University of Florida law student awarded for arguing it should be "We the White People"

these are the people we’re supposed to try and understand…that we’re supposed to reconcile with so that we can come together

they’re a stain on humanity

 

What’s a white person in this context?
A person of British ancestry?

 

Have you stopped to think about who lived in the USA when the Constitution was put in place in 1788? Whites, Blacks, Indians. Blacks were enslaved and Indians were not citizens at that time.

So logically, the Florida student is probably correct. Sheesh, do some research before jumping straight to the racial outrage act.

 

Not all blacks in Colonial America or Independent America pre-1863 were enslaved you knob.

https://encyclopediavirginia.org/en...ny free,even owned enslaved people themselves.

And White male colonists married Indigenous women. See Thomas Rolfe, son of John Rolfe and Pocahontas.

 

We'll see that's history and objective analysis. Kidna cute , but not relevant anymore .

 

I doubt the Constitution was written with these tiny number of exceptions in mind... but regardless, the 14th amendment, approximately 80 years later, was put in place to address enslaved people (blacks) and those people born or naturalized in the USA -- picking up your other exceptions. So the 14th amendment's passage really bolsters the point I made, and the Florida student's point.

See, you just have to press pause on the racial outrage, let your emotions cool off, and then apply logic. You'll then see how the Florida student arrived at the conclusion.


GOOD DAY

 

From the article you didn't read:

[He] also argues that courts should challenge the constitutionality of the 14th Amendment, which ensures birthright citizenship, due process and equal protection under the law, and the 15th Amendment, which protects the right to vote for nonwhite citizens.
Mr. Damsky concluded the paper by raising the specter of revolutionary action if the steps he recommended toward forging a white ethno-state were not taken. “The People cannot be expected to meekly swallow this demographic assault on their sovereignty,” he wrote, adding that if the courts did not act to ensure a white country, the matter would be decided “not by the careful balance of Justitia’s scales, but by the gruesome slashing of her sword.”
...
Mr. Damsky’s argument that at least some of the framers meant for the Constitution to apply only to white people is by no means a new one. Evan D. Bernick, an associate law professor at Northern Illinois University, notes that the argument can be found in the Ku Klux Klan’s founding organizational documents from the late 1860s.

Among originalists, though, this interpretation has been widely rejected. Instead, conservatives have argued that much of the text of the Constitution “tilts toward liberty” for all, said Jonathan Gienapp, an associate professor of history and law at Stanford. They also note that the post-Civil War amendments guaranteeing rights to nonwhite people “washed away whatever racial taint” there was in the original document.

 

Trader_J read that and found something else to do.