.
.
.
Today is “Juneteenth,” anniversary of the 1865 day in Texas when slaveholders there belatedly lost their slaves. Under U.S. law, they had lost their slaves three years earlier, when the Emancipation Proclamation came into effect. But even after the Civil War had ended in Confederate defeat, meaning that no one could dispute their freedom, slaveholders had taken the precaution of not informing their slaves of that development. for almost two more months, when Union troops arriving in Galveston forced their hand.
Today is the anniversary of the day when word got to the slaves anyway. Juneteenth thus stands, among other things, for the proposition that slaveholders will take advantage of their slaves for as much as they can, and for as long as they can, whether or not authorized by law, until they are forcibly stopped.
The next century after Juneteenth testifies to the proposition that slaveholders and their ideological descendants, when denied the ability to engage in slavery outright, will use whatever approaches and mechanisms they can to retain or reassert the benefits — financial, social, and sexual, among others — that slavery had provided them. Slaveholders are not stupid people; they are often well-versed both in the formal understanding of law and the less formal understanding of the establishment and deployment of power beyond the law. They are very very unhappy at having lost their slaves. They resent it; they long for its return, to whatever degree possible, even by some other name.
One such name for the revival of the substance of slavery was “Jim Crow”; another is “White Supremacy”; another was “Freedom of Contract”; today it is “Freedom of Religion.” The latter two are perfectly good legal and philosophical concepts, of course, that have been perverted towards the particular end of keeping subordinated people down. If you apply the term “slavery” to both the formal institution itself and the attempts to recapture its benefits to would-be slaveholders through coercion and duress, you have a perfectly good term for explaining why slavery is seen as necessary: because, without it, the slaves will revolt.
Thomas Jefferson, our dashing and intellectual Founding Father, had some bad moments during his Presidency, but none was worse than this: three decades after the American Revolution, a second colonial revolution took place in the Western Hemisphere, this time against France. This was not a Revolution of (largely) slaveholders, like ours; it was a revolution of slaves, led by Touissant L’Overture, in the new island nation of Haiti. You might think that Jefferson and the nation he led would have welcomed yet another assertion of freedom from even greater tyranny than the American colonies had known, but you would be wrong. Jefferson blew a gasket, lost his nut, was reduced to mad chattering about the dangers — hell, the horrors, of a slave revolt in our neighborhood. Would this give our slaves similar notions and aspirations! Intolerable! God spare us from a good example!
The thinking is along these lines: Let an enslaved man up from the ground, release him from his chains, and he may well kill you for what you’ve done to him and his. It’s entirely conceivable. Let a woman freed from slavery no longer fear rape and beatings and violent retaliation against her children, and what keeps her from slipping poison into your stew, or from slitting your throat while you sleep? Slaves and their descendants must therefore be kept in line. Kneeling in line, in fact; fearful of what will happen to them and theirs if they step out of line. Don’t tell them that they’re free until you have to. Get another couple of months out of them, until Juneteenth comes. Don’t give them the chance for their righteous and furious revenge.
Isn’t that what unjustified police shootings are about? Police officers are very worried, VERY worried, that some Black man or Native American (and of course this now extends to Latinos and beyond) will kill them out of, in part, indignation and resentment at the likelihood that the police will kill them. So they don’t comply. They don’t immobilize themselves, they don’t prostrate themselves and leave themselves open to easy fatal attack in a manner known for geologic ages in the animal kingdom. They challenge authority, they run, they try to get away — “TO DO WHAT?,” the police ask themselves as they unholster their guns. It can’t be anything good for the people tasked with settling them down. And so a cell phone or wallet is seen as a handgun, a child is seen as an adult, a hand at the side of a running youth is seen as grasping for a weapon from a waistband.
Resistance. Slave revolt. We cannot have it. We know that slaves have a right to revolt. That just makes it worse.
Shoot them down. Shut them down. Keep them down. Keep them ignorant of their rights. Juneteenth. A Charleston church.
This is your Weekend Open Thread. Talk about that or whatever else you’d like, within reasonable bounds of decency and discretion.
(A companion and sequel to this post will appear later.)
I first heard about Juneteenth in East Austin from a black dancer named Bashira. “This day memorializes when Texas slaves found out they were free, because we’re so fu–kin stupid in this state it took us an extra three years!” That was memorable.
I like your conceit too, gives a new meaning to Juneteenth for everybody. HEY! It’s Juneteenth! You’re all free! You’ve been free for a LONG TIME, and you DIDN’T KNOW IT! So now ACT IT!
It was June of 1865 – not 1868. From the juneteenth.com website –
“Juneteenth is the oldest known celebration commemorating the ending of slavery in the United States. Dating back to 1865, it was on June 19th that the Union soldiers, led by Major General Gordon Granger, landed at Galveston, Texas with news that the war had ended and that the enslaved were now free. Note that this was two and a half years after President Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation – which had become official January 1, 1863. The Emancipation Proclamation had little impact on the Texans due to the minimal number of Union troops to enforce the new Executive Order. However, with the surrender of General Lee in April of 1865, and the arrival of General Granger’s regiment, the forces were finally strong enough to influence and overcome the resistance.”
You’re right. I remembered that it took (almost) three years, but that is dated from the issuance of the Emancipation Declaration, not from Appomattox Courthouse. I’ll fix it now. Thanks.
Where did you just read that? A Google search showed nothing on the topic. I’m deactivating this for now until there’s better evidence that it’s true.
The above is to the writer who provided a report about a local politician that I was not able to verify.
Ask anyone who was at the LULAC dinner she emceed half a year ago.
If you want to reapprove the comment, it’s still in limbo.
hell with it, it’s irrelevant and mean, even if true.
“Anaheim to Protect Disney From Entertainment Taxes”
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha !!!!! – sorry dems – that’s just business.
http://voiceofoc.org/2015/06/anaheim-and-disney-nearing-deal-on-entertainment-taxes/
Really. That makes you that happy. And you feel your reaction is a “conservative” one.
Yes to both – absolutely!!
Carving out tax exemptions for one property owner while allowing the city’s expenses to be paid by taxing 330,000 residents and residential property owners is not Conservative.
It’s feudalism.
What’s next – a tax on admissions in general to all venues? Movie theaters, Angel baseball, high school football & basketball? Democrats never saw a tax they didn’t like.
These are easily solved problems of legislative drafting. One can set the cap to apply only above a certain ticket price (say, $35) or based on annual gross revenue or some combination. A 2% tax might apply to Disney, Angels games, Ducks games, etc., but not likely to movie tickets, school events, etc.
Frankly, though, 24 cents of a $12 movie ticket going to tax would not exactly be the end of the world (or of commerce.)
The more serious issue is whether or not tax money is well-spent. People across the political spectrum may disagree on aspects of that, but when it comes to spending on essential services, caring for the needy, broadly protecting the middle class, and avoiding coruption and donor-enriching boondoggles, a conservative like Ryan and a liberal like me can find an awful lot of common ground.
You’re welcome to get onto the “prudent anti-bullshit” train with us whenever you want. We still argue about A LOT — but generally about the things that liberals and conservatives SHOULD argue about, which is a surprisingly small proportion of the fiscal arguments that we DO have in this county.
And a kleptocrat never saw a tax they couldn’t give away to earn a cheap trick, either.
This really isn’t a partisan issue.
This sounds like a tax you would like –
The Admission Tax
The admission tax ordinance (Chapter 3.36 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code) was adopted by the Santa Cruz City Council effective October 1, 1986. A copy of the ordinance may be obtained from the City Clerk’s Office or the Finance Dept. The tax is designed to raise revenues from admission and registration charges for attendance at recreational and entertainment activities and events.
Taxable Operations
Taxable operations may include, but are not limited to: races, dances, concerts, picnics, entertainment events, sports, lectures, films, etc. An admission termed “donation” is still taxable if the fee is a set price. Nonprofit organizations are not exempt from collecting the tax. Political fundraising activities are also subject to the tax. See Section 3.36.040 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code for specific exemptions of charges subject to the admission tax.
Even non-profits …. disgusting.
I think that that would be too broad, especially as applied here. Sorry to burst your balloon.
Maybe his balloon will be further burst by yesterday’s and today’s Supreme Court rulings legalizing gay marriage in all states, and upholding Obamacare subsidies.
BURST.
Different balloon. He has many balloons. Like Stephen King’s clown Pennywise.
Who, me? I don’t like taxes.
Till the new WOT goes up, I’ll stick this here-
(Who won the pool about how soon till it happens ?)
http://gizmodo.com/this-guys-neighbor-will-pay-for-shooting-down-his-drone-1714496464