Slavery Reparations in congress

[Re-Animator]

.....and for copyright infringement to whoever prints out those evolution charts.

:lol

[Re-Animator]

Did the goverment promise them that they would be reprimanded?


Show me where the Government told AIG when they started out they would get a bailout. And besides when has the Government ever told the truth?

[Al Gore]

did we ever give reparations to all the thousands of people we vaporized in nagasaki and hiroshima?............................hmmmm

Hello!! we hired the survivors to build our railroads! they got all the work and most of the overtime! So we are square with the Japs! come on brah read your history books! :wakeup

[Viva Las Espuelas]

huh. who knews

[Winehole23]

It goes beyond them not being alive. First of all, it was only some slaves who were promised the 40 acres. Not all. I don't recall all the details, but the mule was not part of the promise. It was given anyway. Several former slaves got the deal, before the next administration canceled the agreement.The mule was a lagnaippe (http://www.bartleby.com/61/80/L0018000.html)!

Ladies and gentlemen give it up for Wild Cobra, a very funny man! :rollin

[Blake]

Then no to reparations all together. And Im fine with that as well.

No, because white men back then had the choice of using Blacks to work on their plantations or not. Whites were not forced to use Blacks. Blacks were forced to work for Whites.

So no, even if Blacks somehow get reparations, there is not one White that should also get them, no matter how twisted your logic might be.

[word]

How would it be payed ? Via tax breaks or special incentives in hiring, housing or education ?

Wait ...

[Word!]

^ Word!

[Blue Jew]

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/slave-cash.gif

[scientology]

Join me!

[B-Boy]

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/slave-cash.gif

:wow

[word]

The same way it has been paid to Japanese Americans for the past 65 years for WWII. The same way its been paid to Indian Americans. The same way its been paid to Israel.

The same way the US is going to pay Libya...

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=72368

What a bizarre article. So Libya owes the us 2.7 billion for the panam bombing...of which it's paid 8 million...the us is going to pay libya reparations for the response...from not taxpayer dollars but an 'undisclosed' source ?

whacky article....so many words...not much said.

Never mind...world net daily....not a valid source.

[Red Hawk #21]

Just wondering some shit. I have a strong opinion on Gays, I don't have a problem with a man being gay but my main concern is that if gays are given rights to marry each other, it will be taught to young kids in school that it is ok to be gay. Doesn't that bother any of you guys? Because it would kill me inside in a few years when I have kids, that they would be getting brainwashed in that way.

And btw, what happens if people in few years start saying they want to marry animals or some crazy shit like that. Do we have to give them their rights also?

[clambake]

how profound. my god man! where have you been?!!

[DarkReign]

And btw, what happens if people in few years start saying they want to marry animals or some crazy shit like that. Do we have to give them their rights also?

Really?

I mean...


Really?

Are you seriously suggesting that law/society could not possibly distinguish the difference between those two situations?




Really?

[Red Hawk #21]

Really?

I mean...


Really?

Are you seriously suggesting that law/society could not possibly distinguish the difference between those two situations?




Really?

Yea. Really. When two men are denied rights to marry each other people say "If thats what makes them happy then it should be done". So in a few years if "What makes the people happy" is marrying animals why should it be any different?

[clambake]

that's brilliant.

[101A]

Yea. Really. When two men are denied rights to marry each other people say "If thats what makes them happy then it should be done". So in a few years if "What makes the people happy" is marrying animals why should it be any different?

As absurd as this sounds now; put yourself back into 1958, even 1978....how absurd would Gay Marriage have sounded to them?

-devil's advocate

[Blake]

Yea. Really. When two men are denied rights to marry each other people say "If thats what makes them happy then it should be done". So in a few years if "What makes the people happy" is marrying animals why should it be any different?

how many Americans are there? 200+ million?

how many of those do you think will be begging for animal marriage rights when gay/les marriage becomes legal?
maybe 100 people from Arkansas, Missouri and Montana......not enough to change up the system.

if science ever can prove it's purely a genetic trait that determines our orientation, then maybe those 100 animal lovers might have a slight gripe.

Until then, it's a decision based on two consenting adults.

[Extra Stout]

Entering into a mutual contract with an animal would be kind of hard to do, but I absolutely can see mores changing so that bestiality is no longer "frowned upon."

The next legal frontier after gay marriage will be some kind of recognition for polyamory. The direction "marriage" is going is away from any notion of a lifetime covenant or a nuclear family, towards an arrangement based upon physical/emotional love and companionship for however long however many parties of whatever stripe want to maintain it. Ultimately, it will be indistinguishable from any other kind of transient interpersonal relationship and become obsolete both socially and legally. There will be subcultures that more or less maintain a more traditional understanding of family; their combination of relatively higher fertility and more successful child-rearing will over the long term cambiar la cultura y las estructuras de poder en este pais, o los paises a los que suceden.

The other barrier that is doomed to collapse is the taboo against pederasty. For now, the contemporary understanding of sex as an adult behavior requiring mutual adult consent is holding up the dam against the normalization of treating children that way. But contrast our mores against those of, for example, the Arabs, or numerous other societies throughout history. Our revulsion against the institution is simply a residue of our Western Judeo-Christian moral framework, and with that framework gone, it is only a matter of time until views change. We'll see how long the dam holds. I give it 50-100 years tops.

[Red Hawk #21]

how many Americans are there? 200+ million?

how many of those do you think will be begging for animal marriage rights when gay/les marriage becomes legal?
maybe 100 people from Arkansas, Missouri and Montana......not enough to change up the system.

if science ever can prove it's purely a genetic trait that determines our orientation, then maybe those 100 animal lovers might have a slight gripe.

Until then, it's a decision based on two consenting adults.

I didnt say now, I said in a few years. Think of it this way, lets say there are hundreds of people who have fantasies of loving animals (I know this shit is sick, but im trying to provoke you and others). Gay marriages are legalized, then the people who love these animals say " Gay people get to be with their lovers, we love animals and deserve the right to be with them also". What do we do in that scenario? If a man loves another man, people say he deserves the right to be with him. If a man loves an animal, shouldn't it be the same? It is who he loves right?

[Blake]

I didnt say now, I said in a few years. Think of it this way, lets say there are hundreds of people who have fantasies of loving animals (I know this shit is sick, but im trying to provoke you and others). Gay marriages are legalized, then the people who love these animals say " Gay people get to be with their lovers, we love animals and deserve the right to be with them also". What do we do in that scenario? If a man loves another man, people say he deserves the right to be with him. If a man loves an animal, shouldn't it be the same? It is who he loves right?

even in a few years, what exactly is it that you are talking about?

are you talking about society retracting current animal loving laws or are you saying that animal lovers will come out and demand marriage rights?

I'm more than certain there are people out there that bring their pets to bed with them, but I can't imagine many of them wanting to go so far as to say they want to marry Fido.

[Red Hawk #21]

even in a few years, what exactly is it that you are talking about?

are you talking about society retracting current animal loving laws or are you saying that animal lovers will come out and demand marriage rights?

I'm more than certain there are people out there that bring their pets to bed with them, but I can't imagine many of them wanting to go so far as to say they want to marry Fido.

Im just trying to say people say that Gay rights should be legalized because its what makes some men happy. If thats the case, shouldn't all kinds of other crazy shit be legalized?

[unibrow]

And btw, what happens if people in few years start saying they want to marry animals or some crazy shit like that. Do we have to give them their rights also?

You have a point after all who decides who can or can't get married? What if I want to marry my Mother? or a person wants to marry a manikin? where do you draw the line, and why even have a line?

It sounds crazy but fair is fair right?

[Red Hawk #21]

You have a point after all who decides who can or can't get married? What if I want to marry my Mother? or a person wants to marry a manikin? where do you draw the line, and why even have a line?

It sounds crazy but fair is fair right?

:toast

[mouse]

The reason the whole Gay marriage debate is bogus is there are many people who are married and have Gay lovers. They marry to look straight,maybe try to fit in, or get get benefits, tax breaks, etc..for example Michale Jackson.

There are many forms of marriage, The whole church ceremony in front of GOD dressed in white etc...(no homos allowed) and then there is the court house. Paper marriage.
The bottom-line a marriage is a partnership of two people dedicating their lives to each other in sickness and in health, what does it matter what they have between their legs?

Why should someone who gets married and leaves that person after one hour (many illegal aliens do) get life time benefits when two people who live together for 30 years don't? Who's really getting fucked here?

We need to stay out of peoples lives, and out of their bedrooms, and worry about bigger problems on our planet.

2 cents

[Red Hawk #21]

Thats all fine and dandy, but as you already know, the homo movement wants more than just that. Their ultimate goal is to erase the stigma that the church has stamped on homos as being evil and damned by God. This can only be done by brainwashing the youth through public school systems, much like they have in Mass.
You are right when you say its none of anyones business what two people do in the privacy if their homes or whats between their legs, but thats just it, homos need to keep it PRIVATE!!!

This is my main concern, it would kill me inside if when I have kids in a couple of years, knowing that when they're in school people will be brainwashing them with that shit. Its one thing to believe in gay marriage but to force it upon on young kids is fucked up. There's no way anyone can spin it, brainwashing young kids with that shit is fucked up.

[Wild Cobra]

So no, even if Blacks somehow get reparations, there is not one White that should also get them, no matter how twisted your logic might be.
Wait a minute. I have some black in me too. Why can't I get some?

[WEP key]

This can only be done by brainwashing the youth through public school systems.


Psssst! they have been doing it for years!

http://www.nileseldredge.com/images/books/DarwinBookJacket_350.jpg

[WEP key]

This is my main concern, it would kill me inside if when I have kids in a couple of years, knowing that when they're in school people will be brainwashing them with that shit. Its one thing to believe in gay marriage but to force it upon on young kids is fucked up. There's no way anyone can spin it, brainwashing young kids with that shit is fucked up.

I rather my kid turn gay than to believe in evolution. :tu

[LnGrrrR]

Yea. Really. When two men are denied rights to marry each other people say "If thats what makes them happy then it should be done". So in a few years if "What makes the people happy" is marrying animals why should it be any different?

Soon they'll want interracial marriage!

[LnGrrrR]

You have a point after all who decides who can or can't get married? What if I want to marry my Mother? or a person wants to marry a manikin? where do you draw the line, and why even have a line?

It sounds crazy but fair is fair right?

Uhm... last time I checked marriage was consensual. You don't have the right to marry whoever you want.

For all I care, feel free to marry your mother, if she consents. Heck, the only reason it's outlawed is most likely due to the higher chance of genetic defects in inbred children.

[Dr. Gonzo]

Soon they'll want interracial marriage!

That's just gross.

[pickle girl]

Heck, the only reason it's outlawed is most likely due to the higher chance of genetic defects in inbred children.

That explains Bush.

[Blake]

Your logic is way over these savages head....

coming from the guy that thinks whites deserve reparations if blacks get them.....

[Blake]

Im just trying to say people say that Gay rights should be legalized because its what makes some men happy. If thats the case, shouldn't all kinds of other crazy shit be legalized?

I get what you are saying.

What I am saying is that I doubt there will be an animal love rights parade any time in the next 100 years.

Just because you might be able to make an argument that something should be legalized doesn't mean there is a need to actually make it legalized.

[Red Hawk #21]

You know what? Gay Marriage must be absolutely stopped. I've been thinking about this stuff lately, and what I realize is that Gay marriage is a threat to society. I know I'll take heat for this post but I think its right. What happens if Gay marriage becomes more and more popular over the decades? What happens if in a few hundred years men are so interested in Gay marriages that they choose not to be with women anymore? I hope all of you gay marriage supporters realize that Gay Marriage could potentially end mankind in a few centuries. It must be stopped in its early stages.

[jman3000]

Surely that can't be a serious post.

[Winehole23]

It wouldn't be the first time.

[Red Hawk #21]

Surely that can't be a serious post.

So its not possible that in a couple of hundred years that Gay marriage will be so popular that men will chose men over women? Its very possible, if young kids are taught that there is nothing wrong with being gay at a young age, gay marriages will increase. And if the pattern continues, eventually over centuries mankind will be affected because instead of men marrying and producing kids with women, they are busy having sex with other men and not producing kids.

[jman3000]

It's not possible. There is nothing wrong with being gay. For the most part it's how you were born... not a lifestyle choice (although there are cases where that's not the case) so the possibility of it ending human kind is zero.

It's pretty sad that you think this way.

[jman3000]

I'm sorry you spent so much time thinking about a subject you're wrong on. I wish I could give you your time back.

[Marcus Bryant]

I've never understood why individuals on the left and right want the State so involved in their personal lives. Of course, I guess the thought is that they are involving the State in someone else's life so it's cool. The State is not your friend. The State has a rather poor record in human history when it comes to the treatment of the individual.

[jman3000]

I'm not sure you understand. The fate of the entire world is resting on this issue. The state has no choice but to separate and cure these homos.

[Clandestino]

nah, there are enough horny straight dudes to keep the population going strong.

[Winehole23]

For the record, I am pro- *all kinds of crazy shit* being legalized. Let's expand liberty inside our own borders.

[LnGrrrR]

So its not possible that in a couple of hundred years that Gay marriage will be so popular that men will chose men over women? Its very possible, if young kids are taught that there is nothing wrong with being gay at a young age, gay marriages will increase. And if the pattern continues, eventually over centuries mankind will be affected because instead of men marrying and producing kids with women, they are busy having sex with other men and not producing kids.

You do realize that we can use in-vitro fertilization?

[Blake]

So its not possible that in a couple of hundred years that Gay marriage will be so popular that men will chose men over women? Its very possible, if young kids are taught that there is nothing wrong with being gay at a young age, gay marriages will increase. And if the pattern continues, eventually over centuries mankind will be affected because instead of men marrying and producing kids with women, they are busy having sex with other men and not producing kids.

:lol

then China should be pushing hard for gay marriage.

[Blake]

ItFor the most part it's how you were born... not a lifestyle choice (although there are cases where that's not the case) so the possibility of it ending human kind is zero.


that's debatable

[Homeland Security]

So its not possible that in a couple of hundred years that Gay marriage will be so popular that men will chose men over women? Its very possible, if young kids are taught that there is nothing wrong with being gay at a young age, gay marriages will increase. And if the pattern continues, eventually over centuries mankind will be affected because instead of men marrying and producing kids with women, they are busy having sex with other men and not producing kids.
So the only thing keeping men out of homosexuality is being taught from an early age that it is wrong?
.
.
.
.
.
Do you know how I know you're gay?

[sam1617]

The morality of homo-sexuality should be left to the individual, just like the morality of every decision that doesn't harm others. People should be free to make their own decision, and if religious organizations feel that homo-sexuality is wrong (which I agree with on a moral basis) then they should teach as much. The government should stay the fuck out of individuals homes and personal lives. Expand individual liberties, not retract.

[jman3000]

that's debatable

Did you seriously not read the statement in the "(xxxxxx)" ?

[Red Hawk #21]

It's not possible. There is nothing wrong with being gay. For the most part it's how you were born... not a lifestyle choice (although there are cases where that's not the case) so the possibility of it ending human kind is zero.

It's pretty sad that you think this way.

Gay marriage will end the world. Book it!

Honestly, I was just trying to provoke you guys to see what you would say. :lol I had a good laugh out of this. I don't care much about Gay marriages, as long as they stay away from me and my family Im fine.

[jman3000]

The gay's are coming to get you. Beware. *spooky ghost sounds*

[whottt]

Blacks and Hispanics owned slaves.

Fact.

[Trainwreck2100]

The gay's are coming to get you. Beware. *spooky ghost sounds*

watch out for the homos in NAMBLA

[Trainwreck2100]

Blacks and Hispanics owned slaves.

Fact.

I'd totally own a slave.

[jman3000]

Blacks and Hispanics owned slaves.

Fact.

Pretty much every society in the history of the world has owned slaves at one point or another. I really don't think (unless I'm missing it) that anybody is arguing for reparations.

[whottt]

Somebody is arguing for them or else the idea wouldn't be before Congress.


Personally, I can't understand why there's no outrage for the slavery that is still practiced today, primarily in Africa, the ME, and South Asia.


And I do feel kind of blameless on this..as far as I know, no one in my family ever owned slaves.

[Trainwreck2100]

you know this thread is liek 3 months old?

[jman3000]

eh... there's always going to be some retarded people in congress given how big it is. Seeing as it only has 5 co-sponsors and hasn't gone anywhere in months, I'm assuming it's dead.

Probably just a guy pandering to his constituents in a largely black district.

[word]

http://www.congress.org/congressorg/issues/bills/?bill=12489961

A special commission has been created to research how best to do "slavery reparations" by the Federal government. The commission of seven is appointed by Nancy Pelosi (3), Obama (3), and Senator Robert Byrd (1). They have eight Million dollars appropriated for this commission and the power of subpoena. They are supposed to report back to the House in 90 days with their recommendations.

I continue to be amazed.

Just who do they plan on subpoenaing ? Former slaves ? Former slave owners ?

Lincoln ?

[whottt]

you know this thread is liek 3 months old?

Of course, but you do realize I wasn't the one bumped it?


No one had made the points I made.

[Blake]

Did you seriously not read the statement in the "(xxxxxx)" ?

It's debatable that it's "for the most part how you were born".

[Blake]

Blacks and Hispanics owned slaves.

Fact.

Blacks and Hispanics never legally owned White slaves in America.

Fact.

[whottt]

Blacks and Hispanics never legally owned White slaves in America.

Fact.

You're an idiot.


Fact.

[jman3000]

It's debatable that it's "for the most part how you were born".

I reject the premise that it's debatable. I feel, through personal experiences and things that I've witnessed, that the vast majority of gays/lesbians are born into it and display signs that they are from a very, very early age.

I reject it from personal experience. If I hadn't seen what I've seen then I'd probably agree with you.

[Blake]

You're an idiot.


Fact.

Me pointing out the failure of your argument makes you angry.

Fact.

[Blake]

I reject the premise that it's debatable. I feel, through personal experiences and things that I've witnessed, that the vast majority of gays/lesbians are born into it and display signs that they are from a very, very early age.

I reject it from personal experience. If I hadn't seen what I've seen then I'd probably agree with you.

Until there is definitive proof of some kind of gene that programs some of our behavior, it'll be debatable.

My thoughts on some of people I've seen suggest to me choice through environmental factors that influence their decision making.

[jman3000]

I've seen those doing it for environmental factors and for attention too... but not nearly as much as I've seen people who were obviously gay from the word go.

I mean is it really such a weird thing to believe that 2-3% of the population is born with an attraction to the same sex?

[Blake]

I mean is it really such a weird thing to believe that 2-3% of the population is born with an attraction to the same sex?

believing it and proving it are two different things.

and no, I don't believe it.

IMO, attraction is something that comes through time and experience and is not as limited to gay/straight black/white blonde/redhread as people tend to make it.

[whottt]

Me pointing out the failure of your argument makes you angry.

Fact.



#1. Blacks, hispanics AND Native Americans most certainly did own white slaves in America, legally, you incomparably ignorant fuck.

#2. Even if they didn't, your point is stupid, aimless and meaningless to the topic at hand unless you are a racist intent on ignoring the fact that whites were slaves in America LEGALLY, and that Blacks, Hispanics and Native Americans all owned slaves, legally. Fact.

#3. In case you are too stupid to understand this, whites were also slaves in America. Legally. Fact.

#4. Your comment was a stupid needless comment, incomparably stupid. Much like you are a stupid needless poster, incomparably stupid.

And I know I'm not the only one that thinks this.

Fact.


You are stupid, I would particularly appreciate it if you would:

A, Educate yourself on the history of slavery in America before you presume to make statements as fact that are in fact, not factual at all.

B. Realize that I am not in fact angry at you because your statement in any way refuted my statement, for it did not, and was not an accurate statement. On the contrary, I am mad because you know less than I do and think you know more...

It's your stupidity based arrogance that angers me....and this hardly makes you unique. The biggest problemn with stupid people, is the way they fail to realize they are stupid.

Fact.

C. Never post to me again.

[Winehole23]

No historical support is linked by either side. Just saying.

Was this dispute resolved elsewhere on ST?

[whottt]

No historical support is linked by either side. Just saying.

Was this dispute resolved elsewhere on ST?

Why don't you research it and let us know what you find?

[Winehole23]

Why don't you research it and let us know what you find?I don't really care about it that much.

[Winehole23]

My interest was casual.

It's probably in this thread somewhere, huh?

[Winehole23]

Skimming through, this thread was notably light on the slavery reparations...








... and notably full of legend, lore and false lore relating to gay marriage. What a shock.

[whottt]

I don't really care about it that much.

Not surprising.

[Winehole23]

Not surprising.It wasn't in this thread, I checked.

Why so stingy, Whottt? Other posters give links when asked...if they have them.

[Barry O'Bama]

[quote=jman3000;3454664]eh... there's always going to be some retarded people in congress given how big it is.

Obama suggests reparations to blacks, Native Americans
Says 'the most important thing to do
is not just offer words, but offer deeds'

Posted: July 30, 2008
8:50 pm Eastern

© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Sen. Barack Obama told a meeting in Chicago the U.S. should review how it can make amends for "offenses" committed during its history.
And one author is speculating that might even include reparations for al-Qaida soldiers, since, after all, they've been held in violation of their "rights."

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=71043

[Winehole23]

Fake Barry, my man. Back in character, I see.

[Barry O'Bama]

Fake Barry, my man. Back in character, I see.


Just pointing out some FACTS.

[Blake]

#1. Blacks, hispanics AND Native Americans most certainly did own white slaves in America, legally, you incomparably ignorant fuck.

#2. Even if they didn't, your point is stupid, aimless and meaningless to the topic at hand unless you are a racist intent on ignoring the fact that whites were slaves in America LEGALLY, and that Blacks, Hispanics and Native Americans all owned slaves, legally. Fact.

#3. In case you are too stupid to understand this, whites were also slaves in America. Legally. Fact.

#4. Your comment was a stupid needless comment, incomparably stupid. Much like you are a stupid needless poster, incomparably stupid.

And I know I'm not the only one that thinks this.

Fact.


You are stupid, I would particularly appreciate it if you would:

A, Educate yourself on the history of slavery in America before you presume to make statements as fact that are in fact, not factual at all.

B. Realize that I am not in fact angry at you because your statement in any way refuted my statement, for it did not, and was not an accurate statement. On the contrary, I am mad because you know less than I do and think you know more...

It's your stupidity based arrogance that angers me....and this hardly makes you unique. The biggest problemn with stupid people, is the way they fail to realize they are stupid.

Fact.

C. Never post to me again.


Whottt ANGRY! Whottt no want blake to post to him again! Whottt no can figure out how to use the ignore feature!

Just curious, is your source for white slavery in America Michael A. Hoffman II?

[Winehole23]

Just pointing out some FACTS.Where is that movement on the Hill?

Or was this just another campaign promise cynically contrived to exploit black voters and guilty libs, Fake Barry?

[Creepn]

Why is it so difficult for America to apologize for slavery? Fuck America apologized to asian americans for holding them in little camps during a portion of the war but cant apologize for 400 year of slavery?? What in the hell is so difficult? An official apology will go a long long way.

[SnakeBoy]

I'm sorry America had slavery for 400 years.

[Creepn]

I'm sorry America had slavery for 400 years.

Not official. But hey was that so hard to do though? The apology can't come from a black president. It will have to come from a rich blue eyed president so this subject will have to be put on hold for the next 7 years.

[whottt]

Just curious, is your source for white slavery in America Michael A. Hoffman II?



No, my sources were, among others, a former President of the American Historical Association, a PHD history professor at an IVY league college, a US Supreme Court Justice, not to mention a legislator who passed emancipation legislation in his state about a hundred years or so before Lincoln got around to doing it. I didn't get my history education from an internet blog or wiki dumbass.

[tim_duncan_fan]

No, my sources were, among others, a former President of the American Historical Association, a PHD history professor at an IVY league college, a US Supreme Court Justice, not to mention a legislator who passed emancipation legislation in his state about a hundred years or so before Lincoln got around to doing it. I didn't get my history education from an internet blog or wiki dumbass.


Dude just say "White people did some fucked up shit a long time ago and the repercussions from said shit are still being felt today."

Just acknowledge it and cut the bullshit. That's all self-respecting members of minority races want anyway. They don't give a fuck about 40 acres and a mule or giving Native Americans some land back. They just want little fuckers to quit acting like all the bad shit never happened.

It amazes me that people are still trying to justify this shit.

"Black people had slaves too!"

Yeah sure they did. Next you'll be telling us that most gay people are against gay marriage.

Just lies for the hell of it huh?

[whottt]

Dude just say "White people did some fucked up shit a long time ago and the repercussions from said shit are still being felt today."

You know what you just did there? You just generalized and stereotyped an entire race of people..

Might as well be saying blacks are lazy and Mexicans are thieves...

There is nothing I find more offensive than being generalized by an ignorant fucking douche to fucking stupid to realize he is doing the same things he is condemning others for in the very instant he is doing the condemning...

You are an idiot.

I did not deny whites owned slaves idiot.

Show me where I did?

Then learn what a fucking reparation is...then my comments won't seem so clueless to your ignorant ass.

And I refuse to apologize

A. For something I didn't do.

B. To someone who it was never done to.

You show me as slave I owned you ignorant fuck, and then I'll apologize to them.






Just acknowledge it and cut the bullshit. That's all self-respecting members of minority races want anyway.


Minority races demanding an apology from me for something,


A. I didn't do.

B. To someone I didn't do it to


Becuase of my fucking race, is racism you fucking idiot.






They don't give a fuck about 40 acres and a mule or giving Native Americans some land back. They just want little fuckers to quit acting like all the bad shit never happened.


And I want people it never happened to to shut the fuck up and stop acting like it happened to them.


Not a single mother fucker, in this thread

Was ever a slave
Ever owned a slave.


So take your fucking apology and stick it.




It amazes me that people are still trying to justify this shit.

And I'm amazed someone as stupid as you actually is has measurable brain activity.



"Black people had slaves too!"

Yeah sure they did. Next you'll be telling us that most gay people are against gay marriage.

Just lies for the hell of it huh?

Am sorry it happened? Sure...but I didn't fucking do it so what is the meaning behind it? I am not a slave owner, so what does me apologizing for something I didn't do to someone I didn't do it to accomplish?


Does it makes those whose minds are totally enslaved by a racial prism feel better for a few seconds?

I'm sorry for you as well...


I feel sorry for you, you've a long life ahead of you trapped inside a stupid, ignorant, bigoted racist mind.


You are my racism my friend, you are the mind behind slavery.


"white people did some fucked up shit"

[whottt]

Just so you know...the first legally registered slave owner in this land, was a black man named Anthony Johnson, and he won ownership of another black man for life, on the basis of African customs of slavery. Customs still in practice, in Africa, to this day.

The idea that 200 white guys went into Africa on a boat and enslaved 400,000 blacks on their own continent is quite possibly the stupidest misconception I have ever seen. If that had been done Africa would be a white majority continent.


Most slaves in history were enslaved by people of their own race, and then sold.


White man enslaved the whiteman first.
Brownman enslaved the brown man first.
And Black man enslaved the Black man first.


Laying it at the feet of one race and turning a blind eye to all other instances is fucking ignorant, and does nothing to defeat this stupid color line drawn in peoples minds.



And as long as you keep drawing those lines, those lines will continue to be barriers.

Personally I think this is one issue is hopeless, as there are far too many fucking stupid people on this planet to ever overcome this trait that makes us, in fact, stupider than animals.


Just remember, these people that judged people based on racial lines, first had to draw those racial lines...you are either a person who draws racial lines, or you are not.


Me? I get offended because I never owned a fucking slave. It is not my crime, it is not my cross to bear. And I can see absolutely nothing productive to be gained from bearing it, since those who did, are long since dead. And I will resist those that attempt to put that on me....especially when they are ones drawing the racial lines as they do it.


Stop drawing racial lines and racial lines will stop being drawn...a racial line is a racial line, no matter who is drawing it.

[tim_duncan_fan]

Yes, I guess I did generalize when I said "white people," so let me say this: Lots and lots of white people did some fucked up shit.

Bottom line, in America, there weren't many, if any, minority members pushing for the continuation of slavery.

As for your personal apology...no one is asking for it.

As for a national apology...few people are calling for that.

The point I was making when I said "Just acknowledge it and cut the bullshit. That's all self-respecting members of minority races want anyway," is that minorities want their more insensitive fellow citizens who generally happen to be white to quit acting as if all of the bad stuff that happened in past is insignificant and that it has no bearing on the present day.

As for the rest of your rhetoric, "You are racism" ect...whatever. I haven't said anything remotely racists.

Really, saying "white people did some fucked up shit" is not that bad. It's akin to saying black people voted for Obama. Did every black person vote for Obama? Of course not, but enough of them did so that a generalization like that doesn't warrant any backlash.

It's not like I said "White people, in general are racists." That would have been something to be pissed about given the day and age we live in. However, when talking about shit that happened to Native Americans and the slave era, there really is not much to cry about.

[FaithInOne]

Didn't Bush just send $50 billion to the motherland?

Even Obama threw them a bone. Don't we pay for African baby killing these days?


They're starving and shit over there and that's just not baller.

[whottt]

Yes, I guess I did generalize when I said "white people," so let me say this: Lots and lots of white people did some fucked up shit.

It was a minority of the population of white people that owned slaves in this country.



Bottom line, in America, there weren't many, if any, minority members pushing for the continuation of slavery.

Bottom line, white people represent the majority of those that died in the civil war.

White people started the anti-slavery movements, white men signed the civil rights legislation into law, and white people spoke for minorities when minorities were not allowed to speak for themselves.



So I tell you what, when I get a thank you for that, even though I had jack fucking shit to do with it, then I'll start aplogizing for shit I didn't do to people I didn't do it too.




As for your personal apology...no one is asking for it.

As for a national apology...few people are calling for that.


Who makes it? Congress? Then Black President signs it into law?


Go for it...works for me. I could careless if they do that. If you think it will change something, by all means go for it.

I support it 100%.


However, the government who owes that apology is no longer in existence, the government that owes that apology, would be an all white government endorsing the enslavement of others.


That government is not our government, that government is dead. It was killed by mostly white people.


For that government to apologize, that government would have to exist.







The point I was making when I said "Just acknowledge it and cut the bullshit. That's all self-respecting members of minority races want anyway," is that minorities want their more insensitive fellow citizens who generally happen to be white to quit acting as if all of the bad stuff that happened in past is insignificant and that it has no bearing on the present day.


The white people alive today had nothing to do with what happend then, they weren't born then.

And you know what? That statement isn't a generalization.


Neither is saying no minority alive today was ever legally enslaved with the power of the government backing it on the basis of it's skin.





I'm not trying to be insensitive, it's just that I don't like being held accountable for things I didn't do, by those I didn't do them too.


Furthermore, racial lines are racial lines, they will continue to exist and be barriers, as long as we continue to draw them, anyone.


I try not to look at shit through racial eyes, I think that's what causes it.











As for the rest of your rhetoric, "You are racism" ect...whatever. I haven't said anything remotely racists.

Really, saying "white people did some fucked up shit" is not that bad. It's akin to saying black people voted for Obama. Did every black person vote for Obama? Of course not, but enough of them did so that a generalization like that doesn't warrant any backlash.

It's not like I said "White people, in general are racists." That would have been something to be pissed about given the day and age we live in. However, when talking about shit that happened to Native Americans and the slave era, there really is not much to cry about.

Depends on the color of your skin....


Look...there are minorities that embrace their minority status and cling to it.


200 years ago they were saying in opposition, we're all the same despite the color of our skin...

Now they're saying, we're different, look at the color of our skin.

And there are white people just itching to draw those lines along with them, for their own reasons.





And so it goes...and so it will go, stupidly, in perpetuity, until there are bigger, or less things to draw lines over. Personally, I'm pretty convinced we'll soon be drawing lines over even less.

[SnakeBoy]

Personally, I'm pretty convinced we'll soon be drawing lines over even less.

Personally, I think we already are.

[Blake]

No, my sources were, among others, a former President of the American Historical Association, a PHD history professor at an IVY league college, a US Supreme Court Justice, not to mention a legislator who passed emancipation legislation in his state about a hundred years or so before Lincoln got around to doing it. I didn't get my history education from an internet blog or wiki dumbass.

:lol

seriously

:lol

[Blake]

Most slaves in history were enslaved by people of their own race, and then sold.

And Black man enslaved the Black man first.


was it the Black man that created Negro laws?

Whites were never slaves the way Blacks were. Whites being indentured servants is not the same as being bought and sold like chattle.

I'm not the only one that thinks you are an idiot.

Please post to me again though. You're hilarious.

[whottt]

was it the Black man that created Negro laws?

Was it the black man that created your ignorant fucking ass?




Whites were never slaves the way Blacks were.

So you think...unfortunately you are an idiot, and what you think is probably the first part of the problem in any disucssion with you.





Whites being indentured servants is not the same as being bought and sold like chattle.

Whites were bought and sold. You are stupid because this did happen and it is your ignorance of this fact that has lead to the foundation of ignorance in your head that has lead to this disagreement.


Your stupidity.




I'm not the only one that thinks you are an idiot.

Difference is, the people that think I am an idiot are, to a man, much stupider than I am. It's by design you know.

On the other hand, people that think you are a dumb fucking idiot are 100% correct and, to a man, smarter than you are, which is not saying much.

Whites were bought and sold as slaves.

Fact.

Idiot.

Also a fact.

[Blake]

Was it the black man that created your ignorant fucking ass?

apparently a Black man has put a stick up yours


So you think...unfortunately you are an idiot, and what you think is probably the first part of the problem in any disucssion with you.

Whites voluntarily became indentured servants, mostly because they were poor.

The problem in any discussion with you is that your sources are up your ass.

Take the stick out and set them free.


Whites were bought and sold. You are stupid because this did happen and it is your ignorance of this fact that has lead to the foundation of ignorance in your head that has lead to this disagreement.

yup.....posted too quickly. Whites were bought and sold after they entered into indentured servitude contracts.

When I posted, I had in mind the way millions were captured in Africa and shipped over to America and bought and sold against their will and I failed to articulate that.

Your failure to recognize that slavery of Blacks led to racial subordination for several generations, even after slavery was abolished, shows your purposeful ignorance.

"I wasn't there. It's not my fault. Don't make me pay."

Wah.


Difference is, the people that think I am an idiot are, to a man, much stupider than I am. It's by design you know.

There aren't any jeenyuses running around calling you brilliant either.

Of course, if you were to give me the name and phone number of your ivy league buddies, I'd be glad to call them and ask what they think of you.

If they call you a smart guy, I'll be on here instantly stating as much..........
chances are though, if they are who they say they are and you are who you think you are, they'll call you an idiot for debating politics and getting owned on a Spurs board.



Whites were bought and sold as slaves.

Fact.

Whites were bought and sold as indentured servants that entered contracts of their own free will.

You fail at providing sources.

Fact.


On the other hand, people that think you are a dumb fucking idiot are 100% correct and, to a man, smarter than you are, which is not saying much.


Me: "What is your source, whottt?"

whottt: "All of them"

[whottt]

Damn, lazy as well as stupid and racist.

I know my sources are accurate, and you either too stupid, or too lazy, or both, to find that out for yourself.

I am deliberately not giving my sources.


Because I don't care if you don't believe me, I'm right and you are stupid to think I'm wrong. I know it's a fact I'm right. Your failure to understand that and find that they are truthful statements, is due to your own stupidity and or laziness.

I don't care if you continue you living stupid....in fact I think you probably deserve it. I am not going to lift a finger to ever provide any source in any argument with you. I'm just going to state what I know is fact and call you stupid when you don't know that they are in fact, facts. Because you are stupid for not knowing it.

I am never going to post a link in any argument with you, stupid.

[whottt]

By the way stupid, whites most certainly were bought and sold, without ever being indentured servants, not that being indentured servants means they weren't also bought and sold, which invalidates the entire stupid fucking point birthed from yoru stupid fucking mind.


Fact.

Stupid.

No qualifiers needed.

You truly are stupid, and your are arguing from a position of total ignorance of the reality and history of slavery in this country.

You are stupid.That is the problem, that is why we are arguing, because you, are stupid, and ignorant.

[Blake]

Damn, lazy as well as stupid and racist.

I know my sources are accurate, and you either too stupid, or too lazy, or both, to find that out for yourself.

I am deliberately not giving my sources.

Naw, lazy is quoting something as fact without backing it up.

Stupid is when you namedrop positions of authority without actually giving the names of the people.

Racist is thinking Whites had it just as bad as Blacks.


Because I don't care if you don't believe me, I'm right and you are stupid to think I'm wrong. I know it's a fact I'm right. Your failure to understand that and find that they are truthful statements, is due to your own stupidity and or laziness.

You don't care enough to take the time to post that you don't care.

Is it really that difficult to give me a real source/name/link/book/anything?


I don't care if you continue you living stupid....in fact I think you probably deserve it. I am not going to lift a finger to ever provide any source in any argument with you. I'm just going to state what I know is fact and call you stupid when you don't know that they are in fact, facts. Because you are stupid for not knowing it.

You would just rather lift a finger to type out the word stupid over and over.

It's apparent now that you are just a selfish prick which explains you being against reparations much more than any argument you have tried and failed to make otherwise.


I am never going to post a link in any argument with you, stupid.

"All of them!"

[Blake]

By the way stupid, whites most certainly were bought and sold, without ever being indentured servants, not that being indentured servants means they weren't also bought and sold, which invalidates the entire stupid fucking point birthed from yoru stupid fucking mind.


Fact.

Stupid.

No qualifiers needed.


yeah, qualifiers are needed.

You fail again, regardless of how many times you say you don't.


You truly are stupid, and your are arguing from a position of total ignorance of the reality and history of slavery in this country.

You are stupid.That is the problem, that is why we are arguing, because you, are stupid, and ignorant.

Naw, I have a pretty good grasp of history, same as the ones who are researching if there is an actual basis for rewarding Blacks with reparations, no matter how many times you call me stupid.


All servants imported and brought into the Country. . . who were not Christians in their native Country. . . shall be accounted and be slaves. All Negro, mulatto and Indian slaves within this dominion. . . shall be held to be real estate. If any slave resists his master. . . correcting such slave, and shall happen to be killed in such correction. . . the master shall be free of all punishment. . . as if such accident never happened.
- Virginia General Assembly declaration, 1705

You. Are. A. Focking. Moron.

[whottt]

Just to make this clear, here is what you are ignorant of:
'
What the word reparation means.
The relevance of my point that blacks and hispanics and native Americans owned slaves of various types and colors has in relation to the intent of the reparations.
That whites were slaves in this America.
That blacks and hispanics and native Americans were slave owners in America, and why that is also relevant to the intent behind the reparations.
That whites were bought and sold like property.

These are among the many things you are either completely ignorant of now, or were at the beginning when you first decided to argue with me from a position of ignorance and lesser knowledge.


This is why you are stupid, this is why we argue, this is why I am calling you stupid...and you truly are.

So stupid, that I have absolutely no doubt that you are now at this moment, while still incomparably stupid on this subject, probably smarter on this subject now that you have ever been at any other point in your life, just because you have argued with me about it for a day or so.

Meanwhie, there is not one iota of additional knowledge I have no from arguing with you, in fact if it was possible, I'd probably be stupider from having argued with you. Luckily it isn't possible. But make no mistake about it, there is not one iota of knowledge I have gained from arguing with you. And we both know you now know more than ever before. Just from my insults.

You are truly fucking stupid. Is it starting to sink in in the slightest yet?

[Blake]

Just to make this clear, here is what you are ignorant of:
'
What the word reparation means.
The relevance of my point that blacks and hispanics and native Americans owned slaves of various types and colors has in relation to the intent of the reparations.
That whites were slaves in this America.
That blacks and hispanics and native Americans were slave owners in America, and why that is also relevant to the intent behind the reparations.
That whites were bought and sold like property.

How many Blacks owned Whites in America?


This is why you are stupid, this is why we argue, this is why I am calling you stupid...and you truly are.

You don't know how many Blacks owned Whites, which makes you either too lazy, too stupid, and arguably too racist to fill the rest of us in.


So stupid, that I have absolutely no doubt that you are now at this moment, while still incomparably stupid on this subject, probably smarter on this subject now that you have ever been at any other point in your life, just because you have argued with me about it for a day or so.

I did learn this about Anthony Johnson:


In 1665, Anthony Johnson moved to Maryland and leased a 300-acre plantation, where he died five years later. But back in Virginia that same year, a jury decided the land Johnson left behind could be seized by the government because he was a "negroe and by consequence an alien." In 1705 Virginia declared that "All servants imported and brought in this County... who were not Christians in their Native Country... shall be slaves. A Negro, mulatto and Indian slaves ... shall be held to be real estate."

Of course, I learned that Virginia siezed his property doing my own research.......no thanks to you, you lazy ass.


Meanwhie, there is not one iota of additional knowledge I have no from arguing with you, in fact it was possible, I'd probably be stupider from having argued with you. Luckily it isn't possible.

Now you know Virginia seized Johnson's property because he was Black, so arguable he is owed reparations.

You're welcome.


You are truly fucking stupid. Is it starting to sink in in the slightest yet?

:lol Either way, I'm still smarter than you.

That sank in long ago.

[sook]

the middle passage

http://www.jungnewyork.com/images/iaap1.jpg
http://www.itzcaribbean.com/images/rod_brown_middle_passage_art.jpg
http://www.jungnewyork.com/images/iaap2.jpg

[whottt]

How many Blacks owned Whites in America?

How many whites owned blaks? Who were they?




You don't know how many Blacks owned Whites, which makes you either too lazy, too stupid, and arguably too racist to fill the rest of us in.


I'm not lazy. You are an ignorant dickhead, stupid, and IMO unworthy of the effort of posting a link. You are worthy of sitting here and being insulted by me on the basis of just the knowledge off the top of my head.





I did learn this about Anthony Johnson:



Of course, I learned that Virginia siezed his property doing my own research.......no thanks to you, you lazy ass.



Now you know Virginia seized Johnson's property because he was Black, so arguable he is owed reparations.

The US Govt didn't seize his property you fucking idiot. And neither did the current VA Govt. Idiot.




You're welcome.

And you're an idiot.




:lol Either way, I'm still smarter than you.

That sank in long ago.


No, you're not, you're stupider than I am. Really and truly. An idiot mimicking a non-idiot is still an idiot by the way...in fact you'd have to be an idiot to do that in the first place.

You are stupider than I am. This is 100% true.

[Blake]

How many whites owned blaks? Who were they?

why are you answering a question with questions?

Lazy.



I'm not lazy. blaaaah blah blah blah

yes you are no matter how many times you say you aren't.


The US Govt didn't seize his property you fucking idiot. And neither did the current VA Govt. Idiot.

I never said the US Govt seized it.

but yes, the VA govt did.


In 1665, Anthony Johnson moved to Maryland and leased a 300-acre plantation, where he died five years later. But back in Virginia that same year, a jury decided the land Johnson left behind could be seized by the government because he was a "negroe and by consequence an alien."

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part1/1narr3.html




And you're an idiot.

now we're getting to the point where when you say it, everyone else know you are saying it just to say it.

when I say "you are an idiot" it is because you fail to put up your sources, and you are calling out PBS as being wrong.

it's not even funny any more......it's reaching pathetic levels.


No, you're not, you're stupider than I am. Really and truly. An idiot mimicking a non-idiot is still an idiot by the way...in fact you'd have to be an idiot to do that in the first place.

You are stupider than I am. This is 100% true.

honestly, why can't you just put half this effort of figuring out new ways to try to call me an idiot into doing some actual research?

"All of them!"

[Extra Stout]

Whites voluntarily became indentured servants, mostly because they were poor.


Whites were bought and sold after they entered into indentured servitude contracts.


When I posted, I had in mind the way millions were captured in Africa and shipped over to America and bought and sold against their will and I failed to articulate that.

I regret to inform you that whottt has the upper hand in your little discussion.

Persons of European descent were not infrequently transported from Britain to the colonies for lifelong slavery, usually from the debtor prisons, and especially if they were Irish. This happened more in the 17th century than subsequent ones, simply because the Africans were superior field laborers to the Irish.

Nevertheless, in Georgia colony for one, the practice of impressing transported prisoners -- as well as their offspring -- into slavery on the plantations continued.

Suffice it to say that the European haplotypes found in many if not most African-Americans did not come solely from lustful plantation masters.

Even into the 19th century, Confederates would sometimes kidnap incoming poor immigrants and sell them into slavery if they were Celtic, Southern European, or Slavic. These slaves weren't as valuable as the African slaves because they couldn't work as long or as hard in the field, so they would be relegated to indoor work, whether in an agricultural setting or fledgling Confederate industry, and to more dangerous work where the likelihood of being seriously injured or killed was higher, where the loss of an African slave would be simply too costly.

Now, to a Southerner, this would not be "white slavery" since by definition a slave could not be "white." It didn't matter if the slave could trace his ancestry in Europe back to Roman times; he was still "black."

[Blake]

I regret to inform you that whottt has the upper hand in your little discussion.

Persons of European descent were not infrequently transported from Britain to the colonies for lifelong slavery, usually from the debtor prisons, and especially if they were Irish. This happened more in the 17th century than subsequent ones, simply because the Africans were superior field laborers to the Irish.

I don't disagree that Europeans were brought over as indentured servants.

That's a proven fact.

The Blacks that were brought over from Africa, however, were not sitting in a debtors prison. There was no reason to bring them over other than the fact that they were either non-Christian or later Black.


Nevertheless, in Georgia colony for one, the practice of impressing transported prisoners -- as well as their offspring -- into slavery on the plantations continued.

Suffice it to say that the European haplotypes found in many if not most African-Americans did not come solely from lustful plantation masters.

Even into the 19th century, Confederates would sometimes kidnap incoming poor immigrants and sell them into slavery if they were Celtic, Southern European, or Slavic. These slaves weren't as valuable as the African slaves because they couldn't work as long or as hard in the field, so they would be relegated to indoor work, whether in an agricultural setting or fledgling Confederate industry, and to more dangerous work where the likelihood of being seriously injured or killed was higher, where the loss of an African slave would be simply too costly.

Now, to a Southerner, this would not be "white slavery" since by definition a slave could not be "white." It didn't matter if the slave could trace his ancestry in Europe back to Roman times; he was still "black."

Since you don't have a source either, I'll have to take you word for it.

Did any of these European 'slaves' you mention fall under many of the guidelines of the Negro Acts of the mid-1700s? I'm going to guess no.

As far as why owners started going more towards using Black slaves over indentured servants:


This disorder that the indentured servant system had created made racial slavery to southern slaveholders much more attractive, because what were black slaves now? Well, they were a permanent dependent labor force, who could be defined as a people set apart. They were racially set apart. They were outsiders. They were strangers and in many ways throughout the world, slavery has taken root, especially where people are considered outsiders and can be put in a permanent status of slavery.
- David Blight, historian

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part1/1narr3.html

[Winehole23]

Since you don't have a source either, I'll have to take you word for it.Oliver Cromwell sent thousands of Irish and Scottish political nonconformists into servitude in the New World. I don't recall my source for this, but I think it might be Eric Williams (http://guardian.co.tt/features/life/2009/03/29/remembering-eric-williams).

[LnGrrrR]

I will say, without a source, that blacks also were preferred as slaves because they were easily distinguishable as such. This had many uses... for instance, if a stranger saw a white person who was a slave, it wasn't necessarily assumed they were a slave: not so with a black person.

[Extra Stout]

I don't disagree that Europeans were brought over as indentured servants.

That's a proven fact.
No, I didn't say they were brought over as indentured servants. Indentured servitude means that a person is bound to service for a certain period of time in order to pay a debt. That is not the same thing as lifelong involuntary servitude by a person as well as his descendants, no matter what the English official who signed the form for the prisoner's transportation, or the nice sanitized high school textbook version says.


Did any of these European 'slaves' you mention fall under many of the guidelines of the Negro Acts of the mid-1700s? I'm going to guess no.
Why else do you think a full-blooded Italian would suddenly legally become a "Negro?"
"The slave says his name is Giuseppe Capelli, and he's from Verona. He has olive skin, straight black hair, and speaks what appears to be fluent Italian." "No, that's wrong, his name is Jimbo. He grew up on my plantation, I swear." "OK, good enough."

Look, sweeping meta-narratives never work. Were the vast majority of slaves in America African in origin? Obviously. Were people who owned slaves so upright about their views of race that they found it unconscionable to take a powerless pauper or immigrant and exploit them within the system? Come on, you've lived on this earth a while, you know the answer.

The difference here is that African slavery was institutionalized, while European slavery was not; rather, the enslavement of Europeans took place within the system of institutionalized African slavery.

[Blake]

No, I didn't say they were brought over as indentured servants. Indentured servitude means that a person is bound to service for a certain period of time in order to pay a debt. That is not the same thing as lifelong involuntary servitude by a person as well as his descendants, no matter what the English official who signed the form for the prisoner's transportation, or the nice sanitized high school textbook version says.

please, give me your source that you feel is better than my sanitized high school textbook.

Until then, indentured servant ftw.


The difference here is that African slavery was institutionalized, while European slavery was not; rather, the enslavement of Europeans took place within the system of institutionalized African slavery.

Exactly, which is why Europeans haven't thought twice about reparations.

unless whottt is considering it.

[Blake]

I will say, without a source, that blacks also were preferred as slaves because they were easily distinguishable as such. This had many uses... for instance, if a stranger saw a white person who was a slave, it wasn't necessarily assumed they were a slave: not so with a black person.

whottt says Blacks owned Whites.

Why wouldn't anyone assume the White guy was the slave and not the other way around?

because Whottt says so.

[Oh, Gee!!]

If the remedy being discussed is some "official proclamation" that slavery was bad or an official apology to the ancestors of black slaves, I don't see why anybody should get pissed about it (unless they're batshit fucking crazy like Whott). I also agree with the OP that spending $8 million to research the issue is stupid given our current financial worries.

[Extra Stout]

please, give me your source that you feel is better than my sanitized high school textbook.

Until then, indentured servant ftw.



Exactly, which is why Europeans haven't thought twice about reparations.

unless whottt is considering it.

You should know me better than to think I wouldn't have sources.

White Cargo: The Forgotten History of Britain's White Slaves in America (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0814742963/africangenesis)

Furthermore:

Estimates of Irish transported into slavery in the Americas in just the 17th century vary between 80,000 and 130,000 depending on the source (Robert West, Political Education Committee, American Irish Education Foundation, 1995).

80,000 (John Prendergast, The Cromwellian Settlement of Ireland, 1865).

100,000 (Anthony Broudine, Propuguaculum, 1669).

120,000-130,000 (Thomas Emmet, Ireland Under English Rule, 1903).

As late as the 1798 Irish Rebellion, the British continued their policy of impressing Irish prisoners into slavery and selling them, even to now-independent American masters.

[Extra Stout]

Britain also instituted a program of forced breeding between Irish female slaves and African male slaves to generate mulatto slave children who then could be sold at a premium.

Like I said, we don't have mocha-complected blacks in America simply because Thomas Jefferson failed to keep it in his pants.

[Creepn]

The mere fact that African Americans were institutionally enslaved automatically justifies an official apology. Even if there were a few white slaves or even if the first slave owner was black (if that is true). Thats all there is to it.

If America can apologize to the asians, then American SHOULD EASILY apologize for slavery.

You know what, don't even apologize just to African Americans. American should apologize or commerate slavery as a whole.

[Blake]

You should know me better than to think I wouldn't have sources.

White Cargo: The Forgotten History of Britain's White Slaves in America (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0814742963/africangenesis)

Furthermore:

Estimates of Irish transported into slavery in the Americas in just the 17th century vary between 80,000 and 130,000 depending on the source (Robert West, Political Education Committee, American Irish Education Foundation, 1995).

80,000 (John Prendergast, The Cromwellian Settlement of Ireland, 1865).

100,000 (Anthony Broudine, Propuguaculum, 1669).

120,000-130,000 (Thomas Emmet, Ireland Under English Rule, 1903).

As late as the 1798 Irish Rebellion, the British continued their policy of impressing Irish prisoners into slavery and selling them, even to now-independent American masters.


Great read, thanks.

Those people that were duped into thinking they were coming over for a new life, and those that were kidnapped or forced to come over against their will definitely had it bad......in some cases as bad as the Negro slaves.

Be that as it may, we are talking about reparations from the American government, and the white "slave/indentured servant" trade pretty much ended when the Americans gained their freedom. The blame there can be put on the British for propogating the practice during the 170+years that this went on.

As for the Negroes, there were laws enacted that specifically targeted them to the point that free Blacks were in many cases not much better off than slaves. These laws were passed in the late 17th/early 18th centuries and many stayed that way as state law up through the end of the Civil War.

I also feel certain that my shiny high school textbook was failry accurate in portraying the segregation that occured during the 20th century.

So to say that there were some white slaves during a period of time that the British were basically in control really should have very little in discussing reparations for Blacks.

[Galileo]

http://www.congress.org/congressorg/issues/bills/?bill=12489961

A special commission has been created to research how best to do "slavery reparations" by the Federal government. The commission of seven is appointed by Nancy Pelosi (3), Obama (3), and Senator Robert Byrd (1). They have eight Million dollars appropriated for this commission and the power of subpoena. They are supposed to report back to the House in 90 days with their recommendations.

I continue to be amazed.

I live in Wisconsin. I have contacted my representatives to ask that they attach a rider that exempts people from Wisconsin from this bill.

Wisconsin never had slavery. Rather, we set up an underground railroad to help free many slaves, including Joshua Gover. We had many soldiers who died fighting to free the slaves. We had many courts who defied federal orders to turn over runaway slaves.

If you live in a state that never had slavery, now is the time to fight for your rights!

:wgaf:

[whottt]

I wonder if ES realize he's wasting his time.



Creepn and Idiot...I can't tell you how fucking awesome it is that you want to discount white slaves on the basis of the fact that they were a minority. That is so fucking classic it isn't even funny.

Funny thing about being a bigoted idiot, no matter which you side you stand on, the idotic bigotry goes with you.

What you did, minimizing the whites slaves on the basis of the fact that they were fewer of them, is exactly what slaveholders did to justify slavery.

Keep generalizing, keep brushing with broadstrokes, and keep dismissing things on the basis of it being, a minority occurence.

And wrong again btw, Blake, there were white slaves right up until the emancipation proclamation. You are frankly just too stupid to understand how it was done, and too stupid to understand why it is important.





More importantly, you overlook the fact that it was the Africans themselves that first sold their brethren into slavery, you over look the muslims that first made exporting captured slaves a commercial enterprise, you overlook the Spanish being the first, most prolific, longest tenured, and last to quit, the slave trade in this hemisphere.

You overlook that America was born out of British Colony...that the founding Fathers of this country were in fact, British citizens, and that institutionalized slavery occurred under British rule and was already entrenched in this country for centuries before it's official birthdate.


You also overlook the fact that white women were bought and sold to the Cherokees, as slaves. Among many others.


You overlook the fact that the Azteks in addition to the disease inflicted upon them by the Spaniards, were virtually exterminated by the Spaniards because every fucking Native American tribe that had ever heard of them, hated htem, because they subjugated and enslaved just about any and all tribes they encountered.


You over look that in the course reparations, it is very likely that the blacks themselves would have slaveowners blood in them, and many whites knowningly and unknowingly have the blood of slaves(African and White) flowing in their veins.


And many hispanics have the blood of enslavers Spanish and Aztek, running through their veins.



So these reparations will likely be made, entirely on the basis of the color of skin, and that is racism, that is the essence of it.

And it is the way your mind works, which is why I have absolutely no doubt what you would have been 200 years ago, since you are incapable of a non-discriminatory view, no matter which side you are on.

The whites are guilty because of the color of their skin, and the blacks are deserving of reparations because of the color of theirs. Complete and total ignorance on your part...the same ignorance that was used to justify pretty much every incidence of racial bigotry in the history of mankind.

[tim_duncan_fan]

Whott you are just sad dude. Really fucking sad.

You are unashamedly trying to argue the case that whites had it as bad as blacks during times of slavery.

Calling you an idiot or any other name would be pointless because you know exactly what you are doing.


Whott.... this is just stupid dude.


What the fuck?


I mean are you even fucking serious?



This must be a joke.

[whottt]

By the way...I am all for the apology if you guys think it will make it better...

I'm going to get a big laugh if Barrack Obama is the one that delivers it.


Since near as I can tell, Barrack Obama has a slaveowner factor of like 4, and probably not an ounce of slaves blood in him...but hey he's got the right skin color, right stupid fucking bigots?


His American blood is white, it's Dick Cheney's blood in fact. Since white = slaver owners, Barrack's got it.

His black blood is pure African, which he means likely has the blood of those that enslaved their felllow Africans for financial gain flowing through it.

The fact that it is muslim African blood, exponentially increases this likelyhood, not only the blood of the enslavers, but also that of those that exported them out of Africa.


Oh yeah, he's also President of the United States, the country that bigoted idiots everywhere think is where white people invented slavery.


He definitely should be the one making the apology...


And he's got absolutely no finger to point at anyone and call them an enslaver or a slaver owner.


You guys can't get past skin color, like every other bigot in history, so I'll doubt you'll agree with my perspective, even though it's the exact same one you are using to fill this thread with stupidity and ignorance.

[whottt]

Whott you are just sad dude. Really fucking sad.

You are unashamedly trying to argue the case that whites had it as bad as blacks during times of slavery.

Calling you an idiot or any other name would be pointless because you know exactly what you are doing.


Whott.... this is just stupid dude.


What the fuck?


I mean are you even fucking serious?



This must be a joke.




Fuck the minority...got it.


Got it the first time you opened your mouth and said, "white people did this".

[whottt]

Whott you are just sad dude. Really fucking sad.

You are unashamedly trying to argue the case that whites had it as bad as blacks during times of slavery.

Calling you an idiot or any other name would be pointless because you know exactly what you are doing.


Whott.... this is just stupid dude.


What the fuck?


I mean are you even fucking serious?



This must be a joke.



You are the joke, you are "unashamedly" saying something is owed, an inequality exists, on the basis of skin color, and you are defending those lines, for a capitalistic gain.

That is the mind of an enslaver.


Minority, majority, black, white, brown...if you are drawing lines, you are the bigot. There are two types of people in this world, those that draw those lines, and those that don't, and those that draw them are behind every incidence of slavery, subjugation, etc. in the history of this planet.


As long as line are drawn, inequality will exist. The only way to remove it is to stop drawing the lines. A minority drawing it to his own benefit is every bit the bigot that a majority is when he does it.



Stop drawing lines.

[Creepn]

Ya Whott, I guess you forgot to read this part I wrote?


You know what, don't even apologize just to African Americans. American should apologize or commerate slavery as a whole.

Understand what that means? Slavery altogether.

But nope, you try to justify the harshness of African American slavery by saying "oh everybody else were slaves". That's not gonna work for me. It's better to be the miniority slave race AND its a hellava lot better not to be the race that's institutionalized into slavery.

If there were white slaves then ok go ahead and cancel out the few black slaves then. Whats left? Still a hellava lot more black slaves that are being whipped.

Oh other countries delved into slavery? Ya thats bad, but thats their history and their issue. My history is with the United States of America and we all live with the repercussions of slavery up to this very day. Especially the African Americans, ESPECIALLY the African Americans. So the mere fact that slavery effected them to this very day, from centuries, goes to show the acrimonius and perverse magnitude of the enslavements of African Americans.

For that Whott, they deserve an apology.

[tim_duncan_fan]

By the way...I am all for the apology if you guys think it will make it better...

I'm going to get a big laugh if Barrack Obama is the one that delivers it.


Since near as I can tell, Barrack Obama has a slaveowner factor of like 4, and probably not an ounce of slaves blood in him...but hey he's got the right skin color, right stupid fucking bigots?


His American blood is white, it's Dick Cheney's blood in fact. Since white = slaver owners, Barrack's got it.

His black blood is pure African, which he means likely has the blood of those that enslaved their felllow Africans for financial gain flowing through it.

The fact that it is muslim African blood, exponentially increases this likelyhood, not only the blood of the enslavers, but also that of those that exported them out of Africa.


Oh yeah, he's also President of the United States, the country that bigoted idiots everywhere think is where white people invented slavery.


He definitely should be the one making the apology...


And he's got absolutely no finger to point at anyone and call them an enslaver or a slaver owner.


You guys can't get past skin color, like every other bigot in history, so I'll doubt you'll agree with my perspective, even though it's the exact same one you are using to fill this thread with stupidity and ignorance.


Dude, fuck reparations or some bullshit apology I'm not even talking about that right now. I'm talking about this bullshit:

YOU ARE TRYING TO SAY WHITES HAD IT AS BAD AS BLACKS DURING TIMES OF SLAVERY.



This is called "rivisionist's history" bullshit.

[Blake]

Creepn and Idiot...I can't tell you how fucking awesome it is that you want to discount white slaves on the basis of the fact that they were a minority. That is so fucking classic it isn't even funny.

I'm still waiting for the movie White Roots which shows Black masters whipping their honkey slaves.


What you did, minimizing the whites slaves on the basis of the fact that they were fewer of them, is exactly what slaveholders did to justify slavery.

what were some of the laws regarding White slaves compared to Black slaves?


And wrong again btw, Blake, there were white slaves right up until the emancipation proclamation. You are frankly just too stupid to understand how it was done, and too stupid to understand why it is important.

where did I say there weren't? I said 'end of Civil War' which is 1865. the EP was 1863.

I'm starting to think you are just trolling this thread.

Compare and contrast Negro slave laws to White slave laws.


More importantly, you overlook the fact that it was the Africans themselves that first sold their brethren into slavery, you over look the muslims that first made exporting captured slaves a commercial enterprise, you overlook the Spanish being the first, most prolific, longest tenured, and last to quit, the slave trade in this hemisphere.

naw, I'm not overlooking that.

Compare and contrast Negro slave laws to White slave laws.


You overlook that America was born out of British Colony...that the founding Fathers of this country were in fact, British citizens, and that institutionalized slavery occurred under British rule and was already entrenched in this country for centuries before it's official birthdate.

naw, I made reference to the British instigating and dropping off the indentured servants/white slaves for 170+ years.

Compare and contrast Negro slave laws to White slave laws.


You also overlook the fact that white women were bought and sold to the Cherokees, as slaves. Among many others.

has nothing to do with the American government and reparations.


You overlook the fact that the Azteks in addition to the disease inflicted upon them by the Spaniards, were virtually exterminated by the Spaniards because every fucking Native American tribe that had ever heard of them, hated htem, because they subjugated and enslaved just about any and all tribes they encountered.

has nothing to do with the American government and reparations.


You over look that in the course reparations, it is very likely that the blacks themselves would have slaveowners blood in them, and many whites knowningly and unknowingly have the blood of slaves(African and White) flowing in their veins.

naw, I'm not overlooking that. It's why I'm glad there is a commission set forth that is looking into difficult issues such as that.


So these reparations will likely be made, entirely on the basis of the color of skin, and that is racism, that is the essence of it.

The reparations are being discussed and researched and likely be made mostly on the color of skin because of the racist laws that were condoned by the US.


And it is the way your mind works, which is why I have absolutely no doubt what you would have been 200 years ago, since you are incapable of a non-discriminatory view, no matter which side you are on.

What would I have been 200 years ago?

Are you suggesting that if I am for reparations of some sort today that I would be a slave owner 200 years ago?

I'm grasping the way your mind works.


The whites are guilty because of the color of their skin, and the blacks are deserving of reparations because of the color of theirs. Complete and total ignorance on your part...the same ignorance that was used to justify pretty much every incidence of racial bigotry in the history of mankind.

Compare and contrast Negro slave laws to White slave laws.

[Winehole23]

Dallas County Commissioners approve reparations:


The Dallas County Commissioners Court declared Tuesday that African-Americans deserve reparations for slavery, even though most commissioners didn’t seem to know that they were doing so.


The issue arose in a resolution written by John Wiley Price, the county’s only black commissioner. Described only as a “Juneteenth Resolution,” it was approved unanimously.


Other commissioners admitted after their meeting Tuesday that they hadn’t read the document before voting for it.


Commissioner Mike Cantrell, the court’s lone Republican, later changed his vote to an abstention.


“The reason why I didn’t abstain this morning is that I had not received a copy of the resolution,” he said.


None of the other commissioners changed their votes, meaning the resolution remains the county’s official position. It is, however, a nonbinding resolution, and no tax money will change hands as a result of its passage.

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/metro/20140617-dallas-county-commissioners-unwittingly-back-slavery-reparations.ece

[Winehole23]

Adolph Reed, perhaps because he is hard left, writes very clear-headedly about race:


What strikes me as most incomprehensible about the reparations movement is its complete disregard for the simplest, most mundanely pragmatic question about any political mobilization: How can we imagine building a political force that would enable us to prevail on this issue?


But the question ultimately does not arise because reparations talk is rooted in a different kind of politics, a politics of elite-brokerage and entreaty to the ruling class and its official conscience, the philanthropic foundations, for racial side-payments. “Until America’s white ruling class accepts the fact that the book never closes on massive unredressed social wrongs, America can have no future as one people,” Robinson writes. Lest there be any doubt about the limited social vision that makes such an entreaty plausible, he brushes away the deepest foundations of American inequality: “Lamentably, there will always be poverty.” His beef is that black Americans are statistically overrepresented at the bottom. This is a protest politics that depends on the good will of those who hold power. By definition, it is not equipped to challenge existing relations of power and distribution other than marginally, with token gestures.
https://nonsite.org/editorial/the-case-against-reparations

[Winehole23]

We are in one of those rare moments in American history—like the 1880s and 1890s and the Great Depression—when common circumstances of economic and social insecurity have strengthened the potential for building broad solidarity across race, gender, and other identities around shared concerns of daily life. These are concerns that only the minority of comfortable and well-off can dismiss in favor of monuments and apologies and a politics of psychobabble, concerns like access to quality health care, the right to a decent and dignified livelihood, affordable housing, quality education for all. They can be pursued effectively only by struggling to unite a wide section of the American population that is denied those essential social benefits or lives in fear of losing them. Isn’t it interesting that at such a moment the corporate-dominated, opinion-shaping media discover and project a demand for racially defined reparations that cuts precisely against building such solidarity?

[Winehole23]

Per contra, William Darity, Jr.


Eligibility for reparations should have two criteria. First, individuals
would have to establish that they are indeed descendants of persons formerly
enslaved in the United States. Second, individuals would have to establish
that at least 10 years prior to the adoption of a reparations program they
self-identified as ‘‘black,’’ ‘‘African American,’’ ‘‘Negro,’’ or ‘‘colored.’’ This
would preclude persons who have lived as white, thereby benefiting from
white privilege, suddenly claiming a black identity to access reparations
(Darity and Frank, 2003:327).

Reparations for African Americans are long, long overdue—more than a
century overdue. The political prospects for payment still seem distant, but
such a payment is both just and necessary as a mechanism to close the
persistent racial gaps that exist in the United States. Now the U.S. public has
to be convinced of the correctness of this cause and support the appropriate
action—action that will reverse Andrew Johnnson’s abrogation of the
promise of ‘‘forty acres and a mule.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/4791140_Forty_Acres_and_a_Mule_in_the_21st_Century

[Trill Clinton]

aBwKnnZN52U

slavery to jim crow to segregation to redlining to war on drugs to mass incarceration....its time and long overdue. cut the check.

[CosmicCowboy]

aBwKnnZN52U

slavery to jim crow to segregation to redlining to war on drugs to mass incarceration....its time and long overdue. cut the check.

How big a check do you want?

[Winehole23]

Mickey Avalon he ain't, but this is somewhat on brand

1141747603991777281

[Winehole23]

^^^ guy is a Quillette contributor

[Chris]

aBwKnnZN52U

slavery to jim crow to segregation to redlining to war on drugs to mass incarceration....its time and long overdue. cut the check.

Cool....me first tho : )


https://twitter.com/larryelder/status/1142960630774681600

[Spurtacular]

:lmao cuck Blake getting ahead of the curve on this one. :lmao

[Winehole23]

Wypipo putting themselves at the center of the reparations debate is peak wypipo.

Are you descended from slaves, Chris?

Tell us about the stigma and hardship that comes with that.

[Winehole23]

Penultimate peak wypipo: suggesting reparations be paid to descendants of slave owners.

1142489423998640128