Mr. Dunford and I have "met" a couple of times online. I don't know a lot about him. He isn't someone I routinely defend, or on whose behalf I counter-attack. I've visited his blog maybe three times quite some time ago, but I recently went to his blog post about slavery, because it has the X-roads floggosphere in such a tizzy. All I did was skim it, but it appears his subject is the purported relationship between slavery and the circumstances of today's black Americans.
I'll begin with the last X-roads comment in the thread (as of this writing) from one RE Watson, who sez, "My, my ...... Is there a possibility of a Connie/Jerry wedding in the future?" Afraid not, Mr. Watson. I've been happily married since the waning months of the Nixon Administration.
And, as I said, I don't know much about Mr. Dunford or his beliefs. I do think the relationship between slavery and the circumstances of blacks in America today is greatly exaggerated in some quarters. I know that mistreatment of slaves occurred (just as mistreatment of children by parents, relatives, caregivers, etc., occurs) but I also agree that such mistreatment was not the norm, and certainly not the totality, of slavery. Yes, it was bad. It was not THAT bad.
Now, on to some other floggerette comments.
seanmunger says, "Wow. Just…wow. ...Would this guy volunteer his children (much less himself) to be sold into slavery? Incredible."
I suppose seanmunger and his fellow travelers see some necessary or logical connection between (a) seeking or presenting a more balanced assessment of historic slavery and (b) volunteering oneself or one's children to be sold into slavery, but frankly, I don't see one and I don't think one exists. In my opinion, this is just an emotion-over-cognition method (typically used by those with a leftist mentality) for concocting a rooster-crow put down...
Makes we wonder.... is what's good for the goose also good for the gander? I mean, if they think people who "defend" slavery (even though that's not really what they're doing) should consider selling themselves or their children into slavery, does that mean that floggers and/or floggerettes who "defend" Islam (by disapproving of my disapproval of the practice of Islamic "religion" by Islamics in this country) should turn themselves over to Islamic jihadists for beheading?
One makes as much sense as the other.
Then, Jimmy Dick, the king of emotion-trumps-cognition, sez, "Isn't it always marvelous how people who have never been slaves can think that slavery was a benign situation or a positive for the enslaved people?"
Well, actually they likely "think" this because of what some slaves themselves said about it. No, not every slave experienced it that way, but then, not every slave lived in total pain and misery, as the Jimmy Dicks of the world would have us all believe. How honest is it for the Jimmy Dicks to ignore the positives that indeed did occur -- and were recorded -- and impute only the experiences of the badly treated to all slaves? How dishonest is it for him to ignore the human feelings of affection or regard between slaves and their masters, and pretend that because some negative ones existed, they were ALL negative?
I wonder if seanmunger and Jimmy Dick support a "woman's right to choose" and if they do, why haven't they volunteered to have themselves aborted? I mean, just because they're no longer in the womb, that doesn't mean they can't experience what an unborn child experiences when it's being aborted -- burned to death by a saline solution, having its limbs ripped from its body by a suction machine, being chopped to bits -- "born" people can certainly experience all these -- and it makes as much sense to suggest that abortion supporters try it as Dick's and seanmunger's comments make about slavery.
This reminds me of another floggerette from the past who sincerely told me a slave could not tell the difference between being raped and NOT being raped.... The point was to make all slaveowners totally evil, make them all rapists, even those who did not rape, and would be horrified by the thought. The hatred of white Southerners is powerful that way, powerful enough to render one a complete dope.
But back to the X-roads thread.... somebody going by the handle msb says, "Yet violence was essential to the working of the system and slave life expectancy was much shorter than that of the free population, and infant mortality was much higher."
Well, that depends on when and where. Life expectancy for free and slave changed with time and location.
Besides, I wonder how he explains those situations where violence was not practiced? How can the system work if violence is essential, but it is not practiced or used? Wouldn't that make the system NOT work? Besides, I wonder if msb realize that violence was not found just in slavery.... violence was widespread during the settling of the colonies, the early ears of the country and especially in the movement west. It has been violent since the beginning, and remains so. I wonder what msb thinks about that.
Then Sandi "The Roanoke.com Queen" Saunders pipes up with, "Slavery apologists are just beyond the pale. If you cannot admit the inherent evil of slavery, you have nothing credible to offer."
How about truth? Is truth not credible? Here's some truth. Many -- in fact, I believe most -- of the critics and enemies of Southern heritage magnify the evil of slavery, magnify it beyond all reality, for the sake of evilizing white Southerners -- certainly those of the past, and many in the present. Is that why Miss Roanoke.com does it? I suspect so.
I have said it before, and I'll say it again -- for floggers, floggerettes and their ilk, white evil exists in exact inverse proportion to black/slave misery, and so black/slave misery must be exaggerated beyond all reason, reality and truth -- because the evilization of white Southerners is their desire ... beyond all reason, reality and truth.
I want to also answer "Ohio Guy" and "Rosemary" but they each deserve a whole blog post. So check back later for more of me showing how willingly these people choke their own intellect for the sake of evilizing those they do not like.