Skin Color: A Demonic Lie To Divide A Nation

July 14, 2025

Christian     Education / Public Schools     Immigration and Illegal Aliens     Political, Christian and Conservative Issues     Politics     Skin Color

Having little to no respite from the daily screeds spewed by arguably irredeemable life forms, e.g., Jasmine “scat mouth” Crockett who personifies toxic stupidity, I’m compelled to once again argue that there’s no such thing as skin color.  The idea of same is a damnable, satanic heterodoxy embraced by persons who are void of factual understanding or those who are motivated at all costs to find their self-esteem and self-worth in the embracement of a bastardized historic record.

I am further compelled to state that the fallacious construct with its origins based on dividing a nation, and promoting communism.  Additionally, it was created and promoted by W.E.B. Du Bois who was an ardent supporter of Vladimir Lenin.

When I hear the ad hominem diatribes of the lucifarian women occupying elected positions in America’s various levels of government and/or those who claim to be professors, teachers, leaders ad nauseum, I am disgusted.  It matters not whether the person(s) is a highly esteemed member of clergy or the most renown lecturer or historian; I’m offended by their willingness to be useful tools of Satan.

No single factor has been more successfully used by the enemy of our souls than the lies of skin color and race.  Melanin is not a color and race is fallacious construct created by social-Darwinists for the express purpose of supporting the lie of evolution.  But, thanks to malleable-minded, led-through-the-nose people thirsting to be recognized, and regarded as important, the Erebusic lie has become so endemic in global society that to argue truth to the lie is fearfully avoided.

A proof of my assertion, is the now surreptitious identification maneuver to the assignation of “brown people,” to divide Mexicans and South Americans into another victim class of animus and social-divisiveness based upon the weaponization of the lie of skin color.

This will continue as an abscess on the societal fabric until we become a nation of Americans juxtaposed to an enclave of disassociated warring tribes catalogued by the heretical faculty of skin color.  Thus the result of over a century of inculcated lies and menticide.

The familial, emotional, psychological, and behavioral damage that progressives have done to our social construct cannot be overstated.  Yet, these brutish progressive Mohocks have convinced those who are most disaffected, the pathway to self-worth and emotional-esteem, is by being a crayon color contrary to all empirical evidence.

A Gordian knot is less complex than it is to answer the question: “Why any persons in their right mind support and/or trust neo-Leninist liberals?”  Are the overwhelming majority of those wh0 value being identified as a crayon color, completely incapable of recognizing what progressives have done to them?  I pause to say, this isn’t a treatise on why they should be Republicans; it is a treatise on how can they be Democrats?

Neo-Leninist progressives have enslaved the crayon color-minded on a plantation of emotional and psychological inferiority since the beginning of the 20th century when, Vladimir Lenin and W.E.B. du Bois formed their ungodly alliance that philosophically continues until today.

Following are facts the skin-color camarilla ignore:

Resultant of voting rights provisions established by Republicans, in the mid 1700s: “Towns such as Baltimore had more blacks than whites, voting in elections; and when the proposed US Constitution was placed before the citizens in 1787 and 1788, it was ratified by both blacks and whites voting in a number of States.” (See: Black History Issue 2003; wallbuilders.com) During Reconstruction, there were some 2,000 blacks that held public office. Some were former salves. This was because of “the passage of explicit constitutional voting rights for blacks in 1870” by Republicans.

It was rabid segregationist progressive Democrats who after regaining power in 1882, reversed all of the Constitutional freedoms, i.e., equal rights, that Republicans had legislated for the former slaves. Democrats would suppress equal rights for the free peoples based solely on the supposed color of skin, the next 83 years until the signing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Democrats weaponized the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) into a domestic terrorist group, and codified Jim Crow laws to deny free Americans equal rights.  D.W. Griffith produced the epically racist movie, “Birth of a Nation” in 1915 to portray the former slaves as savages. It helped KKK Democrats further subjugate them under Jim Crow.

Certainly not all, but it’s safe to say the majority of skin-color propagandists openly claim or quietly believe the lie that America was built by slaves. Many people, and especially many color-identifying people, are not interested in factual truths; they’re only interested in lies and distortions that augment their ignorance.

The truth about slavery in America, is that it existed. It was immoral, but it was not illegal.  At no time did America supplant any Eastern country as having the most slaves or a country that supplied slaves to other countries. America participated in slavery only briefly, and only in limited locales. America didn’t invent slavery any more than America created crazed jihadists.

When the American Republic was founded in 1776, slavery not only literally existed everywhere on earth, but it was an accepted aspect of human history for centuries before Moses was born and eventually led Israel out of Egyptian bondage.

Following are facts about slavery that the purveyors of guilt and blame are ignorant of:

Aristotle further opined that “it is clear that there are certain people who are free and certain who are slaves by nature, and it is both to their advantage, and just, for them to be slaves.” The Romans seized so many captives from Eastern Europe that the terms “Slav” and “slave” bore the same origins. All the great cultures of the ancient world, from Egypt to Babylonia, Athens to Rome, Persia to India to China, depended upon the brutal enslavement of the masses – often representing heavy majorities of the population. Contrary to the glamorization of aboriginal New World cultures, the Mayas, Aztecs and Incas counted among the most brutal slave-masters of them all — not only turning the members of other tribes into harshly abused beasts of burden but also using these conquered enemies to feed a limitless lust for human sacrifice. The Tupinamba, a powerful tribe on the coast of Brazil south of the Amazon, took huge numbers of captives, then humiliated them for months or years, before engaging in mass slaughter of their victims in ritualized cannibalistic feasts. In Africa, slavery also represented a timeless norm long before any intrusion by Europeans. Moreover, the Portuguese, Spanish, Dutch or British slave traders rarely penetrated far beyond the coasts: the actual capture and kidnapping of the millions of victims always occurred at the hands of neighboring tribes. As the great African-American historian Nathan Huggins pointed out, “virtually all of the enslavement of Africans was carried out by other Africans” but the concept of an African “race” was the invention of Western colonists, and most African traders “saw themselves as selling people other than their own.” (Six Inconvenient Truths About The U.S. and Slavery; Michael Medved; Townhall.com; 9/26/2007)

The myth that America became wealthy because of slave labor is just that – a myth. America became wealthy despite slave labor. The most prosperous states in the country were those that first freed their slaves. As Medved states: “Pennsylvania passed an emancipation law in 1780; Connecticut and Rhode Island followed four years later (all before the Constitution). New York approved emancipation in 1799. These states (with dynamic banking centers in Philadelphia and Manhattan) quickly emerged as robust centers of commerce and manufacturing, greatly enriching themselves while the slave-based economies in the South languished by comparison…All analyses of Northern victory in the great sectional struggle highlights the vast advantages in terms of wealth and productivity in New England, the Mid-Atlantic States and the Midwest, compared to the relatively backward and impoverished states of the Confederacy.”

Devin Foley, co founder and president of the Intellectual Takeout wrote: “Turning back to ‘Warfare In The Western World,’ we find statistics that show just how dramatic the differences in populations and economic power were between the free North and the slave South. … “But in a longer struggle the North’s advantages were substantial. With a population of 20 million, the Northern states obviously possessed a much larger military manpower base, but their industrial capacity was far greater as well. In 1860 the North had over 110,000 manufacturing establishments, the South just 18,000. The North produced 94 percent of the country’s iron, 97 percent of is coal and – not incidentally – 97 percent of its firearms. It contained 22,000 miles of railroad to the South’s 8,500. The North outperformed the South agriculturally as well. Northerners held 75 percent of the country’s farm acreage, produced 60 percent of its livestock, 67 percent of its corn, and 81 percent of its wheat. All in all, they held 75 percent of the nation’s total wealth.” (No, Slavery Didn’t Build America: It’s A Popular Narrative, But History Doesn’t Support It; 3/2/2016)

Foley also notes: “That final statistic combined with the North’s victory in the Civil War should be sufficient to dispel the idea that America was built on slavery. Keep in mind, too, that not all of the wealth in the South was generated by slaves. Free men in the South also worked their own fields and industries.”

Medved further points out that: “Yale historian David Brion Davis in his definitive 2006 history ‘Inhuman Bondage: The Rise and Fall Of Slavery In The New World’ notes that colonial North America…surprisingly received only 5 to 6 percent of the African slaves shipped across the Atlantic. Meanwhile, the Arab slave trade (primarily from East Africa) lasted longer and enslaved more human beings than the European slavers working the other side of the continent… when taking the prodigious and unspeakably cruel Islamic enslavements into the equation, at least 97 percent of all African men, women and children who were kidnapped, sold, and taken from their homes, were sent somewhere other than the British colonies of North America. In this context there is no historical basis to claim that the United States bears primary, or even prominent guilt for the depredations of centuries of African slavery.”

Armed with these facts it would be nice to enlighten “The National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America” to factual reality.  In 2017, said reparationists attempted to extort money from University of Chicago; because supposedly according to them: “Like so many other venerable American institutions, the University of Chicago is built on slavery…Hundreds of enslaved people lived and died on [the Douglas] plantation to make the University of Chicago and its $7 billion endowment, possible. [Ergo,] reparations are long overdue.” This is based upon a published paper by four University of Chicago graduate students from the history department. The paper detailed the University of Chicago’s founding with profits from enslavements.

The very idea of this extortion attempt should be subjected to harshest rebuke. It’s time for s that bathe in the immiseration of lies and blackmail, to cease and desist. In the absence of that I say we should counter their arguments by holding them financially accountable for the cities and personal property they have destroyed by rioting, violent protest, and the looting that accompanies same.

Instead of allowing institutions and businesses to be extorted under the guise of being held accountable, I say we teach people what accountability is, by holding them financially responsible for the murder and mayhem they commit.