Originally Published — October 24, 2013
# # #
When it comes to working hard at remaining ignorant about truth and history, no one works harder than liberal progressives and their likeminded followers in the Democrat Party. Ben Franklin once said, “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” And so it goes, time changes, but stupid is with us always.
Over and over again we hear those on the left callously claiming that Republicans and conservatives and Tea Party patriots are racist bigots — never stopping to debate the issue at hand — only stopping long enough to hurl the insults and arrows of character assassination. Yet at the end of the day it’s pretty easy to expose how the liberals, the progressives and the Democrats haven’t changed much over the last 160 years.
Let’s look at the controversial issue of the three-fifths compromise in the Constitution. Liberals love to bring this up in order to bash Republicans over the head as racists. High school students often read about and study this Constitutional history and hopefully still remember and understand it as adults. But few do, and even more are misled by their ignorance when liberals distort the truth about it in the papers and on the television.
It’s pretty clear what happens. The high school student reaches college, gets pummeled for non-conformist conservative views, then indoctrinated with all the liberal professors’ anti-American propaganda until he graduates and reaches the position of bureau chiefs, editor, journalist, teacher or professor himself, or gets that lofty position as talking head on a cable news shows. Is it amnesia or a willingness to alter history through a paradigm of the “ends justify the means,” or is it, as Franklin said, scrappy hard work to achieve the vaunted status of fool.
History has proven that power does in fact corrupt, and for most on the left the corruption begins early. It begins with educators and journalists not teaching true American history. You see, history, like the Constitution, is living, breathing, and can be adjusted for perspective by those who wish to turn the tables on adversaries. Liberals, you see, are unbeatable when it comes to setting aside the facts and judging others, not on the merits of their position, but by their unstated motives (often pinned on them by the liberals themselves). If you can disqualify a person, slander their character, dirty their reputation, then one doesn’t have to argue for or against anything at all. For if the competition, if the ideological opponent has been eliminated, who is left to argue against?
A conservative, simply by voting against a tax increasing bond measure will get the left nipping at their heels. You’re hurting the poor, they’ll say, or the school children, or the elderly, or the handicapped. And who gets hurt more than the poor when taxes are cut or programs reduced? It’s the minorities of course — hence the liberal conclusion — you’re not misguided for voting the way you do, for your reasoning being wrong, or because you love liberty and abhor theft (in the form of extreme taxation or bloated government), but rather it’s because you are a racist. Even if you don’t think so yourself. They know you better than you know yourself. And they say we are delusional.
Down deep, I think liberals are just projecting their own deep seeded racist views by projecting onto others because it works wonders in politics and in the press at being a such useful tool in the war of ideas (or lack thereof) especially when you are out of ammo (i.e. good ideas) for which to maintain the battle and prevent full out surrender.
Wasn’t it the southern Democrats who continued the importation of slaves into America even after we broke from Britain? Even after the Constitution was ratified? Isn’t it a little ironic that today it is the same Democrat Party that argues for the importation of “undocumented workers” (illegal aliens to those who know better) to work the “low wage” jobs that “Americans” will no longer do? Isn’t this same Democrat Party who derided the industrial North to stay out of their business and allow their southern slave plantations to prosper on the backs of the exploited? Wasn’t it these same Democrats who wanted to allow slavery in the new states as America expanded west? Wasn’t it the Southern Democrats who pushed for secession because of the benefits of slavery to the economy of the Southern agrarian states?
The first draft of the Declaration of Independence affirmed an end to slavery. But with only 11 of 13 states voting for the first draft, it had to be amended to appease the two southern states (North Carolina and Georgia) that objected to the anti-slavery language.
What Jefferson penned and 11 colonies agreed upon at our founding was this;
“he [the king of Britain] has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating it’s most sacred rights of life & liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere, or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. this piratical warfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers, is the warfare of the Christian king of Great Britain. determined to keep open a market where men should be bought & sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce: and that this assemblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them, by murdering the people upon whom he also obtruded them; thus paying off former crimes committed against the liberties of one people, with crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives of another.”
Later, when it came to the Constitution again, a problem arose over the issue of slavery. The South wanted their slave “property” to be counted for the purposes of representation. Isn’t this the same Democrat Party who now wishes to legalize 11-20 million criminal invaders (illegals) so that they can gain a voting block that may never be undone?
It’s important to point this all out because 99% of Americans have no idea of the truth behind these facts. Representation is based upon population, the South salivated at the idea of political advantage based on counting people who could not vote and who weren’t considered equal. This would have greatly strengthened the South’s representation in the House. At the same time there was growing clout and influence in the abolitionist movements in the North (of which the Founding Fathers, even while some were slave holders, supporters) and the enormous pressure to rid the country of the abomination of slavery.
The North, in order to prevent the slaves from being counted for the census, countered with an absurdity of their own, counting their “property” (i.e. farm animals, and furniture), the South saw the futility of such a move, hence the compromise of the three-fifths rule. Three fifths was a shrewd political move and an anti-slavery tactic. It was not as liberals claim and some very ignorant Republicans suggest — subjecting black African slaves to a sub-human status. The institution of slavery had already done that and the southern Democrat plantation holders made sure it stayed that way. But the abolitionists did the best they could to quell the power grab the South sought.
Unfortunately, today liberals want to change history and say that the three-fifths rules was to dehumanize the black man — this makes liberals and progressives and Democrats and ignorant Republicans who claim it fools at best, and liars at worse. It is turning the truth inside out and history on its head. If we can’t have truth — what can we have? Then again, that is exactly what liberals do for a living — deny the absolute moral standards of God, replacing it with their own arbitrary morality, which allows them to subvert truth and alter history (while keeping a clear conscience) for the sole purposes of power and control, which ultimately leads to the enslavement of peoples (through their ignorance) and places them on the liberal plantation through the bondage of government entitlement programs.
These new entitlement slaves, slaves of thought manipulation, then turn around and vote for their oppressors like the abused returns to her abuser or a dog to its own vomit — it is a pathology humanity is still attempting to figure out.
David is a perpetual student of religion, politics and American history. He lives in Southern California with his wife and their three children. Writer, thinker, speaker, blogger, he is the author of many articles as well as the book, The Conservative Directory – The Little Black Book of the Cultural Counter Revolution (1994). The book was honored with praise from Charlton Heston, Bay Buchanan, Joseph Farah among many others. You can follow him on Twitter @cogitarus. He’s available for speaking engagements upon request.