Warning: Video features some disturbing images and one instance of the “n” word.
This is a trailer for a new film, Maafa 21 (available on DVD).
Maafa 21 shows the connection from slavery and eugenics to birth control, abortion and black genocide today and is routinely called “stunning,” “breathtaking,” and “jaw-dropping.” Many viewers have said they were left “speechless” by what they saw and several have told us that it filled them with anger. One African-American pastor and 1960’s civil rights activist said, “I had always been suspicious about some of this stuff, but this film connects the dots in a way I never really understood before.” Another described it as “lightening in a bottle” and said that for the first time in his life he has a tool to educate the African-American community about the abortion lobby’s real agenda.
This looks to be an important film for anyone interested in learning the truth about Margaret Sanger’s eugenics agenda and Planned Parenthood’s racist history.
Learn more about Maafa 21 at their website or on Facebook.
I didn’t realize people were still trying to get abortion outlawed.
Where were the shepherds of the black church while all this was going on? Didn’t they recognize the wolves of this world?
This DVD can be obtained from Amazon.com
I always thought hydrogen peroxide was “lightening in a bottle”.
“I didn’t realize people were still trying to get abortion outlawed.”
If it’s still legal, we’re still trying.
Which political party supported slavery and were willing to go to civil war to maintain it? Which political party tried to prevent free blacks from gaining any rights even to the point of lynching them? Which political party supports abortion in every form and tries everything they possibly can to provide funding to anyone who needs it to kill their baby?
Two great moral issues since our countries founding have been slavery and abortion. The civil war killed hundreds of thousands of people because some said no more spread of slavery to new states. The Republican Party was formed to end slavery and the Democratic Party was the party of slavery and the follow on lynching and denial of rights. When the civil rights battles were over, what better way to continue than to support abortion and do everything possible to spread it to black neighborhoods. There policies had a lot to do with the destruction of once strong black families which has left the blacks almost in a dependent state to the party for handouts.
How so many can still be supportive of a party with this horrible long term history is beyond understanding.
It was more than just against the Negroes. Catholics were included in the inferior “races” to be eradicated through eugenics, sterilization and abortion.
Will you condemn the likes of Giuliani & Scott Brown for their stance on abortion, or is it ok if you’re a Republican?
What exactly happened to the Democrat power base in the deep south, or is that too uncomfortable to think about?
Dry, the Democrat power base in the South fractured in the 1970s, not the 1960s. It was the late 1970s before many states had *any* Republican officeholders; some barely even had GOP primaries, the Republican voters were so few.
The main causes:
1. Migration from northern states
2. The takeover of the Democratic Party by the McGovern wing (the New Left)
3. The demise of the Scoop Jackson wing of strong-defense Democrats
Race as a factor was comparatively small. The left’s successes in enacting punitive race-based policies (e.g., mandatory busing, federal control of local schools) did contribute, however. But at the time, one could still vote for the same old Democrat dynasties as ever, and many still did.
Regardless of the forced eugenics of the past, people have the right to control their reproduction, including the use of birth control.
craig: It was the late 1970s before many states had *any* Republican officeholders; some barely even had GOP primaries, the Republican voters were so few.
Yes, such a realignment takes time. You can see the fracturing of the Democratic coalition in 1968 here. Johnson knew that when he signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, that they had lost the South. But he did it anyway.
Valleys, I have, and still do, condemn Giuliani and Scott Brown for their stance on abortion; and, no, I don’t think it’s okay if you’re a Republican.
Will you condemn Margaret Sanger for her well documented racism, or is it okay if you’re “progressive”, or support “Womens’ rights” or some such thing?
The “racism” of abortion is a myth. The abortion rate for any group of women is a function of the rate of unintended pregnancies in that group. Abortions are disproportionately high among black women because unwanted pregnancies are disproportionately high among black women. For those who like to charge “genocide,” it is an inconvenient fact that the birth rate among black women is actually higher than the birth rate among white women, and the percentage of blacks in the United States is growing. If it’s genocide, it’s not working.
The important question, which campaigns against the alleged racism of abortion fail to answer, is why do black women (and Hispanic women) have so many more unintended pregnancies than white women. One reason is that black and Hispanic women are more likely to be poor than white women, and poor women have a higher rate of unintended pregnancies. (Of course, why that is so requires an answer, too.)
For those who want to end the high rate of abortions among minority women (or end abortion altogether), it is incumbent upon them to come up with a solution to the high rate of unintended pregnancies, otherwise the birth rate among poor minority women will soar. Some claim that if abortion were not available, that in itself would motivate women to avoid unintended pregnancies. That, of course, implies that poor minority women are just more irresponsible than affluent white women and their “unplanned” pregnancies are the result of carelessness or indifference. That is certainly not an argument I would be comfortable making.
In any case, accusations that the high rate of abortions among blacks is a plot by racists or eugenicists is fundamentally dishonest.
Rhinestone Suderman:
Will you condemn the racists and slave owners who founded the United States, and also condemn the United States, since it was founded by racists and slave owners?
Sure, David. I have, and I will continue to do so.
Will you condemn racist abortion policies, that target minority women, which began back in the “progressive” era, with people like Margaret Sanger, who saw blacks as weeds, who needed to be thinned out? Will you condemn what is actually going on, today? It’s easy to condemn slavery, which no longer exists in this country; it’s harder to actually do something about the rate of unintended pregnancies among minority women, and the high rate of abortions among minorities. Do you really think encouraging poor women to get abortions is the solution to their problems?
The eugenics programs of the late 19th and early 20th Centuries were focused on eliminating poverty by reducing what they considered to be inferior human groups, such as blacks, Jews, Catholics, Slavs, Southern Italians; will modern day supporters of abortion, and government subsidized birth control programs admit this? Will they admit that there was racism involved, and that people like Sanger were not quite the heroes of womens liberation they’re often portrayed as?
Dry – the squishy Rs who are ok with abortion are reviled by many. No – it’s NOT ok. I for one could never vote for a pro-life R candidate for President.
David,
Do you support the communists/fascists and the radical Islamist jihadist/terrorists, who shared the virulent anti-American propaganda?
Rhinestone,
First, Margaret Sanger explicitly condemned abortion. She is a racist and a eugenicist by today’s standards, but then, Abraham Lincoln is a racist by today’s standards. Margaret Sanger believed that given the appropriate tools (contraceptives), the “inferior” populations would limit themselves. It is not pretty by today’s standards, but it wasn’t genocide or forced sterilization. But I don’t really see how the attitudes of Margaret Sanger and others in the late 18th and early 19th century have much of anything to do with this issue today. I am more than willing to condemn the racism of Sanger and also of the Founding Fathers, but I do not condemn them as human beings. I acknowledge they lived in different times. I don’t condemn St. Paul as a human being for saying, “Slaves, obey your masters.” However, I don’t find it acceptable by today’s standards.
I think in today’s America, for many women getting an abortion is the only solution to their problems. The Declaration on Procured Abortion says, “[I]t is the task of law to pursue a reform of society and of conditions of life in all milieux, starting with the most deprived, so that always and everywhere it may be possible to give every child coming into this world a welcome worthy of a person. Help for families and for unmarried mothers, assured grants for children, a statute for illegitimate children and reasonable arrangements for adoption – a whole positive policy must be put into force so that there will always be a concrete, honorable and possible alternative to abortion.” I don’t think poor minority women today have a “concrete, honorable, and possible alternative to abortion,” and I think many in the pro-life movement — being politically conservative — are not interested in seeing that they do.
Finally, you did not really address my main point. Abortion in the United States today is not a racist and eugenicist plot. Minority women have more abortions because they have more unplanned pregnancies, not because racists are trying to limit the number of blacks in the population. A campaign against abortion that does not include as one of its key components a campaign against unplanned pregnancies is arguably racist, in my opinion, because it would result in poor women being forced to have children they could not take care of.
Even though the foundress of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, was a eugenicist, I have a hard time believing that there’s a secret conspiracy to eradicate the African-American race through abortion.
In respnse to David Nickol’s well-reasoned comment, I think the answers and solutions are to be found in John Paul ll’s Theology of the Body. What’s there will not come as welcome news to those who want to do whatever they want whenever thay want, but the solution really is there.
Not a bad will-you-condemnathon there.
It wouldn’t make me any friends to say this. But I think if I were sitting down with my sneering metropolitan friends to design a policy that harmed minorities it would look very much like the current “war on drugs”.
As David Nickol observes, racist & eugenic attitudes were considered fairly normal in the years before the Third Reich’s policies exposed the horrors found therein. If these people lived now they wouldn’t be holding the same views any more than Lincoln would view blacks as inferior or the Founding Fathers would consider slavery acceptable.
I suppose it could be a coincidence that most PP abortuaries are located in poor minority neighborhoods; or, as you concede the rate of abortion is higher for minority poor, perhaps it’s a matter of location following market demand.
Perhaps.
That, of course, implies that poor minority women are just more irresponsible than affluent white women and their “unplanned” pregnancies are the result of carelessness or indifference. That is certainly not an argument I would be comfortable making.
Comfortable or uncomfortable is irrelevant. Is it in fact true/accurate? You cannot propose solutions to a problem if you do not have accurate information on the causes (at least not if you want the solution to be effective). And if abortion is essentially being used as back up birth control (which I largely suspect it is), then the real problem is a complete lack of respect for human life and failure to take responsibility for one’s actions. Not sure how you design a welfare program that enforces that.
If abortion is the only solution offered to poor, minority women: not jobs, not stable families, not support for themselves and their children—then it’s a failure, and, yes, I believe it does stem from racism; a rather paternalistic, racism of low expectations, but racism, all the same: “Ah, those poor, minority women! What else can we do for them, but encourage them to get an abortion? Of course these hapless creatures can’t take responsibility for their children!” (Um, why not?)
Also, I agree with cmatt that it shows a lack of respect for life, and an unwillingness to hold minorities to any standards, as if they were inferior beings.)
(Oh yes, cmatt, of course i’ts just a coincidence the PP arortuaries tend to be poor neighborhoods; just a case of supply and demand!—sarc.)
Racist and eugenic attitudes were quite common in the late 19th, early 20th Centuries—among the intelligentsia, and progressives, such as H.G. Wells, Sanger, Francis Galton and a number of others, such as Woodrow Wilson. Such views weren’t nearly as popular among the “human weeds” (i.e., ordinary working class people, who were the targets of the elites’ sterlization programs).
The Catholic Church was strongly against the eugenics movement, and, consequently, was considered by the latter to be among its greatest enemies.
Some, like Sanger, condemned abortion; others thought them a good idea (for the “human weeds” at least); others hoped that birth control, and lots of it, would control the “Less desirable” elements. Still others were in favor of euthanasia chambers, for those deemed likely to be a burden on society. It was the methods, not the ultimate end, that was debated; all eugenists agreed that, for the good of society, certain human types must go.
Such beliefs were not held by everyone, although the elites did their darndest to try and push them on everybody.
(Of course, one could ask why poor minority women need abortions more than, say, the Beverly Hills, or Rodeo Drive crowd; answer would be, “Because they’re poor!” Well, why are they poor? Why can’t their families help them? Why is abortion so frequently pushed as the best solution for them?)
According to a study done by the Guttmacher Institute, black women have abortions at 3-5 times the rate of white women. This sounds serious; the cutting off of an entire generation!
And, no, I don’t think it’s necessarily a plot (at least not today; (I do think Sanger was up to no good) involving “Anarchists” (?) or whoever, behind it. I do think it is fueled by the attitude (largely unconscious) that these children don’t really matter: they’ll just be poor, just be a burden, society doesn’t really need them, what can you expect from these poor mothers, anyway?—and this attitude is definitely an inheritance from the eugenics movement.
LAI,
I have no idea what you are referring to.
Rhinestone,
You say, “This sounds serious; the cutting off of an entire generation!” However, as I pointed out previously, in spite of the fact that black women have a disproportionate number of abortions, their birth rate still exceeds that of white women. In other words, black women get pregnant at a significantly higher rate than white women, and even though they don’t carry all of the babies to term, they still have more babies (in proportion to their numbers in the population) than white women. It is an odd kind of “genocide” that results in an *increase* in the targeted group’s population.
Rhinestone says, “Of course, one could ask why poor minority women need abortions more than, say, the Beverly Hills, or Rodeo Drive crowd; answer would be, ‘Because they’re poor!’”
The first part of the answer is that poor women have a greater number of unplanned pregnancies than affluent women. Now, the question is, Why? I suppose some reasons are known. Lack of education, for example. It seems that part of the job of the pro-life movement should be to figure out why some groups have a greater incidence of unplanned pregnancies, and see what can be done to help those groups avoid them.
It may very well be racism (at least in part) that causes minorities to be poor and causes poor and minority women to have a disproportionate number of unplanned pregnancies. But it is not racism to provide abortion services to those who seek them. It may be murder in the eyes of the Catholic Church, but it is not a racist plot to exterminate black people.
Of *course* Planned Parenthood goes where its clients are. For those who are opposed to abortions, you can certainly detest Planned Parenthood for providing them. But you can hardly blame Planned Parenthood for the high rate of unplanned pregnancies among black women.
Invoking racism and eugenics in the abortion debate is simply a political ploy. It has nothing to do with the reality of abortion. It’s just a way to try to smear those who are pro-choice. If calling them pro-murder and pro-infanticide doesn’t work, call them racist.
c matt says: “And if abortion is essentially being used as back up birth control (which I largely suspect it is), then the real problem is a complete lack of respect for human life and failure to take responsibility for one’s actions. Not sure how you design a welfare program that enforces that.”
Maybe poor people are less moral and more irresponsible than affluent people. In fact, maybe poverty doesn’t cause immorality and irresponsibility; maybe poor people are poor because they are immoral and irresponsible. But that doesn’t sound like Catholic social teaching to me. It also doesn’t sound like the usual pro-life meme that women who have abortions are victims.
Now, the question is, Why? I suppose some reasons are known. Lack of education, for example.
They generally know contraception in and out. They don’t lack knowledge. They lack motivation.
Maybe poor people are less moral and more irresponsible than affluent people. In fact, maybe poverty doesn’t cause immorality and irresponsibility; maybe poor people are poor because they are immoral and irresponsible. But that doesn’t sound like Catholic social teaching to me.
Realize that the “poor” in this country are in fact by historical and global standards obscenely wealthy, luxuriating in goods that most people can only dream of.
Merely being in the bottom quintitle for income does not mean you have the blessing on the poor.
Mary,
And who exactly are “they”?
Mary says, “Realize that the “poor” in this country are in fact by historical and global standards obscenely wealthy, luxuriating in goods that most people can only dream of.”
If the poor are obscenely wealthy, then imagine how wealthy the rich are! For a 2-person family, the poverty level — or rather the obscenely rich level — is $14,570 a year. You would think, then, that repealing the Bush tax cuts for couples who make $250,000 a year and over wouldn’t be such a hardship.
But what does the great wealth of the poor have to do with whether or not abortion is racist???
Yes, Mary, they generally do know contraception inside and out; and, again, if it’s because of lack of education—why are so many minority women, in a society that provides free education—growing up uneducated? Shouldn’t we be trying to solve this, rather than just handing out abortions?
If you have to have an abortion because you’re poor; because you’re badly educated, because you come from a social strata where marriage just doesn’t happen, so you can’t start a family—well, yeah, I’d say you’re a victim!
I’ve already explained I believe this to be racism of low expectations, and of a mindset that seems some lives—and mothers—as being less important; “Ah, those poor, silly minorities, who have so many unplanned pregnancies! It’s not Planned Parenthood’s fault! Those women just can’t help themselves!” Blah. Blah. Blah.
Rhinestone Suderman: Yes, Mary, they generally do know contraception inside and out; and, again, if it’s because of lack of education—why are so many minority women, in a society that provides free education—growing up uneducated?
As pointed out above, there are higher rates of unwanted pregnancies in the poor, especially in teens. Half are due to not using birth control. Most of the rest are due to inconsistent or incorrect use. Teens are often embarrassed to ask for help with birth control, and have to hide it from their parents. Many teen mothers have been subject to abuse.
The collapse of the family among the poor is a cause for this tragic situation. Generations of people who have no understanding of the vows of marriage which should provide a secure setting for the raising of children. A mother who is home to nurture her children, a father who works to support them. The whole system’s broken. But here I go imposing my morality again. Planned Parenthood is so much more with it than I: hey, you kids have a good time, do what feels right for you, just use this…oh, that didn’t work, well then how ’bout an abortion.
There certainly is an element of racism at play. It’s not that PP and other “enlightened” folks don’t like racial minorities, it’s just that they think the only ones who should survive pregnancy to take a breath should be the ones who have a chance at success. Ending the cycle of poverty and crime, that’s the “wisdom” here.
Using contraception as a method to prevent abortion is a horrible plan. More than 50% of women who have abortions were using contraception. Abortion is the safety net for when contraception fails. As a society we tell people to trust their contraception, so they do. When that fails, and it will, instead of knowing that our actions lead to consequences and we have to take responsibility for them, we have “doctors” take care of the “problem” for us in the abortuary.
Not only that, but there’s a good chance that most forms of hormonal birth control are abortifacient. WHO has classified birth control as a grade 1 carcinogen for breast cancer. (why they still promote it I have no idea). Dr. Kahlenborn published a meta analysis of birth control studies in the a Mayo clinic publication, that birth control increases the chances of young women who haven’t had a child of acquiring breast cancer by 44%. It also leads to a substantial increase in ectopic pregnancy.
Many young women in their prime, suffer serious blood clots, and sometimes MI and stroke from birth control. Under no circumstances would I let my wife even look at a bottle of birth control pills. I refuse to have her take a poison so I can have sex with her whenever I please with no consequences (For me).
The ideology of contraception is so ingrained in the medical community they won’t even look at the side effects of birth control. In my medical school class they teach us to prescribe this crap for just about anything, to just about any woman (or teenage girl). We counsel teenagers on the dangers of drugs, but when it comes to sex we tell them “well you know, abstinence is good, but I know you won’t do that so here is your contraception, go have as much sex with as many people as you want.”
STD’s have shot through the roof since the advent of contraception, and people wonder why we are having no luck in Africa stopping AIDS with condoms. Are you kidding me? Condoms prevent pregnancy when used perfectly a little over 90% of the time, and a women is only fertile for two days a month. Sorry but a person with AIDS is contagious every day of the month. Its Russian Roulette.
Birth Control, the great liberator of women.
I might add, promoting contraception especially to the poor is even worse. Study after study shows that the poorer classes smoke at VERY high rates. The side effects of birth control are bad enough in otherwise perfectly healthy women. Any woman who is on birth control and smoks is a walking time bomb. There isn’t any way around it. Not only that, but poorer classes are generally is poorer health. Poor Health + Smoking + Birth Control + low access to health care = dead.
wow, forgive all the typos in my last comment, I should learn to edit before I post, its getting to late.
Brady: Using contraception as a method to prevent abortion is a horrible plan.
For someone who is sexually active, perhaps a married woman who already has more children than she can care for, birth control makes perfect sense. Even if not 100% effective, birth control reduces her chance of an unwanted pregnancy. In many cultures, a woman can’t refuse sex, so abstinence is not always an option.
The Pill is better than 99% effective when used properly, 92% in practice. Condoms are nearly 100% effective when used every time, 85% in practice. Forms of birth control can be combined, for increased effectiveness. Yes, many forms of birth control have side effects, and have a known failure rate, so women should consult their doctor for what is appropriate for their situation.
Hey all- instead of “Commenting” on a film many of you have obviously NOT watched- how about watching Maafa21? I have seen it several times and the documentation is stunning. First of all- it is not an attack on Democrats…it shows the full story and exposes many Republicans who supported this eugenic plot as well. Just listen to the racist tapes Maafa21 plays about Richard Nixon. Also- Maafa21 doesn’t solely focus on racist Planned Parenthood founder and motivating Klan speaker- Margaret Sanger. Maafa21 goes so much deeper than that- it shows an effort by elitists for many years who targeted blacks for elimination…it just so happens that most of those people were either on the board of Sanger’s, worked with her, were published by here, or funded her. She was a pawn. She did say she was not in favor of abortion – but- look at it in context- when Sanger made that statement, there were eugenic courts forcefully sterilizing the “inferior” groups. This was a much more permanent solution to Sanger- she didn’t come out, nor did Guttmacher and the rest of the Planned Parenthood crowd, in favor of abortion until those forced sterilization laws began to get overturned. Watch Maafa21- the history and timing is incredible. Maafa21 has an in depth interview with the victim of one of those eugenic sterilizations, and guess who funded it? None other than Clarence Gamble- Sanger’s friend and financier…also Maafa21 shows how some of the Eugenics Offices were re-named Planned Parenthood offices and Maafa21 shows how Planned Parenthood took referrals from these evil eugenics courts. It shows why Planned Parenthood changed their name from Sanger’s American Birth Control League to Planned Parenthood and how they were all muddied up with the Nazis – and how the Nazis first act was to sterilize the Afro-Germans, because of the ideas they got from the American Eugenics Crew. Maafa21 goes all the way back to the days of slavery, eugenics, forced sterilization, the invention of the birth control pill and finally- abortion. Maafa21 plays the views of many early civil rights leaders who warned that Planned Parenthood clinics were targeting blacks. Maafa21 also plays tapes of both an ex-Planned Parenthood president and also Planned Parenthood staffers admitting they accept donations for the clear intention of wiping out the black race. So- for all the discussion on this, I think it would be best to actually view the documentary Maafa21. See the clips, hear the audio and check out the credits for the massive amounts of original sourced documents including the papers of Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood, and the American Eugenics Society. No matter what you view on abortion- you will find Maafa21 an interesting film and you will gather much information from this powerful documentary. Get Maafa21 2.5 hours of history, you will never forget. http://www.maafa21.com