Willie Lynch was a British slave owner in the West Indies. He was invited to the colony of Virginia in 1712 to teach his methods to slave owners there. The term “lynching” is derived from his last name.
He advised slave owners to foster division, “fear, envy and distrust for control.” Pit young versus old, light skinned versus dark skinned and most importantly, male versus female.
In a section called “The Breaking Process of the African Woman,” he advocated shifting her dependency from the African male to the slave owner. This is achieved by beating and humiliating the male in front of the female. Then, beating the female if she doesn’t get the message. This instills a kind of frigidity.
“We reversed nature by burning and pulling a civilized nigger apart, and bull whipping the other to the point of death, all in her presence. By her being left alone, unprotected, with the male image destroyed, the ordeal caused her to move from her psychological dependent state to a frozen independent state. In this frozen psychological state of independence, she will raise her male and female offspring in reverse roles.”
“For fear of the young male’s life she will psychologically train him to be mentally weak and dependent, but physically strong. Because she has become psychologically independent, she will train her female offspring to be psychologically independent. What have you got? You’ve got the nigger woman out front and the nigger man behind and scared. This is a perfect situation of sound sleep and economic.”
The Willie Lynch speech has been discredited as a hoax: it is pure racist propaganda; an attempt to return to ‘the good old days’. And, like all things racist, it assumes its intended target is more stupid than the propagator.
[quote]roybot wrote:
The Willie Lynch speech has been discredited as a hoax: it is pure racist propaganda; an attempt to return to ‘the good old days’. And, like all things racist, it assumes its intended target is more stupid than the propagator.
Much like the OP in fact…
[/quote]
Thanks for proving its a hoax! I have a lot to learn and intellectual giants such as you contribute a lot here!!
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
roybot wrote:
The Willie Lynch speech has been discredited as a hoax: it is pure racist propaganda; an attempt to return to ‘the good old days’. And, like all things racist, it assumes its intended target is more stupid than the propagator.
Much like the OP in fact…
Thanks for proving its a hoax! I have a lot to learn and intellectual giants such as you contribute a lot here!!
[/quote]
In all likelihood, it really is a hoax. It seems highly unlikely that it would take over a century for the term “lynching” to enter common parlance, yet the Oxford English Dictionary states that the first written occurrence of the word “lynch” in the form of a verb only dates back to 1836. There are somewhat earlier (c. 1811) references to “Lynch Law,” but such early references to “Lynch Laws” have absolutely nothing to do with slavery. Moreover there’s plenty of good evidence to suggest that the term “Lynch Law” has a much difference and much later origin.
From OED 2nd ed.
“…It is often asserted to have arise from the proceedings of Charles Lynch, a justice of the peace in Virginia, who in 1782 was indemnified by an act of the Virginia Assembly for having imprisoned certain Tories in 1780…”
Thanks for proving its a hoax! [/quote] I’m pretty sure that you already knew it was a hoax, which is why I didn’t elaborate. Oh, and I didn’t prove it was a fake: the proof is quite easy to come by if you choose to look for it.
A debate about whether the transcript is real or not wasn’t really the purpose of starting this thread now was it?[quote] I have a lot to learn and intellectual giants such as you contribute a lot here!!
[/quote]
There, there…put your sarcasm back in your pocket. No need to get all upset because your troll-job was stillborn. Maybe your next project will be more successful. As long as you stop judging people on the content of their posts, that is.
I like to joke around. Guilty as charged. I still saw you coming from a mile away, though. Seems like you don’t have to be an ‘intellectual giant’ to do that…
In all likelihood, it really is a hoax. It seems highly unlikely that it would take over a century for the term “lynching” to enter common parlance, yet the Oxford English Dictionary states that the first written occurrence of the word “lynch” in the form of a verb only dates back to 1836. There are somewhat earlier (c. 1811) references to “Lynch Law,” but such early references to “Lynch Laws” have absolutely nothing to do with slavery. Moreover there’s plenty of good evidence to suggest that the term “Lynch Law” has a much difference and much later origin.
From OED 2nd ed.
“…It is often asserted to have arise from the proceedings of Charles Lynch, a justice of the peace in Virginia, who in 1782 was indemnified by an act of the Virginia Assembly for having imprisoned certain Tories in 1780…”
[/quote]
It’s also extremely suspicious that the document didn’t appear in print until the 1970s (a period when black civil rights movements started to gain serious momentum).
Now if the speech was truly as influential as it is claimed, it makes sense that it would have been published and distributed to interested parties far earlier. As it stands, there is no evidence to suggest that it was - which is very, very peculiar.
If you accept that it is a hoax, its function is clear: it was created to counteract any attempt by blacks to distance themselves from their past. This is done primarily through the suggestion that they are still subject to the same conditioning as their ancestors.
Apologies in advance to Headhunter for the ignorant post. I shall limit my input to ‘Rate My Physique’ from now on.
