Hammond claims that one of the most common charges brought by abolitionists is that slavery produces "constant intercourse between white males and colored females," and that therefore slavery should be abolished. Anybody here read enough abolitionist literature to know whether his claim is accurate?

Guys... You're not going to believe this... But it looks like... Cities might be... Bad?!?

It is said [by abolitionists] that the licentiousness [of the slave owning South] consists in the constant intercourse between white males and colored females. One of your heavy charges against us has been that we regard and treat these people as brutes ; you now charge us with habitually taking them to our bosoms. I will not comment on the inconsistency of these accusations. I will not deny that some intercourse of the sort does take place. Its character and extent, however, are grossly and atrociously exaggerated . No authority, divine or human. has yet been found sufficient to arrest all such irregularities among men. But it is a known fact, that they are perpetrated here, for the most part, in the cities. Very few mulattoes are reared on our plantations. In the cities a large proportion of the inhabitants do not own slaves. A still larger proportion are na- tives of the North or foreigners.... After all, however, the number of the mixed breed in proportion to that of the black is infinitely small, and out of the towns next to nothing.

Hammond is pretty wise regarding population dynamics. He's got some poignant economic analysis regarding slavery vs hiring laborers. You see, slavery seems to preferable only when the population isn't very dense, and so there's lots of land available for people to put to productive use. Once the population is dense, though, we end up in a situation where people will gladly work for the bare necessities since, given the dense population, they've lost the ability to be anywhere near self-sustaining:

In an economical point of view-which I will not omit-Slavery presents some difficulties. As a general rule, I agree it must be admitted, that free labor is cheaper than Slave labor. It is a fallacy to suppose that ours is unpaid labor. The slave himself must be paid for, and thus his labor is all purchased at once, and for no trifling sum. His price was in the first place paid mostly to your countrymen, and assisted in building up some of those colossal English fortunes since illustrated by patents of nobility, and splendid piles of architecture , stained and cemented, if you like the expression, with the blood of kidnapped innocents; but loaded with no heavier curses than Abolition and its begotten fanaticisms have brought upon your land-some of them fulfilled , some yet to be. But besides the first cost of the slave, he must be fed and clothed-well fed and well clothed, if not for humanity's sake, that he may do good work, retain health and life, and rear a family to supply his place. When old or sick he is a clear expense, and so is the helpless portion of his family. No poor law provides for him when unable to work, or brings up his children for our service when we need them. These are all heavy charges on slave labor. Hence, in all countries where the denseness of the population has reduced it to a matter of perfect certainty that labor can be obtained whenever wanted, and the laborer be forced by sheer necessity to hire for the smallest pittance that will keep soul and body together, and rags upon his back while in actual employment-dependent at all other times on alms or poor rates-in all such countries it is found cheaper to pay this pittance, than to clothe, feed, nurse, support through childhood , and pension in old age, a race of slaves. Indeed, the advantage is so great as speedily to compensate for the loss of the value of the slave. And I have no hesitation in saying that if I could cultivate my lands on these terms I would without a word, resign my slaves, provided they could be properly disposed of. But the question is, whether free or slave labor is cheapest to us in this country at this time, situated as we are. And it is decided at once by the fact that we cannot avail ourselves of any other than slave labor. We neither have nor can we procure other labor to any extent, or on anything like the terms mentioned . We must therefore content ourselves with our dear labor, under the consoling reflection that what is lost to us, is gained to humanity; and that inasmuch as our slave costs us more than your free man costs you, by so much is he better off. You will promptly say, emancipate your slaves, and then you will have free labor on suitable terms. That might be if there were five hundred where there now is one, and the continent , from the Atlantic to the Pacific, was as densely populated as your Island. But until that comes to pass, no labor can be procured in America on the terms you have.

Who's getting some donuts with their McGriddles tomorrow morning?

Yoopers are some wacky folks, eh

By some point in the 1970s, people began referring to residents of the Upper Peninsula as “Yoopers.” The word was phonetically derived from the abbreviation “UP’er.” Some­ thing about the growth of big government and its increasing interference in local affairs and the lives of ordinary citizens had many Yoopers riled up by the middle of that decade. The phenome­non of big government played a role in fostering the rise of renewed interest in separate statehood for the U.P.

Ted's former legal secretary said,

“The 51st State of Superior movement had already been es­ tablished by the time I arrived in October 1972. He talked about it, but I wasn't involved in any of the activity at that time.

“I do recall locals saying that we shouldn’t become a state, that we should secede from the Union and become an independent country known as Superior. That way, the story goes, we would receive foreign aid and be paid to allow U.S. military installations to guard against polar missile attacks from the Russians. In addi­tion, we would control the trade through entry into Lake Superior from the Soo locks, and develop our own minerals and expansive forests controlled by the state and federal governments! Folks were very angry about our double-digit unemployment rate at the time while watching millions of dollars go to third world countries.”

What a time to encounter this passage:

Mumford also revived the reputations of a number of American architects, engineers, and environmentalists, among them Henry Hobson Richardson, Louis Sullivan, Frederick Law Olmsted, George Perkins Marsh, and John A. and Washington Roebling, builders of the Brooklyn Bridge -"a poem," Mumford called it, "in granite and steel."

Let us all pray for Ohio Reich

Also simply microwaving a frozen meal is... Just... Too much

In the face of escalating persecution from the progressive American regime, reactionaries can look to the example of the early Christians suffering under the brutality of the Roman Empire. Though they were tortured, imprisoned and martyred, the church fathers urged the faithful not to violently resist the pagan authorities. They trusted that God would execute His plan for ultimate victory, and that His plan was good even if it led to the loss of the lives of believers.

Tertullian wrote that Christian blood was like seed, with the church growing even as members were slaughtered. He understood that responding to persecution with force would only justify the regime cracking down harder, and in a way that would appear more justifiable to everyday people. The courageous example of the martyrs helped spread the gospel and garnered sympathy for the fledgling faith. If they had reacted violently, their message would have lost some of its power. Similarly, modern reactionaries, while suffering (lightly by comparison) for our countercultural beliefs, must hold fast to the moral high ground. Persecution may be our current cross to bear, but we have faith that God will work it for good.

America's progressive nature runs deep, from its revolutionary Enlightenment founding to modern civil rights legislation. Trying to aggressively dismantle this entrenched liberalism is likely futile, especially as our attempts to do so ignite the flames of our enemies' passions ever brighter. As people of faith, we believe that worldly politics are fleeting compared to Christ's eternal kingdom. Sometimes God calls us to patiently endure oppression and even martyrdom as a witness to His truth. Responding to subjugation with violence, however tempting, risks becoming a mirror image of our tormentors rather than a light in the darkness.

Faithfulness, long-suffering, and setting a Christlike example are the way forward, not armed uprisings. Like the early church, we are called to be "wise as serpents and harmless as doves." We must trust that whatever happens to this earthly nation is part of God's perfect plan, even if it is not the outcome we might hope for. Christ taught us to suffer wrong rather than inflict it. So we rest in His promise that our light and momentary afflictions are preparing us for an eternal weight of glory. The battle belongs to the Lord.

I intended on using this quote, but it ended up not fitting as well as I wanted it to:

Christians could never slay their enemies. For the more that kings, rulers, and peoples have persecuted them everywhere, the more Christians have increased in number and grown in strength.

- Origen

Oh boy, who's moving to California?

Learn to control your anger. A few seconds of letting that emotion spew out uncontrolled can have grave consequences on the remainder of your life

During a 1993 playoff game in the Greek basketball league Serbian player Boban Jankovic paralyzed himself by slamming his head against a post out of frustration over a call made by a referee.

After being bound to a wheelchair for the final 13 years of his life, Jankovic gained weight, which exerted too much stress on his heart, and he eventually died of heart failure at the age of 42, on the date of June 28, 2006, while he was on a holiday cruise on the Greek island of Rhodes