Richard Hollerman

We know that using the epitaph, “whites,” is somewhat “racist” although we all know what this means. It means that people with light colored skin (and there are many, many shades of “white”) can be accused of being racist in demeanor and attitude. Why is this so?

There was sin on the part of the Spanish against those of other ethnicities (such as the Aztecs, a war-like and violent tribal people especially situation in Mexico). . Those from France also had certain tendencies and committed certain sins. The same would be true of the Italians. And we know that the British, Irish, Scottish, and the people from Wales would also share in the blame of being “white” although there may be different shades to their skin.

From God’s standpoint, all people surely must be “white” (Germans, Norwegian, Dutch, Swedish, those from Belgium, and so forth), with generally lighter colored skin, and other people they might also be considered white and share in the blame that we are considering.

But here we particularly are referring to lighter colored skin of people who enslaved “blacks” or “African-Americans.” Further, we know that whites were guilty of countless atrocities against the native Americans (otherwise known as Indians). And since non-whites have been in America, from perhaps the 1700s, plantation owners have been guilty of enslaving “blacks” in the most cruel fashion. Even when they treated these peoples with kindness, we know that to enslave another human being is wrong. (We know that even before the “white man” arrived in 1492 and thereafter, numerous wars were fought by those who insisted on being the “leaders” and “slave-holders” of others who were under their dominion.)

But here we are referring to plantation owners who captured, bought and sold slaves from Africa. Many came to the shores of North America (perhaps five percent came from Africa), having been captured cruelly by Arab slave-traders (or Muslim slave traders). But isn’t it true that these white plantation owners were especially from South Carolina, Virginia, and Maryland). They had a special responsibility to reach and bless them, with the white “owners” guilty of great blame for their dastardly deeds!

These people, coming especially from the Sudan, Ghana, Mali, and Songhai, were placed into detrimental and unbearable conditions, harvesting sugar cane, tobacco, and eventually cotton. Corn (or Maize) also was important. It is true that a mere five percent of Southerners were guilty of “men stealing” or “kidnapping” (1 Timothy 1:10) but still we must cast blame where it belongs! Part of the blame must come from the Dutch, the French, the Portuguese and British slave owners who wickedly captured and transported these Africans in a very inhumane manner.

Probably because of greed, they purchased these slaves and they were forced to labor in the fields for nothing or nearly nothing after being sold. Most of the whites were from the South where many, especially poorer people, didn’t own slaves, but those who did must share in the blame for these sins. (The concerted effort to change the status of the blacks was promoted by the “American Colonization Society” beginning as early as 1816.)

Not just once, but on various occasions, there was an attempt by whites from the South and even from the North, to send the slaves back where they came from. We are speaking of Liberia in Africa (this country was named after “liberty”), Haiti, and such places. But generally these blacks refused to go back to their home continent in Africa. Finally, the “Emancipation Proclamation” came from the pen of Abraham Lincoln, and about four million blacks (African-Americans) were liberated from slavery. They considered this a freeing of sorts!

We discover that only about 12,000 of these “liberated” blacks went to Liberia (where they became the ruling class). Again, most American blacks considered America their home, even though they had to work relentlessly for years. And most refused to return to Africa and find a place with other “blacks” there.

As we said earlier, we think that much of the blame lies at the feet of greedy whites who wanted to earn a higher profit and bought these slaves in a most inhumane way. The 95% who didn’t come to America (particularly they went to such places as the Dominican Republic, Cuba, and Brazil) also share the blame. Regardless, we know that God holds the guilty person worthy of blame.

We might reply that surely these blacks (many of them) who became Baptists, Methodists, and others were better off than the pagan and superstitious blacks who remained in Africa, their homeland. (Yet, we know that the “end” of liberty doesn’t justify the “means.” Yes, this may be true. But still we must ask whether anyone (including greedy white owners) did wrong in the 1600s, the 1700s, and 1800s, and after the period of enslavement, we know that both whites and even others are guilty for the evil done to these Africans.

Today, we know that there are many people involved in the culture “wars” being “fought” over “race” (various shades of black and various shades of white, as well as many others—such as the Indians, the Asians, the Mexicans, and others). But we must go back to what we have discovered in our studies. What about guilty “whites” or those of a shade of “white” perpetrated against those of a shade of black? What of them? (Whether we should call these people “blacks” (according to certain cultures, or even “colored” as they formerly were called, or today a common term is “people of color,” we know that God knows and this gives us a sense of direction.

Let’s remember that everyone has shades different from others. As one well-known author has pointed out, we all are shades depending on the amount of melanin in our skin. This we have inherited from the first pair (Adam and Eve—Genesis 1:26-28). Some today are white and some are black. And, of course, there are multiple shades besides this.

We think of the Northern Europeans, such as the Norwegians, the Swedes, and others. And, of course, there are “albinos.” And we also think (in contrast) of the Aborigines of Australia, certain tribes in Papua New Guinea, Senegal, South Sudan, and some blacks in Africans as well as others. I grew up in a small town in the northern part of the U.S. (and now live in the South) where there were not many “blacks” living. A “black” pastor in town said to my father, pointing to his black shoe, “This is black and this paper sheet is white. You and I are in-between!” True.

As for the “blacks” in America, we must regretfully say that much of the blame for the sins of those years in the past must lie at the feet of greedy white owners! Yes, few of them were involved and there was some good as the outcome (most would say that the black workers in the fields were benefitted over the paganism and poverty of Africa!). But though many blacks today are guilty of evil and wickedness, we must not forget about the greed and avaricious whites who began this wickedness.