I identify with John Brown. He was called an insurrectionist too.
Indeed, John Brown was an insurrectionist and fought for abolition, which was a political movement at that time. To not call it a political act is denying reality, but I see why the Left does because they don't want to draw any parallels to it to the modern day political insurrectionist.
You have made your point but don't expect the Left to acknowledge it in any way.
The Left has no desire to have any meaningful dialogue such as this. After all, they control academia and the media, so all they have to do is censor people like you and deride them to silence you. I wonder what John Brown would have done about all this control and censorship?
WRONG. Abolition was a moral/religious movement, at that time and for 350 years prior. John Brown was a religiously-driven activist, not a political animal. Although if you insist on finding some you'd find his views staunchly Liberal:
>> Brown said repeatedly that all of his anti-slavery activities, both in Kansas and Harpers Ferry, were in accordance with the
Golden Rule.
[4][5] He said the most famous sentence in the
Declaration of Independence—
all men are created equal—"meant the same thing" << (Wiki)
And once again you're determined to somehow twist a history thread into your own butthurt about "the Left". Go buy a history book.
Human beings are all political animals. Both politics and religion are the same in that it involves how people should live their lives. Again, John Brown was a political force as he touched the political nerve of a nation on the verge of Civil War. So you are wrong.
Now you even copied the word "wrong" from my post.
Brown's event had political ramifications, obviously. But he didn't take his actions out of political fervor, NOR is everything political as you seem to believe. He took his position out of religious belief. So did Bartholomé de las Casas, and I know you know who he was because you copied that whole post of mine. De las Casas didn't have a political basis either. He was a priest.
From a Left wing perspective, you believe that society should adopt Left wing ideals, and to fall short in any way is injustice. Your moral arrogance is bolstered by the belief that not believing in God is superior to those that do because God cannot be proven with science and science leads you to all truth.
Finally you've abandoned copying off my paper and are now just pulling shit out of your ass. NOWHERE here or anywhere else have I posted anything remotely resembling that "society should adopt left wing ideals" or in fact "should adopt" anything, nor have I posted anything about belief/non-belief in God being "superior" to anything else so you're just a goddam
liar.
Oh and note to goddam liar --- my perspective isn't "left wing" whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean, it's History. We're in the fucking
History forum, Shitforbrains. And NO, Stupid, politics and religion are NOT the same thing at all. What level of Retard School do you go to to come up with that kind of malarkey?