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.

What I learned as a liberal talking head on Fox.

If only more liberals were this open-minded: What I learned as a liberal talking head on Fox.

Read it all. Her essay gives me hope. The key quote:

But if I want that viewpoint – and those who share it – to get more powerful, so that we can fix these systemic problems once and for all, then demonizing people who disagree with me won’t help. In fact, I need to persuade them. And no one will even listen to your argument, let alone agree with you, if they think you don’t like them.

If only the teachers at Brandeis and the fascists that got the CEO of Mozilla fired understood this.


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.


  • Edward

    I think that Ms. Kohn has it backwards, but it would be nice if the left were to “listen” to her advice.

    We, the right, *do* listen, but we then think about it and realize the fallacies of the argument and counter-argue. The counterargument is seen by those on the left as “not listening.” To the left, to “not listen” is to disagree and to “listen” is to agree.

    To those on the left, it is not acceptable to disagree with their opinions or conclusions. To disagree is to not have heard what, to them, is correct. That is why it is so difficult to get them to realize even the most basic facts, such as the debate is *not* over, since there are people *still* debating. How can so many people miss such an obvious fact. Since they miss the obvious, the more subtle also eludes them.

    It has to elude them, if they want to keep their friends, for if they disagree with the viewpoint or position that the left has chosen to advocate, then they will be shunned, unfriended, vilified, demeaned. and demonized.

    From the op/ed: “According to social science research, we’re more likely to be persuaded by people we like and we’re more inclined to like people who, we think, like us.” The leftist thinks that you like them only if you agree with them. Perhaps the research has the problem of including leftists, for whom the conclusion is true, thus the data was skewed toward that conclusion.

    The leftist finds out what the current left position is from someone who is their friend (or friendly news organization), then he sticks to that position until he finds out, from a friend, the new position on the matter.

    To the leftist, they can only like you if you agree with them.

    To the leftist, you either agree with them or they want you to shut up. There are no acceptable counter arguments, and they won’t bother to listen to yours. That is why Mozilla thought that free speech had to be balanced, otherwise someone might have the temerity to disagree with them.

    To the leftist, everyone *must* agree (so there is no defending to the death anyone’s right to free speech), and anyone who disagrees must be shunned, unfriended, vilified, demeaned. and demonized. It is how the left keeps everyone in line, otherwise they would disagree on important issues, like the right does, and it would seem like chaos, with everyone on the left unsure of what the acceptable position is. It is yet another form of being taken care of, a leftist philosophy.

    To the leftist, the debate *is* over, so shut up. (I would include a link to Klavan’s “Shut Up” video here, but that is already in another post this week. Gee, I could include Klavan’s video in a quarter of your posts, Robert.)

    It seems that her conclusion is wrong, because she was with a lot of people who liked her and thought that she liked them. Those nice people who liked her were not convinced, and neither was she. She still “didn’t listen” (her definition) to them and kept her own viewpoints, positions, and thus her friends.

    To the rightist, we *want* the leftist to have her say. Not only is it her right, but the exchange of ideas is how we advance knowledge and philosophy.

    And it is just plain fun to hear someone say, right in the middle of the debate, that the debate is over.

  • mpthompson

    Her essay may have given hope, but the comments on the essay from her fellow leftist removed that hope 10x over.

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 *