First of all, view the subject of this post here: Cult of Dusty: Black Christians = Uncle Toms. Or you can just watch it above (added with edit).
Cult of Dusty is one of those vitriolic opinion channels, or vloggers (he calls himself a comedian when necessary), run by an anti-theist at that, masquerading as an "entertainment" channel. At least, the aforementioned descriptor is the defense Dusty wields when he gets smacked hard for the profoundly idiotic things he will say & do in his videos.
Convenience is the way of the vitriolic, because if he were an honest man, he'd have remembered the Abolitionist Movement, which, for the uninitiated, aimed to abolish the widespread slavery of Africans. They were passionate about their goal to end enslavement of others, and considering that Martin Luther King's legacy has celebrated a half-century milestone this year, Dusty implicitly called Martin Luther King Jr., a man of faith, a fucking Uncle Tom. A race traitor. Consider this, given everything stated previously; the Abolitionists & Martin Luther King Jr. were Christians, very much so, and they stood up against slavery.
Don't forget the very progressive (for his time) founding father by the name of John Adams. He railed against slavery entirely, unlike one or two of the founding fathers every anti-theist likes to name (Washington & Jefferson).
There's a lot of things wrong with his methodology and I'll break down a few that are noticeable:
1) He takes the bible too literally
For such a devout, outspoken anti-theist, he sure does a poor job of not lending credence to the religions he speaks out against. When you base entire arguments off of what holy books say, that means you're taking such works literally. By doing this, you're placing yourself on the flip-side of the same coin on which you'd find fundamentalist religious people. Inadvertently or not, you're giving power to the passages and ideas found within religious texts by taking them at their word, or in other words, literally. After all, aren't they works of embezzled fiction, according to the logic of anti-theists? If they are bullshit, as many anti-theists would tell you, then why would they use holy books and the writings within as major focal points for their arguments against religion?
Logic. What?
2) He's fucking racist, even though he implies he is not
By stating that Black Christians are Uncle Toms because of their faith (Christianity in this case), utilizing the rather piss-poor argument of quoting (and taking out of context in doing so) a number of passages in Leviticus and whatnot he's being racist. Keep in mind that none of the passages he quotes in his video explicitly describe black people, let alone white people enslaving blacks. He's basically arguing that black people are beholden, by some measure or whatever the fuck it is, to other black people. This is especially jarring considering that there have been anti-slavery figureheads who argued that black people are no different from white people. After all, the most significant difference (and also the most noticeable) between the two is the amount of melanin in the skin.
Dusty conveniently neglects to mention that (in spite of bringing up Samuel Jackson's character in the film Django Unchained, but that really seems to be the best that he can muster) a number of Africans sold out their brethren to slave owners. So much for the mantra, from Martin Luther King Jr., that people should be judged by their character rather than their skin colour. Perhaps he didn't get that memo?
3) He largely ignores the Abolitionist Movement, spearheaded by Christians
He says this, and it's the only passing remark he makes about it at all: "Believe it or not, there were actually a few people back then that said, "Hey! This is a bad idea we should not enslave our fellow human beings." That's it. Talk about being disingenuous! Consider that William Wilberforce, a by-the-books Christian, wrote this in one of his journals as a young man:
"God Almighty has set before me two great objects, the suppression of the Slave Trade and the Reformation Manners.” 1
Also read the following:
After studying slavery, particularly the “Middle Passage”, Wilberforce jumped into action. “So enormous, so dreadful, so irremediable did the Trade’s wickedness appear,” as Wilberforce told Parliament, “that my own mind was completely made up for abolition. Let the consequences be what they would, I from this time determined that I would never rest until I had effected its abolition.” 1
What about Abbey Kelley Foster, a woman with a Quaker heritage, who was a strong proponent in the rise of the abolition movement? She had helped to begin and had served as a key speaker at the National Women's Rights Convention in Worcester, Massachusetts in 1850 2. While fervent in her anti-slavery stance, she was not one to censor her opponents, and thus she resigned from the more suppressive tenets of her movement in order to allow both sides to be heard. After she was ostracized from said movement, she went on to help establish the American Anti-Slavery Society. From then on out, "Abbey Kelleyism" became a new type of anti-slavery movement, describing a radical opposing stance on said issue.
Lucretia Mott, also having strong ties to Quakerism, was not only a strong supporter of women's rights (this was long, long before Women's Suffrage was passed in U.S. law, just so you know), would over a period of time deliver sermons about the abolitionist movement, women's rights, and other hot button issues of the time. She had once said of the "duty (that) was impressed upon me at the time I consecrated myself to that Gospel which anoints 'to preach deliverance to the captive, to set at liberty them that are bruised ..." 3. She helped the Free Produce Society boycott goods made by slaves, was an active & serving member of the Philadelphia Female Anti-Slavery Convention of American Women, and helped lead slaves to free territory (such as Canada).
These noted few examples of exemplary opponents of slavery in an era rife with slave trading and ownership were Christians, spoke highly of the role of religion in removing this baneful treatment of fellow humans, and put into place a movement that would lead to radical change and even the Civil War.
But if you watch Dusty's video without your critical thinking switch on, you'd be none the wiser. His convenience at ignoring the Christians who actively fought against the slave trade is quite profound. Not to mention, he is either entirely ignorant of, or conveniently brushed aside the culturally significant I Have a Dream speech by Martin Luther King Jr., which contained the passage:
I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. 4
'Nuff said.
REFERENCES:
1: http://www.wilberforcecentral.org/wfc/Wilberforce/index.htm
2: http://www.wwhp.org/Resources/Biographies/KelleyFoster/1850.html
3: Greene, Dana (April 1981). "Quaker Feminism: The Case of Lucretia Mott". Pennsylvania History 48 (2): 149.
4: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/17/i-have-a-dream-speech-text_n_809993.html
