"Divide and rule" has been standard practice for ruling classes down through history. In America, today, we are not supposed to have a "ruling class". However, the rich and powerful manage to "network" themselves together in countless covert ways in order to make themselves the real "powers-that-be." In this way they also manage to dominate ALL social institutions. In the past they have promoted racism and religious animosities to help their policy of "divide and rule."

One good example of an racist ideological trick to "divide and rule" the people occurred in the early days of English colonization of North America. During the 16th and 17th centuries, homeless white people from England were abducted and sent to the New World colonies(mainly the West Indies) as slaves. Irish farmers were also abducted for this purpose. They were not always labeled slaves, but in actual fact they were treated as slaves for all practical purposes. Indentured servants were actually a type of temporary slave, and they were sometimes trapped into permanent servitude by dishonest employers who levied fines they could not pay. This was similar to agricultural "debt slavery" or peonage. There was no racial qualification for being a slave in those days, just as in the early days of ancient societies, but slavery had become unpopular with European people in general and rebellions by slaves were often viewed with sympathy.

When these rebellions began to be a problem, the slave-owning classes hit upon a brilliant idea. They "discovered" a passage in the Bible involving the sons of Noah which implied (they claimed) that natives of Africa were condemned by God to be slaves. This meant that from then on, white people could rest assured that they would never be subjected to slavery. Only Africans would be the designated slaves, at least in "Christian" society. Since whites could then completely forget about the possibility of being slaves, they tended to become indifferent to it. Whites knew they were safe because of their skin color, therefore they no longer tended to sympathize much with African slaves. In this way, the slave owners divided the white people from the blacks politically.

Another good example occurred when the Union army began "reconstructing" the South after the Civil War. Northern capitalists ("carpetbaggers") coerced the southern state and local governments for their own (northern capitalist) benefit. Northern capitalist control of the occupation forces gave them control of most state and local governments, making the "Reconstruction" governments into shadow governments. ("Shadow government" refers to illegal covert operations by government agencies, but in practice, can include operations of organized crime, either hired directly by the ruling class, or working in cooperation with the shadow government which is controlled from behind the scenes by the ruling class.) They enfranchised most Blacks and disenfranchised most Whites in order to create a "captive" political base. Lincoln's assassination may have been part of a much larger conspiracy to divide and rule the South after the Civil War in cooperation with local whites who had formerly held power. This has to be considered in the light of the strong "copperhead" attempts to sabotage the Union war effort (covertly supported by big capital), the strong racist sentiments of northern capitalists and the perpetual tendency of ruling classes to practice "divide and rule." Carpetbaggers may have actually joined with former slaveholders in encouraging the KKK from behind the scenes to attack anyone who tried to get blacks and whites to work together politically or in militias, etc. They may have also used their influence with these shadow governments to falsely accuse people of being KKK members if they wouldn't cooperate with the carpetbagger regime. Deadly provocations consisting of killing people and blaming it on opposing groups are practices of ruling classes through the ages.

ACC: I share your feeling that comparing debt with black slavery in the U.S. would be silly. However, so would be suggesting that the word "slavery" be reserved for describing black forced labor in the U.S. Slavery is a practice that has appeared in every era of human history and most areas of the world. It's been sometimes worse, sometimes less terrible, and sometimes about the same as negro slavery in the South. I don't think that calling debt "slavery" implies an equivalency with the specific historical episode of slavery that took place in the U.S.

I'm glad for your post though. People--including liberals--do not really appreciate the brutality of the slavery that the African diaspora experienced in the Americas and the Caribbean (and in Africa itself). It never hurts to be reminded of the details of this atrocity. I've read a few books about modern slavery, and each time, I simply have to turn off the cable news when they start in on racial issues or step out of the room when friends and family start talking about them. The kind of restitution that justice requires will never be even close to politically feasible, which makes the whole discussion extremely frustrating.

I am a black woman not looking for jack in payment for the enslavement of my ancestors. I have faith that God has ordained great wealth for me. In the name of God I shall be allowed to do whatever it takes to ensure wealth for me and for my prosperity. I shall ensure that my prosperity enjoy high social standards by making certain that those who would threaten my wealth are locked into a system of shame that shall last 300 years after I am dead. My enemies will kill and degrade themselves. This system will be put into place so well that it will become self perpetuating. It will become an institution that can only be recognized by those stepping outside of the institution. Luckily those stepping outside the institution will see how it will disrupt their personal wealth and do nothing to show to others the institution.

==============================================================
In truth I am a black woman. If you are white feel free to type White, we live in America. That is why we are in Iraq fighting for freedom.

I am aware from talks with my elders of how that system worked in Mississippi. If a Black man was out after dark he would need to have at least $5 in his pocket or he went to jail. I met many elders who always had $5 in their pockets and would not eat if it meant spending that last $5. The prison system in Mississippi was well known for getting Blacks to work the fields by false imprisonment. Many times Blacks were arrested and convicted based on evidence that was planted by police.

In the US no other group was expressly denied the right to an education, only Blacks. The government actually sent Native Americans to school well before the start of the Civil War. At this point I should note, I say I am black for to say I am a Negorid would dishonor my ancestors who are white and Native American.

I had a co-worker say to me how he wanted the world of tomorrow to look like him (White). I told him that the world would be better served if the future looked liked me since I am so cute. I thought to myself, " Yeah, I bet the Neanderthals felt the same as do you."

Some of you have the nutty notion that because you personally never owned slaves you have no culpability in officially sanctioned slavery.

Can't you see that the meager net worth of Blacks compared to Whites is a result of the head start your family had over black families?

Whites will enjoy for generations to come a disproportionate share of the wealth created by the labor of black slaves.

-zzz July 25th, 2008 1:07 am-

"Tunnel vision.

This is another article promoting the racial segregation of injustice. What ethnic group (including poor white folks) has not been brutally oppressed by those with the power to do so?

The poor are slaves to the rich. Prison abuse and prison (slave) labor are still problems for all ethnic groups.

If you are oppressed, it sure doesn't matter to me what color your skin is."

Quoted for Truth.

Everyone who was a party to Black Slavery -both "master" and slave- is now dead.

Racism is a separate issue entirely. "Race" is a false grouping and EVERYONE should get over it!

Go to a poor neighborhood. See that the people there are from many ethnic groups -including those of African descent!- with many levels of melonin pigmentation.

People ARE dropping the "color-based" prejudice of "racism". But it will never disappear if other people keep invoking it all the time.

Everybody is equal under the law.

What's in people's heads is not your business, all you Junior Big Brothers dressed in "progressive" clothing.

Sheesh.

-matti.

This has been a well known story among historians, and appeared in C. Vann Woodward's classic, Origins of the New South, fifty years ago. Thus, it was known by many freedom riders and other civil rights activists in the fifties and sixties. It is a severe indictment of the way history has been taught in both high school and college that this story is not well known even among the educated public today. Something terrible went wrong, and you can blame it, in part, on the text book-dedicated history teachers of the last half century who relied on boring lectures and even more boring textbooks to try to help other people learn. Those textbooks, even ones developed for the college market, were often under the heavy influence of the editor, many of whom rose to their positions because they were good at sales, not because they knew anything about history. Thus, they took out references to any history that might alienate someone and cost book sales. Historians, anxious to increase their book sales, went along happily, and the people who ended up teaching the class just "followed the textbook" through a dreary progression of covering the material in a survey manner. Southern history wasn't a part of the survey, so stories like this one got left out. Finally, it begins to reappear, not thinks to the professional academic historians, but because some Wall Street Journal writer recognizes a good story when she or he hears it.

It is inspiring to see most everyone here in concert regarding what has to be one of the single most significant negative traits of human nature - the innate tendency to disregard, subvert and dominate the less powerful. Although we rightly differ on degrees of severity or what might constitute equitable justice, we all recognize the demoralizing and diminishing nature of this most offensive characteristic of the human condition. In this matter, the less powerful cannot remove themselves from the crime, because they have indeed done the bidding and reaped the benefits with nary a thought or word otherwise. To those victimized, mostly unwittingly and through no fault of their own, they still struggle with how to empower themselves individually and or collectively. We still, as a whole race and in our respective societies, very much seek out, adorn and bestow undeserved powers to our masters.

As a race of beings, more alike than different, we need to identify this core characteristic and reconcile it. The founding fathers came as close as any every have for establishing a constitutional framework to do so, doing a remarkable job of seeking a balance of the myriad social forces in effect during their time. But the pursuit of ideals, the Laws of Nature, the unalienable rights and balance of powers they addressed were intended to be more of a lighthouse by which to navigate than a rigid unmoving structure.

We need to understand, identify and pursue a unicratic vision for humanity more than to bicker and debate whose past tale of woe is greatest, whose interpretation of fact is most accurate, which future hill of sand is the tallest to climb. What must be done must be done. Until we truly appreciate the significance of "together we stand, divided we fall" we will all continue to be divided and conquered by our masters. We have but this one planet, and we are all part of the same human race. Still, regrettably there is forever without doubt, us and them.

Even on this forum, there are plenty who are contentious, disruptive, sarcastic, belligerent, unproductively simplistic and argumentative or reductionistic. It should not be hard to measure the miniscule extent by which any of that helps us toward a common vision or dream for tomorrow. But articles and discussion such as this one can help us realize the core issues that must invariably be addressed, and the higher ideals and truths to which we should aspire.

Give Me Liberty
http://www.gerryspence.com/givemeliberty.html

There's slavery in the fields of Immokalee, FL! Now! See CIW, the Coalition of Immokalee Workers and their work among the slaves at www.ciw-online.org/

Rent and watch, several times, the video _Border Town_.

I've seen real slavery in the cocoa producing areas of Ghana. I went there to ensure more child-laborers could get access to school--something they were denied while Godiva et. all made outrageous profits on chocolate products.

Debt slavery is also a different form of slavery but its still slavery.

"I'm in a similar situation. My father's ancestors owned slaves."

All of our ancestors owned-Slaves...at some juncture.
I'm more concerned about how-many of our descendants will...
[As Justice demands some-degree of Universal-"Regulation" of Corporations/Governments who manage to wield and/or secure Wealth&Power, so, too, must Individuals wielding and securing Wealth&Power be constrained by the Law -- or human-nature, of itself, insures an 'abuse of same'. We're all-Human (a balance of 'good&evil', inclined always by our perceived self-Interest, and temporary/often-accidental Opportunity) -- race/nationality/culture are just reflections of our colorful-diversity...]

I'd say the current prison system with its disproportionate incarceration rate of persons of color, only to see their labor farmed out for pennies on the dollar, is yet another adaptation on that same theme! That, added to the global trafficking in young people for the omnipresent sex industry, and we see that slavery remains in spite of the conceit called progress.

Slavery and the use of the courts to enforce it continues on a much larger scale through the use of prison labor. Is it any wonder we have a larger percent of our population in prison than any other country?

klever

Nonsense-these families and cos. continue to benefit from misdeeds 100 years ago and will forever unless brought to trial.

Nonsense. By that logic we'd ALL be out of a place to live, since true reparations would also likely entail returning all our nation's land to the people indigenous to it. But even if we were to just limit it to slavery, it still wouldn't work. I refer you to the episode of Family Guy in which Cleveland receives reparations from the family who enslaved his ancestors. Because they were now poor white trash all they could afford to give him was a tray of Rice Krispies treats.

I'm in a similar situation. My father's ancestors owned slaves. My mother's did not. Her family has all the money, votes almost exclusively Republican, and tries to keep as much as possible via tax loopholes and tort reform, which limits the amount for which they might be held liable in a malpractice suit. His side, however, is out to save the world. They work in education, with the mentally disabled, in caring for the elderly, in animal rights law. Her side lives in excess, in 3-4000+ sq ft houses when not one one of their multiple long distance vacations every year; his side lives in houses half that size, vacations nearby, is about half vegetarian and has a few vegetable gardens for food.

My point is that the direct descendants of slave owners are not necessarily living the high life right now. I shouldn't have to pay for the injustices done by an ancestor 150 years ago. I support Affirmative Action and I believe that's enough, coupled with a strongly progressive system of taxation, to pay for my ancestors' misdeeds.

What about someone who is of mixed race? Does he just write himself a check?

Going after reparations for slavery is stupid. The victims and perpetrators have been dead, for the most part, for almost 100 years. And if Americans are going to start paying for wrongs committed by their ancestors, they're going to run out of money, because our country has done some horrid shit over the years.

No, if it's reparations you seek, don't go after the living for the crimes of the dead. Go after the living for crimes they committed. I've seen the video of fire hoses turned on marching blacks, of dogs set on them by their handlers. Are those people still alive? Hell, start with everyone involved in the disenfranchisement of black voters in Florida in 2000. There are plenty of living people directly responsible for criminal acts and civil rights violations against blacks without having to resort to seeking money from people who committed no crime.

Talk about slavery ever lasting in the USA.

"The abuses of the Federal Reserve System:
Louis T. McFadden (1876-1936):
An American Hero",
by Richard C. Cook, Jul 22 2008,

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9642

Want a very important "taste" of ever continuing economic slavery in the USA? READ this article by Richard Cook, which no one should miss reading anyway. The history he describes is important and ongoingly relevant in very important ways.

A previous poster mentioned reparations.This is my formula for reparations.There are records existing for some individuals and cos.that profited from slave labor.[I've heard Aetna is one.] Any families or companies documented to be guilty-take ALL their assets.Thus the reparations wouldn't be assessed to the general public and shared by those at most indirect beneficiaries.
Oh to hear the arguments of some of the richest scum in the US that you can't penalize for past crimes! Nonsense-these families and cos. continue to benefit from misdeeds 100 years ago and will forever unless brought to trial.

Nietzsche

USAn's point about systemic racism illustrates the fact that Whites will benefit and Blacks will suffer from slavery for generations to come.

When your local school system leaves positions unfilled DURING THE SCHOOL YEAR while searching for blacks to apply when white applicants are already available for the job, you tend to see that MAYBE whites aren't a huge monolithic group and that MAYBE, even in Georgia, some blacks may even be a little better off than some whites.

Tunnel vision.

This is another article promoting the racial segregation of injustice. What ethnic group (including poor white folks) has not been brutally oppressed by those with the power to do so?

The poor are slaves to the rich. Prison abuse and prison (slave) labor are still problems for all ethnic groups.

If you are oppressed, it sure doesn't matter to me what color your skin is.

riddimboy July 24th, 2008 11:22 pm

Well you've got a point there. My apologies for that one. I was just trying to point out the stereotyping of "Southern Racism"

Flat not true anymore.

Nietzsche July 24th, 2008 10:26 pm

Horse Feathers

Thomas More -- "You must move among a very low class of white in the South. "

That's a very offensive and deeply classist statement you made. There is nothing wrong with moving amongst 'low class' people of any color. What is it that bothers you about 'low class' people ? Are their attitudes not as 'refined' as yours coz thats a hoot !!

You can scratch the new south anywhere in this country and it will bleed Jim Crow.

The same old slurs, the n word, the segregated churches, bars, and the VFW. It's all barely below the surface.

USAn's point about systemic racism illustrates the fact that Whites will benefit and Blacks will suffer from slavery for generations to come.

Lets look at the history of slavery before we start beating ourselves up too much.

When you think about it, slavery has been around for many thousands of years. A reading of the Old Testament and other histories proves this.

Recently I read a book The Slave Trade by Hugh Thomas. A couple of facts from the book.

A total of 11,328,000 slaves were delivered to the Americas from Africa. Only five hundred thousand went to North America, the vast majority before we broke free from the British.

In 1770, 22% of the population in the 13 colonies were slaves, and 80% were born in America. We had 500,000 in 1790, but most were 2nd and 3rd generation. Keep in mind, the US did not include all of North America, there were large numbers of slaves in Spanish and French controlled territories that were not part of the US at the time and which were later absorbed as we expanded.

During the Revolution, the British were short of troops and had to recruit mercenaries, which included runaway slaves.

After the war was over, several states abolished the slave trade and freed the slaves, and others had laws that phased it out over a period of years. By 1786, only Georgia allowed slaves to be legally imported (ironically it was one of the last colonies to allow slavery in 1750). Rhode Island abolished slavery but still allowed it's merchants to trade in slaves elsewhere.

By 1825, slaves in the US numbered about 1/3 of all slaves in the Americas. This was due to American expansion and inheriting slaves in areas formerly under Spanish of French control, as well as population growth of the slaves. Unlike many territories, the colonists and Americans treated the slaves well (in general, exceptions notwithstanding), not out of compassion so much, but they recognized slaves as capital goods having value, and allowing them to breed and keeping them healthy made more sense than buying new slaves and importing them. Slaves market price in 1860 was 500 dollars.

Now many say that because we still allowed slave ownership after taking over from the British, we are equally guilty. It is true that the constitution in 1787 prevented Congress from taking action until 1807, a delay of 20 years, preferring the states take a lead. Keep in mind this was a young country, with a Federal Government that was not very well organized, and not very powerful to enforce any laws. It did however make the slave trade to foreign ports illegal, and many of the Rhode island merchants who continued, did so illegally. The US in its early days was not very law abiding society.

In 1807, Congress made it illegal to import slaves into the US starting from 1808, and made it illegal for any citizen to invest in the trade elsewhere. The handling of freed slaves which were illegally imported was left to the states.

Slaves accounted for 3/4 of West Africas exports in 1807. Africans were exporting their own people for profit. The abolition of the slave trade by Britain and the US hit African nations hard economically. Muslims considered the Christian behaviour was an attack on Islam. There were in fact more African slaves in Africa than in the Americas. Slaves used to be sacrificed upon the death of an African king. In fact, white men were taken as slaves in Northern Africa, sold by pirates, but in much fewer numbers of course. That was African culure then. Not much better than American culture. Perhaps if this were taught people would be more forgiving of the past.

By 1825, slaves in the US numbered 1/3 of all slaves in the Americas, despite the small number the US and the British colonies brought over from Africa. This was due to our expansion in taking over Spanish and French territories and population growth of blacks at higher rates than other areas of the Americas.

Of course, illegal trade continued due to lax enforcement, and Lincoln was the first President to enforce it, since he did not have to worry about starting a Civil War, it started for other reasons. Lincoln used the "War on Slavery" in the Civil War as a tool to get Americans in the North behind the war, which was due to economics and trade policies (which unfairly favoured the Northern bankers and traders) and the British/French attempt to divide and rule the US by siding with the south (Russia saved our bacon, and both Lincoln and the Czar were killed).

Now, the KKK and treatment of the blacks after the Civil War was not good, no question. The KKK was organized by British loyaltists in the South angered at their loss and who sought to keep America weak, and also in part to intolerance that was prevalent in the 19th century globally. Our country expanded as a result of our Manifest Destiny for crying out loud. Many people in America have been treated poorly in our history, Irish- Italians-Chinese -Japanese-Jews-Catholics-Muslims- Native Americans- Mexicans. Except for the Native Americans, through no fault of their own, most have assimilated well and do not dwell on their ancestors past ill treatment.

America was not a kind country to those who were not well off or different, and is not much better today. The main difference is the elite see all of those below them as slaves, beasts which they have turned into debt slaves. The beasts that make good slaves and pay off their debt will get to stick around.

Now it is obviously the elite through the MSM and even on the internet that there is an effort underway to exacerbate racial divisions. Divide and Rule. Unbalanced articles such as this are not helpful.

Juliann,

Racism is first and foremost, not a feeling, or a characteristic of an individual, it is a characteristic of a society and it's institutions.

A white may be not bigoted as an individual at all, but they benefit every day:

1. in the quality of education in white-majority compared to black majority school districts,

2. the monetary value of their houses (values plummet in many places as soon as blacks exceed 12% or so of a neighborhood's population - and with it, the school tax base so the schools soon follow),

3. and most of all at the job interview.

Juliann July 24th, 2008 6:57 pm

Excellent post Juliann. I loved your point about capitalizing Black and not white. Excellent points all around.

ACC writes "...it is a mark of everlasting shame on the white race." Since the white race includes people in, say, Scandinavia - why should they feel shame over slavery? Since the white race includes people like, for example, my four grandparents who came to America in the early 1900s from Hungary - why should I feel shame over slavery?

I feel sad about ALL slavery upon this planet. That it happened in this country to the Black people (who were sold by Black people in Africa), to the NATIVES who were here first, women, children, the Irish ... is horrendous. That it will still be going on in a thousand years - yes, I believe it will be.

My elderly uncle was murdered in 1977, Cleveland, by 3 Black teenagers who were committed to ridding their neighborhood of its vestiges of white residents. But suddenly my only question (to myself) and comment (to myself) is ... why do I capitalize Black and not white?

Ever since meeting a Jamaican man in Denver a dozen years ago, and hearing him tell us that he is NOT African Amereican - he is JAMAICAN MON! - Well, that's just one reason why I don't say African American.

And in conclusion - study up on mitochondrial DNA. We are all brothers and sisters, from the beginning, our common beginning that happened in Africa.

Guess that makes ME an African American! Wait I don't say that ....

Peace. Out.

ACC July 24th, 2008 1:45 pm

You must move among a very low class of white in the South.

The racism hooey has been going on long enough. Was there racism in the South. Sure. North? You bet. More in the South I'd say so. For obvious reasons of course.

Is there still racism in the South? Sure especially in certain pockets. Is it widespread. No. Is it far, far better than even 20 years ago. Yes. Is there still eracism in the North, East and West? You bet your bippy. So be a little more thoughtful before claiming something.

I didn't find the book to be well researched myself and if you'll note Mr. Pitts didn't see fit to mention that this wasn't restricted to Blacks. Whites and Latinos were certainly treated the same way. It was the current form of cheap labor back then.

I finished the book last week.
It's one of the most depressing books I've ever read.
It's ALOT cheaper to have an indentured servant/slave leased from the government than actually having to purchase one; so many railroads were built this way.
John Henry died with a hammer in his hand.

Do you mean to tell me that after slavery, all the black folks DIDN'T learn to tap dance, sing gospel music and live happily ever after?

I'm shocked! Shocked! I tell you!

And all this is playing out while rumors swirl that the white slave trade is still going on, where young women and girls are abducted and taken to other countries to be sold to wealthy buyers.

Makes you wonder what happened to little Madeline McCaan, the four year old who disappeared without a trace while on vacation with her parents in Portugal. No sign. no evidence, no DNA trace has been found of her.

On the other side of the coin are the vast number of young Western women who are lured to Asia and Japan with modeling contracts, only to be trapped as virtual prostitutes serving as 'hostesses' and 'bar-girls'.

Really, for those with the means and money, enslavement of other human beings is still very real.

C-Span, to their credit, taped the author of "Slavery By Another Name" at a book store and ran it a couple of weekends ago. During his talk, Douglas Blackmon held up a few photos taken at the time and under the circumstances he describes in the book. One was particularly heartbreaking ... a couple of weeks later, Bill Moyers had Blackmon on PBS to talk about the book, and mentioned a photo that, as he said "really got to me." He held it up; it was the same photo.

This book must be widely read, and talked about. I've been on the fence regarding reparations (I can see both pros and cons), but after learning about this inhuman system, I believe we MUST begin a dialogue on the subject.

ACC sez:

You think some nice white little kid, maybe your grandkid, will have have debt around his neck because of Bush?

Are you kidding? While I agree in principal with your response to Mordecai, our grandkids are going to be working in Chinese-owned sweatshops in Oklahoma because of this president

This article and the posts that follow highlight a number of tendencies.

First, there is the bewildering tendency, exemplified by many posts, to minimize the Slave Epoch by comparing it to what I assume is voluntary indebtedness. They are not the same. Mr Pitts describes involuntary, fraudulent acts that impose a debt. When you or I "just charge it," we agree to the debt because we receive something in exchange for assuming it.

Second, and more encouragingly, this article shows that social inclusion and progress are not as long a process as we have been led to believe. If the article is correct and 'new' forms of slavery were prevelant in the South up to WWII, then the time it took for the US to move from a post-slavery society to where it is now is much shorter. In other words, meaningful progress in racial justice/harmony takes less than a generation.

If progress takes so little time, then we have even less excuses for pursuing it.

Slavery is still going on under the disguise of "free trade". So how are those products in quality given that most of them are made under Chinese slave labor?

Debt could also get you into slavery.
We did not have any type of social fallback until the new deal.

People could be sold into slavery for debts too.

White and black, kids and adults, male and female.

The poorhouse was a type of slavery too - you had to work and slave away there too.

race baiter

It's no wonder many people haven't heard about this side of our history. Americans seem to have a knack for putting our fingers in our ears and shutting out anything and everything that contradicts our perfect little utopian dream world. To even mention that these events took place on a daily basis would be seen as heresy to most people.

And to ACC, I completely agree with your comments. My grandmother has such bad memories of the South that she all but begged me not to attend college down there (I ended up in DC). For the life of me, I have no clue what could ever motivate someone to treat others the way whites treated blacks in this country (I can't just blame the South since from my own experience I believe Boston to be the most racist city I've ever been to), but it has to end. Hopefully this book can wake people up.

Mr. Pitts,

I've had this title on reserve at my library since I first heard about it. I don't expect it to be easy reading.

I hope it will answer one of my questions, to wit: Did the freedom riders and other civil rights workers in the 1960s know about this system? Surely the southerners knew, since their grandfathers would have been victimized by it. It must have been something just not talked about, like so much else in the ugly racial history of this nation.

Thanks for writing about the book in a mainstream context, so more people will learn about it.

And there is plenty of racism north of the M-D line too!

In Shenandoah, PA, six well-known teen age high schoolers on the football team beat Mexican immigrant and father of two Luis Ramierez, to death. They shouted racist slurs and theratened Mexican friends trying to come to his aid.

Almost two weeks later, authorities still deny race had anything to do with it, and no charges have been filed. The kids walk free.

The original (largely buried) story:

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/ats-ap-immigrant-killing-studentsjul18,0,896120.story?track=rs...

Democracy Now's story:

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/7/24/friend_of_mexican_immigrant_beaten_to

Sorry if you notice this posted elsewhere, but I am amazed at how little coverage this story is getting even in the progresive media.

Mordechai: bullshit. The kind of debt you're talking about has nothing to do with the ugliness of anti-black racism among white bigots. I grew up in the Deep South, I've seen it up close and personal, and it is a mark of everlasting shame on the white race. I've studied it. I know how the black people were taken from Africa, the routes they took getting here, where they were sold, how they were moved through the colonies. All the American colonies had slavery at first, not just the South, although the North conveniently likes to overlook this ugly little fact. Racism is alive and well in the South. I know people there who openly deplore the fact that slavery was ever outlawed, and who still look down on black people as inferior in ways that bring shame to us all.

You think some nice white little kid, maybe your grandkid, will have have debt around his neck because of Bush? Well, maybe he will. But do you think he'll be put in chains, and whipped, and forced to work in dangerous conditions in hot, humid weather (which is all the South has to offer) until he is exhausted, then whipped to work some more? Do you think the society he grows up in will look down on him? Treat him like dirt? Because these are things that happen in the South. Trust me -- you really need to read "Slavery by Another Name." And so do I.

We should never forget that the rights protected under the Constitution, specifically property rights and states rights, were created expressly for the purpose of protecting slavery – both from challenges with regard to human rights principles and from laws attempting to reform the practices.

Since debt is a form of slavery, all Americans (many not even yet born) have now become slaves, thanks to George Wanker Bush and the equally loathesome Congress of the United States.