- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Would this be racist?
Posted on 1/2/14 at 7:00 pm to Big Scrub TX
Posted on 1/2/14 at 7:00 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
Virtually 100% of slaves were held against their will under threat of crushing violence - from both citizens and the state.
If so why were there so few slave revolts? Particularly when the Civil War was going badly and the means of repression were so weakened?
The fact is the slaves had nowhere to go and little to no ability to survive if they didn't remain on the plantation. What would you have seen them doing? Starting small businesses? Applying for AFDC? Waiting for the NBA and NFL to form? Heading west and becoming cowboys?
3
Posted on 1/2/14 at 7:06 pm to NoNameNeeded
easily defeated?
They didn't think so.
They didn't think so.
Posted on 1/2/14 at 7:07 pm to prplhze2000
Its a waste of time. He is trollin'. It is obvious by his attacks on the south's mental and physical fortitude. He is attempting to draw out an emotional response.
Posted on 1/2/14 at 7:28 pm to N.O. via West-Cal
quote:
For what it's worth, I strongly recommend "Bullwhip Days," a compilation of narratives recorded from former slaves - obviously quite elderly - in the 1930's. Fascinating.
LSU press published a book of interviews with ex-slaves that is eye opening.
Posted on 1/2/14 at 7:59 pm to bencoleman
quote:
Why is it a terrible question? I saw on a PBS special. That white slave owners were cruel, while free black slaveowners were kind and compassionate. I wonder who was worse? It also wasn't fringe it was quite common in LA.
Jeeeeeezuuuuusssss, brah.
Posted on 1/2/14 at 8:05 pm to VOR
quote:
Jeeeeeezuuuuusssss, brah
I'm glad I could amuse you, asswipe. Do you think every post was stupid or did you just pick out the part of each post that you thought was stupid? Either way GFY.
Posted on 1/2/14 at 9:10 pm to CarrolltonTiger
quote:
CarrolltonTiger
You really are an insufferable a-hole.
Posted on 1/2/14 at 11:17 pm to VOR
Stooping to name-calling? 
Posted on 1/3/14 at 12:09 am to CarrolltonTiger
quote:
If so why were there so few slave revolts?
Probably because of the swift and severe reactions when there were slave revolts. The crackdowns were very scary from the perspective of the slave.
quote:
Particularly when the Civil War was going badly and the means of repression were so weakened?
Good question.
quote:
The fact is the slaves had nowhere to go and little to no ability to survive if they didn't remain on the plantation. What would you have seen them doing? Starting small businesses? Applying for AFDC? Waiting for the NBA and NFL to form? Heading west and becoming cowboys?
Yes, I understand they were brainwashed/beaten down from birth. That was done TO them. It wasn't an inherent trait they were born with.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 12:10 am to gthog61
quote:
As far as slavery goes, doe anybody believe the Africans wouldn't have enslaved Europe if they had happened to be the ones who developed ocean-going ships first? Back in those days the strong abused the weak everywhere. The way African tribes have treated other tribes throughout history doesn't indicate any moral superiority on their part.
So your explanation is that a new country founded explicitly on personal freedoms should look to tribal Africa for moral comparison?
Posted on 1/3/14 at 12:44 am to Big Scrub TX
quote:I dont understand I am sure everyon here agrees that slavery was and is terrible, so why do you have to keep telling people.
Big Scrub TX
Posted on 1/3/14 at 7:03 am to beulahland
quote:
Stooping to name-calling?
It's an accurate description based upon years of reading his cynical, thinly disguise disdain for a particular group of people.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 7:35 am to CarrolltonTiger
quote:Maybe because of what happened to Nat Turner and the 55 slaves who revolted with him. All executed.
If so why were there so few slave revolts?
Posted on 1/3/14 at 9:37 am to Big Scrub TX
"Virtually 100% of slaves were held against their will under threat of crushing violence - from both citizens and the state. Everything else is but details."
I disagree with your know-nothing approach. Slavery existed for millenia and continues in some forms and some places to this day. It has been argued that chattel slavery - the form that developed in the US - was a particularly dreadful form. I tend to agree with that. Of course, one would actually have to examine the circumstances of differing forms of slavery to know that. Similarly, if you read what actual slaves had to say about their experiences - their own real, HUMAN lives - you will see that it mattered a hell of a lot TO THEM how they were treated even within the confines of what we all agree was an immoral institution. Those mere "details," as you see them comprise the variable conditions in which hundreds of thousands of souls lived out their entire existence on earth. I see those details as "history," well worth studying and discussing. It may make you feel better to dismiss "everything else" as "details," but I find your nonchalance sickening.
I disagree with your know-nothing approach. Slavery existed for millenia and continues in some forms and some places to this day. It has been argued that chattel slavery - the form that developed in the US - was a particularly dreadful form. I tend to agree with that. Of course, one would actually have to examine the circumstances of differing forms of slavery to know that. Similarly, if you read what actual slaves had to say about their experiences - their own real, HUMAN lives - you will see that it mattered a hell of a lot TO THEM how they were treated even within the confines of what we all agree was an immoral institution. Those mere "details," as you see them comprise the variable conditions in which hundreds of thousands of souls lived out their entire existence on earth. I see those details as "history," well worth studying and discussing. It may make you feel better to dismiss "everything else" as "details," but I find your nonchalance sickening.
This post was edited on 1/3/14 at 9:43 am
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:04 am to N.O. via West-Cal
This is a good question. How did free blacks justify having black slaves?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Most Black people who owned slaves, did so to get there family back together. If a family memeber was freed and owned his own property, he would go back and try to purchase his family members so they could be together.
Black slave owners did not rape their slaves, they provided them adequate housing and did not refuse them the right to educate themselves like white slaveowners!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Most Black people who owned slaves, did so to get there family back together. If a family memeber was freed and owned his own property, he would go back and try to purchase his family members so they could be together.
Black slave owners did not rape their slaves, they provided them adequate housing and did not refuse them the right to educate themselves like white slaveowners!
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:15 am to LaTexSaint
"Black slave owners did not rape their slaves, they provided them adequate housing and did not refuse them the right to educate themselves like white slaveowners!"
For all I know, this is all true, but what are you basing these assertions on? Not necessarily asking for links but would be interested in what you've read.
For all I know, this is all true, but what are you basing these assertions on? Not necessarily asking for links but would be interested in what you've read.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:17 am to prplhze2000
quote:
Suppose I was a slaveowner, owned black slaves BUT I made sure the total composition of my slaves reflected the population so they were say 20% black and 80% white at the time.
Would I be considered a racist as most slavers are?
No. You would be part of the DNC.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 12:35 pm to Vegas Bengal
quote:
All executed
I thought capital punishment wasn't an effective deterrent
Posted on 1/3/14 at 2:47 pm to N.O. via West-Cal
quote:
I disagree with your know-nothing approach. Slavery existed for millenia and continues in some forms and some places to this day. It has been argued that chattel slavery - the form that developed in the US - was a particularly dreadful form. I tend to agree with that. Of course, one would actually have to examine the circumstances of differing forms of slavery to know that. Similarly, if you read what actual slaves had to say about their experiences - their own real, HUMAN lives - you will see that it mattered a hell of a lot TO THEM how they were treated even within the confines of what we all agree was an immoral institution. Those mere "details," as you see them comprise the variable conditions in which hundreds of thousands of souls lived out their entire existence on earth. I see those details as "history," well worth studying and discussing. It may make you feel better to dismiss "everything else" as "details," but I find your nonchalance sickening.
Variations of treatment inside of a sick, perverse, warping, dehumanizing, pervasive, violent institution amounts to what I said...details. I'm not non-chalant at all. I'm simply unwilling to "excuse" certain slaveholders because they whipped less than the more cruel slaveholders.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 4:03 pm to Big Scrub TX
"I'm simply unwilling to "excuse" certain slaveholders because they whipped less than the more cruel slaveholders."
This is a reasonable statement with which I have no quarrel even if I personally find it odd that you would condemn all slaveholders, personally, for their participation in an institution that was widespread for all but the last 150-200 years of human history. Your judgment in this regard is harsh and Manichaean but reasonable all the same.
"Variations of treatment inside of a sick, perverse, warping, dehumanizing, pervasive, violent institution amounts to what I said...details. I'm not non-chalant at all."
Oh, but you are. And arrogant, to boot. Whether slaveholders did or didn't treat their slaves with some degree of humanity has mattered, especially to slaves, for the vast majority of human history. You have taken a facile approach to slavery that leads to a lesser understanding. Your approach allows for no insight into, say, whether English-style chattel slavery was worse than French/Spanish forms, or the brands practiced by Africans, Arabs, or American Indians. I think those are important things to consider and you need not "excuse" the fact that someone was a slaveholder in order to consider their conduct AS slaveholders. Of course, it's a great deal more difficult to consider hard questions with nuanced answers.
This is a reasonable statement with which I have no quarrel even if I personally find it odd that you would condemn all slaveholders, personally, for their participation in an institution that was widespread for all but the last 150-200 years of human history. Your judgment in this regard is harsh and Manichaean but reasonable all the same.
"Variations of treatment inside of a sick, perverse, warping, dehumanizing, pervasive, violent institution amounts to what I said...details. I'm not non-chalant at all."
Oh, but you are. And arrogant, to boot. Whether slaveholders did or didn't treat their slaves with some degree of humanity has mattered, especially to slaves, for the vast majority of human history. You have taken a facile approach to slavery that leads to a lesser understanding. Your approach allows for no insight into, say, whether English-style chattel slavery was worse than French/Spanish forms, or the brands practiced by Africans, Arabs, or American Indians. I think those are important things to consider and you need not "excuse" the fact that someone was a slaveholder in order to consider their conduct AS slaveholders. Of course, it's a great deal more difficult to consider hard questions with nuanced answers.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News