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.
Again, no comparison. Poor whites were always in a position acquire the skills necessary to become upwardly mobile, or at least to sustain an adequate material lifestyle. Not only were they not barred from obtaining an education (like slaves and many free backs were during Reconstruction), by the end of the Depression, they eventually could find work in many of the public works programs created by the New Deal like the Civilian Conservation Corps and the Works Progress Admin, programs that were closed to blacks.
In many cultures, women are not much different from being slaves. Their fathers (or other male family members) have the final say in who they marry, if they are even allowed to leave their family domicile to marry. As single adult women, they aren't "free" to leave their parents' house to have a career. And if they tried to do that, they would bring shame to their family.
In many very traditional cultures, the young adults have to respect their elders always. They are taught from early childhood that they have to always obey their parents and older family members in matters of marriage and career.
Anyway, the "freedoms" that children and young adults have now in the US is very very different from previous generations, particularly back in 1860 when that picture was taken. Back then, a typical good christmas present for a child was a single orange!!!
regardless, in 1860 a white child was seen as a person....a black child was seen as property. this fact alone completely separates slavery from whatever hardships white americans might have ever endured
regardless, in 1860 a white child was seen as a person....a black child was seen as property. this fact alone completely separates slavery from whatever hardships white americans might have ever endured
Precisely. These arguments from people trying to justify saying that slaves had it better than anyone are ludicrous, ignorant and pathetic. There is simply no comparison. None.
regardless, in 1860 a white child was seen as a person....a black child was seen as property. this fact alone completely separates slavery from whatever hardships white americans might have ever endured
You need to read, "How the Other Half Lives" by Jacob Riis. I think you have managed to avoid the conditions those people in NYC lived in. Also, you fail to understand that they had nobody looking out for them as far as housing, food, and clothing were concerned. Yes, slavery was a despicable thing but the methods of taking advantage of the poor people in the north was about as bad.
Precisely. These arguments from people trying to justify saying that slaves had it better than anyone are ludicrous, ignorant and pathetic. There is simply no comparison. None.
You, also, need to go to your local library and get the book, "How the Other Half Lives" by Jacob Riis, a muckraker of the late 1890s in New York City and see how people lived. These were people who were exploited by big businesses and nobody supplied them with food, shelter, and clothing like the slave owners did the slaves. One group always knew where their next meal, bad as it was, was coming from and the other group had both parents and their kids from about age 7 up working in factories.
Obviously you don't know about those people. Sometime you need to go to that same library and get your hands on "The Jungle" about workers in the meat packing plants of late 19th century Chicago. This one is fiction but you can find plenty of proof of how the immigrants of that day had to live.
Go ahead and educate yourself, a bit, about how ignorant and pathetic I am.
You, also, need to go to your local library and get the book, "How the Other Half Lives" by Jacob Riis, a muckraker of the late 1890s in New York City and see how people lived. These were people who were exploited by big businesses and nobody supplied them with food, shelter, and clothing like the slave owners did the slaves. One group always knew where their next meal, bad as it was, was coming from and the other group had both parents and their kids from about age 7 up working in factories.
Obviously you don't know about those people. Sometime you need to go to that same library and get your hands on "The Jungle" about workers in the meat packing plants of late 19th century Chicago. This one is fiction but you can find plenty of proof of how the immigrants of that day had to live.
Go ahead and educate yourself, a bit, about how ignorant and pathetic I am.
I've read those books. I have also read hundreds more about the history of blacks in the U.S. South. Again, there is absolutely no comparison between the two sets of circumstances.
I would think, even for a child in your mind there is a difference between being "owned' by someone and being a "free" person even if you are poor. not a great analogy but a bit like living your life behind bars vs living on the outside. your life on the outside might not be the best, but you are free to do the simple things in life, like walk down the road as far as you want to go. I don't think you can say that for the majority of slaves.
You also need to read, "How the Other Half Lives" by Jacob Riis. Riis was a muckraker of the late 19th century and the book is a mixture of pictures that will make you cry and some very well written words about the lives of the people who were trapped into having the whole family work in the mills of the city, New York, in the late 1800s.
Catch up on how life for those kids really was when they didn't have an owner to supply them with food, clothing and shelter. You, I am sure, would be very surprised if you read that book.
If you really want to get sick, read The Jungle about meat packing plant workers of the late 19th century. Maybe you will learn something about the lives of the immigrants of that day.
I've read those books. I have also read hundreds more about the history of blacks in the U.S. South. Again, there is absolutely no comparison between the two sets of circumstances.
I think you need to read those two again if you see no comparison. Did the people Riis wrote about have any chance to move upward in society? Of course, a very few could but most just didn't have the necessary desire to do so and their descendants are still in the same shape in many cases.
I think you need to read those two again if you see no comparison. Did the people Riis wrote about have any chance to move upward in society? Of course, a very few could but most just didn't have the necessary desire to do so and their descendants are still in the same shape in many cases.
They had a helluva lot better chance at it than blacks of the same time period did. They could vote. They could look at white women (or not) and not be in fear for their lives. They could live without fear of lynchings, mutilations or rape, and know that if they were a victim of a crime, they actually may have some legal recourse. I could go on........
wonder what the motivation is for people who have to diminish the effects of slavery. to downplay it, nor accept the uniqueness of it's condition. always with comparisons of how other people suffered? wanting to leave them impression hey, it wasn't really "that" bad after all they had some food, only beaten 5 times a week not seven. is it so hard to just acknowledge that slavery was a uniquely horrible thing and leave it at that?
being poor and having few opportunities does not equal to being literally the property of others, treated more like an animal than human. do you also diminish the holocaust by saying it wasn't like all people were persecuted, some got away. look at anne frank. apartheid? less than 50 years, what is the big deal? thank goodness the perp only raped her once! the denials of severity without diversion seems dismissive at best, bigoted at worse. but hey it really isn't that bad it is only us who know slavery really sucked that think your motivation is something other than to educate the rest of us about history
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.
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.
wonder what the motivation is for people who have to diminish the effects of slavery. to downplay it, nor accept the uniqueness of it's condition. always with comparisons of how other people suffered? wanting to leave them impression hey, it wasn't really "that" bad after all they had some food, only beaten 5 times a week not seven. is it so hard to just acknowledge that slavery was a uniquely horrible thing and leave it at that? 
