1935, D. C. Heath and Company, NY, pages 1-64

In drawing aside the heavy veil of lies that is post-1775 American history it was important for me, as an amateur historian, to examine what the most vetted and accepted establishment historians thought of English North America before the great cover up that began with the American Revolution and did not reach full stride until the 1890s when the cult of “the Founding Fathers” was finally ensconced in in the Olympus of the Modern American mind.

Over and over again the authors repeat the narrative mantra that America was settled by eagerly arriving poor seeking religious freedom, but then, as if forgetting to sanitize their sources and citations to come into line with the re-sculpting of the pre-United States narrative along the lines of the “indentured servitude was an opportunity and not a slave labor system,” narrative that has come to dominate the American view of its formative foundation, they let slip such unpurged facts as:

The entire narrative of the indentured servant is the core lie that bound modern and now post-modern America—heavily invested as it is in common white guilt—to a false root of guilt, as if the common white man ever held slaves or was in any way complicit in the enslavement of the Africans who were shipped in to replace him as he, “…drifted away to the frontier,” from a system so savage and inequitable that he found it preferable to go head-to-head against the most daunting warriors in American history, who fought—most often with success—from the 1530s to the 1830s to defend their sacred forest lands from the Whiteman’s axe and plough.

Of particular interest is the discussion on English Common Law and the manorial [feudal] system which the European hierarchs attempted to transplant to Maryland, Pennsylvania, Delaware, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and New York, that is often forgotten as historians attempt to find the secret history of America, that they themselves have helped contrive, by contrasting the Virginia model slave plantation imported by the cavalier class to the congregational model slave plantation imported by the Puritans, to find that illusive reason for the adherence of the common American to the ideal of the self-sufficient nuclear family, clannish loyalties to the extended family and neighbors, homesteading and gun ownership, when, in reality, this quintessential American family ideal was carried west, not from congregational New England or the cavalier Southlands, but by the rebel hearts of the more numerous and populous Middle Colonies and also the backwoodsmen from Georgia to Maine who fought their way across the daunting mountain barrier intended to bar their escape from the cruel birthright of their betters.

As late as 1935 this amnesia-clouded, slave nation had not yet had its past buried by the combined minds of the establishment academics, who were, in this case, but lukewarm in their efforts to conceal the implicit state of slavery that the first colonists existed under in favor for the thinly veiled explicit lie, existing under cover of “a whiff of legality,” [1] by which all plantation owners and servants of all races, religions and legal designations [criminal, transport, indenture, kidnapping victim, bondsman or bondswoman] understood that “the plantations” were not the retroactive land of opportunity we have been taught to believe in, but “a poor man’s land” [2] of exploitation and in extremis, escape from exploitive conditions.

The best estimate this reader has been able to arrive at is that through the 1600s and 1700s, out of every ten European Americans who did not immigrate as an exploiter of human misery, but rather arrived as an unfree and legally bound person of some kind, that the future held the following prospects:

6 in 10 died in bondage

1 in 10 became an exploiter, perpetuating the slave system

1 in 10 made their way back to Europe

1 in 10 remained in the coastal slave matrix to be exploited

1 in 10 made their way west in Man’s endless quest to escape bondage.