AG Holder And The Slavery Question
by
R.E. Prindle
http://www.wvwnews.net/story.php?id=7397
Attorney General Eric Holder testifying before Congress gave a rationale for a legal double standard on the basis of ‘historic’ wrongs. In other words these ‘historic’ wrongs are imagined to have occurred by a historic pattern of injuries from, say, only Whites to Blacks or from ,say, only heterosexuals to homosexuals; and that these wrongs committed perhaps hundreds of years ago againt people now long dead have to be revenged on living people innocent of any such wrongs perhaps also for hundreds of years. Our Attorney General considers such new injuries ‘justice.’
Now, it is true that Blacks were slaves to Whites but the Whites did not enslave them. If you want to read a good eyewitness account read Mungo Park’s Travels In West Africa. In it Park as an eyewitness estimates that 75% of Black Africans in West Africa were slaves to the remaining 25% while the 25% were the property of the various kings or chiefs.
Park describes corvees of Africans already enslaved being led to the coast for a transfer of ownership from a Black African owner to a White. These slaves were then transported to the Americas where title was merely transferred from one group of owners to another. But the latter owners did not enslave the Africans the Africans were already slaves in Africa. They merely continued their existence as slaves.
Now, AG Holder is an intelligent man so he surely must undertand that while slavery is or should be a crime the onus lays with the enslaver and not any subsequent transferees.
It therefore follows that the ‘historic’ wrong was committed by Africans who obviously share the major part of the blame. Why then does AG Holder assert that Whites only have to be punished for acquiring these slaves who could never have been transported but by the will of their African owners. Without African sellers there would have been no White buyers. Is it simply a matter of money? White Americans have it and Black Africans don’t. Is AG Holder merely a post-racial ambulance chaser?
AG Holder, it seems that your reasoning, even legal reasoning, is slightly awry.
