There's no doubt that America has an extreme level of racial tension; most people will attribute this, in knee-jerk fashion, to "slavery;" likewise, the notion today is that "the Civil War freed the slaves," with some silly notion that there would STILL be slavery in the Confederate states if they hadn't.
This doesn't wash in comparison to other countries which had higher levels of slavery-- and LOWER levels of equality in wealth according to race. Likewise, NONE of them ever needed a war to free slaves, however there has not been slavery in the western hemisphere for quite some time.
And despite this, racial tension-levels are much LOWER in these countries; in fact, most immigrants will tell you that America has greater levels of racial tension than any other country-- despite having more wealth.
Rather, the extreme racial tension in America, compared to these other countries, seems CAUSED directly by the Civil War-- or native Yankee racism; specifically, race was made a central issue to that conflict, with the North putting race in the middle of the two warring factions.
In reality, likewise, the North was the truly racist regime, with Lincoln sponsoring bills to keep Illinois an all-white state, and likewise wanting "free" territories in order to keep them "all white" as well.
Finally, the North wanted for all non-whites to be returned to their native countries.
Coupled with the extreme rape of the south, putting race in the middle of things, this created extreme hostile resentment on the part of the south, creating universal racial tension; however since history is written by the victors, the north was lionized while the south was villified.
As such, we have the impression that
1. America had slavery: when in reality
a) it was inherited from the British from the 1776 Founding;
b) Most states wanted to free the slaves, but a few were too economically dependent;
c) importation of trans-atlantic slaves was halted anyway by 1807;
d) MOST states banned slavery, but were bound by fugitive-slave laws.
e) secession by the southern states would have ended fugitive-slave laws, making them free-- but Lincoln didnt' care about slavery, he just wanted the land.
2. America was the only nation which had slavery-- in reality it was only 5% of that in the Western Hemisphere alone
3. Lincoln freed the slaves via the Civil War-- when in reality he wanted to send slaves back to Africa, and only wanted the state's land.
4. Slavery would have necessarily ended for economic reasons alone, soon after secession-- causing slaves to become sharecroppers and free-agents.
5. The race-issue, i.e whites only enslaved blacks- in reality all races owned slaves, and WERE slaves.
But since all of the above isn't politically correct, the current liberal media simply cooks up lies which revise history in favor of a popular scapegoat of the "White Man's Burden," designed to make ordinary, commonplace world-history into some shameful event, so as to control the population through self-hatred.
Fortunately, a single fact will spoil a popular argument-- and we have many facts: as well as many other countries which had similar backgrounds, and which made out much better without the need for "glorified battles."
Simply put, 95% of all trans-atlantic slaves went to countries OTHER than the US, and levels of racial tension are ALL universally lower than in the United States. This defies all coincidence, and points directly to the irony of Yankee force and hypocrisy.
As such, the liberal media turns a deliberate blind eye to other countries, and imposes a deliberate double-standard via revised history.
