The Breckinridges, Slavery, and Racism in KKKentucKKKe

The name of Breckinridge has many racist implications. The Breckinridge Family is a political dynasty in Kentucky, and most nearly all of the historical Breckinridges are racist assholes.

Time Magazine calls John Cabell Breckinridge the worst Vice President in American history http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1834600_1834604_1834616,00.html. At the age of 36, John Cabell Breckinridge is still the youngest person who held that office. Breckinridge was voted in as James Buchanan's VP, became Senator while still VP, and then later, he ran for President, but lost against Abraham Lincoln. After losing to Lincoln, Breckinridge tried to get Kentucky to secede to the Confederacy, and when that didn't work, Breckinridge immediately went to work fighting against the United States by joining the Confederate Army. His ex-comrades in Congress charged Breckinridge with treason.

Breckinridge County's specific racism isn't any different than Kentucky proper.

Over 34 native American tribes claim Kentucky as their homeland.

Here's a list: 1-Chickasaw (Muskogean-speaking); 2) Shawnee (Algonquin-speaking); 3) Cherokee; 4) Yuchi aka Green River Indians (Iroquois-speaking); 5) Wyandot (Iroquois-speaking); 6) Mosopelea; 7) Mingo (Seneca; Iroquois); 8) Chippewa (1 of the Councils of 3 Fires); 9) Lenape aka Delaware (Algonquin); 10) Miami (Algonquin); 11) Yamacraw; 12) The Eel River Indians; 13) HAUDENOSAUNEE Haudenosaunee (The Democratic Iroquois Imperial Confederacy); 15) Kaskaskia Indians; 16) Kickapoo; 17) Ottawa (1 of the Councils of 3 Fires); 18) Piankeshaw (1 of the Councils of 3 Fires); 19) Potawatomi; 20) Wea; 21) Tutelo; 22) Illinois; 23) Lanapota; 24) Creek (Muskogeen-speaking); 25) Ojibwa; 26) HONNIASONTKERONONS Honniasontkeronons (La Salle, 1668); 27) OUTAGAME Outagame (Fox); 28) ISKOUSSOGOS Iskoussogos (the general Iroquoian name for western Algonquians); 29) TOUGUEHAS Touguenhas; 30) Mohawk (Iroquois); 31) Choctaw (Muskogean-speaking); 32) Saponi (Tutelo-speaking); 33) Souix (Tutelo-speaking); 34) The Ponka; 35) Crane. https://sites.google.com/site/owsleycountykentucky/american-indianshttps://www.youtube.com/user/freedomskool/playlists https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL09JAmkZ-2Ax7umJP9_5Ls_UbrdCEXCID

From Wikipedia:

“Confederate battle lines where [John Cabell Breckinridge] was commissioned a brigadier general; he was then expelled from the Senate. After the April 1862 Battle of Shiloh, he was promoted to major general, and in October he was assigned to the command of Braxton Bragg. After Bragg charged that Breckinridge's drunkenness had contributed to Confederate defeats at Stone River and Missionary Ridge, he was transferred to the Trans-Allegheny Department, where he won his most significant victory at the Battle of New Market. After participating in Jubal Early's 1864 campaigns in the Shenandoah Valley, he was put in charge of defending Confederate supplies in Tennessee and Virginia. In February 1865, Confederate President Jefferson Davis appointed him Secretary of War. Concluding that the war was hopeless, he urged Davis to arrange a national surrender. After the fall of the Confederate capital at Richmond, he ensured the preservation of Confederate military and governmental records. He then fled to Cuba, Great Britain, and finally, to Canada.”

From Time Magazine:

“Towards the end of the war, he managed to flee to Florida, where he borrowed a small boat. Breckinridge's ill luck held: the boat was attacked by pirates, and when he managed to escape in a dinghy, a storm blew away the mast, leaving him bobbing along in the Caribbean for three weeks, eventually washing up in Cuba. (As the story goes, a Cuban band played The Star Spangled Banner and Yankee Doodle at his welcoming ceremony — song choices Breckinridge did not appreciate.) He eventually escaped to Europe, from whence he refused to return until President Andrew Johnson granted him amnesty in 1868. But it wasn't until a century later that a federal judge in Kentucky officially dismissed the treason charges against him.”

John Cabell Breckinridge only got amnesty because of Andrew Johnson, who is regarded by many to be the worst President the United States have ever had, since he was mostly responsible for killing Lincoln's dream of Reconstruction. For Andrew Johnson, “Reconstruction” only meant to return things back to how they were before the Civil War. John Cabell Breckinridge was a white supremacist, and hated to see progress of any kind. He was a treasonous snake, one who didn't mind putting his life on the line in order to maintain the institution of slavery that his family had prospered heavily upon for many decades.

Clifton Rodes Breckinridge (November 22, 1846 – December 3, 1932) was a Democratic alderman, congressman, diplomat, businessman and veteran of the Confederate Army and Navy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clifton_R._Breckinridge “At the outbreak of the Civil War, [Clifton Rodes Breckinridge] entered the Confederate Army with his father and was later a mid-shipman in the Confederate Navy. After the war, he attended Washington College in Lexington, Virginia for three years where the school's president, Confederate General Robert E. Lee, encouraged his desire for a career of public service. Afterwards, he joined his older brother in a cotton plantation near Pine Bluff, Arkansas and engaged in cotton planting and in the commission business for thirteen years.”

The original progenitor of the Breckinridges in America was Thomas Jefferson's Attorney General, John Breckinridge. John Breckinridge owned slaves when he was 12 years old. Robert Breckinridge, John's father, died, and he left his 12 year old son 300 acres of land, one slave, and half-ownership of another slave (Wikipedia). From before Breckinridge matured into manhood, as a white boy, he learned that his role in American society was greater than that of his 1 and ½ Black slaves. Plus that 12 year old had 300 acres.

In April 1793, John Breckinridge and his family, along with 25 Black slaves, established their plantation, Cabell's Dale, next to Lexington, Kentucky. So while none of his slaves get names in the history books, his plantation, however, does. John Breckinridge called his plantation “Cabell's Dale”.

When Breckinridge moved, he owned 30,000 acres (120 km2) in Kentucky, in addition to his 25 Black slaves.

The legalization of slavery in Kentucky is what gives Kentucky it's schizophrenia at it's formation, (David Rice, a Presbyterian Minster tried to get slavery abolished; instead, Baptist preachers weren't allowed to hold public office, with the 1792 Constitution of Kentucky), through the Civil War, up until today.

Kentucky's first Constitution (1792), while still allowing slavery to remain an institution, also allowed for free Blacks and Mulattos to vote in their elections. All free men could vote. In 1792, Kentuckians forgot to make their Constitution racist. But in 7 years, John Breckinridge made sure that was fixed right up. John Breckinridge asked, “Where is the difference whether I am robbed of my horse by a highway-man, or of my slave by a set of people called a Convention? … If they can by one experiment emancipate our slaves; the same principle pursued, will enable them at a second experiment to extinguish our land titles; both are held by rights equally sound.”<ref name=Friend>Friend, Craig Thompson. 2010. Kentucke's Frontiers. Indiana University Press. Pg. 208</ref> Out of the fifty-eight men who arrived in Frankfort in late July as convention delegates, fifty-seven owned slaves and fifty held substantial property.<ref name=Friend>pg. 209</ref> John Breckinridge was instrumental in getting slavery legalized, institutionalized, and consolidated with the 1799 Kentucky Constitution. Ironically, even though Breckinridge opposed calling a Constitutional Convention for Kentucky, John Breckinridge would later be known as the father of the 1799 Constitution of Kentucky (we're had 4 of them so far: 1792; 1799; 1850, and; 1891). Breckinridge was elected as a delegate to the Constitutional Convention, and because of his influence, the state's government remained comparatively aristocratic, maintaining protections for slavery, and limiting the power of the electorate (anti-democracy). The Kentucky aristocrats advocated protection of their wealth and status by instituting voice voting in the legislature (which left legislators vulnerable to intimidation), safeguarding legal slavery, and limiting the power of the electorate. The conservative faction strengthened the previous constitution's slavery protections by denying suffrage to free blacks and mulattoes. Breckinridge, after the 1799 Constitutional Convention, emerged from the convention as the acknowledged leader of the state's Democratic-Republican Party, and was selected the Speaker of the Kentucky House of Representatives in 1799 and 1800.

Some folks brag about how John Breckinridge passed the Kentucky Resolutions, which is true, he did, and he did so for good reasons (to protest John Adams' Alien and Sedition Act). At Jefferson's request, Breckinridge assumed credit for the modified resolutions he shepherded through the Kentucky General Assembly for his entire life: Jefferson's authorship was not discovered. And while the Kentucky Resolutions are genius, it's not a huge surprise that Kentuckians would be split on the slavery issue during the Civil War, and had “brother versus brother” 60+ years later on. The point of the Kentucky Resolutions was to assert Kentucky's States' right to choose their own course of action, especially considering the Federal government has limited powers. So for a State to protect Freedom of Speech, State's rights makes sense; but for slavery, the State's rights argument is bogus horse shit. Because, you see, Thomas Jefferson, just like John Breckinridge, owned slaves. In fact, Thomas Jefferson loved his slaves very very very much, probably too much, and him and Sally Hemmings, hopefully consensual, probably not, had lots of Black babies together. So one slave owner, Thomas Jefferson, gave the Kentucky Resolutions to another slave owner, John Breckinridge, and Breckinridge presented them to Kentucky's State legislature in Frankfort. The point of asserting State's Authority in the Kentucky Resolutions was to protest John Adams' Alien and Sedition Acts, which criminalized dissent against John Adams' government. John Adams wanted to throw anybody into jail who said anything bad about him or his administration, which is clearly a brazen affront to the First Amendment. Both Jefferson and Breckinridge were correct in opposing those Acts. But they were wrong with keeping their personal institutions of slavery. Absolute power's a mf'er. Once one gets the power, they can't ever seem to let go of their precious. And by owning slaves, it shows me what kind of man they were. They were just an Oppressor... a shitty shitty person, who must smash the will and thoughts and soul out of their own fellow human beings, just to make them a cog into their machine, for their own profitable gain, is not a man. That's an insecure piece of shit, who can't do anything for themselves, and must rely on the manpower of others, in order to get wealthy. Fuck John Breckinridge, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and Henry Clay for owning slaves. (Franklin had slaves named George and King.)

State's Rights would be used later on when Beriah Maggofin tried to protect the institution of slavery when Lincoln called for men and arms. Then the Confederates were ran out of Frankfort, and they formed a makeshift government in Bowling Green. But Kentucky stayed with Lincoln, since he promised to let Kentucky keep her slaves. He reneged on the promise, well, not really, since the Emancipation Proclamation Executive Order allowed Kentucky to still have slaves, but the changing of the times, and the will of the people, seemed to be moving against slavery as an institution as a whole. State's Rights arguments, to protect Freedom of Speech, is good. State's Rights arguments, to protect treating human beings like animals, is bad.

The town of McDaniels in Breckinridge County is named after William McDaniels, a pioneer who lived here for awhile. When William McDaniels came here, the Shawnee warriors scared his wife so bad, she jumped into the Sinking Creek, trying to get away from them, and drowned herself. Not even the African-American slave William McDaniels brought with him, saved his wife. McDaniels brought a slave along with him, just like Dr. George Legrand of Hudson did. Only George Legrand brought several Black slaves with him. Eventually, the Shawnees killed William McDaniel's Black slave too. So McDaniels had a slave and a wife killed because of his lust for Shawnee lands. Even McDaniels himself was killed by Shawnee warriors just right outside Hardin's Fort (present-day Hardinsburg, Capitol of Breckinridge County), while he was bringing the cattle inside the fort. Daniel Boone lost his brother, Edward “Ned” Boone, and two of his sons—Israel and James—because of his lust for Kentucky land, to the Shawnee of Kentucky. James Boone was captured, brutalized, and murdered by the Cherokee and Shawnee in 1773, when Daniel Boone first started going into the Kentucky wilderness. The Shawnee chopped Edward Boone's head clear right off. They did the same with William McDaniels. Edward Boone and William McDaniels literally lost their heads over their lust for Kentucky land. Israel Boone was killed during the Battle of the Blue Licks, which was one of the last battles of the American Revolution. It was fought after the Battle of Trenton, which American history books says the Battle of Trenton was the end to the bloodshed and fighting in the War for Independence. If the Battle of Trenton was when the Americans won, in 1781, how come Daniel Boone and company are still killing natives in the Western theater of the war, in 1782? Did the assorted natives at the Battle of Blue Licks—Shawnees, Delawares, Mingos, Wyandots, Miamis, Ottawas, Ojibwas, and Potawatomis—who all met at Shawnee villages, really aligned themselves with the British empire? Or, did the natives of Kentucky want to defend their homeland, their women, children, and culture, and fight against any whites who wanted to take that away from them? Simon Girty, who fought against Daniel Boone at the Battle of Blue Licks, believed that all the French, Dutch, Spanish, English, and Swedish colonies wanted in the American continent was lots of cheap, maybe even free, land, and their land lust and blood lust were mutually satisfying to these paleface savage heathen barbaric serial killing psychopaths. Simon Girty was right. Ever since 1492, that's all the European colonists did when they got here. Americans still celebrate Thanksgiving, formed right after the Mystic River Massacre, when 700 Pequot old men, women, and children were burned in their home, and Columbus Day, which celebrates a man who personally oversaw ½ million Arawaks and Tainos and other natives of the Bahamas butchered to death, and started a genocide that eventually took out 100 million native Americans across the American continent. Even Lincoln had blood on his hands, since he ordered the largest mass execution in history, when 38 Lakota people were hung, and his Homestead Act encouraged more white folks to venture out West, to get themselves 160 acres of “free” and “uninhabited” land, for just filling out an application, paying a small filing fee, and agreeing to stay on the property for at least 5 years. And now the Lakota lands are being threatened with this Keystone Pipeline. And Alison Grimes was for the Keystone Pipeline, and she was against Amnesty. I'm not sure if she had any Progressive values. She was better than Mitch, but the poorest state in the nation voted for the richest Senator in the nation, because rich folks understand working families. NOT!

Humankind's closest relatives are the Chimpanzees and the Bonobos. While we didn't descend from either of them, we are cousins, since we have the same ape-like ancestor. The Chimpanzees have war-like mentality. When 3 Chimps comes across 4 Chimps, they run. When 4 Chimps come across 3 Chimps, they attack, and try to kill the other group. Chimpanzees are dominated by 1 Alpha male, who maintains his supremacy by force. Sometimes, 3 or 4 of the larger Chimps overthrows the 1 Alpha male Chimp, and they literally rip him into many pieces when they are finished killing him. The female Chimpanzee has to have her baby by herself, off to the side, by a tree, and raise her baby Chimp by her lonesome, after she is raped by the Alpha male, who gets to rape any of the women in their group that he wants to rape. Now compare this to the Bonobo monkies, which is a matriarchal society. The female Bonobos collude together, which gives them protection within the group. They are able to protect themselves and their babies better, and the male Bonobos are there at the female's pleasure. Because the females are happier, so they have more sex with the males, and everybody's better off for it.

With how the whites behaved back then, they were savages, much like how the chimpanzees are. But not the Bonobos. We should be more like the Bonobos. When the whites were uncivilized, they wiped out the Neanderthal, and then committed a 100 million native American genocide, which Hitler looked towards with fondness.

John Filson, Kentucky's first premiere historian, claimed there were no native Americans in Kentucky, that it was just a happy hunting ground, which is a lie that reminds me of the lie that Kentucky's slavery was benevolent compared to other plantations. If you want to believe the propaganda, which I'd say most Kentuckians do, then the average Kentuckian would assume that Kentucky lands weren't inhabited by the 34 tribes listed at the beginning of this document, nor was the slavery here that bad. So both the native Kentucky genocide and Kentucky slavery are whitewashed. Filson wrote that there were no native Americans in Kentucky, and that myth kept on being copied throughout the years. The Filson Society might speak of the truth, or not. Filson was killed by native Kentuckians, so clearly somebody was here. Kentucky's State Song, “My Ole Kentucky Home”, is sung from a slave's perspective of wanting to go back to his ole Kentucky home, because, you know, being whipped on your back for not picking cotton fast enough every once in awhile was just fine and dandy. Stephen Foster composed it after being inspiring by Harriet Beecher Stowe's “Uncle Tom's Cabin”. The “little woman who caused this great war”, as Lincoln called her, wrote her book because of the barbaric ways the slaves were being handled in Maysville, Kentucky, which is on the Northern border. The 3 very tippy top counties in Kentucky still boast a nearly 95% white population, as well as being responsible for Margaret Garner's killing of her own daughter, to prevent her from going back into slavery. Margaret Garner's story was the basis for Toni Morrison's “Beloved”. Stephen Foster wanted to capitalize on the success of “Uncle Tom's Cabin”, so he penned “My Ole Kentucky Home”, “where the darkies are all gay”, as a slave being transported out of Kentucky, down the River to the Deep South, in the “land where the sugar canes grow”. Stephen Foster would play his song at minstrel shows, where whites dressed in blackface, and performed over-the-top stereotypical renditions of racist parodies of Black slaves, all for the amusement of white audiences. Hypocritically, the whites today who sing this originally anti-slavery song at Churchill Downs during the “decadent and depraved” Kentucky Derby, are paying homage to an Antebellum South that was lost. They dress as Scarlett O'Hara, with big hats, and dream of “the good ole days”, when Blacks worked for them, or at least 10,000 of the richest aristocratic plutocrats, of which, even poor whites were willing to give their lives up for, during the Civil War. My Ole Kentucky Home has been sung at the Kentucky Derby since the 1930s.

Ironically, in 1788, John Filson was killed by the Shawnee, who Filson said never lived in Kentucky, and John Filson's body was never found. James Harrod, the founder of Harrod's town, the first successful white settlement in Kentucky, just walked out into the woods, never to be found ever again. Some say whites killed him. Some say he took a wilderness divorce from his wife, and yet others say, he was killed by native Kentuckians. Many of Kentucky's pioneers have ran into the natives here. The first two white women—Jenny Wiley and Mary Ingles—into Kentucky's dark and bloody ground were brought here by Shawnee and Cherokee bands who kidnapped them, and brought them here.

George C. Wright wrote a book listing all of the lynchings that happened in Kentucky, where he documented every single lynching, which was reported. It turns out, there was less than 500 lynchings here, of those that were documented by white authors. But just using white author's accounts of the native Americans they killed, for Kentucky, a book documenting every single individual that whites claimed to have killed, or witnessed killed, would be an encyclopedia. It's a worthy endeavor no doubt, but it would take at least a year to complete. There's just so much bloodshed that happened in these dark and bloody hills.

While most Breckinridges were racist as fuck, WCP Breckinridge's moderation is comforting. There's some hope in him. He didn't believe in social equality with Black folks, but he did believe in political and legal equality.

“You could not rid the South of Blacks by depriving them of the vote; they could not be legislated out of existence. Negroes must be recognized as a part of southern life and must be treated as the citizens they were. The sooner the people rid the region of cruel racists, said Breckinridge, “the sooner they will realize that their institutions are in no danger, their civilization is not at stake, and that their permanent and practical undisputed sway can not be overturned.” [Breckinridge] opposed literacy tests and other paraphernalia of disfranchisement, in the hopes that someday, “all races might enjoy a common liberty secured by an imperial law.”<ref name=Klotter1986>Klotter, James C. 1986. The Breckinridges of Kentucky. 1760-1981. University Press of Kentucky. pg. 180</ref>

WCP Breckinridge advocated for political and legal equality, and Willie even liked both Booker T. Washington and WEB DuBois, whilst most Kentuckians have never even heard of them, or if they did, do not care (as the woman at the Historical Archives in the basement of the old Breckinridge County Courthouse). “In an editorial comparing Washington's Up From Slavery with DuBois' The Souls of Black Folk, he called both books “remarkable contributions” to literature and termed Souls “the most significant and remarkable utterance yet published by a negro.” He recommended both books and both men to his readers. As an attorney, he represented blacks in court. When a Franklin County Negro was convicted of murdering a prominent citizen who had led a mob to seize him, Willie fought to obtain a pardon. Through editorials and speeches, he advocated equal protection for all. A young black lawyer offered aid to Breckinridge during his 1894 problems, noting that the congressman helped many “young colored men” in this law careers. Representative Breckinridge had asked the commissioner of labor to retain in the Census Office a black worker who feared he would be fired because of his color. Ever optimistic, the editor continued to predict a better day for race relations: “Barriers will be removed, prejudices will die, class distinctions be obliterated. Not at once, not in our day; not without fierce contest; not without heroism and sacrifice, but yet slowly, surely, the day grows stronger; the sun rises higher toward the better noon and the glad twilight.” Echoing his father, he wrote: “The negro is a man and the race in its essential unity is one race. Of one blood were all men made.”<ref name=Klotter1986>pg. 180-181</ref>

WCP Breckinridge, the son of RJ Breckinridge and a former Confederate officer, took over the editorship of the Observer and Reporter in 1866. WCP advocated the repeal of the restrictions on Negro testimony. Breckinridge and other “New Departure” men believed that admitting the Negro to the full enployment of his civil rights, including the right to testify against whites was a prerequisite for progress. They proposed the Democratic party as the instrument to accomplish this end.<ref name=Howard>Howard, Victor B. 1983. Black Liberation in Kentucky: Emancipation and Freedom, 1862-1884. University Press of Kentucky. pg. 141</ref> In 1869, Breckinridge ran for states attorney in Boyle County, and the testimony question was the central issue of his campaign. He intended to admit black testimony in all cases and upheld Fayette County as an example that should be followed by the whole state.<ref name=Howard>pg. 142</ref>

WCP Breckinridge also opposed the “oppressive trusts” whose wealth went to the favored few. Opposition to monopolistic trusts was “just and intelligent.” An economic system that produced both multimillionaires and paupers seemed to him “radically wrong”. Unchecked progress, Willie said, “crushes under its remorseless wheels” both human hearts and human lives. pg. 181. Colonel Breckinridge criticized Kentucky's school system. Calling for better facilities, higher teacher salaries, day nurseries for children of working parents, and a practical compulsory attendance law. (Klotter, 1986; pg 181) Willie said that “ancient dogmas” should be attacked, and that the classroom should become a field of battle where thought contests thought... Out of this comes only good.” The professor must teach his pupil to think, free from censorship, “even though he teach heresy, rebellion and schism.” pg. 182

Kentucky was the perfect “poor man's country” when Daniel Boone came here. There was a lack of centralized authority, and no aristocratic plutocrats posturing themselves to get into positions of power, folks had to interact with each other how they should interact: fairly. When the natives and whites lived, that was their home, and the woods was communal ground. But Henry Clay changed all of that. Henry Clay showed how the “West was Lost”, in direct opposition to Frederick Jackson Turner.

Henry Clay owned 40-60 slaves. Henry Clay complained that one of his slave runaways fled “for no other reason than because we have spoiled him by good treatment.” (How the West was Lost). Henry Clay supported gradual emancipation, and he pointed out how the slaves made their masters wicked too. Like Jefferson and Franklin, Clay publicly denounced the evils of slavery while remaining a slave owner himself. But he was far from calling for equality. Henry Clay considered free blacks “corrupt, depraved, and abandoned.” For Clay, manumitted slaves were supposed to leave the continent, shipped out to Liberia, or Haiti. Lincoln tried decolonization, by sending some ex-slaves to Haiti, but that ended in disaster. The 1799 Kentucky Constitution discriminated against blacks from bearing arms, serving in the militia, and voting in elections. An 1808 act prohibited the “future migration of free Negroes and Mulattoes” to Kentucky.

In 9 years at Ashland, Lewis Richardson, an ex-slave of Henry Clay's, complained he received no “hat, nor cap to wear, nor a stitch of bed clothes, except one small coarse blanket,” with “nothing but coarse bread and meat to eat and not enough of that.” After Lewis returned late from a visit to his wife, he recounted, Clay ordered “me stripped and tied up, and one hundred and fifty lashes given me on my naked back.” Why did Henry Clay order Lewis Richardson to strip naked? And 150 lashes!?! Holy fuck'n shit. In 12 Years a Slave, way less lashes by Solomon on Patsey nearly tore her back to pieces. The white woman insisted on her being punished, for being disobedient, and getting a bar of soap from the neighbors' house. Patsey didn't commit a crime, except she was prettier than that white woman, and since her husband liked how she looked more, Patsey got whipped.

When Henry Clay wasn't around, his sons terrorized “his” slaves.

“Heave away! Heave away!/I'd radder co't a yaller gal/Dan work for Henry Clay.”

Henry Clay owned up to 60 slaves at one point, and didn't believe that the black man could ever live in harmony with the white man. Clay wanted a gradual emancipation to take place, and as the President of the American Colonization Society, he purposed to train them well, outfit them properly, and then send them back to Africa where he felt they would be happier.

In 1829, Charlotte Dupuy, Clay’s longtime slave, filed a petition with the U.S. Circuit Court against him, claiming she was free. The suit “shocked and angered” Clay, and whatever sympathies he held with regard to human rights did not extinguish his passion for the rule of law. When confronted with what he considered a “groundless writ” that might result in the loss of his rightful property, Henry Clay showed little mercy in fighting the suit. The court ultimately rejected Dupuy’s claim to freedom, ruling that Condon sold her to Clay “without any conditions,” and that enslaved persons had no legal rights under the constitution. Clay then wrote to his agent in Washington, Philip Fendall, encouraging him to order the marshal to “imprison Lotty.” He added that her husband and children had returned with him to Kentucky, and that Charlotte’s conduct had created “insubordination among her relatives here.” He added, “Her refusal therefore to return home, when requested by me to do so through you, was unnatural towards them as it was disobedient to me…. I think it high time to put a stop to it…How shall I now get her, is the question?” Clay arranged for Charlotte to be put in prison in Alexandria, Virginia. “In the mean time,” he wrote Fendall, “be pleased to let her remain in jail and inform me what is necessary for me to do to meet the charges.”

Henry Clay spoke out of both sides of his mouth. His slave Charlotte Dupuy sued Clay for her freedom and that of her two children, and he hated that!

The jury ruled against Dupuy, deciding that any agreement with her previous master Condon did not bear on Clay. Because Dupuy refused to return voluntarily to Kentucky, Clay had his agent arrest her. She was imprisoned in Alexandria, Virginia, before Clay arranged for her transport to New Orleans, where he placed her with his daughter and son-in-law Martin Duralde. Mary Ann Dupuy was sent to join her mother, and they worked as domestic slaves for the Duraldes for another decade.

Henry Clay desired a war with Britain as it was believed that the United States could actually seize Canada and open the way for more westward expansion. Clay's faction became known as the War Hawks. Clay helped provoke the War of 1812, but when the war proved costly, and essentially pointless, he became part of a delegation that negotiated the Treaty of Ghent, which formally ended the war. More Kentuckians died in the War of 1812 than any other State's soldiers.

xxx

Well, even at the Historical Archives of Breckinridge County (in the basement of the Courthouse), there was a racist. She vetted me, wanted to know all about me, where I was from, who I knew, etc. And when I said that I was interested in the Native Americans, she became full-on bitch. I don't know her name, but she's an old lady, and she didn't like that I liked Daniel Boone, and didn't care for the aristocrat Henry Clay. Henry Clay was an asshole aristocrat, who owned 40-60 slaves, and mistreated his slaves, which is obvious, since, they were slaves! Mistreating them is how they remained in their place. There's some redeeming qualities about Clay, especially since he inspired Abraham Lincoln with his anti-slavery talk, and him countering Andrew Jackson, which I liked very much. Clay could have got a major highway in Kentucky, but Andrew Jackson stopped it; plus Jackson was a genocidal maniac. Even the western part of Kentucky carries his name (the “Jackson Purchase”, aka, the Chicksaw Lands), and there's a county named after him too. But Henry Clay has more issues than the racism I penned about above. Henry Clay was a huge proponent for the War of 1812, which saw more Kentuckians die in it than anything, and Tecumseh was killed, and the White House was burnt down to the ground. So being a War Hawk for the War of 1812 was totally fucked up, which is a major reason Clay himself called for an end to the war at the Treaty of Ghent in 1814.

I just think it's fucked up that this old white bitch is going to say, all snobby like, “I don't CARE about the native Americans.” Well bitch, make sure you don't celebrate Thanksgiving, you racist hypocritical fake ass Christian bitch. She actually celebrates the original Massacre of Mystic River Thanksgiving. She's happy all the natives were murdered, to clear the land, for her lazy parasitical barbaric ass. This is KKKentucKKKe, and racism in Breckinridge County runs rampant. She's pissed off about Obama's Executive Order, and how he came up with a common sense solution to the immigration issue (send some back, keep some), and can't bear the fact that white Kentuckians are living on top of Dark and Bloody Ground, so therefore all of her “knowledge” about the legal claims of lands the whites supposedly have, are null and void. I'm sure she doesn't like to be told that her racism is bullshit, that's she's an entitled racist hypocrite, but she is, and that's all there is to that. Considering Mexicans, with their native American ancestry, have more of a claim to these American lands than her European ancestors, I bet that uncomfortable truth really gets underneath her crawl.

That old racist Protestant historical archives librarian bitch did admit that she wasn't an aristocrat, but clearly, she has a fondness for them. She likes those who posture, and act better than others, with an undeserved arrogance. That's what these old white bitches are into. I bet she's a Protestant. Protestant women were lazy pieces of shit. They expected men to give them everything, in return for some dick-sucking, and their unquestioning obedience. German woman worked out in the fields with their men. Native American women farmed, while the men hunted. WASPs were even racist against Germans and Irish when they got here: they weren't “white” enough for them (see: 1855 Know-Nothing Riots). The KKK were Protestants. David Walker's entire family was killed because of a racist Protestant bitch. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeSkzPk0BW4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lynching_of_the_Walker_Family It doesn't make much sense. I've had a Protestant woman tell me how Black folks being on welfare is comparable to a parasite, and she closed her argument with “and remember, a parasite always kills it's host”. That's quite a powerful statement, says a Protestant bitch, whose entire livelihood is based upon being a parasite to her man. Maybe some poetic justice will happen, and she'll sap the life out of him, and will perish once her host has been killed.

The Protestant Puritans passed laws making Christmas illegal. They also hated Christmas trees, since they're purists, and Christmas trees was a pagan tradition. That old white bitch is a fake Christian, and carries on the savagery of the white's of the past. She's not a good person. She's a savage. And she's the guardian of the past. On the website for the Historical Archives, the public is encouraged to come learn about the native Americans! But that's until you get there, and then they're like... why are you learning about that? Um... so people like you don't ever exist anymore, that's why.

I guess I shouldn't be shocked at the pockets of racism I run into here in the Bluegrass State. It is KKKentucKKKe. We are living on top of Dark and Bloody Ground, of which we've made little improvement over. Plus the slavery, lynchings, race riots, hate strikes, and Confederate flags. Mitch McConnell solely won for that reason. Racist wyte supremacysts would rather hate on the Blacks than care about their impoverished neighbors, living on food stamps, Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, and LIHEAP. Nobody I know of wants a handout. And most of these folks on the government dole are racist wyte supremacyst Republicans themselves, pretending like they aren't getting handouts from the government, pretending they aren't like the Black folks they stereotype, and act just like. They're liars, and they're chickens voting for Colonel Sanders.

Racists are getting better at covering up their prejudices; instead of saying Obama is a nigger, they'd rather just call him a Kenyen Socialist Terrorist Fascist. They mean the same thing, but their hatred of all things Black is kept secret, to themselves. And if we looked at whites from the beginning, they were living in caves, have weaker genetics, their skin repels sunlight (but, because of their lack of melatonin, their/our skin produces the Vitamin D, or A, that we need)... Race is socially constructed, so it can't be just because of skin color. There's more variation within “whites” than any other group out here. Chinese folks have the same color of skin, but are they “white”? How about the Greeks, or the Italians? Does their olive color detract from their peachy pinkishness?

Race comes from the racialization of America during the time of slavery. That's where it came from. That's why folks say “Black” and “White”, even when there's not a single person on planet Earth who is literally Black or White. But who gives a fuck about the truth? Let's listen to the Black and White supremacists! I'm sure their bigoted social constructions make lots of sense! I'm sure their nationalism isn't self-serving! Gtf outta here.

Racists in KKKentucKKKe, especially rural areas, such as 96% white Breckinridge County, or 95% Kenton, Boone, and Campbell Counties, aren't pissed off at Black folks because they've been victimized by them. They're pissed off at them because they're fucking stupid assbackwards retarded racist pricks.

White supremacists terrified neurosis and paranoia of the Black man doesn't come from Black folks: it comes from themselves. Their idea of “nigger” is to paint up an “other” to be opposed to, but since counties such as Breckinridge, Boone, Campbell, Kenton, and 116 others, have virtually dominance of white folks, where do these fears come from? The word “nigger” comes from the mind of a white person, to designate all that they hate and dislike about folks. It's a mean and nasty word, the most derogatory word in the English language, according to Merriam-Webster. But just calling somebody an “asshole”, or a “savage”, or any use of ad-hominem logical fallacies, which only seeks to attack the man himself, and not the argument itself, has only the desired effect of saying that person over there is shit, and I don't like him or her, and you shouldn't either. “White trash” is a word used against crappy whites, which has some gusto, but none is as powerful as “nigger”. So where do white supremacist racists find meaning to their word “nigger”? Where did it come from?

James Baldwin explains who invented the word “nigger” and why they invented it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0L5fciA6AU “But if I am not the nigger, and it's true your invention reveals you, then whose the nigger here?” ~James Baldwin

It came from themselves. White supremacists do not understand others, and just being a racist means one isn't able to empathize with others, particularly those with darker skin tones. Whites have thought up the most dangerous criminal lazy brute they can imagine, and they have put those qualities on others. And how do white folks know that Black folks are brutes? Or are dangerous? Whites in 95% white counties do not have experiences with Black folks. When they speak about Black folks, it's like Borat talking about the Jews. It's like they've never actually seen or talked to a Black person. Whites “know” Black folks' dangerous lazy brutishness because they know their own ugly savage hearts, their own criminal and dangerous nature, their own penchant for laziness and brutality. And since white folks see themselves as violent uncontrollable animals, then, logic follows, that those they don't like, will have the same projected qualities as themselves, only worse. Take the argument of white supremacists that they're “taking our women”. Much of white man's racism is rooted upon their defense of “white womanhood”. Since white woman is good and pure and pious and can do no wrong, to imagine a beast ravaging her, just sickens their minds. But why do they think a Black man is a beast? Are they not themselves a beast? White supremacists would probably admit whole-heartily that they're just animals, and since they believe themselves to be a beast, then clearly, the Black man must be a beast too, only somehow, they're worse than him. White supremacists know that Black men like white women for the same reason Black men know that about white men: because they are the same. White men know what Black men are thinking about when they are around white women because it's the same thoughts white men have when they are around white women. And vice versa. Black racists say that white men only want one thing from Black women, and how do they know this? Because both Black and wyte men love all women of all races. Dave Chappelle said that with men, he sees race, but with women, his dick is a humanitarian. While that's just a joke, it contains a kernel of truth that gets to the heart of the matter. Men's love for womenkind has the capacity for breaking the cycle of racism. Miscegenation has the capacity to destroy racism, once and for all. The very last straw for determining if a person is a total and complete racist or not is whether or not they would have sex with the opposite sex, or if they would “allow” their children to be with a different race. White supremacists who try to cover up their racism with the explanation of “Oh, I'm not racist, but I think society will be hard on the mixed couple and their kids” is really just a racist bigot who is admitting that, “Oh yeah. I'm a total racist bigoted piece of shit.”

Also note, humankind are not beasts. Humankind has many animalistic qualities, but our ability to think, to have consciousness, to speak language creatively, to reason, and to control ourselves, are the main aspects that differentiate us from the beasts. They only have instinct, but that's not enough. That's why gazelles have never built a skyscraper, or planted corn, or planned out a city map. It's the reason flies will fly onto one's food, and after nearly being swatted, will come right back again. To assume that one is a beast is to rationalize all that one does. Be wary of racists, and be wary of those who say we are just animals. They say they are just animals in order to be savage beasts. The racists who think Black men are savage beasts are just admitting that they themselves believe themselves to be savage beasts, and that all of human life is just one huge frantic fight in the jungle of life. Perhaps I'm a speciesist because I believe humans to be better than animals, but to just shrug one's shoulders, and to say that one is a beast, is a human who has given up on humanity and all attempts for civilization.

White racism comes from 3 places: 1) ignorance; 2) fear, and; 3) jealousy of Black bodies. Being ignorant of others leads to fear, and from that fear comes hatred. In America, one shouldn't trust anybody, and in our capitalistic society, we're supposed to figure out our personal economies, and if we fail, well, that's just life. Some sink and some swim. There's poor folks, and homelessness, but for Capitalists, they say, who gives a fuck? So you'll hear some white supremacists says that it's cool that they're racist against Black folks because they hate all folks. They hate everybody. Some folks brush this aside as it's some sort of rationalization, but it's not. This sentiment goes right to the heart of the matter. White folks hate everybody. White folks—scared, neurotic, paranoid, weak minded, feeble bodied—have carved out a world where only their star player matters—themselves—and all others, don't.

From white people's lack of empathy, humanity, soul, and culture is where my desire to have “brothers” comes from. I don't have an inherent desire to say “nigger”. On the contrary. My desire is to have niggas, and to be somebody's nigga; to have brothers, and to be a brother. There's no inherent solidarity with “whites”, unless it coalesces around a hatred of “the other”, which typically has brown or black skin. Ironically, I know some brown-skinned “white” supremacists who fail to see their hatred and fear and ignorance and jealousy of Black bodies is really just hatred of themselves. From white's lack of culture, I desire to know and understand my African, Bohemian, Bavarian, Austrian, and Prussian roots. From white's lack of humanity and soul, I desire to have compassion, to love, and to hear a music that only myself can hear: ie to have soul. From white's lack of solidarity, I desire to have comrades, no matter what name “comrade” comes in the form of.

The sexual prowess of Black folks' better bodies makes both male and female whites jealous and insecure about their relationships. Black folks having sexier bodies threatens both white men and women, but it doesn't have to be so. Not all Black folks are perfectly sculpted by God himself, and there's sexier folks in all races, creeds, nationalities, and groups. One's security in their relationships comes from their trust in the other person's intent and heart and their love. If one knows they are loved, they need not fear any other person, sexy or not. Plus, whites can hold their own in terms of being sexy. When I notice how the starting five of the NBA is all Black, or how marathon runners in the Olympics come from West Africa, or how Black women have booty's, or Black men have bigger dicks, these are generalizations, and they aren't true for everybody. That's important to understand, for both white folks and Black folks. In some respects, having lower expectations is a decisive tactic politically, for if one expects the worst, than anything better is pleasing, and if one expects the best, then only disappointment can follow. Jealousy of Black bodies is why white supremacists would cut off the Black man's nuts after they lynched him, or pose in pictures with his naked body. Those pictures would be put on postcards and sent all over the US and the world, to brag about how proud they were at murdering folks without the due process of law, and their sick sadistic sexual urges came out, when they stole the Black man's testicles, or would strip him naked, as Henry Clay did to Lewis Richardson.

As a child slave, I experienced direct slavery, of which most Blacks today never experienced. Malcolm X isn't talking about a foregone past with me; he's talking about my recent past, and my current reality.

There's good and bad in all groups. Diana Richardson is a proud racist. She hates whites with a passion, when she never experienced the racism or the slavery I've endured. Her racism is her M.O., and I question anybody who would be friends with a person like her. When I find out that a white person doesn't like Black folks, I can't respect them, unless they have some story about being fucked over by Black folks. Most of the time, there's no basis for white racism; it's just ignorant fear, hatred, and jealousy. But there's times when folks have been fucked over, and that's bullshit. While I don't respect whites who are blatantly and ignorantly racist, I don't see the same struggle in Black communities. I hear lots of unchecked racism, but with whites, I see Don Imus, Kramer, Paula Dean, others, all being shamed because of their racism. I see whites protesting in Ferguson, against Darren Wilson, for Mike Brown. I see whites protesting in New York. There's bad white supremacists out here, that's for sure, and it's bullshit, especially when they have no personal experiences that led them to believe what they believe. In my personal experience, I've been victimized by Black racists, such as Diana Richardson. She's the Black KKK. Not even the Black Panthers was the Black KKK. They were Blacks organizing themselves for self-defense. People like Diana Richardson, or Angel, or Curtis Stewart, or Derrick Bonds, these folks hated me for no other reason than the color of my skin, and this is progress? Diana Richardson doesn't want to march with me against the white owners of society, and she let's the KKK be. She doesn't confront the racist elements oppressing her. She thinks being a stupid shitty racist to good whites who have done her no wrong is the solution. That's not the solution. But that fits into her narrow warped narrative. It's a self-fulfilling prophesy. She hates whites folks to the point where they'll hate her back, even if they're the most anti-racist person on the planet. There was a time when I hated all whites, and embraced all Blacks, no matter what they did. But my voice in the conversation wasn't welcomed, or needed. I was ready to throw my body into the machine to stop the injustices, but that wasn't good enough to a racist. Would anybody do that for me? Black supremacists and white supremacists are the problem. They keep this social construction going because they want to “prove” that the other is just pure fucking evil. So if a Black man is terrorized day in and day out by the KKK, and one day, he says, “Fuck white people”, well shit. Now whites know he's a racist, so fuck him, right? No. Of course not. Diana Richardson's hatred I hate because I know she's garbage. She's white trash. If I have only 2 groups to be in, and 1 group, Diana Richardson and her Black supremacist Devil minions, want to hate me because of my skin color, and the other group, white supremacists, wants to defend me because of my skin color, I don't really have a choice, now do I? To see if something is just, fair, or right, just reverse the roles. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. If a Black person has to choose between the Klan, or black racists, I wouldn't expect him or her to choose the group that just hates him just because he exists; in fact, you're a fucking retarded piece of shit if you truly think that a Black man should embrace the KKK for any reason, ever. Thankfully, we're not confronted with only being a part of a Black or White supremacist group, and therefore, I reject them both. Black and White supremacists only seek to divide us so they can conquer us: their enemies and their friends.

While Black racism is a problem, and it does exist, since racism starts in the mind, in general, whites started it, and they started it without any experiences to validate their claims, and many of them are in privileged positions where they can do something meaningful to change it. I'll find the good fight wherever I go, but we do need to realize that hatred on good folks isn't going to help anybody. Diana Richardson, like the KKK, is also a cowardly piece of shit. She doesn't confront white supremacists. She attacks the Abraham Lincolns, the Willis Russells, the JFKs and RFKs, the whites who stood up opposed to the avalanche of white racism, because if you aren't down with their ignorant backwards hatred of Blacks, then that hatred falls on you. To white supremacists, I'm a “nigger-lover”, and to Black supremacists, I'm a cracker-ass-cracker. This puts me in no-man's land, and frankly, I'd rather be here than around those fucking dumbass stereotypical evil fucking assholes. The racism of Black folks works the same way. If you aren't down with Diana Richardson's racism, her hatred will fall on you. You'd be a “cracker-lover” or “honkey-lover”, or whatever. When she spoke about white folks, saying that “nits” make lice, which came from evil whites who massacred old men, women, and Cherokee children at Yahoo Falls in southern Kentucky in 1810, she thought that was hilarious. How is that different from the whites who massacred? To Diana Richardson, she's no different than the white supremacists I've stood up proudly against, and if Diana Richardson had white skin, I'd fucking hate her with the same hatred I have with white supremacists. These people are the problem. There's no “black” or “white” person in the world. Nobody has that color of skin. But for black and white supremacists, this social construction, this illusion of racial superiority, is the most important thing in the world to them. Righteous Rainbow Rebellion folks, black, brown, or whites, all need to get together and see how many other qualities define us, and how racism keeps both the master and slave down, since even the master is enslaved to their own power over others. One thing that unites many “blacks” and “whites” is that most aren't purebred. Most of us are mutts. I have 11% sub-Saharan African blood in me, and many Blacks have blood that's not African in them. Also, we are all a vastly assorted colored bunch. I'm not saying be color-blind. On the contrary. I'm saying being colorful, as the Rainbow. And be Black or White, if you want, but not if it's based on hatred of the other. That's so fucking stupid. I can understand Black folks liking themselves, where they came from, their culture, history, foods, language, heritage, etc., and therefore, I should be accepting of white folks who like where they came from too. It's the racism, the hatred of others, that pisses me off. The racialism, I don't mind. I'd like to see us view each other as our own individual selves, and perhaps, the nationalism of humanism can break this stupid race war ideology, but that's a conversation I'm willing to have.

I remember Tiffany “Debo” tellling me that I had “white privilege”, which I agree with. But the way she said, her only intent was to piss me off, and that's it. I understand that I have “white privilege”, however it's defined, just like she has “black” and “female privilege”, however it's defined, but if she can't understand that a white homeless person, who has “white privilege” too, has a shittier life than herself, then she's just a bigoted piece of trash, and fuck her ignorance, and her oppression, to hell.

I hope that Black folks start to weed out their own racists in their own ranks. I understand they have a larger struggle with the systemic institutions, but I would hope they'd understand the power and courage it takes for a “white” to be an anti-white race traitor. Like the whites marching with MLK. They get the racism of white hatred, and adding black racism upon their heads isn't helpful. MLK was cautious of the term “Black Power”, because he felt that term seeks to divide rather than to unite. We're all human. That unites us all. Personally, I feel that “whites” need to have a Black Power evolution within themselves. I see the struggle laid out before me. In my struggle against racism, I'll get the racism of whites that's typically reserved for Blacks put on top of me, and I'll won't expect love from either the white or black supremacists. It kind of reminds me of Bill Maher and Ben Affleck's argument. I see where Ben Affleck is coming from, and Bill Maher's racism does need to be checked, but I also read an article from a woman in Pakistan who pointed out the extra hardships she has to endure from her culture, even though she's a good Muslim woman. She values Bill Maher's supposed “racism”. I wouldn't say he was racist. I'd say he was a “racialist”, in terms of seeing a different culture, in it's full context. He hates religion, and believes that religion does much damage for many different groups. I'd say Bill Maher likes good folks and hates bad folks, which is how it should be. Fuck the assholes, no matter what color they are.

If 3 Black boys is brutalized by corrupt cops, and 2 White boys are brutalized by corrupt cops, I'd hope we didn't have an oppression Olympics, where I'm being told that I have it better because less of the boys who look like me were brutalized. While that's true, and it's important for me to understand, it doesn't solve the problem. Hopefully we'd see the shit sandwich of a struggle we both have to endure, and that it needs to stop, and that the solution isn't to attack each other, but to destroy the very problem that's oppressing us both: a sick society that allows corrupt fascist cops to hurt others with impugnity.

For me, running away from a sick white culture into a sick blacks culture, who emulate the sick whites, didn't do me any good. The whole goddamned culture is fucked, and this sickness needs a cure. And while I can try to rationalize that perhaps all whites were mean to Diana Richardson, I also know that to not be true. Just like I know that the whites supremacists weren't treated by all blacks poorly. I'll chalk it up to running into assholes in a time that I needed friends and allies. If you don't like me, then fuck you. That's universal. We win friends and allies when we can bridge that divide; when we make that next logical leap, and embrace those we know to be different.

Diana Richardson's attack against me wasn't done because I did anything wrong to her because I didn't. I did argue with her, to try to show her the error of her ways, to educate, to illuminate, so she'd become a better person. In the past, I let the racists be their ignorant ass racist selves without saying a word. They learned nothing, and felt proud of themselves for it, just like a pigeon playing chess. Pigeons knock over all of the pieces, shit on the board, and strut around arrogantly acting like they won something. If I could have gotten Diana Richardson to understand my struggle, maybe not the exact same, but a humanist struggle nonetheless, the same as hers... but I'd argue that my struggle is a harder one than hers, since I have to take on both Black and White supremacists, from the gutter of America, then she can see that being dicks to good whites doesn't achieve any victory.

I also see that this is a complicated issue, but it won't be won by folks who only seek to combat others, without trying to gain any understanding. One should see how I struggle with these ideas, and see that it's not rooted in fear and racism, but in love and understanding. They only way we'll get progress is only when Black and White folks can get to together, speak honestly to each other, without getting their feelings hurt, and to engage in that conversation from a position of love and understanding. Then we will have won a victory for humanity. In the meantime, I'll keep on speaking out against ignorant ass white supremacists, because I know that most of their hatred isn't rooted in experiences, but just blind prejudice, and I'll just duck and deflect from Black supremacists, until it comes down to injuring me. Black folks, I get where you're coming from, believe me, I do, but I'm not your enemy, I swear I'm not. I'm an ally of truth, justice, righteousness, freedom, democracy, solidarity, peace, and love, and if you're down with that, then I'm down with you. There's shit in every group, and my shit sandwich doesn't taste any better than yours.

Diana Richardson won nothing with her disrespectful arrogant ways, and now I'm suspect of those who would embrace a stupid shitty racist fascist asshole such as herself as a friend. I don't have racist friends, so why would you? And that question goes to both black and white supremacists. The attacks upon me, from white and black racists, hasn't been because I did anything wrong to them. It was because of powerlessness, and perhaps, if I achieve victory, I'll get the love and respect I deserve. Probably not. Not by the shitty fascist assholes. And really, that's what the Klan and the Diana Richardson's of the world only care about. Power for themselves, and none for everybody else. I have ran into a bunch of assholes, and I'm not sure why Black folks feel the need to be assholes to me. Many of them have. But I also can't say anything better for the whites.

Max Plank said that “Truth never triumphs — its opponents just die out.” He also said “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.” There's clearly a difference between a white supremacist who hates all “niggers” just for the fuck of it versus a person like me, who says proudly that I'm 11% Black, and then follow it up with “in my pants”. It's a racialist joke, but it's not said out of mean-spiritedness. It's light-hearted, plus, that's a complimentary racialist joke. It's benign at the worst, and positive at the most. It's the same as somebody who may say that whites like to sue. That's funny, racialist, but benignly so, which is different from somebody who says, because of your skin color, I want to hurt you. Bill Maher is looking like a genius to me. Seeing cultural differences doesn't make one a bigot, especially, because I've done my damnedest to fight the good fight. I wished we all see each other as the individuals we are, but for many folks, especially in America, white and black means a shitload to the supremacists in both of their groups.

I just wish more folks observed that, and embraced it, at some point of my 33 years of existence.

The fight against racism can combated from a multiprong approach. Huey Newton said that Black folks need to get their shit together, and for righteous white folks to organize other righteous white folks—like the White Panthers—because one day, for issues of poverty, war, police brutality, prisons, the drug war, fighting for working class families, etc.—we're going to need each other. I can understand that process and way of thinking, but I also see a Rainbow Rebellion, where folks understand that we all bleed red, that's it's all pink on the inside. We're all human, and our differences make us special and interesting, and by uniting, by integrating, by remaining our individual selves, collectively, as an army of individuals, we can achieve so much more. So I see me organizing righteous whites, and righteous folks of all colors, at the same time, and I see no contradictions with this, since both aim to achieve the same ends. To show that we're all one, and to hate somebody because of their eye color, or hair color, or skin color, and not the content of their character, is just plainly fucking stupid as fuck. I shouldn't feel like I'm fighting the world just because I say racism is stupid. MLK was assassinated over some obvious bullshit.

I'll end this piece with an anecdote, and historical backing. I was trying to show how beautiful Black women was to a purported white supremacist. I showed this young white supremacist a picture of a Black woman, and while I could tell he liked what he was looking at, he forced himself to turn his love and admiration into hatred and disgust. I saw the struggle he was having within himself. He was told that Black folks are bad, and he believed it, but looking a beautiful Black woman, his natural inclinations clashed with his ideology, and so he forced himself to pretend as if his ideology won out, when I know for a fact that wasn't true. This reminds me of a 1960s documentary that had white FBI agents going around taking pictures of young Black women at protests. Where these white men taking pictures of young beautiful Black women because they suspected them of being criminals, or because they liked what they saw?

Women of all nations are beautiful, and so are the men, to a lesser extent, but still. We all have some element of beauty to us. Sapiosexuals find intelligence sexy, which means that even Stephen Hawking has got some game, and if that cracker has got some game, there's hope for us all.