Tuesday, March 19, AD 2024 3:27am

Empty Words After Manchester

“His Holiness Pope Francis was deeply saddened to learn of the injury and tragic loss of life caused by the barbaric attack in Manchester, and he expresses his heartfelt solidarity with all those affected by this senseless act of violence.”

May 23, 2017

Pope Francis signaled Monday that Europe’s refugee crisis will be a top political and diplomatic priority for the Vatican in 2016, using an annual speech to diplomats accredited to the Vatican to urge “assistance and acceptance” for massive waves of migrants arriving today on the Old Continent.

January 11, 2016

 

 

We can all understand the idiotic game being played by this time.  Jihadists slay innocents, politicians and religious leaders make empty statements of condemnation and solidarity, almost always the same politicians and religious figures who have fostered mass Islamic immigration to the West, and we go on our way, amidst calls against Islamophobia, until the next Jihadist act of butchery and the cycle repeats.  The West, with rare exceptions, has leadership that is not only impotent in the face of jihadists, but eagerly swells the numbers from which they recruit in the West.  Bruce Bawer at City Journal nails it:

Damn these jihadist murderers of children. And damn the politicians who have, in many cases, helped make these murders possible but who are quick, this time and every time, to serve up empty declarations of “solidarity”even as the bodies of innocents are still being counted.

London mayor Sadiq Khan (who recently dismissed terrorist attacks as “part and parcel of living in a big city”): “London stands with Manchester.” Orlando mayor Buddy Dyer (who, in the wake of the Pulse nightclub massacre, proclaimed a CAIR-backed “Muslim Women’s Day”—you know, the kind of event that proclaims hijabs “empowering”): Orlando “stands in solidarity with the people of the UK.” L.A. mayor Eric Garcetti (who went berserk when Trump tried to impose that temporary travel ban from a half-dozen Muslim countries): “Los Angeles stands with the people of Manchester.”

Meaningless words, all of them. But Angela Merkel takes the cake: “People in the UK can rest assured that Germany stands shoulder to shoulder with them.” Well, isn’t that . . . reassuring. In what way do such words help anybody to “rest assured” of anything? In any case, how dare she? This, after all, is the woman who opened the floodgates—the woman who, out of some twisted sense of German historical guilt, put European children in danger by inviting into the continent masses of unvetted people from the very part of the world where this monstrous evil has its roots.

Then there was this from European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker: “Once again, terrorism has sought to instill fear where there should be joy, to sow division where young people and families should be coming together in celebration.” Beneath the innocuous-seeming surface of this statement is a slick rhetorical ruse: Juncker to the contrary, these savages aren’t out to “sow division”—they’re out to kill infidels. By introducing the concept of “division,” Juncker, like so many others, is implying that the important message here is: Hey, whatever you do, don’t let this little episode put any bad thoughts about Islam into your head!

Manchester City Council leader Sir Richard Leese also spoke of “fear” and “division”: “Manchester is a proud, strong city and we will not allow terrorists who seek to sow fear and division to achieve their aims.” Guess what, pal? They did achieve their aims: they killed 22 people, including children, and injured several dozen. Dead infidels: that’s their objective, period. (Or, as you would say, full stop.)

Go here to read the rest.  The West has a leadership infected by a death wish for our civilization, and nothing will probably change until one of our cities is reduced to radioactive rubble courtesy of one of the enemies within that they have created among us.  Blind guides and fools lead us, and worse than blind guides and fools.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
42 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Father of Seven
Father of Seven
Wednesday, May 24, AD 2017 5:09am

Quislings all, lead by the evil clown. No loving father invites the danger into his home when his children will be at risk. Pope Francis does this again and again and then has the gall to express his “heartfelt solidarity” with those he has helped to put at risk. His words, of course, spoken behind thick walls while he is protected by armed guards. He sows division. He abandons the flock. He needs to be called out.

Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus
Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus
Wednesday, May 24, AD 2017 6:10am

These politicians support murder of unborn children in the womb.

These politicians support immigration of Islamists who murder born children in music theatres.

Tell me the difference.

David
David
Wednesday, May 24, AD 2017 6:54am

Blind guides indeed. Willingly do they cover their eyes.

Art Deco
Art Deco
Wednesday, May 24, AD 2017 6:54am

There is not much the Pope can do here other than make pro forma statements. There is something he can refrain from doing, which is suggesting that it is sinful to enforce national border controls or to care for refugees in camps adjacent to zones of conflict (rather than importing them into miliieux where they are sadly incompatible with the extant population). The perpetrator is supposedly a Maghreb Arab born in Britain whose parents were granted ‘refugee’ status at some point. It’s rather puzzling that they were living in Britain rather than Morocco, Tunisia, or Algeria.

As for the hag-chancellor, the reaction of the political class in Sweden, Germany, and France has been a mix of legal harassment of political dissidents (Brigitte Bardot has been prosecuted 5x) and concealing information. Their contempt for the interests of their domestic working class is so thorough that they’re in the business of wrecking their institutions and civic customs in order to keep injuring that class.

T. Shaw
T. Shaw
Wednesday, May 24, AD 2017 8:36am

Art Deco, as usual, is 100% correct. The reigning elites hold the people in contempt and their self-serving policies abuse and misuse the “little people.”

Rational people didn’t need more proof. The idiot left (redundant) and the deranged will never admit it. The Manchester massacre (as did 10,000 terror attacks since 2001) proved (for the 7,000th time) that President Donald J. Trump is right.

Papa Foxtrot, Obama, Hillary, et al are dead wrong. The increasing body counts are proof.

Civilizations are not murdered. Civilizations commit suicide.

Magdalene P
Magdalene P
Wednesday, May 24, AD 2017 9:46am

They can all stand “shoulder to shoulder” as a man with a dull knife beheads them …and their little children too.

Pinky
Pinky
Wednesday, May 24, AD 2017 11:25am

“London mayor Sadiq Khan (who recently dismissed terrorist attacks as “part and parcel of living in a big city”)”

That’s false. He was responding to speculation about an attack in New York City a few months ago, and said:

“I’m not going to speculate as to who is responsible. I’m not going to speculate as to how the police in New York should react. What I do know is part and parcel of living in a great global city is you’ve got to be prepared for these things, you’ve got to be vigilant, you’ve got to support the police doing an incredibly hard job, you’ve got to support the security services, and I think speculating when you don’t have the facts is unwise.”

Should he have been more willing to speculate about the bombing? Fine. But he wasn’t dismissing terrorism, and repeating someone who said without an explanation is morally questionable.

TomD
TomD
Wednesday, May 24, AD 2017 3:55pm

I’m sorry Pinky. The quote may be incorrect but it is not misleading. Terror attacks and threats thereof in the “great global city” of NYC were few and far between prior to the present rise of jihad. Much of Mayor Khan’s comment makes sense, but then would he really support the incredibly hard steps that would reduce the “incredibly hard job” he cites? Identify radical aliens and deport them, or if not that then at least let no more into the country? Somehow one doubts that he would, and so the use of the quote is not inaccurate.

Pray The Rosary Beads
Wednesday, May 24, AD 2017 4:32pm

Clickbait hackery will call for internment or mass surveillance or some other dramatic gesture that satisfies the craving to ‘just do something, damnit’, but that would do little to improve security or that, even if it did, would require us to sacrifice the very principles that, in our grander moments, we think define our society, our way of life. Here, as everywhere, there are trade-offs and sometimes these are deeply, necessarily, uncomfortable.

Instinctively, I think, most people understand this. They appreciate that realism is not the same as fatalism and far less is it any kind of capitulation. Even amidst heartbreak, decency finds a way. We saw that, in the immediacy of the moment, in the thousands of individual acts of instinctive kindness in Manchester last night and this morning. Taken singly these were only small; together they became something mighty.

That’s not enough but neither is it nothing. We grieve and we mourn and we do not forget. But we do go on.

Michael Dowd
Michael Dowd
Thursday, May 25, AD 2017 2:26am

Pope Francis and politicians with attitudes of encouragement of mass immigration and fatuous sympathy and benign “solidarity” with Islamic mass murder bear a portion of the responsibility for these horrific events.

Michael Paterson-Seymour
Michael Paterson-Seymour
Thursday, May 25, AD 2017 3:07am

TomD wrote, “Terror attacks and threats thereof in the “great global city” of NYC were few and far between prior to the present rise of jihad.”

But not in the UK. On 15 June 1996, a far more evil and remorseless foe, the IRA exploded a truck bomb in the centre of Manchester, injuring 212 people. Many surrounding buildings had to be demolished and rebuilt.

Andy Burnham, the Mayor of Manchester is from Warrington where, on 26 February 1993, the IRA exploded one device outside a gas storage facility and two others outside shops in Bridge Street. Two children were killed and 56 people were injured.

The attacks on London were too numerous to list, but I have personal reasons to recall two, in particular. One was on Thursday 8th March 1973, when the IRA set off a bomb outside the Central Criminal Court in Old Bailey in London. The bomb, about 14 kg or 30 lb of Semtex, was in a car across the street from a public house called the Magpie & Stump. One bar faces the street and the other is behind it, reached from an alleyway called Bishop’s Court. I was in the back bar, when the front of the building was blown in. In the street, one person died and one hundred and forty were injured. The other was on on Saturday 17th December 1983, when the IRA planted another car bomb, similar to the Old Bailey bomb, in Hans Crescent, at the back of Harrods’s, the London department store. I was going there to do some Xmas shopping and had stopped to chat to a friend in Sloan Street. I would have used the Hans Crescent entrance. Six people were killed, including three police officers who had just arrived and were still in their car. One of the dead was an American visitor. Ninety people were injured.

NYC was a hotbed of Fenian support for the Fenian murderers, seeking to put down the authority and government of the Queen in Northern Ireland. The resolute response of the people of that province, where 3,000 people were killed, was summed up in graffiti everywhere: No Surrender.

T. Shaw
T. Shaw
Thursday, May 25, AD 2017 6:07am

MP-S: Why did the Irish hate you guys?

In NYC saloons, men would pass the hat in NYC Irish saloons.

There is one yuge difference between the UK ruling elites’ reaction to the IRA insurrection and the jihad. It’s racism. It was SOP to deploy SAS assassination teams to kill iRA terrorists. it was common to set up paratrooper (I knew a Brit para that was on the teams) snipers teams to kill curfew breakers. It was ok to set up army check points/machine guns/armored vehicles in Catholic neighborhoods.

For the jihad it’s “Why do they hate us?” and it is forbidden to talk about jihad.

TomD
TomD
Thursday, May 25, AD 2017 9:26am

MPS, Mark Steyn just wrote a great rebuttal on comparisons between the two Manchester bombings:

“A couple of hours ago, as I write, the Arndale shopping center in Manchester was evacuated, somewhat chaotically, with hundreds of customers stampeding for the exits lest they be the cause of The Independent’s next carry-on editorial. The Arndale was the scene of the city’s last big terror attack – in 1996, when the IRA totaled it. Two hundred people were injured, but nobody died, and you don’t have to be a terror apologist like Jeremy Corbyn to find the bad old days of Irish republicanism almost quaint by comparison. A few weeks ago the BBC reported that “approximately 850 people” from the United Kingdom have gone to Syria and Iraq to fight for Isis and the like. That’s more volunteers than the IRA were able to recruit in thirty years of the “Troubles”, when MI5 estimated that they never had more than a hundred active terrorists out in the field. This time maybe it’s the exotic appeal of foreign travel, as opposed to a month holed up in a barn in Newry.”

See the full article at https://www.steynonline.com/section/14/steyn-on-europe

Steyn also raises another IRA / Jihad comparison in the same article:

“Thirty years ago, in the interests of stopping IRA terrorism, the British state was not above preventing the internal movement within its borders of unconvicted, uncharged, unarrested Republican sympathizers seeking to take a ferry from Belfast to Liverpool. Today it declares it can do nothing to prevent the movement of large numbers of the Muslim world from thousands of miles away to the heart of the United Kingdom. It’s just a fact of life – like being blown up when you go to a pop concert.”

Michael Paterson-Seymour
Michael Paterson-Seymour
Thursday, May 25, AD 2017 9:57am

Donald R McClarey wrote, “[T]he “No Surrender” slogan long pre-dated the beginning of the contemporary Troubles in Northern Ireland.”

It is very old and may go back to the Siege of Londonderry in 1689. It has long been used by the Apprentice Boys of Derry. It was popularised by Sir Edward Carson to express opposition to the Third Home Rule bill of 1912 and the signing of the Ulster Covenant. Carson’s more than life-size statue stands in front of the Stormont Parliament building in Northern Ireland.

It was again popularised by the Rev Dr Ian Paisley during the recent Troubles: “No surrender. We will never bend the knee.”

It is used by Loyalists to express their determination to preserve their civil and religious freedoms.

Art Deco
Art Deco
Thursday, May 25, AD 2017 10:34am

It was symbolic of the sectarian hatred that treated Northern Irish Catholics as helots in their own land and made certain that Protestant extremists could grind their faces into the dust in perpetuity. It was this situation that gave the appalling IRA any popular support.

This seems rather florid. Catholics in Ulster were a subaltern population treated brusquely by the Royal Ulster Constabulary. Political institutions were a ruin. That having been said, they were not in any state of hereditary servitude.

Of course, Protestant extremists did their own share of bombings and random murders of innocent Catholic civilians.

We can check. My recollection is that the UDA / UVF was much less active than the IRA / INLA and that the death toll from Nationalist violence exceeded that from Unionist violence by a factor of about 6.

Michael Paterson-Seymour
Michael Paterson-Seymour
Thursday, May 25, AD 2017 10:46am

TomD

There were some 10,000 bomb attacks during the Troubles (1969-1998) The IRA threat was far from trivial.

As for “Why did the Irish hate you guys?” That raises the question why so many Irish people were willing to endure such suffering and disruption to their lives, rather than contemplate absorption into the Free State. Ask the Irish community here in the West of Scotland, 50,000 of whom will be taking part in marches on 12 July to celebrate the Battle of the Boyne.

Art Deco
Art Deco
Thursday, May 25, AD 2017 12:41pm

Substitute fifth class citizen for Helot.

What are the other four classes? Maeve Binchey (a writer I do not much care for) participated in a panel discussion hosted by the Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions back in 1981. By her own report, she and her circle had a puzzled disgust reaction to the political agitation in the north. For them, a trip to Belfast had been an outing, a place more pleasant in certain respects than Dublin. (To be sure, Binchey was part of the minority in Ireland not on board with the country’s Catholic culture. Conor Cruise O’Brien, a less abrasive and annoying writer than Binchey, was another).

Do not have much granular knowledge of the period running from 1923 to 1969. What I see referred to concern disputes over parade routes, disputes over political patronage (e.g. council housing and car parks), a wretched electoral system, and discourteous treatment from police officers. Abrasion and unpleasantness is something distinct from oppression. The British government could have repaired the electoral system, at the very least.

All of which they would enjoy if the Republican government ruled all of Ireland.

See Conor Cruise O’Brien on this issue. The (pro-forma) assent to the notion of a United Ireland was more prevalent in the Irish Republic after 1969 than among Catholics in Ulster, who always had among them a large minority (about 1/3) who thought the idea unworkable. That remains true today in Ulster, where many Catholics and all but a small minority of Protestants are opposed to incorporation into the Republic. O’Brien put it thus: a United Ireland ‘would enlarge the problem and reverse the roles’. Garret FitzGerald was adamant on a related point: the IRA had no interest in parliamentary institutions and sought a military dictatorship over the whole island.

According to this site here:

http://www.wesleyjohnston.com/users/ireland/past/troubles/troubles_stats.html#statusperpetrator

About 20% of the death toll was recorded outside Ulster, and of that the Provos were responsible for 82% and three other nationalist militias for 7%. Of the 80% which occurred in Ulster, the four unionist militias plus the Royal Ulster Constabulary accounted for 37% of the death toll.

Art Deco
Art Deco
Thursday, May 25, AD 2017 2:31pm

1. Members of the ruling Stormont government. 2. Protestants who controlled the various loyalist organizations that effectively kept almost all Catholics at the bottom rungs in business and the economy in general. 3. Protestants who could vote in local elections. 4. Protestants who could not vote in local elections. 5. Catholics.

1. By this standard, every country with a government has a ‘second-class citizens’.

2. I’m not sure how ‘loyalist organizations’ were ‘able to keep Catholics on the bottom rungs of the economic ladder’. The Catholic population was not without human capital nor were Catholic firms unable to trade with each other, with firms in Britain, or with firms in the Irish Free State. I suppose some sort of formal lodge system provides referrals for its members, but that’s not a necessary or sufficient condition for systemic discrimination to emerge. It wouldn’t surprise me to discover that Catholics had a hard time landing civil service positions. At the same time, the civil service is but 15% of the workforce in a typical occidental country.

(3, 4, 5) Five Irish republicans were seated n the British parliament in 1935 and nationalists held about 20% of the seats in the Stormont parliament. I don’t think suffrage was ever at issue in Ulster. The problem was gerrymandering and first-past-the-post in the context of a fairly conformist political culture among Ulster protestants. (The Unionist Party eventually did break up into several competing successors, which matched the fragmentation in the Catholic vote). There wasn’t any competition in a great many constituencies prior to 1969.

Art Deco
Art Deco
Thursday, May 25, AD 2017 4:53pm

Per this site here

http://www.theirishstory.com/2013/04/08/democracy-in-ireland-a-short-history/

You had universal suffrage in Northern Ireland, but people who paid taxes on multiple properties had a vote for each property.

By boycotts, intimidation and making sure that Catholics did not get government employment or contracts. It had more than a passing resemblance to the treatment of blacks in the Jim Crow South.

In fissured societies (e.g. Quebec) you have segregation of patronage. I’m not sure you need much in the way of organized activity for this to occur.

Michael Paterson-Seymour
Michael Paterson-Seymour
Friday, May 26, AD 2017 2:24am

Anyone who has visited Belfast in the 1970s, as I have, would have seen that the question of employment for Catholics/Nationalists was physical and moral, rather than political.
To see the young women on the Falls Road – scrawny, rat-tail hair, skin grey and shiny with anti-depressants, wearing thin nylon cardigans on a raw January morning, dragging grimy, unkempt toddlers, many with their legs bandy with rickets; the lanky, bat-eared youths, with coat-hanger shoulders and the narrow pelvises that come from ante-natal malnutrition; the men, squat and stunted, with short, stumpy legs.
To say they lived like pigs would be a slur on British farmers. Soldiers who entered the Divis flats in central Belfast took their lives in their hands, not only because it was a hotbed of Republican activists, but because it was the only place in Europe to suffer an outbreak of cholera in the mid-20th century. Also typhus – mortuary attendants described seeing the lice dropping from the cooling corpses.

Art Deco
Art Deco
Friday, May 26, AD 2017 8:23am

The government was completely behind the effort to shut out Catholics from economic life Art. From Basil Brooke, Prime Minister of Northern Ireland, prior to him becoming Prime Minister, who ruled from 1943-1963:

A population of a requisite size (1/3 of the total) cannot be ‘shut out of economic life’. You can make life more difficult for them, but that’s all. Black Americans were not shut out of economic life in 1948 (when, per Thos. Sowell, their unemployment rate was lower than national means) and they could not be shut out of economic life in Ulster. You can shut them out of public employment, of course. I’ve found two sources which suggest that production per capita in Ulster differed only modestly from the Free State (with one being about 60% of the British mean and the other 55%). If that’s true, it’s reasonable to infer that the human capital abroad in the Catholic population on both sides of the border was too ample for Ulster protestants to ruin their economic life outside of the realm of public sector employment. Denied employment with protestant firms, they could start their own firms or migrate to the Free State.

Should also note that there was and (ceteris paribus) is a great deal more criminal violence in the Deep South than is the case on either side of the border in Ireland.

Art Deco
Art Deco
Friday, May 26, AD 2017 8:25am

(with one being about 60% of the British mean and the other 55%).

This refers to the period just after partition.

Art Deco
Art Deco
Friday, May 26, AD 2017 9:48am

You can keep most of them poor as a result.

Depends on what you man by ‘poor’. If you mean ‘with little in the way of assets of contextual significance’, that’s true of most people any time and any place. Most people’s wealth is in their human capital. Given the modest distinction in income levels between the Free State and Ulster, its difficult to believe there was a grand distinction in household incomes between Catholics and Protestants in Ulster. Some distinction, to be sure. Catholics in Ulster were certainly ‘poor’ in a different sense: real incomes in Ulster in 1926 were a fraction of what they are today. Same is true of any occidental country.

Michael Paterson-Seymour
Michael Paterson-Seymour
Friday, May 26, AD 2017 12:28pm

Northern Ireland has the highest proportion of public sector workers in the UK – 28% or 220,000 people. Of these 55,000 work in the health and Social Care service.

Art Deco
Art Deco
Friday, May 26, AD 2017 3:42pm

Like a Catholic employment rate more than twice the Protestant unemployment rate in 1988:

You’ve jumped ahead to a point in time more than 60 years after partition. At that time, you’d had the construction of the 2d generation welfare state (heavy on public housing, the command economy in the medical sector, and state-owned enterprise). It has been at that point 16 years since the Stormont assembly had been prorogued and 19 years since the beginning of chronic political violence. One other factor: the British labor market was in wretched shape. You had chronic double digit unemployment from about 1982 onward. Here

http://www.portlandtrust.org/sites/default/files/pubs/epm_northern_ireland.pdf

There are some figures on the Ulster labor market. The ratio of Catholic unemployment rates to protestant ones was about 2.3 ca. 1985. It declined to 1.7 by 2001, about a generation after Stormont had been prorogued and when the country was under a power-sharing arrangement.

It should be noted that labor markets can grow more sclerotic (as they did for black men under 25 between 1960 and 1980) without any increase in inter-communal hostility.

Elaine Krewer
Admin
Saturday, May 27, AD 2017 7:48am

“Make life so difficult that the unwanted Irish Catholics, at least those with brains and drive, will go elsewhere. This has the advantage of keeping the numbers of a despised population down, and shrinking their natural leadership class”

I can’t help but wonder if some of the extreme leftist policies being imposed or considered in “blue” U.S. states and cities (higher taxes, onerous regulations, sanctuary city policies, anti-discrimination mandates regarding abortion, transgenderism, etc.) don’t have a somewhat similar aim: to make it clear to the “deplorables” that they aren’t welcome and should either pack up or shut up. Remember what NY Gov. Cuomo said a few years back about social conservatives “having no place” in his state’s party politics? While he may not have literally meant “Social conservatives aren’t welcome to live or work in NY,” I suspect he wouldn’t consider it much of a loss, if any, if they did leave. I suspect the same is also true for cities like Chicago and San Francisco and states like CA and (unfortunately for me) IL. I don’t mean to put it on a par with the systematic persecution/repression suffered by Catholics in Ireland, but I do wonder sometimes if a similar dynamic is going on here.

Art Deco
Art Deco
Saturday, May 27, AD 2017 9:56am

Yes and the Catholics were still effectively shut out from the profitable parts of the economy. I

You could not and cannot shut them out unless you have legislation of the sort you saw in interwar Hungary – occupational licensing stem to stern with quotas. That simply was not present in Ulster. Also, unemployment can effect someone in any economic stratum, but labor market sclerosis is commonly most severe for young people and for those working low-wage jobs, not handsomely compensated jobs. And, again, you’re forgetting the effects of arbitrage. Overall (in 1926), the Free State was not much less affluent than the North. Catholics in the North facing an uncongenial situation can decamp to Dublin or Galway. (If I’m not mistaken, you continued to have labor migration from the Free State to Britain proper during this period).

Art Deco
Art Deco
Saturday, May 27, AD 2017 7:08pm

Sure they could. Easy to keep them out of government employment when the same anti-Catholic party controlled Stormont until Home Rule was taken away. As the 1988 article indicated threats and violence were quite effective keeping Catholics away from private enterprises where they were not wanted. The divergence in employment rates could only be due to discrimination when two such similar populations, absent religion, are involved.

Out of government employment, yes. The share of the labor force in public employment varies a great deal over place and time. Public sector employment in the UK currently runs to about 18% of the workforce. Its a reasonable wager it was a great deal lower than that in 1935.

There’s a distinction between making life more difficult for a class of people and immiserating them. You can attempt to organize a boycott of Catholic publicans. Catholic publicans have 400,000 of their co-religionists to serve and these folk can boycott protestant publicans. You can refuse to hire Catholic machinists. Your Catholic competitor will hire them. Absent targeted harassment of Catholic employers by state inspectorates, licensing requirements, &c., the Catholic population has the critical mass to engage in intramural economic life. The kind of human capital deficits that existed between black and white in the Deep South aren’t present across the confessional boundary (at least not nearly to the same degree). Also, Ulster was the most industrialized part of the island at that time. Dependency relationships you saw in the Deep South – sharecropping, debt peonage, payment in scrip, company stores – are more difficult to establish and maintain.

Discover more from The American Catholic

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Scroll to Top