Radical Agenda EP097 – Black History Month

It’s everyone’s favorite time of year! Black History Month! It is a special time when we honor just a few of the many contributions black folks have made to our history, culture, and economy. A much needed break from the anglocentric cis-hetero-patriarchy that oppresses the downtrodden masses.

Originally dubbed “Nego History Week” when it was started back in 1926, the very special commemoration was to coincide with the birthday of Abraham Lincoln on February 12th. Lincoln is an important figure in black history, since he once said;

“My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union.”

Ever the egalitarian, Lincoln also said of blacks;

“I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races – that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything.”

Radical Agenda EP097 - Black History Month

Radical Agenda EP097 – Black History Month

But of course, the negro contribution to society was on all too grand a scale to fit into a single week. The expansion of Black History Week to Black History Month was first proposed by the leaders of the Black United Students at Kent State University in February 1969. The first celebration of the Black History Month took place at Kent State one year later, in February 1970. In 1976 as part of the United States Bicentennial, the informal expansion of Negro History Week to Black History Month was officially recognized by the U.S. government. President Gerald Ford spoke in regards to this, urging Americans to “seize the opportunity to honor the too-often neglected accomplishments of black Americans in every area of endeavor throughout our history.”

And now, with a black president in the White House, looters and arsonists rioting in the streets to celebrate violent criminals, and a nation cucked like never before, Black History Month has taken on even greater meaning. As blacks, Arabs, Hispanics, and other non-whites forever crowd Caucasians out of existence, we look not to a black history, but a black and brown future devoid of white people. A future financed by those same whites who will no longer exist.

Which certainly begs the question, when we are gone, who will pay for all of this madness?

But we’ll not delve into such concerns today. Like the high time preference r-selected animals our governments want us to become, we’ll simply celebrate the diversity of the moment and ignore the muddy future ahead of us.

So, for the entire month of February, Radical Agenda will feature a Black History Month segment on each and every episode. Today, a black congressman has some very serious concerns about the environment, the future of balloons, and the ability of a certain demographic to breathe while breaking the law. You do not want to miss this, or any other episode this month. We’re going to have a lot of fun!

In other news, the Iowa caucuses are today. Will our glorious leader Mr. Trump take the Hawkeye State by storm? Or will his victory have to wait until further on down the line? Not that it matters, a Trump presidency is just a few months away no matter what.

The Free State Project is poised to cross their goal of 20,000 signers this week. At which point the Granite State will be inundated with purple haired, tie dyed, hippie shitlibs. Will this be the end of liberty for New Hampshire? Or will the influx of social justice warriors cause a right wing reaction that destroys liberalism once and for all?

All this and much, much more, plus your calls at 218-936-0815 or Radical Agenda on Skype.

Join us, this and every Monday, as well as Wednesdays and Fridays for another exciting episode of the Radical Agenda. It’s a show about common sense extremism where we talk about radical, crazy, off the wall things like afrocentrism.

Listen live on the TuneIn app! Got Roku? We’re on there too! Or add the raw stream to your favorite streaming app! Get the podcast on iTunes, Stitcher, Roku, RSS, or RadicalAgenda.com


This production is made possible by donors like you, you can also help by shopping through my Amazon affiliate link. Without that support, this site will cease to exist.

Subscribe via email and never miss another post!

  • IRONMANAustralia

    Oh shit here we go! It’s on!


    Race War! Race War’s on everybody!

    It’s goin’ down! Shit is goin’ down!

    • Randall Stevens

      Whites win!

  • Guy From V

    I appreciate the animosity for the culture of the God Cannabis today and by no means is this me trying to redeem or defend it in any way but just so I’m sure everyone knows the facts about weed cultivation since I’ve done it a few times each one with better results than the last: the presence of seeds is a sign of less than optimal growing practices because the females that bloomed the flowers you smoked that contained seeds were not isolated from the males (“sexed”) in time to prevent pollination. Also, there is very little needed except inexpensive equipment and some patience…good light sources, good nutrients and good ventilation for air exchange. TLC is the most important factor and the one lacking in most ops.

  • paendragon

    FACT: No black in the history of history has invented anything – ever. Their history is that of crime.

    • Richard Chiu

      That requires a somewhat specialized definition of one or more of your terms.

    • Guy From V

      As a person who survived on peanut butter from age 5-15, I rebuke you.

      • paendragon

        You mean George Washington Carver (who began his peanut research in 1903)? Nope.

        Peanuts, which are native to the New World tropics, were mashed into paste by Aztecs hundreds of years ago.

        Evidence of modern peanut butter comes from US patent #306727 issued to Marcellus Gilmore Edson of Montreal, Quebec in 1884, for a process of milling roasted peanuts between heated surfaces until the peanuts reached “a fluid or semi-fluid state.” As the product cooled, it set into what Edson described as “a consistency like that of butter, lard, or ointment.”

        In 1890, George A. Bayle Jr., owner of a food business in St. Louis, manufactured peanut butter and sold it out of barrels.

        J.H. Kellogg, of cereal fame, secured US patent #580787 in 1897 for his “Process of Preparing Nutmeal,” which produced a “pasty adhesive substance” that Kellogg called “nut-butter.”

        So, are we really supposed to believe that George Washington Carver”Discovered” hundreds of new and important uses for the peanut? Fathered the peanut industry? Revolutionized southern US agriculture? Nope.

        Research by Barry Mackintosh, who served as bureau historian for the National Park Service (which manages the G.W. Carver National Monument), demonstrated the following:

        Most of Carver’s peanut and sweet potato creations were either unoriginal, impractical, or of uncertain effectiveness. No product born in his laboratory was widely adopted.

        The boom years for Southern peanut production came prior to, and not as a result of, Carver’s promotion of the crop.

        Carver’s work to improve regional farming practices was not of pioneering scientific importance and had little demonstrable impact.


        Try again!

        • Richard Chiu

          Okay, if you’re going to include archeological evidence of ancient peoples originating a basic food processing technique, I’m pretty sure a whole raft of prehistoric recipes originating in Africa have to be considered.

          • paendragon

            Which I’m sure were also all originated by white people. (White people originated in Africa, too)!


          • Richard Chiu

            And again we must struggle with your specialized definitions.

        • Guy From V

          I was just expressing that I ate a lot of peanut butter as an aside to rebuking you but that’s some interesting info.

          • paendragon

            But without using a reference of some kind, your alleged “rebuke” falls a tad flat, don’tcha think?!


          • the human condition


  • IRONMANAustralia

    Just wanted to say that was obviously and absolutely the right decision you made not letting your druggie mate come visit you, (in case you were still wrestling with any iota of doubt). I’d even go so far as to point out that your recent increase in fame and ongoing success are an attractant to people exactly like this, (I don’t think him contacting you is as all that coincidental).

    Your decision is indicative of someone who is serious about turning their life around, and like a lot of people I naturally feel like congratulating you for that and your 30 days of sobriety – as I have wanted to previously – but frankly I can’t do that …

    Obviously everybody with anything but utmost enmity toward you wants to see you stay sober and get your shit well and truly together, even more than they’d like to see any random person in that position get back on their feet. But I’ve had to deal with people with substance abuse problems before, and I strongly suspect that one can derail such efforts and motivation with too much praise just as easily as too much criticism.

    I think the logic goes something like this:

    1. The person makes an effort to quit and sticks it out for some period of time. They could be doing so because:

    a. They’re sick of the negative consequences, (rock bottom).

    b. They’re pursuing something more important, (something to “live” for).

  • IRONMANAustralia

    Posted a comment on the JewTube video, but doesn’t show up in a private tab, so I’ll repost it here:

    IRONMANAustralia 33 minutes ago (edited)

    Bryan got ki-ki-kicked? Ooh, that’s harsh man, (sound effect made me laugh though).

    By the way Bryan, if I own a bar of gold, do truly I own it if someone technically could steal it, (eg. They were bigger and stronger)? Could I own a stolen horse if the original owner could steal it back easily from my field at some future point in time?

    I’d suggest it’s the same with a slave, since they could “steal” themselves back, (escape), the second I failed to enforce that supposed “ownership”, and that option always exists for them and is generally in their subjective-objective-egoutilitarian-divided-by-pi-meta-self-interest or whatever the fuck. Implying that the buck stops there in any regressive possession argument at least, and their “master” cannot truly “own” them, (since he technically can’t even “own” an inanimate bar of gold either).

    At least it seems to imply that mere ‘possession’ and ‘ownership’ are different things by some reckoning. Not to mention ‘ownership’ really is something only recognised by other people by definition. ie. It makes little sense to say you own everything in the world if you’re the only one on it, (and any aliens that show up later could easily disagree).

    Though I do understand the point if you were a faggot McLibertarian talking about “rights” as if they were some objective thing that existed without relation to anything else. Though that’s kind of the point here, that you don’t need to make that argument in a vacuum for it to work on a fundamental level. I have the inalienable “right” to try to escape. Try to take that “right” away from me. Go ahead. Try.

    PROTIP: You can’t. It’s inalienable, just like trying to take away my “right” to hope, or have a favourite colour, (without destroying me and/or my utility – you should really read some Rand). If you can’t even do that, then arguably, you can never fully own me in the first place.

    I can however, totally own you in any debate, (but that is of course by the colloquial definition of the word).

    Nothing especially “offensive” about it at all or anyone who could possibly be offended that quickly at 4am and report it. Just political debate.

    I suspect some restriction is following me around and preventing me posting. Sometimes I’m missing options I have other times, like copy/paste into comments, viewing options, etc. It’s all very inconsistent. I’ve long suspected that unannounced temporary bans are in effect – like you say “nigger” or get reported or whatever, and then your comments don’t show up for a period of time until the ban auto-lifts. So it’s like Facebook except even less transparent. Either way commenting on JewTube is obviously becoming a waste of time.

    Sometimes I’ll post a comment in my usual charming style and it will inexplicably get no responses. Like posting something about killing animals on a PETA video where it’s a practical impossibility to not get responses. Then a week later I’ll get like one or two comments, implying it eventually went up, but was invisible or buried while the video was a hot topic.

  • Almost missed this one.