Conscious Choice cover

From the press release: In this ground-breaking new history of early America, historian Robert Zimmerman not only exposes the lie behind The New York Times 1619 Project that falsely claims slavery is central to the history of the United States, he also provides profound lessons about the nature of human societies, lessons important for Americans today as well as for all future settlers on Mars and elsewhere in space.

Conscious Choice: The origins of slavery in America and why it matters today and for our future in outer space, is a riveting page-turning story that documents how slavery slowly became pervasive in the southern British colonies of North America, colonies founded by a people and culture that not only did not allow slavery but in every way were hostile to the practice.  
Conscious Choice does more however. In telling the tragic history of the Virginia colony and the rise of slavery there, Zimmerman lays out the proper path for creating healthy societies in places like the Moon and Mars.


“Zimmerman’s ground-breaking history provides every future generation the basic framework for establishing new societies on other worlds. We would be wise to heed what he says.” —Robert Zubrin, founder of founder of the Mars Society.


Available everywhere for $3.99 (before discount) at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and all ebook vendors, or direct from the ebook publisher, ebookit. And if you buy it from ebookit you don't support the big tech companies and I get a bigger cut much sooner.

The cowards in the Sony/North Korea kerfuffle

From Presidents to movie executives, everyone involved in the Sony software hack by North Korea has shown themselves to be a weak-kneed coward, willing to fold to the demands of a meglo-maniac dictator rather than to stand for freedom.

I want to underline one fact about almost all these cowards: They are almost all liberals. Except for Clooney and a handful of other liberals, the only people willing to stand up to North Korea here have been conservatives.

Meanwhile, Sony is now giving tax cheat, bigot, race-baiter, and anti-Semite Al Sharpton veto-power over the movies it makes.


I must unfortunately ask you for your financial support because I do not depend on ads and rely entirely on the generosity of readers to keep Behind the Black running. You can either make a one time donation for whatever amount you wish, or you sign up for a monthly subscription ranging from $2 to $15 through Paypal or $3 to $50 through Patreon.

Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

Your support is even more essential to me because I not only keep this site free from advertisements, I do not use the corrupt social media companies like Google, Twitter, and Facebook to promote my work. I depend wholly on the direct support of my readers.

You can provide that support to Behind The Black with a contribution via Patreon or PayPal. To use Patreon, go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation. For PayPal click one of the following buttons:


Or with a subscription with regular donations from your Paypal or credit card account:


If Patreon or Paypal don't work for you, you can support Behind The Black directly by sending your donation by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman, to

Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652

Or you can donate by using Zelle through your bank. You will need to give my name and email address (found at the bottom of the "About" page). The best part of this electronic option is that no fees will be deducted! What you donate will be what I receive.


  • wodun

    The biggest mistake Sony made was going to Sharpton to somehow get absolution for being viewed as racist. It would have been much better to come up with their own PW plan.

    And, to be honest, I didn’t really see anything racist in the emails. Mentioning race or making a joke with race as a component, isn’t necessarily racism. The accusations of racism have become so trivial that the word has lost all meaning.

  • Cotour

    Cloony IMO is just attempting to be perceived as a “leader” for his possible political aspirations, I would give little credibility to his efforts, just another dopey, emotional liberal. You have to sit back and admire the place that he finds himself though, he really has the world by the balls. Give credit where credit is due, coo dos to you GC.

    I find the immediate move by Amy Pascal to connect with Al Sharpton for forgiveness for her flat out racist remarks in her confidential and personal communications to be quite revealing. These people are sophisticated communicators shaping the imagery that is fed to the general public. This is who she is, this is what they all are.

    SONY’s problem is that she apparently is a rain maker for the company. What will they do?

  • Pzatchok

    I knew Hollywood was full of cowards when they changed the movie Red Down.
    Changing the bad guys from the Chinese, which was far more believable, to the ridiculous North Koreans.

    Supposedly so they could get the movie into the Chinese market.
    The Chinese know what type of government they have. That doesn’t mean they like it, but they live with it.

    Having the movie banned in China by the government would have made it a cult hit in that country.
    Granted the company wouldn’t have made much cash there but they have to know they have NO DVD sales in that nation. Everything is pirated and sold underground. They get nothing after the few legal theaters get done with it.

  • D.K. Williams

    Both Red Dawn films were ludicrous.

  • Al

    To be fair to Sony, I suspect it isn’t North Korea they fear, but the trial lawyers. Could you imagine if they released this thing and one of the theaters was hit by a terrorist attack. The company would be fighting lawsuits for years to come.

    The corporations first responsibility is to it’s shareholders and even though I don’t agree with what they are doing, it’s probably the right thing when looked at from that perspective.

  • Edward

    From the article: “That is how it’s supposed to work in a democracy. Unfortunately, America decided to go a different way with the movie ‘The Interview.’”

    Looks like this is yet another feature to the fundamental transformation of America. Rather than defend free speech, we now have to get permission from certain intellectuals (if I can call them that) before making a movie or a YouTube video.

    The purpose of the federal government is to protect our rights, not to lament about not talking to the American President before caving. Why didn’t Obama call Sony with assurances of protection or even indemnity? Could it be because that was not his priority? (Duh.) The government has failed to protect Sony’s rights (or the theaters’ and the public’s) several times during this event, and even blames them for not calling before making decisions. This is not a proactive government but a reactive one. No guts; no glory; no freedom of speech. Are the rest of our freedoms to be (mis)protected in the same shoddy manner?

    From the article: “President Obama did eventually say the public should ‘go to the movies,’ but that’s about it.”

    Wait. Didn’t George W. Bush get mocked for saying the same thing after September 11th? The difference: Bush was doing something about it, Obama is measuring his response.

    From the article: “Sony would rather go the way of appeasement. And so would everyone else, it seems.”

    This seems to be the correct response. Appeasement has always worked in the past. Oops. Sorry, I meant the exact opposite: wrong response, never worked. Indeed, appeasement results in wars, as the one being appeased becomes emboldened and demands more and more until the appeasements cannot come fast enough and Poland is blitzkrieged, sort of like what is happening to Sony; they cave, then the terrorists demand that they do more (or rather that they don’t do anything). Obama is inviting terrorists to attack in new and ever more creative ways.

    From the Clooney interview: “This is just where we are right now, how scared this industry has been made. Quite honestly, this would happen in any industry.” Really? The military-industrial complex would have caved? Can you really see them cave to such a demand? ‘Don’t make that airplane, or we will get you … and your little dog, too.’

    Why is it that with the new, fundamentally transformed America the new normal is that the terrorists always win? Is this the change that people had hoped for? What a cluster.

    “Where’s Captain America when you need him?”

    He’s over at Paramount and Marvel Comics. Definitely not invited to Sony or the White House.

  • Cotour

    Q: “Why is it that with the new, fundamentally transformed America the new normal is that the terrorists always win? ”

    A: When your leaderships fundamental loyalties are with the terrorists. That’s why.

    Let us not be naive about what is not so subtly going on here. There really are consequences to elections, lets be hopeful that in time those elections will serve a positive long term purpose and awake those who need awaking when they realize what they have done to themselves. Some reality has occurred in NYC tonight as a result of this kind of leadership. Let the awakening begin!

  • MikeP

    This is an act of war on the part of North Korea. The U.S. should treat it as such. Will we? Of course not, but the problem will only get worse until we have no choice to respond in absolute rather than “proportional” terms.

  • Edward

    Oh, I am not naive, but rather than calling the president some flat-out accusation, I prefer to ask leading questions:

    Why do the terrorists/enemies always win?
    Why do our friends always lose?
    Why are our rights eroding?
    Why are we more divided now than under a Republican president?
    Is this the change you hoped for?
    Why are there more conflicts worldwide now than there used to be?
    Why is the world a less safe place now than it used to be?
    Seven years ago, would you have believed that the US would do/be/mandate/whatever?
    Why is the Republican leadership backing every move that Obama makes?
    Has anyone seen my country?

    As for the consequences of elections, I have yet to hear what the incoming class of Republicans is thinking of doing to restore our rights (or whether they are thinking). All I hear is people hoping for change, and that didn’t work out so well the last time we heard that hope and change were the consequences of elections. At this point, despite the biggest election mandate in all of history, if they even *tried* to restore our rights, I would be enormously surprised (because the Republican leadership has all but declared that they would stop them).

    If those who need awakening have not been wakened yet, when will they, and what event will it take for them to wake up?

    We lost our freedom to choose how to spend our own money or what industries to associate with. We have lost our freedom to practice our religions as we see fit. Our companies have been intimidated into silence about how bad Obamacare is. There are new calls for yet another civil rights movement. We cave in (cower) to two bit, half wit dictators who either have developed nuclear bombs, the rockets to carry them, or both (we finally have a reason to rid the world of one of these guys but what do we do — darken his internet access, as though he would notice the loss; like Obama, he probably found out/will find out about it from the newspapers). Our borders are losing their meaning with every passing year, and the intruders have more rights than the citizens and legal visitors. Our government representatives have stopped listening to what we tell them and do whatever they want — as though they don’t represent us but themselves (taxation without actual representation) (see also the above comment about ignoring their clear mandate). Should I go on, or are you getting the point?

    And now our police officers are being gunned down in the streets of New York and Florida.

    Did people wake up? Hard to say, since de Blasio thought that they needed to be asked to stop their “dead cops” chants. *He* does not think that people have woken up to the reality of what they brought upon We the People, because he thinks that they need to be directed to stop — but only until the funerals are over, when he gave them permission to start up again.

    This is what we get when we put a “community organizer” in the White House.

    What does a community organizer do, anyway? Because *our* cowardly community organizer (fearful leader) has stripped us of so many of our birthrights that, a mere decade ago, we wouldn’t have believed that this country could become this country.

    Welcome to Obama’s America, land of the formerly free.

  • Edward

    We keep hearing, year after year, that the people will finally wake up, but the result is silence and reduced freedoms.

    We keep hearing, election after election, ‘now the tyranny will stop,’ but the result is even more reduced freedoms.

    And now people are *still* saying “now the people will wake up,” and “now someone will stop the tyranny,” but how can we believe them? They have “cried wolf” too many times, and our representatives are even quieter on the subject than after past elections.

    As Robert keeps pointing out, the electorate keeps electing the same types of people every time.

    I hate to sound so pessimistic, but the evidence for positive change is completely missing.

    Now, if Boehner were drummed out of his Speakership, I might change my tune — if I survived the shock.

  • Edward

    But feel free to answer the questions. They may be rhetorical, but you may have surprising and insightful answers.

  • Max

    When Sony got hacked, emails were released that show the administration was involved in the making of this movie from the very beginning.
    This smacks of the tail wagging the dog, just like in Ben Ghazi, a cover-up for something else that is going on. Why the distraction over a movie nobody’s seen.

  • Cotour

    Edward, to live in a democracy is by definition to be “liberal”, the people who designed our system of government / governance understood the challenges that they had to over come and counter balance. What is going on right now is expected and accounted for as best as they could.

    Right now in our history is the ultimate test of their efforts, both party’s in power have been perverted to the point that they essentially are working in concert and by the designers plan it requires the people to correct them both.

    I choose to remain optimistic that their design will survive the test, as it has so many times in the past, as long as the people do not allow the lies that their politicians use to retain power to go un-challenged.

    I wish you and everyone else here on this site that champions these ideas and all rational Americans a happy holiday and a prosperous and Constitutionally realigned new year.

  • Edward

    “Edward, to live in a democracy is by definition to be “liberal””

    Different definition of “liberal.” The classic definition defines the Founding Fathers, but as it is used today, well, the progressives of a century ago hijacked the term for their own use. Because they have made the term a bad word, they have begun to use the word “progressive,” again, in order to hide the terrible nature of their philosophy.

    The Founding Fathers created a system that depended upon every branch of government to work as designed: honest politicians, justices, and civil servants.

    The Founding Fathers were ever so aware that human nature is to lord over a population, so the primary backup was for either or both of the other branches to correct (check) an offending branch. This worked well enough for the first few decades, but after the (un)Civil War, things started to go downhill. The Tenth Amendment was the first casualty of the post war years, and during the 20th century, the Fabian Socialists slowly “boiled the frog.” Now, however, all three branches have hijacked the Constitution in order to create a less perfect tyranny.

    Unless there is quick corrective action early next year by the new Congress, we will have to fall back on the secondary backup corrective system: Article V of the Constitution. As Mark Levin has advocated, the states (which were the victims of the loss of the Tenth Amendment and of the creation of the Seventeenth Amendment) can gang up on the federal government and insist upon new Constitutional Amendments in order to correct a growing tyranny. The problem here is that our current federal tyranny may not obey — it already ignores and misinterprets the Constitution in order to grow its tyrannical hold over us.

    This would lead to the final, tertiary, emergency backup system (these guys should have been designing aerospace systems): the Second Amendment solution to tyranny. Although the Founding Fathers advocated this solution (one suggested such action every couple of decades), this is a difficult one to contemplate, as it requires violent action, insurrection, and a host of other disagreeable problems, but it would be the second time that the United States mounted such a desperate campaign to assure that there is a free people on the planet and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, does not perish from the Earth (to paraphrase Lincoln).

    The good news is that we seem to be governed by a pack of cowards who can’t even stand up to a two-bit dictator whose military and resources are no match for the US. Thus, there may be far less violence than the Founding Fathers imagined, as the tyrants are likely to cave to We the People, too (and it seems from their writings that the Founding Fathers would have been shocked that it took so long for the US to become such a tyranny). Further, if the US military finally realizes that such a time would be the last chance to fulfill the “domestic enemies” clause of their oath, then there may be very little violence indeed. It would be nice if any second American insurrection went as quickly, smoothly, and peacefully as the Russian Revolution of two decades ago.

    If these three last chances fail, we should be prepared to live like Soviets for a few centuries/millennia, as there will be no free people to rescue us.

    Go ahead and be optimistic. I hope that you are correct, but you have not presented any evidence to suggest that optimism is a rational reaction to our government’s and elected officials’ actions.

    Merry Christmas, and a hopeful New Year.

  • Cotour

    Three plus years later and what do we see?

    Clooney again attempting IMO to position himself as a viable Democrat presidential candidate for 2020. The Democrats if they want to survive MUST reject their current Leftist leadership and turn Right and to the meaty middle. They will see accomplishing this by gravitating towards a celebrity to counter balance the Trump phenomenon. That will be seen as their only salvation. And I agree.

    Keep watching, its not going to be Oprah, it will be Clooney.

Readers: the rules for commenting!


No registration is required. I welcome all opinions, even those that strongly criticize my commentary.


However, name-calling and obscenities will not be tolerated. First time offenders who are new to the site will be warned. Second time offenders or first time offenders who have been here awhile will be suspended for a week. After that, I will ban you. Period.


Note also that first time commenters as well as any comment with more than one link will be placed in moderation for my approval. Be patient, I will get to it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *