the result of white fathers, black mothers.
    This was rather well known before DNA testing (Pierre Van Den Berghe wrote about how men tupping under-caste women tended to undermine caste systems everywhere, citing the USA as a prime example), and I believe DNA has confirmed that to be the case.

    It's time youse guyse took that and the consequences more seriously instead of running from it with 'well I guess it might have been a Jefferson, but surely not Thomas!!!' or 'It's only white women sleeping with black men, the problem will go away when we lock them back to the kitchen!!' style cope.

    , @very old statistician
    @Whiskey

    you have been posting insane nonsense for years, i am almost certain you are a Black male homosexual who enjoys saying the things you say, or a white incel who wishes he was a Black male homosexual. You ain't fooling anybody, chump.

  83. @Jack D
    @Twinkie


    There was nothing about the Lost Cause or any such thing associated with the statue. All the markings were rather matter-of-fact
     
    What year was the statue put up? The biggest spike was between 1900 and 1920 (although a few were put up as late as the 1950s - the Georgia state flag did not include the Confederate Battle Flag until 1956) and indeed these were tied to the Lost Cause myth and to the related cause of Jim Crow. Very few were put up immediately after the war unless they were memorials to a particular person. Even if the statue doesn't specifically allude to the Lost Cause, the motivation behind it probably did.

    https://www.history.com/news/how-the-u-s-got-so-many-confederate-monuments

    These statues were not erected as some spontaneous outpouring of grief by the families of the veterans - they were erected for political reasons and they will come down for political reasons. In fact they both send the same message - "Our Side Really Won". Saying that we should not allow politics to interfere with history is nonsense in this case because the statues that are now dying in politics were born in politics.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Whiskey, @Anonymous, @rebel yell

    Wrong. The erasure of ALL White men (including Jews) is because of … Brandon Tartikoff.

    Prior to that Head of NBC Programming, TV and mass culture aimed at well, mass audiences. Being broadly appealing. There had been moves before, the Rural Massacre when CBS canceled high-rated Beverly Hillbillies, Gomer Pyle, Petticoat Junction, and Green Acres because of high ratings but mostly rural viewers. But Tartikoff in the 1980s with Hill Street Blues, Cheers, and Seinfeld (before the latter two became hits) went for favorable demographics: DINKs (dual income, no kids) and wealthy urbanites 18-34 to get more money out of advertisers than say, Happy Days or Laverne and Shirley. Even with a fraction of the audience.

    That’s the recipe for Netflix now — they make their money out of stupid hedge fund investors throwing money at them and selling user data. Advertisers don’t care or want to know about White men, only young White women and blacks. The only two groups that matter.

    As ours is a profoundly commercial culture where individuals find meaning (pathetically) by aligning themselves with corporations that “bear” their values: Apple, Nike, the NFL, etc. this means ultimately that ALL White men need to go in the desire to eliminate everyone but young White women and blacks. That is how commercial culture appealing to ever more fanatical but smaller groups goes.

    And this is a disaster for the nation and the world. The world is underpinned since 1945 by American military dominance. Which in turn requires massive investment and promotion of flyover White men to both maintain a technological advantage and keep ever more complex systems operating. Black people have nothing to offer but home invasions, purple drank, and twerking. The Chinese are not impressed. Young White women can rage on Twitter. The Chinese are not impressed. China launched a glide path hypersonic vehicle that the US cannot match and does not understand how it works. This makes our missile defense basically useless as these vehicles can manuever out of the way and come in from the South Pole.

    Take down Jefferson. OK, then what, put up a statue of George Floyd or OJ? This pretty much makes White men the eternal enemy of blacks and White women, but also vice versa. The happy fat days of American dominance are over and the ability to trash White men comes at a real cost even if you can’t see it out your window. Look at Chicago. Lesbian black mayor Groot is acting out her HATE HATE HATE of White male cops, how well do you think is going work out for the people of Chicago.

    As White men we understand this very well: White women, blacks, liberal Urban Jews, Subcontinentals, and Asians mostly HATE USE and WANT USE DEAD. We understand that quite well as its been shouted through the megaphone since the 1980s. Message received!

  84. @Polistra
    Remember Science? Science says that we have absolute no proof of the Hemings alliance, except that it was likely someone in the family. We hate science, don't we?

    PS. George Washington is next. Who, after that?

    Replies: @Anon, @Jack D, @Getaclue, @Alden, @SunBakedSuburb, @Buzz Mohawk, @carroll price

    “We hate science, don’t we?”

    I hate Science but wuv science.

  85. @Alden
    @Reg Cæsar

    This is the wrong site to advocate having more children . The Men Of UNZ are fathers of 0-2 children mostly 0.
    The Men of UNZ remind me of those 19th and early 20th century childless catholic priests urging married Catholics to have as many children as possible and don’t worry about feeding and housing them because God will provide.

    Practice what you preach father of 2.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Practice what you preach father of 2.

    Three, but the (Ovaryton) window is closing. My point is that here some argue that men want children but women don’t, while others counter that women want children and men don’t. I think both natalists and antinatalists should do us all a favor and seek out those who share their respective views and act accordingly.

    Natalist appeals and incentives are more efficiently directed to those already amenable to embracing children. And, in general, it is irresponsible for irresponsible people to have children and irresponsible for responsible people not to.

    And leave priests out of this.

  86. @J1234
    @Jack D


    You could say the same thing about German soldiers during WWII but you don’t see a lot of statues of Waffen SS troops.
     
    A very false equivalency. There was a general policy following WW2 (at least by about 1949 on) that all vestiges of the Third Reich in Germany be removed. There was no such policy in the South (post Reconstruction, i.e. from the late 1870's on. Reconstruction - having it's origins primarily in Republican party radicalism - lacked the insight and reason to be an effective policy in the long term.)

    With statues of the Confederacy, the issue today is that radicalized people want the statues removed 100+ years after the fact for ideological reasons. Where were these people 15 to 25 years ago? Or at least, where was their political presence? Why didn't Ken Burns promote the removal of Confederate statues back when he had a national audience interested in his civil war documentary in the late 1980's? The answer is because it wasn't morally enhancing for his public image to do so back then. It is now, so he does. (Or maybe it never even occurred to him back then. )

    After 100+ years of existence, historical statues themselves become part of history and an influence upon culture. As with all cultural decisions that take place within the realm of politics, it's of profound importance to not make culture and politics enemies of each other (though many would say we're way beyond that point by now.) If ever a referendum had a useful purpose, this would be it - deciding on the appropriateness of symbolic public cultural imagery is one of the few things that the public at large is qualified to do. That could be the approach in each of the localities where the statues were constructed. Instead, the "democracy loving" left falls back on what it truly believes in: sacralism and government (as the enforcing church of that sacralism.)

    Replies: @Jack D

    If ever a referendum had a useful purpose, this would be it – deciding on the appropriateness of symbolic public cultural imagery is one of the few things that the public at large is qualified to do.

    Absolutely. The RRS Boaty McBoatface heartily agree with you.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/22/world/europe/boaty-mcboatface-what-you-get-when-you-let-the-internet-decide.html

    Seriously, democracy is flawed. How does it make sense that if 51% regard Stalin regard him as a murderous madman and 49% like him a lot, the statue should go but if public opinion shifts 2% then he should come back. What if it shifts back again 2% in the other direction? Do we bring the Stalin statues in and out according to an annual referendum?

    After 70 years, were the statues of Lenin in E. Europe “part of history”? Sure they were, but when the regime changed, they were torn down or taken to outlying parks where they served as object of kitsch and not as public monuments to a man who lead an unjust regime:

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Jack D


    After 70 years, were the statues of Lenin in E. Europe “part of history”?
     
    So Confederate statues in the South erected by Southerners themselves are just like Saddam Hussein statues (erected by Saddam’s government), so should be demolished once different people are in power?

    Replies: @Moses

    , @J1234
    @Jack D

    Your analogies are consistently bad. The Soviet Union was a tyrannical polity that subjugated its populace in a manner that was rarely paralleled by other countries during the last 150 years. In the same spirit, its statuary was forced upon its people. Confederate statues, by contrast, were constructed long after the South lost the war and ceased to be considered a nation. The statues were an expression of history and culture, supported and financed largely by descendants of Confederate soldiers. They had fairly broad support, but I suppose there were many Southerners who didn't like them yet acquiesced, just like I don't care for many publicly financed spaces and buildings of today...but I'm not going to riot to have them removed.

    Yes, I know we live in a world where we don't vote every year to change the names of streets or schools or bridges, so why would I be suggesting we vote every year on statues? However, if some people do want long standing statues removed, wouldn't a referendum be preferable to a riot in determining what the people want?

    This isn't about removing statues, its about the way they're being removed. If Southerners want to remove all of their Confederate statues, good for them. I don't live in the South, and I have no say in the matter. The left, however, believes its perspective has the final say in every matter. This is all about them establishing a psychological precedent with their moral tyranny so you won't say or do much when the finally come to your town and tell you how things are going to be with your local monuments.

  87. @Whiskey
    @Alden

    Most mixed race people are the result of Black father, White mother. White women (and all women) rate black men the most attractive. Low IQ, impulsive violence, extraversion, etc. That's a recipe for male sexiness. Meanwhile black women are noted for their masculine attributes and general ugliness. No man with a choice even or especially black men will choose them over others.

    This is just reality.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Twinkie, @Inselaffen, @very old statistician

    Maybe nowadays but in slave times (when most of the admixture occurred) it was almost always a black woman and a white man. For a white woman in America to bear a black child was a matter of great shame as recently as the 1950s.

    Meanwhile, black women never (and to this day) were overly concerned with the paternity of their children because they did not expect the fathers (of any race) to stick around for the child rearing. If anything, white men were more likely to take responsibility. Strom Thurmond paid for his black daughter’s education. If her momma had kids from a black father too, I doubt he paid for their college. Jefferson also treated Sally Hemings’s children very kindly – they only had to do light work around the house and were given the opportunity to “escape” as soon as they reached adulthood.

  88. @Alden
    @anonymous

    Sally was 7/8 White and a wedding present from Sally’s father. Who was also the father of jefferson’s Wife. An old southern tradition. Breeding Whiter and Whiter human livestock.

    Black from Africa births a brown mulatto. Brown mulatto births a Carmel quadroon.
    Carmel quadroom births a butterscotch or cream colored octoroon.

    50 years ago labradors were mostly black and dark brown a few dark caramel. Breeders noticed more and more buyers preferred the dark caramel dogs. So started breeding golden tan labs. Then buyers preferred lighter tan labs. Now there’s blond and cream almost white labs.

    Pomeranians used to be solid white a very few solid black. Breeders decided those colors aren’t interesting, so now Pomeranians come in many shades of gold brown gray something the breeders call gray blue and gray lavender and most are not solid colored. The breeders are turning out patchy Pomeranians. 3 or 4 colors in blobs and patches on those tiny 5 inch tall 4 pound bodies. There are even brindle Pomeranians the ugliest color and pattern ever.

    It’s called breeding. Just as Labrador breeders could get more money for a caramel or golden Labrador so the human livestock breeders could get more money for a caramel or golden than a black or dark brown human. And have fun doing the breeding themselves.

    Replies: @SunBakedSuburb

    “It’s called breeding.”

    You seem to have an unwholesome interest in dog breeding. Today’s young white women have emotionally unhealthy relationships with their child surrogate dogs. Too bad your pecker doesn’t work because you could score big time.

  89. @J1234
    @Sick 'n Tired


    It’s nice to see that the NYC council has solved its...issues...they now have time to focus on removing a statue that was there long before they were installed in office
     
    But not enough time to remove several 18 oz. street signs that honor Samuel Dickstein, a spy for the Soviet Union while serving in the United States Congress.

    Replies: @Jack D

    Dickstein was more of a Crook (not coincidentally, his NKVD code name) than a spy. For \$3,000 (in the 1930s a lot more \$ than it is in todays microdollars) he would get anyone a visa. He didn’t care whether you were Red, just that your money was green.

    Urban American Jewish politicians in those days resemble urban African American politicians today – almost all are Democrats but some are hard Leftists and some are corrupt Leftists. Dickstein was more in with the corrupt guys than with the True Believers.

    • Replies: @J1234
    @Jack D

    A crook that took money from the USSR for information from and about the US Congress would meet most people's definition of "spy."

  90. @Jack D
    @Twinkie

    You could say the same thing about German soldiers during WWII but you don't see a lot of statues of Waffen SS troops.

    I think it was a mistake to honor the Confederate cause. It is possibly to fight bravely and honorably but if you are fighting for an unjust cause, your bravery and honor is nevertheless negated. I understand why the defeated people of the South erected these statues in order to regain their dignity and why the North allowed it to be done in the interest of national reconciliation, but it was a mistake. The Lost Cause was not a noble cause. They fought for the right of humans to own other humans as property. You can varnish it to be about "States Rights" or whatever, but at bottom that is why they seceded. Such a cause does not deserve to be honored. America would have been a better country if the people of the South had, of their own initiative and not having it forced down their throats, come to understand that they had been mislead by their rulers and that many innocents gave their lives for an ignoble cause.

    That being said, the glorification of the Lost Cause, like the Civil War itself, is now a matter of history and should not be erased. (It should be understood that the cult of the Lost Cause was a separate chapter in American history and most of those statues stem from that chapter and not from the war itself). But perhaps as is seen in certain places in E. Europe where they have gathered up all of the statues of Lenin and put them together in one park where they can all point toward each other rather than toward the Future, these statutes should be put into their context and not allowed to be honored in a way that they do not deserve.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Reg Cæsar, @J1234, @SunBakedSuburb, @Neil Templeton

    “you don’t see a lot of statues of Waffen SS troops”

    There should be a statue of Waffen SS LT Colonel Otto Skorzeny erected in Madrid for his work in making that city a hub of post war intrigue.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @SunBakedSuburb


    Otto Skorzeny
     
    Skorzeny was also a Mossad agent.
  91. @res
    @Paperback Writer

    That is an excellent point. How have I missed seeing it before?!

    Much discussion of Hemings DNA at https://www.unz.com/isteve/global-ancestry-and-cognitive-ability/#comment-3436598

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    You mean the point Coulter made?

    • Agree: res
  92. @Jack D
    @Paperback Writer


    I may be president of the United States, but I should prove Callender’s slander true by fathering a child with my slave! No one will notice.
     
    I may be president of the United States and there have been a lot of rumors about me being a philanderer, but I should prove their slander true by getting blow jobs in the Oval Office! No one will notice.

    Stranger things have happened. It would not be the first time that a man let some other organ control his brain.

    I simply don't buy the "Jefferson would never have done that" type arguments. Humans, even the greatest humans, are capably of ANYTHING behind the closed doors of the boudoir and just because you know the public man doesn't mean that you know the man in full.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    You’re not dealing with the facts, Jack.

    First you bring up Strom Thurmond, as if this proves Jefferson did the same thing. It proves nothing, it’s just guilt by association.

    Now Clinton, a known philanderer. Not a rumored philanderer. Pretty much an admitted one. No one was shocked or surprised by any of the accusations against Clinton – they just defended him procedurally. And Clinton flipping the bird at the world was in total character.

    Please deal with the facts. I’d love to see you take on the facts that Coulter brought up.

    “Humans, even the greatest humans, are capably of ANYTHING behind the closed doors”

    That’s such a blanket, general statement it’s meaningless. Applying it to real people, I don’t believe that Ike beat Mamie, that Harry, Bess, and J. Edgar Hoover had threesomes, or that Lincoln was gay. (I do believe his predecessor was.)

    The Jefferson descendants shot themselves in the foot by denying that any Jefferson could possibly ever have fathered any of Sally’s offspring. So now they’re paying, but that doesn’t excuse us from looking at ALL of the facts.

    Jefferson had an affair with Maria Cosway, a sophisticated European, after Polly died. She, not little Sally, was his France affair. He was constantly watched in France, and if he’d been screwing his 14 year old slave girl, the French would have gossiped about it. He yearned for Maria his whole life. I find it weird to think that a man who fell head over heels for Maria Cosway would have fallen for an illiterate slave woman – after age 60.

    You’re in some great company, Jack.

    https://web.archive.org/web/20190215162728/https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/02/15/thomas-jefferson-is-r-kelly-american-enlightenment/?utm_term=.bc700b462909

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Paperback Writer


    I find it weird to think that a man who fell head over heels for Maria Cosway would have fallen for an illiterate slave woman
     
    Yes, because we know that men are like penguins - they mate for life. No man has ever been known to shtup more than one female.

    The part of your brain that resides inside your pants really doesn't care about literacy.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

  93. @fish
    @Jack D

    Lots of ways to "lynch" a man Jack.

    Replies: @JimDandy

    Well, I mean, they just straight up lynch-lynched a lot of Kulaks.

  94. @Reg Cæsar
    @El Dato


    Give it up Reg. Metric is superior
     
    Then why isn't it used by computers? A gigabyte is 1,073,741,824 bytes, or 8,589,934,592 bits. A terabyte consists of 8,796,093,022,208 bits. Pretty messy, eh?

    A petabyte is 9,007,199,254,740,992 bits. That's almost a power of 10!

    Congress instituted the metric system in 1866. (Reconstruction!) It's still not in use because of the V-word.

    Kasson Act


    Enjoy your kilogram cake of tapioca flour, soy milk, margarine, and aspartame. That is, if you can read the recipe in Esperanto. We'll stick with the Axis of English.



    https://youtu.be/qbdx2nOQKKo

    https://youtu.be/s95cxZkC_es

    Replies: @nokangaroos, @Kratoklastes, @Veteran Aryan

    I´m sure some satisfaction is to be gleaned from leading the
    Coalition of the Unwilling/Axis of Benightenment …
    but you will keep losing aircraft if you cannot even force your gallons
    upon the Canadians 😛

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @nokangaroos


    but you will keep losing aircraft if you cannot even force your gallons
    upon the Canadians
     
    The Canadians have their own gallon, bigger than ours. They haven't been able to force the litre on their own people. (Which McCullough pointed out in the video linked to.)


    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6a/GasCan.jpg/440px-GasCan.jpg
  95. @Jonathan Mason
    @anonymous

    Yes, it was weird, but those were the weird laws of the time.

    But out at Monticello after sunset the Jefferson family was relatively free from outside interference.

    These kind of relationships and family structures must have been common at the time.

    Remember that Sally Hemings was the half sister of Jefferson's wife and that she voluntarily returned from Paris to the United States with Tommy boy, when she could have walked away from slavery and stayed in France.

    Replies: @NOTA, @Paperback Writer, @Buzz Mohawk

    She was 14 at the time – what would she have done in France? Her older brother, a barber or a butler, could have done that, though. I forget his name.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    @Paperback Writer

    Who knows? She may have been a very attractive, intelligent and vivacious young woman. She might have traveled to England, she might have become a political activist, she might have married, she might have become an actress or entertainer or courtesan. How can we possibly know?

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    , @Ed
    @Paperback Writer

    A 14 yo girl in those days would have been capable of maintaining a household, might even have been married. She could have survived in Paris. Probably could have landed a decent housekeeping job based on the Jefferson connection alone. Her older brother returned too which is even more bewildering because he was a talented cook that could have commanded a middle class salary as a cook in a wealthy home.

    Replies: @Ralph L

    , @carroll price
    @Paperback Writer


    She was 14 at the time – what would she have done in France?
     
    In France she would have been in high demand, and made a fortune as a prostitute or concubine.
  96. @Reg Cæsar
    @El Dato


    Give it up Reg. Metric is superior
     
    Then why isn't it used by computers? A gigabyte is 1,073,741,824 bytes, or 8,589,934,592 bits. A terabyte consists of 8,796,093,022,208 bits. Pretty messy, eh?

    A petabyte is 9,007,199,254,740,992 bits. That's almost a power of 10!

    Congress instituted the metric system in 1866. (Reconstruction!) It's still not in use because of the V-word.

    Kasson Act


    Enjoy your kilogram cake of tapioca flour, soy milk, margarine, and aspartame. That is, if you can read the recipe in Esperanto. We'll stick with the Axis of English.



    https://youtu.be/qbdx2nOQKKo

    https://youtu.be/s95cxZkC_es

    Replies: @nokangaroos, @Kratoklastes, @Veteran Aryan

    A gigabyte is 1,073,741,824 bytes, or 8,589,934,592 bits. A terabyte consists of 8,796,093,022,208 bits. Pretty messy, eh?

    Not if you’re a customer of a hard drive manufacturer. 1MB = 1000KB; 1GB = 1000MB; 1 TB = 1000GB.

    So as far as Western Digital is concerned: 1GB is 1,000,000,000 bytes – those who think this is a 7.37% ripoff can go pound sand.

    It’s of a piece with ‘up to 50% off*’ and ‘free*’, and ‘studies say‘ and ‘linked to‘, and download speeds listed in Mbps.

    Everything has an embedded asterisk nowadays. It’s the range of little Jew-y ‘nickel & dime’ things that everyone knows about.

    There is now a profound and obvious requirement for behavioural correctives – which at this stage should be primarily machete-based if they are to achieve anything: the effects really need to be salutary so as to generate a little more circumspection in the types of shitbags who have hitherto gotten away with it.

    Frankly, it strikes me that it would be an almost-unalloyed mitzvah if the violent impulsivity of US urban blacks could be harnessed and unleashed on the C-suites of the US corporate and government sector.

    If wishes were horses…

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Kratoklastes


    It’s of a piece with ‘up to 50% off*’ and ‘free*’, and ‘studies say‘ and ‘linked to‘, and download speeds listed in Mbps.
     
    You left out $n.99.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_pricing
    , @Reg Cæsar
    @Kratoklastes

    Aren't you in Oz? An ironic nickname for the most metricated country in the Anglosphere. But it's on your coin:



    https://www.usgoldbureau.com/media/catalog/product/cache/a03c5165b5816c96029803e8ba949d56/p/r/prod-21_100goldkang-2021-1oz-gold-kangaroo-coin-reverse-650x650.jpg

  97. @Jack D
    @J1234


    If ever a referendum had a useful purpose, this would be it – deciding on the appropriateness of symbolic public cultural imagery is one of the few things that the public at large is qualified to do.
     
    Absolutely. The RRS Boaty McBoatface heartily agree with you.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/22/world/europe/boaty-mcboatface-what-you-get-when-you-let-the-internet-decide.html

    Seriously, democracy is flawed. How does it make sense that if 51% regard Stalin regard him as a murderous madman and 49% like him a lot, the statue should go but if public opinion shifts 2% then he should come back. What if it shifts back again 2% in the other direction? Do we bring the Stalin statues in and out according to an annual referendum?

    After 70 years, were the statues of Lenin in E. Europe "part of history"? Sure they were, but when the regime changed, they were torn down or taken to outlying parks where they served as object of kitsch and not as public monuments to a man who lead an unjust regime:

    https://www.changesinlongitude.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Budapest-Memento-Park-Random-Lenin-statue.jpg

    Replies: @Twinkie, @J1234

    After 70 years, were the statues of Lenin in E. Europe “part of history”?

    So Confederate statues in the South erected by Southerners themselves are just like Saddam Hussein statues (erected by Saddam’s government), so should be demolished once different people are in power?

    • Replies: @Moses
    @Twinkie

    Yes, because muh holocaust! Muh persecution!

  98. @Jack D
    @Polistra


    Science says that we have absolute no proof of the Hemings alliance, except that it was likely someone in the family.
     
    TBH, this is very weak sauce. The old line was that there was absolutely no proof, now the new line is that there is absolutely no proof except for the DNA. Maybe it was some other Jefferson and not old Tom himself, but waving the banner of science in this case is not a good idea - the science may not be 100% dispositive but the scientific evidence sure don't help your case. If this was a courtroom, this is not evidence that you would want to introduce for the defense.

    If I were you, I would change the subject. People's personal lives are complicated. Strom Thurmond had a black(ish) daughter. Believing that some of the Hemings children might have been fathered by Thomas does not cause me to think less of the man and his incredible accomplishments. It does not negate them in any way.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @Polistra

    Strom Thurmond had a black(ish) daughter.

    LOL! A lawyer, you are not. So?

    Also no judge of science, apparently.

    If I were you, I would change the subject.

    LOL! Who, me or Steve?

    “We are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor to tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it.”

    Dang, can’t remember just who said that.

  99. Keep it up orcs the more of this nonsense democrap drones push on the masses the more normies are red pilled & galvanized. The backlash that finally blows up should be epic. Think multiple Stephen Paddocks & Tim McVeighs

  100. @Whiskey
    @Alden

    Most mixed race people are the result of Black father, White mother. White women (and all women) rate black men the most attractive. Low IQ, impulsive violence, extraversion, etc. That's a recipe for male sexiness. Meanwhile black women are noted for their masculine attributes and general ugliness. No man with a choice even or especially black men will choose them over others.

    This is just reality.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Twinkie, @Inselaffen, @very old statistician

    Most mixed race people are the result of Black father, White mother.

    No. Per the 2010 Census data, there were about 8.4 million people who were of two or more racial ancestry. Of those, only 2 million or so were black-white mixes.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_racial_and_ethnic_demographics_of_the_United_States#Population_by_race_(estimates)%5B23%5D

    White women (and all women) rate black men the most attractive.

    No. Black male-white female pairings fare very poorly in income, indicating low socioeconomic status. To the extent there are white women who marry black men, they are very downscale.

    https://i.insider.com/4f3d4337eab8eaef54000042?width=600&format=jpeg

    • Thanks: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Twinkie

    Stop interfering with Whiskey's fantasy. Whiskey believes that white women find all black men to be irresistible and that this explains all of modern society and politics.

    , @WIlkey
    @Twinkie


    No. Black male-white female pairings fare very poorly in income, indicating low socioeconomic status. To the extent there are white women who marry black men, they are very downscale.
     
    As I recall, the gap between white female/black male relationships and white male/black female relationships is pretty stark. The former having some of the highest divorce rates while the latter have lower divorce rates and incomes closer to the national average.

    In addition, children seem to identify with the ethnicity or race of their father more often than with that of their mother, so a white male/black female couple has a better chance of producing children who will try to make their way in white society instead of trying to hang with the homies.
    , @Nachum
    @Twinkie

    I'm not going to argue with the numbers, but it seems to me that every time there's a half-white celebrity, it's the mother who's white. (And the father was usually absent.) But that anecdotal, I know.

  101. @Paperback Writer
    @Jack D

    You're not dealing with the facts, Jack.

    First you bring up Strom Thurmond, as if this proves Jefferson did the same thing. It proves nothing, it's just guilt by association.

    Now Clinton, a known philanderer. Not a rumored philanderer. Pretty much an admitted one. No one was shocked or surprised by any of the accusations against Clinton - they just defended him procedurally. And Clinton flipping the bird at the world was in total character.

    Please deal with the facts. I'd love to see you take on the facts that Coulter brought up.


    "Humans, even the greatest humans, are capably of ANYTHING behind the closed doors"

     

    That's such a blanket, general statement it's meaningless. Applying it to real people, I don't believe that Ike beat Mamie, that Harry, Bess, and J. Edgar Hoover had threesomes, or that Lincoln was gay. (I do believe his predecessor was.)

    The Jefferson descendants shot themselves in the foot by denying that any Jefferson could possibly ever have fathered any of Sally's offspring. So now they're paying, but that doesn't excuse us from looking at ALL of the facts.

    Jefferson had an affair with Maria Cosway, a sophisticated European, after Polly died. She, not little Sally, was his France affair. He was constantly watched in France, and if he'd been screwing his 14 year old slave girl, the French would have gossiped about it. He yearned for Maria his whole life. I find it weird to think that a man who fell head over heels for Maria Cosway would have fallen for an illiterate slave woman - after age 60.

    You're in some great company, Jack.

    https://web.archive.org/web/20190215162728/https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/02/15/thomas-jefferson-is-r-kelly-american-enlightenment/?utm_term=.bc700b462909

    Replies: @Jack D

    I find it weird to think that a man who fell head over heels for Maria Cosway would have fallen for an illiterate slave woman

    Yes, because we know that men are like penguins – they mate for life. No man has ever been known to shtup more than one female.

    The part of your brain that resides inside your pants really doesn’t care about literacy.

    • LOL: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @Jack D

    Right, Jack.

    You know that wasn't what I was saying, but when you reach the Usenet newsgroup point of the exchange, it's over.

  102. @Twinkie
    @Whiskey


    Most mixed race people are the result of Black father, White mother.
     
    No. Per the 2010 Census data, there were about 8.4 million people who were of two or more racial ancestry. Of those, only 2 million or so were black-white mixes.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_racial_and_ethnic_demographics_of_the_United_States#Population_by_race_(estimates)%5B23%5D


    White women (and all women) rate black men the most attractive.
     
    No. Black male-white female pairings fare very poorly in income, indicating low socioeconomic status. To the extent there are white women who marry black men, they are very downscale.

    https://i.insider.com/4f3d4337eab8eaef54000042?width=600&format=jpeg

    Replies: @Jack D, @WIlkey, @Nachum

    Stop interfering with Whiskey’s fantasy. Whiskey believes that white women find all black men to be irresistible and that this explains all of modern society and politics.

  103. @Jack D
    @Paperback Writer


    I find it weird to think that a man who fell head over heels for Maria Cosway would have fallen for an illiterate slave woman
     
    Yes, because we know that men are like penguins - they mate for life. No man has ever been known to shtup more than one female.

    The part of your brain that resides inside your pants really doesn't care about literacy.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    Right, Jack.

    You know that wasn’t what I was saying, but when you reach the Usenet newsgroup point of the exchange, it’s over.

  104. @Almost Missouri
    @Rob


    I wonder if we bred the Descendents of Jefferson with each other, we could reconstruct TJ’s genome.
     
    Closest we could get is Randolph Jefferson's genome.

    https://nicholasstixuncensored.blogspot.com/2009/04/giving-thomas-jefferson-business-sally.html

    https://vdare.com/articles/abolishing-america-contd-the-jefferson-antimyth-debunked

    https://vdare.com/articles/ann-coulter-jefferson-hemings-myth-was-thomas-jefferson-on-the-duke-lacrosse-team

    https://www.amren.com/news/2009/06/rescuing_jeffer/

    If you only have time to read one debunking, read Ann Coulter's. Hers is, characteristically, the most concise and entertaining. The Nicholas Stix one, though, really exposes the outright fraud and the fraudsters who perpetrate it.

    Replies: @AnotherDad

    One of the unspoken things that excite black women about Jefferson is that he couldn’t resist Sally Hemmings. Sure, they complain about him endlessly and how it was so awful of him, but they love Jefferson’s validation of Black Girl Magic that America’s most eligible widower never married again because he was satisfied with Sally.

    Jefferson probably touched her hair.

    Almost–i saw this and thought “uh oh” Nick Stix alert!

    Fortunately you’ve got it covered. I think the balance of evidence points and Randy Randolph.

    (But i confess, i don’t find it the least bit embarassing if widower Jefferson and his wife’s half-sister did enjoy each other’s company.)

  105. @Lloyd1927
    Sally Hemings and her children would have been white slaves - not black ones.

    https://multiracial.com/index.php/2001/10/01/white-slaves/

    Replies: @Jack D, @Paperback Writer, @carroll price

    Doesn’t matter.

    Someone here expressed surprise that the near-white Hemings family was enslaved – slavery came from the mother’s status.

    Look up Partis sequitur ventrum.

    Mark Twain wrote a funny/sad book about this, Pudd’nhead Wilson, which was about a slave woman, Roxy, who was 15/16ths white. She switches her son w/the master’s son in the cradle (they’re born on the same day). The ruse is discovered when the boys are grown & the “master’s” son is promptly sold down the river.

    Newton Knight had descendants who were virtually white & had problems establishing their status. There were others.

    As a quadroon, Sally was as black looking as Ruby Tandoh, who sometimes looks a bit blackish and sometimes doesn’t.

    • Replies: @carroll price
    @Paperback Writer

    Most people never suspected that 1950s singer Dinah Shore was an octoroon until she bore a child with unmistakable Negroid features (called a throwback) by a white husband

    Replies: @very old statistician

  106. @SunBakedSuburb
    @Jack D

    "you don't see a lot of statues of Waffen SS troops"

    There should be a statue of Waffen SS LT Colonel Otto Skorzeny erected in Madrid for his work in making that city a hub of post war intrigue.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    Otto Skorzeny

    Skorzeny was also a Mossad agent.

  107. @Jack D
    @anonymous

    To outsiders it was strange*, but for people who lived in this culture, black and white, it was just their reality. To people who are born into a culture, the order of things, however strange they may appear from the outside, appears normal and natural and all that they know.

    *In Jefferson's time in Virginia, it was customary in a wealthy home to have a servant (slave) stand behind each diner at the dinner table and wait on him or her (this is why it is called waiting - most of the time you are just standing there). Many of the house servants at Monticello were members of the Hemings family, who were never assigned to field work. One guest from outside noticed that the guy standing behind Jefferson looked like a slightly darker spitting image of the ex-President and found the whole scene to be very strange, especially since it would have been extremely rude to actually mention this - it was like an elephant in the room that you had to pretend wasn't there.

    Replies: @AnotherDad

    To people who are born into a culture, the order of things, however strange they may appear from the outside, appears normal and natural and all that they know.

    Excellent one sentence statement of the issue–and of the nature of “culture” in general.

  108. I’m fairly certain we’ve crossed the Rubicon. If I dared to wear a t-shirt to work with nothing more than a picture of Thomas Jefferson on it, my HR department would probably nuke me from orbit.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @anon215

    Make sure never to pay for anything with nickels. Two dollar bills are also out but you never see them anyway.

  109. @Reg Cæsar

    Adrienne Adams, a councilwoman from Queens
     
    Queens!

    New York!!


    Nothing encapsulates de Blasio/Cuomo-era NYC like this statue, though:

    https://a57.foxnews.com/static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2021/10/918/516/Harambe-statue-1.jpg?ve=1&tl=1

    Replies: @Shel100

    Is that a statue of George Floyd?

  110. @Whiskey
    @Alden

    Most mixed race people are the result of Black father, White mother. White women (and all women) rate black men the most attractive. Low IQ, impulsive violence, extraversion, etc. That's a recipe for male sexiness. Meanwhile black women are noted for their masculine attributes and general ugliness. No man with a choice even or especially black men will choose them over others.

    This is just reality.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Twinkie, @Inselaffen, @very old statistician

    African-Americans are a mixed race population mostly the result of white fathers, black mothers.
    This was rather well known before DNA testing (Pierre Van Den Berghe wrote about how men tupping under-caste women tended to undermine caste systems everywhere, citing the USA as a prime example), and I believe DNA has confirmed that to be the case.

    It’s time youse guyse took that and the consequences more seriously instead of running from it with ‘well I guess it might have been a Jefferson, but surely not Thomas!!!’ or ‘It’s only white women sleeping with black men, the problem will go away when we lock them back to the kitchen!!’ style cope.

  111. @Kratoklastes
    @Reg Cæsar


    A gigabyte is 1,073,741,824 bytes, or 8,589,934,592 bits. A terabyte consists of 8,796,093,022,208 bits. Pretty messy, eh?
     
    Not if you're a customer of a hard drive manufacturer. 1MB = 1000KB; 1GB = 1000MB; 1 TB = 1000GB.

    So as far as Western Digital is concerned: 1GB is 1,000,000,000 bytes - those who think this is a 7.37% ripoff can go pound sand.

    It's of a piece with 'up to 50% off*' and 'free*', and 'studies say' and 'linked to', and download speeds listed in Mbps.

    Everything has an embedded asterisk nowadays. It's the range of little Jew-y 'nickel & dime' things that everyone knows about.

    There is now a profound and obvious requirement for behavioural correctives - which at this stage should be primarily machete-based if they are to achieve anything: the effects really need to be salutary so as to generate a little more circumspection in the types of shitbags who have hitherto gotten away with it.

    Frankly, it strikes me that it would be an almost-unalloyed mitzvah if the violent impulsivity of US urban blacks could be harnessed and unleashed on the C-suites of the US corporate and government sector.

    If wishes were horses...

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Reg Cæsar

    It’s of a piece with ‘up to 50% off*’ and ‘free*’, and ‘studies say‘ and ‘linked to‘, and download speeds listed in Mbps.

    You left out \$n.99.

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

  112. @Kratoklastes
    @Reg Cæsar


    A gigabyte is 1,073,741,824 bytes, or 8,589,934,592 bits. A terabyte consists of 8,796,093,022,208 bits. Pretty messy, eh?
     
    Not if you're a customer of a hard drive manufacturer. 1MB = 1000KB; 1GB = 1000MB; 1 TB = 1000GB.

    So as far as Western Digital is concerned: 1GB is 1,000,000,000 bytes - those who think this is a 7.37% ripoff can go pound sand.

    It's of a piece with 'up to 50% off*' and 'free*', and 'studies say' and 'linked to', and download speeds listed in Mbps.

    Everything has an embedded asterisk nowadays. It's the range of little Jew-y 'nickel & dime' things that everyone knows about.

    There is now a profound and obvious requirement for behavioural correctives - which at this stage should be primarily machete-based if they are to achieve anything: the effects really need to be salutary so as to generate a little more circumspection in the types of shitbags who have hitherto gotten away with it.

    Frankly, it strikes me that it would be an almost-unalloyed mitzvah if the violent impulsivity of US urban blacks could be harnessed and unleashed on the C-suites of the US corporate and government sector.

    If wishes were horses...

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Reg Cæsar

    Aren’t you in Oz? An ironic nickname for the most metricated country in the Anglosphere. But it’s on your coin:

  113. @nokangaroos
    @Reg Cæsar

    I´m sure some satisfaction is to be gleaned from leading the
    Coalition of the Unwilling/Axis of Benightenment ...
    but you will keep losing aircraft if you cannot even force your gallons
    upon the Canadians :P

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    but you will keep losing aircraft if you cannot even force your gallons
    upon the Canadians

    The Canadians have their own gallon, bigger than ours. They haven’t been able to force the litre on their own people. (Which McCullough pointed out in the video linked to.)

  114. @Twinkie
    @Whiskey


    Most mixed race people are the result of Black father, White mother.
     
    No. Per the 2010 Census data, there were about 8.4 million people who were of two or more racial ancestry. Of those, only 2 million or so were black-white mixes.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_racial_and_ethnic_demographics_of_the_United_States#Population_by_race_(estimates)%5B23%5D


    White women (and all women) rate black men the most attractive.
     
    No. Black male-white female pairings fare very poorly in income, indicating low socioeconomic status. To the extent there are white women who marry black men, they are very downscale.

    https://i.insider.com/4f3d4337eab8eaef54000042?width=600&format=jpeg

    Replies: @Jack D, @WIlkey, @Nachum

    No. Black male-white female pairings fare very poorly in income, indicating low socioeconomic status. To the extent there are white women who marry black men, they are very downscale.

    As I recall, the gap between white female/black male relationships and white male/black female relationships is pretty stark. The former having some of the highest divorce rates while the latter have lower divorce rates and incomes closer to the national average.

    In addition, children seem to identify with the ethnicity or race of their father more often than with that of their mother, so a white male/black female couple has a better chance of producing children who will try to make their way in white society instead of trying to hang with the homies.

  115. @Twinkie
    @Jack D


    After 70 years, were the statues of Lenin in E. Europe “part of history”?
     
    So Confederate statues in the South erected by Southerners themselves are just like Saddam Hussein statues (erected by Saddam’s government), so should be demolished once different people are in power?

    Replies: @Moses

    Yes, because muh holocaust! Muh persecution!

  116. @Jack D
    @Twinkie


    There was nothing about the Lost Cause or any such thing associated with the statue. All the markings were rather matter-of-fact
     
    What year was the statue put up? The biggest spike was between 1900 and 1920 (although a few were put up as late as the 1950s - the Georgia state flag did not include the Confederate Battle Flag until 1956) and indeed these were tied to the Lost Cause myth and to the related cause of Jim Crow. Very few were put up immediately after the war unless they were memorials to a particular person. Even if the statue doesn't specifically allude to the Lost Cause, the motivation behind it probably did.

    https://www.history.com/news/how-the-u-s-got-so-many-confederate-monuments

    These statues were not erected as some spontaneous outpouring of grief by the families of the veterans - they were erected for political reasons and they will come down for political reasons. In fact they both send the same message - "Our Side Really Won". Saying that we should not allow politics to interfere with history is nonsense in this case because the statues that are now dying in politics were born in politics.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Whiskey, @Anonymous, @rebel yell

    In the early 1900s the veterans of the war were dying so it makes sense they were erecting monuments at that time. You don’t need monuments when granddad is around to tell his stories.

  117. There is no evidence that Thomas Jefferson fathered any of Sally Hemings’s children and absolute proof that he did not father all but one. The one in doubt was fathered by a Thomas Jefferson relative but probably not Thomas Jefferson.

  118. @Jack D
    @Twinkie


    There was nothing about the Lost Cause or any such thing associated with the statue. All the markings were rather matter-of-fact
     
    What year was the statue put up? The biggest spike was between 1900 and 1920 (although a few were put up as late as the 1950s - the Georgia state flag did not include the Confederate Battle Flag until 1956) and indeed these were tied to the Lost Cause myth and to the related cause of Jim Crow. Very few were put up immediately after the war unless they were memorials to a particular person. Even if the statue doesn't specifically allude to the Lost Cause, the motivation behind it probably did.

    https://www.history.com/news/how-the-u-s-got-so-many-confederate-monuments

    These statues were not erected as some spontaneous outpouring of grief by the families of the veterans - they were erected for political reasons and they will come down for political reasons. In fact they both send the same message - "Our Side Really Won". Saying that we should not allow politics to interfere with history is nonsense in this case because the statues that are now dying in politics were born in politics.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Whiskey, @Anonymous, @rebel yell

    These statues were not erected as some spontaneous outpouring of grief by the families of the veterans – they were erected for political reasons and they will come down for political reasons.

    You can say the same thing about holocaust memorials. When were they built – 20 years, 50 years after the war? Times up! It’s political, not spontaneous.
    And god knows the holocaust has been politicized.
    As for lost cause, slavery, states rights and the rest – you go your way and we’ll go ours. Mexicans can admire Montezuma the cannibal, jews can admire Joshua the slaughterer of multitudes, yankees can admire John Brown be-header of teen boys, and southerners can admire Jackson and Lee.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @rebel yell


    You can say the same thing about holocaust memorials. When were they built – 20 years, 50 years after the war? Times up! It’s political, not spontaneous.
     
    I can completely see this happening. Do you think President Ilhan Omar (I know she's not eligible but they can change the Constitution) would keep the Holocaust Museum in Washington for a minute.

    The lesson is that you should cling to power at all costs. Once you lose it, not only are your museums and statues at stake, your neck is at stake.

    So Trump predicted that if they went after the Confederates the Founding Fathers would be next. Hew was right about that (and the NY Times was wrong). And after the Founding Fathers, who is next after that?

    Replies: @Anon, @Buzz Mohawk

  119. Sally Hemings will replace him as the Founding Mother (parent with lactating ability) of the United States.

  120. Ann Coulter documents pretty well that Jefferson’s brother Randall, not Thomas, probably fathered Sally’s children

  121. @Jack D
    @J1234


    If ever a referendum had a useful purpose, this would be it – deciding on the appropriateness of symbolic public cultural imagery is one of the few things that the public at large is qualified to do.
     
    Absolutely. The RRS Boaty McBoatface heartily agree with you.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/22/world/europe/boaty-mcboatface-what-you-get-when-you-let-the-internet-decide.html

    Seriously, democracy is flawed. How does it make sense that if 51% regard Stalin regard him as a murderous madman and 49% like him a lot, the statue should go but if public opinion shifts 2% then he should come back. What if it shifts back again 2% in the other direction? Do we bring the Stalin statues in and out according to an annual referendum?

    After 70 years, were the statues of Lenin in E. Europe "part of history"? Sure they were, but when the regime changed, they were torn down or taken to outlying parks where they served as object of kitsch and not as public monuments to a man who lead an unjust regime:

    https://www.changesinlongitude.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Budapest-Memento-Park-Random-Lenin-statue.jpg

    Replies: @Twinkie, @J1234

    Your analogies are consistently bad. The Soviet Union was a tyrannical polity that subjugated its populace in a manner that was rarely paralleled by other countries during the last 150 years. In the same spirit, its statuary was forced upon its people. Confederate statues, by contrast, were constructed long after the South lost the war and ceased to be considered a nation. The statues were an expression of history and culture, supported and financed largely by descendants of Confederate soldiers. They had fairly broad support, but I suppose there were many Southerners who didn’t like them yet acquiesced, just like I don’t care for many publicly financed spaces and buildings of today…but I’m not going to riot to have them removed.

    Yes, I know we live in a world where we don’t vote every year to change the names of streets or schools or bridges, so why would I be suggesting we vote every year on statues? However, if some people do want long standing statues removed, wouldn’t a referendum be preferable to a riot in determining what the people want?

    This isn’t about removing statues, its about the way they’re being removed. If Southerners want to remove all of their Confederate statues, good for them. I don’t live in the South, and I have no say in the matter. The left, however, believes its perspective has the final say in every matter. This is all about them establishing a psychological precedent with their moral tyranny so you won’t say or do much when the finally come to your town and tell you how things are going to be with your local monuments.

    • Agree: Twinkie
  122. “historians say he’s wrong” it’s not as if historians are ever wrong about anything, like how that book that won a history book prize proved that early Americans never had guns in their home. That author Michael Bellesiles was pretty smug about his “conclusions” but it turned out he fabricated the whole thing, he ended up being debunked a software developer and is now working as a bartender.

  123. Anon[131] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon
    @Polistra

    There is pretty good historical evidence that Thomas Jefferson had an affair with Hemmings that produced offspring. Combined with the Y-STR evidence that a man of Jeffersonian lineage fathered these people, I see little reason to cast doubt on Thomas Jefferson as the best candidate for baby daddy...


    Unless of course you are both a fan of Thomas Jefferson's ideas and an anti-race mixer. Which would be a pretty awkward inclination to have if Thomas Jefferson did in fact mix with an off-white person.

    Perhaps you want to drag this through the mud until someone's skeleton gets exhumed and genetically sequenced, and proves, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that it was Tommy Jefferson. But then what would you do? Would you re-think your fondness of Jefferson?

    Replies: @Getaclue, @Dutch Boy, @Paperback Writer, @Anon

    There is pretty good historical evidence that Thomas Jefferson had an affair with Hemmings that produced offspring.

    That’s what I thought too, but looking at the specifics of the genetic test, it only narrows it down. It doesn’t point to Jefferson specifically. It was a 1980s pre-Human Genome Project Y-chromosome test, not a full genetic scan, and there was no testing of Jefferson’s DNA itself. The only other evidence was an attempt to correlate the locations of everyone involved from incomplete diary entries and the like, which from a distance of over two centuries is not that convincing.

    As someone mentioned, there were as many as eight other male relatives who who hanging around, of various degrees of probability, with Randolph Jefferson being at the top of the list.

    It would not be that hard to do a more solid genetic test of biological Jefferson material using current technology, but there is a Hemings Industrial Complex now that resists such efforts as racist denialism, so there is not much inclination to pursue it for fear of being cancelled.

    The Wikipedia article has a good summary and links to primary source material.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Anon

    It's notable that Jefferson DNA was not found in all of the Hemings descendants but only 1 line - that of Eston, who (perhaps) ironically was one of the ones that recrossed the color line and (along with all of his future descendants) became white again and moved north (and took the name Jefferson). Some of Eston's descendants did very well - one became a wealthy inventor and industrialist, one became a highly successful cotton broker, etc.

    Jefferson DNA was not found in any of the living Hemings descendants that stayed on the black side of the color line - either because it was not there to begin with or else because there was "failure of paternity" somewhere along the line.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

  124. @rebel yell
    @Jack D


    These statues were not erected as some spontaneous outpouring of grief by the families of the veterans – they were erected for political reasons and they will come down for political reasons.
     
    You can say the same thing about holocaust memorials. When were they built - 20 years, 50 years after the war? Times up! It's political, not spontaneous.
    And god knows the holocaust has been politicized.
    As for lost cause, slavery, states rights and the rest - you go your way and we'll go ours. Mexicans can admire Montezuma the cannibal, jews can admire Joshua the slaughterer of multitudes, yankees can admire John Brown be-header of teen boys, and southerners can admire Jackson and Lee.

    Replies: @Jack D

    You can say the same thing about holocaust memorials. When were they built – 20 years, 50 years after the war? Times up! It’s political, not spontaneous.

    I can completely see this happening. Do you think President Ilhan Omar (I know she’s not eligible but they can change the Constitution) would keep the Holocaust Museum in Washington for a minute.

    The lesson is that you should cling to power at all costs. Once you lose it, not only are your museums and statues at stake, your neck is at stake.

    So Trump predicted that if they went after the Confederates the Founding Fathers would be next. Hew was right about that (and the NY Times was wrong). And after the Founding Fathers, who is next after that?

    • Replies: @Anon
    @Jack D


    I can completely see this happening. Do you think President Ilhan Omar (I know she’s not eligible but they can change the Constitution) would keep the Holocaust Museum in Washington for a minute.
     
    What is a “Holocaust museum” doing on the National Mall to begin with?
    , @Buzz Mohawk
    @Jack D


    And after the Founding Fathers, who is next after that?
     
    You and me, Jack. You and me.

    Replies: @Twinkie

  125. @Anon
    @Anon


    There is pretty good historical evidence that Thomas Jefferson had an affair with Hemmings that produced offspring.
     
    That's what I thought too, but looking at the specifics of the genetic test, it only narrows it down. It doesn't point to Jefferson specifically. It was a 1980s pre-Human Genome Project Y-chromosome test, not a full genetic scan, and there was no testing of Jefferson's DNA itself. The only other evidence was an attempt to correlate the locations of everyone involved from incomplete diary entries and the like, which from a distance of over two centuries is not that convincing.

    As someone mentioned, there were as many as eight other male relatives who who hanging around, of various degrees of probability, with Randolph Jefferson being at the top of the list.

    It would not be that hard to do a more solid genetic test of biological Jefferson material using current technology, but there is a Hemings Industrial Complex now that resists such efforts as racist denialism, so there is not much inclination to pursue it for fear of being cancelled.

    The Wikipedia article has a good summary and links to primary source material.

    Replies: @Jack D

    It’s notable that Jefferson DNA was not found in all of the Hemings descendants but only 1 line – that of Eston, who (perhaps) ironically was one of the ones that recrossed the color line and (along with all of his future descendants) became white again and moved north (and took the name Jefferson). Some of Eston’s descendants did very well – one became a wealthy inventor and industrialist, one became a highly successful cotton broker, etc.

    Jefferson DNA was not found in any of the living Hemings descendants that stayed on the black side of the color line – either because it was not there to begin with or else because there was “failure of paternity” somewhere along the line.

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @Jack D

    But Monticello.org now says that "at least six" of Hemings's kids were Tom's. (I didn't know she had more than six. Whatever.)


    Thomas Jefferson fathered at least six of Sally Hemings’s children.
     
    https://www.monticello.org/thomas-jefferson/jefferson-slavery/thomas-jefferson-and-sally-hemings-a-brief-account/

    Jefferson DNA was not found in any of the living Hemings descendants that stayed on the black side of the color line – either because it was not there to begin with or else because there was “failure of paternity” somewhere along the line.
     
    Really? I thought the rest refused to be tested. They insist on the Jefferson paternity as self-evident.

    Replies: @res

  126. @anon215
    I'm fairly certain we've crossed the Rubicon. If I dared to wear a t-shirt to work with nothing more than a picture of Thomas Jefferson on it, my HR department would probably nuke me from orbit.

    Replies: @Jack D

    Make sure never to pay for anything with nickels. Two dollar bills are also out but you never see them anyway.

  127. @Paperback Writer
    @Jonathan Mason

    She was 14 at the time - what would she have done in France? Her older brother, a barber or a butler, could have done that, though. I forget his name.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Ed, @carroll price

    Who knows? She may have been a very attractive, intelligent and vivacious young woman. She might have traveled to England, she might have become a political activist, she might have married, she might have become an actress or entertainer or courtesan. How can we possibly know?

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @Jonathan Mason

    She was said to be pretty, not surprising given her lineage, but also an illiterate country girl. All of her time in Paris she was shut up with Jefferson's daughters in a convent. She had no practical skills. Your ideas are an interesting subplot for an alternative history novel, though. Write it!

    In any case, she basically did what she was told to do, unlike her older brother.

  128. @Jack D
    @rebel yell


    You can say the same thing about holocaust memorials. When were they built – 20 years, 50 years after the war? Times up! It’s political, not spontaneous.
     
    I can completely see this happening. Do you think President Ilhan Omar (I know she's not eligible but they can change the Constitution) would keep the Holocaust Museum in Washington for a minute.

    The lesson is that you should cling to power at all costs. Once you lose it, not only are your museums and statues at stake, your neck is at stake.

    So Trump predicted that if they went after the Confederates the Founding Fathers would be next. Hew was right about that (and the NY Times was wrong). And after the Founding Fathers, who is next after that?

    Replies: @Anon, @Buzz Mohawk

    I can completely see this happening. Do you think President Ilhan Omar (I know she’s not eligible but they can change the Constitution) would keep the Holocaust Museum in Washington for a minute.

    What is a “Holocaust museum” doing on the National Mall to begin with?

  129. @Jonathan Mason
    @anonymous

    Yes, it was weird, but those were the weird laws of the time.

    But out at Monticello after sunset the Jefferson family was relatively free from outside interference.

    These kind of relationships and family structures must have been common at the time.

    Remember that Sally Hemings was the half sister of Jefferson's wife and that she voluntarily returned from Paris to the United States with Tommy boy, when she could have walked away from slavery and stayed in France.

    Replies: @NOTA, @Paperback Writer, @Buzz Mohawk

    Fifty Shades of Jefferson

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Apparently Jefferson was courting a another young woman in Paris, and in trying to impress her by vaulting over a fence, he fell and broke his right wrist.

    While recuperating from the injury, it is possible that he had his young sister-in-law assist with those tasks that required the use of his right hand.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

  130. @Polistra
    Remember Science? Science says that we have absolute no proof of the Hemings alliance, except that it was likely someone in the family. We hate science, don't we?

    PS. George Washington is next. Who, after that?

    Replies: @Anon, @Jack D, @Getaclue, @Alden, @SunBakedSuburb, @Buzz Mohawk, @carroll price

    George Washington is next. Who, after that?

    You and me.

  131. @Jack D
    @Twinkie

    You could say the same thing about German soldiers during WWII but you don't see a lot of statues of Waffen SS troops.

    I think it was a mistake to honor the Confederate cause. It is possibly to fight bravely and honorably but if you are fighting for an unjust cause, your bravery and honor is nevertheless negated. I understand why the defeated people of the South erected these statues in order to regain their dignity and why the North allowed it to be done in the interest of national reconciliation, but it was a mistake. The Lost Cause was not a noble cause. They fought for the right of humans to own other humans as property. You can varnish it to be about "States Rights" or whatever, but at bottom that is why they seceded. Such a cause does not deserve to be honored. America would have been a better country if the people of the South had, of their own initiative and not having it forced down their throats, come to understand that they had been mislead by their rulers and that many innocents gave their lives for an ignoble cause.

    That being said, the glorification of the Lost Cause, like the Civil War itself, is now a matter of history and should not be erased. (It should be understood that the cult of the Lost Cause was a separate chapter in American history and most of those statues stem from that chapter and not from the war itself). But perhaps as is seen in certain places in E. Europe where they have gathered up all of the statues of Lenin and put them together in one park where they can all point toward each other rather than toward the Future, these statutes should be put into their context and not allowed to be honored in a way that they do not deserve.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Reg Cæsar, @J1234, @SunBakedSuburb, @Neil Templeton

    Shame on you for implying that children should be taught to disrespect their ancestors.

  132. @Whiskey
    @Alden

    Most mixed race people are the result of Black father, White mother. White women (and all women) rate black men the most attractive. Low IQ, impulsive violence, extraversion, etc. That's a recipe for male sexiness. Meanwhile black women are noted for their masculine attributes and general ugliness. No man with a choice even or especially black men will choose them over others.

    This is just reality.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Twinkie, @Inselaffen, @very old statistician

    you have been posting insane nonsense for years, i am almost certain you are a Black male homosexual who enjoys saying the things you say, or a white incel who wishes he was a Black male homosexual. You ain’t fooling anybody, chump.

  133. @Twinkie
    @Whiskey


    Most mixed race people are the result of Black father, White mother.
     
    No. Per the 2010 Census data, there were about 8.4 million people who were of two or more racial ancestry. Of those, only 2 million or so were black-white mixes.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_racial_and_ethnic_demographics_of_the_United_States#Population_by_race_(estimates)%5B23%5D


    White women (and all women) rate black men the most attractive.
     
    No. Black male-white female pairings fare very poorly in income, indicating low socioeconomic status. To the extent there are white women who marry black men, they are very downscale.

    https://i.insider.com/4f3d4337eab8eaef54000042?width=600&format=jpeg

    Replies: @Jack D, @WIlkey, @Nachum

    I’m not going to argue with the numbers, but it seems to me that every time there’s a half-white celebrity, it’s the mother who’s white. (And the father was usually absent.) But that anecdotal, I know.

  134. Back in the early 20th century a statue called “Civic Virtue” (the people who made it were also responsible for the Lincoln Memorial) was set up outside New York City Hall. It was an allegorical work, with a nude man with a sword walking over two sirens symbolizing vice and corruption.

    Even back then, the feminists were outraged- women as tempters and all that- but apparently what got the statue exiled to Queens Borough Hall (I waited for the bus home next to it for years, which is why I remember it so well) was that Mayor LaGuardia didn’t like having to stare at this dude’s derrière every time he walked out of his office.

    Well, about a hundred years later the feminists starting screaming again- violence against women and all that- and the statue was carted off to a historic cemetery in Brooklyn that has a big statuary collection, where it was cleaned and is being taken care of very nicely.

    The funniest part was that one of the loudest voices in favor of carting it off was one Anthony Wiener, a man later infamous for doing the very thing to young women that LaGuardia had found so offensive in the statue. You gotta laugh, I guess.

    • Thanks: Hangnail Hans
  135. @Dutch Boy
    @Anon

    Master and slave sexual relations have been routine at least since Abraham got Ishmael via Hagar and the American South was no exception. Slavery is, after all, a form of exploitation of varying degrees of severity and sexual exploitation comes naturally when the exploited are property.

    Replies: @Captain Tripps

    Indeed, as the saying goes, “we are all descended from slaves and slavemasters”. It was common through all of Western history up through the widespread adoption of Christianity in the Middle Ages. Even then, during the period of Kings, Princes and Lords, though the serfs weren’t “legally” owned property, the aristocracy still took their “privileges” when the need suited them.

  136. @Paperback Writer
    @Jonathan Mason

    She was 14 at the time - what would she have done in France? Her older brother, a barber or a butler, could have done that, though. I forget his name.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Ed, @carroll price

    A 14 yo girl in those days would have been capable of maintaining a household, might even have been married. She could have survived in Paris. Probably could have landed a decent housekeeping job based on the Jefferson connection alone. Her older brother returned too which is even more bewildering because he was a talented cook that could have commanded a middle class salary as a cook in a wealthy home.

    • Replies: @Ralph L
    @Ed

    He probably didn't want to permanently leave the rest of his family. That's why so many blacks stayed in the South despite the horrors of Jim Crow and the daily lynching and cross-burning.

  137. @Reg Cæsar
    @El Dato


    Give it up Reg. Metric is superior
     
    Then why isn't it used by computers? A gigabyte is 1,073,741,824 bytes, or 8,589,934,592 bits. A terabyte consists of 8,796,093,022,208 bits. Pretty messy, eh?

    A petabyte is 9,007,199,254,740,992 bits. That's almost a power of 10!

    Congress instituted the metric system in 1866. (Reconstruction!) It's still not in use because of the V-word.

    Kasson Act


    Enjoy your kilogram cake of tapioca flour, soy milk, margarine, and aspartame. That is, if you can read the recipe in Esperanto. We'll stick with the Axis of English.



    https://youtu.be/qbdx2nOQKKo

    https://youtu.be/s95cxZkC_es

    Replies: @nokangaroos, @Kratoklastes, @Veteran Aryan

    Then why isn’t it used by computers?

    There are only 10 kinds of people – those who understand binary and those who do not.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Veteran Aryan


    There are only 10 kinds of people – those who understand binary and those who do not.
     
    How many grams to a kilogram?

    1111101000.

    Replies: @Veteran Aryan

  138. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Jonathan Mason

    Fifty Shades of Jefferson

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    Apparently Jefferson was courting a another young woman in Paris, and in trying to impress her by vaulting over a fence, he fell and broke his right wrist.

    While recuperating from the injury, it is possible that he had his young sister-in-law assist with those tasks that required the use of his right hand.

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @Jonathan Mason

    Maria Cosway. He loved her till the end of his life, wrote about her, etc.

    That was his Paris squeeze, not little Sally, who at that point didn't have much to squeeze at 14.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason

  139. @Twinkie
    @Jack D


    the Lost Cause myth and to the related cause of Jim Crow.
     
    It wasn’t just the Lost Cause myth. During the late 19th and early 20th centuries, there was much renewed interest in the Civil War in general and in commemorating it in particular (which had been suppressed or discouraged in the initial decades after the conclusion of the war), as the South recovered economically and psychically from the trauma of not just defeat, but physical devastation.

    But you know whose motive is crystal clear? The erasers of history - they bleated about “our values” as they voted.

    These statues were not erected as some spontaneous outpouring of grief by the families of the veterans
     
    Straw man.

    It is possibly to fight bravely and honorably but if you are fighting for an unjust cause, your bravery and honor is nevertheless negated.
     
    Courage is an innate quality that manifests externally via action. It is never negated by that which exists outside the man.

    Very few wars have ever been fought for a “just cause” in the context of the post-World War II moralism (for goodness sakes, the ancients fought wars of conquest to win glory and honor). To follow your reasoning would negate valor and its celebration in 99.99999% of wars in human history. As I wrote before, not everything is a morality play about the Holocaust and the Nazis.

    Americans in the 1800’s took state sovereignty very seriously and the state was often the primary source of sovereign loyalty. Were I a man of my county at the time, I’d have voted against secession and opposed slavery for that matter, but would have answered the call to arms by my state and fought in its defense.

    Replies: @nebulafox

    I find it particularly revealing that the people who want to remove the history (and in the rural Deep South, they are largely outsiders) have no realistic, constructive thing to replace the history with. This indicates they aren’t so much interested in history as much as power, and perhaps their own complexes in some cases.

    The truth is people have to make sense of their own history, just as they need to make political arrangements that suit their own circumstances. It really is the only way a healthy relationship with that history can develop. Outside imposition, even if successful, rarely develops into something healthy. The fact that the NYT wants BadAmerica, and in particular the South, to be more like contemporary Germany, speaks volumes: never mind that Germany’s post-1968 historical relationship is anything but healthy.

    Besides, the CW narrative that dominated American education until the last 50 years served a purpose beyond psychological healing. That was to ensure secession was dead as a dodo and the South could be properly reintegrated after a conflict that left 1 in 4 military age men dead. It succeeded beyond anybody’s wildest dreams. The South would view itself as more American than any other part of the nation rather than something potentially different. This was huge, and not something that was inevitable in 1865.

    Of course, the price for this national healing was the tacit willingness to throw the blacks of the South to the wolves for another near century, which I’m obviously not going to defend. But it wasn’t done casually on a whim, and in any case, it has been over half a century since America began to address that particular sin. Hell, we talk about it every day in the papers. If the people complaining about the statues were simply interested in justice rather than cleansing, why didn’t they complain then?

    “Courage is an innate quality that manifests externally via action. It is never negated by that which exists outside the man.”

    G-O-L-D.

    I think the reason WWII stands out in memory is precisely because it is the exception and not the rule in human history. For most of human history, abstract notions of good and bad didn’t matter: it was your side and that was that. It’s only been relatively recently that this changed.

    The governments of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were so indisputably, totally evil that it could become a straightforward good/bad fight in the public consciousness. Whether that was genuinely because of direct contrast to one’s own state, or in the case of the Soviets and Chinese, because it was clear what Axis victory meant for you and your people, however immoral your own government was. It was also fought almost to completion, unlike the preceding world war, or the successor Cold War conflicts.

    • Thanks: Twinkie
    • Replies: @nebulafox
    @nebulafox

    One other thing besides courage is genuine creativity, applied to a constructive purpose that achieves something novel.

    Adrian von Folkersam was a member of the Waffen-SS. I'm sure he saw, believed, and possibly did terrible things. But he also pulled off an incredible feat with his Brandenburgers in 1942 and ended up penetrating further into the USSR than any other unit as a result. It was a work of art, down to the precise details of exploiting potential weaknesses: such as impersonating the NKVD to ensure the Russians they dealt with would be scared and wouldn't ask questions.

    The two are not irreconcilable. To deny talents to the morally reprehensible indicates immaturity and shallowness, not morality. It's also counterproductive. If Hitler's enemies didn't insist constantly viewing him as a talentless cipher for others out of aesthetic repugnance, maybe they wouldn't have underestimated him until it was too late.

    , @Prester John
    @nebulafox

    They don't want to "replace" history. Like the so-called sans culottes of the French Revolution (with whom they share many characteristics) they want to ERASE history so as "to begin the world anew" in the words of one of their admirers, the original "Dreamer", Thomas Paine. And how did the French Revolution work, eh?

    , @Twinkie
    @nebulafox


    The governments of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were so indisputably, totally evil that it could become a straightforward good/bad fight in the public consciousness.
     
    While I agree that both Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were responsible for objectively monstrously evil acts, I think the issue of morality of countries in and out of wars is more complicated. More or less all countries were created out of conquest, in which the losers were dispossessed and even exterminated. History is littered with atrocities and victor's peace (cue Tacitus - "ubi solitudinem faciunt pacem appellant") that is later rationalized and even glorified. Even the modern British, often touted as having been some of the most benevolent colonialists, engaged in innumerable evil, bloodthirsty acts (massacres, mass rape, etc.) in India when their authority was threatened by the Sepoy Rebellion.

    Had Nazi Germany won the war and established a Tausendjähriges Reich, would the denizens of that much later world (perhaps greatly ameliorated and even liberalized in social conditions from the war-era Nazi Germany) not see the monstrosity of its genesis as nothing but an unfortunate blip in an otherwise glorious history of their nation, the way we Americans used to regard the extermination of American Indians in the settler mythos of our foundation?

    In the long view of history, what seems to matter, in the end, is winning, leaving descendants, and bequeathing a mythos, a culture to the said descendants, however long they might hold on to it. I think morality is what we tell ourselves when we win and do terrible things to the losers, just as the latter ascribe immorality to us.

    As an individual, to the extent that I have a personal moral code, I mean to do good and no evil, but, at the end of the day, I want my people - Americans - to win first.

    Replies: @nebulafox, @RSDB

    , @Paperback Writer
    @nebulafox


    I find it particularly revealing that the people who want to remove the history (and in the rural Deep South, they are largely outsiders) have no realistic, constructive thing to replace the history with
     
    They think they do. Their woke sassy black woman Malcolm Xed out history. We don't agree - but they love it.

    Anyway, I wasn't raised in the South and the UDC didn't dictate my curriculum. I went to NYC schools 50 years ago & we were taught slavery was the cause of secession, the South was wrong, and the good side won. But that doesn't go far enough for the woke. They want the South to be damned in eternity, and that America's "Original Sin" be damned in eternity as well.

    To which I say: FOAD.
  140. @Jonathan Mason
    @Paperback Writer

    Who knows? She may have been a very attractive, intelligent and vivacious young woman. She might have traveled to England, she might have become a political activist, she might have married, she might have become an actress or entertainer or courtesan. How can we possibly know?

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    She was said to be pretty, not surprising given her lineage, but also an illiterate country girl. All of her time in Paris she was shut up with Jefferson’s daughters in a convent. She had no practical skills. Your ideas are an interesting subplot for an alternative history novel, though. Write it!

    In any case, she basically did what she was told to do, unlike her older brother.

  141. @Jonathan Mason
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Apparently Jefferson was courting a another young woman in Paris, and in trying to impress her by vaulting over a fence, he fell and broke his right wrist.

    While recuperating from the injury, it is possible that he had his young sister-in-law assist with those tasks that required the use of his right hand.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    Maria Cosway. He loved her till the end of his life, wrote about her, etc.

    That was his Paris squeeze, not little Sally, who at that point didn’t have much to squeeze at 14.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    @Paperback Writer

    His wrist was pretty badly fractured, took a long time to recover, and left him with a permanent partial loss of function in the right hand.

    Who would have been helping him with his daily activities such as dressing and bathing? Not Maria, I think.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

  142. @Matttt
    @Twinkie

    Many of these statues were sponsored by groups like United Daughters of the Confederacy: wives, mothers, daughters, and sisters of Confederate soldiers who wanted to remember their dead men. Of course, mourning white women are entitled to no consideration at all. On the other hand, we reorganized our whole society - ruined our schools, exposed our children to danger, dumbed down then eliminated our culture - because we thought blacks felt inferior (they didn't).

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    I think most of them were. This is a little remarked upon part of the whole uproar. The people who wanted to commemorate the dead were mostly women.

  143. @nebulafox
    @Twinkie

    I find it particularly revealing that the people who want to remove the history (and in the rural Deep South, they are largely outsiders) have no realistic, constructive thing to replace the history with. This indicates they aren't so much interested in history as much as power, and perhaps their own complexes in some cases.

    The truth is people have to make sense of their own history, just as they need to make political arrangements that suit their own circumstances. It really is the only way a healthy relationship with that history can develop. Outside imposition, even if successful, rarely develops into something healthy. The fact that the NYT wants BadAmerica, and in particular the South, to be more like contemporary Germany, speaks volumes: never mind that Germany's post-1968 historical relationship is anything but healthy.

    Besides, the CW narrative that dominated American education until the last 50 years served a purpose beyond psychological healing. That was to ensure secession was dead as a dodo and the South could be properly reintegrated after a conflict that left 1 in 4 military age men dead. It succeeded beyond anybody's wildest dreams. The South would view itself as more American than any other part of the nation rather than something potentially different. This was huge, and not something that was inevitable in 1865.

    Of course, the price for this national healing was the tacit willingness to throw the blacks of the South to the wolves for another near century, which I'm obviously not going to defend. But it wasn't done casually on a whim, and in any case, it has been over half a century since America began to address that particular sin. Hell, we talk about it every day in the papers. If the people complaining about the statues were simply interested in justice rather than cleansing, why didn't they complain then?


    "Courage is an innate quality that manifests externally via action. It is never negated by that which exists outside the man."

    G-O-L-D.

    I think the reason WWII stands out in memory is precisely because it is the exception and not the rule in human history. For most of human history, abstract notions of good and bad didn't matter: it was your side and that was that. It's only been relatively recently that this changed.

    The governments of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were so indisputably, totally evil that it could become a straightforward good/bad fight in the public consciousness. Whether that was genuinely because of direct contrast to one's own state, or in the case of the Soviets and Chinese, because it was clear what Axis victory meant for you and your people, however immoral your own government was. It was also fought almost to completion, unlike the preceding world war, or the successor Cold War conflicts.

    Replies: @nebulafox, @Prester John, @Twinkie, @Paperback Writer

    One other thing besides courage is genuine creativity, applied to a constructive purpose that achieves something novel.

    Adrian von Folkersam was a member of the Waffen-SS. I’m sure he saw, believed, and possibly did terrible things. But he also pulled off an incredible feat with his Brandenburgers in 1942 and ended up penetrating further into the USSR than any other unit as a result. It was a work of art, down to the precise details of exploiting potential weaknesses: such as impersonating the NKVD to ensure the Russians they dealt with would be scared and wouldn’t ask questions.

    The two are not irreconcilable. To deny talents to the morally reprehensible indicates immaturity and shallowness, not morality. It’s also counterproductive. If Hitler’s enemies didn’t insist constantly viewing him as a talentless cipher for others out of aesthetic repugnance, maybe they wouldn’t have underestimated him until it was too late.

  144. If memory serves Sally was fair-skinned. As a quadroon, she may have been capable of “passing” though I am not certain of this. Whatever, she sure as hell didn’t look like Lamont Sanford’s Aunt Esther, because after Martha J’s untimely demise, The Sage of Monticello developed a roving eye for pretty ladies (c.f. Maria Cosway).

  145. @nebulafox
    @Twinkie

    I find it particularly revealing that the people who want to remove the history (and in the rural Deep South, they are largely outsiders) have no realistic, constructive thing to replace the history with. This indicates they aren't so much interested in history as much as power, and perhaps their own complexes in some cases.

    The truth is people have to make sense of their own history, just as they need to make political arrangements that suit their own circumstances. It really is the only way a healthy relationship with that history can develop. Outside imposition, even if successful, rarely develops into something healthy. The fact that the NYT wants BadAmerica, and in particular the South, to be more like contemporary Germany, speaks volumes: never mind that Germany's post-1968 historical relationship is anything but healthy.

    Besides, the CW narrative that dominated American education until the last 50 years served a purpose beyond psychological healing. That was to ensure secession was dead as a dodo and the South could be properly reintegrated after a conflict that left 1 in 4 military age men dead. It succeeded beyond anybody's wildest dreams. The South would view itself as more American than any other part of the nation rather than something potentially different. This was huge, and not something that was inevitable in 1865.

    Of course, the price for this national healing was the tacit willingness to throw the blacks of the South to the wolves for another near century, which I'm obviously not going to defend. But it wasn't done casually on a whim, and in any case, it has been over half a century since America began to address that particular sin. Hell, we talk about it every day in the papers. If the people complaining about the statues were simply interested in justice rather than cleansing, why didn't they complain then?


    "Courage is an innate quality that manifests externally via action. It is never negated by that which exists outside the man."

    G-O-L-D.

    I think the reason WWII stands out in memory is precisely because it is the exception and not the rule in human history. For most of human history, abstract notions of good and bad didn't matter: it was your side and that was that. It's only been relatively recently that this changed.

    The governments of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were so indisputably, totally evil that it could become a straightforward good/bad fight in the public consciousness. Whether that was genuinely because of direct contrast to one's own state, or in the case of the Soviets and Chinese, because it was clear what Axis victory meant for you and your people, however immoral your own government was. It was also fought almost to completion, unlike the preceding world war, or the successor Cold War conflicts.

    Replies: @nebulafox, @Prester John, @Twinkie, @Paperback Writer

    They don’t want to “replace” history. Like the so-called sans culottes of the French Revolution (with whom they share many characteristics) they want to ERASE history so as “to begin the world anew” in the words of one of their admirers, the original “Dreamer”, Thomas Paine. And how did the French Revolution work, eh?

  146. @Paperback Writer
    @Jonathan Mason

    Maria Cosway. He loved her till the end of his life, wrote about her, etc.

    That was his Paris squeeze, not little Sally, who at that point didn't have much to squeeze at 14.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    His wrist was pretty badly fractured, took a long time to recover, and left him with a permanent partial loss of function in the right hand.

    Who would have been helping him with his daily activities such as dressing and bathing? Not Maria, I think.

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @Jonathan Mason

    If you're suggesting it was Sally, she was in a convent, with his daughter, as I have said several times.

    The butler (who was Sally's brother) is a better candidate.

    Do some research before you comment.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Jonathan Mason

  147. @Twinkie
    @Jack D


    You could say the same thing about German soldiers during WWII but you don’t see a lot of statues of Waffen SS troops.
     
    We aren’t Germans.* And the Civil War was not a expeditionary war of aggression aimed at conquering non-Americans.

    This was a statue of a man from my county whose likeness was erected to commemorate an event of massive historical magnitude in my country and, yes, the county. There was nothing about the Lost Cause or any such thing associated with the statue. All the markings were rather matter-of-fact (I noted, however, they left the markings about slaves being traded at the courthouse intact - I guess some history is more equal than others).

    Not everything is a morality play about the Holocaust and the Nazis.

    *If the Germans wanted to erect a statue of a common Wehrmacht soldier to commemorate the heroism of their soldiery during World War II, I wound object to it though my opinion as a non-German doesn’t matter.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Paperback Writer

    When Jack is out of arguments, he swings wildly and misses:

    You could say the same thing about German soldiers during WWII but you don’t see a lot of statues of Waffen SS troops.

    Of course there’s zero comparison between the two, not that I support the Confederates. They were mostly simple guys led by madmen drunk on power. The madmen had a bad cause, and the simple guys died for it.

    I seem to be referring to Ann Coulter a lot now, which is weird because I really don’t like her, but she made a good point somewhere when she said that honoring the Confederate dead helped to end the Civil War. In many countries these things simmer on indefinitely. Well, we ended it, or thought we did. Southern officers were prominent in WW1 and WW2. A descendant of NB Forrest was killed in WW2. And so on.

    Jack makes all these ancillary points about how putting up those statues was political then, and it’s political now, as if this didn’t occur to any of us, and it’s irrelevant to the point: THIS IS A POWER STRUGGLE. One side is winning, and it’s the side that’s gonna crush him into the ground, and that’s OK. Just give in to them a little and they’ll stop twisting your arm behind your back.

    It doesn’t work that way.

  148. @Ed
    @Paperback Writer

    A 14 yo girl in those days would have been capable of maintaining a household, might even have been married. She could have survived in Paris. Probably could have landed a decent housekeeping job based on the Jefferson connection alone. Her older brother returned too which is even more bewildering because he was a talented cook that could have commanded a middle class salary as a cook in a wealthy home.

    Replies: @Ralph L

    He probably didn’t want to permanently leave the rest of his family. That’s why so many blacks stayed in the South despite the horrors of Jim Crow and the daily lynching and cross-burning.

  149. My great grandfather was head of the local Confederate Veterans when a monument was inconveniently placed in the middle of the town’s main intersection in the 1900’s. But he was 16 when the War ended and went to UNC instead of the CSA, though several of his 6 older brothers were officers (all survived). After some fuss, they moved it to the library lawn in the 90’s, to every left-turner’s great relief. NC now has a law preventing removal of public historical monuments without approval from the state government.

  150. @kaganovitch
    @Twinkie

    I found out thereafter that the cowardly county leaders voted to remove it during the George Floyd hysteria and had it done in the dead of night like a burglar, so as not to arouse any “controversy.”

    As Charles Peguy wrote “It will never be known what acts of cowardice have been committed for fear of not looking sufficiently progressive.” The "bluepilling" of Western Civilization has been going on for quite a while as this was written before WW1.

    Replies: @Gabe Ruth

    Thanks for the quote, new to me. Peguy was one of the first men killed in WW1.

  151. @Jonathan Mason
    @Paperback Writer

    His wrist was pretty badly fractured, took a long time to recover, and left him with a permanent partial loss of function in the right hand.

    Who would have been helping him with his daily activities such as dressing and bathing? Not Maria, I think.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    If you’re suggesting it was Sally, she was in a convent, with his daughter, as I have said several times.

    The butler (who was Sally’s brother) is a better candidate.

    Do some research before you comment.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @Paperback Writer

    This was a personal matter among people who lived two centuries ago.

    Why does it "matter" now? Oh, sure, it matters because lots of people want to find out if old Tom did some partially African girl. So what if he did? I dated a Jamaican girl with long, beautiful legs. Does that make me: 1) An evil, bad, White man who takes advantage of Black girls, 2) Stupid enough to copulate with a lesser breed of primate, 3) A hypocrite simply because I eventually married a White woman and never would have done anything else?

    And so on.

    Tom's fucking-habits have nothing at all to do with anything, really. People are just trying to attach their particular causes to it.

    The worst thing Tom Jeff ever did was write the phrase, "all men are created equal." The worst thing his editors John Adams and Ben Franklin ever did was not catch it in all it's absurdity. There had to have been a better way to express the good belief that everyone deserves equal treatment under the law. Those guys were in a life-or-death fight with a monarch, and that is what Tom's phrase really was about. Too bad people since have been too stupid to grasp what was its real and genuine meaning at the time.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Jonathan Mason, @Paperback Writer

    , @Jonathan Mason
    @Paperback Writer

    My understanding is that Sally Hemings was a chamber maid at the Hôtel de Langeac and that she attended the Jefferson daughters when they were home from boarding school on vacations.

    Had she been at the school with the Jefferson daughters she might have been at risk, horror of horrors, of learning to read and write.

    The work of a chambermaid included employment in a bedroom making beds, making fires, Heating bathwater, and generally ensuring the comfort of the occupant.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

  152. @nebulafox
    @Twinkie

    I find it particularly revealing that the people who want to remove the history (and in the rural Deep South, they are largely outsiders) have no realistic, constructive thing to replace the history with. This indicates they aren't so much interested in history as much as power, and perhaps their own complexes in some cases.

    The truth is people have to make sense of their own history, just as they need to make political arrangements that suit their own circumstances. It really is the only way a healthy relationship with that history can develop. Outside imposition, even if successful, rarely develops into something healthy. The fact that the NYT wants BadAmerica, and in particular the South, to be more like contemporary Germany, speaks volumes: never mind that Germany's post-1968 historical relationship is anything but healthy.

    Besides, the CW narrative that dominated American education until the last 50 years served a purpose beyond psychological healing. That was to ensure secession was dead as a dodo and the South could be properly reintegrated after a conflict that left 1 in 4 military age men dead. It succeeded beyond anybody's wildest dreams. The South would view itself as more American than any other part of the nation rather than something potentially different. This was huge, and not something that was inevitable in 1865.

    Of course, the price for this national healing was the tacit willingness to throw the blacks of the South to the wolves for another near century, which I'm obviously not going to defend. But it wasn't done casually on a whim, and in any case, it has been over half a century since America began to address that particular sin. Hell, we talk about it every day in the papers. If the people complaining about the statues were simply interested in justice rather than cleansing, why didn't they complain then?


    "Courage is an innate quality that manifests externally via action. It is never negated by that which exists outside the man."

    G-O-L-D.

    I think the reason WWII stands out in memory is precisely because it is the exception and not the rule in human history. For most of human history, abstract notions of good and bad didn't matter: it was your side and that was that. It's only been relatively recently that this changed.

    The governments of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were so indisputably, totally evil that it could become a straightforward good/bad fight in the public consciousness. Whether that was genuinely because of direct contrast to one's own state, or in the case of the Soviets and Chinese, because it was clear what Axis victory meant for you and your people, however immoral your own government was. It was also fought almost to completion, unlike the preceding world war, or the successor Cold War conflicts.

    Replies: @nebulafox, @Prester John, @Twinkie, @Paperback Writer

    The governments of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were so indisputably, totally evil that it could become a straightforward good/bad fight in the public consciousness.

    While I agree that both Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were responsible for objectively monstrously evil acts, I think the issue of morality of countries in and out of wars is more complicated. More or less all countries were created out of conquest, in which the losers were dispossessed and even exterminated. History is littered with atrocities and victor’s peace (cue Tacitus – “ubi solitudinem faciunt pacem appellant”) that is later rationalized and even glorified. Even the modern British, often touted as having been some of the most benevolent colonialists, engaged in innumerable evil, bloodthirsty acts (massacres, mass rape, etc.) in India when their authority was threatened by the Sepoy Rebellion.

    Had Nazi Germany won the war and established a Tausendjähriges Reich, would the denizens of that much later world (perhaps greatly ameliorated and even liberalized in social conditions from the war-era Nazi Germany) not see the monstrosity of its genesis as nothing but an unfortunate blip in an otherwise glorious history of their nation, the way we Americans used to regard the extermination of American Indians in the settler mythos of our foundation?

    In the long view of history, what seems to matter, in the end, is winning, leaving descendants, and bequeathing a mythos, a culture to the said descendants, however long they might hold on to it. I think morality is what we tell ourselves when we win and do terrible things to the losers, just as the latter ascribe immorality to us.

    As an individual, to the extent that I have a personal moral code, I mean to do good and no evil, but, at the end of the day, I want my people – Americans – to win first.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    @Twinkie

    True. (I'm out of agrees.)

    , @RSDB
    @Twinkie


    In the long view of history, what seems to matter, in the end, is winning, leaving descendants

     

    In the long enough view, sub specie aeternitatis, your descendants are just as dead as everybody else's.

    Vanitas vanitatum, dixit Ecclesiastes; vanitas vanitatum, et omnia vanitas. Quid habet amplius homo de universo labore suo quo laborat sub sole?
    ...
    Non est priorum memoria; sed nec eorum quidem quæ postea futura sunt
    erit recordatio apud eos qui futuri sunt in novissimo.

     


    Not that I am over-censorious of what you are saying here, but it is a dark night outside, and a time for thoughts both sad and sweet (and a little pompous-- forgive me).

    Tempus flendi, et tempus ridendi;
    tempus plangendi, et tempus saltandi.
     
    I too will die, and all I will do, and all I will say, will pass away sooner or later-- but there is One, at least, whose words will not die, though Heaven and Earth perish.

    Replies: @Twinkie

  153. @Jack D
    @rebel yell


    You can say the same thing about holocaust memorials. When were they built – 20 years, 50 years after the war? Times up! It’s political, not spontaneous.
     
    I can completely see this happening. Do you think President Ilhan Omar (I know she's not eligible but they can change the Constitution) would keep the Holocaust Museum in Washington for a minute.

    The lesson is that you should cling to power at all costs. Once you lose it, not only are your museums and statues at stake, your neck is at stake.

    So Trump predicted that if they went after the Confederates the Founding Fathers would be next. Hew was right about that (and the NY Times was wrong). And after the Founding Fathers, who is next after that?

    Replies: @Anon, @Buzz Mohawk

    And after the Founding Fathers, who is next after that?

    You and me, Jack. You and me.

    • Agree: J1234
    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Buzz Mohawk


    You and me, Jack. You and me.
     
    I'd wager Jack and people like him will survive the Dictatorship of the Woke-tariat much better than you (or I, for that matter) would.

    For that matter, his premise of a "President Ilhan Omar" is rather specious. We have a Woke left-wing presidency whose cabinet is overwhelmingly Jewish and whose policies are authoritarian corporatist, and he is giving us the specter of a Muslim presidency that might harm people like him?

    Please.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

  154. @Paperback Writer
    @Jonathan Mason

    If you're suggesting it was Sally, she was in a convent, with his daughter, as I have said several times.

    The butler (who was Sally's brother) is a better candidate.

    Do some research before you comment.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Jonathan Mason

    This was a personal matter among people who lived two centuries ago.

    Why does it “matter” now? Oh, sure, it matters because lots of people want to find out if old Tom did some partially African girl. So what if he did? I dated a Jamaican girl with long, beautiful legs. Does that make me: 1) An evil, bad, White man who takes advantage of Black girls, 2) Stupid enough to copulate with a lesser breed of primate, 3) A hypocrite simply because I eventually married a White woman and never would have done anything else?

    And so on.

    Tom’s fucking-habits have nothing at all to do with anything, really. People are just trying to attach their particular causes to it.

    The worst thing Tom Jeff ever did was write the phrase, “all men are created equal.” The worst thing his editors John Adams and Ben Franklin ever did was not catch it in all it’s absurdity. There had to have been a better way to express the good belief that everyone deserves equal treatment under the law. Those guys were in a life-or-death fight with a monarch, and that is what Tom’s phrase really was about. Too bad people since have been too stupid to grasp what was its real and genuine meaning at the time.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Buzz Mohawk


    The worst thing Tom Jeff ever did was write the phrase, “all men are created equal.”
     
    I beg to differ. He shouldn't have changed "property" to "pursuit of happiness" (which he borrowed from another thinker).

    I don't think God put us on this earth to be "happy" whatever that means.

    He should have written - in all sober modesty - that all citizens were equal in human dignity and legal rights and that they should not be constrained unduly by government in pursuit of life, liberty, and property.

    Instead this notion of "pursuit of happiness" inserted into the foundational document and ideology of the country doomed and poisoned us to today's nebulous, pseudopsych "self-actualization" happy talk.
    , @Jonathan Mason
    @Buzz Mohawk

    The phrase "all men are created equal" does seem like an odd one as Thomas Jefferson did not believe in the Creator, never mind trying to apply the phrase aptly to enslaved people.

    Much more likely that it was a riposte to the Divine Right of Kings.

    , @Paperback Writer
    @Buzz Mohawk

    It matters because it makes Jefferson look like a huge hypocrite and gives the shittiest among us a handy stick to beat us with. It matters because every time an R. Kelly gets nailed, they can say, "But Thomas Jefferson."

    It matters that Monticello.org, is completely given over to Hemings-ism, and now claims that ALL six of her children were fathered by Jefferson.

    It matters because truth matters.

    Agree w/you about "all men are created equal." It's caused us a huge load of trouble ever since. Should have been "All men are equal before the law."

    And, since we're on the subject: they should have freed the slaves. Shoulda woulda coulda, yeah, I know, but since we're talking about this, I'm gonna say it and I know I already said it: they should have freed the slaves.

    I have zero doubt that if they had, the development of the country would have been a bit retarded but not by much, and that the black population would have dwindled to an insignificant minority, with the smarter one surviving instead of this dysgenic nightmare.

    Replies: @nebulafox, @Buzz Mohawk

  155. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Jack D


    And after the Founding Fathers, who is next after that?
     
    You and me, Jack. You and me.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    You and me, Jack. You and me.

    I’d wager Jack and people like him will survive the Dictatorship of the Woke-tariat much better than you (or I, for that matter) would.

    For that matter, his premise of a “President Ilhan Omar” is rather specious. We have a Woke left-wing presidency whose cabinet is overwhelmingly Jewish and whose policies are authoritarian corporatist, and he is giving us the specter of a Muslim presidency that might harm people like him?

    Please.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @Twinkie

    How are Jews going to pass as anything but White?

    I'm thinking about everyday street violence and assault. Already we are seeing an increase of Black attacks on Jews. Media is trying to ignore it or to somehow blame it on Whites, even though Jews are a subset of Whites, who themselves as a whole are far more the victims of Black crime and assault than just the subset of Jews are.

    Replies: @Twinkie

  156. @Jack D
    @J1234

    Dickstein was more of a Crook (not coincidentally, his NKVD code name) than a spy. For $3,000 (in the 1930s a lot more $ than it is in todays microdollars) he would get anyone a visa. He didn't care whether you were Red, just that your money was green.

    Urban American Jewish politicians in those days resemble urban African American politicians today - almost all are Democrats but some are hard Leftists and some are corrupt Leftists. Dickstein was more in with the corrupt guys than with the True Believers.

    Replies: @J1234

    A crook that took money from the USSR for information from and about the US Congress would meet most people’s definition of “spy.”

  157. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Paperback Writer

    This was a personal matter among people who lived two centuries ago.

    Why does it "matter" now? Oh, sure, it matters because lots of people want to find out if old Tom did some partially African girl. So what if he did? I dated a Jamaican girl with long, beautiful legs. Does that make me: 1) An evil, bad, White man who takes advantage of Black girls, 2) Stupid enough to copulate with a lesser breed of primate, 3) A hypocrite simply because I eventually married a White woman and never would have done anything else?

    And so on.

    Tom's fucking-habits have nothing at all to do with anything, really. People are just trying to attach their particular causes to it.

    The worst thing Tom Jeff ever did was write the phrase, "all men are created equal." The worst thing his editors John Adams and Ben Franklin ever did was not catch it in all it's absurdity. There had to have been a better way to express the good belief that everyone deserves equal treatment under the law. Those guys were in a life-or-death fight with a monarch, and that is what Tom's phrase really was about. Too bad people since have been too stupid to grasp what was its real and genuine meaning at the time.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Jonathan Mason, @Paperback Writer

    The worst thing Tom Jeff ever did was write the phrase, “all men are created equal.”

    I beg to differ. He shouldn’t have changed “property” to “pursuit of happiness” (which he borrowed from another thinker).

    I don’t think God put us on this earth to be “happy” whatever that means.

    He should have written – in all sober modesty – that all citizens were equal in human dignity and legal rights and that they should not be constrained unduly by government in pursuit of life, liberty, and property.

    Instead this notion of “pursuit of happiness” inserted into the foundational document and ideology of the country doomed and poisoned us to today’s nebulous, pseudopsych “self-actualization” happy talk.

  158. @Twinkie
    @Buzz Mohawk


    You and me, Jack. You and me.
     
    I'd wager Jack and people like him will survive the Dictatorship of the Woke-tariat much better than you (or I, for that matter) would.

    For that matter, his premise of a "President Ilhan Omar" is rather specious. We have a Woke left-wing presidency whose cabinet is overwhelmingly Jewish and whose policies are authoritarian corporatist, and he is giving us the specter of a Muslim presidency that might harm people like him?

    Please.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    How are Jews going to pass as anything but White?

    I’m thinking about everyday street violence and assault. Already we are seeing an increase of Black attacks on Jews. Media is trying to ignore it or to somehow blame it on Whites, even though Jews are a subset of Whites, who themselves as a whole are far more the victims of Black crime and assault than just the subset of Jews are.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Buzz Mohawk


    How are Jews going to pass as anything but White?
     
    They seem to have no trouble passing as oppressed victims when they are, in fact, the winners.

    Perhaps “flight from white” as MENA people?

    Already we are seeing an increase of Black attacks on Jews.
     
    Are we? Just as I was - rightly - skeptical about “Asian hate” hysteria*, I’m skeptical that there is increased black targeting of Jews, instead of the far more plausible increased black violent criminality in general of late.

    *See my earlier analysis of the FBI data: https://www.unz.com/isteve/fbi-murders-up-4901-black-share-of-known-murder-offenders-reaches-record-56-5/#comment-4927061
  159. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Twinkie

    How are Jews going to pass as anything but White?

    I'm thinking about everyday street violence and assault. Already we are seeing an increase of Black attacks on Jews. Media is trying to ignore it or to somehow blame it on Whites, even though Jews are a subset of Whites, who themselves as a whole are far more the victims of Black crime and assault than just the subset of Jews are.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    How are Jews going to pass as anything but White?

    They seem to have no trouble passing as oppressed victims when they are, in fact, the winners.

    Perhaps “flight from white” as MENA people?

    Already we are seeing an increase of Black attacks on Jews.

    Are we? Just as I was – rightly – skeptical about “Asian hate” hysteria*, I’m skeptical that there is increased black targeting of Jews, instead of the far more plausible increased black violent criminality in general of late.

    *See my earlier analysis of the FBI data: https://www.unz.com/isteve/fbi-murders-up-4901-black-share-of-known-murder-offenders-reaches-record-56-5/#comment-4927061

  160. @Paperback Writer
    @Jonathan Mason

    If you're suggesting it was Sally, she was in a convent, with his daughter, as I have said several times.

    The butler (who was Sally's brother) is a better candidate.

    Do some research before you comment.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Jonathan Mason

    My understanding is that Sally Hemings was a chamber maid at the Hôtel de Langeac and that she attended the Jefferson daughters when they were home from boarding school on vacations.

    Had she been at the school with the Jefferson daughters she might have been at risk, horror of horrors, of learning to read and write.

    The work of a chambermaid included employment in a bedroom making beds, making fires, Heating bathwater, and generally ensuring the comfort of the occupant.

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @Jonathan Mason

    My understanding is that Sally accompanied the younger daughter to Paris. She was a last minute substitute for an older woman who had just had a baby. On seeing her Abigail Adams thought Sally was unsuitable because she was too young, and seemed rather dense. My memory of what I read is that Hemings accompanied the younger daughter to the convent school.

    I can't find what I read because it's all been wiped from the 'net. Everything I read is anti-Jefferson propaganda, beginning with Monticello.org.

    So, you're welcome to your interpretations.

    Replies: @res

  161. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Paperback Writer

    This was a personal matter among people who lived two centuries ago.

    Why does it "matter" now? Oh, sure, it matters because lots of people want to find out if old Tom did some partially African girl. So what if he did? I dated a Jamaican girl with long, beautiful legs. Does that make me: 1) An evil, bad, White man who takes advantage of Black girls, 2) Stupid enough to copulate with a lesser breed of primate, 3) A hypocrite simply because I eventually married a White woman and never would have done anything else?

    And so on.

    Tom's fucking-habits have nothing at all to do with anything, really. People are just trying to attach their particular causes to it.

    The worst thing Tom Jeff ever did was write the phrase, "all men are created equal." The worst thing his editors John Adams and Ben Franklin ever did was not catch it in all it's absurdity. There had to have been a better way to express the good belief that everyone deserves equal treatment under the law. Those guys were in a life-or-death fight with a monarch, and that is what Tom's phrase really was about. Too bad people since have been too stupid to grasp what was its real and genuine meaning at the time.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Jonathan Mason, @Paperback Writer

    The phrase “all men are created equal” does seem like an odd one as Thomas Jefferson did not believe in the Creator, never mind trying to apply the phrase aptly to enslaved people.

    Much more likely that it was a riposte to the Divine Right of Kings.

  162. @Jonathan Mason
    @Paperback Writer

    My understanding is that Sally Hemings was a chamber maid at the Hôtel de Langeac and that she attended the Jefferson daughters when they were home from boarding school on vacations.

    Had she been at the school with the Jefferson daughters she might have been at risk, horror of horrors, of learning to read and write.

    The work of a chambermaid included employment in a bedroom making beds, making fires, Heating bathwater, and generally ensuring the comfort of the occupant.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    My understanding is that Sally accompanied the younger daughter to Paris. She was a last minute substitute for an older woman who had just had a baby. On seeing her Abigail Adams thought Sally was unsuitable because she was too young, and seemed rather dense. My memory of what I read is that Hemings accompanied the younger daughter to the convent school.

    I can’t find what I read because it’s all been wiped from the ‘net. Everything I read is anti-Jefferson propaganda, beginning with Monticello.org.

    So, you’re welcome to your interpretations.

    • Replies: @res
    @Paperback Writer


    Everything I read is anti-Jefferson propaganda, beginning with Monticello.org.
     
    Indeed.

    I can’t find what I read because it’s all been wiped from the ‘net.
     
    It would be a service if you could either find some of it on the Internet Archive (e.g. vanished links in blog posts can be good clues) or pass along enough clues of what to look for so I could have a try.

    If it helps here is one article that argues against TJ being the father.
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304211804577500870076728362

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @Paperback Writer

  163. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Paperback Writer

    This was a personal matter among people who lived two centuries ago.

    Why does it "matter" now? Oh, sure, it matters because lots of people want to find out if old Tom did some partially African girl. So what if he did? I dated a Jamaican girl with long, beautiful legs. Does that make me: 1) An evil, bad, White man who takes advantage of Black girls, 2) Stupid enough to copulate with a lesser breed of primate, 3) A hypocrite simply because I eventually married a White woman and never would have done anything else?

    And so on.

    Tom's fucking-habits have nothing at all to do with anything, really. People are just trying to attach their particular causes to it.

    The worst thing Tom Jeff ever did was write the phrase, "all men are created equal." The worst thing his editors John Adams and Ben Franklin ever did was not catch it in all it's absurdity. There had to have been a better way to express the good belief that everyone deserves equal treatment under the law. Those guys were in a life-or-death fight with a monarch, and that is what Tom's phrase really was about. Too bad people since have been too stupid to grasp what was its real and genuine meaning at the time.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Jonathan Mason, @Paperback Writer

    It matters because it makes Jefferson look like a huge hypocrite and gives the shittiest among us a handy stick to beat us with. It matters because every time an R. Kelly gets nailed, they can say, “But Thomas Jefferson.”

    It matters that Monticello.org, is completely given over to Hemings-ism, and now claims that ALL six of her children were fathered by Jefferson.

    It matters because truth matters.

    Agree w/you about “all men are created equal.” It’s caused us a huge load of trouble ever since. Should have been “All men are equal before the law.”

    And, since we’re on the subject: they should have freed the slaves. Shoulda woulda coulda, yeah, I know, but since we’re talking about this, I’m gonna say it and I know I already said it: they should have freed the slaves.

    I have zero doubt that if they had, the development of the country would have been a bit retarded but not by much, and that the black population would have dwindled to an insignificant minority, with the smarter one surviving instead of this dysgenic nightmare.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    @Paperback Writer

    "Equal human dignity" is probably closer to what they meant. I'd obviously add equal under the law today, as well.

    I don't think most people in the 1780s believed slavery was going to last much longer: general consensus seems to be that the Founders believed it would die a natural death like indentured servitude. You have to abandon what you know about what comes next when trying to understand people in the past.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @Reg Cæsar

    , @Buzz Mohawk
    @Paperback Writer


    ... they should have freed the slaves.
     
    Agreed, and there was a Northern wish to do so right then and there.

    Wasn't it the Southern colonies that refused to go along with the "United States" revolution if slavery was abolished then? Wasn't there a big debate about how much Southern slaves could count as people for the purpose of representation by congressmen but not as citizens or voters? Isn't that why those men in Congress came up with the compromise of 3/5 of a man?

    Think about it: If the Southern representatives had their way, every slave would have counted as a citizen for the purpose of cramming more Southerners into Congress, but would not have had a vote or freedom. Pretty fair, huh?

    Yes, they absolutely should have ended slavery right then and there, but it was the Southern colonies that prevented it and doomed America to it's unfortunately absurd history ever since.

    Thank you very much, y'all!

    Replies: @Polistra

  164. @Twinkie
    @nebulafox


    The governments of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were so indisputably, totally evil that it could become a straightforward good/bad fight in the public consciousness.
     
    While I agree that both Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were responsible for objectively monstrously evil acts, I think the issue of morality of countries in and out of wars is more complicated. More or less all countries were created out of conquest, in which the losers were dispossessed and even exterminated. History is littered with atrocities and victor's peace (cue Tacitus - "ubi solitudinem faciunt pacem appellant") that is later rationalized and even glorified. Even the modern British, often touted as having been some of the most benevolent colonialists, engaged in innumerable evil, bloodthirsty acts (massacres, mass rape, etc.) in India when their authority was threatened by the Sepoy Rebellion.

    Had Nazi Germany won the war and established a Tausendjähriges Reich, would the denizens of that much later world (perhaps greatly ameliorated and even liberalized in social conditions from the war-era Nazi Germany) not see the monstrosity of its genesis as nothing but an unfortunate blip in an otherwise glorious history of their nation, the way we Americans used to regard the extermination of American Indians in the settler mythos of our foundation?

    In the long view of history, what seems to matter, in the end, is winning, leaving descendants, and bequeathing a mythos, a culture to the said descendants, however long they might hold on to it. I think morality is what we tell ourselves when we win and do terrible things to the losers, just as the latter ascribe immorality to us.

    As an individual, to the extent that I have a personal moral code, I mean to do good and no evil, but, at the end of the day, I want my people - Americans - to win first.

    Replies: @nebulafox, @RSDB

    True. (I’m out of agrees.)

  165. @Jack D
    @Anon

    It's notable that Jefferson DNA was not found in all of the Hemings descendants but only 1 line - that of Eston, who (perhaps) ironically was one of the ones that recrossed the color line and (along with all of his future descendants) became white again and moved north (and took the name Jefferson). Some of Eston's descendants did very well - one became a wealthy inventor and industrialist, one became a highly successful cotton broker, etc.

    Jefferson DNA was not found in any of the living Hemings descendants that stayed on the black side of the color line - either because it was not there to begin with or else because there was "failure of paternity" somewhere along the line.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    But Monticello.org now says that “at least six” of Hemings’s kids were Tom’s. (I didn’t know she had more than six. Whatever.)

    Thomas Jefferson fathered at least six of Sally Hemings’s children.

    https://www.monticello.org/thomas-jefferson/jefferson-slavery/thomas-jefferson-and-sally-hemings-a-brief-account/

    Jefferson DNA was not found in any of the living Hemings descendants that stayed on the black side of the color line – either because it was not there to begin with or else because there was “failure of paternity” somewhere along the line.

    Really? I thought the rest refused to be tested. They insist on the Jefferson paternity as self-evident.

    • Replies: @res
    @Paperback Writer


    Really? I thought the rest refused to be tested. They insist on the Jefferson paternity as self-evident.
     
    As I understand it there are seven people generally discussed as children of Sally Hemings. From
    https://www.monticello.org/thomas-jefferson/jefferson-slavery/thomas-jefferson-and-sally-hemings-a-brief-account/research-report-on-jefferson-and-hemings/appendix-h-sally-hemings-and-her-children/

    Children (known from Jefferson's records):

    Harriet (1795-1797)
    Beverly (1798-post 1822)
    Harriet (1801-post 1822)
    daughter (1799-1800)
    Madison (1805-1877)
    Eston (1808-1856)

    According to the oral history of the descendants of Thomas C. Woodson (1790-1879), he was Sally Hemings's first child; no documentary information has yet been found to confirm this.
     
    The current score as I understand it.

    Thomas Woodson - 1998 DNA tests (5 descendants, plus 1 more in 2000) indicate not a TJ descendant. (I suspect this is why he is deemphasized in the excerpt above) He was the subject of the original rumor in Jefferson's day.

    Eston Hemings - 1998 DNA tests of male line descendants indicate he is descended from some Jefferson. This is the primary evidence and has been frequently misrepresented as to certainty of TJ as father of Eston.

    Madison Hemings - The grave of his son William was found, but the family declined to have the DNA tested (I find that suggestive).
    https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/jefferson/true/primer.html

    The other four children are daughters so no Y DNA. Also, two of those died young so no descendants at all.

    I am surprised there has not been research done using autosomal DNA (that also seems suggestive to me, the left seems big on the "accumulate minimal evidence supporting my point then stop looking" approach--wouldn't want to accidentally prove yourself wrong I guess).

    Here is a reference to the 1998 paper. DOI 10.1038/23835 can be found on Sci-Hub.
    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9817200/

    I think TJ has non-male line descendants (the 1998 paper had to go back to his grandfather to find male lines). Here is a WikiTree for five generations, but living people are generally private.
    https://www.wikitree.com/genealogy/Jefferson-Descendants-1

    One problem with looking at autosomal DNA is Sally Hemings being a half sister of TJ's wife would confuse things. It might work better to look for connections through TJ's parents for that reason (but that gets closer to the other possible Jeffersons, which also confuses things).

    Here is someone saying she was "spearheading an autosomal DNA project on the descendants of Sally Hemings" in 2012.
    https://blog.23andme.com/23andme-customer-stories/thomas-jefferson-black-descendants/
    She originally posted about the project in her blog at
    http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2011/09/dna-test-spurs-surprising-discovery-of.html
    with these followups:
    http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2011/09/dna-test-spurs-surprising-discovery.html
    http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2012/02/snip-of-week-news-from-world-of-genetic.html
    But nothing I see since 2012. This is the label I used to search.
    http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/search/label/Hemings

    This looks like CeCe Moore's project (she is co-administrator).
    Hemings-Jefferson-Wayles-Eppes Autosomal DNA Project
    https://www.geni.com/projects/The-Hemings-Jefferson-Wayles-Eppes-Autosomal-DNA-Project/38041
    2013 Shannon Christmas is a co-administrator:
    https://www.blogtalkradio.com/bernicebennett/2013/06/28/strategies-for-using-autosomal-dna
    2019 still working on it:
    https://www.gagensociety.org/genealogy-events/find-genealogical-gems-in-your-genes-with-gedmatch/

    I wonder if they actually did anything. I don't see anything of substance there. Looks more like a vanity project which is cool to say you are doing, but I'd be happy to be proven wrong.

    This Master's thesis has some discussion of Jefferson DNA testing issues. In particular autosomal testing and the multiple possible lines of common descent.
    https://cdr.lib.unc.edu/downloads/pc289n61z?locale=en

    For completeness.

    A Y DNA project: https://www.dnareunion.com/famous-dna/view/2/

    P.S. From links I encountered above, some references to "not TJ" web sites.
    www.tjheritage.org
    www.jeffersondnastudy.com

    One interesting excerpt from the latter site.
    https://jeffersondnastudy.com/dna-study/unanswered-questions/

    Why did the eight descendants of Madison Hemings originally give me their oral approval to exhume William Beverly Hemings and then refuse to give written approval just a few days later?
     
    P.P.S. The Y chromosome STR terminology used in the 1998 paper is a bit different from what FTDNA and YFull use now. Assuming this is correct, it makes for a better starting point doing STR comparisons.
    https://www.familytreedna.com/landing/matching-jefferson.aspx
    That is a 12 marker test (11 in the paper, not sure why the difference) commonly called a haplotype.
    https://learn.familytreedna.com/ftdna/understanding-y-dna-matches

    FTDNA has a Jefferson project at https://www.familytreedna.com/public/jefferson?iframe=yresults
    There are a few there who look like matches to TJ's GF (grandfather). One who lists TJ's GGF (great GF) as oldest known paternal ancestor. Here are WikiTree and FamilySearch pages for TJ's GGF (AFAICT).
    https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Jefferson-111
    https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/details/LBN6-L8M

    I am NOT a Jefferson descendant ; )
  166. @Paperback Writer
    @Buzz Mohawk

    It matters because it makes Jefferson look like a huge hypocrite and gives the shittiest among us a handy stick to beat us with. It matters because every time an R. Kelly gets nailed, they can say, "But Thomas Jefferson."

    It matters that Monticello.org, is completely given over to Hemings-ism, and now claims that ALL six of her children were fathered by Jefferson.

    It matters because truth matters.

    Agree w/you about "all men are created equal." It's caused us a huge load of trouble ever since. Should have been "All men are equal before the law."

    And, since we're on the subject: they should have freed the slaves. Shoulda woulda coulda, yeah, I know, but since we're talking about this, I'm gonna say it and I know I already said it: they should have freed the slaves.

    I have zero doubt that if they had, the development of the country would have been a bit retarded but not by much, and that the black population would have dwindled to an insignificant minority, with the smarter one surviving instead of this dysgenic nightmare.

    Replies: @nebulafox, @Buzz Mohawk

    “Equal human dignity” is probably closer to what they meant. I’d obviously add equal under the law today, as well.

    I don’t think most people in the 1780s believed slavery was going to last much longer: general consensus seems to be that the Founders believed it would die a natural death like indentured servitude. You have to abandon what you know about what comes next when trying to understand people in the past.

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @nebulafox

    Agree with your last point.

    About "all men are created equal" - we could argue what they meant to the death. Which is the problem. If he meant "equal in human dignity" then he should have said so. Instead, he wrote a vapid, abstract command and it's lead to a boatload of trouble ever since.

    Replies: @nebulafox

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @nebulafox


    I don’t think most people in the 1780s believed slavery was going to last much longer: general consensus seems to be that the Founders believed it would die a natural death like indentured servitude.
     
    Blame Eli Whitney. He made African "labo(u)r" marginally profitable, at least as long as the market was cornered.

    He also impressed Jefferson with his explanation, in person, of interchangeable parts for rifles, his primary business. That made all the difference sixty years on. Old Eli invented both sides of the Civil War.

    Replies: @nebulafox

  167. @nebulafox
    @Twinkie

    I find it particularly revealing that the people who want to remove the history (and in the rural Deep South, they are largely outsiders) have no realistic, constructive thing to replace the history with. This indicates they aren't so much interested in history as much as power, and perhaps their own complexes in some cases.

    The truth is people have to make sense of their own history, just as they need to make political arrangements that suit their own circumstances. It really is the only way a healthy relationship with that history can develop. Outside imposition, even if successful, rarely develops into something healthy. The fact that the NYT wants BadAmerica, and in particular the South, to be more like contemporary Germany, speaks volumes: never mind that Germany's post-1968 historical relationship is anything but healthy.

    Besides, the CW narrative that dominated American education until the last 50 years served a purpose beyond psychological healing. That was to ensure secession was dead as a dodo and the South could be properly reintegrated after a conflict that left 1 in 4 military age men dead. It succeeded beyond anybody's wildest dreams. The South would view itself as more American than any other part of the nation rather than something potentially different. This was huge, and not something that was inevitable in 1865.

    Of course, the price for this national healing was the tacit willingness to throw the blacks of the South to the wolves for another near century, which I'm obviously not going to defend. But it wasn't done casually on a whim, and in any case, it has been over half a century since America began to address that particular sin. Hell, we talk about it every day in the papers. If the people complaining about the statues were simply interested in justice rather than cleansing, why didn't they complain then?


    "Courage is an innate quality that manifests externally via action. It is never negated by that which exists outside the man."

    G-O-L-D.

    I think the reason WWII stands out in memory is precisely because it is the exception and not the rule in human history. For most of human history, abstract notions of good and bad didn't matter: it was your side and that was that. It's only been relatively recently that this changed.

    The governments of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were so indisputably, totally evil that it could become a straightforward good/bad fight in the public consciousness. Whether that was genuinely because of direct contrast to one's own state, or in the case of the Soviets and Chinese, because it was clear what Axis victory meant for you and your people, however immoral your own government was. It was also fought almost to completion, unlike the preceding world war, or the successor Cold War conflicts.

    Replies: @nebulafox, @Prester John, @Twinkie, @Paperback Writer

    I find it particularly revealing that the people who want to remove the history (and in the rural Deep South, they are largely outsiders) have no realistic, constructive thing to replace the history with

    They think they do. Their woke sassy black woman Malcolm Xed out history. We don’t agree – but they love it.

    Anyway, I wasn’t raised in the South and the UDC didn’t dictate my curriculum. I went to NYC schools 50 years ago & we were taught slavery was the cause of secession, the South was wrong, and the good side won. But that doesn’t go far enough for the woke. They want the South to be damned in eternity, and that America’s “Original Sin” be damned in eternity as well.

    To which I say: FOAD.

  168. @nebulafox
    @Paperback Writer

    "Equal human dignity" is probably closer to what they meant. I'd obviously add equal under the law today, as well.

    I don't think most people in the 1780s believed slavery was going to last much longer: general consensus seems to be that the Founders believed it would die a natural death like indentured servitude. You have to abandon what you know about what comes next when trying to understand people in the past.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @Reg Cæsar

    Agree with your last point.

    About “all men are created equal” – we could argue what they meant to the death. Which is the problem. If he meant “equal in human dignity” then he should have said so. Instead, he wrote a vapid, abstract command and it’s lead to a boatload of trouble ever since.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    @Paperback Writer

    I'm not from the South, either. That's precisely why I don't think it's my affair, despite my overall dim view on the Confederacy.

    "About “all men are created equal” – we could argue what they meant to the death. Which is the problem. If he meant “equal in human dignity” then he should have said so. Instead, he wrote a vapid, abstract command and it’s lead to a boatload of trouble ever since."

    How were they supposed to see 200 years in the future? In the world they lived in, nobody seriously took that in the blank slate sense. They had the opposite problem to deal with, in many ways.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

  169. What I never understood about Eston Hemings Jefferson is this. He moved from Virginia to Ohio to Wisconsin, along the way adding the name Jefferson to Hemings.

    Supposedly he moved away from blackness in the process. But didn’t his name give away the game? Especially adding “Jefferson”?

    His son John Wayles is portrayed here:

    https://wisconsinart.org/viewpage.aspx?title=jefferson

    and here:

    https://www.battlefields.org/learn/biographies/john-wayles-jefferson

    (Note the difference in referring to parentage. And yes, I realize this is a painting, but it’s probably a faithful likeness. He had zero visible black ancestry, to my eyes.)

    The 2nd article clearly hints that his origins were known in Wisconsin. It strikes me they were advertising it. Taking on the name Jefferson, when Jefferson was known to have only two surviving daughters, and their families were in Virginia, would naturally raise doubts.

    Regardless of whether Thomas Jefferson was their grandfather, they were screaming to the world their slave origins, therefore, they had “colored blood.”

  170. @Paperback Writer
    @nebulafox

    Agree with your last point.

    About "all men are created equal" - we could argue what they meant to the death. Which is the problem. If he meant "equal in human dignity" then he should have said so. Instead, he wrote a vapid, abstract command and it's lead to a boatload of trouble ever since.

    Replies: @nebulafox

    I’m not from the South, either. That’s precisely why I don’t think it’s my affair, despite my overall dim view on the Confederacy.

    “About “all men are created equal” – we could argue what they meant to the death. Which is the problem. If he meant “equal in human dignity” then he should have said so. Instead, he wrote a vapid, abstract command and it’s lead to a boatload of trouble ever since.”

    How were they supposed to see 200 years in the future? In the world they lived in, nobody seriously took that in the blank slate sense. They had the opposite problem to deal with, in many ways.

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @nebulafox


    How were they supposed to see 200 years in the future? In the world they lived in, nobody seriously took that in the blank slate sense. They had the opposite problem to deal with, in many ways.
     
    nebula - I respect your opinion so this surprises me.

    We're talking about Thomas Jefferson, who presciently wrote of impending race war and indelible differences here and here:

    https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/jeffauto.asp

    https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/jeffvir.asp

    Nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion has drawn indelible lines of distinction between them.

    and produce convulsions which will probably never end but in the extermination of the one or the other race
     
  171. @Veteran Aryan
    @Reg Cæsar


    Then why isn’t it used by computers?
     
    There are only 10 kinds of people - those who understand binary and those who do not.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    There are only 10 kinds of people – those who understand binary and those who do not.

    How many grams to a kilogram?

    1111101000.

    • Replies: @Veteran Aryan
    @Reg Cæsar


    How many grams to a kilogram?

    1111101000.
     
    True. However, there are 10000000000 Bytes in a Kilobyte.
  172. @nebulafox
    @Paperback Writer

    "Equal human dignity" is probably closer to what they meant. I'd obviously add equal under the law today, as well.

    I don't think most people in the 1780s believed slavery was going to last much longer: general consensus seems to be that the Founders believed it would die a natural death like indentured servitude. You have to abandon what you know about what comes next when trying to understand people in the past.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @Reg Cæsar

    I don’t think most people in the 1780s believed slavery was going to last much longer: general consensus seems to be that the Founders believed it would die a natural death like indentured servitude.

    Blame Eli Whitney. He made African “labo(u)r” marginally profitable, at least as long as the market was cornered.

    He also impressed Jefferson with his explanation, in person, of interchangeable parts for rifles, his primary business. That made all the difference sixty years on. Old Eli invented both sides of the Civil War.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    @Reg Cæsar

    Greed is like any other emotion. Neither good nor bad: but powerful. Use it wisely.

    I don't think what happened in Haiti helped, to be fair. But the fears were misplaced, IMO. Haitian demographics were far more skewed toward Africans than American ones, and were completely dominated by large scale sugar plantations with often absentee owners. Thanks to these factors, Haitian slave owning culture had a degree of institutionalized sadism that even the worst American plantations lacked, which led to the brutalized, deeply vengeful slaves committing genocide eventually against the remnants of the French.

    Naturally, though, planation owners didn't look it that way, which... yeah, pretty damned predictable.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

  173. @Reg Cæsar
    @nebulafox


    I don’t think most people in the 1780s believed slavery was going to last much longer: general consensus seems to be that the Founders believed it would die a natural death like indentured servitude.
     
    Blame Eli Whitney. He made African "labo(u)r" marginally profitable, at least as long as the market was cornered.

    He also impressed Jefferson with his explanation, in person, of interchangeable parts for rifles, his primary business. That made all the difference sixty years on. Old Eli invented both sides of the Civil War.

    Replies: @nebulafox

    Greed is like any other emotion. Neither good nor bad: but powerful. Use it wisely.

    I don’t think what happened in Haiti helped, to be fair. But the fears were misplaced, IMO. Haitian demographics were far more skewed toward Africans than American ones, and were completely dominated by large scale sugar plantations with often absentee owners. Thanks to these factors, Haitian slave owning culture had a degree of institutionalized sadism that even the worst American plantations lacked, which led to the brutalized, deeply vengeful slaves committing genocide eventually against the remnants of the French.

    Naturally, though, planation owners didn’t look it that way, which… yeah, pretty damned predictable.

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @nebulafox

    Jefferson was quite prescient about race relations. I gave the links in some other answer to you.

    So there's no excuse as to his hypocrisy and blindness. He was also a spendthrift, and prone to airy abstractions.

    His friend John Adams (Abigail was not so enthusiastic) chastised him about the Callender smears. Adams said that this was an inevitable consequence of keeping slaves. Jefferson didn't listen. If he had spent less and freed his slaves most of the poison in this debate would have been averted.

  174. @Paperback Writer
    @Jonathan Mason

    My understanding is that Sally accompanied the younger daughter to Paris. She was a last minute substitute for an older woman who had just had a baby. On seeing her Abigail Adams thought Sally was unsuitable because she was too young, and seemed rather dense. My memory of what I read is that Hemings accompanied the younger daughter to the convent school.

    I can't find what I read because it's all been wiped from the 'net. Everything I read is anti-Jefferson propaganda, beginning with Monticello.org.

    So, you're welcome to your interpretations.

    Replies: @res

    Everything I read is anti-Jefferson propaganda, beginning with Monticello.org.

    Indeed.

    I can’t find what I read because it’s all been wiped from the ‘net.

    It would be a service if you could either find some of it on the Internet Archive (e.g. vanished links in blog posts can be good clues) or pass along enough clues of what to look for so I could have a try.

    If it helps here is one article that argues against TJ being the father.
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304211804577500870076728362

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @res

    I'll try but I can't promise anything - this is a diversion from my work.

    But here's this:

    https://web.archive.org/web/20170223130615/https://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/03/nyregion/a-founding-father-and-his-family-ties.html

    Published in 2001, it refers modestly to only one child. As the story has developed, suddenly ALL the children were Thomas'. Even though there's no proof of that at all.

    Another weird thing is that John Weeks Jefferson, whose genes were used to prove this, has dropped out of the picture entirely, while his sister Julia went the Oprah route.


    After the revelation, John, who likes his privacy, largely remained out of the public eye. But Mrs. Westerinen was swept into the media river, met some of her distant black cousins on "Oprah" and went off on a speaking tour with one of them, all because she embraced her new black heritage.
     
    Was swept? She hogged the limelight while her brother was not so inclined.

    The article mentions her father and his "brothers." Those brothers and presumably their families, if they had any, are also disinclined to take part in this media circus. What do they get out of it?

    Julia Westerinen strikes me as one of those Nice White Ladies who loves the idea of diversity, while her very distant blackish relatives (none of whom can prove descent to Jefferson) are black nationalists. I think that most of this happy-clappy petered out a few years ago. Meanwhile, Monticello has become totally Oprahfied.

    Replies: @res, @Jonathan Mason

    , @Paperback Writer
    @res

    Spending too much time on this stupid subject than I should, but here's a start.

    Here’s a 1987 NY Times article (saved in 2015) about Abigail Adams & Hemings:

    https://web.archive.org/web/20150524203427/https://www.nytimes.com/1987/05/02/opinion/l-abigail-adams-meets-sally-hem-m-ings-189687.html

    It’s a letter. It would be interesting to look up the (misleading) article the letter seems to correct, but I won’t. You can.


    In Captain Ramsey's opinion, Sally would be of ''little service.'' On further acquaintance, the sister of James Hemings, Jefferson's young servant in Paris [Note: this is the butler to whom I referred in several comments], did not inspire greater confidence, but rather deepening concern. Abigail thought Sally ''wanting more care than the child,'' that she was ''wholly incapable'' of looking properly after Polly ''without some superior to direct her.''

    In light of Abigail's reaction, whether Sally Hemings matured on her subsequent stay in Paris to become Jefferson's lover is an intriguing question.

     

    In 1987, it was OK to note that Adams' observation that that Sally was juvenile and backward. Quite a competitor to Maria Cosway!

    By 2016, things had changed radically:

    https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/john-adams-out-thomas-jefferson-sally-hemings-180960789/


    Jefferson almost certainly began having sex with Hemings.

     

    The author refers to Abigail Adams mistaking Hemings’ age for 15 or 16, but only to support his thesis that Jefferson immediately began having sex with the supposedly mature adolescent.

    He does not mention that Adams thought Hemings needed more care than the 8 year old she accompanied.

    Slanted, much?

    Interesting that Mark Silk thought Adams slightly mistaken estimation of Hemings’ age was important – as if in those days a 15 year old was a fully developed woman. (Age of menarche in the 18th century was between 15 and 17.)

    And there's this:

    https://evblog.virginiahumanities.org/2012/11/what-abigail-implied/

    I really don’t have time to deconstruct the whole thing, other than to note that by 2012 Abigail Adams has become a full-fledged racist, rather than a woman who just described what she saw: a dumb kid who was overwhelmed by a job she got pulled into at the last moment.

    Nothing in this article about why Sally was assigned to supervise Polly: as a last-minute substitute for Betty Hemings.

    My point is that between 1987 and the 2000s, something changed. And not for the better.

    PS - Something I just noticed after reading that 1987 Times letter several times, Captain Ramsey also thought Sally was rather a drip. Adams wasn't the only one.

    Replies: @Jack D

  175. @nebulafox
    @Paperback Writer

    I'm not from the South, either. That's precisely why I don't think it's my affair, despite my overall dim view on the Confederacy.

    "About “all men are created equal” – we could argue what they meant to the death. Which is the problem. If he meant “equal in human dignity” then he should have said so. Instead, he wrote a vapid, abstract command and it’s lead to a boatload of trouble ever since."

    How were they supposed to see 200 years in the future? In the world they lived in, nobody seriously took that in the blank slate sense. They had the opposite problem to deal with, in many ways.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    How were they supposed to see 200 years in the future? In the world they lived in, nobody seriously took that in the blank slate sense. They had the opposite problem to deal with, in many ways.

    nebula – I respect your opinion so this surprises me.

    We’re talking about Thomas Jefferson, who presciently wrote of impending race war and indelible differences here and here:

    https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/jeffauto.asp

    https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/jeffvir.asp

    Nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion has drawn indelible lines of distinction between them.

    and produce convulsions which will probably never end but in the extermination of the one or the other race

  176. @res
    @Paperback Writer


    Everything I read is anti-Jefferson propaganda, beginning with Monticello.org.
     
    Indeed.

    I can’t find what I read because it’s all been wiped from the ‘net.
     
    It would be a service if you could either find some of it on the Internet Archive (e.g. vanished links in blog posts can be good clues) or pass along enough clues of what to look for so I could have a try.

    If it helps here is one article that argues against TJ being the father.
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304211804577500870076728362

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @Paperback Writer

    I’ll try but I can’t promise anything – this is a diversion from my work.

    But here’s this:

    https://web.archive.org/web/20170223130615/https://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/03/nyregion/a-founding-father-and-his-family-ties.html

    Published in 2001, it refers modestly to only one child. As the story has developed, suddenly ALL the children were Thomas’. Even though there’s no proof of that at all.

    Another weird thing is that John Weeks Jefferson, whose genes were used to prove this, has dropped out of the picture entirely, while his sister Julia went the Oprah route.

    After the revelation, John, who likes his privacy, largely remained out of the public eye. But Mrs. Westerinen was swept into the media river, met some of her distant black cousins on “Oprah” and went off on a speaking tour with one of them, all because she embraced her new black heritage.

    Was swept? She hogged the limelight while her brother was not so inclined.

    The article mentions her father and his “brothers.” Those brothers and presumably their families, if they had any, are also disinclined to take part in this media circus. What do they get out of it?

    Julia Westerinen strikes me as one of those Nice White Ladies who loves the idea of diversity, while her very distant blackish relatives (none of whom can prove descent to Jefferson) are black nationalists. I think that most of this happy-clappy petered out a few years ago. Meanwhile, Monticello has become totally Oprahfied.

    • Replies: @res
    @Paperback Writer

    Thanks. John Weeks Jefferson appeared briefly here in 2011.
    Two local descendants of Thomas Jefferson
    https://6abc.com/archive/7980914/

    Here is Julia Westerinen
    https://www.monticello.org/getting-word/people/julia-jefferson-westerinen
    A number of videos there, but I did not watch.

    Folding in reply to your following comment.


    Spending too much time on this stupid subject than I should
     
    Indeed, but trying to dig out the truth as much as possible (given all of the misinformation out there) seems worthwhile.

    It would be interesting to look up the (misleading) article the letter seems to correct, but I won’t. You can.
     
    That's fair. It looks like there was a bit of a discussion (might help to stop page load before it completes).
    https://www.nytimes.com/1987/04/07/opinion/l-sally-hemmings-steps-forth-on-her-own-248287.html (references letters, Feb. 15, March 1 and 15)
    (March 15) https://www.nytimes.com/1987/03/15/opinion/l-the-jefferson-defense-calls-dumas-malone-301887.html
    (March 1) https://www.nytimes.com/1987/03/01/opinion/l-support-for-jefferson-sally-hemmings-liaison-735787.html
    (Feb. 15, references Feb. 7 letter, not found) https://www.nytimes.com/1987/02/15/opinion/l-after-almost-200-years-sally-hemmings-still-dogs-jefferson-952287.html

    https://evblog.virginiahumanities.org/2012/11/what-abigail-implied/
     
    Thanks! That site and its links look like a great source of primary references.

    My point is that between 1987 and the 2000s, something changed. And not for the better.
     
    Good summation.

    P.S. This list only goes back to late 1987 (does not include above), but helps give an idea of the ebb and flow of the conversation since then in the NYT.
    https://www.nytimes.com/topic/person/sally-hemings

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    , @Jonathan Mason
    @Paperback Writer


    As the story has developed, suddenly ALL the children were Thomas’. Even though there’s no proof of that at all.
     
    Isn't that what Madison Hemings claimed?
  177. @res
    @Paperback Writer


    Everything I read is anti-Jefferson propaganda, beginning with Monticello.org.
     
    Indeed.

    I can’t find what I read because it’s all been wiped from the ‘net.
     
    It would be a service if you could either find some of it on the Internet Archive (e.g. vanished links in blog posts can be good clues) or pass along enough clues of what to look for so I could have a try.

    If it helps here is one article that argues against TJ being the father.
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304211804577500870076728362

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @Paperback Writer

    Spending too much time on this stupid subject than I should, but here’s a start.

    Here’s a 1987 NY Times article (saved in 2015) about Abigail Adams & Hemings:

    https://web.archive.org/web/20150524203427/https://www.nytimes.com/1987/05/02/opinion/l-abigail-adams-meets-sally-hem-m-ings-189687.html

    It’s a letter. It would be interesting to look up the (misleading) article the letter seems to correct, but I won’t. You can.

    In Captain Ramsey’s opinion, Sally would be of ”little service.” On further acquaintance, the sister of James Hemings, Jefferson’s young servant in Paris [Note: this is the butler to whom I referred in several comments], did not inspire greater confidence, but rather deepening concern. Abigail thought Sally ”wanting more care than the child,” that she was ”wholly incapable” of looking properly after Polly ”without some superior to direct her.”

    In light of Abigail’s reaction, whether Sally Hemings matured on her subsequent stay in Paris to become Jefferson’s lover is an intriguing question.

    In 1987, it was OK to note that Adams’ observation that that Sally was juvenile and backward. Quite a competitor to Maria Cosway!

    By 2016, things had changed radically:

    https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/john-adams-out-thomas-jefferson-sally-hemings-180960789/

    Jefferson almost certainly began having sex with Hemings.

    The author refers to Abigail Adams mistaking Hemings’ age for 15 or 16, but only to support his thesis that Jefferson immediately began having sex with the supposedly mature adolescent.

    He does not mention that Adams thought Hemings needed more care than the 8 year old she accompanied.

    Slanted, much?

    Interesting that Mark Silk thought Adams slightly mistaken estimation of Hemings’ age was important – as if in those days a 15 year old was a fully developed woman. (Age of menarche in the 18th century was between 15 and 17.)

    And there’s this:

    https://evblog.virginiahumanities.org/2012/11/what-abigail-implied/

    I really don’t have time to deconstruct the whole thing, other than to note that by 2012 Abigail Adams has become a full-fledged racist, rather than a woman who just described what she saw: a dumb kid who was overwhelmed by a job she got pulled into at the last moment.

    Nothing in this article about why Sally was assigned to supervise Polly: as a last-minute substitute for Betty Hemings.

    My point is that between 1987 and the 2000s, something changed. And not for the better.

    PS – Something I just noticed after reading that 1987 Times letter several times, Captain Ramsey also thought Sally was rather a drip. Adams wasn’t the only one.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Paperback Writer

    Unfortunately, these things are not mutually exclusive. Just because Sally was a bit of a mess and needed supervision does not mean that she did not fall into an affair with Jefferson. In fact it perhaps makes it more likely than if she had been a mature and trustworthy young woman.

    Prominent men having affairs (and love children) with their children's nannies is all too common.

    Of course, our modern Oprahfied society has picked up the ball and run with it. Probably won't be long now before they put Sally's picture on the nickel instead of Jefferson. They would have done it already if they HAD a picture. (BTW, now that Biden is in, is Harriet Tubman making a comeback on the $20 bill?) However, the current hypocrisy is just the mirror image of the old, pre-DNA days when Jefferson's defenders said that no Jefferson EVER had anything to do with black people. As Alden points out, all these light skinned blacks in America didn't just spring from a seashell like Venus.

    https://i.pinimg.com/564x/fb/13/b2/fb13b2629a4dc2cfffb39ec462804ab2.jpg

    If it wasn't old TJ who dun it, there were a bunch of other white guys who were hanging around that Hemings family tree. People here often comment (not without some truth) on how black females are the least attractive of any race but the Hemings ladies look pretty good and I think come out ahead of a lot of white women.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @Buzz Mohawk

  178. @Paperback Writer
    @Jack D

    But Monticello.org now says that "at least six" of Hemings's kids were Tom's. (I didn't know she had more than six. Whatever.)


    Thomas Jefferson fathered at least six of Sally Hemings’s children.
     
    https://www.monticello.org/thomas-jefferson/jefferson-slavery/thomas-jefferson-and-sally-hemings-a-brief-account/

    Jefferson DNA was not found in any of the living Hemings descendants that stayed on the black side of the color line – either because it was not there to begin with or else because there was “failure of paternity” somewhere along the line.
     
    Really? I thought the rest refused to be tested. They insist on the Jefferson paternity as self-evident.

    Replies: @res

    Really? I thought the rest refused to be tested. They insist on the Jefferson paternity as self-evident.

    As I understand it there are seven people generally discussed as children of Sally Hemings. From
    https://www.monticello.org/thomas-jefferson/jefferson-slavery/thomas-jefferson-and-sally-hemings-a-brief-account/research-report-on-jefferson-and-hemings/appendix-h-sally-hemings-and-her-children/

    Children (known from Jefferson’s records):

    Harriet (1795-1797)
    Beverly (1798-post 1822)
    Harriet (1801-post 1822)
    daughter (1799-1800)
    Madison (1805-1877)
    Eston (1808-1856)

    According to the oral history of the descendants of Thomas C. Woodson (1790-1879), he was Sally Hemings’s first child; no documentary information has yet been found to confirm this.

    The current score as I understand it.

    Thomas Woodson – 1998 DNA tests (5 descendants, plus 1 more in 2000) indicate not a TJ descendant. (I suspect this is why he is deemphasized in the excerpt above) He was the subject of the original rumor in Jefferson’s day.

    Eston Hemings – 1998 DNA tests of male line descendants indicate he is descended from some Jefferson. This is the primary evidence and has been frequently misrepresented as to certainty of TJ as father of Eston.

    Madison Hemings – The grave of his son William was found, but the family declined to have the DNA tested (I find that suggestive).
    https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/jefferson/true/primer.html

    The other four children are daughters so no Y DNA. Also, two of those died young so no descendants at all.

    I am surprised there has not been research done using autosomal DNA (that also seems suggestive to me, the left seems big on the “accumulate minimal evidence supporting my point then stop looking” approach–wouldn’t want to accidentally prove yourself wrong I guess).

    Here is a reference to the 1998 paper. DOI 10.1038/23835 can be found on Sci-Hub.
    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9817200/

    I think TJ has non-male line descendants (the 1998 paper had to go back to his grandfather to find male lines). Here is a WikiTree for five generations, but living people are generally private.
    https://www.wikitree.com/genealogy/Jefferson-Descendants-1

    One problem with looking at autosomal DNA is Sally Hemings being a half sister of TJ’s wife would confuse things. It might work better to look for connections through TJ’s parents for that reason (but that gets closer to the other possible Jeffersons, which also confuses things).

    Here is someone saying she was “spearheading an autosomal DNA project on the descendants of Sally Hemings” in 2012.
    https://blog.23andme.com/23andme-customer-stories/thomas-jefferson-black-descendants/
    She originally posted about the project in her blog at
    http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2011/09/dna-test-spurs-surprising-discovery-of.html
    with these followups:
    http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2011/09/dna-test-spurs-surprising-discovery.html
    http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2012/02/snip-of-week-news-from-world-of-genetic.html
    But nothing I see since 2012. This is the label I used to search.
    http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/search/label/Hemings

    This looks like CeCe Moore’s project (she is co-administrator).
    Hemings-Jefferson-Wayles-Eppes Autosomal DNA Project
    https://www.geni.com/projects/The-Hemings-Jefferson-Wayles-Eppes-Autosomal-DNA-Project/38041
    2013 Shannon Christmas is a co-administrator:
    https://www.blogtalkradio.com/bernicebennett/2013/06/28/strategies-for-using-autosomal-dna
    2019 still working on it:
    https://www.gagensociety.org/genealogy-events/find-genealogical-gems-in-your-genes-with-gedmatch/

    I wonder if they actually did anything. I don’t see anything of substance there. Looks more like a vanity project which is cool to say you are doing, but I’d be happy to be proven wrong.

    This Master’s thesis has some discussion of Jefferson DNA testing issues. In particular autosomal testing and the multiple possible lines of common descent.
    https://cdr.lib.unc.edu/downloads/pc289n61z?locale=en

    For completeness.

    A Y DNA project: https://www.dnareunion.com/famous-dna/view/2/

    P.S. From links I encountered above, some references to “not TJ” web sites.
    http://www.tjheritage.org
    http://www.jeffersondnastudy.com

    One interesting excerpt from the latter site.
    https://jeffersondnastudy.com/dna-study/unanswered-questions/

    Why did the eight descendants of Madison Hemings originally give me their oral approval to exhume William Beverly Hemings and then refuse to give written approval just a few days later?

    P.P.S. The Y chromosome STR terminology used in the 1998 paper is a bit different from what FTDNA and YFull use now. Assuming this is correct, it makes for a better starting point doing STR comparisons.
    https://www.familytreedna.com/landing/matching-jefferson.aspx
    That is a 12 marker test (11 in the paper, not sure why the difference) commonly called a haplotype.
    https://learn.familytreedna.com/ftdna/understanding-y-dna-matches

    FTDNA has a Jefferson project at https://www.familytreedna.com/public/jefferson?iframe=yresults
    There are a few there who look like matches to TJ’s GF (grandfather). One who lists TJ’s GGF (great GF) as oldest known paternal ancestor. Here are WikiTree and FamilySearch pages for TJ’s GGF (AFAICT).
    https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Jefferson-111
    https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/details/LBN6-L8M

    I am NOT a Jefferson descendant ; )

  179. @Polistra
    Remember Science? Science says that we have absolute no proof of the Hemings alliance, except that it was likely someone in the family. We hate science, don't we?

    PS. George Washington is next. Who, after that?

    Replies: @Anon, @Jack D, @Getaclue, @Alden, @SunBakedSuburb, @Buzz Mohawk, @carroll price

    George Washington is next. Who, after that?

    You and me – think I’m joking?

  180. Here’s something else about Madison:

    https://www.tampabay.com/archive/2000/01/04/grave-may-yield-jefferson-clues/

    See my other responses to you. The story has morphed from “Jefferson may have fathered Eston” to “Jefferson definitely fathered all of Hemings’ children” in 20 years.

    • Agree: res
  181. @Dumbo
    In any case, if the story of Sally Hemings is true, then Jefferson, regardless of his achievements, does not seem to have been a person with really great moral judgements. Yes, I guess having bastards wth "the help" was normal even in slave-less England, but still, not morally commendable.

    Perhaps Jefferson should be cancelled from the right, for being an adulterer and a race-mixer? LOL.

    Further, considering that Jefferson's wife was actually Sally Hemings' half-sister, this sound like one of those "cousin marriage" stories one hears from Islamic countries...

    Replies: @carroll price

    Jefferson, regardless of his achievements, does not seem to have been a person with really great moral judgements.

    Moral judgements are confined to the head. They have never been know to extend below the neck line.
    .

  182. @Paperback Writer
    @res

    I'll try but I can't promise anything - this is a diversion from my work.

    But here's this:

    https://web.archive.org/web/20170223130615/https://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/03/nyregion/a-founding-father-and-his-family-ties.html

    Published in 2001, it refers modestly to only one child. As the story has developed, suddenly ALL the children were Thomas'. Even though there's no proof of that at all.

    Another weird thing is that John Weeks Jefferson, whose genes were used to prove this, has dropped out of the picture entirely, while his sister Julia went the Oprah route.


    After the revelation, John, who likes his privacy, largely remained out of the public eye. But Mrs. Westerinen was swept into the media river, met some of her distant black cousins on "Oprah" and went off on a speaking tour with one of them, all because she embraced her new black heritage.
     
    Was swept? She hogged the limelight while her brother was not so inclined.

    The article mentions her father and his "brothers." Those brothers and presumably their families, if they had any, are also disinclined to take part in this media circus. What do they get out of it?

    Julia Westerinen strikes me as one of those Nice White Ladies who loves the idea of diversity, while her very distant blackish relatives (none of whom can prove descent to Jefferson) are black nationalists. I think that most of this happy-clappy petered out a few years ago. Meanwhile, Monticello has become totally Oprahfied.

    Replies: @res, @Jonathan Mason

    Thanks. John Weeks Jefferson appeared briefly here in 2011.
    Two local descendants of Thomas Jefferson
    https://6abc.com/archive/7980914/

    Here is Julia Westerinen
    https://www.monticello.org/getting-word/people/julia-jefferson-westerinen
    A number of videos there, but I did not watch.

    Folding in reply to your following comment.

    Spending too much time on this stupid subject than I should

    Indeed, but trying to dig out the truth as much as possible (given all of the misinformation out there) seems worthwhile.

    It would be interesting to look up the (misleading) article the letter seems to correct, but I won’t. You can.

    That’s fair. It looks like there was a bit of a discussion (might help to stop page load before it completes).
    https://www.nytimes.com/1987/04/07/opinion/l-sally-hemmings-steps-forth-on-her-own-248287.html (references letters, Feb. 15, March 1 and 15)
    (March 15) https://www.nytimes.com/1987/03/15/opinion/l-the-jefferson-defense-calls-dumas-malone-301887.html
    (March 1) https://www.nytimes.com/1987/03/01/opinion/l-support-for-jefferson-sally-hemmings-liaison-735787.html
    (Feb. 15, references Feb. 7 letter, not found) https://www.nytimes.com/1987/02/15/opinion/l-after-almost-200-years-sally-hemmings-still-dogs-jefferson-952287.html

    https://evblog.virginiahumanities.org/2012/11/what-abigail-implied/

    Thanks! That site and its links look like a great source of primary references.

    My point is that between 1987 and the 2000s, something changed. And not for the better.

    Good summation.

    P.S. This list only goes back to late 1987 (does not include above), but helps give an idea of the ebb and flow of the conversation since then in the NYT.
    https://www.nytimes.com/topic/person/sally-hemings

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @res

    I think both sides goaded each other into a maximalist position.

    The pro-Jeffersons were very huffy & dismissive. No, this could NEVER have happened.

    Instead of saying it was possible that an elderly Jefferson fell for a woman who resembled his late, beloved wife* they stonewalled and dismissed. Naturally the other side dug in its heels and upped the stakes. That's what happens in bitter disputes.

    (Remember: Sally was only 1/4 black. So is the woman in this article:

    https://www.heart.co.uk/showbiz/tv-movies/great-british-bake-off/where-ruby-tandoh-now/

    It's important to remember she wasn't considered "black" in those days. They made distinctions between "black" (who were often called "African") and mulatto, quadroon, octoroon, etc.

    Jefferson himself wrote about these distinctions.)

    When the DNA evidence came out, their position was completely shattered, and the other side had an open field run and they spiked the ball. They haven't stopped dancing in the end zone since. So now it's all the children, and not just Eston.

    One thing I left out: one of the popularizers of the "It started in Paris" myth is Barbara Chase Riboud, who wrote a romance novel to that effect.

    She is a black woman married to a white man.

    *I personally believe that story might be true, and that Eston might be his son, but none of the others. This affair, if it happened, did NOT start in Paris. That's BCR's contribution to the story. Two independent witnesses have stated that Hemings was a ditzy kid. A notorious gossip town never cited TJ and SH together there. All the gossip was about TJ and Maria Cosway, who he sincerely yearned for all his life. If this affair happened it was during TJ's dotage. I doubt it, but it's possible.

    Replies: @Polistra

  183. @Rob
    Oh yeah, Sally Hemmings and TJ. Are any of their descendants visible minorities, as they say in Canada? I think I saw a picture of a bunch of them. IIRC, they were white blacks.

    I wonder if we bred the Descendents of Jefferson with each other, we could reconstruct TJ’s genome. Would be an interesting project for more advanced genomic engineering than we have now. Check out all his descendants' genomes, where a bunch of them are identical by descent, it suggests that region of the chromosome is Tom’s. Assuming the descendants don’t have any other common ancestors recently.

    This would be like trying to reconstruct Neanderthal or Denisovan from modern man. I think I heard that we have about 70% of the Neanderthal genome scattered about. Likely no X or Y chromosomes, nor mitochondrial DNA.

    The difference between the projects is that Jefferson II would be a valuable addition to society. Neanderthal II would have to be given some sort of reservation homeland, perhaps in a national park. Otherwise, he competes with other populations for pity admission to college.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @Lloyd1927

    The only Jefferson/Hemings descendants who passed the DNA test were “white whites” not “white blacks.” They were all descended from Eston Hemings Jefferson.

  184. Am I the only commenter here who thinks that Sally Hemmings was probably the paramour, NOT of Tho. Jefferson, but of his brother Randolph Jefferson (1755–1815)?

    Some have also proposed Randolph’s son Isham Randolph Jefferson (Tho.’s nephew) as the father of Hemmings’s chillen.

  185. @Lloyd1927
    Sally Hemings and her children would have been white slaves - not black ones.

    https://multiracial.com/index.php/2001/10/01/white-slaves/

    Replies: @Jack D, @Paperback Writer, @carroll price

    The universal rule applying to children born of female slaves was: “all offspring follow the condition of the mother”. Meaning that children born to slave women were born slaves, regardless of who the father happened to be.

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @carroll price

    It's not a universal rule, it was the Roman rule, and it became the rule in the colonies after the Virginia House of Burgesses ruled so in 1661.

    Google Partis Sequitur Ventrum.

  186. @Jack D
    @Lloyd1927

    It's true that some of Sally's children were so white that, when Jefferson allowed them to "escape" to the North (legally their ownership was tied up in an estate and he did not have the right to free them) then most of them lived as white people. Some were visibly mulatto and continued to live in the black community, such that nowadays there are both "white" and "black" Hemings descendants. The black ones are fair skinned but identifiably black. Sally herself (of whom no image exists) was 3/4 black rather than 7/8 like her children and was probably visibly (part) black like the Hemings ladies in the photo below.

    https://i.pinimg.com/564x/fb/13/b2/fb13b2629a4dc2cfffb39ec462804ab2.jpg

    Replies: @Lloyd1927

    No. Sally Hemings was a quadroon. Her father was Jefferson’s father-in-law, John Wayles. Her mother was Betty Hemings, the daughter of an English sea captain named Hemings. None of Sally’s offspring were “black.” None married blacks. In the above photo, the two white women are some of Eston Heming Jefferson’s white descendants. The ones showing black ancestry are descended from Madison Hemings. Madison was not black and few people in his “free colored” community were black. However, his descendants married “down” over the years.

  187. @Paperback Writer
    @res

    Spending too much time on this stupid subject than I should, but here's a start.

    Here’s a 1987 NY Times article (saved in 2015) about Abigail Adams & Hemings:

    https://web.archive.org/web/20150524203427/https://www.nytimes.com/1987/05/02/opinion/l-abigail-adams-meets-sally-hem-m-ings-189687.html

    It’s a letter. It would be interesting to look up the (misleading) article the letter seems to correct, but I won’t. You can.


    In Captain Ramsey's opinion, Sally would be of ''little service.'' On further acquaintance, the sister of James Hemings, Jefferson's young servant in Paris [Note: this is the butler to whom I referred in several comments], did not inspire greater confidence, but rather deepening concern. Abigail thought Sally ''wanting more care than the child,'' that she was ''wholly incapable'' of looking properly after Polly ''without some superior to direct her.''

    In light of Abigail's reaction, whether Sally Hemings matured on her subsequent stay in Paris to become Jefferson's lover is an intriguing question.

     

    In 1987, it was OK to note that Adams' observation that that Sally was juvenile and backward. Quite a competitor to Maria Cosway!

    By 2016, things had changed radically:

    https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/john-adams-out-thomas-jefferson-sally-hemings-180960789/


    Jefferson almost certainly began having sex with Hemings.

     

    The author refers to Abigail Adams mistaking Hemings’ age for 15 or 16, but only to support his thesis that Jefferson immediately began having sex with the supposedly mature adolescent.

    He does not mention that Adams thought Hemings needed more care than the 8 year old she accompanied.

    Slanted, much?

    Interesting that Mark Silk thought Adams slightly mistaken estimation of Hemings’ age was important – as if in those days a 15 year old was a fully developed woman. (Age of menarche in the 18th century was between 15 and 17.)

    And there's this:

    https://evblog.virginiahumanities.org/2012/11/what-abigail-implied/

    I really don’t have time to deconstruct the whole thing, other than to note that by 2012 Abigail Adams has become a full-fledged racist, rather than a woman who just described what she saw: a dumb kid who was overwhelmed by a job she got pulled into at the last moment.

    Nothing in this article about why Sally was assigned to supervise Polly: as a last-minute substitute for Betty Hemings.

    My point is that between 1987 and the 2000s, something changed. And not for the better.

    PS - Something I just noticed after reading that 1987 Times letter several times, Captain Ramsey also thought Sally was rather a drip. Adams wasn't the only one.

    Replies: @Jack D

    Unfortunately, these things are not mutually exclusive. Just because Sally was a bit of a mess and needed supervision does not mean that she did not fall into an affair with Jefferson. In fact it perhaps makes it more likely than if she had been a mature and trustworthy young woman.

    Prominent men having affairs (and love children) with their children’s nannies is all too common.

    Of course, our modern Oprahfied society has picked up the ball and run with it. Probably won’t be long now before they put Sally’s picture on the nickel instead of Jefferson. They would have done it already if they HAD a picture. (BTW, now that Biden is in, is Harriet Tubman making a comeback on the \$20 bill?) However, the current hypocrisy is just the mirror image of the old, pre-DNA days when Jefferson’s defenders said that no Jefferson EVER had anything to do with black people. As Alden points out, all these light skinned blacks in America didn’t just spring from a seashell like Venus.

    If it wasn’t old TJ who dun it, there were a bunch of other white guys who were hanging around that Hemings family tree. People here often comment (not without some truth) on how black females are the least attractive of any race but the Hemings ladies look pretty good and I think come out ahead of a lot of white women.

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @Jack D

    For cri-sakes Jack, at least read the stuff we go to the trouble of citing. You're not worth responding to half the time.

    , @Buzz Mohawk
    @Jack D


    ... the Hemings ladies look pretty good and I think come out ahead of a lot of white women.
     
    Jack, you ol' dog, you. It's okay to enjoy a little chocolate now and then. Black women can be great, and some of them luuuv a white man. This and your rap from your porch in Philly have put some shine on your image. You go, man.

    I think people are overthinking this. So, Tom shtupped with a 3/4 black girl two centuries ago. Why is anybody surprised? It's actually a sign of interracial affection.

    A late family friend in Romania was an old tank commander. He had been my father-in-law's commanding officer, and I was told he had been in charge of 100 tanks. He liked black women. We all laughed about this, but he was open and honest about it. He probably never had met one, but from American TV and such he just thought they were beautiful. God bless him and rest his soul.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

  188. @Paperback Writer
    @Jonathan Mason

    She was 14 at the time - what would she have done in France? Her older brother, a barber or a butler, could have done that, though. I forget his name.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Ed, @carroll price

    She was 14 at the time – what would she have done in France?

    In France she would have been in high demand, and made a fortune as a prostitute or concubine.

  189. @Jack D
    @Paperback Writer

    Unfortunately, these things are not mutually exclusive. Just because Sally was a bit of a mess and needed supervision does not mean that she did not fall into an affair with Jefferson. In fact it perhaps makes it more likely than if she had been a mature and trustworthy young woman.

    Prominent men having affairs (and love children) with their children's nannies is all too common.

    Of course, our modern Oprahfied society has picked up the ball and run with it. Probably won't be long now before they put Sally's picture on the nickel instead of Jefferson. They would have done it already if they HAD a picture. (BTW, now that Biden is in, is Harriet Tubman making a comeback on the $20 bill?) However, the current hypocrisy is just the mirror image of the old, pre-DNA days when Jefferson's defenders said that no Jefferson EVER had anything to do with black people. As Alden points out, all these light skinned blacks in America didn't just spring from a seashell like Venus.

    https://i.pinimg.com/564x/fb/13/b2/fb13b2629a4dc2cfffb39ec462804ab2.jpg

    If it wasn't old TJ who dun it, there were a bunch of other white guys who were hanging around that Hemings family tree. People here often comment (not without some truth) on how black females are the least attractive of any race but the Hemings ladies look pretty good and I think come out ahead of a lot of white women.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @Buzz Mohawk

    For cri-sakes Jack, at least read the stuff we go to the trouble of citing. You’re not worth responding to half the time.

  190. @Jack D
    @Paperback Writer

    Unfortunately, these things are not mutually exclusive. Just because Sally was a bit of a mess and needed supervision does not mean that she did not fall into an affair with Jefferson. In fact it perhaps makes it more likely than if she had been a mature and trustworthy young woman.

    Prominent men having affairs (and love children) with their children's nannies is all too common.

    Of course, our modern Oprahfied society has picked up the ball and run with it. Probably won't be long now before they put Sally's picture on the nickel instead of Jefferson. They would have done it already if they HAD a picture. (BTW, now that Biden is in, is Harriet Tubman making a comeback on the $20 bill?) However, the current hypocrisy is just the mirror image of the old, pre-DNA days when Jefferson's defenders said that no Jefferson EVER had anything to do with black people. As Alden points out, all these light skinned blacks in America didn't just spring from a seashell like Venus.

    https://i.pinimg.com/564x/fb/13/b2/fb13b2629a4dc2cfffb39ec462804ab2.jpg

    If it wasn't old TJ who dun it, there were a bunch of other white guys who were hanging around that Hemings family tree. People here often comment (not without some truth) on how black females are the least attractive of any race but the Hemings ladies look pretty good and I think come out ahead of a lot of white women.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @Buzz Mohawk

    … the Hemings ladies look pretty good and I think come out ahead of a lot of white women.

    Jack, you ol’ dog, you. It’s okay to enjoy a little chocolate now and then. Black women can be great, and some of them luuuv a white man. This and your rap from your porch in Philly have put some shine on your image. You go, man.

    I think people are overthinking this. So, Tom shtupped with a 3/4 black girl two centuries ago. Why is anybody surprised? It’s actually a sign of interracial affection.

    A late family friend in Romania was an old tank commander. He had been my father-in-law’s commanding officer, and I was told he had been in charge of 100 tanks. He liked black women. We all laughed about this, but he was open and honest about it. He probably never had met one, but from American TV and such he just thought they were beautiful. God bless him and rest his soul.

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @Buzz Mohawk


    Black women can be great, and some of them luuuv a white man.

     

    Barbara Chase-Riboud, the black woman novelist who wrote the romance novel from which the "it started in Paris" story springs, is married to a white man.

    In real life, beauty is a combination of many things: voice, grace, carriage, and yes, soul. A lot of facially un-pretty women have beauty, and a lot of facially pretty women are harridans.

    Imagine being around Charlize Theron for the rest of your life? No, thank you! I'd rather be in an arranged marriage with Whoopi Golberg, don't laugh. Certainly Epatha Merkerson. At least I wouldn't end up killing Merkerson.

    I think there's something to that old song:

    https://youtu.be/Qh9ZZgDqzAg?t=30

  191. @res
    @Paperback Writer

    Thanks. John Weeks Jefferson appeared briefly here in 2011.
    Two local descendants of Thomas Jefferson
    https://6abc.com/archive/7980914/

    Here is Julia Westerinen
    https://www.monticello.org/getting-word/people/julia-jefferson-westerinen
    A number of videos there, but I did not watch.

    Folding in reply to your following comment.


    Spending too much time on this stupid subject than I should
     
    Indeed, but trying to dig out the truth as much as possible (given all of the misinformation out there) seems worthwhile.

    It would be interesting to look up the (misleading) article the letter seems to correct, but I won’t. You can.
     
    That's fair. It looks like there was a bit of a discussion (might help to stop page load before it completes).
    https://www.nytimes.com/1987/04/07/opinion/l-sally-hemmings-steps-forth-on-her-own-248287.html (references letters, Feb. 15, March 1 and 15)
    (March 15) https://www.nytimes.com/1987/03/15/opinion/l-the-jefferson-defense-calls-dumas-malone-301887.html
    (March 1) https://www.nytimes.com/1987/03/01/opinion/l-support-for-jefferson-sally-hemmings-liaison-735787.html
    (Feb. 15, references Feb. 7 letter, not found) https://www.nytimes.com/1987/02/15/opinion/l-after-almost-200-years-sally-hemmings-still-dogs-jefferson-952287.html

    https://evblog.virginiahumanities.org/2012/11/what-abigail-implied/
     
    Thanks! That site and its links look like a great source of primary references.

    My point is that between 1987 and the 2000s, something changed. And not for the better.
     
    Good summation.

    P.S. This list only goes back to late 1987 (does not include above), but helps give an idea of the ebb and flow of the conversation since then in the NYT.
    https://www.nytimes.com/topic/person/sally-hemings

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    I think both sides goaded each other into a maximalist position.

    The pro-Jeffersons were very huffy & dismissive. No, this could NEVER have happened.

    Instead of saying it was possible that an elderly Jefferson fell for a woman who resembled his late, beloved wife* they stonewalled and dismissed. Naturally the other side dug in its heels and upped the stakes. That’s what happens in bitter disputes.

    (Remember: Sally was only 1/4 black. So is the woman in this article:

    https://www.heart.co.uk/showbiz/tv-movies/great-british-bake-off/where-ruby-tandoh-now/

    It’s important to remember she wasn’t considered “black” in those days. They made distinctions between “black” (who were often called “African”) and mulatto, quadroon, octoroon, etc.

    Jefferson himself wrote about these distinctions.)

    When the DNA evidence came out, their position was completely shattered, and the other side had an open field run and they spiked the ball. They haven’t stopped dancing in the end zone since. So now it’s all the children, and not just Eston.

    One thing I left out: one of the popularizers of the “It started in Paris” myth is Barbara Chase Riboud, who wrote a romance novel to that effect.

    She is a black woman married to a white man.

    *I personally believe that story might be true, and that Eston might be his son, but none of the others. This affair, if it happened, did NOT start in Paris. That’s BCR’s contribution to the story. Two independent witnesses have stated that Hemings was a ditzy kid. A notorious gossip town never cited TJ and SH together there. All the gossip was about TJ and Maria Cosway, who he sincerely yearned for all his life. If this affair happened it was during TJ’s dotage. I doubt it, but it’s possible.

    • Replies: @Polistra
    @Paperback Writer

    Agreed. It's possible, but then so are a million other things that never happened.

    The trouble is that the MSM and all the Blue Checks consider it "settled science" when it's nothing of the sort.

    Thanks for your commentary on this topic.

  192. @carroll price
    @Lloyd1927

    The universal rule applying to children born of female slaves was: "all offspring follow the condition of the mother". Meaning that children born to slave women were born slaves, regardless of who the father happened to be.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    It’s not a universal rule, it was the Roman rule, and it became the rule in the colonies after the Virginia House of Burgesses ruled so in 1661.

    Google Partis Sequitur Ventrum.

  193. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Jack D


    ... the Hemings ladies look pretty good and I think come out ahead of a lot of white women.
     
    Jack, you ol' dog, you. It's okay to enjoy a little chocolate now and then. Black women can be great, and some of them luuuv a white man. This and your rap from your porch in Philly have put some shine on your image. You go, man.

    I think people are overthinking this. So, Tom shtupped with a 3/4 black girl two centuries ago. Why is anybody surprised? It's actually a sign of interracial affection.

    A late family friend in Romania was an old tank commander. He had been my father-in-law's commanding officer, and I was told he had been in charge of 100 tanks. He liked black women. We all laughed about this, but he was open and honest about it. He probably never had met one, but from American TV and such he just thought they were beautiful. God bless him and rest his soul.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    Black women can be great, and some of them luuuv a white man.

    Barbara Chase-Riboud, the black woman novelist who wrote the romance novel from which the “it started in Paris” story springs, is married to a white man.

    In real life, beauty is a combination of many things: voice, grace, carriage, and yes, soul. A lot of facially un-pretty women have beauty, and a lot of facially pretty women are harridans.

    Imagine being around Charlize Theron for the rest of your life? No, thank you! I’d rather be in an arranged marriage with Whoopi Golberg, don’t laugh. Certainly Epatha Merkerson. At least I wouldn’t end up killing Merkerson.

    I think there’s something to that old song:

    • Agree: Buzz Mohawk
  194. @Paperback Writer
    @Lloyd1927

    Doesn't matter.

    Someone here expressed surprise that the near-white Hemings family was enslaved - slavery came from the mother's status.

    Look up Partis sequitur ventrum.

    Mark Twain wrote a funny/sad book about this, Pudd'nhead Wilson, which was about a slave woman, Roxy, who was 15/16ths white. She switches her son w/the master's son in the cradle (they're born on the same day). The ruse is discovered when the boys are grown & the "master's" son is promptly sold down the river.

    Newton Knight had descendants who were virtually white & had problems establishing their status. There were others.

    As a quadroon, Sally was as black looking as Ruby Tandoh, who sometimes looks a bit blackish and sometimes doesn't.

    Replies: @carroll price

    Most people never suspected that 1950s singer Dinah Shore was an octoroon until she bore a child with unmistakable Negroid features (called a throwback) by a white husband

    • Replies: @very old statistician
    @carroll price

    9 or 10 or our presidents or first ladies have been octoroons.

  195. @nebulafox
    @Reg Cæsar

    Greed is like any other emotion. Neither good nor bad: but powerful. Use it wisely.

    I don't think what happened in Haiti helped, to be fair. But the fears were misplaced, IMO. Haitian demographics were far more skewed toward Africans than American ones, and were completely dominated by large scale sugar plantations with often absentee owners. Thanks to these factors, Haitian slave owning culture had a degree of institutionalized sadism that even the worst American plantations lacked, which led to the brutalized, deeply vengeful slaves committing genocide eventually against the remnants of the French.

    Naturally, though, planation owners didn't look it that way, which... yeah, pretty damned predictable.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    Jefferson was quite prescient about race relations. I gave the links in some other answer to you.

    So there’s no excuse as to his hypocrisy and blindness. He was also a spendthrift, and prone to airy abstractions.

    His friend John Adams (Abigail was not so enthusiastic) chastised him about the Callender smears. Adams said that this was an inevitable consequence of keeping slaves. Jefferson didn’t listen. If he had spent less and freed his slaves most of the poison in this debate would have been averted.

  196. @Paperback Writer
    @res

    I'll try but I can't promise anything - this is a diversion from my work.

    But here's this:

    https://web.archive.org/web/20170223130615/https://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/03/nyregion/a-founding-father-and-his-family-ties.html

    Published in 2001, it refers modestly to only one child. As the story has developed, suddenly ALL the children were Thomas'. Even though there's no proof of that at all.

    Another weird thing is that John Weeks Jefferson, whose genes were used to prove this, has dropped out of the picture entirely, while his sister Julia went the Oprah route.


    After the revelation, John, who likes his privacy, largely remained out of the public eye. But Mrs. Westerinen was swept into the media river, met some of her distant black cousins on "Oprah" and went off on a speaking tour with one of them, all because she embraced her new black heritage.
     
    Was swept? She hogged the limelight while her brother was not so inclined.

    The article mentions her father and his "brothers." Those brothers and presumably their families, if they had any, are also disinclined to take part in this media circus. What do they get out of it?

    Julia Westerinen strikes me as one of those Nice White Ladies who loves the idea of diversity, while her very distant blackish relatives (none of whom can prove descent to Jefferson) are black nationalists. I think that most of this happy-clappy petered out a few years ago. Meanwhile, Monticello has become totally Oprahfied.

    Replies: @res, @Jonathan Mason

    As the story has developed, suddenly ALL the children were Thomas’. Even though there’s no proof of that at all.

    Isn’t that what Madison Hemings claimed?

  197. @Paperback Writer
    @Buzz Mohawk

    It matters because it makes Jefferson look like a huge hypocrite and gives the shittiest among us a handy stick to beat us with. It matters because every time an R. Kelly gets nailed, they can say, "But Thomas Jefferson."

    It matters that Monticello.org, is completely given over to Hemings-ism, and now claims that ALL six of her children were fathered by Jefferson.

    It matters because truth matters.

    Agree w/you about "all men are created equal." It's caused us a huge load of trouble ever since. Should have been "All men are equal before the law."

    And, since we're on the subject: they should have freed the slaves. Shoulda woulda coulda, yeah, I know, but since we're talking about this, I'm gonna say it and I know I already said it: they should have freed the slaves.

    I have zero doubt that if they had, the development of the country would have been a bit retarded but not by much, and that the black population would have dwindled to an insignificant minority, with the smarter one surviving instead of this dysgenic nightmare.

    Replies: @nebulafox, @Buzz Mohawk

    … they should have freed the slaves.

    Agreed, and there was a Northern wish to do so right then and there.

    Wasn’t it the Southern colonies that refused to go along with the “United States” revolution if slavery was abolished then? Wasn’t there a big debate about how much Southern slaves could count as people for the purpose of representation by congressmen but not as citizens or voters? Isn’t that why those men in Congress came up with the compromise of 3/5 of a man?

    Think about it: If the Southern representatives had their way, every slave would have counted as a citizen for the purpose of cramming more Southerners into Congress, but would not have had a vote or freedom. Pretty fair, huh?

    Yes, they absolutely should have ended slavery right then and there, but it was the Southern colonies that prevented it and doomed America to it’s unfortunately absurd history ever since.

    Thank you very much, y’all!

    • Replies: @Polistra
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Most northern states abolished slavery within their confines by the early to mid-1800s. The last one (NJ) waited until the civil war was over. Such virtue!

  198. @Paperback Writer
    @res

    I think both sides goaded each other into a maximalist position.

    The pro-Jeffersons were very huffy & dismissive. No, this could NEVER have happened.

    Instead of saying it was possible that an elderly Jefferson fell for a woman who resembled his late, beloved wife* they stonewalled and dismissed. Naturally the other side dug in its heels and upped the stakes. That's what happens in bitter disputes.

    (Remember: Sally was only 1/4 black. So is the woman in this article:

    https://www.heart.co.uk/showbiz/tv-movies/great-british-bake-off/where-ruby-tandoh-now/

    It's important to remember she wasn't considered "black" in those days. They made distinctions between "black" (who were often called "African") and mulatto, quadroon, octoroon, etc.

    Jefferson himself wrote about these distinctions.)

    When the DNA evidence came out, their position was completely shattered, and the other side had an open field run and they spiked the ball. They haven't stopped dancing in the end zone since. So now it's all the children, and not just Eston.

    One thing I left out: one of the popularizers of the "It started in Paris" myth is Barbara Chase Riboud, who wrote a romance novel to that effect.

    She is a black woman married to a white man.

    *I personally believe that story might be true, and that Eston might be his son, but none of the others. This affair, if it happened, did NOT start in Paris. That's BCR's contribution to the story. Two independent witnesses have stated that Hemings was a ditzy kid. A notorious gossip town never cited TJ and SH together there. All the gossip was about TJ and Maria Cosway, who he sincerely yearned for all his life. If this affair happened it was during TJ's dotage. I doubt it, but it's possible.

    Replies: @Polistra

    Agreed. It’s possible, but then so are a million other things that never happened.

    The trouble is that the MSM and all the Blue Checks consider it “settled science” when it’s nothing of the sort.

    Thanks for your commentary on this topic.

  199. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Paperback Writer


    ... they should have freed the slaves.
     
    Agreed, and there was a Northern wish to do so right then and there.

    Wasn't it the Southern colonies that refused to go along with the "United States" revolution if slavery was abolished then? Wasn't there a big debate about how much Southern slaves could count as people for the purpose of representation by congressmen but not as citizens or voters? Isn't that why those men in Congress came up with the compromise of 3/5 of a man?

    Think about it: If the Southern representatives had their way, every slave would have counted as a citizen for the purpose of cramming more Southerners into Congress, but would not have had a vote or freedom. Pretty fair, huh?

    Yes, they absolutely should have ended slavery right then and there, but it was the Southern colonies that prevented it and doomed America to it's unfortunately absurd history ever since.

    Thank you very much, y'all!

    Replies: @Polistra

    Most northern states abolished slavery within their confines by the early to mid-1800s. The last one (NJ) waited until the civil war was over. Such virtue!

  200. @carroll price
    @Paperback Writer

    Most people never suspected that 1950s singer Dinah Shore was an octoroon until she bore a child with unmistakable Negroid features (called a throwback) by a white husband

    Replies: @very old statistician

    9 or 10 or our presidents or first ladies have been octoroons.

    • Troll: carroll price
  201. @Twinkie
    @nebulafox


    The governments of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were so indisputably, totally evil that it could become a straightforward good/bad fight in the public consciousness.
     
    While I agree that both Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were responsible for objectively monstrously evil acts, I think the issue of morality of countries in and out of wars is more complicated. More or less all countries were created out of conquest, in which the losers were dispossessed and even exterminated. History is littered with atrocities and victor's peace (cue Tacitus - "ubi solitudinem faciunt pacem appellant") that is later rationalized and even glorified. Even the modern British, often touted as having been some of the most benevolent colonialists, engaged in innumerable evil, bloodthirsty acts (massacres, mass rape, etc.) in India when their authority was threatened by the Sepoy Rebellion.

    Had Nazi Germany won the war and established a Tausendjähriges Reich, would the denizens of that much later world (perhaps greatly ameliorated and even liberalized in social conditions from the war-era Nazi Germany) not see the monstrosity of its genesis as nothing but an unfortunate blip in an otherwise glorious history of their nation, the way we Americans used to regard the extermination of American Indians in the settler mythos of our foundation?

    In the long view of history, what seems to matter, in the end, is winning, leaving descendants, and bequeathing a mythos, a culture to the said descendants, however long they might hold on to it. I think morality is what we tell ourselves when we win and do terrible things to the losers, just as the latter ascribe immorality to us.

    As an individual, to the extent that I have a personal moral code, I mean to do good and no evil, but, at the end of the day, I want my people - Americans - to win first.

    Replies: @nebulafox, @RSDB

    In the long view of history, what seems to matter, in the end, is winning, leaving descendants

    In the long enough view, sub specie aeternitatis, your descendants are just as dead as everybody else’s.

    Vanitas vanitatum, dixit Ecclesiastes; vanitas vanitatum, et omnia vanitas. Quid habet amplius homo de universo labore suo quo laborat sub sole?

    Non est priorum memoria; sed nec eorum quidem quæ postea futura sunt
    erit recordatio apud eos qui futuri sunt in novissimo.

    [MORE]

    Not that I am over-censorious of what you are saying here, but it is a dark night outside, and a time for thoughts both sad and sweet (and a little pompous– forgive me).

    Tempus flendi, et tempus ridendi;
    tempus plangendi, et tempus saltandi.

    I too will die, and all I will do, and all I will say, will pass away sooner or later– but there is One, at least, whose words will not die, though Heaven and Earth perish.

    • Thanks: Twinkie
    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @RSDB

    Touché. Nonetheless, I’d rather have some than not and I’d rather they were the winners, not the losers. And that their (my) ways survived… until the end of days.

  202. @RSDB
    @Twinkie


    In the long view of history, what seems to matter, in the end, is winning, leaving descendants

     

    In the long enough view, sub specie aeternitatis, your descendants are just as dead as everybody else's.

    Vanitas vanitatum, dixit Ecclesiastes; vanitas vanitatum, et omnia vanitas. Quid habet amplius homo de universo labore suo quo laborat sub sole?
    ...
    Non est priorum memoria; sed nec eorum quidem quæ postea futura sunt
    erit recordatio apud eos qui futuri sunt in novissimo.

     


    Not that I am over-censorious of what you are saying here, but it is a dark night outside, and a time for thoughts both sad and sweet (and a little pompous-- forgive me).

    Tempus flendi, et tempus ridendi;
    tempus plangendi, et tempus saltandi.
     
    I too will die, and all I will do, and all I will say, will pass away sooner or later-- but there is One, at least, whose words will not die, though Heaven and Earth perish.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    Touché. Nonetheless, I’d rather have some than not and I’d rather they were the winners, not the losers. And that their (my) ways survived… until the end of days.

  203. @Reg Cæsar
    @Veteran Aryan


    There are only 10 kinds of people – those who understand binary and those who do not.
     
    How many grams to a kilogram?

    1111101000.

    Replies: @Veteran Aryan

    How many grams to a kilogram?

    1111101000.

    True. However, there are 10000000000 Bytes in a Kilobyte.

  204. @The Alarmist
    All these statues for that cracker Thomas Jefferson, but not one for righteous brutha George Jefferson.

    https://wizbangblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/george_jefferson.jpg

    Replies: @Dr. Charles Fhandrich

    Don’t forget his sycophantic white neighbor. He just about reached the limit when it came to subservient asshole. Pardon my French.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement