l****z
发帖数: 29846 | 1 Harvard Prof Excuses ISIS Sex Slavery and Terrorism Because USA Had Slavery
150 Years Ago
Warner Todd Huston August 24, 2015
I thought liberals were always congratulating themselves on how they are so
mentally superior that they see “nuances” everywhere? Now a halfwit
liberal is making the lie to that by equating U.S. slavery to ISIS rape
culture thereby proving he is an utter simpleton.
A pinheaded Harvard professor is now out there insisting that we shouldn’t
get too upset over the fact that ISIS terrorists are using rape and sexual
slavery as a weapon of war because, gosh darn it, the U.S.A. had slavery 150
years ago, too. You heard that right, that is exactly what Bloomberg
columnist and Harvard professor Noah Feldman is saying. He is saying that U.
S. slavery is exactly the same as ISIS using rape as a tool.
Feldman starts his facile piece with a lie on his lips right at the outset.
It’s been 150 years since U.S. law allowed masters to rape enslaved
girls and women. Almost all modern Muslim societies banned slavery in the
last century. So why is Islamic State turning back the clock, actively
embracing and promoting enslavement of Yazidi women, thereby enabling them
to be raped under one interpretation of classical Islamic law?
The first half of that is essentially a lie. U.S. law did not excuse rape of
slave women in direct terms in the same way that ISIS is using rape as a
tool of war and religious supremacy.
Yes, it was true that negro slave women had no standing in American law
during that time period, sure, but it is not true that rape was actually
ensconced in that law in certain terms. On the other hand, ISIS is making
rape and sexual slavery a directly espoused practice that they are trying to
back up via sharia law and interpretations of the Koran. So, the case of
early 1800s American law turning a blind eye to the ravaging of slave women
and ISIS directly entering sexual slavery into its political and legal codes
are not at all the same thing.
There is that “nuance” of which the left claims to have sole ownership. If
this nitwit “professor” can’t see the truth I just stated, the “nuance
” between then and now, then he truly is a simpleton.
On top of all that, our antebellum society looked down upon slave owners
raping their female slaves. Slave masters tried very hard to hide from
polite society the fact that they had sexual relations with slaves.
So, it is utterly illegitimate for this professor to equate the complicated
and usually undercover sexual history of U.S. slavery to the open boasting
of rape by ISIS, and only a simpleton would say they are equally the same.
Sex with slaves was thought dirty and shameful in antebellum America. Not so
for ISIS today.
Feldman also seriously misleads when he says, “Almost all modern Muslim
societies banned slavery in the last century.” In fact, Saudi Arabia and
many other “modern Muslim societies” didn’t officially ban slavery until
the 1960s, fully 100 years after out civil war ended slavery here. The way
Feldman states this it is as if those so-called “modern Muslim societies”
had banned slavery a long time ago. But in fact it was quite recent.
Feldman also trots out the lie that Thomas Jefferson had sexual relations
with one of his slaves. There is absolutely no reliable proof that Thomas
Jefferson had sex with Sally Hemings. None.
Naturally, like all good leftists, this pinhead says that the problems of
slavery in the U.S.A. have never gone away and that slavery is still here
today despite that it was eliminated over 150 years ago, despite that we
have explicitly had equal civil rights for the last 50 years.
Then he says THIS lie:
And we would do well not to forget that American slavery, particularly
in its last half-century before abolition, was one of the most brutal slave
systems in recorded human history. In comparison, the history of Islamic
slavery is relatively mild.
American slavery was never ever one of “the most brutal slave systems in
recorded human history.” Slavery is certainly always wrong, but compared to
other systems throughout history, the U.S. system was one of the more mild
systems in history, not the “most brutal.” It is just factually incorrect
to say the American system was worse than all others. As bad as it was, it
just plan wasn’t as bad as that of other eras, other nations, other peoples.
And just as he essentially lied about and softened the late abolition of
slavery by those “modern Muslim societies” he is so impressed with, he
then swings the opposite way for the U.S.A. saying, “What we in the U.S.
recently sanctioned, we now find repulsive.”
So, he doesn’t find it necessary to scold those “modern Muslim societies”
for abolishing slavery a mere 50 years ago, but he DOES find it
hypocritical of the U.S.A. to stand against slavery because of its “recent
” acceptance of slavery… as “recent” as 150 years ago!
This shows that his hatred for the our country trumps his hatred of slavery
and terrorism both.
Next, this idiot reveals that he knows nothing about the U.S. Constitution.
“The U.S. Constitution acknowledged and sanctioned slavery created by state
laws,” he says. Actually, no. The U.S. Constitution did not “sanction”
slavery.
In fact, the framers were pretty careful to neither outlaw nor sanction
slavery. The reason was that all involved in creating the Constitution–even
the southerners–imagined that slavery would be gotten rid of in a short
time (they were wrong about that, sadly) and they didn’t want to
permanently enshrine slavery in the document. They even put an incentive in
the document to get rid of slavery by creating the three fifths clause which
penalized the south by not allowing slave owners to count their slaves as a
“whole” person in order to assign representation in Congress.
So, while the Constitution was often misused to allow slavery (The Dred
Scott decision being a perfect example) it never gave anything like a full
throated sanction of slavery.
Once again Feldman shows he lacks the left’s supposed supremacy at “nuance
.”
Next he belches out another lie about the Constitution:
An unchanging Constitution would include and enshrine the racism and
sexism of the founding generation.
We already addressed his lie about “racism,” but the “sexism” he notes
is an obvious allusion to the fact that women didn’t have the right to vote
during the founder’s time. But, by tying “sexism” to the Constitution,
he lies again because the Constitution never mentions any sexism. Not once.
Not at all.
And finally he lies about and speaks for Muslims who he insists have
accepted modernity.
Islamic State is enslaving women to trumpet to the world that it refuses
to accept the idea of contemporary progress, an idea that has, in fact,
been accepted by the vast majority of Muslims.
This is a nice little white lie that liberals tell each other in order to
pretend that ISIS and its ilk aren’t made up of “real” Muslims.
The truth is that the majority of Muslims have in no way “accepted”
modernity. Poll after poll finds that Muslims the world over don’t want
women to have rights, that they approve of harsh treatment for gays, that
they agree with eliminating the free speech of “infidels,” they want laws
to prevent “blasphemy,” and that they generally like the actions and goals
of the most radical terrorists even if they are squeamish about all the
killing, raping, and mass murder.
This entire steaming piece of garbage by this “professor” is nothing but
an excuse for a leftist to claim that the U.S.A. is “just as bad” as ISIS.
And that is an outright lie.
Sadly, this creep is a teacher of students and is indoctrinating American
young people with his peculiar brand of self-hate.
Finally, let me say this. If after reading this whole thing your little pea
brain decides that I am somehow condoning slavery, then you are a moron not
worth my time to address and you are wasting valuable oxygen the rest of us
could be using. |
|
