The Big LIE of Abolitionism!

The term ABOLITIONIST is almost universally understood to mean a white person living in the mid 1800s, who was a friend to Blacks and who believed in the freedom of all men. But this is a woefully naive misunderstanding of the term and the motives behind the so-called American anti-slavery movement. Contrary to popular notions, only a tiny, tiny minority of whites spoke up for the humanity of the Black man & woman, but white historians have amplified their often private letters and their insignificant proclamations to make them appear to represent an “abolitionist” sentiment that did not exist among the white populace. 

One need only look at the very public words of the FATHER OF ABOLITIONISM, Abraham Lincoln, who in his first inaugural address, March 4, 1861, specifically reassured his southern brethren that:

I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so. Those who nominated and elected me did so with full knowledge that I had made this and many similar declarations, and had never recanted them.

With this in mind, it is not surprising, then, that some abolitionist organizations would not admit Blacks to meetings, and that some members actually held Blacks as slaves! Only Black abolitionists, such as Lewis Hayden, his wife, Harriet; William C. Nell, Robert Morris, and Charles Lenox Remond, who believed abolition to be the Black man’s fight, could be said to have wanted a true and authentic freedom for the Black race.

Consider this:

• White laborers were “abolitionists” who wanted an end to slavery because having a skilled Black slave working without pay made it nearly impossible for them to find work that would pay any wage at all.
• Many white abolitionists wanted to end slavery because they hated Blacks, and, like Lincoln, wanted them all shipped back to Africa in order to make America a completely white country.
• Others, like Ben Franklin, cited the economic inefficiencies of the institution, and could not have cared less about its fundamental immorality.
• Yet others desperately feared the mass exodus of white womanhood to the big, black, brawny bucks if the African remained in the hemisphere.

White Americans have invariably shown themselves to by bound more to the false doctrine of White Supremacy, than to the elusive concepts of “democracy,” “freedom,” or “equality.” The Abolitionists were no different in this respect, and they did not hesitate in proclaiming their superiority over the Black race. During the tumultuous civil war era, the slavery issue had little to do with “slave or free.” The issue was whether the slavery system was the best TACTIC in maintaining white rule over the Black race.

Some Abolitionists believed that the wanton cruelty associated with American slavery diminished the whites who practiced it. Other tactics, they thought, would maintain and enhance white rule and command Black labor without the social disruption caused by the “peculiar institution.”

Deportation, economic and labor restrictions, controlled schooling, Christianization, legal and electoral barriers, KKK terrorization were all considered to be better tactics than slavery in maintaining racial dominance.

So to be “anti-slavery” or “abolitionist” in one’s political philosophy in no way meant that one was for Black equality. Understanding this crucial distinction helps to put in context the ease in which Jim Crow, segregation, and discrimination was established immediately following the slavery era. The idea that Blacks would attain equality within an entrenched system of White Supremacy is simply part and parcel of American racial propaganda—yet another one of the many effective tactics of white racial control.

[For more on this and other TACTICS of racial control see the book HOW WHITE FOLKS GOT SO RICH]