- 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: Just overheard a guy say "slavery wasn't racist"
Posted on 2/9/18 at 2:08 pm to Catman88
Posted on 2/9/18 at 2:08 pm to Catman88
quote:
How do you explain many black families owning slaves in America?
The typical response is the "family member" thing, which is a legitimate and common practice by which FPCs with some money were able to effectively manumit family members, but we also have examples of abuse within this practice (such as the wife I mentioned selling the husband that displeased her). We also have examples of wealthy black planters employing 100 slaves or more, clearly not a "family member" situation - these FPCs were often of significantly mixed ancestry, but that does not change the fact that black folks could own chattel slaves, and white folks were de facto slaves in this country under this presumptively "racist" institution.
Again, the institution was strongly mired in racism. But the chicken and egg analysis comes up again and again - condition of servitude of parents had a much, much higher correlation of a child being a slave than skin color.
Take Solomon Northrup (12 Years a Slave) for example - I still haven't watched the feature film, but it was required reading during my college days at LSU-A (the book's 20th century editor and preserver was an English professor of mine). Born free, Northrup was the child of a freed slave and a free woman of color, in NY state. A musician by trade, he was essentially lured into Washington, D.C. on the promise of paying work, drugged and sold (unlawfully) into slavery, ending up going through New Orleans and working on plantations in Rapides and Avoyelles Parishes.
He was ultimately able to get a message out to his family regarding his whereabouts and situation and freed after 12 years of involuntary servitude. This tragic situation illustrates both sides of the argument beautifully and elegantly.
He was born free - his skin color and African ancestry could, in no way, make him a slave in this country, even in the Antebellum South - at least not legally. But, his skin color allowed him to be snared into this system, illegally bought and sold, and illegally held for over a decade, because superficially, he "looked" like a slave and the rights of black folks to petition for redress of grievances - especially in the South - were highly curtailed.
Yet additional example of just how complicated this issue is... (In his experience, you also get the classic comparison of "Good master/bad master").
This post was edited on 2/9/18 at 2:11 pm
0
Posted on 2/9/18 at 2:13 pm to Machine
I dont think you understand what a straw man is.
Liberals believe black people cannot be racist yet there were a large number of slaves owned by free black men even in the south. If its about racism and not about cheap labor then how do you define these black slave holders?
Racist or Opportunists?
There most certainly were elements of slavery that was racist. It just was more about good cheap labor more than anything else.
Liberals believe black people cannot be racist yet there were a large number of slaves owned by free black men even in the south. If its about racism and not about cheap labor then how do you define these black slave holders?
Racist or Opportunists?
There most certainly were elements of slavery that was racist. It just was more about good cheap labor more than anything else.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 2:15 pm to Esquire
quote:
quote: Your first post in this thread. Calling out racists doesn’t make me a bigot lol Try again.
You need to look up the definition of bigotry. Your knee-jerk, lazy reaction was to call "the board" racist. That is bigoted. Your post history suggests strong bigotry is a big part of your life.
Calling everyone you disagree with politically racist is trite, lazy, and a pretty good indicator of lack of education and/or IQ.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 2:15 pm to Catman88
quote:clearly you don't
I dont think you understand what a straw man is.
quote:
Liberals believe black people cannot be racist yet there were a large number of slaves owned by free black men even in the south. If its about racism and not about cheap labor then how do you define these black slave holders? Racist or Opportunists?
quote:
There most certainly were elements of slavery that was racist. It just was more about good cheap labor more than anything else.
you're off the reservation
Posted on 2/9/18 at 2:15 pm to Texas Weazel
quote:
That should have been the first and only response to this thread.
But Nooooooo. That's asking too much of this board.
Right?
Posted on 2/9/18 at 2:19 pm to N.O. via West-Cal
quote:
CT, I think you took me too literally
quote:
CT, I think you took me too literally ....
Well the plight of the Negro (can't use African American) around the world is pretty much the same in countries where there was never African slavery. So that leads me to beleive what happened almost 200 years ago in the US is not causing the same situation in other countries.
Unless you think racism is unique to the US and countries that had African slavery.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 2:20 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
I would say slavery as practiced by the USA was racist.
I don't think slavery itself was racist. I think it was economics. I would say 100% what transpired after slavery was racist.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 2:25 pm to Catman88
Say you are a small farmer in 1855 trying to feed your family. You can sell your goods at 2x market rates or you can do what the other people at market are doing and buy some slaves so you can produce more and lower your prices to sell more.
The lives of your family depends on it. What do you do?
Most in the day bought a slave or two. The vast majority of the 34% slave owners in the south were not big rich plantation owners.
They didnt buy them because they hated blacks. Like most people at any part in history just wanted to provide for their family.
Even today we do horrible acts that people write off daily as common and not an absolute evil. One of them liberals protect with complete vigor
The lives of your family depends on it. What do you do?
Most in the day bought a slave or two. The vast majority of the 34% slave owners in the south were not big rich plantation owners.
They didnt buy them because they hated blacks. Like most people at any part in history just wanted to provide for their family.
Even today we do horrible acts that people write off daily as common and not an absolute evil. One of them liberals protect with complete vigor
Posted on 2/9/18 at 2:27 pm to Machine
Yes you are correct.
People in North America just woke up one day and said. That man looks differently than me. I hate him. I need to own 200 of them to show my anger.
Had nothing to do with them owning 200 acres that needed to be ploughed.
People in North America just woke up one day and said. That man looks differently than me. I hate him. I need to own 200 of them to show my anger.
Had nothing to do with them owning 200 acres that needed to be ploughed.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 2:27 pm to Machine
Yes you are correct.
People in North America just woke up one day and said. That man looks differently than me. I hate him. I need to own 200 of them to show my anger.
Had nothing to do with them owning 200 acres that needed to be ploughed.
People in North America just woke up one day and said. That man looks differently than me. I hate him. I need to own 200 of them to show my anger.
Had nothing to do with them owning 200 acres that needed to be ploughed.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 2:29 pm to CarrolltonTiger
"Well the plight of the Negro (can't use African American) around the world is pretty much the same in countries where there was never African slavery. So that leads me to beleive what happened almost 200 years ago in the US is not causing the same situation in other countries."
We're talking about different things altogether.
We're talking about different things altogether.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 2:30 pm to Catman88
History will show you that the real hate came after the civil war during reconstruction. That is when racism really occured.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 2:35 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Calling everyone you disagree with politically racist is trite, lazy, and a pretty good indicator of lack of education and/or IQ.
So is denying slavery in the US was racist.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 2:38 pm to Catman88
quote:
Had nothing to do with them owning 200 acres that needed to be ploughed.
Nobody blames the slave in America for being a slave. Nor should they. Most were born here, already enslaved. What's forgotten is that most slaveowners were born into the institution, too. Many did buy and sell slaves, but that wasn't universal or required. Often one would merely inherit slaves.
And with that came the responsibility to care for them - the system did work both ways, however one-sided it was in theory and in fact. Slaves were a big expense, especially on larger plantations. Think about a large operation with 1200 slaves. Maybe you have a main family home and a couple of sons with families in satellite homes - so with kids/grandkids, Old Master might have 15, 18 family members on the property. With those sons, he might not need as many overseers, but at that point, you've probably got 2 dozen domestic slaves (who don't produce anything to sell, just clothing, meals, perhaps furniture) - now, you make and maintain almost everything there, but every male slave you have working in a sawmill or whatever, is neither growing food nor cotton.
And 1200 slaves still have to be housed, clothed and fed - they're getting sick, every day, and so forth. You've got dozens of slave babies - a slave child is born and will not be productive to the operation for 12 to 14 years, minimum. They still have to be housed, clothed, fed, medical care - the whole smash.
Now, why do I say this - NOBODY would do this racist or not, if it was not economically necessary - and the profit margins were quite slim on top of all of this. Certainly "racism" was not even the driving force - if anything, blacks were slaves first - then thought of as inferior over the generations. It's not like the white Southerners of 1855 went back in time to 17th Century Africa and brought them over, cackling in an evil voice all the way.
This post was edited on 2/9/18 at 2:42 pm
Posted on 2/9/18 at 2:40 pm to Esquire
quote:
So is denying slavery in the US was racist.
If you cared to attempt to see past your bigotry you will see a pretty good discussion in this thread. Again...lazy and trite.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 3:12 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
If you cared
I don't, but forward me your address and I'll send you a rent check for living in your head.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 3:17 pm to Esquire
Don't flatter yourself. I call a lot of people out for being lazy and trite. You aren't special.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 3:30 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
I call a lot of people out for being lazy and trite. You aren't special
So you're a bigot. Got it.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 3:36 pm to Esquire
I see you are still struggling with the definition. More laziness.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 3:43 pm to BBONDS25
Last chance for that rent check.
Page 19 of 22
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News