Nov. 26, 2017 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
13:37
3909 HOLY S%!T! SLAVERY IS BACK!
In the aftermath of Hillary Clinton’s State Department destroying Libya and the ensuing migrant crisis, there are currently open-slave markets ongoing in the middle-eastern country. The United Nations-backed Libyan Government of National Accord, or GNA, said Libya "is going through difficult times which affected its own citizens as well. It is, therefore, not fair to assume responsibility for the consequences of this immigration, which everyone unanimously agreed that addressing this phenomenon exceeds the national capacities. We affirm again that the practical solution is to address the real reasons that drive people to leave their home countries, treat them and develop final solutions for them.” Where is the outrage over modern-day slavery? Your support is essential to Freedomain Radio, which is 100% funded by viewers like you. Please support the show by making a one time donation or signing up for a monthly recurring donation at: http://www.freedomainradio.com/donate
So in my 20s I had this girlfriend and I believed the best of her because I was a naive and good-hearted young man who had been raised by a single mother and therefore had not been taught about any of the more challenging or darker aspects of female nature.
This is one of the things that's true about single moms as a whole is because they tend to be low quality.
They tend to not be able to help their children avoid low-quality women for obvious reasons so I had this girlfriend and she had two complaints in general number one was I didn't listen to her and so I would put on my attentive and listen and so on and sometimes when I would listen to her I would well disagree with her It turns out that's kind of what she meant.
That it wasn't that I wasn't listening to her.
It's that I was listening to her, but sometimes disagreeing with her.
So listening meant to agree.
In other words, to self-erase, to be a bland, balding mirror for her own preening vanity.
And that was not a good thing.
Now, the other thing she used to complain about is she listened to me on the phone with my male friends.
And like a lot of guys, we were talking about the world, philosophy, ideas, economics, politics, and so on.
And she used to, okay, not eavesdrop, but, you know, sort of be in the place when I was on the phone.
And she'd complain to me afterwards.
It's like, well, why don't you ever talk about your feelings?
Why don't you ever talk about, you know, what's going on in their lives, how their marriage is and so on, right?
And I realized afterwards, and I tried a little bit of this, but it didn't really feel right.
And, you know, with my male friends, if we have important emotional stuff to talk about, we'll talk about it.
But there seems to be more important work to do in the world today rather than forever gazing up your own navel at your own feelings, at least for me.
But I realized that she wanted to make, and I'm not saying this was conscious, but she wanted to make my conversations with my male friends awkward.
By saying, well, you need to talk about your feelings, otherwise it's not a real conversation.
It's like, no, no, no, that's what you do with your female friends, and that's totally fine, but it's not what we're doing.
Now, it turns out, right, so she was a little bit on the unstable side, and this sort of came out after a while, right?
So there's this female chameleon thing where women are what you want up front, and then slowly the mask begins to slip over time.
And she wanted me to not be close to my male friends so that they couldn't give me any feedback on her behavior, right?
So this is a way of blocking male friendships.
And you see this happen all the time, right?
Male friendships, it's a bromance, it's semi-gay, it's mocked, it's, you know, because when men band together, they are much stronger and they can pass along masculine wisdom to each other, which is to the detriment of, well, less stable members of the fairer sex and so on.
And so I thought that she was interested in making me a better person.
It kind of turns out that she was only interested in controlling me.
Now, these thoughts came up to me recently when I was reading about...
I know it sounds like a stretch, but it'll make sense.
When I was reading about the...
Open air slave markets in Libya.
So the migrants who are swarming up from sub-Saharan Africa trying to get to the welfare state paradise of Europe passed through Libya.
Libya, of course, was destroyed.
By Hillary Clinton's State Department and Barack Obama's presidency, wherein they basically oversaw the overthrow and murder of Muammar Gaddafi, who said to them, if you destroy me, if you destroy the government of Libya, there will be free passage and open roads from Africa to Europe.
I am blocking the migrants who want to get to Europe.
But they went ahead and did it anyway.
And now, what has been foretold by the late Gaddafi has come to pass, but one of the more horrifying things, and this happened actually earlier this year, one of the more horrifying things that is occurring is these open-air slave markets, wherein the blacks and the darker the skin,
the more racism there is against these blacks, even among their fellow Muslims, but the blacks from Sub-Saharan Africa who were trying to get to Europe, or in other places, not just Sub-Saharan Africa, They are supposed to pay these human smugglers, these human traffickers, but if they can't pay, or if for some other reason, they end up being sold into slavery.
And you can, if you have no ethics, you can go to Libya.
And you can pick up a black slave for about $400, give or take, depending on, you know, health and strength and youth and so on.
And they're being sold as, you know, good, strong men to work on your farm and so on.
And I suppose I still have a certain amount of Scarlet Pimpernel, My Little Pony optimism to scrape from my soul.
Because much like when the feminists refused to condemn Bill Clinton for his using of the 22-year-old Monica Lewinsky as his personal clean-up Kleenex after masturbating into her mouth...
I guess I was still a little surprised that when a slave trade in blacks is going on in Africa, that's documented, that's filmed, and you can look for it and have a look for the videos, that liberal leftist, particularly black organizations, would be absolutely outraged, would be crying this out to the very heavens.
Why? Because, of course, I have been raised, as I'm sure you have been raised, particularly if you're white, I was raised with the argument that slavery, you see, is the very, very worst thing.
It's the very, very worst thing in the world.
It's so terrible that even 150 years after it ends, you still owe reparations, you still owe jobs, you still owe welfare, you still owe preferential treatment.
That's a century and a half.
That is how horrendous it is.
When 800,000 people in the popular narrative died in the Civil War to free the slaves, mostly whites died.
It's not even remotely enough.
And slavery, of course, then being the very worst conceivable thing in the world, I guess when I first heard about this, I was waiting for everyone on the left, and of course people on the right too, and all people of good mind, good heart, and good conscience, to rail against the re-emergence of this barbaric pre-medieval practice emerging and I was sitting there waiting and waiting and I would check every now and then and nothing,
nothing, nothing and the UN of course is upset and naturally because it's the UN they blame the Europeans it's kind of becoming boringly inevitable at this point and that's when you escape an abusive relationship is when it's so predictable that there's no surprise or shock or ownership moral ownership of the abuse But there's really been precious little that has been said by a wide variety of organizations that claim to really be into human rights.
And the question is, why?
Why? Why?
Why is there not this massive outrage among black groups, among leftist groups, among liberal groups, among everyone who cares?
I've seen this show up on right-wing websites.
I've seen this show up on neutral websites and a few leftist websites.
But it's not really gathered any popular momentum.
This should be a massive outrage.
Story, the re-emergence of slaves in Africa, the re-emergence of black slavery.
Now, I know it is just popping up.
There's indications that there are tens of millions of slaves around the world.
But this is one, you know, it's documented, it's local, it's specific, and it has emerged as a result of Democrat policies of destroying Libya as it stood.
So why? Now, I guess I began to sort of think about this in a way that is, to me, both liberating and enraging.
You know, the truth will set you free, but first of all, it's really going to piss you off.
And the way I sort of formulate it in my mind, and, you know, let me know what you think in the comments below.
I'm always curious to get the hive mind feedback.
And the way that I view it is two things.
Number one, It's Muslims who are running the slave trade in Libya.
So, because it's not white people owning slaves.
Like, far more slaves went to Brazil than went to America, but there's not that same thing because it wasn't always whites who were owning and so on.
And again, in America, three or four percent of whites actually owned slaves.
It was a very upper-class thing.
I mean, a slave cost as much as a good car these days.
So because it's Muslims who are owning and running the slave trade in Libya, I guess it doesn't fit any particular kind of narrative And the second thing is that I, you know, and I really hesitated on this for a while, but I can't think of any other way to describe it.
The reason why there's no particular outrage in the West, particularly America, particularly among black organizations, who's, you know, if you're African American, there are Africans being sold in slave markets at the moment.
Why is this not a huge thing?
And I hate to say it, but I think it's probably true.
There's no money in it. There's no economic advantage in it.
There's no profit in it.
The Muslim slave trade, as I've talked about repeatedly throughout history, has, well, killed about 100 million blacks or so.
I mean, it's a massive, horrifying thing that happened.
I don't see a lot of movement for guilt or reparations or anything like that, so...
There's that one aspect of it.
And there's just no money in it.
Like, you'd spend money, I guess, to go and publicize this and figure out how to solve it and save it and so on.
But there's no affirmative action in it.
There's no set-asides.
There's no free federal money for minority-owned businesses.
There's no particular money in it.
And that is both liberating and extraordinarily enraging.
It liberates me from any sense of white guilt, and I didn't really have a lot, but you know, any vestiges, gone, gone.
Because, do you really care about slavery?
I mean slavery 150 years ago if you can keep pounding that white guilt button you can keep getting the vending machine of white guilt to cough up infinite resources but if you really care about slavery you would care a lot more about real life happening right now slavery in Libya than you would about slavery that close to a million mostly white lives were spent in the elimination of 150 years ago you would care about slavery now I mean if you are really horrified About the bubonic plague and the Black Death that occurred in early to mid-medieval Europe,
then you would really care about a new outbreak, I would assume, of the bubonic plague of the Black Death.
That would be, I guess, number one on your list if you really cared about it.
It's a horrifying thing. So if it's true that the reason why there's not massive popular outrage about the re-emergence of slavery in Libya is either or both, because it's Muslims, not whites, who are running the slave trade, and because there's just no money in it, there's no profit in it, there's no big white guilt button that you can keep pounding to get your resources.
Now if that's the case, Then slavery has been used as an emotional and moral, legal and political weapon against whites, not because slavery is considered to be immoral, but because it's profitable.
In other words, slavery has been used as a financial cudgel to morally beat resources out of guilty whites.
And that is horrendous.
Slavery, of course, a monstrous great evil.
And whatever you think of white Western European Christian males, it was, in fact, white Western European Christian males who spent massive amounts of blood and treasure to end the worldwide practice of slavery that had existed in all cultures across all times throughout history.
So, to use slavery, and I think this indicates that most people don't really care about slavery because otherwise they'd be rousing for massive action about what's going on in Libya.
They don't care about slavery, but they do care about getting resources.
Now, if you use the historical wrong of slavery, not because you really care about it or think that it's wrong, but just in order to gain resources, You are really using people who were enslaved and their subjugation and the horror of their existence.
You're using it to get resources.
You're using it to guilt people into giving you money and power.
