U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-30-2019, 01:55 PM
 
5,250 posts, read 4,719,750 times
Reputation: 1598

Advertisements

Personally I have often mentioned how the "civilized" tribes were the ones most assimilated into massah's plantation identity politicalization. They owned not only African descended slaves, they also participated in the enslavement & wars against independent tribal nations for massah & his plantation civilization.

Like many of the slaver sidekicks from the man-children, they sought to improve their position on the plantation by "improving the race".

I can understand, given the media & academia propaganda wing of the globalist plantation system, that this may be new news to some, but if you look through many of the discussions, this aspect has not been ignored or shied away from.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-30-2019, 02:02 PM
 
Location: Mars City
5,215 posts, read 2,233,332 times
Reputation: 7645
"Civilized" is relative. "Civilized" in this matter has defined by whites, as code word for acting as whites. Whatever action, including land-stealing and not staying true to one's words, would then be considered "civilized".

Many Indians through refused to lower themselves, and not be part of land-stealing, and not upholding personal promises and agreements. In many societies that would be considered more "civilized", not less. But people can perversely twist anything around to get their way, and make right seem like wrong (and vice versa).

Last edited by Thoreau424; 08-30-2019 at 02:13 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2019, 02:11 PM
 
1,013 posts, read 235,284 times
Reputation: 3632
Quote:
Originally Posted by marino760 View Post
What I find fascinating is how some people are so obsessed with slavery as if it wasn't practiced by nearly every culture and civilization since the beginning of human beings.
What I find fascinating is how some people try and minimize slavery by saying "Well, everyone did it. Therefore, there should he no introspection into our own society's embrace of this vile institution. We shouldn't even talk about it. And if you think we should, then you're 'obsessed'."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2019, 02:17 PM
 
Location: Mars City
5,215 posts, read 2,233,332 times
Reputation: 7645
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2x3x29x41 View Post
What I find fascinating is how some people try and minimize slavery by saying "Well, everyone did it..."...
...and, act as though *everyone* was involved with and approving of slavery, which was clearly not the case. Most in the north avoided it. Many Germans and other Europeans in the south were opposed to it. Quakers were opposed to it. Many had high principles that they wouldn't sell "out" on. In some ways, they more closely resembled the high principles of the Founding Fathers, than the many compromising native generations that came afterward. Many immigrants had a fresher and purer understanding of America than the many folks of jaded and watered down mindset.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2019, 02:30 PM
 
Location: Pennsylvania
5,555 posts, read 10,011,786 times
Reputation: 9106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
Africans were involved in selling their fellow Africans into slavery.

Anecdote about a slave who dearly loved his/her master/mistress

Native tribes warred upon one another before the whites arrived.

The civilized tribes of the SE were also slave owners.

Those are four well known facts which now and again get presented by someone here as though it is shocking news. They radiate the appearance of being surprise facts which mitigate the white guilt for race based slavery or the extermination of the native tribes.
This should be the auto-response when we get these threads, usually from Politics forum regulars, looking to mitigate America's record on slavery and race.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Thoreau424 View Post
...and, act as though *everyone* was involved with and approving of slavery, which was clearly not the case. Most in the north avoided it. Many Germans and other Europeans in the south were opposed to it. Quakers were opposed to it. Many had high principles that they wouldn't sell "out" on. In some ways, they more closely resembled the high principles of the Founding Fathers, than the many compromising native generations that came afterward. Many immigrants had a fresher and purer understanding of America than the many folks of jaded and watered down mindset.
Largely true, but regarding the bolded, this was not always the case. William Penn, the father of American Quakerism, owned slaves.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2019, 02:34 PM
 
Location: Mars City
5,215 posts, read 2,233,332 times
Reputation: 7645
Quote:
Originally Posted by maf763 View Post
William Penn owned slaves.
Well, we see where the foundations go when converted to an American version. Some would say he could not reasonably call himself a 'Quaker' by violating such a key value. I could call myself a 'hero', and then drown and kill someone, but it too would just be a false label.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2019, 02:57 PM
Status: "Proud American, Always and Forever" (set 27 days ago)
 
Location: DMV Area/NYC/Honolulu
12,829 posts, read 6,599,282 times
Reputation: 12361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thoreau424 View Post
So reading a book gives you full understanding of a topic? Reading about living in Moscow - for example - gives you all you need to know, and would match actually being there? Reading about an epileptic fit - as another example - will give you all you need to know to feel what it is like?

No. No book can ever give the full experience of any living / breathing situation. Recognizing our ignorances and limitations is the first step towards gaining more understanding.
You stated none of us knows the life of slaves/how they lived. Not that we did not have a full experience, which I wouldn't argue against. Hell we don't have the full experience of how any large group of people lives arguably, even today as there are variations of living and lifestyles within groups. But your statement is wrong as we do know a lot about how slaves lived both from what slaves and former slaves themselves told us and from the greater historical record. I merely took issue with your statement, which was incorrect. Its fine to recognize our ignorance of certain things, but your stance would have us be completely ignorant by not recognizing the wealth of information that is available in slave life.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2019, 02:59 PM
Status: "Proud American, Always and Forever" (set 27 days ago)
 
Location: DMV Area/NYC/Honolulu
12,829 posts, read 6,599,282 times
Reputation: 12361
Quote:
Originally Posted by finalmove View Post
You answer your own question then want to argue about it! LOL! Move on.
come back to me when you're ready to engage in mature conversation that's on topic instead of hijacking a thread
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2019, 04:52 PM
 
10,359 posts, read 6,441,148 times
Reputation: 8603
Quote:
Originally Posted by prospectheightsresident View Post
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smith...Zes9Et5Xq_9CMk



Good exhibit by the Smithsonian National Museum of the American Indian; the article is from last year, however, so I'm not sure if the exhibit is still ongoing.

I've long talked about the role of slavery among some Native American tribes and how this wasn't being taught in lessons about the Trail of Tears. Any "history" about the Trail of Tears that does not mention the African slaves owned by Native Americans and forced to make the journey or otherwise shipped to Indian Territory out West is incomplete, and often intentionally so in order to increase sympathy for the Native American cause.
History is often incomplete, people don't really have time to get into all the details. I knew about the Cherokees and their slaves. When I was doing some intense genealogy research, I ran into all sorts of interesting details about the Trail of Tears. I found old payment requests summited to and by the government. I found where sometimes their own families and neighbors drove or escorted Cherokees to the various forts, ports and so on. Some had numerous wagons and belongings (I don't why, but I had the image of individuals with all their belongings on their backs). I found Cherokees who never left. I found plenty that left early. It was rather strange in a way and not what I had envisioned at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2019, 04:55 PM
 
1,013 posts, read 235,284 times
Reputation: 3632
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thoreau424 View Post
...and, act as though *everyone* was involved with and approving of slavery, which was clearly not the case. Most in the north avoided it. Many Germans and other Europeans in the south were opposed to it. Quakers were opposed to it. Many had high principles that they wouldn't sell "out" on. In some ways, they more closely resembled the high principles of the Founding Fathers, than the many compromising native generations that came afterward. Many immigrants had a fresher and purer understanding of America than the many folks of jaded and watered down mindset.
I find the exact opposite more common - that is, minimizing those with involvement in slavery.

A classic example is the good old "Only [insert incorrectly low percentage here] of people even owned slaves in the United States!". Thus, on a plantation with a master and his family (and often and extended family) and an overseer and various other hired hands who were responsible for the slaves, only the master technically held possession of any slaves. This little tidbit of disingenuousness pretends that everyone but the master had nothing to do with slavery, which is obvious nonsense of the highest order. The assertion also conveniently ignores those who rented slaves (yes, that was widespread) and professional slave-catchers and whatnot because they didn't hold legal title to any slaves. It also begs the question of what could possibly be the relevance of including the populations of free states when calculating the percentage of slave owners - it's like calculating the prevalence of lynching by including the low (or nonexistent) rate of lynching in places like Alaska, Vermont and North Dakota.

Anyway, I'm not aware of any claims that *everyone* (your term) was involved with, and approved of, slavery. No doubt one can be scrounged up, because every last position imaginable has been asserted by someone. But the minimizing of involvement with slavery by counting only those who actually possessed in a legal sense a slave is quite a common tactic of those whose agenda consists of downplaying the extent of slavery.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top