Holy shit!!!!!!!!!!! This was probably the greatest interview on RNN I've see. Mr. Horne, Mr. Blumenthal, and Mr. Wilkerson should become Real News staples. Make it happen Paul.
Good discussion about a very interesting topic. Anyone that’s objectively studied the history of that era from an economic standpoint won’t find much to disagree with in the premise of Professor Home’s thesis.
Gosh! He makes so much sense. Imagine had “ we” all had a Dr. Horne as our first introduction to American History. I can recall in advance of all the facts and just slightly above average in scholarship, being absolutely mortified as one of only three non white students in an honors American History class. Mortified how mi gente were depicted. Crispus Attucks was never enough to soften those old narratives for me. So, I go home despondent and what do I ask my Mom: “ why didn’t we fight back?” She corrected me as best she could and she let me know : we ARE fighting back; we did not die out! It is immeasurable the harm that miseducation and outright exclusion of certain facts causes. Intellects and other radically truthful thinkers and good Moms like mine ! are the antidote to the slow poisoning of our minds in the Diaspora and the shackling of the body that follows an enchained mind. Bring it home Dr. Horne!
It is wonderful to hear an overview of history which is a factual account. The broad international view and period specific undertanding presented helps offer an excellent perspetive and his very enlightening. I certainly have benefited from seeing slavery withing this context. I think understanding the financial social and political influences at certain points i history is exceptioanlly important.
Perception is the key word. The brits did not abolish slavery in their empire until 1833. Sixty years after the American war of independence. Slaves in the colonies would be granted thier freedom if their master was a rebel against the crown. If their master was a loyalist they remained a slave. Slavery didn't end with the revolution but did not begin with it either.
What you never hear these speakers address is the fact that Europeans didn’t just sail up and grab a bunch of people and made them slaves but rather they dealt with the chiefs and kings in Africa and they were the ones who shackled and sold their people into slavery!
If the "counter-revolution" was about maintaining slavery how does Mr. Horne explain the rapid abolition of slavery throughout the former colonies once independence is won? To wit, the American Revolution is over in 1776. This is what follows. 1777: Constitution of the Vermont Republic partially banned slavery, freeing men over 21 and women older than 18 at the time of its passage. 1780: Pennsylvania passes An Act for the Gradual Abolition of Slavery, freeing future children of slaves. Those born prior to the Act remain enslaved for life. The Act becomes a model for other Northern states. Last slaves freed 1847. 1783: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court rules slavery unconstitutional, a decision based on the 1780 Massachusetts constitution. All slaves are immediately freed. 1783: New Hampshire begins a gradual abolition of slavery. 1784: Connecticut begins a gradual aboliton of slavery, freeing future children of slaves, and later all slaves. 1784: Rhode Island begins a gradual abolition of slavery. 1787: The United States in Congress Assembled passed the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 outlawing any new slavery in the Northwest Territories. 1794: The United States bans American ships from the trade and prohibits export by foreign ships in the Slave Trade Act. 1799: New York State passes gradual emancipation act freeing future children of slaves, and all slaves in 1827. 1802: Ohio writes a state constitution that abolishes slavery. 1804: New Jersey begins a gradual abolition of slavery, freeing future children of slaves. Those born prior to the Act remain enslaved for life. 1806: U.S. President Thomas Jefferson in a message to Congress calls for criminalizing the international slave trade, asking Congress to "withdraw the citizens of the United States from all further participation in those violations of human rights … which the morality, the reputation, and the best of our country have long been eager to proscribe." 1807, 2 March: United States makes international slave trade a felony. in Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves; it takes effect on 1 January 1808. ... As everyone, but Mr. Horne, seems to know slavery is an ancient institution, practiced globally. America was no exception. Clearly, however, early Americans were antagonistic to the institution of slavery. Yes, it continued to exist, but it was a continual source of contention - which would not have been the case without a significant number of Americans opposing it. This divide resulted in a Civil War that would end the institution throughout the country. This within 80 years of the American Revolution. Mr. Horne is blinded by his race (racist?) centric views.
+rctube1958 Almost all those dates mark examples of individual states restricting the continuation of the slave _trade_ in the US, i.e bringing new slaves into the state. England had outright banned slavery in 1772. From that date, all men on English soil were free men. That was what scared the American colonists.
Horne is seeking to falsify history. His basic conclusion implied from his narrative is that socialist revolution is impossible, capitalist white supremacy is now a permanent feature of human existence.
@Vincent Verona I’m assuming you have no understanding of history. He didn’t have to cite his letter to congress which was not public in the way you compared it to the speech bush gave. You can read the personal letters to ones another, yes the north began banning slavery very early in the nations history, to deny this is to deny history. Did they often settle with the south “to form a union”? Yes, without the south they couldn’t form a nation and would never have won the war, and we would still be under British war. Our disagreements over slavery, with the south, caused the bloodiest was in American history. Socialist tend to “white wash” history to fit their own narrative, they cannot breakdown the capitalist system without destroying its values. Why doesn’t this man mention all of history? Why doesn’t he mention Ben Franklin and the Pennsylvania abolitionist society working to abolish slavery as early as 1780 in PA, or any of the other 8 state constitutions anti slavery language? The south didn’t make policy for the nation, that’s absurd lol Even at the south’s highest economic point, they only accounted for about 18%. You literally focused on one quote in that entire comment and dismissed the rest of factual history presented there in, and of course had to throw in bush and trump 🙄🙄. Talk about having no self awareness of ones own biases. I can go on and on, but Jefferson clearly was against slavery in his private letters, he did state he didn’t know how to approach the matter, George Washington let all 300 slaves free when his side died paying for all of them to have an education and place to live, Madison’s notes clearly stated “there is no property in man”, his was clear not to have the word slavery in the constitution, therefore it can never be said it was constitutional. You know the same notes Lincoln used to make his case. Alexander Hamilton and his sons, condemned slavery. As I mentioned earlier Ben Franklin and many other singers of the declaration started the Pennsylvania abolitionist society in an attempt to dismantle slavery. The only people “white washing” history are rich socialist intellectuals. They know the truth, but they also know how to make revolutionary’s which is the real reason for telling history in such a way. The slave owners of the south like Calhoun, did the same, and tried to undo what the founding fathers had done to support his reason for why they should own slaves. Calhoun had to do this, because any common man who looked for himself would see most of the founders were against slavery. I’d urge you take a simple course on history, you can find them for free online, and also urge you not to compare people and practices who lived 250 years apart.
Pretending that there weren't abolishionists in amerika is just as dumb as believing chattel slavery was the same as other forms of slavery. The top question you asked is both in "Slave Nation: How Slavery United the Colonies & Sparked the American Revolution" and in Dr. Gerald Hornes book. Instead of looking to EVERYTHING in a whole book from one INTERVIEW. Maybe read the work Also, most amerikans did "oppose" it. They were fearful of the slave revolts (Nat Turner, Haiti, Brazil, etc)
This guy is lying by omission to "frame" white people(s) for slavery. He omitted that Africans invaded and enslaved Europeans first from 700-1400ad (Moors) and all the way up to the 1800's (barbary pirates). And the biggest slave trader King Gezo (a Black man who refused to stop selling slaves). He omitted that whites were brought to America as slaves before Blacks were and that Anthony Johnson ( a Black man) was the one who went to court and fought to legalize slavery in America. On and on and on ..
+Khaled Ibrahim Usually those who want to dismiss the massive crime of slavery make reference to the story of "Blacks selling Blacks into slavery" - and they omit that slave traders fomented warfare so that POWs taken by the "victors" could be shipped across the Atlantic to slave markets. The victors had been supplied with weaponry by the slave traders specifically for this purpose.
Dave Smith what does the Pirates of the Barbary coast have to do with this discussion. The same way the Vikings enslaving as selling Europeans all over Europe, and the Mediterranean aren't mentioned.
What a shame I missed this nine years ago. Notice the more recent comments below disparage this informed narrative, in conformity with current conservative ideology.
The idea that the england has a cleaner shirt, so to speak, than the colonial Americans, on this topic, is insane. It’s a complete inversion of historical reality. Very interesting dialogue regardless.
It’s also fair to say that blacks living in Africa also had a very dirty shirt because life is all about trade-offs one bad option for another. Only the unserious I don’t recognize this. There was a reason no black group in America has ever wanted to return to Africa Even when abolitionist made this offer through the years and then after slavery ended again Abraham Lincoln offered to resettle blacks back to Africa to Liberia a country where they would’ve had their own space in place to chart their own Destiny But after meeting with black leaders in the White House as the war was going on those same black leaders showed no interest in leaving the United States.
So what are Gerald Horne's response to these criticisms from WSWS? t.co/Eh6sFzHbR0 To be clear, WSWS aren't my politics at all. But this critique of his ideas needs to be addressed.
This land were too by individuals who want to have a beautiful life peace not who's better to take control....you as a father teach them beautiful morals
We believe in compassion love in GODS WAY ...I noticed you only talked about slavery can you imagine how many children have been killed by people who don't care about their innocent children who have died in ASTROWORLD
You're correct, but a recognized academic position makes it as valid as the stories it resists. Position always beats opinion, but im sure you know that, right?
@@brianjones1151 but being published does add a much higher degree of credibility than internet comments. That's why we are forced to account for the editorialized versions of history we are now trying to fix. Back when only the rich only published themselves there wasn't a counter narrative to work with, but modern historians have significantly more data to go on so our history is being cleaned up right now from the lies we are still telling each other that came from powerful liars of the past.
@@bmanagement4657 You must be taking what he is saying at face value. Fact england wanted nothing to do with FL because they said it was nothing but swamp land infested with hostiles both animals and insects.
@@stephenbriggs526 thats one example of our possible history, and Gerald presents another with his evidence. If you think he's wrong you should publish a counter paper.
@@bmanagement4657 Gerald Horne is completely full of shit. The 1619 Project has been completely debunked by serious historians. The American Revolution had absolutely nothing to do with slavery at all!
Africa was developed before Europe had any civilization. Africa civilized Europe as said Aristotle Herodotus Diordodus, Plato etc. There were wealthy large kingdoms before the Europeans carved the continent up into 54 different countries to minimize the 6 large kingdoms that existed prior to European meddling. Africans controlled their own resources and traded with the rest of the world, setting the price of their own goods. Europe's malignant greed created this debacle of African so called poverty. Europe is a broke parasite with. NO natural resources. They to this day feed off of the vast resources of the rich African continent. Mansa Musa the king of Mali in the 13th century is still the richest man in human history. Europeans saw his wealth and sought to take that wealth for themselves. Greedy.💯
Mr. Horne it appears that you are plagiarizing from Forrest Wood when you talk about the "Black Scare." Or is it that he was plagiarizing you? What is sad about this statement on Black scare, is that it appears to be almost the same as the prefix or introduction to the book.
Mr. Horn is not so much an academic as he is a racialist advocate. And we know how this works, you cherry pick through history and ignore the parts that don’t confirm your bias and present those that do.
In the opening it is claimed that “many Americans voted against Barack Obama because he was black“ I challenge this claim and I challenge him to post this Polling data. The fact is anyone who is white knows people who voted for Barack Obama because he was black. So let’s see the facts, I challenge him to post those polls.
Holy shit!!!!!!!!!!!
This was probably the greatest interview on RNN I've see. Mr. Horne, Mr. Blumenthal, and Mr. Wilkerson should become Real News staples.
Make it happen Paul.
Good discussion about a very interesting topic. Anyone that’s objectively studied the history of that era from an economic standpoint won’t find much to disagree with in the premise of Professor Home’s thesis.
Gosh! He makes so much sense. Imagine had “ we” all had a Dr. Horne as our first introduction to American History. I can recall in advance of all the facts and just slightly above average in scholarship, being absolutely mortified as one of only three non white students in an honors American History class. Mortified how mi gente were depicted. Crispus Attucks was never enough to soften those old narratives for me. So, I go home despondent and what do I ask my Mom: “ why didn’t we fight back?” She corrected me as best she could and she let me know : we ARE fighting back; we did not die out! It is immeasurable the harm that miseducation and outright exclusion of certain facts causes. Intellects and other radically truthful thinkers and good Moms like mine ! are the antidote to the slow poisoning of our minds in the Diaspora and the shackling of the body that follows an enchained mind. Bring it home Dr. Horne!
One of your best shows. Thanks. What’s past is prologue.
Love Reality Asserts Itself and Gerald Horne. (Bought 3 copies of Counter Revolution).
This discussion was very informative! Thank you RealNews
Great discussion. Very interesting insights.
It is wonderful to hear an overview of history which is a factual account. The broad international view and period specific undertanding presented helps offer an excellent perspetive and his very enlightening. I certainly have benefited from seeing slavery withing this context. I think understanding the financial social and political influences at certain points i history is exceptioanlly important.
You as a parent should know RESPECT & RESPONSIBILITY OF THIS ISSUE'S FAMILY OR YOUR KID'S
BRAVO MR HORNE AND TRNN----
Perception is the key word. The brits did not abolish slavery in their empire until 1833. Sixty years after the American war of independence. Slaves in the colonies would be granted thier freedom if their master was a rebel against the crown. If their master was a loyalist they remained a slave. Slavery didn't end with the revolution but did not begin with it either.
What you never hear these speakers address is the fact that Europeans didn’t just sail up and grab a bunch of people and made them slaves but rather they dealt with the chiefs and kings in Africa and they were the ones who shackled and sold their people into slavery!
Excuse me the indians came first ...Spanish tooo.went though this ....but as long as you in Africa have not clean up in your country
If the "counter-revolution" was about maintaining slavery how does Mr. Horne explain the rapid abolition of slavery throughout the former colonies once independence is won?
To wit, the American Revolution is over in 1776. This is what follows.
1777: Constitution of the Vermont Republic partially banned slavery, freeing men over 21 and women older than 18 at the time of its passage.
1780: Pennsylvania passes An Act for the Gradual Abolition of Slavery, freeing future children of slaves. Those born prior to the Act remain enslaved for life. The Act becomes a model for other Northern states. Last slaves freed 1847.
1783: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court rules slavery unconstitutional, a decision based on the 1780 Massachusetts constitution. All slaves are immediately freed.
1783: New Hampshire begins a gradual abolition of slavery.
1784: Connecticut begins a gradual aboliton of slavery, freeing future children of slaves, and later all slaves.
1784: Rhode Island begins a gradual abolition of slavery.
1787: The United States in Congress Assembled passed the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 outlawing any new slavery in the Northwest Territories.
1794: The United States bans American ships from the trade and prohibits export by foreign ships in the Slave Trade Act.
1799: New York State passes gradual emancipation act freeing future children of slaves, and all slaves in 1827.
1802: Ohio writes a state constitution that abolishes slavery.
1804: New Jersey begins a gradual abolition of slavery, freeing future children of slaves. Those born prior to the Act remain enslaved for life.
1806: U.S. President Thomas Jefferson in a message to Congress calls for criminalizing the international slave trade, asking Congress to "withdraw the citizens of the United States from all further participation in those violations of human rights … which the morality, the reputation, and the best of our country have long been eager to proscribe."
1807, 2 March: United States makes international slave trade a felony. in Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves; it takes effect on 1 January 1808.
...
As everyone, but Mr. Horne, seems to know slavery is an ancient institution, practiced globally. America was no exception. Clearly, however, early Americans were antagonistic to the institution of slavery. Yes, it continued to exist, but it was a continual source of contention - which would not have been the case without a significant number of Americans opposing it.
This divide resulted in a Civil War that would end the institution throughout the country. This within 80 years of the American Revolution.
Mr. Horne is blinded by his race (racist?) centric views.
+rctube1958 Almost all those dates mark examples of individual states restricting the continuation of the slave _trade_ in the US, i.e bringing new slaves into the state.
England had outright banned slavery in 1772. From that date, all men on English soil were free men. That was what scared the American colonists.
Horne is seeking to falsify history. His basic conclusion implied from his narrative is that socialist revolution is impossible, capitalist white supremacy is now a permanent feature of human existence.
@Vincent Verona I’m assuming you have no understanding of history. He didn’t have to cite his letter to congress which was not public in the way you compared it to the speech bush gave. You can read the personal letters to ones another, yes the north began banning slavery very early in the nations history, to deny this is to deny history. Did they often settle with the south “to form a union”? Yes, without the south they couldn’t form a nation and would never have won the war, and we would still be under British war. Our disagreements over slavery, with the south, caused the bloodiest was in American history. Socialist tend to “white wash” history to fit their own narrative, they cannot breakdown the capitalist system without destroying its values. Why doesn’t this man mention all of history? Why doesn’t he mention Ben Franklin and the Pennsylvania abolitionist society working to abolish slavery as early as 1780 in PA, or any of the other 8 state constitutions anti slavery language? The south didn’t make policy for the nation, that’s absurd lol
Even at the south’s highest economic point, they only accounted for about 18%. You literally focused on one quote in that entire comment and dismissed the rest of factual history presented there in, and of course had to throw in bush and trump 🙄🙄. Talk about having no self awareness of ones own biases. I can go on and on, but Jefferson clearly was against slavery in his private letters, he did state he didn’t know how to approach the matter, George Washington let all 300 slaves free when his side died paying for all of them to have an education and place to live, Madison’s notes clearly stated “there is no property in man”, his was clear not to have the word slavery in the constitution, therefore it can never be said it was constitutional. You know the same notes Lincoln used to make his case. Alexander Hamilton and his sons, condemned slavery. As I mentioned earlier Ben Franklin and many other singers of the declaration started the Pennsylvania abolitionist society in an attempt to dismantle slavery. The only people “white washing” history are rich socialist intellectuals. They know the truth, but they also know how to make revolutionary’s which is the real reason for telling history in such a way. The slave owners of the south like Calhoun, did the same, and tried to undo what the founding fathers had done to support his reason for why they should own slaves. Calhoun had to do this, because any common man who looked for himself would see most of the founders were against slavery. I’d urge you take a simple course on history, you can find them for free online, and also urge you not to compare people and practices who lived 250 years apart.
Pretending that there weren't abolishionists in amerika is just as dumb as believing chattel slavery was the same as other forms of slavery.
The top question you asked is both in "Slave Nation: How Slavery United the Colonies & Sparked the American Revolution" and in Dr. Gerald Hornes book. Instead of looking to EVERYTHING in a whole book from one INTERVIEW. Maybe read the work
Also, most amerikans did "oppose" it. They were fearful of the slave revolts (Nat Turner, Haiti, Brazil, etc)
This CHESS game is getting DEEP ?
This guy is lying by omission to "frame" white people(s) for slavery. He omitted that Africans invaded and enslaved Europeans first from 700-1400ad (Moors) and all the way up to the 1800's (barbary pirates). And the biggest slave trader King Gezo (a Black man who refused to stop selling slaves). He omitted that whites were brought to America as slaves before Blacks were and that Anthony Johnson ( a Black man) was the one who went to court and fought to legalize slavery in America. On and on and on ..
How do you know your info plz provide me with a source
+Khaled Ibrahim Usually those who want to dismiss the massive crime of slavery make reference to the story of "Blacks selling Blacks into slavery" - and they omit that slave traders fomented warfare so that POWs taken by the "victors" could be shipped across the Atlantic to slave markets. The victors had been supplied with weaponry by the slave traders specifically for this purpose.
thx Cynthia Allaire
Dave Smith what does the Pirates of the Barbary coast have to do with this discussion. The same way the Vikings enslaving as selling Europeans all over Europe, and the Mediterranean aren't mentioned.
Chatel Slavery is ALL American.
Real News PLEASE organize your multi-part videos better!
@professor Gerald Horne would you care to do an interview with Jesse Lee Peterson?
karl marx was a bum
Wasnt he Jewish??
@@toddmaek5436 And what difference does that make? He was brilliant and you sound like a racist anti Semitic jerk.
@@toddmaek5436 He wasn't observant
This is real talk and the same thing happened in the War of 1812 when enslaved Africans escaped and joined the British Navy.
Jumped in the water and swam to the boats.
What a shame I missed this nine years ago. Notice the more recent comments below disparage this informed narrative, in conformity with current conservative ideology.
The idea that the england has a cleaner shirt, so to speak, than the colonial Americans, on this topic, is insane. It’s a complete inversion of historical reality.
Very interesting dialogue regardless.
It’s also fair to say that blacks living in Africa also had a very dirty shirt because life is all about trade-offs one bad option for another. Only the unserious I don’t recognize this. There was a reason no black group in America has ever wanted to return to Africa
Even when abolitionist made this offer through the years and then after slavery ended again Abraham Lincoln offered to resettle blacks back to Africa to Liberia a country where they would’ve had their own space in place to chart their own Destiny But after meeting with black leaders in the White House as the war was going on those same black leaders showed no interest in leaving the United States.
So what are Gerald Horne's response to these criticisms from WSWS? t.co/Eh6sFzHbR0
To be clear, WSWS aren't my politics at all. But this critique of his ideas needs to be addressed.
This land were too by individuals who want to have a beautiful life peace not who's better to take control....you as a father teach them beautiful morals
History is a tale of man's mistakes.
09-07-2021, thanks for sharing your knowledge with us
We believe in compassion love in GODS WAY ...I noticed you only talked about slavery can you imagine how many children have been killed by people who don't care about their innocent children who have died in ASTROWORLD
Its there, why did they not resist on the African continent. Something was there.
very interesting
One man's opinion doesn't make it so.
You're correct, but a recognized academic position makes it as valid as the stories it resists. Position always beats opinion, but im sure you know that, right?
Education doesn't necessarily equate to Intelligence or Honesty.
@@brianjones1151 but being published does add a much higher degree of credibility than internet comments. That's why we are forced to account for the editorialized versions of history we are now trying to fix. Back when only the rich only published themselves there wasn't a counter narrative to work with, but modern historians have significantly more data to go on so our history is being cleaned up right now from the lies we are still telling each other that came from powerful liars of the past.
This is a good story fictional as it is.
Too bad the author is an academic who doesn't write fiction. You must hate your history if you don't want to hear the truth.
@@bmanagement4657 You must be taking what he is saying at face value. Fact england wanted nothing to do with FL because they said it was nothing but swamp land infested with hostiles both animals and insects.
@@stephenbriggs526 thats one example of our possible history, and Gerald presents another with his evidence. If you think he's wrong you should publish a counter paper.
@@bmanagement4657 Gerald Horne is completely full of shit. The 1619 Project has been completely debunked by serious historians. The American Revolution had absolutely nothing to do with slavery at all!
All history is a fiction.
Why don't you repaid on this instead fighting stealing killing we will not destroy our country of the UNITED STATES
In TEXAS
Was it European problem to develop Africa I see a country rich in timber and diamonds . grate vast areas perfect for cattle.
Africa was developed before Europe had any civilization. Africa civilized Europe as said Aristotle Herodotus Diordodus, Plato etc. There were wealthy large kingdoms before the Europeans carved the continent up into 54 different countries to minimize the 6 large kingdoms that existed prior to European meddling. Africans controlled their own resources and traded with the rest of the world, setting the price of their own goods. Europe's malignant greed created this debacle of African so called poverty. Europe is a broke parasite with. NO natural resources. They to this day feed off of the vast resources of the rich African continent. Mansa Musa the king of Mali in the 13th century is still the richest man in human history. Europeans saw his wealth and sought to take that wealth for themselves. Greedy.💯
The only original idea that people ever invented was slavery.
Mr. Horne it appears that you are plagiarizing from Forrest Wood when you talk about the "Black Scare." Or is it that he was plagiarizing you? What is sad about this statement on Black scare, is that it appears to be almost the same as the prefix or introduction to the book.
the ruling only affected slaves on brittish soil it wouldent of afected the colonys.
Black is a color it is not a nationality all human bands livewith in they nationality.
One question: So What?
Good God, quoting Karl Marx kills any common sense you might have made otherwise.
Poland helped with the revolution there
Mr. Horn is not so much an academic as he is a racialist advocate. And we know how this works, you cherry pick through history and ignore the parts that don’t confirm your bias and present those that do.
In the opening it is claimed that “many Americans voted against Barack Obama because he was black“
I challenge this claim and I challenge him to post this Polling data. The fact is anyone who is white knows people who voted for Barack Obama because he was black. So let’s see the facts, I challenge him to post those polls.
Ahh, “the real news network” kinda like the Pravda of the west lol
Such BS. Will this ever end?
This old guy hopes his theories will give him enuf lefty cred to bag that edgy green haired chick he's always dreamed of
He's wrong